prohibite the worship of all those Gods which were then worshipped in the world will any one in theirs wits hence conclude that if the folly and superstition of men should set up a new race and generation of Gods in after ages that the worship of these new Gods is not as well forbidden by this general Law as the worship of those gods which were worship'd at that time when this Law was given If this were true possibly Pagan Rome it self was not guilty of Idolatry for most if not all of their Gods might be of a later date then the giving the Law 3. Now since no such distinctions as these appear in Scripture it is impossible they should justifie the worship of Saints and Angels which is so expresly forbidden by the Law if we will acknowledge them to be distinct Beeings from the Supreme God for if they are not the Supreme GOD we must not worship them for we must worship none but God No distinctions can justifie us in this case but such as GOD himself makes for otherwise it were easie to distinguish away any Law of God Humane Laws will admit of no distinctions but such as they make themselves for a distinction does either confine and streighten or enlarge the Law and he who has power to distinguish upon a Law has so far power to make it If the Law says that we shall worship no other Beeing besides God and we have power if we have but wit enough to invent some new distinctions between the worship of good and bad spirits between Supreme and Subordinate absolute and relative worship this makes a new Law of it for it is one thing to say thou shalt worship GOD only and quite contrary to say thou shalt worship God only and good Spirits God with a supreme and absolute good Spirits with a subordinate and relative worship This I think is sufficient to shew that we must admit of no distinctions upon a Divine Law but what the Scripture it self owns and therefore since those distinctions with which the Church of Rome justifies her worship of Saints and Angels are no where to be found in Scripture they have no authority against an express Law 3. The next course the Papists take to justifie their Creature-worship in contradiction to that Law which expresly commands us to worship none but God is an appeal to such authorities as they think sufficient to decide this matter Now I shall not say much to this for I believe all Mankind will acknowledge that no Authority less then Divine can repeal a Divine Law and therefore unless God himself or such persons as act by a Divine Authority have repealed this Law no other Authority can do it That Christ and his Apostles have not repealed this Law I have already proved that the whole Church in after Ages had any Authority to repeal this Law I desire them to prove For the authority of the Church as to the essentials of Faith and Worship is not the authority of Law-givers but of Witnesses The Church never pretended in former Ages to make or to repeal any Divine Laws but to declare and testifie what the belief and practice of the Primitive and Apostolick Churches was and it is unreasonable to think that they should have any such Authority for then Christ and his Apostles preached the Gospel to little purpose if it were in the power of the Church to make a new Gospel of it when they pleased But indeed could it appear that the Apostles did teach the Christians of that Age and the Church in those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles did practise the worship of Saints and Angels we should have reason to suspect that we and not they are mistaken in the sense of that Law which commands us to worship none but God But then none can be admitted as competent witnesses of this matter but those who did immediately succeed the Apostles or conversed with Apostolical men and Churches And thanks be to God there is no appearance of creature-creature-worship in those Ages we dare appeal to the testimony of Fathers and Councils for above three hundred years and those who come after come a little too late to be witnesses of what was done in the Apostolick Churches especially when all the intermediate Ages knew nothing of it I shall not fill up this discourse with particular â—itations which learned men know where to find since the Roman Doctors can find nothing in the Writings of the first Fathers to justifie the worship of Saints and Angels and the Protestant Writeâ—s find a great deal in those Ages against it Indeed at the latter end of the fourth Century some of the Fathers used some Rhetorical Apostrophes to the Saints and Martyrs in in their Orations which the Church of Rome interprets to be Prayers to them but though other See Bishops Ushers Answer to the Jesuits Challenge Learned men have vindicated those passages so far as to shew the vast difference between them and solemn and formal Invocation which is not my business at this time yet there are several things very well worth our observation towards the true stating of this matter As 1. That these Fathers came too late to be witnesses of the Apostolical practice which they could know no otherwise then we might know it if there had been any such thing viz. by the testimony and practice of the Church from the Apostles till that time This was no where pretended by them that the Invocation of Saints had been the practice of the Catholick Church in all ages and they could have no proof of this unless they had better Records of former times then we have at this day and such as contradicted all the Records which we now have of the Apostolick and Primitive Churches and I believe few men will be so hardy as to assert this and me thinks there should be as few who are so credulous as to believe it and I am sure there is no man living who is able to prove it 2. Nay the particular sayings of these Fathers by which the Romanists prove the Invocation of Saints do not prove that it was the Judgement and practice of the Church of that age They no where say that it was and it does not appear to be so by any other Records Let them shew me any Council before or in those times when these Fathers lived that is in the fourth Century which decreed the worship of Saints and Angels Let them produce any publick offices of Religion in in those dayes which allows this worship and if no such thing appears those men must be very well prepared to believe this who will without any other evidence judge of the practice of the Church only from some extravagant slights of Poets and Orators and if even in those dayes the worship of Saints was not received into the publick offices of the Church methinks we may as well live without it still and they must either grant
of civil honour due to beasts as that there is an inferiour degree of Religious Worship due to some men For all degrees of Religious Worship are as peculiar and appropriate to God as civil respects are to men and as the highest degree of civil honour is to a Soveraign Prince However should we grant that some excellent Creatures might be capable of some inferiour degrees of Religious Worship yet as the Prince is the fountain of civil honour which no subject must presume to usurp without a grant from his Prince so no creature how excellent soever has any natural and inherent right to any degree of Religious Worship and therefore we must not presume to worship any Creature without Gods command nor to pay any other degree of worship to them but what God hath prescribed and instituted and the only way to know this is to examine the Scriptures which is the only external revelation we have of the will of God Let us then inquire what the sense of Scripture is in this controversie and I shall distinctly examine the testimonies both of the Old and New Testament concerning the object of Religious Worship SECT II. The Testimonies of the Mosaical Law considered TO begin with the Old Testament and nothing is Sect 3. 1. more plain in all the Scripture then that the Laws of Moses confine â— Religious worship to that one Supreme God the Lord Jehovah who Created the Heavens and the Earth For 1. The Israelites were expresly commanded to worship the Lord Jehovah and to worship no other Beeing as our Saviour himself assures us who I suppose will be allowed for a very good Expositor of the Laws of Moses It is written Matth. 4. 10. Deut. 6. 13. Deutr 10. 10. thou shalt worship the Lord they God and him only shalt thou serve In the Hebrew Text from whence our Saviour cites this Law it is only said Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and serve him without that addition of him only And yet both the Septuagint and the vulgar Latine read the words as our Saviour doth him only shalt thou serve and the authority of our Saviour is sufficient to justifie this Interpretation and withal gives us a general rule which puts an end to this controversie that as often as we are commanded in Scripture to worship God we are commanded also to worship none besides him For indeed the first Commandment is very express in this matter and all other Laws which concern the obiect of Worship must in all reason be expounded by that Thou shalt have none other Gods before me The Septuagint 20 Exod. 3. renders it plen emu besides me so does the Chaldee Syriack and Arabick to the same sense And it is universally concluded by all Expositors that I have seen that the true interpretation of this Commandment is that we must worship no other God but the Lord Jehovah To pay Religious Worship to any Beeing does in the Scriptures notion make that Beeing our God which is the only reason why they are commanded not to have any other Gods For there is but one true God and therefore in a strict sense they can have no other GODS because there are no other Gods to be had but whatever Beeings they worship they make that their God by worshiping it and so the Heathens had a great many Gods but the Jews are commanded to have but one GOD that is to worship none else besides him In other places GOD expresly forbids them to worship any strange Gods or the Gods of the people or those Nations Deut. 6. 14 that were round about them And least we should suspect that they were forbid to worship the Gods of the people only because those Heathen Idolaters worship Devils and wicked Spirits the Prophet Jeremiah gives us a general notion who are to be reputed false GODS and not to be worshipped Thus shall ye say unto them the Gods that have not made the Heavens and the Jer. 10. 11. Earth even they shall perish from the Earth and from under these Heavens So that whatever Beeing is worshipped whither it be a good or a bad Spirit which did not make the Heavens and the Earth is a false GOD to such Worshippers and I suppose the Church of Rome will not say that Saints or Angels or the Virgin Mary as much as they magnifie her made the Heavens and the Earth And then according to this rule they ought not to be worshipped But to put this past doubt that the true meaning of these Laws is to forbid the worship of any other Beeing besides the Supreme GOD I shall observe two or three things in our Saviours answer to the Devils temptation which will give great light and strength to it 1. That our Saviour absolutely rejects the worship of any other Beeing together with the Supreme GOD. The thing our Saviour condemns is not the renouncing the worship of God for the worship of Creatures for the Devil never tempted him to his but the worship of any other being besides GOD though we still continue to worship the Supreme GOD. It is written thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Which is a plain demonstration that men may believe and worship the Supreme God and yet be Idolaters if they worship any thing else besides him The Devil did not desire our Saviour to renounce the worship of the supreme God but was contented that he should worship God still so he would but worship him also And therefore it is no reason to excuse the Church of Rome from Idolatry because they worship the supreme God as well as Saints and Angels this they may do and be Idolaters still for Idolatry does not consist meerly in renouncing the worship of the supreme God but in worshipping any thing else though we continue to worship him When the Jews worship'd their Baalims and false gods they did not wholly renounce the worship of the God of Israel and the Heathens themselves especially the wisest men amongst them did acknowledge one supreme God though they worshiped a great many inferiour Deities with him 2. Our Saviour in his answer to the Devils temptation does not urge his being a wicked and Apostate Spirit an enemy and a rebel against God but gives such a reason why he could not worship him as equally excludes all Creatures whither good or bad Spirits from any right to Divine Worship Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Him and none else whither they be good or bad spirits for our Saviour does not confine his answer to either and therefore includes them both When we charge the church of Rome with too plain an imitation of the Pagan Idolatry in that worship they paid to their inferiour Daemons which was nothing more then what the Church of Rome now gives to Saints and Angels they think it a sufficient answer that the Heathens worshiped Devils and Apostate Spirits
