Popery Anatomized, Section 12

Popery Anatomized · Section 12

p. 189SECTION XII. Of the manifold abuſes of the Maſs.

Maſter John Welſch his Reply.

AS for your Ceremonies, you did moſt wiſely in rejecting the probation of them till another place: and ſo to hold the Reader in the halfe (as we ſpeak) becauſe ye are never able to do it: and it is good to delay to enterpriſe a thing that is impoſſible. But how can you be ſo impudent, as to write that you will prove the ceremonies p. 190of your Maſs by the Scripture, ſeeing the Maſs it ſelf hath not the warrant out of the ſame, but contrary and repugnant to the ſame, as hath been proved. And I can ſcarcely think. M. Gilbert, that you have ſpoken this in earneſt, when you ſaid, you would prove the ceremonies of your Maſs by the ſame holy Word, which is the Scripture. For what then will you ſay to the Council of Trent, Seſſ. 22. cap. 5. who referrs not the inſtitution of them to the Lord Jeſus in his written Word, but to the Church by the unwritten traditions. And to Bellarmin, who ſaith, the Church inſtituted them, lib. 2. de miſſa, cap. 13. and ſo referrs the inſtitution of them, not to CHRIST in his written Word, but to the inſtitution of the Church, and to your own Doctors, and Canon Law, and Writers, who aſcribes the inſtitution of them, to your Popes, and others of your Church, as I have proved before. O, M. Gilbert! What a prepoſterous love is this that ye bear to your abominable ſacrifice, that ye are not aſhamed to write, that the very ceremonies of it hath their warrant in the ſame holy Word, and that contrary your own general Council of Trent, and all your learned Doctors and Writers. I think ye thought that we had never read your ceremonies, or never known them, that ye write ſo boldly of them. Shal the Council of Trent ſay, they are inſtituted by the Church, by Apoſtolical traditions, which your Church confeſſes are not written in the Scripture? And yet are not you aſhamed to ſay, they have their warrant by the Scripture, and ſo openly to contradict the doctrine of your own Council of Trent. I will ſay no further, but ſurely either they err in this point, or elſe ye: and if they err, then the general Church may err, and hath erred: and ſo one of your main foundations is gone. Chooſe you whither you will take this blot to your ſelf, or let it fall on them.

But becauſe ye account this Maſs of yours moſt p. 191heavenly: and ye vaunt, that ye only have in your Church that heavenly action: and becauſe it is the chiefeſt point of your ſervice and worſhip, which ye give to God in your Church: and alſo becauſe ye ſo impudently affirm, that the ceremonies thereof hath their warrant out of the Scripture: Therefore I will diſcover here, as ſhortly as I can, the abominations, abſurdities, blaſphemies, idolatries, vain, idle ſuperſtitions, Jewiſh and Ethnick ceremonies of the ſame, that poor folks be not deceived any longer therewith. For certainly, for as heavenly as ye think it is, I dare affirm that it is nothing elſe, but a very ſink and filthy cloſet of all abominations, idolatries, and horrible blaſphemies. So that as it is ſaid in the Proverbs, of the vertuous woman, that many women have done vertuouſly, but thou ſurmounts them all, Prov. 31.23. So it may be ſaid of the Maſs: Many ſervices and worſhips deviſed by man, have been idolatrous, blaſphemous and abominable: but this ſacrifice of the Maſs brought in the Church of God by Antichriſt, in idolatrie, abominations, and blaſphemies, ſurmounteth them all: ſo that the like of it hath never been before it, nor never ſhal be after it. For beſide the fore: ſaid abuſes, that it is a will-worſhip inſtituted by man, that it hath corrupted the Sacrament of the Supper, which was given us to aſſure us of the grace of Chriſt, and hath turned it in a ſacrifice, and that a propitiatory ſacrifice, and meritorious, not to the Prieſt only, but to the beholders alſo: and not to the preſent only, but to the abſent; and not only for the living, but for the dead: that it hath aboliſhed the death of Chriſt, and the vertue of that one ſacrifice: and that it hath ſpoiled Chriſt Jeſus of his Prieſthood, and communicated it unto others: beſide theſe intolerable abuſes, it abounds and overflows with other intolerable abominations.

As firſt, their altars in their Maſs, whereon they think p. 192they ſacrifice the Son of God, and therefore in the beginning of their Maſs, the Prieſt ſaith, And I will go in into the altar of God: whereby they renew either Judaiſm or Paganiſm: for their material altars was a part of the Ceremonial law of the Jewes, which was aboliſhed by the death of Chriſt: and Numa Pompilius 700 years before Chriſt, ordained that the Ethnick Prieſt when he went about to offer ſacrifice that he ſhould draw near to the altar. This entry of the Maſs is ſaid to be the ordinance of Pope Celeſtin the firſt, about the year of God 426 And becauſe the Prieſts take the altars for the Table whereon the Supper is celebrat, which he confounds with the abominations of the Maſs; & alſo becauſe M. Gilbert ſaid, he was minded to prove the ceremonies of the Maſs by the Scripture; therefore I will ask him, and his fellow Prieſts theſe few things concerning their altars Firſt, where read they that Chriſt did ever inſtitut in the New Teſtament, that the Table of our Lord ſhould only be of ſtone, and not of timber, or any other mettal, as their altars whereon they chant their Maſs, muſt be according to their law? Diſt. 1. conſ cap. Altaria ſi non. Secondly, where read they in the New Teſtament, that the Table of the Lord ſhould be conſecrated with oyl and chriſm, with a ſprinkling of water, mixed of wine and ſalt, of ciphers of holy water, at the four corners of the ſame, at the middle part, and that none may do this but a Biſhop: if a Clark do it, that he be degraded, and if one of the Laicks do it, that he be excommunicat? Canon, Non alij. What folly is this, that a Prieſt hath authority (as they think) to ſacrifice the Son of God, & yet he may not powr a little oyl upon a ſtone? That the Biſhop compaſs the altar ſeven times, ſinging the 51. Pſalm. Thou ſhalt waſh me with hyſop, &c. prophaning the truth of God. And there to bury the relicks of ſome Saints put in a little ſhrine, with three grains of incenſe: that God for p. 193their cauſe may hear the prayers, and accept of the ſacrifice offered up upon that altar: And then anointing the table of the altar with oyl, and ſinging, Jacob erected up a ſtone, &c. Where, I ſay, read you theſe in the New Teſtament, that Chriſt commanded theſe things to be done to the table of his Supper, which ye do to the altars whereon ye ſay your Maſſes? And ſuch like, where read you that none ſhould chant their Maſſes, but on ſuch altars as are conſecrated: And ſuch like, that your altars are not lawful, where there is not found the bodies or relicks of ſome Martyrs? Canon. Placuit ut altaria, Such like, that ye dedicat your altars whereon ye chant your Maſs, to others then to Chriſt, as unto the Virgin Mary, Peter, and other Saints departed? And ſuch like, that the Prieſt ſhould kiſs the altar often, and namely when he approaches unto it carrying the calice? Hath Chriſt commanded this? Hath the Apoſtles uſed them? Hath the Scripture made mention of them? What think you will you anſwer to God, when it ſhal be ſaid to you, Who required all theſe things at your hands? And wherefore alſo tranſgreſs ye your own law, in having mo altars then is neceſſary, ſeeing by it ye are commanded by expreſs terms, that ſuperfluous altars be deſtroyed? Canon. Eccleſ. vel altaria. To conclud this then with Ambroſ. in Epiſt. ad Heb. cap. 8. & 10. As our ſacrifice, ſaith he, which is no other thing but our prayers and thanksgiving, is not viſible, but inviſible: ſo our altar alſo is not viſible, but inviſible.

