Hey on Article XXXI: Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross

1. The subject of this Article is the Romish Mass. „ We will begin, as usual, with a few 4iftorical observations; but as there may be some who have not attended so much to Romish Docttines as to have a clear idea of what is meant by the Romish Mass, it may be proper, previously, to give some account of it.

The Protestant notion of the Lord’s Supper has been explained; all that some Protestants do, is to commemorate the Death of Christ; others join in a ceremony which may represent a Feast on a sacri- fice; that is, those who consider the Death of Christ as a sacrifice. The farthest any Protestant

A A 2 goes,

372 BOOK IV, ART, xxxI. SECT. 1.

goes, is to offer a symbolical commemorative* sacti. fice.—But Romanisis, by conlecrating bread, make it, in their opinion, the real Body of Christ, and they use it in two different ways; they not only administer it as a Sacrament, but they offer it up to God the Father as a real Sacrifice : they have one Form for offering up the bread, another for offer. ing up the consecrated* cup.— The sacrifice here offered, 1s not said to be symbolical, but a real, literal, propitiatory sacrifice.— There is one form which requests Christ to® deliver and assist the sup. pliant by the Body of Christ just received.

What was said of some Romish Doctrines at the opening, of the twenty-second Article, and since of others, seems fully applicable to the Doctrine of the Mass.

The Romanists have a //fem of notions to sup- port this of offering the consecrated bread as the Body of Christ; it seems intended to obviate ob- Jeftions, But this will appear when we look into their writings, by and by.

All those masses in which the Congregation are Speftators, and the Priest alone receives the elements, may be called /o/itary, in some sense; but those, I think, are properly solitary masses, at which no one but the Priest © is present. Several of these may be going on in the same church, at different Altars, at the same* time. These are generally

5 intended

See Heylin’s Life of Laud, page 21.—Bishop Cleaver’s two Sermons, page 2. 18. |

d Present Spirituel, page 35. © Thid. page 3.

4 Card. Bona seems to call both forts private. Sive enim dicatur privata ex eo qudd solus Sacerdos in ea communicet; five quia vel unus duntaxat vel pauci ei inter/int,” &c, Bona Rerum liturgicarum, 1. 14. 1.

There are some which are called dry Masses ; mere outward shew, without Consecration, &c. but these and es

ame

BOOK IV. 11. 373

intended to deliver departed Souls out of Purgatory : and are paid for; insomuch that some Priests are said to get their /iving by offering up Christ a great number of times in a day. Indeed in public masses there are some parts which are not audible, called in French Lat Secrete, and in all, or most, I suppose, there are some prayers for the dead.

This custom of saying Mass prevails so much as to exclude®, in a manner, all other worship.

This is the ate of that Romish practice of which we should now attempt to give some his- torical account.

11. The only questions are, when did this prac- tice begin? and what variations has it been subject to? It may be difficult to assign for its commence- ment any period with precision. The Mats, in the strictest sense, could not begin before the Doc- trine of Transubstantiation existed, because it proceeds upon that doctrine. — But something which sounds like it, and approached to it, and would in effect bring it on, may be found before. It is difficult to trace out facts nicely in dark and and 1gnorant ages, but the name of Sacrifice for m4 2 parts of divine worssip, has been long in use?,

The

blamed by Bona, & c. as abuses, I do not mention them. Nau- tical Masses are without wine, for fear the motion of the ship should shake it so much as to {pill it. — See these and others mentioned, Bingham, 1 5. 4. 5.

.* Present Spir. page 38.— Orai/on secrete, or sometimes La decrete, as a substantive. Di, Acad.

• Rhemists on Luke xxii. 20.

In scripture, Beneficence is called a sacrifice, Heb. xiii. 16. we have also the sacrifice of praise, Heb. xiii 15. the Body of Man is to be a living (sometimes in old English called /zvely) sacrifice, Rom. xii. 1,—And when the captive Jews could offer no sacrifices, their devotions were called the Calves of their lips. |

AA 3

374 dock iv. 11.

