/ _^_,_ 
 
 -- — — .-- .^ ~ ^ ^ 
 
 ^:^ ot 5^3 2.^. ^:^ i:^. ^2- ' 
 
 OK TUK 
 AT 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 SAMUEL AGNEW, 
 
 UK 1" H 1 L A r> K I. P H I i , PA. 
 
 Tl^cwaJ^ J^r&§^S~, 
 
 
 'i 
 
 ^^-^ 
 
 ^_-v4-^,<2 
 
 
 
 -e4l 
 
 Division, 
 
 ■|) rvf.sv:, 
 
 *' HheJj\ Sectien || 
 
 l' Booh% No, 
 
 S3^! 
 
 5C^ 
 
 ^^7^4 - 
 
:% --^ -:vA-i^ 
 
.. MkS" 
 
SERMONS 
 
 ^y~^^ A G A I N S T(Cr-fi.n^f// y^aj 
 
 POPER^. 
 
 P R E A C H ' D 
 
 In the Reign of King JAMES II. 
 
 And other Papers wrote in the 
 POPISH CONTROVERSY. 
 
 By Dr. JOHN S HARP, 
 
 Then Red:or of St. Giles s in the Fields, and 
 late Lord Arch-Bifhop of Y o r k. 
 
 Never before Printed, and now Pubhfhed 
 from His Own MSS. 
 
 VOL. VII. and Laft. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed for W. Parker, at the Kijtgs 
 Head in St. PWs Church-vard, 
 MDCCXXXV. ' 
 
T O T H E 
 
 READER. 
 
 N the Preface to the 
 Two Volumes of Arch-Bi- 
 Jljop SharpV TVorh^ which 
 were lately pri72tedy 7?ie7t- 
 tlon is mcide of 2i (mall Refer ve of 
 Difcourfes in the Popiflh Controverfy 
 which might poffibly, fome time or 
 other, be publidied with other of his 
 Papers relating to that Controverfy. 
 
 When that Preface was w?'ote^ the 
 Editor had not deter?nined with 
 himfelf whether this Collet ion p:)oidd 
 ever come abroad or no. M,uch lefs 
 had he any Appreherfions that he 
 fhould^ infofhort a 7'imey commit it 
 to the Frefs, For he looked iipon 
 that Difpute as out of vogue^ and 
 little attended to ; a7id alfo cojifider- 
 edy that the JVriti7igs of the Prote- 
 fiafit Divines i7i the Reigns of 
 A 2 ^^^g 
 
ii To the Reader. 
 
 King Charles, and King James IL 
 were very Numerous as well as Ex- 
 celle72t : and therefore that thefe Dif- 
 courfes (though properly enough a 
 Part of the Popifh Controversy) 
 would feem ftiperfluous a7td unfeafo- 
 nable. And under thefe Reajojis he 
 was dfpofed to acquiefce^ had not the 
 late Atte7iipts of the Roman Catho- 
 licks /;/ and about London, give?t 
 Qccafion to revive the negleSied Dif- 
 pute^ a?2d to put Me?t upon a Re- 
 view of the Subje&s in Debate be- 
 tween the Church of England, ajid 
 the Church of Rome. 'This he 
 thought a feaJo?table junBure for 
 bringing to light the following Trea- 
 tifes, which has been Jupprejfed above 
 Fifty TearSj and perhaps might air- 
 ways have co7ttinued fo^ if fome fuch 
 Reafon as this had not accide72tally 
 offered it f elf to uper the7n into the 
 World, 
 
 They are ally or 7nofl of the7n^ de- 
 fgnedly calculated for the Ufe of the 
 unlearned P7''otefiant, The Author 
 
 of 
 
To the Reader. iii 
 
 of them had the Care of 077e of the 
 laf^gefl Pari floes 171 London, duri?tg 
 the whole T'wie the late Popifli Con- 
 troverfy was on Foot, He was per- 
 feSily well acquahtted with the Sub- 
 tilties of the Popifli Divines, aiid 
 htew by abimdaiit Experience among 
 his own PariJIjionerSy what were 
 the Pri?2cipal Difficulties that the 
 hife7^ior Sort laboured under, fro7n 
 the fallacious and i72fdious Peijuafl- 
 ons and htfmuations of thofe who 
 flrove to pcT'vert the7n. What he 
 wrote therefore^ a?2d is 7:ow publifj- 
 ed^ was purpofely contrived as a pre- 
 fe7it Antidote to the Mi f chiefs at- 
 te7npted ajn072ghis Flock, For which 
 Reafon he e7iterd as little as poffible 
 ^iipon the Learned or Hiftorical Part 
 of the Controverfy (as will be obferved^ 
 though he was very capable of dif 
 chargi7ig that part of it with Succejs) 
 hut co7fnd hifnfelf chiefly to thoje 
 Points which were more immediate- 
 ly necejjary to guard the TVeak fro7n 
 the Sophiflry of the Jcfuits, and to re- 
 lieve 
 
iv To the Reader. 
 
 tieve and deliver the Unwary^ who were 
 already entangled in their Snares. 
 
 With this view he hath formed 
 his Argwneiits fo plain ^ and made his 
 Chaifi of Reafo7ii72g upon them fo na- 
 tural a7id fo familiar^ that they 
 appear to he adapted to the Taft as 
 well as the Capacities of Ordinary 
 Chriftians. So7nethin7 there is like- 
 
 o 
 
 wife to the Taft of the Party he op- 
 pofes ; fuch of the77t at leaf as have 
 any Taji of Beauty and Excellence 
 in writi7ig up07i co77troverted Poi72ts ^ 
 viz. "The Calm77efs and 'Tejnper where- 
 with he engages them^ and the fpe~ 
 cial Care he always takes, 7tever to 
 calunmiate or 7nijreprefe7tt the77t. He 
 was wo77t to fay hi77ifelf That in his 
 Sermons againft the Papists he 
 had ahvays dealt honeftly and fairly 
 with them, charging them with no- 
 thing but what their Church 
 openly avowed in her Creed, and 
 Councils, and Publick Offices. 
 Which Cafidour of Temper and Equi- 
 ty of ConduEl'i i7i a7iy Co?itrov&rfy^ tho 
 
 it 
 
To the Reader. 
 
 ii be not always the readiejl Means of 
 working upon the Vulgar', yet caimot 
 Jail of havi?ig a great Influe?tce up07t 
 all fer ions and well-n7ea7ting People, 
 
 He was often prejfed by his Friends 
 to print thefe Difcourfes hifnfelf. 
 But he declined it. When he was fol- 
 licited to do fo about the I'ime of tha 
 Revolution^ or foon after ity he gave 
 for an Anfwer^ that the Danger 
 was then over, and the Defign of 
 them was fuperfeded ; and that to 
 Publifli them at that Time would 
 only look like making his Court. 
 
 And it doth not appear that at 
 any 'Tijne afterwards he regarded 
 them^ or meddled with them^ fur- 
 ther than to correEi and tranfcribe 
 one or two of them which he preached 
 at York, i7i order to check foine At- 
 tempts that the Popijh Priefls were 
 fufpeEled and reported to have 7nade 
 in that Neighbourhood. One of thefe 
 was that remarkable Sermo7i which 
 upon the Firfi Delivery of it in his 
 Parijlj Qhurch at London, in 1686, 
 A 4 had 
 
vi To the Reader. 
 
 had drawn upon hitn the Difpleafure 
 of King James and his Courts and 
 had give?! Occajion to the Order 
 that was fen t to Dr. Compton, then 
 Bijhcp of London, to fufpend him^ 
 which brought on the Troubles of 
 that Prelate fro77t the Eclefiaftical 
 Com million. But whereas in his 
 'Tra7ifcript of this Difcourfe^ upo?i 
 the Revifal of //, that Paffagc which 
 was fuppofed to be moft offenfive and 
 obnoxious, was entirely left out^ (af 
 being a particular Aitfwer to a cer- 
 tain Argument that had been fip'd 
 i72to his Hand in St Giles's Church, 
 as he fuppofed^ by way of Challenge, 
 and which therefore could not per- 
 tine?2tly be repeated when he preached 
 the fame Sermon^ above Twenty Tears 
 after^ at his own Cathedral) there- 
 fore recourfe was had for that Faffage 
 to the Firfi or Original Copy. And 
 whereas the other differences betweeit 
 the two Copies did ?tot appear to be 
 material^ but to confijl rather in Cor- 
 7:eBio?z of Exprejpons and StiUy than 
 
 of 
 
To the Reader. vii 
 
 of the Matter or Argujnents, it was 
 judged mojl advifable to follow the 
 Firjl Copy altogether in this Editiorz ; 
 •f both for the fatisfa8iio7i of the 
 Reader^ whofe Curiofty would he 
 better gratified with a true aiid faith- 
 ful Reprefentatio?i of the very fame 
 Sermon that produced the Effe&s a- 
 bovementioned '^ a?td alfo to vi7id id- 
 eate the Author oj it^ from the tm- 
 jufi RefleBions of Father Orleans 
 tipon ity who knowing nothi?tg of the 
 Contents of it^ charged it arbitrarily 
 and upon hear fay ; and likewife (for 
 that was a?iother Co7ifederation worth 
 regarding) to 7?take it of a Piece 
 with all the refiy which are now 
 Publijhed jro7n the firfl Hand^ and 
 without E7?te?2dation of any ki?2dy 
 fince the T'ifne they were preach' d in 
 St. Giles's Pulpit. With this only 
 
 f Serm. VI. A DifcuJJior. cfthe ^ejlion which the Roman 
 Catholic ks fnoji infift upon zviih the Pntefiants, viz. in which 
 ttf the different Communions in ChriJlcnJom the only true Church 
 ofChrijl is to be found. With a Refutation of a certain Popijb 
 Argument barided about in MS. Anns i6S6. 
 
 Excep' 
 
mil To the Reader. 
 
 'Exceptlony that what were two Ser- 
 mons, upon 2 Pet. iii. 1 6. appear now 
 only as one. And whereas the Ser^ 
 
 '^■monupon Auricular -Confeffion was 
 conneEied with others upon the fame 
 Yexty which were lately printed in the 
 Fifth Volume under the 'Title of Con- 
 feflion af Sins neceflary to Repen- 
 tance, P. 1 9 1 . it heca772e unavoidable 
 both there and here to omit as much 
 as ferved only to fjew the Connexion 
 between the7n^ and %vhich therefore 
 
 . CQuld have no Place i?i their prefent. 
 State of Separation, 
 
 TJjefe were Liberties which'Dx, Bar- 
 
 'ker owns he made no Scruple of ta- 
 ki?ig with the Pofthumous Sermons 
 of Arch-Bifhop Tillotfon, whofe Au~ 
 
 ' thority he alfo pleads for doing fo, 
 ihe- Editor hopes he may he mdulged 
 in the fame Liberty^ having 7iever 
 ufed it hut when he judged it ?iecef' 
 far% and even then withont altering 
 the Senfe^ and with as little change 
 to the Words as pofftbk. 
 
 And 
 
To the Reader. ix 
 
 And 7WW the Reader has all befof^e 
 him that is requijite for his Infor ~ 
 matio7i concerning thefe Sermo?ts. If 
 he fhall not find them fo finiped and 
 correB as thofe already prijtted^ ha 
 will k?20w where to afcribe the DefeEl, 
 An Lnptitatio?t of Rafhnefs in the 
 Publijljer of them-, grounded on this 
 Reafon ojtly^ will not much affeSi him^ 
 'provided his foh Aim in the Publi- 
 cation be anfwerd^ which is the 
 preferring fome People^ i?ito whofe 
 Hands they may fall .^ from the Errors 
 of Popery, arideflaUifding them 7norc 
 fir??2ly in the Communion of the 
 Church of England. Once they coji- 
 tributed very much to this good End, 
 And it is not unreafonable to expeSi 
 they may dofo again. And as it is 
 certain that Dr. Sharp owed to thetn 
 much of his Reputation in the laft 
 Age, fo it is pref timed they inay be 
 received with fome degree of Appro^ 
 hat ion i?i the prefe?tt : atleafl'tishoped^ 
 That what tended fo e7?ti7iently to ad- 
 vanQe his Credit then, will not turn to 
 
 the 
 
To the Reader. 
 
 the Difadvantage of his Memory now* 
 7he clofing the ColleEiion of his Works 
 with his earliefl Performa7tces^ is 
 not unprecedented^ neither can itfeefit 
 improper to co?7clud his Remains with 
 thofe Pieces which firjl ferved to raife 
 his CharaEler iit the World. 
 
 As concerfting the Papers fub jo i?ied 
 in the ylppe?tdix^ their Relatio?: to 
 the SuhjeEi of the Sermons to which 
 they are annexed mufl fpcak their 
 Propriety. The Firfi is a Reply to 
 a Letter from a Gentlewoman who 
 had lately fallen into the hands of 
 Dr. Crofs (a Jellnt, Author of tlie 
 Contemplations of the Virgin, and of 
 fo??ie other Popip Books.) Mrs. Kinges- 
 miliV Letter is printed from the 
 Original^ a7id the Aifwer from a 
 Copy ofit^ of Dr. SharpV owjz writing ; 
 As all the other Papers that follow, are 
 likewife fouftd under his ow?i Ha7id, 
 'They may have their Ufe, at leafi as 
 there are hut few of the^n^ the Pub- 
 licatio?^ of the^n at this Time will 
 deferve no Cenfure. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
Jl% J?«. J)^^. -SM.JM-- £^^Jl% 
 
 COxN TENTS 
 
 O F. T H E 
 
 Seventh Volume. 
 
 F 
 
 SERMON I. Page I. 
 
 AITH and Reafon reconcil'd : Or, no- 
 thing to be believed in Religion but what 
 it may be proved from Principles of 
 Reafon, that it ought to be believed. 
 
 I P E T. iii. Part of the 15th Verfe. 
 Be ready always to give an Anjwer to 
 
 every Man that asketh you a Reafon of the 
 Hope that h in you. 
 
 5ERM. II. p. 25. 
 
 Every Man to judge for himfelf in Things 
 neceifary to Salvation. The different Ways 
 prefcribed by the Roman Catholicks^ and 
 the Protejlants, for the coming to the true 
 Faith, compared. 
 
 I PET. 
 
Contents. 
 
 The fecond Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 iPET. iii. 15. 
 
 . Be ready always to give an Anfwer to 
 
 every Man that asketh you a Reajon of the 
 Hope that is iiryou. 
 
 SERM. III. p. 42. 
 
 Concerning the Infallibility of the Church. 
 Which being admitted in the Senfc oi the 
 Roman Catholicks, would not anfwer the 
 Ends they propofe to ferve by it. 
 
 I'he third Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 1 PET. iii. 15. 
 
 Be ready always to give an Afifwer to 
 
 every Man that asketh you a Reajon of the 
 Hope that is in you. 
 
 SERM. IV. p. 66. 
 
 That the Scriptures may be underftood in 
 all neceflary Points by private Perfbns, 
 with ordinary Helps, without an infalli- 
 ble Interpreter of their Senfe j and there- 
 fore not Co be denied to the common 
 People. 
 
 2 PET. iii. 16. 
 
 In which are fome things hard to be iin- 
 
 derjloody which they that are unlearned and 
 iinjlable wreji, as they do alfo the other 
 ScripttireSj unto their own deftruBion. 
 
 SERM. 
 
C.ONTENTS. 
 
 S E R M. V. p. 102. 
 
 The Number of the Sacraments afcertalncd. 
 Of the Church. The only Scripture No- 
 tion of it. Wherein coniifts the Unity 
 of the CathoHck Church. Reflexions 
 thereupon. 
 
 I Cor. xii. 13. 
 
 For i?y one Spirit we are ail baptifed into one 
 Body\ whether we be Jews or Gentiles, 
 whether we be bond or free ^ and have been 
 all made to dri?ik into one Spirit. 
 
 SERM. VI. p. 123. 
 
 A DiJ'cufpon of the ^eftion which the Roman 
 Catholicks much injiji upon with the Prote- 
 ftants, '■ciz. In which of the different 
 Communions in Chrillendom, the only 
 true Church of Chrift is to be found ? 
 
 With a 'Refutation of a certain PopiQi Argu- 
 ment handed about in M.S. in 1686. 
 
 The fecond Sennon upon the fame Text. 
 
 I COR. xii. 13. 
 
 JFor by one Spirit we are all baptifed into one 
 Bodyy whether we be Jews or Gentiles, 
 whether we be bond or free^ and have been 
 all made tQ drink into one Spirit. 
 
 SERM. 
 
Contents. 
 
 S E R M. VII. p. 148. 
 
 The Popifii and Proteftant Doctrines con- 
 cerning Confeflion, explained and com- 
 pared. And the Popifh Do6lrine of Au- 
 ricular Confeffion, proved not to be the 
 Dodrine of Scripture and the antient 
 Church. 
 
 P R O V. xxviii. 13. 
 
 He that covereth his Sms fiall not pro/per. 
 But whofo confejfeth them^ and forfaketh 
 them ^ Jlo all jind Mercy. 
 
 S E R M. VIII. p. 175. 
 
 Againfl: the Dodrines of the Church of 
 Kome^ concerning Satisfactions, and Pur- 
 gatory. 
 
 The fecond Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 P R O V. xxviii. 13. 
 
 He that covereth his Sins /hall not pro/per. 
 But whofo confefffith them^ and forfaketh 
 them^ fhall find Mercy, 
 
 SERM. IX. p. 196. 
 
 Againft other Corruptions and Innovations 
 in the Popifli Dodlrine concerning Re- 
 pentance. 
 
 The 
 
Contents. 
 
 The third Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 PROV.xxviii. 13. 
 
 He that covereth his Sins jlmll not pro/per. 
 But whofo cmfejjeth them, and forfaketh 
 them J jJmlljind Mercy. 
 
 SERM. X. p. 215. 
 
 Abufes and Corruptions of the Church of 
 Rome^ in the Sacrament of the Lord's 
 Supper. Firji, In their private MalTes, 
 or Prieft's receiving alone. Secondly^ In 
 their Denial of the Cup to the Laity, 
 
 1 COR. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that which I 
 aljb delivered to you^ that the Lord J ejus, 
 the fame Night in which he was betray d, 
 took Bread: 
 
 And when he had given T^hanks, he brake it, 
 andfaid, take, eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the fame manner alfo he took the Cup, 
 when he had fupped, faying. This Cup ts 
 the New Teftament in my Blood : This do 
 ye, as eft as ye drink it, in remembranci 
 of me* 
 
 ^ SERM 
 
Contents. 
 
 SERM. XI. p. 244. 
 
 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 The fecond Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 I COR. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that which 
 I alfo deliver d to yoti, that the Lord Jefus^ 
 the fame Night in which he was betray dy 
 took Bread : 
 
 And when he had given T^hanh^ he brake it^ 
 andfaid, take^ eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the jame manner aljo he took the Cup^ 
 
 when he had flipped:, f^j^^S,r ^^^^ ^^P ^^ 
 the New Tef anient in my Blood : ^his do 
 ye^ as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 SERM. XII. p. 267. 
 Concerning Tranfubftantiation. 
 
 The third Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 I COR.xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that which 
 1 alfo deliver d to you, that the Lord Jejus^ 
 the fame Night in which he was betray dy 
 took Bread: 
 
 And 
 
Contents. 
 
 And when he had given Thanks, he brake it^ 
 and/aid, take, eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the fame manner alfo he took the Cup, 
 when he had Jiipped, faying. This Cup is 
 the New Tefiament in my Blood : This do 
 ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance 
 of me, 
 
 SERM. XIII. p. 294. 
 
 The ufual Plea or Apology for Tranfubflan- 
 tiation, anfwer'd. 
 
 The fourth Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 iCOR. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that ichich 
 I aljb deliver d to you, that the Lord jfus, 
 the fame Night in which he was betray a, 
 took bread: 
 
 And when be had given Thanks, he brake it, 
 andfaid, take, eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the fame manner alfo he took the Cup, 
 when he had juppcd, faying. This Cup is 
 the New Teflamcnt in my Blood : This do 
 ye, as ojt as ye drink it, in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 SERM. 
 
C-ONTENTS. 
 
 SERM. XIV. p. 317. 
 Concerning the Adoration of the Hoft. 
 
 The fifth Sermon upon the fame Text. 
 
 I COR. xi. 23, 24, 26. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that 'which 
 I alj'o deliver d to yoiiy that the Lord yeJuSy 
 the fame Night in which he was betray d, 
 took Bread: 
 
 And when he had given Thanks^ he brake it, 
 and /aid, take^ eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the fame 7nanner alfo he took the Cup, 
 when he had flipped, faying, This Cup is 
 the New Teftament in my Blood: This do 
 ye, as oft as ye drink it^ in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 SERM. XV. p. 344. 
 
 The Hxth Chapter of St. John doth not favour 
 the Popifh Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation: 
 And the Senfe of the Church of Englajid^ as 
 to the real Prefence in the Eucharift. 
 
 JOHN vi. 53. 
 
 Then jfefus faith tmto them, verily, I Jay unto you, 
 except ye eat the FleP^ of the Son of Man, and 
 drink his Blood, ye have no Life in you. 
 
 SERMON 
 
SERMON I. 
 
 Faith ajjcl Reafo?t reconciled : Or^ 7io~ 
 thincr to be believed in Religioii but 
 what it ntay be proved from Prin- 
 ciples of Reafon^ that it ought to 
 he believed. 
 
 I P E T . iii. Part of the 15th Verfe. 
 Be ready always to give an Anjhver to 
 
 every Man that asketh you a Reajbn of the 
 Hope that is in you. 
 
 FI E Hope that is here fa id to be 
 in Chrillians, and of which they 
 are to be ready to give an Ac- 
 count, is without doubt nothing 
 elfe but that Faith, or that Do- 
 ctrine, or that Rehgion which theChriftians 
 do profefs, and upon which their Hope of 
 
 In this figurative 
 
 another Life is grounded. 
 Vol. VII, 
 
 B 
 
 Senfe 
 
2 Faith and Reafon 
 
 Senfc is the Word us'd in other places of 
 Scripture, particularly in the 26th oi Athy 
 ver. vi. where the Hope for which St. Faul 
 is accus'd of the 'Jews^ is plainly the Chri- 
 ftian Dcdrine, and particularly that Part of 
 it which concerned the Refurre6lion of the 
 Dead. 
 
 This then is the plain Meaning of the 
 Precept in my Text ; That all Christians 
 fliould fo far inquire into the Grounds of 
 that Religion which they profefs, and upon 
 which they bottom their Plopes as to be rea- 
 dy and prepared ar any time (when they 
 are called upon to do it) to give a reafona- 
 ble Account of it ; fuch an Account as may 
 fatisfy any unprejudic'd Mind that they a61: 
 like rational Men in believing, and profef- 
 fing as they do. Be ready always to give an 
 AnJ'wer to every Man that asketh you a Rea~ 
 Jon of the Hope that is in you -y that is, be pre- 
 pared and inftrud:ed at all times to give a 
 iiuisfaclory Account of your Faith and Re- 
 ligion to all fuch as {hall at any time call in 
 queftion the Reafonablenefs of it. 
 
 This being the Senfe of the Text, two 
 Points very neccffary in thej'e Times we may 
 Preach'd obicrve ffom it. 
 
 in 1637. 
 
 Fi7Ji of all that Faith and Reafon are not 
 inconfiftent one with another, but may well 
 fland together. Whatever we are obliged 
 to believe in Matters of Religion, we are 
 by this Precept obliged to be able to give a 
 
 Reafon 
 
reconciled in Religion, 
 
 lleafon for ; or to give an Account of the 
 Reajhnabkmj's of that Belief. And therefore 
 certainly we are not obliged to believe any 
 thing that is unreajbnabk^ or that we cannot 
 give a Reafon for our believing ic. 
 
 The Second Point to be obferved from 
 hence is, That it is not enough that our 
 Faith, or Hope, or Religion be reafonable in 
 itfclf, but it is the Duty of every ProfeiTor 
 of that Faith fo to fatisfy himfelf of the 
 Keafonablenej's of it, as to be able to a?2fwer 
 them that ask a Reafon for it. And therefore 
 every Man not only may, but ought to en- 
 quire into his Religion, and not io to rely 
 on the Authority and Judgment of other 
 Men, as to fwallov/, without examination, 
 every thing that they propofe to him. 
 
 Thefe two Points are plainly contained In 
 the Text, and accordingly I (hall make them 
 tiie Heads of my Difcourfe upon it. 
 
 I. The Tirjl Point is this ; That Reafon 
 and Faith are not inconfiftent. Or this ; 
 The Religion we profefs is no unreafonable 
 thing. On the contrary in all the Parts of 
 it, it is fuch as recommends itfelf to the 
 Reafon of Mankind ; in all the Parts of it, 
 it is fuch ac we may be able to give a Rea- 
 fin for. 
 
 The not attending to this Point hath done 
 much Milchief to Religion j for it hath been 
 
 B 2 the 
 
4 Faith a7id Reafon 
 
 the Occafion that many abfard Dodtrine?^ 
 have been introduced into it, which per- 
 chance if this Propolicion had been conli- 
 dered, would never have found Entertain- 
 ment in the World. They have done no 
 kindnefs at all to our Religion, but rather a 
 great deal of diilervice to it, who have made 
 Faith and Reafon two things oppofite one 
 to the other j maintaining this abfurd Pofi- 
 tion, That our Reafon was fo much of a 
 different Nature from our Faith, that it ought 
 never to be confulted, much lefs to be heard 
 when Faith was concerned : Nay, any 
 thing that was propofed to us as a Matter 
 of Faith, was fo much the more to be be- 
 lieved, becaufe it was contrary to our Rea- 
 fon. And if we can once attain to that 
 pitch of Virtue, as ftrongly to believe things 
 impoflible in human Reafon, our Faith was 
 therein much the more glorious, and (liould 
 be much better rewarded. 
 
 This Notion may indeed do great Ser* 
 vice to the Caufe of the Church of Ro?ne^ 
 but how it will ferve any purpofes of the 
 Gofpel of Chriji no considering Man will 
 be able to fee. 
 
 My defign at this time is to confute and 
 expofe this abfurd Pofition, and to fhew the 
 necelTary dependance that Faith hath upon 
 Reafofi : but withal, the great Improvement 
 that Reafo?i receives from Faith. To fliew 
 that they are not inconfiftent things, but 
 have an entire agreement one with an« 
 
 other : 
 
7'econciled in Religioii. 
 
 either : Nay, fo clofely are they linked, 
 that if we rejedl either one or the other, 
 or advance one to the prejudice of the 
 other, we cannot avoid the running into 
 dangerous Errors and Inconveniences. 
 
 The Propofition we have before us is 
 this. 'T^hat ResiJo?i and Faith are not con- 
 tradiSlioiis things j or this ; that the Religion 
 which is of God^ and which it is our Duty to 
 believe, doth not in any one part or article of 
 it do violence to our Reafon. 
 
 For the making out this, I lay down 
 thefe following Propofitions. 
 
 1. Firft of all, That nothing that is pro- 
 pofed to us to be believed as a Matter of 
 Faith, or an Article of Religion, is further 
 to be entertained by us than we have a Rea- 
 fon to convince us of the Truth of it. 
 
 2. Secondly y That we have no other way 
 to judge, or to be convinced of the Truth 
 of any Matter of Faith, or Article of our 
 Religion, but the Agreeablcncfs of it v/iih 
 the Principles of our natural Reafon. 
 
 3. Thirdly, Whatever therefore is plain- 
 ly and apparently repugnant to, and incon- 
 fiftent with the Principles of natural Rea- 
 fon, cannot be true ; and therefore ought 
 not to be believed by us as an A.rticle of 
 Religion, or a Matter of Faith. 
 
 B 3 4. Fourthly, 
 
Faith a7id Reafoji 
 
 4. Fourthly^ Thar, notvv^irhflanding, there 
 may be many things in Religion highly rea- 
 fonable to be believed, which yet natural 
 Reafon could not difcover, nor after they 
 are difcovered can it fully comprehend. 
 There may be Reafon enough to convince 
 us of the Truth of them, though v/e have 
 not our Reafon fo perfed: as to be able to 
 fee perfedly through them, or to anfwer 
 all the Difficulties that may be raifed againft 
 them. 
 
 The clearing thefe four Propofitions will 
 not only fully explain and prove our main 
 Point, but alfo obviate all the Difficulties 
 and Objeiftions that are ufually raifed in 
 this Controverfy. I fliall therefore fpeak to 
 them in order. 
 
 I. The firft Propofition is this ♦, That no- 
 thing that is propofed to us to be believed 
 as a Matter of Faith, or an Article of Re- 
 ligion, is further to be entertained by us, 
 than we have Reafon crivcn us for the Truth 
 of ir. 
 
 This, I think, is fo univerflilly acknow- 
 ledged by all Mankind, of what Perfuafion 
 or Religion focver they be, that it would be 
 rt needlefs thing to attempt the Proof of it. 
 There is no Man in the World ever en- 
 deavour'd to draw another Man to his own 
 Opinion, but he would offer him Reafons 
 why he fliould embrace that Opinion, ra- 
 cier than the contrary,, And there is no 
 
 ' - Man 
 
T'econciled in Religion. 7 
 
 Man ever took up any Opinion or Pcrfua- 
 fion, either in Religion or in other things, 
 but he either had Reafon, or thought lie 
 had Reafon to incline and determine him to 
 it. ^ Man cannot beheve as he pleafeth. 
 How defirous foever he may be, that this 
 or the oth^r thin^ lliould be true, .yet he 
 cannot bring his Mind to afienr to it, un- 
 lefs he have Ibme Reafon, or fomething that 
 looks like a Reafon, that inclines him to 
 it. Whatever Power the Will oi Man hath 
 to determine itfelf, yet it is certain the XJn- 
 derjianding mud always go according to the 
 Evidence that is given in to it. It implies 
 a Contradidlion, that a Man Aiould believe 
 a Propofition any further than he is con- 
 vinced of the Truth of it. And how can 
 he be convinced of the Truth of it, further 
 than he is fitisfied that there are folid and 
 ftrong Reafons to pcrfuadc him unto it ? 
 But to fpeak more Words upon this, is to 
 add Light to the Sun. 
 
 2. I therefore proceed. 7'he next Pro- 
 pofition we lay down, is this, I (lat we have 
 no other Meafure to juci^re of the IVuth of 
 any Religion, than the Agreeablencfs of it 
 with the Principles of our natural Rea- 
 fon. 
 
 For the Proof of this, if it need any, 
 the former Propofition hath laid a fufficient 
 Foundation. We ought not, nay we can- 
 not believe any thing further than there is 
 Reafon given us for the I'ruth of it. When 
 B 4 there- 
 
8 Faith and Reafon 
 
 therefore any thing is propofed to our Be- 
 lief, it is certain we muft examine whether 
 there be Reafon fufficient to perfuade us to 
 believe it. Now how can we examine this 
 otherwife than by comparing the Thing in 
 queftion with fome Rules or Principles of 
 our owp Minds, by which we ufe to fearch 
 out the Truth or FaKhood of Things ? If 
 the Point recommended to our Belief be 
 agreeable to them, we judge it true; if o- 
 therwife, we are to conclude it faife. This 
 is the way of proceeding of all Mankind, 
 when they deliberate concerning a Propo- 
 fition, whether it be true or falfe. 
 
 Well then fome fixed certain Rules and 
 Principles we muft have in our felves with 
 which we are to compare, and by which 
 we are to judge of the Truth or FaKhood 
 of Things recommended to us. Now the 
 only remaining queftion is, what thofe Rules 
 and Principles are ? But indeed it is no que- 
 flion at all ; for what other can be affign'd 
 befides our natural Reafon ? that is to fay, 
 our Underftandings ading according to thofe 
 Notions that are either connatural with it, 
 or collected from our Senfes. Thefe are the 
 Principles by which we are to judge of all 
 things in the World, that are not felf-evi^ 
 dent, that is to fay, that need any Proof to 
 recommend them to our Belief, and the 
 comparing things with thefe Principles, and 
 making conclulions from fuch comparifons 
 Js that vi'hich we call Reafon. 
 
 Now. 
 
reconciled in Religion. 
 
 Now it is certain, there is no Man in the 
 World can affign any other fiire way of dif- 
 tinguifliing Truth from Falfliiood i3Ut this. 
 And it is certain that every Man in the world 
 in all other things that do mod nearly con- 
 cern him, doth always make hisjudgment by 
 this rule and meafure. And if in all other 
 things, why not in matters of Religion ? 
 What pretence, what colour is there that 
 Religion only (hould be exempted from the 
 tribunal of Reafon, to which all mens other 
 concernments are confeffedly fubjedt ? If in- 
 deed Religion was a thing defigned to deflroy 
 and take away our natures ; if it was one 
 thing to be a man, and another thing to be 
 religious, there would be fome colour for 
 this. But there is no fuch thing. God in 
 obliging us to Religion confiders us as men. 
 He doth not thereby intend to deftroy our 
 human natures, but to improve them. Now 
 if in matters of Religion we mufl be fup- 
 pos'd to be dealt with as men, it is certain 
 we can have no principles to judge of Reli- 
 gion by but only thofe cominon principles of 
 Reafon which are planted in all the men in 
 the world, and v/hich confiitute their na- 
 tures, and diftinguifli them from Brutes, and 
 by which they are govern'd in all their hu- 
 mane adlions. 
 
 If any man reply to this, that in things of 
 Religion we are to be guided by Divine Re- 
 velation, and not by Reafon, forafmuch as 
 |leafon is utterly unable to dire(5t us in the 
 
 things 
 
I o Faith and Reafon 
 
 things of God j we readily and heartily 
 grant it. But this makes noihing againit 
 what I have now laid down. For this is 
 that we fay. We are to judge of that Reve- 
 lation whether it be from God or no., whe- 
 ther it be a Divine Pvcvelation or an impof- 
 ture J I fay we are to judge of this by the 
 Principles of our Reafon. It is acknowledg- 
 ed by us as a certain thing, rhac after we are 
 once convinced that God hath made a Re- 
 velation of his Will in any point, we are 
 without more ado to believe it, and ftedfaft- 
 ly to adhere to it. And there is the grcateft 
 reafon in the World that we fliould fo do. 
 For it is one of the firfl: Principles of Reafon 
 that God cannot deceive others, nor be de- 
 ceived himfelf ; and therefore whatever he 
 faith mufh be true. But then the Matter in 
 doubt is how fliall we be fatisiied that God 
 hath made fuch a Revelation ? MuO: we take 
 every Docflrine for a divine Revelation that 
 any one doth confidently affirm to be from 
 God? If fo, then v»x fiiall never be fecure 
 from being impofed upon, and we fhail have 
 everyday Dodrines obtruded upon us for Di- 
 vine Truth, which are utterly inconfiftent 
 with, and contradicflory to one another. On 
 theotherfide, if we muftnot take everything 
 for a Revelation from God that pretends to 
 be fo, then tiiere is a neceffity we fhould 
 examine whether that which comes recom- 
 mended to us as fuch, doth really defervc that 
 name. But what rules or meafures can we 
 
 examine 
 
reconciled i7i Religion, 1 1 
 
 examine this by, but the Principles of our 
 natural inbred fenfcs and reafon ; thofe Prin- 
 ciples of Truth which God hath implanted 
 in our Natures antecedently to all politive 
 Revelations of his Will? 
 
 If any man will not be content with this, 
 but will objed; further in this matter that 
 v^'e are not to judge of God's Revelations by 
 Reajbn^ but by the Spirit ; in order to the 
 making an anfwer to this, all that we de- 
 fire to know is, what they who thus affirm 
 do mean by the Spirit? If by the Spirit they 
 mean only the affiflance of the Holy Spirit 
 given to well-difpofed perfbns for the remov- 
 ing of their prejudices, and finful lufls, that 
 may hinder them from embracing the truth, 
 and the better enabling them to make ufe of 
 their reafon, and difcerning faculties in the 
 fearching and finding out the truth, we grant 
 what they fay. We do believe, that the Spi- 
 rit of God doth thus concur with every good 
 man to the >vorking Faith in him, or the 
 making him a Believer. But if by tlje Spi- 
 rit which they fay is to judge of the things 
 pertaining to God and Religion, rhey mean 
 a Principle in a Man that hadi no agreement 
 or communication with that other Principle 
 of his Nature which we call Reafon ; bur is 
 a thing put in oppofition, and contradidion 
 to that, then we utterly deny what they af- 
 firm. We fay, that fuch a Spirit ought not 
 to have any influence upon our Underfland- 
 ings, or to be any rule or meafure of our be- 
 lief. 
 
1 _ 
 I. 
 
 1 2 Faith and Reafo?% 
 
 lief. For at this rate we could never have 
 any fixed Rule to diftinguifh between the 
 Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Falfehood, 
 and every Impofture of the Devil's might 
 pafs with us for the di(5tate of the Spirit 
 of God ; and we could no way help it ; in 
 a word we had no way to fry Spirits^ but 
 muft believe every Spirit pretending to come 
 from God: Which is exprefsly contrary to 
 the Apoftle's command, who bids us not to 
 jolin 4. believe evefj Spirit ^ but to try the Spirits whe- 
 ther they be of God or no. How much fo- 
 ever therefore the Spirit of God doth influ- 
 ence us in order to the making us believers, 
 this doth not in the leaft hinder, but that we 
 are to try and examine the Spirits ; that is, 
 to ufe our utmoft skill and endeavour to find 
 out whether that Spirit that would perfuade 
 us to the belief of fuch and fuch Do(flrines 
 be really from God or no. And what Rule 
 have we to try the Spirits by but the Prin- 
 ciples of Reafon which is planted in our 
 Natures : That is to fay our Senfes, and our 
 common Notions, and the Dictates of that 
 natural Religion which every man is born 
 with. By the agreement or difagreement 
 of any Dodtrine propofed to thofe principles, 
 we only can certainly know whether the 
 Revelation that propounds that Doc^irine be 
 from God or no. 
 
 And thus much let it fuffice to have fpo- 
 kcn of our fecond Fofition. 
 
 3. The 
 
reconciled i?i Religiori. 13 
 
 3. The third AiTertion is this. That 
 whatever is propounded to us in Matters of 
 Rehgion, if it Ao plainly and evidently con- 
 tradid: the Principles of natural Rcafon, and 
 be repugnant thereto, we ought not to be- 
 lieve it as coming from God, becaufe it can- 
 not be true. 
 
 I put in thefe terms of plainly and evi^ 
 dently^ becaufe feveral points there may be 
 of that nature, that they may feemingly 
 ciafh with Reafon, though they do not ; and 
 may feem to contradid: Senfe, which yet do 
 nor. And fo ill judges are fome men, both 
 of Senfe and Reafon, that they may rejed: a 
 Point as inconfiftent with both, which yet 
 to all the wifer fort of men will appear 
 highly agreeable to them. But whatever is 
 plainly and evidctitly repugnant to the com- 
 mon Senfe of Mankind, that is to fay, con- 
 tradids thofe Principles by which all Men 
 dlllinguifh between Truth and Falfliood, 
 and in fuch Things and Objeds where Senfe 
 ond Reafon have a fair Scope to exerclfe 
 themfclves ; I fay, whatever in this Cafe is 
 repugnant to thofe Principles, ought not to 
 be admitted by us as a Truth of God, nor 
 Confequently ought it to obtain our belief. 
 
 For if we are to judge of the Truth of 
 Divine Revelations by the Principles of our 
 Reafon, then certainly whatever is con- 
 tain'd in any Revelation which praends to 
 be Divine, that is evidently contradidory 
 to thofe Principles, that very thing ought 
 
 to 
 
14 Faith and Reajon 
 
 to be a juil: and fiifliclent Argument to 
 make us reje6l that Revelation as to that 
 Point ; for it is certain that Truth cannot 
 be contrary to Truth. But now we luppofe 
 that our Reafon and common Notions and 
 Senfes are all true, and to be relied upon j 
 otherwife they would be no Rules for us 
 to meafure and judge of other Things by. 
 Whatever therefore doth contradidt them 
 cannot be true, and confequently cannot be 
 fuppofed to come from God. 
 
 But fome may fay, may not God reveal 
 fomething to Mankind in Religion, and o- 
 blige them to believe it, which is contrary 
 to Reafon ? I anfvver he can no more be 
 fuppofed to do this, than he can be fuppo- 
 fed to deny himfelf. For thofe natural No- 
 tices we have for the diftinguifliing of Truth 
 and Falfehood of Things that are reprefent- 
 ed to us are from him. They are the Image 
 of his own Mind imprefs'd upon our Souls. 
 And therefore, whatever doth not agree with 
 thefe faithful Copies^ cannot poffibly agree 
 with the Original, if we once be brought 
 to believe that God's Revelations in any part 
 of them do contradid: the common Princi- 
 ples of Reafon implanted in our Nature, 
 we muft of Necefiity at the fame Time be- 
 lieve, that God can do and undo at the fame 
 time. That he doth at Pleafure fo alter the 
 Nature of Things, that that which was 
 true Yefterday, is not true to Day, and that 
 which is now true and acknowledged to be 
 
 true 
 
reconciled in Religion. 15 
 
 true by us (becaufe we have the beft evi- 
 dence in the World for the Truth of it) 
 (hall upon a new Revelation that he may 
 rr.ake, ceafe to be true to Morrow. Which 
 Polition, if it do not deflrov all Truth and 
 all Morality, I do not know what doth. 
 
 The Ule I make of this Point is this. 
 That when any Perfon endeavours to pcr- 
 luade us to the belief of any Point, we 
 fliould in the firft Place fatisfy ourfelves that 
 the Point is not repugnant to our Reafon, 
 or our Senfes. If it be, we ought not by 
 any Means to give ear to it. Nay, by this 
 very Thing we may certainly know, that 
 the Man that would perfuade us, is either 
 an Impoftor himfelf, or impofed upon, fince 
 he teacheth That for a divine Truth which 
 is a perfedt Falfehood. 
 
 As for Inftance. If any Man will endea- 
 vour to draw me over to the Belief of the 
 Dodtrine of Tranfubftantiation ; that is to 
 fay, to believe that in the Sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper, that which appears to mc 
 to be Bread and Wine, is not really Bread 
 and Wine, but the very Body and Blood of 
 Chrift that was broken and flied fixteeii 
 hundred Years ago, and is now (as all Chri- 
 ftians agree) at the right Hand of God in 
 Heaven : I ought not to believe him in 
 this, be he otherwife never fo credible a 
 Perfon, becaufe it contradidls my own Rea- 
 fon, and my Senfes. And tho' for my con- 
 vidion he quotes a thoufand Times the 
 
 Words 
 
1 6 Faith and Reafon 
 
 Words of our Saviour, who faid, this is my 
 Bod)\ and this is my Blood, yet I muft fay, 
 that our Saviour could not mean thefe 
 Words in the Senfe that he means them ; 
 for if he did underftand them in that Senfe, 
 he mud in effe(5l tell me I am not to be- 
 lieve my own Eyes, nor my own Tafle, nor 
 my own Feehng, in a plain Matter of Senfe, 
 nor my ov\^n Reafon in a Thing that is as 
 obvious as any Thing in the World. 
 
 Again : If a Man will preach to me that 
 for the Caufe of Religion it is lawful for a 
 Bifhop to depofe and murder Sovereign Prin- 
 ces J that I may take Oaths of Fidelity to 
 the Government, and yet break them upon 
 a Difpenfation from the Vicar of Chrift j 
 that I may affirm or deny any Thing before 
 an Heretical Magiftrate, tho' it be with the 
 Solemnity of venturing my Salvation upon 
 ir, by fwearing upon the Gofpels ; that I 
 am not to keep Faith with Man fo long as 
 I have a fecret refer vation in my Mind, and 
 am priviledged thereto by the licence of 
 my fpiritual Guide j I fay, whoever would 
 impofe upon me in fuch Things as thefe, 
 ought, Vv^ithout any other difpute, to be re- 
 jedted by me as a Cheat. For what he 
 would perfuade me to, is contrary to the 
 natural Notions of Religion, and Juftice, 
 and Honefly, that are implanted in my 
 Mind. And if he pretend any Revelation 
 from Scripture for thefe Things, I may cer- 
 tainly deny ir, becaufe no Revelation, no 
 
 Scrip- 
 
reconciled in Religion, tj 
 
 Scripture of God can allow of fuch Things j 
 they being contrary to the Principles of na- 
 tural Religion ; that is, that natural Reafon 
 I have concerning Religion, upon the Cre- 
 dit of which I am to believe and receive 
 all Scripture and Revelations. 
 
 Again : If any one would convince me 
 that I ought to worfliip the Bleffed Virgin 
 or any other Saint, and afTure me that ie- 
 veral Miracles have been wrought for the 
 Confirmation of this Point j why here I 
 muft alfo refufe my aflent upon the fame 
 Account. If a thoufand Miracles had been 
 performed (as are told us) by the Images of 
 the Virgin, or other Saints, yet if God 
 hath long before declared that we are to 
 Worfhip none but himfelf with divine Wor- 
 fhip ; and if that Declaration of his has 
 been confirm'd by an infinite Number of 
 undoubted Miracles in old time, both of 
 Mofes and the Prophets, and Chrift, and his 
 Apoftles ; all the new Miracles they tell us 
 of, ought to fignify nothing to us. For 
 God having once declared his Will and 
 attefted that Declaration by many uncon- 
 troulable, unexceptionable Miracles, That 
 is to be our (landing perpetual Rule to walk 
 by : And whatever Miracles are oppofed 
 thereto in thefe latter Times, ought not to 
 be regarded by us ; but we are to look up- 
 on them either as the Delufions of the De- 
 vil, or the Figments and Impoftures of de- 
 figning Men. For it is an eternal and un- 
 
 VoL. VII, C alterable 
 
1 8 Faith and Reafon 
 
 alterable Principle of Reafon, that what God 
 hath once made a Law to Mankind, and 
 hath declared likewife that he will never 
 alter that Law, or put a new one in the 
 place of it. That Law {hall always bind, 
 whatever Pretences of new Credentials or 
 Atteftations from Heaven be made ufe of 
 CO make us believe that it is repealed or dif- 
 penfed with. 
 
 Laftly, if any Man will be infinuating, 
 fhat the Scripture is now out of Doors as 
 being a dead Letter, and that it is the Spi- 
 rit that is to guide us all ; that the Sacra- 
 ments of Chriftianity and the Hiftorical 
 Matters of our Faith concerning Jefus Chrift's 
 Birth, Life, and Sufferings, are all to be in- 
 terpreted in a Myftical Spiritual Senie ; 
 which Senfe we are to have from the In- 
 fpiration of the Spirit that witneffeth with- 
 in us J fuch a Man as this I ought to aban- 
 don as a falfe Prophet, as one that oppo- 
 feth my Senfe and Reafon, and fets up a 
 private Spirit againft the Reafon of Man- 
 kind, and the Revelation of Jefus Chrift, 
 once publickly attefted to the Satisfaction 
 and Convidion of the World. 
 
 4. And thus much of my third Point. I 
 now proceed to my lafl: Propofition. That, 
 notwithftanding what we have faid, there 
 may be many Things in Religion highly 
 reafonable to be believed, which yet natu- 
 ral Reafon could not difcover -, nor after 
 
 they 
 
reconciled in Religio7t. ig 
 
 they are difcovered can it fully compre- 
 hend. Though we do affirm, that God 
 doth never obhge us to beheve any Thing 
 contrary or repugnant to Reafon ; yet at the 
 lame Time we do heartily acknowledge, 
 that he hath obliged us to believe feveral 
 Things which cannot be demonftrated by 
 Reafon ; Nay, and fome Things, which 
 Reafon cannot fo perfecSlly fathom as tp 
 mailer all the difficulties of them. But 
 yet for all that, there is infinite Reafon 
 that we ffiould believe thefe Things ; and 
 in the belief of them, we proceed upo^ 
 ihofe very foundations of common Senfe 
 and Reafon, that we have all this while 
 been eftablilliing. 
 
 For Inftancej It cannot be demonftra- 
 ted by Reafon, that God fliould fend his 
 vSon Jefus Chrifl for the Salvation of 
 Mankind j much lefs that he fl^ould ex- 
 polc him to a cruel Death, as a Sacrific;e 
 for the Sins of the World. Nor can it b|e 
 prov'd by Reafon, that this Jefus that di- 
 ed for us, muft at the end of the World, 
 come again vifibly in Perfon, to judge the 
 quick and the dead ; and that then, all 
 Men that have ever died, (hall be raifed; 
 That is to fay, they (hall have Bodies united 
 to their Souls, fo as to find themfelve per- 
 fectly the fame Perfons, which they were 
 in this World ; (which is that which we 
 call the Refurre6lion.) I fay, Reafon could 
 not have found out any Qf thefe Things. 
 ' C 2 The 
 
20 Faith and Reafo7t 
 
 The moft fagacious and contemplative 
 Man upon Earth, could never have difco- 
 vered this Method of God's proceeding 
 with Mankind. Or, if he fliould have 
 happened on feme Thoughts or Fancies 
 about fome of thefe Points, yet he could 
 never, by folid Arguments, have proved 
 them to be certain Truths : becaufe, they 
 altogether depended upon the Pleafure of 
 God. So that thefe Things we are to be- 
 lieve perfedily, upon the Authority of Di- 
 vine Revelation. We therefore know them 
 to be true, becaufe God hath told us that 
 they are fo. But then, after God hath re- 
 vealed thefe Dodrines to us by his Son Je- 
 fus Chrift, and his Apoftles, they do appear 
 fo highly reafonably in themfelves, and fo 
 every way fuitable to the Goodnefs, and Juf- 
 tice, and Wifdom of God, that any Man's 
 Reafon, if it be fincere, and pure, and un- 
 prejudiced, cannot but heartily clofe with 
 them, and aflent to them, as foon as ever 
 they are fairly propofed with the Evidence 
 that attends them. 
 
 Nor is there any Objedion to be made 
 againft them, either in point of Poffibility, 
 or in point of Reafonablenefs, or in point 
 of Evidence, but what any confidering Man 
 can eafiily quit himfelf of. 
 
 But then, there is another Sort of Doc- 
 trines, which our Chriftianity obliges us to 
 believe, which are more myftcrious ; that 
 is to fay, do not lie fo plain and obvious to 
 
 our 
 
reconciled in Religion. 2l 
 
 our Reafon, even after they are revealed 
 to us, as the former do. But fo much are 
 they above the Capacity of our fhort Under- 
 ftandings, that we muft beheve them, with- 
 out being able to have a full and adequate 
 Comprehenfion of them. And fuch are thefe 
 two Articles of our Religion, the Do<^lrinc 
 of the Incarnation, and the Dodlrine of 
 the Trinity. Not that thefe Dodtrines are 
 unintelligible ; or, that we cannot form a 
 confiftent Notion of them ; for it is cer- 
 tainly otherwife ; we may truly under- 
 ftand, and form a confiftent Notion of both 
 thefe Points: But this is the Thing, by 
 Reafon of the Infinity of the Obje<5 that 
 is here prefented to us, and the Shallow- 
 nefs of our finite Underftandings, that are 
 to confider them, we muft of Neceftity 
 fall ftiort of feeing fo clearly through thefe 
 Points, as not to be intangled with great 
 Difficulties, when we would overcurioufly 
 prie into them. But then, all this may 
 well confift with what we have been af- 
 ferting. Notwithftanding this, we do in 
 no wife adt contrary to Reafon or Senfe, 
 in giving aftent to thofe Do6trines, how 
 much above our Reafon foever they be. 
 We are ft ill al?Ie to give an anfwcr to every 
 one that Jloall give us a Reafon of the Faith 
 that is in us^ even as to thefe two fublime 
 Myfteries. There is nothing in them con- 
 trary to our common Senfe and Reafon, 
 and fo it is pofTible they may be true. 
 C 3 ' ' God 
 
22 Faith and Reafon 
 
 God Almighty (and that we can provfe) 
 hath ad:ually revealed arid taught therii 
 by his Son : And fo we afe certain they 
 ate true. Here is fufficient Satisfad:ion fof 
 our Reafon, and here is fufficient Evidence 
 for our Faith. All that we have here to 
 do, is to examine', whether Jefus Chrift and 
 his Apoflles have taught thefe D'odrihes :: 
 and when we are convinced of that, to 
 believe them heartily, to profefs them con- 
 ftantly, to worfhip God according to the 
 Difcoveries he hath made of his Nature, 
 and to acquiefce in thefe Revelations with- 
 out troubling ourfelves or others with nice 
 Queftions and Speculations about them. 
 
 But yet, here it is that we are now-a- 
 days briskly attacked by the Patrons of 
 that Do6lrine, which I touched upon un- 
 der my laft Head. Rather than we fhall 
 not believe Tranfubftantiation, they would 
 have us call in Queftion the Trinity and 
 Chrift's Incarnation. For, fay they, you 
 have the fame Evidence in Scripture for 
 the one Doctrine, that you have for the 
 other; and as for the Point of Reafon, 
 the one is every whit involved with as 
 many Difficulties, and Abfurdities, as the 
 other is pretended to be ; Why therefore 
 (liould you not equally believe both ? 
 
 I have hot now Time to Arifwer this 
 Argument as it deferves to be anfwered. 
 Only I leave with you- thefe three Differ- 
 i^nces between th?: two Dod^rines, Tran- 
 
 fubflanr 
 
reconciled in Religion, 23 
 
 fubftantiation on the one Hand, and the 
 Trinity and Incarnation on the other. 
 
 The Flrjl is, That there is not the 
 fame Evidence in the Word of God for 
 the one, that there is for the other : The 
 former being no where evidently Taught 
 there j No, nor thought to be Taught 
 there by the Chriftians of the firft Ages : 
 The latter being plainly deliver'd by Chrift 
 and his Apoftles, as the very Foundation 
 of Chriftianity, and the Faith into which 
 all Believers were to be Baptized. 
 
 The Secojid Difference is. That Tranfub- 
 ftantiation is plainly about a Matter that 
 falls under the Cognizance of our Sen- 
 fes and Reaforu But the Doctrines of the 
 Trinity and Incarnation, have an infinite 
 God for their 0bife£t§'f to- whole Nature 
 neither our Senfes'l^r our Reafon is any 
 ways adasquate or commenfurate. 
 
 The ^hird Difference is, That there are 
 manifeft Abfurdities and Contradidions in 
 the one Dodtrine, but none at all in the 
 other Two. Though they be above our 
 Reafon, yet they are not contrary to 
 it. 
 
 But I may fpeak more of thefe Things, 
 
 and of this Text hereafter. In the mean 
 
 Time confider what you have heard, 
 
 C 4 afld 
 
24 Faith and Reafon^ &c. 
 
 and God give you Underftanding in all 
 Things, s 
 
 N, B. See thefe three lafi Points of 
 Difference enlarged upon^ in the latter End 
 of the fecond Sermon againjl "Tranfubjian- 
 tiation, 
 
 S E R-. 
 
25 
 
 SERMON II. 
 
 Every Man to judge for Himfelf hi 
 'Things necejfary to Salvation. The 
 different Ways prefcrihed by the 
 Roman Catholicks, and the Pro- 
 teftants, for the coming to the true 
 Faithy compared. 
 
 I P E T. 
 
 111. 
 
 15- 
 
 — Be ready always to ghe an Jlnjhjoer to 
 every Man that asketh you a Reajbn of 
 the Hope that is in you. 
 
 WO general Points I laid down 
 to infiil; upon from this Text. 
 
 Firji^ That Faith and Reafon 
 are not inconfiftent one with 
 another, but may well ftand 
 together. If we be obliged to be able to 
 give an Account of the ReafonableneJ's of our 
 Faitby (which is the fame Thing which is 
 
 here 
 
26 Man to judge for himfelf 
 
 here called Hope) then certainly we are not 
 
 obliged to believe any thing which is Un- 
 
 reafonable, or that we cannot give a Rear- 
 
 fan for believing it. :,' 
 
 Secondly, That it is not enough that our 
 Faith or Religion be reafonable in itfelf, 
 but it is the Duty of every ProfelTor of 
 that Faith, fo to fatisfy himfelf of the 
 reafonablenefs of his Belief, as to be able 
 to anfwer them that ask a Reqjbn of it. And 
 therefore every Man not only may, but 
 ought to enquire into the Grounds of his 
 Faith, or Religion, and not fo to rely up- 
 on any human Authority, as to believe, 
 without Examination, every Thing that is 
 propofed to him. 
 
 Thefe are the two Points, or Dodrines, 
 or Obfervations, which- 1 raifed upon this 
 Text: And which I defigned both to ex- 
 plain and to vindicate. The former of 
 them I have already difpatched. X. now 
 proceed to the other. 
 
 II. It is not indeed in dired Words af- 
 'ferted in the Text, but it is by neceffary 
 Confequence infer'd from it. For if every 
 Chriftian ought ^o well to inforrri himfelf 
 about what he believes, as to be able to 
 give others a Reajbn of his Faith, then he 
 ^ certainly not only may, but ought to exa- 
 mine every Thing that is propos'd to his 
 Belief and upon that Examination to make 
 
 a 
 
in Things necejfary to Salvation, 27 
 
 a Judgment, whether it is rdafonable for 
 him to believe it or no. 
 
 This Confequence is fo direct and full 
 from the Text, that there is no avoiding 
 of it. And indeed, this is no more than 
 what is every where taught and dehvered 
 as the Priviledge, and as the Duty of all 
 Chriflians^ even thofe that are private Per- 
 fons. It is not to the Bifhops and Paftorsi 
 ^nd Gtiides of Souls only, but to the Peo- 
 ple that St. Paul directed that Precept of 
 his, in his firfl: Epiftle to the 'T'heff'alomam^ v. zi. 
 that they {hould prove all Tubings, and hold 
 faji that which is good. Every thing was 
 to be tried and examined before they ad- 
 mitted of ir. And if after that Trial and 
 Examination they found it to be a good 
 Dodrine, a Dodtrine agreeable to the Gof- 
 pel, then they were to embrace it, and fo 
 to hold it as never to depart from it. 
 
 It was likewife to all Chriftians, that 
 St. John wrote when he faid thefe Words, 
 Beloved believe not every Spirit, but try the 
 Spirits %vhetber they are of God: becaiije ?na- ^-^^^-^^ 
 fiy falje Prophets arc gone out into the \. 
 World. What is the meaning that we are 
 not to believe every Spirit, but to try the 
 Spirits, whether they be of God? certainly 
 this ; That we are not to believe every one 
 that takes upon him to be an infpired 
 Man, or that would pretend to deliver 
 Dodtrines to us, as the infallible Truths of 
 God : Bijt we are to examine thofe that 
 
 make 
 
28 Man to judge for himfelf 
 
 make this Pretence, whether they can 
 really produce their Credentials that they 
 come from God. We are to examine like- 
 wife the Dodrines they teach, whether 
 they be really agreeable to thofe Princi- 
 ples of natural and revealed Truths which 
 we are fure came from God. And there 
 is great Reafon why we fliould all thus 
 try before we truft, for as the Apoftle 
 adds, there are many falfe Prophets j that is, 
 falfe Teachers, gone out into the World. 
 
 Furthermore, What is the meaning of 
 all thofe feveral Exhortations and Declara- 
 tions of our Saviour, where he dedred the 
 
 John V. People to fearch the Scriptures, as the true 
 
 ^^* way to bring them to the belief of him 
 
 and his Dodlrines? Where he cautions 
 
 ^^^. ...them againfl calling any Man Rabbi^ or 
 
 V. s, 10. Majler iip07i Earth ; becaufe they have hut 
 one Majier or Teacher, and that is, our 
 Lord Jefus? Where he reproaches them 
 for too blindly following their Guides, tel- 
 
 Matt. XV. ling them, if the blifid lead the blind, both 
 4- JImU fall into the Ditch F Where he ex- 
 poflulateth with them for relying too much 
 upon the Authority of their Teachers, and 
 therefore rejecting his Dodlrines becaufe his 
 Superiours did not believe it ? IVhy of your 
 
 jLuke x'n. own fehes, faith he, did ye not judge that 
 75- which is right? Sure if any thing can be 
 plain, it is plain from the New Tcftament, 
 that God not only allows, but alfo requires 
 that every Man in matters of his Salva- 
 tion 
 
271 T'hmgs pecejfary to S-ahation. 29 
 
 lion fliould judge for himfelf : And not ^o 
 give up himfelf to the Condudt of any 
 humane Authority, but that he ought ftill 
 to be at hberty to examine Doctrines of 
 Faith by the common Principles of Rea- 
 fon and Divine Revelation ; and according 
 as he finds them agreeable to, or inconfift- 
 ent with thofe Principles, either to admit 
 them, or rejed: them. 
 
 I will but mention one thing more upon 
 this Head and I have done. Mind thefe 
 Words of St. Paul If we, fays he, ^r an ^^' ^ s. 
 Angel from Heaven preach t-o yon any other 
 Gojpel than what ye have received^ let him 
 be accnrfed. How not an Apoftle, not the 
 greateft of all the Apoftles St. Faul^ who 
 labour'd more abundantly in the Work of 
 the Lord than all the Apoftles, not for him 
 to preach another Gofpel ? No, nor an An- 
 gel from Heaven ; tho' he came with never 
 fo many Signs and Wonders, (as undoubt- 
 edly if an Angel from Heaven was to 
 preach, it would be with Miracles in abun- 
 dance;) I fay for thefe not to be believed, 
 when they taught things contrary to and 
 Jnconfiftent with the (landing Revelations of 
 Cofpcl, as we have them in the Scrip- 
 tures ? Nay, not only not to be believed, 
 but to be abhorred ; to be utterly rejeded 
 as Impoftors, and falfe Prophets, and to be 
 accurfcd ? I fay, what are we to gather 
 from hence ? Certainly if we can gather 
 any thing, we may gather thefe three 
 things. I. That 
 
go Man to judge for himfelf 
 
 1. That there is but one Gofpel. That 
 very Gofpel which was preach 'd by Chrift 
 and his Apoftles, and which we have con- 
 veyed down to us in the Books of the A^^-z:; 
 Teftame?it. 
 
 2. That whatever Article of Faith is pro- 
 pofed to our Behef, if it be repugnant to 
 that Gofpel once delivered to us, is to be 
 rejed:ed as a falfe Dodrine ; and the Prea- 
 chers of fuch Dod:rines, let them be Apo- 
 flles or Angels, let them fhew never fo ma- 
 ny Miracles for the Proof of their Miffion, 
 are not to be heard but held as falfe Pro- 
 phets. 
 
 3. That every Man who hath once been 
 inftrudled in the Gofpel of Chrift, and is a 
 Profeflbr of ic, is to judge for himfelf, whe- 
 ther any Doctrine that is propofed to him 
 be agreeable to that Gofpel or no. If it 
 be inconfiftent with the Gofpel which he 
 hath once received, he is to reject it, tho' 
 St. Paul or an Angel from Heaven fhould 
 preach it to him. I fay, of this every Man 
 is to be judge for himfelf; for other wife 
 why {hould St. Paul fay this to the People 
 of Galatiaf Why lliould he tell them fo 
 folemnly, that they fliould adhere to that 
 Gofpel he had preach'd to them, notwith- 
 ilanding all the Pretences of the falfe Tea- 
 chers that were come among them ? Nay, 
 he tells them that if he himfelf , or an An- 
 gel from lleaven, JJmdd preach to them any 
 
 other 
 
in 7*hings necejfary to Salvation. 3 1 
 
 f)ther GoJ'pel than what they had received he- 
 fore^ they fiould not be heard. Did he not 
 plainly in this make them the Judges of that 
 Gofpel, and of what was conliftent with it, 
 and inconfiflent with it ? Was not that 
 Gofpel the Standard by which they were 
 to meafure all other new Dodtrines? And 
 were not they themfelves to be the Mea- 
 furers ? Were not they to be the Judges ? 
 
 Certainly it muft be fo ; and for the ma- 
 king it appear I would only ask this: Whe- 
 ther it had been a Fault or a Sin in the Ga-^ 
 latianSj after St. Paul had thus warned 
 them, to have taken up, or given credit 
 to any DoQrines of the falfe Apoftles, con- 
 trary to the Gofpel ? If it be anfwered, that 
 this were a Sin and a Fault in them if they 
 did fo, then I infer undeniably, that they 
 were true and proper Judges of what was 
 the Do6lrine of the Gofpel and what was 
 not. Ix. was their Parts, having been in- 
 truded in the true Gofpel, to have com- 
 pared the Novel Dodirines of the falfe Tea- 
 chers with it, and accordingly as they 
 found them difagreeing to the Gofpel, to 
 have rejeded them. If this had not been 
 their Duty, it could not have been their Sin 
 to have followed the falfe Teachers in their 
 new Dodtrines. 
 
 So that the Inference remains ftrong and 
 undeniable, that in Matters wherein Man's 
 Salvation is concerned, he is to be a Judge 
 for himfelf. And God having given him a 
 
 Rule 
 
3 2 Man to judge for himfelf 
 
 Rule to judge by, he is to examine all Do- 
 d:rines that are propofed to him as neceffa- 
 ry to be believ'd by that Rule, and whatfo- 
 ever Dodtrine he finds different from, or in- 
 confiftent with that Rule, he is to reje(fi:, 
 whofoever the Man be, or vvhatfoever the 
 Church be, that propofeth them to him. 
 
 And thus I think I have iufficiently made 
 good my Point. But I ought not thus to 
 leave it. How plain ibever this Matter feems 
 1687. to be, yet there are at this Day no fmall flirs 
 made about it. Nay, I believe I may fay 
 that upon this very Point the main Difputes 
 do turn, which do at this Day divide the 
 Chriftian Church in thefe Parts of the World. 
 
 Thus far we are all agreed. That the Re- 
 ligion of JefusChrift is the only way to Sal- 
 vation. And likewife we are agreed. That 
 every Man ought fo far to enquire into Chrift's 
 Religion, as to be fatisfied what it is, and 
 where it is to be found. But then here it is 
 we begin to differ. 
 
 As Chriftianity now goes in thefe Weftern 
 Parts of the World, there are two different 
 Ways prefcribed for the coming to the Know- 
 of Chrift's Religion ; and each of them is 
 vigoroully contended for by their feveral 
 Parties. 
 
 The one Way is that which the Roman 
 Catholicks go, and in (hort it is this. That 
 every Man, as to the Concernments of his 
 Soul, is fo far to enquire and examine, till 
 he be fatisfied which is the true Church 
 
 of 
 
hi things neceffary to Salvation. % % 
 
 of Chriil. But after he hath once found 
 that true Church, he has no need of fur- 
 ther examining, but he is from hencefor- 
 ward to yield up himi'elf to the Govern- 
 ment cf that Church, and to believe eve- 
 ry thing which that Church teacheth with- 
 out further examination ; becaufe that the 
 true Church is infallible, neither can be 
 deceiv'd itfelf nor deceive others. 
 
 The other Way is that which the Pro- 
 teftants go, and it is this. That Jefbs 
 Chrift being the fole Author of our Faith 
 and Religion, we ought not, v^^e cannot 
 believe any thing as an Article of Faith, 
 or as necelTary to Salvation, but what he 
 and his infpired Apoftles taught; nor have 
 we any certain way of knowing what they 
 taught, but by the Holy Scriptures they left 
 behind them. Thefe we are fure are the 
 Word of God, and do contain all the ne- 
 cefTary Points that Chrift and his Apoftles 
 preached to the World ; and whatever is 
 not contained in them, or may not be proved 
 by them^ is not, cannot be required of any 
 to be believed as of necejjlty to Salvation, (as 
 our Church in her Articles doth word it.) 
 And therefore whatever Do(ftrine is recom- 
 mended to us us an Article of Faith, if 
 we find that the Scriptures teacheth it, or 
 that it may by good confequence be pro- 
 ved from thence, we do heartily and wil- 
 lingly embrace it. On the other fide, if 
 we find anv Dodrine which is recommend- 
 
 VoL. Vil. C ed 
 
3 4 Ma?i to judge for himfelf 
 
 cd to us as an Article of Faith to be repug* 
 nant to the Holy Scriptures, or to clafli 
 with them, we do certainly reject it. And 
 this Right and Priviledge of examining 
 Matters of Religion, and trying them by 
 the Holy Scriptures, we do not fo appro- 
 priate to the Guides of the Church (though 
 they of all others, as they are beft quali- 
 fied, fo are they moft efpecialiy obliged to 
 do this) but we do allow it alfo to every 
 Man of a private Capacity, fo far as he 
 hath Means and Opportunities of inform- 
 ing himfelf 
 
 For fince, as the Roman Catholicks fay, 
 every Man's Salvation depends upon his 
 profeffing the true Religion of Jefus Chrift, 
 it is but infinitely reafonable that every Man 
 fliould judge for himfelf about that Religion. 
 And fince as we fay (and mofc of them 
 likewife acknowledge) that all the Religion 
 of Jefus Chrift is contained in the Scrip- 
 tures, it is but infinitely reafonable (fay we) 
 that every Man fhould be well fatisfied, 
 that the Dodtrines which are propofed to 
 him as Articles of Faith, are really the 
 Dodrines of Holy Scripture. And whe- 
 ther they be fo or n^t, he is to be the fole 
 Judge himfelf, taking in all the beft Helps 
 he can have for the making fuch a Judg- 
 ment. 
 
 This is a plain Account of the two Ways 
 that are prefcrib'd or advis'd for the com- 
 ing 
 
in "Things neceffary to Salvation, 3 5 
 
 ing to the true Faith, the one by the Ro- 
 man Catholicks, the other by Us. 
 
 In this both agree. That every Man Is 
 allow'd, nay is bound to make enquiry or 
 examination of his Reh2;ion. We are all 
 agreed, that every Man (liould be able to 
 give a Keafon for the Hope that is in him. 
 But then here we differ. The Roman Ca- 
 thoHcks fay, we are to examine till we 
 have found the true Church; but when 
 once we have found that, we are for ever 
 after to be concluded by that Church's de- 
 terminations. The Proteftanrs fay. That a 
 Man cannot know the true Church but by 
 examining the Doctrines which that Church 
 holds and teacheth, whether rhey be Chrift's 
 Dodtrines or no ; and there being no way 
 to knov/ that, but by examining whether 
 they do really agree with thofe Dodtrines 
 that are taught in the Holy Scriptures, I 
 fay, fmce this is the Cafe, there is a Ne- 
 celTity of allov^ing every particular Man to 
 try his Faith by the Holy Scriptures, and 
 after that Trial to judge for himfelf. 
 
 So that you fee here is a material dif- 
 ference between us. The Roman Catho- 
 licks do only fo far inquire into R.eligion as 
 to find the true Church, and after that they 
 fubmit to their Church's Guides in all 
 Things. The Proteftants do inquire into 
 Chrift's Religion, as it is taught by the 
 Word of God, and by that they find out 
 the true Church. The one believe the Do- 
 D 2 <5lrines 
 
36 Man to judge for himfelf 
 
 iflrines of Religion for the Church's fake 
 that teaches them : The other believe the 
 Church for the Doctrine's fake that fhe 
 teacheth, as being in all things agreeable 
 CO the Word of God. The one take up 
 their Religion from the Church : The other 
 rake up their Church from its Religion. 
 Or if you would have me exprefs this Bu- 
 finefs in the Language of my Text ; if a 
 a Pfoteftant be required to give a Reafon of 
 the Hope that is in hlm^ it will be neceffary 
 for him to give a rational Account of ail 
 the Articles of his Faith. But if a Roman 
 Catholick be required to do this, it is fuf- 
 ficient to fay, that he refts fatisfied in the 
 Judgment of his Superiors ; or, to ufe the 
 Words of the Rhemijh 'Tejiamcnt^ The Man 
 faith enough^ and defendeth himfef fiijfjciejitly^ 
 djat anjwers he is a Catholick^ and that he 
 will live and die in that Faith^ and that his 
 Church can give a Reafon of all things which 
 are demanded of him. So that if the Church 
 be but able to give a Reafon of the Faith, 
 it is no great Matter whether the Man that 
 profefleth that Faith be able to give an 
 Anfwer or no. 
 
 And now having laid before you the two 
 dii!crent Ways of giving a Reafon of our 
 Faith, I will, if you pleafe, fairly examine 
 both of them. And I will begin with the 
 Roman Catholicks Way of Inquiring and 
 giving a Reafon of our Faith. 
 
 And 
 
in Things 7iecejjary to Salvation, 3 7 
 
 And that, as I tcld you, is this. That tho* 
 we are every one to examine and enquire 
 about our ReHgion, and- fo to be able to give 
 a Reafon of our Faith, yet the main Thing 
 we are to enquire or examine into is this : 
 Which is the true Church where Infallibility 
 is lodged'^ for after we have found that 
 Church (as we find it no where but in the 
 Church of Rome) our enquiry is at an end. 
 We are from henceforward to beUeve, and 
 to obey the Church. 
 
 This is the Point I am now to difcufs. 
 And I will do it with all the fairnefs and 
 all the plainnefs I poflibly can ; tho' all 
 that I (liall do at this time towards it, is 
 only to ask thefe two or three Queftions, 
 
 Firft of all, fince it is acknowledged by 
 them, that we are to make ufe of our beft 
 Skill, and Reafon, and Sagacity for the find- 
 ing of the true Church, how comes it a- 
 bout, that all on a fudden, after we have 
 found that true Church, v/e muft difcard 
 thefe Things as ufelefs Tools, and never af- 
 ter employ either our Skill, or our Reafon, 
 or our natural Sagacity for the making a 
 Judgment of any Point that concerns our 
 Souls ? This is very hard, and unfair deal- 
 ing with thofc Parts that God Almighty 
 hath given us. In all odier concernments 
 of our Lives we find, and arc fenfible, that 
 thofe Powers and Faculties in us, which firft 
 enable us to under ft and any Bufinefs, and 
 i) 3 to 
 
38 Man to judge for himfelf . 
 
 to fet about ir, we have need of in thb 
 Condu(ft of that Bufinefs ever after. 
 
 In every paltry Defign of this World, a 
 Man thinks it not enough that he hath laid 
 his Projeds well, and put them into good 
 Hands, but if he means to have fuccefs in 
 his Defigns he is obliged to purfue them, 
 and to make ufe of all the Talents of Wit 
 and Induftry he hath to bring thein about. 
 Reafon is never to forfake him, or if it do, 
 it is ten to one but he is forfaken of others 
 upon whom he depended. But now as the 
 Cafe flands in Religion, according to the 
 Roman Catholick Do(!trine, Reafon, and 
 Thinking, and Studying, and Examination, 
 and Indufi:ry, and Search, tho' they be ne- 
 ceiiary Tools to be made ufc of for the 
 putting a Man into good Hands, yet after 
 he is in thofe Hands, he is to throw all thefe 
 things away, and never after to make ufe 
 of them. Doth this look like a Dodtrine 
 of God ? No certainly. Every one thatun- 
 derftands the Dignity of his own Nature, 
 and knows what Reafon is, and how far 
 Men differ from Brutes, and in what things 
 they excel them, will be of another Opi* 
 nion. How can any Man conceive, that 
 God fhould have given us our Reafons and 
 Underflandings merely for the finding the 
 true Church, and afterwards thofe Reafons 
 and Underflandings ihould be altogether in- 
 ^gniiicant as to Matters of Religion ; that 
 we fhould have no ufe of them, but be adled 
 
 like 
 
/;; Tljings ?tecej[ary to Salvation. 39 
 
 like fo many Machines ? Is this to ofer a 
 reajmable Service to God ^ 
 
 The Roman Catholick Dodrinc fuppo- 
 feth us all to have Eyes, and to be able to 
 chule our Way fo long as we are tiereticks, 
 or fo long as we are wavering ; all that 
 time they allow us to have our Eye-fight, 
 and then they bid us to enquire, and exa- 
 mine, and to prove, and to try. But when 
 afterwards any of us hath found the true 
 Church (that is their Church) then we 
 are no longer to examine, or co prcve, or 
 try. But what is this but in plain RjigUP-^ 
 to tell us, God hath given you Eyes for 
 the Choice of your Guide, but after you 
 are fatisfied, that you have light on a good 
 Guide, you are from henceforward ro put 
 out your Eyes, and for ever after to adlas 
 you are ordered by your Guide? 
 
 Another Qusilion I would ask is this. 
 They tell us that we are to enquire and 
 examine Matters of Religion till we have 
 found the true Church, but after that we 
 are to acquiefce in the Dererminations of 
 that Church. Now the Quertion I would 
 ask is, How we fliall find the true Church 
 any other way than by comparing the Do- 
 iftrines that the Church holds Vv^ith the Holy 
 Scriptures ? 
 
 I know that the Roman Catholicks have 
 
 taken a great deal of Pains to give us the 
 
 Notes of the true Church. And of all 
 
 others Cardinal Bellarjmie has taken the 
 
 D 4 greatefl 
 
40 Man to judge for him/elf 
 
 greateft Pains, and hath given us fifteen 
 Notes of the true Church, and one of thofe 
 Notes is SanSfity of Dodirine. We do all 
 grant that he is perfedtly right in this, 
 however he may be miftaken in the reft. 
 For it is certain, That the true Church of 
 Chrift is to be known by the Dodrines it 
 teacheth j and no Church can be a true 
 Church, unlefs it profeffeth and teacheth 
 Chrifli's true Doctrines, as to all the Foun- 
 dations of Chriftianity. But now if this 
 be fo, as it certainly is, how can any Man 
 pretend to know the true Church, with- 
 out a particular Examination of the Do- 
 ctrines that that Church teaches ? If one 
 Mark of the true Church be (as Bellarmine 
 lays it is) that it fhould teach the Dodlrine 
 oi Jefus Chrift, then cerr^inly we cannoc 
 know the true Church rill we have exa- 
 mined its Dodlrines ; and therefore before 
 we can know the Goodnefs of a Church, 
 we are to examine and enquire whether the 
 Dcdrines that arc taught in it be all ho- 
 Beft, and chriftian, and pious, and agreea- 
 ble to the Word of God. So that after 
 all, every Man is to examine by the Word 
 qf God, what Things he is to believe in 
 erder to bis Salvation. 
 
 But thirdly, here is a greater Point yet 
 behind. For admitting the Church of Chrift 
 to be Infalliblej nay admitting the Church 
 Df Ikifjyje (which pretends to be the Catho- 
 
in 'Things necejfary to Salvation. 4 1 
 
 lick Church) to be Infallible, yet would 
 private Men be the better for it ? Would 
 they be more fecure from Errors in Faith 
 than we who pretend to no Infallibility ? 
 This is a very great Queftion, unlefs every 
 particular Guide that is to convey the 
 Church's Faith down to us, be Infallible 
 like wife ; nay, unlefs every private Man 
 that hearkens to that Guide were alfo as In- 
 fallible in taking the true Senfe of the Do- 
 ctrines, as the Teacher is Infallible in pro- 
 pofing them. 
 
 And laftly, here comes the great Queftion 
 of all. How doth it appear that that Church, 
 or any Church, or all Churches taken toge- 
 ther, are Infallible in all things that tJjey 
 propofe as Articles of Faith f I muft confels, 
 I take this to be a verv difficult Thing to 
 be proved. Nay, I fay further, it is impoffi- 
 ble to be proved. Nay, as far as a Nega- 
 tive can be proved, we can prove the con- 
 trary. 
 
 But I dare not new enter upon thefe 
 Points, but fball referve tliem together with 
 what remains upon this Argument to an- 
 nrber opportunity. 
 
 SERMON 
 
^;^^^^^^§;^[;^-^^^i^^^^^^f^^ 
 
 SERMON III. 
 
 Concerning the Infallibility of the 
 Church. Which being admitted in 
 theSenfe of the Roman Catholicks, 
 would 7iQt anfwer the Ends they 
 propofe to ferve by it. 
 
 I P E T. ill. 15. 
 Be ready always to give an Anfwer to 
 
 every Man that asketh yQu a Reafon of 
 the Hope that is in you, 
 
 HE Point which I was lafi: in- 
 fifting upon was this. That it 
 appears from this Text, that 
 it is the Duty of every Chrif- 
 tian fo to fatisfy himfelf about 
 the Reafonablenefs of his BeUef, as to be 
 fble to anjwer them that ask a Reafon of it. 
 And therefore every Man not only may, 
 but ought to enquire into the Grounds of 
 his Faith or Religion^ and not fo to rely 
 
 upon 
 
Of the Infallibility^ Sic. 43 
 
 upon the Authority of his Guides, as to 
 beheve, without Examination, every Thing 
 that is propoied to them. 
 
 This is the Point before us. And I en- 
 deavour'd to make it good by fuch Argi:- 
 ments as I thought moft convincing, n^iz. 
 Such as were drawn from plain Texts 
 of Scripture. 
 
 After this, I proceeded to give an Ac- 
 count of the two different Ways and Me- 
 thods that are now on foot among us, as 
 to this Matter. We are all agreed that 
 every Man is allowed, nay is bound to make 
 an Inquiry or Examination about his Reli- 
 gion. We are all agreed that every Man 
 fliould be able to give a Reajhn of the Hope 
 that is in him. But then here we differ. 
 One Party faith that we are to examine 
 till we have found the true Church: But 
 when we have found that, we are to be 
 for ever after concluded by that Church's 
 DeterminationSjbecaufe that the true Church, 
 wherever it is, is Infallible to all that llie 
 propofeth as Matters of Faith. The other 
 Party faith, That a Man cannot know the 
 true Church but by examining the Docflrines 
 which that Church holds and teacheth, 
 whether they be Chrift's Dodrines or no. 
 And there being no way to knov/ that, but 
 by examining whether they do really agree 
 with thofe Doftrines which we are fure 
 were taught by Chrifl and his Apoftles, 
 and are contained in the Holy Scriptures ; 
 
 1%, 
 
44 ^f i^^ Infallibility 
 
 I fay, fince this is the cafe, there is a Ne- 
 ceffity of allowing every Perfon to try his 
 Faith by the Holy Scriptures, (making ufe 
 of the befl: Means he hath for the right 
 Underftanding of them) and after that Tri- 
 al to judge for himfelf. So that you fee 
 here is a material Difference. The one Side 
 would have Men only fo far inquire into 
 Religion as to find the true Church, and 
 after that, to fubmit to their Guides in all 
 Things. The other Side would have Men 
 to inquire into ChriiVs Religion as it is 
 taught in the Word of God, and to make 
 ufe of their own Judgment all along. The 
 one believes the particular Dodrines of Re- 
 ligion for the Church's fake that teacheth 
 them; The other believes the Church for 
 the fake of the Dodrine that (he teacheth. 
 The one takes up his Religion from the 
 Church, the other takes up his Church 
 from its Religion. 
 
