FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79  
80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   >>   >|  
nds are received, and and [sic] that if we would teach this, he would cheerfully allow us both kinds. This I could not accede to; nevertheless, I excused those who had hitherto erroneously received but one kind; for they cried out, the whole church is condemned by us. What think you of this? The command of Jesus refers to ministers and laymen. Hence if it is our duty to receive the _sacrament_, we are also obligated to retain the form of the entire sacrament. If you also are of this opinion, then inform me of it distinctly. On the subject of the _mass_, vows and marriage, there was no discussions, only some conditions were proposed, which we, however, did not accept." [Note 21] Here again, the distinction between the sacrament and the mass is clearly made, and we are told that at the disputation before the umpires, the former was debated and the latter not. Can anything be plainer, than that a distinction is here made between eucharist and mass? 4. Under date of August 28, Melancthon thus writes to _Luther:_ "They (the Papists,) wish us to admit, that neither those who administer but one kind, nor those who receive it, are guilty of sin. We have, indeed, exonerated those from blame, who receive but one kind; but as to those who administer but one,--there is the knot. The Synod of Basil conceded the _whole sacrament_ to the Bohemians, on condition that they would acknowledge that it may, with propriety, be taken and received in one kind only. This confession they also wish to extort from us. _Eckius_ says he contends for this point, merely because the people cannot be retained in the discharge of duty, unless _we_ also release their consciences in regard to the _sacrament_ (that is, unless the reformers would admit, that its reception in one kind was also allowable). We therefore desire to know your judgment on the case. As to the application of _masses_, they are willing to postpone this till the meeting of the synod (or council); and thus they intimate, that they will not oppress us with the reception of their ungodly views on the _mass_ (Koethe's edition: mit der gottlosen Application der Messe, with the ungodly application of the mass, _i.e._ to the living and dead). And yet they desire us to receive the _canon_ of the mass, (_i.e._ the most objectionable part of the ritual of the mass, relating to the transubstantiation of the bread and wine, its application to others, &c.,) but with a convenient and devout explana
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79  
80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

sacrament

 
receive
 
application
 

received

 
reception
 
desire
 
ungodly
 

distinction

 

administer

 

retained


discharge
 

reformers

 

release

 

consciences

 
regard
 
extort
 

condition

 

Eckius

 

acknowledge

 
confession

Bohemians
 

conceded

 

propriety

 

people

 
contends
 

intimate

 

objectionable

 
gottlosen
 

Application

 
living

ritual
 

convenient

 

devout

 

explana

 

relating

 
transubstantiation
 

edition

 

masses

 

postpone

 
judgment

meeting

 

oppress

 

Koethe

 

exonerated

 
council
 

allowable

 

obligated

 
retain
 

laymen

 

refers