The Anatomy of the Mass, Book 1 · Chapter 17
CHAP. XVII. Of the Prieſts intention, without which the Roman Church beleeve… no conſecration, nor Tranſubſtantiation is made.
THe Roman Church holdeth, that … the Prieſt hath not intention to conſecrate, and to doe what the Church doth, there is no conſecration or Tranſubſtantiation made. It is thus defined and determined by Pope Eugenius the 4. in the inſtruction of the Armenians, which is at the end of the Councell of Florence: And by the Councell of Tren… in the 7. Seſſion, Canon 11. in theſe words:*Si quis dixerit in Miniſtris dum Sacramenta conſic…unt, & conferunt, non requiri intentione, ſaltem faciend… quod Eccleſia ſa…it, …ath… ma ſit. If any one ſay that the intentiont… doe at leaſt what the Church doth, is not requiſite in the Miniſters, let him be accurſed.
The Sacrament then being of no value, if the Prieſts intention be not to conſecrate, it is impoſſible for the people to be aſſured that the conſecration was made. For they know not what the intention and thought of the Prieſt was: only they preſume it by conjecture. God only knows the hearts of men, 2. Chron. 6.30. The adoration therefore of the Hoſte, is a conjecturall adoration, and which is done at all adventure, ſince no man is aſſured of the Prieſts intention, without which the Sacrament is of no value. Bellarmin confeſſes it ingenuouſly in his third Book of Juſtification, chap. 8.*Dicent. Ne que poteſt quis eſſe certus certitudine fidei ſe percipere verum Sacramentum, cum Sacramentū non conſiciatur ſine intentione Miniſtri, & intentionem alterius nemo videre poſſit. No man (ſaith he) can be certaine by the certitude of faith that he receives a true Sacrament, becauſe it depends upon the intention of the Miniſter: And none can ſee another mans intention. And truly this Cardinall hath reaſon to ſay that none can be certaine of it: for there are Prieſts that are Magitians, and there are examples of Prieſts convicted and puniſhed for having conſecrated in the name of the Devill. Even very lately there was one put to death at Loudun, accuſed of Magicke by the Ʋrſulina Nunnes that were poſſeſt with the Devill. There be Prieſts Atheiſts & profane, that ſcoffe and jeſt at every thing they doe in the Church. I have knowne diverſe Prieſts, who beeing converted to the true Religion, did confeſſe to have ſung Maſſes for many yeares together againſt their intention, and deteſting in their hearts what they did, and asked forgiveneſſe of God for that they had fought ſo long againſt their owne conſciences. In all theſe Maſſes then no conſecration was made.
By the ſame doctrine it appeares that the Prieſt doth not know whether he b… a Prieſt or no. For he knowes not what the intention of his Ordinator was▪ Whence followeth that all the Maſſes he ſings, and all the abſolutions he giveth, remaine in ſuſpence, and no man knowes whether they be of any force or value Peradventure this Prieſt received the order of Prieſthood of a Biſhop that had intention, but this Biſhop perhaps received his Orders of another Biſhop that had no intention. And ſo mounting upwards, the uncertaintie encreaſeth and multiplies it ſelfe ad infinitum. Gabri… Biel acknowledges the ſame in his Epitomie of the Canon of the Maſſe:*Null…s …elebrans poteſt evidenter ſcice ſe eſſe Sacer dotem, quia non poteſt c… …nter ſ…re …e ſore baptizatu, aut leg…m… ordinatum. No Priest (ſaith he) that celebrateth, can know evidently whether he be a Prieſt: for he cannot know evidently whether he be baptized, or whether he hath received the Ordination lawfully.
The Church then under the Old Teſtament had a great advantage over the Chriſtian Church; for then the Salvation of Children depended not upon the intention of thoſe that circumciſed them, but on the onelyonly grace of God, and upon his Covenant, which is a ſtay infinitely more firme than the intention of men.
