§. IX.
But since we find that several Testimonies of Scripture do sufficiently shew, That such external Rites are no necessary Part of the New Covenant Dispensation, therefore not needful now to continue, however they were for a Season practised of old, I shall instance some few of them, whereby from the Nature of the Thing, as well as those Testimonies, it may appear, That the Ceremony of Bread and Wine is ceased, as well as those other Things confessed by our Adversaries to be so. The Ceremony of Bread and Wine is ceased.The first is Rom. xiv. 17. For the Kingdom of God is not Meat and Drink, but Righteousness and Peace, and Joy in the Holy Ghost: Here the Apostle evidently shews, That the Kingdom of God, or Gospel of Christ, stands not in Meats and Drinks, and such like Things, but in Righteousness, &c. as by the Context doth appear, where he is speaking of the Guilt and Hazard of judging one another about Meats and Drinks. So then, if the Kingdom of God stand not in them, nor the Gospel, nor Work of Christ, then the eating of outward Bread and Wine can be no necessary Part of the Gospel-worship, nor any perpetual Ordinance of it. Another of the same Apostle is yet more plain, Col. ii. 16. the Apostle throughout this whole second Chapter doth clearly plead for us, and against the Formality and Superstition of our Opposers: For in the Beginning he holds forth the great Privileges which Christians have by Christ, who are indeed come to the Life of Christianity; and therefore he desires them, Ver. 6. As they have received Christ, so to walk in him; and to beware, lest they be spoiled through Philosophy and vain Deceit, after the Rudiments or Elements of the World; because that in Christ, whom they have received, is all Fulness: And that they are circumcised with the Circumcision made without Hands (which he calls the Circumcision of Christ) and being buried with him by Baptism, are also arisen with him through the Faith of the Operation of God. Here also they did partake of the true Baptism of Christ; and being such as are arisen with him, let us see whether he thinks it needful they should make use of such Meat and Drink as Bread and Wine, to put them in Remembrance of Christ’s Death; or whether they ought to be judged, that they did it not; Ver. 16. Let no Man therefore judge you in Meat and Drink: Is not Bread and Wine Meat and Drink? But why? Which are a Shadow of Things to come: But the Body is of Christ. ’Tis but a Sign and Shadow they confess.Then since our Adversaries confess, That their Bread and Wine is a Sign or Shadow; therefore, according to the Apostle’s Doctrine, we ought not to be judged in the Non-observation of it. But is it not fit for those that are dead with Christ to be subject to such Ordinances? And which do perish with the Using.See what he saith, Ver. 20. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the Rudiments of the World, why, as though living in the World, are ye subject to Ordinances? (Touch not, taste not, handle not: Which all are to perish with the Using) after the Commandments and Doctrines of Men. What can be more plain? If this serve not to take away the absolute Necessity of the Use of Bread and Wine, what can it serve to take away? Sure I am, the Reason here given is applicable to them, which all do perish with the Using; since Bread and Wine perish with the Using, as much as other Things. But further, If the Use of Water, and Bread and Wine, were that wherein the very Seals of the New Covenant stood, and did pertain to the chief Sacraments of the Gospel and Evangelical Ordinances (so called) then would not the Gospel differ from the Law, or be preferable to it. The Law was Meats and Drinks; not so the Gospel.Whereas the Apostle shews the Difference, Heb. ix. 10. in that such Kind of Observations of the Jews were as a Sign of the Gospel, for that they stood only in Meats and Drinks, and divers Washings. But if the Gospel-worship and Service stand in the same, where is the Difference?
Object.If it be said, These under the Gospel have a spiritual Signification;
Answ.So had those under the Law; God was the Author of those, as well as Christ is pretended to be the Author of these. But doth not this contending for the Use of Water, Bread and Wine, as necessary Parts of the Gospel-worship, destroy the Nature of it, as if the Gospel were a Dispensation of Shadows, and not of the Substance? The Law has Shadows, the Gospel brings the Substance.Whereas the Apostle, in that of the Colossians above-mentioned, argues against the Use of these Things, as needful to those that are dead and arisen with Christ, because they are but Shadows. And since, through the whole Epistle to the Hebrews, he argues with the Jews, to wean them from their old Worship, for this Reason, because it was typical and figurative; is it agreeable to right Reason to bring them to another of the same Nature? What Ground from Scripture or Reason can our Adversaries bring us, to evince that one Shadow or Figure should point to another Shadow or Figure, and not to the Substance? And yet they make the Figure of Circumcision to point to Water-baptism, and the Paschal Lamb to Bread and Wine. But was it ever known that one Figure was the Anti-type of the other, especially seeing Protestants make not these their Anti-types to have any more Virtue and Efficacy than the Type had? Their Sacraments confer not Grace.For since, as they say, and that truly, That their Sacraments confer not Grace, but that it is conferred according to the Faith of the Receiver, it will not be denied but the Faithful among the Jews received also Grace in the Use of their Figurative Worship. And though Papists boast that their Sacraments confer Grace ex opere operato, yet Experience abundantly proveth the contrary.