— PRINCETON, N. J. TLo-tT. BX 5037 .S5 1829 v. 5 Sharp, John, 1645-1714. The theological works of the j She Most Reverend John Sharp, I r / V 1 THE THEOLOGICAL WORKS OF THE MOST REVEREND JOHN SHARP, D.D LATE ARCHBISHOP OF YORK. A NEW EDITION, IN FIVE VOLUMES. VOL. V. OXFORD, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. MDCCCXXIX. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014 https://archive.org/details/theologicalworks05shar TO THE READER In the preface to the two volumes of Archbishop Sharp's Works, which were lately printed, mention is made of a small reserve of discourses in the popish controversy, which might possibly some time or other be published, with other of his papers relating to that controversy. When that preface was wrote, the editor had not determined with himself whether this collection should ever come abroad or no. Much less had he any apprehensions that he should, in so short a time, commit it to the press ; for he looked upon that dispute as out of vogue, and little attended to ; and also considered that the writings of the protestant divines in the reigns of king Charles and king James II. were very numerous as well as excel- lent; and therefore that these discourses (though properly enough a part of the popish controversy) would seem superfluous and unseasonable. And under these reasons he was disposed to acquiesce, had not the late attempts of the Roman catholics in and about London given occasion to revive the neg- lected dispute, and to put men upon a review of the subjects in debate between the church of Eng- land and the church of Rome. This he thought a seasonable juncture for bringing to light the follow- ing treatises, which have been suppressed above fifty years, and perhaps might always have continued so, a 2 IN- TO THE READER. if some such reason as this had not accidentally of- fered itself to usher them into the world. They are all, or most of them, designedly calcu- lated for the use of the unlearned protestant. The author of them had the care of one of the largest parishes in London, during the whole time the late popish controversy was on foot. He was perfectly well acquainted with the subtilties of the popish divines, and knew by abundant experience among his own parishioners, what were the principal diffi- culties that the inferior sort laboured under, from the fallacious and insidious persuasions and insinua- tions of those who strove to pervert them. What he wrote therefore, and is now published, was pur- posely contrived as a present antidote to the mis- chiefs attempted among his flock. For which reason he entered as little as possible upon the learned or historical part of the controversy, (as will be ob- served, though he was very capable of discharging that part of it with success,) but confined himself chiefly to those points which were more immediately necessary to guard the weak from the sophistry of the Jesuits, and to relieve and deliver the unwary, who were already entangled in their snares. With this view he hath formed his arguments so plain, and made his chain of reasoning upon them so natural and so familiar, that they appear to be adapted to the taste as well as the capacities of or- dinary Christians. Something there is likewise to the taste of the party he opposes ; such of them at least as have any taste of beauty and excellence in writing upon controverted points ; viz. the calmness and temper wherewith he engages them, and the special care he always takes never to calumniate or TO THE READER. V misrepresent them. He was wont to say himself, that in his sermons against the papists he had al- ways dealt honestly and fairly with them, charging them with nothing hut what their church openly avowed in her creed and councils and public of- fices. Which candour of temper and equity of con- duct, in any controversy, though it be not always the readiest means of working upon the vulgar, yet cannot fail of having a great influence upon all se- rious and well-meaning people. He was often pressed by his friends to print these discourses himself ; but he declined it. When he was solicited to do so about the time of the revolution, or soon after it, he gave for an answer, that the danger was then over, and the design of them was super- seded ; and that to publish them at that time would only look like making his court. And it doth not appear that at any time after- wards he regarded them, or meddled with them, further than to correct and transcribe one or two of them which he preached at York, in order to check some attempts that the popish priests were sus- pected and reported to have made in that neigh- bourhood. One of these was that remarkable ser- mon which, upon the first delivery of it in his parish church at London, in 1686, had drawn upon him the displeasure of king James and his court, and had given occasion to the order that was sent to Dr. Compton, then bishop of London, to suspend him, which brought on the troubles of that prelate from the ecclesiastical commission. But whereas, in his transcript of this discourse, upon the revisal of it, that passage which was supposed to be most offensive and obnoxious, was entirely left out, (as VI TO THE READER. being a particular answei* to a certain argument that had been slipped into his hand in St. Giles's church, as he supposed, by way of challenge, and which therefore could not pertinently be repeated when he preached the same sermon above twenty years after at his own cathedral,) therefore recourse was had for that passage to the first or original copy. And whereas the other differences between the two copies did not appear to be material, but to consist rather in correction of expressions and style, than of the matter or arguments, it was judged most advisable to follow the first copy altogether in this edition 3 ; both for the satisfaction of the reader, whose curiosity would be better gratified with a true and faithful representation of the very same sermon that produced the effects above mentioned ; and also to vindicate the author of it from the un- just reflections of Father Orleans upon it, who know- ing nothing of the contents of it, charged it arbi- trarily and upon hearsay ; and likewise (for that was another consideration worth regarding) to make it of a piece with all the rest, which are now published from the first hand, and without emendation of any kind, since the time they were preached in St. Giles's pulpit : with this only exception, that what were two sermons upon 2 Pet. iii. 16. appear now only as one. And whereas the sermon upon Auricular Confession was connected with others upon the same text, which were lately printed in the fifth a Sermon VI. a discussion of the question which the Roman catholics most insist upon with the protestants, viz. in which of the different communions in Christendom the only true church of Christ is to be found. With a refutation of a certain popish ar- gument handed about in MS. anno 1686. p. 95 TO THE READER. Vll volume 3 under the title of Confession of Sins ne- cessary to Repentance, it became unavoidable both there and here to omit as much as served only to shew the connection between them, and which therefore could have no place in their present state of separation. These were liberties which Dr. Barker owns he made no scruple of taking with the posthumous sermons of archbishop Tillotson, whose authority he also pleads for doing so. The editor hopes he may be indulged in the same liberty, having never used it but when he judged it necessary, and even then without altering the sense, and with as little change to the words as possible. And now the reader has all before him that is requisite for his information concerning these Ser- mons. If he shall not find them so finished and correct as those already printed, he will know where to ascribe the defect. An imputation of rashness in the publisher of them, grounded on this reason only, will not much affect him, provided his sole aim in the publication be answered, which is the preserving some people, into whose hands they may fall, from the errors of popery, and establishing them more firmly in the communion of the Church of Eng- land. Once they contributed very much to this good end ; and it is not unreasonable to expect they may do so again. And as it is certain that Dr. Sharp owed to them much of his reputation in the last age, so it is presumed they may be received with some degree of approbation in the present ; at least it is hoped, that what tended so eminently to advance his credit then, will not turn to the disadvantage of a See vol. iv. pp. 152 — 178 of this edition. viii TO THE READER. his memory now. The closing the collection of his works with his earliest performances is not unpre- cedented, neither can it seem improper to conclude his remains with those pieces which first served to raise his character in the world. As concerning the papers subjoined in the Appen- dix, their relation to the subject of the sermons to which they are annexed must speak their propriety. The first is a reply to a letter from a gentlewoman who had lately fallen into the hands of Dr. Cross, (a Jesuit, author of the Contemplations of the Virgin, and of some other popish books.) Mrs. Kingesmill's letter is printed from the original, and the answer from a copy of it of Dr. Sharp's own writing, as all the other papers that follow are likewise found under his own hand. They may have their use ; at least, as there are but few of them, the publication of them at this time will deserve no censure. THE CONTENTS. THE CONTENTS. SERMON I. Faith and reason reconciled : or, nothing to be believed in religion but what it may be proved from principles of reason that it ought to be believed. 1 Pet. iii. 15. — Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you. Page 1 SERMON II. Every man to judge for himself in things necessary to salvation. The different ways prescribed by the Roman catholics and the protestants for the coming to the true faith, compared. 19 From the same text. SERMON III. Concerning the infallibility of the church : which being admitted in the sense of the Roman catholics, would not answer the ends they propose to serve by it. 32 From the same text. SERMON IV. That the scriptures may be understood in all necessary points by private persons, with ordinary helps, without an infallible interpreter of their sense ; and therefore not to be denied to the common people. 2 Pet. iii. 16. — In which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 50 ABP. SHARP, VOI,. V. b X THE CONTENTS. SERMON V. The number of the sacraments ascertained. Of the church. The only scripture notion of it. Wherein consists the unity of the catholic church. Reflections thereupon. 1 Cor. xii. 13. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or j°ree ; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. 78 SERMON VI. A discussion of the question which the Roman catholics much insist upon with the protestants, viz. in which of the different communions in Christendom the only true church of Christ is to be found ? With a refutation of a certain popish argument handed about in MS. in 1686. 95 From the same text. SERMON VII. The popish and protestant doctrines concerning confession explained and compared. And the popish doctrine of au- ricular confession proved not to be the doctrine of scripture and the ancient church. Prov. xxviii. 13. He that covereth his sins shall not prosper : but whoso confesseth them and Jbrsaketh them shall find mercy. 114 SERMON VIII. Against the doctrines of the church of Rome, concerning satisfactions, and purgatory. 135 From the same text. SERMON IX. Against other corruptions and innovations in the popish doctrine concerning repentance. 152 From the same text. THE CONTENTS. SERMON X. Abuses and corruptions of the church of Rome, in the sacrament of the Lord's supper. First, in their private masses, or priests receiving alone. Secondly, in their denial of the cup to the laity. 1 Cor. xi. 23-25. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered to you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread : and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat : this is my body, which is broken for you : this do in remembrance of me. After the sdme manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood : this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, hi remembrance of me. 167 SERMON XI. Concerning the sacrifice of the mass. 190 From the same text. SERMON XII. Concerning transubstantiation 208 From the same text. SERMON XIII. The usual plea or apology for transubstantiation an- swered. 229 From the same text. SERMON XIV. Concerning the adoration of the host. 247 From the same text. SERMON XV. The sixth chapter of St. John doth not favour the popish doctrine of transubstantiation : and the sense of the church of England, as to the real presence in the eucharist. John vi. 53. Then Jesus saith unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye cat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 268 Xll THE CONTENTS. APPENDIX. Mrs. KingesmilFs letter. F. 290 Answer to the said letter. ibid. Answer to questions proposed by a Roman catholic. 302 Answer to a popish paper, &c. 319 Advice to protcstants of ordinary capacities, &c. 326 Short argument against the doctrine of infallibility, &c. 331 A S E R M O N ON 1 PETER III. 15. — be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you . The hope that is here said to be in Christians, and of which they are to be ready to give an ac- count, is without doubt nothing else but that faith, or that doctrine, or that religion which the Chris- tians do profess, and upon which their hope of an- other life is grounded. In this figurative sense is the word used in other places of scripture, parti- cularly in the twenty-sixth of Acts, ver. 6, where the hope for which St. Paul is accused of the Jews, is plainly the Christian doctrine, and particularly that part of it which concerned the resurrection of the dead. This then is the plain meaning of the precept in my text ; That all Christians should so far inquire into the grounds of that religion which they profess, and upon which they bottom their hopes, as to be ready and prepared at any time (when they are called upon to do it) to give a reasonable account of it ; such an account as may satisfy any unprejudiced mind that they act like rational men in believing and professing as they do : He ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you; that is, Be prepared and instructed at all times to give a satisfactory account ABP. SHARPE, VOL. V. R 2 A SERMON of your faith and religion to all such as shall at any time call in question the reasonableness of it. This being the sense of the text, two points, very necessary in these times a , we may observe from it. First of all, that faith and reason are not incon- sistent one with another, but may well stand toge- ther. Whatever we are obliged to believe in mat- ters of religion, we are by this precept obliged to be able to give a reason for ; or to give an account of the reasonableness of that belief. And therefore cer- tainly we are not obliged to believe any thing that is unreasonable, or that we cannot give a reason for our believing it. The second point to be observed from hence is, That it is not enough that our faith, or hope, or re- ligion be reasonable in itself, but it is the duty of every professor of that faith so to satisfy himself of the reasonableness of it, as to be able to answer them that ask a reason for it. And therefore every man not only may, but ought to inquire into his re- ligion, and not so to rely on the authority and judg- ment of other men, as to swallow, without examina- tion, every thing that they propose to him. These two points are plainly contained in the text, and accordingly I shall make them the heads of my Discourse upon it. I. The first point is this ; That reason and faith are not inconsistent : or this ; The religion we pro- fess is no unreasonable thing. On the contrary, in all the parts of it, it is such as recommends itself to the reason of mankind ; in all the parts of it, it is such as we may be able to give a reason for. The not attending to this point hath done much a Preached in 1687. ON 1 PETER III. 15. mischief to religion ; for it hath heen the occasion that many ahsurd doctrines have been introduced into it, which perchance, if this proposition had been considered, would never have found entertainment in the world. They have done no kindness at all to our religion, but rather a great deal of disservice to it, who have made faith and reason two things oppo- site one to the other ; maintaining this absurd posi- tion, that our reason was so much of a different na- ture from our faith, that it ought never to be con- sulted, much less to be heard when faith was con- cerned : nay, any thing that was proposed to us as a matter of faith, was so much the more to be be- lieved because it was contrary to our reason. And if we can once attain to that pitch of virtue, as strongly to believe things impossible in human rea- son, our faith was therein much the more glorious, and should be much better rewarded. This notion may indeed do great service to the cause of the church of Rome, but how it will serve any purposes of the gospel of Christ no considering man will be able to see. My design at this time is to confute and expose this absurd position, and to shew the necessary de- pendance that faith hath upon reason ; but withal, the great improvement that reason receives from faith. To shew that they are not inconsistent things, but have an entire agreement one with another ; nay, so closely are they linked, that if we reject either one or the other, or advance one to the pre- judice of the other, we cannot avoid the running into dangerous errors and inconveniences. The proposition we have before us is this : That reason and faith are not contradictious things ; or B 2 A SERMON 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 reason. For the making out this, I lay down these follow- ing propositions : 1. First of all, That nothing that is proposed 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 reason to convince us of the truth of it. 2. Secondly, 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 agreeable- ness of it with the principles of our natural reason. 3. Thirdly, Whatever therefore is plainly and ap- parently repugnant to and inconsistent with the principles of natural reason cannot be true ; and therefore ought not to be believed by us as an ar- ticle of religion or a matter of faith. 4. Fourthly, That notwithstanding, there may be many things in religion highly reasonable to be be- lieved, which yet natural reason could not discover, nor after they are discovered can it fully compi'e- hend. There may be reason enough to convince us of the truth of them, though we have not our rea- son so perfect as to be able to see perfectly through them, or to answer all the difficulties that may be raised against them. The clearing these four propositions will not only fully explain and prove our main point, but also obviate all the difficulties and objections that are usually raised in this controversy. I shall therefore speak to them in order. 1. The first proposition is this; That nothing that is proposed to us to be believed as a matter of faith, ON 1 PETER III. 15. 5 or an article of religion, is further to be entertained by us, than we have reason given us for the truth of it. This, I think, is so universally acknowledged by all mankind, of what persuasion or religion soever they be, that it would be a needless thing to attempt the proof of it. There is no man in the world ever endeavoured to draw another man to his own opinion, but he would offer him reasons why he should em- brace that opinion rather than the contrary. And there is no man ever took up any opinion or per- suasion, either in religion or in other things, but he either had reason, or thought he had reason, to incline and determine him to it. A man cannot believe as he pleaseth : how desirous soever he may be that this or the other thing should be true, yet he cannot bring his mind to assent to it, unless he have some reason, or something that looks like a reason, that inclines him to it. Whatever power the will of man hath to determine itself, yet it is certain the understanding must always go according to the evidence that is given in to it. It implies a contradiction, that a man should believe a proposition any further than he is convinced of the truth of it. And how can he be convinced of the truth of it further than he is satis- fied that there are solid and strong reasons to per- suade him unto it? But to speak more words upon this is to add light to the sun. 2. I therefore proceed. The next proposition we lay down is this ; That we have no other measure to judge of the truth of any religion, than the agree- ableness of it with the principles of our natural rea- son. For the proof of this, if it need any, the former it 3 6 A SERMON proposition hath laid a sufficient foundation. We ought not, nay, we cannot believe any thing further than there is reason given us for the truth of it. When therefore any thing is proposed to our belief, it is certain we must examine whether there be reason sufficient to persuade us to believe it. Now how can we examine this otherwise than by comparing the thing in question with some rules or principles of our own minds, by which we use to search out the truth or falsehood of things ? If the point recommended to our belief be agreeable to them, we judge it true ; if otherwise, we are to conclude it false. This is the way of proceeding of all mankind, when they deliberate concerning a proposition, whether it be true or false. Well then, some fixed, certain rules and principles we must have in ourselves, with which we are to com- pare, and by which we are to judge of the truth or falsehood of things recommended to us. Now the only remaining question is, what those rules and prin- ciples are? But indeed it is no question at all; for what other can be assigned besides our natural reason ? that is to say, our understandings acting according to those notions that are either connatural with it, or collected from our senses. These are the principles by which we are to judge of all things in the world that are not self-evident, that is to say, that need any proof to recommend them to our belief; and the com- paring things with these principles, and making con- clusions from such comparisons, is that which we call reason. Now it is certain, there is no man in the world can assign any other sure way of distinguishing truth from falsehood but this. And it is certain, that every man in the world, in all other things that do most ON 1 PETER III. 15. 7 nearly concern him, doth always make his judgment hy this rule and measure. And if in all other things, why not in matters of religion ? What pretence, what colour is there that religion only should he exempted from the tribunal of reason, to which all men's other concernments are confessedly subject? If indeed re- ligion was a thing designed to destroy and take away our natures ; if it was one thing to be a man, and another thing to be religious, there would be some colour for this : but there is no such thing. God in obliging us to religion considers us as men : he doth not thereby intend to destroy our human natures, but to improve them. Now, if in matters of religion we must be supposed to be dealt with as men, it is certain we can have no principles to judge of religion by, but only those common principles of reason which are planted in all the men in the world, and which constitute their natures, and distinguish them from brutes, and by which they are governed in all their human actions. If any man reply to this, that in things of religion we are to be guided by divine revelation, and not by reason; forasmuch as reason is utterly unable to di- rect us in the things of God ; we readily and heartily grant it : but this makes nothing against what I have now laid down. For this is that we say ; we are to judge of that revelation, whether it be from God or no, whether it be a divine revelation or an impos- ture ; I say, we are to judge of this by the principles of our reason. It is acknowledged by us as a certain thing, that after we are once convinced that God hath made a revelation of his will in any point, we are without more ado to believe it, and steadfastly to adhere to it. And there is the greatest reason in B 4 8 A SERMON the world that we should so do : for it is one of the first principles of reason that God cannot deceive others, nor be deceived himself ; and therefore what- ever he saith must be true. But then the matter in doubt is, how shall we be satisfied that God hath made such a revelation ? must we take every doctrine for a divine revelation that any one doth confidently affirm to be from God ? If so, then we shall never be secme from being imposed upon, and we shall have every day doctrines obtruded upon us for divine truth, which are utterly inconsistent with and con- tradictory to one another. On the other side, if we must not take every thing for a revelation from God that pretends to be so, then there is a necessity we should examine whether that which comes recom- mended to us as such doth really deserve that name. But what rules or measures can we examine this by, but the principles of our natural, inbred senses and reason ; those principles of truth which God hath im- planted in our natures antecedently to all positive revelations of his will ? If any man will not be content with this, but will object further in this matter, that we are not to judge of God's revelations by reason, but by the Spi- rit ; in order to the making an answer to this, all that we desire to know is, what they who thus af- firm do mean by the Spirit f If by the Spirit they mean only the assistance of the Holy Spirit given to well-disposed persons for the removing of their pre- judices and sinful lusts, that may hinder them from embracing the truth, and the better enabling them to make use of their reason and discerning faculties in the searching and finding out the truth, we grant what they say. We do believe that the Spirit of ON 1 PETER III. 15. 9 God doth thus concur with every good man to the working faith in him, or the making him a believer. But if by the Spirit, which they say is to judge of the things pertaining to God and religion, they mean a principle in a man that hath no agreement or communication with that other principle of his nature which we call reason, but is a thing put in opposition and contradiction to that, then we ut- terly deny what they affirm. We say, that such a spirit ought not to have any influence upon our un- derstandings, or to be any rule or measure of our belief. For at this rate we could never have any fixed rule to distinguish between the spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood, and every imposture of the Devil's might pass with us for the dictate of the Spirit of God ; and we could no way help it : in a word, we had no way to try spirits, but must be- lieve every spirit pretending to come from God : which is expressly contrary to the apostle's com- mand, who bids us not to believe every spirit, but to try the spirits whether they be of God or no, 1 John iv. 1. How much soever therefore the Spirit of God doth influence us in order to the making us believers, this doth not in the least hinder but that we are to try and examine the spirits ; that is, to use our utmost skill and endeavour to find out whe- ther that Spirit that would persuade us to the belief of such and such doctrines be really from God or no. And what rule have we to try the spirits by, but the principles of reason which is planted in our natures : that is to say, our senses, and our common notions, and the dictates of that natural religion which every man is born with. By the agreement or disagree- ment of any doctrine proposed to those principles, 10 A SERMON we only can certainly know whether the revelation that propounds that doctrine be from God or no. And thus much let it suffice to have spoken of our second position. 3. The third assertion is this : That whatever is propounded to us in matters of religion, if it do plainly and evidently contradict the principles of natural reason, and be repugnant thereto, we ought not to believe it as coming from God, because it cannot be true. I put in these terms of plainly and evidently, be- cause several points there may be of that nature, that they may seemingly clash with reason, though they do not ; and may seem to contradict sense, which yet do not. And so ill judges are some men, both of sense and reason, that they may reject a point as inconsistent with both, which yet to all the wiser sort of men will appear highly agreeable to them. But whatever is plainly and evidently re- pugnant to the common sense of mankind, that is to say, contradicts those principles by which all men distinguish between truth and falsehood, and in such things and objects where sense and reason have a fair scope to exercise themselves ; I say, whatever in this case is repugnant to those principles, ought not to be admitted by us as a truth of God, nor con- sequently ought it to obtain our belief. For if we are to judge of the truth of divine reve- lations by the principles of our reason, then cer- tainly whatever is contained in any revelation which pretends to be divine that is evidently contradictory to those principles, that very thing ought to be a just and sufficient argument to make us reject that revelation as to that point ; for it is certain that ON 1 PETER IIL 15. 11 truth cannot be contrary to truth. But now we suppose that our reason and common notions and senses are all true, and to be relied upon ; otherwise they would be no rules for us to measure and judge of other things by. Whatever therefore doth con- tradict them cannot be true, and consequently can- not be supposed to come from God. But some may say, May not God reveal something to mankind in religion, and oblige them to believe it, which is contrary to reason? I answer, He can no more be supposed to do this, than he can be sup- posed to deny himself. For those natural notices we have for the distinguishing of truth and false- hood of things that are represented to us are from him ; they are the image of his own mind impress- ed upon our souls ; and therefore, whatever doth not agree with these faithful copies cannot pos- sibly agree with the original. If we once be brought to believe that God's revelations in any part of them do contradict the common principles of reason im- planted in our nature, we must of necessity at the same time believe that God can do and undo at the same time ; that he doth at pleasure so alter the nature of things, that that which was true yesterday is not true to day, and that which is now true, and acknowledged to be true by us, (because we have the best evidence in the world for the truth of it,) shall, upon a new revelation that he may make, cease to be true to-morrow. Which position if it do not destroy all truth and all morality, I do not know what doth. The use I make of this point is this : that when any person endeavours to persuade us to the belief of any point, we should in the first place satisfy our- selves that the point is not repugnant to our reason 12 A SERMON or our senses. 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 persuade us is either an impostor himself, or imposed upon, since he teacheth that for a divine truth which is a perfect falsehood. As for instance : If any man will endeavour to draw me over to the belief of the doctrine of tran- substantiation ; that is to say, to believe that in the sacrament of the Lord's supper that which appears to me to be bread and wine is not really bread and wine, but the very body and blood of Christ that was broken and shed sixteen hundred years ago, and is now (as all Christians agree) at the right hand of God in heaven ; I ought not to believe him in this, be he otherwise never so credible a person, because it contradicts my own reason and my senses. And though for my conviction he quotes a thousand times the words of our Saviour, who said, This is my body, and, This is my blood, yet I must say, that our Sa- viour could not mean these words in the sense that he means them ; for if he did understand them in that sense, he must in effect tell me I am not to be- lieve my own eyes, nor my own taste, nor my own feeling, in a plain matter of sense, nor my own rea- son in a thing that is as obvious as any thing in the world. Again ; If a man will preach to me that for the cause of religion it is lawful for a bishop to depose and murder sovereign princes ; that I may take oaths of fidelity to the government, and yet break them upon a dispensation from the vicar of Christ ; that I may affirm or deny any thing before an heretical ma- gistrate, though it be with the solemnity of venturing ON 1 PETER III. 15. 13 my salvation upon it, by swearing upon the Gospels ; that I am not to keep faith with man so long as I have a secret reservation in my mind, and am privi- leged thereto by the license of my spiritual guide ; I say, whoever would impose upon me in such things as these, ought, without any other dispute, to be re- jected by me as a cheat. For what he would per- suade me to is contrary to the natural notions of re- ligion and justice and honesty that are implanted in my mind. And if he pretend any revelation from scripture for these things, I may certainly deny it, because no revelation, no scripture of God, can allow of such things ; they being contrary to the principles of natural religion ; that is, that natural reason I have concerning religion, upon the credit of which I am to believe and receive all scripture and revelations. Again ; If any one would convince me that I ought to worship the blessed Virgin or any other saint, and assure me that several miracles have been wrought for the confirmation of this point ; why here I must also refuse my assent upon the same account. If a thousand 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 worship none but himself with divine wor- ship, and if that declaration of his has been con- firmed by an infinite number of undoubted miracles in old time, both of Moses and the prophets, and Christ, and his apostles ; all the new miracles they tell us of ought to signify nothing to us. For God having once declared his will, and attested that de- claration by many uncontrollable, unexceptionable miracles, that is to be our standing, perpetual rule to walk by: and whatever miracles are opposed thereto A SERMON in these latter times ought not to be regarded by us ; but we are to look upon them either as the delusions of the Devil, or the figments and impostures of de- signing men. For it is an eternal and unalterable principle of reason, that what God hath once made a law to mankind, and hath declared likewise that he will never alter that law, or put a new one in the place of it ; that law shall always bind, whatever pre- tences of new credentials or attestations from Heaven be made use of to make us believe that it is repealed or dispensed with. Lastly, If any man will be insinuating that the scripture is now out of doors, as being a dead letter, and that it is the Spirit that is to guide us all ; that the sacraments of Christianity and the historical matters of our faith concerning Jesus Christ's birth, life, and sufferings, are all to be interpreted in a mystical, spiritual sense ; which sense we are to have from the inspiration of the spirit that witnesseth within us ; such a man as this I ought to abandon as a false prophet, as one that opposeth my sense and reason, and sets up a private spirit against the reason of mankind and the revelation of Jesus Christ, once publicly attested to the satisfaction and conviction of the world. 4. And thus much of my third point; I now pro- ceed to my last proposition : That, notwithstanding what we have said, there may be many things in re- ligion highly reasonable to be believed, which yet natural reason could not discover; nor after they are discovered can it fully comprehend. Though we do affirm that God doth never oblige us to believe any thing contrary or repugnant to reason ; yet at the same time we do heartily acknowledge that he ON 1 PETER IH. 15. 15 hath obliged us to believe several things which can- not be demonstrated by reason; nay, and some things which reason cannot so perfectly fathom as to master all the difficulties of them. But yet for all that, there is infinite reason that we should believe these things ; and in the belief of them, we proceed upon those very foundations of common sense and reason that we have all this while been establishing. For instance ; it cannot be demonstrated by rea- son, that God should send his son Jesus Christ for the salvation of mankind ; much less that he should expose him to a cruel death, as a sacrifice for the sins of the world. Nor can it be proved by reason, that this Jesus, that died for us, must at the end of the world come again visibly in person to judge the quick and the dead ; and that then all men that have ever died shall be raised ; that is to say, they shall have bodies united to their souls, so as to find themselves perfectly the same persons which they were in this world ; (which is that which we call the resurrection ;) I say, reason could not have found out any of these things. The most sagacious and contemplative man upon earth could never have discovered this method of God's proceeding with mankind. Or if he should have happened on some thoughts or fancies about some of these points, yet he could never, by solid arguments, have proved them to be certain truths : because they altogether de- pended upon the pleasure of God. So that these things we are to believe perfectly upon the authority of divine revelation. We therefore know them to be true, because God hath told us that they are so : but then, after God hath revealed these doctrines to us by his son Jesus Christ and his apostles, they do IG A SERMON appear so highly reasonable in themselves, and so every way suitable to the goodness and justice and wisdom of God, that any man's reason, if it be sin- cere and pure and unprejudiced, cannot but heartily close with them, and assent to them, as soon as ever they are fairly proposed with the evidence that at- tends them. Nor is there any objection to be made against them, either in point of possibility, or in point of reasonableness, or in point of evidence, but what any considering man can easily quit himself of. But then, there is another sort of doctrines which our Christianity obliges us to believe, which are more mysterious ; that is to say, do not lie so plain and obvious to our reason, even after they are re- vealed to us, as the former do. But so much are they above the capacity of our short understandings, that we must believe them without being able to have a full and adequate comprehension of them. And such are these two articles of our religion, the doctrine of the Incarnation and the doctrine of the Trinity. Not that these doctrines are unintelligible, or that we cannot form a consistent notion of them, for it is certainly otherwise; we may truly under- stand, and form a consistent notion of both these points : but this is the thing, by reason of the in- finity of the object that is here presented to us, and the shallowness of our finite understandings that are to consider them, we must of necessity fall short of seeing so clearly through these points, as not to be entangled with great difficulties when we would overcuriously pry into them. But then, all this may well consist with what we have been asserting. Not- withstanding this, we do in no wise act contrary to ON 1 PETER III. 15. 