Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
sense_n body_n bread_n transubstantiation_n 1,791 5 11.1891 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A30349 An exposition of the Thirty-nine articles of the Church of England written by Gilbert Bishop of Sarum. Burnet, Gilbert, 1643-1715. 1700 (1700) Wing B5792; ESTC R19849 520,434 424

There are 23 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Saviour's words Ibid. The discourse Joh. 6. explained 312 It can only be understood spiritually 313 Bold Figures much used in the East Ibid. A plain thing needs no great proof 314 Of unworthy Receivers and the effect of that sin 315 Of the effects of worthy receiving Ibid. Of Foederal Symbols 316 Of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ Ibid. Of the like Phrases in Scripture 317 Of our Sense of the Phrase Real Presence Ib. Transubstantiation explained 318 Of the words of Consecration 319 Of the Consequences of Transubstantiation Ibid. The grounds upon which it was believed 320 This is contrary to the Testimony of all our Faculties both Sense and Reason Ibid. We can be sure of nothing if our Senses do deceive us 321 The Objection from believing Mysteries answered 322 The end of all Miracles considered Ibid. Our Doctrine of a Mystical Presence is confessed by those of the Church of Rome 323 St. Austin's Rule about Figures Ibid. Presumptions concerning the belief of the Ancients in this matter 324 They had not that Philosophy which this Doctrine has forced on the Church of Rome 325 This was not objected by Heathens 326 No Heresies or Disputes arose upon this as they did on all other Points 327 Many new Rituals unknown to them have sprung out of this Doctrine Ibid. In particular the adoring the Sacrament 328 Prayers in the Masses of the Saints inconsistent with it Ibid. They believed the Elements were Bread and Wine after Consecration Ibid. Many Authorities brought for this 329 Eutychians said Christ's Humanity was swallowed of his Divinity 330 The Fathers argue against this from the Doctrine of the Eucharist Ibid. The Force of that Argument explained 331 The Fathers say our Bodies are nourished by the Sacrament Ibid. They call it the Type Sign and Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ 332 The Prayer of Consecration calls it so 333 That compared with the Prayer in the Missal Ibid. The progress of the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence 334 Reflection on the Ages in which it grew 335 The occasion on which it was advanced in the Eastern Church 336 Paschase Radbert taught it first 337 But many wrote against him Ibid. Afterwards Berengarius opposed it 338 The Schoolmen descanted on it Ibid. Philosophy was corrupted to support it 339 Concerning Consubstantiation Ibid. It is an Opinion that may be born with 340 The Adoration of the Eucharist is Idolatry Ibid. The Plea against that considered Ibid. Christ is not to be worshipped though present 341 Concerning reserving the Sacrament Ibid. Concerning the Elevation of it 342 ARTICLE XXIX 343 THE wicked do not receive Christ Ibid. The Doctrine of the Fathers in this Point Ibid. More particularly St. Austin's 344 ARTICLE XXX 345 THE Chalice was given to all Ibid. Not to the Disciples as Priests Ibid. The breaking of Bread explained 346 Sacraments must be given according to the Institution Ibid. N● Arguments from ill consequences to be admitted unless in cases of necessity 347 Concomitance a new Notion Ibid. Vniversal practice for giving the Chalice Ibid. The case of the Agrarii 348 The first beginning of taking away the Cup Ibid. The Decree of the Council of Constance 349 ARTICLE XXXI 350 THE term Sacrifice of a large signification Ibid. The Primitive Christians denied that they had any Sacrifices Ibid. The Eucharist has no virtue but as it is a Communion 351 Strictly speaking there is only one Priest and one Sacrifice in the Christian Religion 352 The Fathers did not think the Eucharist was a Propitiatory Sacrifice 353 But call it a Sacrafice in a larger sense Ibid. M●sses without a Communion not known then 354 None might be at Mass who did not communicate Ibid. The Importance of the Controversies concerning the Eucharist 355 ARTICLE XXXII 356 NO Divine Law against a Married Clergy Ibid. Neither in the Old or New Testament but the contrary 357 The Church has not Power to make a perpetual Law against it Ibid. The ill consequences of such a Law 358 No such Law in the first Ages Ibid. When the Laws for the Celibate began 359 The practice of the Church not uniform in it Ibid. The progress of these Laws in England 360 The good and the bad of Celibate balanced Ibid. It is not lawful to make Vows in this matter 361 Nor do they bind when made Ibid. Oaths ill made are worse to be kept 362 ARTICLE XXXIII 363 A Temper to be observed in Church Discipline Ibid. The necessity of keeping it up Ibid. Extremes in this to be avoided 364 Concerning the delivering any to Satan Ibid. The Importance of an Anathemea 365 Of the effect of Church-Censures Ibid. What it is when they are wrong applied 366 The causless jealousy of Church-Power Ibid. How the Laity was once taken into the exercise of it 367 The Pastors of the Church have Authority Ibid. Defects in this no just cause of Separation 368 All these brought in by Popery Ibid. A Correction of them intended at the Reformation 369 ARTICLE XXXIV 370 THE Obligation to obey Canons and Laws Ibid. The great Sin of Schism and Disobedience 371 The true Notion of Scandal Ibid. The fear of giving Scandal no warrant to break established Laws 372 Human Laws are not unalterable Ibid. The Respect due to Ancient Canons 373 The Corruptions of the Canon Law Ibid. Great Varieties in Rituals Ibid. Every Church is a compleat Body 374 ARTICLE XXXV 375 THE occasion of compiling the Homilies Ibid. We are not bound to every thing in them Ibid. But only to the Doctrine 376 This illustrated in the Charge of Idolatry Ib. What is meant by their being necessary for those times Ibid. ARTICLE XXXVI 377 THE occasion of this Article Ibid. An Explanation of the words Receive ye the Holy Ghost 378 ARTICLE XXXVII 379 QVeen Elizabeth's Injunction concerning the Supremacy Ibid. The Popes Vniversal Iurisdiction not warranted by any of the Laws of Christ 380 Nor acknowledged in the first Ages 381 Begun on the occasion of the Arian Controversy Ibid. Contested in many places 382 The Progress that it made Ibid. The Patriarchal Authority founded on the division of the Roman Empire sunk with it 383 The Power exercised by the Kings of Judah in Religious Matters Ibid. That is founded on Scriptures 384 Practised in all Ages Ibid. And particularly in England 385 Methods used by Popish Princes to keep the Ecclesiastical Authority under the Civil Ibid. The Temporal Power is over all persons 386 And in all causes Ibid. The Importance of the Term Head 387 The Nec●ssity of Capital Punishments Ibid. The measure of these 388 The Lawfulness of War Ibid. Our Saviour's words explained Ibid. In what cases War is ju●t 389 Warranted by the Laws of God 390 How a Subject may serve in an unlawful War Ibid. ARTICLE XXXVIII 391 COncerning Property and Charity Ibid. The Proportion of Charity to the Poor 392 ARTICLE XXXIX 393 THE Lawfulness of Oaths proved Ibid. From Natural Religion and
Arguments for the Negative yet that was not necessary For as a Negative always proves it self so that holds more especially here where that which is denied is accompanied with so many and so strange Absurdities as do follow from this Doctrine The last Topick in this Matter is the Sense that the ancient Church had of it For as we certainly have both the Scriptures and the Evidence of our Senses and Reason of our side so that will be much fortified if it appears that no such Doctrine was received in the First and best Ages And that it came in not all at once but by degrees I shall first urge this Matter by some general Presumptions And then I shall go to plain Proofs But though the Presumptions shall be put only as Presumptions yet if they appear to be violent so that a Man cannot hold giving his Assent to the Conclusion that follows from them then though they are put in the Form of presumptive Arguments yet that will not hinder them from being considered as concluding ones By the stating this Doctrine it has appeared how many Difficulties there are involved in it These are Difficulties that are obvious and soon seen They are not found out by deep enquiry and much speculation They are soon felt and are very hardly avoided And ever since the Time that this Doctrine has been received by the Roman Church these have been much insisted on Explanations have been offered to them all and the whole Principles of natural Philosophy have been cast into a new Mould that they might ply to this Doctrine At least those who have studied their Philosophy in that System have had such Notions put in them while their Minds were yet tender and capable of any Impressions that they have been thereby prepared to this Doctrine before they came to it by a Train of Philosophical Terms and Distinctions so that they were not much alarmed at it when it came to be set before them They are accustomed to think that Ubication or the being in a Place is but an Accident to a Substance So that the same Bodies being in more Places is only its having a few more of those Accidents produced in it by God They are accustomed to think that Accidents are Beings different from Matter like a sort of cloathing to it which do indeed require the having of a Substance for their Subject But yet since they are believed to have a being of their own God may make them subsist As the Skin of a Man may stand out in its proper Shape and Colour though there were nothing but Air or Vacuity within it They are accustomed to think that as an Accident may be without its proper Substance so a Substance may be without its proper Accidents And they do reckon Extension and Impenetrability that is a Bodies so filling a Space that no other Body can be in the same Space with it among its Accidents So that a Body composed of Organs and of large Dimensions may be not only all crouded within one Wafer but an entire distinct Body may be in every separable Part of this Wafer At least in every piece that carries in it the Appearances of Bread These besides many other lesser Subtilties are the evident Results of this Doctrine And it was a natural Effect of its being received that their Philosophy should be so transformed as to agree to it and to prepare Men for it Now to apply this to the Matter we are now upon We find none of these Subtilties among the Ancients They seem to apprehend none of those Difficulties nor do they take any pains to solve or clear them They had a Philosophical Genius and shewed it in all other things They disputed very nicely concerning the Attributes of God concerning his Essence and the Persons of the Trinity They saw the Difficulties concerning the Incarnation of the Eternal Word and Christ's being both God and Man They treat of Original Sin of the Power of Grace and of the Decrees of God They explained the Resurrection of our Bodies and the different States of the Blessed and the Damned They saw the Difficulties in all these Heads and were very Copious in their Explanations of them And they may be rather thought by some too full than too sparing in the canvassing of Difficulties But all those were more speculative Matters in which the Difficulty was not so soon seen as on this Subject Yet they found these out and pursued them with that Subtilty that shewed they were not at all displeased when occasions were offered them to shew their Skill in answering Difficulties Which to name no more appears very evidently to be St. Augustin's Character Yet neither he nor any of the other Fathers seem to have been Sensible of the Difficulties in this Matter They neither state them nor answer them nor do they use those reserves when they speak of Philosophical Matters that Men must have used who were possessed of this Doctrine For a Man cannot hold it without bringing himself to think and speak otherways upon all natural Things than the rest of Mankind do They are so far from this that on the contrary they deliver themselves in a way that shews they had no such Apprehensions of Things They thought that all Creatures were limited to one Place And from thence they argued against the Heathens who believed that their Deities were in every one of those Statues which they consecrated to them From this Head they proved the Divinity of the Holy Ghost Because he wrought in many different Places at once Which he could not do if he were only a Creature They affirm that Christ can be no more on Earth since he is now in Heaven and that he can be but in one Place They say that which hath no Bounds nor Figure and that can neither be touched nor seen cannot be a Body That Bodies are extended in some Place and cannot exist after the Manner of Spirits They argue against the Eternity of Matter from this that nothing could be produced that had a Being before it was produced And on all Occasions they appeal to the Testimony of our Senses as Infallible They say that to believe otherwise tended to reverse the whole State of Life and Order of Nature and to reproach the Providence of God since it must be said that he has given the Knowledge of all his Works to Liars and Deceivers if our Senses may be false That we must doubt of our Faith if the Testimony of hearing seeing and feeling could deceive us And in their Contests with the Marcionites and others concerning the Truth of Christ's Body they appeal always to the Testimony of the Senses as Infallible And even treating of the Sacrament they say without Limitation or Exception that it was Bread as their Eyes witnessed and true Wine that Christ did Consecrate to be the Memorial of his Body and Blood and they tell us in this very Particular that we ought not to
the Sacrament of his Blood is the Blood of Christ he carried himself in his own hands in some sort when he said This is my Body St. Chrysostom says the Bread is thought worthy to be called the Body of our Lord And in another Place reckoning up the improper Senses of the word Flesh he says the Scriptures use to call the Mysteries that is the Sacrament by the Name of Flesh and sometimes the whole Church is said to be the Body of Christ. So Tertullian says Christ calls the Bread his Body and names the Bread by his Body Tertul. Lib. 4. adv Marci c. 40. The Fathers do not only call the consecrated Elements Bread and Wine They do also affirm that they retain their proper Nature and Substance and are the same thing as to their Nature that they were before And the Occasion upon which the Passages that I go next to mention are used by them does prove this Matter beyond Contradiction Apollinaris did broach that Heresy which was afterwards put in full Form by Eutyche● and that had so great a Party to support it that as they had one General Council a pretended one at least to favour them so they were condemned by another Their Error was that the human Nature of Christ was swallowed up by the Divine if not while he was here on Earth yet at least after his Ascension to Heaven This Error was confuted by several Writers who lived very wide one from another And at a distance of above a hundred Years one from another St. Chrysostom at Constantinople Theodoret in Asia Ephrem Patriarch of Antioch and Gelasius Bishop of Rome All those write to Prove that the human Nature did still remain in Christ not changed nor swallowed up but only sanctified by the Divine Nature that was united to it They do all fall into one Argument which very probably those who came after St. Chrysostom took from him Epist. ad Celarium So that though both Theodoret and Gelasius's Words are much fuller yet because the Argument is the same with that which St. Chrysostom had urged against Apollinaris I shall first set down his Words He brings an Illustration from the Doctrine of the Sacrament to shew that the human Nature was not destroyed by its Union with the Divine and has upon that these Words As before the Bread is sanctified we call it Bread but when the Divine Grace has sanctified it by the means of the Priest it is freed from the name of Bread and is thought worthy of the name of the Lord's Body though the nature of Bread remains in it And yet it is not said there are two Bodies but one Body of the Son So the divine Nature being joined to the Body Both these make one Son and one Person In Photi Bibli Cod. 229. Ephrem of Antioch says The Body of Christ which is received by the faithful does not depart from its sensible Substance So Baptism says he does not lose its own sensible Substance and does not lose that which it was before Dial. 1st and 2d ●ont Eutych Theodoret says Christ does honour the Symbols with the name of his Body and Blood not changing the nature but adding grace to nature In another Place pursuing the same Argument he says The mystical Symbols after the sanctification do not depart from their own nature For they continue in their former substance figure and form and are visible and palpable as they were before But they are understood to be that which they are made Pope Gelasius says The Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Christ are a divine thing Lib. de du●bus nat Christ for which reason we become by them partakers of the divine Nature and yet the substance of Bread and Wine does not cease to exist And the image and likeness of the Body and Blood of Christ are celebrated in holy Mysteries Upon all these Places being compared with the Design with which they were written which was to prove that Christ's Human Nature did still subsist unchanged and not swallowed up by its Union with the Divinity some Reflections are very obvious ●irst If the corporal Presence of Christ in the Sacrament had been then received in the Church the natural and unavoidable Argument in this Matter which must put an end to it with all that believed such corporal Presence was this Christ has certainly a natural Body still because the Bread and the Wine are turned to it and they cannot be turned to that which is not In their Writings they argued against the possibility of a substantial Change of a Human Nature into the Divine but that could not have been urged by Men who believed a substantial Mutation to be made in the Sacrament For then the Eutychians might have retorted the Argument with great Advantage upon them The Eutychians did make use of some Expressions that were used by some in the Church which seemed to Import that they did argue from the Sacrament as Theodoret represents their Objections But to that he answers as we have seen denying that any such substantial Change was made The Design of those Fathers was to prove that things might be united together and continue so united without the change of their Substances and that this was true in the two Natures in the Person of Christ And to make this more Sensible they bring in the Matter of the Sacrament as a thing known and confessed For in their arguing upon it they do suppose it as a thing out of dispute Now according to the Roman Doctrine this had been a very odd Sort of an Argument to prove that Christ's Human Nature was not swallowed up of the Divine because the Mysteries or Elements in the Sacrament are changed into the Substance of Christ's Body only they retain the outward appearances of Bread and Wine To this an Eutychian might readily have answered that then the Human Nature might be believed to be destroyed And though Christ had appeared in that likeness he retained only the Accidents of Human Nature but that the Human Nature it self was destroyed as the Bread and the Wine were destroyed in the Eucharist This had been a very absurd way of arguing in the Fathers and had indeed delivered up the Cause to the Eutychians Whereas those Fathers make it an Argument against them to prove that notwithstanding an Uninion of two Beings and such an Union as did communicate a Sanctification from the one to the other yet the two Natures might remain still distinguish'd and that it was so in the Eucharist Therefore it might be so in the Person of Christ. This seems to be so evident an Indication of the Doctrine of the whole Church in the Fourth and Fifth Century when so many of the most eminent Writers of those Ages do urge it so home as an Argument in so great a Point that we can scarce think it possible for any Man to consider it fully without being determined by it