The ſecond abuſe is in the confeſſion of the Prieſt, that he ſaith in the entring of the Maſs, I confeſs to God Almighty, and to the bleſſed Virgin, and to all the Saints, that I have ſinned. In the which are ſundry abſurdities. Firſt, that this confeſſion is made not only to God, but alſo to the dead, who neither ſees the ſecrets of the hearts, nor yet are able to give remiſſion. The ſecōd is, in the prayer that is ſet p. 194down in the latter end of it, ſaying, I pray thee, bleſſed Mary, & all the hee Saints, and ſhee Saints of God, to pray to God, that I may have mercy: wherein are two horrible abuſes: one, that he makes no mention of Jeſus Chriſt our only Mediator, 1. Tim. 2.5. & deſires him not to make interceſſion for him: Next, that he prays unto the Saints departed, and makes them Interceſſors and Mediators, who neither knows our neceſſities, and the ſecrets of our hearts, neither is able to hear or help us, which wants all warrant out of the Word of God, Rom. 10.14. 1. Tim. 2.5 1. John 2. 1. Jer. 17.5. Pſal. 50.15. Jer. 29.12. Matth. 6.9. James 1.17. Gen. 20.1.2. 2. Kings 6.6. 2 Chron. 6.30. Iſa. 63 17. Eccleſ. 9.6. And ſeeing prayer is a honor only due to God, & Jeſus Chriſt is our only Mediator and Interceſſor; therefore this prayer to Saints departed is both idolatrous, and injurious to Chriſt his interceſſion and mediation. This confeſſion was inſtituted by Pontian and Damaſus Popes, anno 335. and 368.

The third abuſe, is the abſolution pronounced to the beholders of the Maſs: Amen, Brethren and ſiſters, by the mercy of our Lord Jeſus, by the help and ſign of the croſs, by the interceſſion of the Virgin Mary, by the merits of the Apoſtles, and of all the hee Saints and ſhee Saints, God give you mercy. Firſt, this agrees not with their privat Maſſes, where the Prieſt and the Clark only are preſent: For how can the Prieſt ſpeak truly, Amen, brethren and ſiſters, ſince none is preſent but the Clark only? Next, that which is only proper to Jeſus Chriſt, to his death, merits, and interceſſion, to make the Father merciful unto us, and to make him to forgive us our ſins, is taken from him here, and communicat unto the Virgin Mary, and the merits of all the hee Saints and ſhee Saints: and which is moſt horrible, unto the ſign of the croſs, that by her interceſſion, their merits, and the help of the ſign of the croſs, God might have mercy. What horrible idolatry is this, to joyn ſuch helpers to p. 195the Son of God, who is a perfect Savior? To joyn the merits of fleſh and blood to his merits, as though his were not ſufficient to obtain ſalvation? And as though men were not only able to merit eternal life to themſelves, but alſo had ſuch aboundance of merits, that they ſerved to obtain mercy for others: and ſo not only to make them ſaviors of themſelves, but of others alſo. And that which is yet more horrible idolatry and blaſphemy (if worſe can be) to joyn with him the help of the ſign of the croſs. Therefore in their Breviary they ſay, Keep us, Lord, with thy peace, &c. whom thou haſt redeemed by the tree of thy holy croſs. And in a Hymn, O croſs, hail; O croſs, only hope, increaſe righteouſneſs to the godly, and forgive the guilty. And in their Breviary, they ſay, We adore thy croſs, O Lord. Now what is it to mock God, if this be not? To ſubſtitut creatures, yea a very ſtock and a tree, in the room of the Son of God, and to aſcribe redemption unto it, and to pray for righteouſneſs and remiſſion at the ſame, to adore it, and to call it their only eſperance? What place is left then to the blood and death of Chriſt?

The fourth abuſe is in this prayer of the Maſs, We pray thee, Lord, for the merits of thy Saints, whoſe relicks are here, to forgive me all my ſins. Where firſt, he makes no mention of Chriſt, or his merits. Next, he prays to God, that for the merits of the Saints he may be forgiven; ſo he puts them in the room of Chriſt. Thirdly, they have the relicks of the Saints in ſuch account, that they have made a law, that it ſhal not be lawful to celebrat any Maſs, but upon ſuch altars where the relicks of ſome Saints are, De conſecrat. diſt. 1. cap. Placuit. But to what purpoſe is this? To make their altars commendable, and their ſacrifices acceptable? But hath not the Prieſt (as he thinks) in his hands, Chriſt Jeſus, the Holy of the Holieſt? And is there relicks of Saints more precious and worthy, then his blood is? yea, p. 196and what relicks, I pray you, for the moſt part? Not of Saints, but of harlots and brigands: yea, they have ſo multiplied their relicks, that they have made ſome of them to have mo heads then one, to have mo legs and arms then they were born with. As for example, Peter his whole body is buried in Rome in Vatican, Annal. Eccleſ. Tom. 1. & 3. and yet the half of him is in another part of Rome, Via Oſtienſi, Onu. d. 7. urb. Eccleſ. cap. de Baſilica; another part in Conſtantinople, Bellar. lib. 2. de Eccleſ. trium. cap. 3. & 4. and his head kept in the fourth place, Romae Onu. ibidem; and another part of his head in the fifth place, Romae Onu. ibidem, another part of his head in the ſixth place, Pictavi… Calv. admon de reliq. and yet ſundry of his teeth in other parts, Onu ibidem. So that if he had as many bodies, and bones, and teeth, and heads, and arms, and legs, as are ſaid to be his, and are kept as his relicks, his body were monſtrous. And the head of S. Barbara was ſhown in ſo many parts, that it behoved her to have ſeven bodies, or at the leaſt ſeven heads, Luther poſtil. in Evang. fest. exalt. cruce. And that which is yet worſe, they honor them, adores them, and prays unto them: the which is ſo manifeſt by the ordinary practiſe of their Church, that it needeth no probation.

Unto this we may joyn the fifth abuſe, their images upon the hoſtes of their Maſs, and the reſt of their Idols and Images, which they call the Books of the Laicks, wherewith they fill their Temples and Chapels: which they honor, adore, and pray unto, ſaying unto a ſtock, Thou art my father, and to a ſtone, thou art my mother: not only without commandment or example in the Scripture, but contrary the expreſs commandment of God given out of Mount Sinay, in horror and fear▪ ſo that the Mountain ſhook, and Moſes himſelf feared: Thou ſhalt make thee no graven Image to worſhip it. And contrary the p. 197whole Scripture, Exod. 20. Deut. 4.15. Iſa. 40 15.16. Jerem. 10.3. Acts 17.29 Rom. 1.23. 1. Cor. 10.14. 1. John 5.21. Rev. 9.20. & 21.8. And alſo the doctrine of the Fathers, Tertull. lib. de corona militis, Orig. contra Celſum, lib. 7. & 8. Lactant. de divin. instit. lib. 2. cap. 29. Cyprian. de van. idol. Clemen… lib. 5. ad Jac. frat. Chryſoſt. hom. 57. in Geneſ. 31. Concil. Elib. Can. 36. with ſundry others.

