AMong the many Disadvan­tages, which those who plead in any sense for Li­berty of Conscience are ex­posed unto, it is not the least, that in their arguings and Pleas they are enforced to admit a Supposition, That those whom they plead for, are indeed really mistaken in their Ap­prehensions about the matters concerning which they yet desire to be indulged in their practice. For unless they will give place to such a supposition, or if they will rigidly contend that what they plead in the be­half [Page 2] of, is absolutely the Truth, and that obe­dience thereunto, is the direct Will and Command of God, there remains no pro­per field for the Debate about Indulgence to be mannaged in. For things acknow­ledged to be such, are not capable of an Indulgence properly so called; because the utmost Liberty that is necessary unto them, is their Right and Due in strict Justice and Law. Men therefore in such Dis­courses, speak not to the nature of the things themselves, but to the Apprehensi­ons of them with whom they have to do. But yet against this Disadvantage every Party which plead for themselves, are re­lieved by that secret reserve that they have in the perswasion of the Truth and Good­ness of what they profess, and desire to be indulged in the practice of. And this al­so, as occasion doth offer it self, and in the defence of themselves from the charge of their Adversaries, they openly con­tend and avow. Neither was it judged formerly, that there was any way to de­prive them of this Reserve and Relief, but by a direct and particular Debate of the matters specially in difference, carried on unto their Conviction by evidence of Truth, managed from the Common Princi­ples of it. But after Tryal made, this [Page 3] way to convince men of their errors and mistakes, who stand in need of Indulgence with respect unto the outward Admini­stration of the powers that they are un­der, is found, as it should seem, tedious, unreasonable, and ineffectual. A new way therefore to this purpose is fixed on, and it is earnestly pleaded, That there needs no other Argument or Medium to prove men to be mistaken in their Apprehensions, and to miscarry in their practice of Reli­gious duties, than that at any time, or in any place they stand in need of Indulgence. To Dissent, at all adventures, is a crime; and he whom others persecute, tacitly at least, confesseth himself guilty. For it is said, That the Law of the Magistrate being the sole Rule of Obedience in Religious Worship, their Non-complyance with any Law by him established, evidencing it self in their desire of Exemption, is a suffici­ent conviction, yea a self-acknowledge­ment not only of their Errors and Mistakes in what they apprehend of their Duty in these things, and of their Miscarriages in what they practise, but also that them­selves are persons Turbulent and Seditious in withdrawing Obedience from the Laws which are justly imposed on them. With what Restrictions and Limitations, or whe­ther [Page 4] with any or no, these Assertions are maintained, we shall afterward enquire.

The Management of this Plea, (if I greatly mistake him not) is one of the principal Designs of the Author of that Discourse, a brief Survey whereof is here proposed, The Principle which he proceeds herein upon, himself it seems knew to be Novel and Uncouth, and therefore thought it incumbent on him, that both the man­ner of its handling, and the other Princi­ples that he judged meet to associate with it, or annex unto it, should be of the same kind and complexion. This Design hath at length produced us this Discourse; which of what use it may prove to the Church of God, what tendency it may have to retrive or promote Love and Peace among Christians, I know not. This I know, that it hath filled many persons of all sorts with manifold surprizals, and some with amazement. I have therefore on sundry Considerations, prevailed with my self much against my inclinations, for the sake of Truth and Peace, to spend a few hours in the examination of the prin­cipal parts and seeming pillars of the whole Fabrick. And this I was in my own mind the more easily indueed unto, be­cause there is no concernment either of [Page 5] the Church or State in the things here un­der debate, unless it be, that they should be vindicated from having any concern in the things and opinions here pleaded and argued. For as to the present Church, if the Principles and reasonings here main­tained and managed, are agreeable unto her Sentiments, and allowed by her; yet there can be no offence given in their Exa­mination, because she hath no where yet declared them so to be. And the truth is, if they are once owned and espoused by her, to the ends for which they are as­serted, as the Christians of old triumphed in the thoughts of him, who first engaged in wayes of violence against them among the Nations in the world, so the Non-Con­formists will have no small relief to their minds in their sufferings, when they under­stand these to be the avowed Principles and Grounds, on which they are to be perse­cuted and destroyed. And for the power of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction belonging to the Kings of this Nation, as it hath been claimed and exercised by them in all ages since the establishment of Christian Religi­on among us, as it is declared in the Laws, Statutes, and Customs of the Kingdom, and prescribed unto an Acknowledgement in the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, it [...] [Page 8] and steddiness of expression, which we shall be farther accustomed unto. But in what here he avers of himself, he seems to have the advantage of our Lord Jesus Christ, who upon less provocations than he hath undertaken the consideration of (for the Pharisees with whom he had to deal, were Gentlemen be tells us, unto those with whom himself hath to do) as he saith, fell in­to an hot fit of Zeal, yea, into an height of Impatience, which made him act with a seem­ing fury, and transport of passion, pag. 7. And if that be indeed his temper which he commends in himself, he seems to me to be obliged for it unto his Constituti­on and Complexion, as he speaks, and not to his Age; seeing his juvenile expressions and confidence, will not allow us to think that he suffers under any defervescency of spirit by his years. The Philosopher tells us, that old men in matters dubious and weighty, are not over-forward to be Positive, but ready to cry, [...], per­haps, and it may be so, and this [...], because they have experience of the un­certainty of things in this world. As in­deed those who know what entanglements all humane Affairs are attended withal, what appearing Causes and probable Rea­sons are to be considered and examined [Page 9] about them, and how all rational determi­nations are guided and influenced by un­foreseen emergencies and occasions, will not be over-forward to pronounce abso­lutely and peremptorily about the dispo­sal of important affairs. But as the same Author informs us, [...]; Young men suppose that they know all things, and are vehement in their Asseve­rations; from which frame proceed all those Dogmatical Assertions of what is Politick, and Impolitick in Princes, of what will esta­blish or ruine Governments, with the con­tempt of the Conceptions of others about things conducing to publick peace and tran­quility, which so frequently occur in our Author. This makes him smile at as seri­ous Consultations for the furtherance of the welfare and prosperity of this Nation, as it may be in any age, or juncture of time have been upon the Wheel, Preface p. 48. These Considerations made it seem to me, that in an ordinary course, he hath time enough before him to improve the notions he hath here blessed the World with a discovery of; if upon second thoughts he be equally enamoured of them unto what now he seems to be.

I could indeed have desired, that he had given us a more clear account of that [Page 10] Religion which in his judgement he doth most approve. His commendation of the Church of England, sufficiently manifesteth his interest to lye therein; and that in pursuit of his own principles he doth out­wardly observe the Institutions and pre­scriptions of it. But the Scheme he hath given us of Religion, or Religious du­ties, wherein there is mention neither of Sin, nor a Redeemer, without which no man can entertain any one true notion of Christian Religion, would rather bespeak him a Philosopher, than a Christian. It is not unlikely, but that he will pretend he was treating of Religion, as Religion in general, without an Application of it to this or that in particular; but to speak of Religion as it is among men in this world, or ever was since the fall of Adam, with­out a supposition of sin, and the way of a relief from the Event of it mentioned, is to talk of Chimaera's, things that neither are, ever were, or will be. On the other hand the profit and advantage of his De­sign falls clearly on the Papal Interest. For whereas it is framed and contrived for the advantage, security, and unquestionable­ness of absolute Complyers with the pre­sent Possessors of Power, it is evident, that in the States of Europe, the advantage lyes [Page 11] incomparably on that hand. But these things are not our Concernment. The design which he manageth in his Discourse, the subject matter of it, the manner how he treats those with whom he hath to do, and deports himself therein, are by him­self exposed to the judgement of all, and are here to be taken into some Examina­tion. Now because we have in his Preface a perfect Representation of the things last mentioned throughout the whole, I shall in the first place take a general view and Pro­spect of it.

And here I must have regard to the Judgement of others. I confess for my own part I do not find my self at all con­cerned in those Invectives, tart and upbraid­ing Expressions, those sharp and twinging Sa­tyrs against his Adversaries, which he avow­eth or rather boasteth himself to have used. If this unparalleld heap of Revilings, Scoffings, despightful Reproaches, Sar­casms, Scornful contemptuous Expressi­ons, false Criminations, with frequent In­timations of Sanguinary affections towards them, do please his Fancy, and express his Morality to his own Satisfaction, I shall never complain that he hath used his Li­berty; and do presume that he judgeth it not meet that it should be restrained. It [Page 12] is far from my purpose to return him any Answer in the like manner to these things; to do it

Yet some Instances of Prodigious ex­cesses in this Kind, will in our Process be reflected on. And it may be the Repeti­tion of them may make an appearance unto some less considerate Readers, of a little Harshness in some passages of this return. But as nothing of that nature in the least is intended, nothing that might provoke the Author in his own spirit, were he ca­pable of any hot impressions, nothing to disadvantage him in his Reputation or esteem, so what is spoken being duly weigh­ed, will be found to have nothing sharp or unpleasant in it, but what is unavoidably infused into it from the discourse it self, in its approach unto it to make a represen­tation of it.

It is of more Concernment to consider with what frame and temper of Spirit he manageth his whole Cause and Debate; and this is such as that a man who knows nothing of him, but what he learns from [Page 13] this Discourse, would suppose that he hath been some great Commander,

Associate unto him, who with his breath blew away and scattered all the Legions of his Enemies, as the wind doth leaves in Autumn.

Such Confidence in himself and his own strength, such contempt of all his Adversa­ries, as persons Silly, Ignorant, Illiterate, such boastings of his Atchievments, with such a face and appearance of scorning all that shall rise up against him; such expressions animi gladiatorii doth he march withall, as no man sure will be willing to stand in his way, unless he think himself to have lived, at least quietly, long enough. Only some things there are, which I cannot but ad­mire in his undertaking and management of it; as first, that such a Man of Arms and Art as he is, should harness himself with so much preparation, and enter the Lists with so much pomp and glory, to combat such pittiful poor baffled Ignoramus's as he hath chosen to contend withall; especially con­ [...]idering that he knew he had them bound hand and foot, and cast under his strokes [Page 14] at his pleasure. Methinks it had more be­come him, to have sought out some Giant in Reason and Learning, that might have given him at least par animo periculum, as Alexander said in his conflict with Porus, a danger big enough to exercise his Cou­rage, though through mistake it should in the issue have proved but a Wind-mill. Again! I know not whence it is, nor by what Rules of Errantry it may be war­ranted, that being to conflict such pittiful trifles, he should before he come near to touch them, thunder out such terrible words, and load them with so many re­proaches and contemptuous Revilings, as if he designed to scare them out of the Lists, that there might be no tryal of his strength, nor exercise of his skill.

But leaving him to his own choice and liberty in these matters, I am yet perswa­ded that if he knew how little his Adver­saries esteem themselves concerned in, or worsted by his Revilings, how small ad­vantage he hath brought unto the cause managed by him, with what severity of Censures, that I say not Indignation, his proceedings herein are reflected on by persons Sober and Learned, who have any respect to modesty or sobriety, or any reverence for the things of God, as de­bated [Page 15] among men, he would abate some­what of that self-delight and satisfaction which he seems to take in his Achieve­ment.

Neither is it in the matter of Dissent alone from the established Forms of Wor­ship, that this Author, and some others, endeavour by their Revilings and Scoffings to expose Non-Conformists to scorn and vio­lence; but a semblance at least is made of the like Reflections on their whole Pro­fession of the Gospel, and their Worship of God; Yea these are the special subjects of those swelling words of contempt, those farcastical invidious Representations of what they oppose, which they seem to place their confidence of success in; But what do they think to effect by this Course of proceedure? do they suppose that by cry­ing out canting, phrases, silly, non-sense, Me­taphors, they shall shame the Non-Confor­mists out of the Profession of the Gospel, or make them foregoe the course of their Ministry, or alienate one soul from the Truth taught and profest amongst them? They know how their Predecessours in the faith thereof, have been formerly enter­tained in the World: St. Paul himself fall­ing among the Gentlemen Philosophers of those dayes was termed by them [...], [Page 16] a Babler, or one that Canted; his Doctrine despised as silly and foolish, and his Phrase's pretended to be Unintelligible. These things move not the Non-Conformists, unless it be to a Compassion for them whom they fee to press their Wits and Parts to so wretched an employment. If they have any thing to charge on them with respect to Gospel-truths, as that they own, teach, preach, or publish any Doctrines, or Opi­nions that are not agreeable thereunto, and Doctrine of the Antient, and late (Re­formed) Churches, let them come forth, if they are men of Learning, Reading, and Ingenuity, and in wayes used and appro­ved from the beginning of Christianity for such ends and Purposes, endeavour their Confutation and Conviction; let them I say with the Skill and Confidence of Men, and according to all rules of Method and Art, state the matters in difference be­tween themselves and their Adversaries, confirm their own judgements with such Reasons and Arguments as they think pleadable in their behalf, and oppose the Opinions they condemn with testimonies and reasons suited to their Eversion. The course at present steered and engaged in, to carpe at phrases, expressions, manners of the Declaration of mens conceptions, [Page 17] collected from, or falsly fathered upon par­ticular persons, thence intimated to be common to the whole party of Non-Conformists (the greatest guilt of some whereof, it may be is only their too near approach to the ex­pressions used in the Scripture to the same purpose, and the evidence of their being educed from thence) is unmanly, unbecom­ing persons of any philosophick generosity, much more Christians and Ministers; nay some of the things or sayings reflected on, and carped at by a late Author, are such, as those who have used or asserted them, dare modestly challenge him in their de­fence to make good his charge in a perso­nal conference, provided it may be Scho­lastical, or Logical, not Dramatick or Ro­mantick. And surely were it not for their Confidence in that Tame and Patient Humour, which this Author so tramples upon, p. 15. they could not but fear that some or other by these disingenuous proceedings might be provoked to a Recrimination, and to give in a Charge against the cursed Oaths, Debaucheries, Profaneness, various Immo­ralities, and sottish Ignorance, that are openly and notoriously known to have taken up their residence among some of those persons, whom the Railleries of this and some other Authors are [Page 18] designed to countenance and secure.

Because we may not concern our selves again in things of this nature, let us take an Instance or two of the manner of the dealing of our Author with Non-conformists, and those as to their Preaching and Praying, which of all things they are principally maligned about; For their Preaching he thus sets it out, p. 75. Whoever among them can Invent any new Language presently sets up for a Man of new Discoveries, and he that lights upon the prettyest non-sense, is thought by the Ignorant Rabble to unfold new Gospel Mysteries, and thus is the Nation shattered into infinite factions with senseless and phan­tastick phrases; and the most fatal miscar­riage of them all lyes in abusing Scripture ex­pressions, not only without, but in contra­diction to their sense; so that had we but an Act of Parliament to abridge Preachers the use of fulsome and luscious Metaphors, it might perhaps be an effectual cure of all our present Distempers. Let not the Reader smile at the Oddness of the proposal; for were men ob­liged to speak sense as well as Truth, all the swelling mysteries of Phanaticism would then sink into flat and empty non-sense; and they would be ashamed of such jejune and ridiou­lous stuff as their admired and most profound nations would appear to be. Certainly there [Page 19] are few who read these expressions that can retain themselves from smiling at the pittiful phantastick souls that are here cha­racterized; or from loathing their way of Preaching here represented. But yet if any should by a surprizal indulge them­selves herein, and one should seriously en­quire what it is that stirred those humours in them, it may be they could scarce return a rational account of their Commotions: For when they have done their utmost to countenance themselves in their scorn and derision, they have nothing but the bare Assertions of this Author for the proof of what is here charged on those whom they deride; And how if these things are most of them, if not all of them absolutely false? how if he be not able to prove any of them by any considerable avowed instance? How if all the things intended whether they be so or no as here represented, de­pend meerly on the judgement and fancy of this Author, and it should prove in the issue that they are no such rules, measures, or standards of mens rational expressions of their Conceptions, but that they may be justly appealed from? and how if sundry things so odiously here expressed, be pro­ved to have been sober Truths declared in words of Wisdom and Sobriety? What if [Page 20] the things condemned as fulsome Metaphors prove to be Scriptural expressions of Go­spel Mysteries? What if the principal Do­ctrines of the Gospel about the grace of God, the Mediation of Christ, of Faith, Justification, Gospel-obedience, Commu­nion with God, and Union with Christ, are esteemed and stigmatized by some as swell­ing Mysteries of Fanaticism; and the whole work of our Redemption by the blood of Christ as expressed in the Scripture, be deemed Metaphorical? In brief, What if all this Discourse concerning the Preach­ings of Non-Conformists be, as unto the sense of the words here used, false, and the Crimes in them injuriously charged upon them? What if the Metaphors they are charged with, are no other but their expression of Gospel Mysteries not in the words which mans wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy-Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with Spiritual? As these things may and will be made evident when particulars shall be instanced in. When I say these things are discovered and laid open, there will be a composure possibly of those affe­ctions and disdainful thoughts, which these swelling words may have moved in weak and unexperienced minds. It may be also it will appear that upon a due consi­deration, [Page 21] there will be little subject matter remaining to be Enacted in that Law or Act of Parliament which he moves for; un­less it be from that uncouth motion that men may be obliged to speak sense as well as truth; seeing hitherto it hath been suppo­sed that every Proposition that is either true or false, hath a proper and determi­nate sense; and if sense it have not, it can be neither. I shall only crave leave to say, that as to the Doctrine which they Preach, and the manner of their Preaching, or the way of expressing those Doctrines or Truths which they believe and teach, the Non-Conformists appeal from the rash, false, and invidious charge of this Author, to the judgement of all learned, judicious and pious men in the world; and are rea­dy to defend them against himself, and whosoever he shall take to be his Pa­trons or his Associates, before any equal, competent, and impartial Tribunal under Heaven. It is far from me to undertake the absolute defence of any party of men, or of any man because he is of any party whatever; much less shall I do so of all the individual persons of any party, and least of all, as to all their Expressions, private Opi­nions, and peculiar ways of declaring them, which too much abound among persons of [Page 22] all sorts. I know there is no party, but have weak men belonging to it; nor any men amongst them but have their weak­nesses, failings and mistakes. And if there are none such in the Churcb of England, I mean those that universally comply with all the Observances at present used there­in, I am sure enough that there are so amongst all other parties that dissent from it. But such as these are not principally intended in these aspersio [...]s: nor would their Adversaries much rejoyce to have them known to be, and esteemed of all what they are. But it is others whom they aim to expose unto contempt; and in the behalf of them, not the mistakes, misapprehensions, or undue expressi­ons of any private persons, these things are pleaded.

But let us see, if their Prayers meet with any better entertainment; an Account of his thoughts about them he gives us, p. 19. It is the most solemn strain of their devotion to vilifie themselves with large Confessions of the hainousest and most aggravated sins: They will freely acknowledge their Offences against all the Commands, and that with the foulest and most enhancing circumstances; they can rake toge­ther, and confess their injustice, uncleanness and extortion, and all the Publican and Har­lot [Page 23] sins in the world; In brief, in all their Confessions, they stick not to charge themselves with such large Catalogues of sin, and to a­mass together such as heap of Impieties, as would make up the compleatest character of lewdness and villany; and if their Consciences do really arraign them of all those crimes whereof they so familiarly indite themselves, there are no such guilty and unpardonable Wretches as they: So that their Confessions are either true or false; if false, then they fool and trifle with the Almighty; if true, then I could easily tell them the fittest place to say their prayers in.

I confess this passage at its first perusal surprized me with some amazement. It was unexpected to me, that he who designed all along to charge his Adversaries with Pha­risaism, and to render them like unto them, should instance in their Confession of Sin in their prayers, when it is even a Characte­ristical note of the Pharisees, that in their prayers they made no confession of sin at all. But it was far more strange to me, that any man durst undertake the re­proaching of poor sinners with the deep­est acknowledgement of their sins before the holy God, that they are capable to conceive or utter. Is this, thought I, the Spirit of the men with whom the Non-Conformists [Page 24] do contend, and upon whose Instance alone they suffer? Are these their Apprehensions concerning God, sin, them­selves and others? Is this the Spirit where­with the Children of the Church are acted? Are these things suited to the principles, Doctrines, practices of the Church of England? Such reproaches and reflecti­ons indeed, might have been justly ex­pected from those poor deluded souls, who dream themselves perfect and free from sin; but to meet with such a Treaty from them who say or sing, O God the Father of Hea­ven, have mercy upon us miserable sinners, at least three times a Week, was some sur­prizal. However I am sure, the Non-Con­formists need return no other answer to them who reproach them for vilifying themselves in their Confessions to God, but that of David to Michal, It is before the Lord, and we will yet be more vile than thus, and will be base in our own sight. Our Au­thor makes no small stir with the pretend­ed censures of some whom he opposes; namely, that they should esteem themselves and their Party to be the Elect of God, all others to be reprobates, themselves and theirs to be godly, and all others ungodly; where­in I am satisfied, that he unduely chargeth those whom he intends to reflect upon: [Page 25] However I am none of them; I do not judge any Party to be All the Elect of God, or all the Elect of God to be confined unto any Party; I judge no man living to be a Reprobate, though I doubt not but that there are living men in that condition; I confine not holiness or godliness to any Party; not to the Church of England, nor to any of those who dissent from it; but am perswaded that in all Societies of Christians that are under Heaven that hold the head, there are some really fearing God, working righteousness, and accept­ed with him. But yet neither my own judgement, nor the Reflections of this Author, can restrain me from professing that I fear that he who can thus trample upon men, scoff at and deride them for the deepest Confessions of their sins before God, which they are capable of making, is scarce either well acquainted with the holiness of God, the evil of sin, or the deceitfulness of his own heart, or did not in his so doing, take them into sufficient consideration. The Church of England it self requires its Children to acknowledge their manifold sins and wickednesses, which from time to time they have grievously committed by thought, word and deed, against the Divine Majesty; and what in general, others can [Page 26] confess more, I know not. If men that are through the light of Gods Spirit and Grace, brought to an acquaintance with the deceitful workings of sin in their own hearts, and the hearts of others, consi­dering aright the terror of the Lord, and the manifold aggravations wherewith all their sins are attended, do more par­ticularly express these things before, and to the Lord, when indeed nor they, nor any other can declare the thousandth part of the vileness and unworthiness of sin and sinners on the account thereof, shall they be now despised for it, and judged to be men meet to be hanged? If this Author had but seriously perused the Confessions of Austin, and considered how he traces his sin from his nature in the womb, through the Cradle, into the whole course of his life, with his marvellous and truly inge­nious acknowledgements and aggravati­ons of it, perhaps the Reverence of so great a name might have caused him to suspend this rash, and I fear, impious Dis­course.

For the particular instances wherewith he would countenance his Sentiments and Censures in this Matter, there is no diffi­culty in their removal. Our Lord Jesus Christ hath taught us, to call the most se­cret [Page 27] workings of sin in the heart, though resisted, though controlled, and never suf­fered to bring forth, by the names of those sins which they lye in a tendency unto; and men in their Confessions re­spect more the pravity of their natures, and the inward working and actings of sin, than the outward perpetrations of it, wherein perhaps they may have little con­cernment in the world; as Job who plead­ed his uprightness, integrity, and righte­ousness against the charge of all his friends, yet when he came to deal with God, he could take that prospect of his Nature and heart, as to vilifie himself before him, yea to abhor himself in dust and ashes.

Again, Ministers who are the Mouths of the Congregation to God, may, and ought to acknowledge, not only the sins whereof themselves are personally guilty, but those also which they judge may be upon any of the Congregation. This assuming of the persons of them to whom they speak, or in whose name they speak, is usu­al even to the Sacred Writers them­selves. So speaks the Apostle Peter, 1 Epist. 4. 3. For the time past of our lives may suffice us, to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings [Page 28] and abominable idolatries. He puts himself amongst them, although the time past of his life in particular was remote enough from being spent in the manner there de­scribed: And so it may be with Ministers when they confess the sins of the whole Congregation. And the Dilemma of this Author about the truth or falshood of these Confessions, will fall as heavy on St. Paul as on any Non-Conformist in the world. For besides the acknowledgement that he makes of the former sins of his life when he was injurious, a Blasphemer, and Persecu­tor, (which sins I pray God deliver others from) and the secret working of in-dwel­ling sin, which he cryes out in his present condition to be freed from; he also when an Apostle professeth himself the chiefest of sinners; Now this was either true, or it was not; if it was not true, God was mocked; if it were, our Author could have directed him to the fittest place to have made his acknowledgements in. What thinks he of the Confessions of Ezra, of Daniel and others in the name of the whole people of God? Of David concerning him­self, whose self-abasements before the Lord, acknowledgements of the guilt of sin in all its Aggravations and Effects, far exceed any thing that Non-Conformists are able to express.

[Page 29] As to his Instances of the Confession of injustice, uncleanness, and extortion, it may be as to the first and last, he would be put to it to make it good by express particu­lars; and I wish it be not found that some have need to confess them, who cry at present, they are not as these Publicans. Vncleanness seems to bear the worst sound, and to lead the mind to the worst appre­hensions of all the rest; but it is God with whom men have to do in their Confessions; and before him, What is man that he should be clean, and he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? Behold he putteth no trust in his Saints, and the Heavens are not clean in his sight, and how much more abomi­nable and filthy is man, who drinketh in ini­quity like water, Job. 15. and the whole Church of God in their Confession cry out, We are all as an unclean thing, and all our Righteousnesses are as filthy raggs, Isa. 54. There is a Pollution of Flesh and Spirit, which we are still to be cleansing our selves from whilst we are in this world.

But to what purpose is it to contend about these things? I look upon this Dis­course of our Author as a signal instance of the power of prejudice and passions over the minds of men. For setting aside the consideration of a present influence [Page 30] from them, I cannot believe that any one that professeth the Religion taught by Je­sus Christ, and contained in the Scripture, can be so ignorant of the terror of the Lord, so unaccustomed to thoughts of his infinite Purity, Severity and Holiness, such a stranger to the Accuracy, Spirituality, and Universality of the Law, so unacquainted with the sin of Nature, and the hidden deceitful workings of it in the hearts, minds and affections of men, so senseless of the great guilt of the least sin, and the manifold inexpressible aggravations where­with it is attended, so unexercised to that self-abasement and abhorrency which be­comes poor sinners in their approaches to the holy God, when they consider what they are in themselves, so disrespective of the price of Redemption that was paid for our sins, and the mysterious way of cleansing our souls from them by the blood of the Son of God, as to revile, despise and scoff at men for the deepest hum­blings of their souls before God, in the most searching and expressive acknow­ledgements of their sins, that they do or can make at any time.

The like Account may be given of all the charges that this Author man [...]ageth against the men of his indignation; but I shall [Page 31] return at present to the Preface under con­sideration.

In the entrance of his Discourse, being as it seems conscious to himself of a strange and wild intemperance of speech in reviling his Adversaries, which he had either used, or intended so to do, he pleads sundry things in his excuse or for his justification. Hereof the first is, his zeal for the Reformation of the Church of England, and the settlement thereof with its Forms and Institutions; these he saith are countenanced by the best and purest times of Christianity, and established by the Funda­mental Laws of this Land; (which yet as to the things in contest between him and Non Conformists I greatly doubt of, as not believing any fundamental Law of this Land to be of so late a date,) to see this opposed by a Wild and Fanatick rabble, rifled by Folly and Ignorance, on slender and fri­volous pretences so often and so shamefully baffled, yet again revived by the pride and ignorance of a few peevish, ignorant and male­pert Preachers, brainsick people, (all which gentle and peaceable expressions are crowded together in the compass of a few lines) is that which hath chased him into this heat and briskness; If this be not to deal with gain-sayers in a spirit of meek­ness, [Page 32] if herein there be not an observation of the rules of speaking evil of no man, despising no man, of not saying Racha to our Brother, or calling of him Fool; if here be not a discovery how remote he is from self-conceit, elation of mind, and the like Immoralities, we must make enquiry after such things elsewhere; for in this whole ensuing Treatise we shall scarce meet with any thing more tending to our satisfacti­on. For the Plea it self made use of, those whom he so tramples on, do highly honor the Reformation of the Church of England, and bless God for it continually, as that which hath had a signal tendency unto his glory, and usefulness to the souls of men. That as to the outward Rites of Worship and Discipline contested about, it was in all things conformed unto the great Rule of them, our Author doth not pretend; nor can he procure it in those things, whatever he sayes, any countenance from the best and purest times of Christianity: That it was every way perfect in its first Edition, I suppose, will not be affirmed; nor considering the posture of affairs at the time of its framing both in other Na­tions and in our own, was it like it should so be. We may rather admire that so much was then done according to the Will of [Page 33] God, than that there was no more. What­ever is wanting in it, the fault is not to be cast on the first Reformers, who went as far as well in those dayes could be expected from them. Whether others who have succeeded in their place and room, have since discharged their duty in perfecting what was so happily begun, is sub judice, and there will abide, after this Author and I have done writing. That as to the things mentioned, it never had an absolute quiet possession or admittance in this Na­tion, that a constant and no inconsidera­ble Suffrage hath from first to last been given in against it, cannot be denyed; and for any savage worrying or rifling of it at present, no man is so barbarous as to give the least countenance to any such thing. That which is intended in these exclamations, is only a desire that those who cannot comply with it as now esta­blished in the matters of Discipline and Worship before mentioned, may not meerly for that cause be worried and de­stroyed, as many have already been.

Again, the chief glory of the English Reformation consisted in the purity of its Doctrine, then first restored to the Nati­on. This, as it is expressed in the Arti­cles of Religion, and in the publickly au­thorized [Page 34] Writings of the Bishops and chief Divines of the Church of England, is, as was said, the glory of the English Refor­mation. And it is somewhat strange to me, that whilst one writes against Original Sin, another preaches up Justification by Works, and scoffs at the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ to them that believe; yea whilst some can openly dispute against the Doctrine of the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, and the Holy Ghost; whilst Instances may be collected of some mens impeaching all the Articles almost throughout, there should be no Reflection in the least on these things; only those who dissent from some outward Methods of Worship must be made the Object of all this wrath and indignation.

Some mens guilt in this Nature, might ra­ther mind them of pulling out the be am out of their own eyes, than to act with such fury to pull out the Eyes of others, for the Motes which they think they espy in them. But hence is occasion given to pour out such a storm of fury, conveyed by words of as great reproach and Scorn, as the inven­tion of any man I think could suggest, as is [Page 35] not lightly to be met withal: Might our Au­thor be prevailed with to mind the old rule, Mitte malè loqui, dic rem ipsam, these things might certainly be debated with less scandal, less mutual offences and provo­cations.

Anothor account of the Reasons of his intemperance in these reproaches, supplying him with an opportunity to encrease them in number and weight, he gives us pag. 6. & 7. of his Preface, which because it may well be esteemed a summary representati­on of his way and manner of arguing in his whole Discourse, I shall transcribe.

I know, sayes he, but one single Instance in which zeal or a high indignation is just and warrantable: and that is when it vents it self against the Arrogance of haughty peevish and sullen Religionists, that under higher pre­tences of godliness supplant all principles of Civility and good Nature; that strip Religion of its outside to make it a covering for spight and malice; that adorn their peevishness with a mark of piety, and shrowd their ill nature under the demure pretences of godly zeal, and stroke and applaud themselves as the only Darlings and Favourites of Heaven; and with a scornfull pride disdained all the residue of mankind as a rout of worthless and unrege­nerate Reprobates. Thus the only hot fit of [Page 36] zeal we find our Saviour in, was kindled by an indignation against the pride and inso­lence of the Jews, when he whipped the Buyers and Sellers out of the outward Court of the Temple; for though they bore a blind and su­perstitious reverence towards that part of it that was peculiar to their own worship, yet as for the outward Court, the place where the Gentiles and Proselytes worshipped, that was so un­elean and unhallowed, that they thought it could not be profaned by being turned into an Exchange of Vsury: Now this insolent con­tempt of the Gentiles, and impudent conceit of their own holiness, provoked the mild Spi­rit of our blessed Saviour to such an height of impatience and indignation, as made him with a seeming fury and transport of Passi­on whip the Tradesmen thence, and overthrew their Tables.

What Truth, Candor, or Conscience hath been attended unto in the inso­lent Reproaches here heaped up against his Adversaries, is left to the Judgement of God and all impartial men; yea let judgement be made, and sentence be past according to the wayes, course of life, conversation, usefulness amongst men, readiness to serve the common concerns of mankind, in exercising lovingkindness in the earth, of those who are thus injuri­ously [Page 37] traduced, compared with any in the approbation and commendation of whom they are covered with these reproaches, and there lives not that person who may not be admitted to pronounce concern­ing the equity and righteousness or ini­quity of these intemperances. However it is nothing with them with whom he hath to do to be judged by mans day; they stand at the judgement seat of Christ, and have not so learned him as to relieve themselves by false or fierce Recrimina­tions. The measure of the covering pro­vided for all these excesses of unbridled passion, is that alone which is now to be taken. The Case expressed it seems is the only single instance in which zeal is just and warrantable. How our Author came to be assured thereof I know not; sure I am that it doth neither comprize in it, nor hath any aspect on, the ground, occasion, or nature of the zeal of Phinehas, or of Ne­hemiah, or of David, or of Joshuah, and least of all of our Saviour as we shall see. He must needs be thought to be over­intent upon his present occasion, when he forgot not one, or two, but indeed all instances of just and warrantable zeal that are given us in the only sacred repository of them.

[Page 38] For what concerns the example of our blessed Saviour particularly insisted on, I wish he had ossended one way only in the report he makes of it. For let any sober man judge in the first place, whether those expressions he useth of the hot fit of zeal, that He was in, of the Height of impatience that he was provoked unto, the seeming Fury and Transport of Passion that he acted withall, do become that Reverence and Adoration of the Son of God which ought to possess the hearts, and guide the Tongues and Writings of men that profess his Name. But whatever other mens ap­prehensions may be, as it is not improbable but that some will exercise severity in their Reflections on these Expressions; for my part; I shall entertain no other thoughts but that our Author being engaged in the Composition of an Invective Declamation, and aiming at a Gradeur of Words, yea to fill it up with Tragical expressions, could not restrain his pen from some extravagant excess, when the Lord Christ Himself came in his way to be spoken of.

However it will be said the Instance is pertinently alledged, and the occasion of the Exercise of the zeal of our Blessed Saviour is duly represented. It may be some will think so, but the truth is, there [Page 39] are scarce more lines than mistakes in the whole discourse to this purpose. What Court it was of the Temple wherein the Action remembred was performed, is not here particularly determined; only 'tis said to be the Outward Court wherein the Gentiles and Proselytes worshipped in opposition to that which was peculiar to the worship of the Jews. Now of old from the first Erection of the Temple there were two Courts be­longing unto it and no more; the inward Court, wherein were the Brazen Altar with all those Utensils of worship which the Priests made use of in their sacred Offices; and the outward Court whither the people assembled, as for other Devotions, so to behold the Priests exercising their Functi­on, and to be in a readiness to bring in their own especial sacrifices, upon which account they were admitted to the Altar it self. Into this outward Court which was a dedicate part of the Temple, all Gentiles who were Proselytes of Righteous­ness, that is who being circumeised had taken upon them the Observation of the Law of Moses, and thereby joyned them­selves to the people of God, were admit­ted, as all the Jewish Writers agrree. And these were all the Courts that were at first Sanctified, and were in use when the [Page 40] words were spoken by the Prophet, which are applyed to the Action of our Saviour; namely, My house shall be called a House of Prayer, but ye have made it a Den of Thieves; Afterwards in the dayes of the Herodians another Court was added by the immuring of the remainder of the Hill, whereunto a promiscuous entrance was granted unto all people. It was therefore the antient Out­ward Court whereinto the Jews thought that Paul had brought Trophimus the Ephesian, whom they knew to be Uncircumcised. I confess some Expositors think that it was this latter Area from whence the Lord Christ east out the Buyers and Sellers; but their Conjecture seems to be altogether ground­less; for neither was that Court ever ab­solutely called the Temple, nor was it esteemed Sacred, but common or Prophane; nor was it in being when the Prophet used the words mentioned concerning the Tem­ple. It was therefore the other antient outward Court common to the Jews and Proselytes of the Gentiles that is intended; for as there the Salt and Wood were stored, that were daily used in their Sacrifices, so the Covetous Priests knowing that many who came up to offer, were wont to buy the beasts they sacrificed at Hierusalem to prevent the charge and labour of bringing [Page 41] them from farr; to further as they pre­tended their Accommodation, they appro­priated a Market to themselves in this Court, and added a Trade in money, re­lating it may be thereunto, and other things for their Advantage. Hence the Lord Christ twice drove them; once at the Beginning, and once at the End of his Ministry in the flesh; not with a seem­ing Transport of Fury, but with that evi­dence of the presence of God with Him, and Majesty of God upon Him, that it is usually reckoned amongst one of the Miracles that he wrought, considering the state of all things at that time amongst the Jews. And the reason why He did this, and the occasion of the exercise of his Zeal, is so express in the Scripture, as I cannot but admire at the Invention of our Author, who could find out another Reason and Occasion of it. For it is said directly, that he did it because of their wicked profanation of the house of God, contrary to his express Institution and Command; Of a regard to the Jews contempt of the Gentiles there is not one word, not the least Intimation; nor was there in this matter the least occasion of any such thing.

These things are not pleaded in the least, [Page 42] to give countenance to Any, in their proud supercillious Censures and Contempt of others, wherein if any person living have out-done our Author, or shall endeavour so to do, he will not fail I think to carry away the prize in this unworthy Contest. Nor is it to Apologize for them whom he charges with extravagances and excesses in this kind. I have no more to say in their behalf, but that as far as I know, they are falsly accused and calumniated, though I will not be accountable for the expessi­ons of every weak and impertinent person. Where men indeed sin openly in all man­ner of Transgressions against the Law and Gospel, where a spirit of enmity to holi­ness and obedience unto God discovers and acts it self constantly on all occasions; in a word, where men wear Sin's Livery, some are not afraid to think them Sin's Servants. But as to that Elation of mind in self-con­ceit wherewith they are charged, their contempt of other men upon the account of Party which he imputes unto them, I must expect other proofs than the bare assertion of this Author before, I shall joyn with him in the management of his Accusation. And no other Answer shall I return to the ensuing Leaves, fraught with bitter Reproaches, Invectives, Sarcasms, far [Page 43] enough distant from Truth and all Sobrie­ty. Nor shall I though in their just and necessary vindication, make mention of any of those things which might represent them persons of another Complexion. If this Author will give those whom he pro­bably most aims to load with these Aspersi­ons, leave to confess themselves poor and miserable sinners in the sight of God, willing to bear his indignation against whom they have finned, and to undergo quietly the severest Rebukes and Revilings of men, in that they know not but that they have a Providential permissive Commission from God so to deal with them, and add thereunto, that they yet hope to be saved by Jesus Christ, and in that hope endeavour to give up themselves in Obedience to all his Com­mands, it contains that Description of them which they shall alwayes, and in all conditions endeavour to answer. But I have only given these Remarks upon the preceding Discourse, to discover upon what feeble grounds our Author builds for his own justification in his present En­gagement.

Pag. 13. of his Preface, He declares his Original Design in writing this Discourse, which was to represent to the World the la­mentable folly and silliness of those mens [Page 44] Religion with whom he had to do, which he farther expresses and pursues with such a Lurry of virulent reproaches as I think is not to be parallel'd in any leaves, but some others of the same hand; and in the close thereof he supposeth he hath evin­ced that in comparison of them, the most Insolent of the Pharisees were Gentlemen, and the most savage of the Americans Philosophers. I must confess my self an utter stranger unto that generous disposition and Philosophick nobleness of mind, which vent themselves in such revengefull scornfull wrath, ex­pressed in such rude and barbarous rail­ings against any sort of men whatever, as that here manifested in, and those here used by this Author. If this be a just delineation and character of the Spirit of a Gentleman, a due portraicture of the Mind and Affections of a Philosopher, I know not who will be ambitious to be esteemed either the one or the other. But what measures men now make of Gentility I know not; truly noble Ge­nerosity of Spirit was heretofore esteem­ed to consist in nothing more, than re­moteness from such pedantick severities against, and contemptuous reproaches of persons under all manner of disadvan­tages, yea impossibilities to manage their [Page 45] own just Vindication, as are here exer­cised and expressed in this Discourse. And the principal pretended Attainment of the old Philosophy, was a sedateness of mind, and a freedome from turbulent Passions and Affections under the great­est Provocations; which if they are here manifested by our Author, they will give the greater countenance unto the Character which he gives of others; the judgement and determination whereof is left unto all impatial Readers.

But in this main design he professeth him­self prevented by the late Learned and In­genious Discourse, The Friendly Debate; which to manifest, it may be, that his Rhetorical faculty is not confined to Invectives, he spendeth some pages in the splendid Enco­miums of. There is no doubt, I suppose but that the Author of that Discourse, will on the next occasion require his Panegyrick, and return him his Commendations for his own Achievements with Advantage; they are like enough to agree like those of the Poet,

For the present his Account of the ex­cellencies [Page 46] and successes of that Discourse minds me of the Dialogue between Pyrgo­polynices and Artotrogus:

Although the particular instances he gives of the man's successes, are prodigi­ously ridiculous, yet the casting up of the summ Total to the compleating of his Victo­ry, sinks them all out of Consideration: And such is the Account we have here of the Friendly Debate. This and that it hath effected, which though unduly asserted as to the particular Instances, yet altogether comes short of that absolute Victory and Triumph which are ascribed unto it. But I suppose that upon due consideration, mens glorying in those Discourses, will be but as the Crackling of thorns in the fire, noise and smoak without any real and solid use or satisfaction. The great design of the [Page 47] Author, asis apparent unto all, was to ren­der the Sentiments and Expressions of his Adversaries ridiculous, and thereby to ex­pose their persons to contempt and scorn, ‘Egregiam vero laudem & spolia ampla!’

And to this end his way of writing by Dialogues is exceedingly suited and accom­modated: For although Ingenious and Learned men, such as Plato and Cicero, have handled matters of the greatest Impor­tance in that way of writing, candidly-proposing the Opinions and Arguments of Adverse parties in the persons of the Dia­logists, and sometimes used that method to make their design of Instruction more easie and perspicuous, yet it cannot be denyed that advantages may be taken from this way of Writing to represent both Persons, Opinions, and Practices, invidiously and contemptuously, above any other way; and therefore it hath been principally used by men who have had that Design. And I know nothing in the skilfull Contrivance of Dialogues, which is boasted of here with respect unto the Friendly Debate, as also by the Author of it in his Preface to one of his worthy Volumes, that should free the way of writing it self, from being supposed [Page 48] to be peculiarly accommodated to the ends mentioned. Nor will these Authors charge them with want of skill and art in composing of their Dialogues, who have designed nothing in them but to render Things uncouth, and Persons ridiculous, with whom themselves were in Worth and Ho­nesty no way to be compared.

An Instance hereof we have in the case of Socrates. Sundry in the City being weary of him for his Uprightness, Integri­ty, and continual pressing of them to courses of the like nature; some also be­ing in an especial manner incensed at him, and provoked by him; amongst them they contrived his ruine. That they might effect this design, they procured Aristopha­nes to write a Dialogue, his Comoedy which he entituled [...], the Clouds; wherein Socrates is introduced and personated, talking at as contemptible and ridiculous a rate, as any one can represent the Non-Conformists to do; and yet withal to com­mend himself as the only man considerable amongst them. Without some such pre­paration of the peoples minds, his enemies thought it impossible to obtain his Perse­cution and Destruction; and they failed not in their Projection. Aristophanes be­ing poor, witty, and as is supposed hired to [Page 49] this work, layes out the utmost of his en­deavours so to frame and order his Dia­logues, with such Elegancy of words, and Composure of his verses, with such a sem­blance of relating the words and expres­sing the manner of Socrates, as might leave an impression on the minds of the people. And the success of it was no way inferi­our to that of the Friendly Debate; for though at first the people were somewhat surprized with seeing such a person so tra­duced, yet they were after a while so pleased and tickled with the ridiculous Representation of him and his Philosophy, wherein there was much of Appearance and nothing of Truth, that they could make no end of applauding the Author of the Dialogues. And though this were the known design of that Poet, yet that his Dialogues were absurd and inartificial, I suppose will not be affirmed; seeing few were ever more skilfully contrived. Having got this ad­vantage of exposing him to publick con­tempt, his provoked malicious Adversaries began openly to manage their Accusati­on against him. The principal Crime laid to his charge was Non-conformity, or that he did not comply with the Religion which the Supream Magistrate had enacted; or as they then phrased it, he esteemed not them [Page 50] to be Gods whom the City so esteemed. By these means, and through these advantages, they ceased not until they had destroyed the best and wisest person, that ever that City bred in its Heathen condition, and whereof they quickly repented themselves. The Reader may see the whole story exactly related in Aelian. lib. 2. Var. Histor. cap. 13. Much of it also may be collected from the Apologies of Xenophon and Plato in behalf of Socrates, as also Plutarch's Discourse con­cerning his Genius. To this purpose have Dialogues very artificially written been used and are absolutely the most accommodate of all sorts of writing unto such a design. Hence Lucian who aimed particularly to render the things which he disliked Ridi­culous and Contemptible, used no other kind of writing; and I think his Dialogues will be allowed to be Artificial, though sundry of them have no other design but to cast contempt on persons and Opinions better than himself and his own. And his way of dealing with Adversaries in points of Faith, Opinion and Judgement, hath hither­to been esteemed fitter for the Stage, than a serious disquisition after Truth, or Confutation of Error: Did those who ad­mire their own Achievements in this way of Process, but consider how easie a thing it [Page 51] is for any one, deposing that respect to Truth, Modesty, Sobriety, and Christianity which ought to accompany us in all that we do, to expose the persons and opini­ons of men by false, partial, undue Repre­sentations to scorn and contempt, they would perhaps cease to glory in their fan­cied success. It is a facile thing to take the wisest man living, and after he is lime­twigg'd with Ink and Paper, and gagged with a Quill, so that he can neither move nor speak, to clap a Fools Coat on his back, and turn him out to be laughed at in the Streets. The Stoicks were not the most contemptible sort of Philosophers of old, nor will not be thought so by those, who profess their Religion to consist in Morality only. And yet the Roman Orator in his pleading for Muraena, finding it his present Interest to cast some disreputation upon Cato his Adversary in that cause, who was addicted to that Sect, so represented their Dogmes, that he put the whole As­sembly into a fit of laughter; whereunto Cato only replyed, That he made others laugh, but was himself Ridiculous; and it may be some will find it to fall out not much otherwise with themselves by that time the whole account of their under­taking is well cast up.

[Page 52] Besides, do these men not know, that if others would employ themselves in a work of the like kind by way of Retortion and Recrimination, that they would find real matter amongst some whom they would have esteemed sacred, for an ordinary In­genuity to exercise it self upon unto their disadvantage? But what would be the issue of such proceedings? Who would be gain­ers by it? Every thing that is professed among them that own Religion, all wayes and means of their Profession, being by their mutual Reflections of this kind, ren­der'd riciculous, what remains but that men fly to the Sanctuary of Atheism to pre­serve themselves from being scoffed at and despised as fools. On this account alone I would advise the Author of our late De­bates to surcease proceeding in the same kind, lest a provocation unto a Retalia­tion should befall any of those who are so fouly aspersed.

But, as I said, what will be the end of these things, namely of mutual virulent reflections upon one another? Shall this Sword devour for ever? And will it not be bitterness in the latter end? For, as he said of old of persons contending with re­vilings;

Great store there are of such words and expressions on every hand, and every pro­voked person, if he will not bind his pas­sion to a Rule of Sobriety and Temperance, may at his pleasure take out and use what he supposeth for his turn. And let not men please themselves with imagining that it is not as easie, though perhaps not so safe, for others to use towards them­selves, haughty and contemptuous expres­sions, as it is for them to use them to­wards others. But shall this wrath never be allayed? Is this the way to restore peace, quietness and satisfaction to the minds of men? Is it meet to use her Language in this Nation concerning the present Diffe­rences about Religion,

Is agreement in all other things, all Love [Page 54] and Forbearance, unless there be a cente­ring in the same Opinions absolutely, be­come criminal, yea detestable? Will this way of proceeding compose and satisfie the minds of men? If there be no other way for a Coalescence in love and unity in the bond of Peace; but either that the Non-conformists do depose and change in a moment, as it were, their thoughts, ap­prehensions and Judgements about the things in difference amongst us, which they cannot, which is not in their power to do; or that in the presence, and with a pecu­liar respect unto the eye and regard of God, they will act contrary unto them, which they ought not, which they dare not, no not upon the present instruction, the state of these things is somewhat de­plorable.

