of that again as the Apostle goes on verse 18. Are not they who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the Altar 't is eating and communicating that makes us partakers of Christs sacrifice We do then eat of the sacrifice and so partake of it as the Jews did of their sacrifices the communion is a feasting upon a true oblatum the body and blood of Christ as is excellently made out by a Learned man of our own we do not there sacrifice Christs body but only sacramentally eat of it as being already sacrificed and offered once for all by Christ himself upon the Cross It is not at all necessary that it should be sacrificed again by us to make us become partakers of it for cannot a sacrifice be applyed without being sacrificed again It seems a very strange and uncouth way to sacrifice the same thing over and over in order to applying the vertue of it as if the Jews when they had slain the Paschal Lamb must have slain another Lamb in order to the partaking the vertue of it no they were to eat of it for that purpose and so are we of Christs sacrifice and this is the way whereby we do communicate of it and have its full vertue applyed to us It was the weakness and insufficiency of their sacrifices that made them so often repeat them and sacrifice them anew but Christs sacrifice being perfect is to be but once offered though it be often to be eaten and partaken of by us which it may be without being again sacrificed Thirdly The Authour of this Epistle makes not the least mention of Christs sacrifice being offered again upon Earth or of its being repeated in the sacrifice of the Mass but after he himself had once offered it upon the Cross he immediately speaks of his presenting it to God in Heaven and there by vertue of it interceeding and mediating with him for us that by his own blood he entered into the holy place having obtained eternal Redemption for us chap. 9. ver 12. as the Jewish high priest on the great day of expiation after he had offered the sacrifice of atonement for the whole Congregation upon the Altar carried the blood of it into the Holy of Holies and there sprinkled it before the mercy-seat Levit. 16.15 This great Anniversary sacrifice for the whole Congregation was the great Type and Figure of Christs sacrifice for all mankind and the Holy of Holies was the Type of Heaven and the High Priest of Christ as is confessed by all Christ therefore our great High Priest to whom alone it belonged to offer this sacrifice of Atonement and Expiation for the whole World having done this upon the Cross he entred not into the holy places made with hands which are the figures of the true but into heaven it self now to appear in the presence of God for us chap 9. ver 24. To appear there as our Advocate and Mediator and by vertue of his own blood there presented to his Father to make a very powerful intercession for us Now from this discourse of the Apostle we have a full account of Christs sacrifice that it was to be once offered upon the cross and then to be carried into the Holy of Holies in Heaven and no more to be offered upon Earth for this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever sat down on the right hand of God chap. 10. ver 12. The Apostle speaks not one tittle nor gives the least hint or intimation of this sacrifice being offered again by others upon Earth this lyes cross to the whole tenour of his discourse and the similitude and agreement which he represents between the Jewish sacrifice of Atonement and Christs is quite altered and destroyed by it for besides the High Priests offering this sacrifice this makes every lesser Priest to be still offering the same sacrifice upon the Altar when the High Priest is entred with the blood of it into the Holy of Holies and though he cannot go in there upon which the vertue and the perfection of the sacrifice does in great measure depend yet still to offer the same sacrifice and besides it makes this facrifice like to the Jewish where every priest standeth daily ministring and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices which for the reason shewed they could never take away sins chap. 10. ver 12. in opposition to which he says this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever sat down on the right hand of God verse 13. that is Christs sacrifice was never to be repeated as the Jewish were for if it had been to be offered by others though not by Christ himself and the Christian Priests were to stand daily ministring and offering the same sacrifice both they and their sacrifice would have been the same upon this account with the Jewish and there had not been that difference between them which the Apostle does there plainly mean and declare Further it cannot but seem very strange that when this Divine Author does so largely and copiously and designedly treat of the sacrifice of Christ and of those of the Jews and compare them so much together and show the excellency of the one above the other that he should never say the least word of the sacrifice of the Mass when he had so much occasion to do it that it can hardly be imagined he should have so wholly omitted it had it been as others since account it as true and proper