never offended with the Will of God have I say a Title to the Testimony God gave to Abraham Now I know that thou fearest God. Certainly it would be no mean encouragement to us it would raise up our minds to very great degrees of Joy and Triumph to have God say that to us that he did to Abraham but we are to remember that it was said to him once for all in behalf of all his Children that should tread in the steps of his Faith This was not an Honour given to Abraham only though to him principally and in the first place it was done him also for the Credit of Religion in all Ages of the World and for the comfort and Joy of all Religious and Holy Men and Women to the end of the World. Wherefore my Brethren that we may come in for some share in the Praise and Reward of Abraham's Faith let there be in none of us an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God The evil heart of unbelief is the evil heart that causeth unbelief i. e. some corrupt Inclination some unmortified Lust some carnal Interest or other Do thou therefore in the first place when thou hast an eye upon the example of Abraham conceive how much thou art obliged to take thy sin thy dearly beloved sin whatever it be and slay it that is the first Sacrifice thou canst offer to God to wit a broken and contrite heart an heart clean from worldly and sinful lusts Do this and thou wilt find nothing too dear for God thy Faith will then make thee to be entirely at the disposal of his Will and Pleasure it will justifie and support thee in so doing and the God of Abraham will be thine exceeding great reward The Seventh Sermon MATTH XV. 1 2 3. Then came to Jesus Scribes and Pharises which were of Jerusalem saying Why do thy Disciples transgress the Tradition of the Elders for they wash not their hands when they eat bread But he answered and said unto them Why do ye also transgress the Commandment of God by your Tradition THough never Man was so unreproveable in his Doctrine and Example as our Lord Jesus yet never was Man more opposed or cavilled at as the Evangelists do abundantly testifie that History of him which they have written for us being upon the matter made up of the Holy Doctrines which he delivered the good works in which he was always employed and the contradictions which he continually met with And it was very necessary that some instances of the last should be recorded for our sakes that they who profess the Truth as it is in Jesus should not think it strange if they happened to meet with such opposition as their Master did and likewise that by his Answers to the Cavils of his Adversaries they might be instructed how they should defend themselves afterwards against the like Objections One instance whereof we have in the Text I have now chosen to speak to Then came to Jesus Scribes and Pharises which were of Jerusalem c. As to which words I shall not need to say much concerning the Persons that our Saviour had to deal withal because their Character is so well known to all that diligently read the Gospels The Scribes were the Men that professed to teach the Law and expected to have all their Interpretations received as Oracles The Pharises were the most subtle and prevailing Sect amongst the Scribes for though as things were in that Age and for some time before the Scribes generally agreed in corrupting the Law and deceiving the People yet they had their Parties and Factions among themselves the Pharises in our Saviour's time being a Sect of the greatest power in the Council and of the greatest Reputation with the People and whereas it is said that they were the Scribes and Pharises or the Scribes of the Pharisaical Party which were of Jerusalem that came to Jesus the meaning is that they were such as kept their Schools in the City of Jerusalem and were therefore of the first rank amongst the Pharises And now I shall discourse to you of these two things First Of the Objection which these Men made against Jesus and his Disciples Secondly Of the Answer which our Saviour made to the Charge that was laid against them I. Of the Objection which these Men made against Jesus and his Disciples Why do thy Disciples transgress the Tradition of the Elders for they wash not their hands when they eat bread A Charge laid with as much confidence as anger and therefore they scorned to put any of his Disciples to answer it and thought fit to challenge the Master himself about it Now the first thing that is proper to be considered here is 1. The nature of the Charge which seems to be a general one illustrated by one particular instance The general Charge was that the Disciples of Jesus transgressed the Tradition of the Elders The particular instance was that they transgressed such Tradition in not washing their hands before meat As to the general Charge they had transgressed the Tradition of the Elders But what was the Tradition of the Elders The Tradition of the Elders was the Doctrine that had been delivered and the Rules that had been laid down by wise and great Men and universally received in former Ages One would think therefore that the Laws of Moses and the Rules of the Prophets and whatsoever was commanded in the Scriptures had been the Tradition of the Elders for all these things had been delivered down by an uncontroulable Tradition from hand to hand for near two thousand years But there was no such meaning under these words as they used them By the Tradition of the Elders or by the ancient Tradition of wise and great Men they meant no Doctrines or Rules for Faith or Practice that were expressed in the Writings of Moses and the Prophets but such Doctrines as not being written in the Law were delivered down by word of Mouth and by constant usage from Father to Son and so from one Age to another And thus Josephus tells us Antiq. 13.13 That the first and main Principle of the Pharises was that they denyed all those things to be written which concerned Religion The Fundamental Rule of their Sect was this that there was a double Law an Oral Law and a Written Law A Law delivered from Age to Age by word of Mouth as well as a Law delivered in such Books as had Authority from Moses and the Prophets To gain reverence to these Traditions they perswaded the People that though they were not written in the Law yet they were delivered to Moses by God himself to Joshua by Moses to the Prophets by Joshua to Esdras by the Prophets and thence to the Masters of the Schools of whom they were the Successors And they being the Guardians of these unwritten Traditions which were to be had in equal or rather superior regard to that which the Scriptures were
there is a shorter and a surer way to determine this matter and that by comparing those Doctrines and Practices with the Scriptures For the Scriptures have a more certain Tradition than any of those Histories that give an account of the Revolutions of Church Affairs since the beginning and now what matter is it if I am assured that such and such Corruptions were brought into the Church sometime or other after the Apostles because they are contrary to what the Apostles taught and left in their Writings though I cannot tell just the Year when or the Person by whom they first crept into the Church I would very fain know of any Man that when our Saviour set himself to overthrow that wicked Tradition which we were speaking of before whether he could not if he had pleased have given an exact account of the Persons that began it in the Jewish Church and of the time when it began and of every circumstance that attended its entrance into the World and its growth and encrease afterwards But did he go this way to work It is certain that the Pharises pretended the Traditions which they taught the People were delivered from God to Moses and that through several Ages they were conveyed down to them successively by word of mouth And I grant that if our Lord had with many words shewn them that they were such and such men who first brought them in this had been a confutation of their pretence but for all that he was pleased to use a better and a shorter argument against them and told them what the commandment was in the Law which their pretended Tradition made void and this was instead of a thousand arguments that their Doctrine never came from Moses but was invented some time afterwards And I beseech you let none of us be ashamed to use that kind of argument which our Saviour thought fit to confute those People withal and which we have reason to think he used that he might shew us the best way to secure our selves from being imposed upon by unwritten Traditions and by a pretence of having received such Doctrines from the Apostles as they never delivered When therefore we are asked If Transubstantiation be an Error and not an Article of Faith when did it come in If Service in an Vnknown Tongue be an Innocation when did it come in If the Sacrifice of the Mass be a Corruption when did it come in Let us account it sufficient to answer for so our Saviour thought it in the like case That Transubstantiation makes void those places of Scripture which expresly affirm that by eating of Bread we shew forth the Death of Christ and are made partakers of his Body That Service in an Vnknown Tongue makes void the Fourteenth Chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians And that the Sacrifice of the Mass makes void the Seventh and the Tenth Chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews which expresly tell us that Christ can be offered no more and that there remains no more Sacrifice for Sins and therefore we are very well assured that they did come in sometime or other since the Apostles but whether they came in sooner or later is nothing to the purpose for certainly nothing ought ever to have come in that makes void any part of the Word of God but if any such thing hath got in there is all the reason in the World that it should be thrown out again They may well be ashamed that cannot bear this sort of arguing but most certainly we have no reason to be ashamed to use it since our blessed Saviour hath used it before us for when he set himself to overthrow the credit of these Doctrines for which they pretended a constant Tradition in the Church he thought it sufficient for his purpose to shew that they voided the Commandments of God and made his word of none effect 2. If there be one Traditionary Doctrine that notoriously contradicts the written Word of God 't is enough to overthrow the whole Credit of that Tradition which pretends to bring down unwritten Doctrines that are necessary to be received For thus we find that our Saviour by the single instance of that Tradition which voided the Fifth Commandment