The ancient Fathers expressed themselves warmly, and nobly; the same feelings, which made them give dignity to every sacred ordinance by cere. monies and habits, made them cloath their expres- sions of things sacred, with splendid metaphors, And if they called the Evening prayer their even- ing sacrifice’, no wonder they gave the name of sacrifice to that ordinance *, which they considered as a representation of the sublime and affecting sacrifice of Christ himself. If one wanted to {ce a number of instances, one might consult the Rhemish Testament on 1 Cor. x. 21. and Dr. Fulke’s answer : but I can select no better single passage than that which is attributed to Ambrose, on Heb. x. 11. though the fame! is found in Chryso- stom. The 5 unbloody sacrifice, has also been used by the Fathers for the Lord’s Supper, and adopted by the Romanists for their sacrifice of the Mass.—Misa is itself an” ancient word. Obla- tions, of one sort or other, are very ancient, and so is the custom of dedicating or offering them up to God at the Altar. Now suppose a Priest, in an age of ignorance and superstition, heated with zeal and piety, to get all things strongly into his mind, and to fancy he had Christ in his hand ; may we not conceive, that he might begin the custom of offering him up to God the Father?

To carry our attempts farther, in accounting for the Mass, would not probably answer any good purpose ;—only we may add, that the idea of

; | profiting

i Psalm exli. 2.— Bingham, 13. 1. 5.

• See Priestley’s Hist. Corr. Vol. 2. page 6.— Bingham, 2. 20. 8. Sacrificii opus fine Presbytero esse non potuit, from Hil. Fragm. page 129,—Sce Heylin’s Laud, page 21.

| Rhem. Test. on Heb. X. 11. and Fulke,

m See Art. xXXV111. Sect. 11. — Fulke thinks, that Malsa is not so ancient as the time of Ambrose. On Rhem, Test. opp. page 280. — On 1 Cor. x. 21,

BOOK IV, ART. XxxxI. SECT. 11. 375

profiting particular people (and the Priest of course) by particular offerings, made at the Lord’s table, or altar, on their behalf, with the conse- cration used at the communion, seems to have been carried into execution before” the tenth Century, the æra of Transubstantiation: though such offerings were more properly sacraments than Sacrifices.— They were accounted abuses, and Laws were made against them. Prayers for. the dead were in use in the time of Chry/o/tom, and were offered at the lime of celebrating the Lord’s Sup- per. —A weakness not unnatural, but, as it now seems to us, 1njudicious : yet there might be dif- ficulty in seeing, at that time, that it could be attended with much harm.

It may be proper to remark here, that though the Fathers sometimes used expressions which founded like those of the later Romanists, yet that such expressions were declamatory, and are not to be understood in a proper or literal sense. The very ancient Fathers, having occasion to speak

inst the heathen sacrifices, and speaking lite- rally, declared, in their Apologies, that Christians had owes, And in the molt declamatory sentences, something always appears, from which it is evident, that the expressions are not intended as plain or literal, —Gratiau, who lived about the middle of the twelith Century?, undertook to reconcile Canons, &c. and expressions of Fathers seeming] discordant ; on the words, Hor eff, he observes, therefore as the Heavenly bread, which is the Flesh of Christ, is called, after the proper manner thereof, the Body of Christ, when in deed and

| truth

» Bingham, 15. 4. 4 —Mosheim, Cent. 8. 2. 4.

„ Fulke on Rhem. Test. opp. 279 or on 1 Cor, x. 21.— Prieftley’s Hist. Corr. Vol. 2. page 11. is near this purpose.

