it and had constant recourse to it for the determining of differences and yet that that very Church which hath enjoyed and used it so long should now be at a loss where to find it Nothing could fall out more unluckily than that there should be such differences among them about that which they pretend to be the only means of ending all differences There is not the least intimation in Scripture of this priviledge conferr'd upon the Roman Church nor do the Apostles in all their Epistles ever so much as give the least directions to Christians to appeal to the Bishop of Rome for a determination of many differences which even in those times happened among them And it is strange they should be so silent in this matter when there were so many occasions to speak of it if our Saviour had plainly appointed such an infallible Judge of Controversies for this very end to decide the differences that should happen among Christians It is strange that the Ancient Fathers in their disputes with Hereticks should never appeal to this Judge nay it is strange they should not constantly do it in all cases it being so short and expedite a way for the ending of Controversies And this very consideration to a wise man is instead of a thousand arguments to satisfy him that in those times no such thing was believed in the whole world Now this Doctrine of Infallibility if it be not true is of so much the more pernicious consequence to Christianity because the conceit of it does confirm them that think they have it in all their other errors and gives them a pretence of assuming an Authority to themselves to impose their own fancies and mistakes upon the whole Christian world 2. Their Doctrine about Repentance Which consists in confessing their sins to the Priest which if it be but accompanied with any degree of Contrition does upon Absolution received from the Priest put them into a state of Salvation though they have lived the most lewd and debauched lives that can be imagined than which nothing can be more destructive of a good life For if this be true all the hazard that the most wicked man runs of his Salvation is only the danger of so sudden a death as gives him no space for Confession and Absolution A case that happens so rarely that any man that is strongly addicted to his Lusts will be content to venture his Salvation upon this hazard and all the arguments to a good life will be very insignificant to a man that hath a mind to be wicked when remission of Sins may be had upon such cheap terms 3. The Doctrine of Purgatory By which they mean a state of temporary punishments after this life from which men may be released and translated into Heaven by the Prayers of the Living and the Sacrifice of the Mass. That this Doctrine was not known in the Primitive Church nor can be proved from Scripture we have the free acknowledgment of as Learned and Eminent men as any of that Church which is to acknowledge that it is a superstructure upon the Christian Religion And though in one sense it be indeed a building of Gold and Silver upon the foundation of Christianity considering the vast Revenues which this Doctrine and that of Indulgences which depends upon it brings into that Church yet I doubt not but in the Apostles sense it will be found to be Hay and Stubble But how groundless soever it be it is too gainful a Doctrine to be easily parted withal 4. The Doctrine of Transubstantiation A hard word but I would to God that were the worst of it the thing is much more difficult I have taken some pains to consider other Religions that have been in the world and I must freely declare that I never yet in any of them met with any Article or Proposition imposed upon the belief of men half so unreasonable and hard to be believed as this is And yet this in the Romish Church is esteemed one of the most principal Articles of the Christian Faith though there is no more certain Foundation for it in Scripture than for our Saviours being substantially changed into all those things which are said of him as that he is a Rock a Vine a Door and an hundred other things But this is not all This Doctrine hath not only no certain Foundation in Scripture but I have a far heavier charge against it namely that it undermines the very Foundation of Christianity it self And surely nothing ought to be admitted to be a part of the Christian Doctrine which destroys the reason of our belief of the whole And that this Doctrine does so will appear evidently if we consider what was the main Argument which the Apostles used to convince the world of the truth of Christianity And that was this That our Blessed Saviour the Author of this Doctrine wrought such and such miracles and particularly that he rose again from the dead And this they proved because they were eye-witnesses of his Miracles and had seen him and conversed with him after he was risen from the dead But what if their senses did deceive them in this matter then it cannot be denied but that the main proof of Christianity falls to the ground Well! We will now suppose as the Church of Rome does Transubstantiation to have been one principal part of the Christian Doctrine which the Apostles preached But if this Doctrine be true then all mens Senses are deceived in a plain sensible matter wherein 't is as hard for them to be deceived as in