Baillie’s Parallel. Chapter VI.
James Dodson
CHAP. VI.
Concerning the Propitiatory Sacrifice which is the rest of the Canon.
Our prayer of oblation from the Mass, and not from the English Liturgy.
Follows the prayer of oblation, as in our Book so in the Missal subjoined immediately to the words of consecration, thus stands in the Missal the Romish memorial, Unde & memores Domine nos tui servi ejusdem Christi filij tui Domini Dei nostri tam beatæ passionis, nec non & ab inferis resurrectionis, sed & in cœlo gloriosæ Ascensionis offerimus præclaræ Majestati tuæ de tuis donis ac datis hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, panem sanc-
(61)
tum vitæ æternæ, & calicem salutis perpetuæ, supra quæ propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris, & accepta habere, sicut accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui justi Abel, & sacrificium Patriarchæ nostri Abrahæ, & quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchisedech sanctum sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam supplices te rogamus omnipotens Deus, jube hæc perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui, in sublime altare tuum in conspectu divinæ Majestatis tuæ ut quotquot ex hac altaris participatione, sacrosanctum filij tui corpus & sanguinem sumpserimus, omni benedictione cœlesti & gratia repleamur per eundem Christum Dominum nostrum [Wherefore, O Lord, we thy servants, being mindful of the same Christ, thy Son, our Lord God, of his blessed passion, and also of his resurrection from the dead, and also of his glorious ascension into heaven, offer unto thy excellent Majesty from thy gifts and things given a pure host, a holy host, an immaculate host, the holy bread of eternal life, and the chalice of perpetual salvation. Upon these things deign to look with a propitious and serene countenance, and to hold them accepted, even as thou didst deign to hold accepted the gifts of thy righteous servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham, and that which thy high priest Melchizedek offered unto thee, a holy sacrifice, an immaculate host. We humbly beseech thee, almighty God, command these things to be borne by the hands of thy holy Angel to thy altar on high, in the sight of thy divine Majesty, that as many of us as shall have received, by this participation of the altar, the most sacred body and blood of thy Son, may be filled with every heavenly blessing and grace; through the same Christ our Lord]. Here our Book doth much reform the English, a Rubric for oblation they have none, but we proclaim a prayer of oblation, and that not of the former Offertory, wherein the bread and wine was offered on the Altar in a peace offering, but of a second sacrifice, even as the Mass distinguishes, to the which the first offering was but a preparation.
Secondly, The most of this prayer in the English is put after the Communion to be a thanksgiving and a spiritual sacrifice of praise to GOD for the blessings in the Communion received, but we correct and draw it back from that place and set it at the back of the consecration, where it stands in the Missal, and make it change the English nature, resuming the old Romish Spirit to be no more a thanksgiving but a prayer, and that of oblation of a new sacrifice to God for sin.
Thirdly, We put in sundry clauses which the English put out, as these words [may worthily receive the most precious body and blood of thy Son Jesus Christ] borrowing them from the Mass clause in the same place, Quotquot ex hac altaris participatione sacrosanctum filij tui corpus & sanguinem sumpserimus [As many of us as shall have received, from this participation of the altar, the most sacred body and blood of thy Son]. And the first eight lines which gave the form of the oblation we resume from the Mass, professing Christ’s ordinance to make, and our intention to make, that is, both according to the Popish Commentary & late English style, offer up in a sacrifice if we believe either Bellarmine or Heylin, the one Lib. 1. de Missa, c. 12. maintains that in the institution hoc facite [do this] is rightly expounded, sacrificate [sacrifice], the other in his Anti-
(62)
dotum, avowing that Christ in the supper made the Apostles sacrificing Priests, and gave to them as Priests power in these words hoc facite [do this]. How ever the most pregnant passages which can be found in the Missal for the Romish propitiatory and unbloody sacrifice are translated hence and put in this our prayer. I grant that some things are added and some things detracted, but both the detractions & additions are made for our disadvantage, we want God’s acceptation of that bread and cup, as of the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham, and Melchizedek, his command to the Angels to bring this sacrifice up to the heaven; but by these clauses our Divines use to reject the Romish Propitiatory sacrifice, and so they might not stand in our Book which will admit of no bar to that abomination, the clause we add in the end of our prayer, one part is taken out of the prayers which in the Mass do follow: Non æstimator meriti, sed veniæ, quæsumus largitor [Not as an appraiser of merit, but, we beseech thee, as the giver of pardon], and doth nothing cross the doctrine of merit: The other part is taken out of the prayer which in the Mass immediately goes before: Hanc igitur oblationem servitutis nostræ quæsumus Domine ut placatus accipias per Christum Dominum nostrum [This oblation, therefore, of our service, we beseech thee, O Lord, that being appeased thou wouldst accept; through Christ our Lord], now from this clause both Bellarmine and Heylen conclude their unbloody sacrifice, the one de Missa, L. 2. c. 21. Hanc igitur oblationem servitutis nostræ, &c. ubi apertè ostenditur eam oblationem proprie esse sacrificium quippe quæ per ministerium sacerdotum Deo offertur [This oblation, therefore, of our service, etc.; where it is plainly shown that this oblation is properly a sacrifice, since it is offered to God through the ministry of priests]. The other in his Antidotum out of all the Liturgy chooses this one place to prove that the English Church in the Supper offereth up to God, a proper, outward, unbloody Sacrifice: These words as in the English Liturgy they stand in a thanksgiving after the Communion have no such shew, but as they are transposed to stand at the back of a consecration in a prayer of oblation, before the communion, may well prove this intent.
