Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book V: On the Sacrifice of the Mass (First)
Chapter 9: The Sacrifice of the Mass Is Proved from the Prophecies of the Prophets
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 fourth principal argument can be taken from the prophecies of the prophets. For, as Augustine rightly says, letter 49, question 3, “Our sacrifice is demonstrated not only in the evangelical, but also in the prophetic books.” Six testimonies of the prophets are wont to be adduced, but the last is the chief, and therefore we shall only briefly touch the rest, that on the last it may be lawful to dwell longer.
The first testimony is had in the book of 1 Kings, chapter 2 near the end, where a certain unnamed prophet foretells to Heli the priest that a time will sometime come when his priesthood and that of his fathers shall cease, and a new priest shall rise who shall walk before the Christ of God all days. Which passage they expound of the priesthood and sacrifice of the Christians, which succeeded the Aaronic and will remain until the consummation of the world: Cyprian, Book 1 against the Jews, chapter 17; Augustine, Book 17 of the City of God, chapter 5; Eusebius, Book 4 of the Demonstration of the Gospel, chapter 26; Gregory, Bede, and Eucherius in their commentaries on that place.
But on the contrary it could be objected that that prophecy seems fulfilled in Samuel, or in Sadoc. For Samuel succeeded Heli; and then Solomon cast out Abiathar, who descended from the family of Heli, and set in his place Sadoc, and Scripture adds, 3 Kings chapter 1, that this was done that the word of the Lord against Heli in Silo might be fulfilled.
To this objection Augustine answers in the cited place that that prophecy was fulfilled in Samuel or Sadoc, inasmuch as they bore the figure of the Christian priests. And so the casting out of Heli was a figure of the casting out of the Aaronic priesthood, and the assumption of Samuel and Sadoc was a figure of the assumption of the Christian priesthood: which Augustine proves from this, that Scripture, when it says that Heli is to be cast out with his fathers, openly speaks of Aaron, since it names him who at the exit from Egypt was first appointed by God as priest.
The second prophecy is taken from chapter 9 of Proverbs: Wisdom hath built herself a house, she hath immolated her victims, she hath mingled her wine, and set forth her table. Of this passage thus Cyprian, Book 2, letter 3: “Through Solomon the Holy Spirit foreshows the type of the Lord's sacrifice, making mention of the immolated host, and of bread and wine, and also of the altar and of the Apostles.” See also Augustine, Book 17 of the City of God, chapter 20, where he expounds this whole passage of the Eucharist.
The third testimony is taken from that of Isaiah chapter 19: The Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day, and shall worship Him with hosts and gifts. Eusebius, Book 1 of the Demonstration of the Gospel, chapter 6, and Jerome in his commentary, prove from this passage that the law was translated, since the priesthood is translated, when among the Egyptians, that is, among the Gentiles, sacrifices are offered to the true God. Nor is the answer of Calvin valid, Book 4 of the Institutes, chapter 18, § 4, that Isaiah speaks of the spiritual sacrifices which are offered by all Christians. For in the same place mention is made of the altar of the Lord set in a visible place: In that day, he says, there shall be an altar of the Lord in the midst of Egypt. But for spiritual sacrifices no visible altar is necessary.
The fourth testimony is had in Isaiah 66: And I will take of them to be priests and Levites, saith the Lord. To which is like that of Jeremiah 33: There shall not be cut off from David a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel, and of the priests and Levites there shall not be cut off a man before my face, to offer holocausts, etc. These passages Jerome on Isaiah, and Theodoret on Jeremiah, expound of the priests of Christ, who will perpetually continue until the consummation of the world. Nor can they be otherwise expounded, since each prophet most openly speaks of the conversion of the Gentiles and the building of the Church.
Kemnitz, in Part 2 of the Examination, page 753, acknowledges that these passages ought to be expounded of the priests of the New Testament: nor does he answer anything except that these prophecies are partly fulfilled in Christ, who was a true Priest and succeeded the priests of the Old Testament, partly fulfilled in all Christians, who are spiritual priests. But neither exposition is to the point. For those prophecies cannot be understood of Christ alone, since they expressly set down priests and Levites in the number of a multitude: nor can they be understood of all Christians, since each prophet distinguishes the future priests from the rest of the people.
Someone will say: The prophecies speak of the ministers of the New Testament who succeeded the ministers of the Old Testament in the ministry of doctrine and of the Sacraments, although they did not succeed in the ministry of sacrificing. But if it were so, why would they be called priests? Why would Jeremiah say that they would offer holocausts? Those ancients, therefore, must be succeeded by true priests who truly and properly offer sacrifices.
The fifth testimony is that of Daniel 8 and 11, where it is said that Antichrist will take away the continual sacrifice: which passage Hippolytus the Martyr expounds of the sacrifice of the Mass, in his book on Antichrist. Nor does it stand in the way that Daniel seems to speak of Antiochus, for he speaks of Antiochus as he bore the figure of Antichrist, as is clear from the comparison of this passage with the Apocalypse chapter 13.
