BX, 5133 Popery Examin'd in two of its Principal Doctrines, that of Merit, and that of Transubstan- tiation, in two sermons ,. By Edmond Ryves UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES POPERY Examin'd in Two of its Principal Bo&rines, T II A T OF M E R i T, and That of Tranfubftantiation. IN TWO S E R M O N S Occafion'd By the Great INCREASE of it in his Parifh, notwithstanding the Utmoft Care by him taken to prevent it. By EDM,\RY v E s, D.D. of Swmnerton, and lately Fellou of Mcwd. Coll O L N D N, Printed for R I C HA R D SOU T HA L L> Bookfellei' in Stafford. 1724. '* TO My PROTESTANT BRETHREN o F T H E Parifh and near Neighbourhood of Swinnerton in Stafford/hire. My Good Neighbours, A "TING been prefented ly tic Univerfity of Oxford to this 'Place, ly a Law made on purpofe to pre- vent tbe Trogrefs of Top cry among you, and having obferved how much it has fpread in nine or ten Tears loft paft, and the conflant under-hand tricks and Artifices ly which it might in all 'Pro- bability in a few Tears fpread much far- ther \ I thought it my T)uty to deviate a little ? from my ufual way of preaching among you^ ~ (.which has leen generally Tragical 'Divi- nity) and to enter a little into the Contro* verfy between us and the Tapifts. A 2 396858 ' (4) Tbefe two Sermons, which I now prefent you with, were composed for your Sakes', be- ing, as I think, a fufficicnt Confutation of two of their mojl not or 'mis T>oclrines : which* as 7nany of you were pleased to fay you heard with Satisfaction, fo I hope you will-, and your Children after you, read with 'Profit. You might in a few Years have forgot ihofe Arguments you heard from the Tidpit, which now you will have fy you to refer to. I am fe7ifible of the Influence a f Popi]Jj Landlord muft have over you^ but if you will but consider the Weight of the Arguments in each Scrmoji, you will le perfiiaded, that no bargain can be a good one, where you mufl loo fe your Souls to.-cbtain it. \ Had I chofen any Great Name to have fatroriis'd thefe c Dijcoitrfes, I had needed to have made many Apologies for V///, and you might have thought I made ''em publick for my own Advancement ; but I chufe rather to ptibliflj *em for your fakes, plain as they are, tofoew vou that I aim at nothing more than your Happinefs and Salvation ; the promoting of which') foall always be the ut- inoft Ambition of Your Faithful Paftor, E D M. R Y V E S. /& THE DOCTRINE OF MERIT Confuted, I N A SERMON O N St. LUKE xvii. 10. So likewife you, when ye foall have done all thofe things, which are commanded you y fay, We are Unprofitable Servants. By E D M. R T v E s, D. D. Re&or of Swinnerton, and lately Fellow of MagJ. Coll. Oxon. St. L u K E xvii. ro. So likewise you, when yt [hall have done all thofe things, which are commanded you, fay, We are un* frof table Servants. F we confider the true State and Condition of Man, from his Entrance into the World to the time of his going out of it, we (hall find him, when left to himfelf, the moft helplefs and infufficient Part of the Creation. All other Creatures do, by fome natural Inftinft, as foon as they are born find the Way them- felves to fome Support or Suftenance ; where- as Man would foon be loft, without Direftion and Afliftance : The reft have naturally either Wool or Feathers, or fome other fort of na- tural **4 (8 ) ^ tural Clothing to defend 'em from the Wea- ther; but this poor naked Wretch has no- thing but a thin Skin and a tender Conftitu- tion, to grapple with the Difficulties and Hard (hips of either Storms or Tempefts. Out of the very Duft of the Earth, which he now tramples on, was he taken, fo that he has no great reafon to brag of his Original ; and to put a flop to his Pride and Vanity, to that too frail he return. A poor Account truly of this Great, this Lordly Creature ! So that if there be nothing between thefe two, I mean between his Birth and Death, that can give occafion to his Vanity, I cannot imagine what it is he can boaft of. And if there be, it muft be either in his Infancy, his Youth, or his Old Age. In the firft, he is u'nder Parents, Tutours, and Guardians, fo that he is not then fo much as his own Man, as we call it : In the laft, he is haftning down the Precipice apace, and frequently as child- ifh, and in as much need of Governours as in the former Condition ; fo that it's plain he can have nothing to boaft of either in his Infancy or Old Age : So that if there be any , thing that can reafonably give encourage- ment to his Vanity, it muft be in his Youth. And for my part, I cannot conceive what that can be. For is he placed in the moft eminent and exalted Poft of Honours ? It is poflible that may bs owing more to the Favour of his Prince, than to any real Merit of his own : But fuppofe he doss by his great Parts and diftin- (9) diftinguifhing Abilities moft abundantly de- ferve it, that one Queftion, Who maketh thee to differ from another ? is enough to mortify all his Pride, and to convince him, that not his Merit, but God's Mercy occafion'd his Advancement ; that it is he that pulleth down one, and fetteth up another. Is he rich (as he vainly thinks) beyond all Po/Itbi- lity of Want ? Why there too he will find himfelf helplefs and infecure ; for he that gave may foon take away, and then he has no Remedy, but to blefs the Name of the Lord that did it. So that I can fee nothing that he can poflibly boaft of. He cannot fo much of himfelf as think a good Thought, much lefs perform a good A It muft be done to the Benefit of ano^ ther, who thereupon muft be obliged in gra- titude to repay it. 4f#/y, And laftly, There muft be an Equa- lity between the