upon their own Authority to begin a new Church and to broach new Doctrines directly contrary to the judgement of the High Priest and Sanhedrin yea after they had pronounced Sentence against Jesus of Nazareth and condemned him to death and excommunicated his followers and punished as many as they could get into their power what could it in their opinion be but the Spirit of Faction and disobedience thus to oppose the Authority of their Church in believing contrary to its decrees and reforming without any power derived from it We see in our Saviours time how severely they checked any of the people who spake favourably of Christ and his Doctrine As though the poor ignorant people were fit to judge of these matters to understand Prophecies and to know the true Messias when he should appear And therefore when some of their Officers that had been sent to apprehend him came back with admiration of him and said Never man spake like this man they take them up short and tell them They must believe as the Church believes what they take upon them to judge of such matters No they must submit to their Governours Have any of the Rulers or Pharisees believed on him but this people which know not the Law are cursed i e. When they set up their own judgement in opposition to the Authority of the Church And after our Saviours death at a solemn Council at Hierusalem when Peter and John were summoned before them the first Question they asked was By what power or by what name have ye done this They never enquired whether the Miracle were wrought or no or whether their Doctrine were true all their Question was about their Mission whether it were ordinary or extraordinary or what authority they could pretend to that were not sent by themselves but let the things be never so true which they said if they could find any flaw in their Mission according to their own Rules and Laws this they thought sufficient ground to forbid them to preach any more and to charge them with Faction if they disobeyed 2. They charged the Christians with Faction in being so active and busie to promote Christianity to the great disturbance of the Jews in all parts This Tertullus accused St. Paul of that he was a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world and accordingly the Jews at Thessalonica take the Christians by force and carry them to the Rulers of the City crying Those that have turned the world upside down are come hither also This they knew was the most effectual course to render them odious to all Governours who are apt to suspect all new things as dangerous and think no truth can compensate the hazard of alterations Thus it was especially among the Roman Governours who had learnt from the counsel given to Augustus to be particularly jealous of all innovations in Religion and had much rather the people should continue quiet under an old error than have the peace disturbed for the greatest Truth This was really the greatest difficulty in the way of Christianity it came no where but people were possessed before hand with quite other apprehensions of Religion than the Christians brought among them The Jewish and Pagan Religions were in possession in all places and the people were at ease in the practice of them What then must the Christians do Must they let them alone and not endeavour to convince them of the truth of their own Doctrine If so they are unfaithful to their trust betrayers of truth and false to the Souls of men if they go about to perswade men out of their Religion they know such is the fondness most men have for their own opinions especially in Religion that where they might hope to convince one they might be sure to enrage many especially of those whose interest lay in upholding the old Religion How little doth Reason signifie with most men where Interest is against it Truth and falshood are odd kind of Metaphysical things to them which they do not care to trouble their heads with but what makes for or against their Interest is thought easie and substantial All other matters are as Gallio said questions of names and words which they care not for but no men will sooner offer to demonstrate a thing to be false than they who know it to be against their interest to believe it to be true This was the case of these great men of the Jews that came down to accuse Paul they easily saw whither this new Religion tended and if it prevailed among their people farewell then to all the Pomp and Splendour of the High-Priesthood at Hierusalem farewell then to the Glory of the Temple and City whither all the Tribes came up to worship thrice a year farewell then to all the riches and ease and pleasure which they enjoyed And what was the greatest Truth and best Religion in the world to them in comparison with these These were sufficient reasons to them to accuse Truth it self of deceiving men and the most peaceable Doctrine of laying the Foundation of Faction and Sedition Thus we have considerd the false imputations which were cast upon Christianity at first implyed in these words After the way which is called heresie 2. I now come to the way taken by St. Paul to remove these false imputations which he doth 1. By an appeal to Scripture as the ground and rule of his faith Believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets 2. By an appeal to the best and purest Antiquity as to the object of Worship So worship I the God of my Fathers not bringing in any new Religion but restoring it to its primitive purity 1. By an appeal to Scripture as the ground and rule of his faith The Jews pleaded Possession Tradition Authority of the present Church against all these St. Paul fixes upon a certain and unmoveable Foundation the Law and the Prophets He doth not here insist upon any particular revelation made to himself but offers the whole matter in dispute to be tryed by a common Rule that was allowed on both sides And his meaning is if they could prove that he either asserted or did any thing contrary to the Law and the Prophets then they had some reason to accuse him of innovation or beginning of a new Sect but if the foundation of his doctrine and practice lay in what themselves acknowledged to be from God then they had no cause to charge him with introducing a new Sect among them But the great Question here is What ground St. Paul had to decline the Authority of the present Church Since God himself had appointed the Priests to be the interpreters of the Law and therefore in doubtful cases resort was to be made to them and not the judgement left to particular persons about the sense of Scripture and yet in this case it is apparent St. Paul declined all Authority of the present