That alone which in the Discourses men­tioned seemeth to me of any considerati­on, if it have any thing of truth to give it countenance, is that the Non-Conformists under pretence of preaching Mysteries and Grace, do neglect the pressing of Moral Duties, which are of near and indispensable concernment unto men in all their Rela­tions and Actions; and without which, Re­ligion is but a pretence and covering for vice and sin. A crime this is unquestio­nably [Page 55] of the highest nature if true, and such as might justly render the whole Profession of those who are guilty of it suspected. And this is again renewed by our Author, who to charge home upon the Non-Conformists reports the saying of Fl [...]ius Ilyricus a Lutheran who dyed an hundred ye [...]rs ago; namely that bona opera sunt pernitiosa ad salutem, though I do not remember that any such thing was main­tained by Illyricus, though it was so by Amsdorsius against Georgius Major. But is it not strange, how any man can assume to himself, and swallow so much confidence as is needful to the mannagement of this charge? The Books and Treatises published by men of the perswasion traduced, their daily preaching witnessed unto by multitudes of all sorts of people, the open avowing of their duty in this matter, their prin­ciples concerning sin, duty, holiness, ver­tue, righteousness and honesty, do all of them proclaim the blackness of this ca­lumny, and sink it with those who have taken, or are able to take any sober cog­nizance of these things, utterly beneath all Consideration; Moral duties they do esteem, commend, count as necessary in Religion as any men that live under Hea­ven; It is true they say that on a suppo­sition [Page 56] of that performance whereof they are capable without the assistance of the Grace and Spirit of God, though they may be good in their own nature, and useful to mankind, yet they are not available un­to the salvation of the souls of men; and herein they can prove, that they have the concurrent suffrage of all known Churches in the world, both those of old, and these at present: They say moreover, that for men to rest upon their performances of these moral duties for their Justification before God, is but to set up their own Righteousness through an Ignorance of the Righteousness of God; for we are justified freely by his Grace; neither yet are they sensible of any opposition to this Asser­tion.

For their own discharge of the Work of the Ministry, they endeavour to take their rule, pattern and instruction from the precepts, directions, and examples of them who were first commissionated unto that work, even the Apostles of our Lord Je­sus Christ, recorded in the Scripture, that they might be used and improved unto that end. By them are they taught, to endea­vour the declaring unto men all the Coun­sel of God concerning his Grace, their Obe­dience and Salvation; and having the word [Page 57] of Reconciliation committed unto them, they do pray their hearers in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God; to this end do they declare the unsearchable riches of Christ, and comparatively determine to know no­thing in this world but Christ and him cru­fied, whereby their preaching becometh principally the word or Doctrine of the Cross, which by experience they find to be a stumbling block unto some, and foolish­ness unto others; by all means endea­vouring to make known what is the riches of the glory of the mysterie of God in Christ, re­conciling the world unto himself; praying withal for their Hearers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Glory, would give unto them the Spirit of Wisdom and Reve­lation in the knowledge of him, that the eyes of their understanding being enlightned, they may learn to know what is the hope of his Calling, and what the Riches of the Glory of his inheritance in the Saints; and in these things are they not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, which is the power of God un­to salvation.

By this Dispensation of the Gospel, do they endeavour to ingenerate in the hearts and souls of men, Repentance towards God, and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. To pre­pare them also hereunto, they cease not [Page 58] by the preaching of the Law, to make known to men the Terror of the Lord, to convince them of the nature of sin, of their own lost and ruined condition by reason of it, through its guilt as both Original in their Natures, and Actual in their lives, that they may be stirred up to fly from the wrath to come, and to lay hold on eternal life; and thus as God is pleased to succeed them, do they endeavour to lay the great Foundation Jesus Christ, in the hearts of their Hearers, and to bring them to an interest in him by believing. In the farther pursuit of the work committed un­to them, they endeavour more and more to declare unto, and instruct their Hearers in all the Mysteries and saving Truths of the Gospel, to the end that by the knowledge of them, they may be wrought unto Obe­dience, and brought to Conformity to Christ, which is the end of their Decla­ration; and in the pursuit of their duty, there is nothing more that they insist up­on, as far as ever I could observe, than an endeavour to convince men, that that Faith or Profession that doth not mani­fest it self, which is not justified by works, which doth not purifie the heart within, that is not fruitful in universal Obedience to all the Commands of God, is vain and [Page 59] unprofitable; letting them know that though we are saved by Grace, yet we are the workmanship of God created in Christ Jesus to good works, which he hath ordained for us to walk in them; a neglect whereof doth uncontrollably evict men of Hypocrisie and falseness in their Profession; that therefore these things in those that are Adult, are indispensably necessary to salvation. Hence do they esteem it their Duty, continually to press upon their Hearers the constant observance and doing of whatsover things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatso­ever things are pure, whatsoever things are comely, whatsoever things are of good report; letting them know that those who are cal­led to a participation of the Grace of the Gospel, have more, higher, stronger ob­ligations upon them to Righteousness, In­tegrity, Honesty, usefulness amongst men, in all moral duties, throughout all Relati­ons, Conditions and Capacities, than any others whatever.

For any man to pretend, to write, plead that this they do not, but indeed do dis­countenance Morality and the Duties of it, is to take a liberty of saying what he pleases for his own purpose, when thou­sands are ready from the highest experi­ence to contradict him. And if this false [Page 60] supposition should prove the soul that ani­mates any Discourses, let men never so passionately admire them, and expatiate in the commendation of them, I know some that will not be their Rivals in their Ex­tasies. For the other things which those Books are mostly filled withal, setting aside frivolous trifling exceptions about Modes of Carriage, and common phrases of speech, altogether unworthy the review or perusal of a serious Person, they consist of such exceptions against expressions, say­ings, occasional reflections on Texts of Scripture, Invectives, and impertinent cal­ling over of things past and by-gone, as the merit of the Cause under contest is no way concerned in. And if any one would engage in so unhandsome an employment, as to collect such fond speeches, futilous expressions, ridiculous expositions of Scri­pture, smutty passages, weak & impertinent Discourses, yea profane scurrilities, which some others whom for their Honors sake, and other Reasons I shall not name, have in their Sermons and Discourses about sa­cred things been guilty of, he might pro­vide matter enough for a score of such Dialogues as the Friendly Debates, are com­posed of.

But to return, That the Advantages [Page 61] mentioned are somewhat peculiar unto Dialogues, we have a sufficient evidence in this, that our Author having another spe­cial design, he chose another way of wri­ting suited thereunto. He professeth, that he hath neither hope, nor expectation to convince his Adversaries of their Crimes or Mistakes, nor doth endeavour any such thing. Nor did he meerly project to ren­der them contemptible and ridiculous; which to have effected, the writing of Di­alogues in his mannagement would have been most accommodate. But his pur­pose was to expose them to persecution, or to the severity of Penal Laws from the Magistrate, and if possible, it may be, to popular Rage and Fury. The voice of his whole Discourse is the same with that of the Jews concerning St. Paul, Away with such fellows from the earth, for it is not meet they should live. Such an account of his thoughts he gives us; pag. 253. saith he, The only cause of all our Troubles and Distur­bances (which what they are he knows not, nor can declare) is the inflexible per­verfeness of about an hundred proud, ignorant, and seditious Preachers, against whom if the severity of the Laws were particularly levelled how easie would it be, &c.

But I hope it will appear before the close of this Discourse, that our Author is far from deserving the reputation of Infallible in his Politicks, whatever he may be thought to do in his Divinity. It is suffici­ently known how he is mistaken in his Cal­culation of the numbers of those whom he designs to brand with the blackest marks of Infamy, and whom he exposeth in his Desires to the severities of Law for their Ru­ine. I am sure, it is probable, that there are more than an hundred of those whom he intends, who may say unto him, as Gregory of Nazianzen introduceth his Father speaking to himself, ‘Nondum tot sunt anni tui, quot jam in sacris Nobis sunt peracti victimis,’

Who have been longer in the Ministry than He in the World, But suppose there were but an hundred of them, he knows, or may know, when there was such a dispa­rity in the numbers of them that contested about Religion, that it was said of them, All the World against Athanasius, and Atha­nasius against the World; who yet was in the [Page 63] right against them all, as they must acknow­ledge who frequently say or sing, his Quicunque vult.

But how came he so well acquainted with them all and every one, as to pro­nounce of them that they are Proud, Igno­rant, and seditious; allow him the Liberty, which I see he will take whether we allow it him or no, to call whom he pleaseth Se­ditious upon the account of reall or sup­posed principles not complyant with his thoughts and apprehensions; yet that men are Proud, and Ignorant how he can prove but by particular Instances from his own acquaintance with them, I know not; And if he should be allowed to be a competent judge of Knowledge and Ignorance in the whole compass of Wisdom and Science, which it may be some will except against, yet unless he had personally conversed with them all, or were able to give suffici­ent instances of their ignorance from Act­ings, Writings, or Expressions of their own, he would scarce be able to give a Tolera­ble account of the Honesty of this his p [...]remptory censure; And surely this must needs be looked on, as a lovely, gentle, and Philosophick Humour, to judge all men Proud and Ignorant, who are not of our minds in all things, and on that ground alone.

[Page 64] But yet let them be as ignorant as can be fancied, this will not determine the Diffe­rence between them and their Adversaries. One unlearned Paphnutius in the Council of Nice stopped all the learned Fathers when they were precipitately casting the Church into a snare; And others as unlearned as He, may Honestly attempt the same at any time. And for our Authors Projection for the obtaining of Quiet by severe dealings with these men in an especial manner, one of the same nature failed in the instance mentioned. For when Athanasius stood al­most by himself in the Eastern Empire for a Profession in Religion, which the supream Magistrate and the generality of the Clergy condemned, it was thought the Levelling of severity in particular against Him, would bring all to a Composure. To this pur­pose after they had again and again charg­ed him to be Proud and Seditious, they vi­gorously engaged in his Prosecution, ac­cording to the Projection here proposed, and sought him neer all the World over, but to no purpose at all, as the event dis­covered. For the Truth which he pro­fessed having left its root in the hearts of multitudes of the people, on the first op­portunity they returned again to the open avowing of it.

[Page 65] But to return from this Digression! this being the Design of our Author, not so much to expose his Adversaries to common Contempt and Laughter, as to Ruine and Destruction, he diverted from the beaten path of Dialogues, and betook himself unto that of Rhetorical Invective Declamati­ons, which is peculiarly suited to carry on and promote such a Design. I shall there­fore here leave him for the present, fol­lowing the Triumphant Chariot of his Friend; singing io triumphe! and casting Reflections upon the Captives that he draggs after him at his chariot wheels, which will doubtless supply his Imaginati­on with a pleasing entertainment, untill he shall awake out of his dream, and find all the Pageantry that his Fancy hath erected round about him, to vanish and disap­pear.

His next attempt is upon Atheists, where­in I have no concern, nor his principal Ad­versaries the Non-Conformists; For my part I have had this Advantage by my own Obscurity and small Consideration in the World, as never to converse with any persons that did, or durst Question the Being or Providence of God, either really or in pretence. By common reports, and published discourses, I find that there are [Page 66] not a few in these dayes, who either out of pride and ostentation, or in a real comply­ance with their own darkness and Igno­rance, do boldly venture to dispute the things which we adore; and if I am not greatly mis-informed, a charge of this pro­digious Licentiousness and Impiety, may from pregnant instances, be brought neer the doors of some who on other occasions declaim against it. For Practical Atheism the matter seems to be unquestionable; many live as though they believed neither God nor Devil in the world, but Them­selves; With neither sort am I concerned to treat at present, nor shall I examine the Invectives of our Author against them; though I greatly doubt, whether ever such a kind of Defence of the Being of God was written by any man before him. If a man would make a judgement upon the genius and way of his Discourse, he might possibly be tempted to fear, that it is persons, ra­ther than Things that are the object of his Indignation; and it may be the fate of some, to suffer under the Infamy of Athe­ism, as it is thought Diagoras did of old, not for denying the Deity, nor for any ab­surd conceptions of mind concerning it, but for deriding and contemning them, who without any interest in, or sense of Re­ligion, [Page 67] did foolishly, in Idoliatrous Instances make a pretence of it in the world. But whatever wickedness or miscarriages of this nature our Author hath observed, his zeal against them were greatly to be com­mended, but that it is not in that only In­stance wherein he allows of the exercise of that vertue, Let it then be his Anger or Indignation, or what he pleases, that he may not miss of his due praises and com­mendation. Only I must say, that I questi­on whether to charge persons enclined to Atheism with profaning Johnson and Fletcher as well as the Holy Scriptures, be a way of proceeding probably suited to their Con­viction or Reduction.

It seems also that those who are here chastised do vent their Atheism in Scossing and Drollery, jesting, and such like con­temptible efforts of Wit, that may take for a while amongst little and unlearned people, and immediately evaporate. I am afraid more of those who under pretences of so­ber Reason do vent and maintain opinions and principles that have a direct tendency to give an open admission unto Atheism in the minds of men, than of such fooleries. When others fury and raving cruelties suc­ceeded not, he alone prevailed, qui solus accessit sobrius ad perdendam Remp. One [Page 68] principle contended for as Rational and true, which if admitted will insensibly se­duce the mind unto, and justifie a practice ending in Atheism, is more to be feared, than ten thousand jests and scoffs against Religion, which methinks, amongst men of any tolerable Sobriety should easily be buried under Contempt and Scorn. And our Author may do well to consider whe­ther he hath not, unwittingly I presume, in some instances, so expressed and demeaned himself, as to give no small Advantage to those corrupt Inclinations unto Atheism, which abound in the hearts of men; Are not men taught here to keep the Liberty of their Minds and Judgements to themselves, whilest they practise that which they ap­prove not, nor can do so; which is di­rectly to act against the light and convicti­on of Conscience? And yet an associate of his in his present design, in a modest and free Conference, tells us, that there is not awider step to Atheism than to do any thing against Conscience, and enforms his Friend, that Dissent out of grounds that appear to any founded on the will of God, is Conscience; but against such a Conscience, the Light, Judgement and Conviction of it, are men here taught to practise; and thereby in the judgement of that Author, are instructed [Page 69] unto Atheism. And indeed if once men find themselves at Liberty to practise con­trary to what is prescribed unto them in the name and authority of God, as all things are which Conscience requires, it is not long that they will retain any re­gard of him, or Reverence unto Him. It hath hitherto been the Judgement of all, who have enquired into these things, that the great concern of the Glory of God in the world, the interest of Kings and Rulers, of all Governments whatever, the good and welfare of private persons, lyes in no­thing more, than in preserving Conscience from being debauched in the conducting principles of it; and in keeping up its due Respect to the immediate Soveraignty of God over it in all things. Neither ever was there a more horrid attempt upon the Truth of the Gospel, all common Morality, and the good of Mankind, than that which some of late years or Ages have been en­gaged in, by suggesting in their Casuistical Writings such principles for the guidance of the Consciences of men, as in sundry particular instances might set them free, as to practice, from the direct and immeds­ately influencing Authority of God in his Word. And yet I doubt not, but it may be made evident, that all their principle [...] [Page 70] in conjunction are scarce of so pernicious a tendency as this one general Theorem, That men may lawfully act in the Worship of God, or otherwise, against the Light, Dictates, or Convictions of their own Consciences. Exempt Conscience from an absolute, immediate, entire, uni­versal dependance on the Authority, Will, and Judgement of God, according to what Conceptions it hath of them, and you disturb the whole harmony of divine Pro­vidence in the Government of the World; and break the first link of that great chain whereon all Religion and Government in the world do depend. Teach men to be like Naaman the Syrian to believe only in the God of Israel, and to Worship Him ac­cording to his Appointment by his own Choice, and from a sense of duty, yet al­so to bow in the house of Rimmon contra­ry to his Light and Conviction out of Complyance with his Master; or with the men of Samaria to fear the Lord, but to wor­ship their Idols, and they will not fail at one time or other, rather to seek after Rest in restless Atheism, than to live in a perpetual conflict with themselves, or to cherish an everlasting Sedition in their own bo­somes.

I shall not much reflect upon those Ex­pressions [Page 71] which our Author is pleased to vent his Indignation by; such as Religious rage, and fury, Religious villany, religious lunacies, serious and Consciencious Villanies, wildness of godly madness, men lead by the Spirit of God to disturb the publick peace, the world filled with a buzze and noise of the di­vine Spirit, sanctified fury, sanctified barba­rism, pious villanies, godly disobedience, sullen and cross-grained godliness, with innumera­ble others of the like kind; which al­though perhaps he may countenance him­self in the use of, from the tacite respect that he hath to the persons whom he in­tends to vilifie and reproach; yet in them­selves, and to others, who have not the same apprehensions of their occasion, they tend to nothing but to beget a scorn and derision of all Religion, and the profession of it; an humour which will not find where to rest or fix it self, untill it comes to be swallowed up in the Abysse of Atheism.

We are at length arrived at the last Act of this Tragical Preface; and as in our pro­gress we have rather heard a great Noise and Bluster, than really encountred either true difficulty or danger; so now I confess that Weariness of conversing with so many various sounds of the same signification, [Page 72] the summ of all being Knaves, Villains, Fools, will carry me through the remainder of it, with some more than ordinary precipita­tion, as grudging an Addition in this kind of employment to those few minutes where­in the preceding Remarques were written or dictated.

There are two or three heads which the remainders of this Prefatory Discourse may be reduced unto. First, a magnificent Proclamation of his own Achievements; what he hath proved, what he hath done, especially in representing the Inconsistence of Liberty of Conscience with the first and Fundamental Laws of Government; and I am content that he please himself with his own Apprehensions, like him who admired at the marvelous feats performed in an empty Theatre. For it may be that upon examination it will be found, that there is scarce in his whole Discourse any one Ar­gument offered at, that hath the least seem­ing cogency towards such an end; Whe­ther you take Liberty of Conscience, for Liberty of Judgement, which himself con­fesseth uncontroleable, or Liberty of Pra­ctice upon Indulgence which he seems to oppose, an impartial Reader will I doubt be so far from finding the Conclusion men­tioned to be evinced, as he will scarcely [Page 73] be able to satisfie himself that there are any Premises that have a tendency there­unto. But I suppose he must extreamly want an Employment who will design him­self a business, in endeavouring to dispossess him of his self-pleasing Imagination. Yea he seems not to have pleaded his own cause absurdly at Athens, who giving the City the news of a Victory when they had received a Fatal Defeat, affirmed that publick thanks were due to him, for affording them two dayes of Mirth and Jollity, before the tidings came of their ill success; which was more than they were ever like to see again in their lives. And there being as much satisfaction in a fancied, as a real success, though useless and failing, we shall leave our Author in the highest content­ment that thoughts of this nature can afford him. However it may not be amiss to mind him of that old good Counsel, Let not him that girdeth on his Armour, boast like him that putteth it off.

Another part of his Oration is to decry the folly of that bruitish Apprehension that men can possibly live peaceably and quietly if they enjoy the Liberty of their Consci­ences; where he fears not to affirm, that it is more elegible to tolerate the highest De­bauchertes, than liberty for men to worship [Page 74] God according to what they apprehend he requires; whence some severe persons would be too apt it may be to make a conjecture of his own Inclinations; for it is evident that he is not absolutely insensible of self-interest in what he doth or writes. But the contrary to what he asserts, being a truth at this day written with the beams of the Sun in many Nations of Europe, let Envy, Malice, Fear, and Revenge suggest what they please otherwise, and the Na­ture of the Thing it self denyed being built upon the best, greatest, and surest Foundations and Warranty that mankind hath to build on, or trust unto for their peace and security, I know not why it's denial was here ventured at, unless it were to embrace an opportunity once more to give vent to the remainders of his Indig­nation, by Revilings and Reproaches, which I had hoped had been now ex­hausted.

But these things are but Collateral to his principal Design in this close of his Declamation; and this is the Removal of an Objection, that Liberty of Conscience would conduce much to the Improvement of Trade in the Nation. It is known that many persons of great Wisdom and Experience, and who, as it is probable, have had more [Page 75] time to consider the State and proper Inte­rest of this Nation, and have spent more pains in the weighing of all things condu­cing thereunto than our Author hath done, are of this mind and judgement. But he at once strikes them and their Reasons dumb, by drawing out his Gorgon's head, that he hath proved it inconsistent with Go­vernment, and so it must needs be a foolish and silly thing to talk of its usefulness to Trade. Verum, ad populum phalera; if great blustering words, dogmatical Assertions, uncouth, unproved principles, accompa­nied with a pretence of Contempt and scorn of all exceptions and oppositions to what is said, with the persons of them that make them, may be esteemed proofs, our Author can prove what he pleaseth, and he is to be thought to have proved what­ever he affirms himself so to have done. If sober Reason, Experience, Arguments de­rived from common acknowledged Prin­ciples of Truth, If a Confirmation of De­ductions from such principles, by confessed and commonly approved Instances are ne­cessary to make up convincing proofs in matters of this Nature and Importance, we are yet to seek for them, notwith­standing any thing that hath been offered by this Author, or as far as I can conjecture [Page 76] is likely so to be. In the mean time I ac­knowledge many parts of his Discourse to be singularly remarkable. His Insinua­tion That the Affairs of the Kingdom are not in a fixed and established condition, that we are distracted amongst our selves with a strange variety of Jealous [...]es and Annimosities, and such like expressions, as if divulged in a Book printed without Licence, would and that justly, be looked on as Seditious, are the Foundations that he proceedeth upon. Now as I am confident that there is very little ground, or none at all for these Insinuations, so the publick dispo­sing of the minds of men to fears, suspicious, and apprehensions of unseen dangers by such means, becomes them only, who care not what disadvantage they cast others, nay their Rulers under, so they may compass and secure their own private ends and concerns.

But yet not content to have expressed his own real or pretended apprehensions, he proceeds to manifest his scorn of those, or his smiling at them, who with mighty pro­jects labour for the improvement of Trade, which the Council appointed, as I take it, by His Majesty thence denominated, is more concerned in than the Non-conformists, and may do well upon this Information finding [Page 77] themselves lyable to scorn, to desist from such an useless and contemptible employ­ment. They may now know, that to erect and encourage trading Combinations, is only to build so many Nests of Faction and Sediti­on; for he sayes, there is not any sort of peo­ple so inclinable to seditious practices as the trading part of a Nation; and that their Pride and Arrogance naturally encrease with the improvement of their stock. Besides the Fanatick party, as he sayes, live in these grea­ter Societies, and it is a very odd and prepo­sterous folly, to design the enriching of that sort of people; for wealth doth but only pam­per and encourage their presumption; and he is a very silly man, and understands nothing of the follies, passions and inclinations of hu­mane nature, who sees not that there is no creature so ungovernable as a wealthy Fana­tick.

It cannot be denyed, but that this Mo­dern Policy, runs contrary to the principles and experience of former Ages. To pre­serve industrious men in a peaceable way of emproving their own Interests, where­by they might partake in their own and family concerns, of the good and advanta­ges of Government, hath been by the weak and silly men of former Generations, esteemed the most rational way of indu­cing [Page 78] their minds unto peaceable thoughts and resolutions. For as the wealth of men encreaseth, so do their desires and endea­vours after all things and wayes whereby it may be secured; that so they may not have spent their labour and the vigour of their spirits with reference unto their own good and that of their posterity in vain. Yea, most men are found to be of Issachar's temper, who when he saw, that Rest was good, and the Land pleasant, where­in his own advantages lay, bowed his shoul­der to bear, and became a servant unto Tri­bute; Fortes and Miseri, have heretofore been only feared, and not such as found sa­tisfaction to their desires in the encreases and successes of their endeavours. And as Caesar said, he feared not those fat and corpulent persons Anthony and Dolabella, but those pale and lean discontented ones, Bru­tus and Cassius; So men have been thought to be far less dangerous, or to be suspect­ed in Government, who are well clothed with their own wealth and concerns, than such as have nothing but themselves to lose, and by reason of their straights and distresses, do scarce judge them worth the keeping.

And hath this Gentleman really consi­dered what the meaning of that word [Page 79] Trade is, and what is the concernment of this Nation in it? or is he so fond of his own Nations and Apprehensions, as to judge it meet that the Vital Spirits and Blood of the Kingdom should be offered in Sacrifice unto them? Solomon tells us, that the profit of the Earth is for all, and the King himself is served by the field; and we may truly in England say the same of Trade; all men know what respect unto it there is in the Revenues of the Crown, and how much they are concerned in its growth and promotion; the Rents of all from the highest to the lowest that have an interest in the soyl, are regulated by it, and rise and fall with it; nor is there any possibility to keep them up to their pre­sent proportion and standard, much less to advance them, without the continuance of Trade in its present condition at least, may without a steddy endeavour for its encrease, furtherance and promotion. No­blemen and Gentlemen must be contented to eat their own Bief and Mutton at home, if Trade decay; to keep up their antient and present Splendour, they will find no way or means. Corporations are known to be the most considerable and significant Bodies of the Common people, and here­in lies their Being and Bread; to diminish or [Page 80] discountenance their Trade, is to starve them, and discourage all honest Industry in the world. It was a sad desolation that not long since befell the great City by Fire; yet through the good Providence of God, under the peaceable Government of his Majesty, it is rising out of its ashes, with a new signal Beauty and Lustre. But that Consumption and Devastation of it, which the pursuit of this Council will inevitably produce, would prove Fatal and Irrepa­rable. And as the Interest of all the seve­ral parts of the Common-wealth do de­pend on the Trade of the people amongst our selves, so the honor, power and secu­rity of the whole in reference unto forraign Nations, are resolved also into the same Principles; for as our soyl is but small in comparison of some of our Neighbours, and the numbers of our people no wayes to be compared with theirs, so if we should forego the advantages of Trade for which we have opportunities, and unto which the people of this Nation have Inclinati­ons, above any Countrey on Nation in the world, we should quickly find how un­equal the Competition between them and us would be: for even our Naval Force, which is the honour of the King, the security of his Kingdoms, the Terror [Page 81] of his Enemies, oweth its rise and continu­ance unto that preparation of persons em­ployed therein, which is made by the Trade of the Nation. And if the Coun­cel of this Author should be followed, to suspend all thoughts of the supportment, encouragement, and furtherance of Trade, until all men by the severity of Penalties should be induced to an Uniformity in Religion; I doubt not but our envious Neighbours would as readily discern the concernment of their malice and ill will therein, as Hannibal did his, in the Action of the Roman General, who at the Battel of Cannae, according to their usual Discipline, (but fatally at that time misapplyed) caused in the great distress of the Army, his Horsemen to alight and fight on foot, not considering the Advantage of his great and politick enemy, as things then stood, who immediately said, I had rather he had delivered them all bound unto me, though he knew there was enough done to secure his Victory.

THE Author of this Dis­course, seems in this First Chapter to design the stating of the Controversie, which he intendeth to pursue and handle, (as he expresseth himself pag. II.) as also to lay down the Main Foundations of his ensuing Superstru­cture. Nothing could be more regularly projected, nor more suited to the satisfa­ction of ingenious Inquirers into the mat­ters under debate; For those, who have any design in reading, beyond a present divertisement of their Minds, or enter­tainment [Page 84] of their Fancies, desire nothing more than to have the subject matter which they exercise their thoughts about, clearly and distinctly proposed, that a true judgement may be made concerning what men say, and whereof they do affirm. But I fear our Author hath fallen under the misadventure of a failure in these projections; at least as unto that certainty, clearness, and perspicuity in the declara­tion of his Conceptions, and expression of his Assertions and Principles; without which all other Ornaments of Speech in matters of moment, are of no use or con­sideration. His Language is good and pro­per, his Periods of Speech laboured, full, and even; his expressions poynant to­wards his Adversaries, and singly taken, appearing to be very significative and ex­pressive of his mind. But I know not how it is come to pass, that what either through his own defect, as to a due com­prehension of the notions whose mannage­ment he hath undertaken, or out of a de­sign to cloud and obscure his sentiments, and to take the advantage of loose decla­matory expressions, it is very hard, if pos­sible, to gather from what he hath writ­ten, either what is the true state of the Controversie proposed to discussion, or [Page 85] what is the precise determinate sense of of those words wherein he proposeth the Principles that he proceeds upon. Thus in the Title of the Book he asserts the Power of the Magistrate over the Consciences of men; elsewhere confines the whole work and duty of Conscience to the inward thoughts and perswasions of the mind, over which the Magistrate hath no power at all. Conscience it self he sometimes sayes is every mans Opinion; sometimes he calls it an Imperious Faculty, which surely are not the same; sometimes he pleads for the uncontrollable power of Magistrates over Religion and the Consciences of men; sometimes asserts their Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as the same thing, and seemingly all that he intends; where­as I suppose, no man ever yet defined Ec­clesiastical Jurisdiction, to be, an uncontrol­lable power over Religion and the Consciences of Men. The Magistrates power over Reli­gion he asserts frequently, and denyeth outward Worship to be any part of Religion, and at last pleads upon the matter only for his power over outward Worship. Every particular Vertue he affirms to be such, be­cause it is a Resemblance and Imitation of some of the Divine Attributes; yet also teacheth that there may be more vertues, or new ones that were not so, and that to [Page 86] be Vertue in one place which is not so in another: Sometimes he pleads that the Ma­gistrate hath power to impose any Religion on the Consciences of his subjects, that doth not countenance Vice, or disgrace the Deity; and then anon pleads for it in indifferent things, and circumstances of outward Wor­ship only. Also that the Magistrate may oblige his Subjects Consciences to the perfor­mance of Moral Duties, and other Duties in Religious Worship under penalties, and yet punisheth none for their Crime and Guilt, but for the example of others. And ma­ny other Instances of the like Nature may be given. Now, whatever dress of words these things may be set off withal, they sa­vour rankly of crude and undigested Noti­ons, not reduced unto such a Consistency in his mind, as to suffer him to speak evenly, steadily, and constantly to them. Up­on the whole matter, it may not be unmeet­ly said of his Discourse, what Tally said of Rullus his Oration about the Agrarian Law; Concionem advocari jubet; summâ cum expectatione concurritur; Explicat Orationem sane longam & verbis valdè bonis; Vnum erat quod mihi vitiosum videbatur; quòd tantâ ex frequentiâ nemo inveniri potuit qui intel­ligere posset quid diceret. Hoc ille utrum ins [...] ­diarum caus [...] fecerit, an hac genere Eloquen­tia [Page 87] delectetur, nescio; tamen siqui acutiores in concione steterant, de Lege Agrairia nescio quid voluisse eum dicere suspicabantur. Many good words it is composed of, many sharp Refle­ctions are made on others, a great Ap­pearance there is of Reason; but besides that, it is plain that he treats of the Non­conformists and the Magistrates power, and would have this latter exercised about the punishment or destruction of the former, (which almost every Page ex­presseth) it is very, hard to gather what is the Case he speaks unto, or what are principles he proceeds upon.

The entrance of his Discourse is designed to give an account of the great Difficulty which he intends to assoyl, of the Con­troversie that he will handle and debate, and of the Difference which he will com­pose. Here, if any where, Accuracy, Per­spicuity, and a clear distinct direction of the minds of the Readers unto a certain just Apprehension of the matter in questi­on and difference, ought to be expected. For if the foundation of Discourses of this nature, be laid in terms general, ambigu­ous, loose, rhetorical, and flourishing, giv­ing no particular determinate sense of the Controversie, (for so this is called by our Author) all. that ensues in the pursuit of [Page 88] what is so laid down, must needs be of the same complexion. And such appears to be the declamatory entrance of this Chapter. For instead of laying a solid Foundation to erect his superstructure up­on, the Author seems in it only to have built a Castle in the Air, that makes a good­ly appearance and shew, but is of no va­lidity or use. Can he suppose that any man is the wiser, or the more intelligent in the difference about Liberty of Con­science, the power and duty of Magistrates in granting or denying an Indulgence unto the exercise of it, by reading an elegant parabolical Discourse of two Supream Pow­ers, the Magistrate and Conscience, contesting for Soveraignty, in and about no man knows what? What Conscience is; what Liber­ty of Conscience; what it is pleaded for to extend unto, who are concerned in it; whether its Plea be resolved absolutely in­to its own Nature and Constitution, or in­to that respect which it hath to another common Rule of the minds and concepti­ons of men in and about the Worship of God, is not declared; nor is it easily dis­cernable, what he allows and approves of in his own Discourse, and what he intro­duceth to reflect upon, and so reject. Pag. 5. he tells us, that Conscience is subject [Page 89] and accountable to God alone, that it owns no Superiour but the Lord of Consciences. And pag. 7. That those who make it ac­countable to none but God lone, do in effect usurp their Princes Crown, defie his Authori­ty, and acknowledge no Governour but them­selves. If it be pleaded that in the first place, not what is, but what is unduly pretended is declared, his words may be as well so expounded in all his Ascriptions unto Magistrates also; namely, that it is not with them as he asserts; but only' tis unduly pretended so to be, as to any thing that appears in the Discourse. The di­stinct consideration of the Principles of Conscience, and the outward exercise of it, can alone here give any shew of Re­lief. But as no Distinction of that nature doth as yet appear, and if rested on, ought to have been produced by any one who understood himself, and intended not to deceive or entangle others, so when it is brought on the Stage, its inconsistency to serve the end designed shall be evinced. But that a plea for the Consciences of private men, (submitting themselves free­ly and willingly to the Supream Power and Government of Magistrates in all things belonging to publick peace and tranquili­ty,) to have liberty to express their Obe­dience [Page 90] unto God in the exercise of his outward Worship, should receive such a Tragical description of a Rival Supream Power set up against the Magistrate to the usurpation of his Crown and Dignity, is a new way of stating Controversies whether in Divinity or Policy, which this Author judgeth conducing to his design and pur­pose. And I shall say no more but that those who delight in such a way of wri­ting, and do receive light and satisfaction thereby, do seem to be exercised in a Lo­gick that I was never acquainted withal, and which I shall not now enquire after.

What seems to be of real Difficulty in this matter which is so rhetorically exagge­rated, our Blessed Saviour hath stated and determined in one word; Give, saith he, unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are Gods; and this he did, when he gave his Disciples command not only to think, judge and believe ac­cording to what he should propose and reveal unto them, but also to observe and do in outward practices what ever he should command them. As he requires all subje­ction unto the Magistrate in things of his proper Cognizance, that is all things neces­sary to publick Peace and Tranquility in this world the great end of His Authori­ty: [Page 91] So he asserts also that there are things of God which are to be observed and pra­ctised, even all and every one of his own commands; in a neglect whereof on any pretence or account, we give not unto God that which is His. And he doubted not, but that these things, these distinct respects to God and man, were exceed­ingly well consistent, and together dire­ctive to the same end of publick good. Wherefore passing through the flourishes of this Frontispiece with the highest in­concernment, we may enter the Fabrick it self, where possibly we may find him declaring directly what it is that he as­serts in this matter, and contendeth for; and this he doth pag. 10. And therefore it is the design of this Discourse by a fair and impartial Debate to compose all these dif­ferences and adjust all these quarrells and contentions, and settle things upon their true and proper foundations; first by proving it to be absolutely necessary to the peace and Go­vernment of the World, that the Supream Magistrate of every Commonwealth should be vested with a power to govern and con­duct the Consciences of Subjects in Affairs of Religion.

I am sure our Author will not be sur­prized, if after he hath reported the [Page 92] whole Party whom he opposeth, as a Com­pany of silly, foolish, illiterate Persons, one of them should so far acknowledge his own stupidity, as to profess that after the Consideration of this Declaration of his Intention and mind, he is yet to seek for the Direct and determinate sense of his Words, and for the Principle that he designes the Confirmation of. I doubt not but that the Magistrate hath all that power which is absolutely necessary for the preservation of publick Peace and Tranquility in the world. But if men may be allowed to fancy what they please to be necessary unto that end, and thence to make their own measures of that power which is to be ascribed unto Him, no man knows what bounds will be fixed unto that Ocean wherein the Leviathans they have framed in their Imagination may sport themselves. Some will perhaps think it necessary to this purpose that the Magistrate should have power to declare, and determine whe­ther there be a God or no; whether if there be, it be necessary He should be worship­ped or no; whether any Religion be need­ful in, or usefull to the World; and if there be, then to determine what all sub­jects shall believe, and practise from first to last in the whole of it. And our Au­thor [Page 93] hopes that some are of this mind. Others may confine it to lesser things, ac­cording as their own Interest doth call upon them so to do; though they are not able to assign a clear distinction between what is subjected unto Him, and what may plead an exemption from his Authority. He in­deed who is the Fountain and Original of all Power, hath both assigned its proper end, and fully suited it to the attainment thereof. And if the noise of mens Lusts, Passions, and Interests, were but a little silenced, we should quickly hear the har­monious consenting voice of Humane na­ture it self, declaring the just proportion that is between the Grant of power and its end; and undeniably express it in all the instances of it. For as the Principle of Rule and Subjection, is natural to us, concreated with us, and indispensably ne­cessary to Humane Society in all the di­stinctions it is capable of, and Relations whence those Distinctions arise; so Nature it self duly attended unto, will not fail by the Reason of things, to direct us unto all that is essential unto it, and necessary unto its end. Arbitrary Fictions of Ends of Government, and what is necessary thereunto, influenced by present Interest, and arising from circumstances confined to [Page 94] one Place, Time, or Nation, are not to be imposed on the Nature of Government it self; which hath nothing belonging unto it but what inseparably accompanieth mankind as Sociable.

But to let this pass; The Authority here particularly asserted, is a Power in the su­pream Magistrate to govern and guide the Consciences of his Subjects in affairs of Reli­gion. Let any man duly consider these expressions, and if he be satisfied by them as to the sense of the Controversie under de­bate, I shall acknowledge that he is wiser than I, which is very easie for any one to be. What are the Affairs of Religion here intended, all or some? Whether in Reli­gion, or about it; what are the Consciences of men, and how exercised about these things; what it is to govern and conduct them; with what power, by what means this may be done; I am at a loss for ought that yet is here declared. There is a Guidance, Conduct, yea Government of the Consciences of men, by Instructions and Directions in a due proposal of ratio­nal and spiritual motives for those ends; such as is that which is vested in, and ex­ercised by the Guides of the Church; and that in subjection to, and dependance on Christ alone, as hath been hitherto appre­hended; [Page 95] though some now seem to have a mind to change their Master, and to take up praesente Numine who may be of more Advantage to them. That the Magistrate hath also power so to govern and conduct the Consciences of his Subjects in his way of Administration, that is by ordering them to be taught, instructed, and guided in their duty, I know none that doth deny. So did Jehosophat, 2 Chron. 17, 7, 8, 9. But it seems to be a Government and Gui­dance of another nature that is here in­tended. To deliver our selves therefore from the Deceit and Intanglement of these general expressions, and that we may know what to speak unto, we must seek for a Declaration of their sense and Importance from what is elsewhere in their pursuit af­firmed and explained by their Author.

His general Assertion is (as was ob­served) that the Magistrate hath power over the Consciences of his Subjects in Religion, as appears in the Title of his Book; Here p. 10. that power, is said to be, to govern and conduct their Consciences in Religious Af­fairs; pag. 13. that Religion is subject to his dominion as well as all other affairs of State, pag. 27. it is a Soveraignty over mens Consciences in matters of Religion, and this Universal, Absolute, and Uncontrollable; [Page 96] Matters of Religion are as uncontrollably subject to the supream power, as all other Civil Concerns; He may if he please reserve the Exercise of the Priesthood to Himself, p. 32. that is, what now in Religion corresponds unto the ancient Priesthood, as the Or­dering Bishops and Priests, Administring Sa­craments and the like; as the Papists in Q. Elizabeth's time did commonly report, in their usual manner, that it was done by a Woman amongst us, by a fiction of such principles as begin it seems now to be owned. That if this power of the Govern­ment of Religion be not Universal and Un­limited it is useless, p. 35. that this power is not derived from Christ, nor any grant of his, but is antecedent to his coming, or any power given unto Him or granted by Him, pag. 40. Magistrates have a power to make that a par­ticular of the Divine Law, which God had not made so, p. 80. and to introduce new duties in the most important parts of Religion. So that there is a publick conscience which men are in things of a publick concern (re­lating to the Worship of God) to attend unto and not to their own. And if there be any sin in the command, he that imposed it, shall answer for it, and not I whose whole duty it is to obey, p. 308. Hence the command of Authority will warrant obedience, and [Page 97] obedience will hallow my actions, and excuse me from sin, ibid. Hence it follows, that whatever the Magistrate commands in Re­ligion, his Authority doth so immediately affect the Consciences of men, that they are bound to observe it on the pain of the greatest sin and punishment; And he may appoint and command whatever he pleaseth in Religion, that doth not either countenance Vice, or disgrace the Deity, p. 85. And many other expressions are there of the general Assertion before laid down.

This therefore seems to me, and to the most impartial Considerations of this Dis­course that I could bring unto it, to be the Doctrine or Opinion proposed and advanced for the quieting and composing of the great tumults described in its entrance; namely, That the supream Magistrate in every Nation hath power to order and ap­point what Religion his Subjects shall profess and observe, or what he pleaseth in Religi­on, as to the worship of God required in it, provided that he enjoyneth nothing that coun­tenanceth Vice, or disgraceth the Deity; and thereby binds their Consciences to profess and observe that which is by him so ap­pointed (and nothing else are they to ob­serve) making it their duty in Conscience [Page 98] so to do; and the highest Crime or Sin to do any thing to the contrary; and that whatever the precise Truth in these mat­ters be, or whatever be the apprehensions of their own Consciences concerning them. Now if our Author can produce any Law, Usage, or Custome of this King­dom, any Statute or Act of Parliament, any authentick Record, any Acts or De­clarations of our Kings, any publickly authorised writing, before or since the Reformation, declaring, asserting, or other­wise approving the Power and Authority described, to belong unto, to be claimed or exercised by the Kings of this Nation, I will faithfully promise him never to write one word against it, although I am sure I shall never be of that mind. And if I mistake not in a transient Reflection on these Principles, compared with those which the Church of England hath formerly pleaded against them who opposed her Constitu­tions, they are utterly by them cast out of all consideration; and this one notion is advanced in the room of all the Founda­tions, which for so many years her Defen­ders, (as wife and as Learned as this Au­thor) have been building upon. But this is not my concernment to examine; I shall leave it unto them whose it is, and whose [Page 99] it will be made appear to be, if we are again necessitated to engage in this dis­pute.

For the present; be it granted, that it is the duty, and in the power of every su­pream Magistrate, to Order, and Deter­mine what Religion, what Way, what Modes in Religion shall be allowed, pub­lickly owned, and countenanced, and by publick revenue maintained in his Domi­nions. That is, this is allowed with respect to all pretensions of other Soveraigns, or of his own Subjects; with respect unto God, it is his Truth alone, the Religion by him revealed, and the Worship by him appoint­ed that he can so allow or establish. The Rule that holds in private persons with respect to the publick Magistrate, holds in him with respect unto God. Illud possumus quod jure possumus. It is also agreed, that no men, no individual Person, no Order, or Society of men, are either in their per­sons or any of their outward concerns, exempted, or may be so on the account of Religion, from His Power and Jurisdicti­on; nor any Causes that are lyable unto a legal, political disposal and determinati­on; It is also freely acknowledged that whatever such a Magistrate doth determi [...] about the Observances of Religion. [Page 100] under what penalties soever, His Subjects are bound to observe what He doth so com­mand and appoint, unless by general or especial Rules, their Consciences are ob­liged to a Dissent, or contrary Observa­tion by the Authority of God and His Word; In this case they are to keep their Souls entire in their spiritual subjection unto God, and quietly and peaceably to bear the troubles, and inconveniencies which on the account thereof may befall them, without the least withdrawing of their Obedience from the Magistrate. And in this state of things as there is no Ne­cessity or appearance of it, that any man should be brought into such a condition, as wherein Sin on the one hand, or the other, cannot be avoided; so that state of things will probably occurr in the world, as it hath done in all Ages hitherto, that men may be necessitated to Sin, or Suffer.

To winde up the state of this Contro­versie; we say that antecedent to the Con­sideration of the power of the Magistrate, and all the Influence that it hath upon men or their Consciences, there is a superiour determination of what is true, what false in Religion, what right and what wrong in the Worship of God, wherein the [Page 101] Guidance of the Consciences of men doth principally depend, and whereinto it is ultimately resolved. This gives an Obliga­tion, or Liberty unto them, antecedent unto the imposition of the Magistrate, of whose command and our actual Obedience unto them in these things, it is the Rule and Measure. And I think there is no Principle, no common presumption of Nature, nor dictate of Reason more evi­dent, known, or confessed, than this, that whatever God commands Us in his Worship or otherwise, that we are to do; and what­ever he forbids us, that we are not to do, be the things themselves in our eye great, or small.

Neither is there any difference in these things with respect unto the Way or manner of the declaration of the Will of God; Whether it be by innate common light, or by Revelation, all is one; The Authority and Will of God in all is to be observed. Yea a Command of God made known by Revelation, (the way which is most con­tended about) may suspend as to any particular Instance, the greatest command that we are obliged unto by the Law of Nature in reference unto one another; as it did in the precept given to Abraham for the Sacrificing of his Son. And we shall [Page 102] find our Author himself setting up the Supremacy of Conscience in opposition unto, and competition with that of the Magistrate, (though with no great self-consistency) ascribing the preheminence and prevalency in obligation unto that of Conscience, and that in the principal and most important duties of Religion and humane life. Such are all those moral Vertues, which have in their Nature a resemblance of the divine perfections, wherein he placeth the Substance of Re­ligion; With respect unto these, he so setteth up the Throne of Conscience, as to affirm that if any thing be commanded by the Magistrate against them, to disobey Him is no Sin, but a Duty; and we shall find the Case to be the same in matters of meer Revelation. For what God commands that he commands, by what way soever that com­mnad be made known to us. And there is no consideration that can adde any thing to the obligatory power and efficacy of in­finite Authority. So that where the Will of God is the formal Reason of our Obedi­ence, it is all one how or by what means it is discovered unto us, Whatever we are instructed in by innate Reason, or by [...] ▪ the Reason why we are [...] by it, is neither the one nor [Page 103] the other, but the Authority of God in both.

But we must return unto the Conside­ration of the Sentiments of our Author in this matter as before laid down. The Authority ascribed to the Civil Magistrate being as hath been expressed; it will be very hard for any one to distinguish be­tween it and the Soveraignty that the Lord Christ himself hath in and over his Church; yea if there be any Advantage on either side, or a comparative prehemi­nence, it will be found to be cast upon that of the Magistrate. Is the Lord Christ the Lord of the Souls and Consciences of men? Hath he dominion over them to rule them in the things of the Worship of God? It is so with the Magistrate also; He hath an universal power over the Consciences of his Subjects. Doth the Lord Christ require his Disciples to do and observe in the Wor­ship of God what ever he commanded them? So also may the Magistrate, the Rule and Conduct of Conscience in these mat­ters belonging unto him; provided that he command nothing that may countenance Vice, or disgrace the Deity; which, with Reverence be it spoken, our Lord Jesus Christ himself, not only on the Account of the Per [...]ection and rectitude of his own [Page 104] Nature, but also of his Commission from the Father, could not do. Is the Autho­rity of Christ the formal Reason making Obedience necessary to his Commands and Precepts? So is the Authority of the Ma­gistrate in reference unto what he re­quires. Do men therefore sin if they neg­lect the observance of the commands of Christ in the Worship of God, because of his immediate Authority so to command them binding their Consciences? So do men sin if they omit or neglect to do what the Magistrate requires in the Worship of God because of his Authority, without any farther respect. Hath the Lord Christ instituted two Sacraments in the Worship of God, that is outward visible signs, or Symbols, of inward invisible or spi­ritual Grace? the Magistrate if he please may institute and appoint twenty under the names of significant Ceremonies; that is outward visible signs of inward spiritual grace, which alone is the significancy contended about. Hath the Magistrate this his Au­thority in and over Religion and the con­sciences of men from Jesus Christ? no more then Christ hath his Authority from the Magistrate; for he holds it by the Law of Nature antecedent to the promise and coming of Christ? Might Christ in his [Page 105] own Person administer the Holy Things of the Church of God? not in the Church of the Jews, for he sprang of the Tribe of Ju­dah, concerning which nothing was spoken as to the Priesthood; only he might in that of the Gospel, but hath judged meet to com­mit the Actual Administration of them to others? So is it with the Magistrate also. Thus far then Christ and the Magistrate seem to stand on even or equal terms; But there are two things remaining that absolutely turn the scale and cast the ad­vantage on the Magistrates side. For First, Men may do and practise many things in the Worship of God which the Lord Christ hath no where, nor by any means required; yea to think that his Word or the Revelation of his Mind and Will there­in, is the sole and adequate Rule of Religi­ous Worship, is reported as an Opinion foolish, absurd, impious and destructive of all Government. If this be not supposed not only the whole Design of our Author in this Book is defeated, but our whole Controversie also is composed and at an end. But on the other hand, no man must do or practise any thing in that way, but what is prescribed, appointed and com­manded by the Magistrate, upon pain of Sin, Schism, Rebellion and all that follows [Page 106] thereon. To leave this unasserted is all that the Non-Conformists would desire in order unto peace. Comprehension and Indulgence would ensue thereon. Here I think the Magistrate hath the advantage. But that which follows will make it yet more evident; for Secondly, Suppose the Magistrate require any thing to be done and observed in the Worship of God, and the Lord Christ require the quite contra­ry in a mans own apprehension, so that he is as well satisfied in his apprehension of his mind as he can be of any thing that is pro­posed to his faith and Conscience in the Word of God; in this case he is to obey Magistrate, and not Christ, as far as I can learn; unless all Confusion and Disorder be admitted an entrance into the world. Yea, but this seems directly contrary to that Rule of the Apostles, which hath such an evidence and power of rational convicti­on attending it, that they refer it to the judgement of their Adversaries, and those persons of as perverse corrupt minds and prejudicate engagements against them and their cause, as ever lived in the world; namely, Whether it be meet to obey God or man, judge ye. But we are told, that this holds only in greater matters; the Logick (by the way) of which distinction, is as strange as its [Page 107] Divinity. For if the formal Reason of the difference intimated, arise from the com­parison between the Authority of God and man, it holds equally as to all things small or great that they may be oppositely concerned in. Besides who shall judge what is small, or what is great in things of this Nature? Cave ne titubes. Grant but the least judgement to private men themselves in this matter, and the whole Fabrick tumbles; If the Magistrate be Judge of what is great and of what is little, we are still where we were without hopes of de­livery. And this to me is a notable in­stance of the preheminence of the Ma­gistrate above Christ in this matter. Some of the Old Irish have a Proverbial Speech amongst them, That if christ had not been Christ when he was Christ, Patrick had been Christ; but it seems now that take­ing it for granted that he was Christ, yet we have another that is so also; that is Lord over the Souls and Consciences of men; and what can be said more of him, who sits in the Temple of God, and shews him­self to be God.

