of the most ancient Fathers or in the Decrees of the first Councils but since we find no such thing we may firmly conclude them to be no essential Articles of the Christian Faith As if now that party in the Roman Church which asserts the freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Original sin should so far prevail as to get a Council like that packt up at Trent to establish this new opinion as an Article of Faith would it not be enough for us to reply that this is no where to be found in Scripture or in the Creed and therefore whether true or false yet certainly is no article of faith And thus we shew our selves to be of the same faith with the Catholick Church of old whilst we embrace the very same Articles which she did and what more is obtruded upon us as part of the faith we do constantly reject it either as false or as unnecessary Though as to all or most of the points which we thus reject you will find sufficient evidence against them in holy Scripture as I shall afterward shew L. But they commonly say that they have only established these new Doctrines in opposition to new Heresies with which the Church in former times was not troubled and therefore did not so fully and expresly determine against them as they now have done yet they pretend that these their new Articles were plainly implied and contain'd under some head or other of ancient Doctrine T. All this is most false and frivolous since if these new coin'd Articles of theirs had been true there was the same reason why they should have been taught anciently as well as now and occasion enough was frequently offered To instance in one for all If Saint Peter was indeed to have been made supreme Governour of the Christian Church and the Bishops of Rome after him would not our Saviour have told his Apostles so when they were contending who should be greatest And after this in the Primitive times when there were often hot contentions amongst Bishops and Churches would they not all have appeal'd to the Pope for the decision of their controversies and have yielded submission to his sentence if this had been the current Doctrine of the Church that he was their Supreme Governour and Infallible Judg But alas we find no such matter And consider further that when Heresies arose the ancient Fathers who wrote against them plainly shew'd how they contradicted the Holy Scripture and the common Doctrine contain'd in the Creed as explain'd by those who went before them Thus when the Arrians denied the Divinity of our Saviour the Orthodox both proved it by Scripture and urged that Article of the Creed that Jesus is the Son of God which they shew'd was still interpreted of his partaking of a Divine nature as was afterward therefore more fully exprest in the Nicene Creed But now where can Papists shew Scripture in proof of their Novelties Or in what Article of the Creed will they prove them to be virtually contain'd and shew that the Article was so understood by those Ancients who have written Comments on the Creed How will they by this method make out that the Pope is Christs Vicar on Earth not surely because Christ is the Son of God Or what because there is mention made of the Catholick Church must that be meant only of the Roman Church so that none must belong to it but those who yield subjection to the Pope But what ancient Writer did ever thus explain this or the other Article And to what Articles I beseech you must we reduce those other peculiar Doctrines of theirs Transubstantiation Purgatory c. with the rest of their gross Errors and Innovations These therefore do we most justly reject as being corrupt additions to the ancient Christian Faith the common Faith of Gods Holy Catholick Church which we retain firm and entire without adding or diminishing CHAP. IV. Of the fourth Mark of the true Church that it is Apostolick L. BY your last discourse I am fully satisfied how little reason Papists have to assume and engross to themselves the title of Catholicks and that our Church of England is a true and sound part of the Catholick Church And at the same time I do also perceive that the last mark of a true Church doth as properly belong to it viz. that it is Apostolick T. This is indeed so very plain from what hath been said under the former head that I reckon there is little need to spend much time in speaking particularly to it For as I have often inculcated our Church receives all those Doctrines which we are certain were taught by the Apostles that faith which was delivered by them to the Churches which they planted as it is to be found at large in their writings and which is summ'd up in that which we call the Apostles Creed as being the Summary of their Doctrine All the Articles of this Creed we do stedfastly embrace and profess and that in the plain sense of the words according to the commonly received interpretation of the Church of Christ in the first and purest ages And thus our Doctrine is Apostolical so also is our Government our Worship and Administration of the holy Sacraments and therefore our Church doth most justly deserve the title of an Apostolical Church For according to the precepts and example of the Apostles we worship the true God in the name of his Son Jesus our only Mediator and that in a language understood by the people We baptize with water In the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And in the Lords-Supper do give both Bread and Wine to the people according to our Saviours own institution In a word we preach the very same Faith the same holiness and righteousness of life which the Apostles did But on the other hand it 's most certain that as to the chief points wherein the Church of Rome and we differ the Apostles never delivered those Doctrines nor enjoyn'd those practices which are obtruded upon us by that corrupt Church They never taught that the Bishop of Rome is the supreme and infallible Head of the Church They never taught us to pray to Angels or Saints no not to the Blessed Virgin her self nor to make Prayers for the Dead that they might be delivered out of Purgatory nor to take away the Cup from the Laity nor to worship the consecrated Host to adore Images or to make any use of them in Religious service These things with many others now used in the Church of Rome were never taught or practised by the Holy Apostles and therefore so far that Church is not Apostolical L. I do verily believe it deserves not that name with respect to those Doctrines and practices wherein it differs from us But I hear them often making great boasts that theirs must certainly be an Apostolical Church because an Apostle himself was once their Bishop even St. Peter and he ordained another
from the corruptions of Popery the Blessed Fruits whereof we do at this day enjoy and hope we shall still continue so to do through the same Divine Grace and favour which first bestowed this mercy upon us though most unworthy of the same But leave we this shadow of an Argument and pass to his third L. Pray do so T. It is this That Church is only to be heard which â—â—s all the marks of a true Church but the Roman Câ—urch has them and no other therefore she only is to be â—â—ard These marks as he goes on are Antiquity Miracles Holiness of Life and Doctrine Universality Uâ—â—ty Succession of Bishops from the Apostles these he calls Infallible Marks of the true Church which belong to none but that of Rome L. These marks of the Church or most of them I do well remember you spoke largely to in the beginning of our â—â—st conference and from what you have there said I 〈◊〉 furnished with a sufficient Answer to this Argument viz. that the Church of Rome as it is now corrupted with â—hose Doctrines wherein Popery consists such as the Popes Supremacy and Infallibility Purgatory Transubstantiation c. it cannot truly plead these marks he lays down For these Popish Doctrines are not of the same Antiquity with pure Christianity there never were any true Miracles wrought to confirm them they are not Holy in themselves nor do tend to promote Holiness of Life but rather the contrary they are not nor ever were Universally received by all Christian Churches nor is there much Unity amongst themselves in their explication of them though if there were this signifies nothing as being but the Unity of a Sect within it self and though their Bishops may live in the same City that the Apostles once did yet they did not receive these Doctrines from the Apostles but have introduced them since some at one time some at another and therefore in respect of Doctrine they are not the Apostles Successors nor are to be hearkned to as such T. What you alledge is most undeniably true And let me further add that suppose the Church of Rome were now as pure in its Doctrine and Worship as in the very days of the Apostles it was so that these marks did really belong to it yet this is no good Argument that we must all therefore be of the Church of Rome if ever we hope to be saved since many other Churches might plead the same even all that received the Christian Religion in the same purity and simplicity whose Members therefore might have as good grounds to hope for Salvation But when we further consider how that Church has degenerated from its Primitive purity beside that it has no dominion over us there is still much less reason that we should for the embracing of her Communion desert our own Church of England which is a most sound part of the Catholick Church as any this day in Christendom To her agree all the marks of a true Church as I have formerly shewn She hath these mention'd by this Author Antiquity c. For the Doctrines of our Church are as old as the times of our Saviour and his Apostles This is that true Christian Doctrine which was confirmed by all those Miracles which are recorded in the New-Testament These Doctrines are all Holy as well as True and have a natural tendency to make men Holy and Good These are Universally received by all Christian Churches that now are or ever were in the World being the very same you find summ'd up in the Apostles Creed Thus are we at Unity with the truly Catholick Church and thus whilst our Ministers Preach the very same Doctrines use the same Worship and Sacraments which the Apostles did they are in that respect truly their Successors Yea beside this those Bishops of our Church whom God made use of for the Reformation of it did receive their Orders from those who were of the Church of Rome so that if their Ordination be valid so is ours if they have a succession from the Apostles so have we To say nothing of what is commonly related in History that some of the Apostles or Apostolical men sent by them first planted Christianity in these parts