Shiloh or the Messiah should appear he expresses it by affirming that as the Scepter which is an Ensign of Regal Power should not depart from Judah so neither a Lawgiver from between his knees Gen. 49.10 In like manner as Homer if we may joyn Profane Authors with Sacred where he speaks of the same Regal Dignity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But so also that I may return to the Scripture after it had been said that Moses commanded a Law to the Inheritance of the Congregation of Jacob to let us know by what Authority he did so the Scripture adds And he was King in Jesurun when the Princes and Tribes of the People were gathered together to receive it Deut. 33.4 5. But not to content my self with these or the like Texts which attribute the Power of Making Laws to Princes let us which will be a yet more convincing Topick at least to some Men consider the End of their Institution For if that End be not to be compass'd without the Power of Making Laws Princes must consequently be suppos'd to be invested with that Power and their Subjects under a necessity of obeying them It is the Affirmation of St. Paul Rom. 13.3 4. That Rulers are appointed by God for the encouragement of those that do good and the avenging of those that do evil Now though each of these Ends may seem to be compass'd by having a regard in them to the Laws of God and Nature yet if we do more nearly consider it we shall find they cannot compass either unless they have a Power of Making Laws For the Laws of Nature and Scripture descending not to all those Particulars which are necessary to be observ'd in order to the attaining of them hence there ariseth the necessity of a Power to draw them down to particular Instances and accommodate them to the Exigencies of their respective Governments Thus for instance though the Laws of God require the Judging of Offenders and inflicting on them such Punishments as they shall be found to deserve yet inasmuch as they prescribe nothing concerning the Manner or Time of Judging them and much less mark out the Punishments which are to be inflicted on particular Offenders hence there ariseth a necessity in Princes to prescribe when and after what manner they shall be judg'd and what Punishments they shall undergo if they be found guilty of the Crimes laid against them In like manner though the Laws of God and Nature prescribe the encouraging of the Good and doing as much as lies in Princes toward the securing and advancing of their several Properties yet inasmuch as they prescribe nothing at all by what Means that is to be done nor indeed can do by reason of the multiplicity and variety of Humane Affairs hence there ariseth a necessity of making Laws by which they may be secur'd in their several Properties or enabled to improve them to their and the States advantage Forasmuch therefore as without Laws the Good cannot be secur'd as neither Evil-doers either judg'd or condemn'd it follows that they who are appointed both for the one and the other are invested with a Power of Making Laws and consequently the Subjects under a necessity of obeying them But so that they are is yet more evident from the express Declarations of the Scripture For beside that in the fore-quoted place of St. Paul Men are required to be subject to them which as Grotius hath well observ'd imports * Rom. 8.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 5.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 3.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Obedience to their Commands as well as Submission to their Coercion Beside that disobedience in Things lawful is a resisting of their Authority and therefore the contrary to be thought to be intended in that Subjection which is there requir'd Beside lastly that he who requires every Soul to be subject doth it upon intuition of their receiving Praise from them as well as not receiving Vengeance the former whereof cannot in reason be expected where there is no compliance with their Commands to cut off all doubt concerning Obedience to them the same St. Paul admonisheth Titus chap. 3.1 not onely to put his Charge in mind of being subject to Principalities and Powers but to obey Magistrates and to be ready to every good work in compliance with their Commands as well as far from doing so much evil as to oppose themselves against their Power and Government 2. That Obedience is to be given to Princes we have seen already inquire we now by whom and after what measure For the resolution of the former whereof it may suffice to alledge that of St. Paul Rom. 13.1 â—or requiring there every Soul to be subject to the Higher Powers and neither he nor any other of the Apostles else-where making any Exception from it he thereby plainly shews that all are to be so of what Rank and Condition soever And accordingly as whatever is now pretended by the Papists for an Exemption of the Ecclesiastical Order yet no such Plea was ever made by the Priests or Prophets of the Old Testament so till Luxury and Wantonness made the Clergy forget their Duty they also were of the same mind and declar'd it both by their Actions and their Writings St. Chrysostome * Hom 2.3 in Epist ad Rom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in particular explaining every Soul by the Soul of an Apostle as well as of a Layman of one in the highest rank in the Church as well as of the most inferiour Members of Church or State 3. From the subjects of this Obedience therefore pass we to the measure of it which is both a more important question and more difficult to be resolv'd Where first of all I shall observe that it must be in such things as are not forbidden by the Almighty For as where God and Man's commands come in competition it is so clear we are to prefer those of God that St. Peter permits it to the judgment of those who commanded him to act contrary to it Act. 4.19 So that we ought to obey God rather than Princes the place they hold under God may serve for an abundant Evidence For inasmuch as Princes are only the Ministers of God they are in reason to be post-posed to him whose Ministers they are Care only would be taken first That we do not fondly and without just ground pronounce those things as forbidden by God which are imposed upon us by the commands of Princes For though we may be excus'd for not obeying where the thing commanded by Princes is so forbidden yet we cannot without sin refuse our Obedience to such commands as are not any where countermanded by the Almighty Again though we are not to obey where the matter of the Command is evidently against that of God because the Inferiour ought to give place to the Superiour yet
subject to these as well as to the Higher Powers yet with this difference as you may see 1 Pet. 2.13 14. To the King as Supreme but unto Governours as them that are sent by him Making the Authority of inferiour Magistrates to result from the will of the Supreme and consequently not to be made use of against it Neither will it avail to say that the constitution of our Nation bears witness to the contrary as by which the Sentence of a Judge in matters of Estate shall be of force not only against any private Order of the Princes but even where his own property is concern'd For as on the one side that Constitution neither reacheth any farther than matter of Estate neither hath any farther power to pass it than the Posse comitatus will afford it which at the most extends no farther than the County where the Sentence is to be executed so the reason why a Decree of the Judge shall prevail against any private Order of the Kings is not because our Law allows the inferiour Magistrate to oppose the Supreme but because the Judge being commissionated by the King himself to judge between Him and his Subjects in matters of Estate what is so sentenc'd by him is rather to be presum'd to be the will of the Prince than any private Order against it As little of force is there as to what is pleaded for inferiour Magistrates resisting the exorbitant power of the Prince because commissionated by him to draw the Sword of Justice against Offenders For as St. Paul after he had affirm'd that God had put all things under our Saviour's feet yet ceased not to add as a limitation of that affirmation that it was manifest he is excepted which did put all things under him so we may that when the Prince commissionates the inferiour Magistrates to punish Offenders it is no less manifest that he is excepted who did so commissionate him it being not to be presum'd that he who by the Laws of God and Man is constituted as supreme will commissionate any person against himself As for that saying of Trajan the Emperor when he delivered a Dagger to the Praefectus Praetorio Vse this for me if I govern rightly but if ill against me it is but agreeable as Grotius * De Jure Belli ac Pacis l. 1. c. 4. Sect. 6. hath observ'd to that Princes other demeanour who made shew of behaving himself not so much as an Emperor but as the Servant of the Senate and the people In which case there is no doubt but it might have been lawful for the Praefect to oppose him if the Senate and people should upon the Emperors default have so commanded him Because so the Emperor should not be the Supreme but that Senate and people to whose judgment he professed to subject himself But as it doth not follow that the like may be done to Soveraign Princes whose Supremacy is a bar to all attempts of the inferiour Magistrate so if Soveraign Princes should give such a Power they should neither consult their own honour nor the welfare of that Kingdom which is committed to their trust He who gives another a power against himself if he govern ill not only making him the judge whether he govern so or no but giving him a power against the Commonwealth which depends on the well-being of him that administers it From that second plea pass we to a third which is taken from those Oaths which Kings do commonly make before they are solemnly crown'd of governing the people by the Laws the government as some think seeming thereby to arise from a compact between them and their Subjects upon the breach whereof on the Kings part it may be lawful for the Subject to depart from their Allegiance and resist him in the execution of his Power For answer to which not to tell you what intolerable mischiefs would ensue from such a Tenent as often as any seditious man should go about to perswade the people they were not so well govern'd as they ought I will alledge in behalf of our own Princes farther than which we shall not need to look that which will cut the throat of this objection to wit that our Kings are to as full purpose such before their Coronation as after Witness not only their peforming all the Acts of a King but that known Maxim in our Laws that the King of England never dies From whence as it will follow that the Kings of this Nation owe not their being such to any compact between them and their people that upon any supposed breach thereof it might be lawful for the Subject to resist them so also that the Oaths taken by them at their Coronation are not to procure them that Power which otherwise they could not have but for the encouraging the people to yeild the more ready obedience to them which they may very well do when they who are to govern plight their Faith and Reputation to govern them according to their own Laws There is but one Objection behind that is any thing considerable which alledgeth that there are many Kings in Title which are not so in Reality as being not Supreme in their several Dominions In which case nothing hinders they may be resisted because the command of every Soul 's being subject to the higher powers is by St. Paul himself limited to those that are Supreme that being the true notion of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But neither will this plea be of any avail if consider'd with relation to our own Princes beyond which we shall not be concern'd to enquire Because it is certain from the Laws and Customs of this Realm that they are both the Supreme and the only Supreme Witness not only the several Titles * See Lord Chief Baron Bridgman's Speech at the Tryal of the Kings Judges that are given them such as that beforementioned The Lieutenants of God immediate from God and the heads of the Commonwealth as to their Crown of being an Imperial Crown and immediately subject to God and to no other Power but also that Power wherewith they are Invested All Laws are made by them their Le Roy le Veult inscrib'd upon all Acts of Parliament evidently shewing it all Proceedings in Law run in their name To them it belongs to Treat of War and Peace By them Parliaments are at Pleasure call'd and dissolv'd again when they think good to do it In fine all jurisdiction flows from them and is bestow'd as they are pleased to appoint All which put together make it evident that the Kings of England are Supreme and therefore to be reckoned among those higher Powers to whom St. Paul hath commanded every Soul to be subject And indeed as so to be is the interest of the People whatsoever the Prince is it having been happily observ'd that how bloody soever Nero was yet there was not so much Blood spilt in his fourteen years Raign as there was
thy duty towards God Answ My duty towards God is to believe in him to fear him and to love him with all my heart with all my mind with all my soul and with all my strength to worship him to give him thanks to put my whole trust in him to call upon him to honour his holy Name and his Word and to serve him truly all the days of my life Quest What is thy duty towards thy Neighbour Answ My duty towards my Neighbour is to love him as my self and to do to all men as I would they should do unto me To love honour and succour my Father and Mother To honour and obey the King and all that are put in authority under him To submit my self to all my Governours Teachers Spiritual Pastors and Masters To order my self lowly and reverently to all my betters To hurt no body by word or deed To be true and just in all my dealings To bear no malice nor hatred in my heart To keep my hands from picking and stealing and my tongue from evil speaking lying and slandering To keep my body in temperance soberness and chastity Not to covet nor desire other mens goods but to learn and labour truly to get mine own living and to do my duty in that state of life unto which it shall please God to call me AN INTRODUCTION TO THE EXPLICATION OF THE DECALOGUE DISCOURSE I. Of the Law of NATVRE How it doth appear that there is such a Law What the general Contents of that Law are And of what continuance its obligation is A digression concerning mens misapprehensions in the matter of Nature's Law and from whence those misapprehensions do proceed Of what use the knowledge of Nature's Law is after the superinducing the Laws of Moses and of Christ PRoposing to my self to entreat of the Decalogue or Ten Commandments according as the Catechism of the Church of England hath understood them I foresee it necessary to premise somewhat concerning the Divine Laws in general and then of the Ten Commandments in particular For as that Catechism though it restrains Gods holy will to the Ten Commandments yet doth it upon supposition of their containing in them all other his Laws and Commandments so before we descend to the Explication of those Ten it will be necessary to enquire By what Authority they stand how they come to oblige us and what measures we are to proceed by in the Interpretation of them Now the Laws of God are of two sorts to wit either Natural or Positive by the former whereof I understand such a Law or Laws as are founded upon natural principles and investigable by them by the latter such as have no other visible foundation at least than the meer good pleasure of God and are therefore to be known only by revelation from himself The Law of Nature again hath these four things to be enquired into which accordingly shall be the boundaries of my discourse concerning it 1. How it doth appear that there is such a Law 2. What the general Contents of that Law are 3. Of what continuance the obligation thereof is 4. Of what use the knowledge thereof is after the superinducing the Laws of Moses and Christ I. It is very well observed by the judicious Hooker and will be evident to any man that shall consult his own understanding that all knowledge is at length resolved into such things as are clear and evident of themselves for all knowledge of things obscure being made by such things as are more known than the things