We must offer the Popish sacrifice of the Mass.
Farther, the sacrifice which here we pretend to offer is the oblation of praise and thanksgiving; See how Bellarmine expounds this part of the Canon of the Mass, L. 2. c. 21. Falsum est per sacrificium laudis cujus in canone fit
(63)
mentio dehinc accipi sacrificium spirituale quod in laude et gratiarum actione consistit. Significatur enim ea voce sacrificium veri corporis Domini, quod sacrificium laudis dicitur, quia per illud Deus magnopere laudatur et gratiæ illi aguntur pro summis ejus in nos beneficijs, unde etiam sacrificium eucharisticum merito nominatur [“It is false that the ‘sacrifice of praise,’ of which mention is made in the Canon, is to be understood from this as the spiritual sacrifice which consists in praise and thanksgiving. For by that expression is signified the sacrifice of the true body of the Lord; and this is called a sacrifice of praise because through it God is greatly praised and thanks are given to him for his highest benefits toward us. Hence it is also deservedly called the eucharistic sacrifice.” The point is explicitly anti-Protestant: it rejects taking “sacrifice of praise” as merely spiritual thanksgiving, and instead identifies it with the Roman doctrine of the Mass as the sacrifice of Christ’s true body, called “eucharistic” because thanksgiving is rendered through it]; that the Canterburians take this sacrifice no otherwise now, see Peter Heylen in his Antidotum about the midst, where in the matter of this sacrifice my L[ord]. his Grace gives him leave to utter at length far other speeches than ever dropped before from any English man, which pretended opposition to Papists; the farthest that Montague himself, let be Andrews, Hooker, or any other of their Divines, did go, was to a commemorative, improper, spiritual sacrifice, but that man will have here a proper, corporal, outward, unbloody sacrifice offered, for which the Ministers of the Gospel are constitute by Christ as proper Priests of Melchizedek’s order, as ever were these of the Law after the order of Aaron, this sacrifice cannot possibly be any other but of the body and blood of Christ, for the offering of the bread and wine is the first sacrifice, and but preparatory, and upon it the Evangelical Priesthood is not grounded, the offering up of praise, alms, our selves are expressly by Heylen excluded from that sacrifice he speaks of, so it remains that he must profess the offering up the very body and blood in an unbloody and propitiatory Sacrifice. In this place hear his own words—[The passion of Christ as it was prefigured by the Lord’s ordinance to the Jews in the legal sacrifices a parte ante [with respect to what precedes], so by Christ’s institution its to be commemorate by us Christians in the holy Supper a parte post [with respect to what follows], a sacrifice it was in the figure, a sacrifice in the fact, and so by consequent a sacrifice in the commemoration or in the postfact, a sacrifice there was among the Jews, foreshewing to them his coming in the flesh, a sacrifice there must be among the Christians to shew forth his death till he come, and if a sacrifice must be, there must also be Priests to do, and Altars whereupon to do, for without a Priest and an Altar there can be no sacrifice, yet so that the precedent sacrifice was of
(64)
a different nature from the subsequent, and so are also both the Priests and the Altars from these before, a bloody sacrifice then, an unbloody now, Priests derived from Aaron then, from Melchizedek now, an Altar for Mosaical sacrifices then, for Evangelical now, the Priests were ordained by Christ, to wit, the Apostles and their successors in the Evangelical Priesthood, there is a hoc facite [do this], for the Priests only, who have power to consecrate, hoc edite [eat this] is both for Priest and People.] Thereafter at length he produceth many testimonies of antiquity for true, proper, external, corporal, visible, mystical sacrifices in the Church, but for no better purpose than the Papists before him have done, who laid all these citations to his hands.
If there be any clause in the Mass prayer of oblation concerning their unbloody propitiatory sacrifice for the remission of sins which is not in ours, as hardly ye will miss any sentence necessary for this purpose, yet if any be, it is little matter, it may be soon added, for there is naught in this part of the Canon which our men will not gladly embrace; for this see the Appendix to Dr. Field, L. 3. c. 1. p. 201. where he justifies all this part of the Mass to a letter, and shews how we may truly offer to God the body and blood of Christ in a propitiatory sacrifice for remission of sins and pacifying of God: Such justifications of the Mass were wont to be counted most unreasonable, albeit possible, by all Protestants even those who came nearest to the Roman Church, yea by Papists themselves who had any ingenuity. In that same place of Field, we may read of Luther’s censure of the Canon, yea of Cassander and other Papists, their desire to have the Canon reformed, at least glossed with marginal notes, but in that 28 year, wherein this Appendix long after the pretended Author’s death was Printed, my L. of Canterbury did sit in the sea of London, and had power to make men both living and dead speak from the Presse language, which was never before heard in the reformed Church; albeit since the uncouth voices of sundry their dead men, both Andrews, Overhall, Field, and others
(65)
have been made to ring loud over all the Isle for men’s amazement.
