The Papists call the Masse their Liturgy or their Service-Booke. THat yee may behold the generall ac­cord, if not identitie of our Liturgie and Service Booke, with the Masse: consi­der first the words, and then the matter; for the words, the Papists most gladly will call their Masse by the name of our Service and Liturgy. And wee must make no question to call our Liturgy or Service by the name of their Masse, for the accord of Papists to our name, see the Iesuit Sainctes in his Liturgy. pag. 8. printed at Anwerp. 1560. professing that the most convenient name which can be given to the Masse, is that of Liturgy and Service. Si placet Missah Hebraeorum ad Graecos traducere, quo id fa­cias aptissimè, non aliud quàm Liturgias nomen comperies, contra si liturgiam Graecorum vis ad linguam sanctam re­vocare per Missah id cures necesse est. Si Latinè utrum­que postulas nullum quàm officij nomen significantius habe­bitur quo Latina Ecclesia cum agitur de sacrificio saepè de­lectatur.

The Prelati­call men call their Liturgy the Masse.For our contentment to take their name of Masse to our Service, see Pocklington, Sunday no Sabbath, subscri­bed by Canterburies Chaplaine about the midst, where from a supposititious testimonie of Ambrose, he will have [Page 2] the saying of their second service at the Altar, to be just the same with that which that Authout calles Missam facere caepi dimissis catechumenis, that none but Schisma­ticks will denie their harmonie with the ancients in this Missification: but it is not onely that part of the Litur­gy which they have of late begun to call the second ser­vice, to which they will give the style of Masse, as Co­zens used to doe long agoe in Durham, where the for­mer part of the Communion hee was wont to call the Matins, and the latter the Masse, as ye may see in Smarts Sermon printed at Edinburgh 1628. But the whole Ser­vice Pocklington will stile with the name of Masse in the foresaid Sermon towards the end; where this suppositi­tious testimony of Austin, quidam cogunt sacerdotem ut abbreviet Missam, & ad eorum libidinem cantet, he trans­lates, some force the Priest to curtall Divine Service, or to say or sing it after their phansie. Bishop Montagu in his Antidiatribae pag. 10. makes no scruple of the Masse so farre as concernes the word; yea, and the matter too, if ye put a commodious sense upon it. Missam ipsam non damnamus quoad vocem quippe cùm nihil impietatis habeat, sed neque Missae [...] sano sensu intellectum. In the words here betwixt the parties you see a perfect agreement.

Our men ap­prove the mat­ter of the Masse.In the matter, consider if there be any discord of impor­tance, the English not refusing to approve the Masse, the Papists not refusing to approve the Liturgie. For the first, Pocklington in his Altar neere the end is approved by Can­terbury to professe upō a very false alleagence, that K. Iames would like well enough of the Masse, if the Priest would shrive it of Transubstantiation: now any may defend that Transubstantiatiō cannot be inferred by any sound reasō from any part of the Masse as it is read at Rome, or if it be inferred from any passage therin, then from these mainlie which of late have beene put in our Booke: so that they who like of the Masse, if it wanted Transubstantiation may like of it as it stands this day at Rome; for Transub­stantiatiō cannot be deduced from the words of it, but by the glosses of the interpreters, which may agree as well to the words of our Service, as to these of their Missall [Page 3] how ever Transubstantiation it selfe will not deterr us from the Masse: here Montagu imbracing that word as well as the other of the Masse, Antidiat. p. 10. De vo­cibus dixi ne missae quidem imò ne transubstantiationis certa­men moveremus. And how farre hee is from the matter of Transubstantiation wee will finde hereafter; here onely marke how neere hee drawes the Romish Masse and English Liturgy in his recusancie. p. 1. [Our ser­vice is the same in most things with that in the Church of Rome, the differences are not great, nor should make any separation] how small a difference they put betwixt their service and the Masse, see the Letter of the King and his Councell in King Edwards dayes, Acts and Mo­numents, vol. 2. p. 667. [As for the service in the Eng­lish tongue, it perchance seemes to you a new service, and yet indeede it is no other but the old, the selfe-same words in English which were in Latine, having a few things taken out. If the service of the Church was good in Latine, it remaineth good in English; for nothing is altered, but to speake with knowledge, that which was spoken with ignorance.]

The Papists approve the matter of the Liturgy.Thus doe the English Prelates judge of the matter of the Masse, heare what the Papists say of the matter of the Liturgy. Pope Pius the fourth is said to have offered his approbation to the Liturgy. For this see Mortons appeale, p ult. also Cambden his life of Queene Elizabeth, p. 46. in these words. The Pope, Pius-quartus sent unto her Vincentio Parpalia, Abbot of S. Saviors with secret in­structions and letters of flatterie, the report goes that the Pope gave his faith that he would confirme the English Liturgy by his authority, so as shee would joyne herselfe to the Romish Church, and acknowledge the primacie of the chaire of Rome; yea, and that certaine thousand crownes were promised to those that should procure the same. The Councell of Trent was nothing opposite to this offer of the Pope, for about that same time being consulted by the Popish Nobility of England, if it was lawfull for them to countenance the Liturgy, they did no waies discharge or give any signe of disallowance to [Page 4] this fact albeit they would not give any act of their ap­probation when there was no condition of advantage propounded to them. Yea long thereafter Pope Grego­ry the 13. repeated the offer of Pius to the Queene of ap­proving the Liturgy upon her admission of his Primacie, for this see the late Bishop of Canterbury, Doctor Abbots in his expli [...]at [...]o illustrium quaestionum c. 4. p. 112. Cùm testi­bus Pontificijs magnates aliquot nobilèsque Anglicani per lega­tos inea quaestione Concilium Tridentinum interpellârint prae memoriae lapsu aut oblivione patres non omiserunt, quin potiùs credo per conniventiam quandā tacitos praeterijsse prospicientes quam incommodum futurumesset tot tantisque suarum partium aut carceris aut exilij molestiam facessere, & nesciebant an ali quis venturus esset Pontifex, qui jacturâ suae partis deliberatè perpensâ ad damnum resarciendum liturgiam Anglicanam pos­set approbare & confirmare, id quod à Papa Gregorio 13. Reginae oblatum fuisse modò titulus supremae gubernationis Romanae sedi redderetur, pervagato hominum & magnorum sermone jactitatum aliquando significat Houlettus num verè illud an falsò nescio, at solet ex indulgentia sua sanctissimus Pater quae videntur duriora nonnunquam concedere quo faciliùs secreta sui cordis desideria amplissimè consequatur. By these testimo­nies it is cleare, how neere the Papists thinke the Liturgy drawes to their Masse, and how neere the Prelates think the Masse to come to their Liturgy both in words and matter. But it will be more manifest how litle either of the parties are deceived in this their judgement, If wee will cut both the Bodies of the Masse and Liturgy in small parts, and so lay limbe to limbe, and member to member, here will the analogie or disproportion, the agreement or disagreement, the diversity or identitie ap­peare to the eye of any common beholder.

What are the parts of the Masse.The most received division of an whole is into parts essentiall, integrall or subjective, to finde the essentiall parts of the Masse actually, and in expresse words in our service is no great labour: For to the essence of the sacri­fice of the Masse are required but two things, or three at the most, according to Bellarmine de missa, Lib. 1. c. 27. To wit, the consecration, the oblation not before nor [Page 5] after but in the consecration, and thirdly the consumpti­on in the Priests receiving alone in both the kinds, these will be all found as expressely in our Booke as in the Missall as heereafter shall be shewed.

The subjective parts of the Masse are the divers kinds and species of the Masse, for of Masses some are ordinary and daylie, some extraordinary and solemne, and these againe of a great number according to the-severall festi­vities wherein and diverse ends for which they are cele­brated upon these severall sorts of Masses, the greatest part of the Missall is spent, and upon these likewise more then two parts of our Booke are consumed.

But the parts of the Masse most cōmonly spoken of are the integral of the daily & ordinary Masse, with these let us begin, & that with those which are principall. The ne­cessary ceremonies or circumstances especially the univer­sall ones w^ch run along the whole body of the Masse, such as the Priest, the altar, the vestments, the crossings, the perfumings, &c. may well receive the names of parts, at least the large & frequent Rubricks concerning them, but because these are but ceremonies & at best but among the integral parts lesse principall, we wil let them alone till we have first considered these which are confessed by all to bee most principall members of this unhappie body, of these more or fewer are made according to the diverse conceptions of writers. Innocentius reduceth all to three heads, Bellarmin to foure, Durandus to five, Thomas to sixe.

Bellarmines foure parts de Missa. lib. 2. c. 21. are first Missa Catechumenorum, the part of the ordinary Masse whereat the Catechumeni might have bin present: se­condly, the Offertory thirdly, the Consecration or Canon: fourthly, the Communion. Our Service at the Communion hath all these parts in the same order, the first part in the English, seemed not cleerely enough di­stinguished, for there followed no mention immediately of an offertory, nor at all of a consecration, but in our Booke all are clearely professed and in England now also are like to be better considered, for the Missa Catechume­norum by Canterburies men is called the first Service, per­formed [Page 6] in the body of the Church, the rest as the Missa fidelium is called the second Service, and appointed to bee officiate onely at the Altar, and that in the Quire, none present but onely Communicants, expressely against the old Canons and Customes o [...] that Church, which now no man but a Schismaticke must challenge; for this see Pocklington in his Sunday no Sabboth about the middest [dimissis catechumenis missam facere caepi. Saint Ambrose beganne the second Service as our Church calls it, at the Altar, having before finished the first Service in the bo­dy of the Church, no man will goe about to put away this sweet harmony which our Church still keepes with antiquitie but Schismatickes.]

But passing the division or Bellarmine, wee will follow that of Thomas in his third p. quaest. 83. art. 4. in corp. as serving more to cleare that blacke body which hath in­deede much neede of clearing, as being the most mistie and darke piece that ever my hand touched. He drawes it to sixe heads, the first he calles a preparation, the next an instruction, the third an offertory, the fourth a con­secration, the fift a participation, the sixt a Thankesgi­ving: all these we will goe through in order.

The ten Par­ticles of the introitus are but all late in­ventions of Popes, and yet all are in our Booke.THe preparation is subdivided in a number of par­cells. 1. The Pater Noster. 2. The Ave Maria. 3. The Oration. 4. The Introitus. 5. The Uersicle, Gloria Pa­tri. 6. The Confession 7. The Misereatur. 8. The Ab­solution. 9. The Letany Kyrie eleison. 10. The Ange­like hymne, Gloria in excelsis. 11. The Salutation, Domi­nus vobiscum, with the responsorie & cum Spiritu tuo. 12. The Collects. All these goe oft under one name of introitus, being but the beginning and ingresse to that [Page 7] which followes. All these ten or twelve parts of the Masse, are but so many patches put in by the superstition of severall Popes, the truth of this, who pleases to see, set them reade Morney de Missa. c. 1. p. 80. and c. 3. p. 107. And especially his Authors Walafridus, Berno, Albinus, Tungrensis, &c. In the eleventh Tome of Bibliotheca Patrum, Hittorpius his auctarium. For the present I cite but two testimonies which will not admit Bellarmines elusi­on from two Popes which laboured as much to under­stand the Masse as any of their Collegues either before or after, Gregory ep. l. 7. Epist. 63. Mos Apostolorum fuit ut adipsam solummodò Orationem Dominicam oblationis hosti­am consecrarent & valdè mihi inconveniens visum est, ut pre­cem quam Scholasticus composuerat super oblationem dicere­mus, & ipsam traditionem quam Dominus composuerat non diceremus. He avowes that the Apostolicke times had no other order of Communion but to say the Lords Prayer with the institution from the Gospel, and Saint Pauls Epistles as I take it, also that the very Canon it self, let be the preparation, was made by a late Scholar, Innocent 3. de Mysterijs Missae Lib. 2. c. 18. Caelestinus Papa constituit ut Psalmi ante sacrificium canerentur anti­phonatim, quod anteà non fiebat, sed Epistola tantùm & Evan­gelium legebantur. So before Caelestine none of these ten or twelve parts of the introitus were extant, nothing was read or sung before the Epistle or the Gospel: of the Church of Rome Bellarmine grants this, but he hath bet­ter reason to grant it of other Churches, for reade these Liturgies which falsely are ascribed to James, to Ba­sile, to Chrysostome, composed as it seemes in the very late and corrupt times of the Easterne Church, yee will finde at most but some Psalmes and prayers for con­fession of sinnes, all diverse from these in the Masse, and diverse also among themselves. So then wee may take all the parcells of this first part of the Masse to bee the Popes invention, which either for antiquity or universa­litie are not much considerable, yet such peeces must bee obtruded on us, for try which of them our Bookes do not beare.

1. The Pater Noster,The first, the Pater Noster; not that wherby the Apo­stles are said to consecrate, for that followeth in the Missall, and our booke also long thereafter, but that which the order of Sarum puts immediately after the introitus, with this our Communion beginnes, it is the first words the Priest sayes at the Altar after the Ro­man order of the Pontificall Masse, where this Pater Noster is the first speech which the Pope reades at the altar, for thus doth the Pontificall printed at Lions 1542. testifie, fol. 119. p. 2. Quibus indutus surgit Pontifex & ad altare stans detecto capite, dicit, Pater Noster qui es in coelis, &c. And this as it seemes according to the Canon before the Breviarie rubricae generalis. c. 32. Pater Noster & Ave Maria semper dicuntur secretò ante omnes horas, so wee see that our Matins must beginne with it, and our Masse also.

2. The Ave Maria.As for the second parcell, the Angelike salutati­on, Ave Maria, it is not actually in our Booke; but may wee not say it is in it potentially? when my L. of Canterbury (in whose power it will be to put into it at the next edition these passages of antiquity, which will bee found expedient for our further union with other Chri­ans) hath permitted Mr. Stafford to print at London of late the defence of the Popish use of this salutation to sing in his Poems omnis terra revibrat ave, and to invey in his Prose against Puritans, who have left this practise of their ance [...]ors: These are his words towards the end of his female glorie. [The Puritants reject all testimo­nies of her worth, as Haile Marie full of grace, the Lord is with thee; they challenge to themselves a greater measure of knowledge, but a lesser of pietie then had their ancestors, by disclaiming words and phrases familiar to antiquity; of one thing I will assure them, till they be good Marians, they s [...]all never be good Christians while they derogate from the dignity of the mother, they can­not honour the Son.] When these words are challenged, Peter Heylen appointed by Canterbury to answer, and Chrystopher Dow allowed in the answer, hee was pleased to make, doth not retract or disallow any thing in these [Page 9] sayings: What then shall we expect from our Bishops, but a Canon to injoyne those who will not bee Puritans, who will not leave the pietie of their Ancestors, who will not be contemners of CHRIST; That they be­come at last so good Marians as to joyne hereafter, their Ave Maria at the back of their Pater noster?

3. The Orati­on.The third part of the preparation, is the First Collect, the very name is little lesse then the Masse, if we beleeve Bellarmine; he counts the Collects the chiefe parts of the Masse: for the which the Masse it selfe uses to be called a Collect, eaedem collectae dicuntur Missae, quia sunt pars quae­dam eáque non minima Missae. L. 2. de Missa. cap. 16. This first Collect in the Missall of Sarum, is the same with our first Prayer after the Pater noster to a Letter. Thus speaks the Priest in the Masse: Deus cui omne cor patet & omnis voluntas loquitur — quem nullum latet secretum, purifica per infusionem S. Spiritus cogitationes cordis nostri, ut te per­fectè diligere, & dignè laudare mereamur, per Dominum no­strum Iesum Christum, Amen. Missale ad usum Ecclesiae Sarisburiensis Parisijs 1555. fol. 141. And wee turne it Almightie GOD, &c.

4. The Introi­tus.The Fourth part is the Jntroitus, the 43. Psalme so called, because sung by the Quire antiphonatim, while the Priest is comming in, or rather for that fourth ver­sicle of it, introibo ad altare Dei which is most chanted: This is not in our Booke actually, yea, w [...]e think it was put out of the English expresly, both for the great impertinencie of it, and also the evident abuse, which was made of that introibo ad altare, meaning it, of the in­going of a Priest to a proper Altar, for as proper sacrifi­cing as was in the old Testament: yet wee may take it virtually to be in our Booke, for it's a part of the Masse which Canterburie professeth he likes well, and sayes, (but not truly) that it is in the Church of England, these are his words in his Speech before the Starre-Chamber, p. 44. [After the Iudaicall worship was ended, as farre upward as there is any tract of a Liturgie, this was the introitus of the Priest all the Latine-Church over, and in the daylie prayers of the Church of England, this was retained at the Reforma­tion.] [Page 10] I thinke his Grace is mistaken in that he sayes, ve­nite was the introitus in the Latine-Church, for all the Missalls I have seen of the Romish-Church, which to him are the Liturgies of the Latin-Church, have never venite for the introitus, only in the Breviarie, it is the invitatorie for the Matins, and so the English retained it, indeed the Greek-Church uses it for the introitus, as we read in For­tunatus Antiphonarie, Cap. 21: But never the Latine. I grant the Papists could be content to change, and take in this venite in place of their old introibo, for Heigam in his exposition of the Masse, approved by the Doctours of Doway, printed at S^t. Omers, 1622. p. 83. avowes that the Angels were heard to sing in Constantinople, this venite a­doremus for the Introitus, but most falsly: for all that his Author Fortunatus sayes, in the forenamed place, in their own edition at Paris, 1610. is, hunc Psalmum audivi Con­stantinopoli, in Ecclesia. S. Sophiae in principio Missae cele­brari, the singing of it by the Angels, is Heigams false ad­dition to Fortunatus. However my Lord of Canterburie showes his good liking of the Latin introitus, and, albeit he mistake the Psalme, yet that which wee most except against in the Latin true Introitus, hee does approve of it; for let bee to approve the Priests introibo ad altare, he adds the convenience, not only to goe in to the Altar, but to adore even the Altar it selfe; Domino & altari ejus, which he alleages, the English-Book imports: albeit, au­thoritie too loose heere, does not constrain the practice. This is much more than the Romish introitus, albeit, no more than the Papists practice, according to other parts of their Masse.

5. The Gloria Patri.The Fift part, is their Gloria Patri. This wee have more formally then they, for according to our Rubrick, i [...] must be sung at the backe of every Psalme; yea, of eve­ry Hymne: but the Roman Rubrick admits sundrie dispensations. Breviarium Roman. Rubricae generales, cap. 21. In fine Psalmorum semper dicitur, Gloria Patri praeter­quàm, &c. For the matter of this Hymne, let it be as old as Bellarmine can make it, yet the first Author who can be alleaged for putting it in the Masse, is Pope Damasus, [Page 11] and that as Bellarmine avowes on false grounds; yea, the joyning of it to the back of any Psalmes, seemes later, let be the putting of it in the Masse, but the singing of it after the fashion of our Booke, is a new invention to hinder the people to sing, Glorie to the Father, and to the Sonne, to hinder the Minister to sing, as it was in the be­ginning, to make the first, the Priests song alone, the second, the peoples responsorie onely, is the Romanists very late invention: We are rold by Isidor, and the rest of the old Rationalists, that the answering of the people was the invention of the Italians, as the Reciprocrations and Antiphonies was the invention of the Greeks: but this answering of the people, which in our Booke is ordained at the back of Gloria Patri, is a Noveltie much later then any of these old Writers on the Masse: for Walafridus cap. 25. shewes, that the Hymne was no wayes divided in his dayes; but in all Churches it was one passage, sung without division of parts, albeit with varietie, the Spanish Church keeping this forme Gloria & honor Patri, & filio, & Spiritui sancto in saecula saeculorum, Amen. Latini verò eodem ordine & ijsdem verbis hunc hymnum decantant, adden­tes tantúm in medio, sicut erat in principio. Berno hath the same observation: So that this part of our Booke, seems to follow the late Roman orders against the practice, not only of all the Reformed Churches, but all the anci­ent also: yea, more precise are we here, than the Roma­nists themselves, as I have said.

