The Romish mass-book with notes and observations thereupon, plainly demonstrating the idolatry and blaspheymy thereof with unanswerable arguments proving it no service of God : published at this juncture to inform mens judgments and put a stop to the designs of those that endeavor to introduce popery amongst us / faithfully translated into English.

The History of the Mass.

The Introite.

CElestinus Pope gave the first Introite, as Plati∣na and Sigebertus writ••.

The Psalm Judica me Deus &c.

The Priest prepares himself to his Mass, first with the Psalm Judica me Deus, & discerne causam meam &c. which was ordained by the said Ce∣lestinus.

And where they ascr••be to Sa••nt Ambrose the two Prayers which he used in the preparation to the Mass, and be added to the Books of Ambrose, E∣rasmus judgeth the same to be none of his, and that rightly, as it seemeth; for therein are con∣tained Errors not els•• to be found in the Books of Ambrose, both in giving ••doration to the bread of the Sacrament, and making invocation to the Saints, namely to blessed Mary as in the second Prayer where he saith, ut efficax haec mea sit depr••∣catio, beatae Mariae Virgin•• suffragia peto▪ &c. that is, And that this my Prayer may be of Efficacy. I desire the suffr••ge and intercession of blessed Mary the Virgin &c. whereby it may appear that learned Ambrose was not the Author of such an Error.

Chrysostom in the XI homily upon the Gospel of Mathew saith, that in his time (and afore hi•• time) the use was to sing whole Psalms till they were en∣tred and assembled together, and so belike Celestinu•• borrowed this custom of the Greeks, and brought it into the Latin Church as R••pertus w••ite••h.

Gregory the Great as some w••it••, called a Synod at Rome about the Year of our Lord 594 in which Synod he appointed that the In••••oit of the Mass should be taken out of some Psalm.

The Confiteor.

The Confiter Pope Damasus brought into the Mass as it is written, albeit peradventure not this Popish Confiteor which in the later Church hath been used, stuft full of Idolatry and Invocation of Saints, against the word of God.

The Kyrie Eleyson.

The Kyrie Eleyson which is 9 times to be repeated in such a Tongue as few Priests either understood or do rightly pronounce. Gregory did institute about 600 years after Christ taking it out of the Greek Church and yet transposing it otherwise then there it was used. For among the Greeks this Kyrie Eleyson which they called their Litany, was sung of all the People, the which Gregory ordained to be sung only of the Quire, adding thereto also Christs Eleyson, which the Grecians used not as Gregory himself writing to the Bishop of Syracuso doth testifie.

Gloria in Excelsis.

Next followeth Gloria in Excelsis &c. which words were sung of the Angels at the Birth of our Saviour, albeit these words also were corrupted, as many other things were in the Church, for where the words of the Angels Hymn were hominibus bo¦•••• voluntas, that is to men good will, the Mass said hominibus bona voluntatis, that is to men of good will &c. This Hymn was brought into the Mass by Pope Symmachus and not by Tolesphorus, as some mistakenly write saying, that he ordained three Masses on Christmas-day, for in his time there was no Mass in the World Anno 140. The said Hymn

was augmented by Hillarius Pistariensis with those words that follow, Laudamus te &c. singing it first in his own Church, which was Anno 340. And afterward brought into other Churches by Pope Symmachus Anno 510.

Dominus vobiscum with the Answer Oremus, and the Collects.

Dominus vobiscum with the Answer of the Peo∣ple, although we have no certain Author named by whom it came, yet this is certain that it was dedu∣ced out of the Greek Church, into the Latin, as may appear by the Lyturgie attributed to Chryso∣stom and Basilius (but tis a doubt whether that Li∣turgy be rightly ascribed unto them) also by Origen and other antient writers, by whom it may seem that the Lyturgie or Mass (as they call it) did first begin with Dominus vobiscum, and then Sursum cor∣da. After that, Gratias agamus Domino deo nostro, and so following upon the same vere dignum & Augustum est, &c. To the which beginning of the Canon other additions after were put into by others, as ye shall hear (by the Lords grate) more here∣after at large.

Hugo des Victore writeth that this Prayer was taken out of the antient Salutation of Rooz saluting his Harve•• Folks, and out of the Book of Chroni∣cles where the Prophet saluteth Azan the King with his Company about him saying Dominus vobiscum; Honorius writes thus, Presbiter cum salutatione ve∣••eris testamenti, & Episcopus cum salutatione novi Testamenti salu••at Populum, quiae dignius est novum ••uam ve••us testamentum. That is the Priest salu∣••eth the People with the words of the old Iesta∣ment Dominus vobiscum, so the Bishop useth the words of the New Testament saying Pax vobiscum &c. Concerning the Collects: Walafridus Strabo writeth that as they be diverse and uncertain, if

they were made of divers and sundry Authors as every of them thought it fit. Hugo des Victore affirms that chiefly they were made by Gelersius and Gregorius. Why they were called Collects, W. Du∣randus and Micrologus shew the cause, for that in the City of Rome, they said them over the People collected together in their station day, therefore they were called Collectae.

The Gradual with Alleluya tracti & sequencies.

The Responsary which is called the Gradual (be∣ing wont to be sung at the steps going up) with Alleluya, Honorius saith, that Ambrose made them, but Pope Gregory ordained them to be received.

Upon festival days, the sequencies which were wont to be sung, were chiefly composed by an Abbot called Nokkerus des gallo, and by Pope Nicholas commanded to be sung in the Mass.

The Gradual, the people were wont to sing when the Bishop was about to go up to the Pulpit, or some higher standing, where the word of God might be the better and more sensibly heard at his mouth, Read∣ing the Epistle and the Gospel.

The Epistle and the Gospel.

The Reading of the Epistle and the Gospel although it was not used in the Apostles times, yet it seem∣eth to be of ancient continuence as Hugo saith, Pri∣mus temporibus ab Epistola Pauli missa incipiebatur, postquam sequebatur Evangelium sicut nunc i. e. In former time the Mass begun first with the Epistle of Saint Paul, after which Epistle then followed the Gospel as also now &c.

Walafridus Strabo saith it is uncertain who first or∣dered and disposed them to be.

Some attribute them to Hierome, some to

Damasus some to Telesphorus aforesaid, this is cer∣tain that Pope Anastasius ordained to stand up at the hearing of the Gospel read about the Year of our Saviour 406.

Petrus Cirvelus writeth thus, legimus & circa annos Christianae salutis 500 fere, jam institutas Epi¦stolas in officio missali &c. about 500 years since almost the Epistle saith he, was first brought into the Mass.

Honorius lib. 1. Epistolam & Evangelium, Alex∣ander Papa legi, ad missam constituit Hieronimus autem presbiter lixionarium & Evangeliarum ut ho∣die habet Ecclesia collegit; sed Damasus papa, ut nunc moris est, legi censuit. Alexander, saith he, appolut∣the Epistle and Gospel to be read at Mass.

The Translation and the Disposition of them in that order as they stand, Hierome, the Priest collected, but Damasus appointed them to be read in the Church so as the use is now.

Betwixt Epistle and the Gospel the old Canons of the Spaniards did forbid any Hymn or Canti∣cle to be sung in the Order of the Mass, which now by the Romish order is broken.

The Creed.

The Creed was made by the Synod of Constan∣tinople, but by Damasus the Pope ordained to be sung at the Mass, and where some affirm, that it was brought in by Pope Marcus about the Year of our Lord 340, to reconcile these two together, peradventure thus it may be taken, that the one brought in the Creed or Symbol of the Nicene Councel, the other appointed the Creed of Con∣stantinople as is said.

The Offertory.

After this oblations were wont to be offered of the People to the Priest, and the Offerto••y to be sung of the Quire.

Of these oblations speaketh Irenaeus, pro diver∣sis Sacrificiorum ritibus, simplex oblatio panis & V••ni fid••tibus sufficiat &c. Instead of the sundry rights of Sacrifices, let the simple oblation of bread and wine ••nffice the faithful.

Item Walafrid, omnis populus intrans Ecclesiam debet sacrifica••e sicut docet ordo institutionis Eccle∣siasticae, that is every Person entring in the Church must do Sacrifice as the order of Ecclesiastical in∣stitution doth ••each, what order this was it is de∣clared, in ordine Romano by these words, Populus dat oblationes suas, id est panem & vinum primo mas¦culi, d••inde feminae, novissime vero Sacerdo••es & Diaconi afferunt, sed solum panem & hoc ante altare i. e. The People give every one his oblation that is bread and wine, first the Men, then the Women, after them, Priests and Deacons offer but bread only &c.