17 reason or sense, in giving assent to those doctrines, how much above our reason soever they be. We are still able to give an answer to every one that shall ask us a reason of the faith that is in us, even as to these two sublime mysteries. There is nothing in them contrary to our common sense and reason, and so it is possible they may be true. God Almighty (and that we can prove) hath actually re- vealed and taught them by his Son : and so we are certain they are true. Here is sufficient satisfaction for our reason, and here is sufficient evidence for our faith. All that we have here to do, is to examine whether Jesus Christ and his apostles have taught these doctrines : and when we are convinced of that, to believe them heartily, to profess them con- stantly, to worship God according to the discoveries he hath made of his nature, and to acquiesce in these revelations without troubling ourselves or others with nice questions and speculations about them. But yet here it is that we are nowadays briskly attacked by the patrons of that doctrine which I touched upon under my last head. Rather than we shall not believe transubstantiation, they would have us call in question the Trinity and Christ's Incarna- tion. For, say they, you have the same evidence in scripture for the one doctrine that you have for the other ; and as for the point of reason, the one is every whit involved with as many difficulties and absurdities as the other is pretended to be : why therefore should you not equally believe botli ? I have not now time to answer this argument as it deserves to be answered. Only I leave with you these three differences between the two doctrines, ABP. SHARPE, VOL. V. C 18 A SERMON ON 1 PETER III. 15. transubstantiation on the one hand, and the Trinity and Incarnation on the other. The first is, that there is not the same evidence in the word of God for the one that there is for the other ; the former being- nowhere evidently taught there, no, nor thought to be taught there by the Christians of the first ages ; the latter being plainly delivered by Christ and his apostles, as the very foundation of Christianity, and the faith into which all believers were to be baptized. The second difference is, that transubstantiation is plainly about a matter that falls under the cogni- zance of our senses and reason. But the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation have an infinite God for their object, to whose nature neither our senses nor our reason is any ways adequate or commensu- rate. The third difference is, that there are manifest absurdities and contradictions in the one doctrine, but none at all in the other two. Though they be above our reason, yet they are not contrary to it. But I may speak more of these things and of this text hereafter. In the mean time consider what you have heard, and God give you understanding in all things. N. B. See these three last points of difference enlarged upon, in the latter end of the second sermon against tran- substantiation. A SERMON ON 1 PETER III. 15. — be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you. Two general points I laid down to insist upon from this text. First, That faith and reason are not inconsistent one with another, but may well stand together. If we be obliged to be able to give an account of the reasonableness of our faith, (which is the same thing which is here called hope,) then certainly we are not obliged to believe any thing which is unreasonable, or that we cannot give a reason for believing it. Secondly, That it is not enough that our faith or religion be reasonable in itself, but it is the duty of every professor of that faith so to satisfy himself of the reasonableness of his belief, as to be able to an- swer them that ask a reason of it. And therefore every man not only may, but ought to inquire into the grounds of his faith, or religion, and not so to rely upon any human authority, as to believe, without ex- amination, every thing that is proposed to him. These are the two points, or doctrines, or observa- tions, which I raised upon this text ; and which I designed both to explain and to vindicate. The former of them I have already despatched. I now proceed to the other. II. It is not indeed in direct words asserted in the text, but it is by necessary consequence inferred c 2 20 A SERMON from it. For if every Christian ought so well to inform himself about what he believes, as to be able to give others a reason of his faith, then he cer- tainly not only may, but ought to examine every thing that is proposed to his belief, and upon that examination to make a judgment, whether it is rea- sonable for him to believe it or no. This consequence is so 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 delivered as the privilege and as the duty of all Christians, even those that are private persons. It is not to the bishops and pastors and guides of souls only, but to the people, that St. Paul directed that precept of his, in his First Epistle to the Thes- salonians, that they should prove all things, and hold fast that which is good, ver. 21. Every thing was to be tried and examined before they admitted of it. And if after that trial and examination they found it to be a good doctrine, a doctrine agreeable to the gospel, then they were to embrace it, and so to hold it as never to depart from it. It was likewise to all Christians that St. John wrote when he said these words, Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God : because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 1 Ep. iv. 1. 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 inspired man, or that would pretend to deliver doctrines to us as the in- fallible truths of God ; but we are to examine those that make this pretence, whether they can really ON 1 PETER III. 15. 2] produce their credentials that they come from God. AVe are to examine likewise the doctrines they teach, whether they be really agreeable to those principles of natural and revealed truths which we are sure came from God. And there is great reason why we should all thus try before we trust ;for, as the apostle adds, there are many false prophets, that is, false teachers, gone out into the world. Furthermore, what is the meaning of all those several exhortations and declarations of our Saviour, where he desired the people to search the scriptures, John v. 39, as the true way to bring them to the belief of him and his doctrines ; where he cautions them against calling any man rabbi, or master, upon earth ; because they have but one Master, or Teach - er, Matt, xxiii. 8, 10. and that is, our Lord Jesus ? where he reproaches them for too blindly following their guides, telling them, if the blind lead the blind, both shall Jail into the ditch, Matt. xv. 14 ? where he expostulated with them for relying too much upon the authority of their teachers, and therefore rejecting his doctrines because their superiors did not believe them ? Why of your own selves, saith he, did ye not judge that which is right? Luke xii. 57. Sure if any thing can be plain, it is plain from the New Testament, that God not only allows, but also re- quires, that every man in matters of his salvation should judge for himself ; and not so give up him- self to the conduct of any human authority, but that he ought still to be at liberty to examine doc- trines of faith by the common principles of reason and divine revelation ; and according as he finds them agreeable to or inconsistent with those prin- ciples, either to admit them or reject them. c 3 2* A SERMON I will but mention one thing more upon this head, and I have done. Mind these words of St. Paul : If ' we, says he, or an angel from heaven, preach to yon any other gospel than what ye have received, let him he accursed, Gal. i. 8. How! not an apostle, not the greatest of all the apostles, St. Paul, who laboured more abundantly in the work of the Lord than all the apostles, not for him to preach another gospel ; no, nor an angel from heaven, though he came with never so many signs and wonders ; (as undoubtedly if an angel from heaven was to preach, it would be with miracles in abundance ;) I say, for these not to be believed, when they taught things contrary to and inconsistent with the standing revelations of gospel, as we have them in the scriptures ; nay, not only not to be believed, but to be abhorred ; to be utterly rejected as impostors and false prophets, and to be accursed ; I say, what are we to gather from hence ? Certainly, if we can gather any thing, we may gather these three things : 1. That there is but one gospel ; that very gospel which was preached by Christ and his apostles, and which we have conveyed down to us in the books of the New Testament. 2. That whatever article of faith is proposed to our belief, if it be repugnant to that gospel once de- livered to us, is to be rejected as a false doctrine ; and the preachers of such doctrines, let them be apostles or angels, let them shew never so many mi- racles for the proof of their mission, are not to be heard, but held as false prophets. 3. That every man who hath once been instructed in the gospel of Christ, and is a professor of it, is to judge for himself, whether any doctrine that is pro- ON 1 PETER III. 15. posed to him be agreeable to that gospel or no. If it be inconsistent with the gospel which he hath once received, he is to reject it, though St. Paul, or an angel from heaven, should preach it to him. I say, of this every man is to be judge for himself; for otherwise why should St. Paul say this to the people of Galatia? why should he tell them so so- lemnly, that they should adhere to that gospel he had preached to them, notwithstanding all the pre- tences of the false teachers that were come among them? Nay, he tells them, that if he himself, or an angel from heaven, should preach to them any other gospel than what they had received before, they should not be heard. Did he not plainly in this make them the judges of that gospel, and of what was consistent with it and inconsistent with it? was not that gospel the standard by which they were to measure all other new doctrines ? and were not they themselves to be the measurers ? were not they to be the judges? Certainly it must be so ; and for the making it appear, I would only ask this ; Whether it had been a fault or a sin in the Galatians, after St. Paul had thus warned them, to have taken up, or given credit to any doctrines of the false apostles contrary to the gospel ? If it be answered, that this were a sin and a fault in them, if they did so, then I infer undeni- ably that they were true and proper judges of what was the doctrine of the gospel, and what was not. It was their parts, having been instructed in the true gospel, to have compared the novel doctrines of the false teachers with it, and accordingly as they found them disagreeing to the gospel, to have re- jected them. If this had not been their duty, it c 4 24 A SERMON could not have been their sin to have followed the false teachers in their new doctrines. So that the inference remains strong and unde- niable, that in matters wherein man's salvation is concerned, he is to be a judge for himself. And God having given him a rule to judge by, he is to examine all doctrines that are proposed to him as necessary to be believed by that rule ; and whatso- ever doctrine he finds different from or inconsistent with that rule, he is to reject, whosoever the man be, or whatsoever the church be, that proposeth them to him. And thus I think I have sufficiently made good my point : but I ought not thus to leave it. How plain soever this matter seems to be, yet there are at this day [1687] no small stirs made about it. Nay, I believe I may say, that upon this very point the main disputes do turn which do at this day divide the Christian church in these parts of the world. Thus far we are all agreed, that the religion of Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation. And like- wise we are agreed, that every man ought so far to inquire into Christ's religion, as to be satisfied what it is, and where it is to be found. But then here it is we begin to differ. As Christianity now goes in these western parts of the world, there are two different ways prescribed for the coming to the knowledge of Christ's religion ; and each of them is vigorously contended for by their several parties. The one way is that which the Roman catholics go ; and in short it is this : That every man, as to the concernments of his soul, is so far to inquire and examine, till he be satisfied which is the true church ON 1 PETER III. 15. 25 of Christ. But after he hath once found that true church, he has no need of further examining, hut he is from henceforward to yield up himself to the go- vernment of that church, and to believe every thing which that church teacheth without further exam- ination ; because that the true church is infallible, neither can he deceived itself nor deceive others. The other way is that which the protestants go ; and it is this : That Jesus Christ being the sole au- thor of our faith and religion, we ought not, we can- not believe any thing as an article of faith, or as ne- cessary to salvation, but what he and his inspired apo- stles taught ; nor have we any certain way of know- ing what they taught, but by the holy scriptures they left behind them. These we are sure are the word of God, and do contain all the necessary points that Christ and his apostles 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 necessity to salvation," (as our church in her Articles doth word it.) And there- fore whatever doctrine is recommended to us as an article of faith, if we find that the scriptures teach it, or that it may by good consequence be proved from thence, we do heartily and willingly embrace it. On the other side, if we find any doctrine which is re- commended to us as an article of faith to be repug- nant to the holy scriptures, or to clash with them, we do certainly reject it. And this right and privilege of examining matters of religion, and trying them by the holy scriptures, we do not so appropriate to the guides of the church, (though they of all others, as they are best qualified, so are they most especially obliged to do this,) but we do allow it also to every 26 A SERMON man of a private capacity, so far as he hath means and opportunities of informing himself. For since, as the Roman catholics say, every man's salvation depends upon his professing the true reli- gion of Jesus Christ, it is but infinitely reasonable that every man should judge for himself about that religion. And since, as we say, (and most of them likewise acknowledge,) that all the religion of Jesus Christ is contained in the scriptures, it is but infi- nitely reasonable, say we, that every man should be well satisfied that the doctrines which are pro- posed to him as articles of faith are really the doc- trines of holy scripture. And whether they be so or not, he is to be the sole judge himself, taking in all the best helps he can have for the making such a judgment. This is a plain account of the two ways that are prescribed or advised for the coming to the true faith ; the one by the Roman catholics, the other by us. In this both agree, that every man is allowed, nay is bound, to make inquiry or examination of his religion : we are all agreed that every man should be able to give a reason for the hope that is in him. But then here we differ. The Roman catholics say, 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 determina- tions. The protestants say, that a man cannot know the true church but by examining the doc- trines which that church holds and teacheth, whether thev be Christ's doctrines or no ; and there being no way to know that, but by examining whether they do really agree with those doctrines that are taught ON 1 PETER III. 15. 27 in the holy scriptures, I say, since this is the case, there is a necessity of allowing every particular man to try his faith by the holy scriptures, and after that trial to judge for himself. So that you see here is a material difference be- tween us. The Roman catholics do only so far inquire into religion as to find the true church, and after that, they submit to their church's guides in all things. The protestants do inquire into Christ's re- ligion as it is taught by the word of God, and by that they find out the true church. The one be- lieve the doctrines of religion for the church's sake that teaches them ; the other believe the church for the doctrines' sake that she teacheth, as being in all things agreeable to the word of God. The one take up their religion from the church ; the other take up their church from its religion. Or if you would have me express this business in the language of my text ; if a protestant be required to give a reason of the hope that is in him, it will be necessary for him to give a rational account of all the articles of his faith. But if a Roman cathoUc be required to do this, it is sufficient to say, that he rests satisfied in the judgment of his superiors ; or, to use the words of the Rhemish Testament, " The man saith enough, " and defendeth himself sufficiently, that answers, he " is a catholic, and that he will live and die in that " faith, and that his church can give a reason of all " things which are demanded of him." So that if the church be but able to give a reason of the faith, it is no great matter whether the man that profess- eth that faith be able to give an answer or no. And now having laid before you the two different ways of giving a reason of our faith, I will, if you 28 A SERMON please, fairly examine both of them ; and I will begin with the Roman catholics' way of inquiring and giving a reason of our faith. And that, as I told you, is this ; that though we are every one to examine and inquire about our re- ligion, and so to be able to give a reason of our faith, yet the main thing we are to inquire or ex- amine into is this ; Which is the true church where infallibility is lodged ? for after we have found that church (as we find it nowhere but in the church of Rome) our inquiry is at an end. We are from henceforward to believe and to obey the church. This is the point I am now to discuss, and I will do it with all the fairness and all the plainness I possibly can ; though all that I shall do at this time towards it is onlv to ask these two or three questions. First of all, since it is acknowledged by them that we are to make use of our best skill and reason and sagacity for the finding of the true church, how comes it about, that all on a sudden, after we have found that true church, we must discard these things as useless tools, and never after employ either our skill or our reason or our natural sagacity, for the making a judgment of any point that concerns our souls ? This is very hard and unfair dealing with those parts that God Almighty hath given us. In all other concernments of our lives we find, and are sensible, that those powers and faculties in us which first enable us to understand any business, and to set about it, we have need of in the conduct of that business ever after. In every paltry design of this world, a man thinks it not enough that he hath laid his projects well, and ON 1 PETER III. 15. 29 put them into good hands, but if he means to have success in his designs, he is obliged to pursue them, and to make use of all the talents of wit and industry he hath to bring them about. Reason is never to forsake him, or, if it do, it is ten to one but he is forsaken of others upon whom he depended. But now, as the case stands in religion, according to the Roman catholic doctrine, reason, and thinking, and studying, and examination, and industry, and search, though they be necessary tools, to be made use of for the putting a man into good hands, yet, after he is in those hands, he is to throw all these things away, and never after to make use of them. Doth this look like a doctrine of God ? No, certainly : every one that understands the dignity of his own nature, and knows what reason is, and how far men differ from brutes, and in what things they excel them, will be of another opinion. How can any man conceive that God should have given us our reasons and un- derstandings merely for the finding the true church, and afterwards those reasons and understandings should be altogether insignificant as to matters of re- ligion ; that we should have no use of them, but be acted like so many machines ! Is this to offer a rea- sonable service to God ? The Roman catholic doctrine supposeth us all to have eyes, and to be able to choose our way, so long as we are heretics, or so long as we are wavering ; all that time they allow us to have our eyesight, and then they bid us to inquire, and examine, 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 to prove, or try. But what is this but in plain English to tell 30 A SERMON us, God hath given you eyes for the choice of your guide, but after you are satisfied that you have light on a good guide, you are from henceforward to put out your eyes, and for ever after to act as you are ordered by your guide ? Another question I would ask is this. They tell us that we are to inquire and examine matters of re- ligion, till we have found the true church, but after that, we are to acquiesce in the determinations of that church. Now the question I would ask is, How we shall find the true church any other way than by comparing the doctrines that the church holds with the holy scriptures ? I know that the Roman catholics have taken a great deal of pains to give us the notes of the true church. And of all others cardinal Bellarmine has taken the greatest pains, and hath given us fifteen notes of the true church, and one of those notes is sanctity of doctrine. We do all grant that he is per- fectly right in this, however he may be mistaken in the rest. For it is certain that the true church of Christ is to be known by the doctrines it teacheth ; and no church can be a true church, unless it pro- fesseth and teacheth Christ's true doctrines as to all the foundations of Christianity. But now if this be so, as it certainly is, how can any man pretend to know the true church, without a particular examina- tion of the doctrines that that church teaches ? If one mark of the true church be, (as Bellarmine says it is,) that it should teach the doctrine of Jesus Christ, then certainly we cannot know the true church till we have examined its doctrines ; and therefore, be- fore we can know the goodness of a church, we are to examine and inquire whether the doctrines that ON 1 PETER III. 15. 81 are taught in it be all honest, and Christian, and pious, and agreeable to the word of God. So that, after all, every man is to examine by the word of God what things he is to believe in order to his sal- vation. But, thirdly, here is a greater point yet behind : for admitting the church of Christ to be infallible, nay, admitting the church of Rome (which pretends to be the catholic church) to be infallible, yet would private men be the better for it? would they be more secure from errors in faith than we who pre- tend to no infallibility? This is a very great question ; unless every particular guide that is to convey the church's faith down to us be infallible likewise ; nay, unless every private man that hearkens to that guide were also as infallible in taking the true sense of the doctrines, as the teacher is infallible in proposing them. And, lastly, here comes the great question of all ; How doth it appear that that church, or any church, or all churches taken together, are infallible in all things that they propose as articles of faith ? I must confess I take this to be a very difficult thing to be proved ; nay, I say further, it is impossible to be proved ; nay, as far as a negative can be proved, we can prove the contrary. But I dare not now enter upon these points, but shall reserve them, together with what remains upon this argument, to another opportunity. A SERMON ON 1 PETER III. 15. — be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you. The point which I was last insisting upon was this : That it appears from this text, that it is the duty of every Christian so to satisfy himself ahout the reasonableness of his belief, as to be able to an- swer them that ask a reason of it. And therefore every man not only may, but ought to inquire into the grounds of his faith or religion, and not so to rely upon the authority of his guides, as to believe Avithout examination every thing that is proposed by them. This is the point before us. And I endeavoured to make it good by such arguments as I thought most convincing, viz. such as were drawn from plain texts of scripture. After this, I proceeded to give an account of the two different ways and methods 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 religion ; we are all agreed that every man should be able to give a reason of the hope that is in him. But then here we differ : one party saith 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 con- cluded by that church's determinations, because that ON 1 PETER III. 15. 33 the true church, wherever it is, is infallible to all that she proposeth as matters of faith. The other party saith, that a man cannot know the true church but by examining the doctrines which that church holds and teacheth, whether they be Christ's doctrines or no. And there being no way to know that, but by examining whether they do really agree with those doctrines which we are sure were taught by Christ and his apostles, and are contained in the holy scrip- tures ; I say, since this is the case, there is a neces- sity of allowing every person to try his faith by the holy scriptures, (making use of the best means he hath for the right understanding of them,) and after that trial, to judge for himself. So that you see here is a material difference. The one side would have men only so far inquire into religion as to find the true church, and after that, to submit to their guides in all things. The other side would have men to inquire into Christ's religion as it is taught in the word of God, and to make use of their own judgment all along. The one believes the particu- lar doctrines of religion for the church's sake that teacheth them ; the other believes the church for the sake of the doctrine that she teacheth. The one takes up his religion from the church, the other takes up his church from its religion. Having thus given an account wherein the main difference between the two churches lies, as to this point, I proceed to inquire which of these two ways, theirs or ours, doth most recommend itself to a pru- dent man. And here I urged two things against their way, and for ours ; that their way seems very hard and unnatural, because it puts an affront upon the faculties that God hath given us, for the examin- ABP. SHARPS, VOL. V. D 34 A SERMON ing and judging of things by ; and, secondly, that it seems to be destructive of itself; for since both sides are agreed, that that cannot be the true church which doth not hold the true doctrines of Jesus Christ, and since they themselves do assign it as a mark or a note whereby we may come to know the true church, namely, that it holds Christ's true doc- trines ; how is it possible for any man to find the true church, without first examining what doctrines that church holdeth, and trying them by the scrip- tures, whether those doctrines be the doctrines of Jesus Christ or no : still making use, as I said be- fore, of the best means he hath for the right under- standing of those scriptures. And if thus much will be allowed us, we will contend for no more. Thus far I went the last time. And now, in the third place, I have this other thing to add about the inconveniency of their way more than ours ; and that is, allowing that to be true which they ground this their method upon, viz. that the true church is infallible ; I say, allowing this to be true, yet it doth not at all appear, that particular persons 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 per- haps not near so good. Both they and we acknowledge the scriptures are infallible ; and we say, that they are likewise so plain in all necessary points, that every Christian, with the help of such means as he hath daily at hand in our church, may rightly understand them, as to all points needful to his salvation ; so that every honest Christian among us may have a sure foundation to build his faith upon. ON 1 PETER III. 15. '65 On the other side their position is, that a private man cannot be certain that he is in the right way, unless he be certain that he adheres to the doctrines of the church, and squares his faith by them ; the church being the only infallible interpreter of scrip- ture. Well now, we will suppose a man heartily to be- lieve this ; is satisfied that he hath not true faith) unless he believes according to the faith of the church. Here a question ariseth, how shall he be able to know whether he believes as the church be- lieveth, that he holds all points of faith as the church holdeth them ? This he must be able certainly to know, or else he hath no better ground for his faith than his neighbours. Though the church is infal- lible in what she teaches, yet what doth this infalli- bility signify to him, unless he knows what the church teacheth ? But how shall he know that any better than he can know what the scripture teach- eth ? Nay, how can he know that half so easily as he may do the other ? it being certain, that the de- finitions of the church in matters of faith, as they are more in number, so they are more nice and in- tricate than those of the scripture are. Well, but to this it is answered, that private men, who have not abilities and opportunities of learning the doctrines of the church from its authentic de- crees, must rest satisfied in the judgment and direc- tion of their particular guides, and take the doc- trines of the church from them. Well, this is very true : but here the question returns : Are particular guides infallible or no? If they be not, then it is possible that the guides themselves may be mistaken, and, if so, they may mislead the man that trusts to d 2 36 A SERMON them ; and then what service doth the church's in- fallibility do him, in order to the certainty of his faith ? If it be said that particular guides are infal- lible, I only answer, it would be well if they were so ; but yet it is a thing that they themselves do not pre- tend to. Well, but supposing every guide or con- fessor was infallible in all things that he taught for the doctrine of the church, as the head of the church himself is, yet still the difficulty is not over. When a guide doth expound the catholic faith to a private man, and the man is certain that he doth rightly ex- pound it, yet how is he certain that he rightly un- derstands the meaning of those doctrines that his guide hath declared to him, for the faith of the church ? It is not a new thing for those that do make it their business to instruct others as plainly as possibly they can in matters of religion, to have their discourse most horribly misunderstood and per- verted by those that hear them. And now, if the thing be so, and this be the condition of all private men, that they may mistake what is taught them, then what security hath a man that gives up him- self entirely to the conduct of his guide, that he is not mistaken in matters of faith, any more than we have, who, besides the use of our guides, make use likewise of our own eyes in examining by the scrip- tures the doctrines they teach us ? nay, I ask, whe- ther indeed our security be not much greater than theirs ? It seems to me that there is the same dif- ference in our cases, as there is (to make the most favourable instance I can) between a man's taking up the truth of a relation at the third or fourth hand from a credible person, and so depending upon the truth of it, as he understands it, from him, with- ON 1 PETER III. 15. 37 out further examination ; and a man's taking the same story from the same person, but yet withal not sticking 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 current money, merely upon the credit of his goldsmith, without further trial, and a man's both advising with his goldsmith, and withal making use of all the other helps he can come by for the dis- cerning true money from counterfeit. But I am got a little out of my way ; all that I meant to shew under this head is this, that admit- ting the church to be infallible, yet private men would not be the better for it ; would not be more secure from errors in faith, than we who pretend to no infallibility, unless every particular guide that is to convey the church's faith down to us be infallible likewise. Nay further ; admitting every lawful teacher of the church to be infallible in what he taught, yet even that would, not secure us from error, unless also it was supposed that every man that hears him was as infallible in taking the true sense of those doc- trines, as the teacher is infallible in proposing them. And if these things be so, I leave it to any man to judge what greater matters the church's infallibility, if there was any such thing, could do as to the se- curing men from errors in faith, than the protestant way of adhering to the infallible scriptures in all matters of religion, and making use of all the helps we can for the right understanding of them. But, fourthly, let us at last come to the main point upon which all this dispute is grounded ; and that is plainly this : Whether indeed Christ hath D 3 38 A SERMON any infallible church upon earth or no? One side affirms that the true church of Christ is infallible, and that their church is that church. The other side deny that any church is infallible. If what they say be true, then we grant there is all the rea- son in the world that we should in all things submit to the definitions of their church, and it would be foolish to dispute any particular points after we were certain that that church had decided them ; though yet, as I have told you, the means of coming to that certainty are not so 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 see, that for the clear resolution of this point there are two things to be examined : first, whe- ther Christ hath any infallible church upon earth ; secondly, whether that church, which lays claim to this infallibility, be that church of Christ upon earth. But I shall drop this latter question ; for if it do appear that no church is infallible, there will be no need of confuting the claim that any particular church makes to that privilege. I hope I may inoffensively treat a little on this argument ; it is a point wherein our church is nearly concerned, and wherein she hath most expressly de- clared herself : and therefore it cannot be looked upon as a controversial point among us. It is a point likewise that is at present [1687] the great inquiry of unsettled minds, and therefore it cannot be judged unseasonable to speak a little about it. I would not willingly offend or exasperate any per- son upon earth, and most of all I would avoid it in ON 1 PETER III. 15. 39 my preaching. But if in the choice of the matter of my argument I should happen to displease, yet I promise those that are offended, that I will not dis- please them in the manner of my handling it. For I desire only to inform men's minds, but neither to provoke any men's passions nor to humour or gra- tify them : In speaking to this point, I desire only to premise this, in order to your clearer understanding the state of the question. We throw out of our debate all disputes about the church's infallibility in fundamentals. We are ready to grant, that the church of Christ is infallible in all points necessary to salvation. We do not in- deed approve much of the word infallible, because in this case it is improperly used ; (for in true speak- ing, the church is not more infallible in fundamentals than in those points that are not fundamental ;) but since the proposition is often put in these terms, we do not change them. But then you are to remem- ber, that all we mean, when we say that the catholic church is infallible in fundamentals, amounts to no more than this, that wherever there is a church of Christ, (as Christ hath promised there shall always be a church,) that church will retain all the founda- tions of Christ's doctrine ; will hold and teach all things that are absolutely necessary to salvation. And the reason why we affirm this is, because, in truth, without this it would be no church at all. But then this doth not hinder but that in the first place any particular church may err and fail, even in fundamental points, so as to cease to be any longer a true church. Because God hath not confined his catholic church to any particular place or country. d 4 40 A SERMON It is enough for the fulfilling of Christ's promises, that there shall for ever, to the end of the world, be somewhere or other a true church of Christ, pro- fessing and teaching all the essential, necessary points of his religion, which is all that is needful to the making of a church. Secondly, neither doth this concession of ours hin- der but that every particular church, nay, and all the churches of the world, though they may be in- fallible in fundamentals, (as we have phrased it,) that is, though they do hold the foundations of Christ's religion, and upon that account are true churches ; yet, for all that, they may err and mistake in matters that do not belong to the foundation. They are not secured by any privilege that Christ hath made over to them, even while they continue true churches, either from teaching falsehood for truth, or imposing such practices upon their members as are inconsistent with the laws of God. So that they cannot be relied upon, merely upon account of their authority, with- out an examination of their doctrines and practices. And this is indeed the true state of our point. The question then that is here to be discussed is, Whether Christ hath any church upon earth abso- lutely and in all things infallible ; so that that church is at all times secured from errors in all things which she proposeth or teacheth in matters of reli- gion ? this, I say, is the question ; and it is deter- mined by the church of England in the negative. And my work at present is, (though it be a very hard, nay an unreasonable task to prove negatives, yet,) fairly and modestly to lay before you some of the many reasons why we do not bebeve that there is any such infallible church, or that Christ ever in- ON 1 PETER III. 15. tended there should be such a one, though the time will oblige me to be very short. I. And the first thing we offer is this ; that if Christ had meant that there should be always an infallible church upon earth, we cannot but believe that it would have been somewhere or other ex- pressly told us in the New Testament, both that there was an infallibility lodged in the church for ever, and likewise in which of all the churches in the world this infallibility was lodged ; that so, upon all occasions, Christians in all ages might know where to have recourse to that infallible church. But now, this not being done in the whole New Testament, neither by our Saviour nor by his apostles, it is a strong argument to us that no such thing was ever intended by them. We are not ignorant that several texts of the New Testament are produced as proofs of the church's infallibility. But in truth, if those texts be but never so little considered, and men be not carried away with the mere sound of words, it will appear to any unbiassed reader, that even those texts do not speak at all to the business of infallibility ; or, if they do, they concern none but the apostles themselves. Thus, for instance, to prove the church's infalli- bility, they urge the words of our Saviour to St. Peter ; / say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this, rock will I build my church ; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, Matt. xvi. 18. But now, whatsoever be here meant by the rock upon which Christ would build his church, whether St. Peter's person, or the faith that he then confessed, as most of the fathers interpret it ; yet it is plain that Christ did not here promise infallibility to his 42 A SERMON church, but only a perpetuity. He did not say that his church should never err, but he said, that his church should never perish. Everyone that knows any thing of the language of scripture will be satis- fied that is the meaning of the phrase, that the gates of hell should never prevail against his church. Again : They urge these words of our Saviour, Matt, xviii. 15. where he advises, that if a man's brother trespass against him, and the matter cannot be made up between them, either by a private ad- monition, or by referring it to the arbitration of two or three friends ; in that case, the last remedy that the injured person had was to tell the business to the church ; and if the man refused to hear the church, he was then to be accounted as an heathen or a publican, ver. 17- But what is here meant by telling the church ? there lies all the difficulty. Why, every one that considers the scope of the place will plainly see that Christ 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 publicly of the injury to the congregation ; and if upon the advice or rebukes of the governor of the assembly the man did not make satisfaction, but still continued obstinate, the injured person was not from henceforward obliged to use any more en- deavours to bring him to a sense of his fault, but might after that look upon him as a stranger, or an heathen, and no longer as a brother. This is plainly the sense of the place. But what is this to the business of infallibility ? if it make any thing that way, it rather proves the infallibility of the superiors of every congregation, or the in- fallibility of every bishop's consistory, in redressing ON 1 PETER III. 15. 43 complaints that come before them, than the infalli- bility of the church in determining matters of faith. Thus again it is urged, that Christ told his apostles that he would be with them, that is, with them and with the bishops that succeeded them, to the end of the world, Matth. xxviii. 20. Right ; Christ will always, by the influence of his Spirit, be present, not only with the governors of his church, but with every member of his church. But yet, I say, this doth not imply that every member or every bishop is infal- lible. For my part, I should think it did more con- cern our Lord Jesus, by virtue of this promise, to make his church impeccable, than to make it infal- lible. My meaning is, that it was a much more de- sirable thing to secure his ministers and people from the danger of sin than from the danger of error. But the former he hath not done, and therefore I much doubt of the latter. Again : It is urged, that Christ said to his apostles, that after his departure he would send the Com- forter to them, even the Spirit of truth, and when he came he should lead them into cdl truth, John xvi. 13. This is very true : and our Saviour was as good as his word ; for he did by his Spirit lead the apostles 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 promise was made only to the apostles, and not to all that should come after them. For after he had said that the Spirit should lead them into all truth, he pre- sently adds these words, and he will shew you things to come,ver. 13; viz. he would endue the apostles with the gift of prophecy. But now I hope all those that 44 A SERMON succeed the apostles in the church do not pretend to any such assistance of the Spirit as that was. If the bishops of any church can shew that they have the gift of prophecy in a continued succession, and that they can foretell things to come, as the apostles did, then we will own that this promise of Christ was directed to his church in all ages. But not till then. Lastly, it is brought for a proof of the church's in- fallibility, that St.Paul tells Timothy, lEp.iii. 15, that the church ivas the pillar and ground of the truth. Why, admitting that St. Paul said so, yet it is plain that it was not of the church, but of a church, a particular church, viz. that of Ephesus, that he spoke these words ; which church of Ephesus, where Ti- mothy was bishop, is not now in being, though while 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 supposing we understand these words of St. Paul of the church catholic, as the Roman catholics would have us, yet even this will do them no service at all. For we say, in the first place, that he might style the church a pillar and support of truth, not upon account that it always is so, and always shall be so, but because it ought to be so; just as our Saviour calls all his disciples, all Christians, the salt of the earth, and yet in the same place tells us, that that salt may become unsavoury, Matt. v. 15. It is the duty of Christians 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 these attributes, that either the one or the other shall always perform or make good those characters. I say, if we do give this ac- ON 1 PETER III. 15. 