to goe in to bow with his Master in the house of Rimmon and therefore prayeth twice for mercy for it professing he will neuer worship any but the true God neither doth he onely pray for sinne past but in the sence of his owne weakenesse desireth mercy that 〈◊〉 may not bee drawne from his purpose and withsll stirreth vp the Prophet to pray for him that God would giue him grace and strength and for pardon if at any time hee should against his purpose bee drawne into his former sinne and in this sense the Prophet bids him goe in peace as if hee should say I will pray that God would keepe thee in thy godly resolution and for mercy and pardon if thou shouldest be drawne aside and so farewell The words of the Prophet Elisha Goe in peace are also diuerssy expounded Some thinke the Prophets words 〈◊〉 no grant made vnto his petition but rather a prohibition not to trouble himselfe about those matters as if he should haue sayd Content thy selfe require no such thing it would trouble thy conscience but goe in peace keepe a good conscience and labour for the peacetherof so as Polan obserues the words of the Prophet are Tantum dimittentis abeuntem non concedentis postulatum onely a valediction and not any concession or granting of his request Againe it appeares not by the words of the Prophet that he gaue any tolleration or dispensation vnto Naaman for Naaman makes in one verse two petitions one for permission to goe into Rimmons Temple the other for two mules load of earth to carry home with him to offer sacrifice vpon vnto the Lord. Now the Prophet makes the same answer vnto both and therefore doth either condescend to both or deny both but grant them both he did not for the one was cleane contrary to the law to giue Naaman leaue to sacrifice in Syria who was not a Priest whose office it was alone to offer sacrifice and moreouer Ierusalem was the onely place appointed for that action This request therefore the Prophet can by no meanes be thought to haue granted Ergo nor the other And vnto this sence I doe adhere for that the Prophet neither could nor durst giue any liberty to Naaman to be present at the Idolatrous worship of the Syrian Rimmon I am not ignorant of the opinion of some that the Prophet answers dispensando by the way of dispensation though not generally yet in that case onely to goe into the Idols Temple and to bee present at their Idolatry But Lyranus will haue it declarando by declaring it to be lawfull for Naaman to bee present in the Temple of Rimmon at Idolatrous seruice and sacrifice so it were onely for ciuill respect vnto the king his Master and of this opinion seemes 〈◊〉 to be who allowes a man to bee present by reason of some ciuill office so hee yeeld not to the least shew of Idolatry but I should rather commend the practise of the Protestant Princesat Augusta who brought Charles the fift their Emperour along as he was going to the Masse but left him at the Church doore as also of Valentinian who brought Iulian to the Temple of his Idols and when the doore-keeper sprinkled his gowne with the Idols water as the Pagans vsed Valentinian forthwith gaue him a blow on the eare Conclusion Thus hauing sufficiently refelled their strongest arguments and giuen answer to their chiefest pleas the conclusion shall bee this Seeing the Romish Masse hath quite ouerthrowne and thrust the Supper of the Lord out of the Church the holy Supper being an assembly a body of the faithfull vnited and knit together in one spirit strengthening our faith 〈◊〉 our charity kindling our zeale wherein is celebrated the memory of the death and passion of our Lord by a plaine and open rehearsall of the cause manner and benefits of the same whereby the faithfull are taught to acknowledge and call to mind the greatnesse of their sinnes and to admire and magnifie the great and vnspeakeable mercies of God whereby they are stirred vp to renounce and forsake themselues to giue themselues wholy vnto God to dye vnto their lusts and concupiscences and to liue vnto Christ who hauing once deliuered himselfe to the death of the crosse for to giue them life did yet further vouchsafe to giue himselfe to them in this sacrament as spirituall meate and drinke to feede their soules vnto eternall life and herein all the faithfull doe communicate together in the bread and in the cup in the body and in the blood of our Lord being taught thereby that they are diuers members of one mysticall hody whereof Christ is the head being quickned mooued and gouerned by one Spirit euen the Spirit of Christ liuing one life and hauing their hearts vnited one to another by loue Herein wee are seriously admonished of our bond and obligation to God the Father for sending his Son and God the Sonne fulfilling the will of his Father the remembrance of whose death wee shew forth till he come who as verily as the Minister giueth vs the bread and wine to be receiued with our hands which being eaten and drunken are conuerted into our substances and become nourishments of our bodies giueth vs his body and 〈◊〉 to be receiued with faith that we may eate and drinke them spiritually and that they may be turned into the life and substance of our soules making vs one with Christ and Christ one with vs. This was the holy Supper of the faithfull in the ancient Church and this is ours with the rest of the reformed Churches But in the Masse there are no footsteps of the holy Supper but all things are so changed as if the Lords Supper were abolished and the Masse were come in the stead therof for in the Masse there is a Prieft in a strange garment his face fixt vpon an Altar with a Clarke standing behind him muttering in a strange language interlarded with signes lifting vp a wafer in an affected and ceremoniall superstitious sort causing it to be worshipped dipping it in the wine eating it alone persuading the people that by thus much as hath beene done beeing at their request and bought with somepiece of money he hath sacrificed Christ for them What shewing foorth of the Lords death is there till he come Nay is there not an abolishing of the perfection value and efficacy of Christs death and sacrifice Is their not 〈◊〉 in robbing the lay-people of the cup Is not the Masse ful of abhominable blasphemies and grosse impieties Are not the deaths and sufferings of Saints and Martyrs rather reckoned vp then the death of Christ represented Is there not rather a breach of charity then any Symbole of loue when the Priest eates all himselfe the common people being excluded from it where is there any communion betweene the members or signification of our engrafting into Christ The scriptures neither authorising nor the Primitiue and Apostolicall
estated in glory By him we haue our fetters knockt off and our filthy rags cast away by him we are arrayed with rich apparrell of holines and innocencie by him wee are brought into his fathers presence and are accepted of God Almightie Through him we haue our Iustification through him we haue our Sanctification through him we haue our Glorification Seeing then the saluation of all beleeuers is perfectly wrought and consummated by the sacrifice of Christ here may arise a question Quest. Whether there be any sacrifices to bee offered by Christians vnder the Gospell or no Answ. I answer there are not any Ilasticke or propitiatory sacrifices to bee offered for attonement with God for to that end Christ hath offered himselfe once for all But as you haue heard that all Christians are spirituall Priests so they haue spirituall sacrifices to offer still vnto God which sacrifices are these First a broken and a contrite heart The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit a broken and a contrite heart oh Lord thou wilt not despise without this sacrifice all others are abhominable in the sight of God Secondly the offering vp of beleeuers per leitourgian ministrornm by the seruice of Gods ministers of this Paul speakes That I should be the minister of Iesus Christ to the Gentiles ministring the Gospell 〈◊〉 God that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable 〈◊〉 sanctified by the Holy Ghost Thirdly al manner of prayer and supplication Let my prayers be directed before thee as 〈◊〉 incense and the lifting vp of my hands as the euening sacrifice Fourthly all praise and thanksgining which wee giue vnto God By him therefore let vs offer the sacrifice of prayse to God 〈◊〉 that is the fruits of our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thanks to his name This sacrifice of 〈◊〉 Orthodox fathers called an im ton thu sian an vnbloody sacrifice as 〈◊〉 in his embassage for the Christians to the Emperours Antonius and 〈◊〉 And Eusebius Offerant illi logikas kai anaimous thu sias Let them offer 〈◊〉 and vnbloody sacrifices So Cyrill Oecumenicus Iustine Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus fathers of great 〈◊〉 called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haleluiahs of Angels and the holy hymnes of the Saints acceptable 〈◊〉 sacrifices Fiftly our almes and reliefe of the poore are spirituall sacrifices To doe good and to distribute forget not for with such sacrifices God is well 〈◊〉 And Paul calls the beneuolence of the Philippians sent by Ep phroditus an odor of a sweet smell and a sacrifice acceptable well pleasing to God Sixtly there is the sacrifice of righteousnesse or iustice Offer to God the sacrifices of right 〈◊〉 and againe Then shalt thoube pleased with the sacrifices of righteousnesse 〈◊〉 there is the slaying of our sinnes and offering them vp dead vnto the Lord with there signation of our selues to Gods seruice I beseech you therefore 〈◊〉 by the mercies of God that you present your bodies a liuing sacrifice holy and acceptable to God which is your reasonable seruice Eighthly the bodily death of the Martyrs inflicted on them by bloody tyrants is a spirituall sacrifice Thus Paul calls himselfe a Sacrifice Yea if I bee offered vp a sacrifice for the seruice of your faith And I take it in this sense it is the Prophet Dauid speakes saying Precious in the sight of God is the death of his Saints Thus did that holy Polycarpe the Disciple of Saint Iohn call his death which hee indured for the testimony of Iesus a Sacrifice And so Saint Augustine speaking of the Martyrs hath these words The Gentils dedicated Temples consecrated Priests erected altars and offered sacrifices to their gods We Christians dedicate Temples to our Martyrs not as to Gods but to their memories as to dead men whose spirits liue with the Lord. Neither doe we erect alvars whereon we sacrifice to the Martyrs but to one God theirs and ours Wee offer sacrifice at which sacrifices those Martyrs as men of God are named in their place and order nor are they 〈◊〉 by him that offers the sacrifice for the sacrifice is not made to them but to God although it be in the remembrance of them for he is the minister of God and not theirs and the sacrifice is the body of Christ which is not offered vnto them for they themselues are that body In the latter end of which words Saint Augustine shewes that the whole Church which is the mysticall body of Christ whereof the Martyrs are a part is a gratefull sacrifice acceptable vnto God Lastly the sacrament of the Lords supper is a sacrifice but not after the manner of the Papists but onely figuratiuely So the bread and cup are called the sacrifices of Christians by Iustine Martyr because they represent the sacrifice of Christ and were instituted in remembrance of it So Dyonisius calls it Sumbolike ierourgia ☠Symbolicum Sacrificium Eccles. Hiera cap. 30. a Symbolicall sacrifice So Saint Augustine Quod ab omnibus appellatur sacrificium signum est veri 〈◊〉 That which by all men is called a sacrifice is but a signe of the true sacrifice And that immolation which is in the hands of the Priest is called the passion death and crucifixion of Christ not that it is so indeed and in truth but onely by the way of remembrance So that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper may be called Sacrificium 〈◊〉 a Recordatory Sacrifice wherein vsing the signes and Symbolls of his body and blood with true faith and thankfull hearts we celebrate the memoriall of the death and sacrifice of our Sauiour Iesus Christ. Wherefore the Fathers called it an vnbloody sacrifice because it was not a proper sacrifice but onely mysticall and figuratiue And indeed this makes it not to bee properly a sacrifice because in a sacrifice we giue vnto God but in a Sacrament wee receiue from God but in the Lords Supper wee giue not the body and blood of Christ vnto God but receiue it from the minister as from Christ for the confirmation of our faith which makes it to be properly and truely a sacrament but a sacrifice it is called improperly and by representation Thus you see what was the sacrifice offered by Christ and what are the spirituall sacrifices of euery Christian. Now followes the third branch of this first part of the text Namely the cause why Christ offered this sacrifice or the end whereunto this sacrifice was directed which is said here to be for sinne But this man hauing offered one sacrifice for sinne Here we are to note that albeit the Angels had sinned as well as man yet it was not for their sinne that Christ offered sacrifice for they had no benefite by his incarnation death or passion but for the sinnes of mankind and withall we are to obserue that albeit Christ was a man endued with true humane nature yet in regard he was not a sinnefull man but a lambe without blemish and without spot a
