them to the danger mentioned Mat. 5. 22. and to hate their Brethren for hating them that they may be as Murderers that have not eternal Life abiding in them 1 Joh. 3. 15. 7. And lastly they hereby perhaps quiet their own Consciences and deceive themselves or at least for a while with some preserve their Reputations by making it believed that their Conformity or difference from the Non-Conformists consisteth but in the rejection of such wild Opinions as the Affirmers hold and in being the wise Spectators of such as are beside themselves But the Sun will arise after the longest and the darkest Night In the mean time this Candle may serve the formerly deceived Reader to save his Soul from the mortal sin of hating his Brethren wrongfully which false Accusers would tempt him to be guilty of The Terms need little Explication 1. We call things here Lawful and Unlawful in respect to the Laws of God For as to the Laws of Men the Affirmation of the Question were but a mad Contradiction 2. We speak of that which is Antecedently Lawful as Cloathed with all its Accidents save this subsequent one being commanded by Authority And that the Question is whether the Command of Authority be an Accident that rendereth it Unlawful 3. We take Lawful Authority to be a Tautologie for all Authority is Lawful being in the Sense in the Question nothing else but a Jus R 〈◊〉 gendi and Jus Justum or a Lawful Right is a Tautologie If it be not Lawful or a Jus it is but equivocally called Authority Yet because the equivocal use of the Word may to some need such an Expository Epithete it may here be born And we suppose that the Word signisieth Authority over the Persons and in General over the Affairs in Question so that you may see first here what is not the Question and thereby the more easily perceive what it is 1. The Question is not of a thing before Lawful meerly as an Act in genere vel specie but Unlawful by some other Accident e. g. It is Lawfal to kill and to kill a Man else none could be put to death for Capital Crimes but it is Unlawful to kill a just Man And if Rulers Command it it is still Unlawful but not because it is Commanded by them but because it is forbidden of God It is Lawful to forbear preaching else Women might not forbear but not for a true Minister of Christ to forbear it when mens Souls notoriously need his preaching and he is able consideratis consideran 〈◊〉 is to perform it If then Rulers forbid it him it is still Unlawful to forbear but not because they forbid him but because God Commandeth him in season and out of season instantly to preach 2 Tim. 4. 1 2. 2. The Question is not of the Command of Usurpers Civil or Ecclesiastical For their Command sometimes may make a thing Antecedently Lawful to become Vnlawful by Accident at that time and to that Person As it is Lawful in it self to meet an Usurper and to put off the Hat to him and to give him Money but if he by pretended Authority Command the Kings Subjects to appear before him as their King or to put off the Hat in token of subjection to him or to pay him Tribute as his Subjects it is an Unlawful owning of him so far to obey him It is in it self Lawful to go to Rome but not in obedience to the Pope who is an Usurper if he Command it us It is in it self Lawful to take an Oath yea an Oath of Obedience viz. To the King But if the Pope or one of his Prelates would Command the Kings Subjects to take an Oath of Obedience to him yea or to perform Obedience as such it may become Unlawful so to own his Usurpation It is Lawful and a Duty to be justly obedient to a true Pastor or Bishop of the Church But if Arrians be obtruded on Antioch A 〈◊〉 exandria Cesarea and other Eastern Churches even by the Emperour Valens the Churches will resolutely refuse to obey or hear them Or if sede vacante one intrude without a true Call and will tyranically make himself a Pastor or is obtruded by the Pope or other Foreign Power without the consent of the Church either the Clergie or the Flocks or any one that hath true power to chuse him to that place or Office it may be a sin to own such an Usurper though by 〈…〉 in it self 3. The Question is not of men that have Lawful 〈…〉 and not over the Person in Question The King of France may have Lawful Authority there and yet no Authority to Command us in England 4. Nor is the Question of a Ruler that hath Authority in other matters but not in the matters now in Question For as Rich. Hooker saith Though a man be a Lawful Governour yet if he extend his Commands beyond his Authority and Command that which he hath no true power to Command it is not disobeying Authority therein to disobey him e. g. If the Judge of the Common-Pleas Command that which is proper to the Judges of the Kings-Bench extra proprium forum they have no Authority If a Bishop would command Husband-men when to Plow and