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]
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 Many others give patristic and historical references.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]
stãding without the dores to wait for the misse of the cõgregatiõ. And again in the next chapter folowing, he inferreth the same vocable Missa in like sense: Cõtēti, inquit sõno qui nobis post vigiliarum missa vsque ad lucis indulgetur aduētū. i. Cõtēted (saieth he) with so much slepe as serueth vs for the misse, or breaking vp of the nighte Marginalia Vigils wer called in the olde time the assēblies of the congregatiõ in the night in cõmõ prayer & fastyng.vigill, vnto the comming of the day &c.[Back to Top]
Socra. eccl. hist. 1. 2 c. 13
Epiph. trip. hist. li. 4. c. 13.
Sozom. li. 2 cap. 32.
Epiph trip. hist. 1. 3. c. Marginalia
Socrat.. 1. 3. cap. 9.
Epiph. trip. hist. 1. 6. c. 23. Marginalia
Socrat. 1.5. cap. 15.
Χαὶ χαδξ αυτὃς εχχλκοὶαςεὶν
Epiph. trip. hist. li. 7. ca. 13 & apud seipsos missarum celebrari solēnia &c.
Item collectas agūt & quod Socrates græce li. 5. cap. 22. inquit.
ῶερὶ δὲ συ νάξεὶον συνάξοὶςπο ιὃσιν But to let passe these cõiectures, this by þe way I geue to the reader to note & vnderstãd, that as this word Misssa neuer yet entred into the church nor vsage amõg the Grekes: so it is to be obserued emõg our Laten interpretors, such as haue trãslated of old time the anciēt greke autors, as Eusebius, & the Tripartite history, and others: that wher the Greke writers haue these terms σμνὰγειν, σμνὰξεισ ποὶεῖν εχχλκσιὰςειν þt is, to call the cõgregatiõ, to conuēt assēblies & to frequēt together, the old translator of Epiphanius and other trãslate vpõ the same Missas facere, collectas agere, missas celebrare &c. wherby it is not obscure to be sene, that this word masse in the old time, was not only & peculiarly applied to the action of consecration, but aswel to al christē assēblies collected, or congregations conuēted, according as in the doutch lãguage this name (Messe) signifieth any solēne frequēcy, or panagyrie, or gathering together of the people. But of the name inough, and to muche.
To expresse now the absurdity of the said masse & the irreligious applicatiõ therof, vnsemely, & perilous for christiãs to vse, I wil bring two or thre reasons of the worthy seruant and Martir of god Iohn Bradford, to whiche manye more may be also added out of others. Marginalia The masse a double enemi agaynst christ The masse iniuriouse to the priesthod of christ.[Back to Top]
First the masse, saith he, is a most subtile & perniciouse enemy agaynst Christe, & that double waies: namely agaynst his priesthode, & against his sacrifice, which he proueth by this way. For the priesthod of christ, saith he, is an euerlasting priesthod, and such an one as cannot go to another But the masse vtterly putteth hym out of place, as thouh he were dead for euer: and so god wer a lier, which said that christ should be a priest for euer: which briefly commeth vnto this argument.[Back to Top]
That thing is not perpetual, nor standeth not a-
lone which admitteth succession of other to do the same
thing, that was done before.
But the masse priests succede after christ, doing the
same sacrifice (as they saye) which he dyd before.
Ergo the masse priests make Christs priesthode
not to be perpetuall.
|Marginalia Maior. Ba.|| |
Al priestes either be after the order of Aron, or after
thorder of Melchisedech, or after the order of the apos-
tles. or after that sprituall sorte wherof it is written,
vos estis spirituale sacerdotium. &c.
|Marginalia Minor. ro.|| |
But our masse priests neither be after the ordre of
Aaron, (for that is to resume that which christ hath a-
bolyshed:) neither after the order of Melchisedech (for
that is peculiar onely to Christ:) neither after thorder
of the Apostles (for then should they be mynisters, not
massers, not priestes but preachers: (and which of the
Apostles was euer named by the title of a prest?) Again
neither ar they after þe general sort of the spritual pryest
hod. For after that prerogatiue, euery true christiã is a
spiritual priest as wel as they, offering vp spiritual, not