Edification Nor do's our Church impose them like the Church of Rome as necessary and as parts of Religion but as merely indifferent and changeable things As for our Penances 't is needless to shew that they are not cruel like those of Rome 3. The Church of Rome subjects her Members by several of her Doctrines to enslaving passions For instance Purgatory subjects them to fear and auricular confession to shame and the dependence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priest's intention exposes them to great anxiety But our Church rejects the Doctrines of Purgatory and the dependence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priest's intention and do's not oblige her Members to Confess their sins to Men but when for the relief of their Consciences or making satisfaction c. it is their duty so to do 4. The Church of Rome maintains Licentious Principles and Practices which our Adversaries cannot charge upon the Church of England Secondly In all those Doctrines and Practices in which the Church of Rome is justly charg'd with plainly contradicting the Scripture For instance our Church rejects and utterly abhors the Popish Doctrines and Practices of Image-worship invocation of Saints Transubstantiation Pardons Indulgences Sacrifice of the Mass denying the Bible to the Vulgar Prayers and Sacraments in an unknown Tongue robbing the Laity of the Cup in the Lord's Supper prohibiting Marriage to Priests Merit Superogation making simple Fornication a mere venial sin damning all that are not of her Communion c. Nor is there any Church that more severely condemns all instances of unrighteousness and immorality than the Church of England do's Thirdly In their public Prayers and Offices To shew this in all particulars wou'd be a tedious task therefore I shall instance only in the office of Infant-Baptism by which the Reader may judge of the rest Before they go into the Church after many preparatory prescriptions the Priest being drest in a Surplice and purple Robe calls the Infant saying what askest thou c. the Godfather answers Faith P. What shalt thou get by Faith G. Eternal Life P. If thou therefore c. Then the Priest blows three gentle puffs upon the Infant 's face and saies Go out of him O unclean Spirit c. Then Crossing the Infant 's Forehead and Breast he saith Receive the sign of the Cross c. Then he praies that God wou'd alwaies c. And after a long Prayer the Priest laying his Hand on the Infant 's Head comes the idle and profane Form of the Benediction of Salt viz. I conjure thee O creature of Salt in the Name c. with many Crossings Then he puts a little Salt into the Infant 's mouth saying Take thou the Salt of Wisdom and adds most impiously be it thy Propitiation unto Eternal Life After the Pax tecum he praies that this Infant c. Then the Devil is conjur'd again and most wofully be-call'd Then the Priest Crosses the Infant 's Forehead saying And this sign c. Then he puts his Hand on the Infant 's Head and puts up a very good Prayer Then he puts part of his Robe upon the Infant and brings him within the Church saying Enter thou c. Then follow the Apostles Creed and the Paternoster Then the Devil is conjur'd again and the Priest takes spittle out of his mouth and therewith touches the Infant 's Ears and Nostrils saying c. Then he conjures the Devil again saying Be packing O Devil c. Then he asks the Infant whether he renounces the Devil c. Then dipping his Thumb in Holy Oyl and anointing the Infant with it in his Breast and betwixt his shoulders he saies I anoint thee c. Then he puts off his Purple Robe and puts on another of White colour and having ask'd four more questions and receiv'd the answers he pours water thrice upon the Child's Head as he recites over it our Saviour's Form of Baptism Then dipping his Thumb in the Chrism or Holy Ointment he anoints the Infant upon the Crown of his Head in the figure of a Cross and praies O God Omnipotent c. Afterwards he takes a white linnen cloth and putting it on the Child's Head saies Take the white garment c. Lastly he puts into the Child's or his God-Father's Hand a lighted Candle saying Receive the burning Lamp c. Besides those things which are in the Common Ritual there are divers others added in the Pastorale which I shall not mention And now if any Man will read our Office of Baptism he will acknowledge that no two things can be more unlike than these two Offices are Our Litany indeed has been Condemn'd by Dissenters as savouring of Popish Superstition but nothing is more false if a Man compares it with the Popish one the greater part of which consists in invocations of Saints and Angels But the Brevity I am confin'd to in this Discourse will not permit me to