he must infinitely humble himselfe and in humbling himselfe he must die for vs and in dying for vs he must die not for the righteous but for sinners and if the wordes of Christ be true that greater loue there cannot be then that a man should lay downe his life for his friend how great then is that loue when God shall lay downe his life for his enemies If Christ hath thus loued vs let vs labour to loue him againe and if wee will giue an euident demonstration of our loue to Christ let vs expresse it by this euen by our care to keepe his commandements for so sayes Christ If yee loue me keepe my commandements Thus so often as wee meditate on the Priest-hood and sacrifice of Christ whereby wee receiue remission of sinnes and reconciliation wee should in them as in a glasse behold the incomprehensible compassion of God our father and the vnspeakable loue of Christ our Sauiour The third vse of this point is for consolation vnto all Gods elect who are sanctified with the grace of Christ hauing the eyes of their vnderstandings illuminated and being renewed in the spirit of their minds are become new creatures for to them hath he made an atonement and reconciliation by his sacrifice and oblation which hee offered vpon the crosse once for all Whosoeuer thou art therefore that fearest the Lord and art begotten againe to a 〈◊〉 hope albeit thou findest in thy selfe many failings and infirmities and that the burthen of those 〈◊〉 which thou diddest commit in the dayes of thy vnregeneration and non-conuersion doe so oppresse thee as that thou art weary and heauy laden yet lift vp the eyes of thy faith vnto Christ hee was the Priest that offered vp his humane nature an al-sufficient sacrifice for the sinnes of all that beleeue in him he felt the sharpe wrath of God against him but it was for thy sinnes that thou mightest be freed from the wrath to come he hath borne thine infirmities he was broken for thy transgressions the chastisement of thy peace was layd vpon him and by his stripes thou art healed he put himselfe in thy roome and by the punishment of his soule and body did free thy soule and body from eternall damnation If therefore thou be stung with sinne Christ is the brazen Serpent exalted on the crosse list vp the eyes of faith vnto him and thou shalt be restored It was for thy sake that Christ Iesus was made a Holocaust or sacrifice that he might abandon all enmity and consummate a perfect peace betweene thee and God Wherefore feare not thy sinnes but reioyce in thy Christ and let thy soule be ioyfull within thee say vnto thy soule as Dauid did Prayse the Lord ô my soule and all that is within me prayse his holy Name because hee hath of his tender compassion on thee conferred the riches of his mercy and incorporated thee into the mysticall body of his sonne Christ Iesus by whose most holy sacrifice God is so appeased that I dare runne boldly vnto the Throne of Grace and with confidence in his name assure my selfe of eternall life But vnto all wicked men which liue without feare and die without repentance albeit their outward profession be more glorious in shew then was the profession of the most strict Pharisie but doing good workes in hypocrisie and dissimulation I will say concerning the benefit of Christs Sacrifice as Peter sayd to Simon Magus touching the guifts of the Holy Ghost You haue neither part nor lot in this matter that is in the sacrifice of Christ for your heartes are not right in the sight of God Repent 〈◊〉 of your wickednesse and pray God if perhaps the thoughts of your hearts may be forgiuen you for I 〈◊〉 you are in the gall of bitternesse and band of 〈◊〉 Oh you wicked and vngodly men 〈◊〉 not your soules feede not your selues with vaine hopes and dreaming expectations of future happinesse for vnto heauen can you not come but by the sacrifice of Christ and till you leaue your sinnes by 〈◊〉 and reformation and be changed from your miserable state of nature to the comfortable state of grace you can haue no part norportion in Christs sacrifice for that was onely offered for them that were elected before all time and shall be called in time to the sauing knowledge of the Lord Icsus Christ. Wherefore if any man desire to come to heauen and there to enioy the felicity of Gods glorious Kingdome let him then by a true 〈◊〉 faith apply the sacrifice of Christ vnto himselfe Let the 〈◊〉 for sake-his wayes and the vnrighteous his thoughts and let him returne vnto the Lord and hee will haue mercy vpon him and to our God for hee will aboundantly pardon The last vse of this point is for consutation of that most blasphemous doctrine and damnable heresie of the Church of Rome concerning the sacrisice of the Masse established by Canons in the cursed Councill of Trent and is now taught and beleeued by all Papists The words of which Canons are these If any man shall say that in the Masse there is not offered vnto God a true and proper Propitiatory Sacrifice vnder the formes of bread and wine or shall deny that by this sacrifice is effected that those which come vnto God with a true heart and vpright conscience do obtaine mercy let him be accursed The other Canon hath these words If any man shal say the sacrifice of the masse to bee onely a sacrifice of praise and 〈◊〉 or a bare commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse and not propitiatory or shall say that it is profitable onely for him that 〈◊〉 it and not both for the quicke and the dead for their sinnes punishments and satisfactions let him bee accursed This diuelish and most hereticall doctrine as it hath beene already confuted by the Scriptures which are as the ancients stile them the touchstone of truth the pillar of faith a strong army against heretickes so shall it also appeare to bee vnknowne to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and gain-sayd by diuers of then owne Writers Now if in this 〈◊〉 wee shall somewhat more then ordinarily relye vpon the 〈◊〉 of Writers it is to be borne with in regard that it is the best course 〈◊〉 like owles they 〈◊〉 the light of the Scripture to deale with them which so much stand vpon antiquity by the 〈◊〉 of antiquity and the testimony of their 〈◊〉 men And the 〈◊〉 shall I 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it falls so patte in the way that I must eyther remooue it or leape ouer it as also because herein consisteth the most principall part of Diuine Seruice in the Church of Rome and vnto them it is the badge and cognizance to distinguish betweene the good and euill Christian and in going thereunto or not going a man workes his owne saluation or damnation as also because it compriseth in it the doctrine or the
Priests should become Christochthonoi Christ Killers Yet how can they auoid the suspition of treason against the life of Christ when they seperate his reall body from his blood for it is greatly to be feared that they who powre out his liuely blood and breake his reall and substantiall body are guilty of the death of our Lord and Sauiour Argument 8. Eighly If Christ be dayly sacrificed in the Masse then Christ doth daily satisfie for our sinnes but Christ doth not daily satisfie for our sinnes ergo Christ is not dayly sacrificed in the Masse The consequence is plaine by euidence of Scripture for wheresoeuer and whensoeuer Christ was to be sacrificed it was for the satisfaction of his Fathers wrath for sinne Who gaue himselfe a ransom for all to be testified in due time Hee was delinered to death for our offences Who loued vs and gaue himselfe for vs an offering and a sacrifice to God of a sweete smelling sauour If when we were enemies we were reconciled vnto God by the death of his sonne c. Who gaue himselfe for our sinnes that he might deliuer vs from this present euill world By these and diuers other places of holy Scripture it is plainely prooued that satisfaction for our sinnes is the end of Christs sacrifice and in naming the one wee suppose the other The Minor is prooued because Christ did perfectly satisfie for the sinnes of all the elect appeasing fully the wrath of God by his sacrifice vpon the Crosse and now ceasing from making any further satisfaction he onely sitting at the right hand of God maketh intercession for vs. For to satisfie the wrath of God is to doe that for vs which wee should haue done and to suffer that which we had deserued namely death and so Christ should againe yeelde obedience to the Law and suffer death againe but the Apostle sayth Christ being once dead dyeth no more neither is Almighty God so vniust as to require satisfaction of him that hath perfectly satisfyed already But our aduersaries say that Christ is sacrificed in the Masse to apply vnto vs the satisfaction which Christ hath giuen for vs on the Crosse. But so in applying satisfaction he makes satisfaction for Christ cannot be sacrificed truely but hee must truely die and he cannot die but to make satisfaction Againe if Christ ought to be sacrificed againe that the fruite of his sacrifice may be applyed vnto vs then ought he as well to be incarnate againe in the wombe of the Virgin that the fruite of his incarnation may be applied vnto vs to die to be buried to rise againe that so the fruite of his death Sepulture and resurrection may be applyed vnto vs. Lastly the application of the benefit of Christs sacrifice by reiteration of his sacrifice is not found in Scripture But there is a double meanes one internall and that is the efficacie of the Spirit of God which powerfull applies 〈◊〉 vs the vertue of Christs sacrifice the other is externall namely the Preaching of the word and the Sacraments which two concurring together beget faith in the soule which particularly applies the benefit of Christs oblation to the beleeuer In a word let them consider what applicari to be applied signifies and they shall easily perceiue that the sacrifice of Christ is applied vnto vs when Christ is offered not to God as in the Masse but to vs as in the holy Eucharist Christ freely giuing his body to be eaten his blood to be drunke and that spiritually by faith Argument 9. Ninthly if in the Masse Christ be offered vnto God by the Priests of Rome then hee is not the onely Priest of the new Testament But Christ is the onely Priest of the New Testament Ergo he is not offered by the Priests of Rome in the sacrifice of the Masse The consequence is true for if there be a true and reall sacrifice in the Masse there must needes follow a true and reall Priest-hood which offereth this sacrifice and so Christ is not the onely Priest of the new Testament The Minor is denied by our aduersaries but is proued by vs. First there is no other proper externall Priesthood vnder the Gospell but that which is after the order of Melchizedech of which order there is no man worthy but onely Christ as is sufficiently declared And whereas our aduersaries vainely boast their Priest-hood to be after the order of Melchizedech herein they are contrary to Scripture which makes this not to be a common Priest-hood as Aarons was but personall belonging onely vnto Christ wherefore the Apostle sayes that Christ because he continueth for euer hath Aparabaton Hierosunen such a Priest-hood as cannot passe from one to another Where the Apostle plainly shewes that such as were mortal and consequently not eternall were vncapable of that order of Melchizedech such are the Priests of Rome mortall as those of Aaron were and thereof vnto them cannot this Priest-hood be diuolued They thinke to cut vs off with this distinction Christ is the primary or principall Priest but men may be secundary and lesse principall by whose ministery Christ may offer himselfe vnto God I demaund then was not Christ euen vnder the Law a Priest after the order of Melchizedech and were not the Priests of Aaron being compared to Christ that was to come Secundary Priests were they not therefore Types and figures of the Priest-hood of Christ wherefore when the primary or superior Priest was come the Priest-hood of Aaron vanished and the Apostle would haue no legall Priesthood to remaine But where hath he substituted any other secundary Priests instead of the former Certes the Scripture hath not appointed any Againe by the same reason that the Apostle disanulles the legall Priest-hood hath he also excluded all other externall Priest-hood vnder the Gospell for he opposeth him that is immortall against those that are mortall God and man against those who are meere men Now if the Priests of Rome be no freer from mortality or fuller of deity then the Priests of Leuy they are then by the same reason both excluded for Cui ratio perfectum medium conclusionis conuenit eidem ipsa conuenit conclusio To whom the true reason and perfect medium of a conclusion doth agree to the same also the conclusion it selfe may be applied Againe Christ is plainely manifested to be the only Priest of the New Testament and so alone able to offer the sacrifice of propitiaton for our sinnes by that figuratiue entring alone of the high Priest once a yeare into the Tabernacle Againe he that offers a true propitiatory sacrifice effectuall in it selfe to procure pardon for 〈◊〉 must needes be a Mediator of the new Testament therefore is it sayd of Christ But now hath hee obtained a better ministry by how much also he is made a Mediator of a better couenanant And for this cause he is the 〈◊〉 of the new Testament that by meanes of death c. By which
