صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

Tho' I know there can be no Answer to this Syllogifm which can give eafe and quiet to the Confcience of any confidering Chriftian who drinks that Idolatrous Health; yet I am aware of the only Two Things which leave the leaft room for Cavil.

First, That fame ambiguity which perplexes them recurrs again, and they will grant that the Action of drinking in Remembrance of the Perfon of Chrift departed this World, is Inftituted a Part of Divine Worfhip; but the drinking in Remembrance of K-W-m, or any other Perfon departed this World, is not made a Part of Divine Worship; I am entirely of their Opinion, and of my own ftill. But how is this an Answer? Don't they now see that this wife Diftinction amounts to no more than this; That drinking in Remembrance of Chrift, is not drinking in Remembrance of K-W-m; nor that of K-W- drinking in Remembrance of Chrift? No certainly; and this is the very Caufe of their Profanenefs and Idolatry; because the Action is the fame, and the Perfons infinitely different. And now I hope they fee the Reafon of my wording the Argument in general Terms; which was to fhew, that it is the very fame Action which they apply to both; for in both Inftances it is drinking; drinking in an honourable and thankful Remembrance; and in Remembrance of a Perfon departed this World. So that all the Answer they make, is, one is a Divine Perfon, the other a meer Man, True; but can't the Action be the fame, tho' one of the Persons to whom it is perform'd is now dead ¿ and the F 2

other

other now living? When the Papifts kneel, or bow, or repeat a Prayer to the Virgin Mary; and at another time to God; Is not the Action the fame; tho' one of the Perfons is dead, (notwithstanding their Doctrine of her Affumption) and the other is alive? When they fwear by God, and by the Virgin Mary; the A&tion is the fame, and yet 'tis Idolatry in one Inftance, and Divine Worship in the other. And in fhort what Argument have we left against the Idolatry of the Church of Rome in thefe and all other Inftances, upon the Principle of thefe Immortal HealthDrinkers?

Another thing which may be Objected againft this Syllogifm is, that Expreffion of its being by Command and Inftitution of Chrift made a Part of Divine Worship. But that Expreffion is agreeable to the Senfe of all Chriftians; it was ever fo accounted among them, and will be fo to the End of the World: And this not without the Authority of Scripture, from whence we plainly Collect that it is not only a Part, but the Principal and moft Solemn Part of Chriftian Worship. St. Paul, 1 Cor. 11. 20. 23. fuppofes this Remembrance of Chrift to be the chief Intent and Business of Chriftians in their Affemblies. Eating and Drinking in Remembrance of Chrift, plainly fuppofed his leaving of them, and going to his Father; and this was the way they were to Celebrate his Memory in their Meetings during his Abfence, i. e. to the End of the World. This was what they came together for; and we find, Acts 20. 7. that it was for this very Performance that the Disciples met

on

[ocr errors]

on the first Day of the Week. If any one Ob jects, that nothing is a proper and direct A&t of Worship but the inward Subjection of the Mind. I answer, that the outward Action of Eating and Drinking in Remembrance of Chrift, is appointed as an outward Expreffion of the greateft inward Veneration, and humbleft Adoration of our Souls: And where the outward Action is not Accompany'd with this, it is Eating and Drinking the Lord's Body unworthily; whom we are to Worship and Adore by that Action, attended with the moft profound Subjection of our Souls; and this fure ought ever to be exprefs'd with the humbleft Pofture of our Bodies.

VIII. And now I come to that which is in truth no Objection in it self, and hath no Meaning when the Words are Understood; yet because it proceeds from Ignorance in Logick, and in the receiv'd Form of Speaking, hath made a great Noife: And that is my Saying, That the very Effence of the Euchariftical Sacrifice confifts in the Remembrance of a Perfon once Dead, or departed this World. So that I have no more to do here, but to inform fuch Readers as ftand in need of it, that in Natural Philofophy no Diftinction is more common than that of the Matter, and Form of every thing; the Matter is what is common to it with many other Things; the Form is that which is fo peculiar to it, that it diftinguishes it from all Things of another kind. This, when Men wou'd fpeak diftinctly, they call the Effence of a thing, or the Effential Form; fo the Body is the Matter of a Man, which is common to him with Beafts, &c. The Soul is

the

the Form or Effence, by which he is diftinguish'd from all other Things. From thence the Words are transferr'd into Ethicks or Moral Philofophy; and nothing is more common than in Actions even purely Moral, to diftinguish between the Matter, and Form or Effence of them; and much more in any Inftitution, Human or Divine. The Effential Form or Effence is that which distinguishes it from all other Inftitutions; and which will remain when you divest it of all Circumftances and Accidents which are common to it, with other Inftitutions or Actions. So Bread or Wine; the breaking and pouring out; the diftributing of them; and Eating and Drinking, may all be apply'd to common Ufe; and Bleffing or Confecrating are us'd in other Inftitutions; therefore none, nor all of thefe together, can be, in ftrictness of Speaking and exact Propriety of Language, call'd the Effence of the Sacrament. But that other Part of that Sacrament, which confifts in the Remembrance of a Person who is now in another World, can never be feparated from that Sacrament, no not in Thought, without deftroying the very Being of it; and is that Part of it which is Incommunicable to any other Inftitution whatfoever. You will fay it cannot be a Sacrament without all the reft, and particularly without Confecration. So fay I; no more than he who Objects thus, can be a Man without his Body; and yet he wou'd fpeak very Illogically if he fhould fay his Body is as much his Effence, as his Soul; a Part may be abfolutely Neceffary, and yet not equally Efential with another. However, if any one will

[ocr errors]

fay

fay that Confecration is as Effential to this Sacrament as the Bread Confecrated to that Remembrance; I will fall in with his way of Speaking, tho' it is not fo ftrictly Logical: and I do this the rather because our Holy Church exprefly fays that Water, and that Form In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, are Effential Parts of Baptifm. Not ALL Water, I hope, but Water apply'd to the washing away of Sin, and admiffion into a vifible Body. Now if each of thefe is Effential to Baptifm, then the applying either of them to a civil Ufe, is applying that which is Effential to Baptifm; and that is a horrid Profanation of it. So let us fay that the Confecration or Bleffing, and the Bread and Wine apply'd to the Remembrance, are two Effential Parts of the Eucharift; then, fay I, if you apply Bread or Wine to the Remembrance of any Perfon departed this World, you apply that which is Effential to that Sacrament; and that is bare-fac'd Idolatry.

If any one is fo felf will'd that he must have a way of Speaking by himself, and reject the Word Effence or Effential, as having any thing of Magick or Delufion in it; in Pity to his great Infirmity he hath my free leave; and let him call that Remembrance of a Perfon departed this World, the chief End, Intent, Purpofe, or Defign of that Holy Sacrament; or what other Word hits his Humour better. This will be no Ease to his Confcience in fo great a Crime; for ftill the Profaneness and Idolatry will be the fame,to apply that which is the chief End, Intent, Purpofe, or Defign of that Holy Sacrament to a meer

Man,

« السابقةمتابعة »