The ſixth abuſe, is in the prayer that the Prieſt ſaith when he offers his hoſte upon the altar: Receive, holy Father, this immaculat ſacrifice which I offer unto thee, for my own ſins, and for the ſins of all the faithful, both living and dead, that it may profit to me and them, to ſalvation and everlaſting life. And he prays the like when he offers the calice upon the altar: That it may aſcend in the preſence of his Majeſty, for the ſalvation of him, and of all the world. Wherein the Prieſt commits horrible blaſphemy, in aſcribing remiſſion of ſins and redemption, to the ſacrifice of bread and wine, for as yet the words of conſecration are not pronounced: and ſo by their own confeſſion, they are yet but bread and wine: and yet the Prieſt ſaith, he offers it to God for the ſins of the quick and dead, and for the ſalvation of the world. Now what blaſphemy is this to aſcribe that to the ſacrifice of bread and wine, which by their own confeſſion is not changed yet in Chriſts body and blood, which is only proper to the blood of Jeſus Chriſt? John 1.29. Heb. 9.26. and 10.12. 1 John 1.7 and 2.2. Acts 4.12 Next, that he offers this ſacrifice for the ſalvation of the dead, ſeeing the elect departed are in heaven, and ſo they need no ſacrifice for them: and the reprobat departed are in hell, ſo no ſacrifice will avail them. And as for Purgatory which they dream of, the Scriptures knows not ſuch a thing I paſs by the mixing of the wine with water, contrary the expreſs inſtitution of Chriſt, and the neceſſity of the ſilver and golden veſſels, or at the leaſt tin veſſels in your ſacrifice.

p. 198The ſeventh abuſe, is their magical bleſſing of their incenſe, after the manner of ſorcerers, without the warrant of the Word, and the vertue which the Prieſt prays for, that it may chaſe away the Devil, make whole every diſeaſe: which hath no more vertue then their exorciſmes and adjurations, which the Prieſt makes in Baptiſm, and in their other ſervices, by their holy water, by their lighted candles, their oyls, anointings, and other like ceremonies. And in this ceremony, they either Judaize: for the Jewes uſed this ceremony of incenſe under the Law, to figure the ſweet ſavor of the ſacrifice of the Son of God to his Father: and ſo makes the death of Chriſt of no effect to them: or elſe they follow the cuſtome of the old Romane idolaters. For we read more then 700. years before Chriſt, that they uſed incenſe in their ſacrifices and other ſervices, which they did to their Idoles, Alex. ab Alex. lib. 4. cap. 17. Some ſay, that Leo the third joyned to the Maſs this part, concerning the incenſe, about the year of God 800.

The eight abuſe is, in that they make their Maſs a memorial of Chriſt his incarnation, circumciſion, reſurrection and aſcenſion: and that they celebrat the ſame to the honor of others then to God; to wit, to the honor of the Virgin Mary, and of all the Saints, which is horrible blaſphemy, to give that which is Gods glory to his creatures. And therefore they have a Maſs of our Lady, a Maſs of S. Antony, a Maſs of S. Michel, &c. Now if the Maſs be one with the Lord his Supper (as they ſay it is) then it is properly a memorial of his death, and it is inſtituted only to the glory of God, and not to the honor of any creature: therefore our Savior ſaith, Do this in remembrance of me, and not of his Saints.

The ninth abuſe (paſſing by their monſtrous Tranſubſtantiation, whereof I have ſpoken in another place) is p. 199their round hoſte, taken from the uſe of the old Romane idolaters 700. years before Chriſt, who had little round bread which was conſecrated to the honor of their Gods, which they did eat after the ſacrifice, Pollux in Onom. lib. 6. & Alex. ab Alex. lib. 4. cap. 17. So it was not the Spirit of Chriſt which taught you this form, but the ſpirit of Numa Pompilius, the Magician, who breathed this doctrine in you: for there is no word of this round bread in Chriſts Teſtament.

The tenth abuſe, is the lifting up of the ſacrifice above their head, and the adoring and worſhipping of the ſame, which is abominable idolatry, to worſhip a bit of bread, as the great God and Creator of all the world, contrary the expreſs commandment of God, Thou ſhalt only worſhip the Lord thy God, and him only ſhalt thou ſerve, Deut. 6.16. And how can they excuſe themſelves from idolatry, according to their own doctrine: for they hold this, that if the Prieſt have not an intention, (ſome ſaith actual, other ſome habitual) that is, a purpoſe to conſecrat, that the bread and the wine are not changed in the body and blood of Chriſt: and if he had a purpoſe to conſecrat but the one half of the bread, the other half is not changed, but remains common bread? Summa angel. Euch. cap. 26. They therefore that adore it, if the Prieſt had not that purpoſe, what do they worſhip but the creature, and that according to their own doctrine? And who can be certain of the Prieſts intention? So who can worſhip in faith that God of theirs, ſeeing they cannot be certain of the intention of the Prieſt, upon the which this change depends? and that which is done without faith is ſin. Secondly, their own doctrine is, that the intention of the Prieſt ſuffices not, unleſs it be according to the inſtitution of Chriſt, Bonaventura in compend. ſacr. Theolog. lib. 6. Hugo de S. Victor, Gerardus Lorichius. Now ſundry of their own learned Doctors p. 200ſaith, that their privat Maſſes, where there is no publick communion, is not according to the inſtitution of Chriſt; therefore by their own doctrine, they are vile idolaters, both Prieſt and people, in worſhipping a bit of bread that is made of wheat, as the great God: ſeeing by their own doctrine, there is no change there in their privat Maſſes of the bread and wine in the body and blood of Chriſt. Laſt of all, ſeeing there are ſundry caſes, and that very ordinary, wherein the Prieſt (by their own doctrine) doth not conſecrat at all: as if the Prieſt have forgotten to put wine in the calice: if the bread be made of other thing then flowr: if the water ſurmount the wine: if the wine be ſowr: if he left out one of the words of conſecration, Thom. p. 3. q. 83. Joan. de Burgo Pupilla, cap. 3. Gerſon contra Florent. extra de celebrat. Miſſ. Now what certainty can the ſtanders by have, that the Prieſt hath fallen in none of theſe caſes? So with what aſſurance of faith can they worſhip their breaden God?