Action and the Reward ; B t for for if the latter be greater, it cannot proceed from Merit, but Favour. i/?, Then Man cannot pofiibly merit from God, if we confider the firft Property of Merit, viz. That the A&ion by which he pretends to it be done by himfelf; for if it be done by another, it cannot be meritorious. Now I think I have plainly {hewn in the Preface to this Difcourfe, that we cannot of ourfelves fo much as think a good Thought, but our Sufficiency is of God. So that what- ever good Aftions we do, we do 'em by the Grace and Afliftance of him, from whom we pretend to merit by 'em. And can any thing be a greater Contradi&ion, than to imagine we can lay an Obligation upon any Man, by lending him his own Money, which he had before a juft Right and Title to ? Would that Man be thought in his Senfes, that ihould bring an Action at Law for the Reco- very of a Debt of that nature? Would not the Defendant plead, That there was nothing alter'd but the PoffefTour, that the Property was his own before, and that therefore it cannot juftly lay any Obligation of Debt up- on him? And if this be the Cafe now be- tween Man and Man, how much more is it fo between Man and God ? upon whom we are fo far from being capable of laying any Obligation, that all that we can do is not more than our Duty. Which is the fecond Property of Merit I proceed to confider, viz. w f, , That the Action be done voluntarily, and of our own Free Will ; for if it be a Debt, we do no more than our Duty. Thus our Saviour himfelf, whofe Omni- fcience forefaw the proud haughty Tempers of Men, tells 'em in the words following the Text, That when they have done all thofe things which are commanded 'em, they fhould fay, they have done that which was their Duty to do ; intimating, no doubt, that where Duty engaged on one fide, there could be no Obligation laid on the other. So that as we cannot make a Man our Debtor by lending him his own Money, fo neither can we cancel a Debt by paying a Man with hje own, much lefs lay any Obligation ; for that would make a Man both Debtor and Credi- tor at the fame time, and in the fame re- fpecl:, which implies nothing lefs than the utmoft Folly and Abfurdity. So that I ar- gue thus : Where the Debt is fo great, that it cannot be fatisfy'd by all that we have or can do (as the Cafe is between God and Man) there can be founded no fort of Obli- gation, and confequently there can be no room for Merit. So that I think it is plain from the two firlt Properties of Merit, that it is impoflible for Man to plead any fuch thing from God. Proceed we therefore to the ^ viz. idly. That the Aftion be done to the Be- nefit of another, who thereupon muft be obli- ged in gratitude to repay it. ( H ) This we are told is impoflible in Job xxii. 2,3. by a Queftion implying the ftrongeft Negative : Can a Man be profitable to God, tts he that is wife may be profitable to him- felf? Is it any plea fur e to the Almighty ', that thou art Righteous ? Is it gain to him that thou makeft thy Way pcrfen ? And in the 55 then, and the yth Verfe, If thou be righteous^ what givcft thou him<> or what receiveth he at thy hands ? So that if what- ever we do, be neither pleafure nor profit to God ; if by our being righteous we give him nothing, and if he can receive nothing from our hands, as it is plain he that is infinitely happy cannot, it follows by neceflary Confe- quence, that we cannot merit from him, by doing that which is unprofitable to him. So that it's evident this third Property of Merit makes as much againft the Papifts as either of the other two. Pafs we on therefore to the fourth and laft, viz. tyhly, And laftly, that there be an Equa- lity between the Action and the Reward ; for if the latter be greater, it cannot proceed from Merit, but Favour. Now it being what Men expect always from one another, that the Return be at leaft as great as the Kindnefs done, that they have full a Pennyworth (if not more) for their Penny, they are apt to expeft the fame from God too ; and fo to magnify their own good Works, as if they thought they in the ftricleft Senfe deferved Heaven, and that no? thing (15) thing lefs than eternal Happinefs could make 'em diffident Compenfation or Satisfaction for 'em. But alas ! what mighty Performances can be expe&ed from this poor precarious helplefs Creature, that he can pretend to weigh in the Ballance with an eternal Weight of Glory ? His very Righteoufnefs is as filthy Rags, and he is altogether Vanity. He doats and dreams of Merit, not confidering what would be the dreadful Confequence of his having his Defert. He vacates the Merit of Chrift's Sufferings, by vainly afcribing it to his own good Works, and fo loofes Heaven, by pre- tending to deferve it. And this too, contrary to the common Senfe and Reafon of Man- kind, fince 'tis fo entirely difagreeabie to all the four Properties, that any thing that he can do, fhould deferve that Name. Having thus (hewn from the Nature of Me- rit, that 'tis impoffible for Man to merit any thing from God, I proceed to prove the fame, II. Prom Scripture. The firft Text therefore that f fhall men- tion as a plain Contradiction to this Doctrine of Merit, is that in Ro?