in the Psalms and other Scriptures Psalm that the heavens must contain him till the last day otherwise there would be a falsification of no less then three Articles of our Faith Apost Creed He ascended into heaven He there sitteth at the right hand of God the Father From thence he shall come c. Now if he be corporeally in heaven how shall he be upon the Altar for the same body cannot possibly be in two places Our Saviour in his institution does not say take my body Four Gospels but take bread nor is it to be imagined that the nature of it can be changed by the blowing mumbling a few words from a Priests mouth Besides when Christ instituted his last supper he had a mortal body now being immortal how can it be said this is my body which shall be delivered up for you We do finde all the holy Evangelists calling it bread Gospels Acts 2.41 1 Cor. 10. we finde in the Acts of the Apostles said how they continued stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread c. then in S. Paul to the Corinthians the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ and again in the next Chapter so let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup Thus currently in Scripture is the Sacrament called bread and yet your Church will have no bread left in it Our Saviour gives us a fair warning Mat. 24 of those deceivers Mat. 24.5 that shall come and say in his name here is Christ and there is Christ and shall deceive many we are not therefore to believe those that say that Christ is in this or in that Host That it is Impious to deprive the people of the cup is proved thus Our Saviour Christ did institute the Sacrament under both kinds Mat. 26. and communicated both to his Apostles and gave a command absolutely to all drink ye all of this Our Saviour being likewise to recommed the Sacramental use to us says plainly John 6.53 that he who drinketh not his blood as well as he that eateth not the flesh of the son of man hath no life in him It is confest by all of your own side that the Primitive Christians did always communicate under both kindes by what authority then do they come now to be deprived And if the Church hath power to take away one part of the Sacrament why can it not likewise by the same reason take away the other and forbid them the use of the whole Eucharist You all confess that your Priests sin mortally if they do not communicate under both species why then should not the Laity sin as much by their omission so to receive it That your Mass is not or can be made a sacrifice is clear by these sacred Texts S. Paul speaking of the true sacrifice of Christ Heb. 10.10.12.14 says That we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Christ once for all again this man after he had offered one sacrifice c. Then afterwards the Apostle repeats and refers thus for by one offering be hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Then again he speaks more plainly in another Chapter to this purpose Heb. 7.26 27. For such an high Priest became us c. who needeth not dayly as those high Priests to offer up sacrifice first for his own sins and then for the peoples for this he did once when he offered up himself Then the current of the whole 9th Chapter is to prove that Christ did once by his blood Heb. 9. enter into the Holy of Holies for our eternall redemption 26. and towards the latter end of it expresly says vers 26. that now once at the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself The Mass can be but a Testament at most out of our Saviours own words Mat. 26. Luke 22.20 This is my blood of the new Testament so S. Matthew and S. Luke gives them thus This cup is the new Testament in my blood which is shed for you now I would fain know how a sacrifice can be made out of a Testament Your Mass is but a remembrance at most of that sacrifice and oblation which Christ once offered therefore he saith not in his institution offer this but do this in remembrance of me and again so often as you shall do this do it in remembrance of me no word of sacrifice or offering That your Priests saying Mass in Lattine and not in English do offer abuse to God and his Church is proved thus The whole drift of the 14th Chapter 1 Cor. is to forbid the Corinthians and consequently all others 1 Cor. 14 the use of unknown tongues in Churches It is manifest likewise in the current of that Chapter Vers 19. that whatsoever is done in the Church publickly must be done to the understanding of the people but when your Mass is said in Lattine it is impossible for all the Laity to understand your service The Apostle frequently commands in other places as well as this same Chapter 1 Cor. 8. 