An Antidote Against Popery, Treatise · Chapter 10
CHAPTER X. Of the Sacrifice of the Masse.
The state of the Question.
FIRST:Chrysost. hom. 83. in Math et 17. in Heb Amb. in c. 10. ad Heb. Euseb demō. Evāg. l. 1. c. 10. Innocen. 3. de myst. Missae, lib. 6. capite 19. Alcuinus, de Divinis Officiis, cap. 11. & 40. Azor. Instit. Moral. parte 3. li. bro 10. cap. 18. Binius, Tom. 3. Concil. pag. 110. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Missa, cap. 1. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 7. §. Ex quibus, &c. As for the new Titles which the Romanistes giuegive vntounto the SACRAMENT, calling it a SACRIFICE, and the MASSE, wee should not insist much in Logomachies, if by Sacrifice they vnderstood it onelie to bee, (as Venerable Antiquitie acknowledgeth it) Commemoratiue, Representatiue, and Eucharisticall. Neyther should wee bee contentious for the name of MASSE, (seeing that this is not the custome of the Church of GOD) if that word imported no more than their owne Pope and Doctors (cited in the margine) acknowledge that it did of olde: to wit, a Mission or Dimission of such after Divine Service, as were not prepared, or fit as yet for the participation of the mysterie of the holie Eucharist; the Deacon crying to such, Ite, Missa est.
Yet heere-anent in the generall, with Bellarmine him-selfe we must affirme, that the libertie of vsing new wordes in the Church, (sayeth he) is a most dangerous thing; seeing piece and piece, by newe wordes, newe thinges them-selues doe aryse, when it is lawfull for everie one to invent newe names in matters that are Divine. Wherfore, (sayeth hee) S. PAVLL did forbidde prophane Noveltie of wordes. And holie AVGVSTINE sayeth also, that Philosophers, indeed, vse a libertie of new words, nor feare they not-with-standing of the offence of religious eares, when the same is done for the vnderstanding of difficill thinges. But it is onelie lawfull for vsus, (sayeth hee) to speake according to a certayne Rule, (to wit,Bell. l. 1. de Verbo, c. 2. §. Quare cū. Scripture) lest the libertie of wordes beget a wicked errour, concerning those thinges which are signified thereby.
Therefore it is, that for the name, wee choose rather to speake with Scripture,Bell. l. 1. de Missa c. 1. §. Sed non. by calling that holie Sacrament, The LORD'S SƲPPER, or The Communion, than to vse anie such name of a later stampe, three hundreth threescore & ten years after CHRIST, which the most ancient Fathers, as Origen, Epiphanius, Iustin Martyr, and Ierome, Hieron. ep. ad Pammac. & Ocean.(as witnesseth Bellarmine) never vsed, and where-of as yet there is no mention in the Greeke Church, (sayeth hee:) So that as Ierome speaketh to Pammachius, so in the same wordes concerning this name of MASSE, wee may saye to anie, Why after foure hundreth yeares wouldest thou teach vsus nowe, that which hitherto was not knowne?
The mayne Controversie, then, standeth heere-in, that they will hauehave the Masse to signifie, and the celebration thereof, to bee reallie and properlie, an externall, essentiall, and truelie propiatorie Sacrifice, for the quicke and the dead, (as the Councell of Trent decreeth to bee believed, vnderunder paine of a Curse, Sess. 6. sub Pio 4. Cap. 1. Can. 1. & 2.) Where-in, externallie, by the handes of the Priest, and corporallie, the verie bodie and blood of CHRIST, locallie there beeing on the Altar, is offered vp to the Father, for the persons foresayde, and worshipped by the people, as CHRIST'S true bodie, with Divine Adoration. This wee abhorre, as a Lurd Errour, and moste Idolatrous Practise, agaynst the cleare evidence of these SCRIPTVRES following.
1. Authoritie of Scripture.
HEBR. 7.24. But this Man, because He continueth for ever, hath an vnchangeable (or, as the RHEMISTS translate, an everlasting) Priesthood.
