binds necessarily but that rule which makes it a duty to follow it for examples in indifferent things do not bind without a Law making it to be a duty And so it evidently appears that all obligatory force is taken off from the examples themselves and resolved into one of the two former the morall nature of the action or a positive Law And therefore those who plead the obligatory nature of Scripture-examples must either produce the morall nature of these examples or else a rule binding us to follow those examples Especially when these examples are brought to found a New positive Law obliging all Christians necessarily to the end of the world Concerning the binding nature of Apostolicall practice I shall discourse largely afterwards The next thing pleaded for a Divine Right is by Divine Acts. As to this â—t is again evident that all Divine Acts do not constitute such a Right therefore there must be something expressed in those Acts when such a Divine Right follows them whence we may infallibly gather it was Gods intention they should perpetually oblige as is plain in the cases instanced in the most for this purpose as Gods resting on the seventh day making the Sabbath perpetual For it was not Gods resting that made it the Sabbath for that is only expressed as the occasion of its institution but it was Gods sanctifying the day that is by a Law setting it apart for his own service which made it a duty And so Christs resurrection was not it which made the Lords day a Sabbath of Divine Right but Christs resurrection was the occasion of the Apostles altering only a circumstantiall part of a morall duty already which being done upon so great reasons and by persons indued with an insallible spirit thereby it becomes our duty to observe that morall command in this limitation of time But here it is further necessary to distinguish between acts meerly positive and acts donative or legall The former conâ—er no right at all but the latter do not barely as acts but as legall acts that is by some declaration that those acts do conserr right And so it is in all donations and therefore in Law the bare delivery of a thing to another doth not give a legall title to it without express transferring of dominion and propriety with it Thus in Christs delivering the Keys to Peter and therest of the Apostles by that act I grant the Apostles had the power of the Keyes by Divine Right but then it was not any bare act of Christ which did it but it was only the declaration of Christs will conferring that authority upon them Again we must distinguish between a right conferâ—'d by a donative act and the unalterable nature of that Right for it is plain there may be a Right personall as well as successive derivative and perpetuall And therefore it is not enough to prove that a Right was given by any act of Christ unless it be made appear it was Christs intention that Right should be perpetuall if it oblige still For otherwise the extent of the Apostolical Commission the power of working miracles as well as the power of the Keyes whether by it we mean a power declarative of duty or a power authoritative and penall must continue still if a difference be not made between these two and some rule sound out to know when the Right conferr'd by Divine Acts is personall when successive Which rule thus found out must make the Right unalterable and so concerning us and not the bare donative act of Christ For it is evident they were all equally conferr'd upon the Apostles by an act of Christ and if some continue still and others do not then the bare act of Christ doth not make an unalterable Divine Right And so though it be proved that the Apostles had superiority of order and jurisdiction over the Pastors of the Church by an act of Christ yet it must further be proved that it was Christs intention that superiority should continue in their successors or it makes nothing to the purpose But this argument I confess I see not how those who make a necessary Divine Right to follow upon the acts of Christ can possibly avoid the force of The last thing pleaded for Divine Right is Divine approbation but this least of all constitutes a Divine Right For if the actions be extraordinary Gods approbation of them as such cannot make them an ordinary duty In all other actions which are good and therefore only commendable they must be so either because done in conformity to Gods revealed Will or to the nature of things good in themselves In the one it is the positive Law of God in the other the Law of Nature which made the action good and so approved by God and on that account we are bound to do it For God will certainly approve of nothing but what is done according to his Will revealed or natural which Will and Law of his is that which makes any thing to be of Divine Right i. e. perpetually binding as to the observation of it But for acts of meerly positive nature which we read Gods approbation of in Scripture by vertue of which approbation those actions do oblige us in this case I say it is not Gods meer approbation that makes the obligation but as that approbation so recorded in Scripture is a sufficient testimony and declaration of Gods intention to oblige men And so it comes to be a positive Law which is nothing else but a sufficient declaration of the Legislators will and intention to bind in particular actions and cases Thus now we have cleared whereon a necessary and unalterable Divine Right must be founded either upon the Law of Nature or some positive Law of God sufficiently declared to be perpetually binding CHAP. II. Six Hypotheses laid down as the basis of the following Discourse 1. The irreversible obligation of the Law of Nature either by humane or Divine positive Laws in things immediately flowing from it 2. Things agreeable to the Law of Nature may be lawfully practised in the Church of God where there is no prohibition by positive Laws inlarged into 5 subservient Propositions 3. Divine positive Laws concerning the manner of the thing whose substance is determined by the Law of Nature must be obeyed by vertue of the obligation of the natural Law 4. Things undetermined both by the naturall and positive Laws of God may be lawfully determined by the supream authority in the Church of God 5. What is thâ—â— determined by lawfull authority doth bind the consciences of men subject to that authority to obedience to those determinations 6. Things thus determined by lawfull authority are not thereby made unalterable but may be revoked limited and changed by the same authority HAving shewed what a Divine Right is and whereon it is founded our next great inquiry will be How far Church-Government is founded upon Divine Right taken either of these two wayes