To prove this by ſome examples, that by their own doctrine they make the people to commit idolatry in worſhipping of their breaden God. About the year 1536. there was four Auguſtin Friers hanged in Sevil in Spain, who had ſecretly by night murthered their Provincial. The day following, to avoid all ſuſpicion of the murther, they all four ſaid Maſs, but they had no intention to conſecrat, as they themſelves afterward confeſſed, and ſo there was no Tranſubſtantiation there, by their own doctrine: and therefore, all theſe that heard their Maſs that day, by their own doctrine, committed idolatry, becauſe there was no conſecration there. I will ſet down another example. There was a certain Prieſt who being depoſed for his filthy life, wherein he had continued for the ſpace of 30. years with a harlot: being demanded by one, if he had truly repented him of this his abominable life, and if he p. 201had put away this his concubine from him, with intent never to receive her again? He never had, ſaid he, any ſuch purpoſe. Being asked again, how then ſaid he Maſs every day, and made he no ſcruple to eat the bread of the Lord, and drink of his holy cup, his conſcience accuſing him of ſuch an erroneous ſin? At the laſt, he confeſſed, that to avoid the unworthy receiving of the body and blood of the Lord, he did not pronounce the ſacramental words wherewith it is conſecrat. And being urged again, how he durſt commit ſo horrible a wickedneſs, as to give ſo great an occaſion of ſo horrible idolatry to the people, who kneeling on their knees, caſting themſelves on the earth, lifting up their hands toward the altar, ſtriking their breaſts, did worſhip the unconſecrated bread and cup? Unto whom he anſwered, that it was not ſo great a fault as he ſaid of it: and that he was not alone, but many mo did the ſame, which thought it not ſo abominable an offence, as he made of it. Theſe two Hiſtories I find written by a Spaniſh Author, one Cyprian Valera, the title whereof is, Of the Pope, and his authority; and of the Maſs, and the holineſs thereof. All theſe then that heard the Maſſes of theſe men, and adored the Sacrament which they lifted up, committed idolatry, by their own Canons and Decrees: For the laſt did not pronounce the words of conſecration, and the other four had not the intent to conſecrat; and therefore there was no tranſubſtantiation there, by their own doctrine, and ſo they worſhipped bread and wine, as their great Redeemer and Creator. But what a miſerable Religion is this, that depends upon the intention of another? And therefore who can be certain, by their own doctrine, whither it be God they worſhip or not, in their Sacrament? And this made a certain Inquiſitor, an enemy to the truth, fearing when he heard Maſs, whither the Prieſt had intention to conſecrat or not, to ſay, O Lord▪ p. 202if thou be there, I adore thee: and ſo by this ſubtilty, he thought to eſcape committing of idolatry. In the time of the Council of Conſtance, there was three Popes that the Council for their abominations did depoſe, and elected another: Theſe three not being Popes, could not ordain Prieſts, nor give them authority to conſecrat; ſo that by their own Canons, all they that heard Maſſes of ſuch Prieſts as had their authority from them, committed idolatry. This ſame may be ſaid of them that heard the Maſſes of all theſe Prieſts that were ordained by Pope Conſtantin the firſt, and the whore Pope John the 8. For neither of theſe had power to ordain Prieſts, by their own Canons. And as for Pope John, there is no controverſie of it, becauſe ſhe was a woman, not capable of that authority, by their own Canons. And as for Conſtantin the firſt, he was a laick man, who without receiving any orders, was by force named Pope. He not being a Prieſt himſelf, could not give this authority to others. And ſo by their own doctrine, all theſe that heard the Maſſes of ſuch Prieſts, did commit horrible idolatry. And howſoever the Pope and his Clergy affirms it to be God, and not bread and wine, which they adore; yet ye ſhal ſee what eſtimation they have themſelves of that breaden God of theirs, by ſome examples Pope Gregory the ſeventh, uſed it for conjuration, and ſought a reſponſe of it; and becauſe it would give him none, he caſt it in the fire, and burnt it, and ſo burnt his Creator. They uſe it to revenge their wrongs, hatred and malice by it: and therefore Pope Victor the third, in the year 1088. was poiſoned in the calice by his Sub-deacon. Such like the Archbiſhop of York, poiſoned in the calice. Such like Henry the ſeventh, poiſoned by a Dominican Frier in the Sacrament. They uſe it for an Harvenger, ſending it one or mo days journey before, with the baſeſt ſort of the people. The Dominican Friers of the town p. 203Auxerra in France in the year 1536. did burn it, being vomit out by a Frier that ſaid Maſs. And the Franciſcans de alia Villa, burnt the Cow which had eaten up the Sacrament out of the Prieſts hand, and ſo in burning her, did burn their Creator with her. Molon, one of the Spaniſh Inquiſition, 35 years ſince, being to go into proceſſion upon the day of Corpus Chriſti, and the hoſte that was to be put in the box, being ſo great that it could not be placed in the ſame, he being impatient to await while another hoſte had been conſecrat, demanded a pair of ſhears, and clipped his God and Creator, and ſo went on forward to their proceſſion. Of the which we gather two things. Firſt, that their Popes and Eccleſiaſtical rable is without all God and Religion, that makes ſo light of their God as to clip it and burn it, and uſe it as the inſtruments of their malice and revenge. Secondly, that this conſecrat bread of theirs which they ſell to the people to be worſhipped and adored, is moſt abominable Idolatry, whereof one day they ſhal give a reckoning to God. And thus much for the tenth abuſe of their idolatrous Maſs.

The eleventh abuſe is, that in your cōmunions: Firſt, contrary the inſtitution of Chriſt, ye give not the bread to the hands of the people to take, but puts it in theirs mouthes, as though their mouthes were holier then their hands. Next, ye ſpoil the poor people of a ſweet pledge of their ſalvation, the Sacrament of the wine, giving them only bread: contrary firſt▪ the expreſs command of Jeſus Chriſt, Drink ye all of this, Matth. 26.27. Mark 14.23. next, contrary the doctrine of the Fathers, Auguſt. in lib. ſeu proſp. your own Canon Law, de conſecrat. dist. 2. can. Dumfrangitur hoſtia, Cyprian ſerm. 5 de lapſis: and Pope Gelaſius, de conſecrat. diſt. 2. can. Comperimus. The ſecond is, that in your Maſs, ſuppoſe ye ſpeak of a communion and communicants, yet there is none at all; for your Prieſt eats and p. 104drinks out all. And therefore have ye added to the words of Chriſt, eat all, drink all; contrary the expreſs inſtitution of the Supper, Take ye, eat ye, and drink ye all of this. And contrary alſo to the doctrine of the ancient Doctors of the primitive Church, Hieron. in 1. Cor. cap. 11. Chryſoſt. in 1. Cor. hom. 18. and of ſome Councils, Concil. 2. Antioc. cap. 2. Conc. 4. de Tolet. cap. 17. and ſome of your own Popes alſo, Alex 5. Epist 1. de myſt. corp. & ſang. Calixtus de conſecrat. dist. 2. Can. Peracta.