6. The Kyrie eleison.The sixt part, is the Kyrie eleyson, this is a very powerfull and efficacious part of the Masse, Magna est istorum verborum efficacia sayes Durand the Rationalist lib. 4. on this Rubrick, legitur enim quód dum beatus Basilius Kyrie eleison clamasset, portae vicinae Ecclesiae sint apertae, rursus cùm B. Geminianus Kyrie eleison clamaret quinque Reges conversi dicuntur in fugam, unde fortè significat aliud quàm Domine miserere, quod tamen nos ignoramus. These so miraculous words are used in the Masse, and put at the back of the song of Jntroitus, mainly to obtain mer­cy to the Quiristers, whose mind by the melodie of their song, was puffed up to vaine Pride, so does Amalarius [Page 12] shew us. Kyrie eleison necessariò constitutum est à praecepte­ribus Ecclesiae, ut cantores post finitam antiphonam, deprecen­tur Domini misericordiam, quae deprimat inanem jactantiam quae solet sequi cantores: habent enim quandam exultationem propter egregiam compositionem melodiarum. This was put into the Masse by Pope Gregory, a Father of many other Superstitions, he confesseth in his 63. Epistle of the se­venth Booke, that he changed the Greeke forme; for it was their custome, when their Priest did make the pray­er for the people, by way of assent, to subjoyne [...] as you have it in Morney de Missa. lib. 1. cap. 7. from Sidonius Apollinaris. Gregory would keepe the Greeke words, he would have them thrice repeated, he would make them to be said by the Clergie, and the people only to answer, he would have the Name of Christ put in the midst, thus farre he counselleth. But his successour Innocent the third, tells us more; that the intention of these three sentences, is to call on God the Father, Son and holy Ghost, for to obtaine mercy for three kindes of sinne, Originall, Mortall, and Veniall: yea, to ob­taine from the Father, mercie for sinnes of Infirmitie which are against him, from the Sonne, sinnes of Igno­rance which are against him, from the Holy Ghost, sinnes of Malice which are against him. Est peccatum fragilitatis per impotentiam, simplicitatis, per ignorantiam, malignitatis, per invidentiam, hoc est, peccatum in Patrem, peccatum in Filium, peccatum in Spiritum Sanctum. B. Gregorius Kyrie eleison ad Missam cantari praecepit à Clero quod apud Graecos ab omni populo cantabatur. This order our Booke followes, the Presbyter saying, let us pray: Lord have mercy upon us, Christ have mercy upon us, Lord have mercy upon us. For the language they will make no scruple, they keep latin words enough as obscure as these Greeke ones, to wit, Benedictus, Magnificat, Venite, &c. Andrews in his Sermon of Imaginations, after the begin­ning, maintaines the lawfulnesse of this practice, in these words. [Some will heare no Greeke or Latine, yet S. Paul feared not to use termes as strange to the Corinthi­ans as Maranatha, Belial, Abba, which easily he might [Page 13] have expounded: but it liked him to retain his Libertie in this point.] Neither will the Papists stand much in this point to the Greek, for they grant that the Greeks themselves, pronounce these words in Latine. So Al­binus de celebratione Missae, Kyrie eleison Latinè Graeci, & Graecè Latini proferunt. Biblo. patr. auctar. pag. 278. E.

7. After the Introitus, Gloria Patri, Kyrie eleison fol­lowes the Confiteor, 7. The Confi­teor. where first the Priest confesseth his sinnes, and the people say, Misereatur: Then the peo­ple confesse their sinnes, and the Priest sayes, Mise­reatur, praying for Mercie and Absolution. This Con­fession is generall, no particular enumeration; it is on­ly of Veniall sinnes, and the Absolution is not Sacra­mentall: for the particular Confession is in secret before the Masse, and to this auricular Confession, the Priest pronounceth the Sacramentall Absolution. Innocen. lib. 2.13. Pontifex de peccatis suis cum astantibus confitetur. Illud autem in hac confessione notandum est, quia non in specie sed in genere confitenda sunt peccata, quoniam ista confessio non est occulta sed manifesta; To this Durand addes, that the Psalme of Confession was put in the Masse by Pope Coelestine, Rubrica de confessione, Heigams exposition of the Masse. cap. 22. [As the Confession was generall, so the Absolution is general which the Priest gives only by way of Prayer, and not of Sacrament, as that ego te ab­solvo, and extendeth it selfe no farther, than to the taking away of Veniall sinnes.] This he learned from Hugo de Sancto Victore, fit communis confessio ut mundemur à pec­catis venialibus, fine quibus communis vita non facilè ducitur. Consider whether all these three parts may be said to be actually in our Booke; both the Confiteor, the Miserea­tur, and the Absolution, the Confiteor and the Miserea­tur is twice in the Masse, the Absolution but once, so is it with us. The Confession of sinnes in the Masse, is shorter, confiteor quod peccavi nimis cogitatione, loquutione, & opere which we say, not only thus shortly; [Wee acknowledge our manifold sinnes which wee have grie­vously committed, in thought, word, and deede.] But [Page 14] in our first Confession, wee goe through all the tenne Commandments, and craves a Misereatur for every one of them.

And this forme of Confession wee have learned from the houres of the Virgin Mary, after the order of Sarum, printed at Paris 1533. where, after the Latine prayer is subjoyned a forme of Confession in English, going through all the 10. Commandments, & acknowledging the breach of everie one with this conclusion: [whereof I cry God mercy] that this our Confession is so generall, that it excludes mortall sinnes to the auricular confession before the Sacrament, I can hardly thinke: yet wee see that the Rubrick expresly calls this Confession generall: Also we know that the English Divines of the faction, doe now distinguish betwixt Mortall & Veniall sins, and that the speciall Confession whereto the Rubrick in the visitation of the sicke referres, is applycd now by them to an auricular Confession, to be made by all the Com­municants before the Communion: However this dou­ble Confession of the Masse, and our double Confession, seemes to be really one.

8. The Mise­reatur.8. As for the Misereatur, its one, word by word in both Bookes; for so the Missall of Sarum. pag. 141. Mi­sereatur vestri omnipotens Deus, & dimittat vobis omnia pec­cata vestra, liberet vos ob omni malo & confirmet in bono, & ad vitam perducat aeternam, Amen. This wee turne, [Almightie GOD, have mercy upon you, pardon & de­liver you from all your sinnes, confirme and strengthen you in all goodnesse, and bring you to everlasting life, through Iesus Christ our Lord, Amen.]

9. The Abso­lution.9. The Absolution of the Priest in the Masse, and of the Priest in the Liturgie, differeth not in the matter; there it is, deinde dicat sacerdos absolutionem & remissionem omnium peccatorum vestrorum, spatium verae poenitentiae & emendationem vitae, gratiam & consolationem Sp. sancti tribu­at vobis omnipotens & misericors Deus. Sciendum est quicun­que sacerdos officium exequatur, semper Episcopus si praesens fuerit dicat absolutionem. With us [then shall the Presby­ter, or the Bishop being present, pronounce this Absolu­tion. [Page 15] Almightie GOD have mercy, &c.] Both the Ab­solutions are nought, but a prayer for Remission. There is indeede in the Confiteor of Sarum, two clauses about the Saints, which our Confession wants; for it sayes thus: Confiteor Deo, beatae Mariae, omnibus sanctis & vo­bis, quod peccavi nimis, precor sanctam Mariam, omnes sanctos Dei, & vos orate pro me, the last clause of the prayer to Mary and the Saints, no marvell that our Booke leaves it out, for the Roman Missall hath put it out before us: See fol. 26. Micrologus also hath put it away in the Parish Edition of Labigne. 1609. In his 23 chap. Thus he recits that portion: Confiteor Deo om­nipotenti, istis Sanctis, & omnibus Sanctis, & tibi frater quia peccavi in cogitatione, loquutione, & opere, ideò pre­cor te, ora pro me. But our men will not care much, in their Confession to put in both these clauses. For as shall be showen when we come to the Canon, they do defend the lawfulnesse of praying to the Saints and Angels, yea they pray by the Merits of the Saints, to obtaine grace from GOD. So Field writes, but yee must remember it is a posthume appendix, which the World saw not, till the 1628. When my Lord of Canterbury sate in London and made that same yeere Bishop Andrewes tell us many strange tales after his death, as a little after Bishop Mountague made Doctour Overhall after his death also speake to the World, very uncouth language, as we shall heare hereafter.

10. The next part is the Angelike-Hymne 10. The An­gelike hymne. which is in our Book, word by word: Thus speakes the Priest after the order of Sarum: Gloria in excelsis Deo, & in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis, laudamus te, benedicimus te, ado­ramus te, glorificamus te, gratias agimus tibi propter magnam gloriam tuam Domine Deus Rex coelestis, Deus pater omnipo­tens, Domine fili unigenite Iesu Christe, Domine Deus agnus Dei, filius Patris qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis, qui tollis peccata mundi suscipe deprecationem nostram, qui sedes ad dextram patris, miserere nobis, quoniam tu solus sanctus, tu solus Dominus, tu solus altissimus Iesu Christe cum S. Spiritu in gloria Dei Patris, Amen. Conferre this [Page 16] with our Booke, you will finde it translated to a Letter. This piece of the Masse, is a patch of many hands; the first words of it are Scripture, the words of the Angel in Christs nativitie. This was put in the Masse, as Albinus alleages, by Telesphorus, and was ordained to be sung e­very Sunday by Symmachus long thereafter; the rest of these words after the Angels words, are ascribed to Hi­larie, but this Albinus proves by no authoritie, and him­selfe lived in so late and fabulous a time, that we may not leane to his writ. It is confessed that a number of the Churches hymnes, which used to be ascribed to Hilarie and Ambrose, are the fruit of dull and base Spirits, many hundred yeares after the death of these Fathers. The words of Alcuin are; Telesphorus natione Graecus ex ana­choreta, constituit ut hymnus diceretur Angelicus (ante sa­crificium ad Missam nocturnam natalis Domini, as Innocent comments it) Symmachus post Telesphorum quadragesimus quintus constituit, ut omni die Dominico & natalitijs Marty­rum idem hymnus diceretur. Auct. Bibl. patr. p. 276. E. In­cipit sacerdos hymnum ab Angelis decantatum, sed à beato Hi­lario Pictaviensi posteà auctum & consummatum, & hoc ip­sum ad imitationem Angelorum: From this place this tale by the rest of the Rationalists, is chanted and rechanted, according to their custome of transcribing one anothers words, with dissimulation of their Authors. Innocentius puts to this addition, that the Priest in this Song repre­sents the Angels, yea, Christ the great Angel, Mox sequi­tur hymnus Angelicus, quem ille primus inchoando pronuncia [...] qui Angelum magni consilij repraesentat. This Durand and the rest of the later takes from Innocents hand. In this hymne the Missall makes mention of Marie, but neither for invocation nor adoration, and so our men will make no bones of that commemoration.

11. The Sa­lutation.The next part is the Salutation which Sarum fol. 143. thus expresses [vertat se sacerdos ad populum, dicens, Domi­nus vobiscum, & chorus respondeat, & cum Spiritu tuo] Our Booke hath it thus [the Presbyter with a loud voyce pronouncing, the Lord be with you. Answer, and with thy Spirit.] The words of this Salutation, the people [Page 17] may not utter, no not the Deacon, and Durand gives a good reason in Rubrica de Salutatione, Lib. 4. [Sane Dia­conus non dicit Dominus vobiscum per horas eò quòd non ita gerit personam Christi sicut sacerdos, qui eâ in persona Chri­sti utitur.] Howsoever it seemes a mocking of God and man, that this salutation of the people should bee used where no people is, and Innocent, besides many other Popish writers, doth confesse the acts of the Church, which are yet extant in the distinction of consecration, never to say this part of the Masse but where the people at least two persons are with the Priest, yet now it is o­therwise resolved from P. Damianus reasons, that the Priest in his chamber alone may well say Dominus vobis­cum albeit none be with him, because hee must say no other prayers than these which are in the forme appoin­ted by the Church, which must be inviolably kept with­out any change, also in that his pensum which for the Church he sayes to God, the whole Church with whom he is one in faith, is supposed to bee present, and to reape the benefit of his prayer; so speakes he in his trea­tise of Dominus vobiscum. c. 7. [Ecclesiasticae traditionis regulam sive soli, sive cum pluribus uniformiter observate, si enim Doctores Ecclesiae id expedire decernerent in Ecclesiasti­cis officijs, alium multis ordinem tradidissent, sed unum con­tenti remotâ diversitate composuere, unum nos docuerunt or­dinem inviolabili semper observatione tenere, providerunt enim quia quicquid in divinis obsequijs à quolibet Ecclesiae membro reverenter offertur, id etiam fide & devotione cunctorum uni­versaliter exhibetur.] Which most idle superstition our Booke seemes to approve, for the first Rubricke obliges every Presbyter to say the morning prayers, whereof Dominus vobiscum is a part, and gives liberty to say it in private in their secret chamber, as well as in publike in their families or Church.

In the peoples answer, and with thy Spirit; their mea­ning is that God may direct the Priests minde, that hee may have an intention to pray, and to consecrate the sacrifice, else their prayers would not bee accepted, nor the hoste be trasubstantiated; for this see Durand Lib. 4. [Page 18] fol. [Hac responsione populus se refert solûm ad actionem immolationis, ad quam sacerdos accedit, & in qua per Spiritum totaliter elevatus, & ab omni terrenitate prorsus abstractus esse debet.] For this salutation no author in the time of purer antiquity can be alleaged, Bellarmines eldest citati­ons are but trash in the late and corrupter times.

12. The Ore­mus.12. The last part of the preparation is the Oremus, the posterior Collects that stand before the Epistle, of this more or fewer may be used at the Priests discretion, one, three, five, seven, keeping alwaies an unequall number. [Sacerdotes in Missa septenarium numerum non excedant, nā Christus septem petitionibus omnia corporis & animae necessa­ria comprehendit, quia verò Deus numero impari gaudet sum moperè, quidam observant ut impares dicant oratiōes in Missa vel unam, vel tres, vel quinque, vel septem, unam vel tres propter unitatis Sacramentum vel Trinitatis mysterium] This we observe, for at the beginning wee use after the Pater Noster but one, and that word by word from the Masse, here before the Epistle we use three. The first is that of the day which for common is word by word from Sarum, as we shall see in due time; for the present take but one exāple. In the day of Epiphany, see if our Col­lect before the Epistle be not the English of this Oremus. [Deus qui hodierno die unigenitum tuum gentibus stellâ reve­lâsti, concede propitius, ut qui jam te ex fide cognovimus usque ad contemplandam speciem tuae celsitudinis perducamur per eundem Dominum, &c.] The other two are for the King according to the patterne of Sarum also, there is nought in them which a Papist will not subscribe to see their Oremus in Sarum, conclusiones Missarum. [Da quae­sumus omnipotens Deus famulo tuo Regi nostro salutem men­tis & corporis, ut bonis operibus inhaerendo, tuae semper virtu­tis mereatur protectione defendi, per eundem Dominum nost­rum Iesum Christum, Amen.

The Eight parts of the In­struction, are to be found in our Booke.THe second part of the Masse, which Aquinas and others after him call the Instruction, is subdivided in­to eight portions, the first foure onely principall are the Epistle, Gospel, Creede, and Homilie, thes wee have all from the Masse: the next foure are lesse principall and of small consideration, to wit, the Graduall, Halelujah, tractus, and sequentia, these the Papists will dispense with, though they bee left out, and our Book-men may not oppose, though they be put in, but let us goe through all the eight in order.

1. The Epistle.The first is the Epistle, the putting of this peece in the Masse is ascribed to Pope Alexander, and Damasus, so Gemma Animae. cap. 88. [Epistolam & Evangelium Alex­ander Papa ad Missam legi instituit, Hieronymus autem Presbyter Lectionarium, & Evangeliarium, ut hodiè habet Ecclesia, collegit, sed Damasus Papa, ut nunc moris est, legi censuit:] but who ever have put the Epistle in the Masse it seemes incredible, that the abuses of the Epistle, which this day are in the Masse, and in our Booke from it, can have any very ancient, or yet very judicious authour. Why against the order of the New Testament are the Epistles set before the Gospel, the reason which the Ra­tionalists give, is that the Epistles are baser then the Gospel, Alcuin indeed denies this, but Walafridus and the rest after him avow it: also because that the E­pistle hath the office of Iohn the Baptist, making way for the Gospel of Christ, they containe morall instructi­ons, and are but like to the Law, and so their doctrine is of lesse worth then the doctrine of the Gospel: the E­pistle is read by a Subdeacon in a lower place, the people [Page 20] sitting; but the Gospel must bee read at least by a Dea­con in a high place all reverently standing, see Innoc. Lib. 3. c. 29. Durand, Lib. 4. fol. 53. I cite but one passage of Rupertus de divinis officijs. Lib. 1. c. 32. [Epistola vox legis est suam in Joanne imperfectionem profitentis, & ad per­fectionem Evangelicam suos auditores transmittentis. Quam vis autem saepè de Apostolicis sumatur literis, tamen in eo gra­du est, ac si semper de lege sit ac Prophetis, semper enim mo­ralitatem vitámque activam magis quàm contemplativae sub­limitatem, quae in Evangelio radiat, instruit. Igitur morale Le­gis officium agit Epistola, tantum distans ab eo quod in officio Missae praecedit sancto Evangelio, quantum servus à Domino, praeco à judice, legatus ab eo qui misit illum, quapropter cum legitur non injuriâ sedemus, cum tamen sanctum Evangelium audimus demissis reverenter aspectihus sicunt Domino nostro assistimus.

Another evident abuse there is, that in the Masse and our Booke, the Acts of the Apostles, the Revelation, the Prophets, any booke of the old Testament should bee called the Epistle except onely the five bookes of Moses. Walafridus points at the noveltie of this corruption in these words, cap. 22. [Videtur autem non alias lectiones an­te Evangelium fuisse tunc positas, nisi tantùm Apostoli Pauli quod S. Damasus Papa ad Hieronymum scribens ostendit, & fortasse inprimis solius Pauli lectiones eo loco legebantur, po­steà autem omnibus latius augmentatis aliae lectiones non tan­tùm de Novo, verùm etiam de veteri intermixtae sunt Testa­mento. To this Durandus addes, Epistola tamen non legi­tur de quinque libris Mosis, quia in illis temporalia promit­tebantur, fol. 53.

A third abuse in the Epistle is, that never a full passage is read but a shread, beginning after the beginning of a Chapter, and cutting before the end, chusing out parts most impertinent for the purpose, and very oft directed to colour some idle or superstitious conceit: To these and other such faults, the Epistles of our booke are sub­ject, as well as these of the Masse; for commonly in both bookes, the same passages of Scripture are set downe for Epistles, as on S. Stephens day the seventh of the Acts, [Page 21] upon Innocents day the 14. of the Revelations, 1. of Lent, 2. of Ioel, the Tuesday before Easters, the 50. of Isaiah.

The second is the Gospel.The next portion of the instruction is the Gospel, here we follow the paterne of Sarum as much as in the Epi­stles, as the Missals reade the Gospels without any or­der, but that which the sole pleasure of some Popes in the latter times hath given to them, beginning at the end of a booke, at the midst of a Chapter, ending with the beginning of a booke, looping every day heere and there without any reason or example of antiquity which can be showne, so does our Booke follow preciselie, looke for example the first foure Sundayes in Advent, wherein the first Sunday our Gospel is Mat. 21. v. 1. in the se­cond, chap. 21. vers. 25. in the 3. Matth. 11. vers. 2. in the 4. Iohn 1. vers. 19. of such coursing what reason can be given, but a conformity with Sarum in times of Po­pery.

As in the matter of our Gospel we follow rhe Missall so in our formes. The Epistle was contumeliously de­based, but the Gospel is superstitiously exalted, Rupertus Lib. 1. c. 37. and from him Durand, Evangelium princi­pale est omnium quae dicuntur ad Missae officium, sicut enim caput praeeminet corpori, & illi caetera membra subserviunt, sic Evangelium toti officio praeeminet. For this cause Pope Anastasius ordained, that when the Gospel was in rea­ding, all should stand on their feet, and that with their head and eyes bowed to the ground for reverence. Ana­stasius Papa decrevit ut dum Evangelium legitur, nullus se­deat: Also the people must say before the Gospel Glo­ria tibi Domine, and after it is ended, they must say Deo gratias: The reasons see in Durand, Lib. 4. fol. 59. This we are injoyned twise, least we should forget it, both at the Communion, and in the Collects, Epistles, and Gos­pels for the whole yeere, we get leave to sit at the Epi­stle, to be silent when it beginnes, and silent when it ends, but all the time of the Gospel we must stand, and use our exclamations both at the beginning and end of it.

