in a threefold consideration And first of all the worship of God properly so called and the chiefest is that inward wordship of the mind which consisteth in the exercise of inward Vertues as of Faith Hope Love Invocation Confidence c. Secondly those outward Acts by which that inward worship of the mind is partly expressed and partly helped and fostered such as are publick Prayers Singing of Psalms the Hearing of the word and the participation of the Sacraments c. may reducibly and lesse properly be called and oftentimes are called the worship of God as they are the outward Testimonies and Helps of that worship which so properly is called Thirdly Seeing it is impossible that any outward action especially if it be a solemn one should be performed without some Circumstances either more or lesse of Time Place and Gesture from whence it comes to passe that the very same Circumstances which if established by Laws or Customes are called also Rites do sometimes receive the appellation of worship although very improperly and only for that Concomitancy which they have to that outward worship which it self also is improperly called a worship It is therefore to be affirmed That the inward primary worship properly so called doth only so acknowledge God to be the only Author of it that it is not lawful for any man either to institute a new worship or being instituted by God to exhibit it to any other besides God himself We are to affirm also That the outward worship according to its substantials is instituted only by God but there is a far different account to be made of the circumstances which are accessary to this outward worship and those which do accompany it If there be any who will Honor them also with the Name of worship For seeing that the outward worship of God cannot be performed without Circumstances and God in the Gospel hath not given any certain particular Circumstances perpetually to be observed in sacred Assemblyes but only hath lay'd down some Generals as may conduce to Order Honesty and Edification it must necessarily follow that the Determination of the said Circumstances which are but Accidental to the worship it self and mutable according to the respect of Times Places and Occasions must pertain unto those who under Christ have a Right and Power of Governing the Churches which that they may be imposed by those who in the several Churches are invested with publick Authority and being imposed may Religiously be observed by all the Members of the said Churches the nature of Holy worship doth not forbid but Solemnity rather Decency doth require We observe also that even those Men themselves who so Lordly bitterly do inveigh against the Canons and Ecclesiastical Constitutions yet as often as they please do use those Rites in the outward worship of God no where prescribed by Christ or his Apostles as the lifting up of their hands in the taking of an Oath the uncovering of the Head in the Holy Conventions and many other things which because we dayly observe to be done it is unnecessary to rehearse them XXX In the fourth place they object that Moses the pattern of the old that is of the Jewish Church who was given by God to the people of the Jews to be their Lawgiver did not only by his Law define the Substantials of the Jewish worship but according to that fidelity which was in him he omitted not the least Circumstances and in building the Tabernacle which was to be a Type of the Christian Church he most compleatly and perfectly finished all things according to the Idaea of the Example which was propounded to him in the Mount And now if Christ the-Lawgiver of the new Testament should not have prescribed all things and every thing even to the least Circumstances which are to be performed in the Ecclesiastical worship it may justly be believed to suspect which is near to Blasphemy that he was lesse faithful in the House of God than Moses and thereupon there is a remarkable injury and contumely done unto Christ if any new Rites never instituted by him should by humane Authority be brought into the Church or be received by the Christian common people But they who do object these things ought in the first place to have considered that by this Argument all humane political Laws are no lesse everted than Eclesiastical for Moses by the commandement of God did give unto the people of Israel a certain and a defined Law not only of those Rites which belonged to the worship of God but also of those Decrees and Judgments which belonged to the Administration of Civil Government XXXI In the second place it is a wonder moreover that they observed not that by this comparison of that fidelity which was in both Law-givers Moses and Christ that they could not more importunately have alleged any thing that could bring a greater dammage to their own Cause or more strongly have confirmed ours For as from that that Moses both in rituals and judicials did give many Laws unto the people of the Jews we do truly collect it was the will of God that the people of the Jews should be so restrained in their duties under that paedagogy and Mosaick Discipline as under a Yoak of servitude so that very few things should be free unto them so from that also that Christ the most faithful Interpreter of his Fathers Will did give unto the Christian Church but a very few Laws of Ceremonies we do truly collect that it is the will of God that the Magistrates and Christian people should be permitted in those things to their own Liberty so that it is now free for any private Man of his own accord no command or prohibition of a superior intervening to do as shall seem in his own Judgement to be most expedient and to the several Churches and their Governors to prescribe those things which according to the condition of the time and place shall seem to them to be most subservient to Order Honesty Edification and Peace XXXII Moreover Those who do make use of this Argument ought in the third place to have considered that under that Paedagogy of Moses the Jews themselves had not all the Liberty of Rites in things pertaining to the worship of God so take away that it was not lawful for them by their own Authority to observe and to institute those things which it is manifest were never commanded either by God himself or by Moses his Servant Of many take these few instances First the solemn feast of the Passover which by the Law of Moses was commanded should be observed but seaven dayes was by a special Law of Hezekias who received a singular testimony of his piety from God himself and by the consent of the people continued seaven dayes longer The History is extant 2. Chron. 30. Secondly Esther and Mordecay did institute that the seast of Purim should be yearly celebrated in memory of
assign some Notes and Critisms and betwixt those which were of a particular right it is not necessary that any such distinction should be made Nay we may roundly affirm that those Laws of Moses which are called Political or Judicial do none of them oblige Christian Magistrates to a strict observation of them but it is lawfull for them according to their own discretion and as they shall find find it expedient for the safety and profit of the Common-wealth either to revive them into power or to make them of no effect XXXI I affirm in the fourth place That the moral Law delivered by Moses that is to say the praecepts of the Decalogue or the ten Commandements do oblige all Christians as well as Jews to the observation of them All Protestants that I do know of do with one mouth acknowledge this truth Bellarmine therefore doth us the greater injury who feigneth that we do make Christian liberty to consist in this not to be bound in Conscience to be subjected to any Law and that Moses with his Decalogue doth not pertain unto us Let him see how he can clear himself of this scandal and vindicate those of his part from this crime if we are in it For the Controversie amongst his School-men is agitated Whether Christians are bound to the praecepts of the Decalogue only as they are the Declaratives of the Law of Nature or as they were also delivered by God to Moses and by Gods Commandement given by Moses to the people of God and transmitted into the holy Books Some there are of them that do deny the one others that do affirm both And in our Churches the same diversity of opinions is to be found if it be not rather a diversity in words than in opinions For seeing they amongst themselves and we do agree with them in this which is the main of all that the Moral Law which is delivered by Moses and is contained in the precepts of the Decalogue hath the power to oblige the Consciences of Christians it will peradventure be not worth our labour from whence it doth obtain that power to oblige In my judgement they speak more unto the purpose who say that this Law of Moses doth not oblige Christians formally and as it is delivered by Moses but onely by reason of the matter as it is the Declarative of the Law of Nature and it receiveth therefore all its force of obliging not from Moses bringing or delivering it but from the Dictates of the Law of Nature which God in the first Creation did inspire into our minds and after the Fall would have it to remain in them as the Remembrancer of his will And this may suffice to be spoken of the old Law or the Law of Moses XXXII The new Law or the Law of Christ that is to say the Gospel doth contain these three things 1. Mysteries of Faith to be believed in which chapter I comprehend the promises of God by Grace 2. Sacred Institutions Ceremonial and Ecclesiastick And 3. The Moral Precepts of which I speak and universally of all of them That the Gospel obligeth none but those only who are called those only to whom it is preached For where there is no Law there can be no transgression for moraly especially in Supernaturals it is the same thing Non esse et non apparere not to be and not to appear or not to be so sufficiently propounded as it may be known The words of our Saviour are expressly to this sence Ioh. 15. 