The twelfth abuſe, is in the prayer contained in the Canon of the Maſs, in theſe words, Look mercifully upon theſe things (to wit, Jeſus Chriſt his body and his blood, which the Prieſt thinks he offers up to God: and ſo Biel a exponer of the Maſs, interprets the ſame) and accept of them, as thou accepted of the ſacrifice of Abel, of Abraham, and of Melchiſedeck. And in another place, the Prieſt prays unto God, to receive that ſacrifice (to wit, of Chriſt) and to ſanctifie it with the bleſſing wherewith he ſanctified the oblation of Abel. Now if any thing can be ſaid to be blaſphemy, certainly this muſt be blaſphemy, to a Maſs-Prieſt, a ſinful creature, to interceed between God the Father, and Chriſt his Son; to pray the Father that he may ſanctify his Son and accept of him, as though he were not fully ſanctified in himſelf, and were not the fountain of all holineſs to others; and as though the Father were not well pleaſed in him already. And becauſe the Maſs-Prieſt vaunts that in his ſacrifice of the Maſs he offers up the eternal Son of God in a ſacrifice to his Father, for the ſins of the quick and the dead: I will ask him this: Doth not he blaſpheme horribly, who vaunts that in ſomething that he doth, he is more acceptable to God, then Jeſus Chriſt is? This cannot be denyed. But I aſſume that the Prieſt vaunts that in his Maſs he is more acceptable to God, then Jeſus Chriſt is: Therefore the Prieſt is a horrible blaſphemer. p. 205And I prove the aſſumption thus: The Prieſt vaunts that in his Maſs he offers up Jeſus Chriſt to God his Father: the Prieſt alſo in the Maſs prays the Father, that he would ſanctifie and accept of his Son which he offers up: Therefore the Prieſt vaunts that he is more acceptable to God in the Maſs, then Jeſus Chriſt is: for God regards more the perſon that offers up, then the thing that is offered up. This is Ireneus language, lib. 4. contra haereſ. Valent. cap. 34. and for this purpoſe he brings forth the examples of Abel and Cain, and their ſacrifices. For he ſaith, They two offered up to the Lord, but they were not both accepted of him: for Abel his ſacrifice pleaſed God, becauſe his perſon pleaſed him, and that becauſe of his faith: but the ſacrifice of Cain pleaſed not God, becauſe his perſon pleaſed him not, and that becauſe of his incredulity. Seeing therefore that the Maſs-Prieſt vaunts that he offers up Jeſus Chriſt in his Maſs to the Father: and ſeeing the Prieſt muſt be more acceptable then your ſacrifice: Therefore it muſt follow, that the Prieſt in the Maſs vaunts, that he is more acceptable to God then Jeſus Chriſt is, and ſo is a horrible blaſphemer in his Maſs.

The thirteenth abuſe is, that he compares the ſacrifice of the Son of God, with the ſacrifice of Abel, Abraham, and Melchiſedeck, which by infinit degrees ſurpaſſeth them all.

The fourteenth, what horrible blaſphemy commits the Prieſt, when he prays that that oblation which he thinks to be Jeſus Chriſt, may be carried to heaven by the hands of an Angel, as though Chriſt were not as powerful now to aſcend to heaven, as he was after his reſurrection, and therefore hath now need of the help of an Angel to carry him to heaven? What blaſphemy is this? But let me ask you, M. Gilbert, wherefore pray ye that he may be carried to heaven, ſeeing ye eat him, and makes him to p. 206deſcend in your belly (as ye think) and to aſcend and deſcend are things contrary? And if ye will ſay, that firſt it mounts to heaven, and then deſcends again: then I ſay, firſt, the accidents of the bread and wine are left there alone; for they are not carried to heaven, but remains in your hand: and Chriſts body and blood are not under them, ſeeing he is carried to heaven by the hands of an Angel, and ſo your real preſence is gone. Secondly, ſeeing ye eat his body and drink his blood, it muſt follow that ye muſt make a new tranſubſtantiation, to cauſe Chriſt come down again from heaven, and to make the bread and wine to be tranſchanged again in his body and blood, that ye may eat him and drink him. And ſo theſe are many voyages which ye cauſe Chriſt to make: Firſt, to deſcend from heaven by the means of your Tranſubſtantiation, then to make him to aſcend to heavē by the means of your prayer: and then laſt of all, to make him again deſcend from heaven, that ye may eat him and drink him. Theſe are the blaſphemies which follows on your blaſphemous Maſs.

The fifteenth abuſe, is in their prayer for the dead, wherein they pray for a place of refreſhment, light and peace for them who have died in faith, ſleeps in peace, and reſts in the Lord; and yet in the Maſſes that are ſaid for them, they will not give the Pax to be kiſſed, which is a ſign of peace: let them adviſe how they will reconcile this. But firſt, I ſay, their prayer for the dead, is without all warrant of the Word: next, I would know who theſe are for whom the Prieſt prays? not for them that are in hell; for they have not died in faith, nor ſleeps in peace, nor reſts in the Lord: and prayers for them are needleſs; for out of hell is no redemption: not for them that are in heaven; for what greater light, or peace, or joy can they have, then that which they have already? Not for them that are in Purgatory; for beſide that it is but the deviſe of man, according p. 207to their own doctrine, they that are in Purgatory ſleeps not in peace, but are tormented in fire (if their doctrine of the fire of Purgatory be true:) and ſo this prayer cannot be for them neither.

The ſixteenth, is your horrible cruelty againſt the Son of God, in breaking the body of Chriſt in three pieces in your Maſs, as ye think; which is greater cruelty then the men of war did to him upon the croſs: for they brake not a bone of him, and yet ye Maſs-Prieſts makes no ſcruple to part his body in three pieces.

The ſeventeenth, is your dipping a part of the hoſte into the cup, which is without all warrant or example of the Scripture, and is againſt the doctrine of one of your Popes, Pope Julius de conſecrat. diſt. 2. Can. Cum omne crimen.

The eighteenth, is in the prayer wherein the Prieſt prays, that the receiving of Chriſt his body be not to his condemnation, ſeeing he means not here by the body of Chriſt, the bread which is a ſeal of his body, but properly the body of Chriſt: which whoſoever receives, receives not to death, but to life, ſeeing he is life and ſalvation it ſelf.

The nineteenth, is the blowing and mumbling of the Prieſts on the bread and wine, their turning of their back to the people when they pronounce the words of conſecration: their ſo oft ſigning with the ſign of the croſs in their Maſs, 25. times: their keeping and incloſing of Chriſts body (as they ſuppone) in a box: their burning of candles before it, The ordinance of Honorius the 3. confirmed by Pope Innocent the 4. de celebrat. Miſſ. Canon. Sane. & de cuſtod. Euchar. cap. 1. their carrying of it in proceſſion upon their ſolemn days, which they call the Feaſt of God, in their Temples, Villages, ſtreets: their carrying of it to the ſick and diſeaſed, with theſe blaſphemous words ſpoken by the Prieſt to the patient, Behold, my friend, God your Creator, p. 208which I have brought unto you: Ordinance of Pope Urban, anno 1564. What blaſphemie is this? And what a God is this that cannot come by himſelf, but muſt be brought by another? And what comfort can this God bring to the patient, that cannot bring himſelf to the patient but as he muſt be born by the Prieſt? What a mockery of God, of his Word, of themſelves, and of the poor people, is this? Do their Prieſts the thing that Chriſt did in the Sacrament? Did he any of theſe things, or commanded he them to be done? Croſſed he the bread and wine? Did he blow and mumble the words upon it? Commanded he the bread to be kept in a box, to be carried in proceſſions, to be carried to the ſick, to burn candles before it? What ſpirit hath revealed to you theſe things, ſeeing the Spirit of Chriſt hath not revealed them in the Scriptures? You muſt ſeek therefore for a new Goſpel, to prove theſe ceremonies: for the Goſpel of Chriſt makes no mention of them: yea, this keeping of the ſacrifice, it is forbidden by your own Canon Law, de conſecrat. dist. 2. cap. 3. Gradibus. So ye both fight againſt the Scripture, and your own Canon Law.