vse as meanes for the conuersion of others were to liue in future ages and had not as yet beeing and consequently could not at that time finish those acts whereunto they were destined of God but if he vnderstand by these words All things necessary for mans saluation are not finished all the specificall acts of religion as Prayer Preaching Administration of the Sacraments c. and whatsoeuer of that kind which is necessary to mans saluation is not finished this is false for that they had their institution from Christ before his death and so in the species they were finished Or if thereby the sacrifice of Christ was not finished this is false for both it and the saluation of man by it was finished as appeares by the Apostles vsing the same words saying With one offering teteleioken consummauit he hath consummated for euer such as are sanctified And whereas he sayes that if all things necessary for mans saluation were consummated then the sacraments and all doctrine should bee superfluous this is false for the institution of them might be consummated although the exercise of them in future ages were not finished Againe the perfection of Christs sacrifice abolisheth not the vse of doctrine and Sacraments which doe represent vnto vs the death and sacrifice of Christ but it abolisheth all other sacrifices of Propitiation for if they be but memorialls of Christs death they are superfluous the word and sacraments beeing sufficient to that end and if they be more then memorials as auaileable to forgiue sinnes they are blasphemous and make Christs sacrifice imperfect Argument 17. The seauenteenth argument is taken from the falshood of the Canon of the Masse and it is thus framed Such as is the Canon such is the sacrifice But the Canon of the Masse is false Ergo the sacrifice is false and consequently not Propitiatory The falshood of the Masse appeares in diuers things 1. In the ancient Church when the Lords Supper was celebrated the Christians vsed to bring their agapai which were the bread and wine for the reliefe of the poore and the maintenance of the Ministry and when they had laide downe these oblations which were neuer accounted a Propitiatory sacrifice they prayed for the prosperity and preseruation of the Church which in the Canon before the consecration is applyed vnto the bread and wine and the bread and wine is offered vnto God the Father for the happinesse of the Church Secondly in the Canon They pray vnto God that he would accept that pure sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ as he accepted the sacrifices of Abell and Melchizedech In which words they become intercessours vnto God the Father to accept his Son Iesus Christ as though he were not worthy to be accepted of himselfe And how absurd is it to compare the most pretious sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ if it were so really and truely vnto the sacrifice of Abel which was but a lambe or a goate And how vnwisely doe they pray that God would accept the sacrifice of his Sonne as hee did accept the sacrifice of Melchizedech whereas it cannot appeare as is formerly prooued by the holy scripture that Melchizedech offered bread and wine how absurd is it then to compare the sacrifice of Christ with that sacrifice which neither was is nor shall be Thirdly the Canon saith that the Priest offereth vnto God the heauenly Father the bread of life But where are they commanded to offer the bread of life seeing in the scripture there is mention made of eating the bread of life but not of offering Fourthly the Canon ouerthrowes the article of ascension for it commands the Angells to carry that vnspotted sacrifice to the high Altar of heauen and to present it before God the Father What Is not Christ ascended and fitteth for euer at the right hand of God and hath he now more need of the helpe of Anglls then when he first ascended by the whole power of his Godhead and cannot hee appeare before his Father but by the assistants of Angells But let me bee bold to demand three questions of our aduersaries grounded vpon these words of the Canon Supplices te rogamus omnipotens Deus iube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli c. We humbly beseech thee O Omnipotent God that tbou wouldest command this sacrifice to be carryed by the hands of the holy Angell vnto thy high Altar in the sight of thy diuine Maiesty c. First if they vnderstand it of the bread and wine transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ how comes it to passe that they are not taken by the Angell and carryed immediately into heauen according to the prayer of the Church Secondly I demand if their doctrine bee true of their Multipresence that the true humane body and blood of Christ be both in heauen and in many thousand places vpon the earth at one time what need then the Angell to carry the body of Christ into heauen where it is already before his heauenly Father Thirdly if it be so as they say that Christ in the night when he instituted the Lords Supper did offer himselfe his naturall body and blood vnder the forms of bread and wine a true Propitiatory sacrifice to his heauenly Father I demand whether the Angell did carry this sacrifice into heauen or whether it did 〈◊〉 before his Father in heauen or no If they say no how then was the sacrifice accepted or how comes the Church to pray for that priuiledge of hauing this sacrifice carryed into heauen which was not vouchsafed to the sacrifice offered immediately by Christ himselfe If they affirme that it was carryed into heauen it would then follow that Christs body was in heauen before his passion resurrection or ascension and when he in his humane nature ascended into heauen from his Disciples hee found his humane body and blood before his Father and to haue beene there before it came thither Thus they make Christ to haue two bodies and consequently two soules and so Christ is not one but two but many but innumerable These absurdities doe directly result and arise from their blasphemous Canon which is so grosse and palpable as deserues to be hissed out of the Church Lastly the Canon in diuers places ouerturnes the Mediation of Christ in that they pray to Saints and Angells making them to be intercessours it also establishes Purgatory and prayer for the dead doctrines so dissonant from the truth of the Scriptures as when we see them authorized in the Church of Rome wee may iustly call in question the vertue of their massing sacrifice Argument 18. The eighteenth Argument is taken from the effect of the Masse thus That which destroyeth the true nature of the Lords Supper cannot be a true Propitiatory sacrifice for the 〈◊〉 of the quicke and the dead But the pretended sacrifice of the Masse doth subuert and destroy the nature of the Lords Supper Ergo
the pretended sacrifice of the Masse is not Propitiatory for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead The Maior is not denyed by our aduersaries The Minor is thus prooued Augustine saith Sacramentum est visibile signum inuisibilis gratiae a visible signe of inuisible grace so that in euery sacrament there is signum signatum the signe and the thing signified both which abide whole and intire in such sort as it is not possible that the one can be the other or any part of the other But the sacrifice of the Masse destroyeth the nature of a sacrament for it taketh away the substance of the bread which is the signe and seale of his body it taketh away the substance of the wine which is the symbole of his blood and that by 〈◊〉 and altering them as some of them hold or els by annihilating them as others say or by reducing them into their first matter from substances into accidents contrary vnto all nature yea contrary to the things signified for there ought to be resemblance betweene the signe and the thing signified as Manna did represent the bread of life which came downe from heauen in baptisme water which washeth away corporall spottes the blood of Christ which cleanseth our spirituall pollutions bread and wine which nourish our naturall life the body and blood of Christ which sustaine and feede vs vnto eternall life But roundnesse whitenesse moistnesse and rednesse which they giue vs for signes what analogy or proportion haue they with our spirituall nourishment These accidents of bread and wine haue no power or vertue to feede the body but the substance of bread and wine they leaue those and take away this where then is the sacrament when the signe is abolished Againe the sacrifice of the Masse taketh away the thing signified in the Lords Supper What 's that It is the body and blood of Christ yea Christ himselfe For the very body and blood of Christ was giuen only for them which 〈◊〉 in him and abide in him for them saith the Apostle which dwell in him by faith and in whose hearts he dwelleth for them saith Saint Augustine which are his members and therefore the same Father saith a man may eate panem Domini the bread of the Lord and yet not eate panem Dominum the Lord the bread making a difference betweene the bread in the sacrament and that life-giuing bread which is Christ himselfe represented by the symboles in the Eucharist But oh what iniury is offered by the Papists in their sacrifice vnto the body and blood of Christ which is the food of eternall life when dogs and swine that is reprobates and hypocrites shall bee made pertakers of it nay and these ex opere operato by vertue of the very act of receiuing doe merit remission of sinnes and relaxation of punishment nay a Mouse or a Dog may eate the precious body of our Lord Iesus Christ which doth so 〈◊〉 their greatest Doctors that if it be demanded Whether if a Dog or a Mouse doe eate the 〈◊〉 Host they doe 〈◊〉 the very body of Christ they are at a non plus and know not what to answer Wee affirme and dare iustifie That the signe of the Sacrament may be receiued of all that are of competent age in the Church But Res Sacramenti the thing signified in the Sacrament can onely be receiued by the faithfull which are rightly of the Church for so saith Origen Of this true and verie meate of this Word made flesh no wicked or vngodly man can eate because it is the Word and Bread of life because hee that eateth of this bread liueth for euer And S. Augustine speakes plainely to this purpose saying The Signes are common to the good and 〈◊〉 but the thing proper to the faithfull alone therefore the Apostles did eate Panem Dominum The bread which was the Lord but Iudas onely Panem Domini the Bread of the Lord against the Lord. Doth not this take away Christ himselfe when the Church shall giue vnto wicked men and vnbeleeuers and they themselues shall receiue the very substantiall Body of Christ. Againe they destroy the humanity of Christ for the which the Fathers of the Church haue so mightily contended against diuers Heretikes for when without warrant of Gods word they ascribe vnto this body a property of being in a thousand places at once how do they not destroy the nature of a true Humane body which can be but in one place at one time as is prooued Pag. 198. Nay doth not this