of scripture, by acknowledging the truth of the horrible doctrine of the real presence, than which a more daring and outrageous blasphemy has never been invented by the Prince of hell!

The following suggestions may perhaps lead the mind of an honest inquirer, who may be in doubt, to the truth.

1. We cannot admit the doctrine of transubstantiation to be true, because it overthrows the very nature of a sacrament, which requires a sign, and a thing signified. According to transubstantiation, the bread ceases to be a sign, because it becomes the thing signified, viz., the body of Christ.

2. From 1 Cor. xi. 25, and elsewhere, it is manifest that the bread and wine remain such after the consecration.

3. To say that the glorified body of Christ, which is in heaven, and shall there remain to the end of time, is daily created in ten thousand different places upon earth, by the hocus pocus of a priest, is the first born of absurdities.

4. If the substance of the bread and wine does not remain after the consecration, then when poison is mixed in the sacrament, either it is mixed with the mere accidents, (i. e. with the taste, smell, colour, &c.) or with the body of Christ; both of which are absurd. Now poison has been mixed with the consecrated host, and with the wine, and it has been but too manifest that the substance of the bread and wine has been affected by it. Witness the case of Pope Victor III., who was poisoned by the cup, and that of the Emperor Henry VII., who died in consequence of receiving a poisoned host.

5. If the bread entirely loses its substance, then it must cease to exist; for that which has been, but has ceased to be, is of course annihilated. Hence it is absurd to speak of the bread and wine being converted into the body and blood of Christ, for in every change the matter must remain, otherwise it becomes an exchange, or a substitution, or succession. And therefore, as the substance of the forms does not remain, the body and blood of Christ must be substituted, or must succeed in their place; and hence it would be far more rational to speak of day being transubstantiated into night, than to maintain the doctrine of the Church of Rome even with her own premises.

8. Christ says, Do this in remembrance of me. We remember the absent, not the present. Christ instituted the Eucharist as a memorial of himself until he should come.

9. The Saviour says, John xii. 26, Where I am, there shall also my servants be; that is they shall be with him in his glory. Christ is now in his glory, and therefore his saints and servants, who have de

parted this life, are with him. Now when Christ is in the sacrament, or rather when the sacrament becomes Christ, is he in his glory, or is he not? If he is, then the saints must be there present to see, and be partakers of his glory, For they are ever with him, 1 Thess. iv. 17, And follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth, Rev. xiv. 4. But if Christ be not in his glory in the Romish Eucharist, then it is sacrilege to deprive him of it, by thus CRUCIFYING THE LORD AFRESH, AND PUTTING

HIM TO AN OPEN SHAME!

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

TREATISE CONCERNING THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

PREFACE.

"Hitherto we have treated of the Eucharist, inasmuch as it is a sacrament, or is ordained to the sanctification of man; now we must discuss the subject in so far as it is a sacrifice, or as it relates to the worship of God.

Canons of the Council of Trent concerning the sacrifice of the Mass.

"1. Whoever shall say that in the mass there is not offered to God a true and proper sacrifice, or that Christ's being offered is nothing else than his being given to us to be eaten; let him be accursed!

66

"2. Whoever shall say that by these words, Do this in remembrance of me, Christ did not appoint the apostles as priests; or that he did not ordain, that they and other priests should offer his body and blood; let him be accursed!

"3. Whoever shall say that the sacrifice of the mass is merely an offering of praise and thanks, or a simple commemoration of the sacrifice performed on the cross, and not propitiatory; or that it is of benefit only to the recipient; and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, penances, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be accursed!

"4. Whoever shall say that by the mass the most holy sacrifice of Christ, finished upon the cross, is blasphemed, or that the mass is dero. gatory to it; let him be accursed!

"5. Whoever shall say that it is an imposture to celebrate masses

in honour of the saints, and for the purpose of obtaining their intercession with God, as the Church intends; let him be accursed!

"6. Whoever shall say that the canon of the mass contains errors, and therefore ought to be abrogated; let him be accursed!

"7. Whoever shall say that the ceremonies, robes, and external signs which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of masses are impious vanities rather than offices of piety; let him be accursed!

"8. Whoever shall say that the masses, in which the priest alone communes sacramentally, are unlawful, and therefore should be abrogated; let him be accursed!

"9. Whoever shall say that the rite of the Roman Church, by which a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low voice, ought to be condemned; or that the mass should be celebrated only in a vernacular tongue; or that water should not be mixed with the wine in the cup that is to be offered, because it is contrary to the institution of Christ; let him be accursed!"

"Sacrifice properly and strictly taken, for the sacrificial action of which we here treat, is thus defined: An external oblation, by which any sensible and permanent thing is consecrated, slain, or changed by a legitimate minister, as a protestation of the dominion of the Supreme God, over all created things, and of our subjection to him." (No. 1.)