overthrew the Objection of the Pharises against his Disciples Why do thy Disciples transgress the Tradition of the Elders i. e. their unwritten Traditions which was as much as to say that they ought all of them to be Religiously observed because they had all the same Authority Our Saviour therefore produces an instance of their Traditions that takes away all Authority inasmuch as it was a plain contradiction to the Law of God if therefore amongst their unwritten Doctrines and Rules there were any that had some kind of goodness and usefulness they were to be regarded upon their own account and not upon the Authority of Tradition But when he had utterly overthrown all that pretended Authority by an undeniable argument he then speaks to the case which themselves had propounded and lays down the truth concerning it They had a vast number of Superstitions for which they pretended Tradition and they tax our Saviour's Disciples for not observing one of them Now he with admirable wisdom first breaks the Authority of their Tradition shewing that one of them was plainly against the Law of God and then he shews how superstitious and foolish they were in the case which themselves chose to speak to In this also our Lord hath set us an example that if we are prest by a pretence to Tradition in favour of unwritten Doctrines and Articles we should in the first place shew that one or more of these is contrary to the Word of God and therefore that there is no reason to pretend Tradition for any of them since they are all said to have come down together Which being done in the first place it will be then seasonable to shew what is to be thought of the rest if they are judged of by the general Rules of Reason and Scripture 3. The Universal consent of some one or two Ages that such and such Doctrines were delivered by word of mouth many Ages before is no argument that they were so delivered The Pharises did pretend that their Doctrines and Interpretations of the Law had been conveyed down from Moses by Oral Tradition to that Age in which they lived and there were several of these Traditions universally believed in that Age to have been so conveyed and the Practice of the People was universally governed by them For instance that of Religious Washing before Meat and the washing of Cups and Pots as a thing in it self good and holy was universally received and practised as St. Mark tells us Now I would fain know whether they might not have reasoned in this fashion We in this Age received this Doctrine and Rule from our Forefathers who professed they received it from theirs and if they had not received it from theirs then
they all agreed together to cheat us as their Forefathers agreed to cheat them if they had not received it from theirs and so this Tradition must have come originally from Moses or else there was one Age that agreed to cheat the next in things concerning the Service of God and the Salvation of Mens Souls But after all the prettiness of this demonstration I think we have more reason to believe that this Superstition never came from Moses because our Saviour exposed it as a vain and foolish Doctrine than to believe that it did because the Jews ever since the Pharises time who were a Sect of full three hundred years standing were taught to pretend Tradition for the Innovations of the Pharises and for this amongst the rest And therefore it is a vain thing to pretend that because such and such Traditionary Doctrines were in such an Age taught without controul as necessary to Salvation they must needs have been taught so from the very first 4. That we have great reason to stick to the word of God delivered to us in the Holy Scriptures and to examine all Doctrines and Pretences by this Rule For the Holy Scriptures are indeed the Rule whereby we are to try that pretence that there is another Rule viz. of unwritten Tradition and if that other pretended Rule doth in any thing contradict the Scriptures most certainly it is but a pretended Rule and to be rejected To deal plainly this same Oral Tradition was never pretended for any good either by Jews or Christians nor made use of but to advance and protect some Doctrines or Practices that stand condemn'd by the Scriptures And therefore after so long experience had of the mischief as well as vanity of this pretence it were perhaps not unreasonable for any Christian to reject the Argument of unwritten Tradition without any more ado and to entertain no Doctrine or Practice necessary to Salvation which cannot be proved out of the Scriptures nor to entertain any thing at all that is contrary thereunto let Men talk of Tradition or any other Authority as long as they please And now I question not but this Discourse will be acknowledged to be very plain and convincing but for all that it is not certain that the Argument of it self will secure us from being deceived by the Sophistry of others if we do not take heed to the main thing of all and that is to lead such Lives as the Scriptures direct us to lead for there is no such temptation in the world to be fond of Traditionary Doctrines as to live in that manner that if the Traditionary Doctrines be not true we can have no hope of Salvation If we will live according to the Scriptures we shall have no temptation and I am sure we have no reason to believe otherwise than according to the Scriptures Let us often think that here we have no continuing place we must not always live here but that in a very little time we are to go into another World and to appear before our Judge Let us remember that this is the great argument by which the Scriptures engage us to live a sober righteous and godly life and let us consider that it is the strongest Argument in the World and be perswaded by it to do accordingly and this will above all things establish us in the Truth It is something hard to keep that man from being deceived who needs the comfort of false Principles For Men are very apt to be running for comfort where it is to be had though they cheat themselves for it Brethren the Holy Scriptures are God's Book and they are acknowledged to be so by all Christians in the World therefore I say it again and again stick to the Scriptures live according to the Scriptures and believe according to the Scriptures Make the Scriptures the Rule of your Practice and then you will need no more arguments to make them the Rule of your Faith And as many as walk according to this Rule Peace will be upon them The Eighth Sermon 1 COR. XI 19. For there must be Heresies also amongst you that they which are approved may be made manifest among you THE word Heresie did at first indifferently signifie any party distinguished from others by Opinions and Practices peculiar to it self whether those Opinions were true or false those Practices good or bad insomuch that Christianity it self was called a Sect or Heresie for some time But in time it came to be used in the worser sense and was restrained to those that distinguished themselves by the profession of false Doctrines or by unjustifiable Practices Which use of the word began soon after Christianity as far as I can find and there was this reason for it that Christianity having established one Form of Doctrine which was to be universally received there were now to be no Heresies or Sects that is no departure from the Unity of that Doctrine and every new Sect from that time forward must necessarily be in the wrong Thus also the word Schism or Division came in a little time to be restrained to that side or party by whose fault the breach of Christian Communion and Concord was made and although when a dissention and breach of Unity happens they that are not in the fault are at the same distance from those that are that the faulty are from the innocent yet the faulty were only said to be in Schism or Division Moreover it seems that Heresie and Schism were words at first used indifferently to signifie the same fault of discord and contention because breach of Charity and Communion was for the most part made by departing from Unity of Doctrine though in process of time Heresie was restrained to signifie an Error about the Faith and Schism a breach of Order and Christian Communion St. Paul doth in this place seem to mean the same thing by both words for in the foregoing verse says he I hear that there be Divisions or Schisms among you and I partly believe it that is I believe it of some of you And there he adds For there must be also Heresies among you that is Sects and Parties distinguished from one another by their peculiar Doctrines and Practices The matter about which there was a disagreement in the Church of Corinth was no less than that of the Administration of the Holy Communion that having happened so early which in the latter Ages of the Church has obtained in a much higher degree that the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper which was in great part instituted to unite the Faithful in one Body was perverted into an occasion of dividing them from one another Upon which observation St. Paul inserted this memorable saying There must be also Heresies among you that they which are approved may be made manifest There must be Heresies i. e. Parties that will contend for false Doctrines and unlawful Practices that will either take away from the Faith or add to