from which time it was never utterly rooted out But I think I need add nothing more on this Head having already said so much in another place L. No Sir but rather proceed to the fourth Argument T. It is this That Church is to be heard which takes the narrow way that leads to Life Matt. 7. but the Roman Church takes it and therefore she is to be heard And this he proves because she takes as he says not only the way of Gods commands but also the narrow way of Christs Counsels What say you to this L. Even the same in effect that you lately said upon the former Argument viz. that supposing it to be true that the Church of Rome does take this narrow way yet it is not she alone that takes it and therefore there is no necessity that I should renounce all other Churches for Communion with her I am sure there is no reason why I should on this account forsake our own Church wherein the precepts of Christ are most plainly taught and strictly urged upon the people and in the very same way to Heaven are we dayly exhorted to walk in which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles have led us by their Example as well as Doctrine even the way of Piety Righteousness and serious Holiness T. Your Answer is solid and true L. But I have yet somewhat more to say against his Argument and do directly deny that their Church takes the same way to Salvation in all things which our Saviour hath proposed in his Gospel For whatever he talks of their following not only his Commands but his Counsels yet sure I am that their Church requires many things to be believed and done in order to Salvation which our Blessed Saviour never commanded counsel'd or taught and therefore in these things they do not take the way of the Gospel but one of their own devising For in the Gospel we no where find that a Man cannot be saved except he acknowledge the Popes Supremacy believe Transubstantiation worship Images c. These things I think are directly contrary to the Doctrines and Precepts of the Gospel and yet these with many more of like nature are required in the Roman Church with all strictness imaginable in doing of which she takes not the way of the Gospel nor therefore in this ought she to be heard T. Most certainly she ought not But you have all the reason in the World to remain fixed in Communion with your own Church which requires nothing to be believed or practised as of necessity to Salvation but what is revealed in the Holy Scriptures Herein following the direction which our Saviour gave to his Apostles and in them to their Successors Matt. 28. ult that they should
infallible and the Mistress of all other Churches that there is a Purgatory with the rest of those Doctrines which they embrace and we reject Nay these opinions with their consequences rather tend to make men much worse than otherwise they would have been Some of them make them more loose and careless in the leading of their lives and some make them most cruel and uncharitable to such as differ from them yea render them many times disobedient to their rulers and furious disturbers of the peace by Plots and Treasons and Rebellions for the advancing of their cause True Christianity puts men upon no such courses but these are the natural effects of Popery as has often been verified by sad experience L. I understand you well and am fully perswaded that we in our Church do embrace all those Christian Doctrines that tend to the promoting of good life and do retain none that are an hindrance to it But what say you to their objections against Calvin and Luther who as my Author says were very wicked men and strange stories he tells of them out of Bolsec and other Writers of their Church T. To this I answer that it sufficiently appears how bad their cause is which must be maintain'd by the most odious lies and forgeries For there are no Books in the world less to be credited than those which their Monks and Priests have written in praise of those they have Canonized for Saints and in dispraise of such as they have damned for Hereticks making the former somewhat more than Angels and the latter worse than Devils But as to Calvin and Luther some of the more ingenuous even of their own Church have given a fairer character of them than their lying Bolsec and such Authors And had they but been as zealous for Popery as they were against it no doubt but they had past amongst them for great Saints with all their faults But in the mean time were they really as bad as they falsely accuse them to be yet are we little or nothing concerned herein since they were not the Reformers of our Church Nor yet if they had is it the goodness of this or that person which we are obliged to defend but the truth of our Doctrine and the lawfulness and necessity of our Reformation Thus they make a great out-cry against Henry the Eighth what a bad man he was and what ill designs he had in throwing off the Popes Supremacy which was the most he did toward the Reformation but let his designs be what they would the thing it self was justifiable and good VVhat if a bad Emperor upon carnal designs should have supprest Heathenism and promoted Christianity as Constantine himself was accused by some is this any dishonour to the Christian Religion But little cause have Papists of all men to talk of ill instruments whilst they may remember from what a Trayterous Murderer and Usurper the Pope first received the title of Universal Bishop for which he had been long quarrelling with the Bishop of Constantinople And however they slander Calvin and Luther we might with much more reason and truth object what kind of creatures multitudes of their Popes have been whom they own as Heads of their Church even such monsters of men for all manner of impiety filthiness and cruelty as the world hath scarce ever heard of the like And this we have from those of their own Church who have written their Lives and their greatest Champions such as Bellarmine and Baronius cannot deny it L. But it s further objected against Calvin and Luther and the first Reformers that they never wrought miracles to shew they had a commission from God T. Our first Reformers never pretended to bring in any new Religion only they cast out Popish Innovations which had corrupted and defaced it and for this they needed no extraordinary commission from heaven nor any miracles to warrant the same For they preached no other but the same old Religion which was taught by Christ and his Apostles and was abundantly confirmed by the miracles which they wrought long ago And with us the Reformation was begun and carried on in a just and regular manner by our Rulers in Church and State who had full authority to make the same even as the Kings and High-Priests of old had to reform any abuses and corruptions which at any time were crept into the Iewish Church And as these needed no new commission from Heaven no new miracles to authorize them to rectifie disorders and reform the Church according to the rules of Moses's Law no more did our Reformers need them for the removing of those errors and superstitions which had by degrees been brought in contrary to our Saviours Gospel L. I see no reason indeed why miracles should be expected from them who only cast out new inventions and keep fast to the old Christian Religion which hath already been confirmed by so many and great miracles But yet my Author says that in their Church they have had miracles wrought in all ages such as curing the blind and deaf raising the dead and casting out of Devils which he accounts to make mightily for the honour of their Saints and of the Church to which they belong T. In the Primitive times indeed such miracles were wrought for proving of the Christian Doctrine that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and all that he taught most certainly true and this Doctrine so confirmed is the Religion which we at this day do openly profess in our Church But then I utterly deny that ever such miracles were wrought to prove the truth of Popish Doctrins properly so called as of Transubstantiation Pargatory Invocation of Saints c. for these were never taught by Christ or his Apostles and therefore could not receive confirmation from the miracles of their working As to any that are pretended to be done in the Church of Rome for the attesting of these they are meer cheats and forgeries or lying wonders agreeable to the nature of those false Doctrines which they are designed to confirm And though your Author talks of healing the sick raising the dead c. I can hear of no such thing done by any of them amongst us whatever they may pretend to in Popish Countries where it s an easie matter for cunning Priests to impose upon credulous people But were indeed any such miracles wrought for the proof of Popish Doctrines one would think they should be done amongst those they call Hereticks who stand in need of such arguments for their conviction rather than amongst their own people who need them not Great Stories they often tell of their casting out of Devils and for this knack are their Priests mightily magnified by their deluded followers and prefer'd before the Ministers of our Church who pretend to no such matter But that this is a gross cheat seems plain enough from hence that what their Priests pretend to in this kind for all that ever I could
