spiritual mediatorly administration of rule towards his purchased ones and this is twofold in or over persons particularly or in and over bodies politick In and over particular persons his Throne is the same viz. Conscience in the regenerate and unregenerate onely he rules these legally and the other evangelically these by a Law of Fear them by a Law of Love merely natural men by a dispensation of the Covenant of Works Believers by a dispensation of the Covenant of Grace And here the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ rules in a Christians Heart and the Conscience according to rule acquits or condemns Neither is the true regulating force of the Moral Law any way extinct but the terrifying embondaging nature of it removed or at least abated any remainder of which is called the Spirit of Bondage neither is there therefore two Laws in a Believer Moral and Evangelical but the Moral Law is evangeliz'd to him by his new relation to Christ the Curse being taken away due to the sinner and he coming under another obligation to an obediential conformity to the Law viz. the greatest ties of love and thankfulness and hence his Obedience is called New Obedience § 6. Another part of his special and immediate Government consists in his giving Laws to his Church Militant and deputation of Ministers for execution thereof and therefore he is called The Head of his Church Eph. 1.22 Hence his Apostles and Prophets durst not teach any thing but what they had immediately from him either by word or tradition Matth. 28. and we may boldly assert as James 4.12 there is but one Law-giver and though it be so plain and indisputable a truth yet because men of corrupt mindes by practice and argument have made it their great aim to rob Christ of this Prerogative we shall make it the principal part of the ensuing Discourse to illustrate and confirm this position against all humane Vsurpations § 7. Christ's immediate Government of his Church Militant is not to be understood as if he had not appointed the executive administration to be by Pastors and other Officers deputed by himself as appears from 1 Cor. 12.28 Ephes 4.11 12. but the meaning is that it is immediate these two manner of ways 1. In that he hath not authorized or commissionated any such Officers or Governours on earth who may compose and enact new Laws for the disciplining of his Church in the order and manner of his instituted Worship his own Laws here are onely binding 2. In that all Church-officers receive their executive power from Christ immediately nullo Papa aut Episcopo mediante neither have any of them any power of deputation or substitution of others to execute that Office or Power committed to themselves by Christ And herein lieth the opposition between Christ's immediate reign in his Church and his mediate in the Kingdoms of men and for this amongst other differences which Amesius makes between the Magistratical and Ministerial jurisdiction he saith Magistratus jurisdictionem habet cum Imperio atque adeo si summus sit justâ ratione possit leges condere abolere atque jurisdictionem aliis mandare Sed Ministri Ecclesiastici in sese considerati sunt mandatorii meri qui proprii nihil habent sed quiequid legitime agunt id omne vice Christi mandantis agunt atque adeo neque leges possunt ferre neque aliis mandare potestatem illam quam acceperunt Medul lib. 2. cap. 17. § 48. § 8. The chief of our assertion about the immediate Government of Christ concerns his Legislative power that where-ever he governs in this manner he hath reserved the law-giving-Law-giving-power to himself as his peculiar Prerogative as to natural Agents Who can give and prescribe Laws for such orderly and natural direction of them to their several places and ends but the Creator alone Who can give Ordinances to the Sun Moon and Stars set a bound to the Seas command the former and latter Rain appoint the vicissitudes of Day and Night Summer and Winter Spring and Autumn c. and would not such a Creature be justly chargeable with the greatest folly and presumption that should pretend to such a Power and therefore God challengeth Job on this account Job 38. As for Conscience all are witnesses that will deal but impartially in the acknowledgment of the truth that there is nothing lays a true obligation thereon but a Divine Law neither do Humane Laws any farther binde Conscience than they are dependent upon or reducible unto some Divine Law and therefore all true obedience to them is for the Lords sake As for the Church he always prescribed what Law and Rule he would have the affairs thereof managed by The Church of the Jews had her Laws from Christ though under a more legal and typical Dispensation executed in the ministration of Moses and of other Ministers of his own appointment in that Levitical Oeconomy So in the New Testament he sent forth his Ministers to teach onely such Laws and Orders of his House as he himself had instituted and appointed and he is compleat in that respect in his House which in some respect is more properly his the Old Testament-Church being called Moses's house because the will of Christ is here more plainly and fully dispensed and administred more immediately Christ acting there by the ministration of Moses for the delivery of Levitical Laws and for constituting and ruling the Body Politick of his Church but in the latter days of the Gospel God spake to us by his Son Christ immediately himself delivering the order and manner of the Gospel-Church when he was here on earth and after his Ascention by his Spirit inspiring his Apostles and such as were extraordinarily qualified in the primitive times since which he hath managed that Government by his ordinary Ministers acting according to the Rules and Prescripts left behinde him in his holy Word CHAP. IIII. Of Christ's Mediate Legislative Power § 1. HAving somewhat treated of the immediate Jurisdiction of Christ it 's needful to speak a little of his Mediate viz. how far he rules Bodies Politick by the mediation of man or hath committed a power of law-making and executing unto him and to shew that mans power cannot be indefinite and unlimited but derivative and limited and for the illustrating hereof we are to examine whence man hath his Civil Power and how far it extends § 2. All Civil Powers have their just Authority from Christ the King of Kings the Head of all Principalities Powers Body Politicks Societies as is manifested by the following Scriptures and such others Prov. 8.15 16. Dan. 4.25 Rom. 13.1 2 4. wherefore it is the manifest will of Christ 1. That there should be Civil Government in the world 2. That the personal possession of it be received by the all-disposing Providence of God 3. That it 's an Ordinance and appointment of Christ that such execute distributive Justice for the encouragement of Well-doers
if the Law be just and equitable a Christian is bound in Conscience to yield positive active obedience not onely for wrath i. e. fear of threat and punishment but for Conscience sake because the Law of God obligeth us to obedience to all the just Laws of men civil Government being his appointment as much as Oeconomical but it 's not mans Law that nextly and immediately bindes Conscience to obedience but Gods and mans Law bindes onely by vertue of and for the sake of Gods Hence a man that breaks the just Laws of man sins against God and eo nomine wrongs his Conscience As on the other hand he that obeys an unjust Law of man i. e. a Law no way warrantable by the revealed will of God breaks Gods Law and if his Conscience tell him so he sins against his Conscience which always aggravates any sin against God Hence if at any time he hath to do with any such Law he ought rather to run the hazard of mans displeasure than Gods God is to be obeyed rather than man if one must be disobeyed and obeying God indemnifies Conscience from the guilt of sin in our disobeying of man in the same act So if a Law of man lies before us which we doubt concerning the lawfulness of we are here at least to suspend active obedience while we seek for further information for whether the thing in it self be sin or no it 's not so much to us at present as whether we are satisfied of the nature of it and know what it is by the light of Truth shining in our Hearts it will amount to sin in us to do a doubtful action if the Apostles Doctrine be true But if the Precepts of men be found upon the best examination to be contrary to God's a Christian's Conscience is the most certainly disobliged his duty lies plain before him God's Law is to be observed and hence it is that some can joyfully suffer all wrongs from the hands of men in the case of refusal of active obedience unto their Laws because they are perswaded either from a truely-enlightned Conscience or from an erring which is binding as to present action for a man must walk by that light he hath or by none at all that such refusal of active Obedience and the sufferings of theirs is agreeable to the revealed minde of God and therefore most justifiable at God's and Man's Tribunal § 6. Here will fall in a great enquiry That although it be true that all Humane Power both Legislative and Executive be limited by a superiour Power yet there 's but few that have the felicity of keeping within prescribed bounds or having such Subjects that will not be excepting against the Laws of their Superiours as not agreable to God's Laws and this they will make the Plea for their disobedience Both Superiours and Inferiours will plead Conscience though never so unrighteously what should be done in this case Unto this Allegation many things may be said for it 's sufficiently known that though every Law primarily requires active Obedience yet upon a Transgression it is satisfied with the due execution of the Penalty but for the future expects active Obedience and a reiterated refusal of Obedience the Law looks upon as presumptuous and is really so if this continuation at enmity with the Law be voluntary and deliberate after sufficient Information and Conviction And if this refusal be conjoyn'd with resistance it is no better than Rebellion which we explode as unwarrantable for a Christian About Presumption we distinguish there is that which is really so and that which is onely called so by an unjust Law and mistaking Judge Persisting in refusal of obedience after conviction of our duty is presumption and a sin against God whoever the Law-maker is But if such persistance be justified by the light of God's Law in Conscience it is not a presumptuous sin or any sin at all against God however man may term it a presumptuous breach of his Law for a conscientious Christian can no more obey an unrighteous Law after suffering than before § 7. In all cases of voluntary deliberate refusal of active Obedience to a Law there is and must needs be a wrong done to the Law-giver or Subject To the Law-giver if his Power Law and Ends be good and they not answered for the first end of every Law is and ought to be active Obedience as beforesaid the Law of God first obliging us so to the just Laws of man and the end of the execution of punishment is for the reducing the sufferers to active Obedience and the exemplary restraint of others from Disobedience Hence it follows that a deliberate resolved and constant undergoing of Suffering in this way of refusal is a practical charging the Magistrate with the highest Usurpation and Tyranny in imposing Laws of that nature and therefore the greatest disparaging testimony born against his Law a great reputation in the judgement of the world to the Cause pleaded for let it be truth or errour and the most exemplary disappointment of the Magistrates Law-making ends whereby others are greatly emboldened to the same kind of refusal § 8. In all cases where Magistrates abuse their Power they do a wrong to the supream Judge in going beyond his Commission and intrenching on his Prerogative and do apparent injury to the Subject 1. In that an inferiour subordinate Law-giver hath bereaved him by a Law of those just Liberties and Priviledges granted to him by the Charter of his supream Law-giver 2. In afflicting and grieving his Subject by imposing an unjust Law and causing him to suffer by it when he pleads exemption by a Law in full force and a discharge from a higher Court and is praiseworthy for the said refusal not to be condemned no nor reproached as an evil doer or presumptuous for his permanency in non-obedience 3. In laying his Subject under a necessity of continued and reiterated sufferings he being obliged in Conscience or else to answer the default at a higher Tribunal constantly to persist in his refusal to yield such Obedience though he is to pass under renewed and reiterated penalties for a man to return to obedience after a deliberate suffering is a visible practical condemnation of himself for his former refusal which would greatly reflect on his honour both as a man or a Christian unless by the access of further light he findes his Conscience did erre and so be convinced of his duty then it becomes him both as a man and Christian to retract Humanum est errare beluinum in errore persistere § 9. Now seeing such inevitable wrong lights somewhere in cases of these deliberate refusals it will be enquired who or what must determine to the satisfaction of each party both standing highly on their Justification To which I answer An actual reconciliation is utterly impossible rebus sic stantibus because it will be as the greater overswaying earthly power will have it Deo