Sow and with what Seed and what Cloaths to wear and what Meat to eat in particular or all Physitians what Physick to give each Patient these Commands are Usurpations and make no Duty Nay unless greater Accidents preponderate to make the thing needful on some other accounts it may do somewhat towards the making of an Act otherwise Lawful to become Unlawful when the doing it will encourage and strengthen such Usurpers and be a scandalous seeming to own their Usurpation So if a Justice would presume to arrogate the power of a Judge or a Constable of a Justice or a Church-warden of a Constable or a Magistrate of the Pastors of the Church c. But because it seemeth doubtful whether the Question be of one that hath Authority to Command the Lawful thing in Question or only of one that hath Authority in General whether his Authority extend to the Point in Question and if not whether his Command make the Act Unlawful to be done We shall include what we assert in these Propositions which will shew what it is that we deny Pr. 1. To question whether it be Lawful yea or a Duty to obey them Whom we suppose to have Authority to Command the very thing questioned is but to question the same thing which we first affirm and to deny it is to deny what we first affirm For to have Authority to Command an Action is nothing else but to have Authority to oblige me to do that Action by Command And is it a wise Mans Question whether he that hath Authority to oblige me by his Command to do an Action doth not by making it my Duty make it become Unlawful That is whether Duty be Sin whether Life be Death and Light be
Assembly He chuseth a less convenient Hour of the Day he placeth the Pulpit in a les 〈◊〉 convenient Place he appointeth a tollerable but not the best Translation of the Scripture and Metre of the Psalms or Tunes to be used he appointeth a Bible of a worser Print and supposing him Authorized to chuse the Preacher he appointeth not the best or fittest Preacher which might be had And whether it be the present Pastor or any other we now dispute not that who hath Authority to chuse Chapters and Texts and word the Sermons and Prayers if he chuse a less convenient Chapter Text or Subject and less convenient Method and Words in Preaching and Prayer all this is his Infirmity and Fault but yet the People must not refuse the thing so commanded Not that we must obey it sub ratione maâ—â— as ill chosen and inconvenient but Though it be such not qua but quod inconveniens And the Reasons are 1. An inconvenient ill-chosen Place Time Text Translation Metre Tune c. may be good as a means of Union and Concord in the Worship which without that would not be had and that Union and Concord is a Duty Therefore so is the necessary means though it be not the best that could be chosen If the People will not join with that Translation Metre Tune Subject Place Time which the Minister useth or chuseth they cannot join with him in the Worship Were there no Interposition of Authority but mens consent if a thousand of the People are for a less convenient means Time Place c. and a small part for a more convenient they cannot concur but in some agreement And if the mistaken part will not yield to the other when Unity is necessary for that Unity sake the rest must yield to them 2. The less convenient way may accidentally become a means to avoid Persecution and the loss of all their Liberty and Publick Advantages and they that refuse that may be deprived of all the rest And it 's better worship God e. g. at an inconvenient Time Place c. than not at all 3. The General Obligation to obey our Governours is not nullified by every mistake in the Law or Determination For all Mankind being imperfect it is supposed that all Government by Man is imperfect If we should forbear praying till we can pray without all sin we should never pray and if we should forbear obeying till Rulers Commands be perfect or blameless we should never obey There is some fault in every Translation of the Bible every Version of the Psalms every Sermon and Prayer that we hear or make and in every Book that we Write and Read If no Parent Teacher Master Prince oblige us but only by such Laws and Mandates as have no 〈◊〉 ault all Government and Obedience is null or at an End Obj. No Man is bound to that which is evil Answ 1. It may be evil in the Commander and good in the Obeyer Not that the same thing is good to one and ill to the other though in other Instances that often fall out for it is not the same thing To Command an Inconnveient Time Place Translation Tune c. is one Action and to obey that Command is another 2. We obey it not as evil but as good The inconvenient Time Place c. is not good as inconvenient but as a means of Order and Concord and so we use it And the General Nature of Obedience is good and if we must do no good which