abide any longer upon this Argument Fourthly In the Books they receive for Canonical For the Church of Rome takes all the Apocryphal Books into the Canon but the Church of England takes only those which the Primitive Church and all Protestants acknowledge 'T is true she reads some part of the Apocryphal Books for instruction of manners but she do's not establish any Doctrine by them Fifthly and Lastly in the Authority on which they found their whole Religion The Church of Rome founds the Authority of the Scriptures upon her own infallibility and the Authority of many of her own Doctrines on unwritten traditions and the Decrees of her Councils which she will have to be no less inspir'd than the Prophets and Apostles but the Church of England builds her whole Religion upon Scripture which is her rule of Faith and Practice She Reverences ancient general Councils but do's not think them infallible And as for that Authority which our Church claims in Controversies of Faith by requiring subscription to 39 Articles 't is plain that she means no more Authority than to oblige her Members to outward submission when her decisions do not contradict any essentials of Faith or Manners but not an authority to oblige Men to believe them infallibly true and this is necessary for the Peace of any Church 'T is true she thinks it convenient that none should receive Orders be admitted to Benefices c. but such as do believe them not all as Articles of our Faith but many as inferiour truths and she requires Subscription as a Test of this belief but the Church of Rome requires all Persons under pain of damnation to believe all her false and wicked Doctrines as much as the most undoubted Articles of Faith as may be seen in the Creed of Pius the fourth As to the Motives which our Church proposes for our belief of the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures they are such as are found in the Scriptures themselves viz. the excellency of them and the Miracles which confirm them
made by incense the coals were to be taken from thence and therefore surely 't was peculiar to those offices Nay just after the account of the extraordinary way of lighting the fire follows this relation of Nadab and Abihu to shew wherein they offended For before it was the office of Aaron's Sons to put fire upon the Altar and now they suffer'd for attempting to do as formerly because Heaven had declar'd to the contrary There was also a Conformity between the punishment and the sin for as fire from the Lord consum'd the burnt-offering so fire from the Lord consum'd them So that their case seems like that of Vzzah 1 Chron. 13.7 10 15.2 for they acted contrary to God's command I may add that in other places also the phrase not commanded is apply'd to things forbidden such as are call'd abominations that is idolatrous worship false Prophets c. Deut. 17.3 4. Jer. 7.31 19.5 32.35 so that since the phrase is always spoken of things plainly forbidden 't is a sign that 't is rather God's forbidding that made them unlawful than his not commanding But say they why shou'd the phrase be us'd at all in such matters if not commanded is not the same as forbidden To this I answer that not commanded is only a softer way of speaking which is usual in all languages and frequently to be met with in Scripture Thus God saies that hypocrites chuse that in which I delighted not Is 66.4 that is their abominations as we read v. 3. So the Apostle saies the Gentiles did things not convenient Rom 1.28 29. that is envy murther c. And the phrase not commanded is of the like kind when the things it 's apply'd to are alike abominable Besides if not commanded be the same as forbidden then the very notion of indifferent things is destroy'd and there is no indifferent thing in the world because a thing indifferent is as I said before that which is neither commanded nor forbidden But 't is said that all things not commanded in God's Word are additions to it and that such additions are unlawful because God saies Ye shall not add unto the Word which I command you neither shall ye diminish ought from it Deut. 4.2 and the Scribes are condemn'd Matth. 