Sacrifice make Christ a dead Christ in that they doe really separate his body from his blood making them in consecration and after consecration to subsist apart which separation was the very death of Christ And whereas Christ saith I am with you vnto the end of the world And Where two or three are gathered together in my name I will be in the middest of them These and the like speeches are to be vnderstood of the Diuinitie of Christ which filleth all places as these Speeches You shall not have me alwaies with you It is expedient for you that I goe away The heauens must containe him vntill the restauration of all things are to be vnderstood of his Humanity which is circumscriptiuely onely in one place at once And so the Fathers vnderstand these places Origen saith It is not the man which is euery where Where two or three be gathered together in his name Or yet is alwaies with vs vntill the end of the world Or which is in euery place where the faithfull are assembled but it is the Diuine power which is in Iesus And so Saint Augustine You haue the poore alwaies with you c. Let not good men be troubled in respect of his maiestie prouidence grace c. It is fulfilled which he said I am alwaies with you In respect of the flesh which the Word tooke vpon it it is the same which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You shall not haue me alwaies The Church enioyed him but a few daies in respect of his bodily presence but now it possesseth him by faith and seeth him no more with these bodily eies c. And in another place vpon 〈◊〉 words Vado venio ad aos He went as men he staied behinde as God He went in as much as he was but in one place he staied and abode still in as much as hee was euery where By which words of S. Augustine it appeares that hee conceiued the Humane body of Christ to reside in one place and not to bee in many places at once And in another of his writings hee hath these words It is expedient for you that I goe Although that hee be alwaies with vs by his Diuinitie but if he had not gone away from vs corporally we should haue seen him daily with these carnall eies and should neuer haue beleeued in him spiritually c. And for this cause he hath absented himself in
Ireneus speakes The sacrifice receiues its efficacy and value from the Priest that offers it Wherefore the sacrifice that was offered for the sinnes of man beeing of infinite worth and excellencie according as the sinne of man was of infinite deformitie and deserued infinite punishment so must the Priest likewise bee of infinite desert at the hands of God that must offer so great a sacrifice Hereupon it followes that the humane nature of Christ beeing perfectly holy of it selfe yet not infinitely holy could neuer haue beene a sufficient sacrifice for our sinnes had not the Dietie beene vnited to it so to make him an infinite Priest that hee might giue infinite merite and efficacie to his oblation But a creature of infinit desert could not be found Not Angels who are finite in being and whose holinesse is but deriued from God his Sanctitie being the fountaine and theirs the streames 〈◊〉 man for he had corrupted his wayes and was become abhominable and had neede of a Mediatour to stand betweene God and himselfe None there for was sufficient for this function none worthy of this Priesthood but Christ Iesus the Sonne of God By the ground of this reason wee may obserue a maine difference betweene a Sacrifice and a Sacrament a Sacrament doth not receiue it efficacie and vertue from the minister but may be administred effectually to a beleeuer albeit it be by a wicked Minister but a sacrifice is either accepted or reiected for the worthinesse or vnworthinesse of the person 〈◊〉 As appeares euidently in Cain and Abel their sacrifices both sufficient for matter but God imbraced Abels because he offered with a righteous heart and abhominated Cains because he was wicked The people of 〈◊〉 and Iudah because their 〈◊〉 was full of blood and their hearts full of 〈◊〉 therefore were 〈◊〉 sacrifices an abhomination vnto the Lord and for their wickednes did the Lord 〈◊〉 his owne ordinances The third reason why Christ onely is that Priest who can offer a perfect propitiatorie sacrifice for the sinnes of mankind is because he that offered that oblation was to haue neither archen emeron nor zoes telos beginning of dayes nor end of life but what creature is there which was not framed in time by the God of eternity seeing in the beginning God made the heauen and the earth and all things therein where then shall we find any Priest to parallell eternity but onely Christ Iesus the Sonne of God Fourthly there was and is but one Mediatour betweene God and man which was the office of the Priest but this Mediatour is onely Christ Iesus For albeit there bee appointed ministers of Gods holy word to present the prayers of the faithfull before God and to impetrate for them yet this is not for the worthinesse of their owne persons and in their owne names but in the name and for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christ do they make request for the whole Church of Christ. And to this purpose Saint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in these words If the Apostle had 〈◊〉 These things haue I written vnto you that you should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but if any man sinne you haue me for a Mediatour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by my prayer obtaine pardon for your sinnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 placeth the Bishop to be a Mediatour betweene God and the people what good or faithfull Christian 〈◊〉 abide him who would behold him as the Apostle of Christ and not rather as Antichrist By which words of Saint Augustine it appeares to be a point of 〈◊〉 to place any creature as a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God and man but onely hee who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God and man Christ Iesus Fiftly and lastly there is but one that could offer this Sacrifice because as the Priesthood was peculiar to Christ alone so the act of offering this sacrifice according to the order of that Priesthood did properly and personally appertaine to Christ. Now Christ had such a Priesthood as no creature was capable of and therefore the Apostle cals it aparabaton ierosunen such a priesthood as could not passe from him to any other creature no not to the father or the holy Ghost therefore was it translated from Aarons order to Christ where it resteth and from whom it cannot be translated or remooued by succession or any other wayes and seeing he hath translated the Leuiticall Priesthood and bound it to his owne person hee hath thereby made the new Testament vnalterable and his priesthood vnchangeable Wherefore seeing there is but one onely that is God and man after the order of Melchisedech without father without mother king of Salem and Prince of Peace Seeing there is but one that is of equall dignitie with this all-sufficient sacrifice Seeing there is but one that hath neyther beginning nor end of dayes Seeing there is but one Mediatour betweene God and man And seeing the priesthood was tyed to one particular person and all these agree onely vnto Christ it followes therefore that there is but one onely priest who was worthie and able to offer this perfect satisfactorie sacrifice and that was Iesus Christ. The first vse of this point is for confutation of the doctrine of the Church of Rome for you haue heard that Christ is Priest not according to his humane nature onely but also according to his diuine which the papists veterly deny making him to bee a priest onely as he was man but altogether vniustly for in the office of priesthood there are two things necessarie Ministerie and Authoritie In respect of the Ministeriall part Christ performed that office as man but in respect of Authoritie of entring into the Holy of Holyes and presenting vs before God and reconciling vs vnto him which was the principall part of his priesthood he did performe it as the Sonne of God as the second person in the Trinitie co-worker with the Father in the creation of the world wherefore that he might be a priest able and worthy to make attonement with God he was God that his reconciliation might extend to men he was man and so being God and man he is a perfect mediatour between God and man and an high Priest for euer after the order of Melchizedech But the Papists hold Christ to bee a Priest onely in his humane nature because they thinke that onely in his humane nature he was annoynted I answer that if this annoynting be onely taken for the collation of the gifts and graces of the Spirit it is true onely the humane nature of Christ was annointed But by this annointing is also vnderstood the ordaining of Christ to be the Mediatour and Sauiour of the world and in this sence not onely his humane nature but also his diuine was annoynted to this end For the humane nature of Christ albeit it was pure and spotlesse yet could it neuer haue wrought our redemption without the assistance of his Godhead for as he was man so he was borne hee fasted he suffered he dyed but to rise from the
Peter S. Marke S. Matthew S. Andrew S. Dennis S. Clement These are nothing but forged fables of which we may say as Augustine touching that false booke of the Acts of the Apostles which the Manichees falsely pretended that hereby the enemies of the Gospel endeauour to weaken the strength of the scriptures and to strengthen the arme of falshood and therefore I may say of them as Leo the first said of those writings That these pretended writings of the Apostles which vnder their names containe the seedes of many false doctrines 〈◊〉 not onely to be forbidden in the Church but quite banished and burned Forged they are as appeares First by this that they abound so with errours which in the purer ages of the Church were not hatched Secondly in that none of them were euer mentioned by any of the Fathers that liued 500 yeares after Christ. Lastly in that in the masse of St. Iames many sentences yea whole clauses of Paules Epistles are wouen in and inserted albeit St. Iames was beheaded before Paul writ any Epistles Fiftly they alledge for the maintenance of their blasphemous sacrifice that Epistle which quite kils it and huntes it out of the world Wee haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate which serue in the Tabernacle Now say they if they had an altar then had they also a sacrifice and if a Sacrifice what but that of the Masse Ans. I answere let vs learne what this Altar is and wee shall soone know what the sacrifice is The scope and meaning of the Author is to prooue that as the beasts were burned without the campe which were offered for sinne-offerings for the people so Christ suffered without the gates being made a sinne-offering for his elect and as the Priest that serued in the Tabernacle had no part of that sinne offering so they that trusted in the ceremonies of the leuiticall Law and thought to be made perfect by legall sacrifices they had no part in Christ and that because they did make frustrate the Crosse of Christ which was the visible Altar whereon hee was offered without the gate And thus and no otherwise hath their owne glosse vnderstood it saying We haue an 〈◊〉 that is the Crosse vppon which Christ was offered of which Christs sacrifice And saith he according to this second manner it is proper to this sacrament that Christ is immolated or sacrificed therein Thus these great and learned Doctors pillars I may call them of the Church of Rome confesse the same with vs that Christ is not really properly and truely sacrificed in the Eucharist but Metonymically because therein is a representation of the death of Christ and a commemoration of his passion and an application to euery particular beleeuer of the benefits of Christs redemption vnto himselfe by faith And here we are to take notice of the reason why the Fathers tearmed the Sacrament by the name of a Sacrifice and why they called it an vnbloody Sacrifice Seeing the whole outward seruice both of the Iewes and Gentiles consisted principally in sacrifices it seemed hard and harsh to those that were conuerted either from the one side or other and like to giue much offence if the Church should wholy abolish all sacrifices because these Prosolites newly conuerted to Christianity did not beleeue that religion could subsist without sacrifices Least therefore they might exasperate or prouoke either the one or the other the Christians applyed themselues both to heare and speake of altars and sacrifices and for that the Apostles had taught them that all externall sacrifices had their end in Christ they therefore durst not giue any approbation to the continuance of Iewish sacrifices much lesse to Heathenish therefore they called the Lords Supper their prayers their seruice their almes and well-nigh euery religious actions a Sacrifice the Table of the Lord an Altar the Bishops and Pastors Priests And thus the Fathers called the Supper of the Lord the true Sacrifice of Christ because of the truth of representation and truth of the effect thereof to the faithfull because also that the Church doth therein truely offer her selfe to God as August de ciuit Dei lib. 10. cap. 20. Thus the Lords Table was called by the Fathers an Altar not properly but by a signe and allusion and hereupon sometimes it is called an Altar sometimes a Table The Table of thy spouse hath holy bread and an 〈◊〉 Cup. And Augustine None say so 〈◊〉 such as receiue life from the Lords Table Againe he calls it an Altar Ad Bonifa Epist. 