they be truly I think it a very vain thing either for God or men to make any Laws For 1. I desire to know what these Gentlemen would prove by such kiâ—â— of arguments as these Suppose we should grant them that the Saints are received into Heaven before the Resurrection and are actually possest of all that Glory and Hapiness which they say they are suppose we should grant them that by some means unknown to us Saints and Angels are acquainted with all that we do and suffer in this world heaâ— all oâ—r vocal or mental prayers which we offer to GOD or to themselves and that they do actually pray and interceed for us what follows from hence Therefore we may pray to Saints not I hope if there can be an express Law against it These arguments aâ— most can onely prove that in the nature of the thing it might be fitting and reasonable to pray to Saints if God thought fit to allow it noâ— that we must pray to Saints though God has forbid it For those are powerful reasons indeed which can justifie saint-Saint-worship against the express Law and declared Will of God Could they first prove one of these three things Either 1. that there is no such Law against the worship of any other Beeing besides God Or 2. that this is not the sense of the Law that they must not pray to Saints or Angels that the Law which forbids us to worship any Beeing but God does not forbid the worship of Saints Or 3. that though there was such a Law and this were the sense of it and this Law were never formally repealed by God yet it disappears of it self and oblidges no longer since the discovery such reasons as these for the worship of Saints and Angels I say could they prove any thing of this in the first place then there would be as much reason for the worship of Saints as there is strength and validity in their Arguments but no reason can take place against an express Law till it be as expresly repealed For 2. If an express Law may be disobeyed as often as men fancy they see reason to do what the Law forbids this overthrows the whole authority of making Laws and makes every Subject a Judge whither the Laws of a Soveraign Prince shall be obeyed or not At this rate he has the greatest authority who has the best reason and since every man believes his own reason to be best every man is the Soveraign Lord of his own actions It is to be presumed that no Prince makes a Law but what he apprehends some reason for and to oppose any mans private reason against a Law is to set up a private mans reason against the publick reason of government and yet it is much worse to oppose our reason against a Divine Law which is to oppose the reason of Creatures against the reason of God unless we will say that GOD makes Laws without reason and those who can believe that may as easily imagine that God will expect that those Laws he makes without reason should be obeyed without reason also and then to be sure all their reasons cannot repeal a Law nor justifie them in the breach of it It becomes every Creature to believe the will of God to be the â—ighest reason and therefore when God has declared his will by an express Law while this Law continues in force as it must do till it be as expresly repealed it is an impudent thing to urge our reasons against the obligations of it So that since God has expresly forbid us to worship any Beeing besides himself unless we can prove that God has repealed this Law it will never justifie the worship of Saints and Angels though we could by the plainest and easiest arguments prove to the conviction of all Mankind that Saints and Angels are very fit objects of our Religious Worship and that it is no diminution to the glory of God to pay some degree of Religious worship to them 3. Especially when the matter of the Law is such that whatever reasons may be pretended on one side or the other it most still be acknowledged to be wholly at the will and pleasure of the Law-giver whâ—ch fide he will choose As for instance suppose there were no natural and necessary reason against the worship of Saints and Angels yet there is no natural and necessary reason for it neither and therefore God may either allow or forbid it as he himself pleases without assigning any reason why he does either And when it appears that God might forbid it if he pleases and that he has actually forbid it by an express Law it is time to leave off reasoning about it natural reason can give us no assurance of any thing which it cannot prove to be necessary whatever in the nature and reason of things may be or may not be can never be proved either to be or not to be by meer reason for it is a contradiction to say that there is no necessary reason why such a thing should be and yet that I can prove by reason that it must be which supposes that there is a necessary reason why it should be for I cannot prove that it must be unless I can prove that it most necessarily be that is that there is a necessary reason why it should be To apply this then to our present Case The Law expresly forbids us to worship any other Beeing besides the supreme God the Church of Rome prays to Saints and Angels and Images which is an essential part of Divine Worship and without ever attempting to prove this Law to be repealed she justifies her worship by such reasons and consequences as I have now cited from their most celebrated Doctors and some of which are the principles whereon the Council of Trent founds their praying to Saints and Angels I ask then whither these arguments whereby they endeavour to justifie the worship of Saints and Angels prove that we must worship them that such worship is their natural right and our duty No this the Church of Rome will not own the most the Council of Trent sayes is that it is bonum utile good profitable to do it but say I if they do not prove it to be necessary they prove nothing for if Saints and Angels have not a natural right to our worship though we should suppose them to be very fit objects of some degrees of worship yet it is at Gods choice whither he will allow it or not and they can challenge no worship and we must give none if God forbids it and therefore since God has forbid the worship of any Beeing but himself and therefore of the most excellent Saints and Angels by an express Law and it no where appears where or when or in what manner this Law was repealed a hundred such arguments as these cannot prove it lawful to worship Saints and Angels against an express Law not to do it
and promulged this Law this reason can never repeal it nor dissolve the obligation of it Thus if the Saints and Angels being in Heaven be a good reason why they should be worshipped this was as good a reason at the giving of of the Law as it is now for thö we should suppose with the Church of Rome that Saints departed were not in Heaven then yet certainly the Angels were and if their being in Heaven made them fit objects of our worship why did God so expresly forbid it and if he forbad it then when there was as much reason to allow the worship of of those heavenly Inhabitants as there is now this argument cannot prove but that God forbids it still The same may be said of the Intercession of Saints and Angels The Papists suppose that the Saints and Angels pray and intercede for us in Heaven and obtain for and convey many blessings to us and therefore it is good and profitable to pray to them and to flie to their patronage now though indeed they date the Intercession of Saints as they do their admission into heaven from the Resurrection of our Saviour yet there is as much evidence for the aids and intercessions of Angels before and under the Law as there is now nay I think somewhat more for the government of the world was much more under the administration of Angels in the time of the Law then it is now and yet notwithstanding this God did by an express law forbid the worship of any being but himself and therefore of these Angelical powers who are somewhat superiour to Saints in Heaven and if this were no good reason against making this law it can be no good reason to prove the abrogation of it â— The next way they take to evade the obligation of this law of worshipping God only is by distinctions As to name the chief of them They tell us that this law is only opposed to the worship of false Gods such Gods as the Heathens worshipped not to the worship of Saints and Angels who are the Friends and Favourites of God And then they distinguish about the nature of worship they confess there is a worship which is peculiar to God Supreme and Soveraign worship which is peculiar to the Supreme Beeing and this for what reason I know not they call Latria but then there is an inferiour degree of worship which they call Dulia which may be given to excellent Creatures to Saints and Angels who reign with Christ in Heaven They farther distinguish between absolute and relative worship Absolute worship is when we worship a Beeing for its self and thus God only is to be worshipped but relative worship is when we worship one Beeing out of respect to another and thus we may worship Saints and Angels upon account of their relation to God Now I shall have occasion to examine these distinctions more particularly hereafter my business at present is to examine how far these distinctions can justifie the worship of Saints and Angels against an express Law which commands us to worship God only And I have three things to say on this argument 1. That the letter of the law will admit of no such distinctions as these 2. That the Scripture no where allows any such distinctions And 3. That no distinctions can justifie our acting against the letter of a law which have not the same authority which the Law has 1. The letter of the Law will admit of no such distinctions Exod. 20 as these The Law is Thou shalt have none other Gods before ME. The explication of this Law is Deut. 10 20. Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God him shalt thou serve and to him shalt thou cleave and swear by his name Or as Matth 4 10 our Saviour expounds it Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Now these words do plainly exclude the worship of all other Beeings besides the Supreme God They exclude indeed the worship of all the Heathen Gods which were at that time worshipped in the world but they are not confined to the worship of the Heathen Gods nor meerly to the worship of those Gods who were at that time worshipped but should any new Gods start up in after Ages whither among Jews or Christians the words extend to all that are and all that ever shall be worshipped Thou shalt have noe other Gods before Me signifies that we must worship no other Beeing but the Supreme God for to have a God is to give religious worship to some Beeing as appears from that exposition which both Moses and our Saviour Christ gives of it Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve For it is impossible to have any God besides the Supreme God in any other sense then as we worship some other Beeing besides the Supreme God with Divine honours and whatever being we so worship become our God and therefore this Law forbids the worship of any Beeing which is not God be it Saint or Angel or the Virgin Mary how excellent and perfect Creatures soever they be they are not our God and therefore must not be worshipped If we must worship and serve God only as our Saviour expresly tells us that we must worship no creature whatever it be the worship of saints and Angels is as expresly forbid by this Law as the worship of the Heathen Gods for that Law which commands us to worship GOD onely excludes the worship of all Creatures whatever they be But may not the meaning of this Law be onely this That we must not give supreme and soveraign worship to any other â—eeing but the supreme GOD but we may give an inferiour degree of worship to some excellent spirits who under God have the care of us And is not this plainly signified in the very letter of the Law when it sayes Thou shalt have none other Gods before me For no other worship makes any Beeing a God but that which is supreme and soveraign peculiar and appropriate to the One supreme God and therefore not to have any other Beeing for our God is not to give Supreme and Soveraign Worship to it Now what that worship is which is peculiar and appropriate to the Supreme God I shall discourse particularly in the second part our present inquiry is whither this Law makes any such distinction The Laws says Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve Here is no distinction between supreme and subordinate worship whatever is an Act of worshâ—p must be given to God onely But the Law sayes Thou shalt have no other Gods before me and therefore it must signifie supreme and soveraign worship for no other degree of worship makes a God Did the Heathens then worship no inferiour gods did those who worshipped so many several gods look â—pon them all as supreme and absolute or were they so senseless as to give supreme and soveraign