Likewise Bu••ardus testifieth the same in Synodo Ma••iscon, decretum est ut in omnibus Dominicis di∣cbus aliisque festivitatibus oblatio ab omnibus qui ad Missam convenerint utriusque sexas offeratur in Eccle∣sia singulas oblationes offerentes, finita Missa oblati∣ones a Presbitero accipiant i. e. In the Synod of Ma∣tiscon it was ordained that every Sunday and Fe∣stival day, oblation was made of all the People which came to the Mass or Liturgy both Men and Women in the Church, every Person bringing and off••ring his own oblation, the Liturgy being done, they receive the oblations of the Priest &c.

Thus you may see what were their oblations and sacrifice in the antient Time in their Liturgy,

whereof now remaineth nothing but the Name only with a Song.

This offertory some ascribe to Eutichianus about the Year of our Lord 280, but thereof no cer∣tain Evidence appeareth.

Orate pro me fratres &c.

Nauclerus writeth that Pope Leo brought in that which is said in the Mass, Orate pro me fratres & s••rores &c.

The Preface of the Canon.

The preface of the Canon from vere dignum & justum est &c. to per Christum Dom••num nostrum is given to Gelasius, Sursum corda seemeth to be bor∣rowed out of the old manner of the Greek Church, S. Cyprian also maketh mention of the same And S. Austin de vera Religione cap 3.

And therefore Thomas Waldensis judgeth that this part of the preface cannot be attributed to G••lasius.

After Christum dominum nostrum in the old Li••urgie then followed Qui pridie quam pateretur as Renanus supposeth, But then came Pope Gelasius the first about the year of our Lord 497. who inserted that which followeth Te jugiter Clementissime &c.

Whereby it is to be noted, that Polidorus Vir∣gilius (which ascribeth qui pridie to Pope Alex∣ander) de invent lib 5. cap. 10. is deceived.

The like is also to be said of Panormitanus who Referreth the same Clause Qui pridie &c. to the Apostles lib. de celebratione Missae.

Furthermore note (good Reader) how this doth agree with the long Canon of Saint Ambrose, lib. 4. de Sacramentis cap. 5. dicit Sacerdos fac nobis ••anc oblationem ad scriptam rationalem, acceptabilem, quod est figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Jesus Christi. Qui pridie quam pataretur in sanctis mani∣bus

suis, accepit panem, res pexit ad Coelum ad te sancte pat••r omnipotens & Eternae Deus gratias a∣gens bene dixit, fregit &c. If it be true that either Pannormitanus saith; or that Gelasius, made Qui pri∣di•• &c, how can this Canon then be fathered up∣on S. Ambrose; And by the same reason also his whole book Intituled de sacramentis may be su∣spected as of divers learned men it is.

Then came Pope Sixtus ten Years after him which brought into the Canon sanctus, sanctus, thrice to be sung out of the Book of Esay, and to an∣nex it together, joyned also that which goeth be∣fore, per quem Majestatem tuam &c.

He that writeth the Liturgy of Basilius ascribeth it to his Name, whether he doth it truly or no, I will not here contend. This is to be noted that seeing in the said Liturgy of Basilius, the same particle, sanctus, sanctus, sanctus Dominus Deus Saba∣oth: pleni sunt Cali & Terra gloria tua Osanna in ex∣c••••sis, is sung, therefore it must needs follow that either Leo which was about the Year of our Lord 460 borrowed this out of Basi••ius Liturgy, or else the same is falsly attributed to Basilius.

After this followeth sanctum sacrificium immacula∣tam ••est an till you come to placatus accipias which Leo the first did make and institute.

The word, in the Communion, hoc quotioscunque seceritis in mei memoriam faci••tis &c. were put in by Pope Alexander i e. As Humbertus writeth under Alexander Martyr and Papa 5. ab Apost Pet••o passi∣onem Domini inserens Canoni Missae ait, hoc quoti∣escunque feceritis &c.

Pope Gregory the third, about the Year of our Lord 732. Put to his peice Et corum quorum me∣moria &c

This Gregory the third called a Councel at Rome, wherein he decreed that Images, should not only be had in Temples, but also worshiped and that all gainsayers should be counted as Hereticks.

Innocentius the third of that Name affirmeth Pope Gelasius which was about 490. Years after Christ to have made a great peice of that Canon, as he himself did something therein about the Year of our Lord 1215.

Panormitanus affirmeth that Gregory did add to the Canon this clause, Diesque nostros in pace disponas.

Breifly Gregorius in Registro saith that one Scho∣lasticus made the most part of the Canon, finding al∣so fault with the same, that in composing the Ca∣non he would put in his own Prayers and leave ou•• the Lords Prayer, &c. Where is to be noted for the reconsiling of these writers together, of whom some Impute the Canon to Gelasius, some again to Scholasticus: In my conjecture it may be said, that both these be one, and so the matter is reconciled the reason that moveth me is this, for so I find, in vetusto quodam libro de officio missae after these words Gelasius Papaex Scholas••ico effectus in ordine 48. fe∣cit-tractatus & hymnos &c.

The Elevation and Adoration.

The Elevation and Adoration of the Sacram••nt we cannot find to come in by any other then by Honorius the third, about the Year of our Lord 1222 which ordained that the People then should kneel down and worship the Sacrament.

The Pater Noster.

Johannes Diaconus writing of Gregory saith Ora∣tionem Dominicam mox post Canonem super hostiam censuit recitari, i. e. That Gregory caused the Lords prayer to be Recited immediately after the Canon upon the host. &c.

Although the Apostles never used the Lord•• prayer at the Supper of the Lord, as is said be∣fore, yet Gregory ••elike placed it so in that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 after the Canon, and brought it in with those wo••••

precepth salutarib••••, &c. Gregorius in Rege Domi•••• ••••atio spud gracos ab omni populo apud nos vero, sole sacerdote cantatur i. e. The Lords Prayer saith amongst the Grecians was wont to be sung general of all the People, with us it is sung only of the P. lest,

Agnus.

The Agnus Pope Sergius about the Year of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Lord 700 brought into the Mass as witnesseth E••∣posit, R. ord propter officium confractionis Dominici cor••••∣ris constitutum est à papa sergio, & Agnus des ••••∣cantetur &c.

The Pax.

Innocentius ordained the Pax to be given to the People. Pacis ait, osculum dandum post confect a ••••∣steria & constet populum ad omnia qua in misteri aguntur prebuisse consensum &c.

Peter Martyr in his Comentaries in Jud. sait that it was brought in by Pope Leo the Second as it is said, yet he supposeth the same, not to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 so, saying, that this was an antient custom in the A∣postles time for Christians to salute one another with the Kiss of peace &c.

To this of Peter Martyr, agreeth also Gabr•• Biel writing in these words, porrexit in primiti•••• Ecclesia Sacerdos osculum pacis ministro, c••texis i•• parti••nd••m ut per hoc significaret &c. That is, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the primitive Church the Priest gave a Kiss of Pea•••• to the Minister, to be given by him to the Peopl••▪

The Distribution and Communion.

After this followeth the Communion, wherein o•• ••opish Mais and Ministers thereof do much alter a

degenerate from ancient antiquity two manner of ways.

First in that they make no Communion thereof re∣ceiving only to themselves, contrary both to their own words, where they say, after their receiving, sacramenta quae Sumpsimus &c. and also to the anci∣ent examples and decrees of the Apostles and others. And where it is decreed in the Epistle of Anacletus; Peracta autem Consecratione omnes communicant qui noluerint Eclesiastic••s carere liminibus. Sic enim, & Apostoli statuerunt, & S. Romana tenet ecclesia &c. i. e. The consecration being done let all communicate to∣gether, unless they will be thrust out of the Church doors, &c.

Here note by the way, Reader how Gracianus, the writer of the Popes decrees is overseen, which in his Book de consecrat dist. 2 referieth this Saying of Anacletus to Pope Calixtus, and likewise also Cocleus writing against Musculus, followeth Grati∣anus in the same Error.

Likewise in the Canons of the Apostles (if the Canons were theirs) we read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. That is, all the faithful that resort to the Church, and tarry not out the End of the Service, and receive not the holy Communion, be such as bringing in disorder to the Church ought to be disse∣vered &c. And again, si quis Episcopus, Presbiter, aut Diaconus, aut quicunque ex sacerdotali consortio, oblatione fa••••a, non communi caverins, causam di∣cito &c.

For how can that be called a Communion which is not Common but private to one as Microlog•••• writ••••h Nec enim proprie, communio dici potes••, nisi plures de codem sacrificio participent &c. It cannot be called a Communion Except mo••e then one do participate of one sacrifice &c. And Duran∣du•• In primitiva Ecclesia omnes qui celebratione Mis∣saru•• interer••nt singulis diebus communicare soleban••,

co quod Apostoli omnes de calice biberunt &c. that is in the primative time, all that were present at the ministration were wont everyday to Communi∣cate, because that the Apostles did altogether drink of the Cup. &c.

