obligari qui. n. obligatur debet vel tenetur id facere ad quod 〈◊〉 nec quantum est exparte suâ aliter absolvitur ab obligatione Ligari autem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui 〈◊〉 dispositus est circa aliquod agibile quod non potest licitè procedere prout exigit natura illius agibilis ad modum illius qui ligatur corporalitèr nec potest procedere etiam in rectâ planâ via Conscience is said obligare to bind unto when 't is a bounden duty to doe or not doe what it dictates when t is not onely a sin to do any thing against it but also not to doe according to it Conscience is said ligare meerly to bind when t is a sin as to act against it so also to act according to it Capreolus and others that follow him quarrell with this distinction that Durand puts between ligare and obligare But Capreolus himselfe 〈◊〉 down a distinction of obligation that will come unto all one Obligatio inquit potest referri ad duo Primo ad conformandum se tali conscientiae ad nullo modo discordandum illi ad non deponendum eam secundò ad non discordandum ei sednon ad conformandum nec ad non deponendum Primò strictissimè sumitur illo modo Conscientia crronea non obligat Secundò sumitur largè illo modo intelligitur conclusio nostra quod conscientia 〈◊〉 obligat quia habens eam tenetur non discordare illi ita quod illa stante faciat oppositum quod illa dictat Nec 〈◊〉 tonetur so conformare illi nec tenetur eam conservare immo potest tenetur eam deponere Here his obligation largely so called differs nothing from Durand's ligation The Controversy then is but a strife of words and therefore not worthy the heeding These things thus premised I shall lay downe foure Conclusions First if the action in its nature be not necessary but indifferent and arbitrary and the person mis udging it be in respect thereof suijuris not determined therein by the command of any superiour power Why then he is bound in Conscience during this his opinion to abstaine from the action For we suppose it 〈◊〉 rent and a man may lawsully forbeare action where there is no necessity of doing à licitis po 〈◊〉 absque 〈◊〉 abstineri We suppose it although indifferent yet against 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 is done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a setled reluctancy of a mans own judgment and consciencè against it cannot be of faith and whatsoever is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14. 23. That is 〈◊〉 action is done without a firme perswasion of the lawfulnesse thereof let it be quoad rem and essentially in it selse lawfull nay necessary yet it becomes quoad hominem and accidentally evill unto him it is sin Now that action may lawfully must necessarily be forborne that can be omitted but cannot be committed without sinne But now on the contrary to come to a second Conclusion if either the action be in its nature necessary or the person entertaining this misprision thereof be justly enjoined persormance of it by some superiour power that can herein lawfully challenge obedience from him by a law not 〈◊〉 p nall and so the action too though indifferent for its nature be yet in its use and unto him become 〈◊〉 Why then this misperswasion of its unlawfullnesse cannot bind to abstaine from it for so it should oblige unto either omission of a necessary duty or else disobedience unto lawfull authority both great sinnes And nulla est obligatio ad illicita There is no obligation unto things unlawfull can lye upon us For first obligation is onely to that which is a morall good now nothing unlawfull can be a morall good and therefore an erroneous Conscience cannot oblige unto it Secondly no command of an inferiour power can oblige if it be contrary to the command of a superiour power But if an erroneous Conscience should bind unto things unlawfull it should oblige against the commandement of God whose 〈◊〉 Conscience is Indeed Conscience is the next rule of voluntary actions But First it is a well informed censcience that ought to be this rule the will is not bound to follow a blind guide for then being of it selfe 〈◊〉 potentia it must needs fall into the ditch And secondly conscience is but a subordinate rule unto the Law and Word of God and therefore its power to oblige is derived there from it obligeth not therefore but by vertue of some command of Gods Law or word and Gods Law cannot command things unlawfull for then it should clash with it selfe Capreolus Becanus Raynaudus with many others resolve that however a right and well informed Conscience onely binds unto a thing per se formaliter in omnem eventum yet an erroneous conscience denominated such from an invincible and involuntary errour may oblige unto a thing materially per accidens sub conditione and secundum quid It obligeth per accidens as it is apprehended and believed to be right and well informed so that an erroneous Conscience is adhered unto for the rectitude supposed to be in it It obligeth sub conditione upon condition that such errour of Conscience lasteth for it may be removed without sin and when it is removed the obligation ceaseth then that which obligeth conditionally obligeth onely secundum quid and not absolutely Unto this I have three exceptions First they limit themselves to errour invincible and involuntary which is not imputable or blameworthy This errour may be conceived to be either in matter of fact or in matter of rule Errour in matter of fact as when Jacob mistooke Leah for Rachell as when a poore subject that cannot judge of the titles of primes thinks a usurper to be his lawfull Soveraigne or as when a man takes goods left unto him by his Parents to be truly his own though perhaps a great part of them were gotten by sraud or oppression without any knowledg of his These and the like particulars are all impertinent unto our present purpose and therefore I shall not stay upon the consideration of them Errour in matter of Law right or rule is againe twofold either in regard of law naturall or law positive Now unto all that have actuall use of reason The errour of the law of nature is vincible and voluntary because the law of nature is sufficiently promulgated unto them it is written in their hearts Rom 2. 15. And we may say the same of Christians that enjoy the plenary promulgation of the Gospell and are capable of understanding it for the Gospell sufficiently reveales all divine positives so that a rationall man may know them and is bound to know them and Aquinas states it rightly 1. 2 ae q. 19. art 6. voluntas 〈◊〉 rationi erranti circaca quae quis scire tenetur 〈◊〉 est mala If a man erre concerning such things as he may know and
said that he would willingly preach at Paris in a fooles coate if leave could not be gotten of the King upon any other condition If this great light of France ever dropped such words he had in them doubtlesse a very good devout and zealous meaning but yet under correction I cannot see how his resolution can be accorded with that rule of the Apostle Let all things be done decently for it cannot as yet sink into my foolish head how that a fooles coat is a decent garment to preach in But this on the bie To proceed unto a second sort of Ceremonies which we may call for distinction sake humane Doctrinall 〈◊〉 such as men institute by their morall signification to teach v. g. the Crosse Surplice c if these might lawfully by any humane authority whatsoever be unavoidably annexed with necessary duties we should then soon resolve that we are not then to abstaine from them but the non-conformists ever held that no mortall wight whatsoever could lawfully urge or presse the unavoidable connexion of such Ceremonies with necessary duties and indeed they have very good reason against the Command of such a connexion because it would have been against religion and against charity First against religion they never granted them as is still supposed to be indifferent but alwaies arraigned them as guilty of superstition and will-worship and so manifest 〈◊〉 against the second commandement presumptuous additions unto the word and ordinances of our Lord Jesus Christ a setting of mans threshold by Gods threshold and their posts by Gods posts Ezek. 43. 