Exhortations of Scripture which are likewise read to the people in an unknown tongue Are these directed to God or to the people only And are they not designed by God for their instruction and read either to that purpose or to none And is it possible to instruct men by what they do not understand This is a new and wonderfull way of teaching by concealing from the people the things which they should learn Is it not all one as to all purposes of edification as if the Scriptures were not read or any thing else in the place of them as they many times do their Legends which the wiser sort among them do not believe when they read them For all things are alike to them that understand none as all things are of a colour in the dark Ignorance knows no difference of things it is only knowledge that can distinguish 3. They say that some do at least in some measure understand the particular prayers If they do that is no thanks to them It is by accident if they are more knowing than the rest and more than the Church either desires or intends For if they desired it they might order their service so as every man might understand it 4. They say that it is convenient that God should be served and worshipped in the same Language all the world over Convenient for whom For God or for the People Not for God surely For he understands all other Languages as well as Latin and for any thing we know to the contrary likes them as well And certainly it cannot be so convenient for the People because they generally understand no Language but their own and it is very inconvenient they should not understand what they do in the service of God But perhaps they mean that it is convenient for the Roman Church to have it so because this will look like an argument that they are the Catholick or universal Church when the Language which was originally theirs shall be the universal Language in which all Nations shall serve God and by this means also they may bring all Nations to be of their Religion and yet make them never the wiser and this is a very great convenience because knowledge is a troublesome thing and ignorance very quiet and peaceable rendring men fit to be governed and unfit to dispute II. As to their depriving the people of the Scriptures the summ of what they say may be reduced to these three Heads 1. That the Church can give leave to men to read the Scriptures But this not without great trouble and difficulty there must be a Licence for it under the hand of the Bishop or Inquisitor by the advice of the Priest or Confessor concerning the fitness of the Person that desires this privilege And we may be sure they will think none fit but those of whom they have the greatest confidence and security And whoever presumes to do it otherwise is to be denied absolution which is as much as in them lies to damn men for presuming to read the Word of God without their leave And whatever they may allow here in England where they hold their people upon more slippery terms yet this privilege is very rarely granted where they are in full possession of their power and have the people perfectly under their Yoke 2. They tell us they instruct the people otherwise This indeed were something if they did it to purpose but generally they do it very sparingly and slightly Their Sermons are commonly made up of feigned stories and miracles of Saints and exhortations to the worship of them and especially of the blessed Virgin and of their Images and Relicks And for the truth of this I appeal to the innumerable Volumes of their Sermons and Postils in print which I suppose are none of their worst I am sure Erasmus says that in his time in several Countries the people did scarce once in half a year hear a profitable Sermon to exhort them to true piety Indeed they allow the people some Catechisms and Manuals of devotion and yet in many of them they have the conscience and the confidence to steal away the second Commandment in the face of the eighth But to bring the matter to a point if those helps of instruction are agreeable to the Scriptures why are they so afraid the people should read the Scriptures if they are not why do they deceive and delude them 3. They say that people are apt to wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction and that the promiscuous use of them hath been the great occasion of Heresies It cannot be denyed to be the condition of the very best things in the world that they are liable to be abused health and light and liberty as well as knowledge But must all these be therefore taken away This very inconvenience of peoples wresting the Scriptures to their own ruine St. Peter takes notice of in his days but he do's not therefore forbid men the reading of them as his more prudent Successours have done since Suppose the reading of the Scriptures hath been the occasion of Heresies were there ever more than in the first Ages of Christianity and yet neither the Apostles nor their Successours ever prescribed this remedy But are they in earnest must not men know the truth for sear of falling into Errour Because men may possibly miss their way at noon-day must they never travel but in the night when they are sure to lose it And when all is done this is not true that Heresies have sprung from this cause They have generally been broached by the learned from whom the Scriptures neither were nor could be concealed And for this I appeal to the History and Experience of all Ages I am well assured the ancient Fathers were of another mind St. Chrysostome says if men would be conversant in the Scriptures and attend to them they would not only not fall into errours themselves but rescue those that are deceived And that the Scriptures would instruct men both in right opinions and a good life And St. Hierome more expresly to our purpose That infinite evils arise from the Ignorance of the Scriptures and that from that cause the most part of Heresies have come But if what they say were true is not this to lay the blame of all the ancient Heresies upon the ill management of things by our Saviour and his Apostles and the holy Fathers of the Church for so many Ages and their imprudent dispensing of the Scriptures to the people This indeed is to charge the matter home and yet this consequence is unavoidable For the Church of Rome cannot justifie the piety and prudence of their present practices without accusing all these But the thing which they mainly rely upon as to both these practices is this That though these things were otherwise in the Apostles time and in the Antient Church yet the Church hath power to alter them according to the exigence and circumstances of time I
and clear enough That there is a God and That his Providence governs the World and That there is another Life after this though neither Pope nor Council had ever declared any thing about these matters And for Revealed Doctrines we may be certain enough of all that is necessary if it be true which the Fathers tell us That all things necessary are plainly revealed in the Holy Scriptures Fourthly An infallible Judge if there were one is no certain way to end Controversies and to preserve the unity of the Church unless it were likewise infallibly certain That there is such a Judge and Who he is For till men were sure of both these there would still be a Controversy whether there be an infallible Judge and who he is And if it be true which they tell us That without an infallible Judge Controversies cannot be ended then a Controversie concerning an infallible Judge can never be ended And there are two Controversies actually on foot about an infallible Judge One Whether there be an infallible Judge or not which is a Controversie between Us and the Church of Rome and the other Who this infallible Judge is which is a Controversie among themselves which could never yet be decided And yet till it be decided Infallibility if they had it would be of no use to them for the ending of Controversies Fifthly There is no such absolute need as is pretended of determining all Controversies in Religion If men would devest themselves of prejudice and interest as they ought in matters of Religion the necessary things of Religion are plain enough and men would generally agree well enough about them But if men will suffer themselves to be by assed by these they would not hearken to an infallible Judge if there were one or they would find out some way or other to call his Infallibility into question And as for doubtful and lesser matters in Religion charity and mutual forbearance among Christians would make the Church as peaceable and happy as perhaps it was ever design'd to be in this World without absolute unity in Opinion Sixthly and Lastly Whatever may be the inconveniences of mens judging for themselves in Religion yet taking this Principle with the Cautions I have given I doubt not to make it appear that the inconveniences are far the least on that side The present condition of humane Nature doth not admit of any constitution of things whether in Religion or Civil matters which is free from all kind of exception and inconvenience That is the best state of things which is liable to the least and fewest If men be modest and humble and willing to learn God hath done that which is sufficient for the assurance of our Faith and for the peace of his Church without an infallible Judge And if men will not be so I cannot tell what would be sufficient I am sure there were Heresies and Schisms in the Apostles Times when Those who governed the Church were certainly guided by an infallible Spirit God hath appointed Guides and Teachers for us in matters of Religion and if we will be contented to be instructed by them in those necessary Articles and Duties of Religion which are plainly contained in Scripture and to be counselled and directed by them in things that are more doubtful and difficult I do not see why we might hot do well enough without any infallible Judge or Guide But still it will be said Who shall judge what things are plain and what doubtful The answer to this in my opinion is not difficult For if there be any thing plain in Religion every man that hath been duly instructed in the Principles of Religtion can judge of it or else it is not plain But there are some things in Religion so very plain that no Guide or Judge can in reason claim that Authority over men as to oblige them to believe or do the contrary no though he pretend to Infallibility no though he were an Apostle though he were an Angel from heaven S. Paul puts the case so high Gal. 1.8 Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than what you have received let him be accursed which plainly supposeth that Christians may and can judge when Doctrines are contrary to the Gospel What not believe an Apostle nor an Angel from heaven if he should teach any thing evidently contrary to the plain Doctrine of the Gospel If he should determine Vertue to be Vice and Vice to be Vertue No not an Apostle nor an Angel because such a Doctrine as this would confound and overturn all things in Religion And yet Bellarmin puts this very Case and says If the Pope should so determine we were bound to believe him unless we would sin against Conscience I will conclude this Discourse by putting a very plain and familiar Case by which it will appear what credit and authority is fit to be given to a Guide and what not Suppose I came a Stranger into England and landing at Dover took a Guide there to conduct me in my way to York which I knew before by the Mapp to lie North of Dover having committed my self to him if he lead me for two or three days together out of any plain Road and many times over hedge and ditch I cannot but think it strange that in a civil and well inhabited Country there should be no High-ways from one part of it to another Yet thus far I submit to him though not without some regret and impatience But then if after this for two or three days more he lead me directly South and with my face full upon the Sun at noon day and at last bring me back again to Dover Pere and still bids me follow him Then certainly no modesty do's oblige a man not to dispute with his Guide and to tell him surely that can be no way because it is Sea Now though he set never so bold a face upon the matter and tell me with all the gravity and authority in the world That it is not the Sea but dry Land under the species and appearance of Water and that whatever my eyes tell me having once committed my self to his guidance I must not trust my own senses in the case it being one of the most dangerous sorts of Infidelity for a man to believe his own eyes rather than his faithful and infallible Guide All this moves me not but I begin to expostulate roundly with him and to let him understand that if I must not believe what I see he is like to be of no farther use to me because I shall not be able at this rate to know whether I have a Guide and whether I follow him or not In short I tell him plainly that when I took him for my Guide I did not take him to tell me the difference between North and South between a Hedge and a High-way between Sea and dry Land all this I knew before as well as he