worship to inferiour Deities or does not this Law forbid the worship of those Gods whom the Heathens worshipped as inferiour Daemons but only the worship of those Gods whom they accounted Supreme and Soveraign If this Law forbids the worship of all Heathen Gods and it is certain that they worshipped a great many Gods whom they did not account Supreme then there can be no place for this distinction here for such an inferiour worship as makes an inferiour God is as well forbid as supreme and soveraign worship The Law says Thou shalt have none other Gods before me or besides me which as I observed before does not exclude the worship of the supreme God but forbids the worship of any other Beeing together with him The meaning is not Thou shalt not renounce my worship for the worship of any other Gods but thou shalt worship me and no other God besides me now I would only ask this question whither a Jew who worshipped the God of Israel who declared himself to be the Supreme God could give supreme worship to any other God this is contrary to the sense of all mankind to worship him as Supreme whom they do not believe to be Supreme And therefore when God forbad them to joyn the worship of any other Gods with the worship of himself he must forbid all kinds and degrees of worship even the most inferiour worship which the Heathens paid to their inferiour Deities If you say that God did indeed forbid all kinds and degrees of worship to be paid to the Heathen Gods which were impure and wicked spirits but still it is lawful to pay inferiour worship to Saints and Angels who are the friends of God I answer the Law makes no distinction between the worship of good and bad Spirits and therefore as far as this Law is concerned we must either deny this inferiour degrees of Worship to all or grant it to all If this Law does not forbid giving inferiour degrees of worship to other Beeings then it does not forbid the inferiour worship of Heathen Gods that may be faulty upon other accounts but is no breach of this law and then the Heathens were not guilty of Idolatry in worshipping their inferiour Dâ—â—mons with an inferiour worship If this Law does forbid even this inferiour degree of worship then it forbids the worship of good Spirits too though with an inferiour worship which transforms true Saints and Angels into false and fictitious Deities But I have another argument to prove that this Law can have no respect to the different degrees of worship The Roman Doctors themselves grant that the difference between supreme and subordinate or inferiour worship does not consist in the outward Act that all or most of the external Acts of worship may belong to both kinds they except indeed Sacrifice but contrary to the sense of all men for the Heathens offered Sacrifice to their inferiour Deities as well as to the supreme and there is no imaginable reason to be assigned why Sacrifice as well as Prayer may not be an act of inferiour as well as of supreme worship The difference then between supreme and inferiour worship is only in the intention and devotion of the worshippers and no man can by the external act know whither this be supreme or inferiour worship Now from hence I thus argue if the worship forbidden by this Law be such as can be known by the external act then this Law can have no regard to the degrees of worship for the degrees of worship are not in the external acts but in the mind of the worshipper which cannot be known by external acts Now that the Law did forbid the external acts of worship without any regard to the intention of the worshipper appears in this that this Idolatrous worship was to be punished with death and therefore it must be such external Idolatry as falls under the cognizance of humane Judicatures Had there been Deutr. 13. 6 7. c. any regard to the degrees of worship no man could have been convicted of Idolatry by the external act and could not have been liable to punishment unless he had confessed his intention of giving supreme worship to a false God and so this Law of putting such Idolaters to death had signified nothing because it had been impossible for them to convict any man of Idolatry but by his own confession but when the external act which is visible to all men is sufficient to convict any man of Idolatry it is next to a demonstration that the Law had no respect to the degrees but to the acts of worship And that our Saviour in that Law thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve had no regard to the different degrees of worship I have already proved at large for allowing that distinction he had not given a good answer to the Devils temptation Thus as for their distinction between absolute and relative worship that though we must not worship any Creature the most excellent Saints and Angels for themselves yet we may worship them upon account of that relation they have to God that is we may worship them for Gods sake though not for their own I find no intimation of any such distinction in the Law We are there commanded to have no other Gods to worship God and him only which excludes Saints and Angels from being the object of our worship as well as Devils 2. But possibly it may be said that though the Law takes no notice of such distinctions yet the Scripture in the explication of this Law may make allowances for it Now in answer to this I only desire to know where the Scripture has made any such distinction between worshipping good and evil Spirits the enemies and Rivals or the Friends of God between supreme and subordinate absolute or relative worshâ—p I can find no such distinctions in Scripture and I have a material reason to believe no such can be found viz because there was no occasion for them The Scripture no where allows us to give any kind of worship to any Creature and therefore there was no need to distinguish between the kind and degrees of worship The most material thing that can be said in this cause is this that when the Scripture mentions this Law of worshipping One God it opposes it to the worship of the false Gods of the Heathens from whence some may conclude that God Deut 6. 13. 14 Deut 13. 7. forbade the worship only of these false Gods But we must consider that the Law is conceived in such general terms as to exclude the worship of all Beeings besides the Supreme God but it could not be thought that God should at that time immediately apply this Law against the worship of any other Beeings but those which were at that time worshipped in the world If God gives a Law which forbids the worship of any Beeings besides himself and particularly applies this Law to
and partial corruption Secondly A Protestant may without Submission Assert II. of his judgement to the Roman Church find out in the Books of Holy Scripture the necessary Articles of Christian Faith Two things are here supposed and both of them are true First That the Scriptures contain in them all the necessary Articles of our Faith Secondly That the sense of the Words in which these Articles are expressed in Scripture may be found out by a Protestant without the Submission of his Judgement to the Papacy First The Scriptures contain in them all the necessary Articles of the Faith This is true if the Scriptures themselves be so For this they Witness * See S. Joh. 20. 30. 31. c. 21. 25. St. Paul b 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16 17. saith of the Old Testament as expounded of Christ that it was able to make a Man wise unto Salvation Much more may this be affirmed of the entire Canon The Apostles preached the necessaries to Salvation and what they had preached they wrote down * Iren. l. 3. c. 1. concerning the manner of it Eusebius may be consulted †Eus Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 14. For the Primitive Fathers they allowed the Scriptures to be a sufficient Rule Irenaeus said of them they were perfect * Iren. l. 2. c. 47. S. Aug. de doct Christ l. 2. c. 9. and of the words of St. Austine this is the sense Among those things which are plainly set down in Scripture all those things are to be found which comprehend Faith and Good Manners Nay the Romanists themselves attempt to prove their very additional Articles out of the Bible That there are in it the Articles of the Apostolical Creed is evident enough to a common Reader But how the Romish Articles should be found in that Bible which was written some hundreds of years before they were invented is a riddle beyond the skill of Apollo Secondly the sense of the Scriptures in matters necessary to Salvation may be found out by Men of the Reformed Religion without Submission to Roman Infallibility The Learned know the Originals and the true wayes of Interpretation And amongst us those of the Episcopal Clergy have obliged the World with such an Edition of the Bible in many Languages as was not before extant in the Roman Church And a Romanist who writes with great mastery in such matters prefers it before the great Bible of Paris a V. P. S. p. Hist Critique p. 583 Mais elle est plus ample plus commode c. For those of the Laity who are Unlearned they have before them a Translation which erres not in the Faith And the phrases are not so obscure but that by study and Ministerial helps they may understand them They have before them a Translation which erres not in the Faith Of this the Italians and the French may be convinced by comparing the Translations of James de Voragine and the Divines of Lovain with those of Signior Diodati and Olivetan or Calvin And the English may receive satisfaction in this matter by comparing their Translations with that of Doway In all of them they will find the same Fundamental Doctrines of Faith And were there any such material alteration made in our Bible it would appear by the notorious inconsistence of one part of the Canon with another It would have been long ago detected and exposed to publick shame both by the Romanists and the other Dissenters from our Communion But the former are not able to produce one instance and the latter agree with us in the use and excellence of the Translation though in other things they extreamly differ from us And where they do but dream we erâ—e they forbear not to proclaim it In so much that a difference in the Translations of the Psalter which concerns not Faith or Manners †See Hook Eccl. Pol. Book fifth Sect. 19. and a supposed defect in the Table for keeping Easter have been made by them publick Objections * Mr. Hs. peaceable design renewed p. 14. and stumbling blocks in the way to their Conformity It is true there is a Romanist who hath raved against the Bible of the Reformed in these extravagant words ‡ A. S. Reconciler of Religions Printed 1663. c. 11. p. 38 39. The Sectaries have as many different Bibles in Canon Version and sense as are dayes in the year The Sectarian Bible is no more the Word of GOD then the Alcoran Almanack or Aesops Fables Of great corruption he speaks in general but his Madness has admitted of so much caution that he forbears the mention of any one particular place The Learned Romanists understand much better and the Ingenuous will confess it And they are not ignorant that we Translate from the Original Tongues after having compared the Readings of the most Ancient Copies and of the Fathers Whilst they Translate the Bible from the Vulgar Latin which indeed in the New Testament is a tolerable but in the Old a very imperfect Version If our English Bible were turned into any one of the Modern Tongues by a Judicious Romanists who could keep Counsel it would pass amongst many of that Church for a good Catholick Translation And this is the rather my perswasion because I have read in Father Simon a Historie critique ch 25. p. 392. 393. that not unpleasant story concerning the Translation of Mr. Rene Benoist a Doctor of the Faculty of Paris This Doctor had observed that a new Latin Translation of the Organon of Aristotle performed by a person who understood not the Greek Tongue had been very well received Upon this occasion he was moved to turn the Bible into the French Tongue though he was ignorant of those of the Greek and Hebrew For the accomplishing of this Design he served himself upon the French Translation of Geneva changing only a few words and putting others of the same signification in their room But it seems he was not exact enough in this change of words For he having overlooked some words which were used by the Genevians and not the Romanists a discovery was made by the Divines of Paris and this Edition of the Bible was condemned by them though published under the name of one of their Brethren I do not say that such places of Scripture as contain Matters of Faith are plain to every Man But those who have a competence of capacity who are not prejudiced against the Truth who pray to God for his assistance who attend to what they read who use the Ministerial helps which are offered to them shall find enough in Holy Writ to Guide them to everlasting life In finding out the sense of the Scriptures the Church gives them help but it does not by its Authority obtrude the sense upon them The Guides of it are as Expositors and School-Masters to them And by comparing phrase with phrase and place with place and by other such wayes they teach them how to judge of
