this Because there is no Law of God which doth oblige us in all Cases to do that which is Best And if we be not bound to do always that which is Best we are not bound to do always that which is most Reasonable for certainly that which is Best is always most Reasonable And if we be not bound to do that which is most Reasonable much less are we bound to do that which is Safest because that which is Safest is not always either Best or most Reasonable And if there be no Law of God that doth oblige us to any of these things then it is certain we do not sin if we Act otherwise For where there is no Law there is no Transgression Now That the first of these Principles is true we have as good Proof as can be desired viz. the Authority of St. Paul who hath in the 7th of the first of the Corinthians thus determined And if that be true the other two must needs be so likewise because they follow from it by unavoidable Consequence Taking now this for granted I ask what Law doth a man Transgress that in a purely Doubtful Case chuseth either side indifferently without respect to what is Safest or most Reasonable Always supposing that the side he chuseth be not in it self evil and forbidden by God. I say according to these Principles he transgresseth no Law at all and consequently cannot properly be said to sin at all If the man be at all guilty it is upon one of these accounts viz. either because he Acteth against the dictate of his Conscience or because he Acteth against the Law of God in preferring that which is less reasonable and safe before that which is more so Now Upon the former account he is not at all guilty for his Conscience hath passed no Dictate no Verdict in this matter and therefore he cannot be supposed to act against any such Dictate or Verdict The man is in such a state that he either believes he may act as he doth without violation of his Duty Or at least he hath no belief to the contrary so that his Conscience doth not any way Condemn him And as for the other thing of his not chusing that side of the Doubtful Case which appeared to him most reasonable it is true if there was any Law of God which obliged him to make such a Choice he would be guilty of sin if he chose otherwise But now it doth not appear that there is any such Law of God. Nay so far from that that it appears from St. Paul that there is no such Law but that every man is left to his own liberty in this matter always supposing that he take care not to chuse or do any thing that he judgeth to be inconsistent with his Duty which in our Case we do likewise suppose But then having said this we must add further That though we here have concluded that no man in a Doubtful Case properly so called is strictly obliged by any Law of God under the penalty of sin to chuse one side more than another but may indifferently chuse either Yet in the first place Whoever doth believe or is perswaded in his own Mind either that he ought not at all to Act against a Doubt or that in every Doubtful Case he is bound to follow the safer side such a man so long as he so believes cannot without sin Act according to the Principles we have now laid down And Secondly We are far from encouraging any man to act thus hand over head in a Doubtful Case much less from commending him for so doing For though we say that strictly speaking a man doth not sin which way soever he Act in a purely doubtful Case yet on the other hand I think he is but in a low Dispensation as to Vertue and Goodness that never looks further into his Actions nor takes more care about them than only that they be not directly sinful He that is heartily Good will with St. Paul not only consider what things are Lawful but what things are Expedient and do Edifie It will not ordinarily be sufficient to ingage such a man in an Action to satisfie him that he may do that Action without transgressing any Law of God But he will examine whether the doing or forbearing the Action doth more serve the ends of Vertue and Charity And accordingly as that appears to him so will he determine his Choice In a word The Better and the more Vertuous any man is the more delicate and tender sense will he have not only of that which the Law of God hath precisely made his Duty and so in a proper Sence doth oblige his Conscience but also of every thing that is Reasonable and Excellent and Praise-worthy So that it will really grate upon his mind to do many things which in strict speaking cannot be accounted unlawful or forbidden And thus it is in our present Cas If we suppose a man to be a Devout Christian and a sincere Lover of God he will not be able to prevail with himself in a Case where he Doubteth to chuse either side indiscriminately though if he should I do not know as I said before what Law of God he transgresseth but he will weigh and consider the Reasons on both sides and that which appears to him after such Consideration to be most reasonable and conducing to Gods Glory and his own and the Worlds good that shall have the preference To come to a conclusion The sum of what I have now said is this As Conscience is the immediate Guide of our Actions So the Rule by which Conscience it self is to be guided is the Law of God and nothing else Though therefore we cannot be safe in following our Conscience where our Conscience is not guided by the Law of God because as I have often said our false Judgment of things doth not cancel our Obligation to act according to what the Laws of God require of us unless we can justly plead unblameable Ignorance of those Laws Yet on the other hand where-ever Conscience tells us that me must do this Action because the Law of God hath commanded it we must do it or we sin And again Where-ever Conscience tells us that we must avoid this Action because the Law of God hath forbidden it we must forbear that Action or we sin But if Conscience cannot say that this Action is commanded or forbidden there we are not tyed under the penalty of sinning either to do or to forbear that Action But yet if a Mans Conscience should thus suggest to him Though I cannot say directly that this Action is a Duty or that it is a sin because I am at a loss how the Law of God stands as to this matter and consequently I cannot lay any direct Obligation upon you either way yet my advice is that you would chuse this way rather than the other For this way all things considered appears most fit and
