Bondage But is this all that these words Thou shalt have no other Gods before me signifies The Worship of God indeed is supposed in them but the express words of the Law are not for the Worship of the Lord Jehovah but against the Worship of any other Gods before him or besides him But according to our new Expositor this is no part of the Law though according to the express words it is the principal if not the whole meaning of it If this Argument be good viz. That Idolatry is nothing else but the Worship of other Beings besides the Lord Jehovah as Supreme Gods then other Gods in this Commandment must signifie other Supreme Gods and then the Commandment runs thus Thou shalt have no other supreme Gods before me Now this is a very absurd sence because it supposes that men may Believe and Worship more Supreme Gods than one for if there can be but one Supreme God and by Gods in the Commandment be meant Supreme Gods then it is absurd to forbid any man to have other Supreme Gods because no man can acknowledge two Supremes It should have been Thou shalt not have any other God besides me not Gods For though it had been possible for them to have acknowledged some other God to be Supreme and rejected the Lord Jehovah from being Supreme yet they could not have other Supreme Gods. But it is evident that God here forbids the Worship of a Plurality of Gods of other Gods and therefore they could not all be Supreme Gods. But suppose it had been any other God in the single number yet to understand this of a Supream God is very absurd because there is no other supream God but the Lord Jehovah and those who worship but one Supream God worship him and none else For a supream God is not to be pointed at is not to be distinguished by his Person or Features as one man is distinguished from another indeed a Prince may properly say to his Subjects You shall own none but me for your King because they know his Person and can distinguish him from all other men But the Jews never saw God nor any likeness or similitude of him they were not acquainted with his Person nor could they distinguish him from other Gods by any personal Characters they knew him only by his Notion and Character of the Supream Being who made the World and all things in it and brought them by a mighty hand out of the Land of AEgypt Now does it not found very strange that the Supream God who is known only by this Character that he is Supream the great Creator and Soveraign Lord of the World should make a Law that we should worship no other Supream God but himself when it is absolutely impossible that he who worships a Supream and Soveraign God should worship any other God but himself because he alone is the Supream God and therefore those who worship the Supream God under this Notion as Supream worship him and no other Being So that if we will make sense of it the meaning of the first Commandment is plainly this Thou shalt not give Divine Honours to any other Beings as to inferiour Gods as the Idolatrous Practice of the World now is which worships a great many things for Gods but thou shalt worship only one Supream and Soveraign Being the maker and Soveraign Lord of the World which is I my self the Lord Jehovah who brought thee out of the Land of AEgypt out of the House of Bondage When the Supream God commands us to worship himself the meaning must be that we pay our Worship and Adorations to a Supream Being considered as Supream and he who worships such a Supream Being worships the true God whom we can distinguish from false Gods only by this Character that he is Supream And when this Supream Being forbids us to worship any other Gods it must signifie that we must worship nothing which is not Supream not that we must not believe that which is not Supream to be the Supream God which would be ridiculous Nonsence to command them not to own that Being for the Supream God which they know not to be Supream But it may be said that the Heathens did worship some Beings who were not the Supream God as Supream as this Author tells us they did the Sun though no body told him so that I know of for Macrobius whom he cites in this Cause does not say that they worshipped the Sun as Supream God though he says that most of the Gods they worshipped did signifie the Sun But suppose the Sun were the chief Object of their Worship and look'd on as the greatest and most principal God this does not prove that they worshipped it as the Supream God for these are two very different things to be worshipped as the chief God which such a People have and to be worshipped under the Notion of Absolutely Supream Some Pagan Idolaters might worship a Creature as their chief and greatest Deity and might call it their great their greatest God because it is the greatest God they have their King and Prince of Gods as Mr. Selden tells us they called the Sun as being the chief Planet who directed and governed the Influences of the rest not as the Maker of the World as this Author asserts But those who direct their Worship to a Supream and Soveraign Being considered as absolutely Supream infinite in all Perfections the Maker and Governour of the whole World can under this Notion worship no other but the Lord Jehovah because there is no other Supream God but he Which shews that the first Commandment is so far from forbidding the Worship of other Supream Gods besides the Lord Jehovah that to make sense of it these other Gods must be expounded not of Supream but inferiour Deities and it is so far from