Disciples but also of their more Learned Writers who whatever strength they really fancy may be in the Argument it self think it a very proper Weapon to attempt the Vulgar and the Weak withall to amuse and dazle the less discerning eve at least when backâ— and set off with the stately Names of Infallibility Succession Anâ—iquity and the like and they tell us roundly our Faith was but yesterday our Religion is new and upstart as only Henry the Eights and â—romwels contrivance they may truly say as much as their Treason was Cecils Plot That our Faith began only in the year 1517 in Saxony by one Martin Luther an Apostate Fryar who for the sake of a fair Nun and other designs renounc'd the Ancient Faith and set up his new Device of Protestantism at Spires which did not quietly last much above seven years for in the year Bellar. Tom. lib. 4. p. 287 1. 25. starts up Zuinglius after two years more he Anabaptists who change and correct Luther's Religion and draw great numbers of his disciples from him and himself for his reward dyed a strange Death great Noises and Crackings were heard in his Tomb which being opened neither Body nor Bones were found and the smell of Brimstone was ready to stifle the standers by And therefore they say we ought to look from whence we are faln to repent of our Heresie and returne to our first Love and not stick so close to our Religion the new invention of so ill a Man That we may therefore keep those firme that are members of our Religion and bring those back that have revolted from us into the Romish Communion we have endeavour'd to give a satisfactory Answer to this their Question Where was your Religion before the times of Luther Not to trouble our selves with such Legends as these and Uncharitableness along with them the Answer is thus 1. Telling them plainly where our Religion was before Luthers time 2. By shewing what Errors and Mistakes are included in the Question 3. To turn the Question upon themselves and ask them some others of the like nature 1. The plain Answer to the Question is this That our Religion was long before the times of Luther and believed and setled in many Kingdoms and Nations of the World and hath neither Novelty nor Singularity in it 'T is an old Religion I am sure 't is of Age and can speak for it self It hath lasted now these 1600 years and more founded at first by Christ and his Apostles handed down to us through many Sufferings and Persecutions and here it is preserved It contracted indeed in the coming down a great deal of rust by the Falseness and Carelesness of its keepers particularly by the Church of Rome we scowr'd off the rust and kept the mettal that 's the Romish Religon this is the English They added False Doctrines to the Christian Faith we left the one and kept to the other this is Ancient those are New Our Religion is the same with that of the Early Christians Martyrs and Confessors believed in the first 300 years and defended by all Councils truely General Our Religion in those first Ages was in Palestine and Greece in Egypt in Antioch where the Discâ—â—les Acts 11. 26. were fiâ—st called Christians and in Rome it self and wherever the great labours of her first Apostles carry'd her to the different and reâ—ote Countries of the World Then and there our Religion lâ—v'd where Peter Linus and Cletus and all the first and Pious Bishops of Rome did It suffered indeed great variety of changes and conditions by the interest and wickedness of men sometimes more Adulterated and sometimes more Pure it flitted from Country to Country sometimes greater and sometimes smaller in its number sometimes in a dejected and sometimes in a more flourishing state but somewhere or other it was intire and without mixture as it was at first given unto the world and such an old Religion as this we are of holding fast neither more nor less neither adding to nor diminishing what Christ and his Apostles taught and iâ— Antiquity must evidence the Truth of our Religion we are safe and secure that we have right on our side And this will appear if we consider these following things 1. What Conformity our Religion carries to that of Christ and his Apostles Let any impartial eye compare them both together and he will find the features and complexion the whole body of Religion the same in both Whatever they delivered out at first as Fundamental to Salvation whatever they instituted as parts of Devotion Discipline and Order we still faithfully retain in our Church and if any Truth of moment hitherto by Fraud or Negligence be concealed from her she is ready to receive it when ever it is made plain not having stopt up the way of Truth by a pretence of Infallibility or want of Modesty to confess an error She hath the same sense of the Nature Offices the Design and whole Undertakings of Christ that the truly Ancient Church had She receives the Creed and Bible and any Traditions that can be made out to be truly Divine in the same meaning and understanding that Christ and his Apostles gave to the first Christians and they to us What their thoughts of Saints and holy Souls departed were ours are thoughts of respect remembrance and imitation not divine Worship Christ instituted proper Figures and Symbols of Bread Wine to represent and confirm to conveigh and commemorate his bloudy Passion and Benefits to Mankind in this sense She preserves the Institution sacred and doth not really Sacrifice or Crucifie the LORD of Life again Christ commanded good works under the penalty of eternal Damnation She doth the same and in our Masters language bids the doers of them call themselves unprofitable Servants beating down Pride and Merit Christ and his Apostles told the World what departing Souls must expect Her sense is the same that there are no second Ventures and Trials to be made neither can a kind Friend with a good Estate left for Masses or Monks compound for a Life ill spent Run through the whole constitution of our Church in Articles of Faith and Rules of Manners you may trace them to Christ and his Apostles time and all other parts of her Government and Order are truly Primitive And it must needs be so if She sincerely folloâ—s her rule of Faith the holy Scriptures so Ancient so Divine and whatever is declared there essential to Salvation She brings into her Creed and resolves to keep it like a mighty Treasure faithfully unto death And indeed the Church of Rome confesses that what we do retain is ancient and Apostolical but pretends that we are defective in many things and want some necessaries which they have to make an entire Faith But we challenge them to prove that those opinions wherein we differ from them were delivered by Christ or any men divinely inspired in those times
glorious with arrogant Titles and borrow'd Names Search into the Pedegree of Romes Religion we do not find Christ or St. Peter or any of his Apostles to be the Authors of it but Pride Interest and Design old Vices indeed but new Fathers of a Christian church which brought in a late and new generation of Opinions and additions to Christs Religion clothing them with the venerable Names of Primitive and Apostolical Where was the Romish Religion before the Council of Trent concluded onely about the year 1563. of a latter date then when Luther first began which legitimated all their Innovations the issue of Scholastick Wranglings pretended Dreaâ—â—s and Visions forc'd and unnatural Senses of Scripture Ambition and Profit the Fxchequer of Rome to be made Sons of the Church and Fundamentals of the Christian Faith Many of their own Writers confess that for 1400 or â— 500 years the Pope was not believ'd to be infallible till of late some of their flaming Zealots have vested him with infallibility whereby the Roman Church is sick unto death and no cure is to be applyed because she is so certain and sure that she is well Their lewd Doctrine of Transubstantiation was not made an Article of Faith till the Council of Laâ—eran under Innocent the third above 1200 years after Christ and many of their own Writers are still dissatisfied about it The Title of Vniversal Bishop was obtained by Pope Boniface the Third not till about 600 years after Christ fearing a powerful Rival the Constantinopolitan Bishop who affected the same and therefore by the Popes themselves was declaimed against as proud and Antichristian but now by Hypocrisie and base compliance with the wicked Phocas who was guilty of Treason and Murder against the Emperour Mauritius Rome gained the delicious point and has made it a fundamental Article of her new Religion though the Popes came not up to their swaggering temper and Power of Hectoring Christian Princes some hundred of years afâ—erwards The Doctrine of Purgatory which some derive from the Platonick Fancies of Origen the Montanism of Tertullian pretended Visions and Pagan Stories Rhetorical Flourishes and doubtful Expressions of the later Fathers yet it was not positively affirmed till about the year 1140. and not made an Article of Faith till the Council of Trent then indeed a good Estate became a surer way to Heaven then a good Life and Conversation The use of indulgences was the Moral to the Fable of Purgatory and began to grow much what about the same time though it came not to the height and perfection till Pope Leo the Tenths time when Luther so stoutly opposed them then Heaven was set to sale and the best Chapman was the greatest Saint though they boast of the second Council of Nice for the Antiquitie of their Image Worship And if it will do thern any good so they may of Simon Magus who was of an elder date and a very fit Patron of Acts 11. 13 such an Opinion yet the Council of Frankfurt condemned it and the purest times did not so much as allow the making of Images And it was not the Catholick Doctrine in France for almost 900 years after Christ nor in Germany till after the 12th Câ—â—tury then indeed such a Doctrine might be very proper when true Religion was turned into Pageantry and a form of Godliness The number of the seven Sacraments is now an Article of the Romish Faith yet the Council of Florence ended in the year 1439 was the first Council and Peter Lombard the first man that precisely fixt that number That the Laity ought to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper onely in one kind was never made an Article of Faith till the Council of Constance concluded in the year 1418 then indeed that Council with the greatest insolence and a direct Invasion of the Authority of CHRIST took the Cup from the Laymens mouths notwithstanding as it was then acknowledged the Institution of CHRIST to the contrary and they may as well Christen the Laicks Children only in the name of the Holy Ghost leaving out the Father and the Son by the way of concomitancy it being as Lawful to Baptize as Communicat by the halfes For what cannot such a pretended Power do The prohibiting of Priests to Marry was not in perfection as 't is now till Pope Gregory the Sevenths time Let them tell us where 't is said by Christ or his Apostles or any of the truly Ancient Writers of the christian Church that Pennance is a Sacrament or that Auricular Confession is necessary to Salvation or that Prayers ought to be made in an unknown Tongue or that good works are strictly meritorious or where can they find the many Impieties and absurdities of their Mass in those early times of Antiquity And since they are fond of asking us this Question we might ask them many more about the many Fopperies and Innovations in their Faith and Devotion and many they are and large is the inventory almost as many as are the Christian Truths in direct opposition to them or prevarication from them But they seem to confess the newness of their Religion when they arrogantly set up a Power in their Church to frame new Articles of Faith and many things only Opinions and Notions at first have grown up by degrees to Fundamental Truths and having once slipt into errour they are bound to maintain it for the Reputation and Autâ—ority of Holy Church And who knows how many of this Nature are upon the Romish forge ready to be put into their Creed and where must we end not till it be believed that consecrated Feathers and Holy Water can convey Divine Grace to us and drive away wicked Spirits and the Weathercocks of our Churches be thought Pâ—illars of it Would the Champions of Rome speak out they would tells us as their Eckius did the Duke of Bavaria That the Doctrine of Luther might be overthrown by the Fathers though not by the Scriptures 't is a plain confession that we have the truest Antiquity on our side and in the beginning it was not so But we add that we have the Fathers also on our side for otherwise what mean their Expurgat orian Indices of the Fathers and other Ancient Writters but that they very well know that these are old Enemies to Pope Pins's new Creed and the Truth in them confounds their errour Such an account as this about the Original and Progress of their new Additions to the old Faith was convenient to be given not because the Nature of the thing did necessarily require it for it had been sufficient only to have prov'd that these Romish Additions to the Christian Faith are contrary to the Word of GOD and no where to be found in any of the Divine Writings the only Infallible Rule of Faith and that they have no power of minting new Articles Fundamental to Salvation but because the Disciples of Rome so frequently ask us the Question and
