he went about doing good to the bodies and to the souls of men his miracles were not destructive to mankind but healing and charitable He could if he had pleased by his miraculous power have confounded his enemies and have thundred out death and destruction against the Infidel world as his pretended Vicar hath since done against Hereticks But intending that his Religion should be propagated in human ways and that Men should be drawn to the profession of it by the bands of love and the cords of a man by the gentle and peaceable methods of Reason and perswasion he gave no example of a furious zeal and religious rage against those who despised his Doctrine It was propounded to men for their great advantage and they rejected it at their utmost peril It seemed good to the Author of this institution to compell no man to it by temporal punishments When he went about making proselytes he offered violence to no man only said If any man will be my disciple If any man will come after me And when his disciples were leaving him he does not set up an Inquisition to torture and punish them for their defection from the faith only says Will ye also go away And in imitation of this blessed Patern the Christian Church continued to speak and act for several Ages And this was the language of the holy Fathers Lex nova non se vindicat ultore gladio the Christian Law doth not avenge it self by the sword This was then the style of Councils Nemini ad credendum vim inferre to offer violence to no man to compell him to the Faith I proceed in the Second place to shew the Vnjustifiableness of this spirit upon any pretence whatsoever of zeal for God and Religion No case can be put with Circumstances of greater advantage and more likely to justify this spirit and temper than the case here in the Text. Those against whom the Disciples would have called for fire from heaven were Hereticks and Schismaticks from the true Church they had affronted our Saviour himself in his own person the honour of God and of that Religion which he had set up in the World and of Jerusalem which he had appointed for the place of his worship were all concerned in this case so that if ever it were warrantable to put on this fierce and furious zeal here was a case that seemed to require it But even in these circumstances our Saviour thinks fit to rebuke and discountenance this spirit Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of And he gives such a reason as ought in all differences of Religion how wide soever they be to deter men from this temper For the Son of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them that is this Spirit is utterly inconsistent with the great design of Christian Religion and the end of our Saviour's coming into the world And now what hath the Church of Rome to plead for her cruelty to men for the cause of Religion which the Disciples might not much better have pleaded for themselves in their case what hath she to say against those who are the objects of her cruelty and persecution which would not have held against the Samaritans Does she practice these severities out of a zeal for truth and for the honour of God and Christ and the true Religion Why upon these very accounts it was that the Disciples would have called for fire from Heaven to have destroyed the Samaritans Is the Church of Rome perswaded that those whom she persecutes are Hereticks and Schismaticks and that no punishment can be too great for such offenders So the Disciples were perswaded of the Samaritans and upon much better grounds Only the Disciples had some excuse in their case which the Church of Rome hath not and that was Ignorance And this Apology our Saviour makes for them ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of They had been bred up in the Jewish Religion which gave some indulgence to this kind of temper and they were able to cite a great Example for themselves besides they were then but learners and not throughly instructed in the Christian Doctrine But in the Church of Rome whatever the case of particular persons may be as to the whole Church and the Governing part of it this ignorance is wilful and affected and therefore inexcusable For the Christian Religion which they profess to embrace does as plainly teach the contrary as it does any other matter whatsoever and it is not more evident in the new Testament that Christ died for sinners than that Christians should not kill one another for the misbelief of any Article of revealed Religion much less for the disbelief of such Articles as are invented by men and imposed as the Doctrines of Christ You have heard what kind of Spirit it is which our Saviour here reproves in his Disciples It was a furious and destructive Spirit contrary to Christian charity and goodness But yet this may be said in mitigation of their fault that they themselves offered no violence to their enemies They left it to God and no doubt would have been very glad that he would have manifested his severity upon them by sending down fire from Heaven to have consumed them But there is a much worse Spirit than this in the world which is not only contrary to Christianity but to the common Principles of Natural Religion and even to Humanity it self Which by falshood and perfidiousness by secret plots and conspiracies or by open sedition and rebellion by an Inquisition or Massacre by deposing and killing Kings by fire and sword by the ruine of their Country and betraying it into the hands of Foreigners and in a word by dissolving all the bonds of humane Society and subverting the peace and order of the