we seek after either it must terminate in such things as are clear and evident of themselves or we can have no certain knowledge of any thing That by which we endeavour to know any thing requiring still something to manifest it and so on in infinitum Now though a resolution into things clear and evident of themselves be not always actually made nor indeed necessary to be so the intermediate principles of any Science coming by discourse to be as well known as those things which are clear and evident of themselves yet being now to penetrate as it were into the very bottom of all Moral Truths it will be requisite for us to dig so much the deeper and deduce the being of the Law of Nature if not from such principles as are the lowest in their kind yet from such as are nearest to them I have * Explic. of the Apostles Creed elsewhere shewn and shall therefore now take it for granted that there is such a thing as an Alwise and good God that that God is the Creator and Sustainer of the world and all things in it which being granted it will follow that there is a right in God to give Laws to his Creatures in such things as are in their power and suitable to their nature to execute For what can be more rational than that every one should have the disposal of those things which he is the Author of and consequently if God be the Author of all things that he himself should have the command of them All therefore that will be requisite for us to enquire into is whether as God hath the power of giving Laws to his Creatures and to man in particular so he hath actually done it and consigned him to the obedience of them Now for this we shall need no other proof than that freedom of will which God hath given to humane nature for being man is not carried by any inevitable necessity as other Creatures are but left to the guidance of his own reason and will either he must have a Rule set him to proceed by or it shall be in his power even by the consent of the Almighty to disturb the order of Nature Now forasmuch as it can be no way suitable to the wisdom of any one to put Creatures into a power that I say not into a kind of necessity to disturb his own orders and designs therefore God being Alwise must necessarily have prevented this inconvenience and given him a Rule to direct his will and operations Again being it appears not that man at the first had any other revealed Law of God than that of not eating the forbidden Fruit and many Nations of the World have no opportunity to know those Revelations he hath since made it follows that God hath implanted in the soul of each particular man a Law by which he is to act or at least such principles from which he may deduce it Lastly forasmuch as there is in all men a conscience excusing or commending them when they have done any thing they apprehend to be good but disapproving and condemning them if they have done any thing which they believe to be evil it follows undeniably that there is a Rule whereby our actions are to be guided For if mankind were left at large what ground could there be of his either applauding or condemning himself for any supposed either virtuous or vitious actions Neither is
two generals the giving to every man that which is his own and where that is requisite the ministring to them of ours The former whereof as it is so plain that it hardly admits of any proof so both the one and the other receive sufficient confirmation from our natural desire of receiving the like charity and justice from others for being as the forementioned Hooker well observeth those things which are equal must needs all have one measure if I cannot but wish to receive all justice and requisite charity from the hands of others I cannot but think it reasonable to afford it and I must either condemn my own desires and that nature from whence they flow or think other mens as necessary to be complyed with III. From what hath been said concerning the Law of Nature it is evident thirdly that this Law is unchangeable or at least must continue of force so long as our nature doth for being as was before said rooted in Nature and flowing from natural causes it must consequently have the same continuance with those causes from whence it flows Thus for example to give every man that which is his own is so a duty that it can never cease to be so as in like manner to offer violence to no man not to take away any mans life or substance Indeed it sometimes happens that there seems to be a change in this Law as in those known instances of the Israelites spoiling the Aegyptians and Abrahams sacrificing his innocent Son But if it be well considered it will be found that there is not so much a change made in the Law as in the matter about which it is conversant for God having a paramount power over the Creatures and never so parting with it as not to reserve to himself a liberty to withdraw it at pleasure whatsoever he commands to be taken away doth thereby cease to be that persons whose it was before and consequently it is no violation of that Law which commands the giving every man his own to disrobe such a person of it The like is to be said concerning Abrahams sacrificing his Son or the Magistrates putting a Malefactor to death for it being not simply murther to take away a mans life but to take it away either without commission from God or without any just motive Abrahams sacrificing his Son and the Magistrates putting a man to death is no breach of that Law which forbids murther Because the former did what he did by commission from God who is absolute Lord of the Creatures and the Magistrate puts Malefactors to death by virtue of that general Commission which impowers those that are in Authority to execute vengeance upon all that do evil By which solution all pretence is taken away of drawing those actions into example and particularly that of spoiling the Aegyptians For it being evident from the Scripture that whatsoever any man how wicked soever acquires by the ordinary course of Gods providence is truly and properly his and no diminution of that appearing but by an express command from God as the Israelites had to spoil the Aegyptians to take any thing away from such a person without that command is truly and properly to take away that which is anothers and consequently eternally sinful because that Law of which it is a transgression is eternal But here a question may not impertinently be made and I shall the rather intend it because the resolution thereof may confer somewhat to the clearing of that which follows to wit how it comes to pass that this Law of Nature hath not only been so much disobeyed but so much misunderstood by those who were under the obligation of it for flowing as I have before said from natural principles the truth whereof is evident to all and being also as was now shewn eternally obligatory to all mankind it may seem a wonder how this Law should be so strangely misunderstood as experience tells us it hath been The Romans a polite and civilized people accounting it no injury to invade the Territories of their Neighbours as the whole Heathen world strangely offending against that fundamental Law which forbids the adopting of any Creature into equal honour with the Almighty In answer to which we are first to know that though the first principles of natural knowledge carry sufficient evidence in themselves and accordingly have been with great consent acknowledged by all whence it is that no Nation almost hath been so barbarous as not to own a God and that God is to be worshipped yet the deductions from those principles which are no less a part of that Law require some care and intention in those that make them which the world generally slothful not being over forward to use it is no wonder if men have many times erred in several particulars thereof for let the truth we are to know be built upon never so certain and evident principles yea upon such as are no less evident than that the whole is greater than the part yet if we attend not to the consequences of those principles we may erre in our apprehensions about them even as he who hath a light to guide him may either stumble or wander out of his way if he do not advert to those bright rays that stream from it 2. But there is yet a more weighty cause of mens misapprehensions in those things which are the Precepts of this great Law and that is the depravedness of their wills and affections and their earnest pursuit of such things as promise them any present pleasure or advantage for finding sin to minister to these and themselves strongly enclined to obtain them the desire of so doing makes them first willing to believe that which leads to them to be no impiety and then actually to believe it none for as Minutius Felix speaks facilè credimus quae volumus we easily believe that which we desire to be our passion for any present enjoyment either wholly stifling or suppressing the dictates of right reason which should keep us from the pursuing of it 3. Lastly which S. Paul expresly affirms * Rom. 1.28 and is in truth the best account of this difficulty the Heathen world liking not to retain God in their knowledge nor those Precepts of his which this great Law contain'd it is no wonder if he gave them over not only to vile affections but also to a reprobate and brutish mind for how can it be but extremely just to withdraw the light from those who shut their eyes against it when they have it and to make that their punishment which was their own choice IV. The fourth and last thing comes now to be discussed to wit What is the usefulness of this Law A question which may seem the more necessary to be asked after the superinducing of the Law of Moses and that of Christ In answer to which I say 1. That though these later Laws should acquaint us with every thing that
Reason of his Fact onely the tediousness of the Journey to Jerusalem and moreover representing his Calves as the gods that brought them out of the land of Egypt which was a known Periphrasis of the God of Israel And accordingly though Jehu who was one of his Successors departed not from the sin of Jeroboam as the Scripture observes of him 2 Kings 10.29 yet is his zeal in the destruction of Baal's Priests stil'd by himself a zeal for the Lord ver 16. and which is of much more consideration he himself intimated by the Scripture to have walked in the law of the Lord God of Israel save onely in the matter of the calves ver 31. of the same Which could in no wise be affirm'd if he and those of his Sect had renounc'd the God of Israel and worshipp'd either the Calves themselves or some Foreign Deity in them To all which if we add That Ahab is said to have offended more heinously than all that went before him because serving Baal and worshipping him 1 Kings 16.31 so we shall not in the least doubt but that the setting up of the Calf was intended onely to worship the True God in it For wherein had the great aggravation of Ahab's sin been if they that were before him had worshipp'd either the Calf it self or some of the Heathen Gods in it The onely thing remaining to be shewn is That their Worship of the Calves was Idolatry which will be no very hard Task to evince For though their Worship is no where expresly stil'd so yet are they call'd Idols which is enough to make the Worship of them Idolatry But so that they are that of Hosea is an abundant Testimony chap. 13.4 For having premis'd the Israelites making them molten images of their silver and idols according to their own understanding all of them the work of the craftsmen to let us know what Idols he means he subjoyns They say of them Let the men that sacrifice kiss the calves Forasmuch therefore as the Calves were no other than Idols forasmuch as one Egg cannot be more like unto another than the Calves of Jeroboam were to that of Aaron it must needs be because they were such and the Worshipping that of Aaron reputed Idolatry that that of Jeroboam's was so also and consequently that it is Idolatry to worship even the True God in an Image Two things there are which are commonly alledg'd against the foregoing Arguments to prove the Idolatry of the Israelites not to have had the True God for its Object 1. That what they sacrific'd to their Idols they are said to sacrifice to devils and not to God And 2. That the Prophets are frequent in inculcating That the Gods they worshipp'd were gold and silver that they could neither see nor hear nor understand which may seem to import their looking upon the Images themselves as Gods And indeed if onely one of these things had been objected possibly it might have serv'd in some measure to shroud an evil Cause but urging them both they do but help to destroy it because urging such things as taken in the strictness of the Letter are inconsistent with each other For if the Israelites worshipp'd Evil Spirits in all their Images then did they not worship the Images themselves and if they held the Images themselves for Gods then did they not worship Evil Spirits in them The onely thing remaining to be said is That some Images they look'd upon as Gods themselves and others as Representations of Evil Spirits both of which being granted will contribute little to the proving any thing against us For nothing hinders all this while but they might look upon some Images and particularly upon the Calves as Representations of the God of Israel But let us a little more particularly consider both the one and the other Allegation and see how little force there is in either It is alledg'd out of Deuteronomy chap. 32.17 That they sacrific'd unto devils and not to God But doth it follow from thence that they did so in sacrificing to Aaron's Calf when there is not onely no particular mention of it but it is also sufficiently known that they worshipp'd many of the Heathen Deities besides But be it that the Calf of Aaron were there included as well as their other Idols Yet will it follow from thence that they directly and intentionally worshipp'd an Evil Spirit in them For may not a Man serve the Devil unless after the Custom of the Indians he fall down and worship him But how then could the Widows that forsook the Faith be said to be turned after Satan for onely breaking that Faith they had plighted unto God Beside when the Devil is consessedly the Author and Promoter of all false Worship what impropriety is there in affirming those who comply with his Suggestions in it to sacrifice rather to him than to God whom they design to honour Otherwise what shall we say to reconcile what the Scripture in several places affirmeth concerning the Idols of the Heathen to wit That what the Gentiles sacrifice to Idols they sacrifice to Devils and not to God for so St. Paul tells us and again That the gods of the heathen are silver and gold the work of mens hands as the Psalmist It being impossible that both should be true in the Letter and therefore a Qualification to be admitted The onely thing therefore to be accounted for is the Scriptures so often inculcating That their Idols were but Silver and Gold that they could not either see or hear or understand which may seem to import that the Hebrews look'd upon the Images themselves as Gods But neither will this serve their turn or enervate the Conclusion before laid down because it is certain 1. They worshipp'd the Host of Heaven and erected Images to them It is no less certain 2. That the Heathen who are in like manner charg'd with the same sottish Worship look'd upon not their Images but several Dead Men as Gods whom they represented by them From both which put together it is manifest That when we find both the one and the other faulted for making Gold and Silver their Gods as those Gold and Silver Gods again decry'd for not being able to see or hear or understand we are to understand thereby that they dealt foolishly not in looking upon their Images as Gods for this few or none were so sottish as to believe but for thinking such Representations as those to be either proper Representations of the Divine Nature or fit Passports of his Worship which could neither see nor hear nor understand What remains then especially since God hath both licenc'd and commanded us so to do but that we go immediately to himself but that we fall down and kneel not before his Image but before the Lord our Maker or if we will needs worship him in an Image but that we worship him in his Son who is the brightness of his glory and the express image of