The Booke of the Gospel must stand upon the Altar to signifie that with the preaching of the Gospel ever [Page 22] must be conjoyned the sacrifice of the Altar, and when it is to be read, the Deacon must come, and lift the booke from the Altar, to signifie that the sense of holy Scrip­tures must be taken alone from the warrant of the holy Church, see Heigam. pag. 122. In the ceremonies and sig­nifications it seemes we must agree with Rome, for wee see that among the decent furniture wherewith our Al­tar is adorned, the text of the Gospel is a chiefe part, also the necessity of the Altars and sacrifices, where ever the Gospel is preached, and the taking of the sense of Scrip­ture from the hand of the Church, yee may see expresse passages from Heylen, Montagu, and White, in Canter­bury-selfe-conviction.

Farther, when the Deacon hath lifted the text of the Gospel from the Altar, hee gives it to the Subdeacon to carry at his backe, two waxe candles are lifted from the Altar by two Acolytes, to bee carried burning before him so long as the Gospel is in reading, the crosse or cru­cifix is also on Festivall dayes carried before the Gospel, also a Censer with fire and Incense, the booke is crossed, and perfumed, and when the lesson is ended, the Booke by the Deacon is kissed, the reason of all these ceremo­nies, see in the forenamed places of Durand and Jnnocent, from none of these superstitions we can be long secured: Our Deacons are begun already to bee consecrate, the chiefe part of their office is their Service at the Sacra­ment, and their reading of Scripture; the orders of Sub­deacon and Acolytes are proclaimed to be convenient, if the Church had maintenance for them, by Andrewes: the wax Candles are standing on the Altars already: the sil­ver Crucifix is avowed by Pocklington to have a meet standing upon the same Altar; the crossings and perfu­mings and lights are maintained by Andrewes, as Can­terbury sets him forth, the kissing of the Booke is now daily practised.

3. The Creed of Constan­tinople.The third portion of the instruction is the Creede of Constantinople, Credo in unum, &c. This is put in the Masse by Pope Mark according to Durand, or by Pope Damasus according to Innocentius. Damasus Papa constituit, utsym­bolum [Page 23] cantaretur ad Missam, Lib. 2. c. 49. or rather it was put in the Masse long thereafter, for Walafridus tells that the Latines learned this part of the Masse from the Grecians, and that after the Councell of Constantinople, cap. 22. This Bellarmine approves de Missa, Lib. 2. c. 17. as also Wala­fridus addition, that the French and Dutch Church recei­ved not this part of the Masse, till the dayes of Charle­maine and that through the occasion of the heresies of Felix.

This part of the Masse wee have word by word from the Missall of Sarum, fol. 143. yea, the Romish ceremo­nies about it, put out of the English Liturgie, wee seeme to resume, the English sayes no more, but that the Creede shall follow the Gospel; the reason of which or­der the Rationalists give at length, but our Rubricke before the Creede sayes farther, to wit, this Creede shall be said or sung all reverently standing up, importing first that at the reciting of the Creede of Constantinople, not that of Nice, nor that of the Apostles, we must use much more reverence, then at the reciting of the Epistles of the Apostles, or writings of the Prophets, even the same reverence wee use at the reading of the Gospell, of this Durand gives a good reason; [Quia symbolum verbum est Evangelicum, ideò stando illud audire, sicut & Evangeli­um debemus, Lib. 4. fol. 60. col. 3.] Next our Booke imports the singing of the Creede, and that according to the reasons of the Masse, which at this place takes rather in that of Constantinople, then the Creede of the Apostles or of Nice, because it agrees better to the song by musi­call voices or instruments then these; so speakes Wala­fridus, c. 22. [Et notandum, Graecos illud symbolum, quod nos ad imitationē eorum intra Missas adfumimus potiùs quàm a­lia in cantilenae dulcedinē ideò transtulisse, quia Constantinopo­litani Concilij proprium est, & fortasse aptius videbatur modu­lis sonorum quam Nicenum, quod tempore prius est] Third­ly, the saying or singing of the Creede is given in our Booke, neither to the Priest, nor to the people, as the Gospel immediately before was injoyned to bee read on­ly by the Priest, and the acclamations to be said onely by [Page 24] the people, but the Creede is to bee said neither by the Priest, nor by the people, but it is to bee begun by the Priest, and to be sung through by the Quiristers, for the mysterious reasons ye may see in Durandus: after the Creede is sung, the Priest bowing downe kisses the Altar as we have in Heigam. pag. 162. This ceremonie Heylen in his Epistle to the King before his antidotum commends in the person of these, who did fall downe and reverence with affectionate kissing of the Altar.

4. The Predi­cation.The fourth part of the instruction is the predication, this was a principall part of the Sacrament, which was much regarded not onely by the auncients, as wee may see in the order of celebration set downe by Iustine Mar­tyr, and Dionysius Areopagita, as also in manifold Ser­mons yet extant of Cyprian, Basile, Ambrose, Augustine, and others, which they delivered at such occasions, but even in the later times in the second Councell of Toledo. c. 2. and the first of Lateran, c. 10. where strict order is taken for Preaching of the word, that is, as the place makes cleare for the exposition and application of the Scriptures before read to the reproofe, instruction, com­fort, admonition of the people, as their present state did require. This part of the Masse is acknowledged by Durand, Lib. 4. fol. 224. col. 2. yea, in the Roman pon­tifical there are sundry rubricks spent upon it, among the rest we have these words, fol. 224. col. 4. Si autem post Evangelium ut plerumque fit in curia sit praedicandum, Ponti­fex sedet & accipit mitram à Diacono, tum ille qui est praedi­caturus accedit ad eum, & pontifex benedicens ei, dicit, Domi­nus sit incorde tuo, & in labijs tuis ut dignè & fructuose annu­ncies verba sancta sua, tum surgit praedicator & accedit ad pul­pitum & exequitur officiū finitâ praedicatione expectat in pul­pito praedicator, &c. It is most cleare that in all antiquity, to the very latest and most corrupt times, the care not of reading only, but preaching was seriously recommended to all Bishops and Presbyters, as we may see in their or­ders of consecration yet standing in the Pontificall, yet at last the ignorance and carelesnesse of the Clergy grew so great, that this duty was all utterly neglected for sundry [Page 25] ages, as we may see acknowledged by the Councell of Trent, the history of it printed at London in Italian, fo. 165. so in the Missals of Sarum, this part of the Masse is omit­ted, and how ever the English Rubrick have an expresse command for a Sermon, Evangelio lecto sequitur concio, and the very Councell of Trent have strict acts for refor­ming the old neglect of Sermons, injoyning to the B. himselfe, let be to other Presbyters the dutie of prea­ching, at least every Sunday, and all holy dayes, as the chiefe part of the Episcopall office, to feed the Soules of their flock with the bread of the Word preached; yet our Booke seems to like better of the old order of Sarum, which according to the custome of these dark times, did neglect Sermons, so our Rubrick is conceived, [After the Creed if there be no Sermon] directly absteining to give a­ny injunction for Sermon at the Communion. How great enemies our Bookmen are to Sermons, it is shewen at large in the Canterb. self-conviction, The Papists even at Trent makes it needfull to preach every Sabbath; yea the Popish Princes this day, who have any taste of devo­tion, be their affaires never so weightie, will have two Sermons every Sabbath; so we see in the life of the late Emperour Ferdinand; but our men at most will admit but of one, yea, they thinke that one in a moneth is e­nough, and all that their Canons doe require, and that one must be very short, without any prayer either before or after. What spite they carry at the preaching which this day is used in England, may be seene in the words which Canterbury makes Andrewes use after his death, and which himselfe useth before the Starre Chamber in his late Speech; yea, these men are now brought to a­vow in Print the great expediency to put downe prea­ching, by bringing us back to that order which was used in England in the time of Popery, where the want of our present kinde of preaching, did keepe the people in their ancient simplicitie, and so in that old laudable integritie and devotion; see passages for all this in the Self-convi­ction.

As for the Homilies which are ordained to be read in [Page 26] place of Sermons, their forme is taken from the Roman Breviarie, which after the reading of the Lessons from Scripture, ordaines the reading of many Homilies; the English Liturgie also permits the reading of Homilies, printed by the Reformers of Religion, in these places of the Land, where maintenance cannot be had for a prea­ching Minister; but here our Booke seemes to be worse than either the Roman Breviary, or the English Liturgie; for the Homilies which are in the Breviary, were com­posed of old by the ancient Fathers, and these Homilies of England are most orthodox, and composed by the most sound Fathers of that Church since the Reforma­tion; but our Homilies which we are obliged to receive are not yet extant, and the composition of them, as of all our Books is committed to the hands of that faction, who of late in their printed Sermons, have vented all the points of Arminianisme, and the farre most and grossest poynts of Popery, if not all without any exception, as the Self-conviction makes good; when they have stuffed their Homilies so full as they thinke good, of Arminianisme and Popery, we must approve, subscribe, and use them daily, as the publike doctrine of our Church, or else be excommunicate as rebellious schismaticks without any remedy; for the composers of these Homilies take to themselves in this act the title and authoritie of our Church representative, whose dictates must be embra­ced under the highest paines both civill and spirituall. Yea, beside the burthen of Homilies, it seemes we must lay downe our back to beare the Legends also, whether they be of gold, or of lead, or of drosse; for as the Bre­viary puts their fabulous Legends and Martyrologies at the back of their Homilies, so our Bookmen are begin­ning to print the great conveniency of reading in the Church to the people the lives and histories of the Mar­tyrs, see Quaeres.

The foure lesse principal parts of the Instru­ction.As for the foure lesse principall parts of the Instructi­on, to wit, the Graduall, Halelujah, tractus, and sequen­tia, which are sung betwixt the Epistle and the Gospell, the Papists will grant that they are put in onely of late, [Page 27] to hold up the musicall harmony, and so may well be o­mitted, yea, they are discharged by the Councell of Tole­do, and came in only by custome; heare Walafridus Con­fession of the Graduall and Halelujah, as for the tractus & sequentia, they were not heard of even in his dayes, cap. 22. [Responsoria & halelujah quae ante Evangelium can­tantur, deinde adjuncta videntur & prohibita canonibus His­panorum, in illis enim jubetur ne aliquis hymnus inter lectio­nem Apostolicam & Evangelium in ordine Missae ponatur, ex quo intelligitur id aliquos tentasse tunc temporis, sed propter novitatem rei studium eorum non fuisse receptum, quod tamen postea usu Romano commendatum ad omnes Latinorum perve­nit Ecclesias] This Bellarmine cannot deny, de Missa, l. 2. c. 17. yea all the foure parts are of so small importance, that the Papists themselves would be quit of them; so speaks Spalato of them as they stand in the Breviary, l. 7. c. 12. art. 96. [Antiphonae, responsoria, versiculi & ejusmodi minuta, quae ut puto, cantus & modulationis gratia intermis­ceri lectioni solita fuerunt ad tollendum fastidium ubi Musicae locus non est, non videntur necessaria, impediunt enim cursum piae & utilis lectionis] This Spalato did learne from Car­dinall Quignonius, who did print the same advise with the good liking both of Pope Paul the third and Clement the seventh. The Cardinalls words are these in Spalatoes next section, giving a reason why in his Breviary he put out all these foure things which were in use to be sung betwixt the Epistle and the Gospel [Versiculos responsoria & capitula omittere idcirco visum est, quoniam cum intro­ducta sint ad cantus potissimum modulandos, & legentes saepè morentur, cum molestia quaeritandi locum, relinquere volui­mus, nec enim ad precandum cuncta salubria & utilia congeri debent ne clerici graventur iniquiori pondere] yee see how with the Pope and Cardinalls good leave, we may leave out of our Book all these particles in hand.

But suppose that the Pope this day would be more pre­cise, and require strictly the use of them all, our men would easily yeeld to this his rigorous importunitie; for consider,1. The Gra­duall. if in all these foure parts of the Masse there be any thing which their stomacks could not well digest, [Page 28] the graduall or responsory is nought but two verses of a Psalme sung on the gradus or steps of the Altar, the first by two Querister boyes in their Surplices, the other in way of answer by the whole Quire, as we see on the first Sunday of Advent, where the graduall is the third verse of the 25 Psalme, Ʋniversi qui te exspectant non confunden­tur Domine, the Versicle responsory to this is the fourth verse, Vias tuas Domine notas fac mihi & semitas tuas edoce me.

2. The Halelu­jah.The Halelujah is nought but this Hebrew sentence, which we reade oft in Scripture, used on festivall dayes.

3. The tractus.The tractus is but a line of other Scriptures, which on fasting dayes in times of sorrow is put in the place of Halelujah and sung tractim heavily, laserly, in sad, grave, and long notes, as the first Sunday of Lent the tractus is the first verse of the 91 Psalme, Qui habitat in adjutorio altissimi in protectione Dei coeli commorabitur. The versicle or responsory, is the second verse of that same Psalme, Dicet Domino susceptor meus es tu & refugium meum De­us meus, sperabo in eum.

4. The sequen­tia.The sequentia or prosa, is a song of praise put at the back of Halelujah, a long rithme in prose used at some few high festivals, invented first by Nocherius a dutch Abbot, and put in the Masse by Pope Nicolaus, as Durand tells us, l. 4. fol. 56. col. 3. Here is nothing which our men will oppose, as in that famous sequency of Pentecost S. Spiri­tus adsit nobis gratia, quae corda nostra sibi faciat habitacula, expulsis inde cunctis vitijs spiritalibus &c. In some of their sequencies, I grant, there are contained praises of the B. Virgin and other Saints, but no wayes so grosse as these which followes in the Canon, and are defended by our men as lawfull, as shortly wee shall heare: So then the foure little and lesse principall parts of the Instruction, will not be refused by us upon any reason, if wee keepe the grounds of our Book, when ever it shall be the will of our Clergy to put them in, with the other foure large and principall parts of the same Instruction.

HAving gone thorow the two first members of the Masse, the Preparation and Instruction, and the twelve portions of the first, with the eight portions of the second, and so the first twentie parts of the Masse as it lyes in the old Missall of Sarum, and having shewed how that all the principall of these twenty parts are a­ctually in our Book, and the rest to the very least virtu­ally, we come now to the Offertory, The Offertory. this in the Masse fol­lowes the Gospell and the Creed; the reason of the con­nexion Pope Innocent gives it in these words, Ordo con­veniens est ut post praedicationem Evangelij sequatur fides in corde, laus in ore, fructus in opere; fides in symbolo, laus in offertorio, fructus in sacrificio, quapropter offerenda cantatur, quia sacrificium laudis offertur. Mysteriorum missae, l. 4. c. 53. These words Durand transcribes. This order our Book followes precisely, after the Creed shall follow the Homily, and after it the Presbyter shall earnestly exhort the people to remember the poore, saying or singing these sentences.

This part of the Masse was not in use in the primitive Church, so does Walafridus testifie, c. 22. Offertorium quod inter offerendum cantatur, quamvis à prioris populi con­suetudine in usum Christianorum venisse dicatur, tamen quis specialiter addiderit officijs nostris apertè non legimus cum ve­rè credamus priscis temporibus patres sanctos silentio obtulisse vel communicasse quod etiam sabbathe Pasche nos hactenus observamus, sed sicut supra dictum est, diversis modis & par­tibus per tempora decus processit Ecclesiae & us (que) in finem au­geri non desinet. That this was a part of the Masse which of late times had been put in, wherewith antiquitie was not acquainted, Berno confesses in the very same words of Strabo. Honorius gives the invention of this portion to Gregory the father of many moe innovations of the Church, Gemma animae, l. 188. Offertorium Gregorius [Page 30] Papa composuit, & ad Missam cantari statuit, This is said not onely of the singing and musick of the Offertory, but of the composition of the very matter of it, we grant long before the custome was to make offrings or publike gifts of bread and wine, and yet never before the old A­gapae were abolished, which were in use after Tertullians dayes, but we say withall, that the Offertory as it is now in the Masse, and as our Book translates it hence, seemes to be an invention farre later than Gregorius dayes; for in his dayes that Canon of the third Councell of Carthage, which we see standing in the decret de consecrat. 2. Can. in Sacramento, or rather that fift of the Canons called A­postolick, injoyning nothing to be brought to the Table but bread and wine, and all other gifts to be brought to the house of the Bishop, these Canons were then in use, no moneys then were set on the Table by the hand of the Priest; that it was so the Roman order puts it out of question, this order is not alleadged to be composed be­fore Gregory, yea the barbarismes of it will make it many ages later, and yet even in it no money offered, onely bread and wine, out of the which the elements for the Sacrament were taken. The first that seemes to have admitted the offering of money at the Altar, expresly a­gainst the old Canons and customes, seemes to have bin that good man Hildebrand, Gregory the 7. for to him does the Canon Law de consecrat. dist. 1. ascribe the Canon, (Omnis Christianus) injoyning all Christians to bring some thing to offer when they come to the Masse, draw­ing that which before was onely bread and wine to ali­quid, money, or what ever might be for the use of the poore Priest; but what ever Pope hath been the inven­tor of this kinde of Offertory, which this day stands in the Missall and in our Book, it is one of the Jewish cere­monies, if we will beleeve Durand, l. 4. fol. 65. Ritus igitur synagogae transivit in religionem Ecclesiae & sacrificia carna­lis populi translata sunt in observantiam populi spiritualis.

The first part of the Offerto­ry.This Offertory may be subdivided in foure portions, the first is passages of Scriptures sung or said for the en­couragement of the people to contribute: In this porti­on [Page 31] our Book seemes to goe beyond the Missall in cor­ruption in three respects; first, in the needlesse multipli­cation of passages to the number of sixteene, recommen­ding in the posterior Rubrick the saying not onely one of them, but of them all, whereas the Missall eschewing here tediousnesse, beside its custome, is content with one passage alone, as Durand remarks, l. 4. fol. 62. Secondly, the passages of the Missall doe no wayes savour, for the farre most part of a Legall, Jewish, or any proper Obla­tion, neither does the English passages looke that way, but the passages which our Book here doth use, as may be seene in the first five, set in the forefront, all out of the old Testament, carries directly to a legall oblation. Thirdly, how ever the avarice of the Romish Clergy be notorious, and their purpose in this part of the Masse to draw money from the people to their owne purses be well knowne, yet they are not so impudent as to make a profession in their Booke of such a base designe, but our men think no shame to avow their designe, to in­tervert the peoples oblations, and to spoyle the poore of their almes, for all the Scriptures which are said for the Offertory, where one is for an almes to the poore, three are expresly directed for a gift to the Church and the Priest, however some of the same Scriptures be used in the English, yet all their Rubricks hinder this abuse and misapplication, and doe not permit the Clergie to take up for themselves what was given onely for the poore, but our Rubrick is expresse for the giving of the one half to the Presbyter, and the other half to any pious or cha­ritable use that the Priest thinks meetest, the Church fa­brick, or what else, though the poore should sterve.

The second part of the Offertory.The second portion of the Offertory, is the offering up to God the moneys given by the people, this I thinke is the daily practice of the Masse Priest, yet I find not a­ny thing in the Missall, or Expositors of it old or new ex­cept some thing in Durand, which looks that way, the English Book hath nothing of this, but all which is gi­ven is directed as a simple almes to be put in the poore mans box, and without further ceremony for the poores [Page 32] use alone, but our Book here hath a faire and cleare Jew­ish peace offering; for as the people under the Law did give their offering not to God directly, but first to the Priest, and he did not offer it to God but upon the Altar, so here the Deacon having taken the oblations from the people gives them in their name to the Priest, and he sets them upon the Altar or Table there to be presented be­fore God, this ceremony is borrowed from the Missall by way of analogie, for there the plate with the offering of the bread must be presented by the Deacon to the Priest, and he must place it before God on the Altar. Take it in Durands words, l. 4. fol. 64. Subsequenter Dia­conus ipse patinam cum hostia Pontifici repraesentat, & Ponti­fex seu sacerdos hostiam collocat super altare. The mysteries hid in these actions see in the place, onely he shewes a reason why it is necessary that the Deacon must put these oblations in the holy hands of the Presbyter, fol. 66. Sacerdos oblationes manu tangit repraesentans illud, Levit. 1. & 4. ponet (que) manus super caput hostiae & acceptabilis erit & in expiationem proficiens.