90. saying They rushed in vpon him with horrible 〈◊〉 and furious cruelty with clubs and such like weapons as he stood at the Altar breaking downe the wood of the Altar most barbarously And some of the Fathers deny that they haue any Altar properly which doubtlesse they would neuer haue done had they acknowledged a Propitiatory sacrifice in the Sacrament Our Altar is an earthly gathering together of such as do apply themselues to prayers Arnobius sayth The heathen did accuse the Christians because they did not build them Altars About the 400. yeare Altars began not for sacrifice but for the honour and memory of the Martyrs as the Councill of Carthage doth record cap. 11. Now how do the Fathers call it an vnbloody sacrifice In two respects first thereby to distinguish betweene this representatiue Sacrifice of the Sacrament and the bloody sacrifices of the law and the bloody Sacrifice offered by Christ himselfe vpon the Crosse by which very distinction it appeares that the Fathers dreamed not of Transubstantiation or the presence of any humane or 〈◊〉 blood in the Sacrament for then doubtlesse they would neuer haue vsed that distinction And me thinkes that distinction being admitted by the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 and ouerturneth the reality of a Propitiatory 〈◊〉 For Christ cannot be sacrificed except hee be slaine and he cannot be slaine without shedding of blood and if his blood be shed really vpon the Table after a corporall manner then how is it an vnbloody Sacrifice wherefore it is first called an vnbloody Sacrifice to distinguish betweene the bloody sacrifices of the Iewes and of Christ himselfe it being not a resacrificing of Christ but onely a figuratiue representation and a mysticall commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ. Secondly it was called an vnbloody Sacrifice because it was Eucharisticall and a sacrifice of prayse and thankesgiuing as for all blessings in generall so especially for the worke of our redemption by Christ. And this is manifested by a notable saying of Saint Augustine Hold it firmely and doubt not that the only begotten sonne of God which was made flesh for vs offered himselfe for vs a sacrifice of a sweet smelling sauour vnto God to whom with the Father and the Holy Ghost in the time of the ancient Law liuing sacrifices were offered and to whom now with the Father and the holy Ghost one onely God
the holy Church dotb not cease to offer bread and wine throughout the whole world For in those carnall sacrifices there is a figuring of the flesh of Christ which hee was to offer for our sinnes and of the blood which he was to shed for the remission of sinnes but in this sacrifice there is a commemoration and thankesgiuing for the flesh of Christ which he hath offered and of the blood which he powred out for vs. Obserue here first he calleth it bread and wine which is offered Secondly hee shewes the end only for commemoration and thanksgiuing So that none of the Fathers did tearme the Eucharist or Sacrament of the Lords Supper in that sence which the Papists doe to bee an vnbloody sacrifice because Christ without shedding of 〈◊〉 was really properly and personally offered but because it was both a representation of that substantiall and great sacrifice which Christ offered on the Crosse as also because it was a sacrifice of prayse thanksgiuing and commemoration And heereupon some of the learned Papists as Gropperus and others being ashamed of this grosse and 〈◊〉 opinion of the Romanists haue confessed the Masse to be nothing but Onely a remembrance of the passion of Christ in a publicke congregation of Christians where there is a generall thankesgiuing for the benefit of our redemption but that Sacrifie of Christ vpon the Crosse to bee offered to God and to remaine in the presence of God in the time of the Supper that when a man despaires of his owne worth hee may apprehend the price of our redemption to wit the body of Christ by faith and offer it to God betweene the wrath of God and his sinnes for the obtaining of that pardon which Christ hath both merited and procured Thus haue wee at length brought this first part of our confutation to an end in which is plainely prooued that the Popish Sacrifice of the Masse hath no foundation either in the Scriptures or Apostolicall constitutions or was either knowne vnto or named by the Fathers for the space of 600. yeares after Christ as also that the Fathers vsed the word Sacrifice in a farre different sence from that of the Church of Rome The second part followes wherein wee shall demonstrate how and by what degrees the Masse was brought into the Church and how it increased and first shall I shew the meaning of the word Masse and how it was vsed in the Ancient Church The Papists themselues are not certaine of the antiquity of the word Missa the Masse yet they finde it no ancienter then Pope Leo and Saint Ambrose his time so their owne Iesuites confesse Bellarmine and others But the word Missa when it is vsed by the Fathers signifies nothing but a publike meeting to the Communion and prayers or a dismission of the assembly or the forme of their religious worship For the first of these it 〈◊〉 an 〈◊〉 gathered together to serue God publikely as Georg. Cassan. praefat in preces suas confesseth which the Greekes signified by the word sunagein to meete together sunaxeis poiein to make congregations ekklesiazein to gather together which words they for the establishing of their hereticall doctrine haue absurdly translated to make Masse or to goe to Masse Secondly the word Masse was vsed for the forme of religious seruice vsed by and in the Church and signified the same with 〈◊〉 or hierourgia The Meleuitan Counsell taketh prayers and Masses both for one thing and to this purpose Saint Augustine in a Sermon if it be his sayth There are some and chiefly great men in the world when they come vnto the Church are not deuoutly affected to celebrate the Prayses of God Sed cogunt presbiterum vt abreuiet Missam but compell the Minister to make short the Masse Heere the word Masse signifieth the whole Liturgie reading of Scriptures singing of Psalmes Prayers and Praysings of God Thirdly it signified the dismission of some of the congregation as wee shall shew immediately The Papists deriue it diuersly some a missione Quia oblatio preces ad Deum mitttantur because an I oblation and prayers are sent vp to God or Quia Angelus a Deo mittatur qui sacrificio 〈◊〉 because an Angell is sent from God to assist the Sacrifice Some of the word Missath vsed Deutr. 16. 10. or Masah which signified a free gift or Eleuation but certainly there are no words now vsed in the Church of the Latines or which were vsed formerly deriued of the Hebrewes but they were first vsed by the Greeke Church and Fathers but this word Missa or Missath was neuer vsed by any of the Fathers of the Greeke Church to signifie either the assembling or seruice or Sacrifice of the Church And therefore is rather to be thought to be deriued a missione and that two wayes either a donis missis from the gifts that were sent by such as were of ability at the celebration of the Sacrament both for the furnishing of the Lords Table as also for the reliefe of the poore Or else it was called 〈◊〉 a dimissione populi as Cyprian calls remissam peccatorum for remissionem when the Deacon cries Ite missa est Leaue is granted you may depart And it is not vnlikely that the same custome was vsed by the Greeke Church when the Minister cried Aphesis laois dismission to the people This dismission was two-fold The first was called Missa 〈◊〉 when the Catechumeni that is such as beeing conuerted to Christianity but not sufficiently 〈◊〉 in the principles of religion and therefore were not as yet baptized were caused to depart as 〈◊〉 with them the Penitents who for some open and scandalous crime did do publike penance in the congregation and the Energoumenoi that is such as were excommunicate who were so called because being deliuered vp vnto Sathan they were supposed to be vexed with wicked spirits These three sorts of people were permitted to bee present both at the prayers seruice and Sermon but when the Lords Supper began to be administred they were to depart wherefore the Deacon cryed with a loud voyce Ite missa est Leaue is giuen you must depart A custome not vnlike that of the Iewes which was not to permit any Leprouse or infected person to be present at their sacrifices and the 〈◊〉 of the Heathens who would haue present at their sacrifices and augurations neither enemy nor conquered nor woman nor virgin nor any profane person wherefore the Priest was wont to aske T is têde who is there and the answere was returned Kaloi k'agathoi none but such as are good and honest The second was Missa Fidelium the Masse of the Faithfull which was the whole ceremony and celebration of the Lords Supper Then all things being finished they had liberty to depart Thus it appeares that the word Masse is not so ancient as our aduersaries pleade Ierome who was the Pastor of Rome and of no
small credit with them neuer vses the words Ambrose once onely Augustine but twise and neither of these in that sence in which the Papists vse it And whereas they obiect that place of Ierome one the 11. chapter of the Prouerbes it is not thought to be his because therein is mentioned Gregory who liued about 200. yeares after Ierome but the best learned do ascribe it to Bede as they do the Sermon of Saint Augustine de tempore to Ambrose or Hugo de Sancto Victore But from the name let vs proceede to the thing it selfe Albeit that about the time of Saint Gregory there hapned such an alteration of the Canon of the Masse of the manner of seruice of vestiments of the bread of priuate Masses of prayers vnto Saints and so continued till Charles the great insomuch that the Church of Rome had cast off her ancient simplicity and Matron-like habit and became like a garish Curtezan yet this sacrifice of the Masse was not as yet allowed of generally in the Church Not in Gregories time for Bellarmine himselfe confesseth he could finde nothing in his writings for confirmation of this their sacrifice For the corporall reality of this sacrifice which our aduersaries defend vpon an imagination of a Transubstantiation of the bread into the body of Christ seemes to be sufficiently confuted by that disputation held by Gregory against Eutiches the Hereticke who denied that Christ had a true humane body against whom Gregory obiected 〈◊〉 saying of our Sauiour to his Disciples who after his resurrection made a doubt of that which 〈◊〉 spared not to maintaine namely that it was not the same body wherein he was cruified but onely a shadow of a body and so his humanity was but kata Phantasian not really but onely in appearance But Gregory obiects the words of Christ. Handle me and see for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me haue behold my hands and feete that it is I my selfe By the same testimony of sence may Christians now discerne bread to be bread after consecration by which the Disciples discerned Christs flesh to be flesh after resurrection they were to beleeue because they did see and feele it to be the flesh of Christ wee haue the benefit of foure sences seeing handling tasting smelling to prooue vs to receiue not flesh but bread And here we may note what was the faith of the Church of England about those times of St. Gregory by an ancient Homily written in the Saxon tongue and appointed to be preached throughout England in euery Church vpon Easter day Part where of runnes thus In the holy sont we see two things in that one creature after the true nature the water is corruptible water and yet after 〈◊〉 