Common Places, Discourses 1 · Discourse 3
Whether the Maſſe be a ſacrifice.
THat the Maſſe is a ſacrifice, there is no leſſe variance at this daie, than was in old time betwixt the Troians and Graecians for Helen. And they which defend the Maſſe, would hauehave the Euchariſt to hauehave a double reſpect: firſt, that it is an oblation and ſacrifice that is offered vp by the prieſt; ſecondlie, that it is diſtributed vntounto the faithfull for a communion. And in the ſacrifice of their Maſſe, they indeuour to comprehend theſe two things. For there the Maſſe-prieſt (as they themſelues with full mouth teſtifie) not onlie ſacrificeth and offereth vp the Lord Ieſus Chriſt, but alſo eateth and drinketh, and that alone, whatſoeuer he had offered vntounto God before, as well for himſelfe as for others. But that thou maiſt know what error & ſuperſtition is conteined in this opinion, Two kinds of ſacrifice, propitiatorie and gratulatorie.we muſt bréefelie ſée what is the nature of a ſacrifice. Which that we leaue not the iuſt method of a treatiſe, we will diuide it, calling the one propitiatorie, the other thankſ-giuing, or (as the Graecians ſpeak) foreign.
Theſe parts of the diſtinction are concluded vnderunder a certeine common and generall definition, The definition of a ſacrifice.wherein we ſaie; that A ſacrifice is nothing elſe, but a worke, in which we offer ſome thing vntounto God, according to his will, that we may honour him. And maruell not, that I hauehave added that particle [According to his will:] ſéeing by the godlie, nothing ſhould be offered vp vntounto God, but that he himſelfe hath required and declared to be acceptable vntounto him. This doo we obſerue; when we would preſent anie man with a gift for honour ſake, we ſpeciallie learne to knowe with what things he is moſt delighted. But betwéene a propitiatorie ſacrifice, and a gratulatorie, this difference we note: that we ſaie, A propitiatorie hath power to pacifie God being angrie, and to deſerue forgiueneſſe of ſinnes for all men for whom it is offered. But the ſacrifice gratulatorie, or of thankſ-giuing, hath not this power to reconcile vsus vntounto God; but of thoſe, which are alreadie receiued into fauour. It is offered, to the intent they may giuegive thanks, as well for the reconciliation which they hauehave obteined; as alſo for innumerable other benefits, which they perceiue themſelues dailie to obteine. And this diuiſion is ſufficientlie taught vsus in the old lawe. Leuit. 1.For (as it appéereth in Leuiticus) the men of old time had ſacrifices for ſinnes, and burnt offerings, which are ſaid to hauehave made God mercifull and fauourable to them. Whereof they rightlie gather this firſt member of our diuiſion.
Moreouer, they had peace offerings: for they offered firſt fruits, tenths, and manie other ſuch kind of things, which muſt be referred to the other kind; to wit, the ſacrifice of thankſ-giuing, Wherefore we will prooue, that the Maſſe is no propitiatorie ſacrifice; that is to wit, that the prieſt can offer our Lord Ieſus Chriſt the ſonne of God vntounto the father, and by ſuch a ſacrifice can make him well pleaſed and mercifull; alſo, that he can of him obteine remiſſion of ſinnes vntounto them, for whom he ſaith he dooth offer; or (as they rather would hauehave it) dooth ſacrifice. And this being ſhewed, we ſhall ſée, whether the Maſſe may be called a ſacrifice of thankſ-giuing. And that we may performe that, which at the firſt we determined to ſhew; we will begin with that, wherein we knowe our aduerſaries doo agrée with vsus; which is this: that the ſupper of the Lord, or the Euchariſt is a ſacrament. Which if it be (as they fréelie grant) it followeth, that the ſame can be no propitiatorie ſacrifice: for the nature of a ſacrament altogither differeth from the nature of a ſacrifice. Which that it may be perceiued, I will define a ſacrament.
