of Christ is "a savour of life," and not of death; and, as the French ambassador replied, "The apostles who did give it, were not empoisoners; and the many ages of the primitive church did receive it with very great emolument and spiritual comfort."-To this I know it will be said by some, who cannot much defend their church in the thing itself, that it is no great matter; and if all things else were accorded, this might be dispensed withal; and the pope could give leave to the respective churches, to have according as it might be expedient, and fit for edification.' But this will not serve the turn: for, first, the thing itself is no small matter, but of greatest concernment. It is the sacramental blood of Christ. The holy bread cannot be the sacrament of the blood; and if Christ did not esteem it as necessary, to leave a sacrament of his blood, as of his body, he would not have done it; and if he did think it as necessary, certainly it was so. But, 2. Suppose the matter be small, why should a schism be made by him, that would be thought the great father of Christians? and all Christendom almost displeased and offended, rather than he will comply with their desires of having nothing but what Christ left them? If the thing be but little, why do they take a course to make it, as they suppose, damnation to desire it? And if it be said, 'because it is heresy to think the church hath erred all this while in denying it;' to this, the answer will be easy,- that themselves who did deny it, have given the occasion; and not they who do desire it; neither have all the Christian churches denied it; for I think none but the Roman church does; and if the Roman church, by granting it now to her own children, will be supposed to have erred in denying it; to continue this denial, will not cure that inconvenience: for that which at first was but an error, will now become heresy, if they be pertinacious in the refusal. But if it were not for political, and human considerations, and secular interests, there will be little question, but that it will be safer, and more agreeable to Christ's institution, and the apostolical doctrine, and the primitive practice, to grant it lovingly, than to detain it sacrilegiously for, at least, the detention will look like sacrilege; and the granting it cannot but be a fatherly and pious ministration; especially since when it is granted, all parties are pleased, and no man's authority, real, or pre tended, is questioned. But whatever become of this consideration, which is nothing but a charitable desire, and way of peace with our adversaries, and a desire to win them by our not intermeddling with their unalterable and pertinacious interest; yet as to the thing itself, it is certain, that to communicate in both kinds, is justifiable by the institution of Christ, and the perpetual practice of the church for many ages; which thing certainly is, or ought to be, the greatest rule for the church's imitation. And if the church of Rome had this advantage against us in any article, as I hope there would not be found so much pertinacity amongst us, as to resist the power of such an argument; so it is certain there would not be amongst them so much modesty as to abstain from the most absolute triumph, and the fiercest declamations in the mean time, our safety in this article also is visible and notorious. Against the saying of St. Ambrose, which, in the preface to the first part, I brought to reprove this practice, those who thought themselves obliged to object, will find the quotation justified in the section of the 'half-communion;' to which I refer the reader. 7. What a strange uncharitableness is it, to believe and teach, that poor babes, descending from Christian parents, if they die unbaptized, shall never see the face of God, and that" of such is not the kingdom of heaven?" The church of England enjoins the parents to bring them; and her priests to baptize them, and punishes the neglect where it is criminal; and yet teaches no such fierce and uncharitable proposition, which can serve no end, but what may with less damage and affrightment be very well secured; and to distrust God's goodness to the poor infants, whose fault it could not be, that they were not baptized; and to amerce their nofault with so great a fine, even the loss of all the good which they could receive from him that created them, and loves them, is such a playing with heads, and a regardless treatment of souls, that for charity' sake, and common humanity, we dare not mingle in their counsels. But if we err, it is on the safer side; it is on the one side of mercy and charity. These seven particulars are not trifling considerations; but as they have great influence into the event of souls, so they are great parts of the Roman religion, as they have pleased to order religion at this day. I might instance in many more, if I thought it necessary, or did not fear they would think me inquisitive for objections: therefore, I shall add no more; only I profess myself to wonder at the obstinacy of the Roman prelates, that will not consent, that the liturgy of their church should be understood by the people. They have some pretence of politic reason, why they forbid the translation of the Scriptures; though all wise men know they have other reasons, than what they pretend, yet this also would be considered; that if the people did read the Scriptures, and would use that liberty well, they might receive infinite benefit by them; and that if they did abuse that liberty, it were the people's fault, and not the ruler's; but that they are forbidden, that is the ruler's fault, and