World that is by all the wicked ways imaginable doth incite men to promote and advance their Religion As if all the world were made for them and there were not only no other Christians but no other Men besides themselves as Babylon of old proudly vaunted I am and there is none besides me And as if the God whom the Christians worship were not the God of order but of confusion as if he whom we call the Father of mercies were delighted with cruelty and could not have a more pleasing sacrifice offered to him than a Massacre nor put a greater honour upon his Priests than to make them Judges of an Inquisition that is the Inventors and decreers of torments for men more righteous and innocent than themselves Thus to misrepresent God and Religion is to devest them of all their Majesty and Glory For if that of Seneca be true that sine bonitate nulla majestas without Goodness there can be no such thing as Majesty then to separate goodness and mercy from God compassion and charity from Religion is to make the two best things in the world God and Religion good for
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
that is this That there is some way to discern mere pretenders to Inspiration from those who are truly and Divinely inspired And this is necessarily implied in the Apostles bidding us to try the Spirits whether they are of God For it were in vain to make any trial if there be no way to discern between pretended and real Inspirations Now the handling of this will give occasion to two very material Enquiries and useful to be resolved I. How we may discern between true and counterfeit Doctrines those which really are from God and those which only pretend to be so II. To whom this judgement of discerning doth appertain I. How we may discern between true and counterfeit Doctrines and Revelations for the clearing of this I shall lay down these following Propositions I. That Reason is the faculty whereby Revelations are to be discerned or to use the phrase in the text it is that whereby we are to judge what Spirits are of God and what not For all Revelation from God supposeth us to be men and to be indued with Reason and therefore it does not create new Faculties in us but propounds new Objects to that Faculty which was in us before Whatever Doctrines God reveals to men are propounded to their Understandings and by this Faculty we are to examine all Doctrines which pretend to be from God and upon on examination to judge whether there be reason to receive them as Divine or to reject them as Impostures 2. All supernatural Revelation supposeth the truth of the Principles of Natural Religion We must first be assured that there is a God before we can know that he hath made any Revelation of himself and we must know that his Words are true otherwise there were no sufficient reason to believe the Revelations which he makes to us and we must believe his Authority over us and that he will reward our obedience to his Laws and punish our breach of them otherwise there would neither be sufficient obligation nor encouragement to Obedience These and many other things are supposed to be true and naturally known to us antecedently to all supernatural Revelation otherwise the Revelations of God would signifie nothing to us nor be of any force with us 3. All Reasonings about Divine Revelations must necessarily be governed by the Principles of Natural Religion that is by those apprehensions which men naturally have of the Divine perfections and by the clear Notions of good and evil which are imprinted upon our Natures Because we have no other way to judge what is worthy of God and credible to be revealed by him and what not but by the natural notions which we have of God and of his essential perfections which because we know him to be immutable we have reason to believe he will never contradict And by these Principles likewise we are to interpret what God hath revealed and when any doubt ariseth concerning the meaning of any divine Revelation as that of the Holy Scriptures we are to govern our selves in the interpretation of it by what is most agreeable to those natural Notions which we have of God and we have all the reason in the World to reject that sense which is contrary thereto For instance when God is represented in Scripture as having a humane shape eyes ears and hands the Notions which men naturally have of the Divine Nature and Perfections do sufficiently direct us to interptet these expressions in a sense worthy of God and agreeable to his Perfection And therefore it is reasonable to understand them as rather spoken to our capacity and in a Figure than to be literally intended And this will proportionably hold in many other cases 4. Nothing ought to be received as a Revelation from God which plainly contradicts the Principles of Natural Religion or overthrows the certainty of them For instance it were in vain to pretend a Revelation from God That there is no God because this is a contradiction in terms So likewise to pretend a command from God That we are to hate and despise him because it is not credible that God should require any thing of Reasonable Creatures so unsuitable to their Natures and to their Obligations to him Besides that such a Law as this does tacitly involve a contradiction because upon such a supposition to despise God would be to obey him and yet to obey him is certainly to honour him So that in this case to honour God and to despise him would be the same thing and equal contempts of him In like manner it would be vain to pretend any Revelation from God That there is no life after