Romish Church But for the Papist the happy man that has had the good luck to hit into this true Church they have so many tricks and quirks to secure him in his life at his death and after it that let his faults be what they will it s very strange if he miss of Heaven at least after he has taken Purgatory in his way if he was very poor for rich men may easily escape that too or get soon out of it if they 'l follow the Priests directions Such fine devices they have to give men a lift to Heaven without putting them to the trouble of walking in that narrow way of serious holiness which alone leads thither So that I cannot but say and without any prejudice or partiality I speak it notwithstanding all that noise and talk of holiness in the Church of Rome nothing but Holy Mother Church Holy Father the Pope Holy Altars Holy Images Holy Water Holy Crosses Beads Agnus Dei's Reliques and a thousand holy trinkets more yet I think there is as little true holiness of life and conversation to be found amongst them as in any Church of the world Yea we shall often find that when those of that way are told of the holy Lives of many Protestants or are themselves exhorted to strictness and piety of life as that wherein true Religion chiefly consists they will be ready presently to make a puff at it as if this was of no value in comparison of being of the true Church of the infallible Catholick Church as they fondly call their own Sect as if being in a good Church would secure a bad man when we are so plainly taught that without holiness no man shall see God let him be of what Church he will Wherefore to conclude this remember that since in the Church of England the holy Gospel is most purely taught and the holy Sacraments duly administred according to our Saviours own institution and the members of it are neither required to profess any falshood or practise any evil in order to their communion with it but on the contrary are most strictly enjoyned to be holy in all their conversation and do here enjoy all manner of helps and advantages thereto therefore I say this is such an Holy Church as that you may and ought to hold communion with it Proceed we now to the following Marks of the true Church CHAP. III. Of the third mark of the true Church that it's Catholick L. THE next mark he lays down of the true Church is that its Catholick And here they make great boasting and triumphing for they say none else call themselves Catholicks but they nor as they pretend have any reason so to do since they tell of vast numbers belonging to their Church in all places of the world far and near and how they convert Heathens whilst Protestants they say are but a little handful here and there in corners amongst a multitude of Catholicks T. As to what they call themselves it matters little for be sure they 'l give themselves good words Neither is it true that none but they lay claim to that name for we of this Church do esteem our selves true Catholick Christians as professing the ancient Catholick faith of Christ and so do frequently stile both our selves and our Doctrine and with good reason as I doubt not to demonstrate As to their great numbers compared to other Christians suppose what they alledge were true as it is most false yet is this no sufficient argument of their being true Catholicks for that 's to be judged by the truth of their Doctrines and not by the number of Professors For if we should at this rate go to the Poll and judg of truth by most votes then might the Mahometans carry it from Christians And heretofore the number of the Arrians was said to be greater than of the Orthodox But that 's to be accounted a true part of the Catholick Church which professes the Catholick faith even the same Christian Religion which all good Christians in all ages former as well as latter and of all Nations have ever constantly profest And by this rule you will find that the Church of England is a most true and sound part of the Catholick Church as professing this same Christian faith contain'd in the Gospel and summ'd up in the Apostles Creed Here you may remember what I have before told you that it is most vain and unreasonable for any one particular Church to stile her self the whole Catholick Church as if there were no Christians in the world but themselves And yet in this sense doth the Church of Rome stile her self Catholick the absurdity of which I have before shewed And there needs nothing more to manifest it than this single consideration that there are thousands and millions of Christians in several parts of the world who neither now do nor ever did own the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome which is the great fundamental article of their faith to pass by all others at present and yet all these whilst they embrace the whole Christian Doctrine taught in the holy Scriptures are to be lookt on as true Catholick Christians though they do not believe the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar upon earth invested with Supremacy over all Christian Churches for this is a Doctrine which our Saviour never taught his Disciples Now without owning this false Doctrine a man cannot be of the Church of Rome according to the Decrees of their Popes and Councils and yet without this I say a man may receive the whole Christian Religion as it was delivered by Christ and his Apostles and therefore he may be a true Catholick Christian though he be not of the Romish Church nor yields subjection to it L. This seems to me very plain and clear T. But it will appear yet more plain if you consider what is a most certain truth that there can be no manner of good evidence given that the Church of Christ for some hundred years after our blessed Saviours time did ever receive this Doctrine of the Popes Supremacy or his Infallibility Nay our learned men assert that there is not so much as any one Christian Writer for at least three hundred years after that time some say four or five that did ever so much as teach any such strange Doctrine as this How then I beseech you can the owning of it now be necessary to make a man a Catholick when the whole Catholick Church for some ages after its first Plantation was a meer stranger to it L. I think there is no appearance of reason for it T. To this add that the whole Greek which was much larger than the Romish before it was over-run by the Turks ever disown'd these same new opinions of the Popes Supremacy and Infallibility with many others of the same stamp neither do they generally embrace them to this day though sometimes the Romanists have used all manner of arts and devices
their case seems most pitiable who through the disadvantage of their education want due means of instruction and what allowances our gracious God will make on that and the like accounts is fittest for us to leave to his own infinite wisdom Only let us be careful to regulate our own practices by the plain rule of Gods holy Word which through his favour we so plentifully enjoy L. What you say shall teach me more charity to those of them that are sincere than they will allow to us But I do still more and more perceive how little reason there is for my entring into communion with that Church in which there is so great hazard of Salvation even no more than for my venturing into a Pest-house full of infected persons because it 's possible some of them may have so much strength of nature as to overcome that dangerous distemper T. The case is much the same CHAP. V. Of some particular points in difference betwixt us and the Church of Rome and first of the Popes Supremacy L. HAving now received so full satisfaction in this first great point concerning the true Catholick Church what it is and who are the members of it and being upon good grounds firmly perswaded that the Church of England is a very sound part of this Catholick Church in whose communion therefore by Gods grace I hope to live and die I would in the next place gladly hear you discourse of some of those particular points wherein chiefly the difference lyes betwixt us and the Church of Rome For they alledg many plansible reasons and sometimes quote Scripture for those opinions of theirs which we reject as Popery and therefore I would gladly be furnisht with solid and good answers to these their Allegations T. Most readily shall I afford you my assistance herein Only let me premise that suppose in this or that particular opinion you should fancy their Church had the truth on her side yea though it really was so yet is this no sufficient reason why you should go over to their communion since from what has been said you may discern that their Church has no manner of jurisdiction over ours which we shall presently make more plain and you cannot lawfully desert your own Church meerly because you apprehend there is some error commonly received in it whilst you have liberty to hold communion with it without owning and professing that error And though for my own part I declare I do not know so much as any one material point of difference wherein the Church of Rome has the truth on her side yet this I speak with respect to those who in some particular cases may be of another mind and afterward may have occasion to make use of it accordingly But now proceed to those several points wherein you desire satisfaction L. I will so and shall herein follow the method in which I find them laid down in this little Book to which I have hitherto had recourse And the first thing here mention'd is concerning one Pope in the Church viz. the Bishop of Rome who is they say to be own'd as the visible Head and Governour of the whole Church under Christ. T. This is indeed the most fundamental point of the Romish faith by which chiefly they stand distinguisht from all other Churches and as such I have often upon occasion mention'd it already and have told you that there is not a word of it in the Apostles Creed which is the summ of the Christian Faith nor yet in the Holy Scriptures whence that Creed was taken which may be sufficient prejudice against it but pray what do they alledg in proof of it L. Both this my Author and others commonly plead that as there is one Emperour in an Empire one King in a Kingdom one Master in a family so there should be one Pope in the Church T. I think they should rather infer the quite contrary that as there is a Master in every Family a King in every Kingdom c. so in every Diocess there should be a Bishop and in every Nation a Primate or chief Bishop or else a Synod of Bishops from whom there should lye no appeal to any foreign Bishop whatsoever It would indeed have look'd a little more like an argument for their purpose if they could have said that as there is one Emperor over all the Kings and Kingdoms of the world so there ought to be one Pope over all Bishops and Churches But as it appears impossible for one man to govern the whole world so neither is it much easier for one Bishop to govern all the Christians in the world especially if all Nations should embrace Christianity as every good man desires they should But to let pass their little similies and idle fancies do you think if it had been a matter of such necessity to salvation as Papists say it is to own the Pope as Christs Vicar and visible Head of the Catholick Church do you think I say that our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles would not have told us of it and have given strict command to all Christians to obey him and to seek to his Infallible judgment in all doubts and controversies and submit to his authority for the composing of all differences whereas we now find not one syllable to this purpose either in the Gospel or Epistles but Christians are exhorted to obey their own Rulers both Sacred and Civil and to take the Doctrine delivered by our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles as the Infallible Rule of their faith and manners and no other Head of the Church do we read of but our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to whom all power is given in Heaven and Earth as he himself tells us Matt. 28. 18. But he no where tells us that he hath transfer'd all this power to any mortal man nor setled any person as his Vicar and Deputy-Governour of all the Christian world L. Yes they say Christ gave this priviledg to Saint Peter stiling him the Rock on which he would build his Church and giving him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Matt. 16 18 19. and from Saint Peter they would have this power to be derived to his Successors the Bishops of Rome T. This is the Text which they commonly bring for their purpose but with how little reason may appear at the very first sight whilst neither is here confer'd upon St. Peter any such power as to be Ruler over all the Christian Church nor the least mention made of any priviledge whatever to be convey'd from him to his Successors at Rome or any other where As to the Rock here spoken of many of the Ancients understand by it the Doctrine which St. Peter had now profest that great fundamental article of the Christian Faith that Iesus was the Christ the Son of the living God But let us suppose it to be meant of his person as he was to be a Preacher of this Doctrine yet
