Graces and Virtues which concern our duty towards one another That it is the sum and abridgement the accomplishment and fulfilling of the whole Law That without this whatever we pretend to in Christianity we are nothing and our Religion is vain That this is the greatest of all Graces and Virtues greater than Faith and Hope and of perpetual use and duration Charity never fails And therefore they exhort us above all things to endeavour after it as the Crown of all other Virtues Above all things have fervent charity among your selves saith St. Peter And St. Paul having enumerated most other Christian Virtues exhorts us above all to strive after this And above all these things put on charity which is the bond of perfection This St. John makes one of the most certain signs of our love to God and the want of it an undeniable argument of the contrary If a man say I love God and hateth his brother he is a lyar for he who loveth not his brother whom he hath seen how can he love God whom he hath not seen This he declares to be one of the best evidences that we are in a state of Grace and Salvation Hereby we know that we are passed from death to life because we love the brethren So that well might our blessed Saviour chuse this for the badge of his Disciples and make it the great Precept of the best and most perfect Institution Other things might have served better for pomp and ostentation and have more gratified the Curiosity or Enthusiasm or Superstition of mankind but there is no quality in the World which upon a sober and impartial consideration is of a more solid and intrinsick value And in the first Ages of Christianity the Christians were very eminent for this Vertue and particularly noted for it Nobis notam inurit apud quosdam it is a mark and brand set upan us by some saith Tertullian and he tells us that it was proverbially said among the Heathen Behold how these Christians love one another Lucian that great scoffer at all Religion acknowledgeth in behalf of Christians that this was the great Principle which their Master had instill'd into them And Julian the bitterest Enemy that Christianity ever had could not forbear to propound to the Heathen for an example the charity of the Galileans for so by way of reproach he calls the Christians who says he gave up themselves to humanity and kindness which he acknowledgeth to have been very much to the advantage and reputation of our Religion And in the same Letter to Arsacius the Heathen High Priest of Galatia he gives this memorable Testimony of the Christians that their Charity was not limited and confin'd onely to themselves but extended even to their Enemies which could not be said either of the Jews or Heathens His words are these It is a shame that when the Jews suffer none of theirs to beg and the impious Galileans relieve not onely their own but those also of our Religion that we onely should be defective in so necessary a Duty By all which it is evident that Love and Charity is not onely the great Precept of our Saviour but was in those first and best Times the general practice of his Disciples and acknowledged by the Heathens as a very peculiar and remarkable quality in them The application I shall make of this Discourse shall be threefold 1. With relation to the Church of Rome 2. With regard to our selves who profess the Protestant Reform'd Religion 3. With a more particular respect to the occasion of this Meeting First With relation to the Church of Rome Which we cannot chuse but think of whenever we speak of Charity and loving one another especially having had so late a discovery of their affection to us and so considerable a testimony of the kindness and charity which they design'd towards us such as may justly make the ears of all that hear it to tingle and render Popery execrable and infamous a frightful and a hateful thing to the end of the World It is now but too visible how grosly this great Commandment of our Saviour is contradicted not onely by the Practices of those in that Communion from the Pope down to the meanest Fryar but by the very Doctrines and Principles by the Genius and Spirit of that Religion which is wholly calculated for cruelty and persecution Where now is that mark of a Disciple so much insisted upon by our Lord and Master to be found in that Church And yet what is the Christian Church but the Society and Community of Christs Disciples Surely in all reason that which our Lord made the distinctive Mark and Character of his Disciples should be the principal mark of a true Church Bellarmine reckons up no less than fifteen marks of the rrue Church all which the Church of Rome arrogates to her self alone But he wisely forgot that which is worth all the rest and which our Saviour insists upon as the chief of all other A sincere Love and Charity to all Christians This he knew would by no means agree to his own Church But for all that it is very reasonable that Churches as well as particular Christians should be judged by their Charity The Church of Rome would engross all Faith to her self Faith in its utmost perfection to the degree and pitch of Infallibility And they allow no body in the world besides themselves no though they believe all the Articles of the Apostles Creed to have one grain of true Faith because