Secondly they alter and degenerate therein from antient antiquity in that when they Communicate also with the people, yet they deprive them of the holy Cup, which deprivation was not in the Church before the Councel of Constance about the Year of our Lord 1414. for before it was so authentickly received that it was counted a Sacriledge to receive the one without the other, as appeareth by the words of Pope Grlasius, Comperimus quod quidam sumpta tantum mode corporis sacri portione &c. The whole in English is this. We understand that there be some which receiving the one part only of the holy Body, abstain from the Cup of the sacred Blood, who be∣cause they be taught so do (by what supersticion I cannot tell) either let them receive the Sacrament whole together, or let them abstain from the whole Sacrament altogether, because the division of that one and whole Sacrament cannot be without great Sacriledge &c.

Hitherto also pertaineth the Testimony of Saint Austin in these words, Et ibi vos estis in mensa & in calice nobiscum vos estis, simul enim boc sumimus, si∣mulbibimus, quia simul vioimus &c. i. e. There b•• you at the Table and at the Cup, there also b•• you with us for together we receive, and together we drink, because we live together.

As also out of the Book of Gregory it is manise•••• that not on'y the people received them in both linds, but also the words were prescribed to the Mini¦ster what he should say in giving the Cup. Item sa∣cerdos Calicem dando dicat; sanguis domini nostri Jes Christi custodiate advitam aternam i. e. let the Prie say in giving the Cup the blood of our Lord Jesus 〈…〉〈…〉 ••hee •••• everlasting life Amen.

Further in rendring the cause why it should so be done Thomas Aquinas writeth, Nam hoc valet ad re∣presentandum Passionem Chrsti in qua seorsim suit sanguis à Corpore seperatus &c. secundo hoc est conveniens usui hujus sacramenti ut seorsim exhibeatur corpus Christi fidelibus in cibum, & sanguis in potum i. e. for that serveth to represent the passion of Christ where∣in his blood was parted severally from the body &c.

Secondly for that it is convenient to the use of the Sacrament that the body should severally be given to the faithful for meat and the blood for drink.

And therefore served the office of the Deacons as we read, Ut oblata à populo super altare consecranda disponant, & perfect is misteriis calicem sacro sancti san∣guinis domini fidelibus prop••nent i. e. say the of∣ferings of the People upon the alter to be hallowed, & when the misteries be consecrated, to distribute the Cup of the sacred blood of the Lord to the faithful &c.

But among all other testimonies to prove that the Sacrament ought to be common to all people in both kinds there is none more evident then that place of Hierome Caeterum dominica, cana omnibu•• debet esse communis quia ille omnibus discipul is suis qui ade∣runt aequaliter tradidit Sacramenta i. e. the supper of the Lord ought to be indifferently common to all his Disciples there present &c.

And there have ye heard the Canon described which otherwise is called Secretum i. e. the secret of the Mass, being so termed because the Priest was wont to read it in secret or in silence, the reason thereof Pope Innocentius the third, declareth in his third Book, for that the holy words (faith he) of the Canon should not grow in contempt with the People by the daily use and hearing there∣of, and he bringeth in an Example concerning the same of certain Shepherds which in the fields using the same words of the Canon upon their Bread and Wine, the matter was turned saith he, into Fiesh and Blood, and they plagued therefore from

Heaven, but with such Popish tales the Church hath been long replenished, as we have touched already.

The Postcommon.

After the Canon and Communion then follow∣eth the postcommon with the Collects which the Mass Book requireth always to be used in an odd Number, sometime teaching to use but one, as in the Sundays Leot, and sometime three as in cer∣tain Massesfrom Low Sunday till the Assention, but never to pass the Number of Seven.

Ita Missa est.

Last of all cometh Ita Missa est whereby the Minister dismisseth or sendeth away all the Con∣gregation there present to their Business, for as you heard before it was decreed in antient time, that it was not lawful to depart from the Con∣gregation in the time of holy Ministration, before the End of the whole Communion, and therefore all things being accomplished, the Priest turning to the Assembly pronounceth Ite Missa est.

Where note that upon Sundays and Festival days on'y, when Gloria in Exc••lsis was sung Ita Missa est was wont to be said, ••on the Work days, bened••eamû•• Domino, sometime, Requi••scant in pace.

Now conc••••ning such Trink••••s as were to the aforesaid Mass appertaining or circumstant first the Li••••••n Albe•• a••d copporasses were brought in by Pope Martus A••••o 340, if that be true which is thought of some: whore note again that in the time of this Pope it was nothing offensive for eve∣ry ••on•••••• Prles•• •••• have his own proper Wise. In the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 also of this Marc••o was ••••ncilium Elibur∣••••••••m which condomn all ••ind•• of Images and ••••••••••res •••• Temples,

Contrary to the which Council, Pope Gregory the third about the Year of our Lord 732. Calling a Council at Rome did not only establish the Images before condemned, but condemned the gainsayers for Heretickes as is aforesaid.

By Sixtus the second it was ordained that no Li∣turgie should be done, save only upon Alters hallow∣ed, about the Year of our Lord 260. as some sup∣pose, but as I see no firm probation upon the same so have I probable conjecture the same not to be true.

Some there be that shame not to say that S. Cle∣ment brought in the Alb and vestments to the Popish Mass.

Item, that the Sacrament of the blood of the Lord should be consecrated in Chalices of glass and not of wood, as it was in former time, they say it was the ordinance of Pope Severinus.

After this came in golden Chalices and a true Proverb withal, that once they had wooden Chalices and Golden Proists, now they have Golden Chalices and wooden Priests.

Sebirianus ordained the Ringing of bells and burn∣ing of Lamps in Churches.

Vitalianu•• the playing on the Organs Damasus by the instinct of Hierome appointed Gloria Patri Glory be to the Father after the Psalms.

Pelagius divised the Memento for the dead.

Leo brought in the Inc••nce.

Eutichianu•• as others say brought in the Offertory which was then after a manner far otherwise then it is or hath been used now a great while.

For what time as many of the Heathen being greatly accustomed to bring offerings were converted unto Christ, and could not be well brought from their old long use of offerings, the Pope thought to bear somewhat with the weak and permitted them to being meats into the congregation of the Church, that when the Bishop had blessed them, they that brought th••m might distribute them to the poor, or take

them to their own use. But afterward did Pope Gregory improve this sentence Non apparebis in con∣s••••••••u D•••• tui vacuus &c. Thou shalt not appear in the Sight of thy God empty &c. That as he wil∣l••d the People to say their Offerings upon the Al∣••••••, so they did and have not yet forgotten to do so still.

Soule-Masses and M••sses applyed for the dead, came in partly by Gregory, partly by Pelagius, which brought in the Memento as is said.

Where note (good reader,) and mark how these two stand together, that which our Saviour saith in hi•• Gospel hoc facite in mei commemorati••nem, Do this in remembrance of me, And that which they say, In quorum memoria corpus Christi sumitur &c. i. e. In whose commemoration the Body of Chrst is taken &c. Christ would it to be done in his Remembrance, and the Pope saith do it in Remembrance of the D••••d &c. what can be more contrary?

Ian••••••••tius the third ordained that the Sacrament should be reserved in the Church, the same also brought in Aricular Confession as a Law about the Year of our Lord 1215. He did also constitute that no Arch Bishop should enjoy the Pall, unless he were of his own Religion, and therefore no great Marvel if there be such Unity in Pop••ry.

Vigilins orda••n••d that the Priest should say Mass having his face towards the East.

P••••tine writeth how the first Latin mass was sung in the fixt Councel of Constantinople which was a∣bout the Year of our Lord 680, so that the said Mass was there and then first allowed and not be∣fore. And yet they (I mean the Greek Church) should have known as soon the Mass, if it had pro∣ceeded from James or Basillus as the Latin Church •••••• know it.

The opinion that the Mass, helps Souls in pur∣••••••ory was constrmed by Pope J••••nn••s the 19. by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of a dream, wherein he dreamt tha•• he heard

and saw the voices of Devils, lamenting and bewail∣ing, that Souls there delivered from them by the sayings of Massos and diriges, and therefore he did approve and Ratifie the feast of All Souls, brought in by Odilo, moreover he had joyned also to the same the the feast of Alhallowes about the Year of our Lord 1003.

Concerning lent fast some think that Telesphorus about the Year of our Lord, 140. was the author thereof, But that paradventure may be as true, as that which they also attribute to him that he or∣dained three Masses of one Priest to be said on Christmas-day, or if he did ordain that Fast, yet he did ordaine it but freely to be kept, for so I find a mong the decrees that Lent was commanded first to be fasted but only of the Clergy or Church∣men.

