A PARAPHRASE WITH NO …

A PARAPHRASE WITH NOTES Upon the Sixth Chapter of St. JOHN.

With a Discourse on Humanity and Charity.

By W. CLAGET, D. D.

The Second Edition.

Imprimatur,

Jo. Battely RRmo Patri ac Dno Dno Wilhelmo Archiepisc. Cantuar. à Sacris Domesticis.
Ex Edibus Lambeth, Maii 31. 1686.

LONDON: Printed for J. Robinson at the Golden Lion, and T. Newborough at the Golden Ball in St. Paul's Church-yard. 1693.

THE PREFACE.

SIR,

'TIS not for nothing that we are desired to read the Sixth Chapter of St. John every day. I have engaged my Thoughts with what attention I can, upon those Passages be­tween the 51 and 61 Verses; and the more I consider them, the more favourably they seem to me to look upon that Opinion, that the very Flesh of Christ is eaten in the Sacrament. I know not what to say to this, that though the Jews understood Christ's Words, of eating his very Flesh, and he saw plainly enough that they did so, yet he went on in the same strain of Ex­pressions, Verily verily I say unto you, Ex­cept ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no Life in you. I know you told me, that these Passages are not to be interpreted of the Sacrament; and that there is no mention in them of any outward and visible Signs; which are necessary to a Sacra­ment. But I have heard that the Church al­ways [Page ii] thought these words to be spoken of the Sacrament. And besides, though there be no mention of a Sacrament, yet if Christ's Words enforce this, that the natural Substance of his Flesh must be properly eaten by us, it will follow that it must be thus eaten in the Sacrament of his Body and Blood, unless we could tell how or where else it is to be done. I would be glad to see such a Paraphrase upon this Chapter, as you speak of, which would help to make all appear plain. And it were well if others might see it too, and thereby see this at least, that you are so well satisfy'd with your own Reasons, that you are not afraid to let those judge of them that are otherwise perswaded.

I am, &c.

The PREFACE.

SIR,

YOU are desired to read the 6th Chap­ter of St. John's Gospel every day; and this I doubt not, for the sake of that part of it between V. 51, and V. 61; which seems to require eating the Flesh, and drinking the Blood of Christ in the proper sense. And here I make no question your Thoughts were closely engaged. But perhaps you have not applied that attention to the rest of the Chap­ter, which you gave to that part where the difficulty lies, and then no wonder that the difficulty still remains. For I beg leave to put you in mind, once more, that the true Sense of those difficult Passages, as you count them, is to be gained by observing their con­nexion with all the rest. And therefore to that Request, that you would often read the 6th Chapter of St. John, which I acknowledge to be a reasonable Request, I must add ano­ther as reasonable as that, which is, that you would not only often read, but likewise of­ten consider the whole Chapter, and mind our Saviour's Design in it: That you would there­fore observe what sort of People he had to do with, and what was the occasion of this Conversation between him and them: What [Page iv] was the Fundamental Cause of their Preju­dices against him; and with what Arguments and Applications he laboured to remove those Prejudices.

For you will then find, that they were Men whose Belly was their God, and who mind­ed earthly things; that they followed Christ for the Loaves; that he disappointed their Hopes; that they were angry at it, and al­tered their Opinion of him upon it; that their earthly-mindedness was the Reason why they now liked him not, but set themselves to cavil at all his Sayings; that to take them off from the Cares and Pleasures of this pre­sent Life, he laid before them better and greater Things, the Means and Hopes of ever­lasting Life: Finally, that he calls the Means and Causes of bettering our Minds, and bring­ing us to everlasting Life, Meat and Drink; and our believing and obeying his Doctrine, eating and drinking. And then, if I am not deceived, you will easily acknowledge, that in particular, he calls the Belief of his Death and Passion for the Sins of the World, and the saving Fruits of that Faith, eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood: And that there is no more reason to imagine that his Flesh should be eaten, and his Blood drank, in the proper and corporeal sense, than that he should make himself Bread to be eaten by us, as we use to eat Bread: But that there is good reason to understand throughout, by that eating and [Page v] drinking which he required, spiritual Actions only, which the whole strain of his Discourse shews, that he opposed to that corporeal feed­ing which they were so inordinately sollici­tous for.

I must for the same Reason desire you to mind those plain Intimations scattered here and there in our Lord's Discourse; by which it is evident, what he meant by eating and drinking. He saith, V. 29. This is the [...]. Work of God, that ye BELIEVE on him whom he hath sent; which is an Interpretation of V. 27. [...]. Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but, &c. Again, V. 35. He that BELIEVETH on me, shall never thirst. And again, V. 47. He that BELIE­VETH on me, hath everlasting Life. So likewise V. 36. and V. 40. This, I say, is fit to be minded. For when not only the oc­casion he had to use these Terms of eating and drinking, (which was their following him for their Bellies) shews these Terms to be allusive; but (as if that were not enough) he likewise added, now and then, the plain and proper meaning of those Allusions; it must, I think, be a wilful Mistake in him that attends to this, to interpret those Ex­pressions as if they were not allusive.

Nor is this all; for you may please to con­sider also, that when our Saviour found some of his Disciples to understand him as the Car­nal Jews did, he thought fit, for more abun­dant satisfaction, to explain his meaning once for all, V. 62, 63. as you will find by the en­suing Paraphrase and Notes.

As for our Saviour's repeating those Ex­pressions at which the Jews had already ta­ken offence; you may consider, that V. 51. he added that Expression of drinking his Blood, to that of eating his Flesh; which was a more plain Intimation of that violent Death which he was to suffer for us, than that former Say­ing, of giving his Flesh for the Life of the World. And so, tho' he kept still to the Al­lusion, yet he represented what kind of Death he was to suffer, more fully than he had done before. But perhaps you are at a loss why he continued to speak allusively at all, when he found that he was so grosly mistunderstood. And then I answer, as I have done in the Notes upon that place, that I am not obliged to say precisely what our Saviour's reason was for that. But, besides what you will find there, it may be said, that sometimes it well becomes a Man of Wisdom and Authority, when he finds his Words perverted by cavil­ing People, to repeat them again, and there­by to speak his own Assurance, that they did not drop unadvisedly from him, and that 'tis not his own but his Hearers Fault, that he is [Page vii] misunderstood. And this is the more reason­able to be said in the present case, if the Jews wilfully perverted our Saviour's Words to that absurd sense of eating his Flesh with their Teeth, as 'tis probably they did; and that be­cause his Expressions were plainly allusive, and because also the Allusion was now and then explain'd, as I shew'd before. What inconvenience is it therefore to suppose that our Lord perceiving that his Divine Dis­courses and Exhortations had but hardened them in a Spirit of Contradiction, did not think himself bound to use presently the ut­most plainness of Words for the sake of Men, to whom he had spoken plainly enough al­ready, if any good were to be done upon them. But for further satisfaction in this matter, I refer you once more to the Para­phrase and Notes, which are already finished, and where some little Light is given to those Passages which may seem obscure; enough, I hope, to lead you out of all danger of suspe­cting those words of our Saviour, V. 51, &c. to enforce that the Substance of his Flesh must be eaten by us, either in or out of the Sacra­ment.

It seems I told you, that these Passages were not to be understood of the Sacrament; I should have added, that because they signi­fy those things which are signify'd in the Sa­crament, that they may be very aptly ap­plied to the Sacrament, especially in Exhorta­tions [Page viii] to Devotion; nay, and that there are some cases in which a Man may argue from the one to the other, and some Questions to which both the one and the other give equal Light: which may very well be, and yet it will by no means follow, that these words are primarily to be understood of the Eucharist. And this Opinion I cannot deliver up, meerly because you have heard that the Church al­ways held the contrary. No Man, I believe, has a greater regard to the constant and uni­versal Tradition of the Church than my self. But then I do not think my self bound to be­lieve that the Church has always held this or that, because this and that Man tells me so. For if a Man can speak, and has a Cause to serve, 'tis as easie to say, Thus saith the Church, as to say, Thus saith the Scripture. I remem­ber indeed, that our Country-man Nicholas Sanders tells us, ThatNic. Sanderus de Euchar. p. 23. to deny these words to be under­stood of the Eucharist, is con­trary to the Instruction and Authority of all An­tiquity. And Maldonate says, That Maldon. in Joan. 6. all the ancient Fa­thers acknowledge it. And others say the same thing; and it seems you have heard it. Now this is but a custom of speaking, which some Men have gotten: For I am well assured, that all the Fathers were not of their mind.

Clemens Alexandrinus [...]. Paedag. lib. 1. c. 6. p. 105. Paris. supposes these Expressions, to eat the Flesh of Christ, and to drink his Blood, to be as figurative as that of St. Paul, to feed with Milk; and tells us, upon this occa­sion, that the word is variously allegorized, being called Meat, and Flesh, and Nourishment, and Bread, and Blood, and Milk; and that our Lord is all these things for our enjoyment who believe in him. Now I am perswaded you will not say that this Father interpreted the Words under Debate of the Eucharist.

Tertullian, to shew that these Words, the Flesh profiteth nothing, do not make against the Resurrection of the Flesh, saith,Sic etsi carnem ait nihil prodesse, ex materia dicti dirigen­dus est sensus. Nam quia durum & intolerabilem existimaverunt sermo­nem ejus, quasi vere Carnem suam illis eden­dam determinasset, ut in Spiritum disponeret sta­tum salutis, praemisit, Spiritus est qui vivificat, atque ita subjunxit, Ca­ro nihil prodest, ad vivificandum scilicet, Exequitur etiam quid ve­lit intelligi spiritum. Verba quae locutus sum vobis Spiritus sunt, Vita sunt. Sicut & supra, qui audit Sermones meos & credit in eum qui, &c. Ita (que) Sermonem constituens vivificatorem, quia Spiritus & Vita Sermo, eundem etiam Carnem suam dixit, quia & sermo Caro erat Pactus, proinde in causam Vitae Appetendus & devorandus Au­ditu, & ruminandus intellectu, & Fide digerendus. Nam & paulo ante Carnem suam panem quo (que) Coelestem pronunciaret; urgens us­quequa (que) per Allegoriam, &c. Tertul. de Res [...]r. Carnis, c. 36, 37. That we are to be directed to the sence of what is said by the subject-matter of it. For because they thought his saying hard and intollerable, as if he intended his Flesh should be truly eaten [Page x] by them; he to shew that the Cause of Life and Salvation was spiritual, premised this, That the Spirit quickneth; and then added, The Flesh profiteth nothing, that is, in respect of quick­ning. And then he shews what he means by the Spirit. The words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life. As he had said also before, He that heareth my words, and believeth in him that sent me, hath Eter­nal Life, and shall not come into Condemna­tion, but hath passed from Death to Life. Therefore making his Word to be the quickning Principle; since his Word is Spirit and Life, he called his Word also his own Flesh; for the Word was also made Flesh: and therefore in order to Life, it is to be hungred after, and devoured by HEARING, and to be chewed again by the ƲNDERSTANDING, and to be digested by FAITH. And afterwards he affirms, that our Lord all along urged his Intent by an Allegory. So that Tertullian was so far from thinking these Passages to refer to the Eucha­rist, that I am in some doubt whether he un­derstood them with any special reference to the Death of Christ.

Origen also interprets Flesh and Blood in like manner: For, says he,Carnibus enim & sanguine Verbi sui, tan­quam mundo cibo at (que) potu reficit omne homi­num genus. Orig. in Levit. Hom. 7. By the Flesh and the Blood of his WORD, as with pure Meat and Drink he refresheth all Mankind. [Page xi] AndVide in Mat. Tract. 12. elsewhere he speak­eth to the same purpose.

St. Athanasius likewise seems to me to be of the same Opinion, who speaking of the literal sence in which the Jews understood our Sa­viour, hath these words, [...], &c. Athan. in il­lud Evangelii. Quincun (que) dixerit, &c. For how could his Body suffice for so many to eat of, that it should become nourish­ment for the whole World? It is, says he, for this rea­son that he mentioned the Son of Man's ascending into Hea­ven, that he might draw them off from the Cor­poreal Notion. Which Testimony, as it ma­nifestly shewed his Judgment to be, that our Saviour did not require the proper eating of his Natural Body; so it contains a very pro­bable Argument, that he did not understand those Words of eating his Sacramental Body. For if he had so understood them, it had been very accountable that the Body of Christ, i. e. his Sacramental Body, was sufficient for the nourishment of the whole World. And by removing all Corporeal Notions of eating and drinking, he seem'd to establish only a Spiritual Notion.

But St. Hierom is plain and full to this pur­pose, beyond all contradiction, as I am per­swaded. [Page xii] For thus he speaks,Quando dicit qui non comederit Carnem meam & biberit San­guinem meum, licet & in Mysterio posset in­telligi, tamen verius Corpus Christi & San­guis ejus Sermo Scriptu­rarum est, Doctrina Di­vina est.—Si quan­do audimus Sermonem Dei; Sermo Dei, & Ca­ro Christi, & Sanguis ejus in auribus nostris funditur, & nos aliud cogitamus in quantum periculum incurrimus? — Sic & in Car­ne Christi, qui est Ser­mo Doctrinae, hoc est Scripturarum Sancta­rum Interpretatio, sicut volumus ita & cibum accipimus. Hieron. Com­ment. in Psal. 147. When Jesus saith, He that eateth not my Flesh, and drinketh not my Blood, although it may be understood in a Mystery, (i. e. as I think, of the Eucharist) yet the truer sence is, that the Body of Christ, and his Blood, is the Word of the Scriptures, is Di­vine Doctrine. — And therefore he continues not long after in this manner; If when we hear the Word of God; the Word of God, and the Flesh of Christ, and his Blood, is poured into our Ears, and we think of something else, into how great a danger do we run? Afterwards comparing it to Manna, which was said to give that Taste to every Man which he liked best. So, saith he, in the Flesh of Christ; which is the Word of Do­ctrine, that is, the Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures; as we would have it, so we receive Food. If thou art holy, here thou findest Com­fort, St. Hierom could not have been more ex­press, if he had been to maintain this Inter­pretation against an Adversary.

Nor does the Paraphrase of Eusebius come much behind St. Hierom's Interpretation. For he makes our Saviour's Explication, V. 63. to [Page xiii] run as if he had said, [...]. Euseb. Caesariensis con­tra Marcel. de Eccles. Theol. lib. 3. c. 12. Do not think that I speak of that Flesh which I carry about me, as if you ought to eat that, or that I command you to drink my sensible and corpo­real Blood. You well under­stand that the words which I speak to you, are Spirit and Life. So that, as Eusebius goes on, his Words and Do­ctrines are Flesh and Blood, of which whoever constantly partakes, he being nourished with Heavenly Bread, as it were, shall partake of the Heavenly Life. He that says this, and knows what he says, could hardly suppose that the Eucharist was particu­larly intended by our Saviour in these Pas­sages.

I shall trouble you with no more Instances of this kind, these being sufficient to shew, that All the Ancients did not understand those words of the Eucharist. And now I will make no difficulty to grant that the other Opinion is not destitute of all Authority, but has the Countenance of some Fathers to sup­port it. For we do not pretend to any such priviledge of speaking, as to say, we have All the Fathers, in a Case where we have not every One.

But this I must needs say, That those Fa­thers who, as far as I have yet discovered, seem to speak most expresly in favour of the Sacramental Sense, do not come up to the pe­remptoriness and clearness of those who are for the Spiritual Sense.

Cypr. de Orat. Dom.St. Cyprian under­standing the daily Bread which we pray for, not on­ly of common Food, but of the Eucharist, ap­plies those Words to it; If any man eateth of this Bread, he shall live for ever. And, says he, as 'tis manifest, that Qui corpus ejus at­tingunt. they who belong to his Body, [or Family] and having a right thereunto, communicate in the Eucharist, do live; so it is to be feared, and we are to pray, lest any of us being excommunicated and separated from the Body of Christ, should be far removed from Salvation, since himself uttered this threatning, Except ye eat the Flesh, and drink the Blood, &c.

Now I desire not to make less of these words than they imply. But yet I must say, that St. Cyprian seems, in these and in the fore­going Words, which are to the same purpose, to interpret that Bread, which he that eateth of, shall live for ever; and the Flesh and the Blood of Christ, not only of the Eucharist, but of all the Means of Grace that are af­forded to his Members in the Communion of his Body; whereof, as he had reason, he [Page xv] thought the Eucharist to be the principal, to which no excommunicated Person had right. Not to say that the Eucharist might be here particularly mentioned, because those words, Except ye eat &c. have a more clear allusion to the Eucharist, than to any other Means. Nor am I alone in this Interpretation of St. Cy­prian; Notae in Cypr. Pa­ris. For thus saith Pri­orius, The Explication of this place is taken from Tertul­lian, Cap. 6. de Orat. Therefore by desiring daily Bread, we pray for a perpetual continuance in Christ, and to remain undivided from his Body. Thus also Rigaltius upon the place; The words of God the Father, which Christ in the Flesh brought for our Salvation, are here to be understood. Therefore all that time in which Christ lived amongst us in the Body, his Preaching, his Gospel, is the Body and Flesh of Christ. It is the Cross of Christ, 'tis the Blood of Christ. With this Meat and Drink we Chri­stians are nourish'd to eternal Life. By which 'tis manifest, that Rigaltius did not under­stand St. Cyprian in that manner, as to abate at all of his Judgment, that theObserv. Galeat. in Cypr. Id. spiritual sense of eating and drinking, is to be un­derstood throughout in the 6th of St. John.

Basil. Moral. Reg. 21.St. Basil is another who applies these Words to the Sacrament; not where he undertakes to give their proper meaning, [Page xvi] but in his moral Collections, under the Head of receiving the Eucharist; which I do not see but he might do, and yet believe that the Spiritual Sense of eating and drinking Christ was directly intended. For, as I have already told you, the Eucharist represents the Death of Christ, and our Spiritual feeding thereup­on; and these words in St. John signifie what the Eucharist represents. No wonder therefore if Christian Writers, in speaking of the Eu­charist, produce these words, which have so near an affinity with it. And this I think they may do pertinently enough, without supposing that these Passages in St. John signi­fie the Eucharist, because they signifie some of the same things which the Eucharist signi­fies.

St. Augustin indeed brings forth that saying, Except ye eat the Flesh, &c. in his Disputations against the Pelagians, supposing there, as it should seem, that it was a direct and proper Command to receive the Eucharist, under the penalty of Damnation: And I remember, that in one place he urges it for the necessity of Communicating Infants. This is so noto­riously known, that I shall not turn to the places; and though I will not be positive, yet I think he is not clear for this Sense, in any other Cause, but that wherein he was enga­ged against the Pelagians. But there is this very great Prejudice against his Authority in this matter, that elsewhere, viz. out of the [Page xvii] Heat of that Controversie, he gives clearly another sence of these words, and speaks of them as if they were reductive only to the Eucharist. Mark therefore what he says;Hunc ita (que) cibum & potum societatem vult intelligi corpo­ris & membrorum su­orum, quod est Sancta Ecclesia in praedestina­tis & vocatis, & justifi­catis, & glorificatis San­ctis, & fidelibus ejus. —Hujus rei Sacra­mentum, id est, unitatis Corporis & Sanguinis Christi, alicubi quotidie, alicubi certis intervallis dierum in Dominicâ Mensâ praeparatur, & de Mensâ Dominicâ sumi­tur quibusdam ad vi­tam, quibusdam ad ex­itium. Res vero ipsa cujus Sacramentum est, omni homini ad vitam, nulli ad exitium quicun­que ejus particeps fue­rit. Aug. Tract. 26. in Johan. Therefore by this Meat and Drink, he would have us to understand the Society of his Body and Members, that is, the Holy Church, consist­ing of his predestinated, and called, and justified, and glo­rified Saints and Faithful. And presently after; The Sacrament of this thing, that is, of the Ʋnity of the Bo­dy and Blood of Christ, is in some places every day, in o­ther places upon certain days prepared upon the Lord's Table, and received from the Lord's Table; by some to Life, by some to Destruction. But the thing it self, of which it is the Sacrament, is for Life to every Man, for Destruction to no Man, who­soever he be that partakes of it. By which words it is evident, that St. Austin did not here understand, that eating of the Flesh, and drinking of the Blood of Christ, to which Salvation is promised; of sacramental eating, but of being incorporated into the Invisible Church of Christ: and this, because he says, The Sacrament of this thing may be received [Page xviii] to Destruction; and because he expresly says, That this Meat and Drink is the Society of the Body of Christ, consisting of his predestinated, &c. Members.