Tell the Church Ibid. H●w the Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth 206 Christ's Promise I am with you alway even to the end of the world Ibid. Of that It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Ibid. Some Gener●l Councils have ereed 207 ARTICLE XXII 217 THE D●ctrine of Purgatory Ibid. Sins once pard●ned are not punished 218 Vnl●ss with chastisements in this life 219 No state of satisfaction aft●r death Ibid. No mention made of that in Scripture 220 But it is plain to the contrary 221 Different Opinions among the Ancients Ibid. The Original of Purgatory 222 A p●ss●ge in Maccabees considered Ibid. A p●ss●ge in the Epistle to the Corinthians c●nsidered 223 The pr●gress ●f the ●elief of Purgatory 2●4 Prayers for the dead among the Ancients 225 End●wments for redeeming out of Purg●to●y 226 Whether these ought to be sacred or n●t 227 The Doctrine of Pardons and Indulgences 228 It is only the excusing from Penance 229 N● Foundation for it in Scrip●ure Ibid. General Rules concerning Idolatry 230 Of the I●olatry of H●athens 231 Laws given to the Jews against it Ibid. The Expostul●●ions of the Prophets 232 Concerning the Golden Calf Ibid. And The Calves at Dan and Bethel 233 The Ap stles opposed all Idolatry Ibid. St. Paul at Athens and to the Romans 334 The sense of the Primitive upon it 235 The first use of Images among Christians Ibid. Pictures in Churches for Instruction 236 Were afterwards worshipped Ibid. Contests ab●ut that Ibid. Images of the Deity and Trinity 237 On what theWorship of Images terminates 238 The due Worship settled by the Council at Trent Ibid. Images consecrated and how 239 Arguments for worshipping them answered Ibid. Arguments against the use or worship of Images 240 The worship of Relicks 241 A due regard to the Bodies of Martyrs Ibid. The progress of Superstition Ibid. No warrant for this in Scripture 242 Hezekiah broke the Brazen Serpent Ibid. The memorable passage concerning the Body of St. Polycarp 243 Fables and Forgeries prevailed Ibid. The Souls of the Martyrs believed to hover about their Tomb● 244 Nothing of this kind objected to the first Christians Ibid. Disputes between Vigilantius and St. Jerom 245 No Invocation of Saints in the Old Testament 246 The Invocating Angels condemned in the New T●stament 247 No Saints invocated Christ only Ibid. No mention of this in the three first Ages 248 In the Fourth Martyrs invocated Ibid. The progr●ss that this made 249 Scandalous Offices in the Church of Rome Ib. Arguments against this Invocation 2●0 An Apology for those who begun it Ibid. The Scandal given by it 251 Arguments for it ans●ered 252 Wheth●r the Saints see all things in God Ib. This no part of the Communion of Saints 253 Prayers ought to be directed only to God Ib. Revealed Religion designed to deliver the World from Idolatry 254 ARTICLE XXIII 255 A Succ●ssi●n of Pastors ought to be in the Church Ibid. 〈◊〉 was settl●d by the Apostles 256 And must continue to the end of the World Ibid. It was settl●d in the first Age of the Church 257 The danger of m●ns taking to themselves this Authority without a due Vocation Ibid. The difference between means of Salvation and prec●pts for orders sake 258 What is lawful Authority Ibid. What may be done upon extraordinary occasions 259 Necessity is above Rules of Order Ibid. The High Priests in ●ur Saviour's time 260 Baptism by Women 261 ARTICLE XXIV 262 THE chief end of worshipping God Ib. The Practice of the Jews 263 Rules given by the Apostles Ibid. The Pr●ctice ●f the Church 264 Arguments for Worship in an unknown Tongue answered Ibid. ARTICLE XXV 266 DIfference between Sacraments and Rites Ibid. Sacraments do not imprint a Character 267 But are not mere Cerem●nies 268 What is necessary to constitute a Sacrament 269 That applied to Baptism Ib. And to the Eucharist 270 No me●tion of seven Sacraments before Peter Lombard Ibid. Confirmation no Sacrament Ibid. How practised among us Ibid. The use of Chrism in it is new 271 Oyl early used in Christian Rituals Ibid. Bishops only consecrated the Chrism 272 In the Greek Church Presbyters appli●d it Ibid. This used in the Western Church but condemned by the Popes Ibid. Disputes concerning Confirmation 273 Concerning Penance Ibid. The true Notion of Repentance Ibid. Conf●ssion not the matter of a Sacrament 274 The use of Confession Ibid. The Pri●st's Pardon Ministerial 275 And restrained within bounds Ibid. Auricular Conf●ssion not necessary 276 Not commanded in the New Testament Ibid. The beginnings of it in the Church 277 Many Canons about Penance Ibid. Confession forbid at Constantinople 278 The ancient D●scipline sl●ck●n'd Ibid. Conf●ssion may be advised but not commanded 279 The good and bad eff●cts it may have Ibid. Of Contrition and Attrition 280 The ill effects of the Doctrine of Attrition Ibid. Of doing the Penance or Satisfaction 281 Concerning sorrow for sin Ibid. Of the ill effects of hasty Absolutions 282 Of Fasting and Prayer Ibid. Of the Form I absolve thee 283 Of H●ly Orders 284 Of the ancient Form of Ordinations Ibid. Of delivering the Vessels 285 Orders no Sacrament Ibid. Whether Bishops and Priests are of the same Order 286 Of Marriage Ibid. It can be no Sacrament 287 Intention not necessary Ibid. How Marriage is called a Mystery or Sacrament 288 Marriage dissolved by Adultery Ibid. The Practice of the Church in this matter 289 Of Extreme Vnction Ibid. St. James's words explained 290 Oyl much used in ancient Rituals 291 Pope Innocent's Epistle considered Ibid. Anointing used in order to Recovery 292 Afterwards as the Sacrament of the dying 293 The Sacraments are to be used Ibid. And to be received worthily 294 ARTICLE XXVI 295 SAcraments are not effectual as Prayers are Ibid. Of the Doctrine of Intention 296 The ill cons●quences of it 297 Of a just Severity in Discipline Ib●d Particularly towards the Clergy 298 ARTICLE XXVII 299 COncerning St. John's Baptism Ibid. The Jews used Baptism Ibid. The Christian Baptism 300 The difference between it and St. John's Ib. The necessity of Baptism 301 It is a Precept but not a Mean of Salvation Ibid. Baptism unites us to the Church 302 It also saves us Ibid. St. Peter's words explained 303 St Austin's Doctrine of Baptism Ibid. Baptism is a Foederal Stipulation 304 In what sense it was of more value to preach than to baptize Ibid. Of Infant-Baptism 305 It is grounded on the Law of Nature Ibid. And the Law of Moses and warranted in the New Testament Ibid. In what sense Children can be holy 306 It is also very expedient Ibid. ARTICLE XXVIII 308 THE change made in this Article in Queen Elizabeth's time Ibid. The Explanation of our Doctrine 309 Of the Rituals in the Passover Ibid. Of the words This is my Body 310 And This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood Ibid. Of the horror the Jews had at Blood 311 In what sense only the Disciples could understand our
be found to be a true demonstration The chief Objection that lies against it is That in the Opinion of those who deny that there are any indivi●●ble points of Matter and that believe that Matter is infinitely divisible it is not absurd to say That one Infinite is more than another For the smallest crumb of Matter is Infinite as well as the whole Globe of the Earth And therefore the Revolutions of Saturn may be infinite as well as the Revolutions of Days though the one be vastly more numerous than the other But there is this difference betwixt the Succession of Time and the Composition of Matter That those who deny Indivisibles say That no one Point can be assigned For if Points could be assigned or number'd it is certain that they could not be Infinite For an infinite Number seems to be a contradiction but if the Series of Mankind were Infinite since this is visibly divided into single Individuals as the Units in that Series then here arises an Infinite Number composed of Units or Individuals that can be assigned The same is to be said of Minutes Hours Days and Years Nor can it be said with equal reason that every portion of Time is divisible to Infinity as well as every parcel of Matter It seems evident that there is a present time and that past present and to come cannot be said to be true of any thing all at once Therefore the Objection against the assigning points in Matter does not overthrow the truth of this Argument But if it is thought that this is rather a slight of Metaphisicks that intangles one than a plain and full conviction Let us turn next to such Reasonings as are more obvious and that are more easily apprehended The other Moral Arguments are more sensible as well as they are of a more complicated Nature and proceed thus The History of all Nations of all Governments Arts Sciences and even instituted Religions the peopling of Nations the progress of Commerce and of Colonies are plain Indications of the Novelty of the World No sort of Trace remaining by which we can believe it to be Ancienter than the Books of Moses represent it to be For though some Nations such as the Egyptians and the Chineses have boasted of a much greater Antiquity yet it is plain we hear of no series of History for all those Ages so that what they had relating to them if it is not wholly a Fiction might have been only in Astronomical Tables which may be easily run backwards as well as forward The very few Eclipses which Ptolomy could hear of is a remarkable instance of the Novelty of History since the observing such an extraordinary Accident in the Heavens in so pure an Air where the Sun was not only observed but adored must have been one of the first effe●ts of Learning or Industry All these Characters of the Novelty of the World have been so well considered by Lucretius and other Atheists that they gave up the Point and thought it evident that this present frame of Things had certainly a beginning The Solution that those men who found themselves driven from this of the World 's being Eternal have given to this difficulty by saying that all things have run by chance into the Combinations and Channels in which we see Nature run is so absurd that it looks like men who are resolved to believe any thing how absurd soever rather than to acknowledge Religion For what a strange conceit is it to think that Chance could settle on such a regular and useful frame of things and continue so fixed and stable in it and that Chance could do so much at once and should do nothing ever since The Constancy of the Celestial Motions the Obliquity of the Zodiack by which different Seasons are assigned to different Climates the Divisions of this Globe into Sea and Land to Hills and Vales the Productions of the Earth whether latent such as Mines Minerals and other Fossils or visible such as Grass Grain Herbs Flowers Shrubs and Trees the small beginnings and the curious Compositions of them The Variety and curious Structure of Insects the disposition of the Bodies of perfecter Animals and above all the Fabrick of the Body of Man especially the curious Discoveries that Anatomy and Microscopes have given us the strange beginning and progress of those the Wonders that occur in every Organ of Sense and the amazing Structure and Use of the Brain are all such things so Artificial and yet so regular and so exactly shap'd and fitted for their several Uses that he who can believe all this to be Chance seems to have brought his mind to digest any Absurdity That all Men should resemble one another in the main things and yet that every Man should have a peculiar Look Voice and way of Writing is necessary to maintain Order and Distinction in Society By these we know men if we either see them hear them speak in the dark or receive any Writing from them at a distance without these the whole Commerce of Life would be one continued course of Mistake and Confusion This I say is such an Indication of Wisdom that it looks like a Violence to Nature to think it can be otherwise The only Col●ur that has supported this monstrous Conceit That things arise out of Chance is That it has long passed current in the World That great Varieties of Insects do arise out of corrupted Matter They argue That if the Sun 's shining on a Dunghil can give Life to such Swarms of curious Creatures it is but a little more extraordinary to think that Animals and Men might have been formed out of well-disposed Matter under a peculiar Aspect of the Heavens But the exa●ter Observations that have been made in this Age by the help of Glasses have put an end to this Answer which is the best that Lucretius and other Atheists found to rest in It is now fully made out That the Production of all Insects whatsoever is in the way of Generation H●at and Corruption do only hatch those Eggs that Insects leave to a prodigious quantity every where So that this which is the only specious thing in the whole Plea for Atheism is now given up by the Universal Consent of all the Enquirers into Nature And now to bring the force of this long Argument to a head If this World was neither from all Eternity in the state in which it is at present nor could fall into it by Chance or Accident then it must follow That it was put into the state in which we now see it by a Being of vast Power and Wisdom This is the great and solid Argument on which Religion rests and it receives a vast accession of strength from this That we plainly see Matter has not Motion in or of it self Every part of it is at quiet till it is put in motion that is not natural to it for many Parts of Matter fall into a state
Frame of Nature must go out of the Channel into which God did at first put it The Order of Things on this Earth takes a great Turn from the Wind both as to the Fruitfulness of the Earth and to the Operations on the Sea and has likewise a great Influence on the Purity of the Air and by consequence on mens good or ill Health and the Wind or the Agitation of the Air turns so often and so quick that it seems to be the great Instrument of Providence upon which an unconceivable variety of things does naturally depend I do not deny but that it may be said that all those Changes in the Air arise from Certain and Mechanical though to us unknown Causes which may be supported from this That between the Tropicks where the Influence of the Heavenly Bodies is stronger the Wind and Weather are more Regular though even that admits of great Exceptions Yet it has been the common Sense of Mankind That besides the Natural Causes of the Alterations in the Air they are under a particular Influence and Direction of Providence And it is in it self highly probable to say no more of it This may either be managed immediately by the Acts of the Divine Mind to which Nature readily obeys or by some subaltern Mind or Angel which may have as Natural an Efficiency over an Extent of Matter proportioned to its Capacity as a Man has over his own Body and over that compass of Matter that is within his reach Which way soever God governs the World and what Influence soever he has over Mens Minds we are sure that the governing and preserving his own Workmanship is so plainly a Perfection that it must belong to a Being infinitely perfect And there is such a Chain in things those of the greatest consequence arising often from small and inconsiderable ones that we cannot imagine a Providence unless we believe every thing to be within its Care and View The only difficulty that has been made in apprehending this has arisen from the Narrowness of Mens Minds who have measured God rather by their own Measure and Capacity than by that of Infinite Perfection which as soon as it is considered will put an end to all further doubtings about it When we perceive that a vast Number of Objects enter in at our Eye by a very small Passage and yet are so little jumbled in that Crowd that they open themselves regularly though there is no great space for that neither and that they give us a distinct apprehension of many Objects that lye before us some even at a vast distance from us both of their Nature Colour and Size and by a secret Geometry from the Angles that they make in our Eye we judge of the distance of all Objects both from us and from one another If to this we add the vast Number of Figures that we receive and retain long and with great order in our Brains which we easily fetch up either in our Thoughts or in our Discourses we shall find it less difficult to apprehend how an Infinite Mind should have the Universal View of all things ever present before it It is true we do not so easily conceive how Free Minds are under this Providence as how Natural Agents should always move at its direction But we perceive that one Mind can work upon another A man raises a sound of Words which carry such signs of his inward Thoughts that by this Motion in the Air another Man's Ear is so struck upon that thereby an impression is made upon his Brain by which he not only conceives what the other Man's Thought was but is very powerfully inclined to consent to it and to concur with it All this is a great way about and could not be easily apprehended by us if we had not a clear and constant Perception of it Now since all this is brought about by a Motion upon our Brains according to the force with which we are more or less affected it is very reasonable for us to apprehend that the Supreme Mind can besides many other ways to us less known put such Motions in our Brain as may give us all such Thoughts as it intends to impress upon us in as strong and effectual a manner as may fully answer all its purposes The great Objection that lies against the Power and the Goodness of Providence from all that Evil that is in the World which God is either not willing or not able to hinder will be more properly considered in another place at present it is enough in general to observe That God's Providence must carry on every thing according to its Nature and since he has made some Free Beings capable of Thought and of Good and Evil we must believe That as the Course of Nature is not oft put out of its Channel unless when some extraordinary thing is to be done in order to some great End so in the Government of free Agents they must be generally left to their liberty and not put too oft off of their Biass This is a hint to resolve that difficulty by concerning all the Moral Evil which is generally speaking the occasion of most of the Physical Evil that is in the World A Providence thus setled that extends it self to all things both natural and free is necessary to preserve Religion to engage us to Prayers Praises and to a dependence on it and a submission to it Some have thought it was necessary to carry this further and so they make God to be the first and immediate cause of every Action or Motion This some Modern Writers have taken from the Schools and have drest it in new Phrases of General Laws Particular Wills and Occasional Causes and so they express or explain God's producing every Motion that is in Matter and his raising every Sensation and by the same parity of Reason every Cogitation in Minds This they think arises out of the Idea of Infinite Perfection and fully answers these words of the Scriptures That in God we live move and have our being To others all this seems first unnecessary for if God has made Matter capable of Motion and capable of receiving it from the Stroke or Impulse that another piece of Matter gives it This comes as truly from God as if he did immediately give every Motion by an act of his own Will It seems more suitable to the Beauty of his Workmanship to think that he has so framed things that they hold on in that course in which he has put them than to make him perpetually produce every new Motion And the bringing God immediately into every thing may by an Odd Reverse of Effects make the World think that every thing is done as much without him as others are apt to imagine that every thing is done by him And though it is true that we cannot distinctly apprehend how a Motion in our Brain should raise such a Thought as Answers to it in our Minds