Our men do reject nothing of the Canon of the Mass.
We have gone through the principal parts of the Canon, that which Pope Innocent styles the heart of the Canon and head or top of the Mass, Cor & summus vertex [the heart and highest summit]: there is in it yet four other prayers, two before the consecration and sacrifice, and two after, these our Book hath passed by, but upon no necessity, there is nothing in any of them which our Men have not avowed, thus have they made Field speak after his death for all these four prayers, and what ever else is in the Canon, p. 221. [The Canon of the Mass rightly understood is found to contain nothing in it contrary to the rule of faith, and the profession of Protestant Churches] what dislike they have of any thing in these prayers, we shall see in discussing the particulars; the first of these four because it is long let it be divided in three parts, behold the first, Te igitur clementissime Pater per Jesum Christum filium tuum Dominum nostrum supplices rogamus, ac petimus ut accepta habeas & benedicas hæc dona, hæc munera, hæc sancta sacrificia illibata inprimis quæ tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia tua sancta, catholica, quam pacificare, custodire, adjuvare & regere digneris toto orbe terrarum unà cum famulo tuo Papa nostro & antistite nostro & Rege nostro, & omnibus orthodoxis atque Catholicæ & Apostolicæ fidei cultoribus [Therefore, most merciful Father, through Jesus Christ your Son, our Lord, we humbly pray and beseech you, that you would hold as accepted and bless these gifts, these offerings, these holy and unblemished sacrifices, which, in the first place, we offer to you for your holy catholic Church: that you would deign to pacify, guard, assist, and govern her throughout the whole world, together with your servant our Pope, and our bishop, and our king, and all orthodox worshippers of the catholic and apostolic faith]. The chief things here that our Book-men might seem to have reason to mislike, is the making of the Sacrament a sacrifice, which they offer to God for the Church and all the members of it, next that the Pope the Antichrist’s name must stand in the prayers of the Church. Thirdly, That the Bishops name must stand before the Kings, but none of these things will trouble their stout stomachs.
What the Canon speaks of a sacrifice they approve.
For the first, that they make this Sacrament a true sacrifice we shewed before, and that this their sacrifice they do offer up to God for the welfare not only of all Christians living, but also for many of the dead we may see in many late approved writs, Montag. apparat. p. 379. Unde Tertullianus de corona militis ait, pro natalitiis annua die facimus hoc est ὑπὲρ νεκρῶν ἡμέρᾳ offerimus in commemorationem
(66)
orationem agonistarum J. Christi [Wherefore Tertullian, in On the Soldier’s Crown, says: “We perform this on the annual day for their natal days,” that is, ὑπὲρ νεκρῶν ἡμέρᾳ [“on the day, for the dead”], we offer in commemoration and prayer for the combatants of Jesus Christ]. Dow against Burton about the midst [That the ancient Church had oblations for the dead, the ancient Liturgies put it out of question] Pocklington in his Altare not only at the beginning brings out with approbation from the Decretals that Canon of Fabian, Decernimus ut omnibus diebus Dominicis, altaris oblatio fiat [We decree that on every Lord’s Day the offering of the altar be made], but also about the midst hath these words [At the Altar their Priests did stand at their solemn stations and offer prayers there pro omni Episcopatu nostro, etiam pro Regibus (for our whole episcopate, also for kings)] pointing expressly at the place of the Mass in our hands: And thereafter, at the Altar also were commemorations made in Cyprian’s time, and who had made a Deacon his Executor, the Canon was that for such a one non offerretur, nec pro dormitione ejus celebraretur neque enim ad altare Dei meretur nominari in sacerdotum prece qui ab altari Dei Sacerdotes avocare voluit [that no offering should be made, nor any celebration held for his falling asleep; for he does not deserve to be named at the altar of God in the prayer of the priests, who wished to call priests away from the altar of God].
What honour the Mass gives to the Pope, they yield it to the full.