45 count of the passage in St. Paul, there is none of them can confute us. Again: We say, in the second place, that the church may be always a pillar and ground of the truth, and yet be far from being infallible. All that St. Paul can be supposed to have meant by this phrase, if he had spoke of the catholic church, can be no more than this, that the church of Christ should always be the pillar and support of that necessary truth which goes to the making up the mystery of godliness, ver. 16, which he speaks of in the very next verse; that is to say, the fundamental truths of Christianity shall be always taught and professed in the church, viz. so much truth as will carry the professors of it to heaven, if they live up to it. But this comes infinitely short of infallibility. The church may be thus a pillar and support of the truth, and yet at the same time hold and teach a great many errors. But although this is sufficient to shew that this text, if understood of the church, makes nothing for infallibility ; yet I believe any indifferent person that reads the words, and minds them well, will be almost forced to acknowledge that they are not to be un- derstood of the church, but to be applied to Timothy himself, to whom the apostle writes, so as to be read thus : These things I write unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly ; but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how to behave thyself in the house of God, the church of the living God, as a pillar and support of the truth. He is giving rules to Timothy how to behave himself in the church, which he calls the house of God. Now, after that he called it ati house, one would think it not proper 46 A SERMON that he should in the very same breath call it a pil- lar of an house. But now it is very natural to give that name to Timothy, and to exhort him to behave himself as such in the house of God ; as indeed the apostles and bishops are in scripture called by the name of pillars. And if you take the text in this sense, (as I do verily believe this is the meaning of it,) it is still further off from the purpose that it is brought for. These are the chief texts in the Bible that are brought in favour of the church's perpetual infalli- bility. But you see by that little I have said of them, that not one of them doth near come up to the point ; nay, indeed, doth not in the least touch it. And yet one would think, that so great a point as this, a point which, as they say, so nearly con- cerns every man's salvation, should not have been thus silently passed over, both by our Saviour him- self, and by those inspired men that pretend to give us an account of his doctrines. 2. But I leave this, and proceed, in the second place, to another reason why we cannot believe that Christ hath any infallible church upon earth, viz. because we do not find that any of the primitive churches ever pretended to such infallibility ; no, not the church of Rome herself. We do not find that the doctrine of the infallibility of the church, much less of the Roman church, is asserted by any one ancient council, or by any one ancient father. We do not find, that, in the controversies which arose in the ancient church about matters of faith, the guides of the church ever made use of this argu- ment of the church's infallibility for the quieting and ending of them ; which yet, had they known of any ON 1 PETER III. 15. 47 such thing, had been the properest and the easiest means they could have used. Nay further, we know that the ancient fathers had another method of con- futing heretics and schismatics than by appealing to the church's infallibility ; namely, by bringing their doctrines to be tried by the ancient usages and doc- trines of the apostolic churches, and especially by the divine oracles of scripture, which they looked upon as the entire and only rule of faith. We know further, as to the church of Rome, that by what appears by the carriage and behaviour of other churches in the primitive times towards that church, in matters where they were concerned to- gether, it must be thought impossible that those churches should ever have entertained any opinion, or so much as imagination, of the Roman church's infallibility ; they making no scruple, whenever there was occasion, to oppose the sense of that church as vigorously as they either did or could oppose any other particular church that differed from them. 3. But, thirdly, another reason why we are hardly brought to believe that any church is infallible is, because we do not see any effect of this infallibility in the world, or any good which hath accrued to the church, which may not as well be ascribed to God's ordinary assistance of every Christian church without infallibility as with it. It is said indeed, that without a living infallible judge controversies that arise among Christians can- not be ended. Why, that very church that pretends to infallibility are not yet agreed among themselves about several points pertaining to religion. Nay, this very business of infallibility, (as important a point as it is,) as to the seat of it, where, or in whom 48 A SERMON it is lodged, is yet as great a controversy among them as any. It is said, that without an infallible judge the scriptures cannot be expounded ; the sense of texts cannot be ascertained. Why, as to this, we desire to be informed what advantages that church that pretends to infallibility hath in this respect above other churches that pretend to none. Do they in that communion understand scripture better than those who differ from them ? or have they settled or cleared the sense of any one doubtful text, by virtue of infallibility, during all the time they have laid claim to it? It will be a hard matter to pro- duce one text of scripture, the sense of which was by this means ascertained. We all know, and must confess, that all those texts of scripture which were difficult and obscure at the first, remain so to this day, for any thing that any infallibility hath done toward the clearing of them ; and if the sense of any obscure passage in those holy books be more cleared, or better ascertained to us than they were formerly, next to the blessing of God, we are obliged for it to the learning and industry of fallible com- mentators. These are shrewd presumptions that it was not the design of Christ that we should arrive to the knowledge of his will by the conduct of an unerring guide, but rather by honestly and industriously em- ploying those parts and those ordinary means which he hath afforded us for that purpose. I might mention another reason why we think it very unsafe to rely upon any church's infallibility, as to matters of faith, (and which indeed is worth all the rest ;) and that is this : because it may be ON 1 PETER III. 15. 49 made to appear that that church, which only of all others claims infallibility to herself, hath actually erred in her determinations about matters. of faith. In saying this, I say no more than what our church hath declared in her nineteenth article. The words of it are these : " As the church of Jerusalem, of Alexandria, and " Antioch have erred, so also the church of Rome " hath erred, not only in their living, and manner of " ceremonies, but also in matters of faith." But I have held you too long already to engage you in a new argument, especially such a one as needs no proof to us, we owning ourselves protest- ants, and being presumed to be already satisfied about it. And therefore I take my leave of this argument, and close all with these petitions in our Liturgy : " That it would please God to give all his people " increase of grace, to hear meekly his word, and " receive it with pure affection, and to bring forth " the fruits of the Spirit. " That it would please him to bring into the way " of truth, all such as have erred and are deceived. " That it would please him to strengthen such as u do stand, to comfort and help the weakhearted, " to raise up them that fall, and finally to beat down " Satan under our feet." God of his infinite mercy grant this, for the sake of his dear Son. To whom, &c. ARCIIBP. SHARPE, VOL. V. E A SERMON ON 2 PETER III. 16. hi which are some thing's hard to he understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. St. PETER in this chapter is treating of the se- cond coming of Christ to judge the world, and an- swering the objection that some scoffers in those days made against the truth of it, upon account that it was delayed so long. To this he replies several things, and he backs what he had said with the authority of St. Paul, who had written concerning these matters. Ye should account, says he, that the longsuffering of our Lord(which is objected against) is meant for our salvation, even as our beloved bro- ther Paul also, according to the wisdom given unto him, hath written unto you, ver. 15; as also in all his Epistles, speaking in them of these things, ver. 16. And now, having mentioned St. Paul and his Epistles, he adds this note as it were by way of parenthesis, [In which, says he, there are some things, &cc ~\ Upon which words, before I come to treat of the main point I design from them, I shall desire leave to make a few strictures or short notes. 1. First of all it is doubted, whether the first words of my text, in which, do refer to St. Paul's Epistles, or to the things he writes of in those Epistles. For the relative article is in some copies expressed in ON 2 PETER III. 16. 51 one gender, ev a\g, to refer to the Epistles ; but in most copies h oig, to refer to the things spoken of. According to the first reading, this is the proposition in the text, viz. That in St. Paul's Epistles there are some things hard to be understood. According to the other reading, this is the proposition ; That among those particulars that St. Peter is now in- sisting on, and which St. Paid likewise hath in his Epistles treated of, there are some hard to be un- derstood. There is some difference between these propositions ; but yet they are both of them certainly true : and I do not see any such matter of conse- quence which of them we pitch upon, as to think it worth the disputing whether of them is to be pre- ferred. 2. There have been various conjectures what those particular points or passages are in St. Paul's Epi- stles which St. Peter here calls ^vrvo^Ta, hard to be understood, and which he says men in his time did wrest to their own destruction. St. Austin will have it, that he had his eye on St. Paul's doctrine of justification by faith without works ; which some heretics in those days perverted to very ill purposes. Others give other accounts, but they are all uncer- tain ; and it is a business of greater curiosity than usefulness to be inquisitive about this matter. 3. It is more to our purpose, in the third place, to take notice of this ; that it is not only in St. Paul's Epistles that there are rtva ^vavovjra, some things hard to be understood, but in all the other scrip- tures likewise : and seems to be intimated here by St. Peter, when having told us how liable unlearned and unstable men were to wrest some passages in St. Paul's Epistles to a wrong sense, upon account E 2 52 A SERMON that they were hard to he understood, he adds, that they did so likewise with other scriptures. Indeed it cannot be denied, that there are abun- dance of passages, both in the writings of the Old and New Testament, which are very hard to he un- derstood. Some upon account of the depth and mysteriousness and obscurity of the things them- selves that are delivered ; and many more upon the account of the shortness and difficulty of the ex- pressions wherein they are cloathed. But most upon account of our ignorance and unacquaintance with the idioms of the languages they were wrote in, and the customs and histories and other things proper to those places and persons they were first intended for, which are referred to in them. So that if any man will say that the whole scripture is plain, and easy to be understood, he affirms very rashly. There are a multitude of texts which will puzzle the most learned and intelligent man now living to give a certain account of. And therefore easily may we imagine that there is a far greater multitude, which an ordinary unlearned reader will be able to say lit- tle or nothing to. 4. But I observe, in the fourth place, after what manner in all times the scriptures have been dealt with ; even in the apostolical times there were men that wrested them. The word is aTpefiXovo-i ; they did distort them from their natural meaning ; they did torture them, to make them speak what sense they would have them ; they did not study to take up their opinions from scripture, but they studied to force the scripture to comply with those opinions they had taken up before. This is properly wresting the scripture ; and this practice, as it did begin very ON 2 PETER III. 16. early, so hath it ever since continued in the world. In every age, and at this day as much as ever, the scriptures have heen wrested from their proper sense and meaning to serve turns : among all the numer- ous divisions and factions that have been, or are in the Christian church, either with reference to doc- trine or pi'actice, there is not one of them but hath always urged scripture in its own defence. There was none of the old heretics (were their principles never so unscriptural) but had abundance of texts to vouch for their orthodoxy, if they might have the liberty of interpreting them. And at this day, not only we do urge the scriptures for our cause, but Papists, Socinians, Quakers, Antinomians, and all the other divisions among us, do all with equal con- fidence appeal to the scripture for the truth of their cause. Now certainly the scripture can have but one true sense, let the pretenders to that sense be as many as they please. And therefore all these men holding contradictions to one another, cannot all be supposed to interpret scripture faithfully and sin- cerely ; but some of them do wrest it in order to the serving that cause which they have espoused. 5. But, fifthly, it is worth our notice what kind of persons they were in the apostle's time that did thus wrest the scripture ; they were, as he tells us, afxaOeis km avrvipiKToi, unlearned and unstable. It may be he meant the same thing by both these words. But if they be to be distinguished, by the unlearned we are to understand the ignorant and unskilful; they who never applied their minds to the careful reading of the scripture, nor have taken care to furnish themselves with those helps and ac- quirements which are necessary to be had, in order E 3 54 A SERMON to the right understanding it when they read it. By the unstable, we are to understand those that are not well fixed and established and grounded in the faith of Christ ; (as the word aa-TYjpiKTOi most pro- perly signifies ;) but, for want of true principles, do fluctuate this way and that way, and are tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine, as St. Paul expresses it, Ephesians iv. 14 : these were the un- learned and unstable men that did, in the apostle's time, wrest the scripture. And such kind of per- sons have they always been that followed this prac- tice of theirs in succeeding generations. What- ever innovations or corruptions have been brought into the church, whatever departures have been made from catholic faith and catholic charity and communion, they had generally both their rise and continuance from such unlearned and unstable men. That which I would gather from hence is this : How very necessary it is for those who would rightly expound the scripture, both to furnish themselves with a competent measure of such kind of learning and skill and knowledge, as is proper for the under- standing of that book, and also to be thoroughly grounded and principled in the substantial and fun- damental doctrines of the Christian religion. If either of these qualities be wanting, a man is like to make sad work, if he sets up for an interpreter of scripture. 6. The sixth and last thing I take notice of in these words is, the sad consequence of a man's wrest- ing the scriptures, which is here mentioned : They wrest them, says the apostle, to their own destruc- tion. This consideration ought to make us all in- finitely careful how we abuse or pervert the scrip- ON 2 PETER III. 16. 55 ture, or make a tool of it for the serving our own ends. By such wicked proceedings we shall not only do a great mischief to religion and the church, but undo ourselves at the long run. It is not indeed every error and mistake about the sense of a text of scripture that is of this dangerous consequence, nor many such errors and mistakes put together. A man may be ignorant or mistaken in a thousand texts of scripture, without any danger of his salva- tion. But this is that we say is dangerous, when a man makes use of scripture to countenance his vi- cious inclinations ; as either when he so perverts or corrupts the Christian doctrine, as to give encou- ragement to a wicked and unchristan life, or suborns texts of scripture for the making or upholding divi- sions and scbisms in the Christian church. This we say is such a wresting of the scriptures, as it is to be feared those that use it may too truly be said to do it to their own destruction. And thus much I thought fit to speak by way of explication of the text. It shall now be my busi- ness to resolve the three following inquiries : First, Since the character that St. Peter gives of the scripture, especially of St. Paul's Epistles, is, that there are in them tvuvurpra, things hard to he understood ; with what truth can we protestants affirm that the scriptures are plain and perspicuous, and easily understood by vulgar capacities ? Secondly, Whether from this point, that there are in scripture things hard to he understood, we can reasonably draw such a conclusion as this, that there- fore there is a necessity that Christ should have left in his church some visible, infallible judge for the in- terpretation of them ? E 4 56 A SERMON Thirdly, Whether the difficulty and obscurity of the holy scriptures, and their being liable on that account to be wrested and perverted to evil pur- poses, be a sufficient ground for the forbidding the use of them to the people ? and whether for all that, every man may not, and ought not, seriously to ap- ply himself to the reading of the holy scriptures, or the hearing them read ? I. My first inquiry is, How can the protestant's position be true, that the scriptures are plain and perspicuous, and intelligible to ordinary capacities ; when yet, if we may believe St. Peter, there are in them things hard to he understood? This is a difficulty that the Roman catholics 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 dif- ficulty at all, if they would but rightly represent our doctrine in this matter. 1. In the first place, we do not say that every pas- sage of scripture is plain, easy, and perspicuous ; nay, we acknowledge that there are several passages of it obscure and intricate, and such as will puzzle, not only an ordinary reader, but even the most learn- ed to give the meaning of. So that we leave room enough for St. Peter's assertion, that there are in scripture n'va WvoVa, some things hard to he tinder- stood. Nay, if any man will enlarge his proposition, and say that there are many things hard to he un- derstood in it, we do readily concur with him. 2. Neither, secondly, do we say that those pas- sages which are intelligible to a learned reader, to one that is well versed and experienced in these kind of matters, are all of them easy and intelligible ON L 2 PETER IH. 16. 57 to an unlearned one. We acknowledge as well as they, that as a man is more or less furnished with proper helps and means and instruments for the un- derstanding the scriptures ; as he hath more or less improved himself hy acquired knowledge and learn- ing ; so he shall in proportion understand more or less of those holy books. And we do not, upon a pretence of private inspiration from the Spirit of God, teach or think that every well-meaning godly person is presently qualified to expound the scrip- tures. 3. But, thirdly, this is all that we say, as to the plainness and perspicuity and intelligibleness of the scriptures, that though there be in them many diffi- cult passages, nay, perhaps whole books, yet, as to all those things wherein the salvation of mankind is concerned, they are sufficiently plain, and easy to be understood, both by the learned and unlearned. So far as scripture is a rule of faith and manners, (and we contend that it is a perfect rule of both,) so far it is perspicuous and obvious to all capacities ; sup- posing the men come with an humble and honest mind, desirous to learn their duty, and willing to practice it after they have learnt it. We do not say that there are no difficulties in scripture ; but we say, that all those things that are necessary to be believed or practised are not difficult : or, if some of them be more obscurely expressed in one place, they are more plainly in another. So that none can justly except against the scripture, as to the fitness of its being a rule of faith and manners, and very necessary to be read and known of all men, upon account of the difficulty or obscurity of it. But as to this the Roman catholics urge, that it 58 A SERMON is not so clear that the scripture is plain and perspi- cuous, even in necessary points, wherein the salva- tion of men is concerned. For if it were, how comes it to pass that there are so many disputes among the protestants about the sense of scripture, even in mat- ters which they account (at least one side of them doth account) fundamental and necessary ? To this I answer, That though we should admit this sugges- tion to he true, that the protestants differ in their interpretation, even in fundamental points, yet it is no argument against the plainness and perspicuity of scripture, in matters of faith and manners. For things may be plain enough to all disinterested men, that are not plain to those who are strongly preju- diced against those things by education, or passion, or interest, and the like. If no writing be allowed to be plain and intelligible, till all men be agreed in the sense of it, or till it be impossible that a man that sets his wits awork should be able to find any colour for the wresting it to another sense than that which was meant by the author ; then farewell all plainness and perspicuity in any writing; nay, not only so, but farewell all plainness in any speeches or declarations that are made by word of mouth. So that this objection will as much disserve the cause of the church of Rome, who would have tradition and the authority of the pope for their rule of faith, as it will disserve our cause, who pretend to be go- verned by the scriptures. But I would ask, Why doth any Roman priest, when he hath to deal with a protestant, and would bring him over to their communion ; I say, why doth he endeavour to convince him from the scriptures of the erroneousness of our religion, and the neces- ON 2 PETER III. 16. 59 sity of believing and practising as their church teach- eth ? Why doth he labour to prove, by texts of scripture, those several points which they would bear us in hand are necessary to be believed, and which yet we deny, as transubstantiation, for in- stance, and the supremacy of St. Peter, and the like? Doth not every man among them that proceeds in this way, for the convincing of protestants, (and yet they all make use of this way,) plainly acknowledge by this very proceeding, that all those points that are necessary to be believed or practised are suffi- ciently plain in the scripture ? and that even an un- learned man is capable of understanding them ? for certainly no man ever endeavoured to prove a thing to another, but by something which he thought the person he would prove it to would readily appre- hend, and see the force and evidence of. This is therefore a concession, that he doth in his own con- science believe the scriptures to be sufficiently plain, at least in all necessary points, even to ordinary un- derstandings. II. But to proceed to our second inquiry, which is, Whether from this point, that there are in scrip- ture things hard to be understood, we can reasonably draw such a conclusion as this, that therefore there is a necessity that Christ should have left in his church some visible, infallible judge, to whom all Christians should resort for the interpreting scripture ? This indeed is a conclusion which the Roman catholics would draw from St. Peter's proposition in my text ; and for any thing I know, it is as good an argument for the infallibility of the bishop of Rome as any they produce. But, however, let us examine what ground there is for drawing such a consequence. GO A SERMON 1. In the first place, where is the force of the argument? Some texts of scripture are hard to be understood : therefore the bishop of Rome is infallible ; or therefore there must be somewhere a visible authority, to which all Christians should re- sort, for the infallible declaration of the sense of scripture : and since no man pretends to such an authority but the head of the church of Rome, therefore in him it is to be presumed it is lodged. But why doth it follow that, because some scrip- tures are hard, therefore there is need of an infal- lible interpreter of all scripture? What is it that doth connect these two propositions together ? If indeed all scripture had been hard to be understood, and not only some things in it ; or if those things in it that are really hard to be understood had been so necessary that a man could not go to heaven without understanding them ; if either of these things had been true, there would have been some colour for the drawing such a consequence as this. But since, on the one hand, all that is necessary to be believed or practised in order to salvation is suf- ficiently plain in scripture without such an inter- preter ; and, on the other hand, whatever is difficult in scripture is not necessary to be understood ; it plainly follows there is no need of any infallible in- terpreter at all, because we may understand all things needful in the scriptures without such an interpreter. 2. But, secondly, if God had meant to have esta- blished a standing visible infallible authority in the church for declaring the sense of scripture, it cannot be doubted but he would in those scriptures have plainly told us somewhere or other ; and not only ON 2 PETER III. 16. 61 so, but have given us such particular accounts and descriptions of the person vested with that authority, that all Christians in all ages might have known who he was and where he lived ; that so they might be able to make application to him at all times as there was occasion. But now there is not a word of this in the whole scripture, but a perfect silence both as to the authority itself, and the person or persons in whom it is lodged. So far are the scrip- tures from giving us the least intimation that the bishops of Rome are set up by God to be the infallible declarers and interpreters of the sense of scripture to all the Christian world, from generation to gene- ration ; and that consequently in all disputes con- cerning the meaning of any passage in the Bible we ought to have recourse to that see ; I say, so far are the scriptures from this, that it doth not in the least appear from them that God hath appointed any means at all of that kind for the coming to the knowledge of the sense of scripture. There is no mention of any infallible judicatory in the whole Christian world erected by our Lord Jesus for this purpose, and much less of the court of Rome being that judicatory. If our adversaries would convince us of either of these things, they must bring other kind of proofs than those words of our Saviour, " Tu es Petrus," Thou art Peter, Matt. xvi. 18 ; and " Pasce oves," Feed my sheep, John xxi. 16 ; and " Dabo tibi " claves," &c. / will give thee the keys of the king- dom of heaven, Matt. xvi. 19. For these do make no more to the business we are speaking of than this expression, " Hie sunt duo gladii," Here are two swords, Luke xxii. 38, doth to the proving the G2 A SERMON pope's temporal jurisdiction over all Christians, as well as his spiritual ; or than God's malting two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, Gen. i. 16, doth to the proving that the pope must consequently be above the emperor. 3. But, thirdly, so far are we from being directed by God's word to apply ourselves to any visible judge, much less the bishop of Rome, for the understand- ing hard texts of scripture, that it doth propose quite another method to us for that purpose. The method which the scriptures themselves do provide for the coming to a right knowledge and under- standing of them is plainly this, to read them care- fully, to examine the things spoken of, to compare one thing with another, and to judge of all accord- ing to the analogy of faith ; to use all the prudent means and helps that may further us in the know- ledge of the truth, to pray to God for wisdom, to confer with one another, especially our spiritual guides, and above all things to free ourselves from lust and passion, and all other prejudices and pre- possessions ; and to come with an honest and humble mind, well disposed both to receive the truth and to practise it : for it is the upright man that God will guide in judgment, and those that are gentle, to them will he teach his way; the secret of the Lord being with them that fear him; and to such only he hath jyromised to shew his covenant, Ps. xxv. 14, 12, 9- These are the means which the Bible prescribes for the coming to the knowledge of God's word, and these are the rational proper means of attaining to truth of any kind, and for receiving benefit by any books ; but most of all proper for those kind ON 2 PETER III. 16. 63 of truths and those kind of books we are now speak- ing of. But is not this a quite different thing from giving up ourselves entirely to the conduct and dictates of an unerring judge ? or when we are entangled in any difficulty, to have no more to do than to ask the opinion of him that sits in the infallible chair, and to acquiesce in it, whatsoever it be ? These two ways are so different from one another, and indeed so inconsistent, that no man who finds the former laborious way of reading, and examining, and judg- ing, of proving all things, and trying the spirits, and the like, recommended in scripture, will or can be easily convinced, that the latter short expeditious way of appealing to the bishop of Rome in all con- troverted cases was ever so much as thought of when the Bible was written. Far am I, by what I have now said, from endea- vouring to weaken or undermine the rights of eccle- siastical authority. We do readily acknowledge that every Christian church in the world has a right and authority to decide controversies in religion, that do arise amongst its members, and consequently to declare the sense of scripture concerning those controversies. And though we say that every pri- vate Christian hath a liberty left him of examining and judging for himself, and which cannot, which ought not to be taken from him, yet every member, every subject of a church, ought to submit to the church's decisions and declarations, so as not to op- pose them, not to break the communion or the peace of the church upon account of them, unless in such cases where obedience and compliance is apparently sinful, and against God's laws. A SERMON 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 Rome. And besides, the authority which we ascribe to every church, and to the church of Rome among others, doth not imply a power of determining con- troversies infallibly, so as to oblige all Christians to receive and believe their determinations as the very oracles of God. For we say, that no one man, nor any society of men among Christians, no, not a general council, is infallible, or free from possibility of error : but we only say, that every church hath power so far to determine differences that arise among its members, and to oblige them so far to compliance, as to be able to preserve peace and unity and com- munion in itself. 4. In the fourth and last place, it is an idle thing to talk of the necessity of an infallible expounder of scripture upon this account, that some things in scripture are hard to be understood ; was there no- thing to be said against it but only this, that though the Roman catholics pretend that there is in the church such an infallible judge, and hath been al- ways since Christ's time, and that that judge is the bishop of Rome ; yet for all that, the Christian world hath not for so many ages received any considerable benefit (if indeed any at all) from this infallibility, as to the clearing of difficulties or silencing disputes that have been among Christians concerning the sense of scripture. We do indeed heartily acknow- ledge that we have received great benefit, and abundance of light for the expounding of several texts of the Bible, from the histories and doctrines and practices of the universal church of Christ, and ON 2 PETER III. 16. 65 from the writings of the fathers, and other eccle- siastical authors in all ages (some of which writers may perhaps have been bishops of Rome ;) this, I say, we readily grant and contend for. But in the mean time it is a quite different thing from a single man, or a multitude of men, interpreting scripture by a divine power and commission, and in an authoritative and infallible way. That which we say is, that as obscure and difficult as the scrip- tures are in many passages, and as plenary a power as the popes have had in the clearing such obscuri- ties, and untying such difficulties, yet the world to this day hath seen no effects of this power in that kind, hath received no benefit from it, in order to the clearing of dark texts ; but all the texts that were obscure before, are so still, for any authoritative in- terpretation that any pope hath given them. And this alone is enough to spoil all the Romish pre- tences of the necessity of an infallible judge, to ex- pound the scriptures where they are obscure. And thus much on our second inquiry upon this point. III. I come now to the last ; which is this: Whe- ther the difficulty and obscurity that is to be met with in the scriptures, and their being liable on that account to be wrested and perverted by unlearned and unstable men, be a sufficient ground to debar the people from the use of them. This is indeed the Romish gloss upon this text. " Hereby it is very " plain," (say the translators of Rhemes in their note upon this text,) " that it is a very dangerous thing " for such as be ignorant, and for wild-witted fel- " lows to read the scriptures." (vid. Rhemish Testa- ment.) And they commend the wisdom of the coun- cil of Trent, which hath taken care to forbid the ABP. SHARPK, VOL. V. F 66 A SERMON common reading of the Bible, except to such parti- cular men as shall have express license thereto from their ordinary. On the contrary, our doctrine is, that no lay-person that can read, ought to be dis- couraged from reading the holy scriptures, and much less forbidden it ; but rather advised and persuaded to the frequent reading of it : only he should be di- rected in the reading of it, and most seriously cau- tioned, that he do not turn that wholesome food he may there meet with into poison, by his wicked misuse of it. But let us take this matter a little into examina- tion. There are in the scriptures some things hard to be understood. Therefore, say they, the people must not read them. But is this fair dealing with the people ? because some things are hard to be un- derstood, must 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 because there are some things hard to be under- stood, must therefore the key of knowledge be taken from them ? must they be debarred the means and opportunities of understanding as many of those things as they can ? Well, but it is further said, that ignorant and un- stable men, when they read the scriptures, are apt to wrest them to their own destruction ; and therefore the scriptures should be kept from all such, just as we keep weapons from children, for fear they should hurt themselves with them. To this I answer: If indeed the scriptures were of no more or greater use to laymen than edged tools are to children, and if there was the same danger that laymen would do mischief to themselves by reading the scriptures, as ON 2 PETER III. 16. 67 there is that children would hurt themselves, if the use of knives and swords was permitted to them ; I grant there would be some reason to conclude that the Bible ought to be as far removed out of the people's way, as weapons are out of the way of chil- dren. But there is no such matter. 1. For first we say, that every one of the people, be he never so 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 us all wise unto salvation. They are the instruments by which we come to the knowledge of the Christian religion. 2. Nay, there is a great deal more probability that an ignorant man that comes with an honest mind to the reading or hearing of the scriptures, will put them to a good use, and learn some things by them, and go away better from them, than there is danger that he should pervert them, and go away worse. It is true, most 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 likely they will mistake and misconstrue not a few : but then we say there is no great harm in this, either to them- selves or others. For every mistake in the sense of a text of scripture is not a wresting of the scrip- ture, and much less a wresting it to a man's own destruction. For wresting the scripture is inter- preting the scripture to serve a man's own private turn, and wresting them to his own destruction is forcing them to declare in favour of some wicked, unchristian doctrine that he hath espoused, or some wicked, unchristian practice that he lives in. So that though a good man, nay, perhaps every good man, is F 2 68 A SERMON now and then mistaken in the meaning and applica- tion of the scriptures, yet none but a bad man can wrest them, especially wrest them to his own de- struction. 3. But thirdly, how liable soever the scriptures are to misconstruction, and what bad use soever some men may make of them for the broaching of heresies, or the making or continuing schisms in the church, which are the proper instances and effects of wresting the scriptures ; yet, all things considered, it is more for the good of the world, that the use of them should be allowed to all persons, (upon account that all persons are capable of receiving benefit from them, and most in all probability will,) than it is for the good of the world, that the use of them should be generally forbidden, (upon account that here and there some persons do wrest them, and abuse them to their own mischief, and the disturbance of the church.) There is nothing that God hath made, or contrived, or appointed, but is capable of being abused ; and too many there are that will and do abuse it. But is it therefore better upon the whole, that every good creature of God should be laid aside, (at least as to the common use of it,) because it is thus liable to be abused, and some men here and there do mischief to themselves and others by thus abusing it ? Certainly no : for by this rule of rea- soning all learning, all arts, all books in the world, as well as the Bible, and all preaching and praying in public ; nay, those creatures of God which he hath made for the support and delight of our very natural lives, I say, all these things upon this prin- ciple must be foi'bidden, at least to the multitude and generality of mankind. ON 2 PETER III. 16. 69 These things, I think, may be sufficient to shew the unreasonableness of the popish position which we are now speaking of. But I design more upon this argument than barely vindicating the doctrine of our church from the popish exceptions; I would, if it were possible, convince you, not only of the lawfulness, but of the obligation that is incumbent upon all sorts of men, most diligently and seriously to apply themselves to the frequent reading of those holy books. And in order to that, I would represent this to your consideration, viz. that this business of dili- gently reading the scriptures is a thing recom- mended to us both by the scriptures themselves, and by the practice and advice of the most ancient and most holy Christians, and by the reason of the thing itself. And whoever doth discourage or discounte- nance this in any one doth act in opposition to all these. 