we cannot do without some adherent evil we must never Pray Preach Eat Drink or Trade more Pr. 5. if a Ruler go beyond and so without his Authority yet in several Cases we may be bound to do what he Commandeth as such For Instance In case the thing be in it self good or at least indifferent and Lawful and the Honour of the Ruler or the Peace of the Society dependeth on our material obeying him It is our Duty to honour the King and our Parents and Pastors and to avoid all things that will dishonour them or that will encourage others in disobedience or disorder the Society If therefore it were granted to be the Pastors Duty and not the Kings toword our Prayers and Sermons and chuse Translations Chapters Metres Tunes c. yet if the King do it though beyond his Calling that is If he appoint us what Chapter to read every day in Publick and Command some Prayers to be read and some Homilies or Printed Sermons to be sometime read which are all good and lawful in themselves not destroying the Office of the Ministry and if by him or the People it be taken for Contempt and a dishonouring him to disobey him the General Command of honouring the King will here oblige us to the Commanded Action And if the Question be Whether this be formal Obedience or only material We Answer 1. It is but material and not formal Obedience de specie properly as it is to a Command that is without Authority to that thing But 2. It partaketh of formal Obedience as to the Genu in as much as we do it for the honour of a Ruler and because it is his Command who hath Authority to Govern us though not to do it by this mistaken Action Pr. 6. If a Rightful Ruler should go quite beyond the bounds of his Authority so far as that his Command did not at all bind us yet would it not make an indifferent thing become unlawful meerly because he doth Command it what ever any other Accident may do Proved 1. Because there is no force in the Inference It is Commanded ergo it is unlawful 2. Though his Act be culpable and without true power yet he is no Usurper whom we are obliged to disown and all true Governours have their faults 3. The thing may be good and so a Duty on other accidental reasons viz. 1. As a means of Concord 2. Of pleasing others to their edification 3. Of honouring Superiours 4. Of obtaining liberty and avoiding mischief and as such though not as an Act of Obedience may be a Duty 4. Else it would be in the power of ill-minded Rulers to make all indifferent lawful things to be sin or unlawful to us by Commanding them and so to deprive us craftily of all our liberty and make us Slaves If Rulers forbidding them make not all things indifferent sinful which many say much less their commanding them else they might command instead of forbidding and do the same thing We do believe that there may be found some Persons in the world of such weak Understandings and unruly Spirits as to think that it is a sinful betraying of their Liberty to do a thing antecedently indifferent when it is commanded them Were we acquainted with such a one we might ask him 1. At what Age he would have Mankind begin the practice of this Principle Infants cannot learn it If before they can feed themselves they should refuse Meat at the
Law Pr. 41. But to know of several Goods which is most eligible or the greatest is a matter of great difficulty in many Instances in which consisteth no small part of the Christian Wisdom Work and Life The Rules of such discerning are elsewhere laid down by such as have written on that Subject see Christian Direct p. 137. c. Pr. 42. A Good that in it self is Lesser may be the matter of a Greater Duty pro hic nunc because the Greater may have another season when the Lesser cannot E. G. to save a Soul or to build a Church may be a better work than to quench the Fire in an House And yet for that time the quenching of the Fire may be the greater Duty because it can be done no other time when the other may and so both done in their several seasons are better than one alone Pr. 43. A greater Good may be no Duty to him that is not called to do it as preaching to a Woman or unable Lay-man To Rule well as a King is a greater Good than private Business and yet private Men must not usurp it but let it alone as no work of theirs The Subject must not take up the Rulers work nor the Child the Fathers nor the Wife the Husbands nor the Scholar the Teachers because it is better Pr. 44. A Rulers Command will not justifie all scandal given by the Act commanded nor make that Act lawful Nor will all scandal that we foreknow will thence be taken excuse us from obeying the Rulers Command in the offending Act. It is therefore a matter of great difficulty and prudence sometimes to discern whether the Rulers Command or the scandalousness or accidental hurtfulness of the Act put into the Counterballance do weigh