Ceremonies of the Monstrous Popish Mass, Part 2 · Chapter 39
Of the fift parte of the Canon, conteining the entraunce into the Tranſubſtantiation. CHAPTER XXXIX.
a The Prayer.
b WHich oblation we beſeeche thee ô God, vouchſafe to make it in eueryevery reſpect, bleſ † regi † ſtred, rati † fied, reaſonable, and acceptable, to the ende it may be made vntounto vsus, the bo † dy, and bl † ood of thy deare beloued Sonne our Lord Ieſus Chriſt.
c The three former croſſes, are commonly made ouer the hoſte and Chalice: The fourth, onelyonly ouer the hoſte: and the fifte, ouer the Chalice.
Oratio.
QVAM oblationem in Deus, in omnibus quaeſumus bene † dictam, aſcri † ptam, ra † tam, rationabilem, acceptabilem que facere digneris, vt nobis cor † pus & ſan † guis fiat dilectiſſimi Filij tui Domini noſtri Ieſu Chriſti.
Tres praecedētes cruces primae fiunt ſuper hoſtiam & …licē cōmuniter, quarta fit tantū ſuper hoſtiam, & quinta fit ſuper calicē.
a This is one of thoſe prayers which is againe attributed to Leo and Gregory. They which deuide the Canon but into fiue partes, begin here the ſecond conteining the conſecration of the ſacrifice.
b I will not here enter into the expoſition of the epithetes and titles which they here giuegive vntounto their oblation. And therefore they which hauehave a minde to vnderſtand them, may learne them at their handes which hauehave treated of that matter. It is enough for vsus that we aduertiſe here the Readers, to call to minde that which we hauehave already admoniſhed them of, elſe where, as concerning the bread and wine in the Supper, which were taken from the offrings of the faithful: & remember likewiſe that which we hauehave already hādled ſomwhat at large of the tranſubſtantiatiō of the Auncients, and in what ſenſe they vnderſtood how the bread and wine were made the body & blood of our Lord Ieſus in the Supper, and chaunged & turned into them. For we hauehave here, the maner & teſtimonie of all theſe thinges. For, this oblation, which is here ſpoken of, according as they in the olde time vſed it (in that ſenſe that it hath already bene interpreted) was taken from the giftes and preſents which we hauehave ſo often made mention of. And therfore the Church made this prayer vntounto God, not meaning that the ſubſtance of the bread and wine were changed into the ſubſtance of the body and blood of Ieſus Chriſt, according to the doctrine of Popiſh tranſubſtantiation: but that they were dedicated and conſecrated vntounto this holy Sacrament, truely to repreſent this body and blood, and the right communicating of them, in ſuch ſenſe as we hauehave already handled them, when as we ſpake of the nature of the conſecration, & in what ſignification the ſame ought to be taken. For, if theſe wordes be otherwiſe vnderſtood, they are taken contrary to the meaning of the holy Scriptures and the auncient Church: as hath very largely and manifeſtly bene ſhewed by the teſtimony of the auncient Church doctors, alleaged for that purpoſe, by occaſiō of the office of the Feaſt of Corpus Chriſti day: who hauehave vſed the like wordes, in the very ſelfe ſame ſenſe that we expound theſe. Howbeit, theſe our Romaniſtes, hauehave playd their partes herein, as they hauehave done in all other ſuch like thinges, applying this to their tranſubſtantiation, as they hauehave applied the teſtimonies of the auncient doctours: cleane contrary to the meaning both of the doctours, & alſo of the auncient Church. And therefore this prayer may very well be thus taken, as a requeſt which the Church requireth, that the bread and wine might be ſo dedicated and conſecrated to this holy Sacrament, as that in communicating thereof, it might alſo be a true partaking of the body and blood of Ieſus Chriſt, and of their ſacrifice: as in very deed they are figured by the bread and wine, and as the bread and wine, by a ſacramentall and ſpirituall preſence and vnion do lay them open before vsus. And ſurely there is no reaſon why we ſhould take it in the ſame ſenſe that the Romaniſtes take it, for, in it, is conteined a moſt intollerable blaſphemy. For, what a kind of ſpeach is this, to craue at the handes of God, to hauehave the ſubſtaunce of bread and wine chaunged into the ſubſtaunce of the body and blood of Ieſus Chriſt? For, if that ſhould be ſo, it would thereupon follow, that that which before was bread, is now become the body of Chriſt, which in very deed it was not. And ſo, the body of Chriſt ſhal be a new body, and not that body which is in heauē. For, if it be the ſame body which is in heauen, thē can not the bread be turned into it, and be made that body that before it was. For, what ſhould become of the ſubſtance of bread, ſeeing it hath no more the ſubſtance of bread. And therfore it muſt either vtterly become nothing, or elſe become ſuch a thing as it neuer was before. For, this bread muſt either be conuerted into the body of Ieſus Chriſt, or elſe this body muſt needes be a new boby of Ieſus Chriſt: or, if it be the ſame that is in heauen, it muſt needes be that the bread muſt be onelyonly ioined vntounto it, or elſe this body muſt needes grow into the ſame ſubſtaunce that the bread is of, which is ioined vntounto it. The Queſtionarie and Sophiſticall doctors, ſeeing that theſe abſurdities and an infinite number of other ſuch like, woulde follow vponupon this doctrine, hauehave, through diuerſe gloſes & expoſitions, wonderfully tormented thē ſelues, to make an open waye to eſcape withall, which we hauehave ſufficiently ſpokē of in our booke of the miniſtery & Sacraments. And therefore we wil here ſpeake no more of them.
c Our Romiſh doctors, make ſundry and diuerſe expoſitions of the ſignes of the croſſes that are here made. But chiefly they diligently admoniſh, and namely Berno, to hauehave great regard, that the numbers be not odde,Ber, Micro. de offic. Miſſ. Ca. 14. Alama. de offic Miſſ. Ca. 14. according to the reaſons by him alleaged. And contrariwiſe Alamarius ſayeth, that it ſhall not now be needefull to be very inquiſitiue, why they make moe in one place then in another, and more or leſſe. For, ſayeth he, they that were with Ieſus Chriſt, when he made his ſupper, can right wel tel, whether he made any croſſes, or not, eſpecially, ſeeing the croſſe whereon he was crucified, was not yet ſet vp. Wherin, he giueth vsus ſufficiently to vnderſtand, that it is more likely that Ieſus Chriſt made none at that time, thē otherwiſe. But, ſeeing they hauehave bene not onelyonly added to the Sacraments, as he ſayeth, but are alſo ſo requiſite to be had in them, as that wi…hout thē, there is nothing well done, as we hauehave alreadye treated in another place. Nowe becauſe it is not truly knowne who ordeined theſe croſſes,Micro. Ber. de oſſic. Miſſ. Ca. 14. Berno, referreth them all to the Romiſh office, & to Gregory who ordeined it: ſaying that all this, came from the Apoſtolique ſea, as all the reſt of the ceremonies of the Church did. And becauſe Berno ſetteth not downe what Gregorye it was, it is noted in the margine, amōgſt the exemplares which Cochleus imprinted,Cochle in Specu anti deuo. im. that it was Gregory the ſeauenth. Which ordinaunces doe right well agree with his condition, like a coniurer as he was, if the teſtimonies which we hauehave heard of him be true. For it is the property of all coniurers to vſe diuerſe caracters, ſignes, and ſigures.