22. If I had not come and spoken to them they had not had sin that is they had not been guilty of despising the Gospel But it obligeth all men to whom it is preached to an obedience as well of Faith as of Life so that we are all bound to whom the Gospel is preached both to believe in Christ as our Redeemer and to obey him as our Law-giver And whosoever shall fail in the performance of these two things shall suffer everlasting punishment for the neglect of his duty XXXIII I say in the third place That the Christian Church is obliged to the Sacred Institutions that is to the preaching of the word the administration of the Sacraments the Ordination of Ministers of the Gospel and the exercise of the Keyes as well of Knowledg as of Power it is bound I say in all those things which pertain to the essence of them according to the institution of Christ and the Apostles so that it is not lawful for the Church much lesse for any particular congregation or person either willingly to diminish or to change any thing at all therein But the external circumstances of the Sacred Institution are so free that any particular Church may determine of them according to Time and Place and to the custome of the People of God and as it shall seem most expedient to Edification XXXIV In the third place I affirm That the Moral Precepts of the New Testament are the same according to their substance with the Morals of the Old Testament and they are both of them to be reduced to the Law of Nature which is contained in the ten Commandements as omnia Entia realia all real Beings are reduced to the ten Predicaments But the Precepts of Christ in the new Law as the holy Fathers of the Church do every where acknowledge are in many things far more excellent than the Precepts of Moses in the old Law not onely in that respect that they are propounded more fully and clearly but because they ascend also higher and do advance the true Christian to a more eminent degree of perfection and that with most effectual inducements on both sides the past Example of Christ being propounded to him on the one side and the inestimable reward to come in the Kingdom of Heaven on the other And this most clearly may appear in those two great Duties of a Christians life commanded in the new Law viz. of loving our enemies and taking up the cross For as some have dreamed these are not so onely to be esteemed as if they were onely Counsels to a more perfect life propounded to all men under the condition of a more large reward and oblige no man under sin and punishment but those onely who by a vow have obliged themselves to the observation of them But they expresly in themselves are Precepts and properly so called and universally obliging to the observation whereof all those who profess the Name of Christ are bound under the guilt of the most grievous sin to wit the abnegation of Christ and the punishment of eternal damnation unless they truly do repent And thus much concerning the second Light of the mind XXXV The third remaineth which we call the light acquired which surely is nothing else but an addition or increase of that light whether of Nature or Revelation which was before in the minde to some more eminent degree of clearness as when the will of God the
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom mention is made in the fourth verse of this 2 of the Galatians who pretending that they came from James did indeed creep in privily of themselves to observe the liberty of St. Paul and other Christians as some do think or rather as others are of opinion and more probably whether they were weak Brethren sent indeed by St. James but as yet not throughly instructed concerning the cessation of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Law St. Peter desiring to be gracious with them or rather fearing to give them an offence did immediately and altogether abstain from the Tables and the society of the Gentiles and from the meats forbidden in the Law of Moses by whose example the Jews of Antioch being induced who by the Sermons of Paul and his fellow labourers in Christ had been taught the Christian â—iberty a little better than those that came from Jerusalem and more fully understood the abolishing of the ceremonial Law yet being but weak themselves and more addicted to the ceremonies to which a long time they had been accustomed they easily suffered themselves to be seperated from the communion of their brethren the believing Gentiles not without some suspition as it is probable that Peter the chief of the Apostles was the more compent judge of these things what was to be done that themselvs were hitherto drawn in by Paul with the gratefull but the empty shew of liberty and what is more to be admired for it is not strange or unaccustomed for the weaker sort to stumble even Barnabas himself who was St. Pauls collegue and his daily companion in his journeys who constantly asserted the Doctrine of Christian liberty against the Jews being overcome by the authority of so great an Apostle did stoop with him into the same fellowship of dissimulation not without a great offence to the believing Gentiles III. Paul doth here declare that for this fact St. Peter was reprehended by him and that vehemently openly and deservedly Not only that he himself to the scandal of so many of the brethren out of too great desire of complacence or thâ— fear of offence had shewed himself more favourable to the Jewish ceremonies than did become him but that he drew others by his example into the same participation of Hypocrisie with him and by the same example had endeavouted to enforce the believing Gentiles although unwilling and against their Consciences unto Judaisme I am not ignorant that St. Hierom having alleged some other Authors that jump with him in that opinion doth give a far different interpretation of this reproof than what I here have specified viz. That this affair was not carryed seriously and as indeed it was betwixt these two chiefest of the Apostles but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by contrivance the benefit of the Church at that time so requiring it Indeed he would perswade us that this dissimulation of St. Peter was necessary to retain the good opinion of the Jews which that it might not be too dangerous to the Gentiles this counterfeit reproof of St. Paul was altogether as necessary by which the errour of the Jews concerning the continuing force of the ceremonial Rites might be so corrected that by the same endeavour provision should be made that no danger of scandal should be given to the Gentiles And thus by the conjoyned dissimulation of both the Apostles it was so effected that the Jewes as well as the Gentiles should by this pious fraud be more easily retained in the faith of Christ which not long they had imbraced These words therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are so handsomly interpreted by him to maintain his own opinion as above all other of the Fathers he is accustomed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serve those assertions which are but his own conjectures that the words he withstood him to the face do not in his construction signifie openly and before the people or to his own face but only under a pretence and shew and according to the outward appearance in which construction these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are by him usurped also as it is manifest 2 Cor. 10. 7. IV. This opinion of St. Hierome was nothing pleasing to St. Augustine who denieth that any thing was here done by contract or contrivance but that St Paul most sincerely and exprssely did oppose himself to this unseasonable combination he therfore in a letter did very friendly admonish St. Hierome of his errour Inter Epist Hierou Epist 97. who persisting more obstinate in his opinion letters being often sent from the one to the other the question began to be disputed betwixt them as became the contestation of two such great wits with much acutenesse on both sides and with solid weights of reason at the last in the judgment of most men the victory stood on St. Augustines side and his arguments being conceived to be more sound and more considerable but very few did adhere to the opinion of Chrysostome in which it is not to be wondred at if Cardinall Baronius were one who being carefull that the affairs of Rome should not suffer any diminution and that the infallibility of his Jove of the Capitoll should not grow into contempt if any stain of rashness or error should blemish the reputation of St. Peter or if any man should be so bold to reprove him or to dare to open his mouth against him by saying Master why do you so doth here use all his art and industry to crown with applause the exploded opinion of St. Hierome and to restore it unto honor though banished and begging for reputation all the world over but truly this is that Baronius as every where he doth betray himself to be partiall who in his voluminous and laborious Chronicles did make it all his busines to gratify the Bishop of Rome and to measure the faith and Authority of all monuments and the great moments of all opinions and testimonies by the dignity and Advancement of the Sea of Rome But Paul to return from whence I have digressed did most iustly reprove St. Peter his fellow Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is face to face as the same phrase is read in the 15 of the Acts and in other places of importunate dissimulation and this he did boldly and openly before all and more especially because that by his example he had drawn Barnabas into an error and the Jewes of Antioch and given a great and a greiveous offence to the Gentiles who had newly imbraced the Christian faith to the great danger and scandal of the liberty of the Gospel V. I have more willingly inlarged my self upon this as well to give some light to a place heretofore obscure and much controverted as to make more manifest the force of the argument which for the confirmation of our position is deduced from this discourse of the Apostle For St. Paul judged that not only St. Peter who was the leading example but that