down the other Pr. 45. If Governours determine Circumstances antecedently indifferent as the place and hour of Assemblies c. that way which some will be scandalized at and turn to their sin and hurt when they might have avoided this occasion of their sin by another way without any or so great a hurt this is the Governours sin so to mis-do But it may notwithstanding be a Duty in the Subject to obey that Determination because 1. It is a Command of a Ruler in his place 2. The thing is supposed not only lawful but such as doth more good for Concord as it is a Determination of Authority than it doth hurt by Mens mistake of which we have spoken in another Paper As e. g. some are so offended at the old Metre of our singing Psalms that they will separate from the worship on that account Suppose that the Magistrate and Pastors will use them and no other If they sin in chusing no better and if my using them be offensive to them that separate yet is it my Duty and the rest of the Peoples to obey the Magistrate and Pastor and joyn with the Church in using them rather than separate as others do for many reasons Pr. 46. Of the Nature Kinds Causes and Cure of Scandal given and taken one of us hath written so much Christian Directory Tom. 4. p. 80. c. as may excuse the omission of the same in this writing But we must still desire the Reader to note that the word Scandal is among us variously used 1. Sometime by the vulgar for meer displeasing or grieving another especially in matters of Religion 2. Sometime for a seeming sinfulness So a Scandal is said to be raised of a Man when he is truly or falsly accused of sin especially a disgraceful sin And a Man is called scandalous and scandalized when others justly or unjustly report him to be a disgraceful Sinner and he is called a Scandal in the place where he liveth for that Infamy 3. The use of the word in the Gospel is for any thing that is a Snare or Trap or Stumbling-block to others to keep or hinder them by Temptation from Faith Repentance Holiness or Salvation Pr. 47. Love kindled by Faith and Faith kindling Love and Love working in the order of Obedience is the Sum of all our Duty or Religion To love our Neighbours as our selves and exercise Love in doing good to all as we are able is indispensible Duty We speak of Natural and Moral-legal Power Conjunct Illu 〈◊〉 possumus quod animae corporisque viribus jure possumus Seeing then that Love is the fulfilling of God's Law no Rulers Law can disoblige us from it no not to our very Enemies Nor are they disobliged themselves Pr. 48. He breaketh the sixth Command Thou shalt not Murder who doth not do his best to save his Neighbours Life in danger Much more if he voluntarily and unnecessarily do that which he knew or ought to know would be the occasion and means abused to effect it He that oweth maintenance to another and denyeth it him is guilty of his suffering though he take nothing from him E. G. He that provideth not Food for the Life of his Child and famisheth him by such omission He that suffereth his Neighbour to famish when he might relieve him Yea or his Enemy except when in Wars or a Course of Justice he may take away his Life He that seeth his Neighbour in Fire or Water or among Thieves and could save him by lawful means and doth not is guilty of his Blood So is he that seeth his Neighbour in Drunkenness Folly or Passion making away himself and doth not save him from himself if he can Much more is be guilty of Murder who wilfully selleth Poyson to him who he knoweth doth intend to kill his Neighbour or himself much more his Prince with it And if we have any Casuists more loose than the Jesuites accused by Montaltus who will justifie this because that selling Arsenick c. is lawful per se and unlawful only per accidens ye we suppose that the Judges would be stricter Casuists in judging him to punishment that sinned thus per accidens And as Gods Laws reaching the Conscience are stricter in such things than Mans so should the Expositors of them be than the Judges And we hope that our Casuists will never see a Law so made that shall Command or tolerate all Apothecaries to sell Poyson to those that they know mean to use it to Treason or Murder and shall say you are not bound to neglect your Trade your Right or Liberty to prevent another Mans sin and abusing it to his own or others hurt Our Law-makers will never say we may Command this because it is sin but per accidens When Interest is against their Errour who by Interest were led into it it will then be easie to see the evil of such commanding yea or conniving at sin per accidens Till then it is hard curing them whom mistaken Interest blindeth of the most Inhumane Errour Pr. 49. We therefore who are called Non-Con 〈◊〉 ormists and Puritans by Men whose Interest dictateth reproaches do now confess that whereas we once