And that therefore he would not have scrupled to interpret eating by believing; since 'tis Faith by which we are united to the Body of Christ, no reasonable Man will question. However, we have his own Word for it, who upon that Saying of our Saviour, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent, Goes on thus,Hoc est ergo man­ducare cibum, non qui perit, sed qui perma­net in vitam eternam. Ut quid paras dentes & ventrem? Crede & manducasti. Id. Tract. 25. This therefore is to eat that Food which perisheth not, but endureth to everlasting Life. To what purpose dost thou make ready thy Teeth and thy Belly? Believe, and thou hast eaten. Afterwards he puts both together;Accedat, credat, in­corporetur ut vivifice­tur. Id. Tract. 26. Let him come and believe, and be incorpo­rated, that he may be quick­ned.

Which Words of his are the more remark­able, because in that place he professedly treats of the Exposition of this Chapter. Where also upon that saying, He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him, he discourseth thus. [Page xix] Hoc est manducare escam illam & illum bi­bere potum, in Christo manere, & illum ma­nentem in me habere. Ac per hoc, qui non manet in Christo, & in quo Christus non ma­net, proculdubio nec manducat spiritualiter carnem ejus nec bibit ejus sanguinem, licet carnaliter & visibiliter premat dentibus Sacra­mentum Corporis & Sanguinis Christi, sed magis tantae rei Sacra­mentum ad judicium si­bi manducat & bibit, quia immundus prae­sumsit ad Christi acce­dere Sacramenta, quae aliquis non digne su­mit, nisi qui mundus est, &c. Tract. 26. in Joh. This it is to eat that Food, and drink that Drink, viz. to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwelling in me. And therefore he that dwel­leth not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwelleth not, undoubtedly doth not spiritu­ally eat his Flesh, nor drink his Blood, although he doth carnally and visibly press with his Teeth the Sacrament of his Body and Blood; but he rather eats and drinks the Sa­crament of so great a thing to his Condemnation; because being impure, he hath pre­sumed to come to Christ's Sacraments, which none worthily receives who is not pure; of which 'tis said, Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Whence it is manifest, that in St. Au­stin's Judgment, to eat the Flesh of Christ, and to drink his Blood, was to eat and drink it Spiritually, so as good and holy Men only do partake thereof, not all that do press the Sacrament thereof with their Teeth. And it is further observable, that if to eat that Food, and drink that Drink▪ be as St. Austin says, to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwell in us; then all holy Persons do constantly e t the Flesh, and drink the blood of Christ; be­cause they still dwell in Christ, and Christ in [Page xx] them; but they are not always receiving the Sacrament, and therefore St. Austin could not understand these words properly of the Eucharist.

And that these were not sudden Notions of his, appears from this, that we find them elsewhere, and particularly in his Book of the City of God, towards the end; which Book he finished just before his Death. There he hath these words;Nec isti ergo di­cendi sunt manducare Corpus Christi, quoni­am nec in membris computandi sunt Chri­sti. Ut. enim alia ta­ceam, non possunt si­mul esse, & Membra Christi, & Membra Me­retricis. Denique ip­se dicens, qui man­ducat Carnem meam, & bibit Sanguinem me­um in me manet, & ego in eo: ostendit quid fit non Sacramento tenus, sed reverâ Corpus Chri­sti manducare & ejus Sanguinem bibere; hoc est enim in Christo ma­nere, ut in illo maneat & Christus. Sic enim hoc dicit tanquam di­ceret. Qui non in me manet, & in quo ego non maneo, non se di­cat aut existimet man­ducare Corpus meum, aut bibere Sanguinem meum. De Civit. Dei. lib. 21. c. 25. For neither are they to be said to eat the Body of Christ, because neither are they to be account­ed amongst his Members. For to omit other things, they can­not be both the Members of Christ, and the Members of an Harlot. Lastly, himself saying, He that eateth my Flesh, and drinketh my Blood, dwelleth in me and I in him, sheweth what it is to eat the Body of Christ, and drink his Blood, not by the Sacrament, but verily and indeed; for this is to dwell in Christ, so as that Christ dwelleth in him. For his speaking this, was as if he had said, He that dwel­leth not in me, and in whom I dwell not, should not say or think that he eateth my Flesh, or drinketh my Blood. Now the Persons here [Page xxi] spoken of were Christians of vicious Lives, who yet received the Sacrament, and conti­nued in the Communion of the Church to the last. But since St. Austin, denying that they ate the Body of Christ in Truth, even when they received the Sacrament; does al­so affirm, that Christ spake of receiving his Body in Truth only, when he said, He that eateth my Flesh, &c. it seems evidently to fol­low, that when St. Austin wrote these Pas­sages, he did not understand those places in St. John of Sacramental Eating. Finally, by comparing this place with the former, it is plain also, that to eat and drink Christ Spiri­tually, and to eat and drink him in Truth and Reality, was in St. Austin's Judgment all one; and consequently that we may really eat the Flesh of Christ, and drink his Blood, though we do it not corporeally. These Pas­sages of this Father I have the rather insisted upon, because I have affirmed in the Notes, that he would not allow that a wicked Man is truly a partaker of the Body and Blood of Christ; which is evident from these Passages, tho I have produced them chiefly to shew what his most deliberate Thoughts were con­cerning the sense of the sixth Chapter of St. John.

But after all, though I verily think that I could make out a Title to the Consent of All the Fathers, with vastly more probability than those who claim it for the other Opini­on; [Page xxii] yet, suppose that they have these three that are cited last, and as many more as they can name with any colour; what would they get by it, if notwithstanding these Fathers did not believe that the Natural Flesh of Christ was properly eaten, and his Blood properly drank by the Faithful in the Eucharist? What if they believed the Substance of Bread and Wine to remain in the Sacrament, and that Christ himself could be fed upon by the Mind only; and therefore that these words them­selves, Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, &c. though spoken of the Sacrament, were not properly but figuratively to be un­derstood? If this be so, they have lost their main Cause, and have taken a great deal of pains to be where they were at first; and this Dispute, whether the Church has always un­derstood the Eucharist to be directly intended by our Saviour in the mentioned Passages, is lost as to any Advantage that Transubstantia­tion can get by it.

That the Substance of Bread and Wine re­main after Consecration, is manifest fromEpist. ad Caecili­um. St. Cyprian; and that Christ is fed upon by the Mind only, fromIn Isai. cap. 3. St Ba­sil, to whom I refer you, that I may not be over-te­dious; especially since for the present one Te­stimony of St. Augustin may serve the turn. Observe therefore these words of his, con­cerning [Page xxiii] the Exposition of Scripture-Phrases;Si praeceptiva est locutio aut flagitium aut facinus vetans, aut be­neficentiam jubens non est Figurata. Si autem Flagitium aut Facinus videtur juberi, aut utili­tatem aut beneficenti­am vetare Figurata est. Nisi manducaveritis, in­quit, carnem filii homi­nis & sanguinem bi­beritis, vitam in vobis non habebitis, Facinus vel Flagitium videtur Jubere, Figura ergo est praecipiens Passioni Do­mini esse communican­dum, & suaviter atque utiliter in memoriâ re­condendum, quod caro ejus pro nobis crucifixa & vulnerata sit. De Doctrinâ Christianâ, lib. 3. c. 16. If the Saying be precep­tive, either forbidding a wicked Action, or commanding to do that which is good, it is no figurative saying. But if it seems to command any Villany or Wickedness, or to forbid what is profitable and good, it is Figurative. This saying, Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no Life in you; seems to com­mand a villanous or wicked thing. It is therefore a FI­GƲRE, enjoyning us to com­municate in the Passion of our Lord, and to lay it up in dear and profita­ble remembrance, that his Flesh was crucified and wounded for our sakes. The vast pains that have been taken to avoid this Testimo­ny, are a convincing Argument that Preju­dice may grow to that strength, as to be in­vincible. You will confess, I doubt not, that this Passage so plainly shews St. Austin's per­swasion in this matter, that as it needs no words to illustrate it, so it is capable of no Answer to the purpose.

To come to a Conclusion. As I have shewn that several Fathers did not understand the mentioned Words of our Saviour, as spo­ken of the Eucharist; so I could shew, that very many Doctors of the Roman Communi­on have declared against it; amongst whom Cardinal Cajetan, for his singular Merit, and because I have referred to his Reasons in my Notes, ought to be particularly remembred. In his Commentary upon V. 53. Verily verily I say, &c. he comes to speak of a third Sence, viz. of Sacramental eating by wor­thy Receivers; And, says he, the Sence is this: ‘Except ye really eat the Flesh of the Son of Man in the Sacrament of the Host, and drink his Blood in the Sacrament of the Chalice, you have no Life in you. So that according to this sence, not only the Sacra­ment of Baptism, but the Sacrament of the Eucharist also, under both kinds, is necessary to Salvation. But the usage of the Church is repugnant to this sence, since she does not give the Communion to Infants at all, nor to the People under both kinds; and not only the Usage, but the Doctrine of the Church too, because she teaches that 'tis suf­ficient to Salvation, to communicate under the Species of Bread. And tho' this Autho­rity be sufficient to shew that the Text does not deliver a Precept of receiving the Sacra­ment in both kinds, and consequently that it [Page xxv] does not deliver a Precept of eating and drink­ing the Sacrament of the Eucharist; yet the Bohemians—are not satisfied, but produce this Text for themselves against our Usage and Doctrine, saying, That if our Lord had not treated of receiving the Sacrament in these words, he would not have distinguished between eating and drinking, least of all be­tween eating the Flesh and drinking the Blood; but since he so accurately distinguish­eth between these things, he insinuates his Discourse to be concerning the reception of the Eucharist, &c. But, says the Cardinal, these things are easily thrown off; by ob­serving that in this very Chapter Jesus said not long before, He that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth in me shall never thirst. For in these words which, 'tis plain, do not belong to the Sacrament of the Eucharist, our Lord plainly distinguishes Hunger from Thirst, which is equivalent to his distinction between eating and drinking. For Hunger refers to eating, and Thirst to drinking. Therefore from the distinction between eating and drinking, no solid Argu­ment can be drawn to infer the Discourse to be of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. In like manner the distinction between Flesh and Blood availeth nothing to their purpose, but rather against them; because the Flesh is not distinguished from the Blood after any [Page xxvi] sort, but only as they are separated, as Meat from Drink. But 'tis evident that the real separation of the Flesh and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament, is represented only: But in the Death of Christ it was actual, and ac­cording to the thing it self. And if it be ur­ged that the Flesh and the Blood are here dis­coursed of under the Notion of Meat and Drink, and not according to what they were in their own Nature, and that for this reason, the Discourse runs upon the Flesh in the Sacrament, and the Blood in the Sacrament, separated one from another. The Answer to this is afforded by what has been already said, viz. that our Lord had spoken of him­self before, as of one that takes away Hun­ger, and of one that takes away Thirst; and yet 'tis not also inferred from hence, that he spake of himself as under that species of the Sacrament, whereby he takes away Hunger, and that species of the Sacrament whereby he takes away Thirst. For he discourses of the Flesh and Blood,Partibus mortis suae. which are parted at his Death, as they are to be embraced by the Mind, being the Meat and Drink of the Soul: Because un­less our Spirit be sustained by the Death of Christ as by Meat, and be delighted with it as with Drink, there is not the Life of the Spi­rit in us.’

And now, Sir, having given you so large an Account of this great Man's Opinion in his own Words, I shall content my self to say in general, that if it were needful, others might be produced for the same; even Popes, Car­dinals, Bishops and Doctors, who (as far as I can discern) were for number, as well as qua­lity, not inferiour to those who maintained the contrary side before the Council of Trent.

Nay, that Council it self would have bet­ter informed those that told you, the Church has still understood this part of the Chapter as treating of the Eucharist. There were warm Discourses in the Congregation between the Divines, concerning the Interpretation of these Passages: But at last it was concluded, neither to affirm or deny them to be meant of the Eucharist; but it was agreed however to deny, that the necessity of communicating in both kinds could be inferred, supposing that the Eucharist was meant; that is to say, it was carried by the Majority: And to gratifie those that thought it was not meant, it was to be acknowledged that they had Fathers and Do­ctors of their Opinion. For the Matter, all things considered, was accommodated as well as it could be in these words;Sed neque ex Ser­mone illo apud Jo [...]n­nem sexto recte coli­gitur utriusque spe [...]i communionem à Domi­no Praecepram esse, [...] ­cunque juxta varias sanctorum Patrum & Doctorum Interpretatio­nes inteliigatur. Conc. Trid. Sess 21. cap. 1. Nor from that Discourse in the 6th of St. John is it rightly gathered, that the [Page xxviii] Communion of both kinds was enjoined by our Lord; however that Discourse be understood ac­cording to the various Interpretations of the Holy Fathers and Doctors.

I doubt I have said more than enough up­on your short intimation of that Pretence, that the Church has always interpreted these places of the Eucharist. But I hope you will make this construction of it, that I am one of those who bear a due regard to the Au­thority and Tradition of the Universal Church, as I believe you to be another. For which Reason I thought it more needful to remove so great a Prejudice out of your way, as the belief of the foresaid Insinuation would have been. And I am confident you now see that in maintaining the Eucharist not to be intended by our Saviour in any part of this Chapter, any more than other parts of Chri­stianity, I am not obliged to encounter the Authority of All the Ancients, or of the whole Church; nay, that in this matter I do not so much as entrench upon the Authority of the Council of Trent it self.

Indeed that Council would have me to be­lieve, that not one of the various Interpreta­tions of the Fathers and Doctors, makes a­gainst the Communion in one kind. But I hope I may be excused, if I can believe that which several Men of high Rank in their own Church were not able to believe.

And as for that Doctrine, that Christ is properly eaten in the Eucharist, I ought to be excused too, if I can by no means believe it; or else those Fathers must be condemned, who believed the Capernaites to be a perverse sort of Men, for turning our Saviour's words in this Chapter, to so inhumane and absurd a sense, as if he had exhorted them to eat a Man's Flesh, according to the propriety of those words. For no Man can say, that this is either inhumane or absurd, who believes the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, and that Christ is properly eaten in the Eucharist.

So that for what I can see, this Chapter of St. John, instead of affording a solid Argu­ment for that Conclusion, when it comes to be well considered upon the Grounds of Rea­son and Authority, does at last yield a Ter­rible Objection against it.

I have thought of all these Things, with the liberty of one that loves Truth, not with­out due regard to the Ancient Doctors of the Church. Our common Master hath taught me, to call no man Master upon Earth; yet I never refused the help of his Ministers to guide me into the knowledge of this Truth: And since I have been able to use that help, I have still valued, in the first place, that as­sistance which is offered me from the Primi­tive [Page xxx] Bishops and Fathers. And this Liberty I have been encouraged to use in the Church of England, not only for judging of Points which she has not determined, but those also which she has. And from the bottom of my heart I give thanks to Almighty God, that I have had my Education in the Communion of a Church, which at the same time that it pre­scribes to me a Rule of Doctrine and Wor­ship, does give me full liberty to enquire all manner of ways, whether she has dealt sin­cerely with me or not. Under the Discipline of so honest a Church, I trust that I have learn'd to be an honest Man. For though I am as confident of the main Question as I desire to be, yet I have, and by the Grace of God always will have, a quiet Reserve for better Information: And I shall not count him an Enemy but a Friend, that both can and will discover my Mistakes. For which Rea­son I have obeyed your Advice, and asked the leave of my Superiors, to let these plain Thoughts go into the World. And I let them go, much rather desiring that they may meet with Contradiction, than Approbation in any part, where they ought to be contra­dicted.

Nay, I will not refuse to make allowance for them who cannot oppose an Adversary without Huffing and Vanity. If I can see that they offer, though but a little Reason, I will [Page xxxi] readily acknowledge it; or if they offer none at all, let them but seem to believe what they say, and they shall not go without a Reply.

As for that Sense which I have (not with­out good Authority) offered, of those Passa­ges in this Chapter concerning the Father's drawing, and giving Men to Christ; if it does not equally please all Persons, I hope they who are otherwise minded will not be dis­pleased with me, when I have declared, that I shall no longer care for it, when any Man shall lead my Understanding to a better.

Sir, I have but one thing more to say; Let you and I observe and follow the Mo­ral Instructions of this Chapter; which if all would do, I am confident none of us should run into any dangerous Mistake about the meaning of any part of it. Our Lord hath said it: That if any man will do his Will, he shall know of the Doctrine whether it be of God. In paraphrasing our Saviour's Dis­courses here, I could not but observe how apt it was to infuse a truly wise, honest and godly Temper into the Minds of his Hearers. And therefore for a Conclusion, I added to the Paraphrase what I thought was a suitable Exhortation; that whilst we may happen to dispute about the sense of some [Page xxxii] more difficult Passages in this Chapter, we may not forget to make the great Design of it the Subject of our Practice. And so I commend you to the Grace of God, and rest,

Your most, &c.

The Sixth Chapter of St. JOHN.
The ARGUMENT.

This Chapter begins with a Narrative of the miraculous feeding of Five Thousand in the Wilderness, and consisteth wholly of those Passages that happened upon this occasion. The People were so overjoyed with the Miracle, that they resolved to make Jesus a King; which he avoided, and secretly went to Ca­pernaum. But they not so satisfied, fol­lowed him thither the next day; when he took another course to prevent their de­sign; and that by reproving their worldly-mindedness, and by calling them off from the Cares and Pleasures of this Life, to mind Heavenly Things, and everlasting Life; which so turned their Stomachs against him, that they fell to cavil at his Sayings, and to dis­parage his Miracles, by setting up the Manna wherewith Moses had fed their Fathers, [Page 2] against his feeding them the day before. Whereupon he inculcated two things upon them with great Earnestness: The one was this, That they might gain eternal Life by Him and his Doctrine; which he therefore called the Bread of Life, and the Bread that came down from Heaven; and therefore that it was a vain thing in them to chal­lenge him with Moses's giving their Fathers that Bread from Heaven, which served only to sustain a mortal Life. The other was this, That they had sufficient Evidence of his com­ing from God; but that they believed not, because of their worldly Prejudices against him. Whereupon he tells them, that God had committed no other Persons to his effectual Care, to convince and save them, but such only who were disposed to receive the Truth by an honest Mind; and that himself was not bound to conquer the obstinacy of unteachable Men. Notwithstanding all which, they pro­ceeded to cavil at his Sayings; and because, in allusion to the Loaves he had multiplied, and to that Manna which they boasted of, he had called himself the Bread of Life: and in pursuance of such Figurative Speeches, he did also express believing in him, and trusting in his Death, &c. by eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood: They exclaimed against him, as if he had, in the literal sense, offered his Flesh to be eaten: some of his own Disciples also understanding him in [Page 3] that manner: To whom indeed he explained himself: But for all that, upon his free Re­proof of their insincerity, they left him. And then he proved the Constancy of his Twelve Apostles, permitting them also to go, if they were not willing to stay: shewing withal, that he understood who were sincere, and who were not.

The Chapter.

V. 1. AFter these things Je­sus went over the Sea of Galilee, which is the Sea of Tiberias.

V. 2. And a great multitude follow'd him, because they saw his Miracles which he did upon them that were diseased.

V. 3. And Jesus went up into a Moun­tain, and there he sat with his Disciples.

V. 4. And the Pass­over, a Feast of the Jews, was nigh.

V. 5. When Jesus then lift up his eyes, and saw a great compa­ny come to him, he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread that these may eat?

V. 6. And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do)

V. 7. Philip answer­ed him, Two hundred penny-worth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little.

V. 8. One of his Disciples, Andrew, Si­mon Peters Brother, saith unto him,

V. 9. There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes; but what are they among so ma­ny?

V. 10. And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So that men sat down [Page 6] in number about five thousand.

V. 11. And Jesus took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the Disciples, and the Disciples to them that were set down, and likewise of the fish­es as much as they would.

V. 12. When they were filled, he said un­to his Disciples, Ga­ther up the fragments that remain that no­thing be lost.

V. 13. Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve Baskets with [Page 7] the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and a­bove unto them that had eaten.

V. 14. Then those men, when they had seen the miracle which Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that Prophet which was to come into the world.

V. 15. When Je­sus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a King, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

V. 16. And when Even was now come, his Disciples went down unto the Sea,

V. 17. And entred into a Ship, and went over the Sea, towards Capernaum, and it was now dark, and Jesus was not come to them.

V. 18. And the Sea arose by reason of a great wind that blew.

V. 19. So when they had rowed about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Je­sus walking on the Sea, and drawing nigh unto [Page 9] the Ship: and they were afraid.

