A64611:2090
The sum of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism,…The summe of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism,…
The sum of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism, and then afterwards more enlarged by a sound and judicious exposition, and application of the same : wherein also are debated and resolved the questions of whatsoever points of moment have been, or are controversed in divinity / first Englished by D. Henry Parry, and now again conferred with the best and last Latin edition of D. David Pareus, sometimes Professor of Divinity in Heidelberg ; whereunto is added a large and full alphabetical table of such matters as are therein contained ; together with all the Scriptures that are occasionally handled, by way either of controversy, exposition, or reconciliation, neither of which was done before, but now is performed for the readers delight and benefit ; to this work of Ursinus are now at last annexed the Theological miscellanies of D. David Pareus in which the orthodoxall tenets are briefly and solidly confirmed, and the contrary errors of the Papists, Ubiquitaries, Antitrinitaries, Eutychians, Socinians, and Arminians fully refuted ; and now translated into English out of the original Latin copy by A.R.The summe of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism, and then afterwards more enlarged by a sound and judicious exposition, and application of the same : wherein also are debated and resolved the questions of whatsoever points of moment have been, or are controversed in divinitie / first Englished by D. Henry Parry, and now again conferred with the best and last Latine edition of D. David Pareus, sometimes Professour of Divinity in Heidelberge ; whereunto is added a large and full alphabeticall table of such matters as are therein contained ; together with all the Scriptures that are occasionally handled, by way either of controversie, exposition, or reconciliation, neither of which was done before, but now is performed for the readers delight and benefit ; to this work of Ursinus are now at last annexed the Theologicall miscellanies of D. David Pareus in which the orthodoxall tenets are briefly and solidly confirmed, and the contrary errours of the Papists, Ubiquitaries, Antitrinitaries, Eutychians, Socinians, and Arminians fully refuted ; and now translated into English out of the originall Latine copie by A.R.
London: printed by James Young, 1645
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The Explication.
This question is necessary, by reason of errors, which by the Mass have crept into the Church. It is otherwise demanded, Why the Mass is to be abolished? But here this question is also contained and comprehended: because these differences and contrarieties of the Lords Supper and the Mass, are the causes why the Mass is to be abolished. For whereas it hath so many abuses in it, flat repugnant to the Lords Supper, it may not be confounded therewith, nor be thrust on the Church in place thereof, nor be permitted and tolerated in the Church by godly and religious Magistrates; but it ought to be utterly abandoned and put down. First then let us speak a few words of the name of Mass, or Missa. The word Missa seemeth to have his name derived from the Hebrew Masah; that is, a tribute, or voluntary offering, which was wont to be paid of every one.1 The word is found, Deut. 16.10. Meshach nidbath jadecha, a free gift of thine hand. Now that offering was called so, being as it were an yearly tribute, which was yet no exaction, but given freely. Others interpret it to be a sufficiency, which is, that there should be given so much as was sufficient: and perhaps this is the truer; because the Lord commanded the Israelites, that they should open their hands unto the poor, 2and should lend him sufficient for his need. This the Chaldee Paraphrast interpreteth to be Missah. Hereof these our men think, that it was called Missa, as if it were a tribute, and free-offering, which should be every-where offered to God in the Church, for the living and the dead. But this is not of any likelihood ⟨p. 457⟩to be true. It is manifest indeed, that the Church hath borrowed some words from the Hebrews; as, Satan, Hosanna, Sabaoth, Hallelujah, Pascha, and such like, But those words came not to the Latin Church, but by the Greek Church; and those words are found in the Greek Testament, when first it was written in Greek. And therefore we have no Hebrew words derived unto our Church, which the Greek Church had not before us. If also we seek the Greek Fathers, the word Missa will never be found to have been used by them: Therefore I think not that the word Missa was taken from the Hebrews; but Missa, which doubtless is a Latin word by original, seemeth to have taken from the Fathers, who used Remissa for Remissio, as Tertullian: