Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book V: On the Sacrifice of the Mass (First)
Chapter 5: The State of the Controversy Is Explained, and the Opinions of Catholics and Heretics Are Reported
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. IV, De Sacramento Eucharistiae, Book V: On the Sacrifice of the Mass (First Book). The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
The words Mass and sacrifice being explained, it follows that the question itself be explained: Whether the Mass is a sacrifice. Now the principal question with the heretics of this time is not about a spiritual or improper sacrifice. For Philip in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, and Martin Kemnitz in the Examination of the Council of Trent, and Brenz in the Wurttemberg Confession, and others, confess that the Mass, or the sacred Supper, can be called a sacrifice in many ways: but it is about an external, visible, truly and properly so-called sacrifice, and chiefly about the very genus of a sacrifice properly so called, that is, about a visible oblation made to God by the ministry of the priests.
And so the state of the controversy will be this: Whether in the Mass, or in the action of the Lord's Supper, if it be rightly celebrated, the Eucharist ought to be offered to God. That this is the true state of the question can easily be proved from the testimonies both of the adversaries and of ourselves. And first, the formulas published by themselves for celebrating the Lord's Supper indicate clearly enough what in our Mass displeases them.
The formula of the Mass for the Church of Wurttemberg, published by Luther in the year 1523, admits first the Introit with a Psalm. Secondly, the Kyrie eleison with the Angelic hymn, Glory to God in the highest. Thirdly, the Collect or prayer with the following lesson. Fourthly, the Gradual with the Alleluia. Fifthly, a few Proses or Sequences, as of the Holy Spirit and of the Lord's Nativity. Sixthly, the Gospel. Seventhly, the Creed. Then he thus subjoins: Eighthly, “there follows that whole abomination, to which whatever preceded in the Mass has been compelled to serve: whence it is called the Offertory; and from here on almost everything sounds and smells of oblations.” And below: “Therefore, all those things being repudiated which sound of oblation, together with the whole Canon, let us retain those which are pure and holy.” So he, who then most briefly prescribes the consecration of the Eucharist by uttering the words of the Lord, and the Communion.
The formula of Calvin for administering the Sacraments for the Church of Geneva, and all the others which I could see, most diligently take care that no mention be made of an oblation.
Moreover Luther, in all the books, which he wrote many on this very question, does this one thing, to teach that in the action of the Supper, or Mass, we offer nothing to God but prayers, but on the contrary that rather the Sacrament of the Eucharist is offered to us by God in testimony of the promise. In the year 1520 he published a little book on the Babylonian Captivity, where in the chapter on the Eucharist, near the end of the chapter, he treats this at length. In the year 1521 he published a book on abrogating the private Mass, where he treats the same thing more fully and more furiously. In the year 1522 he published a book against the King of England, in which he repeats the same. In the year 1523 he published a book against the Canon of the Mass. In the year 1527, in his book on the words of the Supper against the Zwinglians, he has the same. Likewise in his confession, which he published in the year 1528, he says that he holds the Mass above all abominations, and grieves for nothing more than that for fifteen years he celebrated Masses after the manner of the Catholics. In the year 1534 he published a book on private Mass and the unction of priests: in which he did not blush to confess that he was taught and persuaded by the devil that the Mass is the highest abomination, and that not in sleep and rest, but openly while he was awake.
This same all the heretics of this time teach. For Philip Melanchthon in the Common Places, title on sacrifice, and John Brenz in the Wurttemberg Confession, chapter on the Eucharist, and Matthias Illyricus in the Apology for the Confession of Antwerp, chapter 15, and Martin Kemnitz in Part 2 of the Examination of the Council of Trent; and John Calvin, Book 4 of the Institutes, chapter 18, §§ 1 and 2 and following, and Peter Martyr in his commentary on chapters 4 and 10 of the first to the Corinthians, and Theodore Beza in his confession, chapter 4, § 3, and others deny that the Eucharist can or ought to be offered to God.
But on the contrary the Catholic writers who in this our age wrote on the sacrifice of the Mass all labor chiefly at this, to show that in the Mass the body and blood of the Lord are truly and properly offered to God, under the visible species of bread and wine. See John Eck in his three books on the sacrifice of the Mass; Jodocus Clichtove in the Bulwark of the Church, Book 1; Caspar Schatzger in his treatise on the Mass; John Faber, Books 2, 4, and 5 on the Mass and the Eucharist; John Fisher of Rochester in his book on the visible priesthood; Cajetan in his treatise on the sacrifice of the Mass, which is treatise 10 of tome 3; Martin Perez in his book on traditions, part 3, consideration 4; John Driedo, Book 4 on the Scriptures and the ecclesiastical dogmas, chapter 3, part 4; Ambrose Catharinus in his book on the truth of the unbloody sacrifice of the new and eternal Testament; Dominic Soto on Book 4 of the Sentences, distinction 13, question 2; Jodocus Tiletanus in his Apology for the Council of Trent against Kemnitz; Ruard Tapper in his explanation of article 16 of the Louvain articles; Albert Pigge, Book 2 of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, chapter 5, and controversies 3 and 6; Antony Demochares in his four books on the sacrifice of the Mass; Alphonsus de Castro, Book 10 against heresies, under the word Mass; Caspar Casalius in his three books on the sacrifice of the Mass; Cardinal Hosius in the Polish Confession, chapter 41; William Lindanus, Book 4 of the Panoply, chapter 37 and following; Melchior Cano, Book 12 on Theological Places, chapter 13; William Allen, Book 2 on the Eucharist; Gregory of Valencia in his treatise and Apology on the sacrifice of the Mass.
