Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book VI: On the Sacrifice of the Mass (Second)
Chapter 8: That the Sacrifice of the Mass Is Rightly Celebrated for the Saints
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. IV, De Sacramento Eucharistiae, Book VI: On the Sacrifice of the Mass (Second 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).
Of those for whom the sacrifice can be offered, there remain only the Saints, who now reign with Christ in heaven. And since the adversaries, and Kemnitz most of all, by wonderful fraud involve the state of the question, and attribute to us what we never dreamed, first the opinion of the Church must be diligently explained, and the state of the question opened. Then the truth must be proved. Lastly the objections must be answered.
As to the first, the opinion of the Church is contained in these three heads. First, sacrifices do not profit the Saints for the remission of guilt or punishment, nor for the increase of essential grace or glory. This is certain among Catholics, nor is there any contention about it with the heretics. Wherefore Saint Augustine, treatise 84 on John, and sermon 17 on the words of the Apostle, and elsewhere, warns that in the sacrifice memory is made of the Saints, but that prayer is not made for them. And therefore when in our Liturgy we ask that the oblation may profit the Saints unto glory, we pray not so much for the Saints as for ourselves: for we ask of God the grace so holily, piously, devoutly, rightly to offer the sacrifice that the Saints may deservedly rejoice thereat, and glory accrue to them before men. And likewise when Cyprian, Cyril, Epiphanius, Augustine, and Chrysostom, whom we shall cite below in the proof of the first proposition, say that the sacrifice is offered for the Apostles and Martyrs, they do not mean that it is offered for their salvation, but for their honor.
Secondly, the sacrifice is not offered to the Saints, and accordingly neither temples nor altars are erected to the Saints, though in their memory all these things can be done, as we shall presently say. This is had expressly in the Council of Trent, session 22, chapter 3, and in Augustine, Book 8 of the City of God, chapter 27, where we read thus: “We do not constitute for the Martyrs temples, priesthoods, sacred rites, and sacrifices.” Which words Kemnitz cites, page 818, and subjoins with an impudent lie: “But this in the Papacy both is done and is still defended.” But he could in the same way lie against Augustine, and say: But this was done in the time of Augustine, and was defended by him. For in the sense in which Augustine denies altars, temples, and sacrifices to the Saints, we also equally deny them: and yet in another sense, with the same Augustine, we attribute temples, altars, and sacrifices to the Saints. Augustine denies, and we with him, that sacrifices are offered to the Saints, and accordingly that temples and altars are erected that the Saints may be sacrificed to in them; but he grants, and we with him equally grant, that sacrifices are offered in memory of the Saints, and accordingly that temples and altars are erected in memory of the Saints; whence also temples and altars, in which sacrifice is made to God alone, are passim called by Augustine memorials of the Saints.
All these things are proved from the words of Augustine himself; for in the place cited by Kemnitz, Book 8 of the City of God, chapter 27, Augustine thus explains what he had said, that temples and sacrifices are not constituted for the Saints: “Who of the faithful ever heard the priest standing at the altar say in the prayers: I offer to thee a sacrifice, O Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian, when it is offered to God at their memorials?” And Book 20 against Faustus, chapter 21: “To no Martyr, though at the memorials of the Martyrs, do we constitute altars. For which of the bishops, standing at the altar in the places of the holy bodies, ever said: We offer to thee, O Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian? But that which is offered is offered to God, who crowned the Martyrs, at the memorials of those whom He crowned.” Further, that temples are dedicated to the Saints in the sense which we said, is clear from the same Augustine, Book 1 of the City of God, chapter 1: “This the places of the Martyrs and the Basilicas of the Apostles testify”; and in his book on the care for the dead, chapter 1, he makes mention of the Basilica of Saint Felix. See very many testimonies of various Fathers about the temples of the Saints in our Book 3 on the Saints, chapter 4.
Thirdly, the sacrifice of the Mass is not per se instituted as for its proper and chief end to honor or invoke the Saints. This we assert against the calumnies of Kemnitz, who page 810 says that the Catholics teach that the Lord's Supper was instituted that in its celebration the Saints might be implored, etc. For we confess that the sacrifice of the Mass was per se instituted for worshipping and propitiating God: and that it would be a true sacrifice, even if no memory of the Saints were made in it. Wherefore only secondarily and consequently do we think that the worship and invocation of the Saints pertains to the sacrifice: for from the fact that thanks are given to God in the sacrifice for the victories of the Saints, there follows the honor of the Saints; and because we honor them in this way, there follows also in turn that they are mindful of us in heaven and pray for us. And this can be understood even from our very Liturgy; for in it nowhere are the Saints directly invoked, except twice or thrice in some versicle, and in the confession which is premised before the introit of the Mass: otherwise the oblation itself is expressly directed to God alone; likewise the Collects both public and secret, and all the prayers of the Canon, are directed to God, none to the Saints. But if the Mass were instituted per se for the worship and invocation of the Saints, certainly the Saints would be directly invoked in the very Canon, as they are invoked in the Litanies.
Not therefore is the state of the question that which Kemnitz proposes: Whether the Lord's Supper is instituted for the worship and invocation of the Saints; but whether it is repugnant to the institution of the Lord's Supper that in its celebration memory be made of the Saints, and consequently the Saints be honored and invoked, whether directly or indirectly. And indeed all Catholics affirm both, that is, that it is not only not repugnant to the institution that in the sacrifice the Saints be named with honor, but not even that they be invoked. Which two things are manifest both from the Council of Trent, session 22, chapter 3, and from the very Liturgy. But Kemnitz admits that the first was customary in the ancient Church, and that both can be tolerated; but the second he will have to pertain to a manifest profanation of the Lord's Supper, and to fight with adverse front against the Lord's institution, and that not so openly as palpably. Wherefore we shall briefly confirm both.
As to the second, therefore, I lay down these propositions.
