it ought to be exerted to wit not in determining of them according to their own will and pleasure and much less in invading the Office of the Priesthood which we know he that attempted was strucken with a Leprosie for but in defending the Church from all both Foraign and Domestick Enemies in keeping the Members of the Church within their respective Duties and punishing with the civil Sword those that shall refuse so to do in calling Councils to determine of matters of Religion and giving force to those things that shall be rightly determin'd by them For as more than these cannot be legitimately inferr'd from those places we have made use of to establish the Authority of Princes by so that they cannot rightly claim more the nature of the Church according as I have before stated it shews For since the Church by the Institution of Christ is endow'd with a power in determining in things relating to it self since also the secular Powers as well by their Baptism as the precepts of the Scripture are bound to be defenders of it for he who gives up himself to the Christian Religion doth thereby profess that he will perform his proper part in it and therefore if he be a King the part of a King it must needs be that their Authority in sacred matters should consist rather in obliging the several members of it to their respective duties than in determining of their own head concerning them The same is no less evident from the practice of Christian Princes in calling together a Council as often as any thing hath stood in need of a definition For as Mr. Thorndike * De ratione ac jure finiendi controversias hath well observ'd he who calls a Council of Bishops to make a Decree to receive a civil sanction from himself doth thereby profess as well that it belongs to the Church to determine in it as to himself to pass that Decree into a Law Which is so true as the same Mr. Thorndike ‖ Ibid. hath observ'd that though Constantius the Emperour would fain have undone what had been decreed by the Council of Nice yet he never attempted it but by Decrees of other Councils which shews what opinion was had of the Authority of the Church even by the Enemies of the Church it self These two things only seem necessary to be subjoin'd that we may give Christian Princes the whole of what is due to them 1. That it belongs to Princes to judge what is rightly or not rightly decreed by the Church and according as they shall judge either to give or withold their assent and 2. That though in things dubious or not at all determin'd by Councils the Prince is to expect the decision of the Church yet there is no necessity of so doing where the thing is evident from the word of God or hath been generally defin'd by former Councils For as where the word of God is clear the Prince need no other warrant who by that word it self is call'd upon to serve the Lord and add the force of his Sanction to the general Injunctions of it so where the thing hath been generally defin'd little doubt can be made of Princes passing what is so into a Law partly because it hath been in some measure defined by the Church and partly because it is to be presum'd the Church gives way to a more particular determination where the thing doth require a present definition or is not of such moment to require the calling of the Bishops from their several charges with the far greater detriment of the Church over which they are appointed to preside In the mean time as it is not to be deny'd that those Princes shall best provide for the peace of their own Consciences who shall not ordinarily determine of Ecclesiastical affairs without the consent of the Church or at least of some of the principal Bishops of it so we can never sufficiently commend the Institutions of this Kingdom whereas in the Parliament the place where all Laws are framed the Bishops have the principal place so the commands of King and Parliament in Ecclesiastical Affairs do for the most part follow the Canons dereed by our Convocations For after this manner both now and heretofore the Book of Common Prayers underwent the Examination of a Convocation before the use of it passed into a Law and extraordinary Forms of Prayers are approv'd by some Bishops before they have the Kings Mandate affix'd to them I will conclude this Discourse with the Doctrine of the Articles of our Church because exactly according with what I have before delivered For as the 20th of those Articles declares the Church to have power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in controversies of Faith so the 37th not only excludes from Princes the ministring either of Gods word or of the Sacraments but makes their Supremacy to consist in ruling all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restraining with the civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers To which as I know not what any reasonable man can oppose because so exactly distinguishing between the Churches Power and that of Princes so I see not how any reasonable man where the Authority of Princes keeps within these bounds can think himself exempted from yeilding obedience to it He who commits the care of the Church to secular Princes necessarily allowing them a superintendency over it and consequently also where that superintendency is not manifestly made use of to the prejudice of Religion obliging all the Members of the Church to yield obedience to their Commands How we are to honour Princes by our Obedience hath been at large declar'd It remains that we also shew both that we are and how we are to honour them with submission to their Censures Which will appear first of all from that Authority wherewith they are invested of drawing the Sword of Justice against Offenders For as an Authority to Command infers a necessity of Obedience in all those that are subjected to it so a Power of Coercion a like necessity of Submission to it in all those who are subjected to it The onely thing of difficulty is Whether that Submission be necessary where the Power of Coercion is us'd against those who seem to themselves and it may be not without reason to have done nothing to deserve it For inasmuch as the Sword of Justice is committed to Princes for the avenging of such onely as are Eyil doers it may seem but reasonable to infer that they who are not Evil doers are free from submitting themselves to the Stroke of it And indeed if the Question be concerning the avoiding of it by Flight there is no doubt it is in the power of the Subject who conceives himself not to have deserv'd it so to avoid if he can the falling under the Power of it Our Saviour having expresly given leave that if we be
as the Scripture which is more to be credited hath taught us another Lesson because forbidding us to say ‖ Prov. 24.29 I will do to my Neighbour as he hath done to me I will render to the man according to his works so it hath elsewhere assign'd such Reasons of it as both shew the unlawfulness of such a Procedure and take off from the force of its Pretensions For giving us to understand that God to whom Vengeance originally belongeth reserveth that part of Justice to himself †Rom. 12.19 and to those whom he hath entrusted * Rom. 13.4 with his Authority it doth consequently make it unlawful to any other than such to assume to themselves the Execution of it and therefore also to do to Men as they have before dealt with them If he who hath his own Injuries return'd upon him receive no more than he doth deserve yet will not that warrant our retaliating them because we have no Authority to chastise him The more Equitable as well as more Christian Rule is certainly Do to other Men as ye would they should do to you as you your selves if you were in their Circumstances would be forward enough to desire from them So doing you will not onely not usurp upon the Prerogative of God or of his Vicegerent but comply with the Sentiments of Nature and Revelation with the several Precepts and Intimations of the one with the Law and the Prophets and Gospels of the other THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT Honour thy father and thy mother that thy days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth theé PART I. The Contents A Transition to the Duty we owe to each other whether consider'd onely as Men or under a more near Relation The latter of these provided for in this Fifth Commandment which is divided into a Duty and a Promise An Essay toward a general Explication of the Duty where is shewn That under Father and Mother are comprehended 1. Grandfather and Grandmother and other the Ancestors from whom we came because though at a distance Authors of our Being 2. Kings and all that are in Authority partly because in the place of Parents to their People and partly because their Authority is a Branch of the Paternal one and succeeded into the place of it 3. Our Spiritual Pastors because begetting us to a better Birth And in fine All that are our Superiours whether in Authority Dignity or Age. The like Comprehensiveness evinc'd in the Honour that is requir'd which is shewn also to include Fear and Love together with the Expressions of them and Honour The Duty of Superiours connoted in the Honour that is to be paid to them and how that Duty may be inferr'd An Address to a more particular Explication of the Duty where the Honour of Parents is resum'd and the Grounds thereof shewn to be first Their being under God the Authors of ours and secondly the Maintainers of it The Consequences of the former Ground propos'd and shewn to preclude all Pretences of Disrespect OUR Duty to God being provided for in the first place as which is both the Foundation and Limitation of all others proceed we according as the Decalogue invites to consider the Duty we owe to each other which may be reduc'd to two Heads that is to say such as we owe to one another as Men or such as arise from some more intimate Relation between us The latter of these is my Task at this time because the Design of the Commandment that is now before us for the Explication whereof I will consider 1. The Duty enjoyn'd And 2. The Promise wherewith it is enforc'd I. Now though if we look no further than the Letter we could not be long to seek what that is which is here bound upon us yet because I have before shewn that many things are contain'd in a Commandment beside what is express'd in it to attain the full importance of this we must enter into the very Bowels of it and extract that Sense which is wrapp'd up in it as well as that which is apparent In order whereunto I will inquire 1. Whether any Superiours are here meant besides Fathers and Mothers 2. What is the importance of that Honour which is here requir'd 3. Whether the Commandment provide for the Behaviour of Superiours towards Inferiours as well as of Inferiours towards them 1. And first of all though Father and Mother be the onely Persons express'd to whom we are requir'd to give Honour yet the general Reason of the Commandment obligeth us to extend it to Grandfathers and Grandmothers and other the Ancestors from whom we are descended because though they contributed not immediately to our Birth yet mediately they did as being the Authors of those from whom we deriv'd it Whence it is that in the Scripture they have often the Name of Fathers as Your Father Abraham rejoyc'd to see my day and was glad But beside that Grandfathers and Grandmothers are to be understood and other the Stocks from whence we came there is no doubt but Kings and all that are in Authority are included in the same general Names Witness first their being in the place of Fathers to those who are under their Dominion For though as Moses sometime told God they do not beget their People if we understand it with reference to their Natural one yet as their Civil Birth is from them so they carry them in their bosom as a nursing Father beareth the sucking Child as the same God commanded the angry Moses Num. 11.12 Again As Kings are in the place of Fathers to their People especially in respect of their Tuition so the Authority of Kings is a Branch of the Paternal one and succeeded into the Place of it Of which beside the Testimony * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vid. Sanders de Oblig Conscient Praelect 7. sect 16. of Aristotle who was no Friend of Kingly Government and the great number of Kings that was anciently in every little Country and particularly in the Land of Canaan we may discern evident Marks in the Authority of Fathers even after the Empire was otherwise dispos'd of these having anciently the Power of Life and Death which is one of the principal Flowers of the Regal Diadem Now forasmuch as Kings are not onely in the place of Fathers to their People but vested in that Authority which was originally and naturally theirs it is but reasonable to think that when God commanded to honour these his Intention was to include the other as who beside their resemblance to them had also the best part of their Authority Next to Kings and Princes consider we our Spiritual Fathers even those who beget us to Piety and to God concerning whom there can be no place for doubt that they ought to be understood in those Fathers we are here commanded to revere For if our Earthly Father is to have Honour those certainly ought not to go
God's Designation and Appointment where is shewn first That they neither do nor can pretend to any Immediate Appointment as those of the Jews might but onely a mediate one And secondly That that Appointment is mark'd out to us by the Dispensations of his Providence which are moreover shewn to be a sufficient Testimony of it Evidence of that Appointment in such Princes as arrive at their Authority by the ordinary Course of Things or such as arrive at it by extraordinary Means and particularly by Fraud and Violence By what Means these last become legitimate Powers and particularly by what Means the Roman Emperours came to be so Of the sorts of Honour which are to be paid to Princes which are shewn as before in Parents to be 1. An Inward Esteem of them and 2. An Outward Declaration of it This latter evidenc'd in the Declaration that is made by the Gesture and by the Tongue where moreover is shewn at large the Sinfulness of speaking evil of Princes even where there want not real Failings in them IT being evident from the general Explication of this Commandment that Kings and all that are in Authority are included in the Name of Fathers and it being no less evident from St. Peter 1 Pet. 2.17 that the Honour of Kings is a part of Christianity for the fuller Explication of this Commandment I will allot them a place in my Discourse and therein inquire 1. What the Grounds of Honouring Kings or Princes are 2. What Honours are to be exhibited to them 3. Answer the Objections that are commonly made for the denial of those Honours and particularly that of Submission to their Censures 4. After which I will descend in the fourth place to consider of the Honour of Inferiour Magistrates and shew upon what Grounds and after what Manner and Measure that Honour is to be paid 5. And lastly Speak a Word or two of their Duty 1. Honour as was before shewn being nothing else than an Acknowledgment of his Excellencies whom we honour to know what the ground of the Honour of Princes is we must enquire what those Excellencies are by which they stand commended to the world In order whereunto I know not what shorter course to take than by having recourse to the 13. Chapter to the Romans where this matter is both largely and perspicuously handled For exhorting both once and again that every Soul should be subject to them and that too not only for Wrath but for Conscience sake the Apostle assigns for the reason of that subjection that they are men of Power or Authority that they are invested with that Authority by God that they are appointed by him over those that are under their subjection that they are Gods Ministers and Vicegerents in the governance of them that they have both Authority and Command to reward and encourage the good and to draw out the Sword of Justice against Evil doers from all which put together it is evident that the ground for which a Prince is to be honoured is that he is Gods Minister and Vicegerent here on Earth and of his designation and appointment For the further evidencing the former whereof as in which it concerns us to be well satisfied in regard of some evil Opinions that have been lately opposed to it the first thing that I shall alledge is Gods giving them his own August name For thus Exod. 22.28 after he had said Thou shalt not revile the Gods to let us know what Gods he means he subjoins in the next words nor speak evil of the Ruler of thy people But so we find them elsewhere more apparently stil'd Psal 82.6 For as his words there are express I have said ye are Gods so it is apparent from the whole Psalm that they are Princes to whom he thus speaketh such to whom it belongs to judge the causes that are brought before them to do justice to the afflicted and needy by defending and delivering them and ridding them out of the hand of the wicked Which Offices though they may and for the most part are communicated to Inferiour Magistrates and particularly to those that have the name of Judges yet as they are originally in the Prince by whom they are so communicated and executed in his Name and by his Authority so that they are a part of his natural Power Solomon shews 1 Kings 3.7.9 he upon Gods making him King in the stead of David his Father begging of him that he would give him an understanding heart to judge his people and to discern between good and bad And accordingly as we find Solomon himself in consequence of the Royal Authority giving judgment between the two Harlots that contended for the Living Child vers 27 28. of the forequoted Chapter so that the Kings of England heretofore sat personally in judgment is notorious from Story and the Bench whereon they sat for that very reason stiled to this day The Vpper or Kings Bench. But beside that Princes have the name of God which is no contemptible indication of their being his Substitutes and Vicegerents we find moreover that God judgeth among them yea that their Throne is no other than Gods For thus what is in 1 Kings 2.12 Then Solomon sat upon the Throne of David his Father is elsewhere expressed Then Solomon sat upon the Throne of the Lord as King instead of David his Father 1 Chro. 29.23 And which comes yet more home to our purpose what was said by Jehosaphat to the Judges he had appointed that they judged not for man but for the Lord 2 Chron. 19.6 for what greater proof can we desire of Princes being Gods Substitutes and Vicegerents than the bearing of his name and sitting in his Throne and that they who judge for and under them judge not for Man but for the Lord Neither will it avail to say that how true soever this may have been of the Kings of Judah which had sometime the Title of a Theocraty yet the like cannot be affirmed of other Princes For as it is apparent enough that they were not such at the time of their Kings God himself having told Samuel that when they went about to desire a King they rejected him from being King over them and the Word of God that they both desired and had a King after the manner of other Nations So what is in the Old Testament affirm'd of the Jewish Kings St. Paul sticks not to affirm of the powers that then were where he calls them the Ministers of God But from hence it will follow whatever hath been pretended to the contrary that Princes do not derive the power they have from the people For if they be Gods Ministers it is his Authority by which they shine neither have they any other Fountain of their Power than that * Irenae l. 5. c. 24. Cujus enim jussu homines nascuntur hujus jussu reges constituuntur Tertul. Apol. c. 30. Inde est imperator unde h
mo antequam imperator inde potestas illi unde spiritus which is the Fountain of their Being And though I know the contrary hath been pretended from the Scripture inasmuch as those Powers are by our Translation of it stiled the ordinance of man 1 Pet. 2.13 yet as the words which they render Submit your selves to every ordinance of Man import no other than ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Ushers Power communicated by God to the Prince c. pag 3. seq the doing of it to every humane creature that is to say for so both the Subjection injoin'd and the Persons †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into whom it is branch'd shews to every humane creature that is in Authority so what the same St. Peter adds as the grounds of our so doing doth plainly overthrow that counterfeit interpretation For requiring the subjecting our selves to them for the Lords sake he shews it is his Authority which commends them and for which they are to be rever'd That Princes are Gods Vicegerents here on Earth hath been at large declar'd it remains that we also shew them to be appointed by God as such For as no one taketh to himself the honour of Priesthood but he who is called of God as was Aaron so undoubtedly no one can assume to himself the honour of Gods Vicegerent unless he be thereto appointed by himself That which is originaly anothers being not capable of becoming ours but by the grant of him to whom it doth so belong To make out therefore the rightfulness of Princes Pleas we must enquire after the donation of the Almighty and by what means both they and we may be assured of it That the Princes of the Jews were appointed by God as his Vicegerents no doubt can be made because he whose Vicegerents they were declared them to be such by men immediately inspired by himself and assured them of that declaration by his word After the former whereof as it was not in the power of their people to doubt so it would have been extremity of madness as well as of Impiety to deny it But because there is not the least appearance of any such immediate appointment of other Princes and beside that they who arrogate to themselves the same Authority do not in the least pretend to it therefore to make out the legitimateness of their Plea some other course must be taken which accordingly I come now to attempt In order whereunto unto the first thing that I shall alledge is those words of St. Paul before remembred that the powers that then were were ordain'd of God For though that will give us little light into the manner of their appointment and consequently contribute little to the understanding of that of our own yet thus far it will contribute to it as to give us to understand that those Princes may be appointed by God who have no immediate designation For inasmuch as it is notorious both from the Scriptures and Profane Authors that the Powers that then were were no other than the Roman Emperours of whose immediate appointment by God there is not the least footstep either in the one or the other it will follow that those Princes may be appointed by him as his Vicegerents who have no such immediate call I observe secondly That as the Powers that then were though they had no immediate call yet are affirm'd by St. Paul to have been ordain'd by God so that they who know nothing of God or of their own appointment are stil'd the Anointed of the Lord which if any thing may seem to have been peculiar to the Jewish Princes For thus in particular Isa 45.1 We find God stiling Cyrus his anointed though as the same God immediately after tells us he had then no knowledge of him I observe thirdly which will bring us yet more neer to the thing intended that though the Powers that now are have no such immediate appointment as the Jewish Princes had yet is there as good Authority for the being of such Power though there be no such designation of the persons that are to be invested with it For it being the voice both of Nature and Scripture that God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace and Order and it being no less evident from experience that Peace and Order cannot be either had or maintain'd without the Institution of Rulers it is necessarily to be presum'd to be the will and pleasure of God that there should be such Rulers in every Nation Which said a way is opened to the discovery of that appointment which we have said the Powers on Earth to stand by For it being of Divine appointment that there should be Rulers in every Nation and God Almighty having not by any immediate Revelation signifi'd his pleasure concerning the Persons that are to be so it follows that to attain the knowledge of his Will in this particular we are to have recourse to his Providence which is the only way besides to come to the knowledge of it For though the Providence of God be no Rule against his revealed Will because that is the proper measure of Good and Evil yet inasmuch as that also is a declaration of his Will nothing hinders but it may have place where the other is not contradicted and mark out the appointments of our great Master to us But from hence it will follow first That those Powers are to be looked upon as ordain'd by God which come to that Power they have as without any fraud or violence so by the ordinary course of Gods Providence For that Authority to which they arrive being consign'd into their hands by his alone Providence in whom all Authority in Heaven and Earth is vested it is in reason to be presum'd to be appointed by himself and accordingly to be look'd upon as such Upon which account all those Powers must be look'd upon as ordain'd by God that either come to the Throne by a lineal descent from former Kings where the Kingdom is Hereditary or by a free and unconstrained Choice where it is Elective It will follow secondly That those also are to be look'd upon as ordained of God which however they do at first attain to their Power by Fraud or Violence yet are confirm'd in it by the Submission and Acceptance of those in whom the Government formerly was and over whom it is to be exercis'd For it being the Appointment of God that there should be Rulers in every Nation and which is more where there is no other Declaration of his Will that we should have recourse unto his Providence it follows that where the Throne becomes empty as it is by the Rendition of those that before sate in it he is in reason to be presum'd to be appointed to it who is not onely permitted by God to ascend to it but those to whom it formerly belong'd together with those that were govern'd by it mov'd by God to accept of