Where-vponupon (sayeth Aquinas) There-fore,Aquin. in Heb. 7 CHRIST ONLIE is our true Priest: and all others, they are but the Ministers of CHRIST, (sayeth hee) as they are called 1. COR. 4.1. HAYMO lyke-wyse, an ancient Father, gathereth another inference from hence, saying,Haymo, in Heb. 7 Seeing IESVS is onlie immortall, Hee hath an aeternall Priesthoode: neyther can Hee hauehave anie to succeede to Him.
According to Aquinas, then, CHRIST beeing our onelie Priest vnderunder the Gospell, none other should bee called so; but, according to the Scripture which hee citeth, Ministers of CHRIST JESƲS.
According also to HAYM…, CHRIST beeing immortall …imselfe, there are none vnderunder the Gospell as Priestes, who can succeede to Him. Succ…ssion beeing onelie because of death, as testifieth the Apostle. Vers 25.
There-fore, to make anie Priests by speciall Office, vnderunder the New Testament, to offer vp anie corporall sacrifice, is to make CHRISTS Priesthood changeable, or separable from His owne person; which is agaynst the nature of His Priesthood, that can not passe from one to another, (for so importeth the word) because of His owne aeternitie. And to make such a pluralitie of Priestes in CHRISTS Priesthood, as Substitutes, or in anie respect partakers of that Office with Him, is to praesuppose, that CHRIST was not able to doe that Office alone; and, that Hee needeth others, to succeede Him: which argued imperfection in the Priesthood of Levi, and is contrarie to this Text that sayeth, Because Hee continueth for ever, He hath an vnchangeable Priesthood, which can not passe from one to another.
HEBR. 7.17. For Hee testifieth, Thou art a Priest for ever, after the Order of Melchisedeck.
In which wordes, the Apostle having entered into a particular comparison, betweene the Leviticall Priesthood, and CHRIST'S, to showe the imperfection of the one, in respect of the other, hee prooveth the Excellencie of CHRIST'S Priesthoode, aboue the other, by the aeternitie thereof, in His owne person, and the dignitie of the Order, beeing a Priest after the Order of Melchisedeck to whome none succeeded in that Office after him: and so none were to succeede to CHRIST.
So that CHRIST beeing a Priest after the Order of Melchisedeck, the Apostle placeth in these two, to wit, Ʋnitie and Aeternitie: 1. Because Christ as onelie Priest vnderunder the Gospell, hath offered vp Himselfe as a propitiatorie Sacrifice on the Crosse for vsus; to whome if anie should succeede (tho subordinate) in the offering vp of such a Sacrifice properlie, then Vnitie (according to the Apostle) were not a propertie of CHRIST'S Priesthood after the Order of Melchisedeck.
Next, CHRIST'S Priesthood is aeternall, both in respect of His intercession, Vers. 25. and of His sacrificing: not according to the act there-of, which was transient; but of the vertue and efficacie there-of, to saue; which is aeternall, and permanent. And so no iteration can bee of that propitiatorie sacrificing in the Masse after Him, without a direct impugning of CHRIST'S aeternall Priesthoode.
HEBR. 7.27. Who needeth not daylie, as those high-Priests, to offer vp Sacrifice, (which the RHEMISTS call HOSTES) &c. for this Hee did once, when Hee offered vp Him-selfe.
Where-vponupon HAYMO concludeth, That this offering once, sufficeth therefore for ever for propitiation, or taking awaye the sinnes of all the faythfull, (sayeth hee.)