The first: It is not repugnant to the institution of the Lord's Supper that in it the Saints be named and honored. It is proved first from the Apostle, 1 Timothy 2, where he bids prayers and thanksgivings to be made in the sacrifice of the Mass (for the ancients expound that passage of this sacrifice, as I showed above) for all, and especially for kings; the Apostle therefore wishes that in the Mass not only supplication be made to God for receiving benefits, but also thanks be given for those received. But it is a singular benefit that God has conferred on our brethren the grace to overcome the world and Satan, and after that victory has crowned them with glory and honor: wherefore it will be lawful, or rather worthy and just, that we offer the sacrifice to give thanks to God for the victory and triumphs of the Saints, and by this also name the Saints themselves in the sacrifice with honor and exultation.
Secondly it is proved by the testimony of all the Liturgies, of James, Clement, Basil, Chrysostom, and others; for in all the Saints are named, and that not once.
Thirdly it is proved from the Fathers. For Cyprian, Book 3, letter 6, asks that the day of death of each of the Martyrs be noted and written to him, that he may be able to make the sacrifice for them by name on the anniversary day of their passion. Epiphanius, heresy 75, and Cyril, catechesis 5, mystagogical, openly write that in the sacrifice the Apostles and Martyrs are named. Chrysostom, homily 21 on the Acts, not only says they are named, but affirms that it is a great honor to the Saints that they are named in the presence of the Lord, while that dreadful sacrifice is performed. Augustine, in his book on holy Virginity, chapter 43, and elsewhere frequently says that the Saints are named in the sacrifice; and especially Book 22 of the City of God, chapter 10: “At which sacrifice they are named in their place and order.”
Fourthly it is proved from the usefulness of this institution: for it profits first to protest the communion of Saints. For the sacrifice of the true body of Christ is offered, and ought to be offered, in the name of the whole mystic body: accordingly, as the living pontiffs, kings, and many others are named, so also the dead ought to be named, whether they be in purgatory or in heaven; for all pertain to the same body. There is added that, as Augustine writes, Book 10 of the City of God, chapter 6, and Book 22, chapter 10, in the sacrifice of the altar is signified the general sacrifice, by which the whole mystic body of Christ, that is, the whole redeemed city, is offered to God through Christ the great Priest: and because to the frame of this body pertain also the Saints who are in heaven, therefore they too in their order are to be named in the sacrifice of the altar.
Another usefulness is the excitation of a holy emulation: which usefulness Saint Augustine touches, Book 8 of the City of God, chapter 27. For giving the reason why the sacred rites are said in memory and at the memorials of the Saints, he says thus: “That by that solemnity we may both give thanks to the true God for their victories, and exhort ourselves to the imitation of such crowns and palms, invoking Him to our aid, by the renewal of their memory.”
The second proposition: It is not repugnant to the institution of the Lord's Supper that in it the Saints be invoked, in the way in which the Catholic Church is wont to invoke them. I explain: in three ways the Saints can be invoked in the sacrifice of the Mass. In one way by the oblation itself, so that the oblation is offered to them; for the oblation itself is a certain silent but most efficacious invocation; and in this way the Church does not invoke the Saints in the Mass, nor could it invoke them without the sin of idolatry, as we said.
In the second way by a prayer directed to them, as when we say: “Holy Father, pray for me”; and in this way the Saints are not invoked in the Mass, as we said above, except in passing, in the versicles after the lesson; and that only in one or another Mass: which way yet has nothing absurd. For if it is lawful to ask of the living that they help us with their prayers while we perform so sublime a ministry, whence also we say in the Liturgy: “Pray, brethren”; why is it not lawful to ask the same of the Saints? But there is no need now to dispute of this matter, because the adversaries do not attack those versicles which are sung in the Mass of the Catechumens, which is not properly a sacrifice; but in the Mass of the faithful, which begins from the oblation, the Saints are never so directly invoked.
In the third way by prayers directed to God, as when we ask of God that He help us by the intercession of the Saints; and in this way in the Mass, both in the Canon and outside, the Saints are invoked: and this is what the adversaries reprehend, and therefore this alone must be proved.
It is proved first from the Fathers. Cyril, catechesis 5, mystagogical, explaining the rite of the sacrifice of the Mass: “When we offer this sacrifice,” he says, “we make mention of those who have fallen asleep before us; first of the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Martyrs, that God, by their prayers and intercessions, may receive our prayers.” Basil in the Liturgy, after the consecration, making memory of the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Martyrs, the holy Mother of God, and all the Saints: “That they may offer continual prayers for us to Thee, and therefore we celebrate their memory, that when we ourselves trust little in ourselves, protected by their memory and legation, we may through them dare to approach Thee, and to discharge this tremendous and sacred office.” Chrysostom in the Liturgy: “Of the honorable, incorporeal, supercelestial; of Saint John the forerunner and Baptist; of the holy glorious Apostles; of this Saint whose memory we keep; and of all Thy Saints; by whose supplications look upon us, O God.” And below: “Establish our steps by the prayers and supplications of the holy Mother of God and ever Virgin Mary, and of all the Saints.” Augustine, treatise 84 on John: “For therefore,” he says, “at that table we do not so commemorate them (the Martyrs) as we do others who rest in peace, so as also to pray for them; but rather that they themselves may pray for us.” The same he has, sermon 17 on the words of the Apostle.
Secondly it is proved by reason. For the Saints without any doubt can pray for us in heaven, and do pray, therefore it is good to ask of God, both that He make the Saints pray for us, and that He hear them praying for us, which two things are asked in the Mass. The consequence is most open and most certain. For if one of the means of our salvation is the prayer of the Saints, why is it not lawful to ask of God that He help us by this means? And if it is lawful to ask that He direct, teach, and protect us through good doctors and pastors on earth, why is it not lawful also to ask that He do the same through the suffrages of the Angels and Saints? And if it is lawful to ask God to excite those who live here to pray for us, and to hear them, why is not the same lawful in the Saints?