entertained in holy Communion and in Sin called to Repentance and for Impenitency shut out by Excommunication and upon Repentance restored by Absolution For the right performance of all these the King may give general regulating Laws subservient to Christ's Laws to secure and promote their execution and he may forbid and punish gross abuses of the Ministry as well as of Physicians and other Callings But if he will usurp the Ministry in the Parts aforesaid or take those Parts out of the Ministers hand and as Uzziah burn Incense If he will chuse for the Minister what Text still to Preach on and what Words in Preaching and Prayer still to say and bid him instruct reprove comfort direct baptise absolve no man but such as are named to him by the King nor in any words but such as he prescribeth this being 1. A destroying of an Office of Christ's Institution 2. And an usurping of it without Christ's consent such Laws oblige not but are null as to Conscience for want of true Authority in the Makers As the Sentence of a Judge in foro alieno or in a Circuit City or Corporation where the Power is appropriated to others 2. And if a Prince or Inferiour Ruler who hath power to determine Circumstantials about the Callings of his Subjects shall so determine them as shall overthrow the very End and Work it self in a Calling which God by Nature or Scripture hath made necessary this Determination bindeth not it being an Act without Authority For it is as true of Magistracy as of Paul ' s Apostleship We have this power for edification and not for destruction 2 Cor. 10. 8. 13. 10. Eph. 4. 12. 2. Cor. 12. 19. 1 Cor. 14. 5. 12. 26. It is the pernicious errour of some Papists to Dream that their Pope and Church hath a Power of obligatory judging in matters of Faith and Practice in partem utramlibet and in this wicked supposition they Cant over and over to the ignorant Who shall be Judge To which we say That Publick Judgment belongeth to Publick Persons that is To the Magistrate who shall have Civil Communion even on Religious accounts and to the Pastors who shall have Church-Communion and private Judgment discerning each Mans Duty belongs to every rational man But all men are Subjects of God and their judging Power is limited by his Laws If the Question be Whether there be a God a Christ a Scripture a Heaven an Immortality of Souls c. Kings and Pastors and Councils may and must judge that there is but none of them may judge that there is not if they do it 's worse than null And in Practicals if the Question be Whether we may or must pray for the hallowing of God's Name the coming of his Kingdom the doing of his Will on Earth as it is done in Heaven or whether we must love and worship God and hear him and meditate on his Word and whether true Ministers of Christ may or must Preach in season and out of season and seek to instruct and save Mens Souls whether we must honour our Parents relieve the Poor and save Mens lives in danger from Murderers c. They have Authority to judge affirmatively but none at all to judge negatively which if they do it 's worse than null So Kings and Pastors have power to judge that we may not take God's Name in vain nor be perjured nor prophane his separated day nor forsake the assembling of our selves for his Publick Worship nor Murder nor commit Adultery nor steal nor lye or bear false witness nor persecute nor hurt any man injuriously but they have no power to judge that we may do any one of these and if they so judge or command it is a nulli 〈◊〉 y to the Subject and worse to themselves God hath made no men absolute Judges but given them a Regulating and Limiting Law to Judge by Even so those Rulers who have Power to Judge and Command some Circumstances of Divine Worship they have it but as a means of promoting that Worship and its Ends by the means of Edifying-Order and they have no Power to destroy the Worship or its Ends. For Instance whoever hath Power to determine of the Place of Publick Worship hath that Power for the Worship and Worshippers sake and is to be obeyed when he doth it accordingly But if he Command a thousand Persons to meet no where but in a Room that will not hold two hundred or three hundred or fifty thousand Persons to meet no where but in one Temple where above three thousand cannot hear this is on pretense of ordering and placing God's Worship to forbid it to all the rest for which God never gave him Power So also it is if he command them to meet no where but forty or thirty or twenty miles off from their Habitation or where they cannot go without destroying the Work and End So whoever hath Power to chuse the Day or the Hours of God's Publick Worship hath this Power for the Work sake and the Peoples edification and is to be obeyed when his Commands are answerable But if he should Command Men to worship God only once a Year or once a Month or to do it only at Mid-night and so destroy the Work by ill-timing it this is a nullity as being an Act without Authority and worse as against the Laws of God So whoever it be that hath Power to appoint Pastors and Teachers to the Churches or Publick Assemblies if they should as Constantius and Valens send Arrians to be Bishops or any other intollerable Persons who through utter insufficiency Heresie or Malignity are uncapable and will do more hurt than good or if they would limit the Churches or Countries to an utterly incompetent Number and say No other shall Preach but such uncapable Persons or no more than one to fifty thousand Souls or where ten or twenty are necessary this is to forbid Preaching or corrupt it and destroy Mens Souls on pretense of Order And it is a nullity and worse So if the same Rulers should say that You shall Preach only in Country Villages but not within many miles of Cities or Corporations which truly and notoriously want your Preaching this were but to forbid such Cities and Corporations to hear the necessary Preaching of the Gospel and the Ministers to Preach it and is a nullity and worse as being both without any Authority from God and against his Laws 3. But if true Rightful Governours who have Power to determine Circumstantials Civil or Religious shall mis-determine them yet so as not to destroy the Work or End nor put Subjects on the breaking of any Law of God here their fault will not disoblige us from the Duty of obeying Though it be a sinful mistake of theirs we may be yet obliged to do what they Command us For Instance The Ruler chuseth a Place less convenient that hath no Seats or an ill access yet capable of the
and what Accidents make a thing unlawful to be commanded and what not and what Scandal is and how far to be avoided which we shall do in these Propositions following Prop. 1. MORALITY is either Regulans or Regulata mensurans or mensurata The first is Radically in God's own Mind and Will and is called by many Lex aeterna and it is signally and expressively in Gods Laws and subord 〈◊〉 nately in Man's Laws as they are a Rule to Subjects Of these we are not now to speak that is not of the holiness of God or his Laws nor of Man's as they are truly a Rule to Subjects Morality as Regulated is subjected in the Minds and Actions of the Creature specially in the WILL and in our Actions as VOLUNTARY and so even the Laws of Men as those Men are God's Subjects and their Laws are Actions good or evil as Regulated by God's Superiour Laws are the Subjects of the Morality now in question Prop. 2. This Morality in Man's Will and Actions is nothing else formally but their Relation of Conformity or Disconformity to God's Law as their Rule and subordinately to subordinate Rules and materially to the End and O 〈◊〉 jects Prop. 3. How far this Moral Relation is immediately founded in a Physical Relation which is before it in order of Nature viz. in the said Relation of the Will and Action to the End and Object as such antecedently to the Relation to the commanding or forbidding Law we would willingly open were it not lest we seem with Men that love not much distinction to justifie or excuse them that censure us as guilty of excess herein and we may do what is now necessary to be done without it Prop. 4. No Being as such no Substance as such no Habit as a Habit no Act as an Act is Morally Good or Evil For so they are but Quid Naturale and God doth not command and forbid Natural Beings as such Prop. 5. All Moral Good and Evil is subjected in Natural Beings or Privations but not immediately as such but as modified circumstantiated and related Prop. 6. Good and Evil make up all Morality there is no third Species There are many things that are Indifferent as to Morality that is neither Morally Good nor Morally Evil but there is nothing Moral-Indifferent Meer Natural Beings and Acts are Indifferent as to Morality that is they are not Moral But whatever is Moral is Morally Good or Evil and not Indifferent Prop. 7. The Subject and quid absolutum Fundamentale of all moral good is quid positivum or a real Being but the Form of moral evil is ever found indeed in a real Subject but not always in a real fundamentum For it is oft at least in total Omissions and Privations of the Act and in Privations of some modal or accidental qualification or rectitude Prop. 8. Yet the formal relations of moral good and evil are both tru 〈◊〉 Relations even Dis-conformity as well as Conformity as curv 〈◊〉 tude and dis-similitude are as well as rectitude and similitude And a Meer Negative is neither good nor evil e. g. Negative Non-conformity which is not Privative Dis-conformity is no sin because there being not the Debitum inessendi the non-inesse is inculpable It seemeth indeed to some Learned Men that non agere may be moral