Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
sense_n worship_n worship_v write_v 30 3 4.9076 4 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
A71330 A preservative against popery. [Parts 1-2.] being some plain directions to unlearned Protestants, how to dispute with Romish priests, the first part / by Will. Sherlock ... Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707. 1688 (1688) Wing S3326; Wing S3342; ESTC R14776 130,980 192

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Bondage But is this all that these words Thou shalt have no other Gods before me signifies The Worship of God indeed is supposed in them but the express words of the Law are not for the Worship of the Lord Jehovah but against the Worship of any other Gods before him or besides him But according to our new Expositor this is no part of the Law though according to the express words it is the principal if not the whole meaning of it If this Argument be good viz. That Idolatry is nothing else but the Worship of other Beings besides the Lord Jehovah as Supreme Gods then other Gods in this Commandment must signifie other Supreme Gods and then the Commandment runs thus Thou shalt have no other supreme Gods before me Now this is a very absurd sence because it supposes that men may Believe and Worship more Supreme Gods than one for if there can be but one Supreme God and by Gods in the Commandment be meant Supreme Gods then it is absurd to forbid any man to have other Supreme Gods because no man can acknowledge two Supremes It should have been Thou shalt not have any other God besides me not Gods For though it had been possible for them to have acknowledged some other God to be Supreme and rejected the Lord Jehovah from being Supreme yet they could not have other Supreme Gods. But it is evident that God here forbids the Worship of a Plurality of Gods of other Gods and therefore they could not all be Supreme Gods. But suppose it had been any other God in the single number yet to understand this of a Supream God is very absurd because there is no other supream God but the Lord Jehovah and those who worship but one Supream God worship him and none else For a supream God is not to be pointed at is not to be distinguished by his Person or Features as one man is distinguished from another indeed a Prince may properly say to his Subjects You shall own none but me for your King because they know his Person and can distinguish him from all other men But the Jews never saw God nor any likeness or similitude of him they were not acquainted with his Person nor could they distinguish him from other Gods by any personal Characters they knew him only by his Notion and Character of the Supream Being who made the World and all things in it and brought them by a mighty hand out of the Land of AEgypt Now does it not found very strange that the Supream God who is known only by this Character that he is Supream the great Creator and Soveraign Lord of the World should make a Law that we should worship no other Supream God but himself when it is absolutely impossible that he who worships a Supream and Soveraign God should worship any other God but himself because he alone is the Supream God and therefore those who worship the Supream God under this Notion as Supream worship him and no other Being So that if we will make sense of it the meaning of the first Commandment is plainly this Thou shalt not give Divine Honours to any other Beings as to inferiour Gods as the Idolatrous Practice of the World now is which worships a great many things for Gods but thou shalt worship only one Supream and Soveraign Being the maker and Soveraign Lord of the World which is I my self the Lord Jehovah who brought thee out of the Land of AEgypt out of the House of Bondage When the Supream God commands us to worship himself the meaning must be that we pay our Worship and Adorations to a Supream Being considered as Supream and he who worships such a Supream Being worships the true God whom we can distinguish from false Gods only by this Character that he is Supream And when this Supream Being forbids us to worship any other Gods it must signifie that we must worship nothing which is not Supream not that we must not believe that which is not Supream to be the Supream God which would be ridiculous Nonsence to command them not to own that Being for the Supream God which they know not to be Supream But it may be said that the Heathens did worship some Beings who were not the Supream God as Supream as this Author tells us they did the Sun though no body told him so that I know of for Macrobius whom he cites in this Cause does not say that they worshipped the Sun as Supream God though he says that most of the Gods they worshipped did signifie the Sun But suppose the Sun were the chief Object of their Worship and look'd on as the greatest and most principal God this does not prove that they worshipped it as the Supream God for these are two very different things to be worshipped as the chief God which such a People have and to be worshipped under the Notion of Absolutely Supream Some Pagan Idolaters might worship a Creature as their chief and greatest Deity and might call it their great their greatest God because it is the greatest God they have their King and Prince of Gods as Mr. Selden tells us they called the Sun as being the chief Planet who directed and governed the Influences of the rest not as the Maker of the World as this Author asserts But those who direct their Worship to a Supream and Soveraign Being considered