any thing in the world For two things can hardly be imagin'd more different than a little bit of Wafer and the whole Body of a Man So that the Apostles persuading men to believe this Doctrine persuaded them not to trust their Senses and yet the Argument which they used to persuade them to this was built upon the direct contrary principle that mens Senses are not to be trusted For if they be not then notwithstanding all the evidence the Apostles offer'd for the Resurrection of our Saviour he might not be risen and so the Faith of Christians was vain So they that represent the Apostles as absurdly as is possible viz. going about to persuade men out of their Senses by vertue of an Argument the whole strength whereof depends upon the certainty of Sense And now the matter is brought to a fair issue If the testimony of Sense be to be relied upon then Transubstantiation is false If it be not then no man is sure that Christianity is true For the utmost assurance that the Apostles had of the truth of Christianity was the testimony of their own Senses concerning our Saviours Miracles and this Testimony every man hath against Transubstantiation From whence it plainly follows that no man no not the Apostles themselves had more reason to believe Christianity to be true than every man hath to believe Transubstantion to be false And we who
did not see our Saviours Miracles as the Apostles did and have only a credible Relation of them but do see the Sacrament have less evidence of the truth of Christianity than of the falshood of Transubstantiation But cannot God impose upon the Senses of men and represent things to them otherwise than they are Yes undoubtedly And if he hath revealed that he doth this are we not to believe him Most certainly But then we ought to be assured that he hath made such a Revelation which Assurance no man can have the certainty of Sense being taken away I shall press the business a little farther Supposing the Scripture to be a Divine Revelation and that these words This is my Body if they be in Scripture must necessarily be taken in the strict and literal sense I ask now What greater evidence any man has that these words This is my Body are in the Bible than every man has that the Bread is not chang'd in the Sacrament Nay no man has so much for we have only the evidence of one Sense that these words are in the Bible but that the Bread is not changed we have the concurring testimony of several of our Senses In a word if this be once admitted that the Senses of all men are deceiv'd in one of the most plain sensible matters that can be there is no certain means left either to convey or prove a Divine Revelation to Men nor is there any way to confute the grossest imposture in the world For if the clear evidence of all mens Senses be not sufficient for this purpose let any man if he can find a better and more convincing Argument 5. I will give but one instance more of their Doctrines And that shall be their Doctrine of deposing Kings in case of Heresie and absolving their Subjects from their Allegiance to them And this is not a meer speculative Doctrine but hath been put in practice many a time by the Bishops of Rome as every one knows that is vers'd in History For the Troubles and Confusions which were occasion'd by this very thing make a good part of the History of several ages I hope no body expects that I should take the pains to shew that this was not the Doctrine of our Saviour and his Apostles nor of the Primitive Christians The Papists are many of them so far from pretending to this that in some times and places when it is not seasonable and for their purpose we have much a-doe to persuade them that ever it was their Doctrine But if Transubstantiation be their Doctrine this is for they came both out of the same Forge I mean the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the third And if as they tell us Transubstantiation was then establish'd so was this And indeed one would think they were Twins and brought forth at the same time they are so like one another that is both so monstrously unreasonable II. I come now in the Second place to consider some Practices of the Church of Rome which I am afraid will prove as bad as her Doctrines I shall instance in these Five 1. Their celebrating of their Divine Service in an unknown Tongue And that not only contrary to the practice of the Primitive Church and to the great end and design of Religious Worship which is the Edification of those who are concerned in it and it is hard to imagine how men can be edified by what they do not understand but likewise in direct contradiction to St. Paul who hath no less than a whole Chapter wherein he confutes this Practice as fully and condemns it as plainly as any thing is condemned in the whole Bible And they that can have the face to maintain that this Practice was not condemned by St. Paul or that it was allowed and used in the first Ages of Christianity need not be ashamed to set up for the defence of any Paradox in the world 2. The Communion in one kind And that notwithstanding that even by their own acknowledgment our Saviour instituted it in both kinds and the Primitive Church administred it in both kinds This I must acknowledge is no addition to Christianity but a Sacrilegious taking away of an Essential part