The third part of the Offerto­ry.The third and maine portion of the Offertory, is the placing of the bread and wine upon the Altar, the offe­ring of them up to God, even before the consecration with certaine prayers to be a peace offering, that so they may be fitted for the matter of the Propitiatory sacrifice following; of this oblation thus speaks Heigam, p. 175. [The Priest having placed the bread and wine in a rea­dinesse to be consecrate, he requireth the holy Trinitie to accept his oblation] and Bellarmine de Missa, l. 2. c. 17. Illa prior oblatio praeparatio fuit ad posteriorem oblationem in qua proprie sacrificium consistit, quapropter rectè dicitur prae­paratum sacrificium quando materia sacranda Deo per quan­dam oblationem est dedicata.

To this offering of the bread and wine on the Altar the Romish Church in the late and worst times detorted all what was said in a good sense of the peoples offerings, in this they put the maine part of their Offertory, almost neglecting all other things to which the terme of offe­ring was wont to be applyed, and by this offering made [Page 33] way for that more wicked oblation which follows in the Canon; the Church of England detesting this abuse plucked it up by the root and put it far away from their Booke, but our men have put it onus in expresse termes and in such a place that the subsequent prayer for the Church must mainly be applyed to it [and the Presbyter shall then offer up and place the bread and wine upon the Lords Table that it may be ready for this service (or on the Altar that it may be ready for that sacrifice, this is now the more ordinary stile of our Booke-makers) and then he shall say let us pray.]

The fourth part of the of­fectory.The fourth part of the offertory is a number of pray­ers said upon the bread and wine, not for consecration nor oblation, but for acceptation of God to bee the mat­ter of that following sacrifice of these prayers there are five publike 1. suscipe sancte Pater, &c. pronounced on the bread that God would take it for a sacrifice, which the Priest offereth for himselfe, for all Christians dead and living that it may profit them. The next is offeri­mus tibi Domine an offering of the Cup with a desire that it may goe up in a sweet smelling sacrifice for the sinnes of the world. The third is suscipe sancta Trinitas a request for both the bread and wine conjunctly, that they may be a sacrifice for the memory of Christs resur­rection, and for the honour of the blessed Virgin and all the Saints that have pleased God from the beginning of the World. The fourth veni sanctificator a request to the holy Spirit to come and fill with his fire the hearts of the faithfull: The fift in spiritu humilitatis a desire in the spirit of humility and contrition to bee accepted with the sacrifice they are preparing for God.

The secret prayers are diverse at the Priests discreti­on, the most common is this short shred for the Church. Ecclesiae tuae quaesumus Domine unitatis & pacis dona con­cede, quae sub oblatis muneribus mysticè designantur. I find also in Sarum joyned to these prayers, this short preface, fol. 144. Hostias & preces tibi Domine offerimus. These secrets or this Secretella as Durand styles it, are the prin­cipall and chiefe prayers of the offertory and the onely [Page 39] prayers, which were in use of old in the Masse; these we see put in the bosome of our offertory prayers word by word with the forenamed preface, whereof Sarums Rubricke sayes Notandum quod in omnibus Missis pro cor­pore praesenti & in anniversarijs cujuscunque fuerint & in tri­gintalibus dicitur hostias & preces, fol. 144. So wee begin our prayer, [we humbly beseech thee to accept our almes (called immediately before oblations) and to receive these our Prayers which we offer unto thy divine Maje­stie, beseeching thee to inspire the universall Church with the Spirit of truth, unity, and concord, &c.] As for the first five publike prayers, they may bee well left out of our Booke, for they are not in the old Missalls, Bellar­mine grants they were all invented of late, and are not to be found in any of the old expositers of the Masse, quin­que autem illae orationes suscipe sancte Pater, &c. neque antiqua admodum sunt neque in Romana Ecclesia ante quingentos annos legebantur, unde etiam Walafridus, Rupertus, Amalarius Al­cuinus imo etiam Innocetius tertius & alij veteres non me­minerunt illarum orationum sed transeunt ab offertorio ad se­cretas: yea they are of so little consequence, that the pre­sent Missals take one or two of them as they please at the Printers discretion. Sarum printed in a faire edition at Paris 1555. hath only two of them, suscipe sancta Trini­tas & inspiritu humilitatis; so though wee should have omitted them in our Booke it would have beene no sa­criledge against the Masse, albeit no necessity obliges our Booke men to omit any of them, three of them for their matter containe no scruple for them to sticke on, what inconvenience ariseth from the matter of the other two concerning the honour of the Saints and Prayers for the dead we will see hereafter when we come to the Canon, that they make no bones of such things, but swallowe them all downe, being a little sweetned and mollified with their commodious interpretations.

We make a sa­crifice in ho­nour of the Saints, and for benefit of the dead.Yea in the same verie place they seeme to make direct way for the worst absurditie in the Masse prayers, to wit, the offering of the sacrifice of Bread and Wine in ho­nour of the Saints, and for benefit of the dead, for in that [Page 35] our Offertory prayer longer alone than all the sixe prayers in the Roman Offertory, after the hostias and preces which Sarum commands never to be heere omit­ted, and the secretall, Ecclesiae tuae quaesumus, the onely offer­tory prayer in the Elder Missals, and after the petitions, for the King, his officers, the Clergy, and their flockes, & for those in affliction, taken all for their matter out of the Letany as ye may reade it in the Sarum office of the Virgin Mary, fol. 124. after all this our Booke subjoynes these new additions to the English Liturgy, showing that in this same offertory they will have the Saints highly honored, the wonderfull grace and vertue which hath appeared, and been declared in these Saints who in their severall generations have beene the lights of the world, proclaimed heere to Gods praise: What say the Papists more for the honour of the Saints in their offertory, the specifying of this generall with the par­ticular names of the Virgin Mary, of the Prophets, or Patriarches, Apostles, or Fathers or any men or women who were knowne to have beene the lights of the world in their severall generations will bee nought against the grounds of our Booke-men, who now are heard oft in their publike prayers and thankesgiving to particularize these names with great disdaine and contempt of the scandall which they know the simple takes at this their practise.

As for the other point, the offering of these oblations and prayers for the benefit, not onely of the quicke but of the dead; wee see that after they have commended their oblations to bee mercifully received of God, and put to their back, prayers for the good of the living in all degrees and callings, they immediately subjoyne not onely their thankesgiving, but their prayers and suppli­cations for the dead, even for the salvation of their Soule [that we and all they may be set at the right hand of thy Sonne] and the dead (for which among the rest of the mysticall body of Christ this salvation is sought) are distinguished expresselie in two rankes: one are sti­led Saints who had wonderfull grace, and were the [Page 36] lights of the world in their severall generations, others of farre inferior qualitie, onely Gods servants who are dead in faith, and now rest from their labour, the mee­test description that can bee of the faithfull in Purgatory as they are distinguished from the canonized Saints in heaven if we will beleeve Bellarmine: As then the Masse referred their oblation of bread and wine, and their of­fertory prayers upon it to the honour of the Saints in heaven, to the benefit of the living and good of the faith­full who are dead in what ever place they be, whether in heaven, or else where, so does our Book, but no wayes the English, for in this place they passe the honour of the Saints, they speake not of the benefit of the dead, and the blessings they crave to the living have no reference at all to the oblation of bread and wine, for they have plucked up by the root that pestiferous weede, which yet our men have planted againe in the old place, and put to the back of it our offertory prayer after the manner of the Masse, so that these benefits craved in that prayer either for quick or dead ought not to be excluded from a relation yea dependance from the preceding offering of bread and wine to which they are annexed. See B. Forbes in the selfe conviction, taxing the Church of England who by Bucers advice did put out the words which import prayer for the dead, which he most earnestly labours to have againe restored as they were in the old Missall.

We make any offertory with­out a Commu­nion.There is a Marginall Rubricke added also to our offer­tory prayer which is most strange [when there is no com­munion these words say they shall bee left out] I remem­ber not that such grossenesse in the Missall is expressed, it is I grant their doctrine and daily practise to offer the sacrifice of their Masse for the present and absent, for the quicke and the dead without any Communion, for the presence of a congregation to celebrate the Sacra­ment, or to offer the sacrifice of Christs body and blood, they doe noe waies require, and farre lesse any commu­nion, the presence of the congregation they thinke mere­ly accidentall and needlesse to the perfecting of the [Page 37] Masse and their communicating much more, for the Priests consumption to them is all, yet they say not so much in their booke, but contrarie waies in all their Masses there are expressely Rubrickes for a Communion and post communion as wee shall heare; so it is very strange that our men heere were not content to have made so many additions except this caipstone had been put on, that all the former service that the oblation of the bread and wine by the Presbyter on the Altar may well be done without a communion, yea without any congregation assembled for such an end, charity it selfe cannot bee offended by imputing to these mens sences which their words doe so clearely beare, that hardly can any other exposition be put on them.

Our exhorta­tions are need­lesse.After the offertory are subjoyned in our booke 3. large exhortations, which are not in the Masse, but in the Masse there are sundry exhortations & praiers w^ch wil be found meeter for this place then any of these three, the first seemes to be altogether needlesse and scornefull, it is spent in a multitude of words, obtesting all to communicate, at that time there is none present who ministers any such attestations, non-communicants are put to the doore at least in the end of Missa Catechumenorum before the offer­tory, the Curate in the morning or night before tooke up the names of all Cōmunicants as it is in the first Rubrick of the Communion, & before this exhortation he did see in the offertory the faces of all Communicants, these who gave up their names in the morning, and presently did contribute their offering as Communicants, neede not be earnestly obtested to come to the Table, and o­thers they are none present, or if they were any accor­ding to the custome of the Church and command of the former Rubricke, they might not be admitted.

The next exhortation is as unreasonable to wit, to bee reconciled with their neighbours, to make satisfaction for wrongs, to come to a Minister to disburden their conscience, or as they doe now directly expound that passage to make their auricular confession in the eare of the Priest; these things at that time and place are not [Page 38] possible to bee done without marring the whole action, and so ought not then to be exhorted unto: As for the third, how good and pertinent so ever, yet may it not well be omitted, that in it alone wee should not breake our uniformity with the Roman Catholike Church, which in all the rest of our booke wee have so carefully kept, and if we will in this be stubborne, the Papists will easily dispense with it, for in it nought is contrary to the tenets of their Church.

After the exhortations followes the invitation to re­pentance, the generall confession and absolution with the grounds of comfort, this is nought but that second con­fession of the people and their absolution which the Masse puts at the backe of the Priests confession in the introitus as we before noted.

The ordinary Prefaces.VVEE are now come to the Canon, a part of the Masse, whereupon the Papists fond love, and the Protestants just hatred is chiefely spent, take Bellar­mine for a witnesse of these contrary affections, de Missa, Lib. 2. c. 17. Sacrum canonem ut summa reverentiâ semper Catholici retinuerunt, ita incredibili furore haeretici hujus temporis lacerant.

This member of the Masse consists of Prayers and pre­faces: The Prefaces are either extraordinary for high times or ordinary for common Masses, the ordinary pre­faces we have word by word, for so reades the Missall: Hic dicit sacerdos sursumcorda, respondet chorus, habemus ad Domi num, sacerdos gratias agamus Domino nostro. Resp. dignum & justum est, sacerdos verè dignum & justum est, aequum & sa­lutare nos tibi semper & ubique gratias agere Domine sancte pater omnipotens, aeterne Deus, & ideo cum Angelis & Arch­angelis, cum thronis, & dominationibus & cum omnibus militiae caelestis exercitibus hymnum gloriae tuae canimus sine fine dicen­tes, [Page 39] sanctus, sanctus, sanctus Dominus Deus Saboth, pleni sunt coeli & terrae gloria tua, hosanna in excelsis: Our Booke turneth it thus, [After which the Presbyter shall say, lift up your hearts. Answer. We have them up unto God, the Presbyter, let us give thankes, &c.] saying all the preface to a letter, the end of these words is according to Bellarmine, to make way to the great sacrifice that then is drawing neere, dicitur praefatio quia est excitatio populi ad illam actionem in qua propriè sacrificium consistit de Miss. Lib. 2. c. 17. or as Heigham. p. 282. [The preface serves to dispose Christians to devotion while the Priest ad­dresseth himselfe to recite the holy Canon which con­taineth the most ineffable & incomprehensible mysterie of the consecration of the body and blood of our Savi­our] what mysteries are hid in every one of these words, yea in some letters besides the words, especially what vaine imaginations are drawne from the orders of An­gels, see who hath leasure in all the Rationalists for in these conceats all of them agree to vage.

As for the Authors who put in these patches to the Masse, so sayes Innocent, Gelasius Papa sacramentorum praefationes dictavit, Sixtus autem, hymnum sanctus, sanctus, sanctus cantari instituit, Lib. 2. c. 61. So likewise Durand with him; the first words sursum corda were in the an­cient times used in the Sacrament, but all the following are but late patches, yea the first words were some ages agoe abused to the furthering of the blasphemous sacri­fice: heare Alcuin de divinis officijs cap. de celebratione Missae, sursum corda hortatur sacerdos populum tanquam dicat corda vestra à terrenis curis sursum ad Dominum dirigite ut sacrifi­cium Deo offerendum quod mihi obtulistis dignè offerre valeam exhortationē quaesequitur verè dign [...]m &c. Gelasius composuis­se dicitur. Amalarius, Lib. 3. c. 21. Hymnus Sanctus, &c. a Sixto Papa additus est ut in gestis Pontificalibus invenitur, the reason why he might have beene moved to this act, we have from Gabriel Biel in Heigham, a boy in the time of an earthquake at Constantinople, being ravished up to the heavens after an houres stay reported that hee heard the Angels sing the hymne of Sanctus, & was comman­ded [Page 40] to desire the people to sing the same, which when they did, the earthquake ceased: For the composition of the Preface we may heare Honorius in Gemma animae, Lib. 1. c. 89. Leo Papa praefationes composuit sursum corda de Ieremia, gratias agamus Deo de Apostolo sumptum est, sed Gelasius Papa ad Missas cantari instituit Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Sixtus Papa dimidium de Esaia, dimidium de Evan­gelio composuit, & ad Missam cantari statuit.

Extraordinary Prefaces.As for the extraordinary prefaces, of old they were many, but thereafter the Popes did canonize ten, which we may see extant this day in the Missall: Thus speakes Durand. Notandum quod licet olim innumerae essent praefati­ones, hodie decem tantùm sunt canonizatae, &c. Lib. 4. fol. 84. This Bellarmine reckons out from him, de Missa. Lib. 2. c. 17. and both from the Canon Law, dist. 79. Et de consecratione dist. 1. Of these ten our Booke makes use of five, in the 1. of Christmasse a little of the Masse Preface is changed in our Booke, but it is done both needlesly and to the worse, for so saies the Missall: Quando per incarnati Verbi mysterium nova mentis nostra oculis lux tuae claritatis infulsit ut cum visibiliter Deum cog­noscimus, per hunc in invisibilium amorem rapiamur. This is in nothing worse then our preface, yea in our Preface is matter of more quarrell for it sayes that Christ was borne on that day which to some breedes no small scruple.

In the second of Easter, there is no change at all, for thus say they in the Masse, Et te quidem omni tempore, sed hac potissimum die gloriosius praedicare, cum Pascha nostrum immolatus est Christus, ipse enim verus est agnus Dei, qui abstulit peccata mundi, qui mortem nostram moriendo de­struxit, & vitam resurgendo reparavit, & ideo cum Ange­lis, &c. Our booke does but turne these in English.

The third, on the Ascention day our Booke takes al­most word by word out of the Masse per Christum Do­minum nostrum qui post resurrectionem suam omnibus disci­pulis suis manifestus apparuit, & ipsis cernentibus est eleva­tus in coelum ut nos divinitatis suae ribueret tesse participes, & ideo cum Angelis, &c.

The fourth Preface of Pentecost the Missall sets down thus, Per Christum Dominum nostrum, qui ascendens super omnes coelos, sedens (que) ad dextram tuam promissum Spiritum Sanctum hodierna die in filios adoptionis effudit, quapropter profusis gaudijs totus terrarum orbis exultat, sed & supernae virtutes, at (que) Angelicae potestates hymnum gloriae tuae conci­nunt sine fine dicentes; What here our Book changes is of their meere pleasure without any necessity.

So in the fift Preface of the Trinitie, there is no mate­riall change; Thus hath the Missall, Aeterne Deus qui cum unigenito filio & Spiritu Sancto unus es Dominus non in unius singularitate personae, sed in unius trinitate substantiae, quod enim tua gloria revelante de te credimus, hoc de filio tuo, hoc de S. Sancto sine differentia distractionis sentimus: we re­peat the same.

The other five canonized Prefaces are for the solem­nities of the Epiphanie, of the first day of Lent, of the Apostles and Evangelists dayes, of the feasts of the Vir­gin Mary, of the feasts of the Croce; all these solemnities our Authors doe keepe but the last, and the last may be injoyned to be observed according to their grounds, when ever it shall come in their will to command so: What ever is said in any of these five Prefaces they im­brace it all, onely some doubt might be made of some ambiguous words in the feasts of the Apostles, but that they digest them and more hard pills wee shall shew at once, so that our want of these five Prefaces, and our possession of the other five, depends allanerly upon the same ground, to wit, the sole pleasure of our Book-ma­kers who were content at this time to put in the one, and hold out the other, for the demonstration of their free-will in the exercise of this act.

The Canon it selfe is but late trash.After the Prefaces follow the Prayers, these altogether goe under the name of the Canon, the action, the secret; our adversaries brag much of the antiquity and holinesse of these prayers, but the more advised of them as yee may see in Field, Append. ad lib. 3. c. 1. doe astrict the spiration of antiquitie and holinesse, but to a small part of these, for how ever the Jesuits please to magnifie to [Page 42] the skies this Canon, yet they which understand it much better then the best of them, confesse that it is but pat­ched like a beggars pall of a number of clouts by diverse hands oft without discretion, Pope Innocent, l. 3. c. 9. and Durand from him, Secreta quae secundum diversos & canon & actio nominatur non tota simul ab uno, sed paulatim à plu­ribus ex eo quo (que) perpenditur fuisse composita, quod ter in ea sanctorum commemoratio repetitur, in secunda quippe comme­moratione supplentur qui de primitivis Sanctis deesse videban­tur in prima: And in the next Chapter, Traditur quod Ge­lasius Papa quinquagesimus primus à B. Petro qui fuit post Sylvestrum per 160. annos Canonem principaliter ordinavit, herewith does Honorius in gemma Animae c. 90. agree: Canonem Gelasius Papa composuit, &c. subjoyning the names of a number of Popes, who put to their proper additions to this cento, this same doth Walafrid. cap. 22. and divers of the old Rationalists. All the Canon as it lies in the Masse our Book does not borrow, neither was it necessary, for the kinde mother Church of Rome can well dispence with some difference, yea with a greater varietie than is betwixt our Book and theirs, in this part take Bellarmines caution for this benignitie, de Missa, l. 2. c. 18. Ne (que) negamus verba Canonis diversa fuisse & etiam hodie esse apud Graecos, & apud quasdam Latinorum Ecclesias, ne (que) cogit Romana Ecclesia, ut Chemnitius mentitur, ut omnes Canonem Missae Romanae tanquam necessarium, omnino ad Eu­charistiam consecrandam servent, nam & in ipsa urbe Roma, & alibi per Italiam videmus Romano Pontifice consentiente à Graecis retineri Liturgiam Basilij & Chrysostomi & Ambro­sianam Mediolani & quam dicunt Mosarabam Toleti in Hi­spania. Our men take in expresly the principall members of this portion, these things which the Papists doe most love and the Protestants most abhorre, and what they omit they shew their good liking of it all, without balk­ing any one line. For the demonstration whereof consi­der that the prayers of the Canon use to be divided in a number of parts, in five, six, seven, eleven, twelve, in moe or fewer, as Authors are pleased diversly to conceive, we shall take them up in six parts.

