phemous'. Several masses too were celebrated in the same church in one day, contrary to the usage of all antiquity'; the Eucharist was borne in procession as a protection against storms and other calamities"; and the Popes adopted, towards the end of the fourteenth century, the practice of having it carried before them when they moved from home". But the most remarkable result of a general belief in transubstantiation was the docdrine of masses satisfactory. The primitive Christians were often reproached by both Jews and Pagans with their neglect of those sacrificial rites which, being common both to the religion of the ancient Record, and to that of unwritten Gentile tradition, were justly deemed integral parts of the • Vid. Hospinian, 404.

* "Cœnam Domini semel tantum in primitiva Ecclesia in uno die et in eodem templo celebratam esse ex historiis certissimum est. Et Mediolanensis ecclesiæ morem ætate sua exponens Ambrosius, Omni Hebdomeda, inquit, offerendum est: etiamsi non quotidie peregrinis; incolis tamen vel bis in hebdomada. His verbis Ambrosius communionem suo tempore semel, aut bis in hebdomada, aut ad summum quotidie semel, si occasio gravior oblata esset, non autem vicies, aut tricies in uno die administratam fuisse testatur. Hanc consuetudinem in Romana Ecclesia suo adhuc tempore usurpatam Franciscus Assissinas monachis suis firmiter tenendam in regula his verbis præscripsit: Moneo et exhortor vos in Domino, ut in locis, in quibus morantur fratres, una tantum celebretur missa in die, secundum formam sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ. Et Græci adhuc unicam tantum missam in die celebrant, Thoma Vualdensi teste, lib. 6. cap. 34." Hospinian, 390. • Ibid. 388.

"Benedictus 13, Papa, circa annum Domini 1390, fertur primus Eucharistiam ante se gestasse ad sui custodiam, ut refert Genebrardus in chronicis." Ibid. 392.

revelation made by God to the common ancestors of mankind. As an answer to this objection it was urged by the early professors of our holy faith, that bleeding victims were no longer necessary; since the mighty propitiation of which they were merely types had been offered on the cross. In the hope, however, of reconciling unconverted men to the Christian faith, her ministers adopted terms familiar to the ears, and dear to the prejudices of those around them. The Lord's Supper was usually termed a sacrifice, the communion-table an altar *. Nor were these metaphors reprehensible; for the Eucharist is not only a commemoration of that sacrifice which hallows the mention of Calvary; it is also a solemn offering made by the communicant of praise and thanksgiving; of his body, his soul, and his alms to that merciful Saviour who offered a propitiation for his sins. In this scriptural manner was the Eucharistic sacrifice explained by doctors of the Roman Church in the twelfth century. But in

* "Les anciens tachans d'attirer à la foy Chretienne les Payens, qui estimoient qu'il n'y a point de religion sans sacrifice, et les Juifs, desquels la religion sous l'ancien Testament consistoit principalement en sacrifices, ont appellé la Sainte Cene sacrifice et la table sacrée autel, et ceux qui servent à cette table Levites." (Anatomie de la Messe, par Pierre Du Moulin. Sedan. 1636. p. 194.) Confiding in this figurative language which occurs in the early theologians, "Eckius told the Elector of Bavaria, that the doctrine of Luther might be overthrown by the Fathers, though not by Scripture." Bp. Jeremy Taylor's Dissuasive from Popery. Polemical Works, p. 289.