between the Evil of condemning an Innocent Person and acquitting a Guilty one it being Murder in the one Case the Judge or Jury should rather follow the safer side than the more Probable and so clear the man rather than find him Guilty Fourthly If the Case be such that the Man doubts equally on both sides and the sin he is afraid of appears likewise to him to be equal on both sides Here other Considerations are to turn the Ballance In this Case he is to consider what Prudential Inducements he has to do the Action or forbear it as how far his Ease and Quiet his Advantage and Benefit his good Name and Reputation his Friends or his Family is concerned one way or other and since all other Considerations that are of a Moral Nature are equal on both sides those of this kind which are the strongest must add so much weight to the Scale as to determine the Man either to do the Action he doubts about or to let it alone And indeed it cannot be denyed that these Considerations will often have a great Influence even upon a good Man not only in the Case I have now put where the directly Moral Arguments are equal on both sides but in all the other doubtful Cases I before mentioned We may talk very rationally about the Degrees of Probability and the Degrees of Sin and what weight each of them is to have with us and all this with so much Evidence that no Man can deny the reasonableness of the Rules we lay down in Theft But yet when we come to Act we find that scarce any Man doth exactly proceed according to these Rules but mixes some of these Prudential Considerations which I have mentioned with his Deliberations and though they do not wholly yet they help to turn the Ballance And for my part I dare not say that all those who thus proceed are to be blamed for so doing supposing that the Case wherein they thus Act be a Case of pure Doubt and there be no Perswasion on either side and withal that the Man who thus proceeds is satisfied in his own Mind with his proceeding The truth is when all is said every Man in doubtful Cases is left to his own Discretion and if he Acts according to the best Reason he hath he is not culpable though he be mistaken in his Measures These are all the Rules that are to be given in the Case of a Double Doubt And I think no body can object against the Truth of them But I am sensible of another Objection that may be made and that is Why I do mention them at all Since to the Generality of Men for whom this Discourse is intended they seem altogether unpracticable For how few are there who are Competent Judges of these different Degrees of Probability or Sinfulness in an Action that we here talk of and much less are capable of so ballancing these things one with another as to be able from thence to form a good Judgment upon the whole Matter But to this I answer That if Rules are to be given at all for the determining Men in Doubtful Cases we must give these because we can give no other These being the only Principles that Men have to govern their Actions by in these Cases And I trust also they will not be wholly useless to the most ordinary Capacities for the Purposes they are intended Because all may hereby at least learn thus much viz. What Methods they are to proceed by for the guidance of their Actions in Doubtful Cases And though they may have false Notions of the Dangers and the Degrees of particular Sins and so may sometimes make false Applications of these Rules to their own Case yet it is enough for their Justification as I said before that they have Reasoned as well as they can Since they are not bound to Act in Doubtful Cases according to what is best and most reasonable in it self But it is abundantly sufficient that they do endeavour it But to render these Rules about a Double Doubt more intelligible and more useful I think it will not be amiss to give my Reader a Specimen both how they are to be applyed to particular Cases and likewise when they are applyed what light they give to a Man for the chusing his way in any Doubtful Case he happens to be ingaged in And since it would take up too much room to give every particular Rule a several Instance I shall pitch upon one Case under which I may consider all the Varieties of a Double Doubt I have now represented and it shall be that Celebrated Case of the Sacrament than which we have not a greater or a more frequent Instance of this kind of Doubt in any Case among us And because I would not by the discussion of this Case divert my Reader against his will from the main Argument I have taken care to have it so marked in the Print that every one may without trouble if he have no mind to read it pass it over as a long Parenthesis and go on to the next Point This is the Case Here is a Man that believes it to be his Duty to take all opportunities of Receiving the Sacrament or at least to take them frequently But on the other side such is his condition that he is constantly under great Fears and Apprehensions of his being unqualified for it and to receive the Sacrament Unworthily he knows to be a great Sin Not that there is any grievous notorious Sin lies upon his Conscience unrepented of much less that he is ingaged in some vicious Course which he is unwilling that his new Vows at his approach to the Lords Table should divorce him from For indeed he desires and endeavours in all things to live honestly and to keep a Conscience void of offence towards God and towards Man. But this is the Case He is not so devout a Christian nor lives so Pure and Spiritual a Life as he thinks becomes the Partakers of such Heavenly Food Or perhaps he cannot bring himself to so feeling a Sense and Contrition for his past Sins or such ardours of Love and Devotion to our Saviour as he hath been taught that every worthy Communicant ought to be affected with Or perhaps he wants Faith in the Blood of Christ not being able to apply the Benefits of his Passion so comfortably to his own Heart as he thinks he ought to do Or perhaps in the last place his mind is so haunted with a company of idle and naughty Fancies especially when he sets himself to be more than ordinarily serious that he thinks it would be a great Profanation of the Sacrament for him to come to it in such Circumstances These or such like are the things that trouble him And though he hath several times endeavoured to put himself into a better condition yet he could never satisfie himself nor get over these difficulties What now must this Man do He
