the office he mutters, though what he says is all alike understood, being in an unknown tongue; sometimes he turns to the people, and gives them a short barbarian benediction; then he goes on till he comes to the five wonder-working words; and then, instead of the bread, which the force of these words hath driven to nothing, behold a God, to be worshipped by the spectators. And after the adoration, the God is to be devoured by the priest; which made the Arabian say, "He never saw a sect of religion so foolish as the Christians were, who with their teeth devoured the God they had adored."

Certainly all this looks so like a piece of extravagance, especially if the simplicity of the first institution be considered, that many will doubt if it be possible that such worship can be received in any corner of the Christian world. And by these hints, though an hundred more might be instanced, let it be guessed what is become of the simplicity of the Christian religion, when it is so vitiated in all the parts and branches of it; and whether that genuine sincere spirituality appear in it which the gospel holds forth to the world: these things having a native tendency for leading away the soul from attending upon God, in her acts of worship, which is the only thing for which external worship is to be continued in, that in it we may jointly concur to converse with our Maker. If from this I should reckon up all the tricks are used in secreter worship, what stories should I tell of the pattering over the beads, of the multiplying little unintelligible prayers, the using of penances, some whereof are ridiculous for their gentleness, and others of them are as formidable for their horror, and fitter for the priests of Baal or the worshippers of Diana Taurica, than for those that worship the living God with joy and gladness of heart! Now by the performance of these the simple deluded people imagine themselves reconciled to God, and secured from his wrath; and so go about them merely in the opinion of a charm.

But I must next shew how the multiplicity of the Jewish rites was also brought in upon Christendom, though Christ came to set us at liberty from that pedagogy, which was made up of ordinances and lifeless precepts, that could not make the doer thereof perfect; nothing being enjoined in the Christian religion but that which was of itself easy and proper for the

great design of purifying our souls. Now such as have brought in a yoke of ordinances that have no tendency to the cleansing of our souls, but oppress us with their tyrannical burdensomeness, being both heavy and numerous, must be looked on as the introducers of a new Judaism for oppressing the Christian world. What a heap of new superadded forms have the high priests of Rome brought upon those who stoop to their tyranny! And how much sanctity do they place in them! enjoining severer censures on the violation of these, than on the greatest transgressions against either the moral or positive laws of God! How many holydays have they instituted! how much distinction of meats, of fasting, and abstinence! And how like are their jubilees and pilgrimages to the jubilees and yearly trotting up to Jerusalem which was among the Jews! In a word, there is not a piece of worship about which there is not a greater appendage of vain, pompous, and withal burdensome ceremonies, than were among the Jews.

Shall I here mention the five superadded sacraments to the two instituted by Christ, with all the rites belonging to each of them, or recount all the rites in their multifarious ordinations? Shall I tell of the laying up the bodies when dead, and of the forms of their burials? the burning of lamps in the clearest day, together with the incense that perfumes the worship, which are clear pieces of antiquated Judaism? In a word, no part of the parallel holds more exactly than that they are zealous of the traditions of their fathers, whereby the commandments of God are made of none effect; and that they honour God with their lips, when their hearts are far from him; and worship him in vain, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, Matt. xv. 8, 9.

And hitherto I have discoursed upon the first limb of Antichristianism, and have discovered too evident indications of the contradictions in it to the first branch of the design of Christianity; whereby the worship of God is partly adulterated, and partly smothered by a heavy and troublesome load of useless and lifeless performances, which must needs lead out the soul from an inward attending on God, or free converse with him.

The second branch of Christianity is, the holding forth that mysterious contrivance of the wisdom and goodness of God,

C

for reconciling the world to himself by his dear Son; whom he gave to the death for us, and also raised up, making him both Lord and Christ; whose glory and dignity is vulgarly branched out in these his three offices, of Prophet, Priest, and King.

By the first of which, he revealed the Father and his whole counsel to mankind in plain and simple discourses, afterwards committed to writing by the faithful eye and ear-witnesses of his majesty. His prophetic office, therefore, is chiefly acknowledged in our grateful receiving these discoveries, and our studying to adjust both our faith and practice to that unerring rule. But can any thing be more contradictory to this, than to keep the knowledge of these writings from Christians, to accuse their darkness and defects, and to apprehend great danger from their diligent perusal; to vilify that sacred study, preferring the lame and lifeless discourses of men to the words of eternal Wisdom? For we must consider, that our study of the gospel is of the same nature with a personal following of Christ when on earth, to see his miracles, and hear his doctrine: the same is also to be said of the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles. Now to bar the vulgar from this, is to hinder them to hear and see Christ and his apostles, as if that were a privilege restricted to churchmen. What shall be then said of these who call the scriptures "a nose of wax, the source of all heresies, a book written not on design, but upon particular emergents;" and do assert its incompleteness, unless made up by the traditions of the church? Is not this to add to the words of that book, and to accuse the faithful witness of unfaithfulness? But worse than all this is held by these who will have all the authority of the scriptures to depend on the church, which must be believed in the first place.