first General Councils are received with great Veneration and a particular a In libro canonum in Synodo Londinensi an 1571. titulo de concionatoribus Imprimis videbunt ne quid unquam doceant pro concione quod a populoreligiose teneri credi velint 〈◊〉 quod consentaneum sit doctrinae Veteris Novi Testamenti quodquo ex illa ipsa doctrina catholici Patres Veteres Episcopi collegerint Injunction was laid upon its Ministers to press upon none the necessary belief of any Doctrine but what may be proved from Scripture and the generall current of the Expositions of the Fathers thereupon So carefull it hath been in all points to keep within the bounds of catholick Principles in those first instilled into its young Disciples in the catechisms and in those delivered in its Articles to be subscribed by such to whom it entrusts any Office that the positive part of them will hardly be disowned by our very Adversaries and can scarce appear otherwise to any then the common Faith of all christians of Orthodox repute in all Ages And for other determinations in the Negative she only declares thereby how little concerned she is to receive or own the false or corrupt additions to the first unalterable Rule No church hath professed and evidenced a more awful and tender regard to Antiquity next to the express Word of GOD. Both which she oft appeals to desires to be ruled by and where their footsteps are not sufficiently clear chooses not to impose upon her own Children nor censure her Neighbours keeps within the most safe and modest boundaries is not forward in determining nice and intricate disputes which have perplexed and confounded many in their hasty and bold Positions particularly about the Divine Decrees and such like sublime Points In which few understand where the main stress of the Controversie lies It may be none can comprehend the depth of the matters upon which the Decision ought to grounded But alas how many have been forward to lay down and fiercely contend for on each side their private opinions herein as the first Rudiments of Theology to be placed in their very Creeds or Catechisms and so a foundation must be laid for endless Contests and Divisions But most cautious hath our Church been in not laying such occasions to fall in the way of any So that both sorts of Adversaries have made their complaints against her for not being positive and particularly in such Declarations though none can charge her justly with defect in any point of Faith so owned in the best Ages of the Church 2. As clear and unexceptionable hath been her proceeding in Church Government preserving that form which from all Testimonies of Antiquity hath continued in the Church from the very Apostles under the conduct and happy Influence of which Christianity hath been propagated and continued throughout the World whatever different measures some other Reformed Churches have taken whither forc'd by necessity or swayed by particular inclination or prejudice The Church of England kept up the universally received distinct prime Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons not desiring to censure others who can best answer for themselves but endeavouring to confine her self to what was most Canonical and Regular and to shew how little affected she was to alteration from any establishment except in notorious corruptions and abuses And how necessary she thought due Order and Subordination in the Church to prevent Schisms and Heresies and to give the greater Authority and advantage to her Ministrations and finally to free her self from all suspicion of irregularity in her Succession derived down from Christ and his Apostles which she as much as any Church in the World may pretend unto And though some intermediate Ages have been blemished with much degeneracy yet she was concerned only to separate this but retain and convey down to others whatsoever good and wholsome provision she received from those before Farther to evince this particular care was taken by express Law a See the Statute 25 of Henry the 8. cap. 19. Sect. 7 expresly revived 1 Eliz c. 1. sect 6. to confirm the Rules of Government or Canon Law before received in the Church till some better provision could be made so far as it contradicts not the Law of the Land or the Word of GOD making as few changes in the outward face of the Church as was possible and sensibly proving it her design properly not to destroy but build nor yet therein to erect a new but reform an old Church 3. Alike Canonical and orderly hath been her Constitution in matters of Worship Her Forms of Prayer and Praise with the whole order of her Liturgy are composed with the greatest temper and expressed in the most plain and comprehensive terms to help forward uniform devotion pious Affection the most Orthodox Profession and catholick communion So that I think it may be universally affirmed that there is not any thing required in her publick Service necessary to those who communicate with her which any that own the name of christians or are owned for such by the general body of them can almost scruple unless because it is a Form by one sort and because it is ours by another sort But how unreasonable herein are both So careful she hath been to lay the ground of most catholick Unity and to remove whatever might obstruct it This our Adversaries the Romanists confirmed by their own practice when for several years as we have been told a Camdeni Eliz. an 1570 in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign they frequented our churches joyn'd in our Prayers and Praises attended on our Sermons and other Instructions and received as some add our Sacraments according to the order for substance the same as now and had it is like done so still having nothing to object against them but from the after-prohibition of the Pope who had reason to fear they who were so well provided of all needfull supply and defence at home might thus by degrees be withdrawn from subjection to his Authority abroad that darling point never to be dispensed or parted with whatever else might have been yielded b Camd. Eliz. an 1560. Our Reformers who composed our Liturgy carefuly collected the remainders of true Primitive Devotion a camdeni Eliz an 1560. then in use and separated from them all those corrupt additions which ignorance superstition and crafty policy had mixed therewith Therefore it is so far from being an objection that any part of our Liturgy was translated from the Roman Offices that while nothing is retained contrary to wholsome Doctrine and sound Piety it is a convincing argument of her impartial Sincerity and desire to preserve Uniformity as much as possible with all christians abroad as well as at home in her own Members securing all the Substantials of Worship according to the plain sense of Scripture and the pattern of the Primitive church And as to Circumstantials
or thing make the same inclosures about the Catholick as about the Roman Church and are as free in their severest censures of all others and as haughty in what they assume to themselves alone as they were though not proceeding upon the same grounds But what that holy Father every where presseth upon them reacheth as nearly our Antagonists the indispensable necessity of Charity that great bond of Unity in the Church and principal evidence of the Divine Spirit which animates the whole without which the highest gifts and most Sacred Ministrations are rendered ineffectual This is one of the prime characteristick notes of the true Catholick Church and every living Member thereof and nothing is more opposit to their Principles and Practices who have formally excluded all other christians and churches from any share therein not only those in the West that have deservedly cast off that Power which they had unjustly arrogated and tyrannical exercised but also the Greeks and others in the East that never owned any subjection to them But most securely may the Church of England glory in true Catholicism which to all her other priviledges and advantages that she may boast of above almost any other Church still maintains and evidences the greatest charity to others of any that I know in the world makes no other inclosures then those which GOD himself hath made not assuming any Authority to command yea or to pass hasty judgment upon any but only to provide for her own the best she can and with such tender regard to common Christianity and the Rights of all other Churches that she seems designedly to have chalk'd out the way of restoring the most desirable â—â—uits of Christian Unity throughout the whole Church and we should have been sensible of considerable effects by it had other Churches pursued like methods That Church sure is most Catholick that makes provision for the most Catholick Communion Peace and Unity and which imposes no other terms or conditions of it but those most universally received throughout all Ages in all places and by almost all Christians which may soon decide the competition whither the Church of England more truely vindicates to her self a part of the Catholick Church or they of Rome arrogate to themselves the whole Or which are the Schismaticks from it they which exclude none whom they own no power over but invite all to them and joyn with any in what is good and agreeable to the Institutions of our common LORD or they who shut out all but those who will subject themselves to their usurp'd Authority and most unjustfiable Impositions a Firmilianus de Stephano Episcopo Rom. ad Cyprianum Ep. 7â— p. 228. Ox. Ed. Siquidem ille vere Schismaticus qui se a Communione Ecclesiasticae unitatis Apostatam fecerit dum enim putas omnes a te abstineri posse solum te ab omnibus abstinuisli Farther the term Catholick is sometimes taken for Orthodox and so the Catholick Church interpreted for that which holds the Catholick Faith opposed to heretical Opinions and Doctrines as well as to Schismatical Separations b S. Cyril Hieros Cat. 18. p. 2. Catholike men â—â—â— kaletai dia to kata pases einai tes oihoumenes apo peraton ges heos peraton kai dia to didaskein catholikes kai anellei pos hapanta ta cis guosin anthropon elthein ophelonta dogmata Sozomen Hist L. 7. c. 4. In this sense the Church of England hath as good a claim in the Catholick Church as any whatever Receiving all the Articles of Christian Faith delivered in Scripture and received in the Primitive Ages for more than five hundred years No Principles having been so formally declared then and for some time after as the catholick Faith of all christians and as such necessary to be own'd which she rejects whatever private opinions there might be then among some eminent Doctors of the Church in which they oft differed one from the other or although there might be some observances then generally received which she thinks her self not bound to retain But ill will this charecter agree to the Romanists who have added so many new dangerous Articles to the common Faith of Christians not only beside the original Rule which they cannot but own with us but too often against it and the professed belief of the first and best Ages of the church Wherefore we reject not these Innovations meerly from negative arguments because not sufficiently proved and yet that way of arguing hath been alwayes allowed in the Fundamentals of Faith which must be grounded upon express Divine Authority and Testimony But we lay the greatest stress of our aversations to them upon that direct opposition which we undertake to prove most of them have to the common Faith and revealed Will of GOD which they and we both own And surely that Church in this acceptation is most Catholick that relies on such Catholick Principles and refers all others to be examined by this touchstone V. But in the fifth place some Objections lie in our way fit to be answered Object 1. They urge against us that we reject several Doctrines since formally determined in the Church by the known and received Authority thereof in Councils more general or particular which they pretend were believed through all Ages but then established when they came first to be called in question Answ We are not much concerned in the first part of the objection though very many exceptions might come in especially as to the formality and regularity of those Councils but as to the latter part in which the main stress lies here we never refused a fair trial thereof 1. From Scripture against which no Authority Civil or Ecclesiastical in single persons or the greatest Assemblies no time or custome of whatever date can prescribe a Tertullian de velandis virginibus c. 1. p. 172. hoc exigere veritatem cui nemo prescribere potest non spatium temporum non patrocinia personarum non privilegium regionum S. Cyprian Ep. 63. p. 155. Quare si solus Christus audiendus est non debemus attendere quid alius ante nos faciendum putaverit sed quid qui ante omnes est Chriflus prior fecit neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem S. Basil de judicio Dei T. 2 p. 392. ejus moral T. 2. p. 423. S. Hierom. adv Joh. Hieros T. 2. p. 185. in eodem T. ex Ep. Aug. ad Hierom. p. 353. 359 c. This hath been ever received till of late as the perfect and intire Rule of all necessary doctrines of Faith and practice of which abundant Testimonies may be seen in most Protestant Writers 2. We appeal also to the Primitive and best Ages of Christianity which either knew nothing of these Additions that we can find or sometimes give as express declarations against them as could be expected at this distance But to take off much of the strangeness of
