Aphorisms of Christian Religion, Chapter 27
CHAP. XXVII. Of the Popish Maſſe.
I. APHORISME.
THe Papiſts faine that the Maſſe is a worke, wherein the Maſſe-prieſt doth create or make his Chriſt of bread, by buzzing or mumbling of theſe fiue words, Hoc eſt enim corpus meum: for this is my bodie. And then offereth him to the Father as a ſacrifice, to expiate the ſins of all, quicke, and dead, for whom that Maſſe is celebrated.
II.
This opinion of prophane Papiſtes, is impious and blaſphemous. For firſt this reproch and diſgrace is offered thereby vntounto Chriſt: that he is not the onlyaHeb. 5.6. and 7.24. Prieſt of the new Teſtament.
III.
Againe, this doctrine ouerthroweth the merite of Chriſts death: as if the ſins of all the faithfull were not perfectly expiate by that one aHeb. 9.12. and 10.12.14.ſacrifice of Chriſtes death.
IIII.
Thirdly, the Papiſtes by this aſſertion, as much as lyeth in them, do againe crucifie Chriſt: in that they promiſe the remiſſion of ſinnes by the Maſſe, and ſo ſet vp a new Teſtament: and in that they ſay they offer vp Chriſt as an hoſt or ſacrifice vntounto God. For where there is a Teſtamēt, there muſt needs be the aHeb. 9.16.death of a teſtator: & where an hoſt is, it muſt be ſlaine.
V.
Fourthly, this opinion or aſſertion doth depriue vsus of the benefit of Chriſts death, that is, the remiſſion of ſinnes: for if ſinnes be pardoned by the merite of the Maſſe, then ſurely are they not pardoned by the merite of the aMat. 26.28.death of Chriſt.
VI.
Fiftly, the Maſſe doth vtterly euert and take away the Lords Supper: for it cannot ſtand with it. For in the Supper the Lords purpoſe is to giuegive a bleſſing aIoh. 6.32.vntounto vsus: but in the Maſſe men purpoſe to offer vp ſatiſfaction vntounto God. Againe, in the Supper the Lord teſtifieth vntounto vsus, that we are & muſt be daily bIoh. 6.57.quickened, by the onelyonly ſacrifice of Chriſt: but in the Maſſe they faine, that Chriſts ſacrifice cannot profite vsus, if it be not iterated euerie day. Thirdly, the Supper is celebrated by the c1. Cor. 11.18. & 10.17. Mat. 26.27.whole congregation, but the Maſſe is celebrated by the Prieſt onelyonly.
VII.
Moreouer, the arguments which Papiſts vſe for the defence of the Maſſe, are of no waight, as theſe following: Chriſt ſayd in the inſtitution of the Supper, Do this: therefore he commaunded his Apoſtles and their ſucceſſours to offer vp or ſacrifice his bodie vntounto God. For ſo this word facere, to do it, (ſay they) is vſed euerie where in holy aExod 29. Num. 28.Scripture, and ſo it is found alſo with bApud Vergil. eclog. 3.prophane writers. But I ſay it is no good conſequent, that becauſe that word is elſewhere ſo taken, that therfore it is alſo ſo vſed in this place. Next, that it muſt hauehave here another ſignificatiō, it is euident, both by the coherence oſentēces, & by the Apoſtle c1. Cor. 11.26.Paules expoſſition, that nothing elſe is ſignified, but this, Eate this bread, and drinke ye of this cup. Againe thoſe words were not ſpoken to the Apoſtles onelyonly, as Miniſters of the Church (for Chriſt himſelfe performed the partes of a Miniſter) but as to all the faithfull receiuing the Sacrament at the hands of the Lords Miniſter. Wherefore theſe wordes doe no leſſe concerne thoſe whom they call lay men, then they do the Prieſts or Miniſters of the Church.
VIII.
Againe, if the Supper be to repreſent Chriſtes ſacrifice and oblation, which he made vponupon his Croſſe: thē Chriſt muſt be offered vp in the Sacramēt of the Supper, for how can we otherwiſe repreſent in the Supper the oblation of Chriſt, but by offering vp Chriſt vnderunder the kindes of bread and wine. But this conſequence is falſe, and ſo is the reaſon thereof. For that oblation which Chriſt made on the Croſſe, both may & muſt be otherwiſe repreſented, that is, by the a1. Cor. 11.24.breaking of the bread and the powring out of the wine.
IX.
Againe, if the paſcall lambe was to be ſacrificed then Chriſt alſo in the Euchariſt muſt be ſacrificed, for that the paſchal lambe was a type of the Lordes Supper: here I anſwere againe, the conſequence is falſe, and the reaſon therof: for of that antecedent this will follow that Chriſt alſo muſt be ſacrificed: for that the lambe was a type of a1. Cor. 5.7.Chriſt, not in the Euchariſt, but on the Croſſe: where as Iohn ſaith, that was finiſhedbIoh. 19.36. which the lambe prefigured.