same Gesture at the Sacred Table Can a Custom changed without any publick Authority sensibly so prevail that what before was not un-decent or un-lawful must now no longer be decent and no longer lawful Cannot a Law inacted by Publick Authority and established by an expresse consent of the people and allowed of by dayly use prevail that what upon no lawful reasons was ever found to be ever unlawful should be esteemed lawful again for the time to come Indeed where these two things Law and Conscience do fight between themselves as hardly they do in this case there is no man of a sober understanding but will acknowledge that Custome should give place to Law and not Law to Custome In the third place I demand of them do they seriously believe or do they not believe that he sinneth immediately in that Act who receiveth the Communion with bended knees If they shall say that he Sinneth seeing that every Sin is a transgression of the Law of God let them shew me some precept in that Law against which he that so doth Sinneth If they shall acknowledge that it may be done without Sin then by their own confession they will level their own Rise and overthrow all the force of their Arguments In the fourth place suppose that the said tricliniary gesture had been abolished before the first institution of the Holy Supper and that Sitting or Standing did succeed it so that Christ and his Apostles must have eaten either Standing or Sitting both of which could not be used at one time I demand if they had eaten Standing whether it were so necessary for us to stand also that we should have sinned if we had sate and on the contrary or whether we might have been free to have used which we would If they should say that we are free for both the Argument taken from the Example of Christ will be of no power and will fall to the Ground for he used only but one of the said Gestures and not both of them If they shall say again that we are precisely bound up to the observation of that posture which is supposed was used by our Saviour wherefore do these so severe Dictators and Controulers of the Liberty of every Church admit unto them an Indulgence of Standing or Sitting at the Holy Supper but not of kneeling or of that posture which it is most probable that our Saviour used In the fifth place I demand If the Example of Christ doth oblige us to the Imitation of it why is this obligation precisely determined in that posture which is but a subalternate Species and hath no reference to some higher Genus or why doth it not fall lower to some more inferiour Species To make it more obvious to your understandings seeing those three things are to be considered The gesture or Posture it self as a superior Genus the Posture at the Table as a Species subalternate to it And the Posture of lying along and leaning as the lowest Species And it is probable that Christ used the last according to the custom and practice of those Times and Climates why must the posture only at the Table which is but an intermedial and a subalternate Species be accounted necessary and sufficient to the true Imitation of Christ and not any other posture sufficient in the Genus of it or why may not the posture of Leaning and lying along be as necessary in the Species Lastly I demand Is the posture of leaning and lying along practised by our Saviour and the Apostles at the first institution of the Holy Supper to be imitated or not I am confident they will not deny that it is to be imitated for indeed they cannot deny it because from thence they do derive the chiefest ground and foundation of their Cause For thus they do propound the examples of Christ of necessity to be imitated by us that is to say not every example simply in it self but every example that may be practised by us I Only therefore in this argumentation take that which they of their own accord do grant which is 1st the proposition That every imitable example of Christ doth oblige a Christian to the imitation of it And 2ly the assumption that the posture in the Species of it which Christ used in the holy Supper whatsoever it was is imitable From these premises I infer this conclusion By the force therfore of this example say I Christians of the next age unto our Saviour were obliged to the same posture in the same Species which he used And in the same manner were Christians of the second and third age ever since unto these present times And it must accordingly be acknowledged that the Church of Christ even at this time also is obliged to the practice of the tricliniary or leaning posture if indeed Christ did use it or at least it must be shown at what time and on what account and by what Author and Authority the force of this obligation is made void XXII By these things which have been spoken it is manifest that all the force of their Argument which with so much pompe is dressed and held forth by them doth come to no more than this that it cannot more rightly or more commodiously be propounded for their own purpose than under this form The example of Christ and his Apostles doth so farre oblige as we think it expedient that it shall oblige but we think it expedient that it shall oblige to the not bending of the knee in the receiving of the Sacrament no further therefore so farre only and not a jot further is the extent of the obligation I am ashamed I confesse to furre your ears with the repetition of these vanities for it becomes not this place nor my age or manners to provoke to laughter in so serious a Subject But what shall we do with these men A bad cause indeed doth need such a Patronage and it cannot but come to pass that oftentimes they are enforced to speak many vain and incongruous things and if throughly they be examined very absurd ones whosoever they are who like unto those men do suffer themselves to be governed by affectation rather than truth I do speak from my heart and as indeed it is although in their writings we do meet with many things not solidly argued and sometimes not sincerely yet I do not remember that I have any where observed meer trifles to be carryed on with so much animosity and contention or the swelling Hills to bring forth a more miserable and ridiculous production than when the bare examples of good men in the holy Scriptures are so importunately urged either to excuse those acts which by the law of God do seem to be prohibited or to induce an obligation upon the Consciences of men for the observation of those things which do not appeare by any law of God to be commanded But I return from whence I have digressed if have transgress'd at all
long use and Custome which is as it were another nature Fourthly by reason of the depraved affections which do ecclipse our judgments and do hinder the right use of them From these and many other causes it is so obvious unto men to erre to fall and to be deceived that it hath been long agoe a proverb Humanum est errare It is the property of a man to erre XXVI Adde to this in the second place that not we our selves do not alwayes sincerely judge of their piety and wisdome whose Judgments we do desire to follow it being very customary with those men who permit themselves to be governed by the arbitration of other men to make choice of such Conductors whom they before are confident will lead them in that way in which before hand they had determined to go themselves Thus doth Satan hold fast unwary men being as it were inclosed in his circle If you demand of them why they suppose such a thing to be true and right they answer Because this or that wise and godly man hath so taught us If you again shall demand of them how they do know their Teacher to be a pious and a prudent man they answer or at least would so answer if they would speak according to their hearts because he thinketh as we do think Et sapit mecum facit Jove judicat aequo The man is wise and doth as I intend And judgeth rightly having Jove his friend Many there are indeed who do measure the piety of other men not according to the practice of the duties of a Christians life and by the works of righteousnesse Mercy Charity and Devotion but by an affection to that faction to which they have bequeathed themselves and by the hatred to another party to which they professe themselves to be Enemies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Apostle 2 Tim. 4. 3. They shall heap up unto themselves Teachers according to their own desires The Metaphor following is most proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when their ears do itch they seek those that will tickle them and thus the same doth befall them which in the old proverb is expressed Muli se mutuo scabunt One Mule doth scratch another XXVII Thirdly the word of God doth expressely forbid us to subject our Consciences to the judgment of any other or to usurp a Dominion over the Consciences of any one Ne vocemini Rabbi unus est enim vester 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Magister Praeceptor Doctor Unctor Christus Be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master who is Christ the word in the original signifies as well School-master Tutor Leader as Master And my brethren be you not many masters saith St. James Chap. 3. verse 5. To this purpose is that of St Peter in his first Book Chap 5. verse 2. Feed you the Flock of God which is committed to you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as holding forth a light before them that is the Doctrine of the true faith and the example of a godly life but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not as excercising a domination and an uncontrouled empire over the Clergy or the people of God And again 1 Cor. 7. 