The twentieth abuſe, is their manifold ſtiles and titles that they give to their Maſs, which cannot be all agreeable to the ſame: ſome taken from the perſons in whoſe name and honor they are celebrat: as the Maſſes of the Trinity, of the Name of Jeſus, of his croſs, crown, and five wounds; of our Lady, of the Angels, of the Saints: ſome taken from the perſons and matters whereof they are ſaid. For there are ſundry ſorts of Maſſes, for ſundry ſorts of perſons, and matters, as one for the Pope, another for the Emperor, the third for the King, the fourth for a man. 5. for a woman. 6. for the bridegroom. 7. for the bride. 8. for priſoners. 9. for them that ſaills▪ 10. for them that goes a voyage. 11. for the dead. 12. for him of whoſe ſoul there is doubt. 13. for the peſt. p. 20914. for the rage. 15. for the tempeſt. 16. for the fire. 17. for all ſorts of diſeaſes, both of man and beast. And laſt of all, ſome of their ſtyles are taken from the diverſity of times and ſeaſons wherein they are ſaid: one ſort of Maſs for Summur, another for Winter: one for the time of Lent, another for the time of fleſh: one for Chriſtmas, another for Paſch, another for Whitſunday, and other ſome for other Feaſt days. Now theſe Maſſes are ſo diverſe, that the Maſs that it ſaid at one of theſe ſolemn times, cannot ſerve for another: the Maſs for Lent, cannot ſerve for the time of fleſh: the Maſs for Paſch, cannot ſerve for Chriſtmas, and ſo forth of the reſt. In the which there are many horrible abuſes. Firſt, if the Maſs be one with the Supper (as they ſay) then as there is but one Supper of the Lord, which is inſtituted only for the remembrance of CHRIST, which is but one in general for all, and whereof all the faithful are partakers, of whatſoever rank they be, be they great, be they ſmal, be they rich, by they poor, and which ſerves for all times. For as our Savior did inſtitut but one Baptiſm to ſerve for all perſons, and for all times, ſo he did inſtitut but one Supper to ſerve for all perſons, and all times. If therefore the Maſs were one with the Supper, it ſhould be but one for all perſons, and for all ſeaſons. But this diverſity of Maſſes doth teſtifie, that it is not the inſtitution of Jeſus Chriſt, but the inſtitution of Antichriſt, and that it is not one with the Lord his Supper, as they falſly alledge: Yea, it doth teſtifie that they have forſaken the truth of God, and are given over of God to believe lies, and to be deceived by ſtrong deluſions, that they might be damned.

Secondly, what needs ſeveral Maſſes of the Trinity, of the holy Spirit, of the Name of Jeſus? For ſeeing the three perſons of the Trinity are one, and they all concurr in the work of our faith, the Father giving his Son by his holy p. 210Spirit in the Word and Sacraments: therefore this diverſity as though the perſons of the Trinity were ſeparat, is needleſs.

Thirdly, this would be marked: that ſuppoſe they have ſtiled their Maſſes from ſundry perſons, yet they have not aſcribed a ſingular Maſs to Jeſus Chriſt, that it might be named ſimply the Maſs of Jeſus Chriſt: and this, no queſtion, is not without the providence of God, that ſeeing the Maſs is not the inſtitution of Chriſt, but of Antichriſt; not the ordinance of God, but of Satan; he would not that ſuch a blaſphemous and idolatrous invention ſhould have the ſame ſtile, to be called the Maſs of Chriſt ſimply, without any further addition, as the Supper is called the Lords Supper.

Fourthly, they have a ſeveral Maſs to the Name of Jeſus, unto the which Boniface the ſixth hath given pardon of three thouſand years to them that ſay this Maſs devoutly, Miſſale Romanum; as though his Name were a thing ſeparat from himſelf: and as though there were ſome ſpecial vertue in the ſyllables & letters of that Name, after the manner of Magiciens and Sorcerers.

Fifthly, their Maſſes to his croſs and crown, is manifeſt idolatry, in aſcribing that which was proper to Jeſus Chriſt, to the tree whereon he hang, and to the crown of thorns which he bure; as though either they had redeemed us, and not himſelf who was crucified on the tree: or elſe that they were one with himſelf: which are both blaſphemy.

Sixthly, their Maſſes to the honor of the Virgin Mary, to Angels, and Saints, is manifeſt idolatry: For the Supper was not inſtituted in the honor of any creature, but only to the honor of him who did redeem us.

Seventhly, wherefore ſerves any Maſs for the Pope▪ For if he be ſuch a one, as himſelf and his Church have p. 211written of him; to wit, That his will is heavenly: that he may make ſomething of nothing: that he may of right diſpenſe against right: that he may make righteouſneſs of unrighteouſneſs: and that he may deliver as many ſouls out of Hell and Purgatory, and place them in heaven, as pleaſeth him, Extra. de tranſlat. Epiſt. Canon. Quanto in textu & gloſſa, Clement. 6. in Bulla, he needs no Maſſes to be ſaid for him. Either therefore theſe ſentences that are ſpoken of him are falſe, or elſe all Maſſes ſaid for him are ſuperfluous.

Eightly, if the Maſs be one with the Supper, then as the Supper was only inſtituted for the living, and not for the dead: and therefore our Savior in the Supper commands, To take, eat, drink, and to do it in remembrance of him, which the dead cannot do: ſo theſe Maſſes ſhould not be for the dead. And for what dead are theſe, that theſe Maſſes are ſaid? If they ſay, for them that are in Heaven or Hell. I anſwer, the one needs them not, and they are unprofitable for the other. If they ſay, for them that are in Purgatory. I anſwer, this Purgatory is but their own invention, to draw water to their own mill, and to enrich the Popes treaſures; for the Scripture makes no mention of it.

Ninthly, their Maſſes that are ſaid for them that are abſent, as for the priſoners, for them that ſail, and are in their voyage, &c. makes it manifeſt alſo, that the Maſs is not one with the Lords Supper: for it was inſtituted not to them that were abſent, but to them that were preſent. For in the Supper they are commanded to take, eat, and to drink in remembrance of him, which the abſent cannot do. Indeed it is true, that theſe that are preſent at the Maſs, do eat and drink as little, as they that are abſent▪ the only vantage they have, is to be beholders of the Prieſt eating and drinking all himſelf alone, and of theſe vain and juglers tricks of the Prieſt in ſaying of his Maſs, which the abſent cannot ſee.

p. 212Tenthly, how can their Prieſts pleaſe God in ſaying Maſs for him of whoſe ſoul it is doubted, ſeeing it cannot be ſaid with faith, and whatſoever is done without faith, the Apoſtle ſaith, is ſin, Rom. 4.23. And this doubting, as James ſaith, cannot ſtand with faith, James 2 6. therefore this Maſs of theirs, for his ſoul of whom there is doubt, cannot pleaſe God? But what is all their Religion, but conjectures, and opinions, and doubtings.

