Part 2 (1/2)

Whatever in this article is stated concerning the most holy office of the ma.s.s that agrees with the Holy Roman and Apostolic Church is approved, but whatever is added that is contrary to the observance of the general and universal orthodox Church is rejected, because it grievously offends G.o.d, injures Christian unity, and occasions dissensions, tumults and seditions in the Holy Roman Empire. Now, as to these things which they state in the article: First, it is displeasing that, in opposition to the usage of the entire Roman Church, they perform ecclesiastical rites not in the Roman but in the German language, and this they pretend that they do upon the authority of St.

Paul, who taught that in the Church a language should be used which is understood by the people, 1 Cor. 14:19. But if this were the meaning of the words of St. Paul, it would compel them to perform the entire ma.s.s in German, which even they do not do. But since the priest is a person belonging to the entire Church, and not only to his surroundings, it is not wonderful that the priest celebrates the ma.s.s in the Latin language in a Latin Church. It is profitable to the hearer, however, if he hear the ma.s.s in faith of the Church; and experience teaches that among the Germans there has been greater devotion at ma.s.s in Christ's believers who do not understand the Latin language than in those who today hear the ma.s.s in German. And if the words of the apostle be pondered, it is sufficient that the one replying occupy the place of the unlearned to say Amen, the very thing that the canons prescribe. Neither is it necessary that he hear or understand all the words of the ma.s.s, and even attend to it intelligently; for it is better to understand and to attend to its end, because the ma.s.s is celebrated in order that the Eucharist may be offered in memory of Christ's pa.s.sion. And it is an argument in favor of this that, according to the general opinion of the fathers, the apostles and their successors until the times of the Emperor Hadrian celebrated the ma.s.s in the Hebrew language alone, which was indeed unknown to the Christians, especially the converted heathen. But even if the ma.s.s had been celebrated in the primitive Church in a tongue understood by the people, nevertheless this would not be necessary now, for many were daily converted who were ignorant of the ceremonies and unacquainted with the mysteries; and hence it was of advantage for them to understand the words of the office; but now Catholics imbibe from their cradles the manners and customs of the Church, whence they readily know what should be done at every time in the Church. Moreover, as to their complaints concerning the abuse of ma.s.ses, there is none of those who think aright but does not earnestly desire that the abuses be corrected. __But that they who wait at the altar live of the altar is not an abuse, but pertains equally to both divine and human law.__ ”Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charge?” says Paul. ”Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?”

1 Cor 9:7,13. Christ says: ”The laborer is worthy of his hire.” Luke 10:7. But worthy of censure, above all things, is the discontinuance of the private ma.s.s in certain places, as though those having fixed and prescribed returns are sought no less than the public ma.s.ses on account of gain. But by this abrogation of ma.s.ses the wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d is diminished, honor is withdrawn from the saints, the ultimate will of the founder is overthrown and defeated, the dead deprived of the rights due them, and the devotion of the living withdrawn and chilled. Therefore the abrogation of private ma.s.ses cannot be conceded and tolerated.

Neither can their a.s.sumption be sufficiently understood that Christ by his pa.s.sion has made satisfaction for original sin, and has inst.i.tuted the ma.s.s for actual sin; for this has never been heard by Catholics, and very many who are now asked most constantly deny that they have so taught. For the ma.s.s does not abolish sins, which are destroyed by repentance as their peculiar medicine, but abolishes the punishment due sin, supplies satisfactions, and confers increase of grace and salutary protection of the living, and, lastly, brings the hope of divine consolation and aid to all our wants and necessities. Again, their insinuations that in the ma.s.s Christ is not offered must be altogether rejected, as condemned of old and excluded by the faithful. For Augustine says this was a very ancient heresy of the Arians, who denied that in the ma.s.s an oblation was made for the living and the dead. For this is opposed both to the Holy Scriptures and the entire Church. For through Malachi the Lord predicted the rejection of the Jews, the call of the Gentiles and the sacrifice of the evangelical law: ”I have no pleasure in you, he saith, neither will I accept an offering at your hand. For from the rising of the sun, even unto the going down of the same, my name shall be great among the Gentiles, and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name and a pure offering.” Mal 1:10, 11. But no pure offering has already been offered to G.o.d in every place, except in the sacrifice of the altar of the most pure Eucharist. This authority St. Augustine and other Catholics have used in favor of the ma.s.s against faithless Jews, and certainly with Catholic princes it should have greater influence than all objections of the adversaries.

Besides, in speaking of the advent of the Messiah the same prophet says: ”And he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.

Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old and as in former years,” Mal. 3:3, 4. Here in the spirit the prophet foresaw the sons of Levi--i.e. evangelical priests, says Jerome--about to offer sacrifices, not in the blood of goats, but in righteousness, as in the days of old. Hence these words are repeated by the Church in the canon of the ma.s.s under the influence of the same Spirit under whose influence they were written by the prophet. The angel also said to Daniel: ”Many shall be purified and made white and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand.” And again: ”The wise shall understand; and from the time that the daily sacrifices shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days,” Dan. 12:10, 11. Christ testifies that this prophecy is to be fulfilled, but that it has not been as yet fulfilled, Matt. 24:15. Therefore the daily sacrifice of Christ will cease universally at the advent of the abomination--i.e. of Antichrist--just as it has already ceased, particularly in some churches, and thus will be unemployed in the place of desolation--viz. when the churches will be desolated, in which the canonical hours will not be chanted or the ma.s.ses celebrated or the sacraments administered, and there will be no altars, no images of saints, no candles, no furniture. Therefore all princes and faithful subjects of the Roman Empire ought to be encouraged never to admit or pa.s.s over anything that may aid the preparers of Antichrist in attaining such a degree of wickedness, when the woman--i.e. the Catholic Church--as St. John saw in the Spirit, will flee into the wilderness, where she will have a place prepared of G.o.d, that she may be nourished there twelve hundred and sixty days, Rev.

12:6. Finally, St. Paul says, Heb. 5:1: ”Every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to G.o.d, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins.” But since the external priesthood has not ceased in the new law, but has been changed to a better, therefore even today the high priest and the entire priesthood offer in the Church an external sacrifice, which is only one, the Eucharist. To this topic that also is applicable which is read, according to the new translation, in Acts 13:1, 2: Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen and Saul sacrificed--i.e. they offered an oblation, which can and ought justly to be understood not of an oblation made to idols, but of the ma.s.s, since it is called by the Greeks liturgy. And that in the primitive Church the ma.s.s was a sacrifice the holy fathers copiously testify, and they support this opinion. For Ignatius, a pupil of St. John the Apostle, says: ”It is not allowable without a bishop either to offer a sacrifice or to celebrate ma.s.ses.”

And Irenaeus, a pupil of John, clearly testifies that ”Christ taught the new oblation of the New Testament, which the Church, receiving from the apostles, offers to G.o.d throughout the entire world.” This bishop, bordering upon the times of the apostles, testifies that the new evangelical sacrifice was offered throughout the entire world. Origin, Cyprian, Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, Basil, Hilary, etc., teach and testify the same, whose words for brevity's sake are omitted. Since, therefore, the Catholic Church throughout the entire Christian world has always taught, held and observed as it today holds and observes, the same ought today to be held and observed inviolably. Nor does St. Paul in Hebrews oppose the oblation of the ma.s.s when he says that by one offering we have once been justified through Christ. For St. Paul is speaking of the offering of a victim--i.e. of a b.l.o.o.d.y sacrifice, of a lamb slain, viz. upon the cross--which offering was indeed once made whereby all sacraments, and even the sacrifice of the ma.s.s, have their efficacy. Therefore he was offered but once with the shedding of blood--viz. upon the cross; today he is offered in the ma.s.s as a peace making and sacramental victim. Then he was offered in a visible form capable of suffering; today he is offered in the ma.s.s veiled in mysteries, incapable of suffering, just as in the Old Testament he was sacrificed typically and under a figure. Finally, the force of the word shows that the ma.s.s is a sacrifice, since ”ma.s.s” is nothing but ”oblation,” and has received its name from the Hebrew word misbeach, altar--in Greek thysiasterion, on account of the oblation. It has been sufficiently declared above that we are justified not properly by faith, but by love. But if any such statement be found in the Holy Scriptures, Catholics know that it is declared concerning fides formata, which works by love (Gal. 5), and because justification is begun by faith, because it is the substance of things hoped for. Heb. 11:1. Neither is it denied that the ma.s.s is a memorial of Christ's pa.s.sion and G.o.d's benefits, since this is approved b the figure of the paschal lamb, that was at the same time a victim and a memorial, Ex. 12:13, 14, and is represented not only by the Word and sacraments, but also by holy postures and vestments in the Catholic Church; but to the memory of the victim the Church offers anew the Eucharist in the mysteries to G.o.d the Father Almighty.