As we formerly said Non-Conformists who are unacquainted with the Mysteries of things of this Nature, must needs desire to know whether these be the avowed [Page 108] Principles of the Church of England, or whether they are only Inventions to serve a present Turn of the pursuit of some mens designs. Are all the old Pleas of the Jus Divinum of Episcopacy, of Example and Dire­ction Apostolical, of a Parity of reason between the Condition of the Church whilst under ex­traordinary Officers, and whilst under ordina­ry; of the power of the Church to appoint Ce­remonies for Decency and Order, of the Consi­stency of Christian Liberty with the necessary practice of indifferent things, of the pattern of the Churches of old, which (whether, du­ly or otherwise we do not now determine) have been insisted on in this cause, swal­lowed all up in this Abysse of Magistrati­cal Omnipotency, which plainly renders them useless and unprofitable? How un­happy hath it been that the Christian World was not sooner blessed with this great Discovery of the only way and means of putting a final end, unto all Reli­gious contests? That he should not until now appear,

But every Age produceth not a Columbus. [Page 109] Many indeed have been the Disputes of Learned men about the power of Magi­strates in and concerning Religion. With us it is stated in the recorded Actings of our Soveraign Princes, in the Oath of Su­premacy, and the Acts of Parliament con­cerning it, with other Authentick Wri­tings explanatory thereof. Some have de­nyed him any concern herein; our Au­thor is none of them? but rather like the Phrenetick Gentleman who when he was ac­cused in former dayes, for denying the Corporal presence of Christ in the Sacrament: replyed in his own defence, that he be­lieved him to be present booted and spurred as he rode to Capernaum. He hath brought him in booted and spurred, yea armed cap-a-pie into the Church of God, and given all power into his hands to dispose of the Worship of God according to his own will and pleasure. And that not with respect unto outward Order only, but with direct obligation upon the Con­sciences of men.

But doubtless it is the Wisdom of So­veraign Princes to beware of this sort of Enemies; Persons who to promote their own Interest make Ascriptions of such things unto them, as they cannot ac­cept of, without the utmost hazzard of the [Page 110] displeasure of God. Is it meet that to sa­tisfie the desires of any, they should in­vade the Prerogative of God, or set them­selves down at his right Hand in the Throne of his only begotten Son? I con­fess they are no way concerned in what others for their advantage sake, as they suppose, will ascribe unto them, which they may sufficiently disown by scorn and silence. Nor can their sin involve them in any guilt. It was not the vain Accla­mation of the multitude unto Herod, the voice of God and not of man, but his own arrogant satisfaction in that blasphemous Assignation of divine glory to him, that exposed him to the judgements and venge­ance of God. When the Princes of Israel found by the Answer of the Reubenites that they had not transgressed against the Law of Gods Worship, in adding unto it or altering of it, which they knew would have been a provocation not to have been passed over without a recompence of Revenge; They replyed unto them, Now have you delivered the Children of Is­rael out of the hand of the Lord; and it is to be desired that all the Princes of the Israel of God in the world, all Christian Potentates, would diligently watch against giving admission unto any such Insinua­tions, [Page 111] as would deliver them into the hand of the Lord.

For my own part, such is my Ignorance, that I know not, that any Magistrate from the foundation of the world, unless it were Nebuchadnezzar, Cai [...]s Caligula, Domi­tian and Persons like to them, ever claim­ed or pretended to exercise the power here assigned unto them. The Instances of the Laws and Edicts of Constantine in the matters of Religion and the Worship of God, of Theodosius and Gratian, Arca­dius, Martian and other Emperours of the East remaining in the Code and Novels; the Capitular of the Western Emperours, and Laws of Gothish Kings, the Right of Ec­clesiastical Jurisdiction inherent in the Imperial Crown of this Nation, and oc­casionally exercised in all Ages are of no concernment in this matter. For no man denyes but that it is the duty of the Su­pream Magistrate to protect and further the true Religion, and right Worship of God, by all wayes and means suited and appointed of God thereunto. To encou­rage the Professors thereof, to protect them from wrong and violence, to secure them in the performance of their duties, is doubtless incumbent on them. What­ever under pretence of Religion brings [Page 112] actual disturbance unto the peace of man­kind, they may coerce and restrain. When Religion as established in any Nation by Law, doth or may interest the Professors of it, or Guides in it, in any Priviledges, Advantages, or Secular Emoluments, which are subject and lyable, as all humane con­cerns, to doubts, controversies, and litigi­ous contests in their security and di­sposal, all these things depend meerly and solely on the power of the Magistrate, by whose Authority they are originally grant­ted, and by whose Jurisdictive Power both the Persons vested with them, and them­selves are disposable. But for an Absolute Power over the Consciences of men to bind or oblige them formally thereby, to do whatever they shall require in the Wor­ship of God, so as to make it their sin de­serving eternal damnation not so to do, without any consideration whether the things are true or false, according to the mind of God or otherwise, yea though they are apprehended by them who are so obliged to practise them, to be contrary to the Will of God, that this hath hither­to been claimed by any Magistrate, un­less such as those before mentioned, I am yet to seek. And the case is the same with respect unto them who are not satis [...]ied [Page 113] that what is so prescribed unto them will be accepted with God. For whereas in all that men do in the Worship of God, they ought to be fully perswaded of its ac­ceptableness to God in their own minds, seeing whatever is not of faith is sin, he that doubteth is in a very little better Capacity to serve God on such injunctions, then he who apprehendeth them to be directly con­trary to his mind.

If an Edict were drawn up for the set­tlement of Religion and Religious Wor­ship in any Christian Nation, according to the Principles and Directions before laid down, it may be there would be no great strife in the world by whom it should be first owned and espoused. For it must be of this Importance.

Whereas We have an Vniversal and Abso­lute Power over the Consciences of all our Subjects in things appertaining to the Worship of God; so that if We please We can introduce new duties, (never yet heard of,) in the most important parts of Religion (pag. 80.) and may impose on them in the practice of Religi­on and Divine Worship what We please; so that in our Judgement it doth not countenance Vice, nor disgrace the Deity, (Pag. 85.) and whereas this Power is naturally inherent in us, not given or granted unto us by Jesus [Page 114] Christ, but belonged to us, or our Predecessors before ever he was born, nor is expressed in the Scripture, but rather supposed; and this being such as that We our selves if We would, (whether We be Man or Woman) (here France must be excepted by vertue of the Salique Law, though the whole project be prin­cipally calculated for that Meridian) might exercise the special Offices and Duties of Religion in Our own Person, especially that of the Priesthood, though me are pleased to trans­fer the Exercise of it unto others; and where­as all our Prescriptions, Impositions, and In­junctions, in these things, do immediately af­fect and bind the Consciences of our Subjects because they are Ours, whether they be right or wrong, true or false, so long as in our judge­ment they neither (as was said) countenance Vice nor disgrace the Deity, We do Enact and Ordain as followeth.

(Here, if you please, you may intersert the Scheme of Religion given us by our Author in his second Chapter, and add unto it; that because Sacrifices were a way found out by honest men of old, to express their grati­tude unto God thereby, so great and necessary a part of our Religious duty; it be enjoyned that the use of them be again revived; see­ing there is nothing in them that offends against the bounds prescribed to the power to be ex­pressed; [Page 115] and that men in all places do offer up Bulls and Goats, Sheep, and Fowls, to God, with as many other Institutions of the like Nature, as shall be thought meet;) Hereunto add,

Now our express Will and Pleasure is, that every man may, and do think and judge what he pleaseth concerning the things enjoyned and enacted by Vs; for what have We to do with their thoughts and judgements? they are under the Empire and Dominion of Consci­ence, which We cannot invade if We would; they may if they please judge them inconveni­ent, foolish, absurd, yea contrary to the Mind, Will, and Law of God: Our only Intention, Will and Pleasure is, to bind them to the con­stant Observation and Practice of them, and that under the Penalties of Hanging and Damnation.

I know not any Expression in such an Im­pious and futilous Edict, that may not be warranted out of the Principles of this Discourse; the main parts of it being com­posed out of the Words and Phrases of it, and those used, to the best of my under­standing, in the sense fixed to them by our Author.

Now, as was said before, I suppose Chri­stian Princes will not be earnest in their Contests, who shall first own the Authori­ty intimated, and express it in a suitable [Page 116] exercise. And if any one of them should put forth his hand unto it, he will find that

There is one who layes an Antecedent Claim to a Sole Interest in this Power, and that bottomed on other manner of Pretensi­ons than any as yet have been pleaded in their behalf. For the Power and Autho­rity here ascribed unto Princes, is none other but that which is claimed by the Pope of Rome, (with some few Enlarge­ments) and appropriated unto him by his Canonists and Courtiers. Only here the old Gentleman, (as he is called by our Author) hath the advantage; that beside the Precedency of his claim, it being entred on Record at least six or seven hundred years before any Proctor or Advocate ap­peared in the behalf of Princes, he hath forestall'd them all in the pretence of In­fallibility; which doubtless is a matter of singular use in the exercise of the power contended about. For some men are so peevish as to think that thus to deal with Religion and the Consciences of men, be­longs [Page 117] to none but him, who is Absolute­ly, yea essentially so, that is Infallible. For as we have now often said (as contrary to their design men in haste oftentimes speak the same things over and over) as to all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over persons and causes Ecclesiastical, and the Soveraign di­sposal of all the Civil and Political con­cernments of Religion which is vested in the Imperial Crown of this Nation, and by sundry Acts of Parliament is declared so to be, I shall be alwayes ready to plead the Right of our Kings, and all Christian Kings whatever, against the absurd Pleas and Pretences of the Pope; so as to this Controversie between him and such Prin­ces as shall think meet to contend with him about it, concerning the power over the Consciences of men before described, I shall not interpose my self in the scuffle; as being fully satisfied they are contend­ing about that which belongs to neither of them.

But what Reason is there, why this Power should not be extended unto the inward thoughts and apprehensions of men about the Worship of God, as well as to the expression of them in pure Spiritual Acts of that Worship. The Power asserted I presume will be acknowledged to be from [Page 118] God; though I can scarce meet with the Communication and derivation of it from him in this Discourse. But whereas, it is granted on all hands, that the Powers that be are of God, and that none can have Au­thority over an other, unless it be origi­nally given him from above; I desire to be informed why the other part of the Power mentioned, namely over the Thoughts, Judgements, and Apprehensions of men in the things of the Worship of God, should not be invested in the Magistrate also; that so he having declared what is to be believed, thought, and judged in such things, all men should be obliged so to believe, think, and judge; for this power God can give; and hath given it unto Jesus Christ. I presume, it will be said, that this was no way needful for the preservation of Peace in Humane Society, which is the end for which all this Power is vested in the Ma­gistrate. For let men believe, think, and judge what they please, so long as their outward Actings are, or may be over-ruled, there is no danger of any publick distur­bance. But this seems to be a mighty un­easie condition for mankind; namely to live continually in a contradiction between their Judgements and their Practices, which in this case is allowed to be incident un­to [Page 119] them. Constantly to judge one way best and most according to the mind of God in his Worship, and constantly to practise another, will, it is to be feared, prove like the conflicting of vehement vapours with their contrary qualities, that at one time or other will produce an Earth­quake. How then if men weary of this perplexing distorting condition of things in their minds, should be provoked to run to excesses and inordinate courses for their freedom and Rest, such as our Author ex­cellently displayes in all their hideous co­lours and appearances, and which are re­ally pernicious to Humane Policy and So­ciety? Were it not much better that all these inconveniencies had been prevented in the first Instance, by taking care that the Faith, Thoughts, Perswasions, and Judge­ments of all Subjects about the things of God, should be absolutely bound up unto the declared conceptions of their Rulers in these matters? Let it not be pretend­ed, that this is impossible, and contrary to the natural liberty of the minds of men, as rational creatures guiding and deter­mining themselves according to their own reason of things and understandings. For do but fix the declared Will of the Ruler, in the room and place of Divine [Page 120] Revelation, (which is no hard matter to do, which some actually do universally, and our Author as to a great share and proportion) and the obligation sought af­ter to prevent all Inconvencies in Govern­ment, falls as full and directly upon the minds, thoughts, and judgements of men, as upon any of their outward Actions. And this, for the substance of it, is now pleaded for; seeing it is pretended that in all things dubious, where men cannot satisfie themselves that it is the Will of God that they should do a thing, or no, the Declaration of the Magistrate deter­mines not only their Practice, but their Judgement also, and gives them that full per­swasion of their minds which is indispen­sably required unto their acting in such things; and that faith which frees them from sin; For he that doubteth, is damned if he eat.

But it will be said, that there will be no need hereof; For let men think and judge what they please, whilst they are con­vinced and satisfied that it is their duty not to practise any thing outwardly in Religion, but what is prescribed by their Rulers, it is not possible that any publick evil should ensue upon their mental con­ceptions only. We observed before that [Page 121] the condition described is exceedingly un­easie; which I suppose will not be denyed by men who have seriously considered, what it is either to judge or practise any thing that lyes before them with reference unto the judgment of God. And that which should tye men up to rest perpetually in such a restless state, is as it seems a meer con­viction of their duty. They ought to be, and are supposed to be convinced that it is their duty to maintain the liberty of their minds and judgements, but to sub­mit in their outward practice universally to the Laws of men that are over them. And this sense and conviction of duty, is a sufficient security unto publick tranqui­lity, in all that contrariety and opposition of Sentiments unto Established Religion and Forms of Worship that may be ima­gined; But if this be so; why will not the same conviction and sense of duty restrain them, who do peaceably exercise the Wor­ship of God according to the Light and Dictates of their Consciences, from any actings whatever that may tend to the di­sturbance of the Publick Peace? Duty, nakedly considered, is even as such, the greatest obligation on the minds of men; and the great security of others in their Actings ariseth from the [...]c [...]. [...] more [Page 122] it is influenced and advantaged by out­ward considerations, the less it is assaulted and opposed by things grievous and per­plexing in the way of the Discharge of it, the more efficacious will be its operations on the minds of men, and the firmer will be the security unto others that thence ariseth. Now these Advantages lye abso­lutely on the part of them who practise, or are allowed so to do, according to their own Light and Perswasion in the Worship of God, wherein they are at rest and full satisfaction of mind; and not on theirs who all their dayes are bound up to a per­verse distorted posture of mind and soul, in judging one thing to be best and most pleas­ing unto God, and practising of the con­trary. Such an one, is the man that of all others, Rulers have need I think to be most jealous of. For what security can be had of him, who hath inured himself unto a continual contradiction between his Faith and his practice? For my part I should ei­ther expect no other measure from him in any other thing, nor ever judge that his profession and wayes of Actings are any sufficient Indications of his mind, (which takes away all security from mankind) or fear that his Convictions of Light and Knowledge, (as he apprehends) would [Page 123] at one time or other precipitate him into attempts of Irregularity and violence for his own relief.

It will be said, perhaps, that we need not look farther for the Disturbance of publick peace, from them who practise outwardly any thing in the Worship of God but what is prescribed, established, and enjoyned; seeing that every such practice is such a disturbance it self. I say this pretence is miserably ridiculous and contemptible, and contrary to the common experience of mankind. If this were so, the whole World for 300 years, lived in one continual disturbance and tu­mult upon the account of Christian Reli­gion, whose Professors constantly practi­sed and performed that in the Worship of God, which was so far from being establish­ed or approved by Publick Authority, that it was proscribed and condemned under penalties of all sorts, pecuniary, corporal, and sanguinary or capital. But we see no such matter ensued, nor the least dis­quietment unto the World, but what was given unto it by the rage of bloody per­secutors, that introduced the first Convul­sions into the Roman Empire, which were [Page 124] never well quieted, but ended in its disso­lution. The experience also of the pre­sent and next preceding Ages, casts this frivolous exception out of consideration. And as such a practice, even against Legal Prohibitions, though it be by the trans­gression of a penal Law, is yet in it self and just consequence remote enough from any disturbance of Government, (unless we should suppose that every Non-obser­vance of a penal Statute invalidates the Government of a Nation, which were to fix it upon such a Foundation, as will not afford it the steddiness of a Weathercok;) so being allowed by way of exemption, it contains no invasion upon, or intrusion into the rights of others; but being accom­panied with the Abridgement of the pri­viledges of none, or the neglect of any duty required to the good of the Com­mon-Wealth, it is as consistent with, and may be as conducing to publick good and Tranquility, as any order of Religious things in the World, as shall be elsewhere demonstrated.

It remains therefore that the only an­swer to this consideration is, that men who plead for Indulgence and Liberty of Conscience in the Worship God ac­cording to his Word, and the Light which [Page 125] He hath given them therein, have indeed no conscience at all, and so are not to be be­lieved as to what they profess against si­nister and evil Practises. This Flaile I know no fence against, but this only; that they have as good and better grounds to suspect him to have no conscience at all, who upon unjust surmises shall so inju­riously charge them, as finding him in a direct transgression of the principal Rules that Conscience is to be guided and di­rected by, than he hath to pronounce such a judgement concerning them and their sin­cerity in what they prosess. And whether such mutual censures tend not to the utter overthrow of all peace, love, and security amongst mankind is easie to determine. Certainly it is the worst game in the World for the Publick, to have men bandying suspicions one against another; and there­on managing mutual charges of all that they do surmise, or what else they please to give the countenance of surmise unto.

I acknowledge the notion insisted on, namely, that mhilest men reserve to them­selves the freedom and liberty of judging what they please, or what seems good unto them in matters of Religion and the Worship of God, they ought to esteem it their duty to practise in all things according to the pre­scription [Page 126] of their Rulers, though every may con­trary unto, and inconsistent with their own judgements and perswasions, unless it be in things that countenance Vice, or disgrace the Deity (where of yet it may be, it will not be thought meet that they themselves should judge for themselves and their own practise, seeing they may extend their conceptions about what doth so unto such minute Instances as would frustrate the whole design) is exceedingly accommodated to the corrupt lusts and affections of men, and suited to make provision for their security in this world, by an exemption from the indispensable command of professing the truth communi­cated and known unto them; a sense of the obligation where of, hath hitherto ex­posed innumerable persons in all Ages to great difficulties, dangers, and sufferings, yea to death the height and summ of all. For whereas men have been perswaded that with the heart man believeth unto Righteousness, and with the mouth Confession is made unto Salvation; the latter clause is in many cases hereby sufficiently superseded; and the troublesome duty seeming to be required in it, is removed out of the way. It will not, it may be, be so easie to prove that in the Religion [Page 127] of the Mahumetans there is any thing en­joyned in practise, that will directly fall under the limitations assigned unto the complyance with the commands of Supe­periours contended for. And therefore let a man but retain his own apprehensions concerning Jesus Christ and the Gospel, it may be lawful for him, yea be his duty to observe the worship enjoyned by the Law of Mahomet, if his lot fall to live under the power of the Grand Seignior, or any Soveraign Prince of the same perswasion. But the case is clear in the Religion of the Papists, which is under the protection of the greatest number of supream Magi­strates in Europe. It will not be pretended, I suppose by our Author, that there is any thing in the confession of the Church of Rome, or imposed by it on the practices of men, that directly gives countenance unto any Immorality, especially as the sense of that term is by him stated; and it is no easie matter for ordinary men to prove and satisfie themselves, that there is ought in their Modes of Worship of such a ten­dency, as to cast disgrace upon the Deity; especially considering with how much learn­ing and diligence the charge of any such miscarriage is endeavoured to be answered and removed; all which pleas ought to be [Page 128] satisfied, before a man can make sedately a determinate judgement of the contrary. Let then men's judgements be what they will in the matters of difference between Protestants and Papists, it is on this Hypo­thesis, the duty of all that live under the Dominion of Soveraign Popish Princes, outwardly to comply with and practise that Religious Worship that is commanded by them and enjoyned. The case is the same also as to the Religion of the Jews. Now as this casts a Reflection of incredi­ble folly and unexpiable guilt upon all Protestant Martyrs, in casting away their own lives, and disobeying the Commands of their lawful Soveraigns? so it exposeth all the Protestants in the World who are still in the same condition of subjection, to the severe censures of Impiety and Re­bellion; and must needs exasperate their Rulers to pursue them to destruction, un­der pretence of unwarrantable obstinacy in them. For if we wholly take off the protection of Conscience in this matter, and its subjection to the Authority of God alone, there is no plea left to excuse dissenting Protestants from the guilt of such crimes, as may make men justly cry out against them as the Jews did against St. Paul, Away with them, away with them, [Page 129] it is not meet that such Fellows should live; or, Frotestantes ad Leones, according to the old cry of the Pagans against the Primitive Christians. But if this should prove to be a way of teaching and justi­fying the grossest Hypocrisie and Dissimula­tion that the nature of man is capable of, a means to cast off all regard unto the Au­thority of God over the wayes and lives of men, all the Rhetorick in the World shall never perswade me that God hath so moulded and framed the order and state of humane affairs, that it should be any way needful to the preservation of publick peace and tranquility. Openness, plain­ness of heart, Sincerity in our Actions and Professions, Generous honesty, and an uni­versal respect in all things to the supream Rector of all, the great Possessour of Hea­ven and Earth, with an endeavour to com­ply with His present revealed mind, and future judgement, are far better Founda­tions for, and ligaments of publick peace and quietness. To make this the Foun­dation of our Political Superstructure, that Divisum Imperium Cum Jove Caesar habet, God hath immediate and sole power over the minds and inward thoughts of men; but the Magistrate over the Exercise of those thoughts in things especially belong­ing [Page 130] to the Worship of God, and in the same Instances, seems not to prognosticate a stable or durable building. The Pro­phet was not of that mind of old, who in the name of God blamed the people for willingly walking after the Commandment of their Ruler, in concerns of Worship not warranted by Divine appointment; nor was Daniel so, who notwithstanding the severe prohibition made against his praying in his house, continued to do so three times a day.

But besides all this! I do not see how this Hypothesis is necessarily subservient to the principal design of the Author, but it may be as well improved to quite distant, yea contrary ends and purposes. His de­sign plainly is, to have one Fabrick of Re­ligion erected, one Form of External Worship enacted and prescribed, which all men should be compelled by penalties to the outward profession and observance of; these penalties he would have to be such as should not fail of their end; namely, of taking away all professed Dissent from his Religious establishment; which if it cannot be effected without the destructi­on and death of multitudes, they also are not to be forborn. Now how this ensues from the fore-mentioned Principle I know [Page 131] not. For a supream Magistrate, finding that the minds of very many of his Subjects are in their judgements and perswasions engaged in a dissent unto the Religion established by Him, or somewhat in it, or some part of it, especially in things of practical worship; though he should be perswaded that he hath so far a power over their Consciences, as to command them to practise contrary to their judge­ment, yet knowing their minds and Per­swasions to be out of his reach and exempt­ed from his Jurisdiction, why may he not think it meet and conducing to publick tranquillity and all the ends of his govern­ment, even the good of the whole Com­munity committed to his charge, rather to indulge them in the quiet and peaceable exercise of the Worship of God according to their own light, than alwayes to bind them unto that unavoidable disquietment which will ensue upon the conflict in their minds between their judgements and their practices, if he should oblige them as is desired. Certainly, as in truth and rea­lity, so according to this Principle, he hath power so to do. For to fancy him such a power over the Religion and Consciences of his Subjects, as that he should be inevi­tably bound on all occurrences and in all [Page 132] conditions of affairs, to impose upon them the necessary observation of one form of Worship, is that which would quickly ex­pose him to inextricable troubles. And Instances of all sorts might be multiplyed to shew the ridiculous folly of such a Conception. Nay it implies a perfect con­tradiction to what is disputed before. For if he be obliged to settle and impose such a form on all, it must be because there was a necessity of somewhat antecedent to his imposition, whence his obligation to im­pose it did arise. And on such a supposi­sition it is in vain to enquire after his Li­berty or his power in these things, seeing by his duty he is absolutely determined, and whatever that be which doth so de­termine him and put an obligation upon him, it doth indispensably do the same on his Subjects also; which as it is known ut­terly excludes the Authority pleaded for.

This Principle therefore indeed asserts his liberty to do what he judgeth meet in these matters, but contains nothing in it to oblige him to judge, that it may not be meet and most conducing unto all the ends of his Government to indulge unto the Consciences of men peaceable, (espe­cially if complying with him in all the [Page 133] Fundamentals of the Religion which him­self professeth) the liberty of Worship­ing God according to what they apprehend of his own mind and Will. And let an application of this Principle be made to the present state of this Nation, wherein there are so great multitudes of persons peaceable and not unuseful unto publick good, who dissent from the present esta­blishment of outward Worship, and have it not in their power either to change their judgements or to practise contrary unto them; and as it is in the power of the supream Magistrate to indulge them in their own way, so it will prove to be his Interest as he is the spring and center of of publick Peace and Prosperity.

Neither doth it appear that in this dis­course our Author hath had any regard ei­ther to the real principles of the power of the Magistrate as stated in this Nation, or to his own which are fictitious; but yet such as ought to be obligatory to himself; His principal Assertion is, that the Supream Magistrate hath power to bind the Consciences of men in matters of Religion, that is by Laws and Edicts to that purpose; Now the highest and most obligatory way of the Supream Magistrates speaking in England, is by Acts of Parliament; It is therefore [Page 134] supposed that what is so declared in or about matters of Religion, should be ob­ligatory to the Conscience of this Au­thor; but yet quite otherwise, p. 59. He sets himself to oppose and condemn a publick Law of the Land, on no other ground than because it stood in his way, and seemed incompliant with his princi­ples. For whereas the Law of 2 and 3 Ed. 6. which appointed two weekly dayes for Abstinence from flesh, had been amongst other Reasons Prefaced with this, That the Kings Subjects having now a more clear Light of the Gospel through the Infinite mercy of God (such canting Language was then therein used) and thereby the Kings Ma­jesty perceiving that one meat of it self was not more holy than another, &c. yet consider­ing that due Abstinence, was a means to ver­tue, and to subdue mens bodies to their souls and spirits, &c. And it being after found (it should seem by a farther degree of Light) that those Expressions meeting with the inveterate Opinions of some, newly brought out of Popery, had given countenance to them to teach or declare, that something of Religion was placed therein; thereon by the Law made 5 Elizab. adding another weekly day to be kept with the former for the same [Page 135] purpose, the former clause was omitted, and mention only made therein of the Ci­vil and Politique Reasons inducing the Legislators thereunto; and withall a Pe­nalty of inflicting punishment on those who should affirm and maintain that there was any concernment of Conscience and Religion in that matter. This provision hath so distasted our Author, that forgetting it seems his own Design, he reproaches it with the Title of Jejunium Cecilianum; and thinks it so far from obliging his Consci­ence to acquiess in the Determination therein made, that he will not allow it to give Law to his tongue or pen; But (vexet censura columbas) it seems they are the Phanaticks only that are thus to be re­strained.

Moreover on occasion hereof we might manifest how some other Laws of this Land do seem carefully to avoid that imposition on Conscience, which against Law and Rea­son he pleadeth for; For Instance in that of 21 Jacob. touching Usury, and the Re­straint of it unto the summ therein esta­blished, it was provided, that no words in this Act conteined shall be construed or expounded to allow the practise of Vsury in point of Reli­gion and Conscience. And why did not the supream Magistrate in that Law determine [Page 136] and bind the Consciences of men, by a declaration of their duty in a point of Religion; seeing whether way soever the determination had been made, neither would immorality have been countenunced, nor the Deity disgraced? But plainly it is rather declared, that he hath not Cogni­ [...]ce of such things with reference to the Consciences of men to oblige them, or set them at liberty, but only power to deter­mine what may be practised in order to publick profit and peace. And therefore the Law would neither bind, nor set at liberty the Consciences of men in such cases, which is a work for the supream Law-giver only.

Neither, as it hath been before observed, do the Principles here asserted and con­tended for, either express or represent the supremacy of the Kings of this Nation in mat­ters Ecclesiastical as it is stated and deter­mined by themselves in Parliament; but rather so, as to give great offence and scan­dal to the Religion here professed and ad­vantage to the Adversaries thereof; for after there appeared some ambiguity in those words of the Oath enacted 1 Eliz. of testifying the Queen to be supream Governour as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes, as in Temporal; and many doubts and [Page 137] scruples ensued thereon, as though there were assigned to her a power over the Consciences of her Subjects in spiritual things, or that she had a power Her self to order and administer spiritual things; In quinto Elizab. it is enacted by way of Explana­tion, that the Oaths aforesaid shall be ex­pounded in such form as is set forth in the Admonition annexed to the Queens In­junctions, published in the first year of Her Reign, where disclaiming the power of the Ministry of divine offices in the Church, or the power of the Priesthood here by our Au­thor affixed to the supream Magistrate, her power and Authority is declared to be a Soveraignty over all manner of persons born within this Realm, whether they be Ecclesiasti­cal or Temporal, so that no foraign power hath, or ought to have any superiority over them; And so is this supremacy stated in the Arti­cles Anno 1562. namely an Autho [...]ity to Rule all Estates and Degrees committed to the charge of the supream Magistrate by God, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal, and to re­strain the stubborn or evil-doers. Of the things contended for by our Author; the Authori­ty of the Priesthood, and power over the Consci­ences of men in matters of Religion there is not one word in our Laws, but rather they are both of them rejected and condemned.

[Page 138] I have yet laid the least part of that Load upon this Principle, which if it be farther pressed it must expect to be bur­dened withal, and that from the Common Suffrage of Christians in all Ages. But yet that I may not transgress against the design of this short and hasty Discourse, I shall proceed no farther in the pursuit of it; but take a little Survey of what is here pleaded in its defence. Now this is un­dertaken and pursued in the first Chapter, with the two next ensuing, where an end is put to this Plea. For if I understand any thing of his words and expressions, our Author in the beginning of his fourth Chapter, cuts down all those Gourds and Wild Vines that he had been planting in the three preceding; for he not only grants but disputes also for an obligation on the Consciences of men antecedent and superiour unto all humane Laws and their obligation; his words are as followeth, pag. 115. It is not because Subjects are in any thing free from the Authority of the Su­pream Power on earth, but because they are subject to a Superiour in Heaven; and they are only then excused from the duty of Obe­dience to their Soveraign when they cannot give it without Rebellion against God; So that it is not originally any Right of their own [Page 139] that exempts them from a subjection to the Soveraign Power in all things; but it is pure­ly Gods right of Governing his own Creatures that Magistrates then invade when they make Edicts to violate or controll his Laws; and those who will take off from the Consciences of men, all obligations antecedent to those of Humane Laws, instead of making the Power of Princes, Supream, absolute, and uncontrolla­ble, they utterly enervate all their Authority, and set their Subjects at perfect Liberty from all their Commands.

I know no men that pretend to Exem­ption from the Obligation of Humane Laws, but only on this Plea, that God by his Law requires them to do otherwise; and if this be so, the Authority of such Laws as to the Consciences of men, is su­perseded by the confession of this Author. Allow therefore but the Principles here expressed, namely, that men have a Supe­riour Power over them in Heaven, whose Laws, and the Revelation of whose Will concerning them, is the Supream Rule of their duty, whence an Obligation is laid upon their Consciences of doing whatever is commanded, or not doing what is for­bidden by him, which is superiour unto, and actually supersedes all Humane Com­mands and Laws that interfere therewith, [Page 140] and I see neither use of, nor place for that Power of Magistrates over the Consciences of men, which is so earnestly contended for. And our Author also in his ensuing Discourse in that Chapter, placeth all the security of Government in the Respect that the Consciences of men have to the Will and Command of God; and which they profess to have; which in all these Chapters he pleads to be a Prin­ciple of all Confusion. But it is the first Chapter which alone we are now taking a view of.

The only Argument therein insisted on to to make good the Ascription unto the Ma­gistrate of the power over Religion and the Consciences of men before described, is the absolute and indispensable necessity of it, unto publick Tranquility, which is the principal, and most important End of Government. In the pursuit of this Argument, sometimes yea often, such expressions are used concern­ing the Magistrates power, as in a tolerable Construction declare it to be what no man denyes nor will contend about. But it is necessary that they be interpreted accord­ing to the Genius and tenor of the Opinion contended for, and accordingly we will consider them. This alone I say is that which is here pleaded, or is given in as the [Page 141] subject of the ensuing Discourse. But after all, I think that he who shall set him­self seriously to find out how any thing here spoken, hath a direct and rational co­gency towards the establishment of the conclusion before laid down, will find himself engaged in no easie an undertake­ing. We were told I confess at the en­trance (so as that we may not complain of a surprizal) that we must expect to have Invectives twisted with Arguments, and some such thing seems here to be aimed at; but if a Logical Chymist come, and make a sepa­ration of the Elements, of this Composition, he will find, if I mistake not, an heap of the drossy Invective, and scarce the least ap­pearance of any argument Ore. Instead of sober rational arguing,

great Aggravations of mens miscarriages in the pursuit of the Dictates of their Consciences, either real or feigned, edged against, and fiercely reflected upon those whom he makes his Adversaries, and these the same for substance, repeated over and over in a great variety of well placed words, take up the greatest part of his [Page 142] Plea in this Chapter; especially the begin­ning of it, wherein alone the Controversie as by himself stated is concerned.

But if the Power and Authority over Religion and the Consciences of men here ascribed unto Supream Magistrates, be so indispensably necessary to the preservati­on of publick Tranquility, as is pretended, a man cannot but wonder how the world hath been in any Age past, kept in any to­lerable peace and quietness; and how it is any where blessed with those ends of Go­vernment at this day. For it will not be an easie task for our Author, or any one else to demonstrate that the Power men­tioned, hath ever been either claimed or exercised by any Supream Magistrate in Christendom, or that it is so at this day. The Experience of past and present Ages, is therefore abundantly sufficient to defeat this pretence, which is sufficiently as­serted, without the least appearance of proof or Argument to give it countenance or confirmation; or they must be very charitable to him, or ignorant in them­selves, who will mistake Invectives for Ar­guments. The remembrance indeed of these Severities I would willingly lay aside; especially because the very mention of them seems to express an higher sense of [Page 143] and regret concerning them, then I am in the least subject unto, or something that looks like a design of Retaliation; but as these things are far from my mind, so the continual returns that almost in every Page I meet with, of high and contemp­tuous Reproaches, will not allow that they be alwayes passed by without any notice or remark.

It is indeed indispensably necessary that publick Peace and Tranquility be preserved; but that there is any thing in point of Government necessary here­unto, but that God have all spiritual power over the Consciences of men, and Rulers Political power over their Act­ings wherein publick Peace and Tran­quility are concerned, the World hath not hitherto esteemed, nor do I expect to find it proved by this Author. If these things will not preserve the publick peace, it will not be kept if one should rise from the dead to perswade men unto their du­ty. The Power of God over the Consci­ences of men, I suppose is acknowledged by all who own any such thing as Consci­ence or believe there is a God over all. That also in the exercise of this Authori­ty, he requires of men all that obedience unto Rulers that is any way needfull or [Page 144] expedient unto the preservation of the ends of their Rule, is a Truth standing firm on the same Foundation of Univer­sal consent, derived from the Law of Cre­ation; and his positive Commands to that purpose, have an evidence of his Will in this matter not liable to exception or con­troll. This Conscience unto God our Au­thor confesseth (as we have observed, in his fourth Chapter, to be the great preser­vation and security of Goverment and Go­vernours, with respect unto the ends men­tioned. And if so, what becomes of all the pretences of disorder and confusion that will ensue, unless this power over mens Consciences be given to the Magi­strate and taken as it were out of the hands of God? Nor is it to be supposed that men will be more true to their Con­sciences supposing the Reiglement of them in the hand of men, than when they are granted to be in the hand and power of God; for both at present are supposed to require the same things. Certainly where Conscience respects Authority, as it always doth, the more Absolute and Soveraign it apprehends the Authority by which it is obliged, the greater and more firm will be the impressions of the obligation upon it. And in that Capacity of preheminence, it [Page 145] must look upon the Authority of God com­pared with the Authority of man. Here then lyes the security of publick peace and tranquility, as it is backed by the Authority of the Magistrate, to see that all outward Actions are suitable unto what Conscience toward God doth in this matter openly and unquestionably re­quire.

The pretence indeed is that the placing of this Authority over the Consciences of men in the Supream Ruler, doth obviate and take away all grounds and occasions of any such Actings on the Account of Religion, as may tend unto publick distur­bance. For suppose Conscience in things concerning Religion and the Worship of God subject to God alone, and the Magi­strate require such things to be observed in the one or the other as God hath not required, at least in the Judgements and Consciences of them of whom the things prescribed are required, and to forbid the things that God requires to be observed and done; in this case it is said they can­not or will not comply in Active Obe­dience with the Commands of the Magi­strate. But what if it so fall out? Doth it thence follow that such persons must needs Rebell and be Seditious and disturb [Page 146] the publick peace, of the Society whereof they are Members? Wherefore is it that they do not do or observe what is re­quired of them by the Magistrate in Reli­gion or the Worship of God, or that they do what he forbids? Is it not because of the Authority of God over their minds and Consciences in these things? And why should it be supposed that men will an­swer the Obligations laid by God on their Consciences in one thing, and not in ano­ther; in the things of his Worship and not of obedience unto Civil Power, concern­ing which his Commands are as express and evident, as they can be pretended to be in the things which they avow their obligati­on unto.

Experience is pretended to the contrary. It is said again and again, that men under pretence of their Consciences unto God in Reli­gion, have raised Wars and Tumults, and brought all things into confusion, in this Kingdom and Nation especially; and what will words avail against the evidence of so open an experience to the contrary? But what if this also should prove a false and futilous pretence? Fierce and long Wars have been in this Nation of old, upon the various Titles of persons pleading their Right unto Supream Government in the Kingdom, [Page 147] against one another; so also have there been about the Civil Rights and the Privi­ledges of the Subjects, in the Confusions commonly called the Barons Wars. The late Troubles, Disorders, and Wars amongst us must bear the weight of this whole charge. But if any one will take the pains to review the publick Writings, Declara­tions, Treaties whereby those Tumults and Wars were begun and carried on, he will easily discern that Liberty of Conscience in practice, or the exemption of it from the power of the Magistrate as to the Rule and Conduct of it now ascribed unto him, in the latitude by sober persons defended or pleaded for, had neither place in, nor influence into the Beginnings of those troubles. And when such confusions are begun, no man can give assurance or con­jecture where they shall end.

Authority, Laws, Priviledges, and I know not what things wherein private men of whom alone we treat▪ have no pretence of Interest, were pleaded in those Affairs. He that would judge aright of these things, must set aside all other Con­siderations, and give his instance of the Tumults and Seditions that have ensued on the account of menskeeping their Consci­ences entire for God alone, without any [Page 148] just Plea, or false pretence of Authority, and the interest of men in the Civil con­cerns of Nations.

However it cannot be pretended that Liberty of Conscience gave the least occasi­on unto any disorders in those dayes. For indeed there was none, but only that of O­pinion and Judgement, which our Author placeth out of the Magistrates cognizance and dispose; and supposeth it is as a thing wherein the publick peace neither is nor can be concerned. It is well if it prove so; but this Liberty of Judgement con­stantly prest with a practice contrary to its own determinations, will I fear prove the most dangerous posture of the minds of men in reference to publick tranquilli­ty, that they can be well disposed into. However we may take a little nearer view of the certain Remedy provided for all these evils by our Author, and satisfie our selves in some Enquiries about it. Shall then according to this Expedient the Su­pream Magistrate govern, rule, and ob­lige unto obedience the consciences of his Subjects universally in all things in Religion and the Worship of God, so that appoint what he please, forbid what he please, Subjects are bound in Concience to observe them [Page 149] and yield obedience accordingly? His answer as far as I can gather his meaning is, that he may and must do so in all things, taking care that what he commands shall neither countenance Vice, nor disgrace the Deity, and then the Subjects are obliged according to the Enquiry. But yet there seems another limitation to be given to this power p. 37. where he affirms, that the Lord Christ hath given severe Injunctions to secure the obedience of men to all lawful Su­periours, except where they run directly cross to the interest of the Gospel; and elsewhere he seems to give the same priviledge of Exemption, where a Religion is introduced that is Idolatrous or Superstitious. I would then a little farther enquire, who shall judge whether the things commanded in Religion and the Worship of God be Ido­latrous or Superstitious? Whether they cross directly the Interest of the Gospel? Whether they countenance Vice, and disgrace the Deity, or no. To say that the Magistrate is to judge and determine hereof, is the highest foppery imaginable. For no Ma­gistrate, unless he be distracted, will en­joyn such a Religion to observance, as he judgeth himself to fall under the qualifi­cations mentioned; and when he hath done declare that so they do, and yet require [Page 150] obedience unto them. Besides, if this Judgement be solely committed unto him, indeed in the issue there neither is, nor can be any Question for a Judgement to be passed upon in this matter. For his Injun­ction doth quite render useless all disquisi­tions to that purpose. The judgement and determination hereof therefore is necessa­ry to be left unto the Subjects, from whom obedience is required. So it lyes in the letter of the Proposal, they must obey in all things but such; and therefore surely must judge what is such and what is not. Now who shall fix bounds to what they will judge to fall under one or other of these limitations? if they determine according to the best light they have that the Re­ligious Observances enjoyned by the Ma­gistrate do directly cross the Interest of the Gospel, they are absolved by our Author from any obligation in Conscience to their observation. And so we are just as be­fore; and this great Engine for pub­lick Tranquility vanisheth into Air and Smoak.

Thus this Author himself in way of ob­jection supposeth a case of a Magistrate enjoyning, as was said, a Religion Supersti­tious and Idolatrous; this he acknowledge­eth to be an Inconvenience; yet such as [Page 151] is far beneath the Mischiefs the ensue up­on the Exemption of the Consciences of men in Religion from the power of the the Magistrate, which I confess I cannot but admire at, and can give Reasons why I do so admire it; which also may be given in due season. But what then is to be done in this Case? he answers, It is to be born: True, but how? Is it to be so born as to practise and observe the things so enjoyned though Superstitious and Idola­trous? though his words are dubious, yet I suppose he will not plainly say so; not can he unless he will teach men to cast off all respect unto the Authority of God, and open such a door to Atheism, as his rhetorical Prefatory Invective will not be able to shut. The bearing then intended must be by patient suffering in a refusal to practise what is so commanded, and ob­serving the contrary Commands of God. But why in this Case ought they to suffer quietly for refusing a compliance with what is commanded, and for their observance of the contrary Precepts of the Gospel? Why, they must do so because of the com­mand of God, obliging their Consciences unto Obedience to the Magistrate in all things wherein the publick peace is con­cerned, and so that is absolutely secured. [Page 152] Is it not evident to him that hath but half an eye that we are come about again where we were before? Let this be ap­plyed to all the concernments of Religi­on and Religious Worship, and there will arise with respect unto them, the same secu­rity which in this case is deemed suffici­ent, and all that Humane Affairs are ca­pable of. For if in greater matters men may refuse to act according to the Magi­strates Command, out of a sense of the Authority of God obliging them to the contrary, and yet their Civil Peaceable­ness and Obedience be absolutely secured from the respect of their Consciences to the Command of God requiring it; why should it not be admitted that they may and will have the same respect to that Command, when they dissent from the Magistrates Constitution in lesser things, on the same account of the Authority of God requiring the contrary of them? Shall we suppose that they will cast off the Au­thority of God requiring their Obedi­ence, on the account of their dissatisfa­ction in lesser things of the Magistrates appointment, when they will not do so for all the violences that may be offered unto them in things of greater and higher importance? The Principle therefore as­serted [Page 153] is as useless as it is false, and par­takes sufficiently of both those properties to render it inconsiderable and contempti­ble. And he that can reconcile these things among themselves, or make them useful to the Authors design, will atchieve what I dare not aspire unto.

I know not any thing that remains in this first Chapter deserving our farther con­sideration; What seems to be of real im­portance, or to have any aspect towards the cause in hand, may undergoe some brief Remarques, and so leave us at liberty to a farther progress. In general a supposition is laid down, and it is so vehemently as­serted as is evident that it is accompanied with a desire that it should be taken for granted; namely, that if the Consciences of men be not regulated in the choice and practice of Religion by the Authority of the Magistrate over them, they will un­doubtedly run into Principles and practices inconsistent with the safety of Humane So­ciety, and such as will lead them to Sediti­ons and Tumults; And hence, (if I un­derstand him, a matter I am continually jea­lous about from the loosness of his expres­sions, though I am satisfied I constantly take his words in the words in the sense which is received of them by most intel­ligent [Page 154] persons) he educeth all his reason­ings, and not from a meer dissent from the Magistrates Injuctions, without the enter­tainment of such Principles, or an engage­ment into such practices. I cannot I say, find the Arguments that arise from a meer supposition that men in some things re­lating to the worship of God, will or do practise otherwise than the Magistrate commands, which are used to prove the in­consistency of such a posture of things with publick Tranquility, which yet alone was the Province our Author ought to have managed. But there is another supposi­tion added, that where Conscience is in any thing left unto its own liberty to choose or refuse in the Worship of God, there it will embrace, sure enough, such wicked debauched and seditious principles, as shall dispose men unto commotions, re­bellions, and all such evils as will actually evert all rule, order and policy amongst men. But now this supposition will not be granted him, in reference unto them who profess to take up all their Profession of Religion from the command of God, or the Revelation of his Will in the Scripture, wherein all such Principles and Practices as those mentioned are utterly condemn­ed; and the whole Profession of Christi­anity [Page 155] being left for 300 years without the Rule, Guidance, and conduct of Consci­ence now contended for, did not once give the least disturbance unto the Civil Governments of the World. Disturbances indeed there were, and dreadful Revoluti­ons of Government in those dayes and places, when and where the Professors of it lived; but no concerns of Religion being then involved in or with the Civil Rights and Interests of men, as the Pro­fessors of it had no Engagements in them, so from those Alterations and Troubles no reflection could be made on their professi­on. And the like Peace, the like Inno­cency of Religion, the like freedom from all possibility of such imputations as are now cast upon it, occasioned meerly by its intertexture with the Affairs, Rights, and Laws of the Nations, and the Inte­rests of its professours as such therein, will ensue, when it shall be separated from that Relation wherein it stands to this world, and left as the pure naked ten­dency of the souls of men to another, and not before.

But what, sayes our Author, If for the present the minds of men happen to be tainted with such furious and boysterous conceptions of Religion as incline them to stubbornness and [Page 156] sedition, and make them unmanageable to the laws of Government, shall not a Prince be al­lowed to give check to such unruly and dan­gerous perswasions? I answer; That such Principles which being professed and avow­ed, are in their own Nature and just Con­sequence destructive to publick peace and humane Society, are all of them directly opposite to the Light of humane nature, that common Reason and consent of Man­kind wherein and whereon all Government is founded, with the prime Fundamental Laws and dictates of the Scripture, and so may and ought to be restrained in the practises of the persons that profess them; and with reference unto them the Magi­strate beareth not the sword in Vain— For humane Society being inseparably conse­quent unto, and and an effect of the Law of our Nature, or concreated principles of it, which hath subdued the whole race of Mankind in all times and places unto its observance, Opinions, perswasions, princi­ples, opposite unto it or destructive of it, manifesting themselves by any sufficient evidence, or in overt Acts, ought to be no more allowed than such as profess an En­mity to the Being and Providence of God himself. For mens Inclinations indeed, as in themselves considered, there is no com­petent [Page 157] Judge of them amongst the Sons of men; but as to all outward Actions that are of the tendency described, they are under publick Inspection to be dealt with­all according to their Demerit.

I shall only add that the Mormo here made use of, is not now first composed or erected; it hath for the substance of it been flourished by the Papists ever since the be­ginning of the Reformation. Neither did they use to please themselves more in, or to dance more merrily about any thing than this Calf; Let private men have their Con­sciences exempted from a necessary obe­dience to the Prescriptions of the Church, and they will quickly run into all pernici­ous fancies and perswasions. It is known how this Scare-crow hath been cast to the ground, and this Calf stamped to powder by Divines of the Church of England. It is no pleasant thing I confess to see this plea revived now with respect to the Magistrates Authority, and not the Popes; for I fear that when it shall be ma­nifested, and that by the consent of all par­ties, that there is no pleadable Argument to botom this pretension for the power of the Magistrate upon, some rather then forego it, will not be unwilling to recur to the fountain from whence it first sprang, [Page 158] and admit the Popes plea as meet to be re­vived in this case. And indeed if we must come at length for the security of publick peace, to deprive all private persons of the Liberty of judging what is Right and Wrong in Religion in reference to their own practice, or what is their duty to­wards God about his Worship and what is not, there are innumerable advantages attending the design of devolving the ab­solute determination of these things upon the Pope, above that of committing it to each supream Magistrate in his own Domi­nions. For besides the plea of at least bet­ter security in his determinations than in that of any Magistrates, if not his Infalli­bility which he hath so long talked of, and so sturdily defended as to get it a great reputation in the world, the delivering up of the Faith and Consciences of all men unto him, will produce a seeming agree­ment, at least of incomparably a larger extent, then the remitting of all things of this nature to the pleasure of every su­pream Magistrate, which may probably establish as many different Religions in the World, as there are different Nations Kingdoms or Commonwealths.