being the Notion of Idolatry to worship other Supream Beings besides the Lord Jehovah that it is Nonsence to suppose it The true Notion of Idolatry in the first Commandment is to worship some Inferiour Beings together with the Supream God It is a grosser sort of Idolatry when men wholly neglect the Worship of the Supream God and worship some Creature for their greatest and chiefest God and it is worse still when men worship bad Spirits than when they worship good Spirits together with the Supream God but it is evident this Law condemns the Worship of any Inferiour Beings though we do also worship the Supream God. I shall give but one Instance more of this nature and that is the second Commandment which in such express words forbids the Worship of all Images of what kind or nature soever Now whatever Reasons men may imagine there are for the Worship of Images they can be of no force against an express Law And if these words be not express Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image c. I despair of ever seeing an express Law For had God intended
by this Law to forbid the Worship of any Images under what notion or respects soever I would desire to know what more significant and comprehensive words could have been used to have declared his mind unless he had expresly rejected those false Interpretations which the Patrons of image-Image-Worship have since invented but were never thought on at that time The same Author whom I have so often mentioned having expounded the first Commandment only to a positive sence not to forbid the Worship of other Gods but only to command the Worship of the Lord Jehovah expresly contrary to the very letter and plain sense of the Law agreeably to this he makes the second Commandment only to forbid the Worship of Idols or false Gods and not that neither unless they take them for the Supreme Deity His words are these In the next place he forbids them the Worship of all Idols i.e. as himself describes them the likeness or similitude of any thing that is in Heaven above or in the Earth beneath or in the Water under the Earth A plain and indeed a logical definition this that Idolatry is giving the Worship of the Supream God to any created corporeal or visible Deity or any thing that can be represented by an Image which nothing but corporeal Beings can and to suppose such a Being the Supream Deity is the only true and proper Idolatry Now let any man judge whether this be not such a gloss as utterly destroys the Text. As for his Worship of Idols there is no such word in the Law but Images Likenesses Similitudes but yet I will not dispute about this for an Idol does not only signifie a false God but the Images either of false Gods or false and corporeal Images of the true God. For the Idols of the Heathens as the Psalmist tells us are silver and gold the work of mens hands which can relate to nothing but Images and Pictures for corporeal Deities which were made by God are not the work of mens hands Now Idolatry he says is giving the Worship of the Supream God to any created corporeal or visible Deity or any thing which can be represented by an Image which nothing but corporeal Beings can Now how plain and logical soever this definition of Idolatry be there is not a word of it in the Text. That forbids not the Worship of any created corporeal or visible Deity which is forbid in the first Commandment but only the Worship of Images the likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth or in the Water under the Earth Now an Image differs from the thing whose Image it is And it is a very strange Exposition of the second Commandment which forbids nothing else but the Worship of Images to take no notice of the Worship of Images as forbid in it According to this gloss upon the Law a man may worship ten thousand Images and Pictures so he do not worship any visible and corporeal Deity and not break this Commandment which I think is not to give the sense of the Law but to expound it away But how does the Worship of corporeal and visible Deities and nothing else appear to be forbid by this Law which mentions nothing at all but the likeness of things in Heaven and Earth and Water Why our learned Author imagines that no Images can be made but only for corporeal and visible Deities because nothing but corporeal Beings can be represented by an Image which Conceit is worth its weight in Gold for it evidently proves that there are no Pictures of God the Father nor of the Trinity in the Church of Rome because they are not corporeal Deities and therefore cannot be represented by an Image so miserably have all Travellers been mistaken who tell us of a great many such Pictures and not very decent ones neither There can indeed be no Picture or Image to represent the likeness and similitude of an incorporeal God but yet the visible parts of Heaven and Earth and the visible Creatures in them may be represented by Images and the Images of such visible things may be made the symbolical representations of invisible and incorporeal Deities and such invisible and incorporeal Deities may be worshipped in the likeness and similitude of corporeal things and then I am sure to forbid the Worship of Images may signifie something more than meerly to forbid the Worship of some visible and corporeal Deities for it may signifie the Worship of invisible and incorporeal Deities by visible Images But I perceive he imagined that when God forbad them to make and worship the likeness of any thing in