they do not believe upon the Authority of their Church which they pretend to be the onely foundation of true Faith This is a most arrogant and vain pretence but admit it were true yet in the Judgement of St. Paul Though they had all Faith if they have not Charity they are nothing The greatest wonder of all is this that they who hate and persecute Christians most do all this while the most confidently of all others pretend to be the Disciples of Christ and will allow none to be so but themselves That Church which excommunicates all other Christian Churches in the world and if she could would extirpate them out of the world will yet needs assume to her self to be the only Christian Church As if our Saviour had said Hereby shall all men know that ye are my Disciples if ye hate and excommunicate and kill one another What shall he done unto thee thou false tongue thou empty and impudent pretence of Christianity Secondly With relation to our seves who profess the Protestant Reformed Religion How is this great Precept of our Saviour not onely shamefully neglected but plainly violated by us And that not only by private hatred and ill-will quarrels and contentions in our civil conversation and entercourse with one another but by most unchristian divisions and animosities in that common relation wherein we stand to one another as Brethren as Christians as Protestants Have we not all one
thing because it self stands in need of another Miracle to give testimony to it and to prove that it was wrought And neither in Scripture nor in profane Authours nor in common use of speech is any thing call'd a Miracle but what falls under the notice of our senses A Miracle being nothing else but a supernatural effect evident to sense the great end and design whereof is to be a sensible proof and conviction to us of something that we do not see And for want of this Condition Transubstantiation if it were true would be no Miracle It would indeed be very supernatural but for all that it would not be a Sign or Miracle For a Sign or Miracle is always a thing sensible otherwise it could be no Sign Now that such a change as is pretended in Transubstantiation should really be wrought and yet there should be no sign and appearance of it is a thing very wonderfull but not to sense for our senses perceive no change the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament to all our senses remaining just as they were before And that a thing should remain to all appearance just as it was hath nothing at all of wonder in it we wonder indeed when we see a strange thing done but no man wonders when he sees nothing done So that Transubstantiation if they will needs have it a Miracle is such a Miracle as any man may work that hath but the confidence to face men down that he works it and the fortune to be believed And though the Church of Rome may magnify their Priests upon account of this Miracle which they say they can work every day and every hour yet I cannot understand the reason of it for when this great work as they call it is done there is nothing more appears to be done than if there were no Miracle Now such a Miracle as to all appearance is no Miracle I see no reason why a Protestant Minister as well as a Popish Priest may not work as often as he pleases or if he can but have the patience to let it alone it will work it self For surely nothing in the world is easier than to let a thing be as it is and by speaking a few words over it to make it just what it was before Every man every day may work ten thousand such Miracles And thus I have dispathc'd the First part of my Discourse which was to consider the pretended grounds and Reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine and to shew the weakness and insufficiency of them I come in the SECOND place to produce our Objections against it Which will be of so much the greater force because I have already shewn this Doctrine to be destitute of all Divine warrant and authority and of any other sort of Ground sufficient in reason to justify it So that I do not now object against a Doctrine which hath a fair probability of Divine Revelation on its side for that would weigh down all objections which did not plainly overthrow the probability and credit of its Divine Revelation But I object against a Doctrine by the mere will and Tyranny of men impos'd upon the belief of Christians without any evidence of Scripture and against all the evidence of Reason and Sense The Objection I shall reduce to these two Heads First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And Secondly The monstrous and insupportable absurdity of it First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And that upon these four accounts 1. Of the stupidity of this Doctrine 2. The real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine 3. Of the cruel and bloudy consequences of it 4. Of the danger of Idolatry which they are certainly guilty of if this Doctrine be not true 1. Upon account of the stupidity of this Doctrine I remember that Tully who was a man of very good sense instanceth in the conceit of eating God as the extremity of madness and so stupid an apprehension as he thought no man was ever guilty of * De Nat. Deorum l. 3. When we call says he the fruits of the earth Ceres