V. 20. But he saith unto them, It is I, be not afraid.

V. 21. Then they willingly received him into the Ship, and im­mediately the Ship was at the land whither they went.

V. 22. The day fol­lowing, when the peo­ple which stood on the other side of the Sea, saw that there was no other boat there, save that one whereinto his Dis­ciples were entred, and that Jesus went not with his Disciples into the Boat, but that his Disciples were gone a­way alone:

V. 23. (Howbeit, there came other boats from Tiberias, nigh un­to the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had giv­en Thanks:)

V. 24. When the peo­ple therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his Disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Caperna­um, seeking for Jesus.

V. 25. And when they had found him on the other side of the Sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when ca­mest thou hither?

V. 26. Jesus an­swered them and said, Verily, verily I say un­to you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the Mi­racles but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

V. 27. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth to everlasting life; which the Son of Man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

V. 28. Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

V. 29. Jesus an­swered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

V. 30. They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, [Page 13] and believe thee? what dost thou work?

The Paraphrase.

1. I Shall not men­tion those Mi­racles which Jesus wrought be­tween the Passover last mentioned, [Ch. 5. v. 1.] and that which was now at hand, [v. 4. of this Ch.] saving that only of the Loaves; which though it be reported by all the other Evangelists, yet they have omitted that Discourse upon it which he had with the Jews. The occasion of it was this: He went in a Boat with his Disciples over that part of the Lake of Genezareth in Galilee, which washeth the City Tiberias.

[Page 4]2. And a great multitude followed him on foot, [Mat. 14.13.] through Tiberias, some of them being diseased Persons, whom he cured in the Desert where they overtook him, [Luke 11.11.]

3. And he took his Disciples with him to a Mountain in that Desert to instruct them.

4. But the People now hastning from all parts towards Hi­erusalem, because of the approaching Passover.

5. The Company that came to Jesus in this Desert place, was greatly encreased; which he observing, was desired by his A­postles to speak to them to depart, and to provide for themselves: Whereupon he said to Philip, Dost thou think it possible to procure Meat for this Multitude in the Wilderness?

[Page 5]6. (Which he said not that he was at a loss what to do, but to prove the Faith of the Man, who was none of the forwardest to believe,) [Ch. 14. v. 9.]

7. Philip not ex­pecting a Miracle, an­swered, All the Stock we have will not buy Bread enough for e­very one of these so much as to taste a lit­tle of.

8, 9. But Andrew presently interposed, saying, That they had five Loaves and two small Fishes; by which he seemed to expect that his Master would do some extra­ordinary thing, but what he knew not, the Provision being so very little.

10. Then Jesus com­manded the Twelve, to dispose the Men in order upon the grass, of which there was [Page 6] great plenty at that time of the year, [see v. 4.] and so they did, (not distrusting the Event) and found the Men to be about five thousand.

11. And when Je­sus had blessed the little Food that was there, by thanking the Great Creator and Preserver of all things; he with his own hands delivered so many Portions of it to the Twelve, and com­manded them to di­vide themselves to administer to the Multi­tude: And the Bread and the Fish were so marvellously encreased as it went through their hands, that every one of that great Company had as much as he desired to eat.

12, 13. And when they acknowledged that they had eaten enough, he bad the Twelve, gather up the Fragments, &c. And every one of them filled his Basket with what was left; so that there were twelve [Page 7] Baskets full of broken Food, which was an evidence of the un­questionableness of the Miracle, and that no juggle had been put upon the Peoples Stomachs, since there re­mained so much to be seen after they had all eaten.

14. And this Mi­racle was so plain, e­very one of them ha­ving his Belly filled with it, that they cal­led to mind [v. 31.] how Moses gave their Fathers Manna in the Wilderness, and foretold that God would raise up a Prophet like unto him out of their Brethren; and now they concluded that this was that Prophet, and the Person that was to deliver them from the Romans, as Moses deli­vered their Forefathers from the Egyptians, &c. since he, as well as Moses, could, in the greatest Extremity supply them with what Provision they should need.

15. And of this they talked so vehe­mently, that at last they resolved to make him King, whether he would or not; [Page 8] which Jesus perceiving, he first sent away his own Disciples, almost forcing them into the Boat that brought them thither, and pro­mised to be with them before they came to the other side, [v. 17. Mark 6. Mat. 14.] And being thus rid of his Disciples, who were pleased with the Resolution of the People, and ready enough to join with them in it, he more easily satisfied and dispersed the Multitude: and so without any Followers he returned to the Mountain to pray by himself.

16. Now is was just about the Even­ing, when the Dis­ciples came down to the Shore.

17. And entred in­to the Boat to go over towards Capernaum; but it grew very dark before Jesus came to them.

18. And the Sea also was tempestuous with a contrary Wind, [Mark 6.48.]

19. Insomuch that their Sails being a hindrance to to them, they laboured hard with their Oars; and yet by the fourth [Page 9] Watch of the Night they had not gained above 25, or 30 Fur­longs; when they saw Jesus walking upon the Sea, as if he were passing by the Ship; and not yet knowing him, they took him for an Apparition, and were afraid, [Mat. 14.26.]

20, 21. But when they knew him, they received him gladly, believing that all things would go well now he was with them: and so it proved: For though they had made so little Progress before, yet now the Ship came presently to the place whither it was bound.

22. Now the Peo­ple whom Jesus had fed in the Desert, were not so perfectly dispersed, but that many of them kept together till the day following, and came to the Shore where the Disciples took Ship the Evening be­fore; and although [Page 10] they knew there was no other Boat there, when the Disciples went to Sea, but that into which they entred, and that Jesus did not go with them.

23. (Tho' there came other Boats from Tiberias after­wards, which these Men found that mor­ning, near the place where the Miracle was wrought:)

24. Yet knowing that the Disciples were gone, and not being able to find Jesus on that side, they be­lieved he was gone after them, tho' they knew not how, [v. 25.] And so they resolved to follow the Disciples in those Boats that were newly come from Tiberias, hoping to find Jesus himself with them at Capernaum or Bethsaida.

25. And when they found him, they desi­red to know by what Miracle he got thi­ther so soon, for they knew he went not o­ver with his Disciples, and no other Boat was on the other side to [Page 11] transport him, but those in which they came and the way by Land, over the Bridge of Ti­berias, was too far about to get thither in so short a time.

26. But Jesus, with­out satisfying their curiosity in this mat­ter, turned the Dis­course to things of greater moment, and answered them in this manner: I certainly know that ye do not follow me for the true end of those Miracles which I work; which is, that ye might be­lieve in me, and obtain everlasting Life; but meerly for that present Benefit, which you hope to receive by them, as you did yester­day, when you did eat, &c.

27. But I had a far­ther end in feeding your Bodies, which now I require you to mind; and that is, to perswade you not to take so much pains for the prolonging of a Life which will shortly end, as for that Vertue and Knowledge which are the Food of Souls, and the means of living happily for ever, when this Life shall be no more. You [Page 12] should follow the Son of Man for such things as these, the Father having shewed him to be the Person who should convey these Blessings to the Souls of Men, and that by those won­derful Works which he hath sent him to do for the relief of their Bodies.

28. These Men were so suddainly dis­gusted with this Spi­ritual Doctrine, that they replied in this manner, We who have the Law of Moses, do already know what Works God requires; And canst thou tell us, what will be more pleasing to him than our keeping of the Law?

29. Jesus answer­ed, God hath sent his Son into the World, to reveal a better Do­ctrine, and to prescribe a better Life than Mo­ses did: And that Work pleasing to God, and necessary to your Salvation, which you must do, is in short this, To believe him whom God hath sent, and to take his Word for your Security, in doing all that he requires.

30. But they were so strangely prejudi­ced against Jesus, up­on his calling them [Page 13] off from the Cares of this World to a Hea­venly Life, and a bet­ter Hope, that the late Miracle for which they had so extolled him, [v. 14.] was now in their Opinion nothing at all: And so they replied to him, as if they had said; If thou pretendest to a higher Doctrine than Moses taught, why dost not thou shew us equal, if not greater Signs and Wonders than he wrought, that we may see them, and believe thee for their sake? What dost thou perform answerable to such a mighty Faith, as thou re­quirest of us?

NOTES.

V. 30. This suddain Turn of theirs was so strange, that Grotius does not allow those that said this to be the same Persons that were fed in the Wilderness the day before. But I can see no reason for his Opinion; for the Evan­gelist plainly seems to continue the Relation, as of the same Persons; and it is no unusual thing for Men either to keep or alter their Perswasions, as they are led by their Preju­dices and Interests. And our Saviour told those that had been fed in the Wilderness, that they followed him for worldly Advantages, and not for Instruction in Spiritual and Hea­venly matters, v. 26. So that finding them­selves [Page 14] disappointed, it was not unlikely that they would fall in their Opinion of him. To which we may add, that one main Design of his following Discourse was to shew, that ex­ternal Evidence was not sufficient to create Faith, without the inward preparation of a sincere and honest Mind: Which was very pertinent to the Case of those Men who were made confident that Jesus was that Prophet, by the late Miracle, till they found that his Doctrine was contrary to their worldly Af­fections. For which reasons I have chose to continue the Discourse in the Paraphrase, as the Text seems to direct, i. e. between Jesus and the same Persons that spake to him, v. 25. rather than to substitute other Speakers, for which there is neither Authority of the Text, nor any need upon the account of avoiding inconvenience.

V. 31. Our Fathers did eat Manna in the Desert; as it is writ­ten, He gave them Bread from Heaven to eat.

V. 32. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily verily I say unto you, Moses gave you not that Bread from Hea­ven; but my Father giveth you the true Bread from Heaven.

V. 33. For the Bread of God is he that cometh down from [Page 16] Heaven, and giveth life unto the World.

V. 34. Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this Bread.

V. 35. And Jesus said unto them, I am the Bread of Life: He that cometh to me, shall never hunger; and he that believeth in me, shall never thirst.

V. 36. But I said unto you, that ye also have seen me, and be­lieve not?

V. 37. All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me; and him that cometh to me, I will in no wise cast out.

V. 38. For I came down from Heaven, not to do my own Will, but the Will of him that sent me.

V. 39. And this is the Father's Will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

V. 40. And this is the Will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

V. 41. The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the Bread which came down from Heaven.

V. 42. And they said, Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose Father and Mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from Heaven?

V. 43. Jesus there­fore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among your selves.

V. 44. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me, draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

V. 45. It is written in the Prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

V. 46. Not that any man hath seen the Fa­ther, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

V. 47. Verily veri­ly I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting Life.

V. 48. I am that Bread of Life.

V. 49. Your Fathers did eat Manna in the Wilderness, and are dead.

V. 50. This is the Bread which cometh down from Heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

V. 51. I am the living Bread, which came down from Hea­ven: If any man Eat of this Bread, he shall live for ever: and the Bread that I will give, is my Flesh, which I will give for the Life of the world.

V. 52. The Jews therefore strove amongst themselves, saying, How can this Man give us his Flesh to eat?

V. 53. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily verily I say unto you, Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no Life in you.

V. 54. Whoso eateth my Flesh, and drinketh my Blood, hath eternal Life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

V. 55. For my Flesh is Meat indeed, and my Blood is Drink in­deed.

V. 56. He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

V. 57. As the liv­ing Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so, he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

V. 58. This is that Bread which came down from Heaven: not as your Fathers did eat Manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this Bread shall live for ever.

V. 59. These things said he in the Syna­gogue, as he taught in Capernaum.

V. 60. Many there­fore of his Disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying, who can bear it?

V. 61. When Jesus knew in himself that his Disciples murmu­red at it, he said un­to them, Doth this of­fend you?

V. 62. What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before?

V. 63. It is the Spi­rit that quickneth, the Flesh profiteth nothing; The words that I speak [Page 52] unto you, they are Spi­rit, and they are Life.

V. 64. But there are some of you that believe not. For Je­sus knew from the be­ginning, who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

V. 65. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

V. 66. From that time many of his Dis­ciples went back, and walked no more with him.

V. 67. Then said Jesus unto the Twelve, Will ye also go away?

V. 68. Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.

V. 69. And we be­lieve, and are sure that thou art that Christ the Son of the living God.

V. 70. Jesus answer­ed them, Have not I chosen you Twelve, and one of you is a Devil?

V. 71. He spake of Judas Iscariot the Son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the Twelve.

31. 'Tis true, that in our need thou ga­vest us Bread to eat, making five Loaves to serve above five thousand of us. But what was this to Mo­ses's feeding our Fathers in the Desert, who were vastly many more, and this Forty years, with Manna also, which was not earthly Food, such as we are yesterday, but Bread from Hea­ven, as we are taught in Psal. 78.25.

[Page 15]32. Now the Re­ply that Jesus made to this, supposed that these Men wanted not evidence of his com­ing from God; and that they ought not to compare the Man­na which their Fa­thers ate, with the Bread that he had given them the day before, but rather with that inestimable Blessing which God had now be­stowed upon them, in giving his own Son for the Life of the World: And in this he pur­sued his constant Design, of taking off their Affections from Worldly, and directing them to Heavenly Things. For he answered them to this effect: Whereas you magnifie. Moses for giving your Fathers Bread from Heaven, I tell you, it came not from that Heaven which is the place of Immortality, but only from that Region of the Air; which, though it be also called Heaven, shall at last perish with the Earth. But now God offereth un­to you, that which, in the most excellent sense, is Heavenly Bread, and which indeed comes from the place where his Majesty dwel­leth.

33. Whereas also you extol Moses for preserving the Lives [Page 16] of your Fathers in the Wilderness, so long as he did: you may con­sider it was but a short Life at longest, which that Bread served to sustain. But he whom God hath now sent from Heaven, is indeed, and desires therefore to be called the True Bread, because he can preserve you to Eter­nal Life. And Lastly, the Bread which Mo­ses gave your Fathers, did indeed serve a great many; yet they were but a very few in com­parison, for that which I speak of, is suffici­ent to give Eternal Life to the whole World.

34. They replied hereupon; We desire no other, Bread than this which thou so highly magnifiest, give us but such Bread always as this, and without all question we shall believe thee.

V. 34. They are still the same Persons that speak, for there is yet no reason to suppose the contrary. And by this saying, it seems they understood Jesus as if he had spoken to them of Bread from Heaven, in the literal and gross sence, and by giving that to 'em, from day to day, had promised to make them live for ever: So that from his last Words they seemed to conceive some better hope of him again, and that he would go on to fill their Bellies every day. Therefore they spake [Page 17] to him now with more respect. So hard it was even for Jesus to bring them to any understanding, or sence of things that con­cerned their Minds, though he would lead them thereunto, by allusion to things grate­ful to their Senses. And this indeed was the general Temper of the Jews in our Saviour's days, who were also in this respect rather worse than their Fore-fathers. It was just such another Answer that the Samaritan Wo­man made to a like Speech of our Lord, as you may see Ch. 4. 5, 13, 14, 15.

35. Jesus answer­ed, If you understand me aright, you have your Wish. I do not now discourse of those Signs which you de­sire to see, before you believe, (for you have already had Signs in abundance) but of the far greater Benefits which you will gain by believing in me, than your Fathers had from Moses. I tell you therefore, that I am the Bread of Everlasting Life; and he that be­lieveth in me, and submitteth to my Do­ctrine, hath the Bread and Water of Life, and shall hunger and thirst no more; for he shall need no other means of obtaining Ever­lasting Life, than to become my Disciple.

[Page 18]36. Do not think that I take that for granted which I ought to prove, for you have already seen enough to convince you that I speak the Truth. But as I told you before, (ver. 26.) Signs and Mi­racles will not work true Faith in you, so long as you follow me for Temporal Benefits, and have not learned to prefer Spiritual good Things, and everlasting Life, above Meat and Drink, and all the Enjoyments of this World whatsoever.

V. 36. These Persons, of whom our Lord said that they believed not, were those very Men, who the day before having seen the Mi­racle which he did, said, This is of a truth that Prophet that should come into the World: Whereby it should seem that then they believ­ed, but that their Minds were now changed, tho' upon no other reason, than that they now perceived his great Design was, to feed their Minds with good Doctrine, and not to pam­per their Bodies. Which is a plain Instance, how great an hindrance worldly-mindedness is to True Faith, since in this Case, the same Evidence which convinced these Men, while they took our Saviour to be a Benefactor to their Bodies, had lost all its force with them, when they once perceived that his great Busi­ness was, to save their Souls. Some also of [Page 19] our Lord's Disciples were of this Disposition; and it had the same effect upon them, as you may see v. 64.

37. So that the reason why you be­lieve me not, is be­cause you are not pre­pared by a good and honest Heart to re­ceive the Truth. And now I tell you, that the Father, who would have all to be saved, does not expect that I should give a good ac­count of any other Persons, but such as are of a towardly and teachable Disposition. These he hath committed to my special care; and they will learn of me, and not one of them shall want means requisite for his Conviction and Instruction. But though I came to save the World, (v. 51.) I am not bound to bring those to Faith and to Salvation, that obsti­nately set themselves against all that Evidence which is sufficient for honest Minds.

V. 37. It seems very reasonable to inter­pret these Phrases of the Fathers, giving some to Christ, and drawing them, by what our Lord said, v. 26. that these Men followed him, because they did eat of the Loaves; i. e. not from a sincere desire of learning the Truth, and attaining Eternal Life, but for worldly Ends: For on the one side, the Lusts of these [Page 20] Men were the cause of their Unbelief; on the other side, our Saviour says, that all who are given and drawn by the Father, would believe and become his Disciples, and none else: Therefore the Father gives those only to Christ, who are prepared by an honest Heart, and willingness to learn. The Phrase is an Allusion to what is often seen amongst us, i. e. to a Man's committing the Care of educating a hopeful and promising Child, to a wise and skilful Master, with the expectation of having a good account of him at last. Not but that these Expressions also imply the preparations of the Heart to be from the Lord: Neither does this hinder, but that our Lord must be un­derstood to have done what was fit to prepare those whom he found so averse as these Men were. [See Notes on v. 45.] But the mean­ing is, that if Men obstinately persisted in their sensual and worldly Prejudices against the Truth, God hath provided no Remedy for such Men. And therefore, as St. Chry­sostome shews, we must not argue in this man­ner. If every one whom the Father draweth, or giveth, cometh to Christ, and none else, then those whom the Father giveth not, are dischar­ged of all Fault, and cannot justly be accused. For, says he, these are vain words and meer pretences; since the free Choice of our own Wills must go to the effecting of this Matter: For to be taught, and to believe, depends much upon our own chusing.

[Page 21]38. For in this matter, as well as in all others, I do what is as much the Fathers Will, as my own. And I came from Heaven to do it, and cannot depart from it. Ob­serve therefore what I say.

39. It was his plea­sure to commit to my care all Persons of ho­nest and well-disposed Minds, that not one of them should be lost, but that I should do all things which would bring them to Faith and Repentance, and should take care of their Salvation from the First to the Last, even till I shall raise them from the Dead at the last Day.

V. 39. Although the Wicked shall be raised up at the last day, by the Power of Jesus, as well as the Just, yet when the Resurrection is simply mentioned, it is commonly understood of the Resurrection to eternal Life, i. e. the Resurrection of the Just. And by speaking of this Resurrection at the last Day, our Lord did now put them out of doubt, that he meant not to pamper their Bodies, and to take care for their Pleasures in this Life; but that he spake to them of a better Life after this, and the means of attaining it.

[Page 22]40. For it was his Decree also, that every one who seeing the Works that I do, (v. 36.) and attentive­ly considering the Evidence, whereby it appears that I came from God, does there­upon believe and follow my Doctrine; that he, I say, should have everlasting Life, and that I should for that end raise him up at the last Day. Now as my Father doth not expect that I should save any but those that believe and obey the Gospel; so neither doth he ex­pect that I should bring any to Faith, but those that are of teachable Dispositions. But if Men obstinately set themselves to oppose all means of Conviction and Reformation, it was no part of the Trust committed to me by the Father, to reclaim them notwithstanding their incorrigibleness.

