But it 's not all kinde of Intelligence but some only in particular 1. Not a Theoretick Knowledge but a Practick and therefore always referring to some Action or Omission And 2. It is not referred to another mans affairs but his own whose it is And lastly it is not a mere apprehension or suspicion but a knowledge always at least of the fact and often determines by the Rule known of the Legality of the fact and so passeth Judgment and thence is called Judicium but sometimes Conscience is doubtful here and thence it is called a weak doubtful and scrupulous Conscience § 4. It may be therefore thus described Conscientia est modus Intellectus Judicialis practicus Conscience is the Vnderstandings Judicial manner of proceeding concerning our selves and actions A man in Conscience as God's Substitute or Deputy sits in Judgment upon himself first inquires as Jury of the matter of fact whereof according to Self-evidence he is found Guilty or Not-guilty and according to the Law manifested is acquitted or condemned This Judgment of Conscience may be considered in the power and act a man may have a Conscience-power which doth not exert and put forth act as a Man in Infancy or in Sleep Ergo it may be called Potestas intellectiva Intellectual Power reducible into act Again Intellectual Power is either Intuitiva vel ratiocinativa that is the intuitive which is the Vision or Understanding of a Truth Axiomatically or in the Abstract Ratiocinativa which is looking on several Truths compared together and one Truth being laid by another by way of Collation produceth a third Truth which we call a Conclusion or Inference The first and general truth that comes to the knowledge is the Law of God which is brought to us by the light of Nature or by the Word of God which way soever it comes it 's enough to give it a throne in Conscience that it be certainly known to be God's Law Nextly that our actions are laid by this Rule or brought before this Judgment-seat which two being solemnly brought together a third necessary Truth or Judgment according to truth doth result and is accordingly pronounced the certainty of which depends on the certainty of the Premises or at least the exact and just comparing them together The Understanding thus behaving it self puts on the nature of actual Conscience or Conscience in act bringing the habitual or potential Conscience into acts in this manner either concerning a mans state or actions Concerning a mans state The Soul that sins shall die I have sinned Ergo. Or concerning his particular actions He that committeth Idolatry or Adultery c. breaketh God's Law but I have committed such and such an act which is so Ergo § 5. Hence Conscience ruled by Christ's Prerogative is the practical reasoning Vnderstanding or Modus intellectus practicus in man whereby a judgment may be passed concerning a mans self by himself according to his apprehension of the revealed Judgment and Will of God its divine Authority that rules in mans Heart as to the approbation or condemnation of himself or actions The Conscience of the very blinde Heathens admit of no other power to acquit or condemn in this kind but either the convincing light of the moral Law written in them or some supposed false Divine light which by reason of the blindness of their Hearts seduceth them to false Worship and Idolatry § 6. The method of Conscience his acting is thus first there is the general undoubted truth known or assented to as such and it 's either that which is really so or supposedly so only and not so really if it be the latter it 's the main foundation of an erring Conscience It is the prospect of some apprehended Divine Truth or other Moral Levitical or Evangelical which obligeth us to acts of Obedience and this Law-obligation laid by God on man is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Proposition of a practical Syllogisme made by Conscience 2. There is the Application of this Truth to our selves either as to our state or particular actions according to our own knowledge together with God's to judge of our Conformity or Non-conformity to the said Law-obligation and therefore concerning the goodness or evil of our Actions and here we take the Candle of the Lord in our hands to search out and examine our condition and actions in relation to good or evil and herein doth the chief nature of Conscience consist because it 's a submitting ourselves and actions to the judgment of God's Law and is therefore the Assumption of this practical Syllogisme and is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is an Index Record Testimony Witness 3. There is the Crisis Inference or Conclusion necessarily deduced from the Premises and this is called the Judgment passed upon our state or actions Thus we have the whole Syllogisme which the understanding makes in this way of acting The Proposition is de Jure the Assumption de Facto the Conclusion is either a justification of person or action or it 's a condemnation of any of them found guilty § 7. The Synteresis is the light of Truth contained in the Law Nâ—eticè recepta sive practicum Axioma cum assensu intellectivo perceptum A light received into the understanding with assent thereunto or acknowledgment thereof as such A Law may be understood as to the matter of it but not believed as a Truth it may be known as a Truth but not owned as a Law yea it may be acknowledged as a Law but not yielded to as divine and authoritative enough to binde to Obedience yea it may be owned as a Law of God binding some people and at some times but not ourselves or at all times But unless the Truth taken for a Law be thus circumstantiated and so received by us it hath not force enough upon Conscience as a Law binding to Obedience So that Synteresis differs but ratione from the Law itself for it is the Law of God understood and yielded to as obliging unto practice and it 's not only the Law in its Letter and first Principles in its Original positive nature but in its aptitude to particular Cases and in its just Inferences and Consequences deducible from generals thereof all practical Truths pleading Divine Authority justly obliging us to belief § 8. That which stirs up the Understanding to compare Conditions and Actions with the divine Law in the assumption by a practical enquiry is a certain obligation which this Law-light hath the Heart of man under that it doth by a kinde of natural instinct act in the manner above-rehearsed which obligation is a necessity laid on the Understanding of owning and assenting to every known Law of God and thereby to make a practical disquisition and judgment accordingly The reason of this obligation lieth much in the necessity of the object And first the natural inclination the Understanding hath to every known truth as such but this is not