From these we gather that Philip and Kemnitz wrongly set forth the state of this question. For Philip, both in the Common Places, title on sacrifice, and in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, chapter on the Mass, because he neither well defines nor well divides sacrifice, places the whole controversy in this, whether in the Mass a propitiatory sacrifice is offered. But there is another prior controversy, whether a sacrifice is truly and properly offered: for there can be most true sacrifices which nevertheless are not propitiatory, as we showed above.
But Kemnitz, not only unskillfully, but also shamelessly and impudently, in Part 2 of the Examination, pages 739, 744, 761, 766, and 777, asserts that the state of the question is whether that representation by various gestures and vestments, which is seen in the Mass of the Catholics, is a sacrifice instituted by Christ. And in the last place noted by us he dares to say: that that panoply of words, rites, gestures, acts, ornaments, vestments, which afterward was added to the simple institution of Christ, is the very sinews and substance of the Pontifical Mass: whereas nevertheless no one of the Catholics ever wrote this; for all with the highest consent teach that all those things which were added to Christ's institution are accidental ornaments. And what he objects from the book of Eck was already refuted above in chapter 1.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT V. Explicatur status controversias, et sententia: referuntur Catholicorum et haereticorum. Explicatis vocibus Missa?, et sacrificii, se¬ quitur ut ipsa quaestio explicetur : Utrum Missa sit sacrificium. Porro qua?stio principa¬ lis cum haereticis hujus temporis, non est de sacrificio spirituali, aut improprio. Fatentur enim Philippus in Apologia Confessionis Au¬ gustanae, et Martinus Kemnitius in Examine Tridentini Concilii, ct Brentius in Confessio¬ ne Wirtemhergcnsi, et alii, Missam, sive sa¬ cram c cenam multis modis sacrificium dici posse: sed de sacrificio externo visibili, ve¬ re, ac proprie dicto, ac potissimum de ipso genere sacrificii proprie dicti, id est, de obla¬ tione visibili Deo facta ministerio sacerdo¬ tum. Itaque status controversiae hic erit : Utrum in Missa, sive in actione camae Domini, si rite celebretur, Eucharistia Deo offerri de¬ beat. Hunc esse verum statum quaestionis, facile probari potest ex testimoniis adversa¬ riorum, et nostris. Ac primum formulae ab ipsis editae, crenae Domini celebrandae, satis aperte indicunt quid in nostra Missa illis dis¬ pliceat. Formula Missae pro Ecclesia Wirtembcr- gensi a Luthero edita anno 1523. admittit primo. Introitum cum Psalmo. Secundo, Ky- ric cleison cum hymno Angelico : Gloria in excelsis Deo. Tertio, Collectam, seu oratio¬ nem cum lectione sequente. Quarto, Gradu- alc cum Alleluia. Quinto, Prosas, seu Se- quentias quasdam paucas, ut de Spiritu San¬ cto, et de Natali Domini. Sexto, Evangelium. Septimo, Symbolum. Deinde ita subjungit : Octavo « sequitur tota illa abominatio, cui servire coactum est quidquid in Missa prae¬ cessit : unde et Offertorium vocatur; et ab hinc omnia fere sonant, ac olent oblationes». Et infra : « Proinde omnibus illius repudiatis, qua? oblationem sonant cum universo Cano¬ ne, retineamus, qua? pura et sancta sunt. » Haec ille, qui Deinde brevissime praescribit consecrationem Eucharistiae prolatis verbis Domini, et Communionem. Formula Calvini Sacramentorum mini¬ strandorum pro Ecclesia Gencvensi, et ommes aliae, quas videre potui, diligentissime ca¬ vent, ne ulla fiat mentio oblationis. Praeterea Lutherus in omnibus libris, quos multos de hac ipsa quaestione scripsit, id unum agit, ut doceat in actione coenae, seu Missa, nihil nos Deo offerre praeter orationes, sed contra potius offerri nobis a Deo Sacra¬ mentum Eucharistiae in testimonium promis¬ sionis. Anno 1520, libellum edidit de capti¬ vitate Babylonica ubi caip. de Eucharistia prope finem capitis, hoc fuse tractat. Anno 1521, edidit librum de abroganda Missa pri¬ vata, ubi illud idem fusius, ct