That which alone remains seeming to give countenance to the Assertions before [Page 159] laid down, is our Authors assignation of the Priesthood by natural Right unto the supream Magistrate, which in no alteration of Religion he can be devested of, but by vertue of some positive Law of God, as it was for a season in the Mosaical Institution and Government. But these things seem to be of no force. For it never belonged to the Priesthood, to govern or to rule the Consciences of men with an absolute un­controllable power; but only in their name, and for them, to administer the holy things, which by common consent were admitted, and received amongst them. Besides, our Author by his Dis­course seems not to be much acquainted with the rise of the office of the Priest­hood amongst men, as shall be demonstra­ted, if farther occasion be given thereunto. However by the way we may observe what is his judgement in this matter. The Ma­gistrate we are told hath not his Ecclesiasti­cal Authority from Christ; and yet this is such as that the power of the Priesthood is included therein; the exercise whereof as he is pleased to transfer to others, so he may, if he please, reserve it to himself, p. 32. whence it follows, not only that it cannot be given by Christ unto any other, for it is part of the Magistrates power▪ [Page 160] which he hath not limited, nor confined by any subsequent Law, nor can there be [...] Coordinate Subject of the same power of se­veral kinds; so that all the Interest or Right any man, or men, have in or unto the ex­ercise of it, is but transfer'd to them by the Magistrate; and therefore they act therein, in his name, and by his Authority only; and hence the Bishops, as such, are said to be Ministers of State, p. 49. Neither can it be pretended that this was indeed in the power of the Magistrate before the coming of Christ, but not since. For he hath as we are told, all that he ever had, unless there be a Restraint put upon Him by some express prohibition of our Savi­our, p. 41. which will hardly be found in this matter. I cannot therefore see how in the exercise of the Christian Priesthood there is (on these principles) any the least respect unto Jesus Christ, or his Au­thority; for men have only the exercise of it transferred to them by the Magistrate, by vertue of a power inherent in him ante­cedent unto any concessions of Christ; and therefore in his name and Authority they must act in all the sacred offices of their Functions. It is well if men be so far awake as to consider the tendency of these things.

[Page 161] At length Scripture proofs for the con­firmation of these opinions are produced, p. 35, 36. And the first pleaded, is that promise, that Kings shall be nursings Fathers unto the Church. It is true this is promi­sed, and God accomplish it more and more; But yet we do not desire such Nurses, as beget the Children they nurse; The pro­posing, prescribing, commanding, binding Religion on the Consciences of men, is rather the begetting of it than its nursing. To take care of the Church and Religion, that it receive no detriment, by all the wayes and means appointed by God, and useful thereunto, is the duty of Magi­strates; but it is so also antecedently to their actings unto this purpose, to discern aright which is the Church whereunto this promise is made, without which they cannot duly discharge their Trust, nor ful­fill the Promise it self; The very Words, by the rules of the Metaphor, do imply, that the Church, and its Religion, and the worship of God observed therein, is con­stituted, fixed, and regulated by God himself, antecedently unto the Magistrates duty and power about it. They are to Nurse that which is committed to them, and not what Themselves have framed, or begotten. And we contend for no more [Page 162] but a Rule concerning Religion, and the Worship of God antecedent unto the Magistrates interposing about it, whereby both his Actings in his place, and those of Subjects in theirs, are to be regulated Mistakes herein have engaged many Sove­raign Princes in pursuit of their Trust as Nursing Fathers to the Church, to lay out their strength and power for the utter ru­ine of it; as may be evidenced in instances too many of those, who in a subserviency to, and by the direction of the Papal In­terest, have endeavoured to extirpate true Religion out of the World. Such a Nursing Mother we had sometimes in England, who in pursuit of her care burned so many Bishops and other Holy men to Ashes.

He asks farther, what doth the Scripture mean when it stiles our Saviour the King of Kings, and maketh Princes his Vicegerents here on earth? I confess, according to this Gentleman's principles, I know not what it means in so doing: Kings, he tells us, have not their Authority in and over Religion, and the Consciences of men from him, and therefore in the exercise of it cannot be his Vicegerents; for none is the Vicegerent of another in the exercise of any power or Authority, if he have not received that [Page 163] power and Authority from him. Other­wise the words have a proper sense, but no­thing to our Authors purpose. It is his power over them, and not theirs over the Consciences of their Subjects, that is in­tended in the words. Of no more use in this controversie is the direction of the Apostle, that we should pray for Kings, that under them we may lead a quiet and peace­able life; for no more is intended therein, but that, under their peaceable and righte­ous administration of humane Affairs, we may live in that Godliness, and honesty, which is required of us. Wherefore then are these weak attempts made to confirm and prove what is not? Those, or the most of them, whom our Author in this Dis­course treats with so much severity, do plead that it is the duty of all supream Ma­gistrates to find out, receive, imbrace, promote the Truths of the Gospel, with the Worship of God appointed therein, confirming, protecting, and desending them, and those that embrace them, by their Power and Authority. And in the discharge of this duty, they are to use the liberty of their own judgements, enform­ed by the wayes that God hath appointed, independently on the dictates and determi­nations of any other persons whatever; [Page 164] They affirm also, that to this end they are entrusted with supream power over all per­sons in their respective Dominions, who on no pretence can be exempted from the ex­ercise of that power, as occasion in their judgements shall require it to be exercised; as also that all causes, wherein the professi­on of Religion in their Dominions is con­cerned, which are determinable in foro Civili by coercive Vmpirage or Authority, are subject unto their cognizance and power. The Soveraign power over the Consciences of men to institute, appoint, and prescribe Religion, and the Worship of God, they affirm to belong unto him alone, who is the Author and Finisher of our Faith, who is the head over all things to the Church. The Administration of things meerly Spiritual in the Worship of God is, they judge, derived immediately from him to the Ministers, and Administrators of the Gospel, possessed of their Offices by his Command, and according to his institu­tion; as to the external practice of Reli­gion, and Religious Worship as such, it is, they say, in the power of the Magistrate to regulate all the outward civil concern­ments of it, with reference unto the pre­servation of publick peace, and Tranquil­lity, and the prosperity of his subjects; [Page 165] And herein also they judge that such re­spect is to be had to the Consciences of men, as the Scripture, the Nature of the thing it self, and the right of the L. Christ to introduce his spiritual Kingdom into all Nations, do require.

That which seems to have imposed on the mind of this Author is, that if the Ma­gistrate may make Laws for the regulating of the outward profession of Religion, so as publick peace and tranquillity may be kept, added to what is his Duty to do in the behalf of the Truth; then he must have the power over Religion, and the Consciences of men by him ascribed unto him; But there is no privity of Interest between these things; the Laws, which he makes to this purpose, are to be re­gulated by the Word of God, and the good of the Community, over which in the name of God he doth preside; and whence he will take his Warranty to forbid men the exercise of their Consciences in the duties of spiritual Worship, whilest the Principles they profess, are suited to the light of nature, and the fundamental Do­ctrines of the Gospel, with the peace of mankind, and their practices absolutely confistent with publick welfare, I am yet to seek; and so, as far as I can yet perceive, is [Page 166] the Author of the Discourse under Con­sideration. It will not arise from a Parity of Reason from the power that he hath to restrain cursed Swearing, and Blasphemies by penal Coercions. For these things are no less against the Light of Nature, and no less condemned by the common suffrage of mankind (and the persons that contract the guilt of them may be no less effectually brought to judge and condemn them­selves) than are the greatest outrages that may be committed in and against humane Society; That the Gospel will give no coun­tenance hereunto, he seems to acknow­ledge, in his assignation of several reasons why the use of the power, and exercise of it in the way of compulsion by penalties, pleaded for by him, is not mentioned therein; that Christ and his Apostles behaved themselves as Subjects; that he neither took nor exercised any Soveraign power; that He gave his Laws to Private men as such, and not to the Magistrate, that the Power that then was, was in bad hands, are pleaded as excuses for the silence of the Gospel in this matter. But lest this should prove father preju­dicial to his present occasion, he adds p. 42. the only reason why the Lord Christ bound not the precepts of the Gospel upon mens Consciences by any secular compulsories, was not because [Page 167] Compulsion was an improper way to put his Laws in execution; for then He had never established them with more enforcing Sanctions, but only because himself was not vested with any secular power, and so could not use those methods of Government which are proper to its jurisdiction; this in plain English is, that if Christ had had power, he would have ordered the Gospel to have been propaga­ted as Mahomet hath done his Alcoran; an Assertion untrue and impious, contrary to the whole spirit and Genius of the Gospel, and of the Author of it, aud the Com­mands and Precepts of it. And it is fondly supposed that the Lord Christ suited all the Management of the affairs of the Go­spel, unto that state and condition in this world, wherein he emptied Himself, and took upon Him the form of a Servant, making Him­self of no reputation, that He might be obedi­ent unto Death, the death of the Cross; He layes the Foundation of the promulgation and propagation of it in the world, in the grant of all power unto him in Heaven and Earth. All power, saith he to his Apostles, is given unto me in heaven and earth, go ye therefore, and Baptize all Nations, teaching them to observe all things whatever I have com­manded you, Matth. 28. 19, 20. He is con­fidered in the dispensation of the Gospel, [Page 168] as He who is head over all things to the Church, the Lord of Lords, and King of Kings, whom our Author acknowledgeth to be his Vicegerents; On this account the Gospel with all the Worship instituted therein, and required thereby, is accompanied with a Right to enter into any of the King­doms of the Earth, and spiritually to make the Inhabitants of them subject to Jesus Christ; and so to translate them out of the power of darkness into the Kingdom of the Son of God; And this Right is Antecedent and paramount to the Right of all earthly Kings and Princes whatever, who have no power or Authority to exclude the Gospel out of their Dominions; and what they exercise of that kind, is done at their peril.

The penalties that he hath annexed to the final rejection of the Gospel, and disobedience thereunto, are pleaded by our Author, to justifie the Magistrates power of binding men to the Observation of his Commands in Religion on temporal penalties to be by him in­flicted on them; unto that is the Discourse of this chapter arrived which was designed un­to another end. I see neither the order, method, nor projection of this procedure; nor know, ‘[Page 169] Amphora cum cepit institui, cur Vrceus exit;’ However the pretense it self is weak, and impertinent. Man was originally made under a Law and constitution of Eternal Bliss, or Woe; This state, with regard to his necessary dependance on God, and respect to his utmost end, was absolutely unavoidable unto him. All pos­sibility of attaining eternal happiness by himself he lost by Sirr, and became inevi­tably obnoxious to eternal Misery, and the wrath to come. In this condition the Lord Jesus Christ, the supream Lord of the souls and Consciences of men, interposeth his law of Relief, Redemption, and Salva­tion, the great means of man's Recovery, together with the profession of the way, and law hereof. He lets them know, that those by whom it is refused, shall perish under that Wrath of God, which before they were obnoxious unto, with a new Aggravation of their Sin and Condemna­tion, from the contempt of the Relief pro­vided for them, and tendered to them. This He applyes to the Souls and Con­sciences of men, and to all the inward secret actings of them, in the first place, such as are exempted not only from the Judicature of men, but from the cogni­zance [Page 170] of Angels. This he doth by spiri­tual means in a spiritual manner, with re­gard to the subjection of the souls of men unto God, and with reference unto their bringing to Him, and enjoyment of Him, or their being eternally rejected by Him. Hence to collect, and conclude that Earthly Princes, who, (whatever is pretended) are not the Soveraign Lords of the Souls and Consciences of men, nor do any of them, that I know of, plead themselves so to be; who cannot interpose any thing by their absolute Authority, that should have a necessary respect unto mens Eter­nal condition; who have no knowledge of, no acquaintance with, nor can judge of the principal things whereon it doth de­pend, from whose temporal jurisdiction, and punishment the things of the Gospel, and the Worship of God as purely such, are (by the nature of them, being spiritu­al and not of this World, though exercised in it, having their respect only unto Eter­nity, and by their being taken into the sole disposal of the Soveraign Lord of Con­sciences, who hath accompanied His Com­mands concerning them with His own Pro­mises, and Threatnings,) plainly ex­empted; should have power over the Consciences of men, so to lay their Com­mands [Page 171] upon them in these spiritual things, as to back them with Temporal, Corporal Restraints and Punishments, is a way of Arguing that will not be confined unto any of those Rules of reasoning, which hi­therto we have been instructed in. When the Magistrate hath an Arm like God, and can Thunder with a Voice like Him, when he judgeth not after the sight of his eyes, nor re­proveth after the hearing of his ears, when he can smile the Earth with the Rod of his Mouth, and slay the Wicked with the breath of his Lipps, when he is constituted a judge of the Faith, Repentance, and Obedience of men, and of their Efficacy in their Tenden­cy unto the pleasing of God here, and the Enjoyment of Him hereafter, when Spiritual Things in order to their Eternal Issues and Effects are made subject unto Him; in brief, when he is Christ, let him act as Christ, or rather most unlike Him, and guide the Consciences of men by Rods, Axes, and Halters (whereunto alone his power can reach) who in the mean time have an express command from the Lord Christ Himself, not to have their Con­sciences influenced in the least by the con­sideration of these things.

Of the like Complexion is the ensuing Discourse, wherein our Author, p. 43. [Page 172] having spoken contemptuously of the Spi­ritual Institutions of the Gospel, as alto­gether insufficient for the Accomplishment of the Ends, whereunto they are designed, forget­ing that they respect only the Consciences of men, and are his Institutions who is the Lord of their Consciences, and who will give them power, and efficacy to attain their Ends, when administred in his name, and according to his mind, and that be­cause they are His; would prove the ne­cessity of Temporal coercions, and penal­ties in things Spiritual, from the Extraor­dinary Effects of Excommunication in the primitive times, in the Vexation and punish­ment of persons Excommunicate by the Devil. This work the Devil now ceasing to attend unto, he would have the Magistrate to take upon him to supply his place, and Office, by punishments of his own Appoint­ment, and Infliction; and so at last, to be sure of giving him full measure, he hath ascribed two Extreams unto him about Religion, namely, to act the part of God, and the Devil. But as this Inference is built upon a very uncertain conjecture, namely, that upon the giving up of persons to Satan in Excommunication, there did any visible, or Corporal Vexation of them by his power ensue, or any other effects but [Page 173] what may yet be justly expected from an Influence of his Terrour on the minds of men, who are duly and regularly cast out of the visible Kingdom of Christ by that censure; and whereas, if there be any truth in it, it was confined unto the dayes of the Apostles, and is to be reckoned amongst the miraculous Operations granted to them for the first confirmation of the Gospel; and the continuance of it, all the time the Church wanted the Assistance of the Civil Magistrate, is most unduly pre­tended without any colour of Proof, or Instance, beyond such as may be evidenced to continue at this day; supposing it to be true, the Inference made from it, as to its consequence on this concession, is exceed­ing weak, and feeble. For the Argument here amounteth to no more but this; God was pleased, in the dayes of the Apostles, to con­firm their Spiritual Censures against Stuborn Sinners, Apostates, Blasphemers, and such like hainous Offenders, with extraordinary spiritual Punishments, (so in their own nature, or in the manner, or way of their Infliction) therefore the Civil Magistrate hath power to appoint things to be observ­ed in the Worship of God, and forbid other things, which the Light and Consciences of men, directed by the Word of God, [Page 174] require the observation of, upon ordi­nary, standing, corporal penalties to be inflicted on the outward man; quod erat demonstrandum.

To wind up this Debate; I shall com­mit the Vmpirage of it to the Church of En­gland, and receive her Determination in the words of one who may be supposed to know her sense and Judgement, as well as any one who lived in his dayes, or since. And this is Doctor Bilson Bishop of Winchester, a Learned man, skilled in the Laws of the Land, and a great Adversary unto all that dissented from Church Constitutions. This man therefore treating, by way of Dia­logue, in answer to the Jesuites Apologie and Defence, in the Third Part p. 293. thus in­troduceth Theophilus a Protestant Divine, arguing with Philander a Jesuite about these matters. Theoph. As for the Supream Head of the Church; it is certain that Title was first transferred from the Pope to King Henry the eighth, by the Bishops of your side, not of ours. And though the Pastors in King Edwards time might not well dislike, much less disswade the style of the Crown, by Reason the King was un­der years, and so remained until he dyed; yet as soon as it pleased God to place her Ma­jesty in her Fathers Throne, the Nobles and Preachers perceiving the words, Head of the [Page 175] Church, (which is Christs proper and pecu­liar honor) to be offensive unto many that had vehemently refelled the same in the Pope, be­sought her Highness the meaning of that word which her Father had used, might be expressed in some plainer and apter terms; And so was the Prince called Supream Governour of the Realm; that is Ruler and Bearer of the Sword, with lawful Authority to command and punish, answerable to the Word of God, in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes, as well as in Temporal. And no Forreign Prince or Prelate, to have any Jurisdiction, Superiority, Prehe­minence or Authority to establish, prohibit, correct, and chastise with Publick Laws, or Tem­poral Fains, any Crimes or Causes Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within her Realm. Philand. Cal­vin saith this is Sacriledge and Blasphemy. Look you therefore with what Consciences you take that Oath, which your own Master so mightily detesteth. Theoph. Nay look you with what faces you alledge Calvin, who maketh that style to be sacrilegious and blas­sphemous, as well in the Pope as in the Prince; reason therefore you receive or refuse his Judge­ment in both. If it derogate from Christ in the Prince, so it doth in the Pope. Yet we grant the sense of the word Supream, as Calvin per­ceived it by Stephen Gardiners Answer and behaviour, is very blasphemous and injurious [Page 176] to Christ and his Word, whether it be Prince or Pope that so shall use it. What this sense is, he declares in the words of Calvin, which are as followeth in his Translation of them. That Jugler, which after was Chan­celor, I mean the Bishop of Winchester, when he was at Rentzburge, neither would stand to reason the matter, nor greatly cared for any testimonies of the Scripture, but said it was at the Kings discretion to abrogate that which was in use, and appoint new. He said the King might forbid Priests Marriage, the King might bar the people from the Cup in the Lords Sup­per; the King might determine this or that in his Kingdom: And why, forsooth the King had Supream Power. This Sacriledge hath taken hold on us, whilst Princes think they cannot reign, except they abolish all the Authority of the Church, and be themselves supream Judges as well in Doctrine as in all Spiritual Regi­ment. To which he subjoyns; This was the sense which Calvin affirmed to be sacrilegious and blasphemous; for Princes to profess them­selves to be Supream Judges of Doctrine and Discipline; and indeed it is the blasphemy which all godly hearts reject and abomine, in the Bishop of Rome. Neither did King Henry take any such thing on him for ought that we can learn; but this was Gardiners Stra­tagem, to convey the reproach and shame of the [Page 177] Six Articles from himself and his fellows that were the Authors of them, and to cast it on the Kings Supream Power. Had Calvin been told, that Supream was first received to declare the Prince to be Superiour to the Prelates, (which exempted themselves from the Kings Authori­ty by their Church Liberties and Immunities) as well as to the Lay men of this Realm, and not to be subject to the Pope, the Word would never have offended him. Thus far he; and if these Controversies be any farther di­sputed, it is probable the next defence of what is here pleaded, will be in the ex­press words of the Principal Prelates of this Realm since the Reformation, until their Authority be peremptorily rejected.

Upon my first design to take a brief Sur­vey of this Discourse, I had not the least intention to undertake the examination of any particular Assertions, or Reason­ings, that might fall under Controversie; but meerly to examine the general Prin­ciples whereon it doth proceed. But pas­sing through these things Currente calamo, I find my self engaged beyond my thoughts and resolutions; I shall therefore here put an end to the consideration of this Chapter, although I see sundry things as yet remain­ing in it, that might immediately be dis­cussed [Page 178] with case, and advantage, as shall be manifest, if we are called again to a review of them. I have neither desire, nor design Serram reciprocare, or to en­gage in any Controversial Discourses with this Author. And I presume himself will not take it amiss, that I do at present exa­mine those Principles, whose Novelty justi­fies a Disquisition into them; and whose Tendency, as applyed by him, is pernici­ous, and destructive to so many quiet and peaceable persons, who dissent from him. And yet I will not deny, but that I have that Valuation and esteem for that sparkling of Wit, Eloquence, and sundry other Abilities of mind, which appear in his Writing, that if he would lay aside the manner of his treating those from whom he dissents, with Revilings, contemptuous Reproaches, personal Reflections, Sarcasms, and Satyrical expressions, and would can­didly, and perspicuously state any matter in difference; I should think that what he hath to offer, may deserve the consideration of them who have leisure for such a purpose. If he be otherwise minded, and resolve to proceed in the way, and after the man­ner here engaged in, as I shall in the close of this Discourse absolutely give him my [Page 179] Salve aeternum (que) vale, so I hope he will ne­ver meet with any one who shall be wil­ling to deal with him at his own wea­pons.

THE Summary of this Chapter must needs give the Reader a great expe­ctation, and the Chapter it self no less of satisfaction, if what is in the one briefly proposed, be in the other as firmly esta­blished. For amongst other things a Scheme of Religion is promised, reducing all its branches either to Moral Vertues, or In­struments of Morality; which being spoken of Christian Religion, is, as far as I know, an undertaking new and peculiar unto this Author, in whose mannagement all that read him must needs weigh and consider, how dextrously he hath acquitted himself. For as all men grant that Morality hath a great place in Religion, so that all Reli­gion is nothing but Morality, many are now to learn. The Villany of those Mens Re­ligion [Page 180] that are wont to distinguish between Grace and Vertue (that is Moral Vertue) is nextly traduced and inveighed against. I had rather I confess that he had affixed the term of Villany to the men themselves whom he intended to reflect on than to their Religion; because as yet it seems to me that it will fall on Christianity, and no other Real or pretended Religion that is, or ever was in the world. For if the Proses­sors of it, have in all Ages according to its avowed Principles, never before con­tradicted, made a distinction between Moral Vertues (since these terms were known in the Church) and Evangelical Graces, if they do so at this day, what Religion else can be here branded with this Infamous and horrible reproach, I know not. A farther en­quiry into the Chapter it self may possibly give us farther satisfaction; wherein we shall deal as impartially as we are able, with a diligent watchfulness against all prejudicate Affections, that we may disco­ver what there is of Sense and Truth in the Discourse, being ready to receive what ever shall be manifested to have an inte­rest in them. The Civil Magistrate, we are also here informed, amongst many other things that he may do, may command any thing in the Worship of God that doth not tend [Page 181] to debauch Mens practices, or to disgrace the Deity. And that all subordinate Duties both of Morality and Religious Worship (such as elsewhere we are told the Sacraments are) are equally subject to the determination of Hu­mane Authority. These things and sundry others represented in this Summary, being new, yea some of them, as far as I know, unheard of amongst Christians untill with­in a few years last past, any Reader may justifie himself in the expectation of full and demonstrative Arguments to be pro­duced in their proof and confirmation. What the issue will be, some discovery may be made by the ensuing enquiry, as was said, into the body of the Chapter it self.

The design of this Chapter in general is, to confirm the power of the Magistrate over Religion, and the Consciences of men ascribed unto him in the former, and to add unto it some enlargements not therein insisted on. The Argument used to this purpose, is taken from the power of the Ma­gistrate over the Consciences of men in matters of morality, or with respect unto moral Vertue; whence it is supposed the conclusion is so evident unto his power over their Consci­ences in matters of Religious Worship, that it strikes our Author with wonder and amaze­ment [Page 182] that it should not be received an acknowledged. Wherefore to further the conviction of all men in this matter, h [...] proceeds to discourse of Moral Vertue, o [...] Grace, and of Religious Worship, with hi [...] wonted reflections upon, and reproache of Non-conformists, for their ignorance about and villanous misrepresentation of these things, which seem more to be aimed at [...] than the Argument it self.

I must here with again that our Author had more perspicuously stated the things which he proposeth to debate for the sub­ject of his Disputation. But I find an excess of Art is as troublesome sometimes as the greatest defect therein. From thence I presume it is, that things are so handled in this Discourse, that an ordinary man can seldom discern satisfactorily, what it is that directly and determinately he doth in­tend, beyond reviling of Non-conformists. For in this Proposition, which is the best and most intelligible that I can reduce the present Discourse unto, the Supream Civil Magistrate hath power over the Consciences of men in morality, or with respect unto moral vertue; excepting only the subject of it, there is not one term in it that may not have various significations; and those such as have countenance given unto them in [Page 183] the ensuing Disputation it self. But, con­tenti sumus hoc Catone, and make the best we can of what lyes before us.

I do suppose that in the medium made use of in this Argument there is, or I am sure there may be, a Controversie of much more importance than that principally un­der consideration. It therefore shall be stated and cleared in the first place, and then the concernment of the Argument it self in what is discoursed thereupon, shall be manifested. It is about Moral Vertue and Grace, their coincidence, or distinction, that we are in the first place to enquire. For without a due stating of the conception of these things, nothing of this Argument, nor what belongs unto it, can be rightly understood. We shall therefore be neces­sitated to premise a brief Explanation of these terms themselves, to remove as far as may be all ambiguity from our Dis­course.

First then, the very name of Vertue, in the sense wherein it is commonly used and received, comes from the Schools of Philo­sophy, and not from the Scripture. In the Old Testament we have Vprightness, Inte­grity, Righteousness, doing Good and eschew­ing Evil, Fearing, Trusting, Obeying, Believing in God, Holiness and the like; but the name [Page 184] of Vertue doth not occur therein. It is true we have translated [...] a vertuous Woman; and once or twice the same word vertuously, Ruth. 3. 11. Prov. 12. 4. Chap [...] 31. 10, 39. But that word signifies as [...] used, strenuous, industrious, diligent, and hath no such signification as that we now ex­press by vertue. Nor is it any where rendred [...] by the LXX. although it may have some respect unto it, as [...] may be derived from [...], and peculiarly denote the exercise of industrious strength, such as men use in Battail. For [...] is vis, robur, potentia, or exercitus also. But in the com­mon acceptation of it, and as it is used by Philosophers, there is no word in the Hebrew nor Syriack properly to express it. The Rabbins do it by [...] which signifies properly a measure. For studying the Philosophy of Aristotle, and translating his Ethicks into Hebrew, which was done by Rabbi Meir, and finding his vertue placed in mediocrity, they applyed [...] to express it. So they call Aristotles Ethicks [...] the Book of Measures, that is of vertues. And [...] are boni mores. Such a stran­ger is this very word unto the Old Testa­ment. In the New Testament [...] occurs four times; but it should not seem any where to be taken in the sense now gene­rally [Page 185] admitted. In some of the places it rather denotes the excellency and praises that do attend Vertue, than Vertue it self. So we render [...] praises; 1 Pet. 2. 9. as the Syriack doth also [...], praises; and the same Translation, Phil. 4. 9. renders [...], If there be any vertue, by [...], works glorious, or praise worthy. 2 Pet. 1. 9. It is a peculiar gracious di­sposition, operation of mind, distinguish­ed from Faith, Temperance, Patience, Brother­ly kindness, Godliness, Charity, &c. and so cannot have the common sense of the word there put upon it.

The word Moral is yet far more exo­tick to the Church and Scripture. We are beholding for it, if there be any advan­tage in its use, meerly to the Schools of the Philosophers, especially of Aristotle. His Doctrine [...], commonly called his [...] or Moralia, his Morals, hath begotten this name for our use. The whole is ex­pressed in Isocrates to Demonicus by [...], the vertue of manners. If then the signification of the words be respect­ed as usually taken, it is vertue in mens manners that is intended. The Schoolmen brought this expression with all its con­cerns, as they did the rest of Aristotles Philosophy, into the Church and Divinity. [Page 186] And I cannot but think it had been well if they had never done it; as all will grant they might have omitted some other things without the least disadvantage to Learn­ing or Religion. However this expressi­on of Moral Vertue having absolutely pos­sest it self of the Fancies and Discourses of all, and it may be of the Understanding of some, though with very little satisfa­ction when all things are considered, I shall not endeavour to dispossess it, or eliminate it from the Confines of Christian Theologie. Only I am sure had we been left unto the Scripture expressions, of Repen­tance towards God, and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, of the fear of God, of Ho­liness, Righteousness, living unto God, walking with God, and before him, we might have been free from many vain wordy perple­xities; and the whole wrangle of this Chapter in particular, had been utterly pre­vented. For let but the Scripture express what it is to be Religious, and there will be no contesting about the difference or no difference between Grace and Moral Vertue. It is said, that some judge those who have Moral Vertue to want Grace, not to be Gracious. But say, that men are born of God, and do not commit sin, that they walk before God and are upright, that they cleave [Page 187] unto God with full purpose of heart, that they are sanctified in Christ Jesus and the like, and no man will say that they have not Grace, or are not Gracious, if they receive your Testimony. But having, as was said, made its entrance amongst us, we must deal with it as well as we can, and satisfie our selves about its common Acceptation and Use.

Generally, moral Vertues are esteemed to be the Duties of the second Table. For al­though those who handle these matters more accurately, do not so straiten or con­fine them, yet it is certain that in vulgar and common Acceptation, (which strikes no small stroke, in the regulating of the conceptions of the wisest Men, about the signification of words) nothing else is in­tended by Moral vertues or Duties of Mora­lity, but the observation of the Precepts of the second Table. Nor is any thing else designed by those Divines, who in their writings so frequently declare, that it is not morality alone that will render men ac­ceptable to God. Others do extend these things further, and fix the denomination of moral, firstly upon the Law or Rule of all those Habits of the Mind, and its Ope­rations, which afterwards thence they call moral. Now this Moral Law is nothing but [Page 188] the Law of Nature, or the Law of our Creation; which the Apostle affirms to lye equally obligatory on all men, even all the Gentiles themselves, Rom. 2. 14, 15. and whereof the Decalogue is summarily expres­sive. This Moral Law is therefore the Law written in the hearts of all men by Nature, which is resolved partly into the Nature of God himself, which cannot but require most of the things of it from Rational Creatures; partly into that state and condition of the nature of things and their mutual Relati­ons, wherein God was pleased to create and set them. These things might be easily in­stanced and exemplified, but that we must not too much divert from our present oc­casion. And herein lyes the largest sense and Acceptation of the Law Moral, and consequently of Moral Vertues, which have their Form and Being from their Relation and conformity thereunto. Let it be then, that Moral Vertues consist in the universal observance of the requisites and Precepts of the law of our Creation and depen­dance on God thereby. And this descri­ption, as we shall see for the substance of it, is allowed by our Author.

Now these Vertues, or this conformity of our minds and actions unto the Law of our Creation, may be in the light and [Page 189] reason of Christian Religion, considered two wayes. First, as with respect unto the substance or Essence of the Duties them­selves, they may be performed by men in their own strength, under the conduct of their own Reason, without any special as­sistance from the Spirit, or Sanctifying Grace of Christ. In this sense, they still bare the name of Vertues, and for the sub­stance of them deserve so to do. Good they are in themselves, useful to Mankind, and seldome in the Providence of God go without their reward in this World. I grant I say, that they may be obtained and acted without special assistance of Grace Evangelical; though the wiser Heathens acknowledged something Divine in the communication of them to Men. Papinius speaks to that purpose,

But old Homer put it absolutely in the will of his God.

[Page 190] Thus we grant moral vertue to have been in the Heathen of old. For this is that alone whereby they were distinguish­ed amongst themselves. And he that would exclude them all from any interest in mo­ral vertue, takes away all difference between Cato and Nero, Aristides and Tiberius, Titus and Domitian; and overthrows all natural diffe­rence between good and evil; which besides other abominations that it would plenti­fully spawn in the World, would inevitably destroy all humane Society. But now these moral vertues thus performed, what­ever our Author thinks, are distinct from Grace, may be without it, and in their pre­sent description, which is not imaginary but real, are supposed so to be. And if he pleases he may exercise himself in the longsome disputes of Bellarmin, Gregory de Valentia, and others to this purpose innume­rable; not to mention Reformed Divines lest they should be scornfully rejected as Systematical. And this is enough I am sure to free their Religion from Villany, who make a distinction between Moral Vertue and Grace. And if our Author is otherwise minded, and both believe that there is Grace Evange­lical, [...]ever there is Moral Vertue, or, that Moral Vertues may be so obtained and exercised without the special assistance of [Page 191] Grace, as to become a part of our Religion, and accepted with God, and will maintain his Opinion in Writing, I will promise him if I live to return him an answer, on one only condition, which is, that he will first answer what Augustine hath written against the Pelagians on this Subject.

Again these moral Vertues, this obser­vance of the Precepts of the Law of our Creation, in a consonancy whereunto ori­ginally the Image of God in us did consist, may now under the Gospel be considered, as men are principled, assisted, and enabled to and in their performance by the Grace of God, and as they are directed unto the especial end of living unto him in and by Jesus Christ. What is particularly re­quired hereunto, shall be afterwards decla­red. Now in this sense no man living ever distinguished between Grace and Vertue, any otherwise than the cause and the effect are to be, or may be distinguished; much less was any Person ever so Bruitish as to fancy an inconsistency between them, For take Grace in one sense, and it is the efficient cause of this Vertue, or of these Vertues which are the effects of it; and in another they are all Graces themselves. For that which is wrought in us by Grace is Grace; as that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.

[Page 192] To this purpose something may be spoken concerning Grace also, the other term, whose ambiguity renders the Dis­course under consideration somewhat in­tricate and perplexed. Now as the for­mer term of Moral Vertue owed its Original to the Schools of Philosophy, and its use was borrowed from them; So this of Grace is purely Scriptural and Evangelical. The World knows nothing of it but what is declared in the Word of God, especially in the Gospel, for the Law was given by Moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ. All the Books of the Ancient Phi­losophers, will not give us the least light into that notion of Grace, which the Scri­pture declares unto us. As then we al­lowed the sense of the former term given unto it by its first coyners and users, so we cannot but think it equal, that men be precisely tyed up in their conceptions about Grace, unto what is delivered in the Scripture concerning it; as having no other Rule either to frame them, or judge of them. And this We shall attend unto. Not that I here design to treat of the nature of Go­spel Grace in general; but whereas all the Divines that ever I have read on these things, whether Ancient or Modern (and I have not troubled my self to consider [Page 193] whether they were Systematical ones only or otherwise qualified) allow some di­stinctions of this term to be necessary, for the right understanding of those passages of Scripture wherein it is made use of. I shall mention that or those only, which are so unto the right apprehension of what is at present under Debate.

First therefore, Grace in the Scripture is taken for the free Grace, or favour of God towards sinners by Jesus Christ. By this he freely pardoneth them their, sins, Justifieth, and accepteth them, or makes them accepted in the Beloved. This cer­tainly is distinct from Moral Vertue. Secondly, It is taken for the effectual working of the Spirit of God, in and upon the minds and souls of Believers, thereby quickning them when they were dead in trespasses and sins, Regenerating of them, Creating a new heart in them, im­planting his Image upon them: neither I presume will this be called Moral Ver­tue. Thirdly, For the actual supplies of Assistance and Ability given to Believers, so to enable them unto every Duty in particular, which in the Gospel is re­quired of them; for he works in them both to Will and to Do of his own good pleasure. As yet the former distinction will appear [Page 194] necessary. Fourthly, For the effects wrought and produced by this Operation of God and his Grace, in the hearts and minds of them that believe; which are ei­ther habitual in the spiritual disposition of their minds, or actual in their operati­ons; all which are called Grace. It may be our Author will be apt to think that I Cant, use Phrases, or fulsome Metaphors. But besides that I can confirm these di­stinctions, and the necessity of them, and the words wherein they are expressed, from the Scriptures and Ancient Fathers, I can give them him for the substance of them out of very Learned Divines, whether Systematical or no I know not, but this I know they were not long since Bishops of the Church of England.

We are now in the next place to inquire into the mind of our Author in these things; for from his apprehensions about them he frames a mighty difference be­tween himself and those whom he op­poseth, and from thence takes occasion and advantage afresh to revile and re­proach them.

First, Therefore he declares his judge­ment, that the Moral Vertues which he treats of do consist in Mens observance of the Law of Nature, of the Di­ctates [Page 195] of Reason, and Precepts there­of.

Secondly, That the Substance, yea the whole of Religion consists in these Vertues, or Duties; So that by the observation of them Men may attain Everlasting Happi­ness.

Thirdly, That there is no actual con­currence of present Grace, enabling Men to perform these Duties, or to exercise these Ver­tues, but they are called Grace on another account.

Fourthly, That his Adversaries are so far from making Vertue and Grace to be the same that they make them inconsistent. And these things shall we take into a brief examination according as indeed they do deserve.

The first of them, he plainly and more than once affirms; nor shall I contend with him about it. So he speaks pag. 68. The practice of Vertue consists in living sui­tably to the dictates of Reason and nature, and this is the substance and main design of all the Laws of Religion, to oblige mankind to behave themselves in all their actions as becomes creatures endowed with Reason and understanding, and in wayes suitable to Ra­tional beings, to prepare and qualifie them­selves for the State of Glory and immortality. [Page 196] This is a plain description both of the Rule of moral Vertues, and of the nature of them. The Law of Reason and nature is the Rule; and their own nature (as acting, or acted) consists in a suitableness unto Rational Beings; acting, to prepare themselves for the state of immor­tality and Glory. The first end of all vertue no doubt. We need not therefore make any farther inquiry into this matter, wherein we are agreed.

Secondly, That the Substance, yea the whole of Religion consists in these Moral Vertues he fully also declares, pag. 69. Moral Vertue having the strongest and most necessary influence upon the, end of all Religion viz. mans Happiness, it is not only its most material and useful part, but the ultimate end of all its other Duties; (though I know not, how the practice of Vertue in this life can be the Vltimate End of other Du­ties) and all true Religion can consist in nothing else but either the practice of Vertue it self, or the use of those means and instru­ments that contribute unto it. So also p. 70. All Duties of Devotion excepting only our re­turns of Gratitude are not essential parts of Religion, but are only in order to it, as they tend to the practice of Vertue and Moral Goodness; and their goodness is derived upon [Page 197] them from the Moral Vertues to which they contribute; and in the same proportion they are conducive to the ends of Vertue, they are to be valued among the Ministeries of Religion. So then the whole Duty of Man consists in being vertuous, and all that is injoyned him beside, is in order thereunto. Hence We are told elsewhere, that outward Worship is no part of Religion; again pag. 76. All Re­ligion must of necessity be resolved into En­thusiasm or Morality; the former is meer imposture, and therefore all that is true must be reduced to the latter. But we need not insist on particulars, seeing he promoteth this to confirmation by the best of Demon­strations, i. e. an induction of all particu­lars; which he calls a Scheme of Religion; wherein yet if any thing necessary be left out or omitted, this best of Demonstrations is quickly turned into one of the worst of Sophismes. Therefore we have here (no doubt) a just and full Representation of all that belongs to Christian Religion; and it is as follows; pag. 69. The whole Duty of Man referrs either to his Creator, or his Neighbour, or Himself. All that concerns the two last, is confessedly of a moral nature; and all that concerns the first, consists either in Praising of God or Praying to him; The former is a branch of the Vertue of Gratitude, and [Page 198] is nothing but a thankful and Humble temper of mind, arising from a sense of Gods great­ness in Himself, and his Goodness to us. So that this part of Devotion issues from the same vertuous quality, that is the Principle of all other resentments and expressions of Grati­tude; only those acts of it that are terminated on God as their Object are stiled Religious; and therefore Gratitude and Devotion are not divers things, but only differing names of the same thing; Devotion being nothing else but the Vertue of Gratitude towards God. The latter, viz. Prayer is either put up in our own or other mens behalf; if for others it is an act of that Vertue we call kindness or Charity; if for our selves, the things we pray for, unless they be the comforts and enjoyments of this life, are some or other vertuous qua­lities; and therefore the proper and direct use of Prayer is to be instrumental to the Ver­tues of Morality. It is of Christian Religion that this Author treats, as is manifest from his ensuing Discourse, and the Reason he gives why Moral Vertues are stiled Graces. Now I must needs say that I look on this of our Author as the rudest, most imper­fect, and weakest Scheme of Christian Reli­gion that ever yet I saw; so far from comprising an induction of all particulars belonging to it, that there is nothing in it [Page 199] that is constitutive of Christian Religion as such at all. I wish he had given us a summary of the Credenda of it, as he hath done of its Agenda, that we might have had a prospect of the body of his Divinity. The ten Commandments would in my mind have done twice as well on this present occasion, with the addition of the Expli­cation of them given us in the Church Ca­teehism. But I am afraid that very Cate­chism may ere long be esteemed Phanatical also. One I confess I have read of before, who was of this Opinion, that all Religion consisted in Morality alone. But withall he was so Ingenious as to follow the con­duct of his Judgement in this matter, unto a full Renunciation of the Gospel, which is certainly inconsistent with it. This was one Martin Sidelius a Seilesian, who gave the ensuing account of his Faith unto Faustus Socinus and his Society at Cracovia.

Caeterum ut sciatis cujus sim religionis, quamvis id scripto meo quod habetis, ostende­rim, tamen hic breviter repetam. Et primum quidem doctrina de Messia, seu Rege illo pro­misso, ad meam religionem nihil pertinet: nam Rex elle tantum Judaeis promissus erat, sicut & bona illa Canaan. Sic etiam cir­cumcisio sacrificia, & reliquae cerimoniae Mo­sis ad me non pertinent, sed tantum populo [Page 200] Judaico promissa data & mandata sunt. Ne­que ista fuerunt cultus Dei apud Judaeos, sed inserviebant cultui divino, & ad cultum de­ducebant Judaeos. Verus autem cultus Dei quem meam religionem appello, est Decalogus: qui est aeterna Dei voluntas, qui Decalogus ideo ad me pertinet, quia etiam mihi à Deo datus est, non quidem per vocems sonantem de coelo, sicut populo Judaico, at per creationem insita est menti meae; quia autem insitus De­calogus, per corruptionem naturae humanae, & pravis consuetudinibus, aliqua ex parte ob­scuratus est, ideo ad illustrandum cum, adhi­beo vocalem Decalogum, qui vocalis Decalo­gus, ideo etiam ad me, ad omnes populos pertinet, quia cum insito nobis Decalogo con­sentit, imo idem ille Decalogus est. Haec est mea sententia de Messia seu rege illo promis­so, & haec est mea religio, quam coram vobis ingenue profiteor. Martin Seidelius Olavensis Silesius.

That is. But that you may know of what Religi­on I am, although it is expressed in that Writing which you have already, yet I will here briefly repeat it. And first of all, the Doctrine of the Messiah, or King that was promised doth not belong to my Religion; for that King was promised to the Jews only; as was the good Land of C [...]n [...]an. So in like manner circum­cision, Sacrifices and the rest of the Ceremo­nies [Page 201] of Moses belong not to me, but were pro­mised, given, and granted unto the people of the Jews alone. Neither were they the Wor­ship of God among the Jews, but were only subservient unto Divine Worship, and lead the Jews unto it (the same Opinion is maintain­ed by our Author concerning all exterior Worship:) but the true Worship which I call my Religion, is the Decalogue which is the Eternal and immutable Will of God; (And here also he hath the consent and con­currence of our Author) which Decalogue doth therefore belong unto me because it is given by God to me also; not indeed by a voice sounding from Heaven as he gave it to the people of the Jews, but it is implanted in my mind by nature. But because this implanted Decalogue by reason of the corruption of hu­mane nature, and through depraved Customs, is in some measure obscured, for the illustra­tion of it I make use of the vocal Decalogue, which therefore also belongs unto me and all people; because it consenteth with the Decalogue written in our hearts; yea is the same Law with it. This is my opinion concerning the Messiah, or the promised King; and this is my Religion which I freely acknowledge before ye. So he, This is plain dealing. He saw clear­ly, that if all Religion and the Worship of God consisted in Morality only, there was [Page 202] neither need nor use of Christ, nor the Gospel. And accordingly having no out­ward advantage by them, discarded them. But setting aside his bold renunciation of Christ as promised, I see not any material difference between the Religion of this man and that now contended for. The poor deluded souls among our selves, who leaving the Scripture, pretend that they are guided by the Light within them, are upon the matter of the same Religion. For that light being nothing but the Di­ctates of Reason and a natural Conscience, it extends not it self beyond Morality; which some of them understanding, we know what thoughts and apprehensions they have had of Christ and of his Gospel and the Worship of God instituted there­in. For hence it is, (and not as our Au­thor pretends, with a strange incogitancy concerning them and the Gnosticks, that they assert the Scripture to be the only Rule of Religious Worship) that they are fallen into these fond imaginations. And these are the effects which this Principle doth naturally lead unto. I confess then that I do not agree with our Author in and about this Scheme of Christian Reli­gion; which I shall therefore first briefly put in my exceptions unto, and then offer him another in lieu of it.

[Page 203] First, Then this Scheme seems to repre­sent Religion unto us as suited to the state of Innocency, and that very imperfectly also. For it is composed to answer the former assertions of confining Religion to Moral Vertues, which are granted to consist in our conformity unto and expres­sion of the Dictates of Reason and the Law of Nature. Again the whole duty of man is said to refer either to his Creator, or his Neighbour, or himself. Had it been said to God absolutely, another interpretation might have been put upon the words. But being restrained unto him as our Creator, all Du­ties referring to our Redeemer are ex­cluded, or not included, which certainly have some place in Christian Religion. Our Obedience therein is the Obedience of Faith, and must answer the special ob­jects of it. And we are taught in the Church Catechism to believe in God the Father who made us and all the world, and in God the Son who redeemed us and all Mankind; and in God the Holy Ghost, who sanctifies us and all the Elect people of God. Now these distinct acts of Faith, have distinct acts of Obedience attending them; whereas none here are admitted, or at least required, but those which fall under the first head. It is also very imperfect as a description [Page 204] of natural Religion, or the Duties of the Law of Nature. For the principal Duties of it, such as fear, love, trust, affiance of and in God, are wholly omitted; nor will they be reduced unto either of the heads which all Religion is here distributed unto. For Gratitude unto God hath respect formally and directly to the benefits we our selves are made partakers of. But these Duties are eternally necessary on the con­sideration of the nature of God himself, an­tecedent unto the consideration of his communicating of himself unto us by his benefits. Prayer proceeds from them; and it is an odd Method to reduce the Cause under the head of its effect. And Prayer it self is made at length not to be so much a Moral Vertue, as somewhat in­strumental to the vertues of Morality.

Secondly, I cannot think we have here a compleat Representation of Christian Re­ligion, nor an induction of all its parti­culars, because we have neither Supposi­tion nor Assertion of Sin, or a Redeemer, or of any Duty with respect unto them. Gratitude and Prayer I confess are two heads, whereunto sundry Duties of Natural Reli­gion without respect unto these things may be reduced. But since the fall of Adam, there was never any Religion in the world [Page 205] accepted with God, that was not built and founded on the supposition of them, and whose principal Duties towards God did not respect them. To prescribe now un­to us a Religion as it respects God, with­out those Duties which arise from the consideration of sin, and a Redeemer, is to perswade us to throw away our Bibles. Sin, and the condition of all men on the account thereof, their Duty in that con­dition, what God requires of them with reference thereunto, the way that God hath found out, proposed, and requires of us to make use of, that we may be delive­red from that condition, with the duties necessary to that end, do even constitute and make up that Religion which the Scri­pture teacheth us, and which, as it sum­marily expresseth it self, consists in Re­pentance towards God, and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; neither of which, nor scarce any thing that belongs unto them, appears in this Scheme; so that

Thirdly, The most important duties of Christian Religion are here not only omit­ted, but excluded. Where shall we find any place here to introduce Repentance; and as belonging thereunto Conviction of Sin, Humiliation, Godly Sorrow, Conver­sion it self to God? For my part I will [Page 206] never be of that Religion where these du­ties towards God have no place. Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, with all that is ne­cessary to it, preparatory for it, included in it, and consequentiall on it, are in like manner cast out of the verge of Religious duties here schematized. An endeavour to fly from the wrath to come, to receive Je­sus Christ, to accept of the attonement, to seek after the forgiveness of sins by him (that we may cant a little) and to give up our souls in universal Obedience to all his commands, belong also to the duties of that Religion towards God which the Scri­pture prescribeth unto us; but here they appear not in the least intimation of them. No more do the duties which though ge­nerally included in the Law of loving God above all, yet are prescribed and deter­mined in the Gospel alone. Such are self­denyal, readiness to take up the Cross, and the like. Besides all the duties wherein our Christian conflict against our Spiritual Adversaries doth consist, and in especial the whole of our duty towards God in the mortification of sin, can be of no con­sideration there, where no supposition of sin is made or allowed. But there would be no end if all exceptions of this nature, that readily offer themselves, might here [Page 207] have admittance. If this be the Religion of our Adversaries in these things, if this be a perfect Scheme of its Duties towards God, and induction of all its parti­culars; let our Author insult over, and reproach them whilst he pleaseth, who blame it as insufficient without Grace and Godliness: I would not be in the conditi­on of them who trust their eternal concern­ments to meer Observance of it; as know­ing that there is no name under Heaven given unto men whereby they may be saved, but only the name of Jesus Christ. It will be in vain pretended, that it is not a description of Christian Religion, but of Religion, as Religion in general, that is here attempted. For besides that, it is Christian Religion, and that as used and practised by Christians, which is alone under considera­tion; and an Introduction of Religion here under any other notion would be griev­ously inconsistent and incoherent with the whole Discourse. It is acknowledged by our Author in the progress of his Dispu­tation as was before observed, when he gives a Reason why Moral Vertue is stiled Grace, which is peculiar and appropriate to Christian Religion alone. Besides, to talk now of a Religion in the World, which either hath been, or may be, since [Page 208] the fall of Adam without respect unto sin, is to build Castles in the air. All the Re­ligion that God now requires, prescribes, accepts, that is or can be, is the Religion of Sinners, or of those who are such, and of them as such, though also under other qualifications. On many accounts therefore this scheme of Religion or Religious Duties towards God, is exceedingly insufficient and imperfect. To lay it therefore as a Foundation whereon to stand, and revile them who plead for a superaddition unto it of Grace and Godliness, is an undertak­ing from whence no great success is to be expected.