mystery 〈◊〉 hath hallowing might So also wee behold the holy housell it is bread after bodily vnderstanding then wee see it is a body 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 but if wee acknowledge therein a spirituall might then vnderstand wee that life is therein and it giueth 〈◊〉 to them that 〈◊〉 it with 〈◊〉 Much difference there is betweene the inuisible might of the holy 〈◊〉 and the visible shape of the proper nature It is naturally corruptible bread and corruptible wine and it is by the might of Christs word truely 〈◊〉 body and his blood not so notwithstanding bodily but spiritually much difference is there betweene the body that Christ suffered 〈◊〉 and the body that is hallowed to housell the body 〈◊〉 Christ suffered in was borne of the flesh of Mary with blood and with bone with skinne with 〈◊〉 in humane limmes with a reasonable soule 〈◊〉 and his spirituall body which we call the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thered of many cornes without blood and bone without limme without soule and therefore nothing therein is to be vnderstood 〈◊〉 but all is spiritually to be vnderstood By these words 〈◊〉 appeares that the ancient Christians in England held not that grosse transubstantiation maintained now by the Romish Church which is the mother of the Massing sacrifice for take away 〈◊〉 and of necessity you lay the honour of their sacrifice in the dust For the space of 〈◊〉 yeares after Gregory this Sacrifice of the Masse beganne to gather strength and to be taught and 〈◊〉 though not generally in the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 Abbot of Corby in 〈◊〉 hath these words Because we sinne daily Christ is Sacrificed for vs Mystically and his Passion giuen in Mystery Againe The blood is drunken in Mystery spiritually and it is all spirituall which wee eate And The full similitude is 〈◊〉 and the flesh of the imacculate Lambe is faith inwardly that the truth he not wanting to the Sacrament and it be not ridiculous to Pagans that wee drinke the blood of a 〈◊〉 man Note here that he would 〈◊〉 the outward 〈◊〉 and the inward substance represented by the signe to subsist in the Sacrament otherwise it takes away the truth of the Sacrament and hee would not haue the 〈◊〉 thinke the 〈◊〉 to be so absurd as to drinke the reall and substantiall blood of Christ with their bodily mouthes but onely Sacramentally and in a Mystery Bertram 〈◊〉 liued about the 900. yeare of Christ in the time of Charles the 〈◊〉 whose wordes agree directly with the Doctrine of the Church of England and are these Our Lord hath done this at once euen in offering himselfe 〈◊〉 is to say sacrificing himselfe for vs For hee was once offered for the finnes of the people and this 〈◊〉 notwithstanding is dayly celebrated by the 〈◊〉 but in a mysterie to the end that what hath beene accomplished by our Lord lesus in offering himselfe once might be handled 〈◊〉 day by the celebrating of the Mysteries of the 〈◊〉 of the memory of his passion Where is to be noted how he opposeth the mysticall 〈◊〉 to the reall receiuing and the dayly 〈◊〉 of the remembrance to the once offering of the 〈◊〉 Againe He which is dayly offered by the faithfull in the mysterie of his body and his blood namely that whosoeuer will draw neere vnto him may know that he must 〈◊〉 part in his sufferings the image and representation whereof is exhibited in the holy Mysteries About the 1000. yeare liued Theophilact who seems to deny this Propitiatory Sacrifice in these words The medicines which are effectuall and forcible do heale at the first time being administred but those which neede to bee taken againe and againe doe sufficiently argue their weaknesse by that onely note euen so it fareth betweenethe Legall Sacrifices and the Sacrifice of Christ. But here ariseth a question Whether we also doe offer sacrifices without shedding of blood vnto which we answere affirmatiuely but it is that we doe renue the Memory of the death of the Lord and yet in the meane time it is but one Sacrifice not many because it hath beene offered but onely once We offer then 〈◊〉 himselfe or rather the Remembrance of this oblation
sacrament was the Paschall lambe whereupon the Apostle sayes Christ our Paschall Lambe was offered And in place thereof hath succeeded the Eucharist in the new Testament which is a Memoriall of his passion past and suffered as the other was a prefigurer and 〈◊〉 of his passion to come Petrus Alphonsus at the same time did acknowledge the Masse or Eucharist for no other thing then a Sacrifice of praise And this was at that time one of the questions disputed by the Albigenses and Petrus Brutis who was burnt at Tholosa where hee taught publikely that it was not a Propitiatory All these sacrifices saith he which were vsed vnder the law were nothing but 〈◊〉 of this great sacrifice which was to destroy sinne But since the comming of Christ wee vse not any other Sacrifice but that of bread and wine which he hath ordained is like vnto that which Moses in the law called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sacrifice of prayse for therein we prayse God for the benefit hee hath bestowed vpon vs sauing vs by his onely Sonne c. Alexander Hales seemes to crosse the Masse in diuers of his assertions for he speakes thus Iesus Christ hath offered a double sacrifice a spirituall and corporall the spirituall that is a sacrifice of deuotion and loue towards mankind which he hath offered in spirit the corporall the sacrifice of the death which he vnderwent vpon the crosse which is represented in the sacrament Marke he confesseth no realitie of a sacrifice any otherwise then by 〈◊〉 The spirituall figured by the incense and perfume which was made vpon the inner 〈◊〉 the corporall which hee offered in his flesh two wayes that is to say sensibly vpon the crosse and insensibly vpon the altar Obserue he tearmes it an insensible offering not grosse vnder the formes of bread and wine That sensible sort being shadowed out by the sacrifices of beasts but the insensible by the sacrificing of things that are insensible as fruits bread and wine both the one and the other vpon the vtter altar Here he maketh one Propitiatory for such were the sacrifices wherein beasts were offered with the shedding of their blood for sinne figuring out the singular sacrifice vpon the crosse offered by the Messiah the Lord Iesus Christ. The other Eucharisticall onely for such properly were those of fruites bread c. Lyra also that Catholike interpreter of the whole scripture seems not much to dissent from the former for writing of the Sacrifice of Christ that it is not to be iterated preoccupates an obiection thus You will say the sacrament of the altar is euery day offered vp in the Church But the answer hereto is that this is no reiterating of the sacrifice but an ordinary remembring and calling to mind of the onely Sacrifice offered vpon the crosse wherefore it is said Math. 26. Doe this in remembrance of me That most learned Arrias Montanus vpon Luk. 22. thus writes This is my body that is My body is sacramentally contained in this sacrament of bread and straight way he addes like another Nicodemus Christs nightly disciple The secret and most mysticall manner whereof God will once vouchsafe more clearely to vnfold vnto his Church Thus hath the light of truth appeared from the beginning of the Primitiue Church vntill these our dayes albeit till within this hundred and odde yeares it hath from the time of Gregory shined more dimmely and since the Laterane Councell seemed well nigh to be quite extinct But at last the Sunne of righteousnes communicated his light vnto these 〈◊〉 which haue illuminated our Horizon such as Luther Zuinglius Oecolampadius Caluine Beza Iewell and many famous Martyrs in queene Maryes dayes as Cranmer Latimer Ridley Bradford Philpot c. which albeit it pleaseth the Romish Factors to brand them with the title of Heretickes haue so dispelled the darkenesse of superstition and discouered the Mysterie of Antichrist that all the world may point out which is the purple and scarlet Whore Babylon the great the mother of harlots and abhominations of the earth whose shame her children louers and friends would saine conceale but God hath layd it open and will dayly more and more before men and angells till the time come when she shall be cast downe burnt with fire and made desolate for euermore Thus haue I let you see briefly and I doubt more briefly then so ample a matter doth require how the sacrifice of the Masse crept into the Church and how it hath continued How first it was celebrated in a most plaine and simple manner Secondly it began to admit some encrease of ceremonies especially the offerings for the dead which was but a gratulation and thankesgiuing for them vntill 200. yeares after 〈◊〉 Thirdly prayers for the dead got entrance into the Supper about 400. yeares then came in Purgatory and redemption of soules thence by Masses though not generally taught nor authorized by any Councill About the 780. yeare Gregoryes Masse was publikely taken vp in the Churches of Italy whereas before Ambrose his Masse was of more generall vse Fourthly the disputations of Transubstantiation began about the yeare 840. but were not fully concluded till the Councell of Lateran by Innocent the third anno 1216. After which came in the offering of the body and blood of Christ vpon the altar And after that there followed the enclosing carying about and adoration of them Thus grew the Church of Rome from euill to worse till it came to that miserable state wherein it now is And as the Romanists are Innouatours in respect of the Sacrifice of the Masse so are they also in respect both of the Canon of the Ceremonies of the Masse for whereas they boast that the forme of the Masse in respect of the Canon is so ancient as that they deduce it from the Apostles and to this end alleadge the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy of Dionysius some of their owne writers doe question the veritie and antiquity of that book doubting whether it be spurious or no and that the Canon hath admitted diuers additions by seuerall and sundry Popes appeares by their owne Polidore Virgill whose words bee these All the Mysteries were deliuered by Christ to his Apostles barely and plainely sauouring more of piety then outward shew for Peter was went onely to consecrate by saying the Lords prayer after this these 〈◊〉 were enlarged by Saint Iames by Saint Basill Coelestine added the entrance of the Masse beginning with this 〈◊〉 Iudge me oh Lord. Damasus added the confession which is made by the Priest before hee ascend vnto the Altar some ascribe it to Pontianus Gregory added the 〈◊〉 which followeth the Entrance and that Lord haue mercy vpon vs should bee repeated ninetimes with the Antiphonie after the Epistle Gospel and communion Telesphorus added the hymne of glory to God on high Gelasius added the conclusions of the prayers as vpon Christmas day because thou didst