and wine Bacchus we use but the common language but do you think any man so mad as to believe that which he eats to be God It seems he could not believe that so extravagant a folly had ever entred into the mind of man It is a very severe saying of Averroes the Arabian Philosopher who lived after this Doctrine was entertained among Christians and ought to make the Church or Rome blush * Dionys Carthus in 4. dist 10. art 1. if she can I have travell'd says he over the world and have found divers Sects but so sottish a Sect or Law I never found as is the Sect of the Christians because with their own teeth they devour their God whom they worship It was great stupidity in the People of Israel to say Come let us make us Gods but it was civilly said of them Let us make us Gods that may go before us in comparison of the Church of Rome who say Let us make a God that we may eat him So that upon the whole matter I cannot but wonder that they should chuse thus to expose Faith to the contempt of all that are endued with Reason And to speak the plain truth the Christian Religion was never so horribly exposed to the scorn of Atheists and Infidels as it hath been by this most absurd and senseless Doctrine But thus it was foretold that †2 Thess 2.10 the Man of Sin should come with Power and Signs and Lying Miracles and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness with all the Legerdemain and jugling tricks of falshood and imposture amongst which this of Transubstantiation which they call a Miracle and we a Cheat is one of the chief And in all probability those common jugling words of hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus by way of ridiculous imitation of the Priests of the Church of Rome in their trick of Transubstantiation Into such contempt by this foolish Doctrine and pretended Miracle of theirs have they brought the most sacred and venerable Mystery of our Religion 2. It is very scandalous likewise upon account of the real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine Literally to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud St. Austin as I have shewed before declares to be a great Impiety And the impiety and barbarousness of the thing is not in truth extenuated but onely the appearance of it by its being done under the Species of Bread and Wine For the thing they acknowledge is really done and they believe that they verily eat and drink the natural flesh and bloud of Christ And what can any man do more unworthily towards his
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
time I 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
Virtue is Vice and Vice Virtue he would hereby take away the very foundation of Religion and how can I look upon him any longer as a Judg in matters of Religion when there can be no such thing as Religion if he have judged and determined right Secondly The Scripture plainly allows this liberty to particular and private Persons to judg for themselves And for this I need go no farther than my Text which bids men try the Spirits whether they be of God I do not think this is spoken only to the Pope or a General Council but to Christians in general for to these the Apostle writes Now if St. John had believed that God had constituted an infallible Judge in his Church to whose Sentence and Determination all Christians are bound to submit he ought in all reason to have referred Christians to him for the trial of Spirits and not have left it to every man's private judgment to examine and to determine these things But it seems St. Paul was likewise of the same mind and though he was guided by an infallible Spirit yet he did not expect that men should blindly submit to his Doctrine Nay so far is he from that that he commends the Bereans for that very thing for which I dare say the Church of Rome would have check'd them most severely namely for searching the Scriptures to see whether those things which the Apostles delivered were so or not This liberty St. Paul allowed and though he was inspired by God yet he treated those whom he taught like men And indeed it were a hard case that a necessity of believing Divine Revelations and rejecting Impostures should be imposed upon Christians and yet the liberty of judging whether a Doctrine be from God or not should be taken away from them Thirdly Our Adversaries themselves are forced to grant that which in effect is as much as we contend for For though they deny a liberty of judging in particular points of Religion yet they are forced to grant men a liberty of judging upon the whole When they of the Church of Rome would perswade a Jew or a Heathen to become a Christian or a Heretick as they are pleased to call us to come over to the Communion of their Church and offer Arguments to induce them thereto they do by this very thing whether they will or no make that man Judge which is the true Church and the true Religion Because it would be ridiculous to perswade a man to turn to their Religion and to urge him with Reasons to do so and yet to deny him the use of his own judgement whether their Reasons be sufficient to move him to make such a change Now as the Apostle reasons in another case If men be fit to judge for themselves in so great and important a matter as the choice of their