/t. vi. 23. The Wages of Sin is TJeath* but the Gift of God is Eter- nal Life thro" Jefus Chrifl our Lord. Now if Eternal Life could poifibly have been defer v'd, would not the Apoftle have faid, after having told us, That the Wages of Sin was Death, but the Reward of good Works is eternal Life? or fomething to that pur- (1(5) purpofe? Whereas, to convince us of the contrary, he directly in plain Terms tells us, it is the Gift of God. Now the Nature of a free Gift implies the utmoft Contradiction to all Merit : For what does he give me, that delivers no more into my hands than what I have rigidly, and in the ftrideft Senfe de- ferv'd ? So that it's being a free Gift, fuppofes fomething more given than is deferv'd, and confequently its being fuch, muft exclude all Merit. idly^ The fame Apoftle in fit. iii. 5. fays, We are faved not by Works of Right eon f tie fs which we have donc^ but according to his Mercy he faved us. Now I argue thus : Where the Reward is given upon Mercy, there can be no Merit, for Merit fuppofes it in ftrift Juftice due. Now there can be no Mercy fhewn in performing that which is in ftrift Juftice due ; fo that this Text being a plain Proof, that according to his Mercy God faves us, and not according to his ftrict Juftice, muft exclude all Merit : efpecially fmce $\..Taul has in this place oppos'd the Mercy of God to any Works of Righteouf- nefs which we may have done ; it's plain our full Recompence hereafter will not be of them, but of God's Mercy. 3^/y, St. James tells us in James ii. 10 That whofoever foall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one 'Point, he is guilty of all And St. John fays, in \Joh. i. "That every Man does ojfend in one Toint or other j For if we fay , T fay that we have no Sin, we deceive our- felves : So that every Man by confequence mult be guilty of the Breach of the whole Law ; and is not he that is fo, a fit Perfon. to plead Merit from God ? To what a de- gree of Pride and Arrogance will Man afpire, that confidently expefts a Reward for his Offences, that fins conftantly againft God, and yet pleads Merit for fo doing? that pre- tends that he can merit Heaven, and yet is forc'd to confefs, by his daily praying for it as a free Gift, that he does not deferve fp, much as Bread ? Innumerable are the Texts which may be quoted on this Head, as Eph. ii. 8, 10. *By Grace ye are faved thro 1 Faith, and that not of your felves ', it is the Gift, of God) not of Works, which God hath pre- pared^ that we jkould walk in them. And _R0///. viii. 1 8. Tibc Sufferings of this Life are not worthy of the Glory which Jhall be revea- led ; and if not worthy of it, they furely cannot merit it. And many others, and in fhort, the whole Tenour of the New Teftament is fo plain a Contradiction to this Doctrine of Merit, that there can be no better a Rea- fon aflign'd, why the Papifts do at this day forbid the Common People the reading of the Holy Scriptures, than for fear they fhould difcover to 'em the Falfenefs of this Do&rine, upon which the moft beneficial part of the Trade of their Priefts and ' Jefuits does fo much depend. So that having fhewn the Abfurdity of this Doftrine of Merit, C I. ( 18 ) I. From tie Nature of it. And, II. From Scripture. I pafs on, III. 70 anfwer fome Arguments the fa- pi/is urge in defence of it. And , i/?, They fay, Thac in many places of Scripture there is a Reward promifed to all true Believers, who perform good Works; and therefore, fay they, Reward and Merit being relative Terms, the fame Scriptures oblige us to admit the one as well as the other. But this is a great Miftake, and proceeds from want of confidering the Nature of the Reward, which is not a Reward of Debt ; for had it been fo, it would have imply'd the Nearnefs of Relation they fay it has to Merit. But it is a Reward of Mercy, given by the gracious Good- Will of the Almighty, with- out any thing done on Man's part to deferve it : and confider'd as fuch, it is no way a re- lative Term with Merit, and confequently cannot {land them in theleaftftead,who would ufe it as an Argument to defend it. Befides, fuppofe we fhould grant, that Life Everlafting is a Reward upon Defert, it does not follow, that it is for any inherent Excellency in our good Works, but for the Merit of our Sa- viour imputed to us, caufing us thereby to merit ; and then the Relation is between the Reward and Chrift's Merit, and not between that and our own. 'idly, They (ay that our good Works are meritorious, becaufe Chrift merited by his Death, 19 Death, that our "Works fhould merit Eternal Life. And this is no more nor lefs than a down- right Falfhood, and a politick Invention of their own. For all that we can any where find in the Holy Scriptures, is, That our Sa- viour, by the Merit of his Death and Suffb' rings, has obtain'd for us the Pardon of our Sins, Imputation of Righteoufnefs, and Life Everlafting. He died, not to enable our good Works to fatisfy the Anger of his Father, but for our Sins, that they might be forgiven. And this is the Account, and the whole Ac^ count too, that the Scriptures give us of this Matter ; and therefore is their Foundation falfe and rotten, worthy of the Superftru&ure they build upon it. But that they may be left without Excufe for this Aflertion, or that Chrift did not merit, that our Works fhould merit, I (hall offer thefe following Reafons : (i.) If Chrift made a fufficient Sacrifice, Oblation, and Satisfaction for the Sins of th$ whole World, he muft be fuppofed to do more than was neceffary for him to do, if he intended to give any Man power to merit; the fame for himfelf. (2.) He admits of no Partner in the Office? of Mediation between his Father and us ; for Joe is the one Mediator fatween God and Men, the Man Chrift Jefus. Now it's plain, if Men can by any good Works of their own merit the Increafe of Grace and Happi- nefs for themfelves, then has Chrift partners. C 2 & ( 10 ) ;, in the Work of our Redemption ; but the lat- ter is falfe, and therefore the former muft like- wife fall to the ground. Befides,- .