23. Empâ—i estis pretio nolite fieri servi hominum You are bought with a price be you not made the servants of men that is do not submit your Consciences to be governed by the Authority of any man according to his pleasure and command XXVIII From these things which are thus stated and proved to give you now some few Corallaryes and those in a few words it followeth in the first place that the insupportable pride and tyranny of the Pope of Rome ought most deservedly to be hated by every true Christian who by arrogating an infallible judgment to himself and to his chair doth by that name exercise an usurping power and domination over the Consciences of men and pretendeth so much right thereunto that if he should say virtues were vices and vices virtues all Christians are bound under the penalty of mortal sin to submit to his judgment without the least doubt or scruple We are therefore with all thankfulnes to acknowledg the great and Singular goodnes and mercy of Almighty God who for these many years hath freed us and our fore-fathers and the Church of England from so unconscionable a Tyranny and hath again restored us to our just liberties XXIX But we must all of us and every one of us take heed that being freed now from that Tyranny we do not stoop our necks to a new bondage least we be found not so much to have shaken off our yoak as to have changed it Quae bellua ruptis Quùm semèl effugit reddit se prava catenis Horat. Like to the Beast who having broke his chain Fondly returns to have it on again 2 Satyr 9. It doth indeed concern us highly if seriously we would provide for the peace of our own Consciences or of the Church and Common-wealth to take care least what heretofore was spoken of the Church of Corinth I am of Paul I of Apollos and I of Cephas be not heard of us I am of Luther I of Calvin I of Arminius and I of Socinius No let God be true and every man a Lyar He is not worthy to be Christs Disciple who is not the Disciple of Christ alone The simplicity and sincerity of the Christian Faith hath suffered a great prejudice since we have been divided into parties neither is there any hope that Religion should be restored to her former vigour and purity until the wounds made wider by our daily quarrels and dissentions being anointed with the Oyl of Brotherly Love as with a Balsome shall begin to close again and to grow intire into the same unity of Faith and Charity XXX In the third place we are to take heed lest being too indulgent to our depraved affections we do suffer our selves to be so drawn aside into the admiration of some men that we wholly depend upon their Authority Jude 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which words the Apostle with a finger pointeth at the very Fountain of all this evill For this perverse admiration of Names hath no other Spring from whence it floweth but from this desperate self-admiration viz. whiles every man studyeth his own profit is ambitious of Honour and pursueth vain-glory and esteemeth no otherwise of all other men than according to the advantage he may receive from them And his Judgement being corrupted with these sordid affections he is most ready to admire those persons whom he thinks will be most ready to advance his Profit Honour Glory and his other inordinate desires And the very same thing another of the Apostles whom already I have cited doth expressely intimate they did choose unto them Master 2. Tim. 4. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to their own desires XXXI Neverthelesse that due Authority may be given to the Catholick Church
Christ The Scripture therefore as supernaturally it is to be believed is the only and Adaequate Rule of our faith and according to our actions and performances so far as they are spiritual and pertain to a spiritual end it is to be the only and Adaequate Rule of our Manners and by consequent the principal and as I may so speak it the Architectonical Rule of all our actions But seeing it doth belong to Conscience to look back on things that are done not only upon this account as they are spiritual that is to say whether they are done out of Charity and directed to a supernatural end but as they are moral that is whether they be good or evil lawfull or unlawful free or necessary that a right judgment may be passed on these things we are not only to seek unto the holy Scriptures but to make our seasonable addresses unto other helps XVI In the third place this is proved again by the Form the Character and the Temperature of the Scripture which seeing it containeth in it very many precepts but not all of one kind some of them pertayning to Manners some to Rites and some indifferently common unto all and some peculiar only to some Nation and some again to some one order or person Some of them induring only for a time and others of a perpetual obligation some by way of Counsel of things expedient according as the exigence of the affairs requireth and some again in the way of mandate or command of things simply or absolutely necessary in themselves if there were not some other rule besides the Scriptures for the discerning of moral from ritual precepts and of things temporary from perpetual and of things peculiar from common the Conscience would oftentimes labour in a Labyrinth of doubts and know not which way to turn especially when precepts of diverse kinds being delivered as it were in one the same breath in the same Phrase and in continued connexion of words do immediately follow and tread on the heels of one another For examples sake Levit. 19. 18. An example is there given to love thy neigbour as thy self And in the verse immediately following there is a command that two Beasts of a several kind might not be suffered to mingle in generation with one another and that one Field be not sowen with diverse sorts of seeds nor any garment made of Linnen thread interwoven with Woollen The first command herein is moral and universal the other but Ceremonial and judicial and peculiar only to the Nation of the Jews But when these things are read in the Churches it cannot by the Text appear what so great a difference there is betwixt them And in the 30th verse of the same Chapter the Sanctification of the Sabbath the reverence of the Sanctuary are equally commanded and in a continued course of words and even in the very same solemn sanction of the Law given Ego Jehovah I the Jehovah yet I doubt not but that most men are of opinion that in one of the Precepts the Consciences of men are at this day obliged to the performance of it and that in the other they are not Now what the reason is that their opinion is such the precepts in the Text being all alike and no distinction nor the least apparence of so great a difference there can certainly no other reason be given but that it proceedeth from the judgment of reason and prudence which being excluded obligatory precepts cannot so be known from those which are not obligatory but that the Conscience will be oftentimes in a suspence and not able to know or judge what is commanded to be done or what to be left undone XVII It is proved in the fourth place by an argument drawn from the inconvenicies which do arise from the contrary opinion that is from the most grievous calamities which have a long time afflicted the church of Christ by reason of the misunderstanding of the perfection of the holy Scriptures from whence a most dangerous error hath possessed some men of great estimation that they have declared that nothing can be lawfuly done or commanded which is not authorized by God in the Scripture or at least there approved by some laudable example This foundation being once laid not a few men of a hot spirit being transported to judge charitably of them with a zeale to God but not according to knowledge did begin to raise unnecessary strifes and disputation concerning the Ceremonies of the Church they did declare that all Ceremonies not expressly mentioned in the word of God were to be thrust out and for ever to be banished from the Church of Christ that Laws ordained by men concerning things Indifferent were to be cancelled that all the Churches throughout Europe were to be reformed all things to be reduced to the Evangelical purity and Simplicity The unruly rage of these men did hete for a while make a stand but it did not stand here long but as commonly it commeth to passe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one absurdity being granted a thousand will insue their boldnesse derived from his fountain did flow at last into an open rage and brake forth into an Anabaptistical fury And although the growing mischief hath gon so far that it can scarce rise higher yet every day it swels and more and more doth inlarge it self by bringing into the world new monsters of opinions that were we not assured by the word of God that the foundation of God doth continue firm and that the Gates of Hell shall never be able to prevail altogether against the Church it were much to be feared lest the universal Church of Christ overwhelmed with a Deluge of Atheism should utterly be swallowed up by it throughout the world XVIII And let no man think that in vain Rhetorick I do complain of this with more enuy than truth for I am most confident that he whosoever he is that is strongly prepossessed and infected with this errour shall never be able in his daily controversies any ways to satisfie the importunate arguments of the Anabaptists Socinians and other Sectaries whose names I am ashamed to mention For to passe by the established form of Ecclesiastical Government which now adays our Political Divines would either referr to the Civil Magistrate or quite take them away upon no other account but this only that they think it is no where expressed in the word of God they must take away with it the observation of the Lords day the Ordination of Ministers of the Gospel the Baptism of Infants the Sprinkling of water in Baptism for the dipping of the whole body the Sacramental reverence and many other things with all Ecclesiastical Rites and Laws or else having reformed their judgements they must confesse they may all of them be retained without or sin or scandal XIX But this you will say is to derogate from the perfection of the Scriptures which all the Divines of the reformed