Heaven in Earth or in the Waters under the Earth he only forbad the Worship of those Beings whose likeness or Images they made whereas all men know that those very Idolaters who worshipped these glorious parts of the Creation did not represent them in their proper likenesses and figures and that those who worshipped invisible and incorporeal Beings did it by material and visible figures which plainly proves that when God forbad the Worship of Images he had not respect meerly to visible and corporeal Deities but forbad Image-worship whether they were the Images of visible and corporeal or of invisible and incorporeal Deities Our Author durst not say as the Roman Advocates do that God in the second Commandment only forbids the Worship of Images as Gods which is such glorious Nonsence that he could not digest it and therefore he supposes that God does not forbid the Worship of Images at all but only of such corporeal Deities as may be represented by Images which is a more gentile way of discarding the second Commandment than to leave it out of their Books of Devotions But if he will stand to this he condemns the Popish Worship of dead Men and Women for they are corporeal Deities nay of Christ himself considered as a man who might be represented by an Image or Picture And thus I doubt he has done the Church of Rome no kindness at all for this is a Demonstration against the Worship of Saints and the Virgin Mary because they are created corporeal and visible Beings who may be represented by Images and he has thought of an Argument against Images which neither the Scripture nor the Church of Rome know any thing of The Church of Rome thinks it a good Argument for the Images of Christ and the Saints and the Virgin Mary that they are representable by Images and Pictures and therefore there can be no hurt in such Images And the Scripture perpetually urges that Argument against Images that the Deity cannot be represented by an Image but neither of these Arguments are good if our Author's Notion be good For then to worship such corporeal Beings as may be represented by Images is to worship corporeal Gods which is Idolatry And there is no danger in the Images of an incorporeal Deity which cannot represent the God for which they are made for whatever the
Imprimatur Liber cui Titulus A Preservative against Popery c. Febr. 2 1687. Guil. Needham R. R. in Christo P. ac D.D. Wilhelmo Archiepisc. Cant. Ã Sacr. Domest A Preservative AGAINST POPERY Being some Plain DIRECTIONS TO Vnlearned PROTESTANTS How to Dispute with Romish Priests THE FIRST PART By WILL. SHERLOCK D.D. Master of the Temple LONDON Printed for William Rogers at the Sun over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleet-street M DC LXXXVIII A PRESERVATIVE AGAINST POPERY The Introduction WHile so many Learned Pens are employed to such excellent purpose in answering the Writings and confuting the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome I cannot but think it a very useful Work to give some plain Directions to those who are Vnlearned who have neither Time to Read nor Money to Buy nor Abilities to Vnderstand more Learned Controversies Our Divines indeed have taken great care to write short Tracts with great Plainness and Perspicuity and with as little unnecessary shew of Learning as may be to fit them the better for Vnlearned Readers and they have had by the blessing of God wonderful Success Popery was never so generally understood as it is at this day the meanest Tradesmen can now dispute against Popery with sufficient Skill and Judgment and need not be beholding to the prejudices of Education to secure them and therefore my business shall not be at present downright to state any one Controversie between us and the Church of Rome but to direct our people how to secure themselves against the Attaques of our Roman Adversaries to check their conferring and disputing humour or to baffle them I shall reduce all into as plain a Method and as short a compass as I can and show First How to stop them at the beginning of their Dispute Secondly Give some Rules about the Topicks from which they dispute such as Reason Scripture and the Authority of the Ancient Fathers and Writers of the Church Thirdly How to answer some of their most popular pretences such as the Vncertainty of the Protestant Religion the Misrepresentations of Popery c. Fourthly To give some short Directions as to particular Controversies CHAP. I. How Protestants may prevent Disputing with Papists NOw I do not by this mean that they should always avoid their company and run away from them where-ever they meet them which is very ill Manners though it is not adviseable neither to court such acquaintance or to make them our Intimates when neither the obligations of Nature nor other Civil or Political Reasons make it necessary for Conversation many times prevails more than Arguments can do and will as soon corrupt Mens Faith as Manners Nor do I mean that Protestants should obstinately refuse to discourse with Papists when they meet them to hear what they have to say for themselves and to give a Reason for their own Faith this is not agreeable to Protestant Principles to prove all things and to hold fast that which is good and yet this ought to be done with great prudence and caution too for there are a sort of perverse Disputers who are to be avoided according to the Apostolick Precept if any man teach otherwise and consent not to wholsome words even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to godliness he is proud knowing nothing but doting about questions and strife of words whereof cometh envy strife railings evil surmizing perverse disputing of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth supposing that gain is godliness from such withdraw thy self 1 Tim. 6. 