not the people's: but for prohibiting the understanding of their public, and sometimes of many of their private devotions, there can be no plausible pretence, no excuse of policy, no end of piety; and if the church of England be not in this, also, of the surer side, then we know nothing, but all the reason of all mankind is fallen asleep. Well, however these things have, at least, very much probability in them; yet for professing these things according to the Scriptures, and catholic tradition, and right reason (as will be further demonstrated in the following paragraphs), they call us heretics, and sentence us with damnation; with damnation, I say; for not worshipping of images; for not calling the sacramental bread, our God and Saviour; for not' teaching for doctrines, the commandments of men ;* for not equalling the sayings of men to the sayings of God; for not worshipping angels, for not putting trust in saints, and speaking to dead persons, who are not present; and for offering to desire to receive the communion, as Christ gave it to his disciples, and they to all to whom they preached. If these be causes of damnation; what shall become of them that do worship images; and that do take away half of the sacrament from the people, to whom Christ left it? and keep knowledge from them, and will not suffer the most of them to pray with the understanding; and worship angels, and make dead men their guardians, and erect altars, and make Suarez and Bellarmine confess, that to believe transubstantiation, is not absolutely necessary to salvation. vows, and give consumptive offerings to saints, real, or imaginary? Now truly, we know not what shall become of them; but we pray for them as men not without hope: only as long as we can, we repeat the words of our blessed Saviour, "He that breaks one of the least commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven h." SECTION IX. That the Church of Rome does teach for Doctrines, the THE former charge hath occasioned this, which is but an instance of their adding to the Christian faith new articles upon their own authority. And here, first, I shall represent what is intended in the reproof, which our blessed Saviour made of the Pharisees; saying, They taught for doctrines, the commandments of men." And, 2. I shall prove that the church of Rome is guilty of it, and the church of England is not. The words of our blessed Saviour are to be understood σuvdetixãs, or conjunctively; that is, " In vain do ye worship me, teaching doctrines, and commandments of men';" that is, things which men only have delivered; and if these once be esteemed to be a worshipping of God, it is paтaïov oέCaoμa, "a vain worship." Now this expressed itself in two degrees; the first was in over-valuing human ordinances; that is, equalling them to Divine commandments; exacting by the same measures, by which they require obedience to God's laws, and this with a pretended zeal for God's honour and service. Thus the Pharisees were noted and reproved by our blessed Saviour. 1. The things of decency, or indifferent practices, were counselled by their forefathers; in process of time they became approved by use and custom; and then their doctors denied their communion to them that omitted them, found out new reasons for them, were severe in their censures concerning the causes of their omission, would approve none, no, not the cases and exceptions of charity or piety. And this is instanced in their washings of cups and platters, and the outside of dishes; which either was at first instituted for cleanliness and decency, or else as being symbolical to the purifications in the law: but they changed the scene, enjoined it as necessity; were scandalized at them that used it not; practised it with a frequency, passing into an intolerable burden; insomuch that at the marriage of Cana in Galilee there were six water-pots, set after the manner of the purification of the Jews;' because they washed often in the time of their meals; and then they put new reasons, and did it for other causes than were in the first institution. And, although these washings might have been used without violation of any commandment of God; yet even by this tradition they made God's commandment void, by making this necessary, and imposing these useless and unnecessary burdens on their brethren, by making snares for consciences, and making religion and the service of God to consist in things indifferent. So they made void God's commandment by turning religion into superstition. 2. Whereas, human laws, customs, and traditions may oblige in public, and for order' sake, and decency, and for reputation and avoiding scandal, and to give testimony of obedience; and are not violated if they be omitted without scandal and contempt, and injury, with a probable reason: yet, to think they oblige beyond what man can see, or judge, or punish, or feel, is to give to human laws the estimate which is due to divine laws. So did the Pharisees: "Quicquid sapientes vetant palàm fieri, id etiam in penetralibus vetitum est," said rabbi Bachai. But this is the prerogative of Divine laws, which oblige as much in private as in public; because God equally sees in the closet and in the temple: men cannot do this; and, therefore, cannot make laws to bind, where they can have no cognizance and no concern. 3. Human authority is to command, according to its own rate; that is, at the rate of human understanding, where the obedience may be possibly deficient, because the understanding is fallible. But the Divine authority is infallible, and absolute, and supreme; and, therefore, our obedience to it |