A ſacrament is a worke, The definition of a ſacrament.whereby God exhibiteth that which is there ſignified by the word of promiſe, with an outward ſigne added therevnto, as a ſeale of the promiſe made. For two things doth a ſacrament conteine; firſt, the word whereby the promiſe is expreſſed and offered of God; ſecondlie, it hath the outward element, whereby is ſealed the promiſe, that we may the more firmelie take hold of the ſame. Therefore ſo great a difference there is betwéene a ſacrament and a ſacrifice, as is betwéene giuing and receiuing: bicauſe in a ſacrament we receiue of God, that which he promiſed; in a ſacrifice we giuegive and bring that which he requireth of vsus. Wherefore, if we will ſpeake properlie: the ſupper of the Lord, ſéeing it is (as they will hauehave it) a ſacrament, it cannot be a ſacrifice; except we would, that to giuegive, and to receiue, ſhould be all one. Neither ſhall this ſhift vantage them to ſaie, that the Maſſe hath hir name of a propitiatorie ſacrifice; bicauſe it is a remembrance of the oblation, which Chriſt offered vntounto his father vponupon the altar of the croſſe. And no man will denie, but that that was the true propitiatorie ſacrifice: and it ſéemeth agréeable, that ſignes ſhould be called by the ſame names that be the things which they expreſſe. Wherefore Auguſtine, in the 23. epiſtle vntounto Boniface: Was not Chriſt once offered vp in himſelfe, and yet not onelie in all the ſolemne feaſts of Eaſter, but alſo euerie daie, is offered vp in a ſacrament vntounto the people; and yet vndoubtedlie he lieth not, which being demanded, anſwereth that he is offered vp? For if ſacraments ſhould not hauehave a certeine ſimilitude of thoſe things, whereof they be ſacraments, they ſhould in no wiſe be ſacraments: and of this ſimilitude the ſignes oftentimes take euen the names of the things ſignified.
Theſe things hauehave they béene accuſtomed to obiect for their opinion: therefore did I ſaie, that our aduerſaries hauehave gained nothing vnderunder this pretenſe; bicauſe we doo not here diſpute, what the ſupper of the Lord, by a certeine ſimilitude, may be called; but what properlie it is, and ought to be eſtéemed indéed. For Auguſtine. which is cited, dooth not grant this name but by tranſlation, or the figure Metonymia. There is another reaſon, which proueth the ſame thing: Chriſt offered himſelfe, therefore it is not our part to offer him againe; otherwiſe we muſt néeds confeſſe, that that ſacrifice of Chriſt was not perfect and ſufficient. Which is contrarie to the epiſtle vntounto the Hebrues, in ſundrie places of the ninth and tenth chapters. Howbeit, here alſo are they woont to alledge, that Chriſtes ſacrifice vponupon the croſſe was indéed full and perfect; but bicauſe we doo dailie fall, and doo continuallie ſinne, it is néedfull that we ſhould be verie often reſtored, by a new and dailie offering of ſacrifices. It is a feigned deuiſe, which may deceiue ſome, but not them, which hauehave read the epiſtle to the Hebrues; that The Lord Ieſus, by his death and ſacrifice, hath ſanctified vsus for euer, and by one oblation hath made perfect for euer them that be ſanctified.
Wherefore the merit of Chriſtes death was not for a time, that it cannot helpe our dailie offenſes. And that maketh (which is confeſſed) that thing which is offered vntounto GOD to be acceptable vntounto him, for the grace and dignitie of him which offereth it. For ſéeing God made all things, and is the Lord of all things; he hath no néed that anie thing ſhould be giuen him of vsus. Thoſe gifts are acceptable vntounto God.But of the good will, which he beareth vntounto his, he hath béene accuſtomed to receiue gifts, and thankfullie to accept as a ſwéet ſmelling ſauour, thoſe things which his faithfull friends, and thoſe that be coadopted by him to be his children, hauehave (according to his owne commandement) brought vntounto him. Wherefore, if they that offer, be euill, without faith, without charitie, and deſtitute of hope, their gifts are accurſſed of God; as in manie places of the holie ſcripture it moſt plainlie appeareth, eſpeciallie in the firſt chapter of Eſaie. Eſai. 1, 5.Which opinion Irenaeus is of, who affirmeth; that The gifts and oblations, doo by the holineſſe of them that offer, deſerue to become gratefull and acceptable vntounto God. Which being ſo, how great a blaſphemie and abſurditie is brought in of them, which will hauehave Chriſt to be offered vp by the miniſter; that by them (forſooth) he may be made acceptable to the father; euen he, who aboue all is beléeued, by whoſe grace & deſarts it behooued vsus wretches, being the ſonnes of Adam, to be reconciled vntounto God the father?