this nor rewards and punishments in another World because this is contrary to those natural apprehensions which have generally possest mankind and would take away the main force and sanction of the divine Laws The like may be said concerning any pretended Revelation from God which evidently contradicts those natural Notions which men have of good and evil as That God should command or allow Sedition and Rebellion Perfidiousness and Perjury because the practise of these would be apparently destructive of the peace and happiness of Mankind and would naturally bring confusion into the World But God is not the God of Confusion but of Order which St. Paul appeals to as a Principle naturally knowu Upon the same account nothing ought to be entertained as a Divine Revelation which overthrows the certainty of the Principles of natural Religion because that would take away the certainty of Divine Revelation it self which supposeth the truth of those Principles For instance whoever pretends any Revelation that brings the Providence of God into question does by that very thing make such a Revelation questionable For if God take no care of the World have no concernment for humane affairs why should we believe that he makes any Revelation of his Will to men And by this Principle Moses will have false Prophets to be tried Deut. 13.1 If there arise among you a Prophet and giveth thee a sign or wonder and the signor the wonder come to pass whereof he spake unto thee saying Let us go after other Gods and let us serve them thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet And he gives the reason of this ver 5. Because he hath spoken unto you to turn you away from the Lord your God which brought you out of the Land of Egypt Here is a case wherein a false Prophet is supposed to work a true Miracle to give credit to his Doctrine which in other cases the Scripture makes the sign of a true Prophet but yet in this case he is to be rejected as an Impostor Because the Doctrine he teacheth would draw men off from the worship of the true God who is naturally known and had manifested himself to the people of Israel in so miraculous a manner by bringing them out of the Land of Egypt So that a Miracle is not enough to give credit to a
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
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
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
men a secret dread of perjury above most other sins And this inconvenience is so great as to render those who refuse oaths in all cases almost intolerable to humane Society I speak not this either to bring them into trouble or to perswade them to measure truth by their interest but on the other hand I must needs say that it is no Argument either of a wise or good man to take up any opinion especially such a one as is greatly to his prejudice upon slight grounds And this very consideration that it is so much to their inconvenience may justly move them to be very carefull in the examination of it This being premis'd I come now to explain this Prohibition of our Saviour and to this purpose I desire these three things may be well consider'd First That several circumstances of these words of our Saviour do manifestly shew that they ought to be interpreted in a limited sense as only forbidding swearing in common conversation needless and heedless oaths as one expresseth it and in general all voluntary swearing unless upon some great and weighty cause in which the glory of God and the good of the souls of Men is concerned For that in such cases a voluntary oath may be lawful I am induced to believe from the example of St. Paul who useth it more than once upon such occasions of which I shall hereafter give particular Instances And this was the sense of Wise men among the Heathen that men should not swear but upon necessity and great occasion Thus Eusebius the Philosopher in Stobaeus counsels men Some says he advise men to be carefull to swear the truth but I advise principally that men do not easily swear at all that is not upon any slight but only upon weighty occasions To the same purpose Epictetus Shun oaths wholly if it be possible if not however as much as thou canst And so likewise Simplicius in his Comment upon him We ought wholly to shun swearing except upon occasions of great necessity And Quintilian among the Romans In totum jurare nisi ubi necesse est gravi viro parum convenit To swear at all except where it is necessary do's not well suit with a wise man And that this prohibition of our Saviour's ought to be understood of oaths in ordinary conversation appears from the opposition which our Saviour makes Swear not at all but let your communication be yea yea That is in your ordinary commerce and affairs do not interpose oaths but say and do And this is very much confirmed in that our Saviour do's not under this general Prohibition instance in such oaths as are expresly by the name of God The reason whereof is this The Jews thought it unlawfull in ordinary communication to swear expresly by the name of God but lawfull to swear by the Creatures as by Heaven and Earth c. So that our Saviour's meaning is as if he had said You think you may swear in common conversation provided you do not swear by the name of God but I say unto you let your communication be without oaths of any kind you shall not so much as swear by heaven or by earth because God is virtually invoked in every oath And unless we suppose this to be our Saviour's meaning I do not see what good Reason can be given why our Saviour should only forbid them to swear