a sacrifice as any of the Jewish or of Christs himself upon the cross Fourthly The Apostle here plainly layes down a principle directly contrary and wholly inconsistent with their Doctrine of the sacrifice of the Mass and that is that if Christ be offered he must suffer and that without shedding of blood there is no Remission Nor yet saith he at the 25 26. verses and 9th chapter That he should offer himself often as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of others For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself For then must he often have suffered if he had been often offered without suffering then Christ cannot be offered and sacrificed and indeed to sacrifice any thing is to consume and destroy it so that it be wholly parted with and given up to God and to sacrifice any thing that is living is to take away its life and to kill it and so to make it suffer death as a vicarious punishment in anothers stead this is the common and allowed notion of sacrifices but Christ cannot thus suffer in the Mass therefore he cannot be truly offered or sacrificed since according to the Apostle if he be often offered he must often suffer and they would not I hope crucisie to themselves the Lord of Life again and put him to death upon the Altar
as the Jews did upon the cross and yet without this they cannot truly sacrifice him or properly offer him according to the Apostle But this says their great Champion the Bishop of Meaux is done mystically Christ is mystically slain and doth mystically suffer death upon the Altar that is by way of representation and resemblance and the mysterious signification of what is done there as St. Paul says to the Galatians chap. 3. v. 1. Before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth crucified among you Now so Christ may be crucified every time we hear or read his crucifixion lively represented to us as we may see a bloody Tragedy without one drop of blood spilt so Christ may be mystically slain in the Sacrament when his body is broke and his blood poured out in mystery and representation but this is not true and proper Offering which is necessary to make a true and proper sacrifice as they will have that of the Mass to be if they would be contented with a mystical sacrifice to represent and commemorate Christs death that they know we are willing to allow and then a mystical suffering that is not a real and proper would be sufficient for a mystical that is not proper sacrifice but the suffering must be as true and proper as the sacrifice and if the one be but mystical the other must be so too if the Bullock or Goat of the sin-offering which was to be offered on the great day of Atonement had been only Mystically slain and Mystically offered upon the Altar they had been as really alive for all that as any that were in the Fields and had been no more true and proper sacrifices of atonement and expiation then they were for without shedding of blood as the Apostle says there is no Remission Heb. 9.22 it was the shedding or pouring out the blood in which the Life was supposed to be and therefore the taking away the Life of the sacrifice that did really make the sacrifice to be truly propitiatory or avail able before God as a price and recompence for the remission of sins and how then can the sacrifice of the Mass be truly propitiatory when the blood is not truly shed when according to themselves it is Incruentum sacrificium an unbloody sacrifice and therefore according to the Apostle it cannot be propitiatory for the Remission of sins as will be further insisted upon afterwards Thus we see how much there is in those clear places of Scripture against the sacrifice of the Mass and how little there is for it in those dark ones which are produced by our Adversaries Thirdly It has no just claim to Antiquity nor was there any such Doctrine or Practice in the Primitive Church this is greatly boasted and vaunted of and although their cause runs very low in Scripture yet they pretend it carries all Antiquity before it where nothing is more common than to have the name of Oblation and Sacrifice and Host and Victim attributed to the blessed Eucharist and to have it said that we do there offer and immolate and sacrifice unto God this we readily acknowledge and though we can by no means allow Antiquity to take place of Scripture or to set up either an Article of Faith or essential part of Worship which is not in Scripture and our Adversaries seem to agree with us in this that there must be a divine Institution for a sacrifice or else it can have no true foundation so that if Scripture fails them 't is in vain to flye for refuge to Antiquity yet we doubt not but that Scripture and Antiquity will be fairly reconciled and be made very good Friends in this point and both of them against the sacrifice of the Mass as 't is taught and practised in the Church of Rome The name of Sacrifice and oblation is often given both in Scripture and Antiquity in an improper general and metaphorical sense thus it is applyed to the inward actions of the mind to penitence and sorrow for sin The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit a broken and a contrite heart O God thou wilt not despise Psal 51.17 To the outward Thanksgivings of the mouth when we render unto God the Calves of our lips Hosea 14.2 When we offer unto him Thanksgiving Psal 50.14 or as the Apostle more fully expresses it when he commands Christians to offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually that is the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name Heb. 13.15 where the Metaphor is carried on in several words and in the very next verse 't is applied to works of Mercy and Charity and beneficence to others but to do good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is well pleased verse 16. and St. Paul in another place calls the Philippians Charity an odour of a sweet smell a sacrifice acceptable well pleasing to God Philip. 