as absolutely Supream infinite in all Perfections the Maker and Governour of the whole World can under this Notion worship no other but the Lord Jehovah because there is no other Supream God but he Which shews that the first Commandment is so far from forbidding the Worship of other Supream Gods besides the Lord Jehovah that to make sense of it these other Gods must be expounded not of Supream but inferiour Deities and it is so far from being the Notion of Idolatry to worship other Supream Beings besides the Lord Jehovah that it is Nonsence to suppose it The true Notion of Idolatry in the first Commandment is to worship some Inferiour Beings together with the Supream God It is a grosser sort of Idolatry when men wholly neglect the Worship of the Supream God and worship some Creature for their greatest and chiefest God and it is worse still when men worship bad Spirits than when they worship good Spirits together with the Supream God but it is evident this Law condemns the Worship of any Inferiour Beings though we do also worship the Supream God. I shall give but one Instance more of this nature and that is the second Commandment which in such express words forbids the Worship of all Images of what kind or nature soever Now whatever Reasons men may imagine there are for the Worship of Images they can be of no force against an express Law And if these words be not express Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image c. I despair of ever seeing an express Law For had God intended
by this Law to forbid the Worship of any Images under what notion or respects soever I would desire to know what more significant and comprehensive words could have been used to have declared his mind unless he had expresly rejected those false Interpretations which the Patrons of image-Image-Worship have since invented but were never thought on at that time The same Author whom I have so often mentioned having expounded the first Commandment only to a positive sence not to forbid the Worship of other Gods but only to command the Worship of the Lord Jehovah expresly contrary to the very letter and plain sense of the Law agreeably to this he makes the second Commandment only to forbid the Worship of Idols or false Gods and not that neither unless they take them for the Supreme Deity His words are these In the next place he forbids them the Worship of all Idols i.e. as himself describes them the likeness or similitude of any thing that is in Heaven above or in the Earth beneath or in the Water under the Earth A plain and indeed a logical definition this that Idolatry is giving the Worship of the Supream God to any created corporeal or visible Deity or any thing that can be represented by an Image which nothing but corporeal Beings can and to suppose such a Being the Supream Deity is the only true and proper Idolatry Now let any man judge whether this be not such a gloss as utterly destroys the Text. As for his Worship of Idols there is no such word in the Law but Images Likenesses Similitudes but yet I will not dispute about this for an Idol does not only signifie a false God but the Images either of false Gods or false and corporeal Images of the true God. For the Idols of the Heathens as the Psalmist tells us are silver and gold the work of mens hands which can relate to nothing but Images and Pictures for corporeal Deities which were made by God are not the work of mens hands Now Idolatry he says is giving the Worship of the Supream God to any created corporeal or visible Deity or any thing which can be represented by an Image which nothing but corporeal Beings can Now how plain and logical soever this definition of Idolatry be there is not a word of it in the Text. That forbids not the Worship of any created corporeal or visible Deity which is forbid in the first Commandment but only the Worship of Images the likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth or in the Water under the Earth Now an Image differs from the thing whose Image it is And it is a very strange Exposition of the second Commandment which forbids nothing else but the Worship of Images to take no notice of the Worship of Images as forbid in it According to this gloss upon the Law a man may worship ten thousand Images and Pictures so he do not worship any visible and corporeal Deity and not break this Commandment which I think is not to give the sense of the Law but to expound it away But how does the Worship of corporeal and visible Deities and nothing else appear to be forbid by this Law which mentions nothing at all but the likeness of things in Heaven and Earth and Water Why our learned Author imagines that no Images can be made but only for corporeal and visible Deities because nothing but corporeal Beings can be represented by an Image which Conceit is worth its weight in Gold for it evidently proves that there are no Pictures of God the Father nor of the Trinity in the Church of Rome because they are not corporeal Deities and therefore cannot be represented by an Image so miserably have all Travellers been mistaken who tell us of a great many such Pictures and not very decent ones neither There can indeed be no Picture or Image to represent the likeness and similitude of an incorporeal God but yet the visible parts of Heaven and Earth and the visible Creatures in them may be represented by Images and the Images of such visible things may be made the symbolical representations of invisible and incorporeal Deities and such invisible and incorporeal Deities may be worshipped in the likeness