being inimitable, cannot be neceffary. Miraculous Fafting cannot be a Duty, where the Gift of Miracles is not given.

As to the New Testament, there is not a ftated Faft appointed in it: We are indeed commanded to fast and pray; but we are no-where told how much, or how often, we are to do either; but are left to chufe proper Occafions, and proper Inclinations, for doing both. St. Paul is fuch a generous Advocate for Liberty of this Kind, that he condemns all those who condemn others for taking it: Let not, says he, him that eateth, defpife him that eateth not: And let not him which eateth not, judge him that eateth; for God hath received him. One Man efteemeth one Day above another: Another esteemeth every Day alike. Let every Man be fully perfuaded in his own Mind (Rom. ch. xiv. ver. 3, and 5.). The famé Spirit of Charity, and the fame good-natured rational Advice, runs through the whole Chapter.

THE Inftitution of Lent was founded upon our Saviour's Faft of Forty Days in the Wildernefs; as if weak impotent Mortals could imitate the Omnipotent Son of God, in Works done by Divine Power only! They might as well pretend to walk upon the Sea once a Years

of

or to raise the Dead at all times: Besides, our Saviour performed this Faft but once, and his Apostles never, as far as we know. Once a Twelve-month you must keep Lent, is not a Gospel Precept.

No Society, therefore, of Men can injoin any Time, or Measure, of Fafting (except where the Law directs the fame) without departing from the Gofpel, contradicting St. Paul, and fetting up their own Authority in Defiance of both the Gospel and the Saint. Such an Injunction would be impracticable, and even cruel. To many Constitutions it might be dangerous, and even fatal; and to all Men it would render Life wretched and burdenfome. The good God has no-where commanded frail Men to worship him with Pain and Sickness of Body, nor to haften their own Death by the Means of their Devotion. This would be to represent him as delighting in human Mifery, and human Sacrifices; a fort of Worship suitable to the terrible Spirit of Moloch, or any o.hr Demon, but no wise acceptable to the God of Mercy, and the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift.

THE Popish Priests know well, that it is intirely impoffible, that all Men fhould comply with this their Discipline of Hunger; and perhaps

s

haps that very Impoffibility is their best Reason for maintaining it. It is certain, that from hence they draw vaft Gain, by hiring out Difpenfations for Eating on the Days of Fafting; and the Lucre which they make by breaking the Canon, is an unanswerable Argument for defending it. No Man is denied the Privilege of breaking Lent, who can pay for breaking it. He who cannot faft at all, may, for a competent Fee, eat Fish, which is a more luxurious Diet than Flesh; and he who cannot fast upon Fish, may, for a more competent Fee, fast upon a Belly-full of Roast-beef; which, tho' a chaster fort of Food than Fish, is more strictly forbidden by that Church.

INDEED, fuch are the vaft Fees arifing to the Popish Church, from Licences for a Liberty to eat, when it is a Duty to fast, that the whole Institution of Fafting there, seems only a religious Roguery, defign'd for ftarving the People, to feed the Priefts. For myself, I think the Parfon has fo little to do with this Matter, that I do not think, that any Direction ought to be taken about Fafting, but from our Conftitution, or our Physician. If it be our Duty to faft on certain Days, no Tribe of Priests can difpenfe with the Pleasure and the Laws of Almighty God; though it is a

Task

Task which (for Money) they never refuse: And if it be not our Duty, it is infolent and wicked in them to command what neither God nor Nature requires; and it is in us a Sin and a Folly to obey them. Even the Proteftant Priefts, long fince the Reformation, have known how to make the right Ufe of this Power. I myself have feen feveral formal Difpenfations, figned by Archbishop Sheldon, under the Archiepifcopal Seal, to license the eating of Flesh in Lent; which Dispensations, I prefume, were not granted without Application and Fees.

RELIGION is a voluntary Thing; it can no more be forced than Reason, or Memory, or any Faculty of the Soul. To be devout against our Will, is an Abfurdity; and it is ridiculous in others to hope to make us fo, in fpite of ourselves. We have no Power over the Appetites of others, no more than over their Confciences. Neither a Man's Mind, nor his Palate, can be fubject to the Jurifdiction of another; and whoever takes upon him to regulate one's Throat and Stomach, and direct one how much to fwallow, may (with equa Reafon) affume Dominion over the other Offices of Nature, and dictate how much one ought to discharge. If Fafting be good and

pious, because it afflicts and mortifies the Human Spirit and Frame; a Surfeit, or a Debauch, or a Kick on the Guts, or a broken Leg, muft be good and pious, for the fame Reason, if given or

taken with the fame View.

As Fafting ought to be left to every Man's Discretion, because every Man is the best Judge of his Conftitution and his Confcience, fo ought it to be exercised with exceeding Care and Caution; otherwife it will be apt to four our Tempers, or diforder our Heads, and probably do both. Now, neither Ill-nature, nor Enthusiasm, is any-wife related to true Reli gion; far otherwife, they are the greatest Enemies which it has. A bitter Spirit, and a raving Brain, may be occafioned or increased by Fafting; but Chriftianity never produces them, nor owns them. We may faft ourfelves into Peevishness, and call it Chriftian Zeal; and into the Vapours, and call the Wind in our Heads, Inspiration. But, by all this, we only fhew, that we know nothing, at least, poffefs nothing, either of Inspiration or Zeal.

BUT the fame immoderate Fafting does not only render People whimsical and paffionate, and has confequently helped to give Birth to many ridiculous and uncharitable Prin

ciples