Shiloh or the Messiah should appear he expresses it by affirming that as the Scepter which is an Ensign of Regal Power should not depart from Judah so neither a Lawgiver from between his knees Gen. 49.10 In like manner as Homer if we may joyn Profane Authors with Sacred where he speaks of the same Regal Dignity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But so also that I may return to the Scripture after it had been said that Moses commanded a Law to the Inheritance of the Congregation of Jacob to let us know by what Authority he did so the Scripture adds And he was King in Jesurun when the Princes and Tribes of the People were gathered together to receive it Deut. 33.4 5. But not to content my self with these or the like Texts which attribute the Power of Making Laws to Princes let us which will be a yet more convincing Topick at least to some Men consider the End of their Institution For if that End be not to be compass'd without the Power of Making Laws Princes must consequently be suppos'd to be invested with that Power and their Subjects under a necessity of obeying them It is the Affirmation of St. Paul Rom. 13.3 4. That Rulers are appointed by God for the encouragement of those that do good and the avenging of those that do evil Now though each of these Ends may seem to be compass'd by having a regard in them to the Laws of God and Nature yet if we do more nearly consider it we shall find they cannot compass either unless they have a Power of Making Laws For the Laws of Nature and Scripture descending not to all those Particulars which are necessary to be observ'd in order to the attaining of them hence there ariseth the necessity of a Power to draw them down to particular Instances and accommodate them to the Exigencies of their respective Governments Thus for instance though the Laws of God require the Judging of Offenders and inflicting on them such Punishments as they shall be found to deserve yet inasmuch as they prescribe nothing concerning the Manner or Time of Judging them and much less mark out the Punishments which are to be inflicted on particular Offenders hence there ariseth a necessity in Princes to prescribe when and after what manner they shall be judg'd and what Punishments they shall undergo if they be found guilty of the Crimes laid against them In like manner though the Laws of God and Nature prescribe the encouraging of the Good and doing as much as lies in Princes toward the securing and advancing of their several Properties yet inasmuch as they prescribe nothing at all by what Means that is to be done nor indeed can do by reason of the multiplicity and variety of Humane Affairs hence there ariseth a necessity of making Laws by which they may be secur'd in their several Properties or enabled to improve them to their and the States advantage Forasmuch therefore as without Laws the Good cannot be secur'd as neither Evil-doers either judg'd or condemn'd it follows that they who are appointed both for the one and the other are invested with a Power of Making Laws and consequently the Subjects under a necessity of obeying them But so that they are is yet more evident from the express Declarations of the Scripture For beside that in the fore-quoted place of St. Paul Men are required to be subject to them which as Grotius hath well observ'd imports * Rom. 8.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 5.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 3.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Obedience to their Commands as well as Submission to their Coercion Beside that disobedience in Things lawful is a resisting of their Authority and therefore the contrary to be thought to be intended in that Subjection which is there requir'd Beside lastly that he who requires every Soul to be subject doth it upon intuition of their receiving Praise from them as well as not receiving Vengeance the former whereof cannot in reason be expected where there is no compliance with their Commands to cut off all doubt concerning Obedience to them the same St. Paul admonisheth Titus chap. 3.1 not onely to put his Charge in mind of being subject to Principalities and Powers but to obey Magistrates and to be ready to every good work in compliance with their Commands as well as far from doing so much evil as to oppose themselves against their Power and Government 2. That Obedience is to be given to Princes we have seen already inquire we now by whom and after what measure For the resolution of the former whereof it may suffice to alledge that of St. Paul Rom. 13.1 â—or requiring there every Soul to be subject to the Higher Powers and neither he nor any other of the Apostles else-where making any Exception from it he thereby plainly shews that all are to be so of what Rank and Condition soever And accordingly as whatever is now pretended by the Papists for an Exemption of the Ecclesiastical Order yet no such Plea was ever made by the Priests or Prophets of the Old Testament so till Luxury and Wantonness made the Clergy forget their Duty they also were of the same mind and declar'd it both by their Actions and their Writings St. Chrysostome * Hom 2.3 in Epist ad Rom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in particular explaining every Soul by the Soul of an Apostle as well as of a Layman of one in the highest rank in the Church as well as of the most inferiour Members of Church or State 3. From the subjects of this Obedience therefore pass we to the measure of it which is both a more important question and more difficult to be resolv'd Where first of all I shall observe that it must be in such things as are not forbidden by the Almighty For as where God and Man's commands come in competition it is so clear we are to prefer those of God that St. Peter permits it to the judgment of those who commanded him to act contrary to it Act. 4.19 So that we ought to obey God rather than Princes the place they hold under God may serve for an abundant Evidence For inasmuch as Princes are only the Ministers of God they are in reason to be post-posed to him whose Ministers they are Care only would be taken first That we do not fondly and without just ground pronounce those things as forbidden by God which are imposed upon us by the commands of Princes For though we may be excus'd for not obeying where the thing commanded by Princes is so forbidden yet we cannot without sin refuse our Obedience to such commands as are not any where countermanded by the Almighty Again though we are not to obey where the matter of the Command is evidently against that of God because the Inferiour ought to give place to the Superiour yet
there is not the same reason where the thing commanded is not evidently against the Law of God but only doubted of whether it be so or no. For it being certainly a duty to obey the Magistrate in all things not forbidden and but uncertain whether the thing commanded by him be forbidden reason would that that which is the more certain should be preferr'd before that which is uncertain and consequently a clear and express Command before an uncertain scruple But as where the thing commanded by Princes is apparently against that of God there cannot be the least pretence of yeilding Obedience to it so other limits of our Obedience I know none saving those before-mentioned * Vid. Part 2. of the Explic. of this Commandment where we entreated of the Obedience due to Parents and which are no less appliable here unless it be where the Prince hath set bounds to his own Power by Laws or accepted of them when tendred by others In which case because the Princes Laws are the most Authentick declarations of his Will it is to be presum'd that he wills not my obedience in any thing which is contrary thereto and consequently that in those things it is no sin to refuse it Now though what hath been already said concerning the measure of our Obedience may suffice any reasonable man in civil matters yet because Princes do also challenge to themselves an Authority in Religious ones and we of this Nation in particular are oblig'd under an Oath to acknowledge it it will be necessary to enquire farther whether they have any such Authority and what obedience is due from us to it Now the Authority of Princes in Religious matters may be two-fold indirect or direct by the former whereof we are to understand that which pretends to have an oversight of them only in relation to the State by the latter that which pretends to have an Interest in Religious matters as such If the question be whether Princes are invested with such an Authority as pretends to an oversight of them in relation to the State so no doubt can be made by those who shall consider the influence Religious matters may have upon the State For inasmuch as on the one hand the powers of the world were before the Church and the Church it self is by the command of God oblig'd to revere them and on the other hand the things of Religion according as they are constituted may be profitable or hurtful to the State which is committed to their custody those Powers must of necessity be invested with such an Authority therein as may preserve the peace of the State entire But from hence it will follow That Princes have a power so far of calling or limiting Religious Assemblies of appointing who shall serve at the Altars in them or putting by those that are For inasmuch as the Peace of the State may be concern'd in all these particulars they are of necessity so far to fall under the cognizance of those to whom the Government of the State doth appertain And accordingly as all Princes of what perswasion soever in Religion have in Profession or Fact arrogated such an Authority to themselves so provided they do not entrench upon the Laws of Christianity they cannot in the least be faulted for the exercise thereof nor be disobey'd without a violation of the Ordinance of God that constitutes them Because what they do is no more than necessary for the preservation of that State which God hath committed to their charge Thus for instance inasmuch as by means of the Assemblies of discontented Persons there may arise great prejudice to the State no man in his right wits can deny but it may be lawful for a Prince to retrench the number or appoint the manner of the holding of them For though Christianity enjoin upon Christians the assembling of themselves for Religious Worship yet no Law of Christianity appoints that they should meet by Thousands but on the contrary assures them that where even two or three meet together in his name there Christ is in the midst of them From the indirect Authority of Princes in Religious matters pass we to that which we call direct which interests it self in Religious matters as such For the establishing whereof I shall desire you in the first place to reflect upon that of St. Paul to Timothy 1 Tim. 2. from Verse 1. to 4. I exhort therefore first of all that supplications prayers intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men For Kings and all that are in Authority that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth From which words as it is evident that it is acceptable to God that Kings become Christians this as will appear by comparing the first Verse and the fourth being the thing he instructs Timothy to beg of God for them so also that being made Christians they should by their Authority procure to other Christians a peaceable exercise of that Religion whereunto they are called The reason assign'd by the Apostle for praying for their Conversion being that under them and by their Arbitriment they might lead a quiet and peaceable Life in all godliness and honesty From the exhortation of St. Paul pass we to that of David which will both lend light to the former Exhortation and more clearly discover to us that Authority wich we seek Be wise now therefore O ye Kings be instructed ye Judges of the Earth serve the Lord with fear and rejoice with trembling Kiss the Son lest he be angry and ye perish from the way when his wrath is kindled but a little For herein as St. Augustine observes do Kings serve the Lord as Kings if in their Kingdom they command those things that are good and forbid evil and that not only such as appertain to Humane Society but such as appertain also to the Religion of God And elsewhere Wherein then doth Kings serve the Lord in fear but by forbidding and punishing with a Religious severity those things which are done against the commands of the Lord Jesus For one way doth a King serve the Lord as a man and another way as a King And a little after to the same purpose though yet more closely Herein therefore do Kings serve the Lord as Kings when they do those things to serve him which they could not do unless they were Kings Add hereunto that known Prophecy of Isa 49.23 where speaking of the times of the Church he affirms that Kings should be its nursing Fathers and Queens its nursing Mothers Which what other is it than that the Church should be taken care of by them and consequently that it should be committed to their trust But from hence we may collect what the Authority of Princes in Religious matters is and wherein
be angry if the greater be preferr'd before it Again If the Proconsul does command one thing and the Emperour does command another is there any doubt but that contemning the one we are to serve the other I observe thirdly That as the Honour of Inferiour Magistrates is to be with subordination to that of the Supreme so also as was before noted out of St. Augustine with subordination to such Powers as are in higher place than the other the lesser being in reason to give place to the greater and consequently the honour of the former to be limited by that of the other Lastly which will upon the matter acquaint us with the full measure of our duty We are to honour Inferiour Magistrates according to the measure of that Authority which is imparted to them and according to the pleasure of him by whom it is so imparted For inasmuch as they are to be honour'd as persons that are sent by the Prince they are consequently to receive honour from us according to that Authority which they receive from him and according to his pleasure from whom they do But from hence it will follow First That if the Inferiour Magistrate command us any thing which is not within the power of his Commission to do in that case I may without sin withdraw my obedience from him because so far he hath no Authority to command It will follow Secondly That if I think I have receiv'd hard measure from the Inferiour Magistrate I may without breach of submission appeal from him unto the Superiour even as we find St. Paul to have done from the Provincial Governour to Caesar Because he by whom those Inferiour Magistrates are commissionated does not ordinarily commissionate them so far as not to leave an appeal from them unto himself Care only would be taken that we appeal not from them but upon just cause and where it appears to us they exceed the bounds of their Commission and the Law For otherwise we shew our selves refractory to that supreme Authority by which they are constituted and consequently also unto God Lastly it will follow from the premises That as they who are invested with a greater Authority are to have a greater honour and they who are invested with a less Authority a less so the precise measures both of the one and others honour will be best learn'd from the Laws because most evidently declaring the pleasure of the Prince that constituted them And more than this I shall not need to say concerning the honour of Princes or of those who are commissionated by them 5. The order of my Discourse now leads me to enquire of the duty of Princes toward their Subjects and of Inferiour Magistrates toward those over whom they are appointed to preside the Commandment as was before shewn being intended no less for their regulation than of those who are subjected to their commands But because I have to do not with Princes but with Subjects and but little with Inferiour Magistrates and because too for the most part they are too intelligent to stand in need of an Instructour and have more than enough of Monitors even among those who ought rather to obey than to advise it shall suffice me to address this general exhortation to all those who have any Authority in the Commonwealth That they would remember themselves to be Gods Ministers and act with respect to his glory the Princes Ministers and make use of their Authority for and with him That they would remember they are the Ministers of both for the encouragement of the good and not make use of their Authority to vex and worry those that are so the Ministers of both for the punishing of evil-doers and therefore neither to connive at or protect them That they would remember the Oath they have taken which binds their duty so much the faster on them and for the violation whereof if the Prince does not God whose name is invok'd in it will call them to a severe account Lastly That they would remember that all profanation of Gods day by Tipling and Idleness all profanations of his Name by vain Oaths and Execrations In fine That much of the violation of the Laws of God and Man will lie at their doors if they suffer them to go unpunished For inasmuch as all that the Prince can do is to look after the great affairs of State and the appointing of Inferiour Magistrates for the punishing of Offenders the whole of the guilt of private mens Offences must be chargeable upon them who are appointed to take cognizance thereof Which however those men may now make light of because considering not to what judgment it doth expose them yet will appear to be of more importance when God shall render to every man according to his works and particularly to those to whom he hath committed the Sword of Justice For where shall they appear who beside their own personal miscarriages shall have to answer for so many and great miscarriages of other men PART VIII Of the honour of Spiritual Parents which is shewn to be their due from Reason and Scripture The Grounds of that Honour their begetting us unto God and being appointed by God as his Ministers in things pertaining to the Conscience All power in Spirituals vested in our Saviour and from him therefore to be derived through those to whom he transmitted it The kinds of Honours either such as are more peculiar to their Function or such as are common to them with other Parents Of the former sort are 1. The resorting to the place where they Teach and attending both to them and to their Doctrine 2. The yeilding Obedience to their Commands so far as the nature of their Function and the measure of their Office doth require This evidenced from Scripture and from the nature of their Authority which is shewn at large to be Imperative as well as Doctrinal That that Authority of theirs extends no firther than to matters of Religion and is bounded as to them also within the discipline of our Saviour and the edification of the Church 3. The deferring to them in their Decrees concerning matters of Faith whether it be by aquieseing in them so far as to make no publick opposition to them which is the duty of all or by contenting our selves to be debarr'd any publick employment in it unless we declare our cordial assent to such Articles of Religion as they shall judge expedient to be publickly Profess'd and Taught 4. Submission to their respective Censures where the Churches power of inflicting such is also shewn An enquiry concerning such Honours as are common to them with other Parents which also are shewn from Scripture to be their due and particularly an honourable maintenance The like evidenc'd from the impossibility of their being otherwise in any esteem with the generality of men and from the improbability of drawing Men of Worth and Parts into that Function The whole concluded with a short Prayer
