pretended Demonstration of Reason against plain Experience and matter of Fact This is just Zenoe's Demonstration of the impossibility of motion against Diogenes walking before his Eyes For this is to undertake to prove that impossible to have been which most certainly was Just thus the Servants in the Parable might have demonstrated that the tares were wheat because they were sure none but good seed was sown at first and no man could give any account of the punctual time when any tares were sown or by whom and if an Enemy had come to do it he must needs have met with great resistance and opposition but no such resistance was made and therefore there could be no tares in the field but that which they call'd tares was certainly good wheat At the same rate a man might demonstrate that our King his Majesty of great Britain is not return'd into England nor restor'd to his Crown because there being so great and powerfull an Army possess'd of his Lands and therefore obliged by interest to keep him out it was impossible he should ever come in without a great deal of fighting and bloudshed but there was no such thing therefore he is not return'd and restor'd to his Crown And by the like kind of Demonstration one might prove that the Turk did not invade Christendom last year and besiege Vienna because if he had the most Christian King who had the greatest Army in Christendom in a readiness would certainly have employed it against him but Monsieur Arnauld certainly knows no such thing was done And therefore according to his way of Demonstration the matter of fact so commonly reported and believed concerning the Turks Invasion of Christendom and besieging Vienna last year was a perfect mistake But a man may demonstrate till his head and heart ake before he shall ever be able to prove that which certainly is or was never to have been For of all sorts of impossibles nothing is more evidently so than to make that which hath been not to have been All the reason in the world is too weak to cope with so tough and obstinate a difficulty And I have often wonder'd how a man of Monsieur Arnauld's great wit and sharp Judgment could prevail with himself to engage in so bad and baffled a Cause or could think to defend it with so wooden a Dagger as his Demonstration of Reason against certain Experience and matter of Fact A thing if it be possible of equal absurdity with what he pretends to demonstrate Transubstantiation it self I proceed to the Third pretended Ground of this Doctrine of Transubstantiation and that is The Infallible Authority of the present Church to make and declare new Articles of Faith And this in truth is the ground into which the most of the learned men of their Church did heretofore and many do still resolve their belief of this Doctrine And as I have already shewn do plainly say that they see no sufficient reason either from Scripture or Tradition for the belief of it And that they should have believed the contrary had not the determination of the Church obliged them otherwise But if this Doctrine be obtruded upon the world merely by virtue of the Authority of the Roman Church and the Declaration of the Council under Pope Gregory the VII th or of the Lateran Council under Innocent the III. then it is a plain Innovation in the Christian Doctrine and a new Article of Faith impos'd upon the Christian world And if any Church hath this power the Christian Faith may be enlarged and changed as often as men please and that which is no part of our Saviour's Doctrine nay any thing though never so absurd and unreasonable may become an Article of Faith obliging all Christians to the belief of it whenever the Church of Rome shall think fit to stamp her Authority upon it which would make Christianity a most uncertain and endless thing The Fourth pretended ground of this Doctrine is the necessity of such a change as this in the Sacrament to the comfort and benefit of those who receive it But there is no colour for this if the thing be rightly consider'd Because the comfort and benefit of the Sacrament depends upon the blessing annexed to the Institution And as Water in Baptism without any substantial change made in that Element may by the Divine blessing accompanying the Institution be effectual to the washing away of Sin and Spiritual Regeneration So there can no reason in the world be given why the Elements of Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper may not by the same Divide blessing accompanying this Institution make the worthy receivers partakers of all the Spiritual comfort and benefit designed to us thereby without any substantial change made in those Elements since our Lord hath told us that verily the flesh profiteth nothing So that if we could do so odd and strange a thing as to eat the very natural flesh and drink the bloud of our Lord I do not see of what greater advantage it would be to us than what we may have by partaking of the Symbols of his body and bloud as he hath appointed in remembrance of him For the Spiritual efficacy of the Sacrament doth not depend upon the nature of the thing received supposing we receive what our Lord appointed and receive it with a right preparation and disposition of mind but upon the supernatural blessing that goes along with it and makes it effectual to those spiritual ends for which it was appointed The Fifth and last pretended ground of this Doctrine is to magnifie the power of the Priest in being able to work so great a Miracle And this with great pride and pomp is often urg'd by them as a transcendent instance of the Divine wisedom to find out so admirable a way to raise the power and reverence of the Priest that he should be able every day and as often as he pleases by repeating a few words to work so miraculous a change and as they love most absurdly and blasphemously to speak to make God himself But this is to pretend to a power above that of God himself for he did not nor cannot make himself nor do any thing that implies a contradiction as Transubstantiation evidently does in their pretending to make God For to make that which already is and to make that now which always was is not onely vain and trifling if it could be done but impossible because it implies a contradiction And what if after all Transubstantiation if it were possible and actually wrought by the Priest would yet be no Miracle For there are two things necessary to a Miracle that there be a supernatural effect wrought and that this effect be evident to sense So that though a supernatural effect be wrought yet if it be not evident to sense it is to all the ends and purposes of a Miracle as if it were not and can be no testimony or proof of any
and not to impose their Judgement upon others as if they had any Authority over them And this is reasonable because if it were otherwise a Man would deprive others of that Liberty which he assumes to himself and which he can claim upon no other account but because it belongs to others equally with himself Secondly This liberty of judging is not so to be understood as to take away the necessity and use of Guides and Teachers in Religion Nor can this be denied to be a reasonable limitation because the knowledge of Revealed Religion is not a thing born with us nor ordinarily supernaturally infused into men but is to be learned as other things are And if it be to be learned there must be some to teach and instruct others And they that will learn must be modest and humble and in those things of which they are no competent Judges they must give credit to their Teachers and trust their skill For instance every unlearned man is to take it upon the credit of those who are skilfull that the Scriptures are truly and faithfully translated and for the understanding of obscure Texts of Scripture and more difficult points in Religion he is to rely upon those whose proper business and employment it is to apply themselves to the understanding of these things For in these cases every man is not capable of judging himself and therefore he must necessarily trust others And in all other things he ought to be modest and unless it be in plain matters which every man can judg of he ought rather to distrust himself than his Teacher And this respect may be given to a Teacher without either supposing him to be infallibe or making an absolute resignation of my judgment to him A man may be a very able Teacher suppose of the Mathematicks and fit to have the respect which is due to a Teacher tho he be not infallible in those Sciences and because Infallibility is not necessary to such a Teacher it is neither necessary nor convenient that I should absolutely resign up my Judgment to him For though I have reason to credit him within the compass of his Art in things which I do not know I am not therefore bound to believe him in things plainly contrary to what I and all mankind do certainly know For example if upon pretence of his skill in Arithmetick which I am learning of him he should tell me That twice two do not make four but five though I believed him to be the best Mathematician in the World yet I cannot believe him in this thing Nor is there reason I should because I did not come to learn this of him but knew as much of that before as he or any man else could tell me The case is the same in matters of Religion in which there are some things so plain and lie so level to all capacities that every man is almost equally judg of them As I shall have occasion farther to shew by and by Thirdly Neither does this liberty of judging exempt men from a due submission and obedience to their Teachers and Governors Every man is bound to obey the lawful Commands of his Governors and what by publick consent and Authority is determined and established ought not to be gainsaid by private Persons but upon very clear evidence of the falshood or unlawfulness of it And this is every mans duty for the maintaining of Order and out of regard to the Peace and Unity of the Church which is not to be violated upon every scruple and frivolous pretence And when men are perverse and disobedient Authority is Judg and may restrain and punish them Fourthly Nor do I so far extend this Liberty of judging in Religion as to think every man fit to dispute the Controversies of Religion A great part of people are ignorant and of so mean capacity as not to be able to judge of the force of a very good Argument much less of the issue of a long Dispute and such persons ought not to engage in disputes of Religion but to beg God's direction and to rely upon their Teachers and above all to live up to the plain dictates of natural Light and the clear Commands of God's Word and this will be their best security And if the providence of God have placed them under such