mouth Which is so true that it holds even where the Oath was drawn from us by false or deceitful Stories where the thing sworn to is to the disadvantage of him that swears or lastly where the Oath is extort'd by Threats and violence For thus 1. When Joshua and the Israelites had given their Oath to the Gibeonites That they should be suffer'd to live among them notwithstanding they who induc'd them to take it drew it from them by false and crafty Pretences yet the Sentence of the Princes of the Congregation was That they might not touch them because they had sworn to let them live Josh 9.19 Neither was this a causless Scruple of Joshua and other the Princes of the Congregation though who can easily think those Men guilty of any such who were the most eminent for Knowledge and Authority among them for when many years after Saul slew the Race of those Gibeonites with whom the Oath of the Lord had pass'd God was so displeas'd with the whole Nation for it that he visited it with a three years Famine neither would he be entreated for the Land till David had deliver'd up seven of Saul's Sons to the Gibeonites to be by them hang'd up unto the Lord 2 Sam. 12. ver 1. and so on This onely would be added That what we have said of an Oath drawn from us by Craft be understood to hold onely where that in which we are impos'd upon is not express'd as the Ground of our Oath For if that in which we are impos'd upon be expressed as the Ground of our Oath there is no doubt that an Oath so drawn from us doth not oblige Thus to instance in the former Example though the Israelites were bound by their Oath to the Gibeonites although they were no Foreigners as they pretended because the supposition of their being such was not express'd as the Ground of their League but the thing hand over head taken for granted yet if the same Israelites had made a League with them under the Name of Foreigners in that case there is no doubt because that was expresly the Ground of their League that the Oath given by them had not oblig'd them For the Oath being given to them as Foreigners could not in reason be construed to relate to any but Foreigners and consequently not to advantage the Gibeonites when it appear'd they liv'd among them For the further evidencing whereof I will instance in a Case which is produc'd by a Learned Casuist * Sanders de Juram obligat Praelect 4. Sect. 13. of our own though by him somewhat otherwise explain'd For suppose saith he that a Man should swear to a certain Person under the Name of Titia that he would marry her supposing her to be Titia when indeed she was not In this Case the Oath would not oblige him because the supposition of her being Titia was expresly the Ground of what he swore Which Resolution will appear yet more clear if we do farther suppose that the true Titia should upon that Oath of his claim him for her Husband For as the Laws of God and Man forbid him the marrying of them both so there is more reason she should have the Benefit of his Oath who was the Person express'd in it than she who had no other concernment in it than as suppos'd to be the Person In this case therefore that is where that wherein we are impos'd upon is expresly the Ground of our Oath an Oath drawn from us by deceit obliges not but otherwise as the Instance of the Gibeonites shews it ought to be held as Sacred and we to do whatsoever proceedeth out of our mouth 2. Again As an Oath obligeth unless in the former Case where it is drawn from us by the Craft of him we swear to so it obligeth also though the Matter thereof should prove prejudicial to him that taketh it the Prophet David reckoning it among the Characters of him that shall abide in God's Tabernacle That he sweareth to his own hurt and changeth not Psal 50.4 3. Lastly As neither the Craft of him we deal with can generally rescind an Oath nor yet the Disadvantage that comes to our selves by it so neither thirdly the Violence of those Persons that forc'd it from us as for example the Threats of Thieves or Pirats who have it may be compell'd us to make Oath of paying them such a Sum of Money for our Ransom For as it is evident from the Psalmist That it is the Office of a Good Man not to change though he swear to his own hurt and consequently an Oath given to a Thief or Pirate not to be rescinded upon that account so there is no reason it should be upon the account of the Swearers unvoluntariness which is that which is most stood upon in this Case For though we would not have so sworn if we could have help'd it and consequently our Oath was not perfectly voluntary Sanders de Juram oblig Praelect 4. sect 16. yet being under a fear of Death or Bondage from them we chose to oblige our selves and therefore so far willed to be oblig'd Now having willed our own Obligation what should hinder us from performing it and doing that which we not onely promis'd but call'd God to witness we meant and would perform And indeed though some Men consulting more their own Profit than the Sacredness of an Oath have made light of those Oaths when they have delivered themselves yet if they would more attentively consider it they would not be very forward to excuse themselves for not performing even such an extorted Oath For I demand of any such Whether to deliver himself from Thieves or Pirats he doth not think it lawful to make Oath of paying such a Sum of Money for his Ransom If he saith he doth as I know not any that thinks or says otherwise he saith that which will conclude him guilty of Perjury if he violate it For whatsoever it is lawful to swear rebus sic stantibus it is necessary to perform because an Oath in the nature of it is a Tie to that to which it is affix'd Generally speaking therefore as it is in the Place of Numbers before-quoted If a man swear an Oath to bind his soul with a bond he ought not to break his word but to do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth If an Oath at any time oblige not it is for the most part through 1. The inhability of the Taker or 2. The undueness of the Matter 1. Thus to instance in the first If the Person swearing be under the Power of another the Law is express That it shall be in the Power of those to whom they are subject to rescind that Oath which they have made For if saith the Scripture Numb 30.3 and so on a daughter shall vow a vow and bind her self by a bond being in her fathers house in her youth if her father disallow her in the day
Archangel had it in such abhorrence that when contending with the Devil who was sometime a glorious Angel he disputed with him about the Body of Moses yet he durst not bring even against him a railing accusation but said The Lord rebuke thee I will conclude this Particular with that of St. Peter as well for the affinity it hath with the fore-quoted Passage of St. Jude as because it will add more strength to the Prohibition of Evil speaking 'T is in 2 Pet. 2.10 11. For as he there reckons those that despise Government amongst such unjust ones whom God hath reserv'd to the day of Judgment to be punish'd so resuming their Character anew he tells us among other things that they are not afraid to speak evil of Dignities plainly intimating the so speaking to be a thing which is not onely unlawful for a Christian to do but to such a degree also as that he ought to tremble at the very thoughts of it adding moreover that the Angels themselves however mightier and greater do not bring a railing accusation against them before the Lord. They may perhaps according to their Office represent their Crimes before the Almighty they may for God's Glory and the sake of the Oppressed invoke the Divine Majesty to avenge himself upon them But remembring that how criminal soever they may be they are God's Vicegerents and of his own Divine Appointment they abstain from all reviling Speeches and rather accuse their Enormities than their Persons Now forasmuch as even the Angels who are mightier either than us or Princes themselves do yet religiously abstain from all reproachful Language of them forasmuch as Michael the Archangel durst not so treat the Devil himself because as anciently a glorious Image of the Almighty so at this very time an Instrument of his Vengeance upon ungodly Men forasmuch as both St. Peter and St. Jude reckon those who speak evil of Dignities amongst the worst yea the most obnoxious to the Divine Justice and St. Peter moreover intimates the so speaking to be a thing which a Christian ought to tremble at the thought of it is easie to guess that Princes as they are in no small consideration with God so they ought to be had in no small veneration with those over whom God hath appointed them to preside PART VI. Of that Declaration of our Esteem which is made by Obedience to the Commands of Princes the Necessity whereof is evidenc'd from their Legislative Power as that again from the Scriptures attributing that Power to Princes and from the impossibility of compassing otherwise the Ends of their Institution The same Obedience evidenced to be necessary from express Precepts of Scripture That every Soul whatsoever is under the tie of this Obedience as well of the Clergie as the Laity The onely particular Limits of this Obedience an express Prohibition from the Almighty or those which the Prince hath set to himself Of the Authority of Princes in Religious Matters which is either Indirect or Direct the former whereof is evidenc'd from the Influence Religious Matters have upon the State and which therefore are to be so far under their Inspection as the Weal of the State is concerned in them The Result of this Power the Calling or Limiting of Religious Assemblies the Appointing those that shall serve at the Altar in them or putting by those that are That Princes have also a Direct Authority in Religious Matters that is to say an Authority in them consider'd as such Where is also shewn what that Authority is and that it consists rather in encouraging or compelling those that preside in Religious Matters to do their respective Duties than to take upon themselves the Administration thereof The Result of which Authority is the Defending the Church from all both Foreign and Domestick Enemies the keeping the Members of it within their respective Duties and punishing with the Civil Sword those that shall refuse so to do the calling Councils to determine of Matters of Religion and giving force to those Things that shall be rightly determin'd by them The Accordance both of the Practice of this Kingdom and of the Doctrine of the Church with the foregoing Determination Of Submission to the Censures of Princes which is another Declaration of our Inward Esteem The Necessity thereof evidenc'd from the Power of Coercion in them which infers a like Necessity in the Subject of submitting to it Whether this Submission be to be understood where the Coercion is ill employ'd which is answered by distinguishing of Submission to wit as that is oppos'd to all Means of avoiding it or onely to forcible ones The former Submission no way necessary as appears by our Saviour's exhorting Men to flee in Case of Persecution and the Liberty that is given by the Laws to appeal to the Princes Courts of Judicature The latter Submission is of indispensible Duty as appears both by the Scripture and the Practice of the Ancient and Purest Church The like evidenc'd from the inconsistency of Resistance with Princes being the immediate Ministers of God with the End of their Institution and the Counsels of the Divine Providence The first because he who resisteth them endeavours to subject those who are God's immediate Ministers and therefore subject to no other so far at least unto himself as may secure him from the Effects of their Violence The second because leaving it in the power of the Subject to resist when he will himself which will make the Power of the Prince precarious and consequently because that depends upon it the Weal of the People which is the end for which all Governours were instituted The third because the Counsels of the Divine Providence are no less interessed in the Violence of Evil Princes than in the Power of Good Of the paying of Tribute to Princes and that it is both a Duty and a Declaration of our Esteem What Tribute to be paid to be judg'd of by the Laws IT having been before shewn That Honour in the Latitude of the Word comprehends Obedience to Commands it remains that we now inquire whether the Honour of Princes does so also by whom and in what measure that Obedience is to be paid 1. That Obedience is part of that Honour we are to give to Princes is evident from that Legislative Power which God hath given them over their respective Subjects For Laws being nothing else than Rules prescrib'd by those that give them for the regulating the Actions of those to whom they are if it be in the power of Princes to prescribe such Laws it must be the Duty of the Subject to obey them because that Power would be otherwise in vain Now that it is in the power of Princes to give such Laws to their Subjects will appear first of all from the Scriptures annexing this Power to them as the main of that Authority by which they shine Thus for instance when Jacob would describe the continuance of the Regal Dignity in Judah till
it ought to be exerted to wit not in determining of them according to their own will and pleasure and much less in invading the Office of the Priesthood which we know he that attempted was strucken with a Leprosie for but in defending the Church from all both Foraign and Domestick Enemies in keeping the Members of the Church within their respective Duties and punishing with the civil Sword those that shall refuse so to do in calling Councils to determine of matters of Religion and giving force to those things that shall be rightly determin'd by them For as more than these cannot be legitimately inferr'd from those places we have made use of to establish the Authority of Princes by so that they cannot rightly claim more the nature of the Church according as I have before stated it shews For since the Church by the Institution of Christ is endow'd with a power in determining in things relating to it self since also the secular Powers as well by their Baptism as the precepts of the Scripture are bound to be defenders of it for he who gives up himself to the Christian Religion doth thereby profess that he will perform his proper part in it and therefore if he be a King the part of a King it must needs be that their Authority in sacred matters should consist rather in obliging the several members of it to their respective duties than in determining of their own head concerning them The same is no less evident from the practice of Christian Princes in calling together a Council as often as any thing hath stood in need of a definition For as Mr. Thorndike * De ratione ac jure finiendi controversias hath well observ'd he who calls a Council of Bishops to make a Decree to receive a civil sanction from himself doth thereby profess as well that it belongs to the Church to determine in it as to himself to pass that Decree into a Law Which is so true as the same Mr. Thorndike ‖ Ibid. hath observ'd that though Constantius the Emperour would fain have undone what had been decreed by the Council of Nice yet he never attempted it but by Decrees of other Councils which shews what opinion was had of the Authority of the Church even by the Enemies of the Church it self These two things only seem necessary to be subjoin'd that we may give Christian Princes the whole of what is due to them 1. That it belongs to Princes to judge what is rightly or not rightly decreed by the Church and according as they shall judge either to give or withold their assent and 2. That though in things dubious or not at all determin'd by Councils the Prince is to expect the decision of the Church yet there is no necessity of so doing where the thing is evident from the word of God or hath been generally defin'd by former Councils For as where the word of God is clear the Prince need no other warrant who by that word it self is call'd upon to serve the Lord and add the force of his Sanction to the general Injunctions of it so where the thing hath been generally defin'd little doubt can be made of Princes passing what is so into a Law partly because it hath been in some measure defined by the Church and partly because it is to be presum'd the Church gives way to a more particular determination where the thing doth require a present definition or is not of such moment to require the calling of the Bishops from their several charges with the far greater detriment of the Church over which they are appointed to preside In the mean time as it is