by the Creatures and not much rather by the Name of God such oaths being surely of all others most to be avoided as being the most direct abuse and profanation of the Name of God Secondly It is very considerable to the explaining of this Prohibition that there are the like general expressions in other Jewish Authors concerning this very matter which yet must of necessity be thus limited Maimonides from the ancient Rabbies gives this Rule that it is best not to swear at all And Philo useth almost the same words And Rabbi Jonathan comes very near our Saviour's expression when he says The just man will not swear at all not so much as by the common Names of God nor by his Attributes nor by his Works as by Heaven or the Angels or the Law Now it is not imaginable that these learned Jews should condemn Oaths in all cases when the Law of Moses did in many cases expresly require them And therefore they are to be understood of voluntary oaths in ordinary conversation And that the Jews meant this by not swearing at all seems to be very plain from a passage in Josephus who says that the Sect of the Essenes forbad their Disciples to swear at all and yet he tells us at the same time that they who were admitted into that Sect took an oath to observe the Laws and Rules of it So that they who forbad to swear at all allowed of Oaths imposed by the Authority of Superiours Thirdly Which will peremptorily decide this matter this Prohibition of our Saviour's cannot be understood to forbid all Oaths without a plain contradiction to the undoubted practice of the primitive Christians and of the Apostles and even of our Lord himself Origen and Tertullian tells us that the Christians refused to swear by the Emperor's Genius not because it was an Oath but because they thought it to be Idolatrous But the same Tertullian says that the Christians were willing to swear per salutem Imperatoris by the health and safety of the Emperour Athanasius being accused to Constantius purged himself by oath and desired that his Accuser might be put to his Oath sub attestatione veritatis by calling the truth to witness by which form says he we Christians are wont to swear But which is more than this St. Paul upon weighty occasions do's several times in his Epistles call God to witness for the truth of what he says which is the very formality of an Oath God is my witness Rom. 1.9 As God is true our word was not yea and nay 2 Cor. 1.18 and v. 23. I call God for a record upon my Soul Before God I lye not Gal 1.20 God is my record Philip 1.8 God is my witness 1 Thess 2.5 These are all unquestionable oaths which we cannot imagine St. Paul would have used had they been directly contrary to our Saviour's Law And whereas some defend this upon account of his extraordinary Inspiration I cannot possibly see how this mends the matter For certainly it is very inconvenient to say that they who were to teach the Precepts of Christ to others did themselves break them by Inspiration But I go yet farther and shall urge an example beyond all exception Our Saviour himself who surely would not be the first example of breaking his own Laws did not refuse to answer upon Oath being called thereto at his Trial. So we find Matth. 26.63 Yhe high Priest said unto him I abjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God that is he required him to answer this
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
(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
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
manifold Errors and Corruptions which the Reformation hath happily cut off and cast away So that though our Reformation was as late as Luther our Religion is as ancient as Christianity it self For when the Additions which the Church of Rome hath made to the ancient Christian Faith and their Innovations in practice are pared off that which remains of their Religion is ours and this they canot deny to be every tittle of it the ancient Christianity And what other Answer than this could the Jews have given to the like Question if it had been put to them by the ancient Idolaters of the World Where was your Religion before Abraham but the very same in substance which we now give to the Church of Rome That for many Ages the Worship of the one true God had been corrupted and the Worship of Idols had prevailed in a great part of the World that Abraham was raised up by God to reform Religion and to reduce the Worship of God to its first Institution in the doing whereof he necessarily separated Himself and his Family from the Communion of those Idolaters So that though the Reformation which Abraham began was new yet his Religion was truly ancient as old as that of Noah and Enoch and Adam Which is the same in substance that we say and with the same and equal reason And if they will still complain of the Newness of our Reformation so do we too and are heartily sorry it began no sooner but however better late than never Besides it ought to be considered that this Objection of Novelty lies against all Reformation whatsoever though never so necessary and though things be never so much amiss And it is in effect to say that if things be once bad they must never be better but must always remain as they are for they cannot be better without being reformed and a Reformation must begin sometime and whenever it begins it is certainly new So that if a real Reformation be made the thing justifies it self and no Objection of Novelty ought to take place against that which upon all accounts was so fit and necessary to be done And if they of the Church of Rome would