Obrazy na stronie

another in Latin, so far unlike one to the other. Afterward the gloss upon this text of the pope's decree, afore rehearsed, de Consecra, distinct. i. says, that “St James made the canon of the mass, and Eusebius added other pieces to it afterward :" but beside that inconvenience which I spake of afore, that St James then should pray to himself, if that were true, a greater untruth would follow, that is, to pray to saints that were unborn, some one hundred, some two hundred, some three hundred year after, and more; as to Cyprian, Cornelius, Laurence, Chrysogonus, Damianus, which, and such-like women as Luce, Agnes, Cecily, &c. are put in their canon, or privity of their Latin mass. Is this like, that St James, a saint himself, would pray to a saint (if they were saints), that was yet unborn so many years after his death? But it may be thought that they knew these things to be so foolish, that if they were openly read and understand, they would be laughed at and despised, and therefore they enjoin their chaplains to speak softly when they say these things, that none should hear them what they say. If it were good, it were no danger in letting it be heard, for it would make them good that heard it (for faith comes by hearing), though their opinion is that it would be despised. But surely hearing is the way to make men good.

Yet follows a greater inconvenience, if this pope's decree were true. For as the gloss there says that St James made their canon, so it says that Eusebius, which lived (as he says) under the emperor Julianus Apostata, should make the rest. How can their great relic, the mass, then be one thousand five hundred years old, as they crack it to be? This council of the apostles, where St James said mass (as this proctor says), was about fifty years after Christ our Lord was born, and not full twenty years after he was crucified, as many histories do testify; but Eusebius lived under Julian the emperor three hundred and sixty year after the birth of our Saviour Christ : and now since Christ's birth it is one thousand five hundred and sixty-two. Then take three hundred and sixty out of one thousand five hundred and sixtytwo, and so remains but one thousand two hundred and two. So by their own account they lie three hundred and sixty year in the ancienty of their mass.

. vii.

But yet a greater lie. Eusebius was a Grecian, and never wrote in Latin, that any history makes mention of: how then wrote he their Latin mass? Yea, where Gregory, bishop of Rome, in the epistle afore alleged says, that one Scholasticus' Epist: made the prayers of their canon, how can this be true that cap. 63. St James made it? Dare they deny that which the holiest of the popes, their fathers, says is so?

But because they charge us with contrarieties and diversities of opinions, and are most in that fault themselves, I will yet let them see more wherein they differ among themselves. Isidorus, lib. i. de Origine Officiorum, cap. v, as Faber Joan. Faber alleges him’, says that “St Peter ordained first the order of Evangel. the mass or prayers, with which the consecration is made, and that the whole world followed the same order;" and this was done by Peter at Antioch, as the same Joan. Faber says. Then how is that true, that St James and Eusebius made it at Jerusalem ? Nay, how can any of these sayings agree with Platina", one of the pope's sworn men, which affirms that pope Sixtus appointed the Sanctus to be sung ; Gregory, the Kyrie Eleeson ; Telesphorus, Gloria in excelsis ; Jerome, the epistle and gospel; Leo, the censing ; Innocentius I. the pax; Sergius, the Agnus, &c.; which all lived a great sort of years asunder; and from the first to the last, afore it could be

[? Et valde mihi inconveniens visum est, ut precem quam Scholasticus composuerat, super oblationem diceremus; et ipsam traditionem, quam Redemptor noster composuit, super ejus corpus et sanguinem non diceremus. Gregor, Op. T. 11. p. 960. Basil. 1564. ED.]

[ Isidorus, qui ante nongentos floruit annos, lib. 1. de Origine Officiorum, cap. 5. Ordo missæ vel orationum, quibus oblata Deo sacrificia consecrantur, primum a S. Petro est institutus: cujus celebrationem uno eodemque modo totus peregit orbis, &c. Lib. iv. cap. ii. p. 97. Petrus quidem missam celebravit Antiochiæ. Lib. I. cap. ii. p. 8. Paris. 1564. Ed.]

[ In celebratione vero mandavit (Sixtus I.), ut Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus, Dominus Deus sabaoth cantaretur. Nuda primo hæc erant, et omnia simpliciter tractabantur. Petrus enim ubi consecraverat, oratione Pater noster usus est: auxit hæc mysteria Jacobus episcopus Hierosolymitanus: auxit et Basilius; auxere et alii. Nam Celestinus missæ introitum dedit, Gregorius Kyrie eleeson, Gloria in excelsis Deo Telesphorus, collationes Gelasius primus, epistolam et evangelium Hieronymus, * * * thus Leo tertius, osculum pacis Innocentius primus; ut caneretur Agnus Dei, Sergius pontifex instituit. De vitis Pontificum, p. 16. Colon. 1540. Ep.]

patched together, it was six hundred year? For Gregory was pope six hundred year after Christ was born. Other sorts of reckoning there be, which pope added which part to the mass, and they agree not on the names; but in the number of years there is no great difference: for it was seven hundred year after Christ afore they had perfectly patched it together, and brought it in estimation, as appears by these reckonings. Where is now their one thousand five hundred year they crack so much on? When they have learned to speak the truth, and agree among themselves, they may better blame other that do not. I will not lay all their lies and disagreeings to their charge, for it were too long ; but when they have answered these, then they shall have more. In the mean time, these are sufficient to let them see that have eyes, and be not wilfully blind, how vain their bragging lies be, when they crack that their superstition, which they term their religion, is so old, and that the contrary was never heard of unto now a few years past.

