The expositors of the Roman church do raise an objection on this place, for no other end but that they may return an answer unto it
390 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. IX.
perniciously opposite unto and destructiye of the truth here taught by the apostle; though some of them do acknowledge that it is capable of another answer. But this is that which they principally insist upon as needful unto their present cause. They say, there- fore, “That if Christ cease to offer himself, then it seems that his sacerdotal office ceaseth also; for it belongs unto that office to offer sacrifices continually.” But there is no force in this objection; for it belonged to no priest to offer any other or any more sacrifices but what were sufficient and effectual unto the end of them and their office. And such was the one sacrifice of Christ. Besides, though it be not actually repeated, yet it is virtually apphed always; and this belongs unto the present discharge of his sacerdotal office. So doth also his appearance in heaven for us, with his intercession; where he still continues in the actual exercise of his priesthood, so far as is needful or possible. But they have an answer of their own unto their own objection. They say, therefore, that “Christ con- tinueth to offer himself every day in the sacrifice of the mass, by the hands of the priests of their church.” And, “This sacrifice of him, though it be unbloody, yet is a true, real sacrifice of Christ; the same with that which he offered on the cross,”
It is better never to raise objections than thus to answer them. For this is not to expound the words, but to dispute against the doctrine of the apostle, as I shall briefly evince:—
1, That the Lord Christ hath “by the one offering of himself for ever perfected them that are sanctified,” is a fundamental article of faith. Where this is denied or overthrown, either directly or by just consequence, the church is overthrown also. But this is ex- pressly denied in the doctrine of the frequent repetition of his sacrifice, or of the offering of himself. And there is no instance wherein the Romanists do more expressly oppose the fundamental articles of religion.
2. The repetition of sacrifices arose solely from their imperfec- tion, as the apostle declares, Heb. x, 1, 2. And if it undeniably proved an imperfection in the sacrifices of the law that they were repeated once every year, in one place only, how great must the imperfection of the sacrifice of Christ be esteemed, if it be not effectual to take away sin and perfect them that are sanctified unless it be repeated every day, and that, it may be, in a thousand places !
3. To say that Christ offereth himself often, is expressly and in terms contradictory to the assertion of the apostle. Whatever, therefore, they may apprehend of the offering of him by their priests, yet most certain it is that he doth not every day offer him- self, But as the faith of the church is concerned in no offering of Christ but that which he offered himself, of himself, by the eternal
Aint
_~
‘VER, 25.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 391
Spirit, once for all, so the pretence to offer him often by the priests is highly sacrilegious.
4. The infinite actings of the divine nature in supporting and in- ’ fluencing of the human, the inexpressible operation of the Holy Ghost in him unto such a peculiar acting of all grace, especially of zeal unto the glory of God and compassion for the souls of men, as are inimitable unto the whole creation, were required unto the offering of himself a sacrifice of a sweet-smelling savour unto God. And how can a poor sinful mortal man, such as are the best of their priests, pretend to offer the same sacrifice unto God ?
5. An unbloody sacrifice is, (1.) A contradiction in ttself. @voia, which is the only sacrifice which the apostle treats of, is “victimee mactatio,” as well as “victime mactate oblatio.” It isa sacrifice by death, and that by blood-shedding; other Svc/« there never was any. (2.) If it might be supposed, yet is it a thing alto- gether useless; for “without shedding of blood there is no remis- sion,” The rule, I acknowledge, is firstly expressed with respect unto legal sacrifices and oblations: yet is it used by the apostle, by an argument drawn from the nature and end of those institutions, to prove the necessity of blood-shedding in the sacrifice of Christ himself for the remission of sin. An unbloody sacrifice for the re- mission of sin overthrows both the law and the gospel. (8.) It is directly contrary unto the argument of the apostle in the next verse ; wherein he proves that Christ could not offer himself often, For he doth it by affirming, that if he did so then must he “often suffer;”
_ that is, by the effusion of his blood, which was absolutely necessary
in and unto his sacrifice. Wherefore an unbloody sacrifice, which is without suffering, whatever it be, is not the sacrifice of Christ; for if he be often offered, he must often suffer, as the apostle affirms. Nor is it unto any purpose to say, that this unbloody sacrifice of the mass receiveth its virtue and efficacy from the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross, as is pleaded by the defenders of it; for the question is not what value it hath, nor whence it hath it, but whether it be the sacrifice of Christ himself or no.