Much of this section on the origins and development of the mass (1563, pp. 889-900, and 1583, pp. 1397-1405, omitted from the editions of 1570 and 1576) is based on three works: John Bradford's The Hurt of Hearing Mass; John Bale's Scriptorum Maioris Brytanniae ... Catalogus and Polydore Vergil's De inventoribus Rerum. There are also a number of works on which Foxe drew for isolated passages in this section. These definitely include: Platina's papal history; Walafrid of Strabo, Gulielmus Durandus's Rationale divinorum officiorum, Johann Sleidan's Commentaries and Gratian. But although Foxe added some material out of his not inconsiderable knowledge of canon law, liturgy and church history, the framework of this section is from the words of Bradford, Bale and Vergil. It is important to note that the source citations Foxe gives are not reliable guides to the sources Foxe actually consulted.[Back to Top]
What Foxe did in this section was to join together two previous types of protestant polemic: denunciation of the elements of the mass as superstition (although few writers are as witty in this attack as Foxe) and an attack on the elements of the mass as papist inventions. Its placement at the beginning of Book 10 indicates Foxe's determination to use this book as a sustained attack on the mass. This idea was temporarily abandoned when the section was omitted from the 1570 edition in an effort to maintain a manageable edition. The section was restored in the 1583 edition, together with other material omitted from the edition of 1570, because Foxe felt that it should be a part of what he regarded as the definitive edition of his work. When it was reprinted, it was completely unchanged, another indication of Foxe's satisfaction with this section of his work.[Back to Top]
F ORASMVCH AS WE ARE come now to the tyme of Queene Mary, when as so many were put to death for the cause especially of the Masse, and the sacramente of the Altar (as they cal it) I thought it conuenient vppon the occasion geuen, in the ingresse of this foresayd story, first to prefixe before, by the way of Preface, some declaration collected out of dyuers writers and Authors, whereby to set foorth to the Reader the great absurditie, wicked abuse, and perillous idolatry of the popish Masse, declaring how and by whom it came in, clouted and patched vp of diuers additions, to the intent that the Reader, seeing the vayne institution thereof, and waying the true causes why it is to be exploded out of all Churches, may the better thereby iudge of their death, which gaue their liues for the testimonie and the word of truth.[Back to Top]
All of the glosses in this section are in 1563 and 1583 only. It seems probable that 1583 was (carefully) composed with a copy of 1563 to hand. The comprehensive nature here and later of the 1563 glosses can be compared to the much more barren pages that follow for much of the rest of Book 10. Many of the glosses point to the three terms of a syllogism. Many others give patristic and historical references. Some of the glosses summarise the points of an argument. The arguments and the glosses are centred around the unnecessary nature of the mass given the sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice and the content of scripture.[Back to Top]
See Bingham's Christian Antiquities; book xiii. chap. i. ¶. 4. - ED. Appendix:"Quod ad nomen Missæ attinet 'Habraicum vel Chaldaicum esse putidissimum commentum est,' inquit post alios plurimos doctissimos viros (imprimus autem Picherellum Presbyt. in locum Matth. de S. Cœnæ institutione, et Dissert. de Missa, cap. i.) Is. Casaubonus, Exercitat. xvi. p. 582. Hanc sententiam Bellarminus et alii docti Romanenses exploserunt dudum, ut qui diversum sentiunt plane ridiculi sint, et neque Hebraicas neque Chaldaicas literas se intelligere manifeste ostendant.[Back to Top]
"Vocabulum certe Latinum est, et inventum circa finem, ut videtur, tertii seculi, vel paulo ante. Nam si vera est Epistola Cornelii Papæ ad Lupicinum Viennensem, circa A. D. 250 notum jam erat istud vocabulum, ut recte ait Casaubonus." (Considerationes modestæ, per G. Forbesium, Episc. Edenburg.; Lond. 1658, p. 445.)[Back to Top]
Deut. xvi. 10.
Levit. vi. 15.
But to let passe these coniectures, this by the way I geue to the Reader to note and vnderstande, that as thys
word Missa neuer yet entred into the Church nor vsage among the Greekes: so it is to be obserued among our Latin interpretors, such as haue translated of old time the ancient Greeke Authours, as Eusebius, and the Tripartite history, and others: that where the Greeke Writers haue these tearmes σμνὰγειν, σμνὰξει and ποὶεῖν εχχλκσιὰςειν,
Socra, Eccl. hist. l. 2. c. 13
Epiph, trip. hist. li. 4. c. 13.