come to pass afterwards is fit for them only to believe that can believe that the World was made by a casual hit of Atoms To name these things is enough to confute them 2. All that can be farther desired is to be well assured that these Prophecies were not forged by the followers of Jesus but that they were indeed contained in the Ancient Writings that had been delivered down to the Jews of our Saviour's time by their Ancestors and the constant testimony of the Jews themselves who were most bitter enemies to Jesus and to his Doctrine were enough to satisfie us in this point 4ly And Lastly Whereas these Predictions are said to be a more sure word of Prophecy the meaning is this that they are a more convincing Testimony to Jesus than any other taken by its self they are indeed a more permanent Testimony and withal less liable to Cavil and Objection I cannot stand to shew this by making particular comparisons but shall only observe That Prophecy includes all other Testimonies and adds strength to every one of them It comprehends the Miracles of Jesus and of his Apostles his resurrection and ascension the descent of the Holy Ghost and the excellency of his Doctrine because these were all foretold It includes all other proofs as well as the thing proved and those proofs are the more convincing because they also had been foretold by the Prophets From all this it follows That allowing the Scripture that Tradition which other good Histories have and which they have more of than any other Ancient Writings in the world then the Prophecies of the Old Testament and the accomplishment of them in the New do prove the Divine Authority of the Scriptures and this without the help of the Churches Authority and well is it for the Christian Religion that the Scriptures may be proved without the Authority of the Church for otherwise Christianity must never look an Infidel in the face since the Church hath no Authority at all till we are assured of the truth of the Scriptures themselves And I will make bold to add That when all those objections against the Authority of the Old Testament from the time wherein it was put into this form of Books from the light oversights of Transcribers from various readings and all the cavils upon any part of it are put together the word of Prophecy which runs through it all will bear all this reckoning and still remain an invincible argument that the first Authors were inspired that the Prophecy came not in Old time by the will of man but that holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost Well therefore might St. Peter commend the Jewish Converts for taking heed to the Word of Prophecy since this was the way to come to a well-grounded Faith indeed and to grow every day to greater assurance and stedfastness therein and for the same reason let us I beseech you be exhorted to like diligence in conversing with the Holy Scriptures that our minds may be more enlightned with the knowledge of Divine truth and that every doubt if any there be that shakes our Faith may be removed And this Exhortation is so needful that I shall shew that there is no good reason in their objection against it who have taken a great deal of pains to exclude all but the Clergy and those that have special license from reading the Scriptures the sum of what they say is this That the promiscuous Liberty of reading the Scriptures leads the People into pride and self-conceit makes them insolent and ungovernable and ready to throw off all Respect to their lawful Guides That almost all Heresies have proceeded from Misinterpretation of Scripture and that there are so many obscure and difficult places in the Old and New Testament that to translate the Bible into Vulgar Tongues and to encourage the People to read it is to betray them into the danger of infinite errors which they are likely enough to fall into by mistaking the sence of the holy Text which therefore is to be kept out of the hands of the Laity as we would keep Children from medling with edged Tools and lay Swords out of mad-men's way Now if this charge be true the Bible is a very dangerous Book if it be not true there is some other reason doubtless why they that pretend this have no kindness for the Bible I shall omit several advantages that may be taken against this flourish because I think it may be shown very briefly that it pretends things that do by no means hang well together that it takes things for granted that are not true and that it concludes as strongly against the Scriptures being read by the Clergy as by the Laity It pretends some things that do not hang well together On the one side they tell us that the liberty of reading the Bible is apt to make the People throw off all dependance upon the Priest as to instruction on the other side that there are obscure and difficult passages in it by mistaking the true sense of which they will be led into Heresie and consequently into the way of Damnation Now indeed the Scriptures say this of themselves that there are diverse things hard to be understood in them which ignorant and unstable men have wrested to their own destruction But if this be true the best way to keep the People in modest dependance upon the instruction of their Spiritual Guides is to lay the Bible before them and not to keep it from them since there cannot be a more convincing Argument of the necessity of attending to their Pastors in order to farther Instruction than the several difficulties that occur in the Scriptures and the warnings that the Scriptures themselves have given of the danger that unlearned and unstable men are in of wresting them to their own destruction If it be said that experience shews the contrary and that neither this nor any other argument can make People modest if they are geneally permitted to have the Scriptures I add 2. That this arguing takes things for granted which are not true in point of fact all the Faithful anciently had the Scriptures but we find little complaint by the Bishops and Clergy then of the Wantonness and Insolence of the People so little in comparison of the frequent and earnest exhortations that all would diligently Read the Scriptures that it may be said to be none at all Christian People that had been trained up in the first Rudiments of the Faith were not only allowed then but required to Read the Bible and yet they modestly attended upon their Spiritual Guides for farther Instruction out of the Bible And therefore if some men in later Ages have grosly Misinterpreted the Scriptures and would not be set right by those that had more skill to Interpret them this doth not prove that the reading of the Scriptures makes the People ungovernable for then it must always have
suppose he means believing them and by a Rule by which to acquire them He must understand a Rule or means whereby to know what the Articles of the Christian Faith are and then his meaning is That those who believe the Articles of the Christian Faith must be provided of some such Rule or Means to know what they are as cannot deceive them Now whether this be in it self true or false it does not at all follow from what he had laid down before For though the Truth of Things or Propositions is so sure that as he wisely says 't is Impossible they should be false yet it does by no means follow that the Reasons upon which I believe these things must necessarily be as sure as the Truth of the Things themselves And this I make no doubt the Disputer was well aware of But because I am sensible who they are whom he designs to pervert by this Paper and for whose sake I Answer it I will explain this matter by an Instance that will bring it down to all Capacities If there was such a man as Henry the 8th It is certainly Impossible that there should be no such man but my Belief that there was such a Man is grounded upon such Reasons as do not imply an absolute Impossibility of the Contrary because it is grounded upon the Testimony of Fallible men And yet I should be very little better then a mad-man if I should entertain the least doubt that there was such a man which plainly shews that I may have sufficient Reason to believe a thing without any Evidence of the Impossibility of the contrary and this is enough to overthrow his Consequence I shall now inquire what truth there is in the Conclusion it self To which end I observe That there are two things which may be understood by those words cannot deceive them either first that the Rule it self is so plain and certain that no man who uses it can be deceived by the Rule or secondly that 't is Impossible any man should be mistaken in the Vse of it If he means the former then I shall shew him presently that we have such a Rule as he speaks of and that he hath said nothing to make us ashamed of it If he means the latter then I say it is absolutely false That those who without doubting believe the Articles of the Christian Faith must have such a Rule to know what they are as that they cannot possibly mistake in the Vse of it To make which plain to every bodies understanding I shall add another Instance easy to be Applyed If a man skilful in Arithmetick hath a great many Numbers before him and desires to know what Sum they make when they are put together he has the Rule of Addition to do it by which Rule cannot deceive him Now there are these two things to be observed farther which I think the Disputer himself will not deny first that it is in the Nature of the thing Possible that this man may be mistaken every time that he puts these several Numbers together to bring them all into one Sum but secondly that notwithstanding this Possibility of being mistaken yet after he has tryed it over and over again he may be sure without the least doubt that he has done his work right Even so we may have a Rule of Faith that cannot deceive us and though it is not Absolutely Impossible that we should be mistaken in the use of it yet we may for all that be Assured and believe without the least doubting that we have learn'd what the true Faith is by that Rule For all the World knows that it is no sufficient Reason to Doubt of any thing that the Contrary is barely Possible Pap. To a Parliamentary Protestant the Antient Fathers can't be such a Rule because they are Accounted fallible Ans We never said they were such a Rule This therefore is Impertinent Pap. Nor Counsels because they also are accounted fallible Ans This is Impertinent also for we never said they were our Rule of Faith. But we have better Reasons to give why Fathers and Councils cannot be our Rule of Faith than this that the Disputer has made for us And one is this That we cannot make them the Rule of our Faith but by so doing we must depart from the Primitive Fathers and the ancient Councils in as much as all agree That the Holy Scriptures are the Rule of Faith and they made it theirs Pap. Nor Scriptures senced by a fallible Authority because all such Interpretations may be false Ans This is the Place where I shall tell the Disputer what we beleive and why we believe it And when I have done I shall consider whether he hath said any thing in this clause to shake our Assurance We firmly believe all the Articles of the Creed into the Profession whereof we have been Baptized We moreover believe all other Doctrine that is Revealed in Holy Scriptures The Grounds of this our Faith are these That in the Holy Scriptures are Recorded those Testimonies of Divine Revelation by which the Doctrines therein contained are confirmed That these Testimonies were too notorious and Publick to be gainsaid in so much that the Doctrine built upon them could not be overthrown by the Powers of the world engaged against it That the holy Books were written by the Inspired Preachers of that Doctrine which they contain And that for this we have the Testimony of Vniversal and uncontroulable Tradition which is a thing credible of it self This is the Sum of that External Evidence upon which our Faith is grounded In assigning of which I do by no means exclude that Internal Evidence that arises from the Excellent Goodness of the Doctrines themselves which shews them to be worthy of God. Now whereas this Disputer says That these Scriptures cannot be an Infallible Rule to us because they are sensed by a fallible Authority that is because we who are fallible understand them as well as we can I answer That no man needs to be Infallible in order to the understanding of plain Scripture I who do not pretend to Infallibility am yet certain which is enough for me That I do find the Articles of the Creed in the Scriptures and many other Doctrines besides which I do understand I am sure that I know what these words of St. John signifie 1 John 2.25 And Chap. 5.3 This is the Promise that he hath promised us even eternal life And this is the love of God that we keep his Commandments and the like The Antient Fathers thought the Scriptures to be so plain that they argued out of them without pretending to an Infallible Authority of Interpretation as I will shew this Disputer when he pleases If nothing less then Infallibility will serve to understand or as he says to sense words why does this Disputer put into my hands this Paper of his which is none of the plainest neither I am sure he does