4.18 Nay he calls preaching the Gospel a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which our Adversaries earnestly contend to mean nothing less then a sacrifice and the converting the Gentiles he calls a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an offering acceptable to God Rom. 15.16 †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in another place he calls the Faith of Christians a sacrifice Philip. 2.17 †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And his own Martyrdom an Oblation Ib. 1 Tim. 4.6 St. Peter not only calls works of Piety Spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ but he ascribes a holy Priesthood to all Christians to offer these up 1 Pet. 2.5 and upon that account St. John also gives them the Title of Priests Rev. 1.6 Now as the holy Spirit of God often chooses to use this phrase and metaphor which is very easie and natural so from hence and in accommodation probably both to the Jews and Heathens the greatest part of whose Religion was sacrifices the ancient Writers also do very frequently make use of it and apply it both to actions of morality and to all parts of Religious Worship but especially to the blessed Eucharist which is the most sacred and solemn of all other but they do not do this in the strict and proper sense of the word sacrifice as is plain from the foregoing instances but in a large and general and metaphorical one so that though our Adversaries could muster up ten times as many places out of the Fathers wherein the Eucharist is called a sacrifice and oblation and in the celebrating of which we are said to offer and immolate to God with which they are apt to make a great show and to triumph as if the victory were perfectly gained against us yet they are all to no purpose and would do no real execution upon us unless they can prove that these are to be taken in a strict and proper sense which it is necessary they should be to make a proper sacrifice and not in a large and Metaphorical one as we are
very fairly to give up the question and surrender the cause for he owns it is not properly propitiatory and gives a very good reason for it because Christ in his immortal state cannot merit or satisfie or be a true propitiation for us the Bishop of Meaux was aware of this and therefore he makes Christs presence upon the Altar to be not a propitiation but a powerful Intercession before God for all mankind according to the saying of the Apostle that Jesus Christ presents himself and appears for us before the face of God Heb. 9.24 So that Christ being present upon the holy Table under this figure of death intercedes for us and represents continually to his Father that death which he has suffered for his Church †Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church But how comes this Intercession of Christ to be upon Earth Is it not to be in heaven and is not Christ there to appear in the presence of God for us Is not Christ entered into the heavens for that purpose as the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies with the blood of the great sacrifice of Atonement after that was offered upon the Altar Does not the Apostle thus represent it in that place in allusion and with relation to that Jewish Oeconomy and could any but Monsieur de Meaux have brought that place to show that Christ intercedes for us by being present upon the Altar when the Apostles discourse is as directly contrary to that as can be and makes him to appear only in Heaven or in the presence of God for us and there present himself and his sacrifice to God as the Jewish High Priest carried the blood of the Anniversary sacrifice of Expiation into the Holy of Holies and there sprinkled it before the Mercy-seat Christ is not entred into the holy place made with hands which are the figures of the true but into Heaven it self now to appear in the presence of God for us Christ therefore making Intercession for us only in heaven and propitiation only upon the Cross how the sacrifice of the Mass should be either Intercessory which is a new way of de Meaux's or propitiatory as the Council of Trent has determined it I cannot understand Some of them tell us it is propitiatory only relatively and by application as it relates and applyes to us the propitiatory vertue of the sacrifice of the Cross but this it may do as a Sacrament and then it is not propitiatory in it self for sins for punishments and for satisfactions as