15.9 because they taught for doctrines the Commandments of Men. Now to this I reply that if by adding to the Word they mean doing what the Word forbids or appointing somewhat else instead of what God has appointed or expounding away the design of the Word or making that which is not the Word of God to be of equal authority with it as the Scribes did or giving the same efficacy to human institutions as God does to his if I say by adding to the Word they mean any of these things we think that adding to the Word is unlawful And if by diminishing they mean neglecting what the Word requires or thinking God's institutions not compleat we think that diminishing from the Word is unlawful But if they say that doing any thing not commanded in the worship of God tho' it have none of the ingredients before spoken of is a sinful adding to the Word we therein differ from them 1. Because Christ and his Apostles and all Churches have done things not commanded 2. Because this destroys the nature of indifferent things which cannot be indifferent if they be sinful additions to God's Word Besides adding is adding to the Substance and diminishing is diminishing from the Substance so that when the Substance remains intire without debasement or corruption it cannot be call'd an addition or diminution in the Scripture-sence However our Adversaries themselves are really guilty of what they charge upon us for they forbid as absolutely unlawful to use any thing in the worship of God which is not prescrib'd and certainly he that forbids what the Scripture do's not forbid do's as much add to it as he that commands what the Gospel doth not command As for the Words of the 2d Commandment Thou shall not make unto thee any graven image c. they do by no means prove that we must worship God by no other Religious rites than what he has prescrib'd 'T is true we are there commanded to worship none besides God and to worship God in a manner sutable to his Nature and agreeable to his Will but surely rites instituted by Men for the Solemnity of God's Service are not there forbidden It has been said indeed that Ceremonies being invented by Man are of the same nature with images but we must observe 1. That Images are expresly forbidden and Ceremonies are not 2. That Images tend to debase God in the thoughts of those that worship him after that Manner but Ceremonies do not and therefore Ceremonies are not a breach of the 2d Commandment Ceremonies are not Essential parts of Divine Worship but only circumstances of it and certainly our Brethren cannot find fault that such circumstances are us'd to further Devotion For they themselves do plead for sitting at the Lord's Supper c. upon this very account because they think such external circumstances do further Devotion But say they if there be not a Rule for all things belonging to the Worship of God the Gospel wou'd be less perfect than the Law and Christ wou'd not be so faithful in the care of his Church as Moses who was faithful in all his house Heb. 3.2 Therefore as Moses laid down all the particular Rules for God's Worship under the Law so has Christ under the Gospel and it is as dangerous to add as to detract from them Now to this I answer that the design of the Epistle to the Hebrews is to compare Moses and Christ or the Law and the Gospel and to shew the exact Correspondence between the Type and the Antitype and not to shew that our Saviour had as particularly prescrib'd the Order of Christian Worship as Moses had that of the Jewish The Gospel is not so particular in the Circumstantials of Worship as the Law was and we must not affirm that it is because we wou'd have it so We cannot prove that Christ has actually done this because we imagine that he shou'd have done it We may better argue that since these things are not expresly determin'd under the Gospel as they were under the Law therefore they are left to the determination of our Superiours whom we are commanded to obey Nor are the sufficiency of Scripture and faithfulness of Christ to be judg'd of by what we fancy they shou'd have determin'd but by what they have Since we do not find in the Scriptures such particular prescriptions in Baptism as in Circumcision nor in the Lord's Supper as in the Passover nor in our Prayers as in the Jewish Sacrifices therefore 't is plain that the sufficiency of Scripture and faithfulness of Christ do respect somewhat else and that they are not the less for want of them Christ was faithful as Moses to him that
very strange that had the Institution been temporary the Church of Christ for Fifteen hundred Years shou'd never be wise enough to discover it and it seems to me a very high presumption for us to determin against the constant belief and practice of the Church in all Ages without the least warrant so to do either from our Saviour or his Apostles But it is Objected yet farther that tho' Forms of God's appointing may and ought to be us'd yet Forms of Man's composure ought not and that we may as well appoint New Scripture for Public instruction because the inspir'd persons did so as we may appoint new Forms for Public worship because they did so But this objection also will be of no force if we consider Four things 1. That this Objection allows the prescribing of Forms to be lawful