For their affection to the Pope its not enough for Montagu and others of his fellow servants to pour upon the reformed Divines in general oft, and in special upon Calvin, Beza, Scaliger, Casaubon, and such all the venom which spite can invent, Novatores, schismatici, furiosi, Zelotæ, Lemanici, Puritani [innovators, schismatics, madmen, zealots, Genevans, Puritans], and what not. To speak with great respect of the Popish Divines, especially of sundry of the Jesuits, as of profound, grave, moderate Theologues, to inveigh against the overthrow of Abbies, and with earnestly the restitution of Monasteries, that the holy Monks may live as Elias and John the Baptist gave them example. To speak not only of Bellarmine, Baronius, Becanus, as of good, pious, and godly men, let be miraculously learned, but to avow the office of Cardinal to be an eminent dignity in the Church, a due reward of virtue, and worthy by all much to be respected, with this they are not content, except they let the world know also their great respect to the Pope himself, to call him Antichrist who dare among them, except he desire to be trampled upon as a peevish ignorant Puritan; they will have their succession and derivation from the Pope a main pillar of their Church, without which prop the Church of England would fall to the ground. Hear Pock-
(67)
lington with Canterbury’s applause, speaking in his Sundays’ Sermon at the beginning [Our Diocesan can derive himself the successor of an Apostle, otherwise we would have taken his call for the voice of a stranger] and in his Altare thus he says [Miserable were we if he who now sits Archbishop of Canterbury could not derive his succession from S. Austin, and S. Austin from St. Gregory, and St. Gregory from St. Peter, his Grace can say, ego sum hæres Apostolorum [I am the heir of the Apostles], I and my Predecessors have kept possession, I have received the right faith from the right owners] This favour they bear not only to the old Popes, but even to these of the latest and worst times; see what commendation Montague gives to two late Popes, Orig. p. 114. Patrum nostrorum vel avorum memoria duo summi Pontifices viri optimi & doctissimi Adrianus Sixtus & Bellarmini avunculus Marcellus secundus extitere [Within the memory of our fathers, or of our grandfathers, there arose two supreme pontiffs, men most excellent and most learned: Adrian VI and Marcellus II, Bellarmine’s uncle], yea these Popes whom the world knew to be monsters of men, Montague * will have to be called most holy Fathers by all who are not Puritans, by virtue of the place which they enjoy in the Church of God; see his Orig. par. 1. p. 417. Certe quibusdam titulis & elogiis homines ἐπὶ βαθμόν constitutos ab omni retro antiquitate viri prudentes etiam & religiosi honorarunt, istos honorum lemniscos non est cujusvis conculcare, sed nec palam reprehendere id quod solent παντοσοφομάστιγες Puritani, Pontificem Romanum suam sanctitatem indignare certissimus est character Antichristianismi, non tibi sed religioni dicebat olim Isidis adorator, cum asinus portans mysteria se putaret adoratum, honorem pari modo non Paulo alicui quarto, Alexandro sexto, Johanni 23. cæterisque si qui sint prodigia & propudia honestatis, sed religioni exhibendum contendimus, hoc est eminenti & dignitati qua ultra alios in Ecclesia Dei præditi sunt, sed est hæc phrenesis hominum solummodo fanaticorum quibus omnia displicent nisi quæ de suo cerebro confinxerint, quanquam nec illa placere diu possunt [Certainly, prudent and even religious men, from all past antiquity, have honored with certain titles and encomiums men constituted ἐπὶ βαθμόν [in rank, or in a degree of dignity]. It is not for anyone whatever to trample underfoot those ribbons of honor, nor even openly to reprehend them, as the παντοσοφομάστιγες [would-be omniscient censors] among the Puritans are accustomed to do. To begrudge the Roman Pontiff his “Holiness” is a most certain mark of Antichristianism. “Not to you, but to religion,” the worshipper of Isis once said, when the ass carrying the sacred objects thought that he himself was being adored. In the same way, we contend that honor is to be shown not to some Paul IV, Alexander VI, John XXIII, and the rest—if any such are monsters and disgraces of honesty—but to religion; that is, to the eminence and dignity with which they are endowed above others in the Church of God. But this is the frenzy only of fanatical men, to whom nothing is pleasing except what they have fashioned out of their own brain, although even those things cannot please them for long]. It was too much that many of these men oft have professed their willingness to give to the Pope, notwithstanding of all the defaults of that Sea, upon the condition of some Reformation, his old place to be the Patriarch of the West, unto whom all the Western Clergy did owe some
_____
* See in the large Supplement what praises he pours on the head of the present Pope Urban.