not to be deny'd that those Princes shall best provide for the peace of their own Consciences who shall not ordinarily determine of Ecclesiastical affairs without the consent of the Church or at least of some of the principal Bishops of it so we can never sufficiently commend the Institutions of this Kingdom whereas in the Parliament the place where all Laws are framed the Bishops have the principal place so the commands of King and Parliament in Ecclesiastical Affairs do for the most part follow the Canons dereed by our Convocations For after this manner both now and heretofore the Book of Common Prayers underwent the Examination of a Convocation before the use of it passed into a Law and extraordinary Forms of Prayers are approv'd by some Bishops before they have the Kings Mandate affix'd to them I will conclude this Discourse with the Doctrine of the Articles of our Church because exactly according with what I have before delivered For as the 20th of those Articles declares the Church to have power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in controversies of Faith so the 37th not only excludes from Princes the ministring either of Gods word or of the Sacraments but makes their Supremacy to consist in ruling all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restraining with the civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers To which as I know not what any reasonable man can oppose because so exactly distinguishing between the Churches Power and that of Princes so I see not how any reasonable man where the Authority of Princes keeps within these bounds can think himself exempted from yeilding obedience to it He who commits the care of the Church to secular Princes necessarily allowing them a superintendency over it and consequently also where that superintendency is not manifestly made use of to the prejudice of Religion obliging all the Members of the Church to yield obedience to their Commands How we are to honour Princes by our Obedience hath been at large declar'd It remains that we also shew both that we are and how we are to honour them with submission to their Censures Which will appear first of all from that Authority wherewith they are invested of drawing the Sword of Justice against Offenders For as an Authority to Command infers a necessity of Obedience in all those that are subjected to it so a Power of Coercion a like necessity of Submission to it in all those who are subjected to it The onely thing of difficulty is Whether that Submission be necessary where the Power of Coercion is us'd against those who seem to themselves and it may be not without reason to have done nothing to deserve it For inasmuch as the Sword of Justice is committed to Princes for the avenging of such onely as are Eyil doers it may seem but reasonable to infer that they who are not Evil doers are free from submitting themselves to the Stroke of it And indeed if the Question be concerning the avoiding of it by Flight there is no doubt it is in the power of the Subject who conceives himself not to have deserv'd it so to avoid if he can the falling under the Power of it Our Saviour having expresly given leave that if we be
evidenc'd from the prospering of Christianity under the Primitive Persecutions An Answer to that Plea which is made for Inseriour Magistrates resisting upon the account of their being Publick Persons and by the Prince himself Commissionated to execute Justice The former of the two Pretences evidenced to be vain because though the Inferiour Magistrate be a Publick Person in respect of his Fellow-Subjects yet he is but a Private one when considered with relation to the Supreme The Case of the Decree of a Judge prevailing against any private Order of the Prince shewn not to make at all for Inferiour Magistrates resisting the Supreme because the Prevalency of that Decree is founded upon the Presumption of its being the Will of the Prince rather than any private Order against it The latter Pretence of Inferiour Magistrates being Commissionated by the Supreme to punish Offenders shewn to be more vain than the former because it is not to be presum'd that he who by Divine and Humane Law is Supreme will Commissionate any Person against himself That famous Saying of Trajan to the Praefectus Praetorio Hoc pro me utere si rectè impero si malè contra me rather a piece of Ostentation than any real Intendment of his but however no way suitable to the Mouth of the Supreme Magistrate Another Plea for Resistance drawn from Princes swearing before their Coronation to Govern according to the Laws that seeming to imply a Compact between them and their Subjects upon the breach whereof on their part the Subjects may depart from their Allegiance and resist them in the Execution of their Power This Plea evidenced to be vain as to the Kings of England because fully such before their Coronation and the Reason of such Oaths declar'd The like Vanity shewn in that other Plea which alledgeth That some Kings are such rather in Title than Reality and consequently not Supreme in their Dominions Where the Supremacy of our own Kings is evidenced both from their Titles and their Actions Of the Honour of Inferiour Magistrates and what the Grounds thereof are which are shewn to be The Authority they have from God for the Deputing of Inferiour Magistrates and their actual Deputation of them The former of these evidenc'd from the impossibility of their discharging the Duty of their Place without it as the latter from their being God's Ministers in solidum in those Places where they are appointed to Preside Those Inferiour Magistrates which are invested by lesser Powers no prejudice to the forementioned Ground because those Powers do what they do by Commission from the Prince The Honours of the Inferiour Magistrate the same upon the matter for the Kind with those of the Supreme but different as to the Measure which also is there declar'd That the Honour which is to be paid to them be with subordination to that of God the Supreme Magistrate and those of Higher Authority than themselves in fine that it be according to the Measure of that Authority which is imparted to them and according to the Pleasure of him by whom it is imparted The Result whereof is 1. That if the Inferiour Magistrate command any thing which is not within his Commission it is lawful to disobey him 2. That in case of hard Measure shew'd by him we may appeal from him to the Superiour 3. That as they who have a greater Authority ought to have a greater Honour and they who have a less Authority a less so the precise Measures of them are best learn'd from the Laws because the clearest Declarations of the Pleasure of the Prince A short Paraenesis to Inferiour Magistrates where somewhat also of their Duty is describ'd 3. HAVING in the foregoing Discourses establish'd the Grounds and shewn the Kinds of Honour that are due to Soveraign Princes nothing more seems requisite to be done than to shew why and in what manner or measure we are to honour those Persons that are Commissionated by them But because some Mens impatiency of the Yoke of Government hath made them willing to find out Reasons to licence them to shake it off and after that actually to believe them I think it not amiss before I proceed any further both to propose and and answer their Objections That it is not lawful to resist the Supreme Powers even when they make use of their Power against the Innocent hath been at large declar'd and confirm'd both from Reason and Scripture and possibly not without effect as to the Resisters themselves if there wanted not some specious Reasons to take off the force of it as to some particular Cases Of this nature is first those Princes opposing themselves oftentimes against God and against that Religion which he hath establish'd in the World For though we may be oblig'd to sit down tamely under the Violence of Evil Princes when that Violence reacheth no farther than our Persons yet who can think the same Patience necessary when Religion it self is struck at which we are in reason to prefer before all other Considerations In answer to which not to tell you as I well might that Submission to Princes is an undoubted Duty of Christianity and consequently that the contrary thereof is no proper Means to defend Christianity by Not to tell you moreover that that God who hath commanded our Submission to the Higher Powers hath no where derogated from that Command by the exception of any Case And what reason have we to distinguish where the Law of God doth not Not to tell you thirdly that the Princes to whom the Apostles requir'd Men to submit were both foretold by our Saviour * Mat. 10.18 to be Persecutors of Christianity and shew'd themselves to be such in a more than ordinary manner which made it reasonable for the Apostles to except the Case of Religion if that had been intended by God to be so Lastly not to tell you that to allow of Resistance upon colour of Religion would have opened the Gap to all manner of Seditions both because it had been easie to adapt that Pretence to a thousand Cases and because Religion comprehends within it the Whole of a Christians Duty But not I say to insist upon any or all of these which yet are a sufficient Prejudice to the Exemption pleaded for I shall chuse rather to shew which will come up more closely to the Objection That Religion gains as much or more by a patient Submission to Persecuting Princes than it can be suppos'd to do by opposing our selves against them For the evidencing whereof I will first inquire What Religion may rationally be suppos'd to gain by opposing Persecuting Princes 2. What it may hope for from submitting to their Coercion And 3. and lastly compare them both together I begin with the first of these even What Religion may be suppos'd to gain by opposing the Persecutors thereof For the resolution whereof the first thing I shall return is That the utmost it can be suppos'd to gain above what
commands Submission to the Froward for Servants to oppose themselves so if they should be allow'd to do so it would introduce a greater confusion in Families than either the Peace of them or of the State would be consistent with 4. What Honour is due from Servants to their Masters hath been at large declar'd and thereby so far as this particular is concern'd the main intendment of the Commandment discharg'd But because I have often said that the Commandment which is now before us was intended also to comprehend the duty of Superiours toward Inferiours as well as of Inferiours toward them I think it not amiss to speak somewhat of the duty of Masters toward their Servants and the rather because oftentimes they stand as much in need of an admonition as the other In order whereunto following the division before laid down I will consider the duties of Masters toward their Slaves and and then of their duties toward such as though their Servants yet are so in a more ingenuous way Now though the Authority of Masters over Slaves be undoubtedly much greater than that over other Servants though anciently as Justinian * Institut tells us they had the power of Life and Death and were not accountable for it though they put them to death unjustly yet as the Roman Laws * Lib. 1. tit 8. sect 2 3. set bounds to that exorbitant Power of theirs and our own hath yet more retrench'd it so if we consult the Laws of Nature and Christianity we shall find there is more owing from them unto their Slaves than is ordinarily thought fit to be paid Of this Nature is first Furnishing them with Food and Rayment in such a proportion as may suffice the necessities of Nature this being absolutely necessary to enable them to the performance of that Service and Labour which they exact Of the same nature is secondly The imposing such Tasks upon them as is not above their strength to perform this being no more than common humanity requires of which Slaves are equally partakers with our selves But such also is it thirdly Not to punish them above the demerit of their Crime nor above what their Strength will bear Justice requiring that the Punishment do not exceed the Proportion of the Offence and common humanity that it pass not the bounds of their Natural Abilities In fine for so St. Paul plainly intimates where he commands Masters to give unto their Servants that which is just and equal their Commands and Punishments ought to extend no farther than the Laws of the place give leave or Equity and Christian Charity permit which to be sure will not only exclude all Cruelty and Injustice toward them but impose a necessity upon the Master of shewing such Compassion to them as their Weakness or Necessities may at any time require In the mean time though I no way doubt but Masters are to give unto their Slaves that which is just and equal and consequently to abstain from all Cruelty either in their Commands or Censures yet I think it necessary for them to submit both to the one and the other where the burthen which is impos'd is not above the proportion of their strength partly because St. Peter commands subjection to the froward and difficult and partly because that they have so much as their life is owing either to the mercy of their present Masters or of those from whom they were purchas'd From the duties of Masters to their Slaves pass we to the duties of the same to their Servants such I mean as are so in a more ingenuous way Where first of all I shall make no difficulty to affirm as I suppose neither will any man so grant that all those things are undoubtedly owing to Servants which are from a Master to his Slave the condition of Servants being much better than that of Slaves and therefore to be sure not to require less of their Masters than the other As little difficulty can be made that all that is owing to them from their Masters which at the entrance upon their service they do expresly covenant to afford them a Promise even where there is no other Obligation making the party promising a Debter and how much more then where there is a valuable consideration to engage him But from hence it will follow first Where there is any such thing covenanted that they are to give them the promised reward or wages and that too at or near the time wherein they become due to them he paying less than he ought who pays not at or near the the time because depriving the party to whom he owes it of that use and advantage which he might and which because it is his own it is fit he should receive by it It will follow secondly where that is a part of the Contract that Masters carefully and faithfully teach their Servants that Trade for the Learning whereof they become Servants to them which is the rather to be observ'd because it is oftentimes through sloathfulness omitted or basely and invidiously conceal'd at least as to the cheifest Mysteries thereof as if a Contract could be satisfied by paying one half the thing contracted for and it may be too the less considerable one I observe thirdly That in such Servants as are by Contract to receive their whole maintenance from their Masters a regard is to be had not only of what necessity but what the condition of that Service into which they are assum'd requires For by how much the more Ingenuous the Service is so much the more free in reason ought to be the entertainment of those that are in it especially when as it mostly happens paying accordingly to their Masters for it Whence it is that no Man of reason doubts but that the Apprentice of a Merchant or other such more liberal Profession should be treated in a better fashion than one of a man of a more inferiour one or an ordinary Serving Man to the same I observe fourthly That as care is to be taken on the one hand that they afflict not their Servants with immoderate Labours or Punishments so also on the other hand that they suffer them not to be Idle nor be sparing of just Chastisements when they deserve them the omission of that not only proving the bane of their Servants but being a falsification of that Trust which is reposed in them by their Servants Parents and an injury to the Commonwealth which by their slothfulness or cowardise is like to have so much the worse Subjects Fifthly and Lastly more than which I shall not need to say unless it be to exhort them to the practise of what they are thus bound to It is incumbent upon all Masters of Families to restrain their Servants from all Vitious Courses and both prompt and oblige them to the practise of Religious Duties not indeed by any direct obligation upon them from their Authority which reacheth rather to Temporal than Spiritual matters