3 4 5. Men of weak judgments and who are not skilled in the Laws of Disputation may easily be imposed on by cunning Sophisters and such as lie in wait to deceive The Church of Rome is very sensible of this and therefore will not suffer her people to dispute their Religion or to read Heretical Books nay not so much as to look into the Bible itself but though we allow all this to our people as that which God not only allows but requires and which all considering men will allow themselves whoever forbids it yet we do not allow them to be perpetual Seekers to be always doubtful of their Religion to be like children tossed too and fro with every wind of Doctrine And therefore the liberty of Judging and Inquiring which we allow is only that they may understand the true Reasons of their Faith and be well grounded in it which Men may be who are not able to answer every cavilling objection but it is an abuse of this liberty when men have itching ears and hearken after all Novelties of Opinions and grow wanton and Seeptical Disputers and therefore it is very consistent with that liberty which Protestants allow to advise Christians to be very careful how they hearken to such as Preach any new Doctrine which they have not been taught that the weak in Faith and knowledge should not venture upon doubtful Disputations that they should not be hasty to question what they have believed nor to give heed to new Doctrines that they should not rely on their own understanding in these matters but when they meet with any difficulties should consult their Spiritual Guides not to be finally determined by their Authority as the Church of Rome requires but to hear their Reasons and what Answers they can give to such difficulties as they themselves cannot answer with such cautions as these we dare venture our people to hear and read and enquire as much as they please and have not found yet that our Roman Adversaries have been able to make any great impression upon such honest and prudent Inquirers But that which I intend at present is of another nature to teach our people a way to make these men sick of Disputing themselves to make them leave off those Impertinent and noisy squabbles with which they disturb all company they come into and this is no such mighty secret neither as may be expected but is very plain and obvious at the first proposal For when you are assaulted by such troublesome Disputers only ask them whether they will allow you to judge for yourselves in matters of Religion if they will not why do they trouble you with Disputing for the end of Disputing is to convince and you cannot be convinced unless you may judge too would they Dispute with a stone that can neither hear nor understand or would they make a Speech to convince a Horse that he is out of his way and must take another Road if he would return home and do they not talk to as little purpose and spend their breath as vain upon a man who can hear indeed and understand somewhat but must not follow his own understanding if they say that you must judge for your selves ask them whether this be the Doctrine of their Church that private men may judge for themselves whether this do not resolve our Faith into a private Spirit which they
Image So that if a peculiar and appropriate place of worship be contrary to the notion of an infinite Spirit the worship of Images is much more so for besides that they are gross and corporeal representations of a Spirit they are Divine Presences too and appropriate places of worship Secondly As God must be worshipped under the notion of a Spirit so under the character of a Father as our Saviour expresly tells us The hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and truth for the Father seeketh such to worship him and therefore he taught his Disciples to pray Our Father which art in heaven Under the Law God was worshipped as a King and that not so much as the King of the whole world but as in a peculiar manner the King of Israel The Lord reigneth let the people tremble he sitteth between the Cherubims in his Temple at Jerusalem let the earth be moved The Lord is great in Zion and he is high above all people But under the Gospel the peculiar character of God is a Father and that not only as he is the maker of all men and so the Father of all but as he is the Father of Christ and in him the Father of all Christians Now this makes a vast difference in our worship from what is daily practised in the Church of Rome For 1. When we pray to God as our Father we must pray to him as dwelling in Heaven as our Saviour teaches us to say Our Father which art in Heaven For as a Father Heaven is his House and Habitation in my Fathers House are many mansions that is in in Heaven which is his House as a Father as the Temple at Jerusalem was his Palace considered as the King of Israel and this is one reason our Saviour intimates why the presence of God shall no longer be confined to any particular place or Temple because he shall be worshipped as the universal Father not as the King of Jury Now when he is to be worshipped as a Father from all parts of the world he must have such a Throne and presence to which all the World may equally