Cave places him A. D. 1131. Ng

AA 4

376 BOOK IV. ART. xxxI. SECT. III,

truth it is the Sacrament of the Body of Christ,” &c.—and afterwards, „not in the zrutht of the thing, but in a signifying mystery,” & c. And the unbloody sacrifice of the ancients, was only figurative; it meant, the representation of the rea] sacrifice of Christ, in which he shed his þlogd for Mankind.—Indeed I do not see how the sacri- fice of the Romish Mass can be called unbloody, as the blood of Christ, or what they call fo, is solemnly offered up. 111. When once the practice of sacrificing in the Mass was settled, I do not know that there was much variation in it. Some abuses crept in, from avarice, irreverence and superstition. This we learn from the Council of Trent, which makes a Decree for reforming” them. We may now see what the Acts and the Cate- chism of that Council tell us concerning our pre. sent fubje&t.—The Council held their twenty- second Seshon September 22, 1562; ten years aster King Edward’s Articles were made, and there- tore may well be {supposed acquainted with their contents.—They lay down, that Christ superseded the Jew Priesthood, which was to be temporary, by his own, which was to be perpetual. Yet though he was a Priest for ever, he did not mean that earthly Priesthood should cease : according]y, the night before he was betrayed, he offered up, to his heavenly Father, his Body and blood, under the symbols of Bread and Wine, and ordained his dis- ciples Priests, that they (and their successors) might afterwards offer him up. Still there was to be but one Priest, the Apostles acting only for their Lord, The appointed sacrifice - was to represent the — original

4 Gratian, Concord: discord. Distinction 2. C. Hoc est.—-— For this Ergli/h, see Fulke on Rhem. Test. 1 Cor. x. 20. * Sefl, 22d. first Decree, (page 145, Latin.)

BOOK Iv. 377

original one; both being real, but the former bloody, the latter wnblcody : yet the appointed was to be accounted one and ie same with the original one, differing only in the mode of offering; strictly propitiatory, capable of gaining remission of even great sins; and therefore to be offered for the dead as well as the living.

The Catechism keeps pretty close to the Council : in describing the difference between a Sacrament and a Sacrifice, it says, The sacred Eucharist whilst it is kept in the Pyx*, or carried to the sick, has not the nature of a Sacrifice, but of a Sacra- nent: but when it is Soth, © they that offer this sacrifice, wherein they communicate with us, do satisfy and merit the fruits of our Lord’s Passion.” — And afterwards it 1s* said, © He sacrifice,” that is, all communicants. Masses for the Dead are built on Tradition: and no masses are to be called private ; because all pertain to the Salvation of all the faithful.

The Rhemists have a great deal to say, but nothing that I need trouble you with

iv. Wicklife had not, probably, at once set- tIed his principles so as to appear perfectly uniform in his opinions, in all parts of his works; but a proposition condemned as his in the Council of Constance was the following* ; — © The Gospel saith not that Christ instituted the Mass.”

The Reformed Churches seem all against the Romish Mass : the Confession of Augsburg speaks favourably of the term Mass, and exculpates itself from the charge of having abo/i/hed” that rite. —

The

ect. 78. t Sect. 85. u Sect. 86. * See Baxter on Councils, Chap. 13. or page 431.— See also Fox’s Acts, &c. (or Martyrol.) Index, Wicklife.

Y Bishop Andrews was candid also : see Heylin’s Life of Laud, Pave 21,

378 BOOK IV. iv.

The Lutherans departed the least from the Romish Church.

One of the fix articles is, That private Masses ought to be continued, which as it is agreeable to God’s Law, so men receive great benefit from them.”

The Necessary Doctrine, gives instructions with regard to the Sacrament of the Altar, but I fee nothing about Sacrifice. It concludes with a short Lecture on praying for the dead, in which it dif- courages every way of being particular, 1f I may fo speak.— It allows benevolent intercessions for departed Christians in general, on the principle of a Communion of Saints,“ but opposes Masses being said at particular places (at Scala Cæli), &c. —and rejects purgatory, blames all temerarious judgment, and would have all things in which we have not clear knowledge, left to the disposal of God.

Perhaps Henry VIII. suffered Cranmer to un- dermine the Mass, because the custom of saying Masses had a tendency to support the power of the Pope.

In the beginning of the reign of Edward VI. Masses were left much the same as before, only the communion was allowed to the people in bo//* kinds. But in 1550 the Mass-books were called in, and the Altars removed and changed into Tables: the principal English Retormers judging, that the retaining of altars would give offence to the chict enemies of Popery, and tend to keep up amongst the people, the idea of a propitiatory * Mals.— Some Bishops refused to part with their altars, and were deprived for contumacy ; the Lutherans did

retain

z NeaPs Hist. Pur. Vol. 1. quarto, page 36. + Neal, page 44. ibid.