I can easily supply another Scheme of Re­ligion in the room of this, which though it have not any such contexture of method, nor is set out with such gaudy words as those which our Author hath at his dispo­sal, yet I am confident in the confession of all Christians shall give a better account than what is here offered unto us both of the Religion we profess, and of the Du­ties that God requires therein; and this taken out of one Epistle of St. Paul; namely, that to the Romans. And I shall do it as things come to mind in the haste wherein I am writing. He then gives us his Scheme to this purpose. As First, That [Page 209] all Men sinned in Adam, came short of the Glory of God, and rendred themselves liable to death and the whole curse of the Law. Then, that they do all, as left to themselves accumulate their Original Sin and Transgression, with a world of actual sins, and provocations of God. That against Men in this condition, God testi­fies his wrath and displeasure, both in his works and by his word. Hence it neces­sarily follows, that the first Duty of Man towards God is to be sensible of this con­dition, of the guilt of sin, with a fear of the wrath and judgement due to them. Then he informs us, that neither the Jews by the Law, nor the Gentiles by the light of Nature, could disentangle them­selves from this state, or do that which is pleasing unto God, so as they might ob­tain forgiveness of Sin and acceptation with him. This bespeaks unto all the great Duty towards God, of their acknowledge­ment unto him, of their miserable and help­less condition, with all those Affections and subordinate Duties, wherewith it is at­tended. In this state he declares, that God himself in his Infinite Wisdome, Good­ness and Grace, provided a Remedy, a way of relief; on which he hath put such an impression of his Glorious Excellencies as [Page 208] [...] [Page 209] [...] [Page 210] may stirr up the hearts of his Creatures, to endeavour a return unto him from their Apostasie; and that this remedy consists in his setting forth Jesus Christ to be a pro­pitiation through Faith in his blood, to de­clare his Righteousness for the forgiveness of Sin; which he proposeth unto Men for their receiving and acceptance. This ren­ders it the greatest duty of mankind towards God, to believe in the Son of God so set forth, to seek after an Interest in him, or being made partaker of him; for this is the great work that God requires, name­ly that we believe on him whom he hath sent. Again, he declares that God justi­fieth them who so believe, pardoning their sins, and imputing Righteousness unto them; whereon innumerable Duties do depend, even all the Obedience that Christ requires of us; seeing in our believing in him, we accept him to be our King to rule, govern and conduct our souls to God. And all these are Religious duties towards God. He declares moreover, that whereas Men are by Nature dead in trespasses and sins, and stand in need of a new spiritual life, to be born again, that they may live unto God; that God in Jesus Christ doth by his spirit quicken them, and regenerate them, and work in them a new principle of spi­ritual [Page 211] life; whence it is their great Duty towards God (in this Religion of St. Paul) to comply with, and to yield obedience, unto all the wayes and methods that God is pleased to use in the accomplishment of this work upon them, the especial Duties whereof are too many to be instanced in. But he further manifests, that notwith­standing the Regeneration of Men by the Spirit, and their Conversion to God, there yet continues in them a remainder of the Principle of corrupted nature, which he calls the flesh, and Indwelling Sin, that is of it self wholly enmity against God, and as far it abides in any, inclines the heart and mind unto sin, which is to be watched against and opposed. And on this head, he introduceth the great Religious Duty towards God of our spiritual conflict against sin, and of the mortification of it, wherein those that believe are to be exer­cised all the dayes of their lives, and where­in their principal duty towards God doth consist, and without which they can perform no other in a due manner. Moreover he farther adds the great Gospel-Priviledge of the Communication of the Spirit of Christ unto Believers, for their Sanctifica­tion, Consolation, and Edification; with the Duties of Thankfulness towards God, [Page 212] Joy and Rejoycing in him, Cheerfulness under Tryals, Afflictions, and Persecutions, and sundry others that on that account are required of us, all Religious Duties to­wards God, in the Religion by him proposed unto us. Having laid these foundations, and manifested how they all proceed from the Eternal Counsel and free Grace of God, in which it is our Duty to admire, adore, and praise him, he declareth how hereby and on the account of these things, we are bound unto all Holiness, Righteousness, Godli­ness, Honesty, and Usefulness in this world, in all Relations and Conditions whatsoever; declaring our Duties in Churches, accord­ing to our especial interest in them, to­wards Believers; and towards all Men in the World in our several Relations; in Obedience to Magistrates; and all superi­ors; in a word in universal observance of the whole will and all the commands of God. Now whither any one will call this a Scheme or no, or allow it to have any thing of Method in it or no, I neither know nor care; but am perswaded that it makes a better, more plain, and intelligible Represen­tation of the Religious Duties towards God which Christian Religion, requires of us, unto all that suppose this whole Religion to depend on Divine Revelation, than that [Page 213] of our Author. But I find my self in a digression; the end of this Discourse was only to manifest the Sentiments of our Au­thor, on the second head before laid down, which I think are sufficiently evinced.

The third is, That there is no actual work of present Grace, either to sit the Persons, of whom these Duties of Moral Vertues are required, unto the perfor­mance of them, or to work and effect them in them. For although they are called Graces, and the Graces of the Spirit, in the Scripture, yet that is upon another ac­count; as he declares himself, pag. 72. All that the Scripture intends by the Graces of the Spirit, are only Vertuous qualities of the Soul that are therefore stiled Graces, because they are derived purely from God's free-Grace and Goodness, in that in the first Ages of Christi­anity, he was pleased out of his infinite concern for its propagation, in a miraculous manner to inspire its Converts with all sorts of Vertue. Vertuous Qualities of the soul, is a very ambigious expression. Take these Vertu­ous Qualities, for a new principle of Spiri­tual life, consisting in the habitual Dispo­sition, Inclination, and Ability of mind un­to the things required of us in the will of God, or unto the Acts of Religious Obedi­ence, and it may express the Graces of the [Page 212] [...] [Page 213] [...] [Page 214] Spirit; which yet are far enough from being so called upon the account here mentioned. But these Vertuous Quali­ties, are to be interpreted according to the tenour of the preceding Discourses, that have already passed under Examina­tion. Let now our Author produce any one Writer of the Church of God, from first to last, of any repute or Acceptation, from the day that the name of Christian was known in the World, unto this wherein we live, giving us this account why the fruits of the Spirit, the Vertuous or Gra­cious qualities of the minds of Believers, are called Graces that here he gives, and I will give him my thanks publickly for his discovery. For if this be the only Rea­son why any thing in Believers is called Grace, why Vertues are Graces, namely be­cause God was pleased in the first Ages of Christianity miraculously to inspire its Converts with all sorts of Vertue, then there is [...]o Communication of Grace unto any, no work of Grace in and upon any, in an or­dinary way, through the Ministry of the Gospel, in these latter Ages. The whole Being, and efficacy of Grace, according to this notion, is to be confined unto the mi­raculous Operations of God in Gospel con­cernments, in the first Ages, whence a de­nomination [Page 215] in the Scripture is cast upon our Vertues, when obtained and exercised by and in our own strength. Now this plainly overthrows the whole Gospel, and contains a Pelagianisme that Pelagius himself never did, nor durst avow.

Are these things then so indeed? that God did from his free Grace and Goodness, miraculously inspire the first Converts of Christianity with all sorts of Vertues, but that He doth not still continue to put forth in any, actually, the Efficacy of his Grace, to make them Gracious, Holy, Believing, Obedient to himself, and to work in them all suitable actings towards himself and others? Then farewell Scripture, the Covenant of Grace, the Intercession of Christ, yea all the Ancient Fathers, Counsels, Schoolmen, and most of the Jesuites themselves. Many have been the disputes amongst Christians about the Na­ture of Grace, the Rule of its Dispensati­on, the manner and way of its Operation, its Efficacy, Concurrence, and Co-opera­tion in the Wills of men; but that there is no dispensation of it, no operation but what was miraculous in the first Converts of the Gospel, was I think untill now undiscovered. Nor can it be here pre­tended, that although the Vertuous qua­lities [Page 216] of our minds and their Exercise, by which is intended all the Obedience that God requireth of us, in Principle and Practice, that we may please him, and come to the enjoyment of him, are not said to be called Graces, only, on the account men­tioned; For as in respect of us, they are not so termed at all, so if the term only be not understood, the whole discourse is impertinent and ridiculous. For those other Reasons and Accounts that may be taken in, will render that given utterly use­less unto our Authors intention, and indeed are altogether inconsistent with it. And he hath given us no reason to suppose, that he talks after such a weak and preposterous a rate. This then is that which is here asserted, the Qualities of our minds and their Exercise wherein the Vertues plead­ed about, and affirmed to contain the whole Substance of Religion, do consist, are not wrought in us by the Grace or Spirit of God through the Preaching of the Gospel, but are only called Graces, as before. Now though here be a plain contradiction to what is delivered but two pages be­fore, namely, that we pray for some or other Vertuous qualities, that is doubtless to be wrought in us by the Grace of God; yet this present discourse is capable of no [Page 217] other interpretation but that given unto it. And indeed it seems to be the design of some men, to confine all real Gifts and Graces of the Spirit of God, to the first Ages of the Gospel, and the miraculous operations in it; which is to overthrow the whole Gospel, the Church, and the Ministry of it, as to their use and efficacy, leaving Men only the Book of the Bible to Philosophize upon, as shall be elsewhere demonstrated, Our Author indeed tells us, that on the occasion of some mens writings in Theology, there hath been a buzz and a noise of the Spirit of God in the World. His expressions are exceedingly suited to pour contempt on what he doth not ap­prove; not so to express what he doth himself intend. But I desire that he and others would speak plain, and openly in this matter, that neither others may be deceived nor themselves have occasion to complain that they are mis-represented; a pretence whereof would probably give them a di­spensation to deal very roughly, if not despightfully with them with whom they shall have to do. Doth he therefore think or believe, that there are not now any real Gracious Operations of the Spirit of God, upon the hearts and minds of men in the world? that the dispensation of the Spirit [Page 218] is ceased, as well unto ordinary Ministerial Gifts, with its sanctifying, renewing, assist­ing Grace, as unto Gifts miraculous and ex­traordinary? that there is no work at all of God upon the hearts of Sinners, but that which is purely moral, and perswasive by the word? that what is asserted by some concerning the Efficacy of the Grace of the Spirit, and concerning his gifts, is no more but a buzz and a noise? I wish he would explain himself directly and positively in these things; for they are of great impor­tance. And the loose expressions which we meet with, do give great Offence unto some, who are apt to think, that as per­nicious an Heresie as ever infested the Church of God, may be covered and clock­ed by them.

But to return; In the sense that Moral Vertue is here taken, I dare boldly pro­nounce, that there is no Villany in the Religi­on of those men, who distinguish between Vertue and Grace; that is, there not in their so doing; this being the known and avow­ed Religion of Christianity. It is grant­ed; that whereever Grace is, there is Ver­tue. For Grace will produce and effect all Vertues in the Soul whatever. But Vertue on the other side may be where there is no Grace, which is sufficient to confirm a [Page 219] distinction between them. It was so in fundry of the Heathen of old; though now it be pretended that Grace is nothing but an occasional denomination of Vertue, not that it is the cause or principle of it. But the proofs produced by our Author are exceedingly incompetent unto the end whereunto they are applyed. For that place of the Apostle, Gal. 5. v. 22, 23. The fruit of the Spirit is Love, Joy, Peace, long-suffering, Gentleness, Goodness, Faith, meekness, Temperance; Though our Author should be allowed to turn Joy into cheerful­ness, peace into peaceableness, Faith into Faithfulness, as he hath done, corruptly enough, to accommodate it to his purpose, yet it will no way reach his end, nor satis­fie his intention. For doth it follow that because the Spirit effects all these Moral vertues in a new and gracious manner, and with a direction to a new and special end in Believers, either that these things are nothing but meer Moral Vertues, not wrought in us by the grace of God, (the contrary whereof is plainly asserted in call­ing them fruits of the Spirit) or that where­ever there is Moral Vertue, though not so wrought by the Spirit, that there is Grace also, because Vertue and Grace are the same? If these are the Expositions of [Page 220] Scripture which we may expect from them, who make such out-cries against other mens, perverting and corrupting of it, the matter is not like to be much mended with us, for ought I can see, upon their taking of that work into their own hands. And in­deed his Quotation of this place is pretty odd. He doth not in the Print express the words as he useth, and as he doth those of another Scripture immediately, in a dif­ferent character, as the direct words of the Apostle, that no man may charge him with a false Allegation of the Text. Yet he repeats all the words of it which he intends to use to his purpose, somewhat altering the ex­pressions. But he hath had, I fear, some unhappiness in his Explanations. By Joy he would have Cheerfulness intended. But what is meant by cheerfulness is much more uncertain than what is intended by Joy. Mirth it may be in Conversation is aimed at, or somewhat of that nature. But how remote this is from that Spiritual Joy, which is recommended unto us in the Scri­pture, and is affirmed to be unspeakable and full of glory, he that knows not, is scarce meet to Paraphrase upon St. Pauls Epistles. Neither is that Peace with God through Je­sus Christ, which is rought in the Hearts of Believers by the Holy Ghost, who [Page 221] creates the fruit of the lipps, peace, peace, unto them, a matter of any more affinity with a Moral peaceableness of mind and Affections. Our Faith also in God, and our Faithfulness in our Duties, Trusts, Offices and Employ­ments, are sufficiently distinct. So palpably must the Scripture be corrupted and wrested to be made serviceable to this pre­sumption. He yet adds another proof to the same purpose, if any man know distinctly what that purpose is; namely, Titus 2. 11. Where he tells us that the same Apostle make the Grace of God, to consist in Grati­tude towards God, Temperance towards our Selves, and Justice towards our Neighbours. But these things are not so. For the Apo­stle doth not say that the Grace of God doth consist in these things, but that the Grace of God teacheth us these things. Neither is the Grace here intended, any Subjective or inherent Grace, or to speak with our Author any Vertuous Quality or Vertue, but the Love and Grace of God himself, in sending Jesus Christ as declared in the Gospel, was is manifest in the words and con­text beyond contradiction. And I cannot but wonder, how our Author desirous to prove that the whole of our Religion con­sists in Moral Vertues, and these only called Graces because of the Miraculous Operati­ons [Page 222] of God from his own Grace in the first Gospel converts, should endeavour to do it by these two testimonies; the first whereof expresly assigns the Duties of Morality as in Believers, to the operati­on of the Spirit, and the latter in his judg­ment makes them to proceed from Grace.

Our last inquiry is into what he ascribes unto his Adversaries in this matter, and how he deals with them thereupon. This therefore he informs us pag. 71. It is not enough say they to be compleatly vertuous, un­less ye have grace too. I can scarce believe that ever he heard any one of them say so, or ever read it in any of their writings. For there is nothing that they are more positive in, than that men cannot in any sense be compleatly vertuous unless they have grace; and so cannot suppose them to be so, who have it not. They say indeed, that moral vertues, as before described, so far as they are attainable by, or may be exercised in the strength of Mens own wills and natural faculties, are not enough to please God and to make men accepted with him. So that vertue as it may be without Grace, and some vertues may be so for the substance of them, is not available unto sal­vation. And I had almost said that he is no Christian that is of another mind. In a [Page 223] word, Vertue is, or may be without Grace, in all or any of the Acceptations of it be­fore laid down. Where it is without the Favour of God and the Pardon of sin, where it is without the renewing of our natures, and the endowment of our Persons with a Principle of spiritual life, where it is not wrought in us by present efficacious Grace, it is not enough; nor will serve any mans turn with respect unto the everlasting con­cernments of his Soul.

But he gives in his Exceptions, pag. 71. But when, saith he, we have set aside all man­ner of vertue, let them tell me what remains to be called Grace, and give me any notion of it distinct from all morality, that consists in the right order and government of our actions in all our Relations, and so comprehends all our Duty; and therefore if Grace be not included in it, it is but a phantasme and an imaginary thing. I say first; where Grace is, we cannot set aside vertue, because it will and doth pro­duce and effect it in the minds of men. But Vertue may be, where Grace is not, in the sense so often declared. Secondly, Take moral vertue in the notion of it here recei­ved and explained by our Author, and I have given sundry Instances before, of Gra­cious Duties, that come not within the verge or compass of the Scheme given us of it. [Page 224] Thirdly, The whole aimed at, lies in this, that vertue that governs our actions in all our Duties may be considered either as the Duty we owe to the Law of nature, for the ends of it, to be performed in the strength of nature, and by the direction of it, or it may be considered as it is an especial effect of the grace of God in us, which gives it a new principle, and a new end, and a new respect unto the Covenant of Grace Wherein we walk with God, the consideration where of frustrates the inten­tion of our Author in this discourse.

But he renews his charge, pag. 73. So destructive of all true and real goodness is the very Religion of those men, that are wont to set grace at odds with vertue; and are so farr from making them the same, that they make them inconsistent; and though a man be exact in all the duties of moral goodness, yet if he be a graceless person (i. e. void of I know not what imaginary Godliness) he is but in a cleaner way to Hell; and his conversion is more hopeless than the vilest and most noto­rious sinners, and the morally Righteous man is at a greater distance from grace, than the prophane; and better be lend and debanched than live an honest and vertuous life, if you are not of the Godly Party; with much more to this purpose. For the men that are [Page 225] wont to set grace at odds with vertue, and are so far from making them the same, that they make them inconsistent; I wish our Author would discover them, that he might take us along with him in his dete­station of them. It is not unlikely, if all be true that is told of them, but that the Gnosticks might have some principles not unlike this; but beside them I never heard of any that were of this mind in the world. And in truth the liberty that is taken in these discourses, is a great instance of the morality under consideration. But the fol­lowing words will direct us where these things are charged. For some say, that if a man be exact in all the Duties of moral Goodness, yet if he be a Graceless Person, void of I know not what imaginary Godliness, he is but in a cleaner way to Hell. I think I know both what, and who are intended, and that both are dealt withal with that candour we have been now accustomed unto. But First, you will scarce find those you intend over forward in granting that men may be exact in all the Duties of Mo­ral goodness, and yet be graceless persons. For taking Moral vertues to comprehend, as you do, their duties toward God, they will tell you such Persons cannot perform one of them aright, much less all of them [Page 226] exactly. For they can neither trust in God, no believe him, nor fear him, nor glorifie him in a due manner. Take the Duties of moral Goodness, for the duties of the Law between man and man, and the observation of the outward Duties of Gods worship, and they say indeed, that they may be so perform­ed as that in respect of them, men may be blameless, and yet be Graceless. For that account if they mistake not the Apostle Paul gives of himself. Phil. 3. 6, 7, 8. They do say therefore that many of these Duties, so as to be useful in the world, and blameless before men, they may per­form who are yet Graceless. Thirdly, This Gracelessness is said to consist in being void of I know not what imaginary Godliness. No, no; It is to be void of the Spirit of God, of the Grace of Christ, not to be born again, not to have a new spiritual life in Christ, not to be united to him, or ingrafted in him, not to be accepted and made an heir of God, and enabled to a due Spiritual Evangelical performance of all Duties of Obedience, according to the tenour of the Cove­nant; these are the things intended. And as many with their moral Duties may come short of them and be Graceless; so those to whom they are imaginary, must reject the whole Gospel of Christ as an imagina­tion. [Page 227] And I must say, to give matter of a new charge, that to the best Observation that I have been able to make in the world, none have been, nor are more negligent in the principal Duties of morality, than those who are aptest to exalt them above the Gospel, and the whole Mystery of it; unless morality do consist in such a course of life and Conversation, as I will not at present charactarize.

It is farther added, that the conversi­on of such a one, is more hopeless than the vilest and most notorious Sinners; and the morally Righteous man, &c. Setting aside the inviduous expression of what is here reflected upon, and there is nothing more openly taught in the Gospel. The Phari­sees were a People morally Righteous, where­on they trusted to themselves that they were Righteous; and yet our Lord Jesus Christ told them, that Publicans and Har­lots, the vilest and most notorious of Sin­ners, entred before them into the King­dom of God. And where Men trust to their own Righteousness, their own Du­ties, be they moral or what they will, there are no Men farther from the way of the Gospel than they. Nay our Saviour lets us know, that as such, the Gospel is not concerned in them, not they in it. He [Page 228] came not, he sayes, to call the Righteous, but Sinners to Repentance; not Men justi­fying, or lifting up themselves in a co [...]ceit of their moral Duties, but those who are burdened and laden with a sense of their sins. And so in like manner, that the whole have no need of the Physitian but the sick; and St. Paul declares what Enemies they were to the Righteousness of God, who went about to set up their own Righteousness; Rom. 10. Now because moral Duties are incumbent on all Persons, at all times, they are continually to be pressed upon all, from a sense of the Authority, and com­mand of God, indispensibly requiring all Mens attendance unto them. Yet such is the deceitfulness of the heart of Man, and the power of unbelief, that oftentimes Persons who through their Education, or following convictions, have been brought to some observance of them, and being not enlightned in their minds to discern their insufficiency unto the great end of salvation, in and of themselves, are apt to take up with them, and to rest in them without ever coming to sincere Repentance towards God, or faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; Whereas others, the guilt of whose sins doth unavoidably press upon them, as it did on the Publicans and Sinners of [Page 229] old, are oft times more ready to look out after relief. And those who question these things, do nothing but manifest their igno­rance in the Scripture, and want of ex­perience in the work of the Ministry. But yet upon the account of the charge mentioned, so unduly framed, and impo­tently managed, our Author makes an ex­cursion into such an extravagancy of re­proaches, as is scaree exceeded in his whole Book: Part of it I have considered before in our view of his Preface; and I am now so used to the noise and bluster wherewith he pours out the storm of his Indignati­on, that I am altogether inconcerned in it, and cannot prevail with my self to give it any further consideration.

These things though not direct to the Argument in hand, and which on that ac­count might have been neglected; yet sup­posing that the Author placed as much of his design in them, as in any part of his Discourse, I could not wholly omit the consideration of; not so much out of a desire for their vindication who are un­duly traduced in them, as to plead for the Gospel it self, and to lay a foundati­on of a further defence of the Truths of it, if ocasiou shall so require. And we have also here an insight into the Judg­ment [Page 230] of our Author, or his mistake in this matter. He tells us that it is better to tollerate debaucheries and immoralities, than liberty of conscience, for men to worship God according to their light and perswa­sion. Now all Religion according to him, consisting in morality, to tollerate immora­lities and debauckeries in conversation, is plainly to tollerate Atheism; which it seems is more eligible than to grant liberty of conscience, unto them who differ from the present establishment, only as to some things belonging to the outward worship of God.

These things being premised, the Argu­ment it self pleaded in this Chap. is capa­ble of a speedy dispatch. It is to this pur­pose. The Magistrate hath power over the consciences of men in reference to Morals, or Moral Vertues, which are the principal things in Religion, and therefore much more hath so in reference to the Worship of God, which is of less importance. We have complained be­fore of the ambiguity of these general terms, but it is to no purpose to do so any more, seeing we are not like to be re­lieved in this discourse. Let us then take things as we find them, and satisfie our selves in the intention of the Author, by that Declaration which he makes of it up and down the Chap. But yet here we [Page 231] are at a loss also. When he speaks, or seems to speak to this purpose, whether in the confirmation of the Proposition, or the Inference, whereof his Argument consists, what he sayes is cast into such an inter-tex­ture with invectives and reproaches, and expressed in such a loose declamatory man­ner, as it is hard to discover or find out what it is that he intends. Suppose therefore in the first place, that a Man should call his consequent into question; namely that because the Magistrate hath power over the Consciences of his sub­jects in morals, that therefore he hath so also in matters of Instituted Worship? how will he confirm and vindicate it? Two things are all I can observe that are offe­red in the confirmation of it. First, That these things of morality, moral Vertues, are of more importance in Religion than the out­ward worship of God, which the amplitude of power before asserted, is now redu­cing to a respect unto. Secondly, That there is much more danger of his erring and mistaking in things of morality, than in things of outward Worship, because of their great weight and importance. These things are pleaded, p. 28. And elsewhere up and down. That any thing else is offered, in the confirmation of this consequent I find [Page 232] not. And it may be some will think these proofs to be very weak and feeble, una­ble to sustain the weight that is laid upon them. For it is certain that the first Rule, that he that hath power over the Greater, hath so over the Lesser, doth not hold unless it be in things of the same nature and kind; and it is no less certain and evi­dent, that there is an especial and formal difference between these things, namely moral Vertues, and Instituted Worship; the one depending as to their Being and discovery on the light of Nature, and the dictates of that Reason which is common to all, and speakes the same language in the Consciences of all mankind; the other on pure Revelation, which may be, and is va­riously apprehended. Hence it is, that whereas there is no difference in the world about what is Vertue and what is not, there is no Agreement about what belongs to divine Worship and what doth not.

Again; lesser things may be exempted from that Power and Authority by espe­cial priviledge or Law, which hath the dis­posal of greater committed into it, and in­trusted with it. As the Magistrate amongst us, may take away the life of a Man, which is the greatest of his concernments, the name of his all, for fellony, but cannot [Page 233] take away his Estate or Inheritance of Land, which is a far less concernment unto him, if it be antecedently setled by Law to other uses than his own. And if it can­not be proved that the disposal of the Worship of God, as to what doth really and truly belong unto it, and all the parts of it, is exempted from all humane Power by special Law and Priviledge, let it be disposed of as who so will, shall judge meet.

Nor is the latter consideration suggested to inforce this consequent of any more validity; namely, that there is more danger of the Magistrates erring or mistakes about Moral Vertue, than about Rites of Worship; because that is of most concernment in Re­ligion. For it is true, that suppose a Man to walk on the top of an high house or Tower, on a plain floor with battlements or Walls round about him, there will be more danger of breaking his neck, if he should fall from thence, than if he should fall from the top of a narrow wall that had not the fourth part of the heighth of the house. But there would not be so much danger of falling. For from the top of the house as circumstantiated, he can­not fall, unless he will wilfully and vio­lently cast himself down headlong; and [Page 234] on the top of the Wall, it may be, he can­not stand, with the utmost of his heed and endeavours. The Magistrate cannot mi­stake about Moral Vertues unless he will do it wilfully. They have their station fixed in the world, on the same ground and evi­dence with Magistracy it self. The same evidence, the same common consent and suffrage of mankind is given unto Moral Vertues, as is to any Government in the World. And to suppose a supream Magi­strate, a Law-giver, to mistake in these things, in judging whether Justice, and Temperance, or Fortitude, be Vertues or no, and that in their Legislative capacity, is ridiculous. Neither Nero nor Caligula were ever in danger of any such mis-ad­venture. All the Magistrates in the World at this day, are agreed about these things. But as to what concerns the Worship of God, they are all at variance. There is no such Evidence in these things, no such common suffrage about them, as to free any absolutely from failings and mistakes; so that in respect of them, and not of the other, lyes the principal danger of miscar­rying, as to their determination and admi­nistration. Supposing therefore the Pre­mises our Author layes down to be true, his Inference from them is feeble, and ob­noxious [Page 235] to various impeachments, where­of I have given some few Instances only, which shall be increased if occasion re­quire.

But the Assertion it self which is the foundation of these consequences, is ut­terly remote from Accuracy and Truth. It is said that the Magistrate hath power over the Consciences of Men in reference unto Mo­ral Duties, which are the principal parts of Religion. Our first and most difficult in­quiry, is after the meaning of this Proposi­tion, the later after its truth. I ask then, first whether he hath power over the Con­sciences of men with respect unto Moral Vertue, and over Moral Vertue it self, as Vertue, and as a part of Religion, or on some other account; If his power respect Vertue as a part of Religion, then it equal­ly extends it self to all that is so, by Ver­tue of a Rule which will not be easily everted. But it doth not appear that it so extends it self as to plead an obliging Authority in reference unto all Duties. For let but the Scheme of Moral Duties, especially those whose Object is God, given us by our Author be considered, and it will quickly be discerned how ma­ny of them are exempted from all humane cognizance and Authority; and that from [Page 236] and by their nature as well as their use in the World. And it is in vain to ascribe an authority to Magistrates which they have no power to exert, or take cogni­zance whether it be obeyed or no. And what can they do therein with respect un­to Gratitude to God, which holds the first place in the Scheme of Moral Vertues here given in unto us. We are told also, p. 83. That in matters both of Moral Vertue, and Divine Worship, there are some rules of Good and Evil that are of an Eternal and unchange­able obligation, and these can never be preju­diced or altered by any humane power, because the reason of their Obligation arises from a ne­cessity and constitution of nature, and there­fore must be [...] perpetual as that; but then there are other rules of Duty that are alterable according to the various accidents changes and conditions of humane life, and depend chiefly upon contracts and positive Laws of Kingdoms. It would not be unworthy our inquiry to consider what rules of Moral Duty they are, which are alterable and depend on ac­cidents and contracts. But we might easi­ly find work enough, should we call all such fond Assertions to a just examination. Neither doth the distinction here given us between various Rules of Moral Vertue, very well answer what we are told, p. 69. [Page 237] namely, that every particular Vertue is there­fore such, because it is are semblance and imi­tation of some of the Divine Attributes, which I suppose they are not, whose Rules and formes are alterable upon accidents and occasions. And we are taught also, pag. 68. that the practice of Vertue consists in living suitable to the dictates of Reason and Nature; which are Rules not variable and Changeable. There must be some new distinction to reconcile these things, which I cannot at present think of. That which I would enquire from hence is, whether the Magistrates have power over the Con­sciences of men in reference unto those things in Morality, whose Rules of good and evil are of an Eternal obligation. That he hath not is evidently implyed in this place. And I shall not enter into the con­fusion of the ensuing Discourse, where the latter sort of Rules for Vertue, the other member of the distinction, are turn­ed into various Methods of executing Laws about outward acts of Vertue or Vice; and the Vertues themselves into outward expressions and significations of Duty; for I have at present no contest with this Author about his manner of writing, nor do intend to have. It is enough that here at once all the principal and most im­portant [Page 238] Vertues are vindicated to their own unalterable Rules as such, and the Consciences of Men in reference unto them put under another jurisdiction. And what then becomes of this Argument, That the Magistrate must have power over the Consciences of Men in matters of Di­vine Worship, because he hath so in things Moral which are of greater importance, when what is so of importance, is ex­empted from his power.

Hence it sufficiently, appears that the Authority of the Magistrate over men, with reference unto Moral Vertue and Duty, doth not respect Vertue as Vertue, but hath some other consideration. Now what this is, is evident unto all. How Moral Vertues do belong unto Religion and are parts of it, hath been before de­clared. But God who hath ordered all things in weight and measure, hath fore­designed them also to another end and purpose. For preparing mankind for Po­litical Society in the world among them­selves for a time, as well as for Religious Obedience unto himself, he inlayed his nature and composition with principles suited to both those ends, and appointed them to be acted with different respects unto them. Hence Moral Vertues not­withstanding [Page 239] their peculiar tendency unto him, are appointed to be the instrument and ligament of humane Society also. As the Law of Moses had in it a typical end, use, and signification, with respect to Christ and the Gospel, and a political use as the instrument of the Government of the Na­tion of the Jews. Now the Power of the Magistrate in respect of Moral Vertues, is in their latter use; namely, as they relate to humane policy, which is concerned in the outward actings of them. This there­fore is granted; and we shall enquire far­ther whether any more be proved, namely, that the Magistrate hath power over the outward actings of Vertue and Vice, so far as humane Society or publick Tranquility is concerned in them, and on that ac­count.

Secondly, It may be enquired what is the Power and Authority over Moral Ver­tues, which is here ascribed unto the Civil Magistrate, and over the Consci­ences of men, with respect unto them. Is it such as to make that to be Vertue which was not Vertue before, or which was Vice, and oblige men in Conscience to practise it as Vertue? This would go a great way indeed, and answer somewhat of what is, or as it is said, may be done [Page 240] in the Worship of God, when that is made a part of it which was not so before. But what name shall these new Vertues be called by? A new Vertue both as to its Acts and Objects, will as much fly the imagina­tions of men, as a sixth sense doth. It may be our Author will satisfie us as to this enquiry; for he tells us, pag. 80. That he hath power to make that a parti­cular of the Divine Law, that God hath not made so. I wish he had declared himself how, and wherein; for I am afraid this expression as here it lyes, is offensive. The Divine Law is Divine, and so is every par­ticular of it [...]; and how a man can make a thing Divine, that is not so of it self, nor by Divine Institution, is hard to find out. It may be that only the subject matter of the Law, and not the Law it self formally is intended; and to make a thing a particular of the Divine Law, is no more but to make the Divine Law require, that in particular of a man which it did not require of him before. But this Particular, referrs to the Nature, Essence and Being of the thing, or to the acting, and occasion of it in particular. And if it be taken in the latter sense, here is no more ascribed un­to the Magistrate, than is common with him to every man in the World. For every [Page 241] one that puts himself into new circum­stances, or new Relations, doth so make that unto him to be a particular of the Divine Law, which was not so before; for he is bound and obliged unto the actual performance of many Duties, which as so circumstantiated, he was not bo [...] unto before.

But somewhat else seems to be intend [...] from the ensuing discourse; they are fully empowred to declare new instances of Vertue and Vice, and to introduce new duties in th [...] most important parts of Religion. And y [...] I am still at the same loss. For by his de­claring new Instances of Vertue and Vice, suppose he intends an Authoritative de­claration, such as that they have no other foundation, nor need none to make them what they are. They are new Instances of Vertue and Vice, because so declared. And this suits unto the introducing of new Duties in the most important parts of Reli­gion, made Duties by that introduction. I wish I could yet learn what these new In­stances of Vertue and Vice are, or mean. Whether they are new as Vertues and Vices, or as Instances. For the first, would I could see a new practice of old Virtues; but to tell you the truth, I care not for [Page 242] any of the new Vertues, that I have lately observed in the World; nor do I hope ever to see any better new ones.

If it be the Instances that are new, I wish again I knew what were more in them, than the actual and occasional exercise of old Duties. Pag. 79, 80. conduce most to extri­cate us out of these ambiguities. There we are informed, that the Laws of every Na­tion do distinguish and settle mens rights, and properties, and that distinctly with respect whereunto, Justice, that prime Natural Vertue, is in particular Instances to be exercised. And pag. 84. It is further declared, that in the administration of Justice, there may be great difference in the constitution of penalties and execution of men. This it seems is that which is aimed at; the Magistrate by his Laws determines, whteher Titius have set his hedge upon Caius's ground; and whether Sempronius hath rightly conveyed his Land or House, to his Son, or Neighbour, where­by what is just and lawfull in it self, is accommodated to the use of political So­ciety. He determines also how Persons guilty of death shall be executed, and by whom, and in what manner; whence it must needs follow that he hath power to assign new particulars of the Divine Law, to [Page 243] declare new bounds, or hedges, of right and wrong, which the Law of God neither doth, nor can limit, or hath power over the Consciences of men with respect to Moral Vertues; which was to be demon­strated. Let us lay aside these swelling expressions, and we shall find that all that can be ascribed unto the Civil Magistrate in this matter, is no more, than to preserve Property and Peace, by that Rule and power over the outward Actions of men, which is necessary thereunto.

Having made some enquiry into the termes of Moral Vertue and the Magi­strates power, it remains only that we consider what respect this case hath unto the Consciences of men, with reference unto them. And I desire to know whether all mankind, be not obliged in Conscience to the Observation of all Moral Vertue, antecedently to the command or Authori­ty of the Magistrate, who doth only in­spect their observation of them as to the concerns of publick peace and tranquili­ty. Certainly if all Moral Vertue consists in living suitable to the dictates of Rea­son, as we are told, and in a sense rightly, if the Rule of them all and every one, which gives them their formal Nature, be the Law of our Creation, which all man­kind [Page 244] enter the World under an indispen­sable obligation unto, it cannot be deny­ed but that there is such an antecedent obligation on the Consciences of Men, as that inquired after. But the things men­tioned are granted by our Author; nor can by any be denyed, without offering the highest outrage to Scripture, Reason, and the common consent of Mankind. Now if this Obligation be thus on all Men, unto all Vertue as Vertue, and this absolutely from the Authority of God over them and their Consciences, how comes an infe­riour Authority to interpose it self be­tween that of God and their Consciences, so immediately to oblige them. It is granted that when the Magistrate com­mandeth and requireth the exercise of any Moral Duty, in a way suited unto publick good and tranquility, he is to be obeyed for Conscience sake; because he who is the Lord of Conscience doth require Men to be obedient unto him, whereon they are obliged in Conscience so to be. But if the things required of them be in themselves Moral Duties, as they are such, their Con­sciences are obliged to observe and exer­cise them, from the command of God, and other obligation unto them as such, they neither have nor can have. But the di­rection [Page 245] and command for the exercise of them, in these and those circumstances, for the ends of publick. Good whereunto they are directed, belongs unto the Magistrate, who is to be obeyed. For as in things meer­ly Civil, and which have nothing original­ly of morality in them, but secondarily only, as they tend to the preservation and welfare of humane Society, which is a thing Morally good, the Magistrate is to be obey­ed for Conscience sake, and the things themselves as far as they partake of Mo­rality, come directly under the command of God which affects the Conscience; so in things that have an inherent and insepa­rable Morality, and so respect God in the first place, when they come to have a civil Sanction in reference to their exercise un­to publick political Good, that Sanction is to be obeyed out of Conscience; but the antecedent obligation that was upon the Conscience unto a due exercise of those Duties, when made necessary by circum­stances, is not superseded, nor any new one added thereunto.

I know what is said, but I find not as yet what is proved from these things, concern­ing the uncontroleable and absolute power of the supream Magistrate, over Religion and the consciences of men. Some things [Page 246] are added indeed here up and down, about circumstances of Divine Worship, and the power of ordering them by the Magistrate, which though there may be some different conceptions about, yet they no way reach the cause under debate. But as they are expressed by our Author, I know not of any one Writer in and of the Church of England, that hitherto hath so stated them, as they are by him. For he tells us pag. 85. That all Rituals, Ceremonies, Postures and Manners of performing the outward expressi­ons of Devotion, that are not chargeable with countenancing Vice or disgracing the Deity, are capable of being adopted into the Ministe­ries of Divine Service, and are not exempted from being Subject to the determinations of humane power. Whether they are so or no, the Magistrate I presume is to judge; or all this flourish of words and concessi­ons of power, vanish into smoak. His command of them binds the Consciences of men to observe them, according to the principle under consideration. Hence it must be absolutely in the power of every supream Magistrate to impose on the Chri­stian Subjects, a greater number of Cere­monious observances in the Worship of God, and those of greater weight than ever were laid upon the Jews. For who [Page 247] knows not that under the names of Rituals, Ceremonies, Postures, manners of Performing all Divine Service, what a butrdensome heap of things are imposed in the Roman Church; whereunto as far as I know a thousand more may be added, not chargeable in them­selves with either of the crimes, which alone are allowed to be put in, in Barr or Plea against them. And whether this be the Liberty whereunto Jesus Christ hath vin­dicated his Disciples and Church, is left unto the judgement of sober men. Out­ward Religious Worship we know is to be performed by natural actions; these have their circumstances, and those oft-times be­cause of the publick concernments of the exercise of Religion, of great importance. These may be ordered by the power, and according to the Wisdome of those in Au­thority. But that they should make so many things, as this assertion allows them to make to belong unto, and to be Parts of the Worship of God, whereof not one is enjoyned or required by him, and the Consciences of men be thereby obliged unto their observance; I do not believe, nor is it here at all proved.

To close this Discourse about the power of obliging the consciences of men; I think our Author grants that Conscience is im­mediately [Page 248] obliged to the Observation of all things that are Good in themselves, from the Law of our Creation. Such things as either the nature of God, or our own re­quire from us, our Consciences surely are obliged immediately by the Authority of God to observe. Nor can we have any dispensation for the non-performance of our Duty, from the interposition of the commands and Authority of any of the sons of Men. For this would be openly and directly to set up men against God, and to advance them or their Authority above him or his. Things evidently deduced, and necessarily following the first Principles and Dictates of Nature, are of the same kind with themselves, and have the Autho­rity of God no less enstamped on them than the other; and in respect unto them, Con­science cannot by Vertue of inferiour com­mands, plead an exemption. Things of meer Revelation do remain; and concern­ing them I desire to know, whether we are not bound to observe and do, whatever God in his revealed Will commands us to observe and do, and to abstain from what­ever he forbids, and this indispensably? If this be denyed I will prove it with the same Arguments whereby I can prove that there is a God, and that we are his Crea­tures [Page 249] made to serve him; For the Reason of these things is inseparable from the ve­ry Being of God. Let this be granted, and ascribe what ye will, or please, or can, to the Supream Magistrate, and you shall not from me have the least contradiction.

THe third Chapter entertains us with a Magnificent Grant of Liberty of Conscience. The very first Paragraph as­serts, a Liberty of Conscience in Mankind over all their Actions whether Moral, or Strict­ly Religious. But lest this should prove a Bedlam Concession that might mischief the whole design in hand, it is delivered to the power of a Keeper, who yet upon ex­amination is no less wild and extravagant, than it self is esteemed absolutely to be. This is, That they have it as far as concerns their judgements, but not their practice; That is; They have Liberty of Conscience over their Actions, but not their practices; or over their Practices, but not over their pra­tices. [Page 250] For upon Tryal their Actions and Practices will prove to be the same. And I do not as yet well understand, what is this Liberty of Conscience over mens Acti­ons, Is it to do, or not to do, as their Consciences dictate to them? This is ab­solutely denied, and opposed in the chap. it self. Is it to judge of their Actions as done, whether they be good or evil? This Conscience is at no liberty in. For it is determined to a judgment in that kind Naturally, and Necessarily, and must be so whilest it hath the Light of Nature, and Word of God to regard, So far as a Rule is capable of giving a measure and Determination to things to be regulated by it; That is; its moral actings, are mo­rally determined. What then this Liberty of Conscience over mens actions should be, where they can neither Act freely accord­ing to their Consciences what they are to do, nor abstain from what they are not to do, nor are at liberty to judge what they have done to be good or bad, I can­not divine.

Let us search after an Explication of these things in the Paragraph it self, whose Contents are represented in the words men­tioned. Here we are told, that this Liber­ty consists in mens thinking of things accord­ing [Page 251] to their own perswasion, and therein assert­ing the freedom of their judgements. I would be loth to think that this Liberty of mens Consciences over all their moral Actions, should at first dash dwindle into a Liber­ty in Speculations; That men may Think what they will, opine as they please, in, and about things that are not to be brought into practice; but yet as far as I can perceive, I must think so, or matters will come to a worse issue.

But these things must be a little farther examined, and that very briefly. Here is mention of Liberty of Conscience; but what Conscience is, or what that Liberty is, is not declared. For Conscience it is called sometimes the Mind, sometimes the Vnder­standing, sometimes Opinion, sometimes de­scribed by the Liberty of Thinking, some­times termed an Imperious Faculty, which things without much discourse, and more words, than I can now afford to use, are not reconcilable amongst themselves. Be­sides, Liberty is no proper [...]Affection of the Mind, or Understanding. Though I acknowledge the mind, and its Actings to be naturally free from outward Compul­sion, or Coaction; yet it is capable of such a Determination from the things proposed unto it, and the manner of their proposal, [Page 252] as to make necessary the Elicitation of its Acts. It cannot but judge that two and three make five. It is the will that is the proper seat of Liberty; and what some suppose to be the ultimate determination of the practical understanding, is indeed an Act of the Will. It is so if you speak of Liberty naturally and morally, and not of state and condition, which are here confounded. But suppose what you will to be Conscience, it is Moral Actions or Du­ties that are here supposed to be the Ob­ject of its actings. Now what are, or can be the thoughts, or actings of the Mind of Man about moral Actions, but about their Vertue, or their Vice, their moral good or evil? nor is a conclusion of what is a mans own duty in reference to the practice of them, possibly to be separated from them. That then which is here as­serted is, That a man may think, judge, or conceive such or such a thing to be his Duty, and yet have thereby no Obligati­on put upon him to perform it; for Con­science, we are informed, hath nothing to do beyond the inward thoughts of mens minds.

To state this matter a little more clear­ly; let us take Conscience in the most usual Acceptation of it, and that which [Page 253] answers the experience of every man that ever looks into the Affairs and Concerns within; and so it is, The practical judg­ment that men make of themselves, and of their Actions, or what they are to do, and what they are not to do, what they have done, or what they have omitted, with reference unto the Judgement of God, at present declared in their own hearts, and in his word, and to be fully executed at the last day. For we speak of Conscience as it is amongst Christians, who acknowledge the Word of God, and that for a double end; First, as the Rule of Con­science it self; Secondly, as the Declarati­on of the Will of God, as to his Approbati­on, or Rejecting of what we do, or omit. Suppose then, that a man make a judg­ment in his Conscience, regulated by the Word of God, and with respect unto the judgement of God concerning him, that such and such a thing is a duty, and whose performance is required of him; I desire to know, whether any obligation be upon him from thence to act accordingly? It is answered that the Territory of Conscience is confined unto mens thoughts, judgements and perswasions, and these are free, yea, no doubt; but for outward actions there is no remedy, but they must be subject to the Cognizance of [Page 254] humane Laws, pag. 9. Who ever doubted of it? He that would have men so have Liberty from outward Actions, as not to have those Actions cognoscible by the civil power, as to the end of publick Tranquili­ty, but to have their whole station firmed absolutely in the world upon the plea of Conscience, would no doubt lay a foun­dation for confusion in all government. But what is this to the present enquiry, whether Conscience lay an Obligation on men, as regulated by the word of God, and respecting Him, to practise according to its dictates? It is true enough; that if any of its practices do not please, or satis­fy the Magistrate, their Authors must for ought I know, stand to what will follow, or ensue on them to their prejudice; but this frees them not, from the Obligation that is upon them in Conscience unto what is their duty. This is that, which must be here proved, if any thing be in­tended unto the purpose of this Author; namely that notwithstanding the judgment of Conscience concerning any duty, by the interposition of the Authority of the Magistrate to the contrary, there is no Ob­ligation ensues for the performance of that duty. This is the Answer that ought plainly to be returned, and not a sugge­stion [Page 255] that outward Actions must fall under the Cognizance of the Magistrate; which none ever doubted of, and which is no­thing to the present purpose; unless he would have them to fall under the Magi­strates Cognizance, as that his will should be the supream Rule of them; which I think he cannot prove. But what sense the Magistrate will have of the outward Actions, wherein the discharge of mans duty doth consist, is of another conside­ration.

This therefore is the state of the present case applied unto Religious Worship. Suppose the Magistrate command such things in Religion, as a man in his Conscience guided by the Word, and respecting God, doth look upon as Vnlawful, and such as are Evil, and Sin unto him, if he should perform them; and forbid such things in the Worship of God, as he esteems himself ob­liged in Conscience to observe as com­mands of Christ; If he may practise the things so commanded, and omit the things so forbidden, I fear he will find himself within doors continually at confession, say­ing with trouble enough; I have done those things, which I ought not to have done, and I have left undone those things, which I ought to have done, and there is no health in [Page 256] me; unless this Author can prove that the Commands of God respect only the minds of men; but not their outward actions which are left unto the Authority of the Magistrate alone. If no more be here in­tended, but that whatever Conscience may require of any, it will not secure them, but that when they come to act out­wardly according to it, the Civil Magi­strate may, and will consider their Acti­ons, and allow them, or forbid them according to his own judgement, it were surely a madness to deny it, as great, as to say the Sun shineth not at noon day. If Conscience to God be confined to Thoughts, and Opinions, and Speculations about the general Notions, and Notices of things, about True and False, and unto a liberty of judging, and determining upon them what they are, whether they are so or no [...] the whole nature and being of Conscience, and that to the Reason, sense, and experience of every man, is utterly overthrown. If Conscience be allowed to make its judgement of what is good or evil, what is Duty or sin, and no obliga­tion be allowed to ensue from thence unto a suitable practice, a wide door is opened unto Atheism, and thereby the subversion of all Religion and Government in the world.

