Sacrament alfo, two Signs are of more weight than one alone, for the Confirmation of GOD's Promifes. And fince it is faid, St. Luke xxii. and 1 Cor. xi. that the Cup is the New Teftament, and the New Covenant in the Blood of Chrift, becaufe it is the Sacrament of it: Why then are the People deprived of it?

9. As for the imaginary Dangers and Scandals which the Romish Doctors find in the Peoples partaking of the Cup; I fay in General, that JESUS CHRIST (in whom the Treafures of Wisdom are hid, and in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily ;) forefaw them as well as they: And yet he Inftituted and Adminiftred the Cup, and commanded all to drink of it. And St. Paul, who was extraordinarily infpired by the Holy Ghoft, doth (notwithstanding these pretended Dangers and Scandals,) command the Corinthians, as well Lay-Perfons as Ecclefiaftical, to drink of the Cup; as hath been already proved.

10. The firft inconvenience which our Adverfaries find in Peoples partaking of the Cup, is that they fear they may dip their Moustaches in the Chalice, and fo the Blood of Chrift may remain on fome hair of the Mouftache. Alfo they fear that the Species of the Wine, and confequently Chrift's Blood, may fall to the Ground; and being fallen it cannot be gathered up again.

To this I anfwer, Firft, That Women, Eunuchs, and fuch young Men as have no Beards, ought not to be excluded.

SECONDLY, It is better to be without Moustaches, then without the Participation of the whole Sacrament.

THIRDLY, This inconvenience proceeds only from a falfe Suppofition, viz. that Chrift's Blood is under the Species of the Wine. But if the Sacrament of the Eucharift there be nothing but Bread and Wine in Subftance; and any of it fall to the Ground accidentally, and not through any Fault of ours: This Inconvenience is not great enough to violate the Inftitution and Command of JESUS CHRIST and his Apoftles

II. THE fecond Inconvenience is, That it is almost impoffible to obferve this Law, where there is a great Number of People, and but one Prieft.

To this I answer, Firft, That in Places where there is much People, as in Cities. there are divers Priefts.

SECONDLY, If one Prieft be not enough, another must be called from fome neighbouring Place.

THIRDLY, That which cannot be done in one Day, must be done in two or three Days; rather than the Command of JESUS CHRIST fhould be violated, and the Practice of the PRIMITIVE CHURCH abandon'd.

12. THE third Inconvenience is, that fome. have a naturalAntipathy,or Averfion to Wine; and confequently cannot drink the Cup.

To this I anfwer, That because corporal Actions do depend on certain natural Powers; they are fuppofed to be commanded to

thofe

those that have natural Powers proper to exercise those A&tions, and to none else. For example; The hearing of GOD's Word is not commanded to deaf Perfons, but to those that can hear it. But drinking of Wine is a corporal Action, and therefore commanded to thofe only that can drink it. So that if the Cup must be taken from all Lay-People, because fome of them have a natural Antipathy to Wine; then the preaching of the Gofpel must be taken from CHRISTIANS, because fome of them are deaf and cannot hear it.

13. THE fourth Inconvenience is, That there are fome Countries where no Wine grows, as in Lapland, Norway, &c.

To this I anfwer, Firft, That although no Wine grows in thofe Countries; yet fome may be brought thither.

SECONDLY, But if none can be brought without being spoiled, and its Form changed; then it is better to fubftitute the ordinary Drink of the Country, inftead of Wine.

THIRDLY, But if this common Drink of the Country may not be fubftituted inftead of the Wine; then they that cannot have Wine, do abftain from it, because they are forced thereunto. And it is neither Impudence nor Contempt, to abftain from a Thing commanded by JESUS CHRIST when it is not to be had. But to ordain that they that have Wine in Abundance, fhall abstain from the Cup, is an infufferable Boldness, and a most unchristian Contempt of the Sacrament. CHAP.

CHAP. VII.

Against the Mass.

1. HE Mafs, according to the Ro

T

mish Doctors, is a Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Chrift, Propitiatory for the Sins of the Living and the Dead: And fo it is defined by the Council of Trent, Seffion 22. Against fuch a Mass we might alledge all the Arguments already made Ufe of against Tranfubftantiation, and the pretended Prefence of Chrift's Body in the Hoft. For our Adverfaries confefs that thofe Reasons which deftroy Tranfubftantiation, and the pretended Prefence of Chrift's Body in the Hoft, do alfo deftroy the Mafs. But in this, Chapter we fhall only ufe fuch Arguments as are directly against the Mass, and do utterly destroy it.

THE firft ARGUMENT is drawn from this, viz. that in the Inftitution and firft Celebration of the Eucharift, JESUSCHRIST did not facrifice nor offer his Body and Blood to his Father; as appears by what is menti oned by the Three Evangalifts, and St. Paul, in which there is not the leaft Footstep to be

feen

feen of a Sacrifice or Oblation of Chrift's Body and Blood. This Bellarmine confeffeth in Book 1. of the Mafs, Chap. 27. in thefe Words. The Oblation which is made after Confecration, belongs to the Entireness of the Sacrament, but is not of its Effence; which I prove, because neither our Lord nor his Apoftles did make this Oblation at the first, as we have demonftrated_out of Gragory. The Jefuit Salmeron in Tom. 13. of his Commentaries on the Epiftles of St. Paul, makes a Catalogue of unwritten Traditions, in which he puts the Ecclefiaftical Hierarchy, the Worshipping of Images, the Mass, the Manner of Sacrificing, and the Tradition that JESUS CHRIST did offer a Sacrifice in the Bread and Wine. Card. Baronius, in his Annals on the Year 53. freely confeffeth that the Sacrifice of the Eucharift is an unwritten Tradition. A ftrange Thing, that the Mafs, which is the Foundation of the Romish Church, (for the Doctors require nothing of the People, but that they fhould go to Mafs;) cannot be found to have been inftituted or commanded by JESUS CHRIST. And the Truth is, if J ESUS CHRIST (in the Celebration of the Eucharift,) had offered unto GOD his Father, a Sacrifice of his Body and Blood, Propitiatory for the Sins of the Living and Dead; then there had been no need, that he should have been facrificed on the Crofs: Because (having already expiated our Sins in the Sacrifice of the Eucharift, there was no

need