The worst parts of the Canon are in our Book.The third and fourth onely are the principall, even those pieces whereby alone the consecration and oblati­on of the great sacrifice is performed, for here alone it is Ʋbi sacerdos accedit ad Dominici corporis consecrationem, according to Durand, l. 4. fol. 73. Of these parts it is that Innocent exclaimes, l. 4. c. 1. Ecce nunc ad summum sacra­menti verticem accedentes, ad ipsum cor divini sacrificij pene­tramus. These parts he calls the heart of that wicked bo­dy of the Masse, this unhappy heart the English had pul­led out, that the Serpent might never againe revive a­mong them; but our men with an high hand and open face professe the restoring of the life and putting in again the heart in the body of that dead hydra: They put up in capitall Letters their prayer of consecration and me­moriall of oblation, and set down at the back of the same Rubrick the same words which the Missall uses for their transubstantiation; and to the other the same words which they use in offering up their unbloody propitiato­ry Sacrifice, who ever can cleare our Booke of these ab­hominations, must cleare the Missall of them, for these places of the Missall whence alone, or at least farre most directly and principally the Papists do inferre these their capitall errours, the same places are expresly set downe in our Book without any circumlocution.

Wee have bor­rowed the Po­pish consecra­tion.A Rubrick for consecration alone without any further addition in these dayes had been obnoxious to suspicion of an evill intent, our Book-men knew that however the tearme of consecration uses not so much to be stood upon, yet that the Romish Church does use it in no o­ther sense than to demurmurate a number of words on the elements for their transubstantiation into the body and blood of Christ, and not as we doe for the sanctify­ing of the Elements, or applying them to the holy and sacramentall use by reciting [...]he words of Christs insti­tution to the people, not to the dead elements: Durands doctrine is this day common among our Adversaries, Dicimus illud non consecrari sed sanctificari, differt autem in­ter haec, nam consecrare est consecratione transubstantiare, san­ctificare est sanctum & reverendum efficere ut patet in aqua benedicta.

Wee are injoy­ned in conse­crating to turn our backs to the people, and so by conse­quent to whis­per in what language we will.A Rubrick for consecration alone then had been sus­picious, especially here where the English, yea no refor­med Liturgie had any formes of consecration, but now while to their consecration they will adde a clause of the Ministers posture in this act, commanding him during the time of consecration to leave the former stance he was injoyned in the first Rubricks to keep at the North end of the Table, to come to such a part of the Table where he may with more ease and decency use both his hands, the world will not get them cleared of a vile and wicked purpose. The Papists will have their consecra­tion kept altogether close from the eares of the people for many reasons, especially that by ignorance of their words reverence may be conciliate to them, and the peo­ple may not be able to get them by heart and to profane them, which some Shepheards once did to their great hurt, for they pronounced the words of consecration on the bread of their dinner in the fields, with intention to doe what they did see oft the Priest to doe in the Temple by this pronunciation, their bread before their eyes was transubstantiate into flesh, and fire from heaven came downe which destroyed that flesh and them, at least stroke them dead for a time; whereupon it was decreed that the whole Canon thereafter not onely should be in a tongue unknowne to the people, but also should be whispered so secretly that no man but the Priest alone should heare one word of it: This history is set downe in such a number of the Popish writers that I need make no citations, onely the reformed Church counts the se­cret murmuration of their Canon, and words of conse­cration, a very vile and wicked practice against nature, reason, and all antiquitie; so that we must take it in a very evill part to be brought towards it by our Book, for when our Table is brought to the East end of the Quire, so neer the wall as it can stand, and the Minister brought from the end of it to the bread-side with his face to the East and his back to the people, what he speaks may be Hebrew for them, he may speake so low as he will or what he will, for were his face to the people & his voice [Page 45] never so extended, yet in so great a distance he could not be heard, but now being set in the furthest distance that is possible, and being commanded not onely to turne his shoulder, as he was by his North stance in all the former action, but his very back by his new change of place and not being injoined to extend his voice as some where he is, what can we conceive but it is their plain mind to have the consecration made in that silence which the Romish Rubrick in this place injoines: Whereupon Durand from Innocent and others thus comments; Canon secretâ voce celebratur ne sacro sancta verba vilescant, fertur enim quod cum antiquitus publicè et alta voce Canon diceretur omnes pe­nè per usum illum sciebant, & in plateis & in vicis decanta­bant, unde cum quidam pastores illum in agro cantarent & pa­nem super lapidem posuissent ad verborum ipsorum prolatio­nem panis in carnem conversus est, & illi ipsi divinô judicio ig­ne coelitus misso percussi sunt, propter quod sancti Patres sta­tuerunt verba illa sub silentio dici, inhibentes sub anathemate ne proferantur nisi à sacerdotibus super altare & in missa & cum vestibus sacris. This injunction wee are directed to keepe while we are not only injoyned to goe so far from the people, as the remotest wall and Table will permit, but to use such a posture that our back must be turned to them, that so our speech may be directed to the elements alone, & that in what language you please, and no wayes to the people from whom we have gone away, and on whom we have turned our back.

This is Bellarmines maine prop of celebrating the Sa­crament in an unknowne tongue, de Missa, L. 2. c. 11. Verba consecrationis non dicuntur ad instruendos auditores, sed ad elementum consecrandum, elementum autem nullam lin­guam intelligit, quare impertinens est ad oblationem, utrum Missa dicatur lingua vulgari aut non vulgari. For this wic­ked practice of silence and going from the people Bellar­mines great argument is, the practice of the Jewish Priests in these words, c. 12. Habemus exempla sacrificiorum vete­ris Legis, nam Levit. 16. describitur solenne sacrificium in­censi ac jubetur solus sacerdos intra velum ingredi & sacrifi­care & orare pro se & populo, omnibus alijs foris exspectanti­bus [Page 46] & non modo non audientibus, sed nec videntibus sacerdo­tem quo etiam ritu sacrificasse Zachariam patrem praecursoris, Luc. 1. Yea as the Jewish Priest to be more hid from the people in some solemne sacrifices went within the vaile, so the Popish Priest will have the vailes and curtaines of their Altars drawne about him while he is uttering his Canon and secret consecration; this wee have from Du­rand, Lib. 4. fol. 72. Ad quod repraesentandum in quibus­dam Ecclesiis sacerdos secretam intrans quibusdam cortinis, quae sunt in utro (que) latere altaris, quae tunc extenduntur, quasi tegitur & velatur. Is it not to this that here our Book-men lead us, my L. of Canterbury is not content in his Ser­mon before K. James 1621. to avow it is expedient that the substantiall Church now should goe beyond the ty­pick Church of old in the sumptuous magnificence of many ceremonies, but approves of late his man D^r. Pok­lington in his Altare Christianum a little after the begin­ning to praise their zeale, who made their altars of gold, or silver, and consecrated them, laying on them carpets and corporalls, and inclosing them not onely with railes of timber, but vailes and curtaines of cloth, yea to use ex­presly the present argument of Bellarmine for closing up the Priest in his sacrificing, or making his consecration, so that not onely his words may be removed from the eares, but his person from the eyes of the people, for so speaks the Doctor there with Canterburies good leave af­ter the midst of his Book [As the people were excluded from the altar of incense, they stood without all the time that he was praying or burning incense within, Luk. 1. So in like manner the altar built by Paulinus was in medio constituta, set in the midst of the holy place (which pra­ctice he is urging to be restored in the Church of Eng­land, and defending where it is already set up) which did represent the Sanctuary from which the people were all utterly excluded, the people might see the Priest going into the Sanctuary, might heare his bels, but himselfe within, his gestures, his actions they saw not.]

When our Book hath professed a consecration and at such a place of the Church, and with such a posture of the [Page 47] Priest, that it must of necessitie be so secret from the peo­ple, as the Priest may say it in what language he will, and in so quiet silence as he pleases, for who can challenge him when he is in his Sanctuary divided by his vailes and railes from the people, when the prayer which stood here in the English Liturgie is some impediment in their way opposing their Popish consecration, they have re­moved it to another place fitter for their designes, when our Booke and these men whom we have reason to take for good Commentators to it avow so much, who can blame us to be grieved? but when they goe yet further to bring back the very words of the Masse for their con­secration and oblation, the worst words, I say, that the Masse hath for that end, how shall we not be desperate of any good from their hands?

The very words whereupon the Papists build transubstantia­tion, our Book takes from the Missall.The Popish prayer in Consecration stands thus in the Masse: Quam oblationem tu Deus omnipotens in omnibus quaesumus benedictam, ascriptam, ratam, rationabilem accep­tabilem (que) facere digneris, ut nobis corpus & sanguis fiat dile­ctissimi filij tui Domini nostri I. Christi qui pridie quam pate­retur accepit panem in sanctas & venerabiles manus suas, & elevatis oculis in coelum ad te Deum suum patrem omnipoten­tem, tibi gratias agens benedixit, fregit, (a rubrick interlaced hic frangit hostiam) dedit (que) discipulis suis, dicens accipite & manducate ex hoc omnes, hoc est enim corpus meum (a rubrick here also post haec verba inclinet se sacerdos ad hostiam, & po­stea elevet eam supra frontē ut possit à populo videri) simili mo­do postquam coenatum est accipiens & hunc praeclarum calicem in sanctas & venerabiles manus suas itidem tibi gratias agens benedixit, dedit (que) discipulis suis dicens accipite & bibite ex eo o­mnes (the rubrick hic elevet sacerdos calicem, as before, hic in­clinet se) hic est enim calix sanguinis m [...]i novi Testamenti my­sterium fidei qui pro vobis & multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum, haec quotiescun (que) feceritis in mei memoriam fa­cietis.

This Romish prayer the latter parts of it are said by them to have been composed by Pope Alexander, so Du­rand, L. 4. fol. 74. Haec verba qui pridie us (que) ad hoc est corpus meum, Alexander Papa primus canoni addidisse dicitur, as for [Page 48] the former part which is the prayer formally said by them on their hostie, wee heard before how Innocent a­scribes its composition to Gregories Scholasticus, albeit no wayes as it stands in the Missall and our Book, for in that Scholasticus time the words did run clearly against trans­substantiation, see how they are set downe in the fourth Book de Sacramentis, c. 5. among Ambrose works, but po­sterior to his dayes, Accipe quae sunt verba; dicit sacerdos, fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam, rationabilem, acceptabi­lem (que) quod est figura corporis & sanguinis Domini nostri I. Christi qui pridie quam pateretur in sanctis manibus suis acce­pit panem, respexit ad coelum ad te sancte pater omnipotens ae­terne Deus gratias agens, benedixit, fregit, fractum (que) Apo­stolis suis & discipulis tradidit dicens accipite & edite ex hoc omnes, hoc enim est corpus meum quod pro vobis confringetur, similiter etiam & calicem &c. This prayer composed by whomsoever yet as it stands this day in the Missall and in our Book from it, is the maine ground they have in the Masse for their consecration, transubstantiation, and a­doration of the Hoste, they do controvert among them­selves about the words of consecration, the Arch-bishop of Caesarea de capite fontium a French Preacher of late hath made much adoe to have the consecration made by the words of the prayers, as the Greeke Church ever did think, but the current of their Doctors strives to have the power of consecration placed alone in the five words, for this is my body, &c. This question is taken up and a­greed by the Missall and our Book, ascribing the conse­cration to the prayer and words of the Institution con­junctly without any prerogative to the prayer facere dig­neris ut nobis fiat, above the narration qui pridie, or to this narration above the prayer.

As for transubstantiation, there is no Papist this day but will avow that from the clause ut fiat nobis corpus & sanguis being expurged of the glosse which it bare of old figura corporis & sanguis, from this clause, I say, all Papists think their Transubstantiation clearly to flow, if not as from the words which makes the conversion yet as from the words, which evidently presupposes the conversion [Page 49] presently to be made by the words which in the Missall and our book immediately followes, I grant that some of the old Schoolemen put such Commentaries upon this passage that we may deny to the Papists the flowing of their trasubstantiation therfrom, for Aquinas. p. 3. qu. 83. art. 4. ad septimū. Non tamen videtur ibi sacerdos orare ut consecratio impleritur, sed ut nobis fiat fructuosa, unde signanter dicit ut nobis corpus & sanguis fiat & hoc significant verba quae prae­mittit dicens hanc oblationem facere digneris benedictam, id est, per quam benedicamur, scilicet per gratiam: ascriptam, id est per quam in caelo ascribamur, ratam id est per quam de visceribus Christi esse censeamur, rationabilem, id est per quam a bestiali sensu exuamur, acceptabilem ut qui nobis ipsis displicemus per hanc acceptabiles ejus unico filio simus, but what ever one or two of old may be found to speak, yet the current of their writers even of old, & all of them I know this day doe avow that their monstruous transubstantiation by cleare inference is deduced from this passage, Innocent the third, the most nocent father of this monster, so doth expound it, Lib. 3. cap. 12. petimus ut hanc oblationem Deus fa­ciat benedictam, ut eam consecret in rationabilem hostiam, & acceptabile sacrificium ut ita nobis, id est, ad nostram salutem panis fiat corpus & vinum sanguis dilectissimi filij Dei: so Bel­larmine de Missa, lib. 2. c. 23. Non oramus pro Eucharistia con­secrata, sed pro pane & vino consecrando, neque petimus ut Deus benedicat & sanctificet corpus & sanguinem Christi; sed ut be­nedicat & sanctificet panem & vinum, ut per eam benedictionē & sanctificationem fiat corpus & sanguis Domini Heigam whom the Doctors of Doway of late have given to the English nation for an approven expositor of the Masse, c. 48. p. 242. on our words. [Heere beginnes the principall part of all the holy Canon which is the consecration where the Priest beseecheth almighty God that the crea­tures of bread & wine may be sanctified and blessed, yea changed and converted into the precious body and blood of our Saviour, worthilie is this word (fiat) ad­ded in this place, because there is required the same Al­mighty power in this conversion which was in the cre­ation of all the world, and in the incarnation of the Al­mighty, [Page 50] for God said, when he was to create the world, fiat lux, and our Lady said to the Angell when Christ our Lord was to bee incarnate, fiat mihi, so the Priest in this place, fiat corpus;] I know no Popish writer who this day takes this passage in any other sense.

Great appeare­ance that our men intend to have their words expoun­ded popishly.That our Bookemen desire us to take it in any other meaning, there is no appearance, they have let no clause fall from their pen which rejects transubstantiation or at lest a corporall presence, these which in the English book did crosse it are now put out, at the delivery of the elements, the English hath two sentences which are a­gainst the coporall presence in the elements: This our booke hath scored out as impertinent, their Rubrieke gave leave for the Minister to carry home the relikes of the elements to be imployed as he thought meet in com­mon uses, this our Book doth strictly discharge: no con­secrate bread may be carried out of the holy place but as the Papists injoyne all the relickes of the H [...]stie and wine even these that stucke on the Priests fingers to be gathe­red together and consumed in the holy place by the Priest or Deacon, or else burnt, and the ashes to bee put in a holy vessell, so all the remaines of our holy elements must be eaten by the Priest himselfe or these Communi­cants that day which the Priest counts most fit, and they must be eaten with great reverence, and that onely in the holy place And to the end that all dangers may bee eschewed which may befall on the unreverent eating of these elements for we know what adoe the Papists make if a crumme of the consecrate bread, or a drop of the consecrate wine should fall to the ground, or upon the beard of a laick, for eschewing of such greevous inconve­nients, we are ordained to consecrate, & ever to cōsecrate as little as may be, yea far rather to bee short of necessa­ries, though it should be supplyed with new provision, & that to be consecrate over againe, beginning at such a part of the canon as the Rubricke of the Masse doth prescribe than to have any to leave about the consumption wher­of, the devote minde might bee perplexed: yea as if they would avow manifestly their beliefe, and their comman­ding [Page 51] of our soules to beleeve with them their transubsta­tiation,Se Canterb. Selfe-convicti­on. c. 6. and Sup. c. 2. at least their reall presence of the body within the elements, they will have the linnen cloathes which cover the consecrat elements to bee called a very coporall, the world knowes that corporalls were never heard of in this Sacrament till transubstantiation was borne.

All these changes, transpositions, additions, parings of the English Liturgy here, our men among their friends professe are made propter sacramentarios. M^r. Mitchels Epistles are knowne counting not us alone in the Scot­tish, French, Fleemes, Switz, and other Churches as ever they did Zuinglian and Sacramentarian hereticks, but e­ven the body of the English Church, which loves not to adde to their old Liturgie. We have the more reason to bee affraid for their humour of novation when wee see what sundry of that faction have lately printed on this subject, that they agree with Lutherans and Papists, and with them have no controversie at all about the matter it selfe of the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacra­ment, that all the question is about the manner of the presence, which question they pronounce to be needlesse, as being about a mode which is not necessary to know, yea which is impossible to be determined, being a myste­rie imperceptible, yea that none heere will make any controversie but devilish Puritans and Iesuits, whom an evill Spirit possesseth to the maintenance of factions and schismes in the Christian Churches, which without their unhappie humours would easily agree, yea to facilitate the agreement; they are come further to the very mode of the Popish presence, or at least so neere as is possible, without the open avowing of it in terminis, professing such a presence of the body in the very elements, and up­on the Altar, that for it the Altar it selfe as the chaire or throne wherein it sits must be adored and worshipped, not onely the elements which are farre nearer to it. For all this there are passages brought in the Selfeconviction from Montagu, Pocklington, Canterburie, and others of that faction: heere I will not repeate, onely heare one passage of D. Laurence Sermon, I like S. Ambrose, Lom­bard, [Page 52] Bucer, Roffensis and Harding, who advice in this ar­gument to forbeare the determination of the manner of presence, but to cloath our fancy with indefinit and gene­rall expressions, as I like not those that say hee is bodily there, so I like not those that say his body is not there, because Christ sayes it is there, & S. Paul saies it is there, and the Church of England sayes it is there, & the Church of God ever said it is there, and that truely, substantially, essentially, not only by way of representation or comme­moration and yet without either, con, sub, or trans, which the ancient Church said not but by a reall, and never­thelesse spirituall, mysticall, and supernaturall presen­tation and exhibition, we must beleeve it is there, we must not know how it is there: It is a mysterie they all say, and it were not a mysterie if it were knowne. The presence they determine yet the manner of his presence they determine not, they said he is there, but they said, the Lord knowes how. pag. 71. 18.

They are for bread worship and Altar worship.As for the adoration of the Hostie, and so the vilest Idolatry that wee chalenge this day in the Church of Rome, it is builded upon the forenamed Rubrickes, di­recting the Priest in the consecration to take the Hostie in his hand, to lift it up, to bow before it, and the people then to prostrate: how neere are wee brought to this in the consecration, wee are directed to take the patine and chalice in our hand, they needed not have abstained from the word hostie, the latine Masse words of patine and chalice are as unkoth to us, yea Pocklington with Canter­buries leave as hee delights to bring in use the words of officiating Priests with patine and chalice and corporals, carpets and vailes, so likewise the words of Hostie and Sacrifice, yea Montagu showes his contentment of the words Masse and Transubstantiation, alwaies we are di­rected to take in our hands the chalice and the patine with the hostie not for eat king of it, or distribution of it, nor any such end: to say that the end of this taking in our hands is that same for which the Papists use elevation, to wit, the Priests inclination and the peoples prostration see if any charity does hinder these suspicions, it is now [Page 53] the daily practice of that faction not onely at the conse­cration to lift up the consecrat elements that the people may see them (as one of our chiefe Bishops professed to my selfe, it had beene his custome to doe these many yeares bygone if my memory be good) but also to bow before them, both at their taking up and laying downe, so that at least they may be perceaved to give foure incli­nations to the elements before the act of receiving: As for the people, there prostration we cannot be far from it, when we see their head and Prince my Lord of Canter­bury complaining in print of the laxnes of authority that urges not all to bow, prostrate, and adore not onely at, but to the very Altar, for the relation it hath to the body which usually sits thereon; must authority urge all to adore the Altar for the Sacrament that is but some times upon it? And shall it permit people to bee so profane? for to this vice Canterbury gives no better name, yea a farre more scurrile epithet) as to neglect adoration to the consecrate Hoste which brings all that respect to the Altar whereupon it is laid.