in its own nature for otherwise God must have done that which is unlawful in its own nature Nay our Saviour's prescribing his Form was a tacit approbation of other Forms that were prescrib'd before and that not only by God but by Men too For the Jews us'd several Forms of human composure in their Temple and Synagogues in our Saviour's time yet he was so far from disapproving them that he prescrib'd a Form to his own Disciples which Form as Mr. Gregory has prov'd he collected out of the Jewish Forms in whose Books the several Parts and Clauses of it are Extant almost verbatim to this day And certainly had he disapprov'd their Forms as evil and sinful he wou'd never have Collected his own Prayer out of them Since therefore our Saviour's giving a Form in such circumstances signifies his approbation of other Forms 't is plain either that he approv'd what is evil or that Forms are lawful 2. That this Objection must allow the prescribing of Public Forms to be not only lawful but also useful For otherwise God who alwaies Acts for wise Ends and Uses the most proper means wou'd never have prescrib'd any Forms And certainly what was once useful is useful still For 1. we are now dull and carnal enough to need Forms and 2. our Saviour has prescrib'd one to be us'd in all Ages which he wou'd not have done had it not been useful for the Gospel-state 3. That this Objection must also allow that God's prescribing Forms by Inspir'd Persons may be lawfully imitated by us provided we have the same reason for it And therefore Governours may prescribe Forms as long as Forms are useful 4. That tho' Governours may prescribe Forms after God's Example yet they may not prescribe them as Scripture or Divine Inspiration For as Spiritual Governours must take care to instruct the People after God's Example but are not obliged to do it by Inspir'd Persons so they may prescribe Forms of Prayer after God's Example but cannot pretend to do it by Inspiration They have God's Example for doing the Action but they cannot pretend to Inspiration in the doing of it without manifest falshood and presumtion And therefore tho' God's Example will warrant for the one yet it will not warrant them falsly to pretend to the other Thus then it appears that some Forms of Prayer are commanded in Holy Scripture and that our Governours are Authoriz'd by God's Example to prescribe others when they judge them useful II. Therefore I am to prove that tho' no Forms were prescrib'd yet Forms are as lawful as conceiv'd or Extempore Prayers Certainly there is no command of God to pray Extempore and therefore Forms have a better claim to Divine Authority than they 'T is said indeed that wheresoever we are commanded to Pray Vocally we are commanded to Pray in our own Conceptions and words but this is a great mistake For certainly when God commanded Men to Pray by his own Forms they did pray Vocally tho' not in their own words And here let me take notice that Dissenters appropriate the Name of Prayer to Praying in their own words and call the using a Form not Prayer but Reading a Prayer But surely the Levites did really Pray when they us'd the Words of David and Asaph and so did the Primitive Christians when they said the Lord's Prayer and if so then a Form may be truly call'd a Vocal Prayer For Vocal Prayer consists in the speaking of our devout affections to God whether with or without a Form But they pretend that whatsoever instances there may be of Forms in Old Times God has declar'd in the New Testament that it is his Will we shou'd Pray by our own gift of utterance for the future Now methinks had it been the Will of God that we shou'd not Pray by Forms 't is very strange that in all the New Testament there shou'd be no express prohibition of it Especially since I have prov'd that the Jews had Forms and Philo de Victim p. 483. and the Modern Rabbins own the same they were also a People most tenacious of their customs and therefore needed to be forbidden the use of Forms had our Lord design'd to exclude them out of his Worship Nay the Essenes who of all the Sects of the Jews did most readily embrace Christianity had certain Forms of Prayer as Josephus observes De Bell. Jud. l. 2. c. 7. p. 783. Now when those that were most likely to receive the Christian Faith were so addicted to Forms can we imagine that had Christ intended they shou'd use them no longer he wou'd not have given them express warning of them But when instead of so doing he bids them say Our Father c. how cou'd they think but that he design'd they shou'd still use a Form as they did before Were not that his design 't is strange that he took no care to undeceive them But that I may fully prove that the Scripture does not