tion is oftner Attributed in Holy Scripture to His Blood than to His Body. We are Saved by His BLOOD- Propitiation through His BLOOD by the Sprinkling of His BLOOD-&c.

L. Ther is Mention made fometimes of the breaking of Bread, when ther is nothing faid of the Cup; and this we make use of as an Argument that the Cap is not Neceffary. This is mainly Infifted upon in our Catechifm, the Chap. you juft now Named, Sect, Ixix, And Joh. vi. 51. is Quoted, I am the Living Bread if any Man eat of this Bread

the Bread I will give is my Flefb.

And

G. We take not this to be fpoke of the Satrament, but of Faith in Chrift, here Expreffed by Eating, that is, Spiritually, as Himself explains it, ver. 63. It is the Spirit that Quickneth, the Flesh profiteth Nothing: The Words that I fpeak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life. But let it be taken of the Sacrament, as you do, you will find the Bloo Joined with the Flesh, in the next Words, ver. 53. Except ye Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and Drink His Blood as before Quoted: And again, ver. 54. Whofo Eateth My Flesh, and Drinketh My Blood. And ver. 55. For My Flefb is Meat indeed, and My Blood is Drink indeed. And ver. 56. He that Eateth My Flefb, and Drinketh My Blood Is not the Blood

here Named with the Flefb? But if it were not, ther are a Hundred Places, as I now observed, where the Blood of Christ is Named as Cleansing, as Redeeming us, &. without M 2

any

any Mention of His Flesh or Body. Are they therefore Excluded? This is fuch a fort of Reasoning, as if I invite you to Eat with me, you must have no Drink to your Dinner, becaufe it was not Named. But if by Eating we commonly mean the Whole Meal, and Drinking is likewife Included, this Criticism upon the Lord's Supper, of calling it Eating, will Appear what it is, and not be thought Sufficient to Exclude the Cup in the Sacrament, And other Foundation you have none in Scripture. But if I once call it Eating the Lord's Supper, and feveral times call it both Eating and Drinking, will not the Latter explain the Former? Or will Eating exclude Drinking, though Drinking be exprefly Named? To Eat the Lord's Supper is the only Phrase we use, I never heard any Body call it Drinking the Supper: And you may thence Prove that we have not the Cup in our Sacrament, as well as that the Apoftles had it not, because it is faid they Eat Bread, or broke Bread. But I have Over-Laboured this Point, because you lay fo much Strefs upon it.

I will now fhew you another Restriction your Church has made upon the Institutions of God. As fhe has taken the Cup from the Laity, fo has fhe taken another of your Sacraments, that is Marriage from the Clergy. I pass by the Politick Views and Advantages. the Court of Rome has in this, as giving the Pope the more Abfolute Command and ma

king Him in Effect Heir of all the great Poffeffions of the Clergy, for the Canon Law obliges the Regular Bishops not to Difpofe of their Eftates by [a] Will, and the other Clergy not to be too Liberal of their Alms in their Sicknefs. And what they leave, the Pope difpofes of as Grand Treasurer of the Church. But waving all this, I will Infift now only upon what Relates to Confcience. You reckon it a Defilement in your Church for a Clergy-Man to Marry. No great Complement to the Marryed State, which yet was Inftituted of God in Paradife while Man was in his Innocence. And the Apoftle fays, [b] Marriage is Honourable in All, and the Bed Undefiled. And forbidding to Marry is Reckoned one of the [c] Doctrines of Devils. And directions are given how a Bishop fhould Go vern his Wife and Children, [d] for if a Min know not how to Rule his own House, how ball he take Care of the Church of God? Yet your Interpreters would have this Wife and this Houfe to be the Church St. Peter was Married Man, and forfook not his Wife after he was an Apostle, but [e] led her about with him as other Apofles did And that in the Primitive Church the Clergy did Marry is Plain from Socrates his Ecclef. Hift. lib. i. cap. 11 and 1. v. c. 22. The Vow of Single Life was not Impofed upon the Clergy till Pope Hildibrand. See Matth.

J

M.3

[a] Decretal. Gregor. lib. 3 de Teftam. tit. 26. cap. 7. 9. [b] Heb. xiii. 4. [] i. Tim. iv. 3. [4] Chap. iii. 5. [e] 1. Cor. ix. 5.

Matth. Weftmon. ad An. 1074, Vincent. Spec. Hift. I. 24. c. 45. Antonin. 1. 16. c. 1. ff. 21, And it was without Precedent (fays Sigebert. Chron. ad An. 1074.) and, as many thought, out of an indifcreet Zeal, contrary to the Opinion of the Holy Fathers. But Hildebrand, was not obeyed in this in England for above a Hundred Years after, for our ancient Records fay, (a) All thofe Decrees availed nothing, for the Priests by the King's Confent ftill had their Wives as formerly. And Gregory the Great said (b) That it was lawful for Juch of the Clergy as could not contain, to Marry. And Pius the Second faid the fame, (c) That they may be allowed to Marry. And your great Canonift Panormittan fays, (d) Ther is as great Reafon to allow Priefts to Marry now, as ever ther was to Refrain it. Let St. Bernard bear Witnefs in his Time what Reafon ther was for Allowing it, he fays, (e) Ther, are many who cannot be bid for their Multitude, nor do seek to be Concealed through their Impudence, who, being Refrained from the Nuptial Remedies, run into all Filthiness. And another fays, (f) That few in thofe Days were free from Fornication. And Matthew Paris tells that the Pope thought it almost a Miracle that a Candedate for

a

(a) Hiftor. Petroburg. An. 1127. ap. Spelm. T. 2. p. 36. (b) Refponf. ad Interrog. Secund. Aug. Cantuar. (c) Pius 2. in Gett. Concil. Bafil. See also Platin. in his Life. p. 329. (d) De Clericis conjug. can. cum olim. (e) De Converf. ad Cleric. cap. 29. (f) Gloff. ad Gratian. Dift. 82. c. 5:

L

a Bishoprick was faid to be a Pure Virgin. Whence the Gloff. ad Gratian in the Place just before Quoted, calls (a) Fornication but a Vel mal Sin. And it is Tollerated if not Allowed (b) However it was Reckoned a lefs Sin in a Priest than Marriage. For this Reason, Deadly Sin is added to Fornication in our Litany. But why was Calibacy enjoined to the Priests? And why Marriage a greater Sin than Fornication? Because the Firft is a Breach of the Command of the Church, and the Latter of the Command of God! And the Difference of the Punishment of thefe in your Church, fhews that the thinks fo; for a Priest committing Fornication comes off for a Small Penance, whereas if he Marries he is Degraded. May we not then fay to the Church of Rome, as Chrift to the Church of the Jews, in a Parallel Cafe, (c) Full well ye Reject the Commandment of God, that ye may keep your own Tradition.

But if Marriage be fuch a Defilement as is Unworthy a Prief, how came you to make a Sacrament of it? I fuppofe you cannot mean lefs by a Sacrament than a Means of Grace, you have made many lefs things fo, as is fhewed before. And would you Deprive the Clergy of any Means of Grace? Or is it your Modeity to put them upon the Level with the Laity for Depriving them of the Cup, in the Sacrament of Chrift's own Inftitution.

M 4

Marriage

(a) Decret. P. Alex. 1. 3. tit. 2. c. 3. Gloff. ad Gratian, dift. 82. c.s (b) Ibid, Dist. 34, Cau. 7. Cofterus Enchirid, de Coelinat, c. 17. (c) Mark. vii. 9.