Sozom. li. 2. cap. 32..
Epiph. trip. hist. l. 3. c. 11. Marginalia
Socrat. l. 3. cap. 9.
Epiph. trip. hist. l. 6. c. 23. Marginalia
Socrat. l. 5. cap. 15.
Χαὶ χαδξ αυτὃς εχχλκοὶαςεὶν
Epiph. trip. hist. li. 7. ca. 13. & apud se iposos missarum celebrare solēnia. &c.
Item collectas agūt &c. quod Socrates grece. li. 5. cap 22. inquit. ῶερὶ δὲ συ νάξεὶον συνάξοὶςπο ιὃσιν. &c.that is, to call the congregation, to conuent assemblies, and so frequent together, the old translator of Epiphanius, and other translate vppon the same Missas facere, collectas agere, missas celebrare, &c. wherby it is not obscure to be seene, that this word Masse in the olde time, was not onely and peculiarly applied to the action of consecration, but as wel to all Christen assemblies collected, or congregations conuented, according as in the Dutch language this name (Messe) signifieth any solemne frequency, or panagyrie, or gathering together of the people. But of the name inough, and too much.
To expresse now the absurditie of the saide Masse, and the irreligious application thereof, vnseemely, and perilous for Christians to vse, I will bring two or three reasons of the worthy seruaunt and Martyr of God, Iohn Bradford, to which many more may be also added out of others.
MarginaliaThe Masse a double enemy against Christ
The Masse iniurious to the Priesthood of Christ.First the Masse, sayeth he, is a most subtile and pernicious enemie against Christ, and that double wayes: namely, against his Priesthode, and against his sacrifice, which he prooueth by this way. For the Priesthoode of Christe, (sayeth he) is an euerlasting Priesthoode, and such an one as can not go to another. But the Masse vtterly putteth him out of place, as though he were dead for euer: and so God were a lier, which said that Christ should be a Priest for euer: which briefly commeth vnto this Argument.
That thing is not perpetuall, nor standeth not alone,
which admitteth succession of other to do the same thing
that was done before.
But the Masse Priests succeede after Christ, doing the
same sacrifice (as they say) which he did before.
Ergo,the Masse Priests make Christs Priesthode not
to be perpetuall.
|MarginaliaMaior. Ba-|| |
All Priests eyther be after the order of Aaron, or after
the order of Melchisedech, or after the order of the A-
postles, or after that spirituall sort whereof it is writ-
ten,Vos estis spirituale sacerdotium, &c.
|MarginaliaMinor. ro-|| |
But our Masse Priests neither be after the order of
Aaron, (for that is to resume that which Christ hath a-
bolished:) neither after the order of Melchisedech (for
that is peculiar only to Christ:) neither after the order
of the Apostles (for then should they be Ministers, not
Maisters, not Priests, but Preachers: (and which of
the Apostles was euer named by the title of a Priest?)
Againe, neither are they after the generall sorte of the
spirituall priesthoode. For after that prerogatiue, eue-
ry true Christian is a spirituall Priest as well as they,
offering vp spirituall, not bodily sacrifice, as prayers,
thankesgeuing, obedience, mortification of the bodie
framed to the obedience of his commaundements.
|MarginaliaConclusio. co.|| |
Ergo,our Masse Priests are no Priests (vnlesse it be
after the order of the Priestes of Baal.)
MarginaliaThe Masse iniurious to the sacrifice or death of Christ.Secondlye, concerning the sacrifice of Christ aboue mentioned, hee reasoneth in lyke manner: whyche wee haue reduced in the waye of Argumente, as followeth:
|MarginaliaMaior. Da-|| |
To reiterate a thing once done, for the atteining or
accomplishing of the ende wherefore it was begon, de-
clareth the imperfection of the same thing before.
|MarginaliaMinor. ri-|| |
The Masses Priestes do reiterate the sacrifice of Christ
once done for the end wherefore it was begonne (that
is, for propitiation and remission à pœna & culpa pro
viuis & pro defunctis:)
|MarginaliaConclusio. j.|| |
Ergo, Masse Priestes make the sacrifice of Christe to
be vnperfect, and so are they iniurious to the sacrifice of