Guides as do seduce them into Error their Ignorance is invincible and God will not condemn them for it so long as they sincerely endeavour to do the will of God so far as they know it And this being the case of many especially in the Church of Rome where Ignorance is so industriously cherished I have so much charity as to hope well concerning many of them And seeing that Church teacheth and enjoins the people to worship Images it is in some sense charitably done of them not to let them know the second Commandment that they may not be guilty of sinning against so plain a Law Having premised these Cautions I proceed in the II. Place To represent to you the grounds of this Principle of our Religion viz. That we allâ—w private persons to judge for themselves in matters of Religion First Because many things in Religion especially those which are most necessary to be believed and practised are so plain that every man of ordinary capacity after competent instruction in matters of Religion which is always to be supposed can as well judge of them for himself as any man or company of men in the world can judge for him Because in these he hath a plain Rule to go by Natural Light and clear Revelation of Scripture And this is no new Principle of the Protestants but most expresly owned by the ancient Fathers Whatever things are necessary are plain saith St. Chrysostom All things are plainly contained in Scripture which concern faith and a good life saith St Austin And nothing can be more reasonable than that those things which are plain to every man should be left to every man's judgment For every man can judg of what is plain of evident Truth and Falshood Virtue and Vice of Doctrines and Laws plainly delivered in Scripture if we believe any thing to be so which is next to madness to deny I will refer it to no mans Judgment upon earth to determine for me Whether there be a God or not Whether Murder and Perjury be Sins Whether it be not plain in Scripture That Jesus Christ is the Son of God That he became man and died for us and rose again So that there is no need of a Judg in these cases Nor can I possibly believe any man to be so absolutely infallible as not to call his infallibility into question if he determines any thing contrary to what is plain and evident to all mankind For if he should determine that there is no God or that he is not to be woshipped or that he will not punish and reward men or which is the case that Bellarmin puts that
thing because it self stands in need of another Miracle to give testimony to it and to prove that it was wrought And neither in Scripture nor in profane Authours nor in common use of speech is any thing call'd a Miracle but what falls under the notice of our senses A Miracle being nothing else but a supernatural effect evident to sense the great end and design whereof is to be a sensible proof and conviction to us of something that we do not see And for want of this Condition Transubstantiation if it were true would be no Miracle It would indeed be very supernatural but for all that it would not be a Sign or Miracle For a Sign or Miracle is always a thing sensible otherwise it could be no Sign Now that such a change as is pretended in Transubstantiation should really be wrought and yet there should be no sign and appearance of it is a thing very wonderfull but not to sense for our senses perceive no change the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament to all our senses remaining just as they were before And that a thing should remain to all appearance just as it was hath nothing at all of wonder in it we wonder indeed when we see a strange thing done but no man wonders when he sees nothing done So that Transubstantiation if they will needs have it a Miracle is such a Miracle as any man may work that hath but the confidence to face men down that he works it and the fortune to be believed And though the Church of Rome may magnify their Priests upon account of this Miracle which they say they can work every day and every hour yet I cannot understand the reason of it for when this great work as they call it is done there is nothing more appears to be done than if there were no Miracle Now such a Miracle as to all appearance is no Miracle I see no reason why a Protestant Minister as well as a Popish Priest may not work as often as he pleases or if he can but have the patience to let it alone it will work it self For surely nothing in the world is easier than to let a thing be as it is and by speaking a few words over it to make it just what it was before Every man every day may work ten thousand such Miracles And thus I have dispathc'd the First part of my Discourse which was to consider the pretended grounds and Reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine and to shew the weakness and insufficiency of them I come in the SECOND place to produce our Objections against it Which will be of so much the greater force because I have already shewn this Doctrine to be destitute of all Divine warrant and authority and of any other sort of Ground sufficient in reason to justify it So that I do not now object against a Doctrine which hath a fair probability of Divine Revelation on its side for that would weigh down all objections which did not plainly overthrow the probability and credit of its Divine Revelation But I object against a Doctrine by the mere will and Tyranny of men impos'd upon the belief of Christians without any evidence of Scripture and against all the evidence of Reason and Sense The Objection I shall reduce to these two Heads First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And Secondly The monstrous and insupportable absurdity of it First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And that upon these four accounts 1. Of the stupidity of this Doctrine 2. The real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine 3. Of the cruel and bloudy consequences of it 4. Of the danger of Idolatry which they are certainly guilty of if this Doctrine be not true 1. Upon account of the stupidity of this Doctrine I remember that Tully who was a man of very good sense instanceth in the conceit of eating God as the extremity of madness and so stupid an apprehension as he thought no man was ever guilty of * De Nat. Deorum l. 3. When we call says he the fruits of the earth Ceres and wine Bacchus we use but the common language but do you think any man so mad as to believe that which he eats to be God It seems he could not believe that so extravagant a folly had ever entred into the mind of man It is a very severe saying of Averroes the Arabian Philosopher who lived after this Doctrine was entertained among Christians and ought to make the Church or Rome blush * Dionys Carthus in 4. dist 10. art 1. if she can I have travell'd says he over the world and have found divers Sects but so sottish a Sect or Law I never found as is the Sect of the Christians because with their own teeth they devour their God whom they worship It was great stupidity in the People of Israel to say Come let us make us Gods but it was civilly said of them Let us make us Gods that may go before us in comparison of the Church of Rome who say Let us make a God that we may eat him So that upon the whole matter I cannot but wonder that they should chuse thus to expose Faith to the contempt of all that are endued with Reason And to speak the plain truth the Christian Religion was never so horribly exposed to the scorn of Atheists and Infidels as it hath been by this most absurd and senseless Doctrine But thus it was foretold that †2 Thess 2.10 the Man of Sin should come with Power and Signs and Lying Miracles and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness with all the Legerdemain and jugling tricks of falshood and imposture amongst which this of Transubstantiation which they call a Miracle and we a Cheat is one of the chief And in all probability those common jugling words of hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus by way of ridiculous imitation of the Priests of the Church of Rome in their trick of Transubstantiation Into such contempt by this foolish Doctrine and pretended Miracle of theirs have they brought the most sacred and venerable Mystery of our Religion 2. It is very scandalous likewise upon account of the real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine Literally to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud St. Austin as I have shewed before declares to be a great Impiety And the impiety and barbarousness of the thing is not in truth extenuated but onely the appearance of it by its being done under the Species of Bread and Wine For the thing they acknowledge is really done and they believe that they verily eat and drink the natural flesh and bloud of Christ And what can any man do more unworthily towards his
all the brevity and clearness I can And I doubt not to make it appear that as to the point of Vniversality though that be no-wise necessary to justifie the truth of any Religion ours is not inferior to theirs if we take in the Christians of all Ages and of all parts of the World And as to the point of Antiquity that our Faith and the Doctrines of our Religion have clearly the advantage of theirs all our Faith being unquestionably ancient their 's not so 1. As to the Point of Vniversality Which they of the Church of Rome I know not for what reason will needs make an inseparable property and mark of the true Church And they never slout at the Protestant Religion with so good a grace among the ignorant People as when they are bragging of their Numbers and despising poor Protestancy because embraced by so few This pestilent Northern Heresie as of late they scornfully call it entertained it seems only in this cold and cloudy Corner of the World by a company of dull stupid People that can neither penetrate into the proofs nor the possibility of Transubstantiation whereas to the more refined Southern Wits all these difficult and obscure Points are as clear as their Sun at Noon-day But to speak to the thing it self If Number be necessary to prove the truth and goodness of any Religion ours upon enquiry will be found not so inconsiderable as our Adversaries would make it Those of the Reformed Religion according to the most exact calculations that have been made by learned men being esteemed not much unequal in number to those of the Romish persuasion But then if we take in the ancient Christian Church whose Faith was the same with ours and other Christian Churches at this day which all together are vastly greater and more numerous than the Roman Church and which agree with us several of them in very considerable Doctrines and Practices in dispute between us