8. and the justice of their accusation will be soon confessed by all learned and unprejudiced men that will with patience and impartiality reade the reenforcement of their arguments by Parker Didoclave and Ames against all answers and replies whatsoever The Prelates connexing of humane symbolicall ceremonies with duties and ordinances that are necessary and commanded by the word of God brings into my mind an artifice of Julian the Apostate in the market places of Cities he set up his own image with the Essigies of the gods of the Heathen pictured round about to the end that whosoever should do civill reverence to the Emperours Image might also seem to worship the gods of the Gentiles and by the contrary they who would not bow to the Gods of the Gentiles might seeme also to refuse all due 〈◊〉 to the Emperour Thus the Prelates of their own heads most presumptuously have set up in Gods worship and service their own inventions and have commanded them to be joined with the ordinances of Christ so that hereby they drave many conscientious Ministers into a great strait if out of a lothnesse to loose the exercise of their Ministry they conformed unto their Ceremonies this they interpreted to be an approbation os them and if to avoid their Ceremonies they did forbeare to baptize to administer the Lords supper c. then they accused them for neglect and contempt of Gods Ordinances Secondly it was against charity for the Prelates so rigidly and peremptorily to presse their paultry Ceremonies as that unlesse men observed them they would not suffer them by their good wills to enjoy the precious Ordinances of Christ Jesus and this can reasonably be denied by none who think that the soules of men may be damnified by the want of such ordinances But to proceed unto a second restriction in the former edition Former Edition If we are not secondly nostri juris but restrained and determined by authority we must 〈◊〉 disobey that to 〈◊〉 Brother transgresse duty to expresse charity So to please men we should displease God So we should doe evill that good might come thereof When the Obligation of two precepts 〈◊〉 lyeth upon us at the same time and impossible for both to be at once obeyed in such a case because there is no clashing between Gods 〈◊〉 neither doth God by them impose upon his creatures any necessity of sinning therefore one of 〈◊〉 precepts must give place unto the other to wit that which 〈◊〉 a lesse duty unto that which prescribes a more weighty and pressing one Now the 〈◊〉 of Justice as a learned Inconformitant even Amesius himselfe med 〈◊〉 lib. 2. cap. 16. § 62 63 will tell us are of stricter obligation 〈◊〉 those of charity We are more bound to pay our debts then to distribute Almes He that hath trespassed against another is more strictly 〈◊〉 to sue for reconciliation then the party who hath received the injury Now to hinder the scandall of the weake is a duty of Charity to obey the lawfull commands of authority a duty of justice and therefore of the greater obligation and 〈◊〉 unto it then the other must give place I would have travelled farther in this argument but that I am anticipated by the learned and 〈◊〉 Professors of 〈◊〉 in their Duplies to the second answers of the Covenanting ministers who from pag. 65. unto 75. have 〈◊〉 discussed this very question whether the precept of obedience to Superiors or the precept of eschewing scandall be more obligatory and have there proved by many unanswerable arguments that the former precept that of obedience to Superiours is of the twaine more Obligatory Those then that desire larger satisfaction concerning this matter I shall 〈◊〉 unto the perusall of them How ever in the meane while 〈◊〉 it not be thought troublesome if I insert what I judge in them if not most yet very remarkeable 'T is this Debitum obedientiae the debt of obedience which we owe unto superiours is say they pa 74 not only debitum morale a debt or duty unto which we are tyed by morall honesty and Gods Commandment but also debitum legale or debitum justitiae quod viz fundatur in proprio jure alterius a a debt grounded upon the true and proper right which our Superiours have to exact this duty of us so that they may accuse us of injury and censure us if we performe it not There is a great difference betwixt these two sorts of debts the last is farr more obligatory than the first as for example A man oweth 〈◊〉 to the poore by a morall debt but to his Creditour he oweth them by legall debt or debt of justice and therefore he is more strictly obliged to pay his creditor than to give almes So by morall honesty and Gods precepts also a man oweth to his neighbour a pious car fulnesse to hinder sinne in him by admonition instruction good example and by omission even of things lawfull when he foreseeth that his neighbour in respect of his weaknesse will be scandalized by them But his neighbour hath not such a right to exact these things of him neither can he have action against him for not performing of them as our lawfull superiours have for our due obedience Thus they Hence then may we shape an answer unto that same frequent clamour of some tumultuous spirits that our 〈◊〉 for sooth is wondrous offensive
be applied unto our Ceremonies there will be in such application a meer begging of the question for that our Ceremonies were things indifferent the command of them lawfull the practise of them a duty of justice a legall debt is the maine thing in controversy betwixt the conformists and non-conformists and therefore all this should be proved and not barely presupposed as it is But Secondly the fore mentioned rule is to be understood with this limitation caeteris paribus if the termes of the comparison be equall and equall they are not when the minims of justice are put into the ballance with the weightiest duties of charity and so 't is in the present comparison though we suppose our Ceremonies to be indifferent and the practise of them a dutie of justice for of what importance is such practise in comparison of the not scandalizing of our Brother Who that is not extreamly transported with prejudice will think that the commands of the Prelates to weare the surplice to signe children with the signe of the Crosse in Baptisme c. carry any tolerable proportion with those precepts of the Apostle destroy not him with thy meat thy indifferencies for whom Christ died for such things destroy not the worke of God Rom. 14. 15 20. What lawes of any earthly wight whatsoever concerning ceremonies can be more obligatory than the Commands of God touching the externalls of his worship and service and yet it is his will and pleasure that these externals of his worship should be laid aside for the performance of outward works of mercy I will have mercy and not sacrifice Matth. 12. 7. Thus are we to leave our prayers both publique and private to forsake a Sermon for to save the life 〈◊〉 our neighbours to quench the firing of his house to helpe his cattle out of the ditch now if the sacred Ordinances of God are to give way unto works of mercy unto the bodies of men surely then much more is the trash of humane inventions to yeild unto a worke of mercy towards the soules of men This answer which I now give was made by 〈◊〉 in his dispute of scandall unto the Duplies of the Doctors of Aberdeen pa. 50 51 52 53. his discourse there is so satisfactory as that I have thought fit to transcribe what he saies and I hope the reading of it will not be irksome unto the Reader It is true these duties which we owe to others by way of justice are more obligatory then those which we owe only by way of charity caeteris paribus 〈◊〉 duties of the Law of nature and morall Law are compared together then indeed the duties which we owe both by the tye of justice and charity are more obligatory then the duties that 〈◊〉 owe onely by the tye of charity As for example My Father is in danger before mine eyes to be drowned in one 〈◊〉 water and before my 〈◊〉 also my neighbour or friend is in danger of the like kind the two 〈◊〉 and bands of justice and charity both by the fifth and sixt Commandements are more obligatory hic nunc and do more strictly oblige that I run to succour and preserve the life of my Father than the life of my neighbour for the obligation to my neighbour is only Charity by the obligation of the sixth Commandement which obligation ceaseth hic nunc at this time when my fathers life is in hazard and thus farre the Doctors argument goeth for strong as School-men Casuists and Divines teach But it is not to a purpose for the Doctors for all offices and duties generally and universally of what ever kind which we owe by way of Justice are not more obligatory than duties which we owe only by way of charity as when duties of a positive commandement of God 〈◊〉 by our superiours and duties which we owe by charity only are compared together then the Doctors Major proposition is not cleare of it selfe as they dreame neither do Casuists or Amesius or Divines say with them but truth and all our Divines say against them Let us suppose that the King and Convocation and Assembly of Priests and Prophets of Israel make a Canon according to Gods word That no manner of man presume to eat shew-bread save the Priests only All men owe obedience to this both because it is Gods expresse Law and by the band of Justice the 〈◊〉 and assembly of the Ancients have forbidden it But if our Doctors argument st and strong David at the point and hazard of famishing for hunger sinned in eating shew-bread yet Christ acquitteth him of all sinne and saith Matth. 