command us to Pray without a Form I shall examine the reasons for which the Dissenters think it do's God say they has promis'd us an ability to utter our minds in Vocal Prayer and therefore to Pray by Forms of other Men's composure is contrary to his intention But I shall afterwards prove that this ability which they pretend is promis'd for the purpose of Vocal Prayer is a common gift which God has no more appropriated to Prayer than to any other end of utterance and elocution and that therefore to omit the using it in Prayer is no more contrary to the intention of God than to omit the using it upon any other just and lawful occasion However because they urge some places of Scripture to prove that 't is design'd merely for Vocal Prayer I shall therefore consider them 1. They urge Zach. 12.10 I will pour out upon the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplications The Hebrew word translated supplications do's alwaies say they denote Vocal Prayer and therefore pouring out the Spirit of supplications must imply communicating an ability to Pray Vocally To this I answer that the word is no
more restrain'd to Vocal Prayer than any other word that signifies Prayer in Scripture 'T is true we read Psal 28.2 Hear the voice of my supplication when I cry unto thee but the voice of my supplication do's not necessarily denote Vocal Prayer For 't is a Hebraiâ—â— and may signify no more than my Supplication or Prayer For so Gen. 4.10 't is said The voice of thy Brother's blood cries c. Now the blood had no real voice to cry with but cry'd just as mental Prayer do's In other places the word signifies both mental and vocal Prayer indifferently Psal 86.6 6.9 or Prayer in general Jer. 31.9 But suppose the word were alwaies us'd for Vocal Prayer yet surely the Promise of pouring out the Spirit of supplications intends a much greater good than the gift of extempore utterance in Prayer of which bad Men may have a greater share than the most devout And what is that greater good but the gift of Heavenly affections in Prayer If it be urg'd that God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son crying Abba Father Gal. 4.6 and that we have receiv'd the Spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father Rom. 8.15 and that these Texts prove us to be enabled to Pray Vocally by the Spirit and that therefore we ought not to Pray by Forms I answer 1. That if these words oblige us to cry Vocally to God by our own gifts then we are equally obliged in all our Vocal Prayers to cry to him in these words Abba Father because that is the cry which the Spirit enables us to make and the Text is every whit as express for one as for the other 2. I deny that crying here do's necessarily denote Vocal Prayer For how often do we find the word apply'd to things that have no Voice at all Thus the stones wou'd immediately cry out Luke 19.40 and the Labourers hire is said to cry to God James 5.4 And indeed crying to God has the same latitude with Prayer which includes both Vocal and Mental 3. Suppose that crying Abba Father by the Spirit signifies Vocal Prayer yet all that can be gather'd from it is only this that when we Pray Vocally we are enabled by the Holy Spirit to address our selves to God with assurance as to a merciful Father and this we may as well do in a Form as otherwise For if we never cry Abba Father by the spirit but when we word our own Prayers we can no more be said to do it when we join with a public Extempore Prayer than when we join with a public Form because we word our own Prayers in neither 'T is true the Scripture speaks of a gift of utterance which say they was given for Praying as well as Preaching but I answer that the gift of utterance was miraculous and particular to the Primitive Ages This gift saies Saint Chrysostom Hom. 24. ad Eph. c. 6. is that which Christ promis'd Mark 13.11 by which the Disciples spake without premeditation and what they spake was the inspir'd Word of God and this Gift no sober Dissenter will pretend to The Apostles began to speak with tongues as the spirit gave them utterance Act. 2.4 and the Dissenters may as well pretend to the gift of Tongues as that of Utterance they being both extraordinary But say they tho' all Men have not the Gift of Praying Extempore yet some have and therefore God requires such to Pray by their gift and not by a Form For he requires them not to neglect the gift 1 Tim. 4.14 but to stir up the gift 2 Tim. 1.6 and to Minister the gift 1 Pet. 4.10 and that having gifts c. Rom. 12.6 and if Men are obliged to exercise their gifts in general then they must exercise their gift of Praying Extempore in particular Now to these things I answer First That the gift bestow'd upon