if the Law be just and equitable a Christian is bound in Conscience to yield positive active obedience not onely for wrath i. e. fear of threat and punishment but for Conscience sake because the Law of God obligeth us to obedience to all the just Laws of men civil Government being his appointment as much as Oeconomical but it 's not mans Law that nextly and immediately bindes Conscience to obedience but Gods and mans Law bindes onely by vertue of and for the sake of Gods Hence a man that breaks the just Laws of man sins against God and eo nomine wrongs his Conscience As on the other hand he that obeys an unjust Law of man i. e. a Law no way warrantable by the revealed will of God breaks Gods Law and if his Conscience tell him so he sins against his Conscience which always aggravates any sin against God Hence if at any time he hath to do with any such Law he ought rather to run the hazard of mans displeasure than Gods God is to be obeyed rather than man if one must be disobeyed and obeying God indemnifies Conscience from the guilt of sin in our disobeying of man in the same act So if a Law of man lies before us which we doubt concerning the lawfulness of we are here at least to suspend active obedience while we seek for further information for whether the thing in it self be sin or no it 's not so much to us at present as whether we are satisfied of the nature of it and know what it is by the light of Truth shining in our Hearts it will amount to sin in us to do a doubtful action if the Apostles Doctrine be true But if the Precepts of men be found upon the best examination to be contrary to God's a Christian's Conscience is the most certainly disobliged his duty lies plain before him God's Law is to be observed and hence it is that some can joyfully suffer all wrongs from the hands of men in the case of refusal of active obedience unto their Laws because they are perswaded either from a truely-enlightned Conscience or from an erring which is binding as to present action for a man must walk by that light he hath or by none at all that such refusal of active Obedience and the sufferings of theirs is agreeable to the revealed minde of God and therefore most justifiable at God's and Man's Tribunal § 6. Here will fall in a great enquiry That although it be true that all Humane Power both Legislative and Executive be limited by a superiour Power yet there 's but few that have the felicity of keeping within prescribed bounds or having such Subjects that will not be excepting against the Laws of their Superiours as not agreable to God's Laws and this they will make the Plea for their disobedience Both Superiours and Inferiours will plead Conscience though never so unrighteously what should be done in this case Unto this Allegation many things may be said for it 's sufficiently known that though every Law primarily requires active Obedience yet upon a Transgression it is satisfied with the due execution of the Penalty but for the future expects active Obedience and a reiterated refusal of Obedience the Law looks upon as presumptuous and is really so if this continuation at enmity with the Law be voluntary and deliberate after sufficient Information and Conviction And if this refusal be conjoyn'd with resistance it is no better than Rebellion which we explode as unwarrantable for a Christian About Presumption we distinguish there is that which is really so and that which is onely called so by an unjust Law and mistaking Judge Persisting in refusal of obedience after conviction of our duty is presumption and a sin against God whoever the Law-maker is But if such persistance be justified by the light of God's Law in Conscience it is not a presumptuous sin or any sin at all against God however man may term it a presumptuous breach of his Law for a conscientious Christian can no more obey an unrighteous Law after suffering than before § 7. In all cases of voluntary deliberate refusal of active Obedience to a Law there is and must needs be a wrong done to the Law-giver or Subject To the Law-giver if his Power Law and Ends be good and they not answered for the first end of every Law is and ought to be active Obedience as beforesaid the Law of God first obliging us so to the just Laws of man and the end of the execution of punishment is for the reducing the sufferers to active Obedience and the exemplary restraint of others from Disobedience Hence it follows that a deliberate resolved and constant undergoing of Suffering in this way of refusal is a practical charging the Magistrate with the highest Usurpation and Tyranny in imposing Laws of that nature and therefore the greatest disparaging testimony born against his Law a great reputation in the judgement of the world to the Cause pleaded for let it be truth or errour and the most exemplary disappointment of the Magistrates Law-making ends whereby others are greatly emboldened to the same kind of refusal § 8. In all cases where Magistrates abuse their Power they do a wrong to the supream Judge in going beyond his Commission and intrenching on his Prerogative and do apparent injury to the Subject 1. In that an inferiour subordinate Law-giver hath bereaved him by a Law of those just Liberties and Priviledges granted to him by the Charter of his supream Law-giver 2. In afflicting and grieving his Subject by imposing an unjust Law and causing him to suffer by it when he pleads exemption by a Law in full force and a discharge from a higher Court and is praiseworthy for the said refusal not to be condemned no nor reproached as an evil doer or presumptuous for his permanency in non-obedience 3. In laying his Subject under a necessity of continued and reiterated sufferings he being obliged in Conscience or else to answer the default at a higher Tribunal constantly to persist in his refusal to yield such Obedience though he is to pass under renewed and reiterated penalties for a man to return to obedience after a deliberate suffering is a visible practical condemnation of himself for his former refusal which would greatly reflect on his honour both as a man or a Christian unless by the access of further light he findes his Conscience did erre and so be convinced of his duty then it becomes him both as a man and Christian to retract Humanum est errare beluinum in errore persistere § 9. Now seeing such inevitable wrong lights somewhere in cases of these deliberate refusals it will be enquired who or what must determine to the satisfaction of each party both standing highly on their Justification To which I answer An actual reconciliation is utterly impossible rebus sic stantibus because it will be as the greater overswaying earthly power will have it Deo