whence it is that they are call'd Masters according to the Flesh but by virtue of that Great Law of Christianity which commands Men as much as in them lies to promote the business of Religion Which lying more in Masters powers than in other Mens by means of that Authority they have over them there doth from thence arise an Obligation upon them to promote Religion by their commands in all those which are subjected to their Dominion And indeed as that which is honest will very rarely be found to be separate from profitable if Men would estimate the advantageousness of a thing by that which is most certainly and lastingly so so there cannot be a more compendious way to promote our Interest in the World than by endeavouring as much as in us lies to make those Religious whom we employ Because as what such do is most faithfully and diligently done so it is most likely to be prosper'd by the Divine Providence from whom as all other good Gifts so this Worlds Wealth will be found to come PART XI Of the Promise wherewith the Duty of this Commandment is enforced and what the due importance of it is Where is shewn 1. That the Blessing here promis'd is a long and happy Life and particularly in the Land of Canaan 2. That that Blessing is to be expected from our Parents as well as from God partly by that sustenance and encouragement which our Honour will prompt them to afford and partly by their Intercession with God for us Vpon occasion whereof the efficacy of a Parent 's blessing is declar'd and the reasonableness of Children's desiring it of them is asserted 3. That the Blessing here promised implies a contrary Curse to the Violators of the Commandment as is evident both from the ineffectualness of a single Promise to perswade and the denunciations of God elsewhere Whether or no and how far the promise belongs to us Christians Evidence of its belonging to us from the obligation of that Duty to which it is annexed and from St. Paul's making use of it to perswade the Ephesians to the performance of the other An Essay toward the shewing in what manner and measure it appertains to us Where first is made appear that it appertains not to us in the same manner and measure wherein it did unto the Jews Evidence hereof from its referring to the Land of Canaan which was the proper Portion of the Jews and from the nature of those earthly promises that were made to them those as they were not clogg'd with the same exceptions wherewith they are now so intended in a great measure as shadows of more substantial Blessings That this and other such like Promises appertain to us First and chiefly in the Mystery or Substance where withal is shewn what the Mystery here adumbrated is even a Happy and Immortal Life in Heaven That they appertain to us also in the Letter but not without the exception of Persecutions nor yet any farther than they shall be found to be subservient to our Spiritual welfare and the Glory of God and of his Gospel Enquiry is next made whether or no and in what proportion the present Promise doth belong to the Observers of the several Duties of this Commandment That it belongs in some measure to all is evidenced from the extensiveness of the Duty which the Promise is in reason to answer But first and principally to the Honourers of Parents because that is the only Duty expressed and because that tye which Parents have upon us approacheth nearest unto that whereby the Honour of God is bound upon us The honourers of other Superiours more or less entitled to it according as those Superiours approach neerer to or are farther removed from our Natural Parents The consequence whereof is that it belongs more to the honourers of our Civil and Spiritual Parents than to other Superiours as again more to the honourers of our Civil than Spiritual ones because the former have a greater Interest in our Temporal Being The Explication concludes with enquiring what appearance there is of the literal completion of this promise Evidence hereof in the Honourers of our Natural Parents from the observations both of Greeks and Jews As in the Honourers of other Superiours and particularly of our Civil or Spiritual Parents partly from the orderliness of their behaviour which is more likely to be successful than Turbulent and Seditious ones and and partly from their preventing those Wars and Confusions which do principally occasion the shortning of Mens days II. HAVING entreated at large in several Discourses of the Duty here enjoin'd as well that which we owe to our Civil and Spiritual Parents together with all other kinds of Superiours as that which we owe unto our Natural ones it remains that we proceed to the Promise wherewith it is inforc'd of the prolongation of our days For though the words wherein it is express'd look rather like a Motive drawn from the Consequents of our Honour than a Promise of what God will bestow upon it yet as that Law-giver who proposeth any thing under the Notion of a Motive must if he Act like a Law-giver both represent that which is advantageous and moreover if the thing depend upon his Will an assurance of his own readiness to contribute towards it which is the very formality of a Promise so that that which God proposeth under that Notion was intended as a Promise St. Paul gives us to understand Ephes 6.2 He there stiling this Commandment a Commandment with a Promise and the first of that Nature meaning thereby the first of the Decalogue to which there was any express and special one Taking it therefore for granted that the words now before us have the nature of a Promise to the due observers of this Commandment I will make it my business to enquire 1. What is the due importance of it and 2. Whether or no and how far it appertains to us Christians upon the performance of the duty enjoin'd 3. Whether and in what proportion it belongs to the several duties therein contain'd I. Now there are three things within the resolution whereof the answer to the first of these will be comprehended 1. What the Blessing here promised is 2. From whom it is to be expected And 3. Whether it implies any thing of a Curse to the violators of the Commandment 1. What the Blessing promised is we shall not be long to seek because so particularly expressed in this place and in the parallel one of Deuteronomy chap. 5. 6. it being evident from them both that a long life is promised from that of Deuteronomy * And that it may go well with thee that that life shall be happy as well as long and from both again that that long and happy life should be spent in their own Country and particularly in the Land of Canaan that being the Land promised by God unto the Israelites and to which this Promise and in a
It is true I say that the Subject of that Voice is not express'd and much less is it affirm'd that it call'd for Vengeance But as it is not to be imagin'd that that should call for any thing else when we find God himself subjoyning so severe a Curse against him that had been the Shedder of it so that it did not will be made more than probable by the cry of the souls under the Altar even the Souls of those Persons that were slain for the Word of God and the Testimony that they held Rev. 6.9 10. the Subject of their Cry being no other than How long holy and true dost thou not judge and avenge our blood upon them that dwell on the earth But so we find also which may serve for a farther confirmation that because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrha was very great or rather of the Sins of their Inhabitants as you may see Gen. 18.20 therefore the Lord sent Angels to destroy them Gen. 19.13 For as it is apparent from thence that the Subject of their Cry was no other than the Vengeance of the Sinners so that the Cry of foul Crimes is so loud and earnest that God cannot be at rest till he hath dispatch'd the Instruments of his displeasure The result of the Premises is this That all hainous Sins are in Scripture said to have a Voice and that that of Murther is as loud as any and then we may have leave to conclude it to be one of the first Magnitude because it is so importunate for Vengeance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Murther is not more clamorous in the Ears of the Almighty than it is in his who is guilty of it which though intended onely to represent the Horrours it creates in the Conscience of the Man of blood was yet literally true in him of whom Plutarch speaks in his Book De serâ Numinis vindictâ For passing one day by a Nest of chattering Swallows he thought he heard them upbraiding him with the Murther he had committed and his Ears were no less filled with the noise of his own horrid Act than his guilty Conscience was And indeed if as the Scripture speaks Sin lies at any Persons doors the Sin of the Murtherer doth being ever ready to fly in his Face and afflict him with the remembrance of it Of which though it were easie to alledge other convincing Proofs and particularly those Spectra or Representations of the murthered Party which they themselves have often complain'd to have disturb'd their Repose yet I shall chuse rather to represent as being both more apparent and more convincing their own easie discovery of the Murthers they have been guilty of For well may we think the disquiets of those Mens Consciences to be great who chuse rather by such a Discovery to expose themselves to the Severity of the Law than lie any longer under the secret Lashes of the other What should I tell you of the inquisition God is said in Scripture to make after it of the strange and unusual ways he makes use of to discover it of the discovery that hath been sometime made by the Corps * Thuan Hist l. 32. pag. 159. of the Murthered Party of the sure and certain Vengeance that attends it For as these are so known both from History and our own Experience as not to admit of any the least doubt so all of them do sufficiently proclaim Gods detestation of the Crime and what dread it ought to be held in by us 2. The Criminalness of Murther being thus explain'd proceed we to inquire what killing is to be accounted such In order whereunto 1. The first thing I shall observe is That all killing is not so to be esteem'd because where God first of all forbids the shedding of Blood he doth not onely except the shedding of the Blood of the Murtherer but enjoyns the effusion of it For thus Gen. 9.5 not contented to affirm that he himself would require the life of man at the hand of that whether man or beast that should invade it he subjoyns in the next words that whoso sheddeth mans blood by man should his blood be shed Neither will it avail to say That if any Limitation be admitted we must find out other Reasons for the prohibition of Murther than those we have before laid down For beside that the killing of the Murtherer is not onely not injurious to Humane Society but on the contrary a great Safeguard to it as by means of which other Men may be deterr'd from offering the like Injury to it beside that the slaying of the Murtherer though it take away his Life yet doth it not without just cause and cannot therefore be said to offer an irreparable Injury to him it offers no Affront to the Divine Nature by the violation of that Image of God which is suppos'd to be upon him Partly because the Murtherer hath in a great measure defac'd that Image as well upon himself as the Party slain and partly because the slaying the Murtherer conduces to the Glory of God himself which is in reason to be preferr'd before the preservation of his Image The Murtherer hath indeed the Image of God upon him though much defac'd and upon that account ought to be look'd upon with a proportionable Respect but as an Image is in reason to yield to the Honour of that of which it is so because deriving all its Lustre from it so it ceases to be Sacred where it cannot be preserv'd without the violation of his Honour whom it was design'd to represent 2. That all Killing is not Murther or the Killing here forbidden enough hath been said to shew Proceed we now to inquire what is or is not to be accounted such For my more orderly resolution whereof I will consider the Act of Killing 1. As purposely effected or 2. As casual and beside the Intention of the Doer The former again will require a double Consideration according to the different sort of Persons by whom it may be effected which are either such as are invested with Publick Authority or such as are onely Private Persons If the Question be concerning the former killing by such as are invested with Publick Authority so it is not to be look'd upon as Murther or as the Killing here forbidden where the Authority is competent the manner legal and the Party that is kill'd deserves it For beside that where God first forbids the shedding of Blood he commands the shedding of the Murtherers to wit as the Chaldee Paraphrase well interprets it upon proof made by witnesses and by the Sentence of the Judge beside that under the Law of which this Commandment was a part there was both leave and command to those that were in Authority to take away the Lives of Offenders which shews that that Killing was not here intended we are told for Christianity by St. Paul that the Powers that are have the Sword of Justice committed to them for what
us to take heed of it Luke 12.15 and his Apostle to content our selves with food and rayment 1 Tim. 6.8 So that in this particular it is evident Christ had no design to thwart the dictates of Nature or Moses the precepts of the Law or the wholsome advices of the Prophets The only thing remaining to be enquir'd into is whether he came to destroy the precepts of justice and charity the two last branches of the Moral Law Concerning the latter hereof I shall say nothing at present both because I may have occasion to resume it when I come to intreat of our Saviours fulfilling the Law and because the Evangelists and Apostles as well as the Law and the Prophets are full fraught with Precepts concerning it That which I shall bestow the remainder of my discourse upon is the Precepts of justice even that justice which commands us to give Caesar and all other our Superiours their due Which I shall the rather do because this hath been too often accounted a part of that bondage from which our Saviour came to set us free I begin with Fathers because their authority as it was the first so the foundation even of Regal power Concerning whom if the Law be express that we should give them honour and obedience the Gospel of our Saviour is no less Witness his faulting the Scribes and Pharisees for evacuating that Royal Law by a foolish tradition of their own Mat. 15.4 His Apostle S. Paul's pressing the Ephesians with the letter of it Eph. 6.2 His calling upon children in the verse before to be obedient to their parents his commanding the children of the Colossians to be obedient to them in all things Col. 3.20 His instructing the children of widows to requite their parents 1 Tim. 5.4 His reckoning disobedience to parents amongst the foulest crimes of the Gentiles Rom. 1.30 Than which what more could be said to shew our Saviour's detestation of that crime and his concurrence with the Law and the Prophets in the contrary vertue From the Authority of a Father proceed we to that of a Master and compare the doctrine of the Gospel with the Law of Nature and that of Moses And here indeed is a manifest difference but which is to the advantage of the Gospel for whereas the Law of Moses doth rather suppose obedience to Masters than go about to enjoin it the Gospel is full of precepts to this purpose Servants be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh so S. Paul Eph. 6.5 Servants obey in all things your masters according to the flesh so the same Apostle Col. 3.22 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour 1 Tim. 6.1 And exhort servants saith the same person to Titus to be obedient unto their own masters and to please them well in all things Tit. 2.9 To the froward as well as the gentle to the believing master and the infidel with all chearfulness with all simplicity out of a regard to Christ whose will it was they should obey to his Gospel which would be otherwise blasphem'd Lastly if the Law and the Prophets call'd upon the Jews to honour the Fathers of their Countrey as well as the Fathers of Families to fear the Lord and the King to speak no evil of the Ruler of the people to curse him no not in their heart the holy Jesus on the other hand reminds his of giving unto Caesar that which is Caesar's Mat. 22.21 His Apostle S. Peter of fearing God and honouring the King 1 Pet. 2.17 Submitting themselves to every ordinance of man or as the Greek reads it to every humane creature whether supreme or subordinate and not making use of that liberty which Christ hath purchased for a cloak of disobedience Thus in every particular doth our blessed Saviour rather confirm than destroy those Moral Precepts which are deliver'd by Moses and the Prophets And therefore let men pretend what they will upon the account of their faith and Baptism He is no Christian who is not a devout adorer of the Divine Majesty chast and temperate in his converse a dutiful child an obedient servant and a faithful subject to his Prince DISC. IV. That Christ came not to destroy but to fulfil and add to the Law of Moses General proofs hereof from the Sermon upon the Mount where moreover is shewn that the opposition there made by Christ is between his Law and that of Moses The Law of Moses considered as the Common Law of their Nation and in what respects Christ added to it A discourse concerning the same Law as intended for a rule of life where is shewn wherein Christ either did not or did add unto it That the additions Christ made to the Law in that latter notion of it do not entrench upon the esteem either of it or of its Author The allegation of the imperfection of Moses's Law both answered and disproved LET the Libertine and the Antinomian be from henceforth for ever silent they whose Life or Doctrine or both proclaim the ever blessed Jesus to have abrogated the Law and Prophets for beside that instead of justifying that wisdom whose children they pretend to be they shew themselves as forward as any in condemning her giving countenance to that calumny which was sometime fastend on our Saviour by the Jews behold a man gluttonous and a wine-bibber a friend of Publicans and sinners they do directly oppose his own vehement asseveration and doctrine as well as the Law of Moses unless to destroy and not to destroy be one and the same thing or to abrogate the Law and the Prophets and to fulfil But so Hercules in the Fable added to the Serpent Hydra's monstrous heads by going about to take them off each wound he gave it becoming strangely prolifical and two heads starting up where there was one lopt off For setting aside the Ceremonial that shadow of good things to come and which therefore was to vanish at the appearance of the Son of Righteousness all the Law and the Prophets beside have rather received an increase than any diminution by his Doctrine Can any one pretend that he hath abrogated the Law concerning adultery who hath substituted two in its room which are no less dreadful than the former The one forbidding all outward uncleanness the other the adultery of the heart If the Law concerning murther be alledged as destroyed by him he hath forbidden calumnies as well as that the wounds of a malicious Tongue as well as the piercing of a Spear II. Having shewn in the foregoing discourse that our Saviour came not to destroy the Law and the Prophets but on the contrary to confirm and establish them it remains that we shew it to have been his design to fulfil or add to them according as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place so often referr'd to is generally understood by the Antient Fathers the Law in their opinion being
mercy to those of a different profession the scope of our Saviours answer as appears from the question proposed being not to declare the necessity of shewing mercy but the persons to whom we are to do it But as Schismaticks and Samaritans by the Discipline of our Saviour are to have a share of that love which we are to shew to enemies so also Pagans and Infidels men who are not only Separatists from but perfect strangers to the Commonwealth of Israel Witness one for all that known place of S. Paul 1 Tim. 2.1 where he exhorts that first of all supplications prayers intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men for Kings and for all that are in Authority that we may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all godliness and honesty For as it is evident from the stories of those times as well as from the words that follow that the Powers that then were had not attained the knowledge of the truth so it is no less that they were the Christians enemies and made use of that authority which God put into their hands for the repressing of evil doers to discountenance and extirpate them In the love therefore of enemies it is manifest that Christ includes the Heathen and the Samaritan as well as the Christian and the Orthodox professor But though such as these are to be lov'd whatsoever their enmity may be to us yet certainly not when enemies to us upon the account of Christianity and thereby to the Authour of it Indeed the present practice of Christians would so perswade a man that were not studied in the doctrine of our Saviour there being generally no hatred accounted too great to shew to those that are the enemies of our Religion But what the will of our Saviour was his behaviour toward the Samaritans when they denyed him entertainment snews plainly enough and his own words in his Sermon upon the Mount for it was not upon any particular grudge to his person that they denied him entertainment that they refused him that civility which seems due to all strangers the text it self tells us Luke 9.53 that the reason of their not receiving him was because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem thereby professing that he looked upon that City as the place appointed for Gods publick worship which was the chief controversie between the Jews and the Samaritans And yet notwithstanding this their rudeness to our Saviour upon the account of the true Religion our Saviour would by no means hear of calling for fire from Heaven upon them and checked his Disciples for the motion intimating withall that they were to be of a different temper from him whose fiery zeal they commended to him But let us view our Saviour's own words in his Sermon upon the Mount and see whether our love be not to take in such persons as are enemies to us for his name sake But I say unto you Love your enemies bless them that curse your do good to them that hate you and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you even to those especially which persecute you for righteousness sake which speak all manner of evil against you for mine For beside that these are the persecutors and revilers spoken of in the former verses and therefore in all probability to be understood here S. Luke hath subjoined the Precept of loving enemies immediately after that beatitude which pronounces a blessing upon those that are persecuted for Christs sake and the woe that is opposed to it thereby plainly shewing that they who persecute us for Christs sake are in the number of those enemies whom he obliges us to love and pray for For after he had said c. 6.22 Blessed are ye when men shall hate you and when they shall separate you from their company and shall reproach you and cast out your name as evil for the son of mans sake as on the other side Wo unto you when all men shall speak well of you for so did their fathers to the false prophets vers 26. he adds in the very next verse to wit the 27. But I say unto you Love your enemies do good to them that hate you and pray for them that despitefully use you by which enemies what other can be meant than those who were so because they were Christians and hated them not for their own sake but the Son of man's We have seen the intent of this Precept under the Gospel let us now look upon it as prescribed by the Law and the Prophets which if we do we shall soon discern that the Precepts thereof fall short of those of our blessed Saviour For first of all whereas Christianity makes no difference between a sound Christian and a Schismatick or an Infidel the Law though enjoining the same love of enemies yet restrains it to such as were of the Jewish Nation or Religion If he who opposeth thee be of thy own blood or profession if he be a natural son of Abraham or one adopted into his family then thou oughtest to look upon him as thy neighbour and shew thy self benevolent to him Say I this of my self or saith not the Law the same For is not neighbour and children of thy people made synonymous even where this very argument is intreated of for thou shalt not saith Moses Lev. 19.18 avenge or bear any grudge against the children of thy people but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self Nay doth not our Saviour intimate this to have been the meaning of the Law when in pursuance of this most excellent Precept he adds Mat. 5.47 If ye salute your brethren only what do ye more than others Again to resume that place which we before made use of to shew the Jews obligation to this Precept at all doth not the book of Deuteronomy sufficiently declare the enemy whom they were there obliged to assist to be one of their own Nation or profession If you take the pains to compare them together you will easily discern that that is the due meaning of it If saith Moses in the book of Exodus thou meet thine enemies oxe or ass going astray thou shalt surely bring it back to him again If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burthen and wouldst forbear to help him thou shalt surely help with him Exod. 23.4 5. But in Deut. c. 22.1 Thou shalt not see thy brothers oxe or his sheep going astray and hide thy self from them thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother and v. 4. Thou shalt not see thy brothers ass or his oxe fall down by the way and hide thy self from them thou shalt surely help with him to lift them up plainly shewing that the enemy they were forbidden to hide themselves from was such an one as was also a brother which in the Hebrew phrase was an Israelite by Nation or Religion I observe secondly that as the love the Jews were obliged