Kemnitz answers, page 753, that the passage is understood literally of Antiochus, and only by allegory of Antichrist: but that from allegories solid arguments are not drawn. But from this allegory a most solid argument can be taken. For it is explained by John in the Apocalypse, chapter 13, and by Paul, 2 Thessalonians 2; nay Daniel himself too explains it, when he says that this king, who will take away the continual sacrifice, will fight against all gods, and against the very God of his fathers. For these things cannot be understood of Antiochus, who, it is established, openly worshipped the gods of his fathers, as Jerome in his commentary shows, but they fit Antichrist most aptly, of whom Paul writes, 2 Thessalonians 2, that he will lift himself above all that is called God.
Kemnitz answers secondly that that passage of Daniel can be understood of the spiritual sacrifice, that is, of the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments; nay he tries to prove that the continual sacrifice was taken away by Antichrist, because the Roman Pope, as he says, took away the purity of the word and of the Sacraments. But all these are most vain. For first it is one thing to take away, another to corrupt. Antichrist will not corrupt, but simply take away the continual sacrifice, at least from the public temples: whence, as is added in the same place, the place of the sacrifice will remain desolate. Then in Scripture nowhere is called sacrifice absolutely, and especially in the singular number, except that which is truly and properly a sacrifice. Finally, the continual sacrifice among the Hebrews was not spiritual sacrifices, but a sacrifice properly so called, that is, the two lambs which were daily offered in holocaust, one in the morning, the other in the evening, as is clear from Exodus 29 and Numbers 28. Wherefore Daniel, when he calls the sacrifice continual, speaks of a true and proper sacrifice, whose type was that continual sacrifice of the Hebrews.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT IX Probatur sacrificium Missse ex vaticiniis Prophetarum. Quartum argumentum principale , sumi potest ex vaticiniis prophetarum. Nam, ut recte ait Augustinus epist. 49. quaest. 3, « Nostrum sacrificium non solum evangelicis sed etiam Propheticis libris demonstratum est. » Sex testimonia Prophetarum adduci, solent, sed postremum est praecipuum, et ideo caetera breviter solum attingemus ut in postremo diutius liceat immorari. Primum testimonium habetur lib. I Re¬ gum cap. ii. prope finem, ubi quidam Pro¬ pheta innominatus praedicit Heli sacerdoti futurum aliquando tempus, ut cesset sacer¬ dotium ipsius, et patrum suorum, et surgat novus sacerdos, qui ambulet coram Christo Dei, omnibus diebus. Quem locum exponunt de sacerdotio, et sacrificio Christianorum, quod successit Aaronico, et manebit usque ad mundi consummationem : Cyprianus lib. I contra Judaeos, cap. 17. Augustinus lib. xvii. civit, cap. 5. Eusebius lib. iv. Demonstrat. Evangel. cap. 26. Gregorius, Beda etEuche- rius in comment. ejus loci. Sed contra objici posset, videri impletum illud vaticinium in Samuele, vel in Sadoc. Nam Samuel, successit Heli ; et deinde Sa¬ lomon ejecit Abiatar, qui descendebat de familia Heli, et constituit pro eo Sadoc, et addit Scriptura, lib. III Reg. cap. i. id factum esse ut impleretur verbum Domini contra Heli in Silo. R,espondent ad hanc objectionem Augu¬ stinus loco citato, vaticinium illud impletum fuisse in Samuele, vel Sadoc, quatenus illi gerebant figuram Christianorum Sacerdo¬ tum. Itaque ejectio Heli, erat figura ejectio¬ nis sacerdotii Aaronici, et assumptio Samue- lis, et’ Sadoc, fuit figura assumptionis sacer¬ dotii Christiani : id quod probat Augustinus ex eo, quod Scriptura cum dicit, ejiciendum Heli cum patribus suis, aperte loquitur de Aarone, siquidem nominat eum, qui primus in exitu de iEgypto constitutus est a Deo Sacerdos. Secundum vaticinium sumitur ex cap. ix. Proverb. : Sapientia aedificavit sibi domum , immolavit victimas suas, miscuit vinum, et po¬ suit mensam suam. De hoc loco ita Cyprianus ‘lib. ii. epist. 