with that we do also perceive the advantage of such an easy Thought as arises out of a Sensation such as Seeing or Hearing which gives us no trouble we think without any trouble of many of the Objects that we see all at once or so near all at once that the progression from one Object to another is scarce perceptible but the labour of Study and of pursuing Consequences wearies us though the Pleasure or the Vanity of having found them out compensates for the Pain they gave us and sets men on to new Enquiries We perceive in our selves a love of Truth and a vexation when we see we are in Error or are in the dark and we feel that we act the most perfectly when we act upon the clearest Views of Truth and in the strictest pursuance of it and the more present and regular the more calm and steady that our Thoughts of all things are that lye in our compass to know present past or to come we do plainly perceive that we do thereby become perfecter and happier Beings Now out of all this we can easily rise up in our Thoughts to an Idea of a Mind that sees all things by a clear and full Intuition without the possibility of being mistaken and that ever acts in that Light upon the surest Prospect and with the perfectest Reason and that does therefore always rejoice in every thing it does and has a constant Perception of all Truth ever present to it This Idea does so genuinely arise from what we perceive both of the Perfections and the Imperfections of our own Minds that a very little Reflection will help us to form it to a very high degree The Perception also that we have of Goodness of a desire to make others good and of the pleasure of effecting it of the joy of making any one wiser or better of making any one's Life easy and of raising his Mind higher will also help us in the forming of our Ideas of God But in this we meet with much difficulty and disappointment So this leads us to apprehend how diffusive of it self Infinite Goodness must needs be and what is the Eternal Joy that Infinite Love has in bringing so many to that exalted state of endless Happiness We do also feel a Power issuing from us by a Thought that sets our Bodies in motion The Varieties in our Thoughts create a vast Variety in the state of our Bodies but with this as that Power is limited to our own Bodies so it is often check'd by Disorders in them and the Soul suffers a great deal from those painful Sensations that its Union with the Body subjects it to From hence we can easily apprehend how the Supreme Mind can by a Thought set Matter into what Motions it will all Matter being constantly subject to such Impressions as the Acts of the Divine Mind give it This Absolute Dominion over all Matter makes it to move and shapes it according to the Acts of that Mind and Matter has no Power by any Irregularity it falls into to resist those Impressions which do immediately command and govern it nor can it throw any uneasy Sensations into that Perfect Being This conduces also to give us a distinct Idea of Miracles All Matter is uniform and it is only the variety of its Motions and Texture that makes all the variety that is in the World Now as the Acts of the Eternal Mind gave Matter its first Motion and put it into that Course that we do now call the Course of Nature so another Act of the same Mind can either suspend stop or change that Course at pleasure as he who throws a Bowl may stop it in its Course or throw it back if he will this being only the altering that Impulse which himself gave So if one Act of the Infinite Mind puts things in a regular Course another Act interposed may change that at pleasure And thus with Relation to God Miracles are no more difficult than any other Act of Providence They are only more amazing to us because they are less ordinary and go out of the Common and Regular Course of Things By all this it appears how far the Observation of what we perceive concerning our selves may carry us to form livelier and clearer Thoughts of God So much may suffice upon the First Article ARTICLE II. Of the Word or Son of God which was made very Man The Son which is the Word of the Father begotten from Everlasting of the Father the very and Eternal God of One Substance with the Father took Man's Nature in the Womb of the Blessed Uirgin of her Substance so that two whole and perfect Natures that is the Godhead and Manhood were joined together in one Person never to be divided whereof is one Christ very God and very Man who truly suffered was dead and buried to reconcile his Father to us and to be a Sacrifice not only for Original guilt but also for actual Sins of Men. THERE are in this Article Five Heads to be Explained I. That the Son or Word is of the same Substance with the Father begotten of him from all Eternity II. That he took Man's Nature upon him in the Womb of the Blessed Virgin and of her Substance III. That the Two Natures of the Godhead and Manhood both still perfect were in him joined in one Person never to be divided IV. That Christ truly suffered was Crucified Dead and Buried V. That he was our Sacrifice to Reconcile the Father to us and that not only for Original Guilt but for Actual Sins The first of these leads me to prosecute what was begun in the former Article And to prove That the Son or Word was from all Eternity begotten of the same Substance with the Father It is here to be noted That Christ is in Two respects the Son and the only begotten Son of God The one is As he was Man the Miraculous overshadowing of the B. Virgin by the H. Ghost having without the ordinary course of Nature formed the first beginnings of Christ's Human Body in the Womb of the Virgin Thus that Miracle being instead of a Natural begetting he may in that respect be called the begotten and the only begotten Son of God The other sense is That the Word or the Divine Person was in and of the Substance of the Father and so was truly God It is also to be considered That by the Word one Substance is to be understood that this second Person is not a Creature of a Pure and Excellent Nature like God Holy and Perfect as we are called to be but is truly God as the Father is Begetting is a term that naturally signifies the Relation between the Father and the Son But what it strictly signifies here is not possible for us to understand till we comprehend this whole Matter nor can we be able to assign a Reason why the Emanation of the Son and not that of the H. Ghost likewise is called begetting In
My God My God Why hast thou forsaken me It is not easy for us to apprehend in what that Agony consisted For we understand only the Agonies of Pain or of Conscience which last arise out of the Horror of Guilt or the Apprehension of the Wrath of God It is indeed certain That he who had no Sin could have no such horror in him and yet it is as certain That he could not be put into such an Agony only through the Apprehension and Fear of that violent Death which he was to suffer next day Therefore we ought to conclude That there was an inward Suffering in his Mind as well as an outward visible one in his Body We cannot distinctly apprehend what that was since he was sure both of his own spotless Innocence and of his Father's unchangeable love to him We can only imagine a vast sense of the heinousness of Sin and a deep Indignation at the Dishonour done to God by it a melting Apprehension of the Corruption and Miseries of Mankind by reason of Sin together with a never-before-felt withdrawing of those Consolations that had always filled his Soul But what might be further in his Agony and in his last Dereliction we cannot distinctly apprehend only this we perceive That our Minds are capable of great pain as well as our Bodies are Deep horror with an inconsolable sharpness of Thought is a very intolerable thing Notwithstanding the Bodily or Substantial Indwelling of the fulness of the Godhead in him yet he was capable of feeling vast pain in his Body So that he might become a compleat Sacrifice and that we might have from his Sufferings a very full and amazing apprehension of the Guilt of Sin all those Emanations of joy with which the Indwelling of the Eternal Word had ever till then filled his Soul might then when he needed them most be quite withdrawn and he be left merely to the firmness of his Faith to his patient Resignation to the Will of his heavenly F●ther and to his willing readiness of drinking up that Cup which his Father had put in his hand to drink There remains but one thing to be remembred here though it will come to be more specially Explained when other Articles are to be opened which is That this Reconciliation which is made by the Death of Christ between God and Man is not absolute and without conditions He has Established the Covenant and has performed all that was Incumbent on him as both the Priest and the Sacrifice to do and to suffer and he offers this to the World that it may be closed with by them on the terms on which it is proposed and if they do not accept of it upon these conditions and perform what is enjoined them they can have no share in it ARTICLE III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell As Christ died for us and was buried so also is it to be believed that he went down into Hell THIS was much fuller when the Articles were at first prepared and published in King Edward's Reign For these words were added to it That the body of Christ lay in the Grave untill his Resurrection but his Spirit which he gave up was with the Spirits which were detained in Prison or in Hell and preached to them as the place in St. Peter testifieth Thus a determined sense was put upon this Article which is now left more at large and is conceived in words of a more general Signification In order to the explaining this it is to be premised That the Article in the Creed of Christ's descent into Hell is mentioned by no Writer before Ruffin who in the beginning of the Fifth Century does indeed speak of it But he tells us That it was neither in the Symbol of the Roman nor of the Oriental Churches and that he found it in the Symbol of his own Church at Aquileia But as there was no other Article in that Symbol that related to Christ's Burial so the words which he gives us descendit ad Inferna he descended to the lower parts do very naturally signify Burial according to these words of St. Paul Eph. 4.9 He ascended what is it but that he also descended first to the lower parts of the Earth and Ruffin himself understood these words in that sense None of the Fathers in the first Ages neither Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens nor Origen in the short Abstracts that they give us of the Christian Faith mention any thing like this And in all that great variety of Creeds that was proposed by the many Councils that met in the Fourth Century this is not in any one of them except in that which was agreed to at Arimini and was pretended though falsly to have been made at Sirmium In that it is set down in a Greek word that does exactly answer Ruffin's Inferna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And it stood there instead of Buried When it was put in the Creed that carries Athanasius's Name tho' made in the Sixth or Seventh Century the word was changed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hell But yet it seems to have been understood to signify Christ's Burial there being no other word put for it in that Creed Afterwards it was put into the Symbol of the Western Church That was done at first in the words in which Ruffin had expressed it as appears by some Ancient Copies of Creeds which were published the Great Primate Usher We are next to consider what the Importance of these words in themselves is for it is plain that the use of them in the Creed is not very Ancient nor Universal We have a most unquestionable Authority for this that our Saviour's Soul was in Hell In the Acts o● the Apostles St. Peter in the first Sermon that was preached after the wonderful Effusion of the Spirit at Pentecost applies these words of David concerning God's not leaving his Soul in Hell nor suffering his Holy one to see corruption to the Resurrection of Christ. Now since in the composition of a Man there is a Body and a Spirit and since it is plain that the raising of Christ on the Third day was before that his Body in the course of Nature was corrupted The other Branch seems to relate to his Soul though it is not to be denied but that in the Old Testament Soul in some places stands for a dead Body But if that were the sense of the word there will be no opposition in the two Parts of this period The one will be only a redundant repetition of the other Therefore it is much more natural to think that this other Branch concerning Christ's Soul's being left in Hell must relate to that which we commonly understand by Soul if then his Soul was not to be left in Hell then from thence it plainly follows that once it was in Hell and by consequence that Christ's Soul descended into Hell Some very Modern Writers have thought that this is to be understood
that Affectation of Sublimity had denied that there was any Reward and from thence sprung the Sect of the Sadducees so these men perhaps at first mistaking the meaning of the New Testament went wrong only in their Notions and still meant to press the necessity of true Holiness though in another set of Phrases and upon other Motives yet from thence many wild and ungovern'd Notions arose then and were not long ago revived among us All which flowed from their not understanding the Importance of the Word Law in the New Testament in which it stands most commonly for the complex of the whole Iewish Religion in opposition to the Christian as the Word Law when it stands for a Book is meant of the Five Books of Moses The maintaining the whole frame of that Dispensation in opposition to that Liberty which the Apostles granted to the Gentiles as to the Ritual parts of it was the Controversy then in debate between the Apostles and the Judaizing Christians The stating that matter aright is a Key that will open all those difficulties which with it will appear easy and without it insuperable In opposition to these who thought then that the Old Testament having brought the World on to the knowledge of the Messias was now of no more use this Article was framed The Second Part of the Article relates to a more Intricate Matter and that is whether in the Old Testament there were any promises made other than Transitory or Temporal ones and whether they might look for Eternal Salvation in that Dispensation and upon what account Whether Christ was the Mediator in that Dispensation or if they were saved by Virtue of their Obedience to the Laws that were then given them Those who deny that Christ was truly God think that in order to the raising him to those great Characters in which he is proposed in the New Testament it is necessary to assert that he gave the first assurances of Eternal Happiness and of a free and full pardon of all Sins in his Gospel And that in the Old Testament neither the one nor the other were certainly and distinctly understood It is true That if we take the words of the Covenant that Moses made between God and the People of Israel strictly and as they stand they Import only Temporal Blessings That was a Covenant with a Body of Men and with their Posterity as they were a People engaged to the Obedience of that Law Now a National Covenant could only be establish'd in Temporal promises of Publick and Visible Blessings and of a long continuance of them upon their Obedience and in Threatnings of as signal Judgments upon the Violation of them But under those general promises of what was to happen to them Collectively as they made up one Nation every single person among them might and the good men among them did gather the hopes of a future State It is clear that Moses did all along suppose the Being of God the Creation of the World and the promise of the Messias as things fully known and carried down by Tradition to his days So it seems he did also suppose the knowledge of a future State which was then generally believed by the Gentiles as well as the Iews though they had only dark and confused Notions about it But when God was establishing a Covenant with the Iewish Nation a main part of which was his giving them the Land of Canaan for an Inheritance it was not necessary that Eternal Rewards or Punishments should be then proposed to them But from the Tenor of the promises made to their Forefathers