them in particular but to the Magistrate in general So that in things left lawfull and undetermin'd by the Word where there ariseth no obligation from the matter it must arise from our subjection and relation to the Magistrate and what is the ground of obedience is the cause of the obligation Secondly He hath only the power of obligations who hath the power of making Sanctions to those Laws By Sanctions I mean here in the sense of the civil Law eas legum partes quibus poenas constituimus adversus eos qui contra leges fecerint those parts of the Law which determine the punishments of the violaters of it Now it is evident that he only hath power to oblige who hath power to punish upon disobedience And it is as evident that none hath power to punish but the civill Magistrate I speak of legall penalties which are annexed to such Laws as concern the Church Now there being no coercive or coactive power belonging to the Church as such all the force of such Laws as respect the outward Polity of the Church must be derived from the civill Magistrate Thirdly He who can null and declare all other obligations void done without his power hath the only power to oblige For whatsoever destroys a former obligation must of necessity imply a power to oblige because I am bound to obey him in the abstaining from that I was formerly obliged to But this power belongs to the Magistrate For suppose in some indifferent Rites and Ceremonies the Church representative that is the Governors of it pro tempore do prescribe them to be observed by all the Supreme power fâ—rbids the doing of those things if this doth not null the former supposed obligation I must inevitably run upon these absurdities First that there are two supreme powers in a Nation at the same time Secondly that a man may lie under two different Obligations as to the same thing he is bound to do it by one power and not to do it by the other Thirdly the same action may be a duty and a sin a duty in obeying the one power a sin in disobeying the other Therefore there can be but one power to oblige which is that of the Supreme Magistrate Having thus far asserted the Magistrates due power and Authority as to matters of Religion we proceed to examine the extent of this power in determining things left at liberty by the Word of God in order to the Peace and Government of the Church For our clear and distinct proceeding I shall ascend by these three steps First to shew that there are some things left undetermined by the Word Secondly that these things are capable of positive Determinations and Restraint Thirdly that there are some bounds and limits to be observed in the stating and determining these things First That there are some things left undetermined by the Word By Determining here I do not mean determining whether things be lawful or no for so there is no Ritâ— or Ceremony whatsoever but is determined by the Scripture in that sense or may be gathered from the application of particular actions to the general Rules of Scripture but by Determining I mean whether all things concerning the Churches Polity and Order be determined as Duties or no viz. that this we are bound to observe and the other not As for instance what time manner method gesture habit be used in preaching the Word whether Baptism must be by dipping or sprinkling at what day time place the Child shall be baptized and other things of a like Nature with these Those who assert any of these as duties must produce necessarily the Command making them to be so For Duty and Command have a necessary respect and relation to one another If no Command be brought it necessarily follows that they are left at liberty So as to the Lords Supper Calvin saith whether the Communicants take the Bread themselves or receive it being given them whether they should give the Cup into the hands of the Deacon or to their next Neighbour whether the Bread be leavened or not the Wine red or white nihil refert it matters not Haec indifferentia sunt in Ecclesiae libertate posita they are matters of indifferency and are left to the Churches liberty But this matter of Indifferency is not yet so clear as it is generally thought to be we shall therefore bare the ground a little by some necessary distinctions to see where the root of indifferency lies Which we shall the rather do because it is strongly asserted by an Honourable person that there is no Indifferency in the things themselves which are still either unlawful or necessary if lawful at this time in these circumstances but all indifferency lies in the darkness and shortness of our understandings which may make some things seem so to us But that Honourable person clearly runs upon a double mistake First that Indifferency is a medium participationis of both extremes and not only negationis viz. that as intermediate colours partake both of black and white and yet are neither so in morality between good and bad there is an intermediate entity which is neither but indifferent to either Whereas the Nature of Indifferency lies not in any thing intermediate between good and bad but in some thing undetermined by Divine Laws as to the necessity of it so that if we speak as to the extremes of it it is something lying between a necessary duty and an intrinsecal evil The other mistake is that throughout that Discourse he takes Indifferency as Circumstantiated in Individual actions and as the morality of the action is determined by its Circumstances whereas the proper notion of Indifferency lies in the Nature of the action considered in its self abstractly and so these things are implyed in an indifferent action First absolute undetermination as to the general nature of the act by a Divine Law that God hath left it free for men to do it or no. Secondly that one part hath not more propension to the Rule then the other for if the doing of it comes nearer to the rule then the omission or on the contrary this action is not wholly indifferent Thirdly that neither part hath any repugnancy to the Rule for that which hath so is so far from being indifferent that it becomes unlawful So that an indifferent action is therein like the Iron accosted by two Loadstones on either side of equal virtue and so hovers in medio inclining to neither but supposing any degree of virtue added to the one above the other it then inclines towards it or as the Magnetical Needle about the Azores keeps its self directly parallel to the Axis of the world without variation because it is supposed then to be at an equal distance from the two Great Magnets the Continents of Europe and America But no sooner is it removed from thence but it hath its variations So indifferency taken in