in their circumstances and therefore cannot be determined but pro hic nunc and must be liable still to no other judgement than that of Discretion Those things that Christ hath left under it cannot by humane Laws be removed from it therefore indifferent things may be agreed on by common consent in Congregations or by the Officers thereof according as the expediency or conveniency appears unto them and for so long and no longer Hence they cannot undergo the Title or Denomination of a Law but onely of prudential Rules which have no binding reason for observation but the continuance of the agreeing circumstances as it may be judged most convenient by the Church to assemble at such an hour so long as the days are of such a length but when that circumstance alters then it may be more convenient at another Many such instances may be given and no Church can walk comfortably as long as any Authority undertakes to prohibit them of this liberty of their Prudentials in all such matters of circumstance and alterable appendixes to the worship of God CHAP. XII Wherein is handled the first Question about things Indifferent § 1. THe first Question that seems to offer itself to be so this Whether a religious Gospel-Indifferency ceaseth to be so when any thing is positively and certainly determined as to its practice by humane Authority Explic. By religious Gospel-Indifferency I understand as before-mentioned any thing or action which circumstantially adheres to the worship of God and may be used or omitted or altered according to the judgement of discretion without any transgression of a Law of Christ Again this we acknowledge that a thing may be determined as to Expediency by a Society or lawful Authority but not imposed as a standing and binding Law but being commended by the judgements of many concurring conscientiously studious of the minde and will of Christ it carries the more force along with it to perswade us at least to present acting till by further and greater illumination we be otherwise enclined Nay if any thing be determined by those that are in Authority and proposed as their judgement according to their light received not Magisterially but Demonstratively onely convincingly enough as to the Expediency it carries with it the force of a Law unto Conscience not of man but of God man being a Candlestick onely to hold forth that Light and binds it to submit thereunto But otherwise if men in authority undertake to make a Law that a thing in itself by Christ's Law left indifferent i. e. to Christian discretion to do or omit shall become an absolute necessity or an expedient necessity and according to their will and opinion binde Inferiours to the constant practice of this by a penalty We affirm that a religious Gospel-Indifferency notwithstanding all humane authoritative determination changing it into a necessity keeps its pristine indifferency and remains the same to a Christians Conscience and practice The proof of this Assertion follows § 2. Argum. 1. That power that can change Gospel-indifferencies into Gospel-necessities can also change Gospel-necessities into Gospel-indifferencies but no humane Authority can do the latter Ergo not the former The Assumption will not be denied by any Protestant it being a presumption of the highest nature for humane authority to pretend to dispense with or null any of the manifest Laws of Christ The Major is also evident because it must be an Authority of the same kind to make and null a Law of the same kinde If it be said a humane authority may make a Gospel-indifferency necessary genere civili the Answer falls far short for we speak of Laws of the same kinde having equal force upon the Conscience for a Civil Legislative power can as well null any Law of a civil nature onely as it can make it So if Man could make Moral Laws he might as well null those which he hath made or dispense with them at pleasure as make new We must always allow a Soveraign Prerogative to Supream Law-givers in any kinde as to promulgate so to abrogate or dispense with their own Laws at pleasure And if it be said that those Laws that man makes concerning the use of indifferent things necessarily in the worship of Christ are civil onely being onely for decency splendor c. I reply that it cannot be so in the nature of them for it 's the respect and end of a thing that gives it its specifical denomination when it hath none such absolutely considered that which respects and aims at the Gospel-worship of Christ or pretends so to do is or should be a part of Gospel-worship as kneeling is an indifferent gesture a man may kneel when he doth other things besides acts of Worship or according to the Law of Christ he may kneel or stand or use another posture in Worship but when this or that gesture is applied to Worship it 's religious by its Respect Vse and Application but still of an indifferent nature under the Laws of Christ till by some binding Law the Conscience becomes bound up to the use of it in this or that part of Worship Now he that undertakes to binde Conscience here undertakes to make a Law for Christ and to entrench upon the Prerogative of Christ and that such that make such Laws do claim such a power is manifest because they make obedience unto such Laws necessary by vertue of a Law of Christ Let every Soul be subject to the higher power § 3. Argum. 2. If the nature of an Evangelical Indifferency may be changed jure into an Evangelical Necessity by any power besides Christ's then it must be because it 's Evangelically evil that this or that should remain indifferent which Christ hath left so or at least better for the honour of Christ and good of his Church that it should become a necessity i. e. a commanded good or prohibited evil than indifferent to be disposed by the discretion of particular Churches or Christians but there is no true Evangelical Indifferency that hath such a reason for the change of it into a necessity Ergo the reason of the Consequence is this because whatever is altered by a Law is supposed to be altered from worse to better and what is altered by a Law for Christ is or should be made more for the honour of Christ and therefore far better than it was before but it cannot be supposed that any thing that this wise Law-giver left in indifferency to practice or omit according to the judgement of discretion should be more for his honour if it were converted into a necessity by a Law for to say so would be a high impeachment of the wisdom of Christ as it is of a King and Parliament when any shall presume to say they have not made such Laws as are needfull to be made and have left the Subject under a greater liberty than is for the good of the Commonweal or honour of the King To say
so therefore is to make a double reflexion on Christ First that his Laws are defective for the accomplishment of those ends for which they were established and that the liberty granted by Christ unto his Members in indifferent things hath too great a latitude to be consistent with that exact Gospel-worship which we should honour him by And if it be said that which Christ hath left Evangelically indifferent may be unlawful in respect of other Laws we say that all the true jus of other Laws must be founded on Christ's and his is precedaneous to them and therefore as in authority or practice it must take place before them Moreover we say that Christ hath not so ill establish'd Christian Liberty as that thereby we are licensed to violate any natural or civil bonds § 4. Argum. 3. That which by Christ's Authority hath left a Character impressed on Conscience cannot by any authority be abrogated without removal of the said Character but as the Laws so the Liberty by Gospel-Charter granted by Christ hath left such a Character impressed indelibly on Conscience as cannot be removed by any other Authority therefore Christian Liberty cannot be abrogated c. Ergo a religious Gospel-indifferency cannot be taken away or cease by the determination of mere humane Laws i. e. humane Laws that Christ never allowed man to make The Major is evident in that the revealed will of Christ when it shines into the Heart fixeth an indelible Character upon Conscience for positive obedience and also as to indifferent things for he that knows not one by the Law knows not the other nor can never tell when he sins and when he doth not and if any other could interpose and make a Law to binde Conscience sub reatu by new Laws or release it by new Liberties either to make additional Characters or delete Christ's Christian Religion would thereby become no other than an undigested heap of uncertainties and confusions It 's true Characters are sometimes removed from Conscience as in case of Justification of a sinner by Faith Rom. 8. So in case of an erring Conscience that supposeth this to be his duty which is not and that to be indifferent which is necessary all errour when entertained lays hold on Conscience Sub pretextu authoritatis Christi under pretence of Christ's Authority and so do all humane usurping Laws when they insinuate themselves into Conscience and when by a farther informing light the Errour is expell'd from the Judgement and Conscience the Authority of Christ still remains expelling the Errour which no humane Authority could do and confirming the Conscience in the truth maugre all the opposition of any humane power so that where Christ's Laws hath once prevailed so far as to fix his Authority there it was never known that whatever mens external practices or conformities were that ever any humane Power could blot out the Characters of Christ's Prerogative and fix another Supremacy there for that is but a vain Law in religious things that cannot binde the Conscience under guilt in case of transgression I shall never conscienciously observe that for my duty the omission of which doth not make me conscious of a Transgression As to the Minor that the liberty granted by Christ leaves a Character on Conscience as well as the Laws of Christ is manifest 1. Because Laws are the bounds of Liberty and one must be known and acted as well as the other as hath been said before 2. Because their liberty is not the will of Christ permissive onely but in some measure positive i. e. so far as that Christians should walk in it he having but two paths to walk in either of positively directed obedience or of Liberty under the judgement of discretion regulated by the rules of Expediency for either in matters of instituted Worship Christ hath by a manifestation of his will limited our Actions or hath left Churches and Christians in the Equilibrio of indifferency to poise themselves according to Conscience-Light as to respective differencies by discretion and where there is an equality to chuse pro arbitrio Again our assurance is not onely negative but positive that it is Christ's will that we should maintain our liberty in Religious things stand fast in that liberty c. Neither can any take it away without intruding on Conscience and entrenching on his Prerogative which for us to yield to were to betray his Crown and Scepter § 5. Argum. 4. Hence if such a Law be made it ought not to be made and ergo the thing retains its pristine nature That Law which directly puts a Christian on a necessity of sinning in obeying it ought not to be made but a Law that changeth Evangelical indifferencies into necessities doth directly put a Christian on a necessity of sinning if he obeys Ergo it ought not to be made That the Major may be universal I adde directly because many good Laws are occasions of sinning indirectly but when the Law requires such obedience which in the very substance of it is sin because the obedience directly aimed at is the formal reason of the Law such a Law must needs be sinful The Minor doth thus appear because such a Law bindes a man up in obedience to it in one part of the indifferency whereas that part of the indifferency according to Christ's rules of expediency may be unlawful to be done and then the humane Law and the said Gospel-rules contradict one another Expediencies altering daily as to attending circumstances at some times it 's lawful to do that thing which at another is more agreeable to the honour of Christ and the good of others to avoid As for Example the Apostle reckons eating this or that sort of meat sold in the Shambles as an indifferent thing if I make no question whether it be Jewishly unclean or Heathenishly sacrificed to Idols 1 Cor. 10.25 27. but if I am enforced by Law to eat this or that sort of meat in the Shambles which is sacrificed to Idols I am necessitated to sin 1. I offend my Brother that makes this Law confirming him in sin for the sake of whose Conscience I ought by the Apostles rule to forbear this act and therefore sin against all such as idolatrously eat this sacrificed meat For what can tell me more plainly than the Law that this or that meat by its attending circumstances is sacrificed to Idols Again to hear the Word of God in this or that publick place is an indifferency to hear it to my edification as near as possible is the Precept of Christ but if I am bound by a humane Law to hear always in my own Parish-church and thereby debarred of my liberty of hearing there where I can most profit and whereas the Parish-minister is ignorant prophane or erroneous whom to hear constantly must needs be sin to me I am certainly by this Law put upon a necessity of sinning in yielding active obedience unto it § 6. Argum. 5. That Indifferencies