V. 40. To see Jesus, signifies the same that it does v. 36. i. e. seeing his Miracles, and all other Testimones of a Divine Authority that were discernable in him: Only [...] seems to note an attentive consideration of them, which is proper to ingenuous and honest Men, and will certainly produce Faith. Where­as [...], v. 36. may signifie that careless and superficial sight of his Works, proper to [Page 23] those Men in whom Prejudice so prevailed, that they saw, and yet believed not. Now that our Saviour does here, and elsewhere, repeat his Doctrine concerning that inward Work of God, viz. an honest and godly Dis­position, is an Argument that he laid great stress upon it; and that indeed this was the main thing they were to take pains with them­selves about. For the outward Evidence was given them whether they would or not; but the inward Preparation, without which the outward Evidence would do them no good at all, must in some part be their own Work as well as God's; which was plain, from Christ's speaking to them so much about it as he did. For if it was not their own fault that they were not inwardly prepared; and if it was impossible for them to do any thing conside­rable towards it, his Reproof had seemed something unreasonable and unjust; and if they had so understood it, they had not been wanting to tell him so.

41. But the Peo­ple were by no means pleased with what Je­sus said; for they ex­pected he would give them Bread from Hea­ven, as Moses had done for their Fathers, (v. 34.) but now they plainly perceived, that by the Bread of Life coming down from Heaven, [Page 24] which he spake of, he meant Himself and his Doctrine, (v. 35.) and that instead of feeding their Bodies, he promised them everlasting Life; which they were not greatly concerned about. And upon this disappointment, they again set themselves to disparage him all they could.

42. And said one to another, Why does this Man, whom we know to be the Son of Joseph and Mary, pretend such high things of himself? How could he come from Heaven, who was born into this World as other Men are, and in as mean Circumstan­ces as the most.

43. To these Cavils Jesus answered, Do not lose time, by rai­sing Difficulties a­bout my Person and Doctrine: There is another Work that lies upon your Hands, which is at present more seasonable and necessary for you, than to strain for Objections against what I say, and that is, to mend your Tempers; to shake off your worldly Spirits; to make eternal Life your End, and sincerely to desire the Knowledge of that Way which leads to it.

[Page 25]44. For if you are not thus qualified, all my Sayings and Works will never convince you of the Truth: For the Father did not send me into the World with any other Charge, than that I should do what is abundantly sufficient to save Men of plain Honesty and sincere Inten­tion; which Dispositions therefore you should endeavour after; and if by the Grace of God you obtain them, then you will readily un­derstand and embrace the Truth. But till then you do but entangle your selves to no purpose: And therefore I advise you to leave off objecting and disputing, till you have learnt plain Duties, and to become honest Men. And I tell you again, I will take care that no such Persons shall want abundant means of Con­viction and Salvation, but they shall be my peculiar Charge, from the time that they are so disposed, till I shall raise them up at the last Day.

V. 44. St. Chrysostom observes, that upon this saying the Manichees confidently affirmed, that nothing was in our own Power: For, said they, If a man comes to him, what needs he to be drawn? But, says he, this does not take away all power over our own Actions, but rather shews that we stand in need of God's help; and that not every negligent Person, but he that takes [Page 26] great pains with himself, will come to Christ. The true sence of this Verse is more largely expressed in the Paraphrase, and in Notes upon V. 37.

45. And these Ad­monitions I give you, are warranted by the Prophets, who have foretold, that when the Kingdom of Christ shall begin to be e­stablished upon the Earth, Men shall not want any reasonable means of Conviction for the saving of their Souls, because God will then vouchsafe to appear more remarka­bly to instruct Men, than ever he did since the World began: And therefore if any Man re­mains in Unbelief, or refuses to obey, it can­not be for want of means to make him wise unto Salvation, but for want of an humble and an honest Mind, and a sincere Intention, without which God's speaking to Men, by his own Son, will have no success upon them, but will leave them as bad as they were be­fore. But because God is a Master in whom nothing can be wanting to instruct; every one that desireth to know the Truth, and to be saved, will submit to the Doctrine of his Son, and become his Disciple.

V. 45. The 54th Chapter of Isaiah, con­taineth a Description of God's gracious Care and Providence over his Church; one Instance whereof, v. 33. is this; And all thy Children shall be taught of God. Which must needs imply these two things: 1. That God would reveal that Truth which the Church should profess; and this was eminently done by the Son of God himself coming down from Hea­ven to make it known, and by the Holy Ghost inspiring the Apostles afterward. 2. That God would abundantly satisfie Men by Di­vine Testimonies, that he had sent his Son into the World for that purpose. For these Reasons, all that believe in Christ, are taught of God. Now the force of our Saviour's Argument from this Prediction, lies in this: If God hath promised to reveal to Men the knowledge of saving Truth, and to convince them that he doth reveal it; then no Man to whom this Revelation is made, shall want suf­ficient means of Instruction and Conviction: and consequently, every Man that is not un­der the power of worldly Lusts and Interests, will be effectually wrought upon by them. And this freedom from such Prejudices our Lord here calls hearing and learning of the Father, which is the same with being given or drawn to Christ, (the Phrase used before;) and this intimates, that it is something we do towards the preparing our selves; and that [Page 28] we may also hinder it: For Hearing and Learn­ing are voluntary Actions. A Man may stop his Ears against Instruction, and alienate his Mind from what is suggested to him: There­fore something Men may do to attain that ho­nest Heart which the Divine Inspiration work­eth: They may also quench this Work of the Holy Spirit. The meaning of the whole is, as if our Lord had said, You must have God for your Master, before you can be the Disci­ples of the Son: You must be prepared by those qualities, which there is no need of a new Revelation to teach you, before you are fit to receive that Doctrine which the Son brings. And now it is plain, that these very Speeches and Reasonings of our Saviour, ten­ded to prepare them for Conviction and Faith: For by shewing them the great need of a teach­able Spirit in hearing and learning of God, and what Blessings the want of this Dispositi­on would bereave them of, and by repeating and inculcating upon them, that great Con­cernment of the Resurrection at the last Day; he did what was most proper in it self to dis­pose them to a better Mind, to weaken their Prejudices, and to make them attend to those Testimonies of his coming from God, which they had already seen, instead of desiring more Signs, which in the temper they were in at present, would have done them no good if they had been granted.

[Page 29]46. The meaning of which Scriptures is not, that any Man shall be immediately taught by the Father: For the Will of the Fa­ther is not thus to be manifested to any of you, it being the Priviledge of the only be­gotten Son, intimately to know his Mind, without the mediation of any other Person, [Ch. 1. v. 18.]

47. Take notice therefore of what I say, The Will of my Father, which by me he makes known to you, is this, that he who receiveth my Do­ctrine, firmly believing it, and submitting his Heart and Soul to it, shall as surely obtain Everlasting Life, as if he were possess'd of it already.

V. 47. This Saying of our Saviour ex­plains all that he says about the necessity of eating, &c. shewing clearly, that he meant the believing of his Doctrine, and being con­formed to it in Heart and Life. For if he that believeth shall obtain everlasting Life, then he eateth Christ, according to his mean­ing in this Chapter, that believeth in him.

[Page 30]48. And therefore, as I told you before, you are to look upon me as the True Bread of Life, whereof I have been speaking to you; for I came down from Heaven to guide you to everlasting Life.

V. 48. Here our Lord calleth himself Bread again, thereby implying what he afterwards expressed, that he is to be eaten. Now most certainly we are in such a sence to eat Christ, as that is wherein he is Bread. But no Man will say, that Jesus was, or can be properly Bread; therefore it is not eating him literally and properly that can be here meant, but on­ly believing on him, which is by the same Fi­gure called eating, whereby he called himself Bread.

49. Which should make you concerned to attend my Instru­ctions, instead of de­siring such Bread as Moses gave your Fathers in the Wilderness, which served only to sustain a short Life in this World, for they are long since dead that ate it, [v. 31, 34.]

50. But I bring you Food from Hea­ven, which whosoever eateth, it shall pre­serve [Page 31] him to everlasting Life: For I bring you a Doctrine, the Belief and Obedience whereof will avail to your Salvation; and I who bring it, am come with the highest Au­thority to require your Faith, and with Di­vine Testimonies of my Authority to justifie your Faith; so that nothing is wanting to secure your Salvation, but forwardness on your own parts to eat this Heavenly Food that I invite you to feast upon, now that it is brought down to you from Heaven, and is as near you, as that Bread wherewith I fed you yesterday in the Wilderness. Nothing is wanting, I say, but that you would think who it is that God hath sent to you, and of how great concern to your Souls that Message is which I bring you from Heaven, and how a­bundantly God hath testified that I am come from him to give you everlasting Life: and that considering these things, you would do like reasonable Men, believe what I say, and receive my Doctrine into your very Hearts and Souls, and give thanks to God for his un­speakable Gift.

V. 50. This is the first place where our Sa­viour, in pursuance of that Figure of calling himself Bread, expresseth believing in him, [v. 35, 47.] by eating him. In the 35th ver. where he also calls himself the Bread of Life, he did not pursue the Figure throughout, by saying, he that eateth me, but he that cometh to [Page 32] me, i. e. who is my Disciple, shall never hun­ger; and, he that believeth on me, (not he that drinketh me) shall never thirst: Which makes it very plain, that by eating here we are to un­derstand believing; not a corporeal, but a spiritual Action. And because it does not yet appear that he limits the Object of Be­lieving, we are therefore to understand him as speaking of the necessity of receiving his whole Doctrine, and submitting to it in Heart and Life; which whosoever does, shall not die, but live eternally.

51. And when I tell you, that I am the living Bread which came down from Hea­ven, and which he that eateth of, shall live for ever; as you are to understand this with respect to all that Do­ctrine which I deliver, so especially with re­spect to that part of it, that I am come in­to the World, to lay down my Life for the Salvation of Mankind. And as I came for this end, so I will give my Body to the Death, for the Life of the World; which is an infinitely greater Benefit, than either your Fathers received from Moses, when he [Page 33] gave them Manna to eat; or than you received from me yesterday, when you were filled with that Provision I made for your Bodies.

V. 51. Without doing great Violence to our Saviour's Words in this place, they can­not be so understood, as if he promised to turn Bread into his Flesh, for the Life of the World; as they must suppose, who will ground the Roman Doctrine of Transubstan­tiation upon this place. For if some such Change were here to be understood, it must be quite contrary, viz. a Change of his Flesh into Bread; inasmuch as he calls himself the living Bread, and says, That the Bread which he would give was his Flesh, that he would give for the Life of the World. If therefore it be insisted upon, that the Words are to be pro­perly understood; and that therefore a change must be supposed, of one Substance into an­other, it must not be of Bread into the sub­stance of Christ's Flesh, but of Christ's Flesh into the substance of Bread; which Interpre­tation I think no body has ever yet been so unreasonable as to contend for. What account therefore is to be given of these Words, but this, That our Saviour having hitherto pur­sued a Figurative way of speaking, upon the occasion so often mentioned, went on in the same way of expression, to lay before them that principal Doctrine of the Gospel, that Christ was to die for the Salvation of Man­kind: [Page 34] which is the plain sence of giving his Flesh to be bread for us: For he gave his Flesh for the Life of the World, when he gave him­self to the Death for us all: And his Flesh so given, is Bread to us, because his Death is the means of our living for ever.

And whereas Christ mentioned the giving of his Flesh for the Life of the World, as a future thing; and likewise the giving of his Flesh to be Bread; it does not follow, that be­cause the former was to be performed on the Cross only, therefore the latter was to be per­formed only in the Eucharist. This, I say, does not follow, unless it could be proved that he promised, in those Words, to give us his natural Flesh to be eaten properly in the Eu­charist; which I have shewn is impossible to be proved from hence. Still therefore we are to understand, not a corporal, but a spiritual eating: And whereas our Saviour said, The Bread which I will give is my Flesh, which I will give for the Life of the World; the meaning is this, that his Flesh shall be given for the Life of the World, once for all; but the Spiritual Food or Nourishment, which his Flesh so given, should afford, would be given ever­more, not only in the Eucharist, but in the whole ministration of the Gospel; which holds forth the Death of Christ to be believ­ed, and offers the blessed Fruits and Advan­tages thereof to all that are disposed to par­take of them.

It is also objected against this Interpretati­on, That if the Doctrine of our Lord's Passi­on, and the believing of it, be here meant, no reason can be given, why our Saviour should speak in the Future Tense, The Bread which I will give is my Flesh: Since this Spiritual Food was no less given before the Incarnation and Passion of Christ, than after­ward; for the Patriarchs lived and were nou­rished by Faith. And therefore if spiritual eating be only intended, Christ seemed to pro­mise a new thing, which yet he had given of old: So that his Promise is to be understood, of giving his natural Flesh to be eaten, which was never done before the Eucharist. This is the Objection; and a very strange one it must needs be to him that shall consider, 1. That our Saviour speaketh in the Future Tense to the Woman of Samaria, where yet the Ex­pression is acknowledged to be Figurative, and the meaning of it to be believing: Who­soever drinketh of the Water that I shall give him, shall never thirst; but the Water that I shall give him, [ [...]] shall be in him a Well, &c. Now would not this be rare arguing, Our Lord says, I will give Water: Therefore he promised something that he had never giv­en before; therefore spiritual drinking, or be­lieving, is not meant, because the Patriarchs believed of old, therefore the Promise is to be taken literally and properly? And yet this is that very Argument to prove the literal sence [Page 36] in this Verse. But then, 2. Our Lord speaks of the necessity of present eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood, in the 53d and 54th Verses. And therefore the Argument from the Future Tense, to prove that he spake pro­perly of the Eucharist, is insufficient. 3. Sup­posing that all had been future, and that some­thing was promised more than had been for­merly given, yet it follows not that Christ spake properly of the Eucharist, much less of giving his Flesh properly to be eaten there. For although the Fathers believed of old, yet the Doctrine of the Passion was never clearly understood by the Faithful before our Saviour's Time; no, nor as yet by his own Disciples. Our Saviour did now and then mention it; and here he gave them some Intimations, of it, which they understood not then so well as they did afterwards. [See Note on V. 53.] Himself said to them, Many Prophets and righteous Men have desired to see those things that ye have seen, and have not seen them; and to hear those things that ye hear, and have not heard them, Matth. 13.17. And yet his Disciples hitherto had attained to a very im­perfect knowledge of Christianity, to what they had afterwards. Although therefore the good Men of old were justified by Faith, and saw the Promises afar off, and had some gene­ral Intimations of the Gospel; yet whether the particular Objects of our Faith were not a [Page 37] new thing worthy of Christ's Promise, I leave indifferent Men to judge.

Lastly, It has been said, That the Natural Flesh of Christ was to be given, or offered up­on the Cross substantially or properly for the Life of the World, and therefore the same Flesh was to be given with the same Propriety, to be Bread for us, and to be eaten by us, viz. in the Eucharist. To which I answer, 1. as before, That this arguing will conclude more than they desire who urge it. For if the for­mer Clause is to be understood in the same strictness and propriety of words with the latter Clause, then the Flesh of Christ was to become Bread properly. For he said, The Bread which I will give, is my Flesh. But, 2. It is much more reasonable to understand the giving of his Flesh to be Bread, according to the meaning of this kind of Expressions throughout the whole Discourse: And our Adversaries do acknowledge, that those Pas­sages, I am the Bread of Life; He that eateth of this Bread, shall live for ever; that is, all of this kind from Vers. 32. to this very Clause in Vers. 51. are to be understood of spiritual eating, i. e. of believing. Since therefore our Saviour gave no manner of intimation that he changed his style, there is more reason to in­terpret those words, of giving his Flesh to be Bread, and of eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood, in a sence agreeable to that, wherein eating Him is to be understood all along be­fore, [Page 38] than to understand them properly, that is to say, of bodily eating; although it is the Flesh of Christ which is given to be eaten, that Flesh which was substantially and proper­ly given for the Life of the World.

52. Upon this the Jews disputed against him afresh, the great­er part of them ta­king his last words in a gross sence, as if he had promised to give them his Flesh to eat with their Teeth, and to swallow it down their Throats, as their Forefathers had eaten Manna, and as they had eaten in the Wilder­ness the day before. And upon this advan­tage which they thought they had against him, they exclaimed as if he had spoken ab­surdly and inhumanly, and taught his Disci­ples to devour Man's Flesh.

53. But notwith­standing this perverse Construction of his words, Jesus did not think fit to deliver his meaning in such pro­per Expressions as might avoid all the Cavils of these unreasonable Men, but defer­ring for a while a further Explication of him­self, he vehemently repeated his Doctrine, un­der such Expressions and figurative Speeches, [Page 39] as they had hitherto given him just occasion to use; only to signifie that he was to die a violent and bloody Death for the Salvation of Mankind: To that Expression of eating his Flesh, he added another, of drinking his Blood; affirming, that except they did this, they must not expect Eternal Life; as if he had said, ‘Except ye believe the Merit of that Sacrifice which I shall offer for the Sins of the World, and own me for your Saviour, in dying a painful and ignominious Death for your sakes, and learn Charity, and Pa­tience, and Humility, and Resignation to the Will of God, by my Sufferings, ye have not Spiritual, nor shall have Eternal Life.’

V. 53. If it be asked, Why our Saviour still persisted in a figurative and allusive way of Expression, although he saw their gross, and perhaps wilful mistake of his former words? [v. 52.] It may be answered, That he knew good reason for it, though the Reason be not left upon Record. However, a probable Con­jecture ought to suffice in such a Case as this, where the Objection is, That no account can be given of it. I answer therefore, That our Lord did not think fit to foretel the ignomini­ous Death he was to suffer upon the Cross, so publickly as he foretold his Resurrection. Sometimes he told his Disciples that he was to suffer, and be killed, [Matth. 16.] but to others he intimated it obscurely, with intenti­on [Page 40] that they might afterwards remember what he said, rather than that they should understand it presently. But neither to the Multitude, nor to his Disciples, did he clearly signifie the Reasons and Ends of his Passion; this seeming to be one of those things that they could not bear now, but which the Com­forter should reveal to them afterward. It may therefore be said, That our Lord did not deliver the Doctrine concerning the Death he was to suffer, and the blessed Fruits thereof to all Believers, in such-like plain words and expressions, as I have endeavoured to use in the Paraphrase, because he used to conceal the former from the People, and reserve the clear manifestation of the latter, till after his Re­surrection and Ascension, when these Sayings would be brought to remembrance, and better understood than they were at first. But one may ask, Why did he not at least tell these Men, that these were still but Expressions of spiritual things, by way of allusion to things sensible? To which I answer, That he did thus explain himself to his Disciples presently after, and that upon occasion of this gross Mistake, [see V. 62, 63.] and nothing appears to the contrary, but that this Explication was made in the Synagogue, in the Hearing of all. But whether it was so or not, 'tis sufficient for us that he explained himself as he did to the Dis­ciples.

In the mean time, Cardinal Cajetan's Argu­ment, that this place cannot be understood of the Eucharist, because then it would infer a necessity of the Peoples receiving the Cup, is an Argument ad Homines, plain and strong. Neither is it to be avoided, by pretending that Christ does not speak of the Species ei­ther of Bread or Wine, but of the Things con­tained under them; and therefore that be­cause whole Christ is contained under one kind, the Condition of Eternal Life is fulfilled, by receiving him under either kind: For they that receive him under the Species of a Wafer, or a morsel of Bread only, which is to be eaten, cannot with any Modesty be said to drink his Blood; which is yet made as neces­sary as eating his Flesh. We grant, that eating and drinking being taken as figurative Ex­pressions, do signifie the same thing, viz. be­lieving; and we say, that believing, when 'tis expressed by eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood, refers to that particular Object of Faith, the Death of Christ, signified by the separate mention of his Body and Blood. But eating and drinking being taken properly, do not signify the same thing. If therefore our Saviour is to be understood properly, of re­ceiving him in the Eucharist by eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood: The words are plain, beyond all dispute, that he is to be re­ceived by drinking his Blood there, as well as by eating his Flesh: Which since the Church [Page 42] of Rome denies to the Laity, the Cardinal had good reason not to understand these words of the Eucharist, being concerned, as he was, to make the best of all those Usages which he found in his Church. And yet I doubt this great Man hath not quite delivered that Church from all the Reproof this very Text has for their half Communion. For although these words are not to be understood properly of the Eucharist; yet, I think, what Grotius says, cannot be reasonably denied, viz. that here is a Tacit Allusion to the Eucharist. And if that be true, the Text even thus taken, will con­demn their witholding the Cup from the Laity. For the Allusion must consist in this, that, as according to the Institution of the Eucharist, the Holy Bread and Cup were se­parately taken to shew forth the violent Death of Christ; so in these words of eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood, the believing of his meritorious Death, and following the Ex­ample of his Patience, &c. is expressed by the separate mention of his Flesh and Blood, and therefore of eating the one, and drinking the other. Which allusion is so apt, that I should not wonder, if it inclines those that enquire no further, to believe that our Saviour here speaks of the Eucharist. But since the sepa­rate taking of the Holy Bread and the Holy Cup in the Eucharist on the one side, and the separate mention of his Flesh and Blood on the other, is that in which the Allusion consists, [Page 43] it is utterly destroyed by the pretended Con­comitance, i. e. by giving the Body and Blood, not as separated, but as united; or by giving the Body and Blood to be eaten; not the Flesh to be eaten, and the Blood to be drunk. In short, as our Saviour did Sacramentally repre­sent his Death, by taking the Holy Bread, and the Holy Cup, separately, and giving them separately; so he did in Words, alluding to that Sacrament, represent the same Death, i. e. by the distinct mention of his Flesh and Blood; and he represented also the necessity of Faith in his Death, under the distinct Expressi­ons of eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood. And therefore they who in the Eu­charist pretend to give both Kinds in one, de­stroy the reason why these words allude to the Eucharist. But if they say, that our Saviour here speaks properly of the Eucharist, nothing can be more evident, than that they openly condemn themselves, in denying that to the People, which, as they say, he required in pro­per and express Terms; and that is, the drink­ing of his Blood.