the Council declares it and as propitiatory sacrifices used to be which were in themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 satisfactory payments and prices for sins and for the punishments due to them Bellarmin having owned it not to be properly propitiatory he says * Cum autem dicitur propitiatorium vel satisfactorium id est intelligendum ratione rei quae impetratur dicitur enim propitiatorium quia impetrat remissionem culpae satisfactorium quia impetrat remissionem poenae Bellarm. de Miss l. 2. c. 4. C. When it is called propitiatory or satisfactory this is to be understood by reason of the thing which is impetrated by it for it is said to be Propitiatory because it impetrates Remission of sin Satisfactory because it impetrates Remission of punishment But thus our Prayers may be said to be propitiatory because by them we beg and obtain Mercy and Pardon at the hands of God but a propitiatory sacrifice is to do this not only by way of petition and impetration but by way of price and payment and satisfaction so that after all this improper sacrifice of the Mass is but very improperly propitiatory and when they come closely to consider it they are forced to confess so and cannot tell how to make out their Councils Doctrine that 't is truly propitiatory for sins and for punishments 5. Let us consider next how it is impetratory if they mean only that it is so upon the account of those Prayers which are there made and which are more efficacious in that solemn office of Religion as the Eucharist has relation to the Cross and the sacrifice of Christ upon it which is the foundation of all our Prayers and by vertue of which we hope to have them heard and answered by God so in that solemn Religious and express memorial of it we may suppose them to have a greater vertue and efficacy if this be all they mean who will deny it and why may not this be without the Eucharist's being a sacrifice 't is only Christs sacrifice and offering upon the Cross that gives vertue and power to our prayers at that time when we are devoutly celebrating the remembrance of it and 't is not any offering of him up then any otherwise then by Faith and the inward devotion of our Mind that makes our prayers the more powerful either for our selves or others We are to make Prayers and Supplications for all men and for theirs and our own wants and necessities in this solemn and publick office of our Religion and so did the first Christians pray then for Kings and all that were in Authority as the Apostle commands and as we find they did at large in St. Cyril * Catech. Mystag 5. and the Apostolick Constitutions †l. 8. c. 12. and it was in the Sacrament they used their Litanies or general Supplications for all men and for all things as is evident beyond all dispute from those places where they prayed not only for the Church and the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons and all the faithful but for the King or the Emperor where they lived for the City and all its inhabitants for the sick for the Captives and banished for all that Travelled by Sea or by Land and so for all things for the peace of the Church and for the quiet of the Empire and for all temporal mercies as well as spiritual for the fruits of the Earth and for the temperature of the Air and for all things they stood in need of Now they did not think the Eucharist did as a sacrifice impetrate all this or as a real instead of a verbal prayer as Bellarmine represents it to be * Ipsa enim oblatio tacita quaedam sed officacissima est invocatio Bellarm. de Miss l. 2. c. 8. B. but they made particular and express prayers for these in the Eucharist and did not think that was to supply the place of prayer or be a prayer in action or in dumb signs instead of words neither did the primitive Church ever say a Mass for to quench a fire or stay an Earthquake much less to cure the Murrain in Cattle or to recover a Sheep or a Cow or Horse when they were sick as is scandalously and shamefully done by those who ascribe such an impetratory power to it that it shall do the work in all cases 6. To make it a sacrifice truly propitiatory in its
feared that it is not accepted by God or else it need not be so often tendered and paid again and again so many several times but as Bellarmine says both the sacrifice it self and Christ who then offers it are infinitely acceptable to God * Ipsa hostia offerens Christus infinito modo sunt Deo grata Ib. What account then can be given of this He is the most miserably put to 't that ever good guesser was at this unaccountable thing and with a salvo to better judgment †Videntur mihi salvo meliore judicio tres esse causae hujus rei Bellarm. de Miss l. 2. c. 4. F. which is a squeamish piece of modesty that he is seldom guilty of at other times he offers at three reasons though he owns the cause of it is not certain †Causa non est adeo certa Ib. The first is in respect of the sacrifice it self which is offered in the sacrifice of the cross says he Christ in his very natural being and human form was destroyed but 't is only his sacramental being is so in the Eucharist * Prima sumitur ex parte hostiae quae offertur nam in sacrificio destruebatur ad