Wherefore had God a reſpect vntounto the gifts of Abel, and not vntounto the gifts of Caine? Gen. 4, 4.Whie did GOD receiue the ſacrifice of Aaron, Leui 9, 24. Num. 16, 19but not of Cora, Dathan, & Abiram? We cannot yéeld anie other reaſon, but that this was doone, in reſpect of the condition and holineſſe of the perſons: I meane of Abel and Aaron. For, as touching God, to whom the ſacrifice was doone; it was all one thing, and the gift of both parts were alike. But ſhall we, by the ſame reaſon ſaie, that in this their propitiatorie ſacrifice of the Maſſe, God dooth receiue vntounto him his ſacrificed ſonne for the ſacrificers ſake, his deſarts and woorthineſſe? God kéepe the minds of the faithfull, from ſo great an impietie! I will admoniſh by the way, that the ſtate of ſacraments is farre otherwiſe, being ſuch as doo in no reſpect challenge to themſelues efficacie, holineſſe, or honour from the miniſter. For whatſoeuer woorthineſſe thoſe hauehave, they hauehave it vndoubtedlie by inſtitution from God, and from Ieſus Chriſt our Lord; wherby it commeth to paſſe, that they cannot be polluted by euill miniſters. Wherefore, no doubt but this may be granted, that the offerer can offer vntounto God nothing more woorthie than himſelfe. And therefore we ſée, that Chriſt, when he was to make a moſt noble ſacrifice, offered his owne ſelfe; and that of vsus, he required this, as the chiefe and moſt excellent gift; to wit, that for his ſake we ſhould loſe our liues, and ſhould denie our owne ſelues. And this dooth Paule, in the twelue chapter to the Romans moſt vehementlie exhort to be doone, when as he ſaith; verſe. 1.I beſeech you by the merciemercy of God, that ye giuegive vp your bodies a liuelie ſacrifice, holie, and acceptable vntounto God. Where thou ſéeſt, that we hauehave nothing to offer vntounto God more excellent than our ſelues, ſo that we be his thankfull and acceptable children through faith.
Therefore, if we will in the ſupper of the Lord doo the ſame things that Chriſt did, we ſhall not ſlea him, but our owne ſelues, and ſhall mortifie our ſelues as ſacrifices of a ſwéet ſmelling ſauour. Contrariwiſe, Ephe. 5, 2.in miniſtering of the ſacraments, there is no miniſter of the church, except he be clearelie void of wit, but will confeſſe that he miniſtreth to the ſhéepe of Chriſt, committed vntounto him, things which farre excéed his owne woorthineſſe. For he, by the ſacraments, diſtributeth vntounto the faithfull, Chriſt himſelfe, grace, the holie Ghoſt, and remiſſion of ſinnes: which things do not onlie excell all his owne vertues, but with him that is but duſt and aſhes, they are in no wiſe to be compared. There is a verie great diuerſitie betwéene offering vp of Chriſt vntounto the father, and giuing of Chriſt by ſacraments vntounto beléeuers: this may be doone by the miniſter of the church being a méere man, but they could onlie be doone by Chriſt himſelfe man and God. Wherefore, for the vtter reiecting of this blaſphemie, whereby we ſhould be conſtreined to confeſſe, that Chriſt the ſonne of God is regarded and accepted of the father for the grace and worthineſſe of him that offereth, let vsus condemne this opinion, that the Maſſe is ſuch a thing, wherein Chriſt (as they ſaie) is offered vntounto the father by the prieſt. There is no prieſt that is able to offer ſuch a ſacrifice, except our Lord his owne ſelfe, who once did it; and that ſo perfectlie, as he truelie ſaid vponupon the croſſe; It is finiſhed.