nations vpon horses and in chariots and in litters vpon mules and vpon swift beasts vnto my holy mountaine Ierusalem saith the Lord as the children of Israell bring an offering in a cleane vessell to the house of the Lord. What must all Christians be properly slaine and offered as sacrifices to the Lord or figuratiuely or must they be brought to the terrestriall or to the spirituall and celestiall Ierusalem But Bellarmine vrges that the Prophet speakes of a pure offering which cannot be polluted but spirituall sacrifices may be defiled by the offerer I answer No holy action as prayer preaching mortification prayses Almes-deeds and the like are sacrifices but onely as they are offered in and through Iesus Christ so that in respect as they proceed from vs simply they may bee defiled by our inherent corruptions yet being offered through Christ they are pure and holy for as our Sauiour telleth vs it is the Altar that sanctifieth the gift So in Christ are all our sacrifices offered and hee is the altar that sanctifieth them and therefore saith the Apostle By him that is by Christ Iesus spoken of in the former verse let vs offer the sacrifice of 〈◊〉 to God continually So the Apostle Peter calls the faithfull An holy Priesthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices by Iesus Christ. So that our spirituall sacrifices being offered on Christ our Altar cannot be contaminated by our sinnes Thirdly whereas Bellarmine would perswade vs that the Prophet speaketh of such an oblation as was not in vse among the Iewes we deny it for he speaketh not of any new kind of oblation but makes a difference betweene the impurity of the Iewish sacrifices and the pure offerings of Christians the one being offered with disdaine the other with true faith in Christ. And it appeares that the Prophets reproofe extendeth it selfe as well vnto the people as to the Priests verse 14. Cursed be he that 〈◊〉 in his flocke a male and voweth and sacrificeth to the Lord a corrupt thing Thus the people were blamed for bringing polluted bread for offering the blind the lame and the sicke for oblations to God and the Priests were blamed for accepting of such impure sacrifices They alleadge the iudgements of the Fathers as of Ireneus Iustine Martyr and Augustine who haue applyed this place vnto the bread and the cup in the Eucharist or Lords Supper We deny not that it may be applyed vnto the Sacrament of the Supper but therefore it followes not that thereby is giuen sufficient ground for the instituon of a Sacrament and yet admit this were a sufficient foundation whereon to build the institution of the Eucharist yet not therefore of the sacrifice of the Masse seeing as I shall hereafter shew there is irreconcilable difference betweene the holy Supper of our Lord Christ and the blasphemous sacrifice of the Idolatrous Masse and doubtlesse these Fathers that applyed this place vnto the Eucharist neuer dreamed of any true reall Propitiatory sacrifice which should be offered by the Minister in the administration of the Sacrament as appeares sufficiently by all their writings Moreouer as one well obserued if our aduersaries will haue this place vnderstood literally then must the Priests of Rome not be after the order of Melchizedech but after the order of Aaron for the Prophet speaking of the same sacrifice chap. 3. vers 3. sayes that Christ at his comming shall purifie the sonnes of Leui they shall be Leuiticall but onely purified but they will not grant themselues to be after the order of Aaron but they are there called Leuites by the way of allusion say they assimulating them vnto the priests of the Law but if they admit of a figuratiue 〈◊〉 in the persons offering why not as well in the sacrifice offered I will conclude this answer with laying before your eyes the common consent first of the Prophet Dauid and the Euangelist S. Iohn the Diuine and the Apostle Paul then of the Fathers of the Church in succeeding ages Dauid vnderstands it of prayer and supplications Let my prayers come before thee as the incense and the lifting vp of my hands as the euening sacrifice where the Prophet vseth the same word Mincha which is vsed by Malachy the one place giuing most cleere light vnto the other for by incense is plainely meant praier and by the pure oblation the lifting vp of the hands Thus the beloued Disciple of Christ expounds what is meant by this incense And another Angell came and stood at the altar hauing a golden censer and there was giuen to him much incense that he might offer it with the prayers of the Saints vpon the golden Altar This Angell is Christ as is shewed formerly the censer is his humanity the incense is his righteousnes wherby our spirituall sacrifices of prayer and prayses haue their acceptance in the eyes of God This place of Malachy may also seeme to be expounded by that of Paul I will therfore that men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands without wrath and doubting Thus haue we the consent of Scripture let vs see also the agreement of Fathers Tertullian citing this place expounds it of spirituall sacrifices which being pure hee opposeth to the impure sacrifices of the Iewes and in his booke against Marcion he expounds it of glorifying and praysing God and of prayer proceeding from a pure conscience Hierome on this 1. of Malachy hath these words Dicit orationes sanctorum Domino offerendas esse non in vna orbis prouincia Iudea sed in omni loco The Prophet here saith that the prayers of the Saints shall be offered not in that one Prouince of Iudea but in euery place Chrysostom vnderstands it of the spirituall worship of God Eusebius vnderstands it of prayer lib. 1. de demonstratione Euangelica c. 6. Malachias nihil aliud significat c. The Prophet Malachy signifies nothing hereby but that neither definitiuely at Ierusalem nor any other place but in euery region the Gentiles shall offer the incense and sacrifice of prayer to di euchôn thumiama vnto God which is called a cleane sacrifice not by blood but by godly actions Tertullian also expounds it of the preaching of the Gospell among all nations And so Hieronim vpon Esay saith The sound of the Apostles is gone throughout all the ends of the world euery where there is sacrifice offered to God And herein is accomplished the word of the Prophet namely in this that God is purely preached and purely called vpon in euery place Theodoret expounds it of the abolishing the Iewish sacrifices and of the seruing of God in spirit and truth as our Sauiour af firmeth in his speech vnto the woman of Samaria And whereas they obiect some Fathers who haue vnderstood it of the Eucharist wee haue alleadged both the same Fathers and others with them expounding it otherwise Againe if those places be well confidered we shall finde
according to the spirit now offereth Out of the house of this Israel he hath not taken any calues for in it are offered and sacrificed vnto God the sacrifice of prayse Where we see manifestly that Augustine shewing the difference between the sacrifices of the Iewes and of the Christians declares the Iewes to haue onely the shadowes of the sacrifice of Christ but vs to haue the true sacrifice which wee celebrate with praise and thankesgiuing And he addeth afterward saying In euery place incense is offered to my name And Saint Iohn expoundeth it in the Apocalyps the prayers of the Saints Thus haue wee hunted them out of their chiefest starting hole euen this place of Malachi clearing it from all pretence of the sacrifice of the Masse both by consent of Scripture and of the Fathers as also freeing the obiected testimonies of the Ancients from their corrupt expositions The fourth argument follows And it is Bellarmines who argues thus against vs for the maintaining of his Sacrifice If the Fathers had thought that the Eucharist were a Sacrament onely and not a sacrifice also meaning Propitiatory they could not haue spoken otherwise of the Eucharist then of Baptisme but the Fathers neuer call baptisme a sacrifice or say that to baptize is to sacrifice Therefore the word Sacrifice was vsed by the Fathers in a proper sence Whereby he doth clearely grant that the word Sacrifice attributed by the ancient Fathers vnto the Eucharist may be interpreted Metaphorically if once it could be shewed that the same Fathers haue applyed the same word Sacrifice vnto the Sacrament of Baptisme Otherwise their Iesuite Suarez would not so vrgently haue moued his Reader principally to Obserue against Heretickes so he calleth Protestants that the holy Fathers of 〈◊〉 times did neuer call the Ministry of baptisme by the name of a sacrifice although Metaphorically it might be so tearmed therefore it is a signe that when they tearme the Eacharist a 〈◊〉 they name it so properly Seeing then the parallell of Baptisme may giue our aduersaries their demanded satisfaction we desire them first to consult with St. Augustine who expounding that place to the Hebrewes chap. 10. Vnto them that sinne voluntarily after they haue obtained the knowledge of the truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinne sayth Illud ad Hebreos diligentius qui pertractant sic intelligunt vt non de sacrificio contribulati per paenitentiam cordis accipiendū sit quod dictum est non adhuc pro peccatis relinquitur Sacrificium sed de Sacrificio de quo tunc loquebatur Apostolus id est Holocausto dominicae passionis quod eo tempore offert quisque pro peccatis suis quo eiusdem passionis fide dedicatur et Christianorum fidelium nomine baptizatus imbuitur vt hoc significaret Apostolus nempè non posse deinceps eum qui peccauer it iterum baptizando purgari c. That it is not to be vnderstood of a sacrifice of a troubled spirit by repentance but of that sacrifice wherof the Apostle spake that is that the Holocaust or burnt offering of the Lords Passion which euery one offers at that time for his sinnes when he is dedicated by faith in the same passion and being baptized is endued with the name of a faithfull Christian that the Apostle might signifie thus much That he that sinned could not afterward by baptisme bee purged And let them looke vpon their Iesuite Salmaron who doth not vtterly reiect that interpretation And to the end they may rest sufficiently satisfied they may be contented to consult with their learned Reader of Spaine who renders the reason why most of the fathers did call Baptisme a sacrifice which they did sayth he Metaphorically that is figuratiuely his words are these Sed quaeris quid causae plerisque antiquorum fuerit vt Baptismum hostiam appellauerint ideoque 〈◊〉 non superesse hostiam 〈◊〉 quiae Baptismus repeti non potest Sanè quia Baptismo commorimur per hoc Sacramentum applicatur nobis hostia crucis ad plenam peccati remissionem Hinc illi per Eaptisu ū 〈◊〉 hostiam nuncupârunt post baptisma semel acceptum nullam hostiam esse reliquam 〈◊〉 sunt quia baptismus secundus non est Neither may we thi ke that the calling Baptisme a Sacrifice is a solecisme in Diuinity seeing the Apostle speaking of rebaptizing calles it a recrusifying of Christ as Salmaron obserues rightly out of Pope Clemens and their Iesuite Ribera consirmes it out of Chrysostome Theophilact Oecumenius and Damascene And how could our aduersaries doubt that the fathers would call Baptisme a sacrifice who haue so vsually called it the Passion slaying and crucifying of Christ. Baptisma estpassio Christi sayes Chrysostome Baptisme is the passion of Christ. Tingimur in passione Christi sayth Tertullian We are dipped in the passion of Christ. But how is it called a sacrifice or the Passion of Christ properly or figuratiuely Let their owne I esuite answere for vs in this point It is named a crucifying of Christ sayth he because it is a similitude of Christs Passion Wherefore by this Analogy betweene these two Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist wee may conclude out of the restimony of St. Augustine recorded by their ancient Schoole-man Aquinas That names of things are giuen to the signes of the same things which are represented as for example the paintea image of Cicero wee vse to call Cicero and so the celebration of this Sacrament namely of the Lords Supper which is a representation of the Passion of Christ the true sacrificing is called an immolation Where we see their owne Doctor agreeing with Augustine and we consent with them both in this that the Eucharist may bee called a sacrifice as a Picture may be called by the name of the thing which it representeth A 〈◊〉 Argument which they alleadge followes and it is grounded on the words of Esay But yee shall be named the Priests of God Againe And I will also take of them for Priests and for Leuites sayth the Lord. And Them will I bring vnto my Holy mountaine and make them ioyfull in the house of Prayer their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shal be accepted vpon mine Altar This say they must bee vnderstood of the Christian Church wherein the Prophet Esaias fore-telleth that there shal be externall Priests Altars and Sacrifices whereby must needes be vnderstood the sacrifice of the Masse We answere first by deniall of the consequence for because the Prophet sayth there shall be in the Church of Christ Priests Altars Sacrifices therefore it must be an externall Priest-hood materiall Altars proper sacrifices this is a plaine Non sequitur For who sees not that the Prophet expressing the VVorship of God vnder the Gospell alludes vnto the ceremonies of the Law and by an externall Legall Priest-hood and sacrifice figuratiuely intimates that which is Spirituall and Euangelicall