and the Church of Rome and all of them in disclaiming that fundamental point of the Roman Religion and Summ of Christianity as Bellarmine calls it I mean the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome over all Christians and Churches in the World then the Number on our side will be much greater than on theirs But we will not stand upon this advantage with them Suppose we were by much the sewer So hath the true Church of God often been without any the least prejudice to the truth of their Religion What think we of the Church in Abraham's time which for ought we know was confined to one Family and one small Kingdom that of Melchisedec King of Salem What think we of it in Moses his time when it was confined to one People wandering in a Wilderness What of it in Elijah's time when besides the two Tribes that worshipped at Jerusalem there were in the other ten but seven thousand that had not bowed their knee to Baal What in our Saviour's time when the whole Christian Church consisted of twelve Apostles and seventy Disciples and some few Followers beside How would Bellarmine have despised this little Flock because it wanted one or two of his goodliest marks of the true Church Vniversality and Splendor And what think we of the Christian Church in the height of Arianism and Pelagianism when a great part of Christendom was over-run with these Errors and the number of the Orthodox was inconsiderable in comparison of the Hereticks But what need I to urge these Instances As if the Truth of a Religion were to be estimated and carried by the major Vote which as it can be an Argument to none but Fools so I dare say no honest and wise man ever made use of it for a solid proof of the truth and goodness of any Church or Religion If multitude be an Argument that men are in the right in vain then hath the Scripture said Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil For if this Argument be of any force the greater Number never go wrong 2. As to the Point of Antiquity This is not always a certain Mark of the true Religion For surely there was a time when Christianity began and was a new Profession and then both Judaism and Paganism had certainly the advantage of it in Point of Antiquity But the proper Question in this Case is Which is the true Ancient Christian Faith that of the Church of Rome or Ours And to make this matter plain it is to be considered that a great part of the Roman Faith is the same with Ours as namely the Articles of the Apostles Creed as explained by the first four General Councils And these make up our whole Faith so far as concerns matters of meer and simple Belief that are of absolute necessity to Salvation And in this Faith of Ours there is nothing wanting that can be shewn in any ancient Creed of the Christian Church And thus far Our Faith and theirs of the Roman Church are undoubtedly of equal Antiquity that is as ancient as Christianity it self All the Question is as to the matters in difference between us The principal whereof are the twelve new Articles of the Creed of Pope Pius the IV concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass Transubstantiation the Communion in one kind only Purgatory c. not one of which is to be found in any ancient Creed or Confession of Faith generally allowed in the Christian Church The Antiquity of these we deny and affirm them to be Innovations and have particularly proved them to be so not only to the answering but almost to the silencing of our Adversaries And as for the negative Articles of the Protestant Religion in opposition to the Errors and Corruptions of the Romish Faith these are by accident become a part of our Faith and Religion occasioned by their Errors as the renouncing of the Doctrines of Arianism became part of the Catholick Religion after the rise of that Heresie So that the Case is plainly this We believe and teach all that is contained in the Creeds of the ancient Christian Church and was by them esteemed necessary to Salvation and this is Our Religion But now the Church of Rome hath innovated in the Christian Religion and made several Additions to it and greatly corrupted it both in the Doctrines and Practices of it And these Additions and Corruptions are their Religion as it is distinct from ours and both because they are Corruptions and Novelties we have rejected them And our rejection of these is our Reformation And our Reformation we grant if this will do them any good not to be so ancient as their Corruptions All Reformation necessarily supposing Corruptions and Errors to have been before it And now we are at a little better leisure to answer that captious Question of theirs Where was your Religion before Luther Where-ever Christianity was in some places more pure in others more corrupted but especially in these Western parts of Christendom overgrown for several Ages with
were the great Doctors among the Jews the Teachers and Interpreters of the Law of God And because many of them were of the Sect of the Pharisees which above all others pretended to skill and knowledge in the Law therefore it is that our blessed Saviour do's so often put the Scribes and Pharisees together And these were the men of chief Authority in the Jewish Church who equalled their own unwritten word and traditions with the Law of God Nay our Saviour tells us they made the Commandments of God of none effect by their traditions They did in effect assume to themselves infallibility and all that opposed and contradicted them they branded with the odious name of Hereticks Against these our Saviour denounced this Woe here in the Text Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees Hypocrites for ye shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against Men c. All the difficulty in the words is what is here meant by shutting up the Kingdom of Heaven against Men St. Luke expresseth it more plainly ye have taken away the key of knowledge ye entred not in your selves and them that were entring in ye hindered By putting these two expressions together we shall the more easily come at the meaning of the Text. Ye have taken away the key of knowledge and have shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against Men. This Metaphor of the key of knowledge is undoubtedly an allusion to that known custome among the Jews in the admission of their Doctors For to whomsoever they gave Authority to interpret the Law and the Prophets they were solemnly admitted into that office by delivering to them a Key and a Table-book So that by the key of knowledge is here meant the interpretation and understanding of the Scriptures and by taking away the key of knowledge not onely that they arrogated to themselves alone the understanding of the Scriptures but likewise that they had conveyed away this key of knowledge and as it were hid it out of the way neither using it themselves as they ought nor suffering others to make use of it And thus they shut the Kingdom of Heaven against men which is very fitly said of those who have locked the door against them that were going in and have taken away the key By all which it appears that the plain meaning of our Saviour in these Metaphorical expressions is that the Scribes and Teachers of the Law under a pretence of interpreting the Scriptures had perverted them and kept the true knowledge of them from the People Especially those Prophecies of the Old Testament which concerned the Messias And by this means the Kingdom of Heaven was shut against men And they not only rejected the truth themselves but by keeping men in ignorance of the true meaning of the Scriptures they hindered many from embracing our Saviour's Doctrine and entering into the Kingdom of Heaven who were otherwise well enough disposed for it Having thus explained the words I shall from the main scope and design of them observe to you these two things 1. The Necessity of the knowledge of the holy Scriptures in order to our eternal Salvation It is called by our Saviour the key of knowledge that which lets men into the Kingdom of Heaven 2. The great and inexcusable fault of those who deprive the People of the knowledge of the holy Scriptures They hut the kingdom of heaven against men and do what in them lies to hinder their eternal Salvation and therefore our Saviour denounceth so heavy a woe against them I shall speak briefly to these two Observations and then apply them to those who are principally concerned in them I. First I observe hence the Necessity of the knowledge of the holy Scriptures in order to our eternal Salvation This is by our Saviour called the key of knowledge that which lets men into the Kingdom of Heaven Knowledge is necessary to Religion It is necessary to the Being of it and necessary to the life and practice of it Without Faith says the Apostle it is impossible to please God Because Faith is an act of the understanding and do's necessarily suppose some knowledge and apprehension of what we believe To all acts of Religion there is necessarily required some act of the Understanding so that without knowledge there can be no devotion in the service of God no obedience to his Laws Religion begins in the Understanding and from thence descends upon the heart and life If ye know these things says our Saviour happy are ye if ye do them We must first know God before we can worship him and understand what is his will before we can do it This is so very evident that one would think there needed no discourse about it And yet there are some in the World that cry up Ignorance as the Mother of Devotion And to shew that we do not wrong them in this matter Mr. Rushworth in his Dialogues a Book in great vogue among the Papists here in England does expresly reckon up Ignorance among the Parents of Religion And can any thing be said more absurdly and more to the disparagement of Religion than to derive the pedegree of the most excellent thing in the world from so obscure and ignoble an Original and to make that which the Scripture calls the beginning of wisdom and the excellency of knowledge to be the Off-spring of Ignorance and a Child of darkness Ignorance indeed may be the cause of wonder and admiration and the mother of folly and superstition But surely Religion is of a nobler Extraction and is the issue and result of the best wisdom and knowledge and descends from above from the giver of every good and perfect gift even the father of lights And as knowledge in general is necessary to Religion so more particularly the knowledge of the holy Scriptures is necessary to our eternal Salvation Because these are the great and standing Revelation of God to mankind wherein the Nature of God and his Will concerning our duty and the terms and conditions of our eternal happiness in another World are fully and plainly declared to us The Scriptures are the Word of God and from whence can we learn the will of God so well as from his own mouth They are the great instrument of our Salvation and should not every man be acquainted with that which alone can perfectly instruct him what he must believe and what he must do that he may be saved This is the testimony which the Scripture gives of it self that it is able to make men wise unto salvation And is it not very fit that every man should have this wisdom and in order thereunto the free use of that Book from whence this wisdom is to be learned II. Secondly I observe the great and inexcusable fault of those who keep men in Ignorance of Religion and take away from them so excellent and necessary a means of divine knowledge as the H. Scriptures are This our Saviour calls taking away the