But the antecedent of this argument has been fully proved by us in Book 1 on the Saints; nor do the adversaries much contend about this matter. For even though they most obstinately deny that the Saints are to be invoked by us, because they do not believe that they can hear our prayers; yet that they in general are solicitous for the Church, and can pray, and even really pray, Philip confesses in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, in the article on the invocation of the Saints, Brentius in the Wirtemberg Confession, chapter on the invocation of the Saints, Kemnitz in the third part of the Examination of the Council of Trent; Calvin too, Book 3 of the Institutes, chapter 20, § 21 and 24, does not oppose this opinion, although they suffer themselves to be brought to admit it with difficulty. And truly this cannot be denied, unless first Scripture be denied, which, 2 Machabees last chapter, testifies that the departed Jeremiah and Onias prayed for the people, and Apocalypse 5, the twenty-four elders are described as offering incense in heaven, by which John himself explains that the prayers of the Saints are signified: unless also the unity of the body of the Church, or the communion of Saints, which we confess in the Apostolic creed, be denied. For if we are one body, and members one of another, certainly we ought to be solicitous for one another: for such is the nature of members, as the Apostle teaches, 1 Corinthians 12. Finally Augustine, question 108 on Exodus, says that by the prayers of the Martyrs God is propitiated to the sins of His people, and question 149 says that by the merits of the Saints we can be relieved before God, when our evil merits weigh us down.
It remains that we answer the objections of Kemnitz. First he argues thus, page 810: “Christ says: Do this, not in commemoration of the Saints, but of me. And moreover He delivers His body and blood to us in the Supper, that, about to approach the throne of grace, we may obtain mercy through the merits of the one oblation of Christ: therefore the Lord's Supper is profaned when it is asked of God that through the merits and prayers of the Saints we be fortified in all things by the aid of divine protection.”
I answer: Christ nowhere said: Do this, not in commemoration of the Saints, but of me; nor did He say: Do this in commemoration of me alone: wherefore it cannot rightly be gathered: Therefore the commemoration of the Saints is repugnant to the institution of the Supper. Moreover, even if the Lord had said, Do this in commemoration of me alone, still the adversaries would obtain nothing: for the Lord speaks not of any commemoration whatever, but of that by which through the mystery of the Supper His passion and death are represented; by which kind of commemoration the Church is not wont, nor can, to make memory of the Saints in the Mass: for the Eucharist is not a symbol of the passion of the Saints, but of Christ alone. Other, therefore, is the memory of the Saints which we celebrate in the sacrifice: namely we name the Saints, that for their victory we may offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, as we said above.
To the other part of the argument we answer that in one way through the intercession and merits of Christ, and in another way through the merits and prayers of the Saints, we expect and ask mercy from God. For through the merits of Christ we ask mercy immediately from God; for He alone is our immediate intercessor before God. But through the merits and prayers of the Saints we ask mercy from God, the same Christ mediating: for they too, when they pray for us, pray through Christ. And so, just as our prayer for ourselves to God is not superfluous, nor does injury to Christ, though He be our advocate before God, because we pray to God for ourselves through Him: so the prayers of the Saints for us are neither superfluous nor to the injury of Christ, though Christ be our advocate, because they ask through Christ. And just as the Saints can pray to God for us, notwithstanding the intercession of Christ; so we too can ask of them that they pray for us, and ask of God that He impel them to pray, and hear them praying, notwithstanding the intercession of Christ.
The second objection is from Augustine, who Book 22 of the City of God, chapter 10, says that in the administration of the Lord's Supper the Saints are indeed named by the priest, but in no way invoked by the priest.
I answer: If Kemnitz had cited the words of Augustine, he would have laid open his fraud to all, even with us silent. But these are his words: “To the one God, both of the Martyrs and ours, we immolate the sacrifice: at which sacrifice, as men of God, who conquered the world in His confession, they are named in their place and order: yet they are not invoked by the priest who sacrifices. For he sacrifices to God, not to them, though he sacrifice in memory of them, because he is God's priest, not theirs.”
You see here first that Augustine does not say: “In the administration of the Lord's Supper,” but “in the sacrifice which we immolate”; and almost repeats it, that the priest sacrifices a sacrifice to God, not administers a supper. Secondly you see that Augustine most openly says that the sacrifice is made in memory of the Saints, and that the Saints are named in it: which is not only against the novelties of these sectaries, who in their supper make no mention of the Saints, but is expressly against Kemnitz, who a little before was disputing that Christ said: Do this, not in commemoration of the Saints. Thirdly you see that Augustine, when he denies that the Saints are invoked, speaks of the invocation by the sacrifice, that is, of the oblation, which, as we said above, is a most efficacious invocation: for he speaks formally, when he says: “Yet they are not invoked by the priest who sacrifices,” as is clear from the following words: “For he sacrifices to God, not to them, because he is God's priest, not theirs.”
But that Augustine does not deny that the Saints can and ought to be invoked in the Mass, in the way in which the Catholic Church does, is clear from treatise 84 on John cited by us above, where he says that the Saints are commemorated at the table of the Lord, not that we may pray for them, but that they may pray for us. From these things it appears how vainly Kemnitz exulted on account of the passage of Augustine, and how undeservedly and impudently he called the Synod of Trent a Babylonian Thais.
The third objection is from the history of antiquity; and Kemnitz gathers the progress of antiquity in this way. First he says that in the primitive Church it was the custom that the annual memory of the Martyrs was solemnly celebrated in the very places where the bodies of the Martyrs were buried: and this he proves from the letter of the Church of Smyrna in Eusebius, Book 4 of the History, chapter 15. Secondly he says that in the progress of time this was added, that the bodies of the Saints were placed under the very tables: and he proves it from Ambrose, Book 10, letter 85. Thirdly he says that in the prayers of the Church memory was made of the Martyrs, because the Church prayed that it might sometime be made a consort in eternal life of the Martyrs themselves; which he proves from the letter of the Smyrnaeans cited above. And these three things he says are according to the usage of the purer Church, and consonant to Scripture. Fourthly he says that in the time of Augustine there arose strange and vicious opinions about the singular intercessions of the Martyrs for their worshippers, about the merits and operations of the Martyrs. Fifthly he says that Augustine left these opinions in the middle, as neither ancient nor certain: which he proves from Book 22 of the City of God, chapter 10, and on the care for the dead, chapter 16. Sixthly he says that Augustine little by little began to attribute something to these opinions; but that Jerome, Basil, and Nazianzen were bolder in this question. Seventhly he says that in the last times an article of faith was fabricated about the patronages and merits of the Saints, and, what is more horrible, the very action of the Lord's Supper began to be wrested to it.