of Christ was not of the seed of Dauid sed exsemine triticeo of the seed of wheat was sowed in the earth grinded in the mill baked in the ouen and at last torne a peeces with mens teeth Thus haue I laid open vnto thee Christian Reader a iust suruay and tryall of the sacrifice of the 〈◊〉 Masse which I doubt not appeares to thee as it is in it owne nature a Masse of impiety and that Mystery of iniquity foretold by Saint Paul which albeit it pretend the greatest honour and worship to Christ of any Ecclesiasticall seruice yet is there not a greater enemy vnto our King and Sauiour the Lord Iesus nor a more hellish traytour vnto his crowne and dignity wherein if euer The diuell hath transformed himselfe into an Angell of light couering his poysenous and deadly hooke with the baite of religion the most preualent Stratagem that euer Satan put in practise to hinder and oppugne the kingdome of Christ yet this is the Diana for which Demetrius and his companions are so importunate because by this Craft they get their gaine It may well bee stiled a Craft because it is a Mystery of iniquity whereby the Church of Rome is swollen so bigge with deuouring the gold treasure and inheritance of the Laity that the guttes of it are well nigh bursten This is that Helena for which the aduersaries of the truth doe so fiercely encounter which hath made the Kings of the earth drunken with the cup of her fornication This they labour so much to vphold which is the Pillar that vpholds them and for it they fight as the ancient Romanes were wont tanquam pro focis aris while on it depends their rich offerings vpon their Altars and the fatnes of their kitchin Take but away this one Pillar and their house will fall and the fall of it will be great for it will slay all the Lords of the Philistims Now if any true Orthodoxe Christian or soundmember of the Catholicke Church demand of me whether it be lawfull for him to be present at Masse albeit hee pretend that so hee keepes his heart to God I answere No for 〈◊〉 the Masse is full of so many impieties and abhominable blasphemies against the blessed person of the Sonne of God ouerthrowiug both the Word and Sacraments of our Lord Iesus Christ it is therefore vtterly vnlawfull for any Christian to be present at it or to communicate in that seruice Argument of Ridley and Bradford Secondly we cannot be partakers of Gods religion and Antichrist seruice whereof the Masse is a principall limbe a man cannot bee a member of the Church of Christ and of the Church of Rome as it now stands But he that frequenteth their Idolatrous assemblies makes himselfe a member thereof And therefore cutteth himselfe off from being a member of the Church of Christ. Argument of Bradford Thirdly to dissemble and halt in matters belonging to Gods glory is impious and vngodly but they who are present at Masse both hearing the name of God blasphemed and seeing many abhominations and yet hold their peace do notably dissemble Ergo They sinne egregiously against God Argument of Bradford Fourthly 〈◊〉 of the Masse impugneth diuers petitions of the Lords Prayer and so the practise of such is contrary to the dayly prayer they vse How can we say Thy Kingdome come when nothing in the earth doth more destroy the Kingdome of Christ then the Masse How can we pray Thy will be done when we do our owne wils and the wils of Idolaters flat against the will of God How can we pray Hallowed be thy name when wee seeme to approoue the Masse which is nothing but blasphemy against the whole Trinity How can wee pray Deliuer vs from euill which knowing the Masse to bee euill doe runne into it wherefore if wee meane as we pray we must not pertake in the Masse least wee approue of that in our practise which we condemne in our prayer Argument of Bradford Fiftly whatsoeuer giues occasion to the wicked to be more obfirmed and to the weake to stumble and fall is to be abhorred But Protestants going to Masse and by their presence giuing allowance to it do occasion the obstinate to be more intractable the weake Papists to be more resolute the wauering Protestant quite to fall Bradfords Argument Sixtly Daniel refused to be filled with the Kings meates which were polluted by Idolatry And so Iudeth likewise The Maccabees manfully gaue their liues in defence of the Ceremonies of the Law Ergo we ought much more to endure and suffer all things for the maintenance of the pure word of God and holy Sacraments Bishop Ridleyes Argument Seauenthly God commanded his people Israel by the mouth of his Prophet Amos Not to seeke Bethel nor to enter into Gilgall where Idolatry was vsed And againe My soule hath no pleasure in those that withdraw themselues sayth the Lord If any man prophane the Temple of the Lord him will God destroy for the Temple of God is holy which yee are All strange worship is counted whoredome by the Lord and they that follow it goe a whoring But they that goe to Masse enter into Bethel and Gilgal that is places of Idolatry they withdraw themselues from the faith in their outward behauiour they prophane their bodies which are Gods Temples being present at 〈◊〉 seruice they goe a whoring after a strange religion Ergo Protestants going to Masse disobey Gods command procure his displeasure will cause God to destroy them and diuorce themselues from God and his Church Philpots Argument Eightly The Apostle directly forbids all participation with such as are Idolaters in the eating of meat sacrificed to Idolls shewing that thereby the weake brethren are offended and the partakers make themselues Communicants at the Table of Diuells now a man cannot be partaker at the Lords Table and the table of Diuells But the Masse is an Idolatrous seruice a superstitious worship and the Altar thereof is the Table of Diuells howsoeuer it is to be hallowed with the inuocation of God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost Angels Apostles Martyres Confessors Saints and painted ouer with the lustre of religion whereas it is indeed nothing but a painted Iezabel a deceitfull Strumpet with a false complexion Ninthly God is the Creator both of soule and body therefore he is to be worshipped both in soule and body Know 〈◊〉 not that your body is the Temple of the holy Ghost therefore glorifie God in your body and spirit which are Gods whereas God hath giuen both so hee requires the seruice of both And Paul will not giue a tolleration to any man to dishonour God by his body I beseech you brethren by the mercies of God that you present your bodies a liuing sacrifice holy and acceptable vnto God God will not be content with reseruing the soule to him when men bestow the worship of their bodyes vpon Idols The soule
is carried about in the streetes to be worshipped and adored Neither do the fathers compare the Paschall Lamb to the Eucharist or Lords Supper but onely in these three respects first that as the Iewes did eate the one so do Christians the other Secondly as the Paschall Lambe did represent Christum moriturum Christ which was to die so the Lords Supper doth represent Christum mortuum Christ which hath dyed Thirdly as the one was in commemoration of the bodily deliuerance of Israell out of Egypt so is the other in commemoration of our spirituall redemption out of the iawes of Satan Touching the first namely the eating of the Paschall Lambe and the feeding on Christ in the Sacrament Chrysostome speaks Hoc mysterium tradidit c. Hee deliuereth this mystery when the Law was to cease and he dissolueth their principall solemnity to wit of the Paschall Lambe and cals them to a terrible Table saying Take eate this is my body Where note that he calles it a Table to be trembled at not because of the reall presence of Christ there as the Papists expound it but because of worthy or vnworthy communicating So Ierome Our Passeouer is sacrificed prouided that we eate it with 〈◊〉 bread of sincerity and truth Basil sayth Let vs celebrate the Passeouer not in the leauen of malice wickednes but in the vnleauened bread of sincerity and truth seeing Christ who is the true Lambe is offered in the euening that is in the end of the world whose flesh is meate indeede Secondly they compare it to the Eucharist in representing Christ. Tertullian Our Lord hauing declared that he desired to eate his Passeouer for it was indignity for the Lord to desire any thing but his owne gaue and distributed it to his Disciples and made it his body saying this is my body that is a figure of my body Thomas their owne Angelicall Doctor sayth Seeing Christ our Passeouer is offered let vs feast feeding on Christ not onely Sacramentally according to that of St. Iohn If you eate the flesh of the sonne of man c. but also spiritually by enioying his wisedome Lastly they are compared in respect of commemoration So Lyra. All whatsoeuer Moses hath written hath relation to Christ and therefore in the sacrificing of the Lambe there is a double sence the one is the state of the people comming out of Egypt this is the litteral and first sence the other is the fore-shewing and shadowing out of Christ who was to be crucified and this is the first in intention though last in accomplishment By which allegations it appeares plainly that the ancients seldome or neuer call the Paschall Lambe a sacrifice and in what respects they compare it to the holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper And thus much for answere vnto the second argument The third argument which is alleadged by the Romanists and whereupon they most depend is grounded on the prophesie of Malachy chap. 1. 11. For from the rising of the Sunue to the going downe of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles and in euery place incense shall be offered to my name and a pure offering for my name shall be great among the Heathen saith the Lord of Hoasts Seeing the sacrifice of the Masse is so generally offered among all Gentiles therefore it must needs be that pure oblation foretold by the Prophet Malachy And that this Sacrifice may the better appeare Bellarmine alleadgeth these reasons First from the signification of the Hebrew word Mincha which properly betokeneth an externall Sacrifice made with oyle and incense and therfore cannot be vnderstood of Spirituall and internall sacrifices Secondly it is called a pure offering such as cannot be polluted but prayers may be polluted onely the sacrifice of the Masse cannot bee defiled by the illnesse of the Minister Thirdly the Prophet speaketh of such an offering as was not in vse among the Iewes saying I will not accept any offering at your hands but spirituall sacrifices were in vse among them Fourthly the Prophet speaketh directly to the Priests Thus saith the Lord of Hoasts vnto you oh ye Priests and reproouing their sacrifices bringeth in a new kind of offering which a new Priesthood should offer to God which cannot be meant of spirituall sacrifices To these we answer That the intent of the Lord by the Prophet is to oppose the Gentiles against the Iewes and shew the difference betweene the Leuiticall sacrifices which they defiled and the spirituall sacrifices which should bee offered not by one nation onely but by euery people vnder the new Testament Wherefore the Prophet doth comprehend the whole seruice of the Christian Church vnder these three heads 1. The knowledge of God by the preaching of the Gospell 2. Inuocation or calling vpon the name of the Lord by prayer 3. Liberality towards the poore in workes of charity The first is shewed in these words From the rising of the Sunne to the setting of the same my name shall bee great among the Gentiles The second in these words and in euery place incense shall be offered to my name The third is signified by the word Mincha or a pure oblation for as Zanchius obserues by the names of bread and wine all beneficence and liberalitie is signified in the Scripture So Iacob calls the Present hee sent his brother Esau Mincha and Abigail the present she brought to Dauid by the same name But I tye not my selfe precisely to this exposition of Zanchius vnderstanding by Mincha Beneficence or Liberality Therefore I answer to Bellarmin that if he will haue Mincha vnderstood properly and not 〈◊〉 then it would follow that the Prophet did speake in that place of the Iewish ceremonies which should bevsed among Christians but with more purity then among the Iewes but the Papists confesse that hee speaketh not of Iewish sacrifices but of the sacrifices of Christians Againe if he will haue Mincha to bee vnderstood Metaphorically then the Masse is but figuratiuely a sacrifice and not properly at most it will bee but flower or bread without any Transubstantiation as Mincha was And whereas Bellarmine inferreth that because Mincha signifieth properly an offering of flower or bread with oyle and incense therefore it cannot be vnderstood of the spirituall sacrifices of Christians how vnschollerlike and therefore how vnlike himselfe doth hee argue Who knowes not that many things are spoken figuratiuely being applyed improperly from their natiue significations to signifie things which indeed they are not I am a doore saith Christ I am the vine if these things be vnderstood literally and not Metaphorically we shall make but a bad construction But an example like this of the Prophet Malachy may bee that of the Prophet Esay where speaking of the Church of Christ among the Gentiles he faith And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering to the Lord out of all