tolerably well give answer thereto from what I have already heard from you Nor do I find here much that is new but many of the same things in other words drest up with much art and cunning T. I am glad you are so good a proficient and since you tell me this let us if you will for a while at least take a new method in our following discourse Give me your Book and for the trial of your skill I 'le propose thence the arguments which your Author makes use of and you shall return answers to the same L. I shall do my best but must crave your assistance when I am at a loss T. That you may be sure I shall readily give and if we meet with many the same things which we have had already we shall the quicklier dispatch them Only something I have to premise before I come to his arguments In the beginning of this his last Chapter he brings in his Scholar desiring to be furnish'd with some pregnant arguments for the reducing of Sectaries to the Catholick Church which he says they have groundlesly forsaken and cruelly persecuted Now what ground we whom he unjustly calls Sectaries had to forsake the Romish Church not the Catholick we have already shewn and shall do more but whilst he would insinuate that we Protestants have been grievous persecutors of Papists this I am sure is a very groundless charge and I wonder he had the impudence to fasten it upon us especially considering how infamous their own Church hath long been for the most cruel bloody persecution of poor Protestants meerly upon account of Religion and that in this Kingdom to go no further Whereas it 's very rare that any Papist hath suffered the loss of his life amongst us purely upon that account nor should I desire ever to see such severity used toward them or any other Sect if they will but live peaceably and not disturb the Government But most certain and undeniable it is that many of them have suffered for downright Treason and Rebellion as in the Gunpowder-Plot and at several other times And indeed our Laws make it Treason for any of the Kings subjects to go to the Church of Rome for Orders and then come over to draw away the people into communion with that Church this being look'd on as a seducing of them from their Allegiance to his Majesty which no wise Prince will suffer And with good reason is it so look'd on since few of these Priests will take the Oath of Allegiance and do reckon themselves exempt from the Civil power and both they and their deluded proselytes are taught to prefer the power of a foreign Potentate viz. the Bishop of Rome before that of their own Prince Some of them indeed say not all that this his power is only in Spirituals but whilst the Pope is judge in his own cause what either is spiritual or has a tendency to it may he not under this pretence extend his power as far as he pleases as you heard before But though in this and other instances the principles of Papists are extremely dangerous to the Civil Government yet I wonder whether Protestants may be permitted to live as quietly in Italy or Spain as thousands of Papists do here in England Nay at this day even in France it self what disturbances and persecutions do poor Protestants meet with and that chiefly as is said through the malicious instigations of fierce and furious Clergy men whilst yet we hear not that they can in the least charge them with any seditious or unpeaceable behaviour What impudence then is it for Papists to cast such dishonourable reflections upon our Government whether of Church or State as if we were guilty of I know not what rigorous proceedings against them Whereas it will be hard to find any where in Christendom more mildness than in the Church of England nor any where more cruelty and severity than in that of Rome whose bloody Inquisition has been long talked of throughout the world But to follow your Author yet before he brings forth his Arguments he tells us that Christ sends us to the Church quoting Matt. 18. 17. That if we neglect to hear the Church we must be counted for no better than Heathens and Publicans What this makes to his purpose I do not well understand For this seems plainly to be meant of that particular Church whereof we are Members in peaceable communion wherewith we ought to live rendring chearful obedience to all its lawful injunctions But what 's this to the Church of Rome which neither has any Authority over us in England and whose impositions are notoriously sinful He next quotes that of St. Paul 1 Tim. 3. 15. That the Church is the pillar and ground of truth Which is true both of the Catholick Church and of every particular Church that is a sound Member of it For hereby is declared that the truth of the Gospel that is the Christian Religion is carefully preserved openly profest and taught in the Christian Church The expression here made use of is commonly thought to allude to the fixing up of Writings upon a Pillar in some publick place that they may be seen and read of all like that in Iosh. 8. 32. But still I am to seek what this makes for his advantage If he only intend by these Quotations to prove that a Man ought to live in communion with the true Church of Christ and to behave himself peaceably and obediently in that particular Church of which he is a Member Who denies it Or what will he gain by it Since this tends nothing to prove it our duty to become Members of the Romish Church to believe all her Doctrines and obey her commands Well but this is that he will now demonstrate we are all bound to and that by five Arguments all of them as he fancies most strong and unanswerable which we shall particularly survey and examine the strength of them His first is That Church is to be heard in which there is most assurance that one is in the way to Salvation but in the Roman Church there is most assurance of this and therefore she is to be heard and obey'd What say you to this L. I deny that there is most assurance of our being in the way to Salvation in the Roman Church T. And well you may but thus he goes on to prove it Protestants grant that one living and dying in the Roman Church may be saved else they condemn all their Ancestors to the pit of Hell and therefore those of that Church have most assurance of their Salvation since it 's granted by all that they are in the way to it and thus he says it has been held by all the World time out of mind And to give full strength to his Argument we must add what he has in other places that Papists deny that a Protestant can be saved whilst Protestants grant that a Papist may and
Prayers and Sacraments are framed and ordered according to the rules of it and all most evidently tend to the producing of that holiness which the Gospel most strictly requires being a Doctrine according to godliness as the Apostle stiles it And through Gods blessing on his own Ordinances and the endeavours of his faithful Ministers there are great numbers amongst us who do live truly religious Christian holy lives as many I am apt to think as are to be found in any Christian Church throughout the world of the same largeness with ours As to the wickedness of others which we justly lament as good men in all ages have sadly lamented the same this is the fault of particular persons and not to be charged upon the Church which owns no Doctrines that promote wickedness much less does she require of her members the embracing and professing of any such false and mischievous Doctrines nor does she impose upon them any thing which God has forbidden nor restrain them from any duty which he has commanded This therefore may sufficiently shew the Holiness of our Church to be such as that we may lawfully hold communion with it yea and are bound so to do since there is nothing sinful required of us in order thereto but here we may be as pious and holy as in any Church whatever and I think have as great helps and encouragements thereto L. My Author grants that there are some in our Church who appear modest and charitable and so there are among the Heathens but he says its all but outward appearance since we have no true Religion as he pretends and therefore can have no true virtue T. How utterly groundless and unjust is this charge whilst as hath been said before we do most firmly believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God and from this our belief in him and his holy Gospel do our works proceed and out of true love to God and to our brother Judg then whether they who have that faith in Christ which works by love are to be reckoned amongst Heathens and Infidels Or rather are not they destitute both of Christian charity and common modesty and ingenuity who talk at this absurd and most malicious rate L. Indeed I see not how they can excuse themselves herein but yet I hear them boasting often what numbers of Saints and Martyrs they have had in their Church both in former and latter ages and will allow no Saints in any other Church but theirs T. As to Saints of latter ages they keep up the names and tell fine stories of some of whom its much doubted whether they ever had a being in the world But which is far worse there are some whom they cry up for Saints and Martyrs who died as Rebels and Traytors against their Prince in a blind furious zeal for their great Master the Pope Such was their Thomas à Becket formerly and Garnet lately with others of the like stamp But as to the true Saints of former ages though some of them might live in the same places in which they of the Romish Church now do yet are they not to be accounted members of that Church according to its present constitution since they were utter strangers