12. 5. he and his followers are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blamelesse Now David was under a duty by mercy and love to his own life and the lives of his followers to eat shew bread and he was under the band of Justice by the Law of the Ancients of Israel and Gods law not to eat Therefore in some cases when our superiours commandements are only positive Lawes they are not more obligatory than duties of Charity only commanded in the Law of nature I cleare it further thus I see my neighbour in danger before my eyes of drowning and my father commandeth me to goe and labour or sow his farme in that time while I am to preserve the life of my neighbour in present danger to loose his life in a great water By the Doctors maxime I am under the higher obligatory tie of Justice to obey my father who commandeth a thing both lawfull and necessary by vertue of the higher commandement to wit the first of the second Table than I am obliged by the sixth Commandement and of charity only to give present succour and helpe to my dying neighbour so I must let my neighbour dye in the waters to give a duty of Justice to my father of farre lesse necessity I would not commit my Conscience to such Casuists as are the Doctors of Aberdeen But if the Doctors would see with some new light of reason it is cleare that not only the tye of justice maketh the precept more obligatory but also the 〈◊〉 of the thing commanded yea and if the positive Commandements of the Lord our God who of Justice and Kingly soveraignty hath right to aske obedience of us above all earthly Superiours do yeild and cede as lesse obligatory then commandements of love only that are commanded in the Law of nature What do our Doctors clatter and fable to us of a right of Justice that mortall Rulers have to command in things indifferent from which the destruction of soules doth arise for these commandements of Rulers Kneele religiously before bread the 〈◊〉 image of Christ crucified keepe humane holy dayes Crosse the ayre with your thumb above a baptized infants face at best are but positive Commandements not warranted by Gods word But shall they be more obligatory by a supposed band of Justice that Prelates have over us to command such toyes than this
which he prescribed and designed unto him for the utmost end unto which man was appointed was the glory of God Prov. 16. 4 and his owne eternall happinesse consisting in the beatificall vision of God's essence and the eternall fruition of his glory even the light of reason dictated this only to be the supreme end of man and all other ends to be unsatisfactory below the nature of his spirituall and immortall soule God's giving man a capacity of this end was a sufficient intimation that it was to be the chief end which he was to aime at hereupon also was it that there was naturally in man a desire of this end and no other end could give satisfaction unto his infinite and boundlesse desires so that Bellarmine himselfe sticks not to affirme that it was naturall unto man Quoad appetitum though not Quoad consecutionem Now God by thus designing man unto this end and placing in him a naturall appetite thereunto engag'd himselfe to furnish him with all necessary meanes abilities and qualifications for the compassing of it for qui destinat ad sinem destinat ad media and originall righteousnesse was undoubtedly a qualification absolutely necessary for such a purpose and if he bad been created without it he had been made not only a little lower than the Angels but beneath the very beasts that perish below the most contemptible wormes that crawle upon the face of the earth for there is none of them destitute of such furniture as is requisite for the reaching of their respective ends Thirdly his decree concerning the Lawes unto which he intended to oblige him he intended to write the Law of nature in his heart assoone as he was created and accordingly it was written so that from his creation he was obliged unto severall duties but it was impossible for man to performe acceptably these duties without originall righteousnesse and therefore God by his purpose to impose these duties upon man determined himselfe to enable him for them by making him habitually upright and holy for if he should have enjoined impossible commandements where there was no ability for obedience he had been a very unjust Law-giver like Pharoah that exacted bricke and would not allow straw God's purpose to create such a creature as man with the rational faculties of understanding and will imply'd a purpose to oblige him to serve obey and glorify him as his Creator and this againe imply'd a purpose to enable and qualify him for such service and obedience and was not originall righteousnesse a necessary qualification for this Man no sooner knew that he was a poore creature dependant upon the All-mighty maker of Heaven and Earth but he forthwith understood that he was by the Law of creation without any positive superadded Law bound to love this his Maker above all things with all his soule heart might and strength to love himselfe and all other things in reference unto him to 〈◊〉 all his voluntary and rationall actions unto his Glory at least virtually but now all these duties were unfeasible without the virtue or grace of the love of God and therefore from God's purpose to to oblige man unto these duties we may conclude his purpose to 〈◊〉 into him the habit of love and what we say of the acts and habits of love may be applied unto the acts and habits of other graces This Medium the Arminians generally make use of to prove the 〈◊〉 of universall grace Because God hath commanded all men to believe and obey therefore he hath bound himselfe to give every man power to believe and obey Their abuse of this argument it is not now pertinent to examine only I cannot but observe the inconsistency of it with their opinion in the now controverted question for Arminius and his followers generally hold that originall righteousnesse was not naturall that is due and necessary unto man in his innocency But for resutation of this their deniall wee need no other medium but that now mentioned which they bring for universall grace for that with due change will sufficiently serve our turne God commanded man in the state of innocency actuall righteousnesse therefore he had bound himselfe to furnish him with originall righteousnesse therefore originall righteousnesse was necessary and due unto man in that state and that is all we meane by the word naturall There be diverse other arguments usually alleadged by Protestants which I shall for the present wholy wave only I cannot but take notice of one that is urged by Macovius and others from the remainders of this original righteousnesse in man since the fall these are now naturall unto man therefore originall righteousnesse it selfe was naturall to man before the fall but this argument hath a tang of Pelagianisme there be reliques of Gods image in man in his corrupt and unregenerate condition but none of originall righteousnesse for this was wholy lost and extinct supernaturalia erepta naturalia corrupta however then there be left some