Religion why should they be thought unworthy to judge in lesser matters They tell us indeed that a man may use his judgement in the choice of his Religion but when he hath once chosen he is then for ever to resign up his judgment to their Church But what tolerable reason can any man give why a man should be fit to judge upon the whole and yet unfit to judge upon particular Points especially if it be considered that no man can make a discreet judgment of any Religion before he hath examined the particular Doctrines of it and made a judgment concerning them Is it credible that God should give a man judgment in the most fundamental and important matter of all viz. To discern the true Religion and the true Church from the false for no other end but to enable him to chuse once for all to whom he should resign and inslave his judgment for ever which is just as reasonable as if one should say That God hath given a man eyes for no other end but to look out once for all and to pitch upon a discreet person to lead him about blindfold all the days of his life I come now to the III. Thing I propounded which is To Answer the main Objection of our Adversaries against this Principle and likewise to shew that there is no such Reason and necessity for an universal Insallible Judge as they pretend Now their great Objection is this If every man may judge for himself there will be nothing but confusion in Religion there will be no end of Controversies so that an universal infallible Judge is necessary and without this God had not made sufficient provision for the assurance of men's Faith and for the Peace and unity of his Church Or as it is expressed in the Canon Law aliter Dominus non videretur fuisse discretus otherwise our Lord had not seem'd to be discreet How plausible soever this Objection may appear I do not despair but if men will lay aside prejudice and impartially consider things to make it abundantly evident that this ground is not sufficient to found an Infallible Judge upon And therefore in answer to it I desire these following particulars may be considered Firft That this which they say rather proves what God should have done according to their fancy than what he hath really and actually done My Text expresly bids Christians to try the Spirits which to any man's sense does imply that they may judge of these matters But the Church of Rome says they may not because if this liberty were permitted God had not ordered things wisely and for the best for the peace and unity of his Church But as the Apostle says in another case What art thou O man that objectest against God Secondly If this reasoning be good we may as well conclude that there is an universal infallible Judge set over the whole world in all Temporal matters to whose Authority all mankind is bound to submit Because this is as necessary to the peace of the World as the other is to the peace of the Church And men surely are every whit as apt to be obstinate and perverse about matters of Temporal Right as about matters of Faith But it is evident in fact and experience that there is no such universal Judge appointed by God over the whole World to decide all Cases of temporal Right and for want of him the World is fain to shift as well as it can But now a very acute and scholastical man that would argue that God must needs have done whatever he fancies convenient for the World should be done might by the very same way of Reasoning conclude the necessity of an universal infallible Judge in Civil matters as well as in matters of Religion And their aliter Dominus non videretur fuisse discretus otherwise God had not seem'd to be discreet is every whit as cogent and as civil in the one Case as the other Thirdly There is no need of such a Judge to assure men in matters of Religion Because men be sufficiently certain without him I hope it may be certain
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
rather desires if it may be to be of the number of those who shall be found alive at the coming of Christ and have this mortal and corruptible body while they are clothed with it changed into a spiritual and incorruptible body without the pain and terrour of dying of which immediate translation into heaven without the painfull divorce of soul and body by death Enoch and Elias were examples in the old Testament It follows ver 5. Now he that hath wrought for us the self same thing is God That is it is he who hath fitted and prepared us for this Glorious change who also hath given us the earnest of the Spirit The Spirit is frequently in Scripture called the witness and seal and earnest of our future happiness and blessed resurrection or change of these vile and earthly bodies into spiritual and heavenly bodies For as the resurrection of Christ from the dead by the power of the holy Ghost is the great proof and evidence of immortality so the spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelling in us is the pledge and earnest of our Resurrection to an immortal life From all which the Apostle concludes in the words of the Text Therefore we are always confident that is we are always of good courage against the fear of death knowing that whilst we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may better be rendred whilst we converse or