to those falshoods and superstitions which are now establish'd amongst them only they embraced that same pure plain Christian Religion which is at this day profest with us and are therefore rather to be reckoned of our Church than theirs L. This is plain enough but what say you to the great numbers of Religious people still amongst them viz. those of their several Orders in their Monasteries and Nunneries that live single lives being retired from the world that they may wholly give up themselves to Gods service for they talk much of these when they boast of the holiness of their Church T. For my part I hope there are some amongst them who deserve the name of Religious and where there is one truly so I wish there were an hundred Yea I would to God that both with them and all other Churches every man who is called a Christian may walk worthy of his holy profession I have no desire to make any party of men worse than indeed they are nor any delight in representing how bad they be or are commonly censured at least And therefore I shall say nothing of all that filthiness and lewdness which in former times their Monks and Nuns have been severely accused of by some of their own Church for I care not for raking in such a channel Nor shall I take notice how much they are degenerated from the first institution of a Monastick life in which men were wont to be very diligent and industrious in some honest and useful employment But yet that you may not be abused by fair shows and specious pretences I would not have you think that men and women are ever the more holy and religious for leaving their families and callings and shutting up themselves in Cloisters there to repeat over so many Creeds and Pater-Nosters in a day For there is no encouragement given in the Gospel for our entring into such a lazy retired course of life Nor is it at all like to the life of our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles neither do they hereby bring that honour to God nor that good to the world which by a more free and active life they might do So that I doubt not but that in thousands of pious well ordered families there is more true devotion yea more purity and chastity than in most of these their Religious Houses as they call them But beside all this there is one thing I would have you seriously to consider that though I grant there may be and I hope are some Papists truly religious whether in their Cloisters or out of them yet it is not as they are Papists but as they are Christians of the same faith with us who are reformed from their errors So that whatever holiness is amongst them it makes nothing for the honour of Popery that is of those Doctrines wherein they differ from us but of Christianity in its purity and simplicity as it is profest amongst us To speak yet plainer if need be any of them that are truly good become so through the grace of God by their firm and effectual belief of the Christian Religion viz. that Jesus Christ is the Son of God that he died for our sins and rose again for our justification that he will come to judge the quick and the dead and will sentence the wicked to everlasting punishment and receive the righteous to life eternal Such as these are the great truths of our Religion which being heartily believed and seriously considered do by Gods blessing thoroughly change mens hearts and lives and make them truly pious and good But no body becomes so by his believing that the Bishop of Rome is Christs Vicar and has power over all the Princes on earth that their Church is
hear is still done in some dark corner amongst those of their own party not daring to come into the open light and submit their proceedings herein to the careful examination of skilful and impartial persons Sometimes perhaps they perswade melancholy people that they were possest and they have cured them when they either leave them little better than they found them or else may work a cure by Physick proper for that purpose Sometimes its notorious they have train'd up Cheats for this very purpose A famous instance there was of this some years ago amongst our selves viz. the Boy of Bilson near Wolverhampton in Staffordshire said to be dispossest by some Catholick Gentlemen as they stiled themselves but to the grief and shame of the Authors the whole Imposture was discovered and publish'd to the world by Dr. Morton then Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry L. If they indeed had this miraculous power of casting out Devils which they make such boasts of I wonder they do not shew the same power in working other miracles as well as this T. 'T is very true But this they may chuse to deal in because the Imposture is not so easily found out For here they commonly have to do with poor melancholy people and with young women especially who are sometimes afflicted with strange distempers which both themselves and their friends may ignorantly fancy to be a possession of the Devil and so are lyable to be imposed upon either by a subtile or by a silly Priest who may perhaps be deceived as well as his Patients and if they happen to recover may think he has done great feats by the mighty pains he has taken And truly the method which they use in these their Exorcisms or casting out of Devils as it s described in their own Books is nothing like that of our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles who by the speaking of a few words did presently cast them forth with authority whereas Popish Priests make a long work and keep a great deal of stir about it using such ceremonies and charms such strange ways of proceeding as makes it look like some unlawful conjuring or at best the whole appears very odd and ridiculous they having neither any command or example in the holy Scripture for the warrant of such practices on this occasion And one remarkable difference there is which is worth our notice that in the Primitive times those out of whom the Devils were cast generally were Heathens or Infidels who hereupon commonly became Converts to Christianity whereas now adays those who are said to be dispossest by their Priests are people of their own party who may easily be practised upon or induced to believe whatever their Ghostly Father tells them But I wonder when we hear of a Protestant being possest with Devils and dispossest by a Popish Priest except when there has been much juggling with a new Convert L. I confess I never heard of any If you please we will now proceed to the next mark of a true Church T. Yes presently we will but before I leave this subject of the Holiness of the Church I would desire you to take notice that every good Christian who is no Papist hath in and from himself as full evidence of the falshood of Popery as he has of his own sincerity and true piety for they declare that no man has any true faith or holiness that is not of their Church and on this account the current Doctrine amongst them is That no man out of it can be saved But now if you upon a faithful examination of your own heart and life do find that you do by Gods grace most stedfastly believe the Gospel of our Lord Jesus and do live in sincere obedience to the precepts of it according to the best of your understanding you have then at hand a most plain and undeniable demonstration even from this knowledg of your self that their Doctrine is most false whilst they confine both holiness and salvation to their own party since you who are not of it do believe and obey the Gospel and our blessed Saviour hath promised pardon and salvation to all that do so without requiring them moreover to believe the Pope to be his Vicar and to submit to all his Doctrines and Decrees Hence then I say its very evident to every honest Christian though no Papist that he may be holy and so may be saved without being of the Romish Church and consequently this is not that Catholick Church out of which no salvation is to be had L. This is indeed a plain argument which every good man may fetch from the knowledg of his own faith and godliness whilst I know and feel that I believe in my Saviour and truly love and serve him certainly I may upon good grounds hope for that happiness which he hath promised to all that are so qualified And whilst I thus know my own sincerity I shall not much be concern'd though a thousand Popish Priests should tell me that I have neither faith nor holiness nor can possibly be saved because I am not their follower for sure the testimony of a mans own conscience is of much more value than all their censures and Christs promises are worthy of more regard I hope than the Popes threatnings T. I think they are It may also be worth our notice to consider what a great dishonour is cast upon their proselytes by this Doctrine of theirs for if there be no true faith or holiness out of the Romish Church then these their Converts must confess that they had neither before they turned Papists but were meer Infidels and profane ungodly persons L. This seems evidently to follow upon their principles and I fear it 's often too true For though I will not take upon me to censure those whom I know not yet I must confess so far as I have observed in the place where I live most of those who have been perverted by them were persons of very ill lives before T. Yea and more than this so they commonly remain after For as we shall rarely find any persons of much sobriety and seriousness revolt to them from our Church so never did I for my own part know one that became a better man and stricter liver by his turning Papist For whatever they talk of holiness their chief business like the Pharisees of old is to make proselytes to their own party and then whether after that they grow better or worse as to their Morals is a matter they seem not much concern'd about Get them but once into the bosom of the Church and their business is done As for a poor Protestant let him be never so humble and holy never so obedient to his Rulers and charitable to his brethren never so desirous to know the whole will of God and to do it yet there is no help for him no way but to Hell he must go because forsooth he is an Heretick out of the