Case where he is entangled by a wilfully Erroneous one will no more discharge him from Sin as to his Soul if he do an evil Action than the Second Concoction though never so regular can rectifie the Errors of the First as to his Body But Secondly Though that which I have now offered be the proper Answer to the Case before us Yet there is this further to be said to it viz. Though we should suppose that the Law of God had not obliged us to keep the Unity of the Church or to obey our lawful Superiors but had left it as an indifferent matter and that there was no danger at all in forbearing these things but the only danger was in doing them So that the Doubt about Conformity should have perfectly the nature of a Single Doubt as it is put in the Case I say now even upon this Supposition it will bear a just Dispute whether Conformity or Non-conformity be the more eligible side Nay I say further that if the Rule I laid down about a Single Doubt be true it will appear that as things now stand it is more reasonable for a man to Obey the Laws and Communicate with the Church so long as he hath only a bare Doubt about the Lawfulness of these things than to Disobey and Separate For thus I argue Though in a Single Doubt the Rule be That a man should chuse that side of an Action concerning which he hath no Doubt rather than that concerning which he Doubts Yet as was said before that Rule is always to be understood with this Proviso that all other Considerations in the Case be equal If it should happen that a very great Good may be compassed or a very great Evil may be avoided by Acting on the Doubtful side That very Consideration hath weight enough with a Wise man to turn the Balance on that side and to make that which abstractedly considered was a Doubtful Case to be clear and plain when it comes cloathed with such Circumstances As I gave Instances in the Case of Usury and Law-Suits And twenty more might be added to them if it were to any purpose If this now be admitted for Truth we have a plain Resolution of the Case before us and that is this There are so many great Advantages both to the Kingdom and to a mans self to be obtained by Worshipping God in the way of the Church and likewise so many both Publick and Private Mischiefs and Inconveniences that are consequent upon Separation That if in any Case these Considerations have weight enough to Over-balance a simple Doubt about the Lawfulness of an Action they will certainly have sufficient weight in this Case And that man who is not swayed by them doth not Act so reasonably as he might do For my part I should think it very foolishly done of any man that so long as he is utterly uncertain whether he be in the right or in the wrong as every one that Doubteth is should be so confident of his Point as to venture upon it no less a stake than the Peace of the Kingdom where he lives and the Security of the Religion Established and withal his own Ease and Liberty and lastly the Fortunes also of his Posterity And yet such a wise Venture as this doth every one among us make that upon the account of a bare Doubt about the Lawfulness of the things enjoined in our Communion doth persist in disobedience to the Government and Separation from the Church I wish this were well considered by our Doubting Dissenters They are wise enough as to the World in other matters it is to be desired that they would be as wise in this And if they were I dare say it would not at all prejudice their Wisdom as to the other World. It will be but little either to their Comfort or their Reputation at the long run to have it said of them that besides the Disturbance they have all along occasioned to the Publick Peace and Unity they have also brought their Estates and Families into danger of Ruine by the just Prosecutions of Law they have drawn upon themselves and all this for the sake of a Cause which they themselves must confess they are altogether uncertain and unresolved about But this will appear much clearer when we have set the Doubt about Conformity upon the right Foot viz. Considered it as a Double Doubt as indeed it is in its own Nature Which I come now to do In the Second place There are other Dissenters who as they have good reason do Doubt on both sides of this Question As they Doubt on one hand whether it be not a sin to Conform to our Worship because there are several things in it which they suspect to be unlawful So on the other hand they Doubt whether it be not their Duty to Conform to it because the Laws of the Church and of the Land do require them so to do And of these as I said there are likewise two sorts Some perhaps are equally Doubtful whether the Terms of our Communion are Lawful or no and consequently must Doubt equally whether they be bound to Conform or no. Others Doubt unequally That is to say of the Two it appears more probable to them that our Communion is Sinful than that it is a Duty Now as to the first of these Cases The Answer is very short and it is this We have before proved by many Arguments that in a Case of a Pure Doubt about the Lawfulness of an Action where the Probabilities on both sides are pretty equal In that Case the Command of Authority doth always turn the Balance on its own side so as that it is not only reasonable for the man to do that in Obedience to Authority of the Lawfulness of which he Doubteth but it is his Duty to do it he sins if he do not For this I refer my Reader to the Third General Head of this Discourse The only difficulty therefore is in the other Case where the Doubt is unequal And here the Case is this As the man apprehends himself in danger of sinning if he do not come to Church and obey the Laws So he apprehends himself in a greater danger of sinning if he do because it doth appear more probable to him that our Communion is Sinful than that it is a Duty And a greater Probability caeteris paribus is always to be chosen before a less But to this likewise we are ready provided of an Answer from the foregoing Discourse viz. That though it should be supposed that in such a Case as this where the Ballance is so far inclined one way the Authority of our Superiors alone will not have weight enough to cast it on its own side Yet in this particular Case of Church Communion there are so many other Arguments to be drawn from the Consideration of the greater Sin and the more dreadful Consequences of disobeying the Laws than of obeying them as will