The Protestant Religion Truly State and Justified, Part 39 – Part 40
The One and Fortieth accuſed Point.
That there is not in the Church a true and proper Sacrifice; and that the Maſs is not a Sacrifice.
Anſ. True and proper, if the words are intelligible, are put againſt falſe and equivocal or figurative. And what man can tell us which Sence of the word [Sacrifice] muſt be taken for the only proper Sence, when with Heathens and Chriſtians the word is uſed in ſo many Sences, and there are ſo many ſorts of Sacrifices? This man would not tell you whether it be the Thing or the Name that he controverteth; that would be to come into the Light. If it be the thing, we never doubted but divers things are and muſt be in the Church, which are called Sacrifices, ſome in Scripture, and ſome by Papiſts: And ſome things by them called Sacrifices, are in their Church which God is againſt.
If it be the Name that is the queſtion, we know that in a General Sence it may be given to many things of different Species, and equivocally yet to more; but which Sence to call proper among ſo many, let quibling Grammarians tell him: We ſtrive no further about Names, than tendeth to preſerve the due Judgment of things.
Sometime a Sacrifice ſignifieth a ſecond thing offered to God by way of worſhip.
Sometime more ſtrictly, ſomewhat ſuppoſed highly to gratifie or pleaſe him, offered to expiate ſome Crime that diſpleaſeth him, or by pleaſing to procure ſome benefit from him.
Among Heathens and Jews, there were various ſorts of Sacrifices: Some Hilaſtical, ſome Euchariſtical: Some of things Lifeleſs, and ſome of Living Creatures; where ſtrictly part was burnt and ſo offered to God, and part given to the Prieſt, and part eaten by the Offerers.
We hold, 1. That Jeſus Chriſt offered his Body on the Croſs a Sacrifice to God for the expiation of Sin, as a thing pleaſing to God, in a ſence which no other Sacrifice ever▪was or is; not that God delighted in his Blood, Pain or Death as ſuch; but as finis gratiâ, it was the moſt excellent means to demonſtrate his Wiſdom, Love, Juſtice, and Mercy, and ſave a ſinful race of men, with the honour of his Law and Government.
2. We hold that Chriſt hath inſtituted his Sacrament, to be a viſible Repreſentation of this his Sacrifice, both for Commemoration and for actual Inveſtiture and Collation of Chriſt to be our Saviour, and Head in Union, and of his Grace and Benefits, Pardon, Reconciliation, Adoption, Juſtification, Sanctification, and Title to Glory. And we know that the ancient Churches called this often a Sacrifice: Not in the ſame ſence as Chriſt was our Sacrifice; nor as the Moſaical Types were Sacrifices; but a Repreſentative Sacrifice, repreſenting Chriſts own. But we are the ſhier to uſe the name Sacrifice, where Papiſts apply it to Idolatry.
3. We know that all Chriſtians are bound to dedicate themſelves to God, and even to lay down their Lives when he requireth it; and bound to offer him penitent Confeſſion, Praiſe, Thanksgiving, and to give Alms to the poor, and ſerve and honour him with all their Wealth and Power. And all theſe are called Sacrifices in Scripture, becauſe they are ſacred oblations, acceptable to God through the merits of Chriſts Sacrifice.
Is not this man a Calumniator then, that faith we hold, [that there is not in the Church a true and proper Sacrifice,] unleſs he call none true and proper but what no man can offer to God.
But what ſay we to the Sacrifice of the Maſs? We ſay, that for the Prieſt to pretend that after his words, Bread is turned into Chriſts Fleſh in a Phyſical ſence, and Wine into his Blood, and that this is our God, and that he ſacrificeth this God to God, and eateth and drinketh him ſo ſacrificed, and that all that ſo receive him have Eternal Life: This is a prophanation of Holy things, a deceiving of Souls, a blaſpheming of Chriſt, and Idolatry againſt God. And all ſacrificing in their Maſs, that is more than a Repreſentation of Chriſts own ſacrificing himſelf, for Commemoration and Communication of the gifts of his Teſtament, and the expreſſion of our Gratitude, and Devotedneſs to God by him, is their own prophane invention.