And in truth, they destroy the significancy of the Sacrament, which is no otherwise a re­presentation of our Lord's Death, than as it represents the separation of his Flesh and Blood. And then I desire them to tell me, how they can be said to commemorate the Death of Christ, by receiving a Sacrament that shews forth the separation of his Body and Blood, [Page 44] who do not receive them separated, but uni­ted? St. Paul concluding the End of the Sacra­ment from the Institution of it, said, As often as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come: The Rea­son whereof is exceeding plain, viz. Because the separation of the Blood from the Body is shewn, by the distinct taking of the Bread and the Cup, to eat the one, and drink the other. But this Reason is so confounded by the Half-Communion, and the Doctrine of Concomitance, that the Institution is not only contradicted, but, I fear, the Sacrament is denied to them that receive one Kind only; and that they have not so much as an Half-Communion, inas­much as they do not receive a Sacrament that shews the Death of Christ.

54. ‘But he that is so far from rejecting me, and being of­fended at me, because of that painful Death which I am to suf­fer, that he doth, on the other hand, receive all that Divine Instruction which it does af­ford, and turns it into spiritual Nourish­ment, by learning the high displeasure of God against Sin, and his infinite Love to Man­kind; and the Vanity of this World, and the worth of his own Soul, and the necessity of Repentance, and of a Godly Life; my [Page 45] Death shall be to him a means of that Eter­nal Life, to which I shall raise him at the last day; and this as certainly, as if he were now in actual possession of it.’

V. 54. Because our Lord continues in his Speech, to make a separate mention of his Flesh and Blood; it follows, that he still speaks of his Death, and the particular Doctrine con­cerning his Death, which would be entertained with the greatest difficulty, viz. that he was a Sacrifice for the Sins of the World; and there­fore a Saviour, because crucified, &c. The live­ly belief whereof is, that which our Lord means by eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood; and not eating and drinking the Sa­crament of his Body and Blood, which a Man may do to his Condemnation. And there­fore, although St. Austin sometimes under­stood these words of the Eucharist, yet he did not so understand them, as if every one who partakes of the Eucharist, does also Eat the Flesh, and Drink the Blood of Christ; for he manifestly denied that the Wicked were par­takers of the very Body of Christ, though they partook of the Sacrament of his Body: And yet 'tis impossible but they must do the one as well as the other, if it be true, that the proper Substance of the Body of Christ is in the Sacrament, as the Church of Rome pre­tends. And by consequence, if this corporal eating be intended, it seems clearly to follow, [Page 46] that no Man who partakes of the Eucharist can be damned; which is certainly very false, and therefore corporal eating cannot be meant here, but only spiritual eating. And so St. Austin understood it, although he applied these Words sometimes to the Eucharist, in­asmuch as he denied that the Wicked do eat the Flesh, and drink the Blood of Christ, al­though with their Mouths they take the Sa­crament of his Body and Blood. But because this spiritual eating, which is necessary to Sal­vation, is by no means confined to the parti­cipation of the Eucharist; and because many do not partake spiritually in the Body and Blood of Christ, that yet do partake of the Sacrament, I cannot understand why our Sa­viour should speak here directly and properly of the Eucharist; and therefore I adhere to the sence of those Fathers who interpret this place, and those that follow, of spiritual Acti­ons only.

55. ‘So that the Doctrine concerning my Sufferings and Death, which will give the greatest of­fence to Unbelievers, is the most excellent Meat and Drink, because it is the Food of Souls, when 'tis received with a firm and effi­cacious Faith; and will secure also the Re­surrection of the Body to everlasting Life.’

V. 55. He continues to distinguish the Flesh from the Blood, and therefore still speaks of his Passion, giving some kind of preeminence to Faith in his Death, above the belief of other particular Doctrines, though that would be admitted with greatest difficulty.

56. ‘And there­fore he that believ­eth my Death to be a Sacrifice for the Sins of the World, and does thereby learn that Duty which it teacheth, and re­ceive that Comfort which it affordeth, he will love me, and devote himself entirely to my Service, because I have thus humbled my self; though that be the reason for which such as you will be violently prejudi­ced against me. And on the other side, he shall be peculiarly beloved and cared for by me: For though in love to Mankind I am to be made an Offering for Sin, yet 'tis a particular care I shall express towards those, who have a true sense of my Sufferings in their behalf, who make a right use of them, and return that thankfulness and obedience which their Faith requires, [1 Tim. 4.10.]’

V. 56. His pursuance of the same Expression, still shews that he speaks of the same thing, [Page 48] viz. believing his death to be a Sacrifice, &c. And here he intimates, that his Sufferings, which would be a Stumbling block to Unbe­lievers, would be an effectual Engagement to all good Men to love him; and that their fervent Love, and humble Gratitude, would be rewarded with his especial Love. For as God's dwelling in Men, signifies his gracious Presence amongst them, and his delight in doing them good; so their dwelling in him, signifies their Love to him, and constant attendance upon the doing of his Will, and the delight they have in knowing themselves to be always in his Presence.

57. ‘And one re­markable Expression (and that of weight enough to make you consider what I say) of my peculiar love to every such Belie­ver, is what I have told you already; and I do earnestly repeat it again: As sure as the Father who sent me will raise me from the Dead, so surely will I raise up every one to everlasting Life, that believeth my Doctrine, and liveth by his Faith.’

V. 57. Here our Lord seems to leave the special consideration of his Sufferings and Death, and to speak now of his whole Do­ctrine, [Page 49] as he had done before; for as by eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood, we are to un­derstand believing the merit and instruction of his Death, &c. so by eating Him, we are taught before [V. 35, 47, 50.] to understand believing him in general, that is, believing all his Doctrine.

58. ‘Mark there­fore what I say to you [V. 33, 35.] at first, That I am that true Bread from Hea­ven, wherewith the Manna that your Fathers ate, and the Bread which you ate yesterday, are not to be compared; for they were good for nothing but to preserve a mortal Life for a short time; whereas he that feedeth upon the Word and Doctrine which God hath sent you from Heaven, shall be raised from the Dead, to ascend thi­ther, and to live there for ever.’

V. 58. Here he concludes all, with return­ing to the same thing, and using the very Expressions that he began withal, [V. 32, 35.50.] than which we need not a clearer proof, that he all along spake in the same style, and in those Expressions of eating and drinking, perpetually alluded to the Manna and the [Page 50] Loaves in the Wilderness; which gave occa­sion to all this Discourse.

59. These things he said publickly in the Synagogue at Ca­pernaum, where the People, whom he had fed in the Wilderness, found him, [V. 24, 25.] and gave him the occasion of discoursing in this manner, by following him for the Loaves, [V. 26.] and (when they found them­selves disappointed) by setting the Manna which Moses gave their Fathers, against the feeding so many thousands the day before, [V. 31.] And the great end of his Discourse upon this occasion, was to draw their Minds from world­ly to heavenly Things, and to make them more desirous of the Spiritual and Heavenly Benefits of his Miracles, than of the bodily relief which they had found by them.

60. But because he expressed his Mind in this figurative way, and was by many un­derstood, as if he had commended to them the eating of his Flesh, and drinking of his Blood, in the literal sence; therefore many, even of those that had for some time followed him, talked a­mongst themselves, as if these Sayings of their Master, must needs be offensive to the Ears [Page 51] of all Persons that had a sence of Humanity; and as for themselves, that they knew not what to make of them.

61. Neither did they desire him to ex­plain himself further; but he, by his Divine Spirit, knowing what they muttered a­mongst themselves, applied himself to them in particular, and upbraided them in this manner for taking so unreasonable an offence against him.

62. ‘When you shall see me ascend up to Heaven, it will not seem strange that I came down from thence; and because even then it will re­main necessary that you should eat my Flesh, and drink my Blood; you may be sure, I do not mean, that gross feeding upon my Flesh, and drinking my Blood, in which you un­derstand what I have said; for my Body will then be too far removed from the Conversa­tion of mortal Men, to be capable of being so used.’

63. ‘No; when I speak to you of the Conditions of ob­taining everlasting [Page 52] Life, though I have now expressed them, by eating my Flesh, and drinking my Blood; yet you had reason to understand me of spiritual Actions, which do indeed tend to the bettering of the inward Man. For they are such things only that feed the Soul, and can preserve it to Eternal Life: But to this purpose the flesh profiteth nothing; No, not my own Flesh, if you should eat it as grosly as you understand my Sayings: For even this would be but bodily Nourishment, but would have no Influence upon the Mind. But if you would know what those things are that better the Soul, (and it is my Business to call you off from that sollicitous Care you take of your mor­tal Bodies, to mind your Souls, and to pro­vide for a blessed Resurrection:) If, I say, you would know what things are proper for the Improvement of the Mind, they are the Words that I speak unto you; they are those Precepts of a heavenly Life, and those Pro­mises of eternal Life which I have laid be­fore you; that Faith which I require you to have in my Death, and that Example of Do­ctrine, Charity and Humility, which I require you to follow. These are the spiritual means of renewing your Minds, and therefore Means also of fitting you for Eternal Life.’

V. 61, 62, 63. Our Lord perceiving how grosly the Jews, and some of his own Disci­ples, understood those Expressions, of eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood, did upon this occasion explain his own meaning as fully as he did to Nicodemus in the point of Rege­neration. For Nicodemus having said, How can a Man be born when he is old? Can he en­ter the second time into his Mothers Womb and be born? Jesus answered, Verily verily, I say un­to thee, except a Man be born of Water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. That which is born of the Flesh, is Flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit, is Spirit. Which was as much as to say, The Flesh profi­teth nothing, (as here, V. 63.) ‘And if you were, by a strange Miracle, to be born again the natural way, by this fleshly Birth, you would come again but into a mortal Life; but that fleshly Birth would not avail you for everlasting Life.’ In the very same man­ner our Saviour repeated, in this Chapter, those Sayings which the Jews and some of his own Disciples were offended at; and in the same manner he explained them afterwards. It is the Spirit that quickneth; the Flesh profi­teth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life. Which be­ing compared with the Answer to Nicodemus, now mentioned and explained, by the light that Answer affords, can yield no other mean­ing, [Page 54] than that which I have expressed in the Paraphrase.

As for the 62d V. it might be intended as an Answer to that particular Exception against him, mentioned V. 42. that he was the Son of Joseph, and could not therefore reasona­bly pretend to come down from Heaven: To which if our Lord referred, his words are a proper Answer, viz. that when they should see him ascend into Heaven, they would no longer doubt of the truth of his coming from thence. But I rather think those words refer to that great Offence which some of his own Disciples took against him, that he should speak of their eating of his Flesh, and drinking of his Blood: For they were his Disciples on­ly that saw him ascend. And when they should know that he was in Heaven, they could not, without great Stupidity, think that he would give them his Flesh to eat, and his Blood to drink, in that gross sence wherein they un­derstood him. However, I have put both these Interpretations into the Paraphrase.

64. ‘But no won­der that you wrest my Sayings to so absurd a sence as you do; for there are some amongst you that dislike my Doctrine, and are grown weary of following me, and wait [Page 55] for an opportunity to leave me.’ For as soon as any Man professed himself his Disciple, Je­sus knew how he stood affected towards him. And he did not only know who of the Mul­titude that follow'd him would revolt, but likewise which of his Apostles would betray him. See V. 36.

65. And Jesus ad­ded, ‘Because I knew that there were some such amongst you, therefore I thought fit to tell you before, [V. 37, 39, 44.] that my Doctrine would never be heartily en­tertained, by any but those whom God had prepared for it, by enduing them with a Mind willing to learn, and with a prevailing desire of obtaining God's Favour, and Eter­nal Life.’

66. Upon this close application of his Do­ctrine to the Consci­ences of those insin­cere Disciples of his; they finding them­selves discovered, and that it was to no pur­pose to dissemble, resolved to pretend them­selves his Disciples no longer, and went off from him without more ado.

[Page 56]67. Jesus seeing them turn their Backs upon him, took this occasion both to shew that some of his Disciples were sincere, and that he cared not to be followed by any but those that were willing; and therefore he said to the Twelve, You see I do not compel Men to follow me, but that I let them depart if they will go. Now what say you? will ye still continue my Disciples, or follow the Ex­ample of these Men, and go away?

68. Whereupon Pe­ter (who was still the most forward Speak­er in his Master's Cause) answered for himself and the rest; Lord, our greatest concern is, to attain eternal Life; and there is none other but thy self who can guide us to it. And we understand, that those very Sayings of thine, with which these Men were so unreasonably offended, do shew us the necessity of believing thy Words and Doctrine (as thou didst now tell them) [V. 63.] that we may live for ever.

V. 68. Thou hast the words of eternal Life. This saying of St. Peter confirms the Inter­pretation I have given of V. 63. For here he seems plainly to repeat our Lord's sence al­most in the same Words; The Words that I [Page 57] speak unto you, they are Life; or, the Words of Eternal Life: As if St. Peter had said, We do not understand thee in that gross and ab­surd Sense to which these Men have perverted thy Sayings; for we perceive that thou speak­est of those Doctrines and Revelations by which we are to be guided to eternal Life. But if St. Peter had understood our Saviour in that sence wherein the unbelieving Jews, and his revolted Disciples understood him, St. Peter's Answer would surely have been to this pur­pose, Whatever appearance there is of Inhuma­nity and Contradiction in giving thy Flesh to be eaten, and thy Blood to be drunk, for the Life of the World; yet we believe that we shall eat thy natural Flesh, and drink, &c. because thou hast said it: For though this hard Saying staggered those Men that are gone off, yet it does not stagger us at all. This had been a Confession of Faith suitable to the occasion, and to the Spirit of St. Peter, if he had understood our Saviour as the Jews did. At least he would have used those very Expressions which our Saviour used when the Jews took offence, i. e. he would have said, To whom should we go but to thee, who wilt give us thy Flesh to eat, and thy Blood to drink, that we may have Eter­nal Life? But when he rather chose to con­fess his Faith in the Explanatory words, V. 63. Thou hast the words of Eternal Life. I think a reasonable Man must acknowledge that St. Peter did not understand our Saviour's [Page 58] Expressions, as the perverse Jews understood them.

69. And we have already arrived to this Faith, by seeing thy mighty Works, and hearing thy Divine Doctrines; for by these Testimonies we are convinced, beyond all doubt, that thou art the promised Messias; and whereas these Men casted thee the Son of Joseph, we assuredly believe that thou art the Son of that God who giveth Life to All, and will give Eternal Life to all that believe in thee. And to this An­swer of Peter's all the rest assented.

V. 69. And St. Peter having thus shewed plainly enough, what he understood by the Flesh and Blood of Jesus, viz. his Doctrine, or words of eternal Life; he shews as plainly in this Verse, what he and the rest understood by eating, viz. believing, as Jesus himself had explained it before, Vers. 47. Therefore, says he, And we believe, and are sure, &c. So that by what St. Peter said upon this oc­casion, it appears sufficiently, that if Jesus had meant the literal and gross sence, the Jews and the Disciples that forsook him, understood him aright; and Peter, and the rest of the Apostles and Disciples that staid, mistook him; which 'tis certain they did not, because our [Page 59] Saviour approved what St. Peter said in the name of all the rest. And in the Interpreta­tion of our Saviour's words, it is, I believe, more safe to follow St. Peter, with the appro­bation of our Saviour, than to follow any of his Successors without it.

70. But this being spoken in the Name of All: Jesus, to shew that he as well un­derstood the Hearts of his Twelve Apostles, as he did of the multi­tude of his Disciples, [V. 64.] answered them to this purpose; What one of you hath said in behalf of All, is true of All but one. I have indeed chosen you Twelve before all my other Disciples, to be my chief Companions and Ministers; but there is one of you who already hates me, and is treacherously bent to do me mischief.

71. Though he did not mention Judas the Traytor, yet he meant him, and not any other of the A­postles.

THE CONCLUSION.

AND now I heartily beseech All, into whose Hands these Papers may chance to come, not to think that this Chapter is to be done withal, when they are once satisfied what our Lords meaning was in those Expres­sions of Eating him, and the like; but that they would please to attend to the Reason and End of these, and such kind of Sayings; which will convince them, I doubt not, that this excellent Chapter is fit to be thought of, and laid to heart every day they live.

Great pity it is, that this Portion of God's Word also, should come to be a Bone of Con­tention; which was designed to beget and im­prove in the Disciples of Jesus, a Spirit of true Wisdom and Piety, and to establish them in a Holy Life.

That which our Lord principally aimed at in all this Discourse, was, to make his Hear­ers concerned in good earnest for their Eternal State, which will at first sight appear to any [Page 61] Man that mindeth how often those Sayings return, of everlasting Life, and living for ever, and being raised up at the last day. Now this indeed seemed to be his great Design in almost all his Sermons and Applications to the Peo­ple; from whence we may gather this profi­table Instruction, that Men were more or less prepared to receive the Truth, as it is in Je­sus, according as they were more or less af­fected with the End of his coming into the World, which was to bring them to ever­lasting Life.

But in this Chapter, and in some others, there is a peculiar Instruction tending to this purpose, which we ought all of us very fre­quently to consider, not slighting it, because it is very plain, but making much of it, both because it is very useful, and strongly suggest­ed by our Lord himself. And 'tis in short this, that the Care we are at, and the Pains we take for the Welfare of this short Life, should awaken in us a greater care and concern for our everlasting Welfare: And that we who are so thoughtful and diligent in pursuing our Temporal Interests, should be ashamed, and count our selves reproved by our worldly Cares, if we are not much more careful to work out our Salvation. This was the Method our Lord took to bring those People to Wis­dom; and therefore he represented to them the Means and Conditions of everlasting Life, under the Names of those Things which [Page 62] their Hearts had hitherto been most set upon, i.e. Bread, and Eating and Drinking. For these were the Men that had been fed by him the day before; and now they followed him for the Loaves, that is, in hope to reap such bodily Advantages as these from him every day. But to bring them to some sense of better things, and to lead them towards a due Esteem of that end for which he came into the World, he proceeds in his Admoniti­ons, by calling the Spiritual Benefits which he had in store for them, Bread, and Food; and their receiving those Benefits, Eating and Drinking; ever and anon letting them know, that if they ate and drank of that Food, which he came to give them, they should live for ever. And what was the Instruction of this way of discoursing to them, but that if the bodily Food, for which they were so sol­licitous, were a valuable Enjoyment, which yet would serve but for the prolonging of a mortal Life, how ought they to hunger and thirst for the Meat that would preserve them for ever? And therefore when he came, in the same way of speaking, to intimate to them those Benefits of his Passion, which they would better understand afterwards than they could at present; He told them, My Flesh is Meat indeed, and my Blood is Drink indeed; as if he had told them in plainer Words than he thought fit to use at that time; It is infi­nitely more profitable to enjoy the Fruits of my [Page 63] Sufferings and Death, by being reconciled to God, by forbearing to provoke his Justice, and by following my Example, than if I should take the same care of you as long as I live, which I did yesterday, when I fed your Bodies by a Mi­racle.

