Two Sermons Preached at Several Visitations

AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER.

G Ood Christian Reader, understand, that in the delivery of these Sermons (because it was fit I should proportion my speech as near as I could, to the hour) I was forced to cut off here and there part of what I had penned: which yet now, together with that which was spoken, I here present to thy view, distinguished from the rest with this note (,,) against the lines. Thus much I thought needful to advertise thee (because I see men are captious more then enough,) lest I should be blamed of unfaithfulness, in either adding anything unto, or altring anything of, that which I delivered: which I have avoided, as near as the imperfection both of my Copies, and memory would permit. Read without gall, or prejudice: Let not truth fare the worse for the Plainenesse: Catch not advantage at Syllables and Phrases: Study, and seek the Churches Peace: Judge not another's servant. Let us all rather pray one for another; and by our charitable support, help to bear the burdens one of another: and so fulfill the Law of Christ. Amen, Amen.

THE FIRST SERMON.

I T cannot be avoided, so long as there is or Weakness on earth, or Malice in hell, but that scandals will arise, and differences will grow in the Church of God. What through want of Judgment in some, of Ingenuity in others, of Charity in almost all; occasions (God knoweth) of offense are too soon both given and taken: whilst men are apt to quarrel at trifles, and to maintain differences even about indifferent things. The Primitive Roman Church was not a little afflicted with this disease: For the remedying whereof, Saint Paul spendeth this whole Chapter. The Occasion, this: In Rome there lived in the Apostles times many Jews: of whom, as well as of the Gentiles, diverse were converted to the Christian Faith, by the preaching of the Gospel. Now of these new Conuerts, some better instructed then others, as touching the cessation of legal Ceremonies, made no difference of Meats, or of Days; but used their lawful Christian liberty in them both, as things in their own nature merely indifferent: Whereas others, not so thoroughly catechized as they, still made difference for Conscience sake, both of Meats, accounting them Cleane, or Unclean; and of Days, accounting them Holy, or Seruile, according as they stood under the Levitical Law. These later, Saint Paul calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , weak in the Faith: those former then must by the law of Opposition, be Strong in the Faith.

It would have become both the one sort, and the other, (notwithstanding they differed in their private judgments, yet) to have preserved the common peace of the Church, and labored the edification, not the ruin one of another: the strong by affording faithful instruction to the consciences of the weak; and the weak, by allowing favorable construction to the strong. But whilst either measured other by themselves; neither one nor other did 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as our Apostle elsewhere speaketh, Walk uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel. Fault and offenses there were on all hands. The Strong faulty, in Contemning the Weak; the Weak faulty, in Contemning the Weak; the Weak faulty in Condemning the Strong. The strong proudly scorned the weak, as silly and superstitious; for making scruple at some such things, as themselves firmly believed were lawful. The weak rashly censured the strong, as profane & irreligious; for adventuring on some such things, as themselves deeply suspected were vnfawfull. The blessed Apostle desirous all things should be done in the Church in love and unto edification aequa lance, and eodem charitatis moderamine, as Interpreters speak, taketh upon him to arbitrate, and to mediate in the business: and like a just umpire layeth his hand upon both parties, impartially showeth them their several oversights, and beginneth to draw them to a fair & an honorable composition: as thus. The Strong; he shall remit somewhat of his superciliousnesse, in dis-esteeming, & despising the Weak: and the Weak; he shall abate somewhat of his edge and acrimony in judging and condemning the Strong. If the parties will stand to this order, it will prove a blessed agreement: for so shall brotherly love be maintained, Scandals shall be removed, the Christian Church shall be edified, and God's name shall be glorified. This is the scope of my Text, and of the whole Chapter.

In the three first Verses, whereof there is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . First, there is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in the first Verse; the Proposall of a general Doctrine as touching the usage of weak ones: with whom the Church is so to deal, as that it neither give offense to, nor take offense at, the weakness 〈…〉 . Him that is weak in the Faith receive you, but not to doubtful disputations. Next, there is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in the second Verse, a Declaration of the former general proposal by instancing in a particular case, touching the difference of Meats. There is one man Strong in the Faith; he is infallibly resolved, there is no ^• meat unclean of it self, or (if received with thankfulness and sobriety) unlawful: and because he knoweth he standeth upon a sure ground 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he is confident he may eat anything, and he useth his liberty accordingly, eating indifferently of all that is set before him, making no question for conscience sake, One man believeth he may eat all things. There is another man Weak in the Faith; • he standeth yet unresolved and doubtful, whether some kinds of Meats; as namely; those forbidden in the Law, be clean; or he is rather carried with a strong suspicion that they are unclean: our of which timorousness of judgment, he chooseth to forbear those meats, & contenteth himself with the fruits of the earth; Another who is weak, eateth Hearbs. This is Species Facti; this the Case. Now the Question is, in this Case what is to be done, for the avoidance of scandal, and the maintenance of Christian Charity? And this question my Text resolveth in this third Verse: wherein is contained 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Saint Paul's judgment; or his counsel rather, and advice upon the Case, Let not him that eateth, despise, &c. The remainder of the Verse, and of the Chapter being spent, in giving reasons of the judgment, in this and another like case, concerning the difference and observation of Days.

I have made choice to entreat at this time of Saint Paul's advice; as useful for this place and auditory, and the present assembly. Which advice, as the Parties and the Faults are, is also twofold. The Parties two: He that eateth, that is the Strong; and he that eateth not, that is the Weak. the Faults likewise two: The Strong man's fault, that's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ despising of his brothers infirmity; and the Weak man's faults, that's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , judging of his brothers liberty. Proportionably, the parts of the advice, accommodated to the Parties, and their Faults, are two. The one, for the Strong; that he despise not, Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not. The other, for the Weak, that he judge not, Let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth. Of which when I shall have spoken some what on their general use; I shall by God's assistance proceed by way of application to inquire how far the differences in our Church, for conforming, and not conforming, agree with the present case of eating, and not eating: and consequently how far forth Saint Paul's advice in this case of eating and not eating, ought to rule us in the cases of conforming, and not conforming in point of Ceremony. And first of the former rule or brand of the advice, Let not him that cateth, despise him that eateth not.

The terms, whereby the Parties are charactered, He that eateth, and He that eateth not, have in the opening of the Case been already so far unfolded; as that I shall not need anymore to remember you, that by him that eateth, must be understood the strong in Faith, and by him that eateth not, the weak. And so reducing the words ab hypothesiad Thesin; this part of the Advice, Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not, beareth sense, as if the Apostle had said, Let not the strong in faith despise the weak. Weak ones are easily despised: Strong ones are prone to despise: and yet despising is both a grievous sin in the despiser; and a dangerous scandal to the despised. In all which respects, it was but needful the holy Ghost should lesson us, not to despise one another weakness. Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not.