Churches do willingly acknowledge and to open a door to the Traditions of the Church of Rome and to take away all the force from the arguments drawn negatively from the Scriptures which the antient Fathers of the Church and the most learned of the Divines of these times do very frequently make use of I make answer that the Church of Rome doth derogate from the perfection of the Scripture in this consideration that in the matters of Faith and things necessary to salvation they do thrust in their unwritten Traditions to be received with the same reverence as the written word of God as if it were not enough for the sons of God to be wise unto salvation by having the new Testament conferred on them which is the Inheritance left them by their Father but they must also have the vain books inserted of humane Traditions But as for those who do dispute negatively from the Scriptures concerning things which are necessary to salvation either to be believed or practised let them make use of this argument as indeed they ought to do But there is no question here of the rule of Faith but of the rule of Conscience and not of the chief rule of it but of the Adaequate and not what is necessary for a Christian to believe or practice to attain unto the salvation of the Soul but what is lawfull for a pious and prudent man to do lawfully or to leave undone at such a time or in such a place The sum of all is that the holy Scripture is the Adaequate Rule of Faith and of things supernaturally to be believed as also of all moral actions so far as they are spiritual and ordained to a supernatural end and it is also the the Law of Conscience the Chief and supreme Rule for the putting of moral things in practice so that where the Scripture determineth of any thing universally either by the way of precept or prohibition it is not lawfull for any other Law whatsoever to stand in opposition to it but it is not so to be understood to be the only Law of Conscience that what is not commanded there to be therefore presently unlawfull And thus much of the third Conclusion XX. The fourth followeth The proper and adaequate Rule of Conscience is the will of God in what way soever it is revealed unto Men. Some call this the Law of God others the eternal Law the words differing in the sound but agreeing in the sence Every part of this Conclusion is to be weighed by it self In the first place I do say it is the will of God which by the Schoolemen though by some of them not rightly expounded and by others of them not rightly applyed is distinguished into Voluntatem beneplaciti and Voluntatem signi the will of the good pleasure and the will of the sign The first called the will of the good pleasure of God is that which God from all eternity did with himself resolve what he himself will do the other which is called the will of the sign is that by which God hath given us a Law by signifying what he would have us to do The first is called the will of God properly and univocally the other improperly and analogically The will of the good pleasure if it be lawfull to speak of the majesty of God after the manner of men is in some respect a Law unto God himself whereby he acteth for he always acteth that which is complacent unto him but it is not given to us by God to be a Law or to be a rule unto our Consciences or at the least for the putting of any thing into action In some respect indeed it may be said to pertain unto the Consciences in regard of sufferings but this is a posteriori from an after observation in this sence that in Conscience we are obliged with patience to endure all things whatsoever shall befall us after that by the event it is manifest to us that God would have it so For rectified reason doth dictate this unto us that we ought not to be displeased at the method of the Divine Providence who can will nothing but that which is most righteous It remaineth therefore Optimum est Deum quo Authore omnia proveniunt sine murmuratione concomitari Senec. Epistol 108 Placeat homini quicquid Deo placuit Idem Epist 71. that the will be the rule of our Consciences which is called The will of the sign For when God by prohibiting and by commanding hath signified what we ought to do and what we ought not to do it is our duties absolutely to conform our wills unto his will Many things amongst the School-men are with unprofitable acutenesse disputed on this Subject viz. Whether and how far the will of the reasonable creature in a thing willed is bound to conform it self to the will of the Creator When the whole matter as much as belongs to our business and the use of humane life may briefly in one word be dispatched which is That we are always bound to will that which God willeth that we should will Thus when God commanded Abraham to offer up his Son Isaac Although God in the will of his good pleasure would not have had that done which at the same time he commanded to be done as by and by shall appear by the event yet Abraham was bound to will the very same thing because God by commanding it did signifie that it was his will that Abraham should have a will unto it XXI I say secondly the will of God revealed unto Men because this revealed will is the formal Cause and Reason of the obligation For the will of God doth not oblige those unto whom it is not revealed And hence it is that the Gentiles to whom the Gospel is not preached are not bound to believe it or to have any faith in Christ for there is no man that is bound to that which is impossible And it is impossible for that man to whom the Gospel hath been never preached and who never hath heard any thing of Christ to believe either in Christ or in the Gospel seeing that the light of Reason cannot ascend so high according to that of the Apostle Rom. 10. 15. How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard and how shall they hear without a Preacher And the same Apostle thinks it not meet that others should be judged by the Law but those only who have sinned in the Law Rom. 11. 12. Neither doth this suffize to bring an obligation upon the Conscience that the will of God is revealed to him unlesse it be revealed to him as the will of God in a peculiar reference to himself Insomuch that if any of the Gentiles who were Aliens should casually have met with the Books of Moses and by reading of them should observe the Commandements which are there given to the people of Israel he had not presently been obliged to the
knowledge whereof hath hitherto shined into our minds whether internally imprinted by the light of Nature or externally revealed by the Word or whether by our own meditation or by the institution of others is now more excellently and more illustriously made manifest unto us The chief Helps or Mediums thereunto are the Discourse of Reason and Authority the last of which is the Judgement and the Practice of the Church of which neither doth the time permit to speak much neither doth it self require that many things should be spoken of it From the Law of Nature many particâ—lar Propositions of things to be done like so many Conclusions from their Principles are deduced by the discourse of Reason to the use of the Conscience In which unless we orderly proceed from the first unto the last we shall be apt to erre as already I have expressed we must therefore be very carefull that in every part of the Discourse the proceeding be legitimate that those things that follow may aptly depend upon those which go before and that the consequence be necessary lest the Conscience being mis-led do not dictate this or that or otherwise to the will than what it ought to do It is again to be feared lest we erre also in applying the holy Scripture unto the use of the Conscience unless a due regard of Reason be had unto Reason and of Authority unto Authority The Papists while they bestow all their studies that nothing be taken away from the Authority of the Church they give but little unto Reason The Socinians on the other side whiles rejecting all Authority they do measure Faith by Reason onely they do onely attain unto this that they grow mad with reason Both have the same errour but it variously deceiveth And both rocks shall not more easily be avoided than if Authority with Reason and Reason with Authority shall handsomely and prudently be conjoyned XXXVI What place either of them ought to have in the right and orderly unfolding and applying the holy Scripture it is not for this time or my present purpose to represent unto you I shall touch upon it in few words There is especially a twofold Use of Reason in relation to the Scriptures Collative and Illative Collative diligently to compare those divers places of Scripture especially those which seem to bear a remarkable correspondence or repugnancy amongst themselves Illative the propriety of the words the context and the scope being found out effectually and artificially to infer Doctrines being in the mean time not forgetfull that we must attribute so much the more to humane Reason in things to be done than in things to be believed as the mysteries of Faith do more exceed the capacity of natural understanding than the Offices of Life XXXVII The chiefest use of Authority is to beat down the boldness of Hereticks and Impostor who indeavour to cast a mist over the clearest testimonies of the Scripture and to elude the force of them with their subtilties and distinctions whose mouths you can no better stop nor more effectually preserve your selves and others from the contagion of them than by opposing unto their Sophisms and Deceits the Judgement and Practice not of one or of a few men not of one Age or of one corner of the Church but of the whole Catholick Church of all places and all times spread over the whole face of the Earth so heretofore those great Advocates of the Christian Faith Irenaeus Tertullian Vicentius and others judged it to be their safest course to deal with their Adversaries by the right of prescription which how advantagious it hath been to Christendome the event hath taught But those things which deserve a larger consideration I am now forced to omit being mindfull of the time of you and of my self and to defer unto another day what remaineth to be spoken concerning the Obligation of Humane Laws THE FIFTH LECTURE In which the Question is thorowly handled concerning the Obligation of Humane Laws in general ROM 13. 