^^ (3.) For one good Aftion we do, we are guilty of many Sins, even the beft of us, which ftain and defile our higheft Vertues after fuch a manner, as make 'em incapable of pleading for us, our Vices being infinitely too heavy for 'em in the Ballance of the Law. So that I think this Argument requires no further Anfwer. Pafs we on therefore to the ^d Argument of the Papifts in behalf of their beloved, becaufe profitable Doctrine of Merit. For fo, p* idly, They fay, That oar Works merit by Way "of Bargain or Covenant, becaufe God has promifed to reward 'em. Now the Scriptures mention but two Co- venants, the one Legal, the other Evangeli- cal. In the legal Covenant, Eternal Life is promifed to good Works, 2)0 thefe things, and thou $alt live. But who is fufficient for thefe things ? Who is able to do all that the Law requires ? So that we muft fly to the Evangelical Covenant, if we intend to attain to everlafting Happinefs. And here we fhall find that the Reward is not .promis'd to the Work, but to the Doer of it for the Sake and Merit of Chrift. As for example, 2te 'faithful witoT)eatlo, Mid I will give thee the Crown of Life. Where you fee, the Promife is not made to the Virtue of Fi- delity, but to the faithful Man, whofe Fide- < V ) jity (hews that he is in Chriftj for the Merh of whofe Obedience God promifed the Crown of Life. But, fay they, , if Works do not merit, why are they mentioned in the Pro- mife ? The Reafon is plain in the Inftance above-mention'd, becaufe they are Tokens that the Doer of them is in Chrift, for whofe alone Merit the Promife (hall be perforated. So that having anfwer'd three of the princi- pal Arguments the Papifts urge in behalf of the Doctrine of Merit, I fhall, : -IK! jr-'if V'uhi yd vrnnrr, bf>r.f!Ti;;-/[ IV. Andlaftly, conchide with fome Prac- tical Inferences from the Whole. \ft Then, If it has been fhewn from the Nature of Merit (and furely nothing caa fhew the Nature of it more fully than tiie four moft infeparable, effential Properties of it ;) I fay, if it has been fhewn from thence, that this Doctrine of Merit is falfe, abfurd, and impoflible, and the beft Man living can- not, by his compleateft Services, ftritly me- rit Eternal Life : This is not only a manifeft Confutation of the Papifts Doctrine of Me- rit, Works of Supererrogation, Indulgences, and all that Heap of Lumber built upon it ; but is, by natural Confequence, and direct: Inference, as good an Argument againft the Avians and Socinians, as any the Wit of Man can find in the whole Bible. For can any thing be more entirely difa- greeable to the three firft Properties of Me- rit, rit, than that Chrift fhould merit, and yet be nothing but a mere Creature. For, (i.) His Manhood, confidered t*y itfelf does nothing of itfelf, but by Grace received from the God head. (2.) Asa Creature, he is bound to do what- foever he does. (3.) Chrift, as a Creature, rannot give a- ny thing to God, that he did not receive from him. For thefe three Reafons certainly the Manhood cannot by itfelf merit, but only as it is perfonally united to the Godhe- ci of the Son ; fo that they are, by this A rgument, brought into this Dilemma, either to own Chrift's Divinity, or to deny his Merit and Satisfaction. And indeed I thought myfelf oblig'd to make this juft Inference againft this too prevailing a Seft and the Papifts at the fame time> fmce they both equally deny the Merit of Chrift's Satisfaction ; one by denying his Divinity, and the other by af- fuming Merit to themfelves. 2^/y, If the Scriptures are a plain Proof likewife, that it is impoffible for Man to me- rit any thing from God (as I think has been as fufficiently fhewn as a Difcourfe of this Length would admit) let us adhere firmly to that Truth, that is fo clearly revealed to us in God's Holy Word ; and not only fo, but let us return our moft hearty Thanks to the Great God of Heaven and Earth, that he has been pleas'd to convey his Mind to us thro' ft (IJ) , . fo many different Generations ; that we have the Scriptures not only publickly read to us, but likewife, upon any Difficulty, to confult every one in our own Tongue, which can- not be lefs than the utmoft Satisfaction, when- ever fuch monftrous Doclrines are obtruded on us by the Cunning and Sophiftry of defign- ing Men. And I cannot forbear being chari- tably inclin'd to hope, that many of the Pa- pifts themfelves, who are now fo fierce Stick- lers for this Doctrine of Merit, had they the Advantage of the Scriptures as we have, would be of another Opinion ; and fo like- wife as to many other of their Tenets. Greatly therefore were it to be wifh'd, that God would be pleas'd to put it into their Hearts to confult thofe Sacred Oracles, fot here in England they may do it if they pleafe ; and thence I am apt to think they would receive fuch full and ample Satisfac- tion, that we fhould, for the future, have nothing to fear either from the real or pre- tended Danger of Popery among us, but Ihould all join in one common Faith and In- tereft ; they would there fee how they are impos'd upon by their Priefts and Jefuits, that they oblige them to the Belief of the Doc- trine of Merit, only for the fake of Works of Supererrogation, and of both only as a Con- trivanqfc to make a Penny for themfelves. 