but speak their mind out in this matter they are not so much displeased at the Reformation which we have made because it is new as because it is a Reformation It was the humour of Babylon of old as the Prophet tells us that she woud not be healed Jer. 51.9 and this is still the temper of the Church of Rome they hate to he reformed and rather than acknowledge themselves to have been once in an Error they will continue in it for ever And this is that which at first made and still continues the breach and Separation between us of which we are no-wise guilty who have onely reformed what was amiss but they who obstinately persist in their errors and will needs impose them upon us and will not let us be of their Communion unless we will say they are no Errors II. The other Prejudice against the true Religion is the contrariety of it to the vicious inclinations and practices of Men. It is too heavy a yoke and lays too great a restraint upon humane Nature And this is that which in truth lies at the bottom of all Objections against Religion Men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil But this Argument will require a Discourse by it self and therefore I shall not now enter upon it onely crave your patience a little longer whilst I make some Reflections upon what hath been already delivered You see what are the Exceptions which Idolatry and Superstition have always made and do at this day still make against the true Religion and how slight and insignificant they are But do we then charge the Church of Rome with Idolatry Our Church most certainly does so and hath always done it from the beginning of the Reformation in her Homilies and Liturgy and Canons and in the Writings of her best and ablest Champions And though I have as impartially as I could consider'd what hath been said on both sides in this Controversy yet I must confess I could never yet see any tolerable defence made by them against this heavy charge And they themselves acknowledge themselves to be greatly under the suspicion of it by saying as Cardinal Perron and others do that the Primitive Christians for some Ages did neither worship Images nor pray to Saints for fear of being thought to approach too near the Heathen Idolatry And which is yet more divers of their most learned men do confess that if Transubstantiation be not true they are as gross Idolaters as any in the World And I hope they do not expect it from us that in complement to them and to acquit them from the charge of Idolatry we should presently deny our senses and believe Transubstantiation and if we do not believe this they grant we have Reason to charge them with Idolatry But we own them to be a true Church which they cannot be if they be guilty of Idolatry This they often urge us withall and there seems at first sight to be something in it And for that reason I shall endeavour to give so clear and satisfactory an answer to it as that we may never more be troubled with it The truth is we would fain hope because they still retain the Essentials of Christianity and profess to believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith that notwithstanding their Corruptions they may still retain the true Essence of a Church as a man may be truly and really a man though he have the plague upon him and for that reason be fit to be avoided by all that wish well to themselves But if this will not do we cannot help it Therefore to push the matter home Are they sure that this is a firm and good consequence That if they be Idolaters they cannot be a true Church Then let them look to it It is they I take it that are concerned to prove themselves a true Church and not we to prove it for them And if they will not understand it of themselves it is fit they should be told that there is a great difference between Concessions of Charity and of Necessity and that a very different use ought to be made of them We are willing to think the best of them but if they dislike our Charity in this point nothing against the hair 〈◊〉 they will forgive us this Injury we will not offend them any more But rather than have any farther difference with them about this matter we will for quietness sake compound it thus That till they can clearly acquit themselves from being Idolaters they shall never more against their wills be esteemed a true Church And now to draw to a Conclusion If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord and to worship him only to pray to him alone and that only in the name
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
Exhortations of Scripture which are likewise read to the people in an unknown tongue Are these directed to God or to the people only And are they not designed by God for their instruction and read either to that purpose or to none And is it possible to instruct men by what they do not understand This is a new and wonderfull way of teaching by concealing from the people the things which they should learn Is it not all one as to all purposes of edification as if the Scriptures were not read or any thing else in the place of them as they many times do their Legends which the wiser sort among them do not believe when they read them For all things are alike to them that understand none as all things are of a colour in the dark Ignorance knows no difference of things it is only knowledge that can distinguish 3. They say that some do at least in some measure understand the particular prayers If they do that is no thanks to them It is by accident if they are more knowing than the rest and more than the Church either desires or intends For