We also admitted, that then, as now, the word mass was sometimes used
by the Romanists for the sacramental celebration in general, including
the mass proper.
Thirdly, we assumed as undenied, that the Reformers, having been born
and educated in the Romish religion till their majority, were
accustomed to this two-fold use of the term mass.
We then asserted that the Reformers continued the twofold use of the
term, and as its occasional use for the eucharist in general is not
disputed, we especially proved that they continued to observe the
distinction and to employ it in its _specific sense_, whenever the
mass proper was spoken of.
We proved from various letters and other documents of _Luther_, written
in the year of the Diet, that he makes the distinction and uses the
term mass for the above described mass proper.
We proved from various letters and other articles of _Melancthon_,
written during the session of the Diet, that he employed it in this
specific sense.
We proved that the other Reformers used the word in this specific
sense, such as Aurifaber, and Spalatin. And finally:
We proved that the _Romanists_ used it in this sense at the Diet, in
their pretended Refutation of the Augsburg Confession.
There being no possible doubt of the Reformers using the word mass to
mean the specific mass, in their other writings at that time; the, only
remaining question was, whether Melancthon so used it in the disputed
passages of the Article XXIV.
Pages:
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119