seeing them in this heat notwithstanding all the reasons they pretended for their passion and for all they sheltered themselves under the great Example of Elias doth very calmly but severely reprove this temper of theirs Ye know not what manner of Spirit ye are of for the Son of Man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them Grotius observes that these two excellent Sentences are lest out in a Manuscript that is in England I cannot tell what Manuscript he refers to but if it were a Copy written out in the height of Popery no wonder if some zealous Transcriber offended at this passage struck it out of the Gospel being confident our Saviour would not say any thing that was so directly contrary to the current Doctrine and practice of those times But thanks be to God this admirable Saying is still preserv'd and can never be made use of upon a fitter occasion Ye know not what manner of Spirit ye are of That is Ye own your selves to be my Disciples but do you consider what spirit now acts and governs you Not that surely which my Doctrine designs to mould and fashion you into which is not a furious and persecuting and destructive spirit but mild and gentle and saving tender of the lives and interests of men even of those who are our greatest Enemies You ought to consider That you are not now under the rough and sowr Dispensation of the Law but the calm and peaceable Institution of the Gospel to which the spirit of Elias though he was a very good man in his time would be altogether unsuitable God p rmitted it then under that imperfect way of Religion but now under the Gospel it would be intolerable For that designs universal love and peace and good-will and now no difference of Religion no pretence of zeal for God and Christ can warrant and justifie this passionate and fierce this vindictive and exterminating spirit For the Son of Man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them He says indeed elsewhere that he was not come to send Peace but a Sword which we are not to understand of the natural tendency of his Religion but of the accidental event and effect of it through the malice and perverseness of men But here he speaks of the proper intention and design of his coming He came not to kill and destroy but for the healing of the Nations for the salvation and redemption of Mankind not onely from the wrath to come but from a great part of the evils and miseries of this life He came to discountenance all fierceness and rage and cruelty in men one towards another to restrain and subdue that furious and unpeaceable Spirit which is so troublesome to the world and the cause of so many mischiefs and disorders in it And to introduce a Religion which consults not only the eternal Salvation of mens souls but their temporal peace and security their comfort and happiness in this world The words thus explained contain this Observation That a revengeful and cruel and destructive Spirit is directly contrary to the design and temper of the Gospel and not to be excused upon any pretence of zeal for God and Religion In the prosecution of this Argument I shall confine my Discourse to these Three heads First To shew the opposition of this spirit to the true Spirit and design of the Christian Religion Secondly The unjustifiableness of it upon any pretence of zeal for God and Religion Thirdly to apply this Discourse to the occasion of this Day First I shall shew the opposition of this spirit to the true Spirit and design of the Christian Religion That it is directly opposite to the main and fundamental Precepts of the Gospel and to the great Paterns and Examples of our Religion our Blessed Saviour and the Primitive Christians 1. This spirit which our Saviour here reproves in his Disciples is directly opposite to the main and fundamental Precepts of the Gospel which command us to love one another and to love all men even our very enemies and are so far from permitting us to persecute those who hate us that they forbid us to hate those who persecute us They require us to be merciful as our Father which is in Heaven is merciful to be kind and tender-hearted forbearing one another and forgiving one another if any man have a quarrel against any even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven us And to put on as the elect of God bowels of mercy meekness and long-suffering and to follow peace with all men and to shew all meekness to all men And particulary the Pastors and Governors of the Church are especially charged to be of this temper The servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle unto all men apt to teach in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves if peradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth To all which Precepts and many more that I might reckon up nothing can be more plainly opposite than inhumane Cruelties and Persecutions treacheroos Conspiracies and bloody Massacres a barbarous Inquisition and a holy League to extirpate all that differ from us And instead of instructing in meekness those that oppose themselves to convert men with fire and faggot and to teach them as Gideon did the men of Succoth with briars and thorns and instead of waiting for their repentance and endeavouring to recover them out of the snare of the Devil to put them quick into his hands and to dispatch them to Hell as fast as is possible If the precepts of Christianity can be contradicted surely it cannot be done more grosly and palpably than by such practises 2. This spirit is likewise directly opposite to the great Paterns and Examples of our Religion our Blessed Saviour and the Primitive Christians It was prophesied of our Saviour that he should be the Prince of peace and should make it one of his great businesses upon earth to make peace in heaven and earth to reconcile men to God and to one another to take up all those feuds and to extinguish all those animosities that were in the world to bring to agreement and a peaceable demeanour one towards another those that were most distant in their tempers and interests to make the lamb and the wolf lie down together that there might be no more destroying nor devouring in all Goll's holy mountain that is that that cruel and destructive spirit which prevailed before in the world should then be banished out of all Christian societies And in conformity to these predictions when our Saviour was born into the world the Angels sang that heavenly Anthem Glory to God in the highest peace on earth and good will among men And when he appeared in the world his whole life and carriage was gentle and peaceable full of meekness and charity His great business was to be beneficial to others to seek and to save that which was lost
been a thing evil in it self and forbidden by the Law of Nature would not have been done Secondly Another undeniable Argument from the Text of the lawfulness of Oaths is that God himself in condescension to the Custome of men who use to confirm and give credit to what they say by an Oath is represented by the Apostle as confirming his promise to us by an Oath verse 13. When God made the promise to Abraham because he could swear by none greater he swears by himself For men verily swear by the greater and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife Wherein God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel confirmed it by an oath which he certainly would not have done had an oath been unlawful in it self For that had been to comply with men in an evil practice and by his own example to give countenance to it in the highest manner But though God condescend to represent himself to us after the manner of men he never does it in any thing that is in its own nature evil and sinful Thirdly From the great Usefulness of Oaths in humane affairs to give credit and confirmation to our word and to put an end to Contestations Now that which serves to such excellent purposes and is so convenient for humane society and for mutual security and confidence among men ought not easily to be presumed unlawful till it be plainly proved to be so And if we consider the nature of an oath and every thing belonging to it there is nothing that hath the least appearance of evil in it There is surely no evil in it as it is an act of Religion nor as it is an Appeal to God as a witness and avenger in case we swear falsly nor as it is a confirmation of a doubtful matter nor as it puts an end to strife and controversie And these are all the essential ingredients of an Oath and the ends of it and they are all so good that they rather commend it than give the least colour of ground to condemn it I proceed in the Second place to shew the weakness and insufficiency of the grounds of the contrary opinion whether from Reason or from Scripture First from Reason They say the necessity of an Oath is occasioned by the want of truth and fidelity among men And that every man ought to demean himself with that faithfulness and integrity as may give credit and confirmation to his word and then Oaths will be needless This pretence will be fully answered if we consider these two things 1. That in matters of great importance no other obligation besides that of an oath hath been thought sufficient amongst the best and wisest of men to assert their fidelity to one another Even the best men to use the words of a great Author have not trusted the best men without it As we see in very remarkable instances where Oaths have pass'd between those who might be thought to have the greatest confidence in one another As between Abraham and his old faithful servant Eliezer concerning the choice of a Wife for his Son Between Father and Son Jacob and Joseph concerning the burial of his Father in the Land of Canaan Between two of the dearest and most intimate Friends David and Jonathan to assure their friendship to one another and it had its effect long after Jonathans death in the saving of Mephibosheth when reason of State and the security of his Throne seem'd to move David strongly to the contrary for it is expresly said 2 Sam. 21.7 that David spared Mephibosheth Jonathan's Son because of the oath of the Lord that was between them implying that had it not been for his Oath other considerations might probably have prevail'd with him to have permitted him to have been cut off with the rest of Saul's Children 2. This Reason which is alledged against Oaths among men is much stronger against God's confirming his promises to us by an Oath For he who is truth it self is surely of all other most to be credited upon his bare word and his oath needless to give confirmation to it and yet he condescends to add his oath to his word and therefore that reason is evidently of no force Secondly From Scripture Our Saviour seems altogether to forbid swearing in any case Matth. 