may the King of France do the same in his as if the Pope should provoke him probably he might and so may all others if they please By which means at length the Bishop of Rome would be confined to his own Diocess and his Spiritual power be shut up in much the same limits with his Temporal But alas what an utter ruin would this be to the Papal dignity and honour How would their treasures be drain'd their glory sullied and their power abated yea even reduced to nothing No wonder therefore if Bellarmine in the Preface to his Books of the Romish Bishop stiles this Doctrine of his Supremacy the very summ or chief point of Christianity Had he said of Popery it had been true enough For 't is plain they look upon this as one of the most weighty articles of their faith Let this be denied our conformity to their Church in all other things will signifie little or nothing As it appears in Henry the Eighths case for though he still retain'd the main Body of Popery yet because he rejected this power of the Pope he was reckoned and treated as an Heretick and Apostate Whereas let this be but own'd and you shall be dispensed with in many other things As our Historians tell us it was offered to Queen Elizabeth that we should have our Service in English Communion in both kinds c. provided she would submit to the Popes authority and own his Supremacy L. This is I perceive so useful an opinion that they have great reason to be zealous in asserting it but it doth so apparently serve their own ends that were it for nothing else I should mightily suspect the truth of it but by the very slender proof they bring either from Scripture or Reason I am sufficiently assured that it is notoriously false T. Good ground you have so to be yet pray consider what mighty stress they lay upon this idle opinion whilst they confine the Catholick Church to those who embrace it and Excommunicate all others as Hereticks and Schismaticks Yea such homage they pay to this their great Master that even in things of an indifferent nature they will rather yield obedience to his commands than to those of their own Prince And that 's plain from this instance amongst others that for a considerable time in Queen Elizabeths days the Papists came to our Churches but after the Pope had sent order to the contrary they generally desisted And I have heard some eminent Papists alledging the Popes Prohibition as the chief reason of their not taking the Oath of Allegiance So certainly true it is that a Papist acting according to the rules of his own Church can be no further a good Subject than the Pope will give him leave Nor has any Doctrine been more destructive of the rights of Princes and the duty of subjects than this of the Popes Supremacy In pursuance of this or for the promoting it has the peace of the world in these latter ages been greatly disturbed Kings and Kingdoms Excommunicated and endeavoured to be destroy'd Yea for the disowning of this according to their mercyless tenents must we poor Protestants be made utterly miserable both in this life and that to come Here we must be condemned to fire and faggot and hereafter to everlasting burnings even because we will not believe the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar on Earth L. For the sake of this I am more apt to suspect the rest of their Popish Doctrines But though the Pope be not Christs Vicar yet is it not too severe to stile him Antichrist for so it seems many of our Writers do at which my Author is very angry and says it is a calumny and a lye and most intollerable stupidity to assert it T. Certainly not greater than to assert his Supremacy But pray what reason does he give for this his anger and his confidence L. He says that Antichrist shall be a Jew a particular man at the end of the world whereas the Popes be successively many of divers Nations and many ages ago T. Whilst he gives you only his bare word for all this there would need no more confutation than a bare denial Nor shall I give you or my self the trouble to search into the Revelation or any other obscure places of Scripture thence to prove the Pope to be Antichrist Only you may call to mind the saying of Pope Gregory even now quoted That he who should take on him the title of Universal Bishop is the forerunner of Antichrist And so far as Pope Gregory's Infallibility may be allow'd they may serve to prove his Successors to be an Antichristian generation of men But without going about positively to define what is meant by Antichrist in the New Testament that which I would chiefly recommend to your serious consideration in this matter is this That though the Bishops of Rome were at first very pious and good men and so generally continued for some ages yet as they grew in wealth they did by degrees strangely degenerate from the virtue and piety of their Predecessors till at length they with the Grandees of the Clergy who are the Governing part of the Popish faction have most apparently set up and pursued a design exactly contrary to that of our blessed Saviour which design of theirs may therefore well enough be stiled Antichristian and so may the abettors of it who have by the most vile and unchristian methods carried on the same To make this manifest in a few words consider that our blessed Saviour hath expresly told us that his Kingdom is not of this world does not consist in riches honours and worldly dignity but his whole business was to promote the glory of God and the salvation of mens souls by bringing us to the love and practice of piety and humility righteousness and mercy purity and sobriety and all true virtue and goodness But now on the contrary he who stiles himself Christs Vicar plainly enough declares that his Kingdom is of this world For what is it they seek after and so earnestly contend for but worldly greatness and power pomp and glory to make all men pay homage and obedience to them And under this pretence of being Vicar of Christ and Successor of St. Peter have the Popes for many ages exalted themselves above all that is called God I mean above all Civil power above Kings and Emperours who are indeed Gods Vicegerents on earth They have set their feet on the necks of Princes and kickt off their Crowns at their pleasure deposed and destroy'd Kings absolved their Subjects from the Allegiance due to them and disposed of their Kingdoms to others so far as they had power For their own secular interests they have often stir'd up Wars amongst Christian Princes yea themselves have maintain'd and prosecuted the same They have excited the people to Civil Wars and Seditions and sometimes even drawn the Son to rebel against his own Father They have set
to understand it especially if you consider that though this Discourse in the sixth of St. Iohn may in a secondary sense be applied to this holy Sacrament yet it seems most probable that our Saviour in this Chapter is chiefly speaking of his Doctrines especially that great one of his dying for the sins of the world and of his precepts and promises these are to be believed and embraced duly improved and thoroughly digested into our souls for their spiritual nourishment as common food is received for the support of the body For when the people followed him chiefly for the loaves as he tells them ver 26. he thence took occasion to exhort them not so much to labour for the meat which perisheth as for that which endures to everlasting life As in Ioh. 4. from the womans coming to draw water he enters upon a discourse of that living water which he will give to all that believe on him Now who is so dull as not to take this spiritually as being meant of the graces and comforts of the Spirit And why should we not so understand this sixth Chapter where he represents himself and Doctrine under the notion of bread To omit many other reasons that might be alledged for it our Saviour himself in my apprehension does plainly tell us that we ought so to understand him v. 63. for when the Capernaites mistook his meaning and seemed to take his words in some such gross and carnal sense as Papists at this day put upon them he tells them that the flesh profiteth nothing that the spirit gives life and his words are spirit and life such as that by our embracing of them there is a spiritual and divine life convey'd to our souls quickning and renewing them and so disposing them for life eternal L. But says my Author his flesh did profit much in that he gave it for the redemption of the world T. Most true it did so but our eating of his flesh the very natural substance of it supposing it could be done would profit us nothing What goes into the month can no more sanctifie the heart than it can defile it But it is by our believing in a Crucified Saviour by our loving and serving him and conforming our selves to his likeness that we attain eternal life Whilst his words remain in us and have power over us for the forming and governing of our hearts and lives this while Christ dwells in us and we in him And whilst the graces of his Spirit are communicated to us by his Word and Sacraments we are truly fed and nourished by him in a spiritual manner L. To this purpose my Author himself sometimes seems to speak for he says the manner of Christ's real presence in the Sacrament is not gross sensual and carnal like that of other flesh which is daily eaten but as the Church holds and believes it Mystical and Sacramental T. How wisely then had their Church done to have been content with saying it to be thus Mystical and Sacramental without presuming positively to define after what manner the Body and Blood of Christ are here present as most unreasonably they have done and have murdered thousands for not assenting to these their bold determinations And this your Author plainly contradicts himself for he asserts that the Sacramental Bread and Wine are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ by the mighty power of God as the water was turned into wine Ioh. 2. and that certainly was true plain wine in which there was nothing mystical or obscure And according to this their Doctrine must the eating of Christs Body be understood in a carnal sense why else does he say soon after that if Christ should be seen they should have an horrour to eat him So that eat him it seems they do and that in such a manner as they should have an horrour to do it if they could see him L. And so one would think they should have at the very thought of it though they see him not T. But in the mean time does it not seem strange that the Natural body and blood of Christ should be there and yet neither of them seen nor any way perceived L. Yes truly very strange but they say this is no more than what we find Luk. 4. 