resort and that can be no other then his Throne in Heaven whither we may send up our Prayers from all Corners of the Earth but had he confined his Presence to any place on Earth as he did to the Temple of Jerusalem the rest of the World must have been without God's peculiar Presence could have had no Temple nor place of Worship but at such a distance that they could never have come at it for though God fills all places it is a great absurdity to talk of more Symbolical Presences of God than one for a Symbolical Presence confines the unlimited Presence of God to a certain place in order to certain ends as to receive the Worship that is paid him and to answer the Prayers that are made to him and to have more than One such Presence as this is like having more Gods than One. So that all our Worship under the Gospel must be directed to God in Heaven and that is a plain argument that we must not Worship God in Images on Earth for they neither can represent to us the Majesty of God in Heaven nor is God present with the Image to receive our Worship there if God must now be Worshipped as dwelling in Heaven it is certain there can be no Object of our Worship on Earth for though God fill all places with his Presence yet he will be Worshipped only as sitting on his Throne in Heaven and then I am sure he must not be Worshipped in an Image on Earth for that is not his Throne in Heaven This the Mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies was an Emblem of for the Holy of Holies in the Jewish Temple did signifie Heaven and the Mercy-seat covered with Cherubims signified the Throne of God in Heaven whither we must lift up our Eyes and Hearts when we pray to him for though it is indifferent from what place we put up our Prayers to God while we have regard to the External Decency of Religious Worship yet it is not indifferent whither we direct our Prayers for we must direct our Prayers to the throne of grace if we would obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need Now the Throne of Grace is only in Heaven whither Christ is ascended to make Atonement for us for he is the true Propitiatory or Mercy-seat And therefore if to direct our Prayers to God to his Picture or Image or to the Images of the Virgin Mary or any other Saints did not provoke God to jealousie yet it would do us no good unless such Images are God's Throne of Grace for all other Prayers are lost which are not directed to God on his Throne of Grace where alone he will receive our Petitions If a Prince would receive no Petitions but what were presented to him sitting on such a Throne all men would be sensible how vain a thing it were to offer any Petition to him else-where And yet thus it is here A Sinner dare not must not approach the Presence of God but only on his Mercy-seat and Throne of Grace for any where else our God is a Consuming Fire a Just and a Terrible Judge now God has but one Throne of Grace and that is in Heaven as the Mercy-seat was in the Holy of Holies which was a Type of Heaven thither Christ ascended with his Bloud to sprinkle the Mercy-seat and to cover it with a Cloud of Incense which are the Prayers of the Saints as the High-Priest did once a Year in the Typical Holy Place Which is a plain proof that all our Prayers must be immediately directed to God in Heaven where Christ dwells who is our true Propitiatory and Mercy-seat who has sprinkled the Throne of God with his own Bloud and has made it a Throne of Grace and where he offers up our Prayers as Incense to God. 2. To Worship God as our Father signifies to Worship him only in the Name and Mediation of his Son Jesus Christ for he is our Father only in Jesus Christ and we can call him Father in no other Name By the right of Creation he is our Lord and our Judge but he is the Father of Sinners only by Adoption and Grace and we are Adopted only in Christ so that if Christian Worship be the Worship of God as a Father then we must pray to God in no other Name but of his own Eternal Son The Virgin Mary though she were the Mother of Christ yet does not make God our Father and then no other Saint I presume will pretend to it which shews what a contradiction the Invocation of Saints is to the Nature of Christian Worship and how unavailable to obtain our requests of God. If we must Worship God only as our Father then we must Worship him only in the Name of
must neither believe their Senses nor trust their Reason nor read the Scripture it is easie to guess what knowing and understanding Christians they must needs be But it may be said that notwithstanding this the Church of Rome does Instruct her Children in the true Catholick Faith though she will not venture them to judge for themselves nor to read the Scriptures which is the effect of her great care of them to keep them Orthodox for when men trust to their own fallible Reasons and private Interpretations of Scripture it is a great hazard that they do not fall into one Heresie or other but when men are taught the pure Catholick Faith without any danger of Error and Heresie is not this much better then to suffer them to reason and judge for themselves when it is great odds but they will judge wrong Now this would be something indeed did the Church of Rome take care to Instruct them in all necessary Doctrines and to teach nothing but what is true and could such men who thus tamely receive the dictates of the Church be said to know and to understand their Religion How far the Church of Rome is from doing the first all