Weakness and Smalnesse, be it in what kind soever, is the fittest object to provoke contempt. As we travel by the way, if a fierce Mastiffe set upon us, we think it time to look about, and to bestir our selves for defense: but we take no notice of the little Curres that bark at us, but despise them. When Goliath saw little David make towards him, 1. Sam. 17. the Text saith, He disdained him; for he was but a youth. And S. Paul charging Timothy so to behave himself in the Church of God, as that none should despise his youth; implieth, that youth is obvious to contempt, and likely enough to be despised. And though Wisdom be better then strength; yet Solomon tells us, the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard, Eccl. 9. I am small, and of no reputation, saith David, Psal. 119. And our Saviors Caveat in the Gospel is especially concerning little ones, as most open to contempt: Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones. But of all other, that weakness is most contemptible, which is seen in the faculties of the understanding Soul: when men are indeed weak in apprehension, weak in judgment, weak in discretion; or at leastwise are thought so.

Weakness then is in it self contemptible: yet not more, then Strength is contemptuous. Passive contempt is the unhappiness of the weak.: but Active the fault of the strong. They that find truly, or but ouerweeningly conceit in themselves abilities either of a higher nature, or in a greater measure, then in other men, be it in any kind whatsoever: it is strange to see, with what scornful state they can trample upon their weaker and inferior brethren, and look upon them (if yet they will at all vouchsafe a look) from aloft, as upon things below them! which is properly and literally to despise. For so much the very words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 among the Greeks, and among the Latins Despicere do import. The Pharisee, it is like, cast such a disdainful look upon the poor Publican, when in contempt he called him Iste Publicanus: sure I am, that Parable was spoken of purpose concerning such as trusted in their own righteousness, and despised others, Luk. 18. And they are ever the likeliest thus to despise others, that conceit something in themselves more then others. Wealth, honor, strength, beauty, birth, friends, alliance, authority, power, wit, learning, eloquence, reputation, any trifle; can leaven our thoughts, (partial as they are towards our selves) and swell us, and heave us up above our brethren: and because we think we do over-top them; we think we may overlook them too, and despise them as vulgar and contemptible. Agar could despise Sarah; the bond-servant, the free woman; the maid, her mistress: only for a little fruitfulness of the womb beyond her; because she saw that she had conceived, and her Mistress was barren, Gen. 16. All strength and eminency then we see, be it in any little sorry thing, is apt to breed in men a despising of their weaker and meaner brethren: but none more, then this strength of knowledge and of faith, wherewith we now deal. It should be quite otherwise: our knowledge should praeferre facem, hold the light before us, and help us for the better discovery of our ignorance; and so dispose us to Humility, not Pride. But pride and self-love is congenitum Malum; it is a close, and a pleasing, and an inseparable corruption: which by sly and serpentine insinuations conveyeth it self, as into whatsoever else is good, and eminent in us, and poisoneth it; so especially into the endowments of the understanding part. Sharpnesse of wit, quickness of conceit, faithfulness of memory, facility of discourse, propriety of elocution, concinnitie of gesture, depth of judgment, variety of knowledge in Arts and Languages, and what ever else of like kind; are but as wind to fill the sails of our pride, and to make us swell above our brethren, in whom the like gifts are not, or not in like eminency. Scientia inflat, our Apostle might well say, Knowledge poffeth up: And that it doth so readily and unmeasurably, that unless there be the greater measure both of humility to prevent, and of charity to vent it, it will in short time breed a dangerous spiritual Tympany in the soul. A disease, from which the strongest constitutions that have been, have not been altogether so free, but that they have had, if not a spice of it, yet at leastwise an inclination unto it. Even this our blessed Apostle, who had so much humility, as to account himself of Apostles the least, but of sinners the chiefest; was in so great danger to be exalted above measure through the abundance of revelations; that it was needful he should have a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet him, lest he should be exalted above measure, 2. Cor. 12. No marvel then, if these new Conuerts, but lately called by God out of the darkness of their ignorance, into his marvelous great light; and having their understandings well informed, and their judgments thoroughly settled in the Doctrine and Use, in the nature and extent of that Evangelical Liberty whereinto they were called: no marvel I say, if these, upon so sensible a change, were more then a little distempred with this swelling above their brethren; even as far as to Despise them. So hard is it, even for the most exercised Christian, not to take knowledge of his own Knowledge: or doing so, not to despise and neglect the infirmities of his less-knowing brother. It was not then without good need, that S. Paul should become a remembrancer to the strong in faith, not to despise the weak. And there is as good need, the very strongest of us all should remember it, and take heed of despising even the very weakest. This Despising being hurtful both to the strong, and weak: to the strong, as a grievous sin; and to the weak, as a grievous scandal.

Despising, first is a sin in the strong. Admit thy weak brother were of so shallow understanding and judgment, that he might say in strictness of truth, what Agur said but in modesty, and that with an Hyperbole too, Prov. 30. that surely he were more brutish then any man, and that he had not in him the understanding of a man: yet the community of nature, and the common condition of humanity, should be sufficient to free him from thy contempt. His body was formed out of the same dust, his soul breathed into him by the same God, as thine were: and he is thy neighbor. Let his weakness then be what it can be; even for that relation of neighbourhood, as he is a man, it is sin in thee to despise him, He that despiseth his Neighbor, sinneth, Prov. 14. But that's not all: He is not only thy Neighbor, as a man; but he is thy Brother too, as a Christian man. He hath embraced the Gospel, he believeth in the Son of God, he is within the pale of the Church, as well as thou: though he be not so exquisitly seen in some higher mysteries, nor so thoroughly satisfied in some other points, as thou art. If it have pleased God to endow thee with a larger portion of knowledge: thou [ 1] oughtest to consider first, that thou art bound to be so much the more thankful to him that gave [ 2] it; and then secondly, that it is expected, thou shouldest do so much the more good with it; and [ 3] thirdly again, that thou art charged with so much the deeper account for it. If the same God have dealt these abilities with a more sparing hand to thy brother: in despising his weakness, what other thing doest thou then even despise the good Spirit of God, that bloweth where he listeth, and giveth to everyone as he listeth? For though there be diversities of gifts, (both for substance, and degree;) yet it is the same Spirit, 1. Cor. 12. And the contempt that is cast upon the meanest Christian, reboundeth upwards again, and in the last resolution reflecteth even upon GOD himself, and upon his Christ. He that despiseth, despiseth not man but GOD; who hath given unto us his holy Spirit, 1. Thes. 4. And when ye sin so against the Brethren, and wound their weak consciences, ye sin against Christ, 1. Cor. 8.