1 Cor. 10.23 1 Cor. 14.3 vers 26. all things to be done to edification but where there is no understanding there can beno edification so by consequence no more fruit can follow upon the hearing of one of your Masses than the amendment of a wall is to be expected from an excellent Sermon that is made to it for that purpose Thus I have been bold to trouble your Ladyship but with a few texts yet those are pregnant ones to your purpose and so I pray the Lord to give you understanding in all things The Lady within three or four days sent a servant of hers with this Answer Sweet Mrs. N. being hindred now by very extraordinary occasions from paying your last kinde visit I thought my self never the less obliged to send you the best satisfaction I could to the Paper you left with me and so I have endeavoured to do as you will finde by the inclosed and as punctually as I could to every particular To the first To what you alledge out of S. Matthew against the mystery of the blessed Presence I answer Mat. 28.20 out of the last words of the same S. Matthews Gospel And loe I am with you unto the end of the world it is plain therefore that when our Saviour says me you have not always it is to be understood of his corporeal presence inhumane conversation for now he is not to be annointed washed and dryed as then when he spoke those words he was to be by the blessed Magdalen To the second To what you alledge out of S. John that the flesh profiteth nothing I say first that if the flesh profiteth us Catholicks nothing I am sure the bare bread must profit all Hereticks less Nor indeed
are yet more clearly explicated by St. Paul who tels us thus 1 Cor. 11.23 24 25. For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto 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 you this do in remembrance of me and after the same manner also he took the cup when he had supped saying This cup is the New-Testament in my blood c. And then to set the business out of all doubt concludes He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body Can any thing be more plain Then further St. Paul begins with a Preface I speak as to wise men 1 Cor. 10.15 16 17. judge ye what I say The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the body of Christ The Bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ For we being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread Does not the Apostle here most clearly and expresly shew that in every particle of the consecrated bread the whole body of Christ is communicated and as he thought them only wise that could understand that mysterie so we must think them stupid that will not and worse then Jews that go about to pervert and torment this and other Texts to any other sense Over and ahove all this consider a little more upon that Text before cited 1 Cor. 11.28 29. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup for he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body Here it is clear that by reason of the presence of the body of Christ the unworthy Receiver is damned because he sins against that body There is no man can deny but the unworthy eater be it what it will that is eaten must be guilty of that which is eaten Here St. Paul most clearly instructs the Corinthians that it is no simple bread or ordinary nourishment that is set upon the Altar but the very body of Christ that who ever eats thereof should be guilty of it therefore the Apostle adds not discerning the Lords body that is not distinguishing it from other food This I am likewise informed by the Learned to be the sence of the Church in all Ages no Primitive Christian ever daring to oppose the clearness of so much express Scripture till one Berengarius as they call him had the impudence to do it but afterwards recanted and abjured it before the Pope thirteen Arch-bishops and an hundred Bishops which God grant all those that have followed his footsteps to do likewise Now that this Transubstantiation Gen. 2. or transelementation is no way impossible to be done no nor for you to conceive as you alledge see what God hath done in the like kinde first in the beginning of the world God form'd man of the dust of the earth here God changed dust into flesh in the same chapter we finde how God turn'd the rib of man into woman a bone into flesh Gen. 19. Exod. 4. Then Lots wife looking back is turn'd into a pillar of salts then Moses threw down his Rod and it was turn'd into a Serpent Then I will strike the water of the River with my Rod and it shall be turn'd into blood Exod. 7. and divers more such mutations there are in the Old Testament As for the New we find that our Saviours first publick miracle was to turn water into wine and this great omnipotency of his the Devil full well knew when he to tempt him said If thou beest the son of God turn these stones into bread Thus you dispute that power in him which the Devils themselves acknowledge Now as Christ with five little Breads did feed five thousand men by making of bread by his Almighty multiplication so now he feeds his whole Church of the faithful with one Bread that is his body Sacramentally Then that Jesus Christ did do some things miraculously with his body whilest he was upon the earth which we cannot do with our bodies nor can any humane reason comprehend you will not dare to deny as that he pierced the grave and Tombstone afterwards when he rose from the dead that he pierced a house the doors and windows being shut and that he pierced the Highest Heavens with his body when he ascended all these things I say you will not dare to deny yet this which is enjoyned you by the same Authority to believe you are pleas'd to dispute What is this but to pick and choose what you please your selves to believe and from being such a chooser in matter of Faith shall be ever a part of my Letany Good Lord deliver me for that I am told is to be a true Heretick To what you alledge of Impiety against the Church of Rome for depriving the people of the Cup I answer thus To the first Argument I shall clearly grant what you say that Christ being then to Consecrate did