shadowes and resemblances of it yet not any true remnants of it even Arminius himselfe in his conference with Junius confesseth that there be not left in us so much as any principles or seed of spiritual virtues Dico agnition millam quae est 〈◊〉 pietatem justitiam illam 〈◊〉 de quâ Apostolus non corruptas sed sublatas esse null áque earundem in nobis post lapsum manere principia Fateor principia semina virtutum moralium quae anologiam quandam similitudinem habent ad istas spirituales virtutes in nobis manere post lapsum quin ipsas morales virtutes licet per 〈◊〉 corruptas Haec similitudo fallere potest non accuratè inter hasce illas spirituales virtutes discriminantem In hâc sententiâ mea qua statuo illa bona esse ablata habeo praeeuntem 〈◊〉 nostrum questione 9 his verbis Homo se omnem posteritatem divinis illis 〈◊〉 orbavit Quae autem sint illa divina 〈◊〉 explicatum est quaestione sexta praecedente nempe 〈◊〉 sanctitas But what congruence this hath with other principles of Arminius I leave to be determined by his disciples Before I take my leave of this part of the question I shall desire the Reader to take notice that besides Henricus de Gandavo there have been many learned Papists of the opinion that originall righteousnesse was naturall to man in his state of integrity so much you may see at large in Estius in l. 2. sent dist 26. sect 6. who reckons up distinctly seventeene of their arguments indeed they take originall righteousnesse in a stricter sense than we only for the subjection of the inferiour faculties unto reason but yet even herein they are opposite unto the generality of Papists as well as we But proceed we unto the second part of the question whether or no originall righteousnesse were 〈◊〉 unto man in his state of innocency And here we readily grant that it was supernaturall
the last and general Judgement on Rom. 2. 16. THe difference amongst Expositors about the coherence of the words decided 173 174 175 From the words occasion taken to handle the common place of the last and generall Iudgement which is explained confirmed and applyed For explication of it 〈◊〉 in the Text set forth by its causes object and adjunct 1. By its causes principal and instrumentall 1. Principal God shall judge where inquired in what sense the Father judgeth no man 175 176 2. Instrumental by Ies s Christ where whether he shal judge according to his manhood controverted betwixt the Thomists and the 〈◊〉 176 177 178 2. Next sollows the object of this judgement and that is two-sold personal and reall 1. Personal the persons to be judged men where a conceit of Gorrans that by the naming of men evil angels are excluded is examined 2. Real the secrets of men their secret 1. state 2. actions 179 3. Lastly We have an adjunct the circumstance of time when this judgement shall be in the day where 〈◊〉 in what sense day is taken 179 180 In the next place we have the confirmation or proof of the prediction of a future judgement from the testimony of the Gospel according to my Gospel where three things are inquired 1. What is meant by Pauls Gospel 180 2. How Paul termeth it his Gospell 180 181 3. In what sense God will judge c. according to the Gospel 181 182 183 Unto the proof of the Text are added congiuences out of the School-men for the last and general judgement 183 c. usque ad 191 The Point being confirmed is next applyed And 1. Here is a Vse of Terror unto all the wicked 191 192 193 2. Here is a Vse of Consolation unto all true Believers 193 194 Particularly against their sins 〈◊〉 and death 1. Against their sins 1. The guilt 194 195 2. The being and pollution of them 195 2. Against their afflictions of what nature soever 195 196 3. Against their death 196 197 3. We may hence be exhorted to an expectation of and preparation for this day 1. Expectation of it 197 198 199 200 2. Preparation for it 200 201 Out of those many duties in which this preparation stands some few selected unto which the Scripture propounds the day of Judgement as a motive and they regard either God our selves or others Those which regard God are 1. Faith in him 201 202 203 2. Repentance of our sins against him 203 c. usque ad 212 3. Love of him 212 213 214 4. Fear of him 214 215 216 5. Prayer to him 216 217 A second sort of duties unto which the day of Judgement excites regard our selves 1. Watchfulness 217 218 2. Sobriety 218 219 3. Diligence in our particular callings 219 220 4. A due and diligent use and imployment of our talents 221 c. usque ad 229 A third sort of duties to which the day of Judgement is a provokement regard others And they may again be subdivided they respect either all men or bad men or good men 1. All men and they are two 1. Humility towards them 229 230 2. Charity in our censures of them 230 231 232 233 2. Bad men and they again are two 1. Estrangement from them 233 234 2. Patience towards them 234 usq 〈◊〉 241 3. Good men both ordinary Christians and Ministers and they are two 1. The real expressions of a cordial love of them in general 241 242 243 2. All actions of Christian communion with them in particular 243 244 245 246 The day of Judgement an inducement unto a due and requisite manner in the persormance of the fore-mentioned duties which stands in 1. Fervency 246 2. Frequency ibid. 3. Sincerity 246 247 248 4. Constancy and Perseverance and that 1. In faith and the profession thereof 248 249 250 2. In obedience 251 252 A brief and Scholastical Discourse touching the nature of Thanksgiving Eph. 5. 20. Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. FIve Generals considerable in the words 1. An act or duty giving thanks The disficulty and comprehensiveness of the duty 257 258 By way of Connotation it takes in all duties that concern God or man 258 Formally in it self it hath five 〈◊〉 or degrees 1. Observation 258 259 260 2. Confession 260 261 3. Remembrance 261 4. Valuation 261 262 263 5. Retribution not of justice but of favorable acceptance 263 264 265 2. The second General in the words is the time when this duty is to be persormed always How understood of the effects of thanksgiving and how of thanksgiving it self 266 1. Habitual ibid. 2. Actual in reference to that it is to be taken not in a Mathematical but Morall Latitude and so imports nothing but frequency and constancy 266. 267. 268. 3. The third thing considerable c. is the matter for what all things And we are to give thanks for all things 1. Collectively 268 2. Distributively 1. Pro generibus singulorum 268 2. Pro singulis Generum ibid. Two Questions propounded and resolved 1. The first Whether or no Gods greatness absolute goodness his goodness in himself with other absolute perfections of his c. be matter of thanksgiving c 263 269 2. The second Whether or no we are to be thankfull for afflictions 269 270 271 272 3. The third General is the object unto whom God and the Father The words may be taken either in regard of us or of Christ. 1. In regard of us 272 2. In regard of Christ and so they contain a description of the Father from two relations unto Christ he is 1. The God of Christ as man viz. by special Covenant and confederation 272 2. The Father of Christ. 1. As God by eternal generation 273 2. As man not at all by adoption but by collation of the grace of union 273 274 Having spoken of both titles God and Father considered absolutely they are next treated of as they relate unto our thanksgiving and so they distinguish our thanks from Heathenish and Jewish Doxologies 274 And here 't is observed that the addition of Father is not exclusive of the Son and holy Ghost Notwithstanding then the appropriation of it unto God as limited unto the Person of the Father we may justly infer the dueness of it unto God indefinitely and that unshar'd with any Creature either in whole or in part 274 275 276 277 The last Particular is the Mediator in whose name our thanks are to be tendred In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. There is 1. Necessity of a Mediator whether we regard our selves or our thanks 277 2. Congruity that Christ should be he 277 278 Of Original Righteousness and its Contrary Concupiscence ALL that is said concerning Originall righteousness is reduced unto two heads 1. An Sit 2. Quid sit 1. Inquiry is made concerning its an sit Where proved against the Socinians and Dr.