[Page 257] This therefore is the summ of what is asserted in this matter; Conscience ac­cording to that Apprehension, which it hath of the will of God about His wor­ship, (whereunto we confine our dis­course) obligeth men to act, or forbear accordingly; if their Apprehensions are right and true, just and equal, what the Scripture, the great Rule of Conscience doth declare and require, I hope none up­on second thoughts will deny, but that such things are attended with a right un­to a Liberty to be practised, whilst the Lord Jesus Christ is esteemed the Lord of Lords, and King of Kings, and is thought to have power to command the observance of his own Institutions. Sup­pose these Apprehensions to be such as may in some things, be they more or less, be judged not to correspond exactly with the great Rule of Conscience, yet suppo­sing them also to contain nothing incon­sistent with, or of a disturbing nature to civil Society, and publick Tranquillity, nothing that gives countenance to any Vice, or Evil, or is opposite to the princi­pal Truths and main Duties of Religion, wherein the minds of men in a Nation do coalesce, nor carry any politick entangle [...]ments along with them; and add thereun­to [Page 258] the peaceableness of the persons posses [...] with those Apprehensions, and the impos­sibility they are under to devest themselves of them, and I say Natural Right, Justice, Equity, Religion, Conscience, God him­self in all, and His Voice in the hearts of all unprejudiced persons, do require that neither the persons themselves, on the account of their Consciences, have vio­lence offered unto them, nor their pra­ctices in pursuit of their Apprehensions, be restrained by severe prohibitions and pe­nalties. But whereas the Magistrate is al­lowed to judge, and dispose of all out­ward Actions in reference to publick tran­quility, if any shall assert Principles, as of Conscience, tending, or obliging unto the practice of Vice, Immorality, or Sin, or to the disturbance of publick society, such principles being all notoriously judged by Scripture, Nature, the common con­sent of Mankind, and inconsistent with the fundamental principles of Humane Polity, may be in all instances of their discovery and practice, coer­ced, and restrained. But plainly, as to the commands of Conscience, they are of the same extent with the commands of God: If these respect only the inward man, or [Page 259] the mind, Conscience doth no more; if they respect outward Actions, Conscience doth so also.

From the Liberty of Conscience, a Pro­ceed is made to Christian Liberty, which is said to be a Duty, or priviledg founded upon the (chimaerical) Liberty of Conscience be­fore granted. But these things stand not in the Relation imagined; Liberty of Con­science is of natural Right, Christian Liber­ty is a Gospel-priviledge, though both may be pleaded in bar of unwarrantable Impo­sitions on Conscience. But these things are so described by our Author, as to be confounded. For the Christian Liberty des­cribed in this Paragraph, is either restrain­ed to matters of pure Speculation, where­in the mind of man is left entirely free to judge of the Truth, and falsehood of things; or as it regards things that fall under Laws and Impositions, wherein men are left intirely free to judge of them, as they are objects of meer Opinion. Now how this differs from the Liberty of Con­science granted before, I know not. And that there is some mistake in this descripti­on of Christian Liberty, need no other Con­sideration to evince but this; namely that Christian Liberty, as our Author tells us, is a Priviledge, but this is not so, being [Page 260] that which is equally common unto all mankind. This Liberty is necessary unto Humane Nature, nor can it be divested of it, and so it is not a Priviledge that includes a specialty in it. Every man cannot but think what he thinks, and judge what he judg­eth, and that when he doth so, whether he will or no; for every thing when it is, and as it is, is necessary. In the use of what means they please, to guide, direct, and determine their thoughts, their Li­berty doth consist; This is equal in all, and natural unto all. Now this inward freedom of our Judgements is, it seems, our Christian Liberty, consistent with any impositions upon men in the exercise of the Worship of God, with an Obligation on Conscience, unto their use and pra­ctice; A Liberty indeed of no value, but a meer Aggravation of bondage; And these things are further discoursed, Sect. 3. pag. 95. wherein we are told, That this prerogative of our Christian Liberty, is not so much any new favour granted in the Gospel, as the Restauration of the mind of man to its natural priviledge, by exempting us from the yoke of the Ceremonial Lam, whereby things in themselves indifferent were tyed upon the Con­science with as indispensable an obligation, as the Rule of Essential Goodness, and Equitys [Page 261] during the whole period of Mosaick Dispensa­tion; which being corrected by the Gospel, those indifferent things, that have been made necessary by a Divine positive command, re­turned to their own nature to be used, or omitted, only as occasion should direct.

It is true, that a good part of our Christi­an Liberty, consists in our deliverance from the yoke of Mosaical Institutions; but that this is not so much a new favour granted in the Gospel, as the Restauration of the mind of man to its natural priviledge, is an insertion that runs parallel with many others in this discourse. This Priviledge, as all others of the Gospel are, is spiritual, and its outward concerns, and exercise, are of no value, where the mind is not spiritually made free by Christ. And it is uncertain what is meant by the Restauration of the mind to its natural priviledge; If the privi­ledge of the mind in its condition of na­tural purity is intended, as it was before the entrance of sin, it is false; If any pri­viledge, the mind of man in its corrupt depraved condition is capable of, be de­signed, it is no less untrue. In things of this nature, the mind in that condition is in bondage, and not capable of any Liber­ty; for it is a thing ridiculous, to confound the meer natural Liberty of our wills, [Page 262] which is an affection inseparable from that faculty, with a moral, or spiritual Liber­ty of mind, relating unto God and his Wor­ship. But this whole Paragraph runs up­on no small mistake; namely that the yoke of Mosaical Institutions, consisted in their Im­position on the minds, and judgments of men, with an opinion of the antecedent necessity of them. For although the words recited, things in themselves indifferent, were tyed upon the Conscience with as indispensa­ble an obligation as the rules of essential good­ness and equity, may be restrained to their use, exercise, and observation; yet the Conclusion of it, that whatever our Supe­riours impose upon us, whether in matters of Religious Worship, or any other Duties of mo­rality, there neither is, nor can be any in­trenchment upon our Christian Liberty, provid­ed it be not imposed with an Opinion of Ante­cedent necessity of the thing it self, with the whole scope of the Argument insisted on, makes it evident to be the sense intended. But this is wide enough from the mark; the Jews were never obliged, to judge the whole Systeme of their Legal institutions, to be any way necessary, antecedent unto their Institution and Appointment; nor were they obliged to judge their intrincsik nature changed by their institution, only [Page 263] they knew they were obliged to their con­stant, and indispensable practice, as parts of the Worship of God, instituted and commanded by him, who hath the supream Authority over their Souls and Conscien­ces. There was indeed a bondage frame of Spirit upon them in all things, especially in their whole Worship of God, as the Apo­stle Paul several times declares. But this is a thing of another Nature, though our delivery from it, be also a part of Christian Liberty. This was no part of their in­ward, no more than their outward bon­dage, that they should think, believe, judge or esteem the things themselves enjoyned them, to be absolutely of any other nature, than they were; Had they been obliged unto any such judgement of things, they had been obliged to deceive themselves, or to be deceived; But by the absolute Authority of God, they were indispensi­bly bound in Conscience to the actual ob­servance, and continual use of such a num­ber of Ceremonies, Carnal Ordinances, and outward Observances, as being things in themselves low, and mean, called by the Apostle Beggerly Elements, and enjoyn­ed with so great strictness, and under so severe penalties, many of them, of Exci­sion, or Extermination from among the [Page 264] people, as became an intolerable, and in­supportable yoke unto them. Neither doth the Apostle Peter dispute about a judge­ment of their nature, but the necessity of their Observation, when he calls them a yoke, which neither they, nor their Fathers were able to bear, Acts 15. 10. And when St. Paul gives a charge to Believers, to stand fast in the Liberty, wherewith Christ hath made them fres, it is with respect un­to the outward Observation of Mosaical Rites, as by him instituted, and not as to any inward judgment of their minds con­cerning their Nature, antecedent unto that institution. His whole disputation on that subject, respects only mens practice, with regard unto an Authoritative Obligation thereunto, which he pleaded to be now expired, and removed. And if this Chri­stian Liberty, which he built and pro­ceeded upon, be of force to free, not our minds from the judgement that they had before of things in themselves, but our persons from the necessary practice, and ob­servance of things instituted of God, how­ever antecedently indifferent in them­selves; I think it is, at least, of equal ef­ficacy, to exempt us from the necessary practice of things imposed on us in the Worship of God, by men. For, setting aside [Page 265] the Inequality of the Imposing Authority, which casts the Advantage on the other side, (for these Legal Institutions were im­posed on the Church by God himself, those now intended are such matters, as our Su­periours of themselves impose on us in Religious Worship) the case is absolutely the same; for as God did not give the Law of Commandment's contained in Ordi­nances unto the Jews, from the Goodness of things required therein, antecedent to His Command, which should make them necessary to be practised by them for their Good; but did it of His own Sove­raign Arbitrary Will and Pleasure; so He obliged not the people themselves un­to any other judgement of them, but that they were necessarily to be observed; and setting aside the consideration of his Com­mand, they were things in their own nature altogether indifferent; so is it in the pre­sent case; It is pleaded that there is no Im­position on the Minds, Consciences, or judgements of men, to think or judge other­wise of what is imposed on them, than as their nature is, and doth require; on­ly they are obliged unto their Usage, Ob­servance, and Practice; which is to put us into a thousand times worse condition than the Jews, if Instances of them should [Page 266] be multiplyed, as they may lawfully [...] every year; seeing it much more quiet [...] the mind; to be able to resolve its thought [...] immediately into the Authority of Go [...] under its Yoke, than into that of man. I [...] therefore we are freed from the one by our Christian Liberty, we are so much more from the other; so, as that being made free by Christ, we should not be the servants of men, in things belonging to his Service and Worship.

From this discovery here made of the nature of Christian Liberty, our Author makes some deductions, p. 98, 99. concern­ing the nature of Religious Worship, wherein he tells us, that the whole substance of Religious Worship is transacted within the mind of man, and dwells in the heart, and thoughts, the soul being its proper Seat, and Temple, where men may Worship their God as they please, without offending their Prince; and that External Worship is no part of Religion it self. I wish he had more clearly, and di­stinctly expressed his mind in this matter; for his Assertions, in the sense the words seem to bear, are prodigiously false, and such as will open a door to Atheism with all Villany and Confusion in the World. For who would not think this to be his inten­tion; Let men keep their minds and inward [Page 267] thoughts, and apprehensious right for God, and then they may practise outwardly in Religion what they please; one thing one day, another another; be Papists and Protestants, Arians and Homousians; yea Mahometans and Chri­stians; any thing, every thing, after the manner of the Country, and Laws of the Prince, where they are, and live; the Rule that Ecebolius walked by of old? I think there is no man, that owns the Scri­pture, but will confess that this is, at least, if not a direct, yet an interpretative re­jection of the whole Authority of God. And may not this Rule be quickly ex­tended unto Oaths themselves, the bonds and Ligaments of humane Society? For whereas in their own formal nature they belong to the Worship of God, why may not men pretend to keep up their Reve­rence unto God, in the internal part of them, or their esteem of Him in their In­vocation of His Name, but as to the out­ward part, accommodate it unto what by their Interest is required of them; so swearing with their Tongues, but keeping their Mind at Liberty? If the Principles laid down be capable of any other more tolerable sense, and such as may be exclu­sive of these Inferences, I shall gladly admit it; at present what is here deduced [Page 268] from them, seems to be evidently included in them.

It is true indeed, that Natural, Moral, or Internal Worship, consisting in Faith, Love, Fear, Thankfulness, Submission, Depen­dance, and the like, hath its constant Seat, and Residence in the Souls, and Minds of men; but that the wayes whereby these Principles of it are to be outwardly exer­cised, and expressed, by Gods Command and Appointment, are not also indispensably necessary unto us, and parts of his Wor­ship, is utterly false. That which princi­pally in the Scripture, comes under the notion of the Worship of God, is the due observance of his outward Institutions; which Divines have upon unquestionable grounds, contended to be commanded and appointed in general in the second Com­mandment of the Decalogue, whence all particular Institutions in the several sea­sons of the Church, are educed, and re­solved into the Authority of God therein expressed. And that account which we have here given us of outward Worship, namely, that it is no part of Religion it self, but only an Instrument to express the inward Veneration of the mind, by some outward acti­on or posture of the body, as it is very diffi­cultly to be accommodated unto the sacri­fices [Page 269] of old, or the present Sacraments of the Church, which were, and are parts of outward Worship, and, as I take it, of Religion; so the being an instrument unto the purpose mentioned, doth not exclude any thing from being also a part of Reli­gion, and Worship it self, if it be com­manded by God to be performed in His Service, unto His Glory. It is pretended that all Outward Worship is only an exte­riour signification of Honour; but yet all the parts of it in their performance, are Acts of Obedience unto God, and are the proper Actings of Faith, Love, and Submission of Soul unto God, which if they are not His Worship, and parts of Religion, I know not what may be so esteemed. Let then Outward Worship, stand In what Relation it will to Inward Spiritual Honour, where God requires it, and commands it, it is no less necessary and in dispensably to be per­formed, than any part of Inward Worship it self, and is a no less important duty of Religion. For any thing comes to be a part of Religious Worship outwardly to be performed, not from its own nature, but from its respect unto the command of God; and the End whereunto it is by him designed. So the Apostle tells us that with the heart man believeth unto Righteousness, [Page 270] and with the Mouth Confession is made un [...] Salvation, Rom. 10. Confession is but the exteriour signification of the Faith, that is i [...] our hearts; but yet it is no less necessary to Salvation, than Faith it self is to Righ­teousness. And those, who regulate their Obedience, and Religious Worship by the Commands of God, knowing that which way ever they are signified, by inbred Light, or superadded Revelation, it is they which give their Obedience its formal nature, making it Religious, will not allow that place and use of the outward Worship required by God Himself, which should exclude it from being Religious, or a part of their Religion.

But upon the whole matter our Author affirms, that in all Ages of the World, God hath left the Management of His Outward Worship unto the Discretion of Men, unless when to determine some particulars hath been usefull to some other purpose, pag. 100. The management of Outward Worship, may signifie no more but the due performance of it; and so I acknowledge that though it be not left unto mens discretion to observe, or not observe it, yet it is too their Duty and Obedience, which are their Discretion and their Wisdom. But the management here understood, is opposed to Gods own [Page 271] determination of particular Forms, that is, His especial Institutions; and hereof I shall make bold to say, that it was never in any Age so left to the Discretion of men. To prove this Assertion, Sacrifices are singled out as an Instance; It is known, and granted, that these were the most so­lemn part of the Outward Worship of God for many Ages; and that there was a ge­neral consent of Mankind unto the use of them; so that however the greatest part of the World apostatized from the true, only, and proper object of all Religious Worship, Worship, yet they retained this Mode and Medium of it. These Sacrifices we are told, p. 101. did not owe their Original unto any Divine Institution, but were made choice of by good men as a fit way of imitating the grate­full resentments of their minds. The Argu­ment alone, as far as I can find, fixed on to firm this Assertion is, that those who teach the contrary, and say that this Mode of Worship was commanded, do say so with­out proof, or evidence. Our Author, for the most part, sets off his Assertions at no less rate than as such, without whose admit­tance, all Order, and Government, and al­most every thing that is Good amongst mankind, would be ruined and destroyed. But he hath the unhappiness to found them [Page 272] ordinarily not only on Principles, and O [...]nions dubious, and uncertain; but on su [...] Paradoxes, as have been by sober and lear [...]ed men generally decried. Such is this [...] the Original of Sacrifices here insisted o [...] The Divines of the Church of Rome, do g [...]nerally contend that Religion and Sacrific [...] are so related, that the one cannot be with [...]out the other. Hence they teach Go [...] would have required Sacri [...]ices in the St [...] of Innocency, had mankind continued there­in. And though the Instance be ill laid and not proved, yet the general Rule ap­plyed unto the Religion of Sinners, is no [...] easily to be evicted. For as in Christian Religion we have a Sacrifice that [...], as to its Efficacy, alwayes newly offered, and living; so before the Personal Offering of it in the body of Chirst, there was no season or Age, with­out a due Representation of it in Sacri­fices Typical, and of Mystical signification. And although there be no express mention in the Scripture of their Institution, (for these are ancient things) yet there is as good warrant for it, as for Offering, and burning Incense only with Sacred fire taken from the Altar, which was of an Heavenly traduction; for a neglect whereof the Priests were consumed with fire from before the [Page 273] Lord; that is, though an express command be not recorded for their Institution and Observation, yet enough may be collected from the Scripture that they were of a Divine Extract, and Original. And if they were arbitrary Inventions of some men, I desire to have a rational account given me of their Catholicism in the World; and one Instance more of any thing not Natural, or Divine, that ever prevailed to such an absolute universal acceptance amongst Mankind. It is not so safe, I sup­pose, to assign an arbitrary Original, unto any thing that hath obtained an universal Consent and Suffrage; lest men be thought to set their own houses on fire, on purpose to consume their Neighbours.

Besides, no tolerable colour can be given to the Assertion, that they were the inven­tion of good men. The first notice we have of them, is, in those of Cain and Abel, where­of one was a bad man, and of the Evil One, and yet must be looked on as the prin­cipal Inventor of Sacrifices, if this fiction be allowed. Some of the Antients indeed thought, that Adam Sacrificed the Beasts to God, whose Skins his first Garments were made of; and if so, he was very pregnant and sudden in his invention, if he had no directi­on from God. But more than all this, bloody [Page 274] Sacrifices were Types of Christ from the Foundation of the World; and Socinus himself, who, and his followers are the principal Assertors of this paradox, grants that Christ is called the Lamb of God, with respect unto the Sacrifices of old, even be­fore the Law; As He is termed A Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World, not only with respect unto the Efficacy of his Sacri­fice but to the Typical Representation of it. And he that shall deny, that the Patriarchs in their Sacrifices had respect unto the promised Seed, will endeavour the shaking of a Pillar of the Churches Creed. Now I desire to know how men, by their own Invention, or Authority, could assign such an end unto their Sacrifices, if they were not of Divine Pre­scription, if not designed of God thereunto.

Again; the Apostle tells us, Abel offered his Sacrifice by Faith, Heb. 11. 4. And Faith hath respect unto the Testimony or God, revealing, commanding, and promising to accept our duty. Wherever any thing is done in Faith, there an Assent is inclu­ded to this, that God is True, Joh. 3. 33. And what it doth, is thereby distinguished from Will-Worship, that is resolved into the Commandments, and Doctrines of men, which whoso rest on, make void the Command­ment of God, Matth. 15. 3, 6. And the Faith [Page 275] of Abel as to its general Nature was the Evi­dence of things not seen, and the Substance of things hoped for, Heb. 11. 1. which in this matter it could not be, if it had neither Divine Command, nor Promise to rest up­on. It is evident therefore that Sacrifices were of a divine Original; and the Instance in them to prove, that the Outward Wor­ship of God hath in all Ages been left unto the Prudence, and Management of men, is feeble, and such as will give no countenance unto what it is produced in the Justification of; And herewith the whole Discourse of our Author on this Subject falls to the ground, where I shall at present let it lye, though it might in sundry Particulars be easily crumbled into useless Asseverations, and some express Contradictions.

In the close of this Chapter, an Applica­tion is made, of what hath been before ar­gued, or rather dictated, unto a particular Controversie about significant Ceremonies. I am not willing to engage in any Contests of that Nature; seeing, to the due handling of them, a greater length of Discourse would be necessary, than I think meet at present to draw forth this Survey unto. Only seeing a very few words, may serve to manifest the loosness of what is here Discoursed, to that purpose, I shall [Page 276] venter on the Patience of the Reader wit [...] an addition of them. We have therefore in the first place, a Reflection on the prodi­gious Impertinency of the clamour against th [...] Institution of significant Ceremonies, when i [...] is the only use of Ceremonies, as all other out­ward Expressions of Religion, to be Significan [...]. I do somewhat admire at the Temper of this Author, who cannot express his disser [...] from others, in Controverted Points of the Meanest and Lowest concernment, but with crying out Prodigies, Clamours, Im­pertinencies, and the like Expressions of Astonishment in himself, and Contempt of others. He might reserve some of these great Words for more important oc­casions. But yet I joyn with him thus fa [...] in what he pleads; that Ceremonies in­stituted in the Worship of God, that art not significant, are things very insignificant; and such as deserve not the least conten­tion about them. He truly also in the next words tells us, that all outward Wor­ship is a sign of inward Honour. It is so; both in Civil things, and Sacred. All our Questionis, How these instituted Ceremonies come to be significant, and what it is they signifie, and whether it be lawful to assign a significancy to them in the Worship of God, when indeed they have none, of the [Page 277] kind intended? To free us from any dan­ger herein he informs us, p. 108. That all the Magistrates power of instituting significant Ceremonies, amounts to no more, than a power of determining what shall, or what shall not, be visible signs of honour, and this can be no Vsurpation upon the Consciences of men. This is new Language, and such as we have not formerly been used unto in the Church of England; namely, That of the Magistrates Instituting Significant Ceremonies; It was of old, the Churches appointing Ceremonies for decency and Order. But all the Terms of that Assertion are now metamorphosed; The Church into the Magistrates; Appointing, which respects exercise, into Institution, which respects the nature of the thing, and hath a singular use and sense in this matter (or let them pass for the same) and Order and decency, into Ceremonies signi­ficant. These things were indeed implyed be­fore, but not so fully and plainly expressed or avowed. But the honour here intend­ed in this matter, is the honour, which is given to God in his Worship. This is the honour of Faith, Love, Fear, Obedience spiritual, and holy, in Jesus Christ. To say that the Magistrate hath power to in­stitute visible signs of this honour, to be observed in the outward Worship of God, [Page 278] is upon the matter to say that he hath power to institute new Sacraments; for so such things would be. And to say what neither is, nor can be proved, nor is here either Logically, or any way regularly, at­tempted so to be.

The Compiring of the Ceremonies and their signification, with words and their sig­nification, will not relieve our Author in this matter. Some things are naturally sig­nificant of one another; so Effects are of Causes; so is Smoke of Fire; and such were the Signes of the Weather mentio­ned by our Saviour, Matth. 16. 2, 3. Thus I suppose Ceremonies are not significant; they do not Naturally signifie the things whereunto they are applyed; for if they did, there would be no need of their in­stitution. And they are here said to be instituted by the Magistrate. Again; there are Customary Signes, some it may be Ca­tholick, many Topical, that have prevailed by Custome, and Usage, to signifie such things, as they have no absolute Natural Coherence with, or Relation unto; such are putting off the Hat in sign of Reverence, with others innumerable. And both these sorts of Signs, may have some use about the Service, and Worship of God, as might be manifested in Instances. But the Signes [Page 279] we enquire after, are voluntary, arbitrary and instituted as our Author confesseth; for we do not treat of appointing some Ceremo­nies for order and decency, which our Canons take notice of, but of instituting Ceremonies for Signification, such as neither naturally, nor meerly by Custome and Usage, come to be significant, but only by Vertue of their Institution. Now concerning these one Rule may be observed; namely, that they cannot be of one kind, and signifie things of another, by vertue of any command, and consent of men, unless they have an abso­lute Authority both over the sign, and thing signified, and can change their Natures, or Create a new Relation between them. To take therefore things Natural, that are Out­ward, and Visible, and appoint them to be Signs not Natural, nor Civil, nor Customa­ry, but Mystical of things Spiritual, Super­natural, Inward, and Invisible, and, as such, to have them observed in the Church, or Worship of God, is a thing which is not as yet proved to be Lawfull; signifie thus naturally they never can, seeing there is no natural Relation between them; Civilly, or by Consent they do not so; for they are things Sacred, which they are supposed to signifie; and are so far from signifying by consent, that those, who plead for their [Page 280] Signification, do not agree wherein it doth consist. They must therefore signifie so Mystically, and Spiritually; and Signa, cum ad res Divinas pertinent, sunt Sacramenta, sayes Austin; these things are Sacraments; And when men can give Mystical, and Spiri­tual Efficacy to any of their own Institu­tions; when they can make a Relation be­tween such Signes, and the things signified by them; when they can make that teach­ing, and instructing in spiritual things, and the Worship of God, which he hath not made so, nor appointed, blessed, or conse­crated to that end; when they can bind Gods Promises of Assistance, and Accep­tance to their own Inventions; when they can advance what they will into the same rank, and Series of things in the Worship of God, with the Sacrifices of old, or other parts of instituted Worship introduced into the Church by Gods Command, and at­tended with his promise of gracious Ac­ceptance, then and not before may they institute the significant Ceremonies here con­tended for. Words, it is true, are Signs of things; and those of a mixed Nature; part­ly Natural, partly by Consent. But they are not of one kind, and signi [...]ie things of ano­ther; for, say the Schoolmen, where words are Signs of Sacred things, they are Signs of them as Things, but not as Sacred.

IN the fourth Chapter we have no con­cern; The Hypothesis whose Confutati­on he hath undertaken, as it is in it self false, so it is rather suited to promote what he aims at, than what he opposeth; And the principles which himself proceed­eth on, do seem to some to border on, if not to be borrowed from his, and those which are here confuted. And thence it is that the foundations, which he layes down in the entrance of this discourse, are as destructive of his own pretensions, as of those, against which they are by him­self improved. For it is granted, and assert­ed by him, that there are Actions, and Du­ties in, and about which, the Consciences of men are not to be obliged by humane Au­thority, but have an antecedent Obligati­on on them from the Authority of God himself; So that disobedience unto the contra­ry commands of humane Authority is no sin, but an indispensible Duty; And although he seems [Page 282] at first to restrain things of this nature, un­to things natural, and of an essential Recti­tude; that is, the prime dictates of the Law of Nature; yet he expresly extends it i [...] Instances, unto the belief of the truth of th [...] Gospel, which is a matter of meer and purr Revelation: And hereon he adds, The for­mall, and adequate reason of this exemption of Conscience from humane Authority, and i [...] obligation unto duty, before its considerati­on without it, and against it, which is, not because Subjects are in any thing free from the Authority of the Supream power on earth, but because they are Subject to a Superiour i [...] Heaven, and they are then only excused from the Duty of obedience to their Soveraign, when they cannot give it without rebellion against God; so that it is not originally any right of their own, that exempts them from a Subjecti­on to the Soveraign power in all things, but it is purely Gods right of governing his own Creatures, that Magistrates then invade, when they make Edicts to violate, or controll His Laws.

It is about Religion, and the Worship of God that we are discoursing; Now in these things no man ever thought that it was originally a right of Subjects, as Sub­jects, abstracting from the Consideration of the Authority of God, that should exempt [Page 283] them from a subjection to the Soveraign Power. For though some of the Antients discourse at large, that it is of natural Right and Equity, that every one should Worship God as he would himself, yet they found­ed this Equity in the nature of God, and the Authority of his Commands. This Exemption then ariseth merely, as our Author observes, because they are subject to a Superiour Power in Heaven, which excuseth them from the Duty of Obedi­ence to their Superiours on Earth, when they cannot give it without Rebellion against God; whence it undeniably follows that that Supream Power in Heaven hath exempted these things from all inferiour Powers on earth. Extend this now unto all things wherein men have, and ought to have a regard unto that Superiour Power in Heaven, as it must be extended, or the whole is ridiculous, (for that heavenly Su­premacy is made the formall reason of the exemption here granted,) and all that our Author hath been so earnestly contending for in the preceeding Chapters, falls to the ground. For no man pleads exemption from subjection unto, yea from giving active obedience unto the Authority, and Commands of the Magistrate, even in things Religious, but merely on the account of [Page 284] his subjection to the Authority of God Heaven; and, where this is so, he is set [...] Liberty by our Author from all contra [...] commands of men. This is Bellarmine's [...] tissimum est, which, as King James obse [...]ved, overthrows all, that he had conten­ed for in his five Books de Justificatione.

THe fifth Chapter is at such variance with it self, and what is elsewhere dictated in the Treatise, that it would re­quire no small labour, to make any tolle­rable composition of things between them. This I shall not engage in, as not being of my present concernment. What seems to tend unto the carrying on of the design of the whole, may be called unto some ac­count. In the beginning of it, he tells us that a belief of the indifferency or rather im­posture of all Religions; is made the most ef­fectual, not to say the most fashionable argu­ment for liberty of Conscience. For my part, I never read, I never heard of this pre­tence [Page 285] or Argument, to be used to that pur­pose. It wants no such defence. Nay the principle it self, seems to me, to be suited directly to oppose and overthrow it. For if there be no such thing in reality as Religion in the World, it is certainly a very foolish thing, to have differences perpetuated amongst men upon the account of Consci­ence, which without a supposition of Re­ligion, is nothing but a vain and empty name: But hence our Author takes occasi­on, to discourse of the use of Religion and Conscience in the Government of Af­fairs in the World; and proves in many words, that Conscience unto God, with a re­gard to future eternal rewards or punishments, is the great ligament of humane Society, the se­curity of Government, the strongest bond of Laws, and only support of Rule, without which every man would first and last, be guided by mere self Interest, which would re­duce all power and Authority to meer force and violence. To this purpose doth he dis­course at large in one section of this Chap­ter; And in another, with no less earnest­ness and Elegancy of Words, and Repe­tition of various Expressions of the same signification, that the use and exercise of conscience, will certainly overthrow all Govern­ment, and fill the world with confusion. In like [Page 286] manner, whereas we have been hither [...] throughly instructed, as I thought, tha [...] men may think what they will in the mat­ters of Religion, and be of what perswai [...] they please, no man can or ought to control [...] them therein; here we are told, that [...] power, nor policy, can keep men peaceable, un­till some perswasions are rooted out of thei [...] minds by severity of Laws and Penalties, pag [...] 145. And whereas heretofore, we wer [...] informed, that men might believe what the [...] would, Princes were concerned only i [...] their outward practice; now are we assu­red, that above all things, it concerns Princes to look to the Doctrines and Articles of men [...] belief, p. 147. But these things, as was be­fore intimated, are not of our concern.

Nor can I find much of that Importance [...] in the third and fourth paragraphs of this Declamatory Invective. It is evident whom he regards and reflects upon, and with what false, unmanly, unchristian re­vilings, he indeavours to traduce them. He would have the world believe, that there is a Generation of men, whose principles of Religion teach them to be proud, peevish, malicious, spightful, envious, turbulent, boy­sterous, seditious, and what ever is evil in the world; when others are all for can­dour, moderation and ingenuity; amongst [Page 287] whom no doubt he reckons himself for one, and gives in this Discourse in evi­dence thereof. But what are these Do­ctrines and Articles of mens belief, which dispose them inevitably to all the villanies that our Author could find names for. A catalogue of them he gives us, pag. 147, 148. Saith he, what if they believe that Prin­ces are but the Executioners of the decrces of the presbitery; and that in case of disobedience to their Spiritual Governours, they may be excommunicated, and by consequence deposed? What if they believe that domi­nion is founded in Grace, and therefore all wicked Kings forfeit their Crowns, and that it is in the power of the People of God to bestow them where they please? And what if others believe that to pursue their successes in Villany and Rebellion is to follow Providence? All the World knows what it is, that hath given him the Advantage of providing a covering, for these monstrous fictions; and an account thereof hath been given else­where. And what now if those intended do not believe these things, nor any one of them? What if they do openly disavow every one of them, as for ought I ever heard or know they do, and as I do my self? What if some of them, are ridicu­lously framed into Articles of faith, from the [Page 288] supposed practices of some individual Per­sons? And what if men be of never so vile [...] opinions about the pursuit of their successes, so they have none to countenance them i [...] any unlawful Enterprises, which I think must go before successes? What if only the Papists be concerned in these Articles of faith; and they only in one of them about the Excommunication and Deposition of Princes, and that only some of them; and not one of those have any concern in them, whom he intends to reproach? I say if these things are so, we need look no far­ther for the principles of that Religion, which hath furnished him with all this candor, moderation and ingenuity, and hath wrought him to such a quiet and peace­able temper, by teaching him that Hu­mility, Charity and Meekness, which here bewray themselves

Let it be granted, as it must and ought to be, that all Principles of the minds of men, pretended to be from Apprehensions of Religion, that are in themselves incon­sistent with any Lawful Government, in any place what ever, ought to be coerced, and restrained. For our Lord Jesus Christ, sending his Gospel to be preach­ed and published in all Nations and King­doms of the World, then, and at all times, [Page 289] under various sorts of Governments, all for the same end of publick Tranquility and Prosperity, did propose nothing in it, but what a Submission and Obedience unto, might be consistent with the Government it self, of what sort soever it were. He came, as they used to sing of old, to give men an Heavenly Kingdom, and not to deprive them, or take from them their earthly tempo­ral dominions. There is therefore nothing more certain, than that there is no princi­ple of the Religion taught by Jesus Christ, which either in it self, or in the practice of it, is inconsistent with any Righteous Go­vernment on the Earth. And if any opi­nions can truly and really be manifested so to be, I will be no Advocate for them, nor their Abettors. But such as these, our Author shall never be able justly to affix on them whom he opposeth; nor the least umbrage of them; if he do but allow the Gospel, and the power of Christ to insti­tute those Spiritual Ordinances, and re­quiring their Administration, which do not, which cannot extend unto any thing wherein a Magistrate as such, hath the least concernment in point of prejudice. For if on a false, or undue practice of them, any thing should be done, that is not purely spiritual, or that being done, should [Page 290] be esteemed to operate upon any of outward Concerns, Relations, Interest [...] Occasions of men, they may be restrain by the power of him who presides o [...] publick good.

But besides these pretences, our A [...]thor I know not how, chargeth also the [...]mours, inclinations and passions of some me [...] as inconsistent with Government, and a [...]wayes disposing men to Phanaticisme and [...]dition; and on occasion thereof falls out to an excess of intemperance in reproa [...]ing them whom he opposet [...], such as [...] have not above once or twice before [...] with the like. And in particular he ra [...] about that Zeal, as he calls it, for the G [...]ry of God, which hath turned whole Natio [...] into Shambles, filled the World with Bute [...]ries and Massacres, and fleshed it self wi [...] slaughters of miriads of mankind. No [...] omitting all other Controversies, I sha [...] undertake to maintain this against any m [...] in the World, that the effects here so tr [...]gically expressed, have been produced [...] the Leal our Author pleads for, in co [...]pelling all unto the same sentiments and pr [...]ctices in Religion, incomparably abo [...] what hath ensued upon any other pretenc [...] in or about Religion, what ever. This neel require, I shall evince with such In [...]stances, [Page 291] from the entring of Christianity into the World to this very day, as will admit of no Competition with all those together, which on any account or pre­tence have produced the like effects. This it was, and is, that hath soaked the Earth with blood, depopulated Nations, ruined Families, Countrys, Kingdoms, and at length made innumerable Christians re­joyce in the yoke of Turkish Tyranny, to free themselves from their perpetual per­secutions, on the account of their dissent from the Worship publickly established in the places of their Nativity. And as for the Humours, Inclinations, and passions of men, when our Author will give such Rules and directions, as whereby the Ma­gistrate may know how to make a true and legal judgement, of who are fit on their account, to live in his Territories, and who are not, I suppose there will not be any contest about them; until then, we may leave them as here displayed and set up by our Author, for every one to cast a cud­gel at them, that hath a mind thereunto.

For to what purpose is it to consider the frequent Occasions he takes, to diseourse about the ill tempers and humours of men, or of enveighing against them for being mo­rose, and ungentile, unsociable, peevish, censo­rious, [Page 292] with many other terms of reproach, that do not at present occur to my memory, nor are doubtless worth the searching af­ter. Suppose he hath the Advantage of a better natural temper, have more sedate affections, a more complyant humour, be more remote from giving or receiving pro­vocations, and have learned the wayes of Courtly deportment, only was pleased to vail them all and every one, in the writing of this Discourse; is it meet that they should be persecuted and destroyed, be esteemed Seditious and I know not what, because they are of a natural temper not so disposed to Affability and sweetness of Conversation as some others are? For my part, I dislike the humour and temper of mind characterised by our Author, it may be as much as he; I am sure, I think, as much as I ought. But to make it a matter of such huge importance, as solemnly to introduce it into a Discourse about Reli­gion, and publick Tranquility, will not it may be, on second thoughts, be esteemed over considerately done. And it is not unlikely, but that our Author seems of as untoward a Composition, and peev­ish an Humour to them whom he reflects upon, as they do to him, and that they satisfie themselves as much in their dispo­sition [Page 293] and deportment, as he doth himself in his.

Sect. 5. pag. 155, 156. He inveighs against the Events that attend the permission of different Sects of Religion in a Common­wealth. And it is not denyed, but that some inconveniencies may ensue thereon. But as himself hath well observed in ano­ther place, we do not in these things en­quire what is absolutely best, and what hath no inconvenience attending it; but what is the best which in our present con­dition we can attain unto; and what in that state answers the Duty that God re­quireth of us. Questionless, it were best that we should be all of one mind in these things of God; and it is no doubt also our Duty on all hands to endeavour so to be. But seeing de facto, this is not so, nor is it in the power of men, when and how they wil to depose those perswasions of their minds, and dictates of their Consciences, from whence it is not so, on the one part or the other; (although in some [Page 294] parts of our differences, some may do so and will not, namely in things acknowledg­ed to be of no necessity antecedent to their imposition; and some would do so and cannot,) It is now enquired, what is the best way to be steer'd in, for the Ac­complishment of the desired end of peace and Tranquility for the future; and main­taining love, quietness and mutual use­fulness at present amongst men. Two ways are proposed to this purpose; the one is to exercise mutual forbearance to each other, whilst we are inevitably under the power of different perswasions in these things, producing no practices that are ei­ther injurious unto private men in their rights, or hurtful unto the State, as to pub­lick Peace; endeavouring in the mean time, by the evidence of Truth, and a con­versation suited unto it, to win upon each other to a consent and Agreement in the things wherein we differ. The other is, by Severe Laws, Penalties, outward force, as Imprisonments, Mulcts, Fines, Banish­ments, or Capital punishments, to compell all men out of hand, to an uniformity of practice, whatever their judgements be to the contrary. Now as the state of things is amongst us, which of these wayes is most suitable to the Law of our Being [Page 295] and Creation, the best Principles of the na­ture of man, and those which have the most evident Resemblance of Divine Per­fections, the Gospel, the Spirit and Letter of it, with the mind of its Author our Lord Jesus Christ, which is most condu­cing to attain the end aimed at, in wayes of a natural and genuine complyance with the things themselves of Religion, Consci­ence, and Divine Worship, is left unto the judgement of God, and all good men.

In the mean time, if men will make De­clamations upon their own surmises, jea­lousies, and suspitions of things which are either so indeed, that is really surmized, or pretended to be so for some private interests or advantages of their own, which no man can answer or remove; if they may fancy at their pleasure Ghosts, Gob­lins, Fiends, walking Sprights, Seditions, Drums, Trumpets, Armies, Bears, and Tigers; Every difference in Religion, be it never so small, be the agreement amongst them that differ, never so great, be it the visible, known, open interest of them that dissent from what is established, to live quietly and peaceably, and to promote the good of the Commonwealth wherein they live; do they profess that it is their duty, their Principle, their Faith, and Doctrine, to [Page 296] obey constantly their Rulers and Gover­nours in all things, not contrary to the mind of God, and pretend no such com­mands of his, as should interfere in the least with their power in order to publick tranquility; do they offer all the security of their Adherence to such declared Prin­ciples, as mankind is necessitated to be contented and satisfied with, in things of their highest concernment; do they avow an especial sense of the Obligation that is put upon them by their Rulers, when they are protected in peace; have they no concernment in any such Political Socie­ties, Combinations, Interests, as might alone give countenance unto any such disturbance; all is one, every different Opinion is Press-money, and every Sect is an Army, although they be all and every one of them Protestants, of whom alone we do discourse. Other answer therefore I shall not return unto this part of our Au­thors arguing, than what he gave of old.

Only, I may add, that sundry of the In­stances our Author makes use of, are false, and unduly alledged. For what is here charged on differences in and about Reli­gion, in reference unto publick Tranqui­lity, might have been, yea and was charged on Christian Religion for three hundred years, and is so by many still on Protestan­cy as such; and that it were a very easie and facile task, to set out the pernicious evills of a compelled Agreement in the practice of Religion, and those not fancied only or feigned, but such as do follow it, have followed it, and will follow it in the world.

An enquiry in this Invective, tending to evince its reasonableness is offered, in pag. 158. namely, Where there are divided Interests in Religion in the same Kingdom, it is asked how shall the Prince behave himself towards them. The answer thereunto is not I confess easie, because it is not easie to be understood, what is intended by di­vided Interests in Religion. We will there­fore lay that aside, and consider what re­ally is amongst us, or may be according to [Page 298] what we understand by these expressions. Suppose then, that in the same profession of Protestant Religion, some different way and Observances in the outward Worship of God should be allowed, and the Per­sons concerned herein have no other, can­not be proved to have any other interest with respect unto Religion, but to fear God and honour the King; it is a very easie thing to return an Answer to this enquiry. For not entring into the profound Politi­cal Speculation of our Author, about bal­lancing of Parties, or siding with this or that Party, where the differences themselves constitute no distinct Parties, in reference to Civil Government and publick Tran­quility; let the Prince openly avow by the declaration of his judgement, his con­stant practice, his establishing of Legal Rights, disposing of publick favours in places and preferments, that way of Reli­gion which himself owns and approves; and let him indulge and protect others of the same Religion, for the substance of it with what himself professeth, in the quiet and peaceable exercise of their Consci­ences in the Worship of God, keeping all Dissenters within the bounds allotted to them, that none transgress them to the invasion of the Rights of others; and he [Page 299] may have both the Reality, and Glory of Religion, Righteousness, Justice, and all other Royal Vertues which will render him like to him whose Vice-gerent he is; and will undoubtedly reap the blessed fruits of them, in the industry, peaceableness, and Loyalty of all his Subjects whatever.

There are sundry things in the close of this Chapter objected against such a course of proceedure; but those such, as are all of them resolved into a supposition, that they who in any place or part of the world, desire Liberty of Conscience for the Worship of God, have indeed no Consci­ence at all. For it is thereon supposed without further evidence, that they will thence fall into all wicked and unconsci­entious practices. I shall make, as I said, no reply to such surmises. Christianity suf­fered under them for many Ages. Prote­stancy hath done so in sundry places for many years. And those who now may do so, must as they did, bear the effects of them as well as they are able. Only I shall say, First, Whatever is of real incon­venience in this pretension, on the suppo­sition of Liberty of Conscience, is no way removed by taking away all different practices, unless ye could also obliterate all different perswasions out of the minds [Page 300] of men; which although in one place, tells us ought to be done by severe pe [...] ­ties, yet in another, he acknowledgeth th [...] the Magistrate hath no cognizance of [...] such things; who yet alone is the inflicts [...] of all penalties. Nay where different A [...] prehensions are, the absolute prohibition of different answerable practices, doth thousand times more dispose the minds [...] men to unquietness, than where they [...] allowed both together, as hath been be­fore declared. And he that can oblitera [...] out of, and take away all different Appre­hensions and Perswasions about the Wor­ship of God, from the minds and Consci­ences of men, bringing them to center [...] the same thoughts and judgements absolute­ly, in all particulars about them,

He is God and not Man.

Secondly, It is granted, that the Magi­strate may, and ought to restrain all Prin­ciples and outward practices, that have any natural tendency unto the disturbance of the peace; which being granted, and all obligations upon dissenting Parties being [Page 301] alone put upon them, by the Supream Le­gislative and Executive power of the King­doms and Nations of the world, publick Tranquility is, and will be as well secured on that respect, as such things are capa­ble of security in this world. All the longsome Discourse therefore which here ensues, wherein all the evils that have been in this Nation, are charged on Liber­ty of Conscie [...]ce, from whence not one of them did proceed, seeing there was no such thing granted, until upon other Civil and Political accounts, the Flood-Gates were set open unto the following Cala­mities and Confusions, is of no use, nor unto any purpose at all. For until it can be demonstratively proved, that those who do actually suffer, and are freely wil­ling so to do, (as far as the foregoing, otherwise lawful advantages, open unto them as well as others, may be so called) and resolved to undergo what may farther to their detriment, yea to their ruine be inflicted on them, to preserve their Con­sciences entire unto some commands of God, have no respect unto others of as great evidence and light to be his, (as are those which concern their Obedience unto Magistrates, compared with those which they avow about the Worship of God;) [Page 302] and that private men, uninterested in, [...] uncapable of any pretence unto Publi [...] Authority of any sort, do alwayes this themselves warranted to do such things [...] others have done, pleading Right and Au­thority for their warranty; and [...] be made manifest also, that they have [...] other or greater Interest, than to enjoy the particular conditions and Estates in peace and to exercise themselves in the Worship of God according as they apprehend [...] mind to be, these Declamations are altoge­ther vain, and as to any solid wor [...] lighter than a Feather.

And I could desire that if these Contro­versies must be farther debated, that [...] Author would omit the pursuit of the things, which are really [...] and according to the antient custom [...]tend [...], without Rhetori [...] Prefaces, or unreasonable Passions, unto the merit of the Cause. To this purpose, [...] suppose it might not be amiss for him, consider a few Sheets of Paper lately pub­lished, under the Title of A Case stated, & wherein he will find the main Controversy reduced to its proper heads, and a mode Provocation unto an Answer to what proposed about it.

THE sixth Chapter in this Discourse, which is the last that at the present I shall call to any account, (as being now utterly wearied with the frequent occur­rence of the same things in various dresses;) is designed to the confutation of a Princi­ple, which is termed the Foundation of all Puritanism, and that wherein the Mysterie of it consisteth. Now this is, that nothing ought to be established in the Worship of God, but what is authorised by some Precept or Example in the Word of God, which is the compleat and adequate Rule of Worship. Be it so, that this Principle is by some allowed, yea contend­ed for. It will not be easie to affix a guilt upon them, on the account of its being so; For, lay aside prejudics, corrupt interests, and passions, and I am perswaded that at the first view, it will not seem to be for­raign, unto what is in an hundred places declared and taught in the Scripture. And certainly a man must be Master of extra­ordinary [Page 304] projections, who can foresee [...] the evil, confusion and desolation in the World, which our Author hath found out, as inevitable consequents of its admi [...] tance. It hath, I confess, been former disputed with colourable Arguments, Pr [...] tences and Instances, on the one side and the other; and variously stated among [...] Learn'd men, by, and on various distinction [...] and with diverse limitations. But the man­ner of our Author is, that whatever is con­trary to his Apprehensions, must present [...] overthrow all Government, and bring in [...] confusion into the World. Such huge weight hath he wonted himself to lay o [...] the smallest different conceptions of the minds of men, where his own are not [...] throned. Particularly it is contended that there can be no Peace in any Churche [...] or States, whilest this Principle is admit­ted: when it is easily demonstrable, tha [...] without the admittance of it, as to its sub­stance and principal End, all peace and agreement among Churches are utterly im­possible. The like also may be said of States, which indeed are not at all con­cerned in it, any farther, than as it is a prin­cipal means of their Peace and Security, where it is embraced; and that which would reduce Rulers to a Stability of [Page 305] mind in these things, after they have been tossed up and down with the various sug­gestions of men, striving every one to ex­alt their own Imaginations. But seeing it is pretended and granted to be of so much importance, I shall, without much regard to the Exclamations of this Author, and the reproachful contemptuous expressions, which without stint or measure he poures out upon the Assertors of it, consider both what is the concern of his present Adver­saries in it, and what is to be thought of the Principle it self; so submiting the whole to the judgement of the candid Rea­der. Only I must add one thing to the Position, without which it is not maintain­ed by any of those, with whom he hath to do; which may deliver him from com­bating the air in his next Assault of it; and this is, That nothing ought to be esta­blished in the Worship of God, as a part of that Worship, or made constantly necessa­ry in its Observance, without the warranty before-mentioned; for this is expresly contended for by them, who maintain it; and who reject nothing upon the Autho­rity of it, but what they can prove to be a pretended part of Religious Worship as such. And, as thus laid down, I shall give some further account both of the Principle [Page 306] it self, and of the interest of the Non-Con­formists in it; because both it and they are together here reproached.

What then I say is the true sense and im­portance of that which our Author design [...] to oppose, according to the mind of them who assert it; how impotent his attempts against it are for its removal, shall briefly▪ be declared. In the mean time I cannot but, in the first place, tell him, that if by any means this Principle truly stated, as to the Expression wherein it is before laid down, and the formal Terms whereof it consisteth, should be shaken, or rendred dubious, yet that the way will not be much the plainer, or clearer, for the Intro­duction of his pretensions. There are yet other general maxims, which Non-Confor­mists adhere unto, and suppose not justly questionable, which they can firmly stand and build upon in the management of their Plea, as to all differences between him and them. And because, it may be, he is unac­quainted with them, I shall reckon over some of them for his Information. And they are these that follow.

1. That whatever the Scripture hath in­deed prescribed, and appointed to be done, and observed in the Worship or God, and the government of the Church, that is in­deed [Page 307] to be done and observed. This, they suppose, will not be opposed: at least they do not yet know, notwithstanding any thing spoken or disputed in this Discourse, any pretences, on which it may honestly so be. It is also, as I think, secured, Matth. 28. 20.

2. That nothing in Conjunction with, nothing as an Addition or Supplement unto what is so appointed, ought to be admit­ted, if it be contrary either to the Gene­ral Rules, or particular preceptive Instru­ctions of the Scripture. And this also, I suppose, will be granted: and if it be not freely, some are ready by Arguments to ex­tort the confession of it from them that shall deny it.

3. That nothing ought to be joyned with, or added unto, what in the Scripture is pre­scribed and appointed in these things, with­out some Cogent Reason, making such Conjunction: or Addition necessary. Of what necessity may accrue unto the obser­vation of such things, by their prescripti­on, we do not now dispute: but at present only desire to see the necessity of: their prescription. And this can be nothing, but some defect in Substance or Circum­stance, matter or manner, kind or form, in the Institutions mentioned in the Scri­pture, [Page 308] as to their proper ends. Now whe [...] this is discovered, I will not, for my par [...] much dispute by whom the supplement to be made. In the mean time I do judg [...] it reasonable, that there be some previou [...] Reasons assigned unto any Additional pre­scriptions in the Worship of God unto what is revealed in the Scripture, rendring the matter of those prescriptions antece­dently necessary and reasonable.