5.33 34. Ye have heard that it hath been said to them of old time thou shalt not forswear thy self but I say unto you swear not at all neither by heaven c. But let your communication be yea yea and nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil And this Law St. James recites chap. 5. vers 12. as that which Christians ought to have a very particular and principal regard to above all things my brethren swear not And he makes the breach of this Law a damning sin lest ye fall into condemnation But the authority of our Saviour alone is sufficient and therefore I shall only consider that Text. And because here lies the main strength of this opinion of the unlawfulness of Oaths it is very fit that this Text be fully consider'd and that it be made very evident that it was not our Saviour's meaning by this prohibition wholly to forbid the use of Oaths But before I enter upon this matter I will readily grant that there is scarce any Errour whatsoever that hath a more plausible colour from Scripture than this which makes the case of those who are seduced into it the more pityable But then it ought to be consider'd how much this Doctrine of the unlawfulness of oaths reflects upon the Christian Religion since it is so evidently prejudicial both to humane Society in general and particularly to those persons that entertain it neither of which ought rashly to be supposed and taken for granted concerning any Law delivered by our Saviour Because upon these terms it will be very hard for us to vindicate the divine wisdom of our Saviour's Doctrine and the Reasonableness of the Christian Religion Of the inconvenience of this Doctrine to humane Society I have spoken already But besides this it is very prejudicial to them that hold it It renders them suspected to Government and in many cases incapable of the common benefits of Justice and other privileges of humane Society and exposeth them to great penalties as the constitution of all Laws and Governments at present is and it is not easie to imagine how they should be otherwise And which is very considerable in this matter it sets those who refuse Oaths upon very unequal terms with the rest of Mankind if where the estates and lives of men are equally concern'd their bare testimonies shall be admitted without an Oath and others shall be obliged to speak upon Oath Nothing being more certain in experience than that many men will lie for their interest when they will not be perjured God having planted in the natural Consciences of
play fast and loose with oaths And it is a very sad sign of the decay of Christian Religion amongst us to see so many who call themselves Christians to make so little conscience of so great a sin as even the Light of Nature would blush and tremble at I will conclude all with those excellent Sayings of the Son of Sirach concerning these two sins I have been speaking of of Prophane Swearing and Perjury Eccl. 23.9 10 c. Accustom not thy mouth to swearing neither use thy self to the naming of the holy One. A man that useth much swearing shall be filled with iniquity and the plague shall never depart from his house If he shall offend his sin shall he upon him and if he acknowledg not his sin he maketh a double offence And if he swear salsly he shall not be innocent but his house shall be full of calamities And to represent to us the dreadfull nature of this sin of Perjury There is saith he a word that is cloathed about with death meaning a rash and false Oath There is a word that is cloathed about with death God grant it be not found in the heritage of Jacob for all such things shall be far from the godly and they will not wallow in these sins From which God preserve all good men and make them carefull to preserve themselves as they value the present peace of their own consciences and the favour of Almighty God in this world and the other for his mercies sake in Jesus Christ To whom c. A SERMON Preached at the FUNERAL Of the Reverend Mr. THOMAS GOVGE the 4th of Novemb. 1681. At St. Anne's Blackfryars With a brief account of his Life TO The Right Worshipfull THE PRESIDENT THE TREASURER And the rest of the worthy Governors of the Hospital of christ-Christ-Church in LONDON WHEN upon the request of some of the Relations and Friends of the Reverend Mr. Gouge deceasedy and to speak the truth in compliance with mine own inclination to do right to the memory of so good a man and to set so great an Example in the view of all men I had determined to make this Discourse publick I knew not where more sitly to address it than to your selves who are the living pattern of the same Vertue and the faithful dispensers and managers of one of the best and greatest Charities in the world especially since he had a particular relation to you and was pleased for some years last past without any other consideration but that of Charity to employ his constant pains in Catechising the poor Children of your Hospital wisely considering of how great consequence it was to this City to have the foundations of Religion well laid in the tender years of so many persons as were afterwards to be planted there in several Professions and from a true humility of mind being ready to stoop to the meanest office and service to do good I have heard from an intimate friend of his that he would sometimes with great pleasure say that he had two Livings which he would not exchange for two of the greatest in England meaning Wales and Christ's Hospital Contrary to common account he esteemed every advantage of being useful and serviceable to God and men a rich Benefice and those his best Patrons and Benefactors not who did him good but who gave him the opportunity and means of doing it To you therefore as his Patrons this Sermon doth of right belong and to you I humbly dedicate it heartily beseeching Almighty God to raise up many by his example that may serve their generation according to the will of God as he did I am Your Faithfull and humble Servant Jo Tillotson A SERMON Preached at the Funeral of Mr. THOMAS GOVGE With a short account of his Life LUKE 20.37 38. Now that the dead are raised even Moses shewed at the bush when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the dead but of the living For all live to him THE occasion of these words of our blessed Saviour was an objection which the Sadduces made against the Resurrection grounded upon a case which had sometimes happened among them of a Woman that had had seven Brethren successively to her Husbands Upon which case they put this Question to our Saviour whose wife of the seven shall this woman be at the Resurrection That is if men live in another world how shall the controversie between these seven Brethren be decided for they all seem to have an equal claim to this Woman each of them having had her to his wife This captious Question was not easie to be answered by the Pharisees who fancied the enjoyments of the next life to be of the same kind with the sensual pleasures of this world only greater and more durable From which Tradition of the Jews concerning a sensual Paradise Mahomet seems to have taken the pattern of his as he did likewise many other things from the Jewish Traditions Now upon this supposition that in the next life there will be marrying and giving in marriage it was a Question not easily satisfied Whose wife of the seven this woman should then be But our Saviour clearly avoids the whole force of it by shewing the different state of men in this world and in the other The children of this world says he marry and are given in marriage but they who shall he accounted worthy to obtain that world and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage And he does not barely and magisterially assert this Doctrine but gives a plain and substantial Reason for it because they cannot die any more After men have lived a while in this world they are taken away by death and therefore marriage is necessary to maintain a succession of mankind but in the other world men shall become immortal and live for ever and then the reason of marriage will wholly cease For when men can die no more there will then be no need of any new supplies of mankind Our Saviour having thus cleared himself of this Objection by taking away the ground and foundation of it he produceth an Argument for the proof of the Resurrection in the words of my Text Now that the dead are raised Moses even shewed at the bush when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob That is when in one of his Books God is brought in speaking to him out of the Bush and calling himself by the title of the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. From whence our Saviour infers the Resurrection because God is not the God of the dead but of the living For all live to him My design from these words is to shew the force and strength of this Argument which our Saviour urgeth for the proof of the Resurrection In order whereunto I shall First