5. Wherefore you must be subject not because of anger onely but for conscience sake HAving begun the last Term to treat of the passive obligation of Conscience I proceeded so far that having discovered and disclaimed those subterfuges in which a seduced generation of men do vainly flâ—â—ter themselves that there is some excuse or protection either for the fruit of their Consciences as to things already done or some security for things that remain to be done for the Intention of a good end or by the authority of another mans example or judgment I have proceeded I say so far as to examine and represent unto you that proper and Adaequate Rule of Conscience to which absolutely and simply it ought to conform it self where in the first place I shewed you that God only hath an absolute and direct command over the Consciences of men Secondly that the next and immediate Rule of Conscience is the light with which the mind at that present is endued or to speak after the Schoolmen Ultimum judicium Intellectus practici The last judgment of the practical understanding Thirdly that the written word of God is indeed the supreme and primary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not the Adaequate Rule of Conscience * 4. Fourthly that the proper and Adaequate Rule of Conscience is the will of God which way soever it be revealed or which is the same again the Law imposed by God upon the reasonable Creature Moreover that more fully and more distinctly we may understand what this will of God is I made manifest unto you that Almighty God did lay open his Will unto mankind by a threefold means First by the Law of Nature which consisteth of certain practical Principles known by themselves which is called the Law of God written in our hearts Rom. 2. 15. Which is with an inward light and of the same oâ—iginal as our minds Secondly by the written word of God which is contained in both the volumes of the holy Writ and is an external light supernaturally revealed and infused into our minds Thirdly by a knowledge obtained from both the former either by our own meditation or from the Instruction and Institution of others and this as it were by an acquired light the chief helps and introductions whereunto are the Discourse of Reason and the Authority that is to say the Judgment and the practice of the universal Church II. I also did advertise you to make some way to this following Treatise that besides the Law of God which absolutely by its self and by its own peculiar power doth oblige the Consciences of all men and that in the highest Degree there are also many others which do carry an obligation with them but inferiour to the former and do oblige the Conscience not primarily and by themselves but secondarily and by consequence not absolutely but relatively not by its own power but by the vertue of some divine precept or Institution on which they
Duty so from a double Duty there ariseth a double Obligation for every Duty doth infer an Obligation and every Obligation doth suppose a Duty Therefore one kind of the Obligation of Humane Laws is that by which Subjects are bound to obey the precepts of the Law it self and the other by which they are bound to submit themselves to the power of the Law-giver one of the Obligations belongeth to Active Obedience the other unto that Obedience which is called passive and to which we give the Name of Submission III. If it be here demanded how farr Humane Laws can oblige the Consciences of the Subject It is to be said in the first place that all Laws made by one invested by a lawful Power do oblige to Subjection so that it is not lawful for a Subject to resist the Supreme Power by force of Arms whether things just or unjust be commanded This wâ—â— evermore the mind and practice of the Christians in the first Age of the Church living under the most grievâ—us Tyranny of the greatest Enemies to the name of Christ to make no mention herein of the Conduct and the instinct of Nature and the light of right Reason this is most manifest by the Doctrine of the two chiefest of the Apostles For so Peter the Apostle of Circumcision doth diligently instruct the Jews And so Paul the Doctor of the Gentiles doth as carefully instruct the Gentiles St. Peter in the first book and second chapter commands Servants to be subject to their Masters not only good and gentle Masters but those severer ones who would punish them with Scourges when they had not deserved it Saint Paul Rom. 13. doth urge in many words the necessity of Subjection but granteth unto none the Liberty of Resistance be their case or their pretence never so good In the second place I say That although this Subjection is simply necessary yet it is not satisfactory as to Duty unlesse the command of the Law be obeyed where it can be done without Sin And therefore the Subject is bound to Obedience in Conscience in all things that are lawful and honest Hence it is that this word be Obedient is so often and so expressely inculcated by the Apostle Eph. 6. Col. 3. and in other places In the third place I say Where the precept of the Law cannot be observed without sin if the Subject shall patiently submit himself to the Power of the Law-giver he hath satisfied his Duty and is not obliged in Conscience to perform that which the Law commandeth nay he is obliged not to do it for there can be no Obligation to things unlawful It is alwayes necessary therefore to be subject but not alwayes necessary to obey IV. Furthermore seeing both are certain that the Consciences of Men are free Servitus in totum hominem uon descendit Sen. de Bencf 20. and ought to be so which Liberty no Humane Power can or may infringe And that an Obligation is a kind of a Bond and doth induce a necessity which seemeth to be opposite and to fight with just Liberty for neither is he any wayes free who is bound neither can he be free to both who by some necessity is bound to either that it plainly may appear that this Obligation of Conscience of which we now do treat may consist with the just Liberty of Conscience we must necessarily in this place give you another distinction which is that the Precepts of Humane Law may be taken two wayes either formally for the Act it self of giving the precepts or materially for the thing precepted If the Law-giver therefore should intend an Obligation or impose on the Subject a necessity of obeying from giving the Precept of his Law taken materially that is from the necessity of the thing it self which is precepted which notwithstanding in the truth of the thing was not necessary before that Law was made he in that very fact should lay a force upon the Conscience of the Subject which should be repugnant to the Liberty of it But if he should derive his Obligation from giving the precept of his Law taken formally thâ—â— is from the legitimate Authority with w ch he himself is invested that gives it a moral indifferency of the thing precepted in the mean time remaining and in the same state in which it was before the Law was made although the obligation followeth which imposeth on the Conscience a necessity of obeying yet the inward Liberty of the Conscience remaineth uninjuried and intire V. If this seems obscure to any I will illustrate it unto him by an Example A Civil Law being made that no man should eat flesh during all the time of Lent if the Law-giver either in the preface or in the body of that Law should signify that he laid this Command upon his Subjects because it were ungodly and unlawful for them in that time to eat flesh This were to throw a Snare on the Consciences of his Subjects as much as in him lay to weaken their Liberty But if expressely he should signify that the thing being otherwise free in it self he did so ordain it for the profit of the Commonwealth that his Subjects according to the Example of the antient Church should thereby take an occasion to exercise a more abstemious and severer Discipline or if by the words of the Law it self or elsewhere it might appear that the Law-giver intended not by that Law to fasten any opinion of necessity on the thing so commanded there would on this account no injury be done to the Consciences of the Subjects and the liberty thereof For there is a great difference when one thing is commanded by the Magistrate because it is thought to be necessary oris prohibited because it is conceived to be unlawful And when another thing begins then only to be thought necessary and lawful after that it is commanded by the Magistrate and unlawful because it is forbidden by him The first Necessity which anteceded the Law and is supposed by it to be some cause of it is contrary to the liberty of the Conscience but the other which followeth the Law and proceedeth from it as an essect thereof is not repugnant to it The reason of this difference is because the antecedent necessity which the Law supposeth doth necessarily require some assent of the practical judgement but to the following necessity which proceedeth from the Law the consent of the will is sufficient to the performance of that outward work which by the Law is commanded Now an Act of the Will cannot prejudice the liberty of Conscience as an Act of the judgment doth for the Act of the Will doth follow the dictates of the Conscience as the effect followeth its cause but the Act of the Judgment doth precede those Dictates as the Cause goeth before its effect VI. These distinctions being premised I proceed unto the Doubts where in the first place those which we meet with concerning the material Cause