Our feares of such intentions are increased, when we see that in discourses & printed books they are not ashamed to cleare and free the Papists of all Idolatry in these acts wherein all our reformed Divines put their very Idolo­manie and madnesse upon Idoles: D. Montague whose late writtes M. Dow by Canterburies licence, pronounces to be most orthodox and antipapisticall, and Peter Hey­len when from Canterbury, and as he sayes from the state he answers Burton, absolves with a great elogie from all errour and dissonance from the Church of England, ta­king as I thinke the Canterburian faction for the Church by a great mistake. D. Montague I say thus approven of late in his apparatus showes us how Papists are not Ido­laters, for he tells that no Christian who is a member of the Catholike Church can be an Idolater, how conso­nant to himself a little therafter, I do not say, only thus he speakes p. 1. Et certè quamdiu palam non deficiunt à pietate & cultu Dei proprio ad idolatriam etiam moribus impij, vita contaminati tolerantur in Ecclesia non minus quam miluus & [Page 54] corvus immunda animalia erant in arca Ecclesiae prototypo sin­gulari at nullus erat in arca [...], nec in Ecclesiae societate quià [...] pietatem Christianam quatenus Christianam execratur. Now that the Papists are members of the true Church neither hereticks nor schismatickes, but mem­bers of the same Body, burgesses of the same citie, sonnes of the same Father with us Protestants, and though they maintaine stiffely to death all their popish tenets, yet that they ought in peace and love to be tolerated, and that Di­vines who denie this are but mad, see pag. 283. sectam & haeresin non faciunt ij qui constanter retinent doctrinam tra­ditam, neque enim ille haereticus dicetur qui per omnia Roma­nam fidem integerrimam profitetur, & p. 347. Haec est illa He­lena quae nomen jamdiu Christianum partibus & factîonibus distractum in mutuas caedes concitavit impiè & crudeliter inter ejusdem Ecclesiae membra, ejusdem cives civitatis, ejusdem patris filios, odijs, convitijs, maledictis, ferro s [...]ammâque saevitur in rebus plerumque non tam fidei, quam curiositatis, scimus au­tem ait Cyprianus, quosdam id quod semel imbiberunt nolle de­ponere, nec propositum suum facile mutare, sed salvo pacis & charitatis vinculo quaedam propria quae semel usurpata sunt a­pud se retinere, nolebant illi à suis opinionibuus dimoveri, facile tamen patiebantur dissentientes, at alia nunc sunt tempora, di­versi mores, quicquid factioso alicui aut furioso Theologo, &c. Yea in his Origines hee gives to the putters downe of the Popish Idols in the Church of England no better style than furiosi iconoclastae, p. 162. and religiosi nebulones, 174. yea p. 40. hee proclaimes the distinction of latria and dulia, and avowes that no Papist ever gave to any crea­ture the worship of latria, and all the question wee and they have long tinkled on for the worshipping of Saints, Relicts, Images, or any other consecrate things with dulia is but vaine and for a shadow: That we have been but toying upon ambiguous and obscure words; yea that to those holy things a religious reverence and wor­ship of dulia is truly due if so it bee not a divine latreia which no Papist will give them more nor we, martyrum reliquias, [...], deposita, [...], si quae nancisci potuerimus genuina nec fucata libenter suscipimus, & veneratione sua de­bita [Page 55] ac congrua hcnoramus, (non [...] as hee spake be­fore) deveneratione autem debita hoc est modo & mensura disquirendum, inprimis Dei cultum [...] quem appellant nec possumus alicui creaturae nec debemus sive humanae sive Ange­licae quamvis excellentissimae impendere, hoc fatebitur Bullin­gerus & tota schola non insanientium [...] nolunt enim illi quovis modo cuicunque creaturae latrian ne quidem cultu re­lativo exhiberi, sed non constat quis sit ille cultus latriae soli Deo praecisè & peculiariter debitus, quibus terminis circumscribatur quis ille qui solis debetur creaturis, quis modus, gradus, mensu­ra, partes, conditio, limitatio, omnia vacillant, vel ignorantur nec illud agitur ut constare possint, lusum est diu in hac quaestione & illusum per ambiguitates, è privatis nempe vel contendendi vel ditescendi respectibus, constet autē hoc & facilè conveniet inter nos de sanctorum reliquijs venerandis; magnam certe gratiam ab Ecclesia Christi & partibus inter se contendentibus inierit is vel ille qui doceant quousque progredi in hoc Sanctorum cultu, & [...] possumus. Interim quod pueri solent in hac re ut in multis [...].

The other authour I spake of is D. Laurence, Chap­laine in ordinary in his Sermon Preached lately before the King subscribed by Canterburies Chaplaine and prin­ted (as the booke saies) by the Kings speciall command, he makes idolatry the giving of Divine honour to a cre­ture, and so purges the Church of God of this damnable crime: even as Schelford in his last Sermon notes that images become not idols till they be worshipped with divine worship, and that as Gods, yet Laurence preaches that religious worship and adoration may bee given to creatures especially to the Altars for the singular pre­sence of Christs Body, yea that divine worship which he calls [...] (expresly distinguished from religious venera­tion and prostration belonging to Creatures) may bee given to the Altar but not terminativè, onely transitivè for it is for the respect of God who is there, yea farther he will have the Creator & the creature adored with one conjunct divine adoration without any distinction as Christs Godhead and manhood without any abstraction are adored with a divine adoration, so Christs body and [Page 56] the Altar (much more the elements) are without any abstraction to be adored with one and the selfe same ho­nour, heare the Doctors words, [As Christians distin­guished their oratories into an Atrium a Church-yard, a Sanctum a Church, a sanctum Sanctorum a Chancell, so did they conceave a greater degree of sanctitie in one of them than another, and a greater degree of the presence of God: as that distinction of holy places continued after Christ, so did the reason of that distinction, the whole is the house of God because that although the Lord be without these walls, yet is he more within, as we are not presumed to be so much abroad as at home, as the Church conceived him to be in all the parts of his house yet it conceived him to be more present in one part of it than another, which was the reason that the consecration of the Sacrament was in one place, albeit the distribution was in another, where our Liturgy hath enjoyned also the second service to be read, and after childbirth the pre­sentation of thankesgiving and oblations, and all these in respect of that peculiar dispensation of Gods presence in this division of the Church, as within the vaile in their division of the temple, having an Altar heere answerable to the mercy-seate there, as also in respect of the union betwixt this place and Christs humane nature from 12. to 16. p. a different holinesse of places there is confessed, and this ariseth frō a different presenee of God in these places, and there must follow also a different respect toward these places, else were there not a suteablenesse betwixt honour and merit, which naturall justice requires: wee reade of civill respect, not onely to the persons of great men, but to their portraitures, their chaire of estate, their chamber of presence; and wee reade of reverentiall re­spects to the Tabernacle, to the Temple, to the crosse and Gospels of Christ, for as persons and things have beene in a religious or civill estate, so have religious and civill persons ever esteemed of them, nor is all this to in­sinuate the derivation of Gods honour on any beside God; God divert that damnable idolatry as farre from me as hee hath done from the Church of God: Some [Page 57] things have a civill respect, others a religious, but the Lord onely a divine, this religious respect is called by Damascen, [...]. Reverentia vel honor religiosus debetur omnibus quae propriè spectant ad cultum; this honour is religious not only quia imperatur à religione, but also quia fundamentum habet in relatione rei vel personae alicujus ad religionem et cul­tum sacrum, pag, 25. we find in Ignatius, [...], a honour due to the Altar, & adgeniculari aris a kneeling to the Altars in Tertullian, and [...], an adoration of the Altar, in the fift Councell, & reverenti­am altaribus exhibendam in the Synodals of Odo, [...], in Damascen, yea divina altaria, and in the Greek Li­turgies, an humble prostration before the Altar, and in Damascens life of Mary the Egyptian, [...], although they gave a re­ligious reverence to these places, yet they terminate that religious reverence in God, not in the places; the throne is honoured for the King, he that respects the house for the owners sake, respects not the house but him: al­though the humane nature of Christ receive all from the divine, yet we adore the whole suppositum in grosse, which consists of the humane as well as of the divine, so because of Gods personall presence in the place, wee adore him without abstraction of his person from the place, p. 39.] I doubt if the grossest of the Jesuits have spoken so plaine language, for the adoration with religious reverence of the mind, and prostration of the body, not onely before but unto the Chancel, the Altar, the Crosse, and by good consequent, as I thinke, much more unto the elements, which in all respects are nearer that body, which makes by its presence all the rest to be so adored.

The Popish coursing about the Altar, and crossings ap­proved.Many other poynts of agreement might an acurate pa­ralleler find betwixt the Masse and our Booke, in the pre­sent passage I poynt but at other three, to wit, in cour­sing and in crossing, in neglect of breaking and intention to consecrate: wee reprove in the Papists their folly to course from one nook of their altar to another, from the North to the South, from the right horne to the left, [Page 58] from the end to the midst, and from it to the end again; for these mysterious reasons we may reade in the Ratio­nalists. What other thing does our Rubrick import, bid­ding us leave our North standing, where we were in our Preface, and come to another part of the Altar during the time of consecration, that when it is ended we may returne againe to the North end? Also that the end of our comming to another place in the consecration is the more ease to use both our hands, what use here of both the hands is possible, but that which the Romish Ru­bricks at this place doe injoyne, the multiplication of crosses, whiles with the right, whiles with the left hand, whiles with both the armes extended so far as they may be; this could not be done if we stood at the North end of the Table, for then the East wall of the Church would hinder us to extend our left arme, and so to make the i­mage of Christs extension on the crosse perfectly. The Papists to recompence the want which the people have in their eare by the Priests silence & turning of his back upon them during the time of consecration, as our Book speaks, they thinke meet to fill their eyes with dumb shewes, not onely to set up the crucifix on the Altar, on the Pillars, on the Tapestry, on the East glasse window, where it may be most conspicuous to the eye, but chiefly to cause the Priest at the altar to make a world of crosses and gestures, all which must have a deep spirituall sense. Will not the present Rubrick give us leave to entertaine our people with the same shews, the crucifixes are alrea­dy set upon the Altar, on the Tapestry, on the walls, on the glasse windowes in faire and large figures. The law­fulnesse of crossing not only in Baptisme, but in the Sup­per and any where is avowed, as in the Self-conviction is shewen, what other barre is left us to receive all the cros­sings that are in the Masse, but the sole pleasure of our Prelates who when they will, may practise that which they maintaine and force us to the particular use of these things which they have already put in our Book in gene­rall termes.The breaking of the bread unnecessary.

Againe, we challenge in the Papists that in their forme [Page 59] of consecration they have put out not onely the forena­med sentence, Quod est figura corporis & sanguinis, but also that other sentence, which for a long time stood in the old Liturgies, Quod pro vobis confringetur, that by the ra­zing out of these words, they might put away the break­ing of the bread in the distribution to the people, they have indeed a breaking of the bread after the consecrati­on into three parts, all which are eaten by the Priest for very absurd ends; but when they distribute on Pasche day to the people, they will not break but provide to eve­ry one a round Wafer to be put in their mouth, for if they did breake there would be great danger that some little crummes of the bread in breaking should fall off, and that so many bodies of Christ as in these are broken mites of bread, should fall to the ground, and be trod on or lost, for this cause when they breake the hostie into their three portions, it is done with great circumspection above the cup, that all the crums may fall in the blood and be drunken down with it by the Priest, but no break­ing must be of the bread w^ch is given to the people: With this practice our Book does agree, for it sayes not which was broken for you, but which was given for you, no direction in any of our Rubricks for breaking of the bread, yea one Rubrick pronounces that Wafers shall be lawfull to give to the people, albeit usuall bread may suffice.

The Priests in­tention avow­ed.Farther all know what great disputes we have with the Papists about their intention to consecrate, and what fearfull perplexities they are put in, both Priest and peo­ple, by their Rubrick which will have the Priests inten­tion absolutely necessary for the consecration, as we may see in these two cautels of the Masse: Proferendo verba consecrationis circa quamlibet materiam sacerdos semper in­tendat conficere id quod Christus instituit & Ecclesia facit: The other, Si autem per nimiam distractionem habitualis intentio cum actuali tolleretur, videtur quod deberet verba consecrationis cum actuali intentione resumere, sic tamen quod nollet consecrare si consecratio facta esset; this intention to consecrate our Book avowes in the Rubrick in hand, [Page 60] [let him lay his hands on so much as he intends to con­secrate.]

Thus much for our prayer of consecration, borrow­ing from the Masse these sentences word by word, whereupon they build their consecration, transubstan­tiation, and adoration, whereby they put away the brea­king, and take in the coursing, and manifold crossings, with the Priests intention to consecrate; the rest of the words of the Romish consecration may all be easilier di­gested than any one of these corruptions wee professe to borrow, yea our men avow plainly their approving of this part of the Masse as it stands in the Canon with­out any change, see the appendix ascribed to D. Field af­ter his death, L. 3. c. 1. [In this sense sayes he it is which we find in the Canon, where the Church desires almigh­tie God to accept these oblations of bread & wine which shee presents unto him, and make them to become unto the faithfull Communicants the body & blood of Christ, who the night before he was betrayed, tooke bread in­to his sacred hands, lifted up his eyes to heaven, gave thanks, blessed it, and gave it to his Disciples, saying, Take yee all of this, for this is my body: And in like manner after the Supper, &c.] nothing is in this part of the Masse, but all there is justified.

Our prayer of oblation from the Masse, and not from the English Litur­gie.FOllowes the prayer of oblation, as in our Book so in the Missall subjoyned immediately to the words of consecration, thus stands in the Missall the Romish me­moriall, Ʋnde & memores Domine nos tui servi-ejusdem Christi filij tui Domini Dei nostri, tum beàtae passionis, nec non & ab inferis resurrectionis, sed & in coelo gloriosae ascensionis offerimus praeclarae Majestati tuae de tuis donis ac datis hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, panem san­ctum [Page 61] vitae aeternae, & calicem salutis perpetuae, supra quae pro­pitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris, & accepta habere, sicut accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui justi Abel, & sa­crificium Patriarchae nostri Abrahae, & quod tibi obtulit sum­mus sacerdos tuus Melchisedec sanctum sacrificium, immacu­latam hostiam supplices te rogamus omnipotens Deus, jube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui, in sublime altare tuum in conspectu divinae Majestatis tuae ut quotquot ex hac altaris participatione, sacrosanctum filij tui corpus & sanguinem sum­serimus, omni benedictione coelesti & gratia repleamur per eun­dem Christum Dominum nostrum. Here our Booke doth much reforme the English, a Rubrick for oblation they have none, but wee proclaime a prayer of oblation, and that not of the former Offertory, wherein the bread and wine was offered on the Altar in a peace offering, but of a second sacrifice, even as the Masse distinguishes, to the which the first offering was but a preparation.

Secondly, The most of this prayer in the English is put after the Communion to be a thankesgiving and a spiri­tuall sacrifice of praise to GOD for the blessings in the Communion received, but we correct and draw it back from that place and set it at the back of the consecration, where it stands in the Missall, and make it change the English nature, resuming the old Romish Spirit to be no more a thankesgiving but a prayer, and that of oblation of a new sacrifice to God for sinne.

Thirdly, We put in sundry clauses which the English put out, as these words [may worthily receive the most precious body and blood of thy Sonne Jesus Christ] bor­rowing them from the Masse clause in the same place, Quotquot ex hac altaris participatione sacrosanctum filij tui corpus & sanguinem sumserimus: And the first eight lines which gave the forme of the oblation wee resume from the Masse, professing Christs ordinance to make, and our intention to make, that is, both according to the Popish Commentary & late English style, offer up in a sacrifice if we beleeve either Bellarmine or Heylin, the one Lib. 1. de Missa, c. 12. maintaines that in the institution hoc facite is rightly expounded, sacrificate; the other in his Anti­dotum, [Page 62] avowing that Christ in the supper made the Apo­stles sacrificing Priests, and gave to them as Priests pow­er in these words hoc facite: How ever the most preg­nant passages which can be found in the Missall for the Romish propitiatory and unbloody sacrifice are transla­ted hence and put in this our prayer: I grant that some things are added and some things detracted, but both the detractions & additions are made for our disadvantage, wee want Gods acceptation of that bread and cup, as of the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham, and Melchisedec, his command to the Angels to bring this sacrifice up to the heaven; but by these clauses our Divines use to reject the Romish Propitiatory sacrifice, and so they might not stand in our Book which will admit of no barre to that abhomination, the clause we adde in the end of our prayer, one part is taken out of the prayers which in the Masse doe follow: Non aestimator meriti, sed veniae, quaesu­mus largitor, and doth nothing crosse the doctrine of me­rit: The other part is taken out of the prayer which in the Masse immediately goes before: Hanc igitur oblatio­nem servitutis nostrae quaesumus Domine ut placatus accipias per Christum Dominum nostrum, now from this clause both Bellarmine and Heylen conclude their unbloody sa­crifice, the one de Missa, L. 2. c. 21. Hanc igitur oblatio­nem servitutis nostrae, &c. ubi apertè ostenditur eam oblatio­nem propriè esse sacrificium quippe quae per ministerium sacer­dotum Deo offertur. The other in his Antidotum out of all the Liturgie chuseth this one place to prove that the English Church in the Supper offereth up to God, a pro­per, outward, unbloody sacrifice: These words as in the English Liturgie they stand in a thanksgiving after the Communion have no such shew, but as they are tran­sposed to stand at the back of a consecration in a prayer of oblation before the communion, may well prove this intent.

Wee must offer the Popish sa­crifice of the Masse.Farther, the sacrifice which here we pretend to offer is the oblation of praise and thanksgiving; See how Bellar­mine expounds this part of the Canon of the Masse, L. 2. c. 21. Falsum est per sacrificium laudis cujus in canone fit [Page 63] mentio debere accipi sacrificium spirituale quod in laude et gra­tiarum actione consistit, significatur enim ea voce sacrificium veri corporis Domini, quod sacrificium laudis dicitur, quia p [...]r illud Deus magnopere laudatur et gratiae illi aguntur pro sum­mis ejus in nos beneficijs, unde eti [...]m sacrificium eucharisticum merito nominatur; that the Canterburians take this sacri­fice no otherwise now, see Peter Heylen in his Antidotum about the midst, where in the matter of this sacrifice my L. his Grace gives him leave to utter at length far other speeches than ever dropped before from any English man, which pretended opposition to Papists; the farthest that Montague himselfe, let be Andrewes, Hooker, or any other of their Divines, did goe, was to a commemora­tive, improper, spirituall sacrifice, but that man will have here a proper, corporall, outward, unbloody sacrifice offered, for which the Ministers of the Gospell are con­stitute by Christ as proper Priests of Melchisedecks order, as ever were these of the Law after the order of Aaron, this sacrifice cannot possibly be any other but of the bo­dy and blood of Christ, for the offering of the bread and wine is the first sacrifice, and but preparatory, and upon it the Evangelicall Priesthood is not grounded, the offe­ring up of praise almes, our selves are expresly by Heylen excluded from that sacrifice he speaks of, so it remaines that he must professe the offering up the very body and blood in an unbloudy and propitiatory Sacrifice. In this place heart his own words: — [The passion of Christ as it was prefigured by the Lords ordinance to the Jewes in the legall sacrifices a parte ante, so by Christs instituti­on its to be commemorate by us Christians in the holy Supper à parte post, a sacrifice it was in the figure, a sacri­fice in the fact, and so by consequent a sacrifice in the commemoration or in the postfact, a sacrifice there was among the Iewes, foreshewing to them his comming in the flesh, a sacrifice there must be among the Christians to shew forth his death till he come and if a sacrifice must be, there must also be Priests to doe, and Altars where­upon to doe, for without a Priest and an Altar there can be no sacrifice, yet so that the precedent sacrifice was of [Page 64] a different nature from the subsequent, and so are also both the Priests and the Altars from these before, a bloody sacrifice then, an unbloody now, Priests derived from Aaron then, from Melchisedeck now, an Altar for Mosaicall sacrifices then, for Evangelicall now, the Priests were ordained by Christ, to wit, the Apostles and their successors in the Evangelicall Priesthood, there is a hoc facite, for the Priests onely who have power to con­secrate, hoc edite is both for Priest and People.] There­after at length he produceth many testimonies of anti­quitie for true, proper, externall, corporall, visible, my­sticall sacrifices in the Church, but for no better purpose than the Papists before him have done, who laid all these citations to his hands.