How do they offer his broken body and blood ſhed, any otherwiſe than Repreſentatively, unleſs they kill him, and eat him when he is Dead? It was only a Repreſentation of his own ſacrificed Body and Blood, which he made at the Sacrament himſelf; not then broken and ſhed, but to be broken, ſlain, and ſhed ſoon after, (unleſs he had two bodies, one dead and one alive.) The Sacrament indeed was called a Sacrifice by the ancient Churches, to ſignifie that it is not Chriſts body as now glorified in Heaven that is there Repreſented, but his body as once fleſh and blood ſacrificed on the Croſs: And how can it be that, but by Repreſentation, ſacrificing it was killing it: Do they kill Chriſt a thouſand thouſand times over, yea, and kill his Gloryfied body? He hath no exiſtent Fleſh and Blood in Heaven, ſpeaking properly and formally; but a Spiritual glorified body, that was Fleſh and Blood on Earth: And doth every Prieſt turn Chriſts Spiritual glorified body into Fleſh and Blood again? O what a Maſs of prophanation is their Maſs.
Tho Two and Fortieth accuſed Point.
That Sacramental Ʋnction, is not to be uſed to the Sick.
Anſ. In thoſe Hot-Countries, anointing their bodies was uſed as a great refreſhment for Delight and Health. And Chriſt and his Apoſtles applyed it to the Miraculous uſe of Healing, as Chriſt did Clay and Spittle to a blind Man: And while that miraculous uſe continued, St. James bids thoſe that are ſick as a puniſhment for ſome ſin, to ſend for the Elders of the Church, that they may pray for the pardon of his ſin, and for his recovery, and anoint him with Oil, and if he have not ſinned unto Death, (that is, a Capital Crime, which God would have Magiſtrates puniſh with Death, and will do ſo himſelf,) his Sin ſhall be forgiven, and he ſhall be healed.
See now the Malice of the Prince of Darkneſs. He that tempteth men to caſt out half the ſubſtance of the Lords Supper, meerly to ſhew what they can and will, and dare do againſt his Word, and tempteth men to forbid the very Scripture it ſelf, yet to undoe, he will overdoe, and draw men to be wiſe and Righteous over much: Who would think theſe men are againſt the ſufficiency of Scripture, that will turn its temporary occaſional actions into perpetual Sacraments? They make Conſcience of waſhing Feet, of bearing Palms, of the Holy-Kiſs (but on the Pax) and a Sacrament of anointing the ſick: And why they make not a Sacrament of anointing the Blind with Clay and Spittle, of waſhing at Jordan or Siloam Pools, and of the ſaid Kiſs, and waſhing of Feet, of bearing Palms, of the Popes Riding on an Aſs, &c. I know not.
But for the Name of a Sacrament, (bring firſt a Military, and then a Church Term, not uſed in Scripture) we will not quarrel with them: They may laxly extend it to almoſt any Ceremony or ſign Religiouſly uſed, rightly or wrongly. But, 1. They uſe that to the Dying, when they judge them paſt hope, which St. James ſpake of uſing for Recovery.
2. They uſe that as an ordinary thing, which was to be uſed only for miraculous Cures: and yet ſhew not that they have the Faith or gift of Miracles, nor cure any by it.
3. They force men to that feigned Sacrament now ceaſed with that gift, which was uſed to none but ſuch as Voluntarily deſired it. Why are they not con…ed to uſe it themſelves, but they muſt force all others to it as neceſſary? What Man, Woman, or Child, do you read of in all the New-Teſtament, that was anointed in order to Death, ſave a Woman that meant no ſuch thing, that anointed Chriſt in Health? Where read you that Dragoons or Inquiſitors inforced it, and draged naked the bodies through the Streets, and Buryed them in Dunghils, or where Dogs may eat them, if they refuſe it? Whoſe Sacraments can we think are theſe?