of the Sacrament For the Cup is as essential a part of the Institution as the Bread and they might as well and by the same Authority take away the one as the other and both as well as either 3. Their worshiping of Images Which practice notwithstanding all their distinctions about it which are no other but what the Heathens used in the same case flies as full in the face of the Second Commandment as a deliberate and malicious killing of a man is against the Sixth But if the case be so plain a man would think that at least the Teachers and Guides of that Church should be sensible of it Why they are so and afraid the people should be so too And therefore in their ordinary Catechisms and Manuals of Devotion they leave out the Second Commandment and divide the Tenth into two to make up the number lest if the common people should know it their Consciences should start at the doing of a thing so directly contrary to the plain command of God 4. The worshipping of the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist out of a false and groundless perswasion that they are substantially changed into the Body and Bloud of Christ. Which if it be not true and it hath good fortune if it be for certainly it is one of the most incredible things in the whole world then by the confession of several of their own learned Writers they are guilty of gross Idolatry 5. The Worship and Invocation of Saints and Angels and particularly of the Virgin Mary which hath now for some Ages been a principal part of their Religion Now a man may justly wonder that so considerable a part of Religion as they make this to be should have no manner of foundation in the Scripture Does our Saviour any where speak one word concerning the worshipping of Her Nay does he not take all occasions to restrain all extravagant apprehensions and imaginations concerning the Honour due to her as foreseeing the degeneracy of the Church in this thing When he was told that his Mother and Brethren were without Who says he are my Mother and my Brethren He that doth the will of my Father the same is my Mother and Sister and Brother And when the Woman brake forth into that rapture concerning the blessed Mother of our Lord Blessed is the Womb that bare thee and the Paps that gave thee suck Our Saviour diverts it to another thing Yea rather blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it Does either our Saviour or his Apostles in all their Precepts and Directions concerning Prayer and the manner of it and by whom we are to address our selves to God give the least intimation of Prayer to the Virgin Mary or making use
A SERMON LATELY PREACHED ON 1 CORINTH 3.15 BY A Reverend Divine OF THE Church of England DVBLIN Reprinted for Joseph Howes Bookseller at the Kings-Arms in Castle-street 1685. 1 CORINTH 3.15 But he himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire THE Context runs thus According to the Grace of God which is given unto me as a wise Master-builder I have laid the Foundation and another buildeth thereon But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon For other Foundation can no man lay than that which is laid Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this Foundation Gold Silver precious Stones Wood Hay Stubble every man's work shall be made manifest for the day shall declare it but it shall be revealed by Fire and the Fire shall try every mans work of what sort it is If any mans work abide which he hath built thereupon he shall receive a Reward If any mans work shall be burnt he shall suffer loss But he himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire In these Words the Apostle speaks of a sort of persons who held indeed the Foundation of Christianity but built upon it such Doctrines or Practices as would not bear the trial which he expresseth to us by Wood Hay and Stubble which are not proof against the Fire Such a person the Apostle tells us hath brought himself into a very dangerous state though he would not absolutely deny the possibility of his Salvation He himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire That by Fire here is not meant the Fire of Purgatory as some pretend who would be glad of any shadow of a Text of Scripture to countenance their own dreams I shall neither trouble you nor my self to manifest It is very well known that this is a Proverbial phrase used not only in Scripture but in prophane Authors to signifie a narrow escape out of a great danger He shall be saved yet so as by Fire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the Fire Just as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used 1 Pet. 3.20 where the Apostle speaking of the eight persons of Noah's Family who escap'd the Flood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they escaped out of the Water So here this phrase is to be rendred in the Text He himself shall escape yet so as out of Fire The like expression you have Amos 4.11 I have pluckt them as a firebrand out of the fire And Jude 23. Others save with fear plucking them out of the fire All which expressions signifie the greatness of the danger and the difficulty of escaping it And so the Roman Orator who it is likely did not think of Purgatory useth this phrase Quo ex judicio velut ex incendio nudus effugit From which Judgment or Sentence he escaped