3*//y, If I have fully anfwer'd the three principal Arguments the Papifts make ufe of in defence of this Doftrine of Merit, it muft be (H) be reafonable to believe, that when thefe grand Bulwarks are beaten down, they can have but little to fay for themfelves. No- thing but what any Man, that is converfant with the Holy Scriptures, may, with equal Eafe, contradict and confute. Let us there- fore adhere firmly to the Proteftant Religion, I mean to the Church of England: Let us not be difcouraged from performing what good Works we are able, becaufe they can- not in themfelves merit ; but let us remem- ber that we have an Advocate with the Fa- ther, Jefus Chrift the Righteous, who is the Propitiation for our Sins, and has merited that for us which we could never have done for ourfelves : And tho', after all our beft Ser- vices, we muft acknowledge ourfelves unpro- fitable Servants, yet that we have a kind and indulgent Matter, who has given us his Word, and cannot lye, that he will reward us, tho* not for our Works fake, yet for the Sake and Sufferings of his dear Son, who died for our Sins, and now fitteth at God's Right Hand making Interceflion for us. %o whom, with the Father, and the Holy Spirit, be afcribed, as if moft due, all Honour, Tower, Might, Majefty, and Dominion, both now and for evermore. Amen. THE THE DOCTRINE OF TR AN SUBSTANTIATION Confuted, SERMON O N JOHN vi. 5J. ye have no Life iiz you. This, one would have thought, (fince, as they obferved, 'twas impoffible he Ihould give us his Flefh to eat, in a literal Senfe) Ihould have put them upon enquiring in what other Senfe the Words might reafo- nably be underftood ; and then they would prefently have found, that they did not im- ply fo great a Contradi&ion as they ima- gin'd : For if they had confider'd them in a myftical and a fpiritual Senfe, as our Church does, they muft prefently have concluded them reconcileable to their Reafon, and of infinite Advantage to their eternal Salvation. But their grofs carnal Hearts perfitted ftill on in mifunderftanding his Meaning, which was, by putting the thing fo far as to imply a Contradiction, to convince 'em, that that was not what he defigned by 'em. However, the Jews themfelves were not fo blind but they law the Contradiction, tho* they did not rightly underftand him. But there are many in the World with much wider Throats than the Jews had, that not only take thefe Words in the literal Senfe, as the Jews did, but fwallow the Contradic- tion along with it, and fo ilick at nothing, even twenty other Contradictions both to Scripture and Philofophy, in order to defend that ( Z9 ) ^ that monftrous Doftrine of Tranfubftantia- tion, which the Church of Rome fo zealoufly and fo ftrenuoufly does ; and which therefore for the fake of thofe poor Souls, who may be fatally deluded by it, I fhall endeavour to prove to be contrary, I. fo Reafon. II. fo Scripture. III. / Jball examine tie Arguments the Tapifts urge in the Proof of it. And, IV. and Laft'ly, Conclude with fome Jbort Inferences from the whole. I. Then, I am to prove, that the Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation (which is by the Coun- cil of frent made a neceffary Article, of Faith among the Papifts) is contrary to Rea- fon ; and that it is fo, will appear, j/7, From the Nature of Body. Now one effential Property of Body is, that it be feated in fome Place, fo as one may fay where it is, that it hath Length, Breadth, and Thicknefs, without which it is no longer a Body. Now whatever has thefe Dimenfions muft neceffarily be circumfcribed in fome Place, fo that it may be determined pofi- tively to be there, and there only ; for the fa me Body cannot occupy two different Pla- ces at the fame time : fo that for the Papifts jo affert, that the Real Body of Chrift is prefent in the Sacrament, in fo many different Places as that is adminiftred at the fame time, is ( 3 ) is deftroying at once the very Nature of Bo- dy, and confequently to the Reafon of Man- kind a plain Contradiction. But this will appear further, 2^/y, From the Nature of a Sacrament. 'Tis certain that in all Sacraments there muft be a Sign, and a Thing fignified, and a Pro- portion or Relation between r em : But the fuppofed real Prefence of the Papifts deftroys it all ; for when the Bread is really turned into Chrift's Body, and the Wine into his Blood, the Sign is plainly abolifhed, and there remains nothing but the outward Appearance of Bread and Wine. Now the Nature of any thing includes the feveral Ends for which it was defigned , and one of thefe likewife is deftroyed by the Supposition of a real Pre- fence. Now one chief End of the Sacrament is to remember Chrift till his Coming again : But if he be there prefent, there is no Oc- cafion of remembring him ; befides that it is a manifeft Bull and a Contradiction, re- membring having always a proper and necef- fary regard to fome Perfon or Thing that is abfent from us. "$dly, Another Argument to prove that this Doctrine of the Papifts of Tranfubftantiation is contrary to Reafon, may be drawn from hence, That in the Sacrament the Body of Chrift is received as it was crucified, and his Blood as it was fhed upon the Crofs ; but fuppofing the Elements to be changed into his Body, it remains ftill as a Body, but not as a ( i. ) a Body Crucify'd, becaufe the Aft of Cruci- fixion is ceafed : fo that it is Faith alone in the Receivers, which makes Chrift prefent to 'em in the Sacrament. Betides, what grand Repofitory can they find, where they can have preferv'd the Blood of Chrift, which at his Crucifixion ran out of his Hands, Feet, and Side upon the ground ? Who gathered it up ? or What Neceflity was there of fuch a Collection, he being to live a Spiritual, not a Natural Life, after his Refurre&ion ? They cannot therefore fay,that it is prefent under the form of Wine locally (as the Schoolmen call it) that is, fo as to poflefs or occupy the Place which the Wine did. So that it is, and muft by all Men of Senfe be thought much properer to fay, that we receive it fpiritually by Faith, which