From this long narration Kemnitz strives to persuade the simpler that the invocation of the Saints in the sacrifice of the Mass is a new thing, and feigned by the Papists. But if anyone weigh the matter a little more attentively, from this very disputation Kemnitz and his companions are most openly refuted. For those first three heads, which the adversary confesses to have been in the purer Church, and to be consonant to Scripture, do nothing against us, since they contain nothing contrary to our doctrine: but they make most of all against the adversaries, since they are altogether contrary to their own writings and deeds. For they neither celebrate the memory of the Saints at the relics of the Saints; nor place the bodies of the Martyrs under the sacred table, but rather cast them out; nor finally in the prayers and mystery of the Eucharist make any mention of the Saints: wherefore by the testimony of Kemnitz we conclude that Kemnitz and his companions have departed from the usage of the primitive purer Church, consonant to the sacred letters.
The fourth head is false, and can be refuted from the sixth. For if Basil, Nazianzen, and Jerome follow those opinions about the intercessions and merits of the Saints, as chapter 6 has it, then those opinions did not begin in the age of Augustine, as chapter 4 has it; for the age of Augustine is later than the age of Basil and Nazianzen. Add that the opinion of the Church about the invocation of the Saints did not begin even in the age of Basil, but is far more ancient. For Eusebius, more ancient than Basil, Book 13 of the Preparation of the Gospel, chapter 7: “We make vows to the Saints, by whose intercession before God we profess ourselves not a little helped.” And Irenaeus, more ancient than Eusebius, Book 5 against heresies: “That the Virgin Mary might be made the advocate of the Virgin Eve.”
The fifth head contains a manifest lie and imposture. For Augustine in the places cited by Kemnitz does not leave in the middle, as an uncertain thing, whether the Saints help us and are our intercessors and advocates, and as such to be invoked by us; but only in what way they help us, when miracles are done at their sepulchres. For Augustine is doubtful whether this is done by the work of Angels, or by the very spirits of the Martyrs, or in another way; and this being left in the middle, he asserts it to be an undoubted thing that those who invoke the Saints are helped by them. For Book 22 of the City of God, chapter 8, he proves this very thing by almost innumerable examples, which he affirms to be most certain.
The sixth head needs no other refutation; for I know not who does not see how great a prejudice to his own cause Kemnitz made, when he dared so openly to reprehend those four pillars of the Greek and Latin Church, Basil, Nazianzen, Jerome, and Augustine.
The seventh head is clearly most false, from the testimonies cited by us, of Cyril, Basil, Chrysostom, and Augustine, who most openly write that in the sacrifice of the altar the intercessions of the Saints are asked of God. For with how great a lie is that feigned to have been fabricated in the last times, which more than 1200 years ago was in use in the Catholic Church?
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT VIII. Sacrificium Missse recte celebrari pro Sanctis. Ex iis, pro quibus sacrificium offerri pot¬ est, soli supersunt Sancti, qui jam in coelo cum Christo regnant. Et quoniam adversarii, et Kemnitius maxime, mira fraude statum quaestionis involvunt, et nobis affingunt, quae nunquam somniavimus. Primo explicanda erit diligenter Ecclesiae sententia; et ape¬ riendus status quaestionis. Deinde probanda veritas. Ultimo respondendum ad obje¬ ctiones. Quod ad primum attinet, Ecclesiae sen¬ tentia his tribus capitibus continetur. Primo, Sacrificia non prosunt Sanctis ad culpae vel poenae remissionem, nec ad gratiae vel gloriae essentialis augmentum. Hoc certum est apud Catholicos, neque de eo contentio est ulla cum haereticis. Quare sanctus Augustinus tract. lxxxiv. in Joan. et serm. 17. de verbis Apostoli, et alibi, monet in sacrificio me¬ moriam fieri Sanctorum, sed non orari pro illis. Et idcirco cum in nostra Liturgia pe¬ timus, ut oblatio Sanctis prosit ad gloriam, non tam oramus pro Sanctis, quam pro no¬ bis : petimus enim a Deo gratiam ita sancte, pie, devote, recte sacrificium offerendi, ut merito Saucti inde gaudere possint, et gloria illis coram hominibus accedat. Et similiter cum Cyprianus, Cyrillus, Epiphanius, Au¬ gustinus, et Chrysostomus, quos infra cita¬ bimus in probatione primie propositionis, dicunt sacrificium offerri pro Apostolis, et Martyribus , non intelligunt offerri pro eorum salute, sed pro eorum honore. Secundo, sacrificium non offertur Sarietis, et proinde neque templa, neque altaria eriguntur Sanctis, licet in eorum memoriam ista omnia fieri possint, ut mox dicemus. Hoc habetur expresse in Concilio Tridentino, sess. 22. cap. 3. et apud Augustinum lib. vm. de civit. Dei, cap. 27, ubi sic legimus : « Nos Martyribus non constituimus templa, sa¬ cerdotia, sacra, et sacrificia. » Queo verba citat Kemnitius, pag. 818. et subjungit im¬ pudenti mendacio : « Atqui hoc in Papatu, et factum est, et adhuc defenditur. » Sed poterat