the imagination be uncapable of a morall being and so not of a morall consideration that then they are uncapable of sinne for every 〈◊〉 action is a morall action But now they are not uncapable of sinne for it is most evident that in sensualitate potest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that sin may be in the indeliberate acts of the sensitive appetite and in the acts of the imagination and the reason is because the sensuall powers or faculties are said to belong or appertaine unto reason though not essentialiter yet participativè as being under the conduct and guidance of right reason obliged to hearken unto it's voyce and to obey all it's just Commands and dictates The answere here-unto in the same Author is that the indeliberate acts of the sensitive powers and faculties are of two sorts 1. Some have for their matter sinne and such are morall for they are voluntary though not directly as being produced or commanded by the will yet indirectly as being that which the will is able and obliged to hinder and therefore reason ought to be watchfull to prevent the rising of them But now there are some indeliberate acts of the sensitive faculties which have not for their obiects the matter of sinne such as are above instanced in and of them we may say indefinitely and in the generall that they are not morall because they are not voluntary either directly or indirectly Reason is not bound to keepe any watch over them nor is the will bound to restraine and represse them nisi in casu rationo alicujus adiuncti as Durand limits it As when they are a hinderance to Duties or against that decency which is required in the worship and service of God As for example if a man should be rubbing of his beard scratching of his head moving of his feete or any other part of his body in an undecent way in the act of receiving the elements in the Lords supper That which I have said touching this Conclusion is for the substance of it in Ames de Conscientiâ lib. 3. cap. 18. His words I shall transcribe Actiones quaedam ita sunt hominis ut non sint proprie humanae illae scilicet quae procedunt ab imaginatione nudâ non a ratione deliberatâ ut fricare manus aut barbam scalpere caput levare festucam c. dum aliud aliquid cogitamus Hujusmodi actiones non sunt moraliter 〈◊〉 aut malae quia non sunt in genere moris constitutae dum omni consilio destituuntur Quamvis enim istis etiam 〈◊〉 quis peccare ut si tempore precum vagari sineret imaginationem suam et huiusmodi nugis indulgere ipsae tamen actiones per se 〈◊〉 malae sunt 〈◊〉 bonae Subijciuntur quidem istiusmodi motus imperio arbitrii humani sed ita subijciuntur 〈◊〉 possint exerceri nullo rationis actu 〈◊〉 nequè vlterius illas ratione praevenire tenemur quam ut officis non obsint Sicut in oculorum 〈◊〉 movendis moderandi potestatem habet ratio et voluntas sed non 〈◊〉 operae pretium observare quoties connivemus si modo caveatur ne praeter decorum aut officium aliquid in 〈◊〉 admittatur 1. There be some actions which though they be actions of man yet they are not humane actions such are those which proceed from imagination only and not from deliberate reason as the rubbings of mens hands to scratch the head or beard to take up a straw c. while we are thinking of something else these actions are not morally good or evill they want that which is required to make them so namely counsell and deliberation for although a man may sin by those actions as if in time of prayer he suffer his imagination to wander and do give way to such toyings as those Yet these actions considered in themselves are neither good nor evill It is true these motions are subject to the Command of mans will but yet they are so subject that they may be exercised without any precedent act of reason neither are we 〈◊〉 any farther by reason to prevent them but only so 〈◊〉 that they hinder not the duties we are about So 〈◊〉 moving of the eye-lids reason and the will have power to moderate them but it is not worth the while to take notice how often we winke if so be we take heed that in such things nothing be done which is undecent or against our duty A second Conclusion There be divers deliberate actions that proceed from deliberate reason which if they be considered in actu signato in the generall secundum speciem according to their sort or Kind as abstracted from all singularizing circumstances are indifferent neither morally good nor evill This I shall confirme by scripture and by reason 1. By scripture And here we have a most signall place 1. Cor. 6. 12. All things are lawfull unto me Here all things are to be taken not absolutely but limitedly for all indifferent things for as for things Commanded they are not onely lawfull but also necessary and therefore must be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And as for things prohibited they are unlawfull and sinfull The words then are an undeniable proofe of the indifferency of some actions and withall an explication of such indifferency Indifferent actions are meerly lawfull neither necessary nor unlawfull They may lawfully be done and lawfully be abstained from In this text then 〈◊〉 have the extent of our Christian liberty 〈◊〉 and limited 1. We have the extent of it unto all indifferent things asserted And the Apostle contents not himselfe to affirme it once but doubleth the affirmation The reason of which may be because he thought it an important point or because he would put it out of all doubt and controversy 2. We have also a twofold limitation or restraint put upon the use or exercising of our Christian liberty as touching things indifferent But all things are not expedient But I will not be brought under the power of any Many think that Paul speaks these words per mimesin a figure called imitation that he speakes not in his own person but rehearseth the words of the Corinthians so that here is first Corinthiorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the objection of the Corinthians All things are lawfull for me secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reply of Paul But all things are not expedient But I will not be brought under the power of any But whether the Apostle uttered his own words or the Corinthians is not materiall because suppose they be the words of the Corinthians he grants them with due limitations The sentence of Paul saith Aegidius Hunnius consist's of a concession and correction 1. A Concession of the lawfulnesse of all indifferent things All things are lawfull for me 2. A Correction or restriction of this large grant wherein he sheweth that though all indifferent things be in their generall nature lawfull yet they are in some cases to be
considered in actu exercito in the singular or particular as cloathed with circumstances are indifferent but all of them are morally either good or evill For the better understanding of this Conclusion I shall out of Ames adde two limitations of it 1. Then this conclusion is to be understood only of an adequate consideration of the circumstances of singular actions for not onely one but more circumstances of a humane action in the individuall may be indifferent In a conference of schollers it is many times indifferent whether they discourse in latine or English whether in the morning or afternoone But yet their whole conference considered adequately with all circumstances is either good or evill And the reason is because the determination of an action doth not depend upon one circumstance apart but upon all joyntly A second limitation of the conclusion is that it is not to be extended unto every comparative consideration of humane actions and their circumstances I know that not onely actions indifferent but also those that are commanded become sometime to be sinfull by comparison when they are preferred to better actions God dislikes those recreations that otherwise he alloweth when they justle out duties nay he abhorreth sacrifice when it is inconsistent with mercy but notwithstanding this when there is an equality if not of actions themselves yet of their morall motives as to hic and nunc this present time and place Then curiously to compare and ballance such actions were needlesse for in such a case the prelation of one before the other would be a thing meerly arbitrary neither good nor bad Reading prayer meditation are things commanded but many times