"Sacrifice is divided according to the different state of the world, into the sacrifice of the law of nature, of the Mosaical law, and of the new law."

"By reason of the matter, it is divided into hosts, or victims, when an animal was offered; into immolations, when the fruits of the earth were offered; and into libations, when any liquor was offered. On account of the form, or of the various action by which the thing was wont to be changed, it is divided into the holocaust, in which the thing offered was burned entire, so that nothing of it could be employed for human use, and it was the most perfect sacrifice; into the sin-offering, which was partly burned, and went partly to the use of the priests, who eat of it in the court of the temple; and the peace-offering, which was offered either for returning thanks for benefits received, or for obtaining new ones this sacrifice was divided into three parts, one of which was burned in honour of God, another was appropriated to the use of the priests, and the third to the use of the offerers. On account of its object, it is divided into a reve

rential, propitiatory, or expiatory, a Eucharistical and impetratorial sacrifice. This division differs but little from the preceding. It is called reverential, because it is directed only to the worship of God, by solemnly declaring his supremacy and our subjection; and this is best done in the holocaust. The propitiatory is offered for sins and for averting the penalties and scourges of sins; and is the same as the sin-offering. The Eucharistical is performed as a return of thanks for benefits received; and the impetratorial for benefits to be received: but both in the old law were called a peace-offering. On account of the time, it is divided into the perpetual sacrifice, which was offered daily; into the sacrifice of the paschal lamb, which was offered at Easter; and into sacrifices, which were offered in other solemnities. By reason of the mode, it is divided into bloody and unbloody."

"Observe that these manifold sacrifices both of the law of nature and of the law of Moses, all prefigured the sacrifice of the new law; and therefore they cease under the new law.

"Is the sacrifice of the new law, single or twofold?

"Ans. The sacrifice of the cross is altogether the same as to substance with the sacrifice of the mass; because the priest in both instances is the same, and the victim, Christ the Lord, is the same; and by thus regarding it the sacrifice of the new law is single. If the mode and ceremony of offering be regarded, it is twofold: to wit, bloody, by which Christ offered himself on the cross for the salvation of all: and unbloody, by which the same Christ, under the forms of bread and wine, is daily offered in the mass in memory of the bloody. Hence the Council of Trent, sess. 22, ch. 2, Of the Sacrifice of the Mass, teaches: "For the victim is one and the same, the same who then offered himself on the cross, now offering by the ministry of the priests, with only a different manner of offering.' The sacrifice of the new law might be called twofold in another sense: the one of redemption on the cross, by which he has merited for us a full remission of sins: the other of religion in the Eucharist, by which the same remission is applied to us." (No. 2.)

"Formerly a twofold mass was distinguished, the one of the catechumens and penitents, whom the deacon dismissed

after the gospel and sermon; and hence from the commencement to the offertory it was called the mass of the catechumens: the other of the faithful, and that lasted from the commencement to the end, at which time the deacon dismissed the people with these words: Ite missa est, Depart, the mass is over which second dismission even now remains, and therefore the sacrifice which is daily offered in the temples by the ministry of the priests, is called the mass. Further, the mass is taken for that whole sacred action, by which, in the Catholic Church, the unbloody sacrifice of the new law is offered with the various prayers and ceremonies; all these, however, do not in the same way regard the sacrifice of the mass: but some pertain to the essence of the sacrifice, others to its integrity, others to greater reverence, the explanation of the mystery, and the edification of the faithful, as will appear afterwards."

of

"What is the sacrifice of the mass? Ans. It is the external oblation of the body and blood of Christ, through the forms of bread and wine, sensibly exhibited by a legitimate minister, offered to God in recognition of his supreme dominion, with the use of certain prayers and ceremonies, prescribed by the Church for the better worship of God and edification of the people. The Zuinglians and Calvinists, and as many as deny the real presence Christ in the Eucharist, consequently deny that in the mass there is offered a true sacrifice, properly so called. The Lutherans, although they admit the real presence, yet also reject the sacrifice of the mass, so that Luther, Bk. concerning private mass, was not ashamed to write that it had been suggested to him, and that he had at length been persuaded by the devil, that the sacrifice of the mass was to be abrogated. Therefore the innovators pretend, that in the new law there is only the spiritual sacrifice of good works; that the mass or Eucharist, is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, and that Christ has given to us a table at which we may feast, but not an altar upon which we may sacrifice: against which errors, the council of Trent, sess. 22, can. 1., has decreed in these words: 'Whoever shall say that in the mass there is not offered to God, a true and proper sacrifice, or that Christ's being