Therefore the princes and cities are not censured for retaining one common ma.s.s in the Church, provided they do this according to the sacred canon, as observed by all Catholics. But in abrogating all other ma.s.ses they have done what the Christian profession does not allow. Nor does any one censure the declaration that of old all who were present communed. Would that all were so disposed as to be prepared to partake of this bread worthily every day! But if they regard one ma.s.s advantageous, how much more advantageous would be a number of ma.s.ses, of which they nevertheless have unjustly disapproved. When all these things are properly considered we must ask them to altogether annul and repudiate this new form of celebrating the ma.s.s that has been devised, and has been already so frequently changed, and to resume the primitive form for celebrating it according to the ancient rite and custom of the churches of Germany and all Christendom, and to restore the abrogated ma.s.ses according to the ultimate will of their founders; whereby they would gain advantage and honor for themselves and peace and tranquility for all Germany.

IV. Of Confession.

As to confession, we must adhere to the reply and judgement given above in Article XI. For the support which they claim from Chrysostom is false, since they pervert to sacramental and sacerdotal confession what he says concerning public confession, as his words clearly indicate when in the beginning he says: ”I do not tell thee to disclose thyself to the public or to accuse thyself before others.” Thus Gratian and thus Peter Lombard replied three hundred years ago; and the explanation becomes still more manifest from other pa.s.sages of Chrysostom. For in his twenty-ninth sermon he says of the penitent: ”In his heart is contrition, in his mouth confession, in his entire work humility. This is perfect and fruitful repentance.” Does not this most exactly display the three parts of repentance? So in his tenth homily on Matthew, Chrysostom teaches of a fixed time for confession, and that after the wounds of crimes have been opened they should be healed, penance intervening. But how will crimes lie open if they are not disclosed to the priest by confession? Thus in several pa.s.sages Chrysostom himself refutes this opinion, which Jerome also overthrows, saying: ”If the serpent the devil have secretly bitten any one, and without the knowledge f another have infected him with the poison of sin, if he who has been struck be silent and do not repent, and be unwilling to confess his wound to his brother and instructor, the instructor, who has a tongue wherewith to cure him, will not readily be able to profit him.

For if the sick man be ashamed to confess to the physician, the medicine is not adapted to that of which he is ignorant.” Let the princes and cities, therefore, believe these authors rather than a single gloss upon a decree questioned and rejected by those who are skilled in divine law. Wherefore, since a full confession is, not to say, necessary for salvation, but becomes the nerve of Christian discipline and the entire obedience, they must be admonished to conform to the orthodox Church.

For, according to the testimony of Jerome, this was the heresy of the Montanist, who were condemned over twelve hundred years ago because they were ashamed to confess their sins. It is not becoming, therefore, to adopt the error of the wicked Monta.n.u.s, but rather the rite of the holy fathers and the entire Church--viz. that each one teach, according to the norm of the orthodox faith, that confession, the chief treasure in the Church, be made in conformity to the rite kept among them also in the Church.

V. Of the Distinction of Meats.

What they afterwards a.s.sert concerning the distinction of meats and like traditions, of which they seem to make no account, must be rejected. For we know from the apostle that all power is of G.o.d, and especially that ecclesiastical power has been given by G.o.d for edification: for this reason, from the Christian and devout heart of the holy Church the const.i.tutions of the same holy, catholic and apostolic Church should be received as are useful to the Church, as well for promoting divine wors.h.i.+p as for restraining the l.u.s.t of the flesh, while they enable us the more readily to keep the divine commands, and when well considered are found in the Holy Scriptures; and he who despises or rashly resists them grievously offends G.o.d, according to Christ's word: ”He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth Him that sent me.” Luke 10:16. A prelate, however, is despised when his statutes are despised, according to St.

Paul, not only when he says: ”He that despiseth, despiseth not man, but G.o.d, who hath also given unto us his Holy Spirit,” 1 Thess. 4:8, but also to the bishops: ”Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to rule (Vulgate) the Church of G.o.d,” Acts 20:28. If prelates, therefore, have the power to rule, they will have the power also to make statutes for the salutary government of the Church and the growth of subjects. For the same apostle enjoined upon the Corinthians that among them all things should be done in order, 1 Cor. 14:40; but this cannot be done without laws. On that account he said to the Hebrews: ”Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves; for they watch for your souls, as they that must give an account,” Heb. 13:17. Here St. Paul reckons not only obedience, but also the reason for obedience. We see that St. Paul exercised this power, as, in addition to the Gospel, he prescribed so many laws concerning the choice of a bishop, concerning widows, concerning women, that they have their heads veiled, that they be silent in the church, and concerning even secular matters, 1 Thess.

4:1, 2, 6; concerning civil courts, 1 Cor. 6:1ff. And he says to the Corinthians very clearly: ”But to the rest speak I, not the Lord.”