alone can give a Being to things which are not. Thus I think I have plainly fhewn, that the Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation is contrary to Reafon. Proceed we therefore to prove, II. That it is fo like wife to the Scriptures. And one would think that whatever Doc- trine can be plainly fhewn to be contrary both to Reafon and Scripture, fince all Mankind value themfelves fo much for the one, and ought to be guided by the other, fhould be fo far from gaining the Belief of any, that it ought to be univerfally detefled and abhorr'd. And that I may give you full Satisfaction in this point, I (hall endeavour to fhew, that it is is contrary to feveral Articles of our Creed, which were all collected from, and may be prov'd by Scripture. i ft Then, Our Creed teaches us, that drift's Body was made of the Pure Subftance of the Virgin Mary, and that but once, ifciples, faying, Take, Eat, This is my Body, ^otbis in remembrance t of me. Now if his Body was actually pre-' fent in that Sacrament, then did he take and break himfelf, and not only gave himfelfto his Difciples to eat, but eat himfelf likewife : Now can any thing be more monftroufly filly and ridiculous than this ? 6tbly, And laftly, St. 'Paul tells the Corin- tbians, in Chap. xi. of his firft Ep. and the s6th Verfe, For as often as ye eat this Bre and drink this Cup, ye do flew forrtff Lord's 'Death, ''till be come ; fo that it feems he is not there prefent already : if he were, 9 fill he come muft be downright NonFenfe. From all which Texts put together, fuf&cient to convince any reafonable Man, I conclude that the Do&rine of Tranfubftantiation is as E con- ( 34 ) contrary to Scripture, as I've (hewn it to be to Reafon. Proceed we therefore, III. *fo examine the Arguments urge in the proof it* And i/?, Their firft Argument is drawn from thefe words in Johnv'i* 5$. My Flcjhis Meat indeed, and my 'Blood is 'Drink in- deed* From whence they would argue, that Chrift's Body and Blood mufl be eaten and drank with the mouth ; and this they fay is fo plain, that they admire how any one can deny the Premifes, they being our Saviour's own Words, or the Force of the Conclufion drawn from 'em. I anfwer, (i.) That if in the Premifes by the Fkjb they underftand carnal Meat, and by the Blood real and natural Drink, I deny the Truth of the Proposition : For tho' his Body be Meat indeed, yet is it Spiritual Meat ; and tho' his Blood be Tlrink indeed, yet is it Spiritual Drink : and if they allow this Senfe of the Words, then I deny the Force of their Conclufion. So that they may as well infer the Do&rine ;of Tranfubftantiation from the Words of our own Catechifm, where we fay, " That the Body and Blood of Chrift are ve- " rily and indeed taken and received by the " Faithful in the Lord's Supper," as from this Text ; a Spiritual Eating and Drinking being underftood in both places. Befides, (2.) The very Intent and Defign of this Chapter of St. Joh7i is to prove, that to have Faith 35 Faith in Chrift, and to eat his Flefh and drink his Blood, are all one , which is the Reafon why they are verily and indeed only receiv'd by the Faithful in the Lord's Supper. (3.) This Chapter of St. John cannot pof- fibly be underftood of a Sacramental Eating his Flefh and Drinking his Blood, becaufe the very Words of the Text would, taken in that fenfe, infer the Damnation of all thofe, who died before the Paflion of our Saviour. For thefe Words were fpoken at the Paflbver then inftant, which was above a Year before our Saviour's Paflion. (4.) He that fays, He that eateth my Flefh jhall live for ever, fays alfo, He that eateth of this Bread Jhall live for ever. Mow- no one can pretend to fay, that Chrift evec was or could properly be Bread, or be eaten by Mankind as fuch ; forafmuch therefore as he could only be figuratively eaten as Bread, we may fairly argue, that he could only be figuratively eaten as Flefh, the fame Phrafe or Manner of Expreflion being fairly taken in the fame fenfe in both places. But, 2^/y, The next Text by which they would impofe this monftrous Doctrine of Tranfub- ftantiation upon the World, is taken from the Words of the Institution, T*bi$ is my 'Body. And to this likewife we may make the fame Reply, That the Words are a figurative Expreflion, meaning that this Bread is a Re- prefentation of his Body; and that for this undeniable Reafon, That in the Inftitution of E 2 the the other part of the Sacrament, the Papifts themfelves acknowledge a Figure in the Ex- preflion, fbis Cttp is the New Tcftament in my Blood ; that is, 'tis a Sign, Seal, and Pledge to allure us thereof. Now can any Man of fenfe doubt, when he is forced to own a Figure in one place, but that Chrift defigned to fpeak by a Figure in the other ? efpecially when the natural Senfe of the Words imply fuch a manifeft Contradiction (as has been fhown) both to Reafon and Scripture ? Add to this, (2.) That the Scripture's ufual way of Ex- preflion concerning the Sacrament has been ge- nerally by a Figure,by putting the Name of the Thing fignify'd to the Sign : As for inftance in (Sen. xvii. 10. Circumcifion is call'd the Co- venant of God ; and in the next Verfe, by way of Expofition, the Sign of the Covenant, And in Exod.til. n. the Pafchal Lamb is call'd the AngeTs faffing by, or over the Houfes of the Ifraelites; whereas indeed it was but a Sign of it. And the Rock was Chrift ; And the Taffover was Chrift : and innumerable other places. So that, to fay no more of all the other Difficulties and Incon- fiftencies 'tis necefTarily attended with, 'tis but underftanding our Saviour, as you muft understand all the other Expreflions of