Thus you see Despising is hurtful to the despiser, as a sin: it is hurtful also, as a scandal, to the despised. And therefore our Savior in Math. 18. discoursing of not offending little ones; anon varieth the word, and speaketh of not despising them: as if despising were an especial and principal kind of offending, or scandalizing. And verily so it is, especially to the Weak. Nothing is more grievous to Nature, scarce death it self, then for a man to see himself despised. Ego illam anum irridere me vt sinam? Satius est mihi quouis exitio interire, could he say in the Comedy. It is a thing that pierceth far, and sinketh deep, and striketh cold, and lieth heavy upon the heart: flesh & blood will digest anything with better patience. The great Philosopher, for this reason maketh Contempt the ground of all Discontent; and sufficiently proveth it in the second of his Rhetoriques: there being never anything taken offensively, but sub ration contemptus; nothing provoking to Anger, but what is either truly a contempt, or at leastwise so apprehended. We all know how tenderly everyone of us would take it, but to be neglected by others; to have no reckoning at all made of us; to be so reputed as if we were not, or not worth the looking after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as the Oracle said to the Megarenses. And yet this is but the least degree of Contempt; a privative contempt only. How tenderly then may we think a weak Christian would take it; when to this privative he should find added a Positiue contempt also? when he should see his person, and his weakness, not only not compassioned, but even taunted, and flouted, and derided, and made a laughing stock, and a jesting theme? when he should see them strive to speak and do such things in his sight and hearing, as they know will be offensive unto him, of very purpose to vex, and afflict, and grieve his tender soul? Certainly for a weak Christian newly converted to the Faith, to be thus despised; it were enough, without God's singular mercy and support, to make him repent his late conversion, and revolt from the Faith, by fearful and desperate Apostasy. And he that by such despising should thus offend, though but one of the least and weakest of those that believe in Christ: a thousand times better had it been for him, that he had never been borne; yea, ten thousand times better that a Mill-stone had been hung about his neck, and he cast into the bottom of the Sea, ere he had done it. Despising is a grievous Sin, in the despiser, in the Strong: and despising is a grievous scandal to the despised, to the Weak. Let not therefore the Strong despise the Weak. Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not. And th • s much for the former branch of Saint Paul's advice: the other followeth. Let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth.

Faults seldom go single; but by couples at the least. Sinful men do with sinful provocations, as ball-players with the Ball. When the Ball is once up, they labor to keep it up: right so when an offense or provocation is once given, it is tossed to and fro, the receiver ever returning it pat upon the giver, and that most times with advantage; and so betwixt them they make a shift to preserve a perpetuity of sinning, & of scandalizing one another.

I will not trouble you with other significations of the word; to Judge, as it is here taken, is as much as to Condemne: and so the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is often taken in the worser sense for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Tropically, by a Synecdoche gener is, say Scholiasts: and they say true. But it is a Trope, for which both in this, and in diverse other words, we are not so much beholden to good Arts, as to bad manners. Things that are good, or indifferent, we commonly turn to ill, by using them the worst way: whence it groweth, that words of good or indifferent signification, in time degenerate so far, as to be commonly taken in the worst sense. But this by the way. The fault of these weak ones in the case in hand, was, that measuring other men's actions, and consciences, by the model of their own understandings, in their private censures they rashly passed their judgments upon, and pronounced peremptory sentence against such, as used their liberty in some things, concerning the lawfulness whereof themselves were not satisfied; as if they were loose Christians, carnal professors, nomine tenus Christiani, men that would not stick to do anything, and such as made either none at all, or else very little conscience of their actions. This practice my Text disalloweth, and forbiddeth: and the rule hence for us is plain and short, We must not judge others. The Scriptures are express; Judge not, that ye be not judged, Math. 7. Judge nothing before the time, &c. 1. Cor. 4. Thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest, Rom. 2. And if thou judgest, thou art not a doer of the Law, but a Judge, I am. 4.

First, it is an Vsurpation. He that is of right to judge, must have calling and commission for it. Quis constituit te? sharply replied upon Moses, Exod. 2. Who made thee a Judge? and Quis constituit me? reasonably alleged by our Savior, Luk. 12. Who made me a Judge? Thou takest too much upon thee then, thou son of man, whosoever thou art that judgest: thus saucily to thrust thy self into God's seat, and to invade his Throne. Remember thyself well, and learn to know thine own rank. Quis tu? Who art thou that judgest another? I am. 4. or Who art thou that judgest another's servant? in the next following verse to my Text. As if the Apostle had said; What art thou? or what hast thou to do to judge him that standeth or falleth to his own Master? Thou art his fellow-servant, not his Lord. He hath another Lord, that can and will judge him; who is thy Lord too, and can and will judge thee: for so he argueth anon at verse. 10. Why doest thou judge thy brother? We shall all stand before the Judgment-feat of Christ.

Secondly, it is Rashness in us. A Judge must understand the truth, both for matter of Fact, and for point of Law; and he must be sure he is in the right for both, before he proceed to sentence: or else he will give rash judgment. How then dare any of us undertake to sit as Judges upon other men's consciences, wherewith we are so little acquainted, that we are indeed but too much unacquainted with our own? We are not able to search the depth of our own wicked and deceitful hearts; and to ransack thoroughly the many secret windings and turnings therein: how much less then are we able to fathom the bottoms of other men's hearts, with any certainty to pronounce of them either good or evil? We must then leave the judgment of other men's spirits, and hearts, and reins; to him that is the Father of spirits, and alone searcheth the hearts and reins: before whose eyes all things are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as the word is most Emphaticall, Heb. 4. Wherefore our Apostles precept elsewhere is good to this purpose, 1. Cor. 4. Judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts. Unless • e be able to bring these hidden things to light, and to make manifest these counsels; it is rashness in us to judge: and therefore we must not judge.

Thirdly, this judging is uncharitable. Charity is not easily suspicious; but upon just cause: much less then censorious, and peremptory. Indeed when we are to judge of Things, it is wisdom to judge of them secundùm quod sunt, as near as we can, to judge of them just as they are, without any sway or partial inclination either to the right hand, or to the left. But when we are to judge of Men, and their Actions; it is not altogether so: there the rule of Charity must take place, Dubia in meliorem partem sunt interpretanda. Unless we see manifest cause to the contrary, we ought ever to interpret what is done by others, with as much favor as may be. To err thus is better, then to hit right the other way; because this course is safe, and secureth us as from iniuring others, so from endangering our selves: whereas in judging ill, though right, we are still unjust 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the event only, and not our choice freeing us from wrong judgment. True Charity is ingenuous; it thinketh no evil, 1. Cor. 13. how far then are they from charity, that are ever suspicious, and think nothing well? For us, let it be our care to maintain charity; and to avoid, as far as human frailty will give leave, even sinister suspicions of our brethren's actions: or if through frailty we cannot that, yet let us not from light suspicions fall into uncharitable censures: let us at leastwise suspend our definitive judgment, and not determine too peremptorily against such, as do not in every respect just as we do, or as we would have them do, or as we think they should do. It is uncharitable for us to judge, and therefore we must not judge.