And this indeed seemed to be our Saviour's great Design in preaching the Necessity of Faith and Repentance, and a Godly Life to the People, under so many Figurative Expressions as we find he used, viz. to lead them by Tem­poral Things, to the Care of Things Eternal, and to raise their Minds from Earth to Hea­ven, by a most familiar and convincing way of arguing with them, from Earthly Things themselves. Therefore if he found them va­luing themselves upon their Liberty, or careful for Life, or labouring for Wealth, or sollici­tous for Food: He called himself sometimes, and sometimes his Doctrine, and their receiv­ing of it, Liberty, Life, and Treasure, and Meat, and Drink, as occasion required; and this to let them understand, that there was a more real Good to be found in Faith and Pie­ty, than in these, or any other kind of world­ly Advantages; and that whatever reason they had to be concerned for these transitory Enjoyments, they had much more to be care­ful in receiving as they ought, those Spiritual good Things which he came to confer upon them.

If therefore we will suffer our selves to be instructed by such Passages as these are; most of us, I fear, may learn, from our Concern about the things of this World, to be asha­med of our remisness in providing for a bet­ter: And all of us should learn to reflect ve­ry often upon matters of greater Concern­ment, when we are engaged even in the ho­nest Designs of this Life, and pursuing the lawful Business thereof; and so we should in some measure preach to our selves, as Christ once did to his Hearers when he was upon Earth.

And we should not think that the Jews on­ly had need of this kind of Instruction, who I confess had been Educated under a Law, that promised little else besides Temporal Advan­tages to those that observed it: but that we our selves, who know the great Blessings pro­mised in the Gospel to be Spiritual and Eter­nal, stand in need also of such Admonitions as these are: For the Cares of this World, and the Love of its Riches, and Pleasures, and Ho­nours, are as apt to take hold of us, as they were of the Jews, if we do not take pains to affect our selves deeply with that Truth con­cerning another Life, which our Lord Jesus hath revealed; and to the belief of which we have been educated in his Church. And if we have less prejudice against these Doctrines than the Jews had, and yet are swallowed up with this World as much as they were, we are [Page 65] but the more inexcusable. So that undoubt­edly the advantage we have over them, should make us the more concerned to lay these things to heart; because we are so much the more to blame, if knowing these things al­most from our Infancy, we do not practise accordingly.

Nay, when the Profession of the True Faith does bring in Worldly Advantages, there seems to be as much (if not more) reason to reflect in this manner upon our selves, as when nothing was to be gotten by it in this World, but the loss of all things. We are then doubtless to remember, that the Kingdom of Christ is not of this World, and that the good things of this Life are not the Rewards which he hath promised; but that by setting our Hearts inordinately upon that worldly Ease and Profit which we enjoy by the Profession of true Christianity, we are in the way of losing that Fruit thereof which will last for ever, and the hope of which was all that our Lord used to invite Men to be­come his Disciples.

If we follow Christ for the Loaves, we shall forsake him when we find our selves disap­pointed, as the Jews at Capernaum did, and take Occasions and Pretences so to do as easi­ly as they, and some of his own Disciples found them. For we are not to think, that that Saying, Except ye eat the Flesh, &c. was the true cause of their going off from him, [Page 66] but only such a plausible Occasion as they had a good while waited for. The reason of their Offence, at the bottom, was, that they had long since perceived our Saviour was not like­ly to satisfie their worldly Expectations, and they did not believe it worth their while to follow him for a Reward in another Life; which Prejudice against him had destroyed all their Faith, as he told them himself, There are some among you that believe not, Vers. 64. They were those that said, Vers. 60. This is an hard Saying, who can hear it? For it is not said that All, but only, Many of his Disciples when they had heard this, said, This is an hard, &c. viz. Those very Men of whom he said, But there are some among you that be­lieve not, Vers. 64. i. e. who had followed him for worldly Advantages, as the Jews did from the Wilderness to Capernaum: Of whom our Lord said the same thing, viz. That they believed not, Vers. 36. For though but the day before they had acknowledged him to be the Pro­phet that was to come into the World, yet find­ing that he was likely to disappoint their worldly Hopes, they presently changed their Opinion of him. So that a sincere Aim at Everlasting Life is very necessary even to­wards a constant Belief and Profession of the Faith.

And much more to a Practice answerable to it; which will, as I said before, be advan­ced not a little, if we will use our selves to [Page 67] consider what care we at for these mortal Bo­dies, and this worldly Life; and what reason there is to be incomparably more concerned for a blessed Resurrection to Eternal Life; which I make not the least doubt, is the great Instruction we are to learn from these figu­rative Discourses of our blessed Saviour. And if we constantly have it in our Eye, it will not not only render the meaning of this Chap­ter very plain, but the reading of it, if we should read it every day we live, very useful to us.

And indeed, those parts of God's Word which are purposely designed to work in us a deep Concern for Everlasting Life, ought to be very present to our Minds, and to dwell richly in us, that we may be always well pro­vided to resist the Temptations of the World. For which Reasons we should often think of those Lessons of our Saviour; Lay not up for your selves Treasure upon Earth, where Moth and Rust doth corrupt, and where Thieves break through and steal: But lay up for your selves Treasure in Heaven, where neither Moth, &c. And, Be not afraid of them that kill the Body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed, hath pow­er to cast into Hell: yea, I say unto you, fear him. And that in this Chapter; Labour not for the Meat which perisheth, bat for that [Page 68] which endureth to everlasting Life, which the Son of Man shall give unto you.

Which Rules seeming at first sight to dis­charge us of all Care for our Life and Welfare in this World, St. Chrysostom thought it need­ful to observe upon the last of them, that our Lord did not intend to countenance Laziness, who himself said, It is more Blessed to give than to receive: And that St. Paul admonish­eth a Man to work with his hands the thing that is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. But since these Exhortations run, as if we were to be absolutely uncon­cerned about this Life, no question but that care of Eternal Life is prescribed; in compa­rison to which, our Cares for this World should seem nothing at all. Therefore when we desire our appointed Food, we should think how much more it is our Interest to hunger and thirst after Righteousness, and that Meat which endureth to everlasting Life. And when we most of all feel the hopes and fears of things that go no farther than this World, we cannot entertain a better Thought than this, that if we are so much concerned for this Life, how careful ought we to be not to miss of Eternal Salvation?

Which kind of Reflections are the more necessary for us, the more deeply we are en­gaged in this World. For we do not only labour for the meat that perishes, that is, for just enough to serve the Necessities of Life; [Page 69] but we would be at ease beside, and live in reasonable Plenty, and enjoy what is conve­nient for the Pleasure, as well as the Suste­nance of Life: and there are very few that know when to make an end of multiplying Riches, when once they are got into the way of Encrease. But are we thus concerned for an end of infinitely greater Moment? Or ra­ther do not these very worldly Cares reprove our negligence about better and greater things, while perhaps we do no more towards our Salvation, than to avoid the grossest Sins of all, but take little thought how to grow in Grace, and in the Knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The whole Strain of our Saviour's Dis­course in this Chapter, naturally leads to such Considerations as these: And if we mind them in good Earnest, they will, by the Grace of God, moderate our Affections and Cares about this World in the first place; and then leave all that Concern for present and transi­tory good things, which we cannot be with­out, as a perpetual Admonition, to be much more thoughtful for our everlasting Salvation, and to make it the greatest business of our Lives, by Prayers and good Works, to lay up for our selves Treasure in Heaven, and to lay the stress of our Comfort whilst we are here, in the joyful hope of being raised up at the last day to live for ever. Amen.

A POSTSCRIPT.

SInce these Papers were almost Printed off, I met with Dr. Godden's Sermon upon St. Peter's Day; in which he endeavours, from some Passages in this Chapter, to infer the substantial Change of the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist, into the Body and Blood of Christ: But upon the most Impartial Judge­ment that I can make of his Performance, I do not find that he offers any colour of Argu­ment for his Conclusion, which I have not pre­vented. And therefore instead of stopping these Papers for the sake of his Sermon, I think it fair enough to say to him, and to the World, that I can see no reason obliging me to do it.

A DISCOURSE OF HUMAN …

A DISCOURSE OF HUMANITY AND CHARITY.

GAL. VI.10.

As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all Men, especially unto them that are of the Houshold of Faith.

By W. CLAGET, D. D.

LONDON: Printed for J. Robinson at the Golden Lion, and T. Newborough at the Golden Ball in St. Paul's Church-yard. 1693.

A DISCOURSE OF Humanity and Charity.

GAL. VI.10.

As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all Men, especially unto them that are of the Houshold of Faith.

FROM these Words I might well take occasion to discourse upon three di­stinct Subjects.

First; Of the several Acts or Expressions of Charity, which are here all comprehen­ded [Page 74] under doing good; although by the 6th Verse it should seem, that the Charity of com­municating in the good things of this World, was principally intended in this place.

Secondly; Of the Objects of Charity; con­cerning which the Text expresly affirms, that they are all Men in general, but especially the Houshould of Faith.

And, Thirdly; Of the Rewards of Charity, which are intimated in the Text by the refe­rence of those words, As we have therefore opportunity, in the foregoing Promise, vers. 9. In due season we shall reap if we faint not. For this shews the Opportunity here menti­oned to be the time that we have for sowing our good Works; and that if we use it, they will yield a Harvest of Rewards, which we shall certainly reap in due season.

But in so narrow a compass of time, I must not undertake to enlarge upon these three Particulars; and therefore omitting the First, I chuse to insist upon the Second, and to conclude with some few Reflections upon the last.

And thus the first thing to be considered is, the Exhortation to doing Good, with respect to the general Object: Let us do good unto all Men. Now, because it is impossible that we should be actually beneficent to every [Page 75] Man in the World, otherwise than by our Prayers for All: Therefore the plain meaning of the Exhortation is this, that we should ex­clude no Man out of our Charity, who needs our Help, and comes within the Compass of our Ability to do him good. Which tho it be a Duty so much for the Interest of Man­kind, that one would think no body should be against it; yet as the World goes, it seems to need the Charity of us All, in standing up for it against all false Principles, and bad Examples, that are advanced in opposition to it.

I must be content at this time to speak for it, without reflecting upon any Opinions or Practices that are against it. And therefore I proceed forthwith to represent this part of the Apostle's Exhortation, To do good unto all, as a Duty under Obligations common to all Men, and under Obligations peculiar to Chri­stians.

I. The Obligations of the first sort, are Common Humanity, and Natural Piety.

1. Common Humanity. For the sense of that Nature which is common to us All, does oblige us to bear kind Affection one to another. Because I know how I my self am affected with Pain and Poverty, with Hunger and Thirst, with Fear and Grief, and with all the Sufferings that Humane Life is subject to; I know how others are affected with [Page 76] them too, inasmuch as we are All moulded into one and the same Nature: So that Na­ture it self has given me a sense of the Mise­ries of others, which had been a trouble without any Advantage, if she had not there­by shewn me the way to ease my self, by re­lieving them. And that we are framed to these Affections, is one of the noblest Privi­ledges we have above Brutes, who were made for Selfishness, because they do not under­stand, and cannot feel what their Fellow-Brutes suffer. For as for those appearances of Kindness which the Author of Nature hath disposed them to, especially of the old ones to their young, we see they proceed from an Impulse, the meaning of which they under­stand not, because they go off by certain Rules; for when the young ones can shift for themselves, there is no appearance of Compassion afterwards in the old, whatsoever occasion there may be for it. To Man only of all Creatures under Heaven, God has giv­en this quality, to be affected with the Grief and with the Joy of those of his own kind; and to feel the Evils which others feel, that we may be universally disposed to help and relieve one another.

Now this, no less than other moral Dispo­sitions, is under the power of our own Liber­ty to improve it, or weaken it. Tho' Na­ture inclines us to Humanity, yet Custom and bad Principles may give us another Bias, [Page 77] and make us unconcern'd what others feel. But Nature, without Art and Force used up­on it, seldom proves cruel; and we see that they which have the least of that we call Breeding, are prone to Pity and Commi­seration. Men of a simple and rustick Edu­cation, and of mean Professions, easily fall into Compassion; and seldom fail of relieving one another, if the consideration of their own Interest does not prevail against it.

But where Humane Nature meets with the best Improvements, there Humanity grows into generous Inclinations. The more that Men are exalted above Brutes, the more that they are framed to other Vertues, to Wisdom, Patience, and Fidelity, and Temperance, and Fortitude, and Modesty; so much the more are they addicted to Mercy and Compassion, and forward to relieve others, tho' with loss and pain to themselves. But Inhumanity grows evermore upon the Corruption of Na­ture, by wretched Mistakes, by bruitish Sen­suality, or by Pride and Insolence. It grows no where but in a Soil that is already cursed. And sometimes there must be a Complication of all manner of Vices to make way for this. For some Men who are not otherwise good, are not yet bad enough to put off Compassi­on to their own kind.

Finally, That Applause and Commendati­on that is universally given to Men of a bene­ficent and generous Temper, is a standing Ar­gument [Page 78] that to do good to All, is the Law of our Nature. Nay, the Commendation given to Vertue, is in great part owing to this, that every Vertue is beneficial not only to him that hath it, but to others too. What­soever is lovely, and of good Report amongst Men, as all Vertue is, takes the name of Goodness, because it partakes of its Nature, and serves its End: Insomuch that Justice it it self has it's Praise from Goodness and Mercy. The Severity of the Laws against Villains, and the Punishments inflicted on them, being not so much approved for the Pain that they suffer, as for the Instruction of the Example, and the Security it brings to honest Men. In short, tho' Greatness will be always flattered, yet nothing is more evident, than that Good­ness, and Goodness only, will be approved and loved; whilst Unmercifulness and Cru­elty, how common soever the practice of it may be, is yet counted unnatural, and is ge­nerally so hated a thing, that they who are most guilty of it, will call Impudence to their Aid, as long as it will serve the turn, to purge themselves to the World, by denying the Fact.

2. Natural Piety does no less bind us to do good to all, than common Humanity. For we are taught so to do, not only by what we know concerning our selves, but by all that we know of God.

As he has made us all in one Nature, so he hath made a common provision for us all, of things needful for our Life and Welfare. He has given us space and room enough to live in, and the Sun, and the Rain, and the Fruits of the Earth to serve us all, and all things convenient and comfortable in plenty, sufficient for the whole Race of Mankind; a plain sign of his Goodness to us all, and a plain Instruction that he would have us live without Envy and Rapine, and be inoffensive and kind, and where need requires, liberal to one another.

And yet in the midst of this common Pro­vision he hath still left us in need of one ano­thers Assistance; and even the greatest of All for many Comforts of Life; nay, for the ve­ry necessary supports of it, to depend upon the meanest, as these do, for other Benefits, depend upon those above them; that so this mutual dependance we have upon one ano­ther might be a further obligation to a mu­tual Affection, and that Benefits given and returned might always cherish and improve it.

Farther; Inasmuch as God hath derived us all from one Stock, and made us of one Blood; this seems to speak his Intention of obliging all Men to mutual Beneficence. He could as easily have peopled the World at first, as he created one Man, and out of that Man took a Woman, to be the Parents of Mankind. [Page 80] But he rather chose that we should be the Children of one Stock, that remembring how we were All once in the Loins of one Parent, we should as Brethren love and help one another.

To conclude this Argument; There is no Perswasion concerning God more deeply root­ed in our Natures, than that he is good and gracious, full of Compassion, and ready to help the Miserable. For we are made to be­lieve this so strongly, that no Opinions which imply the contrary, can utterly extinguish this Faith. For they that think the hardest things of God, do in effect confess their own Mistakes, by praying always to him, and with more earnest Applications, when they fall into Distress. But is it not evident, that God by leaving such Impressions of his own Goodness upon our Minds, signified his Plea­sure that we should be good to one ano­ther, under the penalty of being odious to him?

Such things as these may be said, to shew the common Obligations we are un­der to do good to All, as we are Men. But then,

II. There are peculiar Obligations to it as we are Christians. I will be bold to say, that if Christianity had destroyed the Prin­ciples of Humanity, it had been a terrible Temptation to a good Man to reject it; [Page 81] Nay, if it had not established and impro­ved them, we had wanted one considerable Inducement to receive it. For there is so much natural Evidence that Men are bound to do good to one another, that I doubt no Evidence can be great enough that a Reli­gion comes from God, which lets Men loose from all the Obligations of Huma­nity. And if there be any other Character of Doctrine, which would induce a Man to receive it as coming from God, more than another, it is this, That it doth effectually promote Benignity and Charity, a kind and generous Temper, and all sorts of good Works. And this I am sure is the Chara­cter of true and uncorrupted Christianity. For,

1. As it is a Rule of Manners, it is whol­ly framed to destroy all Dispositions to Rage, Malice, Cruelty, and Uncharitableness; and to plain Goodness, Compassion and Benig­nity in our Minds. To this end it hath provided against all the Causes of Uncharita­bleness; that is, against Covetousness, Lust, Ambition, Impatience, Revengefulness, and the like. And therefore the Apostle doubt­ed not to say, that the end of the Command­ment is Charity. And that which is most remarkable in this kind is, That whereas no­thing can with greater colour of Reason ob­struct [Page 82] the Disposition of a Christian to be good to All Men, than to be himself abused and wronged by others; therefore our Lord, to guard the Duty of Universal Beneficence, has made it our Duty to forgive; nay, and to love our very Enemies; which seems to be a Law peculiar to Christianity.

2. If we consider our Lord Jesus him­self, the Author of our Religion, he was the most glorious Pattern of Charity and doing good, that ever appeared in the World. For he was contented to come down into this wretched World, and to lead an afflict­ed Life, and to endure an ignominious and painful Death, for the Salvation of Man­kind. And when he conversed publickly amongst his Country-men, he went about do­ing good: And though his Doctrine and his Works were still cavilled at, and perver­ted to a wrong Intention, by a froward and unthankful Generation of Men, yet he cea­sed not to do good to all that came to him for Relief; and to many others that never sought it from him. So that we are to treat every Man, as one whom Christ so loved, as to die for him. And if our Religion stands at all in the imitation of Christ, we are to do good to the Ʋnthankful and Ʋn­just, as need requires; nay, and to do Good against Evil, and if possible, to overcome Evil with Good. But,

[Page 83]3. The way which he chose for the pro­pagation of his Religion, was above all things a Demonstration, that he intended his Disciples should be inoffensive and bene­ficent to all Men. If indeed under a pre­tence of saving the Souls of Men, he had armed his Followers to kill his Enemies, his Doctrine had not carried so much as a face of Sincerity, but had rather looked like a Design of Interest and Ambition, than of Charity and doing good. But with what Weapons did he send abroad his Ministers to subdue Men to himself? Go, says he, cleanse the Leper, heal the Sick, Matth. 10.7, 8. raise the Dead, &c. Freely ye have received, freely give. If this would not make their preaching effectual, the worst they were to do was,Vers. 14. to shake the Dust off their Feet against that place which rejected them.Vers. 14. If they were persecute in one City, they were to flee to ano­ther. If Sufferings followed them from one place to another, they were to possess their Souls in patience; and, in all this, to love and pray for their Enemies. The Doctrine of our Lord JESUS, and his own Example, and the Means he used to spread his Faith in the World, were all of a piece; that Cha­rity being eminently preached in the way of converting the World to his Religion, which [Page 84] was so powerfully recommended by his Example, and so strongly urged by his Do­ctrine. And if it had not been so, the Do­ctrine of Christianity had not done so much good, as the way of propagating it had done Mischief. The Doctrine it self, of doing good to All, had been but a dead Letter, if it had been carried into the World with Rage, and Cruelty; It had served only to condemn Christians of Hypocrisie, for pretending the good of Mens Souls in destroying their Lives; and for pretending Charity, while they carried Confusion and Desolation where­ever they went. Had they behaved them­selves in this manner, they had given just cause of suspicion that they were gathering a Party in an hostile opposition to all the World besides, and that the Brotherly-kindness of Christians, consisted in excluding the rest of Mankind from common Charity, and re­quired that Unbelievers should be treated as Enemies, and prosecuted with the utmost Hatred. And therefore altho in this very place St. Paul's design was to move the Chri­stians to contribute towards the common Concerns of the Church; yet lest he should seem to exempt them from the obligation of doing good to All, by calling for their Be­nificence towards one another; he prevents the scandal by requiring Beneficence to All, almost out of its place. I say, though his [Page 85] business was now to perswade them to do good to the Houshold of Faith: Yet that this might be no pretence for Inhumanity, he guards his meaning by an Exhortation in the first place, to do good to all Men. And upon all these Accounts, I had much rather at the last Day, bear the Judgment of an Heathen that is endued with Humanity and Mercy, than of a Christian that has no­thing of it, let him have what he will else. And thus much for the general Object of Cha­rit, and the Duty of doing Good to All Men.