Scrip- ture, and there's an end of the Papifts Doc- trine of Tranfubftantiation. But, \dly^ The Papifts urge in behalf of this Do&rine, That the Sacraments are a very great (37) great Myftery, that our poor weak pur-blind Reafon cannot, nor ought not to pretend to judge of Myfteries, all fuch being manifeft- ly above our Reafon. As for inftance, fay they, The Doftrine of the Trinity is a very great and venerable Myftery, and what we cannot any way comprehend, much lefs ar- gue about ; and yet by your own Confeflion, fay they, you are obliged to believe it : and from hence they would infer the Imperti- nence as well as Infufficiency of my firft Ob- jection againft it, That it is contrary to our Reafon. To which I anfwer, That whatever is not a manifeft Contra- diction to our Reafon and our Senfes, we are unqueftionably obliged to believe, if it be plainly reveal'd to us ; which is the Reafoh why our Church believes the Myftery of the Holy Trinity : but whatever is not plainly reveal'd, and at the fame time contradicts the Senfe and Reafon of Mankind, ought to demand our Disbelief, as much as the other challeng'd our Affent ; and that for this Rea- fon, Becaufe cur Saviour in the very Perfor- mance of many of his Miracles, appeaPd to the Senfes of thofe he endeavour'd to con- vince ; which he certainly would never have done, had he not defign'd their Senfes fhould have been the proper Judges in thofe Cafes : So that all this Cant about Myfteries is no- thing to the purpofe, and therefore they are forc'd to fly to their laft Remedy, 1506858 b , , And laftly, That their Church re. quires the Belief of it, it being a Do&rine de fide (as they call it) which they fay is a iufficient Reafon why they fhouid believe it; that is, 'tis the bed they can give : And I muft needs own, that I do not at all won- der, that the Church of Ro7/ie fo pofitively requires an implicit Faith from all its Follow^ crs, becaufe, if they did not, they would have few or no Followers at all. For if they allow'd 'em the Ufe either of their Reafon or the Scriptures, the Falfay of this, and many other of their Doftrines would foon be detected, our Reformation from 'em be entirely juftify'd, and the number of 'em by degrees lefTen'd. When the Lawyer in the Gofpel ask'd our Saviour, what he fhouid do to be faved, he did not tell him, he fhouid believe as this or that Church believes, but anfwers him by another Queftion : What is wtiten in the Law ? How readefl thou ? that is, The Scriptures are thy Rule, do as they direcl: thee, and thou Aalt live. So that the Scriptures being pofitively againft this Doftrine, which their Church enjoins 'em the Belief of, I fhouid think it not in the leaft difficult to determine, which it was lafeft for any Man, who hopes for Salvation hereafter, to adhere to. And thus I hope I have fu/Eciently anfwer'd the A rguments the Papifts urge in defence of this Dpftrine of Traqfukftantiatipn,, which ( 39 ) was the Third Thing I propofed in the en- trance of this Difcourfe. But before I proceed to the Inferences I promis'd you from thefe Premifes, give me leave to obferve one thing to you ; that is, that they have one Loop-hole ftill left to creep out at, by which they delude the ig- norant fort of People, who are not fo well acquainted with Church-Hiftory : and that is, by pleading the Antiquity of this Doctrine, a Falfity any one but a Papift would blufh at ; for 'tis plain there was no fuch Doftrine ever heard of, till above three hundred Years after Chrift, the Fathers of the three firlt Centuries being unanimoufly againft it, it ne- ver having been made an Article of Faith a- mong 'em till the Council of Trent. So that its Novelty is no lefs an Argument againft it, than any other that has been offered. Proceed we therefore, IV. And laftly. To make feme Jhort Infe- rences from the Whole. \fi Then, If this Doftrine of Tranfubftan- tiation be a manifeft Contradiction to our Reafon, and be likewife a neceflary Article of Faith among the Papifts, it follows by fair Implication, that no Man can be a Papiit without laying afide his Reafon. I do not pretend to fet up Reafon againft Revelation, but only fo as to judge of the Senfe of any one part of it, when 'tis found contrary to the whole Tenour of all the reft, and then to have power (40) power to put fuch an Interpretation upon It, a$ that the Parts (hall be found agreeable and confident with each other : And if this be not allow'd us, our Reafon can be of no ufe to us in the moll material thing of all, the Salvation of our Souls : And it would feem very Ilrange, that that which makes us ac- countable in another World, ihould be en- tirely laid afide by us in providing for it. BlefTed be God, we live in a Country where the Eftablifh'd Church does not demand of us an implicit Faith, and is not afraid of re- ferring her Doctrines to the Judgment and Opinion of Mankind, as being eftablifh'd upon fuch a fure Foundation, as will Hand the Teft of the niceil Reafoning. And as a Man muft firft lay afide his Reafon, before he can be a Papift, fo as foon as he becomes fuch, they'll take care to lock up the Scrip- tures from him, and that for this Reafon, for fear, upon confuking thofe Sacred Oracles, he Ihould be prevailed with to revolt from 'em. For if, *dly> This Doftrine be contrary to Scrip- ture, (as I hope has been plainly fhewn) it follows that That, and no other, can be the Reafon why they keep 'em from 'em. I know they give this Reafon for it, That be- caufe ignorant and unlearned People are faid to wreft the Scriptures to their own Deflruc- tion, they fhould therefore be entirely kept out of their hands. But I'll