 Having thus given an Account where- 
 in the main Difference between the two 
 Churches lies, as to this Point, I proceed to 
 enquire which of thefe two ways, theirs 
 or ours, doth moft recommend itfelf to 
 a prudent Man. And here I urged two 
 Things againft their Way, and for Ours ; 
 that their Way feems very hard an unna- 
 tural, becaufe it puts an affront upon the 
 Faculties that God hath given us, for the 
 examining and judging of Things by ; and 
 Secondhy that it feems to be defl:ru(5tiva 
 
 of 
 
of the Church of Rome, 45 
 
 of itfelf ; for flnce both Sides are agreed. 
 That that cannot be the true Church which 
 doth not hold the true Dodrines of Jefus 
 Chrift, and fince they themfelves do affign 
 it as a Mark or a Note whereby we may 
 come to know the true Church, namely, 
 that it holds Chrift's true Doctrines ; how 
 is it poffible for any Man to find the true 
 Church, without firft Examining what Doc- 
 trines that Church holdeth, and trying 
 them by the Scriptures, whether thofc 
 Doctrines be the Dodlrines of Jefus Chrift 
 or no : ftill making ufe, as I faid before, 
 of the bed Means he hath for the right 
 Underftanding of thofe Scriptures. And if 
 thus much will be allowed us, we will 
 contend for no more. 
 
 Thus far I went the laft time. And now 
 in the Third Place, 1 have this other Thing 
 to add about the Inconveniency of their 
 Way more than ours, and that is ; allow- 
 ing that to be true Vv^hich they ground this 
 their Method upon, viz. That the true 
 Church ts Infallible ; I fay, allowing this to 
 be true, yet it doth not at all appear, that 
 particular Peribns that follow their Way 
 have any better Means of coming to the 
 Knowledge of a right Faith, than they have 
 among us, and according to our Method ; 
 and perhaps not near fo good. 
 
 Both they and we acknowledge the Scrip- 
 tures are Infallible, and we fay, that they 
 are like wife fo plain in all neceffary Points, 
 
 thac 
 
4 6 Of the Infallibility 
 
 that every Chriftian with the help of fuch 
 Means as he hath daily at hand in our 
 Church, may rightly underftand them, as 
 to all Points needful to his Salvation j fo 
 that every honeft Chriflian among us may 
 have a fure Foundation to build his Faith 
 upon. 
 
 On the other Side their Poiition is, That 
 a private Man cannot be certain that he is 
 in the right Way, unlefs he be certain that 
 he adheres to the Dotftrines of the Church, 
 and fquares his Faith by them ; the Churcli 
 being the only infallible Interpreter of Scrip- 
 ture. 
 
 Well now, we will fuppofe a Man hear- 
 tily to believe this : Is fatisiied that he hath 
 not true Faith, unlefs he believes accord- 
 ing to the Faith of the Church. Here a 
 Queftion arifeth, Flow Ihall he be able to 
 know whether he believes as the Church 
 believeth, that he holds all points of Faith 
 as the Church holdeth them ? This he 
 muft be able certainly to know, or elfe he 
 hath no better ground for his Faith than 
 his Neighbours. Tho' the Church is Infal- 
 hble in what flie teaches, yet what doth 
 this Infallibility fignify to him, unlefs he 
 knows what the Church teacheth t But 
 how (liall he knov/ that any better than 
 he can know what the Scripture teacheth ? 
 Nay, how can he know that half fo eafi- 
 iy as he may do the other ? it being cer- 
 tain, that the Definitions of the Church, in 
 
 Mat- 
 
of the Church oj Rome. 47 
 
 Matters of Faith, as they are more in 
 Number, fo they are more nice and intri- 
 cate than thofe of the Scripture are. 
 
 Well, but to this it is anfwered, That 
 private Men who have not Abilities and 
 Opportunities of learning the Dodlrines of 
 the Church from its authentick Degrees, 
 muft reft fatisfied in the Judgment and 
 Diredlion of their particular Guides, and 
 take the Dodrines of the Church from 
 them. Well this is very true. But here 
 the Queftion returns. Are particular Guides 
 Infallible or no ? If they be not, then it 
 io poffible that the Guides thcmfelves may 
 be miflaken, and if fo, they may miilead 
 the Man that trufis to them ; and then 
 what fervice doth the Church's Infillibility 
 do him in order to the Certainty of his 
 Faith ? If it be faid that particular Guides 
 are Infallible. I only anfwer it would be 
 v/ell if they were fo j but yet it is a thing 
 that they thcmfelves do not pretend to. 
 Well, but fuppofing every Guide or Con- 
 feffor was Infallible in all things that he 
 taught for the Do6trine of the Church, as 
 the Head of the Church himfelf is, yet ftill 
 the Difficulty is not over. When a Guide 
 doth expound the Caiholick Faith to a pri- 
 vate Man, and the Man is certain that he 
 doth rightly expound it, yet how is he cer- 
 tain that he rightly underftands the Mean- 
 ing of thofe Dodrines that his Guide hath 
 declared to him, for the Faith of the 
 
 Church ? 
 
48 Of the tnfallibility 
 
 Church? It is not a new Thing for thofc 
 that do make it their Bufinefs to inftrudt 
 others as plainly as poffibly they can in 
 Matters of Religion, to have their Difcourfe 
 mod horribly mifundcrftood and perverted 
 by thofe that hear them. And now if the 
 thing be fo, and this be the Condition of 
 all private Men, that they may miftake 
 what is taught them, then what Security 
 hath a Man that gives up himfelf intirely 
 to the Conduct of his Guide, that he is 
 not miftaken in Matters of Faith, any more 
 than we have, who befides the Ufe of our 
 Guides, make ufe likewife of our own 
 Eyes in examining by the Scriptures the 
 Dodrines they teach us ? Nay I ask, whe- 
 ther indeed our Security be not much 
 greater than theirs ? It leems to me that 
 there is the fame differeace in our Cafes, 
 as there is (to make the moft favourable 
 Inftance I can ) between a Man's taking up 
 the Truth of a Relation at the third or 
 fourth Hand from a credible Perfon, and 
 fo depending upon the Truth of it, as he 
 underftands it, from him, v/ithout further 
 Examination ; and a Man's taking the fame 
 Story from the fame Perfon, but yet with- 
 al not fticli^ng there, but taking pains to 
 trace it up, as to all the Particulars, to the 
 original Author. Or, as there is between 
 a Man's receiving a Piece of Coin for cur- 
 rent Money, merely upon the Credit of his 
 Goldfmiih, without further Trial ; and a 
 
 Man's 
 
of the Church of Rome. 49 
 
 Man's both advifing with his Goldfmith, 
 and withal making ufe of all the other 
 Helps he can come by, for the difcern- 
 ing true Money from Counterfeit. 
 
 But I am got a little out of my Way- 
 All that I meant to fhevv under this 
 Head is this, That admitting the Church 
 to be Infallible, yet private Men would 
 not be the better for it ; would not be 
 more fecure from Errors in Faith, than wc 
 who pretend to no Infallibility \ unlefs eve- 
 ry particular Guide that is to convey the 
 Church's Faith down to us, be Infallible 
 iikewife. 
 
 Nay further ; admitting every lawful 
 Teacher of the Church to be Infallible in 
 what he Taught, yet even that would not 
 fecure us from Error, unlefs alfo it was fup- 
 pofed that every Man that hears him was 
 as Infallible in taking the true Senfe of 
 thofe Dodrincs, as the Teacher is Infalli- 
 ble in propofing them. And if thefe Things 
 be fo ; I leave it to any Man to judge what 
 greater Matters the Church's Infallibility, 
 if there was any fuch thing, could do as 
 to the fecuring Men from Errors in Faith, 
 than the Proteftant way of adherins: to the 
 infallible Scriptures, in all Matters of Re- 
 ligion, and making ufe of all the Helps 
 we can for the right underftanding of 
 them. 
 
 .But Fourthly^ let us at laft come to the 
 main Point upon which all this Difpute is 
 
 Vol. VII. E grounded; 
 
go Of the Infallibility 
 
 grounded; and that is plainly this. Whe- 
 ther indeed Chrifl hath any infallible 
 Church upon Earth or no ? One Side af- 
 firms, that the true Church of Chrift is 
 Infallible, and that their Church is that 
 Church. The other Side deny that any 
 Church is Infallible. If what they fay be 
 true, then we grant there is all the Reafon 
 in the World, that we fhould in all Things 
 fubmit to the Definitions of their Church, 
 and it would be fooliOi to Difpute any 
 particular Points after we were certain that 
 that Church had decided them ; tho* yet, 
 as I have told you, the Means of coming 
 to that certainty are not fo Infallible. 
 
 This is indeed, the main fundamental 
 Point in Debate between us, and upon 
 which, in a Manner all the other Points 
 of Difference do depend. And you fee 
 that for the clear Refolution of this Point, 
 there are two Things to be examined. 
 Firjiy Whether Chrift hath any Infallible 
 Church upon Earth. Secondly^ Whether 
 that Church which lays claim to this In- 
 fallibility, be that Church of Chrift upon 
 Earth. 
 
 But I fliall drop this latter Queftion ; 
 for if it do appear that no Church is In- 
 fallible, there will be no need of confut- 
 ing the Claim that any particular Church 
 makes to that Priviledge. 
 
 I hope I may inoffcnfively treat a little 
 on this Argument ; it is a Point wherein 
 
 our 
 
of the Church of Rome. 51 
 
 our Church is nearly concerned, and where- 
 in She hath moft exprefsly declared herfelf : 
 And therefore, it cannot be looked upon as 
 a controverfial Point among U6. It is a Point 
 likewife, that is at prelent, the great Enqui- 
 ry of unfettled Minds, and therefore it can- 
 not be judged unfeafonable to fpeak a lit- ^gg,^ 
 tie about it. I would not willingly offend 
 or exafperate any Perfon upon Earth, and 
 moft of all, I would avoid it in my Preach- 
 ing. But if in the choice of the Matter 
 of my Argument I fliould happen to dif- 
 pleafe, yet I promife thofe that are offend- 
 ed, that I will not difpleafe them in the 
 manner of my handling it. For I defira 
 only to inform Mens Minds, but neither 
 to provoke any Mens Paflions, nor to hu- 
 mour or gratify them. 
 
 In fpeaking to this Point, I delire only 
 to premife this, in order to your clearer 
 underftanding the State of the Queftion. 
 
 We throw out of our Debate all Dif- 
 putes about the Church's Infallibility in 
 Fundamentals. We are ready to grant, that 
 the Church of Chrift is Infallible in all 
 Points neceffary to Salvation. We do not 
 indeed approve much of the word InfaU 
 lible^ becaufe in this Cafe it is improperly 
 ufed; (for in true fpeaking, the Church is 
 not more Infallible in Fundamentals than 
 in thofe Points that are not Fundamental.) 
 But fince the Propofition is often put in 
 thefe Terms, we do not change them, 
 E 2 But 
 
^2 Of the Infallibility 
 
 But then you are to remember, that all 
 we mean, when we fay that the Catholick 
 Church is Infallible in Fundamentals, a- 
 mounts to no more than this, That where- 
 ever there is a Church of Chrift, ( as Chriil: 
 hath promifed there {hall always be a 
 Church) that Church will retain all the 
 Foundations of Chrift's Dodtrine : Will hold 
 and teach all Things that are abfolutely ne- 
 cefTary to Salvation. And the Reafon why 
 we affirm this is, becaufe in Truth, without 
 this, it would be no Church at all. But then 
 this doth not hinder but that in the firft 
 Place any particular Church may err and 
 fail, even in fundamental Points, fo as to 
 ceafe to be any longer a true Church. Be- 
 caufe God hath not confined his Catholick 
 Church to any particular Place or Coun- 
 try. It is enough for the fulfilling of Chrift's 
 Promifes, that there (hall for ever, to the 
 end of the World, be fomewhere or other 
 a true Church of Chrift, profefilng and 
 teaching all the efiential neceffary Points 
 of his Religion, which is all that is need- 
 ful to the making of a Church. 
 
 Secondly, Neither doth this Conceflion 
 of ours hinder, but that every particular 
 Church, nay, and all the Churches of the 
 World, tho' they may be Infallible in Fun- 
 damentals, (as we have phrafed it) that 
 is, tho' they do hold the Foundations of 
 Chrift's Religion, and upon that Account 
 are true Churches j yet for all that, they 
 
 may 
 
of the Church of Rome. 53 
 
 may err and miftake, in Matters that do 
 not belong to the Foundation. They arc 
 not fecured by any Priviledge that Chrift 
 hath made over to them, even while they 
 continue true Churches, either from teach- 
 ing Falfehood for Truth, or impofing fuch 
 Pracflices upon their Members, as are in- 
 confiftent with the Laws of God. So that 
 they cannot be relied upon, merely upon 
 Account of their Authority, without an Ex- 
 amination of their Do(flrines and Pradlices. 
 And this is indeed the true State of our 
 Point. 
 
 The Queftion then that is here to be 
 difcufled is, Whether Chrifl hath any 
 Church upon Earth abfolutely, and in all 
 Things Infallible : So that that Church is 
 at all Times fecured from Errors in all 
 Things which flie propofeth or teacheth, 
 in Matters of Religion ? This I fay is the 
 Queftion. And it is determined by the 
 Church of Rngland in the Negative. And 
 my Work at prefent is, ( though it be a 
 very hard, nay an unreafonable task to 
 prove Negatives) yet fairly and modeftly 
 to lay before you fome of the many Rea- 
 fons, why we do not believe that there is 
 any fuch Infallible Church, or that Chrift 
 ever intended there ftiould be fuch a one, tho' 
 the Time will oblige me to be very ftiort. 
 
 I. And the firft Thing we offer is this. 
 
 That if Chrift had meant that there ftiould 
 
 E 3 be 
 
54. Of the Infallihility 
 
 be always an Infallible Church upon Earth* 
 we cannot but believe that it would have 
 been fomewhere or other exprefsly told 
 us in the New Tejlamenty both that there 
 was an Infallibility lodged in the Church 
 for ever, and likewife, in which, of all the 
 Churches in the World, this Infallibility 
 was lodged ; that fo upon all Occafions, 
 Chriftians in all Ages might know where 
 to have recourfe to that Infallible Church. 
 But now, this not being done in the whole 
 ISJeiv Teftament, neither by our Saviour, 
 nor by his Apoftles, it is a ftrong Argument 
 to us, that no fuch Thing was ever intend- 
 ed by them. 
 
 We are not ignorant, that feveral Texts 
 »f the New Tejiament are produced as 
 Proofs of the Church's Infallibility. But 
 in Truth, if thofe Texts be but never io 
 little confider'd, and Men be not carried 
 a Way with the mere Sound of Words, it 
 will appear to any unbiaffed Reader, that 
 even thofe Texts do not fpeak at all to 
 the Bufinefs of Infallibility ; or if they do, 
 they concern none but the Apoftles them- 
 felves. 
 
 Thus, for Inftance, to prove the Church's 
 
 InfillibiUty, they urge the Words of our 
 
 Saviour to St. Peter^ ^ J^y ^^^^ ^^^^> ^^^^ 
 
 <^iM. XVI. ^^^ Peter, and upon this Rock will I build 
 
 sg, my Churchy and the Gates of Hell fiall 7J0t 
 
 )revail againjl it. But now, whatfoever be 
 
 bere meant by the Rock upon which Chrill 
 
 would 
 
of the Church of Rome. c^^ 
 
 would hiiild his Church, whether St. Pcfer*s 
 Perfon, or the Faith that he then confeff- 
 ed, as moft of the Fathers Interpret it, 
 yet it is plain, that Chrift did not here 
 promife Infallibility to his Church, but on- 
 ly a Perpetuity. He did not fay that his 
 Church (hould never err-y but he faid, that 
 his Church (liould ntstv periJJ:>. Every one 
 that knows any Thing of the Language of 
 Scripture will be fatisfied that is the Mean- 
 ing of the Phrafe, that the Gates of Hell 
 Jlmdd never prevail againft his Church. 
 
 Again : They urge thefe Words of our Sa- j^^^^ ^^^n. 
 viour, where he advifes, That if a Mans 15. 
 Brother T^refpafs againfl him^ and the Mat- 
 ter cannot be made up between them, ei- 
 ther by a private Admonition, or by refer- 
 ing it to the Arbitration of two or three 
 Friends ; in that Cafe, the laft Remedy 
 that the injured Perfon had, was to tell the 
 Bufinefs to the Church : And if the Man 
 refufed to hear the Churchy he was then to v. 17. 
 be accounted as an Heathen, or a Publicafu 
 But what is here meant by telling the 
 Church ? There lies all the Difficulty. 
 Why every one that confiders the Scope 
 of the Place will plainly fee, that Chriil 
 meant no more than this, That if the Man 
 could not make a private Agreement with 
 his Brother that had injured him, he was 
 to complain publickly of the Injury to the 
 Congregation ; and if upon the Advice, 
 or Rebukes of the Governour of the Alfem- 
 E 4 bly 
 
56 Of the Infallibility 
 
 bly the Man did not make Satisfadion, 
 but ftill continued obftinate, the injured 
 Perfon was not from henceforward, obh- 
 ged to ufe any more endeavours to bring 
 him to a Senfe of his Fault, but might 
 after that, look upon him as a Stranger, 
 or an Heathen^ and no longer as a Bro- 
 ther, 
 
 This is plainly the Senfe of the Place. 
 But what is this to the Bufincfs of Infalli- 
 bility ? If it make any thing that way, it 
 rather proves the Infallibility of the Supe- 
 riors of every Congregation, or the Infalli- 
 bility of every Bifliop's Confiflory, in re- 
 dreffing Complaints that come before them, 
 than the Infallibility of the Church in de- 
 termining Matters of Faith. 
 
 Thus again it is urged, That Chrift told 
 
 Matth. his Apoflles that he would be with them ; 
 
 xiviii. 20. jj^^j- is, Vv'ith them, and with the Bifliops 
 that fucceeded them, to the E?id of the World. 
 Right. Chrift will always, by the Influence 
 of his Spirit, be preienr, not only with the 
 Governors of his Church, but with every 
 Member of his Church. But yet I fay, 
 this doth not imply that every Member or 
 every Bifliop is Infallible. For my parr, I 
 ihould think it did more concern our Lord 
 Jefus, by virtue of this Promife, to make 
 ills Church impeccable^ than to make it /?z- 
 fallible. My meaning is. That it was a much 
 more defirable thing to fecure his Minifters 
 i^r*d People from the Danger of Sin, than 
 
 from 
 
of the Church of Rome. 57 
 
 from the Danger of Error. But the for- 
 mer he hath not done, and therefore I 
 much doubt of the latter. 
 
 Again : It is urged, That Chrift faid to 
 his Apoftles, that after his departure he 
 would fend the Comforter to theniy even /^^JoJ^^xvi. 
 Spirit of Ttruthy and when he came he fhould '^* 
 lead them into all T^ruth. This is very true. 
 And our Saviour was as good as his Word, 
 for he did by his Spirit lead the Apoflles 
 into all 'Truth : Nay, to that degree, that 
 we believe they did infallibly, and with an 
 unerring Spirit, preach all the Truths of 
 God, and nothing but the Truth. But 
 then it is plain that this Promife was made 
 only to the Apoftles, and not to all that 
 fhould come after them. For after he had 
 faid that the Spirit {hould lead them into 
 all Truth, he prefcntly adds thefe Words, 
 mjd he will fldew you Things to come^ viz. He^sf- ^3- 
 would endue the Apoftles with the Gift of 
 Prophecy. But now, I hope, all thofe that 
 fucceed the Apoftles in the Church, do not 
 pretend to any fuch affiftance of the Spi- 
 rit as that was. If the Biftjop of any 
 Church can fhew that they have the Gift 
 of Prophecy, in a continu'd Succeffion, and 
 that they can foretel Things to come^ as the 
 Apoftles did, then we will own that this 
 Promife of Chrift was direcfted to his Church. 
 in all A2;es. But not till then. 
 
 Laftlv, 
 
58 Of the hifallibility 
 
 Laftly, It is brought for a Proof of the 
 Church's InfalUbility, That St. Faiil tells 
 I Tim. iii. Timothy^ that the Church was the Pillar and 
 *S' Ground of the ^ruth. Why, admitting that 
 St. Paul fa id fo, yet it is plain that it was 
 not of 'The Church, but of A Church, a par- 
 ticular Church, njiz. that of Ephefus that he 
 fpoke thefe Words. Which Church of 
 Ephefus, where Timothy was Bi{hop, is not 
 now in being, tho' v/hile it was in being 
 it was a Stay and Support of Truth. But 
 what doth this make to the proving, That 
 any Church at this Day is Infallible ? But 
 fuppofing we underftand thefe Words of 
 St. Paid of the Church Catholick, as the 
 Roman Catholicks would have us, yet even 
 this will do them no fervice at all. For 
 we fay in the firft Place, that he might 
 IHle the Church a Pillar and Support of 
 Truth, not upon account that it always is 
 fo, and always fhall be fo ; but becaufe it 
 ought to be fo ; juft as our Saviour calls all 
 his Difciples, all Chriftians, the Salt oj the 
 Earth, and yet in the fame place tells us, 
 M*tth. V. that That Salt may become unfavoury. It is 
 ^5- the Duty of Chriftians to be the Salt of 
 the Earth, and of the Church to be a Pillar 
 and Support of the Truth ; but it doth not 
 follow from thefe Attributes, that either 
 the one or the other {hall always perform 
 or make good thofe Characters. I fay, if 
 we do give this account of the Palllige in 
 
 St. 
 
of the Church of Rome. eg 
 
 St. "Paul^ there is none of them can con- 
 fute us. 
 
 Again : We fay in the fecond Place, That 
 the Church may be always a Pillar and 
 Groimd of the Triithy and yet be far from 
 being Infallible. All that St. Paul can be 
 fuppos'd to have meant by this Phrafe, if 
 he had fpoke of the Catholick Church, can 
 be no more than this, That the Church of 
 Chrift fhould always be the Pillar and Sup- 
 port of that neccfTary Truth which goes to 
 the making up the Myjlcry of Godlinefs^Yit. x^ 
 which he fpeaks of in the very next Verfe: 
 That is to fay, the fundamental Truths of 
 Chriftianity Ihall be always taught and pro- 
 fefTed in the Church, 'viz. fo much Truth 
 as will carry the ProfefTors of it to Hea- 
 ven, if they live up to it. But this comes 
 infinitely {hort of Infallibility. The Church 
 may be thus a Pillar and Support of the 
 'Truth, and yet at the fame time hold and 
 teach a great many Errors. 
 
 But altho' this is fufficient to (liew, that 
 this Text, if underflood of the Church, 
 makes nothins for Ii^fallibility ; yet I be- 
 lieve, any indifferent Perfon that reads the 
 Words, and minds them well, will be al- 
 moft forced to acknowledge that they are 
 ?iot to be underftood of the Church, hue 
 to be applied to Timothy himfelf, to whom 
 the Apoflle writes ; fo as to be read thus. 
 Theje things I write unto thee, hoping to 
 come unto thee fl:ortly j but if I tarry long, 
 
 that 
 
6o Of the htfallibtlity 
 
 that thou may Jl know how to behave thy felf 
 in the Houje of God^ the Church of the li- 
 ving Godi as a Pillar and Support of the 
 I'ruth, He is giving Rules to fimothy how 
 to behave himlelf in the Church, which 
 he calls the Houfe of God. Now, after that 
 he called it an Houfe ^ one would think it 
 not proper that he Ihould in the very fame 
 Breath call it a Pillar of an Houfe. Bust 
 now it is very natural to give that Name to 
 timothy J and to exhort him to behave him- 
 felf as fuch in the Houfe of God ; as indeed 
 the Apoftles and Bifhops are in Scripture, 
 called by the Name of Pillars, And if you 
 take the Text in this Senfe (as I do verily be- 
 lieve this is the meaning of it) it is flill far- 
 ther off from the Purpofe that it is brought 
 for. 
 
 Thefe are the chief T'exts in the Bible 
 that are brought in favour of the Church's 
 X perpetual Infallibility. But you fee by that 
 little I have faid of them, that not one of 
 them doth near come up to the Pcnnt. Nay, 
 indeed, doth not in the leaft touch it. And 
 yet one would think, that fo great a Point 
 as this, a Point which as they fay, fo near- 
 ly concerns every Man's Salvation, fhould 
 rsot have been thus filently paffed over both 
 by our Saviour himfelf, and by thofe in- 
 Ipired Men that pretend to give us an Ac- I 
 count of his Dodtrines. 
 
 2. But 
 
of the Church of Rome. dt 
 
 2. But I leave this, and proceed in the 
 fecond Place to another Reafbn, why we 
 cannot believe that Chrift hath any Infalli- 
 ble Church upon Earth, 'wi-z. becaufe we 
 do not find that any of the Primitive Church- 
 es ever pretended to fuch Infallibility ; no, 
 not the Church of Rojne herfelf. We do 
 not find that the Dodtrine of the Infallibi- 
 lity of the Church, much lefs of the Roman 
 Church, isaflerted by any one antient Coun- 
 cil, or by any one antient Father. We do 
 not find, That in the Controverfies which a- 
 rofe in the antient Church about Matters of 
 Faith, the Guides of the Church ever made 
 ufe of this Argument of the Church's Infal- 
 libility for the quieting and ending of them: 
 which yet, had they known of any fuch 
 Thing, had been the propereft and the eafi- 
 eft means they could have ufed. Nay fur- 
 ther we knov/, that the antient Fathers had 
 another Method of confuting Hereticks and 
 Schifmaticksthan by appealing to the Church- 
 es Infallibility ; namely, by bringing their Do- 
 ctrines to be Tried by the antient Ufages and 
 Dodrines of the Apoftolick Churches, and 
 efpccially by the divine Oracles of Scrip- 
 ture, which they looked upon as the en- 
 tire and only Rule of Faith. 
 
 We know further, as to the Church of 
 Kome^ that by what appears by the Car- 
 riage and Behaviour of other Churches in 
 the Primitive Times towards that Church, 
 in Matters where they were concerned to- 
 gether. 
 
62 Of the Li fallibility 
 
 gether, it muft be thought impofiible that 
 thofe Churches (hould ever have entertain- 
 ed any Opinion, or fo much as Imagina- 
 tion of the Roman Church's Infallibility : 
 They making no fcruple, vtrhencver there 
 was occafion, to oppofe the Senfe of that 
 Church as vigoroufly, as they either did 
 or could oppofe any other particular Church 
 that differ'd from them. 
 
 3. But Thirdly, another Reafon why we 
 are hardly brought to believe that any 
 Church is Infallible, is, becaufe we do not 
 fee any effedl of this Infallibility in the 
 World, or any Good which hath accrewed 
 to the Church, which may not as well be 
 afcribed to God's ordinary alTiftance of eve- 
 ry Chriftian Church without Infallibility, as 
 with it. 
 
 It is faid indeed, That without a living 
 infallible Judge, Controverfies that arife a- 
 mong Chriftians cannot be ended. Why, 
 that very Church that pretends to Infallibi- 
 lity are not yet agreed among themfelves 
 about feveral Points pertaining to Religion. 
 Nay, this very Buiinefs of Infallibility (as 
 important a Point as it is) as to the Seat of 
 it, where, or in whom it is lodged, is yet 
 as great a Controverfy among them as 
 any. 
 
 It is faid, That without an Infallible 
 Judge the Scriptures cannot be expounded ; 
 the Senfe of Texts cannot be afcertained. 
 
 Why, 
 
€f the Church of Rome. 63 
 
 Why, as to this, we defire to be informed, 
 what Advantages that Church that pretends 
 to Infallibility hath in this refped:, above 
 other Churches that pretend to none. Do 
 they in that Communion, underftand Scrip- 
 ture better than thofe who differ from them ? 
 Or have they fettled or cleared the Senfe 
 of any one doubtful Text, by virtue of In- 
 fallibility, during all the time they have 
 laid claim to it ? It will be a hard Matter 
 to produce one Text of Scripture, the Senfe 
 of which was by this means afcertained. 
 We all know, and muft confefs, That all 
 thofe Texts of Scripture which were diffi- 
 cult and obfcure at the firft, remains fo to 
 this Day, for any thing that any Infallibi- 
 lity hath done toward the clearing of them. 
 And if the Senfe of any obfcure PaiTage 
 in thofe Holv Books be more cleared, or 
 better afcertained to us than they were for- 
 merly, next to the Bleffing of God, we arc 
 obliged for it to the Learning and Induflry 
 of fallible Commentators. 
 
 Thefe are flirewd Prefumptions, that ic 
 was not the Defign of Chrift that we fhould 
 arrive to the Knowledge of his Will, by 
 the Condu<fl of an unerring Guide, bur. ra- 
 ther by honeftly and induftrioufly employ- 
 ing thofe Parts, and thofe ordinary Means 
 which he hath afforded us for that pur- 
 pofe. 
 
 I might mention another Reafon why we 
 think it very unfafe to rely upon any 
 
 Church's 
 
64 Of the Infallibility 
 
 Church's Infallibility, as to Matters of Faith, 
 (and which indeed is worth all the reft) 
 and that is this. Becaufe it may be made 
 to appear, That that Church, which only 
 of all others claims Infallibility to her felf, 
 hath adlually erred in her determinations 
 about Matters of Faith. 
 
 In faying this, I fay no more than 
 what our Church hath declared in her 
 nineteenth Article. The Words of it are 
 thefe. 
 
 " As the Church of Jerufalem^ of Ale^ 
 " xandria^ and Antioch have erred, fo alfo 
 " the Church of Rome hath erred, not only 
 " in their Living and Manner of Ceremo- 
 " nies, but alfo in Matters of Faith." 
 
 But I have held you too long already to 
 engage you in a new Argument ; efpecial- 
 ly fuch a one as needs no Proof to us, we 
 owning our felves Proteftants, and being 
 prefumed to be already fatisfied about it. 
 
 And therefore I take my leave of this 
 Argument, and clofe all with thefe Petitions 
 in our Liturgy. 
 
 " That it would pleafe God to give all 
 " his People increafe of Grace, to hear 
 " meekly his Word, and receive it with 
 " pure Affedlion, and to bring forth the 
 " Fruits of the Spirit. 
 
 " That it would pleafe him to bring in- 
 " to the Way of Truth, all fuch as have 
 " erred and are deceived. 
 
 '' That 
 
of the Church of Rome. 
 
 " That it would pleafe him to ftrcngthen 
 " fuch as do ftand, to comfort and help the 
 " weak- hearted, to raife up them that fall, 
 " and finally to beat down Satan under our 
 " Feet. 
 
 God of hh infimte Mercy grant this^ 
 for the fake of hh dear Son. To 
 ivho??!, &c. 
 
 Vol. VII. 
 
 SER' 
 
66 
 
 SERMON IV. 
 
 77)af the Scriptures may be under- 
 jlood in all neceffary Points by pri- 
 vate Perfons^ with ordinary HelpSy 
 without an infallible hiterpreter 
 of their Sejtfe , and therefore not 
 .to be de?ned to the common People, 
 
 2 PET. iii. i6. 
 
 — In which are fome things hai'd to be un- 
 derjlood \ which they that are unlearned 
 and iinfiable wrejl, as they do alfo the other 
 Scri^tureSy unto their own deJlrnStion. 
 
 in this Chapter 
 of the Second 
 
 T. Feter 
 is treating 
 Coming of Chrift to Judge 
 
 p^^^M the World, and anfwering 
 *^s=W#^ the Objedion that fome Scof- 
 fers in thofe Days made againft the 
 Truth of ir, upon account that it was de- 
 layed lb long. To this he replies feveral 
 
 Things, 
 
"The Scriptures not to be de?iiedy &,c. 67 
 
 Things, and he backs what he had faid with 
 the Authority of St. Paul, who had writ- 
 ten concerning thefe Matters. Ye (hould Ver. ic. 
 account (fays he) that the long-fuffering of 
 our Lord (which is objected againfl) is meant 
 for our Salvation y €ve?i as our beloved Bro- 
 ther Paul aljb according to the Wijdom given 
 unto him^ hath 'written unto you ; as aljb i?i^^^' '^• 
 all his Epijilcs^ [peaking in them of thefe 
 things. And now having mentioned St. Paul 
 and his Epiftles, he adds this Note a? it 
 were by way of Parenthefis \In whichy fays 
 he, there are fome things, &c.] 
 
 Upon which Words, before I come to 
 treat of the main Point I defign from them^ 
 I fliall defire leave to make a few Stridbures 
 or fliort Notes, 
 
 I. Firdof all it is doubted, Whether the 
 firft Words of my Text In which, do refer 
 to St. PaiW^ RpHllcs, or to the Thifigs he 
 writes of in thofe Epiftles. For the relative 
 Article is in fome Copies exprefled in one 
 Gender cv tth, to refer to the Epiltles ; but 
 in moft Copies ^ ok, to refer to the Tlmigs 
 Ipoken of. According to the firft reading, 
 this is the Propofuion in the Text, viz. 
 ^hat in St. Paul'i Epijlles there are fome 
 things hard to be under jlood. According to 
 the other reading, this is the Propofition, 
 That among thofe Particulars that St. Peter 
 is now inffing on, and which St. Paul like-* 
 wife hath in his Epijlles treated of there are 
 F 2 fome 
 
6 8 T'he Scriptures not to he denied 
 
 fome hard to he underjiood. There is fome 
 difference between thefe Propofitions : but 
 yet they are both of them certainly true : 
 And I do not fee any fuch matter of con- 
 fequence which of them we pitch upon, 
 as to think it worth the difputing whether 
 of them is to be preferred. 
 
 2. There have been various Conjetflures 
 what thofe particular Points or Faflages are 
 in St. Paul's Epiftles, which St. Peter here 
 calls i'vtrv'mTA, hard to be underjiood^ and 
 which he fays Men in his Time did wreji 
 to their own definition. St. Aiifiin will have 
 it, that he had his Eye on St. Paul's Do- 
 ctrine of Jufiification by Faith without Works ; 
 which fome Hereticks in thofe Days per- 
 verted to very ill Purpofes. Others give 
 other Accounts j but they are all uncertain j 
 and it is a Bufinefs of greater Curiofity 
 than Ufefulnefs, to be inquifitive about this 
 Matter. 
 
 3. It is more to our purpofe in the third 
 Place, to take notice of this. That it is 
 not only in St. Paul's Epiftles, that there 
 are tUa J^va-vonra, fome things hard to be un- 
 derjloody but in all the other Scriptures like- 
 wife. And feems to be intimated here by 
 St. Peter^ when having told us how liable 
 unlearned and unfiahle Men were to wrefi 
 
 fome Paffages in St. Paul's Epiftles to a wrong 
 Sfenfe, upon account that they were hard to 
 he underjiood^ he adds that they did fo like- 
 wife with other Scriptures, 
 
 Indeed 
 
to commofi People. 6g 
 
 Indeed it cannot be denied, That there 
 are abundance of PafTages, both in the Wri- 
 tings of the Old and New Tejlafjient^ v/hich 
 are very hard to be underfiood. Some upon ac- 
 count of the Depth, and Myfterioufnefs, 
 and Obfcurity of the Things themfelves that 
 are deHvered ; and many more, upon the 
 account of the {hortnefs and difficulty of 
 the Expreffions wherein they are cloathed. 
 But moft upon account of our ignorance 
 and unacquaintance with the Idioms of the 
 Languages they were wrote in, and the 
 Cuftoms, and Hiftories, and other Things 
 proper to thofe Places and Perfons they 
 were firft intended for, which are refer'd 
 to in them. So that if any Man will fay, 
 that the whole Scripture is plain and ealy 
 to be underftood, he affirms very raflily. 
 There are a Multitude of Texts which will 
 puzzle the moft learned and intelligent Man 
 now living, to give a certain account of. 
 And therefore eaiily may we imagine that 
 there is a far greater Multitude, which an 
 ordinary unlearned Reader will be able to 
 fay little or nothing to. 
 
 4. But I obferve in the fourth Place, 
 after what Manner, in all Times, the Scrip- 
 tures have been dealt with. Even in the 
 Apoftolical Times there were Men that 
 wrejled them. The Word is, s-f g/s^Bcn : they 
 did diftort them from their natural Mean* 
 ing: they did torture them to make them 
 fpeak what Senfe they would have them : 
 F 3 they 
 
*]0 T'he Scriptures not to be dejtied 
 
 they did not ftudy to take up their Opi- 
 nions from Scripture, but they ftudied to 
 force the Scripture to comply with thofe 
 Opinions they had taken up before. This 
 is properly wrejimg the Scripture ; and this 
 Practice, as it did begin very early, fo hath 
 it ever lince continued in the VVorid. In 
 every Age, and at this Day as much as 
 ever, the Scriptures have been wrejied from 
 their proper Senfe and Meaning to ferve 
 Turns : Among all the numerous Divifions 
 and Fadtions that have been, or are in the 
 Chriftian Church, either with reference to 
 Doctrine or Pradticc, there is not one of 
 them but hath always urged Scripture in 
 its own Defence. There was none of the 
 old Hereticks (were their Principles never 
 fo Unfcriptuxal) but had abundance of Texts 
 to vxDuch for their Orthodoxy, if they might 
 have the liberty of interpreting them. And 
 at tiiis Day, not only we do urge the Scrip- 
 tures for our Caufe, but Papifts, Socinians, 
 Quakers, Antinomians, and all the other Di- 
 vifions among us, do all with equal confi- 
 dence appeal to the Scripture for the Truth 
 of their Caufe. Now certainly the Scrip- 
 ture can have but one true Senfe, let the 
 Pretenders to that Senfe be as many as 
 they pleafe. And therefore all thefe Men 
 holding contradidlions to one another, can- 
 pot all be fuppofed to interpret Scripture 
 faithfully and fincerely : But lome of them 
 
 do 
 
to common People, 71 
 
 do wref, it in order to the ferving that 
 Caufe which they have efpoufed. 
 
 5. But fifthly, it is worth our notice, 
 what kind of Perfons they were in the 
 Apoftle's time, that did thus wreft the Scrip- 
 ture ; they were, as he tells us, ct/^iad-Sf xj aVh- 
 etK\oi, unlearned and unflable. It may be he 
 meant the fame thing by both thefe Words. 
 But if they be to be diftinguifli'd, by the 
 unlearned we are to underftand the igno- 
 rant and unskilful ; they who never applied 
 their Minds to the careful reading of the 
 Scripture, nor have taken care to furnifh 
 themfelves with thofe helps and acquire- 
 ments which are neceffary to be had, in 
 order to the right underftanding it when they 
 read it. By the unflable^ we are to under- 
 ftand thofe that are not well fixed and efta- 
 blillied and grounded in the Faith of Chrift, 
 (as the Word <tV«et;c7o/ moft properly fignifies) 
 but for want of true Principles, do fluduate 
 this v/ay and that way, and are tofjed /oEph. iv. 
 and fro ivith every Wind of Doctrine^ as ^^' 
 St. Faul exprcfles it. Thefe were the un- 
 learned and unflable Men that did, in the 
 Apoille's time, wreft the Scripture. And 
 fuch kind of Perfons have they aKvays been 
 that followed this Prad:ice of theirs in fuc- 
 ceeding Generations. Whatever Innovations 
 or Corruptions have been brought into the 
 Church, whatever Departures have been 
 made from Catholick Faith, and Catholick 
 Charity and Communion, they had genc- 
 F 4 rally 
 
7 2 H'he Script teres not to he denied 
 
 rally both their Pvife and Continuance from 
 fuch imlearned and unliable Men. 
 
 That which I would gather from hence 
 is this. How very neceliary it is for thofe 
 who would rightly expound the Scripture, 
 both to furnilh themfelves with a compe- 
 tent Meaiiire of fuch kind of Learning, 
 and Skill, and Knowledge, as is proper for 
 the underftanding of that Book, and alfo to 
 be thoroughly grounded and principled in 
 the fubftantial and fundamental Doctrines 
 of theChriflian Religion. If either of thefe 
 C^^lities be wanting, a Man is like to make 
 fad Work if he fets up for an Interpreter of 
 Scripture. 
 
 6. Thefixth and lad: Thing I take notice 
 of in thefe Words is, the fad Confequence 
 of a Man's ivrpliing the Scripture^ which is 
 here mentioned. T:hey ivreli them, fays the 
 Apoftle, to their own DeJiriidfimL This con- 
 iideration ought to make us all infinitely 
 careful how we abufe or pervert the Scrip- 
 ture, or make a Tool of it for the ferving 
 our own Ends. By fuch wicked proceed- 
 ings, we fhall not only do a great Mifchief 
 to Religion and the Church, but undo our 
 felves at the long run. It is not indeed 
 every Error and Miftake about the Senfe of 
 a Text of Scripture that is of this dange- 
 rous Confequence, nor many fuch Errors 
 and Miftakes put together. A Man may 
 he ignorant or miflaken in a thoufand Texts 
 of iJcripturCj without any danger of his 
 
 Salva- 
 
to common People, 73 
 
 Salvation. But this is that we fay is dan- 
 gerous, when a Man makes ufe of Scrip- 
 ture to countenance his vicious Inclina- 
 tions : As either when he fo perverts or cor- 
 rupts the Chriflian Dodtrine, as to give in- 
 couragement to a wicked and unchriftian 
 Life, or fuborns Texts of Scripture for the 
 making or upholding Divifions and Schifms 
 in the Chriflian Church. This we fay is 
 fuch a ivrejtwg of the Scriptures as it is to 
 be feared, thoie that ufe it, may too truly 
 be faid to do it to tkeir oivn DeJiruBion. 
 
 And thus much I thought fit to fpealc 
 by way of Explication of the Text. It 
 (liall now be my Bufinefs to refolve the 
 three following Enquiries. 
 
 FirJ}^ Since the Character that St. Peter 
 gives of the Scripture, efpecially of St. 
 Paul's E piffles is, that there are in them 
 lucvohi Things hard to be under jlood •■, with 
 what Truth can we Protejiants afHrm, That 
 the Scriptures are plain and perfpicuous, 
 and eafily iinderffocd by vulgar Capacities? 
 
 Secondly^ Whether from this Point, that 
 there are in Scripture, Things hard to be 
 7inder/iood^ we can reafonably draw fuch a 
 Conclufion as this, that therefore there is a 
 neceflity, that Chriff fhould have left in 
 his Church fome vifible infallible Judge 
 for the Interpretation of then ? 
 
 I'hirdlyy 
 
74 ^^ Scriptures not to he de7iied 
 
 Thirdly^ Whether the Difficulty and Ob- 
 fcurity of the Holy Scriptures, and their 
 being liable on that Account, to be wreft- 
 ed and perverted to evil Purpofes, be a fuf- 
 ficient Ground for the forbidding the Ufe of 
 them to the People ? And whether for all 
 that, every Man may not, and ought not, 
 ierioufly to apply himfelf to the reading 
 of the Holy Scriptures, or the hearing them 
 Read. 
 
 I. My Firft enquiry is, How can the "Pro- 
 tejlants Polition be true, That the Scriptures 
 are plain and perfpicuous, and intelligible 
 to ordinary Capacities ; when yet, if we 
 may believe St. Peter, there are in them 
 Things hard to be tinderjiood? 
 
 This is a Difficulty that the Roman Ca- 
 thoUcks do urge us with, in order to the 
 making us quit the Scriptures as our Rule 
 of Faith, and take up Tradition in the 
 Place thereof. But this would appear no 
 Difficulty at all, if they would but rightly 
 reprefent our Dodtrine in this Matter. 
 
 I. In the firft Place, we do not fay 
 that every paiTage of Scripture is plain, ea- 
 fy, and perlpicuous j nay, we acknowledge 
 that there are feveral PalTages of it ob- 
 fcure and intricate, and fuch as will puz- 
 zle not only an ordinary Reader, but even 
 the moil Learned to give the Meaning of. 
 So that we leave room enough for, St. Pe- 
 ters 
 
IQ cojnmon People, 75 
 
 tcr\ AiTertion, that there are in Scripture 
 tiv(t ^vfmiTA, Jome Things hard to be un- 
 derftood. Nay, if any Man will enjarge 
 his Propofition, and fay, that there are ma- 
 ny things bard to be iinderjlood in itj we 
 do readily concur with him. 
 
 2. Neither fecondly do we fay, That thofe 
 Paflages which are intelligible to a learned 
 Reader, to one that is well verfed and ex- 
 perienced in thefe kind of Matters, are all 
 of them eafy and intelligible to an unlear- 
 ned one. We acknowledge as well as they, 
 that as a Man is more or lefs furnifhed 
 with proper Helps, and Means, and Inftru- 
 ments, for the underftanding the Scripture ; 
 as he hath more or lefs improved himfelf, 
 by acquired Knowledge and Learning ; fo 
 he (hall in proportion, underftand more or 
 lefs of thofe holy Books. And we do not 
 upon a Pretence of private Infpiration from 
 the Spirit of God, teach or think that eve- 
 ry well-meaning godly Perfon, is prefently 
 qualify 'd to expound the Scriptures. 
 
 3. But thirdly, this is all that we fay, as 
 to the plainnefs, and perfpicuity, and intel- 
 ligiblenefs of the Scriptures, that tho' there 
 be in them many diflicult PafTages, nay 
 perhaps whole Books ; yet, as to all thofe 
 Things wherein the Salvation of Mankind 
 is concerned, they are fufficiently plain and 
 eafy to be underftood, both by the learned 
 
 and 
 
J 6 The Scriptures not to he denied 
 
 and unlearned. So far as Scripture is a Rule 
 ff Faith and Manners^ (and we contend 
 that it is a perfed: Rule of both ) fo far it 
 is perfpicuous and obvious to all Capa- 
 cities ; fuppofing the Men come with 
 an humble and honeft Mind, defirous to 
 learn their Duty, and willing to praflice 
 it after they have learnt it. We do not 
 fay, that there are no Difficulties in Scrip- 
 fure ; but we lay, that all thofe Things 
 that are neceflary to be believed or prac- 
 tifed are not difficult. Or, if fome of them 
 be more obfcurely expreifed in one Place, 
 they are more plainly in another. So that 
 none can juftly except againft the Scripture, 
 as to the fitnefs of its being a Rule erf Faith 
 imd Manners^ and very necejfary to be read 
 £ind know?! of all Men, upon account of the 
 Difficulty or Obfcurity of it. 
 
 But as to this the Roman Catholicks urge. 
 That it is not fo clear that the Scripture 
 IS plain and perfpicuous, even in necelTary 
 Points, wherein the Salvation of Men is 
 concerned. For if it were, how comes it 
 to pais, that there are fo many Difputes 
 among the Proteftants about the Senfe of 
 Scripture, even in Matters which they ac- 
 count (at lead: one fide of them doth ac- 
 coun ) Fundamental and NecefTary ? To 
 this I anfwer j That tho* we (hould admit 
 this Suggeftion to be true, that the Protef- 
 tants differ in their Interpi-etation, even in 
 fundamental Points, yet it is no Argument 
 
 againft 
 
to com?770?i People. 
 
 iigainft the plainnefs and perfpicuity of 
 Scripture, in Matters of Faith and Man- 
 ners. For Things may be plain enough 
 to all dilinterefted Men, that arc not plain 
 to thofe who are ilrongly prejudiced againft 
 thofe Things by Education, or Paffion, or 
 Intereft, and the like. If no Writing be 
 allowed to be plain, and intelligible, till 
 all Men be a9;reed in the Senle of it, or 
 till it be impoliible that a Man that fets 
 his Wits a work fliould be able to find a- 
 ny Colour for the wrefting it to another 
 Senfe, than that which was meant by the 
 Author J then farewel all plainnefs and 
 perfpicuity in any Writing : Nay not only 
 fo, but farewel all plainnefs in any Speech- 
 es, or Declarations that are made by word 
 of Mouth. So that this Objedion will as 
 much differ ve the Caufe of the Church of 
 RofnCy who would have Tradition^ and the 
 Authority of the Pope for their Rule of Fait by 
 as it will differve our Caufe who pretend 
 to be governed by the Scriptures. 
 
 But I would ask, Why doth any Roman 
 Prieft when he hath to deal with a Pro- 
 teftant, and would bring him over to their 
 Communion ; I fay, why doth he endea- 
 vour to convince him, from the Scriptures, 
 of the Erroneoufnefs of our Religion, and 
 the Neceffity of believing and pradifing as 
 their Church teacheth ? Why doth he labour 
 to prove, by Texts of Scripture, thofe fevcral 
 Points which they would bear us in hand, 
 
 are 
 
7 8 llde Scriptures not to be denied 
 
 arc necejfary to be believed ^ and which yet 
 we deny, as ^ranfubjlantiation^ for Indance, 
 and the Supremacy of St. Peter, and the 
 like? Doth not every Man among them 
 that , proeeeds in this Way, for the convin- 
 cing of Proteftants (and yet they all make 
 ufe of this way) plainly acknowledge by 
 this very Proceeding, that all thofe Points 
 that arc neceflary to be believed or prac- 
 tifed, are fufficiently plain in the Scripture ? 
 and that even an unlearned Man is capa- 
 ple of underflanding them ? For certain- 
 ly, no Man ever endeavour'd to prove a 
 Thing to another, but by fomething which 
 he thought the Perfon he would prove it 
 to, would readily apprehend, and fee the 
 Force and Evidence of This is therefore 
 a conceffion, that he doth in his own Con- 
 fcience believe the Scriptures to be fuffi- 
 ciently plain, at leaft in all neceffary Points, 
 even to ordinary Underftandings. 
 
 II. But to proceed to our fecond En- 
 quiry, which is. Whether from this Point, 
 That there are in Scripture 'Things hard to 
 be iinderjloody we can reafonably draw fuch 
 a Conclufion as this, that therefore there is 
 a Neceffity that Chrift fhould have left in 
 his Church fome vifible infallible Judge, 
 to whom all Chriftians fliould refort for 
 the interpreting Scripture ? 
 
 This indeed is a Conclufion which the 
 Roman Catholtcks would draw from St. Pe- 
 ters 
 
to common People. 79 
 
 f€r\ Propofition in my Text : And for any 
 thing I know, it is as good an Argument 
 for the Infalhbiliry of the Bifliop of Rome 
 as any they produce. But however, let us 
 examine what Ground there is for drav/ing 
 fuch a Confequence. 
 
 I. In the firfl Place, where is the Force 
 of the Argument. Some Texts of Scrip- 
 ture are hard to be underftood. Therefore 
 the Bi{hop of Rome is Infallible : Or there- 
 fore thete muft be fome where a vifible 
 Authority to which all Chriftians fliould 
 reforr, for the Infallible Declaration of the 
 Senfe of Scripture : And fince no Man pre- 
 tends to fuch an Authority, but the Head 
 of the Church of Rome^ therefore in him 
 it is to be prefum'd it is lodged. But why 
 doth it follow that, becaufe fome Scrip- 
 tures are hard, therefore there is need of 
 an Infallible Interpreter of all Scripture ? 
 What is it that doth connedl thefe two Pro- 
 pofitions together ? If indeed all Scripture 
 had been hard to be underftood, and not 
 only Jbme Tubings in it ; or if thofe Things 
 in it that are really hard to be underftood, 
 had been fo neceflary, that a Man could 
 not go to Heaven without underftanding 
 them; If either of thefe Things had been 
 true, there would have been fome colour 
 for the drawing fuch a Confequence as this. 
 But fince on the one Hand, all that is ne- 
 ceftary to be believed or pradifcd in or- 
 der 
 
8o T^he Scriptures not to be deitied 
 
 der to Salvation, is fufficiently plain in 
 Scripture without fuch an Interpreter ; and 
 on the other Hand, whatever is diilicult in 
 Scripture, is not necefTary to be underftood ; 
 It plainly follows, there is no need of a- 
 ny Infallible Interpreter at all, becaufe we 
 may underftand all Things needful in the 
 Scriptures without fuch an Interpreter. 
 
 2. But fecondly, if God had meant to 
 have eftablifhed a {landing vifible infalli- 
 ble Authority in the Church for declaring 
 the Senfe of Scripture, it cannot be doubt- 
 ed but he would in thofe Scriptures have 
 plainly told us fomewhere or other; and 
 not only fo, but have given us fuch par- 
 ticular Accounts and Defcriptions of the 
 Perfon veiled with that Authority, that all 
 Chriftians in all Ages m.ight have known 
 who he was, and where he lived ; that fo 
 they might be able to make application to 
 him at all Times as there was Occafion. 
 But now there is not a Word of this in 
 the whole Scripture, but a perfed Silence 
 both as to the Authority itfelf, and the 
 Perfon or Perfons in whom it is lodged. 
 So far are the Scriptures from giving us 
 the lead intimation that the Bifhops of 
 Rotne are fet up by God, to be the Infal- 
 lible Declarers and Interpreters, of the Senfe 
 of Scripture to all the Chriftian World, 
 from Generation to Generation, and that 
 confequently in all Difputes concerning the 
 
 Mean- 
 
to commo?i, P.eople. 8i 
 
 Meaning of any PafTage in the Bible, we 
 ought to have recourfe to that See ; I fay, 
 fo far are the Scriptures from this, that it 
 doth not in the leaft appear from them, 
 that God hath appointed any Means at all 
 of that kind, for the coming to the know- 
 ledge of the Senfe of Scripture. There is 
 no mention of any Infallibb Judicatory in 
 the whole Chriftian World, eredted by our 
 Lord Jefus for this purpofe, and much lefs 
 of the Court of Rome being that Judica- 
 tory. 
 
 If our Adverfaries would convince us of 
 either of thefe Things, they mufl bring other 
 kind of Proofs than thofe Words of our 
 Saviour, T^ues Petrus^ Thou art Peter ; and ^^^t- xvi. 
 Pafce oveSj Feed my Sheep ; and Dabo tibi i^-^l^ \^-^ 
 claves^ &c. / will give thee the Keys of the i6. 
 Kingdom of Heaven ? For thefe do make no '^'^^^- ^^'' 
 more to the Bufinefs we are fpeaking of, 
 than this Exprefiion, liic funt duo gladii^. k • " 
 Here are two Swords^ doth to the proving 33/ 
 the Pope's Temporal Jurifdi(flion over all 
 Chriftians, as well as his Spiritual; or than 
 God's making two great Lights^ the greater 
 Light to Rule the Day, and the lepr Light Gsn.ii6» 
 to Rule the Night, doth to the proving that 
 the Pope muft confcquently be above the 
 Emperor. 
 
 3. But thirdly, fo far arc we from be- 
 ing direded by God's Word to apply our- 
 felves to any vilible Judge, much lefs the 
 Vol. VII. G Bifliop 
 
8 2 ^he Scriptures not to be denied 
 
 Bifliop of Rome^ for the Underftanding hard 
 Texts of Scripture, that it doth propofe 
 quite another Method to us for that pur- 
 pofe. The Method which the Scriptures 
 themfelves do provide for the coming to 
 a right Knowledge and Underftanding of 
 them, is plainly this, to read them careful- 
 ly, to examine the Things fpoken of, to 
 compare one Thing with another, and to 
 ]udge of all according to the Analogy of 
 Faith 5 to ufe all the prudent Means and 
 Helps that may further us in the Know- 
 ledge of the Truth, to pray to God for 
 Wifdom, to confer with one another, ef- 
 pecially our Spiritual Guides, and above all 
 Things, CO free ourfelves from Luft and 
 Paffion, and all other Prejudices, and Pre- 
 poffeffions J and to come with an honeft and 
 humble Mind, well difpofed both to receive 
 the Truth and to practice it. For it is the 
 upright Man that God will guide in Judg- 
 fi yxv. me?ity and thofe that are gentle^ to them 'will 
 i^:i2,g./jg teach his IV ay. ''The Secret of the Lord 
 being with them that fear hiin, and to fuch 
 only he hath promifed to fiew his Cove?iant. 
 Thefe are the Means which the Bible pre- 
 fcribes for the coming to the Knowledge 
 of God's Word, and thefe are the rational 
 proper Means of attaining to Truth of a- 
 ny kind, and for receiving benefit by any 
 Books J but mofl of all, proper for thofe 
 kind of Truths, and thofe kind of Books, 
 we are now fpeaking of. 
 
 But 
 
to cofmnon People. 83 
 
 But is not this a quite different Thing 
 from giving up ourfelves intirely to the 
 Condud: and Didates of an unerring Judge? 
 or when we are intangled in any Difficul- 
 ty, to have no more to do than to ask the 
 Opinion of him that fits in the InfiUible 
 Chair, and to acauiefce in it whatfoever 
 it be ? Thefe two Ways are fo different 
 from one another, and indeed fo incoLiiO:- 
 ent, that no Man who finds the former 
 laborious way of reading, and examining, 
 and judging, of proving all T^hings^ and try- 
 ing the Spirits^ and the hke, recommended 
 in Scripture, will or can be eafily convin- 
 ced, that the latter fhort expeditious Way of 
 Appealing to the Bilhop of Komc in all 
 controverted Cafes, was ever fo much as 
 thought of when the Bible was written. 
 
 Far am I, by what I have now faid, from 
 endeavouring to weaken or undermine the 
 Rights of Ecclefiaflical Authority. We do 
 readily acknowledge, that every Chriflian 
 Church in the World has a Right and Au- 
 thority to decide Controverfies in Religion, 
 that do arife amongfi: its Members, and 
 confequently to declare the Senfe of Scrip- 
 ture concerning thcfe Controverljes. And 
 though we fay, that every private Chri- 
 flian hath a liberty left him of examining 
 and judging for himfelf, and which can- 
 not, which ought not to be taken from 
 him, yet every Member, every Suhjedl of 
 a Chwrch, ought to fubmit to t}ie Church's 
 G 2 Decifions 
 
84 'The Scriptures not to he denied 
 
 Decifions and Declarations, fo as not to op- 
 pofe them, not to break the Communion, 
 or the Peace of the Church upon account 
 of them, unlefs in fuch Cafes, where Obe- 
 dience and CompHance is apparently finful 
 and againft God's Laws. 
 
 But then, what is this to the Pretences 
 of the Church of Rome ^ Every National 
 Church hath as full an Authority in this 
 Matter as the Church of Home. And be- 
 fides the Authority which we afcribe to 
 every Church, and to the Church of Rome 
 among others, doth not imply a Power of 
 determining Controverlies Infallibly, fo as 
 to oblige all Chriftians to receive and be- 
 lieve their Determinations as the very Ora- 
 cles of God. For we fay, that no one Man, 
 nor any Society of Men among Chriftians, 
 no not a general Council is Infallible, or 
 free from poffibiiity of Error : But we on- 
 ly fay, that every Church hath Power fo 
 far to determine Differences that arife a- 
 mong its Members, and to oblige them fo 
 far to compliance, as to be able to preferve 
 Peace and Unity and Communion in itfelf 
 
 4. In the fourth and laft Place, it is an 
 idle Thing to talk of the Neceffity of an 
 Infallible Expounder of Scripture upon this 
 Account, that fome Things in Scripture 
 are hard to be underftood j was there no- 
 thing to be faid againft it but only this, 
 that tho' the Roman Catholicks pretend that 
 
 there 
 
to com772on People. 85 
 
 there is in the Church fuch an InfalHble 
 Judge, and hath been always fince Chrift's 
 Time, and that that Judge is the Bifhop 
 of Rome; yet for all that, the Chriftian 
 World hath not for fo many Ages received 
 any confiderable Benefit ( if indeed any at 
 all ) from this Infallibility, as to the clear- 
 ing of Difficulties or filencing Difputes that 
 have been among Chriftians concerning the 
 Senfe of Scripture. We do indeed heartily 
 acknowledge, that we have received great 
 Benefit, and abundance of Light for the 
 Expounding of feveral Texts of the Bible, 
 from the Hiftories, and Dodrines, and Pra- 
 ctices of theuniverfal Church of Chrift, and 
 from the Writings of the Fathers, and o- 
 ther Ecclefiaftical Authors in all Ages (fome 
 of which Writers may perhaps have been 
 Bifliops of Rome-,) This I fay, we readily 
 grant and contend for. But in the mean 
 Time it is a quite different Thing from a 
 fingle Man, or a multitude of Men, inter- 
 preting Scripture by a divine Power and 
 CommifTion, and in an Authoritative and 
 Infallible Way. That which we lay is. That 
 as Obfcure and Difficult as the Scriptures 
 are in many PaiTages, and as plenary a 
 Power as the Popes have had in the clear- 
 ing fuch Obfcurities, and untying fuch Dif* 
 ficulties, yet the World to this Day hath 
 feen no Effeifis of this Power in that kind, 
 hach received no Benefit from it in order 
 to the clearing of dark Texts j but all the 
 G 3 Texts 
 
8 6 T})e ScHptures not to be denied 
 
 Texts that were obfcure before, are fo ftill, 
 for any Authoritative Interpretation that a- 
 ny Pope hath given them. And this alone 
 is enough to fpoil all the Romi{l:i Pretences 
 of the Neceffity of an Infallible Judge, to 
 expound the Scriptures where they are ob- 
 fcure. And thus much on our fecond En- 
 quiry upon this Point. 
 
 III. I come now to the lafl; which is 
 this. Whether the Difficulty and Obfcuri- 
 ty that is to be met with in the Scriptures, 
 and their being liable on that Account to 
 be wrejied and perverted by unlearned and 
 unliable Men^ be a fufficient ground to de^ 
 bar the People from the Ule of them. This is 
 indeed the Pvomifh glofs upon this Text. 
 "Hereby it is njcry plain (fay the Tranflators of 
 Rhemes in their Note upon this Text ) 
 that it is a very dangerous Tubing for fuch 
 as he ignorant^ and for wild witted Fellows 
 to read the Scriptures. ( 'vid, Rhemiji Te- 
 ftament.) And they commend the Wifdom 
 of the Council of T^rent, which hath ta- 
 ken care to forbid the common reading 
 of the Bible, except to fuch particular Men 
 as fhall have exprefs Licence thereto from 
 their Ordinary. On the contrary, our Doc- 
 trine is. That no Lay-Perfon that can read, 
 ought to be difcouraged from reading the 
 Holy Scriptures, and much lefs forbidden 
 ft ; but rather advifed and perfuaded to 
 iMc freauent reading of it : Only he fhould 
 
 be 
 
to co?n?non People, 8 7 
 
 be diredled in the reading of it, and mofl 
 ferioully cautioned, that he do not turn that 
 wholefome Food he may there meet with 
 into Poifon, by his wicked mifufe of it. 
 
 But let us take this Matter a Httle into 
 Examination. T^here are in the Scriptures 
 Jome Tubings hard to be tmderjfiood. T^here- 
 fore (^fay theyj the People muji not read them. 
 But is this fair deahng with the People ? 
 Becaufe fome Things arc hard to be under- 
 ftood, muft they therefore be deprived 
 of the Benefit of the plain Things that are 
 there, and which are incomparably more than 
 the hard Things are ? Or becaufe there are 
 fome Things hard to be underftood, muft 
 therefore the Key of Knowledge be taken 
 from them ? Muft they be debarred the 
 Means and Opportunities of underftanding 
 as many of thofe Things as they can ? 
 
 Well, but it is further faid, That ignorant 
 and unftable Men, when they read the 
 Scriptures, are apt ]to wreft them to their 
 own Deftrudiion, and therefore the Scrip- 
 tures fliould be kept from all fiich, juft as 
 we keep Weapons from Children, for fear 
 they fhould hurt themfelves with them. 
 To this I anfwer. If indeed the Scriptures 
 were of no more or greater Ufe to Laymen 
 than edged Tools are to Children, and if 
 there was the fame danger that Laymen 
 would do Mifchief to themfelves by read- 
 ing the Scriptures, as there is that Children 
 would hurihsmfclvcs, if the Ufe of Knives 
 G 4 and 
 
88 ^^ Scriptures not to he dejtied 
 
 and Swords was permitted to them ; I 
 grant there would be fome Reafon to con- 
 clude, that the Bible ought to be as far re- 
 moved out of the People's Way, as Wea- 
 pons are out of the Way of Children. 
 But there is no fuch Matter. 
 
 1. Forfirft we fay, That every one of the 
 People, be he never fo ignorant, is capable 
 of receiving great Advantages and Benefits 
 by reading the Scriptures, or hearing them 
 read ; for they are the Means which God 
 hath appointed for the making iis all wife 
 tmto Salvation. They are the Inftruments 
 by which we come to the Knowledge of 
 the Chriflian Religion. 
 
 2. Nay, there is a great deal more pro- 
 bability, that an ignorant Man that comes 
 with an honeft Mind to the reading or 
 hearing of the Scriptures, will put them to 
 a good Ufe, and learn fome Things by them, 
 and go away better from them, than there 
 is danger that he fliould pervert them and 
 go away worfe. It is true, moft readers or 
 hearers, when they have done all they can, 
 will be ignorant of the Meaning of many 
 Texts of Scripture ; nay, and it is very like- 
 ly they will mirtake and mifconflrue not a 
 few: but then we fay there is no great 
 harm in this, either to themfelves or o- 
 thers. For every miflake in the Senfe of 
 a Text of Scripture, is not a wrejling of 
 
 the 
 
to co?n?non People. 89 
 
 the Scripture^ and much lefs a wrejling it to 
 a Mans own Dc/iru5iion. For lurejitng the 
 Scripture^ is interpreting the Scripture to 
 ferve a Man's own private Turn, and wrejl- 
 ing them to his own DeJiniBion^ is forcing 
 them to declare in favour of fome wicked 
 unchriftian Dodtrine that he hath efpoufed, 
 or fome wicked unchriflian Prad:ice that 
 he Hves in. So that tho' a good Man, nay 
 perhaps every good Man is now and then 
 miftaken in the Meaning aed AppHcation of 
 the Scriptures, yet none but a bad Man can 
 wrcji them^ efpecially wrejl them to his own 
 deJiru5lion, 
 
 3. But thirdly, how liable foever the Scrip- 
 tures are to Mifconftrudlion, and what bad 
 \}^^ foever fome Men may make of them 
 for the broaching of Herefies, or the ma- 
 king or continuing Schifms in the Church, 
 which are the proper Inftances and Effeds 
 of wrejling the Scriptures. Yet all things 
 confidered, it is more for the Good of the 
 World, that the Ufe of them fliould be al- 
 lowed to all Pc-fons (upon account that all 
 Perfons are capable of receiving Benejfit 
 from them, and mojl in all probability 
 will) than it is for the Good of the World, 
 that the Ufe of them (hould be generally 
 forbidden, (upon account that here and there 
 fome Perfons do wreft them, and abufe 
 them to their own Mifchief, and the Di- 
 fturbance of the Church.) There is nothing 
 
 that 
 
go *The Scriptures not to be denied 
 
 that God hath made, or contrived, or ap- 
 pointed, but is capable of being abufed j 
 and too many there are that will and do 
 abufe it. But is it therefore better upon the 
 whole, that every good Creature of God 
 fhould be laid afide (at leaft as to the com- 
 mon Ufe of it) becaufe it is thus liable to 
 be abufed, and fome Men here and there 
 do Mifchief to themfelves and others, by 
 thus abufing it ? Certainly no. For by this 
 Rule of Reafoning all Learning, all Arts, all 
 Books in the World, as well as the Bible^ 
 and all preaching and praying in publicki 
 nay, thofe Creatures of God, which he 
 hath made for the Support and Delight of 
 our very natural Lives, I fay, all thefe Things 
 upon this Principle muft be forbidden, at 
 leaft to the Multitude and Generality of 
 Mankind 
 
 Thefe Things, I think, may be fufficient 
 to (hew the unreafonablenefs of the Popifh 
 Pofition which we are now fpeaking of. 
 But I defign more upon this Argument than 
 barely vindicating the Dodlrine of our 
 Church from the Popifh Exceptions; I 
 would, if it were poffible, convince you, 
 not only of the Lawfulnefs, but of the Obli- 
 gation that is incumbent upon all forts of 
 Men, moft diligently and ferioufly to apply 
 themfelves to the frequent reading of thofe 
 holy Books. 
 
 And in order to that, I would reprefent 
 this to your confideration, 'viz. That this 
 
 Bufinefs 
 
to com?no?i People, g i 
 
 Bufinefs of diligently reading the Scriptures, 
 is a Thing recommended to us both by 
 the Scriptures themfelves, and by the Pra- 
 ctice and Advice of the moft ancient and 
 moft holy Chriftians, and by the Reafon of 
 the Thing itfelf And whoever doth dif- 
 coiirage or difcountenance this in any one, 
 doth a(5t in oppofition to all thefe. 
 
 I. Firft of all it is recommended to us 
 in the Scriptures themfelves. This may be 
 fufficiently gathered from the Command of 
 God in the fixth of Dent. ver. 4. Hear oy^^'^- 
 Ifrael, (Sc. The IVords which I command thee '' ' ' 
 this Dayfiall be in thy Hearty and thou JJjalt 
 teach them diligently unto thy Children^ and 
 jbalt talk of them when thou fitteji in thine 
 Houje^ and when thou walkejl by the Way^ 
 and when thou lieji down^ and when thou ri- 
 J'eji up ; and thou Jliall bind them for a Sign 
 upon thine Hand ^ ai2d they pall be as frontlets 
 between thine Eyes : a/id thou JJ: alt write them 
 upon the Pojis of thine Hoiije and on thy Gates, 
 By what Words now could God more em- 
 phatically fignify to his People that it was 
 his Pleafure, That all forts of Men among 
 them, unlearned as well as learned, (hould 
 thoroughly acquaint themfelves with the 
 Word of God, than he hath done by thofc 
 Expreflions. If any one fay that this on- 
 ly concern'd the fews^ with reference to the 
 Law of Mq/fs, but fignifies nothing to us 
 Chriftians ; i anfwer. That the Reafon of 
 
 the 
 
9 2 The Script uj^es not to be denied 
 
 the Precept will concern us as much or 
 more than it did them. For if when God 
 dehvcred his Law to Mofes, which was but 
 a carnal temporary Law, he did yet give 
 fiich a Charge to the JJ'raelites, that every 
 Soul of them Oiould continually exercife 
 themfelves in reading and learning this Law, 
 and teaching it to their Children ; can we 
 imagine that lefs is expeded of us Chri- 
 ftians, with reference to that everlafting Spi- 
 ritual Law of the Gofpel, that Law by 
 which alone all Men are to expedl Salva- 
 tion, which our Lord Jefus and his Apoftles 
 iirft revealed by Word of Mouth, and then 
 took care that it {hould be conveyed down 
 to us by the Scriptures of the New I'ejia- 
 ment ? No certainly, if it was their Duty to 
 read the Word of God, which they had to 
 meditate upon it, and to be fo well verfed 
 in it, that it fliould be as familiar to them 
 as the moft ordinary things they ufed ; as 
 familiar as if it had been wrote on the 
 Doors of their Houfes, or the Gates of their 
 Cities, then certainly we Chriftians are un- 
 der as great an Obligation to acquaint our 
 felvcs as familiarly with that Word of God 
 which we have, and which was delivered 
 by a greater Prophet than Mofes was, and 
 which is of far greater Concernment to the 
 World. 
 
 But to come to our Saviour and his Apo- 
 ftles. Did our Saviour, when he preached 
 to the Jews^ difcourage any of them in his 
 
 Days 
 
to common People, 93 
 
 Days from reading the Scriptures ? So far 
 from that, that he exhorts all of them fo 
 to do, bidding them J'earch the Scriptures^]o^n- '^' 
 fbr in thtm they expeBed to have eternal Life; ^^' 
 and they were they that teftijied of him. And 
 St. Faul makes it the great commendation 
 of timothy ^ that from a Child he had known 2 Tim. jH. 
 the Scriptures ; which, faith he, are able to ^9- 
 make a Man wife unto Salvation. And fo far 
 were the Pereans from being blamed or 
 checked, that when St. Paul preached the 
 Chriftian Religion to them, they did not 
 barely rely upon his Authority, but did dai- 
 ly examine the Scriptures, a?id enquired whe- 
 ther his DoShine did agree with them or no, 
 that they are much applauded for it in the 
 A6ts of the Apostles, and accounted more 
 noble than thofe of T\iQi^\x\on\cd,, becaufe they 
 did fo. Nay, the Eunuch of Candace ^een Aa vm, 
 of the ^Ethiopians that read the Scriptures 
 (as he himfelf confefled) without any means 
 of underftanding them, yet was this his 
 over-diligence (as it might be accounted) lb 
 far from being imputed to him as a Fault, 
 that God Almighty made it the Means and 
 and the Occafion of his Converfion to Chri- 
 ftianity. For upon this his reading (tho' 
 without knowledge) God fent Philip to 
 him by a Miracle, who did fo effectually 
 expound what he read, as to make a Pro- 
 felyte of him to Jefus Clirill before he part- 
 ed from him : So ready is God to afford his 
 allifliince to all thofe that ufe the Means 
 
 that 
 
54 ^^ Scriptures 720t to be denied 
 
 that he hath appointed, tho' they be un- 
 der never fuch difadvantagious Circumftan- 
 ces. 
 
 It is true, in all thefe PalTages that I have 
 quoted, the Scriptures that are here men- 
 tioned, are meant of the Scriptures of the 
 Old Tejlament \ and there is good reafon for 
 k, for in truth there were no others then 
 extant, the Scriptures of the New ^ejia- 
 ment not being then wrote ; and therefore 
 it is an idle thing to exped: a Precept out 
 of the New Teflament for the reading of the 
 New Tejiament^ when the Canon of it was 
 not yet finiihed. But for all that, the Rea- 
 fon of the Texts I have named will hold as 
 flrongly for our reading the New T^ejiament^ 
 now that we have it, as they did for the 
 reading of the Old at that time. Did our 
 Saviour command the 'Jews to fearch the 
 Scriptures of the Old 'T'cjlament^ becaufe 
 they tejiificd of him^ and were the Means by 
 which they might be convinced that he was 
 the true Meihah ? And will it not be a 
 Duty as much incumbent upon us to fearch 
 the Scriptures of the New Tejiament now, 
 iince they are the Means that God hath ap- 
 pointed both for the conveying down to us the 
 Dod:rine of the Gofpel, and the Evidence 
 of the Truth of it ? Were even the Scrip- 
 tures of the Old Teflament in thofe Days 
 able to make a Man wife unto Salvation "^ and 
 are not tlie Scriptures of the Old and New 
 Teflament together, much more able to make 
 
 us 
 
to common People, 9^ 
 
 tis in thefe Days iDife unto Salvatkfi ? Was 
 it Timothys CQmmendation i\i2it from a Child 
 he had known the Writings of Mofes a?2d the 
 Prophets ; and will it be any dilparage- 
 ment to us grown Men, that v/e exercife 
 our fehes in the Study of what was taught 
 by Chriil and his Apoftles ? Laftly, Was 
 God fo ready to affift a Pagan even in an 
 extraordinary Way, when he confcientiouA 
 iy read the Prophets, tho' without proba- 
 bihty of underftanding what he read ? And 
 can we think that he will deny hfs Affift- 
 ance, and Bleffing, and Grace to us in an 
 ordinary Way, when we read the Gofpel of 
 Chrift, and are in a good Meafure in a Ca- 
 pacity of underftanding it and receiving Be- 
 nefit from it .? 
 
 2. But enough of this. I defire in the 
 fecond Place it may be confider'd, what the 
 Senfe of the primitive and beft Chriftians 
 was as to this Matter. How did they pra- 
 ^tife and advife as to Peoples reading of the 
 Scripture ? Why every Body that is in the 
 leaft verfed in the Hiftories of thofe Times, 
 knows what a mighty value all the Chri- 
 ftians of the early Ages fee upon the BiUe, 
 above all other Things. They jovfully 
 heard it read in their publick AffembUes, 
 and they dihgently read it, and ftudied it, 
 and meditated upon it in their private Hou- 
 fes. They would, feveral of them, have it 
 read to them, even while they were taking 
 
 their 
 
96 '\the Scriptures not to be dejtied 
 
 their ordinary Food. They took care not 
 only to read it, but to get feveral Portions 
 of it by Heart. They in{tru(5ted their young 
 Children in it ; and Inftances we have of 
 thofe that both knew the Scriptures and 
 enquired into the Senfe of them, even from 
 their Childhood. In thofe Days, as St. "Je- 
 rom tells us, miy one as he walked hi the Fields^ 
 might hear the Plowman at his Hallelujahs^ 
 and the Labourers in the Vi?ieyards fmging 
 DavidV Pjalms. And the fame Father tells 
 us. That of thofe many Virgins that lived 
 with Paula (a famous devout Lady in thofe 
 Days) it was not allowed to any of them to 
 be ignorant of the Pjdlms^ or to pafs over one 
 Day without learning jomc part of the Scrip- 
 turs. And to fuch a Degree were the Vv^o- 
 men of that Time sklU'd in the Scripture, 
 that "Julian the Apolfate lays it as a Charge, 
 as a Matter of Accufation againft the Chri- 
 ftians. Laftly, Such a Veneration had the 
 Chrifcians in thofe Days for the Bible, that 
 they efteemed and prized it above any thing 
 in the World ; and would rather part with 
 their Lives than deliver it up to the Pagan 
 Officers that came to demand it of them. 
 And whoever did deliver up their Bibles, 
 were always accounted as Apoflates. 
 
 And lead any one (hould fufped: that this 
 diligence of theirs, in reading the Scriptures, 
 was rather an effect of the Peoples for- 
 wardnefs to meddle with Things above 
 them, than any thing they were advifed and 
 
 direded 
 
to common Peopled 97 
 
 direfted to by their Spiritual Guides, there 
 are fufficienc Proofs to the contrary. The 
 devout People, in ihofe Days, were not 
 more forward to read and learn the Scrip- 
 tures, than the Bifliops and Guides of the 
 Church were to exhort them to it, and 
 encourage them in it. St. Augujlin thus 
 fpeaks to the People, T^hink it not jufficient 
 that ye hear the Scriptures in the Churchy 
 but alj'o in your Houfes at home, either read 
 them your fehes, or get Jojue other to read to 
 you. Origen faith, Would to God we would 
 all do as it is written, fearch the Scriptures, 
 St. Chryfojlome fays to the People, I admonijh 
 you ; / beg of you to get Books. And again : 
 Hearken to me ye Laymen : ye Men of the 
 World. Get ye the Bible, that mofi whole- 
 Jbme remedy of the Soul. If ye will do ?iothing 
 elfe, yet at leaf get the New Teftament, the 
 Gofpels, St. PaulV Epiftles, and the Afts of 
 the Apoflles, that they may be your continual 
 Teachers. Laftly, So far v/as that Father from 
 confining the Ufe of the Bible to Men in 
 Holy Orders, that he doubts not to affirm. 
 That it was as necejfary to be read by Lay- 
 ?}ief2, as by thofe who were profefsd Monks. 
 Nay, if we will believe him, much more ne-^ 
 cefary : For thefe are his Words, Te think 
 the reading of the Holy Scripture belongeth on- 
 ly unto Monks, whereas in truth it is much 
 viore neceffary for you than for them. We 
 fee then that in ihofe Days, when Chri- 
 ftians lived much more holily and purely-, 
 Vol. VII. H ' than 
 
9 8 T.he Scriptures not to he defiled 
 
 than (it is to be feared) they have done 
 fince, there v/as no check given to any 
 Man's reading the Scriptures j but on the 
 contrary, all the Encouragement imaginable. 
 It was not then thought, that Ignorance v^'as 
 the Parent of Devotion, or that the Scrip- 
 tures were too dangerous to be trufted in 
 the Hands of unlearned ordinary Perfons. 
 It was not then imagined, that reading the 
 Bible was the way to make Men Hereticks, 
 ©r Schifmaticks, or any way refradlory ei- 
 ther againft the Laws of Chrift, or the 
 Laws of the Country where they lived. But 
 on the contrary, they took it to be the beft 
 Expedient in the World to make Men good 
 Chriftians, and peaceable SubjeOs, and hear- 
 ty Lovers one of another j and accordingly 
 they did advife, they did exhort, they did 
 encourage every Man, as he had an oppor- 
 tunity to be frequent, and diligent, and fe- 
 rious in the reading and ftudying of this 
 beft of Books, the deareft Pledge that we 
 have vifible among us of the Love of God, 
 and the mod effedliial Inftruments to pro- 
 mote Virtue and Goodnefs, and univerfal 
 Chriftian Holinefs in the Lives of Men. 
 