This one thing more we will adde, that in all ſacrifices this thing is neceſſarie; to wit, that they be grounded vponupon the commandement of GOD, otherwiſe they be vnprofitable. So far off are they from pacifieng of God, as they rather prouoke and offend him. And this we knowe happened vntounto Saule, 1. Sam. 15, 22.to whome Samuel ſaid; that Obedience is better than ſacrifices. verſe. 22.And Ieremie in the ſeuenth chapter ſaith; that God ſpake not a word of burnt offerings and ſacrifices to the forefathers of the Iewes, when he brought them from the bondage of Aegypt; but that he onelie required of them, that they would hearken vntounto his voice. Neither for anie other cauſe (as we hauehave alreadie ſpoken before in the definition of a ſacrifice) did we thinke good to adde, that it ſhould be offered according to the will of God. But if obedience ſhall not be the roote of the ſacrifice, it becommeth deadlie vntounto them that offer it. But where will theſe men ſhew me a commandement to offer vp the ſonne of God? Onelie thus did Chriſt command his apoſtles, when he inſtituted the ſupper; Mat. 26, 16. Luk. 22, 19. 1. Cor. 11, 24.Take, eate; take, drinke yee all of this, and when ye ſhall doo theſe things, doo them in remembrance of me. I hauehave heard manie, which hauehave béene bold to ſaie; that Facere, To doo, How the papiſts will that To doo and To ſacrifice, is all one.in this place is all one with Sacrificare; To ſacrifice: as though Chriſt commanded by thoſe words, that they ſhould ſacrifice him in euerie holie ſupper, or (as they had rather ſaie) in euerie Maſſe. Trulie I am aſhamed to confute ſuch a feined ſophiſticall deuiſe: but this one thing I ſaie, that doctrine muſt not be grounded vponupon doubtfull ſpéeches; and ſpeciallie commandements, touching ſo great matters, were not woont in the holie ſcriptures to be giuen with ſpéeches of double vnderſtanding. Paule and the Euangeliſts, who hauehave made ſuch plaine mention of theſe myſteries; in what place I beſéech you hauehave they ſhewed one word, either of a ſacrifice, or of an oblation to be offered of vsus?
And here would not that impudent boldneſſe of theirs ſtaie it ſelfe: for to this falſe ſacrifice, An application of the oblation.it feined a certeine application thereof; to wit, that it ſhould be in the choiſe of the Maſſing prieſt, to communicate the oblation of Chriſt to whome he would, either liuing or dead. As if we were ignorant, that the death of Chriſt is applied to euerie chriſtian, by the preaching of the Goſpell, if it be receiued of them by faith. But to receiue a ſacrament for an other man, is nothing elſe, than if I ſhuld eate or drinke for thée: which, how it can be a helpe vntounto thée, be thou thine owne ſelfe the iudge. Who at anie time hath baptiſed himſelfe for an other man? And yet neuertheleſſe this rout of Maſſing prieſts dare affirme, that in this their feined ſacrifice, they eate and drinke the ſacraments for whome they will, liuing and dead. Howbeit, in theſe their ſacrifices falſelie feined, ſo far are they off from communicating the death of Chriſt, either to themſelues, or to others deceiued by them; as rather themſelues, and they which obeie them, are by ſuch Maſſes depriued of the benefit of the true ſacrifice of Chriſt once offered vponupon the croſſe. Wherefore aptlie doo they ſéeme to hauehave called theſe Maſſes, wherein onelie the prieſt dooth eate and drinke, priuate Maſſes; a name in verie déed not heard of among the fathers, bicauſe they be void and deſtitute of all the fruit of Chriſts ſacrifice.
Awaie therefore out of the church at length with theſe priuate Maſſes, and let thoſe that are perfect come in their places; wherein is obſerued the iuſt and true inſtitution of Chriſt, which he left vntounto his diſciples for the true kéeping of the Lords ſupper. Wherein there may be a communion of the brethren, which togither may be made partakers of the perfect & iuſt ſacraments of the Lord. For in theſe priuate Maſſes, there is rather an excommunication, than a communion; ſith therein one onelie ſo receiueth thoſe things that are offered, as others doo receiue nothing at all. I knowe that they go about to ſhift off theſe things, with this feined deuiſe; to ſaie, that one prieſt dooth communicate in the name of the whole church. But by what commandement dooth he this? By what word of GOD is this ceremonie mainteined? Which if it be profitable, it ought to be doone by faith: but faith hath no place where the word of God ſoundeth not. By that reaſon a man may go and baptiſe himſelfe euerie daie, and may make pretenſe, that he doth this in the name of the whole church; and may applie this baptiſme of his to whome he will, either liuing or dead. And no leſſe is this to be conſidered, that we in this time of the new teſtament hauehave no outward ſacrifice: and therefore we find, Rom. 12, 1.that ours is called by Paule; A reaſonable ſeruice of God. And Chriſt warned, that it would come to paſſe, Iohn. 4, 23.that The true worſhippers ſhall worſhip in ſpirit and in truth.