much in some few things yet he will play the Hypocrite and lie fast enough in others To such an one the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and take such an one out of the huff of his Pride and Passion he cannot but acknowledge that this person which he hath thus much contemned and despised is one truely fearing God though he hath many weaknesses and incongruities attending of him Thirdly Another piece of Charity is to help succour and assist one another in the bearing any evil of affliction coming out of any evil of sin and attaining any good desired Rom. 15.1 We that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak to put our Shoulders under the burthen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to aggravate their weakness and lay greater burthen upon them but to help them with comforts under afflictions resolutions in doubts good counsel for their recovery when they are under sin and guilt and not please your selves our pride corrupt passions and affections as self must be denied in following Christ so in associating with his Members § 6. We have spoken of the Charity the Apostle requires in the walking of strong and weak towards one another it remains to adde something concerning the rules of Wisdom whereby they are to walk 1. The Strong is not to do any indifferent action which he foresees may be a real sinning offence unto his Brother Rom. 14.19 20 21. It 's of the greatest transgression of the rule of Charity in the Apostles sence and therefore it 's wisdome for the Strong to chuse such times and circumstances for the use of indifferent things as may not scandalize the weak and give him occasion either sinningly to judge him or embolden him to imitate him in an action which his own Conscience cannot bear for that meat which the Strong can eat without conscience of the Idol the Weak cannot Therefore some things must be wisely avoided by a Christian for the sake of another mans Conscience in matters of indifferencies though he findes no reason for it in his own I need make no farther proof of this than that full place 1 Cor. 8.10 1 Cor. 10.27 28 29. Here the judgement of discretion must be managed by the rules of Expediency All things that are lawful are not expedient and if it be a sin against Christian Charity and Wisdome to do that action that may really scandalize a weak Brother it is much more a transgression of a hainous nature to impose this action and compel the Weak to the doing of it 2. The wisdom of the Weak should be to be so far from judging and condemning the Strong as rather to suspect his own Judgement and lay aside Pride Prejudice and Partiality and sincerely endeavour after more light believing still that it 's most probable that a Christian that hath more Knowledge Experience Gifts and Parts and Advantages may know much more than himself and though he cannot reach Light enough to see so far as to practise with him yet at least to believe that his stronger Brother hath walked according to the best of his light and knowledge in that thing when he sees no eminent moral swaying reason to the contrary And though the Conscience or Example of the Strong is not the rule that the Weak must walk by unless it 's manifest to the Weak that the Strong walks agreeable to the Minde or Example of Christ It 's not any mans Place Dignity Learning Piety barely and absolutely considered that renders him a Standard and Rule of Christian walking yet he is to learn so much pious Wisdom as to remember all those relations that he stands to him by and to violate none of them upon this account and rather come to him as a Scholar than as a Master to teach him or Judge to condemn him It were great folly in a man that 's blinde or hath but one Eye to condemn all men for Cheats and Knaves that have two Eyes and stronger sighted than themselves Besides it 's most agreeable to the rules of equity that the strong man should be allowed the same liberty as to his own practice which the weak challengeth viz. of walking by the light of his own Conscience be it more or less than anothers though I confess if there be any bar of Liberty in indifferent things in the Law of Christ it 's on the part of the Strong i. e. of him that hath the over-ruling governing or exemplary power over others for the sake of the Weak for that is an undoubted Law of Christ that the Strong or he that thinks or pretends himself so to be may not do an indifferent action with offence unto the Weak And whereas the Strong may object and say that the Weak is as much bound to conform to an indifferent thing for the sake of the Strong as the Strong to forbear it for the sake of the Weak I 〈…〉 there can be no sin in forbearing an indifferent act to 〈…〉 upon it as such when there is unavoidable sin in doing it 〈◊〉 that esteems it in his Conscience so to be so that the reason is not the same in this kinde for the Strong and Weak The Weak cannot walk with the Strong in all matters of indifferency but the Strong may with the Weak by receiving of them as the Apostle saith without the consideration of those differences because the Weak should sin in doing a thing absolutely indifferent which he judgeth unlawful but the Strong doubting not the indifferency can never think that he sins in forbearing it and therefore should prize his Brothers communion before pleasing himself in such actions § 7. The sum of all is this that notwithstanding the real disproportion or supposed between the Strong and Weak and the disputes in the world who is one and who is the other the will of Christ is that they should walk brotherty and inoffensively towards each other each one as strong and weak as strong in respect of his Wisdom and Charity as weak in respect of his Humility Teachableness and Suspicion of himself Every one esteeming another better than himself for the same Christian may be strong and weak strong in the knowledge and experience of some Truths and in respect of some Temptations weak in his apprehension and judgement of others strong at one time and weak at another And besides attending infirmities must be considered on both parts for it cannot be but sometimes it will fall out that the Weak will manifest his weakness by Peevishness Prejudice Passion or Bewraying his manifest ignorance for which the Strong is not to despise him or reject him but rather help him under this burthen and endeavour to win him nearer unto him by a spirit of forbearance and meekness for men in manifest weaknesses are to be pitied and supported not to be insulted over and trampled upon So the Strong will sometimes shew his strength though it be his sin and therefore a weakness relatively in