that defile a man but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man i. e. doth not by any means affect his Soul or his Conscience for in this respect he is neither better for washing nor worse for letting it alone and to think otherwise is a Superstition hurtful to your selves and dishonourable to God and of very bad consequence though it be not so impudent and notorious an abuse as the making void of God's Law by the other leud Tradition that I mentioned before It is to this purpose that we are to understand the method and design of our Saviour's Discourse in this place in answer to the Objection of the Pharises brought against the Disciples From which answer there are some things to be gathered well worth our observation 1. That it is sufficient to overthrow the Authority of a pretended Tradition that it is contrary to the Commandment of God. 2. That if there be one Traditionary Doctrine that notoriously contradicts the Law of God that one instance is sufficient to overturn the credit of that Tradition which pretends to deliver unwritten Doctrines of equal Authority with those that are written 3. That the universal consent of some one Age or more that such and such Doctrines were delivered by word of mouth many Ages before is no argument that they were so delivered 4. That we have a great reason to stick to the word of God delivered to us in the Scriptures and to examine all Doctrines and Rules which are said to be necessary to Salvation by that Rule and to reject the Authority of unwritten Traditions 1. That it is sufficient to overthrow the Authority of a pretended Tradition that it is contrary to the Commandment of God For if when Tradition is pretended for any Doctrine or Practice it be not enough to shew that the same Doctrine or Practice is inconsistent with what is plainly required in the Scriptures which are acknowledged by all to contain the word of God I say if this be not enough then our Saviour used an insufficient Argument against the pretended Tradition of not suffering the Son that was under a Vow of the contrary to relieve his Father or Mother that it made void the Commandment of God. But doubtless our Saviour was so far from using a bad Argument that he used the best and most convincing of all And truly if we did not in this case consider our Saviour's Authority yet it must be a monstrous prejudice that keeps any Man from discerning the strength of this Argument against the Authority of any unwritten Doctrine that it is contrary to what is written for nothing is more certain than that Contradictions cannot be true and yet they must be true if that Doctrine for which unwritten Tradition is pretended can be of God though it contradicts the written Tradition which is by all acknowledged to be Divine But as plain as this argument is yet it is very well for us that we find our blessed Saviour giving such Authority to it because there are Christians in the World bearing up themselves upon the Tradition of the Church that are loth to admit this Argument which we have no cause to be amazed at because it is an utter Confutation of all their pretences We charge them with having brought into the Church new Articles of Faith and new Doctrines of Worship which are not only very different from what was taught at first by Christ and his Apostles but some of them contrary thereunto as we can shew them out of the Scriptures But this way of proceeding doth by no means content them and they insist upon it that the Cause may be tryed otherwise For say they You acknowledge that our Church was once a pure Church and taught the Gospel sincerely but if as you say she departed from the pure Faith and Worship which the Apostles left it is impossible but this must have been very notorious because it could not have been done without opposition and resistance from some that must needs observe it Tell us therefore when were these new and false Doctrines introduced Who were the Men that brought them in Who were the first that made the discovery What Council condemned them after they were discovered For if none of these things can be shewn it is absurd to think that any such alteration should have been as you say Which reasoning amounts to thus much that it is impossible we can be sure that in the compass of a thousand Years there was a great alteration happened in the state of Religion unless withal we can tell how it came about and just when it came about the precise time and the punctual manner and circumstances thereof which is just as if a Man almost desperately sick of a Disease that had been for some Years growing upon him should prove to his Friend that he is as well as ever he was in his Life for says he You know I was well once and if I am now so ill as you say pray shew me the time when this Disease first happened the manner how and what Physitians were called about me which kind of arguing would certainly prove no more than that the Disease had taken his head When the Servants came and told their Lord that the tares came up with the wheat it was excusable in them to say We sowed good seed whence hath it these tares But when their Master told them An enemy hath done this if they had disputed and told him It was impossible there should be any Tares at all because he could not tell punctually that very Night when they were sown and who the Persons were that took the malicious pains to sow them then they had been very inexcusable thus to renounce their own certain knowledge for the sake of a vain Speculation Now we are very sure that the Apostles did at first sow nothing in the Church but good and true Doctrine Our Fathers that lived about fourteen hundred Years after found quite another sort of Doctrine gotten into the Church and some of them contrary to what the Apostles taught as the Scriptures manifestly shew and yet there have been a long time and still there are certain Disputers that go about to stagger others with such like questions as we have been speaking of and teach them to defie all reasoning out of the Scriptures till these questions are satisfied What Age What Year of our Lord were these Errors brought into the Church Who were they that brought them in and who first complained of them Now although a very reasonable account both may be and hath been given of the Persons the Time and the Manner and the Degrees by which such Corruptions got into the Church yet it is very unreasonable to expect that every Christian should be able to answer these Questions punctually because it requires more Labour and Reading than generally they have either leisure or ability to go through with but withal it is very needless because
Lord Jesus Christ which is so necessary a duty incumbent on all that he who makes not this profession is in no respect within the Unity of the Church this being the ground of all other reasons of Unity whatsoever and therefore the Apostle makes this to be one principal foundation of the Unity of the Church that it professes subjection to one Lord Ephes 4.5 And in the third verse of this Chapter he layes down this mark of distinction between the impulse of the Spirit of God and the impulse of an evil Spirit That whosoever is led by the former doth say that Jesus is the Lord. They are also One in professing the Common Faith that was at first delivered to the Saints which began to be Preached when the Holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles and hath ever since been contained in the Holy Scriptures and summarily expressed in the Ancient Creeds And therefore to one Lord the Apostle doth in the forementioned place add one Faith Thus we find in Rom. 6.17 That one Form of Doctrine was delivered to Christians and that they are to stand fast in one Spirit and with one mind striving together for the Faith of the Gospel Phil. 1.27 Thus St Paul charged Timothy That if any man taught otherwise and consented not to wholsome Words the words of our Lord Jesns Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to Godliness he should from such withdraw himself 1 Tim. 6.3 not looking upon them any longer as Christians or as such conversiing with them which together with many other like passages manifestly shews that he who in any point departed from the common faith of Christians that was received from the Apostles was broken off from the Unity of the Church which is One by a Common profession of certain points of Grand importance taught at first by the Holy Spirit For which reason St. Cyprian doubted not to say He cannot seem a Christian who doth not persist in the Vnity of Christ's Gospel and Faith. 3. There is an Unity of Sacraments in the Christian Church One Baptism by which we are all admitted into the same state of Duties and Priviledges undertaking the conditions of the New Covenant and gaining a right to the promises thereof and therefore the Apostle adds also One Baptism And here in the Text he expresly affirms that by one Spirit we are Baptized into one Body into one Body of People professing one Common Faith and claiming the Priviledges belonging to such a profession The like Unity is inferred from the other Sacrament since we are all made to drink into one Spirit And in the 10th Chapter of this Epistle v. 16 17. he saith The Cup of blessing which we bless is it not the Communion of the Blood 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. 