then the whole Christian worship which was signified and prefigured by these Types must be peculiar and appropriate to the one Supreme GOD. As for instance I have already proved at large that the Jews were to worship but one God because they had but one Temple to worship in and all their worship had some relation or other to this one Temple and therefore all their worship was appropriated to that one God whose Temple it was now we know Gods dwelling in the Temple at Jerusalem was only a Type and Figure of Gods dwelling in Humane Nature upon which account Christ calls his body the Temple and St. John tells us That the word was made flesh and dwelt among us es kenosen en hemin tabernacled 2 Joh. 19. 21. 1 Joh. 14. 2 Coloss 3. among us as God formerly dwelt in the Jewish Tabernacle or Temple and St. Paul adds That the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in Christ bodily somatikos realy substantially as an accomplishment of Gods dwelling by Types and Figures and shadows in the Jewish Temple Now if all the Jewish worship was confined to the Temple or had a necessary relation to it as I have already proved and this Temple was but a figure of the Incarnation of Christ who should dwell among us in humane nature then all the Christian worship must be offered up to God through Jesus Christ as all the Jewish worship was offered to God at the Temple for Christ is the only Temple in a strict and proper sense of the Christian Church and therefore he alone can render all our services acceptable to God So that God who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the only object of our worship and Christ considered as God Incarnate as God dwelling in humane nature is the only Temple where all our worship must be offered to GOD that is we shall find acceptance with God only in his name and mediation we must worship no other Beeing but only the Supreme God and that only through Jesus Christ Thus under the Law the Priests were to interceed for the people but not without Sacrifice their Intercession was founded in making atonement and expiation for sin which plainly signified that under the Gospel we can have no other Mediator but only him who expiates our sins and interceeds in the merits of his Sacrifice who is our Priest and our Sacrifice and therefore our Mediator as St. John observes If any man sin we have 1 Joh. 2. 1 2. an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins The Law knew no such thing as a Mediator of pure intercession a Mediator who is no Priest and offers no Sacrifice for us and therefore the Gospel allows of no such Mediators neither who mediate only by their prayers without a Sacrifice such Mediators as the Church of Rome makes of Saints and Angels and the Virgin Mary but we have onely one Mediator a Mediator of redemption who has purchased us with his Blood of whom the Priests under the Law were Types and Figures Thus under the Law none but the High Priest was to enter into the Holy of Holies with the blood of the Sacrifice now the Holy of Holies was a Type of Heaven Heb. 1. 12. and therefore this plainly signified that under the Gospel there should be but one High Priest and Mediator to offer up our Prayers and Supplications in Heaven He and He only who enters into Heaven with his own Blood as the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies with the blood of the Sacrifice There may be a great many Priests and Advocates on Earth to interceed for us as there were under the Law great numbers of Priests the Sons of Aaron to attend the Service and Ministry of the Temple but we have and can have but one Priest and Mediator in Heaven Whoever acknowledges that the Priesthood and Ministry of the Law was Typical of the Evangelical Priesthood and Worship cannot avoid the force of this argument and whoever will not acknowledge this must reject most of St. Paul's Epistles especially the Epistle to the Hebrews which proceeds wholly upon this way of reasoning Now this manifestly justifies the worship of the Church of England as true Christian worship for we worship One God through one Mediator who offered himself a sacrifice for us when he was on Earth and interceeds for us as our High Priest in Heaven which answers to the One Temple and the One High Priest under the Law But though the Church of Rome does what we do worship the Supreme GOD through Jesus Christ yet she spoils the Analogie between the Type and the Antitype the legal and Evangelical worship by doing more when she sends us to the Shrines and Altars of so many several Saints surely this cannot answer to that one Temple at Jerusalem where God alone was to be worshipped there are many Temples and Mercy-seats now as there are Shrines and Altars of Saints and Angels by whose Intercession we may obtain our requests of God When she advances Saints and Angels to the Office of Mediators and Intercessors in Heaven this contradicts the Type of One High Preist who alone might enter into the Holy of Holies which was a type of Heaven for there is some difference between having one Mediator in Heaven and there can be no more under the Gospel to answer to the Typical High Priest under the Law and having a hundred Mediators in Heaven together with our Typical High Priest To have a Mediator of pure Intercession in Heaven who never offered any Sacrifice for us cannot answer to the High Priest under the Law who could not enter into the Holy of Holies without the blood of sacrifice The High Priests entering but once a year into the Holy of Holies which was typical of Christs entering once into Heaven to interceed for us cannot be reconciled with a new succession of Mediators as often as the Pope of Rome pleases to canonize them So that either the Law was not typical of the state of the Gospel or the Worship of Saints and Angels which is so contrary to all the types and figures of the Law cannot be true Christian Worship Sixthly I shall add but one thing more that Christ and his Apostles have made no alteration in the object of the worship appears from hence that de facto there is no such Law in the Gospel for the worship of any other Beeing besides the One supreme God There is a great deal against it as I have already shewn but if there had been nothing against it it had been argument enough against any such alteration that there is no express positive Law for it The force of which argument does not consist meerly in the silence of the Gospel that there is nothing said for it which the most Learned Advocates of the Church of Rome readily grant and give their reasons such as they are why
matter of them they are such as God himself hath required to be served by are significant of that disposition of Mind which we know God accepts and have an aptnesâ— to the producing of that temper in us which God intends to work us up to by them We use all the Instances of Devotion which they of the Church of Rome use if they be either necessary or fit though indeed often to other and better purpose We pray constantlie but only for the living for we look on the Dead as past the means of Grace and consequentlie past the benefit of our Prayers We praise God for his Excellencies in himself and thank him for his Goodness to others as well as to our selves We practise Confession of Sins to God in publick and in private and advise it to be made also to the Ministers of Gods Word when it is necessary for Ghostly Council and Advice for the satisfying of their Consciences and the removal of Scruple and Doubtfulness but we cannot say it is necessary to be made to Men in order to the Pardon of God We reckon it rather as a priviledge or advantage then a Duty And if Men will not make use of this priviledge as often as there is Occasion unless we tell a lye to advance the credit of it we cannot help that We enjoyn Fastings and disallow not of Penances but advise People to take an holy revenge on themselves when they have sinned but not as the Papists do to satisfie for their sins or merit at Gods hand but to shew the sincerity of their Repentance and to strengthen their Resolutions of amendement for it is our amendement and not our punishment which God is pleased with And we take care that all these things be performed in a due measure proportionably to the strength of the Person and the Nature and Design of the Duty but are afraid of straining them too high lest men should be altogether deterred from them or acquiesce only in the outward Action or render our selves and our Cause ridiculous by an imprudent management We have the Sacraments duly administred as our Saviour commanded them we reckon our Baptism with Water perfect without Oyl or Spittle We grutch not the cup to the Laity nor celebrate solitary Communions nor admire whispering to God in the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ but as we have received from Christ so we teach and administer without Addition or Diminution of any thing essential or material In short in the holy Offices themselves and the behaviour which our Church requires they be celebrated with there is alwayes a great propriety observable agreeable to the command of God in Scripture and the practice of the Apostles and first Ages of the Church proper to the several parts of divine Worship expressive of our Sense consonant to Reason and the use of the World especial respect being alwayes had to the exciting of Piety and Devotion in the minds and carriage of our fully afforded and pressed on Men. For we not only have all our Service in a Language which the meanest People understand but have it so contrived by frequent Responses that every Person bears a part in that Worship which he is so much concerned in and doth not only hear the Priest speak to God Almighty but prayes for himself and is required to joyn his assent to every short Prayer by a distinct Amen With us the same Service and Rules of Life are enjoyned to all all Men having the same Concern in another Life however different their Circumstances and Concerns are in this Life We have constant Prayers in every Parish weekly at least in many dayly with the blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ frequently administred nay every Sunday not only in Cathedrals but in â—everal Colledges and private Parish Churches And we appeal to all Men whither there be any where more practical Sermons fitted to the Cases of Men without Vanity and Superâ—â—ition then among us Whither good and free Learning be any where more encouraged or where better care is taken foâ— the due instruction of the People The Scriptures being in every oneâ—s hands with us and other excellent Books made according to the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures instead of Legends and Lives of Saiâ—â—â— St. Bonaventure's Psalter and other such Books which are really Libels against Christianity and yet are the principal books which the Priests of the Church of Rome commend to their People For as for the Bible if any one of them hath happened to read in it who is not licensed to that purpose he must own it as sin to his Priest at his next Confession And as there are such blessed Opportunities afforded so constantly and such Prudent provision made for all Cases Ordinary and Extraordinary so I thank God we can say that our people are generally very diligent in the use of these Means and would be more so were it not for the Division which they of the Church of Rome especially raise among us For they may easily perceive that we urge no more on them then their own good and the commands of God require of them â— though our church knows her Power very well yet she makes use of it only to ensorce the Laws of God to explain illustrate and apply them to particular Cases but never to set up her own commands in Opposition to them as the Church of Rome doth and therefore though we teach our People to dread an Excommunication it being sammum futâ—ri Judicii Praejudicium as Tertullian calls it a foretast or forestalling of the last Judgment and not for a World to lye under it though it were inflicted only for contempt yet we warn them in the first place to avoid the Cause and Occaâ—ion of Excommunication and therefore not to value what Censures of the Church of Rome we are under they being so very unjust and Groundless Fourthly and lastly as only the true Object of Devotion is here worshipped only proper Expressions allowed all usefull Helps afforded so also the greatest stresâ— is laâ—d on the practice of it agreeable to the true Nature End and design of it The principal ends of Devotion are to pay a Homage to God our great Creatâ—â— and Benefactor to get his Blessing and to work our selves up to a better temper of â—â—indâ— And to this end we are in our service importâ—â—ate without Vanity or Impertinency long without Tediousness or Idle Repetitions Only we use the Lord's Prayer often that no part of our service may be without that perfect form and also in Consideration of the great Comprehensiveness of it and of the Distraction of Men's Minds which seldom can attend to the full sense of it all at one time And we teach our People that every Man must work for himself for he that prayes only by a proxy it is very just that he should be rewarded only by a Proxy too we put our People in mind that