 3. And very great Caufe had they thus 
 to think of the Holy Scriptures, and thus 
 to recommend them to the careful perufal 
 of every Chriftian. For in the Reafon of 
 the Thing (which is the third and laft Point 
 wfe are now to fpea k to) the Holy Scripture 
 
 above 
 
to common People, 99 
 
 above all other Books in the World, do re- 
 commend themfelves to the diligent Study 
 of every Man that would be a good Chri- 
 ftian. Of all Books in the World they can- 
 not but be judged, of confidering Perfons, 
 to be the fineft, the nobleft, and every way 
 the moft ufeful and profitable for all Or- 
 ders, and Degrees, and Sexes, and Ages, 
 and Conditions of Chriftians to fpend their 
 Days in the reading and meditation of. 
 For here, and here only, we have the Mea- 
 fures of all God's Wifdom and Knowledge 
 in the Redemption of the World by our 
 Lord Jefus, difcover'd to Mankind. Here 
 only we have the authentick Declarations of 
 God's Mercy to us, and of the Terms and 
 Conditions upon which we are to expedl 
 everlafling Salvation from him. Here it is 
 from whence we are to fetch both the Mat- 
 ter of our Faith, and our Evidence for the 
 Truth of it. Here are the Fountains from 
 whence we are to draw both the Know- 
 ledge of our Duty, and DireQions for the 
 Prailifing of it, and Comfort and Support 
 in and after we have pra6tifed it. Here are 
 contained the invaluable Promifes that God 
 hath made to his Servants in Chrift Jefus, 
 and the unfpeakable Incouragement he hath 
 given to all penitent and returning Sinners. 
 Here are thole affectionate Invitations, thofc 
 pathetical and hearty Perfuafives of God to 
 Men to oblige them to love him, and to 
 be eternally happy, that do make good 
 H 2 Men 
 
100 T^he Scriftures 7iot to he debited 
 
 Men amazed and afloniflied at the infinite 
 Condefcentions of the Divine Goodnefs. 
 And here are thofe ftrong, thofe powerful, 
 I may fay thofe irrefiftible Motives to be 
 good, to be happy, to love God, to love 
 Virtue, to love our own Souls, that one may 
 as much be filled with Wonder and Aflo- 
 nifliment that any human Creature can be 
 fo fottifh, and Itupid, and infenfible, as not 
 to be vanquiihed thereby, to become fo 
 holy and happy as God would have them 
 to be. In a word, here are all things that 
 are either needful, or ufeful, or delightful 
 to a good Man, and all things (as far as a 
 Book can have them) that may prevail with 
 one that is not good to become lb. 
 
 And judge now, whether thefe Things 
 confider'd, the Bible be not a Book fit to be 
 read and ftudied by all forts of Perfons. Fit 
 did I fay ? that is too little : Is it not ne- 
 ceilary ? Is it not an indifpenfible Duty ? 
 Doth not every IVIan who hath opportuni- 
 ty, both fin againft God, and negled: the 
 eternal Concernment of his own Soul, if he 
 is remifs and carelefs in this Matter ? 
 
 Let me therefore ferioufly exhort all of 
 you to be diligent, to be conftant in con- 
 verfing with the Floly Scriptures. Let it 
 be the Care of your Lives, and the Delight 
 of your Minds to read them, to think of 
 them, to confer about them, to let every 
 one about you feel the Effedts of that Love 
 ajid Efleem and Zeal you have for them. 
 
 Teach 
 
to com7m7i People. ici 
 
 Teach them to your Children, and your 
 Servants ; recommend them moft heartily 
 to all that you have influence over ; fpeak 
 of them alv^^ays with great Reverence, and 
 hear them' read with Humility and Atten- 
 tion. 
 
 Which that we may all do, and receive 
 the Benefit of fo doing, let us join in put- 
 ting up our Prayers to God in the Words 
 of our Liturgy, being the Colledt for the fe- 
 cond Week in Advent, with which I con- 
 clude. 
 
 Blejfed Lord who has caufed all Holy 
 Scripture to be written for our 
 Learning, &c. 
 
 U % S E R- 
 
102 
 
 
 SERMON V. 
 
 7^^ Ntwiher of the Sacraments afcer- 
 tai7ted. Of the Chu?xh. 'The on- 
 ly Scripture Notion of it. Where- 
 in co7ififls the Unity of the Catho- 
 lick Church. RefleBions thereupon. 
 
 I C O R. xii. I 
 
 ^* 
 
 For by one Spirit wc dre all baptifed into one 
 Body, ivhether 'we be Jews or Gentiles j 
 ^ii;hetber we he bond or free ^ mid have been 
 all made to drink into one Spirit, 
 
 HE Meaning of thefe Words 
 will appear to every one that 
 will mind the Argument which 
 the Apoiile is treating of in this 
 Chapter. The Point that he 
 lays down is this, That though there be 
 creat Varietv of Conditions and Fund:ions 
 ^mong Chriftians, and tho' Hkewife there 
 
 wa§ 
 
Of the Churchy &c. 103 
 
 was great Variety of Gifts and Powers in 
 thofe Days beflowed upon Men for the Dif- 
 charge of thofe Fundtions ; yet all thefe fe- 
 veral Sorts of Chriftians, thus feverally gift- 
 ed and qualified, did but make up one So- 
 ciety J and all the Gifts and Graces be- 
 ftowed upon them, were wholly in order 
 to the publick and common Benefit of that 
 Society. 
 
 This, I fay, is the Point that the Apoflle 
 here endeavours to pofiTefs his Readers with 
 a Senfe of. And accordingly in the Verfc 
 before the Text, he illuftrates it by fuch a 
 Similitude as would reach the Apprehen- 
 fions of the meaneft Perfon he fpoke to. 
 As the Bod)\ faith he, is one, and hath many 
 Members, and all the Members of that one 
 Body, being many, are one Body : So alfo is 
 Chrid : that is, fo alfo is the Chriftian 
 Church ; fo alfo is Chrift and all Chrilli- 
 ans. Chrift is the Head, and all Chriftians 
 throughout the World are the Members : 
 And altogether do make one Society ; one 
 Corporation. Or as the fame Apoftle ex- 
 preffeth it in the 12th of Rom. 4, 5. As we 
 have many Members in one Body, and all the 
 Members have not one Office : So we being 
 ma?iy are one Body in Chrijl^ and every one 
 Members one of another. 
 
 This is St. Paid\ Propofition. And for 
 the further clearing and confirming of it ; 
 he doth in the Text fliew. That it was the 
 Bufinefs aud Defign of both thofe Sacraments 
 
 H 4 which 
 
104 Of the Churchy 
 
 which our Lord appointed in his Church, 
 to unite all Chriftians, by the Means of the 
 Spirit, to Chrifl: Jefus, and to one another, 
 and fo to make them one Body. By one 
 Spirit^ faith he, we are all baptifed into one 
 Body J whether we be Jews or Gentiles; whe- 
 ther we be bond or free \ and have been all 
 made to drink into one Spirit. As if he had 
 fa id : The Defign of our Baptifm is by the 
 Influence of the Spirit to incorporate all 
 Believers in one Society, of what Nation, 
 or of what Condition foever they be ; whe- 
 ther "Jews or Gentiles^ Bondmen or Freemen. 
 They are all, by being Baptifed, enter'd into 
 Chrift's Church, and made one Body: They 
 become Members of Chrift, and Members 
 one of another. This, I fay, is done by 
 Means of that one Spirit which animates 
 and enlivens that whole Body, and gives 
 Strength and Nourilfliment to every Part of 
 that Body. And as this is the Defign of 
 our Baptifm, fo it is alfo the Defign of the 
 other Sacrament wherein we partake of the 
 Cup of the Lord ; for there alfo we are 
 made to drink into one Spirit. Our eating 
 that Bread, and drinking of that Cup (he 
 exprefiTes only one of them, but he means 
 both) I fay, that is the means which Chrift 
 hath appointed for our receiving ttie conti- 
 nual Influences of the Holy Spirit, by which 
 the Union that is between Chrift and his 
 jMem_bers is preferv'd and maintain'd. 
 
 Th 
 
 IS 
 
a?2d Number of its Sacraments. 105 
 
 This is as plain an Account as I can give 
 of the Meaning of my Text. And now if 
 any one ask what Defign I mean to purfue 
 in this Text, what Purpofes I would apply 
 it to ? I anfwer, That this Text will lervc 
 to feveral good Purpofes, viz. For the clear- 
 ing feveral Points that it is fit we fhould all 
 be truly informed in. 
 
 I. I name thefe three. F/r/? of all this 
 Text will give us good Help towards the 
 afcertaining the true Number of the Chri- 
 ftian Sacraments, about which the Churches 
 are divided. 
 
 II. Secondly, This Text will help us to 
 give a plain and true Account of a conli- 
 derable Article of our Faith ; and that is the 
 Unity of the Catholick Church, which is here 
 afferted. 
 
 III. And Thirdly, This Text will {hew us 
 the Way that was ufed in the Primitive 
 Church, as to the Peoples receiving the Sa- 
 crament, viz. That they did not only par- 
 take of the Bread, but of the Cup too. 
 The Sacrament was adminiftred in both 
 Kinds to all the Faithful. For St. Paul 
 here fpeaking of this Sacrament, calls it a 
 drinking into one Spirit. As elfewhere in the 
 Scripture, the Lord's Supper is expreiled by 
 breaking of Bread, without naming the Di- 
 ftribution of the Cup, (from whence fomc 
 
 would 
 
io6 Of the Churchy 
 
 would form an Argument, that the Faith- 
 ful did then only receive the Bread) fo in 
 this Text the fame Lord's Supper is expref- 
 fed by drinking of the Ciip^ without naming 
 the giving of the Bread. From whence we 
 may certainly draw this conclufion. That 
 the one was as necefTary to the People 
 as the other. And they may as well fay, 
 That where the Cup is only mention- 
 ed, there was no Bread broken ; as they 
 can fay, That where the Bread is only men- 
 tioned, there was no Cup given : And con- 
 fequently wherever it happens in any Text, 
 that for fliortnefs fake (or for fome Alluiion 
 that fuited better with the Scope of the 
 Writer) one Kind or Species of the Sacra- 
 ment only is exprefly mentioned, yet the 
 whole Sacrament, in both the Kinds of it, 
 is, in all thofe Texts, to be underftood. 
 
 I begin with the firft of thefe Points. 
 I. This Text doth fairly infinuate to us 
 the true Number of the Chriftian Sacra- 
 ments. 
 
 It is plain. That the Apoftles In this Text 
 doth exprefly fpeak of the Chriflan Sacra- 
 ments : And it is as plain. That two Sacra- 
 ments, and no more than two, doth he here 
 mention. And thefe two are the two Sa- 
 craments which the Church of Eiiglandy 
 with all Primitive Antiquity, doth own for 
 the only Sacraments of Chrift's Inftitution, 
 iHz. Baptifm, and the Supper of the Lord. 
 
 Thefe 
 
and Number of its Sacrame^tts, 107 
 
 Thefe two now, it is certain and evident 
 that they are Sacraments, truly and proper- 
 ly fo called ; that is to fay, they are out- 
 ward Signs and Pledges of an inward Grace 
 that goes along with them, and they were 
 inftituted by our Lord Jefus in the moft ex- 
 prefs Terms chat can be ; and by the very 
 Words of the Inftitution it appears, that 
 they were defigned to be of perpetual Obli- 
 gation even to the World's end. But as for 
 other Sacraments, or more Sacraments than 
 theie, there is a deep filence both in this 
 Text, and throughout the whole 'New Tf- 
 (lament. And yet the Council of 'Treizt^ 
 which is the Rule of the Roman Church, 
 hath, befides thofe two, made five more ; 
 and fo ftridly hath that Council obliged all 
 of that Communion to receive and own fe- 
 ven Sacraments, that it hath pronounced a 
 Curfe againji all thoje 'who fiall ajfirrn that 
 ikcre are either more or fewer Sacraments in- 
 ftittited by Chrill than fe'ven^ or who Jlja 11 'af- 
 firm that any one of thofe f even are not truh 
 and properh Sacraments. 
 
 This we muft needs think is a very hard 
 and fevere Impolition upon the Faitli of 
 Chriilians ; cfpecially, when we can (liew, 
 that fome of thofe Seven cannot, in the Na- 
 ture of Things, be true and proper Sacra- 
 ments : And befides, when we do confident- 
 ly challenge any Man of that Communion 
 to produce any one Council, any one Fa- 
 ther, nay any one fingle Writer for eleven 
 
 bun- 
 
io8 Of the Churchy 
 
 hundred Years after Chrift, that faid or 
 taught there were juft feven Sacraments, and 
 neither more nor fewer, of Chrift's Inftitu- 
 tion. Peter Lombard^ by all that we can 
 find, (who lived in the 12th Century, and 
 was the Father of the Schoolmen) was the 
 firft who ailerted this precife Number. But 
 can the bare Opinion of fuch a Man, at 
 fuch a diftance from the Primitive Church, 
 be of Authority enough to ground an Ar- 
 ticle of Faith upon, nay, and to make it 
 damnable for any Man to believe other- 
 wife ? 
 
 But I know it will be faid. That the an- 
 cient Fathers do give the Name of Sacra- 
 ments to Marriage, to Orders, to Penance, 
 and to all thofe other Things which are 
 now by the Church eftablifhed for Sacra- 
 ments of Chrift's appointment. Why, be 
 it fo 5 yet this doth not come home to the 
 Bufinefs. For if they will pretend to make 
 a true and proper Sacrament of every thing 
 that fome Fathers have applied the Name 
 of Sacrament to, they may with as much 
 Reafon make feven and twenty Sacraments 
 ^% feven. At this rate they muft make faft- 
 ing, and praying, and weeping, and wafh- 
 ing the Difciples Feet, and crofling of them- 
 fclves, and vowing Virginity, and many 
 other fuch things j I fay, they muft make 
 all thefe to be Sacraments, as well as the 
 jive they have been pleas'd to obtrude up- 
 on US; becaufe indeed every one of thofe 
 
 Things 
 
and Number of its Sacraments, 1 09 
 
 Things is by fome Father or other called 
 by the Name of a Sacrament. Nay, the 
 Scripture is a Sacrament, and the whole 
 Religion of Chrift is a Sacrament in the 
 Language of fome of the Fathers. But now 
 for Sacraments truly fo called, and in that 
 Notion in which both they and we do un- 
 derftand the Word, namely, for fuch out- 
 ward vifible Signs, or Symbols, or Elements 
 as were appointed by Jefus Chrift, for the 
 conveying Spiritual Grace to all that did 
 worthily partake of them : I fay, in this 
 Notion of Sacraments, it will be h^^rd to 
 find more, either in Scripture or in the Fa- 
 thers, than thofe two we are all agreed up- 
 on, Baptifm and the Lord's Supper. St. Cy- 
 prian^ I dare fay, thought of no more, when 
 lie tells us, T^hat then Men may be thorough- 
 ly JmSIiJiedy and become the Children of God 
 (fi utroque Sacramento nafcantur) if they be 
 regenerated by both the Sacrame}its. If he 
 had believed more Sacraments than two, it 
 is impoifible he iliould have exprelTed him- 
 fclf in this manner. St. Aujtin likewife hath 
 a memorable Paffage to this Purpofe. Our 
 Lord Jefus Chri/l^ fays he, hath knit Chri- 
 flians together with Sacraments (which is ex- 
 adly the fame thing that is here faid in the 
 Text) which Sacramefits^ faith he, are mojl 
 few in Nufnber^ mojt eafy to be Obfer'-^ed^ moji 
 excellent in Signification, and thefe are Bap- 
 tifm and the Lord's Supper. And in another 
 place he tells us, Hac junt Ecclfoe genuina 
 
 Sacra- 
 
T r o Of the Churchy 
 
 Sacramenta. 'Thefe are the two Sacraments 
 of the Church. But if after all this, the 
 Church of Rome will, without the Autho- 
 rity of the Scriptures, without the Suffrage 
 of any one fingle Author for above a thou- 
 fand Years together, nay againft the Reafon 
 of the Thing, and againft the Senfe of the 
 Primitive Fathers, make it an Article of 
 Faith, and neceffary to Salvation, that eve- 
 ry Chriftian ihould believe that Chriil: or- 
 dained feven true and proper Sacraments 
 of perpetual Ufe in the Church, and all 
 conferring Grace to the worthy Receivers 
 of them ; whereas, by all that appears, he 
 ordained but two of this Nature j who can 
 help it ? This only we muft needs fay. That 
 ihe affumes a vail Authority over Mens 
 Confcience. But whether it be reafonable 
 without better Evidence, to fubmit our Judg- 
 ments and Confciences to that Authority, 
 let indifferent Pcrfons judge. 
 
 2. But I have fpoke enough of this Point. 
 Let us again look over the Text, and take 
 up fome other. IVe are ally fays the Apo- 
 ftle, bapttfed into one Body^ and tnade to drink 
 into one Spirit. From thefe Words this now 
 may be obferved in the fecond Place. 
 
 We have here a plain Declaration and 
 Affertion of an Article which we profefs to 
 believe in our Greedy and that is the Unity 
 of the Church. In the Creed which we 
 repeat every Day, we own the Belief of the 
 
 Catho' 
 
a7id Number of its Sacraments, 1 1 1 
 
 CatJjolick Church. And in the Creed which 
 we repeat on Sundays and Holidays^ we do 
 more expHcitly declare the Onenefs of that 
 Church, in thefe Terms, / do believe in one 
 Catholick and Apojiolick Church. If now we 
 took no other guide but the Holy Scrip- 
 tures for the Meaning of this Article, it 
 would appear as plain a Bufinefs as any in 
 the whole Bible. But as the different In- 
 tcrefts of Men have been concern'd in the 
 Interpretation of it, it is become an intri- 
 cate Thing, a Bone of Contention, a Foun- 
 tain of I know not how many Controver- 
 fies. But the Reafon hereof is very evident. 
 • Men, through their over-great Love of 
 ihemfelves, and favour to their own Party, 
 have no mind to let the Church of Chrift 
 lie in common, as without doubt our Sa- 
 viour intended it, but every one will be en- 
 grofiing the whole Church to themfelves^ 
 and to thofe of their Communion. And 
 this hath put their Wits upon the Rack of- 
 tentimes for the deviling and inventing God 
 knows how many Marks and Tokens v/here- 
 by to diftinguidi the True Church from 
 Falfe and Pretended Churches : Though yet 
 it is evident enough to any By-ftander, that 
 the Marks they give of the True Church, 
 are rather contrived to fuit with the Qua- 
 lity and Genius of that Church they ap- 
 pear for, and whofe Caufe they would ferve, 
 than taken from the Holy Scripture, or col- 
 Jeded by the Meafures of right Reafon. 
 
 But 
 
112 Of the ChurcJj^ 
 
 But let us lee what Account the Holy 
 Scriptures, and efpecially the Scripture of 
 my Text give of this Churchy this one Churchy 
 about which fo much Noife is made. 
 
 It is plain from the Holy Scripture, That 
 it was the Delign of our Lord Jefus to de- 
 liver to Mankind the whole Will of God, 
 fo far as their Salvation was concerned in 
 it : To reveal to them all that was needful, 
 either to be believed or pradifed, in or- 
 der to their future Happinefs. All thefe 
 Things thus deUvered and revealed by him, 
 we call the Chriftian Religion : And this 
 Religion was taught to the World partly 
 by himfelf, and partly by his Apoftles ; and 
 this Religion was put into Writing by in- 
 fpired Men, and is now extant among us 
 in the Books of Holy Scripture, Further- 
 more it was our Lord's Defign, that all 
 who fhould embrace this Religion of his, 
 Ihould be united among themfelves and 
 with their Head Chrift Jefus, and fo be- 
 come one Body by the Means of one Holy 
 Spirit which Hiould adluate and influence 
 them ; and this is that v/hich the Apoftle 
 faith, There is One Bod)\ and One Spirit. 
 They are therefore One Body, becaufe they 
 are all a6led and enliven'd by the fame Spi- 
 rit, derived from the Head Chrift Jefus. 
 And further, in the laft Place, it was our 
 Lord's Intention and Defign, That all Be- 
 lievers, all that profeffed his Religion, fhould 
 be admitted to the Participation of this Spi- 
 rit, 
 
and Number of its Sacra?ne?2ts, 113 
 
 rir, and fo be made Members of this com- 
 mon Body, by the Sacrament of Baptifm : 
 And Hkewife that they (liould be continued 
 and maintained in this Memberfliip, and 
 receive continual Influence from that fame 
 Spirit by eating and drinking in the Sacra- 
 ment of the Communion. And this is that 
 which is told us in the Text, that we are 
 all by one Spirit baptized i?ifo one Body, and 
 made to drink into one Spirit. 
 
 Taking now thefe Things along In our 
 Minds, we may eafily form a true Notion 
 of the Church : That Notion I am confi- 
 dent which the Scripture meant to give us 
 of it, when it fpeaks of the Church as one. 
 The Church, according to thefe Principles, 
 can be nothing elfe but the whole Multi- 
 tude of thofe Perfons, whether Jews or 
 GentileSy that do embrace and profefs the 
 Chriftian Religion, and are joined together 
 by the means of the Sacraments in one Bo- 
 dy or Society under one Head Chrift Jefus, 
 This, I fay, is the general Notion of the 
 Church. But it will not be amifs, if I 
 treat of this Matter a little more particular- 
 ly, that every Body may fully underftand 
 the Nature of that Church which wc all 
 profefs to believe, but yet are fo much di- 
 vided about. And I am confident we (hall 
 find enough in the Holy Scripture to fatisfy 
 all our Scruples about this Bufinefs. 
 
 The firft time that our Saviour makes 
 mention of his Church, was before he had 
 ' Vol. VII. I adualiy 
 
114- Of the Church, 
 
 adually any Church in the World ; for he 
 
 fpeaks of it as a Thing future. It was upon 
 
 V St. Peters, publick Confeffion of him to be 
 
 the Chrift, the Son of God. Upon this, 
 
 fays our Saviour, Verily I Jay unto thee, tkou 
 
 0rt Peter, and upon this Rock will I build 
 
 Mm.y.v\.my Church, and the Gates of Hell fi all not 
 
 1 8. prevail againji it. Afterwards, when he was 
 
 leaving the World, and afcending up into 
 
 Heaven, he gives particular Orders to his 
 
 Apoftles about the Building of this Church 
 
 which he had promis'd. And this was the 
 
 Commiffion he gave them, Go, fays he, 
 
 ajid make Difciples of all Nations, baptizing 
 
 them in the Name of the Father, and of the 
 
 Matth. *^^^^j ^^^ of the Holy Ghofl j and teaching them 
 
 xxviii. 1 9, to ohferve whatever I have commanded you. 
 
 '°' A?2d lo I I am with you alway, even unto the 
 
 End of the World. 
 
 This Commiflion of our Saviour we may 
 properly enough ilile the Charter of the 
 Church, and mind, I pray, what is contain- 
 ed in it. Our Saviour here declares the 
 Extent of his Church, and of what Perfons 
 he would have it conftituted. It was to 
 extend throughout all the World, and to 
 be made up of all Nations. He here de- 
 clares by whom he would have it built and 
 conllituted, viz. the Apoftles. He here de- 
 clares upon what Grounds he would have 
 it condituted, or upon what Conditions any 
 Ferfon was to be received into it, viz. their 
 becoming the Difciples of Jefus Chrift, and 
 
 under'. 
 
and Nu7nher of its Sacraments. 115 
 
 undertaking to obferve all that he had com- 
 manded. He here likewife declares the 
 Form or the Method by which Perfons were 
 to be admitted into this Church, and that 
 was by being baptized in the Name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghofl: : And laftly, he here promifes the per- 
 petual Prefence of his Holy Spirit, both to 
 alfift the Apoftles and their SuccefTors in 
 the building and governing this Church, 
 and to aduate and enliven ail the Members 
 of it. 
 
 Well then, Chrift before he left the 
 World, promifed that a Church fhould be 
 built, and he gave a Commiffion for the 
 building of it. Let us now fee how this 
 Promife was fulfilled, how this CommiiTion 
 was executed, and how this Church was 
 adually built and confticuted. 
 
 Now as to this, we find in the fecond 
 Chapter of the A£is, that in purfuance of 
 a Commiffion given to the Apoftles, they, 
 with th-e reft of the Difciples, met together 
 at Jerufalem on the Day of Peutecpfly and 
 then and there did the Holy Spirit (as Chrift Ver, i. 
 had promifed) defcend upon the Apoftles, 
 and endued them with the Pov/er of fpeak- 
 ing all Languages, that io they might be 
 enabled to execute their Commiftion of 
 preaching to all Nations; and then and there 6. 
 did St. Peter (to whom Chrift had promi- 
 fed the Honour of laying the Foundation of 
 this Church for his io generous a Confef- 
 
 I 2 fion 
 
1 1 6 Of the Churchy 
 
 Vcr, 14. lion of him.) Then, I fay, did St. Petei" 
 begin to preach the Rehgion of Jefus Chrift 
 to the JewSy (as we find he afterwards did 
 to the Ge?2tiles^ A6is x.) exhorting them to 
 repent and to embrace the Chriftian Faith, and 
 
 38. to be baptized^ every one of them in the Name 
 of the Lord Jejhs^ for the RemiJJion of their 
 Sins : And the Event of this Sermon was, 
 
 41. That they who gladly received his Words were 
 baptized^ and the fame Day there were added 
 unto them about three thoufand Souls. The 
 fame Chapter further tells us, That thefe 
 being all added to the Number of the Dif- 
 
 4-- ciples, continued fiedfafily in the Apoftles Do- 
 Brine a?id FellowfJnp^ and in breaking of 
 Breads and in Frayer. And then it follows, 
 
 47. That the Lord added to the Church daily^ 
 fuch as fiould be faved. 
 
 Here is the firft Time that we have men- 
 tion in the "New T^eftament of a Church 
 actually built and conftituted ; and we fee 
 plainly, That that Church was conftituted 
 by fuch Officers, of fuch Members, and with 
 fuch Rites and Ceremonies as Chrift had or- 
 dered in his general Charter before fpoken 
 of. All thofe Perfons, of what different 
 Language or Condition whatfoever, that up- 
 on the Apoftle's preaching, did embrace the 
 Chriftian Religion, and were baptized ; I 
 lay, all thofe, together with the Apoftles 
 who preached and adminiftered to them, 
 made up one Church. And they exercifed 
 rhis Church-member- ftiip by an outward 
 
 Profef- 
 
and Ntimher of its Sacraine?its, iiy 
 
 Profeflion of the Chriftian Religion (which 
 is there called the Apoftle's Do5lrine) and 
 by joining with the Apoftles in the Sacra- 
 ment of the Lord's Supper, (which is there 
 called breaking of Bread) and in publick 
 Prayers. And to this Church thus confli- 
 tuted were daily added others, till in pro- 
 cefs of Time this Church, thus inconfider- 
 able at firit, grew to that bulk and thole 
 dimenfions which we fee it hath at this 
 Day. 
 
 It is true, the firfl: Apoftolical Church was 
 not then ftiled by the Name of Catholick 
 or JJniverJ'al Church ; ( I fay Catholick or 
 Unherfal, for both thele Words mean the 
 fame thing, the difference only being, that 
 the one Word is Greeks and the ozh^x Lati?i) 
 but it was (imply called the Churchy or the 
 Church of God^ without any other Epithet. 
 And there was good Reafon for this. For 
 this Church, as you fee, was at that time 
 confined only within the Walls of Jeriifa- 
 Icm, and for fome time after within the Na- 
 tion of the Jews: but afterwards, when this 
 Church encreafed fo that many Cities and 
 many Nations were incorporated into it, 
 each of which were properly Churches of 
 Chrift, then, in contradiftindion to thofc 
 particular Churches, came up the Stile and 
 the Title of the Catholick or Univcrfal 
 Church. So that whenever we name or 
 fpeak of the Catholick Church, we mean by 
 that Word, the whole Multitude of Chri- 
 
 I 3 ilians 
 
1 8 of the Churchy 
 
 ftians throughout the World, that are em- 
 bodied into one Society under their Head 
 Chrift Jefus, by Baptifm, and the Profeflion 
 of the Chridian Faith, and the Participa- 
 tion of the common Means of Salvation. 
 But when we fpeak of a Church of any 
 iingle denomination, as the Greek Churchy 
 the Ethiopick Church, the Roman Church, 
 the Church of Englaizd, and the like, we 
 mean only fome particular Church which 
 is but a Part of the Church Catholick or 
 TJniverJal. The Catholick Church is but one, 
 and can be but one ; becaufe all the Chri- 
 ftians in the World belong to it : And that 
 is the Church which we profefs to believe 
 in our Creeds. But particular Churches are 
 many, as many as the Nations are that own 
 and profefs the Chriftian Religion : nay, as 
 many as are the Diocefes into which Chri- 
 ftian People are dillributed under their fe- 
 veral Biiliops. But yet all thefe Churches, 
 whether they be Diocefan, or Provincial, or 
 National, they are all Parts of the Univerfal 
 Church, iuft as our feveral Limbs and Mem- 
 bers are Parts of our Body. 
 
 Thus I am fure I have given you the true 
 Notion of the Church which the Scripture 
 always intends, when it mentions the Church 
 in general ; when it fpeaks of the Church 
 fin the Body of Chrift ; when it fpeaks of the 
 Church which Chrift pu7'chajed with his Blood; 
 when it fpeaks o^the Church into which we are 
 baptized ; when it fpeaks of the Church to 
 
 which 
 
a?id Number of its Sacraments. 119 
 
 v:hich all thofe glorious Promifes are made 
 ef the ForgiveneJ's of Sim, of the perpetual 
 Prefence and AJjiJlance of the Holy Spirit -, 
 of the Gates of Hell never prevailing again/l 
 tt, and of everlafli?ig Salvation in the IVorld 
 to come. I fay, that Church is always meant 
 of the whole Company of Chriilians dif- 
 perfed over all the World, that profefs the 
 common Faith (though perhaps none of 
 them without mixture of Errors) and enjoy 
 the Adminiflration of the Word and Sacra- 
 ments under their lawful Paftors and Go- 
 vernours : All thefe People, wherever they 
 live, or by what Name foever they call 
 themfelves, make up together that one Bo- 
 dy of Chrift which we call the Catholick 
 Church. 
 
 And thus having, as I hope, done fome- 
 thing towards the fixing and fettling the 
 Notion of the Church (fo far as our Text is 
 concerned in it) my next Work is (before 
 I difmifs this Head) to make fome Refle- 
 ctions and Remarks upon what has been 
 faid, with reference to feveral Points which 
 we have occafion given every Day to hear 
 of and to think of; and which it highly 
 concerns us very well to fatisfy our felves 
 about. The Points which I think mod: na- 
 tural, and at this time mod: needful to be 
 treated of, with reference to this Argument 
 of the Catholick Church, are thefe that fol- 
 low ; which I chufe to propofe rather by 
 way of Enquiry, than by way of dogmati- 
 I 4 cal 
 
120 Of the Churchy 
 
 cal Aflertion, that we may be the more fair- 
 ly led to a juft and equal Difcuffion and Exa- 
 mination of them. 
 
 And the firfl Enquiry fhall be this, Whe- 
 ther upon a true dating of the Notion of 
 the Catholick Church (as I have endeavour'd 
 now to do it) that Queftion which the Ro- 
 manijis infift fo much upon when they tam- 
 per v/ith our People, and upon which they 
 lay the main Strefs of their Caufe, '^iz. In 
 which Part of the World, or in which of 
 the different Communions of Chriftendomi 
 the only true Church of Chriil: is to be 
 found ; I fay, whether this Queftion of 
 theirs be not quite out of Doors ? Whether 
 it be not a very ufelefs impertinent Que- 
 ftion, as being grounded upon a falfe No^ 
 tion of the Catholick Church ? A Notion 
 which is not only repugnant to the Scrip- 
 tures, but abfurd in its felf ? 
 
 If they would draw all the Matters in 
 difpute between us into one Point, and that 
 Point fliould be with relation to the Church, 
 the Queftion upon which we were to join 
 Iflue ftiould not be put thus, Which of all 
 the pretended Churches is the true Church ? 
 or, Which of all the divided Communions 
 of Chriftendom, is that Communion in 
 which only we may have Salvation ? (for 
 there are many true Churches, and many 
 Communions in which Salvation may be 
 had:) but this; Which of all the feveral 
 phurches tjiat are in the World, is the moft 
 
 Pure 
 
and Nu7nher of its Sacra??ie?2ts. 121 
 
 Pure and Orthodox ? Or, Which of all the 
 feveral Communions in Chriftendom is moft 
 agreeable to the Laws of Chrift, and in 
 which a Man may mofl fafely, and with 
 the leaft hazard, venture his Salvation? 
 Now if the Queftion be thus put, we will 
 join Iffue with them whenfoever they pleafe. 
 But I forget, I am not now anfwering of 
 Queftions, but propofing them. 
 
 In the fecond Place, my next Enquiry 
 upon this Argument (hould be this. Since 
 they as well as we do allow, that Baptifm 
 doth admit Men into the Catholick Church, 
 whether they be not obliged, upon their 
 own Principles (owning our Baptifm to be 
 valid, as they all do) to acknowledge us oi 
 the Church of England to be true Members 
 of the Catholick Church? 
 
 My third Enquiry fhall be this. Whe- 
 ther, by all the Marks and Tokens that are 
 given of the Church in the Holy Scriptures, 
 the Church of Engla?id may not be proved 
 to be both a true and a found Pare of the 
 Catholick Church ? 
 
 My fourth Enquiry fliall be this. Whe- 
 ther our Charity to the Church of Rome^ m 
 owning them to be a true Church, whilft 
 they are fo uncharitable to deny us to be 
 fo, be any good Argument that their Com- 
 munion is fafer than ours ? 
 
 My fifth Enquiry fhall be this. Whether 
 there be any Colour of Rcafon, that the 
 Church cf Rom^y and they who adhere to 
 
 her 
 
12 2 Of the Churchy &c. 
 
 her Communion, fhould engrofs to them- 
 felves the Name of the Catholick Churchy 
 or that they who are out of her Communion 
 {liould be thought no Catholicks ? 
 
 My fixth Enquiry (hall be this. Allow- 
 ing, as we do, Churches of different Com- 
 munions to be Parts of the Catholick Churchy 
 and allowing Chriftians in thofe feveral 
 Churches to be capable of Salvation, Whe- 
 ther it can juftly from thence be infer'd, 
 that it is an indifferent Matter, as to a Man's 
 Salvation, what Church or what Commu- 
 nion he is of, fo long as he is but of any 
 one ? and, Whether every one is not bound, 
 upon pain of Damnation, to adhere to that 
 Church, which he is convinced is moft a- 
 greeable to the Word of God ; and to for- 
 bear Communion with that Church in which 
 he cannot Communicate without either pro- 
 feffing to believe fome Things which he 
 cannot believe, or pracftifing fome Things 
 which he is convinced God's Laws have 
 forbidden him ? 
 
 Thefe are all ufeful Enquiries : And I 
 fiiall hereafter, as I have Opportunity, en- 
 deavour to give as plain an Anfwer to them 
 as I can. 
 
 I?i the mean timey confider what ye 
 have heardy &c. 
 
 S E R- 
 
123 
 
 SERMON VI. 
 
 A 'DifcuJJion of the ^efiion ivhich the Ro- 
 man Catholicks much infift upon with the 
 Proteftants, viz. In which of the different 
 Communions in Chridendom, the only 
 true Church of Chrifl: is to be found ? 
 
 With a Refutation of a certain Popifh Argu- 
 ment handed about in M. S. in 1686. 
 
 The 2d Sermon upon the following Text. 
 
 I CO R. xii. 13. 
 
 For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one 
 Body^ whether we be Jews or Gentiles, 
 whether we be bond or free ^ and have been 
 all ?nade to drink into one Spirit. 
 
 HE plain Meaning of thefe 
 Words is (as I told you) this : 
 The Defign of our Baptifm is, 
 thro' the Influence of the Spirij. 
 which is then given, to incor- 
 porate all Believers in one Society, of whar 
 
 Nation 
 
1 24 A Refutation of a Poptfh Argtwient 
 
 Nation or Condition foever they be. They 
 are all, by their being Baptized, entered int9 
 Chrift's Church, and made one Body. They 
 become the Members of Chrift, and Mem- 
 bers one of another. And this, I fay, is 
 done by means of that one Spirit, which 
 animates and enlivens that whole Body, and 
 gives Strength and Nourifliment to every 
 Part of it. 
 
 And as this is the Dcfign of our Baptifm, 
 fo it is alfo the Defign of the other Sacra- 
 ment, wherein we partake of the Cup of 
 the Lord ; for there alfo we are made to 
 drink into one Spirit. Our eating of that 
 Bread and drinking of that Cup, (he ex- 
 prefTes only one of them, but he includes 
 both) I fay, that is the Means which Chrift 
 hath appointed for our receiving the con- 
 tinual Influence of the Holy Spirit, by which 
 the Union which is between Chrift and his 
 Members is preferv'd and maintain'd. 
 
 Three Points I told you this Text did 
 fairly lead us to difcourfe upon. Firji^ The 
 Number of the Chriftian Sacraments, which 
 feems here to be adjufted and afcertained; 
 and they are Baptifm and the Lord's Sup- 
 per. Both thefe are here exprefsly men- 
 tioned j but no other, neither in this Text 
 nor in any other Paffage in the New Tiejia- 
 ment ; nor do we find that the Ancient Fa- 
 thers thought of any more ; nor doth it 
 appear that any Writer of the Church, for 
 
 eleven 
 
handed about in M. S. /";/ 1686. 125 
 
 eleven hundred Years together, did ever give 
 that precife Number of the Sacraments 
 which the Church of Kome now doth. 
 
 The Second Point to be infifted on from 
 this Text, is the Unity of the CathoUck 
 Church into which we are baptized. 
 
 And the Third Point, the Right that the 
 Laity have by Chrift's Inftitution, and the 
 Apoftle's Pradiice, to the Cup of the Com- 
 munion ; fince it is plain by this Text, 
 That all the Faithful did, in the Apoftles 
 Times, drink into one Spirit, as well as eac 
 into one Spirit. 
 
 The two former of thefe Points I treated 
 upon the lall: Lord's Day : And as for the 
 Firft of them, I (hall not repeat any thing 
 of what I then faid ; but as for the Second, 
 becaufe I have not yet done with it, it is 
 neceffary that I give you fome general Ac- 
 count of the Notion of the Church and its 
 Unity, which I then endeavoured to efta- 
 bli(h ; tliat fo you may the better go along 
 with me, as to thofe Points wherein I {hall 
 be concern'd at this time. 
 
 The Sum of what I laid concerning the 
 Church and its Unity, was this. That w'.en- 
 ever we name or fpeak of the Catholick 
 Church, (if we will take the Scripture No- 
 tion) we muft mean by that Word, the 
 whole Multitude of Chriftians throughout 
 the World that are imbodied into one So- 
 ciety 
 
126 A Refutation of a Popifh Argument 
 
 ciety by Bapcifin, and the Profeffion of the 
 Chriftian Faith, and the Participation of the 
 common Means of Salvation. But when 
 we fpeak of a Church of any fmgle Deno- 
 mination, as the Greek Churchy the Ethio- 
 pick Churchy the Roman Churchy the Englifi 
 Churchy or the like, we mean only fome 
 particular Church, which is but a Part of 
 the Church CathoUck or Univerfal. The 
 Catholick Church is but one, and can be 
 but one ; becaufe all the Chriftians in the 
 World do belong to ir. But particular 
 Churches are many, as many as the Nations 
 are that own and profefs the Chriftian Re- 
 ligion ; nay, as many as are the Diocefes 
 into which Chriftian People are diftributed 
 under one Bilhop. But yet all thefe Chur- 
 ches, whether they be Diocefan, or Provin- 
 cial, or National, or Patriarchal, they are 
 all Parts of the Catholick Church, juft as 
 our feveral Limbs and Members are Parts 
 of our Body ; and taken all together^ they 
 do make up that Society which we are 
 baptized into. 
 
 This I largely proved to be the true No- 
 tion of the Church which the Scripture 
 always fpeaks of, when it mentions the 
 Church in general ; when it fpeaks of the 
 Church as of the Body of Chrijl ; when it 
 fpeaks of the Church which Chrijl purcha- 
 fed with his Blood ; when it fpeaks of the 
 Church to which all thofe glorious Promi- 
 ies are made of the perpetual Prefence and 
 
 Affift- 
 
handed about in M. S. /;; 1 6 8 6. 127 
 
 Affijiance of the Holy Spirit^ and of the Gates 
 of Hell never prevailing againji it, I fay. 
 That Church is always meant of the whole 
 Company of Chriftians difpcrfed over all 
 the World, who profefs the common Faith 
 (though perhaps none of them without mix- 
 tures of Error) and enjoy the Adminiftra- 
 tion of the Word and Sacraments under 
 their lawful Paflors and Governors. All 
 thefe People wherever they live, or by what 
 Name foever they ftile themfelves, whether 
 the Church of Egypt, or Ethiopia ; whether 
 of the Eaftern or Weftern Communion ; 
 whether Churches unreformed or Churches 
 of the Reformation ; all thefe fingly and fe- 
 parately taken, are but Parts of the Catho- 
 lick Church ; but taken all together (as 
 none of them are to be excluded) they do 
 make up that one Body, which the Apo- 
 ftle in my Text fpeaks of, when he faith, 
 'we are all by one Spirit baptized into one 
 Body^ and are all made to drink into one. 
 Spirit. 
 
 And now before I difmifs this Argument, 
 my Defign is to make fome Reflexions upon, 
 or to draw fome inferences from what has 
 been faid concerning the Church, with re- 
 ference to fome Points that are debated hot- 
 ly between us and the Church of Rome. 
 
 And the firfl Thing I (hall infift upon is 
 this. We may, from what has been faid, 
 be able, not only to give an Anfvver to that 
 Queftion which the Papifts have continual- 
 
12 8 A Refutation of a Poptfh Argument 
 
 ly in their Mouths when they tamper with 
 our People, "uiz. Where that Church is 
 which we profefs to believe in our Creed, 
 but alfo to dilcern how utterly Impertinent 
 that Qiieftion is to their Purpofe, notwith- 
 flanding the great Strefs they lay upon it. 
 
 The ufual Method, when they would fe- 
 duce any from our Church is this. They 
 will tell you, that Chrift can have but one 
 Church here upon Earth. If you acknow- 
 ledge this, as you certainly muft, they will 
 tell you that you need not trouble your 
 felf with entring into that Ocean of parti- 
 cular Difputes which are between the Prore- 
 flants and them, when the main, and, inTruth, 
 the only Queftion is, Where that Church is 
 which we profefs to believe in the two Creeds.? 
 You declare there to believe one Catholick 
 and Apoftolick Church: And you own like- 
 wife, that out of that Church there is no 
 ordinary Means of Salvation. What need 
 now have you to trouble your felf about 
 any more, than merely to fatisfy your felf in 
 which of the Communions of Chriftendom 
 this Church is to be found, and having found 
 it to join your felf to it. 
 
 I muft needs fay. That the waving all o- 
 ther Difputes, and putting the Controverfy 
 upon this Iffue, is a very compendious 
 Way, and will fave you a world of Trouble, 
 which otherwife you muft neceifarily un- 
 dergo in common Methods of enquiring 
 into, and coming to the Knowledge of the 
 
 Truth. 
 
ha?icied about in M. S. Z;^ 1 6 8 6. 129 
 
 Truth. For if you can but fatisFy your 
 felf, as they would have you, about the true 
 Church (which is their Church) they will 
 take care to fatisfy you about all other 
 Things whether you will or no. For af- 
 ter this Difpute is over, you are not per- 
 mitted to Difpute any more, becaufe ha- 
 ving found the true Church, you have 
 found an Infallible one, and if the Church 
 be Infallible, you muft be concluded by 
 her Determinations in all Matters whatfo- 
 ever. 
 
 Well, but let us examine what great 
 Weight and Moment there is in this Quef- 
 tion, that the being fatisfied about it 
 fhould put an end to all other particular 
 Difputes. Methinks this Queftion is jufl 
 fuch another Queftion as this. Since there 
 is but one City of London but abundance 
 of Streets, and Lanes, and Alleys in ir, 
 fome of which are well built, others rui- 
 nous and ready to tumble ; fome are health- 
 ful and free from contagious Diftempers, 
 others perhaps are vifited with the Plague; 
 now in which of all thefe Streets, Lanes, 
 and Alleys, is the true City of London to 
 be found ? Why fure any Man in his Wits 
 will think this an idle Queftion. For 
 whatever Difference there is as to thofe par- 
 ticular Places, upon account of fome of 
 them being much more fafc than others, 
 and fome of them more convenient or 
 more uniform than others, yet they are all 
 Vo L. VIL K of 
 
230 A Refutatmi of a Popijh Argument 
 
 of them Parts of the fame City, but none 
 of them, fingly taken, is that City. Now 
 juft fuch an Anfwer as this is to be given 
 to the Qiieftion before us. The Quef- 
 tion is. Where that Church is to be found 
 which we profefs to beheve in our Creeds? 
 To this Queftion we give a plain Anfwer 
 from the Principles we have before laid 
 down. That Church which we believe 
 in our Creeds is the Catholick cr Univer- 
 fal Church of Chrift, into which all Chrif- 
 tians are baptized: And therefore being 
 thus Catholick or Univerfal, it is not to be 
 confined to England, or to the Reforma- 
 tion abroad ; It is not to be confined to "Rome 
 or thofe of Her Communion; It is not to 
 be confined to Greece, to Syria^ to Armenia, 
 to the BjOJI Indies^ to Ethiopa, to Egypt ; but 
 it is in all thefe Places, becaufe in all thefe 
 Places there are Chriftians profefllng the 
 the common Faith of Chrift, and parta- 
 king of the fame common Sacraments un- 
 der their lawful Paftors and Governors ; 
 tho' yet, in Communion, many of them are 
 divided one from another. So that in all 
 thefe Places, and in every Place under Hea- 
 ven, where there are fuch People, there is 
 a true Church of Chrift, but not the whole 
 Church of Chrift, becaufe the whole Church 
 which we call the Catholick Church is 
 m.ade up of all thofe Churches. Only this 
 it is fit we (liould take Notice of, that tho' 
 in all thefe Places the Church is to be 
 
 found. 
 
handed about hi M. S. Z;^ 1 6 8 6. 23 1 
 
 found, yet the Chtirch, or that Part of the 
 Church which is found in fome of thofe 
 Places, is far more Pure, and Holy, and 
 Apoftolical than it is in other Places. And 
 in all the Countreys where the Church may 
 be faid to be, thofe where the Faith is 
 profefTed according to the Church of KomCy 
 have the greateft Mixture of Errors and 
 Corruptions. 
 
 And now let any Man judge. Whether 
 there be any fuch extraordinary Feats to be 
 done by this Queftion, as they would bear 
 us in hand ; nay, Whether it be not wholly 
 impertinent to our Bufinefs. For you fee 
 that, notwithftanding this Queftion is an- 
 fwered, yet all the particular Difputes be- 
 tween us and the Church of Korne are yet 
 unfettled ; and we are at as great a didance 
 from them as ever, Notwithftanding we 
 are willing to own them to be truly a 
 Church, (as we do all the Eaftern and We- 
 ftern Churches,) yet ftill we dare not com- 
 municate with them ; ftill our Complaints 
 remain againft their Ufurpations, againft 
 their impofing God knows how many new 
 DocSlrines for Articles of Faith, which the 
 Scriptures and the Primitive Church never 
 taught ; againft their Worftiip of Images, 
 and Invocation of Saints, of having the pub- 
 lick Service of God in an unknown Tongue, 
 and depriving the People of half of the Sa- 
 crament, and other fuch Things. We fay 
 they are truly a Churchy that is, a Part of 
 K 2 the 
 
132 A Refutation of a Popifj Argument 
 
 the Catholick Church, becaufe we think 
 they retain all the Fundamentals of the 
 Chriftian Religion, both as to Dodtrine and 
 Sacraments, and Government. But yet we 
 cannot be of their Communion, unlefs they 
 will either withdraw their unlawful unfcrip- 
 tural Impofitions from being Terms of their 
 Communion, or fatisfy us (which they ne- 
 ver can do any intelligent Man) that thefe 
 new Things which they impofe and we 
 except againft, are really agreeable to the 
 Word of God. So that you fee the Ocean 
 of Difputes mufh be failed thro', or elfe we 
 can never come to an Harbour. 
 
 But it will perhaps be infifted on, as I 
 know it is by the pretended Catholicks, 
 How is it polliblc that there (hould be but 
 one Church (as there is but One, by the 
 acknowledgment of all) and yet fo many 
 different Communions among thofe that pre- 
 tend to be of that Church ? Can all thefe 
 People, thus divided and feparated, belong 
 to that one Body of Chrift ? No, certainly 
 it is but One of all thofe Communions that 
 can be the true Church ^ 
 
 To this I anfwer. It were heartily to be 
 wifli'd. That all who profefs the Chriftian Re- 
 ligion were of one Communion, as they were 
 atfirlh And fure I am, it is the Duty of e- 
 , very particular Man, and of every particular 
 Church, to endeavour it, as much as its pof- 
 fible, without violating Faith, and a good 
 Confciencc. And Woe be to them who have 
 
 been 
 
ha?ided about i7i M. S. //^ 1 6 8 6. 133 
 
 been the Caufe or the Occafion of fuch 
 difmal Rents and Schifms as are to be fecn 
 at this Day in the Chriftian World ! But yet 
 notwithftanding, there is no Realon to be 
 aihgned why Churches of ditierent Com- 
 munions may not for all that, remain truly 
 Parts of the Catholick Church, fo long as 
 they have thofe Effentials of a Church which 
 I have fo often nam'd. I grant indeed, that 
 fo long as thefe Dividons and Separations 
 do remain, there is a criminal Schifm lies 
 at the Door of fome Party or other : For 
 certainly by Chrift's Laws, the whole Ca- 
 tholick Church fhould be of one Commu- 
 nion ; and Ecclefiaftical Affairs (liould be 
 fo adminifter'd among all People and Lan- 
 guages, that every honeft Man, when he 
 had occafion to travel from one Country in- 
 to another, even to the remoteil: Parts of 
 Chriftendom, might readily, with a good 
 Confcience, join in publick Pravers and Sa- 
 craments with that Chrittian Congregation 
 which he found upon the Place. So that 
 as the State of Chriftendom now ftands, we 
 muft needs acknowledge there is an horri- 
 ble Schifm, and hath been for many Ages 
 among the Churches j nay, perhaps there 
 may be more Churches than one that arc 
 guilty of thisSchilm in fome degree or odier. 
 But Hill, I fay, thefc Schiimatical Churches 
 are yet Parts of the Catholick Church, tho' 
 very corrupt and degenerate ones ; their 
 Schifm dodi no more cut tiicni Qtf irom 
 K 3 being 
 
134 A Refutation of a PopiJJj Argwneiit 
 
 being Members of Chrift's Kingdom (fo 
 long as they do hold to the Foundation) 
 than, for Inftance, if it fliould happen in 
 'England^ that two FamiHes, or two Parifhes, 
 or two Counties fhould quarrel among them- 
 felves, and that quarrel fhould proceed fo 
 far as that they fhould refufe all mutual 
 Commerce and Intercourfe, fliould be in- 
 hofpitable one towards another, and break 
 the King's Peace whenever they met one 
 with another j I fay, the Schifm in the for- 
 mer Cafe will no more cut off the Churches 
 concerned, from being Members of Chrift's 
 Kingdom, fo long as they retain the Faith 
 and Worfliip of Chrift Jefus, than the Quar- 
 rel or Breach of Peace in the latter Cafe 
 will cut off thofe People from being the 
 King of England's Subjedls, or from being 
 Members of his Kingdom, fo long as they 
 profefs to bear Faith and true Allegiance to 
 His Majeffy, and own his Laws and Go- 
 vernment. 
 
 It is a plain cafe that there were Separa- 
 tions and Schifms, and different Commu- 
 nions even in the moft Primitive Times of 
 Chriilianity : witnefs that great Schifm that 
 happened in the Church of Corinth^ which 
 cccafion'd two famous Epiftles, one from 
 St. Faiil^ ai^othex from St. Ckmeiit to that 
 Church. But yet, not a Word in either of 
 thefe Epiftles, that the Schifmaticks were 
 no Chriftians, or out of the Pale of the 
 Church, 
 
 Within 
 
handed about in M. S. /;^ 1 6 8 6. 135 
 
 Within two hundred Years after Chrift, 
 there arofe a notorious Schifm between the 
 Eajiern and the Latin Churches^ about the 
 Time of celebrating Eajier. And there the 
 Pope of Rome (as they have always been 
 ready at fuch Turns) excommunicated the 
 Churches of Jlfia for difagreeing with them 
 about that Point. Here now the Catholick 
 Church was divided into two Communions; 
 but will any Man in his Wits fay, That 
 either of thofe Communions was cut off 
 from the Catholick Church, when at that 
 Time there was in both of them fo manv 
 glorious Martyrs and Confeflbrs ? But if ei- 
 ther of them did forfeit their Tide of be- 
 ing Catholicks, it will be eafily ghefied 
 which of them it was. For certainly the 
 Afiatick Churches were in no fault, fince 
 they did but obferve their ancient Ufage. 
 But it was the Roman Church that was the 
 Schifmatick, in fo groundlefsly excommu- 
 nicating them. 
 
 But then I have this further to add upon 
 this Point, That though, as you fee we do 
 afTert that Churches of different Commu- 
 nions may, for all that, belong to the true 
 Catholick Church, yet it is not for the ferv- 
 ing our own Canfe that we do afiert this. 
 The Church of E/igland doih not need this 
 Hypothefis for the juftifving Herfelf to all 
 the Workl -, but we take this Hvpothefis, 
 and fay all this, out of the great Chanty 
 and Tendernefs we have to the Church of 
 K 4 Rcmc^ 
 
136 A Refutation of a Popipo Argume7it 
 
 RomCy and thofe other great Bodies that dif- 
 fer both from them and us, though much 
 more from them, than they do from us. 
 But if indeed it {hould prove true, which 
 the pretended CathoHcks of Rome fo much 
 contend for, viz. That among all the dif- 
 ferent Communions in Chriftendom, there 
 can but one of thofe Communions be the 
 True Church, and all the reft are out of 
 the Catholick Church ; I fay, if this (hould 
 be true, I declare. That if I had yet my 
 Communion to chufe, of all the Commu- 
 nions in Chriftendom, which have the Face 
 of a Church, The Communion of the 
 Church of Rome^ as it is now eftablifhed, 
 fhould be the Laft that I iliou'd join my 
 felf to : And my Reafon is, That if either 
 Herefy or Schifm deftroy a Church, and 
 cut off the Members of it from the Body 
 of Chrift, I (hould more fufped: that Com- 
 munion upon both thefe Accounts, than any 
 other. As for Herefy, the Notion of it is 
 not fo fully agreed upon. But if it be He- 
 sely to teach Dodtrines of Religion that are 
 not true, and Pradices in Religion that are 
 not fafe j (to give it the moft favourable 
 Term we can) if it be Herefy to declare 
 new Articles of Faith as neceffary to Salva^- 
 i|on, which neither Chrift, nor his Apoftles, 
 nor the Primitive Church ever declared as 
 fuch, then I fear the Roman Church \\2iXh 
 gone as far towards the making her felf 
 guilty of Herefy, as any of the feveral Coni- 
 
 munion^ 
 
handed about in\A.^.in\b%b, 137 
 
 munions of Chriflendom, even the moft er- 
 roneous of them. But as for Schifn^, (he 
 hath gone a great Way further. We are 
 all agreed, That Schifm is an unneceffary 
 caufelefs Separation from a Church, with 
 which we were bound to Communicate. 
 Taking it now for granted, that all the 
 Churches in the World are bound to be 
 of one Communion, yet if Separations do 
 happen, (as God knows there are abundance) 
 that Church only is guilty of Schifm which 
 is the Caufe and Occalion of that Separa- 
 tion. If we defire to communicate with 
 all Churches upon the Gofpel-Terms, but 
 fome Churches will not let us communi- 
 cate with them upon thofe Terms, but im- 
 pofe other Terms which the Laws of the 
 Gofpel doth not allow ; here is indeed a 
 Schifm, and a Rent between thefe Churches : 
 But which of them is the Schifmatick ? 
 Certainly not we that would own them as 
 Brethren, and join with them in Prayer and 
 Sacraments ; but they that will not let us 
 join with them, but upon fuch Terms, us 
 we cannot with a fife Confcience fubmic 
 to. 
 
 And this, I fear, is the Cafe between the 
 Church of Kome^ and thofe other Churches 
 that are of a different Communion. The 
 Church of Rome taking in all the Kingdom.<i 
 and Nations that adhere to her at this Day, 
 js not by all computation above one fourth 
 JPart (if fo much) of that company of Men 
 
 whlcb. 
 
138 A Refutation of a Popijh Argument 
 
 which profefs the Faith of Chrift, and have 
 the Sacraments, and all other EfTentials of 
 a Church. Yet all thofe Churches are di- 
 vided from her. Here now is a Schifm, 
 and a fearful one. But the Queftion is, at 
 whofe Door the Sin lies ? Why truly, it is 
 to be fear'd, that Church which hath im- 
 pofed new Terms of Communion, which 
 were never heard of in the Primitive Times ; 
 that Church which, taking advantages of 
 the Smallnefs of fome Churches, and the 
 Diftreffes of others, hath eredted an univer- 
 fal Monarchy over the Chriftian World, and 
 inftead of contenting her felf with being a 
 Part of the Catholick Church, will needs be 
 the Whole, and excommunicate all thofe 
 that refufe to yield Obedience to the Bifliop 
 of Rome^ as the Vicar of Chrift, and the 
 only vifible Head of the Church j I fay, 
 thii ufurping, monopolizing Church is, in 
 all Reafon, the Schifmatick ; and not thofe 
 other Churches that are {hut out of her 
 Communion. 
 
 Well, but there is one Argument goes 
 about, which, notwithftanding all we have 
 faid, doth irrefragably prove. That the 
 Church of Ro7ne, and no other, is that true 
 vifible Church that Chrift is to have always 
 upon Earth. 
 
 I have met with it in a litde manufcript 
 Paper: And it is faid to have done fome 
 
 Feats, 
 
handed about hi M. S. in i6S6. 139 
 
 Feats. I will fpeak two or three Words to 
 it, and fo conclude this Point. 
 
 The Argument is this. " If you deny the 
 " Church of Rome to be the only true viji- 
 " ble Churchy then I defire that you will be 
 " pie aid to Jhew me a viftble Church oppo- 
 " Ji^S ^^^ Church of Rome in thofe T^oBrines 
 " wherein you differ from them^ and praSii- 
 " fi'^Z ^^ ^^^fi Poifjts as the Church of Eng- 
 " land doth, from the Time of Chrtfi till the 
 " Rejormation. For if there was any time 
 *' wherein there was no Chriffian Church, but 
 *' that in Communion with the See of Rome, 
 " // 77iuft 1 conceive be granted, that that is 
 " the True Church, or that Chrill had no 
 " vifible One upon Earth!' 
 
 This is the Paper, Word for Word, leav- 
 ing out the Preface, about which we have 
 no Controverfy : and the Force of it lies in 
 thefe two Points. IVe ca?i?iot fiew a isifibk 
 Church that hath, from Chrift's Time to the 
 "Reformation, oppofcd the Church of Rome in 
 thoje Do£frines and PraSlices wherein we dif- 
 fer from her j and, There was a Time when 
 all Chrijlian Churches were in Communion 
 with the Church of Rome. The conclufion 
 from hence is, That therefore the prefcnt 
 Church of Rome is the only True Church of 
 Chriji upon Earth. 
 
 This 
 
140 A Refutation ofaPopiJIj Argument 
 
 This is as furprifing a Conclufion from 
 fuch Premifes, as can enter into the Mind 
 of a Man. Firft of all we cannot fliew a 
 vifible Church that hath, from Chrift's Time 
 to the Reformation, oppofed the Church 
 of Rome in her Pretences ; therefore the 
 Church of Rome is the only True Church.r^ 
 Why, fuppofing that all the Churches of 
 the World had, from Chrift's Time to this, 
 agreed with the Church of Rome in all Points 
 both of Do<5trine and Practice, yet doth it 
 from thence follow, that the Church of 
 Rome is the only vifible Church ? No, not 
 in the leaft : She is flill but a Part of the 
 vifible Church, and the other Churches 
 that agree with her are as much Parts of 
 it as {he. And if this be fo, how can it in 
 the leaft follow, that when Churches are 
 divided from her both in Dodtrine and 
 Pradice, fhe is any more the whole vifible 
 Church than they ? Why are not they as 
 much the vifible Church after they are di- 
 vided, as they were before, fuppofing it 
 was her Fault and not theirs, that occafio- 
 ned this Divifion and Separation ? And if 
 the vifible Church can be but in one 
 Communnion, why are not thofe Churches 
 that are feparated from the Church of 
 Rome, the only true Catholick vifible Church, 
 and the Church of Ro}7ie no part of it 
 all, fince it appears that in this Cafe it is 
 is fhe that hath caufed the Schifm ? 
 
 But 
 
handed about in M, S. in 1686. 141 
 
 But that I may fully expofe the Sophiftry 
 of this Argument to the meaneft Under- 
 flanding, and enable every one to give an 
 Anfwer to it, I will put the whole Force 
 of it into an obvious Cafe. 
 
 The Argument is, That if we cannot 
 fhew a vifible Church diftindt from the Ro- 
 man^ that hath in all Times, from the Be- 
 ginning, oppos'd the Dodtrines and Pra<fti- 
 ces of the prefent Church of Rome^ then it 
 will undeniably follow, that the prefent 
 Church of Rome is the only vifible Church. 
 
 Why now, methinks, this is juft fuch an 
 Argument as this. 
 
 A Father bequeaths a large Eftate among 
 his Children, and their Children after them. 
 They do for fome Generations quietly and 
 peaceably enjoy their feveral Shares, with- 
 out Difturbance from each other. At lad, 
 one Branch of this Family (and not of the 
 eldeft Houfe neither) ftarts up, and being 
 of greater Power than the reft, and having 
 got fome of the fame Family to join with 
 him, very impudently challengeth the whole 
 Eftate to himfelf, and thofe that adhere to 
 him : And would difpoffefs all the reft of 
 the Defcendants, accounting them no bet- 
 ter than Baftards, though they be far more 
 in number than his own Party, and have a 
 far greater Share in the Inheritance. Upon 
 this they conteft their own Right againft 
 him, alledging their Father's Will and Te- 
 ftament, and their long PoflefTion, and that 
 
 they 
 
142 A Refutation of a Popifh Argument 
 
 they are all lawfully defcended from their 
 firft common Anceftor. 
 
 But this Gentleman, who would Lord it 
 over his Brethren, offers this irrefragable 
 Argument for the Juftice of his Claim.. If, 
 faith he, you deny me and my Adherents 
 to be the fole Proprietors of this Eftatc, 
 then it lies upon you to fhew. That ever 
 lince the Death of our Progenitor, who left 
 us this Eflate, there hath appeared fome of 
 the Family who have always oppofed my 
 Claim to this Eflate. But that you cannot 
 fhew ; and therefore I have an undoubted 
 Title to the whole Eflate : I am Lord of 
 the whole Inheritance. 
 
 I do appeal to any Man living, whether 
 this Plea would pafs in any Court of Judi- 
 cature ; nay, whether any private Man, tho' 
 never fo unlearned, can believe that this 
 infolent Pretender doth offer any fair Rea- 
 fon for the diffeifing the Coheir of their In- 
 heritance. And yet this is jufl the Argu- 
 ment with which thofe learned Gentlemen 
 would perfuade us to give up our Birthright, 
 to depart from that Share of the Inheritance 
 we have in theCatholick Church. 
 
 Well, but what will the Coheirs that are 
 concerned fay to this Argument? Why there 
 are three Things fo obvious to be faid to 
 it, That if the Perfons concerned have not 
 the Wit to hit upon them, they are fit to 
 eome under the Cuflody and Guardianfhip 
 of this pretended Heir- General. May they 
 
 not 
 
ha?tded about inM.S, in i6S6. 143 
 
 not fay to this Gentleman that makes fo 
 univerfal a Claim, — Sir, your Claim was 
 not fo early as the Death of our Forefather 
 vvfio left us this Joint-Inheritance. Your 
 Anceftors and ours lived a great while peace- 
 ably together, without any clafhing about 
 this Eftate ; and we were fuffered for fome 
 Ages to enjoy our own Right, without any 
 moleftation from you or thofe you derive 
 from : and the Cafe being fo, there was no 
 need of oppofing your Pretences becaufe you > 
 made none. But then, (which is the fe- 
 cond Thing) when you did fet up for this 
 Principality, and wheedled fome of our Fa- 
 mily, and forced others to join with you, 
 you know you were prefently oppofed by 
 others of our Family, who would not fo 
 eafily part from their Rights. You know, 
 that as foon as ever you made your Claim 
 there were fome that ftoutly declared againft 
 it, tho' they had not Power, and Strength, 
 and Intereft enough in the World to ftem 
 the Torrent of your Ambition. 
 
 But then, thirdly, may they fay ; fuppo- 
 fing it was not fo : Suppofing you had met 
 with no Rub in your Pretences (which yet 
 you know you did) : Suppoiing our Family 
 were not fo fuddenly aware of the Mifchief 
 that would come upon them from thofe 
 your Ufurpations, as to make a prefent Op- 
 pofition ; doth it now follow, That becaufe 
 no Oppolition was juft then made to your 
 Pretences, that therefore your Pretenfions to 
 
 the 
 
144- ^ Refutation of a Pop iJJj Argument 
 
 the whole Eftate are juftifiable ? No, we 
 can prove they are not lb, for it is plain by 
 the Tejlament^ by the Settlement of our 
 common Father, that we have as much a 
 Right to our Parts in this Eftate as you 
 have, or as your Anceftors ever had. Tell 
 not us, that you were not at nrft, or that 
 you were not always oppofed in your Claim : 
 Bat tell us by what Right or Juftice you 
 can pretend to be the fole Lord of this In- 
 heritance. Let the Will of our common 
 Parent be produced, and that will plainly 
 lliew, That we have as much a Share in 
 this Eftate as you have. 
 
 This Allegory is fo pat to our Bufinefs, 
 and the Application of it fo eafy to our pre- 
 fent Cafe, that I think I ftiould injure the 
 moft vulgar Underftanding, if I fhould fu- 
 fpe(5l his Ability to make that Ufe of it 
 which I intend. 
 
 And then, fourthly, as for the other 
 Thing which the Paper ufes as an Argu- 
 ment of the Church of Rome being the on- 
 ly vifible Church, namely this, 'That if there 
 was any Time wherein there was no Chrifiian 
 Church but that in Communion with the 
 See of Rome, it mufi be granted that that 
 is the true Churchy meaning, the only True 
 Church. I fay, if this be any Argument, 
 it will prove a great deal more than the 
 Author of the Paper would have it. For it 
 will prove as ftrongly, That the Britijlo 
 Church here in this Nation is the only vi- 
 fible 
 
handed about in M. S. in 1686. 14 r 
 
 fible Church of Chrift, or that the Church 
 of Conjiantinople is the only Church of 
 Chrifl:, or that the Church of Alexandria in 
 B^gypt is the only Church of Chrift, as it will 
 prove that the Church of Rome is the only 
 Church of Chrift. For if there was any 
 Time wherein there was no Chriftian 
 Church but what was in Communion with 
 the Britijh Church, then, according to this 
 Argument, it muft be granted, that the 5r/- 
 iip Church is the only true Church. If 
 there was a Time wherein there was no 
 Chriftian Church but what was in Commu- 
 nion with the See of Conjiantinople, then it 
 muft be granted that the Greek Church un- 
 der the Patriarch of Conjiantinople, is the 
 only true vifible Church of Chrift j and fo 
 it may be carried on as to the Church of 
 Alexandria, and fever al other Churches yet 
 in being. For whenever that Time was, 
 when all thofe Churches were in Commu- 
 nion with all other Churches (as I believe 
 it was in the Primitive Times of Chriftia- 
 nity) I think it is evident, that the Church 
 of iR.ome was as much in Communion with 
 the Britijh Churches, as the Britip Chur- 
 ches were in Communion with the See of 
 Rome } and fo as to all the reft. If now the 
 BritiJ}^ Churches, and all other Churches 
 being once in Communion with the Church 
 of Rome, be a good Argument that the 
 Church of Rome is the only true Church, 
 then fure the Church of Rome, and all other 
 Vol. VII. L Churches 
 
146 A Refutation of a Popifh Argument 
 
 Churches, being once in Communion with 
 the Britifi Church, is as good an Argument 
 that the Britifi Church, and we of the 
 Church of England that are now come in 
 their Place, are the only true Church. And 
 this, in Truth, is all that they get by this 
 Argument. 
 
 But we are not fo arrogant as to pretend 
 to be the only true Church of Chrift, though 
 I am fure, all things confidered, we have 
 more reafon to do fo than they. But we 
 are contented to be a Part of the Catho- 
 lick Vifible Church j and we wifh they 
 would be fo too. And we have this com- 
 fort that we can fay we are a found Part 
 of the Catholick Church, which we hear- 
 tily wifli we could fay of them -, but to 
 our Grief we cannot. 
 
 I am fenfible I have made a long and 
 a tedious Difcourfe about this Bufmefs of 
 the Church : but I thought it needful to 
 do it (having io fair an occafion given 
 me by my Text) that I might furnifh you 
 with anfwers to thofe People who are fo con- 
 tinually talking about the Church, the true 
 Church, the one Vifible Church, out of 
 which there is no Salvation. This I am 
 fure of, and I conclude with it. So long 
 as you continue in our Communion you 
 are in the Communion of the true Church 
 of Chrift, and in an infinitely fafer Communi- 
 on than if you were in theirs. 1 dare an- 
 fwer for the Salvation of all thofe who, 
 
 conti- 
 
handed about in M. S. Z;^ 1 6 8 6. 1 47 
 
 continuing in CM.ir Church, do Hve up to 
 the Principles of it j But I dare aniwer 
 nothing for them who being brought up 
 in this Church, and having fo great oppor- 
 tunities given them of knowing the Truth, 
 do yet depart from it. I pray God they 
 may be able to anfwer for themfelves. 
 
 1 pray God make us all honeft and 
 wife, and then I am fure as to our Prin- 
 ciples we (hall continue the fame we are 
 now, but as to our Lives and Converfati- 
 ons we (hall grow much better. 
 
 May God of his infinite Mercy grant 
 this to us for the fake of his dear 
 Son Jefus Chriji — Tb ivhom^ &c. 
 
 7his being the Sermon that gave Occafion to the King''s 
 Mandatory Letter to the Bijhop of London to ftijpend Dr. 
 Slurp. And the B'lpop having advijed him to forbear Preu' 
 eking till his Majejiy's Difpleafure was removed. He was pre- 
 vented fro?n proceeding any further in the Examination of 
 thoje other five ^eries which he had propofed at the End 
 of the former Sermon, fo that we have no more of his Con- 
 (hjlon from this Text. 
 
 K2 SERMON 
 
148 
 
 SERMON VII. 
 
 ^he PopiJIj and Protejlant DoBrmes 
 concerning Confejfion^ explained and 
 cojnpared. And the Popijld Do- 
 Brine of Aricidar Co7ifeJfton proved 
 7Wt to be the DoBrijte of Scripture 
 and the antieitt Church. 
 
 P R O V. xxviii. 13. 
 
 He that covereth his Sim fiall not profper. 
 . But iJDhojb confejpth them^ and forjaketh 
 them^ jhall jlnd Mercy. 
 
 g H E S E Words contain a very 
 ^ full tho' a very fhort defcrip- 
 tlon (and by how much the 
 the fhorter fo much I think 
 the better) of true Repentance: 
 Such a Repentance as God would ac- 
 cept, and that firft Negatively, in what it 
 doth not conlifi, or rather is not confiftent 
 
 with 
 
Hje PopiJIj andFrotejlant^ 6cc. 149 
 
 with it: And that in the former Part of 
 the Verfe. He that cover eth his Sins JJjall 
 not projper. And iecondly, pofitively in 
 what it doth confifl: And that in thefe 
 two Things, confefling our Sins and forfake- 
 ing them. Whofo coufejfeth and forj'aketh 
 tbe?}j JJmll find Mercy. 
 
 Repentance, however it may appear to 
 fome as a fingle Duty, yet in truth it is 
 one full half of all that the Gofpel re- 
 quires of us. For the whole condition of 
 the New Covenant is comprized in thefe 
 two Things, viz. Repentance towards God, ^^q.^ ^ 
 and Faith towards our Lord Jejiis Chrifi ; 
 as the Apoftle has declared. 
 
 It miifl: therefore be of infinite con- 
 fequence, that we all be rightly inftruded 
 in the Nature of Repentance, fmce there 
 is fo great ftrefs laid upon it. If we 
 take falfe Meafures in this Point, it is as 
 much as our Souls are worth. And yet as 
 things go in the World, tho' nothing be 
 more plainly and fully declared in the 
 Holy Scriptures than the Nature of this 
 Repentance, as to all the Branches of it, 
 fo that no Man of but tolerable Parts, that 
 will bring an honed Mind along with him, 
 can eafily mifs of rightly informing himfclf 
 from thence of all that he is concerned 
 to know about this Duty ; yet, I fay, ai 
 Matters now ftand, there is fcarce any 
 Do(5trine of Religion more obfcured, moie 
 mifreprefented, more dillorccd and corrup- 
 
 L 3 ted. 
 
150 'The Popijh and Protefiant 
 
 ted, even to the great Peril of the Souls 
 of Men, than thisDo(5trine of Repentance is. 
 
 Some Men there are who, for the ad- 
 vancing the Authority of the Clergy, and 
 the more fully eftablifhing their Empire over 
 the Confciences of Menj as likewife for the 
 enriching themfelves by other Mens Sins, 
 and at the fame time making the Confciences 
 of thofe that pay for it as eafy and as quiet 
 as may be: I fay, they have found out God 
 knows how many Devices as to this Bufmefs 
 of Repentance, which the Writers of the 
 Scripture never knew of; nay, which indeed 
 are diredly contrary to their Senfe and Mean- 
 ing. And fuch Devices they are too, that 
 at the fame time they both perplex the Con- 
 fciences of the more fcrupulous fort of Men, 
 and alfo give too much Encouragement to 
 the Vices and Exceffes of thofe that are 
 loofely given. 
 
 The wife Man here in the Text tells us, 
 ^hat wkojb confefeth his SinSj and forfaketh 
 them, fidall find Mercy. This is both plain 
 enough, and home enough ; and this fame 
 Notion of Repentance is all along incul- 
 cated both in the Old and New Teftament; 
 and no other but this. Every where a con- 
 trite Confeffion of our Sins to God, and a 
 forfaking them, are thought enough to de- 
 nomiinate a Sinner a true Penitent, and to 
 entitle him to the Mercies of God. And, 
 on the other fide, whoever doth not come 
 up to this J v/hoever doth not both thefe, 
 
 is 
 
DoSirines of Confejfwn^ compare/. X£i 
 
 is not qualified for God's Mercies. The one 
 without the other will not be fufficient. If 
 a Man confefs, but doth not forfake, his Sins 
 are yet upon him ; he is not in the State of 
 a true Penitent. On the other fide, tho' a 
 Man do forfake his Sins, if he do not con- 
 fefs them (which indeed it is hardly to be 
 fuppofed that a Man can do -,) yet fi:ill his 
 Repentance is imperfed:. It is not that Re- 
 pentance to which God, in his Revelations 
 to Mankind, has made any Promife of Mercy 
 and Forgivenefs. Both thefe Things there- 
 fore are necefifary, and where they do con- 
 cur, they are all that is neceffary. 
 
 But now the prefent Dodtrines of the 
 Church of Rome concerning this Matter of 
 Repentance, are quite of another Strain, as 
 will appear by thefe Three of them which 
 I fiiall take occafion from my Text to exa- 
 mine. 
 
 1. FirJI of all they teach. That a Mun is 
 not only to confefs his Sins to God, but he is 
 bound to confefs them aljo to a Pt^iej} ; other- 
 wife they will not be forgiven him. And 
 when he doth thus make his Confeflion, he 
 is bound to difcover not only all his mortal 
 Sins that, upon fi:ri6t Examination of him- 
 felf, he can remember, but alfo the Circum- 
 ftances of them. 
 
 2. Sccoi2dly, whereas it is here fald, That 
 he that confefeth and jorfaketh his Sins, f:all^ 
 without more-ado, find Mercy ; that is, his 
 Sins fhall be forgiven him ; they teach q\]ite 
 
 K 4 other- 
 
152 I'he Popijh and Protefiant 
 
 otherwife : For a Man, according to them, 
 may confefs his Sins and forfake them too, 
 and yet they {hall not be forgiven him, un- 
 lefs he make Satisfaction for them over and 
 above. They grant indeed, that upon his 
 Confeffion to a Prieft, and receiving Abfo- 
 lution from him, the eternal Puni(hment due 
 to his Sins is remitted ; but yet there is a 
 very terrible temporal Punifhment to be un- 
 dergone, either in this Life or the next ; 
 which Punifhment the Sinner cannot be 
 freed from, unlefs he either in his own 
 Pcrfon, or fome other for him, do make a 
 compleat Satisfadlion to the Divine Juftice. 
 
 3, Thirdly, Whereas by the Words of our 
 Text one would think, t\\2it forfaking of Sin 
 was as neceflary to the finding Mercy as Con" 
 fefiion, and that one without the other would 
 not be available for the procuring any Man's 
 Pardon j they teach quite otherwife (if not 
 diredtly, yet by Confequence.) For, accord- 
 ing to their Definitions, if a Man do but de- 
 voutly and contritely confefs to a Prieft, and 
 receive his Abfolution, he is prefently put 
 into the State of God's Favour, fo far as 
 that he (hall not fufFer eternally for his Sins, 
 but at laft go to Heaven ; tho' in the mean 
 time he do not forfake his Sins till his dying 
 Day: Tho', as I faid before, if he have not 
 made Satisfadion, he muft for a long time 
 be kept in Purgatory. 
 
 Thefe are the Popifti Corruptions and In- 
 novations in this Matter of Repentance that 
 
 we 
 
DoB rifles cf Confejfwn^ compard, 153 
 
 we all complain of, and think we have juft 
 Reafon fo to do. And thefe Opinions and 
 Dodlrines are not only taught by private 
 Men among them, but are partly the ex- 
 prefs Definitions of their General Council of 
 'Tre7it (which, with them, is Authority ne- 
 ver to be oppofed and contradidted) and 
 partly they are the undeniable Confequences 
 and Refults of v/hat they have there decreed 
 and declared concerning the Sacrament of 
 Penance. 
 
 Of thefe three Points I come to give an 
 Account : And I begin with their Dodlrine 
 of Confeffion ; which I am the more de- 
 firous to infift upon, becaufe really feveral 
 among our felves are apt enough to think 
 that the Church of Rome hath the Advan- 
 tage of us in this Matter. And it is made 
 a Pretense by fome, why they have left our 
 Communion, viz. That in our Church they 
 want the Benefit oi private Confejjion^ which 
 in the Church of Rome is ftridtly enjoin'd. 
 
 Now my Bufmefs is to lay this Matter 
 plainly before you ; to ftate both their 
 Do(n:rine and ours in this Point of Confef- 
 fion ; and then, I dare fay, it will eafily ap- 
 pear which Church is to be preferr'd upon 
 this Account. 
 
 1. Firji then I (hall fhev/, how far we of 
 the Reform'd Religion do allow of Confef- 
 fion of Sins unto Men. 
 
 2. Secondly^ What that Dodrine of the 
 Church of Ro?ne is, that we find fault with 
 
 ill 
 
154 ^^ Popijh and P rot eft ant 
 
 in this Matter, and for what Reafons it is 
 juftly blameable. 
 
 I. Firjl then, I fhall plainly lay before 
 you what it is we teach as to this Matter 
 of confeffing Sins to Men, whether Priefts 
 or others. All the Sins that can be confef- 
 fed will fall under fome of thefe three Heads : 
 They are either fuch whereby God is of- 
 fended, and He only ; or they are fuch 
 whereby fome particular Man is injur'd, as 
 well as God offended j or Laftly, they are 
 fuch whereby Scandal is given to the pub- 
 lick Society of Chriftians where we live, tho' 
 no particular Man be injur'd by ihem. 
 
 Now as to each of thefe Kinds of Sins, 
 let us examine what Confeilion to Men is 
 due. 
 
 I. And Firft of all, there is no doubt but 
 that as to all thefe Sins that come under the 
 fecond Head I have named, that is to fay, 
 all thofe Sins whereby we have offended or 
 injur'd our particular Neighbours ; there is 
 no doubt, I fay, that we are not only bound 
 to confefs them to God, as being Tranf^ 
 grelTors of his Law, but bound likewife to 
 make Satisfadlion to our Neighbours for the 
 Injury we have done to them by them. 
 And that both by a penitential Confeflion 
 and Acknowledgment of them ; and, if that 
 be not fufhcient, by making fuch further 
 Reparations as the Cafe requires. This we 
 are bound to do by the natural Laws of 
 
 Juflice 
 
DoEi rules of Confejfwn^ compaj'd. 155 
 
 Juftice and Equity : And our Saviour hath 
 fufficiently intimated his Pleafure as to this 
 in that Precept of his, //' thou bring thy Matt. v. 
 Gift to the Altar^ and there remember efi that ^^' ''^" 
 thy Brother hath ought agai?ijl thee^ leasee there 
 thy Gift before the Altar^ and go thy ways^ 
 jirjl be reconciled to thy Brother^ and then 
 come and offer thy Gift. In which Words he 
 plainly teaches us, That it is not enough wken 
 we have offended or affronted any Perfon, 
 to go and ask God forgivenefs for it, but 
 we are to go and reconcile our felves to him, 
 by acknowledging our Faults, and ujaking 
 all fuch Reparations, as the Injury requires; 
 otherwife we are no ways capable of making 
 our Prayers to God for his Forgivenefs. O 
 that we would all ferioufly think on this ! 
 If we did, it would not be poliible for us 
 to offer the leaft Provocation, or to do the 
 leafl Injury to any Man in the World. Or if 
 we were fo foolifh, or fo unhappy as to do 
 it, we fliould not be able to take any Reft 
 till we had made him Satisiadiion. For I 
 I account no Man can be able to reft quietly, 
 who is not in a Condition to f\iy his Prayers. 
 