and similitude of corporeal things and then I am sure to forbid the Worship of Images may signifie something more than meerly to forbid the Worship of some visible and corporeal Deities for it may signifie the Worship of invisible and incorporeal Deities by visible Images But I perceive he imagined that when God forbad them to make and worship the likeness of any thing in Heaven in Earth or in the Waters under the Earth he only forbad the Worship of those Beings whose likeness or Images they made whereas all men know that those very Idolaters who worshipped these glorious parts of the Creation did not represent them in their proper likenesses and figures and that those who worshipped invisible and incorporeal Beings did it by material and visible figures which plainly proves that when God forbad the Worship of Images he had not respect meerly to visible and corporeal Deities but forbad Image-worship whether they were the Images of visible and corporeal or of invisible and incorporeal Deities Our Author durst not say as the Roman Advocates do that God in the second Commandment only forbids the Worship of Images as Gods which is such glorious Nonsence that he could not digest it and therefore he supposes that God does not forbid the Worship of Images at all but only of such corporeal Deities as may be represented by Images which is a more gentile way of discarding the second Commandment than to leave it out of their Books of Devotions But if he will stand to this he condemns the Popish Worship of dead Men and Women for they are corporeal Deities nay of Christ himself considered as a man who might be represented by an Image or Picture And thus I doubt he has done the Church of Rome no kindness at all for this is a Demonstration against the Worship of Saints and the Virgin Mary because they are created corporeal and visible Beings who may be represented by Images and he has thought of an Argument against Images which neither the Scripture nor the Church of Rome know any thing of The Church of Rome thinks it a good Argument for the Images of Christ and the Saints and the Virgin Mary that they are representable by Images and Pictures and therefore there can be no hurt in such Images And the Scripture perpetually urges that Argument against Images that the Deity cannot be represented by an Image but neither of these Arguments are good if our Author's Notion be good For then to worship such corporeal Beings as may be represented by Images is to worship corporeal Gods which is Idolatry And there is no danger in the Images of an incorporeal Deity which cannot represent the God for which they are made for whatever the
Dispute will quickly be at an end It had been very easie to have given more instances under every head and to have observed more false ways of expounding Scripture which the Doctors of the Church of Rome are guilty of but these are the most obvious and therefore the best fitted to my design to instruct unlearned men and I must not suffer this Discourse which was at first intended much shorter than it already is to swell too much under my hands SECT III. Concerning the Antient Fathers and Writers of the Christian Church THough Learned men may squabble about the sense of Fathers and Councils it is very unreasonable that unlearned men should be concerned in such Disputes because they are not competent Judges of it and yet there is nothing which our Roman Disputants make a greater noise with among Women and Children and the meanest sort of People than Quotations out of Fathers and Councils whom they pretend to be all on their side Now as it is a ridiculous thing for them to talk of Fathers and Councils to such People so it is very ridiculous for such People to be converted by Sayings out of the Fathers and Councils I confess it has made me often smile with a mixture of pity and indignation at the folly of it for what more contemptible easiness can any man be guilty of than to change his Religion which he has been taught out of the Scriptures and may find there if he pleases because he is told by some honest Priest a sort of men who never deceive any one that such or such a Father who lived it may be they know not where nor when and wrote they know not what has spoke in favour of Transubstantiation or Purgatory or some other Popish Doctrine And therefore let me advise our Protestant who is not skilled in these matters when he is urged with the Authority of Fathers to ask them some few Questions 1. Ask them How you shall certainly know what the Judgment of the Fathers was and this includes a great many Questions which must be resolved before you can be sure of this as how you shall know that such Books were written by that Father whose name it bears or that it has not been corrupted by the ignorance or knavery of Transcribers while they were in the hands of Monks who usurped great Authority over the Fathers and did not only pare their Nails but altered their very Habit and Dress to fit them to the modes of the times and make them fashionable How you shall know what the true meaning of those words are which they cite from them which the words themselves many times will not discover without the Context How you shall know that such Sayings are honestly quoted or honestly translated How you shall know whether this Father did not in other places contradict what he here says or did not alter his opinion after he had wrote it without writing publick Recantations as St. Austin did Whether this Father was not contradicted by other Fathers And in that case Which of the