honorem Dei ipsum esse naturale Christi in formâ humanâ in sacrificio Missae destruitur tantum esse sacramentale Ib. but Christ I hope is as much in his natural being in the Eucharist as he was upon the cross else what becomes of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and he is offered as truly to God in his natural being there why should not then his natural being be as valuable in the one as in the other if his natural beings not being destroyed there makes it to be no true sacrifice as one would think he had it here in his thoughts then indeed he gives a good and a true reason why the one is not a sacrifice nor upon that account so valuable as the other but for fear of that he quits this reason and goes to the next which is * Secunda sumitur ex parte offerentis nam in sacrificio crucis offerens est ipsa persona filii Dei per se at in sacrificio Missae offerens est filius Dei per ministrum Ib. in respect of the offerer because in the one the offerer is the very person of the Son of God by himself but in the other the offerer is the Son of God by his Minister but surely if the oblation be the same of the same worth and value the offerer will by no means lessen and diminish it and how often do they tell us that Christ himself is the offerer of the sacrifice of the Mass when we charge them with the great boldness and presumption of having a mortal man offer up Christ and so consequently purchase our Redemption and make propitiation for sin which none but Christ can do to avoid this the Bishop of Meaux says That Christ being present upon the Table offers up himself to God for us in the Eucharist * Exposition of the doctrine of the Catholick Church So that the Priest is only to set him upon the Table according to him by the words of consecration and then Christ offers up himself to God and Christ being present upon the holy Table under this figure of Death intercedes for us and represents continually to his Father that death which he has suffered for his Church * Ib. And the Council of Trent says It is the same offerer as well as the same sacrifice that was upon the cross and the difference between that and the sacrifice of the Mass is not at all upon the account of the offerer but only the manner of offering †Vna eademque hostia idemque offerens sola offerendi raetione diversâ Conc. Trid. Sess 6. c. 2. This therefore can be no true reason of the different value of the two sacrifices and oblations The Third is taken from the will of Christ for though Christ (c) Tertia ratio sumitur ex ipsâ Christi voluntate nam etiamsi possit Christus per unam oblationem sacrificii incruenti sive per se sive per ministrum oblati quaelib◠à Deo pro quiouscunque impetrare tamen noluit petere nec impetrare nisi ut pro singulis oblationibus applicetur certa mensura fructûs passionis suae sive ad peccati remissionem sive ad alia beneficia quibus in hâc vitâ indigemus Bella. de Miss l. 2. c. 4. H. could by one oblation offered either by himself or his minister obtain any thing or for any person yet he would not otherwise desire or impetrate this but only that in every oblation a certain measure of the fruit of his passion be applyed either to Remission of sin or to other benesits which we want in this Life but where does this will of Christ appear Christ may dispose of his merits and the fruits of his passion as he pleaseth but how do they know that he intends thus to parcel them out and to distribute them in such small measures and scantlings as they think fit and as serves only for their purpose If the sacrifice and oblation be the same it ought to be without doubt of the same infinite value with that upon the Cross and though it be very bold and precarious to guesse at Christs will without some declaration of it from himself yet I cannot see how it was possible that it should be Christs will to have it the same sacrifice and yet not have the same vertue which is as if a Physician should have an Universal Midicine that by once taking would certainly cure all Diseases whatever and yet should for some reasons so order the matter that the very same Medicine should if he pleased have only a limited vertue cure but one Disease at a time or only some lesser smaller illnesses and that even for those it must be often taken This would certainly bring a suspicion either upon his Medicine or himself and no body but would doubt either that it had not such a vertue in it at first or that it was not the same afterwards nor made truly by him as he pretended 8. They make the Priest in the Mass-sacrifice to do all in the name of Christ and to act as his Agent and Deputy and so they say 't is the same Priest who offers as well as the same Sacrifice which was offered upon the Cross and that he pronounces those words of Consecration This is my Body in Christs name not by an Historical reciting of them but as speaking authoritatively in the Person of Christ himself and that this makes the Sacrifice great and valuable as it is thus offered to God by Christ himself I ask then whether all the sacrificial Acts in the Mass are performed by Christ Does Christ consecrate his own Body for Consecration is the most principal part of the sacrificing Action