4. That the words [sic] mass is used in its appropriate specific sense in this Article, and not as synonymous with Lord’s Supper, or eucharist, as the Plea for the Augsburg Confession [Note 33] asserts, is proved by the fact, that if you substitute either of these words for it, many passages in the Article will not make sense. We will present a few specimens, which may be multiplied by any one who will take Article XXIV. of the Confession and read it, substituting either Lord’s Supper or eucharist in place of the word mass.
“By which means the people are attracted to the communion and the eucharist, (the mass;”) which is equivalent to saying, they were attracted to the eucharist and the eucharist.
“An annual fair was made, at which eucharists (masses) were bought and sold.” This would be historically untrue.
“And the greater part of them (the eucharists) in all the churches, were performed for money.” To this the same remark applies.
“These money-eucharists and closet eucharists (masses,) have ceased in our churches:” but the eucharist certainly had not ceased.
“Hence also arose the controversy, whether a eucharist (mass) performed for (not by) a number of persons collectively, was as efficacious as a separate eucharist for each individual.” This question applies only to the mass proper, and was never mooted about the eucharist.
“The ancient canons also show, that one of the priests performed or celebrated (halten, celebrare) eucharist, and administered the communion to the other priests and deacons.” [Note 34] This specimen, like the first, would be purely tautological.
5. That the word mass is used in Article XXIV., distinctively for the mass, is evident from the fact that the Romanists so understood it, and in their answer to the Confession attempt to refute the Protestant rejection not of the Lord’s Supper, but of the private masses, the closet masses, and the sacrificial and vicarious nature of the mass in general whilst they applaud the retention of public mass by the Reformers, if they would only celebrate it according to canonical regulations. We will cite a single passage, out of many that might be adduced:—