fulness saith S. John have we all received and grace for grace Joh. 1.16 Now as the assistance of the divine grace removes all pretexts of our inability to perform what he requires and consequently leaves those inexcusable who come short in the doing of it so can it not but be a powerful inducement to yield obedience to his Laws from whom that assistance is derived For when he who is the giver of the Law is also assisting to the doing of it when he doth as the Apostle speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and bear a part of that burthen which he hath laid upon us what ingratitude must it be to withdraw our shoulders from it and refuse to obey him who doth not only impose a light burthen upon us but contributes also to the sustaining of it Thus though the deliverance from Egypt cannot be pressed upon us as an inducement to yield obedience to this Royal Law yet there want not others of the like nature but of far greater force to endear its obedience to us and then I hope it will be no diminution to it if instead of I am the Lord thy God who brought thee out of the land of Egypt out of the house of bondage we substitute I am the Lord thy God who beside the common benefit of thy creation have delivered thee from sin and hell and both given thee a more ingenuous and easy service and ability to undergo it THE FIRST COMMANDMENT THE FIRST COMMANDMENT Thou shalt have no other Gods * or before me but me PART I. The Contents The Commandment divided into three Capital Precepts I. That we have the one true God for our God II. That we look upon the God of Israel as such III. That we have no other Gods beside him Of the first Capital Precept and what is meant by the having the One true God for our God which is shewn in the General to be no other than our owning him as such An address to a more Particular Explication of it where is premised a brief account of the Nature and Attributes of God how the knowledge thereof is to be attained and of what necessity such a knowledge is IT is easy to observe upon a Superficial view of this first Commandment that the whole of it may be comprised in these three Capital Precepts 1. That we have the one true God for our God 2. That we look upon the God of Israel as such and 3. and lastly that we have no other Gods besides him For as the last of these is the very letter of the Commandment and therefore not at all to be doubted of so the two former though not expressed yet are manifestly implied in the Commandment and the preamble to it For inasmuch as The God of Israel prefaceth it with the declaration of his being the Lord our God and in the body thereof forbids the having of any other before or besides himself he manifestly supposeth the having of himself and the true as well as the not having any other In the mean time if that alone be not sufficient to perswade the rule before laid down and the abstract which Christ hath given of the duties of the first Table will For if every negative in the Decalogue do include the affirmative if the loving the Lord our God which is no other than the God of Israel with all our heart and mind and strength be the abstract or summary of the Commandments of the first Table either that which is an abstract or summary must contain more in it than that of which it is one or we must be supposed to be obliged to the having the one true God and the God of Israel as well as to the not having of any other I. I begin with the first of these even the having the one true God for our God prescinding from the consideration of the God of Israel's being he Where not to insist upon the difference that seems to be between the Hebrew and our English because the difference is meerly verbal it being all one in sense There shall not be to thee any other Gods and Thou shalt not have any other Gods before me I will proceed to enquire both in the general and in particular what is meant by the having of a God 1. Now the force of that expression which will furnish us with a general explication will soon appear if these two things be considered 1. That that which is required of us must be somewhat that depends upon our will and 2. That the authority of God depends no farther upon that than as to our owning or acknowledging it Forasmuch as nothing can be the matter of a command but what is in the power of our will either to embrace or refuse and the authority of God depends no farther upon our will than as to our owning or acknowledging it it follows that when we are commanded to have the one true God for our God according as the affirmative part of this Precept imports the meaning thereof can be no other than that we own him as such as on the other side that when we are required not to have any other Gods beside that we own no other in that relation Neither is the expression here made use of any whit disagreeing from what we have said to be intended by it For as in the language of S. Paul men are said to be the servants of him to whom they yield obedience so by the same proportion of speech to have him for their God whom they own and revere as such And indeed though in a sense we may be all said to have one and the same God because we are all subject to the same yet in strictness of speech no man can be said to have any one for his God whom he doth not some way revere as such For the word have supposing our admittance of that which we are said to have if we do not admit of him and his authority neither can we be said to have him and consequently neither to perform that which this Precept requireth of us Add hereunto which will farther confirm this notion what our Saviour hath affirmed to be the sum and substance of the first table of the Decalogue for if the duties of the first table be comprised in that Precept Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul and strength according as our Saviour hath affirmed then must the having him for our God which is the first and chiefest Precept of it be our owning him as such our having that affection and esteem for him which is due unto a God 2. Having thus shewn in the general what it is to have the Lord for our God even to own and revere him as such we are in the next place to enquire more particularly how that is to be done and what respect is due unto him as a God But because that is not to be known and much less to be
Adversaries which we shall find to be more groundless than the former For as without any cogent Reason or indeed onely probable one they annex this Second Commandment to the First so against all Sense and Reason they divide that into two which saith Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house wife c. making the Ninth to be Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife as the Tenth Thou shalt not covet other the possessions of thy neighbour But beside that our Saviour himself referr'd the looking upon a Woman to lust after her to that of Thou shalt not commit adultery it is to be observ'd That in the Twentieth Chapter of Exodus which was the Copy of the Decalogue as it was given Moses reckons the coveting of the house first and then that of our neighbours wife So that by their Account the Ninth Commandment should lie in the Body of the Tenth and the Tenth lie part of it before the Ninth and part of it after which as a Learned Man hath well observ'd * D. Taylor Duct Dubit ubi supr is a Prejudice against it far greater than can be out-weigh'd by any or all the Pretences that can be made for it Especially when the last Clause of the Commandment nor any thing that is his shews the Coveting there forbidden to refer in every Article of it to the coveting of another Mans Possessions which is not the Sin of Intemperance but Injustice But because when I come to entreat of the Matter of the Tenth Commandment I may have occasion to speak farther of it I will quit the prosecution of that Particular to apply my self to the Commandment now before me wherein you may observe with me these two Parts 1. The Precept it self Thou shalt not make or worship a graven image 2. The Sanction of that Precept God will avenge the Transgression of it upon the children of the transgressors to the third and fourth generation as on the other side reward the Observance of it to a far greater tract of time and number in the Posterity of those that shall observe it I. Among the several Rules before laid down for the Explication of the Ten Commandments you may remember I assign'd this for one That in every Negative Precept we were to look out for an Affirmative one answerable thereto By which Rule if we proceed here so 1. The Affirmative Precept will be That we worship God after a due manner and particularly because the present Prohibition strikes especially at that gross way of Worship by a Bodily Representation That we worship him in spirit and in truth The onely difficulty is what that due manner is which accordingly I come now to explain For the resolution whereof not to descend to Particulars both because I have in part prevented my self in the foregoing Discourse and because the labour would be infinite I shall observe 1. First That to worship God after a due manner is to square it by his Nature and Attributes For Worship being nothing else than an Acknowledgment of his Excellencies whom we pretend to worship it is in reason to be suited to those several Excellencies which are discernable in the Divine Majesty But from hence it will follow That to worship God after a due manner is to fear and love and trust in him because those Affections are suitable to that Majesty and Goodness and Fidelity which are eminent in the Divine Nature I observe 2. That to worship God after a due manner is to worship him according to his own direction and appointment that is to say That we worship him as he hath commanded us to do and that we worship him after no other manner Of the former of these there cannot be the least doubt to wit That we are to worship God according as he himself hath enjoyn'd he that omits so to do or acts contrary to his will and pleasure denying that Authority which is inherent in the Divine Nature The onely difficulty is Whether provided we worship him according as he himself hath appointed we may not also worship him according as we our selves shall judge farther expedient For the resolution whereof we must distinguish of the Substantials of Religious Worship and of those things which are but Circumstances thereof If the Question be concerning the former there is no doubt but the Will of God ought not onely to be our Rule but the onely Rule whereby we are to proceed For God having not onely given us the Light of Nature to direct us in his Worship but the more clear Declarations of his Word to add any thing to his Worship as a Substantial Part thereof would be a blemish to those Declarations because supposing God to have made imperfect ones The Case is far otherwise as to the Circumstances of Time or Place or the Gestures by which it is to be perform'd For it being necessary on the one hand that some Time and Place and Gesture be made use of for the performance of his Worship and it being evident on the other hand that God either hath not prescrib'd at all concerning them or at least not done it with that fulness that is requisite either the Worship of God must be wholly omitted or it must be left to the Reason of Private Men to order their own private Worship as to the Circumstances thereof and to the Reason of the Governours of the Church to order the Publick ones Care onely would be taken 1. That what is order'd by Private or Publick Persons be agreeable to those General Rules which the Light of Nature teacheth or the Doctrine of the Scriptures present us withal Otherwise we do not onely set up our own Inventions but oppose them to the Commands of God Care would be taken 2. That what is so ordered be not either represented or enjoyn'd as the Command of God For that is literally to teach for doctrines the commandments of men which our Saviour hath expresly forbidden us 3. Lastly Care would be taken That what is so order'd in the Worship of God be not represented as things pleasing to God in themselves but onely as they serve for Order and Decency and as they are Instances of our Obedience to those whom God hath plac'd in Authority over us For by inculcating them as things pleasing to God in themselves we fall under the Charge of Will-worship because not onely adding our own Inventions to the Worship of God but placing them in the same rank with it But these Cautions being observ'd there is not any the least doubt to be made either of the necessity of our Obedience to them or of our freedom from that Will-worship which the Apostle condemns For as the Commandment is express for our yielding obedience to those that have the rule over us and particularly to such as watch for our souls which cannot but be suppos'd to take in all those things which require a determination in order to the more decent performance of God's Publick
God in general or with respect to the Publick one For inasmuch as the Worship of God as well as all other Actions requires some Time for the performance of it and Experience shews that what is left at large for the Time is either very rarely or perfunctorily perform'd there ariseth from thence a necessity of appointing a certain Time that it may not be either altogether omitted or carelesly celebrated when it is not And accordingly as all Nations have agreed in the owning of a God and in their own Obligation to worship him so we find them also universally to have set apart certain Times for the Adoration of that Deity they profess'd to own Not perhaps without some hint from the Tradition of better Times or from the Example of God's peculiar People for even in Natural Precepts the dull Mind of Man may sometime need to be excited by the instigation of others but without doubt for the main out of their own consciousness of the necessity of fixing a certain Time that so it might not either be omitted or carelesly perform'd There is yet another Reason of setting apart a certain Time if we consider it with respect to the Publick Worship and that is That they who are so to worship may know when they are to meet for that purpose For if * 1 Cor. 14.8 the trumpet give none or an uncertain sound who shall prepare himself to the battel or know when as Tertullian ‖ Apol. c. 39. Coimus ad deum quasi manu facta precationibus ambiamus Haec vis deo grata est speaks they are to meet to besiege God and extort from him those Blessings which they need 4. But beside the setting apart of a certain Time for the Celebration of the Worship of God there is also requisite such a Rest from our Employments as may give us the leisure to intend it and free us from distraction in the performance of it For as the Mind of Man cannot at the same time intend Things of so distant a nature as Sacred and Civil are so if there be not some Interval between our Employments and our Devotions the Businesses of the World will be apt to insinuate themselves into our Thoughts and thereby divert us from intending of the other Such are the Substantial Parts of this Fourth Commandment of the Decalogue such their Nature and the Obligation which they induce What the Circumstances thereof are and what their Nature and Obligation is another Question and will therefore require a distinct Consideration PART II. Concerning such Duties as are onely Circumstances of the Precept which do either respect the determination of the Time wherein we are to worship or the manner of the Observation of it That there is no Obligation upon us either from Nature or the present Precept to observe a Just day a Seventh day or that Seventh day which is here prescrib'd The Ancient Christians Observation of the Jewish Sabbath together with their own Lord's-day considered and answered A Transition to the Observation of the Lord's-day where is shewn That much less than a whole day cannot be deem'd a competent Time for the solemn performance of God's Private and Publick Worship That since God exacted of the Jews a Seventh part of their Time we cannot give less who have far greater Obligations to the Almighty and That Christ's Resurrection upon the Lord's-day is as just a Motive to consecrate it unto God as that of God's Resting the Jewish Sabbath The Observation of the Lord's-day founded in the Vniversal Practice of the Church which is there also deduced from the days of the Apostles down to the Times of Tertullian That such a Practice is of force to infer an Obligation partly because declaring the Consent of that Body wherein it is and to which therefore it is but reasonable that particular Men should subject themselves and partly because an Argument of its having been instituted by the Apostles According to that known Rule of St. Augustine That what the Universal Church holdeth and always hath if it appear not that the same was first decreed by Councils is most rightly believ'd to have been delivered by the Authority of the Holy Apostles The Reason why when God gave the Jews so clear a Precept for the Observation of their Sabbath he should leave us who live at so great a distance from the Institution of ours rather to collect it from the Practice of the Apostles and the Church than to read it in some express Declaration II. HAVING shewn in the foregoing Discourse what the Substantial Parts of this Precept are together with the Morality thereof it remains that I proceed to those which are Circumstantial which may be reduc'd to two Heads 1. The Determination of the Time wherein we are to Worship And 2. The Manner of the Observation of it 1. In the handling of the former whereof I will proceed in this Method 1. I will inquire whether the Determination of the Time according as it is here fix'd be directly obligatory to us Christians 2. Whether if not any thing may be inferr'd from it toward the establishing of the Lord's-day and by what it is further to be strengthned 3. To which I shall add in the third place an Account of other Christian Festivals and shew their Lawfulness Usefulness and the Esteem wherein they ought to be held 1. Now there are three things which this Commandment prescribes concerning the Time of the Solemn Worship of God That it be a Day That it be a Seventh day and That it be that Seventh day on which the Jewish Sabbath fell or Saturday Concerning each of which I will particularly inquire Whether they are morally or otherwise obligatory to us Christians And first If the Question be concerning a Day according as the Jews reckon'd it and as they were commanded to observe their Sabbaths * Lev. 23.32 that is to say of that space of Time which is between the Evening of the foregoing Artificial Day and the Evening of the following one so no Reason appears either from Nature or otherwise why such a Day should be look'd upon as obligatory to us Christians For be it that that Account is most agreeable to the Order of Nature in which as the first Chapter of Genesis assures us Darkness had the precedency of Light and accordingly had the precedency both in the Scriptures and the Jews Account Be it secondly as was before insinuated that the Jews were oblig'd so to reckon their Sabbaths as the foremention'd Precept and their own Practice shew Yet as no Reason in Nature can be given why the Worship of God should begin rather with the Evening than the Morning according as it constantly doth with us so that this Commandment binds not such a Day upon us the perpetual Practice of the Church and the Occasion of that Festival we weekly observe shew For the First day of the Week or Lord's-day being set apart by the Church in
I should go about to prove it The onely thing worthy our consideration will be what use may be made of it to infer our own Obligation to observe it And here in the first place I shall alledge the Practice it self as a sufficient Argument to evince it For as an approved Custom hath the nature of a Law because declaring the Consent of that Body wherein it is and to which it is but reasonable that particular Men should subject themselves so St. Paul gives it that force in the Church where disputing against the Corinthian Women's praying uncovered he alledges That they had no such custom nor the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11.16 For if the Argument from a Custom negative be good and valid much more from the same positive and especially when there is so general an one But because such arguments as these through the contempt Men now have of the Church may possibly not have their due efficacy I will alledge in the second place that there is reason enough even from that Practice to believe it to have been of Apostolical Institution For it being morally impossible that the Christians of all Places should so unanimously agree to the Observation of it if there had not been something of a Law to constrain them to it and there appearing no such Law of the Church it self antecedent to the Practice of it it is but reasonable to believe it to have been Instituted by those who were the first Founders of it according to that known Rule * Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi Authoritate Apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur of St. Augustine That what the Vniversal Church holds and always hath if it appear not that the same was first decreed by Councils is most rightly believ'd to have been delivered by the Authority of the Holy Apostles And higher than that we shall not need to go because he who had all power in heaven and earth given him did at his departure hence delegate so much of it to them as was necessary for the regulating of the Church The onely thing that may seem to have any difficulty is Why when God gave the Jews so clear a Precept for the Observation of their Sabbath he should leave us who live at so great a distance from the Institution of ours rather to collect it from the Practice of the Apostles and the Church than to read it in some express Declaration But even this how difficult soever in appearance will not be hard for him to unriddle who shall remember what hath been before brought to establish it For the Law of Nature and this of Moses evidencing the necessity of a Set Time and the Equity of Moses Law and our own Obligations to the Divine Majesty that we cannot give God a less proportion of our Time than what he exacted of the Jews nothing remained for God to declare but whether he would require more than a Seventh of which there is not the least Indication or if not which of those Seven he would make choice of which an easie hint might suffice to discover For the Saturday which is the last of those Seven being expresly abolish'd and no other having the like Pretences to succeed it it was easie to guess God meant that Day which had not onely our Saviour's Resurrection to adorn it but was moreover by the Apostles and those that followed them kept as holy unto the Lord. PART III. A Digression concerning the Fasts and Festivals of the Church where the Lawfulness of their Institution is evicted and vindicated from the Exceptions of their Adversaries That they are of signal use to insinuate the main Articles of our Religion into the Vnderstanding of the Weak to bring the Occasions thereof to the Memories of the Strong and prompt us all both more particularly and with greater edification to consider them That being instituted by the Church they ought to be Religiously observ'd by all that are the Members of it Of the Manner of the Observation of the Jewish Sabbath which is another of the Circumstantials of this Commandment Of the Strictness of the Rest enjoyn'd the Jews on it and that as such it is not onely not obligatory to us but superstitious What Rest is now obligatory to us by vertue of this Commandment where that Rest is considered both in the Letter and in the Mystery To whom and in what manner the Jewish Rest appertain'd with an application thereof to our own Concernments A particular Inquiry concerning those who are under the Power of others and whether or no they are oblig'd to Rest where they are constrain'd to Labour by Threats or Stripes Of Recreation on the Jewish Sabbath and our own and that rightly dispos'd it is not onely not unlawful but useful An Objection from Isa 58.13 propos'd and answered A Restriction of Recreations to such as are neither unsuitable for the Kind to the Gravity of such a Solemnity nor take up too much time in the Exercise thereof A Caution against profane neglect of the Lord's-day with the necessity that lieth upon the Generality of Men more than ordinarily to intend their Eternal Concernments on it 3. THE Lord's-day being as you have seen establish'd upon Christian Principles and thereby equally secur'd from a Judaical Observance and a profane Neglect the Commandment I am now upon no less than my proposed Method obligeth me to entreat of other the Festivals and Fast-days of the Church For though these have not the Authority of a Divine Command as the Jewish Sabbath had though there is not the same clearness of Evidence for their Apostolical Institution as there is for the Lord's-day or Sunday yet they have this in common with the Jewish Sabbath and our own that they have the same Worship of God for their End and the like signal Acts of God for the Occasions of their Institution even those which have the Title of Saints-days looking through them to the Mercy of God who made them what they are and dedicated to his onely Worship and Service Having therefore so much affinity with the Day here enjoyn'd I shall think it no way impertinent to my present Argument to inquire into the Lawfulness of their Institution their Vsefulness and the Esteem wherein they are to be held 1. It being certain that that is to be look'd upon as lawful which is not forbidden by any Command nothing can be requir'd to establish the Holy-days of the Church but the taking off those Objections which may be made against the lawfulness thereof Now there are two things commonly objected against them and to which therefore before I proceed I will shape an Answer the former whereof strikes at the Observation it self the other at the Injunction of it The ground of the former is laid in those Words of St. Paul Gal. 4.10 11. where the Apostle not onely finds fault with their observing days and