whence it is that they are call'd Masters according to the Flesh but by virtue of that Great Law of Christianity which commands Men as much as in them lies to promote the business of Religion Which lying more in Masters powers than in other Mens by means of that Authority they have over them there doth from thence arise an Obligation upon them to promote Religion by their commands in all those which are subjected to their Dominion And indeed as that which is honest will very rarely be found to be separate from profitable if Men would estimate the advantageousness of a thing by that which is most certainly and lastingly so so there cannot be a more compendious way to promote our Interest in the World than by endeavouring as much as in us lies to make those Religious whom we employ Because as what such do is most faithfully and diligently done so it is most likely to be prosper'd by the Divine Providence from whom as all other good Gifts so this Worlds Wealth will be found to come PART XI Of the Promise wherewith the Duty of this Commandment is enforced and what the due importance of it is Where is shewn 1. That the Blessing here promis'd is a long and happy Life and particularly in the Land of Canaan 2. That that Blessing is to be expected from our Parents as well as from God partly by that sustenance and encouragement which our Honour will prompt them to afford and partly by their Intercession with God for us Vpon occasion whereof the efficacy of a Parent 's blessing is declar'd and the reasonableness of Children's desiring it of them is asserted 3. That the Blessing here promised implies a contrary Curse to the Violators of the Commandment as is evident both from the ineffectualness of a single Promise to perswade and the denunciations of God elsewhere Whether or no and how far the promise belongs to us Christians Evidence of its belonging to us from the obligation of that Duty to which it is annexed and from St. Paul's making use of it to perswade the Ephesians to the performance of the other An Essay toward the shewing in what manner and measure it appertains to us Where first is made appear that it appertains not to us in the same manner and measure wherein it did unto the Jews Evidence hereof from its referring to the Land of Canaan which was the proper Portion of the Jews and from the nature of those earthly promises that were made to them those as they were not clogg'd with the same exceptions wherewith they are now so intended in a great measure as shadows of more substantial Blessings That this and other such like Promises appertain to us First and chiefly in the Mystery or Substance where withal is shewn what the Mystery here adumbrated is even a Happy and Immortal Life in Heaven That they appertain to us also in the Letter but not without the exception of Persecutions nor yet any farther than they shall be found to be subservient to our Spiritual welfare and the Glory of God and of his Gospel Enquiry is next made whether or no and in what proportion the present Promise doth belong to the Observers of the several Duties of this Commandment That it belongs in some measure to all is evidenced from the extensiveness of the Duty which the Promise is in reason to answer But first and principally to the Honourers of Parents because that is the only Duty expressed and because that tye which Parents have upon us approacheth nearest unto that whereby the Honour of God is bound upon us The honourers of other Superiours more or less entitled to it according as those Superiours approach neerer to or are farther removed from our Natural Parents The consequence whereof is that it belongs more to the honourers of our Civil and Spiritual Parents than to other Superiours as again more to the honourers of our Civil than Spiritual ones because the former have a greater Interest in our Temporal Being The Explication concludes with enquiring what appearance there is of the literal completion of this promise Evidence hereof in the Honourers of our Natural Parents from the observations both of Greeks and Jews As in the Honourers of other Superiours and particularly of our Civil or Spiritual Parents partly from the orderliness of their behaviour which is more likely to be successful than Turbulent and Seditious ones and and partly from their preventing those Wars and Confusions which do principally occasion the shortning of Mens days II. HAVING entreated at large in several Discourses of the Duty here enjoin'd as well that which we owe to our Civil and Spiritual Parents together with all other kinds of Superiours as that which we owe unto our Natural ones it remains that we proceed to the Promise wherewith it is inforc'd of the prolongation of our days For though the words wherein it is express'd look rather like a Motive drawn from the Consequents of our Honour than a Promise of what God will bestow upon it yet as that Law-giver who proposeth any thing under the Notion of a Motive must if he Act like a Law-giver both represent that which is advantageous and moreover if the thing depend upon his Will an assurance of his own readiness to contribute towards it which is the very formality of a Promise so that that which God proposeth under that Notion was intended as a Promise St. Paul gives us to understand Ephes 6.2 He there stiling this Commandment a Commandment with a Promise and the first of that Nature meaning thereby the first of the Decalogue to which there was any express and special one Taking it therefore for granted that the words now before us have the nature of a Promise to the due observers of this Commandment I will make it my business to enquire 1. What is the due importance of it and 2. Whether or no and how far it appertains to us Christians upon the performance of the duty enjoin'd 3. Whether and in what proportion it belongs to the several duties therein contain'd I. Now there are three things within the resolution whereof the answer to the first of these will be comprehended 1. What the Blessing here promised is 2. From whom it is to be expected And 3. Whether it implies any thing of a Curse to the violators of the Commandment 1. What the Blessing promised is we shall not be long to seek because so particularly expressed in this place and in the parallel one of Deuteronomy chap. 5. 6. it being evident from them both that a long life is promised from that of Deuteronomy * And that it may go well with thee that that life shall be happy as well as long and from both again that that long and happy life should be spent in their own Country and particularly in the Land of Canaan that being the Land promised by God unto the Israelites and to which this Promise and in a
It is true I say that the Subject of that Voice is not express'd and much less is it affirm'd that it call'd for Vengeance But as it is not to be imagin'd that that should call for any thing else when we find God himself subjoyning so severe a Curse against him that had been the Shedder of it so that it did not will be made more than probable by the cry of the souls under the Altar even the Souls of those Persons that were slain for the Word of God and the Testimony that they held Rev. 6.9 10. the Subject of their Cry being no other than How long holy and true dost thou not judge and avenge our blood upon them that dwell on the earth But so we find also which may serve for a farther confirmation that because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrha was very great or rather of the Sins of their Inhabitants as you may see Gen. 18.20 therefore the Lord sent Angels to destroy them Gen. 19.13 For as it is apparent from thence that the Subject of their Cry was no other than the Vengeance of the Sinners so that the Cry of foul Crimes is so loud and earnest that God cannot be at rest till he hath dispatch'd the Instruments of his displeasure The result of the Premises is this That all hainous Sins are in Scripture said to have a Voice and that that of Murther is as loud as any and then we may have leave to conclude it to be one of the first Magnitude because it is so importunate for Vengeance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Murther is not more clamorous in the Ears of the Almighty than it is in his who is guilty of it which though intended onely to represent the Horrours it creates in the Conscience of the Man of blood was yet literally true in him of whom Plutarch speaks in his Book De serâ Numinis vindictâ For passing one day by a Nest of chattering Swallows he thought he heard them upbraiding him with the Murther he had committed and his Ears were no less filled with the noise of his own horrid Act than his guilty Conscience was And indeed if as the Scripture speaks Sin lies at any Persons doors the Sin of the Murtherer doth being ever ready to fly in his Face and afflict him with the remembrance of it Of which though it were easie to alledge other convincing Proofs and particularly those Spectra or Representations of the murthered Party which they themselves have often complain'd to have disturb'd their Repose yet I shall chuse rather to represent as being both more apparent and more convincing their own easie discovery of the Murthers they have been guilty of For well may we think the disquiets of those Mens Consciences to be great who chuse rather by such a Discovery to expose themselves to the Severity of the Law than lie any longer under the secret Lashes of the other What should I tell you of the inquisition God is said in Scripture to make after it of the strange and unusual ways he makes use of to discover it of the discovery that hath been sometime made by the Corps * Thuan Hist l. 32. pag. 159. of the Murthered Party of the sure and certain Vengeance that attends it For as these are so known both from History and our own Experience as not to admit of any the least doubt so all of them do sufficiently proclaim Gods detestation of the Crime and what dread it ought to be held in by us 2. The Criminalness of Murther being thus explain'd proceed we to inquire what killing is to be accounted such In order whereunto 1. The first thing I shall observe is That all killing is not so to be esteem'd because where God first of all forbids the shedding of Blood he doth not onely except the shedding of the Blood of the Murtherer but enjoyns the effusion of it For thus Gen. 9.5 not contented to affirm that he himself would require the life of man at the hand of that whether man or beast that should invade it he subjoyns in the next words that whoso sheddeth mans blood by man should his blood be shed Neither will it avail to say That if any Limitation be admitted we must find out other Reasons for the prohibition of Murther than those we have before laid down For beside that the killing of the Murtherer is not onely not injurious to Humane Society but on the contrary a great Safeguard to it as by means of which other Men may be deterr'd from offering the like Injury to it beside that the slaying of the Murtherer though it take away his Life yet doth it not without just cause and cannot therefore be said to offer an irreparable Injury to him it offers no Affront to the Divine Nature by the violation of that Image of God which is suppos'd to be upon him Partly because the Murtherer hath in a great measure defac'd that Image as well upon himself as the Party slain and partly because the slaying the Murtherer conduces to the Glory of God himself which is in reason to be preferr'd before the preservation of his Image The Murtherer hath indeed the Image of God upon him though much defac'd and upon that account ought to be look'd upon with a proportionable Respect but as an Image is in reason to yield to the Honour of that of which it is so because deriving all its Lustre from it so it ceases to be Sacred where it cannot be preserv'd without the violation of his Honour whom it was design'd to represent 2. That all Killing is not Murther or the Killing here forbidden enough hath been said to shew Proceed we now to inquire what is or is not to be accounted such For my more orderly resolution whereof I will consider the Act of Killing 1. As purposely effected or 2. As casual and beside the Intention of the Doer The former again will require a double Consideration according to the different sort of Persons by whom it may be effected which are either such as are invested with Publick Authority or such as are onely Private Persons If the Question be concerning the former killing by such as are invested with Publick Authority so it is not to be look'd upon as Murther or as the Killing here forbidden where the Authority is competent the manner legal and the Party that is kill'd deserves it For beside that where God first forbids the shedding of Blood he commands the shedding of the Murtherers to wit as the Chaldee Paraphrase well interprets it upon proof made by witnesses and by the Sentence of the Judge beside that under the Law of which this Commandment was a part there was both leave and command to those that were in Authority to take away the Lives of Offenders which shews that that Killing was not here intended we are told for Christianity by St. Paul that the Powers that are have the Sword of Justice committed to them for what
reason think we but to make use of it upon occasion and as it follows in that Apostle to execute vengeance with it upon all those that do evil Neither will it avail to object That the same St. Paul forbids Christians the avenging of themselves and which is more upon the account of Vengeance belonging to the Lord. For as immediately after that he admonisheth Magistrates to execute Vengeance which shews that so far they were not intended in the former Prohibition so the Reason that is alledg'd doth not onely not include Magistrates but on the contrary shew them not to be intended For though Magistrates are not Gods unless in a secondary sense and as the Images and Substitutes of the True yet being his Ministers and Ministers to execute Vengeance what is inflicted by the Magistrate doth not onely not cease to be God's but is on the contrary to be look'd upon as one of the ways of God's repaying it which shews it rather to be their Duty than their Offence Care onely would be taken that as it is God's Vengeance which they execute so they do it with regard to the Command of God and not to gratifie their own Malice otherwise they avenge not God but themselves which is a thing no where permitted to them What Killing is lawful on the Magistrates part hath been shewn already proceed we to inquire what killing is forbidden which will not be hard to judge after the explication of the other For it appearing from the Premises that no other Killing is lawful to them than what is annex'd to their Authority it will follow that all that is forbidden which either proceeds from an incompetent Authority or is illegally and undeservedly executed The same is to be said of killing in War as is of that which is effected by the Hand of the Executioner For as no doubt can be made but that it is lawful for Princes to make War and consequently to kill where the State which is under their inspection cannot otherwise be secur'd so it is no less unquestionable that War is not where they who make it have either not Authority so to do or levy it without a just provocation For Vengeance as St. Paul tells us belonging unto God and to those whom he hath entrusted with the Execution thereof it can be no farther lawful for the Magistrate to execute it than is within the power of his Commission to do Upon which account all unprejudic'd Men must condemn the War of the late Long Parliament because it is sufficiently known the Power of War was not in them till they did in an unlawful manner assume it unto themselves In like manner the Execution of Vengeance being entrusted to Princes to make use of against those that do evil that and the Actions that attend it must be look'd upon as unlawful where it is directed against those who have done nothing to deserve it This onely would be added for the sake of those who are by Princes appointed to draw the Sword in War That it is not necessary for them to know the Justness of that Quarrel in which they do so kill and slay For inasmuch as Private Persons neither do nor can well understand the Justness of any Publick Quarrel because to the understanding thereof it is requisite they should be acquainted with the great Transactions of their own State and of that against which they make War which it is not to