Fathers you must believe You may add That you do not ask these Questions at random but for great and necessary Reasons for in reading some late English Books both of Protestants and Papists you find large Quotations out of the Fathers on both sides that some are charged with false Translations with perverting the Fathers sense with mis-citing his words with quoting spurious Authors as it seems many of those are which make up the late Speculum or Ecclesiastical Prospective-glass to name no more Now how shall you who are an unlearned man judge of such Disputes as these What Books are spurious or genuine whether the Fathers be rightly quoted and what the true sense of them is For my part I know not what Answer such a Disputant could make but to blush and promise not to alledge the Authority of Fathers any more It is certain in such matters those who are unlearned must trust the learned and then I suppose an unlearned Protestant will rather trust a Protestant than a Popish Doctor as Papists will rather trust their Priests that Protestant Divines and then there is not much to be got on either side this way For when a Protestant shews an inclination rather to believe a Popish than a Protestant Divine he is certainly three quarters a Papist before-hand Indeed unlearned Protestants who are inquisitive and have time to read have such advantages now to satisfie themselves even about the sense of Fathers and Councils as it may be no Age before ever afforded There being so many excellent Books written in English as plainly confirm the Protestant Faith and confute Popery by the Testimonies and Authorities of ancient Writers and such men though they do not understand Latin and Greek are in no danger of all the Learning of their Popish Adversaries and any man who pleases may have recourse to such Books and see the state of the Controversie with his own Eyes and judge for himself but those who cannot do this may very fairly decline such a trial as improper for them For 2. Let our Protestant ask such Disputers whether a plain man may not attain a sufficient knowledge and certainty of his Religion without understanding Fathers and Councils If they say he cannot ask them how many Roman-Catholicks there are that understand Fathers and Councils Ask them how those Christians understood their Religion who lived before there were any of these Fathers Councils Ask them again whether they believe that God has made it impossible to the greatest part of Mankind to understand the Christian Religion For even among Christians themselves there is not one in an hundred thousand who understands Fathers and Councils and it is morally impossible they should and therefore certainly there must be a shorter and easier way to understand Christian Religion than this or else the generallity of Mankind even of profest Christians are out of all possibility of Salvation Ask them once more whether it be not a much easier matter for a plain honest man to learn all things necessary to Salvation out of the Scriptures themselves especially with the help of a wise and learned Guide than to understand all Fathers and Councils and take his Religion from them Why then do they so quarrel at Peoples reading the Scriptures and put them upon reading Fathers and Councils I suppose they will grant the Scriptures may be read a little sooner than so many Voluminous Fathers and Labbe's Councils into the bargain and I believe most men who try will think that they are more easily understood and therefore if Protestants as they pretend can have no certainty of the true sense of Scripture I am sure there is much less certainty to be had from the Fathers A short time will give us a full view of the Scriptures to read and understand all the Fathers is work enough for a man's life the Scripture is all of a piece every part of
and Infinite Spirit who has now confined his peculiar Presence to no place as he formerly did to the Temple at Jerusalem for this was the present Dispute Whether God would be Worshipped at the Temple at Jerusalem or Samaria as I observed above In opposition to which our Saviour tells the Woman that God is a Spirit and therefore not confined to any place he is every-where and present with us every-where and may be worshipped every-where by devout and pious Souls that though for Typical Reasons he had a Typical and Symbolical Presence under the Jewish Dispensation yet this was not so agreeable to his Nature who is a Spirit and therefore he must not now be sought for in Houses of Wood and Stone And indeed the Reformation of the Divine Worship must begin in rectifying our Notions and Apprehensions of God for such as we apprehend God to be such a kind of Worship we shall pay him as is evident from the Rites and Ceremonies of the Pagan Worship which was fitted to the Nature and History of their Gods for where there are no Instituted Rites of Worship all mankind conclude that the Nature of God is the best Rule of his Worship for all Beings are best pleased with such Honours as are suitable to their Natures and no Being can think himself Honoured by such Actions as are a contradiction to his own Nature and Perfections Now if God will be Worshipped more like a pure and infinite Spirit under the Gospel than he was under the Law if this be the fundamental Principle of Gospel-Worship that God is a Spirit and must be Worshipped as a Spirit I think it is plain that nothing is more unlike a pure Spirit then a material Image nothing more unlike an infinite Spirit which can have no shape or figure then a finite and figured