debet in aliqua reali mutatione rei quae significatur that it ought to be founded in some real mutation of the thing which is Sacrificed To whom my answer is In other Sacrifices which have not the force to signify God Author of Life and Death without their own Destruction 't is true in the Eucharist I deny it for the reason I gave afore But if this my answer does not satisfy you know that the Sacrament is destroyed or ceases to be what it was by the Preist's consuming of it In which consumption you see a real change of the Victime which is not only Christ's Body and Blood but Christ's Body and Blood joyned to the species which whole is destroyed by the alteration of the species in the Stomach SUBSECTION III. The Mass proved by the Tradition of our Country WIll we condemn the Piety of our Ancestors marking the chief terms of the Year by a singular devotion above all other Nations to this Mystery with the name of Mass or Oblation Missah in Hebrew signifies Oblation or Offering as to mind us to offer up then a Mass of Thanksgiving either for special Spiritual favours bestowed upon mankind on those dayes or for Rents or Fruits of the Earth coming in at those times We have upon record that all the tennants that held Lands of the Cathedral Church of York which is dedicated to S. Peter ad vincula which is the first of August were bound by their Tenure to bring a Lamb alive into the Church at high Mass on that day hence they call'd and likely we from them the first of August Lammas-day Since we are speaking of Lambs I mind that in the written Law the Children of Israël were commanded Exod. 29. v. 38. to Sacrifice every day a Lamb in the morning and another at night Why supposing the general reasons of a Sacrifice but moreover to foresignify by the offering of a Lamb the daily offering of the Lamb of God in the Law of Grace which is done in the Sacrifice of the Mass SUBSECTION IV. The Sacrifice of the Mass proved by Scripture PROOF I. THe Evangelical Prophet Isaiah c. 61. v. 6. Prophecied that there would be Preists in the New Law who would be called the Ministers of our GOD and consequently he Prophecied that there would be Sacrifices no other beside that of the Cross but the Sacrifice of the Mass therefore the Sacrifice of the Mass is a true Sacrifice Quaeres Why are Protestant Church-men called Ministers and not Preists Answer Because they have no Sacrifice to which Preist-hood relates Every High Preist sayes S. Paul is ornained to offer Gifts and Sacrifices Hebrews 8 v. 3. Note the difference between the high Preist and low Preist is not in their offering of Sacrifice which is common to both for the low Preists in the Old Law offered Sacrifice as well as the High Preist but in this that the High Preist has a superiority over the Low Preists and a special assistance of the Holy Ghost to judge in matter of religion Sacerdotes sayes Guliel Whitaker contra Grego Martin ii verè propriè sunt qui Sacrificia faciunt qualis fuit Aaron Aaronis filii Melchisedech quem illi adumbrabant that is Preists truly and properly are they that offer Sacrifices such as was Aaron and the Sons of Aaron and Melchisedeck and Christ whom they prefigured .. So that Protestant Doctor PROOF II. The Mass was also fore-told by the Prophet Malachie c. 1. v. 11. where having reprehended the ancient Preists for their offering polluted Sacrifices God promises that a pure Sacrifice shall be offered among the Gentils in these words from the rising of the Sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentils and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name and a pure offering Which cannot be understood but of the Sacrifice of the Eucharist which for the Sanctity of the Victime is called pure and for the universality of the offerers is said to be offered in all places from the rising to the going down of the Sun Again it s called pure sayes the Council of Trent Sess 22. cap. 1. because it cannot be defiled either by the malice or unworthiness of the Offerers Mr. Rodon's interpreting Malachie by what S. Paul sayes Rom. 12. v. 1. and 15. v. 16. is of no force since S. Paul's offering the repenting Gentils and they their repentance and the Romans the like or other acts of vertue by which their bodies became living Hosts breathing the service of God are only Metaphorical Sacrifices Whereas the Prophet foretells a true Sacrifice like to that of the Iews and such is that of the Eucharist of which S. Paul speaks 1 Cor. 10. v. 20. and 21. The things which the Gentils Sacrifice they Sacrifice to Devils and not to God And I would not that you should have Fellow-ship with them Viz. eating a part of what they Sacrifice and so becoming Participant of their Altar For Are not they who eat the Hosts partakers of the Altar v. 18. Ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's Table that is Altar and of the Table of Devils to wit eat the Body of Christ which we sacrifice on our Altar and a part of the beast which they sacrifice on theirs Don't wonder that S. Paul calls the Altar Table because on the Altar on which we Sacrifice is set down to the faithful the Bread of Life and the food of our Souls so the Prophet Malachie called also the Altar Table chap. 1. v. 12. having said before to the wicked Preists v. 7. Ye offer polluted Bread upon my Altar Be pleased to read this chapter from the 14 verse to the 22. where the Apostle dehorts and fears the Christians from eating of meats offered to Idols because who eates of the sacrifice offered to Idols is partaker of the Altar of Idols or a worshiper of Idols as who eates of the altar of Chrst and is partaker of the altar of Christians or a worshiper of Christ and as who eates of the altar of the Jews is partaker of the altar of the Jews or a follower of the Mosaik law And consequently since the Christians would not be nor be thought Idolaters they ought not to eat of meats offered to Idols But here take notice he mentions three tables or altars one upon which the Gentils sacrifice to Idols a second on which the Jews offered victims of beasts to God and a third on which Christians offer the Body and Blood of Christ and consequently this oblation of the Eucharist in S. Pauls opinion is a true sacrifice as that of the Jews and that of the Gentils But were offering of the Prayers and other such acts of vertue Sacrifices yet they are not the Sacrifice of which Malachy speaks because the y are not pure not in themseleves as Protestants avow nor pure because they are accepted as pure for say I their impuritie hinders
Chapter of the Churches forbidding Marriage and certain Meats After Mr. Rodon had unadvisedly said that we freely confess that the Decree of the Council of Constance is contrary to the institution and command of Christ which we are so far from confessing that we have proven the contrary He adds If we alleadg that S. Paul Timot. 4. saith That they who forbid to marry and command to â—ob slain from Meats do teach the Doctrines of Devils Romanists need only answer that altho S. Paul doth say so yet they must not believe it because the Romish Church hath determined otherwise Again if we alleadg sayes he that the same Apostle Ephesians 2. saith That we are saved by Grace through Faith and that not of our selves it is the gift of GOD not of works least any man should boast Romanists need only Answer that although this was written by the Apostle yet they must not believe it because the Romish CHVRCH hath determined that we are Saved by Works and Faith as coming from our selves and from the strength of our own free will Answer We know the general approved Councils being guided by the H. Ghost cannot determine against S. Paul We avow 't is a Doctrine of Devils to forbid absolutely to marry as if marriage were ill in it self and of Satan as the Ebionites taught see S. Irereus Lib. 1 Cap. 22. And to command to abstain from certain Meats believing they were of the Devil with the Manicheans See S. Aug. Haeres Manich. 46. But we do not hold it to be a Doctrine of Devils to forbid Preists to marry who cannot use their marriage without breaking their vow made to God If a man be bound to keep his promise of fidelity or conjugal chastity to a Wife is not he as much bound to keep his promise of perpetual Continency made to God The Church I say does not determine against S. Paul 1 Timot. 4. nor against what he sayes Ephes 2. But heartily believes with him that we are saved by Grace through Faith and that this Faith is not of our selves but it is the gift of God not of works done by the force of nature or of the Old Law of which the Jews boasting thought themselves more worthy of Salvation than the Gentils Yet she determines against Mr. Rodon that S. Paul here by Works doth not exclude Works that flow from Faith as acts of Hope Repentance and Charity for S. Mary Magdalen was justified because she loved much Obj. They do not celebrate the memory of Christ's Death as they ought who do not partake of the Cup whereby only we commemorate the effusion of Christ's Blood therefore all ought to partake of the Cup. Answer I distinguish the antecedent they who do not partake of the Cup do not as they ought celebrate the Death of Christ Passively that is they have not an occasion of receiving and do not receive a representation or a memory of the Death of Christ I deny They do not celebrate the memory of the Death of Christ Actively I subdistinguish within themselves producing in their mind a thought of the Death of Christ I deny without themselves putting the Body of Christ under the species of Wine I grant but all are not bound to do so or celebrate a memory of his Death so but only the Preists to whom he gave that command saying Do this in remembrance of me and as often as you sball eat