Son either to follow it or not or whether or no for Loves sake he chuses to express his Will in the form of one as St. Paul did his to Philemon in the form of an Entreaty If the latter of these be it there is no doubt it is not onely obligatory but much more obligatory than any Command For beside that it hath in effect the nature of a Command it hath over and above the addition of the Parents Kindness which cannot be resisted without a great Ingratitude The Case is somewhat different and our Obligation also if he who doth advise leaves it to the liberty of his Child either to follow it or not For in such a Case there is no doubt if our own Reason leads us otherwise it is lawful for us to depart from it This onely would be added That as we are to receive it with respect and to shew some kind of unwillingness even in our departing from it so we are not to depart from it where we have not a considerable Reason to the contrary and such as may absolve us before God and all disinteress'd Persons for not adhering to it For though an Advice have not the nature of a Command and therefore neither the departure from it the nature of Disobedience yet the neglect of it where there is not a weighty Reason to the contrary hath the nature of a Disrespect which is equally a breach of this Commandment The third and last Rule follows even the Command of our Parents which is much more cogent than the other this being a Natural Effect of that Authority they have over us and therefore not to be despis'd without a manifest violation of their Honour And accordingly as among the Jews Disobedience to them was punish'd with Death as a kind of abdication of their Parents so the Scriptures of the New Testament represent it among those things that are worthy of death as you may see Rom. 1.30 32. The onely thing of difficulty is how far our Obedience is to extend which accordingly I come now to consider For the resolution whereof the first thing I shall offer is That it ought not to extend to those things that are forbidden by a Power Superiour to that of our Parents For the Ground of Obedience being the Authority of him that commands it is in reason where it cannot be given to more to be given unto him where is the greatest Authority to require it But from hence it will follow first That we are not to obey our Parents in things before forbidden by God God being not onely Superiour to all other Powers but the Fountain and Author of them Whence it is that though St. Paul in one place exhort Children to be obedient to their Parents in every thing Col. 3.20 yet as he assigns for the Reason of it its being well-pleasing to the Lord which shews that it was not to extend to things of a contrary nature so elsewhere * Ephes 6.1 he limits it to Obedience in the Lord that is to say so far as our Obedience to him is consistent with it It will in like manner follow secondly That we are not to obey our Parents in things forbidden us by the Magistrate For though his Authority be not like that of God yet it is superiour to theirs as having by the command of God the Souls even of Parents subject to it But beside that Obedience to Parents is to cease there where either God or the Magistrate have laid a Prohibition it is also to be suppos'd not to be requir'd where the thing under command carries an invincible Antipathy to our Inclinations Thus for example if a Father offer such an Husband to his Daughter whom though she has endeavour'd yet she can by no means bring her self to like of in this case there is no doubt she is not oblig'd to marry him how strongly soever her Father enjoyns it on her It being not to be thought that where the Children themselves have not power over their own Affections the Parents of the Children should Lastly As our Obedience is not to be thought to be requir'd where the thing under command carries an invincible Antipathy to our Inclinations so neither where it is greatly dishonourable to the Child upon whom the Command is impos'd Thus for example If a Father for the hope of Lucre or any such like cause command his Son to marry a Person who is of an ill Fame or to enter into some Trade that is infinitely below his Quality as for example if a Person of Noble Rank should command his Son to be a Cobler In these and other the like Cases there is no doubt he may refuse that which is so impos'd upon him because the Son where the Father's Ability will suffice hath a Natural Right to be bred up in some measure answerably to that Condition wherein he was born Care onely would be taken that as we pretend not such a disparity where in truth there is no other but what our Pride and Self-conceit makes so in this and all other Refusals of Obedience we proceed with Modesty and Humility and rather seem to decline the Task that is impos'd upon us than contemptuously reject it But as other Carriage than this is not consistent with that Honour which we owe to the Authors of our Being so other Commands than those before-remembred we cannot think it lawful to disobey if we consider that the Apostle enjoyns us to be obedient to our Parents in all things 4. One onely thing remains to fill up the measure of that Honour which we have said to be due from us to our Parents and that is that we express our Esteem of them by submission to their Chastisements as well as by yielding Obedience to their Commands But because that will fall in more pertinently hereafter when I come to entreat of the Chastisements of a Father I will defer the prosecution of it till then contenting my self at present with that of the Son of Sirach * Ecclus. 3.8 as it lies in the Vulgar Latin Honour thy father and thy mother in work in word and in all patience that a blessing may come upon thee from them PART III. With what variety the Honour here requir'd is to be given to either Parent Where the giving the Father the priority in our Honour and when they draw different ways the obeying him against the Mother is asserted against Mr. Hobbes and his Objection answered The Honour of our Parents otherwise equal The Case of a Mother who is either a Princess or a Christian when the Father is either a Subject or Heathen propos'd and stated A Caution against despising our Mother even when we depart from her Advice or Command and with what Humility and Modesty that is to be done Inquiry is also made whether or no and how far a Child may be freed from the Obligation of Honour which is consider'd with relation both to Deceased and Living
that is to say of thinking honourably of and expressing it in our words and gestures as moreover no question hath or can be made of that part of Honour which hath the name of Piety because Children must generally be supposed both to be of years and of a distinct Family before they can be in a capacity to relieve their Parents so as little question would be made of Obedience if men did but consider that the principal ground of it doth always abide for it being alike true at all times that the one is thy Father that begot thee and the other thy Mother that conceiv'd thee it must be alike true because that is the ground of thy Obedience that thou art always to give obedience to their commands If therefore Children be at any time free from the tie of Honour it must be as to the manner or measure which accordingly I come now to consider Thus for instance Though Reverence be always due from us to our Parents and accordingly hath by good Children been always paid to them yet there is no necessity it should be express'd after the same manner by one of full age as by one who is still under Pupillage because the same gestures become not one of full age that are suitable enough to the tenderness of the other Whence it is that though Children in their minority are always bare before their Parents yet those of Riper age have by a general custom which must be judge of matters of this nature been indulg'd a greater liberty as to that particular even by the consent of Parents themselves In like manner that I may instance in the measure Though Children dwelling in their Parents houses and under their power be to yield Obedience to all their commands and particularly those that concern the Family whereof they are Members whence it is that we find the Father in the Parable Mat. 21.28 commanding his Sons to go and work in his Vineyard yet there is not the same tie upon those that are sent out of it that have a Wife and Family of their own to provide for that are delivered over to the tuition of other persons or in fine have any publick charge upon them Not upon those that are sent out of the Family because as sent out with their leave so of necessity to intend their own proper Affairs Not upon those Children that have a Wife and Family of their own to provide for because beside the foremention'd reason by the command of God himself to forsake Father and Mother and cleave unto their Wives Gen. 2.24 The same is to be said much more of Daughters when Married because not only equally oblig'd to cleave to their Husbands but also subjected to their commands Whence it is that when Pharaoh's Daughter was brought to be a Wife to Solomon we find her exhorted to forget her own people and her Fathers house and to look upon and worship Solomon as her Lord Psal 45.10 11. But neither thirdly is there the same tie upon Children that are subjected to the Tuition of others as to those that are under their Fathers roof and power as will appear if we consider them as made Servants to another or pass'd over into another Family by Adoption for being by the Parents consent subjected to other Masters or Fathers they are now no more theirs who gave them Being but those Masters or adopted Fathers to whom they are so transferr'd This only would be added That as the Children spoken of in the former Instances are only free from their Fathers commands by means of those new Relations they have contracted so they are consequently no farther free from yielding Obedience to their Fathers commands than the necessity of serving those Relations doth exact And therefore if a Son or Daughter that is sent abroad to intend their own Affairs or one that is entred into Marriage or made a Servant or a Son and Daughter by Adoption if I say any of these have opportunity and power to serve their natural Parents there is no doubt they ought to do so no less than those who continue under their Roof For the exception of their obedience being only in regard to those new Relations they have contracted according to that known Rule of the Lawyers Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis it must strengthen the tie of Obedience where those Relations do no way hinder The only Children to be accounted for are such as have a publick charge upon them whether in the Church or in the State For though Children are not to enter into these without the consent of their Parents if under their Fathers Tuition or at least not without the call of their and their Fathers Superiours yet being entred they are in reason to prefer the discharge of their Place before any Commands of their Father the Private Good being in reason to yield to the Publick the Commands of Parents to those of Kings and Princes Onely as if the Child can without the neglect or debasement of his Charge fulfil his Fathers Commands there is no doubt he is oblig'd so to do so there is so much of Authority in the Name of a Father that no Dignity whatsoever will make a good Son forget it where it is not contrary to a more important Concern 5. The Duty of Honour being thus explain'd and shewn in what manner and measure it is incumbent upon Children it may not be amiss to subjoyn somewhat concerning Fear and Love which I have said to be also a part of their Duty Onely because they are rather Accessaries than Principal parts of Childrens Duties I will be so much the shorter in describing the Obligation they have upon them That we are to fear our Father and Mother the Scripture hath told us Lev. 19.3 and not without cause if we consider either that it is a part of Honour or that there is in Parents a just Object of it For as Fear is a confession of the Power of those whom we have such an apprehension of so there is Power enough in Parents to excite that Passion in us and make us as well to dread as esteem them Of this nature is first the Power of Chastisement whether as to the Body or Possessions of the Son For as I shall afterwards shew that Parents have Authority to inflict either so Experience makes it evident that they want not Power especially as to the latter Chastisement it being ordinarily in the power of Parents to withhold their Possessions from such as are disobedient to them But of all the things we are to fear in a Parent there is certainly nothing more requiring it than the Power they have with God to procure a greater Punishment of our Disobedience than they themselves are able to inflict For though as the Scripture speaks the Curse causeless shall not come yet both Reason and Experience warrant us to believe that the Curses of Parents shall not be without effect where they
are to have a proportionable Love and Honour from us so if we have a Respect and Kindness for them we must have a Love for those who are equally descended from them with our selves 4. Lastly If Love and Honour do naturally diffuse themselves from those that are the immediate Objects of it to those that are their Relations and Dependents if we have a Respect for our Parents we shall shew some portion of it to those whether Friends or Servants whom they made the Object of theirs PART IV. A Discourse of what is owing by Parents to their Children which is shewn to be first the providing for their Subsistence This evidenc'd from the common Consent of Mankind that Natural Affection which God hath implanted in Parents and from the Scripture The same farther evidenc'd from the Intention of God and Nature in that Being which he conferreth upon Children by them from that Dignity to which Parents are advanc'd and from that Self-love which God hath implanted in their Hearts That the Provision Parents are to make for their Children ought to be as large as their Necessities till they come of Years to provide for themselves yea to continue always such if they prove impotent or foolish The like not to be affirm'd where there is no such Inability Consideration onely to be had whether the Ability of Children can reach to such a Provision as is suitable to their Condition for otherwise it ought to be supplied by the Parents That the Provision of Parents ought to extend beyond their own Times and they accordingly either to lay up for them or put them into a Vocation whereby they may provide for themselves A Caution against Parents suffering their Care for them to entrench upon the Duties of Justice or Charity because these are alike incumbent on them and the best Legacies they can bequeath their Children Institution of Children in Life and Manners a second Duty of a Parent as is made appear both from Nature and Scripture The particular Duties implied in it Instruction Command and Example the first being necessary to teach them how to live the two latter to oblige them to the Practice of it Chastising of Children a third Duty of a Parent and therefore also largely insisted on That it extends not now to Death or the cutting off a Limb as neither to a total Disinheriting or the setting a lasting Note of Infamy upon them Because either the Peculiar of Princes upon whom a great part of the Parents Authority is deriv'd or not so agreeable to Paternal Affection or tending rather to provoke than amend the Parties chastised Corporal Punishments less than those within the power of Parents but yet not to be inflicted upon those of riper Years or not in the same manner wherein they are upon younger Persons Of the Measure in which Chastisements are to be inflicted upon Children That a principal Regard ought to be had that they be within the Quality of the Offence and how they may be known so to be The Strength of the Child another Measure of Chastisement and that that and that alone can be look'd upon to be within it which doth not disable the Child from the performance of those several Offices which Nature or Religion doth exact The Relation of the Chastiser another Measure and what that Relation leads to which is either first the reforming of the Party chastised or the deterring other Children from the like Offences To correct either for ones own Pleasure or Revenge not suitable to a Parent That all possible Submission is due to those Chastisements which are within the forementioned Bounds but however no other Resistance to be made than by Flight or an Appeal to the Magistrate An Inquiry into the supposed Obligation of the Mothers Nursing her own Child and the Arguments for it propos'd and answered II. OF the Duty of Children to their Parents what hath been said may suffice proceed we therefore to consider the Duty of Parents towards them or rather unto God concerning them Where 1. First I shall consider those that are common to each Parent And 2. After that inquire Whether there be any peculiar to the Mother 1. Now there are three things incumbent upon Parents in order to the Welfare of their Children 1. Providing for their Subsistence 2. Institution of them in Life and Manners And 3. Chastisement 1. I begin with the first of these even Parents providing for their Childrens Subsistence where again these three things would be inquir'd into 1. How it appears to be a Duty 2. Whence the Obligation thereof ariseth And 3. What Provision they are to make 1. Now though the Duty of Parents in this Affair would most naturally be made out by pointing at the Grounds from whence it ariseth yet because there are other ways to make the necessity thereof to appear and such too as are more intelligible to the Common sort of Men I think it not amiss to begin with them whereof the first I shall alledge is the Common Consent of Mankind concerning it For it appearing not how all Mankind should so unanimously agree upon the Necessity of Parents providing for their Children if there were not some Principle in Nature to lead them to it it is in reason to be presum'd to be a part of Natural Duty and such as Reason no less than Revelation doth tie upon them From the Consent of Mankind pass we to that Natural Affection which God hath implanted in the Breasts of Parents For as that doth naturally lead Men to make Provision for those toward whom they have so strong an Affection so it is a sufficient Proof of the Intention of the Almighty to oblige Parents to the Practice of it no other account being to be given why God should implant in them so strong an affection but to be as a Spur to them to make Provision for them But so that Parents are naturally obliged St. Paul declares in his Epistle to the Romans and the Second to the Corinthians Witness for the former his charging upon the Heathen among other things the * Text. Graecus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quod propriè significat expertes naturalis affectâ—â— erga liberos want of natural affection to their Children Rom. 1.31 for the latter his express Affirmation that Parents ought to lay up for them 2 Cor. 12.14 For inasmuch as nothing but a Sin could be the matter of a Charge as nothing could be a Sin to the Gentiles which was not a breach of Nature's Law by charging the want of natural affection upon the Heathen he manifestly implies it to have been a transgression of Nature's Law and consequently that the contrary was commanded by it The same is yet more evident from that other place where he affirms in express terms That Parents ought to lay up for them for though as a Learned Man * Sanderson Two Caser of Conscience pag. 72 hath observ'd St. Paul speaks it but upon the By and by
as in their own possessions For by how much greater their obligation thereto was so much the more reproachful must be the violation of it and though it could be supposed possible to bear up against the reproaches of a stranger yet it will be a hard matter certainly to hear a Son and that justly cursing his Father for giveing him a Being which hath only helped to make him Eternally miserable 3. To the Institution of Children in Life and Manners subjoin we the chastizing of them for so both the necessities of Children and the Scriptures require there being no Children so towardly which may not stand in need of it nor any other thing more enjoyn'd upon Parents when they do Of which beside the many Precepts that the Scriptures afford us and particularly the Proverbs of Solomon * Prov. 13.24.19.18.22.15.23.13 that of the ‖ Heb. 12.8 Author to the Hebrews If ye be without chastisement whereof all are partakers then are ye Bastards and not Sons may serve for an abundant evidence For well may that be look'd upon as a duty of a Parent to his Child the omission whereof must put the Child into the number of Illegitimate ones The only thing of difficulty in this affair is to what evils it may extend what ought to be the measures of the inflicting of those which it doth and what submission is due from Children to them And first of all If the question be concerning the Evils to which a Fathers chastisement may extend so I shall not doubt to affirm first that it ought not to go so far as the taking away the Life of the offending Son For though Fathers anciently had power of Life and Death yet it was then only when they were also Princes which Authority being now vested in other hands the power of Life and Death must be supposed to pass over to them and consequently not now to belong to Fathers The same is to be said of taking away a Limb however no doubt anciently in the power of Fathers For beside that this would be an entrenchment upon the Prerogatives of Princes to whom by the Institution of God the Sword of Justice is committed it is neither agreeable with the nature of a Father which is kind and affectionate nor with those bounds which the Apostle hath set to a Fathers chastisement there being no doubt such an Evil would rather exasperate Children against their persons than prompt them to yeild them a more ready obedience to their commands The same is to be said Thirdly of cutting off an offending Son from any Right in his Fathers Estate that is to say not only from being his Heir but from enjoying any part of his Possessions For however such Actions as these may well suit with the Authority of Kings yet not with that of Fathers which is an Authority mixt with Clemency and designs not so much the execution of Vengeance as the reclaiming of the Offender Lastly though it may be suitable enough to the Authority of Princes to set a lasting note of Infamy upon the Disobedient yet it is no way agreeable to that of Parents because though allowed to chastise yet not to provoke their Children which such a Brand would infallibly do But other Chastisements than these as I see no reason to forbid Parents provided they be us'd with moderation so the Charge of Chastising being general it is in reason to extend to all those Evils which there is not some peculiar Reason to restrain Parents from especially when it is certain they have the power of Corporal Punishment * See the places before-quoted out of the Proverbs which is the highest they are in a Capacity to inflict This onely would be added That in the inflicting of Corporal Punishments respect ought to be had to the Age of the Party chastis'd For though as was but now said Corporal Punishments are within the power of Parents if we consider it in the full Latitude thereof yet they are not to be inflicted upon Children of full age or at least not in that manner in which they may be upon younger Children such Chastisements by the reproachfulness thereof being more likely to provoke Persons of Years to shew themselves undutiful than incline them to yield a more ready Obedience to their Commands Having thus shewn to what Evils the Power of Paternal Chastisement doth extend inquire we in the next place into the measure of inflicting them For the resolution whereof I observe in the general That consideration ought to be had of the Quality of the Offence of the Strength of the Offender and of the Relation of the Chastiser He that chastiseth his Child beyond the merit of his Offence being certainly unjust he that chastiseth him beyond his Strength cruel he that doth beyond the measures of a Father unnatural But because it may be still inquir'd when the Chastisement is within the aforesaid limits that is to say within the Quality of the Offence the Strength of the Offender and the Measures of a Father I think it not amiss for the farther elucidation of this Affair to say somewhat to each of these For the first of these to wit when the Chastisement is within the Quality of the Offence much must be left to the Conscience of the Chastiser because of the variety of Circumstances wherewith they may be attended Onely that I may not leave it altogether uncertain I will subjoyn this general Rule which may serve for a competent Direction in it that is to say That consideration be had of the Contumacy of the Offender and the general Custom of Parents For as one and the same Crime may admit of Degrees according to the Degrees of Contumacy wherewith it is committed so what Chastisement is due to each will be best judg'd of by the general Custom of Christian Parents a general Custom being for the most part the result of an approved Reason and therefore no unfit Rule for particular Persons to proceed by From the Quality of the Offence pass we to the Strength of the Offender which will minister less Matter for our Inquiry For as it will be easie for Parents upon the knowledge they have of their Childrens Constitutions to discern what they will be able to bear so that and that onely is to be concluded to be within their Strength which does not disable them from the performance of those several Offices which Nature or Religion does exact The onely thing requiring a more accurate Examination is What are the Measures of a Father which are in short these two First and chiefly the Reformation of the Party chastis'd and secondly the deterring his other Children from the like Offences For as it is evident from the * Prov. 13.24 But he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes Heb. 12.6 7. Scripture that the Parents Love of the Child is the most proper Ground of Chastisement so the Places before-quoted out of the Proverbs shew the Reformation