and the sense of the names must neither be fetched from the custome now used nor from the Etymologie of the word but from the undoubted practice of Apostolical times if that can be made appear what it was Which will be best done if we can once find out what course and order the Apostles took in the forming and modelling the Churches by them planted That which we lay then as a foundation whereby to clear what Apostolical practice was is that the Apostles in the forming Churches did observe the customes of the Jewish Synagogues Totum regimen Ecclesiarum Christi conformatum fuit ad Synagogarum exemplar saith Grotius truly Praesides curatores Ecclesiarum ad instar Presbyterorum Synagogae Iudaicae constitutos fuisse constat as Salmasius often affirms In which sense we understand that famous speech of the Author of the Commentary on St. Pauls Epistles which goes under the name of Ambrose but now judged by most to be done by Hilary a Deacon of the Church of Rome under which name St. Augustine quotes some words on the fifth to the Romanes which are found still in those Commentaries Nam apud omnes utique gentes honorabilis est senectus unde Synagoga postea Ecclesia Seniores habuit sine quorum consilio nihil agebatur in Ecclesiâ which words are not to be understood of a distinct sort of Presbyters from such as were employed in preaching the Word but of such Presbyters as were the common Council of the Church for the moderating and ruling the affairs of it which the Church of Christ had constituted among them as the Jewish Synagogue had before And from hence we observe that the Ebionites who blended Judaism and Christianity together whence Ierome saith of them Dum volent Iudai esse Christiani nec Iudaei sunt nec Christiani they made a Linsey-woolsey Religion which was neither Iudaism nor Christianity These as Epiphanius tells us called their publike Meeting-place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Pastors of their Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thereby implying the resemblance and Analogy between the form of Government in both of them But this will best be made appear by comparing them both together For which we are to take notice how much our Saviour in the New Testament did delight to take up the received practices among the Jews only with such alterations of them as were suitable to the Nature and Doctrine of Christianity as hath been abundantly manifested by many learned men about the Rites of the Lords Supper taken from the post-coenium among the Jews the use of Baptism from the Baptism used in initiating Proselytes Excommunication from their putting out of the Synagogue As to which things it may be observed that those Rites which our Saviour transplanted into the Gospel-soyl were not such as were originally founded on Moses his Law but were introduced by a confederate Discipline among themselves And thus it was in reference to the government of the Synagogues among them for although the reason of erecting them was grounded on a command in the Levitical Law Levit. 23. 3. where holy Convocations are required upon the Sabbath-dayes yet the building of Synagogues in the Land was not as far as we can find till a great while after For although Moses require the duty of assembling yet he prescribes no orders for the place of meeting nor for the manner of spending those dayes in Gods service nor for the persons who were to super-intend the publike worship performed at that time These being duties of a moral nature are left more undetermined by Moses his Law which is most punctual in the Ceremonial part of Divine Service And therefore even then when God did determine the positives of Worship we see how much he left the performance of morals to the wisdom and discretion of Gods people to order them in a way agreeable to the mind and will of God We shall not here discourse of the more elder Customs and observations of the Synagogues but take the draught of them by the best light we can about our Saviours time when the Apostles copyed out the Government of Christian-Churches by them About the time of Christ we find Synagogues in very great request among the Jews God so disposing it that the moral part of his service should be more frequented now the Ceremonial was expiring and by those places so erected it might be more facile and easie for the Apostles to disperse the Gospel by preaching it in those places to which it was the custome for the people to resort And as Paul at Athens observing the Altar inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the unknown God takes his Text from thence and begins to preach God and Christ to them so the Apostles in every Synagogue meet with a Copy of the Law from whence they might better take their rise to discover him who was the end of the Law for Righteousness to all that believe For Moses of old time hath in every City them that Preach him being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day It was their constant custome then every Sabbath day to have the Law publickly read for which every Synagogue was furnished with a most exact Copy which was looked upon as the great Treasure and Glory of their Synagogue in the Copying out of which the greatest care and diligence was used In their Synagogues they read onely the Law and the Prophets the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hagiographa were not ordinarily read in publick the Law for the more convenient reading it was distributed into fifty four Sections which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every week one Section being read joyning twice two lesser Sections together the whole Law was read through once every year But here I cannot say that the Jews were absolutely bound up to read the several Sections appointed for the dayes as it is commonly thought from which Paraschae and the times prefixed of reading them Cloppenburgh fetched a new Interpretation of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is that the first Sabbath was that of the civil year which began with the Section 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the twenty fourth of the month Tisri but the second Sabbath after the first was the first Sabbath of the sacred Year which began with the Section 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the Calends of Nisan but I doe not see any such Evidence of so exact and curious a Division of the several Sections so long since as the time of our Saviour is which appears by our Saviours reading in the Synagogue at Nazareth where it seems he read after the Synagogue custome as one of the seven called out by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to read before the people but we find no Section assigned him by him that delivered the book to him the Office of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but it is said of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