(68)
obedience and subjection, yea to have him as he was of old the first Patriarch of the Christian world, so Montague Antidiatrib. p. 81. Necesse est ut caput Ecclesia habeat, Ecclesia in summa collectione caput est Christus, Ecclesiæ per partes capita sunt constituti Episcopi, hoc est præsunt cum authoritate capitis singuli suis paræcijs, censentur ista capita Pontifex, habet ille locum, jus antiquum obtinet, caput est Ecclesiæ particularis Romanæ cui præest, præcipuæ olim parti Christiani orbis, hoc est, cunctis ad Occidentem regionibus cum authoritate quadam, non illa quidem singulari & suprema, præfuit Pontifex, et si non obstaret perdita illa ambitio præesset hodie etiamnum sed de jure humano, p. 74. Sedem Romanam appellat corýphæam subscribo & eodem ipse titulo eandem sedem cohonestabo, p. 51. De Principe Petro non litigamus, de successorum primatu aliquatenus, domicilium principatus non demolimur, i.e. damus a Petro ad ætatem Augustini in Ecclesia Romana Apostolicæ cathedræ semper perviguisse principatum, p. 49. Ubicunq; multi, & multiplicitas ut ordo eluceat & harmonia conservetur, ab uno arcessenda est origo omnis, unde autem melius origo omnis quam ab Ecclesia principali, loco debetur hæc præeminentia: loci primatum & illum ordinis & propter utrumq; præstantiæ habeat si voluerit Romanus Pontifex, p. 147. antequam terminos transposuerat antiquos, Romanus Episcopus quidni dicebatur—scio alias & amplectur Romanum Pontificem vocatum Benedictum, scio Papam & pastorem nominari; quid si hæc omnia nomina usurpabat, quid si & Apostolicum, p. 41 [It is necessary that the Church have a head. The Church, in her highest collective sense, has Christ as her head. But the Churches considered in their parts have bishops constituted as heads; that is, the several bishops preside over their own parishes with the authority of a head, and these are reckoned heads. The Pontiff has his place; he possesses an ancient right. He is the head of the particular Roman Church over which he presides. Formerly he especially presided over a part of the Christian world, that is, over all the western regions, with a certain authority—not indeed that singular and supreme authority. And if that ruinous ambition did not stand in the way, he would still preside even today, but by human right. p. 74. He calls the Roman See coryphæan [chief/leading]; I subscribe to this, and I myself will honor the same see with the same title. p. 51. Concerning Peter as prince we do not dispute; concerning the primacy of his successors, we dispute in some measure. We do not demolish the seat of principality; that is, we grant that from Peter down to the age of Augustine the primacy of the Apostolic chair always remained vigorous in the Roman Church. p. 49. Wherever there are many, and wherever there is multiplicity, in order that order may shine forth and harmony be preserved, every origin must be fetched from one. And from where better may every origin be drawn than from the principal Church? This preeminence is owed to the place. Let the Roman Pontiff, if he wishes, have the primacy of place, and that of order, and, on account of both, of excellence. p. 147. Before he had transgressed the ancient boundaries, why should he not have been called the Roman Bishop? I know elsewhere also that the Roman Pontiff was embraced as called Benedict; I know that he was named Pope and pastor. What if he used all these names? What if he also used “Apostolic”? p. 41]. He regrets that the Pope is so far debased that he should be spoiled of his just and proper dignity: Gens avium unaquæq; tandem suas sibi plumas repetendo furtivis coloribus denudatam proprijs etiam quod non oportuit improbantq; vehementer οἱ ἐπιεικέστεροι circumcisam ac spoliatam, nudam, ridendam, exsibilandam corniculam exposuerunt [Each kind of bird, by at last reclaiming its own feathers, stripped the little crow of her stolen colors; and even οἱ ἐπιεικέστεροι [the more moderate men] have vehemently exposed her as clipped and plundered, naked, ridiculous, and worthy to be hissed away]. In that same page he assures that Christian Princes and people will gladly yet give to the Popes this old honor and tribute if they will amend their manners; Exhiberent etiamnum, ad priscos illos mores si tantum revertatur & exempla pietatis majorum [They would still exhibit it, if only one would return to those ancient customs and to the examples of the piety of the forefathers]. Thus far Montague went above ten years since, but to go thus far on, that even this day without any reformation, the
(69)
Pope when he is a monster in his private life, for the spiritual dignity he hath in the Church above all other, by virtue of his place he ought to possess his old style, not only of holy Father, but of holiness in the abstract, and that all who will deny this are mad frantic Puritans, who goes thus far cannot but think the Liturgy of all Western Churches to be faulty, where the Pope’s name is not put in the old place of the public prayers.
Yea they will have their very Bishops preferred to Kings.
As for the King’s place after the Bishop, the ambition of our Book-men is capable of such extravagancy: Pocklington before in his relation of the ancient custom puts indeed the King behind the Bishop, and these men oft in their Writs urge that example of Theodose that the Emperours were not permitted to have place to stand at the Altar being but Laics, and not capable of that spiritual dignity proper to Priests, that the Prince’s highest privilege is to come to the Altar with his offering, and then without stay to depart. The Pope’s Legate Seignor Con is made much of among them who propounds to our Prince the example of our old Scottish devout Kings, who did salute the meaner Priests as their superiours, yea it was marked in our Sovereign’s Coronation, that when the greatest Marques was admitted in that solemnity but to the kissing of his Majesty’s hand, the meanest Bishop got a kiss on the cheek; many strange things are alleged of the Clergys’ ambition among us, whereof time may clear them to be