evident to any man that will impartially consider things how little reason there is to understand those words of our Saviour this is my body and this is my bloud in the sense of Transubstantiation nay on the contrary that there is very great reason and an evident necessity to understand them otherwise I proceed to shew 2ly That this Doctrine is not grounded upon the perpetual belief of the Christian Church which the Church of Rome vainly pretends as an evidence that the Church did always understand and interpret our Saviour's words in this sense To manifest the groundlesness of this pretence I shall 1. shew by plain testimony of the Fathers in several Ages that this Doctrine was not the belief of the ancient Christian Church 2. I shall shew the time and occasion of its coming in and by what degrees it grew up and was establish'd in the Roman Church 3. I shall answer their great pretended Demonstration that this always was and must have been the constant belief of the Christian Church 1. I shall shew by plain Testimonies of the Fathers in several Ages for above five hundred years after Christ that this Doctrine was not the belief of the ancient Christian Church I deny not but that the Fathers do and that with great reason very much magnifie the wonderfull mystery and efficacy of this Sacrament and frequently speak of a great Supernatural change made by the divine benediction which we also readily acknowledge They say indeed that the Elements of Bread and Wine do by the divine blessing become to us the Body and Bloud of Christ But they likewise say that the names of the things signified are given to the Signs that the Bread and Wine do still remain in their proper nature and substance and that they are turn'd into the substance of our Bodies that the Body of Christ in the Sacrament is not his natural Body but the sign and figure of it not that Body which was crucified nor that Bloud which was shed upon the Cross and that it is impious to understand the eating of the flesh of the Son of man and drinking his bloud literally all which are directly opposite to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and utterly inconsistent with it I will select but some sew Testimonies of many which I might bring to this purpose I begin with Justin Martyr who says expresly that * Apol. 2 p. 98 Edit Paris 1636. our Bloud and Flesh are nourished by the conversion of that food which we receive in the Eucharist But that cannot be the natural body and bloud of Christ for no man will say that that is converted into the nourishment of our bodies The Second is * Lib. 4. c. 34. Irenaeus who speaking of this Sacrament says that the bread which is from the earth receiving the divine invocation is now no longer common bread but the Eucharist or Sacrament consisting of two things the one earthly the other heavenly He says it is no longer common bread but after invocation or consecration it becomes the Sacrament that is bread sanctified consisting of two things an earthly and a heavenly the earthly thing is bread and the heavenly is the divine blessing which by the invocation or consecration is added to it And * Lib. 5. c. 2. elsewhere he hath this passage when therefore the cup that is mix'd that is of Wine and Water and the bread that is broken receives the word of God it becomes the Eucharist of the bloud and body of Christ of which the substance of our flesh is encreased and consists but if that which we receive in the Sacrament do nourish our bodies it must be bread and wine and not the natural body and bloud of Christ There is another remarkable Testimony of Irenaeus which though it be not now extant in those works of his which remain yet hath been preserv'd by * Comment in 1 Pet. c. 3. Oecumenius and it is this when says he the Greeks had taken some Servants of the Christian Catechumeni that is such as had not been admitted to the Sacrament and afterwards urged them by violence to tell them some of the secrets of the Christians these Servants having nothing to say that might gratisy those who offered violence to them except onely that they had heard from their Masters that the divine Communion was the bloud and body of Christ they thinking that it was really bloud and flesh declar'd as much to those that questioned them The Greeks taking this as if it were really done by the Christians discovered it to others of the Greeks who hereupon put Sanctus and Blandina to the torture to make them confess it To whom Blandina boldly answered How would they endure to do this who by way of exercise or abstinence do not eat that flesh which may lawfully he eaten By which it appears that this which they would have charg'd upon Christians as if they had literally eaten the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament was a false accusation which these Martyrs denied saying they were so far from that that they for their part did not eat any flesh at all The next is Tertullian who proves against Marcion the Heretique that the Body of our Saviour was not a mere phantasm and appearance but a real Body because the Sacrament is a figure and image of his Body and if there be an image of his body he must have a real body otherwise the Sacrament would be an image of an image His words are these * Adverss Marcionem l. 4. p. 571. Edit Rigalâ— Paris 1634. the bread which our Saviour took and distributed to his Disciples he made his own body saying this is my body that is the image or figure of my body But it could not have been the figure of his body if there had not been a true and real body And arguing against the Scepticks who denied the certainty of sense he useth this Argument That if we question our senses we may doubt whether our Blessed Saviour were not deceived in what he heard and saw and touched * Lib. de Anima p. 319. He might says he be deceived in the voice from heaven in the smell of the ointment with which he was anointed against his burial and in the taste of the wine which he consecrated in remembrance of his bloud So that it seems we are to trust our senses even in the matter of the Sacrament and if that be true the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is certainly false Origen in his * Edit Huetii Comment on Matth. 15. speaking of the Sacrament hath this passage That food which is sanctified by the word of God and prayer as to that of it which is material goeth into the belly and is cast out into the draught which none surely will say of the Body of Christ And afterwards he adds by way of explication it is not the matter of the bread but the word which is spoken
(a) In Sent. l. 4. Dist 11. Q 3. Scotus acknowledgeth that this Doctrine was not always thought necessary to be believed but that the necessity of believing it was consequent to that Declaration of the Church made in the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the III. And (b) In Sent. l. 4. dist 11. q. 1. n. 15. Durandus freely discovers his inclination to have believed the contrary if the Church had not by that determination obliged men to believe it (c) de Euchar l. 1. p. 146. Tonstal Bishop of Durham also yields that before the Lateran Council men were at liberty as to the manner of Christ's presence in the Sacrament And (d) In 1 Epist ad Corinth c. 7. citante etiam Salmerone Tom. 9. Tract 16. p. 108. Erasmus who lived and died in the communion of the Roman Church and than whom no man was better read in the ancient Fathers doth confess that it was late before the Church defined Transubstantiation unknown to the Ancients both name and thing And (e) De Haeres l. 8. Alphonsus a Castro says plainly that concerning the Transubstantiation of the bread into the body of Christ there is seldom any mention in the ancient Writers And who can imagine that these learned men would have granted the ancient Church and Fathers to have been so much Strangers to this Doctrine had they thought it to have been the perpetual belief of the Church I shall now in the Second place give an account of the particular time and occasion of the coming in of this Doctrine and by what steps and degrees it grew up and was advanced into an Article of Faith in the Romish Church The Doctrine of the corporal presence of Christ was first started upon occasion of the Dispute about the Worship of Images in opposition whereto the Synod of Constantinople about the year DCCL did argue thus That our Lord having left us no other image of himself but the Sacrament in which the substance of bread is the image of his body we ought to make no other image of our Lord. In answer to this Argument the second Council of Nice in the year DCCLXXXVII did declare that the Sacrament after Consecration is not the image and antitype of Christ's body and bloud but is properly his body and bloud So that the corporal presence of the body of Christ in the Sacrament was first brought in to support the stupid Worship of Images And indeed it could never have come in upon a more proper occasion not have been applied to a fitter purpose And here I cannot but take notice how well this agrees with * De Eucharist l. 1. c. 1. Bellarmine's Observation that none of the Ancients who wrote of Heresies hath put this errour viz of denying Transubstantiation in his Caralogue nor did any of the Ancients dispute against this errour for the first 600 years Which is very true because there could be no occasion then to dispute against those who demed Transubstantiation since as I have shewn this Doctrine was not in being unless among the Eutychian Heretiques for the first 600 years and more But †Ibid. Bellarmine goes on and tells us that the first who call'd in question the truth of the body of the Lord in the Eucharist were the ICONOMACHI the opposers of Images after the year DCC in the Council of Constantinople for these said there was one image of Christ instituted by Christ himself viz. the bread and wine in the Eucharist which represents the body and bloud of Christ Wherefore from that time the Greek Writers often admonish us that the Eucharist is not the figure or image of the body of the Lord but his true body as appears from the VII Synod which agrees most exactly with the account which I have given of the first rise of this Doctrine which began with the corporal presence of Christ in the Sacrament and afterwards proceeded to Transubstantiation And as this was the first occasion of introducing this Doctrine among the Greeks so in the Latin or Roman Church Paschasius Radbertus first a Monk and afterwards Abbot of Corbey was the first broacher of it in the year DCCCXVIII And for this besides the Evidence of History we have the acknowledgment of two very Eminent Persons in the Church of Rome Bellarmine and Sirmondus who do in effect confess that this Paschasius was the first who wrote to purpose upon this Argument * De Scriptor Eccles Bellarmine in these words This Authour was the first who hath seriously and copiously written concerning the truth of Christ's body and bloud in the Eucharist And †In vita Paschasii Sirmondus in these he so first explained the genuine sense of the Catholique Church that he opened the way to the rest who afterwards in great numbers wrote upon the same Argument But though Sirmondus is pleased to say that he onely first explain'd the sense of the Catholique Church in this Point yet it is very plain from the Records of that Age which are left to us that this was the first time that this Doctrine was broached in the Latin Church and it met with great opposition in that Age as I shall have occasion hereafter to shew For Rabanus Maurus Arch-Bishop of Mentz about the year DCCCXLVII reciting the very words of Paschasius wherein he had deliver'd this Doctrine hath this remarkable passage concerning the novelty of it ‖ Epist ad Heribaldum c. 33. Some says he of late not having a right opinion concerning the Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord have said that this is the body and bloud of our Lord which was born of the Virgin Mary and in which our Lord suffered upon the Cross and rose from the dead which errour says he we have oppos'd with all our might From whence it is plain by the Testimony of one of the greatest and most learned Bishops of that Age and of eminent reputation for Piety that what is now the very Doctrine of the Church of Rome concerning the Sacrament was then esteem'd an Errour broach'd by some particular Persons but was far from being the generally receiv'd Doctrine of that Age. Can any one think it possible that so eminent a Person in the Church both for piety and learning could have condemn'd this Doctrine as an Errour and a Novelty had it been the general Doctrine of the Christian Church not onely in that but in all former Ages and no censure pass'd upon him for that which is now the great burning Article in the Church of Rome and esteemed by them one of the greatest and most pernicious Heresies Afterwards in the year MLIX when Berengarius in France and Germany had rais'd a fresh opposition against this Doctrine he was compell'd to recant it by Pope Nicholas and the Council at Rome in these words * Gratian. de consecrat distinct 2. Lanfranc de corp sing Domini c. 5. Guitmund de
