verfies. And this very confideration, to a wife man, is instead of a thoufand arguments, to fatisfy him, that in thofe times no fuch thing was believed in the world.

Now, this doctrine of infallibility, if it be not true, is of fo much the more pernicious confequence to Chriftianity, because the conceit of it does confirm them that think they have it, in all their other errors, and gives them a pretence of affuming an authority to themfelves to impose their own fancies and mistakes upon the whole Christian world.

2. Their doctrine about repentance, which confifts in confeffing their fins to the prieft; which, if it be but accompanied with any degree of contrition, does, upon abfolution received from the priest, put them into a ftate of falvation, though they have lived the moft lewd and debauched lives that can be imagined. Than which nothing can be more plainly deftructive of a good life: for, if this be true, all the hazard that the most wicked man runs of his falvation, is only the danger of so sudden a death, as gives him no space for confeffion and abfolution: A cafe that happens fo rarely, that any man that is strongly addicted to his lufts, will be content to venture his falvation upon this hazard; and all the arguments to a good life will be very infignificant to a man that hath a mind to be wicked, when remiffion of fins may be had upon fuch cheap terms.

3. The doctrine of purgatory: by which they mean an eftate of temporary punishments after this life, from which men may be released, and translated into heaven, by the prayers of the living, and the facrifice of the mafs. That this doctrine was not known in the pri mitive church, nor can be proved from fcripture, we have the free acknowledgement of as learned and eminent men as any of that church; which is to acknowledge, that it is a fuperftructure upon the Chriftian religion. And though in one fense it be indeed a building of gold and filver upon the foundation of Chriftianity, confidering the vaft revenues which this doctrine, and that of indulgences, which depends upon it, brings into that church; yet I doubt not but, in the Apoftle's fenfe, it will be found to be hay and ftubble. But how groundVOL. I. R lefs

lefs foever it be, it is too gainful a doctrine to be eaĥly. parted withal.

4. The doctrine of tranfubftantiation. A hard word; but I would to God that were the worst of it: the thing is much more difficult. I have taken fome pains to confider other religions that have been in the world, and I must freely declare, that I never yet, in any of them, met with any article or propofition, impofed upon the belief of men, half fo unreafonable, and hard to be believed, as this is and yet this, in the Romish church, is efteemed one of the moft principal articles of the Chriftian faith; though there is no more certain foundation for it in fcripture, than for our Saviour's being fubftantially changed into all thofe things which are faid of him, as that he is a rock, a vine, a door, and a hundred other things.

But this is not all. This doctrine hath not only no certain foundation in fcripture, but I have a far heavier charge againft it; namely, that it undermines the very foundation of Chriftianity itself. And, furely, nothing ought to be admitted to be a part of the Chriftian doctrine, which destroys the reafon of our belief of the whole. And that this doctrine does fo, will appear evidently, if we confider what was the main argument which the Apoftles ufed to convince the world of the truth of Christianity; and that was this, That our bleffed Saviour, the author of this doctrine, wrought fuch and fuch miracles; and particularly, that he rofe again from the dead. And this they proved, because they were eye-witneffes of his miracles, and had feen him, and converfed with him, after he was rifen from the dead. But what if their fenfes did deceive them in this matter? then it cannot be denied, but that the main proof of Chriftianity falls to the ground.

Well! we will now fuppofe, as the church of Rome does, transubstantiation to have been one principal part of the Chriftian doctrine which the Apoftles preached. But if this doctrine be true, then all mens fenfes are de ceived in a plain fenfible matter, wherein it is as hard for them to be deceived, as in any thing in the world: for two things can hardly be imagined more different, than a little bit of wafer, and the whole body of a man.

So

that

that the Apostles perfuading men to believe this doctrine, perfuaded them not to trust their fenfes; and yet the argument which they used to perfuade them to this, was built upon the direct contrary principle, That mens fenfes are to be trufted. For if they be not, then, notwithstanding all the evidence the Apoftles offered for the refurrection of our Saviour, he might not be rifen; and fo the faith of Christians was vain. So that they reprefent the Apostles as abfurd as is poffible, viz. going. about to perfuade men out of their fenfes, by virtue of an argument, the whole ftrength whereof depends upon the certainty of sense.

And now the matter is brought to a fair iffue. If the teftimony of fenfe be to be relied upon, then tranfubftantiation is falfe; if it be not, then no man is fure that Christianity is true. For the utmost affurance that the Apoftles had of the truth of Christianity, was the testimony of their own fenfes concerning our Saviour's miracles; and this teftimony every man hath against tranfubftantiation. From whence it plainly follows, that no man, no not the Apoftles themfelves, had more reason to believe Christianity to be true, than every man hath to believe tranfubftantiation to be falfe. And we who did not fee our Saviour's miracles, as the Apoftles did, and have only a credible relation of them, but do fee the facrament, have lefs evidence of the truth of Chriftianity, than of the falfehood of tranfubftantiation.