and the Council at Rome in these words * Gratian. de consecrat distinct 2. Lanfranc de corp sang Domini c. 5. Guitmund de sacram l. i. Alger de sacram l. 1. c. 19. that the bread and wine which are set upon the Altar after the consecration are not only the Sacrament but the true body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ and are sensibly not onlie in the Sacrament but in truth handled and broken by the hands of the Priest ground or bruised by the teeth of the faithful But it seems the Pope and his Council were not then skilful enough to express themselves rightly in his matter for the Gloss upon the Canon Law sayes expresly †Gloss Decret de conse crat dist 2. in cap. Ege Berengarius that unless we understand these words of BERENGARIVS that is in truth of the Pope and his Council in a sound sense we shall fall into a greater Heresie then that of BERENGARIVS for we do not make parts of the body of Christ The meaning of which Gloss â— cannot imagine unless it be this that the Body of Christ though it be in truth broken yet it is not broken into parts for we do not make parts of the body of Christ but into wholes Now this new way of breaking a Body not into parts but into wholes which in good earnest is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome though to them that are able to believe Transubstantiation it may for any thing I know appear to be sound sense yet to us that cannot believe so it appears to be solid non-sense About XX years after in the year MLXXIX Pope Gregory the VII Began to be sensible of this absurdity and therefore in another council at Rome made Berengarius to recant in another * Waldnes Tom. 2. c. 1â— Form viz. that the bread and wine which are placed upon the Altar are substantially changed into the true and proper and quickning flesh and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ and after consecration are the true body of Christ which was born of the Virgin and which being offered for the Salvation of the World did hang upon the cross and sits on the right hand of the Father So that from the first starting of this Doctrine in the second council of Nice in the year DCCLXXXVII till the council under Pope Gregory the VII th in the year MLXXIX it was almost three hundred years that this Doctrine was contested and before this mishapen Monster of Transubstantiation could be lick'd into that Form in which it is now setled and establish'd in the Church of Rome Here then is a plain account of the first rise of this Doctrine and of the several steps whereby it was advanced by the Church of Rome into an Article of Faith I come now in the Third place to answer the great pretended Demonstration of the impossibility that this Doctrine if it had been new should ever have come in in any Age and been received in the Church and con-consequently it must of necessity have been the perpetual belief of the Church in all Ages For if it had not alwayes been the Doctrine of the Church when ever it had attempted first to come in there would have been a great stir and bustle about it and the whole Christian World would have rose up in opposition to it But we can shew no such time when first it came in and when any such opposition was made to it and therefore it was alwayes the Doctrine of the Church This Demonstration Monsieur Arnauld a very learned Man in France pretends to be unanswerable whither it be so or not I shall briefly examine And First We do assign a punctual and very likely time of the first rise of this Doctrine about the beginning of the ninth Age though it did not take firm root nor was fully setled and establish'd till towards the end of the eleventh And this was the most likely time of all other from the begining of Christianity for so gâ—oss an Errour to appear it being by the confession and consent of their own Historians the most dark and dismal time that ever happened to the Christian Church both for Ignorance and Superstition and Vice It came in together with Idolatry and was made use of to support it A fit prop and companion for it And indeed what tares might not the Enemy have sown in so dark and long a Night when so considerable a part of the Christian World was lull'd a sleep in profound Ignorance and Superstition And this agrees very well with the account which our Saviour himself gives in the Parable of the Tares of the springing up of Errours and Corruptions in the Field of the Church * Matth. 13 24. While the men sleept the Enemy did his work in the Night so that when they were awake they wondered how and whence the tares came but being sure they were there and that they were not sown at first they concluded the Enemy had done it Secondliâ— I have shewn likewise that there was considerable opposition made to this Errour at its first coming in The general Ignorance and gross Superstition of that Age rendered the generality of people more quiet and secure and disposed them to receive any thing that came under a pretence of mystery in Religion and of greater reverence and devotion to the Sacrament and that seemed any way to countenance the worship of Images for which at that time they were zealously concern'd But notwithstanding the security and passive temper of the People the most eminent for piety and learning in that Time made great resistance against it I have already named Rabanus Arch-Bishop of Mentz who oppos'd it as an Errour lately sprung up and which had then gained but upon some few persons To whom I may add Heribaldus Bishop of Auxerres in France Io. Scotus Erigena and Ratramnus commonly known by the name of Beriram who at the same time were imployed by the Emperour Charles the Bald to oppose this growing Errour and wrote learnedly against it And these were the eminent men for learning in that time And because Monsieur Arnauld will not be satisfied unless there some stir and bustle about it Bertram in his Preface to his book tells us that they who according to their several opinions talked differently about the mystery of Christs bodie and bloud were divided by no small Schism Thirdlie Though for a more clear satisfactory answer to this pretended Demonstration I have been contented to unty this knot yet I could without all these pains have cut it For suppose this Doctrine had silently come in and without opposition so that we could not assign the particular time and occasion of its first Rise yet if it be evident from Records of former Ages for above 500. years together that this was not the ancient belief of the Church and plain also that this Doctrine was afterwards received in the Roman Church though we could
Doctrine of the Church of Rome as Apelles did with Antigonus his face they must draw but one part half of it that so they may Artificially conceal it as deformed and its blind side That all these do so I shall shew by stating the controversie carefully and truely which is the chiefest thing in this dispute for they love to hide their own Doctrines as much as they can and they cunningly contrive most of them with a back door to slip out at privately and upon occasion The Council of Trent has in this as in other things used art and not spoke out in one place as it does in another that so we mistake half its words for its full meaning as Bellarmine and others were willing to do or at least to have others do so In its sixth Canon on the Eucharist it only sayes a Council Trident. Can. 6. De Euchor si quis dixerit in sancto Eucharistiae Sacramento Christam Vnigenitum Dei filium non esse cultu Latriae etiam externo adorandum Anathema sit If any one shall say that Christ the only begotten Son of God is not to be adored with the external Worship of Latria in the holie Sacrament of the Eucharist let him be accursed Who will not say in those general words that Christ is to be adored with outward and inward Worship both not only in the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist but of Baptism too and in every Christian Office and in every Prayer and solemn Invocation of him either publick or private But they mean a great deal more then all this by Worshipping Christ in the Sacrament and in as plain words they say b Ib. 13. Sess c. 5. That the Sacrament it self is to be adored that whatever it be which is something besides Christ even according to them which is placed in the Patin and upon the Altar which the Priest holds in his hands and lifts up to be seen this very thing is to be adored There is no doubt sayes the Council c Ib. Nullus dubitandi locus relinquitur quin omnes Christi fideles pro more in catholica Ecclesia semper recepto lâ—triae cultum qui vero Deo debetur huic sanctissimo Sacramento in Veneratione adhibeant neque enim minus est adorandum quod fuerit a Christo Dâ—mino ut sumatur institutum but that all faithful Christians according to the custom alwayes received in the Catholick Church ought to give Supreme and Soveraign Worship which is due to God himself to the most Holy Sacrament in their Worship of it for it is nevertheless to be adored tho' it was instituted of Christ to be received That which is to be received which is to be put into the Peoples Mouths by the Priest for since they have made a God of the Sacrament they will not trust the People to feed themselves with it nor take it into their hands and they may with as much reason in time not think fit that they should eat it this which was appointed of Christ to be taken and eaten as a Sacrament this is now to serve for another use to be adored as a God and it would be as true Heresie in the church of Rome not to say that the Sacrament of the Altar is to be adored as not to say that Christ himself is to be adored But what according to them is this Sacrament It is the remaining Species of Bread and Wine and the natural Body and Blood of Christ invisibly yet carnally present under them and these together make up one entire Object of their Adoration which they call Sacramentum for Christs body without those Species and Accidents at least of Bread and Wine would not according to them be a Sacrament they being the outward and visible part are according to their School-men properly and strictly called the Lombard sent l. 4. dist 10. Sacramentum and the other the res Sacramenti and to this external part of the Sacrament as well as to the internal they give Latreia and Adoration to those remaining Species which be they what they will are but creatures religious Worship is given together with Christs Body and they withh that are the whole formal Object of their Adoration Non solum Christum sed Totum visibile Sacramentum unico cultu adorari sayes Suarez a In Th. Quaest 9. disp quia est unum constans ex Christo Speciebus Not only Christ but the whole visible Sacrament which must be something besides Christs invisible Body is to be adored with one and the same Worship because it is one thing or one Object consisting of Christ and the Species So another of their learned men b Henriquez Moral l. 8. c. 32. Speciebus Eucharistiae datur Latria propter Christum quem continent The highest Worship is given to the Species of the Eucharist because of Christ whom they contain Now Christ whom they contain must be something else then the Species that contain him Let him be present never so truely and substantially in the Sacrament or under the species he cannot be said to be the same thing with that in which he is said to be present and as subtil as they are and as thin and subtil as these species are they can never get off from Idolatry upon their own Principles in their Worshipping of them and they can never be left out but must be part of the whole which is to be adored totum illud quod simul adoratur as Bellarmine calls it must include these de Euch. l 4. c. 30. as well as Christs Body Adorationem sayes Bellarmine a Bellarmine de Euch l. 4. c. 29. ad Sybola etiam panis vini peâ—â—nere ut quod unum cum ipso Christo quem continent Adoration belongs even to the Symbols of Bread and Wine as they are apprehended to be one with with Christ whom they contain and so make up one entire Object of Worship with him and may be Worship'd together with Christ as T. G. b owns in his Answer to his most learned Adversary and are the very term of Adoration as Gregory de Valentia c Cathol no Idolaters p. 268. sayes who farther adds that they who think this worship d De Idol l. 2. c. 5. does not at all belong to the Species in that heretically oppose the perpetual custome and sence of the Church Qui censeunt nullo mâ—do ad Species ipsias eam Venerationem pertinere in eo Haeretice pugnare contra perpetuum usum sensum Ecclesiae de Veneratione Sacram. ad Artic. Tom. 5. Indeed they say That these species or Accidents are not be Worship'd for themselves or upon their own account but because Christ is present in them and under them and so they may be Worshipp'd as T. G. sayes d Ib. with Christ in like manner as his Garments were Worship'd together with him upon Earth which is a similitude taken out of Bellarmine