Pope Adrian the 6.*Adrian. 6. Quodlib. Sect. 10. Suppoſito 2. Fol. 70. Conſilium Conſtantienſe excuſa… ſimplices adorā tes hoſtiam non conſecratam, quia tacite implicatur conditio, ſi conſecratio ſit rectè facta. Et paulo poſt, Si ſic adoret, Adoro te ſitu es Chriſtus. Conſideration. 6. after the councell of Conſtance, excuſeth the ſimple people that worſhippeth the unconſecrated Hoſte, which they thinke to be conſecrated, ſaying, the Hoſte is not worſhipped but with this condition, to wit, if the conſecration be made as it ought, in ſaying, Adoro te ſitues Chriſtus: I worſhip thee if thou be Chriſt. As ſaying: I know not whether thou be Chriſt, or whether thou be not Chriſt; but howſoever, and at all adventure, I adore thee if thou be Chriſt.
Gerſon in his Treatiſe of the Examen of Doctrines, Tome 1. moves an objection drawne out of Bonaventure, touching the worſhipping of the Euchariſt which is thought to be conſecrated though it be not. His anſwer after Bonaventure is ſuch:aObjicit idem Bonaventura de adoratione Euchariſtiae quandoque non conſecratae in manibus Sacer dotis. Reſpondet caſum communem eſſe, qui ſemper implicitam habet conditionem vel preſuppoſitionem, quod Sacerdos ſecerit ſecundum debitum Eccleſiae ritum. It is an ordinary eaſe which alwaies carries this condition or implicite preſuppoſition, that the Prieſt hath done as ought to be done in the Church, which condition needs not to be expreſſed in the adoration. Nevertheleſſe this adoration frees it ſelfe from being a ſinne, becauſe it is the cuſtome of the faithfull: whereof we have an example in the worſhipping of Images. Theſe Doctors will have the Hoſte and Images of Saints to be worſhipped upon theſe conditions, viz: if the conſecration was duly made, and if thoſe Images be Images of true Saints, and if thoſe Saints heare us: Which be things that one muſt gueſſe at piouſly, and be contented with conjectures, and be ſaved by cuſtome. As if a wife doubting whether he that hath lien with her, were her husband or no, ſhould ſay unto him, I have received you, but under this preſuppoſition, that you are my huſband: I have indeed lien with you, but it was under this condition, if you were my huſband. The faith of the ſaithfull is not grounded upon conjectures, it worſhips not a conjecturall God, not knowing whether he be a God or no God.
The force of this intention is ſo great, that Vaſquez the Jeſuite ſaith,*Vaſquez in 3 part. Thomae Tomo 3. D…ſp. 171. num. 17. Conſtat Sacerdotibus cōmiſſam fuiſſe poteſtatem conſecrandi, …ta ut ſi vellent cō ſecrare in malū uſū, nempe pro venefi…s & incantationibus cōſecratio corum effectum ha…eret. It is moſt certaine that the power of conſecrating was committed unto Prieſts, ſo that if they would conſecrate to a bad uſe, viz: as for poyſonings, or enchantments, the conſceration never theleſſe ſhould have its effect. By this meanes Chriſt ſhall be in the power of a Magician, and ſhall become the ſport or paſtime of the Devill. Would God have given unto Prieſts a power againſt God himſelfe, which he will not take from them when they employ it in the ſervice of the Devill?
But upon this intention mens conſciences are marvelouſly confounded and troubled, and their Doctors know not at what paſſe they be. For if a Prieſt hath before him a great houshold-loafe, and his intention is but to conſecrate one halfe of it, without cutting it into two pieces: how ſhall a man diſcerne Chriſts body which is in that bread, from the unconſecrated bread? And if the Prieſt hath before him a dozen of wafer cakes, and his intention is but to conſecrate ten of them, if theſe Hoſtes come to be mingled together, how ſhall he diſcern the conſecrated ones from thoſe that are not cōſecrated? How ſhall he diſcern his God from the wafers of common bread? Is it poſſible that Chriſt did not leave unto Chriſtians any meanes to know with certainty whether his body be preſent under the ſpecies, or whether it be not: leſt they ſhould pollute themſelves with Idolatrie?