But cannot God impofe upon the fenfes of men, and reprefent things to them otherwife than they are? Yes, undoubtedly. And if he hath revealed that he doth this, are we not to believe him? Moft certainly. But then, we ought to be affured that he hath made fuch a revelation; which affurance no man can have, the certainty of fenfe being taken away.

I fhall prefs the bufinefs a little farther. Suppofing the fcripture to be a divine revelation, and that thefe words, This is my body, if they be in fcripture, muft neceffarily be taken in the ftrict and literal fenfe; I afk now, what greater evidence any man has, that these words, This is my body, are in the Bible, than every man has that the bread is not changed in the facrament? Nay, no man has> fo much for we have only the evidence of one fenfe,, R 2 that

that thefe words are in the Bible; but that the bread is not changed, we have the concurring teftimony of feve ral of our fenfes. In a word, if this be once admitted, that the fenfes of all men are deceived in one of the most plain fenfible matters that can be, there is no certain means left either to convey or prove a divine revelation to men; nor is there any way to confute the groffeft impoftures in the world: for if the clear evidence of all mens fenfes be not fufficient for this purpofe, let any man, if he can, find a better and more convincing argument. 5. I will inftance but in one doctrine more; and that fhall be, their doctrine of depofing Kings in cafe of he refy, and abfolving their fubjects from their allegiance to them. And this is not a mere fpeculative doctrine, but hath been put in practice many a time by the Bishops of Rome; as every one knows that is verfed in hiftory. For the troubles and confufions which were occafioned by this very thing, make up a good part of the history of feveral ages.

I hope no body expects that I fhould take the pains to fhew, that this was not the doctrine of our Saviour and his Apoftles, nor of the primitive Chriftians. The Papifts are many of them fo far from pretending this, that in fome times and places, when it is not feasonable and for their purpofe, we have much ado to perfuade them, that ever it was their doctrine. But if tranfubftantiation be their doctrine, this is for they came both out of the fame forge, I mean the council of Lateran, under Pope Innocent III. And if, as they tell us, tranfubstantiation was then established, fo was this. And indeed one would think they were twins, and brought forth at the fame time; they are fo like one another, both of them fo monftroufly unreasonable.

:

II. I come now, in the fecond place, to confider fome practices of the church of Rome, which I am afraid will prove as båd as her doctrines. I fhall instance in thefe five.

1. Their celebrating of their divine fervice in an unknown tongue; and that not only contrary to the prac tice of the primitive church, and to the great end and defign of religious worship, which is, the edification of thofe who are concerned in it, and it is hard to imagine

how

how men can be edified by what they do not under-ftand; but likewife in direct contradiction to St Paul, who hath no less than a whole chapter, wherein he con futes this practice as fully, and condemns it as plainly, as any thing is condemned in the whole Bible. And they that can have the face to maintain, that this practice was not condemned by St Paul, or that it was allowed and ufed in the first ages of Christianity, need not be ashamed to fet up for the defence of any paradox in the world.

2. The communion in one kind; and that notwith standing that, even by their own acknowledgement, our Saviour inftituted it in both kinds, and the primitive church administered it in both kinds. This, I must acknowledge, is no addition to Christianity, but a facrilegious taking away of an effential part of the facrament. For the cup is as effential a part of the inftitution as the bread; and they might as well, and by the fame authority, take away the one as the other, and both as well as either..

3. Their worshipping of images. Which practice, not-withstanding all their distinctions about it, which are no other but what the Heathens used in the fame cafe, is as point blank against the fecond commandment, as a deli berate and malicious killing of a man is against the sixth. But if the cafe be fo plain, a man would think, that at leaft the teachers and guides of that church fhould be fenfible of it. Why, they are fo; and afraid the peoplefhould be fo too and therefore, in their ordinary cate chisms, and manuals of devotion, they leave out the fecond commandment, and divide the tenth into two, to make up the number; left, if the common people should know it, their confciences fhould ftart at the doing of a thing fo directly contrary to the plain command of God.. 4. The worshipping of the bread and wine in the eucharift, out of a falfe and groundless perfuafion, that they are fubftantially changed into the body and blood; of Chrift. Which if it be not true, and it hath good. fortune if it be, for certainly it is one of the most incre-; dible things in the whole world; then, by the confeffion of feveral of their own learned writers, they are: guilty of grofs idolatry.

5. The worship and invocation of faints and angels;

R. 3

and