Church for at that very time the High-Priests and Elders came down to accuse him and he takes not the least notice of their judgement in this matter I shall therefore now shew that St. Paul had very great reason so to do and to appeal only to Scripture 1. Because the Authority of the present Church was more lyable to error and mistake than the Rule of Scripture was 2. Because it was lyable to more partiality than that was 1. Because it was more lyable to error and mistake than the Rule of Scripture was It was agreed on both sides that the Law was from God and that the Prophets spake by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost all that was now left was only to find out the true meaning of them and to compare Prophecies with events As in the case of the Messias if the circumstances foretold by the Prophets had their exact accomplishment in Christ as might appear to those who carefully compared them If he were born at Bethlehem of the Tribe of Judah when the Scepter was departed from it and during the second Temple and all other circumstances agreeing then though the ordinary judgement concerning true Prophets belonged to the Sanhedrin yet it was far more reasonable to believe that they were mistaken than that all the Prophecies should be accomplished in a person that was not the true Messias For those Prophecies were not intended only for the Priests and Rulers but for directions to the People that they might be able to judge of the accomplishment of them otherwise when the Authority of the Jewish Church condemned our Saviour the People could have no reason to believe him to be the Messias if they were bound in the sense of Scripture to submit their judgement wholly to the Churches Authority It is plain then that the sense of Scripture may be so evident to private capacities that they are not to submit in it to the present Authority of a Church For notwithstanding all the promises made to the Jewish Church and the command of submitting to the sentence of their Priests and Rulers in a matter of the highest concernment viz. concerning the true Messias men were bound to believe directly contrary to the present Authority in the Church For the people were bound to believe Christ to be the true Messias although the High Priest and Elders had condemned him for a deceiver and malefactor But besides this particular case there may be several others wherein men may lawfully reject the Authority of the present Church and those are when that Authority shall go about to overthrow those things which must be supposed antecedent to the belief of any such Authority as 1. The common sense of mankind 2. The force of a divine Law 3. The liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood All these must necessarily be supposed before any Authority of a Church but if any Church goes about to overthrow these it thereby forfeits its own Authority over men 1. If it requires things contrary to common sense as in that instance wherein some of the Jewish Rabbies required submission to their Authority viz. in believing the right hand to be the left or the left to be the right if they determined so or supposing the Jews to have required the people to deny that they ever saw any Miracle wrought by Christ or in the Miracle of the Loaves that what they saw and handled and tasted to be bread was true bread or to say that the same individual body might be in a thousand places at once or that things whose nature it is to be in another can subsist without their proper subject what Church soever requires such things as these from its members to be believed gives them just reason to reject its Authority 2. If it requires things contrary to the force and reason of a divine Law as the Jews themselves would have acknowledged if any Authority among them had gone about either to have left out the second Commandment or made it lawful to give Religious worship to Images under any distinctions whatsoever or if the Priests had taken away from the people their share in the sacrifices under pretence of the unsanctified teeth or the long beards of the Laity which were not fit to touch what had been offered in sacrifice to God But we need not put cases among them for our Saviour therefore bids men have a care of the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees because by their traditions they made the Commandment of God of none effect as in their Corban if they made a vow to God they thought themselves excused from relieving their Parents and in this way our Saviour generally deals with them shewing that though they pretended to keep the letter of the Law yet by their corrupt additions and false glosses they overthrew the scope and design of it which he thought sufficient reason to reject their Authority and therefore when he bids his Disciples observe and do what soever the Scribes and Pharisees bid them it must be supposed to be only while they keep to the letter and reason of the Law for if he had intended an absolute obedience he would never elsewhere bid his Disciples beware of their Doctrine 3. If it takes away all liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood in Religion For this is a natural right which every man hath to judge for himself and they that take this away may as well command all men to put out their eyes that they may better follow their Guides But the other is so much worse because it is an assault upon our understandings it is a robbing us of the greatest talent God hath committed to our management it is a rape upon our best faculties and prostituting them to the lusts of Spiritual Tyrants it is not captivating our understandings to the obedience of faith but enslaving them to the proud and domineering usurpations of men wherein they would do by us as the Philistins did by Sampson they would put out our eyes that we might grind in their prison and make them sport I would not be mistaken it is the liberty of judgement I plead for and not of practice that may be justly restrained by the Laws of the Church where the other is allowed because the obligations to peace and unity are different from those to faith and inward assent And that no absolute submission of judgement could be required by the Law of Moses notwithstanding the command of outward obedience in the cases mention'd Deut. 17. 8 9 c. is most evident from hence because that Law makes provision for a sin-offering in case the whole Congregation of Israel sin through ignorance and the thing be hid from the eyes of the Assembly or Supream Council and they have done something against the commandment of the Lord which had been a Law made to no purpose if it had been impossible for their chief Authority to have erred or been mistaken