that I set apart such an houre for reading principally may be a thing indifferent that I make choice of one Recreation before another of bowling before Chesse draughts c. that I choose to walke in the forenoon rather then in the afternoon may be of no morall consideration and so neither good nor evill but a matter of indifferency Looke as an Image carver may have no peculiar reason to make this Image rather then that yet if he make any Image at all either he followeth the rules of his art and then he makes a good Image or he swarves from those rules and then he makes a bad image and doth not worke like an Artist So many times it may be to a Christian a matter meerly indifferent to performe this or that action he may have no obligation to doe either or at least to doe one rather then the other but may be left unto his own mind and pleasure but yet he is as a Christian obliged to regard such circumstances in all his actions and therefore whatsoever he doth he doth it either well or ill for either he observeth these circumstances and then his action is good or he neglects them and then it is bad The conclusion being thus explained may be made apparent from the end and rule of deliberate actions 1. From their end and what ought to be the end of all deliberate actions of man may be evidenced from their relation unto their Originall from a consideration of them absolutely as they are in themselves 1. From their relation unto their Originall the rationall soule or the soule as rationall they flow from man as man they proceed from his deliberate reason and therefore should have the same end which man as rationall should propound the glorisying of his maker If they have not this end they are evill and if they have this end why then if there be no fayling otherwise they are good This argument is by Raynaudus thus urged man is related unto his operations as a tree unto it's fruits and branches and therefore there is the same end of the humane operations and the humane nature and the reason is because that nature is the first act and it's operation the second act which is a tendencie of the first act towards it's object and end and therefore it seemes necessary that there should be the same uttermost end of the nature and the operation Even as there is the same end of the tree it 's stock branches and fruits But now the uttermost end of the humane nature is God and therefore God should be the uttermost end of every humane action and consequently no humane action can be indifferent for if it have not God for it's end it is sinfull because it wants that relation unto the uttermost end of the humane nature which it ought to have and if it have God for it's end then it is morally good if it want not any other essentiall requisite 2. From a consideration of them absolutely as they are in themselves Every humane rationall action is referred unto some chiefe end or other and that must be either the creature or the creatour If it be the creature then the creature is most sinfully injoyed as mans supreme end and highest happinesse whereas it should be only used as a means and hereby it is at least virtually and interpretatively idolized deified and placed in the roome of God If it be the Creator then the action is good unlesse it be in some other regard defective And so you see that unto whatsoever end it be referred either created or uncreated it cannot be indifferent For the further enforcement of this reason I shall alleadge and open some few scriptures The first is Matth. 12. 36. But I say unto you that 〈◊〉 idle word that men shall 〈◊〉 they shall give account 〈◊〉 in the day of judgment Three things here merit our consideration 1. What is meant by an idle word 2. What by giving account 〈◊〉 and 3 dly How this makes against the indifferency of humane actions considered in their singulars and actuall existence 1. What is meant by an idle 〈◊〉 that which hath no obliquity in it but this that it wants a good and honest end That it is unprofitable and unfruitfull both unto speaker and hearer quod aut utilitate rectitudinis aut ratione justae necessitatis 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 Homily 6. As for those who think that an idle word is extended unto every word 〈◊〉 wicked false lying blasphemous the very context will disprove them The occasion of our Saviours discourse was that blasphemy 〈◊〉 the Pharisees vers 24. But 〈◊〉 the Pharisees heard it they said this fellow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cast out Devils but by Beelzebub the prince of the Devils Now our Saviours 〈◊〉 is to discover the 〈◊〉 and danger of this blasphemous speech of theirs And this he doth as by severall arguments so particularly in this verse by arguing a minori ad majus from the lesse to the greater As if he should have said If in the day of judgment ye shall give an account for every idle word then much more for such a blasphemous vomit as this of yours That I cast 〈◊〉 Devils by the assistance of 〈◊〉 That our Saviours Argument here stands thus Maldonate tels us
the guilt of these we may wash our hands so that there is no obligation upon us to forbeare those things by which they are in this manner scandalized My Conclusion shall be that we are to eschew the active scandals and consequently scandala passiva data of the wicked and malitious those that are Pharisaicall and willfull spirits this is apparent First from 〈◊〉 prohibition of scandall 1 Cor. 10. 32. Give none offence neither to the Jewes nor to the Gentiles c. he spake of unconverted Jewes and Gentiles such as were enemies unto the Christian faith and the Jewes were of all men the most malitious enemies thereof Secondly from our Saviours denunciation of a woe unto the world by meanes of scandall Matth. 18. 7. 〈◊〉 unto the world because of offences which undeniably is to be extended unto all sorts of men Unto these two arguments we may adde foure other taken from First the distribution 〈◊〉 relation Thirdly effect Fourthly opposite of an active scandall First from the distribution of an active scandall and perusall of the members thereof An active scandall as I shewed but now is distributed into scandalum per se and per accidens now there is no doubt but that we are carefully to avoid such things as scandalize the wicked and malicious per se of themselves and in their own nature publick sins or such words and deeds as have a reall appearance of sin all the question will be concerning such things as scandalize them onely per accidens our duties and our indifferencies and by these they are frequently scandalized and that out of an erroneous opinion concerning their unlawfulnesse in which regard the resolution will be pertinent unto the matter in hand First then duties that are commanded by affirmative precepts may be forborne hic nunc sometimes and in some places to avoide the scandall of the wicked and malitious The usuall instances are in reproofe admonition punishment of sin and the like and this is warranted First by the precept of our Saviour Matth. 7. 6. Give not that which is holy unto the dogs neither cast ye your pearles before swine lest they trample them under their 〈◊〉 and turne againe and 〈◊〉 you Secondly by the example of David Psal. 39. 1 2. I will keep my tongue with a bridle while the wicked is before me I was dumb with silence I held my peace even from good Thirdly by that rule in Divinity affirmativa praecepta obligant semper non ad semper they alwaies bind but not to alwayes they do not oblige to doe the things required at all times but only when they are expedient for the glory of God and the good of others To reprove and admonish sinners is a duty commanded by God Lev. 19. 17. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart thou shalt in anywise rebuke thy neighbour and not suffer sin upon him But now this duty is not to be performed unseasonably when t is likely to bring no glory to God nor good unto others but rather likely to scandalize them Thus every private man is not bound to runne into an ale-house or taverne there to reprehend a company of desperate drunkards who would looke upon his reprehension as an act of pragmaticalnesse and insolency and for it be ready to quoite him downe the Staires or run him through with their swords and as imprudent an act would it be in Spaine to run into their Churches and there to cry against the Idolatry of the Masse and in the Streets of Constantinople to declame against the impostures of Mahomet for hereby we should scandalize them indiscreetly and foolishly occasion them as to blaspheme our religion so to cut us in peices Unto the 〈◊〉 rule in Divinity I shall adde another out of Logick finis dat mediis amabilitatem 't is the 〈◊〉 onely makes the meanes desireable Now reproofe admonition punishment and the like duties are enjoined as meanes in order to the reformation and bettering of others when therefore they are not likely to conduce unto this end but rather to oppose and hinder it prudence in such a case dictates an abstinence from them But let us take two exemplifications of this out of Aquinas 2. 2 dae 9. 43. art 7. The first is concerning the punishment of sin 〈◊〉 quòd poenarum inflictio non est propter se expentenda sed poenae infliguntur ut medicinae quaedam ad cohibenda peccata ideò in tantum 〈◊〉 rationem justitiae in quantum per eas peccata cohibentur Si autem per inflictionem poenarum 〈◊〉 sit plura 〈◊〉 peccata sequi tunc poenarum inflictio non continebitur sub justitia Et in hoc casu loquitur August quando 〈◊〉 ex excommunicatione aliquorum imminet periculum schismatis 〈◊〉 enim excommunicationem ferre non pertinet ad veritatem justitiae The second is concerning brotherly reproofe 〈◊〉 quod correptio fraterna ordinatur ad emendationem fratris ideò in tantum computanda est inter spiritualia bona in quantum hoc consequi potest Quod 〈◊〉 contingit si ex correptione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 si propter scandalum correptio dimittatur non dimittitur spirituale bonum But to proceed next to the scandall of the wicked by our indifferencies That we are to forbear things indifferent when they scandalize the wicked and malitious Parker in his treatise of the Crosse part 2. pag. 57. proves by many instances when the thing was indifferent doth not our Saviour foregoe his liberty to please the malicious as when he paid tribute lest he should offend them Matth. 17. 27. They were malicious at Corinth and seekers of occasion against Paul that were likely to be offended by his taking of wages there yet the thing being no necessary duty he thinketh it his duty to forbeare his power therein 1 Cor. 9. The Heathens are malicious to take offence when Christians go to Law for their own yet because going to law is not a duty necessary it must be forborne and Christians rather must loose their own then give occasion of scandall to them 1 Cor. 6. v. 6 7. Unto these examples let me adde another quoted by the same authour elsewhere out of Ezra 8. 22. I was ashamed saith Ezra to require of the King a band of Souldiers and horsemen to help us against the enemies in the way because we had spoken unto the King saying the hand of our God is upon all them for good that seeke him but his power and his wrath is against all them that forsake him Here for Ezra to have asked of the King of Persia a Heathen a band of souldiers and horsemen for his safe conduct was a thing lawfull and yet he forbore it lest he should scandalize him by begetting in him a suspicion that that was false which he had told him concerning Gods power and justice A second argument is drawn from the relation of an active scandall it is the morall
any man then make any tolerable apology for the tyranny of our late Prelates who commanded all to drive on with a furious career in the course of conformity without any the least stop though hereby were hazarded a world of soules purchased at no lower a rate than the divine bloud of our blessed Saviour It is the will and pleasure of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords that matters commanded by his affirmative precepts should be for a while forborne in case of the likelihood of scandall consequent but these men in imitation of him that exalted himselfe above all that is called God 2 Thes. 2. 4. could not be perswaded to dispense with a temporary forbearance of any ceremonies they enjoined though they well foresaw that the sequele of them was likely to be a very great and spreading scandall But now the non-conformists might spare all this discourse touching the obligation of humane lawes in generall because they hold that humane religious Doctrinall Ceremonies the matter in question cannot be lawfully determined by the authority of either Politicall or Ecclesiasticall superiours and for this they have two as I take it very convincing arguments First because all such Ceremonies are Sawcy additions unto the word and ordinances of God Deut. 4. 2. and cap. 12. 32. strange fire which the Lord commanded not Lev. 10. 8. Secondly because suppose they be indifferent which was a thing never granted yet they are unnecessary toyes and trifles and therefore it is not lawfull for our superiours to command them when from the practise of them it is very probable that scandall will arise For First every power is the Minister of God to thee for good Rom. 13. 4 the power of the Magistrate is like that of the Minister only for edification and not destruction 2 Cor. 10. 8. and cap. 13. 10. but now if he should have power to command humane symbolicall Ceremonies that may be well spared in Gods worship and service whenthere is likelihood of the consecution of Scandall then he should have power to do mischiefe to enjoine things hurtfull and destructive unto the soules of men Secondly our Saviours commination against scandall Matth. 18. 7. Woe to that man by whom the offence cometh reacheth Magistrates as well as private persons and we may say the same of the Apostolicall prohibitions of scandall both to the Romans and the Corinthians Rom. 14. 13 15 20 21. 1 Cor. 8. 9. and chap. 10. 32. Unto these prohibitions adde we Pauls resolution to avoid scandall arising from the use of things indifferent if meat make my brother to offend saith he I will eat no flesh while the world standeth lest I make my brother to offend 1 Cor. 8. 13. For From this resolution the unlawfulnesse of the injunction of such ceremonies as ours will undeniably follow To cleare this I shall presuppose that which cannot with any colour of reason be denied to wit that that which Paul held unlawfull for himselfe to practise in his own person upon a generall account belonging to all Christians could not by him be lawfully imposed upon others by an Ecclesiasticall Canon but now Paul held it unlawfull to eat flesh in case of scandall probably consequent and this was upon a generall reason belonging to all Christians and therefore he thought it utterly unlawsull to impose any such matter upon others when scandall was likely to follow From this thus premised I shall hence thus argue Syllogistically against our Prelates imposition of our Ceremonies If it were unlawfull for Paul to impose upon the Corinthians such ceremonies as ours then it was unlawfull for our Prelates to impose such upon us But it was unlawfull for Paul to impose such Ceremonies as ours upon the Corinthians Therefore it was unlawfull for the Prelates to impose such Ceremonies upon us The sequele of the major is evident because the Prelates could not pretend unto so much authority in matters Ecclesiasticall as Paul had for in each of the Apostles there was a greater 〈◊〉 of jurisdiction then in any that succeeded them As for the Minor that may be confirmed by this following Syllogisme If it were unlawfull for Paul to impose upon the Corinthians the eating of flesh when scandall was likely to ensue then it was unlawfull for him to impose upon them the use of such Ceremonies as ours But the former appeareth to be unlawfull by the 1 Cor. 8. 