3. : « Per Salomonem Spiritus sanctus typum Dominici sacrificii praemon¬ strat, immolate hostiae, et panis, et vini, sed et altaris, et Apostolorum faciens mentio¬ nem. » Vide etiam Augustinum lib. xvii. ci¬ vit. cap. 20. ubi totum hunc locum de Eu¬ charistia exponit. Tertium testimonium sumitur ex illo Isaiae cap. xix. : Cognoscent /Egyptii Dominum, in die illa , et colent eum in hostiis, et muneribus. Eusebius lib. i. demonstrat. Evangel. cap. 6. et Hieronymus in commentario ex hoc loco, probant, legem esse translatam, quan- LIRER Y. 328 do quidem sacerdotium est translatum, cum apud yEgyptios, id est, apud Gentiles sacri¬ ficia Deo vero offerantur. Neque valet re¬ sponsio Calvini, lib. iv. Instit. cap. 18. §. 4. Isaiam loqui de sacrificiis spiritualibus, qua? a Christianis omnibus offeruntur. Nam in eodem loco lit mentio altaris Domini in loco visibili constituti : In die illa , inquit, erit al¬ tare Dominii in medio /Egypti. Ad sacrificia autem spiritualia nullum altare visibile ne¬ cessarium est. Quartum testimonium habetur Isaiae lxvi.: Et assumam ex eis Sacerdotes, et Levitas, dicit Dominus. Cui simile est illud Hierem. xxxiii. Non interibit de David vir, qui sedeat super thronum domus Israel , et de Sacerdotibus, et de Levitis non interibit vir a facie mea, qui offerat holocaustomata elc. Haec loca Hiero¬ nymus in Isaiam, et Theodoretus in Hiere- miam, exponunt de sacerdotibus Christi, qui perpetuo permanebunt usque ad mundi con¬ summationem. Nec possunt aliter exponi, cum apertissime uterque propheta loquatur de conversione Gentium , et aedificatione Ecclesia?. Kemnitius in 2. par. Exam. pag. 753. agnoscit ista loca debere exponi de novi Testamenti Sacerdotibus : neque aliquid re¬ spondet nisi ista vaticinia partim impleta esse in Christo, qui fuit verus Sacerdos, et suc¬ cessit Sacerdotibus Testamenti veteris, par- iim impleri in omnibus Christianis, qui sunt spirituales Sacerdotes. At neutra expositio lacit ad rem. Non de solo enim Christo pos¬ sunt intelligi ea vaticinia, cum diserte in nu¬ mero multitudinis ponant Sacerdotes, et Le¬ vitas : neque de omnibus Christianis intelligi possunt, cum uterque Propheta distinguat Sacerdotes futuros a reliquo populo. Dicet aliquis : Loquuntur vaticinia de 'mi¬ nistris Testamenti novi, qui successerunt ministris Testamenti veteris, in ministerio doctrina? et Sacramentorum, licet non suc¬ cesserint in ministerio sacrificandi. At si ita esset, cur vocarentur Sacerdotes ? cur Hiere- mias diceret, illos holocausta oblaturos ? Suc¬ cedere igitur debent veteribus illis veri Sa¬ cerdotes, qui sacrificia vere, et proprie offe¬ rant. Quintum testimonium est Danielis viii. et vii. ubi dicitur Antichristus ablaturus juge sacrificium : quem locum de sacrificio Missa? exponit Hippolytus Martyr in lib. de Anli- christo. Nec obstat, quod Daniel loqui vi¬ deatur de Antiocho, loquitur enim de An¬ tiocho, ut figuram gerebat Antichristi, ut patet ex collatione hujus loci, cum Apoca¬ lypsi cap. xin. Respondet Kemnitius, pag. 733- locum intelligi ad litcram do Antiocho, et per Alle¬ goriam tantum de Antichristo : ex allegoriis autem non duci solida argumenta. Sed ex hac allegoria solidissimum argumentum su¬ mi potest. Nam explicata est a Joanne in Apocalypsi, cap. xm. et a Paulo, II Thcs- sal. n, imo ipse etiam Daniel eam explicat, cum dicit regem istum, qui auferet juge sa¬ crificium, contra omnes Deos pugnaturum, et contra ipsum Deum patrum suorum. Non enim ista de Antiocho intelligi possunt, quem constat palam coluisse Deos patrum suorum , ut Hieronymus in commentario ostendit, sed in Antichristum optime conve- niunt, de quo Paulus scribit, II Thessal. ii, quod extollet se super omne quod dicitur Deus. Respondet secundo Kemmtics, posse in¬ telligi locum istum Danielis do sacrificio spirituali, id est, do pra?dicatione verbi, et Sacramentorum administratione ; imo co¬ natur probare, ablatum esse juge sacrificium ab Antichristo, quia Papa Romanus, ut ipse dicit, sustulit puritatem verbi, et Sacramen¬ torum. At ista omnia vanissima sunt. Nam in primis aliud est tollere, aliud corrumpere. Antichristus non corrumpet, sed simpliciter auferet juge sacrificium saltem ex publicis templis : unde, ut ibidem additur, manebit locus sacrificii desolatus. Deinde , in Scri¬ ptura nusquam appellatur sacrificium abso¬ lute, et praesertim in numero singulari, nisi id, quod est vere ac proprie sacrificium. Denique, juge sacrificium apud Hebraeos, non erat sacrificia spiritualia, sed sacrificium proprie dictum, id est, duo agni, qui offere¬ bantur quotidie in holocaustum, unus mane, alter vesperi, ut patet Exod. xxix. et Num. xxviii. Quare Daniel cum vocet sacrificium juge, loquitur de vero ac proprio sacrificii, cujus typus fuit juge illud sacrificium He¬ braeorum.