guiltless. Montague in his Antidiatrib. p. 80. Ille principatus obtineat in Ecclesia ut revera semper obtinebat, summus sacerdos inter cæteros ὁ ἀρχιερεύς ut appellant etiam Græci Patres passim, Episcopus constituitur ὁ ὑψίθρονος ut vocatur ab Ignatio—Monarchæ sunt Episcopi in suis παροικίαις, Monarchæ in suis διοικήσεσι Metropolitæ, Monarchæ Patriarchæ augustiores, p. 40. Sacerdotij culmen & τὸ ὑπερβέβηκος non ignorant Reges; Serenissimus Britanniarum Monarcha minime omnium ignorat, fatetur autem ultro aliquo modo in quibusdam supra regiam dignitatem eminere cum vetustis & orthodoxis patribus, ἄρχων ἐστὶν ἐκείνου σεμνότερος [Let him hold that principate in the Church which, in truth, he has always held: the chief priest among the rest, ὁ ἀρχιερεύς (the high priest), as the Greek Fathers also commonly call him; the bishop is constituted ὁ ὑψίθρονος (the high-throned one), as he is called by Ignatius. Bishops are monarchs in their own παροικίαις (parishes); metropolitans are monarchs in their own διοικήσεσι (dioceses); patriarchs are more august monarchs. p. 40. Kings are not ignorant of the summit of the priesthood and τὸ ὑπερβέβηκος (its surpassing/transcendent dignity). The Most Serene Monarch of the Britains is least of all ignorant of it; indeed, along with the ancient and orthodox Fathers, he freely acknowledges that in some manner and in certain respects it rises above royal dignity: ἄρχων ἐστὶν ἐκείνου σεμνότερος (a ruler/chief is more venerable than he)], saves Chrysostom, meaning that the Bishop is a Prince of greater dignity than the Emperour, Gregorius Nazianze-
(70)
nus scripsit in [wrote in] Apologia ὅσῳ ψυχὴ σώματός ἐστι κρείττων, τοσούτῳ Βασιλείας ἱερωσύνη [As much as the soul is better than the body, by so much is the priesthood better than the kingdom]. So much as the Soul exceeds the body, tantùm Regno sacerdotium, & quantum Deus præstat hominibus tantùm regiæ potestati præstare sacerdotium—hæc enim non nesciunt in lege Dei edocti & eruditi Reges, cum Constantius olim, Pipinus, demum Carolus, Fredericus occurrerint, de equis descenderint, venientes exceperint religionis antistites Christianæ, venerationemq; exhibuerint [so greatly does the priesthood excel the kingdom; and as much as God surpasses men, so greatly does the priesthood surpass royal power. For kings taught and instructed in the law of God are not ignorant of these things, since Constantius of old, Pepin, then Charles and Frederick, went forth to meet the prelates of the Christian religion, descended from their horses, received them as they came, and showed them reverence]. We need no more scorn the Canonists for preferring the Pope to the Emperour so far as the Sun is above the Moon. Since D[octor]. Montague is applauded to prove from Scriptures and Fathers, that any Bishop is as far above the King as the Soul is above the body, yea as God is above man.
The next part of the first prayer is this, Memento Domine famulorum famularumq; tuarum & omnium circumstantium quorum tibi fides cognita est, & nota devotion, pro quibus tibi offerimus vel qui tibi offerunt hoc sacrificium laudis pro se suisq; omnibus pro redemptione animarum suarum pro spe salutis & incolumitatis suæ, tibiq; vota reddunt sua æterna Deo vivo & vero [Remember, O Lord, your servants and handmaids, and all who stand around, whose faith is known to you and whose devotion is evident; for whom we offer to you, or who themselves offer to you, this sacrifice of praise, for themselves and for all belonging to them, for the redemption of their souls, for the hope of their salvation and safety; and they render their vows to you, the eternal, living, and true God]. Of this commemoration of the living in general, and in particular of benefactors, they will make no scruple who in their solemn prayers delight to name their Patrons with all their styles, as for the offering for their Soules salvation the former place of Field does justify it.
The commemoration of the Saints in public prayer avowed.
In the third part of this prayer is the greatest difficulty, so it says, Communicantes & memoriam venerantes imprimis gloriosæ semperq; virginis Mariæ genetricis Dei & Domini nostri J. Christi, sed & beatorum Apostolorum & Martyrum tuorum Petri, Pauli, Andreæ, Iacobi, Ioannis, Thomæ, Iacobi, Philippi, Bartholomæi, Matthæi, Simonis, & Thadæi, Lini, Cleti, Clementis, Sixti, Cornelij, Cypriani, Laurentij, Chrysostomi [this should be Chrysogoni; ED.], * Ioannis & Pauli, Cosmæ & Damiani, & omnium sanctorum tuorum, quorum meritis precibusq; concedas ut in omnibus protectionis tuæ muniamur auxilio, per eundem Christum Dominum nostrum, Amen [Sharing in communion, and venerating the memory, first of all, of the glorious and ever-virgin Mary, Mother of God and of our Lord Jesus Christ; but also of your blessed Apostles and Martyrs: Peter, Paul, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon, and Thaddeus; Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysostom (Chrysogonus), John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian, and all your saints. By whose merits and prayers grant that in all things we may be fortified by the help of your protection, through the same Christ our Lord. Amen]. The exceptions which use to be taken at this part of the prayer are mainly two. First, The particular enumeration of the Apostles names, and of other old Martyrs.
_____
* [Chrysostom was not a martyr, but the Roman Canon lists Chrysogonus as a martyr. ED.]
(71)
of this our parties make no question, for diverse of them have printed lately their good liking of the diptychs reading in time of the Sacrament, which hath the names of a great number more and less known Saints than here are expressed. The second is a desire of blessings from God for the merits of the Saints; this they make Field after his death clearly to defend, p. 223. [Let us come (says he) to the other objection concerning the commemoration of the blessed Apostles & other Saints and holy Martyrs, by whose intercession and for whose merits the Priest and people desireth God that they may be kept safe, &c.]