this Bread and drink this Cup you shall shew the Death of the your Lord untill he come And that Protestants understand this to be said to the Ministers only they shew when they say that this Sacrament cannot be rightly ministred without a Sermon of the Death of CHRIST I ask do the Lay-people Preach then CHAPTER VII The Sacrifice of the Mass proved by Reason by the notion of a true Sacrifice By Scripture By the tradition of our Country By the Authority of the Holy Fathers and the Church SECTION I. Proofs SUBSECTION I. Proofs from Reason I. REASON WE must not refuse to Christians that which all other People have had by an instinct of nature viz. to offer a true Sacrifice to the Supream Being God in the 1. Chapter of Leviticus v. 2. does not say by way of command ye shall offer But supposing what they knew to be done by the light of Nature he only prescribes there the manner of Sacrificing S. Paul having cured with a word of his month a Lame man at Lystra the People thinking him for that to be God presently found themselves naturally moved to bring Oxen to Sacrifice to him Act. 14. Men Sacrificed in the Law of Nature in the written Law the Pagan infidel as well as the Faithful Soul all led by this innate light he is to be honoured in a singular manner who is above all The chief end of a Sacrifice is to acknowledge by it God's supream Dominion over us his Creatures as Author of Life and Death and shall Christians who have been by divine favour enlightened above other People be ignorant of this or less sensible than others of their duty to him from whom they have received more Grace No. Then Christians have a true Sacrifice but no other than that of the Mass then that of the Mass is a true Sacrifice I prove the minor proposition because beside the Sacrifice of the Mass Christians have now no Sacrifice but their offerings of Prayers or other Acts of vertue which are only Sacrifices improperly nay God himself distinguishes them from a true Sacrifice saying by the Prophet Samuel 1 Reg. 15. v. 22. Obedience is better then Sacrifice and Math. 9. v. 13. I will have Mercy and not Sacrifice You 'l say we have the Sacrifice of the Cross Answer That is past People in succeeding Ages could not be present at that to do their due homage to God That was made and was sufficient to Redeem all men from their Sin 's past present and to come as much as was required of Christ or on his side as Redeemer but it was not made to Redeem them from their first Duty to God which is still and ever to acknowledge him as Supream Lord as well in all other times as in that at which the Sacrifice of the Cross was offered If that Sacrifice sufficed for all Duty 's what need have we now of Sacraments Faith repentance c. If we have moreover need of Faith for our selves why have we not need of a true Sacrifice as a testimony of our Faith in God to others The holy Patriarches had Faith in their Hearts but did not think themselves to do sufficiently by that their Duty to God without a Sacrifice as a publick profession to men of this their Faith in him You must distinguish the condigne or fully satisfying Sacrifice for Sin from other Sacrifices That the eternal Father required and accepted from his Son alone in burnt-Burnt-offerings and Sacrifices for Sin thou hast no pleasure then said I God the Son
Priest's stomach only for the putting of it on the Altar is the offering of it which is done by the Consecration by which also the chief part of the thing Sacrificed viz. Christ is Mysteriously deprived of Life while his Body and Blood if we regard the force of the words only are put separatly under the species of Bread and Wine which Mystical separation and putting of him there after a Dead manner is made sensible to us by our hearing the words or the Priest's adoration of the Host and his laying it on the Altar which is an offering of it Thus you have the offering and sensible change of the thing offered which are of the Essence of the Sacrifice afore the consumption of the Host in the Preist's stomach ac in the pacifick Sacrifices of the Old Law the Victime was offered and killed afore a part of it was consumed by the Preist and a part by the Person who offered But if you think the sensible change of the thing offered in the Eucharist is not sufficiently made afore the communion of the Preist then I say this change also is sufficiently made afore he parts from the Altar for 't is not required that the species be quite destroyed no more then in Libations or Sacrifices of Liquid things For example in the effusion of Wine on the ground the thing did not presently cease to be what it was but ceased to be capable of the use men make of it and so was looked upon as morally destroyed the same I say of the species of the H. Host SUBSECTION I. Mr. Rodon's passages out of S. Paul to the Heb. answered YOu 'l Object Hebr. 9. v. 22. almost all things