Image made in the likeness of a man or of any thing in Heaven and Earth nothing more unlike an infinite Spirit which is Life and Mind and Wisdom than a dead and senceless Image and if under the Law where God suited his Worship more to a Typical Dispensation than to his own Nature he would not allow of the Worship of Images much less is this an acceptable Worship to him under the Gospel where he will be Worshipped as a pure Spirit for there is nothing in the World more unlike a Living Infinite Omnipotent Omniscient Spirit than a little piece of dead senceless figured Gold or Silver Wood or Stone whatever shape the Carver or Engraver please to give it since God has none Now would any man who understands this that God is a Spirit and will under the Gospel be Worshipped as a Spirit should he go into many Popish Churches and Chappels and see a vast number of Images and Pictures there and People devoutly kneeling before them suspect that these were Christian Oratories or this Christian Worship unless he knew something of the matter before For there you shall find the Pictures of God the Father and the ever Blessed Trinity in different Forms and Representations the Pictures of the Blessed Virgin and other Saints and Martyrs devoutly Adored and Worshipped and would any man guess that this were to Worship God as a pure and infinite Spirit A Spirit cannot be Painted and then to Worship God as a Spirit cannot signifie to look upon any Representation of God when we pray to him which to be sure cannot give us the Idea of an infinite Spirit He who Worships God as a Spirit can have no regard to Matter and Sense but must apply himself to God as to an infinite Mind which no man can do who gazes upon an Image or contemplates God in the art and skill of a Painter for to pray to God in an Image and in the same thought to consider him as a pure and infinite mind is a contradiction for though a man who believes God to be a Spirit may be so absurd as to worship him in an Image yet an Image cannot represent a Spirit to him and therefore either he must not think at all of the Image and then methinks he should not look on an Image when he worships God for that is apt to make him think of it or if he does think of the Image while his mind is filled with such gross and sensible representations it is impossible in the same act to address to God as to a pure invisible and infinite Spirit Which shews how unfit and improper Images are in the Worship of God for they must either be wholly useless and such as a man must not so much as look or think on which is very irreconcileable with that Worship which is paid to them in the Church of Rome or while he is intent upon a Picture or Image his mind is diverted from the contemplation of a pure and infinite Spirit and therefore cannot and does not Worship God as a Spirit And the same is true of the Images of Saints and the Blessed Virgin for though to makes Pictures of Men or Women is no reproach to the Divine Nature since they are not the Pictures or Images of God who is a Spirit but of those Saints whom they are intended to represent yet if all Christian Worship be the Worship of God it is evident that the Worship of Images though they be not the Images of God but of the Saints can be no part of Christian Worship because God must be Worshipped as a Spirit and therefore not by any Image whatsoever Now the Church of Rome will not pretend that the Worship of Saints and their Images is a distinct and separate Worship from the Worship of God but to justifie themselves they constantly affirm that they Worship God in that Worship which they pay to the Saints and their Images for they know that to do otherwise would be to terminate their Worship upon Creatures which they confess to be Idolatry since all Religious Worship must terminate on God and therefore should they give any Religious Worship to Creatures distinct and separate from that Worship they give to God it were Idolatry upon their own principles Now if they Worship God in the Worship of Saints and their Images then they Worship God in the Images of Saints and that I think is to Worship him by Images the Worship of a pure infinite and invisible Spirit will admit of no Images whether of God or Creatures as the Objects or Mediums of Worship But it may be said that this is to graft our own Fancies and Imaginations upon Scripture for though Christ does say that God is a Spirit and must be Worshipped in Spirit he does not say that to Worship God in Spirit is not to Worship him by an Image but to Worship God in Spirit in our Saviour's Discourse with the Woman of Samaria is not opposed to Image-Worship but to confining the Worship of God to a particular place such as the Temple at Jerusalem and Samaria was as I observed above Now to