13. Therefore the latter was unlawfull also There is nothing here can be questioned but the Major and that is easily confirmed from a just comparison of flesh with such Ceremonies as ours First the eating of flesh was undoubtedly a thing more cleerly indifferent then the practise of such Ceremonies of ours Secondly flesh was necessary unto the maintenance of the life of man by disjunction that is flesh or some other meat but now such Ceremonies as ours are not necessary unto the worship and service of God by disjunction for God may be worshipped without them or any others in their stead a surplice saith Rutherford is not necessary by way of disjunction for neither is surplice necessary nor any other white or red habit that hath some mysticall signification like unto Surplice So kneeling to the elements is neither necessary nor any the like religious honouring of them by prostration before them or kissing them But against this accusation of our Ceremonies for scandall there are objected two Comparisons First of the duties of justice and Charity together the duties of justice are more obligatory then the duties of charity as being not only a morall but a legall debt Now to hinder the scandall of the weak is a duty of charity only a morall debt to obey the lawfull command of authority in things indifferent a duty of justice a legall debt and therefore of the greater obligation and moment I shall the rather insist on this argument because it is of late so much stood on by Dr Sanderson in his last Sermons printed 1656. pag. 249. where we are not saith he able to discharge both debts of justice are to be paid saith he before bebts of charity Now the duty of obedience is debitum justitiae and a matter of right my superiour may challenge it at my hands as his due and I doe him wrong if I withhold it from him But the care of not giving offence is but debitum charitatis and a matter of but courtesie I am to performe it to my brother in love when I see cause but he cannot challenge it from me as his right nor can justly say I do him wrong if I neglect it It is therefore no more lawfull for me to disobey the lawfull command of a superiour to prevent thereby the offence of one or a few brethren then it is lawfull for me to do one man wrong to do another man a courtesie withall or then it is lawfull for me to rob the Exchequer to relieve an Hospitall For answer First if this argument
David's My heart is prepar'd O God my heart is prepar'd I will sing and give prayse Psal. 57. 7. 2. Actuall thanksgiving The act of thankfullnesse whether inward or outward cannot be perpetuall We cannot indeed we are not bound to be allwayes actually thankfull for other duties are also required and therefore must have their turne as well as thanksgiving Recourse therefore must be had to that old golden Rule Affirmativa 〈◊〉 obligant semper non ad semper Affirmative precepts doe alwayes bind but not to allwayes so that we are not bound to performe allwayes what they injoyne but only loco tempore 〈◊〉 where we have due time and place We are then allwayes bound to give thanks actually allwayes but then only when there is opportunity and seasonablenesse of doing it The word Allwayes then is to be taken not in a Mathematicall but a Morall latitude and so it imports nothing but Frequency and Constancy And this acception of the word is usuall in Scripture The Disciples of Christ are sayd Luk. 24. 53 to be continually in the Temple prayseing and blessing God that is frequently 〈◊〉 th thy masters Sonne shall 〈◊〉 bread allwayes at my Table 2 Sam. 9. 10. 2 King 25. 29. Giving thanks allwayes then with our Apostle sounds no other than giving thanks frequently and constantly First then we are to doe it 〈◊〉 not for fits and upon brunts only Gods hand is ever opened to blesse us with an operative blessing our mouth should therefore be if not ever yet often open to blesse him with a declarative blessing He dayly loades us with benefits saith David Psal. 68. 19. He 〈◊〉 wes his mercy every morning saith 〈◊〉 Lament 3. 23 we may adde every hower every minute every moment No day morning hower minute moment comes over our heads but we have a fresh supply of them We heve them continued increased inlarged old mercies renew'd new ones added Is it not Justice then that we desire and strive to send him back as often a fresh returne of our praises at least that we ingrosse up as much of our time as we can for this businesse that for it wee thinke all our spare howers too sew David herein was exemplary with him no time amisse no season unseasonable for this worke We have him at it as in the day All the day Psal. 71. 8 seaven times a day Psal. 119 164 all the day long Psal. 35. 28 so at night in the deepest of night At midnight will I rise and give thanks unto 〈◊〉 Psal. 119. 62. 2 Our thanksgiving must be not only frequent but constant durable not as a flash or blaze suddainely extinguish'd but rather as the Vest all fire among the Romans ever kept in This permanency of our thanks was figur'd thinkes Philo the 〈◊〉 by the fire upon the Altar which as you read Levit. 6. 13 was ever to be burning never to goe out Intimated say some by the binding of the sacrifice with cords unto the horns of the Altar mention'd Psal. 118. 27 for it is not only lay the sacrifice viz of prayse on the horns of the Altar but bind it bind it with cords and what so fast and surely bound likely to hold Now for this we can assigne no better reason then the constancy of God s mercies 't was Davids Psal. 89. 2. I will sing of thy mercy saith he for ever Why for I have sayd mercy shall be built up for ever built up built up for ever each terme denotes a fixed and permanent state His compassions faile not Lam. 3. 22. Neither should our thanks therefore faile but be as lasting as our lives while I live saith David I will praise the Lord I will sing praises unto my God while I have any being Psal. 104. 33. His compassions are new every morning Lam. 3. 23 and if so then not fadeing semblably therefore let our thanks be still new and fresh never dying nay not so much as languishing decaying You have seene one extent of thanksgiving in respect of Continuance allwayes Another followes in regard of it's matter for all things Howsoever thankfullnesse askes a sound Judgment to estimate duely of the value of blessings yet not any Invention to find them out to doe that a barren and meane one will serve the turne So we have a thankfull heart we cannot be to seeke of matter for with it all things will supply us giving thanks for all things c. And we may give thanks for all things either collectively or distributively 1. Collectively joyntly for all things together when we heape the whole matter of our thanksgiving into one lump some such generall forme as God be praysed for all his mercies This we may must doe but at this we must not stop We must goe farther and give thanks for all things Distributively severally and apart desire and indeavour we must to doe it not only distributively pro generibus singulorum for all sorts ranks kinds of blessings but also distributively pro singulis generum for all blessings of all sorts and kinds whatsoever Labour we should to keep an exact bill and register of particular favours and for them to allot particular and severall thanksgivings When we come to count our crosses we reckon them distinctly one by one as how we have been afflicted this way how that how crossed in such an action disappointed in such an enterprize and shall we not be as punctuall in our recognition of favours and distinctly blazon out the specialties of them too You see what a sea of matter even without bottome I have before me All things Should I curiously runne over but the heads of blessings blessings positive blessings private blessings temporall blessings spirituall blessings in 〈◊〉 blessings in reversion and expectation this discourse would be enlarged farre beyond my intention I will only then propound and resolve two scruples that hang by this point and soe dispatch it The first of them is Whether or no God's greatnesse absolute goodnesse his goodesse in himselfe with other absolute perfections of his as Truth and power manifested in his workes be matter of thanksgiving whether or no we must be thankfull for them For 〈◊〉 we must presuppose there is a difference betwixt praise and thanks though we ordinarily use the words promiscuously We may you know praise Strangers that never did us good tune nay enemies who have done us many bad but we thanke only benefactors Any worth or excellency may be matter of our praise only benefits of thanksgiving God then absolutely 〈◊〉 without the relation of 〈◊〉 is invested with such attractive 〈◊〉 and ravishing beauties as that he is saith David worthy to be praised Psal. 18. 3. Secondly we must observe that a thing may be said to be matter of our thanksgiving either properly and directly or else improperly and by way of reduction properly and directly only God's relative goodnesse his goodnesse to us the goodt hings we receive from him can be matter