Pope Leo Commanded the Sacrament to be cen∣sed that is perfum'd with Incense, Pope Boiniface set in his foot for covering of the Altars,

In St. Cyprians time it seemeth that water was mingled with the Wine, whereof we read mentio•• in his second Book of Epistles, which mixture is referred to Alexander the first in the order of the Roman Canon.

As concerning the breaking of the body in three parts we read also mention to be made in the same book of order, but no certain author thereof to be named, the words of the book be these; Tripliciter inquit corpus domini intelligitur, unum quod resurrexit à mortuls quod significat particula in sanguinem missa, aliud quod ad huc vivit in terra significatum partuit par∣ticulam a Sacerdote consumptam, tertium quod jam requiescit in Christo quod etiam à tertia particula in altari reservata aptè figuratur &c. i. e. Three ways is the Body of the Lord understood, one which rose again from the Dead, being signified by that part which is let fall to the Blood in the Chalice, the other is that which yet is living in the

Earth, which the part of the Priest eaten doth sig∣nify, the third is that now resteth in Christ which also is figured by that Particle that is reserved up∣on the Altar.

Dedication of Churches came in by Felix the third, and that the Churches might not be hallow∣ed but by a Bishop Anno 492.

The Canticle Gloria laus &c. In the procession be∣fore the Mass on Palm Sunday was instituted by The edulphus Bishop of Aurelia, as Sigebertus writeth a∣bout the Year of our Lord 483.

Giving of holy bread came in by this Occasion as it is to be gathered partly out of Honorius, partly out of Durandus and others, the manner was in an∣cient time, that the Ministers were wont to receive certain Meats of every House or Family, wherewith a great Loaf was made called Panis Dominicus, able to serve in the Communion, and to be distributed unto the People which then was wont every day to be present and received, especially they that offered the Meat, for whom it was wont therefore to be said in the Canon, omnium circumstantium qui tibi h•••• sacrificium laudis efferunt &c. But afterward the Number of the People increasing, and piety de∣creasing as Durandus writeth, it was then ordained to communicate but only upon Sundays.

At length followed the third Constitution, that thrice a Year, at least at Easter every Man should communicate it being thus provided, that instead of the daily Communion before used the Pax did serve, and instead of receiving upon the Sunday bread was hallowed, and every Sunday given and distributed unto the people which also was called ••••logi••, the constitution whereof seemeth to pro∣ceed from Pope Pius, for so we read in the Decree•• of the said Pope Pius, Ut de oblationibus qu•• off〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 à Populo & consecrationibus supersunt, vel 〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 deferunt ••ideles ad Ecclesiam, vel certe de s〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 p••r••••s 〈◊〉〈◊〉 habeat in 〈◊〉〈◊〉

indito & convenienti, & post missarum solennia qui communicare non fuerint parati Eulogias omni Die Dominica, & in di••bus festis, exinde accipiant, That is that the Minister shall take of the oblations of∣fered of the People, remaining of the Consecrati∣on, or else of the bread which the Faithful bring unto the Church or use to make of their own Bread; and cut it conveniently in portions in a clean and a convenient Vessel, so that after the solemnity of the Ministration being done they that were not pre∣pared and ready to communicate, may receive eve∣ry Sunday or Festival day Eulogies or Benedictions with the same. haec illo.

As concerning Holy water which they used to sprin∣kle at the Church door upon them that entred in, I will nor say that it sprung from the Idolatrous use of the Gentiles.

This I say as I find in Historia Zozomeni, erat au∣tem Romanis vetusta consuetudo ut quem limen Templi transeundum esset sacerdos secundum morem ethnicum madidos quosdam Olivae remusculos manu tennens ingre∣dientes aspergebat &c. i. e. It was an old cus∣tum among the Romans that at the entering in at the Church door, the Preist after the usual manner of the Ethnicks, having in his hand moist branches of Olive did sprinkle with the same such as entred in &c.

To the which custom this our manner of giving of Holy water is so like that it seemeth to proceed out of the same.

In the Book of the Popes Decrees, and in the distinctions of Gratianus there is a certain Decree gathered upon Alexander the first about the Year of our Lord 121, which Decree may well seem to be a bastard Decree, neither agreeing to such a fa∣ther, nor such a time, concerning the Conjuring of holy water, the words of the decree be these, A∣••uam sale conspersam in Populis bene dicimus ut ca 〈◊〉〈◊〉 aspersi sanctificentur & purificentur quod om∣nibus

sacerdotibus faciendum esse mandamus: Na〈…〉〈…〉 si cinis vitul•• aspersus Populum sanctificabat, atq〈…〉〈…〉 mundabat, multo magis aqua sale aspersâ, divinisq〈…〉〈…〉 pracibus sacratd, Populum sanctificat atque mund〈…〉〈…〉 Et si sale asperso per Heliseum prophetam sterilit〈…〉〈…〉 aqua sanata est, quinto magis divinis precibus sacra tus sal sterilitatem rorum aufert humanarum, & col〈…〉〈…〉 quinatos sanctificat & purgat, & caetera bona multi∣plicat, & infidias Diaboli avertit, et à phantasmat〈…〉〈…〉 versutis homines defendit. That is, we bless water sprinkled with Salt among the People, that all such as be sprinkled with the same, may be sanctifye and purified, which thing we charge and command all Priests to do, for if the Ashes of the Heifer the old Law being sprinkled among the People did sanctity and cleanse them, much more water sprinkled with Salt and hallowed with godly Pray∣ers, santifieth and cleanseth the People, and if the Helisens and the Prophet by the sprinkling of Salt did heal and help the barrenness of the water, how much more doth the Salt being hallowed by god Prayers, take away the barrenness of human thin〈…〉〈…〉 and sanctify and purge them that be defiled, a〈…〉〈…〉 multiplieth other things that be good. and tu〈…〉〈…〉 away the Snares of the Devil, and defends Men from the deceptions of phantasy &c.

Thus you have heard the Author and Father holy water which some also ascribe to Pope Six〈…〉〈…〉 which succeeded Alexander, but as the Papists do 〈◊〉〈◊〉 agree in the first Author or institutor of this hallow of Elements, so I think the same, untruly to be scribed to either, but leaving the probation of the further leasure, let us now hear in our own to〈…〉〈…〉 their own words which they use in this their C〈…〉〈…〉∣juration.

The form and words used of the Priest in Conju〈…〉〈…〉 Salt.

I Conjure thee thou creature of Salt by th〈…〉〈…〉

••ving God, by the ✚ true God, by the holy God &c.

That thou mayest be made a Conjured Salt, to the Salvation of them that beleive, and that unto all such as receive thee, thou mayest be health of Soul and body, and that from out of the place wherein thou shalt be sprinkled may fly away and depart all phantasy wickedness, or craftiness of the Divils sub∣tilty and every foul Spirit &c.

The form of Cunjuring Water▪

I Conjure thee thou creature of Water in the name of ✚ God the father almighty, and in the name of ✚ Jesus Christ his Son our Lord and in the vertue ✚ of the Holy Ghost that thou become a Cunjured Water to expel all power of the Enemy &c.

Who seeth not in these words Blasphemy intol∣lerable? how that which is only due to the Blood of Christ and promised only to Faith in him, the same is transferred to Earthly and insensible creatures, to be salvation both to body and Spirit, inwardly to give Remission of Sins, to give health and remedies against evils and Devils against all phantasies wick∣edness and all foul Spirits, and to expel the power of the Enemy &c. If this be true, whereto serveth the Blood of Christ and the vertue of Christian Faith.

Therefore Judge thy self (good Reader) whether thou thinkest this trumpery rightly to be fathered up∣on those ancient Fathers afore named? or else whether it may seem more like truth that John Sleydan wri∣teth, whose words in his second Book de Monarchiis are these. Norum decreta sunt in libris inserta conci∣liorum, sed ex his pleraque tam sunt lericula, tam nuga∣toria tam aliena prorsus sacris literis ut credible fit ab aliis longo post tempore fuisse conficta &c.

That is the decrees of these foresaid Bishop and Marters be inserted in the Book of Councels, but of these decrees many whereof be so Childish, so trifling, and so far disagreeing from the holy 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉

it is very like that the same were fained and coun∣ter••elted of others long after their time &c. Thus much ••aith S••eydon with more words in that place▪ unto whose Testimony i•• I might be so bold also to add my conjecture, I would suppose the Con∣juration of this same Water and Salt to spring out of the same Fountain, from whence proceeded the conju∣ring of Flowers and Branches, because I see the order and manner of them both to be so like and uniform as may appear.

The manner of hallowing Flowers and Branches.

I conjure thee thou creature of Flowers and Branches in the Name of ✚ God the Father Al∣mighty, and in the Name ✚ of Jesus Christ his Son our Lord and in the Virtue of the ✚ Holy ghost, therefore be thou rooted out and displanted from this Creature of Flower and Branches, all thou strength of the Adversary, all thou Host of the Divel, and all the Power of the Enemy, even every assault of the Divels &c.