good e. g. Non odisse Deum au 〈◊〉 proximum non ment 〈◊〉 ri not to murder steal c. And it 's true that the 〈◊〉 is the thing remotely commanded or loco materie 〈◊〉 but the thing immâ—â—â—ately commanded is the 〈◊〉 agere The Will by all these Commands is bound positâ—â—ely to nill the forbidden Act e. g. Murder Adultery Lying c. To nill them is the prime Duty or moral Good that we say not with Ockam the only and not-to-d 〈◊〉 them is the secondary but that is as they are Acts restrained or forborn by a Commanding Will For a Man in Infancy or the Womb or in an Apoplexie or when he is wholly taken up with some other sin not then to Steal Lye Murder or commit Adultery is not at all a moral Good But a meer incogitâ—â—â—y non agere non velle may be a true moral Evil The reason is because when a right Volition is commanded as to love God or Man or â—â—ight Action to do good 〈◊〉 not to do it is a breach of the Command And not to will and not to do when we ought is the commonest kind of sinning Prop. 9. Right ordered Actions Dispositions and Habits then as in or of the Will directly and remotely some non agency are the only things commanded called morally Good save that eorum gratia the Soul and whole man or person is well and truly called morall 〈◊〉 Good And the P 〈◊〉 ivation and I 〈◊〉 ordination of Voluntary Actions Dispositions and Habits are the only moral Evil save that the person is also called such eorum gratia Prop. 10. An Action may be Indifferent or of no Morality as to Election or Performance and yet to Deliberate about that Act may be morally good e. g. I may doubt of two ways which are equal to my End as far as can be known by me whether they be so or not or which is the better I may be obliged to deliberate whether they are equal or not to guide my Progress and end my Doubt And when I have found them equal I have found that Comparatively neither of them is matter of Election as by reason to be preferred to the other But yet because I must chuse to g 〈◊〉 on therefore I must take one way and not the other because I cannot go both But this is only a chusing to go and a taking that way but not a chusing it which signifieth a rational preferring it Here my Deliberation is a moral Act and so is my chusing to go but my chusing this way rather than the other is none For upon deliberating I found that neither was Eligible and Choice no Duty Prop. 11. As the smallness of the least Physical Being though undiscernable proveth it not to be Nothing so the smallness of any moral Good or Evil Duty or Sin proveth not that it is no Duty or Sin at all Prop. 12. Moral Good and Evil is it self only an Accident for Habits Dispositions Actions and Relations are Accidents and Privations are either reductively Accidents as some call them or less than Accidents even meer nothings though from a Nullity or Privation a moral Relation truly result on the Person Prop. 13. Therefore when we say that a thing is Good or Evil by Accident we mean somewhat more than that the Good or Evil is an Accident it self for there is no other We mean that it is something acciding or added to the former Accident or State that maketh it now Good or Evil. Prop. 14. In an Action there is considerable 1. The Action as such or as specified only by the Faculty Intellection Volition Imagination c.
hoped that we had differed but in lesser things from our Accusers we do find our selves so far mistaken as that some of them who have thought it worth their labour to write vehemently for our reproach and increased sufferings do differ from us in the Vitals of our Religion even of our Belief our Love and Practice We mean such as hold That all the Obligations of Scandal proceed purely from that extraordinary height of Charity and tenderness of good Nature that is so signally recommended in the Gospel But if it proceed from humour or pride or wilfulness or any other vitious Principle then is the Man to be treated as a peevish and stubborn Person and no Man is bound to part with his own freedom because his Neighbour is froward and humorous and if he be resolved to fall there is no reason I should forego the use of my liberty because he is resolved to make that his Stumbling-block Ecclesiast Polit. page 231. Because this is contrary to that very Religion in which only we hope for Salvation we take the boldness to put these few Questions to them who thus judge Q. 1. Is not Love the fulfilling of the Law and the End of the Gospel and Faith working by Love the Sum of Christian Religion Doth not the Law of Nature oblige us to love our Neighbour as our selves Q. 2. Doth not God beneficently love his Enemies even the sinful the humorous the proud and the peevish Did not Christ come to seek and save them Is there not joy in Heaven for their Repentance Doth not God welcome such Prodigals when they return Luke 16. and