1. First of all, it is recommended to us in the scriptures themselves. This may be sufficiently gathered from the command of God in the sixth of Deut. ver. 4. Hear, O Israel, kc. The words which I command thee this day, shall be in thy heart, and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thine house, and on thy gates, ver. 6 — 9. By what words now could God more emphatically sig- nify to his people that it was his pleasure, that all F 3 70 A SERMON sorts of men among them, unlearned as well as learned, should thoroughly acquaint themselves with the word of God, than he hath done hy those expres- sions. If any one say that this only concerned the Jews, with reference to the law of Moses, but sig- nifies nothing to us Christians ; I answer, that the reason of the precept will concern us as much or more than it did them. For if, when God delivered his law to Moses, which was but a carnal, temporary law, he did yet give such a charge to the Israelites, that every soul of them should continually exercise themselves in reading and learning this law, and teaching it to their children ; can we imagine that less is expected of us Christians, with reference to that everlasting, spiritual law of the gospel ; that law by which alone all men are to expect salvation, which our Lord Jesus and his apostles first revealed by word of mouth, and then took care that it should be conveyed down to us by the scriptures of the New Testament ? No, certainly ; if it was their duty to read the word of God which they had, to meditate upon it, and to be so well versed in it, that it should be as familiar to them as the most ordinary things they used ; as familiar as if it had been wrote on the doors of their houses or the gates of their cities; then certainly we Christians are under as great an obligation to acquaint ourselves as familiarly with that word of God which we have, and which was delivered by a greater Prophet than Moses was, and which is of far greater concernment to the world. But to come to our Saviour and his apostles. Did our Saviour, when he preached to the Jews, dis- courage any of them in his days from reading the scriptures ? so far from that, that he exhorts all of ON 2 PETER III. 16. 71 them so to do, bidding them search the scriptures ; for in them they expected to have eternal life ; and they were they that testified of him, John v. 39- And St. Paul makes it the great commendation of Timothy, that from a child he had known the scrip- tures, which, saith he, are able to make a man wise unto salvation, 2 Tim. iii. 39- And so far were the Bereans from being blamed or checked, that, when St. Paul preached the Christian religion to them, they did not barely rely upon his authority, hut did daily examine the scriptures, and inquired whether his doctrine did agree with them or no, Acts xvii. 11. that they are much applauded for it in the Acts of the Apostles, and accounted more noble them those of Thessalonica, because they did so. Nay, the eunuch of Candace queen of the Ethiopians, that read the scriptures (as he himself confessed, Acts viii.) without any means of understanding them, yet was this his overdiligence (as it might be ac- counted) so far from being imputed to him as a fault, that God Almighty made it the means and the occasion of his conversion to Christianity. For upon this his reading, (though without knowledge,) God sent Philip to him by a miracle, who did so ef- fectually expound what he read, as to make a pro- selyte of him to Jesus Christ before he parted from him : so ready is God to afford his assistance to all those that use the means that he hath appointed, though they be under never such disadvantageous circumstances. It is true, in all these passages that I have quoted, the scriptures, that are here mentioned, are meant of the scriptures of the Old Testament ; and there is good reason for it, for in truth there were no others F 4 A SERMON then extant, the scriptures of the New Testament not being then wrote ; and therefore it is an idle thing to expect a precept out of the New Testament for the reading of the New Testament, when the canon of it was not yet finished. But, for all that, the reason of the texts I have named will hold as strongly for our reading the New Testament, now that we have it, as they did for the reading of the Old at that time. Did our Saviour command the Jews to search the scriptures of the Old Testa- ment, because they testified of him, and were the means by which they might be convinced that he was the true Messiah ? and will it not be a duty as much incumbent upon us to search the scriptures of the New Testament now, since they are the means that God hath appointed both for the con- veying down to us the doctrine of the gospel, and the evidence of the truth of it ? W ere even the scrip- tures of the Old Testament, in those days, able to make a man wise unto salvation ? and are not the scriptures of the Old and New Testament together much more able to make us, in these days, wise unto salvation? Was it Timothy's commendation that from a child he had known the writings of Moses and the prophets ? and will it be any disparage- ment to us grown men, that we exercise ourselves in the study of what was taught by Christ and his apostles ? Lastly, was God so ready to assist a pagan even in an extraordinary way, when he conscienti- ously read the prophets, though without probability of understanding what he read ? and can we think that he will deny his assistance, and blessing, and grace to us in an ordinary way, when we read the gospel of Christ, and are in a good measure in a ON 2 PETER III. 16. 73 capacity of understanding it, and receiving benefit from it? 2. But enough of this. I desire in the second place it may be considered, what the sense of the primitive and best Christians was as to this matter. How did they practise and advise as to people's read- ing of the scripture ? Why every body that is in the least versed in the histories of those times, knows what a mighty value all the Christians of the early ages set upon the Bible, above all other things. They joyfully heard it read in their public assem- blies, and they diligently read it, and studied it, and meditated upon it in their private houses. They would, several of them, have it read to them, even while they were taking their ordinary food. They took care not only to read it, but to get several por- tions of it by heart. They instructed their young children in it ; and instances we have of those that both knew the scriptures and inquired into the sense of them, even from their childhood. In those days, as St. Jerom tells us, " any one as he walked in " the fields might hear the ploughman at his hallelu- iahs, and the labourers in the vineyards singing " David's Psalms." And the same father tells us, that " of those many virgins that lived with Paula," (a famous devout lady in those days,) " it was not al- " lowed to any of them to be ignorant of the Psalms, " or to pass over one day without learning some " part of the scripture." And to such a degree were the women of that time skilled in the scrip- ture, that Julian the Apostate lays it as a charge, as a matter of accusation against the Christians. Lastly, such a veneration had the Christians in those days for the Bible, that they esteemed and prized it 74 A SERMON 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 who- ever did deliver up their Bibles were always ac- counted as apostates. And lest any one should suspect that this dili- gence of theirs, in reading the scriptures, was rather an effect of the people's forwardness to meddle with things above them, than any thing they were ad- vised and directed to by their spiritual guides, there are sufficient proofs to the contrary. The devout people in those days were not more forward to read and learn the scriptures, than the bishops and guides of the church were to exhort them to it, and encou- rage them in it. St. Augustin thus speaks to the people ; " Think it not sufficient that ye hear the " scriptures in the church ; but also in your houses " at home, either read them yourselves, or get some " other to read to you." Origen saith, " Would to " God we would all do as it is written, Search the " scriptures." St. Chrysostom says to the people, " I admonish you, I beg of you to get books." And again : " Hearken to me, ye laymen, ye men of the " world ; get ye the Bible, that most wholesome re- " medy of the soul. If ye will do nothing else, yet " at least get the New Testament, the Gospels, St. " Paul's Epistles, and the Acts of the Apostles, that " they may be your continual teachers." Lastly, So far was that father from confining the use of the Bible to men in holy orders, that he doubts not to affirm, That it was as necessary to be read by lay- men, as by those who were professed monks. Nay, if we will believe him, much more necessary ; for these are his words : " Ye think the reading of the ON 2 PETER III. 16'. 75 " holy scripture belongeth only unto monks, whereas " in truth it is much more necessary for you than for " them " We see then, that in those days, when Christians lived much more holily and purely than (it is to be feared) they have done since, there was no check given to any man's reading the scriptures ; but, on the contrary, all the encouragement imagin- able. It was not then thought that ignorance was the parent of devotion, or that the scriptures were too dangerous to be trusted in the hands of un- learned, ordinary persons. It was not then imagin- ed, that reading the Bible was the way to make men heretics, or schismatics, or any way refractory ei- ther against the laws of Christ, or the laws of the country where they lived. But on the contrary, they took it to be the best expedient in the world to make men good Christians, and peaceable sub- jects, and hearty lovers one of another ; and accord- ingly they did advise, they did exhort, they did encourage every man, as he had an opportunity, to be frequent, and diligent, and serious in the reading and studying of this best of books, the dearest pledge that we have visible among us of the love of God, and the most effectual instruments to promote vir- tue and goodness, and universal Christian holiness in the lives of men. 3. And very great cause had they thus to think of the holy scriptures, and thus to recommend them to the careful perusal of every Christian. For in the reason of the thing, (which is the third and last point we are now to speak to,) the holy scriptures, above all other books in the world, do recommend themselves to the diligent study of every man that would be a good Christian. Of all books in the 76 A SERMON world they cannot but be judged, of considering per- sons, to be the finest, the noblest, and every way the most useful and profitable for all orders, and degrees, and sexes, and ages, and conditions of Christians to spend their days in the reading and meditation of. For here, and here only, we have the measures of all God's wisdom and knowledge in the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus, dis- covered to mankind. Here only we have the au- thentic declarations of God's mercy to us, and of the terms and conditions upon which we are to ex- pect everlasting salvation from him. Here it is from whence we are to fetch both the matter of our faith, and our evidence for the truth of it. Here are the fountains from whence we are to draw both the knowledge of our duty, and directions for the prac- tising of it, and comfort and support in and after we have practised it. Here are contained the inva- luable promises that God hath made to his servants in Christ Jesus, and the unspeakable encouragement he hath given to all penitent and returning sinners. Here are those affectionate invitations, those pathe- tical and hearty persuasives of God to men, to oblige them to love him, and to be eternally happy, that do make good men amazed and astonished at the infinite condescensions of the divine Goodness. And here are those strong, those powerful, I may say, those irresistible 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 astonishment that any human creature can be so sottish, and stupid, and insensible, as not to be van- quished thereby, to become so holy and happy as God would have them to be. In a word, here are ON 2 PETER III. 16. 77 all things that are either needful, or useful, or delight- ful, 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 so. And judge now, whether, these things considered, the Bible be not a book fit to be read and studied by all sorts of persons. Fit, did I say ? that is too little : is it not necessary ? is it not an indispensable duty ? doth not every man who hath opportunity both sin against God, and neglect the eternal con- cernment of his own soul, if he is remiss and care- less in this matter ? Let me therefore seriously exhort all of you to be diligent, to be constant in conversing with the holy 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 effects of that love and esteem and zeal you have for them. Teach them to your children and your servants, recommend them most heartily to all that you have influence over ; speak of them always with great reverence, and hear them read with humility and attention. Which that we may all do, and receive the benefit of so doing, let us join in putting up our prayers to God in the words of our Liturgy, being the Collect for the Second Week in Advent, with which I con- clude. " Blessed Lord, who hast caused all holy scripture " to be written for our learning, &c." A SEE M O N ON 1 CORINTH. XII. 13. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whe- ther we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free ; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. E meaning of these words will appear to every one that will mind the argument which the apostle is treating of in this chapter. The point that he lays down is this ; That though there be great va- riety of conditions and functions among Christians, and though likewise there was great variety of gifts and powers in those days bestowed upon men for the discharge of those functions ; yet all these seve- ral sorts of Christians, thus severally gifted and qua- lified, did but make up one society ; and all the gifts and graces bestowed upon them were wholly in order to the public and common benefit of that so- ciety. This, I say, is the point that the apostle here en- deavours to possess his readers with a sense of. And accordingly in the verse before the text, he illus- trates it by such a similitude as would reach the ap- prehensions of the meanest person he spoke to. As the body, saith he, is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body : so also is Christ : that is, so also is the Christian church ; so also is Christ and all Chris- tians. Christ is the head, and all Christians through- out the world are the members ; and altogether do ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 79 make one society, one corporation, or as the same apostle expresseth it in Romans xii. 4, 5. As we //arc many members in one body, and all the mem- bers have not one office : so we, be/tig many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. This is St. Paul's proposition. And for the fur- ther clearing and confirming of it, he doth in the text shew that it was the business and design of both those sacraments which our Lord appointed in his church, to unite all Christians, by the means of the Spirit, to Christ Jesus, and to one another, and so to make them one body. By one Spirit, saith he, are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles ; whether we be bond or free ; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. As if he had said ; The design of our baptism is by the influence of the Spirit to incorporate all believers in one society, of what nation or of what condition soever they be, whether Jews or Gentiles, bondmen or freemen. They are all, by being baptized, entered into Christ's church, and made one body : they be- come members of Christ, and members one of an- other. This, I say, is done by means of that one Spirit which animates and enlivens that whole body, and gives strength and nourishment to every part of that body. And as this is the design of our baptism, so it is also the design of the other sacrament wherein we partake of the cup of the Lord ; for there also we are made to drink into one Spirit. Our eating that bread, and drinking of that cup, (he ex- presses only one of them, but he means both,) I say, that is the means which Christ hath appointed for our receiving the continual influences of the Holy 80 A SERMON Spirit, by which the union that is between Christ and his members is preserved and maintained. This is as plain an account as I can give of the meaning of my text : and now if any one ask what design I mean to pursue in this text, what purposes I would apply it to ? I answer, That this text will serve to several good purposes, viz. For the clearing several points that it is fit we should all be truly in- formed in. I. I name these three; First of all, This text will give us good help towards the ascertaining the true number of the Christian sacraments, about which the churches are divided. II. Secondly, This text Mill help us to give a plain and true account of a considerable article of our faith ; and that is, the unity of the catholic church, which is here asserted. III. And thirdly, This text will shew us the way that was used in the primitive church, as to the people s receiving the sacrament : viz. That they did not only partake of the bread, but of the cup too. The sacrament was administered in both kinds to all the faithful. For St. Paul here speaking of this sacrament, calls it a drinking into one Spirit. As elsewhere in the scripture, the Lord's supper is ex- pressed by breaking of bread, without naming the distribution of the cup, (from whence some would form an argument, that the faithful did then only receive the bread,) so in this text the same Lord's supper is expressed by drinking of ih& cup, without naming the giving of the bread. From whence we may certainly draw this conclusion, that the one was as necessary to the people as the other. And they may as well say, that where the cup is only men- ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 81 tioned, there was no bread broken ; as they can say, that where the bread is only mentioned, there was no cup given : and consequently wherever it hap- pens in any text, that for shortness sake (or for some allusion that suited better with the scope of the writer) one kind or species of the sacrament only is expressly mentioned, yet the whole sacrament, in both the kinds of it, is in all those texts to be un- derstood. I begin with the first of these points. 1. This text doth fairly insinuate to us the true number of the Christian sacraments. It is plain, that the apostle in this text doth ex- pressly speak of the Christian sacraments : and it is as plain that two sacraments, and no more than two, doth he here mention. And these two are the two sacraments which the church of England, with all primitive antiquity, doth own for the only sacra- ments of Christ's institution, viz. baptism and the supper of the Lord. These two now it is certain and evident that they are sacraments, truly and properly so called ; that is to say, they are outward signs and pledges of an inward grace that goes along with them, and they were instituted by our Lord Jesus in the most express terms that can be ; and by the very words of the institution it appears that they were designed to be of perpetual obligation even to the world's end. But as for other sacra- ments, or more sacraments than these, there is a deep silence both in this text and throughout the whole New Testament. And yet the council of Trent, which is the rule of the Roman church, hath, besides those two, made five more ; and so strictly hath that council obliged all of that communion to receive and ABP. SHARPE, VOL. V. G 82 A SERMON own seven sacraments, that it hath pronounced " a " curse against all those who shall affirm that there " are either more or fewer sacraments instituted by " Christ than seven, or who shall affirm that any " one of those seven are not truly and properly sa- " craments." This we must needs think is a very hard and severe imposition upon the faith of Christians ; espe- cially, when we can shew, that some of those seven cannot, in the nature of things, be true and proper sacraments : and besides, when we do confidently challenge any man of that communion to produce any one council, any one father, nay, any one single writer, for eleven hundred years after Christ, that said or taught there were just seven sacraments, and neither more nor fewer, of Christ's institution. Peter Lombard, by all that we can find, (who lived in the twelfth century, and was the father of the schoolmen,) was the first who asserted this precise number. But can the bare opinion of such a man, at such a dis- tance from the primitive church, be of authority enough to ground an article of faith upon, nay, and to make it damnable for any man to believe other- wise ? But I know it will be said, that the ancient fathers do give the name of sacraments to marriage, to orders, to penance, and to all those other things which are now by the church established for sacra- ments of Christ's appointment. Why, be it so ; yet this doth not come home to the business. For if they will pretend to make a true and proper sacra- ment of every thing that some fathers have applied the name of sacrament to, they may with as much reason make seven and twenty sacraments as seven. ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 83 At this rate they must make fasting, and praying, and weeping, and washing the disciples' feet, and crossing of themselves, and vowing virginity, and many other such things ; I say, they must make all these to be sacraments, as well as the five they have been pleased to obtrude upon us ; because indeed every one of those things is by some father or other called by the name of a sacrament. Nay, the scrip- ture is a sacrament, and the whole religion of Christ is a sacrament in the language of some of the fa- thers. But now for sacraments truly so called, and in that notion in which both they and we do under- stand the word, namely, for such outward visible signs, or symbols, or elements as were appointed by Jesus Christ, for the conveying spiritual grace to all that did worthily partake of them ; I say, in this notion of sacraments, it will be hard to find more, either in scripture or in the fathers, than those two we are all agreed upon, baptism and the Lord's sup- per. St. Cyprian, I dare say, thought of no more, when he tells us, " That then men may be thorough- " ly sanctified, and become the children of God, (si " utroque sacramento nascantur,) if they be rege- " nerated by both the sacraments." If he had be- lieved more sacraments than two, it is impossible he should have expressed himself in this manner. St. Austin likewise hath a memorable passage to this purpose : " Our Lord Jesus Christ," says he, " hath " knit Christians together with sacraments," (which is exactly the same thing that is here said in the text,) " which sacraments," saith he, " are most few " in number, most easy to be observed, most excel- " lent in signification ; and these are baptism and " the Lord's supper." And in another place he tells G 2 84 A SERMON us, H(bc sunt ecclesice genuina sacramenta ; " These " are the two sacraments of the church." But if after all this, the church of Rome will, without the au- thority of the scriptures, without the suffrage of any one single author for above a thousand years toge- ther, nay, against the reason of the thing, and against the sense of the primitive fathers, make it an article of faith, and necessary to salvation, that every Chris- tian should believe that Christ ordained seven true and proper sacraments of perpetual use 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 ; who can help it ? This only we must needs say, That she assumes a vast au- thority over men's conscience. But whether it be reasonable, without better evidence, to submit our judgments and consciences to that authority, let in- different persons judge. 2. But I have spoke enough of this point. Let us again look over the text, and take up some other. We are all, says the apostle, baptized into one body, and made to drink into one Spirit. From these words this now may be observed in the second place. We have here a plain declaration and assertion of an article which we profess to believe in our Creed, and that is, the unity of the church. In the Creed which we repeat every day, we own the belief of the catholic church. And in the Creed which we repeat on Sundays and holidays we do more expli- citly declare the oneness of that church in these terms ; " I do believe in one catholic and apostolic " church." If now we took no other guide but the holy scriptures for the meaning of this article, it ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 85 would appear as plain a business as any in the whole Bible. But as the different interests of men have been concerned in the interpretation of it, it is be- come an intricate thing, a bone of contention, a fountain of I know not how many controversies. But the reason hereof is very evident. Men, through their overgreat love of themselves, and favour to their own party, have no mind to let the church of Christ he in common, as without doubt our Saviour intended it, but every one will be engrossing the whole church to themselves, and to those of their communion. And this hath put their wits upon the rack oftentimes for the devising and inventing God knows how many marks and tokens whereby to dis- tinguish the true church from false and pretended churches : though yet it is evident enough to any bystander, that the marks they give of the true church are rather contrived to suit with the quality and genius of that church they appear for, and whose cause they would serve, than taken from the holy scripture, or collected by the measures of right reason. But let us see what account the holy scriptures, and especially the scripture of my text, give of this church, this one church, about which so much noise is made. It is plain from the holy scripture, that it was the design of our Lord Jesus to deliver to mankind the whole will of God, so far as their salvation was con- cerned in it ; to reveal to them all that was needful either to be believed or practised, in order to their future happiness. All these things thus delivered and revealed by him, we call the Christian religion : and this religion was taught to the world partly by G 3 86 A SERMON himself, and partly by his apostles ; and this religion was put into writing by inspired men, and is now extant among us in the books of holy scripture. Furthermore it was our Lord's design, that all who should embrace this religion of his should be united among themselves and with their head Christ Jesus, and so become one body by the means of one Holy Spirit which should actuate and influence them ; and this is that which the apostle sahh, There is one body and one Spirit. They are therefore one body, because they are all acted and enlivened by the same Spirit, derived from the head Christ Jesus. And further, in the last place, it was our Lord's intention and design, that all believers, all that professed his religion, should be admitted to the participation of this Spirit, and so be made members of this com- mon body, by the sacrament of baptism : and like- wise that they should be continued and maintained in this membership, and receive continual influence from that same Spirit, by eating and drinking in the sacrament of the communion. And this is that which is told us in the text, that ice are all by one Spirit baptized into one body, and made to drink into one Spirit. Taking now these things along in our minds, we may easily form a true notion of the church ; that notion I am confident which the scripture meant to give us of it, when it speaks of the church as one. The church, according to these principles, can be nothing else but the whole multitude of those per- sons, whether Jews or Gentiles, that do embrace and profess the Christian religion, and are joined together by the means of the sacraments in one body or so- ciety under one head Christ Jesus. This, I say, is ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 87 the general notion of the church. But it will not he amiss, if I treat of this matter a little more par- ticularly, that every hody may fully understand the nature of that church which we all profess to be- lieve, but yet are so much divided about. And I am confident we shall find enough in the holy scripture to satisfy all our scruples about this bu- siness. The first time that our Saviour makes mention of his church, was before he had actually any church in the world; for he speaks of it as a thing future. It was upon St. Peter's public confession of him to be the Christ, the Son of God. Upon this, says our Saviour, Verily I say unto thee, Thou art Peter; and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, Matt, xvi. 18. Afterwards, when he was leaving the world, and ascending up into heaven, he gives particular orders to his apostles about the building of this church which he had promised. And this was the commission he gave them : Go, says he, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; and teaching them to observe whatever I have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world, Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. This commission of our Saviour we may properly enough style the charter of the church, and mind, I pray, what is contained in it. Our Saviour here declares the extent of his church, and of what per- sons he would have it constituted. It was to extend throughout all the world, and to be made up of all nations. He here declares by whom he would have G 4 88 A SERMON it built and constituted, viz. the apostles. He here declares upon what grounds he would have it con- stituted, or upon what conditions any person was to be received into it, viz. their becoming the disciples of Jesus Christ, and undertaking to observe all that he had commanded. He here likewise declares the form or the method by which persons 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 Ghost : and lastly, he here promises the perpetual presence of his Holy Spirit, both to assist the apostles and their successors in the build- ing and governing this church, and to "actuate and enliven all the members of it. Well then, Christ, before he left the world, pro- mised that a church should be built, and he gave a commission for the building of it. Let us now see how this promise was fulfilled, how this commission was executed, and how this church was actually built and constituted. Now as to this, we find in the second chapter of the Acts, that in pursuance of a commission given to the apostles, they, with the rest of the disciples, met together at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and then and there did the Holy Spirit (as Christ had promised, ver. 1.) descend upon the apostles, and endued them with the power of speaking all languages, that so they might be enabled to execute their commission of preaching to all nations ; and then and there did St. Peter, ver. 6. (to whom Christ had promised the honour of laying the foundation of this church for his so generous a confession of him ;) then, I say, did St. Peter (ver. 14.) begin to preach the religion of Jesus Christ to the Jews, (as we find ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 89 he afterwards did to the Gentiles, Acts x.) exhorting them to repent and to embrace the Christian faith, and to be baptized, every one of them, in the name of the Lord Jesus, for the remission of their sins, ver. 38 : and the event of this sermon was, that they who gladly received his ivords were baptized, and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls, ver. 41. The same chapter further tells us, that these being all added to the number of the disciples, continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayer, ver. 42. And then it fol- lows, that the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved, ver. 47- Here is the first time that we have mention in the New Testament of a church actually built and constituted ; and we see plainly, that that church was constituted by such officers, of such members, and with such rites and ceremonies as Christ had ordered in his general charter before spoken of. All those persons, of what different language or condition soever, that upon the apostles' preaching did embrace the Christian religion, and were bap- tized ; I say, all those, together with the apostles who preached and administered to them, made up one church. And they exercised this church-mem- bership by an outward profession of the Christian religion, (which is there called the apostles' doctrine,) and by joining with the apostles in the sacrament of the Lord's supper, (which is there called break- ing of bread,) and in public prayers. And to this church thus constituted were daily added others, till in process of time this church, thus inconsider- 90 A SERMON able at first, grew to that bulk and those dimensions which we see it hath at this day. It is true, the first apostolical church was not then styled by the name of catholic or universal church ; (I say catholic or universal, for both these words mean the same thing, the difference only being, that the one word is Greek and the other Latin ;) but it was simply called the church, or the church of God, without any other epithet. And there was good reason for this ; for this church, as you see, was at that time confined only within the walls of Jerusalem, and for some time after within the na- tion of the Jews ; but afterwards, when this church increased so that many cities and many nations were incorporated into it, each of which were properly churches of Christ, then, in contradistinction to those particular churches, came up the style and the title of the catholic or universal church. So that whenever we name or speak of the catholic church, we mean by that word the whole multitude of Christians throughout the world, that are embo- died into one society under their head Christ Jesus, by baptism and the profession of the Chris- tian faith, and the participation of the common means of salvation. But when we speak of a church of any single denomination, as the Greek church, the Ethiopic church, the Roman church, the church of England, and the like, we mean only some par- ticular church, which is but a part of the church ca- tholic or universal. The catholic church is but one, and can be but one ; because all the Christians in the world belong to it : and that is the church which we profess to believe in our creeds. But particular ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 91 churches are many, as many as the nations are that own and profess the Christian religion ; nay, as many as are the dioceses into which Christian people are distributed under their several bishops. But yet all these churches, whether they be diocesan, or provincial, or national, they are all parts of the universal church, just as our several limbs and mem- bers are parts of our body. Thus I am sure I have given you the true notion of the church which the scripture always intends when it mentions the church in general ; when it speaks of the church as the body of Christ ; when it speaks of the church which Christ purchased with his blood ; when it speaks of the church into which we are baptized; when it speaks of the church to which all those glorious promises are made of the forgiveness of sins ■ of the perpetual presence and assistance of the Holy Spirit ; of the gates of hell never prevailing against it ; and of everlasting salvation in the world to come ; I say, that church is always meant of the whole company of Christians dispersed over all the world, that pro- fess the common faith, (though perhaps none of them without mixture of errors,) and enjoy the ad- ministration of the word and sacraments under their lawful pastors and governors : all these people, wherever they live, or by what name soever they call themselves, make up together that one body of Christ which we call the catholic church. And thus having, as I hope, done something to- wards the fixing and settling the notion of the church, (so far as our text is concerned in it,) my next work is (before I dismiss this head) to make some reflections and remarks upon what has been 92 A SERMON said with reference to several points which we have occasion given every day to hear of and to think of; and which it highly concerns us very well to satisfy ourselves about. The points which I think most natural, and at this time most needful to be treated of, with reference to this argument of the catholic church, are these that follow ; which I choose to propose rather by way of inquiry, than by way of dogmatical assertion, that we may be the more fair- ly led to a just and equal discussion and examina- tion of them. And the first inquiry shall be this ; Whether upon a true stating of the notion of the catholic church, (as I have endeavoured now to do it,) that question which the Romanists insist so much upon when they tamper with our people, and upon which they lay the main stress of their cause, viz. In which part of the world, or in which of the different com- munions of Christendom the only true church of Christ is to be found ; I say, whether this question of theirs be not quite out of doors ? whether it be not a very useless, impertinent question, as being grounded upon a false notion of the catholic church? a notion which is not only repugnant to the scrip- tures, but absurd in itself? If they would draw all the matters in dispute be- tween us into one point, and that point should be with relation to the church, the question upon which we were to join issue should not be put thus ; Which of all the pretended churches is the true church? or, Which of all the divided communions of Chris- tendom is that communion in which only we may have salvation ? (for there are many true churches, and many communions in which salvation may be ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 93 had :) but this ; Which of all the several churches that are in the world is the most pure and orthodox? or, Which of all the several communions in Christ- endom is most agreeable to the laws of Christ, and in which a man may most safely, and with the least hazard, venture his salvation ? Now if the question be thus put, we will join issue with them whensoever they please. But I forget, I am not now answering of questions, but proposing them. In the second place, my next inquiry upon this argument should be this : Since they as well as we do allow, that baptism doth admit men into the catholic church, whether they be not obliged, upon their own principles, (owning our baptism to be valid, as they all do,) to acknowledge us of the church of England to be true members of the catholic church ? My third inquiry shall be this : Whether, by all the marks and tokens that are given of the church in the holy scriptures, the church of England may not be proved to be both a true and a sound part of the catholic church ? My fourth inquiry shall be this : Whether our charity to the church of Rome, in owning them to be a true church, whilst they are so uncharitable to deny us to be so, be any good argument that their communion is safer than ours? My fifth inquiry shall be this : Whether there be any colour of reason, that the church of Rome, and they who adhere to her communion, should engross to themselves the name of the catholic church, or that they who are out of her communion should be thought no catholics ? My sixth inquiry shall be this : Allowing, as we do, churches of different communions to be parts of 94 A SERMON the catholic church, and allowing Christians in those several churches to be capable of salvation, whether it can justly from thence be inferred, that it is an in- different matter as to a man's salvation, what church or what communion he is of, so 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 most agreeahle to the word of God ; and to forbear communion with that church in which he cannot communicate without either pro- fessing to believe some things which he cannot be- lieve, or practising some things which he is con- vinced God's laws have forbidden him ? These are all useful inquiries : and I shall here- after, as I have opportunity, endeavour to give as plain an answer to them as I can. In the mean time, consider what ye have heard, &c. A SERMON ON 1 COR. 