"Quo autem sensu Dominica Coena Sacrificium, etiam hisce

1

process of time, men would not bear such rational interpretations: they gradually became persuaded, that in the Eucharist, Christ was truly offered, and that, as when he died at Calvary he made a propitiatory sacrifice, so whenever a priest celebrated mass a propitiatory sacrifice was in like manner offered. By this kind of sacrifice, it was at length believed, the present, though not communicants, the absent, and even the dead, might be benefitted. The natural result of such a be

temporibus dicta fuerit, nemo docebit nos melius quam ipse Sententiarum Magister, Petrus Lombardus, Episcopus Parisiensis. Hanc enim quæstionem movet ille, lib. 4. distinct. 12. Si quod gerit sacerdos, proprie dicatur sacrificium vel immolatio; et si Christus quotidie immoletur, vel semel tantum immolatus sit? Deinde respondet: Illud quod offertur et consecratur a sacerdole, vocari sacrificium et oblationem, quia memoria est et representatio veri sacrificii, et sanctæ immolationis factæ in ara crucis. Et semel, inquit, Christus mortuus est in cruce, ibique immolatus est in semetipso: quotidie autem immolatur in sacramento, quia in sacramento recordatio fit illius quod factum est semel.” (Usser. de Success. 98.) Peter Lombard was a native of Novara in Lombardy, (whence his designation,) who taught theology at Paris with great applause, and was appointed to the bishopric of that city in 1150. He is chiefly known as the compiler of a book of Sentences, (a name commonly bestowed in his time upon theological works,) which is made up for the most part of extracts from the fathers, especially from Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome, and Austin. This work, which served as a nucleus for collecting round it a cloud of commentators, obtained for its compiler the designation of the Master of the Sentences. Peter Lombard died in 1164. Du Pin, III. 273.

After long and keen debates, the council of Trent anathematised, on the 17th of September, 1562, "those who shall say, that the mass is a sacrifice only of praise or thanksgiving, or a

lief, when once firmly established, was, that in every condition was excited an eagerness to purchase these Eucharistic services; hence the Romish priesthood almost daily made accessions of wealth and importance; nor needed it to fear any very serious reverse of fortune so long as a belief in its power to offer propitiatory sacrifices should remain firmly impressed upon the minds of men.

When the Reformers first began their labours, this impression had generally prevailed during two or three centuries, and being supported by some specious scriptural authorities, its soundness was not at first suspected. Zuingle, however, having learned to distrust the whole system of Popery, determined to sift it narrowly in all its parts. In 1524, he entered upon the Eucharistic question, and he soon found that transubstantiation is utterly irreconcilable with the Sacred Record. He then examined the opinions of those who maintain that in, with, or under the elements, are taken the natural body of Christ. All these opinions he found totally untenable, and not even deducible from the words of the fathers critically understood. The result of his enquiries was a conviction, that Christ is received in the Eucha

bare commemoration only of the sacrifice of the cross, and not propitiatory; and that it doth help only him that doth receive it, and ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities." (F. Paul. 574.) The creed of Pope Pius IV. thus expresses the doctrine of the Roman Church upon this subject: "I profess likewise, that in the mass there is offered to God, a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead."

rist by faith spiritually, not by the mouth corporally; and that the schoolmen, in teaching a contrary doctrine, had followed neither Scripture, nor ecclesiastical antiquity. Zuingle, having thus found himself unable to retain the Eucharistic opinions in which he had been educated, and duly feeling the importance of that question which now engaged his attention, apprised the learned of his sentiments extensively both in France and Germany. To many his opinions appeared correct, and he therefore made them public without any farther hesitation, in a course of lectures which he delivered upon the Gospel of St. John. Carlostadt had already written against the carnal presence during the time of Luther's concealment in the castle of Wartburg. As, however, the great Saxon Reformer had refused to sanction other innovations made in his absence, so he also condemned the attack of Carlostadt upon the carnal presence. His support, indeed, of that doctrine under a modification of his own, powerfully influenced his future life, and those who respected his exertions were generally inclined to join with him in reprobating Carlostadt's work upon the Eucharist. The circulation of it, accordingly, was forbidden by the senate of Zurich, until Zuingle, though he did not entirely approve the work, exerted himself to have the prohibition removed. In 1525, Luther published a reply to Carlostadt,

Lavather. Hist. de Orig. et Progress. Controv. Sacram. Tigur. 1563. p. 1.

b Ibid. 2.