The Second is more particular, viz. The Houshold of Faith; and upon this the Ex­hortation runs thus; let us do good, espe­cially to the Houshold of Faith; that is, to Christians, who are one Body or Society of Men, united one to another under one Head, our Lord Jesus Christ, by one Faith, to the Profession of which they are admitted by one Baptism, according to that Saying of the Apostle, One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism; Eph. 4.5. which are the Bonds that make the Church one Family or Houshold. Now to all that are of this Houshold, we are to do good espe­cially, and more than to others, though we are to do good to all Men. And under this Particular there are these two things obser­vable.

[Page 86]1. That the Obligation we are under to do good to all Men, does not hinder pre­ferring some before others, whether in respect of the Time, or the degree of doing good. I observed before, that we have so limited a Power, that we cannot be actually bene­ficent to All, and therefore must choose our Objects with Discretion. There are several good Works which many do not need from us, and we cannot perform them for All that do. And therefore Charity must be guided by Judgment in deter­mining upon whom to let fall the effects of our readiness to do good to All. Some­times that Relation we have to one ano­ther, which is nearest, is to derermine the Case. If I can provide only for my own Family, they are in the first place to be taken care for. And where the Case is in other Respects equal, I am to prefer an Ac­quaintance before a Stranger; my Country­man before a Foreigner; a Friend before an Enemy; a serviceable Man before one that is good for nothing; and a Vertuous Man before a Villain. But the Case may be such, and the need so much more pressing on the one side than the other, that I may be obliged to prefer the later before the for­mer. And as to this matter, when all is said that can be said, the Prudence of every [Page 87] honest Man will be requisite to apply general Rules to particular Cases. Thus much is implied in this part of the Exhortation. But,

2. This is expressed, That whereas there are certain Reasons of making a difference, in doing good between Man and Man; we should have a very special regard to those that profess the true Religion, and are Mem­bers of one Body with us as Christians, be­sides that common relation we have to them in the great Body of Mankind; espe­cially if their Conversation be as it becomes the Gospel of Christ, which I question not is supposed by the Apostle, who would not have had a disorderly Liver so much as continued in the Houshold of Faith; and more especially if their Necessities be great and pressing; and most of all when it hap­pens that they fare ill for doing well, which is a Case that often happens. Tho' such Men be none of our Kindred, tho' they be none of our Country, they are yet allied to us by more Sacred Ties, by a near­er Relation, by stricter Bonds; and that we are to do good to them more than to others, is a point that stands upon plain and strong Reasons.

For, 1. It is very fit and just that we should love them more than others; For they are really better than other Men are; and if upon this Account they deserve a greater Interest in our Affection, they ought to have a proportionable share in the usual Expressi­ons and Testimonies of it. When our Savi­our said, By this shall all Men know that ye are my Disciples, John 13.35. if ye have Love one to another, we must needs think that he meant a more fervent and generous Affection than is at the bottom of the common Friendships of the World, and more effectual and lively Te­stimonies of it, then are usually seen amongst other Men: For otherwise, how should their Love distinguish them from those which were not his Disciples? But was this Extraordinary Affection and Beneficence no better than meer Fondness and Partiality? Was it not to be grounded upon Wisdom and Judgment, and to be justified by the true Worth and Excellence of his Followers? The Disciples of Christ were to be Examples of Fidelity and Justice, Humility and Mode­sty, Patience and Meekness, and Faith in God, and likewise of Charity to Men. God himself loves Men for such Qualities as these are, and will reward them for ever. And therefore how is it possible but for the [Page 89] sake of these Qualities they should love one another, and shew it by the effects of true Esteem and Affection, in doing Good to Men thus qualified, above others. And,

2. 'Tis a very necessary Expression of Love to our Lord Jesus, to make this diffe­rence in favour of his faithful Servants and Followers. He has made them Members of Himself, and as such he will treat them; and therefore he expects that we should do so too, as we undoubtedly shall, if we are true and living Members of his Body our selves. If ye love me, says he, keep my Commandments. And, This is the Command­ment that he hath given us, that we love one another; as St. John tells us with much ear­nestness, and lays great weight upon it. But if it had not been urged in this manner, no Inference from our Love to Jesus could be more natural, than to bear a special kind­ness towards those whom he is pleased to own not only for his Servants, but his Bre­thren and his Friends. The truth is, he hath left them to receive the lively Expressions of our real Affection to him. And it is ob­servable, that although we shall be accoun­table to him for our Behaviour to all Men, yet he hath told us before-hand that a par­ticular regard will be had at our last Ac­count, how we have comforted and relieved [Page 90] his Servants in their Distress. For upon that Charge, that those on the Left-hand had not given him Meat when he was hungry, nor Drink when he was thirsty; nor clothed him when he was naked, nor visited him when he was sick and in Prison; it is added, Then shall they say, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and gave thee no meat, &c. And then shall he answer them, saying, Verily, inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not unto me.

3. Our Charity should run more plenti­fully in this Channel, for the relief of good Christians; because in their Distress, they re­ly only upon God for help, and expect in it such ways only as God approves. But they can­not afford to help themselves by wicked or indirect means. We therefore should take our selves to be God's Ministers in bringing Succour to them; that whilst they have the Honour to approve their Dependance upon him, by refusing all ways of Relief which are inconsistent with their Duty to him, we may have the honour to let them see that they have not trusted God in vain. We should consider true Believers and good Men, when they are oppressed with Want, as under an effectual Restraint from all base and impious ways of supplying themselves; and consequently as the noblest Objects of [Page 91] Charity; of Charity, I say; for the Charity of some Good Men is the usual way by which God relieves other Good Men in their Afflictions. It may sometimes be a good Reason to relieve a Beggar, that we may prevent his taking a worse Course to relieve himself. But Charity should never flow more plentifully than to those that will not be starved out of their Integrity, but trust God though they die. And that,

4. Because the end of Charity is dou­bly attained by having a special regard to such Persons, in doing Good to them, ra­ther, and more than, to others: for here is not only Good done to Men that are in Want and Distress, which is common to the Relief both of the Good and the Bad; but here is an encouragement given to Vertue too, which is peculiar to the Case of doing Good to Good Men. And therefore, besides what is done in meer Humanity, there should be something added as a Reward to Vertue. And we ought to remember, that God in giving us more or less power to be benefi­cial to Men, has thereby put it into our Power to encourage Piety and good Man­ners, and all that is worthy of Praise a­mongst Men. And whilst we make it ma­nifest to the World, that Righteous Men [Page 92] are in their Distress so far from being for­saken of God, that not only their Distress, but their Innocence too, and their Vertue, shall be considered by Men; we do effectu­ally reprove Wickedness and Vice, and preach Honesty and Piety. And it is not un­likely but Charity thus placed, besides the Good that it does to the Bodies of some, will do good also to the Souls of others.

Upon such plain Reasons as these, we should more especially do Good to the Hous­hold of Faith. Whereby also we may with­out farther trouble avoid their Censures, who carry their Respect to those whom God loves and honours beyond what I have been pleading for: I mean those who reckon it to be no small Act of Piety, to visit the Bones, and the Ashes, and other Reliques of Saints and Martyrs, and to leave costly Presents at their Shrines and Sepulchres. For it has been laid to our Charge with no little Confidence, that we dishonour and contemn the dead Servants of God, because we do not thus offer to 'em. But we may, I hope, clear our selves without offence, and say that we are as ready to honour the Dead, as to relieve the Living Saints. We are not well assured that the Bones and the Utensils, to which so mighty a Regard is given, are indeed the Remains of Saints: But if we [Page 93] were, yet we are not satisfied that there is any respect to the dead Bodies of the Saints, beyond that of a decent and honourable In­terment, warranted by the Examples of the truly Primitive Church; and that any Ser­vice to 'em beyond this is acceptable to God, has wanted Proof hitherto, and Defence as well as Proof. But now we are very sure that the Bodies of Righteous and Godly Men, are holy, and the living Temples of God, whilst they live with us in this World: For this the Scripture saith. We are sure that the Sacrifices of Alms, which are Sacri­fices, when given for God's sake, that with them, I say, God is well-pleased; for this is affirmed in the Scripture. We are very sure that they are doubly pleasing to him, when they are presented to his living Members, when they are distributed to the Houshold of Faith; for this also is according to Scrip­ture. And in all these things there is such evident Congruity, that Reason without any Dispute presently agrees to 'em. In a word, I do not read that any the least Promise is made to visiting and presenting the Ashes of the Dead; nor that Christ will take these things when done in honour of his Servants, as done to himself. But I read that at the last day, our having visited, and relieved, our feeding, clothing, and comforting the least of his true Servants that are with us, will be [Page 94] so accounted, and will be rewarded, as if these things had been done to himself. In as much as ye did it to the least of these, ye did it also unto me. All which being considered, we may be sure that we are well guarded a­gainst the angry Reflections of our Neigh­bours, if we take care to excel them in Charity to the Living, as much as they ima­gin they out-do us in honouring the Dead. And thus much for the Objects of Charity, as they are specified in the Text.

I am now to touch upon that Intimation of the Rewards of it, which we have in the Text also: As we have opportunity. It is a true sence of these words to interpret them thus; as often as occasions of Charity present them­selves, and as long as we are in a condition to do good Works of this kind. But as I told you, they have a plain reference to the three foregoing Verses; Be not deceived, God is not mocked: for whatsoever a Man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to the Flesh, shall of the Flesh reap Corruption: but he that soweth to the Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap Life everlasting. And let us not be weary in well-doing; for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not. As we have therefore opportunity, let us, &c. i. e. as long as the opportunity or season of sowing in good Works lasts, let us sow, that we may reap plentifully when Har­vest-time [Page 95] comes, i. e. when the Rewards of Charity shall be given abroad, as they will assuredly be in a better World, if not in this also. The Seed which he means, as we find by the 6th Verse, are the good things of this Life. And as by sowing to the Spirit, he un­doubtedly meant, doing good out of our worldly Store to All Men, and especially to the Houshold of Faith; so by sowing to the Flesh, must on the other hand be meant, the encreasing of our own Possessions, and the serving of our own Pleasures: I will not say providing for inordinate Lusts; for this is more than the Text necessarily implies, tho' that be sowing to the Flesh too? So that we will set that aside, and consider what the use of that Wealth will come to, which is expen­ded in things not to be blamed, in goodly Houses, and fine Cloaths, and a plentiful Ta­ble, and the like. For this is sowing to the Flesh; and the Apostle tells us, that he that soweth to the Flesh, shall of the Flesh reap Cor­ruption; i. e. at the end of this Life he shall find, that all these things have perished in the using, and can turn to no account for him now at last, that there is no farther enjoy­ment of them; and that the very remem­brance of them, which is all that is left, hath neither Pleasure nor Profit in it: And so he shall reap for this sowing, nothing but [...], Corruption, i. e. no increase, but a loss of what he sowed.

Now true it is, that thus we must all sow to the Flesh in some degree or other, we must provide for our own Bodies, and the needs of our Life; and we may make a reasonable use of our Wealth, for the innocent Pleasures of it too. But this is that sowing, which will yield no Harvest at last. There is an En­joyment for the time, but when the use is over, there is no farther Profit to be expected. So that he is said by the Apostle, to sow to the Flesh, who does little or nothing else with the good things of this World that God has given him, but only sets himself out with them, and applies them wholly to the ser­ving of his own Needs and Pleasures. For by him that soweth to the Spirit, he could not mean one that makes no use of his Wealth for supplying his own Needs and Necessities, but one who does that, and relieves others too. Now of him it is said, that he shall reap Life everlasting; for tho' the Seed be it self of a transitory, carnal and perishing Na­ture, yet being thus disposed to a spiritual use, being cast into such a Soil, it shall yield an everlasting Profit, and an Increase that he shall live upon it for ever. But then says the Apostle, Be not deceived, God is not mocked; for as a Man soweth, he shall also reap. Tho' a Cup of cold Water given to a Disciple, in the name of a Disciple, shall not lose its Reward, i. e. when either more is not in the hand of [Page 97] him that gives, or no farther need in him that receives, yet so small a thing is Mocke­ry, where there is greater need on the one side, and ability to answer it on the other. This being remembred, it remains true what our Saviour said, He that receiveth; and therefore he that relieveth a Righteous Man, in the name of a Righteous Man, or because he is a Righteous Man, shall receive a Righteous Man's Reward. For to him in some part the Righteous Man's Thankfulness to God, and the support of his Faith and Dependence up­on God, and the making of his perseverance therein more easie, and the rescuing him out of Temptation, may in good measure be im­puted.

Now Brethren, we have in this Life only the opportunity of sowing to the Spirit in this manner, and of making Friends to our selves of the Mammon of this World, that when it fails, we may be received into ever­lasting Habitations, and of turning the things of this World, which so often betray Men to Perdition, into the Instruments of our Sal­vation. Let us therefore often consider those Words and Exhortations of St. Paul, and that when our Reckoning comes to be cast up at the end of our Lives, there will be no lon­ger any Profit or Comfort in what we have worn, and eaten, and drank; but we shall [Page 98] find that to be true, The Belly for Meats, and Meats for the Belly; but God will destroy both it and them. But that the remembrance of the Good we have done to All Men, and especially to the Houshold of Faith, will be sweet and pleasant to us, and that the Reward of it will endure for ever.

Therefore my beloved Brethren, be ye sted­fast, unmoveable, always abounding in the Work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your Labour is not in vain in the Lord.

A LETTER CONCERNING Protestants Charity to Papists. Published by W. Claget, D. D.

SIR,

I Find that the Translation of the Whol­som Advices from the Blessed Virgin, &c. which may have help'd to settle the Minds of others, has something discompos'd yours. For though you are not, I dare say, pleas'd with the Protestant Preface to it, yet however you dissemble your pain, Wise Men say, that you bite that Preface for grief of [Page 100] the Translation. I cannot but admire the Art of you Gentlemen of the Church of Rome, in running down Books with bold Contempt, which you know not otherwise how to deal with. This Translation and Preface, for some Reasons, is an Eye-sore to you; and chiefly for helping to spoil the new Fashion of maintaining Popery by Repre­senting it. Something therefore must be done with it; and so a little part of the Pre­face, which did not belong neither to the main Design of the Book, must be singled out, and be made an Example. As for all the rest, 'tis sufficiently answer'd by saying, Must I set up for Reader of Anatomy upon all the Pamphlets that come into the World? I am highly obliged to you for the Kindness; but I think the Scavenger has much the better Of­fice▪ who has nothing but Dirt and Sinks to deal with, much less offensive, than to be al­ways raking into filthy Calumnies, fulsom In­congruities, and noysom Impertinencies. Which kind of Language one would hardly use, but out of a great desire to be unanswerable one way or other. After this touch upon the whole, you come to touch at some Particu­lars which seem to fall within your Province of Representing; or rather to touch at some­thing, which you were the better provided to touch, because you had in the very same manner toucht it before in your Fourth Vindi­cation [Page 101] of the First Part. The Particular is, That Papists allow no less a possibility of Sal­vation to Protestants than Protestants do to Papists. Now although this is all that I am concerned to oppose, yet I shall offer a few Words to your Preparatory Discourse, in which you pretend to shew what good Rea­son you have to pronounce against the Pos­sibility of Salvation amongst us; or rather in the new fashion'd Phrase, that we as Pro­testants are guilty of Sins inconsistent with Salvation, inasmuch as we are separated from your Communion, The short of what you say is, That after most serious Considerations and the weighing of all Reasons, the Papist be­lieves the Roman Church in which he is, to be that one only holy Catholick Church, and therefore he does not question, but what is truly affirm'd of the Church of the Apostles and suc­ceeding Ages, and those that fell from it, is most true of the same Church now in being, of which he is a Member, and of all those who separate from it, upon what Pretext soever. Now it had been much more to the purpose to have produc'd those serious Considerati­ons, than to have spent so much time as you did, to prove what none of us make the least Question of, viz. That Christ esta­blish'd a Catholick Church; that he com­mitted the Care of it to the Apostles; that they were inspir'd with the knowledge of [Page 102] Truth; that they left Pastors to govern and feed the Flock after their Decease; and that the Promise of Salvation is made to Believers, exclusively to Unbelievers. This I say, is all very true, but not to your pur­pose, unless you had prov'd also, what you do but insinuate, That we have separated our selves from the Doctrine and Government of the Church of Christ. Which Words I wonder that you were not afraid to use, when they lay so fair to be turn'd upon your selves. For we are no less sure, that many of your Doctrines are no parts of the Doctrine of that Church; and that Rome's being the Mo­ther and Mistress of all Churches, was not the Government of that Church over which the Apostles were, &c. Overseers for their time, than we are, that such a Church was established in the World. And therefore, if they who separate themselves from the Doctrine and Government of the Church of Christ, as it was first establish'd, cannot hope for Salvation: Pray look to your selves as to that Point, instead of contend­ing that you are the only Catholick Church, out of which there is no hope of Salva­tion.

As to what you would insinuate, that there must be in the Church a Succession of Pastors to the Worlds end, who should no [Page 103] more err in teaching, than the Apostles themselves did, and that your Church has that Succession. I must tell you as to the first, that it is by no means proved from John 14. v. 16. since what is there pro­mis'd to the Apostles, is not promis'd to the Church of all Ages, so as it was to the Apo­stles. The Spirit of God abode with the Apostles for ever, that is, so long as they liv'd, to guide them into the knowledge of Truth, and by them to guide the Church in all After-Ages. There are many things in this Discourse of our Saviour to his Apo­stles, which cannot be applied to any Age of the Church after theirs. And therefore what is, and what is not limited to them, must be argued out from the Nature of the things themselves which are said. And last­ly, though you will not have this Promise limited to the Persons of the Apostles, but annext to their Function, as in some sence I grant it may be; yet you ought to have ta­ken notice, that the Promise is however limited by a Condition, even in the Words foregoing and following the Promise: If ye love me, keep my Commandments, and there the Condition is once express'd. For it fol­lows, And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of Truth. And now mark once again what follows, [Page 104] Whom the World cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him. Where, if by the World be meant worldly and wick­ed Men, as I believe you will grant; you see here is no absolute Promise of such a Guidance to a Succession of Pastors, as shall make it at any time of the Church Heresie to contradict whatsoever they teach, or Schism to withdraw from their Obedience. As to the last; If you had prov'd such a Suc­cession of Infallible Teachers as you speak of; yet I tell you once more, that the hardest part of your Task would be still behind; which is to prove, That you have had all along, and still have that Succession; which I desire you to do in your next, if you can, if it be but for the Instruction of a Lay-man that desires to be led into all Truth, necessary, or even profitable for his Salva­tion. And because I would not have you lose your labour, I will open my greatest Difficulty against this Belief. I am sure you cannot go about this Work without taking Scripture in to furnish out your Argument. Now I desire you to bring me such Scrip­tures, which shall at least make it as evi­dent, that your Church was always to have a Succession of Infallible Teachers, as it is to me from divers other Scriptures evident, that your Pastors have most certainly con­tradicted the Doctrine of the Scriptures. [Page 105] And when you have done this, you shall hear farther from me. In the mean time, your loose Affirmations concerning the Ca­tholick Church have been so often answered, that you need not wonder that a Lay-man of our Church can tell what to say to them.

But to come to that wherein I am parti­cularly concern'd. You are disturb'd at my saying, That the Worship, Doctrines and Pra­ctices of the Church of Rome are so extream­ly dangerous; that nothing but Invincible Ig­norance, of which God only can judge, can give us any reasonable hopes of their Salvation who live and die in their Communion. Now sure­ly the uncharitableness of this does not lie in supposing that Invincible Ignorance will be pleadable in this Case, for 'tis a Plea which will go a great way amongst those of the Roman Communion; which, I say, with the more Confidence, because in the Romish Countries where I have been, the People seem to me to have the fairest Claim to the benefit of Ignorance, that can be well ima­gin'd amongst Christians.

Now since at last you are brought in this Pamphlet of yours to agree with Prote­stants, that Ignorance will save Men, and that we yield the greatest part of the Peo­ple [Page 106] have an indisputable Right to it; are not the Protestants charitable to a high de­gree? If this will not please you, I do not know what will. Surely, Sir, you do not expect that Protestants should believe and say, that you, with all your Errors about you, are in as safe a way to Salvation, as they themselves who have renounced them? If this could be, what, I pray ye, made our Fore-fathers suffer themselves to be separated from your Communion? or make us that we cannot joyn with you? Certainly this was, and is still nothing but want of sound Faith, purity of Doctrines and Worship. And I know nothing else can, or ever was pretended to justifie our Separation. And this alone one would think might be suffici­ent to vindicate my Assertion from being uncharitable. But perhaps I may do it more by and by.