Sacram. l. 1. Alger de Sacram. l. 1. c. 19. that the bread and wine which are set upon the Altar after the consecration are not onely the Sacrament but the true body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ and are sensibly not onely in the Sacrament but in truth handled and broken by the hands of the Priest and ground or bruised by the teeth of the faithfull But it seems the Pope and his Council were not then skilfull enough to express themselves rightly in this matter for the Gloss upon the Canon Law says expresly †Gloss Decret de consecrat dist 2. in cap. Ego Berengarius that unless we understand these words of BERENGARIVS that is in truth of the Pope and his Council in a sound sense we shall fall into a greater Heresie than that of BERENGARIVS for we do not make parts of the body of Christ The meaning of which Gloss I cannot imagine unless it be this that the Body of Christ though it be in truth broken yet it is not broken into parts for we do not make parts of the bods of Christ but into wholes Now this new way of breaking a Body not into parts but into wholes which in good earnest is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome though to them that are able to believe Transubstantiation it may for any thing I know appear to be sound sense yet to us that cannot believe so it appears to be solid non-sense About XX years after in the year MLXXIX Pope Gregory the VII th began to be sensible of this absurdity and therefore in another Council at Rome made Berengarius to recant in another Form viz. * Waldens Tom. 2. c. 13. that the bread and wine which are placed upon the Altar are substantially changed into the true and proper and quickning flesh and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ and after consecration are the true body of Christ which was born of the Virgin and which being offered for the Salvation of the World did hang upon the Cross and sits on the right hand of the Father So that from the first starting of this Doctrine in the second Council of Nice in the year DCCLXXXVII till the Council under Pope Gregory the VII th in the year MLXXIX it was almost three hundred years that this Doctrine was contested and before this mishapen Monster of Transubstantiation could be lick'd into that Form in which it is now setled and establish'd in the Church of Rome Here then is a plain account of the first rise of this Doctrine and of the several steps whereby it was advanced by the Church of Rome into an Article of Faith I come now in the Third place to answer the great pretended Demonstration of the impossibility that this Doctrine if it had been new should ever have come in in any Age and been received in the Church and consequently it must of necessity have been the perpetual belief of the Church in all Ages For if it had not always been the Doctrine of the Church whenever it had attempted first to come in there would have been a great stir and bustle about it and the whole Christian World would have rose up in opposition to it But we can shew no such time when first it came in and when any such opposition was made to it and therefore it was always the Doctrine of the Church This Demonstration Monsieur Arnauld a very learned Man in France pretends to be unanswerable whether it be so or not I shall briefly examine And First we do assign a punctual and very likely time of the first rise of this Doctrine about the beginning of the ninth Age though it did not take firm root nor was fully setled and establish'd till towards the end of the eleventh And this was the most likely time of all other from the beginning of Christianity for so gross an Error to appear it being by the confession and consent of their own Historians the most dark and dismal time that ever happened to the Christian Church both for Ignorance and Superstition and Vice It came in together with Idolatry and was made use of to support it A fit prop and companion for it And indeed what tares might not the Enemy have sown in so dark and long a Night when so considerable a part of the Christian World was lull'd asleep in profound Ignorance and Superstition And this agrees very well with the account which our Saviour himself gives in the Parable of the Tares of the springing up of Errours and Corruptions in the Field of the Church * Matth. 13.24 While the men slept the Enemy did his work in the Night so that when they were awake they wondered how and whence the tares came but being sure they were there and that they were not sown at first they concluded the Enemy had done it Secondly I have shewn likewise that there was considerable opposition made to this Errour at its first coming in The general Ignorance and gross Superstition of that Age rendered the generality of people more quiet and secure and disposed them to receive any thing that came under a pretence of mystery in Religion and of greater reverence and devotion to the Sacrament and that seemed any way to countenance the worship of Images for which at that time they were zealously concern'd But notwithstanding the security and passive temper of the People the men most eminent for piety and learning in that Time made great resistance against it I have already named Rabanus Arch Bishop of Mentz who oppos'd it as an Errour lately sprung up and which had then gained but upon some few persons To whom I may add Heribaldus Bishop of Auxerres in France Io. Scotus Erigena and Ratramnus commonly known by the name of Bertram who at the same time were employed by the Emperour Charles the Bald to oppose this growing Errour and wrote learnedly against it And these were the eminent men for learning in that time And because Monsieur Arnauld will not be satisfied unless there were some stir and bustle about it Bertram in his Preface to his Book tells us that they who according to their several opinions talked differently about the mystery of Christ's body and bloud were divided by no small Schism Thirdly Though for a more clear and satisfactory answer to this pretended Demonstration I have been contented to untie this knot yet I could without all these pains have cut it For suppose this Doctrine had silently come in and without opposition so that we could not assign the particular time and occasion of its first Rise yet if it be evident from the Records of former Ages for above D. years together that this was not the ancient belief of the Church and plain also that this Doctrine was afterwards received in the Roman Church though we could not tell how and when it came in yet it would be the wildest and most extravagant thing in the world to set up a
of gross Hypocrisie who pretend a further obligation of Conscience in this matter I shall give this plain Demonstration which relies upon Concessions generally made on all hands and by all Parties No Protestant that I know of holds himself obliged to go and Preach up his Religion and make Converts in Spain or Italy Nor do either the Protestant Ministers or Popish Priests think themselves bound in conscience to Preach the Gospel in Turky and to confute the Alcheran to convert the Mahometans And what is the Reason because of the severity of the Inquisition in Popish Countreys and of the Laws in Turky But doth the danger then alter the obligation of Conscience No certainly but it makes men throw off the false pretence and disguise of it But where there is a real obligation of Conscience danger should not deter men from their Duty as it did not the Apostles which shews their case to be different from ours and that probably this matter was stated right at first So that whatever is pretended this is certain that the Priests and Jesuites of the Church of Rome have in truth no more obligation of conscience to make Converts here in England than in Sueden or Turky where it seems the evident danger of the attempt hath for these many years given them a perfect discharge from their duty in this particular I shall joyn the Third and Fourth Observations together That though the true Religion may have several prejudices and objections against it yet upon examination there will be found those real advantages on its side that it may safely be referred to any considerate mans choice If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve If it seem evil unto you Intimating that to some persons and upon some accounts it may appear so But when the matter is truly represented the choice is not difficult nor requires any long deliberation Chuse you this day whom you will serve Let but the Cause be fully and impartially heard and a wise man may determine himself upon the spot and give his Verdict without ever going from the Bar. The true Religion hath always layen under some prejudices with partial and inconsiderate men which commonly spring from one of these two Causes either the Prepossessions of a contrary Religion or the contrariety of the true Religion to the vicious inclinations and practices of men which usually lyes at the bottom of all prejudice against Religion Religion is an enemy to mens beloved lusts and therefore they are enemies to Religion I begin with the first which is as much as I shall be able to compass at this time I. The Prepossessions of a false Religion which commonly pretends two advantages on its side Antiquity and Vniversality and is wont to object to the true Religion Novelty and Singularity And both these are intimated both before and after the Text Put away the gods which your Father served on the other side of the flood and in Egypt And chuse you this day whom you will serve whether the gods which your Fathers served on the other side of the flood or the gods of the Amorites in whose land ye dwell Idolatry was the Religion of their Fathers and had spread it self over the greatest and most ancient Nations of the world and the most famous for Learning and Arts the Chaldeans and Egyptians and was the Religion of the Amorites and the Nations round about them So that Joshua represents the Heathen Religion with all its strength and advantage and do's not dissemble its confident pretence to Antiquity and Vniversality whereby they would also insinuate the Novelty and Singularity of the worship of the God of Israel And it is very well worthy our observation that one or both of these have always been the Exceptions of false Religions especially of Idolatry and Superstition against the true Religion The ancient Idolaters of the World pretended their Religion to be ancient and universal that their Fathers served these Gods and that the worship of the God of Israel was a plain Innovation upon the Ancient and Catholick Religion of the world and that the very first rise and original of it was within the memory of their Fathers and no doubt they were almost perpetually upon the Jews with that pert question Where was your Religion before Abraham and telling them that it was the Religion of a very small part and corner of the world confined within a little Territory But the great Nations of the world the Egyptians and Chaldeans famous for all kind of knowledge and wisedom and indeed all the Nations round about them worshipped other Gods And therefore it was an intolerable arrogance and singularity in them to condemn their Fathers and all the world to be of a Religion different from all other Nations and hereby to separate themselves and make a Schism from the rest of mankind And when the Gospel appeared in the world which the Apostle to the Hebrews to prevent the scandal of that word calls the time of Reformation the Jews and Heathen still renewed the same Objections against Christianity The Jews urged against it not the ancient Scriptures and the true word of God but that which they pretended to be of much greater Authority the unwritten Word the ancient and constant Traditions of their Church and branded this new Religion with the name of Heresie After the way saith St. Paul that you call Heresie so worship I the God of my Fathers believing all things that are written in the Law and in the Prophets By which we see that they of the Church of Rome were not the first who called it Heresie to reject humane Traditions and to make the Scriptures the Rule of Faith This was done long before by their reverend Predecessors the Scribes and and Pharisees And the Gentiles they pretended against it both Antiquity and Vniversality the constant belief and practice of all Ages and almost all Places of the World Sequimur majores nostros qui feliciter secuti sunt suos says Symmachus We follow our Fore-fathers who happily followed theirs But you bring in a new Religion never known nor heard of in the World before And when the Christian Religion was most miserably depraved and corrupted in that dismal night of Ignorance which overspread these Western parts of the World about the Ninth and Tenth Centùries and many pernicious Doctrines and Superstitious Practices were introduced to the wofull defacing of the Christian Religion and making it quite another thing from what our Saviour had left it and these Corruptions and Abuses had continued for several Ages No sooner was a Reformation attempted but the Church of Rome make the same outcry of Novelty and Singularity And though we have substantially answered it a thousand times yet we cannot obtain of them to forbear that threadbare Question Where was your Religion before Luther I shall therefore apply my self to answer these two Exceptions with