indifferent thing to take it up or let it alone but because of the Fathers command he is bound to do it Ans It 's true because there is a command of Christ that enjoyns the Child's Obedience in all lawful things and therefore upon the Fathers command it becomes necessary that the child yield Obedience but this is but a command for one particular action and therefore under Expediency If the Father should make a Law that one child should pick straws all his days and another play at push-pin such Laws would become null in the nature of them but there is nothing more absurd than to affirm that they alter not the nature of the thing for what can alter it more than to lay it under a Law when a thing was indifferent unto practice before to make it necessary as to practice when it was lawful before to make it unlawful We have shewed that Necessities and Indifferencies are but relative in respect of the Law and he makes a Law that gives things contrary relations and respects to what they had before alters the nature of the thing as much as a Law can and makes one Law contrary to another Men do but trifle that plead that things are not made necessary in the Worship of God when the practice of them are enjoyn'd under the greatest Church-penalties what 's greater than Excommunication yea pecuniary Mulcts Imprisonments Deprivations c. yea and Offenders against the Laws persecuted with greater rigour than those who live in the constant and open Transgression of Moral and Gospel-Precepts § 5. I may take another very plain medium to prove the Minor thus He that makes a thing unlawful either to be done or left undone which Christ hath made lawful by his Law doth that which is contrary to the Word of God but he that changes Indifferencies into Necessities doth so There is nothing more plain than the Major for to make a thing unlawful c. Lawful and unlawful being contradicentia and he that by a new Law renders that unlawful for my practice which Christ's Law hath rendred lawful doth a thing e Regione contrary to the Law of Christ For the Minor it s as evident for by the Law of Christ the indifferent action was lawful for me to do or omit as to eat such a sort of Meat or keep such a day or wear such a garment but there is a new Law of the Church comes which now makes it unlawful for me either to do or not to do those things for he that makes a Law binding always to the practice of either part of the indifferency makes the other part unlawful which antecedaneous to this Law was lawful Now the Church of Christ cannot make that unlawful which he hath made lawful for they may as well make that lawful to do or omit Again If the Church may make that unlawful which he hath made lawful then she may take away the Relative Goodness that is in any part of an indifferent action by the Rules of Expediency and stamp upon it a positive evil which is contrary to what Christ hath done c. Again Nothing can be Ecclesiastically and therefore Religiously unlawful which is not made Ecclesiastically and Religiously Evil and nothing can be so Jure but by the Will of Christ no more than any thing can be Ecclesiastically good and necessary without the said revealed Will of Christ § 6. Argum. 4. The Church is not capable of a Law-making Power Ergo. I prove it thus He that cannot jure or de facto annex a Punishment in some measure correspondent to the nature of the Offence that will be committed against that Law cannot make such a Law as if a Corporation under the King makes a Law to hang or burn in the hand for some Offence which they have no power to do then that is null The Major is very plain But the Church cannot de facto or at least de jure Execute such penalties as are correspondent to her Laws for they being Ecclesiastical are of a Spiritual nature belonging to the Worship of God and therefore the Lawmaker will still have the first stroak of his Law fall upon Conscience by binding it under guilt where was ever any truely enlightned Conscience ever bound under guilt for transgressing a mere Church-Law in matters of Ceremony Secondly They cannot de Jure annex and execute the Penalties of Exclusion from communion as Christ never made a mere Ceremony the condition of communion so he never threatned the Non-observation with Non-communion Let any Precept or any Instance be given of this nature that any suffer'd Church-censures under the New-Testament for Non-observation of a Ceremonial Law Thirdly As for other Penalties which we call Secular as Whipping Imprisoning Fining Confiscating we know the Church hath nothing to do with them they were never in the power of the Church nor never will be § 7. Argum. 5. That Law which directly and unavoidably hinders much good and causeth much evil in the obediential Subjection thereto ought not to be made by the Church but to change religious Indifferencies in the worship of God into Necessities doth so Ergo. The Major is undeniable for though a good action may per accidens hinder some other good and cause some evil yet it doth not so directly and in its true constituted nature but good actions produce good effects as evil actions evil So the Tree is known by its Fruits The Minor that such a change works such ill effects is thus proved 1. Because it hinders the most expedient use of an action left by Christ indifferent to be determined by the Judgement of Discretion whereas the Expediency by Christ's prescript may lye in the contrary part of the action wherein a goodness is placed by the Churches Law and an evil placed in that part of the action wherein there is a goodness by Christ's So that the Churches Law cannot have universal Obedience yielded to it without sin because when Christ's expediency falleth on the part contrary to the Law it will be sin to obey the Church As for Example It 's an indifferent thing which way we turn our Faces in the worship of God East West North or South the Church makes a Law the Minister must turn his Face toward the East in such a part of Worship this hinders the expedient use of that posture 1. It hinders from turning that way which is most for Edification and causeth the Minister to turn his back to the people which is very unexpedient It may confirm a Jew Pagan or Papist in their Superstitious Observances to observe us to do thus de industriâ out of a strict observation and therefore then unexpedient 2. It hinders much Good because it frustrates Christs Ends in the management of Religious and Ecclesiastical Affairs For Christ manageth all those by Necessities and Indifferencies in willing and requiring a necessary Obedience to his positive Laws and an indifferent use of indifferent things
contrary to the truth of the Word of God 6. The Magistrate cannot be conteded to be such a Judge nor is useful as such unless he may be acknowledged to be infallible A supream Judge in our sence and that which must be here understood is one into whose judgment our Faith hath its last and utmost resolution but we cannot acquiesce in a humane fallible determination And besides what Prerogative hath the Magistrates judgment above another mans and what ease and advantage is it to us if our minds lie open to doubt as much after as before the determination No Christians minde can rest satisfied in a humane fallible opinion of divine things the authority causing Belief must have the same original that the Revelation hath therefore Faith built upon a Testimony must be onely on his own fidelity as one infallible as we believe that Truth also which carries its own Evidence with it axiomatically delivered or evinceth it self from the light of another Truth dianoetically § 11. The second Case consists in Causes disciplinarily debated being Differences arising within one particular Church or between Church and Church or between Pastors and Churches c. All Causes usually handled and determined in Ecclesiastical Courts The Question is Whether the civil Magistrate be the supream Judge or Head and Governour By Causes Ecclesiastick are without doubt meant in the Oath of Supremacy all disciplinary Causes handled in Spiritual Courts the supream Head and Governor whereof was the Pope in whose name and authority those Courts were called and managed and to whom it was lawful for any grieved party to appeal before the reign of King Henry the 8th who by the Oath of Supremacy cut off the Popes Supremacy and established his own Now I thus resolve as followeth § 12. If Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Courts be not jure divino nor held jure divino Episcopacy as it 's setled in the Hierarchy and all its Offices and Appurtenances being onely a humane politick device as hath been abundantly by the Opposers thereof proved and by many of the Asserter and Defenders confessed then I say it 's fitter that man should be supream Head there and if any man the supream civil Magistrate within whose Realm or Dominion their Courts and Causes Ecclesiastical be The nature of this Supremacy is or should be that 1. That all Ecclesiastical Courts be called and kept in the Kings Magisties name 2. That the Sentence denounced should be also grounded on some penal Law of the King for all the Kings Courts should judge by his Laws 3. That any party grieved may appeal to a superiour Court of the Kings or to himself from whom there is no Appeal 4. That the King hath power by himself or Judges to prohibit or supersede the proceedings of the said Court at his pleasure This is the true sence of the Oath of Supremacy which the Bishops notwithstanding all the noise they make against Dissenters from their Church will least subscribe unto whereas most others of the Kings Subjects that refuse to own the divine right of Episcopal government will willingly swear the Kings Supremacy in their Ecclesiastical Courts and Causes in the largest extent And though that sort of ruling men use all endeavours to suggest the disloyalty of the said Dissenters yet I doubt not but most Puritans in England would rather refer themselves to the Kings judgment and stand or fall at his Tribunal than at the Churches and have generally found more relief from under the severities of Excommunication in the Kings Courts than in the Ecclesiastical Supposing that all Ecclesiastical proceedings in Spiritual Courts of Judicature and the whole Fabrick of Church-government as now it stands is a humane Polity as is not denied by the most ingenious I know not why any Puritan or Papist should refuse for to take the Oath of Supremacy for it is no more than to acknowledge the King to be supream Head and Governour in his own Courts which is but Reason Justice and Religion that he should be § 13. But if Ecclesiastical Causes be understood of disciplinary Controversies such as follow upon the execution of Laws and administration of the Institutions of the Lord Jesus in the visible Gospel-churches of such