BOOK iv. v. 379

retain theirs*. There is a chapter against Masses in the Reformatio Legum.— And Latimer, in his Ser- mons*, speaks of them as they deserve.

Of men’s notions of the Mass under Elizabeth, we may judge from the second Book of Homilies; in which I do not recollect any laboured argy- ments, but only some short declamatory expres- sions. It is called “ dumb massing,” “ mummi massing.” We are cautioned to take heed lest the Lord’s supper, * of the memory,” be made a sacri- fice;” © lest applying it for the dead, wwe lose the fruit that be alive.” — We are told, that at it « eyery. one of us must be guests and not gazers; eaters and not lookers, feeding ourselves, not hiring others to feed for us,” &c.—The Mats, I suppose, was io far unsettled by this time, that arguments were unnecessary, and eloquence suffi- cient. — Yet it might be worth while for any curious person to compare some of the expressions in our communion-oftice, about the Body and Blood of Christ, about Christ’s being a sacrifice, &c. with the Romish Latin Forms; as he would the more easily conceive how the same expressions might suit the different Religions when taken in a literal © and metaphorical sense. |

Dupin 1s* unyielding as to our present Article: indeed he could change nothing without bringing the whole Fabric of Popislh Worship upon his head. He maintains © that the Sacrifice of Christ is not only commemorated, but continued in the Eucharist, and that every communicant offers him

along with the Priest.”

Cardinal

d On this subject, see Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page 273, octavo.—Heylin’s Life of Laud, page 20.

© Vol, 1, octavo, page 162.—See alto Index, Mass,

4 Art. xxV111. Sect. XXxXxIII.— Art. XXIX, SC, 1V Heylin’s Life of Laud, page 21. |

Mosheim, zd Appendix.

380 BOOK Iv. ART. XXXI, SECT. v.

Cardinal Bona* seems to be the most able Romish writer in defence of the Mass, that J have hap- pened to consult.

v. We should fay something of those who think, that our Church did not recede far enough from the Church of Rome. We may call them col- lectively Puritans, or Dissenters. But we have already®* mentioned the modern custom of /tting at the Eucharist unknown in the ancient Church ;— To these an Altar“ must be abomination, espe. cially the Romish sort, of fone}, set against a wall. Lardner* says, that near the primitive times, the Eucharist was never said to be upon an Altar, — One may easily conceive the Cross to be called an Altar. Some have thought“, that the Apostles would not be in the usual familiar table-posture, at the last supper, when they recerved the bread and wine. Whatever might be the cafe, our kneeling at the communion 1s justified, by our being in a continued act of Devotion; and by our con- fidering the Ordinance as totally emblematical, or symbolical.— Our church, by a Rubric, guards against any suspicion of our adoring the consecrated elements: No English communicant has now ever any such idea in his mind. And farther, we never insist upon the posture of kneeling as necessary for all societies of Christians. We are satisfied with our common expression, Altar-table, as it seems to {uit our idea, that the Eucharist is most properly a

representation of a Feast upon a Sacrifice. vi. We

Rerum Liturgicarum Lib. and De Missa. 8 Art. xxvIII. Sect, x11. d Secker’s Sermons, Vol. 6. page 288. i Fulke’s Rhem. Test. Fol. 287. bottom. * Works, Vol. 4. page 337. See Secker’s Lectures, Let. 36. page 243. a seriaus and devout manner,” More in Secker’s Sermons, Vol. 6.

page 288.

BOOK IV. ART. xxxI. SECT. VI—VIII, 381

vi. We will now proceed to some Explanation.

In the Title, Oblation means, I think, the same as sacrifice : all sacrifices were oblations, and all oblations were {supposed to be accepted as sacrifices. Under the Law of Moses, the poorer sort of men brought offerings, who could not afford sacrifices. In our prayer of consecration, sacrifice and obla- tion come together, and seemingly as synonymous. One oblation is opposed to the continued sacri- fices of the Romanists :—fin//hed is also opposed to perpetuated: and on the Cross, — to, on the Altar. | vii. The Offering” -in the Latin Oblatio; so the English might have been again, OB/lation : but the first sentence of the Article is not our pre- sent concern: it is only introductory, except indeed as it may suggest proofs : but the subject, of Christ’s death being a Sacrifice, has been treated in the Appendix to the eleventh Article: I do not know that it was proved there that „there is none other,” &c. but it is agreed that there can be no other, except what is atterwards mentioned in this Article.