all the brevity and clearness I can And I doubt not to make it appear that as to the point of Vniversality though that be no-wise necessary to justifie the truth of any Religion ours is not inferior to theirs if we take in the Christians of all Ages and of all parts of the World And as to the point of Antiquity that our Faith and the Doctrines of our Religion have clearly the advantage of theirs all our Faith being unquestionably ancient their 's not so 1. As to the Point of Vniversality Which they of the Church of Rome I know not for what reason will needs make an inseparable property and mark of the true Church And they never slout at the Protestant Religion with so good a grace among the ignorant People as when they are bragging of their Numbers and despising poor Protestancy because embraced by so few This pestilent Northern Heresie as of late they scornfully call it entertained it seems only in this cold and cloudy Corner of the World by a company of dull stupid People that can neither penetrate into the proofs nor the possibility of Transubstantiation whereas to the more refined Southern Wits all these difficult and obscure Points are as clear as their Sun at Noon-day But to speak to the thing it self If Number be necessary to prove the truth and goodness of any Religion ours upon enquiry will be found not so inconsiderable as our Adversaries would make it Those of the Reformed Religion according to the most exact calculations that have been made by learned men being esteemed not much unequal in number to those of the Romish persuasion But then if we take in the ancient Christian Church whose Faith was the same with ours and other Christian Churches at this day which all together are vastly greater and more numerous than the Roman Church and which agree with us several of them in very considerable Doctrines and Practices in dispute between us and the Church of Rome and all of them in disclaiming that fundamental point of the Roman Religion and Summ of Christianity as Bellarmine calls it I mean the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome over all Christians and Churches in the World then the Number on our side will be much greater than on theirs But we will not stand upon this advantage with them Suppose we were by much the sewer So hath the true Church of God often been without any the least prejudice to the truth of their Religion What think we of the Church in Abraham's time which for ought we know was confined to one Family and one small Kingdom that of Melchisedec King of Salem What think we of it in Moses his time when it was confined to one People wandering in a Wilderness What of it in Elijah's time when besides the two Tribes that worshipped at Jerusalem there were in the other ten but seven thousand that had not bowed their knee to Baal What in our Saviour's time when the whole Christian Church consisted of twelve Apostles and seventy Disciples and some few Followers beside How would Bellarmine have despised this little Flock because it wanted one or two of his goodliest marks of the true Church Vniversality and Splendor And what think we of the Christian Church in the height of Arianism and Pelagianism when a great part of Christendom was over-run with these Errors and the number of the Orthodox was inconsiderable in comparison of the Hereticks But what need I to urge these Instances As if the Truth of a Religion were to be estimated and carried by the major Vote which as it can be an Argument to none but Fools so I dare say no honest and wise man ever made use of it for a solid proof of the truth and goodness of any Church or Religion If multitude be an Argument that men are in the right in vain then hath the Scripture said Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil For if this Argument be of any force the greater Number never go wrong 2. As to the Point of Antiquity This is not always a certain Mark of the true Religion For surely there was a time when Christianity began and was a new Profession and then both Judaism and Paganism had certainly the advantage of it in Point of Antiquity But the proper Question in this Case is Which is the true Ancient Christian Faith that of the Church of Rome or Ours And to make this matter plain it is to be considered that a great part of the Roman Faith is the same with Ours as namely the Articles of the Apostles Creed as explained by the first four General Councils And these make up our whole Faith so far as concerns matters of meer and simple Belief that are of absolute necessity to Salvation And in this Faith of Ours there is nothing wanting that can be shewn in any ancient Creed of the Christian Church And thus far Our Faith and theirs of the Roman Church are undoubtedly of equal Antiquity that is as ancient as Christianity it self All the Question is as to the matters in difference between us The principal whereof are the twelve new Articles of the Creed of Pope Pius the IV concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass Transubstantiation the Communion in one kind only Purgatory c. not one of which is to be found in any ancient Creed or Confession of Faith generally allowed in the Christian Church The Antiquity of these we deny and affirm them to be Innovations and have particularly proved them to be so not only to the answering but almost to the silencing of our Adversaries And as for the negative Articles of the Protestant Religion in opposition to the Errors and Corruptions of the Romish Faith these are by accident become a part of our Faith and Religion occasioned by their Errors as the renouncing of the Doctrines of Arianism became part of the Catholick Religion after the rise of that Heresie So that the Case is plainly this We believe and teach all that is contained in the Creeds of the ancient Christian Church and was by them esteemed necessary to Salvation and this is Our Religion But now the Church of Rome hath innovated in the Christian Religion and made several Additions to it and greatly corrupted it both in the Doctrines and Practices of it And these Additions and Corruptions are their Religion as it is distinct from ours and both because they are Corruptions and Novelties we have rejected them And our rejection of these is our Reformation And our Reformation we grant if this will do them any good not to be so ancient as their Corruptions All Reformation necessarily supposing Corruptions and Errors to have been before it And now we are at a little better leisure to answer that captious Question of theirs Where was your Religion before Luther Where-ever Christianity was in some places more pure in others more corrupted but especially in these Western parts of Christendom overgrown for several Ages with
man but all the while keeps him ignorant of his trade in order to his being rich and with the strictest care imaginable conceals from him the best means of learning that whereby alone he is likely to thrive and get anestate Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees Hypocrites By what hath been discoursed upon this Argument you will easily perceive where the Application is like to fall For the Woe denounced by our Saviour here in the Text against the Scribes and Pharisees falls every whit as heavy upon the Pastours and Teachers of the Roman Church They have taken away the key of knowledge with a witness not only depriving the people of the right understanding of the Scriptures but of the very use of them As if they were so afraid they should understand them that they dare not suffer them so much as to be acquainted with them This Tyranny that Church hath exercised over those of her Communion for several hundreds of years It grew upon them indeed by degrees For as by the inundation of Barbarous Nations upon the Roman Empire the Romans lost their Language by degrees so the Governours of that Church still kept up the Scriptures and the service of God in the Latin tongue which at last was wholly unknown to the common people And about the ninth and tenth Centuries when by the general consent of all their own Historians gross darkness and ignorance covered this part of the world the Pope and the Priests took away the key of knowledge and did as I may so say put it under the door for several Ages till the Reformation fetched it out again and rubbed off the rust of it And I profess seriously that hardly any thing in the world was ever to me more astonishing than this uncharitable and cruel usage of the people in the Church of Rome And I cannot tell which to wonder at most the insolence of their Governours in imposing upon men this sensless way of serving of God or the patience shall I call it or rather stupidity of the people in enduring to be so intolerably abused Why should reasonable creatures be treated at this rude and barbarous rate As if they were unworthy to be acquainted with the will of God and as if that which every man ought to do were not fit for every man to know As if the common people had only Bodies to be present at the service of God but no Souls or as if they were all distracted and out of their wits and it were a dangerous thing to let in the light upon them But to speak more distinctly There are two things we charge them withall and which they are not able to deny Their performing the publick service of God in an unknown Tongue and depriving the People of the use of the Scriptures And I shall first tell you what we have to say against these things and then consider what they pretend for them 1. As for their performing the service of God in a tongue unknown to the People And I begin with St. Paul who in his first Epistle to the Corinthians hath a whole Chapter on purpose to shew the unreasonableness of this thing and how contrary it is to the edification of Christians His discourse is so plain and so well known that I shall not particularly insist upon it Erasmus in his Annotations upon this Chapter breaks out as well he might into admiration at the practice of the Church of Rome in his time Hâc in re mirum quam mutata sit Ecclesiae consuetudo It is wonderfull says he how the custom of the Church is altered in this matter St. Paul had rather speak five words with understanding and so as to teach others than ten thousand in an unknown tongue Why does the Church doubt to follow so great an Authority or rather how dares she to dissent from it As for the practice of the ancient Church let Origen bear witness The Grecians saith he in their prayers use the Greek and the Romans the Latin tongue and so every one according to his Language prayeth unto God and praiseth him as he is able And not only in Origen's time but for more than the first six hundred years the service of God was always performed in a known Tongue And this the learned men of their own Church do not deny And Cardinal Cajetan as Cassander tells us said it was much better this Custom were restored and being reproved for saying so he said he learned it from St. Paul And Bellarmine himself confesseth that the Armenians Egyptians Ethiopians Russians and others do use their own Language in their Liturgies at this day But it is otherwise now in the Church of Rome and hath been for several Ages And it seems they lay great stress upon it not only as a thing or great Use but Necessity For Pope Gregory the VII forbids the Prince of Bohemia to permit to the People the celebration of divine offices in the Sclavonian Tongue and commands him to oppose them herein with all his Forces It seems he thought it a cause worthy the fighting for and that it were much better the People should be killed than suffered to understand their prayers But let us reason this matter a little calmly with them Is it necessary for men to understand any thing they do in Religion And is not Prayer one of the most solemn parts of Religion and why then should not men understand their Prayers as well as any thing else they do in Religion Is it good that people should understand their private Prayers that we thank them they allow and why not the publick as well Is there less of Religion in publick prayers is God less honoured by them or are we not as capable of being edified and of having our hearts and affections moved and excited by them Where then lies the difference The more I consider it the more I am at a loss what tolerable reason any man can give why people should not understand their publick devotions as well as their private If men cannot heartily and devoutly pray alone without understanding what they ask of God no more say I can they heartily and devoutly join in the publick prayers which are made by the Priest without understanding what they are If it be enough for the Priest to understand them why should not the Priest only be present at them unless the people do not meet to worship God but only to wait upon the Priest But by saying the Priest understands them it seems it is better some body should understand them than not and why is not that which is good for the Priest good for the people So that the true state of the Controversie is whether it be fit that the people should be edified in the service of God and whether it be fit the Church should order things contrary to edification For it is plain that the service of God in an unknown tongue is useless and unprofitable to the