appeal to the Judgment of the whole World, whether this be be not as good an Argument, That becaufe fome Men may take too large a Dofe, and kill themfelves by fo doing, therefore Phy- fick fliould never be ufed at all : So that this can be nothing but a fpecious Pretence, and the other muft be the true and the only Rea- fon of their fo doing. And how abominably wicked that is, to keep that from Men, which is only able to make 'em wife unto Salvation, I mean the Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Teftament ! We have none of thofe little Artifices among us of the Church of England-, as wanting none of them, but are always preffing and encouraging our People to read the Scriptures, as knowing that they, are the Ground of our Faith, and that they who live neareft to their true Senfe ana Meaning are always the trued and the beft Churchmen. But, ldly<> If I have anfwered the chiefeft (if not all the) Arguments the Papifts urge in De- fence of this Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation (as I declare I can at prefent call to mind no other that deferves an Anfwer) what can it be, after all, that can induce fo many to turn Papifts ? Nothing, certainly, but the mean Confideration of Self-Intereft, a powerful Motive indeed with too many, whofe Reli* gion it may be is to chufe, and who before were very little better than downright A- theifts, and who therefore can add nothing but Number to either Side. And indeed I envy them not fuch Profelytes, who are a F Scandal Scandal and Difgrace to any Church they belong to ; but for the fake of their poor Souls, for which I am fincerely and heartily concerned, I would advife each of them to confider the high Importance of that Que- ftion of our Saviour's ; What is a Man fro- fitcd, if he fhall gain the whole World, and loofe his f .wn Soul ? Or what foall a Man give in exchange for his Soul? And he muft neceffarily conclude, that not all the Wealth he can bequeath to the Church, at the clofe of it, can anfwer for an ill-fpent Life, nor all the MafTes they can fay, when he is dead and gone, can make the lead Atonement for 'his taking up a Religion, whofe Doctrines are contrary both to Reafon and Scripture; but will find the Argument turn upon himfelf, That whereas what he did he thought was for his Intereft, he will then, too late, find that the Scriptures had been his fureft Guide, as being the Word of God, who cannot err, and that the following their Directions would have proved to his greateft and eternal Ad- vantage. And now it is high time to draw to a Conclufion : If any of you, after hearing this Difcourfe, wherein, I hope, I have fully proved this Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation to be contrary to Reafon, Scripture, and An- tiquity, and anfwered the chiefeft Arguments in Defence of it, turn Papifts, your Ruin muft be of yourfelves. But ftill I hope (and piy Prayers fhall not be wanting for you) that () .that what I have faid will have fuch f power- ful Influence over you, as to caufe you to ad- here firmly tp that Church in which you have been baptized and bred up, that you will be ftedfaft and unmoveable : However, I have this Confolation, that I have dif- charged a good Confcience, in lav ing before you the Dangers you will otherwife fun ypur- ielves into, and it muft be of yourfelves if ye perifh. 4/^/y, and Laftty, From all that has been faid, we may infer, how much 'tis the Duty of every Clergyman to lay before his Peo- ple the Danger of a Religion, whofe Arti- cles of Faith are contrary to Reafon, Scrip- ture, and Antiquity ; and how much all Magiftrates are obliged, that have any re- gard for the Church of England, to endea- vour to put a ftop to the Growth, of Po- pery, it being a Duty incumbent on 'em, not only by the Laws of Men, but by Laws of God. What then can we think of fuch Men, who, contrary to their Oaths and Sub- fcriptions, are for introducing a Popifh Pre- tender to reign over us ? Can they poffibly imagine that fuch an one will not attempt, at leaft to promote and eftablifh his own Religion among us ? Or can they think they fhall efcape better than their Neighbours if fuch a Thing could be effe&ed ? No ; in the Popifh Account we are all equally Here- ticks, whom they efteem it meritorious to cjeftrqy, and wiih whom that no Faith is (44) to be kept* is a Maxim in their Schools : SucH Men npc.cmly .ad agiinft their Reafon, Scrip- ture, 'and Antiquity, bat againft that too, which, j told, you, induced too many to turn Papiih, the darling Coufideration of $elf-Intereft ; for if it ever fhould fucceed, (Which God avert) it muft end in their own as well as the Rum fcf their Country : But, God be thanked ! out of Mercy to them, felves as well as others, their Attempts have been- hitherto defeated. And may that God, to whom all Hearts be open, and from whom no Secrets are hid, protect and defend the prefent Eftablifhment both in Church and State, that there may never be wanting one of the prefent Proteftant Line to reign over us ; fo (ball we be fafe from having any fuch abfurd, contradictory, impodible Poclrines forced upon us ; fo fhall we aft like rational Creatures, fo fhall we be guided by the Doctrine of Chrift and his Apoftles in this Wprld, and be entitled to the Bleffings promised to thofe that are fo in that which is to come. Now to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Qbqft, be afcribed, as is Moft due, all Honour, Tratfe, Might, Majefty, and dominion, both now and for evermore* Amen. FINIS. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY This book is DUE on the last date stamped below Form L-9 J0m-l,'41(1122)