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 made to drink into one Spirit. The plain meaning of these words is (as I told you) this : the design of our baptism is, through the influence of the Spirit which is then given, to incor- porate all believers in one society, of what nation or condition soever they be. They are all, by their being baptized, entered into Christ's church, and made one body ; they become the members of Christ, and members one of another. And this, I say, is done by means of that one Spirit, which animates and enlivens that whole body, and gives strength and nourishment to every part of it. And as this is the design of our baptism, so it is also the design of the other sacrament, wherein we partake of the cup of the Lord ; for there also we are made to drink into one Spirit. Our eating of that bread and drinking of that cup, (he expresses only one of them, but he includes both,) I say, that is the means which Christ hath appointed for our receiving the continual influence of the Holy Spirit, by which the union which is between Christ and his members is preserved and maintained. Three points I told you this text did fairly lead us to discourse upon ; First, the number of the Christian sacraments, which seems here to be ad- 96 A SERMON justed and ascertained ; and they are, baptism and the Lord's supper. Both these are here expressly- mentioned ; but no other, neither in this text nor in any other passage in the New Testament ; nor do we find that the ancient fathers thought of any more ; nor doth it appear that any writer of the church, for eleven hundred years together, did ever give that precise number of the sacraments which the church of Rome now doth. The second point to be insisted on from this text is, the unity of the catholic church into which we are baptized. And the third point, the right that the laity have, by Christ's institution, and the apostles' practice, to the cup of the communion ; since it is plain by this text, that all the faithful did in the apostles' times drink into one Spirit, as well as eat into one Spirit. The two former of these points I treated upon the last Lord's day ; and as for the first of them, I shall not repeat any thing of what I then said ; but as for the second, because I have not yet done with it, it is necessary that I give you some general ac- count of the notion of the church and its unity, which I then endeavoured to establish ; that so you may the better go along with me as to those points wherein I shall be concerned at this time. The sum of what I said concerning the church and its unity was this : that whenever we name or speak of the catholic church, (if we will take the scripture notion,) we must mean by that word the whole multitude of Christians throughout the world that are imbodied into one society by baptism, and the profession of the Christian faith, and the participation of the common means of salva- ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 97 tion. But when we speak of a church of any single denomination, as the Greek church, the Ethiopic church, the Roman church, the English church, or the like, we mean only some particular church, which is but a part of the church catholic or universal. The catholic church is but one, and can be but one ; be- cause all the Christians in the world do belong to it. But particular churches are many, as many as the nations are that own and profess the Christian reli- gion ; nay, as many as are the dioceses into which Christian people are distributed under one bishop. But yet all these churches, whether they be diocesan, or provincial, or national, or patriarchal, they are all parts of the catholic church, just as our several 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 notion of the church which the scripture always speaks of, when it mentions the church in general ; when it speaks of the church as of the bod// of Christ ; when it speaks of the church which Christ purchased with his blood ; when it speaks of the church to which all those glorious promises are made of the perpetual presence and assistance of the Holy Spirit, and of the gates of hell never prevailing against it. I say, that church is always meant of the whole company of Christians dispersed over all the world, who pro- fess the common faith, (though perhaps none of them without mixtures of error,) and enjoy the ad- ministration of the word and sacraments under their lawful pastors and governors. All these people, wherever they live, or by what name soever they style themselves, whether the church of Egypt or ARCHBP. SHARPE, VOL. V. II 98 A SERMON Ethiopia ; whether of the eastern or western com- munion ; whether churches unreformed or churches of the reformation ; all these, singly and separately taken, are but parts of the catholic church ; but taken all together (as none of them are to be ex- cluded) they do make up that one body, which the apostle in my text speaks of, when he saith, we are all by one Spirit baptized into one body, and are all made to drink into one Spirit. And now, before I dismiss this argument, my de- sign is to make some reflections upon, or to draw some inferences from what has been said concerning the church, with reference to some points that are debated hotly between us and the church of Rome. And the first thing I shall insist upon is this : We may, from what has been said, be able, not only to give an answer to that question which the papists have continually in their mouths when they tamper with our people, viz. where that church is which we profess to believe in our Creed, but also to dis- cern how utterly impertinent that question is to their purpose, notwithstanding the great stress they lay upon it. The usual method, when they would seduce any from our church, is this : they will tell you, that Christ can have but one church here upon earth. If you acknowledge this, as you certainly must, they will tell you that you need not trouble your- self with entering into that ocean of particular disputes which are between the protestants and them, when the main, and in truth the only ques- tion is, where that church is which we profess to believe in the two Creeds? You declare there to believe one catholic and apostolic church ; and you ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 99 own likewise, that out of that church there is no ordinary means of salvation : what need now have you to trouble yourself about any more, than merely to satisfy yourself in which of the communions of Christendom this church is to be found, and having> found it, to join yourself to it ? I must needs say, that the waving all other dis- putes, and putting the controversy upon this issue, is a very compendious way, and will save you a world of trouble, which otherwise you must neces- sarily undergo, in common methods of inquiring into and coming to the knowledge of the truth. For if you can but satisfy yourself, as they would have you, about the true church, (which is their church,) they will take care to satisfy you about all other things, whether you will or no. For after this dispute is over, you are not permitted to dispute any more, be- cause having found the true church, you have found an infallible one, and if the church be infallible, you must be concluded by her determinations in all mat- ters whatsoever. Well, but let us examine what great weight and moment there is in this question, that the being sa- tisfied about it should put an end to all other parti- cular disputes. Methinks this question is just such another question as this : Since there is but one city of London, but abundance of streets and lanes and alleys in it, some of which are well built, others ruinous, and ready to tumble ; some are healthful, and free from contagious distempers, others perhaps are visited with the plague ; now in which of all these streets, lanes, and alleys is the true city of London to be found ? Why sure any man in his wits will think this an idle question : for whatever H 2 100 A SERMON difference there is as to those particular places, upon account of some of them being much more safe than others, and some of them more convenient or more uniform than others ; yet they are all of them parts of the same city, but none of them, singly taken, is that city. Now just such an answer as this is to be given to the question before us. The question is, where that church is to be found which we profess to believe in our creeds ? To this question we give a plain answer from the principles we have before laid down. That church which we bebeve in our creeds is the catholic or universal church of Christ, into which all Christians are baptized: and therefore, being thus catholic or universal, it is not to be con- fined to England, or to the reformation abroad ; it is not to be confined to Rome, or those of her commu- nion ; it is not to be confined to Greece, to Syria, to Armenia, to the East Indies, to Ethiopia, to Egypt ; but it is in all these places, becavise in all these places there are Christians professing the common faith of Christ, and partaking of the same common sacraments under their lawful pastors and governors; though yet, in communion, many of them are divided one from another. So that in all these places, and in every place under heaven, where there are such people, there is a true church of Christ, but not the whole church of Christ, because the whole church, which we call the catholic church, is made up of all those churches. Only this it is fit we should take notice of, that though in all these places the church is to be found, yet the church, or that part of the church, which is found in some of those places, is far more pure and holy and apostolical than it is in other places. And in all the countries where the church ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 101 may be said to be, those where the faith is professed according to the church of Rome have the great- est mixture of errors and corruptions. And now let any man judge, whether there be any such extraordinary feats to be done by this question as they would bear us in hand ; nay, whe- ther it be not wholly impertinent to our business. For you see that, notwithstanding this question is answered, yet all the particular disputes between us and the church of Rome are yet unsettled ; and we are at as great a distance from them as ever. Not- withstanding we are willing to own them to be truly a church, (as we do all the eastern and western churches,) yet still we dare not communicate with them ; still our complaints remain against their usurpations, against their imposing God knows how many new doctrines for articles of faith, which the scriptures and the primitive church never taught ; against their worship of images, and invocation of saints ; of having the public service of God in an un- known tongue, and depriving the people of half of the sacrament; and other such things. We say, they are truly a church, that is, a part of the catholic church, because we think they retain all the fun- damentals of the Christian religion, both as to doc- trine, and sacraments, and government. But yet we cannot be of their communion, unless they will either withdraw their unlawful, unscriptural impositions from being terms of their communion, or satisfy us (which they never can do any intelligent man) that these new things, which they impose, and we except against, are really agreeable to the word of God. So that you see the ocean of disputes must be sailed through, or else we can never come to an harbour. H 3 102 A SERMON But it will perhaps be insisted on, as I know it is by the pretended catholics, how is it possible that there should be but one church, (as there is but one, by the acknowledgment of all,) and yet so many dif- ferent communions among those that pretend to be of that church ? Can all these people, thus divided and separated, belong to that one body of Christ? No, certainly ; it is but one of all those communions that can be the true church. To this I answer : It were heartily to be wished that all who profess the Christian religion were of one communion, as they were at first. And sure I am, it is the duty of every particular man, and of every particular church, to endeavour it, as much as it is possible, without violating faith and a good conscience. And woe be to them who have been the cause or the occasion of such dismal rents and schisms as are to be seen at this day in the Christian world ! but yet, notwithstanding, there is no reason to be assigned why churches of different communions may not, for all that, remain truly parts of the catholic church, so long as they have those essentials of a church which I have so often named. I grant indeed, that so long as these divisions and separations do remain, there is a crimi- nal schism lies at the door of some party or other: for certainly by Christ's laws the whole catholic church should be of one communion ; and ecclesiastical af- fairs should be so administered among all people and languages, that every honest man, when he had oc- casion to travel from one country into another, even to the remotest parts of Christendom, might readily, with a good conscience, join in public prayers and sacraments with that Christian congregation which ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 103 he found upon the place. So that, as the state of Christendom now stands, we must needs acknowledge there is an horrible schism, and hath been for many- ages, among the churches ; nay, perhaps there may be more churches than one that are guilty of this schism in some degree or other. But still, I say, these schismatical churches are yet parts of the ca- tholic church, though very corrupt and degenerate ones ; their schism doth no more cut them off from being members of Christ's kingdom (so long as they do hold to the foundation) than, for instance, if it should happen in England that two families, or two parishes, or two counties should quarrel among them- selves, and that quarrel should proceed so far as that they should refuse all mutual commerce and inter- course, should be inhospitable one towards another, and break the king's peace whenever they met one with another ; I say, the schism in the former case will no more cut off the churches concerned from being members of Christ's kingdom, so long as they retain the faith and worship of Christ Jesus, than the quarrel or breach of peace in the latter case will cut off those people from being the king of England's subjects, or from being members of his kingdom, so long as they profess to bear faith and true allegi- ance to his majesty, and own his laws and go- vernment. It is a plain case that there were separations and schisms and different communions even in the most primitive times of Christianity : witness that great schism that happened in the church of Corinth, which occasioned two famous Epistles, one from St. Paul, another from St. Clement, to that church. But yet not a word in either of these Epistles that the schis- H 4 104 A SERMON matics were no Christians, or out of the pale of the church. Within two hundred years after Christ, there arose a notorious schism between the eastern and the Latin churches about the time of celebrating Easter. And there the pope of Rome (as they have always been ready at such turns) excommunicated the churches of Asia for disagreeing with them about that point. Here now the catholic church was di- vided into two communions ; but will any man in his wits say, that either of those communions was cut off from the catholic church, when at that time there was in both of them so many glorious martyrs and confessors ? But if either of them did forfeit their title of being catholics, it will be easily guessed which of them it was : for certainly the Asiatic churches were in no fault, since they did but observe their ancient usage ; but it was the Roman church that was the schismatic, in so groundlessly excommuni- cating them. But then I have this further to add upon this point, that though, as you see, we do assert that churches of different communions may, for all that, belong to the true catholic church, yet it is not for the serving our own cause that we do assert this. The church of England doth not need this hypo- thesis for the justifying herself to all the world ; but we take this hypothesis, and say all this out of the great charity and tenderness we have to the church of Rome, and those other great bodies that differ both from them and us, though much more from them than they do from us. But if indeed it should prove true, which the pi'etended catholics of Rome so much contend for, viz. that among all the dif- ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 105 ferent communions in Christendom there can but one of those communions be the true church, and all the rest are out of the catholic church ; I say, if this should be true, I declare that if I had yet my com- munion to choose, of all the communions in Christ- endom which have the face of a church, the com- munion of the church of Rome, as it is now esta- blished, should be the last that I should join myself to : and my reason is, that if either heresy or schism destroy a church, and cut off the members of it from the body of Christ, I should more suspect that com- munion upon both these accounts than any other. As for heresy, the notion of it is not so fully agreed upon : but if it be heresy to teach doctrines of re- ligion that are not true, and practices in religion that are not safe ; (to give it the most favourable term we can ;) if it be heresy to declare new articles of faith as necessary to salvation, which neither Christ, nor his apostles, nor the primitive church ever declared as such ; then I fear the Roman church hath gone as far towards the making herself guilty of heresy as any of the several communions of Christendom, even the most erroneous of them. But as for schism, she hath gone a great way further : we are all agreed that schism is an unnecessary, causeless 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 schism which is the cause and occa- sion of that separation. If we desire to communi- cate with all churches upon the gospel-terms, but some churches will not let us communicate with 106 A SERMON them upon those terms, but impose other terms which the laws of the gospel doth not allow; here is indeed a schism, and a rent between these churches: but which of them is the schismatic ? 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 such terms as we cannot with a safe conscience submit to. And this, I fear, is the case between the church of Rome and those other churches that are of a dif- ferent communion. The church of Rome, taking in all the kingdoms and nations that adhere to her at this day, is not by all computation above one fourth part (if so much) of that company of men which profess the faith of Christ, and have the sacraments, and all other essentials of a church. Yet all those churches are divided from her. Here now is a schism, and a fearful one : but the question is, at whose door the sin lies ? Why truly, it is to be feared, that church which hath imposed new terms of com- munion which were never heard of in the primitive times ; that church which, taking advantages of the smallness of some churches, and the distresses of others, hath erected an universal monarchy over the Christian world, and instead of contenting herself with being a part of the catholic church, will needs be the whole, and excommunicate all those that re- fuse to yield obedience to the bishop of Rome, as the vicar of Christ, and the only visible head of the church ; I say, this usurping, monopolizing church is, in all reason, the schismatic ; and not those other churches that are shut out of her communion. Well, but there is one argument goes about, which, notwithstanding all we have said, doth irrefragably ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 107 prove, that the church of Rome, and no other, is that true, visible church that Christ is to have always upon earth. I have met with it in a little manuscript paper ; and it is said to have done some feats. I will speak two or three words to it, and so conclude this point. The argument is this: " If yovi deny the church " of Rome to be the only true, visible church, then " I desire that you will be pleased to shew me a vi- " sible church opposing the church of Rome in those " doctrines wherein you differ from them, and prac- " tising in those points as the church of England " doth, from the time of Christ till the reformation. " For if there was any time wherein there was no " Christian church but that in communion with the " see of Rome, it must, I conceive, be granted, that " that is the true church, or that Christ had no vi- " sible one upon earth." This is the paper, word for word, leaving out the preface, about which we have no controversy ; and the force of it lies in these two points : " We cannot " shew a visible church that hath, from Christ's time " to the reformation, opposed the church of Rome " in those doctrines and practices wherein we differ " from her ; and there was a time when all Chris- " tian churches were in communion with the church " of Rome." The conclusion from hence is, That therefore the present church of Rome is the only true church of Christ upon earth. This is as surprising a conclusion from such pre- mises, as can enter into the mind of a man. First of all, we cannot shew a visible church that hath, from Christ's time to the reformation, opposed the church of Rome in her pretences ; therefore the 108 A SERMON church of Rome is the only true church. Why, supposing that all the churches of the world had, from Christ's time to this, agreed with the church of Rome in all points both of doctrine and practice, yet doth it from thence follow that the church of Rome is the only visible church? No, not in the least ; she is still but a part of the visible church, and the other churches that agree with her are as much parts of it as she. And if this be so, how can it in the least follow, that when churches are divided from her both in doctrine and practice, she is any more the whole visible church than they ? Why are not they as much the visible church after they are divided as they were before, supposing it was her fault, and not theirs, that occasioned this division and separation ? and if the visible church can be but in one communion, why are not those churches that are separated from the church of Rome the only true catholic visible church, and the church of Rome no part of it at all, since it appears that in this case it is she that hath caused the schism ? But that I may fully expose the sophistry of this argument to the meanest understanding, and enable every one to give an answer to it, I will put the whole force of it into an obvious case. The argument is, that if we cannot shew a visible church distinct from the Roman, that hath in all times from the beginning opposed the doctrines and practices of the present church of Rome, then it will undeniably follow, that the present church of Rome is the only visible church. Why now, methinks, this is just such an argu- ment as this : A father bequeathes a large estate among his ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 109 children, and their children after them. They do for some generations quietly and peaceably enjoy their several shares without disturbance from each other. At last one branch of this family (and not of the eldest house neither) starts up, and being of greater power than the rest, and having got some of the same family to join with him, very impudently chal- lenged the whole estate to himself, and those that adhere to him ; and would dispossess all the rest of the descendants, accounting them no better than bastards, though they be far more in number than his own party, and have a far greater share in the inheritance. Upon this they contest their own right against him, alleging their father's will and testa- ment, and their long possession, and that they are all lawfully descended from their first common ancestor. But this gentleman, who would lord it over his brethren, offers this irrefragable argument for the justice of his claim : If, saith he, you deny me and my adherents to be the sole proprietors of this estate, then it lies upon you to shew, that ever since the death of our progenitor, who left us this estate, there hath appeared some of the family who have always opposed my claim to this estate : but that you cannot shew ; and therefore I have an un- doubted title to the whole estate ; I am lord of the whole inheritance. I do appeal to any man living, whether this plea would pass in any court of judicature ; nay, whether any private man, though never so unlearned, can believe that this insolent pretender doth offer any fair reason for the disseising the coheirs of their in- heritance. And yet this is just the argument with which those learned gentlemen would persuade us 110 A SERMON to give up our birthright, to depart from that share of the inheritance we have in the catholic church. Well, but what will the coheirs that are concerned say to this argument ? Why, there are three things so obvious to be said to it, that if the persons con- cerned have not the wit to hit upon them, they are fit to come under the custody and guardianship of this pretended heir-general. May they not say to this gentleman that makes so universal a claim, Sir, your claim was not so early as the death of our fore- father who left us this joint inheritance. Your an- cestors and ours lived a great while peaceably toge- ther, without any clashing about this estate, and we were suffered for some ages to enjoy our own right, without any molestation from you or those you de- rive from ; and, the case being so, there was no need of opposing your pretences, because you made none. But then, (which is the second thing,) when you did set up for this principality, and wheedled some of our family, and forced others to join with you, you know you were presently opposed by others of our family, who would not so easily part from their rights. You know, that as soon as ever you made your claim, there were some that stoutly declared against it, though they had not power and strength and interest enough in the world to stem the tor- rent of your ambition. But then, thirdly, may they say, Supposing it was not so ; supposing you had met with no rub in your pretences ; (which yet you know you did ;) suppos- ing our family were not so suddenly aware of the mischief that would come upon them from those your usurpations, as to make a present opposition ; doth it now follow, that because no opposition was ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. Ill just then made to your pretences, that therefore your pretensions to the whole estate are justifiahle ? No, we can prove they are not so ; for it is plain by the testament, by the settlement of our common father, that we have as much a right to our parts in this estate as you have, or as your ancestors ever had. Tell not us that you were not at first, or that you were not always opposed in your claim : but tell us by what right or justice you can pretend to be the sole lord of this inheritance. Let the will of our common parent be produced, and that will plainly shew that we have as much a share in this estate as you have. This allegory is so pat to our business, and the application of it so easy to our present case, that I think I should injure the most vulgar understand- ing, if I should suspect his ability to make that use of it which I intend. And then, fourthly, as for the other thing which the paper uses as an argument of the church of Rome being the only visible church, namely this, " That if there was any time wherein there was no " Christian church but that in communion with the " see of Rome, it must be granted that that is the " true church," meaning the only true church : I say, 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 strongly, that the British church here in this nation is the only visible church of Christ, or that the church of Constantinople is the only church of Christ, or that the church of Alex- andria in Egypt is the only church of Christ, as it will prove that the church of Rome is the only church of Christ. For if there was any time where- 112 A SERMON in there was no Christian church but what was in communion with the British church, then, according to this argument, it must be granted, that the Bri- tish church is the only true church. If there was a time wherein there was no Christian church but what was in communion with the see of Constanti- nople, then it must be granted that the Greek church, under the patriarch of Constantinople, is the only true, visible church of Christ ; and so it may be car- ried on as to the church of Alexandria, and several other churches yet in being. For whenever that time was, when all those churches were in communion with all other churches, (as I believe it was in the primitive times of Christianity,) I think it is evident that the church of Rome was as much in communion with the British churches as the British churches were in communion with the see of Rome ; and so as to all the rest. If now the British 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 sure the church of Rome, and all other churches, being once in communion with the British church, is as good an argument that the British 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 so arrogant as to pretend to be the only true church of Christ, though I am sure, all things considered, we have more reason to do so than they. But we are contented to be a part of the ca- tholic visible church ; and we wish they would be so too. And we have this comfort, that we can say we are a sound part of the catholic church, which we ON 1 CORINTHIANS XII. 13. 113 heartily wish we could say of them ; but to our grief we cannot. I am sensible I have made a long and a tedious discourse about this business of the church : but I thought it needful to do it, (having so fair an occa- sion given me by my text,) that I might furnish you with answers to those people who are so continually talking about the church, the true church, the one visible church, out of which there is no salvation. This I am sure of, and I conclude with it : So long as you continue in our communion, you are in the communion of the true church of Christ, and in an infinitely safer communion than if you were in theirs. I dare answer for the salvation of all those who, con- tinuing in our church, do live up to the principles of it ; hut I dare answer nothing for them who, being- brought up in this church, and having so great op- portunities given them of knowing the truth, do yet depart from it. I pray God they may be able to an- swer for themselves. I pray God make us all honest and wise; and then I am sure, as to our principles, we shall continue the same we are now, but as to our lives and conversa- tions we shall grow much better. May God of his infinite mercy grant this to us for the sake of his dear Son Jesus Christ. To whom, &c. This being the Sermon that gave occasion to the king's mandatory letter to the Bp. of London to suspend Dr. Sharpe ; and the bishop having advised him to forbear preaching till his majesty's displeasure was removed ; he was prevented from proceeding any further in the examination of those other five queries which he had proposed at the end of the former Sermon, so that we have no more of his conclusion from this text. ABP. SHARPE, VOL. V. I A SERMON ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. He that covereth his sins shall not prosper : but whoso con- fiesseth them and forsakcth them shall Jind mercy. THESE words contain a very full, though a very short description (and by how much the shorter, so much, I think, the better) of true repentance ; such a repentance as God would accept : and that, first, negatively, in what it doth not consist, or rather is not consistent with it ; and that in the former part of the verse ; He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: and, secondly, positively, in what it doth consist ; and that in these two things, confessing our sins and forsaking them ; Whoso conjesseth and forsaheth them shall find mercy. Repentance, however it may appear to some as a single duty, yet in truth it is one full half of all that the gospel requires of us. For the whole con- dition of the new covenant is comprised in these two things ; viz. repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ ; as the apo- stle has declared, Acts xx. 21. It must therefore be of infinite consequence, that we all be rightly instructed in the nature of repent- ance, since there is so great stress laid upon it. If we take false measures in this point, it is as much as our souls are worth. And yet, as things go in the world, though nothing be more plainly and fully de- clared in the holy scriptures than the nature of this ON PROVERHS XXVIII. 13. IIS repentance, as to all the branches of it ; so that no man of but tolerable parts, that will bring an honest mind along with him, can easily miss of rightly in- forming himself from thence of all that he is con- cerned to know about this duty ; yet, I say, as mat- ters now stand, there is scarce any doctrine of reli- gion more obscured, more misrepresented, more dis- torted and corrupted, even to the great peril of the souls of men, than this doctrine of repentance is. Some men there are, who, for the advancing the authority of the clergy, and the more fully establish- ing their empire over the consciences of men, as likewise for the enriching themselves by other men's sins, and at the same time making the consciences of those that pay for it as easy and as quiet as may be ; I say, they have found out God knows how many devices as to this business of repentance which the writers of the scripture never knew of; nay, which indeed are directly contrary to their sense and mean- ing. And such devices they are too, that at the same time they both perplex the consciences of the more scrupulous sort of men, and also give too much encouragement to the vices and excesses of those that are loosely given. The Wise Man here in the text tells us, that whoso conjesseth his sins and forsakeih them shall jind mercy. This is both plain enough, and home enough ; and this same notion of repentance is all along inculcated both in the Old and New Testament ; and no other but this. Every where a contrite con- fession of our sins to God, and a forsaking them, are thought enough to denominate a sinner a true penitent, and to entitle him to the mercies of God. And, on the other side, whoever doth not come up I 2 116 A SERMON to this, whoever doth not botli these, is not qua- lified for God's mercies ; the one without the other will not be sufficient. If a man confess, but doth not forsake, his sins are yet upon him ; he is not in the state of a true penitent. On the other side, though a man do forsake his sins, if he do not con- fess them, (which indeed it is hardly to be supposed that a man can do,) yet still his repentance is im- perfect. It is not that repentance to which God, in his revelations to mankind, has made any promise of mercy and forgiveness. Both these things therefore are necessary, and where they do concur, they are all that is necessary. But now the present doctrines of the church of Rome concerning this matter of repentance are quite of another strain, as will appear by these three of them, which I shall take occasion from my text to examine. 1. First of all, they teach, that a man is not only to confess his sins to God, but he is bound to confess them also to a priest ; otherwise they will not be forgiven him. And when he doth thus make his confession, he is bound to discover, not only all his mortal sins, that upon strict examination of himself he can remember, but also the circumstances of them. 2. Secondly, whereas it is here said, that he that coiifesseth and forsaheth his sins shall, without more ado, find mercy, that is, his sins shall be for- given him, they teach quite otherwise : for a man, according to them, may confess his sins and forsake them too, and yet they shall not be forgiven him, unless he make satisfaction for them over and above. They grant indeed, that upon his confession to a ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 117 priest, and receiving absolution from him, the eter- nal punishment due to his sins is remitted ; but yet there is a very terrible temporal punishment to be undergone, either in this life or the next ; which punishment the sinner cannot be freed from, unless he either in his own person, or some other for him, do make a complete satisfaction to the divine jus- tice. 3. Thirdly, whereas by the words of our text one would think, that forsaking of sin was as necessary to the finding mercy as confession, and that one with- out the other would not be available for the pro- curing any man's pardon, they teach quite other- wise ; (if not directly, yet by consequence ;) for, ac- cording to their definitions, if a man do but devoutly and contritely confess to a priest, and receive his absolution, he is presently put into the state of God's favour, so far as that he shall not suffer eternally for his sins, but at last go to heaven ; though in the mean time he do not forsake his sins till his dying day : though, as I said before, if he have not made satisfaction, he must for a long time be kept in pur- gatory. These are the popish corruptions and innovations in this matter of repentance that we all complain of, and think we have just reason so to do. And these opinions and doctrines are not only taught by pri- vate men among them, but are partly the express definitions of their general council of Trent, (which, with them, is authority never to be opposed and contradicted,) and partly they are the undeniable consequences and results of what they have there decreed and declared concerning the sacrament of penance. I 3 118 A SERMON Of these three points I come to give an account : and I begin with their doctrine of confession, which I am the more desirous to insist upon, because really several among ourselves are apt enough to think, that the church of Rome hath the advantage of us in this matter. And it is made a pretence by some, why they have left our communion, viz. that in our church they want the benefit of private confession, which in the church of Rome is strictly enjoined. Now my business is to lay this matter plainly be- fore you, to state both their doctrine and ours in this point of confession ; and then, I dare say, it will easily appear which church is to be preferred upon this account. 1. First then I shall shew, how far we of the re- formed religion do allow of confession of sins unto men. 2. Secondly, what that doctrine of the church of Rome is, that we find fault with in this matter, and for what reasons it is justly blameable. I. First then, I shall plainly lay before you what it is we teach as to this matter of confessing sins to men, whether priests or others. All the sins that can be confessed will fall under some of these three heads : they are either such whereby God is offend- ed, and he only ; or they are such whereby some particular man is injured, as well as God offended ; or, lastly, they are such whereby scandal is given to the public society of Christians where we live, though no particular man be injured by them. Now as to each of these kinds of sins, let us ex- amine what confession to men is due. 1. And, first of all, there is no doubt but that as to all these sins that come under the second head I ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 119 have named, that is to say, all those things whereby we have offended or injured our particular neigh- bours; there is no doubt, I say, that we are not only bound to confess them to God, as being transgressors of his law, but bound likewise to make satisfaction to our neighbours for the injury we have done to them by them. And that both by a penitential confession and acknowledgment of them, and, if that be not sufficient, by making such further reparations as the case requires. This we are bound to do by the natural laws of justice and equity ; and our Saviour hath sufficiently intimated his pleasure as to this in that precept of his ; If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy hr other hath ought against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy ways, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift, Matt. v. 23, 24. In which words he plainly teaches us, that it is not enough, when we have offended or affronted any person, to go and ask God forgiveness for it, but we are to go and reconcile ourselves to him, by ac- knowledging our faults, and making all such repara- tions as the injury requires ; otherwise we are no- ways capable of making our prayers to God for his forgiveness. O that we would all seriously think on this ! if we did, it would not be possible for us to offer the least provocation, or to do the least injury to any man in the world. Or if we were so foolish, or so unhappy as to do it, we should not be able to take any rest, till we had made him satisfaction. For I account no man can be able to rest quietly, who is not in a condition to say his prayers. 