Wherefore we ſaie, that that argument is ill concluded; There were before the lawe, and vnderunder the lawe outward ſacrifices; Therefore they ought to be ſo now. For as the prieſthood is now tranſlated to Chriſt, and that there be no prieſts extant beſides him; ſo is there in ſacrifice beſides that, which he himſelfe offered vponupon the croſſe. Wherefore we ſaid, that the ſacrifices of the forefathers were ſhadowes and figures of the death of Chriſt, and as it were pictures. The altar and ſlaieng of beaſts for ſacrifice did ſerue their turnes, but Chriſt offered the true ſacrifice: his bodie was the offering, and the croſſe was the altar, wherevpon he was offered: but for vsus that hauehave now the fruit and benefit of Chriſts pretious death and paſſion, it is not fit nor conuenient in ſuch ſort to repreſent and ſhadowe it, bicauſe it is paſt. For it is méet of this ſacrifice to hauehave a feaſt prepared, whereof the miniſter of the church is a diſpenſer, and not the offerer; neither hath be a little altar, except thou wilt figuratiuelie call a table an altar. Whoſoeuer therefore will labor to renew the prieſthood, the altar, and outward ſacrifice; thoſe without doubt indeuour to tranſforme the new teſtament into the old. Hereof it commeth, that the elder fathers ſaid, that our ſacrifices are vnbloudie; that is, ſpirituall and reaſonable. It is moreouer to be conſidered, which the Lord commanded, 1. Co. 11, 26while he celebrated his ſupper, that his death ſhould be ſhewed. Which aſſuredlie is no other thing, than to make mention of his death, as it was a ſacrifice, whereby God is reconciled vntounto vsus, and to giuegive thanks for it.
Doubtleſſe I thinke there is no man, but vnderſtandeth, that the remembrance or token of anie thing differeth in nature from the thing it ſelfe, which it betokeneth and ſheweth to the memorie. For if it were all one with it, it ſhould not be called a token; but ſhould hauehave the name of the thing, to the end that the name might agrée with the nature. Wherefore, ſéeing we grant that this action is a memorie of the oblation of Chriſt, it ſhould be abſurd to ſaie, that the ſame is the oblation of Chriſt it ſelfe. But they ſaie, that the argument dooth conclude, that the Maſſe is not that bloudie ſacrifice once made on the croſſe by the ſonne of God himſelfe. A feigned difference betweene a bloudie and an vnbloudie ſacrifice.But they contend that they neither affirme this, as they that ſaie; This is a certeine other oblation of the bodie and bloud of Chriſt vnbloudie, which they muſt oftentimes renew. Howbeit, to anſwer thus; is to ſaie nothing: bicauſe herein are two things to be knowne of vsus; neither dooth there appeare a third, vnleſſe thou wilt imagine ſome thing. For it is neceſſarie, that thoſe things, which be ſpoken of the oblation of Chriſt, be either referred vntounto his death, which of his owne accord he offered vponupon the croſſe for our ſaluation; or elſe they muſt be vnderſtood of the remembrance thereof, and thankſ-giuing for the ſame. Betwéene theſe two we can perceiue no meane, either by the nature of things, or by the holie ſcriptures, that can be called a ſacrifice, wherein Chriſt ſhould be offered vntounto the father.
And this is declared by the propertie of the names: for among the Latins, that which they will hauehave to be a ſacrifice, is called Miſſ… and of the Graecians, foreign. Whence the name of Maſſe is deriued.The firſt they ſaie is an Hebrue word twiſe ſpoken of in Deuteronomie. But I agrée not to this opinion: bicauſe, if it were an Hebrue word, it ſhould be found among the Gréeke writers, which hauehave handled the Eccleſiaſticall matters. For the Latine Church receiued not chriſtian profeſſion, immediatelie from the Hebrue toong, but by the Gréeke toong; as it appeareth by the epiſtle to the Romans being written in Gréeke, and by the whole new teſtament: ſauing that it is ſomwhat doubted of vsus touching the Goſpell of Matthew; bicauſe ſome hauehave thought the ſame to hauehave béene firſt written in the Hebrue. Which although it were ſo, yet is it ſtill likelie, that the Latins did firſt receiue it written in Gréeke, not in Hebrue. And that which I affirme, may be perceiued in thoſe words, Alleluia, Hoſianna, Paſcha, Meſſiah, and other ſuch kind of words; which thou maieſt ſée were not onelie taken whole from the Hebrues by the Latins, but alſo from the Gréeks before them: for the Gréeke Church is more ancient than the Latine Church. Wherefore it is certeine, that there is not an Hebrue word in the Latine Church, which was not kept in like maner in the Gréeke Church. Séeing then the word Miſſa, that is, Maſſe, as touching eccleſiaſticall writers, is neuer found among the Gréeks; but in the place thereof they write foreign: it followeth, that it is no Hebrue word, but a Latine.