Ecclesiastical Causes it is not the Magistrates part to be the determinating Judge of for 1. To judge and determine a Cause in the Church of Christ is to judge Ecclesiastically and such an act of Judicature is a Church-act which is always preceded by a Church-Officer and no other in foro Ecclesiae and if the agrieved party appeal it must be to an Officer of the same kind it 's not to an Officer of another State 2. He that is supream Judge of a Church-cause on Earth must be an Officer substituted by Christ for none can hold any Place or Office in the Church but by Subrogation from Christ much less the highest Authority but none can shew that Christ hath substituted the Magistrate his Church-Vicar on Earth 3. If the civil Magistrate be supream Head to the Church Ecclesiastically then because he was always so since Christ was on Earth then there was times when Heathen Magistrates in whose jurisdiction the Churches was were his Vicars and Christ himself when on Earth was subject Ecclesiastically though Head of his Church to Heathen Church-Officers for he was no civil Magistrate disclaim'd it nor could be appeal'd unto as such 4. If the civil Magistrate be supream Judge he is the supream Church-Officer for he cannot be denied to be an Officer of that state wherein he doth acts of Judicature as his right And if a Church-Officer then the civil State hath power to chuse and constitute a Church-Officer and that of the highest rank for if he become a Church-Officer his Calling and Constitution must needs be Civil and not Ecclesiastical So that the civil State hath the power of Peter's Keys both to dispose of them and give them to whom she will and the Church cannot be entrusted with them they must still be kept in the Magistrates pocket Hence it will follow that Christ hath not left power enough in the Church for the management of its own political affairs nor wisdom enough for the determining her own Controversies § 14. Seventhly No civil Magistrate can imposse Articles of Faith on any of his Subjects to be owned subscribed or sworn to by a Penal Law for quatenus a Magistrate he is not an universal competent Judge for it 's not necessary that he should be religious understanding found in his principles because he is a Magistrate 1. If he can do it as a Church-Officer we have shewed that Christ hath made no such Officers in his Church 2. If he were Christ never empowered any Church-Officer to use a Magistratical Sword he never put Temporal Crowns on their heads nor Scepters into their hands if any of them out of ambition have got Miters and Crosier Staffs they had them from Antichrist and not from Christ
all actions becoming a Christian Commonwealth then so far the Christian Magistrate hath power more or less so far as may conduce to the due maintaining of the being or well-being of a Christian State and therefore is to be conservator unriusque Tabulae he hath the conservation of the second Table committed to his care that it may be a civil State of the first that it may be a Christian State And therefore as a Family is to preserve the honour and justice of the Moral Law by an Oeconomick Sanction and the Church by an Ecclesiastick so the civil State by Civil Sanction each according to their just derived Laws whereby they are respectively to govern and distinctly to administer § 19. The great Question here is How far the Magistrates power extends in the making and execution of Penal Statutes We have shewed that the Lord Jesus hath not reserved to himself so neer a propriety in the government of civil States as of his Church having taken it as his peculiar Prerogative to give Laws unto his Church and presides there as the only Legislator But unto States he hath onely given them the Magna Charta of the Moral Law and hath allowed unto them a Legislative power in all matters concerning the various Exigences and divers Requisites with attending Circumstances in the due management of State-jurisdiction so as the said Laws are promoting of the common Peace and Justice of their Dominions and deducible from and founded on the said Rules of Distributive and Commutative Justice § 20. The Laws of men that are just and reasonable may take place in all things conducing to the being and well-being of a Christian Commonwealth both as to the matters of the first and second Table so far as is necessary to the managing of it under the due qualifications of a civil State and therefore may not onely punish crimes committed against the second Table but such as are against the first also And there are these especially that they are concerned in 1. Blaspheming of the true God under which is comprehended common profane swearing transgression especially of the third Command 2. Worshipping of false Gods a sin against the first Commandment 3. Idolatry or the worshipping of God by Images a sin against the second Commandment 4. Prophanation of such times as is by God appropriated to himself for publick Worship a sin against the fourth So that these are palpable as to matter of fact clear as to the nature of the offence and of dangerous consequences tending to the eminent ruine and apparent danger of a civil State § 21. In the concernments of the second Table God hath left the civil Magistrate more Arbitrary in making or executing civil Laws as the necessity of the State doth require laying the general Rules of Moral Justice and the particular and relative benefit of the Commonwealth and Subject before his eyes Now in the matters of the first Table being the moral Rule of duty towards God he onely requires the Magistrate to punish and restrain those Vices in this kind that are notorious infectious and pestilent to a Christian Commonwealth in matters of natural Worship reserving instituted Worship built fundamentally on the same precepts to another manner of dispensation wherein the civil Magistrate is not to intermeddle as such neither as to Legislation nor Execution of Penalties nor deligation of Officers § 22. As Murthers Rapines Adulteries Perjuries c. are destructive to Properties Communities and Relations and so to all civility in a State where such Vices predominate and are not generally suppressed by Justice it cannot be denominated a civil State but rather a Pagan Salvage nation So where false Gods are multiplied and worshipped the true God is blasphemed openly and notoriously and all times for publick Worship of him by his own appointment prophaned publickly and generally And such Vices not suppressed by Magistrates such a State cannot be called a Christian civil State but Heathenish whatever moral Justice there is between man and man § 23. Though all sins be alike breaches of Gods Law yet none but those of a more gross external and exemplary nature fall under the cognizance of mans Justice The Blasphemy Profaneness and Concupiscence of the heart are not punishable by man it must come to the Magistrate per allegata probata that such an one blasphemed God worshipped an Idol prophaned the Name of God by swearing c. and that openly either in contempt of that God that is worshipped or that Worship set up or in order to the delusion and seduction of others for it would seem very hard to break into the private houses or appartments of Idolaters that may dwell in the land and proceed judicially against them for that Religion which they are peacibly retired to without any endeavour to publish or prvpagate to the disturbance of the publick or infection of others But no Magistrate ought to suffer that God to be openly blasphemed which he worships If Heathens in a false Worship are zealous upon this account how much more ought Christians Though no Magistrate can enforce any Subject to worship his God or ought to do it by a Penal Law as hath been said yet he may punish him for blaspheming him or for seducing any from the Worship of the true God yea for Apostatizing from the Worship of the true God after he hath owned it Precepts and Persidents in the Old Testament are pregnant to these purposes which I need not enlarge on those that read the Scriptures are acquainted with them But we finde no Precept nor Example for endeavouring to reduce a poor Heathen from bare Idolatry to the Worship of the true God by pecuniary Mulcts and corporal Punishments and I am sure Christ never practised it nor commanded it in the New Testament § 24. The great difficulty that yet attends this case allowing the Magistrate a power as such in some matters concerning our duty directly to Godward what are adaequate and proportionate Penalties in such cases as these for the Magistrates power is always insignificant whatever the Law is if there be not a Penalty annexed to it and vigour in the just execution thereof Now the Enquiry is Of what kind and degree of punishments of such Transgressions ought to be Answ I apprehend it is a hard thing to determine to all mens satisfaction I know some have recourse to the proceedings of the Judicial Law which was but the reduction of the Moral Law into Civil Practice for the State of the Jews and look upon them as binding to Christian Magistrates But I suppose the Judicial Laws to be rather presidential onely that Christian Magistrates may take a measure thereby for the degree of Penalty setting aside their different Emergencies of State and extraordinary cases when God would make one sinner in a case exemplary to all ages by his Prerogative and special Command as in Achans theft and the prophanation of the Sabbath by picking up of
Indifferency which a weak Christian thinks according to his best light from Gods Word to be necessary than the other part which Authority lays a stress upon by a Law the reason is because I must chuse Suffering rather than indanger any Souls salvation in the least Now if I refuse active obedience to the Magistrate I onely run the hazard of suffering the penalty which it may be I can bear and comfort my self under but in case I wrong a Soul by my action I cannot free my self from sin and am an occasion of anothers too either of which are but especially both much heavier than the greatest suffering Lastly if I suffer the penalty of the Law I both fulfil the Law and save my Brother too § 2. Now these Obstacles being removed out of the way I proceed to determine the Question That in case any power Civil or Ecclesiastical shall presume so far as to enact Laws in the concerns of divine Worship so as to change Christian Indifferencies into Necessities that a Christian is bound to refuse active obedience thereto And I make good this Assertion by the following Arguments 1. To yield such obedience is to serve God according to the Will of Man but no Christian ought to serve God according to the Will of Man Ergo. The Major is true because it 's a serving God in such a way as is devised by man and to the obeyer is no other for he in his conscience believes so that it is not the Will of God The Minor is true because that is Will-Worship which is the product only of mans Will Gods Will being the onely Rule of Gods Worship and we must be sure of that Will in all matters of his Worship or else we bring vain Oblations unto him 2. The goodness determined by a humane Law for the sake of mans Will ought not to be preferred before the goodness of Expediency determined by a conscientious Christian for God's sake for such a goodness of Expediency is approved of by God and the contrary to it pro hic nunc is unlawful therefore from this closing with such goodness we are not to be deterred by any humane Law for an expediently necessary action according to the Will of God is to be of far more force with us than an action made absolutely necessary by the Will of man Yea it is to do a thing contrary to the Will of God to do that as necessary which God hath revealed his Will concerning that we should always do in a way of Indifferency and Expediency determinable by the judgment of discretion for to do things by way of Necessity and to do by way of Indifferency is to act by way of Contrariety and therefore to obey such Laws is to act contrary to the Will of God 3. To be brought under the power i. e. a necessity by a Law of any thing religiously indifferent is unlawful 1 Cor. 6.12 but to be brought to constant active obedience to mans Law commanding a necessary performance of an indifferent action is to be brought under the power of a thing i. e. into bondage i. e. under a Yoke which Christ never put us under Now Christ would not have us to make our selves slaves where he hath made us free 4. A Christian is to use his liberty purchased by Christ and to stand fast in it Ergo to practise it constantly notwithstanding all