But you'll tell me, that nevertheless Pro­testants are as uncharitable as Papists, and come not an Ace behind them. Indeed I should be very sorry this were true. And though it is, I know, an untoward Question to Papists, yet I must ask, How do you prove this, Sir? Why thus. Protestants on­ly allow Salvation to Papists upon Invin­cible Ignorance, and Papists do the same to Protestants. I must confess that in this [Page 107] Paper of yours, you grant Salvation to Protestants who live piously, and repent sin­cererely of all Offences, and through invincible Ignorance remain in that Communion. Now whatever Truth there is in the Saying it self, yet from you we look upon this Concession as a piece of New Popery. The Old Popery was, Protestancy unrepented of Damns. Nei­ther Invincible Ignorance, nor Piety, nor any Repentance that included not a leaving the Protestants Communion, and joining with the Romish, could Save. But here we take no­tice, that of this, as well as of all the other unreasonable Pieces of Old Popery, you be­gin at last to be asham'd, or at least to think it for the Interest of your Design on foot, to deny them, or disguise and soften them, that so they may go the better down with those People who are not so well read in your Controversies, and suspect no Snake in the Grass. But to go on with my Point. Did not the Author of Charity Mistaken, and Charity maintain'd Charity maintain'd, p. 1. c. 7. Sect. 6. and in divers other places of that, and Charity Mistaken. (which produc'd that incomparable Book of Mr. Chillingworth) stiffly and boldly assert, That all Roman Catholicks, not one excepted — Do with unanimous Consent believe and profess that Protestancy unrepen­ted destroys Salvation? Did not the Jesuite, in his Relation of Bishop Land's Conference, [Page 108] swear upon his Soul, That there was but one saving Faith, and that is the Roman? And now in our days, has not aLucilla and Elizabeth. late Paper endeavour'd to make us as great Schismaticks as the Dona­tists? And according to you, can Schisma­ticks, dying such, go to Heaven? And does not that Author force St. Austin to tell us in plain Terms, That whosoever is separated from the Catholick Church, (by which, against all Modesty and Truth, you always mean your own particular Church) how laudably soever he thinks himself to live, for this only Crime, that he is disjoyn'd from the Unity of Christ, (that is to say, in your Language, the Pope) he shall not have Life, but the Wrath of God abideth on him. Pray, Sir, be so kind, if not to me, yet to your self, to reconcile these Sayings with what you say, viz. That there is no Papists but what will grant such Protestants hopes of Salvation, who living piously, and repenting sincerely of all Of­fences, and through invincible Ignorance re­main in that Communion. Where's the Truth and Honesty now of your Assertion, That there is No Papist, &c.? When I have alrea­dy produced three, and perhaps if I pleas'd, could name three hundred. What do you call this amongst you? We call it contradi­cting one another. Well, however pray observe, here's two sorts of Popery. But [Page 109] which must a Man rely on for Orthodox? The Old or the New Popery. I must confess I am inclin'd to believe the New to be the best, but certainly the Old Popery is the true standing Doctrine of the Church of Rome. But suppose we stood in need of the New, what should we be the better for't, unless the Concession were stampt with the Fishers Seal? For you that deal it out to the World are but a private obscure Man, and your Church is no more bound to stand to what you say, than mine is to what I say, unless it be Truth. This that you grant, at best, is but a sign that you have a better Opinion of the Protestant Religion than the generality of your Writers. But to let this pass. I will now prove this Truth beyond any possi­ble Reply, viz. That Papists deny Salvation to Protestants remaining such, and that Pro­testants grant a Possibility of it to Papists re­maining such: And therefore by consequence, the first must needs be on the uncharitable, and the last on the charitable side. And this I shall do by shewing, that our Charity is so great to the Papists, and their want of it so apparent to us, that they have abus'd it into an Argument against us. And this is so notoriously true, that the Papists are not asham'd to boast of it in their Writings and Conversation; thinking thereby to draw weak Persons, that cannot consider where the [Page 110] Cheat of the Argument lies to be of their Church: And with this deceitful Argument, which they have fram'd from our Excess of Charity to them, and their want of it to us, I have heard them make a great noise, and tell of the mighty Feats it has done. But certainly it was amongst such as had thrown away all their Reason and Sense; or else if there had been no other thing to recommend the Church of England, they would have thought that to be the best and safest Church, which eminently has the very Beauty and Form of Christian Religion, viz. Charity, which the Church of England so constantly and largely maintains and practises. But the Argument is this, — You Protestants con­fess Salvation may be had in the Romish Church, but we Papists utterly deny it to yours; there­fore by the Confession of both sides, those that are in our Church are safe; but there is great question concerning Protestants, remaining such, for none but themselves say they can be saved. What think you now, Sir, of the Protestants Charity, and the Papists want of it? Is here any Provision made for poor Protestants by Invincible Ignorance? If this does not prove that Protestants have some Charity for Papists, and they none at all for us Protestants, I do not know what can. And that you could be ignorant of these things, and this Argument so commonly us'd by your Men, when they [Page 111] would deceive the well-meaning People of our Church, you must excuse me if I cannot believe it. With what Face then, Sir, could you tell the gaping Multitude, as you think fit to call the poor honest People, That Pa­pists do not advance the Damnation of Prote­stants one Ace farther against them, than the Protestants against Papists; and that the Do­ctrine of Protestants in this affair is the same in reference to each other; and the Protestants are as uncharitable Damners of the Papists, as they are made to be of the Protestants? And now the matter being brought to this Issue, pray, Sir, tell me who are the unchari­table Damners, Thunderers of Hell and Dam­nation! Who imposes upon the People? who are the injurious Slanderers? And who is it that render the Papists black and odious for their Ʋncharitableness, but the Papists themselves? Certainly, Sir, if your Eye-sight had not been horribly indispos'd with the malignant Influence of Rome, you would have seen, that the un­christian Damners are the Papists only. For shame learn, tho' late, to maintain your Cause by Truth and Charity, or let it perish.

But I foresee that you may take it a little ill, that our Charity extends not to the Learn­ed and Judicious, in the number of which I dare say you reckon your self. Now for these Persons who are to consider, whether [Page 112] they know or believe such and such things to be false, which yet for Worldly Ends they maintain for Truths; or after an honest dili­gent search, cannot by any means discover them to be Errors, hindred by Prepossession, Education, &c. For these last Persons I can­not see why Invincible Ignorance will not comprehend them as well as the ordinary and unlearned People: For I cannot tell what Invincible Ignorance is, unless it be this, That after all our best Endeavours according to our utmost Ability and Means, we yet cannot dis­cern which is Error, and which is Truth. But now for the first sort, who maintain known Errors for Truths, against their Conscience, only for Secular Advantages (in the number of which I pray God you be not) what would you have us believe or say of them? God Almighty Himself has made no Provision, that we know of, for bold, wilful and im­penitent Sinners. We judge no Man that hath a Master to stand and fall to. Charity hopeth all things. And I must tell you my Mind freely, for I have vow'd to follow Truth and Charity where-ever they lead me: That I think it had been better, and more like Christians, if no Member of either Church had medled with the Events of things, and leap'd into God's Judgmens-seat, and pronounc'd final Sentence upon Souls. That certainly being a Secret and Prerogative [Page 113] peculiar to God, who only is the Searcher of Mens Hearts, knows all things, and has an absolute Dominion over his Creatures, and can do all that his Justice, his Goodness, and his Mercy wills. Had the Pastors of each Church done no more, but barely and plainly done the Truths of God, or what they sincerely believ'd to be so, and left the Judgment of Persons to him, that always judgeth right, they had doubtless done their Duty. But 'tis evident the Men of your Church first us'd it to work upon Mens Passi­ons, and what they could not perswade their Understandings to for want of Truth and Reason, they were resolv'd to do it by fright­ing of them. For 'tis too apparent, that more are sway'd by Fear than Love; more are drawn by their Affections and Passions, than by their Reason; and some of our Church-men to countermine your Policy, found it expedient to imitate you, as far as Truth and Christian Charity would permit them. And this may suffice also to apologize for my using it in my Preface,

It now remains, Sir, that I speak to ano­ther thing which seem'd to disturb you; which is, Whether I am a Lay-man, or a Clergy-man. For I find you wavering about it; and therefore I'll endeavour to fix you, tho' in a doubtful case; Why should not [Page 114] Charity have inclin'd you that brag of so much, to believe me when I profess my self a Lay-man? Well, but I speak so like a Clergy-man, so almost in the very Words and Phrases of a Doctor of my Church, and ano­ther Doctor mention'd in your Last Re [...]ly, that you cannot but take what I say for Church-sence, dropping through a Lay-Pen. Sir, I must needs thank you for the Honour you do me, in taking me to speak like such great Men; but I have not Vanity enough to believe that I do. Yet thus much I'll confess, that I de­sire to live no longer than I can, if not speak, yet love and admire the Church of England-Sence. But is it impossible for a Lay-man to speak like a Clergy-man? Does Holy Orders make such a difference? Or do you imagine I have never read any of our Churches Writers? Why may not then my Mind be tinctured by them? And so what I speak or write, bear some resemblance to them? Is there not many a Son like his Fa­ther? And how do you know but I am the Son of a Clergy-man? and so by Blood de­rive something of their way of Writing. But to make an end; I fancy, Sir, that you, or whoever was the Author of the First Part of the Papist Misrepresented, &c. and some others of your Church, have found to your Grief and Shame, that either of these Do­ctors you speak of, could, if they had pleas'd [Page 115] to have undertaken so mean a Work, have writ another sort of a Preface than I have done, to the disadvantage of the French Po­pery now imitated in England. Let the mean­ness of the Performance prevail over you, to believe that neither of them made it. But indeed you are injurious to them to fancy they would be guilty of such indirect deal­ing. No, no, Sir, the Divines of the Church of England have a better Cause, they need use no Arts, or Tricks, no feign'd Miracles, no bold Untruths, no malicious Whispers and Slanders to support and defend it, nor put Shams upon the World. This Practice is none of theirs; and if you please that may be added, as a Mark to prove ours a True Church: And indeed I could easily perswade my self to believe, that your own Practice, and that of your Party, was in your Thoughts, when this Fancy entred into your Brain. But in a word, and to put you out of pain about these two Doctors, (for I can­not blame you for dreading them) I do as­sure you, that neither of them made that Preface; and once more, that I who now write this Letter am a Lay-man, and writ that Preface, such as 'tis. And if I could but be infallibly certain, that the old Popery was al­ter'd in the point of Malice, Revenge, and seeking occasion against those who never so little oppose or hinder the Designs of Rome, [Page 116] I would give you entire satisfaction in this Particular, and not only tell you my Name, but where I live. But because I cannot get out of my Thoughts some late Actions, and that hard Usage of the brave Author of Wholsom Advices, &c. I fear lest Old Popery may be practic'd upon me too; and there­fore think it but common Prudence to conceal my self: For, to tell you true, I am not yet weary of that little Happiness I en­joy.

But, Sir, you make your Misrepresenter tell the World, that I am dabling out of my Element; by which one would think, that after all you believ'd I am a Lay-man. Well, but how out of my Element? May not a Lay-man tell Truth, and do good to his Neighbour's Soul? Is God's Spirit, is all Knowledge limitted to Holy Orders? Be­cause there are some Functions appropriated to Clergy-men, such as Administring the Sa­craments, &c. does it therefore follow, that a Lay-man may neither write nor discourse of any Matters of Religion? Pray, Sir, does that Command, Thou shalt love thy Neigh­bour as thy self, oblige Lay-men as well as Clergy-men? If it does, and since I may edi­fie my self, why, I beseech you, not ano­ther? And can a Man express his Charity to his Neighbour in a higher manner than in [Page 117] Spiritual Things? But the Arguments are in­finite which might be us'd in this Case. And therefore I shall only ask you whether Ter­tullian and Origen, and many other of the Ancient Fathers, writ not about Religion when they were Lay-men? Nay, more; did not Pope Adrian and Pope Nicholas ad­mit Laymen into Councils? And pray, what was Picus Mirandula but an Earl, and meer Lay-man? and Sir Thomas More Lord Chan­cellor of England? But above all, what was that Prince who wrote against Luther, for which the Pope thought fit to bestow the Ti­tle of Defender of the Faith upon him? But indeed why should it seem strange, that you and your Church should find fault with Lay-men's medling in Controversies of Religion, especially against you, when you dare totally bar Lay-mens reading the Holy Scriptures, for which they have a Command from God, Search the Scriptures; and perswade them to put out their Eyes, and throw away their Reason, which God and Nature has given them to be their Guide through this deceitful World. And yet I dare say, that if a Lay-man would undertake so knotty a piece of Work, as to write in Defence of your Church, that you would not tell him that he was dab­ling out of his Element, tho' he were no bet­ter than a Profligate Poet.

I pass over your unhandsom Language, and 'tis below me to return it. But I cannot but stand amaz'd, to find a Member of the Church of Rome, and a Maintainer of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, make his Mis­representer say, That the Protestant Teachers know the People they have to deal with—That their discerning Faculties are stupify'd — That they'll pass over fifty Contradictions, without once stumbling; and that there's no fear of en­quiring, How can this be? No, Sir, the Teachers of the Church of England are not guilty of this Tyranny. We are Members of a Church that invites all her Children to the highest Attainment of Knowledge, and teaches them, that a reasonable Service is the most acceptable to God; and imposes no­thing upon them, that either destroys or contradicts their Reason and Senses; that not only allows her Children to read the Holy Scriptures, but beseeches them to do it, pro­vided they do it with a modest Dependence on their lawful Teachers, for the sence of some Texts, which may not be so clear to Per­sons who are unacquainted with the Proprie­ties of the Languages in which the Holy Scriptures were writ, and the Customs and Manners of the People and Countries where they were penn'd. In a Word, the Church of England allows a private Liberty of ex­amining all things she propounds, and does [Page 119] not expect that Men should follow her blind­fold. She requires indeed Obedience in those few Points which are absolutely necessary to Salvation, because they are so plain, that it is impossible for an honest and sound Mind to question them: But for things of an in­different Nature, she only desires that for the sake of Peace and Ʋnity, Order and Decency, that her Children would not dispute about them. In fine, she is very sure, that they, and they only, are her true Children, her most sincere Members, who are the most obedient to Scripture, and most ready to yield to the Evidence of them, and Reason and Sense.

And thus, Sir, I have endeavoured to re­store Peace to your Mind, by shewing that Protestants are not at all uncharitable, but that Papists are; and that I am a Lay-man, and yet may meddle in Divinity, and not be dabling out of my Element. And now I hope you'l be no longer in a Fright of those two Doctors you hinted; for, assure your self, that unless there be occasion to defend a poor Lay-man of their Church, as far as the Truth and the Religion of it are concern'd (for you may possibly hear from me upon some other Point) these two Doctors are better employ'd, than to trouble themselves with you.

But if against this plain Proof, that the Papists are the only uncharitable Persons, you will yet rub your Forehead, and make Pro­testants as bad, what Remedy? Truth will be Truth still. And however it fares with us, we have over and above this Satisfaction; and you know the Testimony of an Enemy proves much, that to give us our due, you say, we are the most Gentile and courtly Damners that can possibly be met with. Now for the Reward of this frank Acknowledgment, I wish with all my Soul, Protestants could say so much of Papists. But the continual sound of Pestilent Hereticks, Damn'd Schismaticks, and such rude and unchristian Names every where heard, will not possibly permit them.

To conclude all; I shall only desire you, for prevention of more Trouble than needs be, (and I have known a great Controversie to arise from a matter less liable to a Mistake) to take notice, that the very Point in diffe­rence, is not. Whether the Religion of Pro­testants or Papists is the Truest or Safest? For he that believes the Second Commandment was given by God, and that it is not lawful to worship any Being but only God, who gave being to all Things, need not be to seek in that: Neither is it, whether the Protestants or Papists are the most uncharitable? But, in Truth, the present Question is, Whether the [Page 121] Papists are not the only uncharitable Persons? And I think I have fully prov'd that they are so, even from the Papists themselves.

Sir, I heartily wish you and your Party would, before it would be too late, shew so much Charity to your selves and others, to leave off deceiving the poor Souls, and di­sturbing the Peace of Mankind, tho' by suc­ceeding in your Enterprize, you might ar­rive to the highest Temporal Felicities, and by desisting, suffer the greatest of Humane Miseries.

And I am Your very humble Servant.

A POSTSCRIPT by the Au­thor of the Answer to the last Re­ply of the Representer.

HAving leave to fill up this place, I use it to rectifie an Error in the 119th Page of the last Answer to the Representer; where an &c. to Cochleus was omitted with­out Correction, and so he is brought in for the Reporter of those Famous Fictions a­bout Luther's Death; whereas his part in it is the least, the rest being reported by o­thers, particularly by Pontacus, Lindan, and our Country-man W. Reinolds. Cochleus him­self, with the Epistle concerning Luther's lat­ter End, published by him fol. 298. of his History, tells the manner of his Death o­therwise. But Thyraeus a Jesuit was the Man whom I had in my Mind, for contradicting those with whom he agreed in the general Design of Defamation. For he says, That day when Luther died, those possessed Persons in a Town of Brabant (where there were very many) who expected deliverance by the Pa­tronage of St. Dymna (of which for many [Page 123] years many had experience) were delivered from the Devils, and a little after were again possessed. For the Case was this; that the cruel Spirits again tormenting those miserable persons, being asked, where they had bestowed themselves the day before, answered, That by the Command of their Chief they were called forth to the Funeral of the New Prophet, and their faithful Fellow-worker, Luther, and had been present at it. Which matter was confirmed by a Servant of Luther, who was with him while he was dying miserably: For as he was looking out of the Casement for fresh Air, he was greatly affrighted to see more than once I know not how many black ugly Spirits skipping and dancing not far off. And this also was con­firmed by the Crows, which with a fearful noise accompanied the Body of Luther as it was car­ried to Wittemberg. Which wise Tale (De Demoniacis par. 1. n. 99.) is also abetted by Flor. Raemundus de Orig. Haeres. l. 3. p. 40. but does by no means agree with what Reinolds reports in his Calvino-Turcismus, lib. 4. p. 957. that Luther, after a merry Supper, was in the Night suddainly strangled by his Wife. This Business, as they have severally reported it, is a very notable Instance how early they be­gan the Trade of Misrepresenting matters of Fact. But more of this when there is more occasion.

I shall only add, that the Authority I have for saying that they spread such like lewd Stories of Luther's Death before he was dead, is indeed the Authority of Protestant Wri­ters, and chiefly of Phil. Lonicerus in his The­atrum Historicum; nor could it be expected that we should have any other.

FINIS.

Some Books lately Printed for J Robinson.

  • BIshop Hopkin's Practical Exposition on the Ten Commandments.
  • —Six Sermons on Acts 26.28.
  • Dr. Bates's Vol. of Sermons on several Oc­casions.
  • Mr. Edwards Enquiry into several difficult Texts of Scripture.
  • —His Discourse on the Authority, Style and Perfection of the Holy Scriptures.
  • Directions for our more Devout Behavi­our in the time of Divine Service, with a short Rationale on the Common Prayer.
  • The Curate's Advice to his Parishioners for the keeping Holy the Lord's Day, &c.
  • The New State of England under Their Majesties King William and Queen Mary, in Three Parts. The Second Edition, with great Improvements, viz. A Geographical and Hi­storical Account of the Principality of Wales, a Concise History of the late Revolution, a List of the Baronets, &c.

Books Printed for Tho. Newborough at the Golden Ball in St. Paul's Church-yard.

  • A Critical History of the Text of the New Testament, wherein is firmly esta­blish'd the Truth of those Acts on which the Foundation of Christian Religion is laid. By Rich. Simon, Priest. 4to.
  • A Critical History of the Version of the New Testament. By Richard Simon: With a Refutation of such Passages as seem con­trary to the Doctrine of the Church of England. 1692.
  • The New-years-gift Compleat, in Six Parts: Composed of Prayers and Meditations for every Day in the Week; with Devotions for the Sacrament, Lent, and other Occasions. 12o.
  • A Sermon Preach'd before the Queen at Whitehall, Feb. 12. 1691. By William Fleetwood, Chaplain in Ordinary to Their Majesties.
  • A Sermon Preach'd before the Right Ho­nourable the Lord Mayor and Court of Al­dermen, at St. Mary le Bow, on Friday the 11th of April, 1692. being the Fast-Day. By W. Fleetwood, Chaplain in Ordinary to Their Majesties.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.