Institute the Sacrament under both kinds and gave it to his Apostles in both kinds who now were Priests Therefore the Priest to this day that celebrates takes it likewise in both kinds but what is this to the Laity For those words Drink ye all of this was said only to his Apostles and Priests who do it still that is Consecrate in the Commemoration of Christ for no other were present at his most holy Supper but the Apostles no not his own blessed Mother as it is clear out of all the Gospels Nay St. Mark tells us Mar. 1â— 23 that they all drank of it which shews clearly that that all was only meant of the Apostles for it was impossible to be true of the Laity To the second I shall likewise grant that he that drinketh not his blood as well as he that eateth not his flesh hath no life in him but to a Sacramental eating and drinking there is required still a Spiritual intelligence according to what our Saviour himself said the words that he spake they were spirit and they were life From whence we may conclude that since the whole Christ both body and blood is comprehended under one Species a Lay man may be said to drink the blood of Christ though not under its proper species yet under the species of Bread Again our Saviour in that Chapter of St. Johns Gospel treats principally of our incorporation into him which is sufficiently effected by our Communion in one kind the whole Christ being there and the other Species is not at all to be said necessary to that incorporation with Christ To the third I shall grant likewise that it hath been permitted to the Laity to participate of the blessed Sacrament under both kinds
do I remember that I ever heard of any Heretick so impudent as to say that the flesh of Christ upon the Cross profited nothing Besides is this a consequence the flesh profiteth nothing therefore it is not in the Sacrament truly if that be good Logick it may as well follow in my judgement that the flesh of Christ profiteth nothing therefore it is not in heaven over and above all this it is plain our Saviour speaks not there of his own flesh for he says not my flesh profiteth nothing indeed some of the Jews there had such a foolish oppinion as to think upon our Saviours mystical words that the very flesh of Christ should be visibly under the species of flesh torn by mens teeth that sottishness of theirs our Saviour onely reproves To the third To what you alledge out of Scriptures and Articles of Faith I answer and acknowledge our Lord and Saviour to be in heaven and fitting on the right hand of his Father in visible and quantitative form yet he may lye invisibly and sacramentally under the species of Bread Nor does the verity of our Eucharist clash at all with the verity of our Articles of Faith for we know as the Scripture tells us that with God nothing is impossible His Almighty word sure can as easily make a body to be in divers places as nature his servant can make the essence of a soul to be in divers members Nay we see it plainly and positively said so nor can it chuse but be so for Jesus Christ who as we said is eternally to be at the right hand of his Father yet appeared upon earth to S. Paul Acts 9.22 1 Cor. 15. To the fourth To what you alledge out of our Saviours institution I utterly deny that he said take ye bread but taking bread he said take and eat this is my body Now I would fain know what difference there is betwixt saying take my body and taking bread to say take this is my body nor is it the mumbling or breathing of the Priests mouth that makes this miraculous change but Christ himself when the Priest according to his institution speaks the words of consecration is pleased to assist with his divine omnipotency and convert the substance of bread into his very body and wine into his blood Now this power was delivered by Christ to his Apostles when he gave them Commission to do the like and bid them so often as they did it to do it in remembrance of him and so the Apostle Paul tells us that what he received from the Lord that he delivered to us Then as to the impassibility of the body of Christ we do most humbly acknowledge it nor do our Priests say who know that our Saviour dies no more that his body shall be delivered but they relate onely that our Saviour did use those words at his last Supper which is Truth for then his body was to be delivered and his blood to be shed To the fifth For the Evangelists calling it bread it is always understood before consecration but that being done they do all unanimously call it the body of Christ In like manner the Apostles and Fathers might sometime call it so because before its change it was so as a Serpent in Scripture was called a Rod because it was a Rod but Aarons Rod devoured their Rods Exod. 7. then because the figure of bread and all its other accidents remain as things are sometimes called from their representations 1 Kings 10. so Solomon was said to make oxen and little Lions because he made the images of them Then the Eucharist may still be called bread because in it is the living bread which came down from heaven John 5. To the sixth and last To what you alledge out of the 24th of S. Matthew I answer that you are mistaken cleerly in the Text for those words you make to be spoken of the body of Christ are clearly meant of Christs kingdome of Faith His divine Majesty cleerly foresaw that the Hussits would have