long before his death Greater love than this hath no man that a man lay down his life for his friend ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you It is a wonderfull love which he hath expressed to us and worthy to be had in perpetual remembrance And all that he expects from us by way of thankfull acknowledgment is to celebrate the remembrance of it by the frequent participation of this blessed Sacrament And shall this charge laid upon us by him who laid down his life for us lay no obligation upon us to the solemn remembrance of that unparallel'd kindness which is the fountain of so many blessings and benefits to us It is a sign we have no great sense of the benefit when we are so unmindfull of our benefactour as to forget him days without number The Obligation he hath laid upon us is so vastly great not only beyond all requital but beyond all expression that if he had commanded us some very grievous thing we ought with all the readiness and chearfulness in the world to have done it how much more when he hath imposed upon us so easie a commandment a thing of no burthen but of immence benefit when he hath onely said to us Eat O friends and drink O beloved when he onely invites us to his table to the best and most delicious Feast that we can partake of on this side heaven If we seriously believe the great blessings which are there exhibited to us and ready to be conferred upon us we should be so far from neglecting them that we should heartily thank God for every opportunity he offers to us of being made partakers of such benefits When such a price is put into our hands shall we want hearts to make use of it Methinks we should long with David who saw but the shadow of these blessings to be satisfied with the good things of God's house and to draw near his altar and should cry out with him O when shall I come and appear before thee My soul longeth yea even fainteth for the courts of the Lord and my flesh cryeth out for the living God And if we had a just esteem of things we should account it the greatest infelicity and judgment in the world to be debarred of this privilege which yet we do deliberately and frequently deprive our selves of We exclaim against the Church of Rome with great impatience and with a very just indignation for robbing the People of half of this blessed Sacrament and taking from them the cup of blessing the cup of salvation and yet we can patiently endure for some months nay years to exclude our selves wholly from it If no such great benefits and blessings belong to it why do we complain of them for hindring us of any part of it But if there do why do we by our own neglect deprive our selves of the whole In vain do we bemoan the decay of our graces and our slow progress and improvement in Christianity whilst we wilfully despise the best means of our growth in goodness Well do we deserve that God should send leanness into our souls and make them to consume and pine away in perpetual doubting and trouble if when God himself doth spread so bountifull a Table for us and set before us the bread of life we will not come and feed upon it with joy and thankfulness A DISCOURSE AGAINST TRANSVBSTANTIATION Concerning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper one of the two great positive Institutions of the Christian Religion there are two main Points of difference between Vs and the Church of Rome One about the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in which they think but are not certain that they have the Scripture and the words of our Saviour on their side The other about the administration of this Sacrament to the People in both kinds in which we are sure that we have the Scripture and our Saviour's Institution on our side and that so plainly that our Adversaries themselves do not deny it Of the first of these I shall now treat and endeavour to shew against the Church of Rome That in this Sacrament there is no substantial change made of the Elements of Bread and Wine into the natural Body and Bloud of Christ that Body which was born of the Virgin Mary and suffered upon the Cross for so they explain that hard word Transubstantiation Before I engage in this Argument I cannot but observe what an unreasonable task we are put upon by the bold confidence of our Adversaries to dispute a matter of Sense which is one of those things about which Aristotle hath long since pronounc'd there ought to be no dispute It might well seem strange if any man should write a Book to prove that an Egg is not an Elephant and that a Musket-bullet is not a Pike It is every whit as hard a case to put to maintain by a long Discourse that what we see and handle and taste to be Bread is Bread and not the Body of a man and what we see and taste to be Wine is Wine and not Bloud And if this evidence may not pass for sufficient without any farther proof I do not see why any man that hath confidence enough to do so may not deny any thing to be what all the World sees it is or affirm any thing to be what all the World sees it is not and this without all possibility of being farther confuted So that the business of Transubstantiation is not a controversie of Scripture against Scripture or of Reason against Reason but of downright Impudence against the plain meaning of Scripture and all the Sense and Reason of Mankind It is a most Self-evident Falshood and there is no Doctrine or Proposition in the World that is of it self more evidently true than Transubstantiation is evidently false And yet if it were possible to be true it would be the most ill-natur'd and pernicious truth in the World because it would suffer nothing else to be true it is like the Roman-Catholick Church which will needs be the whole Christian Church and will allow no other Society of Christians to be any part of it So Transubstantiation if it be true at all it is all truth and nothing else is true for it cannot be true unless our Senses and the Senses of all mankind be deceived about their proper objects and if this he true and certain then nothing else can be so for if we be not certain of what we see we can be certain of nothing And yet notwithstanding all this there are a Company of men in the World so abandon'd and given up by God to the efficacy of delusion as in good earnest to believe this gross and palpable Errour and to impose the belief of it upon the Christian World under no less penalties than of temporal death and eternal damnation And therefore to undeceive if possible these deluded Souls it will be necessary to examine the pretended grounds of
(a) In Sent. l. 4. Dist 11. Q 3. Scotus acknowledgeth that this Doctrine was not always thought necessary to be believed but that the necessity of believing it was consequent to that Declaration of the Church made in the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the III. And (b) In Sent. l. 4. dist 11. q. 1. n. 15. Durandus freely discovers his inclination to have believed the contrary if the Church had not by that determination obliged men to believe it (c) de Euchar l. 1. p. 146. Tonstal Bishop of Durham also yields that before the Lateran Council men were at liberty as to the manner of Christ's presence in the Sacrament And (d) In 1 Epist ad Corinth c. 7. citante etiam Salmerone Tom. 9. Tract 16. p. 108. Erasmus who lived and died in the communion of the Roman Church and than whom no man was better read in the ancient Fathers doth confess that it was late before the Church defined Transubstantiation unknown to the Ancients both name and thing And (e) De Haeres l. 8. Alphonsus a Castro says plainly that concerning the Transubstantiation of the bread into the body of Christ there is seldom any mention in the ancient Writers And who can imagine that these learned men would have granted the ancient Church and Fathers to have been so much Strangers to this Doctrine had they thought it to have been the perpetual belief of the Church I shall now in the Second place give an account of the particular time and occasion of the coming in of this Doctrine and by what steps and degrees it grew up and was advanced into an Article of Faith in the Romish Church The Doctrine of the corporal presence of Christ was first started upon occasion of the Dispute about the Worship of Images in opposition whereto the Synod of Constantinople about the year DCCL did argue thus That our Lord having left us no other image of himself but the Sacrament in which the substance of bread is the image of his body we ought to make no other image of our Lord. In answer to this Argument the second Council of Nice in the year DCCLXXXVII did declare that the Sacrament after Consecration is not the image and antitype of Christ's body and bloud but is properly his body and bloud So that the corporal presence of the body of Christ in the Sacrament was first brought in to support the stupid Worship of Images And indeed it could never have come in upon a more proper occasion not have been applied to a fitter purpose And here I cannot but take notice how well this agrees with * De Eucharist l. 1. c. 1. Bellarmine's Observation that none of the Ancients who wrote of Heresies hath put this errour viz of denying Transubstantiation in his Caralogue nor did any of the Ancients dispute against this errour for the first 600 years Which is very true because there could be no occasion then to dispute against those who demed Transubstantiation since as I have shewn this Doctrine was not in being unless among the Eutychian Heretiques for the first 600 years and more But †Ibid. Bellarmine goes on and tells us that the first who call'd in question the truth of the body of the Lord in the Eucharist were the ICONOMACHI the opposers of Images after the year DCC in the Council of Constantinople for these said there was one image of Christ instituted by Christ himself viz. the bread and wine in the Eucharist which represents the body and bloud of Christ Wherefore from that time the Greek Writers often admonish us that the Eucharist is not the figure or image of the body of the Lord but his true body as appears from the VII Synod which agrees most exactly with the account which I have given of the first rise of this Doctrine which began with the corporal presence of Christ in the Sacrament and afterwards proceeded to Transubstantiation And as this was the first occasion of introducing this Doctrine among the Greeks so in the Latin or Roman Church Paschasius Radbertus first a Monk and afterwards Abbot of Corbey was the first broacher of it in the year DCCCXVIII And for this besides the Evidence of History we have the acknowledgment of two very Eminent Persons in the Church of Rome Bellarmine and Sirmondus who do in effect confess that this Paschasius was the first who wrote to purpose upon this Argument * De Scriptor Eccles Bellarmine in these words This Authour was the first who hath seriously and copiously written concerning the truth of Christ's body and bloud in the Eucharist And †In vita Paschasii Sirmondus in these he so first explained the genuine sense of the Catholique Church that he opened the way to the rest who afterwards in great numbers wrote upon the same Argument But though Sirmondus is pleased to say that he onely first explain'd the sense of the Catholique Church in this Point yet it is very plain from the Records of that Age which are left to us that this was the first time that this Doctrine was broached in the Latin Church and it met with great opposition in that Age as I shall have occasion hereafter to shew For Rabanus Maurus Arch-Bishop of Mentz about the year DCCCXLVII reciting the very words of Paschasius wherein he had deliver'd this Doctrine hath this remarkable passage concerning the novelty of it ‖ Epist ad Heribaldum c. 33. Some says he of late not having a right opinion concerning the Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord have said that this is the body and bloud of our Lord which was born of the Virgin Mary and in which our Lord suffered upon the Cross and rose from the dead which errour says he we have oppos'd with all our might From whence it is plain by the Testimony of one of the greatest and most learned Bishops of that Age and of eminent reputation for Piety that what is now the very Doctrine of the Church of Rome concerning the Sacrament was then esteem'd an Errour broach'd by some particular Persons but was far from being the generally receiv'd Doctrine of that Age. Can any one think it possible that so eminent a Person in the Church both for piety and learning could have condemn'd this Doctrine as an Errour and a Novelty had it been the general Doctrine of the Christian Church not onely in that but in all former Ages and no censure pass'd upon him for that which is now the great burning Article in the Church of Rome and esteemed by them one of the greatest and most pernicious Heresies Afterwards in the year MLIX when Berengarius in France and Germany had rais'd a fresh opposition against this Doctrine he was compell'd to recant it by Pope Nicholas and the Council at Rome in these words * Gratian. de consecrat distinct 2. Lanfranc de corp sing Domini c. 5. Guitmund de