4. There is also an Unity of Obedience to the same Laws and Institutions For to all Christians it equally belongeth to govern themselves effectually by the will of their Lord Jesus Christ to observe his Ordinances and Commands by the doing of which they declare themselves to be of his Flock in that they hear his voice and of his Kingdom in that they live by his Laws and that as there is one and the same obligation so there is one and the same correspondent practice one and the same Spirit of Obedience that runs through all 5. There is also an Unity of Affection or mutual Charity prescribed to the Church Thus saith our Saviour By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye love one another Thus saith the Apostle in this Chapter The Members should have the same care one for another and whether one member suffer all the members suffer with it or one member be honoured all the members rejoyce with it which kind of Unity appeared most visibly after the Church was begun on the day of Pentecost for it is observed presently that the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one Soul. Acts 4.32 6. There is also an Unity of Communion in the Service and Worship of God in joining together in the same Acts of Piety and Devotion according to the Rules of the Gospel in Prayers and in Sacraments and in glorifying God with one mouth moreover in the common defence of the same Truth and in the joint opposition of every dangerous error in propagating and promoting the same Faith of the Gospel and striving together for the interest of it 7. There is also an Unity of Discipline or Government which is to be maintained by every Member's keeping in his Place and Order in the Church the People of Christ receiving the Mysteries of Christianity from their Pastors and these confederating one with another for the maintenance of common Christianity without invading each others Liberty and Jurisdiction and accommodating as near as may be all Rites of Discipline and Worship to one another and assisting each other by Advice and Correspondence and giving no occasion to breach of Charity and Christian Communion by abusing a lawful or by claiming an undue Authority Other more particular Instances might be mentioned but I shall content my self with these believing that upon these Grounds of Unity which I have noted it will not be difficult to satisfie those scruples which have been thrown into some mens minds concerning the necessity of being of that one Church which is the Body of Christ and they are chiefly two 1. That there must be one Church which is the only Church of Christ exclusively to all the rest that are not in Communion with her 2. That where there is most Unity there of necessity must be the true Church 1. That there is but one Society or Communion which is the Body of Christ exclusively to all other Communions whatsoever For thus they argue The Apostle here and the New Testament elsewhere affirms That the disciples of Christ are one Body If therefore there be as there are several Bodies of Christians in this divided state of Christendom that are not United in Communion in Worship in Government no nor in Doctrine neither these cannot all be the Body of Christ which is but one and therefore there must be but one of them which is that Body of Christ or the true Church And from hence they proceed farther since we grant that they are a Church we do in effect grant that we are not so much as a part of the true Church our selves because we are not in Communion with them and we and they are not Members of one another as all the Members of the Church are Which kind of reasoning how likely soever it may be to confound and amuse a Man is by no means fit to unsettle a prudent nor so much as an honest Person if he will give himself leave to consider The plain Answer to
Sermon of the Necessity Dignity and Duty of Gospel-Ministers 4º His Treatise of the lawfulness of the Marriage of the Clergy 8º The Peaceable Christian A Sermon 4o. Bap. Nani's History of the Republick of Venice fol. Sterry's Freedom of the Will. Fol. Lord North's Light in the Way to Paradice 8º Molins of the Muscles With Sir Charles Scarborough's Syllabus Musculorum 8º A Collection of Letters of Gallantry 12º A new and easie Method to learn to Sing by Book 8º Erasmus's Manual for a Christian Souldier 12º A Book of Cyphers or Letters Reverst 8º Leonard's Reports in Four Parts The Second Edition Fol. Bulstrode's Reports in Three Parts The Second Edition Corrected with the addition of thousands of References 1688. Fol. The Compleat Clerk containing the best Forms of all sorts of Presidents 4º Sir Simon Deggs Parsons Counsellor with the Law of Tithes and Tithing in two Books The Fourth Edition 8º The Hind and Panther transvers'd 4º Mr. Gilbert's Answer to the Bishop of Condom with Reflections on his Pastoral Letter 4º The Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome truly represented c. By the Reverend Dr. Stillingfleet Dean of St. Paul's 4º An Answer to a Discourse entituled Papists Protesting against Protestant Popery 4º An Answer to the Amicable Accommodation of the Differences between the Representer and the Answerer 4º A Sermon Preach'd at the Funeral of Dr. Calamy These Three by the Reverend Dr. Sherlock Master of the Temple 4º A View of the whole Controversie between the Representer and the Answerer By Dr. Clagett 4º The Authority of Councils and the Rule of Faith With an Answer to the Eight Theses laid down for the Tryal of the English Reformation The First Part about Councils by Hutchinson Esq the rest by Dr. Clagett 4º An Answer to the eighth Chapter of the Representers Second Part in the first Dialogue between him and his Lay-Friend 4º The Doctrine of the Trinity and Transubstantiation compared as to Scripture Reason and Tradition In a new Dialogue between a Protestant and a Papist Two Parts by the Reverend Dr. Stillingfleet Dean of St. Paul's 4º The State of the Church of Rome when the Church of England began as it appears by two Advices given to Paul 3. and Julius 3. By Dr. Glaget 4º The School of the Eucharist Translated and Published with an excellent Preface by Dr. Clagett Price 4º 1 s. in 8º 6 d. The absolute Impossibility of Transubstantiation demonstrated By Mr. Samuel Johnson 4º A Letter to a Friend reflecting on some passages in a Letter to the D. of P. in answer to the arguing part of his first Letter to Mr. G. 4º The Reflecters Defence of his Letter to a Friend against the furious Assaults of Mr. J. S. in his Second Catholick Letter In four Dialogues 4º The Protestant Resolv'd Or a Discourse shewing the unreasonableness of his turning Roman Catholick for Salvation 4º These Three by the Reverend Mr. Clement Elis. Some Dialogues between Mr. G. and others With Reflections on a Book call'd Pax Vobis By Mr. Linford 8º Francis Brocard Secretary to Pope Clement the Eighth his Alarm to all Protestant Princes With a Discovery of Popish Plots and Conspiracies after his Conversion from Popery to the Protestant Religion 4º Books lately Printed for William Rogers A Perswasive to Frequent Communion in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Price 3 d. 8o. A Discourse against Transubstantiation 8º Price 3 d. A Sermon Preach'd at Lincolns-Inn-Chappel on the 31st of Jan. 1688 Being the Day appointed for a Publick Thanksgiving to Almighty God for having made his Highness the Prince of Orange the Glorious Instrument of the Great Deliverance of this Kingdom from Popery and Arbitrary Power 4o. A Sermon Preach'd before the Queen at White-Hall March the 8th 1689. 4º A Sermon Preach'd before the King and Queen at Hampton-Court April the 14th 1689. 4º All Five by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury The Practical Believer Or the Articles of the Apostles Creed drawn out to form a True Christian's Heart and Practice In Two Parts 8º A Vindication of some Protestant Principles of Church-Unity and Catholick-Communion from the Charge of Agreement with the Church of Rome 4o. A Preservative against Popery Being some plain Directions to unlearned Protestants how to Dispute with Romish Priests Part I. The Fifth Edition 4º The Second Part of the Preservative against Popery Shewing how contrary Popery is to the True Ends of the Christian Religion Fitted for the Instruction of unlearned Protestants Second Edition 4º A Vindication of Both Parts of the Preservative against Popery In answer to the Cavils of Lewis Sabran Jesuit 4º A Discourse concerning the Nature Unity and Communion of the Catholick Church Wherein most of the Controversies relating to the Church are briefly and plainly stated Part I. 4º A Sermon Preach'd before the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London at Guild-Hall-Chappel Novemb. 4. 1688. All six by the Reverend Dr. Sherlock Master of the Temple A Letter to the Superiours whether Bishops or Priests which Approve or License the Popish Books in England particularly to those of the Jesuits Order concerning Lewis Sabran a Jesuit By Mr. Gee 4º A Letter of Enquiry to the Reverend Fathers of the Society of Jesus Written in the Person of a dissatisfied Roman Catholick By J. Taylor Gent. 4º The History of the Persecutions of the Protestants by the French King in the Principality of Orange from the Year 1660 to the Year 1687. 4º The Art of Spelling By J. P. M. A. A Sermon Preach'd before the King and Queen at Hampton-Court May the 12th 1689. By Robert Brograve M. A. 4º A Discourse concerning the Nature of Idolatry in which a late Author's viz. the Bishop of Oxford's True and Only Notion of Idolatry is consider'd and confuted 4º An Exhortation to mutual Charity and Unity among Protestants In a Sermon Preach'd before the King and Queen at Hampton-Court May 20. 1689. A Sermon Preach'd before the Honourable House of Commons at St. Margaret's Westminster June 5. 1689. being the Fast-Day 4º These Three by the Reverend Mr. Wake Dr. Clagett's Seventeen Sermons With the Sum of a Conference between him and Father Gooden about Transubstantiation 8º