2. But, secondly, as to all those sins which come under the third head I mentioned, viz. sins which, i 4 120 A SERMON though they do not injure any particular person, yet injui*e the public society of Christians, are an affront to the religion we profess, and give scandal to the church ; as to these sins, I say, not only our church, but all other protestant churches, do not only allow, but approve of confession unto men, even a public confession, a confession as open as the sins committed were. For instance, if any man deny the faith of Christ, or go over to an heretical communion ; or, lastly, live in the open practice of any sin or sins that are notoriously repugnant to the laws of Christ's religion ; such sins as St. Paul instanceth in, when he directs the Corinthians, that if any man who is called a brother (that is, a Christian) be a forni- cator, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with such a one no not so much as to eat, 1 Cor. v. 11 : as to such persons as these, I say, there is no protestant church but doth highly approve that a public confession should be made in the face of the church of those crimes by every penitent ; that by this means satisfaction might be made to the Christian society which was scandal- ized, and the offending party may, as much as in him lies, undo all the mischief which his bad ex- ample had done to his fellow Christians. And this indeed was the ancient practice of the church of Christ in the primitive times. Such a course was always then taken with scandalous of- fenders. If a man was a known evil liver, if upon admonition he did not reform his life, he was, without more ado, cast out of the communion of the faithful ; and there was no way to obtain his readmission but by a repentance as public as his sin was. Nay, in those days the offending Christians, ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 121 who had their hearts disposed for repentance, were as forward of themselves to make this public confes- sion, and to right the Christian society they had in- jured, as the church was to require it of them. And this is that confession we so often read of in ecclesiastical writers, and which they so much urge as of necessity to repentance, viz. a public confession of crimes, not that private whispering of sins into the ear of a confessor, which the church of Rome hath now brought into the place of it. It is true, there is little of this to be seen in our times : a few footsteps are left of the ancient ecclesi- astical discipline, and that is all : whether ever it will be restored or no, God only knows ; but it is the wish and the prayer of all good men that it may be. Popery first corrupted the discipline of the church ; and happy had it been for us, if when our first reformers took so much care to reduce doctrines of faith to the primitive standard, they had done the same as to our discipline : but perhaps it was not in their power. They sufficiently discover their good- will to it, in the preface of the Commination-office ; where, having mentioned that " there was a godly " discipline in the primitive church; that such persons " as stood convicted of notorious sins were put to " open penance, and punished in this world, that " their souls might be saved in the day of the Lord ; " and that others, admonished by their examples, " might be more afraid to offend ; " they add in the next sentence, " that it is heartily to be wished that " this discipline may be restored." But till that be done, we must use such methods for bringing men to repentance as we can. 3. But, thirdly, all protestants that I know of do 122 A SERMON not only require acknowledgment and confession of injuries to the injured person, as necessary to repent- ance, and approve of public confession of public sins in the face of the church, but even as to private sins, whereby no particular man nor no society is injured, but only God offended ; (which is the third sort of sins that I mentioned in the first place;) I say, as to these, they not only allow of, but approve of confes- sion to men, even private confession to men ; and more especially such confession as is made to those who are ministers. No one protestant, so far as we can judge by the public declarations of their faith, is against private confession of sins to any good man, much less to a minister or pastor. Nay, they are so far from being against it, that they advise it, and re- commend it in sundry cases, as a most excellent in- strument of repentance. So that the papists do very unjustly traduce and calumniate the reformation when they say that the protestants are against private confession ; there is no such thing. There is no protestant church but gives it that due esteem and regard that it ought to have. All that they have done is to regulate it, to set it upon its true basis and foundation ; which is done, not by requiring private confession as a thing necessary, but by exhorting men to it as a thing highly convenient in many cases. In all those in- stances where it can be useful, or serve any good purpose, it is both commended and seriously advised ; that is to say, where a sinner either needs direction and assistance for the overcoming some sin that he labours under ; or where he is so overwhelmed with the burden of his sins, that he needs the help of some skilful person to explain to him the terms of the ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 123 gospel, to convince him from the holy scriptures that his repentance (as far as a judgment can be made of it) is true and sincere, and will be accepted by God ; and, lastly, upon the full examination of his state, and his judgment thereupon, to give him the absolu- tion of the church. In all these cases, no protestant (that understands his religion) is against private con- fession : on the contrary, all the best writers of the protestants, nay, all the public confessions of the pro- testants, (which give an account of their faith,) are mightily for it, and do seriously recommend it. Mr. Calvin hath fully expressed their sense as to this point. " Let every faithful Christian," says he," remember, " that when he is burdened and afflicted with the " sense of his sins, that he cannot ease himself with- " out the help of others, it is then his duty not to " neglect that remedy which the Lord hath prescribed " to him, viz. that, for the easing of himself, he resort " to private confession with his pastor; and that, for " the gaining comfort to himself, he fetch in the as- " sistance of him whose office it is, both privately and " publicly, to comfort the people of God by the doc- " trine of the gospel. But yet this moderation is " always to be used, that, where God hath not laid " impositions, we should not lay impositions on our " own consciences. Hence it follows, that this pri- " vate confession ought to be free, and should not be " required of all, but only recommended to those who " find they have need of it." Thus far Mr. Calvin ; and in the same place where he doth thus recommend private confessions doth he also speak great things of the benefits of private absolution, in order to the easing and comforting afflicted consciences. And this sense of his is the general sense of the 121 A SERMON protestants abroad. If there be any difference among them, it is, that the Lutherans are more strict in re- quiring private confession than either the French or Dutch protestants are. As for our own church, she has directly given her judgment in the matter, as we have now represent- ed, viz. in the public exhortation which is to be read when notice is given of a communion. There it is advised, " That if there be any of the congregation " that cannot by other means quiet his own con- " science, but requireth comfort or counsel; then he " should come to some discreet and learned minister " of God's word, and open his grief; that by the " ministry of God's holy word he may receive the " benefit of absolution, together with ghostly coun- " sel and advice, to the quieting of his conscience, " and avoiding all scruple and doubtfulness." This is the doctrine of the protestants concerning confession ; and this I think may be justified to all the world. II. But the popish doctrine in this matter is quite of another strain, and serves to quite different pur- poses : which what it is, and upon what grounds we find fault with it, I come in the second place to shew. The church of Rome, you are to know, have made repentance to be a sacrament, viz. the sacrament by which only sins committed after baptism are to be forgiven. And of this sacrament of repentance they have made three parts ; 1. contrition for sin ; 2. con- fession to a priest ; 3. satisfaction. Whoever per- forms these three things, upon the priest's absolu- tion, his sins are forgiven. And all these three con- ditions, say they, are necessary to the obtaining par- don and reconciliation. ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 125 By confession, they mean not confession to God, nor confession to our neighbour in case of injuries, nor confession to the church in case of public, noto- rious sin, but private confession to a priest, which is that they call auricular confession, because it is whispered into his ear. This is that confession they make a necessary part of repentance, and without which (supposing we have opportunity) sin is not forgiven. I will give you their sense (as near as I can trans- late) in the words of two of their general councils which have established it as a law among them. The first is, the council of Lateran. There it is ordered, " That every man and woman, after they come to " years of discretion, should faithfully confess all " their sins privately to their own priest, at least " once in the year, and endeavour faithfully to per- " form the penance that is enjoined them ; and after " this they should come to the sacrament, at least " at Easter, unless the priest, upon some reasonable " cause, do judge it fit for them to abstain at that " time. And whoever doth not perform this, he is " to be excommunicated out of the church ; and, if " he die, he is not to be allowed Christian burial." Thus the council of Lateran, very modestly ! But the council of Trent goes much further, and clinch- eth the business as effectually as is possible ; for they decree, that " whoever shall affirm that this private " confession to a priest was not instituted by Christ, " and is by divine right necessary to salvation, let " him be accursed." The same council orders, that " all mortal sins which a man, after diligent exami- " nation of himself, finds his conscience to be bur- " dened with, even those that are most secret, though 126 A SERMON " they be only in thought or desire, even all these " are to be repeated to the priest in confession ; and " not only the sins themselves, but also the circum- " stances of them, that may change the kind of the " sin." And to bind this the faster upon the con- sciences of men, they have made this decree, that " whosoever shall say that in the sacrament of pe- * nance it is not by divine law necessary for the ob- " taining forgiveness, to confess all and every mortal " sin which, after a diligent inquiry, a man can re- " member, even the most secret, together with the " circumstances that change the kind of the sin ; or " shall say that such confession is only of use for the " directing or comforting the penitent, but is not ne- " cessary, let every such man be accursed." This is the plain, avowed doctrine of the present church of Rome as to confession. But we say it is a great error introduced into the doctrine of repent- ance, and of very ill consequence to the souls of men, as will appear by these three following things, which I shall very briefly represent. 1. First, they here make a thing to be of Christ's institution, and of necessity to salvation, that hath no manner of foundation in the holy scriptures, either in the Old or New Testament. If they could but produce one text of the Bible, wherein it did appear that this auricular, sacramental confession of sins to a priest was recommended, either by our Lord or his apostles ; or one text, wherein it did appear that it was practised by any Christian, either of the clergy or laity, in any instance ; or, lastly, one text, whereby it doth appear that it was so much as mentioned or thought on by the holy men of that time ; I say, if they could produce any ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. one text of scripture for the proof of any of these things, they would do something : but we are sure they cannot. And therefore to impose private con- fession, as a necessary condition of repentance, upon all the Christian world, under pain of damnation, that is intolerable. One text there is indeed they make a great noise with, and it looks, at first sight, plausibly to their purpose ; but upon examination it will be found nothing at all to their purpose. It is in the fifth chapter of St. James's Epistle, where the apostle hath this passage ; Confess, says he, your sins one to another, that ye may be healed : for the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man avail- eth much. But, first of all, it can never be made appear that the confession which St. James here prescribes is to be understood of private confession to a priest ; nay, on the contrary, it is manifest from the very words, that the apostle speaks of such a confession as is mutual and reciprocal ; Confess your sins one to another. Which speech intimates, that both par- ties are to confess ; both the confessor and the con- fessed : but now it is not the usage of the church for the confessors to confess to the people who con- fess to them. Furthermore, it is undeniably plain, that the apostle doth not here speak of the sacra- mental confession of the church of Rome, upon this account ; that the end for which he recommendeth confession to one another is only this, that by the prayers of one another they may be healed of their sickness, (whether those sicknesses be the diseases of the soul or of the body it matters not,) for it imme- diately follows, the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. 128 i A SERMON But what is this to the popish confession ? The end of that is not so much to get cured either of our sins or our sicknesses by the prayers of him we con- fess to ; but to obtain the pardon of our sins, by re- ceiving his absolution ; which is quite another thing. But to proceed further : As there is in scripture no command, no practice, no mention of this sacra- mental, private confession, so there is much against it. For the scripture plainly prescribes other terms of forgiveness of sins, and assures us of pardon and the mercy of God merely upon our confessing to God, and forsaking our sins, without any more ado. David certainly never dreamed of the necessity of auricular confession, when he spake these words in the thirty-second Psalm, and the fifth verse : / ac- hnowledged my sins unto thee, and mine iniquities have I not hid. I said, I will confess my sin unto the Lord; and, lol thou Jbrgavest me the iniquity of my sin. Upon his confessing his sins to the Lord above, his sin was forgiven. And, lest we should think that this was an extraordinary privilege vouch- safed unto him, and such a one as others were not to expect, he adds further, For this cause shall every one that is godly make his prayer unto thee in cm acceptable time, ver. 6. To the same purpose St. John ; If we confess our sins, (meaning to God, for to him the whole context restraineth it,) God is faithful and just to forgive us our si?is, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness, 1 Ep. i. 9- And thus again, if we can gather any thing from any parable of our Saviour's, we may certainly ga- ther this from the parable he makes of the publican and pharisee that went together into the temple to pray, that, in order to the forgiveness of sins, God ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 129 requires no more than an humble, sorrowful, and contrite heart, confessing what is past, and amend- ing for the time to come, without respect to any ex- ternal administration of confession to men. For it is plain that the publican, who is there made the example of a penitent sinner, upon his smiting on his breast, and saying in private to God, O God, be merciful to me a sinner, went away justified, (Luke xviii. 13.) that is, accepted of God, when the other was rejected. The same thing may be ga- thered from that other parable of the prodigal son . It appears, from what I have said, (and much more might be said to this purpose,) what little colour there is for this doctrine, that sacramental confes- sion was instituted by Christ, and by him made ne- cessary to true repentance, since from the scriptures we see the quite contrary. But the strength of the Romanists 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 doctrine in antiquity : they give out, that this was the doctrine of the fa- thers, and the practice of the ancient Christians. Well, this we shall now consider in the second place. 2. And as to this pretence of theirs, we shall say two things ; the first by way of confession. In the first place, we grant that public confessions of sins in the face of the church, especially of notorious and scandalous sins, was much in use in the primitive church, and was a constant part of the ancient dis- cipline. We grant also, that private confession of sins to a discreet minister, in order to the obtaining direction and comfort to the penitent, was both fre- ABP. SHAKPE, VOL. V. K 130 A SERMON quently recommended, and frequently practised in all times ; but more especially after the public con- fessions grew into disuse. But then, having granted this, we say, in the second place, that this makes nothing in the world to that confession which is now required in the church of Rome ; for as to their auricular sacramental confession we dare affirm these three things : (1.) First, that it was never enjoined or com- manded by any law of the church, as a necessary duty incumbent upon all Christians, till the council of Lateran, about four hundred years ago ; which council was the same that established the doctrine of transubstantiation, and that other doctrine of de- posing of princes in case they were heretical : but this is not all. Even in that council, this business of confession was only enjoined as an ecclesiastical constitution, and not bound upon us by any law of God ; and that was modest enough, in comparison of what came afterward. But afterwards came the council of Trent, almost in the memory of our fa- thers ; and that was the first council that ever de- creed private confession to a priest to be the ordi- nance of Christ, and necessary to salvation. So that whatever boast the Romanists make of antiquity being on their side, as to this point, it is certain that auricular confession, as it now stands, was not a law of the church, or thought necessary, till within less than these hundred and fifty years. (2.) But, secondly, we will go further: it is cer- tain that it cannot be made to appear from any tes- timony of the ancient fathers, that confession of sins to a priest in private was ever looked upon as any more than a thing very advisable and very useful ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 131 in several cases, both for the directing a man in the conduct of his religious life, and as a means for the obtaining comfort, if he was in any affliction or per- plexity. (3.) But, thirdly, it is also certain that the ancient fathers of the Christian church were so far from thinking that private confession was an essential part of repentance ; they were so far from thinking that it was instituted by Christ, and necessary to sal- vation, (which is that which the church of Rome now teaches,) that they taught directly the contrary; as abundance of instances might be given, if this were a proper place. " What have I to do with men," saith St. Augustin, " that they should hear my con- " fession, as though they could heal my disease." St. Chrysostom also to the same purpose ; " It is " not necessary," says he, " that thou shouldest con- " fess in the presence of witnesses ; let the iniquity " of thy offences be made in thy thoughts ; let this " judgment be made without a witness ; let God " only see thee confessing : therefore I entreat and " beseech you, that you would continually make " your confessions to God, for I do not bring thee " into the theatre of thy fellow-servants, neither do I " constrain thee to discover thy sins unto men. " Unclasp thy conscience before God, and shew thy " wounds to him, and of him ask a medicine." And very many other passages he hath to this purpose. Doth this now favour the Romish doctrine con- cerning confession ? doth it not directly contradict it ? What shall we say ? The Council of Trent de- crees, that " whosoever shall affirm that confession " of all our mortal sins to a priest" (that we can re- member) " is not necessary to the obtaining forgive- K 2 132 A SERMON" M ness of them, shall be accursed." St. Augustin, St. Chiysostom, and many others, do pointblank affirm that this confession is not necessary, but that forgiveness may be had without it. Either there- fore the Roman anathemas are of no force, nor to be regarded by us ; or, if they be, St. Augustin and St. Chrysostom, and other such good men, are in- volved in them as deeply as we protestants. 3. But then, thirdly and lastly ; as they have nei- ther scripture nor ancient fathers on their side, so neither have they any colour of reason for this bu- siness of confession, as they have ordered it : for whilst they teach that every man is bound to confess all his mortal sins, even the most secret, even the sins of his thoughts and desires, that, after the most diligent examination, he finds himself guilty of ; and that if he do not so confess he is not qualified for pardon ; and whilst, on the other side, it is a most difficult matter for a penitent to know which of his sins are mortal, and which are not ; and likewise when it is he hath made a diligent examination of his own heart concerning his sins, and when he hath not ; what a world of endless scruples and perplex- ities is every man almost by this doctrine led into ! For at this rate, what man can be assured that he hath confessed all his sins so particularly, so circum- stantially as he ought to do ; or that he hath used that fidelity and care in examining his own con- science that the law of Christ exacts from him ? This is so true, that it was long ago observed by a famous man of their own, that, according to the cases, in- quiries, and conclusions that the casuists had made in this matter of confession, it was impossible for any man to make a right confession. ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 133 But further ; this is not the only evil consequence that follows upon that doctrine ; for this mischief also attends it, that, according to this notion, not he that most truly repents him of his sins, and most endeavours to forsake them, is hest qualified for the mercy of God ; but he that most accurately repeats them to the confessor, and enumerates their several circumstances. For let a man be never so much sorry for his sins, and never so much endeavour to reform his life ; yet, if he do not perform this part of the sacrament of penance, he is not in so safe a con- dition as that man is who is less sorry for his sins, and doth less endeavour to forsake them, supposing he do but confess well to the priest, and receive his absolution. Lastly, to conclude ; as this confession is managed by the church of Rome, it is so far from being a check or a bridle upon a man to have a care of com- mitting the same sins again that he hath thus con- fessed, (which is the greatest, and indeed the only thing in reason that is pretended for the usefulness of this kind of confession,) that, on the contrary, as the thing is managed, it gives a great encourage- ment for sinners to continue in their sins. For this being their doctrine, that whenever a man is sorry for his sins, and confesseth them to the priest, and thereupon receiveth his absolution, upon promise to perform the penance enjoined ; the man so doing doth that very moment receive remission, as to the eternal punishment 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 conscience, go on again in the same course of life ? All his old sins are now washed away, and he begins k 3 134 A SERMON ON PROV. XXVIII. 13. upon a new score, and it is but repeating his con- fession, and getting a new absolution, and he is as safe as if he had never been a sinner. This is one of the natural consequences of this doctrine, and that a great many in the Roman communion do frequently reduce this into practice is too evident to be denied. And now I do appeal to all men that will impar- tially consider these things that I have now repre- sented, (and I am sure I have faithfully represented matters as they stand on both sides,) whether their doctrine or ours have the better foundation ; whether our doctrine be not much more agreeable to the scrip- tures, to reason, and to the primitive practice ; more tending to the ease and peace and comfort, and more to the edification of souls, than their doctrine is. Let all of us therefore, when we find ourselves burdened with the weight of our sins, apply to God, and unburden ourselves of them by confession to him. If we need either advice, or assistance, or di- rection, or comfort, we may call in the assistance of pious and discreet ministers ; nay, we ought in pru- dence to do so, and we are wanting to ourselves if we do not. But still the confession that is necessary to the obtaining our pardon must ever be understood of confession to God. Whosoever humbly and sor- rowfully confesses his sins to him, and endeavours to forsake them, such a man shall find pardon, whe- ther he confess to men or no. This is the protestant doctrine, and let us all ad- here to it, and practise it. And God Almighty give us grace, that we may no longer cover our sins, but with humble and pe- nitent hearts confess them and forsake them. So shall we find mercy through Jesus Christ, ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 145 must be purged from his sins after he died, by un- dergoing the fire of purgatory. An admirable proof of purgatory : as if every body did not understand the particle of similitude here used, so as by fire, was enough to shew that St. Paul did not here in- tend an escape out of the fire literally ; but such an escape as men make out of an house that is on fire. The words ought to be rendered, he himself shall be saved, yet so as out of the fire. Now it is well known, that by this phrase can be meant no more than this ; that it would be a hard thing for the man to escape ; he run a great risk, his safety was very hazardous, and if he was preserved, it would be with a great deal of difficulty. This expression of escaping as out of the fire, was a common proverbial way of speaking both among the Jews and among the hea- thens in the apostles' time ; and it is always used in this sense both in the scripture and other authors. What else is the meaning of that passage in Amos, ch. iv. 11. Ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning : and of that other passage of Jude ; Others save with fear, plucking them out of the fire, ver 23; which expressions only signify the greatness of the danger, and the difficulty of escaping it : so that cer- tainly we may conclude, that from this text no pur- gatory flames can be kindled. All that St. Paul says is, that the teachers of false doctrines, those that mis- represented Christianity, their works should be con- sumed ; for time would discover truth, and truth should prevail at last; but the persons that thus taught falsely, that thus built hay and stubble upon the foundation of Christ, they should, for this their prevaricating, be in great danger of being severely punished : but yet, upon their repentance, they might ABP SHARPE, VOL,. V. L 146 A SERMON escape; but it would be with a great deal of difficulty; their condition was very hazardous and dangerous. Thus I have given an account of these two texts which the champions of the Romish faith lay the greatest stress upon ; and I hope we may be all con- vinced, that they do not do the work they are brought for : and several of the Romanists them- selves are indeed on our side in this matter, acknow- ledging freely, that neither of them are to be inter- preted of purgatory. But this we are certain of, that if these two texts do not speak of purgatory, there are no other texts do ; nay, not only so, but there are many texts speak against it. The scripture doctrine concerning the condition of men, after they depart out of this body, is only this ; that there are two estates belonging to dying men, a good one and a bad one. As to all pei'sons that die true believers and true penitents, they im- mediately upon their death are put into a happy condition, and shall continue in that condition till the day of judgment ; at which time their happiness shall be completed and consummated by the resur- rection of their bodies. As for unbelievers, and wicked livers, and impenitents, they are immediately upon their death put into a miserable condition, and so shall continue for ever ; though perhaps their misery will not have its consummation and extrem- ity till the day of judgment and the general con- flagration of the world, as neither the other had their happiness completed till that time. This is plainly the scripture account of the state of souls departed ; and there is no mention there in the least of souls that are in purgatory torments, but rather much against it. ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 147 Our Saviour, in that famous parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke xvi. doth seem thus to re- present the state of the other world ; viz. that the souls of good men immediately upon their death are in a happy condition, and the souls of bad men in a state of torments. For no sooner did Lazarus die, but he was carried by angels into the bosom of Abraham, (which bosom of Abraham was a common phrase among the Israelites, as appears yet by their writings by which they used to express the happi- ness and blessedness of pious souls departed,) and, on the other side, the covetous, voluptuous rich man was put immediately into a state of torment. Now though we grant that this discourse of our Saviour is no more than a parable, yet we can never imagine that he would contrive a parable in such a manner, that the very ground and foundation upon which it pro- ceeded should be false: but this is not all It is evidently plain, from the whole current of the New Testament, that all persons that die true penitents, and in the state of salvation, are immediately put into a happy condition ; and therefore consequently there is no such purging, tormenting fire to be un- dergone by them as the papists dream of. St. Paul more than once mentions two houses or tabernacles ; the one, the tabernacle of the body that we are now clothed with ; the other, that house from heaven with which good men be clothed upon in the other life : but his discourse always implies, that as soon as ever good men die, they go straight to Christ, and shall put on that heavenly tabernacle, and pass im- mediately into that everlasting city above, whose maker and builder is God. Furthermore, our Lord Jesus Christ promised the l 2 14S A SERMON penitent thief upon the cross, that that very day he should be with him in paradise. Now paradise certainly is the state or place of happiness that God hath prepared for all holy souls after their departure hence. There is no term more usual among the Jew s, both the ancient and the modern, for the expressing this, than the term of paradise. But however, if it was not so usual, yet our Saviour's words fix it to that sense : the thief was that day to be with him in paradise. Now sure nobody will say that our Saviour went to purgatory, but to heaven ; and there- fore the thief went thither also. And what can more destroy the doctrine of purgatory and satisfactions than this ? for if satisfaction be necessary, as they teach it is, and if purgatory be the place where satis- factions are to be made after this life, then certainly the penitent thief, according to their doctrine, must have continued a long time in purgatory ; for no sa- tisfaction had he made for his sins, as to their tem- poral punishment, since he died after a vicious life, upon a very short and sudden repentance : but yet we see the quite contrary ; for he did not go to pur- gatory, but to that place where our Saviour was to be, that is, the place of the blessed. But if any objection be made against this instance ; as that this thief had not received baptism when he repented, but that his shameful death was in the place of baptism to him, and consequently he had all his sins remitted to him without satisfaction, as all per- sons upon their baptism have ; but as for sins com- mitted after baptism the case is otherwise : as to this, we say, that this pretence will be quite taken away by another text that I am going to mention. St. John, in the Revelations, tells us, that he heard this ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 149 voice from heaven, and was commanded to write it, Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord, for they rest from their labours; and their works follow them, ch. xiv. 13. Here it is said indefinitely of all the disciples of Christ ; all that die in his religion and in his fear, that blessed are they when they die } for they rest from their labours. But now how can this proposition consist with the doctrine of purga- tory ? If all that die in Christ do rest from their la- bours, then it is very certain that none of them are punished and tormented after they are dead. For how can rest from labours stand with dreadful mise- ries and cruel sufferings, as souls in purgatory are said to undergo ? If this doctrine was true, they would not have a rest 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 most heavy and insupportable one in the other state. No, certainly, to suppose that all that die in Christ, that is, all true penitents, do rest from their labours, and their works follow them, (as St. John here, from the authority of the Holy Spirit, affirmeth,) is to suppose that they are all in a happy, blissful condi- tion, and that they receive the rewards of their virtue and piety: and consequently the whole doctrine of purgatory is but a romance ; a thing invented, not only without the warrant, but against the warrant of the holy scriptures. And as we do affirm that this doctrine of purga- tory is without scripture, so we do affirm that it is without and against the sense and the doctrine of the ancient church of Christ for many centuries. This, I think, we may confidently say, and make it good, that there is no one father, nor any one council L 3 150 A SERMON of the primitive church (that is owned by the church of Rome themselves) for five hundred years after Christ, that ever taught the doctrine of purgatory as they now teach and believe it ; and, on the other side, we can produce several passages of several of the primitive fathers that do wholly make against it. Two persons are indeed quoted by them, that were of great name and reputation in the church, who seem to talk on their side ; and these are Origen and Ter- tullian : but neither of these men's testimonies will do any credit to their cause. For as for Origen, (so far as we can gather from his writings now extant, if indeed they be his,) his opinion was, that all the punishments that God in- flicted after this life were purgatory punishments ; that is, would have an end : and that after such a de- terminate time both devils and wicked men, having undergone their purgations, should be released from their torments, and enter upon a new scene of things. But this makes nothing in the world to the doctrine of purgatory as it is established in the church of Rome ; for they make purgatory distinct from hell, holding the former to be temporal, but the other eternal. As for the other father, Tertullian, it is very cer- tain that all the time he continued a catholic Christian he spoke not one word of purgatory; (as far as appears by his writings :) but after he forsook the catholic communion, and turned to the side of Montanus, whom he held to be the Holy Ghost, then indeed he talked of a relief that departed souls, which died in an imperfect state, were to expect from their suffer- ings, by the Paraclete, that is, by the Holy Ghost ; which Paraclete he affirmed to be Montanus. *4 ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 151 This is all the evidence and all the authority that the papists have for their purgatory from primitive antiquity; and let them make the best they can of it, and much good may it do them. On the other side, it is very certain that the current of the an- cients runs perfectly against them ; as might be made good, if this was a fit place for it. But I will proceed no further in this argument. I hope I have given you so plain an account of the popish doctrine in this matter, and have so plainly confuted it from the scripture, that I hope the most ordinary capacity may understand it, and be satis- fied of the erroneousness of it. A SERMON ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. He that covereth his sins shall not prosper : but whoso con- fesseth them and Jbrsaketh them shall find mercy. YToU may please to remember, that my design was to take occasion from these words to consider the popish doctrines of repentance, and to endeavour to shew both the novelty and the erroneousness and the danger of them. And two doctrines of this kind I have already insisted upon. First, that of auricular sacramental confession. In treating of which I both shewed how far our church, and all other protestants, do own and ap- prove of confession to men, and what the doctrine of the church of Rome was in this matter ; and also that this imposition of theirs was a new thing with- out warrant from scripture, without warrant from antiquity, and that which was both unreasonable in itself, and, in many cases, of ill consequence. The second general error I insisted upon was, the doctrine of satisfactions, to be made in person by every sinner, even after his sin is forgiven him, either in this life, or in the purgatory flames of the other world, unless he prevent it by procuring in- dulgences, or getting masses to be said for him. Now, in opposition to this doctrine, I shewed, that there is no ground, either in reason or scripture, ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 153 that when God hath once forgiven a man's sins, as to the guilt of them, he should afterwards inflict the punishment of these sins upon the offender ; (which is the main principle upon which their doctrine pro- ceeds ;) and that their doctrine of purgatory hath no foundation in scripture, or in early antiquity, but, on the contrary, is against the tenor of both. I now proceed to a third doctrine of the church of Rome concerning this matter of repentance, which doth flatly contradict the notion of repentance here delivered in the text, and is likewise of mischievous consequence to the souls of men ; and that is, that they make contrition, with the priest's absolution, at any time sufficient to wash away all our sins, and to procure the pardon of God for them. This is the avowed doctrine of the whole church of Rome, and confirmed by the authority of the council of Trent. Now, that we may not be at a loss what they mean by contrition, the said council hath given us a definition of it ; " that it is grief of mind " for sin committed, and a detestation of it, together " with a purpose to sin no more." So that whoso- ever is thus contrite, and confesseth his sins to the priest, and receives his absolution, promising to per- form the penance enjoined, is actually put into a state of salvation from that moment. This doctrine now, we say, is both against the scripture notion of repentance declared in the text, and in other places, and it is of ill consequence as to the lives of men. 1. First, it contradicts the scripture notion of re- pentance ; for that, as appears both from our text, and abundance of other places, includes in it, not only a sorrow for sin, and resolution against it, but a for- 154 A SERMON saking of it also : only he that confesseth ajid for- saheth his sins shall find mercy. Let a man be never so sorry for his sins, and purpose never so heartily to sin no more, yet if, notwithstanding, he still continues to pursue the same vicious courses, he is not a true penitent. The word by which the true evangelical saving repentance is expressed is fjifrdvoia, which signifies not a transient passion for having offended God, or only a sudden purpose to change our lives, but it signifies an actual 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 must of necessity follow a new life, a conversation quite different from that which was led before ; a habit of such actions as are agreeable to the laws of God. Godly sorrow for sin, which is that which the papists mean by contrition, is not repentance, and cannot procure pardon ; but it is only a good disposition, a right preparation to repentance. This the apostle hath most expressly told us, when he saith, that godly sorrow worketh repentance not to be re- pented of, 2 Cor. vii. 10. If then it be the thing that works repentance, it is not repentance itself. 2. But, secondly, this doctrine, that contrition, with confession and absolution, doth put a man into a state of salvation, is not only against the scriptures, but against good life ; for it gives any man that be- lieves it great encouragement to continue in his sins all his life long, and that upon this account, that it quite puts him off from thinking that there is ever any necessity that he should reform his life. Ac- cording to this doctrine, it is but being sorry for my sins at some solemn times, when I come to confes- ON PHOVERBS XXVIII. 13. 