intention but unprofitable to the publick nay in some sence obnoxious yet the Subject is bound to obey it provided it be made by just Authority and the matter of the Law or the thing commanded be such that it may be done without Sin The reason is because every man ought to be careful and diligent in the performance of that which belongs to his own part Gal. 6. 5. and not too scrupulous of what concerns another For every man shall bear his own Burthen If a Law-giver shall be wanting in his Duty what is that to you Do you perform your Office howsoever As for his intentions whether they be right or not let himself look to it for he must give to God an account of all his actions and intentions And do you look to your self for if you shall refuse to obey him you shall give to the same God an account of your disobedience XII The fourth Dout of the Changing of Laws if they seem to be unprofitable or obnoxious to the Common-wealth whether and how far the Change of them is either to be attempted by the Prince or to be required and urged by the People The reason of the Doubt in one respect is because in a body Civil as in a body natural every change especially if it be sudden and great is dangerous and on the other side because it concerns the Common-wealth that the Laws be accommodated to the Times and Customes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristot 4. Phys text 128. and if the one doth change that the other be changed with them For answer to this I say in the first place it is certain that the Laws may be changed yea and sometimes that they ought to be changed for they have heretofore been changed with great profit to the Common-wealth therefore they may now be changed again and may be so in all future times if occasion shall require it shall be found profitable to the Commonwealth And why may not that be lawful to be done again which hath been lawful heretofore There are every day new emergencies new inconveniencies new evils and if there are not new Laws made to redresse them there will be no remedy Arist 2. And all men saith Aristotle seek not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Polit. 8. And if heretofore it were expedient that a Law should be made because it was profitable to the Commonwealth it being found afterwards by the change of the conditions of Times and manners to become unprofitable why is it not expedient that it should be taken away again XIII I say in the second place That the change of particular Laws is not without danger and therefore not to be attempted unlesse it be upon some great and urgent necessity Aristotle acutely and briefly as his custom is produceth divers reasons 2. Poli. 8. These three are the chiefest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These often changes do very much derogate from the authority of the Law and the Law-giver As we conceive that person to be of a very slender and weak judgement who for no sound or evident reason is easily enduced to change his Opinion Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It maketh the people wanton and petulant This is true enough we not long since have had the experience of it and apt to fly at any thing if they shall find their Law-giver easy on this account and departing from his own right to humour the Votes and unsatisfied desires of the people Therefore the chief Philosopher most gravely and deservedly doth reprove the Law of Hippodamus a Law-maker of Miletum viz. That whosoever had discovered or found out something profitable to the City should be recompenced for his good service with a publick reward This Law was specious enough at the first sight and plausible to the people but look throughly into it and you will find nothing in it either of prudence or safety or Advantage For what could be found more dangerous to disturb the publick Peace than that factious men and of a turbulent and cunning Spirit under the shaddow of a publick good should not only occasion the subversion of the Laws but also call in question the Form of the whole Civil Government and obtrude unto the State a new Idaea of Government according to the humour of their own Invention Do you hear I beseech you a Philosopher famous in his times or rather a Prophet and a foreteller of the manners and the times in which now we live Gravâ—ora inserre vulnera dum minoâ—â—bus medeâ—i defidâ— amus Ambros 2. Oâ—sic 2. Thirdly the Innovation of Laws being ordained for the removing of some present Inconvenience and being it may come to passe and oftentimes it doth so come to passe that from this suddain Immutation many and more grievous Inconveniencies may arise though not peradventure at the first discovered the most grave Philosopher did judge it to be far safer to tolerate endure some Inconveniencies and those not slight ones neither in a Common wealth which may be avouched of the Church also which is a kind of a Common-wealth than in pretence of Reformation either Ecclesiastical or Political to cancel old Laws Statutes turn all things upside down Of a far different judgment to those of our times were the wise men of former Ages whose Rules Principles were as are here these folowing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Malum benè positum non est movendum Imperiti medici est pejus malo remedium adhibere an Evil well placed is not to be removed It is the part of an unskilful Physician to apply a Remedy worse than the disease XIV I say in the third place That although the changing of Laws may seem to be necessary by reason of some great and evident Cause yet it is not to be attempted by the people without the consent of the Prince but modestly they are to crave and patiently to expect it of him and this may aptly be collected from the Analogy of the Head and the Members for how like a monster were it and destructive to the whole body if the Arms the Breast or the Feet should assume unto themselves the office of the Head This is abundantly enough demonstrated in those things which not long since we declared to you when we spake of the efficient Cause of Laws viz. That the principal Act of Jurisdiction cannot be exercised but by him only who is the Head and chief of the whole Commonalty Therefore the Constitution the abrogation and any Immutation of Laws whatsoever which are all of them the principal Acts of the chiefest Jurisdiction cannot pertain unto the people unless where the people are Prince as in a State Democratical but to him only who doth exercise a Soveraignty of Dominion over the whole Commonalty in a State Monarchical and who hath the undoubted power of a transcendent Command by himself In a businesse of so great an importance the duties of the people are these
from our own meditations or the Institution of other men II. I affirmed that all these and every one of them do oblige the Consciences of men and only these absolutely and primarily by themselves and by their proper virtue for all these and these alone do exhibite to us the will of God who alone of himself hath an absolute and a direct command over the Consciences of men But I gave you to understand that there were many other things which Secondarily and relatively and by Virtue of the Law or the Divine will in which they are founded do in their manner oblige the Consciences And all of them do agree in this that they owe all the force of obliging which they have to the Divine will for otherwise the Divine Law would not be the Adaequate Rule of Conscience nevertheless they do all differ among themselves both in the Species by reason of the diversity of the matter and also in the degree according to the power of obliging Moreover there are three degrees of those who do thus oblige The first is of those things whose obligation doth arise from the Authority of another having a right or power in which number are Humane Laws The second is of those things whose obligation doth arise from a free act of the proper will such as are Vowes Oathes Promises and Spontaneous Contracts The third degree is of those things whose obligation doth arise from the intuition of brotherly Charity in which classis is ranked the Law or the Consideration of Scandal or offence III. As for the obligation of Humane Laws I have spoken much more than at the first I propounded to my self yet it may be much less than the weight of the thing deserved of which in our dayly Conversations there is a most frequent Use or the Abundance and Variety of those Doubts required which might cast a scruple into the minds of men In the resolution where of I proceeded so far in the former Terms that having gone over those difficulties which I thought could not improperly be reduced to the material efficient and formal Causes of Laws in my last Lecture I came to treat of those which more properly did pertain to their final Cause where at first having laid this foundation for the whole following Discourse That the good of the Commonalty or which is the same that the publick Peace and Happinesse is the End of Humane Laws with what brevity and perspicuity that I could I answered to the six following Questions First Whether there be any Use or at least any necessary Use of Humane Laws in a Common-wealth in order to the Common Good Secondly It belonging to the Common-wealth that Vertue be reverenced and Vices restrained whether a Law-maker could command all the Acts and Offices of all Vertues and prohibit all Vices and Enormities whatsoever Which if he were not able to perform whether he were at least bound to command and prohibit as many as he could of either kind by Laws which might oblige his Subjects in their Consciences Whether and how far it be required to the effect of the obliging of the Subjects that the Intent of the Law-maker be carryed to the publick Good Fourthly If the Laws made already shall appear less profitable to the publick whether and how far the change of them is either to be attempted by the Prince or to be urged by the Subject Fifthly The Common good being the end of Laws and even of