People Nay it is evidently no publick service of God when the Priest only understands it For how can they be said to be publick prayers if the People do not join in them and how can they join in that they do not understand and to what purpose are Lessons of Scripture read if people are to learn nothing by them and how should they learn when they do not understand This is as if one should pretend to teach a man Greek by reading him Lectures every day out of an Arabick and Persian Book of which he understands not one syllable II. As to their depriving rhe people of the use of the Holy Scriptures Our blessed Saviour exhorts the Jews to search the Scriptures And St. Paul chargeth the Christians that the word of God should dwell richly in them And the ancient Fathers of the Church do most frequently and earnestly recommend to the People the reading and study of the Scriptures How comes the case now to be so altered sure the word of God is not changed that certainly abides and continues the same for ever I shall by and by examine what the Church of Rome pretends in excuse of this Sacrilege In the mean time I do not see what considerable Objections can be made against the People's reading of the Scriptures which would not have held as well against the writing and publishing of them at first in a Language understood by the People As the Old Testament was by the Jews and the Epistles of the Apostles by the Churches to whom they were written and the Gospels both by Jews and Greeks Were there no difficulties and obscurities then in the Scriptures capable of being wrested by the unstable and unlearned were not people then liable to errour and was there no danger of Heresie in those Times And yet these are their great Objections against putting the Scriptures into the hands of the people Which is just like their arguing against giving the Cup to the Laity from the inconveniency of their beards lest some of the consecrated wine should be spilt upon them As if errours and beards were inconveniencies lately sprung up in the world and which mankind were not liable to in the first Ages of Christianity But if there were the same dangers and inconveniencies in all Ages this Reason makes against the publishing of the Scriptures to the people at first as much as against permitting them the use of them now And in truth all these objections are against the Scripture it self And that which the Church of Rome would find fault with if they durst is that there should be any such Book in the world and that it should be in any bodies hands learned or unlearned for if it be dangerous to any none are so capable of doing mischief with it as men of wit and learning So that at the bottom if they would speak out the quarrel is against the Scriptures themselves This is too evident by the counsel given to Pope Julius the III. by the Bishops met at Bononia to consult about the establishment of the Roman See Where among other things they give this as their last advice and as the greatest and weightiest of all That by all means as little of the Gospel as might be especially in the Vulgar Tongue should be read to the people and that little which was in the Mass ought to be sufficient neither should it be permitted to any mortal to read more For so long say they as men were contented with that little all things went well with them but quite otherwise since more was commonly read And speaking of the Scripture they give this remarkable testimony and commendation of it this in short is that Book which above all others hath raised those tempests and whirlwinds which we were almost carried away with And in truth if any one diligently considers it and compares it with what is done in our Church he will find them very contrary to each other and our Doctrine not only to be very different from it but repugnant to it If this be the case they do like the rest of the Children of this world prudently enough in their Generation Can we blame them for being against the Scriptures when the Scriptures are acknowledged to be so clearly against them But surely no body that considereth these things would be of that Church which is brought by the undeniable evidence of the things themselves to this shamefull confession that several of their Doctrines and Practices are very contrary to the Word of God Much more might have been said against the practice of the Church of Rome in these two particulars but this is sufficient I shall in the second place consider what is pretended for them And indeed what can be pretended in justification of so contumelious an affront to mankind so great a Tyranny and cruelty to the Souls of men hath God forbidden the People to look into the Scriptures No quite contrary Was it the practice of the ancient Church to lay this restraint upon men or to celebrate the service of God in an unknown Tongue our adversaries themselves have not the face to pretend this I shall truly represent the substance of what they say in these two points I. As to the service of God in an unknown tongue they say these four things for themselves 1. That the people do exercise a general devotion and come with an intention to serve God and that is accepted though they do not particularly understand the prayers rhat are made and the lessons that are read But is this all that is intended in the service of God do's not St. Paul expresly require more that the understanding of the people should be edified by the particular service that is performed And if what is done be not particularly understood he tells us the People are not edified nor can say Amen to the prayers and thanksgivings that are put up to God and that any man that should come in and find people serving of God in this unprofitable and unreasonable manner would conclude that they were mad And if there be any general devotion in the people it is because in general they understand what they are about and why may they not as well understand the particular service that is performed that so they might exercise a particular devotion So that they are devout no farther than they understand and consequently as to what they do not understand had every whit as good be absent 2. They say the prayers are to God and he understands them and that is enough But what harm were it if all they that pray understood them also Or indeed how can men pray to God without understanding what they ask of him Is not prayer a part of the Christian worship and is not that a reasonable service and is any service reasonable that is not directed by our understandings and accompanied with our hearts and affections But then what say they to the Lessons and
have purposely reserved this for the last place because it is their last refuge and if this fail them they are gone To shew the weakness of this pretence we will if they please take it for granted that the Governours of the Church have in no Age more power than the Apostles had in theirs Now St. Paul tells us 2 Cor. 10.8 that the Authority which the Apostles had given them from the Lord was only for edification but not for destruction And the same St. Paul makes it the business of a whole Chapter to shew that the performing the publick service of God and particularly Praying in an unknown Tongue are contrary to edification from which premisses the conclusion is plain That the Apostles themselves had no Authority to appoint the service of God to be performed in an unknown Tongue and surely it is Arrogance for the Church in any Age to pretend to greater Authority than the Apostles had This is the summ of what our Adversaries say in justification of themselves in these points And there is no doubt but that men of wit and confidence will alwaies make a shift to say something for any thing and some way or other blanch over the blackest and most absurd things in the world But I leave it to the judgment of mankind whether any thing be more unreasonable than to tell men in effect that it is fit they should understand as little of Religion as is possible that God hath published a very dangerous Book with which it is not safe for the people to be familiarly acquainted that our blessed Saviour and his Apostles and the ancient Christian Church for more than six hundred years were not wise managers of Religion nor prudent dispensers of the Scriptures but like fond and foolish Fathers put a knife and a sword into the hands of their Children with which they might easily have foreseen what mischief they would do to themselves and others And who would not chuse to be of such a Church which is provided of such excellent and effectual means of Ignorance such wise and infallible methods for the prevention of knowledge in the people and such variety of close shutters to keep out the light I have chosen to insist upon this Argument because it is so very plain that the most ordinary capacity may judge of this usage and dealing with the souls of men which is so very gross that every man must needs be sensible of it because it toucheth men in the common rights of humane nature which belong to them as much as the light of heaven and the air we breath in It requires no subtilty of wit no skill in Antiquity to understand these Controversies between Us and the Church of Rome For there are no Fathers to be pretended on both sides in these Questions They yield we have Antiquity on ours And we refer it to the common sense of Mankind which Church that of Rome or Ours hath all the right and reason in the world on her side in these debates And who they are that tyrannize over Christians the Governours of their Church or ours who use the people like sons and freemen and who like slaves who feed the flock of Christ committed to them and who take the Childrens bread from them Who they are that when their Children ask bread for bread give them a stone and for an egg a serpent I mean the Legends of their Saints instead of the holy Scriptures which are able to make men wise unto salvation And who they are that lie most justly under the suspicion of Errours and Corruptions they who bring their Doctrine and Practices into the open light and are willing to have them tryed by the true touchstone the Word of God or they who shun the light and decline all manner of tryal and examination and who are most likely to carry on a worldly design they who drive a trade of such mighty gain and advantage under pretence of Religion and make such markets of the ignorance and sins of the people or we whom malice it self cannot charge with serving any worldly design by any allowed Doctrine or Practice of our Religion For we make no money of the mistakes of the people nor do we fill their heads with vain fears of new places of torment to make them willing to empty their purses in a vainer hope of being delivered out of them We do not like them pretend a mighty bank and treasure of Merits in the Church which they sell to the people for ready money giving them bills of Exchange from the Pope to Purgatory when they who grant them have no reason to believe they will avail them or be accepted in the other World For our parts we have no fear that our people should understand Religion too well We could wish with Moses that all the Lord's people were Prophets We should be heartily glad the people would read the holy Scriptures more diligently being sufficiently assured that it is their own fault if they learn any thing but what is good from thence We have no Doctrines or Practices contrary to Scripture and consequently no occasion to keep it close from the sight of the people or to hide any of the Commandments of God from them We leave these mean arts to those who stand in need of them In a word there is nothing which God hath said to men which we desire should be concealed from them Nay we are willing the people should examine what we teach and bring all our Doctrines to the Law and to the Testimony that if they be not according to this Rule they may neither believe them nor us 'T is onely things false and adulterate which shun the light and sear the touchstone We have that security of the truth of our Religion and of the agreeableness of it to the word of God that honest confidence of the goodness of our Cause that we do not forbid the people to read the best Books our Adversaries can write against it And now let any impartial man judge whether this be not a better argument of a good Cause to leave men at liberty to try the grounds of their Religion than the courses which are taken in the Church of Rome to awe men with an Inquisition and as much as is possible to keep the common people in Ignorance not onely of what their late Adversaries the Protestants but their chief and ancient Adversary the Scriptures have to say against them A man had need of more than common security of the skill and integrity of those to whom he perfectly resigns his understanding this is too great a Trust to be reposed in humane frailty and too strong a temptation to others to impose upon us to abuse our blindness and to make their own ends of our voluntary Ignorance and easie credulity This is such a folly as if a rich man should make his Physician his heir which is to tempt him either to destroy