naked as it were out of a burning And one of the Greek Orators tells us that to save a man out of the fire was a common proverbial speech And thus St. Chrysostom interprets this very place He shall escape as one that escapes out of the fire that is saith he as one who when his house at midnight is set on fire wakes and leaps out of his Bed and runs naked out of the doors taking nothing that is within along with him but imploying his whole care to save his body from the flames From the words thus explained the Observation that naturally ariseth is this That men may hold all the Fundamentals of Christian Religion and yet may super add other things whereby they may greatly endanger their salvation What those things were which some among the Corinthians built upon the foundation of Christianity whereby they endangered their Salvation we may probably conjecture by what the Apostle reproves in this Epistle as the tolerating of Incestuous Marriages communicating in Idol Feasts c. And especially by the Doctrine of the false Apostles who at that time did so much disturb the peace of most Christian Churches and who are so often and so severely reflected upon in this Epistle And what their Doctrine was we have an account Acts 15. viz. that they impose upon the Gentile Christians Circumcision and the Observation of the Jewish Law teaching that unless they were Circumcised and kept the Law of Moses they could not be saved So that they did not only build these Doctrines upon Christianity but they made them equal with the Foundation saying That unless men believed and practised such things they could not be saved I shall at this time take occasion from this passage of the Apostles to consider these two things 1. Some Doctrines and Practices which have been built upon the foundation of Christianity to the great hazard and danger of mens Salvation And to be plain I mean particularly by the Church of Rome 2. Whether our granting a possibility of Salvation though with great hazard to those in the communion of the Roman Church and their denying it to us be a reasonable argument and encouragement to any man to betake himself to that Church And there is the more reason to consider these things when so many seducing Spirits are so active and busy â—o pervert men from the Truth and when we see every day so many persons and their Religion so easily parted For this reason these two Considerations shall be the subject of the following Discourse I. First we will consider some Doctrines and Practices which the Church of Rome hath built upon the Foundation of Christianity to the great hazard and danger of mens Salvation It is not denied by the most judicious Protestant but that the Church of Rome do hold all the Articles of the Christian Faith which are necessary to Salvation But that which we charge upon them as a just ground of our separation from them is the imposing of new Doctrines and Practices upon Christians as necessary to Salvation which were never taught by our Saviour or his Apostles and which are either directly contrary to the Doctrine of Christianity or too apparently destructive of a good Life And I begin 1. With their Doctrines And because I have no mind to aggravate lesser matters I will single out four or five points of Doctrine which they have added to the Christian Religion and which were neither taught by our Saviour and his Apostles nor own'd in the first ages of Christianity And the First which I shall mention and which being once admitted makes way for as many Errors as they please to bring in is this their Doctrine of Infallibility And this they are stiff and peremptory in though they are not agreed among themselves where this Infallibility is seated whether in the Pope alone or a Council alone or in both together or in the diffusive body of Christians But they are sure they have it though they know not where it is And is this no prejudice against it can any man think that this priviledge was at first conferred upon the Church of Rome and that Christians in all ages did believe
of her Mediation And can any man believe that if this had been the Practice of the Church from the beginning our Saviour and his Apostles would have been so silent about so considerable a part of Religion insomuch that in all the Epistles of the Apostles I do not remember that her Name is so much as once mentioned And yet the worship of her in the Church of Rome is a main part of their publick Worship yea and of their Private Devotion too in which it is usual with them to say ten Ave Maries for one Pater noster that is for one Prayer they make to Almighty God they make ten Addresses to the blessed Virgin for that is the proportion observed in their Râ—saries He that considers this and had never seen the Bible would have been apt to think that there had been more said concerning Her in Scripture than either concerning God or our blessed Saviour and that the New Testament were full from one end to the other of Precepts and Exhortations to the worshipping of her and yet when all is done I challenge any man to shew me so much as one Sentence in the whole Bible that sounds that way And there is as little in the Christian Writers of the first 300 years The truth is this practice began to creep in among some superstitious people about the middle of the