and from the General Principles of Natural Religion not yet quite extinguished among them they might gather this That under those Carnal promises Blessings of a higher nature were to be understood And so we see that David had the hope of arriving at the presence of God and at his right hand where he believed there was a fulness of joy and pleasures for evermore And he puts himself in this opposition to the wicked Ps. 16.11 Ps. 17.14 15. That whereas their portion was in this life and they left their substance to their Children he says That as for him he should behold God's Face in righteousness and should be satisfied when he awaked with his likeness which seems plainly to relate to a state after this Life and to the Resurrection He carries this opposition further in another Psalm where after he had said That men in honour did not continue but were like the beasts that perished Ps. 49.14 15. That none of them could purchase immortality for his brother that he should still live for ever and not see Corruption They all died and left their wealth to others and like sheep they were laid in the grave where death should feed on them In opposition to which he says That the upright should have dominion over them in the morning Which is clearly a Poetical Expression for another day that comes after the night of Death As for himself in particular he says That God shall redeem my Soul that is his Life or his Body for in those senses the word Soul is used in the Old Testament from the power of the grave That is from continuing in that state of death for he shall receive me This does very clearly set forth David's belief both of future Happiness and of the Resurrection of his Body To which might be added some other passages in the Psalms Ecclesiastes Ps. 84.11.87.6.90.17.96.17 Eccl. 11.9.12.14 Isa. 25.8.26.19 Dan. 12.2 Isaiah and Daniel In all which it appears That the holy men in that Dispensation did understand That under those promises in the Books of Moses that seemed literally to belong to the Land of Canaan and other Temporal Blessings there was a Spiritual meaning hid which it seems was conveyed down by that Succession of Prophets that was among them as the mystical sense of them It is to this that our Saviour seems to appeal when the Sadducees came to puzzle him with that question of the seven Brethren who had all married one Wife He first tells them They erred not knowing the Scriptures which plainly Imports That the Doctrine which they denied was contained in the Scriptures Matt. 22. ●● and then he goes to prove it not from those more express passages that are in the Prophets and Holy Writers which as some think the Sadducees rejected but from the Law which being the Source of their Religion it might seem a just prejudice against any Doctrine especially if it was of great Consequence that it was not contained in the Law Therefore he cites these words that are so often repeated and that were so much considered by the Iews as containing in them the Foundation of God's love to them that God said upon many occasions particularly at his first appearance to Moses I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Iacob Which words imported not only that
God and damnation So Temporary Judgments are often expressed in Scripture And to this they add That Christ has entirely redeemed us from this by the Promise he has given us of raising us up at the Last Day And that therefore when St. Paul is so copiously discoursing of the Resurrection he brings this in That as we have born the image of the first Adam who was earthy so we shall also bear the image of the heavenly and since by man came death 1 Cor. 15.21 22. In Ep. ad Rom. passim by man came also the resurrection from the dead and that as in Adam all dye so in Christ shall all be made alive and that this is the Univesal Redemption and Reparation that all mankind shall have in Christ Jesus All this these Divines apprehend is conceivable and no more therefore they put Original Sin in this only for which they pretend they have all the Fathers with them before St. Austin and particularly St. Chrysostom and Theodoret from whom all the latter Greeks have done little more than copied out their words This they do also pretend comes up to the words of the Article for as this general adjudging of all men to dye may be called according to the Stile of the Scriptures God's wrath and damnation so the fear of Death which arises out of it corrupts mens Natures and inclines them to evil Others do so far approve of all this as to think that it is a part of Original Sin yet they believe it goes much farther and that there is a Corruption spread through the whole Race of Mankind which is born with every man This the Experience of all Ages teaches us but too evidently every man feels it in himself and sees it in others The Philosophers who were sensible of it thought to avoid the difficulty that arises from it when it might be urged That a good God could not make men to be Originally depraved and wicked they therefore fancied that all our Souls pre-existed in a former and purer state from which they fell by descending too much into Corporeal pleasure and so both by a lapse and for a punishment they sunk into grosser Bodies and fell differently according to the different degrees of the Sins they had committed in that state And they thought that a Virtuous Life did raise them up to their former pitch as a Vicious one would sink them lower into more depraved and more miserable Bodies All this may seem plausible But the best that can be said for it is That it is an Hypothesis that saves some difficulties but there is no sort of proofs to make it appear to be true We neither perceive in our selves any remembrances of such a state nor have we any warning given us either of our fall or of the means of recovering out of it So since there is no reason to affirm this to be true we must seek for some other source of the Corruption of human Nature The Manichees imputed it to the Evil God and thought it was his work which some say might have set on St. Austin the more earnestly to look for another Hypothesis to reconcile all But before we go to that it is certain that in Scripture this general Corruption of our Nature is often mentioned The Imaginations of man's thoughts are only evil continually Gen. 6.5.8.21 1 Kings 8.46 Prov. 24.16 Jer. 17.9 2 Cor. 5.17 Eccl. 7.20 Gal. 5.17 Rom. 8.7 8. John 3.6 What man is he that liveth and sinneth not The just man falleth seven times a day The heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked who can know it All that are in Christ must become new Creatures old things must be done away and every thing must become new God made man upright but he sought out to himself many Inventions The Flesh is weak The Flesh lusteth against the Spirit The carnal mind is enmity to the law of God and is not subject to the law of God neither indeed can be And they that are in the Flesh cannot please God Where by Flesh is to be meant the natural State of Mankind according to those words That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit These with many other places of Scripture to the same purpose when they are joined to the universal Experience of all Mankind concerning the Corruption of our whole Race lead us to settle this point that in Fact it has over-run our whole kind the contagion is spread over all Now this being setled we are next to enquire how this could happen We cannot think that God made men so For it is expresly said Gen. 1 27. That God made man after his own Image The surest way to find out what this Image was at first is to consider What the New Testament says of it when we come to be restored to it We must put on the new man Eph. 4.22 24. after the Image of him that created him or as elsewhere the new man in righteousness and true holiness This then was the Image of God in which man was at first made Nor ought the Image of God to be considered only as an Expression that imports only our representing him here on Earth and having Dominion over the Creatures For in Genesis the Creation of Man in the Image of God is expressed as a thing different from his Dominion over the Creatures Gen. 1.27 28. which seems to be given to him as a consequent of it The Image of God seems to be this That the Soul of Man was a Being of another Sort and Order than all those material Beings till then made which were neither capable of Thought nor Liberty in which respect the Soul was made after the Image of God But Adam's Soul being put in his Body his Brain was a Tabula rasa as White Paper had no Impressions in it but such as either God put in it or such as came to him by his senses A Man born deaf and blind newly come to hear and see is not a more Ignorant and Amazed-like Creature than Adam must have been if God had not conveyed some great impressions into him such as first the acknowledging and obeying him as his Maker and then the managing his Body so as to make it an Instrument by which he could make use of and observe the Creation There is no reason to think that his Body was at first inclined to Appetite and that his Mind was apt to serve his Body but that both were restrained by supernatural Assistances It is much more natural and more agreeable to the words of the Wise-man to think that God made man upright that his Body craved modestly and that his Mind was both Judge and Master of those cravings and if a natural Hypothesis may be offered but only as an Hypothesis it may be supposed That a Man's blood was naturally low and cool but that it was
capable of a vast Inflammation and Elevation by which a man's powers might be exalted to much higher degrees of Knowledge and Capacity The Animal Spirits receiving their Quality from that of the Blood a new and a strong Fermentation in the Blood might r●ise them and by consequence exalt a man to a much greater sublimity of Thought But with that it might dispose him to be easily inflamed by Appetites and Passions it might put him under the power of his Body and make his Body much more apt to be fired at outward Objects which might sink all Spiritual and pure Ideas in him and raise gross ones with much Fury and Rapidity Hereby his whole frame might be much corrupted and that might go so deep in him that all those who descended from him might be defiled by it as we see Madness and some Chronical Diseases pass from Parents to their Children All this might have been natural and as much the Physical effect of Eating the forbidden Fruit as it seems Immortality would have been that of Eating the Fruit of the Tree of Life This might have been in its nature a slow poison which must end in Death at last It may be very easy to make all this appear probable from Physical Causes A very small Accident may so alter the whole Mass of the Blood that in a very few Minutes it may be totally changed so the Eating the forbidden Fruit might have by a natural chain of things produced all this But this is only an Hypothesis and so is left as such All the Assistance that Revealed Religion can receive from Philosophy is to shew That a reasonable Hypothesis can be offered upon Physical Principles to shew the possibility or rather probability of any particulars that are contained in the Scriptures This is enough to s●op the mouths of Deists which is all the use that can be made of such Schemes To return to the main Point of the Fall of Adam He himself was made liable to Death But not barely to cease to live for Death and Life are terms opposite to one another in Scripture In Treating upon these Heads it is said That the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life Rom. 6.23 And though the addition of the word Eternal makes the Signification of the one more express yet where it is mentioned without that addition no doubt is to be made but that it is to be so meant As where it is said That to be carnally minded is death but to be spiritually minded is life and peace And believing we have life through his Name Rom. 8.6 Joh. 20.31 Joh. 5.50 Ye will not come unto me that ye may have life So by the rule of Opposites Death ought to be understood as a word of a general Signification which we who have the Comment of the New Testament to guide us in understanding the Old are not to restrain to a natural Death and therefore when we are said to be the servants of sin unto death we unders●and much more by it than a natural Death So God's threatning of Adam with Death ought not to be restrained to a natural Death Adam being thus defiled all Emanations from him must partake of that vitiated State to which he had brought himself But then the Question remains How came the Souls of his Posterity to be defiled for if they were created pure it seems to be an unjust Cruelty to them to condemn them to such an Union to a defiled Body as should certainly corrupt them All that can be said in Answer to this is That God has setled it as a Law in the Creation That a Soul should inform a Body according to the Texture of it and either conquer it or be mastered by it as it should be differently made and that as such a degree of Purity in the Texture of it might make it both pure and happy so a contrary degree of Texture might have very contrary effects And if with this God made another general Law that when all things were duly prepared for the propagation of the Species of Mankind a Soul should be always ready to go into and animate those first Threads and Beginnings of Life those Laws being laid down Adam by corrupting his own frame corrupted the frame of his whole Posterity by the general course of Things and the great Law of the Creation So that the suffering this to run through all the Race is no more only different in degrees and extent than the Suffering the folly or madness of a man to infect his Posterity In these things God acts as the Creator of the World by general Rules and these must not be altered because of the Sins and Disorders of men But they are rather to have their course that so Sin may be its own punishment The defilement of the Race being thus stated a Question remains Whether this can be properly called a Sin and such as deserves God's Wrath and Damnation On the one hand an opposition of Nature to the Divine Nature must certainly be hateful to God as it is the root of much malignity and sin Such a Nature cannot be the Object of his Love and of it self it cannnot be accepted of God Now since there is no mean in God between Love and Wrath Acceptation and Condemnation if such persons are not in the first order they must be in the second Yet it seems very hard on the other hand to apprehend how persons who have never actually sinned but are only unhappily descended should be in consequence to that under so great a misery To this several answers are made Some have thought that those who die before they commit any actual Sin have indeed no share in the favour of God but yet that they pass unto a state in the other World in which they suffer little or nothing The stating this more clearly will belong to another Opinion which shall be afterwards Explained There is a further Question made Whether this Vicious Inclination is a Sin or not Those of the Church of Rome as they believe that Original Sin is quite taken away by Baptism so finding that this corrupt Disposition still remains in us they do from thence conclude that it is no part of Original Sin but that this is the Natural State in which Adam was made at first only it is in us without the restraint or bridle of Supernatural Assistances which was given to him but lost by Sin and restored to us in Baptism But as was said formerly Adam in his first state was made after the Image of God so that his bodily powers were perfectly under the command of his mind This Revolt that we feel our Bodies and Senses are always in cannot be supposed to be God's Original Workmanship There are great Disputings raised concerning the meaning of a long Discourse of St. Paul's the 7th of the Romans concerning a constant struggle that he felt within himself which some arguing
other Church has them equally with her or beyond her If all these must be discussed before we can settle this Question Which is the true Infallible Church A Man must stay long e're he can come to a point in it Therefore there can be no other way taken here but to examine first What makes a particular Church And then since the Catholick Church is an united Body of all particular Churches when the true Notion of a particular Church is fixed it will be easy from that to form a Notion of the Catholick Church It would seem reasonable by the Method of all Creeds in particular of that called the Apostles Creed that we ought first to settle our Faith as to the great Points of the Christian Religion and from thence go to settle the Notion of a true Church And that we ought not to begin with the Notion of a Church and from thence go to the Doctrine The Doctrine of Christianity must be first stated and from this we are to take our measures of all Churches and that chiefly with respect to that Doctrine which every Christian is bound to believe Here a distinction is to be made between those Capital and Fundamental Articles without which a Man cannot be esteemed a true Christian nor a Church a true Church And other Truths which being delivered in Scripture all Men are indeed obliged to believe them yet they are not of that nature that the Ignorance of them or an Error in them can exclude from Salvation To make this sensible It is a Proposition of another sort That Christ died for Sinners than this That he died at the Third or at the Sixth Hour And yet if the Second Proposition is expresly revealed in Scripture we are bound to believe it Since God has said it though it is not of the same nature with the other Here a Controversie does naturally arise that wise People are unwilling to meddle with What Articles are Fundamental and what are not The defining of Fundamental Articles seems on the one hand to deny Salvation to such as do not receive them all which Men are not willing to do And on the other hand it may seem a leaving Men at liberty as to all other particulars that are not reckoned up among the Fundamentals But after all the Covenant of Grace the Terms of Salvation and the Grounds on which we expect it seem to be things of another nature than all other truths which though revealed are not of themselves the Means or Conditions of Salvation Wheresoever true Baptism is there it seems the Essentials of this Covenant are preserved For if we look on Baptism as a Foederal admission into Christianity there can be no Baptism where the Essence of Christianity is not preserved As far then as we believe that any Society has preserved that so far we are bound to receive her Baptism and no further For unless we consider Baptism as a sort of a Charm that such words joined with a washing with Water make one a Christian which seems to be expresly contrary to what St. Peter says of it 1 Pet. ● 21 That it is