no place by subjection i. e. yielding to their imposition no not for an hour that the truth of the Gospel i. e. true Gospel-liberty might continue with you whereas before he yielded to the Circumcision of Timothy to gratifie the weak real Believers Whence it plainly follows that whoever they be that endeavour to enthral our Consciences and Practices though in matters in themselves indifferent are not to be yielded to as weak nor subjected to as strong but rejected as false Brethren 2. The strong sincere Christian is not to violate any positive Law of Christ that he is in his Conscience perswaded of to gratifie the weak or any persons whatever Inferiours Superiours or Equals all the concession must be onely in matters in themselves indifferent neither should the weak offer violence to his Conscience in any thing to please the strongest and wisest Christian in the world CHAP. VIII Of Scandals § 1. HAving spoken of the strong and weak Christian and how they should walk one towards another inoffensively it will be necessary to understand a little the nature and kinde of offences which the Gospel gives us so frequent and strict warning to take heed of The Apostles great inference from the advice that he had given to the Strong and weak was by way of advice Rom. 14.13 Let us not therefoee judge one another any more but judge this rather i. e. determine that no man put a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in his Brothers way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inter se differunt sed non semper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leviorem offensam significat quā tamen aliquis non corruat ut supra 11.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vero graviorem declarat ex quā quispiam prolapsus claudicet Beza and most Interpreters go this way but Estius who saith Non disting inter offendiculum scandalum sicut inter lapidem offensionis petram scandali Rom. 9.33 nam hujusmodi repetitiones ad inculcationem eyusdem rei Scripturis familiares sunt Estius There is two words used but both seem to intend the same thing though some make them differ in degree A Scandal is any impediment or obstruction that lies in a mans way over which he may stumble or fall So that we take a Stumbling-block or occasion of falling for the same thing any thing that doth grieve trouble distract or turn aside carries the nature of a scandal with it and those we must distinguish according to degrees There are the greater and more dangerous that hazard falling and there are those of a lesser nature that hazard stumbling onely They differ onely in degree or in respect that they have to our state or particular actions and concerns Some of more dangerous consequence and some of less Some are more easily removed out of the way some more permanent and lasting As if there be any difference in those expressions a stone of stumbling and rock of offence it lieth in that the offending Stone is easily put aside but the Rock is immovable § 2. Offences are said also to be either such as are given and not taken and in this sence some places must be taken as Matth. 16.23 when Christ said to Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou art an offence to me in endeavouring by thy advice and evil counsel to turn me out of the course of exercising my Mediators office Not that Christ was stumbled but there was such a thing in the nature of Peter's advice in relation to Christ's work that he had to do Some offences are taken and not given i. e. it 's not in the nature of them to be offences but by reason of the corruptions of men by their abuse of the greatest good it often becomes a scandal to them so Christ himself was a scandal to the Jews and a Rock of scandal as well as a Stone of stumbling Rom. 9.33 1 Cor. 1.23 How many when he went preaching about were scandalized at him and at his Doctrine Matth. 11.6 ch 15.12 ch 26.31 This is a supposed scandal to him that is offended Thus the doing of the most justifiable action may undergo the disreputation of an offence when men will either perversly call good evil or interpret it as evilly intended or by reason of ignorance and weakness of judgement judge it so and thus Christ himself and no marvel if the best of his Members be not a scandal many times in their most commendable ways of walking unto the men of the world yea unto many weaker Believers their liberty becomes a Stumbling-block to the weak 1 Cor. 8.9 and a mans good is blasphemed or evil spoken of Rom. 14.16 there are many that will be offended captiously and deliberately and they are the profane men of the world that call Christ Beelzebub and his Disciples no better or the pharisaical Professors The Disciples told Christ Knowest thou not that the Pharisees were offended when they heard these sayings Matth. 15.12 Christ answers That every plant that his Father had not planted should be rooted up Let them alone they are blinde c. therefore no marvel if they bark at the Sun c. These unjust and unreasonable offence-takers are the greatest offence-givers who do truely offend Gods Children in all sences more than the prophane world so Joh. 6.60 61. § 3. An offence given is when a man or thing hath an innate just ground of scandal by relation to the moral Law and is no other than sin or sinful per se in se whatever other mens opinion of it be and therefore works objectively upon others by way of stumbling and scandalizing and they are two sorts on whom it operates this way Either those that behold this action with approbation and they stumble or rather fall in the worst manner thereby for they thereby are encouraged to fall into sin or to remain in sin by reason of it because of the great inducements that they take up from the person committing it his Holiness Wisdom Authority Age c. or those that behold it are grieved at it and at the person offending so as to censure his Person or Religion and provoked by some ways or means to manifest their great disgust not onely to the person offending but even to the world Hence I distinguish Offences into Grieving and Sinning or Grief-causing offences or Sin-causing offences § 4. Of the grieving Offence first and it 's that which tends to the afflicting and troubling the Mindes Hearts and Consciences of the Faithful in their Christian course and the offending party either wrongs and injures by acts of violence and oppression whereby he grieves the oppressed or else he does and persists in such actions as the offended judge unlawful And therefore from true principles of the love of God and his Brother and the hatred of sin he is much grieved and walks heavily to see his Brother walk disorderly and complains of this block laid in the