ensnaring and embondaging Laws of men and is bound to use his judgment in all his actions and where there is an Indifferency to chuse by the Rules of Expediency and not walk by an implicite Faith The wise mans eyes are in his head the fool walketh in darkness 5. Such active obedience is a betraying the Prerogative of Christ for if a Legislative power be Christ's Prerogative as hath been proved then the yielding active obedience to an usurping Law is the doing Homage to another Lawgiver in that kind and giving up the power of the Lord Jesus It 's like a Subjects introducing the power of a forreign Prince and doing all that lies in him to subvert that Law and Soveraignty to which he is naturally related and what can be greater Treason to any State 6. If a Christian here obey it must be for Christ's sake or Conscience sake Rom. 13. It cannot be for Christ's sake because it robs him of his Prerogative or betrays it neither can it be for Conscience sake to embondage it self where Christ hath left it free whatever tends to the captivity or slavery of Conscience is not for the good of Conscience for in this they are not Ministers to me for good for the Law tends not to my good in active obedience which if I see and yet yield I become a Minister of evil to my self 7. If it be a sin in the supream Powers to command and impose their said Laws it is a sin in a Christian to obey at Ergo. The consequence is manifest because the most formal reason of an evil Law is the evil obedience required The Minor hath been proved that such a Law is sin in Superiours to make but to confirm the consequence further to be a copartner with another in sin is sin but if the Magistrate command and I obey I am copartner with him A thing commanded can be evil but two ways either materially or circumstantially if it be materially evil there is no pretence for doing it whatever humane power command and if it be circumstantially it must be in the Commanders usurping a false power or there is some circumstantial relation pro hic nunc that makes it unlawful unto me or another It may be the thing may be materially lawful but under both these sorts of circumstances it may be unlawful as that I give away hereby Christ's Prerogative I rob my self of the use of my judgment of discretion by which every Christian is to walk and I it may be offend my brother I do not say a man may never do that part of the Indifferency that is commanded by a humane Law a Christian hath the use of his liberty as well after as before a humane Law and he is to walk by the Rule of Expediency still When he finds it most for Gods glory and his or anothers edification he may take that part of the Indifferency which is commanded sed non ratione praecepti humani but from that Expedient or convenient Goodness which pro hic nunc he finds in it But that obedience which we here declare against is the doing it as a duty constantly or conscientiously sub paenâ reatus by virtue of such a Law 8. A Christian cannot yield the aforesaid obedience but he must offer violence to his Conscience i. e. practically to contradict the dictates and light thereof for every moral action must be approved or reprobated thereby But he must needs know that that which is not commanded or approved by Christ as indifferent things are though not commanded by him
Legislative Power Chap. 5. Concerning the nature of Conscience Chap. 6. Concerning the dominion of Conscience Chap. 7. Of the strong and weak Christian Chap. 8. Of Scandals and their natures Chap. 9. Of Necessities and Indifferencies Chap. 10. Certain Propositions concerning Necessities and Indifferencies Chap. 11. Of Christian Liberty Chap. 12. The first Question handled about things indifferent Chap. 13. Of the Power of the Church in things indifferent Chap. 14. A Digression concerning Subordination of Pastors in the Church Chap. 15. Of Magistrates power in matters of Religion Chap. 16. Of the use of the Magistrates Sword in the execution of Ecclesiastical Justice Chap. 17. Of the limits of the Magistratical power in matters of Religion Chap. 18. Of a Christians duty in case of humane Laws in matters religiously indifferent Chap. 19. Of Humane Constitutions in the Worship of God besides the Word Chap. 20. Of the united Power Legislative of Church and State Chap. 21. Of Decency and Order Chap. 22. Of Imposition of Ceremonies Chap. 23. Of Obligation to a Form of Prayer ERRATA PAge 12. line 3. for when he by his Law read when man by his Law P. 13. l 3. for immediately r. mediately Ibid. l. 30. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. l. 31. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 24. l. 9. for obedience r. such obedience Ibid. l. 26. for Masters r. Master P. 25. l. 37. dele The in the most certainly P. 35. l. 13. dele They. P. 36. l. 4. for our r. your P. 44. l. for just and equal r. justly charged P. 45. l. 3. dele thereof P. 48. l. 20. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 53. l. 27. for duty r. guilt Ibid. l. 12. for in religious service r. religious service P. 85. l. 24. for c. r. and. Ibid. l. 39. for Co-ordination r. Subordination P. 88. l. 35. for Nation r. Nations P. 93. l. 8. for by Assemblies r. assembled P. 100. l. 21. r. unlawful in the Worship of God P. 112. l. 33 dele therefore that P. 114. l. 16. r. and sound in his principles P. 125. l. 19. r. of what hath been said is Ibid. l. ult for consequentially r. consequential P. 128. l. 11. for thught r. taught P. 140. l. 2. for and Christ hath r. and hath Christ P. 152. l. 17. for prophane use of them r. prophane manner CHAP. I. Of the Twofold Jurisdiction which a Christian by the Law of Christ is subjected unto § 1. THat there is such a thing as Christian Liberty none pretending to a true information in the Doctrine of the Gospel of Christ I suppose will deny neither need I make it my present task for to prove But the great Contest for many Ages hath been about the true Nature and Extent of this Liberty Some stretching the bounds thereof larger than Christ ever did intrenching on Civil and Moral Laws opening thereby a gap to Licentiousness and the violation of the bonds of Humane Societies in Magistratical Rule and Government Others curtalizing and abridging the said Liberty not allowing it those lawful extents allotted thereto by Christ audaciously depriving his poor Members of many Gospel-Priviledges and Advantages granted them by Charter from the Supreme King and Lawgiver Civil and Antichristian Powers still making it their business to spy out this Liberty and their great designe to bring them into Bondage § 2. Calvin observes Duplex esse Regimen in Homine alterum Spirituale quo Conscientia ad pietatem cultum divinum instituitur alterum Politicum quo ad Humanitatis Civilitatis officia quae inter homines servanda sunt homo eruditur Jurisdictio Spiritualis Temporalis i. e. There is in Man a twofold Government the one Spiritual whereby the Conscience is instructed unto Piety and the Worship of God The other Political whereby a man is taught the Duties of Humanity and Civility which are to be observed between man and man a spiritual Jurisdiction and a temporal Which Observation hath Moral foundation and an Evangelical ratification the whole of a Christian being comprehended under these two Heads of Duty charged upon us by the Old and New Testament towards God and towards our Neighbour On the first of which Christ hath by his peculiar Legislative Power over his Church established the whole Oeconomy thereof On the latter he hath chiefly raised the edifices of Civil States and Humane Societies where he hath allowed a latitude of Legislative Power unto the Sons of men as unto his Delegates and Substitutes in earthly Rule and Government Unto both of these Jurisdictions he hath laid on man a firm Obligation by planting his Moral Light in Conscience so that he cannot start from either of these Duties without starting from himself as our first Parents did in their Transgression and all others in putting forth the poyson of that original blot in actual sins of Omission or Commission all which are but irregularities or nonconformities to this Moral obligation laid on Conscience either manifestly so or easily reducible thereunto For whatever is a trespass against the revealed Will of God for Duty in Moral Obedience or instituted Worship is a sin not but that Instituted Worship is fundamentally Moral Obedience but is therefore in some sense distinguished from it the serving of God according to his own appointment being the principal part of the Moral Law because God hath according to the several states of his Church altered the mode and manner of his Worship as he hath thought it best in his Wisdom and as hath bin most suitable to the several ages and states of his Church which alterable or altered Circumstances being the product of Christ's Prerogative alone are called his Instituted Worship § 3. Hence both these Jurisdictions are Primarily and Morally subjected to the King of Kings he orders disposeth of and rules in the Kingdoms of men as well as in his Church and hearts of men yea by ruling Heart and Conscience as well as by disposing Providence he rules Civil States and subordinate Societies but the manifest difference is here that God's political Rule in the Kingdoms of the Earth and humane States is more remote and mediate but that of Church and Conscience being Spiritual is more proximate and immediate He only gives general Laws to Civil Societies and leaves a limited Legislative Power as to particular collateral and incident cases to humane Governours substituted providentially by him To these he leaves the immediate administration of Rule and Government as to an Executive Power altogether and as to a Legislative Power in a great measure but hath reserved the immediate administration of Rule in his Spiritual Dominions to himself alone as to Legislation in his Church and both Legislation and Execution as to Conscience § 4. These two Modes or Degrees of Administration must not be confounded together Man must have no greater share in Rule and Government than
and discouragement of Evil-doers 4. That in the faithful discharge of this trust they are Gods Ministers attending his work § 3. As the King of Kings hath given Magistrates their power so he hath set them their bounds of Government insomuch that they be not Plenipotentiary but are liable to the Law of the supream Law-giver which they may transgress in respect either of the Laws themselves or of persons subjected to them In respect of the Laws two ways in Law-making or Executing In Law-making these ways 1. When they presume to enact such Laws as directly cross any of Christ's Laws either the Law of Nature to enjoyn unnatural things or when he by his Law shall contradict the Moral Law or any Appendix thereunto Or lastly controul the Laws of Christ for the Oeconomy of his Church i. e. in making any Laws to obstruct the execution of Christs Laws according to his revealed Will. 2. He may transgress in Law-making by entrenching on the Legislative Prerogative of Christ either in respect of Moral Obedience or Instituted Worship or any Forms or Rites thereto belonging 3. In failing to Enact such useful and necessary Laws as are needful and requisite for the right ordering or management of the Common-weal or particular Subjects under his Dominion He may fail and transgress in Law Executing either in a slack or careless execution of good Laws or undue application of them or partial distribution of Justice by them all which is Injustitia or he may fail in too vigorous and extreme prosecution and so be guilty of Summum Jus which since the Fall is Maxima Injuria because there is no allowance or abatement for the natural failings and weaknesses of the Subjects obeying § 4. As he is liable to transgress as to Laws so also as to persons 1. By a partial Execution of Justice with respect of persons 2. In pressing the power of his Law further on persons than Christ ever permitted as in endeavouring to impose on Conscience and bring it into thraldom by forcing men to ambiguous Oaths Declarations or Subscriptions 3. When he useth his Power for the obstructing and hindering the Members of Christ in the use of those Priviledges or lawful Liberties granted them by Christ himself § 5. Whence it appears That the Civil Magistrates Jurisdiction is limited to the Civil State and to all persons and things considered in a Civil capacity And thus far he hath Power over the persons of Christians and particular Churches whilst Militant so far as they are persons and Societies laying claim to Civil Rights and Priviledges