155 sion, and resolving to do so no more ; and presently, upon the priest's pronouncing a few words to me, I am absolved of the guilt of them ; I am put into the favour of God, and, if I die that moment, I shall be finally saved. Well ; but what if I do not per- form my resolutions that I then made, but return to my sins again ? Why, it is but my repeating the same medicine, being sorry again, and resolving again, and taking absolution again, and then I am as right again as ever I was : and thus, toties quo- ties, as often as I thus repent, so often are my sins forgiven me. And at my last hour, though I have all my life continued in my sins, yet this repentance and this absolution will as certainly pass me into a right of the favour of God, as if I had never so much reformed my life, and lived never so innocently and virtuously ; always excepting the purgatory pu- nishments that I may, without satisfactions and in- dulgences, endure in another life. But now, upon these principles, how can any sin- ner that is in love with his sins, and deeply engaged in a wicked course, how can he ever think himself obliged to reformation ? how shall he ever be drawn to enter upon, much less to go through, that tedious fatigue of mortification, that intolerable, burdensome business of forsaking his sins, since the being sorry for them will do as well ? What man would be at that pains, when he can obtain pardon and salvation upon so much easier terms ? But I have hitherto given you the fairest repre- sentation of the Romish doctrine of repentance, as to this matter ; that that the strictest casuists among them will be concluded by. But, in truth, it is generally thought too strict and severe for the 156 A SERMON sinners that they have to deal with ; and therefore they have yet easier conditions for penitents to ob- tain pardon, than those I have now mentioned. Con- trition is too heavy a burden to impose upon sin- ners ; and therefore they have found out a way in which a sinner shall be reconciled to God upon easier terms, (still supposing that he confess and re- ceive absolution,) and that is by the means of attri- tion, or imperfect contrition, as the council of Trent calls it ; even this, with the sacrament of penance, will do the business. Now what they mean by attrition we may gather from what we said of contrition ; for if contrition be a hatred of sin, with a resolution against it, then attrition, or imperfect contrition, must be an imperfect hatred of sin, with an imper- fect resolution against it. So that whosoever affirms that attrition, with the priest's absolution, shall be available for the procuring justification before God, doth affirm, that though a man be not so sorry for his sins as he should, nor doth perfectly resolve against them, but only hath some imperfect purposes to forsake them ; yet such a man shall, upon this slight repentance, have his sins forgiven him by God. This now one of us would think was dangerous doctrine ; yet really it is no other than what is pro- fessedly taught by as great doctors as any they have ; and those not one or two, but abundance ; and those not only Jesuitical casuists, but of all other sorts ; nay, books have been published among them, to shew that this is the prevailing authorized doc- trine of their divines. It would be endless to quote authorities in a matter so acknowledged as this is: I will, among an heap that is by sundry authors col- ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 157 lected to our hands, give you the words of one of their divines, and he as eminent and learned as any they have. He there shews, " that grave men, and " famous in their church, do assert, that a penitent < c having received the sacrament of penance, that is, " having confessed, and been absolved, is not bound " to so much as one act of contrition, or the love of " God, in order to his reconciliation with God : nay, " allow a man hath hated God to the last act of his " life, if he receives the sacrament of penance, they " deny that it is necessary for him to be contrite for " his sins, or to love God." This is wild enough, but what follows is more extravagant, and that is this ; " that the excellency of the evangelical sacraments " above the legal consists in this, that the gospel " sacraments have freed us a gravissimo contritionis u et dilectionis Deijugo ;" that is, " they have freed " us from the most heavy yoke of contrition, and of « the love of God. " Is not this wonderfully pious and Christian ? are not these men excellent guides of souls ? and is not a sinner admirably provided for, that puts himself under their conduct ? And yet this is the doctrine that is frequently taught by the wisest and gravest of their divines. But when they are urged with this, it is usually replied, that this is only the judgment of particular men, and that the whole church ought not to be charged with it, since it was never esta- blished nor decreed by any general council. But how frivolous is this pretence ; as if men of their communion, in the business of their repentance, did always strictly examine the decrees of councils, and did not rather wholly give up themselves to the go- vernment of their spiritual guides. We know that all 158 A SERMON their penitents are managed by their confessors ; and we can prove, that their confessors do instil such notions as these into their penitents ; nay, and do avow to all the world in their printed books that they are true. It concerns them therefore to shew, that these notions and doctrines are disallowed and discountenanced by the pope, or by some council. If they can do this, we will no longer lay the fault of their private doctors on their church in general ; but this they cannot do. For though some of the Jansenists have appeared vigorously against this doc- trine we are now talking of, still the pope could never yet be induced to condemn it, or to put a mark of infamy upon it. But this is not all : whatever some of them say, that this is not the doctrine of the church, but rather the doctrine of private men ; to any one that under- stands a consequence, it will appear to be a professed, established doctrine of the church, and that by the holy council of Trent itself. For the proof of this, I desire only that these two passages may be compared together : in one place, the council determines this ; " That attrition, or im- " perfect contrition, though it cannot bring a man to " justification without the sacrament of penance, yet " it doth dispose men for the obtaining the grace of " God by the sacrament of penance." But now in another place it is decreed, " that all the sacraments " do confer grace on all those who are disposed to e( receive it." Let any one now judge, upon comparing these two determinations, whether it doth not necessarily follow from hence, that all those that have but imperfect contrition, or bare attrition for their sins, are by the ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 159 sacrament of penance put into a state of salvation, according to the doctrine of the council of Trent. All sacraments do confer the grace they are ordained for to all that are rightly disposed. Bare attrition, or imperfect sorrow for sin, and imperfect purposes against it, doth dispose a man to obtain grace by the sacrament of penance : both these propositions are laid down by the council of Trent. What in the world then can follow more necessarily than this, that, according to that council, " attrition, with the " sacrament of penance, doth put a man into a state " of grace?" But is not this a most mischievous doctrine, that a little grief of mind, though it do not proceed from the love of God, but merely from the fear of punish- ment ; and though it be not accompanied with firm and steadfast resolutions to forsake our sins, but only hath in it some slight purposes to live better ; (nay, it is enough, as the council of Trent seems to intimate, that the sinner, at that time when he repents, hath not an actual purpose to sin again ;) that this, after a vicious life, after repeated acts of sin, after many habits of it inveterately continued in, should, by the priest's pronouncing three or four words, cancel all a man's sins past, and so reconcile him to God, that if he die that moment he is sure at last of everlasting hap- piness ? What a comfortable doctrine is this to sin- ners ! how admirably doth it reconcile those two things which in all other religions have been thought inconsistent the love of sin, and the love of God ! an habit of vice and a title to eternal happiness ! What wonder is it, that so many dissolute persons go over to the communion of that church, where pardon and reconciliation with God are to be had upon such 160 A SERMON easy conditions ? If sinners give up themselves into the bosom of that holy church to be made better, it would be commendable ; but the principles taught by them do not seem to tend that way ; and it is much to be presumed, that it is not a reformation of life that their proselytes design when they leave us, but a continuance in their sins with greater security and greater comfort than we could promise to them in our way. What Zosimus the pagan historian mali- ciously says of Constantine, viz, " that he was so « great a criminal that no other religion could give " him any hopes of pardon, and therefore he turned to u Christianity, the baptismal waters of which would " with one dash wash away all his sins ;" may be truly said, it is to be feared, of many of our converts to the Roman church. The lives that they lead are so bad, that, so long as they continue in that state, no other religion but that of the church of Rome can give them encouragement to hope for salvation. But that religion can and doth, by the excellent ex- pedients they have invented for the restoring wicked persons, so continuing, to the grace and mercy of God. Thus have I gone through those three principal errors in the doctrine of repentance which the church of Rome hath introduced ; namely, their asserting the necessity of auricular confession ; their asserting the necessity of satisfactions after God hath forgiven sin, upon which is founded their doctrine of purga- tory and indulgences ; and, lastly, their holding that contrition, or even attrition, by the virtue of the sa- crament of penance, is sufficient to put any man into a state of salvation. But, besides these, there are several other doctrines ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 101 relating to this business of repentance frequently taught in that church, and that without any check or reproof, which it is fit all serious persons, that have a care of their souls, should be informed of, and cautioned against. I shall briefly name two of them. First of all, one position generally maintained by tbe popish ca- suists and confessors is, that a man is not bound pre- sently to repent of a sin that he is guilty of ; no, not though it be a mortal sin. Some time or other they acknowledge that he is bound to repent of his sin ; but to do it presently upon the commission of the sin there is no obligation upon him by the divine law. If he so manage his affairs, that his repentance be performed at all, it is enough ; and there is no more required of him. It is indeed very true, that the council of Lateran, that council that first esta- blished auricular confession, doth oblige all Christians to repent once a year at least, and to go to confession, and that is at the solemn time of Easter. But this, the casuists say, 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 time when we come to die : and as for the injunction of the church, we satisfy that by performing the outward solemnity of repentance, the ritual part of it, which consists in confession and coming to the sacrament. One of their famous doc- tors voucheth this to be the doctrine both of pope Adrian and cardinal Cajetan ; and, indeed, to be the sense of all men. But now is not this a most godly doctrine ? doth it not tend mightily to the reforma- tion of all wicked livers ? On the contrary, I would know what can give greater encouragement to any ABP. SHARPE, VOL. V. M 162 A SERMON man to continue in his evil courses than this doc- trine doth ? You have now committed some grievous crime, and it lies heavy upon your conscience : why, be not afraid for that ; if you will now presently go and unburden yourself by confession, and take up new resolutions, you may do well, and take a good course to secure your salvation ; but yet this you are not bound to. Though you are at present in a state of enmity to God, yet there is no law ties you to be immediately reconciled ; if it be but done at any time before you die, it is enough. Is not this kind of reasoning extremely tending to bcentious- ness, and giving encouragement to all sorts of riots and debaucheries? What can put a more effectual bar to a man's reformation of his manners than this doctrine does, if it be once believed? 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 repented of. Their distinction of sins into two sorts, mortal and venial, is sufficiently known. Which distinction, as they order it, is really an hinderance of repentance ; or breeds in every man, that em- braceth that distinction, such a false notion of re- pentance, that he cannot in reason think himself obliged to set himself upon the mortifying and the forsaking several habits of sin which he may find himself guilty of. It is true, we do admit of the distinction of mor- tal sins, and venial in some sense. We do, with the ancient fathers, allow, that some sins are of such malignity, or may be committed with such aggra- vating circumstances, that one act of them shall put a man out of a state of grace ; they shall be mortal ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 163 to any man that is guilty of them, unless he perform a particular repentance for them. On the other side, we say, that there are some sins that are consistent with a state of grace, and which the best of God's children are subject to, and may now and then fall into ; yet, if they strive against them, if they daily beg pardon for them, these sins shall not be imputed to them at the day of judgment ; nay, if they die in them without a particular repentance, yet, if they be good in the main, if they have repented of all their sins in general, both known and unknown, these sins shall do them no mischief. For still, not- withstanding these ignorances and infirmities, they are within the covenant of grace ; and God, for the merits of Jesus Christ, will pass by and forgive these sins in all those who have, for the main of their lives, lived up to the terms of the gospel. But yet at the same time that we say this, we hold like- wise that all sins in their own nature, and in the rigour of the divine justice, are damnable, and de- serve God's wrath and indignation ; and that in all unregenerate men they are so accounted ; and that in hell the damned suffer the punishments as well of their small sins as of their great ones. So that no sin in itself is venial ; but through the merits of Christ, some sins will, even without a particular re- pentance, find pardon. But yet even the most venial sins, the most light and inconsiderable offences, if they be indulged, if they be encouraged, if care be not taken of them, but they increase and grow strong upon us, and at last become habits ; in this case, we say, they are no longer sins of infirmity, but God will account with us for them, as wilful, deliberate sins. This is the protestant doctrine concerning venial and mortal sins. M 2 164 A SERMON But that which the papists teach in this matter is quite another thing. If by their venial sins they meant no more than those daily frailties and in- firmities that good and virtuous persons are subject to, and which they continually strive against, and do their utmost endeavour to overcome ; if this was their notion, we should 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 pardon from God as of right, such as, if all of them in the world were put toge- ther, could not equal one mortal sin. They hold them to lie such, that if we be never so much guilty of them, they cannot put us out of the favour of God; and it is impossible that any man, upon ac- count of them, should perish eternally. Now, I say, what is the natural consequence, of this doctrine, but to make men perfectly careless of repenting, as to one whole kind of sins ; and such sins too, as they are most apt and inclinable to fall into every day, and consequently ought to watch and fortify their minds more particularly against them than any others? But by this doctrine men's consciences are bid to be at perfect ease, and they are not to disquiet themselves as to these small matters ; though in a little time these venial sins (no care being taken of them) do grow to a vast number, and become a course of habitual sin : and that, that was a sin of infirmity at the first, for want of repentance and striving against it, is grown as wilful and as customary a sin as any the man is guilty of. The application of all this, and the use I desire it may be put to, is this ; that we would none of us ON PROVERBS XXVIII. 13. 165 take our measures of repentance from men, what infallibility soever they pretend to, but frame it ac- cording to those models that God, by his prophets and apostles, and especially by his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, hath given us in the scriptures, which are the standing rule by which all mankind are to be guided : that we would not be fond of new inventions, that are contrived for the making the way of salvation easier than Christ hath made it in his holy gospel ; that we would stand to those rules and directions that God hath given us con- cerning repentance, viz. a hearty sorrow for all our sins, and an humble confession of them to our hea- venly Father, and forsaking them henceforward, in the course of our lives ; upon which terms only we shall find mercy. And consequently, in pursuance of this, that we would not think that we repent truly, when we make a full enumeration of our sins to our confessor, or when we are in a pang of sor- row for our vileness and many miscarriages, or even when we make the most solemn and severe resolu- tions to live better, unless, by the fruits of our lives, we shew that those resolutions were effectual. Much less should we put off our repentance to futurity, and think it sufficient that in our last hour we do our endeavour to reconcile ourselves to God ; but presently, as soon as ever we find ourselves guilty of any offence, should humbly and sorrowfully beg pardon, and use all those means that God hath ap- pointed for reconciliation. And far be it from us, in this business of repent- ance, to make such a difference of sins that we are guilty of, as to think that some may be safely ad- mitted by us, without fear of the divine vengeance, M 3 166 A SERMON ON PROV. XXVIII. 13. though others will prove damnable. For we are to strive against all, remembering that every sin, in- dulged and continued in, may prove fatal and damn- able to us. Lastly, let us, in this affair of repentance, stick to Solomon's precept ; which, as it sufficiently directs us to the truth, so it sufficiently gives us a caveat against all those errors by which we may be imposed upon in this affair, viz. that he only who conjesseth and forsaketh his sins shall find mercy. A SERMON ON 1 CORINTH. XI. 23-25. For I have received of the Lord thai which also I delivered to you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread : and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat : this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of' me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance qfme. Many abuses, at the time of writing this Epistle, were crept into the church of Corinth, in the matter of the holy communion ; many disorders they were guilty of, when they met together, in the receiving of it. These abuses and disorders the apostle here complains of, and endeavours to reform. The method he takes for that purpose is, to set before their eyes the primitive institution of that sacrament ; the ends for which our Lord appointed that mystery ; and the manner in which his disciples were partakers of it. This he proposes to them as a pattern for them to follow, or a test whereby they might try their own practices in this matter, whether they were allowable or not. This is the full scope and design of these words I have read unto you ; / have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night that he was betrayed, took bread, &c. As if he had said, Consider well, whether these tumults and disorders, which I hear are com- mitted among you when ye come to receive the M 4 168 A SERMON Lord's supper, do suit with that account I formerly gave you of the ends and institution of it ? Do your practices correspond with the doctrine I delivered to you concerning it ? and yet I delivered nothing hut what I had received before of the Lord himself. My doctrines about the sacrament were no fancies or in- ventions of my own, but what our Saviour taught and practised. Hither therefore you are to look back ; by this rule you are to be tried, whether your present practices be good or bad, be to be approved or con- demned ; and if you be found guilty, according to this rule, you are to reform them. After this manner doth the apostle's reasoning proceed ; and the great point that I gather from it is this ; that in all the ordinances and appointments of Christianity, (such as the sacraments are,) the rule and measure by which all succeeding churches are to square their doctrine and practice, is the original in- stitution of our Lord, and the usage of the apostles : and when any abuses or corruptions happen in a church, as to these matters, they are to be reformed by that primitive pattern. It is true, every thing that we find in scripture practised by our Saviour or his apostles, in those parts of Christian worship we are speaking of, doth not precisely oblige all churches. There are many circumstances in the receiving the sacrament, for instance, (as indeed in every action,) which do not enter the nature of the action, but are indifferent to it ; and so may be thus, or may be otherwise, with- out transgressing the original precept or institution ; for instance, the time, the place, the posture, the number of the persons joining in the action, and the like. In these things, our Saviour's or the apostles' practice is no obliging precedent to us ; but we are to be determined by the laws of the church or the customs of our country. Our Saviour gave the sa- crament in the evening, and after a meal ; but this doth not make our receiving it fasting, and in the morning, to be unlawful. He gave it in an upper room ; but we may, for all that, safely receive it in churches. His giving it to his disciples sitting or leaning, will be no bar to our taking it kneeling ; no more than his administering it only to twelve persons will make it an abuse in us to dispense it to a full congregation. We must therefore distinguish between the essen- tials in religious worship and the external accidents that clothe it ; between what enters the nature of the action, and what is merely circumstantial. It is with respect to the former of these we lay down our pro- position, and of which we understand it ; and being so understood, it will be always true in all ages of the church, that the rule and compass by which every church is to steer herself, as to her doctrine and practice about the sacrament, is, the original institu- tion of our Lord, and the doctrine and practices of the apostles, pursuant thereupon, as they are deliver- ed to us in the scriptures : and when any particular church swerves from this, and teaches or practises things inconsistent with it, it is so far guilty of ab- uses, and stands in need of reformation. And indeed this rule holds not only in matters of worship, but in matters of faith also. Whatever is delivered in scripture by our Saviour and his apo- stles as an article of faith, that is firmly to be believ- ed as such by all Christians ; but whatever is not there delivered, how true soever it may be in itself, yet no church in the world can make it an article of 170 A SERMON faith, or oblige her subjects to believe it as such : and, on the other side, whatever article of religion any church proposeth to us, if upon examination we find it to clash with, or be repugnant to the doctrine of the scripture delivered by our Saviour and his apostles, it is so far from being a Christian doctrine, how infallible soever the church that proposeth it pretends to be, that it is a corruption of Christianity, and ought to be rejected by all good Christians. In a word, both in matters of faith and in matters of Christian worship, the scripture is our rule. What the apostles have received of our Saviour, and there delivered to us, that is the standard both of our belief and our practice : what they taught, we must em- brace : what they ordered in the worship of God, we must follow : whatever is taught or ordered, either in matter of faith or sacrament, inconsistent herewith, we must reject as an innovation, as an abuse, as a corruption of the catholic religion. Thus far I have been led to discourse by the ge- neral reason of the apostle's argument^here used ; but you see the use for which it is brought in the text is, the redressing some particular abuses that the Corinthians were guilty of in this matter of the Lord's supper. To the same use I shall hencefor- ward, in this Discourse, apply it. And in truth, never were there greater abuses of this sacrament than there are at this day ; nay, never was any precept or institution of Christianity more perverted to ends contrary to those that were first intended in it, than this ordinance of our Lord's. Of this we have notorious instances in the present avowed doctrine and practices of that church ; which would be thought the only catholic and apostolical ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 171 church, and condemns all the other churches in the world as heretical and schismatical. It is my design here faithfully to represent to you what that church teacheth and practiseth concerning this sacrament, and to examine those doctrines and practices by that rule and standard the apostle here gives us, viz. the primitive institution and practice of our Lord and his apostles ; and then I will leave it to you to judge, whether they have not horribly spoiled and depraved this so sacred and essential an ordinance of Christianity ; whether they have not made it quite another thing than it was at the first ; nay, whether they have not so far disguised and transformed it, that if a primitive Christian of the apostles' days was to live again, and be present at their mass-service, he would not be so far from knowing it to be the sacred supper that our Lord instituted, that he would rather take it for some pa- ganish and idolatrous worship. I now choose this argument, because I believe if you were duly informed of the practices of the church of Rome in this matter, and how widely she hath swerved from the scripture rule, and from the primitive practice of the Christian church ; and that not only in a circumstance or two, but in things that touch the very essence and nature of the sacra- ment ; you will be much confirmed in the protestant religion you do profess, and be convinced what great and demonstrative reasons we have, why we ought not to join in communion with that church of Rome upon those terms she offereth it. The sacrament is not a matter of notion or specu- lation ; we cannot say of it as we are apt to do of other things controverted between us, It is a school- 172 A SERMON point, about which our doctors are not agreed ; and till they be agreed, both sides may safely, without danger of salvation, hold their opinions. No, it is a matter of practice ; it is the most solemn part of the Christian worship ; and we are all infinitely con- cerned that we be right both in our notions and practices about it ; even just as much concerned as we are that we worship 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 per- form not this worship in the way that Christ insti- tuted it and his apostles practised it, but in a way quite different, nay, perhaps, contrary ; I hope we shall none of us be very forward to leave our own church, and go over to theirs, whatever other plaus- ible arguments they offer for the persuading us. It is the policy of the Romish factors, when they deal with protestants in order to the perverting them, to keep themselves within general terms and commendations of the catholic church. Many and long harangues they will make of the infallibility of St. Peter, and of the pope's being his successor ; that there is but one church in which salvation is to be had, and that their particular Roman church is that church ; and they can prove it by twenty marks of the true church, antiquity, succession, perpetual vi- sibility, and all the rest : whereas our church is but of yesterday's standing, and was never heard of be- fore Luther. While they amuse their hearers with these general encomiums of their church, and in- vectives against ours, all which indeed look very plausible ; (though yet in truth there is nothing in the whole argument but craft and sophistry ;) it is no wonder if they now and then entangle unwary ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 173 persons in their net ; for not one of a thousand is a competent judge of these kind of arguments ; and they know those that they deal with are not so well studied in history and antiquity as to be able to confute them. And therefore be their arguments true or false, it is but affirming strongly, when they meet with a good-natured, credulous man, and their work is done ; but let us but get them out of these generalities, and bring them to particulars, and the case will be otherwise. Here even an ordinary un- derstanding, that is but well acquainted with the scripture, will be able to find some footing, and will not be so easily imposed upon. Nay, as to several particulars that are controverted between us and the Romanists, a protestant, that tolerably well un- derstands his religion, will not only be able to keep his own ground as to these particulars, but from hence will be able to draw arguments that will over- throw those general doctrines I before mentioned, upon which the adversary lays his greatest stress ; and which if he can once bring us to, he is sure he hath us. For instance, let the particular we pitch upon be the daily service of the Roman church, pre- scribed by their mass-book, and resorted to every day by all those that have opportunity, and any sense of devotion. The chief part of this daily ser- vice is the communion, or the celebration of the sacrament of the Lord's supper. If now it be plainly and demonstratively proved, that in this their ser- vice, as they practise it, there are many great errors ; many things believed and practised which are ut- terly inconsistent with the doctrine and practice of Christ and his apostles in this matter ; of the guilt of all which every one that joins in the service is a 17+ A SERMON partaker ; I say, if a protestant be but able to prove this one particular, (as certainly every one that com- petently understands their religion, and understands ours, may be easily able to do,) as he will not be easily beat off from his hold, as to this particular, by their general arguments ; as he will be afraid to communicate in such a worship as he believes to be unchristian, and will draw so great a guilt upon him ; so he will be able to draw an argument from thence that will effectually confute all their pre- tences to antiquity, apostolicalness, and the rest of the specious characters that they would stamp upon themselves. For how can that church be an infal- lible church which teacheth so many errors in the chiefest part of the Christian worship, the holy sa- crament of the Lord's supper ? or how can that be an apostolical church that practiseth so differently, so contrarily to the apostles of our Lord in this par- ticular? Nay, how can this church be any sound member of the catholic, universal church of Christ, that hath so far departed from the institution of our Saviour, and the usage of the primitive church in the highest mystery of the Christian religion, that scarce any one, that knows how things were then taught and ordered in this matter, and how they are taught and ordered now, would believe it to be the same mystery ? I have said enough of the usefulness of this argu- ment; I come now to the argument itself; that is, to examine the Romish doctrine and practices about the sacrament of the Lord's supper by the rule the apostle here lays down ; that is, the institution of Christ, and the practice and tradition of the apostles; and I am confident, upon the whole evidence, it will ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 175 easily appear to every unprejudiced person, that we have not charged that church with any thing in this matter hut what is too plain and evident to he de- nied. I shall not insist here on their making seven sacraments, all of equal authority, all equally neces- sary to salvation, (though not to every particular person,) all equally conferring grace ; whereas, by all we can gather from scripture, Christ never insti- tuted more than two, Baptism and the Lord's Supper. I shall not here insist on their having the whole service or office of the Sacrament in the Latin tongue, a language which none but the learned do understand, and which, consequently, the people are not edified by ; which practice, for that reason, the apostle St. Paul doth severely reprove in the Co- rinthians. Neither shall I insist on the priest's mut- tering the words of consecration to himself, so as that none of the congregation shall hear what he says, though it be without any precedent in the ancient times. Neither shall I insist on the multitude of masses or sacraments that they allow to be celebrated in the same church on the same day, and even at the same time, at the instance of any one that will be at the charge of purchasing them : the price in- deed is not great, no more than twelvepence a mass; but what a vile prostitution of the blessed sacra- ment this is, every body may judge. These corruptions and abuses of the sacrament in the church of Rome, though they be very great, yet I pass them over, because they will appear small and inconsiderable in comparison of those I come now to mention to you. Five grievous errors and abuses we charge the church of Rome with in the matter of the sacra- 176 A SERMON ment ; so grievous that, if they 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 same with that which our Saviour instituted. 1. The first is, that whereas in every mass that is said in that church (and there are every day said many thousands) they have a communion ; yet there is none communicates but the priest : so that here there is every day, in the church of Rome, a com- munion without a communion. 2. Secondly, that at those solemn times when they will allow the people to communicate with the priest in the holy sacrament, yet they rob them of half of it ; for they will not allow any but the priest who then administers to receive the cup : so that here, though there be a communion, yet it is but half of the communion that our Saviour appointed. 3. Thirdly, they have transformed the sacrament into a sacrifice : whereas the only mystery of it con- sists in this, that thereby Christ gives his body and blood, in a spiritual manner, to be fed upon by us, they have made a new business 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 institution, there is a material part, and a spiritual ; the sign, and the thing signified ; the bread and wine to be received for our bodily sustenance, and the body and blood of Christ for the food of our souls ; they have quite taken away the former from us : for they will not allow us to be- lieve that the sign, the symbol, the bread and wine which we think we receive, and eat and drink, is ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 177 cither sign or symbol, or bread and wine, but the very natural body and blood of Christ. 5. Fifthly and lastly, this very bread (as we are apt to call it) which we receive and eat, and the wine that the priest drinks, they require us to worship and adore as very God Almighty, and that under pain of damnation. These are the points and articles in which we accuse the church of Rome to have grievously cor- rupted and depraved the Christian doctrine and practice in this matter of the sacrament. And I shall now endeavour to make this charge good, by a particular consideration of each of them. The first abuse we charge them with is, their private masses. In every mass that is said in the Roman church, there is a communion ; for that, as I said, is the principal part of the mass service. But now, as that service is daily performed among them, the custom is, for none but the priest to communi- cate ; he consecrates the sacrament, and then offers it up to God, and then receives it in both kinds him- self. But though there be a thousand people pre- sent at the service, nay, perhaps several priests among them, yet none are partakers with him ; none but he tastes either the bread or wine : all that they have to do is, only to behold and worship. This is the course of their daily service, and this every one that hath ever been at mass may know to be true : and the council of Trent, which hath the same authority among them that the scriptures have among us, is so far from disowning' this practice, that she commends it. I will give it you in the very words of the council : " The holy synod doth " not condemn those masses in which the priest only ABP. SHARPE, VO(,. V. N 178 A SERMON " communicates, as if they were private and unlaw- " ful, but doth approve of them, and also commend " them." And one of the canons of that council is expressed in these words : " Whosoever affirms, that " the masses in which the priest only doth sacra- " mentally communicate, are unlawful, and therefore " to be abolished, let him be accursed." I now appeal to any one who hath read what the Gospels and what St. Paul speaks of the sacrament, whether this be not a great abuse, and whether this practice of theirs be not directly contradictory to the ends and design of the sacrament, as our Saviour instituted it. The sacrament was intended for a communion, as the scripture teacheth, and as all Christian writers have taught ; and the very council of Trent, by the terms which she useth of the priest's communicating, seems to acknowledge : and yet, you see, here is a sacrament administered, and yet no communion. The priest is indeed said to commu- nicate, but with whom? Why, none but himself. It is just as good sense as if you should say, a man communicates a secret, or a mystery, to himself. Our Saviour blessed the bread, and brake it, and gave it to his disciples. He took the cup, and bid them all drink of it. And this the apostles prac- tised after him. St. Paul, discoursing of this sacra- ment, makes it to be the sign or symbol of our union one with another. One of the ends of its institu- tion, according to him, was the joining all Christians together in one common body, society, or fraternity. This he expressly tells us, 1 Cor. x. 17. We being many are one bread, and one body : because we are all partakers of that one bread, viz. the sacra- mental bread. ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 179 If now his doctrine be true, it is impossible that any sacrament that is solemnized in the way we have been speaking of, can be a true sacrament If one great business of the sacrament be the signify- ing the union of all Christians in one body, which signification is made by their all partaking of the same sacramental bread, then surely that service, in which none partakes of that bread but the priest, cannot be thought a true or a just sacrament ; be- cause the union and society of Christians one*with another is not there signified or represented. But let us leave the scriptures, for it is certain they are so far from favouring the popish prac- tice in this matter, that they quite contradict it. Is there any countenance for such kind of private masses we are speaking of, where the priest com- municates alone, from any doctrine of the fathers ? from any order of councils ? from any practice or usage of any one Christian church for many ages after Christ ? Baiting what Christ and his apostles have delivered in this matter, if they can give us one instance from antiquity, that any such private masses were ever approved of, or practised, or so much as thought of, it will gain some credit to their cause ; but this they cannot give us. The fathers never speak of the sacrament but as of a commu- nion ; and they severely reprove (as we ought to do now) all those who, when they have opportunity of receiving the sacrament, do not receive it. The old canons are so severe against those persons that come to church, and join in the prayers and sermons, and yet refuse to partake in the sacraments, that they declare them excommunicate for their neglect in that point. And there cannot, for the term of six N 2 180 A SERMON hundred years, (I believe I might almost double the term,) any instance be given, that any mass was per- formed in any church, wherein the priest only re- ceived the sacrament, and none of the congregation with him. This I affirm so confidently, because our protestants have constantly challenged the papists in all these points, and were never yet tolerably an- swered. But we need no further argument against this present practice of the church of Rome, than the very name by which they call their office of the sa- crament, that is, the mass. If any one will look into their own authors, concerning the notion and signification of this term mass, he will, even in them, find this account given of it : that that which we call mass, or missa in Latin, is the. communion- office ; and it was therefore called missa or mass by the ancients, because, when that came to be said, all those who did not intend to partake of the sacrament were dismissed the congregation : the deacon told them they were to be gone. And in the old rituals of the church of Rome, we find there were peculiar of- ficers appointed, whose employment it was to turn out of the church all those who did not join in the com- munion. This, it is certain, is the notion of the old mass ; and from hence it is as certain, that the old Roman church never dreamed of private masses, wherein the priest alone should communicate, but that some devout persons always communicated with him ; otherwise, according to this rule, the priest must have been left all alone by himself. The second great point wherein we accuse the church of Rome to have departed from Christ's in- stitution, and the apostolical practice in this business ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 181 of the sacrament, is their denying the cup to the people. In their daily and ordinary sacraments we have seen the people do not communicate at all, which is a great ahuse. But this is not all : even at those so- lemn times, when it is the custom for the people to receive the sacrament, (as every one, by their canons, is obliged at least to receive once a year,) yet they are not allowed to receive it in both kinds, as our Saviour ordained it ; but they only receive the bread. None but the priest who consecrates hath the benefit of the cup ; and this they hold a point so necessary, and so indispensable, that the council of Constance excommunicates all those ministers that shall dare to give the cup of the sacrament to any layman ; and, in pursuance of what was then ordained, the council of Trent hath made these two canons : " If any one " shall say, that all the faithful people of Christ are " bound, by virtue of any commandment of God, or " as of necessity to salvation, to receive the sacra- " ment of the eucharist in both kinds, let him be ac- " cursed" — And, " If any one shall say that there " were not just causes and reason, moving the church " to administer the sacrament to the laity only under " one kind, that of bread, or shall say that the " church hath herein erred, let him be accursed." This is the law of the church, and their practice is conformable thereto ; as every person that hath received the sacrament among them very well knows. But now let any one that hath ever read the New Testament be judge between us and them in this matter. Our Saviour, (as appears by the Gospel,) the same night he was betrayed, took bread, and a lien lie had given thanks, he brake it, and gave it N 3 182 A SERMON to his disciples, saying. Take, eat ; this is my body which is given for you, do this in remembrance of me. Likewise he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them, saying, Drink ye all of this, for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for you, for the remission of sins, Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv. Luke xxii. These are the Avoids of the institution : and I appeal to any man living, whether, according to these words of institu- tion, our Lord did not make the cup every whit as necessary, as essential to his sacrament of the supper, as he made the bread ? I am confident none will or can deny it. If there be any difference, he hath laid more stress upon drinking the cup, than upon eating the bread ; for as to the bread, he only said, Take, eat ; which is an indefinite command, and doth not necessarily imply that all there present were con- cerned in it ; it might be spoken only to one or more of them. But when he comes to speak of the cup, he saith, Drink ye all of it. By which he gives express command, that all there present should be partakers. So that from this difference in the ex- pression, one would be apt to think that he meant to caution his disciples, the succeeding Christians, against that corruption which he foresaw would be introduced into his church, of receiving the sacra- ment of the bread without the cup. It is true, when we urge this institution of our Saviour to the Romanists, they have this to say for themselves : " It is no wonder that our Saviour ad- " ministered the sacrament in both kinds to his disci- " pies at the institution, for they were all priests that " were partakers of it. The apostles who then com- " municated were clergymen ; and it cannot from ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 183 " hence be concluded that the laity have any right to " the same privilege." They grant indeed, that the apostles were laymen, and represented the whole body of Christians when they received the bread ; but when our Saviour said these words, Hocfacite, Do this in remembrance of me, by those very words he ordained them priests ; and these words were spoken before he gave them the cup : so that when he came to dispense the other part of the sacrament, that is, the wine, to them, they then did not receive as laymen, as the representatives of the people, but as clergymen. This, though it be wonderfully subtle, yet it is so far taken notice of by the council of Trent, that they have made this canon, " that whoever should say, " that Christ, when he spoke those words, Hoc " J'acite, Do this in remembrance of me, did not by " those words ordain his apostles to be priests, let him " be accursed." But this curse notwithstanding, how dreadful soever it be, they will never be able to prove that the apostles were more priests, more in holy orders, when they drank the wine, than when they eat the bread. If we will consult the scripture and antiquity, we shall be convinced that they were per- fect laymen in both the actions, and they received no orders or consecration to the priesthood till after our Saviour rose from the dead ; for then, when he breathed upon them, (immediately before his ascen- sion into heaven,) and said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained, John xx. 22, 23. then they were en- tered into holy orders, and not before. And thus much of the words of the institution of our Lord. N 4 184 A SERMON As for the practice of the apostles, nothing in the world is clearer, than that in their days all faithful people received it in both kinds ; and it was then thought necessary they should do so. This is suf- ficiently plain from what St. Paul discourseth to the Corinthians in the words after my text : As oft, says he, as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew forth the Lord's death till he come. The same St. Paul likewise, in the tenth chapter of this Epistle, ver. 16. gives us this account of the sacrament : The cup of blessing, says he, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which ice break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? . If now this be the use and the end of those elements of bread and wine in the sacrament, why then we may safely conclude that the one of them is as essential to the sacrament as the other ; and that both are indeed necessary. For I would ask, is not the communion of Christ's blood as neces- sary to our salvation as the communion of his body ? and the communion of the body as that of the blood ? Certainly none will deny it. We are both to eat the flesh of Christ and to drink his blood, if we mean to have eternal life. If so, then it plainly follows, that that which represents his blood in the sacrament is as necessary to be taken as that which represents his bodv ; and so vice versa. But the papists make a very good shift to bring themselves off from this difficulty, by saying, that the whole perfect Christ, as he lived in the flesh, is contained in the bread alone : so that by receiving the bread, you do virtually receive the cup also ; for you receive both the body and blood of Christ : and whosoever denies this, is, by the council of Trent, ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 185 pronounced accursed. This is that with which they stop the mouths of all those disciples of theirs that desire satisfaction in this business. But if this be so, I would fain know for what purpose Christ instituted the cup ? If his disciples in receiving the bread had received both his body and blood, what need was there afterward that he should give them the cup, and call it the new testament in his blood ? Though God be never wanting in necessaries, yet he never exceeds in superfluities. Again : if partaking of the bread be the commu- nion both of the body and blood of Christ, why should St. Paul, as we have seen, make such a distinction between the bread and the cup, calling one, the communion of the body of Christ, and the other, the communion of his blood ? Lastly, we would ask of them, since, according to their doctrine, both the body and the blood are received in the bread, what is it which the priest, who administers, receives when he takes the cup ? (for he always receives in both kinds.) Is it to him a communion of the blood of Christ, or is it not ? if it be not, for what end doth he receive it ? if it be, why then are the people denied it ? certainly they have as much right to have communion in Christ's blood as the priests have. If the cup be of no necessity, or no advantage to him, he had better let it alone. If it be, then there is all the reason in the world that the people should be sharers of it as well as he. The truth is, this practice of theirs of denying the cup to the laity is every way so unchristian, so un- reasonable, that one would wonder how ever it should obtain among those that call themselves a Christian church. It is, as we have seen, directly contrary to 186 A SERMON the institution of our Saviour, and the doctrine and practice of his apostles. And they cannot say of this, as they say of some others of their doctrines, that they have it from the tradition of the church ; for they cannot produce one testimony out of any one author, that for a thousand years after Christ it was ever known that any church in the world, no, not the Roman church herself, ever administered the sacrament to the people in one kind. And this their own authors do confess. One instance indeed I ought to except, and that is the practice of the Manichees, which St. Augustin makes mention of. They indeed held that the cup of the sacrament was an abominable thing ; and for this reason, be- cause they taught wine was not of God's creation, but of the Devil's. But these kind of people (as all the world knows) were justly detested as most lewd heretics. If the church of Rome will plead this practice of theirs for their precedent, in the matter we charge them with, much good do them with it. But as for others, we are sure they have none. The first establishment of this way in the Roman church, and that is the only church in the world wherein it doth yet obtain, was by the council of Constance, which I mentioned before ; which coun- cil was held about two hundred and sixty years ago. And, by a good token, it is the same council by whose order the famous John Hus, the forerunner of Luther, was burnt for a heretic, although they had before given him safe conduct. About one hundred and thirty years after, that is, about an hundred and thirty years ago, came the famous council of Trent, wherein popery was formed into that shape it now hath, and established by a law, which it never ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 187 was before. In this council many tough debates there were about the business we are speaking of, whether the people should have the cup restored to them or no. The ambassadors both of the emperor and the king of France, and of most of the princes of Germany, did very earnestly, in the name of their several masters, petition the council for it, and re- presented to them the dangerous consequences that would follow, if the laity were not allowed the sa- crament in both kinds. But with all their argu- ments they prevailed nothing. So powerful was the pope's faction at that holy synod, that against the strongest reasons in the world, they carried it for the continuing that sacrilegious denial of the cup, that the former council had brought in. Nay, so zealous was one of the cardinals for this innovation, that he protested, that he would never give his consent that the people should have a cup of such deadly poison administered to them, as that cup was that they desired ; and it was better they should die than be cured by such a remedy. And what was the reason, think you, for all this heat and zeal against so plain an institution of Christ ? Why, truly, the greatest that I could ever find, in all their dis- putes, are these three : First, they said those that desired the cup were disaffected persons, and not true catholics ; and if they should condescend to them in that particular, they would be so far from being satisfied, that they would take occasion, from that easiness of theirs, to make further encroachments upon them, and would be for having their prayers in a known language, and such other things as the Roman church could not allow. 188 A SERMON Secondly, they said the clergy were already in sufficient contempt, and if they should let the people enjoy the same privileges in the sacraments with them, it would make way for a further contempt of them ; for it would, in a manner, render the priest and the people equal. Thirdly, they said the church of Rome cannot err. But that church, in the aforenamed council of Constance, had taken the cup of the sacrament away from the people, and given good reason for it. If therefore they should now grant it to them again, it would be a shrewd argument to the heretics, that the church had been before in a mistake ; which to suppose was intolerable. These are really the chiefest reasons that they bring for the continuing this practice of half com- munion against the earnest desires and endeavours of most of the princes of Christendom ; and are they not, think you, very formidable ones ? Do they not strongly and convincingly prove the thing they are brought for? Christ and his apostles gave the sacra- ment in both kinds, and ordered it should be so done for ever ; and all the churches in the world have always practised accordingly, except the church of Rome, for some three hundred years last past. But now, for fear the laity should be thought of equal dignity with the clergy, and for fear, if what the church of Rome had done once amiss, and against Christ's institution, should be amended, that church should suffer, as to her credit, and the reputation of her infallibility ; for these considerations, that holy and universal synod, notwithstanding Christ's insti- tution, notwithstanding the apostles' practice, not- withstanding the usage of the catholic church for so ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 189 many ages, have ordered, " that none, in the public " sacrament, shall communicate in both the elements " of the bread and wine, but only the priest that " consecrates." This is the plain state of the matter : I have not injured them, nor have I abused you in representing it. I am sure I have dealt faithfully, and have said nothing concerning matter of fact, hut what I have from their own books. As for my reasonings, and the consequences drawn from them, I leave to you, and all considering men, to judge of. And thus much is sufficient to have spoken of these two first abuses of the sacrament in the church of Rome : the rest I shall take another opportunity to speak to. A SERMON ON 1 CORINTH. XI. 23-25. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread : and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat : this is my body, which is broken for you : this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also lie took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. I HAVE made one Discourse upon this text al- ready. The design of these words, or the end for which they come in here, is the redressing some abuses that were in the Corinthian church in the matter of the blessed sacrament of the supper. The general doctrine which we are to observe from them is this ; that in all the ordinances and ap- pointments of Christianity, particularly that of the sacrament, the rule and measure by which all suc- ceeding churches are to square their doctrines and practices is, the original institution of our Lord, and the usage of the apostles ; and when any abuses or corruptions happen in a church, as to these mat- ters, by that primitive pattern they are to be re- formed. The use I meant to put this doctrine to was, to inquire and examine by this rule, whether there were not grievous abuses and -corruptions in the church of Rome, not only tolerated, but openly ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 191 avowed and maintained at this day in the service of the holy communion. And here I undertook faithfully to represent their doctrines and practices in this matter ; and, on the other side, to represent the doctrine and practice of Christ and his apostles, and to leave you and all unprejudiced people to judge, whether that church hath not departed from the primitive rule, the insti- tution of Christ, and the doctrine and practice of the first Christians ; and, consequently, whether she be not guilty of great abuses and corruptions. Five grievous errors and abuses we charged the church of Rome with, in the matter of the sacra- ment. The two first of them have been considered, and largely spoken to. I come therefore now to the third general point wherein we accuse her ; and that is, that of a sacrament they have made it a sacrifice. Whereas the design of Christ, in the in- stitution of it, was to feast us at his table, by making us partakers of his body and blood in a spiritual manner ; they have made the great design of it to be the priest's feasting God Almighty with the body and blood of his Son, by offering it up to him in sacrifice. In speaking to which point, I shall do these three things : 1. First, Give you an account how far we own the service of the sacrament to be a sacrifice. 2. Secondly, Give you a particular account of the doctrine of the church of Rome in this matter, in what sense she holds the sacrament to be a sacrifice. 3. Thirdly, Shew you, by several arguments, the disagreeableness of this doctrine of theirs with the institution of Christ, the tenor of the holy scriptures, and the reason of the thing. A SERMON I. First of all, I shall acquaint you with the pro- testant doctrine in this matter of the sacrament. We do not deny, that the whole office of the communion, as it is ordered in our Liturgy, and as it is performed by us, may be called a sacrifice ; nor do we scruple to call this service the Christian sa- crifice, by way of eminency, because we find the ancient fathers frequently so styling it : but then, it is only upon these three accounts we give it that name ; and, upon examination, it will be found that it was for the same reason, and in the same notions, that it was so called by antiquity. 1. First of all, in this service we bring our offer- ings to God for the use of the poor. We do not ap- pear before him empty, but make a present to him of our substance, every one according to his ability ; whereby we both acknowledge him for the Lord of the world, and the giver of all the good things we enjoy, and also shew our charity to our indigent bre- thren, with which kind of sacrifice St. Paul tells us God is well pleased . These gifts of ours, our church calleth by the name of offerings and oblations ; and in the first solemn prayer in this office, we beg of God to accept those our alms and oblations : and this is the name that both scripture and antiquity give to these gifts ; and these oblations make up one great part of that unbloody sacrifice of Christians that the fathers so often speak of. It is true, in this we differ from the primitive church, that we now offer to God only in money ; but they always, besides other things, brought bread and wine in kind ; which after it had been solemnly presented to God, the priest took a part of it, and, by consecration, made of it the body and blood of Christ, as the lan- ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 19:3 guage of those times was ; which being done, he distributed to the people : so that the people, having offered to God, were by him feasted at his table with part of their own offerings, as the manner was in the Jewish peace-offerings, with which this Chris- tian service hath a great affinity. This was the ancient custom, and in this we at this day differ from them ; but the thing wherein we differ is so very inconsiderable, and so no way relating to the essence of the sacrament ; and, withal, the reason for altering the custom, and bringing in oblations of money, instead of bread and wine, in those times, so good, that we ought not to be concerned at the difference, or to wish the revival of the old custom : for we offer to God as well as they, and for the same purpose that they did, and our offerings are as pro- perly a sacrifice as theirs was. That which I desire to infer from hence is this, that very probably from this account I have given of the ancient oblations of the Christians, we may be able to discover whence it was, and upon what grounds the popish sacrifice of the mass, wherein they pretend to offer the body and blood of Christ, came into the church. It plainly came from a mis- take of that ancient sacrifice, or from not distin- guishing that sacrifice from that other office of consecration of the elements, which followed, in order to be performed by the priest. They who introduced the popish sacrifice knew very well from history that the communicants brought bread and wine as an offering to God when they approached the Lord's table ; and that the priest did solemnly present these offerings of the people to God upon his altar as their sacrifice, and ABP. SIIARPE, VOL. V. O 194 A SERMON implored his acceptance of them as such. And this sacrifice they might perhaps, in some authors, find to be called the sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ ; because, that of those offerings, as I said, it was the custom to take some part, and to consecrate them for the elements, to be received by all faithful Christians as the body and blood of Christ. But, not attending to the order of these two services, nor minding how they were quite distinct the one from the other, they have jumbled them into one and the same thing. And whereas before, the people, or the priest in their name, only offered to God their alms and oblations, now they make the priest to offer the very body and blood of Jesus Christ. It is true, the priest always offered the people's present unto God, but not under the notion of Christ's body and blood, but under the notion of their oblations of the fruits of the earth. It can never be shewed, that after he had once consecrated them for the body and blood of Christ, he offered them in the name of the people, but only distributed to them to eat and drink. In the first of these services, we all grant the people offered a sacrifice, or the priest in their name ; but when that sacrifice was offered and set upon God's table, then it was no longer considered as a sacrifice to God, but as a feast with which God entertained his guests. 2. But secondly, that which our church calls the offertory, that is, the oblation of our alms, is not the only sense wherein we acknowledge the service of the holy communion to be a sacrifice ; for, besides those oblations of our substance, we do also in that service offer up, in the most solemn manner, our prayers for ourselves, and our intercessions for the ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 195 whole church ; our praises likewise aud our thanks- givings ; and, lastly, ourselves, our souls and hodies ; all these we offer up as a sacrifice to God, and, in the sense of anticpjity, they are a main part of the Christian sacrifice. 3. But then, thirdly, to complete the Christian sacrifice, we offer up hoth the aforesaid oblations or sacrifices with a particular regard to that one sacri- fice of Christ which he offered upon the cross, and which is now livelily represented before our eyes in the symbols of bread and wine. That sacrifice 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 con- fidence to offer up unto God the two forenamed sacrifices, and the confidence to hope they shall be accepted. And in this sense we will not deny that we offer up even Christ to his Father ; that is, we commemorate to God what his Son hath suffered ; we represent to him the inestimable merits of his passion ; and we desire God, for the sake of that, to be at peace with us ; to hear our prayers and ac- cept our oblations. In this sense, I say, every pro- testant offers Christ to his Father ; and it is in this sense that St. Chrysostom speaks, when he says, " What then, do we not offer every day ? Yes, we " offer by making a commemoration of his death : " and we do not make another sacrifice every day, " but always the same, or rather a remembrance of " that sacrifice." And in the same sense says Eu- sebius, " We sacrifice a remembrance of the great " sacrifice." In these three things consisted the whole of the Christian sacrifice, as it was held by the primitive o 2 196 A SERMON fathers : they first offered to God of their substance, then they offered their prayers and their praises, and at the same time they commemorated to God the death and sacrifice of Christ, by the merits of which they hoped and they prayed, that both their oblations and themselves might be accepted. And these three things our church observes at this day ; for, after we have made our offerings, and begged God's acceptance of them, as I said before, we come to beg of God that he would " mercifully " accept our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving ; " and we humbly beseech him to grant that, by the " merits and death of his Son Jesus Christ," (which we have now commemorated,) " and through faith in *' his blood, we and all his whole church may obtain " remission of our sins, and all other benefits of his " passion. And we here present unto him ourselves, " our souls and bodies, as a lively sacrifice to him ; " yet being unworthy, through our manifold sins, " to offer unto him any sacrifice, we beseech him to " accept this our bounden duty and service ; not " weighing our merits, but pardoning our offences, " through Jesus Christ our Lord." So that having offered up our sacrifice of alms, and our sacrifice of devotions, for the rendering these two acceptable, we plead, we commemorate, before God, the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the whole of the Christian sacrifice, as the ancients understood it ; and, if the church of Rome would be content with such a sacrifice as this, I know none that would oppose them. And I am sure, if they go further, and pretend to any other sacrifice than this, they go without precedent in an- tiquity. We offer up our alms, we offer up our ON 1 COnTNTHTANS XT. 23-25. 197 prayers, our praises, and ourselves : and all these we offer up in the virtue and consideration of Christ's sacrifice, represented before us by way of remem- brance or commemoration ; nor can it be proved that the ancients did more than this : this whole service was their Christian sacrifice, and this is ours. But the Romanists have invented a new sacrifice, which Christ never instituted, which the apostles never dreamt of, which the primitive Christians would have abhorred, and which we, if we will be followers of them, ought never to join in. II. And this I now come, in the second place, to declare to you. For the understanding this new mystery of the sacrifice of the mass, you are to know, in the first place, that it is the established doctrine of the church of Rome, that in the sacrament of the holy commu- nion are contained truly, really, and substantially, not only the true body and blood, but the soul and deity of our Lord Jesus Christ ; that is to say, the whole Christ ; and whoever denies this, or affirms that Christ is only in the sacrament, as in a sign or a figure ; that he is there present only by his virtue and efficacy, he is, by the council of Trent, pro- nounced accursed. In what manner they thus get Christ into their hands, we know not ; but it is cer- tain that the priest, by saying five words, always doth it ; that is, of the bread and wine makes the very true Christ ; who being thus made by the words of consecration, he is by the priest offered up in sacri- fice to God ; and that in as true and proper a sense as he was offered up upon the cross at Jerusalem : and this sacrifice, thus offered by the priest, hath the same virtue in it that Christ's first sacrifice had ; that o 3 198 A SERMON 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 scarce believe that the church of Rome should teach such doctrines as these, much less teach them for articles of faith, and require the belief of them by all her subjects under pain of damnation : but yet this really they do, as appears by these two canons which the council of Trent hath made about the mass : " Whoever shall say, that in " the mass there is not offered up unto God a true " and proper sacrifice, let him be accursed." And again : " If any shall say, that the sacrifice of the " mass is only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, " or only a commemoration of the sacrifice performed " on the cross, and that it is not propitiatory, or that " it is only profitable to him that takes it, and ought " not to be offered for the living and the dead, for " all manner of sins, punishments, satisfactions, and " other necessities, whoever affirms any of these " things, let him be accursed." This is the Romish doctrine concerning the sacrifice of the mass. But how groundless, how false, how absurd, nay how im- pious it is, I now come, in the third place, to shew. III. 1. And first of all let it be considered, there is no foundation for any such sacrifice as this of the papists either in the institution of the supper by our Lord, or by any other example or doctrine recorded in scripture. It is certain, that all that our Saviour was pleased to order in this matter, as far as the four Evangelists can express it, doth relate to quite an- other purpose, and concludes, that what he himself did, and what he ordered us to- do, was meant a sa- crament, and not a sacrifice : He took bread and Messed it. He gave it to /lis disciples, saying, Do ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 199 this in remembrance of me. Take, eat : this is my body, &c. That it should be a sacrifice wherein either he should offer up himself, or command his church to offer him up to God his Father, it appears neither by any word or any act of his. For in the institu- tion, both his words and actions are directed imme- diately to his disciples. And such special addresses to men are no likely proof of a sacrifice to God. But further ; did our Saviour at his first sacra- ment really offer up himself, body and blood and life, a true, proper sacrifice to God, or did he not? If he did not, how shall we dare to pretend to offer him up in our sacraments ? If he did as the papists say he did, to what purpose did he afterwards offer himself up upon the cross ? As for the other writers of the New Testament, though they have sometimes occasion to mention the sacrament of our Lord, yet not a syllable is to be found in them from whence any one can con- clude that ever they dreamed it was a sacrifice. They run in the same strain that our Lord doth, of taking, eating, and communicating in Christ 's body and blood, and shewing forth his death ; but not the least intimation of our sacrificing Christ to God. Nay, St. Paul's whole discourse to the Corinthians about eating of things offered in sacrifice to idols, which he declares to be unlawful for any Christian to do, telling the Corinthians, that they cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils; I say, all that discourse is an effectual confutation of the Romish sacrifice. For it plainly shews that, in St. Paul's notion, the Christian communion was not a sacrifice, but a feast upon a sacrifice, as the idolatrous feasts were. One thing there is indeed in the scripture which o 4 200 A SERMON the papists make a great noise with, for the proof of their mass oblation. It is Melchisedec's bringing forth bread and wine when he met Abraham, after his ex- pedition against the five kings. Melchisedec, say the)-, was the priest of the most high God, and all Christian priests are after his order. Now his priest- hood consisted in offering up bread and wine, and therefore theirs must do so too : this is the sum of the argument. But how little to the purpose it is, any one will easily see who considers these three things : (1) First, they can never prove that Melchi- sedec's bri?iging forth bread and wine, or, as the Latin translation renders it, offering bread and wine, was any act of his priestly function. He brought out bread and wine, not to offer it up in sacrifice to God, but to treat and entertain Abraham and his follow- ers, who were wearied with their journey. It was an act of humanity and hospitality to those persons, but not an act of devotion to God. (2) But, secondly, supposing that Melchisedec did, as a priest, bring forth this bread and wine, and of- fered it up in sacrifice to God, yet what is this to the Christian ministers, unless it can be proved that they succeed him in his priesthood, which can never be done ? We read indeed that Christ icas a priest after the order of Melchisedec, but not a w r ord that his ministers to the end of the world are so. Nay, the very supposition that Melchisedec was a type of Christ, and of his priesthood, will effectually destroy all pretences to that priesthood in the Gospel min- isters. (3) But, thirdly, supposing all the Christian clergy are the successors of Melchisedec, (which it is certain none of them are,) yet how doth this empower them ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 201 to offer up Christ to his Father in the communion ? Melchisedec only offered bread and wine ; and if the Romish priests would do no more, we should not have so much to say against them. But they pre- tend to offer up the very body and blood of Christ, which was certainly none of Melchisedec's offering : and therefore it is as certain that his action gave no countenance to their present practices. 2. But, secondly, let it be considered that the popish sacrifice of Christ in the mass hath not only no ground or foundation in scripture, but is as di- rectly contrary to it as any thing in the world can be : they pretend every day to offer up Christ. The scripture flatly saith, that Christ was never to be offered up but once ; and the apostle, in the ninth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, mainly in- sists upon this. And herein he placeth the differ- ence between the Law and the Gospel, that the sa- crifices of the law being imperfect, and not able to put away sin, were every year to be repeated, Heb. x. 1, 2. But Christ, by once offering up him- self, hath for ever perfected all those that are sanctified, ver. 14. And therefore, he saith, there is no need that he should offer himself often, as the High Priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of the sacrifice ; for then, says he, Christ must have often suffered since the founda- tion of the world : but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to take away sins by the sa- crifice of himself And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after that the judgment : so Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and to them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation, Heb. ix. 25 — 28. 202 A SERMON Nothing in the world can be plainer, than that, according to St. Paul's sense, Christ was never to be offered but once ; and yet the popish priests do offer him a thousand times every day in the year. What now have they to say for themselves, for thus apparently contradicting the scripture in their daily service ? Why truly this is all. They confess indeed that Christ was never offered more than once, under his own form and figure, and that was upon the cross, when he shed 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 cross, under the form and figure of bread, in the which he sheds no blood. But what horrible shuffling is this ! I will not mention here the nonsense and the impiety they are guilty of, in pretending to pen up the whole entire body and blood of Christ in one single wafer ; nay, in every crumb of that wafer, and exposing it to be devoured by rats and mice, and every thing else that can eat bread : this I shall have a further op- portunity to talk of. But what monstrous equivoca- tions, by this distinction of theirs, do they make the holy apostle to use in what he discourses on this matter ! Such equivocations as even a Jesuit would be ashamed to be taken in. He says downright, that Christ was never to be offered but once. Aye, but say they, his meaning is, that Christ was never to be offered but once in the same form and figure : in another form and figure the apostle allows that he is offered every day. If this be the apostle's mean- ing, is he not wonderfully sincere in his affirmations? even just as sincere as I should be, if I should make oath that I never saw such a person but once in ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 203 my life ; meaning, that I never saw him but once in such a garb or habit ; but in other habits I cannot deny but tbat I have seen him a thousand times. And then further; as to what they say, that Christ's oblation upon the cross was a bloody sacri- fice, (and of such the apostle speaks,) but that which they offer in the mass is a sacrifice without blood ; it is as impudent a shuffle as the other. For with what face can any Romanist say that the sacrifice of Christ, which they offer to God in the mass- service, is a sacrifice without blood ; when it is the avowed doctrine of their church, that in every crumb of bread, after consecration, there is not only the whole body of Christ, but also all his blood ; and whoever denies it, is, by a canon of the council of Trent, pronounced accursed ? Again ; if their sacri- fice of the mass be a bloodless one, with what con- fidence dare they affirm, that it is a sacrifice propi- tiatory for the sins both of the dead and of the living; when St. Paul, in express words, hath told us, that without the shedding of Mood there is no remission of sins, Heb. ix. 22. But I shall pursue this no further. 3. In the third place, as this sacrifice of the mass is without scripture, and against scripture, so it is also in the reason of the thing highly injurious to our Lord Jesus, and to that sacrifice which he once offered upon the cross to his Father ; for it mightily lessens and depreciates the value of it ; it infinitely takes away from the worth and dignity of that ever- lasting sacrifice that it pretends to repeat or reite- rate : for if that first and eternal sacrifice, which Christ once offered upon the cross, hath all that suf- ficiency and all that efficacy which can be procured 204 A SERMON by a sacrifice, nothing is left that can be done by a second. And it is an idle thing to say, that the priest offers every day a sacrifice propitiatory for the living and the dead, when all the propitiation was made by the first sacrifice ; so that at this rate the mass-service will be quite out of doors. But if this second be needful, it must be needful upon this account, that it supplies something that was wanting in the first ; in this point one of the fathers is very full to our purpose : " To be offered," saith he, " is a conviction against the sinner ; but to " be offered more than once, is an evidence of weak- " ness against the oblation itself." Either therefore there must be no second oblation of Christ's body and blood, or, if there ought to be, that second will be a reproach to the infinite value of the first, for it is grounded upon this supposition, that Christ's oblation upon the cross was some way or other de- fective. The way that the Romanists take off this argument is this : They will grant, that Christ's one oblation upon the cross was all sufficient for the pro- curing the pardon of the sins of the whole world ; but they say withal, this oblation is to be every day repeated, in order to the applying to particular per- sons the benefits that were at first obtained by it. But how little to the purpose is this ! The notion of a propitiatory sacrifice is, that it procures the pardon of all sins to the offender. If therefore Christ's first sacrifice did that, what need is there of another ? If the debt be once paid, there is no justice that it should be exacted again. According therefore to this their doctrine, they should not have called the sacrifice of the mass a propitiatory sacri- fice, but an applicator]) one. But then, for this ON 1 CORINTHIANS XI. 23-25. 205 virtue, that they assign to this their sacrifice of ap- plying to believers the benefits of Christ's first sacri- fice, it is the strangest one that ever was heard of. The way that the scripture proposeth to us to have the benefits of Christ's passion applied to us is, the performance of several conditions on our parts ; that is to say, repenting of our sins, and receiving the holy sacrament, and living an honest, godly, and Christian life. But was it ever heard, that the be- nefit of a sacrifice was to be applied to men by the means of offering up another sacrifice?. How can any thing be applied to men, by being offered up and applied to God ? It is just as if we should apply the physic, or the salves that are prescribed, not to the patient, or the wounded person, but to the physician who prescribes them. But there is a further mystery in this applicatory sacrifice than we would perhaps at first think of ; and which hath brought as much money into St. Peter's treasury, as any one trick they have ever made use of. The sacrifice of the mass, you see, is for the applying the merits of Christ's first sacrifice to particular persons. Now this sacrifice the clergy of Rome have wholly in their own hands, and can either apply it to the benefit of particular persons, or not apply it, as they please ; for if they do not intend to apply it to this or the other person, it is not applied ; if they do intend to apply it, then it is. The efficacy of any mass, for the pardon of the peo- ple's sins, depends upon the intention of the priest. I shall give you the words of one of their own au- thors : " It belongs not," saith he, " to God alone, but " also to the priest, to distribute the benefit gotten " by the sacrifice ; because, as it is in his power to A SERMON " determine his intention, whether he will offer for " this or that man ; so it belongs to him to deter- " mine to whom he will communicate what is gotten " by virtue of that sacrifice." Thomas Aquinas ex- presseth it in fewer words : " The mass is beneficial " to them to whom the priest hath an intention to