nothing How much righter apprehensions had the Heathen of the Divine Nature which they looked upon as so benign and beneficial to mankind that as Tully admirably says Dii immortales ad usum hominum fabrefacti penè videantur The nature of the immortal Gods may almost seem to be exactly framed for the benefit and advantage of men And as for Religion they always spake of it as the great band of humane Society and the foundation of truth and fidelity and justice among men But when Religion once comes to supplant moral Righteousness and to teach men the absurdest things in the world to lye for the truth and to kill men for God's sake when it serves to no other purpose but to be a bond of conspiracy to inflame the tempers of men to a greater fierceness and to set a keener edge upon their spirits and to make them ten times more the children of wrath and Cruelty than they were by nature then surely it loses its nature and ceases to be Religion For let any man say worse of Atheism and Infidelity if he can And for God's sake what is Religion good for but to reform the manners and dispositions of men to restrain humane nature from violence and cruelty from falshood and treachery from Sedition and Rebellion Better it were there were no revealed Religion and that humane nature were left to the conduct of its own principles and inclinations which are much more mild and merciful much more for the peace and happiness of humane Society than to be acted by a Religion that inspires men with so wild a fury and prompts them to commit such outrages and is continually supplanting Government and undermining the welfare of mankind in short such a Religion as teaches men to propagate and advance it self by means so evidently contrary to the very nature and end of all Religion And this if it be well considered will appear to be a very convincing way of reasoning by shewing the last result and consequence of such Principles and of such a Train of Propositions to be a most gross and palpable absurdity For example We will at present admit Popery to be the true Religion and their Doctrines of extirpating Hereticks of the lawfulness of deposing Kings and subverting Government by all the cruel and wicked ways that can be thought of to be as in truth they are the Doctrines of this Religion In this Case I would not trouble my self to debate particulars but if in the gross and upon the whole matter it be evident that such a Religion as this is as bad or worse than Infidelity and no Religion this is conviction enough to a wise man and as good as a Demonstration that this is not the true Religion and that it cannot be from God How much better Teachers of Religion were the old Heathen Philosophers In all whose Books and Writings there is not one Principle to be found of Treachery or Rebellion nothing that gives the least countenance to an Association or a Massacre to the betraying of ones Native Country or the cutting of his Neighbours throat for difference in opinion I speak it with grief and shame because the credit of our common Christianity is somewhat concerned in it that Panaetius and Antipater and Diogenes the Stoick Tully and Plutarch and Seneca were much honester and more Christian Casuists than the Jesuits are or the generality of the Casuists of any other Order that I know of in the Church of Rome I come now in the Third and last place to make some Application of this Discourse 1. Let not Religion suffer for those faults and miscarriages which really proceed from the ignorance of Religion and from the want of it That under colour and pretence of Religion very bad things are done is no argument that Religion it self is not good Because the best things are liable to be perverted and abused to very ill purposes nay the corruption of them is commonly the worst as they say the richest and noblest Wines make the sharpest Vinegar If the light that is in you saith our Saviour be darkness how great is that darkness 2. Let us beware of that Church which countenanceth this unchristian spirit here condemned by our Saviour and which teaches such Doctrines and warrants such Practices as are consonant thereto You all know without my saying so that I mean the Church of Rome in which are taught such Doctrines as these That Hereticks that is all who differ from them in matters of Faith are to be extirpated by fire and sword which was decreed in the third and fourth Lateran Councils where all Christians are strictly charged to endeavour this to the uttermost of their power Sicut reputari cupiunt haberi fideles as they desire to be esteemed and accounted Christians Next their Doctrines of deposing Kings and of absolving their subjects from obedience to them which were not only universally believed but practised by the Popes and Roman Church for several Ages Indeed this Doctrine hath not been at all times alike frankly and openly avowed but it is undoubtedly theirs and hath frequently been put in execution though they have not thought it so convenient at all turns to make profession of it It is a certain kind of Engine which is to be screw'd up or let down as occasion serves and is commonly kept like Goliah's Sword in the Sanctuary behind the Ephod but yet so that the High-Priest can lend it out upon an extraordinary occasion And for Practices consonant to these Doctrines I shall go no further than the horrid and bloody Design of this Day Such a Mystery of Iniquity as had been hid from ages and generations Such a Master-piece of Villany as eye had not seen nor ear heard nor ever before entred into the heart of man So prodigiously Barbarous both in the substance and circumstances of it as is not to be parallell'd in all the voluminous Records of Time from the foundation of the World Of late years our Adversaries for so they have made themselves without any provocation of ours have almost had the impudence to deny so plain a matter of fact but I wish they have not taken an effectual course by fresh Conspiracies of equal or greater horror to confirm the belief of it with a witness But I shall not anticipate what will be more proper for another Day but confine my self to the present Occasion I will not trouble you with the particular Narrative of this dark Conspiracy nor the obscure manner of its discovery which Bellarmin himself acknowledges not to have been without a Miracle Let us thank God that it was so happily discovered and disappointed as I hope their present design will be by the same wonderful and merciful providence of God towards a most unworthy People And may the lameness and halting of Ignatius Loyola the Founder of the Jesuits never depart from that Order but be a Fate continually attending all their villanous Plots and Contrivances
Imposition and preserved them in their Places by that means And to the Fellows that were ejected by the Visitours he likewise freely consented that their full Dividend for that year should be paid them even after they were ejected Among these was the Reverend and ingenious Dr. Charles Mason upon whom after he was ejected the College did confer a good Living which then fell in their gift with the consent of the Prevost who knowing him to be a worthy man was contented to run the hazard of the displeasure of those Times So that I hope none will be hard upon him that he was contented upon such terms to be in a capacity to do good in bad Times For besides his care of the College he had a very great and good influence upon the University in general Every Lord's day in the Afternoon for almost twenty years together he preached in Trinity Church where he had a great number not only of the young Scholars but of those of greater standing and best repute for Learning in the University his constant and attentive Auditors And in those wild and unsetled Times contributed more to the forming of the Students of that University to a sober sense of Religion than any man in that Age. After he left Cambridge he came to London and was chosen Minister of Black-Friars where he continued till the dreadful Fire And then retired himself to a Donative he had at Milton near Cambridge where he Preached constantly and relieved the poor and had their children taught to read at his own charge and made up differences among the neighbours Here he stayed till by the promotion of the Reverend Dr. Wilkins his Predecessour in this Place to the Bishoprick of Chester he was by his interest and recommendation presented to this Church But during the building of it upon the invitation of the Court of Aldermen in the Mayoralty of Sir William Turner he preached before that Honourable Auditory at Guild-Hall Chapel every Sunday in the afternoon with great acceptance and approbation for about the space of seven years When his Church was built he bestowed his pains here twice a week where he had the general love and respect of his Parish and a very considerable and judicious Auditory though not very numerous by reason of the weakness of his voice in his declining age It pleased God to bless him as with a plentifull Estate so with a charitable Mind which yet was not so well known to many because in the disposal of his charity he very much affected secrecy He frequently bestowed his alms as I am informed by those who best knew on poor house-keepers disabled by age or sickness to support themselves thinking those to be the most proper objects of it He was rather frugal in expence upon himself that so he might have wherewithall to relieve the necessities of others And he was not onely charitable in his life but in a very bountiful manner at his death bequeathing in pious and charitable Legacies to the value of a thousand pounds To the Library of the University of Cambridge fifty pounds and of King's College one hundred pounds and of Emanuel College twenty pounds To which College he had been a considerable benefactour before having founded there several Scholarships to the value of a thousand pounds out of a Charity with the disposal whereof he was entrusted and which not without great difficulty and pains he at last recovered To the Poor of the several Places where his Estate lay and where he had been Minister he gave above one hundred pounds Among those who had been his Servants or were so at his death he disposed in Annuities and Legacies in money to the value of above three hundred pounds To other charitable uses and among the poorer of his Relations above three hundred pounds To every one of his Tenants he left a Legacy according to the proportion of the Estate they held by way of remembrance of him And to one of them that was gone much behind he remitted in his Will seventy pounds And as became his great goodness he was ever a remarkably kind Landlord forgiving his Tenants and always making abatements to them for hard years or any other accidental losses that happened to them I must not omit the wise provision he made in his Will to prevent Law-suits among the Legatees by appointing two or three persons of greatest prudence and Authority among his Relations final Arbitrators of all differences that should arise Having given this account of his last Will I come cow to the sad part of all sad I mean to us but happiest to him A little before Easter last he went down to Cambridge where upon taking a great Cold he fell into a distemper which in a few days put a period to his life He died in the house of his ancient and most learned Friend Dr Cudworth Master of Christ's College During his sickness he had a constant calmness and serenity of mind and under all his bodily weakness possest his soul in great patience After the Prayers for the Visitation of the Sick which he said were excellent Prayers had been used he was put in mind of receiving the Sacrament to which he answered that he most readily embraced the proposal And after he had received it said to Dr. Cudworth I heartily thank you for this most Christian office I thank you for putting me in mind of receiving this Sacrament adding this pious ejaculation The Lord fulfill all his declarations and promises and pardon all my weaknesses and imperfections He disclaimed all merit in himself and declared that whatever he was he was through the grace and goodness of God in Jesus Christ. He expressed likewise great dislike of the Principles of Separation and said he was the more desirous to receive the Sacrament that he might declare his full Communion with the Church of Christ all the world over He disclaimed Popery and as things of near affinity with it or rather parts of it all superstition and usurpation upon the consiciences of men He thanked God that he had no pain in his body nor disquiet in his mind Towards his last he seemed rather unwilling to be detained any longer in this state not for any pains he felt in himself but for the trouble he gave his friends saying to one of them who had with great care attended him all along in his sickness My dear friend thou hast taken a great deal of pains to uphold a crazy body but it will not do I pray thee give me no more Cordials for why shouldst thou keep me any longer out of that happy state to which I am going I thank God I hope in his mercy that it shall be well with me And herein God was pleased particularly to answer those devout and well-weighed petitions of his which he frequently used in his Prayer before Sermon which I shall set down in his own words I doubt not those that were his constant hearers