or capable of doing or receiving wrong and injury being men subject to Passions and Failures with the rest of Mankinde A Christian is subjected as hath been said to a twofold Jurisdiction Internal and External Internal respects the Jurisdiction of Conscience or God's ruling man by it and here is an impossibility of any third persons interposing between God and us The External Regiment to which a Christian is subjected is Political and that by God's Ordination is twofold viz. Of the Body Civilly Politick and Spiritually or Ecclesiastically Politick this is subjected immediately to the Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Gubernation of Christ alone the other iâ—mediately under the Rule of the Civil Magistrate Now the contest between these two Polities hath been the Original of most of the Trouble in the Christian World Since Christ's presence here on Earth it hath always been mans presumptuous Ambition to sit in his Throne more or less Sometimes Secular Dignities assuming to themselves Legislation in matters of Divine Worship whence hath arose so great Persecutions from Magistrates because Christ's Followers refused to betray or deliver his Prerogative into their hands and judged themselves bound to obey God rather than man Again sometimes usurping Officers in the Church pretending to a derived Power from Christ have assumed the place of Christ himself in and over his Church justling him as much as in them lay out of his Throne hence hath arose the Antichristian Vsurpation tyrannizing not only over Bodies Politick but over Conscience it self and as a just Judgment on Civil Powers which will not kiss the Son but break his bonds and abuse his Churches and Members have bin permitted by Christ to set their feet on the necks of Kings and Governours of the Earth the intolerable burthen the Earth groans under and hath done for many Ages and were they but removed each into its proper sphere i. e. were but the Churches of Christ eased of Civil Usurpations in some Nations and Commonwealths from Ecclesiastical in other and Conscience delivered from the rapes wrongs and injuries insolently offer'd to it from both the Christian World would become such a Paradise of Felicity that scarce yet hath bin since the Infancy of the Gospel-Church and without such reducement of the World to the due Liberties of Church and State we cannot enjoy that worldly Felicity which a good man is capable of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Menand A good man aiming at Felicity Would either dye or at his home live free CHAP. V. Concerning the Nature of Conscience § 1. Having thus far briefly enquired concerning the Jurisdictions a Christian is bound in Duty to submit unto viz. Christ's and Caesars and though he is conscientiously to subject himself unto both yet Christs Authority is to be preferred and he is to have his due in the first place because all others who derive all just and rightful Authority from him are limited by him and must give an account unto him Therefore we say with the Psalmist Give unto the Lord O ye mighty give unto the Lord the Glory due unto his Name And as commanded by Christ Seek first the Kingdom of God and the righteousness thereof c. § 2. The first thing then here to be done is to vindicate the Soveraignty of Christ both in the persons of particular Christians and in Ecclesiastick Bodies Politick in both which he hath reserved the Legislative Power to himself and never yet committed it to any other And first of his Power in Conscience and that it may the more clearly appear that Christ only rules in Conscience it is needful we a little explain the Nature of Conscience and then proceed to prove that the Jurisdiction of it belongs to Christ alone § 3. Conscience taken strictly secundum notationem nominis is a Knowledge together i. e. A mans knowledg of himself and his actions together with another who knows the same with him or as some think the knowledge of his Actions together with the Rule by which they ought to be squared and directed which knowledge must be placed in the Understanding of a rational Creature Mr. Perkins saith It 's a part of the Vnderstanding I had rather say it is Modus Intellectus for the Understanding acts per totum non per partes This is that Spirit of a man which knows the things that are in a man 1 Cor. 2.11
considered according to its internal and its external acting It s internal acting is its believing assenting concurring judging between fact and fact or disbelieving dissenting condemning c. and these are those that are Actus eliciti and they are not without doubt under any humane Law or Power in the world either to force them where they are not or to obstruct them where they are As men may not presume to do it by any external compulsion so there is an impossibility in the nature of the thing that it can never be accomplished 'T is onely God's Prerogative to charge us to believe under a penalty and the light of Truth carries demonstration with it to challenge our assent and call forth our understanding to a free acting unless we be inveloped in the darkness of corrupt nature or captivated in slavery to any Lusts Neither is it in the power of man to remove this vail it 's God onely by the light of Truth working by its prevailing evidence and the mighty operation of the divine Spirit which way it pleaseth that can effect this Hence he that makes a penal Law that this or that thing is a truth and to be believed by me to be assented and consented unto and doth endeavour to compel me to such a belief and assent by the threats and punishments of this Law doth usurp a power that was never given unto him by God neither was ever practicable to effect the end pretended to § 4. Secondly There are external acts Actus imperati of Conscience as professing subscribing declaring doing but these are not properly acts of Conscience but from Conscience as they ought to be under the Rule and Dominion and direction of Conscience and will come to be duely considered in this place whether any man may be thus compelled by any subordinate Power and doubtless there is none that can compel a man to act from Conscience no more than he can compel him to understand or will what he pleaseth for though the acts are external and may be compelled de facto and in some cases de jure the principle of good or evil actions viz. from Conscience cannot be compelled the relation it hath to Conscience is internal as if a man be brought and forc'd upon his Knees before an Idol c. it is no formal act of Conscience for that still resists and opposeth the action though it 's improperly called a forcing of Conscience when a man is thus forced to an action against his Conscience Indeed he is forcibly induced through fear or sense of some evil to do or omit something against his light and conviction and the choice is also free he being attended with such circumstances yet it is said to be compelled because the argument of a Penalty to be incurred upon refusal is very strong to reach flesh to prevent the suffering of which the Will is carried away to chuse that as a comparative good which the enlightned Understanding allows not as lawful nor the Will as absolutely good and this is that compulsion of Conscience which is most usually found in the world And here it will be enquired whether any Subordinate power can lawfully compel us to such imperate acts Ans 1. I say men may make and execute de jure such a Law as many cannot in conscience submit unto by way of active obedience so that it be really such as the great Law-giver hath allowed them to make and it be agreeable to the rules and limits of power committed to their charge and the reason of refusal be the weakness and ignorance or prejudice of the Subject or else no Laws could be made or executed in the world for one or other that should obey would be pretending Conscience against it and here the Subject is to submit either actively if after sufficient illumination he findes the goodness and justness of the Law-giver If he doth not he is to refuse to act if he is perswaded it 's utterly unlawful but if it be doubtfully so he is to suspend his acts till he is better informed and patiently submit to the Magistrates will and pleasure in the Penalty-execution but if any Power endeavour to enforce obedience that no Power enacting may lawfully do and require us and force us with penalties it 's questionless very great Usurpation We must also consider the matter about which this compulsion may be conceived to be No Magistrate may compel to any thing against Conscience quatenus such Scil. under the formality and notion of being against Conscience that were the greatest Tyranny in the world Or we may understand it of compelling under the notion of Truth and so a Faith must be enforced which no man is capable of accomplishing this way Or Thirdly under the notion of Duty not respecting how the Consciences of persons stand affected in relation to it on whom it is urged And thus the Magistrate may compel to the doing of good or avoiding of evil by penal Edicts though accidentally it may be against the Consciences of some on whom it is imposed for the Magistrate being not a competent Judge of mens Consciences he cannot make other mens Consciences the rule of his Laws and Executions but the will of the Lord whose Ministers he is and the good of the Commonweal that is committed to his trust The Magistrate is not to command or forbid any thing under the formality of being with or against Conscience but he supposing that the Consciences of his Subjects are convinced being sufficiently pre-informed may command any thing to be done or forborn according to that latitude of Rule and Government which he hath received from the Lord whose Minister he is for the right knowledge whereof he ought sincerely and impartially to consult the Word of God and his own Conscience and so to take the measures of his own Duty and Actions Neither is his Conscience the Standard to his Subjects for every one must give an account of himself to God the Magistrate for himself as a Magistrate and the Subject for himself as such and therefore the Conscience of the Magistrate doth not binde the Subject to active obedience though his relation to him as such bindes him to Subjection which is abundantly shewed in his quiet and peaceable submitting himself to the Law-penalty if he cannot satisfie himself that the Magistrate acts in his place according to the revealed Minde and Will of God in such cases provided which cases also are always to be of a civil and politick nature for here he hath power compulsory of the outward man mandatory or prohibitory though the Conscience of the Subject is or may be pretended to be against it § 5. And now that all cause of exception may be removed on all hands it will be requisite more explicitely to shew how far a Christians Conscience hath to do with humane Authority and we grant that humane Authority in civil and politick affairs is an Ordinance of God 2. That