not the washing away the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good Conscience towards God that saves us We must conclude That Baptism is a Foederal thing in which after that the Sponsions are made the Seal of Regeneration is added From hence it will follow That all who have a true Baptism that makes Men Believers and Christians must also have the true Faith as to the Essentials of Christianity The Fundamentals of Christirnity seems to be all that is necessary to make Baptism True and Valid And upon this a distinction is to be made that will discover and destroy a Sophism that is often used on this occasion A True Church is in one sense a Society that preserves the Essentials and Fundamentals of Christianity In another sense it stands for a Society all whose Doctrines are true that has corrupted no part of this Religion nor mixed any Errors with it A true Man is one who has a Soul and a Body that are the Essential Constituents of a Man Whereas in another sense a Man of Sincerity and Candor is called a true Man Truth in the one Sense imports the Essential Constitution and in the other it imports only a Quality that is accidental to it So when we acknowledge that any Society is a true Church we ought to be supposed to mean no other than that the Covenant of Grace in its Essential Constituent parts is preserved entire in that Body and not that it is true in all its Doctrines and Decisions The Second thing to be considered in a Church is their Association together in the use of the Sacraments For these are given by Christ to the Society as the Rites and Badges of that Body That which makes particular Men Believers is their receiving the Fundamentals of Christianity so that which constitutes the Body of the Church is the Profession of that Faith and the use of those Sacraments which are the Rites and Distinctions of those who profess it In this likewise a distinction is to be made between what is Essential to a Sacrament and what is the exact observance of it according to the Institution Additions to the Sacraments do not annul them though they corrupt them with that adulterate mixture Therefore where the Sponsions are made and washing with Water is used with the words of Christ there we own that there is a true Baptism Though there may be a large Addition of other Rites which we reject as Superstitious though we do not pretend that they null the Baptism But if any part of the Institution is cut off there we do not own the Sacrament to be true Because it being an Institution of Christ's it can no more be esteemed a true Sacrament than as it retains all that which by the Institution appears to be the main and essential parts of the Action Upon this account it is That since Christ appointed Bread and Wine fo his other Sacrament and that he not only blessed both but distributed both with words appropriated to each kind we do not esteem that to be a true Sacrament in which either the one or the other of these kinds is w ithdrawn But in the next place there may be many things necessary in the way of Precept and Order both with relation to the Sacraments and to the other publick Acts of Worship in which tho' Additions or Defects are Erroneous and Faulty yet they do not annul the Sacraments We think none ought to Baptize but Men dedicated to the Service of God and Ordained according to that Constitution that was settled in the Church by the Apostles and yet Baptism by Laicks or by Women such as is most commonly practiced in the Roman Church is not esteemed null by us nor is it repeated Because we make a difference between what is Essential to a Sacrament and what is
the Phrases would grow old and sound harshly A few Alterations once in an Age will set this matter right besides that the use of such Forms does fix a Language at least as to those Phrases that are used in it which grow to be so familiar to our Ears by constant use that they do not so easily wear out It is above Eighty Years since the present Translation of the Bible was made and above One hundred and forty since our Liturgy was compiled and yet we perceive no uncouthness in the Phrases The simplicity in which such Forms must be drawn makes them not so subject to Alteration as other Composures of Rhetorick or Poetry but can it be thought any inconveniency now and then to alter a little the Words or Phrases of our Service Much less can that be thought of weight enough to balance the vaster prejudice of keeping whole Nations in Ignorance and of extinguishing Devotion by entertaining it with a Form of Worship that is not understood Nor can this be avoided by saying that the People are furnished with Forms in their own Language into which the greatest part of the Publick Offices are translated For as this is not done but since the Reformation began and in those Nations only where the Scandal that is given by an Unknown Language might have as they apprehend ill effects so it is only an Artifice to keep those still in their Communion whom such a gross Practice if not thus disguised might otherwise drive from them But still the Publick Worship has no Edification in it nor can those who do not understand it say Amen according to St. Paul Finally they urge the Communion of Saints in order to which they think it is necessary that Priests wheresoever they go may be able to officiate which they cannot do if every Nation Worships God in its own Language And this was indeed very necessary in those Ages in which the See of Rome did by Provisions and the other Inventions of the Canonists dispose of the best Benefices to their own Creatures and Servants That Trade would have been spoiled if Strangers might not have been admitted till they had learned the Language of the Country And thus instead of taking care of the People that ought to be edified by the Publick Worship Provision was made at their cost for such Vagrant Priests as have been in all Ages the Scandals of the Church and the Reproaches of Religion ARTICLE XXV Of the Sacraments Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only Badges or Tokens of Christian Mens Profession but rather they be certain sure Witnesses and effectual Signs of Grace and God's Will towards us by the which he doth work invisibly in us and doth not only quicken but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him There are Two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel that is to say Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. Those five commonly called Sacraments that is to say Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimony and Extream Unction are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles partly are States of Life allowed in the Scriptures but yet have not like Nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper for that they have not any visible Sign or Ceremony ordained of God The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon or to be carried about but that we should duly use them And in such only as worthily receive the same they have a wholsome Effect or Operation but they that receive them unworthily purchase to themselves Damnation as St. Paul saith THERE is a great Diversity between the Form of this Article as it is now settled and that published by King Edward which begun in these Words Our Lord Iesus Christ gathered his People into a Society by Sacraments very few in number most easily to be kept and of most excellent Signification that is to say Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. There is nothing in that Edition instead of the Paragraph concerning the other five pretended Sacraments Next comes the Paragraph which is here the last only with the Addition of these Words after Operation Not as some say ex opere operato which Terms as they are strange and utterly unknown to the Holy Scripture so do they yield a Sense which savoureth of little Piety but of much Superstition And in conclusion the Paragraph comes with which the Article does now begin so that in all this Diversity there is no real difference For the Virtue of the Sacraments being put in the worthy receiving excludes the Doctrine of Opus operatum as formally as if it had expresly been condemned and the naming the Two Sacraments instituted by Christ is upon the Matter the rejecting of all the rest It was most natural to begin this Article with a Description of Sacraments in General This difference is to be put between Sacraments and other Ritual Actions that whereas other Rites are Badges and Distinctions by which the Christians are known a Sacrament is more than a bare matter of Form and as in the Old Testament Circumcision and Propitiatory Sacrifices were things of a different Nature and Order from all the other Ritual Precepts concerning their Cleansings the Distinctions of Days Places and Meats These were indeed Precepts given them of God but they were not federal Acts of renewing the Covenant or reconciling themselves to God By Circumcision they received the Seal of the Covenant and were brought under the Obligation of the whole Law they were by it made Debtors to it and when by their Sins they had provoked God's Wrath they were reconciled to him by their Sacrifices with which Atonement was made and so their Sins were forgiven them The Nature and End of those was to be federal Acts in the offering of which the Iews kept to their part of the Covenant and in the accepting of which God maintained it on his part so we see a plain difference between these and a meer Rite which though commanded yet must pass only for the Badge of a Profession as the doing of it is an Act of Obedience to a Divine Law Now in the new Dispensation though our Saviour has eased us of that Law of Ordinances that grievous Yoke and those beggarly Elements which were laid upon the Iews yet since we are still in the Body subject to our Senses and to sensible things he has appointed some federal Actions to be both the visible Stipulations and Professions of our Christianity and the conveyances to us of the Blessings of the Gospel There are two Extremes to be avoided in this Matter The one is of the Church of Rome that teaches That as some Sacraments imprint a Character upon the Soul which they define to be a Physical Quality that is Supernatural and Spiritual so they do all carry along with them such a Divine Virtue that by the very receiving them the
impossible to understand it so we conclude that we are in the Right to understand the whole Period in a mystical and figurative Sense And therefore since a Man born and bred a Iew and more particularly accustomed to the Paschal Ceremonies could not have understood our Saviour's Words chiefly at the time of that Festivity otherwise than of a New Covenant that he was to make in which his Body was to be broken and his blood shed for the remission of Sins and that he was to substitute Bread and Wine to be the lasting Memorials of it in the repeating of which his Disciples were to renew their Covenant with God and to claim a share in the blessings of it this I say was the Sense that must naturally have occurred to a Iew upon all this we must conclude that this is the true Sense of these Words Or that otherwise our Saviour must have enlarged more upon them and expressed his meaning more particularly Since therefore he said no more than what according to the Ideas and Customs of the Iews must have been understood as has been explained we must conclude that it and it only is the true Sense of them But we must next consider the importance of a long Discourse of our Saviour's set down by St. Iohn which seems such a preparation of his Apostles to understand this Institution literally John 6.32 33. that the weight of this Argument must turn upon the meaning of that Discourse The design of that was to shew that the Doctrine of Christ was more Excellent than the Law of Moses that though Moses gave the Israelites Manna from Heaven to nourish their Bodies yet notwithstanding that they died in the Wilderness But Christ was to give his Followers such Food that it should give them Life so that if they did eat of it they should never die Where it is apparent that the Bread and nourishment must be such as the life was and that being Eternal and Spiritual the Bread must be so understood For it is clearly expressed how that Food was to be received he that believeth on me hath everlasting life 40. v. Since then he had formerly said that the Bread which he was to give should make them live for ever and since here it is said that this Life is given by Faith then this Bread must be his Doctrine For this is that which Faith receives And when the Iews desired him to give them evermore of that Bread he answered I am the bread of life he that comes to me shall never hunger 47 48 51. v. and he that believeth on me shall never thirst In these words he tells them that they received that Bread by coming to him and by believing on him Christ calls himself that Bread and says that a Man must eat thereof which is plainly a Figure and if Figures are confessed to be in some Parts of their Discourse there is no reason to deny that they run quite through it Christ says that this Bread was his flesh which he was to give for the life of the world which can only be meant of his Offering himself up upon the Cross for the Sins of the World The Iews murmured at this and said how can this Man give us his flesh to eat To which our Saviour answers That except they did eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man 53 54 55. v. they had no life in them Now if these words are to be understood of a literal eating of his Flesh in the Sacrament then no Man can be saved that does not receive it It was a natural Consequence of the expounding these Words of the Sacrament to give it to Children since it is so expresly said that Life is not to be had without it But the words that come next carry this Matter farther whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life It is plain that Christ is here speaking of that without which no Man can have Life and by which all who receive it have Life if therefore this is to be expounded of the Sacrament none can be damned that does receive it and none can be saved that receives it not Therefore since eternal life does always follow the eating of Christ's flesh and the drinking his blood and cannot be had without it then this must be meant of an Internal and Spiritual feeding on him For as none are saved without that so all are saved that have it This is yet clearer from the words that follow my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed It may well be inferred that Christ's Flesh is eaten in the same Sense in which he says it is meat now certainly it is not literally meat For none do say that the Body is nourished by it and yet there is somewhat Emphatical in this since the word indeed is not added in vain but to give weight to the Expression It is also said He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood dwells in me and I in him ●6 v. Here the description seems to be made of that eating and drinking of his Flesh and Blood that it is such as the mutual indwelling of Christ and Believers is Now that is certainly only Internal and Spiritual and not Carnal or Literal And therefore such also must the eating and drinking be All this seems to be very fully confirmed from the Conclusion of that Discourse which ought to be considered as the Key to it all for when the Iews were offended at the hardness of Christ's Discourse he said It is the Spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing v. 6● The words I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are Life Which do plainly Import that his former Discourse was to be understood in a spiritual Sense that it was a divine Spirit that quickned them or gave them that eternal Life of which he had been speaking And that the Flesh his natural Body was not the conveyer of it All this is confirmed by the Sense in which we find eating and drinking frequently used in the Scriptures according to what is observed by Iewish Writers they stand for Wisdom Learning and all intellectual Apprehensions through which the Soul of Man is preserved by the Perfection that is in them as the Body is preserved by Food So buy and eat eat fat of things drink of wine well refined Maimonides also observes M●r● Nevochim that whensoever eating and drinking are mentioned in the Book of Proverbs that they are to be understood of Wisdom and the Law And after he has brought several Places of Scripture to this Purpose He concludes that because this acceptation of eating occurs so often and is so manifest as if it were the primary and most proper Sense of the Word therefore hunger and thirst stand for a privation of Wisdom and Vnderstanding And the Caldee Paraphrast turns these Words ye shall draw Water out of the Wells of Salvation thus