one Christ to stand for them the Lutherans one Christ to be for them the Annabaptists one for them the Calvinists one for them the Arminians one for them and Socinians one for them and the like of such bold challengers of Christ as those and other Hereticks are our blessed Saviour gives us a fair warning to beware which good Mrs. N. God give you grace to do Thus I have briâ—fly and punctually as I could answered your alligations out of the Scripture against the mystery of Christs Reall Presence in the Sacrament Now give me leave to mind you of some places of Scripture that do most expresly assert the Catholick doctrine against you First the words of our Saviours institution in all the four Evangelists are most significantly harmonious to a letter Mat. 14.26 27 28. as first in S. Matthew And as they were eating Jesus took bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it the Disciples and said take eat this is my body and he took the cup and gave thanks and gave it to them saying drink yee all of it for this is my bloud of the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins S. Mark hath it thus And as they did eat Jesus took bread Mark 14 22 23.24 and blessed and brake it and gave to them and said take eat this is my body and he took the cup and when he had given thanks he gave it to them and they all drank of it and he said unto them this is my bloud of the new Testament which is shed for many Luke 22.19 20. St. Luke thus And he brake bread and gave thanks and brake it and gave unto them saying This is my body which is given for you this do in remembrance of me Likewise also the Cup after Supper saying This cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you St. John in his sixth Chapter Joh. 6.51.53 54 55 56 57. makes it his whole business to shew how our Saviour did endeavour to explain this mysterie and therefore is pleased expresly to say I am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world Then upon the Jews murmuring he adds Verily verily I say unto you except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father So he that eateth me even he shall live by me c. The Gospels themselves
and yet that use was not universal neither as it appears in the second chapter of the Acts where it is said that the people continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine Acts. 2 4â—.46 and fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayers and verse 46. And they continued daily with one accord in the Temple and breaking bread there is no mention made at all of the Cup. But howsoever the use was then and there we are sure in the Western Church the Cup was never permitted to the Laity and that for many reasons First considering the multitude of Communicants some old some young some weak and some strong there would be great danger of spilling that most precious liquour 2. It would be very difficult to finde a commodious Vessel to contain a quantity equal to such a multitude from whence it might be taken without danger of effusion 3. The Sacrament under the species of Wine could not easily be conserv'd for the use of the sick because it would be apt to grow sower and corrupt to the moving of a nauceousness and a vomit in the Receiver 4. Without great danger of effusion it could not be easily carry'd from place to place as it should be to the sick 5. It would happen sometimes that some high irreverencies would be offer'd to that most celestial and worthy Sacrament 6. We have it related and attested from some most holy learned persons that some Religious men though Lay Brothers were importunate to receive in both kindes whilst the Priest was in the action of the Sacrament the Patin or Plate where the sacred Host lay appeared full of blood to the astonishment and satisfaction of all the beholders and the Petitioners gave off the importunity of their former request Over above all this we are to beleeve that it was a most ancient custom in the Primitive Church that the Laity should communicate but under one species Nay that it came from the very Tradition of the Apostles because the beginning of it could never yet bee shew'd nor can by any man Besides we know that there were some amongst the Jews that never did nor could drink Wine and in some Christian Countries there is a great difficulty and at some times almost an impossibility to get any Wine Now as for your inference that if the Church could take away one species it might as well take away both I utterly deny for the whole Christ being no lesse under one species than under both and as much fruit of comfort and spiritual nutriment to be had from one as well as the other the Church neither does nor can deprive any Christian of the Benefit of the whole Sacrament To the fourth and last I grant again that the Priest who is to consecrate does and ought to consecrate both species because he is to perform the representation of our Lords passion therefore the body and blood together are consecrated under both their proper species and the Priest in the person of the whole people present offereth and taketh it under both species and the whole people in the person of the Priest do or ought to beleeve that they receive and drink the very blood of Christ by a spirituall kind of taking which is very sufficient for them so there can be in them no guilt of omission at all Now here again give me leave to