him for their Governour who was so advanc'd to it And upon this account it is that the Powers St. Paul spake of became legitimate and the Christians were so earnestly exhorted to submit themselves to them Because though the Authority of those Powers were founded in Violence yet it was submitted to and accepted * Justinianus in Instit lib 1. tit 2. Sed quod Principi placuit legis habet vigorem quum lege Regia quae de ejus imperio lata est populus ei in eum omne imperium suum potestatem concedat Vid. Strabonem in fine Operis cit à Grotio in Flor. sparsione ad Jus Justinianeum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Senate and People of Rome who were both the Governed and Governours In which Case as there could not be any pretence for any other Powers to interpose so God Almighty sufficiently intimated his Pleasure concerning the Roman Emperours by not onely suffering them to rise to that Creatness but by moving the Hearts of the Senate and People quietly to submit to and own them as their Lords and Governours 2. Having thus shewn that there is in Princes a just Foundation of Honour and moreover describ'd at large what are the proper Grounds of it my proposed Method leads me to inquire what Kinds of Honour we are to give them which we shall find to be much the same though in a greater degree than that of Parents Of this nature is I. The entertaining an awful Apprehension of them and regarding them in our Thoughts both as God's Vicegerents and of his Appointment For the very Life of Honour consisting in our Inward Esteem of those whom we pretend to honour it is in reason to be given to those who are a kind of Gods on Earth and appointed as the Representatives of the onely True and Immortal One. The same is no less evident from the Influence which the want of it is apt to have upon our Outward Actions For it being impossible for Men to give the best and chiefest Expressions of Honour where there is not a due Apprehension of the Excellencies of the Party honoured where such an Esteem is wanting those Outward Expressions will naturally fail and consequently our Honour together with it For though a Man may bow down before or speak with submission to those whom he honours not in his Heart yet it is impossible he should submit his Actions to be guided by their Laws which I shall afterwards shew to be a great part of the Honour that is requir'd II. From our Inward Esteem pass we to the several Acknowledgments which the Honouring of any Person doth manifestly involve among which I reckon first the honouring them with our Outward Gesture and Behaviour Bowing down to them or falling down before them For as Nature it self hath prompted us to such an Acknowledgment because inclining us to shew forth in the Behaviour of our Bodies Vid. Part 2. of the Explic. of this Commandment those Affections and Passions we have within so where the Custom of the Place hath made them necessary they cannot be omitted without a manifest violation of their Honour it being impossible for him to think himself honour'd who wants those Expressions of it which the Custom of the Place and of the World hath appointed as Declarations of it Whence it is as was before observ'd that we find all Good Men have ever given it and that too in such Instances as would be look'd upon by us as Notes of Servitude witness one for all their falling flat upon their Faces before them and thereby in a manner professing themselves their Footstools Next to the honouring them with our Gesture proceed we to the honouring them with our Tongues and giving them those Titles which their High Place and Authority doth exact Which is the rather to be inculcated as because the Tongue was given us to express our inward Conceits so because we find the Apostles thus honouring even the Heathen Powers and such by whom they were at that very instant call'd in question For thus when St. Paul answered for himself before King Agrippa and Festus he did not onely give Agrippa frequently the Title of King as you may see in the 26 Chapter of the Acts but when Festus told him he was beside himself which had been enough to have stirr'd an ordinary Patience yet gave him the Title of most Noble Festus as you may see vers 25. of that Chapter But from hence we may collect I do not say what is to be thought of those who omit such Acknowledgments but in stead thereof employ their Tongues to defame and to disgrace them For if we are to honour Princes with our Tongues to be sure we are not to revile them as being directly contrary to the other And accordingly as in the Law of Moses which to be sure was so far Moral because containing no other thing in it than what the Light of Nature doth confirm as I say in the Law of Moses Men were expresly forbidden to revile the Gods or speak evil of the Ruler of the People Exod. 22.28 so that it was of force to St. Paul when converted and consequently to us Christians his Acknowledgment before the Jewish Sanhedrim shews For having been charg'd by the Jews for calling the High Priest Whited wall in stead of going about to excuse the Fact any other way than that it was done through inadvertency he acknowledges it for a Fault as being committed against that known Rule Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy People Acts 23.5 Which Passage is the more to be remark'd because it shews the Prohibition to extend not onely to Calumnies or unjust Reproaches but also to the speaking reproachfully even of the real Failings of our Governours there being no doubt he was no better than a Whited wall who pretending to judge according to the Law did in contradiction to that Law cause an undeserving Person to be stricken Neither let any Man say That these are trifling Matters or at least not so criminal as we have endeavour'd to represent them For beside that we are not lightly to esteem of any thing which God hath thought fit to make the Matter of a Prohibition and much less of what he hath so in relation to those to whom he hath given the Name of Gods and moreover imparted to them of his own Authority beside that the speaking evil of Princes is apt to expose them to contempt as that Contempt to the resisting of them which St. Paul hath pronounc'd to be damnable beside these things I say St. Jude hath represented it as the Character of those Ungodly ones which he placeth in the same Rank with the Apostate Angels and filthy Sodomites For likewise also saith he vers 8. these filthy dreamers defile the flesh despise dominion and speak evil of dignities adding vers 9. which shews yet more the hainousness of the Crime That Michael the
Archangel had it in such abhorrence that when contending with the Devil who was sometime a glorious Angel he disputed with him about the Body of Moses yet he durst not bring even against him a railing accusation but said The Lord rebuke thee I will conclude this Particular with that of St. Peter as well for the affinity it hath with the fore-quoted Passage of St. Jude as because it will add more strength to the Prohibition of Evil speaking 'T is in 2 Pet. 2.10 11. For as he there reckons those that despise Government amongst such unjust ones whom God hath reserv'd to the day of Judgment to be punish'd so resuming their Character anew he tells us among other things that they are not afraid to speak evil of Dignities plainly intimating the so speaking to be a thing which is not onely unlawful for a Christian to do but to such a degree also as that he ought to tremble at the very thoughts of it adding moreover that the Angels themselves however mightier and greater do not bring a railing accusation against them before the Lord. They may perhaps according to their Office represent their Crimes before the Almighty they may for God's Glory and the sake of the Oppressed invoke the Divine Majesty to avenge himself upon them But remembring that how criminal soever they may be they are God's Vicegerents and of his own Divine Appointment they abstain from all reviling Speeches and rather accuse their Enormities than their Persons Now forasmuch as even the Angels who are mightier either than us or Princes themselves do yet religiously abstain from all reproachful Language of them forasmuch as Michael the Archangel durst not so treat the Devil himself because as anciently a glorious Image of the Almighty so at this very time an Instrument of his Vengeance upon ungodly Men forasmuch as both St. Peter and St. Jude reckon those who speak evil of Dignities amongst the worst yea the most obnoxious to the Divine Justice and St. Peter moreover intimates the so speaking to be a thing which a Christian ought to tremble at the thought of it is easie to guess that Princes as they are in no small consideration with God so they ought to be had in no small veneration with those over whom God hath appointed them to preside PART VI. Of that Declaration of our Esteem which is made by Obedience to the Commands of Princes the Necessity whereof is evidenc'd from their Legislative Power as that again from the Scriptures attributing that Power to Princes and from the impossibility of compassing otherwise the Ends of their Institution The same Obedience evidenced to be necessary from express Precepts of Scripture That every Soul whatsoever is under the tie of this Obedience as well of the Clergie as the Laity The onely particular Limits of this Obedience an express Prohibition from the Almighty or those which the Prince hath set to himself Of the Authority of Princes in Religious Matters which is either Indirect or Direct the former whereof is evidenc'd from the Influence Religious Matters have upon the State and which therefore are to be so far under their Inspection as the Weal of the State is concerned in them The Result of this Power the Calling or Limiting of Religious Assemblies the Appointing those that shall serve at the Altar in them or putting by those that are That Princes have also a Direct Authority in Religious Matters that is to say an Authority in them consider'd as such Where is also shewn what that Authority is and that it consists rather in encouraging or compelling those that preside in Religious Matters to do their respective Duties than to take upon themselves the Administration thereof The Result of which Authority is the Defending the Church from all both Foreign and Domestick Enemies the keeping the Members of it within their respective Duties and punishing with the Civil Sword those that shall refuse so to do the calling Councils to determine of Matters of Religion and giving force to those Things that shall be rightly determin'd by them The Accordance both of the Practice of this Kingdom and of the Doctrine of the Church with the foregoing Determination Of Submission to the Censures of Princes which is another Declaration of our Inward Esteem The Necessity thereof evidenc'd from the Power of Coercion in them which infers a like Necessity in the Subject of submitting to it Whether this Submission be to be understood where the Coercion is ill employ'd which is answered by distinguishing of Submission to wit as that is oppos'd to all Means of avoiding it or onely to forcible ones The former Submission no way necessary as appears by our Saviour's exhorting Men to flee in Case of Persecution and the Liberty that is given by the Laws to appeal to the Princes Courts of Judicature The latter Submission is of indispensible Duty as appears both by the Scripture and the Practice of the Ancient and Purest Church The like evidenc'd from the inconsistency of Resistance with Princes being the immediate Ministers of God with the End of their Institution and the Counsels of the Divine Providence The first because he who resisteth them endeavours to subject those who are God's immediate Ministers and therefore subject to no other so far at least unto himself as may secure him from the Effects of their Violence The second because leaving it in the power of the Subject to resist when he will himself which will make the Power of the Prince precarious and consequently because that depends upon it the Weal of the People which is the end for which all Governours were instituted The third because the Counsels of the Divine Providence are no less interessed in the Violence of Evil Princes than in the Power of Good Of the paying of Tribute to Princes and that it is both a Duty and a Declaration of our Esteem What Tribute to be paid to be judg'd of by the Laws IT having been before shewn That Honour in the Latitude of the Word comprehends Obedience to Commands it remains that we now inquire whether the Honour of Princes does so also by whom and in what measure that Obedience is to be paid 1. That Obedience is part of that Honour we are to give to Princes is evident from that Legislative Power which God hath given them over their respective Subjects For Laws being nothing else than Rules prescrib'd by those that give them for the regulating the Actions of those to whom they are if it be in the power of Princes to prescribe such Laws it must be the Duty of the Subject to obey them because that Power would be otherwise in vain Now that it is in the power of Princes to give such Laws to their Subjects will appear first of all from the Scriptures annexing this Power to them as the main of that Authority by which they shine Thus for instance when Jacob would describe the continuance of the Regal Dignity in Judah till
evidenc'd from the prospering of Christianity under the Primitive Persecutions An Answer to that Plea which is made for Inseriour Magistrates resisting upon the account of their being Publick Persons and by the Prince himself Commissionated to execute Justice The former of the two Pretences evidenced to be vain because though the Inferiour Magistrate be a Publick Person in respect of his Fellow-Subjects yet he is but a Private one when considered with relation to the Supreme The Case of the Decree of a Judge prevailing against any private Order of the Prince shewn not to make at all for Inferiour Magistrates resisting the Supreme because the Prevalency of that Decree is founded upon the Presumption of its being the Will of the Prince rather than any private Order against it The latter Pretence of Inferiour Magistrates being Commissionated by the Supreme to punish Offenders shewn to be more vain than the former because it is not to be presum'd that he who by Divine and Humane Law is Supreme will Commissionate any Person against himself That famous Saying of Trajan to the Praefectus Praetorio Hoc pro me utere si rectè impero si malè contra me rather a piece of Ostentation than any real Intendment of his but however no way suitable to the Mouth of the Supreme Magistrate Another Plea for Resistance drawn from Princes swearing before their Coronation to Govern according to the Laws that seeming to imply a Compact between them and their Subjects upon the breach whereof on their part the Subjects may depart from their Allegiance and resist them in the Execution of their Power This Plea evidenced to be vain as to the Kings of England because fully such before their Coronation and the Reason of such Oaths declar'd The like Vanity shewn in that other Plea which alledgeth That some Kings are such rather in Title than Reality and consequently not Supreme in their Dominions Where the Supremacy of our own Kings is evidenced both from their Titles and their Actions Of the Honour of Inferiour Magistrates and what the Grounds thereof are which are shewn to be The Authority they have from God for the Deputing of Inferiour Magistrates and their actual Deputation of them The former of these evidenc'd from the impossibility of their discharging the Duty of their Place without it as the latter from their being God's Ministers in solidum in those Places where they are appointed to Preside Those Inferiour Magistrates which are invested by lesser Powers no prejudice to the forementioned Ground because those Powers do what they do by Commission from the Prince The Honours of the Inferiour Magistrate the same upon the matter for the Kind with those of the Supreme but different as to the Measure which also is there declar'd That the Honour which is to be paid to them be with subordination to that of God the Supreme Magistrate and those of Higher Authority than themselves in fine that it be according to the Measure of that Authority which is imparted to them and according to the Pleasure of him by whom it is imparted The Result whereof is 1. That if the Inferiour Magistrate command any thing which is not within his Commission it is lawful to disobey him 2. That in case of hard Measure shew'd by him we may appeal from him to the Superiour 3. That as they who have a greater Authority ought to have a greater Honour and they who have a less Authority a less so the precise Measures of them are best learn'd from the Laws because the clearest Declarations of the Pleasure of the Prince A short Paraenesis to Inferiour Magistrates where somewhat also of their Duty is describ'd 3. HAVING in the foregoing Discourses establish'd the Grounds and shewn the Kinds of Honour that are due to Soveraign Princes nothing more seems requisite to be done than to shew why and in what manner or measure we are to honour those Persons that are Commissionated by them But because some Mens impatiency of the Yoke of Government hath made them willing to find out Reasons to licence them to shake it off and after that actually to believe them I think it not amiss before I proceed any further both to propose and and answer their Objections That it is not lawful to resist the Supreme Powers even when they make use of their Power against the Innocent hath been at large declar'd and confirm'd both from Reason and Scripture and possibly not without effect as to the Resisters themselves if there wanted not some specious Reasons to take off the force of it as to some particular Cases Of this nature is first those Princes opposing themselves oftentimes against God and against that Religion which he hath establish'd in the World For though we may be oblig'd to sit down tamely under the Violence of Evil Princes when that Violence reacheth no farther than our Persons yet who can think the same Patience necessary when Religion it self is struck at which we are in reason to prefer before all other Considerations In answer to which not to tell you as I well might that Submission to Princes is an undoubted Duty of Christianity and consequently that the contrary thereof is no proper Means to defend Christianity by Not to tell you moreover that that God who hath commanded our Submission to the Higher Powers hath no where derogated from that Command by the exception of any Case And what reason have we to distinguish where the Law of God doth not Not to tell you thirdly that the Princes to whom the Apostles requir'd Men to submit were both foretold by our Saviour * Mat. 10.18 to be Persecutors of Christianity and shew'd themselves to be such in a more than ordinary manner which made it reasonable for the Apostles to except the Case of Religion if that had been intended by God to be so Lastly not to tell you that to allow of Resistance upon colour of Religion would have opened the Gap to all manner of Seditions both because it had been easie to adapt that Pretence to a thousand Cases and because Religion comprehends within it the Whole of a Christians Duty But not I say to insist upon any or all of these which yet are a sufficient Prejudice to the Exemption pleaded for I shall chuse rather to shew which will come up more closely to the Objection That Religion gains as much or more by a patient Submission to Persecuting Princes than it can be suppos'd to do by opposing our selves against them For the evidencing whereof I will first inquire What Religion may rationally be suppos'd to gain by opposing Persecuting Princes 2. What it may hope for from submitting to their Coercion And 3. and lastly compare them both together I begin with the first of these even What Religion may be suppos'd to gain by opposing the Persecutors thereof For the resolution whereof the first thing I shall return is That the utmost it can be suppos'd to gain above what