as that it can be no where else at the same time And though we can very easily apprehend that an Insinite Power can both create and annihilate Beings at pleasure yet we cannot apprehend that God does change the Essences of Things and so make them to be contrary to that Nature and sort of Being of which he has made them Another Argument against Transubstantiation is this God has made us capable to know and serve him And in order to that he has put some S●nses in us which are the conveyances of many subtile Motions to our Brains that give us Apprehensions of the Objects which by those Motions are represented to us When those Motions are lively and the Object is in a due distance when we feel that neither our Organs nor our Faculties are under any disorder and when the Impression is clear and strong we are determined by it We cannot help being so When we see the Sun risen and all is bright about us it is not possible for us to think that it is dark Night No authority can impose it on us we are not so far the Masters of our own Thoughts as to force our selves to think it though we would for God has made us of such a Nature that we are determined by such an Evidence and cannot contradict it When an Object is at too great a distance we may mistake a weakness or an ill disposition in our sight may misrepresent it and a false Medium Water a Cloud or a Glass may give it a tincture or cast so that we may see cause to correct our first Apprehensions in some Sensations but when we have duly examined every thing when we have corrected one Sense by another we grow at last to be so sure by the Constitution of that Nature that God has given us that we cannot doubt much less believe in contradiction to the express Evidence of our Senses It is by this Evidence only that God convinces the World of the Authority of those whom he sends to speak in his Name He gives them a Power to work Miracles which is an Appeal to the Senses of Mankind and it is the highest Appeal that can be made for those who stood out against the Conviction of Christ's Miracles had no Cloak for their Sins It is the utmost Conviction that God offers or that Man can pretend to From all which we must infer this That either our Senses in their clearest Apprehensions or rather Representations of Things must be Infallible or we must throw up all Faith and Certainty since it is not possible for us to receive the Evidence that is given us of any thing but by our Senses and since we do naturally acquiesce in that Evidence we must acknowledge that God has so made us that this is his voice in us because it is the voice of those Faculties that he has put in us and is the only way by which we can find out Truth and be led by it And if our Faculties fail us in any one thing so that God should reveal to us any thing that did plainly contradict our Faculties he should thereby give us a right to disbelieve them for ever If they can mistake when they bring any Object to us with the fullest Evidence that they can give we can never depend upon them nor be certain of any thing because they shew it Nay we are not and cannot be bound to believe that nor any other Revelation that God may make to convince us We can only receive a Revelation by hearing or reading by our Ears or our Eyes So if any part of this Revelation destroys the certainty of the Evidence that our Senses our Eyes or our Ears give us it destroys it self for we cannot be bound to believe it upon the Evidence of our Senses if this is a part of it that our Senses are not to be trusted Nor will this matter be healed by saying that certainly we must believe God more than our Senses And therefore if he has revealed any thing to us that is contrary to their Evidence we must as to that pa●ticular believe God before our Senses But that as to all other things where we have not an express Revelation to the contrary we must still believe our Senses There is a difference to be made between that feeble Evidence that our Senses give us of remote Objects or those loose Inferences that we may make from a slight view of Things and the full Evidence that Sense gives us as when we see and smell to we handle and taste the same Object This is the voice of God to us he has made us so that we are determined by it And as we should not believe a Prophet that wrought ever ●o many Miracles if he should contradict any part of that which God had already revealed so we cannot be bound to believe a Revelation contrary to our Sense because that were to believe God in contradiction to Himself which is impossible to be true For we should believe that Revelation certainly upon an Evidence which it self tells us is not certain and this is a Contradiction We believe our Senses upon this foundation because we reckon there is an Intrinsick certainty in their Evidence we do not believe them as we believe another Man upon a Moral presumption of his Truth and Sincerity but we believe them because such is the nature of the Union of our Souls and Bodies which is the work of God that upon the full Impressions that are made upon the Senses the Soul does necessarily produce or rather feel those Thoughts and Sensations arise with a full Evidence that correspond to the motions of sensible Objects upon the Organs of Sense The Soul has a sagacity to examine these Sensations to correct one Sense by another but when she has used all the means she can and the Evidence is still clear she is perswaded and cannot help being so she naturally takes all this to be true because of the necessary connexion that she feels between such Sensations and her assent to them Now if she should find that she could be mistaken in this even tho' she should know this by a Divine Revelation all the Intrinsick certainty of the Evidence of Sense and that connexion between those Sensations and her assent to them should be hereby dissolved To all this another Objection may be made from the Mysteries of the Christian Religion which contradict our Reasons and yet we are bound to believe them altho' Reason is a faculty much superior to Sense But all this is a mistake we cannot be bound to believe any thing that contradicts our Reasons for the Evidence of Reason as well as that of Sense is the voice of God to us But as great difference is to be made between a feeble Evidence that Sense gives us of an Object that is at a distance from us or that appears to us through a false Medium such as a Concave or a Convex-Glass
our Saviour's speaking of giving his Flesh to them to eat it he adds They foolishly and carnally thought Lib. 20. con Faust. c. 21. in Psal. 98. v. 5. that he was to cut off some parcels of his Body to be given to them but he shews that there was a Sacrament hid there and he thus Paraphrases that Passage The words that I have spoken to you they are spirit and life Vnderstand spiritually that which I have said for it is not this Body which you see that you are to eat or to drink this Blood which they shall shed who crucifie me But I have recommended a Sacrament to you which being spiritually understood shall quicken you And tho' it be necessary that it be celebrated visibly yet it must be understood invisibly Primasius compares the Sacrament to a Pledge Comm. in 1 Ep. ad Cor. which a dying Man leaves to any one whom he loved But that which is more Important than the Quotation of any of the words of the Fathers is that the Author of the Books of the Sacraments which pass under the Name of St. Ambrose Lib. 4. d● Sacram. c. 5. tho' it is generally agreed that those Books were writ some Ages after his Death gives us the Prayer of Consecration as it was used in his time He calls it the Heavenly Words and sets it down The Offices of the Church are a clearer Evidence of the Doctrine of that Church than all the Discourses that can be made by any Doctor in it the one is the Language of the whole Body whereas the other are only the private reasonings of particular Men And of all the Parts of the Office the Prayer of Consecration is that which does most certainly set out to us the sense of that Church that used it But that which makes this Remark the more Important is that the Prayer as set down by this pretended St. Ambrose is very near the same with that which is now in the Canon of the Mass only there is one very Important variation which will best appear by setting both down That of St. Ambrose's is Fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura Corporis Sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi qui pridie quam pateretur c. That in the Canon of the Mass is Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quae sumus benedictam ascriptam ratam rationabilem acceptabilemque facere digneris ut nobis Corpus Sanguis fiat dilectissimi filii tui Domini nostri Iesu Christi We do plainly see so great a resemblance of the later to the former of these two Prayers that we may well conclude that the one was begun in the other but at the same time we observe an Essential difference In the former this Sacrifice is called the Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ. Whereas in the later it is Prayed that it may become to us the Body and Blood of Christ. As long as the former was the Prayer of Consecration it is not pofsible for us to imagine that the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence could be received for that which was believed to be the true Body and Blood of Christ could not be called especially in such a part of the Office the Figure of his Body and Blood and therefore the change that was made in this Prayer was an evident proof of a change in the Doctrine and if we could tell in what Age that was done we might then upon greater certainty fix the time in which this change was made or at least in which the inconsistency of that Prayer with this Doctrine was observed I have now set down a great variety of Proofs reduced under different Heads from which it appears evidently that the Fathers did not believe this Doctrine but that they did affirm the contrary very expresly This Sacrament continued to be so long considered as the Figure or Image of Christ's Body that the Seventh General Council which met at Constantinople in the Year 754 and consisted of above Three hundred and thirty Bishops when it condemned the Worship of Images affirmed that this was the only Image that we might lawfully have of Christ and that he had appointed us to offer this Image of his Body to wit the Substance of the Bread That was indeed contradicted with much confidence by the Second Council of Nice in which in opposition to what appears to this day in all the Greek Liturgies and the Greek Fathers they do positively deny that the Sacrament was ever called the Image of Christ and they affirm it to be the true Body of Christ. In conclusion I shall next shew how this Doctrine crept into the Church for this seems plausible that a Doctrine of this nature could never have got into the Church in any Age if those of the Age that admitted it had not known that it had been the Doctrine of the former Age and so upwards to the Age of the Apostles It is not to be denied but that very early both Iustin Martyr and Irenaeus thought that there was such a Sanctification of the Elements that there was a Divine Vertue in them And in those very Passages which we have urg'd from the Arguings of the Fathers against the Eutychians tho' they do plainly prove that they believed that the Substance of Bread and Wine did still remain yet they do suppose an Union of the Elements to the Body of Christ like that of the Human Nature's being united to the Divine here a Foundation was laid for all the Superstructure that was afterwards raised upon it For tho' the Liturgies and Publick Offices continued long in the first simplicity yet the Fathers who did very much study Eloquence chiefly the Greek Fathers carried this matter very far in their Sermons and Homilies They did only apprehend the Profanation of the Sacrament from the unworthiness of those who came to it and being much set on the begetting a due reverence for so holy an action and a seriousness in the performance of it they urg'd all the Topicks that sublime Figures or warm Expressions could help them with and with this exalted Eloquence of theirs we must likewise observe the state that the World fell in in the Fifth Century Vast Swarms out of the North over-run the Roman Empire and by a long continued Succession of new Invaders all was sackt and ruined In the West the Goths were followed by the Vandals the Alans the Gepides the Franks the Sweves the Huns and the Lombards some of these Nations but in conclusion the Saracens and Turks in the East made Havock of all that was polite or learned by which we lost the chief Writings of the first and best Times but instead of these many spurious ones were afterwards produced and they passed easily in dark and ignorant Ages All fell under much oppression and misery and Europe was so over-run with Barbarity and Ignorance that it cannot be easily
whether formally or substantially or some other way Some Schoolmen thought that the Matter of Bread was destroyed but that the Form remained to be the Form of Christ's Body that was the Matter of it Others thought that the Matter of the Elements remained and that the Form only was destroyed But that to which many inclined was the Assumption of the Elements into an Union with the Body of Christ or a hypostatical Union of the eternal Word to them by which they became as truly a Body to Christ as that which he has in Heaven Yet it was not the same but a different Body Stephen Bishop of Autun was the First that fell on the Word of Transubstantiation Amalric in the beginning of the Thirteenth Century denied in express Words the corporal Presence De Sacram Altaris c. 13. He was condemned in the Fourth Council of the Lateran as an Heretick and his Body was ordered to be taken up and burnt And in opposition to him Transubstantiation was decreed Yet the Schoolmen continued to offer different Explanations of this for a great while after that But in conclusion all agreed to explain it as was formerly set forth It appears by the crude Way in which it was at first explained that it was a Novelty And that Men did not know how to mould and frame it but at last it was licked into shape the whole Philosophy being cast into such a Mould as agreed with it And therefore in the present Age in which that Philosophy has lost its Credit great Pains are taken to suppress the New and freer Way of Philosophy as that which cannot be so easily subdued to support this Doctrine as the Old one was And the Arts that those who go into the New Philosophy take to reconcile their Scheme to this Doctrine shew that there is nothing that subtile and unsincere Men will not venture on For since they make Extension to be of the Essence of Matter and think that Accidents are only the Modes of Matter which have no proper being of themselves it is evident that a Body cannot be without its Extension and that Accidents cannot subsist without their Subject so that this can be in no sort reconciled to Transubstantiation And therefore they would willingly avoid this special Manner of the Presence and only in General assert that Christ is corporally Present But the Decrees of the Lateran and Trent Councils make it evident that Transubstantiation is now a Doctrine that is bound upon them by the Authority of the Church and of Tradition And that they are as much bound to believe it as to believe the corporal Presence it self Thus the going off from the Simplicity in which Christ did deliver the Sacrament and in which the Church at first received it into some sublime Expressions about it led Men once out of the way and they still went farther and farther from it Pious and Rhetorical Figures pursued far by Men of heated Imaginations and of inflamed Affections were followed with Explanations invented by colder and more designing Men afterwards and so it increased till it grew by degrees to that which at last it settled on But after all if the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence had rested only in a Speculation tho' we should have judged those who held it to be very bad Philosophers and no good Criticks yet we could have endured it if it had rested there and had not gone on to be a matter of practice by the Adoration and Processions with every thing else of that kind which followed upon it for this corrupted the Worship The Lutherans believe a Consubstantiation and that both Christ's Body and Blood and the Substance of the Elements are together in the Sacrament That some explain by an Vbiquity which they think is communicated to the Human Nature of Christ by which his Body is every where as well as in the Sacrament Whereas others of them think that since the words of Christ must needs be true in a literal sense his Body and Blood is therefore in the Sacrament but in with and under the Bread and Wine All this we think is ill grounded and is neither agreeable to the words of the Institution nor to the nature of things A great deal of that which was formerly set forth in defence of our Doctrine falls likewise upon this The Vbiquity communicated to the Humane Nature as it seems a thing in it self impossible so it gives no more to the Sacrament than to every thing else Christ's Body may be said to be in every thing or rather every thing may be said to be his Body and Blood as well as the Elements in the Sacrament The impossibility of a Bodies being without extension or in more places at once lies against this as well as against Transubstantiation But yet after all this is only a Point of Speculation nothing follows upon it in practice no Adoration is offered to the Elements and therefore we judge that Speculative Opinions may be born with when they neither fall upon the Fundamentals of Christianity to give us false Ideas of the Essential parts of our Religion nor affect our practice and chiefly when the Worship of God is maintained in its Purity for which we see God has expressed so particular a concern giving it the Word which of all others raises in us the most sensible and the strongest Ideas calling it Iealousie that we reckon we ought to watch over this with much caution We can very well bear with some Opinions that we think ill grounded as long as they are only matters of Opinion and have no Influence neither on Mens Morals nor their Worship We still hold Communion with Bodies of Men that as we judge think wrong but yet do both live well and maintain the Purity of the Worship of God We know the great design of Religion is to govern Men's Lives and to give them right Ideas of God and of the Ways of Worshipping him All Opinions that do not break in upon these are things in which great forbearance is to be used large Allowances are to be made for Mens Notions in all other things and therefore we think that neither Consubstantiation nor Transubstantiation how ill grounded soever we take both to be ought to dissolve the Union and Communion of Churches But it is quite another thing if under either of these Opinions an Adoration of the Elements is taught and practised This we believe is plain Idolatry when an Insensible piece of Matter such as Bread and Wine has Divine Honours paid it when it is believed to be God when it is called God and is in all respects Worshipped with the same Adoration that is offered up to Almighty God This we think is gross Idolatry Many Writers of the Church of Rome have acknowledged that if Transubstantiation is not true their Worship is a strain of Idolatry beyond any that is practised among the most depraved of all the Heathens The only excuse that