Lastly, there is Scandal in judging. Possibly he that is judged, may have that strength of faith and charity; that though rash uncharitable censures lie thick in his way, he can lightly skip over all those stumbling blocks, and scape a fall. Saint Paul had such a measure of strength; With me it is a very small thing, saith he, that I should be judged of you, or of human judgment, 1. Cor. 4. If our judging light upon such an object; it is indeed no scandal to him: but that's no thanks to us. We are to esteem things by their natures, not events: and therefore we give a scandal, if we judge; notwithstanding he that is judged take it not as a scandal. For, that judging is in it self a scandal, is clear from verse. 13. of this Chapter; Let us not therefore, saith S. Paul, judge one another anymore, but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block, or an occasion to fall in his brothers way. And thus we see four main Reasons against this judging of our brethren. 1. We have no right to judge; and so our judging is usurpation. 2. We may err in our judgments; and so our judging is rashness. 3. We take things the worst way when we judge; and so our judging is uncharitable. 4. We offer occasion of offense by our judging; and so our judging is scandalous. Let not him therefore that eateth not, judge him that cateth.

And so I have done with my Text in the general use of it: wherein we have seen the two faults of despising, and of judging our brethren laid open; and the ugliness of both discovered. I now descend to make such Application, as I promised, both of the case and rules; unto some differences, and to some offenses given and taken in our Church in point of Ceremony. The Case ruled in my Text was of eating, and not eating: the Differences which some maintain in our Church, are many in the particular; (as of kneeling, and not kneeling; wearing, and not wearing; crossing, and not crossing, &c.) but all these, and most of the rest of them, may be comprehended in gross under the terms of conforming, and not conforming. Let us first compare the cases; that having found wherein they agree, or disagree, we may thereby judge how far Saint Paul's advice in my Text ought to rule us, for not despising, for not judging one another. There are four special things, wherein if we compare this our Case with the Apostles; in every of the four we shall find some agreement, and some disparity also; 1. The nature of the matter: 2. The abilities of the persons: 3. Their several Practice about the things: and 4. Their mutual carriage one towards another. And first, let us consider how the two cases agree in each of these.

First, the matter whereabout the eater and the not-eater differed in the Case of the Romans, was in the nature of it indifferent: so it is between the conformer, and not-conformer in our Case. As there [ 1] fish, and flesh, and herbs were merely indifferent; such as might be eaten, or not eaten without sin: so here Cap, and Surplis, Cross, and Ring, and the rest, are things merely indifferent; such as (in regard of their own nature) may be used or not used without sin; as being neither expressly commanded, nor expressly forbidden in the Word of God.

Secondly, the persons agree. For as there, so here [ 2] also; some are strong in faith, some weak. There are many, whose judgments are upon certain and infallible grounds assured and resolved, and that certitudine Fidei, that Cap, and Surplis, and Cross, and the rest, are things lawful, and such as may be used with a good Conscience. There are some others again, who through ignorance, or custom, or prejudice, or otherwise weakened in their judgments; cannot (or will not) be persuaded, that these things are altogether free form superstition and Idolatry: nor consequently, the use of them from sin.

Thirdly, the practice of the persons are much alike. [ 3] As there, the strong did use his liberty according to the assurance of his knowledge, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and did eat freely without scruple; and the weak did forbear to eat, because of his doubting and irresolution: So here, most of us in assured confidence that we may wear, and cross, and kneel, and use the other Ceremonies and Customs of our Church, do willingly, and ex animo conform our selves thereunto; yet some there are, who out of I know not what niceness and scruplositie make dainty of them, and either utterly refuse conformity, or at leastwise desire respite, till they can better inform themselves.

Lastly, there is some correspondence also in the fauie Carriage of the parties one towards another. For as there the eater despised the not-eater; and the not eater judged the eater: so here, it cannot be denied, but that some Conformers (although I hope far the lesser, I am sure far the worser sort,) do despise and scandalize the non-Conformers more then they have reason to do, or any discreet honest man will allow. But is it not most certain also, that the non-Conformers (but too generally, yea, and the better sort of them too, but too often and much) do pass their censures with marvelous great freedom; and spend their judgments liberally upon, and against the Conformers? Hitherto the Cases seem to agree. One would think, mutatis mutandis, the Apostles rule would as well fit our Church and Case, as the Roman; and should as well free the non-Conformers from our Contempt, as us from their Censures. Let not him that conformeth, despise him that conformeth not: and let not him that conformeth not, judge him that conformeth.

But if you will please to take a second surview of the four several particulars, wherein the Cases seemed to agree; you shall find very much disparity and disproportion betwixt the two Cases in each of the four respects. In the case of my Text, the matter of difference among them, was not only indifferent in the nature of it; but it was also left as indifferent for the use: the Church (perhaps) not having determined anything positively therein; at least no public authority having either enjoined, or forbidden, the use of such or such meats. But in the Case of our Church it is far otherwise. Cap, Surplis, Cross, Ring, and other Ceremonies, which are the Matter of our differences, though they be things indifferent for their nature, and in themselves: yet are not so for their use, and unto us. If the Church had been silent, if Authority had prescribed nothing herein; these Ceremonies had then remained for their use, as they are for their nature, indifferent: Lawfull, and such as might be used without sin; and yet Arbitrary, and such as might be also forborne without sin. But men must grant (though they be unwilling, if yet they will be reasonable) that every particular Church hath power, for decency and orders sake, to ordain and constitute Ceremonies. Which being once ordained, and by public authority enjoined, cease to be indifferent for their use, though they remain still so for their nature: and of indifferent become so necessary, that neither may a man without sin refuse them, where authority requireth; nor use them, where Authority restraineth the use.