Government it self whether it be lawful and how far lawful for the said Common good to change the form it self of the whole Government or to attempt the change thereof Lastly how that common saying The safety of the People is the supreme Law is to be understood IV. These things I thought necessary to repeat more fully to you that after so long an interruption of Academical exercitations my whole proceedings in these Lectures and the order I have observed therein might better appear unto you and that I might recall into your memory the heads of those things which having heard before with so much humanity I justly do believe that in so long an interval of time you have almost forgotten You will expect I conceive and not undeservedly that I should now proceed in my intended course and go directly on to those next Doubts which yet remain to be resolved As of those of Privileges of Dispensations and to others which some ways do belong to the final kind of a Cause I do confess it indeed and I ought to do it But my friends do interrupt me they advise me that the stubborn and intolerable boldnesse of some men do rather efflagitate that seeing so precisely and so impudently they abuse the Aphorism to the publick ruine although I expounded it but in my last Lecture in the former Term yet that I would take it under examination again and open the genuine sense thereof more clearly and fully than before I had done This in my Construction was nothing else but in a new pomp of words to do over that which I had done before and to the loathing of your Stomacks to give you that meat you before were cloyd with This desire was not pleasing to me but they did grow upon me with new importunities to take it in hand again It will be your humanity to resent and excuse that modesty which I granted to my persisting friends especially having used such a prevalent Argument to overcome me to it not doubting but it would be grateful to the most of you if I should again undertake it V. It is therefore my present businesse to declare unto you what is the meaning of that common Axiom The safety of the people is the supreme Law and how it is to be understood Some men within these few years not well imployed have invented and brought at last into the Common-wealth a new state of Government as before they had brought into the Church a new Religion and as they have earnestly endeavoured under the pretence of Conscience or of Christian liberty to overthrow all the force and frame of the Ecclesiastick Government so under the preâ—ence of Civil liberty or the liberty of the Subject they labour in this confusion of times and with incredible heat of spirit and military terrour to shake and from the very foundation of it to pluck up the whole Fabrick of the Government of State These as often as they are accused of the Royal Dignity trod under feet of the despised Authority of all holy Laws of the disturbance of the publick peace of an unbridled and horrible tyranny exercised on their fellow Subjects all barrs of Right and Justice being broken down of an affected parity in the Church and in the Common-wealth all difference of birth and honours and States being taken away and many more such Anabaptistical impieties they presently defend themselves and their manners with this safety of the people as with a Buckler and think this alone to be preferred
as too burthensome and therefore because too insolently he domineereth over them to drive him out of his house to seize upon his Keys Truncks and all his goods and to mannage themselves the Government of the Family at their own pleasure under this pretence only that The safety of the Family is the supreme Law oeconomical There is no man but will confesse but that these wicked and nefarious Counsels may by some lawful consequence be deduced from these Principles which Principles being rightly understood are most true and profitable And yet an egge is not more like unto an egge than the Arguments of those men who by pretending the peoples safety fill all things with sedition are to this wild kind of reasoning as if and that very eminently also the safety of the General were not contained and included in the safety of the Army and the safety of the Master in the safety of his Family and the safety of a Prince in the safety of his people To be short we must acknowledge the safety of the People that is of the King and People together is the supreme Law but the safety of the People that is of the Subjects the King being excluded is not so XIV In the second place I am to add something more And though I conceive that I have clearly enough proved that in this Axiom by the word People neither the Subjects without the Prince nor the Prince without the Subjects ought precisely and by themselves to be understood but both of them conjunctively yet if any man will more exactly consider either the dignity of the persons or the original of this Aphorism he will willingly grant it to be understood more precisely of the safety of the King than precisely of the safety of the People For first that the Kings Majesty is sacred hath not been only most copiously acknowledged by all the Fathers of the Church even at that time when there were no Christian Kings who have reverenced them as men second to God and lesse only than God himself and have offered Vows and Prayers unto God for their safety and have taught that on their safety the safety and happinesse of the whole people did depend But God himself as largely may be shown if need required hath been pleased that abundantly it should be testified in the holy Scriptures From whence it came to passe that all good Subjects and endued with a right understanding in the height and heat and the extremest danger of Battel have judged that the safety of the King alone was to be preferred above the safety to them all which as it became good Subjects those Israelites gallantly professed who at the time of the execrable Conspiracy of Absolon preserved their fidelity which they vowed to King David 2 Sam. 18. 3. And of the same mind were they who not basely flattering a mortal man for their own profit but speaking according to the Dictates of the Spirit of God have called the King the breath of their nostrils for so that godly Prophet and sanctified from his mothers womb the Prophet Jeremy speaketh it Lamen 4. 20. In a most apt signification That breath which is attracted and emitted through the nostrils being that vital breath Animus Râ—publica tu es illa corpus tuum Senec. 1. de clem 5. Ille spiritus vitalis quem haec tot millia trabunt Ibid. c. 4. with which the soul as with a Bond is united to the Body and which failing the living Creature must forthwith necessarily expire and perish His Breath goeth forth he returneth to his Earth Psal 146. 4. XV. This also is worthy your observation that the Axiom of which we now treat hath been brought unto us from the Roman Nation and then in use with them when Rome did most flourish in a popular state And there is no reason we should wonder That the safety of the people was to them a supreme Law to whom the people themselves were the supreme Power The Lawes were then the Peoples the judgments the Peoples the whole jurisdiction the Peoples the entire Government and autocratical Majesty was the Peoples And from hence it is that amongst all the Historians and in Cicero also and other Writers of that age so frequent a mention is made of the majesty of the Roman people as being in a state Democratical which in a state Monarchical is not the Peoples but the Kings Therefore as much as the safety of the People was to them with whom was the Majesty of the People which how much it was by the Aphorism they would it should be testified to the world so much unto us if we will make use of of that Aphorism an Analogy in the so different forms of both Republicks being rightly observed as fit it should be so should be the safety of our Kings who acknowledge no other majesty but the Kings only XVI From these things which have been spoken I believe it is manifest enough that neither in the appellation of Safety nor in the appellation of People there is any force at all in this vulgar Axiom as to wrest it to the prejudice of Kingly dignity unless with the greatest injury that can be done unto it And if the two other remaining words of it viz. The supreme Law should be rightly weighed they would acknowledge I believe if they had but any Modesty or Reason that nothing can be spoken in this Axiom which is more ample and illustrious to establish the soveraign Power of Kings For these words the supreme Law do suppose that in every Common-wealth there ought necessarily to be somewhere a soveraign Power which is above all humane Laws positive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist 5. Ethic. 14. Nulla tanta providentia potuit esse eorum qui leges compoâ—ebant ut species criminum complecterentur Quintiâ— declam 331. to which he ought to look and by his Authority to take care that neither by the defect of Laws or the too superstitious observance of them the Common-wealth may receive any dammage And the reason of this is plain enough for the wisest Law-maker cannot so foresee all circumstances of events to come neither can he make such a sufficient precaution by the Laws as to prevent all those Evils inconveniencies which he suspects may come to pass and this is not by the fault of the Laws or of the Law-makers but as Aristotle hath excellently observed it it is by reason of the nature of those things that are to be defined by the Laws which being indefinite by Reason of their variety and uncertain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. because depending on futurity cannot be comprehended within some certain Rules of Limitation The Law-maker therefore hath discharged his part if by his Laws he hath ordained those things which are for the most part just Aristot 1. and profitable to the Commonalty Ethic. 14. although it may so fall out as indeed often times it doth that on