Christians in the world are sensible but themselves but that is not our present dispute for though the Church of Rome did instruct her people into the true Christian Faith yet such men cannot be said to know and understand their Religion and to secure the Faith by destroying knowledge is a direct contradiction to the design of the Gospel which is to make men wise and understanding Christians For no man understands his Religion who does not in some measure know the reasons of his Faith and judge whether they be sufficient or not who knows not how to distinguish between Truth and Error who has no Rule to go by but must take all upon trust and the credit of his Teachers who believes whatever he is told and learns his Creed as School boys do their Grammar without understanding it This is not an active but a kind of passive knowledge such men receive the impression that is made on them as wax does and understand no more of the matter now will any one call this the knowledge and understanding of a man or the Discipline of a Child But suppose there were some men so dull and stupid that they could never rise higher that they are not capable of inquiring into the reasons of things but must take up their Religion upon trust yet will any man say that this is the utmost perfection of knowledge that any Christian must aim at is this the meaning of the word of God dwelling in us richly in all wisdom is this the way to give an answer to any one who asks a reason of the hope that is in us the perfection of Christian knowledge is a great and glorious attainment to understand the secrets of God's Laws those depths and mysteries of wisdom and goodness in the oeconomy of Mans Salvation to see the Analogy between the Law and the Gospel how the Legal Types and ancient Prophecies received their accomplishment in Christ how far the Gospel has advanced us above the state of Nature and the Law of Moses what an admirable design it was to redeem the world by the Incarnation and death and sufferings and intercession of the Son of God what mysteries of Wisdom and Goodness the Gospel contains the knowledge of which is not only the perfection of our understandings but raises and ennobles our minds and transforms us into the Divine Image These things were revealed that they might be known not that they should be concealed from the world or neglected and despised but this is a knowledge which cannot be attained without diligent and laborious inquiries without using all the reason and understanding we have in searching the Scriptures and all other helps which God has afforded us Now if Christian Knowledge be something more than to be able to repeat our Creed and to believe it upon the authority of our Teachers if the Gospel of our Saviour was intended to advance us to a true manly knowledge Christ and the Church of Rome seem to have two very different designs our Lord in causing the Gospel to be wrote and publisht to the world the other in concealing it as much as she can and suffering no body to read it without her leave as a dangerous Book which is apt to make men Hereticks for it is hard to conceive that the Gospel was written that it might not be read and then one would guess that he by whose authority and inspiration the Gospel was written and those by whose authority it is forbid to be read are not of a mind in this matter 1. This I think in the first place is an evident proof that to forbid Christian people to read and study and mediate on the word of God is no Gospel Doctrine unless not to read the Bible be a better way to improve in all true Christian knowledge and wisdom than to read it for that is the duty of Christians to grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ this was one great end of publishing the Gospel to the world to enlighten and improve mens understandings as well as to govern their Lives and though we grant men may be taught the principles of Christian Religion as Children are without reading the Bible yet if they will but grant that studying and meditating on the holy Scriptures is the best and only way to improve in all true Christian knowledge this shows how contrary this prohibition of reading the Scriptures is to the great design of the Gospel to perfect our knowledge in the mysteries of Christ. 2 ly This is a mighty presumption also against Transubstantiation that it is no Gospel Doctrine because it overthrows the very Fundamental Principles of Knowledge which is a direct contradiction to the design of the Gospel to advance Divine Knowledge to the utmost perfection it can attain in this world Whoever has his eyes in his head must confess that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is contrary to Sense for were our senses to be Judges of this matter they would pronounce the Bread and Wine after Consecration to be Bread and Wine still and therefore what ever reason there may be to believe it not to be Bread and Wine but Flesh and Blood yet it must be confessed that our Faith in this matter contradicts our sense for even Roman Catholick Eyes and Noses and Hands can see and feel and smell nothing but Bread and Wine and if to our senses it appears to be nothing but Bread and Wine those who believe it to be the Natural Body and Blood of Christ believe contrary to what they see Thus there is nothing more contrary to the natural notions we have of things than the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for if this Doctrine be true then the same individual body of Christ