Neither is this accession of Necessity, any impeachment to Christian Liberty; or insnaring of men's consciences: as some have objected. For then do we ensnare men's consciences by human Constitutions, when we thrust them upon men as if they were divine; and bind men's consciences to them, immediately, as if they were immediate parts of God's worship, or of absolute necessity unto salvation. This Tyranny and Vsurpation over men's Consciences, the Pharisees of old did, and the Church of Rome at this day doth exercise, and we justly hate it in her: equalling, if not preferring her Constitutions to the Laws of God. But our Church (God be thanked) is far from any such impious presumption: and hath sufficiently declared her self by solemn protestation, enough to satisfy any ingenuous impartial judgment, that by requiring obedience to these ceremonial Constitutions, she hath no other purpose, then to reduce all her children to an orderly uniformity in the outward worship of God; so far is she from seeking to draw any opinion, either of divine necessity upon the Constitution; or of effectual holiness upon the Ceremony. And as for the prejudice which seemeth to be hereby given to Christian liberty: it is so slender a conceit, that it seemeth to bewray in the obiecters a desire, not so much of satisfaction, as cavil. For first, the liberty of a Christian to all indifferent things, is in the Mind and Conscience: and is then infringed; when the Conscience is bound, and straitened, by imposing upon it an opinion of doctrinal Necessity. But it is no wrong to the Liberty of a Christian man's Conscience, to bind him to outward observance for Orders sake, and to impose upon him a Necessity of Obedience. Which one distinction, of Doctrinal and Obedientiall Necessity, well weighed, and rightly applied, is of it self sufficient to clear all doubts in this point. For, to make all restraint of the outward man in matters indifferent an impeachment of Christian Liberty; what were it else, but even to bring flat Anabaptism and Anarchy into the Church? and to overthrow all bond of subjection and obedience to lawful Authority? I beseech you consider, wherein can the immediate power and authority of Fathers, Masters, and other Rulers over their inferiors consist; or the due obedience of inferiors be shown towards them: if not in these Indifferent and Arbitrary things? For, things absolutely Necessary, as commanded by God, we are bound to do; whether human Authority require them, or no: and things absolutely Vnlawfull, as prohibited by God, we are bound not to do; whether human Authority forbid them, or no. There are none other things left then, wherein to express properly the Obedience due to superior Authority, then these Indifferent things. And if a Father or Master have power to prescribe to his child or servant in Indifferent things; and such restraint be no way prejudicial to Christian Liberty in them: Why should any man, either deny the like power to Church-Governors, to make Ecclesiastical Constitutions concerning indifferent Things? or interpret that power to the prejudice of Christian Liberty? And again Secondly, [ 2] Men must understand, that it is an Error to think Ceremonies and Constitutions to be things merely Indifferent: I mean in the general. For howsoever every particular Ceremony be indifferent; and every particular Constitution arbitrary and alterable; yet that there should be some Ceremonies, it is necessary, Necessitate absoluta, in as much as no outward work can be performed without Ceremonial circumstances, some or other: and that there should be some Constitutions concerning them, it is also necessary (though not simply & absolutely, as the former; yet ex hypothesi, and) necessitate conuenientiae. Otherwise, since some Ceremonies must needs be used; every Parish, nay every Man would have his own fashion by himself, as his humor led him: whereof what other could be the issue, but infinite distraction, and unorderly confusion in the Church? And again thirdly, to return their weapon upon themselves; If every restraint in indifferent things be injurious to Christian Liberty: then themselves are injurious no less by their negative restraint from some Ceremonies, Weare not, Cross not, Kneele not, &c. then they would have the world believe our Church is by her positive restraint unto these Ceremonies of wearing, and crossing, & kneeling, &c. Let indifferent men judge, nay let thenselves that are parties judge, whether is more injurious to Christian Liberty; public Authority by mature advice commanding, what might be forborne, or private spirits through humorous dislikes, forbidding what may be used: the whole Church imposing the use, or a few Brethren requiring the forbearance; of such things, as are otherwise and in themselves equally indifferent for use, or for forbearance.

But they say, our Church maketh greater matters of Ceremonies then thus; and preferreth them even before the most necessary duties of preaching, and administering the Sacraments: in as much as they are imposed upon Ministers under pain of Suspension and Depriuation from their Ministerial Functions and Charges. First, for actual Depriuation; [ 1] I take it, vnconforming Ministers have no great cause to complain. Our Church, it is well known, hath not always used that rigor she might have done. Where she hath been forced to proceed as far as deprivation; she hath ordinarily by her fair, and flow, and compassionate proceedings therein, sufficiently manifested her unwillingness thereto: and declared her self a Mother every way indulgent enough to such ill-nurtured children, as will not be ruled by her. Secondly, [ 2] those that are suspended or deprived; suffer it but justly for their obstinacy and contempt. For howsoever they would bear the world in hand, that they are the only per secuted ones, and that they suffer for their consciences: yet in truth, they do but abuse the credulity of the simple therein; and herein (as in many other things) jump with the Papists, whom they would seem above all others most abhorrent from. For as Seminary Priests and Jesuits give it out, they are martyred for their religion; when the very truth is, they are justly executed for their prodigious Treasons, & felonious or treacherous practices against lawful Princes and Estates: So the Brethren pretend they are persecuted for their consciences; when they are indeed, but justly censured for their obstinate and pertinacious contempt of lawful authority. For, it is not the refusal of these Ceremonies they are deprived for, otherwise then as the matter wherein they show their contempt: it is the Contempt it self, which formally and properly subjecteth them to just Ecclesiastical Censure of Suspension or Depriuation. And contempt of Authority, though in the smallest matter, deserveth no small punishment: all authority having been ever solicitous (as it hath good reason) above all things to vindicate and preserve it self from Contempt; by inflicting sharp punishments upon contemptuous persons in the smallest matters, above all other sorts of offenders in any degree whatsoever. Thus have we shown and cleared the first and main difference betwixt the Case of my Text, and the Case of our Church, in regard of the Matter: the things whereabout they differed, being every way indifferent; ours not so.

And as in the Matter; so there is secondly much odds in the condition of the Persons. The refusers in the Case of my Text, being truly weak in the Faith; as being but lately converted to the Christian Faith, and not sufficiently instructed by the Church in the doctrine and use of Christian Liberty in things indifferent: Whereas with our refusers it is much otherwise. First, they are not new [ 1] Pr • selytes; but men borne, and bred, and brought up in the bosom of the Church: yea many, and the chiefest of them, such as have taken upon them the Calling of the Ministry, and the Charge of Souls, and the Office of teaching & instructing others. And such men should not be weaklings. Secondly, [ 2] ours are such as take themselves to have far more knowledge and understanding, and insight in the Scriptures, and all divine learning, then other men: such as between pity and scorn seem most to wonder at the ignorance and simplicity of the vulgar, and to lament (which is, God knoweth, lamentable enough; though not comparable to what it was within not many years since:) the want of knowledge, and the insufficiency of some of the Clergy in the Land. And with what reason should these men expect the privilege of weak ones? Thirdly, our Church hath sufficiently declared [ 3] and published the innocence of her purpose and meaning in enjoining the Ceremonies: not so only; but hath been content to hear, and receive, and admit the objections and reasons of the refusers; and hath taken pains to answer and satisfy to the full all that ever yet could be said in that behalf. And therefore it is vanity for these men (or their friends in their behalf) to allege weakness; where all good means have been plentifully used for full information in the points in doubt. Lastly, upon the premises it [ 4] doth appear that the weakness of our Brethren, pretended by those that are willing to speak favorably of them, proceedeth for the most part not so much out of simple ignorance, arising from the defect either of understanding or means; as out of an ignorance at the best in some degree of willfulness and affectation, in not seeking, or not admitting such ingenuous satisfaction, as they might have by reason: if not out of the poison of corrupt and carnal affections (as they give us sometimes but too much cause to suspect) of pride, of singularity, of envy, of contention, of factious admiring some men's persons. By which, and other like partial affections, men's judgments become oftentimes so blinded; that of unwilling at the first, they become at length unable to discern things with that freedom and ingenuity they should. And so the Cases differ in regard of the Persons.