 2. But Secondly^ As to all thofe Sins which 
 come under the Third Head I mention'd, 
 viz. Sins, Vv'hich, tho' they do not injure 
 any particular Perfon, yet injure the publick 
 Society of Chriftians, are an Affront to the 
 Religion we profefs, and give Scandal to the 
 Church; as to thefe Sins, I fay, not only our 
 ''Miurch, but all other Proteftant Churches, 
 
 do 
 
156 The PopiJlD and Protejlant 
 
 do not only allow, but approve of Confef- 
 iion unto Men ; even a publick Confeffion ; 
 a Confeffion as open as the Sins committed 
 were. For Inftance, if any Man deny the 
 Faith of Chrift, or go over to an heretical 
 Communion ; or Laftly, live in the open 
 Pradtice of any Sin or Sins that are noto- 
 rioufly repugnant to the Laws of Chrift's 
 Religion ; fuch Sins as St. Faul inftanceth in, 
 E Cor.v. when he diredts the Corinthians that. If afiy 
 «»• Man who is called a Brother (that is, a Chri- 
 
 ftian) be a Fornicator^ or an Idolater^ or a 
 Railer, or a Drunkard^ or an Extortioner^ with 
 fuch a one no not fo much as to eat. As to 
 fuch Perfons as thefe, I fay, there is no Pro- 
 teftant Church but doth highly approve, 
 that a publick Confeffion {hould be made in 
 the Face of the Church of thofe Crimes by 
 every penitent ; that by this Means Satis- 
 fad:ion might be made to the Chriftian So- 
 ciety which was fcandaliz'd, and the offend- 
 ing Party may, as much as in him lies, un- 
 do all the Mifchief which his bad Example 
 had done to his Fellow-Chriftians. 
 
 And this indeed was the ancient Pra6lice 
 of the Church of Chrift, in the primitive 
 Times. Such a Courfc was always then ta- 
 ken with fcandalous Offenders. If a Man 
 was a known evil Liver, if upon Admoni- 
 tion he did not reform his Life, he was, 
 without more ado, caft out of the Commu- 
 nion of the Faithful. And there was no 
 way to obtain his readmiffion, but by a 
 
 Repen- 
 
DoBrhies of CojifeJ/leny cornpard. 157 
 
 Repentance as publick as his Sin was. Nay, 
 in thofe Days the offending Chriftians who 
 had their Hearts difpofed for Repentance, 
 were as forward of themfelves to make this 
 publick Confeflion, and to right the Chri- 
 ftian Society they had injur'd, as the Church 
 was to require it of them. 
 
 And this is that Confeflion we fo often 
 read of in Ecclefiaftical Writers, and which 
 they fo much urge as of Neceflity to Re- 
 pentance, njiz. A pubHck Confeflion of 
 Crimes, not that private Whifpering of Sins 
 into the Ear of a ConfeflTor, which the 
 Church of Rome hath now brought into the 
 place of it. 
 
 It is true, there is little of this to be {ten 
 in our Times. A few Foot-fteps are left 
 of the ancient Ecclefiafl:Ical Difcipline, and 
 that is all. Whether ever it will be refl:orcd 
 or no, God only knows. But it is the Wifli 
 and the Prayer of all good Men, that it 
 may be. Popery firfl: corrupted the Difci- 
 pline of the Church ; and happy had it been 
 for us, if when our firft Reformers took fo 
 much Care to reduce Doctrines of Faith to 
 the primitive Standard, they had done the 
 fame as to our Difcipline. But perhaps it 
 was not in their Power. They fufficiently 
 difcover their Good-will to it, in the Pre- 
 face of the Comynination-Office ; where, ha- 
 ving mention'd that There was a godly Difci- 
 pline in the primitive Church j that jiich Per- 
 Jons as Jlood conviBed of notorious Sins, 'were 
 
 put 
 
158 T!he Popijh a7tcl Protejlant 
 
 put to open Pena?i€e^ and punified in this 
 IVorld^ that their Souls might be faved in the 
 Day of the Lord ; and that others^ admonijifd 
 by their Examples^ might be more afraid to of- 
 Jend. They add in the next Sentence, That 
 it is heartily to be "wiped that this Difcipline 
 may be refiofd. But till that be done, we 
 muft ufe fuch Methods for bringing Men 
 to Repentance as we can. 
 
 3. But Thirdly, All Proteftants that I know 
 of, do not only require Acknowledgment and 
 Confeffion of Injuries to the injur'd Perfon, 
 as neceflary to Repentance, and approve of 
 publick Confeffion of publick Sins in the 
 Face of the Church, but even as to private 
 Sins, whereby no particular Man nor no 
 Society is injur'd, but only God offended 
 (which is the third fort of Sins that I men- 
 tion'd in the firfl: place ;) I fay, as to thefe, 
 they not only allow of, but approve of Con- 
 feffion to Men, even private Confeffion to 
 Men ; and more efpecially fuch Confeffion 
 as is made to thofe who are Miniflers. No 
 one Proteftant, fo far as we can judge by 
 the publick Declarations of their Faith, is 
 again ft private Confeffion of Sins to any 
 good Man, much lefs to a Minifter or Paf- 
 tor. Nay, they are fo far from being a- 
 gainfc it, that they advife it and recom- 
 mend it in fundry Cafes as a mofl excellent 
 inflrument of Repentance. 
 
 So that the Papills do very unjuflly tra- 
 duce and calumniate the Reformation^ when 
 
 thev 
 
DoBrines of Confefftony compard, 159 
 
 they fay that the Proteftants are againft pri- 
 vate Confeflion. There is no fuch Thing. 
 There is no Proteftant Church but gives it 
 that due Eiteem and Regard that it ought 
 to have. All that they have done is to re- 
 gulate it, to fet it upon its true Bafis and 
 Foundation ; which is done, not by requi- 
 ring private Confeffion as a thing neceffary, 
 but by exhorting Men to it as a Thing high- 
 ly convenient in many Cafes. In all thofe 
 Inftances where it can be ufeful, or ferve any 
 good Purpofe, it is both commended and 
 ferioully advifed ; that is to fay, where a 
 Sinner either needs Dire(51:ion and Affiftance 
 for the overcoming fome Sin that he la- 
 bours under ; or where he is fo overwhelms, 
 ed with the Burden of his Sins, that he 
 needs the Help of fome fkilful Perfon to 
 explain to him the Terms of the Gofpel, to 
 convince him from the Holy Scriptures that 
 his Repentance (as far as a Judgment can 
 be made of it) is true and fmcere, and will 
 be accepted by God; and Laftly, upon the 
 full Examination of his State, and his Judg- 
 ment thereupon, to give him the Abfolution 
 of the Church. In all thefe Cafes, no Pro- 
 teftants (that underftands his Religion) is 
 againll private Confeffion. On the contrary, 
 all the beft: Writers of the Proteftants, nay, 
 all the publick Confeffions of the Prote- 
 ftants (which give an Account of their Faith) 
 are mightily for it, and do ferioufly recom- 
 mend 
 
1 6o 72^ Popip and ProteJla7it 
 
 mend it. Mr. Calvin hath fully exprefTed 
 their Senfe as to this Point. 
 
 " Let every faithful Chriftian (fays he) 
 « remember, that when he is burden'd and 
 " afflided with the Senfe of his Sins, that 
 " he cannot eafe himfelf without the Help 
 " of others, it is then his Duty not to neg- 
 " ledt that Remedy which the Lord hath 
 " prefcribed to him, viz. That, for the eafing 
 " of himfelf, he re fort to private Confellion 
 " with his Paftor ; and that for the gaining 
 *' Comfort to himfelf, he fetch in the Af- 
 " fidance of him whofe Oflice it is, both 
 " privately and publickly, to comfort the 
 " People of God by the Dodlrine of the 
 " Gofpel. But yet this Moderation is al- 
 " ways to be ufed, that where God hath 
 •' not laid Impofitions, w^e (hould not lay Im- 
 " pofitions on our own Confciences. Hence 
 " it follows, that this private Confeffion 
 '' ought to be free, and fhould not be re- 
 " quired of all, but only recommended to 
 " thofe who find they have need of it." 
 Thus far Mr. Calvin \ and in the fame place 
 where he doth thus recommend private Con- 
 felTions, doth he alfo fpeak great Things 
 of the Benefits of private Abfolution, in or- 
 der to the eafing and comforting afflid:ed 
 Confciences. 
 
 And this Senfe of his is the general 
 Senfe of the Protefi:ants Abroad. If there 
 be any Difference among them, it is, That 
 the hiitheram are more ftri(^"t in requiring 
 
 private 
 
Do&rines of Confejfton^ compard* i6i 
 
 private Confeffiofi than either the French or 
 Dutch Proteflants are. 
 
 As for our own Church, {he has dire(5tly 
 given her Judgment in the Matter, as we 
 have now reprefented, viz. In the publick 
 Exhortation, which is to be read when No- 
 tice is given of a Communion. There it is 
 advifed, That if there be any of the Congre- 
 gation that cannot by other Means quiet his 
 own ConJ'cience, but requireth Comfort or Coun- 
 fel ; then he Jhould come to fome difcreet and 
 learned Minijler of God's JVordy and open his 
 Grief i that by the Minijlry of God's Holy 
 Word he may receive the Benefit of Abfolution^ 
 together with ghojlly Counfel and Advice, to the 
 quieting of his Conjcience, and avoiding all 
 Scruple and Doubtfulnefs. 
 
 This is the Dodtrine of the Proteftants 
 concerning Confeflion; and this I think may 
 be juftified to all the World. 
 
 II. But the Popifh Dodrine in this Mat- 
 ter is quite of another Strain, and ferves to 
 quite different Purpofes. Which what it is, 
 and upon what Grounds we find fault with 
 it, I come in the fecond Place to {hew. 
 
 The Church of Rome, you are to know, 
 have made Repentance to be a Sacrament^ 
 viz. The Sacraments by which only Sins 
 committed after Baptifm are to be forgiven. 
 And of this Sacrament of Repentance they 
 have made three Parts ; i. Contrition for 
 Sin ; 2. Confeffion to a Priejl ; 3. Satisfa6lion. 
 Vol. Vll. M Who- 
 
.62 . 7^^ Popip and Protejlant 
 
 Whoever performs thefe three Things, up-* 
 on the Prieft's Abfolution, his Sins is for-^ 
 given. And all thefe three Conditions (fay 
 they) are neceflary to the obtaining Pardon 
 and Reconciliation. 
 
 By Confejpon^ they mean not ConfeiTion 
 to God, nor ConfeiTion to our Neighbour in 
 cafe of Injuries, nor Confeffion to the Church 
 in cafe of publick notorious Sin ; but private 
 ConfeJJion to a Prieji^ virhich is that they call 
 Auricular ConfeJJion^ becaufe it is whifper'd 
 into his Ear. This is that Confeffion they 
 make a neceflary Part of Repentance, and 
 v^ithout which (fuppofing we have Oppor- 
 tunity) Sin is not forgiven. 
 
 I will give you their Senfe (as near as I 
 can tranflate) in the Words of two of their 
 General Councils which have eftablifh'd it 
 as a Law among them. The firft is, the 
 Council of Lateran, There it is ordcr'd, 
 " That every Man and Woman, after they 
 " come to Years of Difcretion, (hould faith- 
 " fully confefs all their Sins privately to their 
 " own Prieft, at leaft once in the Year, and 
 " endeavour faithfully to perform the Pe- 
 " nance that is enjoin'd them ; and after 
 *' this they fhould come to the Sacrament, 
 *' at leaft at Eajler^ unlefs the Prieft, upon 
 ** fome reafonable Caufe, do judge it fit for 
 " them to abftain at that Time. And who- 
 ** ever doth not perform this, he is to be 
 ** excommunicated out of the Church; and 
 " if he die, he is not to be allow'd Chri* 
 
 ..TV « ftiaR 
 
DoSir 17768 of Co7tfeJ[w7ii cofnpard. i6'3'- 
 
 " ftian Burial." Thus the Council of hate- 
 ran^ very modeftly. But the Council of Trent 
 goes much further, and chncheth the Bufi- 
 nefs as effectually as is pofiible ; for they de- 
 cree that, " Whoever Ihall affirm that this 
 " private ConteiTion to a Prielt was not in- 
 " ftituted by Chrift, and is by Divine Right 
 " neceflary to Salvation, let him be accurs'd." 
 The fame Council orders that, " All mortal 
 *' Sins which a Man, after diligent Exami- 
 " nation of himfelf, finds his Confcience to 
 " be burden'd with, even thofe that are mod 
 " fecret, tho' they be only in Thought or 
 " Defire, even all thefe arc to be repeated 
 " to the Prieft in Confefhon ; and not only 
 " the Sins themfelves, but alfo the Circum- 
 " fiances of them, that may change the Kind 
 ** of the Sin." And, to bind this the fafler 
 upon the Confciences of Men, they have 
 made this Decree that, *' Whofoever fliall 
 " fay, that in the Sacrament of Penance, it is 
 " not by Divine Law necelTary, for the ob- 
 " taining Forgivenefs, to confefs all and 
 " every mortal Sin which, after a dili- 
 " gent Enquiry, a Man can rem.ember, even 
 *' the moft fecret, together with the Cir- 
 *' cumftances that change the Kind of the 
 " Sin s or fliall fay, that fuch ConfefTion is 
 " only of ufe for the direding or comfort- 
 *' ing the Penitent, but is not neceflary, let 
 " every fuch Man be accurs'd." 
 
 This is the plain avow'd Doctrine of the pre- 
 fent Church of i^ow^, astoConfefl'ion. But we 
 
 M 2 lay 
 
164 The Poptjld a?id Protejianf 
 
 fay it is a great Error introduced into the 
 Dodlrine of Repentance, and of very ill 
 Confequence to the Souls of Men, as will 
 appear by thefe three following Things, 
 which I {hall very briefly reprefent. 
 
 \. Firft, They here make a Thing to be 
 of Chrift's Inftitution, and of Neceffity to 
 Salvation, that hath no manner of Founda- 
 tion in the Holy Scriptures, either in the Old 
 or New Teflament. 
 
 If they could but produce one Text of the 
 Bible, wherein it did appear that this Auricular 
 Sacramental Confeffion of Sins to a Prieft was 
 recommended, either by our Lord, or his Apo- 
 illcs J or one Text, wherein it did appear that 
 it was pradis'd by any Chriflian, either of the 
 Clergy or Laity in any Inftance ; or Laflly, 
 one Text, whereby it doth appear that it was 
 fo much as mention'd or thought on by the 
 holy Men of that Time; I fay, if they could 
 produce any one Text of Scripture for the 
 Proof of any of thefe Things, they would do 
 fomething : But we are fure they cannot. 
 And therefore to impofe private Confeffion, 
 as a neceffary Condition of Repentance upon 
 .all the Chriflian World, under Pain of Dam-» 
 ,-nation, that is intolerable. One Text there 
 is indeed, they make a great Noife with, 
 and it .looks, at firfl Sight, plaufibly to their 
 Purpofe ; but, upon Examination, it will be 
 found nothing at .all to their Purpofe. It 
 -i& io the fifth Chapter of St. Janm\ Epiftle, 
 
 where 
 
Docfriues of Co?jfeJfio7i^ compard. 165 
 
 where the Apoftle hath this Paflage, Cc7i- 
 fcj's (fays he) your Sins one to another^ that 
 ye may be healed : for the eJfeBiial fer'vent 
 Prayer of a righteous Man availeth much. 
 
 But firft of all ; It can never be made 
 appear, that the Confeffion which Sr. James 
 here prefcribes^ is to be underftood of pri- 
 vate Confeffion to a Prieft ; nay, on the 
 contrary, it is manifefl from the very Words, 
 that the Apoftle (peaks of fuch a Confeffion 
 as is mutual and reciprocal, Confefs your Stns 
 one to another. Which Speech intimates, that 
 both Parties are to confefs ; both the Con- 
 feffor and the ConfelTed, But now it is not. 
 the Ufage of the Church for the Confeilbrs 
 to confefs to the People who confefs to them. 
 Furthermore, it is undeniably plain, that 
 the Apoftle doth not here fpeak of the 6"^/- 
 cramental Confeffion of the Church of Rome, 
 upon this Account ; that the End for which 
 he reconnmendeth Confcffiion to one another, 
 is only this, That by the Prayers of one ano- 
 ther they may be healed of their Sicknefs, 
 (whether thofe Sickneftes be the Difeafes of 
 the Soul or of the Body it matters not) for 
 it immediately follows, T^he effeSlual fervent 
 Prayer of a righteous Man avatleth 7nuch. 
 
 But what is this to the Popidi Confeffiion ? 
 The End of that is not fo much to get cured, 
 either of our Sins or our Sickncfies, by the 
 Prayers of him wc confefs to ; but to obtain 
 the Pardon of our Sins, by receiving his Ab- 
 folution J which is quite another thing. But 
 
 M ; " to 
 
1 66 T'he PopiJJj and Protejlant 
 
 to proceed further: As there is in Scripture 
 no Command, no Pradice, no Mention of 
 this Sacramental private Confeffion, fo there 
 is much againft it. For the Scripture plainly 
 prefcribes other Terms of Forgivenefs of 
 Sins, and affures us of Pardon and the Mercy 
 of God, merely upon our conf effing to God^ 
 and for faking our Sins without any more ado. 
 jD-^wi certainly never dream'd of the Necef- 
 fity o^ Auricular Confeffion^ when he fpake 
 thefe Words in the thirty-fecond P/alm, and 
 the fifth Vcrfe ; I ack?2owkdged my Sins unto 
 'Thee, and mine Iniauities have I not hid. I 
 faid I ii)ill confefs my Sin unto the Lord^ and 
 lo ! thou forgave /I ?ne the Iniquity of my Sin. 
 Upon his confeffing his Sins to the Lord 
 above, his Sin was forgiven, x^nd, left we 
 iliould think that this was an extraordinary 
 Priviledge vouchfaf'd unto him, and fuch a 
 one as others were not to exped:, he adds 
 Ver. II. further, For this Caufefoall every one that is 
 godly fjiake his Prayer unto thee in an accepta- 
 ble Time. To the fame Purpofe St. John \ 
 If we confefs our Sins (meaning to God, for 
 to him the whole Context reftraineth it) 
 \ John i ^^*^ is faithful ajid jujl to forgive us our Sins, 
 9. and to cleanfe us from all IJnrighteoufnef. 
 
 And thus again ; if we can gather any thing 
 from any Parable of our Saviour's, we may 
 certainly gather this from the Parable he 
 makes of the Publican and Phanfee that 
 went together into the Temple to pray^ that, in 
 order to the Forgivenefs of Sins, God re- 
 quires 
 
DoSlf'ines of Co7tfeJ/ion, compard, 167 
 
 quires no more than an humble, forrowful 
 and contrite Heart, confeffing what is paft, 
 and amending for the Time to come, with- 
 out refpedl to any external Adminiflration of 
 Confeflion to Men. For it is plain that the 
 Publican^ who is there made the Example 
 of a penitent Sinner, upon his Jmiti?2g on his 
 Breajl^ a.nd Jay ijjg in private to God, O GWLukxvi 
 be merciful to me aSimier^ went away juftijied\'^^' 
 that is, accepted of God, when the other 
 was rejected. The fame Thing may be ga- 
 ther'd from that other Parable of the Prodi- 
 gal Son, 
 
 It appears from what I have fa id (and 
 much more might be faid to this Purpofe) 
 what little Colour there is for this Doctrine, 
 That Sacramental Confejfion was injlituted by 
 Chrijl^ and by him fnade necejjdry to true Re- 
 pe?ita?7ce, iince from the Scriptures we fee the 
 quite contrary. 
 
 But the Strength of the Romani/Is doth not 
 lie, as to this Point, in the Scripture (nor 
 indeed in many other Points;) but in the 
 Multitude of Vouchers which they pretend 
 to have for their Dodrine in Antiquity : 
 They give out, that this was the Dodrine 
 of the Fathers, and the Pradice of the an- 
 cient Chriftians. Well, this we (hall now 
 confider in the fecond Place. 
 
 2. And as to this Pretence of theirs, we 
 il^.all fay two Things : The iirft by way of 
 Confeflion. In the hrfl: Place, we grant that 
 
 M 4 publick 
 
68 'the Popip and Protefiant 
 
 publick Confeffions of Sins in the Face of 
 the Church, efpecially of notorious and fcan- 
 dalous Sins, was much in ufe in the primi- 
 tive Church, and was a conftant Part of the 
 ancient DifcipHne. We grant alfo, that pri- 
 vate Confeffion of Sins to a difcreet Mini- 
 fler, in order to the obtaining Diredtion and 
 Comfort to the Penitent, was both frequent- 
 ly recommended, and frequently pradis'd in 
 all Times ; but more efpecially after the pub- 
 lick Confeffions grew into difufe. But then, 
 having granted this, we fay, in the fecond 
 Place, that this makes nothing in the world 
 to that Confeffion which is now required in 
 the Church of Rome ; for, as to their Au- 
 ricular Sacramental Confeffion, we dare af- 
 firm thefe three Things : 
 
 (i.) Firft, That it was never enjoined or 
 commanded by any Law of the Church, as 
 a neceflary Duty incumbent upon all Chri- 
 il:ians, till the Coimcil of Later any about four 
 hundred Years ago j which Council was the 
 fame that eftablifh'd the Doftrine of Tran- 
 fubflantiation, and that other Dodrine of 
 t)epofing of Princes in cafe they were he- 
 retical : But this is not all. Even in that 
 Council, this Bufinefs of Confeffion was only 
 enjoin'd as an Ecclefiaftical Conftitution, and 
 not bound upon us by any Law of God ; 
 and that wasmodeft enough, in comparifon of 
 what came afterward. But afterwards came 
 the Council of Trent, almoft in the Memory 
 of our Fathers ; and that was the firil Coun- 
 cil 
 
JDoElrines of CofifeJJlon^ coinpay^ d. 1 69 
 
 cil that ever decreed prhate ConfeJJion to a 
 Prieji to be the Ordinance of Chriji^ and ne- 
 cejjary to Salvation. So that whatever Boaft 
 the Romanijh make of Antiquity being on 
 their Side, as to this Point, it is certain that 
 Auricular Conjejjion, as it new ftands, was 
 not a Law of the Church, or thought ne- 
 celTary, till within lefs than thefe hundred 
 and fifty Years. 
 
 (2.) But Secondly, We will go further ; 
 it is certain that it cannot be made to appear 
 from any Teftimony of the ancient Fathers, 
 that Confefhon of Sins to a Pried in private, 
 was ever looked upon as any more than a 
 Thing very advifeable, and very ufeful in 
 feveral Cafes, both for the diredting a Man 
 in the Condu(5t of his religious Life, and as 
 a Means for the obtaining Comfort if he was 
 in any Affli(ftion or Perplexity. 
 
 (3.) But Thirdly, It is alfo ccrtaifj, that 
 the ancient Fathers of the Chriflian Church 
 were fo far from thinking that private Con- 
 feffion was an eilential Part of Repentance ; 
 they were fo far from thinking that it was 
 inftituted by ChriO, and neceflary to Salva- 
 tion (which is that which the Church of 
 R.ome now teaches) that they taught diredly 
 the contrary ; as abundance of Inrtances 
 might be given, if this were a proper Place. 
 " What have I to do with Men (flurh St. Au- 
 " gujiiri) that they ihould hear my Confef- 
 " lion, as tho' they could heal my Difeafe." 
 St. Cbryfojlome alfo to the fame Purpofc. 
 • ' « It 
 
170 lT)e PopiJJj a7id Protejlant 
 
 " It is not necellary (fays he) that thou 
 " (houldefl confefs in the Prefence of Wit- 
 *' nefles ; let the Iniquity of thy Offences be 
 <' made in thy Thoughts; let this Judgment 
 " be made without a Witnefs ; let God only 
 " fee thee confeffing : Therefore I entreat 
 *' and befeech you, that you would con- 
 ** tinually make your Confeffions to God ; 
 " for I do not bring thee into the Theatre 
 " of thy Fellow-Servants, neither do I con- 
 *' drain thee to difcover thy Sins unto Men. 
 *' Unclafp thy Confcience before God, and 
 *' fhew thy Wounds to him, and of him 
 " ask a Medicine." And very many other 
 Paffages he hath to this Purpofe. 
 
 Doth this now favour the Romifi Doi^rine 
 concerning Confellion ? doth it not diredly 
 contradidt it ? what fhall we fay ? The 
 Council of T'rent decrees that, Whofoever 
 jhall affirm that Confeffion of all our mortal 
 > Sins to a Fricji (chat we can remember) is 
 not neceffary to the obtaining Forgivenefs of 
 them^fiall be accursed, ^i. Augujliny St. Chry- 
 Jbjlome, and many others, do point-blank af- 
 firm, that this Confeffion is not neceffary; 
 but that Forgivenefs may be had without it. 
 Either therefore the Roman Anathema's are 
 of no force, nor to be regarded by us ; or, 
 if they be, St. Augujiin and St. Chryfojlome, 
 and other fuch good Men, are involved in 
 them as deeply as we Proteftants. 
 
 1. But 
 
DoBrines of Confejfton^ compa?'cl. iji 
 
 3. But then Thirdly, andLaftly: As they 
 have neither Scripture nor ancient Fathers on 
 their Side ; lb neither have they any colour 
 of Reafon for this Bufinefs of Confeffion, 
 as they have order'd it. For, whiht they 
 teach that every Man is bound to confefs all 
 his mortal Sins, even the moft fccret, even 
 the Sins of his Thoughts and Defires that, 
 after the moft diligent Examination, he finds 
 himfelf guilty of, and that if he do not fo 
 confefs, he is not qualified for Pardon ; and 
 whilft, on the other fide, it is a moft dilli- 
 cuk Matter for a Penitent to know^ which of 
 his Sins are mortal, and v^hich are nor, and 
 likewife when it is he hath made a dihVenr 
 
 o 
 
 Examination of his own Heart concerning 
 his Sins, and when he hath not j what a 
 world of endlefs Scruples and Perplexities 
 is every Man almoft by this Dodrine led in- 
 to ? For, at this rate, what Man can be af- 
 fured that he hath confefs'd all his Sins i'o 
 particularly, fo circumftantially as he ought 
 to do ; or that he hath ufed that Fidelity 
 and Care in examining his own Confclcnce, 
 that the Law of Chrift exads from him ? 
 This is (o true, that it was Ions aeo obferv'd 
 by a famous Man of their own, that, accord- 
 ing to the Cafes, Enquiries, and Conclulions 
 that the Cafuifts had made in this Matter 
 of Confeffion, it was impoffible for any Man 
 to make a right Confeffion. 
 
 But 
 
172 l^he Popijh and Protejlant 
 
 But further: This is not the only evil Con- 
 fequence that follows upon that Dodrine ; 
 for this Mifchief alfo attends it, That, ac- 
 cording to this Notion, not he that mod 
 truly repents him of his Sins, and moft en- 
 deavours to forfake them, is beft qualified for 
 the Mercy of God ; but he that moft accu- 
 rately repeats them to the ConfefTor, and enu- 
 merates their feveral Circumftances. For let 
 a Man be never fo much forry for his Sins, 
 and never io much endeavour to reform his 
 Life, yet if he do not perform this part of 
 the Sacrament of Penance, he is not in fo 
 fafe a Condition as that Man is who is lefs 
 forry for his Sins, and doth lefs endeavour 
 to forfake them, fuppoling he do but con- 
 fefs well to the Prieft, and receive his Abfo- 
 lutlon. 
 
 Laftly, to conclude : As this Confeffion is 
 managed by the Church of Rome^ it is fo 
 far from being a Check or a Bridle upon a 
 Man to have a care of committing the fame 
 Sins again, that he hath thus confefs'd (which 
 is the greateft, and indeed, the only Thing 
 in Reafon that is pretended for the Ufeful- 
 nefs of this kind of Confeffion,) that, on 
 the contrary, as the Thing is managed, it 
 gives a great Encouragement for Sinners to 
 continue in their Sins. For this being their 
 Dodlrine, That whenever a Man is forry for 
 his Sins, and confefTeth them to the Prieft, 
 and thereupon receiveth his Abfolution, up- 
 on Promife to perform the Penance enjoin'd, 
 
 the 
 
DoEirmes of Co7tfeJfiony co?nparcl, 173 
 
 the Man fo doing doth that very Moment 
 receive Remiffion, as to the eternal Punifli- 
 ment of his Sins, and is put into a State of 
 God's Favour ; what follows from hence, 
 but that the Man may now, without Scruple 
 or Trouble of Confcience, go on again in 
 the fame Courfe of Life ? AH his old Sins 
 are now wafhed away, and he begins upon 
 a new Score, and it is but repeating his Con- 
 feffion, and getting a new Abfolution, and 
 he is as fafe as if he had never been a Sin- 
 ner. This is one of the natural Confequences 
 of this Do(ftrine, and that a great many in 
 the Ro7Jia?2 Communion do frequently reduce 
 this into Pradlice, is too evident to be de- 
 nied. 
 
 And now I do appeal to all Men that will 
 impartially confider thefe Things that I have 
 now reprefented (and I am fure I have faith- 
 fully reprefented Matters as they ftand on 
 both Sides,) whether their Do(ftrine or ours 
 have the better Foundation 9 whether our 
 Do6lrine be not much more agreeable to the 
 Scriptures, to Reafon, and to the primitive 
 Pradice ; more tending to the Eafe, and 
 Peace, and Comfort, and more to the Edifi- 
 cation of Souls than their Dodtrine is. 
 
 Let all of us therefore, when we find our 
 felves burden'd with the Weight of our Sins, 
 apply to God, and unburden our felves of 
 them by Confeflion to Him. If we nee4 
 either Advice or AfTiftance, or Direction, or 
 Comfort, we may call in the Afiiftance of 
 
 pious 
 
174 'TheFopiJh and Protefta72t^ he, 
 
 pious and difcreet Minifters ; nay, we ought 
 ill Prudence to do fo, and we are wanting to 
 our fclves, if we do not. But ftlll the Con- 
 feffion that is necefTary to the obtaining our 
 Pardon, muft ever be underftood of Confef- 
 lion to God. Whofoever humbly and for- 
 rowfullyconfeiles his Sins to Him, and endea- 
 vours to forfake them, fuch a Man (hall find 
 Pardon whether he confefs to Men or no. 
 
 This is the Proteftant Dodlrine, and let us 
 all adhere to it, and pradlife ir. 
 
 And God Almighty give us Grace, that 
 
 we may no longer cover our Sim, but with 
 
 humble and penitent Hearts confefs them and 
 
 forfake them. So (liall v^tfmd Mercy through 
 
 Jefus Chrift, ^c. 
 
 SERMON 
 
175 
 
 SERMON VIII. 
 
 Againjl the DoBri?ies of the Church 
 of Rome, concerning SatisfaBiofiSy 
 and Purgatory. 
 
 The fecond Sermon on the following Text. 
 P R O V. xxviii. 13. 
 
 He that covereth his Sim JJjall not profper. 
 But ivhojb cofifejfeth them^ and Jorfaketh 
 them, Jhallfnd Mercy. 
 
 !HAT I undertook to (hew 
 from this Text was, That the 
 Church of Rome was corrupt, 
 and had innovated in the Mat- 
 ter of Repentance. I have al- 
 ready infifted on that which 
 they call Auricular Sacramental Co?ifeJfion^ 
 and which they have made neceflary to true 
 Repentance. Of this having largely treated 
 
 before 
 
1^6 Agai7ijl the DoFlrines of 
 
 before, I (hall not repeat now any thing that 
 I faid. 
 
 The fecond Corruption with which we 
 charge the Church of Ronie in the Matter 
 of Repentance, is, their Docfri?ie of Satis- 
 fa5tion. Satisfadion is, by them, made one 
 of the Three neceffary and eflential Parts of 
 Repentance. And what they mean by Satis- 
 faction, I {hall now declare to you. 
 
 Thus far we are all agreed. That God 
 Almighty, as the Governor of the World, 
 in his infinite Wifdom, thought it fit not to 
 pardon ths Sins of Mankind without fome 
 Satisfadlion or Compenfation made to him 
 for the Breach of his Laws. 
 
 Thus far likewife we do agree in the fe- 
 cond Place, That our Lord Jefus Chrift, who 
 was God and Man, did, in his own Perfon, 
 by his Incarnation, and efpecially by his cruel 
 Sufferings and ignominious Death upon the 
 Crofs, make fuch a Satisfad:ion to God for 
 the Sins of Mankind, that, in Confideration 
 thereof, he was willing to pardon them. 
 
 And thus far likewife, in the third Place, 
 is agreed on both Sides, That to all . true 
 Penitents this Satisfa(flion that Chrift made 
 to God, is imputed, and (liall be available 
 for the everlafting Salvation of their Souls. 
 Thus far both Parties concur in their Doc- 
 trine. 
 
 But then here we begin to differ. We 
 fay, according to the Doftrine of the Scrip- 
 tures, That where- ever the Guilt of Sin is 
 
 remitted 
 
SatisfaBions and Purgatory. i'J*j 
 
 remitted to any Perfon, the Punlfhrnent is 
 remitted alfo. And we fay likevvife, that 
 the Cafe is the fame as to Sins committed 
 before Baptifm and Sins committed after ; 
 whofoevcr truly repents of his Sins, which 
 he hath committed after he became Chri- 
 flian, thofe Sins (hall as truly be forgiven to 
 him, as fhofe were that were committed by 
 him before Baptifm. 
 
 But now they teach quite otherwifc. They 
 fay there is not the fame RemilTion of Sins 
 after Baptifm as there was before. The 
 Sins of the Heathen State were all done 
 away intirely by the Sacrament of Baptifm ; 
 but as for thofe that are committed after- 
 wards, there is a different Confideration ; a 
 full Satisfaction muft be made for them by 
 the Perfon that committed them, otherwife 
 they will not be forgiven. They grant in- 
 deed, that every true Penitent (liall, by vir- 
 tue of Chrift's Satisfaction, have his Portion 
 in the Life to come at the]Long-run: But, 
 for all that, if he do not make Satisfad:ion 
 for all his mortal Sins in this Life, he muft 
 do it fcverely in the next. They diflinguifli 
 between the Guilt of Sin, and the Punifh- 
 -ment of it. They fay, that to every Chri- 
 ftian that repents, his Sin is forgiven, as to 
 the Guilt of it, fo that he (hall not die eter- 
 nally ; but notwithftanding there is a tem- 
 poral Punifhment due, which, for all the 
 Forgivenefs of the Guilt, the Sinner muft 
 undergo either here or hereafter ; either here, 
 Vo I . VII. N by 
 
lyS Agai?tfl the DoElrines of 
 
 by performing fuch fevere Penances as the 
 Faults require ; or hereafter, by enduring a 
 fevere Punifhment in the Flames of Purga- 
 tory. And, left we (hould think this tem- 
 poral Punifliment of Purgatory but a jefting 
 Matter, they affure us that it is not fo ; but 
 both as to the Duration of it, and the Seve- 
 rity of it, it is very dreadful. For the Du- 
 ration of it, it may laft (for ought we know) 
 from the Time of our Death till the Day of 
 Judgment. As for the Sharpnefs of it, they 
 fay it is, in all refpe^ts, as tormenting as the 
 Pains of Hell it felf ; and there is no diffe- 
 rence but only this, that this Punifliment of 
 Purgatory fliall at laft have an end, but the 
 Pains of Hell never (hall. 
 
 Well J but what Way is there for making 
 thefe Satisfa(5tions ? what Remedy is there 
 againft thefe dreadful Torments in the other 
 Life ? Why, to this the Council of T'rent an- 
 fwers gravely, That Satisfactions for our Sins 
 ;;re made partly by patiently fuffering the 
 Aifliftions that are fent us by God, and part- 
 ly by performing thofe Penances that are en- 
 j©in'd us by our Prieft upon ConfefHon. 
 
 But the Comfort is, there is a better Way, 
 and a much eafier than this-, and that I fhali 
 now give you an Account of. There is a 
 Stock of Merits left to the difpofal of the 
 the Church j that is, both the Merits of 
 Jefus Chrift, as many of them as were more 
 than enough for the fatisfying for the eter- 
 naiPuniftiment of the Sins of Maiikind, and 
 
 like- 
 
SatisfaSiions ajid Purgatory. 179 
 
 likewife the Merits of all the Sairus, that 
 were more than enough for the fatisfying 
 for their own Sins : I fay, all thefe are the 
 ^tock or Treafure of the Chjjrch, and may 
 be difpenfed out to particular Perfons, as 
 the Governor of the Church, the Vicar of 
 Chrift upon Earth, {hall think fit. 
 
 And two Ways there are by which the 
 Benefit of thefe Merits may be made over 
 to us ; that is to fay, by Indulgence^ and by 
 procuring Maffes to be celebrated, and Alms 
 to be given for us after we are dead. By ei- 
 ther of thefe Ways, our perfonal Satisfadlion 
 for our Sins is excufed. And according to 
 the Proportion of thefe Indulgences or Majjes 
 that we have purchafed, our Punifliment in 
 the next World will either be leffen'd, or 
 wholly taken away. In proportion to the 
 Share of the Church's Treafure that we have 
 provided to our felves, either we fhall never 
 come into Purgatory at all, or, if we do, 
 we fhall flay there the lefs time, or our Pains 
 will be proportionably abated. 
 
 This is a plain Reprefentation of their 
 Dodrine, as to this Matter. And I think 
 no Man among them, that underftands their 
 Religion, but will own all that I have now 
 deliver'd to be the Senfe of their Church. 
 But how falfe and unreafonable thisDodrine 
 is, and of what mifchievous Confequences 
 to the Souls of Men, will appear by repre- 
 fenting thefe two following Things. 
 
 N 2 I. Ftrfl 
 
i8o Agamji the DoBrines of 
 
 t. Firft of all, There is no Ground ei- 
 ther in Reafon or Scripture, that when God 
 hath once forgiven a Man's Sins, as to the 
 Guilt of them, he fhould afterwards inflid: 
 the Punifhments of thofc Sins upon the Of- 
 fender : Which is the main Principle upon 
 which their Do(ftrine proceeds. 
 
 2. Secondly, Their Do<5trine of Purga- 
 tory, that is to fay. That there is a temporal 
 Punifliment after this Life to be inflided 
 upon all thofe who have not made full Sa- 
 tisfad:ion for their Sins, either by themfelves 
 or others j though, in the mean time, the 
 Sins have been repented of, and are forgiven 
 by God ; I fay, this Doctrine is altogether 
 groundlefs, and not only fo, but is againft 
 the Tenor of the Scriptures. 
 
 I. To thefe two Things I fhall fpeak. 
 And Firft of all, We fay they do ill in tltis 
 Matter, to diflinguifti between the Guilt of 
 Sin and the Punifhment of it ; and to afBrm, 
 That God doth forgive the Sins of Chriftians 
 upon their Repentance, but doth not excufc 
 them from that temporal Punifhment that 
 doth necefTarily and infeparably adhere to 
 rhem : This, we fay, is againft both Reafon 
 and Scripture. 
 
 I. Firft of all, It is, in the Reafon of 
 (he Thing, abfurd. For forgivenefs of the 
 <Juilt of a Crime doth, in the very Nature 
 
 of 
 
SatisfaBions and Purgatory. 1 8 1 
 
 of it, imply an Exemption from the Punidi- 
 ment that was due to that Crime ; other- 
 wile it is not properly Forgivenefs. We do 
 not here deny that good Men, after they 
 have heartily repented of their Sins, and 
 God hath forgiven them, may notwithftand- 
 ing afterwards be feverely viiited by God in 
 this Life; may fall into many Afflictions and 
 Calamities, and fometimes very fad ones ; 
 this is granted on all hands. And whofo- 
 ever denies it, as he contradiifts Scripture, 
 fo he contradicts the Experience of all Ages. 
 But this we fay, thefe Vifitations, thefe Suf- 
 ferings, thefe Afflictions which God fends 
 upon thofe Perfons, are not properly Punilli- 
 ments for thofe Sins of theirs which God 
 hath already forgiven, but are fent to them 
 upon another account. They are the natu- 
 ral Refuk of the Conftitution of Things 
 here below, and God makes ufe of them as 
 Chaftifements, or as Trials to pious Perfons. 
 They are infliCted not as PuniHiments, but 
 as Mercies ; not as the EffeCts of God's 
 Juftice, but of hisKindnefs; it is intended 
 thereby that either fomething chat was amifs 
 in them may be rcform'd, or that tlicir Faith 
 and Patience and other Virtues rtiould be 
 exercis'd both to their own final Comfort, 
 and the Benefit of others that are about 
 them. Thefe are that Dlfciplinc that God 
 ufeth with his Children, but not PufiiQi- 
 ments properly fo called. 
 
 N \ But 
 
i82 J}gai7tfl the DoSirlnes of 
 
 But are not the temporal Judgments of 
 God, Punishments upon bad Men, and im- 
 penitent Sinners ? And do not good Men 
 fufFer the very fame Judgments ? Both thefe 
 Things are true j but yet we fay, the fame 
 Thing inflided upon one Sort of Men is 
 properly a Punifhment, but with refpedt to 
 the other Sort it is not. For inftance, here 
 is one Man, by the Sentence of the Judge, 
 crder'd to be branded with a hot Iron, for a 
 Crime that he is convided of: Here is ain^ 
 other Man, by the Order of his Phyfician, 
 feared in one of his Limbs for the Cure of 
 fome Ulcer or Gangrene he hath contrad:- 
 ed. Both thefe Perfons now fuffer the fame 
 Thing, and endure the fame Sort of Pain and 
 Smart ; but yet I hope no body will deny, 
 that this Sufferance is upon a quite different 
 Account, and hath a quite different Notion. 
 in the former Cafe, what is inflided is truly 
 and properly a Punifljment, for the Man 
 fuffers as a Malefadtor ; in the latter, it is 
 not a Punifliment, but a Medicine, and the 
 Man fuffers only in order to a Cure. And 
 the very fame thing may be faid as to the 
 Afflidions of good and bad Men in this 
 Life; vih'ich Diftindion, if it be applied, 
 will perfcdly folve all thofe Texts of Scrip- 
 ture that are brought by the RomaniJIs in fa- 
 vour of this their Doclrine. 
 
 2. Bat Secondly, We fay further, this 
 Dodrine of theirs is not only unreafona- 
 JDle \n its felf, but it is without any Groun4 
 
 in 
 
SatisfaSlions a?id Purgatory. 183 
 
 in Scripture j nay, it is exprefly againd what 
 the Scripture declares. Our Saviour hath 
 taught us, in our daily Petitions, thus to 
 fxray ; Forgive us our Debts (meaning our Mitt, vu 
 Sins) as we forgive our Debtors. But can^^- 
 any Man be faid to forgive a Debt to an- 
 other, and yet at the fame time require the 
 Payment of it either in whole or in part? 
 Either therefore there is no Punilliment 
 exadled after Forgivenefs of our Sins, or our 
 Saviour commands us to pray daily for that 
 which God will never grant us. 
 
 Furthermore, the Forgivenefs of our Sins 
 is always reprelented in Scripture as a Thing 
 perfecflly free and gratuitous j as a pure Ef- 
 fe(5t of God's undelerved Favour and Good- 
 nefs. But how can that confift with the 
 Popifli Notion of Forgivenefs, whi-ch fup- 
 pofeth, that we cannot be abfolved from the 
 Puoifliment of our Sins, till we have either 
 here or hereafter paid the uttermoft Farthing 
 that we were accountable for ? 
 
 Laftly, So far is God from exacting the 
 Punifhment of any Man's Sins after he hath 
 repented ©f them, that He exprefly declares 
 that He never will do it. Among other 
 Texts, that in E'zekiel is very remarkable ; 
 If the Wicked (fays he) ivill turn from all^zxvai. 
 his Sins that he hath commit fedy and keep ali^^' ^"' 
 ?ny Statuses, and do that which is lawful and 
 right (which is the juft Defcripcion of ?. true 
 Repentance) he fiall furdy li^jc, he flnill 7mt 
 die. All his Tranigrejjions which he hath com- 
 
 N 4 7nitied 
 
184 Againfi the DoSirines of 
 
 nutted jhall mt be mentioned to him. Or, as 
 other Tranllations have it, JJ:all not be re- 
 membered to him. And fure if God do not 
 rernember them, if God do not mention 
 them, there is no fear that he will punifh 
 them afterwards ; and that for the prevent- 
 ing that Punllliment, the Sinner muft make 
 a compleat Satisfaction to the Divine Jufticc, 
 cither by himfelf or others, as the Romanijis 
 teach. 
 
 II. And thus much of the firft Propofi- 
 tjon. The Second is this : The Popifh 
 Dodrine of a dreadful temporal PuniOriment 
 after this Life, to be infli^ed on all thofe 
 who have not made compleat Satisfa(5lion for 
 Jill their Sins in this Life, is altogether ground- 
 lefs, having no Foundation in Scripture or 
 Antiquity, but dire<ftly repugnant thereto. 
 
 Their Do(^rine is. That all Souls that 
 have not made Satisfadlion for their Sins 
 while they lived, tho' all thofe Sins were re- 
 mitted, fo that they fhall never go to Hell, 
 but at lad (hall go to Heaven ; yet they (hall, 
 in the other State, undergo a grievous Punirti- 
 ment in a certain kind of Prifon which they 
 call Purgatory, for fo long time till they be 
 perfedly purged of their Sins. 
 
 But is there one Word of this Do(flrine in 
 the Scriptures, or the ancient Fathers ? Not 
 a Tittle. Two Places they do indeed pro- 
 duce, which they fay doth much counte- 
 i^ance it \ the one is that PafTage of oiir Sa- 
 viour, 
 
Sat isfaB ions and Purgatory. 185 
 
 viour, where, fpeaking of the Blafphemy 
 againft the Holy Ghoft, he fays, That that Sin^'^*^^-^'"^ 
 JJi all neither be forgiven in this Worlds nor in^"' 
 that which is to come. From whence they 
 take the liberty to conclude, that fome Sins, 
 tho* they are not forgiven in this World, 
 may be forgiven in the World to come ; and 
 confequendy there is a Purgatory, a Place for 
 the purifying Souls from their Sins in the 
 other State. 
 
 But in anfwer to this, let us ask them fe- 
 rioufly this Queftien : Did our Saviour, in 
 this Place, fpcak of the Forgivenefs of Sins 
 in the other World with refpefl to the tem- 
 poral Punifhment that was due to them, or 
 the eternal ? If he fpoke of the Forgiveneis 
 of the eternal Punifhment, then his Words 
 make nothing for Purgatory, but much a- 
 gainft it. For their Do(5lrine is, That Sins, 
 as to the eternal Punishment of them, are, 
 upon Repentance, forgiven in this World, and 
 not in the next ; and that the State of Purga- 
 tory isonlyordain'd as a temporal Puniflimenc 
 of thofe Sins for which Satisfad:ion was not 
 made in this Life. But, on the other fide, if 
 they fay that our Saviour, when he faid that 
 the Sin againft the Holy Ghoft Jhould neither 
 be forgiven in this Worlds nor the World to 
 come^ meant this Forgivenefs of the temporal 
 Puniftiment that is due to Crimes in the 
 other World, which is their Notion of Pur- 
 gatory, then they make our Saviour to fpeak 
 a flat Cpntradidion -, for they make him to 
 
 fay 
 
1 86 Agatnji the DoEiriiies of 
 
 fay that this temporal Punifliment fhall ae- 
 ver be forgiven ; which is, in other Words, 
 juft thus ; That this temporal Puni(hment, 
 which (hall have an end, {hall be an eter- 
 nal Punidiment which (hall never have an 
 end : Which, as it overthrows their Dodtrine 
 of Purgatory, fo it is as great a Contra- 
 diction as can be. 
 
 If any one then fhould ask what is the 
 Meaning of our Saviour's Expreffion, That 
 the Blafphemy againft the Holy G\ioi\.fiall 
 neither be forgiven in this Worlds nor in that 
 'LDhich is to come -J I anfwer, the plain Ac- 
 count of the Phrafe is this. Our Saviour, 
 as far as can be conjedlur'd from his Words, 
 did not in the leaft think of the Popifh Pur- 
 gatory, nor any thing like it, when he ut- 
 tered this Speech. All that he defigned to 
 exprefs was this, That the Contempt and 
 Blafphemy of the Pharifees againft the Holy 
 Ghoft (which they were guilty of, in faying 
 that our Saviour did his Miracles by the help 
 of the Devil, and not by the Spirit of God) 
 was fo grievous a Sin, that it fhould be 
 punilhed feverely both in this World, and in 
 the other. And the Phrafe by which he ex- 
 prefleth this, was very well known to the 
 Je^xSy to whom he fpake ; for he ufed it by 
 way of Allufion to a Tenet of theirs. It 
 was a common receiv'd Doctrine among the 
 Jews J and is to this Day, That for fome 
 Sins a Man was pardon'd prefently upon 
 his Repentance j that other Sins were not 
 
 pardcn'd 
 
Satlsfa&io?is and Purgatory. 187 
 
 pardon'd till the folemn Day of Expiation, 
 and others not to be expiated but by fome 
 grievous temporal Afflidtion j but that all 
 would be expiated at the Death of the Of- 
 fender, provided he were an IJraelite, who, 
 as fuch, muft have his Portion in the Hap- 
 pinefs of another World. To this Dodrine 
 of theirs our Saviour feems to have refpedtj 
 when he tells them that this was a Crime 
 which (hould not be expiated at their Death, 
 according to their Conceit; but whofoever 
 (hould be guilty of it, would have a mifera- 
 ble Portion in the World to come. This 
 feems to be the full Senfe of the Expreffion. 
 As for the other Text of Scripture which 
 feveral of the Roman Doctors urge for Pur- 
 gatory, it is that PalTiige of St. Vaul^ where i Cor. Hi. 
 he fays, That if any Man, iipoji the Founda-'^'^' 
 tiom of Chridianity, 'which ivere laid by the 
 Apoflles, do build Hay and Stubble, and fuch 
 kind of Rubbifli, his Works lliould perifh, 
 and he frjould Juff'er lofs j but he himjelf fiould 
 be favedy yet Jo as by FJ?'e. This feveral of 
 the Ro?naniJts do thus interpret. That the 
 Man that was thus guilty, lliould indeed, 
 upon his Repentance, be eternally faved at 
 Jail: ; but yet he muft be purged from his 
 Sin^. after he died, by undergoing the Fire 
 of Purgatory. An admirable Proof of Pur- 
 gatory : as if every body did not underftand 
 the Particle of Similitude here ufed, fo as by 
 Fire, was enough to (liew that St, Paul did 
 not here intend an Efcapc out of the Fire 
 
 literally.; 
 
1 88 Againjl the Do8iri?ies of 
 
 literally j but fuch an Efcape as Men make 
 out of an Houfe that is on fire. The Words 
 ought to be rcnder'd, he himfelfJJjall befavedy 
 yet Jo as out of the Fire, Now it is well 
 known, that by this Phrafe can be meant 
 no more than this, That it would be a hard 
 thing for the Man to efcape; he run a great 
 rifque, his Safety was very hazardous, and 
 if he was preferved, it would be with a 
 great deal of Difficulty. This Expreffion of 
 cfcaping as out of the Fire^ was a common 
 proverbial Way of fpeaking both among the 
 y^wi and among the Heatheas in the Apo- 
 Itles Time; and it is always ufed in this 
 Senfe both in the Scripture and other Au- 
 thors. What elfe is the Meaning of that 
 Amos^iv. Paflage in Amos\ Te were as. a Fire-brand 
 II. f lucked out of the burning^ and of that other 
 Faffage of Jude ; Others fave with fear^ pluck- 
 pig them out of the Fire? Which Exprcflions 
 only fignify the greatnefs of the Danger, and 
 the difficulty of efeaping it : So that cer- 
 tainly we may conclude, that from this 
 Text no Purgatory Flames can be kindled. 
 All that St. Paul fays, is, That the Teachers 
 of falfe Dodrines, thofe that mifreprefent- 
 ed Chriftianity, their Works fliould be con- 
 fumed ; for Time would difcover Truth, and 
 Truth (hould prevail at lad; but the Per- 
 i'ons that thus taught falfely, that thus Built 
 Hay and Stubble upon the Foundation of Chrijiy 
 they (liould, for this their prevaricating, be 
 ill great Danger of being feverely punidi'd : 
 
 But 
 
 Ver. 23. 
 
SatisfaElions and Purgatory » 189 
 
 But yet, upon their Repentance, they might 
 efcape\ but it would be with a great deal of 
 Difficulty ; their Condition was very hazard- 
 ous and dangerous 
 
 Thus I have given an Account of thefe 
 two Texts which the Champions of the 
 Romijh Faith lay the greateft Strefs upon ; 
 and I hope we may be all convinc'd, that 
 they do not do the Work they are brought 
 for : And feveral of the Romanifts themfelves 
 are indeed on our fide in this Matter, ac- 
 knowledging freely, that neither of them 
 are to be interpreted of Purgatory. But 
 this we are certain of, that if thefe two 
 Texts do not fpeak of Purgatory, there are 
 no other Texts do ; nay, not only fo, but 
 there are many Texts fpeak againft it. 
 
 The Scripture Dodlrine concerning the 
 Condition of Men, after they depart out of 
 this Body, is only this ; That there are two 
 Efiates belonging to dying Men, a good one, 
 and a bad one. As to all Perfons that die 
 true Believers and true Penitents, they im- 
 mediately, upon their Death, are put into a 
 happy Condition, and (hall continue in that 
 Condition till the Day of Judgment ; ac 
 which Time their Happinefs iliall be com- 
 pleated and confummated by the Refur- 
 redtion of their Bodies. As for Unbelievers, 
 and wicked Livers, and Impenitcnts, they 
 are immediately, upon their Death, put into 
 a miferable Condition, and fo fliall continue 
 for ever ; tho' perhaps their Mifcry will not 
 
 have 
 
190 Againjl the DoEl vines of 
 
 have its Confuramntion and Extremity till 
 the Day of Judgment, and the general Con- 
 flagration of the World, as neither the other 
 had their Happinefs compleated till that 
 Time. This is plainly the Scripture Ac- 
 count of the State of Souls departed ; and 
 there is no mention there in the leaft: of 
 Souls that are in Purgatory Torments, but 
 rather much againfl it. 
 Lukexvi. Our 'Saviour, in that famous Parable of 
 the Rich Man and Lazarus, doth feem thus 
 to reprefent the State of the other World, 
 "uiz. That the Souls of good Men, imme- 
 diately upon their Death, are in a happy 
 Condition, and the Souls of bad Men in a 
 State of Torments. For no fooncr did Laza- 
 rus die, but he was carried by Angels into 
 the Bofom of Abraham (which Bofom of 
 Abraham v^^as a common Phrafe am^ng the 
 IJraelitcs, as appears yet by their Writings 
 by which they ufed to exprefs the Happinefs 
 and BlelTednefs of pjous Souls departed) and, 
 on the other fide, the covetous voluptuous 
 Rich Man was put immediately into a State 
 of Torment. Now then we grant that this 
 Difcourfe of our Saviour is no more than a 
 Parable, yet we can never imagine that He 
 would contrive a Parable in fuch a manner, 
 that the very Ground and Foundation upon 
 which it proceeded, fliould be falfe: But 
 this is not all. It is evidently plain froni the 
 whole Current of the New Teflament, that 
 all Perfons that die true Penitents, and in 
 
 the 
 
Sat is faSl 1071$ and Purgatory, 191 
 
 the State of Salvation, are immediately put 
 into a happy Condition ; and therefore con- 
 iequcntly there is no fuch purging torment- 
 ing Fire to be undergone by them, as the 
 Papifls dream of. St. Faul^ more than once, 
 mentions two Hoiifes or Tabernacles j the one 
 the Tabernacle of the Body that we are 
 now cloathed with j the other that Houjefrom 
 Heaven with which good Men be cloathed 
 upon in the other Life. But his Difcourfe 
 always implies, That as foon as ever good 
 Men die, they go ftrait to Chrift, and 
 (hall put on that heavenly Tabernacle, and 
 pafs immediately into that everlafting City 
 above, whofe Maker and Builder is God, 
 
 Furthermore, our Lord Jefus Chrift pro- 
 mifed the penitent Thief upon the Crols, 
 That that very Day he Jhould be with him in 
 Faradife. Now Faradife certainly is the 
 State or Place of Happinefs that God hath 
 prepared for all holy Souls after their De- 
 parture hence. There is no Term more 
 ufual among the "Jews, both the ancient and 
 the modern, for the cxprefTing this, than 
 the Term of Faradife. But however, if it 
 was not fo ufual, yet our Saviour's Words 
 iix it to that Senfc. The Thief was that 
 T)av to be with him in Faradife. Now fure 
 no body will fay that our Saviour went to 
 Purgatory, but to Heaven ; and therefore 
 the Thief went thither alio. And what can 
 more deftroy (he DovSlrine of Purgatory and 
 Satisfa(ffions than this ? For if Satisfadion 
 
192 Agalnjl the DoEirines oj 
 
 be neceflary, as they teach it is, and if Pur- 
 gatory be the Place where Satisfacflions are 
 to be made after this Life, then certainly 
 the penitent Thief, according to their Doc- 
 trine, muft have continued a long time in 
 Purgatory ; for no Satisfaction had he made 
 for his Sins, as to their temporal Punifli- 
 ment, fincc he died after a vicious Life, 
 upon a very (hort and fudden Repentance : 
 But yer we fee the quite contrary ; for he 
 did not go to Purgatory, but to that Place 
 where our Saviour was to be, that is, the 
 Place of the Blefled. 
 
 But if any Objedlion be made againft this 
 Inflance j as that this Thief had not received 
 Baptifm v/hen he repented, but that hisfhamc- 
 ful Death was in the place of Baptifm to him, 
 and confequently he had all his Sins remitted 
 to him without Satisfadion, as all Perfons upon 
 their Baptifm. have ; but as for Sins commit- 
 ted after Baptifm, the Cafe is otherwife: As 
 to this, we fay, that this Pretence will be 
 quite taken away by another Text that I am 
 going to mention. St. '^ohn^ in the Revela- 
 ttQnSy tells us. That he heard this Voice from 
 Heave;? J and was commanded to write it ; 
 Bleff'ed are the Dead that die in the Lord^ for 
 they reji from their Labours^ and their Works 
 Jollow them. Here it is faid indefinitely of 
 all the Difciples of Chrlft ; all that die in 
 his Religion, and in his Fear, That bleffed 
 are they when they die^ for they rcjl from their 
 Labours. But now how can this Propofition 
 
 confill 
 
 XIV. 13. 
 
Satisfa&io?is and Purgatory, 193 
 
 confift with the Dodlrine of Purgatory ? 1/ 
 all that die in Chrift do reft from their La- 
 bours, then it is very certain that none of 
 them are punifticd and tormented after they 
 are dead. For how can Reft from Labours 
 ftand with dreadful Miferies and cruel Suffer- 
 ings, as Souls in Purgatory are faid to undergo ? 
 If this Dodrine was true, they would not have 
 a Reft from their Labours, but only a Change 
 of them ; they would go from one Labour 
 to another; from a light Labour in this Life, 
 to a moft heavy and infupportable one in 
 the other State. No, certainly, to fuppofe 
 that all that die in Chrift, that is, all true 
 Penitents, do rejl from their Labours, ajid 
 their Labours, and their Works follow them, 
 (as St. John here, from the Authority of the 
 Holy Spirit, aftirmeth) is to fuppofe, that 
 they are all in a happy blifsful Condition, 
 and that they receive the Rewards of their 
 Virtue and Piety : And confequently the ' 
 whole Dodtrine of Purgatory is but a Ro- 
 mance ; a Thing invented not only without 
 the Warrant, but againft the Warrant of the 
 Holy Scriptures. 
 
 And as we do affirm, that this Dodrine of 
 Purgatory is without Scripture, fo we do af- 
 firm that it is without, and againft the Senfe 
 and the Dodtrine of the ancient Church of 
 Chrift for many Centuries. This, I think, 
 we may confidently fay, and make it good, 
 That there is no one Father, nor any one 
 Council of the Primitive Churh (that i« 
 
 Vol. VIL O owned 
 
194- Agatnfi the DoSlrines of 
 
 owned by the Church of Rome themfelves) 
 for five hundred Years after Chrifl, thac 
 ever taught the Doctrine of Purgatory, as 
 they now teach and beHeve it : And, on the 
 other fide, we can produce feveral PafTages 
 of feveral of the Primitive Fathers that do 
 wholly make againft it. 
 
 Two Perfons are indeed quoted by them, 
 that were of great Name and Reputation in 
 the Church, who feem to talk on their fide ; 
 and thefe are Origen and Tertullian : But 
 neither of thefe Mens Teftimonies will do 
 any Credit to their Caufe. 
 
 For as for Origen (fo far as we can ga- 
 ther from his Writings now extant, if in- 
 deed they be his) his Opinion was, That all 
 the Punishments that God infli<5ted after this 
 Life, were Purgatory Punifhments ; that is, 
 would have an end : And that after fuch a 
 determinate Time, both Devils and wicked 
 Men, having undergone their Purgations, 
 fhould be releas'd from their Torments, and 
 enter upon a new Scene of Things. But 
 this makes nothing in the wor\d to the Doc- 
 trine of Purgatory, as it is eftablifli'd in the 
 Church of Rome; for they make Purgatory 
 diftin^fl from Hell, holding the former to 
 be temporal, but the other eternal. 
 
 As for the other Father Tertulliariy it Is 
 very certain that all the time he continued 
 a Catholick Chriftian, he fpoke not one Word 
 of Purgatory (as far as appears by his Wri- 
 tings ;) but after he forfook the Catholick 
 
 Comrau- 
 
SatisfaSiions and Purgatory. 195 
 
 Communion, and turned to the Side of Mon- 
 taniii^ whom he held to be the Holy Ghoft, 
 then indeed he talked of a Relief that de- 
 parted Souls, which died in an imperfect 
 State, were to expcdl from their Sufferings 
 by the Paraclete j that is, by the Holy Ghoft j 
 which Paraclete he affirm'd to be Montanus. 
 
 This is all the 6vidence and all the Au- 
 thority that the Papifts have for their Purga- 
 tory from primitive Antiquity ; and let them 
 make the beft they can of it, and much 
 good may it do them. On the other fide, 
 it is very certain that the Current of the 
 Ancients runs pcrfedly againft them ; as 
 might be made good, if this was a fit Place 
 for it. 
 
 But I will proceed no further in this Ar- 
 gument. I hope I have given you fo plain 
 an Account of the Popifh Do<5lrine in this 
 Matter, and have fo plainly confuted it from 
 the Scripture, that I hope the mod ordinary 
 Capacity may underftand it, and be fatisfy'd 
 of the Erroneoufnefs of it. 
 
 O2 SERMON 
 
196 
 
 )2c )ii )!l^ )£()& ^ )£( lit ^ ^ >&>&)&>& )^ )X( )!( }l< )!( )li )l( ]$t )& iEc -^ &)!!!< £ 
 
 »S''3?'J''X''J''?'i''y'i''?'I''?'?'?'?'X''yi"i"S"i"?'?'!P'?-^ ^^ 
 
 SERMON IX. 
 
 Aga'injl other Corruptions and In- 
 novations in the Popijh DoBrine 
 concerning Repentance, 
 
 The third Sermon on the following Text. 
 
 P R O V. xxviii. 13. 
 
 He that cover eth his Sins fiall not fro/per. 
 But whojb confejfeth them, and forj'aketh 
 them, Jhall find Mercy. 
 
 O U may pleafe to remember, 
 that my Defign was to take 
 occafion from thefe Words to 
 confider the Popifh Doiftrines 
 of Repentance, and to endea- 
 vour to (hew both the Novehy, and the 
 Erroneoufnefs, and the Danger of them. 
 
 And two Dodrines of this kind I have 
 already infifted upon. 
 
 Firft, 
 
Againjl Corruptio?iSy $ce. 197 
 
 Flrft, That of Auricular Sacramental 
 CoTifeJfwn. In treating of which, I both 
 (hewed how far our Church and all other 
 Proteftants do own and approve of Con- 
 feflion to Men, . and what the Dodtrine of 
 the Church oi Rome was in this Matter; and 
 alfo that this Impodtion of theirs was a 
 new Thing without Warrant from Scripture, 
 without Warrant from Antiquity, and that 
 which was both unreafonable in it felf, 
 and, in many Cafes, of ill Confequence. 
 
 The fecond general Error I infifted upon 
 was, The Dodtrine of Satisfadtions to be 
 made in Perfon by every Sinner, even after 
 his Sin is forgiven him, either jn this Life, 
 or in the Purgatory Flames of the other 
 World, unlefs he prevent it by procuring 
 Indulgences, or getting MafTes to be faid 
 for him. Now, in oppofition to this Doc- 
 trine, I (hewed, That there is no Ground 
 either in Reafon or Scripture, that when 
 God hath once forgiven a Man's Sins, as to 
 the Guilt of them, he rtiould afterwards in- 
 flicft the Punifliment of thefe Sins upon the 
 Offender ; (which is the main Principle up- 
 on which their Dodtrine proceeds:) And 
 that their Dodlrine of Purgatory hath no 
 Foundation in Scripture, or in early Anti- 
 quity, but, on the contrary, is againft the 
 Tenor of both. 
 
 O 3 I now 
 
igS Againjl Corruptions and 
 
 I now proceed to a third Dodrine of the 
 Church of Rome concerning this Matter of 
 Repentance, which doth flatly contradid: 
 the Notion of Repentance here deliver'd in 
 the Text, and is likewife of mifchicvous 
 Confequence to the Souls of Men ; and that 
 is, That they make Contrition^ with the 
 Prieil's Abfolution, at any time fufficient 
 to wa{h away all our Sins, and to procure 
 the Pardon of God for them. 
 
 This is the avowed Do(flrine of the 
 whole Church of Rome, and confirmed by 
 the Authority of the Council of Trent. 
 Now, that we may not be at a lofs what 
 they mean by Contrition, the faid Council 
 hath given us a Definition of it ; That it 
 is Grief of Mind for Sin committed, and a 
 Deteftation of it^ together with a Purpoje to 
 Jin no more. So that wholbever is thus con- 
 trite, and confelTeth his Sins to the Prieft, 
 and receives his Abfolution, promifing to 
 perform the Penance enjoined, is ac^tually 
 put into a State of Salvation from that Mo- 
 .ment. 
 
 This Dodrine now, we fay, is both a- 
 galnft the Scripture Notion of Repentance 
 declared in the Text, and in other Places, 
 and it is of ill Confequence as to the Lives 
 of Men. 
 
 I. Firft, It contradids the Scripture No- 
 tion of Repentance \ for that, as appears 
 
 both 
 
hifiovations in Popijh DoEfri?te. 199 
 
 both from our Text, and abundance of other 
 Places, includes in it not only a Sorrow for 
 Sin, and Refolution againft it, but a for- 
 faking of it alfo : Only he that confe[jhh and 
 forfaketh hii Sws, fI:aUJitid Mercy. Let a Man 
 be never fo forry for his Sins, and purpole 
 never fo heartily to iin no more, yet if not- 
 withftanding he dill continues to purfue the 
 fame vicious Courfes, he is not a true Peni- 
 tent. The Word by which the true evan- 
 gelical faving Repentance is exprefled, is 
 f«7flcVo/A, which fignifies not a tranfient Pal- 
 lion for having offended God, or only a fud- 
 den Purpofe to change our Lives, but it figni- 
 fies an ad:ual Change of the Mind, and Will ; 
 a Transformation of the whole Soul from 
 bad Principles to good. And where once 
 this Change, this Transformation is made, 
 there muft of neceility follow a new Life, 
 a Converfation quite different from that 
 which was led before ; a Habit of fuch 
 Adtions as arc agreeable to the Laws of 
 God. Godly Sorrow for Sin, which is that 
 which the Papifts mean by Contrition, is 
 not Repentance, and cannot procure Par- 
 don i but it is only a good Difpofition, a 
 right Preparation to Repentance. This the 
 Apoflle hath moil cxprelly told us, when he 
 faith. That Godly Sorrow ivorketh Repentance 2 Cor. v:i. 
 not to be repented of. If then it be the Thing '°- 
 that works Repentance, it is not Repentance 
 it felf 
 
 O 4 2, But 
 
200 Agalnjl Corruptions and 
 
 2. But Secondly, This Dodlrine, that Con- 
 trition, with Confeffion and Abfolution, doth 
 put a Man into a State of Salvation, is not 
 only againfl the Scriptures, but againft good 
 Life ; for it gives any Man that believes it, 
 great Encouragement to continue in his Sins 
 all his Life long, and that upon this ac- 
 count, That it quite puts him off from 
 thinking that there is ever any neceffity 
 that he fhould reform his Life. According 
 to this Do(ftrine, it is but being forry for 
 my Sins at fome folemn Times, when I 
 come to Confeffion, and refolving to do fo 
 no mor^ ; and prefenily, upon the Prieft's 
 pronouncing a few Words to me, I am 
 abfolved of the Guilt of them ; I am 
 put into the Favour of God, and, if I die 
 that Moment I (hall be finally faved. Well, 
 but what if I do not perform my Rcfolu- 
 tions that I then made, but return to my 
 Sins again ? Why, it is but my repeating 
 the fame Medicine, being forry again, and 
 refolving again, and taking Abfolution a- 
 gain, and then I am as right again as ever 
 I v/as : and thus, Toties quoties, as bften as 
 i thus repent, fo often are my Sins forgiven 
 me. And, at my laft Hour, tho' I have all 
 my Life continued in my Sins ; yet this 
 Repentance, and this Abfolution, will as 
 certainly pafs me into a Right of the Fa- 
 vour of God, as if I had never fo much re- 
 formed my Life, and lived never fo inno- 
 cently 
 
Ltnovations in Popijh DoSirine. 201 
 
 cently and virtuoufly ; always excepting the 
 Purgatory Punifhments, that I may, without 
 Satisfadtions and Indulgences, endure in an- 
 other Life. 
 
 But now, upon thefe Principles, how can 
 any Sinner, that is in love with his Sins, 
 and deeply engaged in a wicked Courfe, 
 how can he ever think himfelf obliged to 
 Reformation ? How (hall he ever be drawn 
 to enter upon, much lefs to go through that 
 tedious Fatigue of Mortification, that in- 
 tolerable burdenfome Bufinefs of forfaking 
 his Sins, fince the being forry for them will 
 do as well ? What Man would be at that 
 Pains, when he can obtain Pardon and Sal* 
 vation upon fo much eafier Terms ? 
 
 But I have hitherto given you the faireft 
 Reprefentation of the Romijh Dodlrine of 
 Repentance, as to this Matter: That that the 
 ftrid:eft Cafuifts among them will be con- 
 cluded by. But, in truth, it is generally 
 thought too ftridl and fevere for the Sinners 
 that they have to deal with ; and there- 
 fore they have yet eafier Conditions for Peni- 
 tents to obtain Pardon, than thofe I have 
 now mention'd. Contrition is too heavy a 
 Burden to impofe upon Sinners; and there- 
 fore they have found out a Way in which 
 a Sinner (hall be reconciled to God upon 
 eafier Terms, (ftill fuppofing that he con- 
 fc'fs, and receive Abfolution) and that is by 
 the means of Attrition, or imferfeSl Contri- 
 tion^ as the Council of T^rent calls it ; even 
 
 this. 
 
20 2 Agalnjl Corruptions and 
 
 this, with the Sacrament of Penance, will 
 do the bulinefs. Now what they mean by 
 Attrition^ we may gather from what we faid 
 of Contrition ; for if Contrition be a Ha- 
 tred of Sin, with a Refolution againft it, 
 then Attrition^ or tmperfeSl ContritioUy mull 
 be an imperfect Hatred of Sin, with an im- 
 perfect Refolution againft it. So that who- 
 foever affirms that Attrition^ with the Prieft's 
 Abfolution, fliall be available for the pro- 
 curing Juftification before God, doth affirm. 
 That tho* a Man be not fo forty for his Sins, 
 as he fhould, nor doth perfectly refolve 
 againft them, but only hath fome imper- 
 fe(5t Purpofes to forfake them j yet fuch a 
 Man {hall, upon this (light Repentance, have 
 his Sins forgiven him by God. 
 
 This now, one of us would think, was 
 dangerous Dodrine ; yet really it is no other 
 than what is profelTedly taught by as great 
 Dodtors as any they have ; and thofe not one 
 or two, but abundance, and thoie not only 
 Jefuitical Cafuifts, but of all other forts : 
 nay. Books have been publiffied among 
 them, to fhew that this is the prevailing 
 authoriz'd Dodlrine of their Divines. It. 
 would be endlefs to quote Authorities in a 
 Matter fo acknowledg'd as this is. I will, 
 among an Heap that is by fundry Authors 
 collected to our Hands, give you the Words 
 of one of their Divines, and he as eminent 
 and learned as any they have. He there 
 fliews, " That grave Men, and famous in 
 
 " their 
 
Innovations in Popip^ DoSirine. 203 
 
 " their Church, do aflert, That a Penitent 
 *' having received the Sacrament of Penance, 
 " that is, having confefTed, and been ab- 
 " folved, is not bound to fo much as one 
 *' Ad: of Contrition, or the Love of God, 
 " in order to his Reconciliation with God : 
 " Nay, allow a Man hath hated God to the 
 " laft Adt of his Life, if he receives the^ 
 " Sacrament of Penance, they deny that it 
 " is neceflary for him to be contrite for his 
 '* Sins, or to love God." This is wild 
 enough, but what follows is more extrava- 
 gant, and that is this, " That the Excellency 
 " of the Evangelical Sacraments above the 
 " Legal, confifts in this, That the Gofpel 
 *' Sacraments have freed us a gravijjimo Con- 
 " tritionis & DileBionis Dei Jugo ; that i?, 
 " Tbey have freed us from the mofl heavy 
 *' Toke of ContritioTij and of the Love of 
 
 " Godr 
 
 Is not this wonderfully Pious and Chriftian ? 
 Are not thefeMen excellent Guides of Souls? 
 And is not a Sinner admirably provided for 
 that puts himfelf under their Condu(5l:? And 
 yet this is the Do6lrine that is frequently 
 taught by the wifeft and graveft of their 
 Divines. But when they are urged with 
 this, it is ufually replied, That this is only 
 the Judgment of particular Men, and that 
 the whole Church ought not to be charged 
 with it, fince it was never eftablifli'd nor de- 
 creed by any General Council. But how 
 frivolous is this Pretence ; as if Men of 
 
 their 
 
204 Againji Corruptions and 
 
 their Communion, in the Bufinefs of their 
 Repentance, did always ftridly examine the 
 Decrees of Councils, and did not rather 
 wholly give up themfelves to the Govern- 
 ment of their fpiritual Guides ? We know 
 that all their Penitents are managed by their 
 ConfefTors ; and we can prove, that their 
 Confeflbrs do inftil fuch Notions as thefe 
 into their Penitents ; nay, and do avow to 
 all the World, in their printed Books, that 
 they are true. It concerns them therefore 
 to fhew, that thefe Notions and Doctrines 
 are difallow'd and difcountenanc'd by the 
 Pope, or by fome Council. If they can do 
 this, we will no longer lay the Fault of 
 their private Dodlors on their Church in ge- 
 neral : but this they cannot do. For tho* 
 fome of the yanfenijis have appear'd vigo- 
 roufly againft this Dodtrine we are now talk- 
 ing of, ftill the Pope could never yet be in- 
 duced to condemn it, or to put a Mark of 
 Infamy upon it. 
 
 But this is not all i whatever fome of 
 them fay, that this is not the Dodrine of 
 the Church, but rather the Dodrine of pri- 
 vate Men ; to any one that underftands a 
 Confequence, it will appear to be a pro- 
 felTed elT:abli{hed Dosflrine of the Church, an4 
 that by the Holy Council of I'rent it felf. 
 
 For the Proof of this, I defire only that 
 thefe two Paflages may be compared toge- 
 ther. In one place, the Council determines 
 this, 'That Attrition or imperfe^ Contrition, 
 
 tho" 
 
Innovations in Popijh DoElrine. 205 
 
 tho it cannot bring a Man to Vilification 
 without the Sacrament of Fenance^ yet it doth 
 difpofe Men for the obtaining the Grace of 
 God by the Sacrament of Penance. But now 
 in another place it is decreed, l^hat all the 
 Sacraments do confer Grace on all thofe who 
 are dijpofed to receive it. 
 
 Let any one now judge, upon comparing 
 thefe two Determinations, whether it doth 
 not necelTarily follow from hence, That all 
 thofe that have but ijnperfeB Contrition^ cr 
 bare Attrition for their Sins, are, by the Sa- 
 crament of Penance, put into a State of 
 Salvation, according to the Dodtrine of the 
 Council of T^rent. All Sacraments do con- 
 fer the Grace they are ordain'd for, to all 
 that are rightly difpofed. Bare Attrition, 
 or imperfed: Sorrow for Sin, and imperfe(5t 
 Purpofes againfl it, doth difpofe a Man to 
 obtain Grace by the Sacrament of Penance, 
 Both thefe Propofitions are laid down by 
 the Council of T'rent. What in the world 
 then can follow more neccflarily than this. 
 That, according to that Council, Attrition^ 
 with the Sacrament of Feiiance^ doth put a 
 Man into a State of Grace ? 
 
 But is not this a moft mifchievous Do- 
 drine, that a little Grief of Mind, tho* ic 
 do not proceed from the Love of God, but 
 merely from the Fear of Punifhmenr, and 
 tho* it be not accompanied with firm and 
 ftedfaft Refolutions to forfake our Sins, but 
 only hath in it feme flight Purpofes to live 
 
 better 
 
2o6 Againjl Corruptions and 
 
 better (nay, it is enough as the Council of 
 *Trent feems to intimate, that the Sinner at 
 that time when he repents, hath Hot an 
 actual Purpofe to fin again) that this, after 
 a vicious Life, after repeated A(fls of Sins, 
 after many Habits of it inveterately conti- 
 nued in, Qiould, by the Prieft's pronouncing 
 three or four Words, cancel all a Man's Sins 
 paft, and fo reconcile him to God, that if 
 he die that Moment he is fure at laft of 
 everlafting Happinefs ? What a comfortable 
 Dodlrine is this to Sinners ? How admira- 
 -bly doth it reconcile thofe two things, which 
 in all other Religions have been thought in- 
 confiftent, the Love of Sin, and the LoVe 
 of God ? an Habit of Vice and a Tide to 
 eternal Happinefs ? What wonder is it, that 
 fo many diflblute Perfons go over to the 
 Communion of that Church, where Pardon 
 and Reconciliation with God, are to be had 
 upon fuch eafy Conditions ? If Sinners give 
 up thcmfelvcs into the Bofom of that Holy 
 Church to be made better, it would be com- 
 mendable ; but the Principles taught by 
 them do not feem to tend that Way ; and it 
 is much to be prefumed, that it is not a Re- 
 formation of Life that their Profelytes defign 
 when they leave us, but a continuance in 
 their Sins with greater Security and greater 
 Comfort than we could promife to them in 
 our Way. What Zofmiis the Pagan Hifto- 
 rian malicioully fays of Conjlantine^ viz. 
 " That he was fo great a Criminal, that no 
 
 " other 
 
Innovations in Popijh Do&rim. 29 j 
 
 ** other Religion could give him any hopes 
 " of Pardon, and therefore he turned to 
 " Chriftianity, the baptifmal Waters of which 
 " would, with one dafh, wafh away all his 
 " Sins," may be truly faid, it is to be fear- 
 ed, of many of our Converts to the Roman 
 Church. The Lives that they lead are fo 
 bad, that fo long as they continue in that 
 State, no other Religion but that of the 
 Church of Rome can give them incourage- 
 ment to hope for Salvation. But that Reli- 
 gion can and doth, by the excellent Expe- 
 dients they have invented for the reftoring 
 wicked Perfons, fo continuing, to the Grace 
 and Mercy of God. 
 
 Thus have I gone thro' thofe three prin- 
 cipal Errors in the Dodlrine of Repentance 
 which the Church of Rome hath introduced -, 
 namely, their afTerting the Neceffity of Au- 
 ricular Confejjion : their ailercing the Necef. 
 fity of Satisfadtions after God hath forgiven 
 Sin, upon which is founded their Do(ftrine 
 of Purgatory and Indulgences : and laftly, 
 their holding that Contrition or even Attri- 
 tion, by the Virtue of the Sacrament of Pe- 
 nance, is fufficient to put any Man into a 
 (late of Salvation. 
 
 But befides thefe, there are feveral other 
 Do(f\rines relating to this bufinefs of Repen- 
 tance frequently taught in that Church, and 
 that without any Check or Reproof, which 
 it is fit all ferious Perfons, that have a Care 
 
 of 
 
2o8 Aga'mji Corruptions and 
 
 of their Souls, (hould be inform'd of and 
 caution'd againft. 
 