of gross Hypocrisie who pretend a further obligation of Conscience in this matter I shall give this plain Demonstration which relies upon Concessions generally made on all hands and by all Parties No Protestant that I know of holds himself obliged to go and Preach up his Religion and make Converts in Spain or Italy Nor do either the Protestant Ministers or Popish Priests think themselves bound in conscience to Preach the Gospel in Turky and to confute the Alcheran to convert the Mahometans And what is the Reason because of the severity of the Inquisition in Popish Countreys and of the Laws in Turky But doth the danger then alter the obligation of Conscience No certainly but it makes men throw off the false pretence and disguise of it But where there is a real obligation of Conscience danger should not deter men from their Duty as it did not the Apostles which shews their case to be different from ours and that probably this matter was stated right at first So that whatever is pretended this is certain that the Priests and Jesuites of the Church of Rome have in truth no more obligation of conscience to make Converts here in England than in Sueden or Turky where it seems the evident danger of the attempt hath for these many years given them a perfect discharge from their duty in this particular I shall joyn the Third and Fourth Observations together That though the true Religion may have several prejudices and objections against it yet upon examination there will be found those real advantages on its side that it may safely be referred to any considerate mans choice If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve If it seem evil unto you Intimating that to some persons and upon some accounts it may appear so But when the matter is truly represented the choice is not difficult nor requires any long deliberation Chuse you this day whom you will serve Let but the Cause be fully and impartially heard and a wise man may determine himself upon the spot and give his Verdict without ever going from the Bar. The true Religion hath always layen under some prejudices with partial and inconsiderate men which commonly spring from one of these two Causes either the Prepossessions of a contrary Religion or the contrariety of the true Religion to the vicious inclinations and practices of men which usually lyes at the bottom of all prejudice against Religion Religion is an enemy to mens beloved lusts and therefore they are enemies to Religion I begin with the first which is as much as I shall be able to compass at this time I. The Prepossessions of a false Religion which commonly pretends two advantages on its side Antiquity and Vniversality and is wont to object to the true Religion Novelty and Singularity And both these are intimated both before and after the Text Put away the gods which your Father served on the other side of the flood and in Egypt And chuse you this day whom you will serve whether the gods which your Fathers served on the other side of the flood or the gods of the Amorites in whose land ye dwell Idolatry was the Religion of their Fathers and had spread it self over the greatest and most ancient Nations of the world and the most famous for Learning and Arts the Chaldeans and Egyptians and was the Religion of the Amorites and the Nations round about them So that Joshua represents the Heathen Religion with all its strength and advantage and do's not dissemble its confident pretence to Antiquity and Vniversality whereby they would also insinuate the Novelty and Singularity of the worship of the God of Israel And it is very well worthy our observation that one or both of these have always been the Exceptions of false Religions especially of Idolatry and Superstition against the true Religion The ancient Idolaters of the World pretended their Religion to be ancient and universal that their Fathers served these Gods and that the worship of the God of Israel was a plain Innovation upon the Ancient and Catholick Religion of the world and that the very first rise and original of it was within the memory of their Fathers and no doubt they were almost perpetually upon the Jews with that pert question Where was your Religion before Abraham and telling them that it was the Religion of a very small part and corner of the world confined within a little Territory But the great Nations of the world the Egyptians and Chaldeans famous for all kind of knowledge and wisedom and indeed all the Nations round about them worshipped other Gods And therefore it was an intolerable arrogance and singularity in them to condemn their Fathers and all the world to be of a Religion different from all other Nations and hereby to separate themselves and make a Schism from the rest of mankind And when the Gospel appeared in the world which the Apostle to the Hebrews to prevent the scandal of that word calls the time of Reformation the Jews and Heathen still renewed the same Objections against Christianity The Jews urged against it not the ancient Scriptures and the true word of God but that which they pretended to be of much greater Authority the unwritten Word the ancient and constant Traditions of their Church and branded this new Religion with the name of Heresie After the way saith St. Paul that you call Heresie so worship I the God of my Fathers believing all things that are written in the Law and in the Prophets By which we see that they of the Church of Rome were not the first who called it Heresie to reject humane Traditions and to make the Scriptures the Rule of Faith This was done long before by their reverend Predecessors the Scribes and and Pharisees And the Gentiles they pretended against it both Antiquity and Vniversality the constant belief and practice of all Ages and almost all Places of the World Sequimur majores nostros qui feliciter secuti sunt suos says Symmachus We follow our Fore-fathers who happily followed theirs But you bring in a new Religion never known nor heard of in the World before And when the Christian Religion was most miserably depraved and corrupted in that dismal night of Ignorance which overspread these Western parts of the World about the Ninth and Tenth Centùries and many pernicious Doctrines and Superstitious Practices were introduced to the wofull defacing of the Christian Religion and making it quite another thing from what our Saviour had left it and these Corruptions and Abuses had continued for several Ages No sooner was a Reformation attempted but the Church of Rome make the same outcry of Novelty and Singularity And though we have substantially answered it a thousand times yet we cannot obtain of them to forbear that threadbare Question Where was your Religion before Luther I shall therefore apply my self to answer these two Exceptions with
key of knowledge and shutting the Kingdom of Heaven against Men That is doing what in them lies to render it impossible for men to be saved For this he denounceth a terrible Woe against the Teachers of the Jewish Church Though they did not proceed so far as to deprive men of the use of the H. Scriptures but only of the right knowledge and understanding of them This alone is a horrible impiety to lead men into a false sense and interpretation of Scripture but much greater to forbid them the reading of it This is to stop knowledge at the very Fountain-head and not only to lead men into Errour but to take away from them all possibility of rectifying their mistakes And can there be a greater sacrilege than to rob men of the word of God the best means in the world of acquainting them with the will of God and their duty and the way to eternal happiness To keep the people in Ignorance of that which is necessary to save them is to judge them unworthy of eternal life and to declare it do's not belong to them and maliciously to contrive the eternal ruine and destruction of their Souls To lock up the Scriptures and the service of God from the people in an unknown tongue what is this but in effect to forbid men to know God and to serve him to render them incapable of knowing what is the good and acceptable will of God of joyning in his worship or performing any part of it or receiving any benefit or edification from it And what is if this be not to shut the Kingdom of Heaven against men This is so outragious a cruelty to the souls of men that it is not to be excused upon any pretence whatsoever This is to take the surest and most effectual way in the world to destroy those for whom Christ dyed and directly to thwart the great design of God our Saviour who would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth Men may misâ—â—â—ry with their knowledge but they are sure to perish for want of it The best things in the world have their inconveniences aâ—â—â—ding them and are liable to be aâ—used but surely men are not to be ruâ—â—â—d and damned for fear of abusing their knowledge or for the prevention of any other inconvenience whatsoever Besides this is to cross the very end of the Scriptures and the design of God in inspiring men to write them Can any man think that God should send this great light of his Word into the world for the Priests to hide it under a bushel and not rather that it should be set up to the greatest advantage for the enlightening of the world St. Paul tells us Rom. 15. 