are by the Law purged with Blood and without shedding of Blood there is no Remission Note He doth not say of Sins for the Remission which was made in the Old Law by the Blood of Beasts was only Remission of a Legal uncleanness and temporal Pain but not of Sin for 't is impossible sayes St. Paul for Sins to be taken away by the Blood of Bulls and Goats Hebr. 10. v. 4. It was therefore necessary that the Paterus viz. the Tabernacle or Old Testament and People and Preists living under them of things in the Heavens that is of the New Testament or the Church of Christ as is clear out of the 8. chap. v. 5. should be purified with these viz. Sacrifices of the Old Law but the Heavenly things themselves viz. the People of Christ with better Sacrifices viz. that of the Cross and that of the Mass for that on the Cross was only one then these Answer From this passage nothing is brought against the Mass altho the Sins of the Church of Christ figured by the Synagogue be said to be purged by Blood for the Sacrifice of the Mass affords not a total and compleat Remission but presupposes the merits of the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross of which it is only an application and so it is true that without the shedding of Blood there is no Remission And thus Heavenly things viz. the Church of Christ is purified with more excellent or better Sacrifices viz. that of the Cross meriting the Remission of all the Sins of Men and that of the Mass applying this Ransome of Christ to Men. And this is the force of that word Sacrifices in the plural number And don't tell me that the Sacrifice of the Cross is called Sacrifices in the plural number as Baptism which is but one is called Baptisms in the plural number Hebr. 6. v. 2. For the Baptisms there mentioned are the three Baptisms viz. of Water of Blood and of the Holy Ghost of which the Catechumens were instructed in their Catechism or first Lessons of Christian Doctrine And these are different as to their manner and remote matter You Object Hebr. 10. v. 16. I will put my Laws into their Hearts and in their minds will I write them and their Sins and Iniquities will I remember no more and where Remission of these is there is no more offering for sin and consequently there is no need of the Sacrifice of the Mass Answer I explane the words of St. Paul that is in the New Law I shall poure such abundant Graces into the Hearts of some that they shall so abhor their former Sins that I shall remember them no more as those of a Magdalen an Austin c. to punish them with eternal fire and that for the merits of my Son Now where Remission of those is there is no more offering for Sin That is as a new Ransom or an other Ransom than that Christ hath given its true As an application of that Ransom given I deny I ask doth not God still remember so farr the Sins of some Elect Protestants that he punishes them with a temporal Pain How often do they avow in their Preaching that they have sinned and that the Lord scourges them for their Sins And do not they offer up their fasts and Prayers to God on their dayes of Humiliation to pacific the Lord's Wrath against them And do not they think that they must believe and repent that the merits of Christ may be applyed to them Why then do they stumble at our Sacrifice or offering in the Mass not as a new price for our Sins but as an application of the price given Christ in his Passion not having actually applied it to all who after have by Faith and other conditions required by him applied it to themselves and some in a greater measure then others Unless they will not have it true that as a Star differs from a Star in Light Saints differ from Saints in Sanctity 1 Cor. 15. v. 14. and 42. From the passages of St. Paul Hebr. 9. v. 27. and Hebr. 10. v. 1. Mr. Rodon Forms these Arguments First the Sacrifice of Iesus Christ must not be reiterated for St. Paul sayes that Iesus Christ offereth not himself often Answer Iesus Christ offereth not himself often as the price of the Redemption of Mankind I grant As the application of that price to men I deny Therefore the Sacrifice of the Mass is not the Sacrifice of the Cross reiterated formally as to the manner and end of it as such which was to be the Ransom for mankind I grant It is not the same materially as to the Host offered I deny Now the reiteration which St. Paul denies is only of the Sacrifice in a Bloody manner which God would have once si posuerit pro peccato animam suam Isa 53. v. 10. for the Redemption of man and no more because it was sufficient not only for the Redemption of the men of one age but all ages past and to come And in this the Sacrifice of Christ excells those of Aaron which being weak and unsufficient one was offered for one Sin and an other for an other neither could they altogether give a worthy satisfaction for one Sin so they were not a Remission but a