And thus much concerning the Antiquity of holy Bread and holy water, which is left Before the Christian Reader, that he may judge whether they be of God or the Father of Lyes &c.

Furthermore as touching the Reserving of Re∣liques and the Memorial of Saints, brought into the Mass, Gregory the third is the Author thereof, who also added to the Canon thereof this clause, Qu••rum solemnitatis hodie in conspectu Divin•• Majesta∣tis tu•• celebrantur &c.

Finally, it were too long to recite every thing in order divised and brought in particularly to the Mass and to the Church, for after that mans brain was once set on devising, it never could make an end of ••••aping Rite upon Rite and Ceremony upon Cere∣mony, till all Religion was turned to Superstition, ••••••••••fore cometh Oyle and Creem brought in by

••ope Silvester not wont to be hallowed but by a ••ishop.

That the Corporas should not be of Silk, but only Fine Linnen Cloth. That the Psalms should be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 on Sides, the one fide of the Quire Singing 〈◊〉〈◊〉 verse, the other another, with Gloria Patri &c.

That Baptism should be Ministred at no other time the Year but only at Easter and Whi••sontide (save ••••ly to Infants, and such as were in extreme infirmi∣••••) and that it should be required 40 Days before, so ••••termined by Pope Sixtus, and therefore was it, at Fonts were hallowed only at these two seasons, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which hallowing they keep still, but the ordinance ••••ey have Rejected.

Item that Bells also were Christned, Item no Preist ••ould wear a Beard, or have long Hair, so appointed Pope Martin the first, Item that Auricular confession ••ould be made▪ that the Book of Decrees and de∣••••tals should be stablished, and transubstantiation ••••firmed, in which three arts, Pope Innocentius the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, was the cheif doer, about the Year of our ••••rd, 1215.

Arguments against the Popish Mass and Transubstantiation.

To omit the Janglings of Critical Schoolmen a∣bout the Derivation of the word Missa, (Mass), I•• which the Papists themselves cannot agree the mo•••• probable opinion is, that Missa is taken pro licenti•• dimittendi populum, that is the dismission or sendin•• away the people by their Ite Missa est at the Con∣clusion of the Mass. Or say others, it takes de∣nomination of that which the Greeks call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the dimission of the people, alluding to th•• story of the Hebrews, licensed of Pharoah to De∣part out of Captivity after eating of the Pasch•• lamb, as an old Popish Book de Sacramentis sace•• do••alibus has it &c. Let it be what it will, you ma•• note by the way that this word Missa, was neve•• used by the Greeks: Yet such Latin Interpreters a•• have in old times Translated the Antient Gree•• Books, as Eusebius, The Tripartite History and o∣thers, have made bold to render those term 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, to call the Congregation, to convene Assem∣blies, &c. By the Terms of Missas sacere, Celebrar•• &c. that is to make or Celebrate Masses: So that yo•• may conjecture that the word was not of old time attributed to the action of Consecration, but 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christian Assemblies gathered together. Well, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 best 'tis a barbarous Latin word of an uncertain o∣riginal, and so let the Name pass, Now to th•• thing.

As the Unbelief of the Jews, when our Lor•• Jesus ••••••urned on Earth, was a kind of Miracle, co••∣sidering those ••tupendious, sense-convincing M••∣racles wrought for their Conversion; so, the fre••∣•••• and dotage of Our Mass-adorers is to be ad••••∣red

at, who prostrate their Reason, Con∣science, and Religion, in maintaining such a medley of superstition, Blasphemy and Nonsence, especially in these times of Gos∣pel Sunshine, wherein it has been baffled by unanswerable Arguments, and made ap∣pear (as really it is, the very Invention of the Devil, and his vicar the Romish Anti-Christ. To encounter therefore this Con∣tagion, we will give you an Abstract of some Arguments that have been, or may be us'd, to overthrow it.

The holy Supper instituted by our Lord Jesus is a pledge of his Love, and a Memo∣rial of his Passion. A Sacrament that nou∣rishes, seeds, and refreshes the believing Soul. But these idolatrous Papists turn it into a Soul-killing poyson, quite changing the Nature of it, of which take these brief Instances.

1. There must be W••ter mixt with the Wine, which B••llarmine says, lib. 4. cap. 10. De Euchar▪ cannot be omitted without grie∣vous Sin, verifying the saying of the Pro∣phet thy Wine is mixt with Water. Yet not one Drop of Water is mentioned by any of the Evangelists or Apostles when they treat of the Supper. I read that Pope Hon••∣rius the 3. suspended a poor Priest for ever ab o••••icio & beneficio, from office and benefice, for sacrificing without Water▪

2. They are by no means to use any other but unleavened Bread. Bellarmine ibid. cap. 7. a silly superstitious Vanity like the former; for Christ and the Apostles laid no such re∣straint, but used the Bread that was com∣monly used where they were. The Greek Church contends for leavened Bread only, the Latins for unleavened. This was one of the Crimes of the Priest last mentioned.

3. Their Bread must be a little Wafer Cake—This is notorious to all the World—But if a Man may be so bold to ask them, in what part of the World such water Crust∣lings are used for Bread? without doubt 'tis in Ʋtopia, that is, no-where, where Na∣tives (No people) make it their daily Food. But the Mystery is, it gives a lift towards Transubstantiation, for if it be No bread, it may with ease be somewhat else; and what that should be, you shall hear anòn.

4. One of these Wafers only is to be brok∣en into three parts, and all that too, for the Priest alone to devour. The Commu∣nicants have it whole, (but a less Wafer, such as Letters are seal'd withal) so that there is no breaking of Bread for them •• Quite contrary to Christ who first did break the Bread, and then being broken gave the same Bread to his Disciples; note, that the Priests morsel must be broken over the Cha∣lice, least any Crum should be lost. So the

People must have theirs whole, to avoid the like Danger forsooth; as Durandus and Salmeron tells us.

5. The consecration lies percisely in these words: This is my Body, this is my Blood, saith Bellarmine de Eucar. lib. 4. cap. 13. he ought not to have left out [enim, for] though the Gospel doth; since his Missal hath it, and himself us'd it but at the end of the Chapter before quoted. His Modes∣ty in this place is singular, the Scripture says that every creature of God is sanctifi'd by the word and Prayer; and our Lord first takes Bread; next Blesseth it; then breaks it; af∣ter gives it to his Disciples, biding them, take, eat; and lastly saith, This is my Body: without any [for] of theirs. And can the Consecration lie in the last words only? It cannot be common, but consecrated or bles∣sed Bread, that is Christs Body. And this Bread was Blessed or consecrated before Christ saith thereof, This is my Body.

6. The consecrations must be uttered by the Priest secretly that no body else may hear it. And why must he so mutter? Be∣cause forsooth, (1) Hannahs voice was not heard, only her lips moved, and she (they say) was a tiype of the Church. And the Lord said to Moses, Wherefore try'st thou to me? when he said nothing. And the Pro∣phet said, speak in your Hearts, and in your

Chambers. (2) Else the Priest might mar his own intention, and then all the Freak of transubstantiation vanishes. (3) His voice perhaps might fail by speaking loud (4) the holy words might grow vile (or despicable) as of old time when they were spoken loud, some shepherd learning them, put Bread up on a stone, and by speaking those word turned it into flesh: But (says the whiske•• they were smitten with Fire from Heaven for their pains, some other Raving (not rea∣sonings) they have which I omit see Duran•• Rational. lib. 4. de secret.

7. They have Private Masses (that is Sa∣craments) wherein the Priest alone Com∣municates. This alone Communion is such a peice of Non-sense and impious Contra∣diction, that it might astonish any man to hear those Rabbys, (as men of reason) •• impudently assert it. What can be more contrary to the Command of Christ to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Disciples present, take, Eat, Drink, yet the Ravenous Priest swallows all himself, and bids the people seed with their Eyes; tis pi∣ty but he were so fed. Institution is the sol•• foundation whereon Sacraments stand. And all Examples in Scripture are again these Papists; nor will any Antiquity she••∣ter them▪ see Dr. Caves Primitive Christi∣anity, An Excellent Book.

8. Lay men must not tast at all of the Cu••

but Christ and his Apostles were of ano∣ther mind; Drink ye all of this, was currant then, but now it will not pass. No, No though the Conventicle of Trent sect. 21. Cap. 3. Confess'd the Institution to be o∣therwise. Their Doctrine is that whole Christ is either kind, in defiance of Christ who said, the Bread was his Body, and the Wine his Blood. If the people have a whole Christ under one kind, then the Priests have two Christs under both, thats certain, ei∣ther two, or none. That Popish Hector Bel∣larmine gives you reasons forsooth (lib. 4. de ▪Euchar. cap. 24. ad finem) why they thus rob the Laity. Because it would be im∣possible in large Parishes for one Priest to give the Cup to all (Ah, ah, he is too large) And then, some drops may fall and be split and the Wine by carrying about, one way or other may be made unfit to Drink. Again, many can't abide Wine. (O rare!) some Countrys want it.