Next; In that Hee did offer vp Sacrifice but once; to wit, when Hee offered vp Him-selfe vponupon the Crosse; it is evident, that Hee offered vp no propitiatorie Sacrifice of Him-selfe a before in the last Supper. And, consequentlie, if the Masse-Priest doe but what CHRIST did in the last Supper, it will followe, that hee offereth vp no propitiatorie Sacrifice.Suarez. in 3. parte Thomae, tom. 3 disp. 74. sect. 1. §. Secundo potest. Therefore, (sayeth Suarez the Iesuit) there is no expresse mention in the Historie of the Gospell, of a Sacrifice, or Oblation, as also the fact of CHRIST, which is declared, might hauehave beene done by Him without anie Sacrifice: to wit, the consecrating the Bread and Wine, and giving the same to His Disciples, without anie intention of sacrificing, (sayth hee.)
And, in the same place, hee reporteth,Pag. 949. §. 2. that the B…shop of Bitonto, and others also, at the Councell of Trent, did defende, and mayntayne, that CHRIST, in that night of celebrating His last Supper, offered vp no Sacrifice at all, For if Hee had offered vp an…e propitiatorie Sacrifice then, wherby the sinnes of the worlde had beene expiated, then in His last Supper Hee behoved to hauehave died: (For the Apostle ever joyneth these together.) And so Hee had not needed to hauehave died anie more.
Thirdlie: The Sacrifice of the Evangelicall Priest, vvho is CHRIST onelie, is sayde heere, to bee Him-selfe, who was holie, harmlesse, vndefyled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the Heavens: Therefore in this poynt of offering Him-selfe, and in those excellent personall properties fore-named, seeing none can succeede; therefore neyther can they in His Priesthoode anie way.
HEBR. 10.14. For by one Offering Hee hath perfected for ever them who are sanctified.
Where-vponupon (sayeth Aquinas) seeing, then, it is not to bee reiterated, howe doe wee daylie offer? I answere, (sayeth hee) This is not another, but a commemoration of that which CHRIST offered, as Hee sayde, MATTH. 26. Doe this in rememberance of Mee. Wherefore, if it bee but a COMMEMORATION of CHRIST'S propitiatorie Sacrifice, or Offering, then it is not that Offering it selfe. For the remembering of an action long since done, is not the action it selfe, or doing there-of. And we all grant, that the Sacrament may bee called a Sacrifice commemoratiue: for there-by it will clearlie followe, that it is not, then, properlie propitiatorie.
Agayne: If that one and once offering of CHRIST avayleth for ever, to the remission of sinne, and perfecting, or perfectlie saving of them who are sanctified; then it followeth necessarllie, that there is no more offering for sinne: and, consequentlie, no more neede of Sacrifices propitiatorie.
HEBR. 9.25. Nor yet was it necessarie, that Hee should offer vp Him-selfe often, &c. for then must Hee often hauehave suffered.
Remarke, then, that it is all one in Scripture, CHRIST to bee offered, and CHRIST to hauehave suffered, His Passion and Death beeing inseparable from His Sacrifice: And, therefore, to offer CHRIST daylie, is all one, as CHRIST to die, and to suffer daylie: which seeing Hee doeth not, beeing nowe immortall, therefore Hee is not daylie offered: and consequentlie, in the Masse, there is no propitiatorie Sacrifice of Him reallie performed.
Next: The offering of CHRIST, is the personall action of CHRIST Him-selfe onelie, (as this place showeth:) there-fore none can, nor may offer Him reallie, by sacrificing, but Him-selfe. For the Priest must bee eyther better, or at least as good, as the sacrifice. But none can bee as good as CHRIST, let be better: therefore none can offer CHRIST in a proper propitiatorie Sacrifice.
More-over: To imagine an offering of CHRIST often, is both to giuegive the Lie to this TEXT, and to make CHRIST'S offering, by the repetition of it, imperfect, as was the Leviticall: For if one offering of CHRIST be sufficient, then oftner offering is superfluous. And if often offering bee needefull, then that once offering was not sufficient; and, consequentlie, vnperfect: which were blasphemous to affirme. Wherefore, if anie pretende to offer CHRIST often, hee hath no warrand from CHRIST; but, so farre as in him lyeth, maketh CHRIST'S Offering imperfect, and vsurpeth a Priesthood, wherevnto GOD never called him.