VIII. The Sacrifice of […] this does not seem good grammar; but the Latin has Sacrificia, and the English, in Spar- row’s collection, Sacrifices. Bennet, however, mentions, Sacrifice, as one reading. Masses” — Misa bas occurred“ before: no distinction heie between public and private masses. —*< It was com- . monly said,” — that is, before the Reformation I think we have had a similar expression before. — Pain,“ in Latin pena, which may signify penalty, or punishment. There is © penis” in Trent Ses- sion 22. Canon 3, relating to the same thing.

• Blasphemous

m Art, XXV 111, Sect. 11.— Art. xxxi. Sect. 11.

382 BOOK iv. IX, x.

e Blasphemons fables,” figmenta” : = © dangerous deceits, - perniciosæ inmpoture. Other Reformed Churches use expressions much the same; which are anathematized by the Council of Trent? — How the sacrifices of Mafles have been *© blasphe. mous fables and dangerous deceits,” will best be mentioned under our Proof.

1x. In entering on our Proof, we must settle what Propositions our Article gives us to prove. I see only to.

1. Masses, according to the Romish practice, are © blasphemous Fables,” or figmenta.

2. They are“ dangerous deceits.”

x. Being fables, figments, and deceits, seems to mean only one thing, namely, that they are contrary to scripture, or, at least, unsupported by it.

” This might sufficiently appear from considering, that the doctrine of the Romish Mass is founded upon that of Transub/tantiation, which we suppose ourselves to have removed out of the way. But there are some texts which are so strikingly op- posed to the Mass, that it must be worth while to cite them. 5

Those which were cited in the Appendix to the eleventh Article, to prove Christ’s death a Sacri- fice, would shew, that such sacrifice was completed. But 1 will confine myself. First I will take Heb. ix. 24. and go to the end of that Chapter. Is it

sible ro conceive, that the Apostle could have reasoned thus, and have given no hint about the millions of sacrifices which the Romish Priests profess to have performed? or is it possible to con-

ceive, that any part of worship should be meant to {wallow

n Terence has, Fabulz! for idle tales! tuff! Heauton: Act 2.

Scen. 3. v. 95. © Sefl. 22. Canons 4 and 5.

BOOK iv. x. 383

swallow up all other parts, and yet no injunction be given about it? — Next read Heb. x. 267.— I do not see how it is any argument if there is an

sacrifice after that of Christ : as to all the sacrifices of the Mass, and the sacrifice of Christ making but one, that seems quite a gratis dictum, and no argument.—Heb. v. 3. compared with vii. 24—28. shews, that no man can be a Priest in the room of Christ, to offer up the Christian sacri- fice Read 1 Pet. iii. 18.— Whatever completes types makes a conclusion; that therefore did Christ. — On 1 Pet. 1. 20. we observe, that as Christ was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, he must be the only propitiatory Sacrifice for the sins of all mankind. According to Heb. x. 2, 3. Whatever sacrifice is repeated, cannot take away sin. Either Christ fers in the Sacrifice of tne Mass, or he does not; if he suffers, he must be ever suffering (against Phil. ii. 9.— Heb. ix. 26.) if not, it is no real sacrifice ; add Heb. ix. 224%.— I will not detain you with producing more autho- rities in so plain a case. Private Masses are against 1 Cor. x. 17.— Xii. 13. &c.

Masses may be called blasphemons, as degrading Christ, dragging him, as it were, down from Hea- ven for a few sous :—merely to describe the thing, seems a fort of blasphemy.—A poor Priest /abour- ing, with a wafer, in the occupation and craft of offering up our blessed Lord! treating a happy and glorious Being, *© crowned with glory and . honour,” (Heb. ii. 9.) as wretched and despicable

nay numberless Priests doing this at the same time; and muttering at numberless Altars!—Books of

Travels,

» On this text the Rhemists remark, << Perilous readi Scriptures.”