fourth Century And I remember particularly that Epiphanius who lived about that time calls it the Heresie of the Women And thus I have given you some Instances of several Doctrines and Practices which the Church of Rome have built upon the Foundation of Christianity Much more might have been said of them but from what hath been said any man may easily discern how dangerous they are to the Salvation of men I proceed now in the second place II. To consider whether our granting a possibility of Salvation though with great hazard to those in the Communion of the Roman Church and their denying it to us be a sufficient argument and encouragement to any man to quit our Church and go to theirs And there is the more need to consider this because this is the great popular Argument wherewith the Emissaries and Agents of that Church are wont to assault our people Your Church say they grants that a Papist may be saved Ours denies that a Protestant can be saved therefore safest to be of our Church in which Salvation by the acknowledgment of both sides is possible For Answer to this I shall endeavour to shew that this is so far from being a good Argument that it is so intolerable weak and sophistical that any considerate man ought to be ashamed to be catch'd by it For either it is good of it self and sufficient to persuade a man to relinquish our Church and to pass over to theirs without entring into the Merits of the Cause on either side and without comparing the Doctrines and Practices of both the Churches together or it is not If it be not sufficient of it self to persuade a man to leave our Church without comparing the Doctrines on both sides then it is to no purpose and there is nothing got by it For if upon examination and comparing of Doctrines the one appear to be true and the other false this alone is sufficient inducement to any man to cleave to that Church where the true Doctrine is found and then there is no need of this Argument If it be said that this Argument is good in it self without the examination of the Doctrines of both Churches this seems a very strange thing for any man to affirm that it is reason enough to a man to be of any Church what ever her Doctrines and Practices be if she do but damn those that differ from her and if the Church that differs from her do but allow a possibility of Salvation in her Communion But they who use this Argument pretend that it is sufficient of it self and therefore I shall apply my self to shew as briefly and plainly as I can the miserable weakness and insufficiency of it to satisfie any mans Conscience or Prudence to change his Religion And to this end I shall 1. Shew the weakness of the Principle upon which this Argument relies 2. Give some parallel Instances by which it will clearly appear that it concludes false 3. I shall take notice of some gross absurdities that follow from it 4. Shew how unfit it is to work upon those to whom it is propounded And 5. How improper it is to be urged by those that make use of it 1. I shall shew the weakness of the Principle upon which this Argument relies And that is this That whatever different Parties in Religion agree in is safest to be chosen The true consequence of which Principle if it be driven to the head is to persuade men to forsake Christianity and to make them take up in the Principles of natural Religion for in these all Religions do agree For if this Principle be true and signifie any thing it is dangerous to embrace any thing wherein the several parties in Religion differ because that only is safe and prudent to be chosen wherein all agree So that this Argument if the foundation of it be good will persuade furrher then those who make use of it desire it should do for it will not only make men forsake the Protestant Religion but Popery too and which is much more considerable Christianity it self 2. I will give some parallel instances by which it will clearly be seen that this Argument concludes false The Donatists denied the Baptism of the Catholicks to be good but the Catholicks acknowledged the Baptism of the Donatists to be valid So that both sides were agreed that the Baptism of the Donatists was good therefore the safest way for St. Austin and other Catholicks according to this Argument was to be baptised again by the Donatists because by the acknowledgment of both sides Baptism among them was valid But to come nearer to the Romish Church Several in that Church hold the personal Infallibility of the Pope and the lawfulness of deposing killing Kings for Heresie to be de fide viz. necessary Articles of Faith and consequently that whoever does not believe them cannot be saved But a great many Papists though they believe these things to be no matters of Faith yet they think those that hold them may be saved and they are generally very favourable towards them But now according to this Argument they ought all to be of their opinion in these points because both sides are agreed that they that hold them may be saved but one side positively says that men cannot be saved if they do not hold them But my Text furnisheth me with as good an instance to this purpose as can be desired St. Paul here in the Text acknowledgeth the possibility of the Salvation of those who built hay and stubble upon the foundation of Christianity that they might