They differ thirdly in the practice of the Persons. There the Strong did eat, because he was well assured he might do it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Verse before my Text: and the Weak did no more but forbear eating; as indeed he might do, no authority interposing to the contrary. But here, we conform, not only because we know we may lawfully do it; but for that we know we must of necessity do it, as bound thereunto in obedience to lawful authority, and in the conscience we ought to make of such obedience. And the refusers do not only de facto, not conform; to the contempt of authority, and the scandal of others: but they stand in it too, and trouble the peace of the Church by their restless Petitions, and Supplicatio • s, and Admonitions, and other publications of the reasons and grounds of their such refusal. And verily, this Country and County▪ hath been not the least busy in these factious and tumultuous courses: both in troubling our most gracious, judicious, and religious Sovereign with their petitions; and also in publishing their reasons, in a Book called The Abridgement printed 1605. to their own shame, and the shame of their Country. He who (as I have been informed) was thought to have had a chief hand in the collecting of those reasons, and printing of that book; was for his obstinate refusal of conformity justly deprived from his Benefice in this Diocese, and thereupon relinquished his Ministry for a time, betaking himself to another Calling, so depriving the Church and people of GOD of the fruit and benefit of those excellent gifts which were in him. But since that time he hath, upon better and more advised judgment, subscribed and conformed: and the Church like an indulgent Mother hath not only received him into her bosom again; but hath restored him too, though not to the same, yet to a Benefice elsewhere of far better value.

Lastly, there is difference in the faulty carriage of the persons: and that on both parts; especially on ours. For though our Non-conforming Brethren condemn us with much liberty of speech and spirit, having yet less reason for it then the weak Romans had (for the Strong among them might have forborne some things for the Weak's sake; and it would well have become them for the avoiding of scandal so to have done; which we cannot do without greater scandal in the open contempt of lawful Authority:) yet we do not despise them, (I mean with allowance from the Church; if particular men do more then they should, it is their private fault, and ought not to be imputed to us, or to our Church) but use all good means we can to draw them to moderate courses and just obedience; although they better deserve to be despised then the Weak Romans did: they being truly Weaks, ours Obstinate; they Timorous, ours also Contemptuous.

Now these differences are opened betwixt the Case in my Text, and the Case of our Church: we may the better judge how far forth S. Paul's advice here given to the Romans in their case of eating, and not-eating, ought to rule us in our case of conforming, and not-conforming in point of Ceremony. And first, of not despising: then of not judging. The ground of the Apostles precept for not despising him that ate not, was his weakness. So far then as this ground holdeth in our case, this precept is to be extended; and no further. And we are hereby bound not to despise our Non-conforming Brethren, so far forth as it may probably appear to us they are weak and not willful. But so far forth, as by their courses and proceedings it may be reasonably thought their refusal proceedeth from corrupt or partial affections, or is apparently maintained with obstinacy and contempt: I take it we may, notwithstanding the Apostles admonition in my Text, in some sort even despise them.

But because they think they are not so well and fairly dealt withal as they should be: Let us consider their particular grievances, wherein they take themselves despised; and examine how just they are. They say, first, they are despised in being [ 1] scoffed, and floured, and derided by loose companions, [ 2] & by profane or popishly affected Persons; in being styled Puritans, and Brethren, and Precisians, and in having many jests and fooleries fastened upon them, whereof they are not guilty. They are secondly despised, they say, in that when they are convented before the Bishops and others in Authority, they cannot have the favor of an indifferent hearing: but are proceeded against as far as Suspension, and sometimes Depriuation, without taking their answers to what is objected, or giving answers to what they object. Thirdly, in that many honest and religious men, of excellent and useful gifts, cannot be permitted the liberty of their Consciences, and the free exercise of their Ministry; only for standing out in these things, which our selves cannot but confess to be indifferent. [ 3]

To their first Grieuance we answer, that we have nothing to do with those that are Popishly affected. If they wrong them, as it is like enough they will (for they will not stick to wrong their betters;) we are not to be charged with that: let them answer for themselves. But by the way, let our Brethren consider, whether their stiff and unreasonable opposing against those lawful Ceremonies we retain, may not be one principal means to confirm, but so much the more in their darkness and superstition those that are wavering, and might possibly by more ingenuous and seasonable insinuations be won over to embrace the truth which we profess. And as for loose persons and profane ones, that make it their sport upon their Ale-benches to rail and scoff at Puritans; as if it were warrant enough for them to drink drunk, talk bawdy, swear and stare, or do anything without control, because forsooth they are no Puritans. As we could wish our Brethren, and their Lay-followers, by their uncouth and sometimes ridiculous behavior had not given profane persons too much advantage to play upon them, and through their sides to wound even Religion it self: so we could wish also that some men by unreasonable and vntust, othersome by unseasonable and indiscreet scoffing at them, had not given them advantage to triumph in their own innocence and persist in their affected obstinacy. It cannot but be some confirmation to men in error; to see men of dissolute and loose behavior, with much eagerness, and petulancy and virulence to speak against them. We all know how much scandal and prejudice it is to a right good cause; to be either followed by persons open to just exception, or maintained with slender and insufficient reasons, or prosecuted with unseasonable and indiscreet violence. And I am verily persuaded, that as the increase of Papists in some parts of the Land, hath occasionally sprung (by a kind of Antiperistasis) frō the intemperate courses of their neighbor Puritans; so the increase of Puritans, in many parts of the Land, oweth not so much to any sufficiency themselves conceive in their own grounds, as to the disadvantage of some Profane, or Scandalous, or Idle, or Ignorant, or Indiscreet opposers. But setting these aside, I see not but that otherwise the name of Puritan, and the rest, are justly given them. For appropriating to themselves the names of Brethren, Professors, Good men, and other like; as differences betwixt them and those they call Formalists: would they not have it thought, that they have a Brotherhood and Profession of their own, freer and purer from Superstition and Idolatry, then others have, that are not of the same stamp? and doing so, why may they not be called Puritans? The name, I know, is sometimes fastened upon those that deserve it not; Raskall people will call any man that beareth but the face of honesty, a Puritan: but why should that hinder others from placing it where it is rightly due?