 I fhall briefly name Two of them. Firfl: 
 of all, One Pofition generally maintain'd 
 by the Popifli Cafuifts and ConfefTors is. 
 That a Man is not bound prefently to re- 
 pent of a Sin that he is guilty of; no, not 
 tho' it be a mortal Sin. Sometime or other 
 they acknowledge, that he is bound to re- 
 pent of his Sin j but, to do it prefently, 
 upon the Commiffion of the Sin, there is 
 no Obligation upon him by the Divine Law. 
 If he fo manage his Affairs, that his Repen- 
 tance be perform'd at all, it is enough ; 
 and there is no more required of him. It 
 is indeed very true, that the Council of 
 Laterajt^ that Council that firft eftablifhed 
 Auricular Confeffion, doth oblige all Chri- 
 flians to repent once a Year at leaft, and to 
 go to Confeffion, and that is at the folemn 
 Time of Eajier, But this, the Cafuifls fay, 
 is only a Law and Rule of the Church ; 
 but we are not tied to it by the Law of 
 God. All that we are obliged to by God's 
 Law is, to repent in articulo mortis^ The 
 ^ime when ive come to die : And as for the 
 Injunction of the Church, we fatisfy that 
 by performing the outward Solemnity of 
 Repentance, the ritual Part of it, which 
 cocilifls in Confeflion and coming to the 
 Sacrament. One of their famous Dodlors 
 voucheth this to be the Do61:rine both of 
 P.cpe Adrian and Cardinal Cajetan ; and in- 
 deed. 
 
Innovatio?ts in Popijh DoSirine, 209 
 
 deed, to be the Senfe of all Men. But now, 
 is not this a moft godly Dodtrine ? Doth it 
 not tend mightily to the Reformation of all 
 wicked Livers ? On the contrary, I would 
 know what can give greater Encouragement 
 to any Man to continue in his evil Couifes, 
 than this Dodtrine doth ? You have now 
 committed fome grievous Crime, and it lies 
 heavy upon your Confcience : Why, be not 
 afraid for that j if you will now prefendy go 
 and unburden your felf by Confeffion, and 
 take up new Refolutions, you may do well, 
 and take a good Courfe to fecure you Salva- 
 tion : but yet this you are not bound to. 
 Tho' you are at prefent in a flate of Enmity 
 to God, yet there is no Law ties you to be 
 immediately reconcil'd j if it be but done 
 at any time before you die, it is enough. 
 Is not this kind of Reafoning extremely 
 tending to Licentioufnefs, and giving En- 
 couragement to all forts of Riots and De- 
 baucheries P What can put a more effedlual 
 Bar to a Man's Reformation of his Manners, 
 than this Dodlrine does, if it be once believ'd ? 
 
 Secondly, What they teach, as to the 
 Time of a Man's repenting, is not more 
 pernicious to Souls, than what they teach 
 as to the Kind of Sins to be repei-ted of. 
 Their Diftin(5tion of Sins into two Sorts, 
 Mortal and Venial^ is fufficiently known. 
 Which Diftin<flion, as they order it, is really 
 an hinderance of Repentance ; or breeds in 
 every Man, that embraceth that Diftindtion, 
 
 Vol. VII. P fuch 
 
210 Againjl Corruptions and 
 
 fuch a falfe Notion of Repentance, that he 
 cannot in Reafon think himfelf obliged to 
 fet himfelf upon the mortifying, and the 
 forfaking feveral Habits of Sin which he 
 may find himfelf guilty of. 
 
 It is true, we do admit of the Diflinc- 
 tion of mortal Sins and venial, in fome Senfe. 
 We do, with the ancient Fathers, allow, 
 That fome Sins are of fuch Malignity, or 
 may be committed with fuch aggravating 
 Circumftances, that one A61 of them {hall 
 put a Man out of a ftate of Grace : They 
 fliall be mortal to any Man that is guilty of 
 them, unlefs he perform a particular Re- 
 pentance for them. On the other fide, we 
 fay. That there arc fome Sins that are con- 
 fiilent with a ftate of Grace, and which the 
 beft of God's Children are fubjed: to, and 
 may now and then fall into ; yet, if they 
 ftrive againft them, if they daily beg Par- 
 don for them, thefe Sins fhall not be im- 
 puted to them at the Day of Judgment: 
 Nay, if they die in them without a particu- 
 lar Repentance, yet, if they be good in the 
 main, if they have repented of all their 
 Sins in general, both known and unknown, 
 thefe Sins fhall do them no mifchief. For 
 ftill, notwithftanding thefe Ignorances and 
 Infirmities, they are within the Covenant of 
 Grace; and God, for the Merits of Jefus 
 Chrift, will pafs by and forgive thefe Sins in all 
 ihofe who have, for the main of their Lives, 
 lived up to the Terms of the Gofpel. But 
 
 yet 
 
Lmovations i?t Popijfj Do&rine. 2 1 1 
 
 yet at the fame time that we fay this, we 
 hold hkewife, That all Sins, in their own 
 nature, and in the rigour of the Divine 
 Juftice, arc damnable, and deferve God's 
 Wrath and Indignation ; and that, in all 
 unregenerate Men, they are fo accounted ; 
 and that in Hell the Damned fuffer the 
 Punifliments as well of their fmall Sins, as 
 of their great ones. So that no Sin in ic 
 felf is venial; but through the Mercies of 
 Chrift, fome Sins will, even without a par- 
 ticular Repentance, find Pardon. But yet 
 even the moft venial Sins, the moft light 
 and inconfiderable Offences, if they be in- 
 dulg'd, if they be encourag'd, if care be not 
 taken of them, but they increafe and grow 
 flrong upon us, and at laft become Habits ; 
 in this cafe, we fay, they are no longer Sins 
 of Infirmity, but God will account with us 
 for them, as wilful deliberate Sins. This is 
 the Proteftant Dodtrine concerning venial 
 and mortal Sins. 
 
 But that which the Papifts teach in this 
 Matter, is quite another thing. If by their 
 venial Sins, they meant no more than thofe 
 daily Frailties and Infirmities that good and 
 virtuous Perfons are fubjedt to, and which 
 they continually ftrive againfl, and do their 
 utmoft endeavour to overcome ; if this was 
 their Notion, We fliould not find fault with it : 
 But that which they mean by venial Sins, is 
 quite another thing. They teach. That there 
 is a whole Kind of Sins which may claim 
 P 2 Pardon 
 
212 Againfl Corruptions and 
 
 Pardon from God as of Right j fuch as if 
 all of them in the World were put toge- 
 ther, could not equal one mortal Sin. They 
 hold them to be fuch, that if we be never 
 fo much guilty of them, they cannot put us 
 out of the Favour of God j and it is im- 
 poflible that any Man, upon account of 
 them, fhould periih eternally. 
 
 Now, I fay, what is the natural Conse- 
 quence of this Do6trine, but to make Men 
 perfedly carelefs of repenting, as to one 
 whole kind of Sins ; and fuch Sins too> as 
 they are mod apt and inclinable to fall into 
 every day, and confequently ought to watch 
 and fortify their Minds more particularly 
 againll: them than any others ? But by this 
 Dodlrine, Mens Confciences are bid to be at 
 perfect Eafe, and they are not to difquiet 
 themfelves as to thefe fmall Matters j tho' 
 in a little time thefe venial Sins (no care be- 
 ing taken of them) do grow to a vaft Num- 
 ber, and become a Courfe of habitual Sin : 
 And that that was a Sin of Infirmity at the 
 firft, for want of Repentance and flriving 
 againfl it, is grown as wilful and as cufto- 
 mary a Sin, as ai^y the Man is guilty of. ij 
 
 The Application of all this, and the Ufe 
 I defire it may be put to, is this : That we 
 would none of us take our Meafures of Re- 
 pentance from Men, what Infallibility fo- 
 ever they pretend to, but frame it according 
 to thofe Models that God, by his Prophets 
 and Apoftles, and efpecially by his Son, our 
 
 Lord 
 
Innovations in PopiJJj DoBrine, 213 
 
 Lord Jefus Chrifl, hath given us in the 
 Scriptures, which are the ftanding Rule by 
 which all Mankind are to be guided : That 
 we would not be fond of new Inventions, 
 that are contriv'd for the making the Way 
 of Salvation eafier than Chrift hath made it 
 in his Holy Gofpel : That we would ftand 
 to thofe Rules and Diredtions that God hath 
 given us concerning Repentance, w;:;. A 
 hearty Sorrow for all our Sins, and an hum- 
 ble Confeffion of them to our heavenly Fa- 
 ther, and forfaking them henceforward, in 
 the Courfe of our Lives ; upon which Terms 
 only we fliall find Mercy, And confequent- 
 ly, in purfuance of this, That we would 
 not think that we repent truly, when we 
 make a full Enumeration of our Sins to our 
 ConfelTor, or when we are in a Pang of Sor- 
 row for our Vilenels and many Mifcar- 
 riages, or even when we make the mofl: fo- 
 lemn and fevere Refolutions to live better, 
 unlefs, by the Fruits of our Lives, we (hew 
 that thole Refolutions were effedual. Much 
 Icfs fliould we put off our Repentance to 
 Futurity, and think it fufficient that, in our 
 lafl: Hour, we do our Endeavour to recon- 
 cile our felves to God ; but prefently, as 
 foon as ever we find our felves guilty of 
 any Offence, fliould humbly and forrovvfully 
 beg Pardon, and u(e all thofe Means that 
 God hath appointed for Reconciliation. 
 
 And far be it from us, in this Bufmefs oF 
 
 Repentance, to make fuch a difference of 
 
 P X Siiis 
 
214 Againfl Corruptions^ See. 
 
 Sins that we are guilty of, as to think that 
 fome may be fafely admitted by us, with- 
 out fear of the Divine Vengeance, tho' 
 others will preve damnable. For we are 
 to ftrive againft -all, remembering that every 
 Sin, indulged and continued in, may prove 
 fatal and damnable to us. 
 
 Laftly, Let us, in this Affair of Repen- 
 tance, ft ick to Solomo?!?, Precept ; which, as 
 it fufficiently direds us to the Truth, fo it 
 fufficiently gives us a Caveat againft all thofe 
 Errors by which we may be impofed upon 
 in this Affair, viz. I'hat he only who confejfeth 
 and forfaketh his Si?is, fialljind Mercy, 
 
 SERMON 
 
215 
 
 SERMON X. 
 
 AbuJ'es and Corruptions of the Church cf 
 Rome, in the Sacrament of the Lord's 
 Supper. Firft, In their private Maff'es^ 
 or Priefl's receivifjg alone. Secondly, In 
 their De?iial of the Cup to the Laity. 
 
 I C O R. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that which I 
 I alfo deliver d to you, that the Lord JefuSy 
 the fame Night in which he was betray d, 
 took Bread: 
 
 And when he had given T'hanhy he brake it, 
 a?tdfaidy take, eat : this is my Body^ which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the Ja?ne manner aJJo he took the Cup, 
 when he had fuppedy faji7ig^ This Cup is 
 the New Tejiament in my Blood: This do 
 ye, as oft as ye dri?ik it^ in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 ANY Abufes, at the Time of 
 writing this Epiftle, were crept 
 into the Church of Corinth, in 
 the Matter of the Holy Com- 
 munion i many Diforders they 
 were guilty of, when they met together, in 
 
 P 4 the 
 
2 1 6 Abufes and Corruptio?ts in the 
 
 the receiving of it. Thefe Abufes and Dif- 
 orders the Apoftle here complains of, and 
 endeavours to reform. The Method he takes 
 for that Parpofe, is to fet before their Eyes 
 the primitive Inftitution of that Sacrament ; 
 the Ends for which our Lord appointed that 
 Myftery ; and the Manner in which his 
 Difciples were Partakers of it. This he 
 propofes to them as a Pattern for them to 
 follow, or a Teft whereby they might try 
 their own Practices in this Matter, whe- 
 ther they were allowable or not. 
 
 This is the full Scope and DeHgn of thefe 
 Words I have read unto you ; / have receiv- 
 ed of the Lord that which I aljb deliver d unto 
 yoUy that the Lord yefus^ the fame Night that 
 he was betray d^ took Breads Sec. As if he 
 had faid ; Confider well, whether thefe Tu- 
 mults and Diforders, which I hear are com- 
 mitted among you when ye come to receive 
 the Lord's Supper, do fuit with that Account 
 I formerly gave you of the Ends and Infti- 
 lution of it ? Do your Practices correfpond 
 with the Doctrine I deliver'd to you con- 
 cerning it.? And yet I deliver'd nothing but 
 what I had receiv'd before of the Lord him- 
 felf My Dodrines about the Sacrament 
 were no Fancies or Inventions of my own, 
 but what our Saviour taught and pra6tifed. 
 Hither therefore you are to look back ; by 
 this Rule you are to be tried, whether your 
 prefent Practices be good or bad, be to be 
 approv'd or condemn 'd j and if yqu be found 
 
 guilty, 
 
Sacrament of the Church of Rome. 217 
 
 guilty, according to this Rule, you are to 
 reform them. 
 
 After this manner doth the Apoftle's Rea- 
 foning proceed : And the great Point that I 
 gather from it is this, That in all the Or- 
 dinances and Appointments of Chriftianity 
 (fuch as the Sacraments are) the Rule and 
 Meafure by which all fucceeding Churches 
 are to fquare their Dodrlne and Pradice, is 
 the original Inftitution of our Lord, and 
 the Ufage of the Apoftles : And when any 
 Abufes or Corruptions happen in a Church, 
 as to thefe Matters, they are to be reformed 
 by that primitive Pattern. 
 
 It is true, every thing that we find in 
 Scripture, pradis'd by our Saviour or his 
 Apoftles, in thofe Parts of Chriftian Wor- 
 ship we are fpeaking of, doth not precifely 
 oblige all Churches. There are many Cir- 
 cumftances in the receiving the Sacrament; 
 for inftance (as indeed in every A6tion) which 
 do not enter the Nature of the A6tion, but 
 are indifferent to it : And fo may be thus, or 
 may be otherwife, without tranfgrefTing the 
 original Precept, or Inftitution ; for inftance, 
 the Time, the Place, the Pofture, the Num- 
 ber of the Perfons joining in the Acftion, and 
 the like. In thefe things, our Saviour's, or 
 the Apoftle's Pradice, is no obliging Prece- 
 dent to us; but we are to be determin'd by 
 the Laws of the Church, or the Cuftoms of 
 our Country. Our Saviour gave the Sacra- 
 ment in the Evening, and after a Meal ; but 
 
 this 
 
2 1 8 Abufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 this doth not make our receiving it fafting, 
 and in the Morning, to be unlawful. He 
 gave it in an upper Room j but we may, for 
 all that, fafely receive it in Churches. His 
 giving it to his Difciples fitting or leaning, 
 will be no Bar to our taking it kneeling ; 
 no more than his adminiftring it only to 
 twelve Perfons, will make it an Abufe in us 
 to difpenfe it to a full Congregation. 
 
 We muft therefore diftinguifh between the 
 Effentials in religious Worfliip, and the ex- 
 ternal Accidents that cloath it ; between 
 what enters the Nature of the Adion, and 
 what is merely circumftantial. It is with 
 refpedl to the former of thefe, we lay down 
 our Propofition, and of which we under- 
 fland it j and being fo underftood, it will 
 be always true in all Ages of the Church, 
 That the Rule and Compafs by which every 
 Church is to fteer herfelf, as to her Do(5lrine 
 and Practice about the Sacrament, is the 
 original Inflitution of our Lord, and the 
 Dodrine and Practices of the Apoftles pur- 
 fuant thereupon, as they are delivered to us 
 in the Scriptures : And when any particular 
 Church fwerves from, this, and teaches or 
 pradifes Things inconfiftent wirh it, it is fo 
 far guilty of Abufes, and ftands in need of 
 Reformation. 
 
 And indeed, this Rule holds not only in 
 Matters of Worftiip, but in Matters of Faith 
 alfo. Whatever is deliver'd in Scripture by 
 our Saviour and his Apoftles as an Article of 
 
 Faithj 
 
Sacrament of the Church of Rome. 219 
 
 Faith, that is firmly to be believ'd as fuch 
 by all Chriftians j but whatever is not there 
 deliver'd, how true foever it may be in its 
 felf, yet no Church in the World can make 
 it an Article of Faith, or oblige her Subjed:s 
 to believe it as fuch : And, on the other fide, 
 whatever Article of Religion any Church 
 propofeth to us, if, upon Examination, we 
 find it to clafh with, or be repugnant to the 
 Dodtrine of the Scripture deliver'd by our 
 Saviour and his Apoftles, it is fo far from 
 being a Chriftian Dodrine, how infallible 
 foever the Church that propofeth it pretends 
 to be, that it is a Corruption of Chriftianity, 
 and ought to be rejeded by all good Chri- 
 ftians. In a word, both in Matters of Faith, 
 and in Matters of Chriftian Worftiip, the 
 Scripture is our Rule. What the Apojlles 
 have received of our Saviour, and there de- 
 liver'd to us, that is the Standard both of 
 our Belief and our Pradice. What they 
 taught, we muft embrace. What they or- 
 der'd in the Worftiip of God, we muft fol- 
 low. Whatever is taught or order'd either 
 in Matter of Faith or Sacrament inconfiftent 
 herewith, we muft rejed as an Innovation, 
 as an Abufe, as a Corruption of the Catho- 
 lick Religion. 
 
 Thus far I have been led to difcourfe, by 
 the general Reafon of the Apofile's Argu- 
 ment here ufed ; but you fee the Ufe for 
 which it is brought in the Text, is the re- 
 dreffing fome particular Abufcs that the Co- 
 
 rlntkiani 
 
2 20 Abufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 rinthiam were guilty of in this Matter of the 
 Lord's Supper. To the fame Ufe I (hall 
 henceforward^ in this Difcourfe, apply it. 
 
 And in truth, never were there greater 
 Abufes of this Sacrament, than there are at 
 this Day ; nay, never was any Precept, or 
 Inftitution of Chriftianity more perverted to 
 Ends contrary to thofe that were firft in- 
 tended in it, than this Ordinance of our 
 Lord's. Of this, we have notorious Inftances 
 in the prefent avowed Dodtrine and Pradlices 
 of that Church ; which would be thought 
 the only Catholick and Apoftolical Church, 
 and condemns all the other Churches in the 
 World as Heretical and Schifmatical. 
 
 It is my Defign here, faithfully to repre- 
 fent to you what that Church teacheth and 
 pradtifeth concerning this Sacrament ; and to 
 examine thofe Dodtrines and Prad:ices by that 
 Rule and Standard the Apoftle here gives us, 
 viz. The primitive Inftitution and Pradice 
 of our Lord and liis Apoftles ; and then I 
 will leave it t^ you to judge, whether they 
 have not horribly fpoiled and depraved this 
 fo facred and eftential an Ordinance of Chri- 
 ftianity ; whether they have not made it 
 quite another Thing than it was at the firft ; 
 nay, whether they have not fo far difguis'd and 
 transform'd it, that if a primitive Chriftian 
 of the Apoftles Days was to live again, and 
 be prefent at their Mafs-Service, he would 
 not be fo far from knowing it to be the fa- 
 cred Supper that our Lord inftitutcd, that 
 
 be 
 
Sacrafnent of the Church of Rome. 2 2 1 
 
 he would rather take it for fome Paganifli 
 and Idolatrous WorHiip. 
 
 I now chufe this Argument, becaufe I 
 believe, if you were duly inform'd of the 
 Practices of the Church of Ro??ie in this 
 Matter, and how widely fhe hath fwerved 
 from the Scripture Rule, and from the 
 primitive Prad:ice of the Chriftian Church; 
 and that not only in a Circumftance or two, 
 but in Things that touch the very EfTence 
 and Nature of the Sacrament ; you will be 
 much confirm'd in the Proteflant Religion 
 you do profefs, and be convinc'd what great 
 and demonftrative Reafons we have, why we 
 ought not to join in Communion with that 
 Church of Rome upon thofe Terms (he of- 
 fereth it. 
 
 The Sacrament is not a Matter of Notion, 
 or Speculation ; we cannot fay of it, as we 
 are apt to do of other things controverted 
 between us, // is a School-Poi?it, about which 
 our Do&ors are not agreed -y and, till they be 
 agreed, both Sides mayjafeh\ without dafiger of 
 Salvation, hold their Opinions. No, it is a 
 Matter of Practice s it is the mofl folemn 
 Part of the Chriftian Worfhip ; and we are 
 all infinitely concern'd, that we be right both 
 in our Notions and Pradices about it ; even 
 jufl: as much concern'd as we are, that we 
 worfhip God in a right Way. And therefore 
 if upon Trial it be found, that the Church 
 of Rome is corrupt, as to this Thing ; that 
 they perform not this Worfliip in the Way 
 
 that 
 
22 2 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 that Chriil: infticuted it, and his Apoftles 
 pracftis'd it, but in a Way quite different; 
 nay, perhaps, contrary ; I hope we (liall none 
 of us be very forward to leave our own 
 Church, and go over to theirs, whatever 
 other plaufible Arguments they offer for the 
 perfuading us. 
 
 It is the PoHcy of the Romijh Fadlors, 
 when they deal with Proteftants, in order to 
 the perverting them, to keep themfelves 
 within general Terms and Commenda- 
 tions of the CathoHck Church. Many and 
 Ions Harangues thev will make of the In- 
 fallibility of St. Peter^ and of the Pope's being 
 his Succeffor; that there is but one Church 
 in which Salvation is to be had, and that 
 their particular i^o;;/^;^ Church is that Church j 
 and they can prove it by twenty Marks of the 
 true Church, Antiquity, Succellion, perpetual 
 Vifibility, and all the reft : whereas our 
 Chureh is but of yefterday's Standing, and 
 was never heard of before Luther. While 
 they amufe their Hearers with thefe general 
 Encomiums of their Church, and Invectives 
 againft ours, all which indeed look very plau- 
 fible (tho' yet, in truth, there is nothing in 
 the whole Argument but Craft and Sophiftry) 
 it is no wonder if they now and then entan- 
 gle unwary Perfons in their Net: for not one 
 of a thoufand is a competent Judge of thefe 
 kind of Arguments ; and they know thofe 
 that they deal with are not fo well ftudied 
 in Hiftory and Antiquity, as to be able to 
 
 confute 
 
Sacrame?Jt of the Church of Rome. 223 
 
 confute them. And therefore be their Ar- 
 guments true or falfe, it is but affirming 
 ftrongly, when they meet with a good-natur'd 
 credulous Man, and their Work is done: 
 But let us but get them out of thefe Gene- 
 ralities, and bring them to Particulars, and 
 the Cafe will be otherwife. Here even an 
 ordinary Underflanding, that is but well 
 acquainted with the Scripture, will be able 
 to find fome footing, and will not be fo cafi- 
 ly impofed upon. Nay, as to feveral Par- 
 ticulars that are controverted between us and 
 the Romaniftsy a Proteftant, that tolerably 
 well underftands his Religien, will not only 
 be able to keep his own Ground, as to thefe 
 Particulars; but from hence will be able to 
 draw Arguments that will overthrow thofe 
 general Dodtrines I before-mention'd, upon 
 which the Adverfary lays his greateft Strefs j 
 and which, if he can once bring us to, he 
 is fure he hath us. For inflance, Let the Par- 
 ticular we pitch upon be the daily Service of 
 the Roman Church, prefcribed by their Mafs- 
 Book, and reforted to every Day by all thofe 
 that have Opportunity, aud any Senfe of 
 Devotion. The chief Part of this Daily 
 Service is the Communion, or the Celebra- 
 tion of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. 
 If now it be plainly and demonftratively 
 proved, That in this their Service, as they 
 pracflife it, there are many great Errors; 
 many things believed and pradifed, which 
 are utterly inconfiftent with the Dodrine 
 
 and 
 
2 24 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 and Pradice of Chrift and his Apoftles in 
 this Matter j of the Guilt of all which, 
 every one that joins in the Service is a Par- 
 taker J I fay, if a Proteftant be but able to 
 prove this one Particular (as certainly every 
 one that competently underftands their Re- 
 ligion, and underftands ours, may be eafily 
 able to do) as he will not be eafily beat off 
 from his hold, as to this Particular, by their 
 general Arguments ; as he will be afraid to 
 communicate in fuch a Worfhip as he be- 
 lieves to be Unchriftian, and will draw fo 
 great a Guilt upon him ; fo he will be able 
 to draw an Argument from thence, that will 
 efFcdually confute all their Pretences to An- 
 tiquity, Apoftolicalnefs, and the reft of the 
 fpecious Characters that they would ftamp 
 upon themfelves. For how can that Church 
 be an infallible Church, which teacheth fo 
 many Errors in the chiefeft Part of the 
 Chriftian Worfhip, the Holy Sacrament of 
 the Lord's Supper ? Or how can that be an 
 Apoftolical Church that pradtifeth fo diffe- 
 rently, fo contrarily to the Apoftles of our 
 Lord in this Particular ? Nay, how can this 
 Church be any found Member of the Ca- 
 tholick Univerfal Church of Chrift, that 
 hath fo far departed from the Inftitution of 
 our Saviour, and the Ufage of the Primitive 
 Church in the higheft Myftery of the Chri- 
 ftian Religion, that fcarce any one, that 
 knows how things were then taught and 
 order'd in this Matter, and how they are 
 
 taught 
 
Sacrame7it of the Church of Rome. 225 
 
 taught and order'd now, would believe it to 
 be the fame Myftery ? 
 
 I have faid enough of the Ufefulnefs of 
 this Argument ; I come now to the Argu- 
 ment its felf, that is, to examine the RowiJJj 
 Dodlrine and Pracftices about the Sacramenc 
 of the Lord's Supper, by the Rule the Apo- 
 ftle here lays down ; that is, the Inftitution 
 of Chrift, and the Pra(flice and Tradition of 
 the Apoftles : And I am confident, upon 
 the whole Evidence, it will cafily appear to 
 every unprejudic'd Perfon, that we have not 
 charg'd that Church with any thing in this 
 Matter, but what is too plain and evident to ' 
 
 be denied. I fliall not infift here on their 
 making feven Sacraments, all of equal Au- 
 thority, all equally neceffary to Salvation 
 (tho' not to every particular Perfon) all 
 equally conferring Grace ; whereas, by all 
 we can gather from Scripture, Chrift never 
 inftituted more than two, Baptifm^ and the 
 Lord's Supper. I (hall not here infift on their 
 having the whole Service or Office of the 
 Sacrament, in the Latin Tongue ; a Lan- 
 guage which none but the Learned do un- 
 derhand, and which, confequently, the Peo- 
 ple are not edified by ; which Practice, for 
 that Reafon, the Apoftle St, Paul dorh fe- 
 verely reprove in the Cori/ithians. Neither 
 (hall I infift on the Prieft's muttering the 
 Words of Confccration to himfelf, fo as that 
 none of the Cor.gregation fliall hear what 
 he fays, tho' it be without any Precedent in 
 the ancient Times. Neither fliall I infifi on 
 Vol. VII Q the 
 
2 6 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 the multitude of Maffes or Sacraments that 
 they allow to be celebrated in the fame 
 Church on the fame Day, and even at the 
 fame Time, at the Inftance of any one that 
 will be at the Charge of purchafing them : 
 The Price indeed, is not great ; no more 
 than Twelve-pence a Mafs ; but what a vile 
 Proftitution of the BlefTed Sacrament this is, 
 every Body may judge. 
 
 Thefe Corruptions and Abufes of the Sa- 
 cram.ent in the Church of Kome^ tho' they 
 be very great, yet I pafs them over, becaufe 
 they will appear fmali and inconfiderable, in 
 comparifon of thofe I come now to mention 
 to you. 
 
 Five grievous Errors and Abufes we charge 
 the Church of jRo;^^ with in the Matter of 
 the Sacrament ; fo grievous, that, if they be 
 found guilty of any one of them, no iVIan 
 that reads the Scripture, can believe that the 
 Sacrament, as they hold It, can be the fame 
 with that which our Saviour inftituted. 
 
 1. The Firft is. That whereas in every 
 Mafs that is faid in that Church (and there 
 are every Day faid many thoufands) they 
 have a Communion ; yet there is none com- 
 municates but the PrieU: : So that here there 
 is every Day, in the Church of Ro}ney a 
 Communion without a Communion. 
 
 2. Secondly, That at thofe folemn Times 
 when they will allow the People to commu- 
 
 -nicarc 
 
Sacrament of the Church of Rome. 227 
 
 nicate with the Prieft in the Holy Sacrament, 
 yet they rob them of half of it ; for they will 
 not allow any but the Prieft who then ad- 
 minifters, to receive the Cup : So that here, 
 tho' there be a Communion, yet it is but 
 half of the Communion that our Saviour 
 appointed. 
 
 3. Thirdly, They have transform'd the 
 Sacrament into a Sacrifice ; whereas the only 
 Myftery of it confifts in this, That thereby 
 Clirill: gives his Body and Blood, in a fpi- 
 ritual Manner, to be fed upon by us ; they 
 ha^-e made a new Bufinefs of it : for in 
 every Sacrament they pretend to offer up our 
 Saviour's very Body and Blood as a Sacrifice 
 to God. 
 
 4. Fourthly, Whereas in this Sacrament, 
 according to our Saviour's Inftitution, there 
 is a material Part, and a fpiritual ; the Sign, 
 and the Thing fignified j the Bread and Wine 
 to be received for our bodily Suftenance, and 
 the Body and Blood of Chrift for the Food 
 of our Souls J they have quite taken away 
 the former from us : For they will not allow 
 us to believe, that the Sign, the Symbol, the 
 Bread and Wine which we think we receive, 
 and eat and drink, Is either Sign or Symbol, 
 or Bread and Wine, but the very natural 
 Body and Blood of Chrift. 
 
 Q_2 5. Fifthly, 
 
2 8 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 5. Fifthly, and Laftly, This very Bread 
 (as we are apt to call it) which we receive 
 and eat, and the Wine that the Priefl: drinks, 
 they require us to worfhip and adore as very 
 God Almighty; and that under Pain of 
 Damnation. 
 
 Thefe are the Points and Articles in which 
 we accufe the Church of Rome to have grie- 
 voufly corrupted and depraved the Chriftian 
 Doftrine and Pradtice in this Matter of the 
 Sacrament. And I fliall now endeavour to 
 make this Charge good, by a particular Con- 
 {ideration of each of them. 
 
 The firft Abufe we charge them with is, 
 their private MalTcs. In every Mafs that is 
 faid in the Roman Church, there is a Com- 
 munion ; for that, as I faid, is the principal 
 Part of the Mafs-Service. But now, as that 
 Service is daily perform'd among them, the 
 Cuftom is for none but the Priefl to commu- 
 nicate ; he confecrates the Sacrament, and 
 then offers it up to God ; and then receives 
 it in both Kinds himfelf. But tho' there be 
 a thoufand People prefent at the Service, 
 nay, perhaps, feveral Priefts among them, 
 yet none are Partakers with him ; none but 
 he taftes either the Bread or Wine : AIL that 
 they have to do is, only to behold and wor- 
 fl-iip. This is the Courfe of their Daily Ser- 
 vice ; and this every one that hath ever been 
 at Mafs may know to be true : And the 
 
 Council 
 
Sacrament of the Church of Rome. 229 
 
 Council of T^rent^ which hath the fame Au- 
 thority among them that the Scriptures have 
 among us, is fo far from difowning this 
 Pradlice, that flie commends it. I will give 
 it you in the very Words of the Coun- 
 cil. 'The Holy Sy?wd doth not condemn thofe 
 Maffes in which the Prieji only commiinicateSy 
 m if they were private and unlawful^ but 
 doth approve of them^ and alfo commend thefn. 
 And one of the Canons of that Council is 
 expreffed in thefe Words : Whofoever affirms^ 
 That the Mafes^ in which the Prieji only doth 
 Sacramefitally communicate^ are unlawful^ and 
 therefore to he aholijhed^ let hifn be accurfed. 
 
 I now appeal to any one, who hath read 
 what the Gofpels, and what St. Paul fpeaks 
 of the Sacrament, Whether this be not a 
 great Abufe, and whether this Pradice of 
 theirs be not diredly contradid:ory to the 
 Ends and Defign of the Sacrament, as our 
 Saviour inftituted it. The Sacrament was 
 intended for a Commwiion, as the Scripture 
 teacheth, and as all Chriftian Writers have 
 taught ; and the very Council of Trenf^ by 
 the Terms which rtie ufeth of the Prieft's . 
 Communicating^ feems to acknowledge : And 
 yet, you fee, here is a Sacrament adminifter'd, 
 and yet no Communion. The Prieft is indeed 
 faid to communicate^ but with whom ? Why, 
 none but himfelf. It is jufl as good Senfe 
 as if you {hould fay, a Man communicates a 
 Secret, or a Myftery to himielf. 
 
 0^3 Our 
 
230 Ahiifes and Corruptions in the 
 
 Our Saviour blejfed the Bread, a?td brake 
 it, and gave it to his Difciples. He took the 
 Cupj and bid them all drink of it. And this 
 the Apoftles pradlis'd after him. St. PW, 
 dilcourfing of this Sacrament, makes it to 
 be the Sign or Symbol of our Union one with 
 another. One of the Ends of its Inftitution, 
 according to him, was the joining all Chri- 
 flians together in one common Body, Society, 
 I Cor. X. or Fraternity. This he exprefly tells us: IVe 
 »7- be! fig many are one Bread and one Boby, be- 
 
 cauj'e we are all Partakers of that one Breads 
 *uiz. The Sacramental Bread. 
 
 If now his Dodrine be true, it is impoffi- 
 ble that any Sacrament, that is folemniz'd in 
 the Way we have been fpeaking of, can be 
 a true Sacrament. If one great Bufinefs of 
 the Sacrament be the fignifying the Union of 
 all Chriflians in one Body, which Significa- 
 tion is made by their all partaking of the 
 fame Sacramental Bread ; then furely that 
 Service, in which none partakes of that 
 Bread but the Priefl, cannot be thought a 
 true or a jafl; Sacrament ; becaufe the Union 
 and Society of Chriftians one with another 
 is not there fignified or reprefented. 
 
 But 'let us leave the Scriptures, for it is 
 certain, they are fo far from favouring the 
 Popifl) Practice in this Matter, that they 
 quite contradi(!l: it. Is there any Counte- 
 nance for fuch kind of private MalTes we 
 are fpeaking of, where the Priefl communi- 
 cates alone, from any Dodrine of the Fa- 
 thers ? 
 
Sacrajnent of the Church ^'^Rome. 231 
 
 tbers ? From any Order of Councils ? From 
 any Pradice or Ulage of any one Chrillian 
 Church for many Ages afcer Clirifl: ? Bait- 
 ing what Chrifl: and his Apoftles have deli- 
 ver'd in this Matter, if they can give us one 
 Inftance from Antiquity, that any fuch pri- 
 vate Malles were ever approv'd of, or prac- 
 tiled, or fo much as thought of, it will gain 
 fome Credit to their Caufe: But this they 
 cannot give us. The Fathers never fpeak of 
 the Sacrament, but as of a Communion j 
 and they feverely reprove (as we ought to 
 do now) all thofe who, when they have Op- 
 portunity of receiving the Sacrament, do not 
 receive it. The old Canons are fo fevere 
 againft thofe Perfons that come to Church, 
 and join in the Prayers and Sermons, and 
 yet refufe to partake in the Sacraments, that 
 they declare them Excommunicate foi- their 
 Negle6l in that Point. And there cannot, 
 for the Term 0/ fix hundred Years (I be- 
 lieve I might almofl double the Term) any 
 Indance be given, that any Mais was per- 
 form'd in any Church, wherein the Prieft 
 only received the Sacrament, and none of the 
 Congregation with him. This I affirm fo 
 confidently, becaufe our Proteftantshave con- 
 fiantly challeng'd the Papifls in ail thefe 
 Points, and were never yet tolerably an- 
 fwer'd. 
 
 But we need no further Argument againil 
 
 this prefent Practice of the Church oi' Rome^ 
 
 than the very Name by which they call their 
 
 0^4 0<^icc 
 
532 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 Office of the Sacrament, that is, T'he Mafs. 
 If any one will look into their own Authors, 
 concerning the Notion and Signification of 
 this Term Mafs, he will, even in them, find 
 this Account given of it: That /to which 
 we call Mafs^ or Mijfa in Latin^ is the Com- 
 mun'mi-Office ; and it was therefore call'd 
 Mifj'a or Mafs by the Ancients, becaufe, 
 when that came to be faid, all thofe who did 
 jiot intend to partake of the Sacrament, were 
 dirmifs'd the Congregation : The Deacon told 
 them they were to be gone. And in the old 
 Rituals of the Church of Kome, we find 
 there vrere peculiar Officers appointed, whofe 
 Employment it was to turn out of the Church 
 all thofe who did not join in the Commu- 
 jiion. This, it is certain, is the Notion of 
 the old Mafs ; and from hence it is as certain, 
 that the old Roman Church never dreamed 
 of private Mafes^ wherein the Priefl: alone 
 ihould communicate, but that fome devout 
 Perfons always communicated with him ; 
 otherwife, according to this Rule, the Fried: 
 muft have been left all alone by himfelf. 
 
 The fecond great Point wherein we ac- 
 cufe the Church of Rome to have departed 
 from Chrifl's Inftltution, and the Apoftolical 
 Prfu^ice \\\ this Bufinefs oi the Sacrament, is 
 their denying the Cup to the People. 
 
 In ifjeir daily and ordinary Sacraments 
 we have feen, the People do not, communi- 
 cate at ?ill, wliich is a great Abufe. But this 
 
 is 
 
Sacrament of the Chu?'ch of Rome. 233 
 
 is not all, even at thofe folemn Times, when 
 it is the Cuftom for the People to receive 
 the Sacrament (as every one, by their Canons, 
 is obliged at leaft to receive once a Year) 
 yet they are not allowed to receive it in 
 both Kinds, as our Saviour ordain'd it ; buc 
 they only receive the Bread. None but the 
 Prieft who confecrates hath the Benefit of 
 the Cup ; and this they hold a Point fo ne- 
 cefTary, and fo indifpenfable, that the Coun- 
 cil of Conjiance excommunicates all thofe 
 Minifters that fhall dare to give the Cup of 
 the Sacrament to any Lay-man ; and, in pur- 
 fuance of what was then ordain'd, the Coun- 
 cil of 'Trent hath made th^fe two Canons : 
 If any one Jh all fay ^ that all the faithful Peo- 
 ple of Chrijf are bounds by virtue of any Com- 
 mandmejit of Gody or as of Necejfity to Sal- 
 vation^ to receive the Sacrament of the Eu~ 
 
 chariji in both KindSy let hifn be accurfed 
 
 And If a?ty one fjall fay^ that there were 
 
 not jujl Catfes and Reafon moving the Church 
 to adminifcr the Sacrament to the Laity only 
 under one Kind, that of Bread ; or Jhall fay^ 
 that the Church hath herein erred, let him be 
 accurfed. 
 
 This is the Law of the Church, and their 
 Pradtics is conformable thereto ; as every 
 Perfon tliCt hat^h received the Sacrament 
 among them very well knows. 
 
 Buc now let any one, that hath ever read 
 the New Tejlament, be Judge betv/een us 
 
 and 
 
2 34 Abufes and Corruptions in the 
 Mat.xxvi. and them in this Matter. Our Saviour (as 
 L^X'^'^'^di ^PP^^^s by the Gofpel) the fame Night he was 
 betrayed, took Bread -, and when he had given 
 'Thanks, he brake it, and gave it to his Difci- 
 pies, Jdymg, take, eat, this is my Body, which 
 is given for you, do this in Remembrance of 
 me. Likewife he took the Cup, and when he 
 had given Thanks, he gave to them, fayijig. 
 Drink ye all of this, for this is my Blood of 
 the New Tejlament, which is Jljfdfor you, for 
 the Remifjlon oj Sins. Thefe are the Words 
 of the Inftitution ; and I appeal to any Man 
 living, whether, according to thei'e Words 
 of Inftimtion, our Lord did not make the 
 Cup every whit as necelTary, as eflential to 
 his Sacrament of the Supper, as he made the 
 Bread : I am confident none will or can de- 
 ny it. If there be any difference, he hath 
 laid more Strefs upon drinking the Cup, than 
 upon eating the Bread ; for, as to the Bread, 
 he only faid, Take eat ; which is an indefi- 
 nite Command, and doth not necelTarily im- 
 ply, that all there prefent were concern'd 
 in it ; it might be fpoken only to one or 
 more of them. But when he comes ta 
 ipeak of the Cup, he faith. Drink ye ALL 
 of it. By which he gives exprefs Command, 
 that all there prefent fhould be Partakers. 
 So that from this difference in the Exprefiion, 
 one would be apt to think that he meant, to 
 caution his Difciples, the fucceeding Chri- 
 ftians, againft that Corruption, which he 
 forefav/ would be introduced into his Church, 
 
 of 
 
Sacrame?2t of the Church of Rome. 235 
 
 of receiving the Sacrament of the Bread 
 without the Cup. 
 
 It is true, when we urge this Inflitution of 
 our Saviour to the RomaniJlSy they have this 
 to fay for themfelves ; It is no 'wonder that 
 our Saviour adminiflerd the Sacrament in both 
 Kinds to his Dijcipks at the Inflitution^ for 
 they 'icere all Priejis that were Partakers of 
 it. The Apojilcs who then communicated uecre 
 Clergymen ; and it cannot from hence be con- 
 cluded^ that the Laity have am Right to the 
 fame Privilege. They grant indeed, that the 
 Apoftles were Lay-men, and reprefented the 
 whole Body of Chriftians when they receiv- 
 ed the Bread ; but when our Saviour faid 
 thefe Words, hocfacite. Do this in remembrance 
 of »*v, by thofe very Words he ordain'd them 
 Priefts; and thefe Words were fpoken be- 
 fore he gave them tlie Cup : So that when 
 he came to difpcnfe the other Part of tlie 
 Sacrament, that is, the lVi?ie to tljem, tliey 
 then did not receive as Lay-men, as the Repre- 
 fentatives of the People, bur as Clergymen. 
 
 This, tho' it be wonderfully fubtle, yet it 
 is fo far taken Notice of by the Council of 
 Trent., that they have made this Canon, 
 That whoever Jhould fay., that ChriJ}^ when 
 he fpcke thofe Words ^ hoc facite, Do this in 
 Reme?jibrance of mc^ did not by thofe Words 
 ordain his Apnfdcs to be Priejh, kt him be ac- 
 ciirjcd. But this Curfe, notvviihftanding how 
 dreadful foever it be, they will never be able 
 to prove that the Apoftics were more Priefts, 
 
 more 
 
236 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 more in Holy Orders, when they drunk the 
 Wine, than when they eat the Bread. If 
 _ we will confult the Scripture and Antiquity, 
 we fliall be convinc'd that they were perfed: 
 Lay- men in both theAdions^and they received 
 no Orders or Confecration to the Priefthood 
 till after our Saviour rofe from the Dead ; 
 for then, when He breath'd upon them (im- 
 mediately before his Afcenfion into Heaven) 
 John XX. and fa id, Rccevce ye the Holy Ghojt, JVhofe 
 2-> 23. JQe^er Sins ye refnit^ they are remitted unto 
 them^ and ivhofefoever Si?js ye retain^ they are 
 retained. Then they were enter'd into Holy 
 Orders, and not before. And thus much of 
 the Words of the Inftitution of our Lord. 
 
 As for the Pradice of the Apoftles, no- 
 thing in the World is clearer than that, in 
 their Days, all faithful People received it in 
 both Kinds ; and it was then thought necef- 
 lary they Oiould do fo. This is fufficicntly 
 plain, from what St. Paul difcourfeth to the 
 Corinthians, in the Words after my Text : 
 As oft (fays he) as ye eat this Bread, and 
 drink this Cup, ye do fiew forth the Lord's 
 Death till he come. The fame St. Paul like- 
 Vsr. 16. wife, in the loth Chapter of this Epiftle, 
 gives us this Account of the Sacrament. 
 T^he Cup of Blejfing (fays he) which ^we blefs, 
 is it not the Communion of the Blood ofChriJi^ 
 'The Bread which we breaks is it ?iot the Com- 
 munion of the Body of Chriji f If novv, this 
 be the fjfe and the End of thofe Elements 
 of Bread and Wine in the Saciament, why 
 
 theu 
 
Sacrament of the Chufxh of Ro me. 237 
 
 then we may fafely conclude, that the one 
 of them is as effential to the Sacrament as 
 the other; and that both are indeed necef- 
 fary. For I would ask, is not the Commu- 
 nion of Chrift's Blood as neceflary to our 
 Salvation as the Communion of his Body ? 
 and the Communion of the Body as that pf 
 the Blood ? Certainly, none will deny it. 
 We are both to eat the Flefh of Chrift, and 
 to drink his Blood, if we mean to have eter- 
 nal Life. If fo, then it plainly follows, that 
 that which reprefents his Blood in the Sacra- 
 ment, is as necefll\ry to be taken, as that 
 which reprefents his Body : and fo 'uice 
 verfd. 
 
 But the Paplfts make a very good Shift to 
 bring themfclves off from this Difficulty, by 
 faying, That the whole perfect Chrift, as he 
 lived in the Flefh, is contained in the Bread 
 alone : So that by receiving the Bread, you 
 do virtually receive the Cup alfo ; for you 
 receive both the Body and Blood of Chrift : 
 And whofoever denies this, is, by the Coun- 
 cil of Trent^ pronounced accurfed. This is 
 that with which they ftop the Mouths of all 
 thofe Difciples of theirs that defire Satisfac- 
 tion in this Bufinefs. But if this be io, I 
 would fain know for what Purpofe Chrift in- 
 ftitutcd the Cup ? If his Difciples, in receiv- 
 ing the Bread, had received both his Body 
 and Blood, what need was there afterward, 
 that he fhould give them the Cup, and call 
 it the NewTeftament in his Blood? Tho* 
 
 God 
 
238 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 God be never wanting in NecefTaries, yet he 
 never exceeds in Superfluities. 
 
 Again : if partaking of the Bread be the 
 Communion both of the Body and Blood of 
 Chrift, why (hould St, Paul^ as we have 
 i'c&n^ make fuch a Diftindlion betvv^een the 
 Bread and the Cup, calhng one, 'J'he Com- 
 viimion of the Body of Chrijl^ and the other, 
 "The Communion of his Blood? Laftly, We 
 would ai]-i of them, fnx:e, according to their 
 Do<l^rine, both the Body and the Blood are 
 received in the Bread, what is it which the 
 Prieft, who adminiders, receives when he 
 takes the Cup ? (for he always receives in 
 both Kinds.) Is it to him, A Communion of 
 the Blood of Chrif^ or is it not ? If it be not, 
 for what End dorh he receive it ? If it be, 
 why then are the People denied it .? Certain- 
 ly, they have as much Right to have Com- 
 munion in Chrid's Blood as the Priefls have. 
 If the Cup be of no Neceffity, or no Advan- 
 tage to him, he had better let it alone. If it 
 be, then there is nil theReafon in the World, 
 that the People (liould be Sharers o^ it as 
 well as he. 
 
 The Truth is. This Pra(flice of theirs of 
 denying the Cup to the Laity, is every Way 
 lo unchrift ian, fo unreafonable, that one would 
 wonder hov/ ever it {hould obtain among 
 thofe that call themfclves a Chrillian Church. 
 It is, as we have feen, directly contrary to 
 tlie Indiuuion of our Saviour, and the Doc- 
 trine and Pradice of his Apofties. And they 
 
 cannot 
 
Sacrapient of the Church of Rome. 239 
 
 cannot fay of this, as they fay of fbme o- 
 thers of their Dodrines, that they have 
 it from the Tradition of the Church ; for 
 they cannot produce one Teftimony out of 
 any one Author, that for a thoufand Years 
 after ChrilT: it was ever knov/n that any 
 Church in the World, no not the Ro?nan 
 Church her felf, ever adminiftred the Sa- 
 crament to the People in one Kind. And 
 this their own Authors do confefs. One 
 Inflance indeed I ought to except, and 
 that is, the Praiflice of the Manichees^ which 
 St. Augujl'me makes mention of. They in- 
 deed held, That the Cup of the Sacrament 
 was an abominable Thing ; and for this 
 Reafon, becaufe they taught Wine was not 
 of God's Creation, but of the Devil's. But 
 thefe kind of People (as all the World 
 knows) were juftly detefted as moft lewd 
 Hereticks. If the Church of Kome will 
 plead this Pradtice of theirs for their Pre- 
 cedent, in the Matter we charge them 
 widi, much Good do them with it. But 
 as for others we are fure they have none. . 
 
 The firft Eftabliiliment of this Way in 
 in the Ro?nan Church, and that is the 
 only Church in the World wherein it doth 
 yet obtain, was by the Council of Con- 
 Jiance\ which I mencion'd before. Which 
 Council was held about 260 Years ago. 
 And, by a good Token, it is the fame Coun- 
 cil by whofe Order the famous "John HtiSy 
 
 the 
 
240 Ahufes and Corruptions in the 
 
 the Forerunner of Luther^ was burnt for 
 a Heretick, altho' they had before given 
 him fafe condu<5t. About 130 Years after, 
 that is, about 130 Years ago, came the fa- 
 V mous Council of T'renty wherein Popery 
 v/as formed into that Shape it now hath, 
 and eftabUdied by a Law, which it never 
 was before. In this Council many tough 
 Debates there were, about the Bufinefs we 
 are fpeaking of, whether the People (hould 
 have the Cup reltored to them or no. 
 The AmbafTadors both of the Emperor 
 and the King of France^ and of moft of the 
 Princes of Germany^ did very earneftly, in 
 the Name of their feveral Mafters, peti- 
 tion the Council for it; and reprefented to 
 them the dangerous Confequences that would 
 follow, if the Laiety were not allow'd the 
 Sacrament in both Kinds. But with all their 
 Arguments they prevailed nothing. So pow- 
 erful was the Pope's Faction at that Holy 
 Synod, that againft the ftrongeft Reafons in 
 the World, they carried it for the continu- 
 ing that Sacrilegious denial of the Cup, 
 that the former Council had brought in. 
 Nay, fo zealous was one of the Cardinals 
 for this Innovation, that he profejied that he 
 would ne"cer give his Conjent that the People 
 jhould have a Cup of Jiich deadly Poyfon ad- 
 minillred to them, as that Cup was that they 
 defired. And it was better they JJ:ould die 
 than be cured by Juch a Remedy. And what 
 was the Reafon, think you, for all this Heat 
 
 and 
 
Sacrament of the Church of Rome. 241 
 
 and Zeal againft fo plain an Inftitution of 
 Chrift? Why truly, the greatefl: that I could 
 ever find, in all their Difputes, are thefe 
 three. 
 
 Firft, They faid thofe that defined the 
 Cup were difafFed:ed Perfons, and not true 
 Catholicks; and if they (hould condefcend 
 ro them in that particular, they would be 
 fo far from being fatisfied, that they would 
 take occafion, from that eafinefs of theirs, 
 to make further enchroachments upon them, 
 and would be for having their Prayers in 
 a known Language, and fuch other things 
 as the Roman Chyrch could not allow. 
 
 Secondly, They faid the Clergy were al- 
 ready in fufficient contempt, and if they 
 fhould let the People enjoy the fame Pri- 
 viledges in the Sacraments with them, it 
 will make Way for a further contempt of 
 them; for it would, in a manner, reiider 
 the Priefl and the People equal. 
 
 Thirdly, They faid the Church o{ Rome 
 cannot err. But that Church in the afore- 
 named Council of Con/lance had taken the 
 Cup of the Sacrament away from the Peo- 
 ple, and given good reafon for it. If there- 
 fore they fhould now grant it to them a- 
 gain, it would be a flirewd Argument to 
 the Heteticks, that the Church had been 
 
 Vol. VII. R before 
 
242 Abufes and Corriiptmis i7i the 
 
 before in a miftake ; which to fuppofe was 
 intolerable. 
 
 Thefe are really the chiefeft Reafons that 
 they bring for the continuing this Pra- 
 (fl'ice of half Communion againft the ear- 
 ned Deiires and Endeavours of moft of the 
 Princes of ChriPtendom ; and are they not, 
 think you, very formidable ones ? Do they 
 not flrongly and convincingly prove the 
 Thing they are brought for ? Chrifl: and his 
 Apodles gave the Sacrament in both Kinds, 
 and order'd it fliould be fo done for ever ; 
 and all the Churches in the "World have al- 
 ways pra(n:is'd accordingly, except the Church 
 of Kome^ for fome three hundred Years laft 
 paft. But now, for fear the Laity (hould be 
 thought of equal Dignity Vv^ith the Clergy, 
 and for fear, if what the Church of Rome 
 had done once amifs, and againft Chrift's 
 Inftitution, fliould be amended, that Church 
 lliould fufFer, as to her Credit, and the Re- 
 putation of her Infallibility : For thefe Con- 
 fiderations, that holy and univerfal Synod, 
 . notwith {landing Chrift's Inftitution, notwith- 
 ftanding the ApoftlesPradice, notwithftand- 
 ing the Ufage of the Catholick Church for 
 fo many Ages, have order'd, That none^ in 
 a publick Sacrament, jhall communicate in both 
 the Element i of the Bread and JVtne, but only 
 the Prieji that cojjfecrates. 
 
 This is the plain State of the Matter ; I 
 have not injur'd them, nor have I abufed 
 you in reprefcnting iu. I am fure I have 
 
 dealt 
 
Sacrament of the Church of Rome. 243 
 
 dealt faithfully, and have faid nothing con- 
 cerning Matter of Fadl, but what I have 
 from their own Books. As for my Reafon- 
 ings, and the Confequences drawn from 
 them, I leave to you, and all confidering 
 Men, to judge of. 
 
 And thus much is fufEcIent tohavefpoken 
 of thefe two firft Abufes of the Sacrament 
 in the Church of Rome : The reft I (hall 
 take another Opportunity to fpeak to. 
 
 R ^ 
 
 SERMON 
 
244- 
 
 SERMON XL 
 
 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 The fecond Sermon on the fame Texr. 
 
 I C O R. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that which 
 I alfo deliver d to you^ that the Lord JefuSy 
 the fame Night i?i which he was betray d, 
 took Bread: 
 
 And when he had given l!hanh^ he brake it^ 
 and f aid y take^ eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the Jame manner aljo he took the Cup^ 
 when he had fuppedy faying^ This Cup is 
 the New Tejiament in my Blood: This do 
 ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 HAVE made one Difcoiirfe up- 
 on this Text already. The De- 
 fign of thefe Words, or the End 
 for which they come in here, is 
 the redreffing fome Abufes that 
 were in the Corinthian Church in the Matter 
 ®f the Bleffed Sacrament of the Supper. 
 
 The 
 
Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 2 45 
 
 The general Dodrine which wc are to 
 obferve from them is this, That in all the 
 Ordinances and Appointments of Chriifiani- 
 ty, particularly that of the Sacrament, the 
 Rule and Meafure by which all fucceeding 
 Churches are to fquare their Doctrines and 
 Practices is, the original Inftitution of our 
 Lord, and the Ufage of the Apoftles; and 
 when any Abufes or Corruptions happen in 
 a Church, as to thefe Matters, by that pri- 
 mitive Pattern they are to be reform'd. 
 
 The Ufe I meant to put this Dodrine to, 
 was to enquire and examine by this Rule, 
 whether there were not grievous Abufes and 
 Corruptions in the Church of Rofjie not only 
 tolerated, but openly avow'd and maintain'd 
 at this Day in the Service of the Holy Com- 
 munion. 
 
 And here I undertook faithfully to repre- 
 fent their Doctrines and Practices in this 
 Matter ; and, on the other fide, to reprefenc 
 the Dodtrine and Pradlice of Chrift and his 
 Apoflles ; and to leave you and all unpre- 
 judic'd People to judge, whether that Church 
 hath not departed from the primitive Rule, 
 the Inftitution of Chrift, and the Doctrine 
 and Pra6lice of the firft Chriftians; and con- 
 fcquendy, whether ftie be not guilty of great 
 Abufes and Corruptions. 
 
 Five grievous Errors and Abufes we chare- 
 ed the Church of Rome with, in the Matter 
 of the Sacrament. The two firft of them 
 have been confider'd, and largely fpoken to. 
 
 R 3 I come 
 
246 Concerning the Sacrijice of the Mafs, 
 
 I come therefore now to the third general 
 Point wherein we accufe her ; and. that is, 
 That of a Sacrament they have made it a 
 Sacrifice. Whereas the Defign of Chrift, 
 in the Inftitution of it, was to feaft us at 
 his Table, by making us Partakers of his 
 Body and Blood in a fpiritual Manner ; they 
 have made the great Defign of it to be the 
 Prieft's feafting God Almighty with the 
 Body and Blood of his Son, by offering it 
 up to him in Sacrifiee. 
 
 In fpeaking to which Point, I {hall do 
 thefe three Things. 
 
 1. F/r/?, Give you an Account how far 
 we own the Service of the Sacrament to be 
 •a Sacrifice. 
 
 2. Secondly, Give you a particular Ac- 
 count of the Dodtrine of the Church of 
 Rome in this Matter, in what Senfe flie holds 
 the Sacrament to be a Sacrifice. 
 
 3. 'Thirdly, Shew you, by feveral Argu- 
 ments, the Difagreeablenefs of this Docftrine 
 of theirs with the Inftitution of Chrift, and 
 the Tenor of the Holy Scriptures, and the 
 Reafon of the Thing. 
 
 I. Firft of all, I {hall acquaint you with 
 the Proteftant Do(ftrine in this Matter of the 
 Sacram.ento 
 
 We 
 
CoJicerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs, 247 
 
 We do not deny. That the whole Office 
 of the Communion, as it is order'd in our 
 Liturgy, and as it is perform'd by us, may 
 be call'd a Sacrifice ; nor do we fcruple to 
 call this Service the Chrillian Service by way 
 of Eminency, becaufe we find the ancient 
 Fathers frequently fo ftiling it : But then, 
 it is only upon thefe three Accounts we give 
 it that Name j and, upon Examination, it 
 will be found, that it was for the fame Rea- 
 fon, and in the fame Notions, that it was fo 
 called by Antiquity. 
 
 I. Firft of all, In this Service we bring 
 our Offerings to God for the Ufe of the 
 Poor. We do not appear before him empty, 
 but make a Prefent to him of our Subftance, 
 every one according to his Ability ; where- 
 by we both acknowledge him for the Lord 
 of the World, and the Giver of all the good 
 Things we enjoy, and alfo fhew our Charity 
 to our indigent Brethren, with which kind 
 of Sacrifice St. Paul tells us, God is -well plea- 
 fed. Thefe Gifts of ours, our Church cnl- 
 leth by the Name of Offerings and Obla- 
 tions ; and in the firft folemn Prayer in this 
 Office, we beg of God to accept thofe our 
 Alms and Oblations: And this is the Name 
 that both Scripture and Antiquity give to 
 thefe Gifts; and thefe Oblations make up 
 one great Part of that unbloody Sacrifice of 
 Chriftians that the Fathers fo often fpeak 
 of. It is true, in this we differ from the 
 R 4 priuii- 
 
248 Concerinng the Sacrifice of the Mafs, 
 
 primitive Church, that we now offer to God 
 only in Money ; but they always, befides 
 other things, brought Baead and Wine in 
 Kind ; which, after it had been Iblemnly 
 prefented to God, the Priefl: took a Part of 
 it, and, by Confecration, made of it the Body 
 and Blood of Chrifi^ as the Language of 
 thofe Times was ; which being done, he 
 diftributed to the People : So that the Peo- 
 ple, having offered to God, were by him 
 ieafted at his Table with part of their own 
 Offerings, as the Manner was in the Jewifi 
 Peace-Offerings, v^rith which this Chriflian 
 Service hath a great Afhnicy. This was the 
 ancient Cuftom, and in this we at this Day 
 differ from them ; but the Thing wherein 
 we differ is fo very inconfiderable, and fo 
 no way relating to the Eifence of the Sa- 
 crament j and, withal, the Reafon for alter-^ 
 ing the Cuflom, and bringing in Oblations 
 of Money, inftead of Bread and Wine, in 
 thofe Times, fo good, that we ought not to 
 be concern'd at the Difference, or to wifh 
 the Revival of the old Cuftom : For we of- 
 fer to God as well as they, and for the 
 fame Purpofe that they did, and our Of- 
 ferings are as properly a Sacrifice as theirs 
 was. 
 
 That which I defire to infer from hence 
 is this, That, very probably, from this Ac- 
 count I have given of the ancient Oblations 
 of the Chriitians, we may be able to difco- 
 'yef whence it was^ and upon what Grounds, 
 
Conce7'ning the Sacrifice of the- Mafs. 249 
 
 ihe Popifh Sacrifice of the Mafs, wherein they 
 pretend to offer the Body and Blood of 
 Chrift, came into the Church. It plainly 
 came from a Miftake of that ancient Sacri- 
 fice, or from not diftingu idling that Sacri- 
 fice from that other OfFxce of Confecration 
 of the Elements, which followed, in order 
 to be performed by the Prieft. 
 
 They who introduced the Popifh Sacri- 
 fice, knew very well, from Hiftory, that the 
 Communicants brought Bread and Wine as 
 an Offering to God when they approached 
 the Lord's Table; and that the Prieft did 
 folemnly prefent thefe Otterings of the Peo- 
 ple to God upon his Akar, as their Sacrifice, 
 and implored his Acceptance of them as 
 fuch. And this Sacrifice they might per- 
 haps, in fome Authors, find to be call'd the 
 Sacrifice of the Body and Blood o^ Chrift; 
 becaufe, that of thofe Offerings, as I faiJ, 
 it was the Cuflom to take fome Part, and to 
 confecrare them for the Elements, to be re- 
 ceived by all faithful Chriftians, as the Body 
 and Blood of Chrift. But, not attending to 
 the Order of thefe two Services, nor mind- 
 ing how they were quite diftind: the onci 
 from the other, they have jumbled them 
 into one and the fame Thing. And where- 
 as before, the People, or the Prieft in their 
 Name, only offered to God their Alms and 
 Oblations, now they make the Prieft to oficr 
 the very Body and Blood of Jcfus Chrift. 
 It is true, the Prieft always offer'd the Peo- 
 ples 
 
250 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 pies Prefent unto God, but not under the 
 Notion of Chrift's Body and Blood, but un- 
 der the Notion of their Oblations of the 
 Fruits of the Earth. It can never be (hew- 
 ed, that after he had once confecrated them 
 for the Body and Blood of Chrift, he of- 
 fer'd them in the Name of the People, but 
 only diftributed to them to eat and drinlc 
 In the firft of thefe Services, we all grant 
 the People offer'd a Sacrifice, or the Pried 
 in their Name ; but when that Sacrifice was 
 offer'd, and fet upon God's Table, then it 
 was no longer confider'd as a Sacrifice to 
 God, but as a Feaft with which God enter- 
 tained his Guefts. 
 
 2. But Secondly, That wkich our Church 
 calls the Offertory, that is, the Oblation of 
 our Alms, is not the only Senfe wherein we 
 acknowledge the Service of the Holy Com- 
 munion to be a Sacrifice ♦, for, befides thofe 
 Oblations of our Subftance, we do alfo in 
 that Service offer up, in the moft folemn 
 Manner, our Prayers for our felves, and our 
 Intercefiions for the whole Church ; our 
 Praifes likewife and our Thankfgivings ; and 
 laftly, our felves, our Souls and Bodies ; 
 all thefe we offer up as a Sacrifice to God, 
 and, in the Senfe of Antiquity, they are a 
 main Part of the Chriftian Sacrifice. 
 
 3. But then Thirdly, To compleat the 
 Chriftian Sacrifice, we offer up both the 
 
 afore- 
 
Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 251 
 
 aforefaid Oblations or Sacrifices with a par- 
 ticular Regard to that one Sacrifice of Chrift 
 which he ofFer'd upon the Crofs, and which 
 is now lively reprefented before our Eyes in 
 the Symbols of Bread and Wine. That Sa- 
 crifice of his we now commemorate before 
 God ; we plead the Merits and the Virtue 
 of it before him, and for the Merits, and 
 by the Virtue whereof, we have the Confi- 
 dence to offer up unto God the two fore- 
 named Sacrifices, and the Confidence to hope 
 they (hall be accepted. And in this Senfe 
 we will not deny, that we offer up even 
 Chrift to his Father ; that is, we commemo- 
 rate to God what his Son hath fuffered ; 
 we reprefent to him the ineftimable Merits 
 of his Paffion; and we defire God, for the 
 fake of that, to be at Peace with us ; to 
 hear our Prayers, and accept our Oblations. 
 In this Senfe, I fay, every Proteftant offers 
 Chrift to his Father; and it is in this Senfe 
 that St. Chryjbjlome fpeaks, when he lays, 
 What then, do we not offer every Day ? Tes, 
 ive offer, by making a Commemoration of hii 
 Death : And we do not make another Sacri- 
 fice every Day, but always the fame, or ra- 
 ther a Remembrance of that Sacrifice. And 
 in the fame Senfe (fays E'lfcbius) We facrijice 
 a Remembrance of the great Sacrifice. 
 
 In thefe three Things confifted the Whole 
 of the Chriftian Sacrifice, as it was held by 
 the primitive Fathers: They firft offer'd to 
 
 God 
 
252 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 God of their Subftance, then they ofFer'd 
 their Prayers and their Praifes, and at the 
 fame time they commemorated to God the 
 Death and Sacrifice of Chrift, by the Merits 
 of which they hoped and they prayed, that 
 both their Oblations and themfelves might 
 be accepted. 
 
 And thefe threeThings our Church obferves 
 at this Day ; for, after we have made our Of- 
 ferings, and begg'd God's Acceptance of them, 
 as I faid before, we come to beg of God 
 that he would mercifully accept our Sacrifice 
 of Praife and 'Thafikjgiving j and we humbly 
 befeech him to grant that, by the Merits and 
 Death of his Son J ejus Chrift (which we have 
 now commemorated) and through Faith in his 
 Blood, we and all his whole Church may obtain 
 RemiJJlon of our Sins, and all other Benefits of 
 his Pajfion. And we here prefent unto him our 
 felves, our Souls and Bodies, as a lively Sacri- 
 fice to him-y yet being unworthy, through our 
 manifold Sins, to offer unto him any Sacrifice, 
 we befeech him to accept this our bounden Duty 
 and Service ; not weighing our Merits, but 
 pardoning our Offences, through Jefus Chrift 
 our Lord. So that having offered up our 
 Sacrifice of Ahns, and our Sacrifice of De- 
 votions, for the rendering thefe two accepta- 
 ble ; we plead, we commemorate, before 
 God, the Sacrifice of our Lord Jefus Chrift. 
 
 This is the Whole of the Chriftian Sacri- 
 fice, as the Ancier?.ts underftood it ; and, if 
 the Church of Rome would be content with 
 
 fuch 
 
Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs, 253 
 
 fuch a Sacrifice as this, I know none that 
 would oppofe them. And I am fure, if 
 they go further, and pretend to any other 
 Sacrifice than this, they go without Prece- 
 dent in Antiquity. We offer up our Alms ; 
 we offer up our Prayers, our Praifes, and 
 our felves. And all thefe we offer up in the 
 Virtue and Confideration of Chrift's Sacri- 
 fice, reprefented before us by way of Re- 
 membraQce or Commemoration j nor can 
 it be proved, that the Ancients did more 
 than this : This whole Service was their 
 Chriftian Sacrifice, and this is ours. But the 
 Rojfjanijis have invented a new Sacrifice which 
 Chrift never inftituted ; which the Apoftles 
 never dreamt of; which the primitive Chri- 
 ftians would have abhorr'd ; and which we, 
 if we will be Followers of them, ought 
 never to join in. 
 
 II. And this I now come in the fecond 
 Place to declare to you. 
 
 For the underftanding this new Myftery 
 of the Sacrifice of the Mafs, you are to 
 know, in the firft Place, That it is the efta- 
 blifh'd Dotflrine of the Church of Rottv, 
 that in the Sacrament of the Holy Commu- . 
 nion, are contained truly, really, and fub- 
 ftantially, not only the true Body and Blood, 
 but the Soul and Deity of our Lord Jefus 
 Chrift; that is to fay, the whole Chrift ; and 
 whoever denies this, or affirms that Chrift is 
 Qnly in the Sacrament, as in a Sign or a 
 
 Figure; 
 
254 CoiKer fling the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 Figure ; that he is there prefent only by his 
 Virtue and Efficacy, he is, by the Council 
 of Tre?2fy pronounc'd accurfed. In what 
 manner they thus get Chriffc into their hands, 
 we know not ; but it is certain that the 
 Prieft, by faying five Words, always doth it; 
 that is, of the Bread and Wine, makes the 
 very true Chrift ; who being thus made by 
 the Words of Confecration, he is, by t'he 
 Prieft, ofFer'd up in Sacrifice to God j and 
 that in as true and proper a Senfe as he was 
 ofler'd up upon the Crofs at yerufalem : 
 And this Sacrifice, thus offer'd by the Prieft, 
 hath the fame Virtue in it that thrift's firft 
 Sacrifice had j that is, it is a Propitiation for 
 the Sins of the World ; it is an expiatory 
 Sacrifice both for the Dead and for the Living. 
 One would fcarce believe, that the Church 
 of Rome ftiould teach fuch Doctrines as thefe, 
 much lefs teach them for Articles of Faith, 
 and require the Belief of them by all her 
 Subjeds, under Pain of Damnation : But yet 
 this really they do, as appears by thefe two 
 Canons which the Council of T'rent hath 
 made about the Mafs. fFhoever Jhall fay\ 
 That in the Mafs there is not offer'd up u?ito God 
 a true and proper Sacrifice^ let hitn be accurfed. 
 And again : If any fiall fa\\ That the Sacri- 
 fice of the Mafs is only a Sacrifice of Praife 
 and Thankf giving, or only a Cojnmemoration of 
 the Sacrifice perform d on the Crofs, and that 
 it IS not propitiatory, or that it is only profita- 
 ble to him, that tak^s it^ and ought not to be 
 
 offered 
 
Concerning the Sacrifce of the Mafs 255 
 
 offered for the Living and the Deady for all 
 manner of Sins, Punijhments, SatisfaSlions^ and 
 other Necefities, whoever affirms any oj theje 
 Takings let him be accurfed. This is the RomiJJo 
 Dodrine concerning the Sacrifice of the 
 Mafs. But how groundlefs, how falfe, how 
 abfurd, nay how impious it is, I now come 
 in the third Place to (hew. 
 
 III. I. And firfl: of all let it be confide- 
 red, there is no foundation for any fuch Sa- 
 crifice as this of the Papifts, either in the 
 Inftitution of the Supper by our Lord, or 
 by any other Example or Dodrine record- 
 ed in Scripture. It is certain, That all that 
 our Saviour was pleafed to order in this 
 Matter, as far as the four Evangelijis can 
 exprefs it, doth relate to quite another Pur- 
 pofe, and concludes, that what he himfelf 
 did, and what he ordered us to do, was 
 meant a Sacrament and not a Sacrifice. He 
 took Bread and blefjcd it. He gave it to 
 his Difciples faying, do this in remembrance 
 of me. Take, eat, this is my Body, &c. That 
 it {hould be a Sacrifice wherein either he 
 fliould offer up himfelf, or command his 
 Church to offer him up to God his Fa- 
 ther, it appears neither by any Word, or 
 any Ad: of his. For, in the Inftitution, both 
 his Words and Adtions are diredled imme- 
 diately to his Difciples. And fuch fpecial 
 AddrelTes to Men, are no likely Proof of a 
 Sacrifice to God. 
 
 But 
 
256 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs, 
 
 But further; did our Saviour at his firfl 
 Sacrament really offer up himfelf. Body, 
 and Blood, and Life, a true, proper Sacrifice 
 to God, or did he not ? If he did not, how 
 {hall we dare to pretend to offer him up in 
 our Sacraments ? If he did, as the Papifts 
 fay he did, to what Purpofe did he after- 
 wards offer himfelf up upon the Crofs? As 
 for the other Writers of the New 'Teftiment, 
 though they have fometimes occaiion to 
 mention the Sacrament of our Lord, yet 
 not a Syllable is to be found in them from 
 whence any one can conclude that ever 
 they dreamed it was a Sacrifice. They 
 run in the fame Strain that our Lord doth, 
 oi takings eatings and communicating in Chriji's 
 Body and Bloody and fiewing forth his Death: 
 But not the leafl intimation of our Sacri- 
 ficing Chrift to God. Nay, St. Paul's whole 
 Difcourfe to the Corinthians about eating of 
 Things offered in Sacrifice to Idols, which 
 he declares to be unlawful for any Chri- 
 ftian to do, telling the Corinthians that 
 they cannot be partakers of the hordes Table^ 
 and of the "Table of Devils j I fay, all that 
 Difcourfe is an effedual confutation of the 
 Romifi Sacrifice. For it plainly fliews that in 
 St. Paul's Notion, the Chrifcian Communion 
 was not a Sacrifice, but aFeaifupon a Sacri- 
 fice, as the Idolatrous Feafts were. 
 
 One Thing there is indeed in the Scrip- 
 ture, which the Papifls make a great Noife 
 with, for the Proof of their Mafs Oblation. 
 
 It 
 
Go?icerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 257 
 
 Ic is Mclchizedeck\ bringing forth Bread and 
 Wine when he met Abrabanjy after his Ex- 
 pedition againO: thej^^j^ Kings. Melchizedecky 
 lay they, was the Prieft of the moft high 
 God, and all Chriftian Priefts are after 
 his Order. Now his Pricfthood confifted 
 in Offering up Bread and Wine, and there- 
 fore theirs muft do fo too. This is the Sum 
 of the Argument. But how little to the 
 Purpofe it is any one will eafily fee, who 
 conliders thefe three Things. 
 
 ( i) Firji, They can never prove that Melchi- 
 zedeck's bringing forth Bread and Wine^ or as 
 the Lati7i Tranilation renders it, Offering 
 Bread and Wine, was any A61 of his Prieftly 
 Fundlion. He brought out Bread and Wine 
 not to offer it up in Sacrifice to God, but 
 to treat and entertain Abraham and his Fol- 
 lowers, who were wearied with their Jour- 
 ney. It was an A(5t of Humanity and Hof- 
 pitality to thofe Perfons, but not an Ad; of 
 Devotion to God. 
 
 (2) But Secondly, fuppofing that Melchi- 
 zedeck did, as a Prieft, bring forth this Bread 
 and Wine, and offer'd it up in Sacrifice to 
 God, yet what is this to the Chriftian Mi- 
 nifters, unlefs it can be proved that they 
 fucceed him in his Priefthood; which can 
 never be done ? We read indeed, thatChrift 
 was a Prieft after the Order of Melchizedecky 
 but not a Word that his Minifters, to the end 
 of the World, are fo. Nay, the very Suppo- 
 fition that Melchizedeck was a Type of Chrift, 
 Vo L. VII. S and 
 
258 Comer 7iing the Sacrifice of the Mafs, 
 
 and of his Prieflhcod, will effedtually de- 
 flroy all Pretences to that Priefthood, in 
 the Gofpel Minifters. 
 
 (3) But Thirdly^ Suppofing all the Chri- 
 ftian Clergy are the Succeflbrs of Melchize- 
 deck, (which it is certain none of them are,) 
 yet how doth this inipower them to offer up 
 thrift to his Farher in the Communion ? 
 Mtichizedcck only offered Bread and Wine; 
 and if the Romiflo Priefts would do no 
 more, we fliould not have fo much to fay 
 againft them. But they pretend to offer 
 up the very Body and Blood of Chrift, which 
 was certainly none oi Melchizedeck's Offering. 
 And therefore it is as certain that his Adion 
 gave no Countenance to their prefent Pra- 
 dices. 
 
 2. But Secondly^ Let it be confidered that 
 the Popijh Sacrifice of Chrift in the Mafs, 
 hath not only no Ground or Foundation in 
 Scripture, but is as diredly contrary to it, as 
 any thing in the World can be. They pre- 
 tend every Day to offer up Chrift. The 
 Scripture flatly faith that Chrift was never 
 to be offered up but once, and the Apoftle 
 in the Ninth Chapter of the Epiftle to the 
 Hebrews, mainly infifts upon this. And here- 
 in he placeth the difference between the Law 
 and the Gofpel, that the Sacrifices of the 
 
 ^^^*^^- *° Law being imperfeB, and not able to put a- 
 ' *" way Sin, were every Tear to be repeated. 
 
 vcr. 14, But Chrift, by once Offering up himj'elj] hath 
 
 for 
 
■I' 
 
 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs, 259 
 
 for ever perfected all thofe that are Sa?i^ifeJ. 
 And therefore, he faith, there is no 7ieed that ^-s^f^^s 
 hejlmdd offer hwjjelf often, as the High Prieji 
 entereth into the Holy Place every Tear with 
 the Blood of the Sacrifice. For then, fays he, v. 26. 
 C brill mufi have often fuffcred fince the Foim- 
 d at ion of the World : but now once in the end 
 of the World hath Ix appeared, to take away 
 Sins by the Sacrifice of hivfelf and as it is v. 
 appoitited unto Men once to die, and after that 
 the fudgement : Jo Chrifi was once offered to 
 bear the Sins of many, and to them that look 
 for him fijall he appear the fecond Time with- 
 out Sin unto Salvation. 
 
 Nothing in the World can be plainer 
 than that, according to St. Paul's Senfe, Chrifi 
 was never to be offered but once. And yet 
 the Popiili Priefts do offer him a Thoufand 
 times every Day in the Year. 
 
 What now have they to fay for them- 
 felves, for thus apparently contradicting the 
 Scripture in their daily Service ? Why truly 
 this is all. They confefs indeed that Chrifi was 
 never offered more than once, under his 
 own Form and Figure, and that was upon 
 the Crofs, when he (hed his Blood : but 
 that he may be for all this, and is daily 
 offered upon their Altars, as really as he 
 was that once upon the Crofs, under the 
 Form and Figure of Bread, in the which 
 he fheds no Blood. 
 
 But what horrible Shuffling is this ? I 
 
 will not mention here the Nonfenfe and the 
 
 S 2 Impiety 
 
2 6 o Cojtcerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs» 
 
 Impiety they are guilty of, in pretending to 
 pen up the w^hole in tire Body and Blood of 
 Chriil in one fingle Wafer ; nay, in every 
 Crumb of that Wafer, and expofing it to 
 be devour'd by Rats and Mice, and every 
 Thing elfe that can cat Bread : This I (ball 
 liave a further Opportunity to talk of. But 
 what monftrous Equivocations, by this Di- 
 ilin^lion of theirs, do they make the holy 
 Apoftle to ufe, in what he difcourfes on this 
 Matter ? Such Equivocations, as even a Je- 
 fuit would be adiamed to be taken in. He 
 lays, downright, that Chrifl was never to be 
 offered but once. Ay, but fay they, his Mean- 
 ing is, that Chrifb was never to be offer'd 
 but once in the fame Form and Figure : In 
 another Form and Figure the Apoftle allows 
 that he is offered every Day. If this be the 
 Apoftie's Meaning, is he not wonderfully 
 fincere in his Affirmations ? Even juft as fin- 
 cere as I fliould be, if I (hould make Oath 
 that I never faw fuch a Perfon but once in 
 my Life ; meaning, that I never faw him 
 but once in fuch a Garb or Habit ; but in 
 other Habits I cannot deny but that I have 
 feen him a thoufand Times. 
 
 And then further : As to what they fay, 
 that Chrilt's Oblation upon the Crofs was a 
 bloody Sacrifice (and of fuch the Apoftle 
 fpeaks) but that which they offer in the 
 Mafs, is a Sacrifice without Blood ; it is as 
 impudent a Shuffle as the other. For, with 
 what Face can any Romaniji fay, That the 
 
 Sacrifice 
 
Co7icer7ting the Sacrifice of the Mnfs. 261 
 
 Sacrifice of Chrift, which they offer to God 
 in the Mafs-Service, is a Sacrifice without 
 Blood ; when it is the avowed Dod:rine of 
 their Church, That in every Crumb of Bread, 
 after Confecration, there is not only the 
 whole Body of Chrifl:, but alfo all his Blood; 
 and whoever denies it is, by a Canon of the 
 Council of 'Trent^ pronounced accurfed ? 
 Again : If their Sacrifice of the Mafs be 
 a bloodlefs one, with what Confidence dare 
 they afiirm, that it is a Sacrifice propitia- 
 tory for the Sins both of the Dead and of 
 the Living, when St. Paul, in exprefs Words, 
 hath told us. That without the fhedd'uig ofllth.xyi. 
 Blood there is no Reiniffion of Sins ? But I n:iali ^^• 
 purfue this no further. 
 
 3. In the third Place, As this Sacrifice of 
 the Mafs is without Scripture, and againll: 
 Scripture, fo it is alfo in the Reafon of 
 the Thing, highly injurious to our Lord 
 Jefus, and to that Sacrifice which he once 
 offer'd upon the Crofs to his Father ; for it 
 mightily lefTens and depreciates the Value of 
 it ; it infinitely takes away from the Worth 
 and Dignity of that everlafting Sacrifice that 
 it pretends to repeat or reiterate : For if that 
 firfi: and eternal Sacrifice, which Chrift once 
 offer'd upon the Crofs, hath all that Suffi- 
 ciency, and all that Efficacy which can be 
 procured by a Sacrifice, nothing is left that 
 can be done by a Second. And it is an idle 
 Thing to fay, that the Prieft offers every 
 
 S 3 Day 
 
262 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 Day a Sacrifice propitiatory for the Living 
 and the Dead, when all the Propitiation was 
 made by the firfl Sacrifice : So that at this 
 rate, the Mafs- Service will be quite out of 
 Doors. 
 