his Son for he owns himself our Father in no other Name and if he will hear our Prayers and answer our humble Petitions only as a Father then he will hear only those Prayers which are made to him in the Name of his Son How great Favourites soever the Blessed Virgin and other Saints may be if God hear Prayers only as a Father it is to no purpose to pray to God in their Names for he hears us not 3. To Worship God as a Father signifies to pray to him with the humble assurance and confidence of Children This is the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father For because ye are sons God hath sent forth the spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba Father A dutiful Son does not question his Father's good will to him nor readiness to hear and answer all his just requests he depends upon the kindness of his Father and his interest and relation to him and seeks for no other Friends and Favourites to recommend him And upon this account also the Invocation of Saints is a contradiction to the Gospel-Spirit of Prayer to that Spirit of Adoption which teaches us to cry Abba Father for surely those have not the hope and assurance and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Children who dare not go to their Father themselves but must send their Petitions to him by the hands of Favourites and Intercessors To pray to God in the Name of Christ is onely to pray to him as Sons for it is in his Name only that he owns us for Sons and this is the true Spirit of Adoption in the Name and Mediation of Christ to go to God as Children to a Father but to pray to him in any other Name how powerful soever is not to go to him as a Father but as to our Lord and King who must be Addressed to by the Mediation of some great Favourites To pray to God in any other Name which does not make us his Sons is to distrust our Relation to him as our Father in Christ and this is contrary to the Spirit of Adoption which teaches us to call God Father and gives us that assurance of his Fatherly goodness to us in Christ that we need and desire no other Advocates Thirdly To Worship God in Spirit is to Worship him with our Mind and Spirit for that is most agreeable to the Nature of God who is a Spirit God cannot be Worshipped but by a reasonable Creature and yet a Beast may Worship God as well as a Man who Worships without any act of Reason and Understanding or devout Affections To pray to God without knowing what we say when neither our Understandings nor Affections can joyn in our Prayers is so absurd a Worship of a pure Mind that Transubstantiation it self is not more contrary to Sense than Prayers in an unknown Tongue are to the Essential Reason and Nature of Worship I suppose no man will say that to pray to God or praise him in words which we do not understand is to Worship God in Spirit unless he thinks that a Parrot may be taught to pray in the Spirit What difference is there between a man 's not speaking and speaking what he does not understand Just so much difference there is between not praying and praying what we do not understand and he honours God to the full as much who does not pray at all as he who prays he knows not what and I am sure he affronts him a great deal less However if Christian Worship be to worship God in Spirit Prayers in an unknown Tongue in which the Mind and Spirit cannot be concerned is no Christian Worship SECT IV. Concerning the Reformation and Improvement of Humane Nature by the Gospel of CHRIST 4. ANother principal end and intention of the Gospel was to cure the Degeneracy of Mankind and to advance Humane Nature to its utmost Perfection for as Man fell from his original Happiness by falling from the purity and integrity of his Nature so there was no restoring him to his lost Happiness much less no advancing him to a more perfect state of Happiness not to an earthly but to an heavenly Paradise without changing and transforming his Nature and renewing him after the Image of God. And therefore our very entrance into Christianity is a new Birth Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit And such a man is called a new Creature and a Christian Life is a newness of Life and living after the Spirit and walking after the Spirit and this new Nature is the Divine Nature the Image of God the new man which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness which is renewed in knowledge after the Image of him that created him So that there are two things wherein this new Nature consists Knowledge and Righteousness or true Holiness and I doubt it will appear that the Church of Rome is no great Friend to either I. Knowledge Now I suppose neither the Church of Rome nor any one for her will pretend that she is any great Friend to Knowledge She is so horribly afraid of Heresie that she endeavours to nurse men up in Ignorance of their Religion for fear they should prove Hereticks and indeed she has some reason for it for the Church of Rome was never so Triumphant as in the most ignorant and barbarous Ages but as Knowledge broke in upon the World so men turned Hereticks apace If there be any knowing Papists and it would be very hard if there should be none they are not beholding to their Church for it which deprives them of all the means of Knowledge for she will not allow them to believe their Senses which is one way of knowing things and the most certain we have and yet she commands us to believe Transubstantiation which no man can do who believes his Senses and if I must not believe my Senses in so plain a matter as what is Bread and Wine I know no reason I have to believe them in any thing and then there is an end of all Knowledge that depends on Sense as the proof of the Christian Religion itself does for Miracles are a sensible proof and if I must not trust my Senses I cannot rely on Miracles because I cannot know whether there be any such thing as a real Miracle The Church of Rome also forbids men the use of Reason in matters of Religion will not allow men to judge for themselves nor to examine the Reasons of their Faith and what knowledge any man can have without exercising his Reason and Understanding I cannot guess for to know without understanding sounds to me like a contradiction She also denies Christians the use of the Bible which is the only means to know the revealed Will of God and when men