eodem modo in Augustinum, men¬ tiri, ac dicere. Atqui hoc tempore Augustini fiebat, et ab ipso defendebatur. Nam in quo sensu Augustinus negat altaria, templa, et sacrificia Sanctis^ et nos pariter negamus : et tamen in alio sensu cum eodem Augustino, templa, altaria, et sacrificia Sanctis attri¬ buimus. Negat Augustinus, et nos cum illo, sacrificia offerri Sanctis, et proinde templa, et altaria erigi, ut in iis sacrificetur Sanctis, atconcedit, etnos cum eo pariter concedimus, sacrificia offerri in memoriam Sanctorum, et proinde templa, et altaria erigi in Sancto¬ rum memoriam ; unde etiam templa, et al¬ taria, in quibus soli Deo sacrificatur, passim ab Augustino dicuntur memoriae Sanctorum. Probantur haec omnia ex ipsius Augustini verbis ; nam loco citato a Kemnitio lib. vm. de civit. Dei, cap. 27. ita Augustinus explicat quod dixerat, Sanctis non constitui templa, et sacrificia : « Quis audivit aliquando fide¬ lium, stantem sacerdotem ad altare dicere in precibus : Offero tibi sacrificium, Petre, vel Paule, vel Cypriane, cum apud memorias eorum Deo offeratur? » Et lib. xx. contra Faustum, cap. 21 : « Nulli Martyrum, in¬ quit, quamvis in memorias Martyrum, con¬ stituimus altaria. Quis enim Antistitum in locis Sanctorum corporum assistens altari, aliquando dixit : Offerimus tibi Petre, aut Paule, aut Cypriane? Sed quod offertur, Deo offertur, qui Martyres coronavit, apud me¬ morias eorum , quos coronavit. » Porro templa dedicari Sanctis in eo sensu, quem diximus, patet ex eodem Augustino lib. i. de civitate Dei, cap. 1 : « Testantur, inquit, hoc Martyrum loca, et Apostolorum Basilicae ; » et lib. de cura pro mortuis, cap. 1. meminit Basilicae S. Felicis. Vide testimonia plurima variorum Patrum de templis Sanctorum in nostro lib. m. de Sanctis, cap. 4. Tertio, Sacrificium .Missae non est per se institutum tanquam ad finem proprium, ct praecipuum ad Sanctos honorandos, vel in¬ vocandos. Hoc asserimus contra calumnias CAPUT VIII. 333 Kemnitii, qui pag. 810. dicit, Catholicos do¬ cere ccenam Dominicam institutam esse, ut in ejus celebratione implorentur Sancti etc. Nos enim fatemur, sacrificium Missae per se institutum ad Deum colendum et propitian¬ dum : et verum sacrificium futurum, etiam¬ si nulla in eo fieret Sanctorum memoria. Quare solum secundario, et consequenter existimamus ad sacrificium pertinere San¬ ctorum cultum, et invocationem : nam exeo quod aguntur Deo gratiae in sacrificio pro victoriis Sanctorum, consequitur honor San¬ ctorum; et quia eos hoc modo honoramus, consequitur etiam vicissim, ut ipsi sint nostri memores in coelo, et pro nobis orent. Atque id vel ex ipsa nostra Liturgiaintelligi potest; nam in ea nusquam directe Sancti invocan¬ tur, nisi bis, aut ter in aliquo versiculo, et in confessione, quae praemittitur ante Missae in¬ troitum : alioqui ipsa oblatio expresse diri¬ gitur ad solum Deum ; similiter Collectae tam publicae, quam secretae, et omnes Canonis o- rationes diriguntur ad Deum, nullae ad San¬ ctos. At si Missa esset instituta per se ad cultum, et invocationem Sanctorum, certe directe Sancti invocarentur in ipso Canone, ut invocantur in Litaniis. Non igitur est status quaestionis, quem proponit Kemnitius : An ccena Domini sit instituta ad cultum, et invocationem Sancto¬ rum ; sed an repugnet institutioni ccenae Do¬ mini, ut in ejus celebratione fiat memoria Sanctorum, et cousequenter honorentur, et invocentur Sancti, sive directe, sive indire¬ cte. Et quidem Catholici omnes affirmant utrumque, id est, non solum non repugnare institutioni, ut in sacrificio nominentur San¬ cti cum honore, sed nec etiam ut invocentur. Quae duo tum ex Concilio Tridentino, sess. 22. cap. 3. tum ex ipsa Liturgia manifesta sunt. At Kemnitius illud primum admittit consuetum fuisse in antiqua Ecclesia, et utrumque tolerari posse ; secundum autem vult ad manifestam profanationem ccenac Domini pertinere, et adversa fronte pugnare cum institutione Dominica, idque non tam aperte, quam palpabiliter. Quare nos utrum¬ que breviter confirmabimus. Quod igitur ad secundum attinet, statuo has propositiones. Prima : « Non repugnat institutioni coenec Domini, ut in ea nominentur, et honorentur Sancti. » Probatur primo ex Apostolo I Ti- inoth. ii. ubi jubet fieri orationes, et gratia¬ rum actiones in sacrificio Missee (nam de hoc sacrificio locum illum exponunt veteres, ut supra ostendi) pro omnibus, et maxime pro regibus; vult igitur Apostolus in Missa non solum supplicari Deo pro accipiendis benefi¬ ciis, sed etiam agi gratias pro acceptis. Est autem beneficium singulare, quod fratribus nostris Deus eam gratiam contulerit, ut mun¬ dum, et Satanam superaverint, et post eam victoriam gloria, et honore eos coronaverit : quare licitum erit, vel potius dignum et ju¬ stum, ut sacrificium offeramus ad agendas Deo gratias pro victoria, et triumphis San¬ ctorum, et per hoc etiam Sanctos ipsos in sacrificio cum honore, et exultatione nomi¬ nemus. Secundo probatur testimonio omnium Li- turgiarum, Jacobi, Clementis, Basilii, Chry- sostomi, et aliorum ; nam in omnibus nomi¬ nantur Sancti, idque non semel. Tertio probatur ex Patribus. Nam Cypri¬ anus lib. 3. epist. 6. petit annotari, et ad se scribi diem mortis Martyrum singulorum, ut possit nominatim in die anniversario pas¬ sionis eorum, pro eis sacrificium facere. Epi- phanius hseres. 