of a Gospel-nature cannot be alter'd from their nature by any subsequent Law of man thus appears To change religious Indifferencies into Necessities is to make a Law for Christs Worship that Christ never made nor gave any man power to make but none may make a Law for the Worship of Christ which he never made nor impowred any to make Ergo the Major is without doubt if the indifferency confessed be in the worship of God then when it 's by any Law made necessary it 's still in the worship of God and being appointed so by a Law becomes instituted Worship by a Law which Christ never made The Minor appears in that none may do so i. e. institute Worship or circumstances of Worship by a Law that is not Christ's 1. It 's his Prerogative to exercise a Legislative power in his Church 2. Christ knows onely how he will be worshipped and it must be founded on his revealed will which is our Law 3. None might adde to his Laws under the Old Testament Deut. 4.1 2. much less under the New where there is less of Ceremony and Circumstances Rev. CHAP. XIII Of the power of the Church in matters indifferent § 1. WHen we come to discuss the power of the Church it 's very requisite to unfold the meaning of the word Church there being no word under which lieth more Amphibology Many understand a Church a material building or place of meeting for the worship of God being consecrated and set apart for that use and for the Propriety and Antiquity of this usage and acceptation of Ecclesia learned Mr. Mead very much contends We shall not stay upon this sence because none that will oppose us in the present controversie will insist upon this sence so far as to say that the Legislative Power is to be found here A Church is also in other sences spoken of Some say every Nation where Christian Religion is owned by ruling Authority and by the generality of the people professed is a Church Some call a Province a Church a Diocess a Church a Parish a Church so that it 's more or less extended and comprehensive and it 's usually the sence of Protestants that assert a Churches Legislative Authority in matters indifferent Others say there is no national Churches under the Gospel though there be Churches in every Nation and that properly there are no particular Churches but such who freely and voluntarily combine together in bonds of Society for the worshipping of God according to his revealed will and walk accordingly Various are the Sentiments and Disputes about a Church and the nature of it the consideration of which will not be so much our concern at this time But there is another way of the usage of Church wherein there is greater ambiguity which is very much to the matter in hand that we rightly understand it viz the emphatical use of the word The Church so many mens Writings and Argumentations being filled and confounded with it now a days that who can tell what they mean by The Church The Romanists say the Church hath determined this or that and when we enquire what that Church is they say the Catholick Church which being rightly understood is the true meaning of the Church according to that rule Aequivocum per se positum stat pro famosiori significato the Emphasis putting the word upon the highest and largest signification but when we come to a farther disquision of their meaning they tell us the Church of Rome is the Church and all others that dissent or separate from the Church of Rome are not the Church or of the true Catholick Church Many Protestants also that speak of the Church do not understand the Church of Rome or the Catholick Church but some particular National Church viz. of France England Spain c. but when we enquire what this Church is they will tell us it 's the body of the Clergy met together in a Convocation by a few Representatives to make Laws and Canons and Ecclesiastical Constitutions the executive power whereof is in the Bishops and their Courts so that when these few men have made Laws or exercise Ecclesiastical power compose Forms of Prayer or establish Ceremonies at their pleasure they say the Church did it These two sorts of men make use of this great commanding Word the Church and by this equivocal term sounding so loud of an uncontroulable Prerogative they suggest unto poor well-meaning people on the one side that all that the Pope and the Church of Rome doth on the other hand that all that the Bishops and their Courts do is done by the Church as if it were the whole Vniversal visible Church It is not my present task here to enquire what is the true meaning of the Church according to the Scripture-acceptation or the most true Logical notion thereof whether it be a Genus or an Integrum or totum Aggregativum I shall onely in the ensuing Discourse apply my self to the most rectified sence of those that do defend the Legislative Authority of the Church and if they will not start from all right Reason and Rules of Logick their sence must be That the Catholick Militant Church is The Church whether it may be Organical according to Scripture-constitution we argue not now constituted of Subordinate parts first National or if you please Patriarchal before that of National made up of Provincial Provincial of Diocesan Diocesan of Parochial and this ought to be the sincere meaning of The Church without prevarication in the sence of those beforementioned § 2. Now the main thing in Debate between the Assertors of the Churches Authority and the Dissentors from it is Whether the Church may exercise such a Power as may change Indifferencies in the Worship of God into Necessities Which we hold in the Negative and say That Christ hath never granted such Power unto the Church he hath granted an Executive Power unto his Church but never a Legislative Power for all lawful power that any Church hath it must have it from the Lord Jesus Christ who hath all power given unto him in Heaven and Earth and is the peculiar King of his Church and hath taken care for the right Ordering and Governance of it in all things necessary as to Salvation so to Order and Discipline And therefore what is not derived from the Lord Jesus Christ cannot be allowed to be lawfully exercised 'T is true if it could be shewed where Christ ever granted it by his Charter to his Church that in some particular concerns she might exert a Legislative Power the dispute would soon be ended but no such Charter could ever be shewn § 3. If any such Power be granted by Christ it must be granted to the Catholick Church Militant or to particular subordinate Churches but 't is not granted to either of them Ergo. Not to the Vniversal Church because it is not organized with Officers capable of a Catholick Rule unless we
for that were to fall on the Rock of Presbytery therefore they must say and do say That every ordinary Protestant Priest receives his power from Christ thorough the hands of some superiour Pastor not co-ordinate and then we must needs finde out the derivation of that superiour power from one above him in Order and Dignity and at last must needs arrive at Peter's Chair and his Successors who first received this power from Christ and so it 's handed down through his respective subordinate Officers to those of the lowest rank and degree For if the Parish-Priest receive his Office from the Diocesan then he from the Provincial and he from the Primate and he from the Oecumenical If they the Primates receive their power mediately by the hands of some others besides the Oecumenical Pastor it must be from the co-ordinate power of some National Pastor or Pastors and consequently it will infer a Presbytery of Primates which may prove of as ill and more dangerous Aspect on the Church Catholick than the Presbyterian Assembly on the Church National or it must be that he receive his Dignity from the Suffrage of his inferiour Clergy Then it follows that a Metropolitan is invested with power in a meaner and more despicable way than a Diocesan or Parish-Priest § 6. To avoid splitting on the Romish Church they finde another way of deriving their power from Christ and that is by the Civil Magistrate without the Church as it is practically at least granted To which I say That although he is or may be a Member of the Church yet quatenus a Magistrate he is a Member of another State and therefore in an Office extrinsecal to the Church and hence cannot extend Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Church nor invest an Officer in the Church which is Christ's dominion with Office Power Legislative or Executive the Civil and Ecclesiastical States being distinct from each other as they are such Moreover for an Officer in Christ's state to derive his power from Earthly Potentates is to subject the Kingdom of Christ as such to the Kingdoms of men and make it subordinate thereto in those things which Christ hath reserved to himself as his Prerogative Again if Church-Officers as such must be invested with power from Secular Princes the Church must stand or fall as to its right and orderly manner of Government at the will and disposition of Princes Whence Christs Oeconomy will seem not compleat in it self but lame deficient and headless in that it must be beholding to an Exotick Power for its principal Officers and Rulers and Christ was wanting in not providing for the due governance of his Church under heathenish or heretical Magistrates yea such Magistrates would undoubtedly establish Church-Officers ejusdem farinae with themselves And besides it would follow that the Primitive Churches after our Saviour's ascention could have no due derivation of Church-power unto it for some Ages for want of Christian Magistrates the grand Mediums of Conveyance There is also as much reason that Civil Officers should be at the disposition of the Church as that Church-Officers should be at the disposition of the State And the Oecumenical Bishop may upon as good grounds claim a power of enthroning Emperors as the other claim an Ecclesiastical power of setting a Head over the Church Christ having made Church and State Co-ordinate Lastly if Ecclesiastical Officers derive their power from Civil Authority as their visible Church-head sure the Vitals and the whole Animation must needs be Secular much like the Beast spoken of Rev. 13.4 § 7. Arg. 5. I argue from the chief ends of Subordination of Pastors in the Church It 's to redress Heresie or male Administration of discipline that there may be place for Appeals in case of Injustice determination of Controversies c. Now what end would there be of Appeals if there should not be some Pastor supream to all the rest from whom there could be no Appeal And it 's necessary there be still room for Appeal till a man comes to the Church in its greatest Vnity and Superiority and there is Mother-Church in her Grandeur Ecclesia in Cathedrâ if the resort be made for Appeal or resolution of difficult cases to the Church in her Pastoral multiplicity there will be such variety of Judgments and Interests that there will be no final determination but ye may hear the Catholick body speaking one thing in its Catholick Pastor and Head for if you will know a mans minde and determination of any thing you will go to the Head not to the Arms or Legs and what you have by Signes from them you know is by the influence of the Head So if we will know the minde of the Church in its ultimate Results and Determination you must not go to a Diocesan Primate c. of France c. England c. where you will have but a partial or weak resolution not having a Catholick Interest Intilligence Influence and Concernment but we must go to the Body speaking in the Head who hath a common Concern and Fellow-feeling with the least Finger or Toe complaining or appealing to it § 8. Hence see the reason why the attribute of Infallibility is ascribed to the Church thus speaking in its Head or Supream Pastor 1. Because of his universal Relation and Interest and therefore speaks infallibly the sense of the whole or of any particular part as the Head feels and cannot be deceived in declaring the pain of the Toe and can most infallibly of all the members prescribe a Remedy 2. It 's most probable that he that hath his authority by immediate conveyance from Jesus Christ should have also the most immediate discovery of his Minde and Will so that the infallibility of an Oecumenical Pastor is founded on the Principles of Episcopal government viz. subordination of Pastors in the Church for if in all our Appeals from Pastor to Pastor from Church to Church for determination in matters of controversie and resolution in points of weight and difficulty we do at last arrive at as fallible a Church and Pastor as at first to what purpose is all our Appeals And if it be granted that a Bishop is less fallible than a Parish-Priest and an Archbishop less fallible than a Bishop and a Primate than an Archbishop then upon this account onely it must be that he hath a greater share by his place in the common interest of the Body by the comprehensiveness of his power and relation and being farther removed by his dignity from particular small interests and private passions and therefore more likely to be more impartial universal and less fallible in his judgment than other his inferiour and more limited Pastors And Ergo upon the same reason it will follow that an Oecumenical Bishop is least of all fallible not but that St. Peter and his Successors may err and have but that as Supream Head in the most Catholick capacity he is comparatively to all