The Saints our Mediatours of intercession, by virtue of their own merits.
This he would shew to be no point of Popery by the testimony of Bucer, but no ways pertinent to his purpose, as his own citation will clear, yea they have begun long ago to proclaim the Saints departed our Mediators of intercession, as Christ is our Mediatour of Redemption, so Montague Antidiatrib. p. 19. Non abnuerim illos esse orationis & intercessionis ut loqui solent intercessores, Iesus Christus solus est & absq; alijs Mediator redemptionis, &quoad meritum passionis suae κατ’ ἐξοχὴν Mediator intercessionis [would not deny that they are intercessors of prayer and intercession, as men commonly speak. Jesus Christ alone, without any others, is the Mediator of redemption; and, with respect to the merit of his passion, he is κατ’ ἐξοχὴν (preeminently) the Mediator of intercession]; he avoweth that nought doth keep him from the particular invocation of the Saints, but their ignorance of his particular estate, and confesseth his willingness to invocate his Angel-keeper, whom he knows to understand his affairs, and any other Saint also if he knew that by any mean they could hear him. Tum mihi proba posse me certum esse de scientia Sanctorum particulari quacunq; tandem modo acquisita, ego certe quod ad meipsum attinet sanctos defunctos laureâ donatos immortali, beatam puta Virginem, sanctissimos Apostolos, cæterosq; gloriosissimos Martyres non verebor adire, interpellari, alloqui, supplicibus precibus deprecari habeant me commendatum suis intercessionibus apud Deum patrem per filium suum [Then prove to me that I can be certain concerning the particular knowledge of the saints, by whatever manner it may at length have been acquired; and I, certainly, as far as I myself am concerned, will not fear to approach, appeal to, address, and beseech with suppliant prayers the departed saints crowned with the immortal laurel—namely, the blessed Virgin, the most holy Apostles, and the other most glorious Martyrs—that they may keep me commended by their intercessions before God the Father through his Son]. Now for their cognition of our estate they are speaking of sundry probable ways, these Saints who have lately been on the earth, they tell us take with them all the knowledge of human affairs they had in their body, also the advancement of the Virgin Mary above all the Angels, how easy is a revelation of our case by God or an An-
[Page 72]
gel, or the report of a lately dead soul. For the matter of merit they are as clear as Bellarmine, avowing with approbation in their comital Vessels, Virtutum sancta & speciosa caterva, salutem divino ex pacto quam meruere dabunt [The holy and beautiful company of virtues shall give the salvation which they have merited by divine covenant].
The second prayer of the Canon is this. Hanc igitur oblationem servitutis nostræ sed & cunctæ familiæ tuæ quæsumus Domine ut placatus accipias diesq; nostros in tua pace disponas, atq; ab æterna damnatione nos eripi, & in electorum tuorum jubeas grege numerari per Christum Dominum nostrum [Therefore, O Lord, we beseech you graciously to receive this offering of our service, and also of your whole family; and to order our days in your peace, and command that we be delivered from eternal damnation and numbered among the flock of your elect, through Christ our Lord]. The first words which alone are used by the Papists to a wicked purpose, we have them as I shewed before, the rest formed by Gregory none of them will refuse.
Prayers for the dead avowed, also Limbus Patrum if not Purgatory it self.
Of the two prayers which in the Canon follows the consecration, the first is this. Memento etiam Domine famulorum famularumq; tuarum qui nos præcesserunt cum signo fidei, & dormiunt in somno pacis, ipsis Domine & omnibus in Christo quiescentibus locum refrigerij, lucis & pacis, ut indulgeas deprecamur per eundem Dominum nostrum [Remember also, O Lord, your servants and handmaids who have gone before us with the sign of faith, and who sleep in the sleep of peace. To them, O Lord, and to all who rest in Christ, we beseech you to grant a place of refreshment, light, and peace; through the same our Lord]. This is the only place of the ordinary Mass, whereon universally the Papists hold their Purgatory & Prayer for the dead: Now all this prayer as it stands they make Dr. Field to defend, yea the Bishop of London put his hand to Cozen’s [deceit’s] devotion in the fourth Edition, wherein yet doth stand a Prayer for the Soul departed out of the Body, that it may be preserved from hell and darkness and carried to Abraham’s bosom, and now they are beginning to lay down clear grounds for Purgatory, Montague under pretense to set down Dr. Overhall’s tenet after his death about Limbus Patrum with his own amplifications as he professes, hath these words among many more, Apparat. p. 61. Objciunt nullus tertius locus indicatur in Scriptura præter infernum damnatorum & cœlum. R. si indicatur pios ante Christum in infernis non fuisse quod videtur constare, Luc. 16. Nec illos hominum cœlum patuisse ante Christum quod satis clare indicatur, Heb. 9. Simul indicatur necessarium fuisse aliquem alium locum bis fuerint constituti, sed idem via Sanctorum per Christum aperta utroq; quis, qualis, aut ubi
(73)