were a mere question of Words to dispute concerning the term Sacrifice to consider the Extent of that Word and the many various respects in which the Eucharist may be called a Sacrifice In general all Acts of Religious Worship may be called Sacrifices because somewhat is in them offered up to God Let my Prayer be set forth before thee as Incense and the lifting up of my Hands as the evening Sacrifice Psal. 141.2 Psal. 51.17 The Sacrifices of God are a broken Spirit A broken and a contrite Heart O God thou wilt not despise These shew how largely this Word was used in the Old Testament So in the New we are exhorted by him that is by Christ to offer the Sacrifice of Praise to God continually that is the Fruit of our Lips giving Thanks to his Name A Christian's dedicating himself to the Service of God Hebr. 13.15 Rom. 12.1 is also expressed by the same Word of presenting our Bodies a living Sacrifice holy and acceptable to God All Acts of Charity are also called Sacrifices an odour of a sweet smell Phil. 4.10 a Sacrifice acceptable well pleasing to God So in this large Sense we do not deny that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving And our Church calls it so in the Office of the Communion In two other respects it may be also more strictly called a Sacrifice One is because there is an Oblation of Bread and Wine made in it which being sanctified are consumed in an Act of Religion To this many passages in the Writings of the Fathers do relate This was the Oblation made at the Altar by the People And though at first the Christians were reproached as having a strange sort of a Religion in which they had neither Temples Altars nor Sacrifices because they had not those things in so gross a manner as the Heathens had yet both Clemens Romanus Ignatius and all the succeeding Writers of the Church do frequently mention the Oblations that they made And in the Antient Liturgies they did with particular Prayers offer the Bread and Wine to God as the Great Creator of all things Those were called the Gifts or Offerings which were offered to God in imitation of Abel who offered the Fruits of the Earth in a Sacrifice to God Both Iustin Martyr Irenaeus the Constitutions and all the antient Liturgies have very express Words relating to this Another respect in which the Eucharist is called a Sacrifice is because it is a Commemoration and a Representation to God of the Sacrifice that Christ offered for us on the Cross In which we claim to that as to our Expiation and Feast upon it as our Peace-offering according to that antient Notion that Covenants were confirmed by a Sacrifice and were concluded in a Feast on the Sacrifice Upon these Accounts we do not deny but that the Eucharist may be well called a Sacrifice But still it is a commemorative Sacrifice and not propitiatory That is we do not distinguish the Sacrifice from the Sacrament as if the Priests consecrating and consuming the Elements were in an especial manner a Sacrifice any other way than as the communicating of others with him is one Nor do we think that the consecrating and consuming the Elements is an Act that does reconcile God to the Quick and the Dead We consider it only as a federal Act of professing our Belief in the Death of Cstrist and of renewing our Baptismal Covenant with him The Virtue or effects of this are not General they are limited to those who go about this piece of Worship sincerely and devoutly they and they only are concerned in it who go about it And there is no special Propitiation made by this Service It is only an Act of Devotion and Obedience in those that eat and drink worthily and though in it they ought to pray for the whole Body of the Church yet those their Prayers do only prevail with God as they are devout Intercessions but not by any peculiar Virtue in this Action On the other hand the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is that the Eucharist is the highest Act of Homage and Honour that Creatures can offer up to the Creator as being an Oblation of the Son to the Father So that whosoever procures a Mass to be said procures a new piece of Honour to be done to God with which he is highly pleased and for the sake of which he will be reconciled to all that are concerned in the procuring such Masses to be said whether they be still on Earth or if they are now in Purgatory And that the Priest in offering and consuming this Sacrifice performs a true Act of Priesthood by reconciling Sinners to God Somewhat was already said of this on the Head of Purgatory It seems very plain by the Institution that our Saviour as he blessed the Sacrament said Take eat St. Paul calls it a Communion of the Body and Blood of the Lord and a Partaking of the Lord's Table and he through his whole Discourse of it speaks of it as an Action of the Church and of all Christians but does not so much as by a Hint intimate any thing peculiar to the Priest So that all that the Scripture has delivered to us concerning it represents it as an Action of the whole Body in which the Priest has no special share but that of officiating In the Epistle to the Hebrews there is a very long Discourse concerning Sacrifices and Priests in order to the explaining of Christ's being both Priest and Sacrifice There a Priest stands for a Person called and consecrated to offer some living Sacrifice and to slay it and to make reconciliation of Sinners to God by the shedding offering or sprinkling the Blood of the Sacrifice This was the Notion that the Iews had of a Priest And the Apostle designing to prove that the Death of Christ was a true Sacrifice brings this for an Argument that there was to be another Priesthood after the order of Melchisedec He begins the fifth Chapter with settling the Notion of a Priest Heb. 5.10 according to the Iewish Ideas And then he goes on to prove that Christ was such a Priest called of God and Consecrated But in this Sense he appropriates the Priesthood of the New Dispensation singly to Christ in opposition to the many Priests of the Levitical Law And they truly were many Priests because they were not suffered to continue by reason of Death But this Man Heb. 7.24 because he continueth ever hath an unchangeable Priesthood It is clear from the whole Thread of that Discourse that in the strictest Sense of the Word Christ himself is the only Priest under the Gospel and it is also no less evident that his Death is the only Sacrifice in opposition to the many Oblations that were under the Mosaical Law to take away Sin Which appears very plain from these Words Who needeth not daily as those High-Priests to offer up
some of every sort of men Yet they declared openly against the other and said that if men were Circumcised or were willing to come under such a Yoke Christ profited them nothing and upon that supposition he had died in vain From this plain Precedent we see what a difference we ought to make between the holding Errors in Doctrinal Matters 5. Gal. 3. 2. Gal. 21. and the Imposing them as Articles of Faith We may live in Communion with those who hold Errors of the one sort but must not with those of the other This also shews the Tyranny of that Church which has imposed the belief of every one of her Doctrines on the Consciences of her Votaries under the highest pains of Anathema's and as Articles of Faith But whatever those at Trent did This Church very carefully avoided the laying that weight upon even those Doctrines which she received as true and therefore though she drew up a large Form of Doctrine yet to all her Lay-Sons this is only a Standard of what she teaches and the Articles are to them only Articles of Church-Communion The Citations that are brought from those two great Primates Laud and Bramhall go no further than this They do not seem to relate to the Clergy that subscribe them but to the Laity and Body of the People The People who do only join in Communion with us may well continue to do so though they may not be fully satisfied with every Proposition in them Unless they should think that they struck against any of the Articles or Foundations of Faith and as those Great men truly observe there is a great difference to be observed in this particular between the Imperious Spirit of the Church of Rome and the modest freedom which ours allows But I come in the next place to consider what the Clergy is bound to by their Subscriptions The meaning of every Subscription is to be taken from the design of the Imposer and from the words of the Subscription it self The Title of the Articles bears That they were agreed upon in Convocation For the avoiding of diversities of Opinions and for the stablishing consent touching true Religion Where it is evident that a Consent in Opinion is designed If we in the next place consider the Declaration that the Church has made in the Canons we shall find that though by the Fifth Canon which relates to the whole Body of the People such are only declared to be Excommunicated ipso facto who shall affirm any of the Articles to be Erroneous or such as he may not with a good Conscience Subscribe to yet the 36 th Canon is express for the Clergy requiring them to Subscribe willingly and ex animo and acknowledge all and every Article to be agreeable to the word of God Upon which Canon it is that the Form of the Subscription runs in these words which seem expresly to declare a man's own Opinion and not a bare consent to an Article of Peace or an Engagement to silence and submission The Statute of the 13 th of Queen Elizabeth cap. 12. which gives the Legal Authority to our requiring Subscriptions in order to a man's being capable of a Benefice requires that every Clergyman should read the Articles in the Church where he is to serve with a Declaration of his Unfeigned Assent to them These things make it very plain that the Subscriptions of the Clergy must be considered as a Declaration of their own Opinion and not as a bare Obligation to silence There arose in K. Iames the First 's Reign great and warm Disputes concerning the Decrees of God and those other Points that were setled in Holland by the Synod of Dort against the Remonstrants Divines of both sides among us appealed to the Articles and pretended they were favourable to them For though the first appearance of them seems to favour the Doctrine of Absolute Decrees and the Irresistibility of Grace yet there are many expressions that have another face and so those of the other Persuasion pleaded for themselves from these Upon this a Royal Declarations was set forth in which after that mention is made of those Disputes and that the men of all sides did take the Articles to be for them order is given for stopping those Disputes for the future and for shutting them in God's promises as they be generally set forth in the Holy Scriptures and the general meaning of the Articles of the Church of England according to them and that no man thereafter should put his own Sense or Comment to be the meaning of the Article but should take it in the Literal and Grammatical Sense In this there has been such a general acquiescing that the fierceness of these Disputes has gone off while men have been left to Subscribe the Articles according to their Literal and Grammatical Sense From which two Things are to be inferred The one is that the Subscription does import an Assent to the Article and the other is that an Article being conceived in such general words that it can admit of different Literal and Grammatical Senses even when the Senses given are plainly contrary one to another both sides may Subscribe the Article with a good Conscience and without any Equivocation To make this more sensible I shall give an instance of it in an Article concerning which there is no Dispute at present The Third Article concerning Christ's descent into Hell is capable of Three different Senses and all the Three are both Literal and Grammatical The First is that Christ descended locally into Hell and preached to the Spirits there in prison and this has one great advantage on its side that those who first prepared the Articles in K. Edward's Time were of this Opinion for they made it a part of it by adding in the Article those words of St. Peter as the Proof or Explanation of it Now though that period was left out in Q. Elizabeth's Time yet no Declaration was made against it so that this Sense was once in possession and was never expresly rejected Besides that it has great support from the Authority of many Fathers who understood the descent into Hell according to this Explanation A Second Sense of which that Article is capable is That by Hell is meant the Grave according to the Signification of the Original Word in the Hebrew and this is supported by the words of Christ's descending into the lower parts of the Earth as also by this That several Creeds that have this Article have not that or Christ's being buried and some that mention his Burial have not this of his Descent into Hell A Third Sense is That by Hell according to the Signification of the Greek Word is to be meant the Place or Region of Spirits separated from their Bodies So that by Christ's descent into Hell is only to be meant that his Soul was really and entirely disunited from his Body not lying dead in it as in an Apoplectical Fit nor
hovering about it but that it was translated into the Seats of departed Souls All these Three Senses differ very much from one another and yet they are all Senses that are Literal and Grammatical so that in which of these soever a man conceives the Article he may Subscribe it and he does no way prevaricate in so doing If men would therefore understand all the other Articles in the same largeness and with the same equity there would not be that occasion given for unjust Censure that there has been Where then the Articles are conceived in large and general words and have not more special and restrained terms in them we ought to take that for a sure Indication that the Church does not intend to tie men up too severely to particular Opinions but that she leaves all to such a liberty as is agreeable with the Purity of the Faith And this seems sufficient to explain the Title of the Articles and the Subscriptions that are required of the Clergy to them The last thing to be setled is the true Reading of the Articles for there being some small diversity between the Printed Editions and the Manuscripts that were signed by both Houses of Convocation I have desired the assistance both of Dr. Green the present Worthy Master of Corpus Christi College in Cambridge and of some of the Learned Fellows of that Body That they would give themselves the trouble to collate the Printed Editions and their Manuscripts with such a scrupulous exactness as becomes a Matter of this Importance which they were pleased to do very minutely I will set down Both the Collations as they were transmitted to me beginning with that which I had from the Fellows four Years ago These words said to be left out are found in the Original Articles Sign'd by the Chief Clergy of Both Provinces now extant in the Manuscript Libraries of C.C.C.C. in the Book call'd Synodalia but distinguish'd from the rest with Lines of Minium which Lines plainly appear to have been done afterwards because the Leaves and Lines of the Original are exactly numbred at the end which number without these Lines were manifestly false In the Original these words only are found Testamentum vetus novo contrarium non est quandoquidem c. The Latin of the Original is Et quanquam renatis credentibus nulla propter Christum est condemnatio This Article is not found in this Original This is not found This is not found This Article agrees with the Original but these words The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and Authority in Controversies of Faith suppos'd to begin the Article are not found in any part thereof In the fourteenth Line of this Article immediately after these words But yet have not like nature with Baptism and the Lord's Supper follows quomodo nec penitentia which being mark'd underneath with Minium is left out in the Translation This Article agrees with the Original as far as these words and ●ath given occasion to many Superstitions where follows Christus in coelum ascendens corpori suo immortalitatem dedit naturam non abstulit humanae enim naturae veritatem juxta Scripturas perpetuo retinet quam uno definito loco esse non in multa vel omnia simul loca diffundi oportet quum igitur Christus in coelum sublatus ibi usque ad finem faeculi sit permansurus atque inde non aliunde ut loquitur Augustinus venturus sit ad judicandum vivos mortuos non debet quisquam fidelium carnis ejus sanguinis realem corporalem ut loquuntur praesentiam in Eucharistia vel credere vel profiteri These words are mark'd and scrawl'd over with Minium and the words immediately following Corpus tamen Christi datur accipitur manducatur in coena tantum coelesti spirituali ratione are inserted in a different Hand just before them in a line and half left void which plainly appears to be done afterwards by reason the same Hand has alter'd the first number of Lines and for Viginti quatuor made quatuordecem The Three last Articles Viz. The 39th Of the Resurrection of the Dead the 40th That the Souls of men do neither perish with their Bodies neque otiosi dormiant is added in the Original And the 42d That all shall not be saved at last are found in the Original distinguish'd only with a Marginal Line of Minium But the 41st of the Millenarians is wholly left out The number of Articles does not exactly agree by reason some are inserted which are found only in King Edward's Articles but none are wanting that are found in the Original ARTICLE III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell· AS Christ Died for us and was Buried so also it is to be believ'd That he went down into Hell For his Body lay in the Grave till his Resurrection but his Soul being separate from his Body remain'd with the Spirits which were detain●d in Prison that is to say in Hell and there preached unto them ARTICLE VI. The Old Testament is not to be rejected as if it were contrary to the New but to be retained Forasmuch c. ARTICLE IX And although there is no Condemnation to them that believe and are Baptiz'd c. ARTICLE X. Of Grace The Grace of Christ or the Holy Ghost which is given by Him doth c. ARTICLE XVI Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost The Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is then committed when c. ARTICLE XIX All men are bound to keep the Precepts of the Moral Law although the Law given from God c. ARTICLE XX. Of the Authority of the Church It is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Words written c. ARTICLE XXVI Of the Sacraments Sacraments Ordain'd of Christ c. ARTICLE XXIX Of the Lord's Supper The Supper of the Lord's is not only a Sign of c. Corpus Christi Col. Feb. 4 th 1695 6. UPON Examination we judge these to be all the material differences that are unobserv'd between the Original Manuscripts and the B. of Salisbury's Printed Copy Witness our Hands Io. Iaggard Fellow of the said College Roh Mosse Fellow of the said College Will. Lunn Fellow of the said College After I had procured this I was desirous likewise to have the Printed Editions Collated with the Second Publication of the Articles in the Year 1571. in which the Convocation reviewed those of 1562. and made some small Alterations And these were very lately procured for me by my Reverend Friend Dr. Green which I will set down as he was pleased to communicate them to me Note MS. stands for Manuscript and Pr. for Print Art 1. MS. and true God and he is everlasting without Body   Pr. and true God everlasting without Body Art 2. MS. but also for all actual sins of men   Pr. but also for actual sins of men Art 3. MS. so also it