furiosius agit. Anno 1522, librum edidit contra Regem An- gliac, in quo idem repetit. Anno 1523, edidit librum contra Ganonem Missae. Anno 1527, in libro de verbis Coenae contra Zwinglianos idem habet. Similiter in confessione sua, quam edidit anno 1528. supra omnes abomi¬ nationes dicit se habere Missam, ct nihil ma¬ gis dolore, quam quod per annos quindecim Missas celebraverit more Catholicorum. An¬ no 1531, librum edidit de Missa privata, et unctione sacerdotum : in quo non erubuit confiteri se a diabolo edoctum, et persuasum Missam esse summam abominationem, idque non per somnum, et quietem, sed palam dum vigilaret. Idipsum docent omnes hujus temporis hffiretici. Nam et Philippus Melanchtlion iu locis, tit. de sacrificio, et Joannes Brentius in Confessione Wirtembergcnsi, cap. de Eu¬ charistia, ct Matthias Illyricus in Apologia pro Confessione Antuerpiensi, cap. 15. ct Martinus Kemnitius in 2. par. Examinis Con¬ cilii Tridentini. Et Joannes Calvinus lib. iv. institut. cap. 18. §. 1. et 2. et sequentibus, ct Petrus Martyr in comment. cap. iv. et x. prioris ad Corinth. et Theodorus Beza in sua confessione cap. yit. §. 3. et alii negant Eucharistiam Deo offerri posse, aut debere. E contrario vero Catholici scriptores, qui hoc nostro sa?culo de sacrificio Missa? scri¬ pserunt, omnes ineo potissimum laborant, ut ostendant, in Missa offerri Deo vere ac proprie corpus, ac sanguinem Domini, sub specie visibili panis et vini. Vide Joannem Eckium in tribus libris de sacrificio Missee, Jodocum Clictoveum, in propugnaculo Ecclesia? lib. i, Gasparem Schatzgerum, tract. de Missa ; Joannem Fabrum lib. ii. iv. ct v. de Missa et Eucharistia ; Joannem Rotfenscm in lib. de visibili sacerdotio Cajetanum tract. de sacrificio Missa?, qui est tract. 10. tomi m. Murtinum Peresium in lib. de traditionibus CAPUT VI. 300 par. 3. consideart. 4. Joannem Dricdonem lib. iv. de Scripturis et dogmatibus Eccle- siast. cap. 3. par. 4. Ambrosium Catharinum in lib. de veritate incruenti sacrificii novi et aeterni Testamenti ; Dominicum a Soto in iv. sentent. distinet. 13. qusest. 2. Jodocum Ti- letanum in Apologia pro Concilio Tridentino contra Kemnitium ; Ruardum Tapperum in explicatione art. 16. Lovaniensium ; Alber- tum Pighium lib. n. hierarch. Ecclesiast. cap. 5. et controvers. 3. et 6. Antonium De¬ mocharem in lib. quatuor de sacrificio Mis¬ sae ; Alphonsum de Castro in lib. x. contra h re res. verbo Missa ; Gasparem Casalium in libris tribus de sacrificia Missce ; Hosium Cardinalem in Confessione Polonica cap. 41. WilhelmumLindanumlib.lv. Panoplue cap. 37. et sequentibus ; Melchiorem Canum lib. xii de locis Theologicis, cap 13 ; Wilhel- mum Alanum lib. ii de Eucharistia; Grega¬ rium de Valentia in tract. et Apologia de sa¬ crificio Missai. Ex his colligimus Philippum, et Kemni¬ tium perperam exposuisse statum hujus queestionis. Philippus eniin tum in locis tit. de sacrificio, tum in Apologia Confessionis Augustana) cap. de Missa, quia nec bene de¬ finit, nec bene dividit sacrificium, totam controversiam in eo ponit, utrum in Missa offeratur sacrificium propitiatorium. Sed alia est controversia prior, utrum vere, ac pro¬ prie sacrificium offeratur : possunt enim ve¬ rissima sacrificia esse, qua) tamen non sint propitiatoria, ut supra ostendimus. Kemnitius autem non modo imperite, sed etiam inverecunde, et impudenter in 2. par. Examinis pagina739. 744. 761. 766. et 777. asserit, statum quaestionis esse utrum illa repraesentatio per varios gestus, et vestes, quae in Missa Catholicorum cernitur, fit sa¬ crificium a Christo institutum. Et in postre¬ mo loco a nobis notato dicere audet : Pa- nopliam illam verborum, rituum, gestuum, actuum, ornamentorum, vestium, quae post¬ ea accessit ad simplicem Christi institutio¬ nem, esse ipsos nervos, et substantiam Mis¬ sa) Pontificia) : cum tamen nullus Catholico¬ rum id. unquam scripserit ; omnes enim summo consensu docent, ista omnia qua) ac¬ cesserunt ad Christi institutionem, esse acci¬ dentalia ornamenta. Quod autem ille objicit ex lib. Ekii, jam supra in i. cap, refutatum est.