in their judgement From hence we see St. Paul had great reason to appeal from the High Priest and Elders to the Law and the Prophets because they were subject to errour and mistake but these are not 2. Because the Law and the Prophets are less liable to partiality than a living Judge or the Authority of the present Church I have oft-times wondered to hear men speak so advantageously of a living Judge before an Infallible Rule in order to the end of Controversies If all they mean be only that an end be put to them no matter how I confess a living Judge in that case hath much the advantage but so would any other way that persons would agree upon as the judgement of the next person we met with or Lottery or any such thing but if we would have things fairly examined and heard and a judgement given according to the merits of the cause the case will be found very different here from what it is in civil causes For here the Judge must be a party concerned when his own Authority and interest is questioned and lyable to all those passions which men are subject to in their own cases Which will be notoriously evident in the case before us between the High Priest and Elders on one side and St. Paul on the other They pleaded that if any difficulty arose about the sense of the Law it belonged to them to judge of it St. Paul declines their judgement and appeals only to the Law and the Prophets had it been reasonable in this case for Felix to have referred the judgement to them who were the parties so deeply concerned A living Judge may have a great advantage over a bare Rule to put an end to controversies but then we must suppose impartiality in him freedom from prejudice an excellent judgement diligence and patience in hearing all the evidence and at last delivering sentence according to the sense of the Law if any of these be wanting the controversie may soon be ended but on the wrong side I suppose none of those who would have controversies in Religion ended by a living Judge will for shame say they would have them ended right or wrong but if they would have Truth determined they must give us assurance that these Judges shall lay aside all partiality to their own interests all prejudice against their Adversaries shall diligently search and examine and weigh the evidence on both sides and then shall determine according to the true sense of the Law How likely this is will appear by the living Judges in our Saviours time Was there ever greater partiality seen than was in them or more obstinate prejudice or more wilful errors or a more malicious sentence than came from them in the cause of our Lord and Saviour They would not believe his Miracles though told them by those that saw them when they saw them they would not believe they came from God but attributed them to the Devil they would not so much as enquire the true place of his Nativity but ran on still with that wilful mistake that he was born in Galilee and by this they thought to confound Nicodemus presently Search and look for out of Galilee ariseth no Prophet If they had searched and looked themselves they would have found that Christ was born in Bethlehem and not in Galilee But where men are strongly prejudiced any thing serves for evidence and demonstration whereas all the arguments on the other side shall be despised and contemned How captious were they on all occasions towards our Saviour lying in wait to entrap him with questions to pervert his words and draw blasphemy out of the most innocent expressions And when none of all these things could do they use all the wayes of fraud malice and injustice to destroy the Saviour of the world as a Malefactor and Blasphemer Was not here now a mighty advantage which the Authority of the present Church among the Jews of that time had above the guidance of the Law and the Prophets And the knowledge St. Paul had of the same temper being in them still might justly make him decline their judgement and appeal only to the Law and the Prophets for the ground and Rule of his faith 2. For the object of his worship he appeals to the best Antiquity I worship the God of my Fathers i. e. I bring no new Religion among you but the very same in substance with that which all the Jews have owned so some render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deo Patrio the God whom all my Brethren acknowledge but he rather understands it of the same God that was worshipped by Abraham and Isaac and Jacob quem majores nostri coluerunt so St. Peter in his preaching to the people concerning the resurrection of Christ to avoid the imputation of Novelty saith the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob the God of our Fathers hath glorified his Son Jesus and again to the Sanhedrin he saith the God of our Fathers raised up Jesus and St. Paul the God of our Fathers hath chosen thee in the use of which expressions they purposely declare that they had no thoughts of bringing in any new Religion among them contrary to what God had of old declared to the Patriarchs The main things in which the Jews objected innovation to them did either concern the bringing in some new doctrine or the reformation of corruptions among them 1. For their doctrine that either concerned the Messias or a future state For the doctrine of the Messias it was as antient as the records of any revelation from God were It was the great promise made to the Patriarchs long before the Law of Moses and even Moses himself speaks of him as St. Steven proves to them and David and Isaiah and Jeremiah and Ezekiel and Daniel and Micah and Malachi as the Apostles at large prove in their writings Why should this then be accounted any new doctrine which they all believed and received If the Question be only whether Christ were that Messias or no for that they desire nothing more than the testimony of the Law and the Prophets and the Miracles wrought by him but they had no reason to quarrel with them upon their belief for such an alteration of the state of things which themselves believed must be when the Messias came for in him not only the Nation of the Jews but all the Nations of the earth were to be blessed which was inconsistent with supposing the Ceremonial Law to continue in its force and obligation being particularly suited to one people lying within such a compass as they might three times a year attend upon the service in the Temple at Hierusalem If their quarrel was concerning a future state as though that were a new doctrine St. Paul adds in the next Verse that themselves also allow that there shall be aresurrection of the dead both of the just and the unjust And