to the great danger of other mens Souls who were not well established in the Truth Secondly That the consequence of these Scandals would be very sad and pernicious that is that very many would stumble at them and be turned out of the right way For this must be implied in those words Wo to the World because of Offences For 1. It is no ordinary Misery or Calamity which is expressed in denouncing a Wo and this Wo must likewise refer to those that are turned aside by the Scandals and Temptations that others lay before them because if Offences were not taken as well as given it seems not easie to say why they should produce so much Sin and Misery as is implied in denouncing Wo upon their account Besides our Saviour did afterwards express the guilt and misery of those that should give Offence by itself But wo be to the man by whom the Offence cometh That is to every man that by his own Wickedness laith a Stumbling-block in his Brother's way and draws him into Sin. So that in the former part of this Verse that mischief is exprest which would come of Offences because they would be taken And then 2. it is also implied that the mischief would not only be in itself great but likewise of a very large extent for it is said Wo to the World because of Offences where by the World we cannot understand less than a very great part of Mankind who should be diverted by Offences either from receiving the Gospel at all or from entertaining it in the Purity and Power thereof There are therefore these two Heads which I am to speak to I. That Offences would certainly be given It must needs be that Offences come II. That they would do very great mischief in the World Wo be to the World because of Offences Which two Points being illustrated I intend to apply them in order to farther Instruction 1. That Offences would certainly be given It must needs be that Offences come By which words I do not understand that it was absolutely impossible but Offences must come for God has not necessitated any man to Sin but the meaning is this that it was in it self probable and that in the highest degree that Offences would come and moreover God certainly foresaw that they would arise if he did not interpose his Almighty Power to hinder them which he determined not to do And this is a sufficient ground of the certainty of the Prediction It must needs be that Offences come Now the true notion of Offence being this that it is an occasion given whereby men are either discouraged from the Profession of the Truth or encourag'd Practices in contrary to it I shall 1. lay before you some instances under this general Head And 2. shew why it was not to be expected but that Offences would be given The principal instances are such as these 1. Opposing the Gospel with outward Violence and making it the interest of men to renounce the Truth as they love their Fortunes and their Lives Of which our Saviour spake in the famous Parable of the Sower where he explained him that received the seed into thorny places to be one that heareth the word and with joy receiveth it yet hath he not root in himself and not being fortified with deep resolution he dureth but for a while for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word by and by he is offended Matth. 13.20 21. This was that Offence which our Saviour warned his Disciples of more than of any other He told them plainly beforehand That they should be delivered up to Councils and brought before Governours and be hated of all men for his Name 's sake But says he He that endureth to the end shall be saved and he that taketh not his Cross and followeth after me is not worthy of me Mat. 10. And this is in itself so great an Offence or Stumbling-block to put Men out of the right way that sometimes the general word is used to signifie this particular instance only Thus when our Saviour said Blessed is he whoever shall not be offended in me Mat. 11.6 The meaning is Blessed is he whom the Example of John the Baptist's Sufferings does not fright from being my Disciple And thus when Peter said Though all men should be offended because of thee yet will I never be offended Matth. 26.33 He explaim'd his own meaning afterward by saying Though I should die with thee yet will I not deny thee v. 35. But then 2. Doctrines that give liberty to Lust and that give ease to guilty Minds without reformation are a very dangerous Offence for they are framed at once to draw Men off from the Truth and reconcile them to wicked Practice and therefore they who are under the strongest inclinations to sin and need the most powerful restraints are most forward to receive them i. e. they who will be sure to make the worst use of them He that offers a Key to let Sinners into Heaven without Repentance and keeping the Commandments of God is sure to meet with sufficient Numbers that will not be over-forward to examine how he came by it And this is that which makes all Doctrines of this nature Offences that they are grateful to the corrupt Inclinations of Mankind not that they carry any appearance of Truth It had been long enough ere Men could have been perswaded that particular Confession of Sins to a Man in secret with a bare purpose not to do the like again will at any time suffice for the effect of Absolution if the belief of it were not as much for the ease of the People as for the advantage of the Priest Or that bodily Exercise mere external Works should either be Godliness or supply the want of it These things bear so hard against what we know of God by Reason and by Scripture that nothing but carnal Interest and a desire that they should be true could make way for them and provide them Entertainment And what Wonders that can do was too evident in the beginning of Christianity when the Gnostics seduced no small number of Disciples by giving liberty to fleshly Lusts and discharging them from all obligation to confess Christ when they were to take up his Cross 3. The mixing of Falshood with Truth is another great Offence tending to much Evil as it meets with persons disposed either to overmuch Credulity or too much Distrust By the former the false Doctrin or unlawful Practice is embraced because found in the company of Truth by the latter Truth it self suspected and perhaps thrown off because 't is disgraced with the company of Follies and Lyes Thus the Pharisees recommended their absurd Traditions to the People because in the same breath they taught them the Law of Moses Thus some of the Gentiles were ready to reject Christianity when they were made to believe it necessary for them also to observe the Mosaical Law if they would
reasonable so it is a safe Rule upon this account that if it be followed it will secure us from the greatest Offences as those Opinions and Practices are which are evidently contrary to God's Word 2. Let us keep close to the Ancient Creeds which our Church faithfully delivers for no Man has yet been so bold as to offer the least doubt against that nay all that we are challenged for is that we do not receive those additions to the Creed which in comparison were but of Yesterday These Ancient Forms of confessing the Faith shew what Articles of meer Belief were thought by the Primitive Church necessary to be known and held by all And because the Faith was at once delivered to the Saints no more can be necessary now than was then Now if we observe that the Profession of this Faith is sufficient to make a Christian or a Member of the Church we shall be the better guarded against all erroneous Doctrines which are propounded to us by any Party under the Notion of Necessary Truths For whilst we are sure we profess all that was thought necessary at first we shall be at ease and feel no disturbance in examining what is moreover propounded and determining to receive it if it has Authority from the Scriptures and to reject it if it has none much more if it be contrary thereunto Which Rule I hope you perceive is to take place in judging what you are to believe not in judging whatsoever is to be done for even in the Worship of God there are several things of an indifferent Nature for which there is no particular Precept in the Scripture and in which we may be and ought to be concluded by the Custom of our Church and the Will of our Superiours And he cannot miscarry greatly but is in great measure secured from the mischief of Offences who in matters of Faith will be determined by nothing less than Divine Authority and who in matters of external Order which are no way determined by the Authority of the Scriptures is still ready to be concluded by the Authority of Man. But then 3. Let us keep our selves always in the proper disposition and preparation to judge and conclude aright for our selves i. e. by Sincerity which consists chiefly in a vehement desire to understand the Truth and to do our Duty We must lay our Hands upon this that we will be honest and good and then we shall use all good Rules well to be sure we shall not be a whit the more inclined to embrace Doctrines for our Belief or Practice because they make for our worldly and carnal Interests And this goes a great way to enable men to distinguish between Truth and Error Good and Evil. Offences from without would not stumble us if we were not weakned and blinded by the Offence of a vitious disposition within our selves And therefore our Saviour having given warning against the former in the words of the Text doth in the very next words proceed to direct us how to secure our selves against them and that by preventing the latter Wherefore says he if thy right hand or foot offend thee cut them off And if thine eye offend thee pluck it out and cast it from thee That is subdue thy dearest Lusts and if there be any one that is harder to part with than the rest and is grown a part of thy self though it cost thee as much pain to divide thy self from it as it would to cut off thine hand or pull out thine eye for that very reason do thou mortifie it in the first place For when the World will be full of Offences i. e. encouragements to Sin and of deceitful Errors if thou also art an Offence to thy self for want of a sincere and honest heart and purifying thy mind from worldly and carnal Lusts thou wilt not be able to withstand the Arts and Force of outward Temptations Now the way to gain this Honest Mind is to fix our thoughts steadfastly upon the Life to come which is the means our Saviour directs to the use of in this place too And if thine eye offend thee pluck it out for it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye rather than to be cast into Hell-fire Lastly Let all our other care be begun continued and ended in earnest Prayer to God that he would enlighten the eyes of our minds and purifie our intentions and lead us in the right way and keep us in it by his Grace For the effectual fervent Prayer of a righteous man availeth much for another but much more for himself and most of all when he asketh the best things when he asketh those things that please God best a Mind purified from worldly Lusts and an Understanding enlightned with the knowledge of the Truth He that doth these things shall never fall The Fourth Sermon MATTH XXVI 41. Watch and pray that ye enter not into temptation The spirit indeed is willing but the flesh is weak IN these words are contained an Exhortation to watch and pray that we enter not into temptation and a Reason upon which the Exhortation is made The spirit indeed is willing but the