in their circumstances and therefore cannot be determined but pro hic nunc and must be liable still to no other judgement than that of Discretion Those things that Christ hath left under it cannot by humane Laws be removed from it therefore indifferent things may be agreed on by common consent in Congregations or by the Officers thereof according as the expediency or conveniency appears unto them and for so long and no longer Hence they cannot undergo the Title or Denomination of a Law but onely of prudential Rules which have no binding reason for observation but the continuance of the agreeing circumstances as it may be judged most convenient by the Church to assemble at such an hour so long as the days are of such a length but when that circumstance alters then it may be more convenient at another Many such instances may be given and no Church can walk comfortably as long as any Authority undertakes to prohibit them of this liberty of their Prudentials in all such matters of circumstance and alterable appendixes to the worship of God CHAP. XII Wherein is handled the first Question about things Indifferent § 1. THe first Question that seems to offer itself to be so this Whether a religious Gospel-Indifferency ceaseth to be so when any thing is positively and certainly determined as to its practice by humane Authority Explic. By religious Gospel-Indifferency I understand as before-mentioned any thing or action which circumstantially adheres to the worship of God and may be used or omitted or altered according to the judgement of discretion without any transgression of a Law of Christ Again this we acknowledge that a thing may be determined as to Expediency by a Society or lawful Authority but not imposed as a standing and binding Law but being commended by the judgements of many concurring conscientiously studious of the minde and will of Christ it carries the more force along with it to perswade us at least to present acting till by further and greater illumination we be otherwise enclined Nay if any thing be determined by those that are in Authority and proposed as their judgement according to their light received not Magisterially but Demonstratively onely convincingly enough as to the Expediency it carries with it the force of a Law unto Conscience not of man but of God man being a Candlestick onely to hold forth that Light and binds it to submit thereunto But otherwise if men in authority undertake to make a Law that a thing in itself by Christ's Law left indifferent i. e. to Christian discretion to do or omit shall become an absolute necessity or an expedient necessity and according to their will and opinion binde Inferiours to the constant practice of this by a penalty We affirm that a religious Gospel-Indifferency notwithstanding all humane authoritative determination changing it into a necessity keeps its pristine indifferency and remains the same to a Christians Conscience and practice The proof of this Assertion follows § 2. Argum. 1. That power that can change Gospel-indifferencies into Gospel-necessities can also change Gospel-necessities into Gospel-indifferencies but no humane Authority can do the latter Ergo not the former The Assumption will not be denied by any Protestant it being a presumption of the highest nature for humane authority to pretend to dispense with or null any of the manifest Laws of Christ The Major is also evident because it must be an Authority of the same kind to make and null a Law of the same kinde If it be said a humane authority may make a Gospel-indifferency necessary genere civili the Answer falls far short for we speak of Laws of the same kinde having equal force upon the Conscience for a Civil Legislative power can as well null any Law of a civil nature onely as it can make it So if Man could make Moral Laws he might as well null those which he hath made or dispense with them at pleasure as make new We must always allow a Soveraign Prerogative to Supream Law-givers in any kinde as to promulgate so to abrogate or dispense with their own Laws at pleasure And if it be said that those Laws that man makes concerning the use of indifferent things necessarily in the worship of Christ are civil onely being onely for decency splendor c. I reply that it cannot be so in the nature of them for it 's the respect and end of a thing that gives it its specifical denomination when it hath none such absolutely considered that which respects and aims at the Gospel-worship of Christ or pretends so to do is or should be a part of Gospel-worship as kneeling is an indifferent gesture a man may kneel when he doth other things besides acts of Worship or according to the Law of Christ he may kneel or stand or use another posture in Worship but when this or that gesture is applied to Worship it 's religious by its Respect Vse and Application but still of an indifferent nature under the Laws of Christ till by some binding Law the Conscience becomes bound up to the use of it in this or that part of Worship Now he that undertakes to binde Conscience here undertakes to make a Law for Christ and to entrench upon the Prerogative of Christ and that such that make such Laws do claim such a power is manifest because they make obedience unto such Laws necessary by vertue of a Law of Christ Let every Soul be subject to the higher power § 3. Argum. 2. If the nature of an Evangelical Indifferency may be changed jure into an Evangelical Necessity by any power besides Christ's then it must be because it 's Evangelically evil that this or that should remain indifferent which Christ hath left so or at least better for the honour of Christ and good of his Church that it should become a necessity i. e. a commanded good or prohibited evil than indifferent to be disposed by the discretion of particular Churches or Christians but there is no true Evangelical Indifferency that hath such a reason for the change of it into a necessity Ergo the reason of the Consequence is this because whatever is altered by a Law is supposed to be altered from worse to better and what is altered by a Law for Christ is or should be made more for the honour of Christ and therefore far better than it was before but it cannot be supposed that any thing that this wise Law-giver left in indifferency to practice or omit according to the judgement of discretion should be more for his honour if it were converted into a necessity by a Law for to say so would be a high impeachment of the wisdom of Christ as it is of a King and Parliament when any shall presume to say they have not made such Laws as are needfull to be made and have left the Subject under a greater liberty than is for the good of the Commonweal or honour of the King To say