4. That if any thing or things in this kind, shall be found necessary, to be added and prescribed, then that and those alone be so, which are most consonant unto the general Rules of the Scripture, given as for our Guidance in the Worship of God, and the nature of those Institutions them­selves, wherewith they are conjoyned, or whereunto they are added. And this also I suppose to be a reasonable Request, and such as will be granted by all men, who dare not advance their own Wills and Wisdom above or against the Will and Wisdom of God.

5. Now if, as was said, the general Prin­ciple before-mentioned, should by any means be duly removed, or could be so; if intangled or rendred dubious; yet as far as I can learn, the Non-Conformists will be very far from supposing the matters in con­test [Page 309] between them and their Adversaries, to be concluded. But as they look upon their concernments to be absolutely se­cured in the Principles now mentioned, all which they know to be true, and hope to be unquestionable: so the truth is, there is by this Author very small occasion administred unto any thoughts of quitting the former more general Thesis as rightly stated; but rather, if his Ability be a com­petent measure of the merit of his cause, there is a strong confirmation given unto it in the minds of considering men, from the Impotency and Succeslesness of the at­tempt made upon it. And that this may appear to the indifferent Readers Satis­faction, I shall so far divert in this place from the pursuit of my first design, as to State the Principle aright, and briefly to call the present Opposition of it, unto a new account.

The summ in general, of what this Au­thor opposeth with so much clamour is, That Divine Revelation is the sole Rule of Di­vine Religious Worship; an Assertion, that in its latitude of expression, hath been ac­knowledged in, and by, all Nations and People. The very Heathen admitted it of old, as shall be manifested, if need re­quire, by instances sufficient. For though they framed many Gods in their foolish [Page 310] darkened imaginations, yet they thought, that every one of them would be Wor­shipped according to his own mind, dire­ction and prescription. So did, and, think do, Christians generally believe: on­ly some have a mind to pare this generally avowed Principle, to curb it, and order it so by distinctions and restrictions, that it may serve their turn, and consist with their interest. For an opposition unto it na­kedly, directly and expresly, few have had the confidence yet to make. And the Non-Conformists need not go one step far­ther, in the expression of their Judgements and Principles in this matter. For who shall compell them to take their Adversa­ries distinctions, (which have been in­vented and used by the most Learned of them) of, substantial and accidental; pro­per and reductive; primitive and accessary; direct and consequential; intrinsick and cir­cumstantial Worship, and the like, for the most part unintelligible terms in their ap­plication, into the state of the question? If men have a mind, let them oppose this Thesis as laid down, if not, let them let it alone: and they, who shall undertake the confirmation of it, will, no doubt, carry it through the briets of those unscriptural distinctions. And that this Author may [Page 311] be the better instructed in his future work, I shall give him a little farther account of the terms of the Assertion laid down.

Revelation is either [...] or [...] and containeth every discovery or decla­ration, that God hath made of himself, or of his mind and will, unto men. Thus it is comprehensive of that concreated Light, which is in all men, concerning him and his Will. For although we say, that this is natural; and is commonly contra-distin­guished to Revelation properly so called, which for perspicuity sake we call Revela­tion supernatural; yet whereas it doth not so necessarily accompany humane na­ture, but that it may be separated from it; not is it educed out of our natural faculties by their own native or primigenial Ver­tue; but is, or was distinctly implanted in them by God himself; I place it under the general head of Revelation. Hence what­ever is certainly from God, by the Light of Nature and Instinct thereof declared so to be, is no less a certain Rule of Worship and Obedience, so far forth as it is from h [...]m, and concerneth those things, than any thing that comes from him by express vo­cal Revelation. And this casts out of con­sideration a vain exception, wherewith some men please themselves; as though the [Page 312] men of this Opinion, denyed the Admit­tance of what is from God, and by the Light of Nature discovered to be his mind and will. Let them once prove any thing in contest between them and their Adversaries to be required, prescribed, exacted or made necessary by the Light of Nature, as the Will of God revealed there­in, and I will assure them, that as to my concern, there shall be an end of all diffe­rence about it. But yet th [...] I may adde a little farther light into the sense of the Non-Conformists in this matter; I say,

1. That this inbred Light of Reason guides unto nothing at all in or about the Worship of God, but what is more fully, clearly and directly taught and declared in the Scripture. And this may easily be evinced, as from the untoward mixture of darkness and Corruption, that is befallen our primigenial i [...]bred Principles of Light and Wisdom, by the entrance of sin; so also from the end of the Scripture it self; which was to restore that knowledge of God and his mind, which was lost by sin; and which might be as useful to man in his lapsed condition, as the other was in his pure and uncorrupted estate. At present therefore, I shall leave this Assertion, in expectation of some instance, in matters [Page 313] great or small, to the contrary, before I suppose it be obnoxious to question or dispute.

2. As there can be no Opposition, nor contradiction, between the Light of Na­ture, and inspired Vocal or Scriptural Re­velation, because they are both from God: So if in any instance, there should appear any such thing unto us, neither Faith nor Rea­son can rest in that which is pretended to be natural Light, but must betake them­selves for their resolution unto express Revelation. And the reason hereof is evi­dent; because nothing is natural light, but what is common to all men; and where it is denyed, it is frustrated as to its ruling Efficacy. Again, it is mixed, as we said before; and it is not every mans work to separate the Chaffe from the Wheat; or what God hath implanted in the mind of man when he made him upright, and what is since soaked into the Principles of his Na­ture, from his own inventions. But this case may possibly very rarely fall out, and so shall not much be insisted on.

3. Our enquiry in our present contest, is solely about Instituted Worship, which we believe to depend on supernatural Reve­lation; the light of Nature can no way relieve or guide us in it or about it, [Page 314] because it refers universally to things above, and beyond that light: but only with reference unto those Moral, Natural Circumstances, which appertain unto those actings or actions of men, whereby it is performed; which we willingly submit un­to its guidance and direction.

Again, Vocal Revelation hath come under two considerations: First, As it was occa­sional. Secondly, As it became stated.

First, As it was occasional. For a long time God was pleased to guide his Church in many concerns of his Worship, by fresh occasional Revelations; even from the giving of the first promise unto Adam, un­to the solemn giving of the Law by Moses. For although men had in process of time many stated Revelations, that were preserved by Tradition among them; as the first Promise; the Institution of Sacrifices, and the like: yet as to sundry emergencies of his Worship, and parts of it, God guided them by new Occasional Revelations. Now those Revelations being not recorded in the Scripture, as being only for present or emergent use; we have no way to know them, but by what those, to whom God was pleased so to reveal himself, did pra­ctise; and which, on good testimony found acceptance with him. Whatever they so [Page 315] did, they had especial Warranty from God for; which is the case of the great Insti­tution of Sacrifices it self. It is a sufficient Argument that they were Divinely insti­tuted, because they were graciously ac­cepted.

Secondly, Vocal Revelation as the Rule of Worship, became stated and invariable, in and by the giving and writing of the Law. From thence, with the allowances before mentioned, we confine it to the Scripture, and so unto all succeeding generations. I confess many of our company, who kept to us hitherto in granting Divine Reve­lation to be the sole Principle and Rule of Religious Worship, now leave us, and be­take themselves to paths of their own. The Postmisnicall Jews, after many attempts made that way by their Predecessors, both before and after the Conversation of our Lord Christ in the flesh, at length took up a resolution, that all obligatory Divine Revelation was not contained in the Scri­pture; but was partly preserved by Orall Tradition. For although they added a multitude of Observances, unto what were prescribed unto their Fathers by Moses: yet they would never plainly forego that Principle, nor do to this day; that Divine Revelation is the Rule of Divine Worship. [Page 316] Wherefore to secure their Principle and practice, and to reconcile them together, (which are indeed at an unspeakable vari­ance) they have fancied their Oral Law; which they assert to be of no less certain and Divine Original, than the Law that is written. On this pretence they plead, that they keep themselves unto the fore-menti­oned Principle, under the Superstition of a multitude of self-invented observances. The Papists also here leave us; but still with a semblance of adhering to that Prin­ciple, which carryes so great and uncon­trollable an evidence with it, as that there are very few as was said, who have hitherto risen up in a direct and open opposition unto it. For whereas they have advanced a double Principle for the Rule of Religious Worship, besides the Scri­pture; namely Tradition, and the present Determinations of their Church, from thence educed; they assert the first to be Divine or Apostolical, which is all one; and the latter to be accompanyed with Infallibility, which is the formal Reason of our adherence and submission unto Divine Revelations. So that they still adhere in general unto the fore-mentioned Princi­ple; however they have debauched it by their advancement of those other Guides. [Page 317] But herein also, we must do them right; that they do not absolutely turn loose those two rude creatures of their own; Tradi­tions, and present Church determinations, up­on the whole face of Religion, to act therein at their pleasure; but they se­cure them from whatever is determined in the written word; affirming them to take place only in those things, that are not contrary to the Word, or not condemned in it. For in such, they con [...]ess, they ought not, nor can take place. Which I doubt whether our Author will allow of or no, in reference to the power by him as­serted.

By Religious Worship, in the Thesis above, we understand, as was said before, instituted Worship only, and not that which is purely Moral and Natural; which, in many instances of it, hath a great coinci­dence with the light of Nature, as was before discoursed.

We understand also the Solemn or stated Worship of the Church of God. That Wor­ship, I say, which is solemn and stated, for the Church, the whole Church, at all times and seasons, according to the rules of his appointment, is that which we en­quire after. Hence in this matter, we have no concernment in the fact of this or [Page 318] that particular person, which might be [...]casionally influenced by necessity; as vids eating of the Shewbread was; [...] which, how far it may excuse or just [...] the persons that act thereon, or regu [...] their actions, directly, I know not, nor any way engaged to enquire.

This is the state of our Question in ha [...] the mind of the Assertion, which is h [...] so hideously disguised, and represent in its pretended consequences. Neit [...] do I think there is any thing needful f [...]ther to be added unto it. But yet for [...] clearing of it from mistakes, somethi [...] may be discoursed which relates unto We say then;

First, That there are sundry things be used in, about, and with those Actio [...] whereby the Worship of God is perfor [...]ed, which yet are not Sacred, nor do [...] long unto the Worship of God as su [...] though that Worship cannot be perform without them. The very Breath that [...] breathe, and the light whereby they s [...] are necessary to them in the Worship [...] God; and yet are not made Sacred [...] Religious thereby. Constantine said of o [...] that he was a Bishop, but without the Churc [...] not a Sacred Officer, but one that too [...] care, and had a supervisorship of thir [...] [Page 319] [...]ecessarily belonging to the performance of Gods Worship, yet no Parts or Adjuncts [...] it as such. For it was all still without. Now all those things in or about the Wor­ship of God, that belonged unto Constan­tines Episcopacy, that is the ordering and disposal of things without the Church, but about it; without Worship, but about it; we acknowledge to be left unto common prudence, guided by the general Rules of Scripture, by which the Church is to walk and compose its actings. And this wholly supersedes the Discourse of our Author concerning the great variety of circum­stances, wherewith all humane actions are attended. For in one word, all such cir­cumstances as necessarily▪ attend humane actions as such, neither are Sacred, nor can be made so without an express Institution of God, and are, disposable by humane Authority. So that the long contest of our Author on that Head, is altogether vain. So then,

Secondly, By all the concernments of Religious Worship, which any affirm, that they must be directed by Divine Re­velation, or regulated by the Scripture; they intend all that is Religious, or what­ever belongs to the Worship of God, as it is Divine Worship: and not what be­longs [Page 320] unto the actions, wherein and when by it is performed, as they are actions.

Thirdly, That when any part of Worship is instituted in special, and general Rule are given for the practice of it hic [...] nunc: there the Warranty is sufficient fo [...] its practice at its due seasons; and for those seasons the nature of the thing it self, with what it hath respect unto, and the ligh [...] of the general Scripture Rules, will give them an acceptable determination.

And these few Observations will abun­dantly manifest, the impertinency of those who think it incumbent on any, by ver­tue of the Principle before laid down, to produce express Warranty in words of Scripture, for every Circumstance that doth attend and belong unto the Actions, where­by the Worship of God is performed: which as they require not; so no such thing is included in the Principle as duly stated. For particular circumstances, that have respect to good order, decency, and external regulation of Divine Worship, they are all of them either circumstances of the Actions themselves, whereby Di­vine Worship is performed and exercised▪ and so in general they are natural and ne­cessary; which in particular, or actu exer­cito, depend on Moral Prudence; or Reli­gious [Page 321] Rites themselves, added in and to the whole, or any parts of Divine Service, which alone in this question come under enquiry.

I know there are usually sundry Exce­ptions put into this Thesis, as before stated and asserted: and instances to the contra­ry are pretended; some whereof are touch­ed upon by our Author, pag. 181. which are not now particularly, and at large to be considered. But yet because I am, beyond expectation, engaged in the Explication of this Principle, I shall set it so far forth right and straight unto further examination, as to give in such general Observations, as, being consistent with it, and explanatory of it, will serve to obviate the most of the exceptions that are laid against it. As,

1. Where ever in the Scripture we meet with any Religious duty, that had a pre­ceding Institution, although we find not expresly a consequent Approbation, we take it for granted that it was approved; and so on the contrary, where an Appro­bation appears, and Institution is con­cealed.

2. The Question being only about Re­ligious Duties, or things pertaining to, or required in or about the Worship of God; [Page 322] no exception against the general thesis ca [...] take place, but such as consists in thing [...] directly of that nature. Instances in and about things civil, and belonging meerly to humane conversation, or things natu­ral, as signs and memorials one of another are in this matter of no consideration.

3. Things extraordinary in their per­formance, and which, for ought we know may have been so in their warranty [...] rule, have no place in our debate. Fo [...] we are inquiring only after such things as may warrant a suitable practice in us [...] without any further Authority, which is the end, for which instances against this principle are produced; this actions extr [...] ­ordinary will not do.

4. Singular and occasional Actions which may be variously influenced and re­gulated by present circumstances, are n [...] Rule to guide the ordinary stated Wor­ship of the Church. Davids eating of th [...] shew-bread, wherein yet he was justifie [...] because of his hunger and necessity, was not to be drawn into Example of giving the shew-bread promiscuously to the peo­ple. And sundry instances to the same pur­pose are given by our Saviour himself.

5. There is nothing of any dangerous or had consequence in this whole controver­sie, [Page 323] but what lyes in the imposition on mens practices of the Observation of uncom­manded Rites, making them necessary un­to them in their observation. The things themselves are said in their own nature, antecedent to their injunction for practice, to be indifferent, and indifferent as unto practice. What hurt would it be to leave them so? They cannot, say some, be omit­ted for such and such Reasons. Are there then Reasons: for their observation besides their Injuction, and such as on the ac­count whereof they are injoyned? Then are they indeed necessary in some degree before their Injunction. For all Reason for them must be taken from themselves. And things wholly indifferent have nothing in themselves one more than another, why one should be taken, and another left. For if one have the advantage of another in the Reasons for its practice, it is no more indifferent: at least it is not comparative­ly so. Granting therefore, things injoyn­ed to be antecedently to their injunction, equally indifferent in their own nature, with all other things of the same or the like kind, which yet are rejected or not injoyned; and then to give reasons taken from themselves, their decency, their con­ducingness to edification, their tendency [Page 324] to the increase of devotion, their signifi­cancy of this or that; is to speak daggers and contradictions; and to say, a thing is indifferent before the injuction of its pra­ctice; but yet if we had thought so, we would never have enjoyned it; seeing we do so upon reasons. And without doubt this making necessary the practice of things in the worship of God, proclaimed to be indifferent in themselves, and no way cal­led for by any antecedent Reason, is an act of power.

6. Where things are instituted of God, and he himself makes an Alteration in, or of his own Institutions, those Institutions may be lawfully practised and observed, untill the mind of God for their Alterati­on and Abolition be sufficiently revealed, proposed, and con [...]irmed unto them that are concerned in them. For as the making of a Law doth not oblige, untill, and without the promulgation of it, so as that any should offend in not yielding obedi­ence unto it; so upon the Abrogation of a Law, Obedience may be conscienciously and without sin yielded unto that Law, untill the Abrogation, by what act soever it was made, be notified and confirmed. An instance hereof we have in the obser­vation of Mosaical Rites, in the forbearance [Page 325] of God, after the Law of their instituti­on was enervated, and the Obligation of it unto obedience really dissolved; at least the foundation of it laid; for the actual dissolution of it depended on the declara­tion of the fact, wherein it was founded.

7. There may be a coincidence of things performed by sundry persons, at the same time and in the same place; whereof some may have respect unto Religious Worishp directly, and so belong unto it; and others only occasionally, and so not at all belong thereunto. As if when the Athenians had been worshipping of their Altars, St. Paul had come, and reading the inscription of one of them, and thence taking occasion and advantage to preach the unknown God unto them; their Act was a part of Reli­gious Veneration, his presence and obser­vation of them, and laying hold of that oc­casion for his own purpose, was not so.

8. Many things, which are meer natu­ral Circumstances, requisite unto the per­formance of all Actions in communities whatever, and so to be ordered by pru­dence according unto general rules of the word of God, may seem to be Adjuncts of Worship, unless they are followed to their Original, which will discover them to be of another nature.

[Page 326] 9. Civil usages and customes observed [...] a religious manner, as they are all to be by them that believe, and directed by them un­to moral ends, may have a shew and appear­ance of Religious Worship; and so, ac­cording to the principle before stated, re­quire express institution. But although they belong unto our living unto God is general; as do all things that we do, see­ing whether we eat or drink, we are to do a [...] to the glory of God; and therefore are to be done in faith; yet they are or may be no part of instituted worship, but such Acti­ons of life as in our whole course, we are to regulate by the rules of the Scripture, so farr as they afford us guidance therein.

10. Many observances in and about the Worship of God, are recorded in the Scrip­ture, without especial reflecting any blame or crime on them, by whom they were performed; (as many great sins are histo­rically only related, and left to be judged by the Rule of the world in other places, without the least remark of displeasure on the persons guilty of them,) and that by such whose Persons were accepted of God; yea it may be in that very service, where­in less or more they failed in their obser­vation, God being merciful to them [Page 327] though not in all things prepared accord­ing to the prepartion of the sanctuary; and yet the things themselves not to be ap­proved nor justified, but condemned of God. Such was the fact of Judas Maccabe­us in his offering sacrifices for the sin of them that were dead; adn that of institu­ting an Aniversary feast in commemorati­on of the dedication of the Altar.

This little search have I made into this great mystery, as it is called, of Puritanism, after which so mighty an outcry is raised by this Author; And if it might be here further pursued, it would as stated by us in these general Rules and Explications, be fully manifested to be a principle in gene­ral admitted, untill of late, by all sorts of men: Some few only having been forced sometimes to corrupt it for the security of some especial interest of their own. And it were an easie thing to confirm this Asser­tion by the testimonies of the most learned Protestant writers, that have served the Church in the last ages. But I know how with many amongst us they are regarded; and that the citation of some of the most reverend names among them, is not un­likely to prejudice and disadvantage the cause, wherein their witness is produced. I shall not therefore expose them to the [Page 328] contempt of those, now they are dead, who would have been unwilling to have entred the lists with them in any kind of learning, when they were alive. There is, in my apprehension, the substance of this Assertion still retained among the Papists. Bellarmine himself layes it down as the foundtion of all his controversies; and indeavours to prove, Propheticos & Aposto­licos libros verum esse verbum Dei, & certam & stabilem regulam fidei. De verbo Dei. lib. 1. cap. 1. That the Prophetical and Aposto­iclal books, [...]are the true word of God, a certain and stable rule of faith, wil go a great way in this matter. For all our Obedience in the Worship of God is the obedience of faith: and if the scripture be the Rule of Faith, our faith is not in any of its concerns, to be extended beyond it; nor more than the thing regulated is to be beyond the Rule.

Neither is this opinion of so late a date, as our Author and others would perswade their ceredulous followers. The full sense of it was spoken out roudly of old. So speaks the great Constantine (that an Em­perour may lead the way) in his Oration to the renowned Fathers assembled at Nice. [...]. [Page 329] i. e. The Evangelical and Apostoli­cal Books, and the Oracles of the Ancient Pro­phets, do plainly instruct us, what we are to think of Divine things. Laying aside there­fore all hostile discord, let us resolve the things brought into Question, by the Testimonies of the writings given by divine inspiration. We have here the full substance of what is plead­ed for; and might the Advice of this Noble Emperour be admitted, we should have a readier way to expedite all our present Differences, than as yet seems to be pro­vided for us. The great Basil speaks yet more expresly than Constantine the great lib. de confes. fid. [...]. i. e. It hath the manifest guilt of infidelity and pride, to reject any thing that is written, or to add or introduce any thing that is not written; which is the summ of all that in this matter is contend­ed for. To the same purpose he discour­seth Epist. 80. ad Eustath: where moreover he rejects all pretences of Customs and usages of any sorts of men, and will have all differences to be brought for their Determination to the Scripture. Christ­stome in his Homily on Psalm 95. speaks the same sense, saith he; [...]. [Page 330] Who is it that promiseth these things? Paul. For we are not to say any thing without Testimo­ny, nor upon our meer Reasonings. For if any thing be spoken without Scripture (Testi­mony) the mind of the hearers fluctuates, now assenting, anon hesitating, sometimes re­jecting what is spoken as frivolous, sometimes receiving it as probable. But where the Testi­monies of the Divine Voice comes forth from the Scripture, it confirmeth the word of the Speaker, and the mind of the Hearer. It is even so; whilest things relating to Religion and the Worship of God, are debated and dis­puted by the reasonings of men, or on any other principles besides the express Authority of the Scriptures, no certainty or full perswasion of mind can be attain­ed about them. Men under such actings are as Lucian in his Menippus, says He was be­tween the Disputations of the Philoso­phers; sometimes he nodded one way, some­times another, and seemed to give his assent backwards and forwards to express contra­diction. [Page 331] It is in the Testimony of the Scri­pture alone, about the things of God, that the Consciences of those that fear him can acquiesce and find satisfaction. The same Author as in many other places, so in his 13 Homily on the 2 Epist. to the Corinth. expresly sends us to the Scripture to en­quire after all things, as that which is the exact Canon, ballance, and Rule of Religion. [...]. Among the Latines Tertullian is express to the same purpose. In his Book against Hermo­genes, Adoro (said he) plenitudinem Scrip­turum quae mihi factorem manifestat & facta— again, Scriptum esse hoc doceat Her­mogenis officina, aut timeat, rae illud, ad­jicientibus, aut detrahentibus destinatum. I Adore the fulness of the Scripture;—And let Hermogenes prove what he saith, to be written, or fear the Woe denounced against them, who add to, or take from, the Word. And again in his Book de Carne Christi; Non recipio quod extra Scriptuream de tuo infers. I do not receive, what you bring of your own with­out Scripture. So also in his Book, de Praescriptionibus. Nobis nihil ex nostro ar­bitrio indulgere licet; sed nec eligere quod aliquis de arbitrio suo induxerit Apostoles Domini habemus authores, qui nec ipsi quic­quam ex suo arbitrio quod inducerent elege­runt, [Page 332] sed acceptam a Christo disciplain ani, deliter Nationibus assignaverunt. It is [...] lawful for us (in these things) to ind [...] unto our own choice; nor to choose what [...] one brings in of his choosing. We have Apostles of our Lord for our Examp [...] who brought in nothing of their own min [...] or choice; But having received the Discipl [...] (of Christian Religion) from Chrsit, t [...] faithfully communicated it to the Nation. [...] Hierome is plain to the same purpose i [...] sundry places. So Comment. in 23 Matt [...] Quod de Scripturis authoritatem non habet, ea [...]dem facilitate contemnitur, qua probatur. Th [...] which hath not Authority from the Scripture [...] is as easily despised as asserted. Comm. i [...] Hagg. cap. 1. Sed & alia quae abs (que) autho [...]ritate & testimoniis scripturarum, quasi tra­ditione Apostolica sponte reperiunt at (que) con­fingunt, percutit gladius Dei; But those other things which without Authority or Testimony of the Scriptures, they find out or faign of their own accord, as of Apostolical. Traditi­on; the sword of God smites through. It were easie to produce twenty other Testi­monies out of the Ancient Writers of the church, giving sufficient countenance to the Assertion contended about. What account our Author gives of this Princi­ple is now, very briefly, to be considered. [Page 333] First therefore, pag. 174, 175. he re­ [...]es it as a pretence wild and humoursome, [...]ich men must be absurd if they believe; [...] impudent if they do not; seeing it hath [...]t the least shaddow or foundation either [...]m Scripture or Reason: though it be ex­ [...]esly asserted either in its own terms, or [...]onfirmed by direct deductions, in and [...]om above forty places of Scripture. [...]nd so much for that part of the as­ [...]ault.

The next chargeth it with infinite follies [...]nd mischiefs in those which allow it. And 'tis said, that there can never be an end of alterations and disturbances in the Church, whilest it is maintained. The contrary whereof is true, confirmed by Experi­ence and Evidence of the thing it self. The admittance of it would put an End to all disturbances. For let any man judge, whether, if there be matters in difference, as in all these things there are and ever were; the bringing them to an issue and a setled stability, be not likelier to be ef­fected by all mean consenting unto one common Rule, whereby they may be tryed and examined, than that every party should be left at liberty, to indulge to their own▪ Affections and Imaginations about them. And yet we are told, p. 178. [Page 334] that all the pious Villanies, that ever have disturb­ed the Christian World, have sheltered themselves in this grand Maxime; that Jesus Christ is the only Law-maker to his Church. I confess, I could heartily desire, that such expressions might be forborn. For let what pre­tence men please be given to them, and co­lour put upon them; they are full of scandal to Christian Religion. The Mixime it self, here traduced, is as true as any part of the Gospel. And it cannot be pretended, that it is not the Maxime it self, but the abuse of it, (as all the Principles of the Gospel, through the Blindness and Lusts of men, have been abused;) that is reflected on: seeing the design of the whole Discourse is to evert the Maxime it self. Now whatever Ap­prehensions our Author may have of his own Abilities, I am satisfied, that they are no way competent to disprove this Prin­ciple of the Gospel; as will be evident on the first attempt he shall make to that pur­pose; let him begin the tryal as soon as he pleaseth.

In the third Section, we have an heap of instances raked together to confront the Principle, in its proper sense before de­clared and vindicated, in no one whereof it is at all concerned. For the Reason [Page 335] of things, in matters Civil and Religious, are not the same. All political Govern­ment in theWorld consists in the exercise of Principles of natural Right, and their just Application to Times, Ages, People, Occasions and Occurences. Whilest this is done, Government is acted regularly to its proper end: where this is missed, it failes. There things God hath left unto the pru­dence of men, and their consent; where­in they cannot, for the most part, faile, unless they are absolutely given up unto unbridled lusts; and the things, wherein they may faile, are alwaies convenient or inconvenient; good and useful, or hurrful and destructive; not alwaies, yea very sel­dome directly and in themselves morally Good or Evil. In such things mens ease and pofit not their Consciences, are con­cerned. In the Worship of God things are quite otherwise. It is not Conveni­ence or Inconvenience, Advantage or dis­advantage, as to the things of this life, but meerly Good or Evil, in reference to the pleasing of God, and to Ternity, that is in question. Particular Applications to the manners, customes, usages of places, times, Countreys, which is the proper field of humane Authority, Liberty, and prudence in Civil things, (because their [Page 336] due, useful, and regular Administration d [...]pends upon them;) have here no plac [...] For the things of the Worship of God b [...]ing Spiritual, are capable of no variatio [...] from temporal earthly varieties amon [...] men; have no respect to Climate [...] Customes, Formes of Civil Governmen [...] or any thing of that Nature. But con [...]sidering men quite under other notions namely, of Sinners and Believers; with respect utterly unto other ends, namely their living spiritually unto God here, and the eternal enjoyment of him hereafter are not subject to such prudential Accom­modations or Applications. The Wor­ship of God is or ought to be, the same at all times, in all places, and amongst all Peo­ple, in all Nations; and the order of it is fixt and determined in all particulars, that belong unto it. And let not men pretend the contrary, untill they can give an in­stance of any such defect in the Instituti­ons of Christ, as that the Worship of God cannot be carryed on, nor his Church Ruled and Edified, without an addi­tion of something of their own for the supply thereof; which therefore should and would be necessary to that end antecedent unto its addition; and when they have so done, I will subscribe unto [Page 337] whatsoever they shall be pleased to add of that, or indeed any other kind. [...]ustomes of Churches, and Rules of Decency, which our Author here casts under the Magistrates power, are ambiguous terms, [...]nd in no sense express the Hypothesis he [...]ath undertaken the defence of. In the proper signification of the words, the [...]hings intended may fall under those natu­ral Circumstances, wherein Religious Acti­ons in the Worship of the Church may have their concern, as they are Actions, and are disposable by humane Authority. But he will not, I presume, so soon desert his fundamental Principle, of the Magi­strates appointing things in, and parts of Religious Worship, no where described or determined in the Word of God; which alone we have undertaken to op­pose. The instances he also gives us about Actions, in their own nature and use indifferent; as going to Law, or taking Physick; are not, in the least, to his pur­pose. And yet if I should say, that none of these Actions are indeed indifferent in actu exercito, as they speak, and in their in­dividual performance, but have a Moral good or evil, as an inseparable Adjunct, attending them, arising out of respect to some Rule, general or particular, of Di­vine [Page 338] Revelation, I know he cannot dis [...] ­prove it; and much more is not pleade concerning Religious Worship.

But this Principle is further charge with mischief equal to its folly; which i [...]proved by instances in sundry uninstitu­ted Observances, both in the Jewish, an [...] primitive Christian Churches; as also i [...] Protestant Churches abroad. I answer that if this Author will consent to Um [...]pire these differences by either the Old or New Testament, or by any Protestant Church in the World; we shall be near­er an end of them, than, as far as I can see, yet otherwise we are. If he will not be bound, neither to the Example of the Church of the Jews; nor of the Churches of the New-Testament; nor of the present Protestant Churches; it must he confessed, that their names are here made use of, only for a pretence and an Advantage. Under the Old Testament we find, that all that God required of his Church, was, that they should observe the Law of Moses his Servant, which he com­manded to him in Horeb, for all Israel, with his Statutes and Judgements, Mal. 4. 4. And when God had given out his Institu­tions, and the whole Order of his Wor­ship, it being fixed in the Church ac­cordingly; [Page 339] it is added eight or ten times [...]n one Chapter, that this was done, as [...]he Lord commanded Moses, even so did he, Exod. 40. After this God gives them ma­ny strict prohibitions, from adding any thing to what he had so commanded; as Deut. 4. 2. and Chap. 12. 32 Prov. 30. 6. And as he had in the Decalogue rejected any Worship not of his own appointment as such, Exod. 20. 4, 5. so he made it af­terwards the Rule of his acceptation of that People and what they did, or his re­fusal of them and it; whether it was by him commanded or no. So in Particular, he expresly rejects that which was so added, as to dayes, and times, and places, though of the nearest Affinity and Cognation to what was appointed by himself, because it was invented by man; yea by a King, 1 Kings 12. 33. And when in process of time, many things of an uncertain origi­nal were crept into the observance of the Church, and had firmed themselves with the notion of Traditions; they were all at once rejected in that word of the blessed Holy One; in [...]ain do ye Worship me, teaching for doctrines (that is, what is in my Wor­ship to be observed,) the traditions of men. For the Churches of the New Testa­ment, the foundation of them is laid i [...] [Page 340] that command of our Saviour, Matt 28. 20. go and Teach all Nations; teac [...]ing them to observe and do all whatsoever command you, and so I am with you to th [...] end of the world. That they should b [...] taught to do or observe any thing, bu [...] what he commanded; that his presenc [...] should accompany them in the teaching o [...] observation of any superadditions of their own; we no where find written, inti­mated, or exemplified by any practice of theirs. Nor, however, in that juncture of time, the like whereunto did never occurt before, nor ever shall do again, during the expiration and taking down of Mo­saical Institutions, before they became ab­solutely unlawful to be observed, the Apostles, according to the liberty given them by our Lord Jesus Christ, and dire­ction of the Holy Ghost, did practise some things complyant with both Church­states, did they, in any one instance, im­pose any thing on the practice of the Churches in the Worship of God, to be necessarily and for a continuance observ­ed among them, but what they had ex­press Warrant, and Authority and com­mand of our Lord Christ for. Counsel they gave in particular cases, that de­pended upon present emergencies; Directi­ons [Page 341] for the regular and due observation of Institutions, and the Application of ge­neral Rules in particular practice; They also taught a due and sanctified use of Civil customes; and the proper use of Moral or Natural Symbols. But to impose any Religious Rites on the constant pra­ctice of the Church in the Worship of God, making them necessary to be alwaies observed by that imposition, they did not once attempt to do, or assume power for it to themselves. Yea, when upon an im­portant difficulty, and to prevent a ruin­ing scandal, they were enforced to declare their judgement to the Churches in some points, wherein they were to abridge the practice of their Christian liberty for a season; they would do it only in things made necessary by the state of things then among the Churches, (in reference to the great end of edification, whereby all pra­ctices are to be regulated) before the de­claration of their judgement, for the re­striction mentioned, Acts 15. So remote were they from assuming unto themselves a Dominion over the Religion, Conscien­ces or faith of the Disciples of Christ; or requiring any thing in the constant Wor­ship of the Church, but what was accord­ing to the Will, Appointment and Com­mand [Page 342] of their Lord and Master, Little countenance therefore is our Author like to obtain unto his sentiments, from the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament; or the Example either of the Jews or Chri­stians mentioned in them.

The Instances he gives from the Church of the Jewes, or that may be given, are ei­ther Civil Observances, as the feast of Pu­rim; or Moral conveniencies directed by general Rules, as the building of Synagogues; or customary signes suited to the nature of things, as wearing of Sackcloth; or such as have no proof of their being approved, As the feast of Dedication, and some monethly Fasts taken up in the Captivity, from none of which any objection can be taken against the position before laid down. Those from the Church of the new Testa­ment had either a perpetual binding insti­tution from the Authority of Christ, as the Lords day Sabbath; or contain only a di­rection to use Civil Customes and Obser­vances in an holy and sanctified manner, as the Love Feasts and Kiss of Charity; or such as were never heard of in the New Testa­ment at all, as the observation of Lent and Easter. He that out of these instances can draw a warranty for the power of the Ci­vil Magistrate over Religion and the Con­sciences [Page 343] of men, to institnte new duties in Religion when he pleaseth, so these do not countenance Vice, nor disgrace the Deity; which all his Christian Subjects shall be bound in conscience to observe; or other­wise make good any of those particulat conclusions, that therefore Christ is not the ouly Law giver to his Church; or that Divin [...] Revelation is not the adequate rule of Divin [...] Worship; or that men may add any thing to the Worship of God, to be observed in it, constantly and indispensiely, by the whole Church; will manifest himself to have an Excellency in Argumentation, be­yond what I have ever yet met withal.

A removal of the Argument taken from the perfection of the Scripture, and its sufficiency to instruct us in the whole Coun­sel and Will of God, concerning his Wor­ship and our Obedience unto him, is next­ly attempted: but with no Engines, but what have been discovered to be insuffici­ent to that purpose an hundred times. It is alledged, That what the Scripture commands in the Worship of God, is to be observed; that what it forbids, is to be avoided, Which if really acknowledged, and a concernment of the Consciences of men be granted therein, is sufficiently destructive of the principal Design of our Author. But [Page 344] moreover I say, that it commands and fo [...]bids things by general Rules, as well by particular Precepts and Inhibition and that, if what is so commanded be d [...]served, and what is so forbidden be avoid­ed, there is a direct-Rule remaining in for the whole worship of God.

But this is said here to be of substan [...] duties, but not of external circumstance and if it be so even of substantial dut [...] it perfectly overthrows all that our Autho [...] hath been pleading in the three first Cha [...]ters of his Discourse. For external cir­cumstances; of what nature those are wh [...] are disposable by humane Authority an [...] Prudence, hath been now often declare and needs not here to be repeated.

The summ of his Apprehensions in th [...] matter, about the perfection and suffici [...]ency of the Scripture in reference to th [...] Worship of God, our Author gives us pag. 189. Anything, saith he, is lawful (th [...] is, in the Worship of God) that is no [...] made unlawful by some prohibition: for things become evil, not upon the scors of there be­ing not commanded; but upon that of their being forbidden, And what the Scripture forbids not, it allows; and what it allows, is not unlawful; and what is not unlawful, may lawfully be done. This tale, I confess, we [Page 345] have been told many and many a time: but it hath been as often answered, that the whole of It, as to any thing of reasoning, is captious and sophistical.

Once more therefore; what is com­manded in the Worship of God, is lawful; yea is our duty to observe. All particu­lar Instances of this sort, that are to have actual place in the Worship of God, were easily enumerated, and so expresly com­manded. And why among sundry things that might equally belong thereunto one should be commanded, and another left at liberty without any Institution, no man can divine. Of particular things not to be observed there is not the same reason. It is morally impossible, that all instances of mens Inventions, all that they can find out to introduce into the Worship of God, at any time, in any Age, and please themselves therein, should be before hand enumerated, and prohibited in their par­ticular instances. And if because they are not so forbidden, they may lawfully be introduced into Divine Worship, and imposed upon the practices of men; ten thousand things may be made lawful, and be so imposed. But the truth is, although a particular prohibition be needful to ren­der a thing evil in it self; a general [Page 346] prohibition is enough to render any thing unlawful in the Worship of God. So we grant, that what is not forbid­den is lawful: but withal say, that every thing is forbidden, that should be esteemed as any part of Divine Worship, that is not commanded; and if it were not, yet for want of such a command, or Divine Institution, it can have neither use nor efficacy, with respect to the end of all Religious Worship.

Our Author speaks with his wonted confidence in this matter; yea it seems to rise to its highest pitch: as also doth his contempt of his Adversaries, or whatever is, or may be offered by them in the ju­stification of this principle. Infinite cer­tainty on his own part, pag. 193. baffled and intolerable impertinencies; weak and pu­ny Arguments; Cavils of a few hot-headed and brainsick people, with other opprobri­ous expressions of the like nature, filling up a great part of his leaves, are what he can afford unto those whom he op­poseth. But yet I am not, for all this bluster, well satisfied, much less infinitely certain, that he doth in any competent measure understand aright the Contro­versie, about which he treats with all this wrath and confidence. For the summ of [Page 347] all, that here he pleads, is no more but this; that the Circumstances of Actions in particular are various, and as they are not, so they cannot be determined by the Word of God; and therefore must be ordered by hu­mane Prudence and Authority: which if he suppose that any men deny, I shall the less wonder at his severe Reflections upon them; though I shall never judge them ne­cessary or excusable in any case what­ever. Pag. 198. He imposeth it on others that lye under the power of this perswasi­on, That they are obliged in conscience to act contrary to whatever their Superiours command them in the Worship of God: which further sufficiehtly evidenceth, that either be un­derstands not the Controversie under de­bate, or that he believes not himself in what he saith: which, because the harsher imputation, I shall avoid the owning of in the least surmise.

Section 6. From the Concession, that the Magistrate may take care, that the Laws of Christ be executed; that is, command and require his Subjects to observe the com­mands of Christ, in that way, and by such means, as those commands, from the nature of the things themselves, and according to the Rule of the Gospel, may be com­manded and required; he infers, that he [Page 348] hath himself power of making Laws in Rel [...]gion. But why so? And how doth thi [...] follow? Why, saith he, It is apparently im [...]plyed, because whoever hath a power to see the Laws be executed, cannot be without a pow [...] to command their execution. Very good but the conclusion should have been; he cannot be without a power to make Laws is the matter, about which he looks to the execu­tion: which would be good Doctrine for Justices of the Peace to follow. But what is here laid down is nothing but repeating of the same thing in words a little varied; as if it had been said; He that hath power to see the Laws executed, or a power to command their execution, he hath power to see the Laws executed, or a power to command their exe­cution; which is very true. And this we acknowledge the Magistrate hath, in the way before declared. But that because he may do this, he may also make Laws of his own in Religion, it doth not at all fol­low from hence, whether it be true or no. But this is further confirmed from the nature of the Laws of Christ, which have only declared the substance and morality of Religi­ous Worship: and therefore must needs have left the ordering of its circumstances to the power and wisdom of lawful Authority. The Laws of Christ, which are intended, are [Page 349] those, which he hath given concerning the Worship of God. That these have determined the morality of Religious Worship, I know not how he can well allow, who makes the Law of Nature to be the mea­sure of Morality, and all Moral Religious Worship. And for the substance of Religious Worship, I wish it were well declared what is intended by it. For my part I think, that whatever is commanded by Christ, the Observation of it, is of the substance of Religious Worship; else I am sure the Sacraments are not so. Now do but give men leave, as rational creatures, to ob­serve those commands of Christ in such a way and manner, as the nature of them requires them to be observed; as he hath himself in general Rules prescribed; as the concurrent actions of many in society make necessary; and all this Controversie will be at an end. When a duty, as to the kind of it, is commanded in particu­lar, or instituted by Christ in the Wor­ship of God, he hath given general Rules to guide us in the individual performance of it, as to the circumstances that the actions whereby it is performed, will be attended withal. For the disposal of those circumstances according to those Rules, prudence is to take place and to be used. [Page 350] For men, who are obliged to act as men in all other things, are not to be looked on as Brutes in what is required of them in the Worship of God.

But to institute Mystical Rites, and fixed forms of Sacred Administrations, whereof nothing in the like kind doth necessarily attend the acting of instituted Worship, it not to determine circumstances, but to ordain new parts of Divine Worship: and such Injunctions are here confessed by our Author, pag. 191. to be new and di­stinct commands by themselves, and to en­joyn something that the Scripture no where commands: which when he produce­eth a Warranty for, he will have made a great progress towards the determining of the present Controversie.

Page 192. He answers an Objection, con­sisting of two branches, as by him pro­posed: whereof the first is; that it can­not stand with the love and wisdom of God not to take order himself for all things, that immediately concern his own Worship and Kingdom. Now though I doubt not at all, but that God hath so done; yet I do not remember at present, that I have read any imposing the necessity hereof upon him, in answer to his Love and Wisdom. I confess Valerianus Magnus, a famous Writer of the [Page 351] Church of Rome, tells us, that never any one did so foolishly institute or order a Commonwealth, as Jesus Christ must be thought to have done; if he have not left one Supream Judge to determine the faith and Consciences of men in matters of Re­ligion and Divine Worship. And our Author seems not to be remote from that kind of reasoning, who, without an assign­ment of a power to that purpose, con­tendeth that all things among men will run into confusion; of so little concern­ment do the Scriptures and the Authority of God in them, to some seem to be. We do indeed thankfully acknowledge, that God out of his Love and Wisdom hath ordered all things belonging to his Wor­ship and Spiritual Kingdom in the world. And we do suppose, we need no other Ar­gument to evince this Assertion, but to challenge all men, who are otherwise minded, to give an instance of any defect in his Institutions to that purpose. And this we are the more confirmed in, because those things, which men think good to add unto them, they dare not contend that they are parts of his Worship; or that they are added to supply any defect therein. Neither did ever any man yet say, that there is a defect in the divine Institutions of Worship, which [Page 352] must be supplyed by a Ministers wearing Surplice. All then that is intended in this consideration, though not urged, as is here pretended, is; that God in his Goodness, Love and Care towards his Church, hath determined all things that are needful i [...] or to his Worship: and about what is not needful, men, if they please, may contend; but it will be to no great purpose.

The other part of the Objection, which he proposeth to himself, is laid down by him in these words; If Jesus Christ hath not determined all particular Rites and Cir­cumstances of Religion, he hath discharged his Office with less wisdom and fidelity than Mo­ses; who ordered every thing appertaining to the Worship of God, even as far as the pint or nails of the Tabernacle. And hereunto in particular he returns in answer, not one word: but only ranks it amongst idle and impertinent reasonings. And I dare say, he wants not reasons for his silence: whe­ther they be pertinent or no, I know not. For setting aside the advantage, that, it is possible, he aimed to make in the manner and terms of the proposal of this Obje­ction to his Sentiments; and it will ap­pear, that he hath not much to offer for its removal. We dispute not about the Rites and Circumstances of Religion, which [Page 353] are termes ambiguous, and, as hath been declared, may be variously interpreted; no more than we do about the nails of the Tabernacle, wherein there were none at all. But it is about the Worship of God and what is necessary thereunto. The orde­ring hereof, that is, of the House of God and all things belonging thereunto, was committed to Jesus Christ, as a Son over his own house, Heb. 3. 3, 4, 5. In the discharge of his trust herein, he was faithful as was Moses; who received that testimony from God, that he was faithful in all his house, upon his ordering all things in the Wor­ship of God as he commanded him, without adding any thing of his own thereunto, or leaving any thing uninstituted or undeter­mined, which was to be of use therein. From the faithfulness of Christ, therefore, in and over the house of God, as it is com­pared with the faithfulness of Moses, it may be concluded, I think; that he ordered all things for the Worship of God in the Churches of the New Testament, as far as Moses did in and for the Church of the old; and more is not contended for. And it will be made appear, that his Commission in this matter was as extensive, as that of Moses at the least; or he could not, in that trust and the discharge of it, have that [Page 354] preheminence above him, which in th [...] place is ascribed unto him.

Section 7. An account is given of th [...] great variety of circumstances, which do a [...]tend all humane actions: whence it is in possible that they should be all determine by Divine Prescription. The same we sa [...] also; but add withal, that if men woul [...] leave these circumstance free under t [...] conduct of common prudence in the in [...]stituted Worship of God, as they are com [...]pelled so to do in the performance of Mo [...]ral Duties, and as he himself hath le [...] them free; it would be as convenient fo [...] the Reasons and Consciences of men, an attempt to the contrary. Thus we hav [...] an instance given us by our Author in th [...] Moral Duty of Charity; which is command [...]ed us of God himself; but the times, sea [...]sons, manner, objects, measures of it are le [...] free, to be determined by humane pru [...]dence, upon emergencies and occasions▪ It may be now enquired, whether th [...] Magistrate, or any other, can determine those circumstances by a Law? and whe­ther they are not, as by God, so by al [...] wise men, left free, under the conduct of their Reason and Conscience, who are obliged to the duty it self by the command of God? And why may not the same Rule [Page 355] and Order be observed with respect to the circumstances that attend the performance of the duties of instituted Worship? Be­sides, there are general circumstances that are capable of a determination: such are time and place as naturally considered, without such Adjuncts as might give them a moral consideration, or render them good or evil; these the Magistrate may determine. But for particular circumstances attending individual actions, they will hardly be re­gulated by a standing Law. But none of these things have the least interest in our debate. To add things necessarily to be observed in the Worship of God, no way naturally related unto the actions where­with prescribed Worship is to be perform­ed, and then to call them circumstances thereof, erects a notion of things which nothing but interest can digest and con­coct.

His eighth Section is unanswerable. It contains such a strenuous reviling of the Puritans, and contemptuous reproaches of their Writings, with such Encomi [...]ms of their Adversaries, as there is no dealing with it. And so I leave it. And so like­wise I do his ninth, wherein, as he saith, he upbraids the men of his contest with their shameful overthrows: and dares them to look [Page 356] those enemies in the face, that have so lamen­tably cowed them, by so many absolute tri­umphs and victories. Which kind of juve­nile exultations on feigned suppositions, will, I suppose, in due time receive an al­lay from his own more advised thoughts and considerations. The instance, where­with he countenaunceth himself in his tri­umphant Acclamations unto the victory of his party, is the Book of Mr. Hooker and its being unanswered. Concerning which I shall only say; that, as I wish the same moderation, ingenuity and learning unto all, that engage in the same cause with him in these dayes; so if this Author will mind us of any one Argument in his long­some Discourse, not already frequently answered, and that in Print, long ago, that it shall have its due consideration. But this kind of Discourses, it may be, on se­cond thoughts will be esteemed not so comely. And I can mind him of those, who boast as highly of some Champions of their own against all Protestants, as he can do of any Patron of those Opinions, which he contendeth for. But it doth not alwayes fall out, that those who have the most outward advantages, and greatest leisure, have the best cause, and abilities to mannage it.

[Page 357] The next Sections treat concerning Su­perstition, Will-worship and Popery; which, as he faith, having been charged by some on the Church unduly, he retorts the crime of them upon the Authors of that charge. I love not to strive, nor will I contend about words that may have various significations fixed on them. It is about things that we differ. That which is evil, is so, however you call it, and whether you can give it any special name or no. That which is good, will still be so, call it what and how men please. The giving of a bad or odious name to any thing, doth not make it self to be bad or odious. The managing therefore of those Appellations, either as to their charge or recharge, I am no way concerned in. When it is proved, that men believe, teach or practise otherwise, than in duty to God they ought to do; then they do evil: and when they obey his mind and will in all things, then they do well; and in the end will have the praise thereof. In particular, I confess Supersti­tion, as the Word is commonly used, de­notes a vicious habit of mind with respect unto God and his Worship; and so is not a proper denomination for the Worship it self, or of any evil or crime in it. But yet, if it were worth contending about, I [Page 358] could easily manifest, that according to the use of the word by good Authors in all Ages, men have been charged with that crime, from the kind and nature of the Worship it self observed by them. And when St. Paul charged the Athenians with an excess in Superstition, it was from the mul­tiplication of their Gods, and thronging them together, right or wrong, in the de­dication of their Altars. But these things belong not at all to our present design. Let them, who enjoyn things unto an in­dispensible necessary Observation in the Worship of God, which are not by him prescribed therein, take care of their own minds, that they be free from the Vice of Superstition; and they shall never be judg­ed, or charged by me therewith. Though I must say, that a multiplication of Instances in this kind, as to their own observation, is the principle, if not the only way where­by men who own the true and proper ob­ject of Religious Worship, do or may ma­nifest themselves to be influenced by that corrupt habit of mind; so that they may relate unto Superstition, as the Effect to its Cause. But the Recrimination here in­sisted on, with respect unto them, who refuse admittance unto, or observance of things so enjoyned, is such as ought to [Page 359] be expected from provocations, and a de­sire of Retortion. Such things usually taste of the Cask; and are sufficiently weak and impertinent. For it is a mistake, that those charged do make, as 'tis here ex­pressed, any thing necessary not to be done; or put any Religion in the not doing of any thing, or the non-observance of any Rites, Orders, or Ceremonies; any other, than every one puts in his abstinence from what God forbids; which is a part of our Moral Obedience.