73. et Cyrillus catechesi 5. mystagog. aperte scribunt, in sacrificio no¬ minari Apostolos, et Martyres. Chrysosto- mushomil. 21. in Acta, non solum nominari dicit, sed affirmat ingentem esse honorem Sanctis, quod nominentur Domino praesente, dum horrendum illud sacrificium peragitur. Augustinus in libro de sancta Virginitate, cap. 43. et alibi frequenter dicit, Sanctos no¬ minari in sacrificio; et praecipue lib. 22. de civit. Dei, cap. 10. « Ad quod sacrificium-, inquit, suo loco et ordine nominantur. » Quarto probatur ex utilitate hujus instituti : prodest enim primum ad protestandam com¬ munionem Sanctorum. Nam sacrificium cor¬ poris Christi veri, nomine totius corporis mystici offertur, et offerri debet : proinde sicut nominantur viventes Pontifices, reges, et multi alii ; ita etiam mortui nominari de¬ bent, sive in purgatorio sint, sive in ccelo ; omnes enim ad idem corpus pertinent. Ac¬ cedit quod ut Augustinus scribit lib. x. de civit. Dei, cap. 6. et lib. 22. cap. 10, in sa¬ crificio altaris significatur sacrificium gene¬ rale, quo universum corpus Christi mysti¬ cum, id est, tota redempta civitas offertur Deo per Christum Sacerdotem magnum : et quia ad compagem hujus corporis pertinent etiam Sancti, qui sunt in coelo ; ideo etiam illi suo ordine in sacrificio altaris nominandi sunt. LIBER VI. 381 Alia utilitas est, excitatio sancta; aemula¬ tionis : quam utilitatem attingit S. Augusti¬ nus lib. vui. clc civit. Dei, cap. 27. Nam red¬ dens rationem, cur in memoriam, et apud memorias Sanctorum dicantur sacra, sic ait : (( Ut ea celebritate, et Deo vero de illorum victoriis gratias agamus, et nos ad imitatio¬ nem talium coronarum, atque palmarum eo¬ dem invocato in auxilium ex eorum memo¬ ria; renovatione adliortemur. » Secunda propositio : « Non repugnat in¬ stitutioni camae Domini, ut in ea invocentur Sancti, eo modo, quo adi Ecclesia Catholica invocari solent. » Explico : tribus modis San¬ cti in sacrificio Missae invocari possunt. Uno modo per ipsam oblationem, ita ut eis obla- lio offeratur; ipsa enim oblatio tacita quae¬ dam, sed cfficaccssima est invocatio; et boc modo non invocat'. Sanctos Ecclesia in Missa, nec invocare posset sine peccato idololatriae, ut diximus. Secundo modo per precem ad eos dire¬ ctam, ut cum dicimus : « S. Patre, ora pro me ; » et hoc modonou invocantur Sancti in Missa, ut supra diximus, nisi obiter, in ver¬ siculis post lectionem ; idquc solum in una, vel altera Missa : qui tamen modus nihil ha¬ bet absurdi. Nam si licet a viventibus pete¬ re, ut nos juvent orationibus suis, dum taun sublimi fungimur ministerio, unde etiam di¬ cimus in Liturgia : « Orate fratres ; » cur non liceat idem a Sanctis petere ? Sed noti est opus nunc de ista re disputare, quia nec adversarii istos versiculos oppugnant, qui canuntur in Missa Catechumenorum, qua; non est proprie sacrificium ; in Missa autem fidelium, qute incipit ab oblatione, nunquam ita directe Sancti invocantur. Tertio modo per preces ad Deum directas, ut cura a Deo petimus, ut intercedentibus Sanctis nos juvet; et hocmodo in Missa tura in Canone, tum extra invocantur Sancti : atque hoc est quod reprehendunt adversa¬ rii, et ideo boc solum probandum est. Probatur primo ex Patribus. Cvrillus ca- tecli. 5. mystagogica, explicans ritum sacri¬ ficii Missa; : « Gura hoc sacrificium, inquit, offerimus, mentionem facimus eorum, qui ante nos obdormierunt; primum Patriarcha¬ rum, Prophetarum, Apostolorum, Martyrum, ut Deus orationibus illorum, et deprecationi¬ bus suscipiat preces nostras. » Basilius in Li¬ turgia post consecrationem, memoriam fa¬ ciens Patriarcharum, Prophetarum, Aposto¬ lorum, Martyrum, sancta; Dei genitricis, et omnium Sanctorum : « Ut, inquit, assiduas preces pro nobis tibi offerant, coque memo¬ riam illorum celebramus, ut quando nobis ipsi parum fidimus, memoria, et legatione il¬ lorum protecti, per eos audeamus ad te ac¬ cedere, atque tremendo hoc, et sacro munere defungi. » Chrysostomus in Liturgia ; « Ho¬ norabilium, inquit, incorporalium super cae¬ lestium S. Joannis praecursoris et Baptistae, sanctorum gloriosorum Apostolorum, Sancti hujus, cujus memoriam agimus, et omnium Sanctorum tuorum ; quorum supplicationi¬ bus, respice nos Deus. » Et infra : a Stabili, inquit, nostros gressus precibus, et supplica¬ tionibus sanctse Deiparae, et semper Virginis Mariae, et omnium Sanctorum. » Augustinus tract. 84. in Joan. : « Ideo quippe, inquit, ad ipsam mensam non sic eos (Martyres) com¬ memoramus, quemadmodum alios, qui in pace requiescunt, ut etiam pro eis oremus ; sed magis ut orent ipsi pro nobis. » Idem habet serm. 17. de verbis Apostoli. Secundo probatur ratione . Nam Sancti sine ullo dubio pro nobis in coelo orare pos¬ sunt, et orant, ergo bonum est a Deo petere, tum ut Sanctos pro nobis orare faciat, tum ut illos pro nobis orantes exaudiat, quae duo in Missa petuntur. Consequentia apertissima, et certissima est. Nam si unum ex mediis nostrae salutis est, Sanctorum oratio, cur non liceat a Deo petere, ut per hoc medium nos adjuvet ? Et si licet petere, ut per honos doctores, et pastores in terris nos dirigat, doceat, tueatur, cur non licet etiam petere, ut idem faciat per Angelorum et Sanctorum suffragia ? Et si licet Deum rogare, ut excitet cos, qui hic vivunt ad orandum pro nobis, eosque exaudiat, cur non idem licet in San¬ ctis ? Antecedens autem hujus argumenti fuse probatum est a nobis in i. lib. de Sanctis ; nec adversarii multum de hac re contendunt. Nam etiamsi pertinacissime negent invocan¬ dos esse a nobis Sanctos, quia non credunt illos audire posse nostras preces ; tamen illos in genere sollicitos esse pro Ecclesia, et ora¬ re posse, atque etiam reipsa orare, fatentur Philippus inApolog. Confession. Augustana;, articulo de invocatione Sanctorum, Brentius in Confessione Wirtembergensi cap. de invo¬ catione Sanctorum, Kemnitius in 3. par. Exam. Concilii Tridenti ni, Calvinus quoque lib. 3. Instit. cap. 20. §. 