in the matters of his Worship no others approbation being enough to justifie my actions and therefore to satisfie my Conscience is but Innovation and therefore vain Worship and Ergo rejected by Christ and sinful Mat. 15.9 Now that which a Christian is perswaded of to be thus in his own Conscience and yet doth he offers manifest violence to his Conscience in doing 9. If such Compulsions do by Rules of Expediency necessarily require a man to refuse active obedience then it 's a duty at least sometimes to refuse but Ergo. The Minor is proved beyond all controversie from Paul's Doctrine and practice concerning the use of Circumcision Gal. 2.5 Coloss 2.19 20 21 22. CHAP. XIX Of Humane Constitutions in the Worship of God besides the Word § 1. THe usual grand Evasion of what hath been said That although the Church cannot make Laws contrary to the Word yet she may make Laws besides the Word i.e. new Laws which Christ never made and if she make such Laws which are not contrary to the Word i.e. directly and materially she is to be obeyed by every conscientious Christian For Answer I premise these things 1. All Laws for divine Worship are enacted by Christ or not if enacted we question not the obeying of them if not let any one shew by virtue of what divine Authority we must obey them for we cannot obey them without 2. As Christ never deputed any humane Legislative Authority in his Church so he never allowed any to rectifie and correct his Laws by adding to their penalties and making them more severe and giving such express and explicite Authority which he hath left implicite and consequentially onely and those things more necessary which he hath left less Christ blamed the Pharisees for so doing and not allowed any Churches or Christians so to do 3. It would be grosly impudent if the Church should pretend to a power of making Laws contrary to the Word of God though they should be so therefore they cannot pretend to this Law-making power in any thing but what she saith is in it self indifferent therefore she can pretend onely to the making a new additional Law for Christ such as he never made and for and in such things which he thought best in his wisdom to leave indifferent But the Church finds a mistake in that first Constitution and thinks best to make such things necessary thinks that Christ left too few ceremonies and significant signes and therefore enacts more Laws besides the Word not contrary to what he hath enacted and established already § 2. But I shall now prove that all humane Laws and Constitutions in matters of divine Worship besides the Word are contrary to the Word 1. That which is not the revealed Will of God for his Worship in his Word is contrary to the Word of God but humane Constitutions and Laws for divine Worship are not the revealed Will of God in his Word Ergo. The Major is true because the Word is the revealed Will of God and that Rule of Worship which is not the revealed Will of God is contrary to the revealed Will of God for his Worship for Revealed and not Revealed are contradicentia as justus non justus honestum non honestum and contradicentia will never be denied by any good Logicians to be contraria therefore the revealed Will of God in his Word and not the revealed Will of God in his Word are contraries or there is no contraries in the world The Minor carries its evidence from the very terms for what is beside the Word is beside the Will of God in the Word and not to be found there for whatever is found to be the Will of God in the Word positively or consequentially so obligeth as a Law of God to obedience according to the true intent and meaning thereof 2. Whatever be humane Laws for the Worship of God besides the Word are at the best but the Will of man that those things should be necessary in the Worship of God which Christ hath willed indifferent and revealed in his Word so to be but for man to will those things to be necessary in the Worship of God which Christ hath willed and revealed in his Word to be indifferent is to will or make a Law contrary to the revealed Will of Christ in his Word i. e. for the matter of the Law for necessary and indifferent are adversa and therefore also contraria if the opposites be necessary and not necessary they are contradicentia and they are contraria as before 3. Whatever is not according to the Will of God in the Word is contrary to the Will of God in his Word but all such humane Laws besides the Word are not according to the Word Ergo. The Major is true because all actions are agreeable to the Word by being according to the Word and disagreeing by not being according to the Word and so are contrary to the Word and are really contradicentia for according to and not according to referring to the same subject are contradicentia every action being according or not according and so contrary or not contrary to the Word of God Minor I prove such Laws besides the Word are not according to the Word the meaning of besides the Word is that there is no ground for it in the Word and therefore that cannot be according to the Rule laid down in the Word for that were to be built upon and to be justified by it a man cannot sit upon a seat and sit besides it at the same time the same water poured cannot fall in the Cup and besides it too whatever Law cannot claim a Sanction from the Word is not according to it therefore besides it or against it as Christ saith Whoever is not for me is against me The Word doth either justifie or condemn all actions and those Laws that are not justified at least by Christ's approbation are condemned by the Word of God § 3. 4. Whatever is contrary to the Legislative Prerogative of Christ maintained in his Word is contrary to the Word but such humane Laws and Constitutions besides the Word are contrary to the Legislative Prerogative of Christ Ergo. The Major is clear because every truth maintained and defended by the Word is the Word and whatever is contrary to that truth is contrary to the truth of the Word And what truth is more clearly attested and firmly ratified than this Prerogative of Christ The Minor is clear because nothing can detract more than a Vsurpation in this kind What can detract more from the Legislative power of King and Parliament than for a Corporation or any inferiour combination of men to assume this power to themselves 5. To adde any thing to the revealed Will of Christ in matters of spiritual concern is contrary to the Word of the Old and New Testaments Deut. 4.1 2. Rev. 22.18 but to make such Laws is to adde c. because such Laws by our supposition
being besides the Word we have proved to be no parts of it and Ergo additions to his Laws and institutions in the Word which are perfect and entire in themselves for Doctrine and Discipline in divine Service and Worship and these Laws of humane enaction whatever pretences are put upon them being for the same end and use must needs be additional 6. To teach for Doctrines the commands of men is contrary to the Word of Christ but all humane Constitutions of this kind specified besides the Word are but Commands of men taught for Doctrines The Major is true and undeniable from Mat. 14.9 where such Doctrines and Commands are charged by Christ for the intolerable sin of the Pharisees Compare with this place that in the Old Testament quoted and applied to them by our Saviour Isai 29.14 Their fear towards me is taught by the precepts of men or which our Saviour the best Interpreter of Scripture saith In vain do they worship me producing this from the Prophet Their fear is taught by the Commandments of men not but that they observed also Moses his Commands but because they set up their Posts with Gods their Laws with Gods Laws and this is that which Christ condemns This Argument is cleared and fully prosecuted by another very lately in a learned Exerc. on Mat. 15.9 and Mark 9.13 And therefore I shall not actum agere As to the Minor it 's evident that such Legislators teach for Doctrine their own Laws for they press them doctrinally on the people and charge it as their duty to walk in the practice of active obedience unto such Laws and condemn all such as refuse such obedience upon any pretence whatsoever as disobedient to Governours and Schismaticks CHAP. XX. Of the Vnited Power Legislative of Church and Civil State § 1. LEst it should be replied to our preceding Discourse That although the civil Magistrate cannot of himself be a competent Compiler or Establisher of Ecclesiastical Laws Canons or Constitutions unless they be first compiled approved and propounded by the Church to the Magistrate to compleat their Sanction and Law-ratification with the impress of his Authority yet the Church and civil Magistrate both together have a compleat Legislative power in Ecclesiastical Affairs The Church is supposed to act by its Representatives in a Convocation Assembly of Divines or Synod or Council lawfully assembled by the call of the Magistrate The Question is Whether after they have agreed on Ecclesiastical Canons and Constitutions the civil Magistrate may give Sanction to them by making them Penal Statutes The Question in brief is Whether Ecclesiastical Laws may become Penal Statutes by Magistratick Sanction § 2. In order to the right resolving of this Question it 's fit to enquire first concerning the nature or subject-matter of the said Canons and Constitutions whether the Composers and Proposers thereof do believe them to consist of such things as Christ hath left indifferent and they would have to be necessiary or do they consist of such things as they have by disquisition found to be necessary by virtue of the Will of Christ for the end of such Assemblies is to confer about the Will of Christ in the great and weightier matters of the Church for the clearing up of what is dark and dubious before Now if the mind of Christ be discovered there needs no more Sanction where the word of a King is there is power Make it but out by the clearest demonstrations that this or that is the mind of Christ there needs none of the Magistrates penalties to be annexed it hath force enough of it self to reach the Conscience which is the end of Christ's Laws and to charge guilt upon it in case of disobedience and that is more than all the Penal Laws of men can do It 's needful to enquire whether the Magistrates Sanction be by way of approbation onely or by way of eminent commendation of the said Laws to his Subject not annexing or executing any Penalty himself but allowing onely some spiritual Penalty annexed by Christ or his Church to be executed by Church-Officers or whether he will annex or cause to be executed any external Penalty by his civil Officers as occasion shall serve The matter being thus stated I proceed in the Negative § 3. 1. We have abundantly evidenced that in the matters of Indifferencies in Religion no power on Earth may make any Laws changing them into things religiously necessary 2. Where did Christ ever joyn Magistrates and Ministers together in joynt Commission in the government of his Church 3. If so why may not Magistrates joyn in the judicial proceedings of the Church and fit as due Judges in all Spiritual Courts and excommunicate and absolve He that hath a share in Legislation may reserve to himself the executive part at his own pleasure 4. If such Church-Laws are invalid without the Magistrates Sanction then he hath a negative voice over the Church to stop any Church-proceedings in Legislation or Execution and indeed it 's happy for some people that it is so else the Clergie that call themselves the Church would make mad work were not the civil State wiser and more moderate and by its power able to put a stop sometimes to their mad Carreers 5. The Decrees of the Apostles Elders and Brethren being only a declaration of the mind of Christ in a difficult case became a Law to the Churches without any such Magistatick ratification or annexation of Penalty 6. Christ never annexed any corporal or estate-Penalties to any of his Laws that he setled his Church with at the first 7. Christ provided so for the due government of his Churches that nothing might be wanting for the administration of Government and Ordinances in the worst of times when most persecuted and opposed by those Magistrates in whose Dominions they did militate The Church of Christ would be but in a very weak and lame condition in most Kingdoms and Ages if the Magistrates countenance and concurrence were an Essential Complement of its due state of Ecclesiastick government and that can never be accounted a right Model of Church-government that cannot be erected without the Kings and Princes of the Earth set their hands to it For if it were so Christ should have few duely govern'd Churches on Earth that sort of men being oftner found pulling down than setting up the Kingdom of Christ Lastly we having already proved that neither Church-Officers nor Civil have any Legislative power in the said matters and therefore being put together they are but as two Cyphers that make not so much as an Vnite for ex nihilo nihil fit and therefore I need not enlarge any further on this matter CHAP. XXI Of Decency and Order in God's Worship and Canonical Obedience § 1. THe great Plea that is made for the Magistrates and Churches Legislative power in Spirituals is that there might be Decency and Order in the Church which is most meet to be especially because