in a few months after his death so by resisting the Supreme Powers they make God their enemy I speak as to the present world whom otherwise they might experiment as their friend For as on the one hand there is no doubt but he will avenge the contempt of his Vicegerents because it is his Authority and his alone by which they shine so there is as little doubt on the other hand but if men would submit their Necks to the Yoak God Almighty himself would sooner or later ease them of it It being not to be thought but that he who is no respecter of Persons would be as ready to avenge the Exorbitances of Princes as of those who are subjected to their commands 4. Having thus shewn what Honour is due from us to the Higher Powers and moreover remov'd those Objections which are commonly made against submitting to their Censures nothing remains upon this head but to enquire into the honour of Inferiour Magistrates what are the grounds of it the kinds and in what measure it is to be exhibited For that these also are to have our honour St. Peter shews in the place by me so often quoted where he requires not only that we should submit our selves to the King as Supreme but to Governours as those that are sent by him Now though it be not to be deny'd that these also are Gods Ministers and as such to be rever'd by us yet because it is certain that these are neither Gods immediate Ministers nor immediately appointed by himself therefore to make out the grounds of their Honour we must take another course than what we before did in that of Sovereign Princes Now there are two things upon which the honour of Inferiour Magistrates is grounded and into which therefore it is to be resolv'd by us The Authority Princes have to constitute Inferiour Magistrates and their actual constitution of them Of the former of these we need no other proof than that the ends of Government are not to be attain'd without For it being impossible for any one man especially where his Dominions are any thing large to distribute justice to all those that are committed to his charge there ariseth a necessity of conferring part of the care upon other men as without which it is impossible to be discharged In conformity whereto as we find Jethro the Father-in-Law of Moses advising him for his own ease and the benefit of the people to set such inferiour Rulers over them Exod. 18.21 and so on so we find the same Moses constituting such Rulers over them from Rulers of Thousands to Rulers of Fifties and of Tens vers 25. of that Chapter Now forasmuch as the ends of Government are not possible to be attain'd unless there be Inferiour Rulers as well as others it is to be look'd upon as the intention of God who doth nothing in vain that such Rulers are to appointed and where they are to be rever'd and obey'd As little doubt is to be made of Princes constituting the Persons that are to be so to procure them that honour which is due unto them For being appointed by God as his Ministers in solidum in those places where they are authorized to preside witness St. Paul's both commanding every Soul to be subject to them and representing them as Gods Ministers for Reward and Vengeance which comprehend within them the whole of all Civil jurisdiction whatsoever other Powers there are must derive their Authority from them whom he hath entrusted with that command Whence it is that St. Peter himself where he speaks of submission to them requires it upon this score even because they are sent or rather commissionated by the Supreme It is true indeed that designation is not always apparent not only the Election of Inferiour Magistrates being permitted to several Societies but those Magistrates formally Invested in that Authority by some of the members of it But as the Election or Constitution of such is indulg'd to those several Societies by the Laws or Charters of Princes so being such they who are so Elected or Constituted are to be look'd upon as the Ministers of the Prince and appointed by his Authority and Command He who is appointed by those who are comissionated by the Prince being to be look'd upon as appointed by himself Having thus shewn the ground of honouring Inferiour Magistrates to be that they are with the approbation of God constituted by him whom he hath immediately appointed and consequently that they are Gods Ministers in a secondary manner the next thing to be enquir'd into is what kind of Honours are to be afforded them Which we shall find to be much the same with those we are to pay unto the Supreme because though in an inferiour manner partaking of that Authority with which the Prince himself is vested Of this nature is first esteeming of them according to their several places demeaning our selves respectfully toward them and speaking honourably to and of them so far I mean as their respective Dignities do exact no Authority being likely to have its due force and efficacy where these are not duly paid Of the same nature is secondly yielding Obedience to their Commands and submitting our selves unto their Censures otherwise we do in effect oppose our selves to the Authority of the Prince from whom they have their Commission and consequently also to that of God Add hereunto where any such thing is made their due the ministring to them of our substance as being but a just reward for their attending upon the affairs of the Republick and a just regard to him by whom they are appointed over us The only thing of difficulty is in what measure these Honours are to be paid which accordingly I come now to resolve In order whereunto the first thing that I shall offer is that it ought always to be with subordination to the Divine Majesty For if we are to obey God rather than Princes how much more ought we to do so rather than those who are but their Ministers As little doubt is to be made in the second place but that the Honour which is to be paid to Inferiour Magistrates is to be with subordination to the Supreme For being as St. Peter instructs us to be submitted to and honour'd as Persons that are sent by him that Honour is in reason to be subordinate to his by whom they are so sent or commissionated That by which any thing is such being much more such it self and consequently to be preferr'd before it Excellent to this purpose is that of St. Augustine as I find him quoted by the late Reverend Primate of Armagh * Power Communicated by God to the Prince and the Obedience required of the Subject pag. 116. If thy Curator command thee any thing must it not be done yes questionless And yet if the Proconsul countermand and thou obey him thou despisest not the power of thy Curator but servest a greater Neither ought the lesser to
Which it will not be hard for him to discern who comes to it with an unprejudic'd Mind For inasmuch as that Society whereof they are Governours is instituted by God for the Conservation of Religion it will follow that the onely Authority to which they can pretend is to extend no farther than to Matters of Religion or what is necessary to the Conservation of it Which makes a strange that the Church of Rome should pretend to a Power of taking away the Civil Rights of Princes or their Subjects especially when he who is Head even of their Head hath so frankly declar'd that his kingdom is not of this world If the Governours of the Church claim any Power of that nature it must be by the Indulgence of Princes and to it they are to ascribe it Again Forasmuch as the Governours of the Church are but the Ministers of him who is the Great Shepherd and Bishop of our Souls whatever Authority they have must be within the Limits of his Discipline who is the Author no less of their Power than it Lastly Forasmuch as that Power which the Governours of the Church have was given for the edification and not for the destruction of those that are to be ruled by it 2 Cor. 10.8 it will follow that that ought to be the Limit of their Commands and consequently also of our Obedience Care onely would be taken that we do not rashly nor indeed without great and manifest reason pronounce of any thing they enjoyn as either not for edification or to the destruction of the Church partly because what is for edification of the Publick is not easily to be judg'd of by Private Persons and partly because there are few things more destructive to the Being of the Church than the dissolution of that Discipline by which it is ty'd together 3. From the Commands of the Governours of the Church as which do for the most part respect things to be done pass we to their Decrees in such Controversies as do arise concerning thâ—se â—â—ings which are to be believ'd where at the same time I shall set down what Authority those our Spiritual Parents may pretend to and what kind of Honour is to be paid by us to it For the resolution whereof I shall no way doubt to affirm first That it is in the Power of those Governours to come to a decision in them and oblige the several Members of the Church not to make any Publick Opposition to them For the Peace of the Church being broken not so much by any thing as by Controversies which may arise concerning those things that are to be believ'd the Governours of the Church to whom the preservation of the Peace thereof is committed must consequently be suppos'd to be furnish'd with such a Power of Decision as shall bind up the several Members thereof from making any Publick Opposition to what they do so decide Which is so reasonable a thing that there is no formed Church in the World which doth not claim such a Power nor any reasonable Man in them which doth not think himself to be so far bound up by it provided the Decision do not entrench upon an Article of Faith nor be impos'd upon ours but recommended as such onely to which Men shall not openly oppose themselves For though it be not lawful for any Man to abjure that which he does believe to be a Truth yet it may be lawful and sometime necessary not to make profession of some Truths if the Peace of the Church be like to be broken by it But beside that the Honour of the Governours of the Church may require an Acquiescence in their Decisions where those Decisions though it may be not exact do not entrench upon an Article of Faith nor are impos'd upon our Belief I do no way doubt but it may also require the exacting a cordial Acknowledgment of them from those that are the Ministers thereof For it being of great importance to the Welfare of the Church that those which are its Teachers should be well perswaded themselves lest as is but too frequent they disperse their Errours among the People it cannot but be thought requisite for those who are the Governours to exact of those Teachers before they be approv'd a cordial Acknowledgment of such Articles of Religion as they shall deem expedient to be publickly profess'd and taught For how shall they otherwise provide for the Welfare of that Church which is committed to their Charge and for which they shall be accountable to Almighty God or those Candidates of the Ministry provide for the Honour of their Governours who shall not be content to make such an Acknowledgment if they do heartily believe the things propos'd or to be excluded from the Office of Teachers if they do not Honour implying an Acknowledgment of all such Power and Authority as is requisite in a Governour for the conservation of that Society over which he is appointed to preside 4. One onely Species of Honour remains of those which are more peculiar to their Function and that is Submission to th Censures of these our Spiritual Parents Of which beside the Admonition of the Author to the Hebrews where he requires us not onely to obey those that have the Rule over us but also to submit our selves a Proof may be fetch'd from the Authority those Governours are invested with of excluding them from the Communion of the Church who shall not shew themselves faithful Members of it For beside that every Member of the Church covenants in Baptism to shew himself a faithful Soldier of Christ Jesus and consequently cannot be thought to have any injury done him if he be debarr'd the Communion of the Church upon the breach of that his Covenant beside that the Scripture doth so far enjoyn it upon particular Persons as to oblige them to withdraw themselves from every Brother that walketh disorderly beside lastly that God hath committed to the Governours of the Church the power of binding and losing and promis'd that what they do so bind and loose on earth shall be bound and loos'd in heaven which the Church of God hath ever understood with reference to the Power of Excommunication and Absolution that Power is no more than necessary for the conservation of the Church in obedience to God and to the wholsom Commands of their Superiours For who will generally be very careful of keeping the Covenants they have made in Baptism if it be not in the Power of the Governours thereof to debar them the Priviledges of that Communion which the more sound Members of the Church enjoy Now forasmuch as it is in the Power of these our Spiritual Parents not onely to command such things as are salutary but to exclude from the Communion of the Church all such as are disorderly walkers if we will give them that Honour which is due to them we must of necessity acquiesce in that their Censure if justly inflicted so long as
commands Submission to the Froward for Servants to oppose themselves so if they should be allow'd to do so it would introduce a greater confusion in Families than either the Peace of them or of the State would be consistent with 4. What Honour is due from Servants to their Masters hath been at large declar'd and thereby so far as this particular is concern'd the main intendment of the Commandment discharg'd But because I have often said that the Commandment which is now before us was intended also to comprehend the duty of Superiours toward Inferiours as well as of Inferiours toward them I think it not amiss to speak somewhat of the duty of Masters toward their Servants and the rather because oftentimes they stand as much in need of an admonition as the other In order whereunto following the division before laid down I will consider the duties of Masters toward their Slaves and and then of their duties toward such as though their Servants yet are so in a more ingenuous way Now though the Authority of Masters over Slaves be undoubtedly much greater than that over other Servants though anciently as Justinian * Institut tells us they had the power of Life and Death and were not accountable for it though they put them to death unjustly yet as the Roman Laws * Lib. 1. tit 8. sect 2 3. set bounds to that exorbitant Power of theirs and our own hath yet more retrench'd it so if we consult the Laws of Nature and Christianity we shall find there is more owing from them unto their Slaves than is ordinarily thought fit to be paid Of this Nature is first Furnishing them with Food and Rayment in such a proportion as may suffice the necessities of Nature this being absolutely necessary to enable them to the performance of that Service and Labour which they exact Of the same nature is secondly The imposing such Tasks upon them as is not above their strength to perform this being no more than common humanity requires of which Slaves are equally partakers with our selves But such also is it thirdly Not to punish them above the demerit of their Crime nor above what their Strength will bear Justice requiring that the Punishment do not exceed the Proportion of the Offence and common humanity that it pass not the bounds of their Natural Abilities In fine for so St. Paul plainly intimates where he commands Masters to give unto their Servants that which is just and equal their Commands and Punishments ought to extend no farther than the Laws of the place give leave or Equity and Christian Charity permit which to be sure will not only exclude all Cruelty and Injustice toward them but impose a necessity upon the Master of shewing such Compassion to them as their Weakness or Necessities may at any time require In the mean time though I no way doubt but Masters are to give unto their Slaves that which is just and equal and consequently to abstain from all Cruelty either in their Commands or Censures yet I think it necessary for them to submit both to the one and the other where the burthen which is impos'd is not above the proportion of their strength partly because St. Peter commands subjection to the froward and difficult and partly because that they have so much as their life is owing either to the mercy of their present Masters or of those from whom they were purchas'd From the duties of Masters to their Slaves pass we to the duties of the same to their Servants such I mean as are so in a more ingenuous way Where first of all I shall make no difficulty to affirm as I suppose neither will any man so grant that all those things are undoubtedly owing to Servants which are from a Master to his Slave the condition of Servants being much better than that of Slaves and therefore to be sure not to require less of their Masters than the other As little difficulty can be made that all that is owing to them from their Masters which at the entrance upon their service they do expresly covenant to afford them a Promise even where there is no other Obligation making the party promising a Debter and how much more then where there is a valuable consideration to engage him But from hence it will follow first Where there is any such thing covenanted that they are to give them the promised reward or wages and that too at or near the time wherein they become due to them he paying less than he ought who pays not at or near the the time because depriving the party to whom he owes it of that use and advantage which he might and which because it is his own it is fit he should receive by it It will follow secondly where that is a part of the Contract that Masters carefully and faithfully teach their Servants that Trade for the Learning whereof they become Servants to them which is the rather to be observ'd because it is oftentimes through sloathfulness omitted or basely and invidiously conceal'd at least as to the cheifest Mysteries thereof as if a Contract could be satisfied by paying one half the thing contracted for and it may be too the less considerable one I observe thirdly That in such Servants as are by Contract to receive their whole maintenance from their Masters a regard is to be had not only of what necessity but what the condition of that Service into which they are assum'd requires For by how much the more Ingenuous the Service is so much the more free in reason ought to be the entertainment of those that are in it especially when as it mostly happens paying accordingly to their Masters for it Whence it is that no Man of reason doubts but that the Apprentice of a Merchant or other such more liberal Profession should be treated in a better fashion than one of a man of a more inferiour one or an ordinary Serving Man to the same I observe fourthly That as care is to be taken on the one hand that they afflict not their Servants with immoderate Labours or Punishments so also on the other hand that they suffer them not to be Idle nor be sparing of just Chastisements when they deserve them the omission of that not only proving the bane of their Servants but being a falsification of that Trust which is reposed in them by their Servants Parents and an injury to the Commonwealth which by their slothfulness or cowardise is like to have so much the worse Subjects Fifthly and Lastly more than which I shall not need to say unless it be to exhort them to the practise of what they are thus bound to It is incumbent upon all Masters of Families to restrain their Servants from all Vitious Courses and both prompt and oblige them to the practise of Religious Duties not indeed by any direct obligation upon them from their Authority which reacheth rather to Temporal than Spiritual matters
reason think we but to make use of it upon occasion and as it follows in that Apostle to execute vengeance with it upon all those that do evil Neither will it avail to object That the same St. Paul forbids Christians the avenging of themselves and which is more upon the account of Vengeance belonging to the Lord. For as immediately after that he admonisheth Magistrates to execute Vengeance which shews that so far they were not intended in the former Prohibition so the Reason that is alledg'd doth not onely not include Magistrates but on the contrary shew them not to be intended For though Magistrates are not Gods unless in a secondary sense and as the Images and Substitutes of the True yet being his Ministers and Ministers to execute Vengeance what is inflicted by the Magistrate doth not onely not cease to be God's but is on the contrary to be look'd upon as one of the ways of God's repaying it which shews it rather to be their Duty than their Offence Care onely would be taken that as it is God's Vengeance which they execute so they do it with regard to the Command of God and not to gratifie their own Malice otherwise they avenge not God but themselves which is a thing no where permitted to them What Killing is lawful on the Magistrates part hath been shewn already proceed we to inquire what killing is forbidden which will not be hard to judge after the explication of the other For it appearing from the Premises that no other Killing is lawful to them than what is annex'd to their Authority it will follow that all that is forbidden which either proceeds from an incompetent Authority or is illegally and undeservedly executed The same is to be said of killing in War as is of that which is effected by the Hand of the Executioner For as no doubt can be made but that it is lawful for Princes to make War and consequently to kill where the State which is under their inspection cannot otherwise be secur'd so it is no less unquestionable that War is not where they who make it have either not Authority so to do or levy it without a just provocation For Vengeance as St. Paul tells us belonging unto God and to those whom he hath entrusted with the Execution thereof it can be no farther lawful for the Magistrate to execute it than is within the power of his Commission to do Upon which account all unprejudic'd Men must condemn the War of the late Long Parliament because it is sufficiently known the Power of War was not in them till they did in an unlawful manner assume it unto themselves In like manner the Execution of Vengeance being entrusted to Princes to make use of against those that do evil that and the Actions that attend it must be look'd upon as unlawful where it is directed against those who have done nothing to deserve it This onely would be added for the sake of those who are by Princes appointed to draw the Sword in War That it is not necessary for them to know the Justness of that Quarrel in which they do so kill and slay For inasmuch as Private Persons neither do nor can well understand the Justness of any Publick Quarrel because to the understanding thereof it is requisite they should be acquainted with the great Transactions of their own State and of that against which they make War which it is not to be suppos'd Private Persons should be able certainly to attain either it shall be lawful for them to withdraw their Assistance from the Prince which must prove the bane of the State or they must be content to serve him in his Wars without any such knowledge of the Justness of his Quarrel Again Forasmuch as the making of Wars and other such Publick Matters belong properly to him to whom God hath committed the Sovereign Power it must be left to him to judge whether that Quarrel wherein he engageth be such as is just and warrantable It may be enough to the Subject that he doth not know it to be unjust and that he is commanded by the Prince to serve him in it For however he may thereby be sometimes engag'd in an unjust Quarrel yet the blame thereof shall fall not upon him who is neither concern'd nor qualified to judge of it but upon the Prince who is both and by whose Authority the War is levied This onely would be added That as the Commission * Tull de Officiis lib. â— Pampilius Imperator tenebat provinciam in cujus exerâ—iâ—u Catonis filius tiro militabat Cum autem Pompi to videretur unam legionem dâ—mittere Catonis quoque filium qui in eadem legione militabat dimisit Sed cum amore pugnandi in exercitu remansisser Cato ad Pompilium scripsit ut si eum pateretur in exercitu remanere secundo cum obligaret militiae sacramento quia priore amisso jure pugnare cum hostibus non poterat See also Sanderson's Case of a Military Life of the Prince is the onely Warrant the Subject hath to interest himself in War so it will become him for that reason to take care that private Revenge do not push him on to do further mischief than it is the intention of the Prince he should Upon which account I cannot but highly commend the Carriage of one of Cyrus his Soldiers as which is a noble Instance both of his Humanity and observation of Discipline For having as Xenophon informs us in the time of Battel lift up his Hand to strike his Enemy when he heard the Trumpet begin to sound the Retreat he let fall his Arm and willingly lost his Blow because he thought the time of striking past Of killing by Publick Persons I have spoken at large and both shewn what is and what is not to be accounted Murther It remains that we inquire concerning killing by Private Persons which will require no great pains to resolve For the Execution of Vengeance being challenged by God to himself and to those to whom he hath committed the Sword of Justice it will follow that the Execution of it belongs not to private Persons and consequently that generally all Killing by them is Murther If there be any Case wherein it may be lawful for a Private Person to kill another it must be when a Man is set upon by another and forc'd to it in his own defence In which Case as we have the Warrant of the Law of God in part to secure us which acquits that Person from Murther who should slay a Thief that was found breaking in upon him in the Night Exod. 22.2 3. so it will be found not to be without Licence from the Law of Reason and Nature partly because in the Case of a sudden Onset we can have no recourse to the ordinary Means of Defence I mean the Patronage of the Magistrate and partly because those whom God hath entrusted with the Power of Vengeance do empower