Family did officiate among his Houshold Luke 22.19 1 Cor. 11.23 that it was very Natural to them to understand all that our Saviour said or did according to those Forms with which they were acquainted There were after Supper upon a new covering of the Table Loaves of Unleavened Bread and Cups of Wine set on it in which though the Bread was very unacceptable yet they drank liberally of the Wine Christ took a Portion of that Bread and brake it and gave it to his Disciples and said This is my body which is broken for you Do this in remembrance of me He did not say only this is my body but this is my body broken so that his Body must be understood to be there in its broken State if the Words are to be expounded literally And no reason can be assigned why the Word Broken should be so separated from Body or that the Bread should be literally his Body and not literally his Body broken The whole Period must be either literally True or must be understood mystically And if any will say that his Body cannot be there but in the same state in which it is now in Heaven and since it is not now broken nor is the Blood shed or separated from the Body there therefore the Words must be understood thus This is my Body which is to be broken But from thence we argue that since all is one Period it must be all understood in the same Manner And since it is impossible that Broken and Shed can be understood literally of the Body and Blood that therefore the whole is to be mystically understood and this appears more evident since the Disciples who were naturally slow at understanding the easiest Mysteries that he opened to them must naturally have understood those Words as they did the other Words of the Paschal Supper This is the Lord 's Passover That is this is the Memorial of it And that the rather since Christ added these Words Do this in remembrance of me If they had understood them in any other Sense that must have surprized them and naturally have led them to ask him many Questions Which we find them doing upon Occasions that were much less surprizing as appears by the Questions in the 14th of St. Iohn that discourse coming probably immediately after this Institution Whereas no Question was asked upon this so it is reasonable to conclude that they could understand these Words This is my Body no other way but as they understood that of the Lamb This is the Lord 's Passover And by consequence as their celebrating the Pascha was a constant Memorial of the Deliverance out of Egypt and was a Symbolical Action by which they had a Title to the Blessings of the Covenant that Moses made with their Fathers it was natural for them to conclude that after Christ had made himself to be truly that which the first Lamb was in a Type the true Sacrifice of a greater and better Passover they were to commemorate it and to communicate in the Benefits and Effects of it by continuing that Action of taking blessing breaking and distributing of Bread Which was to be the Memorial and the Communion of his Death in all succeeding Ages This will yet appear more Evident from the Second Part of this Institution he took the Cup and blessed it and gave it to them saying This Cup is the New Testament or New Covenant in my blood drink ye all of it Or as the other Gospels report it This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins As Moses had enjoined the sprinkling of the Blood of the Lamb so he himself sprinkled both the Book of the Law and all the People with the Blood of Calves and of Goats H●b 9.20 saying This is the Blood of the New Testament or Covenant which God had enjoined you The Blood of the Paschal Lamb was the Token of that Covenant which God made then with them The Iews were under a very strict Prohibition of eating no Blood at all But it seems by the Psalms that when they payed their Vows unto God they took in their Hands a cup of Salvation that is Psal. 116. of an acknowledgment of their Salvation and so were to rejoice before the Lord. These being the Laws and Customs of the Iews they could not without Horror have heard Christ when he gave them the Cup say This is my Blood The Prohibition of Blood was given in such severe Terms as that God would set his face against him that did eat blood Levit. 7.26 27. Levit. 17.14 and cut him off from among his people And this was so often repeated in the Books of Moses that besides the natural Horror which Humanity gives at the mention of drinking a Man's Blood it was a special Part of their Religion to make no use of Blood yet after all this the Disciples were not startled at it Which shews that they must have understood it in such a way as was agreeable to the Law and Customs of their Country and since St. Luke and St. Paul report the Words that our Saviour said when he gave it differently from what is reported by St. Matthew and St. Mark it is most probable that he spake both the one and the other that he first said This is my Blood and then as a clearer Explanation of it he said This cup is the New Testament in my Blood The one being a more easy Expression and in a style to which the Iews had been more accustomed They knew that the Blood of the Lamb was sprinkled and by their so doing they entred into a Covenant with God And tho' the Blood was never to be sprinkled after the first Passover yet it was to be poured out before the Lord in remembrance of that sprinkling in Egypt In remembrance of that deliverance they drank of the Cup of Blessing and Salvation and rejoiced before the Lord. So that they could not understand our Saviour otherwise than that the Cup so blessed was to be to them the Assurance of a New Testament or Covenant which was to be established by the Blood of Christ and which was to be shed In lieu of which they were to drink this cup of Blessing and Praise According to their Customs and Phrases the Disciples could understand our Saviour's Words in this Sense and in no other So that if he had intended that they should have understood him otherwise he must have expressed himself in another Manner And must have enlarged upon it to have corrected those Notions into which it was otherwise most Natural for Iews to have fallen Here is also to be remembred that which was formerly observed upon the word Broken that if the Words are to be expounded literally then if the Cup is literally the Blood of Christ it must be his Blood shed poured out of his Veins and separated from his Body And if it is
doubt of the Testimony of our Senses Another presumptive Proof that the Ancients knew nothing of this Doctrine is that the Heathens and the Iews who charged them and their Doctrine with every thing that they could invent to make both it and them odious and ridiculous could never have passed over this in which both Sense and Reason seemed to be so evidently on their side They reproach the Christians for believing a God that was Born a God of Flesh that was crucified and buried They laughed at their belief of a Judgment to come of endless Flames of a heavenly Paradise and of the Resurrection of the Body Those who writ the first Apologies for the Christian Religion Iustin Martyr Tertullian Origen Arnobius and Minutius Felix have given us a large Account of the Blasphemies both of Iews and Gentiles against the Doctrines of Christianity Cyril of Alexandria has given us Iulian's Objections in his own Words who having been not only initiated into the Christian Religion but having read the Scriptures in the Churches and being a Philosophical and Inquisitive Man must have been well instructed concerning the Doctrine and the Sacraments of this Religion And his Relation to the Emperor Constantine must have made the Christians concerned to take more than ordinary Pains on him When he made Apostacy from the Faith he reproached the Christians with the Doctrine of Baptism and laughed at them for thinking that there was an Ablution and Sanctification in it conceiving it a thing Impossible that Water should wash or cleanse a Soul Yet neither he nor Porphiry nor Celsus before them did charge this Religion with the Absurdities of Transubstantiation It is reasonable to believe that if the Christians of that time had any such Doctrine among them it must have been known Every Christian must have known in what Sense those Words This is is my body and This is my blood were understood among them All the Apostates from Christianity must have known it and must have published it to excuse or hide the shame of their Apostacy Since Apostates are apt to spread Lies of them whom they forsake but not to conceal such Truths as are to their Prejudice Iulian must have known it and if he had known it his Judgment was too True and his Malice to the Christian Religion too Quick to overlook or neglect the Advantages which this part of their Doctrine gave him Nor can this be carried off by saying that the eating of human Flesh and the Thyestean Suppers which were objected to the Christians relate to this When the Fathers answer that they tell the Heathens that it was a downright Calumny and Lie And do not offer any Explanations or Distinctions taken from their Doctrine of the Sacrament to clear them from the mistake and malice of this Calumny The Truth is the execrable Practices of the Gnosticks who were called Christians gave the Rise to those as well as to many other Calumnies But they were not at all founded on the Doctrine of the Eucharist which is never once mentioned as the Occasion of this Accusation Another Presumption from which we conclude that the Ancients knew nothing of this Doctrine is that we find Heresies and Disputes arising concerning all the other Points of Religion There were very few of the Doctrines of the Christian Religion and not any of the Mysteries of the Faith that did not fall under great Objections But there was not any one Heresy raised upon this Head Men were never so meek and tame as easily to believe things when there appeared strong Evidence or at least great Presumptions against them In these last Eight or Nine Centuries since this Doctrine was received there has been a perpetual Opposition made to it even in dark and unlearned Ages In which implicite Faith and blind Obedience have carried a great sway And though the Secular Arm has been employed with great and unrelenting Severities to extirpate all that have opposed it Yet all the while many have stood out against it and have suffered much and long for their rejecting it Now it is not to be imagined that such an opposition should have been made to this Doctrine during the nine hundred Years last past and that for the former eight hundred Years there should have been no Disputes at all concerning it And that while all other things were so much questioned that several Fathers writ and Councils were called to settle the Belief of them yet that for about eight hundred Years this was the single Point that went down so easily that no Treatise was all that while writ to prove it nor Council held to establish it Certainly the Reason of this will appear to be much rather that since there have been Contests upon this Point these last Nine Ages and that there were none the first Eight this Doctrine was not known during those First Ages and that the great Silence about it for so long a time is a very strong Presumption that in all that time this Doctrine was not thought of The last of those Considerations that I shall offer which are of the nature of presumptive Proofs is that there are a great many Rites and other practices that have arisen out of this Doctrine as its natural Consequences which were not thought of for a great many Ages but that have gone on by a perpetual progress and have increased very fruitfully ever since this Doctrine was received Such are the Elevation Adoration and Processions together with the Doctrine of Concomitance and a vast number of Rites and Rubricks the first occasions and beginnings of which are well known These did all arise from this Doctrine it being natural especially in the Ages of Ignorance and Superstition for Men upon the supposition of Christ's being Corporally present to run out into all possible Inventions of Pomp and Magnificence about this Sacrament and it is very reasonable to think that since these things are of so late and so certain a date that the Doctrine upon which they are founded is not much ancienter The great Simplicity of the Primitive Forms not only as they are reported by Iustin Martyr and Tertullian in the Ages of the Poverty and Persecutions of the Church but as they are represented to us in the Fourth and Fifth Century by Cyril of Ierusalem the Constitutions and the pretended Areopagite have nothing of that Air that appears in the latter Ages The Sacrament was then given in both kinds it was put in the hands of the Faithful they reserved some portions of it It was given to Children for many Ages The Laity and even Boys were imployed to carry it to dying Penitents what remained of it was burnt in some places and consumed by the Clergy and by Children in other places the making Cataplasms of it the mixing the Wine with Ink to sign the Condemnation of Hereticks are very clear Presumptions that this Doctrine was not then known But above all their not adoring the Sacrament which
is not done to this day in the Greek Church and of which there is no mention made by all those who writ of the Offices of the Church in the Eighth and Ninth Centuries so copiously this I say of their not adoring it is perhaps more than a presumption that this Doctrine was not then thought on But since it was established all the Old Forms and Rituals have been altered and the Adoring the Sacrament is now become the main act of Devotion and of Religious Worship among them One ancient Form is indeed still continued which is of the strongest kind of Presumptions that this Doctrine came in much later than some other Superstitions which we condemn in that Church In the Masses that are appointed on Saints-days there are some Collects in which it is said that the Sacrifice is offered up in honour to the Saint and it is prayed that it may become the more valuable and acceptable by the Merits and Intercessions of the Saint Now when a practice will well agree with one Opinion but not at all with another we have all possible reason to presume at least that at first it came in under that Opinion with which it will agree and not under another which cannot consist with it Our Opinion is that the Sacrament is a federal act of our Christianity in which we offer up our highest Devotions to God through Christ and receive the largest Returns from him It is indeed a Superstitious conceit to celebrate this to the honour of a Saint but howsoever upon the supposition of Saints hearing our Prayers and Interceding for us there is still good sense in this but if it is believed that Christ is Corporally present and that he is offered up in it it is against all Sense and it approaches to Blasphemy to do this to the Honour of a Saint and much more to desire that this which is of infinite value and is the foundation of all God's Blessings to us should receive any addition or increase in its value or acceptation from the Merits or Intercession of Saints So this tho' a late practice yet does fully evince that the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence was not yet thought on when it was first brought into the Office So far I have gone upon the Presumptions that may be offered to prove that this Doctrine was not known to the Ancients They are not only just and lawful Presumptions but they are so strong and violent that when they are well considered they force an assent to that which we infer from them I go next to the more plain and direct Proofs that we find of the Opinion of the Ancients in this Matter They call the Elements Bread and Wine after the Consecration Iustin Martyr calls them Bread and Wine Apolog. 2. and a nourishment which nourished He indeed says it is not common Bread and Wine which shews that he thought it was still so in Substance And he illustrates the Sanctification of the Elements by the Incarnation of Christ in which the human Nature did not lose or change its Substance by its Union with the Divine So the Bread and the Wine do not according to that Explanation lose their proper Substance when they become the Flesh and Blood of Christ. Irenoeus calls it that Bread over which thanks are given and says it is no more common Bread but the Eucharist consisting of two things an earthly and a heavenly Lib. 4. de haer c. 34. Lib. 1. adver Marcion c. 14. Lib. 3 adver Marcion c. 19. Tertullian arguing against the Marcionites who held two Gods and that the Creator of this Earth was the bad God but that Christ was contrary to him urges against them this that Christ made use of the Creatures And says he did not reject Bread by which he represents his own Body And in another Place he says Christ calls Bread his Body That from thence you may understand that he gave the figure of his Body to the Bread Origen says we eat of the Loaves that are set before us Lib. 8. cont●a Celsum Which by prayer are become a certain holy body that sanctifies those who use them with a sound purpose St. Cyprian says Christ calls the Bread that was compounded of many grains Ep. ●6 Ep. 63. his Body And the Wine that is pressed out of many grapes his Blood to shew the Vnion of his People And in another Place writing against those who used only Water but no Wine in the Eucharist He says we cannot see the Blood by which we are Redeemed when Wine is not in the Chalice by which the Blood of Christ is shewed Epiphanius being to Prove that Man may be said to be made after the Image of God though he is not like him urges this In Anchoreto That the Bread is not like Christ neither in his invisible Deity nor in his Incarnate likeness for it is round and without feeling as to its vertue Gregory Nyssen says the Bread in the beginning is common In orat de baptis Christi but after the Mystery has consecrated it it is said to be and is the Body of Christ To this he compares the Sanctification of the mystical Oil of the Water in Baptism and the Stones of an Altar or Church dedicated to God St. Ambrose calls it still Bread De Benedict Patriarch c. 9. Hom. 24. in Ep. ad Cor. and says this Bread is made of the food of the Saints St. Chrysostom on these words the Bread that we break says What is the bread The Body of Christ What are they made to be who take it The Body of Christ. Which shews that he considered the Bread as being so the Body of Christ as the worthy Receivers became his Body which is done not by a change of Substance but by a Sanctification of their Natures St. Ierom says Christ took Bread Comm. in St. Matth. c. 26. that as Melchisedeck had in the figure offered Bread and Wine he might also represent the truth that is in Opposition to the Figure of his Body and Blood St. Augustin does very largely compare the Sacraments being called the Body and Blood of Christ Cit. apud Fulgent de Baptismo with those other Places in which the Church is called his Body and all Christians are his Members Which shews that he thought the One was to be understood Mystically as well as the other He calls the Eucharist frequently our daily Bread and the Sacrament of Bread and Wine All these call the Eucharist Bread and Wine in express Words But when they call it Christ's Body and Blood they call it so after a sort or that it is said to be or with some other mollifying Expression St. Augustin says this plainly Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac Serm. 2. in Psal. 33. Chrys. Ep. ad Caes●r in co●ment in Ep. ad Ga● c. 5. after some sort the Sacrament of the Body of Christ is his Body and