If there be any clause in the Masse prayer of oblation concerning their unbloody propitiatory sacrifice for the remission of sinnes which is not in ours, as hardly ye will misse any sentence necessary for this purpose, yet if any be, it is little matter, it may be soone added, for there is naught in this part of the Canon which our men will not gladly embrace; for this see the Appendix to D^r. Field L. 3. c. 1. p. 201. where he justifies all this part of the Masse to a letter, and shews how wee may truly offer to God the body and blood of Christ in a propitiatory sa­crifice for remission of sinnes and pacifying of God: Such justifications of the Masse were wont to be counted most unreasonable, albeit possible, by all Protestants even those who came neerest to the Roman Church, yea by Papists themselves who had any ingenuitie. In that same place of Field, we may reade of Luthers censure of the Canon, yea of Cassander and other Papists, their desire to have the Canon reformed, at least glossed with marginall notes, but in that 28 yeare, wherein this Appendix long after the pretended Authors death was Printed, my L. of Canterbury did sit in the sea of London, and had power to make men both living and dead speak from the Presse language, which was never before heard in the reformed Church; albeit since the uncouth voices of sundry their dead men, both Andrewes, Overhall, Field, and others, [Page 65] have been made to ring lowd over all the Ile for mens amazement.

Our men doe reject nothing of the Canon of the Masse.We have gone thorow the principalll parts of the Ca­non, that which Pope Innocent styles the heart of the Canon and head or top of the Masse, Cor & summus ver­tex, there is in it yet foure other prayers, two before the consecration and sacrifice, and two after, these our Book hath passed by, but upon no necessitie, there is no­thing in any of them which our Men have not avowed, thus have they made Field speak after his death for all these foure prayers, and what ever else is in the Canon, p. 221. [The Canon of the Masse rightly understood is found to containe nothing in it contrary to the rule of faith, and the profession of Protestant Churches] what dislike they have of any thing in these prayers, wee shall see in discussing the particulars; the first of these foure because it is long let it be divided in three parts, behold the first; Te igitur clementissime Pater per Jesum Christum filium tuum Dominum nostrum supplices rogamus, ac peti­mus ut accepta habeas & benedicas haec dona, haec munera, haec sancta sacrificia illibata inprimis quae tibi offerimus pro Ec­clesia tua sancta, catholica, quam pacificare, custodire, ad­juvare & regere digneris toto orbe terrarum unà cum famulo tuo Papa nostro & antistite nostro & Rege nostro, & omnibus orthodoxis at (que) Catholicis & Apostolicae fidei cultoribus: The chiefe things here that our Book-men might seeme to have reason to mislike, is the making of the Sacrament a sacrifice, which they offer to God for the Church and all the members of it; next that the Pope the Antichrists name must stand in the prayers of the Church. Thirdly, That the Bishops name must stand before the Kings, but none of these things will trouble their stout stomachs.

What the Ca­non speaks of a sacrifice they approve.For the first, that they make this Sacrament a true sa­crifice we shewed before, and that this their sacrifice they do offer up to God for the wellfare not only of all Chri­stians living, but also for many of the dead, wee may see in many late approved writs, Montagu apparat. p. 379. Ʋn­de Tertullianus de corona militis ait, pro natalitiis annua die facimus hoc est [...] offerimus in commemora­tionem [Page 66] agonistarum J. Christi. Dow against Burton about the midst [That the ancient Church had oblations for the dead, the ancient Liturgies put it out of question] Poklinton in his Altare not onely at the beginning brings out with approbation from the Decretals that Canon of Fabian; Decernimus ut omnibus di [...]bus Dominicis, altaris ob­latio fiat, but also about the midst hath these words [At the Altar their Priests did stand at their solemne stations and offer prayers there pro omni Episcopatu nostro, etiam pro Regibus] poynting expresly at the place of the Masse in our hands: And thereafter, at the Altar also were commemorations made in Cyprians time, and who had made a Deacon his Executor, the Canon was that for such a one non offerretur, nec pro dormitione ejus celebraretur ne (que) enim ad altare Dei meretur nominari in sacerdotum prece, qui ab altari Dei sacerdotes avocare voluit.

What honour the Masse gives to the Pope, they yeeld it to the full.For their affection to the Pope its not enough for Mon­tagu and others of his fellow servants to powre upon the reformed Divines in generall oft, and in speciall upon Calvin, Beza, Scaliger, Casaubon, and such, all the venome which spite can invent, Novatores, schismatici, furiosi, zo­lotae, Lemanici, Puritani, and what not. To speak with great respect of the Popish Divines, especially of sundry of the Jesuits, as of profound, grave, moderate Theo­logues, to inveigh against the overthrow of Abbyes, and wish earnestly the restitution of Monasteries, that the holy Monks may live as Elias and Iohn the Baptist gave them example. To speak not onely of Bellarmine, Baro­nius, Boromeus, as of good, pious, and godly men, let be miraculously learned, but to avow the office of Cardinall to be an eminent dignitie in the Church, a due reward of vertue, and worthy by all much to be respected, with this they are not content except they let the world know also their great respect to the Pope himselfe, to call him Antichrist who dare among them, except he desire to be trampled upon as a peevish ignorant Puritan; they will have their succession and derivation from the Pope a maine piller of their Church, without which prop the Church of England would fall to the ground. Heare Pok­lington [Page 67] with Canterburies applause, speaking in his Sun­dayes Sermon at the beginning [Our Diocesan can de­rive himselfe the successor of an Apostle, otherwise we would have taken his call for the voice of a stranger] and in his Altare thus he sayes [Miserable were we if he who now sits Archbishop of Canterbury could not derive his succession from S^t. Austin, and S^t. Austin from S^t. Gre­gory, and S^t. Gregory from S^t. Peter, his Grace can say, e­go sum haeres Apostolorum, I and my Predecessors have kept possession, I have received the right faith from the right owners] This favour they beare not onely to the old Popes, but even to these of the latest and worst times; see what commendation Montague gives to two late Popes, Orig. p. 114. Patrum nostrorum vel avorum memo­ria duo summi Pontifices viri optimi & doctissimi Adrianus Sixtus & Bellarmini avunculus Marcellus secundus extitere, See in the large Supplement what praises he powres on the head of the present Pope Vrban. yea these Popes whom the world knew to be monsters of men, Montague will have to be called most holy Fa­thers by all who are not Puritans, by vertue of the place which they injoy in the Church of God; see his Orig. par. 1. p. 417. Certis quibusdam titulis & elogiis homines [...] constitutos ab omni retro antiquitate viri prudentes etiam & religiosi honorarunt, istos honorum lemniscos non est cujusvis conculcare, sed nec palam reprehendere id quod solent [...] Puritani, Pontificem Romanum suam sanctita­tem indigitare certissimus est character Antichristianismi, non tibi sed religioni dicebat olim Isidis ad orator, cum asinus por­tans mysteria se putaret adoratum, honorem pari modo non Pau­lo alicui quarto, Alexandro sexto, Iohanni 12. caeteris si qui sint prodigia & propudia honestatis, sed religioni exhibendum contendimus, hoc est eminenti dignitati qua ultra alios in Eccle­sia Dei praediti sunt, sed est haec phrenesis hominum solummodo fanaticorum quibus omnia displicent nisi quae de suo cerebro confinxerint, quanquam nec illa placere diu possunt: It was too much that many of these men oft have professed their willingnesse to give to the Pope, notwithstanding of all the defaults of that Sea, upon the condition of some Reformation, his old place to be the Patriarch of the West, unto whom all the Western Clergy did owe some [Page 68] obedience and subjection, yea to have him as he was of old the first Patriarch of the Christian world, so Monta­gue Antidiatrib. p. 81. Necesse est ut caput Ecclesia habeat, Ecclesiae in summa collectione caput est Christus, Ecclesiae per partes capita sunt constituti Episcopi, hoc est praesunt cum au­thoritate capitis singuli in suis paraecijs, censetur inter ista ca­pita Pontifex, habet ille locum, jus antiquum obtinet, caput est Ecclesiae particularis Romanae cui praeest, praecipuae olim parti Christiani orbis, hoc est, cunctis ad Occidentem regionibus cum authoritate quadam, non illa quidem singulari & suprema, praefuit Pontifex, et si non obstaret perdita illa ambitio prae esset hodie eti [...]m [...]um sed de jure humano, p. 74. Sedem Romanam appellat coryphaeam subscribo & eodem ipse titulo candem se­dem cohon [...]stabo, p. 51. De Principe Petro non litigamus, de successorum primatu aliquatenus, domicilium principatus non domolimur, i. e. damus a Petro ad aetatem Augustini in Ec­clesia Romana Apostolicae cathedrae semper perviguisse princi­patum, p. 49. Ʋbicun (que) multi, & multiplicitas ut ordo elu­ceat & harmonia conservetur, ab uno arcessenda est origo om­nis, unde autem melius origo omnis quàm ab Ecclesia principa­li, loco debetur haec praeminentia: loci primatum & illum or­dinis & propter utrum (que) praestantiae habeat si voluerit Roma­nus Pontif [...]x, p. 147. ante quam terminos transposuerat anti­quos, Romanus Episcopus quidni dicebatur—scio alias & am­plector Romanum Pontificem vocatum Benedictum, scio Pa­pam & pastorem nominari, quid si haec omnia nomina usurpa­bat, quid si & Apostolicum, p. 41. He regrates that the Pope is so farre debased that he should be spoyld of his just and proper dignitie: Gens avium unaquae (que) tandem su­as sibi plumas repetendo furtivis coloribus denudatam proprijs etiam quod non oportuit improbant (que) vehementer [...] circumcisam ac spoliatam, nudam, ridendam, exsibilandam corniculam exposuerunt; In that same page he assures that Christian Princes and people will gladly yet give to the Popes this old honor and tribute if they will amend their manners; Exhiberent etiamnum, ad priscos illos mores si tan­tum revertatur & exempla pietatis majorum: Thus farre Montague went above ten yeares since, but to goe thus far on, that, even this day, without any reformation, the [Page 69] Pope when he is a monster in his private life, for the spi­rituall dignitie he hath in the Church above all other, by vertue of his place he ought to possesse his old style, not onely of holy Father, but of holinesse in the abstract, and that all who will deny this are madde frantick Puri­tans, who goes thus farre cannot but think the Liturgie of all Westerne Churches to be faultie, where the Popes name is not put in the old place of the publick prayers.

Yea they will have their very Bishops pre­ferred to Kings.As for the Kings place after the Bishop, the ambition of our Book-men is capable of such extravagancy: Pok­lington before in his relation of the ancient custome puts indeed the King behind the Bishop, and these men oft in their Writs urge that example of Theodose that the Em­perours were not permitted to have place to stand at the Altar being but Laicks, and not capable of that spirituall dignitie proper to Priests, that the Princes highest privi­ledge is to come to the Altar with his offering, and then without stay to depart. The Popes Legate Seignior Con is made much of among them who propounds to our Prince the example of our old Scottish devout Kings, who did salute the meaner Priests as their superiours, yea it was marked in our Soveraignes Coronation, that when the greatest Marques was admitted in that solem­nitie but to the kissing of his Majesties hand, the meanest Bishop got a kisse on the cheeke; many strange things are alleadged of the Clergies ambition among us, where­of I wish time may cleare them to be guiltlesse. Montague in his Antidiatrib. p. 80. Ille principatus obtineat in Ecclesia ut revera semper obtinebat, summus sacerdos inter caeteros [...] ut appellant enim graeci Patres passim, Episcopus con­stituitur [...] ut vocatur ab Ignatio—Monarchae sunt Epi­scopi in suis [...], Monarchae in suis [...] Metropolitae, Monarchae Patriarchae augustiores, p. 40. Sacerdotij culmen [...] non ignorant Reges; Serenissimus Britannia­rum Monarcha minimè omnium ignorat, fatetur antem ultro aliquo modo in quibusdam supra regiam dignitatem eminere cum vetustis & orthodoxis patribus, [...], sayes Chrysostome, meaning that the Bishop is a Prince of greater dignitie than the Emperour, Gregorius Nazianze­nus [Page 70] scripsit in Apologia [...]: So much as the Soul exceeds the body, tan­tùm Regno sacerdotium, & quantum Deus praestat hominibus, tantùm regiae potestati praestare sacerdotium — haec enim non nesciunt in lege Dei edocti & eruditi Reges, cum Constantinus olim, Pipinus, demum Carolus, Fredericus occurrerint, de e­quis descenderint, venientes exceperint religionis antistites Christianae, venerationem (que) exhibuerint, We need no more scorne the Canonists for preferring the Pope to the Em­perour so farre as the Sunne is above the Moone. Since D^r. Montague is applauded to prove from Scriptures and Fathers, that any Bishop is as far above the King as the Soule is above the body, yea as God is above man.

The next part of the first prayer is this, Memento Do­mine famulorum famularum (que) tuarum & omnium circum­stantium quorum tibi fides cognita est, & not a devotio, pro qui­bus tibi offerimus vel qui tibi offerunt hoc sacrificium landis pro se suis (que) omnibus pro redemptione animarum suarum pro spe salutis & incolumitatis suae, tibi (que) vota reddunt sua aterna Deo vivo & vero. Of this commemoration of the living in generall, and in particular of benefactors, they will make no scruple who in their solemne prayers delight to name their Patrons with all their styles, as for the offe­ring for their Soules salvation the former place of Field does justifie it.

The comme­moration of the Saints in publick prayer avowed.In the third part of this prayer is the greatest difficul­tie, so it sayes, Communicantes & memoriam venerantes in­primis gloriosae semper (que) virginis Mariae genetricis Dei & Domini nostri I. Christi, sed & beatorum Apostolorum & Martyrum tuorum Petri, Pauli, Andrea, Iacobi, Joannis, Thomae, Iacobi, Philippi, Bartholomaei, Matthaei, Simonis, & Thaddaei, Lini, Cleti, Clementis, Sixti, Cornelij, Cypria­ni, Laurentij, Chrysostomi, Ioannis, & Pauli, Cosma & Da­miani, & omnium sanctorum tuorum, quorum meritis preci­bus (que) concedas ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxi­lio, per eundem Christum Dominum nostrum, Amen. The exceptions which use to be taken at this part of the prayer are mainly two. First, The particular enumera­tion of the Apostles names, and of other old Martyrs, [Page 71] of this our parties make no question, for diverse of them have printed lately their good liking of the dyptiches reading in time of the Sacrament, which hath the names of a great number more and lesse knowne Saints than here are expressed. The second is a desire of blessings from God for the merits of the Saints, this they make Field after his death clearly to defend, p. 223. [Let us come (sayes he) to the other objection concerning the commemoration of the blessed Apostles & other Saints and holy Martyrs, by whose intercession and for whose merits the Priest and people desireth God that they may be kept safe, &c.The Saints our Mediatours of intercession, by vertue of their owne merits.] This he would shew to be no poynt of Popery by the testimony of Bucer, but no wayes perti­nent to his purpose, as his owne citation will cleare, yea they have begun long ago to proclaim the Saints depar­ted our Mediators of intercession, as Christ is our Media­tour of Redemption, so Montague Antidiatrib. p. 19. Non abnuerim illos esse orationis & intercessionis ut loqui sole­tis intercessores, Iesus Christus solus est & abs (que) alijs Media­tor redemptionis, & quoad meritum passionis suae [...] Mediator intercessionis; he avoweth that nought doth keepe him from the particular invocation of the Saints, but their ignorance of his particular estate, and confesseth his willingnesse to invocate his Angel-keeper, whom he knowes to understand his affaires, and any other Saint also, if he knew that by any meane they could heare him. Tu mihi proba posse me certum esse de scientiu Sanctorum par­ticular Iquocun (que), tand [...]m modo acquisita, ego certe quod ad me­ipsum at tinet sanctos defunctos Iaurea donates immortali, bea­ram puta Virginem; sanctissimos Apostolos, cateros (que) gloriosis­simos Martyres non vereber adire, interpellari, alloqui, sup­plicibas precibus deprecaeri habeant me commendatum suis in­tercessionibus apud Deum patrem per filium suum. Now for their cognition of our estate they are speaking of sundry probably wayes, these Saints who have lately been on the earth, they tell us take with them all the know­ledge of humane affaires they had in their body, also the advancement of the Virgin Mary above all the Angels, how easie is a revelation of our case by God or an An­gel, [Page 72] or the report of a lately dead soule. For the matter of merit they are as cleare as Bellarmine, avowing with approbation in their comitiall Verses, Virtutum sancta & speciosa caterva, salutem divino ex pacto quam meruere da­bunt.

The second prayer of the Canon is this: Hanc igitur oblationem servitutis nostrae sed & cunctae familiae tuae quaesu­mus Domine ut placatus accipias dies (que) nostros in tua pace dis­ponas, at (que) ab aeterna damnatione nos eripi, & in electorum tuorum jubeas grege numerari per Christum Dominum no­strum: The first words which alone are used by the Pa­pists to a wicked purpose, wee have them as I shewed be­fore, the rest formed by Gregory none of them will re­fuse.

Prayers for the dead avowed, also Limbus Patrum if not Purgatory it selfe.Of the two prayers which in the Canon followes the consecration, the first is this: Memento etiam Domine fa­mulorum famularum (que) tuarum qui nos praecesserunt cum signe fidei, & dormiunt in somno pacis, ipsis Domine & omnibus in Christo quiescentibus locum refrigerij, lucis & pacis, ut indul­geas deprecamur per eundem Dominum nostrum. This is the onely place of the ordinary Masse, whereon universally the Papists hold their Purgatory & Prayer for the dead: Now all this prayer as it stands they make D^r. Field to defend, yea the Bishop of London put his hand to Cozens devotion in the fourth Edition, wherein yet doth stand a Prayer for the Soule departed out of the Body, that it may be preserved from hell and darknesse and carried to Abrahams bosome, and now they are beginning to lay downe cleare grounds for Purgatory; Montague under pretence to set downe D^r, Overhalls tenet after his death about Limbus Patrum with his own amplifications as he professes, hath these words among many moe; Apparat. p. 61. 1. Obijciunt nullus tertius locus indicatur in Scriptura praeter infernum damnatorum & coelum. R. si indicatur pios ante Christum in infernis non fuisse quod videtur constare, Luc. 16. Nec ulli homini coelu [...] patuisse ante Christum quod satis clare indicatur, Heb. 9.8. Simul indicatur necessarium fuisse aliquem alium locum ubi fuerint constituti, us (que) dum via San­ctorum per Christum aperiretur utcun (que) quis, qualis, aut ubi [Page 73] sit ille locus non indicetur: praeterea licet non indiceretur in Scriptura non esse tertium locum, non tamen inde sequitur non fuisse tertium, quia multa sunt quae non indicantur in Scriptu­ra, locus ille Matth. 25. Loquitur non de loco aut statu ani­marum ante Christum, sed de statu & loco finali post finem sae­culi, cum duae tantum erunt abs (que) dubio hominum societates, & duo tantum loca, alter praemij, alter poenae sempiternae, quo sen­surectè asserebat Augustinus contra Pelagium, non esse terti­um locum praeter infernum & regnum Dei aut inter mortem aeternam & vitam aeternam. Immediately before he pres­seth the most of the Scriptures which the Papists under the name of the Fathers abuses for the probation of Pur­gatory; Ante adventum Christi omnes ad inferos deduce ban­tur inquit Hieronymus in 4. Ecclesiastae, inde Iacob ad inferos descensurum se dicit, & Iob pios & impios in inferno queritur retineri, & Evangelium dicit magnum chaos interpositum a­pud inferos, & revera antequam flammeam illam rotam & ig­neam romphaeam ad paradisi fores Christus cum latrone resera­ret, clausa erant coelestia, nota ut Samuelem quo (que) credas verè in inferno fuisse, & ante adventum Christi quamvis sanctos omnes inferni lege fuisse detentos. Also locus est qui locus vo­catur et abyssus in qua non erant aquae, in qua animae recludun­tur sive in refrigerio, sive ad poenas: Postquam eo descendit Christus inferorum claustra perfodit, diripuit, vastavit, spolia­vit, vinctas inde animas liberando. How farre Limbus Pa­trum with such Scriptures & reasons maintained is from the next adjacent cellar of Purgatory, especially when we consider what they doe maintaine also of the state of Infants unbaptized any man may judge.