flesh is weak In the Exhortation we may observe a Direction to the use of means watch and pray and then the end why we should do so That we enter not into temptation As to the means watching and praying the use of them both supposes a great concern for the event For if I am not only to be careful my self but to get all the help I can nay if I am to go to the God of Heaven and Earth for his help and to seek it constantly to be sure as the end I aim at ought not to be in it self trivial so neither ought I to be trivially affected with it A great concern for the end is supposed in the use of such means as Watchfulness and Prayer But more particularly as to watching That signifies such a care of our selves as supposes danger and that was the case of the Disciples to whom the Exhortation was immediately given Our Saviour was now preparing them for his approaching Passion he would therefore have them consider before-hand what a terrible Temptation it would be to see their own Master forsaken and contemned and almost every body ashamed or afraid to own him he would have them reflect upon their own Infirmities and examine their own Hearts and to consider whether they were likely to hold out against such a Temptation as was coming upon them He would have them furnish their minds with all the Powers of Faith with all the Reasons of Constancy which they might infer from the Holy Doctrine he had taught them they were now to consider the value of their Souls the vanity of the World the promise of Everlasting Life and what-ever they had learnt from Jesus which was proper to confirm them in that good mind they were in at present he would have them to
to be held in claimed also an absolute Obedience from the People insomuch that it was a saying amongst them If the Scribes say that the right hand is the left or the left hand the right you are to believe them Now the Charge of the Pharises upon our Saviour's Disciples was not that they had transgressed any Tradition that appeared to have a Divine Original by the Books of Moses and the Prophets but that they had transgressed the Tradition of the Elders as they used to call them such Traditions for which they had no other pretence than that they were conveyed down by word of mouth from Father to Son amongst the wise Men and the Masters and the Scribes The particular instance to explain the general Charge was this that the Disciples did not wash their hands before they eat bread For one of those many Traditionary Doctrines for which they were so zealous was this that if a Stranger or an uncircumcised Person should but touch a Jew the Jew was forthwith defiled or if he had but touched any thing that a Jew afterward touched he was unclean and if the Jew should in that state take any Meat to eat that Meat was rendred unclean and would defile his mind for the preventing of which danger it was a part of Religion to wash before eating and thus for an idle fancy they invented an idle relief and placed so much Religion in it that says one of them He that eats bread with unwashen hands sins as much as if he had lain with a Whore And says another It is the highest point of holiness for a man to separate himself from the vulgar and that he doth not touch them nor so much as eat or drink with them and the next to this is to wash away the impurity that is contracted thereby You may see a more particular account of this senceless Superstition of theirs in Mark 7. The Pharises and all the Jews except they wash their hands oft eat not holding the Tradition of the Elders And when they come from the market except they wash they eat not And many other things there be which they have received to hold as the washing of cups and pots brazen vessels and of tables that is they did not only wash their own hands least they should have touched some stranger or one less pure than themselves but least some stranger should have touched the Cup in which they drank or the Dish in which their Meat was or the Tables upon which the Cups were to stand these were washed with all care not for cleanliness for that would not serve the turn but for holiness-sake as if their Minds were made pure by washing their Hands and Cups and all things of this sort This was one kind of their Traditionary Doctrines for transgressing of which the Disciples of Jesus were accused by the Pharises II. We may observe these two things implyed in the Charge 1. The concern which the Scribes had for their Traditions And 2. The reverence in which the People held them 1. The concern of the Scribes and Pharises to have them observed It was so great that a Man might with less danger from them break a plain Law of God than transgress one of their Traditions and they would sooner call him to an account for this latter than for the former if they could have charged our Lord's Disciples with breaking the Fifth Commandment as Jesus charged them with it presently after of this they would have said nothing But they were not able to bear the neglect of the Disciples to wash before eating for Conscience-sake And when he had given the Multitude a plain account of this neglect neither could they bear that but were offended at him v. 12. Hence in their Talmud a Book that pretends to have gathered up their Oral Traditions it is said That there is more in the words of the Scribes than in the words of the Law And we are not to think that the written Law is the Foundation but the unwritten and the words of the Elders are of more Authority and weight than the words of the Prophets So blind was their Zeal for their Traditions that one of the Rabbies being once cast into Prison and Water being given him to wash and to drink and the greater part of it being spilt he rather chose to wash his hands than to drink saying 'T is better to die than to transgress the Tradition of the Elders And no wonder that they were thus concerned when it was by these Doctrines that they kept up an absolute Authority over the People for if the People would be made to believe that the unwritten Law was of greater consequence than the written and that the Scribes were the Guardians and Oracles of the unwritten Law nothing could be better contrived to keep them in an absolute dependance upon the Scribes 2. The Charge doth likewise imply an universal regard of these Traditions in the People Why do thy disciples transgress the traditions i. e. Why do they only do it And we heard from St. Mark that the Pharises and all the Jews except they wash their hands oft eat not Whatever became of the Commandments of God here was very good care taken that the Traditions of the Church should be kept Nay it was so fixed in the minds of our Lord's Disciples themselves that they were to be kept that it was not easie to set them right in these things presently for after our Saviour had told them Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man but that which cometh out of the mouth v. 11. Peter asked him v. 15. to declare the meaning of the Parable or as he thought it hard saying And Jesus said v. 16. Are ye also yet without understanding And so he goes on shewing that he spake of cleanness of mind which was defiled by evil thoughts murders adulteries c. They had not yet got rid of those Superstitious Fancies that reigned amongst the People and were so prejudiced by them that they could hardly understand the plain truth on the other side Nay when after this he had occasion to say to them as you find in the next Chapter ver 6. Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharises and of the Sadduces How do we think they understood this saying And they reasoned among themselves saying it is because we have taken no bread Which shewed they were not yet cured of this Pharisaical Superstition inasmuch as they understood our Saviour as if he had forbidden them to eat any bread which the Pharises had touched as the Pharises would eat nothing that had been touched by a Gentile when all that our Saviour meant was that they should beware of their Doctrine And no wonder that these Traditionary Inventions had taken such root in the minds of men when they did not serve more for the Authority of the Guides than for the ease and liberty of the People that followed them
For though it was something a nice and elaborate business to observe all the Traditions yet this was much more grateful not only to fancy but to flesh and blood than to observe the Rules of true Piety by keeping the Commandments of God For instance though it was something troublesome to be washing at every turn yet if this would keep a man's mind clean it was a much easier care than to keep the heart pure v. 19. from evil thoughts murders adulteries fornications thefts false-witnessings and evil speakings which according to our Saviour's Doctrine were the things that defile the man v. 20. How was it possible but that People should be fond of believing such a conclusion as this whosoever lives in the Land of Israel and eateth his Meat in cleanness and speaks in the Holy Tongue and Morning and Evening says over his Phylacteries let him never doubt but he shall obtain Life in the World to come This was the Doctrine of the Masters and certainly they must be very unreasonable People that could not be content to go to Heaven upon such terms as these if they could be made such Fools as to believe it And truly Men are very apt to hearken to such Follies because they save them the labour of being truly good No wonder therefore that the Scribes were so universally believed and obeyed by the People inasmuch as they undertook to carry them all to Heaven infallibly by such slight and cheap performances as were required by their Tradition And in such a case as this it would cost more than ordinary pains to undeceive them our Saviour himself being constrained to repeat his Instructions over and over again to his Disciples to get these Fancies out of their heads And thus much concerning the nature of that Charge which the Pharises laid against our Lord's Disciples and concerning that which is implyed in it the zeal of the Priests and the Scribes for their Traditions and the fondness of the People that were addicted to them I proceed now to the 2. Point And that is the Answer which our Saviour made to this Charge viz. Why do ye also transgress the Commandment of God by your Tradition Which doth of itself appear to be a plain and wise way of answering their bold Question because it turned the difficulty upon them and that a thousand times a greater difficulty to say if they could by what Authority they advanced their Traditions against the Law of God and since they thought it was so heinous a fault in the Disciples not to observe their