30. where Christ made himself invisible and so past through the midst of his enemies without being seen of them T. It 's only said there that he past through the midst of them and so he might do by conveying himself swiftly away Or suppose he made himself invisible for a while this we may easily enough apprehend that it might be done by hindring the clearness of their sight or by other ways But now for thousands of people in all ages and places having their senses sound and the object at a due distance to be so strangely deceived is a thing utterly incredible Nor do we read a syllable in that or any other place that our Saviour presented to the people some object which had the appearance of quite another thing and yet was really himself and not that other thing which it appeared to be For thus they teach it is in the present case Here is the most plain appearance of Bread and Wine and yet no such substance but the substance of Christs Body and Blood whilst there 's no appearance of them Christ is before them and yet they cannot see him they take him into their hands and yet cannot feel him Nay their sight their feeling their smell and taste do all perceive Bread and Wine and nothing else and yet do they confidently affirm that no Bread or Wine is there but the very substance of Christs flesh and blood though they discern no such thing L. This is all wonderful indeed but they say this change is wrought by the mighty power of God in a miraculous manner as he made the world of nothing T. If any such change there were we should grant it to be miraculous but what a strange sort of miracle is this that after it s wrought there 's yet no appearance of it We dispute not about the manner how it 's wrought but we say we can perceive no such thing to be done It was not thus in the instance he gives for though the world was made of nothing in a miraculous manner yet being made the works of God do visibly appear and so do declare his invisible power and Godhead But if now a man should tell us that God had created a New Heaven and a New Earth whilst we can see no manner of change but all things continue as they were in the old world who would believe him yet such is the invisible change they plead for in the Sacrament which is such a sort of miracle as never was heard tell of either in the Old Testament or the New For the miracles which our Blessed Saviour wrought they plainly appear'd to the senses of those who were present by that means
confirming their belief of his Doctrine The Doctrine was to be believed but the miracle was to be seen which confirm'd that Doctrine To instance in one for all When the water was turn'd into wine Ioh. 2. it was now seen and tasted to be true wine only it was much better than common wine Otherwise do you think if it had still had the colour the smell and the taste of water that the people would have been perswaded it was turned into wine Would they have been satisfied with an odd story that the substance was wine though the accidents of water still remain'd or with any such idle unintelligible talk Would such a sort of miracle as this that could no way be perceived ever have been believed Or would the pretence to such miracles ever have gain'd Disciples to our Saviour And yet such a one is this of Transubstantiation L. So very strange and unaccountable it is that it never ought to be admitted without very good proof T. And is it not then almost as strange that ever any man should believe so absurd a Doctrine not only without good proof but even against the express words of Scripture as well as against his reason and senses L. No matter for sense and reason they cry but how do you prove it to be against Scripture T. It may be proved from those places which tell us of our Saviours being received into Heaven as Act. 3. 21. and he cannot at the same time be corporally present upon earth and in heaven too L. But did he not appear to St. Paul and others after his Ascension T. Yes he did so yet does not this prove him to be then corporally present for he might render himself visible to them without descending as he did to St. Stephen or he might appear to them in a Vision and make himself present to their imagination Or he might be said to appear to them by his Angel whom he sent For thus in Scripture it 's commonly said God appear'd to this or that man when he sent his Angel to him with some message But besides this the plain words of the Evangelists when they relate the institution of this Holy Sacrament do directly contradict this Doctrine of Transubstantiation For they tell us that our Saviour took bread and blessed it and brake it even the very same that he took that he blest and what he blest that he broke and what is this but true bread as to its natural substance Only in a mystical and spiritual sense it was made the Body of Christ by Consecration And thus also St. Paul calls it Bread after Consecration no less than three times in three verses together 1 Cor. 11. 26 c. L. This my Author grants but says it 's called so because the external accidents of bread do still remain T. That is because the colour shape and taste of bread do still remain with all other qualities of common bread Now I beseech you can there be any better or surer way to discover what is the substance or nature of a thing than by such accidents such outward sensible appearances as these How can we distinguish bread from a stone or water from wine but by the colour the smell the taste or the like And thus do we here distinguish bread from flesh and wine from blood and do believe that to be bread which is both call'd so in Scripture and which our own eyes discern to be indeed so L. But he says faith will teach us otherwise from the Word of God T. Nay on the contrary you see Gods word calls it bread after the Consecration and therefore both our faith and our senses assure us that it is bread Nor does this in the least contradict our Saviours words when he says This is my body for so it is in a spiritual sense whilst yet the substance of bread remains unchanged and therefore most properly is it called bread which it could in no wise be if no such substance was there Yet still we say that by partaking of these holy Elements of bread and wine we do really partake of Christs body and blood though in a spiritual manner according to St. Pauls expression 1 Cor. 10. 16. Do you judge then who keeps closest to Scripture in this point they or we L. To me it seems plain that the Doctrine and language of our Church is no less agreeable to Scripture than to reason And I still discover what injury they do us whilst they charge us with holding that the Sacrament is only the figure of Christs body T. It is as I have already said a most false charge for though it be the figure of his body and expresly called so by some ancient Writers yet we own it to be much more than so For in this holy Sacrament are given to us Christs body and blood whilst the blessings and benefits of his Death and Passion are made over to and bestow'd upon the worthy receiver And so our Church expresses it in the Office at the Communion We do spiritually eat the flesh of Christ and drink his blood Christ dwelleth in us and we in him we are one with Christ and he with us L. Yet they say we make the Sacraments of the New Testament in effect no better than the old since the Passover and such like were figures of Christ whereas in the New Testament is to be given the real verity T. A most plain difference we make whatever they say to the contrary for besides that our Sacraments are few and easie clear and intelligible it is to be considered that under the Law were used types and shadows which prefigured Christ to come and that somewhat obscurely whereas the Sacraments now used do most plainly shew him to be already come and to have died for our sins and risen again according to the Scriptures Herein moreover is made to us a more plenteous communication of grace and comfort as the fruit of his Death and Resurrection according to that of the Evangelist The Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Joh. 1. 17. Yet after all we assert that the Elements made use of in these Sacraments of the New Testament are no more changed as to their natural substance than those of the Old that is they are still Sacraments outward visible signs and representations of Spiritual things and are not changed into those very things themselves which they are designed to represent and hold forth to us And this is granted by the Papists themselves as to one of the Sacraments viz. that of Baptism For the water herein made use of still remains water It is not turned into the natural blood of Christ and yet by virtue of that blood which this water represents are our sins washt away in this Laver of Regeneration Hence then it is most evident that the efficacy of a Sacrament consists not in having the natural substance of the Elements altered for then
there would be no virtue in Baptism And consequently neither doth the excellency of the Sacraments of the New Testament above those of the Old consist in any such alteration for if it did then Baptism should not be prefer'd before Circumcision or any of the washings and sprinklings used under the Law since in Baptism water still remains true water And if this be no disadvantage or dishonour to the holy Sacrament of Baptism then no more is it to the other Sacrament that the Bread and Wine used therein do still remain true Bread and Wine as to their natural substance after Consecration L. I cannot imagin any reason for the putting a difference in this case betwixt the two Sacraments And I do a little wonder they should be so careless as to use an argument which if it had any truth er force in it would plainly tend to the disparaging of the Sacrament of Baptism T. You must not expect good arguments in a bad cause but has your Author no better than these L. I find no more arguments on this subject only he makes use of a sumilitude that if a Father should leave to his Son his House and Garden by his last Will would the Son understand by this the picture of the House and Garden or the things themselves in truth In like manner he infers that our Saviour has not left us the bare figures of his Body and Blood but these very substances in the Sacrament T. Rather we may infer that in like manner did our Blessed Saviour truly give up himself for us on the Cross there shedding his blood for the remission of our sins and doth in this Holy Sacrament really confer the blessings purchased by his death upon all true believers and by this means he does most truly give himself to them according to his promise even much more to their advantage than if he had given them his natural flesh and blood in the Sacrament L. I think my Authors Simile does him little service T. Service do you say rather if you consider it well it will be found to make directly against his own opinion For suppose your Father had left you an House and Land by his Will and appointed some body after his death to put you in possession of it by giving you a key and a turf or twig when this is done do you take this key to be the very house or the turf or twig to be the land no surely but only in effect and in the sense of the Law they are so since by these the house and