if they desired it they might order their service so as every man might understand it 4. They say that it is convenient that God should be served and worshipped in the same Language all the world over Convenient for whom For God or for the People Not for God surely For he understands all other Languages as well as Latin and for any thing we know to the contrary likes them as well And certainly it cannot be so convenient for the People because they generally understand no Language but their own and it is very inconvenient they should not understand what they do in the service of God But perhaps they mean that it is convenient for the Roman Church to have it so because this will look like an argument that they are the Catholick or universal Church when the Language which was originally theirs shall be the universal Language in which all Nations shall serve God and by this means also they may bring all Nations to be of their Religion and yet make them never the wiser and this is a very great convenience because knowledge is a troublesome thing and ignorance very quiet and peaceable rendring men fit to be governed and unfit to dispute II. As to their depriving the people of the Scriptures the summ of what they say may be reduced to these three Heads 1. That the Church can give leave to men to read the Scriptures But this not without great trouble and difficulty there must be a Licence for it under the hand of the Bishop or Inquisitor by the advice of the Priest or Confessor concerning the fitness of the Person that desires this privilege And we may be sure they will think none fit but those of whom they have the greatest confidence and security And whoever presumes to do it otherwise is to be denied absolution which is as much as in them lies to damn men for presuming to read the Word of God without their leave And whatever they may allow here in England where they hold their people upon more slippery terms yet this privilege is very rarely granted where they are in full possession of their power and have the people perfectly under their Yoke 2. They tell us they instruct the people otherwise This indeed were something if they did it to purpose but generally they do it very sparingly and slightly Their Sermons are commonly made up of feigned stories and miracles of Saints and exhortations to the worship of them and especially of the blessed Virgin and of their Images and Relicks And for the truth of this I appeal to the innumerable Volumes of their Sermons and Postils in print which I suppose are none of their worst I am sure Erasmus says that in his time in several Countries the people did scarce once in half a year hear a profitable Sermon to exhort them to true piety Indeed they allow the people some Catechisms and Manuals of devotion and yet in many of them they have the conscience and the confidence to steal away the second Commandment in the face of the eighth But to bring the matter to a point if those helps of instruction are agreeable to the Scriptures why are they so afraid the people should read the Scriptures if they are not why do they deceive and delude them 3. They say that people are apt to wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction and that the promiscuous use of them hath been the great occasion of Heresies It cannot be denyed to be the condition of the very best things in the world that they are liable to be abused health and light and liberty as well as knowledge But must all these be therefore taken away This very inconvenience of peoples wresting the Scriptures to their own ruine St. Peter takes notice of in his days but he do's not therefore forbid men the reading of them as his more prudent Successours have done since Suppose the reading of the Scriptures hath been the occasion of Heresies were there ever more than in the first Ages of Christianity and yet neither the Apostles nor their Successours ever prescribed this remedy But are they in earnest must not men know the truth for sear of falling into Errour Because men may possibly miss their way at noon-day must they never travel but in the night when they are sure to lose it And when all is done this is not true that Heresies have sprung from this cause They have generally been broached by the learned from whom the Scriptures neither were nor could be concealed And for this I appeal to the History and Experience of all Ages I am well assured the ancient Fathers were of another mind St. Chrysostome says if men would be conversant in the Scriptures and attend to them they would not only not fall into errours themselves but rescue those that are deceived And that the Scriptures would instruct men both in right opinions and a good life And St. Hierome more expresly to our purpose That infinite evils arise from the Ignorance of the Scriptures and that from that cause the most part of Heresies have come But if what they say were true is not this to lay the blame of all the ancient Heresies upon the ill management of things by our Saviour and his Apostles and the holy Fathers of the Church for so many Ages and their imprudent dispensing of the Scriptures to the people This indeed is to charge the matter home and yet this consequence is unavoidable For the Church of Rome cannot justifie the piety and prudence of their present practices without accusing all these But the thing which they mainly rely upon as to both these practices is this That though these things were otherwise in the Apostles time and in the Antient Church yet the Church hath power to alter them according to the exigence and circumstances of