Timothy was the gift of Episcopal power which he is exhorted to exercise diligently For at the first plantation of the Gospel the Holy Ghost Pointed out the Men that were to be Bishops as the (f) Clem. 1 Epist ad Corinth Chrysost in Act. 13.2 Fathers testifie For this reason the gift is said to be given him by Prophesy 'T was given also with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery and these two circumstances prove that the gift was not the gift of Prophesying but the gift of Episcopal Authority bestow'd upon him by imposition of hands at God's particular Appointment And now I pray how do's this Text prove that we must use a gift of Vocal Prayer in our own words As for 1 Pet. 4.10 Rom. 12.6 I Answer 1. That there can be nothing in them against Praying by a Form for then they wou'd make as much against using the Lord's Prayer as any other Form 2. That the design of those Texts is to stir Men up to diligence in the exercise of those several Offices viz. The Office of a Bishop a Priest a Deacon and a Rich Man For 't is plain that the word Gift do's oftentimes signifie an Office and tho' it may be said that the relief of the Poor is rather the exercise of an Ability than an Office yet I answer that 't is properly the exercise of an Office because the very having Ability do's as much put a Man into the Office of shewing mercy to the Poor as if God had appointed him to it by a solemn Ordination 3. Supposing that by these gifts were not meant Offices but only abilities yet we are obliged so to exercise them That all things may be done to Edification for so the Apostle declares that those extraordinary Gifts that were pour'd out in the Primitive Times were to be us'd 1 Cor. 14.2 6 19 40. as 't is particularly plain by the instance of the Gift of Tongues vers 23 26 28. Now if we are not to exercise our gifts but as they tend to Edification then we must not exercise the gift of Praying Extempore any farther than it tends to Edification And since Praying by a Form in Public Worship do's as I shall afterwards prove tend more to Edification than Praying Extempore therefore 't is plain that we ought to suspend the use of the gift of conceiv'd Prayer Thus I hope I have made it appear that some Forms of Prayer are commanded in Scripture and that those Texts which are urg'd against the use of forms of Prayer do prove nothing against them and therefore I think I may safely affirm that the Scripture do's warrant Forms of Prayer I proceed now to shew that Antiquity do's the same This I shall do 1. by answering those Authorities which are objected by the Dissenters against the use of Forms in the Primitive Ages 2. By proving that they were us'd in those Ages by a short Historical Account of the matter of Fact 1. Then 't is objected First that Justin Martyr saies Apol. 2. p. 98. That the Minister at the Communion Pray'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
this is not the least that God's public Worship is perform'd among us with so little Reverence and Devotion as it is But I will transcribe no more only I shall earnestly desire two things First that you wou'd consider seriously how you wou'd have lik'd what I have transcrib'd from Mr. Hildersham if one of our Men had Preach'd it especially if he added that for the Reverence of God's public Worship care shou'd be taken that the place where the Congregation Assembleth may be decent and comely and that 't is a foul sin and contempt of God's house to be careless about the Neatness of it If you wou'd have thought it unprofitable then consider why such things as please out of one Man's mouth shou'd displease out of another's Is it not manifest that partiality makes you not profit by our Sermons Or if you cou'd not like such Discourses either from Non-Conformists or our Ministers then are you not mistaken about profiting by Sermons when you think those discourses unprofitable which sober Men of all sides have thought necessary For Mr. Hildersham saies Prophaness and Atheism hath made us too void of all care in beautifying the house of God Secondly If you think such a Sermon profitable consider whether you have learnt so much out of Scripture as to study and observe those Rules Do you for instance pay Reverence to God's house and come at the beginning of Service and stand up and kneel with the Congregation c If you do not then the fault is not in our Sermons that you do not profit for you do not profit by the Scriptures themselves which plainly teach these things To conclude if we have all things necessary to the building us up in our most Holy Faith in the Communion of the Church it will be but a poor excuse for our Dividing from it that we hoped to be better Edify'd when