Ergo, the Laity must not have the Cup Well concluded great Bellarmine! Brave Lo∣gick.

Now let's consider this Mass, and exa∣mine whether it be of God or no, In order to which take a few general Reasons of that blessed servant and Martyr of Jesus, John Gradford, thus briefly reduced into Syllo∣gisms. From Fox Act. and Mon. 1. That thing is not perpetual nor standeth not alone

which admits of succession of others to doe the same thing that was done before.

But the Mass Priest [pretend to] succeed after Christ, doing the same sacrifice which he did before.

Ergo, the Mass Priests make Christs Priest∣hood not to be perpetual.

2. All Priests be after the order of Aaron, or after the order of Melchisedech, or after the order of the Apostles, or after that spiri∣tual sort whereof it is written, ye are a spiri∣tual Priesthood &c.

But the Mass Priests are neither of the or∣der of Aaron (for that were to establish what Christ abolish'd) neither after the order of Melchisedech (for that's peculiar only to Christ) neither after the order of the Apos∣tles for they were Ministers and Preachers, never had the title of Priests. Neither after the general sort of the spiritual Priesthood (for every Christian is a spiritual Priest, offer∣ing up spiritual not bodily sacrifice as Prayer thanksgiveing &c.)

Ergo, the Mass Priests, are no Priests, (un∣l••ss after the order of Baals Priests)

Concerning the sacrifice of Christ he rea∣soneth in like manner, this reduced into Ar∣gument.

To Reiterate a thing once done, for the a••∣taining or accomplishing of the end where∣fore it was begun, declareth the imperfect••∣on

of the same thing before the Mass-Priests do reiterate the sacrifice of Christ once done for the end wherefore it was begun (that is for propitiation and remission from punishment and guilt, for the living and Dead.)

Ergo Mass Priest make the sacrifice of Christ to be Imperfect, and so are injurious to the sacrifice of Christ.

To confirm this, mark the Rubrick follow¦ing written before the Mass of the five Wounds in the Mass—Book.

Boniface Bishop of Rome lay sick and was like to die, to whom our Lord sent the Archangel Raphael with the office of the Mass of the five Wounds, saying Rise and write this office, and say it five times, and thou shalt be restored to thy health immediately: And what Priest soever shall say this office for himself or for any (1) other that is sick five times, the Person for whom it is said, shall obtain health and grace, and in the World to come, if he con∣tinue, (2) LIFE everlasting and 3. what∣soever tribulation a man shall be in this life, if, he procure this office to be said five times for him, of a Priest, withont doubt he shall be de∣livered. And if it be said for the SOƲL of the Dead, anon as it shall be said and ended five times, his Soul shall be rid from paines. This

hearing the Bishop, he did erect himself up in his Bed, Conjuring the Angel by the Name of Al∣mighty God, to tell him what he was; and where∣fore he came, & that he should depart without do∣ing him harm who answered that he was Rapha∣el the Archangel sent unto him of God: And that all the premisses were undoubtedly true, Then the said Boniface confirmed the said office of the five Wounds, by the Apostolick Authority.

Reader if I should go about to convince any body, that this Rubrick which these Blushless Blasphemers shame not to print in their Mass-Book, is horribly wicked, it would be a kind of an Impeachment of your Un∣derstanding. Now either the Apparition is ture, or false. If true, it must be from God, or the Devil, It cannot be from God, for 'tis diametrically opposite to his word: For health, Grace, and Salvation are to be had only by and through the Lord Jesus our Re∣deemer. Therefore of necessity it must be from the Devil. But if there was no such Ap∣parition; then the Pope is a devilish lyar; fine Infallibility! is it not.

1. Note here that ther's no need of Do∣cters, or Apothecharies &c. For this Catho∣lick Physitiah has got you a Panpharmacon to cure all diseases; What unmerciful wretches are they to suffer so many of their pocky Brethren to languish under the te∣••ious and Chargeable Cures they are pur∣gatory'd

with, when so easy a remedy is at every Priests disposal,

2. Here's Jesus Christ himself made a meer Cypher; here's the Eternal wisdom Blas∣phemously arraigned of downright folly and Cruelty. For, if Everlasting life might be had at so easy a rate, there was no need that the Eternal Son of God should be expos'd to those torments, and ineffable Agonies w^ch he suffer'd in bearing the whole weight of Gods wrath for our Sins. O the Astonish∣ing Impudence of this Rubrick.

3. Nay this is not all neither, 'twill de∣liver out of all sorts of trouble; will it so? Yes, 'tis undoubtedly, true saith the Hea∣venly Embassador (I should say Satans En∣voy Extraordinary) Well; but how comes it to pass that the late Jesuits and their Bre∣theren Martyr'd for Treason, (If I may use a Catachresis) made no use of this glorious receipt to save their Necks. If they try'd it, the Devil fail'd'um. If not, they were all so many (felo's dese) self murtherers, when they might scape if they would. I would advise the Priests in Newgate &c. to get themselves out by this trick, as also their friends in the Tower. I profess I can hardly forbear laughing when I consider what fools our students are, as well as the vertuosoes and Philosopher-stone-men together with the whole body of learned Phisitians, who spend

so much time and expence in arriving to their Skill. Yea the whole World is mad, that does not lay aside these and other use∣less sciences, and set up a parcel of 5 wound Mass Priests, who will doe the Job presently, be it what it will.

In whatsoever Tribulation] this is a Com∣prehensive word art thou going to be hang'd? Employ a Priest betimes in the Morning, and heel fumble over five Mas∣es before thou getst to high Holborn—there's one Tribulation gone. Art thou over Head and Ears in Debt, and surrounded with a stone Doublet; peh, 'tis nothing, the same Charms will set open the Prison doors for you. Art thou at Sea Menac'd every mo∣ment with the Devouring Billows, whilst the inraged Elements tumultuously en∣counter to destroy thee, the Skys ratling, the Wind roaring, and the swelling Waves mounting like so many Isles of Tenariff fear not; set the Catholik Chaplain to work, and whip, you have all the Ocean as smooth as a Fish pond, before you have surl'd your Sails. An Infinite Number of these benefits may be thought on. And the Nation may save a world of Money in an Age, which i•• given to maintain Our Ministers for Preaching the Gospel of Salvation. If these five Masses can save us, the Gentry may save the Charges of breeding up their

Sons at University's and Inns of Court, be∣cause this Mass Priest can prevent and re∣medy all vexations of Law-suits, so that in a word Divinity, Law, and Physick, are all render'd Superfluous, if this Mass can sup∣ply their places. Risum teneatis amici! But to our Argument.

4. Whatsoever causes or occasions a man to rest in a meer external serving of God, which should be inward and Spiritual, that hinders the service of God.

But the Mass occasions a man to rest in such external service [viz. hearing, seeing, and saying of Mass, which are but the ob∣ject of sense, yet (say they) meretorious ex opere operato, etiam sine bono Motu intentionis, viz, from the work done, even without the good motion of the Intention]

Erog, the Mass hinders the true service of God.

1. The Papists affirm that the Bread after these 5 words of Consecration [hoc est enim Corpus meum] are whispe••ed by the Priest over it, it ceases to be Bread, and at the utterance of the last syllable (um) [mark that, not before] it becomes the real and substantial Body of Christ, Flesh Blood and Bones, without any hope or Allegorical Meaning; even as he convers'd with Mortals upon Earth. This is their great D••••na of a Doctrine.

Well, what then? Then of necessity, if this Doctrine be true, the real Body of Christ is a Dead * substance wholy void of life and sense, for the Consecrated water stirs not, but as the Priest moves it: But the real Bo∣dy of Christ is a living substance, and is, and must be eternally such Rom. 6. 9.—Christ being raised from the Dead, dyeth no more, Death hath no more dominion over him, Rev. 1. 18. I am he that liveth and was Dead: and Behold I am a live for evermore Luk. 20. 35. 36. Ergo this wafer cannot be the real and material Body of Christ, the one being a living, the other a Dead Sub∣stance.