See Bishop Cleaver, page 18,

ng of

384 BOOK iv.

Travels, which relate these facts, must be shocking to every serious reader.

x1. Masses may be called pernicious, in regard to the evil consequences which they tend to pro- duce. They tend to make religion a mere civi- lity; to take Christians off from prayer, and preaching of the word of God ; and to give them an easy method of evading all their duties, moral and religious. Moreover, by presenting a material object, they hinder men from worshipping * jy Spirit* and in Truth.” They tend to promote Infidelity amongst men of improved understand-

ings; and from such, inferior persons soon catch the infection.

x11. And now shall I offer any dire proof? the Romanists have urged many considerations in their own favour, but such as seem to be for the most part mere Hypothe/is, unfounded in Reason and Scripture. The doctrine of the Mass might do in the dark ages, but it will not bear the light, The Romanists, where they are improved, resemble a man, who because he has planned something in a fit of melancholy, rage, or intoxication, determines to carry it into execution at all hazards, when he is become perfectly sober and in his right mind; and to justify it the best he can. However, if any one chuses to make a business of examining the Popish pleas in favour of the Mass, he may con-

{ult the Rhemish Testament*; and if he reads the

r At Reims, a reverend German Marquis (an Abbe) told me, one Sunday evening, that he had been à /a Messe at five o’clock in the morning; after which he had gone à la Chase; (a rabbet- shooting;) and that he was then ready to go à la Comedie.— This he said very innocently, as conscious of no fault. Indeed at the Play he was to make some little change in his dress, that every one might know he was incognito. 5

s John iv. 24. |

t Particularly on Luke xxii.— 1 Cor, x. and xi, and on Heb. ix, and x. |

BOOK Iv. 385

the answers of Dr. Fulke, I think he will be pleased; making an abatement for controversial language, which is seldom pleasing. | XII1. I fear it would not be to much purpose to detain you long on an Application: a form of assent does not seem wanting, and any plan for mutual concessions, is desperate*.— To the interested we can only offer 2 Cor. iv. 4. and observe, that it is as applicable to those who call themselves Chris- tians, as to © them which believe not.” © The God of this world may blind* the minds of either.” But to those who are not affected by the immense sums which have been lavished away on the saying of Masses, we may recommend the interests of rational piety : let not any of them be afraid? to embrace it, though it may subvert, for a time, the whole system of their national religion: neither let them be afraid that the common people, deprived of their present principles, may become wholly un- principled : the common people amongst the Pro- testants, have, many of them, much solid piety; of a better fort than the lower people in Popish coun- tries: and as to men of letters and science, while the Romanists are chiefly Infidels, the Protestants can reckon amongst true believers, those for whose understandings they have the highest esteem on other accounts; an Addison, a Locke, and even a Newton. These have all laboured in the cause of revealed religion. If the Romanists will not listen to our brotherly exhortations, let them hear our threats: the rage of paying for Masles will not last for ever; as men improve, * Hallitax on Prophecy, page 361. * See Comber’s Advice, page 39. | Y P.S. What we find in the second Appendix to Mosheim, suits this advice; I had not read it, Octavo, Vol. 5. page 110.

Fenelon’s notioa. VOL. Iv. B B

386 BOOK Iv. x11 I.

improve, it will continually grow weaker, and weaker : As Philosophy rises, Masses will fink in price; and at length, superstition will pine away, because no one will be interested to maintain and support it. Even Institutions formed by Legacies, will have their revenues transferred to other uses. — But then, the minds of all ranks of men will be in a far worse state than if they had lost their super- stition in any other manner : instead of having a Religion which their reason makes them esteem, at the same time that it warms their hearts with devout affection and Christian benevolence, they will have acquired an habit of despising all religion; and of thinking those most degraded, who shew the most attention to religious“ truth.

z This Lecture was given Feb. 27, 1792 ; with the accidental omission of Sect. x1. and the last paragraph of Sect. x.