the life which we now live in this world may be a patient continuance in well doing in a joyfull expectation of the blessed hope and the glorious appearance of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ To whom with the Father and the Holy Ghost be all honour and glory now and for ever Now the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus Christ the great shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the everlasting covenant make us perfect in every good work to do his will working in us always that which is well pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ To whom be glory for ever Amen A PERSUASIVE TO Frequent Communion 1 COR. XI 26 27 28. For as oft as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye do shew the Lord's death till he come VVherefore whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. MY design in this Argument is from consideration of the Nature of this Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and of the perpetual Use of it to the end of the world to awaken men to a sense of their duty and the great obligation which lies upon them to the more frequent receiving of it And there is the greater need to make men sensible of their duty in this particular because in this last Age by the unwary discourses of some concerning the nature of this Sacrament and the danger of receiving it unworthily such doubts and fears have been raised in the minds of men as utterly do deter many and in a great measure to discourage almost the generality of Christians from the use of it to the great prejudice and danger of mens souls and the visible abatement of Piety by the gross neglect of so excellent a means of our growth and improvement in it and to the mighty Scandal of our Religion by the general disuse and contempt of so plain and solemn an Institution of our blessed Lord and Saviour Therefore I shall take occasion as briefly and clearly as I can to treat of these four Points First Of the Perpetuity of this Institution this the Apostle signifies when he saith that by eating this Bread 1 Cor. 11 26. and drinking this Cup we do shew the Lord's Death till he come Secondly Of the Obligation that lies upon all Christians to a frequent observance of this Institution this is signified in that expression of the Apostle as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup which expression considered and compared together with the practice of the Primitive Church does imply an Obligation upon Christians to the frequent receiving of this Sacrament Thirdly I shall endeavour to satisfie the Objections and Scruples which have been raised in the minds of men and particularly of many devout and sincere Christians to their great discouragement from their receiving this Sacrament at least so frequently as they ought which Objections are chiefly grounded upon what the Apostle says 1 Cor. 11.27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this Bread and drink this Cup of the Lord unworthily is guilty of the Body and Bloud of the Lord and doth eat and drink damnation to himself Ver. 29. Fourthly What Preparation of our selves is necessary in order to our worthy receiving of this Sacrament which will give me occasion to explain the Apostle's meaning in those Words Ver. 28. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup. I. For the Perpetuity of this Institution implyed in those Words For as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew forth the Lord s Death till he come or the Words may be read imperatively and by way of Precept shew ye forth the Lord's Death till he come In the three verses immediately before the Apostle particularly declares the Institution of this Sacrament with the manner and circumstances of it as he had received it not only by the hands of the Apostles but as the Words seem rather to intimate by immediate Revelation from our Lord himself ver 23. For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus in the same night that he was betrayed took Bread and when he had given Thanks he brake it and said take eat this is my Body which is broken for you this do in remembrance of me After the same manner also he took the Cup when he had supped saying this Cup is the New Testament in my Bloud this doe as often as ye shall drink it in remembrance of me So that the Institution is in these Words this doe in remembrance of me In which words our Lord commands his Disciples after his Death to repeat these occasions of taking and breaking and eating the Bread and of drinking of the Cup by way of solemn Commemoration of him Now whether this was to be done by them once only or oftner and whether by the Disciples only during their lives or by all Christians afterwards in all successive Ages of the Church is not so certain merely from the force of these Words doe this in remembrance of me but what the Apostle adds puts the matter out of all doubt that the Institution of this Sacrament was intended not only for the Apostles and for that Age but for all Christians and for all Ages of the Christian Church For as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come that is untill the time of his second coming which will be at the end of the World So that this Sacrament was designed to be a standing Commemoration of the Death and Passion of our Lord till he should come to Judgment and consequently the Obligation that lies upon Christians to the observation of it is perpetual and shall never cease to the end of the World So that it is a vain conceit and mere dream of the Enthusiasts concerning the seculum Spiritûs Sancti the Age and dispenstion of the Holy Ghost when as they suppose all humane Teaching shall cease and all external Ordinances and Institutions in Religion shall vanish and there shall be no farther use of them Whereas it is very plain from the New Testament that Prayer and outward Teaching and the Use of the two Sacraments were intended to continue among Christians in all Ages As for Prayer besides our natural Obligation to this duty if there were no revealed Religion we are by our Saviour particularly exhorted to watch and pray with regard to the day of Judgment and in consideration of the uncertainty of the time when it shall be And therefore this will always be a Duty incumbent upon Christians till the day of Judgment because it is prescribed as one of the best ways of Preparation for it
not seen and yet have believed hath no where said blessed are they that have seen and yet have not believed much less blessed are they that believe directly contrary to what they see To conclude this Discourse By what hath been said upon this Argument it will appear with how little truth and reason and regard to the interest of our common Christianity it is so often said by our Adversaries that there are as good arguments for the belief of Transubstantiation as of the Doctrine of the Trinity When they themselves do acknowledge with us that the Doctrine of the Trinity is grounded upon the Scriptures and that according to the interpretation of them by the consent of the ancient Fathers But their Doctrine of Transubstantiation I have plainly shewn to have no such ground and that this is acknowledged by very many learned men of their own Church And this Doctrine of theirs being first plainly proved by us to be destitute of all Divine Warrant and Authority our Objections against it from the manifold contradictions of it to Reason and Sense are so many Demonstrations of the falshood of it Against all which they have nothing to put in the opposite Scale but the Infallibility of their Church for which there is even less colour of proof from Scripture than for Transubstantiation it self But so fond are they of their own Innovations and Errours that rather than the Dictates of their Church how groundless and absurd soever should be call'd in question rather than not have their will of us in imposing upon us what they please they will overthrow any Article of the Christian Faith and shake the very foundations of our common Religion A clear evidence that the Church of Rome is not the true Mother since she can be so well contented that Christianity should be destroyed rather than the Point in question should be decided against her THE Protestant Religion Vindicated from the Charge of Singularity and Novelty IN A SERMON Preached before the KING At WHITE-HALL April the 2d 1680. JOSHUA XXIV 15. If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve THese are the words of Joshua who after he had brought the People of Israel thorough many difficulties and hazards into the quiet possession of the promised land like a good Prince and Father of his Country was very sollicitous before his death to lay the firmest foundation he could devise of the future happiness and prosperity of that People in whose present settlement he had by the blessing of God been so succesfull an instrument And because he knew no means so effectual to this end as to confirm them in the Religion and Worship of the true God who had by so remarkable and miraculous a Providence planted them in that good Land he summons the people together and represents to them all those considerations that might engage them and their posterity for ever to continue in the true Religion He tells them what God had already done for them and what he had promised to do more if they would be faithfull to him And on the other hand what fearfull calamities he had threatned and would certainly bring upon them in case they should transgress his Covenant and go and serve other Gods And after many Arguments to this purpose he concludes with this earnest Exhortation at the 14th verse Now therefore fear the Lord and serve him in sincerity and in truth and put away the Gods which your father served on the other side of the flood and in Egypt and serve ye the Lord. And to give the greater weight and force to this Exhortation he do's by a very eloquent kind of insinuation as it were once more set them at liberty and leave them to their own election It being the nature of man to stick more stedfastly to that which is not violently imposed but is our own free and deliberate choice And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve Which words offer to our consideration these following Observations 1. It is here supposed that a Nation must be of some Religion or other Joshua do's not put this to their choice but takes it for granted 2. That though Religion be a matter of choice yet it is neither a thing indifferent in it self nor to a good Governour what Religion his people are of Joshua do's not put it to them as if it were an indifferent matter whether they served God or Idols he had sufficiently declared before which of these was to be preferred 3. The true Religion may have several prejudices and objections against it If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord intimating that upon some accounts and to some persons it may appear so 4. That the true Religion hath those real advantages on its side that it may safely be referr'd to any considerate mans choice And this seems to be the true Reason why Joshua refers it to them Not that he thought the thing indifferent but because he was fully satisfied that the truth and goodness of the one above the other was so evident that there was no danger that any prudent man should make a wrong choice If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve intimating that the plain difference of the things in competition would direct them what to chuse 5. The Example of Princes and Governours hath a very great influence upon the people in matters of Religion This I collect from the Context And Joshua was sensible of it and therefore though he firmly believed the true Religion to have those advantages that would certainly recommend it to every impartial mans judgment yet knowing that the multitude are easily imposed upon and led into error he thought fit to encline and determine them by his own example and by declaring his own peremptory resolution in the case Chuse you this day whom you will serve as for me I and my house will serve the Lord. Laws are a good security to Religion but the Example of Governours is a living Law which secretly overrules the minds of men and bends them to a compliance with it Non sic inflectere sensus Humanos edicta valent ut vita Regentis The Lives and Actions of Princes have usually a greater sway upon the minds of the People than their Laws All these Observations are I think very natural and very considerable I shall not be able to speak to them all but shall proceed so far as the time and your patience will give me leave First It is here supposed that a Nation must be of some Religion or other Joshua do's not put it to their choice whether they would worship any Deity at all That had been too wild and extravagant a supposition and which it is likely in those days had never entered into any mans mind But he takes it for granted that all people will