we had no encouragement at all to hope it as long as we continu'd in the state of Separation upon this Pretence For it is the Blessing of God alone and not any Man's Skill in dispensing them that can make the word and ordinances any way beneficial to us With the help of his grace those means of Instruction which we undervalue most may be profitable to our Salvation Without it our Ears may be tickled and our Fancies pleasantly entertain'd for the time but we cannot be truly Edify'd by the most fluent and popular Tongue or the most melting and pathetical Expressions in the World CHAP. XI The pretence of it's being against one's Conscience to join with the Church of England Answer'd HAving Answer'd the most considerable Objections against our Communion I am now to deal with such Persons as separate from us tho' they have nothing to object against us such as pretend that they are not satisfy'd in our way that 't is against their Conscience to join with us or that they doubt of the lawfulness of our Communion or at least they scruple it But I shall shew that these excuses are utterly insignificant and that they cannot escape the wrath of God who commit a sin and think to cover it by pretending Conscience for it But before I enter upon these Matters I shall lay down the Principles I mean to proceed upon by treating distinctly on these Five Heads 1. Of the Nature of Conscience 2. Of the Rule of Conscience 3. Of the Power of Human Laws to oblige the Conscience And particularly 4. In the instances of Church-Communion 5. Of the Authority of Conscience or how far a Man is obliged to be guided by it in his actions I. Then to find out the Nature of Conscience let us consider what every Man doth really mean by that word when he has occasion to use it Now as to this I observe First that a Man never speaks of his Conscience but with respect to his own actions We do not for instance make it a point of Conscience whether a thing be true or false or whether an accident be prosperous or unfortunate or whether another Man has done well or ill These things indeed may please or trouble us but our Conscience is affected only with that which is willingly done or left undone by us or which we may do or may forbear Secondly We never use the Word Conscience about our actions but only so far as those actions are to be directed by some Law or Rule with which if they agree they are good and if they disagree they are evil Thirdly Our actions as we concern our Conscience in them are either already done or not already done But whether they are done or not done whether past or future they are either commanded by God and so they are Duties or forbidden by God and so they are Sins or neither commanded nor forbidden and so they are indifferent actions Our actions I say do not touch our Conscience but as they fall under these considerations and in all these respects we mean the same thing by Conscience For First If the action be not already done we think it either commanded by God and say we are bound in Conscience or think it our duty to do it or forbidden by God and say it is against our Conscience or we think it a sin to do it or else we think it is indifferent and say we may do it with a safe Conscience that is we believe the action may be done without transgressing any Law of God This is undeniably every Man's meaning when he talks of Conscience as to actions that are not yet done Secondly If we speak of our actions that are done and past saying my Conscience bears me witness or I am satisfy'd or troubled in Conscience for doing what I have done we mean nothing more than this that reflecting upon our own actions we find that we have either done as we are convinc'd we ought to do and this is a satisfaction to us or not done as we ought to do and the remembrance of this troubles us But in all these Cases we mean the same thing by Conscience to wit our Judgment and Persuasion concerning what we ought to do or ought not to do Only in the first sort Conscience is consider'd as the guide of actions to be done and in the second sort as the witness of those that are already done but in both sorts Conscience is the same thing to wit the Judgment of a Man's mind concerning the Morality of his Actions This is the true Notion of Conscience in general but if we put Epithets to it and talk of a good or evil Conscience a tender Conscience or the like then it includes more than I am now concern'd to give an account of II. I proceed to the Rule of Conscience It appears by what I have said that Conscience must alwaies have a Rule to follow For since Conscience is a Man's judgment about actions as good or bad or indifferent it is certain a Man must have some measure by applying