To their second Grieuance I answer: Public means by Conferences, Disputations, and otherwise, have been often used: and private men not seldom afforded the favor of respite and liberty to bring in their allegations. And I think it can be hardly, or but rarely instanced; that ever Depriuation hath been used, but where fatherly Admonitions have first been used, and time given to the Delinquents to consider of it, and inform themselves better. This course usually hath been taken: though every private particular man hath no reason to expect it. The Reverend Fathers of our Church, we may well • think amid so much other employment, cannot be so unthrifty of their good hours, as to lavish them out in hearing contentious persons eandem cantilenam, sing the same note a hundred times over, and require farther satisfaction, after so many public and unanswerable satisfactions already given. Yet have the Bishops, and others, Church Governors, out of their religious zeal for the peace of God's Church, been so far from despising our Brethren herein: that they have dispensed sometimes with their other weighty occasions, and taken pains to answer their reasons, and confute their exceptions, satisfy all their doubts, and discover the weakness of all their grounds in the points questioned.

And as to their third Grieuance. First, for my own part, I make no doubt, neither dare I be so uncharitable as not to think, but that many of them have honest, and upright, and sincere hearts to Godward, and are unfeignedly zealous of God's Truth, and for Religion. They that are such, no doubt feel the comfort of it in their own souls: and we see the fruits of it in their conversation, and rejoice at it. But yet I cannot be so ignorant on the other side, as not to know, that the most sanctified and zealous men are men, and subject to carnal and corrupt affections; and may be so far swayed by them in their judgments, as not to be able to discern without prejudice and partiality, truth from error. Good men, and God's dear children may continue in some error in judgment, and consequently in a sinful practice arising thence; and live and die in it (as some of these men have done in disobedience to lawful Authority,) and that unrepented of otherwise, then as in the lump of their unknown sins. It is not Honesty, or Sinceritie, that can privilege men from either erring or sinning. Neither ought the unreproved conversation of men, countenance out their Opinions, or their Practices, against the light of Divine Scripture, and right Reason: As we read Cyprians error in old time; and we see Arminius his corrupt doctrine in our days have spread much the more for the reverend opinion men had of their personal endowments and sanctity. Secondly, though Comparisons be ever harsh, and most times odious; yet since honesty and piety is alleged, (without disparagement be it spoken to the best of them,) there are as good, and honest, and religious, and zealous men every way of them that willingly and cheerfully conformed, as of them that do not. In the times of Popish persecution, how many godly Bishops, and conformable Ministers laid down their lives for the testimony of God's Truth, and for the maintenance of his Gospel? And if it should please God in his just judgment (as our sins, and amongst others our Schisms and distractions most worthily deserve,) to put us once again to a fiery trial (which the same God for his goodness and mercy defend:) I make no question but many thousands of Conformers would (by the grace of God) resist unto blood, embrace the Faggot, and burn at a S • ache, in detestation of all Popish Antichristian Idolatry; as readily, and cheerfully, and constantly, as the hottest, and precisest, and most scrupulous non-Conformer. But thirdly, let men's honesty, and piety, and gifts be what they can: must not men of honesty, and piety, and gifts, live under Laws? And what reason these, or any other respects, should exempt any man from the just censure of the Church, in case he will not obey her Laws, and conform to her Ceremonies? especially, since such men's immunity would but encourage others to presume upon the like favor: and experience teacheth us, that no men's errors are so exemplary and pernicious; as theirs, who for their eminency of gifts, or sanctity of life, are most followed with popular applause, and personal admiration.

We see their Grieuances against us, how unjust they are, in the matter of Despising. I would they did no more despise the Churches authority; then we do their infirmities! But in the matter of judging; see if we have not a just grievance against them. As might be declared at large in many instances, out of their printed Books, and private Letters, and common discourses. I will but give you a taste; because I know I grow tedious; and I long to be at an end.

First they judge our Church as half Popish and Antichristian, for retaining some Ceremonies used in Popery: though we have purged them from their Superstitions, and restored them to their Primitive use. Their great admired opener of the Revelation, maketh our Church the Linsey-Wolsey Laodicean Church; neither hot nor cold. And some of them have slouenly compared our late gracious Sovereign Queen Elizabeth of most blessed memory, to a sluttish housewife; that having swept the house, yet left the dust and dirt behind the doors, meaning thereby the Ceremonies. If our Church were but half so ill, as these men would make it, I think every honest religious man should hold himself bound to separate from it; as his most excellent Majesty hath observed the Brownists have done upon their very grounds: accounting them as lukewarm for not quite separating, as they do us for no further reforming.

Secondly, they judge our Bishops and other Church-Governors, as Limbes of Antichrist; Locusts of the bottomless pit; domineering Lord's over God's heritage; usurpers of temporal Jurisdiction; Spiritual Tyrants over men's Conscienences, &c. seeking by all means to make the name of Lord Bishop odious to the Gentry and Commons. Witness their Mar-prelate; and other infamous and scandalous Libels in that kind. Having power in their hands, if the Bishops should use more rigorous courses towards them, then they have done: could ye blame them?

Thirdly, they judge those that subscribe and conform Machiauellian time-seruers; formal Gospellers; State-Divines; men that know no conscience, but Law; nor Religion, but the Kings: and such as would be as forward for the Mass, as the Communion, if the State should alter.

Fourthly, all such Ministers as are not endowed with gifts for the Pulpit, they damn, as hirelings, and not Shepherds: calling them idol-Shepherds; betrayers of Christ's Flock; intruders into the Ministry without a Calling; dumb Dogs, and I know not how many names besides. Yea, although they be such as are diligent, according to their measure of gifts to perform such duties as the Church requireth; to present the prayers of the people to God; to declare (by reading the holy Bible and good Homilies for that purpose appointed) the will of God to the people; to instruct the younger sort in the points of Catechism; to visit and comfort the sick and afflicted; and to administer reverently and orderly the holy. Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

Fifthly, they judge all such as interpose for the Churches peace, and oppose their novelties, as enemies to all goodness, men of profane minds; haters of Religion; despisers of the Word; persecutors of the Brethren, imps of Satan; instruments of Hell; and such as utterly abhor all godly and Christian courses.