If the Consecrated wafer be the real Body of Christ, then 'tis possible that Christ may have a 100000 Bodys at one, and the same time. For one Pr••est at one Consecration may make as many as the Table will hold, perhaps some hundred Body's at a Clap, with the meer Charm of hoc est enim Corpus Meum, to be sure he makes enough for all the Communicants, which may be Mil••ions at one Instant, at least the same Morning, in Europe &c. This is quite contrary to the Text 1 Cor. 1. 13. Is Christ Divided? &c. that is he is not Divided as by the Context appears. Eph. 4. 4, 5. one Body—one Spi∣rit•• one hope—one Lord—one Faith-one 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

Now if every one of these consecrated, Wafers be a real and substantial Christ; it must of necessity follow that we have so many Christs, yea Christ-Mediators, (for that it must or no Christ) as there are con∣secrated Wafers which the Scriptures in ex∣press terms gain says 1 Cor. 8. 6.—to us there is but one God—and one Lord Jesus Christ &c. 1 Timothy 2. 5. there is one God, and one Me∣diator, (not many) between God and Men, the Man (not Men) Christ Jesus.

The Papists say that Christs Flesh, Blood, and Bones, ay, and his Soul and Divinity too, that is whole Christ, is here sacrificed in their wafer by a Knack they call Concomi∣tancy: A very little room a meer little Ease! Now if there be as many - real Christs or Christs Bodys, as there are consecrated Wa∣fers, they make the Lord Jesus to have only a phantastical Body, that is indeed, none at all contrary to what he himself demonstra∣ted to his Disciples Luke 24. 39. Behold my Hands and my Feet, handle me (or feel me) and see &c, proving the reality of his Body by sight-and touch, so John 14. 19. the World seek me no more (viz. till his second coming) I go unto the Father (viz. in bodily presence ver. 28.) I leave the World &c. but the Pa∣pists can bring him back with a Charm of five Words. The Angel thought twas a good Argument to prove Christ was not on Earth

or in the Sepulcher, because he was risen; but these Logicians will have him risen and here too, strange S••phistry!

If this Transubstan••iation be true, th••n Christs Body may be eaten by Rats, Mice, and other Vermine, (as in the Caveats of the Mass) contrary to Act. 2▪ 27. where 'tis said neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see Corruption.

This consecrated Bread or Wafer hath not the real Nature and property of flesh or a human Body, as Animal Spirits, no taste nor feeling like Flesh, no complexion of flesh, so as to convince the senses of sight, taste and tōuching therefore no real Body of Christ. And if we must believe a thing so con∣tra••y to sense, and that our senses are deceiv∣ed▪ the greatest Evidence of Christianity it self is but a phantastical Dec••ptio visus, or a trick of Leg••rd••main; for to what end serv'd those amazing Miracles done by the Almigh∣ty power, in the Infancy of Christianity, but to convince the unbelieving World? and if sense must be mistrusted or plainly contradi∣cted as in this Case of Transubstantiation; might not the incredulous Jews and Gen∣tiles plead for their unbelief? and say, these are but meer Phantasms and Juggles▪ we won't believe our very eyes, no nor any 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sense, for they may be all deluded: Nay 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••on't believe any thing written in the

Bible, for our Eyes may deceive us &c. See what a Gap these God▪ makers open to let in Infidelity and point blank Atheism!

If our senses err we are sure of nothing un∣der the Sun; no, not that we see this, or that, or to'ther thing, and if the sense of universal Mankind cannot be deceived in so notorious a thing as this is, 'tis certain that the Priests consecrated wafer, is no more than a meer wafer still, without the least alteration or change to be perceived by the Eyes or Spe∣ctacles in the World.

If it should be true that this wafer is real∣ly turn'd into Christs material Body, what Cannibals can be more inhuman than the Pa∣pists? what? make a Breakfast of their God? O horrible! this is a thousand times worse than to be crucified by the Jews. They murther'd the Lord of life, ONCE, and then they let him alone, but these vile, Roman God-eaters, will never let him be quiet, they daily in thousands of places scranch his very bones betwixt their Teeth, & give him an unmerci∣ful swallow; modesty forbids me to mention what treatment the wafer God has after∣wards to the end of the Chapter. These fresh Crucifiers of Christ are hopeless Reprobates Heb. 6. 6, 8. &c.

Further this Bread n••ver came down from Heaven; no Sirs. I can tell you its p••digree▪ 'tis first sowen in the ground, then mow'd o••

reap'd next brought ••nto the barn and soundly thresh'd ground in the Mill, sifted, kneaded, bak'd, and Godded by the Priest Pre∣stol &c. But other parts of the same corn serve for▪ other uses; see Isaiah 44. 15. 16.

This Breād cannot give eternal life to the Receiver, because it self is not external, for ni•• dat quod in se non habet nothing can give that which it has not in it self; a most infalli∣ble Maxim. If it should, then the effect must infinitely tanscend the cause, the grossest of absurdities.

Pray consider what monstrous conclusi∣ons may be drawn f••om this real presence▪ for if it be true, then;

1. That the Body of Christ is a dead sub∣stance, as we mentioned, contrary to Luke 20. 35. 36. Rom. 6. 9. Rev. 1. 18.

2. That Christ may have a 100000 Bo∣dies at one time.

3. That there are so many Lords Christs and Christs Mediators, against 1 Cor. 1. 13. Eph▪ 4. 4. 1▪ Cor. 8. 5, 6. 1 T••m▪ 2. 5.

4. That the Body of Christ is corruptible against Act▪ 2. 2••.

5. That 'tis flesh, yet has neither the Nature, property, complexion, or dimen∣sion of flesh.

6▪ That it may be swallow'd down alive 〈…〉〈…〉 pretend to worship him Heb. 6▪ 6. 〈…〉〈…〉

7. That 'tis the Bread of Heaven, when nothing can be more false, as before.

8. That it can save the Receiver, when it hath no such Virtue existing in it.

It is neither like Man, Woman, nor Child, nor has it any dimensions like them. It has no parts, powers or operations of a human Body; no distinct Members. It moves not, neither do's it grow, it can neither hear nor see, &c. No passions, for Christ upon the Cross was sensible and cry'd, my God, my God &c. But this God speaks never a word when he's in the Devourers hands, a pittiful God indeed, that cannot rescue him self from the Merciless God—Eater.

Christs real Body rose again after he was Crucified, but this knows no Resurrection a∣ny more then Common Excrements. That went to Heaven after it was sacrificed, but this into the Draught. You may with as much reason say that all the Saints of God are material Bread, because 'tis said 1 Cor. 10. 17. we being many are ONE Bread, and one B••dy, and that the Israelites of old were Individual Vine-trees, because they were cal∣led a Vine-yard Isa. 5. 7. as well as call this Bread the real Body of Christ. For Indeed they are all Metaphors.

If the consecrated Bread be the real Bo∣dy of Christ, then no Man needs fear the danger of eating unworthily, unless he be

stark blind, for they may easily see the wafer (and so in the Popish sense discern the Lords Body) the qualification required 1 Cor. 11. 29 But men of good sight, yea if they had Eagles ey's may be damn'd for all that, the discer∣ning here being purely spiritual 1 Cor. 11. 27.

Either this Popish Sacrament is a living or a dead Body, if living, they that bite it, and eat it, are meer Murtherers, yea worse, for they eat it raw: no Ceremony of boiling or roasting, though they often roast the l••ving Members of Christ, the Martyrs of his eter∣nal truth. If it be a dead Body, how can it give life? 'tis no more then an insipie Carkass, that can give no good relish or nourishment.

Besides if the Doctrine of Transubstantia∣tion be true, Christ was his own Executioner, and did eat himself, before Judas betrayed him, or the Jews did murther him. But 'tis certain he did not so, therefore that Do∣ctrine is abominably false.

Moreover this Doctrine makes him suf∣fer Millions of times since his Crucifixion contrary to Heb. 7. 27. For this (viz the Sa∣crifice) he (that is Christ) did ONCE, when he offered up himself. So Heb. 9. 28. and 10. 10. 1. Pet. 3. 18 Heb, 9 24, 25, 26. (mark,) 'tis but ONCE, ONCE, ONCE, &c. Sure no Man would endure to be eaten alive at this rate, ••••d do you think the Lord of life would be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 often Priest-bitten? no, no, by one offering he

hath compleated the work Heb. 10. 14. And he hath all Power in Heaven and Earth, by which Kings reign, and Princes decree. Justice, Matth. 28. Prov. 8.

If this Popish Doctrine be true, then these Papists that buy and sell it are meer Jews and Judasses, the one sold, the others bought him to destroy him, so these sell him that they may devour him.

You cannot be a true Believer in the Ro∣mish sense unless you will be a meer Sot, sense as well as reason must be deny'd, for that there is nothing say they, but the poor species or accidents remaining. And so those accidents must subsist without a Subject; contrary to the very Nature of them, whose being is to be something. As, to instruct the plainest Christian, you have whiteness, round∣ness, thinness, and the like before your Eyes; but 'tis the whiteness, roundness, thinness of nothing. So gratefulness of smell to the Nose, and pleasantness of taste to the Mouth: But gratefulness and pleasantness of nothing still. For Christs Body is not (they confess) white, round, and thin, nor his Blood grateful and pleasant. And Bread and Wine, there is none at all; you hear, and must believe, there's an end on't this is Bedlam Doctrine with a Witness.