indifferent thing to take it up or let it alone but because of the Fathers command he is bound to do it Ans It 's true because there is a command of Christ that enjoyns the Child's Obedience in all lawful things and therefore upon the Fathers command it becomes necessary that the child yield Obedience but this is but a command for one particular action and therefore under Expediency If the Father should make a Law that one child should pick straws all his days and another play at push-pin such Laws would become null in the nature of them but there is nothing more absurd than to affirm that they alter not the nature of the thing for what can alter it more than to lay it under a Law when a thing was indifferent unto practice before to make it necessary as to practice when it was lawful before to make it unlawful We have shewed that Necessities and Indifferencies are but relative in respect of the Law and he makes a Law that gives things contrary relations and respects to what they had before alters the nature of the thing as much as a Law can and makes one Law contrary to another Men do but trifle that plead that things are not made necessary in the Worship of God when the practice of them are enjoyn'd under the greatest Church-penalties what 's greater than Excommunication yea pecuniary Mulcts Imprisonments Deprivations c. yea and Offenders against the Laws persecuted with greater rigour than those who live in the constant and open Transgression of Moral and Gospel-Precepts § 5. I may take another very plain medium to prove the Minor thus He that makes a thing unlawful either to be done or left undone which Christ hath made lawful by his Law doth that which is contrary to the Word of God but he that changes Indifferencies into Necessities doth so There is nothing more plain than the Major for to make a thing unlawful c. Lawful and unlawful being contradicentia and he that by a new Law renders that unlawful for my practice which Christ's Law hath rendred lawful doth a thing e Regione contrary to the Law of Christ For the Minor it s as evident for by the Law of Christ the indifferent action was lawful for me to do or omit as to eat such a sort of Meat or keep such a day or wear such a garment but there is a new Law of the Church comes which now makes it unlawful for me either to do or not to do those things for he that makes a Law binding always to the practice of either part of the indifferency makes the other part unlawful which antecedaneous to this Law was lawful Now the Church of Christ cannot make that unlawful which he hath made lawful for they may as well make that lawful to do or omit Again If the Church may make that unlawful which he hath made lawful then she may take away the Relative Goodness that is in any part of an indifferent action by the Rules of Expediency and stamp upon it a positive evil which is contrary to what Christ hath done c. Again Nothing can be Ecclesiastically and therefore Religiously unlawful which is not made Ecclesiastically and Religiously Evil and nothing can be so Jure but by the Will of Christ no more than any thing can be Ecclesiastically good and necessary without the said revealed Will of Christ § 6. Argum. 4. The Church is not capable of a Law-making Power Ergo. I prove it thus He that cannot jure or de facto annex a Punishment in some measure correspondent to the nature of the Offence that will be committed against that Law cannot make such a Law as if a Corporation under the King makes a Law to hang or burn in the hand for some Offence which they have no power to do then that is null The Major is very plain But the Church cannot de facto or at least de jure Execute such penalties as are correspondent to her Laws for they being Ecclesiastical are of a Spiritual nature belonging to the Worship of God and therefore the Lawmaker will still have the first stroak of his Law fall upon Conscience by binding it under guilt where was ever any truely enlightned Conscience ever bound under guilt for transgressing a mere Church-Law in matters of Ceremony Secondly They cannot de Jure annex and execute the Penalties of Exclusion from communion as Christ never made a mere Ceremony the condition of communion so he never threatned the Non-observation with Non-communion Let any Precept or any Instance be given of this nature that any suffer'd Church-censures under the New-Testament for Non-observation of a Ceremonial Law Thirdly As for other Penalties which we call Secular as Whipping Imprisoning Fining Confiscating we know the Church hath nothing to do with them they were never in the power of the Church nor never will be § 7. Argum. 5. That Law which directly and unavoidably hinders much good and causeth much evil in the obediential Subjection thereto ought not to be made by the Church but to change religious Indifferencies in the worship of God into Necessities doth so Ergo. The Major is undeniable for though a good action may per accidens hinder some other good and cause some evil yet it doth not so directly and in its true constituted nature but good actions produce good effects as evil actions evil So the Tree is known by its Fruits The Minor that such a change works such ill effects is thus proved 1. Because it hinders the most expedient use of an action left by Christ indifferent to be determined by the Judgement of Discretion whereas the Expediency by Christ's prescript may lye in the contrary part of the action wherein a goodness is placed by the Churches Law and an evil placed in that part of the action wherein there is a goodness by Christ's So that the Churches Law cannot have universal Obedience yielded to it without sin because when Christ's expediency falleth on the part contrary to the Law it will be sin to obey the Church As for Example It 's an indifferent thing which way we turn our Faces in the worship of God East West North or South the Church makes a Law the Minister must turn his Face toward the East in such a part of Worship this hinders the expedient use of that posture 1. It hinders from turning that way which is most for Edification and causeth the Minister to turn his back to the people which is very unexpedient It may confirm a Jew Pagan or Papist in their Superstitious Observances to observe us to do thus de industriâ out of a strict observation and therefore then unexpedient 2. It hinders much Good because it frustrates Christs Ends in the management of Religious and Ecclesiastical Affairs For Christ manageth all those by Necessities and Indifferencies in willing and requiring a necessary Obedience to his positive Laws and an indifferent use of indifferent things