 But if this Second be needful, it muft be 
 needful upon this Account, That it fupplies 
 fomething that was wanting in the Firft: In 
 this Point, one of the Fathers is very full 
 to our Purpofe. To be offered (faith he) is 
 a Conviciion againjl the Sinner ; but to be of- 
 fered more than once^ is an EvidejKe of Weak- 
 nefs againji the Oblation itfelf. Either there- 
 fore there muft be no fecond Oblation of 
 Chrift's Body and Blood, or, if there ought 
 to be, that Second will be a Reproach to the 
 infinite Value of the Firft j for it is grounded 
 upon this Suppofition, that Chrift's Oblation 
 upon the Crols was fome way or other de- 
 fedive : The Way that the Romanifts take 
 off this Argument, is this. They will granr^ 
 That Chrift's one Oblation upon the Crofs 
 was all-fufficient for the procuring the Par- 
 don of the Sins of the whole World ; but 
 they fay, withal, this Oblation is to be every 
 Day repeated, in order to the applying to 
 particular Perfons the Benefits that were at 
 firft obtained by it. 
 
 But how little to the Purpofe is this ? The 
 Notion of a propitiatory Sacrifice is, That 
 it procures the Pardon of all Sins to the Of- 
 fender. If therefore Chrift's firft Sacrifice 
 did that, what need is there of another ? 
 
 If 
 
Concerning the Sacrifice of the Majs. 263 
 
 If the Debt be once paid, there is no Jullice 
 that it (hould be exaded again. According 
 therefore to this their Dodlrine, they {ho\ild 
 not have called the Sacrifice of the Mafs 
 a propitiatory Sacrifice, but an applicator y One, 
 But then, for this Virtue, that they affigii 
 to this their Sacrifice of applying to Belie- 
 vers the Benefiis of Chriil's firft Sacrifice, it 
 is the flrangeft one that ever was heard of. 
 The Way that the Scripture propofeth to us 
 to have the Benefits of Chrift's PafHon ap- 
 plied to us, is, the Performance of feveral 
 Conditions on our Parts ; that is to fay, re- 
 penting of our Sins, and receiving the holy 
 Sacrament, and living an Honeft, Godly, and 
 Chriftian Life. But was it ever heard, that 
 the Benefit of a Sacrifice was to be applied 
 to Men by the Means of offering up an- 
 other Sacrifice ? How can any thing be ap- 
 plied to Men, by being offered up and ap- 
 plied to God ? It is juft as if we (hould ap- 
 ply tlie Phyfick, or the Salves that are pre- 
 fcrib'd, not to the Patient, or the wounded 
 Perfon, but to the Phyfician who prefcribes 
 them. 
 
 But there is a further Myftery'in this ap- 
 plicatory Sacrifice than we would perhaps 
 at firft think of j and which hath brought 
 as much Money into St. Peters Treafury, as 
 any one Trick they have ever made ufe of. 
 The Sacrifice of the Mafs, you fee, is for 
 the applying the Merits of Chrift's firft Sa- 
 crifice to particular Perfons. Now this Sa- 
 
 S 4 crifice 
 
64 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 crifice the Clergy of Rome have wholly in 
 their own Hands, and can either apply it 
 to the Benefit of particular Perfons, or not 
 apply it, as they pleafe ; for if they do not 
 intend to apply it to this or the other Per- 
 fon, it is not applied ; if they do intend to 
 apply it, then it is. The Efficacy of any 
 Mafs, for the Pardon of the Peoples Sins, 
 depends upon the Intention of the Prieft. 
 I {hall give you the Words of one of their 
 own Authors; It belongs not, faith he, to 
 God nlofie^ but aljb to the Priefl^ to dijfribute 
 the Benefit gotten by tloe Sacrifice ; becaufe^ as 
 it is in bis Power to determine his Intention^ 
 wfjether he will offer fior this or that Man ; 
 fo it belongs to him to determine to whom he 
 will communicate what is gotten by 'virtue oj 
 that Sacrifice. Tho?nas Aquinas expreffeth it 
 in fewer Words: 'The Mafs is beneficial to 
 them to whom the Priefi hath an Intention to 
 apply it. This now, being the Caie, it may 
 eafily be fuppofed how convenient it is, for 
 the getting the Prieft's good Intentions, to 
 apply the Benefit of the Sacrifice that is of- 
 fered to us, to make good Applications to 
 to him before- hand. 
 
 4. But Fourthly, and Laftly, The Sacri- 
 fice of Chrift, as it is pretended daily to be 
 offered up in the Mafs- Service, is not only 
 injurious to Chrift's one Sacrifice, but alfo 
 barbarous and inhuman. For, in this Sacri- 
 nce, the Prieil pretends every Day to offer 
 
 up 
 
Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 265 
 
 up our Saviour to God his Father, as really 
 as he offered up himfelf upon the Crofs. 
 He pretends alfo not to offer him up only 
 as a Father may offer up his Son, or a Ma- 
 ffer his Servant, but to facrifice alfo as an 
 Heathen Prieft doth when he facrificeth a 
 Bull or a Sheep. For this Purpofe, he pre- 
 tends, by the Words of Confecration (which 
 are but five) to bring down Chrifl's Body, 
 and Soul, and Deity, and all from the 
 Right Hand of God in Heaven ; and to 
 coop them up in the narrow Quantity of 
 a Wafer and a little Wine, where he is 
 forced to lodge fo long as that Wafer is 
 in being, and cannot in the lead help him- 
 felf, or get out of it. To compleat this 
 Sacrifice, the Priefl mull: eat him, or ra- 
 ther, fwallow him down ; for fear that, if 
 he chewed him, fome Crumbs might re- 
 main behind, and fo tlie whole Body be 
 left in his Mouth. This done, both the 
 Prieft and the People muff move God to 
 blefs them in Confideration of this Sacri- 
 fice, in which they have fo kindly and 
 worthily treated his own Son : And then, 
 laftly, both Prieft and People do adore what 
 they have thus lacrific'd. 
 
 This is a very plain, but true Account 
 of the Sacrifice of the Mafs ; whether our 
 Lord be civilly, or kindly, or humanly uled" 
 herein, I will leave any one to judge. 
 
 Thefe 
 
266 Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mafs. 
 
 Thefe Things, I dare fay, which I have 
 reprefented concerning the Popifh Sacrifice, 
 have force enough to convince any unpre- 
 judiced Perfon, that it is not a Service in- 
 ftituted by Chrift ; but that it is a great 
 Corruption, and Abufe, and Depravation of 
 Chriftianity : which was the Thing I was 
 obliged to make out. 
 
 The fourth Abufe which the Papifts have 
 introduc'd into the Sacrament is, their Doc- 
 trine of Tranfubftantiation : But the treating 
 of this I referve to the next Opportunity. 
 
 SERMON 
 
267 
 
 SERMON XIL 
 
 Co7tcermng Tranfubjiantiation, 
 
 The third Sermon on the fame Text. 
 
 I COR. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For 1 have received of the Lord that which 
 la/fo deliver d to you^ that the Lordjefus, 
 the fame Night in which he was bctrafdy 
 took Bread : 
 
 And when he had given Thanks, he brake it^ 
 and /aid J take, eat : this is ;;?y Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the fame manner alfo he took the Cup, 
 when he had flipped, faying, 'This Cup is 
 the New Tefiament in my Blood : This do 
 ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 H E DtTign I am upon Is, To 
 (hew the grievous Corruptions 
 and Abufes that the Churh of 
 Rome is guiJry of in the Mat- 
 ter of the Holy Communion : 
 Three of them I have aheady fpoke to ; 
 a Fourth we now come to, and that 
 
 is 
 
268 Concerning Tranfubjlantiation, 
 
 is this : That whereas in this Sacrament, 
 according to our Saviour's Inftitution, there 
 is a material Part, and a fpiritual; a Sign, 
 and the Thing fignify'd ; the Bread and 
 Wine to be received for our bodily Sufte- 
 nance, and the Body and Blood of Chrift, 
 fignified by them, to be received for the 
 Food of our Souls ; they have quite ta- 
 ken away the former from us: For they 
 teach, That immediately, upon faying the 
 Words of Confecration, that which was 
 Bread and Wine before, and which, accord- 
 ing to the Nature of a Sacrament, now 
 comes to be received by us, is no longer 
 Bread and Wine, but is turned into the very 
 Body and Blood of Chrift. 
 
 And this is that Myftery which they 
 call Tranfubftantiation ; a Myftery as un- 
 intelligible as the Word by which they 
 exprefs it ; a Myftery that has always 
 been a Bone of Contention among them- 
 felves, whenever they came to a particu- 
 lar Explication of it ; and a Myftery 
 which will for ever be a Wall of Separa- 
 tion between them and the reft of Man- 
 kind, that will not renounce their Senfe and 
 Reafon. 
 
 If we were agreed with the Church of 
 "Rome in all other Points whatfoever, yet fa 
 long as they impofed upon us the Belief of 
 this ftngle Do6lrine of Tranfubftantiation 
 as an Article of Faith, or a Condition of 
 their Communion, yet we muft not, we can- 
 not 
 
Concerning l*ranfuhJlant'iaUon, 269 
 
 not ever, upon thefe Terms, come over to 
 them. 
 
 What the Romifro Dodrine of Tranfub- 
 ftantiation is, you will eafily difcern by thefe 
 three or four Canons, Vi^hich I fhall tranf- 
 late Word for Word, out of the Council of 
 Trent ^ which is their Oracle of Religion. 
 
 " If any one fliall deny, That in the Sa- SeiT. 13, 
 " crament of the Eucharift there is contai/i-^^"'* 
 " ed truly, really, and fubftantially, the Body 
 " and Blood, together with the Soul and 
 " Divinity of our Lord Jefus Chrift, ^c, 
 " let him be accurfed. 
 
 " If any one (hall fay. That in the Sacra- Can. 2, 
 " ment there doth remain the Subflance of 
 " Bread and Wine, together with the Body 
 " and Blood of Chrift, and fhall deny the 
 " Converfion of the whole Subftance of the 
 " Bread into the Body, and of the whole 
 " Subftance of the Wine into the Blood 
 " [of Chrift] the Species or Accidents only 
 " of the Bre*d and Wine remaining, which 
 " Converfion orChangetheCatholickChurch 
 " doth moft aptly call by the Name of Tran- 
 " fubftantiation, let him be accurfed. 
 
 " If any ftiall deny, That in the Sacra- Can. 3. 
 " ment the whole Chrift is contained in ei- 
 " therKind, nay, and in every Part of either 
 " Kin 1, when one Part is feparated from 
 " another, let him be accurfed. 
 
 " If any one (hall fay that in the Sacra- Can. 4. 
 " ment, after the Words of Confecration 
 " are faid, there is not the Body and Blood 
 
 « of 
 
270 Concerning 'Tranfuhjlantiation. 
 
 " of Chrift, fave only in the prefent Ufe of 
 " them while they are taken and received, 
 " but that they are not there, either before 
 "or after j or that the true Body of Chrift 
 " doth not remain in the Confecrated Wa- 
 " fers that are left, or that are referved af- 
 " ter the Communion, let him be accurfed. 
 In thefe four Canons the following Points 
 are plainly contained, which will give us a 
 full account of their Doctrine of Tranfub- 
 ftantiation. 
 
 Firjl^ That after the Words of Confecra- 
 tion are fpoken, there is no Bread nor no Wine 
 left upon the Table. 
 
 Secondly, That tho' there be no Bread or 
 Wine, yet the Accidents, that is, the Colour, 
 the Shape, the Bignefs, the Weight, the Taft, 
 and the other Qualities of the Bread and 
 Wine do remain. But neither in the Bread, 
 nor in the Body of Chrift, but by them- 
 felves. Not in the Bread, for Bread there 
 is none. Not in the Body of Chrift, for 
 they will not allow you to fay, that the 
 Body of Chrift is round, or fweer, or white, 
 or the like. So that here is roundnefs with- 
 out any thing being round, whitenefs with- 
 out any thing being white, fweetnefs with- 
 out any thing being fweet. 
 
 Thirdly, That in the Place of the Sub- 
 ftance of Bread and Wine, by the Virtue of 
 
 five 
 
Concerning Tranfubjiantiation, 2ji 
 
 five Words, there is the Subftance of the 
 Body and Blood of Chrift, together with his 
 Soul and Divinity ; tho' it is confefs'd at the 
 fame time, that Chrift hath but one Body, 
 and that Body is in Heaven. 
 
 Fourthly, That this Body and Blood, as 
 it is whole in the whole Bread and Wine, 
 and as both Body and Blood are whole in 
 the Bread alone, fo it is whole alfo in every 
 Crumb of that Bread; which doth admira- 
 bly confift with the Notion of a Body. 
 
 Fifthly, The Body of Chrift is eaten by 
 every Communicant both good and bad. 
 
 Sixthly, Not only fo, but this Body re- 
 mains in thofe Wafers that are not eaten ; 
 fo that if after the Sacrament a Moufe fhould 
 happen to come at one of thefe Wafers and 
 devour it, it would as really eat the Body 
 of Chrift as any Chriftian. And if one of 
 thefe Wafers fliould be burnt with Fire, why 
 then the Body of Chrift would be as really 
 burnt, as it was before eaten. Thefe 
 things cannot be prevented, but by as great 
 a Miracle, as the firft Produdion of the 
 Body was. 
 
 Seventhly, and L^y?/v this change, this con- 
 verfion of the whole Subftance of Bread and 
 Wine into the whole Subftance of the Body 
 and Blood of Chrift, together with his Soul 
 
 and 
 
272 Conccrnhig T'raiifubjlantiation. 
 
 and Divinity, is moft aptly by the Catholick 
 Church called Tranfubftantiation. 
 
 By this Account I have given you, you 
 may in fome meafure difcover what that 
 hard Word means, and what the Do6lrine 
 ,of the Church of Rome is in this matter. 
 
 My Buiinefs now fhould be to (hew the 
 Abfurdity of this Doctrine. But I dare fay 
 the very (hewing you what it is, and the 
 naming to you the feveral Proportions con- 
 tained in it, will be fuliicient to keep every 
 unbiafs'd Perfon from eafily giving his AlTent 
 to it. He mud be of a very ftrong Confti- 
 fution, that can fwallow down and digefl: 
 fuch Pills as are here offered to him, unlefs 
 Education, or Intereft, or a blind Submif- 
 lion to others, have already made them fa- 
 miliar to him. I dare be bold to fay, there 
 never was any Myilery in any Religion in 
 the World, {0 unintelligible, fo unconceiva- 
 b!e, fo contradidious, fo every way both a- 
 gainft Senfe and Reafon, as this is. No 
 y<?zc', no T^iirk^ no Pagan, fo far as we can 
 learn from Hiftory, ever had in their Creeds 
 an Article fo hard to be believed. 
 
 If this had been the Doctrine of our blef- 
 fed Lord and his Apoftles, fure he had ne- 
 ver drawn the World over to his Religon : 
 Johnvi. But even his own Difciples would have 
 done, as they of Capernaum did, when they 
 took his faying about eating his FleJJj and 
 drinking his Blood in a literal Senfe j (juft as 
 
 the 
 
Concerning Iranfubjlantiation. 273 
 
 the Ronmnijls now do) they would have 
 departed from him. 
 
 I lay not this to put any Affront either 
 on the Perfons, or the Parts, or the Honefty 
 of thofe chat are otherwife perfuaded, and 
 do beheve as the Homan Church teacheth ; 
 for I know very well how far Education 
 and Prejudice, and Want of Confideration, 
 may prevail, even upon good Men, for the 
 perverting their Judgments in the plaineft 
 Matters ; efpecially when thefe are backed 
 v/ith this fatal Principle, That they are 
 bound, under Pain of Damnation, to be- 
 lieve as the Church believes ; and that the 
 more difficult the Thing is to be believ'd, 
 the more meritorious is their Faith : I fay, 
 I have nothing to fay to the Men who do 
 believe Tranfubftantiation, nor do I call 
 their Chriftianity into queftion upon thai 
 account ; bur, for the Thing it felf, it is fit, 
 it is juft, we fliould freely reprove it. For 
 certainly, there is no Dodlrine in the World 
 that either more deferves to be, or is more 
 capable of being, expofed and made ridicu- 
 lous, than this is^ a«nd it harh already been 
 fufficiently made fo by as many as have at- 
 tempted it. 
 
 If we fliould purfue thofe feveral Propo- 
 fitions I have named to their feveral Confe- 
 quences, what a Bundle of monilrous Abfur- 
 dities, and grofs Coniradicflions, (hould we find 
 in them ! But this Method of arguing againil 
 Tranfubftantiationj I do not think lb proper in 
 
 Vol. VII. T this 
 
274 Concer?ting Iranfubjlantiation. 
 
 this Place, becaufe it would engage us in a 
 Difcourfe too fubde for ordinary Capacities ; 
 and I would, if I could, fpeak to the meaneft 
 Underftandings. 
 
 Letting pafs therefore the Abfurdities and 
 Contradidions which follow upon this Doc- 
 trine of Tranfuhftantiation, and which the 
 Romanijls themfelves will not pretend to an- 
 fwer, all of them, I will endeavour theie 
 three Things. 
 
 Fir ft. To fhew that the Dodrine of Tran- 
 fubftantiation is fo far from having any 
 Countenance from. Scripture, particularly 
 from the Words of Chrift in the Inftitution 
 [This is my Body] which is the great Ar- 
 gument the Romanijis bring for it, and the 
 Foundation upon which they build it ; that, 
 if there were no other Argument againft it 
 but that, it would from hence be effedually 
 overthrown. 
 
 Seco72dly, To fliew the Danger of this Ar- 
 tifice, forafmuch as it overthrows the Evi- 
 dence of the whole Chriftian Religion. If 
 the Dodrine of Tranfubftantiation be true, 
 it can never be proved that Chriftianity is 
 true. 
 
 Thirdly^ I fliall endeavour to (hew the In- 
 fufficiency of that Plea or Apology which 
 the Romanijls ufually make for their Doc- 
 trine of Tranfubftantiation, that is, the Un- 
 
 accounta- 
 
Co?2cerm77g Tj^anfubJla?itiation, 275 
 
 accountablenefs and Unconceivablenefs of fe- 
 veral other of the Gofpel-Dodrines ; from 
 whence they conclude, that we ought not to 
 rejed: the Dodtrine of Tranfubftantiation up- 
 on this account, that it is hard or unintelli- 
 gible, or feemingly contradictious. 
 
 Of thefe three Points in their Order; 
 and the firft of them will, I believe, take 
 up my whole Time at prefent. 
 
 The great, if not the only Argument of 
 the Ro?jiamJis for Tranfubftantiation is, our 
 Saviour's Words when he inftituted the Sa- 
 crament ; which they think to he fo full 
 and flat for the Converfion of Bread and 
 Wine into the Body and Blood of Chrift, 
 that they wonder with what Face any Pro- 
 teftant can deny it. Doth not our Saviour 
 moft exprefly fay, when he gave the Sacra- 
 ment under the Form of Bread, Take^ eaty 
 this is my Body '^ Doth he not like wife fay 
 of the Cup, that it is his Blood} If ever it 
 was needful that our Saviour fhould fpeak 
 plain, and without a Figure, one would 
 think it (hould be then, when he infti- 
 tuted this fo folemn, and perpetual, and prin- 
 cipal a Sacrament of the Chriftian Church. 
 And what can be more plain, than what he 
 hath fpoken concerning it? Shall we there- 
 fore believe Jefus Chrift, or fliall we be- 
 lieve our own carnal Reafon againft him? 
 No lure. Every Chriftian ought to fubmit 
 his Reafon to Chrift's Revelation j for his 
 
 T 2 Reafon 
 
76 Co7icernvng ^ranfubJia?2tiatio?7, 
 
 Reafon is infinitely fallible; but Chrift can 
 neither deceive, nor be deceived. "To the 
 Word therefore, and to the Tejiifnony, which 
 is your own Proteftant Rule. Chrift hath 
 faid of the Bread, T'his is my Body: and 
 therefore certainly it is fo, whatever our 
 Senfes or our Reafon can fuggeft to the Be- 
 lief of the contrary. 
 
 This is the Argument ; and thus far in- 
 deed it proceeds right, That whatever Chrift 
 faid we are to believe, and likewife that 
 Chrift did fpeak fufficiently plain to his Dif- 
 ciples when he inftituced this Holy Sacra- 
 ment : Neither of thefe will any Proteftant 
 deny. And therefore we do as firmly be- 
 lieve, as we believe any thing, that when 
 Chrift fpake thofe Words, This is my Body, 
 he fpake nothing but what was both true, 
 and very plain and obvious unto thofe to 
 whom he fpake : But the Queftion is, whe- 
 ther thefe Words of his, even in their moft 
 plain and obvious Senfe, do make any thing 
 for zhe Romifi Dodtrineof Tranfubftantiation ? 
 They fay they do j we fay they do not : Here 
 therefore v</e are to join Iflue. 
 
 And here we are ready to prove (if that 
 will fatisfy) That they not only make no- 
 thing for Tranfubftantiation, but quite over- 
 throw it ; that the Senfe that the Proteftants 
 expound them in is far the plaineft and 
 eafieft, and moft natural and proper; nay, 
 that it is impoftible they fliould be expound- 
 ed to any other Senfe, On the contrary, 
 
 thac 
 
Concerning TranfubJ}a?itiatt07i, 277 
 
 that the Romifi Senfe is harili and forced, 
 and makes our Saviour to talk againft all the 
 Rules of Speech. 
 
 For the finding out the Meaning of our 
 Saviour's Proportion, This is my Body, the 
 true Way will be firft to fix the Senfe of the 
 two Terms of it j that is to fay, what he 
 means when he fays Tbis, and what he means 
 by his Body. Now of the Senfe of thefe two 
 Terms, we may be as fully afcerrained from 
 what goes before, and from what follows 
 after, as we can be of the Senfe of any 
 Words in Scripture. 
 
 When we ufe the Word this in any Speech 
 of ours, all the World knows that we do, 
 as with the Finger, point to fomething that 
 is prefent, which we would have thofe we 
 fpeak to take notice of If I have a Bible 
 in my Hand, and hold it forth to you, and 
 fay, This is the Word of God, would you not 
 all think that I fpoke of the Book which I 
 had in my Hand, and fliewed you ? Cer- 
 tainly you would. When our Saviour, there- 
 fore faid to his Difciples, This is my Body, 
 he meant to (hew fomething to them that 
 was prefent ; and accordingly we find, that 
 fomething he had in his Hand, and that was 
 Bread. The Lord "Jejlis, as my Text tells 
 you, after Supper took Bread : lie bleffed this 
 Bread \ he breaks this Bread afcer he had 
 bleffed it ; he gives this Bread to his Dilci- 
 ples afcer he had broken it ; he bids them 
 take and eat of this Bread j and, to oblige 
 
 T 3 them 
 
^yS Cone ending "itranfubjlantiation. 
 
 them fo to do, he adds, for thh is my Body, 
 What now, according to the common Lan- 
 <Tuage of Mankind, is it that our Saviour 
 faith is his Body ? Muft it not of Neceffity 
 be that which he had in his Hand, and 
 which he had blelTed, and broken, and bid 
 them eat of? If any thing can be concluded 
 from Words, it muft be concluded, that 
 when our Saviour faith, ^bis is my Body^ he 
 fpeaks of the Bread he had blefTed and 
 broken j and it is impoffible the Apoftles 
 fliould underftand him otherwife. 
 
 But if this be not fufficient to prove that 
 our Saviour, when he faid, T'his is my Body^ 
 fpoke of the confecrated Bread; let us add 
 the Teftimony of St. Paul^ who, fure, is an 
 infallible Interpreter of our Saviour's Words. 
 Our Saviour tells his Difciples, that what he 
 had commanded them to eat was his Body : 
 This is agreed on all hands. If now we will 
 enquire of St. PW, what it is that is eaten 
 in the Holy Supper, he will inform us plain- 
 ly, that it is Bread : Three times he tells 
 us fo in the Verfes immediately following my 
 Text, j^s often^ fays he, as ye eat this Breads 
 and dri?tk this Cup, v. 26. Whofoever fiall 
 eat this Bread and drink this Cup unworthily^ 
 V. 27. "Let a Man exami?ie hifnjelf, and fo 
 let him eat this Bread and drink this Cup^ 
 V, 28. 
 
 Here now is the Argument. Our Saviour 
 having confecrated the Bread, bids his Dif- 
 ciples eat of it, telling them, it was his 
 
 Body, 
 
Concerning ^ranfubftantiation, 279 
 
 Body. St. Faul faith, that what is eaten in 
 the Sacrament is Bread. From hence there- 
 fore it undeniably follows, that the confe- 
 crated Bread is that which our Saviour calls 
 his Body ; and that, when he faith, T^his ts 
 my Body, it is as much as if he had faid. 
 This Bread which I have blejfed and broken^ 
 and which I give you j this Bread is ?ny 
 Body. 
 
 Having now fixed this as a firm unde- 
 niable Principle that we may fafely build 
 upon, let us proceed to the other Term in 
 our Saviour's Proportion, My Body. Now 
 in what Senfe, or under what Coniideration 
 the Word Body is here to be taken, is as clear 
 from our Saviour's Words, as the former 
 Thing we were fpeaking of The Romanijis 
 do indeed darken the Senfe of this Propofition, 
 by leaving out half of it ; they only fay, This is 
 my Body. Here they break off. But the intire 
 Sentence is this : This is my Body given for 
 yoiiy or, this is my Body broken for you. From 
 hence we may plainly gather, that our Sa- 
 viour doth not fpeak of his Body abfolutely, 
 and without a Qualification, but under this 
 particular Confideration, His Body as given 
 for us ; that is, as offered up to God in Sa- 
 crifice for us (as the Scriptures often ex- 
 plain that Term) His Body broken for us; 
 that is, deprived of Life for our fakes. 
 
 My plain Meaning is, That Chriff never 
 fiid fimply of the Bread, '"//'/; is mv Body ; 
 bur, This is my Body given, or broken for sou: 
 
 T A. that 
 
28o Concernmg I'ranfubjlantiation. 
 
 that is, he hath plainly declared, that the 
 Bread of the Communion is his Body, not 
 living, but dead in our ftead. Which is 
 further confirmed by what Chrifi: faith of 
 the Cup, That it is the Blood of the New 
 Covenant Jloed for them. It was not in any 
 other Senfe his Blood, than as it was jhed 
 for the Kernijjion of Sim. 
 
 Taking now thefe two Things to be fuffi- 
 ciently prov'd, and never to be call'd in 
 queftion again, I come to the main Queftion 
 between us and the Papifts; and that is, in 
 what Senfe thefe two Terms we have been 
 explaining, are coupled together j or, to fpeak 
 plainer, in what Senfe our Saviour faid of 
 the confecrated Bread, that it was his dead 
 Body. Here begins the great Quarrel be- 
 tween them and us; they contend for a di- 
 rect literal Senfe; we fay our Saviour here 
 fpeaks by a Figure ; but yet fuch a Figure as 
 is moil common, and which every one, upon 
 the pronouncing of the Words, would eaii- 
 ly underftand. They underfland our Savi- 
 our in the fame Senfe as they would do one, 
 who (for inftance) ihould point to the King's 
 Perfon, and fay. This is the King. We un- 
 derftand our Saviour in the fame Senfe as 
 we (hould do one who, having the King's 
 Pidure in his Hand, (hould fay, This is the 
 Ki^ig. The Propoiition is the fame in the 
 Mouths of both thofe Perfons; but yet we 
 fee it hath a quite different Signification as it 
 is fpokcn by the one, and as it is fpoken by 
 
 the 
 
CoJtcernmg Tranfubjiafitiation. 281 
 
 the other. Whether of thefe Senfes come 
 nearer to Truth, and to our Saviour's Mean- 
 ing, the" literal, or the figurative, theirs, or 
 ours, we are now to examine : But we are 
 to examine them by thefe two Principles 
 which we have already proved, and now f*. 
 take for granted ; and which, I defire you *^ 
 would keep in Memory, viz. That when 
 our Saviour faid, This is ?ny Bod)\ he fpoke 
 of the Bread ; and when he faid, that the 
 Bread was his Body, he fpoke of his Body 
 not living, but facrific'd for our Redemp- 
 tion. 
 
 Now, taking thefe Things along with 
 us, the two following Confequences will be 
 evident. 
 
 Firft of all, That their Senfe of the 
 Words, and by which alone they can prove 
 Tranfubftantiation, is impofiible, and full of 
 Nonfenfe and Contradictions. 
 
 And Secondly, That the Senfe in which 
 the Proteftants underftand our Saviour's 
 Words, is very natural, and eafy, and a- 
 greeable to the common Way of fpeak- 
 ing ; and the only Senfe in which it was 
 polTible for the Apoftles, to whom our Lord 
 fpoke, to undcrftand them. 
 
 I. Firft of all, The Popifh Glofs upon . 
 thefe Words, fuppofes Things impollible 
 and contradidious. For Firft, 
 
 (I.) If 
 
282 Coftceniing T^ranfuhjlantiation. 
 
 (i.) If we take our Saviour's Words in the 
 literal Senfe, that is, in the Senfe of the Ro- 
 manijis, we muft make him fpeak to this Ef- 
 fe6t : This Bread which I have blejjed and bro- 
 ken, and commanded pu to eat of^ is not Bread y 
 but really and truly my dead Body ; my Body 
 Jacrijiced for you. Now I will appeal to you, 
 whether this be not perfedl Nonfenfe j and 
 and whether it was not impoffible that the 
 Difciples, to whom he fpoke, lliould thus 
 underftand him. For what is this, but to 
 make our Saviour fay and unfay the fame 
 Thing at the fame Time ? He fpeaks of 
 the Bread which he had bleffed and broken, 
 when he proROunceth the Word this, and 
 they all knew it to be Bread ; and yet, ac- 
 cording to the Romanijis, he muft be fup- 
 pofed to mean that it was not Bread, but 
 merely his Body j for, they fay, when once 
 it becomes the Body of Chrift, it is no 
 longer Bread. 
 
 There is nothing in the World, by which 
 they can fhift off this Cantradidion, but by 
 faying thus (as indeed they do fay it) That 
 when our Saviour fpoke the Word T'his, 
 that which he had in his Hands, or then 
 gave unto them to eat, was indeed Bread ; 
 but, by that time he had finifhed his Sen- 
 tence, then it was no longer Bread, but his 
 very Body. 
 
 But this will ftand them in no ftead at 
 all. For tho' hereby they may avoid the 
 Contradi(!tion, yet they make our Saviour 
 
 to 
 
Concerning Tranfuhjlantiation. 283 
 
 to fpcak not only againft the Rules of all 
 Grammar, but to fpeak a flat Untruth. For 
 he fays, in the prefent Tenfe, this Bread zi 
 my Body, when yet, when he begun to 
 fpeak fo, the Bread was not his Body, but 
 only was presently to be turned into his Bo- 
 dy. If indeed he had faid this Bread wiU 
 be my Body, as foon as I have done fpeak- 
 ing thefe Words, he then might have been 
 fuppofed to have fpoken fomething to the 
 purpofe of Tranlubftantiation. But he 
 fpeaks in the prefent Time T^his is, not, This 
 will be -J and if they will be bold to change 
 the Tenfes, then they keep not to the Let- 
 ter of the Words, but have recourfe to a 
 Figure : and a Figure far more unufual in 
 thefe kind of Speeches, than that we con- 
 tend is here made ufe of. When therefore 
 our Saviour fays This is my Bod)\ his Pro- 
 pofition cannot pofTibly be taken, in a literal 
 Senfe, without making him either to fpeak 
 a Contradiction, or to fpeak that which is 
 Falfe. Unlefs it can be made to appear 
 that Bread and our Saviour's Body, are one 
 and the fame Thing, which no Man in the 
 World ever yet aflerted. 
 
 (2.) But Secondly, Let us fuppofe, if we 
 can, as they would have us, that when Chrift 
 had faid thefe Words, This is my Body, that 
 which he had in his Hands was no longer 
 Bread, but became his very Body, yet there 
 is this Queflion ftill behind, How could it 
 
 be 
 
2^4 Concerning Tranfuh fla7itiatio7t. 
 
 be his dead Body ? His Body given, or bro- 
 ken, or facrificed, for them? 
 
 That our Saviour fpoke of his Body in 
 that Condition, and under that Confideration 
 only, I have already (hewed ; and that his 
 Difciples underflood him fo, there is no 
 doubt. But if they did, how is it pofTible 
 they fhould underftand his Words in a literal 
 Scnfe ? 
 
 Chrift fa id to them, T^hu is my Body. 
 Not my Body living, but my Body dead 
 and broken for you. His Difciples who 
 heard thefe Words, faw and knew that the 
 Perfon who fpoke them was alive, that his 
 Body was not yet broken, nor his Blood 
 fhed. What (hall we fay ? MuH: they un- 
 derftand his Words literally, as the Papifts 
 would have them underflood, or no ? If 
 they did, they muft admit of as grofs a Con- 
 tradi6tion as ever was put upon Mankind. 
 They muft believe that Chrift's Body was 
 both alive, and dead at the fame Time. 
 If they could not believe this, as certainly 
 one of us would think they could not, then 
 it is impoffible they ftiould take our Saviour's 
 Words in a literal Senfe, 'uiz. that the Bread 
 he gave them was really and truly, and 
 without any Figure, his very dead Body. 
 
 If they did not take them in a literal Senfe, 
 then it is certain they underftood them in 
 a Figurative, which is that which we Pro- 
 teftants contend for. Which figurative 
 Senfe, how natural, how eafiy, hov/ unexcep- 
 tionable 
 
Concerning T'ranfiihjlantiatmi, 285 
 
 tionable it is, and how impoflible it is, that 
 the Apoftles fhould mifs of it, I come in the 
 next Place to (hew.. 
 
 2. Our Saviour i72 his lajl Supper with his 
 Apojlles takes Breadj andblefjeth it^ andbreak- 
 eth it^ and diftributes it to his feveral Dif- 
 ciples, and bids them eat it, telling them 
 It ID as his Body, his Body broken for them: 
 when yet all thofe Difciples knew, and faw 
 that he was alive, and prefent with them 
 when he fpoke thofe Words. If now we 
 had been in their Places, How fliould we 
 have underftood thofe Words ? Certainly not 
 in a literal, but a figurative Senfe. And 
 what Figure {hould we have Thought of 
 befides that way of fpeaking whereby we 
 give to the Sign the Thing fignified by the 
 Sign. Now, according to this Figure, we 
 {hould have underftood the Words to this 
 effed:, That this Bread v/hich he had bro- 
 ken, and bleffed, did fliew forth and reprefent 
 his Body broken for us, and by our eating 
 of this broken Bread, according to his Com- 
 mand, we were made partakers of the Be- 
 nefits of his Sacrificed Body. No Senfe 
 in the World can be more eafy than this. 
 Nay, all things confidered, it is impoflible, 
 fuppofing the Apoftles to have but common 
 Senfe and Underftanding, and to mind what 
 they were about, that they Ihould take the 
 Words in any other. 
 
 (i.) For 
 
286 Conce?^ning 'Tranfubjlantiation, 
 
 (i.) For Firft of alJ, there is no Figure In 
 Speech more ufual among Mankind in all 
 Languages than this, whereby we give to the 
 Sign the Name of the Thing fignified. Is 
 there any Phrafe more common than when 
 we fliew a Pidure of any one, to fay, this 
 is fuch a Perfon : Or when we have a Map 
 before us, to fay this is fuch, or fuch a 
 Country. When thefe Expreffions are ufed, 
 there is none fo filly as to believe that we 
 mean that Piece of Painting is really the 
 Perfon of the King, for Inftance, or the 
 Queen, whom it reprefents j or that Map 
 is really the Country of France or Spain, or 
 the like. But we all, even the moft liraple 
 of us do underftand that we give the Name 
 of the Perfon or Thing reprefented, to that 
 which reprefents it. 
 
 (2.) But Secondly, as this is an ordinary Fi- 
 gure in common Speech, fo it is alfo in the 
 Language of Scripture. Innumerable are the 
 Paflages that I might quote both out of the 
 Old and New Tejlammt, to (hew that the 
 Sign or Figure of a Thing is called by the 
 Name of the Thing it felf Thus for Inftance, 
 when yofeph expounded Pharaoh's Dream, 
 Thejevenfat Kme, fays he, are fe^-jen Tears, 
 Gen_xii. ^he I'even Ears of Corn are J'even Tears. Thus 
 when Daniel unfolded to Nebuchad?iezzar 
 his Dreams of the great Image, and of the 
 
 ^ and the T'ree which thoujdwejl^ it is thou O 
 King, 
 
 Thus 
 
 c. iv.v. 20 
 
 2 
 
Concerning Tranfubjlantiation. 287 
 
 Thus alfo, in the New Tejiamcnt, our 
 Saviour never fails thus to exprefs himfelf 
 upon the Hke Occafions, as in the Para- 
 ble of the Tares. The Field, faith he, /VMatt. xiU. 
 the World : The good Seed are the Children ^ 
 of the Kingdom : The Tares are the Chil^ 
 dren of the wicked One. The Enemy that v. 39. 
 Joived them is the Devil : The Harvef is 
 the End of the World : and the Reapers are 
 the Angels. And thus when he fpeaks ofMn-^.y. 
 himfelf : / am the Door^ I am the Vine, ^ \^' 
 I am the good Shepherd. And thus alfo i Cor. x. 
 St. Paul : That Rock was Chriji. 4- 
 
 By thefe, and a great many other In- 
 ftances that might be given, you may be 
 convinced, that when the Holy Scriptures 
 would exprefs the Reprefentation of one 
 Thing by another, they do not do it in 
 fuch Terms as thefe, fuch a Thing is the 
 Sign, or the Figure, or the Reprefentation 
 of fuch a Thing, which is the literal Way 
 of exprefling j but in a much fhorter Man- 
 ner ; fuch a Thing is fuch a Thing, gi- 
 ving to the Sign or the Figure the Name 
 of the Thing which it reprefents or figni- 
 fies. And why, when our Saviour faith. 
 This is my Body, he (hould not be thought to 
 ufe the fame Style and Expreffion (efpecially 
 when all other Senfes of the Phrafe are, 
 as I have (hewn, full of Abfurdities and 
 Contradiftions) there is no imaginable Rea- 
 fon to be given. 
 
 (3) But 
 
288 Concerning Tranfubjlantiation. 
 
 (3.) But Thirdly, That he muft be fup- 
 pofed to fpeak in this Language, and that 
 his Difciples fo underftood him, there is 
 this further Argument, becaule this was 
 the Language that was ufed b)' the Jews 
 in their Sacraments, and particularly in that 
 Sacrament that the Apoflles had juft then 
 celebrated. 
 
 And indeed, great Reafon there was that 
 they {hould fpeak in this Stile ; for if. the 
 Signs may be well called by the Name of 
 the Things they lignify (as we have (hewn 
 they often are) then much more may thofc 
 facred Ceremonies, which we term Sacra- 
 ments, be fo called; for thefe are more than 
 bare empty Signs, they are Seals too ; they 
 affure to the worthy Partakers the Truth 
 and Reality of thofe Things they reprefent ; 
 they efFe6tually communicate the Things 
 themfelves. 
 
 Two eminent Sacraments God appointed 
 to the JewSy Circumcilion and the PafTover; 
 yet to both thefe the Floly Scriptures, and 
 the Jews from them, gave the Name of the 
 Thing which they fignified and fealed. Cir- 
 cumcilion, which was no more than the 
 Sign and Seal of God's Covenant with the 
 JcivSy anfwering to our Baptifm, yet is in 
 Scripture called the Covenant it felf Thus, 
 twice in one Chapter, God faich, T^hh is my 
 Gcn.wu.Covenantj every Male Child among you jl^ all 
 »° be circumcifed. hn^ zg-^'in. My Covenant JJmll 
 
 ^' '^' be in your Flffi. Whereas every Body knows, 
 
 that 
 
Concer7iing Tranfubjiantiatlon, 289 
 
 that Circumcifion was not God's Covenant, 
 but the Sign of the Covenant, or the Sa- 
 crament whereby they entered into Cove- 
 nant. 
 
 And then for the other Sacrament, the 
 Pafchal-Feaft, from whence our Saviour took 
 his Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the very 
 Name of Paffbver^ by which it is call'd, is an 
 Inftance of the Figure we are contending for. 
 For the facrific'd Lamb, with which the Jews 
 celebrated this Sacrament, was not the PalTbver 
 it felf, but only a Sign, or Memorial of it; 
 for the PafTover was God's a(ftual paffing 
 over the Ifraelites when he flew the Egyp- 
 tian Firft-born, which was done when they 
 came out of Egypt \ yer, you fee, God him- 
 felf calls this Feaft, T^he Lord's Paffovej\ 
 I'his is, fays he, the Lords Fajjover, Exod. xii. 
 II. And for ever after, every Year, this 
 Pafchal-Feaft was kept (which was as long 
 as the yewifi Polity lafted) when the Lamb 
 was fet upon the Table, the Mafter of the 
 Houfe fpoke to his Company in thefe Words: 
 'T'his is the Pajfover^ which we therefore eat, 
 becaiije God pajfed by our Houfes in Egypt. 
 And this Form of Words, without doubt, 
 our Saviour ufed when he kept this Feaft 
 with his Difciples. 
 
 But now all that were prefent, knew that 
 the Lamb upon the Table was not really the 
 Lord's PalTover, for that was a Deliverance 
 that God wrought for them but once, and that 
 many hundreds of Years before-, but only a 
 
 Vol. VIL U Memo- 
 
290 Concerning 7'ra7tftihJlantiation» 
 
 Memorial of that PalTover ; a Sacrament in- 
 ftituted for the Commemoration of that De- 
 liverance, or that PalTover. 
 
 Taking nov^^ this for granted, as we have 
 fufficient Reafon, fmce God, in Scripture, 
 firft ufed the Expreffion ; and the 'Jewijl) 
 Rituals tell us, that in all fucceeding Paffo- 
 vers it was continued, who can doubt but 
 the Apoftles, when they heard our Sa- 
 viour fay of the Bread, iLhh is my Bod)\ 
 would naturally be led to underftand the 
 Words in the Senfe we have been decla- 
 ring, tho' there was nothing to induce 
 them to it, but what we have juft now 
 faid. The Apoftles, at that Time, were 
 celebrating the yemjlo Sacrament of the 
 Pafchal-Feaft, which was a Commemora- 
 tion of a Deliverance paft, 'wiz. That great 
 Redemption which God had wrought for 
 them from the Egypt iaii Bondage ; yet they 
 heard our Saviour fay of the Bread, T'his is 
 the Bread of AfftiBion which your Fathers 
 eat in Egypt. They heard him fay of the 
 Flefh upon the Table, T'his is the Lord's 
 PaJJover. Well, after they had finiflied this 
 Sacrament, they faw our Saviour take of 
 the fame Bread again, and blefs it as he had 
 done before ; (but with a Defign to make 
 a new Sacrament, wherein both they, and 
 all Chriftians after them, fhould commemo- 
 rate the Death and Sacrifice of the Paf- 
 chal Lamb, of which the other was a 
 Type; by which Sacrifice, a Deliverance 
 
 was 
 
Concerning 7ranful?fta?itiation: 291 
 
 was wrought for all true Ifraelites, to the 
 World's End, out of the fpiritual Bon- 
 dage of Sin and Satan.) Having, I fay, thus 
 blejjed the Breads he bids them eat of it ; 
 and tells them, T'his is his Body broken for 
 them. I dare now appeal to any, whether 
 they would not naturally underftand this lat- 
 ter Expreflion of his in the fame Senfe that 
 they did the former; that is to fay, that 
 the Bread that Chrift now bleffed, and broke, 
 was jufl: as much his Body broken, as the 
 Bread they had before eaten was the Bread 
 of Afflidion which their Fathers eat in 
 Egypt ; or, as the Lamb they had before 
 eaten of, was the Lord's Paflbver. It was 
 this only difference. That the Pafchal Lamb 
 was a Commemoration of a Thing paft, 
 but the new Sacrament was a Commemo- 
 ration of fomething that was yet to come ; 
 for Chrift had not then adtually broken 
 his Body, or fhed his Blood, but was fud- 
 denly fo to do : This excepted, the other 
 Things are the fame. And we may as 
 well imagine, that when thofe Words of 
 the fewijh Ritual, T^his is the Lord's Pajfo- 
 ver, were fpoken, the Difciples underftood, 
 that juft then the deftroying Angel was 
 paffing over the Houfes of the Ifraelites^ 
 and flaying the Firft-born of the Egyp- 
 tiajis J as we can imagine, that when our 
 Saviour faid, ^his is my Body broken for you, 
 they underftood him of his real natural 
 Body, which was not then crucify 'd : And 
 
 IT 2 confe- 
 
292- Concerning Tranfubjlantiatmi, 
 
 confequently therefore they took not his 
 Expreffion literally (as the Papiits do) but 
 in the fame Figure that was fo ufual among 
 them. 
 
 I think now that I have fully made 
 out, that Chrift's Words in the Inftitu- 
 tion, This is my Body, are fo far from ma- 
 king any thing yor the Dodtrine of Tran- 
 fubftantiation, that they do effedlually over- 
 throw it ; and that it is impoflible that 
 the Apoftles fhould underftand them in any 
 other Senfe than w& Proteflants now un* 
 derftand them. 
 
 I am fenfible I have been very tedious 
 in this Bufinefs ; but my Endeavours to 
 fpeak plainly and convincingly have made 
 
 me fo All that I have further to add 
 
 is this, That altho' v/e thus interpret our 
 Saviour's Words, and tho' thus, without 
 doubt, they who heart i him fpeak did un- 
 derftand them ; yet are we far from be- 
 lieving or imagining that the Bread and 
 Wine in the Sacrament are only empty 
 Signs, or Figures, or Reprefentacions of 
 Chrift's Body and Blood. On the contra- 
 ry, we believe, That altho' they do not 
 change their Natures, ibut ftill continue 
 Bread and Wine, yet they do really and 
 effectually convey, to all worthy Receivers, 
 all the Benefits and Virtues of Chrift's Bo- 
 dy that was broken, and c^f his Blood that 
 was (hed. Tho' his Body be in Heaven, 
 
 and 
 
Co72cerning Tra7tfubJla7itiation, 
 
 and not here, yet he is, by his Spirit, really 
 prefent in and with all thofe who do wor- 
 thily partake of his Sacrament, in order to 
 the ftrengthning and refrefhing their Souls 
 by his Influence, as our Bodies are ftrength- 
 ned and refreshed by the Bread and Wine. 
 And this is all that we mean by the real 
 Prefence in the Sacrament, ' ''' 
 
 293 
 
 U 
 
 SERMON 
 
294 
 
 SERMON XIII. 
 
 The ujual Plea or Apology for Tran- 
 Jubjlantiation^ anfwerd. 
 
 The fourth Sermon on the fame Text. 
 
 1 COR. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For 1 have received of the Lord that which 
 lalfo deliver d to you^ that the Lord J ejus ^ 
 the fame Night in which he was betrafd, 
 took Bread : 
 
 And when he had given Thanks, he brake it, 
 andfaidy take, eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the fame manner alfo he took the Cup, 
 when he had fupped, faying, I'his Cup is 
 the New Tefiament in my Blood : This do 
 ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 OU may eafily remember the 
 Argument I am upon ; it is the 
 fhewing (amongft other Errors 
 of the Church oi Rome, in the 
 Matter of the Holy Commu- 
 nion) the great Abu fe they have put upon 
 m by their Dodrine of Tranfubftantiation, 
 
 This 
 
'The ufual Plea or Apology^ Sec. 29^ 
 
 This Doddne, the lad Time, I largely ex- 
 plain'd to you from the Council of Trait ; 
 and gave an Account, brieliy, of the fcveral 
 Abfurdities and Contradidions it contained 
 in it. Having done this, the Method that 
 I pitch'd upon, for (hewing the groundlefs- 
 nefs of the Romijh Doctrine of the Conver- 
 fion of the Bread and Wine of the Sacra- 
 ment into the very Body and Blood of Chrifl:, 
 Was as follows. To JJj-ew that this Dodhine 
 of TrafTjubflantiatio}! is Jo Jar from having 
 any Countenance from the Words of our Sa- 
 viour's Infiitution, that if there was no other 
 Argument againji it but thoj'e Words, it woiddy 
 from hence^ be effeBually overthrown. 
 
 And here it was my Bufinefs to enquire 
 into the Senfe of our Saviour's Words, This 
 is my Body. And two Things I undertook 
 to prove. 
 
 Firji, That the Romanifis, who contend 
 for a literal Senfe of the Words, cannot pof- 
 fibly be in the right. On the contrary, 
 our Saviour's Words are fo far from ma- 
 king for their Dodrine of Tranfubftantia- 
 tion, that they are an cffedual Confutation 
 of it. 
 
 Secondly, That the Senfe that the Prote- 
 teftants give of thofe Words, is the moft na- 
 tural and eafy, tho' it be a figurative one ; 
 and fuch a Senfe it is, as it cannot be ima- 
 gined but they who were prefcnc when our 
 
 U 4 Saviour 
 
296 The ufual Plea or Apology for 
 
 Saviour fpoke the Words, muft naturally and 
 neceflarily hit upon, and underftand him in. 
 
 Thus far I have already gone. What I 
 further propofed to {hew, was, T'he Danger 
 of this Article of T^rajifubjtantiation^ forajmuch 
 as it overthrows the Evidence of the whole 
 Chrijiian Religion -, and the Injiiffciency of 
 that Plea or Apology which the Papijis iifually 
 make for this Dodlriiie, from the Unaccounta- 
 blenefs and Inconceivablenefs of other Gojpel- 
 T)oBrines ; as that of the Trinity and In- 
 carnation. 
 
 For the two Things which are com- 
 monly faid by the Papifts, not lb much by 
 way of anfwering our Arguments (for that 
 is defpaired of) as for taking us off from 
 laying fo great a Strefs upon this Point, as 
 we are w ont to do, are thefe. 
 
 Firjl of all. It is infinuated frequently 
 by them, That whether the Church of 
 Rome be right or wrong in this Matter, yet 
 it is no great Bufinefs. The Controverfy is 
 wholly upon a Matter of Speculation. If 
 rhey fhould be miftaken in their Notions, 
 yet what is the evil Confequence ? There 
 is nothing of Pradlice depends upon the be- 
 lieving or the not believing their Dodlrine. 
 I may live as well, and ferve God as well, 
 tho' I do believe Tranfubftantiation, or do 
 not believe it. And can we think, that 
 a mere fpeculative Point, that hath no In- 
 fluence 
 
T'ranfubjlantiationy anfwerd. 297 
 
 fluence upon our Pracflice, fliould be worth 
 fo hotly contending for ? 
 
 This is one Thing that is faid. And 
 then another Thing that is often thrown 
 upon us, is this: Why are we fo incredu- 
 lous about this Do»5trine of the Church ? 
 Why do we ftand fo much upon the Rea- 
 fon of the Thing? Will we believe no- 
 thing but what is fully made out to us by 
 Reafon ? Do not we believe abundance of 
 Points that are as much above our Reafon 
 as Tranfubftantiation is ? If we will not 
 believe Articles of Faith till we can latisfy 
 our felves about the Reafonablenefs of every 
 one of them, we muft be Unbelievers all 
 the Days of our Life. The Dod:rine of 
 Tranfubftantiation feems to be impoffible, 
 and therefore we reject it ; but muft we 
 not, upon the fame Pretence, rcjed: the 
 Dodrine of the Trinity, the Dodrine of 
 the Refurredion, and feveral other Articles 
 of Faith ? For thefe are every whit as ini- 
 pofTible to our Reafon as their Dodrine is. 
 
 Thefe two Things are frequently made 
 ufe of to beat us from our Hold ; and in- 
 deed, by this Artifice, they have done fome 
 confiderable Advantage to their Caufe, by 
 impofing upon unwary, unthinking Men, 
 that this Point of Tranfubftantiation is ei- 
 ther not fo neceft'ary, or not fo indredible, 
 as to deferve fuch a mighty Buftle and Con- 
 troverfy as we make about it. I think it 
 
 will 
 
298 T'he ufiml Plea or Apology for 
 
 will not be Labour loft to give feme An- 
 fwer to them. 
 
 I. I begin with the Firft, It is pretends 
 cd, That the Dodtrine of Tranfubftantiation 
 is wholly a fpeculative Point ; that our Prac-^ 
 tice is no ways concern'd in itj and there- 
 fore, tho' it (hould be an Error, yet what 
 great Matter is it for a Man to be miftaken ? 
 Will a pure Miftake of a Man's Underftand- 
 ing, fo long as he believes as rightly as he 
 can, be any Bar to his Salvation at the Laft 
 Day ? Why then do we make fuch a Noife 
 and Clamour about this Doftrine, fince it 
 fo little concerns our Salvation ? 
 
 (i.) To this I fay Firft of all : Suppofe 
 it to be merely a fpeculative Error, and no 
 ways to influence upon our Praftice, yet 
 they themfelves have laid fo great Strefs up- 
 on it, that we muft for ever continue in the 
 fame Diftance from them that we do, un- 
 lefs they would mollify their Terms of Com- 
 munion. Be the Error never fo fmall in its 
 felf, yet they have made the believing of it 
 an Article of Faith, and neceffary to Salva- 
 tion. It is one of thofe twelve Articles 
 which the Pope, by the Order of the Coun- 
 cil of T!rent^ hath added to the Apoftles 
 Creed. And where-ever that Council is 
 receiv'd, every Clergyman among them is 
 bound not only to fubfcribe, but to fwear 
 his Belief of this, and all thofe other Addi- 
 tions i and they do not only fwear for them- 
 felves. 
 
T*ranfubJia7niatton^ anfwerd, 299 
 
 felves, but they are bound by their Oath to 
 teach and inftrudl the People in this Faith, 
 as that Faith without which no Man can be 
 faved. So that be the Matter never fo fmall 
 in its felf, they have made it a great Bufinels. 
 Every Man who hath Cure of Souls, takes 
 an Oath, that he believes the Dodrine of 
 Tranfubftantiation himfelf, as a necefTary Ar- 
 ticle of the Chriftian Faith ; and that he 
 will do his utmoft Endeavour, that all thofe 
 who arc under his Care lliould believe fo 
 like wife. 
 
 I fay nothing but what is true, as any 
 Man will be convinced who will be at the 
 Pains to read over Pope Pius the Fourth's 
 Bull, at the End of the Council of Trcnty 
 concerning the Form of the Oath of Pro- 
 fefiion of Faith. Is there now any dally- 
 ing in fuch a Matter as this ? Was it ten 
 times of lefs Confequence than it is, yet we 
 ought to be careful of proteffing this Doc- 
 trine as an Article of Faith, when we be- 
 lieve it to be an Error ; and much more of 
 fwearing to the Belief of it. If it wns a 
 Matter of no Moment before, they have 
 now made it to be a Matter of infinite Mo- 
 ment J for now no Man can be honed:, or 
 a good Chriftian, who doth not entirely 
 fwallow this hard Pill of Tranfubftantiation : 
 But this is not all. 
 
 (2.) For, in the fccond Place, I defire 
 this may be confidered. It is faid that 
 the DQ(^rine of Tranfobftantiation, if it be 
 
 an 
 
300 The ujual Plea or Apology for 
 
 an Error, is only a fpeculatlve One, and 
 hath no influence upon Pradice, This is 
 laid; but it is utterly falfe. For no lefs fol- 
 lows upon this belief than the committing 
 of Idolatry ; and fure no wife Man will fay, 
 but that Idolatry is a Matter of Pradtice, 
 which it infinitely concerns every Chriftian to 
 avoid. The miftakes about the Prefence of 
 Chr id's Body, ifthey terminated there, would 
 not be fo very dangerous ; but they draw 
 after them fuch fearful Confequences, as to 
 Matter of Divine Worfhip, that no Man 
 who hath the leaft care of his Soul, but 
 will think himfelf extreamly concerned to 
 inform himfelf rightly. What can be great- 
 er or groffer Idolatry in the World than to 
 worfhip and perform Divine Adoration to 
 a Piece of Bread, as if it was very God Al- 
 mighty? Yet this Pradice the Doctrine of 
 Tranfubftantiation doth necefTarily and un- 
 avoidably bring us to. If the confecrated 
 Bread be really Chrift's Body, and his Soul, 
 and Deity be hypoftatically united therewith 
 (as they all teach) then I cannot fee but 
 that we are bound to perform Divine Wor- 
 fhip to the Elements in the Sacrament, or 
 to that which in common Speech we Pro- 
 teftants call Bread and Wine. And accord- 
 ingly, in purfuance of this Dextrine of Tran- 
 fubftantiation, all the Papifts univerfally do 
 adually Worfhip the Bread and Wine in 
 the Sacrament as very God Almighty, and 
 
 are 
 
7*ranfubJ}antiationy anfwerd, 301; 
 
 are bound by the Laws of their Religion 
 fo to do. 
 
 But what now if Tranfubftantiation be 
 an Error, in what a cafe are they then ? Are 
 they nor the moft grofs Idolaters ? fuch they 
 are, or there hath never been any Idolatry 
 in the World. And this they ihemfelves 
 have been fo aware of, that one of their Je- 
 fuits fcruples not to affirm, 7'hat if the 
 DoBrine of T'ranfubjiantiation he not true^ 
 the Chrifiam of the Roman Communion are 
 as great Idolaters in worfiiping the Hofi, as 
 the Indians are in worfnping a Red Cloth 
 for God Almighty, If now this be the na- 
 tural and neceffary Confequence of Tran- 
 fubftantiation, is it fuch a light Matter that 
 we fhould take no Notice of it, but put 
 it among the Difputes and Controverfies 
 of the Schools, which it is not a farthing 
 Matter, whether we believe on the one fide, 
 or the other? 
 
 (3.) But further yet, I have this in the 
 Third Place to reprefent in Anfwer to their 
 Suggeftion. They fay the Dod:rine of 
 Tranfubftantiation, is but a Matter of mere 
 Speculation. Be it fo: But yet this we fay, 
 it is fuch a Matter of Speculation, that if it 
 be once admitted, it will fliake the very 
 Foundations of Chriftianity, and be in Dan- 
 ger of overthrowing the Evidence of our 
 whole Religion. And therefore certainly it 
 is not fo light, but that great Strefs fliould 
 be laid upon it. And this, being one of the 
 
 principal 
 
302 T^e iifual Plea or Apology for 
 
 principal Points I undertook to fpeak to, I 
 £hall therefore confider it more fully. 
 
 We fay that the very Suppofing Tranfub- 
 (lantiation,deftroys thofe grounds upon which 
 we do believe our Saviour's Dodtrine. If 
 this Popifli Tenet be true, it is impoffible 
 for us ever to be affured our felves, or to 
 be able to afibre others, that Chriftianity 
 is true. 
 
 This you will fay is a very heavy Charge. 
 But in Truth as heavy as it is, it may be 
 very evidently made good. For I would 
 afk, what are the Grounds upon which any 
 of us do believe the Chriftian Faith, or would 
 perfuade others to believe it ? Jf we would 
 anfwer reafonably, we muft fay thus. The 
 Ground upon which we believe Chrift's Re- 
 ligion, is the Teftimony of the Apoftles and 
 other honeft Men who lived in the Times 
 of Jefus Chrill, and heard him publifh his 
 Dodrine, and were Wicneffes of the Proofs 
 he gave of it: Which Do(flrine and which 
 Proofs they timely committed to Writing, 
 and thofe Writings we may fafely believe 
 upon the Credit and Authority of univer- 
 lal Tradition, to be lincerely conveyed down 
 to us. This is the dired: Anfwer to this 
 Queftion : Not denying, in the mean while, 
 that there are a great many other collateral 
 Evidences of the Truth of Chriftianity, tho* 
 all depending on the fame Foundation. 
 Well, but upon this Queflion, thus an- 
 fwered, there arifeth another. All the Truth 
 
 of 
 
Tj-afifuhjlantiatmi^ anfwerd, 303 
 
 of our Belief dependeth on the Truth of the 
 Apoftles and other Firft Witnefles their be- 
 lief. If they were miftaken, then are we 
 too. Now how (hall we be fure that they 
 were not impofed upon ? All the Anfwer ijow 
 that can be given to this Queftion ib this ; it is 
 impoflible the Apoftles and other WitncfTes 
 of Chrift's A<flions and Do<5lrines, ihould 
 be millaken, for they had the Evidence of 
 their Senfes for what they believed, and 
 what they reported to us. They heard Chrift 
 with their own Ears preaching fuch Do- 
 ctrines, as we now call the Articles of our 
 Faith, which Do(5lrines their Reafon told 
 them were good in themfelves, and agree- 
 able to the Dodrine of the Prophets. They 
 likewifefaw with their Eyes, the Proofs that 
 Chrift gave of them, being prefent at the 
 mighty Miracles he wrought. Seeing him 
 caft out Devils, raife the dead, cure allDif- 
 eafes, and giving all other Evidences of a 
 Divine Power in him. Laftly, after they 
 had {ten. him put to Death, they had all 
 their Senfes to witnefs that he was raifed 
 again from the dead, and converfed with 
 ihem for many days. 
 
 Here therefore we are to fix the Firft 
 Grounds of our Faith, njiz. upcn the Evi* 
 dence of our Senfc. The Apoftles, and thofe 
 other Firft Chriftians who conveyed our Re- 
 ligion down to us, did therefore believe, 
 becaufe they faw, and heard, and feltj and 
 upon tlie Credit of thofe their Senfes, they 
 
 were 
 
304 ^^ ufual Plea or Apology for 
 
 were afTured, that what they delivered to 
 Pofterity, concerning Jefus and his ReHgion, 
 was true. And indeed it is impoflible there 
 {liould be any other Evidence than this, for 
 the Truth of any Divine Revelation, let 
 it be of what Nature it will ; it is into this 
 Proportion that our Senfes do not deceive us^ 
 that we are at leaft to refolve all the Argu- 
 ments we have for the Truth or Credibility 
 of any revealed Religion. And accordingly 
 we find the Arguments of the Apoftles, when 
 Lukei. 2. they would perfuade Men to Chriflianity, 
 ** always proceed upon this Ground. They 
 
 were Eye and Ear~wit?ie[Jcs of what yefus 
 did, and taught^ and of his Refurredion 
 from the Dead ; and therefore they durft 
 avow to all the World that he was the Mef- 
 I Ep. i. fiah. 7hat which was from the beginniiig^ 
 '• ^' faith St. John, that which we have heard, 
 that which we have feen with our Eyes, and 
 looked upon, and our Hands have handled of 
 the Word of Life, that we declare unto you. 
 
 This now being taken for granted, we 
 thus form our Argument. If the Ground 
 of our Faith be the Truth of our Senfes, who- 
 ever teacheth any Dodlrine that fuppofeth 
 our Senfes may be deceived, doth, fo far 
 a5 he teacheth it, overthrow the Ground of 
 our Faith. Or to put it plainer. If the 
 laft Reafon for which we believe the Truth 
 of the Chriftian Doctrine be Founded in this 
 Propofition, that we are to believe our Senfes ; 
 then that Doctrine which fuppofes that we 
 
 are 
 
 V 
 
TranfiihJla7ttiation^ anfwerd. 3c 5 
 
 are not to believe our Senfes, doth quite 
 overthrow the Reafon, and Ground of our 
 Behef. But the Dodrine of Tranfubftanti- 
 ation, as it is maintained by the Papifts, 
 doth quite take away the Credit of our 
 Senfes. For it Teacheth, That that which 
 to all our Senfes (when we make the bed 
 Ufe of them that is poffible) appears to be 
 plain Bread, and Wine, as much as any 
 Bread and Wine in the World can appear 
 to be fo, is yet really riot Bread and Wine, 
 but a quite difterent Thing, even the Body 
 and Blood of Chrift which is in Heaven. 
 Upon thefe Premifes, I fay, that Doftrine 
 thus Teaching, muft be concluded to take 
 quite away all the Evidence we have for 
 our belief of Chriftianity : If this Doctrine 
 be true ; then could not the Apoftles or any 
 others be certain, that what they thought 
 they faw and heard, concerning Jefus Chrift, 
 was true; and confequently much lefs could 
 they perfuade others they preached to, that 
 what they taught concerning him was true, 
 and lead of all us, who live at this Di- 
 ftance of Time. 
 
 I will make this a little plainer if I can. 
 We will fuppofe, as the Doctors of the 
 Roman Church would have us. That Tran- 
 fubftantiation was a Dodrineof our Saviour's 
 which he taught the Apoftles, and that they 
 were to teach it to others, as an Article 
 of Faith. And accordingly we will fuppofe, 
 That one of them is endeavouring to bring a 
 Vol. VII. X Heathen 
 

 6 Tide ufual Plea or Apology for 
 
 Heathen over to the Chriftian Religion. 
 The Man, as is but reafonable, Firfl delires 
 to hear an Account of this Rehgion he 
 would perfuade him to. The Apoftle there- 
 upon declares to him the Articles of the 
 Chriftian Faith, and among the reft, he 
 tells him that one Article is. That in every 
 Chriftian Sacrament of the Eucharift, when 
 Five Words are faid by the Prieft, that which 
 appears to him a fmall round Wafer, and 
 hath, if he may believe his Senfes, all the 
 other Charaders of a Wafer, yet is not a 
 Wafer, but the True Natural Body and 
 Blood of Chrift, who was Crucified at "Je- 
 rufalem. The Man mightily (ticks at this, 
 as he hath good Reafon. " Sir, faith he, 
 " this is a very hard Do6trine to be believ- 
 " ed. I cannot for my Life diftruft the 
 " Evidence of my Senfes ; I muft believe 
 " what I fee, and what I taft, and what I 
 " I feel ; and befides, it is very hard to con- 
 " ceive, in Reafon, how the whole Propor- 
 " tion of the Body of a Man, can be crowded 
 " into fo fmall a bulk as a Wafer bears. 
 " Ay but, (fays the Apoftle,) Chrift who 
 " was Truth itfelf, and could not deceive, 
 " nor be deceived, he hath faid that thii 
 " is my Body, when he had given Bread 
 " to his Difciples to eat. You ought not 
 " therefore to urge your Senfes againft fo 
 " infallible an Authority. Right (faith the 
 " Man) if I were convinced that all that 
 " Chrift faid was true, and that he was aa 
 
 infallible 
 
Tranfubjlantiation^ anjwerd. 307 
 
 ** infallible Teacher fent from God, I would 
 *' do what I could to fwallow this hard Pill, 
 *' the Belief that Bread is an human Body, 
 " tho' it be againft the Grain of my Senfes : 
 " But how fhall I be afTured that your Jefus 
 " was fo infallible an Oracle as you fpeak 
 « him?" 
 
 What now can the Preacher, whoever he 
 be, reply to him more than this, That he 
 hath been converfant with our Saviour all 
 the Time that he lived ; that he faw his 
 Actions, and heard his Dodtrines, and that 
 they were both exadlly framed according to 
 the Chara(51:ers that God had before given of 
 the Meffiah in the Law and in the Pro- 
 phets ; that he was prefent at thofe Tefti- 
 monies that God, by Voices from Heaven, 
 gave to his Son Jefus ; that he had feen him 
 work fuch Miracles as were plainly the Seal 
 of God to the Truth of his Miffion ; and 
 laftly, that he had feen him rife from the 
 Dead, and vifibly afcend into Heaven. Thefe 
 now, I grant, are undeniable Arguments of 
 the Divinity and Truth of our Saviour. Bur, 
 whether will the Pagan be fatisfied with 
 them ? May he not juftly thus reply ? " Sir, 
 *' It cannot be denied but that you fpeak 
 " great and glorious Things of your cruci- 
 " hed Jefus •■, but yet, if you mind, all the 
 " Arguments that you bring for the Truth 
 " of his Religion are. That you have heard 
 " and {^Qn fuch wonderful Proofs of it. So 
 " it feems you lay a great Strefs upon your 
 X 2 Hearing 
 
o 8 "the iifiial Plea or Apology for 
 
 " Hearing and Seeing, and your other Senfes, 
 " and you would have me do fo too. But 
 *' may not I as much truil to my own Senfes 
 " as to yours ? Will you pretend to perfuade 
 " me, that I (hould believe your Senfes, 
 " when-, at the fame time, you forbid me 
 " to believe my own? lam ascertain, by 
 " my Eyes, and Smell, and Handling, that 
 " what you call the Body of Chrift, is no 
 " more than a Piece of Bread, as you can be 
 " certain that ever you heard a Voice from 
 '' Heaven, in Atteilation that Jefus was the 
 " Son of God ; or, as you can be certain 
 " that ever you faw him work any Mira- 
 " cles; or, as you can be certain that ever 
 
 " " you heard him fpeak, or touched him, 
 *' or converfed with him after he rofe from 
 '' the Dead. You have no other Evidence 
 *' but your Senfesyor the Truth of what you 
 
 ' " would perfuade me to, the Chriftian Re- 
 " ligion. I have the fame Evidence againji 
 " the 'Truth of what you would perfuade 
 " me to, the Doctrine of Tranfubftantia- 
 *' tion. If your Senfes may be believed, 
 " why may not mine ? If both our Senfes 
 
 ' " may not be believed in one Matter, 
 " then why {hould they be believed in 
 " another ?" 
 
 This is a very familiar, but a true Re- 
 
 ; prefentation of the Cafe. And I would glad- 
 
 ", ly know, how any Papift in the World, that 
 owns Tranfubftantiation (as every Papifl muft 
 do) can take off this Argument. 
 
 The 
 
 1 
 
Tranfubjlantiat'ion^ a7ifwerd, 309 
 
 The Conclufion therefore is, That if Tran- 
 fubftantiation be true, it can never be made 
 to appear, that Chriftianity is true ; becaufe 
 Tranfubftantlation being fuppofed, the Cre- 
 dit of our Senfes is taken away ; and yet 
 upon their Credit our Belief of Chriftianity 
 is founded. 
 
 But to this the Romanifls fay, That our 
 Senfes, in the Bufinefs of the Sacrament, are 
 no ways abufed or deceiv'd. Whatever is 
 the proper Objedf of our Senfes, is, in the 
 confecrated Bread, left entire. That which 
 appears to our Eyes to be white and round, 
 is really fo ; that which to ourTafte appears 
 to have the Reli(h of Bread, hath really that 
 Relidi; and fo of the other Objedfs of our 
 Senfes. All the Miftake, fay they, lies here: 
 Our Senfes reprefent truly, but we, in our 
 Minds, are apt to form a wrong Judgment 
 of the Thing that is convey 'd under thefe 
 fenfible Qualities. We are not deceived in 
 the Objedts of our Senfes, but we may be 
 deceived by the Subftances that are convey'd 
 under thofe Objeds. 
 
 This is all that I know they have to de- 
 fend thcmfclves with againft the Argument 
 I have been urging: But in truth, if you 
 will well conlider it, it (ignifies nothing at 
 all to the Purpofe. The Queftion is nor, 
 whether there be really fuch Impreflions 
 made to our outward Senfes as we find our 
 felvcs fenfible of, (for that no body denies) 
 but whether, when fuch Impreflions are 
 
 X X made 
 
3IO l*be ufualPlea or Apology for 
 
 made to our Senfes, and we ufe our Senfes, 
 not one fingly, but all of them together, to 
 try the Matter by, and we add our Reafon 
 to boot, and this in a Matter that is as much 
 the Object of Senfe as any in the World ; I 
 fay, the Queftion is, whether, in this Cafe, 
 we may not, by the help of our Senfes, make 
 a true Judgment of the Objedt; or rather, 
 whether we ought not, all Things duly exa- 
 mined by our Reafon which our Senfes offer 
 us, give Judgment according to the Import 
 of our Senfes ? We fay, we ought to do fo. 
 The Papifls fay, we ought not. But in fo 
 faying, they quite overturn the Credit and 
 Evidence of all Senfe ; for, at this rate of 
 talking, no Man can be affured that any 
 Thing he fees, is the Thing he takes it to be; 
 or that any Thing he taftes, is the Thing he 
 fancieth it ; and fo of the reft. 
 
 But they fay further to this : It is true, in 
 all other Cafes, our Senfes (efpecially when 
 we make ule of all of them, and call our 
 Reafon in to their Affiftance) are to be be- 
 lie v'd J only there is a particular Exception 
 in this Cafe of the confecrated Bread and 
 Wine, becaufe Chrift, who cannot lie, hath 
 pronounc'd them to be his Body and Blood. 
 But to this we reply. That Chrift hath no 
 where pronounc'd fo ; but his Words im- 
 port diredly the contrary, as, I think, wc 
 nave already fufficiently proved. 
 
 2. But 
 
T*ranfubftantiatlo7ty anfwerd. 311 
 
 2. But I haften to the other Thing which 
 I was to infift upon ; and that is, the Infuf- 
 ficiency of that Plea or Apology which the 
 Papifts ufually make for their Dodrine of 
 Tranfubftantiation, from the Unaccountable- 
 nefs or Inconceivablenefs of feveral others of 
 our Saviour's Dodlrines. 
 
 Whenever we urge to them the Unintelli- 
 giblenefs or Contradictions of this their Tenet, 
 that which they think to ftop our Mouths 
 with, is this : " Will you be a Chriftian, or 
 " will you not ? If you will, then you muft 
 " be led by Faith, and not by Senfe. You 
 *' muft believe what God hath faid, and not 
 " what your own carnal, fallible Reafon 
 " fuggefts : You cannot conceive how that 
 *' which appears Bread, fliould be the true 
 *' real Body of Chrift which is in Heaven. 
 •' Why can you conceive any better of ma- 
 " ny of the Myfteries of Chriftianity ? Is 
 " not the Incarnation of our Saviour, the 
 <' Manner how God and Man can be one 
 " Perfon, every whit as great and as unac- 
 " countable a Secret ? Are you not as much 
 •' at a lofs, when you endeavour to recon- 
 " cile the Doftrine of the BleiTed Trinity 
 " with your Reafon, as you are in the Cafe 
 *< you obje6t againft us ? Can you, or any 
 " Man living, give a more intelligible Ac- 
 " count of that Myftery, than we can do of 
 " Tranfubftantiation ? Will not the Notion 
 " of Three in One, be eternally as great a 
 X 4 " Contra- 
 
312 iChe ufualPlea or Apology for 
 
 " Contradidlion, as it is that the Body of 
 " Chriil {hould be in a thoufand Places at 
 " once ? Leave therefore thefe fenfual Han- 
 " kerings after Reafon, and believe whatever 
 " God faith is true, how impofTible foever it 
 " feems to us : it is not our Bufinefs to dif- 
 " pute God's Alfertions, but to fubmit to 
 *' them." 
 
 This, that they fay, is very plaufibly faid; 
 and it is likely, with unwary Perfons, may 
 take very much, and hath often done fo. 
 
 But if you will confider well, you will 
 find, there is no Force at all in what is faid ; 
 becaufe there is a vaft Difference and Dif- 
 parity between the Things we charge them 
 with, and the Things that they offer for the 
 Defence of themfelves. 
 
 Three Things I fliall offer, whereby that 
 Difference will manifeftly appear. 
 
 (i.) Firft of all. The Dodrine of the 
 Trinity, how unconceivable foever it be, as 
 likewife the Dodtrine of our Saviour's Incar- 
 nation, are plainly and evidently deliver'd in 
 the Scripture i fo plainly, that we muft de- 
 ny the Authority of the Book of God, if 
 we deny them : Nay, they arc the very firft 
 Principles of Chriftianity, and fet down in 
 the Neiv Tiejiament as fuch ; and none, from 
 Chrift's Time to this, ever rejedted them, 
 but were declared Hereticks for fo doing. 
 Whereas the Dodlrine of Tranfubftantiation 
 hath no Foundation in Scripture, nay, is di- 
 ^edtly contrary to the Words of our Saviour, 
 
"Tranfuhjlantiation^ anfwerd. 313 
 
 as I hope I have fufficiently proved ; and not 
 only lo, but it may be fully proved, it was 
 Dodrine never known to the Fathers for the 
 firft eight hundred Years after Chrift j but it 
 is a perfed Novelty, firfl eftablilli'd by the 
 Council of Lateran ; and, by a very good 
 Token, it was the fame Council that firft 
 decreed the Lawfulnefsof depofing of Princes, 
 and abfolving Subje6ts from their Allegiance, 
 in the Cafe of Herefy : So that it is plain 
 Impudence in any, to name the Dodrine of 
 Tranfubftantiation with thofe other Chri- 
 flian Dodrines, as to the Authority of them, 
 from the Book of God. 
 
 (2.) But Secondly, There is this further 
 Difference between the Dodrine of Tran- 
 fubftantiation, and the Dodrine of the Trini- 
 ty, and the Incarnation of 'bur Lord, and 
 fuch other Myfteries of the Gofpel, that 
 the firft is plainly a Matter that falls under 
 our Senfes, but the other do not fo : This 
 ought extremely much to be regarded in this 
 prefent Controverfy. It is no Wonder, we 
 cannot fathom the Depth of the Trinity, 
 becaufe Cod is an infinite Being, and our 
 Underftandingsare all finite. We may as rea- 
 fonably think, that we can contain the Ocean 
 in a fmall Shell, as thmk we can fully and 
 adequately comprehend the Nature of God 
 in our lliallow Underflandings. The Obi^d 
 is wonderfully too great for us; and there- 
 fore if we will be too curious and inquifitivc, 
 jtisbutjuft, and unavoidably neceflaty, that 
 
 we 
 
314 ^^ ufual Plea or Apology for 
 
 we be entangled in our own Nets. God only 
 knows his own Nature, and we know no 
 more of it than he reveals to us, and there- 
 fore we have no more to do, but to believe 
 what we are certain he hath reveal'd ; and 
 tho' we cannot comprehend what he hath 
 reveal'd concerning himfelf, nor reconcile it 
 with our fhallow Reafon, yet we' know our 
 Reafon was never given us for that Purpofe ; 
 we know there is an infinite Difproportion 
 between the Obje(ft, and the Faculty that is 
 to be employed about it. And tho' we can- 
 not fatisfy our felves in our Speculations con- 
 cerning God, yet we have ftrong Reafon to 
 believe, that our being not fatisfy 'd doth ra- 
 ther proceed from the Greatnefs of the Ob- 
 jeil, and the Weaknefs of our Underftand- 
 ing, than from any Inconfiftency or Unintel- 
 ligiblenefs of the Thing it felf 
 
 But then, when we come to talk of Tran- 
 fubftantiation, it is quite another Matter. 
 This is a juft Obje(5l of Senfe, nay, an Ob- 
 jedl of all the five Senfes. If we can judge 
 of any Thing in the World, fure we may 
 judge of the Reality of a Piece of Bread, 
 or of a Cup of Wine. All Things that fall 
 under our Senfes, we are certainly competent 
 Judges of, or elfe we muft fufpend all man- 
 ner of Determination concerning Things to 
 the End of the World. 
 
 Never therefore let the Romanijis fay, that 
 our not being able to give an Account of 
 the Trinity, is as much an Argument againfl 
 
 the 
 
TranfubJiantiaUony anfwerd. 315 
 
 the Truth of that Myftery, as oar not being 
 able 'to give an AccoQflr of Tranfubftantia- 
 tion is an Argument againfl that: for you 
 fee there is an infinite Difparity in the In- 
 ftances. If the Nature of God fcH under 
 our Senfe^, and was to be judged of by thetr^; 
 as all Bodies are, they would argue rights, 
 and we would not conteft againft them ; but' 
 it is quite other wife, God is infinite, and we 
 are finite, and therefore he exceeds our Mea- 
 fure. But the Things that are expofed to 
 our Senfes, they- are like our felves, and our 
 Senfes were given us for the making Judg- 
 ments about' them ; and it would be an Af- 
 front to the God that gave us them, to think, 
 that when we ufcd them as well as. we could, 
 we (hould be perpetually miftaken, as to 
 fome certain Obieds. 
 
 (3.) But Thirdly, and Laftly: The Papifis 
 fet the Trinity againft Tranfabftantiation, 
 and they fay, w-e may as well refufe the 
 one Dodrine as the other, becaufe they are 
 equally againft Reafon, equally contradid:ious. 
 But we utterly deny if, and that upon this 
 Account: We can fhew a great many Im^ 
 poftibilities and Coniradiftions in their Doc- 
 trine of Tranfubftantiation, evident to every 
 one that hath common Senfe and Reafon ; 
 and fuch Impoffibilities andContradicflions as 
 they can no ways get clear from, with all 
 the Subtil ties, and Niceties, and Diftindions, 
 that they can make ufe of. But they can- 
 not fliew us any fuch Contradidtions or Im- 
 poffibilities 
 
3 1 6 T^he ujual Plea or Apology for^ &c. 
 
 poffibilities in the Do6lrine of the Trinity, 
 how myfterious and incomprehenfible foever 
 it be counted; no, nor in any other Myftery 
 of Chriftianity. There is no Doctrine re- 
 veai'd byChrift, but we can, from Scripture, 
 give fuch an Account of it, as that no Man 
 can charge any Abfurdity upon it. Tho' 
 we cannot prove it by Reafon, yet when 
 God hath once reveal'd it, we can prove 
 that it is not contrary to Reafon. 
 