way the Papists have to bring themselves off from these manifest Absurdities is only a running farther into greater and their little Shifts and Evasions are so thin and Subtill Sophistry or rather such gross and thick falshoods that it could not be imagined that the Heathen Adversaries could ever know them and therefore be so civil as Boileau would make them * Cap. 10. l. 2. de aaor Euch. as not to lay those charges upon them as others do nor can any reasonable and impartial man ever believe them for they are plainly these two That they doe not worship what all the World sees they worship And that they doe not eat what they take into their Mouths and swallow down Which is in plain words an open Confession that they are ashamed to own what they plainly do We do not worship the Bread say they for that we believe is done away and is turned into the naturall Body of Christ and so we cannot be charged with Bread-worship But do ye not worship that which ye see and which ye have before you and which is carried about And would not any man that sees what that is think ye worship Bread or Wafer And could you ever perswade him that it was any thing else And if notwithstanding what you think of it against all Sense and Reason it be still Bread then I hope it is Bread that ye worship and till others think as wildely as ye do ye must give them leave to think and charge you thus But if it were true that ye did not worship the Bread yet ye must and do own that ye worship the Species of the Bread and how ye should do that without being guilty of another very gross Absurdity ye do not know your selves for ye must make them so united to Christ as to make one suppositum and so one Object of Worship as his Humanity and God-Head are and then according to this way of yours Christ may as well be said to be Impanated and United to Bread or its Species as some of you have taught * Belarm de Ruperto Abbate Tuitiensi l. 3. de Euch. c. 11 that the Bread in the Eucharist is assumed by the Logos as the humane Nature was But not to mention these which wheresoever ye turn ye stare ye full in the face and should make ye blush one would think had ye not put off all shame as well as all sense in this matter grant ye what ye would have that it is not Bread but the substantial Body Flesh and Blood of a man that is in the Host will this help much to mend the matter or to lessen the Absurdity and not rather increase and swell it For besides the incredible wonder that a bit of Bread should by a few words of every common Priest be turned immediately into the true and perfect Body of a man nay into ten thousand Bodies at the same time which is a greater Miracle then ever was done in the World and is as great almost as creating the World it self out of nothing and if it were true would make the Priest a God certainly and not a man and much rather to be worship'd then a bit of Bread as Lactantins sayes of the Heathen Idols He that made them ought rather to be worship'd then they * Meliorem esse qui fecit quam illa quae facta sunt si haec adoranda sunt artificem a quo facta sunt ipsum quoque multo potiori jure adorandum esse Lactant. Instit l. 2. c. 2 Besides this it seems it is the whole Body of a man then which is eaten and swallowed down instead of Bread for sure the same thing is not one thing when it is worship'd and another thing when it is eaten and then how barbarous and inhumane as well as absurd and ridiculous must this appear to any man that is not used to swallow the most substantial Nonsense as well as the whole Body of a man for a Morsel and then all the former Absurdities which I mentioned do return again of the Eating that which we worship which the Apologists thought so wild and extravagant in the Egyptian God-eaters Well then there is no other way but to say we don't eat him as we eat other food †Boil c. 10. l. 2. Comestionem substantiae corporis Christi non esse natur alem so might the Egyptians have said too if they had pleased tho how they can otherwise eat him 't is hard to understand but only in the heretical sense of Spiritual and Sacramental Eating unless they will at the same time say They do not eat him truly and naturally and yet do eat him so and they are so used to Contradictions in this point that I don't know whither they will make any more bones of this then of the rest or of the substantial Body of a man himself when they have got so large a Faith or rather so large a Swallow But how is it that ye do not eat him after a natural and carnal manner and yet it is a carnal Body that ye so much contend for and that ye really and truly eat and 't is a Carnal mouth and throat he is put into and sometimes a very soul and wicked one And yet this must by this carnal way eat the very body of Christ as well as the most faithfull But we do not grind this Body with our Teeth nor chew him in our Mouths as our other Food nor digest him in our Stomachs nor cast him out into the draught if ye do not as ye pretend being ashamed of the most shameful and abominable Consequences of it and yet a very great many among you have owned all that z Retract Bereng sub Nicol. 2 in Concil Rom. Verum corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi sensualiter non solum Sacramento sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Sic Gualt Abbaud apud Boil p. 177. as not knowing how it could be otherwise and how if this eating be Spiritual and Sacramental Christs presence may not be so too which is the Heresie on the other side a Iste in omnibus veritatem subtrahit dum asserit omnia fieri sc fractionem attritâ—onem corporis Christi in Eucharistia non substantia sed in specie visibili forma panis Sacramento tantum Gualter adversus Abailard apud Boil 179. and ye seem to make strange Monsters of your selves that have spiritual Teeth and can spiritually and not naturally eat a natural and a carnal body and if ye do not thus eat it as ye eat other meat when ye take it into your Mouths and into your Stomacks and do every thing to it that you do to your other food which is as like eating as it were very true and natural eating and if it be not Bread which is thus eaten when it is just as like other Bread as is
simple and plain vertues the People are brought up to shew so many tricks and to act over so many mimical postures of Worship But thanks be to God we have not so learned Christ we came not into the World to be idle Spectatours therein to be slothfull and unprofitable Monks to gratifie our senses feed our lu 〈…〉 or to live at ease but to pay a reasonable service to God and to promote the publick good not to advance our own advantages and designes but the common interest and benefit of Mankind And as we are not to neglect our duty upon which the saving of our Souls depends in expectation that after this life is ended we may get out of Purgatory into Heaven so we must not mistake our time of doing our duty but begin it as soon as we come to the use of our reason and understanding that assoon as our rationall powers begin to move Religion also may shew it self at the same time with all the brightness and majesty of truth and vertue Therefore Men do mightily abuse themselves when they are led aside by erroneous opinions concerning their future state and so lose the happy occasion of advancing their true interest this they do who put off their living well to the last who defer their Repentance with groundless hopes of having the same good success as the Penitent Thief had or who neglect all those good means that would make them sound and good Christians out of a false perswasion that their sufferings hereafter will be but Temporary and then they shall be as happy as the best Men are Some Philosophicall Persons are mistaken in this matter for they will tell you that they would rather chuse not to be at all then be placed in such a condition of Life as that they shall be in danger of everlasting punishment if they difobey the Laws of God Surely this cannot be the desire of a good or a wise Man as if a Man had better chuse to live in the Woods in a wilde state of confusion and anarchy then be subject to the Laws of a Just and Mercifull Ruler under whom he may lead an happy and quiet life meerly because he shall be punished if he do amiss We are beholding to the infinite bounty and goodnes of God for that he hath given us all a Being and when we were made it was abfolutly necessary that we should carefully observe and keep the Laws of Almighty God but such is the degeneracy of Mankind that they would never doe this unless there were severe penalties to be suffered for the violation of them which penalties are eternal upon impenitent Sinners for this reason among others because the goodness and mercy of God is eminently shewn towards Men both in threatning and inflicting these punishments for hereby they may behold his severity against fin and so break off the practices of it that they may escape the punishments of the future state which are inflicted because Men have been unreclaimable either by the mercies or severities of God towards them in this life The suffering these punishments God may accept of as a â—ull satisfaction to his Law if they be such as tend to break men off from sin assert 〈…〉 's Right and vindicate his honour to the World for we must know that the end of punishment is not the satisfaction of anger in God as a desire of revenge but the design of it is to vindicat the honour and rights of the injured person by such a way as himself shall judge most satisfactory to the ends of his Government But the misery of any Creature cannot be an end to us much less to the Divine nature because an End supposes something desirable for it self so that God neither dâ—â—h nor can delight in the miseries of his Creatures in themselves but as they are subservient to the ends of his Government and yet such is his kindness in that respect too that he uses all means agreeable thereto to make them avoid being for ever miserable For there is a vast dâ—fference between the end of punishment in this Life and in that which is to come the punishments in the life to come are aflicted because Sinners have been unreclaimable by either the mercies or punishments of this Life and they are intended to deter Men from commiting those sins which will expose them to the wrath to come Let us therefore alwayes laud and bless the Name of God in whâ—m we live move and have our Beeing for that he hath raised us out of nothing to be not onely Living but Rational Creatures Now we are bound to act according to the dâ—gnity of our Natures if we do not we degenerate into the lower Rank of Animals and very deservedly pull God's vengeance upon us for disappointing the end of our Creation which was to serve our Creatour in all Faithfulness and Truth it being a fault never to be forgiven for any Creature to say that he is not beholding to God for giving him a Beeing unless he may be freed from the dreadfull apprehensions of that everlasting punishment which is due against all such as wilfully offend so good and wise so holy and just a God Wherefore let no vain expectations of escaping the wrath to come betray us into so great a soâ—tishness as to put off our Repentance or to defer making provision for Eternity to be throughly regenerate is a harder taâ—k then to mumble over so many Pater Noster's or Ave Mary Prayers I fear those ignorant People whose Religion hangs on a string of Beads and whose Prayers are set upon Tallies understand very little what true Sanctification imports what reconciliation with the naturâ— will and mind of God signifies unless we are thus qualified for the enjoyment of God no Flames of Purgatory will ever prepare us for it Now therefore is the time of working out our Salvation the next World will be the time of giving an account of what we have done either good or evil as this Life leaves us so eternal Life will find us what advantages then we have to day of knowing the will of God and of learning his statutes let us make use of them that we may be able to stand before his Judgement Seat and receive the rewards of good and faithful Servants in order to the acquitting of our selves well at this Bar we have the direction of the holy Scripture which we may search as curiously as we please we have all God's institutions to guide us we have the assistance of GOD'S Spirit to help and encourage our endeavours and the promises of the Goâ—pel to assure us that ouâ— labour shall not be in vain These are the benefits of the present time but what warrant have we from Scripture that those duties may be performed hereafter which are now neglected No we are told the quite contrary because I called saith GOD and ye would not answer I will then laugh at your destruction and mock