sojourn in the body than whilst we are at home Because the design of the Apostle is to shew that the body is not our house but our tabernacle and that whilst we are in the body we are not at home but pilgrims and strangers And this notion the Heathens had of our present life and condition in this world Ex vita discedo faith Tully tanquam ex hospitio non tanquam ex domo commorandi enim natura diversorium nobis non habitandi locum dedit We go out of this life as it were from an Inn and not from our home nature having designed it to us as a place to sojourn but not to dwell in We are absent from the Lord that is we are detained from the blessed sight and enjoyment of God and kept out of the possession of that happiness which makes Heaven So that the Apostle makes an immediate opposition between our continuance in the body and our blissfull enjoyment of God and lays it down for a certain truth that whilst we remain in the body we are detained from our happiness and that so soon as ever we leave the body we shall be admitted into it knowing that whilst we converse in the body we are absent from the Lord. And ver 8. we are willing rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord intimating that so soon as we quit these bodies we shall be admitted to the blessed sight and enjoyment of God My design from this Text is to draw some useful Corollaries or Conclusions from this Assertion of the Apostle That whilst we are in these bodies we are detained from our happiness and that so soon as ever we depart out of them we shall be admitted to the possession and enjoyment of it And they are these 1. This Assertion shews us the vanity and falshood of that Opinion or rather dream concerning the sleep of the Soul from the time of death till the general Resurrection This is chiefly grounded upon that frequent Metaphor in Scripture by which death is resembled to sleep and those that are dead are said to be fallen asleep But this Metaphor is no where in Scripture that I know of applied to the soul but to the body resting in the grave in order to its being awakened and raised up at the Resurrection And thus it is frequently used with express reference to the body Dan. 12.2 Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake Matth. 27.52 And the graves were opened and many bodies of saints which slept arose Acts 13.36 David after he had served his own generation by the will of God fell on sleep and was laid to his fathers and saw corruption which surely can no otherwise be understood than of his body 1 Cor. 15.21 Now is Christ risen from the dead and become the first-fruits of them that slept that is the resurrection of his body is the earnest and assurance that ours also shall be raised And ver 51. We shall not all sleep but shall all be changed where the Apostle certainly speaks both of the death and change of these corruptible bodies 1 Thessal 4.14 If we believe that Jesus died and rose again even so them also that sleep in Jesus shall God bring with him That is the bodies of those that died in the Lord shall be raised and accompany him at his coming So that it is the body which is said in Scripture to sleep and not the soul For that is utterly inconsistent with the Apostles Assertion here in the Text that while we are in the body we are absent from the Lord and that so soon as we depart out of the body we shall be present with the Lord. For surely to be with the Lord must signifie a state of happiness which sleep is not but only of inactivity Besides that the Apostle's Argument would be very flat and it would be but a cold encouragement against the fear of death that so soon as we are dead we shall fall asleep and become insensible But the Apostle useth it as an Argument why we should be willing to dye as soon as God pleaseth and the sooner the better because so soon as we quit these bodies we shall be present with the Lord that is admitted to the blissful sight and enjoyment of him and while we abide in the body we are detained from our happiness But if our souls shall sleep as well as our bodies till the general Resurrection it is all one whether we continue in the body or not as to any happiness we shall enjoy in the mean time which is directly contrary to the main scope of the Apostle's Argument 2. This Assertion of the Apostle's doth perfectly conclude against the feigned Purgatory of the Church of Rome which supposeth the far greater number of true and faithful Christians of those who dye in the Lord and have obtained eternal redemption by him from hell not to pass immediately into a state of happiness but to be detained in the suburbs of Hell in extremity of torment equal to that of hell for degree though not for duration till their fouls be purged and the guilt of temporal punifhments which they are liable to be some way or other paid off and discharged They suppose indeed some very few holy persons especially those who suffer Martyrdom to be so perfect at their departure out of the body as to pass immediately into Heaven because they need no purgation But most Christians they
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
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
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
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