Indifferency which a weak Christian thinks according to his best light from Gods Word to be necessary than the other part which Authority lays a stress upon by a Law the reason is because I must chuse Suffering rather than indanger any Souls salvation in the least Now if I refuse active obedience to the Magistrate I onely run the hazard of suffering the penalty which it may be I can bear and comfort my self under but in case I wrong a Soul by my action I cannot free my self from sin and am an occasion of anothers too either of which are but especially both much heavier than the greatest suffering Lastly if I suffer the penalty of the Law I both fulfil the Law and save my Brother too § 2. Now these Obstacles being removed out of the way I proceed to determine the Question That in case any power Civil or Ecclesiastical shall presume so far as to enact Laws in the concerns of divine Worship so as to change Christian Indifferencies into Necessities that a Christian is bound to refuse active obedience thereto And I make good this Assertion by the following Arguments 1. To yield such obedience is to serve God according to the Will of Man but no Christian ought to serve God according to the Will of Man Ergo. The Major is true because it 's a serving God in such a way as is devised by man and to the obeyer is no other for he in his conscience believes so that it is not the Will of God The Minor is true because that is Will-Worship which is the product only of mans Will Gods Will being the onely Rule of Gods Worship and we must be sure of that Will in all matters of his Worship or else we bring vain Oblations unto him 2. The goodness determined by a humane Law for the sake of mans Will ought not to be preferred before the goodness of Expediency determined by a conscientious Christian for God's sake for such a goodness of Expediency is approved of by God and the contrary to it pro hic nunc is unlawful therefore from this closing with such goodness we are not to be deterred by any humane Law for an expediently necessary action according to the Will of God is to be of far more force with us than an action made absolutely necessary by the Will of man Yea it is to do a thing contrary to the Will of God to do that as necessary which God hath revealed his Will concerning that we should always do in a way of Indifferency and Expediency determinable by the judgment of discretion for to do things by way of Necessity and to do by way of Indifferency is to act by way of Contrariety and therefore to obey such Laws is to act contrary to the Will of God 3. To be brought under the power i. e. a necessity by a Law of any thing religiously indifferent is unlawful 1 Cor. 6.12 but to be brought to constant active obedience to mans Law commanding a necessary performance of an indifferent action is to be brought under the power of a thing i. e. into bondage i. e. under a Yoke which Christ never put us under Now Christ would not have us to make our selves slaves where he hath made us free 4. A Christian is to use his liberty purchased by Christ and to stand fast in it Ergo to practise it constantly notwithstanding all ensnaring and embondaging Laws of men and is bound to use his judgment in all his actions and where there is an Indifferency to chuse by the Rules of Expediency and not walk by an implicite Faith The wise mans eyes are in his head the fool walketh in darkness 5. Such active obedience is a betraying the Prerogative of Christ for if a Legislative power be Christ's Prerogative as hath been proved then the yielding active obedience to an usurping Law is the doing Homage to another Lawgiver in that kind and giving up the power of the Lord Jesus It 's like a Subjects introducing the power of a forreign Prince and doing all that lies in him to subvert that Law and Soveraignty to which he is naturally related and what can be greater Treason to any State 6. If a Christian here obey it must be for Christ's sake or Conscience sake Rom. 13. It cannot be for Christ's sake because it robs him of his Prerogative or betrays it neither can it be for Conscience sake to embondage it self where Christ hath left it free whatever tends to the captivity or slavery of Conscience is not for the good of Conscience for in this they are not Ministers to me for good for the Law tends not to my good in active obedience which if I see and yet yield I become a Minister of evil to my self 7. If it be a sin in the supream Powers to command and impose their said Laws it is a sin in a Christian to obey at Ergo. The consequence is manifest because the most formal reason of an evil Law is the evil obedience required The Minor hath been proved that such a Law is sin in Superiours to make but to confirm the consequence further to be a copartner with another in sin is sin but if the Magistrate command and I obey I am copartner with him A thing commanded can be evil but two ways either materially or circumstantially if it be materially evil there is no pretence for doing it whatever humane power command and if it be circumstantially it must be in the Commanders usurping a false power or there is some circumstantial relation pro hic nunc that makes it unlawful unto me or another It may be the thing may be materially lawful but under both these sorts of circumstances it may be unlawful as that I give away hereby Christ's Prerogative I rob my self of the use of my judgment of discretion by which every Christian is to walk and I it may be offend my brother I do not say a man may never do that part of the Indifferency that is commanded by a humane Law a Christian hath the use of his liberty as well after as before a humane Law and he is to walk by the Rule of Expediency still When he finds it most for Gods glory and his or anothers edification he may take that part of the Indifferency which is commanded sed non ratione praecepti humani but from that Expedient or convenient Goodness which pro hic nunc he finds in it But that obedience which we here declare against is the doing it as a duty constantly or conscientiously sub paenâ reatus by virtue of such a Law 8. A Christian cannot yield the aforesaid obedience but he must offer violence to his Conscience i. e. practically to contradict the dictates and light thereof for every moral action must be approved or reprobated thereby But he must needs know that that which is not commanded or approved by Christ as indifferent things are though not commanded by him