be suppos'd Private Persons should be able certainly to attain either it shall be lawful for them to withdraw their Assistance from the Prince which must prove the bane of the State or they must be content to serve him in his Wars without any such knowledge of the Justness of his Quarrel Again Forasmuch as the making of Wars and other such Publick Matters belong properly to him to whom God hath committed the Sovereign Power it must be left to him to judge whether that Quarrel wherein he engageth be such as is just and warrantable It may be enough to the Subject that he doth not know it to be unjust and that he is commanded by the Prince to serve him in it For however he may thereby be sometimes engag'd in an unjust Quarrel yet the blame thereof shall fall not upon him who is neither concern'd nor qualified to judge of it but upon the Prince who is both and by whose Authority the War is levied This onely would be added That as the Commission * Tull de Officiis lib. â— Pampilius Imperator tenebat provinciam in cujus exerâ—iâ—u Catonis filius tiro militabat Cum autem Pompi to videretur unam legionem dâ—mittere Catonis quoque filium qui in eadem legione militabat dimisit Sed cum amore pugnandi in exercitu remansisser Cato ad Pompilium scripsit ut si eum pateretur in exercitu remanere secundo cum obligaret militiae sacramento quia priore amisso jure pugnare cum hostibus non poterat See also Sanderson's Case of a Military Life of the Prince is the onely Warrant the Subject hath to interest himself in War so it will become him for that reason to take care that private Revenge do not push him on to do further mischief than it is the intention of the Prince he should Upon which account I cannot but highly commend the Carriage of one of Cyrus his Soldiers as which is a noble Instance both of his Humanity and observation of Discipline For having as Xenophon informs us in the time of Battel lift up his Hand to strike his Enemy when he heard the Trumpet begin to sound the Retreat he let fall his Arm and willingly lost his Blow because he thought the time of striking past Of killing by Publick Persons I have spoken at large and both shewn what is and what is not to be accounted Murther It remains that we inquire concerning killing by Private Persons which will require no great pains to resolve For the Execution of Vengeance being challenged by God to himself and to those to whom he hath committed the Sword of Justice it will follow that the Execution of it belongs not to private Persons and consequently that generally all Killing by them is Murther If there be any Case wherein it may be lawful for a Private Person to kill another it must be when a Man is set upon by another and forc'd to it in his own defence In which Case as we have the Warrant of the Law of God in part to secure us which acquits that Person from Murther who should slay a Thief that was found breaking in upon him in the Night Exod. 22.2 3. so it will be found not to be without Licence from the Law of Reason and Nature partly because in the Case of a sudden Onset we can have no recourse to the ordinary Means of Defence I mean the Patronage of the Magistrate and partly because those whom God hath entrusted with the Power of Vengeance do empower
exception must be look'd upon as trivial in respect of that Gospel state under which we are the Law of that both remitting us to what Marriage was from the beginning and adding its own suffrage to it I will conclude this particular with that of Malachy because standing as it were in the confines of the Law and Gospel 'T is in the 2. Chapter of his Prophesies Vers 14. and so on Where having alledg'd against the Jews Gods regarding not their Offering nor receiving it with good will at their hands he not only assigns for the reason of it their dealing treacherously with the Wife of their Youth but combates that with this following Argument For did not he even God make one yea though he had the residue of the Spirit that is to say as Drusius glosses on the words did he not make one Male and one Female and when he had done so make them one flesh yea though if he had pleased as wanting not breath to animate them he might have made and given more Wives to our Father Adam And wherefore one as the Prophet there goes on but that he might seek a godly seed that is to say as the forequoted Drusius glosseth it that from that one flesh into which those two were combin'd a lawful progeny might descend The second Law of Marriage relating to the persons is that those between whom it is contracted be not too near of kin to each other For the understanding whereof we will first of all entreat of such as are to one another in the place of Parents and Children As if a Father for example should marry his Daughter or his Sons or Daughters Daughter or a Mother her Son or her Sons or Daughters Son For that such Matches are unlawful even by the Law of Nature is evident from hence that they destroy that reverence which we have before shewn to be due from their Children to them Thus for instance When a Mother marries her own Son or Grand-son from whom by the Laws of Nature there is the highest reverence due inasmuch as by vertue of her marriage she subjects her self to him she leaves no place for that reverence which was before due unto her as a Mother And though the like seem not to happen where a Father marries his Daughter or Grand-daughter because he who was before Superiour continues so still inasmuch as he is the head of her whom he so takes unto his Wife yet doth it in part destroy that reverence which was due unto him as a Father Because though as Husband he be still head of his Child yet he is not in the same measure as a Father because Marriage induceth a kind of parity between those who enter themselves into that State The same is to be said in some measure where the Son marries his Fathers Wife or the Niece and Nephew their Uncle and Aunt because as was heretofore shewn they are unto the former in the place of Parents and consequently must needs loose the reverence of such by being assum'd into such a State as induceth such a Society that excludes it Whence it is that we find St. Paul not only declaiming against that person who had Married his Fathers Wife and representing it as a Fornication that was not so much as named among the Gentiles but in prosecution of that power wherewith he was arm'd to chastise Offenders commanding the Church of the Corinthians to cut him off from their Society and so deliver him into the power of Satan for his Chastisement 1 Cor. 5.1 5. As for those other degrees whether of Consanguinity or Affinity that are forbidden in the 18th of Leviticus such as are the Marrying of a whole or half Sister a Brothers Wife or a former Wives Daughter which are all besides those before mention'd that are expresly forbidden by it though the two former at least have not the same exception to be made against them inasmuch as they seem to contain nothing contrary to natural equity yet because they are forbidden by that Law of God which our Saviour professeth to have come not to destroy but to fulfil and that too as appears by his injunction concerning divorces in the business of Marriage and because the ground of the prohibition is not peculiar to the Jewish Policy or Religion but the nearness of Kindred which holds as much among us as among them Lastly because if such Marriages were permitted there might be danger of Fornication by reason of the free and perpetual converse that such Persons have with each other therefore I think no man of Conscience but must account such Marriages as unlawful to him as if the prohibition thereof had been entred into the Christian Law But other degrees than those or at least such as are in the same order with them as the Law of God condemns not so neither doth our Church or State do and therefore they who keep within those bounds are so far secure from offending as to that Marriage which they contract One onely thing would be added concerning marrying the Brothers Wife because it relates to a famous instance of one of our own Kings and that is that as the Law of Moses did not only permit but command the taking of the Brothers Wife where there was no Child left behind so it seems hard to suppose among Christians that it should not be lawful to do the like where not onely the case is the same as to that particular but as it was in the forementioned instance it was inconvenient to the Kingdom to let the Brothers Wifes Dowry either be spent out of it or at least go away from the Crown The third Law of Marriage relating to the Persons that enter into it is that they be of years sufficient to understand the nature of that compact which they make and to estimate the humour of those Persons with whom they are to associate lest otherwise that which was intended for a help prove a snare and an incumbrance and Marriage become not only a yoak but an insupportable one Whence it is that though Custom and the Laws do sometime give way to the joyning of Children in Marriage especially of the Nobler sort yet the same Laws give leave to the Persons afterwards to rescind their formmer Contract if they find not themselves in a disposition to confirm it Add hereunto hability of Body where there is a desire and expectation of Children and a freedom of consent in those that are so to be conjoin'd Which latter is the rather to be inculcated because of those fatal inconveniencies which arise from constrained Matches it being very rare to find a tolerable accord in those Matches to which young Persons are rather compell'd than invited But of all the qualifications relating to the Married persons the want whereof doth not null the Contract between them I think there is none more considerable than that they who Marry be so far at least of one perswasion in Religion that
shall by and by have occasion to confirm it that God hath endu'd the Husband with Authority over the Wife and commanded her to pay Obedience to it But because it is not impossible Men may arrogate to themselves a greater Authority than ever God intended them or exercise it more fully and with greater rigour than they ought therefore it may not be amiss in describing the peculiar duties of the Husband to shew him what kind of Authority he hath how it is to be exercis'd and about what For answer to which I say first that the Authority of the Husband over the Wife is not coercive but directive that is to say an Authority which priviledges him to command but not to constrain her to Obedience For being given by God to Man as a Companion * Malach. 2.14 and a helper and which is more in such a degree as to become one with him it is unreasonable to think he should have such a power over her as to constrain her to a compliance by force and violence A forcible Treatment degrading her from the condition of a Mate and ranking her among Subjects or Servants Neither will it suffice to say that so also will the laying of Commands because according to the usual saying par in parem non habet potestatem which is alike true as to Commands and Coercions For beside that by the Divine Institution the Man is priviledg'd to rule over her as you may see Gen. 3.16 beside that in this case there is not a perfect parity as the rule before spoken of shews the power of Command is not only not destructive of the conjugal Society but absolutely necessary to the maintaining of it For inasmuch as the Married parties may both entertain different apprehensions concerning such things as are to be done and also take up different resolutions concerning them if there were not a power of ruling somewhere it would be in the power of either party to obstruct the common good of both But as there is not the same necessity of a coercive Power partly because the Husband hath the Law of God to back his Commands and partly because not without a sufficient Power from the Laws of the place he lives in to be able to effect his own purposes so it is perfectly inconsistent with that Society and fellowship into which the Wife is assumed by him It may suffice the Husband that he hath the power of Commanding and in case of refusal that of Reproof and Admonition as which those of far less Authority are not excluded from but other coercion than that no Law of God gives him and is not therefore to be arrogated by him The Authority of the Husband over the Wife being thus explain'd and shewn to consist in Commands Admonitions and Reproofs proceed we to enquire how this Authority is to be exercis'd the second thing propos'd to be discoursed of For the resolution whereof though I might again take my measures from that Partnership into which we have said the Wife to be admitted yet I shall choose rather to shape my Discourse by that Love which the Husband is every where commanded to shew her who is so admitted by him For Love where it is either finding or making Persons equal especially where there is not too great an imparity between the Parties it will follow that the Commands or Admonitions of the Husband are not generally to be delivered in imperious terms and such as savour more of Authority than Kindness St. Paul having taught us by his own behaviour toward Philemon that though a Man may have power to Command yet where that will serve the turn for Love's sake he should rather entreat and not so much constrain as invite them to a compliance I say not the same where she whom God hath commanded to obey shews her self utterly averse from a compliance For in such a case to be too officious were to make himself contemptible and not only so but that Authority which God hath vested in him Only as we learn from St. Paul elsewhere * Col. 3.19 even here also a mean is to be used and though nothing hinders him to express himself in terms suitable to his own Authority yet no Law either of God or Man allows him to be bitter against her The third and last particular comes now to be discours'd of even about what the Authority of a Husband is to be conversant which if we may judge of by the obedience the Wife is required to pay appears to be every thing as you may see Eph. 5.24 But as the same Apostle elsewhere where he entreats of that very Argument adds by way of limitation as it is fit in the Lord Col. 3.18 thereby manifestly restraining the Authority of the Husband to all such things as are within the bounds of our Religion so Reason requires the limiting it to such things also as are suitable to that fellowship into which she is admitted From whence as it will follow that the Husband ought not to impose upon her such things as are more proper for a Servant or Vassal than a Wife so also that he is generally to leave the administration of Houshold affairs to her alone care and management Because as I have often said she is admitted into a Copartnership with him which cannot well be salv'd if that should be taken from her and because both St. Paul 1 Tim. 5.14 and the Laws of Nations appropriate the guiding of the house to her According to that known Proverb which the Roman Matrons were wont to use when they were brought home to their Husbands Houses Vbi tu Caius ibi ego Caia Where you are a Master I expect to be a Mistress and enjoy the priviledges of such 2. Having thus shewn the Duty of the Husband to the Wife as to that Authority wherewith he is invested over her it remains that we enquire what is due from her to him as well in respect of his Authority as her own necessary subjection to it Now though that be easie enough to infer from the foregoing Discourse and may therefore seem to require the less pains in the investigating of it yet I think it not amiss if it were only to observe a due proportion between them to be as particular in the declaration of it as I was before in that of the Authority and Duty of the Husband In order whereunto I say 1. That inasmuch as God hath invested the Man with Authority over the Wife it must be look'd upon as highly irreligious in her to be so far from submitting to it as on the contrary to usurp Authority over him Such a Behaviour bidding defiance to the order of God and Nature because not only thwarting but perverting it And accordingly as St. Paul not only proscribes it as a thing unlawful but moreover represents it as a thing not to be suffer'd 1 Tim. 2.12 So he hath also given us there to understand what is to be