The last prayer of the Canon is; Nobis quo (que) peccatori­bus famulis tuis de multitudine miserationum tuarum speran­tibus partem aliquam & societatem donare digneris cum tuis sanctis Aopstolis & Martyribus, cum Ioanne, Stephano, Matthia, Barnaba, Ignatio, Alexandro, Marcellino, Petro, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucia, Agnete, Caecilia, Anastasia, & cum omnibus sanctis tuis intra quo [...] nos consortium non aestima­tor meriti sed veniae quaesumus largitor, admitte per Christum Dominum nostrum. Nothing here is to trouble their sto­mack, [Page 74] the commemoration of particular names in pray­ers at the Altar we proved before they defended, though here be diverse names that are unknowne, yet they ap­prove the old Martyrologies, and in their Calendar of Saints are a great number of as obscure and uncertaine names, yea Montague will have no story questioned which the long practice of the Church hath allowed, al­beit for it no testimony of any ancient can be produced, Orig. p. 276. Nihil est memoriae proditum quod ego quidem sciem hac de re apud vetustiores sive historic s, sive patres, pro­babile tamen est hane rec [...]ptam Ecclesiae consuetudia [...]m de tra­ditione vetustiore aut scriptis etiam Patrum [...]tustioribus nunc d [...]peraitis dima [...]asse.

BEing now somewhat weary with the former colle­ction, I am forced to draw what followes into short bounds: After the consecration and oblation and the rest of the Canon, followes in the Masse before the Commu­nion some preparatory prayers, according to the Rule which Durand in these words sets downes L. 4. fol. 92. Hoc autem breviter notandum est, quod sacerdos ante percep­tionem corporis & sanguinis Christi debet dicere orationes à sanctis patribus institutas.

Our Pater no­ster in this place borrow­ed from the Masse.Of these Prayers which stand at the back of the Ca­non, the first is the Pater Noster, however wee shew be­fore that some of the auncients did avow the Apostles, and their followers for a time to have used no other set forme of prayer at the Communion, but only this of our Lord, yet the putting of this prayer at the back of the consecration & Canon, w [...]ut a late invention of Pope Gregory, as himselfe and all the Rationalists from him declare; take it in Innocents words, Lib. 5. c. 28. Beatus [Page 75] Gregorius Orationem Dominicam post Canonem super hosti­am censuit recitari: This in him was counted a noveltie, and therefore in his Epistles it behoved him to use Apo­logies for it and to set before it a Preface to make the re­citing of it in this place of the Masse to be taken in good part, being said sometimes before in that same action: Praeceptis salutaribus moniti, & divi â institutione formati dicimus Pater noster: To this Preface of Gregory the for­mers of the Missall thereafter put to the word audemus, and as yee heard from Pope Innocent, this is all said super hostiam, for their boldnesse to call God their Father in this place, and that with bold, lowd, and high voice, while as in the whole Canon they scarce durst peep but mutte­red all in great silence: This their boldnesse now comes from the consecration and oblation whereby they have Christ the Son of God corporally present in their hands, and have offered him in a propitiatory sacrifice to the Father: When this is perfectly done, they are bold to say their Pater Noster. For this heare Heigam, p. 30.5. The Priest having gotten as it were a good opportunity, having now before him the Lord and maker of heaven and earth, and that according to his corporall presence, he exhorteth all the people heartily to pray, saying, Ore­mus Pater noster: The English avoyds all these supersti­tions, they say the Lords prayer after the Communion, but Gregories Preface, Praeceptis salutaribus moniti, &c. And the latter addition audemus dicere, they scrape out. Innocents rule to say it on the consecrate hostie they ab­horre, and put the prayer in a place where it cannot be possibly so abused, but here we leave the English Nova­lists these Sacramentaries, and put our Pater noster in that same place with the same Prefaces, with the same boldnesse of speech which the good old order of Sarum prescribed before the Sacramentaries of England or their Patrons were borne.

Also our Pray­ers of humble accesse.The other prayers wh [...] [...]e Priest uses before the Communion are diverse, one or moe of them to be said according to his good pleasure, all of them run on two [Page 76] poynts, confession of unworthinesse to come to Gods table, and a prayer, by the Sacrament to be profited in Soule and Body; so yee may see in the prayer, Deus qui de indignis dignos facis, & de peccatoribus justos, & de immun­dis mundos; And in that prayer, Domine, non sum dignus qui intres sub tectum meum: Our prayer of humble accesse is formed plainly out of this, yea it speaks in grosser tearmes than any of the Masse prayers of this place, for the most common of the Priests prayers of accesse is this; Corporis & sanguinis tui Domine Iesu Christi Sacra­mentum quod licet indignus accipio, non sit mihi judicio & con­demnationi, sed tua prosit pietate corporis mei & animae saluti, Amen. What they call the taking of the Sacrament of Christs body and blood, wee call the eating of Christs body and drinking of his blood, they desire that the re­ceiving of the Sacrament may be profitable to the salva­tion of their soule and body, wee pray that our Bodies may be cleansed by his Body, and Souls washed by his blood. The English have indeed this our prayer word by word, but in a place that puts it out of all suspition, to wit, before the consecration, but we will have it in the proper place where the Masse requires it, and that with a Preface, that its our prayer of accesse to the Communi­on. In this place being so transposed and Prefaced, it may well serve the turne of those who professe their designe in changing the English Book in these places to cure the diseased mind of Sacramentary Puritans.

There is also in the Masse before the Communion some ceremonies used, as the breaking of the Host, the putting of one part of it in the cup, the giving of the Pax and some prayers joyned with these actions, some of them, as the Agnus Dei, wee have word by word in our Morning prayer, the rest have naught in them that our men will make any scruple of, onely there is in the expo­sition of the last clause of the Pater noster, Libera nos quae­sumus, &c. mention ma [...] the intercession of the bles­sed Virgin and Apostles; but how well they like of such intercession, Mortague shews us, and if he cannot be tru­sted, [Page 77] as it seemes he ought to be, for since B. White is re­moved, he is the principall Writer of that faction wee have to doe with; or if Schelford likewise have no credit in his avowing that the keeper of the Saints day obtaines thereby the intercession of that Saint, and the neglecter of that solemnitie receives a great spirituall losse, even the deprivation of the heavenly prayers of the neglected Saint: If we can beleeve neither of these take a third, D^r. Andrewes in his Stricturae, who must be above all ex­ception, especially when he is presented to the world af­ter his death by my L. of Canterbury: These are his words in the midst of that little Treatise [We celebrate the memories and keep the feasts of the blessed Martyrs, as well for imitation, as that we may be partakers of their intercession:] Is not this a cleare enough text put by my Lord of Canterbury in Montague and in Schelfords hands, which may uphold all the Commentars and de­ductions that they have made upon it.

The worst ce­remonies of the Masse a­vowed.As for the Ceremonies themselves of breaking the Host, of putting part of it in the Chalice, and taking them out againe for the representing of Christs buriall and resurrection, of their giving their Pax to the people, of their kisses and crosses, and bowings, none of all these things in reason can trouble our men, for they defend the Churches power in making so many significant rites as she thinks expedient: All these named and many moe particulars lye under their generall, the power which they give to the Church, will extend it selfe to the find­ing out and imposing all these rites were they yet to be invented, and so many moe as can come hereafter in the fancy of any who hath a place and spirit for leading in the Church: the most of these rites they have avowed already to be lawfull, yea the worst of all the Ceremo­nies and significant signes of the Masse they have pro­claimed long agoe to be good, to wit, the use of Images and prostration before them; [...]on this madnesse a great part of the faction, their zeale is now spent, albeit none of all the reformed Churches have kythed more zeale [Page 78] against Images both in doctrine and practice, than that of England; the Homilie against the Perill of Idolatry, will beare witnesse, but this now is one of the diseases of this age, whereof Canterbury complaines of to the King in his Preface to Andrewes Posthum works. This Icono­machian heresie is one of these fevers, a fit of that frensie, wherein this last and most corrupt age is fallen, to which his Graces medicinall hand offereth a potion; albeit, as he there professeth, without great hope to get his perverse Patient by all the craft he can use, purged of the invete­rate and now desperate disease; however, he will shew his endeavours that posterior ages may know and praise his labours to relieve the age wherein he lived from these epidemick evills whereto the maligne influence of Prior times did make it subject. Behold the tablet in hand which his Lo. by the hand of his Apothecary the Mon­tebank D^r. Montague presents to us to be swallowed for our health,We must fall downe before Images. Antidiatrib. p. 24. Haeretici nequaquam cense­ri debemus in posterum [...] asservamus enim diligenter & cum cura Petri, Pauli, B. Virginis Deiparae, Sanctorum aliorum innumeras imagines praesertim verò I. Christi redemp­toris crucifixi — etiam in templorum adytis, cryptis, lararijs, & p. 26. Sunt apud nos quod aliquoties dicendum frequentis­simae imagines in Ecclesijs perstallos ut vocant Canonicorum per fenestras, ambones, vasa, vestimenta, & ipsa [...]; he dis­allows not the religious use of Images but idolatry, p. 27. Tantummodo taxamus [...] usum & utilitatem non sollicitamus ullo pacto, the greatest fault he alleages on the Papists here is not idolatry, p. 24. Pergamus ad Romanae Ecclesiae [...], this fault he chargeth them with but for the fashion, for he grants the great conveniency of Images in the Church to stirre up effectually by their sight and to invite the hearts of people to sorrow for sin, love of Christ, joy, and all other holy affections, ibid. He sayes farther that the honour of the Image is for the architype, and what co [...]mely is done to the Image, re­dounds to the person whose image it is, that those who doe any disgrace to the image of a Saint are madde and [Page 79] should be punished, p. 128. Verissimum omnino est [...], ut Caesaris imago in numi mate, ut Meletij character in pala annuli, quod si quis Caesarem in cha­ractere & numismate suo [...] in archetypum transit ea contumelia, quod si quis Sancti alicujus imaginem d [...]decore af­ficiat, illum ego & [...] optaverim & suae temeritatis poe­nas dare: Yea if the old Lawes be not exercised upon the breakers of Images which Canterbury makes Heylen to avow to be this day in force as they were in Q Maries dayes, Studley with his Graces approbation hath Printed that the hand of God will be on such profane persons, for he Prints that he knew a Churchwarden who had taken downe a Crosse in the Paroch, much frequented by some devout people, and that for the taking downe and breaking of that Image the poore mans swine were stricken with madnes, and that he thereafter in despaire did drowne himselfe. Yea which is wonderfull, Monta­gue leaves not the matter till he bring us to [...]all down and adore before the Image, just as we doe before the Altar, p. 30. Christiani omnes adoramus Christum, imagini & simu­lachro non prosternimur [...]ram imagine forsan, quid ad rem? Invitatio est ad pietatem ex intuitu; tolle scandalum ita si ve­lis, prosternaris: ante mensam Dominicam inclinamur, in ge­nua procumbimus, venerationem exhibemus, non tamen men­sam adoramus. Will any Papist require more for the out­ward act than to fall down before the Image? Yea doth the spirit of error suffer these men to stand at an adorati­on before the Image and before the Table, hath not God given them over to vent their adoration and prostration not onely before, but unto the Table for the respect of the body that lyes on it, unto God, and to his Altar, and so by Montague his reason to use adoration, not onely before Images, but to Images, when the hornes of that Spirit are come out so long they deserve no compassion who will be deceived with it.

The Priests consumption of the sacrifice injoyned.In the Communion we follo [...] the order of the Masse, there the Priest must communicate, and that in both kinds first: if that once be, the sacrifice of the Masse is [Page 80] perfected, though no other communicate, his participa­tion they injoyn as absolutely necessary and alone essen­tiall to this action. This wee ordaine straitly that the Presbyter himselfe first receive in both the kinds, this is the Priests consumption, wherein (as Bellarmine before did shew us) the maine part of the life, soule, and essence of the Masse did consist. Of this our Church was never carefull, it was indifferent for our Minister to communi­cate at what time, in what order he thought meet.

A doore opened for removing of the cup from the people, and the putting of the bread in their mouth.Beside this, we are injoyned to give otherwise to the people than we take our selves; the Presbyter must take it in both kinds, the people must get it in due order, not a word of both kinds for them, they have given us just occasion to suspect them of the Popish sacriledge of withdrawing the cup from the people, oft in print of late they have forsaken the grounds whereby wee oppugne this Popish crime, they tell us that Scripture doth not command the giving of the cup to the people, that the peoples possession of the cup is grounded on sole traditi­on, that bibite ex hoc omnes concerned the Apostles not as Disciples or people, but as Priests. Heare Doctor Mon­tague in his last Treatise, Orig. p. 396. Ʋbi jubentur in Scriptura infantes baptizari, aut in coena Domini sub utraque specie communicantes participare, sexcenta sunt ejusmodi in re­bus sacris à Deo institutis, Ecclesiae mandatis & usurpatis ab Ecclesia de quibus possumus profiteri nihil tale dicit Scriptura, Scriptura hoc non praedicat. D. White of Ely in his Treatise of the Sabbath after 73. p. among his traditions reckons the baptisme of Infants, the right sanctifying of the Sun­day, the service of the Church in a knowne tongue, and the delivery of the communion to the people in both the kinds. Heylen Antidot. about the midst, tells us that hoc facite belongs to the Priest alone, and to the Apostles as Priests, but hoc edite to the Priests and people both, he will not be pleased to say so much of hoc bibite, Canterbu­ry sets downe in Andr [...]wes posthume stricturae a little after the beginning the acknowledgement of the ancient cu­stome of the peoples communicating in one kinde in di­verse [Page 81] cases without any appearance of dislike of such mutilation of the Sacrament. These are his words [It cannot be denied but reserving the Sacrament was suffe­red a long time in the Primitive Church, in time of per­secution they were permitted to carry away how great a part they would, to keepe it by them, and to take it at all times for their comfort, and those that lived as Her­mits in remote places were likewise permitted to take with them so much as they thought good, to take it at times — As for the sick it was alwayes sent them home were the distance never so great, and against the time of extremitie it was thought not amisse to have it reserved that if the Priest should not be in case to goe to the sicke partie and there to consecrate for him, yet at least it might be sent him] Yea D^r. Poklington is applauded by Canterbury to praise the Church of England, not onely for their Altars, Fonts, Walls, Glasse-windowes, Vestry, Lavatory, Reclinatory for confessions within the Chan­cell, but also for their repository; now it is knowne that no part of the Sacrament used to be reserved and put in the cibor or repository for the use of the sick or others, but the bread onely. By this practice the Papists vehe­mently presse us with the needlesnesse of the cup in all these cases: And by these preparatives the simple need­lesnesse of it for the people in any case.

While also they scrape out of the English Rubrick the giving to the people the Communion in their hand, and put in for it the giving of it in due order, they make way to another Popish abuse of putting the bread in the peo­ples mouth,Vide large Supplem. as being too profane to handle that which so oft after the consecration they call the body of the Lord, and by this due order they evidently distinguish the people from the Clergie that are present, the one communicates at the Altar, but the other is more un­holy than to get leave to come neere to the Altar, but were he a King he must receive the Communion without the rayle. This diverse of them in their late Writts avowes to have been the practice of antiquitie, which they pretend themselves desirous to imitate.

In the delivery of the elements the English Li­turgie is left, and the Masse followed.In the Communion it seemes the Romish Church tyes not precisely to any one forme of words in the deli­very of the Elements; for in the Missall there is a diver­sitie in the forme of these words: My Sarum hath this forme, Corpus Domini nostri I. Christi sit mihi peccatori via & vita in nomine Patris Filij & Spiritus Sancti, Amen. But the most common forme I see is that of the Roman Missall Corpus Domini nostri Iesu Christi custodiat animam meam in vitam aeternam. This our Book followes adstri­cting to one onely forme of words, and that of the Ro­man Missall, correcting as it were but most unhappily the English Liturgie, for both we adde a Rubrick here [the partie receiving shall say, Amen] and repeat it also at the other element, for this sentence savouring so much as words may do of their corporall presence, they will ther­fore have it much heeded, and the people to seale it with their Amen. Also that golden sentence of the English Liturgy, that served much to hinder what ever evill ima­gination people might have taken of a grosse corporall presence of Christs body and blood in the elements or on the Altar, either from the words in hand or any other that golden saying [Take, eat this in remembrance that Christ dyed for thee, by faith eat him in thy heart with thankesgiving] they score out by their new Index least such a firme pillar should stand for these vile heretickes the Sacramentarians to leane upon.

At the taking of the other element the Priest sayes, Sanguis Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeter­nam. This our Booke borrowes [the blood of the Lord Jesus which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soule to life eternall] for feare of Popish transubstantiati­on; the English put to this sentence [Drinke this in re­membrance that Christs blood was shed for thee, and give thanks] But our men have spunged this away, prop­ter Sacramentarios, least any thing should be here to hin­der our returne to our old faith of the reall presence within the elements, and that to this faith we might the more be hastened immediately they subjoyne a Rubrick, to cover the remaines of the consecrate elements with a [Page 83] corporall. Now Pope Innocent tells us that corporaeles pal­l [...]e significant linteamina quibus corpus Christi involutum suit, this linnen is not called a corporall till after the consecra­tion, for onely then it doth involve and lye about the bo­dy of Christ, before the consecration the corpus was not present, and so before they will not give the linnen the style of the Corporall.

The Post com­munion is ap­proved.The Post-Communion is some prayers which the Priest sayes after the participation: These in the ordina­ [...]y Masse are thankesgivings to God that hath given the blessed food of Christs body and blood, and desires to find the fruit of that blessing in sundry formes of words, the same in substance with our Collect of Thankesgi­ving. The most common forme is this, Gratias tibi ago Domine sancte Pater, omnipotens aeterne Deus, qui m [...] refecisti de sacrosancto corpore & sanguine filij tui Domini nostri J. Christi, & precor ut hoc sacramentum salutis nostrae quod sum­si indignus peccator non veniat mihi ad judicium, ne (que) ad con­demnationem pro meritis meis, sed ad profectum corporis meè & animae salutem in vitam aeternam, Amen. The onely thing that any would except against this or any other of the Post Communions is the termes which may import the corporall presence, but these wee leave to take in as grosse words as the Missall doth use. The English have in this place the Lords prayer, and another prayer of thankesgiving; but our Book must rather be dissonant from the English than from the Roman Liturgie; these prayers must not stand here but be put to such places and ranked in such an order as Sarum of old prescribed, onely in one thing we follow the English order in singing their Gloria in excelsis, which the Masse had long before as we shew in the proper place.

After all, while the Priest puts off his cloths, there are read sundry Psalmes, and Scriptures, and prayers, none whereof our men will get refused, and all is closed with the Bishops or Priests blessing, the same which we use, as for the first part of it, it was in the Masse before the giving the pax or peace to the people, but the last part the Masse so expresseth it, Benedictio Dei patris omnipoten­tis [Page 84] descendat super nos, & maneat semper in nomine Patris, Fi­lij, & Spiritus Sancti, Amen: which we turne [The bles­sing of God Almightie, the Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost, be amongst you, and remaine with you alwayes, Amen.]

Nothing in the Masse at all which our men will not imbrace if it were pressed on them by authoritie.It remaines that wee should paralell with our Booke the accidentall parts of the Masse so to call them, the most of these we have actually, their vestments, hoods, surplices, rotchets, miters, copes of all colours filled with numbers of images, palls, corporalls, challices, patins, offertory basins, wax candles, vailes, railes, stalls, lavato­ries, repositories, reclinatories, bowings, duckings, cros­sings, kissings, coursings, perfumings. These wee have already, and what of the ceremonies we want, it were easie to fetch testimonies from our parties writs for their lawfulnesse, or at least to shew the necessitie of taking them when ever they shall be imposed by our Bishops upon as good grounds as we have taken the rest.

As for the parts subjective, the diverse kinds of Masses our Book hath enough of them, it spends 78 leaves on them alone, it hath of them above an hundreth and se­ven, all borrowed from the Missall almost word by word; some from the Sanctorall, but most from the tem­porall, the changes that are be not considerable. What in the particular Masses the order of Sarum joynes to the Collects, Epistles and Gospels, to wit, the Office, Orati­on, Tractus, Sequentia, Communio, post Communio, there is no syllable in them to my memory which crosseth the wrins of our partie, but my present wearinesse and neces­sary a vocation to other studies; also the hopes now we heare by the great mercy of God, and goodnesse of our Prince, to be quite of this unhappy Book, suffer me not to proceed any farther. I must also upon the same reasons leave at this time my i [...]ended Paralell of the Breviarie with our Mattins and Even-song, also the Ceremoniall with our Order of Baptisme, Putrification, Buriall, &c. in all these will be found betwixt the Romish Orders and our Book too great an identitie.