Eleventhly, is their Maſſes for the peſt, tempeſt, fury, fire, and all afflictions and maladies, as well of man, as of beaſt, which containeth intolerable and vile idolatry: for every Maſs hath his own Saint to be a Patron, according to the ſubject thereof, and every Saint hath his own office. Againſt the peſt, the Prieſt ſaith the Maſs of S. Sebaſtian, and S. Roch, for they are the Patrons and defenders againſt it: after the cuſtom of the Pagans, who honored Apollo and Eſculapius by feaſts and ſacrifices, for to be ſaved from the contagion of the ſame. Againſt the tempeſt, they ſay the Maſs of S. Bernard, S. Graith, S. Barbe, and others, in ſtead of Jupiter which the Pagans worſhipped. Againſt the rage or fury, they ſay the Maſs of S. Hubert, who is the Patron of hunters and dogs, as the Goddeſs Diana was the Patron among the Pagans. Againſt the fire, they ſay the Maſs of S. Antony, for they make him the Patron of it: and they ſay, it is a greater oath to ſwear upon the arm of S. Antony, then when one ſwears by the Name of God. For a woman with child, they ſay the Maſs of S. Margaret, in ſtead of Diana and Juno, which the Pagans worſhipped for women with child. For a horſe, they ſay the Maſs of S. Eloy, or S. Antony; yea, for a poor wifes hen, if it be ſick or loſt. And for their pigs, they have the Maſs of S. Antony, Alanus de ſacrific. Euch. cap. 32. But firſt, what blaſphemy is this, to have their recourſe to Saints, hee or ſhee, to obtain of them, or by their merit, or interceſſion, health p. 213in ſickneſs, &c. and ſuch like things, which are only in Gods hands to beſtow: For it is he only that ſends health and ſickneſs, fair weather and foul weather, and ſo forth. Next, the Lords Supper was not inſtituted to be a charm for ſuch diſeaſes of man or beaſt, or for the fire, peſt, tempeſt, &c. but for the remembrance of Chriſts death. So that if there were no more abuſe in the Maſs but theſe two things, it is ſufficient to make all men to abhor ſuch abominable idolatry.

The twenty and one abuſe, is their mixing of parcels of the Scripture with their abomination and idolatries in their Maſs, after the manner of thoſe who go about to impoyſon any, who mix their poyſon with ſome good food, that it may be the leſs ſuſpected: Or rather as the Magiciens and Charmers doth, who mixes with their deviliſh practiſes, parcels of the Scriptures of God; and makes thoſe to ſerve for their deviliſh purpoſes, which was appointed to Gods honor. So are all the places of Scripture which are read and ſung in their Maſs: they are brought forth, not for the truth, but againſt the truth, for their idolatry and abomination: and this they have done, that their idolatrie may be leſs ſuſpected by the ſimple. Next, what warrant have they to prefer the Goſpel (as they call it) to the Epiſtles, in ſtanding up at the reading of the Goſpel, and ſitting at the reading of the Epiſtles, ſeeing they are both inſpired of God, and they both contain the Goſpel of Jeſus Chriſt? as the Apoſtle teſtifies, Rom. 1.1. and 2.16. 1. Cor. 4.15. Thirdly, the Goſpel and Epiſtles were appointed not to be ſung and chanted in the Church (as they do) but to be read and interpreted: for the Pſalms and other Hymns in the Scripture are ordained for that uſe. Fourthly, ſeeing the Scripture which is read and ſung in your Maſs, is read and ſung in an unknown language, as all the reſt of your Maſs is done; to what purpoſe doth p. 214it ſerve? And what is it but a mocking of God, and abuſing of the poor people?

The twenty and two abuſe, is their wax candles which they have burning in the time of their Maſſes, in the fair day light, mocking as it were thereby, both God the Author of all light, and the light of the Sun. And to what purpoſe can they ſerve to burn in the day light when the Sun is ſhining, but to bear witneſs againſt them in the great Day, that in the midſt of the noon-day they groped in darkneſs, and that they have put out the light of the Goſpel, that ſhould have ſhined in their hearts? What, ſhal I ſpeak of the reſt of your ceremonies, which are ſuperſtitious, idle, carnal, and Jewiſh? In attire like them: for as their Prieſts were clad in an Ephod, a Myter, a broidered coat, a girdle, a breaſt-plate, and a robe, Exode 28.4. So with you your Prieſts muſt have an Amice, an Albe, a girdle, a fannel, whereof ſome of them are taken from the faſhion of the Pagans. For Numa Pompilius when he uſed to worſhip, he covered himſelf with a kerchief or vail: and he ordained that theſe idolatrous Prieſts ſhould have their Albe, and a painted colored coat above it, Ovid. in Faſtis, Alex. ab Alex. As the Jewiſh Prieſt had a lawer, whereat they muſt waſh before they ſacrificed, Exod 30.20. ſo have yours: as they lifted up a part of the hoſte, Exod 29.27. ſo you lift up the whole hoſte: as they ſounded the trumpets at their ſacrifices, Num. 10.10. ſo you ring your bells. And what ſhal I ſpeak of the reſt of your vain and ſuperſtitious ceremonies, in waſhing often, in croſſing and bleſſing often, in cenſing often, in ſoft ſpeech and whiſpering, in kiſſing of the Amice, kiſſing of the fannel, kiſſing of the ſtole, kiſſing of the altar, kiſſing of the book, kiſſing of the Prieſts hand, and kiſſing of the Pax, in ſmiting and knocking of the breaſt, in geſturing by rule and meaſure, in bowing and becking, in ſpacing forward & backward, p. 215and turning round about, and traverſing of the ground: his geſture ſo ridiculous, ſo changeable, ſo affectat in ſaying of his Maſs, that a man would think a player were coming forth upon the ſtage to play, when the Prieſt adreſſeth himſelf to the Maſs: beſide de muſick of your Organs where it may be had, and your three-fold ſalutation of the Prieſt, Dominus vobiſcum, which can have no uſe in the privat Maſſes, where the Prieſt is himſelf alone together with the Clark? So that in truth it is more then Jewiſh: For in ceremonies they are above their ceremonies, in orders more exquiſite, in cautels more diligent: ſo that it ſeems rather to be a ſtage-play, then the worſhip of God. But I ſee it is fulfilled in them which was fore-told, that God would ſend them ſtrong deluſions, that they might believe lies, that all theſe might be damned which loved not the truth. Let the Chriſtian Reader judge now, whither the Maſs be an heavenly action, or whither it be not a ſink and cloſet of all abomination, or idolatry, or not.