There is another subtler sort of papist; and when they see these things to be so foolish, that they have no good groundwork, nor able to be defended, they say, that Christ himself said the first mass : and yet that is as untrue as the rest. For the reasons that I made against the canon of St James (as they call it), the same may more justly be applied for our Saviour Christ. I am sure they will not say that he ate all alone, nor prayed to any saints; nor what kind of mass it was, they are not able to shew, and prove it so to be. I grant, and most true it is, that our Saviour Christ instituted the holy Communion, or the Lord's Supper (as St Paul calls it); but for any thing done by him to prove their mass, I utterly deny. In his last supper he sacrificed not for the quick and the dead, as they do in their mass : but that sacrifice was offered by himself in his own body and blood shed on the cross, on Good Friday, the next day after that he instituted his holy Supper the night afore, and bid them do that in remembrance of him unto his coming again. This is that which we desire all to follow: this is that which condemns their mass : this is that which we would have, all to eat and drink of that bread and cup with the minister, as he did with his apostles, and as St Paul wills the Corinthians to do ; and not one priest to stand lifting it over

his head to be worshipped, and the people to stand gazing at it, and be content with looking at it: and when they receive, to take both the bread and the cup, and not to rob God's people of the one half of the supper, the blood of our Saviour Christ, which he shed for the lay-people, as well as for priests; and bad them drink it, as well as the priests : for he loved them, and died for them, as well as for the priests. And priests can no more save themselves than they can, but have the same Saviour that they have, and must go to heaven the same way that they do.

And because they crack so proudly of the ancienty of their Mass. mass', let me see in what ancient writer they read of it or find the word written. I know they would fain have the word to be Hebrew: but if it be so, it rather makes against them than with them. For if it be a sacrifice of the Jews, then it is taken away by our Saviour Christ, and fulfilled by him, as all other sacrifices of Moses be; or else, they be Jews, using those sacrifices which God forbad to use at these days after the coming of Christ. The apostle to the Hebrews says, that “if Heb. vii. the priesthood be taken away and translate to another sort, then the law is taken away too:” but the priesthood of Aaron is taken away and all his sacrifices, (or else Christ is come in vain); why, then the law of sacrificing must be taken away too, as the apostle there says. If they consider the nature of the Hebrew word, they would not strive so much about it. They glory much that the name of their mass is missah in Hebrew, and should be written, Deut. xvi. and thereof should missa come in Latin, or else the Hebrew name to remain still. The word missah signifies a freewill gift, that a man offers willingly unto the Lord; and not only that which the priests offer of themselves, but also which any other man freely brings to be offered : therefore, if this word or place make for them, it proves that all manner of men may say mass ; for every man may willingly bring what he lust to offer; and then priests have spun a fair thread in alleging this against themselves, and proving that every man may say their mass. But the word signifies also a

n In the Acts and Monuments of John Foxe, a contemporary of bishop Pilkington, will be found an interesting and valuable treatise on the Origin and Canon of the Mass. See the beginning of Book x. Edit. 1583. and in Vol. 11. Edit. 1684. En.7


lifting up, as some do take it, and therefore they prove their elevation by it. Thus they be driven to hard shifts, that they cannot well tell what to make of it. They are well content with either signification, or both, if they might keep it; for the one bids men bring, and they would gladly take; the other to lift

up as a sacrifice, and that maintains their state. Read the Deut. xvi. place, and then judge the meaning: “Thou shalt keep the holy

day of weeks,” says Moses (that is, Whit-sunday seven weeks after Easter), “and thou shalt bring a gift of thine own free will according to thy power, as the Lord has blessed thee with much or little.”

This free gift is called missah, and the people must give it: then, if it make any thing for mass, it makes also that the people should say mass; for they bring every one this gift as they be able. The priests say not mass freely, but for money, and therefore it cannot be called a freewill gift on their part. But because they are delighted with gifts, and will not say mass freely, they rather ground themselves hereon, that they may not only sell, but raise the price of them, and lift it high over their heads. They may speak well of the gospel, if they would, or had any good natures in them. For their mass was never so honoured, nor at so great a price, as the gospellers have made it, at a hundred marks, where they will sell it for a groat; and God forbid that ever it be better cheap! Surely, if it be so good as they report it to be, it is too good cheap yet, and they with selling so good cheap have brought it out of estimation. A good thing cannot be too dear: and surely he that will lie broiling in purgatory for sparing one penny, a groat, or ten shillings for a trental, he has few friends; and if he be able to pay it and will not, I will never be sorry for him, though he lie there still.

There is another Hebrew word called mass, that signifies a tribute, which may well be applied to it, (because they be delighted with ancient names, I shall help them,) for it is the greatest tax that ever was laid on the world. All princes, heathen and christened laid together, never took such a tribute of the people, as the pope and his collectors do by mass. For mass princes have given whole countries, noblemen their land, and the people their goods ; they have disherited their children, and impoverished themselves, to feed the pope's chaplains and buy masses. Alas, dear pennyworths for so vile a thing! The

« PoprzedniaDalej »