call invite and intreat them to return Q. 3. Are we not Commanded to be merciful as our Heavenly Father is merciful and to love even our Enemies and pray for Persecutors that we may be like him And is not this a Natural Common Duty Q. 4. Hath not God sent out his Ministers to preach home such sinners and commanded them to do it instantly in season and out of season reproving and exhorting and with meekness to instruct opposers if God peradventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth And must we not labour hard and suffer much for to win such Souls Q. 5. Should not every thing be valued according to its worth And are not the Souls of such as you call humorous peevish or wilful worth more than some of that which you call your Liberty Are they not worth more than a Pipe of Tobacco or a Cup of Sack or a Stage-play or a needless Ceremony which you account part of your Liberty Would you deny none of these to save many Souls Q. 6. Would you not deny your Liberty in a Cup of Drink or a Pipe of Tobacco to save the Life of one that in humour would destroy himself or his House who would set it on fire Q. 7. If not doth this Religion of yours much commend it self to the Nature of Mankind Or is he that writeth this fit to report us of the other mind unfit for subjection or Humane Society Can Christians be of your Religion Q. 8. Are not Souls more worth than Bodies And should not the Soul of a Sinner be as compassionately saved by us as his Body as far as we are able and at as dear a rate Q 9. Is that Man like to profit his Hearers or be taken for a faithful Pastor or an honour to the Church of England who would tell them I would not forsake a Pipe of Tobacco or a lawful sport or jeast to save any of your Souls who are vitious humourous or peevish Q. 10. Doth not this doleful Doctrine tell Men consequently that they should seek to save the Soul of no Sinner in the World For if you 1. Except all that have humour pride wilfulness or any other vitious Principle 2. And that but so far prevalent as to be resolved to make a Stumbling-block of some liberty of anothers What Sinner almost is not here excluded from your Charity Who is it that hath not as great sin as some humorous or peevish stumbling at some lawful thing or who is it that hath no pride no peevishness no humorousness or at least that hath no vitious Principle at all Is not that Man perfectly holy 3. And if to save such an one you would not so much as deny any of your liberty for him what would you do for him at all Who can expect that you should bestow any great labour or c 〈◊〉 st to do good or save a Sinner that would not lose a Cup of Sack to save him Q. 11. Do you not thus reproach Christ that set a higher price on Souls when you value them not at the price of a Cup of Drink Would you have it believed that they are purchased by his Blood Q 12. Would you have God care no more for your soul and value it at no higher a rate Doth he believe the immortality of Souls who will say so Q. 13. Should God give such a Law to all his Creatures for their acting towards your self and one another q. 〈◊〉 D 〈◊〉 ny not so much as a lawful Jeast or Sport or Ceremony to win and save any one in the world that out of any vitous principle will stumble at your liberty what Family or Common-wealth could subsist under such an inhumane privation of love Q. 14. If you loved your Neighbour as your self and did as you would have others do to you would you deny no lawful thing to save his Soul though he had some vitious principle Q. 15. What will people say of such men as you if you shall ever preach for Love and Good Works and would make people believe that its you that are for them and we against them when they compare this Doctrine with your words Q. 16. Why do such men call us Puritans as if we succeeded the old Catharists or Perfectionists and the Novatians when we are so far from so vilifying sinners that have a vitious principle and sin against some lawful thing by taking it for unlawful that we know none in the world that hath no vitious principle and is not to be helped at a dearer rate And seeing we find such real difference in our very Religion it self from such as this we cannot wonder if men of such Principles use us and the Nation no better than they do But we crave their solid resolving of these Doubts if they will lose so much of their Ease and Liberty for the convincing of persons judged so unworthy Pr. 50. For our parts we must profess that we take it to be our duty not only to deny a lawful thing or our liberty therein for the saving of Souls that have vitious principles and humours but to bestow our labours and endure poverty reproach persecution imprisonment and when God calls us to it death it self to serve Christ in the saving of such Souls Pr. 51. We suppose that Christ and his Apostles were