return to you some Texts that you may bee pleas'd to consider of and I hope you will receive the same satisfaction that I have done in the full right and reason of the point that it is sufficient for the people to receive the Sacrament under one kind only First be pleas'd to examine throughly the sixth Chapter of Saint Iohns Gospel where our Saviour so often calls himself the bread of life Joh. 6 3â— 33 34. My father giveth you the true bread from heaven For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven and giveth life unto the world Then again Iesus said unto them I am the bread of life 48. And again I am the bread of life Again 50. this is that bread which came down froâ— heaven that any man may eat thereof and not dye And again I am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eate of this bread he shall live for ever and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world Here our Saviour is pleâ—s'd to mention nothing but Bread Secondly St. Luke assures us Luk. 24.30 that our Saviour gave the Sacrament himself but in one kinde to the two Disciples going to 〈◊〉 And it come to passe as he sate at meat with them he tâ—â—k bread and blessed it and brake and gave to them and inmediately their eyes were opened c. And this was the onely time that our Saviour gave the Sacrament to the Lairy Our Saviour therefore taught us in St. Mat. 6.11 Matthew to pray daily for our substantial Bread no mention at all of Drink Then we find in the Acts of the Apostles immediately after the Ascention of Christ that the people continued stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread Act. 2.42.46 and in prayers And again They continued daily with one accord in the Temple and breaking of bread c. Now for a further confirmation of all this St. Paul makes this inference 1 Cor. 5.7 8. For even Christ our Passeover is sacrificed for us therefore let us keep the feast neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth And in the tenth Chapter explains it thus For we being many meaning Priests and people are one Bread and one body 1 Cor. 10.17 for we are all partakers of that one Bread All these Texts as I am inform'd the Holy Fathers of the Primitive Church understood as the Church does now and being at the point of death themselves would never communicate but in one species To the Proofes that you are pleased to produce against the Sacrifice of the Masse I answer thus To the first Those Texts of the Apostle which you urge are clear to another sence than what you propose For you are to understand a twofold offering of Christ yet both reall and true for in both Christ is truly offered and sacrificed The first way of offering is that with which he once offered his living body and blood to God the Father upon the Altar of the Cross for the sinnes of the whole world and salvation of mankinde and of that great offering the Apostle onely speaks there shewing the excellency of that sacrifice above the sacrifices of the Law Of which sacrifice speaking likewise to the Ephesians Ephes 5.2 he saith he hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savâ—n Now this grand oblation is represented by our holy Mother the Church
back is fit for the Kingdome of God And again Remember Lots Wife Luk. 9.17 Gen. 19. Matth. 10. chap. 24. 2 Thes 2.7 Prov. 20.25 Matth. 22.31 who looking back was turn'd into a pillar of Salt Again he that perseveres to the end shall be saved that is till death The wise King Solomon assures us it is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy and after vows to make inquiry Our Translation reads it thus It is a ruine to man to devoure the Saints and after vows made to retract them Let all pious Votaries therefore according to our Saviours Words in St. Matthews Gospel Renden unto God the things which are Gods that is their Vows that through his mercy they may deserve to be saved To the second I freely grant that Vows of themselves and all the externall works of piety dictated from the severest Rules of Monastick life cannot renew the inward man yet doubtlesse they are very helpfull to the spirit and keep the body from too much oppressing the soul nay I 'le grant too that if those externall works as you call them be done that they make seen of men they are Hypocriticall if done clearly to the glory of God you must sure grant them at least to be laudable Besider the Apostle says not that bodily exercise profiteth nothing but grants that it profiteth a little if it be imployed to piety To the Third Whereas you say that externall works are enemies to Christianity and do extinguish faith and weaken hope c. They are so far from that that they are the very life and nourishment of faith for St. James tells us that faith without works is dead Jam. 2. and it must strengthen his hope for by works both his faith and he must be justified as was sufficiently proved to you in my last Paper Luk. 17. But indeed if he dare to presume in his works then he is not only guilty but condemned already For when we have done all that we can we must say that we are but profitable Servants To the Fourth Whereas you say it is grand presumption in our Votaries to oblige themselves beyond the Rule of Baptisme and the Evangelicall Rule c. It is plain that they make their Vows to no other intent or purpose then to dispose themselves to perfect the Evangelicall precepts and what