X.
Againe, they bring a place of Malach. chap. 1. v. 11. from the riſing of the ſunne, vntounto the going downe of the ſame, my name is great among the Gentils, and in eueryevery place incenſe shalbe offred vntounto my name and a pure offring. But I anſwer, that where they inferre that the body of Chriſt is offred vp in the Supper, becauſe it is a cleane or pure offring, the argumēt is falſe, becauſe it will not follow from the generall to the ſpeciall affirmatiuely. And it is very manifeſt to any man of vnderſtanding, that Malachie here ſpeaketh, as the aSee Ioel. 2.28. & Act. 2.17.Prophets, of the ſpirituall worſhip of the new Teſtament, vnderunder the ſhadowes of the ceremoniall worſhip vſed in the old.
But it is ſtraunge that theſe men dare be bold to bring argumēts for the defence of their Maſſe in ſacrifice out of the Epiſtle to the Hebrues: for that the principall doctrine of that Epiſtle doth plainly euert all this Popiſh inuētion of the Maſſe, out of the 5. chap. v. 1. they hauehave this ſaying. aHeb 5.1. foreign.Euerie Prieſt is ordained, that he may offer ſacrifices for ſinnes. Therefore there are alſo in the new Teſtament, Prieſts properly ſo called, which offer vp ſacrifices for ſins. For that the Apoſtle vſeth a verbe of the preſent tenſe, I anſwer, it is very manifeſt, in all the Apoſtles doctrine and ſpeach in that place, that he ſpeaketh of the Prieſtes of the old Teſtament, and of the ſacrifices which were types of Chriſtes ſacrifice, the only ſacrifice expiatorie for ſinne. And ſo the Apoſtle ſpeaking of Leuitical Prieſts, in all the Epiſtle vſeth verbes of the preſent tenſe, as chap. 7.9.11. The reaſon of that phraſe is, to ſet the matter whereof he ſpeaketh, more manifeſtly before the eyes of men.
XII.
Next they borow out of the 7. chap. the type of Melchi-zedek: & they reaſon thus; If Chriſt did not ſacrifice himſelfe in the Supper in an vnbloudy ſacrifice vnderunder, the kindes of bread and wine, then was he neuer made Prieſt after the order of Melchi-zedek: But he was made, &c. as the Apoſtle witneſſeth in that chap. The reaſon of the conſequence is, becauſe Melchi-zedek offred vp vntounto God bread and wine, I anſwer, the conſequēce is falſe, for Chriſt is called a Prieſt after the order of Melchi-zedek, principally for this cauſe, as the Apoſtle ſheweth, becauſe he is a prieſt for aHeb. 7.3.euer, as Melchi-zedek there is noted and deſcribed, without father, without mother, without kinred. Againe, the reaſon of their conſequēce is falſe, for that Melchi-zedek did not offer bread and wine vntounto God, but brought forth bGen. 14.18bread and wine, for the refection of Abraham and his ſeruants, and that this is there ſignified we may well vnderſtand both by the Hebrue word Hotzi, and by the circumſtance of that action in that place.
XIII.
Laſtly, they hauehave this ſentence out of the 9. chap. It is neceſſarie that the aHeb. 9.23.*Exemplaria.ſimilitudes of heauenly things, should be purified with ſuch things: but the heauenly things themſelues (are purified) with better *foreign. Hoſtes, as they ſpeake.ſacrifices then theſe. Ergo, with oblations of Maſſes: becauſe he ſpeaketh in the plurall number, hoſtes. Therfore he ſpeaketh not of the bloudie ſacrifice of Chriſt, which was but one. But I anſwer that the Apoſtle there ſtill keepeth his plurall number,Enallage n. chaunge of number. taking one number for another, becauſe he continueth in the compariſon of the legall ſacrifices. And of theſe chaunges, we hauehave many examples, as Ruth. 1. v. 10. and chapter. 2. v. 20. And that the Apoſtle there ſpeaketh of that one ſacrifice of Chriſt, may appeare by the ſcope of that whole chap. for that nothing elſe is there intended, but to compare the Prieſthood of Chriſt, with the Leuiticall Prieſthood, and to ſhew how far that excelleth this.
XIIII.
And albeit we vtterly deny that the holy Supper of the Lord (which the Papiſtes hauehave transformed into the monſter of the Maſſe) to be a ſacrifice expiatorie for ſin: yet we do willingly confeſſe and profeſſe it to be the ſacrifice *Sacrifice of prayſe & thankes-geuing.Euchariſticall of the new Teſtament, for that it was inſtituted by the Lord for this ende, by this ſolemne rite to a1. Cor. 11.26.ſhew & ſet forth his death, that we might magnifie him as our onelyonly redeemer to the glorious prayſe of his name.