that freedom of Commerce which they observe to be between the Parties And accordingly as all civil Nations have provided that Marriages should be solemniz'd in publick thereby both to cut off from the Married Persons all pretexts of withdrawing from each other and all scandal from those with whom they converse so I see not how they can be so legitimate as they ought where they are less publick than the Law requires For though the presence of one or two Witnesses may be of force enough to oblige the parties to a Cohabitation yet they cannot take of the scandal which may arise from the clandestineness thereof But neither is it less requisite that Marriages should be made agreeably to the constitutions both of that Church and State whereof the married Persons are Members The latter because the welfare of the State may depend much upon them as particularly in those that are Heirs or Heiresses to great Estates and as it sometimes happens to a Kingdom by the former whereof great Estates may come to be embezzled by the latter a Kingdom to be prostituted to the arbitrement of those who are no way in a capacity to manage it The same is to be said of the necessity of their being made agreeably to the constitutions of the Church For the Law which God hath given concerning Marriage being general or at least not so particular as to determine all questions that may arise concerning it there is a necessity of referring them to the determination of those who are by God and the Church entrusted with the welfare of it and consequently in particular Persons of acquiescing in it I observe Thirdly that though the solemnization of Marriage by a Priest be not absolutely necessary to make it good and valid upon which account we find all those to have been confirm'd * See the Stat. of 12 Car. 2. c. 33. which in the late miserable confusions had been made another way yet is it of so great expediency that I see not how any Christian State can introduce any other and much less how private Persons can For beside that the consunction of Marriage is the act of God ‖ Mat. 19.6 and not of the Contractors and therefore most meet to be dispens'd by those who are the Ministers of God to us in things pertaining to God the thing it self is of so great importance as to our whole life that it cannot but be thought to require the blessing of the Priest to make it happy to the Contracters and his exhortations to make it holy and unblameable For if so sacred a tie as Marriage be so lightly regarded even when it hath the Solemnities of Religion to procure it respect and veneration how may we think it would be contemn'd if it were only look'd upon as a civil one as there is no doubt it would be if it had not the Ministeries of Religion to accompany it And accordingly as in this and I think all other Christian Nations the Solemnization thereof is committed to the Ministers of Religion so that it was so in the first and purest times of Christianity is too evident from Ancient Records to admit of any the least doubt For thus Ignatius that most holy Man and a Disciple of the Apostles in his Epistle to Polycarp * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 13. edit Voss another Apostolical Person tells him It becometh those Men and Women that Marry to enter into that conjunction with the consent of the Bishop that the Marriage may be according to God and not according to lust And Tertullian another Ancient Writer and one of great Authority in the Church in more places than one declares the same usage and belief For not contented to say in his Book de Pudicitiâ * G. 4. Ideo penes nos occultae quoque conjunctiones id est non prius apud Ecclesiam professae juxta moe hiam for nicationem judicari periclitantur That among them even Clandestine Marriages that is to say those that were not professed before the Church were in danger to be censur'd next to Adultery and Fornication in another Tract of his he speaks yet more plainly both as to the usage and the reason of it How ‖ Ad Vxor lib. 2. c. ult Vnde sufficiamus ad enarrandam felicitatem ejus matrimonii quod Ecclesia conciliat confirmat oblatio obsignat benediclio angeli renunciant pater rato habet may we be able to declare the happiness of that Marriage which the Church joins and the Oblation or Sacrament consirms and the Blessing seals in sine which the Angels those he means which are present at and behold our Devotions proclaim and our Father which is in Heaven ratifies For neither upon earth do Children rightly and lawfully Marry without the consent of their Parents I observe Fourthly that as it is expedient and in a more than ordinary manner for Marriage to be celebrated by a Priest so it is also expedient and where Authority hath commanded it necessary to be solemniz'd with such significant Actions or Ceremonies as the joyning of Hands and the giving and receiving of a Ring Because though Marriage and all other Contracts may be made by Words onely yet they neither do nor can make so firm an Impression upon the Minds either of the Parties or the Witnesses as those visible Declarations do Whence it is that in all Civil Contracts almost such Actions as those have place and Men think not themselves well assur'd unless beside a Declaration by Word or Writing from those with whom they have to do they have also a Turf of that Land which they contract for put into their Hands by the Seller or at least those Deeds whereby it is convey'd But what speak I of other Contracts when even in this particular one they who profess'd themselves the Churches Adversaries shew'd themselves to be at an Accord with it For however that Convention which banish'd Marriage by a Priest did also discard the Ring yet they retain'd Joyning of Hands which is no less a significant Ceremony than the other PART II. Of such Laws of Marriage as concern the preserving it inviolable after it is contracted and first of all of such as respect both the Parties Where is shewn first That there is a Tie of Love upon both and the Grounds of that Love declared which are first and chiefly that Vnity which Marriage conciliates and secondly its being intended as a Figure of that Affection which is between Christ and his Church Of the Importance of that Love and what the due Effects thereof are which are shewn to be 1. The doing all things that may any way contribute to each others contentment as on the other side the avoiding all things that may displease 2. The seeking one anothers Profit the Means whereof are also declar'd 3. The endeavouring each others Spiritual Welfare 4. A mutual forgiving and forbearing where Differences do arise That
possible for those who have any great love for each other not to desire and endeavour each others Welfare in that which most especially concerns them so they who remember Marriage to have been intended as a Figure of that Mystical Vnion that is between Christ and his Church will not think they have paid a just Respect to that Mystery which it adumbrates unless they endeavour to their power to make the Conversation of each other approach as near as may be to it Lastly Forasmuch as there is nothing more contrary to Love or to that Union from which it results than Strife and Contention between the Married Parties it will follow that it is their Duty as well as Interest to prevent them what they may or if they happen at any time to break out to suppress them The former whereof will be done by avoiding all occasion of Offence the latter by a mutual forgiving and forbearance where such Offences do arise Which whilst some Persons have imprudently neglected they have but help'd to make themselves miserable and made the Yoke of Marriage as uneasie to themselves as to those whom they design'd to revenge themselves upon It being not to be thought they should reap any advantage to themselves who either kindle or maintain a War within their own House and Bowels 2. To the Duty of Love subjoyn we that of Fidelity which is another necessary Result of that Union which Marriage conciliates he or she no less violating that Unity who bestow their Affections upon a Stranger than they who deny it to the proper Object of it Upon which account as Adultery must needs be look'd upon as highly criminal because violating it in that particular for which it was especially ordain'd so also though in a lower degree the frequenting the Company of others more than their own Consorts or using more familiarity with them than the Laws of Decency and Modesty do allow in fine the spending upon others any considerable part of their Estates to the prejudice or without the consent of the other Party he who joyn'd them so closely to one another as to make them one Flesh consequently forbidding all Commerce with Strangers which either exceeds or rivals or prejudiceth that Commerce which the Society into which they enter obligeth the Married Persons to 3. Thirdly As Love and Fidelity to each other are the indispensible Duties of the Married Parties so also though in a different measure the giving each other Honour according as they expresly stipulate For the evidencing whereof we shall need onely to instance in the Deportment of the Husband to the Wife because as I shall afterward shew there cannot be the least doubt of Honours being to be paid to the Husband by her Now that the Husband is to give Honour to his Wife is evident from that of St. Peter 1 Pet. 3.17 where he exhorts the Husband not onely to dwell with his Wife according to knowledge but to give honour to her as to the weaker vessel Which Words as they are a convincing proof of that Honour which we have affirm'd to be due to her from her Husband so shew the Honour that is to be given her because the Honour of the weaker Vessel to be such as is proper to that State in which God hath plac'd her under her Husband The purport whereof is not that the Husband should subject himself to her who is but in some respects his Equal and much less his Superiour but that inasmuch as she is assum'd into a Copartnership with him he should treat her not as a Servant but a Companion and not onely so neither but as the Companion of such a Person and according to his own Quality or Dignity that he should permit her as in reason he ought to bear her self as a Mother over his Family and not either subject her to or abridge her the exercise of her Authority over it in fine that he should permit her whilst she lives to partake of his Worldly Goods and after her and his Decease to permit her Children to succeed into them For though I know even among us there are other kind of Bargains made and such as do in truth make the Woman rather a Concubine than a Wife as shall hereafter be more at large declar'd though I know also that in Germany there is a sort of Marriage wherein the Husband gives the Wife the Left Hand in stead of the Right that is to say expresly stipulates with her not to take her as a Wife of equal Condition by means of which as * Vid Mylerum in Gamologia seu de matrimonio Personarum Imperii illustrium c citat in le Journal de Scavans parte 1. Mylerus observes neither hath she all the Rights of a Wife neither do her Children succeed either to the Fathers Name or Arms or full Inheritance Yet as I cannot but look upon such Matches among us as a contradiction in adjecto because the Husband in Marriage endows her with all his Worldly Goods so upon all such whether here or elsewhere as contrary to the Divine Institution of Marriage and particularly to that Honour which St. Peter requires Men to exhibit to them For how are they either one with their Husbands or in the esteem of Wives which are set at so great a distance from them I will conclude this part of my Discourse with a Duty that is indeed alike common with the former to each of the Married parties but which hath not themselves but God for the object of it And that is that forasmuch as God is the Author of Marriage they would in respect to him whose institution it is possess their Vessels in Sanctification and Honour as well among themselves as toward others Which they shall do if to give themselves to Fasting and Prayer they shall for a time defraud one another with consent as at all times use that moderation in their enjoyments as may shew them studious of more refined ones and that reservedness and modesty in their outward deportment which may neither tempt others to any impurity nor censure the Divine Institution because of them 2. I have hitherto insisted upon such Duties as are common to the Married parties and which for that reason it is to be hoped will not be distasteful to either of them It remains that I entreat of those that are peculiar to each of them and where if any where I must expect a censure from my Readers But as that rarely happens to a Teacher from the Sober and the Vertuous where his own indiscrete managery thereof gives not occasion to it so he must very much forget his own duty and the dignity of his Employment who shall value any thing of that nature when coming from the Ignorant and Profane Setting aside therefore any farther discourse concerning that I will betake my self to my Task and first of all to 1. Those Duties which are peculiar to the Husband I have heretofore shewn and
shall by and by have occasion to confirm it that God hath endu'd the Husband with Authority over the Wife and commanded her to pay Obedience to it But because it is not impossible Men may arrogate to themselves a greater Authority than ever God intended them or exercise it more fully and with greater rigour than they ought therefore it may not be amiss in describing the peculiar duties of the Husband to shew him what kind of Authority he hath how it is to be exercis'd and about what For answer to which I say first that the Authority of the Husband over the Wife is not coercive but directive that is to say an Authority which priviledges him to command but not to constrain her to Obedience For being given by God to Man as a Companion * Malach. 2.14 and a helper and which is more in such a degree as to become one with him it is unreasonable to think he should have such a power over her as to constrain her to a compliance by force and violence A forcible Treatment degrading her from the condition of a Mate and ranking her among Subjects or Servants Neither will it suffice to say that so also will the laying of Commands because according to the usual saying par in parem non habet potestatem which is alike true as to Commands and Coercions For beside that by the Divine Institution the Man is priviledg'd to rule over her as you may see Gen. 3.16 beside that in this case there is not a perfect parity as the rule before spoken of shews the power of Command is not only not destructive of the conjugal Society but absolutely necessary to the maintaining of it For inasmuch as the Married parties may both entertain different apprehensions concerning such things as are to be done and also take up different resolutions concerning them if there were not a power of ruling somewhere it would be in the power of either party to obstruct the common good of both But as there is not the same necessity of a coercive Power partly because the Husband hath the Law of God to back his Commands and partly because not without a sufficient Power from the Laws of the place he lives in to be able to effect his own purposes so it is perfectly inconsistent with that Society and fellowship into which the Wife is assumed by him It may suffice the Husband that he hath the power of Commanding and in case of refusal that of Reproof and Admonition as which those of far less Authority are not excluded from but other coercion than that no Law of God gives him and is not therefore to be arrogated by him The Authority of the Husband over the Wife being thus explain'd and shewn to consist in Commands Admonitions and Reproofs proceed we to enquire how this Authority is to be exercis'd the second thing propos'd to be discoursed of For the resolution whereof though I might again take my measures from that Partnership into which we have said the Wife to be admitted yet I shall choose rather to shape my Discourse by that Love which the Husband is every where commanded to shew her who is so admitted by him For Love where it is either finding or making Persons equal especially where there is not too great an imparity between the Parties it will follow that the Commands or Admonitions of the Husband are not generally to be delivered in imperious terms and such as savour more of Authority than Kindness St. Paul having taught us by his own behaviour toward Philemon that though a Man may have power to Command yet where that will serve the turn for Love's sake he should rather entreat and not so much constrain as invite them to a compliance I say not the same where she whom God hath commanded to obey shews her self utterly averse from a compliance For in such a case to be too officious were to make himself contemptible and not only so but that Authority which God hath vested in him Only as we learn from St. Paul elsewhere * Col. 3.19 even here also a mean is to be used and though nothing hinders him to express himself in terms suitable to his own Authority yet no Law either of God or Man allows him to be bitter against her The third and last particular comes now to be discours'd of even about what the Authority of a Husband is to be conversant which if we may judge of by the obedience the Wife is required to pay appears to be every thing as you may see Eph. 5.24 But as the same Apostle elsewhere where he entreats of that very Argument adds by way of limitation as it is fit in the Lord Col. 3.18 thereby manifestly restraining the Authority of the Husband to all such things as are within the bounds of our Religion so Reason requires the limiting it to such things also as are suitable to that fellowship into which she is admitted From whence as it will follow that the Husband ought not to impose upon her such things as are more proper for a Servant or Vassal than a Wife so also that he is generally to leave the administration of Houshold affairs to her alone care and management Because as I have often said she is admitted into a Copartnership with him which cannot well be salv'd if that should be taken from her and because both St. Paul 1 Tim. 5.14 and the Laws of Nations appropriate the guiding of the house to her According to that known Proverb which the Roman Matrons were wont to use when they were brought home to their Husbands Houses Vbi tu Caius ibi ego Caia Where you are a Master I expect to be a Mistress and enjoy the priviledges of such 2. Having thus shewn the Duty of the Husband to the Wife as to that Authority wherewith he is invested over her it remains that we enquire what is due from her to him as well in respect of his Authority as her own necessary subjection to it Now though that be easie enough to infer from the foregoing Discourse and may therefore seem to require the less pains in the investigating of it yet I think it not amiss if it were only to observe a due proportion between them to be as particular in the declaration of it as I was before in that of the Authority and Duty of the Husband In order whereunto I say 1. That inasmuch as God hath invested the Man with Authority over the Wife it must be look'd upon as highly irreligious in her to be so far from submitting to it as on the contrary to usurp Authority over him Such a Behaviour bidding defiance to the order of God and Nature because not only thwarting but perverting it And accordingly as St. Paul not only proscribes it as a thing unlawful but moreover represents it as a thing not to be suffer'd 1 Tim. 2.12 So he hath also given us there to understand what is to be
that account which they have from the Witnesses of the manner of the Fact as from the Judge of the nature of the Law other things as the same Learned Man observes being more rightly seann'd by a simple and uncorrupt mind than by craft which is but too often the instrument of another's lust Of the Duty of the former Judges I will not say much because they do not stand so much in need of an Instructor nor am I so proper for it though they did It shall suffice me therefore briefly to admonish or rather pray that inasmuch as the design of their place is to administer Justice they would do what in them lyes to discover where the Right is and not spare any pains or patience to investigate it That they would not receive Informations beforehand to forestall their judgments and much less suffer them to be blinded by the intercession of Friends the sollicitations of great Persons or the receiving of Rewards That they would restrain both the Litigants and their several Advocates from personal aspersions and such as serve rather to hide than discover the truth of the thing in question That they would examine such Witnesses as shew themselves crasty and reserv'd with all dexterity and accuracy and help out and incourage such whom bashfulness and the awe of so great a presence deters that they would bear with the impertinences of those of the meaner sort and who know not how to tell a story without interlacing things of little concernment to it lastly that they would carefully and faithfully recapitulate the whole matter and with all uprightness and perspicuity deliver the sense of that Law which respects it So doing they shall not only fulfill their own parts but help the Jury in a great measure to satisfie theirs Who as they are in Reason and Law to receive the sense of the Law from the Judge and the knowledge of the Fact from the Depositions of the respective Witnesses so shall at least free their own Souls if without favour or hatred or any such corrupt affection they shall set themselves to consider of all that hath been proposed and impartially deliver their own sense For though even thus they may sometime happen to erre in Judgment yet they shall not offend because governing themselves by the best light which the Evidence that hath been given and the Dictates of their own Judgments have afforded them These two things only seem necessary to be added for the better explicating the Duty of these and all other Judges 1. That they ought to pass sentence according to the proofs that are made before them whatsoever jealousie or private knowledge they themselves may have of the falshood of the thing attested to 2. That in doubtful cases and where the truth doth not appear they ought to incline to such determinations as are favourable to the accused party 1. Now though the former of these Assertions be generally allowed of even when the Person who ought to pass sentence hath a strong suspicion of the falseness of the Witnesses for the Reasons before given of the use and necessity of them in Judgment yet as there hath not been the like accord where as it may sometime happen he who is to pass sentence knows the contrary to what hath been deposed so it may seem but necessary for that Reason to enquire whether a Judge in that case ought to pass sentence according to what hath been attested For the resolution whereof the first thing I shall offer is That if he do pass sentence at all he ought to pass sentence according to what hath been deposed yea though his own private knowledge do contradict it For beside that a Judge as such exerciseth a Publick Authority and is therefore in Reason to guide himself in it by a Publick Knowledge and such as comes to him as a Judge and not as a Private Person otherwise he who takes Cognizance and he who passeth Sentence shall not be the same beside that a Judge by the nature of his Office and the Oath which is laid upon him is indefinitely obliged to square his Judgments by the Laws and Manners of the place which do every where make it necessary to proceed according to what is made out to him in Judgment That he ought so to proceed may be abundantly evidenced from the force of those proofs which the Testimony of Witnesses gives for those making the thing prov'd to be look'd upon as Truth even in the opinion of * Joh. 8.17 God himself it is but reason that a Judge who is obliged to judge according to truth should pronounce agreeably to them and consequently not according to his own Private Knowledge Neither will it avail to say which is one of the things that is usually objected that so doing he shall act against his own conscience For beside that there is a difference between acting against a Man's Knowledge and acting against his Conscience the former importing only a speculative Knowledge which induceth no obligation of it self the latter connoting a practical one there is no necessity at all that the Judge of whom we speak should act against his own Conscience For the force of Conscience arising from the perswasion of the Judgment that such or such a thing ought to be done or omitted by us he who can settle it in his mind that he ought to proceed secundùm allegata probata as there is no doubt every Judge ought to do may take the course before spoken of without any reproach from his own Conscience As little am I moved with what is further objected against this Assertion that Positive Laws and particularly those of men ought to yield to the Law of Nature which requires of us for instance the absolving of an innocent person whatsoever Testimony may be made against him For beside that it is the voice of Nature no less than of Positive Laws that in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every word shall be established there being otherwise no end of Contentions if what such suggest may not be admitted to determine them neither is he to be reputed as innocent in foro humano who shall have such Allegations attested against him and shall not be able to wipe them off I conclude therefore That whatsoever a Judges Private Knowledge may inform him he ought if he pass Sentence to guide himself by what appears to him in Judgment But neither secondly shall I stick to affirm that he both may and ought to pass Sentence if the Prince shall oblige him to it As because there is really no iniquity on his part so to do inasmuch as he only condemns him whom the Law pronounceth nocent so because it is a greater inconvenience than the condemning of an innocent Person to detrect the Commands of him by whom he is constituted a Judge He who so doth beside the scandal of his Example opening a way for himself and others to avoid the passing of a