Traditions to purge themselves if they were able of a notorious fault in keeping their Traditions and teaching them to others inasmuch as their Traditions could not be kept without transgressing the commandment of God. Which general Charge our Saviour makes good also by one particular inference so plain that there was no fencing against it For God says he commanded saying Honour thy Father and thy Mother and he that curseth Father or Mother let him die the death But ye say whosoever shall say to his Father or his Mother it is a gift by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me and honour not his Father and his Mother he shall be free thus have you made the Commandment of God of none effect by your Tradition The Tradition was this that if a man had vowed never to relieve or to give any thing to such or such a Person though it were his Father or his Mother he was held by his Vow and if afterwards he should change his mind and be willing to relieve his Parents and in order thereunto go to the Priests to be dispensed with and absolved of his Vow the Priests should challenge all that he now designed to relieve his Parents withal but of his Vow he could not be released and the Money was put into the Treasury of the Temple so that if his Father or Mother came afterwards to him and asked an Alms of him he might say It is Corban or devoted to the Service of the Temple whatsoever I can have a mind to give thee and in St. Mark our Saviour concludes And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his Father or his Mother For they held him to his Vow and whatever Money he could be willing to give them afterwards being under the Religion of a Vow it became Sacred and was to go to the Temple In which most wicked Tradition they had their Ends for the Wealth of the Treasury being partly employed in the Reparation of the Temple partly for the Relief of the Poor partly for the enriching of the Priests and Levites the Pharises who were no small part of the Priests had their share in all that was brought into the Treasury By this Traditionary Doctrine and Practice they had eluded a Law of God not of lesser moment but of great moment that the transgression of it was capital and such a Law too as the light of Nature shews no less than the written word of God and therefore well might our Saviour Conclude Thus have ye made the Commandment of God of none effect by your Tradition But if it be now asked why our Saviour did not keep to that instance which the Pharises produced and answer to that but rather chose another instance The account of this I think very easie viz. That he saw it was necessary to run them down by one of the most undeniable instances that could be imagined of their contradicting the Law of God by their Traditions for the boldness of the Pharises and Priests was so excessive and the fondness of the People about these Traditions was so hard to be broken that it was necessary to make way for their conviction by such an argument as must needs make some impression upon them And when he had made an end of that he did not forget to speak directly to the point they had begun withal for ver 10. we find that he called the multitude and said unto them Hear and understand not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a Man but that which cometh out of the Mouth defileth a Man that is do not suffer your selves to be deluded by these confident Men who use their Authority to that degree as to carry you under a pretence of keeping their Traditions to the transgression of the plainest Commandments of God as I have evidently shewn in the case of the Fifth Commandment and now be willing to be instructed in that other point of pretended Tradition which they blame my Disciples for not observing and know that no Food whatsoever is unclean or unlawful in its own nature to be used nor can any Man's touch make it so nor can any of these things defile a Man's Conscience but a Man's Conscience is defiled by that which comes from his heart by evil thoughts by evil words and by actions contrary to the Command of God such as murders and adulteries c. These are the things
be disproved now he is dead And if the great Esteem I had for that Excellent Person and most useful Instrument of God's Service in our late dangerous and critical Times does not render me a very incompetent judg of whatever comes from his hand the Reader will find even in these short Notes enough to reward his Pains and to keep him from thinking the time lost that he shall please to spend in the perusal of them W. W. A Private Conference BETWEEN Dr. Clagett and Father Gooden ABOUT Transubstantiation c. FAther Gooden Proposed the Rule of Faith to be the Subject of the Conference but upon the Request of the Lady for whose sake they met the Question of Transubstantiation was taken And the Father desiring that the Doctor would be the Opponent the Question was Stated on both Sides Dr. That the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is salse Doctrine and That the Natural Body of Christ is not in the Sacrament but in Heaven Fa. That after the Words of Consecration the true Body and Blood of Christ are in the Holy Eucharist and that the manner is well exprest by Transubstantiation Dr. This is not all the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in the Church of Rome The Doctrine of the Church of Rome is this That the Substance of the Bread is chang'd into the Substance of Christ's Body and the Substance of the Wine is chang'd into the Substance of Christ's Blood which Change the Church of Rome does conveniently call Transubstantiation Now against this I thus argue If the Substance of Bread remains in the Eucharist then it is not chang'd into the Substance of Christ's Body But the Substance of Bread remains in the Eucharist Therefore the Substance of Bread is not changed into the Substance of Christ's Body Fath. I deny the Minor viz that the substance of Bread does remain Dr. If Bread remains the substance of bread remains But Bread remains Therefore the substance of bread remains Fath. If the Nature of Bread remains Bread remains but if only the Name of Bread and Species remain then Bread does not remain Dr. That Bread which is properly Natural Bread remains in the Eucharist is proved from 1 Cor. 11.26 As often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew forth the Lord's death till he come 1 Cor. 10.16 The Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ Now from hence we argue thus If that which is here said to be Broken and to be the Communion of the Body of Christ be properly natural Bread then that which is properly natural Bread remains in the Eucharist Fath. I grant the Major Dr. But that which is here said to be broken and to be the Communion of the Body of Christ is properly natural Bread Ergo Properly natural Bread remains in the Eucharist Fath. I deny the Minor. Dr. The Bread of which Saint Paul speaks is Bread that may be broken and therefore it is truly and properly natural Bread. Fath. I distinguish the Antecedent as to the Accidents and Appearance of Bread it may be broken as to the Nature of Bread it cannot because it is not there Dr. This is to beg the Question for the Question is whether Bread be there or not and the Argument to prove that it is there is Because Saint Paul speaks of Bread that might be and was broken but it is no sufficient Answer to this to say that the Accidents of Bread may be broken because the Bread is not there it self which is the thing that was disproved Fath. The Question to be proved was that the Nature of Bread was there therefore it is not a begging of the Question according to the Distinction given to say that the Nature of Bread is not there and consequently could not be broken For the Bread there spoken of is not meant of Natural Bread but of Bread which came down from Heaven and which is the flesh of Christ John. 6.41 I am the bread which came down from Heaven John 6.48 I am the bread of Life Ver. 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 58. From whence I infer my Answer to be good that though the H. Eucharist be called Bread and broken as to the Species of Bread yet it is not natural Bread but only in appearance of which St. Paul spoke for the same St. Paul 1 Cor. 11. speaking of the same bread saith He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh Damnation to himself not discerning the body of our Lord. Christ also speaking of the same bread saith Take eat this is my Body Matt. 26.26 Also Luk. 22.19 speaking of the same Eucharist This is my Body which is given for you Dr. The Answerer forgetting the Part of a Disputant has pretended to prove largely by the sixth Chap. of St. John and other places of Scripture That St. Paul in the aforementioned places did not speak of Bread properly so called although he spoke of Bread that was to be broken All which places when it is my turn to Answer I will consider particularly But if that which is here said is to go for an Answer the force of it lies in this That by the Bread which St. Paul spoke of we are to understand the Bread which St. John spoke of namely the bread which came down from Heaven by which the Answerer understands the Natural and proper flesh of Christ But that the Bread which St. Paul speaks of cannot be the natural flesh of Christ I prove thus The Bread which St. Paul speaks of was broken But the Natural Body of Christ cannot be broken Ergo. The Bread which St. Paul speaks of cannot be the Natural body of Christ Fath. As to the Species and Appearance of Bread it was broken I grant it as to any Nature contained under those Species of Bread I deny it Dr. This Distinction does not avoid the Argument because if the Bread in St. Paul and the Bread in St. John are really and properly the same and the Bread in St. John be really and properly the flesh of Christ then what is affirmed of the one must be true of the other and therefore if the Bread be broken in St. Paul then the Natural body of Christ must be broken too which cannot be I add further That if by breaking of Bread St. Paul means breaking the Accidents of Bread onely and if the Bread that is broken be really that which is spoken of in St. John as aforesaid it follows also that the Accidents of Bread are properly the body of Christ Fath. That which St. Paul calls Bread had in it both the Accidents of Bread and the substance of Christs body As to the Accidents of Bread it might be broken as to the substance of Christ's body which is mentioned in St. John it is not broken unless you mean as Christ's Body was broken upon the Cross And if the bread which is broken be really that which is spoken of in St. John as aforesaid