And the whole Question, in this matter, is not, whether, as it is here phrased, God hath tyed up his creatures to nice and pettish Laws; laying a greater stress upon a doubtful or indifferent Ceremony, than upon the great duty of obedience. But meerly, whether men are to observe in the Worship of God, what they apprehend he hath enjoyned them; and to abstain from what he doth forbid; according to all the light that they have into his mind and will; Which en­quiry, as I suppose, may be satisfied; that they are so to practise, and so to abstain, without being lyable to the charge of Su­perstition. No man can answer for the minds of other men; nor know what de­praved vicious habits and inclinations, they are subject unto. Outward actions are all, [Page 360] that we are in any case allowed to pass judgement upon; and of mens minds, as those Actions are Indications of them. Let men therefore, observe and do in the Worship of God whatever the Lord Christ hath commanded them; and abstain from what he hath forbidden, whether in particular instances, or by general dire­ctive precepts and Rules, by which means alone many things are capable of falling under a prohibition; without the least thought of placing any Worship of God in their abstinence from this or that thing in particular; and I think, they need not much concern themselves in the charge of superstition, given in, or out, by any against them.

For what is discoursed Section 11. about will-worship, I cannot so far agree with our Author, as I could in what pas­sed before about superstition; and that partly because I cannot discern him to be herein at any good Agreement with him­self. For superstition, he tells us, consists in the Apprehensions of men, when their minds are possessed with weak and uncomly conceits of God, pag. 201. here, that will-worship is one sort of superstition; and yet this will­worship consists in nothing else, than in mens making their own phancys and inventions ne­cessary [Page 361] parts of Religion, which outward actings are not coincident with the inward frame and habit of mind before described. And I do heartily wish, that some men could well free themselves from the charge of will worship, as it is here described by our Author; though cautelously expres­sed, to secure the concernments of his own Interest from it. For although I will not call the things, they contend to impose on others in the worship of God, their phan­cys; yet themselves acknowledge them to be their Inventions: and when they make them necessary to be observed in the whole Worship of God, as publick and stated; and forbid the celebration of that Wor­ship without them; when they declare their Usefulness, and spiritual or mystical significancy in that Worship or service, designed to Honour God in or by their use; setting up some of them to an Exclu­sion of what Christ hath commanded; if I cannot understand, but that they make them necessary parts of Gods Worship, as to the actual observance of it, I hope they will not be angry with me: since I know the worst they can possibly with truth charge upon me in this matter, is, that I am not so wise, nor of so quick an under­standing as themselves. Neither doth our [Page 362] Author well remove his charge from those whose defence he hath undertaken: for [...] doth it only by this consideration; tha [...] they do not make the things, by them intro­duced in the Worship of God, to be parts of Religion. They are not so, he saith, nor are made so by then. For this hinders not, but that they may be looked on as parts of Divine Worship; seeing we are taught by the same hand, that external Worship is no part of Religion at all. And let him abide by what he closeth this section withall; namely, that they make not any Additions to the Worship of God, but only provide, that what God hath required, be perform­ed in an orderly and decent manner, and as to my concern, there shall be an end of this part of our controversie.

The ensuing paragraphs about Christian Liberly; adding to the commands of God; and Pope [...]y; are of the same nature with those preceeding about superstition and Will-worship. There is nothing new in them, but words; and they may be briefly passed through. For the charge of Popery, on the one side or other, I know nothing in it; but that, when any thing is injoyn­ed or imposed on mens practice in the Worship of God, which is known to have been invented in and by the Papal Church [Page 363] during the time of its confessed Aposta­ [...]y, it must needs beget prejudices against it in the minds of them, who consider the wayes, means, and ends of the fatal de­ [...]ection of that Church; and are jealous of a sinful complyance with it in any of those things. The Recharge on those, who are said to set up a Pope in every mans conscience, whilest they vest it with a power of counter­manding the decrees of Princes; if no more be intended, by countermanding, but a re­fusal to observe their decrees, and yield Obedience to them in things against their Consciences, which is all can be pretend­ed; if it fall not on this Author himself, as in some cases it doth; and which by the certain conduct of right reason, must be extended to all, wherein the Consciences of m [...]n are affected with the Authority of God; yet it doth on all Christians in the World, that I know of, besides himself. For adding to the Law of God, it is not charged on any, that they add to his com­mands; as though they made their own divine, or part of his word and law: but only that they add in his Worship to the things commanded by him, which being forbidden in the Scripture, when they can free themselves from it, I shall rejoyce; but as yet see not how they can [Page 364] so do. Nor are there any, that I ko [...] of, who set up any prohibitions of their ow [...] in or about the Worship of God, or as thing thereunto pertaining, as is unduly and unrighteously pretended. There [...] be indeed some things injoyned by me [...] which they do and must abstain from, [...] they would do from any other sin whateve [...] But their consciences are regulated by [...] prohibitions, but those of God himsel [...] And things are prohibited and made sinf [...] unto them, not only when in particular and by a specification of their instances they are forbidden; but also when ther [...] lye general prohibitions against them [...] any account whatever. Some men indee [...] think, that if a particular prohibition of any thing might be produced, they would a [...] quiesce in it; whilst they plead an ex [...]emption of sundry things from being in [...]cluded in general prohibitions; althoug [...] they have the direct formal Reason attend­ing them, on which those prohibition [...] are founded. But it is to be feared, tha [...] this also is but a pretence. For let any thing be particularly forbidden, yet i [...] mens interest and superstition induce them to observe or retain it; they will find out distinctions to evade the prohibition and retain the practice. What can be more [Page 365] directly forbidden, than the making or use­ [...]g of graven Images, in or about Religious Worship? and yet we know how little [...]ome men do acquiesce in that prohibi­ [...]on. And it was the Observation of a [...]earned Prelate of this Nation, in his re­ [...]ection of the distinctions whereby they [...]ndeavoured to countenance themselves in their Idolatry; that the particular instances of things forbidden in the second Com­mandment, are not principally intended; [...]ut the general Rule, of not adding any thing in the Worship of God without his Institution. Non imago, saith he, non si­mulachrum prohibetur; sed non facies tibi. What way, therefore, any thing becomes a sin unto any, be it by a particular or general prohibition; be it from the scandal that may attend its practice; unto him it is a sin. And it is a wild notion, that when any persons abstain from the practice of that in the Worship of God, which to them is sinful as so practised, they add prohibitions of their own to the commands of God.

The same is to be said concerning Chri­stian Liberty. No man, that I know of, makes things indifferent to be sinful, as is pretended; nor can any man in his right wits do so. For none can entertain con­tradictory notions of the same things, at [Page 366] the same time: as those are, that the fa [...] things are indifferent, that is, not sin [...] and sinful. But this some say; that this in their own nature indifferent, that [...] absolutely so, may be yet relatively [...] lawful; because with respect unto that [...]lation forbidden of God. To set up Altar of old for a Civil memorial in a place, was a thing indifferent: but to [...] up an Altar to offer Sacrifices on, who the Tabernacle was not, was a sin. It [...] indifferent for a man that understands th [...] Language, to read the Scripture in La [...] or in English: but to read it in Latine u [...] a Congregation that understands it [...] as a part of Gods Worship, would be [...] Nor doth our Christian Liberty consist al [...] in our judgement of the indifferency things in their own nature, made nec [...]sary to practice by commands, as hath b [...] shewed. And if it doth so, the Jews h [...] that priviledge as much as Christians. A [...] they are easily offended, who complain [...] that their Christian Liberty, in the P [...]ctice of what they think meet in the W [...]ship of God, is intrenched on, by such, leaving them to their pleasure, because their Apprehension of the will of God the contrary, cannot comply with them their practice.

[Page 367] The close of this Chapter is designed to the removal of an Objection, pretended to be weighty and difficult; but indeed made so meerly by the Novel Opinions advanced by this Author. For laying aside all re­spect unto some uncouth Principles broached in this Discourse, there is scarce a Christian Child of ten years old, but can resolve the difficulty pretended, and that according to the mind of God. For it is supposed, that the Magistrate may esta­blish a Worship that is Idolatrous and Super­stitious: and an enquiry is made thereon, what the subject shall do in that case? why? where lyes the difficulty? why, saith he, in this case they must be either Rebels, or Ido­laters. If they obey, they sin against God: if they disobey, they sin against their Sove­raign. According to the Principles hi­ther to received in Christian Religion, any one would Reply, and say, no: for it is certain, that men must obey God, and not contract the guilt of such horrible sins, as Idolatry and Superstition; but in so doing they are neither Rebels against their Ruler, nor do sin against him. It is true, they must quieily and patiently sub­mit to what they may suffer from him: but they are in so doing guilty of no Re­bellion nor sin against him. Did ever any [Page 368] Christian yet so much as call it into questi­on, whether the Primitive Christians were Rebels, and sinned against their Rulers because they would not obey those Edicts, whereby they established Idolatrous Wor­ship? or did any one ever think, that they had a difficult case of Conscience to re­solve in that matter? They were indeed accused by the Pagans as Rebels against the Emperours; but no Christian every yet thought their case to have been doubtful. But all this difficulty ariseth from the making of two Gods, where there ought to be but one. And this renders the case so perplexed, that, for my part, I cannot see directly, how it is determined by our Author. Sometimes he speaks, as though it were the duty of Subjects to comply with the establishment of Idolatry sup­posed, as pag. 214, 215. for with respect, as I suppose it is, to the case as by him stated, that he sayes; men must not withdraw their obedience: and better submit unto the unreasonable impositions of Nero or Caligula, than to hazard the dissolution of the State. Sometimes he seems not to oblige them in Conscience to practise according to the publick prescription; but only pleads, that the Magistrate may punish them, if they do not; and sain would have it thought, [Page 369] that he may do so justly. But these things are certain unto us in this matter, and are so many [...] in Christian Religion; that if the supream Magistrate command any thing in the Worship of God that is Idolatrous, we are not to practise it ac­cordingly; because we must obey God ra­ther than men. Nextly, that in our re­fusal of complyance with the Magistrates commands, we do neither rebel nor sin against him. For God hath not, doth not at any time, shut us up in any condition unto a necessity of sinning. Thirdly, that in case the Magistrate shall think meet, through his own mistakes and misappre­hensions, to punish, destroy and burn them alive, who shall not comply with his Edicts, as did Nebuchadnezzar; or as they did in England in times of Popery; after all honest and Lawful private wayes of self-preservation used, which we are obliged unto; we are quietly and patient­ly to submit to the Will of God in our sufferings, without opposing or resisting by force, or stirring up seditions or tu­mults, to the disturbance of publick peace. But our Author hath elsewhere provided a full Solution of this difficulty, Chap. 8. p. 308. Where he tells us, that in cases and disputes of a publick concern, Private men are not pro­perly [Page 370] sui juris; they have no power over thi [...] actions; they are not to be directed by thei [...] own judgements, or determined by their ou [...] wills; but by the commands and determina [...]ons of the publick Conscience. And if the [...] be any sin in the command, he that imposed i [...] shall answer for it, and not I whose Duty it i [...] to obey. The commands of Authority will war­rant my Obedience, my Obedience will hall [...] or at least excuse my action; and so secure [...] from sin if not from errour, because I folle [...] the best guide and most probable direction, [...] am capable of; and though I may mistake, my integrity shall preserve my innocence; and in all doubtfull and disputable cases it is better to err with Authority, than to be in the right against it. When he shall produce any o [...] Divine Writer, Any of the Ancient Fathers, any sober Schoolmen, or Casuists, any Learn­ed modern Divines, speaking at this rate, or giving countenance unto this direction given to men, for the regulating of their moral actions, it shall be farther attended unto. I know some such thing is mutter­ed amongst the pleaders for blind Obedience upon Vowes voluntarily engaged into, for that purpose. But as it is acknowledged by themselves, that by those Vowes, they deprive themselves of that Right and Li­berty which naturally belongs unto them, [Page 371] as unto all other men, wherein they place much of the merit of them; so by others those Vowes themselves, with all the pre­tended bruitish Obedience that proceeds from them, are sufficiently evidenced to be an horrible Abomination, and such as make a ready way for the perpetration of all villanies in the world, to which pur­pose that kind of Obedience hath been principally made use of. But these things are extreamly fond; and not only, as ap­plyed unto the Worship of God, repug­nant to the Gospel, but also in themselves to the Law of our Creation, and that Mo­ral dependance on God, which is indispen­sible unto all individuals of mankind. We are told in the Gospel, that every one is to be fully perswaded in his own mind; that whatever is not of faith is sin; that we are not to be (in such things) the Servants of men; that other mens leading of us amiss, whoever they are, will not excuse us; for if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall in­to the ditch; and he that followeth, is as sure to perish as he that leadeth. The next Guids of the souls and Consciences of men, are doubtless those who speak unto them in the name of God, or Preachers of the Gospel. Yet are all the Disciples of Christ, fre­quently warned to take heed that they be [Page 372] not deceived by any, under that pretence, but diligently examining what is proposed unto them, they discern in themselves what is good and evil. Nor doth the great Apostle himself require us to be fol­lowers of him, any further than he was a follower of Christ. They will find small re­lief, who at the last day shall charge their sins on the commands of others, whatever hope to the contrary they are put into by our Author. Neither will it be any ex­cuse that we have done according to the Precepts of men, if we have done contrary to those of God. Ephraim, of old, was broken in judgement, because he willingly walked after the commandment, Hos. 5. 14 But would not his Obedience hallow, or at least excuse his action? And would not the Authority of the King warrant his Obedi­ence? Or must Ephraim now answer for the sin, and not be only that imposed the command? But it seems that when Jero­boam sinned, who at that time had this goodly Creature of the publick Conscience in keeping, he made Israel sin also, who obeyed him. It is moreover a brave at­tempt to assert that Private men with re­spect to any of their Moral Actions, are not properly sui juris, have no power over their actions, are not to be directed by their own [Page 373] judgements, or determined by their own wills. This is Circes Rod, one stroke whereof turned men into Hoggs. For to what pur­pose serve their Understandings, their Judgements, their Wills, if not to guide and determine them in their Actions? I think he would find hard work, that should go about to perswade men to put out their own eyes, or blind themselves, that they might see all by one publick Eye. And I am sure it is no less unreaso­nable, to desire them to reject their own Wills, Understandings, and Judgements, to be lead and determined by a publick Consci­ence; considering especially that that pub­lick Conscience it self is a meer Tragelaphus, which never had Existence in Rerum natura. Besides, suppose men should be willing to accept of this condition of renouncing their own Understandings and Judge­ments, from being their Guides as to their Moral actions; I fear it will be found that indeed they are not able so to do. Mens Understandings, and their Consciences, are placed in them by him who made them, to rule in them and over their actions in his name, and with respect unto their depen­dance on him. And let men endeavour it whilest they please, they shall never be able utterly to cast of this Yoke of God, [Page 374] and destroy this order of things, which by him inlaid in the Principles of all Rati­onal Beings. Men, whilest they are me [...] in things that have a Moral Good or E [...] in them or adhering to them, must be guided and determined by their own Un­derstandings whether they will or no. A [...] if by any means, they stisle the actings [...] them at present, they will not avoid the Judgement, which according to them, shi [...] pass upon them at the last day. But the [...] things may elsewhere be farther pursue. In the mean time the Reader may take thi [...] Case as it is determined by the Learned P [...]late before mentioned, in his Dialogue abou [...] Subjection and Obedience against the P [...] ­pists, whose words are as follow. Par. 3 pag. 297. Philand. If the Prince establish any Religion, whatever it be, you must by you [...] oath obey it. Theoph. We must not rebel [...] and take arms against the Prince; but will Reverence and Humility serve God before the Prince, and that is nothing against our Oath. Philand. Then is not the Prince Supream. The­oph. Why so. Philand. Your selves are superiour, when you serve whom you list. Theoph. As thought to serve God according to his will, were to serve whom we list, and not whom Princes and all others ought to serve. Philand. But you will be Judges, when God is well served, and [Page 375] when not. Theoph. If you can excuse us be­fore God when you mistead us, we will serve him as you shall appoint us; otherwise if every man shall answer for himself, good rea­son he be Master of his own Conscience, in that which toucheth him so near, and no man shall excuse him for. Philand. This is to make every man Supream Judge of Religion. Theoph. The poorest wretch that is, may be Supreme Governour of his own heart; Princes rule the publick and external actions of their Countreyes, but not the Consciences of men. This in his dayes was the Doctrine of the Church of England; and as was observed before, no Person who then lived in it, knew better what was so.

The sole enquiry remaining is, whether the Magistrate, having established such a Religion, as is Idolatrous or Superstitious, may justly and lawfully punish and destroy his Subjects, for their non-complyance therewithall? This is that, which, if I understand him, our Author would give countenance unto; contrary to the com­mon sense of all Christians, yea of common sense it self. For wherereas he inter­weaves his Discourse with suppositions, that men may mistake in Religion, and abuse it; all such Interpositions are pure­ly sophistical, seeing the Case proposed to [Page 376] Resolution, which ought in the whole to be precisely attended unto, is about the refusal to observe and practise a Religion Idolatrous or Superstitious. Of the like na­ture is that Argument, which alone he makes use of here and elsewhere, to justi­fie his Principles; namely, the necessity of Government; and how much better the worst Government is, and the most depra­ved in its administration, than Anarchy or Confusion. For as this by all mankind is unquestioned; so I do not think there is any one among them, who can tell how to use this concession to our Authors pur­pose. Doth it follow, that because Ma­gistrates cannot justly nor Righteously prescribe an Idolatrous Religion, and com­pel their Subjects to the Profession and Obedience of it; and because the Subjects cannot, nor ought to yield Obedience therein, because of the antecedent and superiour power of God over them; that therefore Anarchy or Confusion must be preferred before such an Administration of Government? Let the Magistrate com­mand what he will in Religion, yet whilest he attends unto the ends of all Civil Go­vernment, that Government must needs be every way better than none; and is by private Christians to be born with, and [Page 377] submitted unto, untill God in his Provi­dence shall provide relief. The primitive Christians lived some Ages in the condi­tion described; refusing to observe the Religion required by Law; and exer­cising themselves in the Worship of God, which was strictly forbidden. And yet neither Anarchy, nor Confusion, nor any disturbance of publick Tranquility did ensue thereon. So did the Protestants here in England in the dayes of Queen Mary, and sometime before. The Argument, which he endeavours in these Discourses to give an Answer unto, is only of this im­portance. If the supream Magistrate may command what Religion he pleaseth, and enact the observation of it under destru­ctive penalties; whereas the greatest part of Magistrates in the World will and do pre­scribe such Religions and wayes of Divine Worship, as are Idolatrous or Superstitious, which their Subjects are indispensibly bound in Conscience not to comply with­all; then is the Magistrate justified in the punishing of men for their serving of God as they ought; and they may suffer as evil doers, in what they suffer as Christi­ans. This, all the World over, will justifie them that are uppermost, and have power in their hands, (on no other ground, but [Page 378] because they are so, and have so,) in this Oppressions and destructions of them, th [...] being under them in Civil respects, d [...] dissent from them in things Religious, No [...] whether this be according to the mind [...] God or no, is left unto the judgement [...] all indifferent men. We have, I confes [...] I know not how many expressions inte [...]posed in this Discourse, as was observed about sedition, troubling of publick peace men being turbulent against prescribe Rules of Worship, whereof if he pretend that every peaceable dissenter and dissent from what is publickly established in Re­ligious Worship, are guilty, he is a pleasa [...] man in a disputation; and, if he do any thing, he determines his case proposed o [...] the part of complyance with Idolatro [...] and Superstitious Worship. If he do not so; the mention of them in this place it very importune and unseasonable. All men acknowledge, that such miscarriages and practices may be justly coerced and punished. But what is this to a bare refusal to comply in any Idolatrous Worship, and peacable Practice of what God doth re­quire, as that which he will accept and own?

But our Author proceeds to find out many pretences, on the account whereof, Persons whom he acknowledgeth to [Page 379] be innocent and guiltless, may be punished. And though their Apprehensions in Religion be not, as he saith, so much their crime, as their infelicity, yet there is no remedy, but it must expose them to the publick Rods and Axes, pag. 219. I have heard of some wise and Righteous Princes, who have affirmed, that they had rather let twenty nocent persons go free, than punish or destroy one that is innocent. This seems to render them more like him, whose Vice-gerents they are; than to seek out colourable reasons for the punishment of them, whom they know to be innocent; which course is here suggested unto them. Such advice might be welcome to him, whom men called [...], Clay mingled and leavened with blood; others no doubt will abhor it, and detest it. But what spirit of meekness and mercy our Author is acted by, he discovereth in the close of this Chapter, pag. 223. for, saith he, it is easily imaginable how an honest and well-meaning man may, through meer ignorance, fall into such errours, which, though God will pardon, yet governours must punish. His integrity may expiate the crime, but cannot prevent the mis­chief of his errour. Nay so easie is it for men to deserve to be punished for their Consciences, that there is no Nation in the World, in [Page 380] which, (were government rightly understood and duty managed,) mistakes and abuses of Religion would not supply the gallies with vastly greater numbers, than Villany. There is no doubt, but that if Phaeton get into the Chariot of the Sun, the world will be sufficiently fired. And if every Absalom who thinks he understands government and the due management of it, better than its present possessours, were enthroned, there would be havock enough made among mankind. But blessed be God, who in many places, hath disposed it into such hands, as under whom, those who desire to fear and serve him according to his Will, may yet enjoy a more tolerable con­dition than such Adversaries are pleased withall. That honest and well-meaning men, falling into errours about the Wor­ship of God, through their ownignorance, wherein their integrity may expiate their crime; must be punished, must not be par­doned; looks, methinks, with an appear­ance of more severity, than it is the Will of God, that the World should be Go­verned by; seeing one end of his institu­ting and appointing Government among men, is, to represent himself in his Power, Goodness and Wisdom unto them. And he that shall conjoyn another assertion of [Page 381] our Author, namely, that it is better and more eligible to tolerate debaucheries and im­moralities in conversation, than liberty of con­science for men to worship God according to those apprehensions which they have of his will; with the close of this Chapter, that it is so easie for men to deserve to be punished for their consciences, that there is no Nation in the world, in which, were Government rightly understood, and duly managed, mistakes and abuses of Religion would not supply the Gallies with vastly greater numbers, than Villany; will easily judge with what Spirit, from what principles, and with what design, this whole Discourse was composed.

But I find my self, utterly besides and beyond my intention, engaged in particular controversies: and finding by the prospect I have taken of what remains in the Treatise under consideration; that it is of the same nature and importance, with what is past and a full continuation of those opprobri­ous reproaches of them whom he opposeth; and open discoveries of earnest desires af­ter their trouble and ruine, which we have now sufficiently been inured unto; I shall choose rather here to break off this Discourse, than further to pursue the ventilation of those differences, wherein I shall not willingly, or of choice, at any [Page 382] time engage. Besides, what is in the whole Discourse of especial and particular con­troversie, may be better handled apart by it self: as probably ere long it will be; if this new Representation of old pre­tences, quickned by invectives, and im­proved beyond all bounds and measures formerly fixt or given unto them, be judged to deserve a particular considera­tion. In the mean time this Author is more concerned than I, to consider, whether those bold incursions, that he hath made upon the antient boundaries and rules of Religion, and the consciences of men; those contemptuous revilings of his Adversaries, which he hath almost fill'd the Pages of his Book withal; those discoveries he hath made of the want of a due sense of the weaknesses and infirmities of men, which himself wants not; and of fierce, impla­cable, sanguinary thoughts against them, who appeal to the Judgement Seat of God, that they do not in any thing dissent from him or others, but out of a Reverence of the Authority of God, and for fear of pro­voking his holy Majesty; his incompassi­onate insulting overmen in distresses and sufferings, will add to the comfort of that account, which he must shortly make before his Lord and ours.

[Page 383] To close up this Discourse; The princi­pal design of the Treatise thus far survey­ed, is to perswade or seduce Soveraign Princes, or Supream Magistrates unto two evils, that are indeed inseparable, and equally pernicious to themselves and o­thers. The one of these is, to invade or usurp the Throne of God; and the other, to behave themselves therein unlike him. And where the one leads the way, the other will assuredly follow. The Empire over Religion, the souls and consciences of men in the Worship of God, hath hi­therto been esteemed to belong unto God alone, to be a peculiar Jewel in his glo­rious Diadem. Neither can it spring from any other fountain but absolute and infi­nite Supremacy, such as belongs to him, as he hath alone, who is the first cause and last end of all. All attempts to educe it from, or to resolve it into any other prin­ciple, are vain and will prove abortive. But here the Sons of men are enticed to say with him of old; We will ascend into Heaven; we will exalt our Throne above the Stars of God; we will sit upon the Mount of the Congregation, in the sides of the North; we will ascend above the heights of the clouds; we will be like the Most High. For wherein can this be effected? What Ladders have [Page 384] men to climb personally into Heaven? and who shall attend them in their attempt? It is an assuming of a dominion over the souls and consciences of men in the Wor­ship of God, wherein and whereby this may be pretended, and therein alone. And all this description of the invasion of the Throne of God, whence he, who did so, is compared to Lucifer, who sought Supre­macy in Heaven; is but the setting up of his power in and over the Church in its Worship, which was performed in the Temple, the Mount of the Congregation, and in Sion, on the North of the City of Jerusalem, Isaiah 14. This now Princes are perswaded unto: and can scarce escape without re­proaches, where they refuse or omit the attempting of it. Suppose they be pre­vailed with, to run the hazzard and adven­ture of such an undertaking; what is it that they are thereon perswaded unto? How are they directed to behave themselves, after they have assumed a likeness unto the Most High, and exalted themselves to his Throne? Plainly that which is now expected from them, is nothing but wrath, fury, indignation, persecution, destructi­ons, banishments, ruine of the persons, and families of men innocent, peaceable, fear­ing God, and useful in their several stati­ons, [Page 385] to satisfie their own wills, or to serve the interests of other men. Is this to act like God, whose power and authority they have assumed, or like to his great­est Adversary? Doth God deal thus in this world, in his Rule over the souls of men? or is not this that, which is set out in the Fable of Phaeton, that he, who takes the Chariot of the Sun, will cast the whole world into a combustion? So he, who of old is supposed to have affected the Throne of God, hath ever since acted that cruelty to his power, which manifests what was his design therein, and what would have been the end of his coveted Soveraignty. And whoever at any time shall take to himself that power, that is peculiar to God, will find himself left in the ex­ercise of it, to act utterly unlike him, yea contrary unto him. Power, they say, is a liquor, that let it be put into what vessel you will, it is ready to overflow: and as useful as it is, as nothing is more to mankind in this world, yet when it is not accompanied with a due proportion of Wisdom and Goodness, it is troublesome if not pernicious to them concerned in it. The power of God is infinite, and his So­veraignty absolute: but the whole exer­cise [Page 386] of those glorious dreadful Properties of his nature, is regulated by Wisdom and Goodness no less infinite than themselves. And as he hath all power over the souls and consciences of men; so he exercises it with that Goodness, Grace, Clemency, Pa­tience and Forbearance, which I hope we are all sensible of. If there be any like him, equal unto him in these things, I will readily submit the whole of my Religion and conscience unto him, without the least hesitation. And if God, in his Dominion and Rule over the souls and consciences of men, do exercise all Patience, Benignity, Long-suffering and Mercy; for it is his compassion that we are not consumed; doth he not declare, that none is meet to be entrusted with that Power and Rule, but they, who have those things like himself: at least, that in what they are or may be concerned in it, they express, and endea­vour to answer his example. Indeed So­veraign Princes and Supream Magistrates are Gods Vice-gerents, and are called Gods on the earth; to represent his Power and Authority unto men in Government, within the bounds prefixed by himself unto them, which are the most extensive that the nature of things is capable of; [Page 387] and in so doing, to conform themselves and their actings to him and his, as he is the great Monarch, the Proto-type of all Rule and the exercise of it, in Justice, Goodness, Clemency and Benignity; that so the whole of what they do may tend to the relief, comfort, refreshment and satisfaction of mankind, walking in wayes of peace and innocency, in answer unto the ends of their Rule, is their Duty, their Honour and their Safety. And to this end, doth God usually and ordinarily furnish them with a due proportion of Wisdom and understanding: for they also are of God; He gives them an understanding suited and commensurate to their work; that what they have to do, shall not ordinarily be too hard for them: nor shall they be tempted to mistakes and miscarriages from the work they are imployed about, which he hath made to be their own. But if any of them shall once begin to exceed their bounds, to invade his Throne, and to take to themselves the Rule of any Province, belonging peculiarly and solely to the Kingdom of Heaven; therein a con­formity unto God in their actings is not to be expected. For be they never so amply furnished with all Abilities of mind [Page 388] and soul for the work, and those duties which are their own, which are proper unto them: yet they are not capable of any such stores of Wisdom and Goodness, as should fit them for the work of God, that which peculiarly belongs to his Au­thority and Power. His Power is infinite; his Authority is absolute; so are his Wis­dom, Goodness and Patience. Thus he rules Religion, the souls and consciences of men. And when Princes partake in these things, infinite Power, infinite Wisdom, and in­finite Goodness, they may assume the same Rule and act like him. But to pretend an interest in the one, and not in the other, will set them in the greatest Opposition to him. Those therefore, who can pre­vail with Magistrates to take the power of God over Religion and the souls of me [...] in their observance of it, need never fea [...] that when they have so done, they will imitate him in his Patience, Clemency, Meekness, Forbearance and Benignity; for they are no way capable of these things in a due proportion to that Power which is not their own; however they may be eminently furnished for that which is so. Thus have we known Princes, (such as Trajan, Adrian, Julian of old) whilst they [Page 389] kept themselves to their proper Sphere, ordering and disposing the affairs of this world, and all things belonging to publick Peace, Tranquility and Welfare, to have been renowned for their Righteousness, Moderation and Clemency, and thereby made dear to mankind: who, when they have fallen into the excess of assuming Divine power over the consciences of men and the Worship of God, have left behind them such footsteps and remembrances of Rage, Cruelty and Blood in the World, as make them justly abhorred to all Gene­rations. This alone is the seat and po­sture, wherein the Powers of the Earth, are delighted with the sighs and groans of innocent persons, with the fears and dread of them, that are and would be at peace; with the punishment of their Obedient Subjects; and the binding of those hands of industry, which would willingly em­ploy themselves for the publick good and welfare. Take this occasion out of the way, and there is nothing that should pro­voke Soveraign Magistrates, to any thing that is grievous, irksome or troublesome to men peaceable and innocent; nothing that should hinder their Subjects from see­ing the presence of God with them in their [Page 390] Rule, and his Image upon them in their Authority, causing them to delight in the thoughts of them, and to pray continually for their continuance and prosperity. It may be some may be pleased for a season with s [...]rities against Dissenters, such as concerning whom we discourse; who false­ly suppose their interest to lye therein. It may be they may think meet, rather to have all debaucheries of life and conversation tol­lerated, than liberty for peaceable men to Worship God, according to their light and perswasion of his mind and will; as the multitude was pleased of old with the cry of, Release Barrabas, and let Jesus be crucified; Magistrates themselves will at length perceive, how little they are be­holding to any, who importunately sug­gest unto them fierce and sanguina­ry connsels in these matters. It is a say­ing of Maximilian the Emperour celebrated in many Authors; Nullum, said he, enor­mins peccatum dari potest, quam in consci­entias imperium exercere velle. Qui enim conscientiis imperare volunt, ii arcem caeli invadunt, & plerum (que) terrae possessionem per­dunt. Magistrates need not fear, but that the open wickedness and bloody crimes of men, will supply them with objects to [Page 391] be Examples and Testimonies of their Ju­stice and severity. And methinks it should not be judged an unequal Petition by them, who Rule in the stead and fear of God, that those who are innocent in their lives, useful in their callings and occasi­ons, peaceable in the Land, might not be exposed to trouble, only because they de­sign and endeavour, according to their light, which they are invincibly perswaded to be from God himself, to take care, that they perish not eternally. However I know, I can mind them of Advice, which is ten thousand times more their interest to at­tend unto, than to any that is tendred in the Treatise we have had under conside­ration, and it is that given by a King, un­to those that should pertake of the like Royal Authority with himself; Psalm 2. 10, 11, 12. Be wise now therefore, O ye Kings; be instructed, ye Judges of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoyce with trembling. Kiss the Son, left he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little; blessed are all they that put their trust in him. And he who can in­form me, how they can render themselves more like unto God, more acceptable un­to him, and more the Concern and Delight [Page 392] of mankind, than by relieving peaceable and innocent persons from their Fears, Cares, and Solicitousness about undeserved evils, or from the suffering of such things, which no mortal man can convince them, that they have merited to undergo or suf­fer; he shall have my thanks for his dis­covery.

And what is it, that we treat about? What is it, that a little Truce and Peace is desired unto, and pleaded for? What are the concerns of publick good therein? Let a little sedate consideration be exer­cised about these things, and the causeles­ness of all the Wrath we have been con­versing withall, will quickly appear. That there is a sad degeneracy of Christi­anity in the world, amongst the Profes­sors of Christian Religion, from the Rule, Spirit, Worship and Conversation of the first Christians, who in all things observed and expressed the Nature, Vertue, and Power of the Gospel, all must acknow­ledge, and many do complain. Whatever of this kind comes to pass, and by what means soever, it is the interest and design of them, who are present gainers by it in the world, to keep all things in the po­sture, that yields them their advantage. [Page 393] Hence upon every Appearance of an Al­teration, or Apprehension that any will desert the Wayes of Worship, wherein they have been engaged, they are cast into a storm of passion and outrage, like Demetrius and the rest of the Silver-smiths, pretending divisions, present settlement, ancient veneration, and the like; when their gain and advantage, whether known or unknown to themselves, is that, which both influenceth them with such a frame of Spirit, and animates them to actings sui­table thereunto. Thus in the Ages past there was so great and universal an Apostacy, long before fore-told, overspreading Chri­stianity, that by innumerable sober persons it was judged intolerable: and that, if men had any regard to the Gospel of Christ, their own freedom in the world, or ever­lasting blessedness, there was a necessity of a Reformation, and the reduction of the profession of Christian Religion unto some nearer conformity to the Primitive times and pattern. Into this design sundry Kings, Princes, and whole Nations en­gaged themselves, namely what lay in them, and according to the sentiments of Truth they had received, to reduce Religion unto its pristine Glory. What [Page 394] Wrath, Clamours, Fury, Indignation, Re­venge, Malice, this occasioned in them whose Subsistence, Wealth, Advantages, Honour and Reputation, all lay in pre­serving things in their state of defection and Apostacy, is known to all the world, Hence therefore arose bloody persecuti­ons in all, and fierce Wars in many Nati­ons, where this thing was attempted; stirred up by the craft and cruelty of them, who had mastered and managed the former declensions of Religion to their own use and advantage. The guilt of which mischiefs and miseries unto man­kind, is by a late Writer amongst our selves, contrary to all the monuments of times past, and confessions of the Adver­saries themselves, endeavoured to be cast on the Reformers. However a work of Reformation was carried on in the world, and succeeded in many places: in none more eminently, than in this Nation wherein we live. That the end aimed at, which was professedly the Reduction of Religion to its antient Beauty and Glo­ry in Truth and Worship, is attained amongst us, some perhaps do judge, and absolutely acquiesce therein: and for my part I wish we had more did so. For, [Page 395] be it spoken, as I hope, without offence on the part of others, so without fear of giving it, or having it taken, on my own; there are among many, such evident De­clensions from the first established Reforma­tion, towards the old or a new, and it may be worse Apostacy; such an apparent weariness of the principal Doctrines and practices, which enlivened the Reforma­tion; as I cannot but be troubled at, and wherewith many are offended. For although I do own a dissent from some present establishments in the Church of England, yet I have that honour for the first Reformers of it, and Reformation it self; that love to the Truth declared and established in it; that respect to the Work and Grace of God, in the conversion of the souls of thousands by the Ministry of the word in these Nations; that I cannot but grieve continually to see the acknow­ledged Doctrines of it deserted, its an­cient principles and practices derided, its pristine zeal despised by some, who make advantage of its outward constitu­tion; inheriting the profits, emoluments and wealth, which the bounty of our Kings have endowed it withal; but not its Spirit, its Love, its stedfastness in [Page 396] owning the Protestant Truth and Cause. But to return; for these things may bet­ter elsewhere be complained of, seeing they relate only to particular persons. That what is done in Reformation be established; that any farther publick work of the same nature be attempted; or the retrivement of what is done to its original condition and estate, belongs to the determination of the Supream Magistrate, and to that alone. Private persons have no Call, no Warrant to attempt any thing unto those purposes. However many there are, who dislike some Ecclestastical Constitutions and Modes of outward Worship, which have been the matter of great contests from the first Reformation: but much more dislike the degeneracy from the Spirit, way and principles of the first Reformers before mentioned, which in some at present, they apprehend, And therefore though ma­ny seem to be at a great distance from the present established Forms of the Church of England; yet certainly all who are hum­ble and peaceable, when they shall see the Ministry of the Church, as in former dayes in some measure, acted rightly and zealously towards the known ends of it, [Page 397] and such as are undeniably by all acknow­ledged, namely, the Conviction of the World, the Conversion of Souls, and Edi­fication of them that do believe; and the discipline of it exercised, in a con­formily at least to the Rule of the Disci­pline of the secular powers of the earth, not to be a terrour to the good, but to them that do evil; and in these things a demon­stration of the Meekness, Humility, Pati­ence, forbearance, condescension to the weakness, mistakes, errings and wandrings of others, which the Gospel doth as plainly and evidently require of us, as it doth, that we should believe in Jesus Christ; will continually pray for its pro­sperity, though they cannot themselves joyn with it in sundry of its practices and wayes. In the mean time, I say, such persons as these, in themselves and for their own concerns, do think it their duty, not absolutely to take up in what hath been attained amongst us; much less in what many are degenera­ted into; but to endeavour the Redu­ction of their practice in the Worship of God, to what was first appointed by Jesus Christ; as being perswaded, that he requires it of them; and being con­vinced, [Page 398] that in the unspeakable variety that is in humane constitutions, Rest un­to their Souls and Consciences is not otherwise to be obtained. And if at the same time they endeavour not to re­duce the Manner and Course of their Con­versation to the same Rule and Exam­ple, by which they would have their Worship of God regulated; they are hypocrites. Short enough, no doubt, they come in both of perfection; but both they profess to aim equally at. And herein alone can their Consciences find rest and peace. In the doctrine of faith, consent­ed on in the first Reformation, and de­clared in the allowed Writings of the Church of England, they agree with others; and wish with all their hearts they had more to agree withall. Only they cannot come up to the practice of some things in the Worship of God; which being con­fessedly of humane prescription, their Obedience in them would lye in a perfect contradiction to their principal design before mentioned. For those things, be­ing chosen out from a great multitude of things of the same nature, invented by those, whose Authority was rejected in the first Reformation, or Reduction of [Page 399] Religion from its Catholick Apostacy; they suppose, cannot justly be imposed on them; they are sure, cannot be ho­nestly received by them, whilest they de­sign to reduce themselves unto the primitive Rules and Examples of Obe­dience, In this design they profess them­selves ready to be ruled by, and to yield subjection unto any Truth or Direction, that can or may be given them from the Word of God, or any Principles lawfully from thence educed. How their con­viction is at present attempted, let the Book under consideration, and some late unparallel'd and illegal Acts of Violence, conformable to the spirit of it, be a Testi­mony. But in the management of their design, they proceed on no other Princi­ples, than those of the Libetty of judge­ment (of di [...]eretion or discerning they call it,) for the determining of themselves and their own practices, in what they believe and prosess about Religion, and the liberty of their Consciences from all humane impositions, than were owned, pleaded and contended for by the first Reformers, and the most learned defend­ers of the Church of England, in their disputations against the Papists; those [Page 400] they will stand to, and abide by: yea than what are warranted by the Principles of our nature and constitution; for no man practiseth any thing, nor can practise it, but according to his own will and choice.

Now in these things, in their Principle, or in their management of it, it may be they are mistaken; it may be they are in an errour; or under many mistakes and errours. But from their integrity they know themselves innocent, even in their mistakes. And it is in the nature of men to think strange of sedate vio­lences, that befall them without their de­merit, and of suffering by Law without any Guilt. Their design of reducing themselves in Worship and Conversation to the primitive pattern, they openly avow: nor dare any directly condemn that design; nor can they be convinced of insincerity in what they profess. And shall they they be destroyed, if they miss it in some matters of smaller concernment? which, whatever some may boast of, is not hitherto tolerably proved. Shall now their dissent in Religious Observances on this occasion, and those, and that about things mostly and chiefly, if not only, [Page 401] that appear neither name nor thing in the Scripture, be judged a crime not to be expiated, but by their ruine? Are im­moralities or vicious debaucheries rather to be tolerated, or exempted from punish­ment, than such a dissent? What place of Scripture in the Old or New Testament, which of the ancient Fathers of the Church, do speak at this rate? Opini­ons inconsistent with publick Tranqui­lity, with the general Rules of Moral Duties in all Relations and Conditi­ans; practices of any tendency in them­selves to political disturbances, are by none pleaded for. Meer dissent it self, with different Observances in the Out­ward Worship of God, is by some pre­tended indeed to be a Civil distur­bance. It hath alwayes been so by some, even by those, whose own esta­blished wayes have been Superstitious and Idolatrous. But wise men begin to smile, when they hear private inte­rest pleaded as publick good, and the affections which it begets, as the com­mon Reason of things. And these pre­tences have been by all parties, at one time or another, refuted and discarded. [Page 402] Let the merit of the cause be stated and considered, which is truly as above proposed, and no other: set aside Pre­judices, Animosities, Advantages from things past and by-gone in political dis­orders and tumults, wherein it hath no concern; and it will quickly appear how little it is, how much, if possible, less than nothing, that is or can be pleaded for the countenancing of exter­nal severity in this case. Doth it suite the Spirit of the Gospel, or his com­mands, to destroy good Wheat, for stand­ing, as is supposed, a little out of order, who would not have men pluck up the tares, but to let them stand quietly in the field untill Harvest? Doth it answer his mind to destroy his Disci­ples, who profess to love and obey him, from the Earth; who blamed his Disciples of old for desiring to destroy the Samaritans, his Enemies, with fire from Heaven? We are told, that he, who was born after the flesh, persecuted him, who was born after the promise: and a work becoming him it was. And if men are sincere Disciples of Christ, though they may fall into [Page 403] some mistakes and errours, the out­ward persecuting of them on that ac­count, will be found to be of the works of the flesh. It is certain, that for those in particular, who take upon them, in any place or degree, to be Ministers of the Gospel, there are commands for meek­ness, patience and forbearance, given unto them. And it is one of the greatest duties incumbent on them, to express the Lord Jesus Christ, in the frame of his mind and Spirit unto men; and that eminently in his meekness and lowliness, which he calls us all in an especial man­ner to learn of him. A peculiar con­formity also to the Gospel, to the holy Law of Love, self-denyal and condescen­tion, is required of them; that they may not in their spirits, wayes and actings, make a false representation of him, and that which they profess.

I know not therefore whence it is come to pass, that this sort of men do princi­pally, if not only stir up Magistrates and Rulers to Laws, Seventies, Penalties, Coercions, Imprisonments, and the like outward means of fierce and carnal power, against those, who in any thing [Page 404] dissent from them in Religion. Gene­rally abroad throughout Christendome, those, in whose hands the Civil Powers are, and who may be supposed to have inclinations unto the severe exercise of that power which is their own, such as they think possibly may become them as men and Governours, would be incline­able to moderation towards dissenters, were they not excited, provoked and wearied by them, who pretend to re­present Jesus Christ to the world; as if any earthly Potentate had more pati­ence, mercy and compassion, than he Look on those Lutheran Countreyes where they persecute the Calvinists; it is com­monly declared and proved, that the Mi­gistrates, for the most part, would wil­lingly bear with those dissenters, were they not stirred up continually to severi­ties by them, whose duty it were to perswade them to clemency and mode­ration, if in themselves they were other­wise enclined. And this hath ruined the interest of the Protestant Religion in Germany, in a great measure. Do men, who destroy no more than they can, nor punish more than they are able, and cry out for Assistence where [Page 405] their own arm fails them, render them­selves hereby like to their heavenly Fa­ther? Is this Spirit from above? Doth that, which is so, teach men to harrase the consciences of persons, their bre­thren and fellow-servants, on every little difference in judgement and practice about religious things? Whom will such men fulfill the commands of patience, for­bearance, waiting, meekness, condescen­sion, that the Gospel abounds with, to­wards? Is it only towards them, who are of the same mind with themselves? They stand in no need of them: they stand upon the same terms of advantage with themselves. And for those that dissent, arise, kill, and eat, seems to be the only command to be observed towards them. And why all this fierceness and severity? Let men talk what they please, those aimed at, are peaceable in the Land; and resolve to be so, whatever may befall them. They despise all contrary insinu­ations. That they are, in their stati­ons severally, usefull to the Common­wealth, and collectively in their indu­stry and trading, of great considerati­on to publick welfare, is now appa­rent [Page 406] unto all indifferent men. It is or must be, if it be for any thing, (as surely no men delight in troubling others for trouble sake;) for their Errors and Mistakes, in and about the Worship of God. All other Pleass are meer pre­tences of passion and interest. But who judgeth them to be so guilty of errors? Why those, that stir up others to their hurt and disquietment. But is their Judgement infallible? How if they should be mistaken themselves in their judgement? If they are, they do not only err, but persecute others for the Truth. And this hath been the general issue of this matter in the world. Error hath persecuted Truth ten times, for Truths once persecuting of Error. But suppose the worst; suppose them in er­rors and under mistakes; let it be prov­ed, that God hath appointed, that all men who so err, should be so punish­ed, as they would have Non-conformists, and though I should believe them in the truth, I would never more plead their cause. And would these men be willing­ly thus dealt withall, by those who judge, or may judge them to err? It [Page 407] may be some would; because they have a good security, that none shall ever judge them so to do, who hath power to punish them: for they will be of his mind. But sure none can be so ab­solutely confined unto themselves, nor so universally in all their affections and desires unto their own personal con­cerns, as not to have a compassion for some or other, who in one place or other are judged to err by them, who have power over them to affix what guilt they please unto that, which is not their crime. And will they justifie all their oppressors? All men have an equal right in this matter, nothing is required, but being uppermost, to make a difference. This is that, which hath turned Christendome into a Shambles; whilest every prevailing Party, hath judged it their duty and interest, to de­stroy them that do dissent from them.

Once more; what name of sin or wick­edness will they find to affix to these errors? Nullum criminis nomen, nist no­minis crimen. No man errs willingly, nor ought to be thought to tempt or seduce his own will, when his er­ror [Page 408] is to his disadvantage. And he is innocent whose will is not guilty. Moreover, those pretended errors in our case, are not in matters of faith; nor for the most part, in or a­bout the Worship of God, or that which is acknowledged so to be: but in or about those things, which some think it convenient to add unto it, or conjoyn with it. And what quietness, what peace is there like to be in the world, whilst the sword of vengeance must be conti­nually drawn about these things? Coun­sels of peace, patience, and forbearance, would certainly better become Profes­sors of the Gospel, and Preachers of e­verlasting peace than such passionate and furious enterprizes for severity, as we meet withal.

And I no way doubt, but that all generous noble and heroick spirits, such as are not concerned in the impale­ed peculiar interest and advantages of some, and do scorn the pedantick hu­mours of mean and emulous souls; when once a few more clouds of preju­dices are scattered, will be willing to give up to God the Glory of his Sove­raignty [Page 409] over the consciences of men; and despise the thoughts of giving them disquietments for such things, as they can no way remedy; and which hin­der them not from being servants of God, good Subjects to the King, and use­full in their respective lots and conditi­ons.

And now instead of those words of Pilate, What I have written, I have writ­ten, which though uttered by him ma­liciously and despightfully, as was also the Prophecy of Caiaphas, were by the Holy Wise Providence of God, turned into a Testimony to the Truth; I shall shut up this Discourse, with those of our Saviour, which are unspeakably more our concernment to consider, Matth. 24. 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51. Who then is a faithfull and wise Servant, whom his Lord hath made Ruler over his houshold, to give them meat in due season; blessed is that servant, whom his Lord when he cometh shall find so doing. Verily I say un­to you, he shall make him Ruler over all his goods. But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, my Lord deferreth his coming; And shall begin to smite his fellow [Page 410] servants, and to eat and drink with the dru [...] ­ken; The Lord of that servant shall come in a day that he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of; and shall cu [...] him assunder, and appoint him his portion with the Hypocrites; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.