their Idolatry For for this cause saith he even because they changed the Truth of God into a Lie God also gave them up unto vile affections for even their Women did change the natural use into that which is against nature and likewise also the Men leaving the natural use of the Woman burned in their lust one towards another Men with Men working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that recompence of their errour which was meet Rom. 1.26 27. 2. But neither shall I say much of Incestuous Mixtures that is to say where Persons assume to themselves though in the Band of Wedlock such as are too near of kin to them and particularly those that are to them in the place of Parents or stand upon the same level with them For beside that as was before observ'd God hath provided against such Uncleannesses by special Laws and they therefore by the Rule before laid down to be reckon'd to this Prohibition beside that as was before also observ'd they pervert the Order of Nature and destroy that Reverence which is due from Inferiours to Superiours by the Law of Nature and this of Moses that such Mixtures are no less unlawful to Christians St. Paul evidently declares in the Case of the Incestuous Corinthian he by vertue of Christs Power and his own Apostolical one commanding to deliver him up unto Satan which undoubtedly he would not have done if it had not been a Transgression of the Christian Law And though it be true that all that hath the Name of Incest is not of the same Nature as particularly when the Man marries his own Sister or Brothers Wife yet as there want not Instances among the Heathen * Ocellus Luc. De naturâ Vniversi parte pol. text 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Vid. not Vizzanii ad locum of the dislike of such Matches and particularly of that of Brothers and Sisters so they are sufficiently prejudic'd by the Inconveniences they draw after them and such as the Light of Nature prompts us to avoid For beside that if Marriage were permitted betwixt such as are so near of kin that free and continual Intercourse that is between them would in all probability take off that Shame which is the Guard of Chastity and prompt them to unlawful Desires and Enjoyments it would also as Philo ‖ De special legibus Ti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expresseth it from whom I have borrowed both the one and the other Reason shut up within the Walls of a Private Family that Charity and Communion which might otherwise diffuse it self to Continents and Islands and in fine to the whole World Marriage with Strangers as the same Philo goes on producing new Relations and Kindred and such as fall not short of that which nearness of Blood produceth 3. From Unnatural and Incestuous Mixtures pass we to that which is neither but comes up more close to the Crime that is expresly forbidden I mean the defiling of a Person which though not married yet is betrothed to another For beside that she and her Paramour no less than the Adulterer and Adulteress are commanded by God to be put to death Deut. 22.23 24. which shews that their Crimes are of near affinity with each other the Reason there given of God's severity to the Defiler is because he had humbled his Neighbours Wife plainly intimating that as when Persons are betrothed to each other though they have not pass'd the Solemnities of Marriage yet they are in the account of God as Man and Wife so being such both she and her Paramour are by the same God look'd upon as Adulterers and consequently direct Transgressors of this Commandment This onely would be added because what Betrothing is is not commonly understood as being little used among us that by Betrothing we understand not a Promise of future Marriage according as it is vulgarly taken but the actual passing over that Interest they have in themselves to those to whom they are so betroth'd and receiving back a Power over them As if a Man should say to the Woman I take thee for my lawful Wife and the Woman to the Man I take thee for my lawful Husband For though a promise of Marrriage may oblige to the performance if it be not rescinded by the joint consent of both Parties yet it doth not actually pass over to the Party to whom it is made that Power which we have over our own Bodies and consequently neither makes the Parties promising to be in the Relation of Man and Wife nor is that Betrothing which we speak of 4. How the sins before mentioned are reducible to this Commandment hath been at large declared together with such other Reasons from the light of Reason and Nature as shew them to be really criminal Enquire we therefore in the next place what is to be thought of simple Fornication that is to say where the Offenders are both single Persons Where first of all I shall take it for granted that it is to be looked upon as here forbidden if it can be otherwise made appear to be an unlawful Lust because as was before said this and other the Commandments of each Table were intended as Summaries of the Law of God and of its several both Precepts and Prohibitions Now that simple Fornication is an unlawful Lust and as such to be avoided and abhorred will appear first from what we have before said concerning the Institution of Marriage For it appearing from thence that God hath appointed that as the means whereby both to prevent the evils of Solitude and to propagate the World all other Commerce must be look'd upon as forbidden and particularly that which simple Fornication doth involve this as Grotius observes not only being distinct from Marriage but driving Men from it because promising them the same satisfaction at an easier rate I observe secondly that as simple Fornication is inconsistent with the Institution of Marriage and as such therefore to be look'd upon as unlawful so it is directly contrary to the Laws of the same God by which the Decalogue was given there being not only an express prohibition that there should be no Whore of the Daughters of Israel Deut. 23.17 but command given by God for the stoning of that Damsel which should be found to have been corrupted before Marriage because as there follows she had wrought folly in Israel to play the whore in her Fathers House Deut. 22.21 And though I know it hath been thought that there was not the like prohibition of the use of stranger Women which if true would have absolv'd the Men from the imputation of Fornication where an Israelitish Woman was not their complice in it yet as the Proverbs of Solomon set a Brand upon such Persons and upon all communication with them so that such a Fornication was no less interdicted than that with Israelitish Women St. Paul plainly shews 1 Cor. 10.8 he there ascribing that slaughter which we
Principles I shall not onely wave the arguing the generality of the Prohibition from the Latitude wherein the Word Stealing is sometimes taken but profess my self to agree with those who understand no other by Stealing than the clancular taking away of that which is another Mans that being the proper signification of the Word and so understood by all the Translators of the Decalogue And indeed as I shall by and by shew that there is no necessity at all of understanding it in a more general sense so that we ought to take it in a more restrained one the Stile of the Declalogue and particularly of the two foregoing Precepts shews For making use of Murther and Adultery which are onely particular Species of Injuriousness and Uncleanness to denote all those which are of the same Genus it is but reasonable to think especially when the Hebrew phrase inclines us to it that the Commandment we are now upon made use of one particular Crime in the matter of Injustice to express all those that are of the same nature with it Which Observation as it establisheth the proper Notion of the Word Steal for which it was primarily produc'd so withal affords no contemptible Argument of Gods intention to forbid in it all Vsurpations whatsoever or diminutions of the Properties of our Neighbours especially if we add thereto the general Design of the Precepts of the Decalogue and the Agreement of others with that which is here expresly forbidden For with what shadow of Reason can any Man think God intended no other Injustice than that which is expressed in the Commandment when beside the general Design of the Decalogue which I have shewn to have been intended as an Abstract of the whole Duty of Man and the Comprehensiveness of the two foregoing Prohibitions those Injustices which are not mentioned are alike Usurpations upon or Diminutions of Mens Properties which is the Fundamental Reason of the Prohibition I will conclude this Particular with that of Philo * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prope finem in his Tract De Decalogo where he makes this short Remarque upon the present Precept The Third Commandment saith he for so it is in his account of those of the Second Table is of not stealing under which is to be rank'd whatsoever hath the estimate of defrauding of Creditors or denying those things that have been deposited with us of medling with those things which belong to the Publick and which consequently ought not to be shar'd between Private Men as also of shameless Rapines in fine of such Covetousnesses whereby Men are induc'd either openly or privily to withdraw those things which belong to others II. Now though what hath been said may give us a competent understanding of those things which are forbidden by the Commandment it appearing from the Premises that all such are whereby the Properties of our Neighbours are any way impair'd yet because Men are seldom so wise as to apply any general Direction to their own particular Concernments or at least are not over faithful in the doing of it I think it not amiss to draw it down to particular Instances and shew the several Crimes which are here included For my more orderly enumeration whereof I will represent first of all such Usurpations or Diminutions of the Properties of Men as are distinguish'd from each other by the manner of their commission and after that proceed to those which receive their denomination and distinction from those Objects about which they are conversant And here in 1. The first place I shall not doubt to reckon as included in the Prohibition that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Covetousness whereby as Philo speaks the Heart of Man is inclin'd to usurp upon the Property of his Neighbour For though the bare coveting of that which is another Mans be the Subject of another Commandment and shall accordingly be there considered by us yet when it includes in it a Desire or Resolution to get from another that which is his by any fraudulent oppressive or any other unjust Proceeding it is in reason to be reckon'd to that Commandment which we are now upon as because the Heart is that which God principally looks after and which strikes the greatest stroke in absolving or condemning our outward Actions so because our Saviour hath reckon'd to the Prohibitions of Murther and Adultery those injurious or unclean Purposes that are in it For by the same reason that a Man of malicious or unclean Desires is to be look'd upon as a Murtherer or an Adulterer he who hath either a desire or purpose to defraud his Neighbour is to be look'd upon as a Thief and consequently within the compass of the Commandment But so that they who were Strangers yea Enemies to the Christian Faith were also perswaded is evident from a Saying of Julian's * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Grot. d. l. Annot. ad c. 1. which is recorded by Grotius in his First Book de jure Belli ac Pacis The second Law saith he and which is no less Divine than that which enjoyns the acknowledging and worshipping of a God is that which commands wholly to abstain from the Properties of other Men and permits not to confound them either in Word or Work or in the secret Operations of the Heart Words worthy of a better Mouth than that from which they proceeded but however not rendred unworthy of our regard by that blasphemous one from which they came there being nothing which the best of Religions even our own stands more commended for than the restraining of the Heart of Man from all irregular Purposes or Desires 2. But because as Julian intimates in the place before-quoted there is a Theft or Usurpation which the Tongue is an Instrument in therefore it may not be amiss to shew by what ways and means this little Member prejudiceth the Properties of its Neighbour For the more distinct explication whereof I shall consider 1. First of all of its Silence and then 2. Of its Words or Expressions 1. There is a famous Question in Tully's Book de Officiis * Lib. 3. a Book indeed read by Boys but worthy if we may believe the Learned of the consideration of the wisest Men yea of the gravest Theologues as being stil'd ‖ Le Journal des Scavans vol. 1. p. 249. by Monsieur le Fevre Master to the late King of France His Casuist and by Monsieur de Hayes and eminent Advocate of that Kingdom The Gospel of the Law of Nature But there I say there is a Question whether a Man be bound to reveal the Faults of the thing he sells On the one side there is Profit and some shew of Reason also For what saith the same Tully can be so absurd as for the Master of any House to make a publick Proclamation by the Cryer that he sells an infected one On the other side there is a greater appearance of Ingenuity and Clearness and Simplicity which
intended to provide against Whence it is that the Chaldee Paraphrast * Per testes ex sententiâ judicum sanguis ejus fundetur agreeably to the design of a Paraphrast and his own custom elsewhere explains those words Whoso sheddeth mans blood by man shall his blood be shed it shall be shed by the Sentence of the Judges upon the evidence of Witnesses Lastly for against that to be sure no exception can be made whatsoever there may be supposed to be against either of the former Laws the Law of Christ bearing witness to the Divine Institution of Regal Power of which I have heretofore * Explicat of the fifth Commandment Part 5. shewn the Power of Judicature to be a part and moreover declaring those to whom that Power is committed to have been appointed by God for the welfare and praise of the good and the avenging of such as do evil it must also be supposed because that is not otherwise for the most part to be attained to priviledge them to enquire into the causes both of the one and the other and accordingly either to incourage or punish them In conformity whereto as we find all whether Christian or Heathen Magistrates to have proceeded with the general approbation of the Word so which is more S. Paul not only submitting himself to the Tribunal of Caesar but professing himself to be under an Obligation * Acts 25.10 to be judged by it And more than this I shall not need to say of the Divine Right of Humane Judicatories and may therefore have leave to go on to enquire 2. What Persons intervene in them and what their respective Duties are As to the former part of this Query little need to be said because every mans own observation can inform him that the Persons principally concerned are the Plaintiff the Defendant their respective Advocates the Witnesses and the Judge The only thing worthy an investigation is What their respective Duties are which accordingly I come now to enquire into To begin with the Plaintiff because it is he that gives beginning to all that is done in Courts of Judicature where first of all I shall recommend that of the Prophet Moses Exod. 23.1 Thou shalt not raise a false report A Caution extremely necessary whether we consider the Practice of the World or the mischiefs that accrue to our Neighbour by it For as it is too usual with men whether out of maliciousness or some such sinister end to lay to their Neighbours charge things that they know not so the iniquity thereof will easily appear if we consider the inconveniences that do naturally and almost necessarily flow from it The Properties and Lives of Men being not seldom blasted by it but their Reputation always he who boldly calumniates though he attain no other end yet seldom failing to leave a stain upon the good name of him he doth so But neither secondly is it less necessary even upon the score of the fore-mentioned Caution to proscribe and condemn the mixing of untrue with true Accusations or making a worse construction of them than they deserve he who adds to or perverts any Man's Words or Actions being so far guilty of a false Report as he does either add to or pervert them Lastly For though that have been intimated before yet it may seem but necessary to repeat it to obviate the too common Practice of it As it will concern him who is the Plaintiff not to raise a false