Which they offered year by year continually:] He speaks chiefly of the yearly sacrifice, whereof mention is made Levit. 16. although in naming one kind, he comprehends the whole. Thus he reasoneth then, Where there is no more conscience and remorse for sin, there also is no more need of oblations. Now under the Law they offered one and the same offering often. Therefore it follows that God ⟨p. 202⟩was not satisfied; the condemnation taken away, neither the consciences of men quieted: for if it had been otherwise, they would then have ceased to offer any more sacrifices. Moreover, we are diligently to observe, that he saith with the same sacrifices, which had the like reason. For they were esteemed rather by the same ordinance of God, than of divers beasts. And this argument alone is sufficient of it self to refute the subtlety of the Papists, by which they think they finely avoid the absurdity of excusing the sacrifice of the Mass. For when we tell them it is superfluous to reiterate the sacrifice, seeing that which Christ hath once offered retains his virtue for ever; they by and by reply, the sacrifice offered in the Mass, is not another, but the same. This is their solution. But how doth the Apostle here contradict it? Thus, the sacrifice which is offered and many times reiterated: although it be the same, is not effectual, nor sufficient for the purgation of sins. 1Let the Papists now cry a thousand times if they will, that the sacrifice which they offer every day, is the same sacrifice which Christ hath once made upon the Cross, and none other: I will always maintain against them by the mouth of the Apostle, that if the oblation of Christ had this virtue to appease God, then this his sacrifice hath not only put an end to other oblations, but also that it is unlawful to reiterate the same: whereby we see, that it is an execrable sacrilege, to offer Christ in the Mass.
Which they offered yeere by yeere continually:] He speakes chiefely of the yeerely sacrifice, whereof mention is made Leuit. 16. although in naming one kind, he comprehends the whole. Thus he reasoneth then, Where there is no more conscience and remorse for sinne, there also is no more need of oblations. Now vnder the Law they offered one and the same offering often. Therefore it followes that God ⟨p. 202⟩was not satisfied; the condemnation taken away, neither the consciences of men quieted: for if it had been otherwise, they would then haue ceased to offer any more sacrifices. Moreouer, we are diligently to obserue, that he saith with the same sacrifices, which had the like reason. For they were esteemed rather by the same ordinance of God, than of diuers beasts. And this argument alone is sufficient of it selfe to refute the subtiltie of the Papists, by which they thinke they finely auoyde the absurditie of excusing the sacrifice of the Masse. For when we tell them it is superfluous to reiterate the sacrifice, seeing that which Christ hath once offered retaines his vertue for euer; they by and by reply, the sacrifice offered in the Masse, is not another, but the same. This is their solution. But how doth the Apostle here contradict it? Thus, the sacrifice which is offered and many times reiterated: although it be the same, is not effectuall, nor sufficient for the purgation of sinnes. 1Let the Papists now crie a thousand times if they will, that the sacrifice which they offer euery day, is the same sacrifice which Christ hath once made vpon the Crosse, and none other: I will alwaies maintaine against them by the mouth of the Apostle, that if the oblation of Christ had this vertue to appease God, then this his sacrifice hath not onely put an end to other oblations, but also that it is vnlawfull to reiterate the same: whereby we see, that it is an execrable sacriledge, to offer Christ in the Masse.
- 1An objection of the Papists answered, wherein they say they offer not an other sacrifice, but the same which Christ offered.An obiection of the Papists answered, wherein they say they offer not an other sacrifice, but the same vvhich Christ offered.