 And there is this Thing further to be faid 
 about the Trinity, That how intricate and , 
 contradidious foever the Papifts account it, 
 yet it was owned and beheved, for fome 
 Ages, by the wifeft and mod learned of the 
 Heathens themfelves j and even by feveral of 
 thofe who were the bittereft Enemies of 
 Chriftianity. Now thefe, fure, did not think 
 it againft Reafon, but highly agreeable to it. 
 But the Romamjis cannot fay this, nor any 
 thing like it, for their Dodtrine of Tranfub- 
 ftantiation ; for I dare challenge any of them 
 to fhew when, or where, either Pagan, or 
 Turk, or Jew, or any one but a Papiji, did, 
 or could believe fo abfurd a Do6trine, as that 
 of Tranfubftantiation is. 
 
 But I have faid enough upon this Point. 
 Conjidcr what you have heard, &c. 
 
 SERMON 
 
317 
 
 SERMON XIV. 
 
 Concer7img the Adoration of theHoJl, 
 
 The fifth Sermon on the fame Text. 
 
 I COR. xi. 23, 24, 25. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord that which 
 lalfo deliver d to you, that the Lordjefus^ 
 the fame Night in which he was betrafd, 
 took Bread : 
 
 And when he had given Thanks, he brake it, 
 and f aid, take, eat : this is my Body, which 
 is broken for you : this do in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 After the fame manner alfo he took the Cup, 
 when he had fupped, faying, This Cup is 
 the New Tefiamejit in my Blood : This do 
 ye, as oft as ye drifik it, in remembrance 
 of me. 
 
 HAT Patience of yours which 
 hath been exercifed with fe- 
 veral Difcourfes upon this 
 Text, I beg once more to 
 try, and then I fliall difmifs 
 the Argument. 
 
 That which led me to pitch upon this 
 Text was, the fair Occafion it gave me to 
 
 enquire 
 
1 8 Concernt7ig the Adoration of the Hoji. 
 
 enquire into the Dodlrine and Practices of 
 the prefent Roman Church, touching the 
 Sacrament of the Lord's Supper : For here 
 we have a {landing Rule laid down, by 
 which the Pradlice and Doctrines of all 
 Churches in this Matter are to be tried ; 
 and that is, the Agreeablenefs or Conformity 
 of them to what the Apoftles firft received 
 of the Lordy and afterwards delivered unto 
 the Church. By this Teft, we meant to 
 examine the prefent Roman Cacholick Tenets 
 about the Sacrament ; and thofe we have 
 already examined, I doubt nor, appear to 
 you fo far from being Apoftolical, or Catho- 
 lick, or Chriftian, that they are quite con- 
 trary > that is to fay, are fuch as were not 
 only not known to the Apoftles, and the pri-^ 
 mitive Churches of Chrift, for feveral Ages, 
 but perfectly contradictory to what was then 
 taught and pradtifed ; and befides that, are 
 againft all Senfe and Reafon. 
 
 Becaufe we are a going off from this Ar- 
 gument, I think it not amifs to repeat to 
 you the feveral Points or Articles wherein we 
 accufed that Church, for having departed 
 from the Rule of the Text in the Matter of 
 the Sacrament; for they are really worth 
 your remembering. 
 
 Ten Errors, or Abufes of this Kind, . we 
 charge them with ; the firft Five of which 
 I only named ; the other Five I propofed 
 fully to difcourie of ; The firft Five were 
 thefe. 
 
 I. Firji, 
 
Concerning the Adoration of the Hofi. 319 
 
 1. Firjl^ Their making of feven Sacra- 
 ments necefTary to Salvation, altho' not all 
 necefTary to every one j whereas it can never 
 be proved, that our Saviour ordained any 
 more than two. 
 
 2. Secondly y Their having the whole Ser- 
 vice or Office of the Sacraments in the Latin 
 Tongue, which is a Language which the 
 People do not underfland, and by which, 
 consequently, they cannot be edified ; which 
 kind of Pracflice is, for that Reafon, con- 
 demn'd by St. Faiil in the fourteenth Chap- 
 ter of his firft Epiftle to the Corinthians. 
 
 3. Thirdly y The Prieft's muttering the 
 Words of Confecration to himfelf, fo as 
 that none of the Congregation fhall hear 
 what he fays, which is without any Prece- 
 dent in ancient Times. 
 
 4. Fourthly, Their making the Prieft's 
 good Intentions necefTary to the Efficacy of 
 the Sacrament ; tho' he pronounce the Words 
 of Confecration, yet if he intend not to 
 make the Body and Blood of Chrift in his 
 Mind, there is no Body and Blood made, and 
 confequently all they who come to receive, 
 tho* they come never fo worthily and devout- 
 ly difpofed, yet they receive no Sacrament. 
 
 Wt 
 
2 o Co7tcern hig the Ado7^ation of the Hojl. 
 
 5. Fifthly^ The Multitude of Sacraments 
 or Mafles which they allow to be perform'd 
 ill the fame Church on the fame Day, nay, 
 even at the fame Time; and this at the In- 
 ilance of any one who will be at the Charge 
 of buying them. The Price indeed is not 
 much more than Twelve-pence a Mafs; but 
 yet it is a vile Diflionour to, and Proftitu- 
 tion of the bleffed Sacrament of our Lord's 
 Body and Blood. 
 
 Tho' thefe Errors and Corruptions be 
 great enough, yet the other Five, which I 
 was to infiit upon more largely, do far ex- 
 ceed them ; fo grievous they are, that if the 
 Church of Rome be found guilty of any one 
 of them, no Man, that reads the Scripture, 
 can believe that the Sacrament, as they hold 
 it, can be the fame with that which our Sa- 
 viour inftituted. 
 
 FlrJ}^ The Firfl: is, That whereas in every 
 Mafs that is faid in their Church (and there 
 are every Day faid many Thoufands) they 
 have a Sacrament, yet there is none com- 
 municates but the Prieft ; fo that here is 
 every Day, in the Church of Rome^ a Com- 
 munion without a Communion. 
 
 Secondly, That at thofe folemn Times, 
 when they will allow the People to com- 
 municate with the Priefl in the Holy Sacra- 
 ment. 
 
Conce7^ning the Adoration oftheHoJi, 321 
 
 ment, yet they rob them of half of it ; for 
 they will not allow any but the Prieft, who 
 then adminifters, to receive the Cup : fo 
 that here, tho' there be a Communion, yet 
 it is but half of that Communion which our 
 Saviour inftituted. 
 
 I'hirdly^ They have transformed the Sa- 
 crament into a Sacrifice; whereas the only 
 Myftery of it confifts in this, That therein 
 Chrift gives his Body and Blood, in a fpiritual 
 Manner, to be fed upon by us; they have 
 made a new Bufinefs of it: For in every 
 Sacrament they pretend to offer up to God 
 our Saviour's very Body and Blood, as a true, 
 proper Sacrifice propitiatory, both for the 
 Quick and the Dead. 
 
 Fourthly^ Whereas in this Sacrament, ac- 
 cording to our Saviour's Inftitution, there is 
 a material Part, and a fpiritual ; the Sign, 
 and the Thing fignified ; the Bread and Wine 
 to be received for our bodily Suftenance, and 
 the Body and Blood of Chrift for the Food 
 of our Souls; they have quite taken away 
 the former from us by their Dod:rine of 
 Tranfubftantiation, which teacheth, Thar, 
 after the Prieft hath faid the Words of 
 Confecration, there is no Bread and Wine 
 left upon the Table, and confequently none 
 can be received, but all is turned into the 
 very Body and Blood of Chrift, 
 
 Vol, VII. Y Fifthly, 
 
32 2 Concerning the Adoration of the Hoji. 
 
 Fifthly, and Lajlly\ This Bread, as we are 
 apt to call it, which we receive and eat, 
 they require us to worship and adore as God 
 
 Almighty. 
 
 Thefe are the Points and Articles in which 
 we accufe the Church of Rome to have grie- 
 voufly corrupted and depraved the Chriftian 
 Dodrine and Pradice in this Matter of the 
 Sacrament. 
 
 As to the four Firft of them, I have al- 
 ready fully made good this Charge againft: 
 them ; the laft Article only remains to be 
 fpoken to, which I {hall now difcufs as briefly 
 and plainly as I can. 
 
 The Thing then, to be enquir'd into at 
 this Time, is, Whether the Romanijis do not 
 grievoufly amifs, and are guilty of a great 
 Corruption in this Matter of the Sacrament, 
 when they give to it the very fame Wor- 
 ship that they give to God, and oblige all 
 thofe who fhall be of their Communion to 
 do the fame : That this is their Pradice, no 
 Papift can deny; that it is the Dodtrine and 
 Command of their Church, the Council of 
 I'rentj to which all their Priefts are fworn, 
 will, in exprefs Words, affurc us. After 
 that Council hath declared. That, by the 
 Words of Confecration, the whole Subftance 
 of the Bread is turned into the Subftance of 
 tlie Body of Chrift, and the whole Subftance 
 of the Wine into the Subftance of the Blood 
 
 of 
 
Concerning the Adoration of the Hojl, 323 
 
 of Chrift, there immediately follow thefe 
 Words : " It is not therefore to be doubted, 
 " but that all faithful Chriftians fliould give 
 " to this Sacrament, that higheft Worfhip 
 " called Latriuj which is due to the true 
 " God." And whoever affirms otherwife, 
 is, by a Ca?jo?i of that Council, pronounced 
 accurfed: And this Worfhip they give to the 
 Hoft [viz. that round Wafer which we call 
 the confecrated Bread) not only at the Time 
 of receiving it, but whenever it is carried 
 about in the Streets. All PafTengers are then, 
 by the Sound of a Bell, admonifhed to pay 
 their Worfliip and Devotions to the God 
 that paffeth by them ; and if any one fhall 
 fay, that this Practice of theirs is not al- 
 lowable, and that they are idolatrous for fo 
 doing, he is, in the fame Carion^ pronounced 
 accurfed. 
 
 That this kind of Worfhip was ever com- 
 manded by our Saviour, or given by the 
 Apoftles, or allowed, or fo much as thought 
 on in their Times j as there is nothing in the 
 Holy Scriptures from whence we may ga- 
 ther it ; fo there is enough in the Nature 
 and Contrivance ofChriftianity, from whence 
 we may plainly gather the contrary. 
 
 Can it be imagin'd, that that Religion 
 which doth fo ftridtly forbid all Idolatry, 
 fhould fet up a God to beworfhipped, which, 
 to all thofe that will believe their Senfes, can 
 appear no other than an Idol, bccaufe it ap- 
 pears a mere Piece of Bread : That the Ca- 
 
 Y 2 tholick 
 
324. Concermmg the Adoration of the Hoji, 
 
 tbolick Church of Chrift, in the firft Ages, 
 had no fuch kind of Wor{hip, befides a pro- 
 found Silence of Antiquity concerning it, we 
 have this undeniable Argument, That the 
 Pagans would have hit them in the Teeth 
 with it, whenever the Chriftians reproved 
 them for their many Idols ; but yet we do 
 not find that ever they did. All the Wri- 
 tings of the Chriftian Fathers are full of In- 
 ved:ives againfl the Heathen Idolatry ; they 
 take a great deal of Pains to expofe the Folly 
 and Ridiculoufnefs of giving Divine Wor- 
 ihip to that which is but a Creature, or that 
 which is the Work of Man's Hands. Now, 
 with what Face could they do this, if, at the 
 fame time, they were guilty of the fame 
 Practices ? And tho' we fhould fuppofe that 
 they could fatisfy themfelves with this, That 
 what the Pagans worihipped were real Idols 
 and falfe Gods, but that which they wor- 
 fliipped was Jefus Chrift the Son of God, un- 
 der the Form of Bread ; I fay, tho' they 
 might fatisfy themfelves with this, yet how 
 would this fatisfy the Pagans? By them a 
 Piece of Bread would ftill be thought a 
 Piece of Bread, however the Chriftians fan- 
 cied it was God Almighty. If a Pagan had 
 been prefent at one of the Chriftian Affem- 
 blies, and at the Elevation of the Hoft had 
 feen them all fall down, and worfhip, would 
 not he think that he had every jot as great 
 P.eafon to reproach them for adoring a Piece 
 of Bread, as they had to reproach him for 
 
 adoring 
 
Co7icer7zing the Adoratio72 of the Hoji. 32:; 
 
 adoring the Sun, or Moon, or this^ or the 
 other Image ? Minutim Fcelix^ a very early 
 Chriftian Writer, thus harangues it againft 
 the Pagans. " T/67, fays he, melt Brafs ; 
 " they caft it, they fet it up, and faften it : 
 S It is yet no God. They polifli it, they 
 " adorn it ; neither is it yet a God : Bur, 
 « fee now, they confecrate it, they pray to 
 <* it ; then as foon as Men will have it to be 
 " a God, it is a God." 
 
 Whether now, might not the Pagans re- 
 turn the fame Raillery upon the Chriftians, 
 fuppofing the Pradice we are now fpeaking 
 againft, had been then in ufe ? I give it you 
 in the Words of one of our Divines, who 
 hath mod excellently handled this Subjecft. 
 " Chriftians fow Wheat, they cut, gather, 
 " and threfh it : It is no Chrifl: yet. They 
 " grind it, they fift it, they bake it : it is 
 " Sill but a Wafer. They fet it upon an Al- 
 " tar, they lift it up, they crofs it feveral 
 " times : it is yet the fame it was before. 
 " At laft, they fpeak the five Words of Con- 
 '' fecration ; prefently ten Miracles break 
 " forth ; and among an hundred Wafers, 
 " which are all like to one another, that 
 " which the Prieft pleafeth to think upon, 
 " that is their Saviour." If the Pradice of 
 the Pa2;ans in this Matter was abfurd and ri- 
 diculous, then every jot as much was the 
 Practice of the Chriftians ; and might have 
 been as eafily made appear fo, and would, 
 without doubt, have been macje io^. had 
 
 Y \ ' there 
 
326 Concerning the Adoration of the Hoft, 
 
 there ever been any fuch Pradlice among 
 them. 
 
 But let the Pradllce of the Church be as 
 it will, let us come to the Reafon of the 
 Thing. Were the old Pagans Idolaters or 
 no ? If they were not, why do the Scrip- 
 tures, and all the Chriflian Writers, charge 
 them for fuch ? If they were, it will be eafy 
 to be proved, that they who adore the Hoft, 
 in the bleiled Sacrament, with the Worfhip 
 that is due to God only, are Idolaters as 
 much as they. 
 
 I. For Firft of all. Is it Idolatry to wor- 
 iTiip that for God which is not God ? If 
 it be not Idolatry, then the Pagans were 
 not Idolaters ; if it be, then they who wor- 
 ihip the Hoft with Divine Worftiip are Idola- 
 ters j for certainly that which they worfhip 
 is not God, is not our Saviour, but a Wafer ; 
 a Piece of Bread. It is true, they do not 
 think fo, but we are certain that it is no- 
 thing elfe; as certain as we can be of any 
 thing that our Senfes, backed with the beft 
 Reafon, can report to us. If Ignorance and 
 Miftake in this Matter will excufe the Ro' 
 ma72ijtsy it will alfo excufe the Pagans; if it 
 did not excufe thefe, neither will it excufe 
 thofe. 
 
 2. But Secondly, All the Marks that the 
 Holy Scriptures give of an Idol, and all the 
 Reproaches that they caft upon it, do as 
 
 well 
 
Concsrning the Ado^^ation of the Hojl, 327 
 
 well befit the Popifli God in the Sacra- 
 ment, and as heavily light upon it, as up- 
 on any thing that was worfliipped by the 
 Pagans. It is a Mark of a Pagan Idol, 
 and the reproach of it, that it was made 
 by Men ; (as both the Old and New Tejia- 
 ment are very large and rhetorical in fet- 
 ting forth this.) Why is not the God in 
 the Mafs as much the Work of Mens 
 Hands, as any of the Pagan Idols were ? 
 Nay, baiting the Labour of the Baker, there 
 was none of them ever made fo quickly, 
 and fo eafily as this. For the fpeaking but 
 Five Words, with Intention, doth it. 
 
 Let none be offended that I fay the Pa- 
 pifts make their God, or make the Body 
 and Blood of Chrift ; for it is their own 
 Word, and Solemnity ufed by them. And 
 one of the greatefl Reafons for which they 
 deny our Orders and Priefthood in the Pro- 
 teftant Church is, becaufe we in our Ordi- 
 nations do not pretend to confer a Power 
 of making the Body ofChriJi. 
 
 Furthermore the Penmen of the Holy 
 Scripture think they do not only fufxiciently 
 defcribe and mark out an Idol, but fufficient- 
 ly alfo expofe it to Laughter and Contempt, 
 by reckoning up the many Outrages and ill 
 Ufages it is obnoxious to, and from which it 
 cannot refcue it fclf Now there is no A- 
 bufe of this kind which they reckon up, 
 but the God which the Papifts adore in 
 the Mafs, is every whit as liable to it, as 
 Y 4. anv 
 
328 Concerning the Adoration of the Hojl, 
 
 Gen.xxxiany Pagan Idol in the World. If haban 
 
 '^' 3°' be laugh'd at for ferving Gods which were 
 Stol'n away^ are not they we fpeak of as 
 much to be laugh'd at whofe God hath 
 been fo often in Danger of Thieves, that 
 they have been forced to make a Law, 
 for the fecure Cuflody of him ? If the £- 
 gyptians are reproached by IJaiah for Wor- 
 Thipping that, which at the long run is 
 c. ii- cajl to the Moles, and to the Bats ; are not 
 
 ^" ^°" the Romanifts as much to be reproached 
 for Worfhiping that which is never fafe 
 from the Teeth of the Rats and the Mice, 
 if they can poflibly get at it ? If it be 
 thought a fufficient Argument to prove the 
 Gods of the Babylonians to be Idols, becaufe 
 they were forced to be carried upon Mem 
 Shoulders, otherwife they could not help them- 
 felves, and in the Time of Calamity they 
 were liable to be carried away captive, which 
 
 c. l\% 6. Argument the Prophet IJaiah makes ufe 
 of; will it not be as good an Argument 
 to prove the Hod in the Mafs to h% an 
 Idol, becaufe it is expofed to the very fame 
 Inconveniencies ? They do frequently carry 
 it about from Place to Place, to be Wor- 
 fhipped ; and there is one Day in the Year 
 fet apart to that Purpofe, viz. Corpus Chriji' 
 Day. And if we may believe Hiftory, this 
 Hoft hath likewiie been taken from the 
 Ghriftians, and carried away Captive by the 
 Mahometans, ; ; - 
 
 In 
 
Co?2cerning the Adoratmi of the Hojl. 329 
 
 In a Word, there are many other Cha- 
 radters by which the Holy Scriptures do de- 
 fcribe and reproach the Pagan Idols, which 
 if you will take the Pains to fearch out and 
 apply to the Popi{h God in the Mafs, you 
 will find that they fit the one every whit 
 as exadly as the other. 
 
 3. But there is a fijrther Thing to be 
 faid againfl: the Popifli Hoft, that will prove 
 it in a more True Senfe to be an Idol or 
 a Falfe God, than any Pagan Idol can be 
 proved to be lb. The Pagans^ (as the Scrip- 
 ture chargeth them) made Gods of Silver 
 and Gold^ and Wcod and Stone; yet they 
 were never fo fottifli as to think thatafterthey 
 had formed tliofe Materials into fuch or 
 fuch Figures or Images, and by Confecra- 
 tion had made them Gods ; I fay, they were 
 never fo fottilh to think that by this Con- 
 fecration the Silver, or the Gold, or the 
 Wood, or the Stone, loft their Subftances, 
 and were turned into the true Nature and 
 Subflance of that God they meant to w^^r- 
 fhip. Noj they always believed that what 
 they thus confecrated, ftill retained its for- 
 mer Nature and Subftance, and was no more 
 an Obje^]: of their WorlLip, than either as 
 it was a Reprefentation of the God that 
 they Worlliipped, or as by their Confecra- 
 tion it became a Pvcceptacle, a Moufe, a 
 ilabitation in which the God would pcc?]- 
 llarly voucbfaix; his Prefence. And if this 
 
 Idol 
 
3 3 o Concerning the Adoration of the Hoji. 
 
 Idol or material God of theirs happen'd 
 to be ftolen, or to be broken and defaced, 
 or to be carried away captive : They were 
 far fron^ thinking that the Objedl of their 
 Adoration, the God whom they Worfhip- 
 ped, was either flolen or defaced, or car- 
 ried away captive : fuch Affronts might 
 be done to his Image, or to the Houfe 
 in which he dwelt, but he himfelf was 
 infinitely above all thofe Injuries. This 
 was the Pagan Notion. But thofe we are 
 now dealing with, go upon quite other 
 Principles; fuch Principles indeed as by a 
 Pagan would have been thought to have 
 refledled mightily upon the Honour of God, 
 and have done a great Injury to him. 
 They teach that that Bread of which the 
 Priefl; by Confecration makes Chrifl Jefus, 
 (and fo an Obje<5t of Divine Worfliip,) is 
 turned into the very Subflance of that which 
 they adore. By Confecration it is not made 
 a Reprefentation of our Saviour, or a Lodge 
 or Habitation for him to refide in, but it 
 is turned into his very felf : {o that it is no 
 longer Bread, but the very Body of Chrift^ 
 together with his Soul and Divinity united 
 to it ; (as the Council of Trent exprefleth it.) 
 So that if this, which they make the Objedt 
 of their worfliip (we call it a Wafer, they 
 call it the very Body of Chrijl^ together with 
 Soul and Deity) I fay, if this (hould happen 
 to be ftolen or burnt, or trodden under 
 Foot, or devoured by Vermin s they mufl 
 
 needs 
 
Concerning the Adoration of the Hojl. 331 
 
 needs fay, and they cannot deny, that it 
 is their very Saviour, the Perfon whom 
 they worfhip, that fuffers all thefe Abules 
 and Indignities. The Heathenidi Gods had 
 Power enough to free themfeh'es from 
 thofe Extremities, for it was but quirting 
 their Images or Receptacles, and they were 
 at Liberty. But the God of the Chriftians 
 is in a far worfe Condition, if the Romijh 
 Dodlrine be true; For according to them, 
 after once the Words of Confecration arc 
 faid, and thereby the Subftance of the Bread 
 turned into the Body and Blood of Chrift, 
 it will continue fo to be as long as any of 
 the Accidents of Bread remain; that is to 
 fay, fo long any cf us would think it to 
 be Brend. 
 
 4. But this is not all; let me add this 
 in the Fourth and Laft Place. Though all 
 the Reproaches that are caft upon the Pagan 
 Idols in Scripture, do fall heavily upon the 
 Chriftian Idol in the Mafs (if we may fo call 
 if,) yet there is one Thing for which that 
 Worfliip may be reproached, and which 
 cafts fuch an Indignation upon the Perfon they 
 pretend to adore, that never the like Affront 
 was put by any Pagan upon his God. The 
 RomaJiifIs have no fooner of the Bread made 
 a Saviour, and worfliipped him, but they 
 prefently eat him. Mofi commonly indeed 
 the Prieft only eats Jefus Chrift, but at 
 the mod folemn Times, the People alfo eat 
 him as well as he. Was there ever fuch a 
 
 Thing 
 
332 Concerning the Adoration of the Hojl. 
 
 Thing as this heard ©f in any Pagan Coun- 
 try ? Did ever any Man make a God, con- 
 fecrate him, and then adore him with tiie 
 fame religious Worfhip that he gives fo the 
 fupream God, and then within a Minute 
 fwallow him down, and fend him to thofe 
 Places which are not fit to be named? But 
 yet this is done in the Church of Rome^ 
 every Day. 
 
 CicercOy who was a Pagan himfelf, and 
 knew as much of the Pagan Religion as 
 any Man living did, tells us exprefly in 
 ^ ' ^' his Book De Naturd DearuJUy That among 
 all the Religions of his Time^ there was no 
 Man of any fo foolijh and fottijh, as fo pretend 
 to eat his God. The Egyptians that wor- 
 shipped the vileft of Creatures, yet never 
 dared to eat what they had once Wor- 
 fhipped. But yet this Affront the Romanijls 
 put upon the adorable Jefus our God and 
 Saviour, every time that his Sacrament is 
 celebrated. And I dare fay they are the 
 Firft that ever put this Affront upon theDeity. 
 
 What (liall we fay to thefe Things ? I 
 dare appeal to the moft rude Barbarian in 
 the World, whether, according to all the 
 Reafon he hath, and all the natural Principles 
 he is aded by, whether it be not as high 
 an Injury as he can poffibly offer to God, 
 either to eat and devour that which he 
 Sincerely believes to be God, and hath jufl 
 befDre wor(hipped j or to worlhip and 
 adore that for the fupream God Almigh- 
 ty 
 
Concerning the Adoratlrn of the Hoji, 333 
 
 ty that he thinks he may the next Moment 
 lawfully eat. Either therefore let the Pa- 
 pifts ceafe worfliipping and adoring the Sa- 
 crament, or let them ceafe eating of it. 
 If they will do both thefe againft Senfe 
 and Reafon, againft Scripture, againft the 
 Practice of the Firft and heft Chriftians, 
 we have nothing to fay to them when they 
 would perfuade us to become Catholicks, 
 but what a Mahometan faid long ago. If there 
 be no other Catholick Chriftian Religion 
 but this, it is better for us to continue Pa- 
 gam, or Hereticks, or what you will. Cum Dionyf- 
 Chrijiiani adorant quod comedunt (faid that f^^r^^^s. 
 Arabian Averroes) fit anima inea cum -P^^-iVart.\'. 
 lofophis. If there be no Catholicks, no 
 Chriftians, but thofe who will adore that which 
 they eat, it is better for us to be of the Re- 
 ligion of the Philojbphers. 
 
 But to all this charge of Idolatry in the 
 Matter of the Adoration of the Hoft, the 
 Roman Catholicks think it a fufficient 
 Anfwer to fay this: They do not Worfhip 
 any Thing, nor pretend to worfliip any 
 Thing in the Sacrament but Jefus Chrift, 
 the Saviour of the World ; who, as being 
 God-man, is a true and proper Objed: of 
 the highcft Worftiip. Do we think they 
 would give Adoration to the Hoft if they 
 thought it was nothing but a Piece of 
 Bread ? No, they would abhor it as much 
 as we. But being that they are convinced 
 that Jefus Chrift is there under the Form 
 
 of 
 
334 Concerning the Adoration of the Hojl, 
 
 of Bread, and that after the Words of Con- 
 fecration faid there is no Bread left, but 
 the Subftance of it is turned into the Sub- 
 ftance of the Body of Chrift, they think 
 it not only lawful, but their Duty to give 
 Divine Worfliip to Jefus Chrift thus invifi- 
 bly prefent. 
 
 This is the Sum of what they fay for 
 themfelves. And I think they fay nothing 
 but what is True. They would not perform 
 Adoration to the Hoft, but that they verily 
 believe it is the real Body of Jefus Chrift, 
 and not a mere Wafer, as we call it. And 
 I think likewife, that if it was certain and 
 evident that Chrift's real Body, together with 
 his Soul and Divinity, as they phrafe it; that 
 is to fay, the whole Chrift, God and Man, 
 was prefent at the Table, under the Form 
 of a Wafer, they ought to worftiip him as 
 fuch. 
 
 But then, having granted this, it makes 
 nothing to their Purpofe ; this doth not ex- 
 cufe them from the Guilt of Idolatry, as we 
 charge it upon them: For we have thefe 
 two Things to urge them with. 
 
 Firft of all, By their own Confeftion, all 
 that can render the Worship of the Hoft law- 
 ful, or fo much as excufable, is, the Tranfub- 
 ftantiation that is made of the Bread into the 
 Body of Chrift. But now, tho' the Doc- 
 trine of Tranfubftantiationftiould prove true, 
 yer, for all this, they are not certain that 
 
 every 
 
Concernhig the Adorai ton of the Hojl, 335 
 
 every time they give Adoration to the Hoft, 
 they are free from Idolatry. 
 
 But Secondly, If Tranfubftantiation be 
 not true, but the Bread they v^^orfhip be ftill 
 Bread, then they are as much Idolaters as 
 ever the Pagans were. 
 
 I. Firft of all, Tho' the Dodrine of 
 Tranfubftantiation (hould be true, yet they 
 are not certain that every time they worftiip 
 the Hoft, they are free from Idolatry. 
 
 My Argument is this : The Dodrine of 
 Tranfubftantiation may be true, and yet the 
 Bread and Wine may nor, in every Sacra- 
 ment, be turned into the Body and Blood of 
 Chrift. When they are not fo turned, they 
 who wor{hip them, worfhip a mere Crea- 
 ture, and confequently are guilty of Idolatry ; 
 but when they arc, and when they are not 
 fo turned, no Man living can certainly know: 
 For you are to underftand, that, according 
 to the Romijh Dod:rine, the Bread and Wine 
 are never tranfubftantiated, but by a due 
 Confecration. Now, to the making a due 
 Confecration, there are required three Things ; 
 That the Words of the Confecration be right 
 Jpoken-j that he who fpeah them be a lawful 
 Prieft ; and, laftly, thM the Priefi jpeak the 
 Words with Intentioji and Meaning to make the 
 Body of Chrifl of the Bread. If any one of 
 thefe three Requifites be wanting, there is 
 no Confecration ; and if no Confecration, no 
 Tranfubftantiation ; and if no Tranfubftan- 
 tiacion, no Body of Chrift ; and if no Body 
 
 of 
 
3 6 Concefvtt7tg the Adoratio72 of the Hojl, 
 
 of Chrift, then what is worfliipped is no 
 more than a Piece of Bread i and confequent- 
 ly the Worfliip that is given to it is Idolatrous. 
 
 Now I will appeal to any Man, whether 
 he can at any time, much lefs at all times 
 when he is prefent at Mafs, and worships the 
 Hoft ; whether, I fay, he can be affured that 
 the Confecration is performed with all thefe 
 three Requifitcs ? Can he be affured that the 
 Pried Ipeaks the Words right ? It is impof- 
 fible for him, becaufe he cannot hear them 
 pronounced ; for, by the Laws of that 
 Church, the Prieft is to fpeak the Words 
 in a low Voice j fo that the Standers-by can- 
 not diftindly apprehend him. Can he be 
 affured, in the fecond Place, that the Man 
 who confecrates is a true Prieft ? Before he 
 be certain of this, he muft know an hun- 
 dred Things, which it is impoffible for him 
 to know ; as for inftance, that be was law- 
 fully baptiz'd, that is to fay, with the right 
 Form of Baptifm, and with an Intention to 
 be baptiz'd : As alfo, that he had his Orders 
 from a true Bifhop, and that that Bi(hop ob' 
 ferved the effential Form of Ordination, and 
 did intend likewife to make him a Prieft ; 
 and to make this Bifliop a true Bifhop, he 
 muft likewife have been baptized, and or- 
 dained with a due Form, and with due In- 
 tention, and by him that had due Power : 
 And, to know him that did it to have due 
 Power, the fame Queftion muft be alked 
 concerning ihofe that ordained him-, and fo 
 
 back- 
 
Concerning the Adoratmi of the Hojl, 337 
 
 backward, even up to the Apoflles Times, 
 But then, in the third Place, for the Inten- 
 tion of the Prieft that confecrates the Sacra- 
 ment, how can any Man be aflured of that ? 
 Suppofe the Prieft to be an Atheift, or an 
 Infidel, as there have been many ? Suppofe 
 the Prieft himfelf do not believe Tranfub- 
 ftantiation, as there have been feveral come 
 over to us, who have declared, that even 
 while they continued in that Communion, 
 they did not believe it ; if either of thefe 
 Cafes happen, how is it poffible that the 
 Prieft can fincerely mean, or intend to make 
 the true real Body of Chrift, when he fpeaks 
 the Words of Confecration ? 
 
 Thefe now being the Conditions that are 
 required to the making a Tranfubftantiation 
 of the Bread and Wine ; and thefe Condi- 
 tions no Man living being able to afcertain 
 himfelf, whether the Prieft hath them or 
 no, it remains, that it is impoffible for any 
 Man, at any time to know, whether, at the 
 Sacrament, he worfliippeth Chrift Jefus, or 
 a Piece of Bread ; tho' yet, in the main, the 
 Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation be true. Me- 
 thinks, if there was no other Confideration 
 but this, it ought to abate the Zeal of the 
 Roman Catholicks for their Adoration of the 
 Hoft, fince, even according to their own 
 Principles, they cannot be certain that they 
 do not commit Idolatry every time they 
 pra6life it. 
 
 Vol. VII. Z 2. But 
 
3 3 B Concerning the Adoration of the Hoji, 
 
 2. But Secondly, All this is upon Suppofi- 
 tion of the Truth of the Dodtrine of Tran- 
 fubftantiation. But now, if Tranfubftantia- 
 cion {hould prove a mere Fidtion; if the 
 Bread and Wine in the Sacrament, notwith- 
 ftanding the mod authentick Confecration, 
 ihould ftill continue mere Bread and Wine, 
 and the Body of Chrift ftill continue in Hea- 
 ven, at the Right Hand of God, and not 
 come down hither at all ; what will become 
 of the Roman Catholicks then ? If this {hould 
 be true, are they not Idolaters with a Wit- 
 nefs ? Do they not, in this Cafe, give Divine 
 Worfhip to a mere Creature ? And a con- 
 temptible Creature too ? Certainly they do ; 
 and, according to the Notion that the Scripture 
 gives of Idolatry, and that hath hitherto 
 pafTed in the Church, they are Idolaters for 
 fo doing : Nor is it we only that fay fo, buc 
 feveral of the Papifts themfelves have ac- 
 knowledg'd as much. I will give you an 
 Cofter. Inftance in one of the Jefuits, who aprms. 
 That ^if their Church be mijlaken in the Doc- 
 trine of Tranfubjiantiationy they do, ipfo fadlo, 
 Jl and guilty of j'uch a Piece of Idolatry, as ne- 
 ijer was before feen or known in the World, 
 " For the Errors of thofe (fays he) were 
 " more tolerable, who worfhipped fonie 
 " golden or filver Statue, or fome Image 
 " of any other Materials, for their God, 
 " as the Heathens worftiipped their Gods j 
 " or a red Cloth hung upon the Top of a 
 
 " Spear, 
 
Concerning the Adoration of the Hojl, 339 
 
 " Spear, as is reported of the Lapla?iders ; 
 " or fome live Animal, as of old the Egyp- 
 " tians did ; than of thofe who worfhip a 
 " Bit of Bread, as hitherto the Chriftians 
 " have done all over the World for fo many 
 " Years, if the Dodtrine of Trafubdantia- 
 " tion be not true." So that it feems, by 
 the Confeflion of Papifts themfelves, if the 
 Do6trine of Tranfubftantiation be not true, 
 they are very great Idolaters: But, this being 
 granted, we will make bold to add a fecond 
 Propofition. We arc as certain, as we can 
 be of any thing, that the Dodtrine of Tran- 
 fubftantiation is not, cannot be truej lince 
 it is againft all Evidence of Senfe and Rea- 
 fon: And now let any one that will, from 
 thefe two Proportions, make the Conclufion. 
 
 But, I muft needs fay, there is a more 
 plaufible Apology to be made for the Roman 
 Catholicks in this Matter ; and I will not be 
 fo unjuft to them as to pafs it by in Silence : 
 It is this. " They, indeed, do believe Tran- 
 " fubftantiation ; that is, that the Body of 
 " Chrift is indeed prefent in the Sacrament, 
 " inftead of the Subftance of the Bread ; 
 *' and, upon that Account, they give divine \ 
 " Worfhip to it. But, fuppofe they were 
 " miftaken in their Belief, which they hope 
 " they are not; their good Meaning and 
 " Intention would excufe them from the 
 " Crime of Idolatry : They intend no Wor- 
 " (hip but to Jefus, who is a due Object of 
 *' their Adoration. If, thro* Ignorance, they 
 Z 2 " give 
 
3 40 Concerning the Adoration of the HoJJ. 
 
 " give that Worfhip to a Creature, think- 
 " ing, it to be Chrift Jefus; it is true, they 
 " are miftaken ; but they are no more Idola- 
 " ters upon account of that Miftake, than 
 " a Man would be thought a Traytor to his 
 " Prince, that, through Ignorance, {hould 
 " take a Courtier for the King ; and kneel 
 *' down, and pay fuch Refpedl to that Cour- 
 " tier, as were only due to the King." 
 
 It is true, this is very plaufibly laid. But 
 I defire Leave briefly to reprefent thefe two 
 Things, which will {hew how infufficient 
 this Plea is for the clearing the Roman Ca- 
 tholicks in the Matter we are now fpeak- 
 ing of. 
 
 ( I.) Firfl: of all. This that they fay for the 
 freeing themfelves from Idolatry in the Mafs- 
 Worfliip, goes upon a perfe(^ly falfe Foun- 
 dation. It fuppofeth, that Idolatry cannot 
 be committed where a Man is miftaken in 
 the Objedt that he adores. If a Man, in- 
 tending to worfhip the fupreme God, fhould 
 give divine Worfhip to that which is not 
 God, yet thinking it to be God, this Worfhip 
 of his is not idolatrous ; for tho' he be mis- 
 taken in the Objedt, yet his Meaning is right 
 and good : This is the Ground they proceed 
 upon. 
 
 But it is not only falfe, but the dirccft con- 
 trary is true. There was never any ferious 
 Idolatry in the World, but it was fouaded 
 upon a Miftake ; no ferious Man was ever fo 
 foolifli as to adore that for the fupream God, 
 >• ^ which 
 
Concei'nvig the Adoration of the Hojl, 341 
 
 which he did not believe to be the fupream 
 God ; but yet if that which he worfliipped 
 was not God, he was, for all his good Mean- 
 ing, counted an Idolater. I do not think, that 
 the Roman Catholicks do more (ledfaftly be- 
 lieve at this Day, that the confecrated Bread 
 is the true Body of Chrill Jefus, than Thou- 
 fands, I might fay Millions of Pagans did be- 
 lieve of old, that the Sun in the Firmament 
 was the fupream, all-wife, all-powerful, eter- 
 nal God: But yet this Ignorance and Miftake 
 of theirs did not fo quit them from Blame, 
 but that by all the Pen- men of Holy Scrip- 
 ture, they are charged with grofs Idolatry in 
 worfhipping the Sun as fuch. If their Er- 
 ror and Mifapprehenfion did not excufc them, 
 it can be much lefs imagined how the Belief 
 of Tranfubftantiation can excufe the Rommi 
 Catholicks: Which will appear more plainly, 
 after I have reprefented this in the fecond 
 Place. 
 
 (2.) We cannot deny, but that Ignorance 
 and Miftake, fo far as it is innocent, and not 
 contracted by our own Fault, will excufe in 
 all Cafes ; and therefore in this Cafe of Idola- 
 try: Bur, as this is certain, that all Idolatry 
 doth proceed from Miftake and Mifappre- 
 henfion ; fo it is alio certain, that that Idola- 
 try will be the leaft excufeable, and have 
 the leaft allowances made for it, that hath 
 the feweft Temptations to it, and the mofl 
 Arguments of Senfe and Reufon againfl ir. 
 
 Z % And 
 
342 Concerjtlng the Adoration of the Hofi, 
 
 And now I will appeal to all the World, 
 whether the Roma?i Catholicks, that now 
 worfhip a Piece of Bread, have not much 
 fewer Temptations to that Worfliip, have 
 not more Arguments of Senfe and Reafon 
 againfl: it, and confequently can lefs pretend 
 Ignorance and Miftake, and therefore are lefs 
 excufeable than thofc among the Pagans of 
 old that worshipped the Sun. The Pagans, 
 without doubt, had more to fay for the 
 Proof of the Sun's being God, than the 
 Roma?i Catholicks have for the Proof that 
 a Wafer is God : Befides, they had no fuper- 
 natural Revelation of God's Will, but were 
 left wholly to the Light of Nature ; and if 
 being prompted by the Principles of their 
 Education, and the Cuftom of all the World, 
 to worfliip a vifible God, what vifible Being 
 in the W^orld was more likely to be he than 
 the Sun ? But are there the fame Things to 
 be faid for the Romafi Catholicks ? No, cer- 
 tainly. They have the Scripture to dired 
 them to the true God ; they have all their 
 Senfes to tell them that a Piece of Bread 
 cannot be he-^ they have their Reafon to 
 affure them, by the Way of Mathematical 
 Demonflration, thatTranfubftantiation is im- 
 poflible J they have twenty Arguments from 
 vScripture to convince them, that the Senle 
 they put upon our Saviour's Words, This is 
 my Body, is not that he meant, but the 
 qiiite contrary. Laftly, They have had Means 
 and Opportunities enough afforded them 
 
 for 
 
C&ncerntng the Adoration of the Hoji. 343 
 
 for the convincing them of their Error, by 
 the continued Alarms and Awakenings the 
 Proteftants have given them, who, for thefe 
 hundred and fifty Years, have declared and 
 teftified againft therii. 
 
 Never therefore let them pretend invin^ 
 cible Ignorance; nor let them fay, that their 
 worshipping the Bread for Chrift Jefus, thro* 
 a Miftake, can be no worfe interpreted by 
 God, than a loyal Subjed's paying his Ho^ 
 mage to a Privy-Counfellor inftead of the 
 King, can be interpreted by the King : For 
 there is nothing alike in the Things. The 
 Countryman, who thus mifplaceth his Re- 
 fped:, is indeed excufeable; but if he had 
 lived at Court, as long as the Roman Catho- 
 licks pretend to have been acquainted with 
 the Scriptures, and to have made ufe of their 
 Rcafon, and yet {hould continue his firft Com- 
 pliments ; all the World would count hini 
 either a Fool, or a Mad-man, or a Knave. 
 
 But thus much let it fuffice to have fpoken 
 of this Point, and of this Text. 
 
 Confider what you haije beard^ and the 
 Lord give you Underflanding w <?// 
 I'bings, 
 
 SERMON 
 
344 
 
 
 SERMON XV. 
 
 Z^^ ftxth Chapter of St. John doth 
 not favour the Popifh DoEirine of 
 Tranfubfiantiation : And the Se?i/e 
 of the Church of England, as to 
 the real Prefence in the Eucharifl, 
 
 JOHN vl. 53. 
 
 ^he?i y ejus faith wtto thenij 'verity, I fay unto 
 you, except ye eat the FUflo of the Son of 
 Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no Life 
 in you. 
 
 Y Deiign now, is to explain this 
 Text, becaufe indeed, it is a 
 Text that needs fome Explica- 
 tion ; and becaufe I am fenfi- 
 ble, there are feveral Perfons to 
 whom it will be very acceptable to have a 
 clear and fatisfadtory Account given of it. 
 
 • .. For 
 
^he Senfe of the Chu7'ch, &c. 345 
 
 For indeed, this is the only Text in Scrip- 
 ture, belides thole Words of our Saviour in 
 the Inftitution, T^his is my Body, that is apt 
 to ftumble thofe of our Communion in the 
 Point of the Sacrament ; it feeming very 
 much to favour the Dod^rine of Tranfub- 
 ftantiation. 
 
 Our Saviour here faith, Except ye eat the 
 FleJJj of the Son of Mariy and drink his Bloody 
 ye have no Life in you. And he adds fur- 
 ther, Whojb eateth my Flejh, and drinketh 
 my Blood, hath eternal Life; and I will 
 raife him up at the lajl Day. For my Flejh 
 is Meat indeed, and my Blood is Drink 
 indeed. 
 
 This is the whole PafTage. What now 
 (fays the Controverfers of the Roman Chnrch) 
 can be more evidently plain, than that in 
 the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the 
 very true Fledi of Chrift is eaten, and 
 his Blood drunk, even in the mod ftrid: 
 literal Senfe ? 
 
 But what if it can be made to appear, 
 that the diredly contrary is evidently plain, 
 viz. That the Words are fo far from ad- 
 mitting fuch a Senfe, as they now fpeak 
 of, that they muft, of Neceflity, be inter- 
 preted of a fpiritual Eating and Drinking 
 by Faith, as we Proteftants contend for ? 
 1 will not deny, but that our Saviour, in 
 thefe PalBges, might poiTibly make fome 
 Allufion to the Sacrament, which he after- 
 wards inftituted j wherein, under the Sym- 
 bols 
 
34^ ^^ ^snfe of theChurch (p/'England, 
 
 bols of the Bread and Wine, he did then, 
 and doth ftill, exhibit to all worthy Re- 
 ceivers his Body and Blood in a fpiritual 
 Senfe ; that is, the Benefits of his Body 
 broken, and his Blood flied upon the Crofs. 
 But this we fay, that the eating and drink- 
 ing of Chriil's Body and Blood, here men- 
 tion'd, is not primarily to be underftood of 
 receiving the Sacrament j much lefs to be 
 confined to it: For Chriftians do truly eat 
 and drink of Chrift's Body and Blood, as 
 k is here fpoken of, by believing in him^ 
 and being united to him by the vital Com- 
 munications of his Holy Spirit. 
 
 But then further : If thefe Words of our 
 Saviour fhould be granted wholly to refpe(5i 
 our Eating and Drinking in the Sacrament, 
 yet it is impoflible they fhould be undcr- 
 itood in that grofs literal Scnfe that the 
 Papifts would obtrude upon us, viz. That 
 in the Sacrament of the Eucharift, we do 
 eat the very real natural Body of Chrift, 
 and drink his Blood, and not Bread and 
 Wine, as our Senfes would perfuade us. 
 
 In fpeaking to this Text, I will obferve 
 this Method. 
 
 Firjl^ I fliall refcue it from the Romijh 
 GIolTes, and fliew, that it cannot poflibly 
 be interpreted any way in favour of Tran- 
 fubftantiation. 
 
 Secondly^ 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Euchariji, 3 47 
 
 Secondly, I fhall give a clear and intelli- 
 gible Account of the true Meaning of it : 
 and alfo fhevv, as far as I am able to judge, 
 in what Scnfe the Church of England doth 
 own the real Prefence of Chriil's Body and 
 Blood in the Holy Sacrament. 
 
 Thefe Points do defer ve the ferious Con- 
 fideration of all the honeft Members of 
 our Church. 
 
 I. Firft of all, agalnfl: the Papifts, I am 
 to (hew, That there is no Foundation for 
 their Dodtrine of Tranfubftantiation from 
 this Speech of our Saviour's, but rather, con- 
 fidering what goes before, and what fol- 
 lows after, there is enough in this very 
 Text, wholly to overthrow that Dot^rine. 
 
 Now to make good this, I oiFer thefc 
 following Particulars. 
 
 I. Firji, It is fomething to our Purpofe, 
 and ougiht at leall to be taken Notice of, 
 that this Text is by fome of the moft 
 learned Papifts themfelves, fo far from be- 
 ing urged as an Argument for Tranfubftan- 
 tiation, that they acknowledge, nay con- 
 tend, that it doth not refpedt the Sacra- 
 ment at a-ll. Several Men of very great 
 Name among them have gone this way. 
 Cardinal Cajetan, upon the Place, gives 
 exadly the fame Glofs that the generality 
 of the Proteftants do. T^o eat, faith he, 
 the Flcjlj of Chrijly and to drink his Blood, 
 
 is 
 
34-8 7S^ Senfeof the Church ^/England, 
 
 ii Faith in the Death of Jefus Chriji: Jo 
 that the Senfe is this. If ye ufe not the Death 
 of the Son of God as Meat and Drink^ ye 
 have not the Life of the Spirit in you. And 
 he afterwards exprelly denies that thefe 
 Words are to be underftood, of eating and 
 drinking in the Sacrament. In this the 
 Cardinal follows St. Augufin, and others 
 of the Fathers : and he is herein followed 
 by feveral of his own Party: but I (hall 
 not trouble you with their Names. 
 
 2. Secondly, It will be hard to Interpret 
 thefe Words of eating and drinking Chrift's 
 Flefh and Blood, in the Popifh Senfe, upon 
 this Account: Chrift here fpeaks of fuch 
 an eating his Fle(h and drinking his Blood 
 as was actually at that Time neceffary to 
 every Man's Salvation. Except ye eat my 
 FleJJjy and drink my Blood, ye have no Life 
 in you. This plainly proves that it was 
 not only of Obligation to all, but of abfo- 
 lute Neceffity to all that heard our Savi- 
 our even then to eat his Flefh, and drink 
 his Blood. But the Sacrament of the Com- 
 munion was not at that time Inftituted, 
 (but at leaft a Year after) nor could the 
 Apoftles, or any then prefent, have the leaft 
 Knowledge or Intimation of fuch an Infti- 
 tution. Either therefore the Apoftles at 
 that time had no Life in them, but were 
 in a State of Condemnation, or thev eat 
 the Flefli of Chrift and drink his Blood, 
 
 even 
 
as to the real Prefence in the Eucharijl, 3 49 
 
 even then when there was no Sacrament 
 in ule J and confcquently could not eat and 
 drink it in the grofs liceral Senfe they 
 would have. 
 
 3. But T^hirdly^ though we (liould fup- 
 pofe a Prolepfis or Anticipation in thel's 
 Words, that is, that though Chrift exprel^ 
 fed himfelf in the prefent Time, yet he 
 meant in the Future , after that the Sacra- 
 ment (hould be Inftitutedj yet admitting 
 this, it would be very hard fo to rcftrain 
 the eating of Chriji's Flejh and drinking 
 his Bloody to eating and drinking in the 
 Sacrament, as to deny or exclude all other 
 Means of doing it. For if we are ftridlly to 
 expound thefe Words of eating and drink- 
 ing in the Sacrament, what will become 
 of thofe who never had Opportunity to 
 partake of Chrift's Body and Blood in 
 fuch Way ? What will become of all bap- 
 tized Infants that die before they come 
 to Years of Difcretion ? Nay, what will be- 
 come of all Perfons grown up, who are 
 cut off by Death before ever they come to 
 the Lord's Table, as God knows there arc 
 abundance in thefe Days ? Why, if thefe 
 Words be to be underftood only of the 
 Sacrament, all fuch have no Life in them, 
 but are in a State of Death and Condem- 
 nation, notwithftanding their Baptifm. It 
 is true this Glofs, as abfurd as it is, made 
 fuch ImpreiTions upon fome Churches in 
 
 former 
 
350 ^^ &;^ of the Church of England 
 
 former Ages, that they thought it as necefTay 
 to give the Comunion to fucking Children, 
 as to Baptize them. But the Church of 
 Rome it felf is too wife, at this Day, to re- 
 tain any fuch Pradice among them. And 
 yet, if their Expolition of the Text be true, 
 I know not how this Practice can be de- 
 nied to be neceffary. 
 
 4. But Fourthly y Let us take our Savi- 
 our's Words in a literal Senfe, which is the 
 Thing they would have us do: yet this 
 will do no Service to their caufe, but ra- 
 ther diiferve it. Their Dodtrine is, That in 
 the Sacrament, the Elements of Bread and 
 Wine, after the Words of Confecration, are 
 turned into the very Body and Blood of 
 Chrift; this they exprefs by the Term of 
 Tranfubftantiation. But now our Saviour's 
 Words in this Chapter, if taken literally, 
 will rather prove, that the Body and Blood 
 of Chrift are turned into Bread and Wine, 
 than that Bread and Wine are turned into 
 the Body and Blood of Chrift. Our Sa- 
 viour in the forty-eighth Verfe of this 
 Chapter, fays, I am the Bread of Life : and, 
 within three Verfes after, he again repeats 
 the Expreflion, 1 am the living Bread that 
 came down from Heaven ; then in the Text 
 he tells ihem, that they mujt eat his Flejh 
 and drink his Blood. How now are we to 
 underftand this? Why he himfelf explains 
 himfelf fuitably to what he had faid be- 
 fore 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Etichariji, 351 
 
 fore in the Verfe following, and gives a Rca- 
 fon of this ft range Command of his. For^ 
 faith he, my Fkjh is Meat indeed^ and my 
 Blood is Drink indeed. Now, if there be 
 any Force at all in this PafTage, as indeed it 
 is the moft forcible of all the reft, then the 
 Words will much rather prove, that Chrift 's 
 Flefh is turned into Meat ; that is, into that 
 Bread he was before fpeaking of, which is 
 a known, common Food for Mankind, and 
 anfwers to the Manna in the Wildernefe; 
 upon occafion of which, all this Difcourfc 
 begun; I fay, the Words will much m^OTe 
 naturally prove this, than that the Bread is 
 turned into Chrift's Body. There is fomc 
 Colour, from the literal Sound of the Words, 
 to make the former Interpretation ; but no 
 Colour in the World for the latter, but ra- 
 ther diredtly the contrary. 
 
 5. But then Fifthly^ Let us take no Ad- 
 vantage of this ; let us allow the Papifts to 
 interpret the Text of eating Chrift's Body, 
 and drinking his Blood, in that very literal 
 Senfe they defire ; but then they will allow 
 us to interpret Chrift's former Words, of 
 his being Bread in the fanje literal Scnfc 
 alfo. If they do, as in Reafon they muft; 
 do, then let us fee what will come of it. 
 According to this Hypothefis, we muft ac- 
 knowledge, with them, that in the Sacra- 
 ment we eat Chrift's very Body, and drink 
 his Blood ; we eat and drink Chrift himfelf: 
 
 But 
 
352 T^he Senfe of the Church t^/'England, 
 
 But then they muft acknowledge, with us, 
 that Chrift is true Bread (for that the Hteral 
 Senfe of his Exprefiions doth as neceflarily 
 require as in the former Cafe;) and there- 
 fore tho' we eat Chrift's Body in the Sacra- 
 ment, yet we eat true Bread alfo. Now, 
 how we can eat Chrift's very Body, and eat 
 true Bread at the fame time, let them that 
 are concerned anfwer it: But I am fure no 
 Anfwer can be given, but what will over- 
 throw Tranfubftantiation ; for that Dodrine 
 will not allow us to believe that we eat 
 Chrift's very Body and Bread at the fame 
 time ; but, on the contrary, it lays it down 
 as an Article of Faith, That, after the Bread 
 is made Chrift's Body, it is no longer Bread, 
 but the Appearance of it. 
 
 6. Sixthly, There is this other Thing in 
 the Text fit to be taken Notice of, which 
 they will hardly be able to come off from. 
 Let us interpret this Saying of our Saviour, 
 of the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament, 
 and grant, that the one is really turned into 
 Chrift's Body, and the other into his Blood ; 
 let us, I fay, admit this; but what will then 
 follow ? Why this ; In what a miferable 
 Condition, upon this Suppofition, are all 
 Lay- People among them, that are never al- 
 lowed the neceffary Means of obtaining eter- 
 nal Life, that are here required by our Sa- 
 viour ? Our Saviour fays exprefly. Except ye 
 eat the Flefi of the Son oj Man^ and drink 
 
 his 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Eucharijl, 3^3 
 
 his Blood J ye have no Life in you. The Laity 
 now, among the Papifts, it mufl be confefs'd, 
 do eat the Fle(h of Chrift in the Sacrament ; 
 but I do afk, whether they do drink his 
 Blood ? If they do not, then they want one 
 half of the Qualification that is required of 
 them, in order to Salvation. For Chrift hath 
 made the Blood as neceffary as the Flefti ; 
 He doth not fay, except ye eat my Flelh, or 
 drink my Blood, ye have no Life in you; 
 but, except ye eat my Flefti, and drink my 
 Blood. Both of them are certainly necefc 
 fary, if the one be fo; and yet every Body 
 knows, that the Cup of the Sacrament is 
 wholly denied to the Lay-People in the Po- 
 pifh Communion. 
 
 Their Dodtrine of Concomitancy, which 
 they have invented, as to this Matter, will 
 not in the leaft help them to get off from 
 this Difficulty: The Dodtrine of Concomi- 
 tancy is this. They teach that the Blood of 
 Chrift, in the Sacrament, is fo effentially 
 united with the Body, that whofoever com- 
 municates but in one Element, whether it be 
 Bread or Wine, doth, upon Account of that 
 Union, really partake of both Body and Blood. 
 But now, tho' this Shift might ferve fome 
 Turn, as to the evading the Words of In- 
 ftitution (tho* there is no colour in the 
 Earth for it) yet, as to this Text, it cannot 
 do them the fame Service. Chrift here fays 
 exprefly. If they do not both eat his Flefh, 
 and drink his Blood, they have no Life in 
 
 Vol. VII. A a them. 
 
354 ^^ Seitfe of the Church ^y^England, 
 
 them. They will allow no other Interpre- 
 tation of thefe Words but this. That the 
 Flefli of Chrift, here fpoken of, is that which 
 formerly was the Bread in the Sacrament ; 
 and the Blood of Chrift is that which for- 
 merly was Wine in the Sacrament. Admit- 
 ting now this Senfe to be true, I appeal to 
 every one, whether it be not as neceflary for 
 every Chriftian to partake of the Cup, that 
 is, of the Blood, as it is to partake of the 
 Bread, that is, the Body; and confequently, 
 what will become of the People that arc de- 
 nied the Cup ? 
 
 7. But Seventhly^ and Laflly, There is one 
 Thing further to be taken Notice of in this 
 Text, that, if all hitherto faid did (ignify 
 nothing, would alone demonftratively over- 
 throw the Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation, 
 fo far as it is grounded upon that Text. 
 As our Saviour faith that, Except ye eat the 
 Flejlj of the Soji of Man^ and drink his Bloody 
 ye have no Life in you. So he goes further, 
 in the next Verfe, and faith thus : Whofo 
 eateth my Flef\ and drmketh my Bloody hath 
 eternal Life, and I 'will raife him up at the 
 I aft Day. The Romanifts now fay, that this 
 Fleili is that which is eaten in the Sadra- 
 ment of the Eucharift, by every Commu- 
 nicant. The Bread and Wine, by the 
 Prieft's Words, are tranfubflantiated into the 
 Body and Blood of Chrift ; and this Body and 
 Blood every Communicant doth receive and 
 
 eat. 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Euchariji. 355 
 
 ear. What now muft we fay? Doth every 
 one that partakes of the Sacrament, partake 
 of eternal Life, and will Chrifl raife him up 
 at the laft Day ? No, without doubt, a great 
 many receive unworthily ; and (hall be fo 
 far from receiving Benefit by their Commu- 
 nion, that it will increafe their Condemna- 
 tion. Here now is the Point: Chrift fays, 
 Whofoever eateth his Flefi^ and drinks bis Bloody 
 bath eternal Life^ and he will raife him up at 
 the lafi Day, The Church of Rome not only 
 confefleth, but contendeth earneftly, that e- 
 very Perfon who receives the Sacrament, 
 eats Chrift's Flefh, and drinks his Blood ;^ 
 (for the Prieft, of the Elements, hath made 
 both the Body and the Blood.) The natural 
 Conclufion from hence is, that every Man 
 that receives the Sacrament fliall have eternal 
 Life: But is this a true Conclufion.? Or will 
 they of the Church of Rome ftand to it ? I 
 believe they will not ; for, if St. Paul may be 
 believed, a Man, in the Sacrament, may eat 
 and drink Damnation to himfelf] as well as 
 Life to himfelf It is mofi: evident therefore, 
 even to Demonftration, that which is eaten 
 and drunk in the Sacrament, is not always 
 that Body and Blood of Chrift which he 
 fpeaks of in the Text ; and confequently, 
 very far is this Text from proving Tran- 
 fubftantiation j which was the Thing to be 
 made out. 
 
 A a 2 II. And 
 
356 Tloe Senfe of the Church of England, 
 
 II. And now, having done this, I come, 
 in the fecond Place, to give fuch an Account 
 of the Text, as will avoid all the Abfurdi- 
 ties that I have now mention'd, which the 
 Popilh Interpretation is obnoxious to; and 
 will fuit and cohere very well with all 
 the Faflages in this Difcourfe of our Sa- 
 viour's. 
 
 And here I defire, in the firft Place, it 
 may be taken Notice of, that our Saviour 
 himfelf hath given us a Key for the inter- 
 preting this Text, and all the PafTages that 
 relate to it : So that we do not make an Ex- 
 pofition to ferve our own Caufe, but go 
 exadly by fuch Rules as our Lord himfelf 
 hath prefcrib'd for the interpreting his Words. 
 This is certain, that whatever Glofs the Ro- 
 mafiijis make upon the Text, Chrift hath, 
 in exprefs Words, forewarned us, that we 
 (hould not take thefe his Sayings in a grofs 
 literal Senfe, but in a myflical and Ipi- 
 ritual One. 
 
 The Paffage is remarkable. In the fixtieth 
 Verfe of this Chapter it is told us. That 
 many of his Difciples, when they heard this 
 fevere Command of eating Chrift's Flefh, 
 and drinking his Blood (taking the Words 
 in a carnal Senfe, as the Papifts now do) 
 'They were much offended, and faidy This is a 
 hard Saying, who can hear it. Now (as wc 
 have it in the next Verfe) when Jefus knew 
 'this in himfelf that his Dijciples muimiired at 
 
 it. 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Eucharijl. 357 
 
 it, he /aid unto them^ doth this offend you ? 
 What and ij ye J}jall fee the So?t of Man 
 aj'cend where he was before^ In thefe Words, 
 our Saviour fecms to chide their Dulnefs, and 
 to endeavour to redify their Miftake about 
 what he had fpoken : This is his Senfe. 
 " You are offended at me for telling you, 
 '* that you muft eat the Flefh of the Son of 
 " Man, and drink his Blood. This you take 
 " in a grofs literal Senfe ; but fure you will 
 " be convinced, that I have no fuch Mean- 
 *' ing, when you fee this Son of Man, with 
 ** his Body and Blood, vifibly afcend into 
 " Heaven, from whence he firft came down. 
 *' Then fure, you will have no fuch carnal 
 " Imagination of eating my very Body, and 
 " drinking my Blood ; for then there will 
 " be no Body to be eaten, nor no Blood to 
 " be drank ; for both will be in Heaven, 
 " and not here upon Eearth." And, left this 
 (hould not give them Light enough for the 
 underftanding the Allegory he had all along 
 purfued, he yet fpake more plainly to the 
 Bufmefs, by adding this further Thing. It 
 is, fays he, the Spirit that quickneth, the 
 FlejJd projiteth nothing. The plain Senfe of 
 which Words is this : *' Tho' you could 
 " really eat my Body or my Flefli in that 
 " grofs Manner that you have taken me in, 
 " yet that would do you no good, as to the 
 *' fpiritual Life of your Souls, that I have 
 '' been all along fpeaking of In every Crea- 
 »' ture that hath Life, it is not the Flelh that 
 
 K -x "is 
 
3 5 8 T^he Senfe of the Church of England, 
 
 " is chewed by the Teeth, that is the Foun- 
 *' tain or Principle of Life in that Creature, 
 *^ but the Soul or the Spirit that animates 
 " that Body : and fo it is as to the fpiritual 
 «' Life of the Soul. It is not my natural 
 *' Flefh, tho' you fhould eat it with your 
 " Mouths, that would profit you at all, in 
 " order to everlafting Life, but it is the Spi- 
 *' rit of God, my Spirit, that goes along and 
 " dwells with all true Believers and Difciples 
 *' of mine, that muft quicken you at the 
 " Laft Day ; muft both produce the fpiri- 
 *' tual Life in you in this World, and continue 
 " and perfect that Life in eternal Glory/' 
 
 And then he thus concludes : 'The Words 
 that Ifpeak unto you they are Spirit, and they 
 are Ltfe ; that is. The Words that I have 
 new fpoken concerning eating of my Flefh, 
 are to be underftood in a fpiritual Senfe, or 
 of a fpiritual Eating and Drinking ; and by 
 that Means, and that only, a true eternal 
 Life is to be cbtain'd. 
 
 Well now, whether fliall we believe the 
 'Romanijls, who would interpret our Saviour's 
 Words carnally, or our Saviour himfelf, 
 who faith, that he fpeaks them in a fpi- 
 ritual Senfe ; and affirms, that the carnal 
 Senfe, if it was pradicable, would really do 
 Men no good? Well, but what is this fpi- 
 ritual Senfe of eating Chrift's Flefh, and 
 drinking his Blood, that is here intended ? 
 To this I anfwer plainly, according to all 
 the Light that the Contexts afford in thi$ 
 
 Matter, 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Euchariji. 359 
 
 Matter. To eat Chrijl's Flefi^ a?id to drink 
 his Blood (as our Saviour fpeaks of it in this 
 Chapter) is no more than to come to him, or 
 to believe in him : for, by both thefe Phrafes, 
 this Term of Eating and Drinking Chrift's 
 Fle{h and Flood, is expounded in this very 
 Chapter. Chrift faith, in the fortieth Verfe 
 of this Chaf)ter, T'his is the IFill of him that 
 Jent me, that every one that believeth on the 
 Son may have everlajiing Life, and I will raij'e 
 him up at the haft Day. In the forty- fourth 
 Verfe he fays, No Man can ccme unto me, ex- 
 cept my Father draw him, and I will raij'e 
 him up at the haft Day. In the fifty- fourth 
 Verfe he faith, tVhoJb eateth my Flejh, and 
 drinketh my Blood, hath everlafling Life, and 
 I will raij'e him up at the haft Day. So that 
 the very fame Promife, in the fame Words, 
 bsing made in the fame Difcourfe to all 
 that believe in Chriji, to all that come to hijn, 
 to all that eat his Fleft?, and drink his Blood \ 
 it is an undeniable Argument, that both 
 coming to Chrift, and believing on him, and 
 eating and drinking his Flepo and Blood, are 
 but feveral Expreliions of the fame Thing. 
 If there be any Difference in the Phrafes, 
 it is this. That the eating Chrift's Fleft.\ 
 and driiiking his Blood, doth more particu- 
 larly refer to his Death, than the other 
 two Phrafes do. 
 
 This, in the general. But, to fpeak more 
 plainly, and to give a more particular Ac- 
 count from the Context. 
 
 A a 4 Chrift's 
 
360 T^he Se7ife of the Church of Engl and, 
 
 Chrift's whole Bufinefs, in this Chapter, 
 doth briefly lie here. The Men that now fol- 
 lowed Jefus, were thofe who had partaken of 
 a late Miracle of his, whereby lie had fed 
 fome Thoufands with a few Loaves and Fi(h. 
 Jefus takes occafion from this to tell them, 
 V. 26. 'That they did not feek him for the Miracles 
 fake J but for the Loaves they had fiared of. 
 And from thence he takes occafion, as it was 
 V. 27. his ufual Manner, to exhort, Not to labour 
 for the Meat that perif^eth, but for that which 
 endureth to everlafiing Life. They afk him, 
 V- 2??- How they might do that ? He anfwers them 
 V. 29. direcftly, the Way was. To believe in him, 
 V. 30. They afk him. What Sign he would give, or 
 what Miracle he would work, that they might 
 believe in hifn : And they urge him to do 
 V. 31. fuch a Thing as Mofes did, that is, to give 
 V, 32, them Bread from Heaven. Upon this Occa- 
 fion, he begins and compares himfelf with 
 that Manna which Mojes gave the I/raelites; 
 nay, fhews how much he excels that, par- 
 v. 49, jo.ticularly in this, that that only continued a 
 iliort temporal Life, but by believing on 
 him, they might get an eternal Life. They 
 y. 4t. murmur at this. He tells them again confi- 
 V. 47, 4.3.dently, He that helieveth in me hath everlafi- 
 ing Lifc'j I am that Bread of Life, viz. That 
 fpiritual Food which will bring Men to it. 
 And, left they fhould be miftaken what kind 
 bf Bread he meant, he explains himfelf 
 ^^ _ more fully, The Bread (faith he) is fny FkfJ\ 
 ivhich I will give for the Life of the IVorld -, 
 
 that 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Euchariji. 361 
 
 that is to fay, I will lay down my Life 
 for the Salvation of Mankind, and this 
 Death of mine, fliall be Life to others; 
 and this Flefli of mine thus Crucified, fhall 
 be Meat to all believers ; fuch Meat as 
 fhall nouridi them up to everlafting Life; 
 and therefore whofoever eats this Flefh of 
 mine thus ofFer'd, and drinks this Blood of 
 mine thus (bed, {hall have everlafting Life ; 
 and I will raife him up at the laft Day. 
 Which is the fame thing as if he had 
 faid " Whoever doth heartily believe in me, 
 *^ and become my Dilciple, and frames his 
 *' Manners, according to my Commandments, 
 " and is fo far from being fcandalized at my 
 " Death, that ftill he adheres to my Faith, and 
 " continues my Follower 5 to fuch an one, this 
 *' Death of mine will procure eternal Life, by 
 " the Means of my holy Spirit which (hall 
 " raife him up at the laft Day. But on 
 " the other hand, unlefs a Man do believe 
 " in me, and become my Difciple, and 
 " even turn my Death and Paffion to 
 " good Nourifliment (how fcandalous and 
 " ignominious foever it be) by a lively 
 " Faith, fo as that he fliall not upon that Ac- 
 " count forfake me, nor be offended at my 
 " Dodlrine, but ftill perfevere, in my Faith 
 *' and in my Service, I fay, except a Man 
 " doth this, he hath no Life in him, nor 
 " will I raife him up at the laft Day. " 
 
 This in ihort, fo far as we can gather 
 from the whole Chapter, and by comparing 
 
 one 
 
36 2 Ihe Senfe of the Church (j/'England, 
 
 one Paflage with another, is the true ge- 
 nuine Senle of our Saviour's Words we are 
 now infilling on 
 
 Thus you fee that the Text is not to be 
 interpreted in a grofs carnal Senfe, as if it 
 was neceflary to Salvation, that every one 
 fliould with his Mouth eat the natural Flefh 
 ofChrift or drink his Blood. It is enough 
 if he do truly believe in Jefus Chrifl: ; that 
 he be his Difciple; that he fo believe his 
 Death as to be conformable to it, by his dy- 
 ing to Sin, and living to Righteoufnefs. 
 This is truly feeding on Chrift's Body and 
 his Blood, 
 
 And tho' we do not deny that one prin- 
 cipal Inftance of eating Chrift's Fle(h and 
 ^ drinking ChrilVs Blood, be by the Means 
 of the Sacrament, yet it is by no Means to 
 ■ be confined to that only. Every true be- 
 * liever that lives according to his belief, 
 doth in every Adl of Religion he performs, 
 eat the Flefh of Chriil: and drink his 
 Blood, for he exercifeth Ads of Faith and 
 obedience to him, and that is the true 
 eating and drinking here mentioned. 
 
 And this is that which St. Aiigiifiin fo 
 often fpeaks of, How^ fays he, fiall I fend 
 •up my Hands to Heaven to take hold of Chrifl 
 fitting there ? Send thy Faith, and thou haft 
 hold of him. Why prepaj'eji thou thy T'eeth 
 and thy Belly '^ Believe, and thou hafi eaten. 
 For this is to eat the living Bread. He that 
 
 believetb 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Eucharijl, 363 
 
 belicveth in CJoriJi^ eateth Chrijl ; he is ifivi- 
 Jiblj fed, becauje he is invijibly regenerated. 
 
 I might produce many more Teftimonies 
 of the Fathers to prove the Orthodoxy of 
 this Proceftant Expofition, if it were either 
 needful or convenient. 
 
 But what then ? Do not we in the Sa- 
 crament truly partake of the Body and 
 Blood of Chrid ? God forbid that any one 
 {hould deny it. There is none that under- 
 ftands any Thing of the Sacrament, but 
 muft acknowledge, that therein, to all wor- 
 thy Receivers, the Body and Blood of Chrift 
 is both given and likewife received by them. 
 This is the Senfeof the C hurch of E?igla?id wh^w 
 (he doth fo often declare that ihe owns ^ 
 the real Prejhtce of Chrljfs Body a?id Bloody 
 to all that worthily receive the Sacrament. 
 Which being a Point about which fo much 
 Duft hath been lately raifed, it will not be 
 amifs if I dwell a little upon this matter. 
 
 There are fome that would bear us in 
 hand, that whatever Exceptions we make 
 againft the Dodrine of Tranfubflantiation, 
 yet in truth the Doctrine of the Church 
 of England, as to the Sacrament, if it be 
 not the fame with that, yet is every way 
 as myflerious, and may be charged with 
 many difficulties and abfurdities. 
 
 The Church of England, lay they, doth 
 exprefly own and profefs the real Pre/hice 
 of Chrift's Body and Blood to all worthy 
 lleceivers : and this very Thing may be 
 
 loaded 
 
364 l^Je^!:ienfe of the Church ^England, 
 
 loaded with as many Difficulties, as the 
 other Dodlrine. 
 
 To this we anfwer. It can be loaded 
 with no other Difficulty at all, but is a 
 plain and intelligible Thing, as the Church 
 of England explains it. We do indeed own, 
 that Chrift is really prefent in the Sacra- 
 ment, to all worthy Receivers ; and in our 
 Communion-Office we pray God to grant 
 that we may eat the Flefi of his dear Soriy 
 and drink his Blood ; and in the Prayer of 
 Confecration, we befeech him to grants that 
 I we receiving thej'e his Creatures of Bread 
 
 and Wine, may be partakers of Chrifs moji 
 blejjed Body and Blood. All this we own, 
 and it is very necelTary we ftiould ; fince 
 the Apofile hath in exprefs Terms faid 
 I. Cor. the very fame Thing, telling us, T^hat the 
 1 a. X. ^read we break in the Communion of Chrijl's 
 Body ; and the Cup ofBle£ing which we drinky 
 is the Cotnfnunion of his Blood. Now fince 
 ,this was the Language both of Chrift and 
 his Apoftles, about the Holy Sacram.ent, 
 and upon that Account the Church, in all 
 Ages, hath retained thofe Terms and Ex- 
 prcffions, there was very good reafon we 
 in our Publick Liturgy ihould retain them 
 like wife. 
 
 But now all the Queftion lies here, In 
 what Senfe thefe Terms, or Phrafes, or Ex- 
 . preffions are to be underftood ? They of the 
 other Communion contend, That the eating 
 Chrift's Flefh, or the partaking of his Bo- 
 dy 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Euchariji, 365 
 
 dy and Blood, is to be underftood in a 
 ftri(5t, literal, proper Senfe. We fay, that 
 the literal Senfe is impoflible, becaufe Chrift 
 could not give away his Body to the Apoftles, 
 while he was alive, with his own Hands; 
 much lefs could he give it to them broken 
 and crucified before he was crucified. And 
 therefore thefe Expreflions are to be un- 
 derftood in a fpiritual, myftical Senfe ; fuch 
 a Senfe as the Apoftles muft be fuppofed to 
 underftand them in, when they received 
 Chrift's Body and Blood from the Hand of 
 our Saviour himfelf They fay, that the 
 Subftance of Bread and Wine is changed 
 into the Subflance of Chrift's Body and 
 Blood ; fo that in the Sacrament, every Com- 
 municant, good and bad, doth not eat Bread, 
 but the very Flefli of Chrift. Our Church 
 faith, ^hat the natural Body and Blood of 
 our Saviour are in Heaven, and not here ; 
 and therefore our giving^ eating, taking the 
 Body of Chriji, is only after an heavenly and 
 fpi ritual Manner, and the Means whereby they 
 are received and eaten is Faith, Thefe are 
 the very Words of the Kubrick of our 
 Liturgy, and of our Church- Articles. You 
 fee here is a wide Difference between us 
 and them : The plain Meaning of our Church 
 is this. In the Holy Communion, as in the 
 other Sacrament of Baptiftn, there is the 
 Sign, and the T'hing fignified -, the outward 
 Fart, or Sign of the Lord's Supper is the 
 Bread and Wine j the inward Fart, or the 
 
 ^hing 
 
366 Tlje Senfe of the Church of England, 
 
 Tl'hing pgizificd, is the Body a7id Blood of Chriji, 
 Now as our Bodies are made partakers of the 
 Bread and Wine^ for their Stre?igthning and 
 KefrcJIiment ; fo (if we receive them worthily) 
 our Souls are made partakers of the Body 
 and Blood and Chriji^ to their Strengthning 
 and Refrefiment. Thefe are the Words of 
 our Church-Catechifm. But then this Body 
 and Blood of Chrift are to be underftood 
 in fuch a Senfe, as a Soul can be fuppofed 
 to feed upon a Body ; or to receive Strength 
 and Nouri{hment by feeding upon it : But 
 now the Body of Chrift can be no other- 
 wife a Food for the ftrengthning and re- 
 frefhing our Souls, than only as the fpiritual 
 Benefits of that Body and Blood, that is to 
 fay, the Virtue and Effeds of Chrift 's Sacri- 
 fice upon the Crofs are communicated to it; 
 nor is the Soul capable of receiving thofe 
 Benefits otherwife than by Faith. So that the 
 Body and Blood of Chrift, in the Senfe of our 
 Church, are only the Benefits of Chrift's 
 Paffion, that is to fay, the Pardon of Sin, 
 and the Grace of the Holy Spirit, and a 
 nearer Union with Chrift ; and our eating 
 and drinking of that Body and Blood, is 
 our being made partakers of thofe Benefits, 
 and the Mouth, whereby we thus eat and 
 drink, that is, the Means whereby we are 
 made partakers of thofe Benefits, is our true 
 and lively Faith. 
 
 This is plainly the Senfe of our Church 
 in this Matter. Ic is certain, (he cannot 
 
 mean 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Euchariji, 367 
 
 mean the Body of Chrift, in any other Senfe 
 than what we have now declar*d, becaufe 
 {he exprefly affirms, That Chrift hath but 
 one Body, and that Body is now in Heaven^ 
 and not here ; and flie declares further. That 
 that Body which we eat is for the Nourijh' 
 ment of our Sou/s, (which the Body of Chrift, 
 in a proper literal Senfe, tho' it were here 
 prefent, could not contribute any thing to.) 
 And laftly, ftie declares, T'hat the Mouthy 
 whereby we partake of this Body, is Faith : 
 which is fuch a Mouth as never was heard 
 of, for the eating a Body truly and properly 
 fo called. 
 
 The Sum of all this is. That when we 
 talk of the Prefence of Chrift's Body in the 
 Sacrament, or fay, that, to the worthy Re- 
 ceivers, the Body and Blood of Chrift is com- 
 municated, we mean no more than this. 
 That the Holy Spirit of Chrift is prefent at 
 every fuch Ordinance of God ; and that 
 whofoever comes prepared with Faith and 
 Repentance, and Devotion and Charity, that 
 Holy Spirit will not fail to apply to every 
 fuch Communicant the very Body and Blood 
 of Chrift broken and flied for us, that is 
 all the Virtue, and all the Benefits and Ef- 
 fedts of Chrift's Sacrifice. 
 
 So that if any one afk you, whether you 
 own the Body and Blood of Chrift to be 
 truly prefent in the Sacrament, your An- 
 fwer to this Queftion muft be by another 
 Queftion. Aik them what they mean by 
 
 thic 
 
j68 Ihe Senfeofthe Church i?/England, 
 
 the Body and Blood of Chrift ? If by thofe 
 Words they mean the fpiritual Prefence of 
 Chrift Jefus, for the conveying all the Bene- 
 fits and Effcdls of his Body, that was cruci- 
 fied, and his Blood that was (bed for Man- 
 kind, to all thofe Souls that do pioufly and wor- 
 thily commemorate his Death by the Sacra- 
 ment, in this Senfe you do, with the Church 
 of England^ own a real Prefence of Chrift 's 
 Body and Blood to all worthy Communi- 
 cants. But if by the Body and Blood of 
 Chrift, they mean the Subftance of his Body 
 and Blood which was taken of the Virgin 
 Mary^ and was crucified and ftied at "Jeru- 
 falem^ and is now at the Right Hand of 
 God, in this Senfe, according to the Church 
 of England, you cannot own any real Pre- 
 fence, but rather a real Abfence : For Chrift 
 hath but one Body, and that Body is in 
 Heaven, and not here, it being againji the 
 *Truth of his natural Body to be in more Places 
 than one at thejame time. 
 
 This now is a plain, and clear, and in- 
 telligible an Account of the Matter. And 
 this I believe, and no other is the Senfe 
 of the Church of England about the real 
 Prefence, (o far as we can judge by her 
 moft publick authentick Declarations. Andi 
 this hath been her Senfe about it ever 
 fince the Reformation ; nay, I may fay it 
 was the Dodtrine of the Church of England, 
 feveral Ages before the Reformation ; as 
 may appear from the Saxon Homilies yec 
 
 extant, 
 
as to the realPrefence in the Eucharijt. 369 
 
 extant, which were read in our Church 
 here, even before the Conqueji. 
 
 I might be very large in heaping up 
 the Teftimonies of our Divines to this Pur- 
 pofe. But I fliall content my lelf with 
 reciting to you only one Paffage of the 
 moft Learned Arch-Bifiop Cranmer, Whofe 
 Words may go further than any other 
 Man's, for the afcertaining and clearing the 
 Senfe of our Church in this Matter, lince 
 he had the principal Hand both in com- 
 piling our Liturgy and our Articles. The 
 Faffage f fpeak of, is in the Preface to 
 his Book againft Bifiop Gardifier. And I 
 fhall conclude with it. 
 
 " Moreover, (fays he) when I fay, and 
 " repeat many Times in my Book, that 
 " the Body of Chrift is prefent in them 
 " that worthily receive the Sacrament, leafl: 
 " any Man fhould miftake my Words, and 
 " think that I mean, that altho' Chrift be 
 " not corporally in the outward vifible 
 " Signs, yet he is corporally in the 
 " Perfons that duly receive them j this is 
 " to advertife the Reader, that I mean no 
 " fuch Thing. But my meaning is. That 
 " the Force, the Grace, the Virtue, and 
 " Benefits of Chrift's Body that was cru- 
 " cified for us, and of his Blood that was fhed 
 " for us, be really and effedually Prefent with 
 " all them that duly receive the Sacrament. 
 " But all this I underftand of the fpiritual Pre- 
 " fence of the which he faith, I will be wit h^^^^-^^' 
 
 Vol. VII. Bb 
 
 you 
 
 20. 
 