4. That whatsoever things were written were written for our learning that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope And 2 Tim. 3.16 That all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is prositable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness And if the Scriptures were written for these ends can any man have the face to pretend that they do not concern the people as well as their teachers Nay St. Paul expresly tells the Churâ—â— of Rome that they were written for their learning however it happens that they are not now permitted to make use of them Are the Scriptures so usefull and profitable for doctrine for reproof for instruction in righteousness and why may they not be used by the people for those ends for which they were given 'T is true indeed they are fit for the most knowing and learned and sufficient to make the man of God perfect and throughly furnished to every good work as the Apostle there tells us But do's this exclude their being profitable also to the people who may reasonably be presumed to stand much more in need of all means and helps of instruction than their Teachers And though there be many difficulties and obscurities in the Scriptures enough to exercise the skill and wit of the learned yet are they not therefore either useless or dangerous to the People The ancient Fathers of the Church were of another mind St. Chrysostome tells us that Whatever things are necessary are manifest in the Scriptures And St. Austin that all things are plain in the Scripture which concern faith and a good life and that those things which are necessary to the Salvation of men are not so hard to be come at but that as to those things which the Scripture plainly contains it speaks without disguise like a familiar friend to the heart of the learned and unlearned And upon these and such like considerations the Fathers did every where in their Orations Homilies charge and exhort the people to be conversant in the holy Scriptures to reade them daily and diligently and attentively And I challenge our Adversaries to shew me where any of the ancient Fathers do discourage the people from reading the Scriptures much less forbid them so to do So that they who do it now have no Cloak for their sin And they who pretend so confidently to Antiquity in other cases are by the evidence of truth forced to acknowledge that it is against them in this Though they have ten thousand Schoolmen on their side yet have they not one Father not the least pretence of Scripture or rag of antiquity to cover their nakedness in this point With great reason then does our Saviour denounce so heavy a Woe againd such teachers Of old in the like case God by his Prophet severely threatens the Priests of the Jewish Church for not instructing the people in the knowledge of God Hosea 4.6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge because thou hast rejected knowledge I will also reject thee thou shalt be no more a Priest to me seeing thou hast forgotten the Law of thy God I will also forget thy Children God you see lays the ruine of so many Souls at their doors and will require their blood at their hands So many as perish for want of knowledge and eternally miscarry by being deprived of the necessary means of Salvation their destruction shall be charged upon those who have taken away the key of knowledge and shut the kingdom of heaven against men And it is just with God to punish such persons not only as the occasion but as the Authours of their ruine For who can judge otherwise but that they who deprive men of the necessary means to any end do purposely design to hinder them of attaining that end And whatever may be pretended in this case to deprive men of the holy Scriptures and to keep them ignorant of the service of God and yet while they do so to make a shew of an earnest desire of their Salvation is just such a mockery as if one of you that is a master should tell his prentice how much you desire he should thrive in the world and be a rich
People Nay it is evidently no publick service of God when the Priest only understands it For how can they be said to be publick prayers if the People do not join in them and how can they join in that they do not understand and to what purpose are Lessons of Scripture read if people are to learn nothing by them and how should they learn when they do not understand This is as if one should pretend to teach a man Greek by reading him Lectures every day out of an Arabick and Persian Book of which he understands not one syllable II. As to their depriving rhe people of the use of the Holy Scriptures Our blessed Saviour exhorts the Jews to search the Scriptures And St. Paul chargeth the Christians that the word of God should dwell richly in them And the ancient Fathers of the Church do most frequently and earnestly recommend to the People the reading and study of the Scriptures How comes the case now to be so altered sure the word of God is not changed that certainly abides and continues the same for ever I shall by and by examine what the Church of Rome pretends in excuse of this Sacrilege In the mean time I do not see what considerable Objections can be made against the People's reading of the Scriptures which would not have held as well against the writing and publishing of them at first in a Language understood by the People As the Old Testament was by the Jews and the Epistles of the Apostles by the Churches to whom they were written and the Gospels both by Jews and Greeks Were there no difficulties and obscurities then in the Scriptures capable of being wrested by the unstable and unlearned were not people then liable to errour and was there no danger of Heresie in those Times And yet these are their great Objections against putting the Scriptures into the hands of the people Which is just like their arguing against giving the Cup to the Laity from the inconveniency of their beards lest some of the consecrated wine should be spilt upon them As if errours and beards were inconveniencies lately sprung up in the world and which mankind were not liable to in the first Ages of Christianity But if there were the same dangers and inconveniencies in all Ages this Reason makes against the publishing of the Scriptures to the people at first as much as against permitting them the use of them now And in truth all these objections are against the Scripture it self And that which the Church of Rome would find fault with if they durst is that there should be any such Book in the world and that it should be in any bodies hands learned or unlearned for if it be dangerous to any none are so capable of doing mischief with it as men of wit and learning So that at the bottom if they would speak out the quarrel is against the Scriptures themselves This is too evident by the counsel given to Pope Julius the III. by the Bishops met at Bononia to consult about the establishment of the Roman See Where among other things they give this as their last advice and as the greatest and weightiest of all That by all means as little of the Gospel as might be especially in the Vulgar Tongue should be read to the people and that little which was in the Mass ought to be sufficient neither should it be permitted to any mortal to read more For so long say they as men were contented with that little all things went well with them but quite otherwise since more was commonly read And speaking of the Scripture they give this remarkable testimony and commendation of it this in short is that Book which above all others hath raised those tempests and whirlwinds which we were almost carried away with And in truth if any one diligently considers it and compares it with what is done in our Church he will find them very contrary to each other and our Doctrine not only to be very different from it but repugnant to it If this be the case they do like the rest of the Children of this world prudently enough in their Generation Can we blame them for being against the Scriptures when the Scriptures are acknowledged to be so clearly against them But surely no body that considereth these things would be of that Church which is brought by the undeniable evidence of the things themselves to this shamefull confession that several of their Doctrines and Practices are very contrary to the Word of God Much more might have been said against the practice of the Church of Rome in these two particulars but this is sufficient I shall in the second place consider what is pretended for them And indeed what can be pretended in justification of so contumelious an affront to mankind so great a Tyranny and cruelty to the Souls of men hath God forbidden the People to look into the Scriptures No quite contrary Was it the practice of the ancient Church to lay this restraint upon men or to celebrate the service of God in an unknown Tongue our adversaries themselves have not the face to pretend this I shall truly represent the substance of what they say in these two points I. As to the service of God in an unknown tongue they say these four things for themselves 1. That the people do exercise a general devotion and come with an intention to serve God and that is accepted though they do not particularly understand the prayers rhat are made and the lessons that are read But is this all that is intended in the service of God do's not St. Paul expresly require more that the understanding of the people should be edified by the particular service that is performed And if what is done be not particularly understood he tells us the People are not edified nor can say Amen to the prayers and thanksgivings that are put up to God and that any man that should come in and find people serving of God in this unprofitable and unreasonable manner would conclude that they were mad And if there be any general devotion in the people it is because in general they understand what they are about and why may they not as well understand the particular service that is performed that so they might exercise a particular devotion So that they are devout no farther than they understand and consequently as to what they do not understand had every whit as good be absent 2. They say the prayers are to God and he understands them and that is enough But what harm were it if all they that pray understood them also Or indeed how can men pray to God without understanding what they ask of him Is not prayer a part of the Christian worship and is not that a reasonable service and is any service reasonable that is not directed by our understandings and accompanied with our hearts and affections But then what say they to the Lessons and