Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

he can easily answer according to the Doctrin of our Adverfaries, that it do's not appear that Lazarus was rais'd. 'Tis true, faies he, I fee the accidents of Lazarus; I fee his Figure, Complexion, &c. but perhaps thefe accidents may cloath another fubftance. Perhaps the fubftance is that of a Dog, an Horfe, or a Sheep; and Lazarus, tho' his accidents have the appearance of Life, may in the mean time be as truly dead as

ever.

If I reply, that it appears to be Lazarus himfelf, who is now alive, and appeal to the Senfes of this infidel for the truth of it; if I bid him look and examin, and ask his own eyes, whether it be not the fame Perfon whom he faw lying dead in the grave; he may tell me that his Senfes cannot judge of fubftances. 'Tis true, faies he, I fee the accidents of Lazarus; but I cannot be affur'd that Lazarus himself is under them, unless the fubftance of Lazarus be difcernible by the eyes. However, faies he, fuppofe these which I call, and believe to be the accidents of Lazarus, do really cover the fubftance of a Man; yet I am not certain that Lazarus is the Man; because my eyes cannot diftinguish the fubftance of Lazarus from that of another Perfon. Wherefore I am not, and cannot be certain, that the dead Lazarus was rais'd to life; and why then fhou'd I take this thing for granted, and embrace a new Religion upon the account of it?

Thus again the Mahometans, who believe that Symon the Cyrenian was crucified instead of Jefus, cannot be convinc'd of the Death and Refurrection of our Lord, unless the Senfes may be allow'd to discern and distinguish fubftances. For how will you prove that Symon was not crucify'd

under

under our Savior's accidents; if one fubftance may be cloath'd with the accidents of another, and the Senfes cannot pafs a judgment between them? Since we may be fo eafily mistaken in our pretended perception of fubftances, why might not the Jews take Symon for Chrift; and how cou'd the Apoftles be fure, that they convers'd with their Rifen Lord and Mafter?

'Tis in vain to alledge other inftances in fo plain a cafe. 'Tis evident, that all the other proofs of the Chriftian Religion may be evaded after the fame manner. For how can we be affur'd, that any one Miracle was ever wrought, if the Senfes can judge of nothing but a few outward accidents? And I defire our Adverfaries to confider, whether that muft not be thought an abfurd and impious opinion, which overthrows the certainty of our moft holy Faith.

Secondly, I am now to fhew, that we are aflured by the evidence of Senfe, that the fubftances of the Bread and Wine do remain after the Confecration. And for the truth of this I appeal to thofe Senfes, the evidence of which I have prov'd to be alwaies certain. If you ask an infidel, what he fees after the Confecration; he will anfwer you, Bread and Wine. Get a Prieft to place the confecrated Wafers amongst others that are not confecrated; and you'l find it impoffible to distinguish them. Do you not give the lie to your fa culties, when you fay that the Elements are not Bread and Wine? If you were to meet with them upon any fudden occafion; you wou'd depofe upon Oath, that they are what they feem to be, Touch, Taft, and View, and Smell of them a thoufand times; and you'll find, even after the niceft inquiry and ftricteft examination, that your Sen

[ocr errors]

fes

fes do all agree in their teftimony concerning them. They affure you, that the fubftances of Bread and Wine do, as certainly remain after the Confecration; as the Elements were Bread and Wine before the Confecration. And if ye will not believe your Senfes after the Confecration; why did you believe them before it; fince there is equal evidence of Senfe in both Cafes?

Befides, not only your own Senfes, but the Senfes of the whole World do atteft the fame ; and the thing it felf is extremely common. Nay, there are no things in the World, between which we can more easily diftinguish, than between Flesh and Bloud, and a bit of Bread and a few drops of Wine. So that if the Senfes of all Mankind cannot diftinguish fuch objects, tis impoffible to diftinguish any thing by our Senfes; which I have already fhewn to be abfurd.

If it be faid, that the Eucharift is an object of Faith, and therefore cannot be examin'd by our Senfes; I anfwer, that the inward part of the Sacrament, or thing fignify'd thereby (viz. the Grace of Chrift) is an object of Faith: but the outward part of it, or the thing which fignifies (viz. the Elements, which denote and convey the Grace of Chrift) the outward part, I fay, is an object of the Senfes, and may be examin'd by them.

If it be also faid, that the change of the Elements is miraculous, and therefore must not be examin'd by our Senfes; I anfwer that all Miracles (properly fo call'd) are fenfible things, and make their appeal to our Senfes. But whatever be the notion of a Miracle, 'tis certain, that no Miracle can make that to be falfe which is really true. And therefore, fince I have fhewn that the Evi

dence

dence of Senfe is alwaies certain; 'tis not in the power of a miracle ever to make it uncertain; because a thing might then become both true and falfe at the fame time.

[ocr errors]

Wherefore, fince the evidence of Senfe is alwaies certain, and fince it appears by the evidence of Senfe, that the Elements do continue Bread and Wine, after the Confecration; 'tis manifeft that we are affur'd by the evidence of Senfe, that the fubftances of Bread and Wine do remain after the Confecration. And therefore 'tis plain, that the fubftances of the Bread and Wine are not turn'd into the Natural Body and Bloud of Chrift. Now if we are certain, that the fubftances of the Bread and Wine are not turn'd into the Natural Body and Bloud of Chrift: then the Doctrin of Transubftantiation is abfolutely falfe, because that Doctrin fuppofes fuch a change.

I might add, that this Doctrin is repugnant to all the evidence of reafon, and deftroies our very first principles of knowledge; that it is loaded with innumerable Contradictions, and obliges Men to moft abominable and barbarous actions; but I be lieve our Adversaries will find so much strength in this fingle Argument, that I need not trouble them with others.

CHAP

[blocks in formation]

That the Doctrin of Tranfubftantiation cannot be proved from the Sixth Chapter of St. John's, Gospel.

I

Muft now confider, what our Adverfaries alledge in favor of Tranfubftantiation. And

First, they pretend, that the Scriptures do teach it. But in answer to this I defire them to confider three things..

[ocr errors]

1. That, if it were barely poffible, yet 'tis infinitely improbable, that Almighty God wou'd make the Doctrin of Tranfubftantiation a part of the Chriftian Religion. For God defigns that Christianity fhou'd be univerfally believ'd; where as if Tranfubftantiation be a part, it must of neceffity hinder Men from embracing the Whole of our profeffion. For, fince Tranfubftantiation is utter ly repugnant to our Senfes, and fince 'tis a great piece of folly to renounce our Senfes, certainly no wife and confidering Man can embrace, or think it poffible for a gracious God to injoin. that Religion upon pain of damnation, the profeffion of which obliges him to break all the rules of prudence in believing against the evidence of Senfe.

May not an Infidel, when requir'd to believe Tranfubftantiation, juftly object, that Christianity requires Men to believe thofe Miracles which prove it true, upon the teftimony of their Senfes : and at the fame time requires them to believe a Doctrin, which deftroies the certainty of their Senfes? May they not fay, it overthrows its own

« ElőzőTovább »