VponUpon this adoration it muſt be obſerved, that the Councell of Trent *Seſſ. 13. …ap. 5.ordaineth that the Sacrament be worshipped. Now all the Doctors with an unanimous conſent, after Saint Auſtin, define that this word Sacrament, ſignifieth a ſacred ſigne. This Councell then ordains that the ſigne be worshipped. That if by the ſacred ſigne Chriſt himſelfe muſt be underſtood, Chriſt shall be the ſigne and the figure of himſelfe, as Bellarmin *S Produ…in….ſaith in the 24. chapter of his ſecond Booke of the Euchariſt: aIde Chriſtus ſui upſius figura ſuit.The ſame Chriſt was the figure of himſelfe.
In this point of adoration, God in his juſt judgement hath given our adverſaries over into a reprobate ſenſe. For when the Hoſte is fallen into ſome filthy place, or is vomited up through drunkenneſſe, they worſhip it thus defiled, as Vaſquez teaches in his 3 Tome, upon the 3 part of Thomas, Diſput. 195. chap. 5.bVaſq. 3. Tom. in 3. partem Thomae Diſp. 195. cap. 5. Hoc eſt cō tracom… nem ſenſum Eccleſiae, quae ſpecies … loco ſoralido eru… ras, tanquā verum Sacramentum veneraretur. That is (ſaith he) the common opinion of the Church, which would worſhip as a true Sacrament the ſpecies taken ou… of a filthy place, or vomited up againe by a brute beaſt: for there is no reaſon to ſay that Chriſts body ozaſeth to be under them before they be corrupted. And in the ſamecCap. 43. place he teacheth, that if a dumbe creature hath eaten the conſecrated Hoſtes, and drunken the conſecrated cup, this beaſt ſhall grow fat with them, and may be made drunke with it, and its belly ſhall ſwell. It will then be drunke with accidents, and farten with roundneſſes and lines.
The words of this Jeſuite, in the beginning of the 4 chapter of the ſame Diſpute, are ſuch:*A…dere po…eſt ut animal quod ſpecies Sacramenti ſumpſit, non m…nus nutriatur quàm ſi panem & vinum non conſ…rati… manducet. Immo … aceidere poteſt ut animal inebrictur, & venter …jus diſteda…tur. It may come to paſſe that a beaſt that hath eaten the ſpecies of the Sacrament, ſhall not be leſſe nouriſhed with thē then if it bad eaten bread and wine not conſecrated: yea it may fall out that this beaſt may be made drunk therewith, & her belly ſtretch & ſwell. To be ſhort, by this doctrine that beaſt may burſt for having eaten God.
For to avoid this ignominie and preſerve Chriſt from theſe inconveniences, certaine Doctors of the Roman Church, and namely Bonaventure have eſteemed that ſo ſoon as a beaſt hath devoured the conſecrated Hoſte, or that it hath beene caſt into the dirt or in a privie, Chriſts body with drawes himſelfe, and the ſubſtance of the bread returnes by a ſecond tranſubſtantiation no leſſe admirable than the firſt. But Pope†Vaſquez in 3 part. Thomae Diſp. 195. cap 5. Gregory the eleventh§Verum Greg. 11. in Directorie Inquiſitorum 2. p. 4.10. damnavit aſſerentes ſub hoſtia conſ…rata, projecta in lutum, aut locum ſordidum, non manere corpus Chriſti. in his Directorie of Inquiſitors, part. 2. queſt. 20. condemnes this opinion: and that conformably to the opinion of Thomas, and of Scotus, and of the Jeſuites, who hold generally that the body of Chriſt is taken really by a beaſt, and that mice may carry it away.