MASS AND TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 419
to be repeated, not only as theirs was, year by year, from Avhence he ai-gues the imperfection of the greatest solemn sacrifice of expiation, but day by day, with a farther and greater weakness (repetition, in the judgment of the apostle, being an evidence thereof), — there will be no place left for your sacrifice; that is, your main worship be- longs not to the church of God at all. (4.) You pretend that in this worship Christ himself is sacrificed imto God, l)ut " incruenter," and without suffering; but the apostle plainly tells us that if he be often offered he must "often suffer," Heb. ix. 26. And the sacrifice of Christ without his passion, his offering without suffering, evacuates both the one and the other.
But what of all this ? If the apostles used the sacrifice you talk of, that of the mass, is it meet we should do so also ? Hereof you say, " Were not the apostles according to this rite 'KuroxjpyoxivTic, rw Kvpiw, ' sacrificing to our great Lord God,' when Paul was, by imposition of hands, segregated from the laity to his divine service, as I clearly in my paragi'aph evinced out of the history of the Acts of the Apostles? ' No," say you, ' the apostles were not then about any sacrifice, but only preaching God's word, or some such thing, to the people, in the name and behalf of God.' But, sir, is this to be in earnest, or jest? The sacred text says they were sacrificing to our Lord, liturgying and ministering unto him; you say they were not sacrificing to God, but only preaching to the people. And now the question is, whether you or I more rightly understand that apostolical book? For my sense and meaning I have all antiquity, as well as the plain words of the sacred text; you have neither."
How empty and vain this discourse of yours is, wherein you seem gTcatly to triumph, will quickly be discovered. And.. you are a merry man, if you think by such arguments as these to -persuade us that the apostles sacrificed to God according to the rite of your mass; as tliough we did not know by whom the chief parts of it, particularly those wherein you place your sacrifice, were invented, many hundreds of years after they fell asleep. 1. You say they were Xsirovpyouvrfg tOj Kvpiw, " sacrificing to our great Lord God," as though it were God the Father, or God absolutely, that is intended in that expression, ru> Kupiw, " To the Lord." ' O Kvpiog, " The Lord," is, sir, peculiarly deno- tative of the person of the mediator, Jesus Christ, God and man, according to that rule given us by the apostle, 1 Cor. viii. 6, " To us there is one God, the Father; xai ug Kupiog, and one Lord Jesus Christ." And this is the constant denotation of the word when used absolutely, as here it is, throughout the whole New Testament. To Christ the mediator were the churches ministering, Acts xiii. 2 ; that is, in his name and authority, according to his appointment, and unto his service. And this one obsei-vation sufficiently discovers the vanity
420 A VINDICATION OF THE ANIMADVERSIONS ON FIAT LUX.
of your argument; for you will not say that they offered sacrifice to the Lord Christ emphatically and reduplicatively, seeing, if you may be believed, it is he whom they offered in sacrifice. Of such force is the sophism wherein you boast ! And, 2. You wisely observe that Paul, by the imposition of hands there mentioned, was segregated firom the laity ; whereas he tells you that he was " an apostle " (wherein certainly he was segregated from the laity), " neither of men, nor by men, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father," Gal. i. 1 ; that is, there was no intimation or interposition of the ministry or authority of any man in his call to that office, which he had for sundry years exercised before this his peculiar separation to the work of preaching anew to the Gentiles. So well are you sldlled in the sense of that apostolical book ! 3. And not to insist on the repeti- tion of my former answei-, which in your wonted manner you lamely and unduly represent, could you by other arguments, and on other testimonies, prove that the sacrifice you plead for was instituted by Christ and offered by the apostles, there might possibly be some colour for a man to think that they performed that duty also when they were said XitTovpyuv in the service of God ; but from that gene- ral expression, intimating any kind of public ministry whatever, and never used in any author, sacred or profane, precisely and absolutely to signify sacrificing, to conclude that they were offering sacrifice, and to use no other testimony to prove they had any such sacrifice, is such a fondness as nothing but insuperable prejudice can persuade a man in his right wits to give countenance unto. St Paul tells us that the magistrate is Xsirovpyhg &sou, — doth he mean that he is God's sacrificer, or his minister? And he says of himself that he was Xurovpyhg ro\J XpiffTou, — doth he intend that he was Christ's sacrificer, or his servant ? Rom. XV. 16, 27, he says that it was the duty of the Gentiles, Xsirovp- y'r\(Sai h roTg sap'/.r/.o7g, — doth he mean to sacrifice in your carnal things, or to minister of them to the Jews? But you will, it may be, except that they were not said XsiToupysTv rw Kvploj, as those here (that is, the prophets of the church of Antioch, and not the apostles, as you mistake) are said to do, " to liturgy to the Lord ;" it must needs be sacrificing, because it was " to the Lord." But, (1.) I have showed you how this pretence is perfectly destructive of your own intend- ment, in that it is the Loixl Christ that is especially meant, unto whom distinctly you will not say they were sacrificing. And, (2.) Were it not so, yet the expression would not give you the least colour of advantage. What think you of 1 Sam. iii. 1, Kai to 'raiddpiov T.a/MurjX rjv XnTovpyuv rw Kvpiui huTiov 'HXi' — " And the child Samuel was liturgying" (seeing you will have it so) " unto the Lord be- fore Eli?" Do you think that the child, which was not of the family of Aaron, nor yet called to be a prophet, was offering sacrifice