HEBR. 9.22. Without shedding of blood, there is no remission.
Where-by was praefigured, that the remission of sinnes, behoved to be (sayeth AQVINAS) by the blood of CHRIST. If, therefore, without the shedding of bloode, there bee no remission, then it will followe, that where there is no shedding of bloode, there is no remission. But so it is, That in the Masse, there is no shedding of blood, (for they call it, there-fore, an vnbloodie sacrifice:) there-fore, in the Masse, there is no remission. Wherfore, an vnbloodie propitiatorie sacrifice for sinne, is a vayne imagination, which the Apostle acknowledgeth not; else were his wordes heere alltogether vntrue; which is blasphemous to affirme. Eyther, there-fore, must such as pretende to offer CHRIST, for obtayning the remission of sinne, grant, That they shedde the Bloode of CHRIST daylie, as those who crucified Him: or else, that by their offering, no remission of sinne is procured: And so, their Sacrifice in the Masse, is no wayes properlie Propitiatorie.
HEBR. 10.18. Now, where remission of sinne is, there is no more offering for sinne.
To subsume, then; But remission of sinne, is allreadie purchased, vnderunder the Gospell, by that true and onelie propitiatorie sacrifice of CHRIST vponupon the Crosse: There-fore, for the purchasing there-of, there is not vnderunder the Gospell anie more propitiatorie sacrifices to bee offered vp.
Where also remarke, that hee sayeth not, No sacrifice anie more is to bee offered vp for sinne; but, No offering, bloodie or vnbloodie. That Church, there-fore, which praetendeth to offer vp anie propitiatorie offering for the sinnes of the quicke or the dead, vnderunder the Gospell, professeth, in-deede, that there is no remission of sinnes to bee had in her: Because, where there is remission of sinne, there is no more offering for sinne, sayeth the Apostle expresslie.
2. Witnessing of Antiquitie.
CHRYSOSTOME, speaking of that Propitiatorie Sacrifice vponupon the Crosse, Chrysost. hom. 83. in Math & hom. 17. in Hebr.hee sayeth thus of the SACRAMENT; The Symboll and signe, where-of is this Sacrifice, (sayeth hee.) And agayne; Wee offer vp (sayth hee) that same Sacrifice which CHRIST offered. Or rather, (by correcting his speach) Wee celebrate or act the rememberance of that Sacrifice of His. So lykewyse sayeth EVSEBIVS,Euseb demōstrat. Evāg lib. 1. cap. 10 that after CHRIST had offered vp that admirable and excellent Sacrifice to His Father, for the salvation of all, Hee instituted, (sayeth hee) that wee should offer vp the rememberance of that benefite, in place of a sacrifice to GOD.
Wee see, then, that these two call it a sacrifice commemoratiue. Now followeth S. AMBROSE, calling it both Commemoratiue and Representatiue,Ambr in 1. Cor. 11. saying; Because wee are delivered by CHRIST'S death, as myndfull there-of, in eating and drinking, wee represent that Bodie and Blood, which was sacrificed for vsus.
3. Confession of partie.
THAT which is offered vp, and consecrated, by the Priest, is called a Sacrifice and Offering,Lomb. lib. 4. sent. dist. 12. q. Si sit. (sayeth LOMBARD) because it is the Rememberance and Representation of that true Sacrifice, and holie Immolation, which was made vpō the Altar of the Crosse, AQVINAS also giveth this to bee the reason, why it is called a Sacrifice: Aquin. part. 3 q. 83. art. 1.Both because the celebration of this Sacrament, (sayeth hee) is an Image and representation of the Passion of CHRIST; as also, because by this Sacrament, wee are made part-takers of the … of the LORD'S Passion.Dist. de cōsecrat c. Quid sit. Where-fore also sayeth the Glosse vponupon the Pope's Decretall; where it is sayde, that in this mysterie, CHRIST dieth, and His fl…sh suffereth: that is, (sayth the Glosse) His Death, and Suffering, is there represented.
Soli DEO Gloria.