as to use any indifferency to binde himself or suffer himself to be obliged to a prescribed Form of Prayer which Enquiry falls into two parts 1. Whether a Christian may come under an obligation by vow or resolution to use a Set-form of Prayer as before explained 2. Whether he may suffer himself to come under any such obligation by virtue of a Law made by any pretending Authority thereunto § 2. As to the first we shall assert and confirm the Negative That it 's not lawful for a Christian to put himself under any such obligation by his own Vow or Covenant or I may adde by his customary and constant abiding therein which doth in effect amount to a Covenant-tye If such a Tye were lawful it 's either as a thing necessary or indifferent for all lawful things are so 1. It 's not lawful as a thing necessary will be easily granted because none will say that are Protestants that a Christian is necessarily bound to a Form of Prayer by the positive command of Christ if they do let it be shewn where Christ doth require any so to oblige himself or condemn any for not doing it or let him alleadge any Scriptural Example where any hath done it especially in the New Testament I suppose we need not stay on that part The second part of the Disjunction that it 's not lawful for him as an indifferency to binde up himself to such a Form I prove thus All Christian indifferent actions of concern in the Worship of Christ ought to be determined by the judgment of discretion according to the Gospel-rules of Expediency pro hic nunc but to lay ones self under such an Obligation would hinder him from walking by such Rules and by such a Judgment Ergo to use it as an Indifferency and to come under such an Obligation are most inconsistent but if it be said that it 's expedient for him to come under such an Obligation the ratio formalis must be because he cannot compose another Prayer or pray by present conception But that is not a justifiable reason for though he cannot at present he may afterwards be able so to do It 's just as if a man being lame and useth crutches makes a vow never to go without them though he shall be never so well Or it may be another Form may be offered more suitable to his condition we meeting with dayly alterations on that account it 's not fit therefore that we should be bound up always to the same Expressions Petitions Confessions and Thanksgivings our Necessities Temptations Sins and Mercies received dayly changing Besides though a man have not at present the gift of Prayer or assistance of the Spirit thereunto yet he ought to seek and wait for it and therefore ought not to binde himself up to such a Form though he may use it for present necessity § 3. Arg. 1. It 's not an indifferent thing for any man to stint himself in Religion where God hath not stinted him Where Christ hath allotted to us a Freedom the contrary to it is Bondage and no Christian ought to put himself into bondage where Christ hath made him free Whereas stinted Forms bound to brings a man into Bondage to Words or these and those Petitions Confessions c. which though it may be suitable for one state and season may not be at another neither so much to Christ's glory and his own edification for Christ hath foreseen a necessity of freedom in this kind as to the use of words and sentences in Prayer i. e. to be regulated by Gospel-rules of Expediency as all Christian liberty is 1. Because of the various Cases Occurrences and Exigences that a Christian is liable to that it 's impossible any one can suit fore-prescribed Forms unto them and we are enjoyned in all things to make our Requests known unto God 2. Because of the divers helps and assistances of the Spirit in expression of our wants Rom. 8.26 even sometimes in Sighs and Groans unutterable in words and unreducible into any Forms yea often not knowable before we come to ask because discovered to us by the Spirit searching our hearts while we are waiting upon God in the duty 3. Because of the divers frame of a Christians own spirit that he is subject unto sometimes of deadness and despondency sometimes of enlargement that for the most times those are strangers to who keep up in the road of words that the same words and sentences cannot in Faith be uttered without the sameness of heart-frame which cannot always be which they abundantly know who have their senses exercised by reason of use There are the frequent ebbings and flowings of particular Graces in a Christian's heart as of Faith Repentance Joy Patience c. according to which he is always to proportion his expressions in Prayer as neer as may be in order to his own comfort and power against prevailing corruptions Besides I might instance in the various assaults Satan makes upon us his manifold wiles as also the divers workings of our hearts towards or against corruption as lastly the various and unexpected Mercies that we be daily partakers of Examples we have many in Scripture of suiting Prayers in this manner if we consider how it was with the Saints of old as David Heman Hezekiah c. 4. Because Christ hath onely given us general Rules in the Gospel for particular Prayers and hath not bound or limited us to any particular Form § 4. Obj. But Christ hath prescribed us a Form of Prayer viz. that commonly called the Lord's Prayer for he saith Luke 11.2 When you pray say c. Answ It 's most absurd to think that Christ bound his Disciples to those words and sentences and bound us up from all others and one Scripture must explain another Mat. 6.9 it 's after this manner i.e. for sence and meaning 2. If Luke 11.2 were to be understood strictly then we must neither adde to or diminish from nor alter the Form Hence it were unlawful to use the Doxologie mentioned Mat. 6. 3. If it were so Christ's Disciples this Prayer being primarily directed to them upon their request should never have used any other Prayer but we finde not that they ever used the very Prayer in identity of words and sentences 4. In answer to their request it was most probable to be a Rule for Matter and Method for they desired our Saviour to teach them to pray as John taught his Disciples Now we finde not any prescribed Form left by John to his neither I suppose did our Saviour in this leave any more than a Pattern or a standing Rule of Prayer to his people under the Gospel 5. He never used it himself because he had no sin need not say Forgive me my sins 6. All expressions are in the plural number shewing that we have onely the most general Rules secret Prayer is to be referred to it and particular cases but not here mentioned