Synopsis papismi, that is, A generall viewe of papistry wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with an antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: deuided into three bookes or centuries, that is, so many hundreds of popish heresies and errors. Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity.

THE FIFT QVESTION OF priuate Masses.

The Papists.

IF any man shall say, that priuate Masses, wherein the Priest alone by himselfe [error 135] doth communicate, are vnlawful, and therefore to be abolished, we pronounce him accursed, Concil. Tridentin. sess. 22. can. 8.

Argum. The sacrifices of the law were sacrifices, before the people did eate thereof: so the substance & making of a medicine is one thing, the ingredience, or taking of it, an other: Ergo, neither is receiuing part of the substāce or making of the sacrifice of Christs bodie, but a consequence only: therefore there may be a sacrifice and sacrament without it, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 14.

Ans. First, we denie that there is any sacrifice in the Eucharist, but a Sacra∣ment onely: and therefore the comparison holdeth not betweene a sacrifice, which consisted both of oblation to God, and the participation of the people that offered, and the Sacrament which Christ in his institution offered not to God, but to his Disciples. Secondly, neither doth the similitude of a medicine conclude: for you cannot proue that the Sacrament not receiued hath vertue in it, as a medicine hath: for faith is requisite to the worthie receiuing of the Sa∣crament, which is not necessarie in the applying of a medicine: and yet it is not properly called a medicine, vnlesse being made, it be also applied, and being re∣ceiued doth heale.

The Protestants.

WE vtterly condemne the superstitious practises of popish priests, who doe vse to communicate alone in their Masses, the people standing by▪ gazing and looking vpon him: yea you might haue seene many Masses sayd in one Church at once, almost in euery corner one, no person being present for the most part, but the priest and his boy.

Argum. This priuate receiuing of the Sacrament is contrarie to the institu∣tion of Christ, who sayth, speaking to many, Take ye, eate ye, and diuide this a∣mongst you: there must be then a diuision and distribution. Saint Paul also sayth, We that are many are one bread and one bodie, in as much as we are par∣takers of one bread, 1. Corinth. 10.17. Ergo, many must communicate together· For the Apostle speaketh not of the mysticall communion of the faithfull in this place, which doe all make but one bodie in Christ, (for so we doe commu∣nicate with the Church by faith, not onely in the Sacrament, but without it) but of the Sacramentall communion of as many as receiue together: for how els can they be sayd to be partakers of one bread, or loafe, vnlesse they receiue toge∣ther.

Augustine sayth, that, Sacramentum benedicitur, sanctificatur, & ad distribu∣endum comminuitur:* 1.1 That the Sacrament is blessed, sanctified, and broken to be distributed: Ergo, where there is distribution, there must be many to receiue.

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE name of the Sacrament.

The Papists.

* 1.2THey vtterly mislike these names of the Sacrament, that it is called amongst vs the Lords Supper, or Communion: belike (say they) they will bring it a∣gaine to the Supper, or euening seruice, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 6. And the name Communion, is as ignorantly vsed of them, thereby making the people beleeue, that many should communicate together, 1. Cor. 11. sect. 24. they should rather vse the names of the Eucharist, Masse, or Leiturgie.

The Protestants.

FIrst, for the name of the Lords Supper, we doe learne of S. Paul so to call it: When ye come together, (sayth he) this is not to eate the Lords Supper, 1. Corinth. 11.20.

Rhemist. The Apostle calleth their feasts of loue, which they were wont to make after the receiuing of the Sacrament, the Lords Supper, coenas dominicas, because they were made in the Lords houses, which were called Dominicae: he meaneth not the Sacrament.

Ans. First, there were then no such distinct places, as Churches, and Oratories for the seruice of God, which began to be built many yeeres after, but they as∣sembled together in their owne houses. Secondly, if their loue-feasts were called the Lords Suppers, it would followe that they neuer had them but at night, and that then also the Sacrament was celebrated about the time of their feasts, which must be at the eeuentide. But this, I think, they dare not affirme▪ that they celebrated the Sacrament at night: wherefore the Apostle cannot meane any other Supper, but that which was instituted by Christ, as it followeth, vers. 23.

Augustine calleth it the Lords Supper, Coenam manibus suis consecratam disci∣pulis suis dedit: His Supper being consecrated,* 1.3 he gaue with his owne hands to his Disciples. And although we sate not downe at that feast: Ipsam coenam tamē fide quotidie manducamus: Yet we eate that Supper daily by faith.

2. The name Communion, the Apostle also himselfe vseth: he calleth it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The communion of the bodie of Christ, 1. Corinth. 10.16: so doth Au∣gustine name it, Communionem corporis Christi. de ciuit. Det. 20. cap. 9.

3. As for the names of Eucharist, and Leiturgie, we mislike them not, being vnderstood in their own sense: but because they are Greeke and not vnderstood of the people, we vse them not. The horrible sacrilege of the Masse, is the cause also why we vse not that terme.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Epistol. 59.
• * 1.2

  136. Error.
• * 1.3

  In Luk. ser. 33.