Wherein I am confirmed by a ſentence of Auguſtine, who ſaith in a certeine ſermon; that The preaching being finiſhed, Miſſa fit Catechumenis: the Catechumeni were ſent awaie, and the reſt of the faithfull tarried ſtill. So was the communion of the faithfull, and the handling of the myſteries called; bicauſe they then began the ſame, when the Catechumeni were ſent awaie. Wherefore Miſſa is nothing elſe, but Miſſio, a ſending awaie; that is to wit, when there is leaue giuen to depart. And that Miſſa dooth thus ſignifie, we hauehave yet an aſſured teſtimonie; bicauſe the myſteries being finiſhed, the deacon ſpeaketh out alowd; Ite miſſa eſt. He ſendeth them awaie; Ye hauehave leaue (ſaith he) to depart. This doo I thinke as touching that word: albeit I hauehave heard of ſome, and thoſe of good credit, that it was ſo called; bicauſe by the faithfull were ſent vntounto the altar, gifts, bread, wine, and manie other things; thereof afterward was taken a certeine part of the bread and wine, to be appointed to the myſteries, and the reſt was diſtributed to the poore. Which may be ſéene, not onelie out of Irenaeus and Cyprian; but alſo by manie praiers, which at this daie are read in the Maſſe booke. Yea it is verſe likelie, that for this cauſe, thoſe praiers were called by the name of Collects: though that ſome ſaie they were ſo called, bicauſe the miniſter praieth there, not in his owne name onelie, but rather in the name of the multitude gathered togither. Wherefore it forceth not much, whether it be called Maſſe, in reſpect of the ſending awaie; or elſe, for that the faithfull did then ſend gifts; namelie, when the offertorie is ſoong: for then the myſteries begin to be handled. It is both waies a Latine word, of the verbe Mitto.
But admit it be (as they will hauehave it) an Hebrue word, Deut. 16.which is read in Deuteronomie; yet dooth it nothing make for them, bicauſe it ſignifieth the firſt fruites and gifts which the people brought into the tabernacle of the Lord, as a tribute, leaſt they ſhould appeare emptie before God. What is this to the offering vp of Chriſt? For the prieſt did not offer thoſe things, but the people. But now the Maſſing prieſts will offer Chriſt himſelfe, and they exclude the laie men from that offering. The Graecians call it foreign, which word dooth not ſignifie a ſacrifice, but a publike miniſterie: whereof he is called foreign, which exerciſeth a publike office; that is to wit, tributes and cuſtomes for the making of ſhewes, for the building of a nauie, or maintenance of an armie, and ſuch other kind of things. By tranſlation it agréeth with the miniſter of the church: for he, when he teacheth, bringeth foorth the ſacraments, and diſtributeth them; he declareth himſelfe to deale with publike and common good things. But how this hath place in priuate Maſſes, let others ſée. Paule elſe where vſed it for a diſtribution: Rom. 15, 26 2. Cor. 9, 13.yea, and to the Philippians, he called Epaphrodytus, foreign; that is, A miniſter of his neceſſities: for he ſerued his turne on the behalfe of the Philippians. Phil. 2, 25.Wherefore it commeth to paſſe, that foreign, dooth not properlie ſignifie a ſacrifice. Neither is the word deriued of foreign, that is, praiers; but of foreign, that is, publike good things. And of this word hath Demoſthenes and his interpretour ſundrie times made mention. Wherfore, out of the names, as well of Miſſa, as Liturgia, they gather nothing for their purpoſe; to ſhew that the Maſſe is a ſacrifice. Naie rather it is ſhewed, that theſe names doo ſignifie farre otherwiſe. Neither were there priuate Maſſes in ancient time; namelie, When priuate Maſſes began.vntill the time of Gregorie. And that dooth Chryſoſtome manifeſtlie declare (who ſaith) that …he prieſt ſtood at the altar, and exhorted them that ſtood by to drawe néere. Neither ſhalt thou find, among the ancient Fathers, anie mention of priuate Maſſes, vntill Gregorie came.