21. et 24. non re¬ pugnat huic sententia;, tametsi 'segf e ad eam admittendam adduci se patientur. Et sane CAPUT VIII/ 383 id negari non potest, nisi negetur in primis Scriptura, qme 2. Machab. ult. testatur II ie- remiain et Oniam defunctos orasse pro po¬ pulo , et Apoc. y. describuntur viginti qua- tuor seniores in coelo offerre incensum, quo Joannes ipse exponit significari orationes San¬ ctorum : nisi etiam negetur unitas corporis Ecclesia;, vel communio Sanctorum, quam in symbolo Apostolico confitemur. Si enim unum corpus sumus, et alii aliorum membra, certe invicem solliciti esse debemus : ea enim est membrorum natura, ut Apostolus docet 1 Cor. xn. Denique Augustinus quaest. 108. in Exod. dicit Martyrum orationibus propi¬ tiari Deum peccatis populi sui, et quaest. 1 49. dicit, Sanctorum meritis nos relevari posse apud Deum, quando mala nostra me¬ rita nos gravant. llestat, ut Kemnitii objectionibus respon¬ deamus. Primo sic argumentatur pag. 810. « Christus dicit : IIoc facite non in Sancto¬ rum, sed in mei commemorationem. Et prae¬ terea ideo corpus, et sanguinem suum nobis tradit in caena, ut adituri thronum gratia), misericordiam consequamur per merita uni¬ ca) oblationis Christi : ergo profanatur cae¬ na Domini cum a Deo petitur, ut per merita, et preces Sanctorum, in omnibus divina) protectionis muniamur auxilio. » Respondeo : Christus nusquam dixit : lloc facite non in Sanctorum, sed in mei comme¬ morationem ; neque dixit : Hoc facite in mei solius commemorationem : quare non potest recte colligi : Ergo repugnat institutioni coe¬ me , Sanctorum commemoratio. Praeterea etiamsi Dominus dixisset, Hoc facite in mei solius commemorationem ; adhuc nihil adver¬ sarii obtinerent : loquitur enim Dominus non dc qualibet commemoratione, sed de ea, qua per mysterium coeme repraesentatur ipsius passio, et mors; quo genere commemoratio¬ nis non solet, nec potest Ecclesia Sanctorum memoriam in Missa facere : non enim Eu¬ charistia est symbolum passionis Sanctorum, sed Christi solius. Alia igitur est memoria Sanctorum, quam in sacrificio celebramus : nimirum enim Sanctos nominamus, ut pro eorum victoria Deo sacrificium gratiarum actionis offeramus, ut supra diximus. Ad aliam partem argumenti respondemus, aliter per Christi intercessionem, et merita, et aliter per Sancturo minerita, et preces, nos a Deo misericordiam exspectare, ac petere. Nam per Christi merita immediate a Deo mi¬ sericordiam petimus ; ipse enim solus est iin- Tojie IV. mediatus intercessor noster apud Deum. Per Sanctorum autem merita, et preces a Deo misericordiam petimus, eodem Christo me¬ diante : nam et ipsi cum pro nobis orant, per Christum orant. Itaque sicut nostra oratio pro nobis ad Deum, non est supervacanea, nec injuriam Christo facit, licet ipse sit apud Deum advocatus noster, quia nos per illum pro nobis Deum oramus : ita Sanctorum pre¬ ces pro nobis non sunt vel supervacanea), vel in Christi injuriam, licet Christus sit no¬ ster advocatus, quia ipsi per Christum pe¬ tunt. Et sicut sancti pro nobis Deum orare possunt, non obstante Christi intercessione ; ita et nos possumus ab eis petere, ut pro no¬ bis orent, et a Deo petere, ut illos ad oran¬ dum impellat, et orantes exaudiat, non ob¬ stante Christi intercessione. Secunda objectio ex Augustino, qui lib. xxii. dc civit. Dei, cap. 10. dicit, in admini- stratione ereme Dominica) a sacerdote Sanctos quidem nominari, nullo modo autem a sacer¬ dote invocari. Respondeo : Verba Augustini Kcmnitius si citasset, fraudem suam etiam nobis tacen¬ tibus, omnibus patefecisset, lkec autem sunt illius verba : « Uni Deo, et Martyrum, et no¬ stro sacrificium immolamus : ad quud saciifi- cium, sicut homines Dei, qui mundum in e- jus confessione vicerunt, suu loco, et ordine nominantur : non tamen a sacerdote, qui sa¬ crificat, invocantur. Deo quippe, non ipsis sacrificat, quamvis in memoria sacrificet eorum, quia Dei sacerdos est, non illo¬ rum. » Vides hic primo, Augustinum non dicere : « In administrationc coma) Domini, sed in sacrificio quod immolamus ; » et bis, ferve repetere, sacerdotem sacrificare Deo sacrifi¬ cium, non crenam administrare. Secundo vi¬ des, Augustinum apertissime dicere, sacrifi¬ cium fieri in memoriam Sanctorum, et San¬ ctos in eo nominari : quod non solum est contra horum sectariorum novitates, qui in sua crena nullam Sanctorum mentionem fa¬ ciunt, sed est expresse contra Kcmnitium, qui paulo ante disputabat Christum dixisse : IIoc facite, non in Sanctorum commemora¬ tionem. Tertio vides, Augustinum, cum is negat Sanctos invocari, loqui de invocatione per sacrificium, id est, dc oblatione, qua), ut supra diximus, est cffieacissima invocatio : nam formaliter loquitur, cum ait : « Non ta¬ men a sacerdote, qui sacrificat, invocantur,)) ut patet ex verbis sequentibus : « Deo quip- 386 LIBER VI. pe, non ipsis sacrilicat, quia Dei sacerdos est, non ipsorum. » Quod autem Augustinus non neget, posse ac debere Sanctos invocari in Missa, eo mo¬ do, quo facit Ecclesia Catholica, patet ex tract. 