As truth confirms it ſelf, ſo falſhood deſtroys it ſelf: A Kingdom divided against it ſelf (as our Savior ſaith) cannot ſtand. Therefore their diviſions and contradictions among themſelves concerning this their ſacrifice of the Maſs, is an evident token that that Kingdom cannot ſtand. Some of you ſaith, Chriſt deſcends dayly from the boſom of the Father to the altar, and aſcends from thence to heaven again, Turrian. 1. tract. cap. 11. fol. 59. Other ſome ſay the contrary, That he neither deſcends from heaven in the Maſs, nor aſcends from thence to heaven, Scarga art. 11. fol. 335. 2. Bellarmin lib. 2. de Miſſa, cap. 4. ſaith, That the ſacrifice of the Maſs doth not ſatisfie for our ſins, or merit properly the forgiveneſs of them. And yet in lib. 2. de Miſſa, fol. 731. he ſaith, That Chriſt offered in the last Supper a ſacrifice for the ſins of the Apoſtles, and the ſacrifice of the Maſs (ſaith he) is one with that. And their Prieſts ſay in the Maſs, p. 216That he offers it up for the redemption of ſouls, In Canone Miſſ. And the Council of Trent calls it, A true propitiatory ſacrifice for the ſins of the quick and the dead, Seſſ. 6. Can. 2. & 3. And Gabriel Biel, an exponer of the Maſs, ſaith, That the Maſs is one in ſubſtance with the ſacrifice of the croſs, and that it proceeds the ſelf-ſame effects, to wit, the appeaſing of God his wrath, Lect. 85. in explic. Canon. & in 4. ſ…nt. diſt. 12 qu. 2. If it then appeaſe God his wrath, and be offered for the redemption of ſouls, then it muſt both merit properly, and ſatisfie properly. 3. Some of you affirms, That the ſacrifice of the croſs, is more excellent then the ſacrifice of the Maſs, Bellar. lib. 1. de Miſſa, fol. 626. and the vertue of the Maſs depends upon it, Vega de Miſſa, theſ. 141. And yet ſome of you ſaith, It is but one ſacrifice with that of the croſs, the ſame ſacrifice, and the ſame Prieſt in both, Vega theſ. 137. How then can the one be more excellent then the other? 4. Bellarmin lib. 2. de Miſſa, cap. 4 ſaith, That the value of the ſacrifice of the Maſs is finit, and therefore it is oft repeated. But Caietan a Cardinal ſaith, That the vertue, quantity, and effect of it, is infinit, as the ſuffering of Christ, Tract. 7. de celebrat. Miſſae, cap. 2. quaeſt. 1. 5. Some of them ſaith, That Chriſt is offered up in the Maſs by the words of the Church, when it is ſaid, Tua de tuis offerimus tibi, Poſſevinus lib. contra Chytraeum & Volanum. Some when the words of the conſecration are pronounced: But Bellarmin agrees with neither: he ſaith, The ſacrifice is offered up, not ſo much by the words, as by the putting of the ſacrifice upon the altar▪ Lib. 2. de Miſſa, cap. 11. 6. Bellarmin ſaith in a part, That if there be not a real and true ſlaughter of Christ in the Maſs, then the Maſs is not a true and real ſacrifice, Lib. 1. de Miſſa, cap 17 For, ſaith he, to a true and real ſacrifice, is required a true and real ſlaughter of the thing that is ſacrificed: for the eſſence, ſaith he, of the ſacrifice ſtands in the ſlaughter. Upon the which follows, that either Chriſt is dayly truly crucified in the Maſs p. 217by their Prieſts, or elſe their Maſs is not a true and real ſacrifice. And yet in another part, he ſaith, That the ſacrifice of the Maſs requires not a true ſlaughter of the ſacrifice, Ibidem cap. 25. 7. Gaſpa Caſtlius ſaith, That there are two diverſe ſacrifices in the Eucharist or Maſs; the one of the bread and wine, the other of the body and blood of Chriſt, Lib. 1. de ſacr. cap. 20. And yet Bellarmin, and ſundry others denyes it, and ſaith, There is but one, Lib. 1. de Miſſa, cap. 27. 8. Pope Innocent ſaith, That the ſacrifice of the Maſs is offered up for original, venial, and mortal ſins, Tract. de Miſſa. And yet the Maſter of Sentences, and Gerſon, ſaith, That the Maſs purgeth but venial ſins, Lib. 4. ſent. diſt. 12. cap. Posthaec, in Floret. lib. 4. And Thomas of Aquin agrees with neither of them▪ for he ſaith, The ſacrifice of the croſs was for our original ſin, but the ſacrifice of the altar, is for our ordinary ſins, Thomas de Aquaviva. 9. M. Gilbert Brown ſaith, That their Prieſts doth the ſame in the Maſs, which Chriſt did in the Supper. But Bellarmin frankly grants, That Chriſt did not offer up the bread by the ſame words that their Prieſts do now in the Maſs, Lib. 1. de Miſſa, cap. 27. Therefore they do not the ſame thing that Chriſt did. 10. M. Gilbert Brown ſaith, That Chriſt did offer his body and blood to the Father after the conſecration: But Bellarmin ſaith, ibidem, That neither Chriſt nor his Apostles in the beginning did offer up any oblation after the conſecration. I leave the reſt of their contradictions, ſo that ſeeing they have no concord among themſelves, neither in the matter, nor in the form, nor in the effect, nor in the ſubſtance, nor in the circumſtances of their pretended ſacrifice: but that the Lord (as is ſaid in Hoſea) hath divided their hearts; therefore their Maſs muſt periſh. And ſeeing the Lord hath ſent ſuch a confuſion among them, that they underſtand not the language one of another; ſome ſaying one thing, ſome another; therefore it is Babel, the tower of confuſion which they are p. 218building, and not the houſe of the Lord.

To conclud this, they will have their ſacrifice not a creature, but a Creator of all creatures: and therefore they worſhip it with the worſhip of latria, which by their own doctrine is only proper to God, Turrian. 1. tract. cap. 17. & Antonius de Padua, ex Bellarm. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 8. Therefore they ſing after the conſecration, It is not bread, but God and man my Savior: And yet they ſay, That this Creator both begins to be where he was not before, after the conſecration: and ceaſes to be where he was before: and that he is not every where as God is, Scarga art. 5. fol. 335. Turrian. tract. 1. cap. 21. And they ſay, That the Prieſt makes Chriſt his body of the bread in the Sacrament, and Chriſt the King is made of bread. Bellar. lib. 3. de Euch. fol. 399. Pope John 22. lib. orat. inſcrip. Antidotarius animae, & in Breviario & miſſalibus, Qui creavit me ſine me, creatur mediante me: he that created me without me (that is the Prieſt) is created by my moyen; that is, he makes that God that made him. Now how can he be the true God, and a true Creator, which hath a beginning, and ceaſes to be, which is not every where, as God is, which is made of bread and wine by a Maſs-Prieſt, and that by their own doctrine? How therefore ſhal their Church be cleared from abominable idolatrie, that worſhips that which they call God, Creator and Savior: and yet ſuch a God, as by their own doctrine, hath a beginning and ending, and is not every where, and is made of bread and wine by duſt and aſhes. O! wo be to their ſouls that worſhip God which made not heaven and earth, and cauſeth others to do the ſame! And how ſhal their Maſs-Prieſts be cleared from ſacrilegious blaſphemy, which vaunts that in their Maſs they dayly creat their Creator, and that of bread and wine; and ſo makes themſelves Gods, and more then Gods: For God created but creatures, but they (as they ſuppone) creat the Creator. p. 219And as they worſhip a falſe Creator in their Maſs, ſo do they worſhip a falſe Chriſt and Savior in the ſame. For the Scripture ſaith, That the true Chriſt is made of the ſeed of David, & of the ſeed of the woman, Rom. 1.3. Gal. 4.4. and not of any other ſubſtance. But the Chriſt which they offer up in their Maſs, by their own doctrine, is made of bread and wine, and that by the Prieſt. So Bellarmin confeſſeth, ibidem, and Pope John 22. ibidem. For the one ſaith, That it is no abſurd thing to the Prieſt to make Chriſt his body of bread. And the other ſaith, That Chriſt the King is made of bread. Therefore they worſhip not JESUS, the ſon of Mary, who was made of the woman, and of the ſeed of David, but a falſe Jeſus, made of bread, and baken in the oven, and formed by the Prieſt: Therefore of all Idolaters they muſt be the moſt blaſphemous and abominable. And thus much for the Maſs.