they promis'd in Baptisme with more commodiousnesse and greater facility they undertake their Rules only to promote in their way to perfection and to enable themselves with more expedients in the service of God To what you alledge against our vows of chastity and restraining of Priests from Marriage I answer thus To the first I grant that it was indulg'd to the Priests and Levites in the Old Law to have Wives because they had a long time of vacancy from the exercise of their Ministry or Priesthood For there was a great multitude of them and they served by course The case is not the same now for our Priests are in dayly service of the Altar and commanded to be always ready and without delay to attend their Ministry so it would be very inconvenient for them to be clog'd with Wives besides the indecency of it Again they were to be only of one Tribe the Tribe of Levi that were to bee taken into their Priesthood it was therefore necessary for the conservation of the Tribe and propagation of the Priesthood it self which otherwise in one age would have fayled that their Priests should marry Besides we find that those that were to sacrifice in the Old Law did abstain somtime from their Wives likewise so that St. Luke testifies of Zacharias And then it came to pass that so soon as the days of his Ministration were accomplished Luke 1.23.24 he departed to his own house and after those days his Wife Elizabeth conceiv'd c. Over and above all this the Priests of the Old Testament did handle but their proposition bread with the flesh of Goats Oxen Lambs and the like but ours do dayly handle the precious body and blood of Christ As to the other part of your Argument that the Greeks and other Christians have a liberty for their Priests to marry I say you are mistaken for no Priest amongst them is permitted to marry after he is a Priest but one that has taken a Virgin to Wife may be afterwards made a Priest and if his Wife dye he must remain single So a married man may be made a Priest but no Priest can be made a married man To the Second That command of the Almighty which you insist upon to increase and multiply was given when the earth was to be replenish'd heaven too for then then there were but few to procreate now they are innumerable Therefore that command is not to be taken amongst those permanent Laws which were to oblige all Mankind and every particular person for then St. John the Baptist had been a sinner who liv'd and dy'd a Virgin Our blessed Lady had sinned who is the grand Example of Virginity Paul himself had sinned who was the great Counsellour of Virginity and out Saviour Christ had never commended Eunuchs for the Kingdome of Heaven In like manner that precept and repeated by our Saviour Whom God hath joyned let no man separate concerns not sure every one in the World though it be given to every one multitude of the World So the command concerning Tillage and Husbandry does not make it necessary that all the World should bee Husbandmen though some must bee Neither is it necessary for every individuall of mankind to imploy himself in procreation though it is necessary that some must make it their businesse to propagate And so it is in an infinity of other things that are necessary for a whole community and yet not at all for every single person but it sufficeth that it be done by some To the third I deny perfectly that the Church forbids marriages at all but when any man is ty'd by his own voluntary Vow to the contrary the Church prohibits the violation of that Vow for before his vow it was as free for him to marry as for a married man it is impossible to contract again The Church takes a care in this point onely that hee whosoever hee is that vowes shall not deliver up the power of his body to another which was before delivered up to Christ And the Hereticks which you speak of Mark 15. 1 Cor. 10. which Saint Paul mentions were those that succeeded presently after as I am inform'd that did absolutely condemn Matriages for unlawfull To the Fourth That Saint Paul commands Titus to choose a Bishop that was the Husband of one Wife we do not deny but sure you do not believe that hee commanded that a Bishop should of necessity be a married man for then neither he himself nor Titus neither had been Bishops nor many of your own whom you would take it ill if we
conceive enough said on your part against it so I conceive I have said sufficiently for it in my reply to those two parts of it Confession and Satisfaction to which I refer you So I shall make it my business now to prove the other four to be Sacraments and of divine institution and I shall begin with the Sacrament of Confirmation Every Sacrament is a sensible sign having an infallible assistance of the grace of the Holy Spirit and such I prove Confirmation to be by most express Scriptures thus We find in the Acts That when the Apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had receiv'd the Word of God Act. 8.14.15 16 17. they sent unto them Peter and John Who when they were come down pray'd for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost Fâ—r as yet he was fallen upon none of them only they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus Then laid they their hands upon them and they received the Holy Ghost Here was manifestly a confirmation after Baptism and a sensible sign to wit Imposition of hands by which