But here a great difference is to be made betwixt the testimony of a witness and the authority of a judge; the former is not denied to the church, and so the Jews had the oracles of God committed to them; but that doth not prove the authority of their sanhedrim infallible, or superior to scripture; and in this case more cannot be ascribed to the Christian church than was proper to the Jewish in our Saviour's time. But further, if the scripture be to be believed on the testimony of the church, then upon what account is the church first be

lieved? It cannot be said, because of any testimony in scripture, for if it gave authority to the scriptures, it cannot receive its authority from their testimony. How then shall it be proved that the church must be believed? or must it be taken from their own word? And yet no other reason can be given to prove the church infallible. For to say that they have continued in a succession of bishops from the apostles' days, concludes nothing, unless it be first proved that the doctrine of the apostles was of God; otherwise the Mahometan religion is as much to be believed, since for many ages a succession of priests have believed it. Further, the Greek churches drive up the series of their bishops to the apostles' days, as well as the Roman; why then should not their authority be likewise acknowledged infallible? In fine, must the vulgar go and examine the successions of the bishops, and judge about all the dubious elections, whether the conveyance have been interrupted or not? Certainly were this to be done, it were an impossible achievement, and harder than the study of the originals of both Testaments: therefore the vulgar must simply believe the authority of the church on her own testimony; which is the most absurd thing imaginable; and this to every individual will resolve into the testimony of their priest. Behold then a goodly foundation for building our faith upon!

Christ's prophetic office is also invaded by pretence of the church's infallibility in expounding scriptures; for if this be granted, the whole authority will be devolved on the church; for by this doctrine she may teach what she will; and were the scripture evidence never so full to the contrary, yet whatever wrested exposition she offers, though visibly contrary to the plain meaning of the words, must be believed. But with whom this power and authority is lodged, is not agreed to among themselves; some yielding it to the high priest of the church, when in his chair; others to the great sanhedrim of Christendom in a general council; others to both jointly: but all this is asserted without proof; for that of Christ's of telling the church, Matt. xviii. 17, so often repeated by them, is meant of particular offences, and so is restricted to the case of differences among brethren, and relates not to points of doctrine. Besides, the context of these words doth clearly shew them applicable to every parochial church, and yet their infallibility cannot be

asserted. So it is clear that Christ doth only speak of a jurisdiction for quieting of differences among brethren.

That of the gates of hell their not prevailing against the church, Matt. xvi. 18, proves not the pretence of infallibility. And indeed the translation of that place deserves amendment, and instead of hell that word is to be rendered grave; so that the meaning of the phrase is, death (which is the mouth and gate through which we pass into the grave, and is so used by Greek writers) shall never prevail against the church; that is, the church shall never die.

Neither will that of the Spirit of truth leading into all truth, John xvi. 13, advance the cause a whit, since that promise relates to all believers; and it is a part of the happiness of the new dispensation, that all in it shall be taught of God. And the promise of founding the church on St. Peter, Matt. xvi, saith as little; for suppose the rock on whom the church was to be built were St. Peter himself, which I shall not much controvert, that is not peculiar unto him, since we are all built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets; and on the twelve foundations of the new Jerusalem are written the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. But what will that prove for a series of the bishops of Rome?

And finally, for the keys of the kingdom of heaven, Matt. xvi. 19, their being given to St. Peter; that saith no more, but that he was to open the gospel, which is usually called the kingdom of God, or of heaven, in the New Testament. Now the use of keys being to open the door, this was peculiar to St. Peter's honour, who did first publish the gospel both to Jews and Gentiles, and in particular did first receive the Gentiles into the new dispensation. But this hath no relation to the bishops of Rome, nor to the pretended infallibility of that

see.

That which hath the fairest appearance of reason is, that if there be no absolute unerring court on earth, for deciding of controversies, there shall be no end of them; but every private man may, upon the pretence of some ill-understood place of scripture, break the unity of the church; and so the peace of the church is in hazard of being irrecoverably lost. But how specious soever this may appear, it hath no weight in it: for it is certain, that vice as well as error is destructive of reli