land are made over to you and by receiving them you are put in actual possession of them as fully and effectually as if the whole house and all the land had been put into your hands if that had been possible And thus I say by these Holy Elements doth our Blessed Saviour make over himself and all the blessings of the Covenant to his faithful people L. The resemblance is very plain and helps me still better to understand how fitly the Body and Blood of Christ may be said to be verily and indeed received by the faithful in the Lords Supper without giving the least coununance to this Doctrine of Transubstantiation T. That you may be sure of these being the very words used in our Church-Catechism and many the like expressions we find in the Office at the Communion some of which I mention'd before Yet all this while it 's well known how utterly our Church disowns this absurd opinion so contrary to sense and reason and to the express words of Scripture as I have shew'd Yet give me leave in a few words further to manifest how without admitting this opinion we may very properly affirm That Christ is verily and indeed received by the faithful in this holy Supper viz. 1 In a moral sense as servants receive their Master by taking earnest and subjects their Prince by taking the Oath of Allegiance For here we do solemnly profess our selves the disciples servants and subjects of the blessed Jesus and by taking these holy symbols of bread and wine do receive him as our Lord and Saviour to whom we promise and vow all humble obedience and through whom alone we hope for mercy and salvation 2 Here also do we receive those graces of his holy Spirit which transform us into his likeness so that Christ himself may be said to come into us to take possession of us and to dwell in us and we in him even by saith and love and by our likeness to him in all humility purity charity and those other graces which make us partakers of a Divine Nature and may well be stiled Christ in us the hope of glory all which are confirmed and increased by our worthy communicating at this holy Table So that passing by other things that might be added to this purpose you may hence see how properly the holy Elements may be called the Body and Blood of Christ of which they are the Sacrament and Symbol and which they do really convey to us as much to our advantage as if they were changed into the very natural substance of what they represent For suppose we should eat Christs natural flesh and drink his blood what are our souls the better for this if the graces of his Spirit do not accompany them But if these graces are bestow'd on us by our worthy receiving of the holy Elements of Bread and Wine what loss is it to us that these remain unchanged as to their substance L. None at all that I can imagin T. You may be sure of it since what is bodily reaches only to the body and not to the soul of man For as our Saviour tells us Mat. 15. 11. That what enters into the mouth defiles not a man of which he after gives the reason because it passeth into the belly and thence into the draught So neither can that which enters into the mouth of it self purifie and cleanse the soul of man because it 's only received into the body and so passes through it And this is that Doctrine which I have formerly told you our Blessed Saviour himself most plainly teaches Ioh. 6. 63. when he corrected the gross mistake of the dull Capernaites L. Yet how gross soever it was the Papists at this day seem to continue in it as if Christ had promised to give men his natural Flesh to eat T. And this they do contrary to our Saviours own explication of himself in vers 63. and to other places of Scripture before named and also contrary to all true Reason We will not set up our own shallow reasonings against the Holy Scripture but are ready most firmly to believe whatever we find therein plainly revealed And there we may find some things above our Reason though nothing contrary to it But now this Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation it is both contrary to plain Scripture and is also full of so many palpable absurdities and contradictions that
it were almost endless to name them Yet the more to confirm you against it if need be let me mention a few of those many As for instance according to this opinion our Saviours body would be in ten thousand places at one viz. where ever the Consecrated host as they call it is At Rome and at Paris in the East-Indies and the West and in thousands of Churches where it 's reserved And in one place Christs body would rest upon the Altar in another it might be carrying toward a sick man It would be in one Priests box and in anothers hand in this mans mouth and in that mans stomach and all this one and the same body still Yea thus it must have been ever since the first institution of this Sacrament above sixteen hundred years ago Millions of men in the several ages and places of the world would all have eaten this self same body a thousand times over and yet still it remains whole and untouched the very same that it was from the beginning neither multiplied nor divided neither encreased nor diminished Again by this Doctrine every wafer and every part of the wafer is the whole body and a thousand wafers are only that one Yea what is more prodigious if any thing can be so according to this opinion our Blessed Saviour when he was present with his Apostles alive and well did then give himself into their hands to be eaten by them So that he was in their mouths and bellies at the same time that he was sitting amongst them and yet never shewed the least sign nor felt the least effect of any such change upon him And yet after all this same Body was next day offered up and his Blood poured out on the Cross. It deserves also to be considered how the breaking of Christ's natural Body and eating and swallowing it is consistent with its being still alive as surely they will grant it is Yea how this same Body should be at God's right hand shining in honour and glory and yet at the same time be set upon the Altar or carried in a Box yea eaten by Mice or by Worms and Flies But no questions must be asked no doubts or scruples raised all must be swallowed with an implicite Faith and they think to solve all well enough with crying nothing is impossible with God which any Man may as well pretend to justifie the grossest falshoods and absurdities in the World Though truly I think none can be imagined greater than what this opinion stands justly charged with That so mighty a change should be made in the very natural substance of the Bread and yet that there is no manner of appearance of it but still here is the same colour tast smell and all other accidents or qualities of Bread after Consecration as before And notwithstanding all this we must believe that there is no substance of Bread to which these accidents belong but the substance of Flesh without any accidents at all What strange prodigious fancies are these And what a scandal is it to our Religion what a mighty hindrance to the belief of it when such an unreasonable opinion shall be proposed as an Article of Faith And be made of equal necessity to be believed with the great Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation though it has no manner of support from the Holy Scripture as I have before shewn L. I confess if a Man thought he could not be a Christian without receiving this Opinion it would be a strong temptation to Infidelity and go nigh to make him reject our whole Religion T. Doubtless it would and I fear it has often produced this effect Woe be to them by whom the offence cometh Yea further it will appear that on some other accounts this Doctrine directly tends to promote Infidelity whilst as many Learned Writers have observed it does in a great measure evacuate and overthrow the main proofs of the Truth of Christianity For one great Argument our Saviour made use of was the Miracles which he wrought The works which I do saith he bear witness of me If you believe not me believe me for the works sake Now to make this Argument of any force it must be supposed that their Senses did not deceive them but what they saw and heard was really true For if our Senses are not to be relied on in judging of their own proper Objects at a due distance how could the people tell but that all these Miracles were meer cheats and delusions But if they had sufficient assurance that they were truly wrought because they saw them with their own eyes and thereupon had sufficient ground to believe that Religion to be true which was confirmed by them then have we as good reason to believe Transubstantiation to be most false since our Senses do as fully assure us that it is so And hence we are very certain that this could be none of the Doctrines which our Saviour taught because there would have been a direct contradiction betwixt the Doctrine it self and the Argument made use of to prove it for whilst he appeals to his Miracles he supposes that Men may trust their Senses in the discerning of proper Objects whereas according to this Doctrine no trust is to be given to them Moreover we know that our Saviours Resurrection was the great confirmation of his Doctrine and did demonstrate him to be the Son of God the promised Messiah Now how should it be known that the same Jesus who was Crucified was indeed risen from the dead but by their sight of him and converse with him Thus we read what full satisfaction it pleased our Saviour to give to St. Thomas in this respect permitting him to put his Fingers into the print of the Nails and to thrust his hand into his side and by this means all his doubts were removed Now the same ground that St. Thomas had to believe that the Body which was wounded and hung dead on the Cross was after raised again the very same have we to believe that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament are not turned into the natural substance of Christ's Body and Blood even the full evidence of our Senses Whereas if St. Thomas and the rest of the Apostles at the institution of this Holy Sacrament a little before Christs Death had found their Senses to be so grosly deceived as Papists would perswade us I know not how they could well have trusted them so soon after his Resurrection as we find they did If then the Apostles had good reason to believe the Resurrection of Christ to be true so have we to rest assured that this Doctrine of Transubstantiation is most false Yea let me add if we are sure that these words This is my body are in the Gospel then so sure we may be that they cannot be taken in that gross sense which Papists put upon them for as we know them to be there because there we see them and