manifold Errors and Corruptions which the Reformation hath happily cut off and cast away So that though our Reformation was as late as Luther our Religion is as ancient as Christianity it self For when the Additions which the Church of Rome hath made to the ancient Christian Faith and their Innovations in practice are pared off that which remains of their Religion is ours and this they canot deny to be every tittle of it the ancient Christianity And what other Answer than this could the Jews have given to the like Question if it had been put to them by the ancient Idolaters of the World Where was your Religion before Abraham but the very same in substance which we now give to the Church of Rome That for many Ages the Worship of the one true God had been corrupted and the Worship of Idols had prevailed in a great part of the World that Abraham was raised up by God to reform Religion and to reduce the Worship of God to its first Institution in the doing whereof he necessarily separated Himself and his Family from the Communion of those Idolaters So that though the Reformation which Abraham began was new yet his Religion was truly ancient as old as that of Noah and Enoch and Adam Which is the same in substance that we say and with the same and equal reason And if they will still complain of the Newness of our Reformation so do we too and are heartily sorry it began no sooner but however better late than never Besides it ought to be considered that this Objection of Novelty lies against all Reformation whatsoever though never so necessary and though things be never so much amiss And it is in effect to say that if things be once bad they must never be better but must always remain as they are for they cannot be better without being reformed and a Reformation must begin sometime and whenever it begins it is certainly new So that if a real Reformation be made the thing justifies it self and no Objection of Novelty ought to take place against that which upon all accounts was so fit and necessary to be done And if they of the Church of Rome would but speak their mind out in this matter they are not so much displeased at the Reformation which we have made because it is new as because it is a Reformation It was the humour of Babylon of old as the Prophet tells us that she woud not be healed Jer. 51.9 and this is still the temper of the Church of Rome they hate to he reformed and rather than acknowledge themselves to have been once in an Error they will continue in it for ever And this is that which at first made and still continues the breach and Separation between us of which we are no-wise guilty who have onely reformed what was amiss but they who obstinately persist in their errors and will needs impose them upon us and will not let us be of their Communion unless we will say they are no Errors II. The other Prejudice against the true Religion is the contrariety of it to the vicious inclinations and practices of Men. It is too heavy a yoke and lays too great a restraint upon humane Nature And this is that which in truth lies at the bottom of all Objections against Religion Men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil But this Argument will require a Discourse by it self and therefore I shall not now enter upon it onely crave your patience a little longer whilst I make some Reflections upon what hath been already delivered You see what are the Exceptions which Idolatry and Superstition have always made and do at this day still make against the true Religion and how slight and insignificant they are But do we then charge the Church of Rome with Idolatry Our Church most certainly does so and hath always done it from the beginning of the Reformation in her Homilies and Liturgy and Canons and in the Writings of her best and ablest Champions And though I have as impartially as I could consider'd what hath been said on both sides in this Controversy yet I must confess I could never yet see any tolerable defence made by them against this heavy charge And they themselves acknowledge themselves to be greatly under the suspicion of it by saying as Cardinal Perron and others do that the Primitive Christians for some Ages did neither worship Images nor pray to Saints for fear of being thought to approach too near the Heathen Idolatry And which is yet more divers of their most learned men do confess that if Transubstantiation be not true they are as gross Idolaters as any in the World And I hope they do not expect it from us that in complement to them and to acquit them from the charge of Idolatry we should presently deny our senses and believe Transubstantiation and if we do not believe this they grant we have Reason to charge them with Idolatry But we own them to be a true Church which they cannot be if they be guilty of Idolatry This they often urge us withall and there seems at first sight to be something in it And for that reason I shall endeavour to give so clear and satisfactory an answer to it as that we may never more be troubled with it The truth is we would fain hope because they still retain the Essentials of Christianity and profess to believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith that notwithstanding their Corruptions they may still retain the true Essence of a Church as a man may be truly and really a man though he have the plague upon him and for that reason be fit to be avoided by all that wish well to themselves But if this will not do we cannot help it Therefore to push the matter home Are they sure that this is a firm and good consequence That if they be Idolaters they cannot be a true Church Then let them look to it It is they I take it that are concerned to prove themselves a true Church and not we to prove it for them And if they will not understand it of themselves it is fit they should be told that there is a great difference between Concessions of Charity and of Necessity and that a very different use ought to be made of them We are willing to think the best of them but if they dislike our Charity in this point nothing against the hair 〈◊〉 they will forgive us this Injury we will not offend them any more But rather than have any farther difference with them about this matter we will for quietness sake compound it thus That till they can clearly acquit themselves from being Idolaters they shall never more against their wills be esteemed a true Church And now to draw to a Conclusion If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord and to worship him only to pray to him alone and that only in the name
key of knowledge and shutting the Kingdom of Heaven against Men That is doing what in them lies to render it impossible for men to be saved For this he denounceth a terrible Woe against the Teachers of the Jewish Church Though they did not proceed so far as to deprive men of the use of the H. Scriptures but only of the right knowledge and understanding of them This alone is a horrible impiety to lead men into a false sense and interpretation of Scripture but much greater to forbid them the reading of it This is to stop knowledge at the very Fountain-head and not only to lead men into Errour but to take away from them all possibility of rectifying their mistakes And can there be a greater sacrilege than to rob men of the word of God the best means in the world of acquainting them with the will of God and their duty and the way to eternal happiness To keep the people in Ignorance of that which is necessary to save them is to judge them unworthy of eternal life and to declare it do's not belong to them and maliciously to contrive the eternal ruine and destruction of their Souls To lock up the Scriptures and the service of God from the people in an unknown tongue what is this but in effect to forbid men to know God and to serve him to render them incapable of knowing what is the good and acceptable will of God of joyning in his worship or performing any part of it or receiving any benefit or edification from it And what is if this be not to shut the Kingdom of Heaven against men This is so outragious a cruelty to the souls of men that it is not to be excused upon any pretence whatsoever This is to take the surest and most effectual way in the world to destroy those for whom Christ dyed and directly to thwart the great design of God our Saviour who would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth Men may misâ—â—â—ry with their knowledge but they are sure to perish for want of it The best things in the world have their inconveniences aâ—â—â—ding them and are liable to be aâ—used but surely men are not to be ruâ—â—â—d and damned for fear of abusing their knowledge or for the prevention of any other inconvenience whatsoever Besides this is to cross the very end of the Scriptures and the design of God in inspiring men to write them Can any man think that God should send this great light of his Word into the world for the Priests to hide it under a bushel and not rather that it should be set up to the greatest advantage for the enlightening of the world St. Paul tells us Rom. 15. 4. That whatsoever things were written were written for our learning that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope And 2 Tim. 3.16 That all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is prositable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness And if the Scriptures were written for these ends can any man have the face to pretend that they do not concern the people as well as their teachers Nay St. Paul expresly tells the Churâ—â— of Rome that they were written for their learning however it happens that they are not now permitted to make use of them Are the Scriptures so usefull and profitable for doctrine for reproof for instruction in righteousness and why may they not be used by the people for those ends for which they were given 'T is true indeed they are fit for the most knowing and learned and sufficient to make the man of God perfect and throughly furnished to every good work as the Apostle there tells us But do's this exclude their being profitable also to the people who may reasonably be presumed to stand much more in need of all means and helps of instruction than their Teachers And though there be many difficulties and obscurities in the Scriptures enough to exercise the skill and wit of the learned yet are they not therefore either useless or dangerous to the People The ancient Fathers of the Church were of another mind St. Chrysostome tells us that Whatever things are necessary are manifest in the Scriptures And St. Austin that all things are plain in the Scripture which concern faith and a good life and that those things which are necessary to the Salvation of men are not so hard to be come at but that as to those things which the Scripture plainly contains it speaks without disguise like a familiar friend to the heart of the learned and unlearned And upon these and such like considerations the Fathers did every where in their Orations Homilies charge and exhort the people to be conversant in the holy Scriptures to reade them daily and diligently and attentively And I challenge our Adversaries to shew me where any of the ancient Fathers do discourage the people from reading the Scriptures much less forbid them so to do So that they who do it now have no Cloak for their sin And they who pretend so confidently to Antiquity in other cases are by the evidence of truth forced to acknowledge that it is against them in this Though they have ten thousand Schoolmen on their side yet have they not one Father not the least pretence of Scripture or rag of antiquity to cover their nakedness in this point With great reason then does our Saviour denounce so heavy a Woe againd such teachers Of old in the like case God by his Prophet severely threatens the Priests of the Jewish Church for not instructing the people in the knowledge of God Hosea 4.6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge because thou hast rejected knowledge I will also reject thee thou shalt be no more a Priest to me seeing thou hast forgotten the Law of thy God I will also forget thy Children God you see lays the ruine of so many Souls at their doors and will require their blood at their hands So many as perish for want of knowledge and eternally miscarry by being deprived of the necessary means of Salvation their destruction shall be charged upon those who have taken away the key of knowledge and shut the kingdom of heaven against men And it is just with God to punish such persons not only as the occasion but as the Authours of their ruine For who can judge otherwise but that they who deprive men of the necessary means to any end do purposely design to hinder them of attaining that end And whatever may be pretended in this case to deprive men of the holy Scriptures and to keep them ignorant of the service of God and yet while they do so to make a shew of an earnest desire of their Salvation is just such a mockery as if one of you that is a master should tell his prentice how much you desire he should thrive in the world and be a rich