'Tis a strange Parodox to me that Christ should eat his own body and drink his own blood, yet they affirm it, why so? why then

(say I) the Body and Blood of Christ was in his own mouth and stomach, and yet sitting at the table with his Disciples at the same time. It was broken and whole; eaten and uneaten, and all at once. Nay his blood was shed, and in the Cup, and thence drank by himself, yet not one Drop missing out of any Vain of his Body; Ay, and to con∣found us, the Eater was the thing Eaten and the thing Eaten was the Eater to. For with his Body did he Eat, and this his Body that he Eat, so his Disciples did Eat him as Crucifi∣ed and dead; his Body broken and blood ••••••d; but he was still alive, untouched, and before their faces; these are monstrous Gob∣lins. The Scripture assures us tis true BREAD and WINE, that we receive in the Sacrament; Matth. 26. 26. Mark. 14. 22. Luke. 22. 19. And the Apostle calls it bread, no less then three times after the Consecra∣tion, 1 Cor. 11. 26, 28. And calls the Cup the Communion of Christs Blood; and Bread, the Communion of his Body Chap. 18. V. 16. &c. Certainly the most Idolatrous among the Heathens may learn Idolatry from these Nicknamed Christians. the An∣cient Romans us'd to make their Gods of wise, or at least Valient Men; the Greeks chose rea∣sonable Creatures for the object of their ado∣ration. The Egyptians more brutish then the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, would yet have a living Creature for

their chief Diety. But papists take a sense∣less lifeless thing. O, more then Heathen Idolatry, O fulsom (Nicknam'd) Eucharist away with thee.

Reader if thou dost but impartially consi∣der these. Arguments and brief Reasonings▪ I am satisfied you will judg this Mass to be no Institution of Christs, but rather a most abominable rabble of Blashphemys patcht together by the Antichristian synagogue of Rome in opposition to the worship of the Everliving Jesus; and a thing quite different from the sacred supper of the Lord.

By this Mass ariseth false hope, and a false remedy is promised to wicked lives; for such if they hear Mass in the Morning think all's well, and bolster themselves up in security, giving the reins to all kind of sensuality and the Debaucheryes that are Alamode: For who would deny himself of his beloved plea∣sure, (though never so contrary to true piety) that believes alittle Mercenary Priest, A mass, or some Holy water can expiate his sin? O says one, I am now purged from all iniquity, and am a good Catholick, Innocent as the Child unborn. Ay, Crys another, I thank God I saw my Maker to day, I am well enough, so takes his Evening wallow in wickedness, and next Morning a Mass, makes him a Saint again. Certainly that can be none of Gods way that incourages men to vice, as this

〈…〉〈…〉 which besides its Numberless abominati•• 〈…〉〈…〉d in a language unknown to the People and therefore (had it been never so good.) no way edyfying as the Apostle says in one of his Epistles to the Corin∣thians, mentioned before Objection, me thinks these words at every plain, This is my body, what will you make Christ a Lyer? the Catholick Church of Rome take them litterally, and you ought to believe it.

Answer, the Scripture is not always to be taken a•• the lerter foundeth, but the intent and purpose of the holy Spirit the Dictator of it, is to be minded: For •••• you will always follow the bare words, you will quickly shake down the greatest part of Christianity. What's plainer then thi, my Father is greater then I John 14. 28. whence sprung the Arrian Heresie, yet Christ says John 10. 30. I and my Father are one, whence some de∣ny'd the distinction of Persons in the Trinity. It is said Acts 4 32. that the multitude of believers had one heart and one soul, yet every one of them had a heart and soul peculiar to himself. He said that the Man and Wife are one Flesh, yet each has a distinct Body. Judah said of his Brother Joseph, he is our Flesh Gen 37. 27. yet he has not their real Flesh, 'tis said of Melchise∣••••••h that he had neither Father nor Mother, yet he had both. Christ is called a Rock, a Door, a Lamb a Vine, &c. yet he was not really and materially such, the Cup is called the New Testament, yet call it a Metonimy, so that you may see by these and many other Instances of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 like Nature, how frequently such figurative and ••••opical Speeches are used in Scripture, as may be seen 〈◊〉〈◊〉 large in a late Book intituled Tropologia and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sacra &c. And why must this only Text be so 〈◊〉〈◊〉 confined to a meer literal interpretation, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the sense and reason in the World?

〈…〉〈…〉culous to say that a thing is done in 〈…〉〈…〉 it self, this Sacrament is used in 〈…〉〈…〉 therefore not Christ himself.

〈…〉〈…〉 both Visible and Invisible, but

the Sacrament is visible, and the▪Body of Christ invisi∣ble, therefore they are not one, the Body of Christ is food, not for the Body, but for the Soul, and therefore it must be received by faith only, which is the Souls mouth Hence Augustine says in Johan. tract. 15. Quid paras ventrem & dentem? Crede & manducasti Why mak∣est thou ready thy Tooth & thy Belly? Believe & thou hast eaten. Heres a Sylogism for you in Datisi. Of whatsoe∣ver sort the Mouth is of, such is its food; But the Mouth of the Spirit is spiritual, not bodily. Ergo, it receiveth Christs Body spiritually, not bodily,

Spiritual hunger must be spiritually satisfied the most delicate and pallate pleasing dishes cannot content the longings of the fasting Soul, 'tis only spi∣ritual Food lie feeds on.

In my Judgment the very Mice are wiser then these Dating Priests, for if the wafer were not real bread, (for all the Priests conjuring) they wou'd never steal it away and eat it. But if it be a God, then the Church Rats are well fed, when they are banqueted with Gods Flesh.

Under the Law, No man was to eat or drink Blood, yea the prohibition is repeated in the Acts of the Apo∣stles, but these blood thirstly Priests gulge of their Gods Blood unmercifully; yea in the very time of their lent, even on Good-Friday they eat Flesh and drink blood when the poor Lay-men must not eat an Egg or a Mess of Milk, under pain of Church curses, if not Damnation. If this Bread could be metamorphos'd into Christ, real Christ, St. Paul needed not to have wish'd to be dissolved, and to be with Christ, when he might be every day with him at the Altar. But alas! that Blessed man knew better things The Scripture and all the antient Fathers tells us that Christ is ascended in∣to Heaven, and is there to remain at the Right hand of the Father; how can it be true then that every Mass Priest can conjure him down to be eaten at pleasure? Ay, ••••d make a horrible Multiplication of him, I could 〈◊〉〈◊〉

〈…〉〈…〉 though from Antiquity if it were need•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 how can the Sacrament be called a break〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 if there be no Bread remaining unriddle 〈◊〉〈◊〉 God makers. I have read that Henry the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Emperor was poyson'd in the Host, and victor 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the Chalice; what, a poyson'd God! 〈…〉〈…〉!

〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacrament could speak, (and doubtless 〈…〉〈…〉 it were alive,) it would cry out O! I am bitter 〈◊〉〈◊〉 swallow'd, I perish, I mould, I am kept in a Box f〈…〉〈…〉 of Rats, if you leave me out all Night I shall be d〈…〉〈…〉 before Morning, If the Mouse gets me, I am gon•• •• Bread, I am no God, don't believe the wretches mu•• murder murder! &c. I will conclude my Argument 〈…〉〈…〉st this Upstart transubstantiation (which wi〈…〉〈…〉 up from the bottomless Pit in the time of Pop•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 at the ••▪ at the Latarant Councel in Rome abou•• 〈…〉〈…〉rs agoe) with these pithy Sentences of a few 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Fathers.

〈◊〉〈◊〉 in his homily on Levit. says si secundum litera•• naris &c. that is, if ye follow that which is written after 〈…〉〈…〉ener (unless ye shall eat the Flesh of the Son of Man 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shall be no life in you) that letter kills. So Chrysosto•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Hom 46. Caro non prodest &c. The flesh profite•• that is to say, my words must be taken and expounde•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by Spirit for he that heareth after the flesh gainet•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Now what is it to understand Carnally? to take 〈◊〉〈◊〉 simply as they be spoken, and not to consider any fur•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 meaning therein, for things must not be judged 〈…〉〈…〉 seen, but all Mysteries must be seen with inwar〈…〉〈…〉 that is to say spiritually. Teitullian Contra Marc〈…〉〈…〉 says Christus accepit panem & Corpus suum fe〈…〉〈…〉 est Corpus meum, dicendo; id est figura Corpor〈…〉〈…〉 that is, Christ took Bread and made it his Body say〈…〉〈…〉 Body, that is to say, the figure of my Body 〈…〉〈…〉 Augustine, Irenaus &c. say with one voic••