sit ille locus non indicetur: præterea licet non indicaretur in Scriptura non esse tertium locum, non tamen inde sequitur non fuisse tertium, quia multa sunt quæ non indicantur in Scriptura, locus ille Matth. 25. Loquitur non de loco aut statu animarum ante Christum, sed de statu & loco finali post finem seculi, cum duæ tantum erunt absq; dubio hominum societates, & duo tantum locæ, alter præmij, alter pœnæ sempiternæ, quo sensu rectè asserbat Augustinus contra Pelagium, non esse tertium locum præter infernum & regnum Dei aut inter mortem æternam & vitam æternam [They object: No third place is indicated in Scripture besides the hell of the damned and heaven. Reply: If it is indicated that the godly before Christ were not in the hell of the damned—which seems to be established from Luke 16—and that heaven was not open to those men before Christ, which is indicated clearly enough from Hebrews 9, then at the same time it is indicated that there must necessarily have been some other place in which they were situated, until the way of the saints was opened by Christ to both. Yet what that place was, what sort of place it was, or where it was, is not indicated. Moreover, although it were not indicated in Scripture that there is a third place, it still does not follow from this that there was no third place; for many things exist which are not indicated in Scripture. That passage in Matthew 25 speaks not of the place or state of souls before Christ, but of the final state and place after the end of the age, when without doubt there will be only two societies of men and only two places: the one of reward, the other of everlasting punishment. In this sense Augustine rightly asserted against Pelagius that there is no third place besides hell and the kingdom of God, or between eternal death and eternal life]. Immediately before he presseth the most of the Scriptures which the Papists under the name of the Fathers’ abuses for the probation of Purgatory: Ante adventum Christi omnes ad inferos deducebantur inquit Hieronymus in 4. Ecclesiastæ, inde Iacob ad inferos descensurum se dicit, & Iob pios & impios in inferno queritur retineri, & Evangelium dicit magnum chaos interpositum apud inferos, & revera antequam flammeam illam rotam & igneam romphæam ad paradisi fores Christus cum latrone reseraret, clausa erant cœlestia, nota ut Samuelem quoq; credas verè in inferno fuisse, & ante adventum Christi quamvis sanctos omnes inferni lege fuisse detentos. Also locus est qui lacus vocatur et abyssus in qua non erant aquæ, in qua animæ recluduntur sive in refrigerio, sive ad pœnas: Postquam eo descendit Christus inferorum claustra perfodit, diripuit, vastavit, spoliavit, vinctas inde animas liberando [Before the coming of Christ, all were led down to the lower regions, says Jerome on Ecclesiastes 4. Hence Jacob says that he would descend to the lower regions; and Job complains that the righteous and the wicked are detained in hell; and the Gospel says that a great chasm was fixed among those in the lower regions. And truly, before Christ, together with the thief, reopened the heavenly places—the flaming wheel and fiery sword at the gates of Paradise—they were shut. Note this, so that you may believe that Samuel also was truly in hell, and that before the coming of Christ all the saints, however holy, were detained under the law of hell. There is also a place which is called the lake and the abyss, in which there were no waters, in which souls are shut up, whether in refreshment or for punishments. After Christ descended there, he pierced through the bars of hell, plundered, laid waste, and spoiled it, freeing from there the souls that were bound]. How far Limbus Patrum with such Scriptures & reasons maintained is from the next adjacent cellar of Purgatory, especially when we consider what they do maintain also of the state of Infants unbaptized any man may judge.
The last prayer of the Canon is, Nobis quoq; peccatoribus famulis tuis de multitudine miserationum tuarum sperantibus partem aliquam & societatem donare digneris cum tuis sanctis Apostolis & Martyribus, cum Ioanne, Stephano, Matthia, Barnaba, Ignatio, Alexandro, Marcellino, Petro, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucia, Agnete, Cæcilia, Anastasia, & cum omnibus sanctis tuis intra quorum nos consortium non æstimator meriti sed veniæ quæsumus largitor, admitte per Christum Dominum nostrum [To us also, your sinful servants, who hope in the multitude of your mercies, deign to grant some part and fellowship with your holy Apostles and Martyrs: with John, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia, and with all your saints. Into whose company, we beseech you, admit us—not as an appraiser of merit, but as the giver of pardon—through Christ our Lord]. Nothing here is to trouble their sto-
(74)
mach, the commemoration of particular names in prayers at the Altar we proved before they defended, though here be diverse names that are unknown, yet they approve the old Martyrologies, and in their Calendar of Saints are a great number of as obscure and uncertain names, yea Montague will have no story questioned which the long practice of the Church hath allowed, albeit for it no testimony of any ancient can be produced, Orig. p. 276. Nihil esse memoriæ proditum quod ego quidem sciam hac de re apud vetustiores, sive historicos, sive patres, probabile tamen est hanc receptam Ecclesiæ consuetudinem de traditione vetustiore aut scriptis etiam Patrum vetustioribus nunc deperditis dimanasse [So far as I know, nothing has been handed down to memory concerning this matter among the older writers, whether historians or Fathers. Nevertheless, it is probable that this received custom of the Church flowed from a more ancient tradition, or even from older writings of the Fathers now lost].