Report either in whole or in part so neither to take up and prosecute a true one where the matter of the Complaint is onely in trifling Instances and such it may be which though contrary to the Letter of the Law yet are not so to the Intent of the Lawgiver and are capable of a favourable Interpretation For where is that Meekness and Kindness and Forbearance which Christianity so often and so earnestly inculcates if it may be lawful for him that makes profession of it to draw his Brother before a Tribunal for every petty Trespass or harsh Word or for every the least deviation from a Statute From the Plaintiff or Accuser pass we to the Defendant who is either rightly accused or not If the former the Principles of Justice and Charity as well as those of Prudence will perswade him to agree with his Adversary whilst he is in the way with him lest the Adversary deliver him to the Judge and the Judge to the Officer and so he be cast into Prison For what Justice or Charity can it be to put a Man to the vexation or charge of a Suit to recover that which we our selves cannot but acknowledge to be his due But let us suppose the Right either to lie or at least to be suppos'd to lie on the Defendants part as who is there that is not willing to believe it to be on his own yet will not that exempt him from a possibility of offending and therefore neither from the necessity of a Caution Such as is first That that supposed Right of his do not transport him into the like Crime and make him charge the adverse Party with the same or the like Calumnies wherewith he himself is loaded For as it is but too usual with Men otherwise of good behaviour to endeavour by false Accusations to blast the Credit of those by whom they think themselves unjustly worried so beside the imitation of the others Injustice and Falshood it is the result of Revenge which our Religion hath no less severely interdicted than the other Alike criminal and therefore alike necessary to be caution'd against is the avoiding of all civil Converse with those by whom we are impleaded or entertaining them when they come in our way whether with rude Gestures or ruder Language For beside that it is not impossible but that he by whom we are impleaded may be in the right or at least may be as strongly perswaded of it in which case the forementioned rudeness will be unjust as well as uncharitable because bottom'd either upon unsound or uncertain grounds it is ill agreeable with that Kindness to an Enemy which our Religion so much talks of but which so few that make profession of it give any tolerable proofs of But because though the Plaintiff and Defendant furnish Work for Courts of Judicature yet they commonly leave that Work to be managed by Men Learned in the Law who may overshoot themselves as well as those whose Causes they espouse therefore I judge it but necessary that these also should have a share in those Instructions which concern the Regulations of Courts of Judicature Now there are two things which such Persons are to intend and to which therefore our Instructions ought to be adapted the one the Choice of those Causes that come before them the other the Management thereof Now though as to the former of these little scruple be generally made where there is a probability of a proportionable Reward to excite
at the receit of some Letters Into the contents whereof when they had with some curiosity enquired the Prince with a seeming great sorrow told them that he had received certain intelligence that the Archangel Gabriel was dead They to comfort him told him that certainly it could not be true and for their parts they did believe it to be impossible O Fathers replyed the Prince can you think it to be impossible for an Archangel to dye when you affirm the Godhead of Christ did By that Fiction of his plainly convincing them of that Errour which they had taken up concerning the Nature of our Saviour But why do we look into Ecclesiastical History which is less known and less approved when the like Instance occurs in the Sacred Scriptures and that too both in divinely inspired Men and in the delivery of their Message That I mean which it acquaints us with concerning Nathan's address to David and the address of one of the Sons of the Prophets to King Ahab For though a Parable when delivered as such that is to say as an Emblem of some concealed Truth have not the nature of a Falsity because it delivers nothing disagreeable to the mind of him that useth it nor yet with the Custom of the World by which such forms of expression are agreed upon as declarers of it no less than simple and natural ones yet the like cannot be said of a Parable when it is represented as a thing really acted and as such endeavoured to be imposed upon the hearers He who so doth speaking dissonantly both to Truth and his own Thoughts because convinced that that was not real which he suggests as such Which notwithstanding we shall find that even such have been used and upon such occasions also as will put the lawfulness thereof past all question For did not Nathan when sent to David to make him sensible of his sin in the matter of Vriah's Wife did not he I say upon that occasion begin a Story to David of two Men in one City the one rich and the other poor The former whereof when a Traveller came to him spared to take of his own Flocks but took the others only Ewe-lamb which lay in his bosom and was unto him as a Daughter and dressed it for the way-faring Man that was come unto him Nay did he not all along deliver it rather as a thing really acted than as a Parable and so that he convinced King David of the truth of it he immediately subjoining in agreement with Nathan's Story that the Person who had so done should restore the Lamb fourfold according to a Provision made in that behalf by the Levitical Law And indeed otherwise the Prophet Nathan's design might have been frustrated in making David so sensible of his guilt For if he had delivered it to him as a Parable the guilty conscience of David might have been more shye in condemning the action of the rich Person whom Nathan spoke of lest as it after hapned he should be forced to condemn himself But of all the instances which either Sacred or Profane Story suggest concerning the telling of Falsities to insinuate thereby some useful Truth there is certainly none more plain than that Story which was told by a young Prophet to Ahab upon occasion of letting go Benhadad King of Syria the sum of which in short is this One of the Sons of the Prophets being so instructed by God puts on the person and guise of a Man that had been ingaged in the Battel and that he might the better appear so for that in my opinion is the best account of that action commands first one and then another by the word of the Lord to smite him which accordingly that second did and wounded him as you may see 1 King 20.35 That done as the Story doth farther instruct us the Prophet departeth and having disguised himself farther with ashes upon his face waits for the King by the way At length the King comes and this concealed Prophet cryes out to him and tells him that when he went into the midst of the Battel behold a man turned aside and brought a Prisoner to him and said keep this man if by any means he be missing then shall thy life be for his life or else thou shalt pay a Talent of Silver But it happened afterwards saith he that whilst I was busie here and there the man was gone and I thereby lyable to the Penalty Than which what more apparent instance can we desire of the telling of a Falsity thereby to insinuate some useful Truth It appearing both from the Antecedents and Consequents that this whole Story was not only a Fiction of the Prophets which all Parables are but which makes it a perfect Falsity represented not as the cover of some concealed Truth but as a Truth in it self and all the art imaginable used to make it appear so to be Neither will it avail to say as I find it is by some Learned Men that it ought not to be looked upon as such or at least not as a Lye because the intention thereof was not to deceive but to teach with the more elegancy and effectualness For beside that it is to me pretty apparent from a former Discourse of the nature of Truth and Falshood that to deceive is no essential part of the definition of a Lye though it be an inseparable accident of it even this Fiction of the Prophets can no more be acquitted from the design of deceiving than any other Officious Falsities For though the ultimate design of it was to bring the King to the sense of his sin in letting Benhadad go contrary to the Command of God yet the intermediate design of it was to deceive the King and make him believe what he told him to be a real Truth as without which he could not so easily have brought him to condemn his own action in that supposed action of the Prophet But what shall we then say to acquit this and the like actions from being to be looked upon as a sin Even that which was before said to acquit some others to wit That it was neither pernicious to the party to whom it was told which is one ground of the Prohibition of Falsities nor any way destructive of the significancy of those external marks which are agreed upon as the declarers of Mens minds All pretence of that being taken away by the Prophets immediately discovering it to be a Story and that he had no other end in it than to convince the King of his miscarriage He who not only detects the falseness of his own Story but gives an account of the Reason he made use of it leaving no pretence to Men to doubt of his sincere speaking in matters of another nature nor giving any countenance to the insincerity of theirs 3. Lastly As an Officious Falsity cannot be thought to prejudice the Authority and significancy of words where it is both made use of
to be estimated by those things only which can declare our conceptions to the Hearers Which since those Reservations which are in the Mind cannot do in judging of the Truth of any Speech account is to be made of those things only that are expressed and not of mental Reservations Of Pernicious and Officious Falsities what hath been said may suffice proceed we therefore to such as have the name of Jesting ones By which Title I mean not all Fictions of the brain which are devised to delight for so all Parables of the Scripture are and though not invented for delight only yet to delight as well as profit But I mean such Fictions as are represented as real Truths contrary to the mind and knowledge of the Utterer Now concerning these much need not be said to shew them to be generally unlawful and as such to be eschewed and avoided as because the observation of Truth is of much more concernment than our delight so because the Scriptures of the New Testament have not only imposed upon us the simplicity of the Dove * Matt. 10.16 that guileless Creature but moreover forbidden to us the speaking of a vain ‖ Matt. 12.36 or idle word If there be any case wherein these kind of Falsities are allowable it must be where they are in a manner detected as soon as told and neither our own sincerity made lyable thereby to exception nor the signification of those external marks by which we are to communicate our Thoughts to each other brought into uncertainty with the World That of S. Paul shall put an end to this Argument and the Negative part of the Commandment Ephes 4.25 Wherefore putting away Lying speak every man Truth with his Neighbour for we are members one of another All Pernicious Lyes being simply and universally unlawful all Officious ones unless in those few cases before excepted and all Jesting ones unless in the case but now mentioned if yet that may be excepted out of the number And here a fair opportunity is ministred to me Affirmative part of the Commandment of entring upon the Affirmative part of the Commandment which I shall gladly embrace though in the close as you see of this Discourse because I have in a great measure dispatched it already as knowing not well how to entreat of the other without it Where first of all I shall represent because Judicial Matters are principally referred to the doing what in us lyes to advantage a just Cause which that love in which our Saviour sums up this and other the Precepts of the Second Table doth manifestly require Now this a Witness will do yea cannot otherwise discharge himself of the tye of love if he voluntarily present himself to attest his knowledge where either the matter in debate requires it or he can think it will be acceptable to the party concerned If when thus presenting himself or called to it by others he shall duly recollect himself that so he may omit no material part of his Evidence Lastly if having thus recollected himself he clearly and fully declare it and speak the truth and the whole truth as well as nothing contrary to it The Plaintiff shall do his duty if he shall prefer only such Enditements as are true and material and prosecute them with candor and moderation as the Defendant his if he shall own justly imputed Crimes particularly in matter of Estate and fence only against such as he is falsly aspersed with The Advocate shall fulfil his part if he espouse just or at least probable Causes and prosecute them with that fairness and civility which becomes men and Christians and particularly that awful Assembly before which he speaks As the Judge his if he lend a patient ear to the Evidence that is given help out and encourage weak but honest Witnesses and narrowly sift crafty and reserved ones if having so done he shall duly weigh all circumstances and if that be all he hath to do as in our Common-Law Courts it is recapitulate the whole and deliver his own sense clearly and impartially The Jury shall do their part if after a like serious consideration of the matter in debate they shall guide themselves in their Verdict by the opinion of the Judge in matter of Law and by the Evidence that is given as to matter of Fact In fine those to whom the power of Registring is committed theirs if they shall faithfully record the Sentence that is passed upon the whole by the Judge as they and all others to whom the power of the execution of it belongs if they set their helping hand to a speedy and faithful and full execution of it All which Duties I have thus shortly laid together without the addition of their respective Proofs partly because they carry their own conviction in their foreheads and partly because those that seem to stand in need of any have already had them in the foregoing Discourses to which therefore it is but reasonable to refer you From Judicial Matters pass we to Extrajudicial ones where agreeably to those several Falsities which I have shewn to be forbidden in the Negative our Duty as well as the Affirmative part of the Commandment must be to prosecute those Truths that are contrary to them particularly that whereas Pernicious Lyes strike at our Neighbours Reputation or Estate we on the contrary in compliance with that Truth which is opposite to them should endeavour to advantage him in both as the Precept of Love doth manifestly enjoin To advantage him in his Reputation by giving him his due commendation by ascribing to him those Parts or Vertues or Endowments which he is really possessed of and remembring them where ere we come with all the expressions of respect and honour To advantage him again in his Reputation by taking off those Calumnies wherewith he is aspersed and shewing the either falsness or improbability thereof To advantage him in his Estate by a religious observation of our own Promises or Compacts or by causing those of others to be strictly and faithfully observed To have a regard to Truth in our Discourses with our Neighbour even when the contrary thereof may be advantageous to our selves and others unless it be in such cases where the common consent of mankind the saving of an innocent persons life or a speedy detection of the falshood licenseth a departure from it But above all that we intend the prosecution of Truth above our own meer delight and against the temptation of those baits which the pleasure of imposing upon others gives Truth as it is a Duty which is owing to our Neighbours Vnderstanding no less than Good-will is to his Will from ours so being the foundation of all pleasurable and useful Commerce the band of Societies and of those several Compacts by which they are confederated and in fine the fulfilling of this Commandment THE TENTH COMMANDMENT THE TENTH COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house thou shalt not