Therefore, that ſhall we ſaie to the Fathers, The Fathers meane not of anie other ſacrifice in the communion but Euchariſtian or of thankſgiuing.which ſéeme euerie where to obtrude vntounto vsus this oblation and ſacrifice? Theſe doo not ſpeake of a propitiatorie ſacrifice, but of the ſacrifice of the Euchariſt, vntounto which kind belongeth praiſes, thankſgiuing, confeſſion, a…mes, oblations, and eſpeciallie that we giuegive our owne ſelues wholie vntounto God to be ruled and gouerned. All which things, ſéeing they hauehave p…a…e in the holie communion, it is no maruell if thou heare there the name of ſacrifice: for therein is thanks giuen vntounto God, bicauſe he ſo deliuered his ſonne vntounto the death for our ſakes. We confeſſe our ſelues to be ouerwhelmed with innumerable ſinnes, and to be ſaued onelie by the merciemercy of God. Almes are giuen, as well to the poore, as to the altar: & there is none of the faithfull, but in that time, which he receiueth the myſteries, offereth himſelfe to be ſubiect vntounto God, to be mortified, ruled and gouerned. Are not all theſe ſacrifices Euchariſticall, or gratulatorie? But thou wilt ſaie, that they ſpeake of the ſonne of God, that he is there immolated, offered, and ſacrificed; therefore it ſéemeth not that we ſhould flie to theſe ſacrifices Euchariſticall, or of thankeſ-giuing. Naie rather, it hindereth nothing at all: bicauſe thou thalt find in the ſelfeſame fathers, if thou read them attentiuelie, that the ſame, which is doone in the myſteries, is an imitation of that true ſacrifice, which Chriſt himſelfe offered vponupon the altar of the croſſe; and they ſaie, that it is a myſterie thereof.
And no man doubteth, but that myſteries, or ſacraments, and imitations, hauehave the names of thoſe things which they expreſſe. Wherefore, among them, To ſacrifice, ſignifieth nothing elſe, but To repreſent the ſacrifice, to call it to remembrance, to laie it before the eies, and to giuegive thanks for the ſame. And in their ſentences, which be cited of our aduerſaries, if thou well and diligentlie examine all that goeth before, and that followeth, thou ſhalt euermore find ſome ſuch thing. Which if in ſome place perhaps it dooth not plainelie appeare; then that ſentence muſt be interpreted by other ſaiengs of the ſame fathers in other places. But beléeue me, thou ſhalt ſildome find, but that thoſe ſentences themſelues, which be cited, hauehave with them their owne remedie: and it ſhall be ſildome anie néed to expound them by other places. Albeit this I cannot denie, but that the fathers vſed too much exceſſiue ſpeach; & that they inclined to the ſhadowes of the old lawe, more than was neceſſarie. Two things more I thought good to be added; to wit, that theſe ſacrifices of thankſ-giuing in the ſupper of the Lord are not peculiar and ſpeciallie belonging to the ſacrificers; naie rather, ſo manie of the faithfull as be preſent, and doo communicate, doo offer the ſame.
Neither hauehave I knowne anie other difference betwéene the miniſter and the communicants, as touching this action; ſauing that by him the word of God, and doctrine is expounded vntounto the people, by him the ſacraments are proffered, and diſtributed: and that the people with their mind beléeue the ſaiengs, and with their bodie receiue the ſacraments: the miniſter in the action is the director, and the people (as their part is to doo) giuegive their conſent. That the Maſſe is no Euchariſtian ſacrifice.Further, in the papiſticall Maſſe, this Euchariſticall or gratulatorie ſacrifice hath no place: for thoſe that ſtand by vnderſtand not what is ſaid by the Maſſing prieſt; wherfore they cannot anſwer Amen to the praiſes & thankſ-giuing of God. Onlie he dooth communicate, others receiue nothing. Offerings of almes there be in a manner none, the death of the Lord is not preached: wherefore (as it appeareth) they hauehave ouerthrowne all by their priuate Maſſe. And whereas there be two kinds of ſacrifices, a propitiatorie I ſaie, and a ſacrifice of thankſ-giuing; and that they hauehave not the propitiatorie ſacrifice, no more than we hauehave for that did Chriſt wholie and perfectlie offer) and further, that they hauehave not the ſacrifice of thankſ-giuing which we hauehave, what remaineth to their Maſſe, but that it is a méere hypocriſie, and a feigned and damnable counterfetting of the ſupper of the Lord? Wherefore (I beſéech you) let it go awaie at length with ſhame enough, as it hath deſerued. And to this let vsus diligentlie applie our ſelues; that a right and lawfull vſe of the Lords inſtitution may be reſtored.