84. in Joannem a nobis supra citato, ubi dicit, Sanctos ad mensam Domini com¬ memorari, non ut nos pro eis oremus, sed ut ipsi orent pro nobis. Ex his apparet, quam inaniter propter locum Augustini Kemnitius exultaverit, et quam immerito, et procaciter Synodum Tridenti nam Thaidem Babyloni¬ cam appellaverit. Tertia objectio ex historia antiquitatis ; colligit autem Kemnitius hoc modo progres¬ sum antiquitatis. Primo dicit, in primitiva Ecclesia morem fuisse, ut annua memoria Martyrum solemniter celebraretur in ipsis locis, ubi corpora Martyrum sepulta erant : idquc probat ex epistola Ecclesiae Smyrnen- sis apud Eusebium lib. iv. histor. cap. 13. Secundo dicit, progressu temporis id acces¬ sisse, ut corpora Sanctorum sub ipsis men¬ sis ponerentur : et probat ex Ambrosio lib. x. epist. 83. Tertio dicit, in orationibus Eccle¬ sia) factam fuisse memoriam Martyrum, quia Ecclesia orabat, ut aliquando consors fieret in vita aeterna ipsorum Martyrum ; id quod ex epistola supra citata Smyrnensium probat. Atque haec tria dicit esse secundum "usum purioris Ecclesiae, et Scripturae con¬ sentanea. Quarto dicit, tempore Augustini ortas esse opiniones peregrinas, et vitiosas do singularibus Martyrum pro suis cultori¬ bus intercessionibus, de meritis, et operatio¬ nibus Martyrum. Quinto dicit, Augustinum has opiniones in medio reliquisse, tanquam nec veteres, nec certas : id quod probat ex libro xxii. de civit. Dei cap. 10. et de cura pro mortuis, cap. 16. Sexto dicit, Augusti¬ num paulatim coepisse aliquid tribuere his opinionibus ; sed Hieronymum, Basilium, Nazianzenum audaciores fuisse in hac quae- stione. Septimo dicit, postremis temporibus, fabricatum esse articulum fidei de patroci¬ niis, et meritis Sanctorum, et quod horribi¬ lius est, ipsam actionem ccenae Dopiini, eo detorqueri coeptam. Ex hac longa narratione Kemnitius sim¬ plicioribus persuadere nititur, rem esse no¬ vam, et a Papistis confictam, de invocatione Sanctorum in sacrificio Missae. At si quis paulo attentius rem expendat, ex hac ipsa dis¬ putatione Kemnitius, et ejus sodales aper¬ tissime refelluntur. Nam prima illa tria ca¬ pita, quae fatetur adversarius fuisse in pu¬ riore Ecclesia, et esse consentanea Scripturae, contra nos nihil faciunt, cum non contineant aliquid contrarium nostrae doctrinae : at con¬ tra adversarios maxime faciunt, cum sint om¬ nino contraria scriptis et factis ipsorum. Ipsi enim nec celebrant Sanctorum memoriam apud Sanctorum reliquias ; nec Martyrum corpora sub sacra mensa reponunt, sed eji¬ ciunt potius; nec denique in precibus, et mysterio Eucharistiae ullam Sanctorum men¬ tionem faciunt : quare testimonio Kemnitii, concludimus, Kemnitium, et ejus sodales recessisse ab usu primitivae purioris Ecclesiae, sacris litteris consentaneo. Quartum caput falsum est, et ex sexto re¬ felli potest. Nam si Basilius, Nazianzenus, et Hieronymus sequuntur eas opiniones de in- tercessionibusj et meritis Sanctorum, ut habet cap. 6, non igitur coeperunt illi opiones Augustini aetate, ut habet c. 4 ; nam actas Augustini posterior est Basilii, et Nazianzeni aetate. Adde, quod sententia Ecclesiae de invocatione Sanctorum, non coepit etiam Basilii aetate, sed longe antiquior est. Nam Eusebius Basilio antiquior lib. xm. praeparat. Evangel. cap. 7 : « Vota, inquit, Sanctis fa¬ cimus, quorum intercessione apud Deum non parum juvari nos profitemur. » Et Irenaeus Eusebio antiquior lib. v. contra haereses : « Ut Virginis Evae, inquit, Virgo Maria fieret ad¬ vocata. » Quintum caput continet manifestum men¬ dacium, et imposturam. Nam Augustinus in locis a Kemnitio citatis, non relinquit in me¬ dio tanquam rem incertam, an Sancti nos juvent sintque nostri intercessores et advo¬ cati, et ut tales a nobis invocandi ; sed solum quomodo nos juvent, quando miracula apud eorum sepulchra fiunt. Ambigit enim Au¬ gustinus, an id fiat opera Angelorum, an per ipsos Martyrum spiritus, an alio modo ; atque hoc in medio relicto, asserit rem esse indubitatam, quod a Sanctis juventur, qui illos invocant. Nam lib. 2 2. de civit. Dei, cap. 8. probat hoc ipsum innumerabilibus ferme exemplis, quae certissima esse affir¬ mat. Sextum caput non eget alia refutatione ; nescio enim quis non videat, quantum prae¬ judicium causae suae Kemnitius fecerit, cum tam aperte reprehendere ausus est quatuor illas Ecclesiae Graecae et Latinae columnas, Basilium, Nazianzenum, Hieronymum et Au¬ gustinum. CAPUT IX. 387 Septimum caput falsissimum esse patet ex testimoniis a nobis citatis, Cvrilli, Basilii, Chrysostomi, et Augustini, qui apertissime scribunt, in sacrificio altaris peti a Deo San¬ ctorum intercessiones. Quanto enim menda¬ cio postremis temporibus fabricatum fuisse lingitur, quod ante annos 1200. in usu Ec¬ clesiae Catholica! fuit ?