the grace of the holy spirit was confer'd and that is enough to make a Sacrament Again we find in another Chapter of the same Acts Act. 19.2.3 4 5 6. That Paul being at Ephesus and finding some Disciples there said unto them have ye received the Holy Ghost since â—e believed and they said unto him we have not so much as heard whether there be any holy Ghost and be said unto them unto what then were ye baptized and they said unto him Johns Baptism then said Paul John verily baptized with the Boptism of Repentance saying unto the people that they should believe on him which should come after him that is on Christ Jesus when they heard this they believed on Christ Jesus And when Paul bad laid his hands upon them the Holy Ghost came on them and they spake with Tongues and Prophesy'd Here is I say again after Beliefe and Baptism an Imposition of hands by which the grace of the Holy Spirit was ferr'd Now that this Sacrament waa instituted by Christ himself is plain by the Gospells John 16. where he promiseth his Apostles the Comforter his Holy Spirit with which they should be confirmed by virtue from above now the mission of the Holy Ghost in the time of Penticost either was the Sacrament of confirmation it self or instead of it Mark 11.13 14. Matth. 10. again we find in the Gospels That they brought young children to Christ that be should touch them and his Disciples rebuked them that brought them but when Jesus saw it be was displeased and said suffer the little Children to come to me for of such is the Kingdome of God c. Now it is very probable that he did either institute this Sacrament then or at least infinuate it So enough I coceive said to that Now that the Sacramnot of Orders was instituted likewise by Christ himself and with a sensible sign conferrs grace I prove this by expresse Scriptures First we find that when Jesus had called unto him his twelve Disciples Mat. 10.1 he gave them power against unclean spirets and to heal all manner of sicknesse and all manner of diseases Then again Jesus going up into the Mountain and called unto him whâ—m he would and they came unto him and he made that Twelve should be with him Mark 6.7 and he sent them to preach c. And after these things the Lord appointed other seventy also and sent them tweand two before his face into every City and place whither he himself would come Then again we find Luk 10.1 that taking bread he brake it giving thanks and saying this is my Body c. Do this in remembrance of me Then last of all look into St. Johns Gospel and you wil find yet a more express Ordination and mission As my Father hâ—th sens me so send I you Lâ—k 28. And when he had said this he breathed on them and saith unto them receive ye the holy Ghost John 10. â— 21 22 23 Whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosoever sins ye retein they are reteyned Thus you have in the four Gospells the institution of this Sacrament Let us now look a little into the Apostolicall practise We find in the Acts Act. 13. â—â— As they ministred to the Lord and fasted the holy Ghost said separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them and when they had fasted and prayed and I did their hands on them they sent them away Here again is plain Ordination and Mission St. Paul gives direction to young Timothy how to behaave himself in his Ministry and then says 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee which was given to thee by Prâ—phecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Then again he says Lay not thy hands on any man over haftily and again the Elders that govern well are worthy of double honour Then the same Apostle tells Titus 1 Tim. 6. For this Cause I left thee in Creet that thou shouldst make Elders in severall Cities 2 Tim. 1. Then to Philemon he says of those Elders those that are of this sort have a great regard to thus you see what respect St. Paul had to holy orders and yet to admonish us further of our duties to them he makes it his humble request to the Thessalonians thus Phil. 1. We beseech you brethren to know them that labour amongst you and over you on the Lord and admonish you in the Lord and to esteem them very highly in love for their works sake and be at peace amongst your selves See what charge St. 1 Thes 5.12.13 Peter gives the Elders The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder c. Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the eversighe thereof c. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear ye shall receive a Crown of glory that fadeth not away So St. Paul again in the Acts of the Apostles Exhorts the Elders of Ephâ—sus thus Take heed therefore unto your selves and to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops or Overseers as you would have it for it is all one to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own Blood Act. 20.28 Geâ— 1.37 Observe that the Holy Ghost made them Bishops and Overseers and yet you will deny Orders to be a Sacrament but it is plain it is for Imposition of hands is the visible sign which carries with it the invisible grace of the Holy Spirit as you have seen at large proved by Scripture That Matrimony is a Sacrament and instituted by Christ I likewise prove by expresse Scripture thus First it is very probable that the blessing which God Almighty gave to Adam and Eve in Paradice was not unaccompani'd with divine