S6 
 
 370 "The Senfe of the Churchy Sec. 
 
 Mat. xviii « ^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^ ^^^ TForld^ and where foever 
 " /'Z£;o (?r /<6rf^ are gat her d together in my Name^ 
 " //6^r^ lam in the midjt of them. And he that 
 " eateth my Flefi^ and drinketh my Bloody duDel- 
 
 John. VI. £< /^/^ jf2 jne, a'/id I in him. Nor no more 
 " truly is Chrift corporally or really pre- 
 " fent in the due Adminiftration of the 
 " Lord's Supper, than he is in the due 
 " Adminiftration of Baptifm, that is to fay, 
 " in both fpiritually, by Grace. And 
 " wherefoever in the Scripture it is faid 
 " that Chrift, God, or the Holy Ghoft is in 
 " any Man, the fame is to be underftood 
 " fpiritually, by Grace." 
 
 Thefe are the Words of that Excellent 
 Bifliop and Martyr, and there needs no- 
 thing to be added to them. 
 
 I pray God give us all Grace both in the 
 Sacrament y and in all our ABs of Re^ 
 ligious Worflnpy and in our whole Con- 
 verfationj Jo to eat the Flefi of Chrijiy 
 and drink his Bloody that we may have 
 eternal Life abiding in us, and by his 
 Spirit may be raifed up at the laji Day. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
371 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The Letter which occa- 
 fiond the joUowiyig A n- 
 s w ER. 
 
 To the Revere?2d Dr. Sharp. 
 
 Reverend Sir, March i. 1686-7. 
 
 " XF you can prove to me, Thar Chrill 
 " J^ hath no infallible Church upon Earth, 
 ** or if you can give me a Catalogue of hue 
 " one Man in an Age that profeiTed the 
 " fame Faith the Church of Eiigla?id now 
 ** embraces, from our Saviour's Time till 
 " nov^^, I will promife you to be no Roman 
 " Catholick. So begging your Pardon for 
 ** giving you this Trouble, I take Leave to 
 *' fubfcribe my felf, Sir, 
 
 Tour humble Servant, 
 
 Ali: Kingesmill. 
 
 « P. 5. What Church holds all theThirty- 
 " nine Articles of the Church of England'^ 
 
 B b 2 Uh 
 
372 Appendix. 
 
 His Answer. 
 
 Madam, 
 
 N the Bufinefs wherein you have con- 
 cern'd me with you, you feem to have 
 forgot what is your Part, and what is mine. 
 You tell me, you were bred up in the Church 
 of England^ which Church denies the In- 
 faliibihty of the Roman Church ; now, if 
 any Arguments have been ofFer'd you, which 
 {lartles you in that Point, and feem to you 
 to prove that Chrift hath an infalHble Church 
 on Earth, and that the Church of Rome is 
 that Church ; your Province is, to acquaint 
 me with thofe Arguments that do thus unfet- 
 tle you ; and my Part is, to endeavour to 
 give you Satisfaction about them : But now, 
 you turn the Tables, and require of me to 
 prove to you, that the Church is not infalli- 
 ble. Thofe that diredled you to proceed 
 thus, know very well, that this is not fair 
 Dealing ; and fince it is their Side that main- 
 rain the Affirmative, namely. That theChurch 
 of Rome is infallible, they ought to prove it, 
 and not put it upon us, who deny it, to prove 
 a Negative: So that all the Anfwer that I 
 need to return to this Propofition of yours, 
 is, to make another to your Friends ; and 
 that is, That if any of them can prove to 
 me, diat tlie Church of Rome is infallible, 
 
 I will 
 
Appendix. 
 
 I will not only give my Confent that you 
 fhall be a Roman Catholickj but I will be 
 one my felf. 
 
 As for the next Thing you put upon me, 
 "j/zs. To give you a Catalogue of but one 
 Man in an Age, that profefTed the fame 
 Faith the Church of E?jgland now embraces, 
 from our Saviour's Time till now. To that 
 I give you this Anfwer, That whenever your 
 Friends will name one Man, v;ithin the Com- 
 pafs of five hundred Years after Chrifl, of 
 whom it appears that he held, in all Things, 
 according to the Faith of the Church of 
 Rome^ as it is now eftabliilied by the Coun- 
 cil of T'rent^ I will, at the fame Time, do 
 what you deiire of me. 
 
 To the Queftion you afk in the Poftfcript 
 of your Letter, 'viz. What Church holds all 
 the Thirty-nine Articles of our Church, be- 
 fides the Church o^Ejigland? (fo I fuppofe you 
 meant to put it) I return another Queftion, 
 as needful for you to be fatisfied in ; and that 
 is this, What Church in the World holds all 
 the Definitions of the Council of Trent^ be- 
 fides the Church of Romc^ if, indeed, all the 
 Parts even of that Church do receive all of 
 them ? 
 
 Thcfe, Madam, were the Anfwers I drew 
 up to your captious Queftlons, immediately 
 upon the Receipt of your Letter ; and I once 
 thought of fending them thus, without anv 
 further Additions, being fure, that what [ 
 here offer to you, is as reafonablc as what 
 B b ^ vou 
 
 37 
 
^74- Appendix. 
 
 you demand ; and it concerns you as much 
 to be fatisfied by your Friends, in thofe 
 Things that I propofe to you, as it concerns 
 you to be fatisfied by me in thofe Things 
 you have propofed to me. But, upon fe- 
 cond Thoughts, that you might not think 
 that I have a Defign to ufe you, as I per- 
 ceive your Friends do, that is, only to amufe 
 and blunder you, and not to inftrud: you ^ 
 I was refolved to employ my firft Leifure in 
 looking over your Paper again, and giving 
 you, as plainly as I could, my Senfe of it ; 
 and that is the Reafon you flay a Day or 
 two longer for my Anfwer. 
 
 Your firft Demand is, to prove to you, 
 That Chrift has no infallible Church upon 
 Earth. Madam, tho' it be not ufual, as I 
 faid, to put People to prove Negatives (the 
 Proof always lying on the Affirmer's Side, 
 it being fufficient to fatisfy one, that a Thing 
 is not ; that there is no Proof or Reafon for 
 the Being of it) yet I (hall, for once, fo far 
 comply with you, as to offer you fome of 
 my Reafons, why I do not believe thatChriil: 
 hath any Church upon Earth abfolutely, and 
 in all Things infallible, or infallible in that 
 Senfe in which the Romanijis do ufually at- 
 tribute Infallibility to their Church. 
 
 And my firft Reafon is. That if Chrift had 
 meant that there fliould be alv/ays an infal- 
 lible Church upon Earth, I cannot but be- 
 lieve, that it would have been fome- where 
 f r other exprefly told us in the New Tejia- 
 
 ment^ 
 
Appendix. ^JS 
 
 menfj both that there was an Infallibih'ty 
 lodged in the Church for ever; and likewife, 
 in which, of ail the Churches in the World, 
 this Infallibility was lodged ; that fo, upon 
 all Occafions, Chriftians in all Ages, might 
 know where to have Recourfe to that infal- 
 lible Church : But now, this nor being done 
 in the whole New T^cjiamcnt^ neither by our 
 Saviour, nor by his Apoftles ; it is an Argu- 
 ment to me, that no fuch Thing was ever in- 
 tended by them. Your FriendjB here, mufl: not 
 think to put us off with, T^hou art Peter, ^c. 
 And upon this Rock^ &c. A?id if he will not 
 hear the Church, &c. And fuch other Texts 
 as thefe ; which, as they have been anfwer'd a 
 thoufand times j fo in truth, to any unbiafs'd 
 Reader, will appear either not to fpeak at 
 all to the Bulinefs of Infallibility, or not to 
 concern any but the Apoftles themfelves. 
 Indeed, I am fo very well aiTured of the 
 Weaknefs of your Scripture-Proofs for the 
 Roman Church's Infallibility, that, I believe, 
 there may as plain Texts of Scripture be 
 produced for the Infallibility of the King, 
 or for the Infallibility of every good Man, 
 or for the Infallibility of any two or three 
 Chriftians, aftembling together in the Name 
 of Chrift, as there can be produced for the 
 Infallibility of the Pope, or of any particu- 
 lar Church. 
 
 My fecond Reafon, why I do not believe 
 that Chrift hath any infallible Church upon 
 Earth, is, becaufe I do not find that any of 
 
 B b 4 the 
 
3^6 Appendix. 
 
 the primitive Churches ever pretended to 
 any fuch Infallibility, no, not the Church of 
 Rome her felf. 
 
 I do not find that, in the Controverfies 
 which arofe in the ancient Church about 
 Matters of Faith, the Guides of the Church 
 ever made ufe of this Argument of the 
 Church's Infallibility for the difquieting and 
 ending of them ; which yet, had they known 
 of any fuch Thing, had been the properefl 
 and the eafieft Means they could have ufed. 
 
 I know that the ancient Fathers had an- 
 other Method of confuting Hereticks and 
 Schifmaticks, than by appealing to the 
 Church's Infallibility, namely, by bringing 
 their Dodtrines to be tried by the ancient 
 Ufages and Traditions of the Apoftolick 
 Churches j and efpecially by th& Divine 
 Oracles of the Scriptures, which they look'd 
 upon as the entire and only Rule of Faith. 
 
 I know further, as to the Church of 
 Rome^ that, by what appears by the Car- 
 riage and Behaviour of other Churches in 
 the primitive Times towards that Church, 
 in Matters where they were concern'd toge- 
 ther, it mufl: be thought impolTible that 
 ihcfc Churches (hould ever have entertain'd 
 any Opinion, or fo much as Imagination of 
 the RavjiJJo Church's Infallibility, they ma- 
 king no Scruple, whenever there was Occa- 
 iion, to oppofe the Senfe of that Church as 
 vigoroufly, as they either did, or could op- 
 
 poio 
 
Appendix. 3yy 
 
 pofe any other particular Church that dif- 
 fer 'd from them. 
 
 My third Rcafon, why I do not believe 
 the Do6lrine of the Church's Infallibility, as 
 it is maintain'd by the Church of Ro?7iej is, 
 Becaufe I do not fee any Effefts of this In- 
 fallibility in the World, oi any Good that 
 hath accrued to the Church, which may not 
 as well be afcribed to God's ordinary Af- 
 fiftance of every Chriftian Church, without 
 Infallibility as with it. 
 
 It is faid that, without an infallible Judge, 
 Controverfies that arife among Chriftians can- 
 not be ended : Why, that very Church that 
 pretends to Infallibility, are not yet agreed 
 among themfelves about feveral Poinrs of 
 Religion; nay, this very Bufinefs of Infalli- 
 bility, as to the Seat of it, where, or in 
 whom it is lodged, is yet as great a Con- 
 troverfy among them as any. 
 
 It is faid that, without an infallible Judge, 
 the Scriptures cannot be expounded ; the 
 Senfe of Texts cannot be afcertain'd. Why, 
 I would gladly know, what Advantages the 
 Church of RotJie, that pretends to Infalli- 
 bility, hath in this refpedl above other 
 Churches that pretend to nofte ? Do they 
 underftand the Scriptures better than we, or 
 have they clear'd or fettled the Senfe of buf 
 one doubtful Text, by the Power of their 
 Infallibility, during all the Time they have 
 pretended to it ? Let them produce one Text, 
 the Senfe of which is, by this Means, afcer- 
 tain'd ? 
 
-27 8 Appendix. 
 
 tain'd ? I believe they will not offer at it' 
 They know, as well as we, that all thofe 
 Texts of Scripture, which were difficult and 
 obfcure at the firft, remain (o to this Day, 
 for any thing that their infallible Judge has 
 done towards the clearing of them. And if 
 the Senfe of any obfcure Paifages in thofe 
 holy Books, be more clear'd, or better af- 
 certain'd to us, than they were formerly j 
 no Thanks for this to an infallible Judge, 
 but to fallible Commentators, whofe Learn- 
 ing and Induftry, through the Bleffing of 
 God, have been of great Ufe for the unty- 
 ing of Difficulties of Scripture : Nay, I add 
 this further, That, of all Expofitors of Holy 
 Scripture that I know of, the Popes them- 
 felves, who are, by fome, accounted the in- 
 fallible Judges, have been as unlucky as any; 
 and fo far have they been from clearing ob- 
 fcure Texts, that they have miferably per- 
 verted and mifapply'd the plaineft, as abun- 
 dance of Inflanccs might be given out of 
 iheir Eplflles, which now make a confide- 
 rable Part of the Canon-Law. 
 
 My fourth Reafon againft any Church's 
 Infallibility, and v/hich, I fuppofe, will be 
 a good Argument with you, is this, Becaufe 
 I can, as 1 think, make it appear, that the 
 Church of Rome (which is the only Church 
 in the World, that I know of, which pre- 
 tends to this Infallibility) hath, herlclf, 
 actually err'd in feveral Points of Faith ; 
 and if fo, it is impoffible that ihe (hould al- 
 ways 
 
Appendix. 379 
 
 ways have been infallible. This, I hope, 
 is a convincing Reafon againfl theChurch of 
 Romes Infallibility j and, provided your 
 Friend will fairly anfwer my three fore- 
 going negative Proofs, by {hewing that I 
 have mifreprefented Things, as to this Mat- 
 ter ; and that it may be proved from Scrip- 
 ture, and from ancient Church- Authority, 
 and from Effeds vifible in the World, That 
 Chrift always hath an infallible Church up- 
 on Earth; then I promife to join Iffue w^ith 
 him upon this laft Point, and to make out, 
 That the Church of Rome cannot be that 
 infallible Church, becaule (he hath adually 
 erred. 
 
 The Realbns of this my AlTertion are 
 thefe : If the Scriptures be infallible, then 
 the Church of Rome hath adtually erred, be- 
 caufe fhe hath in many Inftances, both of 
 Podlrine and Pra6ticc, departed from the 
 Holy Scriptures. 
 
 Again : If the Church of the primitive 
 Ages was infallible, then the Church of 
 Rome hath acftually err'd, becaufe the Church 
 of Rome now holds Doctrines which the pri- 
 mitive Church, nay, and the Roman Church it 
 felf, difown'dand rejedcd; and, on the other 
 fide, the Church of Rome now rejeds and dif- 
 owns Dodrines which the primitive Church, 
 and the Church of Rome her felf, in thofe 
 Days, own'd a; d believ'd: So that either 
 the ancient Church was not infallible, or 
 the prefent Church is not fo ; however, the 
 Church of Rome hath little Pretence to it. 
 
 Atrain : 
 
380 Appendix. 
 
 Again: If it can be made to appear, that 
 one Pope hath declar'd himfelf contradi6lo- 
 rily to another Pope, in Matters of Faith ; 
 or, that one Council, confirm'd by the Pope, 
 hath contradicted another Council, confirm- 
 ed by the Pope, and that too in Matters of 
 Faith, as one of the Councils themfelves ac- 
 counted them ; then, I fuppofe, you will 
 grant, that the Church of Rome hath actually, 
 at fome time or other, erred ; the higheft 
 Authority in that Church maintaining Things 
 contradictory to one another, unlefs you will 
 fay, that contradictory Propofitions may both 
 be true : But now this we are ready to make 
 our, when there is Occafion. 
 
 I have dwelt the longer upon this Bufinefs 
 of Infallibility, becaufe I remember you told 
 me, that this was the main, if not the only 
 Point, you defir'd to have fome Difcourfe 
 about. 
 
 As for the other Thing in your Letter, 
 about One in an Age prof ejfmg the Faith of the 
 Church of England, how that came to be 
 tack'd to the other, you your felf beft know ; 
 however, I will give you my Anfwer as 
 briefly as I can to that part of your Letter, 
 from whence you your felf may be able to 
 frame an Anfwer alfo to the Queftion in 
 your Poffcript. 
 
 You fay, That if I can give you a Cata- 
 logue of but one Man in an Age that pro- 
 fefs'd the fame Faith the Church of England 
 
 now 
 
A ? r fe N D 1 X. 381 
 
 now embraceth, from our Saviour's Time 
 till now, you promife you will not be a 
 Roma?i Catholick. 
 
 Madam, The Faitli of the Church of 
 Englafid, is that common Faith that was 
 once deliver'd to the Saints, and was puc 
 into Writing by the Apoftles, and other in- 
 fpired Men, and is fummarily contain'd in 
 the ancient Creeds of the Church. It is 
 that Faith into which all Chriftians, in all 
 Ages, of the Church, were baptiz'd ; and 
 which, in ancient Times, was thought fuf- 
 ficient to carry a Man to Heaven, if he 
 lived according to it. And iaftly. It is that 
 Faith which is at this Day own'd by the 
 Churcii of Rome her felf (tho' the Hay and 
 Stubble they have built upon, the new Addi- 
 tions they have made to it in the Council of 
 ^rent, without either Authority of Scrip- 
 ture, or Apoftolical Tradition, are deferved- 
 ly rejedled by us) I fay, this is the Faith em- 
 braced by the Church of England. And 
 whereas you only defire a Catalogue of one 
 Man in an Age that profefs'd this Faith, we 
 will be more liberal to you, and give you 
 Catalogues of great Numbers in every Age 
 that lived and died in this Faith ; nay, vi'e 
 are fure that the Apoftles, the ancient Mar- 
 tyrs and Confcllbrs, nay, and all holy Chri- 
 ftians, in all Ages, profefs'd this Faith, ^id 
 never had any other. 
 
 This now, Madam^ being the plain Stare 
 of the Cafe, I hope you will think your felf 
 
 obliged 
 
^82 Appendix. / 
 
 obliged to continue in our Communion, fince 
 you promife that, if I can but give you a 
 Catalogue of one Man in an Age, that pro- 
 fefs'd the fame Faith. 
 
 Why, Madam^ I declare to you (and let 
 your Friend make out the contrary if he 
 can) That every Church, and every good 
 Chriftian, in every Age, from Chrift's Time 
 till now, hath profefs'd the fame Faith the 
 Church of England now embraceth ; for all 
 Churches, and all good Chriftians, have al- 
 ways profefs'd to believe the Dodrines of 
 the Holy Scriptures, and have always pro- 
 fefs'd to believe all the Articles of the an- 
 cient Creeds j and that, I affure you, is the 
 Faith of the Church of England. And I 
 add this further. That it is for this very Rea- 
 fon, that we allow the Church of Rome to 
 be a Part of the Church of Chrift, and the 
 Members of it capable of Salvation ; becaufe 
 in that Church, the common Faith is ftill 
 profefs'd, even the Faith of the Church of 
 England', tho' yet with fo great a Mixture 
 of dangerous Errors fuperftruded thereupon, 
 that we, who are convinced of thofe Errors, 
 dare not, for the World, embrace the Com- 
 munion of that Church, fo long as the join- 
 ino; In the Profeffion and Pra6lice of thofe 
 Errors, are made necelTary Terms of that 
 Communion. 
 
 But I expedl that you fhould fay. That 
 by the Faith embraced by the Church of 
 
 England 
 
Appendix. 383 
 
 England (as you exprefs it in your Letter) 
 you meant the Thirty-nine Articles, by which 
 the Church of Engld?jd is diftinguifh'd from 
 the Church of Rome: And you would have 
 me give you a Lift either of Churches or 
 Men, that have always believ'd according to 
 that Faith of the Church of England. 
 
 But, Madatn^ Tho' this Demand or Re* 
 queft might juftly enough be made by us to 
 thofe of the Popidi Communion, with refe- 
 rence to the Articles of the Council of Trefit^ 
 as they are fumm'd up in Pope Pius's new 
 Creed, where the Belief of the Tr^;?/'- Arti- 
 cles are made as neceflary to Salvation, as 
 the Belief of the Articles of the old Creed ; 
 yet it is, by no means, a fair Demand of the 
 Papifts to us Proteftants, with reference to 
 our Thirty-nine Articles j and my Reafon is 
 this, Becaufe we do not look upon all our 
 Thirty-nine Articles to be Articles of Faith, 
 in the Senfe that you look upon the Defini- 
 tions of the Council of Tre?2t to be Articles 
 of Faith. 
 
 We believe fome of our Articles to be 
 necelTary Points of Faith, and thefe are 
 common to us with other Churches. We 
 believe all of our Articles to be ufeful Truths, 
 but fcveral of them are negative Ones, being 
 levell'd againft the Corruptions and Innova- 
 tions of the Church of Rome^ and other 
 prevailing Errors of the Times they were 
 made in. Thefe now, are not ftridly and 
 properly Parts of our Faith, but ruther need- 
 ful 
 
384 A P P E N D I X. 
 
 ful Guards and Securities of our Church 
 againft the dangerous Miftakes in Matters of 
 ReUgion that were then, and are now, too 
 prevalent in the World. 
 
 This very Thing, that I have now reprc- 
 fented, may fatisfy you fully of the Unreafo- 
 nablenefs of your Demand, in the Senfe that 
 I believe you meant it in. You would have 
 us fliew you a SucceiTion of Men, that have 
 always made the Thirty- nine Articles of the 
 Church of Enghifid the Standard of their 
 Faith ; or that have, in all Points, held as 
 the Church of Ejigland doth in her Thirty- 
 nine Articles. Why, Madam^ would you 
 have had Doftrines condemned and caution'd 
 againft, before there were any People in the 
 World held thofe Doctrines ? Would you 
 have had Primitive Fathers and Councils to 
 have made exprefs Articles and Declarations 
 againft the Pope's Supremacy? For inftance, 
 againft the Infallibility of General Councils, 
 againft Tranfubftantiation, againft the Half 
 Communion, and the like, when there were 
 no fuch Opinions or Pradlices heard of in 
 the World. It was the Corruptions and In- 
 novations in the Doctrines of Chriftianity, 
 intraduced of latter Times, and chiefly by 
 r.he Church of Rome^ that gave Occafion to 
 thofe Articles and Declarations of our Church ; 
 but fure you cannot expedt that any Church, 
 or that any Man, Hiould have declared againft 
 fuch Errors in the Church, before they were 
 in being. 
 
 Le5 
 
Appendix. 385 
 
 Let us fupporc, for Inftance, the fecond 
 Council of Nice, which eftablifli'd Image- 
 Worfliip, flioLild, ac the fame time, have 
 condemn'd Mahomet an'ifm^ which, not long 
 before, had begun to appear in the World ; 
 lee us fuppofe likewile, a Tliit'k (liould 
 now challenge you to give a Catalogue 
 of but one Church ; or, if that be too 
 much, of but one Man in an Age, that, 
 from Chrift's Time till the fecond Coun- 
 cil of Nice^ always profefs'd the fame 
 Faith, as to Mahomet^ being a falfe Pro- 
 phet, that that Council embrac'd ; nay, 
 and ihould promife you, that if you could 
 give him fuch a Catalogue, he would not 
 be a Mahometan : I afk you, what you 
 would fay to this ^urkip Argument ? Is 
 it a good Argument, or is it not ? Doth 
 it overthrow the eftablifli'd Dodrine of 
 the Council of Nice or no ? I believe 
 you will fay. That the T^urk makes a very 
 unreafonable Demand (confidering that Ma^ 
 hornet appear'd not till long after Chrift's 
 Time) and that his Argument is no- 
 thing to the Purpofe. And yet I afTure 
 you, Madam^ this is jufl: the very fame 
 Argument that your Friend hath put 
 in your Mouth for the overthrowing of 
 the eflablifli'd Dodrines of the Church 
 of England^ in her Thirty- nine Ar- 
 ticles. 
 
 Vol. VII. Cc This 
 
3 86 Appendix. 
 
 This may be fufficient to let you fee how 
 unreafonable your Demand is ; but I will 
 fay this further, by way of direct Anfwer 
 to it, viz. That, by what we can gather 
 from the Scriptures, and from the Senf© 
 of the primitive Church, declared by the 
 Fathers and Councils, we think we have 
 Reafon to believe, that the ancient Churches 
 of Chrift would have joined in Commu- 
 nion v/ith the Church of Ej2gla7id upon 
 fuch Principles and Doctrines as are now 
 eftablidi'd in the Thirty-nine Articles; and 
 that in thofe Points, that are now contro- 
 verted between us and the Church of 
 Rome, if they had then been flatted, they 
 would have been on our Side, and not have 
 fided with the Romanifls. And this we 
 are fo confident of, that we will, at any 
 time, refer the Points in Difference between 
 us to be tried by the Holy Scriptures, and 
 by the Senfe of the primitive Church, fo 
 far as we have any Notices of it by Fa- 
 thers or Councils. 
 
 And now, Madmn, you have my Senfe 
 of your Paper, I have this to beg of you. 
 That, if any of your Friends think fit to 
 reply, he v/ould not catch at any fingle 
 PaiTage or ExprefTion in this my Anfwer; 
 and from thence take occafion to afk me 
 I know not how many fophifi:ical Queftions, 
 which only tend to confound you, and to 
 create me Trouble ; but that he would 
 
 deal 
 
Appendix. 
 
 deal like Ji Man of Learning, and Piety, 
 and Ingenuity, and anfwer my Arguments, 
 or reply to my Anfwers one by one, plain- 
 ly and honeftly, fo as may contribute mod 
 to your Difcovery of Truth. This Way 
 I am fure, if you be (incere, is mod for 
 your Benefit. Thus, Madam^ praying God 
 to dired: you, / rejt^ &c. 
 
 387 
 
 Cc 
 
 ^/t 
 
388 
 
 A71 Answer to fome Qu e 3 t i o n s 
 propofed by a Roman Catholick. 
 
 Q_u E s T I o N I. 
 
 AT a Ma72j wilfully dftng a Roman 
 Catholick^ be Jlrjed? 
 
 Answer. 
 
 What the Propofer means by wilfully 
 dying a Koman Catholick, I know not. In 
 our Language, this now [wilfully] hath com- 
 monly an ill Senfe; and we feldom ufe it, 
 but v/ith refpe6t to a Man that obilinately 
 follows his own Will, againfl: the beft Rea- 
 fon and Advice- Now, if this be his Senfe 
 of wilfully dying a' Roman Catholick, he 
 muft exped a harder Anfwer to hisQueftion, 
 than I am now willing to give: In the mean 
 time, till he hath explained himfelf, this is 
 my general Anfwer, viz. 
 
 A Man, dying a Romati Catholick, may, 
 or may not be laved, according as his Cir- 
 cumftances, in this World, render his Er- 
 rors more or lefs excufeable. 
 
 We hold the Errors of Popery to be, in 
 themfelves, dangerous 5 and therefore we tell 
 
 every 
 
Appendix. 389 
 
 every one, that it concerns them, as they 
 love their Souls, to have a Care of them; 
 but yet we do not fay that all Papifts are 
 damn'd : As neither do the more moderate 
 Roman Catholicks fay that all Proteftants 
 are. 
 
 But what is the Defign of putting this 
 Queftion ? And in the Head oi all the reft ? 
 The Propofer knows well enough, that, whe- 
 ther we can anfwer it or no, or whatever 
 the Anfwer be that is jriven to it, it makes 
 nothing at all to the Caufe depending be- 
 tween us and them. But, I fuppofe, he 
 fancied he fhould make fome Advantage 
 of the ConcefTions he prellimed we {hould 
 make, for the eafier gaining the Perfon, for 
 vvhofe Sake thefe Qucftions were propofed. 
 
 Taking it for granted that we would 
 readily allow, that a Papift may be faved 
 in his Religion ; and withal, telling the 
 Perfon, that the Catholicks do not allow fo 
 much to a Proteftant, dying in the Prote- 
 ftant Religion : He thought, by this Arti- 
 fice, to perfuade him or her, that therefore 
 their Church or Religion muR undoubtedly 
 be fafer than ours. 
 
 But if this was his Defign, he {hews that he 
 had a very mean Opinion of ilie Undcrftand- 
 ing of the Perfon he dealt with ; for, can 
 any one, of ordinary Senfc, be perfuaded, that 
 Popery is ever the better for our charitable 
 Opinion of fome Papifts ? Or that Prote- 
 flancy is ever the worfe, for their unchari- 
 C c 3 tably 
 
390 
 
 Appendix. 
 
 tably damning all thofe that are not of the 
 Popifh Communion. 
 
 If the Caufe that is in Difpute, was 
 at all affeded by what is thus pronounced 
 by either Party upon each other ; for my 
 part, I {hould think that the Advantage 
 would be much on the Side of the Prote- 
 teftants: For fure, any reafonable Man (if 
 he had his Church to chufe, and, fuppo- 
 fing that all other Points in Difference were 
 laid afide) fhould rather join with that So- 
 ciety of Chriftians, which allow'd that Chri- 
 ftians of other Communions might be faved 
 as well as they ; than with that Society that 
 confined Salvation only to their own Party, 
 and damn'd all the reft of the Chriftian 
 World. 
 
 Sure I am, when all Things are conli- 
 dered, it will appear, that Charity is infi- 
 nitely more a certain Note of a true Church, 
 tho' without the Pretence of Infallibility ; 
 than a Pretence to Infallibility, without Ca- 
 tholick Charity : And yet thofe that make 
 Notes of the true Church in the Roman 
 Communion, never fail to put in one, but 
 ufually leave out the other. 
 
 Qju E s T I o N II. 
 
 Was not the Society of Chrijliam^ VMited 
 in Faith and Communion with the Bijhop of 
 Rome, once the true Catholick Church? 
 
 Answer. 
 
Appendix. 391 
 
 Answer. 
 
 If by the Society of Chriftians, united in 
 Faith and Worfhip with the Bifliop o^ Rome, 
 be meant only thofe Chriftians that were un- 
 der his Jurifdidion, and that owned him for 
 their Bi(hop, or for their Head ; then we 
 fay, that Society of Chriftians, thus united 
 with the Bifhop of Rome, was never the 
 true Cathohck Church, but only one Part 
 of it. 
 
 If by the Society of Chriflians here 
 fpoken of, he meant all thofe Churches all 
 the World overj that, as they had the fame 
 Faith, fo were once united in one Commu- 
 nion with the Bifhop of Rome (as, for anv 
 thing I know, before the great Divlfions of 
 Chriftendom, there might be fuch a Time) 
 I fay, if this be the Meaning of the Queftion, 
 then I anfwer, That all thefe Churches ta- 
 ken together, thus united in Faith and Wor- 
 (liip, were the true Catholick Church. But 
 then, we fay, that none of thefe Churches 
 was more the Catholick Church than the 
 reft; but they were all equally Parts of the 
 Catholick Church, and they were no more 
 united with the Birtiop of Ro?fie, than the 
 Bifhop of Rome was with their Bifliops. 
 My Meaning is, while Things thus happily 
 ftood, they were all united together under 
 their feveral Bifliops, in the common Bonds 
 of Faith, and Charity, and Communion, as 
 
 C c 4 all 
 
2^2 Appendix. 
 
 all Chrlftian Churches ought to be, and as 
 k is much to be defired they were. But the 
 Bifhop of Rome had no more Authority over 
 them, than they had over him ; they v^^ere 
 all Sifter-Churches, but own'd no Head, no 
 univerfal Bifhopover them, but Chrift Jefus; 
 and, in cafe of a Rupture (as, God knows, a 
 great one did happen, and ftill continues, 
 and which, not without Caufe, we lay chiefly 
 at the Doors of the Church of Rome, upon 
 account of their groundlefs Ufurpations 
 in Matters of Government, and Innova- 
 tions in Matters of Faith ;) I fay, in cafe of 
 a Rupture, the Church of Rome was as much 
 obliged to re-unite it felf with thofe other 
 Churches, fuppofing the Rupture or Schifm 
 was occafion'd by her, as any of thofe other 
 Churches were obliged to re-unite them- 
 felves with the Church of Rome^ fuppofing 
 the Schifm or the Breach began through 
 their Fault. 
 
 Q^u E s T I o N III. 
 
 In what Century did fie commit the firjl 
 "Error, and what vifible Communion did then 
 vppof'e her? 
 
 Answer. 
 
 i. If it doth appear de fa6fo, that the 
 Church of Rome hath erred, and doth yet 
 coacinue io to do, it is not at all materia], 
 
 whether 
 
Appendix. 
 
 whether we can aflign the precife Time or 
 no, when iLe did commit the firft Error (as 
 the Gentleman phrateth it) or who firft op- 
 pofed her in her Errors. 
 
 Errors are not the lefs Errors for having 
 an undifcernable Beginning, and not being 
 fuddenly taken Notice of; no, than the 
 Tares in the Field of Corn that our Saviour 
 fpeaks of, were the lefs Tares for being fown 
 in the Night, by no-body knows who, while 
 the Husband- Men llept. 
 
 But, I pray, let thele Gentlemen, who call 
 upon us to (liew the Century when the Er- 
 rors of their Church begun, and who, at 
 that Time, oppofed them; orelfe theymuft 
 conclude, that the Church of Rome hath not: 
 erred at all ; I fay, let them try this Argu- 
 ment of theirs, upon a Man tliat is troubled 
 with the Yellow Jaundice, and perfuade fuch 
 a Man, if they can, or any one that fees 
 him, that, if he cannot aflign the precife 
 Day of the Week when his Difteniper firft 
 began, and (liew that fomebody at that Time 
 gave him Notice of ir, and bid him have 
 a care of himfelf; I fiy, that if he cannot 
 fliew this, he may certainly conclude, he 
 hath not the Yellov;^ Jaundice, but is a per- 
 fed: found Man ; notwiihftaiiding that his 
 great Weaknefs and Decay of Spirits, and 
 the Yellownefs of his Eyes and Face, do 
 ]ufncicntly difcover to himfelf, and all that 
 fee b.im, wliat a Condition he is in. 
 
 2. But 
 
 393 
 
394 Appendix. 
 
 2. But Secondly, Tho' it be not needful, 
 for the {hewing that the Church of Rome 
 hath erred, to give an Account of the Be- 
 ginnings, and other Circumftances of her 
 Errors ; yet we are not fo much in the dark 
 about thefe Matters, but that we are able to 
 give competent Satisfadlion to any indiffe- 
 rent Enquirer, both as to the Rife, and as 
 to the Progrefs of moft of the Popifh Er- 
 rors; by what Degrees they crept into the 
 Church ; and who were the great Promoters 
 of them; and who were againft them. 
 And this hath been feveral times done by 
 Proteftant Writers, in their Difcourfes, as 
 there hath been Occafion. 
 
 QjJ E S T I O N IV. 
 
 Was there always a true Church upon 
 Earth? 
 
 Answer. 
 
 We do believe there always was, and al- 
 ways will be a true Church upon Earth ; but 
 we do believe that it never was confined to 
 the Church of Rome: And we believe like- 
 wife that, tho' the Church of Rome was not 
 in Being, nor never had been, there would 
 be ftill, and would always have been a true 
 Church of Chrift upon Earth. 
 
 Question 
 
Appendix. 395 
 
 Q^U E S T I O N V. 
 
 By what legal Authority was the Church of 
 Rome condemned to be Heretical"^ 
 
 Answer. 
 
 I fuppofe thisQueftion Is tacked to the for- 
 mer, to make a Sort of Argument, that the 
 Church o^ Rome is the only true Church ; for 
 the Propofer thought that, if we did allow 
 that there always was a true Church upon 
 Earth, we muft, of Neceffity, grant, that 
 the Church of Rome muft be that Church, 
 unlefs we can prove that {he hath been con- 
 demned to be Heretical by fome legal Au- 
 thority J that is (I fuppofe he means) by 
 fome General Council : But this Soohiflrv is 
 too apparent, not to be eafily feen through. 
 
 For, Firft, Had the Church of Ro^ne con- 
 tinued never fo Orthodox, from the Founda- 
 tion of it to this Day ; yet we Hiould never 
 have own'd that flie was the true Church, in 
 their Senfe ; that is, the one holy Catho- 
 lick Church which we profefs to believe in 
 the Creed. For dill, Vv'c fliould only have 
 owned her as a Part of the Catholick 
 Church, and we fliould have believed other 
 Churches to have been as truly Parts of it 
 as fhe ; only with this Difference, That if 
 it appeared that flie had prcferved the 
 Faith and Worfliip of Chrift more pure 
 
 among 
 
396 Appendix. 
 
 among her Members, than other Churches 
 had done among theirs, we fhould have 
 owned her as a founder Church, and her 
 Communion to be fafer than that of the 
 reft. But then, we muft give the fame Pre- 
 ference to any other Church againft her, 
 when it doth appear (as we think it doth) 
 that they do better conform to Chrift's Rule 
 in Faith and Worlhip than {he doth. 
 
 But Secondly, Why may we not be able 
 to fatisfy our felves, that the Church of 
 Rome is not the true Church, unlefs we can 
 fliew by what legal Authority {he was con- 
 demned to be Heretical ? Can nothing for- 
 feit a Title to the being the true Church 
 but only Herefy ? Suppofing the Church of 
 Rome was not guilty of Kerefy, but only of 
 Schifm (as, of all the Churches in the World, 
 we think we have Reafon to charge her with 
 that Crime in an efpecial Manner:) Is not 
 that fufficient to fatisfy us that {he is not 
 the only true Church ? 
 
 Thirdly, Admitting the Church of Rome 
 muft be the true Church, unlefs {he be He- 
 retical (which yet we can never believe) 
 but admitting this, vi^hat Reafon is there that 
 we fliould be put to prove, that {he has been 
 condemned to be Heretical by fome legal Au- 
 thority? May not the Church of Rome be 
 guilty of Herefy, tho' {he was never con- 
 demned to be Heretical ? By the fame Rea- 
 fon that you will deny this, I will deny any 
 Man to be a Felon (tho* I be never fo fure 
 
 he 
 
Appendix. 397 
 
 he broke up my Houfe and flole my Goods) 
 till I Tee him condemned to be hanged. 
 That which makes a Man or a Church 
 Heretical, is the maintaining openly fuch 
 Dotftrines as arc contrary to the Faith of 
 Chrift ; but the Sentence of Authority againft 
 fuch a Man, or fuch a Church, doth only 
 declare them Heretical, but doth not make 
 them fo. So that the Church of Rome, if 
 flie maintain fuch Doctrines, maybe guilty 
 of Herefy tho' fhe was never condemned 
 to be Heretical. 
 
 And further, I fhould be glad to know 
 by what legal Authority the Proteftant 
 Church of England is condemned to be 
 Heretical: And yet the Roman Catholicks 
 make no fcruple to beflow the Name of 
 Hereticks very liberally upon us. But lee 
 them not name the Council of 'Trent, leaft 
 they hear more about it than they defire. 
 
 But it may be the Author's Defign in 
 propofing this Queftion was only this. He 
 would have us (hew by what legal Au- 
 thority the Church of Rome was condem- 
 ned to be Heretical, otherwife he thought 
 we could not juftify our feparation from 
 that Church. 
 
 Indeed, as Things have flood fince the 
 Errors and Corruptions of the Church of 
 Rome have began to prevail in thefe Weft- 
 ern Parts, and as they do yet ftand, it is 
 impoflible, had the Church of Rome been 
 never fo Heretical, to have her condemn- 
 ed 
 
3g8 Appendix. 
 
 neci as fuch by any general Council truly 
 fo called ; becaufe the Affairs of Chriftendom 
 have of a long Time been, and are now 
 in fuch a Pofture, that fuch a Council can- 
 not be convened as is truly free and gene- 
 ral. All the Eaftern and the Southern 
 Churches, which made Four of the Five 
 Patriarchates, are, by their deplorable Cir- 
 cumftances, cut off from all poffibility of 
 giving their Votes in fuch a general Affem- 
 bly. And as for the Churches in thefe 
 VVeftern Parts of the World, if the Pope 
 be to call a Council of them (as we can 
 expert at prefent no other than fuch) we 
 know what we have to truft to, by an 
 Experiment that was made of this kind in 
 the laft (pretended to be general) Coun- 
 cil of Trent : Which indeed was fo far 
 from being general, that it was not a full 
 W^eftern Council, the major Part of them 
 there affembled being wholly the Pope's 
 Creatures, and carrying all his Points to 
 his Mind, notwithflanding the Remonftran- 
 ces of feveral Sovereign Princes to the con- 
 trary. But tho' we cannot fay that the 
 Roman Church hath been condemned by 
 any general Council as Heretical, for her 
 Innovations, yet we can fay, that {lie doth 
 now hold fome Dodlrines contrary to the 
 Definitions of former general Councils ac- 
 knowledged to be fo ; we can fay, and prove, 
 that ihe teacheth Dodtrines contrary to the 
 Senfe of the primitive Fathers^ and of fome 
 
 of 
 
A p p E N t) I X. 399 
 
 of her own Popes ; and we do fay and be- 
 lieve, that if Popery as it is now eftablifhed 
 by the Counil of T'renty had been brought 
 into Debate at any of the Firft Four gene- 
 ral Councils, it would have been condemn- 
 ed as much as we now condemn it. 
 
 Q^u E s T I o N VI. 
 
 Had the firjl Frotejiant Informer the In- 
 fallible ajjifiance of the Holy Ghojl in the 
 Reforming the Church ? 
 
 Answer. 
 
 There was no need of any perfonal In* 
 fallibility to be beftowed upon the Firft 
 Reformers, for they pretended not to 
 preach a new Gofpel to the World, or 
 to found new Churches as the Apoftles 
 did ; all that they pretended to was, to 
 preach the fame Gofpel that Chrift and 
 his Apoftles delivered to the World, and 
 which by an infallible Spirit, was commit- 
 ted to Writing for the Benefit of After- 
 Ages, and to refcue that Gofpel from thofe 
 Corruptions and Errors which Time and 
 Ignorance had mingled with it: This, I fay, 
 was their Work. And if they were afTured 
 themfelves, and gave futBcient Evidence to 
 thofe they preached to, from the Holy 
 Scriptures, and the Writings of the Primi- 
 tive Fathers that they did this, they need- 
 ed 
 
^oo Appendix. 
 
 ed no private Infallibility for the carrying on 
 that Defign. A wife Man will certainly 
 give more credit to a Perfon in what he 
 offers about Religion, who proves the Do- 
 ftrine by Scripture and Antiquity, than to 
 any Men or Church that pretends to Infal- 
 libility, and yet are dellitute of thefe two 
 Supporters, as to what they propofe to our 
 belief. 
 
 Q_u E s T I o N VII. 
 
 Had the Church of England that Affijl- 
 iince ? If they had, to fjciv it : If not ; 
 How do they know they are rightly In- 
 
 formed'^ 
 
 Answer. 
 
 I have in Part told you ; but I will tell 
 you further what ailifiance the Fathers of 
 -the Church of Eiighmd had in her Re- 
 formation. They had the Scriptures on 
 their fide. They had tlie Primitive Fa- 
 thers and the Councils on their fide. 
 They had the higheft Authority both Ec- 
 clefiaftical and Civil on their fide. And 
 they had the Bluffing of God to go along 
 with their Endeavours. This afilftance the 
 Church o( Efigland \\2id m her Reformation* 
 and no other did (lie ever pretend to j and 
 by thofe very Means and no other, doth 
 {he pretend to know that fhe is rightly 
 
 Informed. 
 
Appendix. 401 
 
 nformed. She knows fhe cannot be an 
 Heretical Church, becaufe {he owns all thofe 
 Summaries of Faith, v/hich Chriftians all 
 the World over were Baptized into. Or 
 if that be not enough, fhe owns all the 
 holy Scriptures which (he makes the Rule 
 of her Faith j and laftly, fhe owns the 
 four Firft general Councils which one of 
 the Popes did declare he received, and 
 embraced, as he did the four Gofpels; and 
 in the laft of which Councils it is decreed, 
 that nothing (hould ever be added to that 
 Creed, or that Faith, that was Published 
 at the Council of Nice. 
 
 She knows fhe is not a fchifmatical 
 Church, becaufe fhe is willing and defirous 
 to hold Communion with all the Churches 
 in the World, upon Catholick Terms, 
 fuch Terms as the antient Churches ob- 
 ferved among themfelves. And if fome 
 Churches now will not admit her to their 
 Communion, but will impofe Terms which 
 the ancient Churches never knew, fhe is 
 forry for this but cannot help it, the Fault 
 lies at their Doors, not at hers. And as 
 to the Points in Difpute between her and 
 the Church of Rome, fhe hath never de- 
 clined any fair Trial which of the Church- 
 es hath Right and Truth on their fide; let 
 but the Church of Rome wave her ground- 
 lefs unacountable Infallibility, which they 
 have neither Scripture, nor any general 
 Council to give Countenance to, and put 
 
 Vol VIL Dd the 
 
402 Appendix. 
 
 the Trial of the Controverfy between them 
 upon holy Scripture, as it is Interpreted by 
 the Primitive Fathers, and fhe will at any 
 Time join IlTue with her. This now be- 
 ing the Conceflion of the Church of Eng- 
 land, who can doubt of the Sincerity of 
 her Reformation, or what {hould hinder 
 to make her abundantly certain that flie 
 is a true Church, tho' {he does not pre- 
 tend to be Infallible? 
 
 QjLJ E S T I O N VIII. 
 
 What Way the Church of England hath 
 to determine Controverfies betwixt her and 
 the Dipnters befides the Penal Laws? 
 
 Answer. 
 
 The fame Way we have to determine 
 Controverfies betwixt us and the Papifts, 
 if the Penal Laws againfl them, were taken 
 away ; of which I have already given an 
 Account. 
 
 QjLJ E s T I o N IX. 
 
 Give me a Demonflration that the Church 
 of England is the Church ; Such a one, as 
 no other Heretick can make ufe of for his Se5l, 
 
 Answer. 
 
Appendix, 403 
 
 A N S W £ R. 
 
 For God's fake, Sir, have a Care how you 
 talk of giving Demonftrations, for I am 
 fure yourCaufe will not bear it. Do butyou 
 give me a Demonftration that St. 'Peter v^^as 
 by Chrift's Appointment made Head of 
 the Apoftles, or that the Bifhop of Ro??ie 
 doth fiicceed St. Peter in that Head{hip, 
 and I will turn Poman Catholick imme- 
 diately. Nay, which is lefs, do but gi^ e me 
 a Demonftration that he is a lawful ca- 
 r.oaical Pope who now polTelTes St. Peters 
 Chair, or that there has been fuch a Pope 
 for many Years ; or that any Man whom 
 you (liall name is a true Biftiop, according 
 to your own Laws and Canons; or that 
 any Prieft you fliall pitch upon is a true 
 Pried ; or that you have in any Church 
 of your Communion, the true Sacraments 
 adminiftred among you, and I do promife 
 again, upon that condition, to be of your 
 Communion. But you know as well as I, 
 that I promife nothing in faying this; for, 
 according to the Nature of the Thing, and 
 Proceedings upon the Laws of your Church, 
 it is impoftible that any of thefe Things 
 fhould be demonftrated. And why there- 
 fore will you put me to give a Demon- 
 ftration that the Church of England is the 
 Church ; and fuch a Demonftration too as 
 no other Heretick can make ufe of for his 
 D d 2 Sea ? 
 
404 Appendix. 
 
 Sed? But fomething I will fay In anfwer 
 to your Demand. 
 
 And Firft of all, You do not put it right- 
 ly. You would have me give you a Demon- 
 ilration, that the Church of England is the 
 true Church. Why, Sir, the Church o^Eng- 
 landnzvzi pretended to be the Church in Op- 
 pofition to all other Churches; tho* that was 
 the Pretence of the Donatiils of old, and 
 that is the Pretence of your Church now, 
 and therefore you are apt to think that other 
 Churches do the fame. All that we pre- 
 tend to is, that we are a found Church, a 
 true Part of the Catholick Church ; and 
 that our Communion is much fafer than 
 yours : And this we will join IfTue with you 
 upon at any time. 
 
 Well, but you will fay, inftead of a 
 Demonftration, give me a Proof that the 
 Church of England is a true Church ; and 
 withal, fuch a Proof, as no other Heretick 
 can make ufe of for his Sed:. This is, in- 
 deed, the Meaning of your Queftion ; I 
 will charitably fuppofe it is your Meaning, 
 becaufe it is the bed Meaning : And I thus 
 anfwer to it. As for Proof that the Church 
 of England is a true, found Part of the Ca- 
 tholick Church, I have, in good Part, given 
 it already : And I repeat it again, and add 
 this, That the Church of England retains 
 the Catholick Faith, according to all the 
 ancient Creeds; flie can be convided of no 
 Error condemned by the ancient Churches ; 
 
 (he 
 
Appendix. 
 
 (he owns all the ancient Canon of Scripture ; 
 (he hath the fame Sacraments, and the fame 
 Priefthood that the ancient Church had ; 
 and if you can deny fuch a Church as this 
 to be a found Part of the Catholick, I pray 
 try your Skill in making out your Denial. 
 
 This is the Anfwer to the former Part of 
 your Queftion. But then, you defire fur- 
 ther, fuch a Proof of the Church of Eng- 
 land being a true found Church, as no other 
 Hereticks can make ufe of for their Seft. 
 Why, to this I alfo anfwer, That if any 
 of thofe whom you call Hereticks, can 
 really and truly fay the fame Things for 
 their Church that we do fay for ours, we 
 fliall never think them Hereticks, whatever 
 you may account them ; but {hall always 
 efteem them true Members of the Catho- 
 lick Church : But then, we always make a 
 Difference between thofe who only pretend 
 to Scripture and Primitive Records for their 
 Dodrines, and thofe who are able to make 
 thofe Pretences good. I grant, that feveral 
 Seds do plead both thofe Things as well as 
 we ; but their Plea is to be examined, be- 
 fore it be allowed. If their Way be agree- 
 able to the Faith once deliver'd to the Saints, 
 it is to be approved ; if not, it is to be 
 reproved. And what we fay as to them, we 
 fay as to you ; for you have no other Proof 
 in the World, that you are" fo much as a 
 true Part of the Church of Chrift, but that 
 you hold the fame Faith, and ufe the fams 
 D d 3 Worfliip, 
 
 405 
 
4o6 Appendix. 
 
 Worflilp, that was taught by Chrifl and his 
 Apoftles : And fo far as you retain that 
 Faith and Worfhip, we allow you fo far to 
 be a true Church ; but wherein foever you 
 depart from it, fo far it is the Duty of 
 every Church to depart from you. As for 
 the Priviledge of InfaHibiHty, which you 
 onb;, of all other Chriftians in the World, 
 do allume to your felves, and from hence 
 draw an Argument to unwary People, that, 
 becaufe no- body pretends to it but your felves, 
 therefore it muft certainly be lodged in your 
 Church; it is lo wholly devoid of all Proof, 
 nay, of all colour of Proof, either from 
 Scripture, or Councils, or ancient Fathers ; 
 and, in truth, looks fo like the Bills that 
 are parted by Empiricks, upon every Wall, 
 for the curing all Difeafes, and refolving all 
 Queftlons, that it feems not worth the while 
 to fpend Time in expofing it. 
 
 Qju E s T I o N X. 
 
 Shew me ^ ever before t be Reign of King Henry 
 f/je Eighth, any Communion or Society, that 
 held all, and no other 'Tenets, than the Church 
 vf England doth hold? 
 
 An s w e r. 
 
 Commend me to this for a fpecial De- 
 mand — But as I have been fo long upon 
 the Qther Queflions, that I am quite tired, 
 
 I fliall 
 
A P P E N D I X. 407 
 
 I {hall make bold to give this, and the other 
 that follow, a very quick Difpatch. 
 
 The Anfwer I give to this is, by making 
 another Demand, which is every whit as 
 good and as proper as this. Shew me, be- 
 fore the Time of the Council of Trent, any 
 Communion or Society, nay, (which is 
 more than is put in the Demand) {hew mc 
 but any one Man, who held all, and no 
 other Tenets than. the Church of Rome fince 
 that Council, doth hold ; I fay, fhew me but 
 this, and I promife I will recant. And this, 
 I think, is a little more than is put in the 
 Demand : but it is an eafy Thing to afk 
 .Queftions, or make Demands. 
 
 QjLT E S T I O N XI. 
 
 May not a PopiJJj King be the fupream 
 Head oj the Church of England, in Spiritual 
 Matters ? 
 
 Answer. 
 
 What is defigned by this Queftion, I know 
 not i but I freely give a fair Anfwer to it. 
 Every Sovereign Prince, whether Popifh or 
 Proteftant, is, by the Law of Nature, and 
 the Law of God, in his own Dominions, 
 fupream Head of the Church, in that Senfe 
 of Headfhip which the Church of England 
 afcribes to the King, namely, that, under 
 Chrift, he is fupream Governor of all Per- 
 D d 4 fons. 
 
4o8 Appendix. 
 
 fons, and in all Caufes, as well Ecclefiaftical 
 as Civil. 
 
 Q^ E s T I o N XII. 
 
 What certain Rule hath the Church of 
 England for the true Interpretation of the 
 Scripture f 
 
 Answer. 
 
 I expeded this Queflion long before, for 
 I hardly ever faw any Popilh Queries, but 
 this was one of them. And, in anfwer to 
 it, I tell the Propofer what he may meet 
 with over and over again, both in the Wri- 
 tings of the Fathers, and in the Proteftant 
 Writers j and that is, that our Rule of in- 
 terpreting is the fame Rule that all the 
 World hath (except thofe who are poflefled 
 with Infallibility) viz. To confider the Texts 
 of Scripture very well, and how they relate 
 to what goes before, and what follows af- 
 ter, and to compare one Text of Scripture 
 with another, efpecially the obfcure Texts 
 with the plainer ; and to examine likewife 
 what was the Senfe of the befl; ancient Chri- 
 ftians ?ibout any Text we confult : (For, what- 
 ever the Prpppfer thinks, we pay as great a 
 Deference to the ancient Writers of the 
 Church, as any of them do, and, perhaps, a 
 great deal more.) 
 
 This 
 
Appendix. 409 
 
 This is the Rule by which the Church of 
 England interprets the Scripture ; and I de- 
 fire any of the Church of Rome to fliew a 
 better. If they will fay that our Rule is 
 not a certain Rule ; I anfwer, It is as cer- 
 tain as the Thing will bear, and is certaia 
 enough for all the Purpofes either of Chri- 
 ftian Life, or of neceflary Chriftian Truths. 
 For, as for thofe Truths of Scripture which 
 are not neceflary, we may be fecurely ig- 
 norant of them : So that we have certainly 
 all the Means of being rightly inform'd that 
 they have, about the Senfe of Scripture, ex- 
 cept one Thing, and that is, the pretended 
 Infallibility of their Church ; and yet this 
 one Thing, among all coniidering Men, mull: 
 go for nothing. For this I dare be bold to 
 fay, that the Church of Rome hath never 
 yet, by virtue of her Infallibility, made any 
 one fingle Text of Scripture clearer or plainer 
 than it was before Infallibility was pretended 
 to. This I infift upon, and would be glad 
 to have one Inftance to confute what I fay; 
 for I love Infallibility, if I could tell where 
 to find it. I grant, the learned Men of the 
 Church of Ro?nc have done confiderable Ser- 
 vice towards the explaining of the Bible; 
 but that Service they have done, is not owing 
 to the Infallibility of their Church, but 
 to their own honed Pains, Induftry, and 
 Study. 
 
 Thus 
 
41 o Appendix. 
 
 Thus I have gone over the Gentleman's 
 twelve Queries : I beg his Pardon that I 
 have dwelt fo long upon them. He has 
 put me to fome Trouble which I did not 
 expeft; I hope my Turn comes next to 
 propofe fome Qneftions to him. If he de- 
 iires it, I will get them ready for him ; and 
 if he will anfwer as clearly and plainly, as 
 I have done, I (hall delire to be better ac- 
 quainted with him. 
 
 A 
 
 n 
 
4it 
 
 An Answer to fome Popifh Paper, 
 put into the Hands of one of his 
 Partjhioners. Sent as an Antidote 
 to the Gentleman who had recei- 
 ved it, 
 
 I Cannot but fay, That whoever wrote this 
 Paper, looked upon the Perfon he gave 
 it to as a very fliallow Man, and eafy to be 
 impofed upon ; otherwife he would have 
 been afhamed, for his own Credit-fake, to 
 have let fuch Sophiftries pafs under his Hand, 
 as are here offered. For this is the Bottom 
 of his Argument. 
 
 Becaiije the Churh of Rome, in former 
 I'imes^ was one of thofe Churches that had a 
 lawful Succejjion from the Apofiles ; therefore 
 that Churchy if it ha've notfime erred, is ftill 
 the true Church. 
 
 The Trick that he would here put upon 
 the Reader, lies in thefe laft Words, is fill 
 the true Church. If he had faid, A true 
 Churchy he knows we would readily have 
 agreed to his Propofition. But that was not^ 
 at all to his Purpofe, becaufe it would not 
 ferve his Caufe ; for there have always been, 
 and yet are, feveral true Churches in the 
 World, befides the Roman, But now draw- 
 ing 
 
412 Appendix. 
 
 ing his Conclufion thus, That the Church of 
 the Rome is the true Church, he would have 
 it believed, that (he is the true Church, in 
 Oppolition to all other Churches and Com- 
 munions. In a Word, that the Roman is the 
 One Catholick Church of Chrift, out of 
 which Salvation cannot be had. This, I 
 fay, muft be his Meaning, if he would 
 make any Profelytes by this Argument. 
 
 But now taking this to be his Meaning, 
 what a palpable Shame is here put upon 
 his Reader. T'he Church of Rome had a law- 
 ful ^uccefjlon from the Apoflles, T'herefore it 
 tsfiill the only True Catholick Church. Where- 
 as, for all its Succeffion from the Apoftles, 
 it could be no more than a Part of the 
 Catholick Church, which was all that the 
 other Apoftolical Churches, as ferifalemy 
 ;ind Antioch, &c. pretended to claim from 
 that Succeffion: Not to be each of them 
 the only true Catholick Church. So that 
 when he fays the Church of Rome is ftili 
 the true Church, he puts upon us in his 
 Conclufion, Things that were not in his 
 Premifes. Could he prove to us, that the 
 Church of ^ome was ever the true Church, 
 in the Senfe he intends it, viz. The One 
 univerfal Church of Chrift, out of which 
 is no Salvation, we might allow fhe is 
 [till Jo. But this, we know, he can never 
 prove ; and we believe he is fo wife, as 
 not to offer at it. 
 
 What 
 
Appendix. 4.13 
 
 What I have now faid, is a full Anfwer 
 to all the Argument that is in the Paper, 
 tho' we {hould meddle no further with ir. 
 For, whether we can, or cannot anfwer 
 what follows, I am fure his Reafon, by 
 which he would perfuade you to become 
 a Convert to their Church, is fhew'd to be 
 no Reafon, becaufe it proceeds upon this 
 falfe Suppofition, That the Church o^ Rome 
 was once the Catholick Church, which it 
 never was: But now being, as he thinks, 
 fecure of that ; and fuppofing that you will 
 readily grant, that if the Church of Ro?ne 
 hath never erred, it is ftill the Catholick 
 Church, he proceeds to (hew that the Church 
 of Rome hath never erred. And he ufcih 
 an admirable Argument for it. No Church, 
 fays he, can err but in three Points, viz, 
 Schifm, Herc/j\ or Jlpojiacy, Which, me- 
 thinks, is jufl fuch a Propofition as this : 
 No Man can be lick, unlels he contra<^ his 
 Difeafe by Surfeitifig^ by catching Cohi^ or 
 by fome Contagion. For can any Man, in 
 good earneft, believe, that no Church can 
 err, unlefs at the fame tinie Hie be guiky ei- 
 ther of Herefy ,or Schifm, or Apoftacy ? Pray 
 what fliall we think of the Churches oi Afia 
 in Pope Vi^or\ Time, who differed from che 
 Weftern Churches about the Celcbraiion of 
 Barter? And where the difference ranfo high, 
 that the Pope proceeded to excommunicate 
 them upon that Account? What fliall we 
 think of the African Churches in St. Cypri- 
 an's 
 
414 Appendix. 
 
 tf«'s Time, who were for Re-baptlzing of 
 Hereticks againft the Senfe of the Ro?Jian 
 Church ? Will this Gentleman fay, that they 
 wereguilty either of Herefy, or Schifm, or Apo- 
 ftacy? I doubt nor, but he will fay they erred s 
 but I believe he would be loath to charge them 
 with any of thefe three Crimes, becaufe, if 
 he doth, he will make fome of the beft Men 
 in thofe Ages, and who are now owned as 
 Saints by the Church of Rome, to be either 
 Hereticks, or Schifmaticks, or Apoftates. 
 
 But fuppofe we (liould tell him, that the 
 Church of Rome hath erred fome of thofe 
 three Ways which he aiiigns to be the only 
 Inftances in which a Church can err ; I am 
 fure he will fooner tax us for our Liberty of 
 cenfuring, than be able to anfwer our Ar- 
 guments. Suppofe we fay, that the Church 
 of Rome is guilty of Schifm, and that no- 
 torioufly, I do not know what he will an- 
 fwer to it ; for Schifm is nothing elfe but a 
 Breach of Catholick Communion, and where 
 there is any fuch Breach, the Schifm lies at 
 their Doors who are the Caufes of it. This 
 is acknowledg'd by all who know any thing 
 of Divinity. But now, in this fad divided 
 State of Chriftendome, where there are fo 
 many Schifms and Separations, who are 
 fo much to be blamed as the Church of 
 Rome^ Who being only upon the fame 
 Level with other Churches, and Sifter to 
 them, has by an unheard-of Ufurpation 
 
 made 
 
 I 
 
Appendix. 41^ 
 
 made herfelf Mother and Miftrefs of all 
 other Churches, and excluded all Chri- 
 ftians who will not own her as fuch out 
 of her Communion. If this be not Schifm ; 
 If this be not a breach of Catholick Com- 
 munion, I know not what is. 
 
 As for the fecond Point, wherein he 
 fays a Church is capable of erring, viz. 
 Herefy ; tho' they do liberally upon all oc- 
 Gallons impute that Crime to us, and fcru- 
 ple not to call us damnable Hereticks, yet 
 if it fhould come to a fair Trial, we fhall 
 be able to make it appear, that they 
 much rather deferve that Name, even ac- 
 cording to the definition of Herefy that is 
 given by themfelves. If Herefy be an Er- 
 ror in Faith obftinately maintained, as I 
 think that is the common Definition that 
 pafleth among them, I do not doubt but 
 we can fbev/ a great many fuch Errors fo 
 maintained in their Church. If they add 
 to this Definition fuch Errors as are main- 
 tained againft the Senfeof the Church, why, 
 upon thefe Terms we will join lilue with them, 
 and are ready to prove, that the prefent 
 Church of Rome doth maintain Errors a- 
 gainfl; the Scnfe of the Scriptures, and the 
 Primitive Apoftolick Churches, which in 
 all Reafon ought to be the Meafure and 
 Standard by which the Truth of the Do- 
 ctrines is to be Tried. And laftly, if it be 
 Herefy to innovate in the Chrillian Faith, 
 
 and 
 
41 6 ApPENDIXi 
 
 and to make new Articles of Religion ne- 
 cefTary to Salvation, which Chrift and his 
 Apoftles never thought of, (as for my Part 
 I think this is as truly Herefy, as any othet- 
 thing whatfoever.) In this refpedt we do 
 not doubt to fay, that the Church of Rome 
 is the moft Heretical Church in the World j 
 becaufe, whereas all other Chriftian Church- 
 es that we know of, are contented with 
 the antient Creeds, fhe hath added to the 
 Creed as many more Articles, and made 
 the Belief of thefe new one's which (he 
 had added, as necelTary to Salvation, as 
 the Belief of the antient One's. 
 
 And then as to the third Inftance he 
 gives of the Church's Error, viz^ by the 
 way of Apoftacy, this we are unwilling 
 to charge the Church of Rome with, for 
 we could not call her by the Name of a 
 Church, if we believed fhe was guilty of 
 it. Apoftacy, (as that Word is commonly 
 ufed) is a Departure from the Chriftian 
 Faith. But we own the Church of Rome 
 doth ftill hold the Foundation of Faith, 
 tho' upon that Foundation ftie has built 
 many Errors. But if by Apoftacy, be meant 
 a Departure from any of Chrift's Do- 
 ctrines, that are not absolutely neceflary to 
 Salvation, in this Senfe we do not doubt but 
 the prefent Church of Ro?ne hath apofta- 
 tized: that is to fay, fhe doth in feveral 
 Inftances teach quite otherwife than Chrift 
 and his Apoftles taught. 
 
 The 
 
Appendix. 
 
 The Gentleman having told you, that 
 the Church cannot err but in thele three 
 Points, puts thele Queftions to you, Whe??^ 
 JVhere^ a?id How the Church erred f Who 
 found out the Error "i What Ajfe77ihl)\ a?id 
 by ivhofe Power gather d together ? Tho' he 
 puts all thefe Queftions concerning the 
 Church in general, yet we fuppofe he here- 
 by means all along the Church of Rome^ 
 other wife he fpeaks nothing to the purpofe. 
 
 Now it is a fufficient Anfwer to fay, that if 
 we can prove that the Church of Rome hath 
 adiually erred, it is not a farthing Matter whe- 
 ther we give an Anfwer to thefe Queftions 
 or no; becaufe they are altogether imperti- 
 nent. They are juft as much to the pur- 
 polV as, if a Man who is really out of Or- 
 der in point of Health, or lies languishing 
 under a Diftemper, fliould endeavour to per- 
 fuade his Friends, or thofe that ftand by 
 him, that he is in perfect Health, and ails 
 nothing, by this Argument. If I be Sick, 
 it concerns you to fhew me whe?:, and where^ 
 and how I got this Sick?iejs: who Jirjl found 
 it out : what confultations of Phy/iciafis dif- 
 covered it^ and if it was a Confult of Rhyfi^ 
 cians^ pray by whofe Order were they fent 
 for? Would not this be a ridiculous Argu- 
 ment to the By-ftanders? And yetjuft fuch is 
 this Argument, by which this Gentleman 
 would perfuade you that his Church was ne- 
 ver difeafed with any Error. 
 
 Vol. VII. E e IC 
 
 417 
 
41 8 Appendix. 
 
 It is fufficient to fatisfy any indifferent 
 Perfon, chat the Church of Rome has been 
 guilty of great Errors, when it is vifible and 
 apparent that (he has departed from the 
 holy Scriptures, both in Dodlrine and Pra- 
 dice, in abundance of Inftances, tho' it 
 cannot be fliewed you wheft^ and ivhere, and 
 how that Church took up thefe Errors, or 
 who firft found them out; tho' even as to 
 thefe Things we are not fo at a Lofsbut that 
 we could give a particular Anfwer, if it 
 was fit to enter upon the Particulars. We 
 can tell you the particular Things wherein 
 the Church of Rome hath departed from 
 the Dodrine of Chrift and his Apoftles : 
 And we give you thefe for Inftance, Half- 
 Communion, Honour given to Images, 
 Adoration of the Hoft, Invocation of Saints, 
 and Service in an unknown Tongue. Thefe 
 are all Matters of Practice, contrary to the 
 Tenor of the Scriptures. And as for Do- 
 d:rines, we can name feveral Inftances 
 which they have made necelfary Articles 
 of Faith, which have no Countenance from 
 Scripture but are much againft it ; as the 
 Dodrines about Penance, and Tranfubftan- 
 tiation, and Purgatory, and Indulgences, 
 and the Pope's Supremacy. 
 
 We can tell you likewife when thefe 
 Dodtrines began to prevail in the Church 
 of RomCy not that they all fprung up at 
 once, but by degrees, and in feveral Ages. 
 But thofe Ages we can name: and we 
 can likewife tell who chiefly promoted 
 
 them. 
 
Appendix. 
 
 them, and for what end j and who oj^po- 
 fed them. 
 
 Laftly, We can Hkewife give you a rca- 
 fonable Account of our own Refer niarion 
 here in E7igla?jdy and fatisfy every indiffe- 
 rent Perfon that it is made by juft and 
 fufficient Authority , forafmiich as every 
 National Church hath Power and Autho- 
 rity in its felf to reform its felf, according to 
 the Laws of God, and the Principles and 
 Pradice of the Primitive Church, v/ith- 
 out confuking the Pope, or any commif- 
 lioned by him. And this Pveformation of 
 ours was duly and regularly carried on, ha- 
 ving the Concurrence both of the Princes 
 and of all the Eftates of the Realm, I'iz. Cler- 
 gy, Nobility, and Laity, which is abun- 
 dantly fufficient to juftify our Proceedings. 
 Tho' yet, had there been none of thefe 
 Things, fo great and dangerous were the 
 Corruptions of the Church of Rome^ tliat 
 even any private Man who was convinced of 
 them, was in Duty bound to abftain from 
 the Communion of that Church, fo long 
 as fhe impofed thofe Things, as neceflary 
 Terms of her Communion. 
 
 4.T9 
 
 Ee2 Advice 
 
4-20 
 
 Advice to Protejlaitts of ordinary 
 Capacities^ how to behave thejn- 
 f elves when they are tampered with 
 to change their Religion. 
 
 THE firft Thing they will ufually tell 
 you is, That it concerns you infinitely 
 to look that you be of the true Churchy for 
 you are damned if you be not, becaufe there 
 is but one Faith, one Baptifm, one Church. 
 
 To this you muft anfwer, That you do 
 believe and profefs that one Faith which was 
 deliver'd by Chrift and his Apoflles, and that 
 you are baptized into that Faith, and confe- 
 quenily you are a Member of ChrilVs Holy 
 Carholick Church. 
 
 They will tell you, that you are not a 
 Member of Chrift's Catholick Church, be- 
 caufe you are not 2. Roman Catholick. 
 
 To this you muft anfwer, that you are a 
 Member of the Catholick Church, tho' you 
 be nor a Member of theRoma?2 Church j for 
 the Roman Church is but a Fart of the Ca- 
 tholick Church. 
 
 They will tell you, That the Roman 
 Church hath all the Marks of the Catholick 
 Church, and no other Church but that hath. 
 
 You may tell them again. That no one 
 particular Church can have all the Marks of 
 the Catholick; no more than a particular 
 County of En^^la?id, as for Inilance, Middle" 
 
Appendix. 421 
 
 feXy can have the Marks of being all Eng- 
 land: For the Catholick Church doth take 
 into its Notion all the Churches of ChriH: 
 throughout the World j but the Roman 
 Church, with all thofe particular Churches 
 that join in Communion with it, m.akes but 
 a fmall Part of thofe Churches. So that all 
 that can be gather'd from her Marks is, thac_ 
 {he is one Part of the Church of Chrift ; 
 but (he wants all thofe Marks that fliould 
 either {hew her to be the whole Church, or 
 a found Part of the Church ; for certainly, 
 among the Marks of a true and found Church, 
 this ought to be put in as one of the princi- 
 pal, That the Church which profe{]eth fo 
 to be, fliould, in Matters of Faith, hold a 
 Conformity with the Floly Scriptures and the 
 Primitive Writings : But this the Church of 
 Rome doth not at this Day. 
 
 They will tell you, That the Church of 
 Rome is, in all Things, conformable to the 
 Holy Scriptures, and to the Primitive Church. 
 
 You may fafely anfwer them, Thar, in a 
 great many Things, the Church of Rome 
 hath defined, and practifeth at this Day con- 
 trary to the Scriptures, or the Ufage of the 
 Primitive Church : As for Inftance, in de- 
 nying the Cup of the Holy Communion to 
 the Laity ; in celebrating the Communion 
 every Day, when none of the Company but 
 the Prieft doth receive ; in having their 
 Prayers in an u'lknown Tongue ; in a re- 
 ligious \Jk of hnages in the Worfhip of 
 
 God J 
 
422 Appendix. 
 
 God ; in feveral Dodtrines which they have 
 made Matters of Faith ; as the Doarine of 
 Indulgences, Purgatory, feven Sacraments, 
 Tranlubftantiation, Invocation of Saints, 
 and the like. As to all thefe Things, you 
 may Safely challenge them, that there is 
 nothing ^o be fliewn in the Holy Scriptures, 
 or in Primitive Antiquity, for the Belief or 
 Pradice of them, but much to be {hewn 
 againfl: them. 
 
 They will afk you, who is to be Judge of 
 the Meaning of Scripture ? Is every private 
 Man to be Judge of that ? At that rate, we 
 (hall have as many Faiths as there are Men. 
 
 To this you may anfwer. You refufe no 
 Judges of the Sen fe of Scripture, fuppofing 
 ihey be equally indifferent ones ; but you 
 think it a litdeunreafonable, that tne Church 
 of Rome {hould be a Judge of the Sen(e of 
 Scripture in Matters wherein (he is a Party ; 
 that you are willing to be concluded by the 
 Judgment of the univerfal Church, as to the 
 Senfe of any Texts of Scripture that are 
 in Debate between the Church of England 
 and the Roman -, and you will, at any time, 
 join IlTue with them upon that Point, pro- 
 vided you may have Liberty to call in one 
 to your Affiftance, who is ufed to thofe 
 Matters. But you may anfwer further : 
 Every Man is a Judge of the Senfe of 
 Scripture, fuppofing it be rightly tranflated, 
 inneedfull Matters; and as to thofe Scrip- 
 tures 
 
Appendix. 423 
 
 tures that are not necelTary, it is no great 
 Matter if you do not underftand them. 
 
 If they fay, that in necefTary Matters the 
 Scriptures are not fufficiently plain, 
 
 Then pray afk them, How it comes about 
 that God (hould not be able, by the Pen-men 
 he made ufe of, to put his Mind plainly in- 
 to Writing, as well as Tully, Arijiotle^ or 
 Virgil^ put their Minds into Writing ? We 
 can, at this Day, underftand the Senfe of 
 thofe Authors, as to moft of the Things 
 they write about ; tho', about fome PafTages, 
 there is a Controverfy. And why may we 
 not as well underftand the Senfe of thofe 
 Writings that were didated by God Al- 
 mighty ? 
 
 When they prefs you to take the Scrip- 
 tures only in their Interpretation, you muft 
 afk them, why they would have you believe 
 their Interpretation ? I fuppofe they will an- 
 fwer, becaufe their Interpretation is the Senfe 
 of the Church, which cannot err. 
 
 If you afk them again, How they prove 
 that the Church cannot err ? 'Tis likely they 
 will tell you, that Chrift hath promifed to 
 be with the Church to the End of the 
 World ; and if fo, how is it pofTible the 
 Church ftiould fall into Errors about Faith ? 
 
 To this you may anfwer, That Chrift 
 hath indeed promifed that he ivill be with 
 the Apojilcs \ and you are likewife willing to 
 grant, that this Promife is to be extended to 
 all thofe who fucceed the Apoftles, to the 
 
 End 
 
424 
 
 Appendix. 
 
 End of the JVorU. But what is this to In- 
 fallibility ? May not Chrift's Spirit be prefent 
 with Chriftian IVIinifters, unlefs, at the fame 
 lime, you fuppofe he confers upon them the 
 Priviledge of Infallibility ? But if this Text 
 do indeed make any thing towards Infalii- 
 bility, it will rather prove the Infallibility of 
 particular Minifters, than particular Churches. 
 But how, from this Text, the Church of 
 Rome, above all others, fliould derive to her 
 lelf a Priviledge of being infallible, is beyond 
 all Reafon, and almoft beyond all Imagina- 
 tion. 
 
 They will afk you wliere was your Church 
 before Luther. You may tell them your 
 Church was there to be found where their 
 Church never was, 'uiz. In the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, and the Records of the ancient Fa- 
 thers and Councils. If they cavil at thisAn- 
 fwer, you may anfvver direcflly to their Quef- 
 tion, in this manner : You may tell them, 
 That the Church of England ^ before Lz//^^r, 
 was juft in the fame Place where it is now; 
 for the Proteftants did not pretend to make a 
 new Church, but only to reform the old One. 
 The Church of England, before that Time, 
 embraced a great many Errors in Matters of 
 Religion, and built a great deal of Hay and 
 Stubble upon the Foundation. But after 
 that Time, through the Mercy of God, (he 
 was purged from thofe Errors, and threw 
 afide that Rubbi(h, which, by Time, and 
 too much Compliance with the Roman 
 
 Churchy 
 
Appendix. 425 
 
 Church, (he had contraded ; but ftill fhe 
 was the fame Church (he had been before, 
 as much as a Face that is wafh'd is the fame 
 that it was before, when it was dirty. 
 
 They will urge you to (hew them any 
 Church, before the Reformation, that held, 
 in Matters of Faith, as the Church of Ejig- 
 land now doth. 
 
 You may tell them. That all the ancient 
 Churches of Chrift held the fame Faith the 
 Church of England now holds ; and if in 
 the Articles, and other publick Monuments 
 of our Church, we have made Declarations 
 againft feveral Particulars, fuch as the Pope's 
 Supremacy, &c. of which we find no men- 
 tion in the Primitive Church, it is becauie 
 there were none in thofe Days who held 
 thofe Doiflrines : But if they had been ftart- 
 ed, we do not in the leaft doubt but they 
 would have been as much condemned by the 
 Ancient Churches, as they are by the Church 
 of England, 
 
 ^'vsr 
 
 15S 
 
 F f A Short 
 
426 
 
 A Short Argument again/i the Dodtrine of 
 Infallibility^ as it is commonly pretended to 
 be proved by the Roman Catholicks. 
 
 HO W will you prove to a Proteftant, 
 that the Church is Infallible ? If you 
 fay, that we have the Church's Tradition for it, 
 you fay no more than this, That the Church 
 hath always taught, and doth now teach, that 
 fhe is Infallible. But then the Queftion re- 
 turns : How (liall we know that the Church 
 is noc miftaken in what (he fo teacheth ? 
 
 If you fay, that the Holy Scripture (which, 
 among all Chridians, is acknowledg'd to be 
 of Divine Authority) doth teach. That the 
 Church, in all Ages, is, and mud be Infalli- 
 ble; we afk again, How can we be certain 
 that the Scripture teacheth fo, fince we do 
 not find that any Text of Scripture hath fuch 
 a Meaning? 
 
 If, in anfwer to this, you tell us, That the 
 Church, to whom only it belongs to interpret 
 Scripture, doth declare, that this is the Senfe 
 of Scripture, you have faid no more than you 
 did before; for all that you fay is this. That 
 therefore we are to believe that Chrid, in 
 Scripture, hath promifed Infallibility to his 
 Church, becaufe the Church faith he did: So 
 that dill we muft take the Church's own 
 Word for her own Infallibility. 
 
 If you go another Way to work to un- 
 tie this Knot, and fay that the Scriptures 
 are fufficiently plain in themfelves to all 
 unprejudiced Perfons about this Point of 
 
 Infaili- 
 
Appendix. ^27 
 
 Infallibility, efpecially as they are backed 
 with the conftant Tradition of the Church 
 in all Ages ; we will acknowledge your 
 Anfwer to be reafonable ; but we will join 
 IfTiie with you upon this Point, and will 
 put the liTue upon thefe two Queflions. 
 
 1. Where can you produce one Text of 
 Scripture that doth either diredly, or by Con- 
 fequence, neceffarily infer, that the Church 
 of Chrift, in all Ages, (hall be fecure from 
 Error in all Do<3:rines that fhe Teacheth? 
 
 2. Among feveral Texts of Scripture which 
 you urge for the Proof of the Church's Infalli- 
 bility, where can you name fo much as one, 
 that hath always had the Tradition of the 
 Church to make that Senfe of it which is now 
 given by your Roman Patrons of Infallibility ? 
 
 Do but produce one Text that maketh 
 for you either of thefe Ways, and you will 
 do Something towards your Caufe. But in the 
 mean Time while you are a doing this, give 
 me leave to remind you, that in putting the 
 Ilfue of the Controverfy upon this Point, we 
 have gained a Point or two from you, which 
 when you come to talk to any Purpofc of 
 your Dodtrine of Infallibility, the Proteftants 
 will take Notice of, and you muft own. 
 
 Firft of all, that all the Certainty of tliat 
 Dodrine refts upon the Authority of the 
 Scripture only. 
 
 2. That every Man, before he can be ra- 
 tionally fatisfied about the Truth of that Do- 
 ctrine, mud judge for himfclf about the Senfe 
 oi the Scri|fturc, tho* he is to take in nil 
 
 the 
 
428 Appendix. 
 
 the helps for the interpreting of it, (the chief 
 of which is Tradition,) that he can come by. 
 
 And therefore Thirdly, He muft: be allow- 
 ed to examine all Texts and compare them one 
 with another, making ufe ftill of the beft aflift- 
 ances he can get for this purpofe, becaufe o- 
 therwife he can make no True Judgment. 
 
 And therefore Fourthly, If he cannot fa- 
 tlsfy himfelf, he muft be allowed to examine 
 all the particular Dodlrines that are taught 
 in the Church where he lives, and to judge 
 of their Agreement or Difagreement with the 
 Scripture. For if any one Dodtrine taught by 
 the Church, be repugnant to the Holy Scrip- 
 ture, it is certain that the Church which 
 Teacheth that Dodlrine cannot be Infallible. 
 
 I do not fay that it is necefTary for every 
 Man, in order to his Satisfaction, to run thro* 
 all this Method ; But I fay, even according 
 to the moftplaufible Methods, that the Church 
 of Rome can defend herfelf by, (he muft al- 
 low of this Method: from which I make 
 three Inferences. 
 
 1. That the Scriptures, when all is done, 
 are the Rule of our Faith. 
 
 2. That every one ought to have Liberty 
 allowed him to examine the Scriptures. 
 
 3-. And that every one, before he can con- 
 clude that the Church is Infallible,{hould be al- 
 lowed to examine all the particular Do(Slrin€S 
 of that Church, and not to run away with a 
 general Notion that fuch a Church is Infal- 
 lible, and therefore all She teacheth is True. 
 
 FINIS. 
 

 :n^:.,. 
 
:?