Sixthly, and lastly (for I irke to rake longer in this sink) they bewray themselves to be manifest Judges of all that are not of their stamp; by singling out unto themselves, and those that favor them, certain proper Appellations, of Brethren, and Good men, and Professors: as if none had Brotherhood in Christ, none had interest in goodness, none made Profession of the Gospel, but themselves. Whereas others have received the sign of their Profession in their foreheads after Baptism, which perhaps they did not: whereas others daily stand up in the Congregation to make Profession of their Christian belief, which it may be they do not: or, those things be not material: whereas others by the grace of God are as steadfastly resolved in their hearts, if need should be, to seal the truth of their Profession with their blood, as any of them can be.

But they will say, these peremptory Censures are but the faults of some few: all are not so hot and fiery. There be others that are more temperate in their speeches, and moderate in their courses; and desire only they may be spared for their own particular: but they preach not against any of these things, nor intermeddle to make more stirs in the Church.

[ 1] I answer first: it were lamentable, if this were not so. If all were of that hot temper, or distemper rather, that many are; they would quickly tire out themselves without spurring. Far be it from us to judge men's hearts: or to condemn men for that we know not by them. Yet of some that carry themselves with tolerable moderation outwardly; we have some cause to suspect, that they do inwardly and in their hearts judge as deeply, as the hottest-spirited railers. And we gather it from their forwardness at every turn, and upon every slender occasion obliquely to •• rd, and indirectly to glance at our Church, and the descipline and the Ceremonies thereof, as far as they well dare. And if such men meddle no further, we may reasonably think, it is not for want of good will to do it; but because they dare not.

[ 2] Secondly, though they preach not against these things in the public Congregations; yet in their private Conuenticles it is not unknown some do. Though their Pulpits do not ring with it; yet their houses do: though their ordinary Sermons ad populum be more modest; yet their set conferences are sometimes but too free, especially when they are required their opinions by those that invite them. And what themselves for fear of Censure thus preach but in the ear; their Lay-Disciples openly preach on the house top.

Thirdly, although both their Pulpits and Tables [ 3] should be silent: yet their Practice sufficiently preacheth their dislike. And who knoweth not that a Re • ll and Exemplary seducement maketh the Author guilty; as well as a Verball and Oratory? Saint Peter did not preach Judaism; but only, for offending the Jews, forbear to eat with the Gentiles: yet S. Paul reproveth him for it to his face, and interpreteth that Fact of his, as an effectual & almost compulsiue seducement; Cogis Iudaizare, Gal. 2. Why compellest thou the Gentiles to Iudäize?

Lastly, it is to be considered; whether it may be [ 4] enough for a Pastor, not to meddle with these things: & whether he be not in conscience bound, especially in case he live among a people distracted in opinions, to declare himself expressly either for them, or against them. If they be utterly unlawful, and he know it so; how is he not bound in conscience to reprove those that use them, or require them? otherwise he betrayeth the truth of God by his silence, and suffereth men to go on in their superstition without rebuke. But if he be sufficiently resolved of their lawfulness; how is he not bound in conscience to reprove those that refuse them, or oppose them? otherwise he betrayeth the peace of the Church by his silence, and suffereth men to go on in their disobedience without rebuke. Nay more, every Minister that hath received pastoral Charge, hath twice or thrice (if not oftener) witnessed his allowance of all and singular the 39. Articles of the Church of England. Once at his Ordination before the Bishop; then at his Institution into his Benefice, before his Ordinary; and both these by Subscription under his hand; and then after, upon his Iuduction, before his own Flock; and that by verbal Approbation. By which Subscription and Approbation, he hath not only acknowledged in the Church the power of ordaining Rites and Ceremonies, Act. 20. but he hath after a sort also bound himself openly torebuke such as willingly and purposely break the Traditions & Ceremonies of the Church, as offenders against the common Orders of the Church, and wounders of the Consciences of the weak brethren, Act. 34. He then, that for any respect whatsoever is meal-mouthed in these things wherein he is bound both in Conscience, & by virtue of his own voluntary Act to speak freely: neither is constant to his own hand and tongue; nor is faithful in God's House, as was Moses, in discharging a good Conscience, and revealing unto his people the whole Counsel of God.

Thus have I endeavored, having the opportunity of this place, (as I held myself both in Conscience, and in regard of my Subscription bound, to deliver my opinion freely, so far as my Text gave occasion, concerning the Ceremonial Constitutions of our Church: and therein labored to free, not only the Conformer from all unjust Censures; but even the Non-conformer also, so far as he hath reason to expect it, from all scandalous Despisings. I beseech you pardon my length, if I have been troublesome: I had much to say; and the matter was weighty; and I desired to give some satisfaction in it to those that are contrary-minded; and I have no purpose (for anything I know) at all to trouble this place anymore hereafter. Let us all now humbly beseech Almighty God to grant a blessing to what hath been presently taught and heard: that it may work in the hearts of us all charitable affections one towards another, due obedience to lawful Authority, and a conscionable care to walk in our several callings, faithfully, painfully, and peaceably; to the comfort of our own souls, the edification of God's Church, and the glory of the euerblessed Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three Persons and one God. To whom be ascribed by us and whole Church, as is most due, the Kingdom, the Power and the Glory, forever and ever. Amen.

THE SECOND SERMON.

A Little before, at the fourth verse, Saint Paul had delivered a Conclusion; found, and comfortable: and strengthened it from David's both experience, and testimony in Psalm. 51. A place pregnant, and full of sinews to enforce it. The Conclusion in effect was; that Nothing in man can annul the Covenant of God. Neither the original unworthiness of God's children, through the universal corruption of nature, nor their actual unfaithfulness bewrayed (through frailty) in particular trials; can alienate the free love of God from them, or cut them off from the Covenant of Grace: but that still God will be glorified in the truth and faithfulness of his promises, notwithstanding any unrighteousness or unfaithfulness in man.

But never yet was any Truth so happily innocent, as to maintain it self free from Calumnie, and Abuse. Malice on the one hand, and Fleshlinesse on the other; though with different aims, yet do the same work. They both pervert the Truth, by drawing pestilent Carollaries from sound Conclusions, as the Spider sucketh poison from medicinal herbs. But with this difference; Malice slandereth the Truth, to discountenance it: but Fleshlinesse abuseth the Truth, to countenance it self by it. The cavilling Sophister, he would fain bring the Apostles gracious Doctrine into discredit: The carnal Libertine, he would as fain bring his own ungracious behavior into credit. Both, by making false, yet colorable, Inferences from the former Conclusion. There are three of those [ 1] Inferences: but never a good. The first; if so, Then cannot God in reason and justice take vengeance of our unrighteousness. The Colour: for why should he punish us for that which so much magnifieth and commendeth his righteousness? But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous that taketh vengeance? The second Inference: If so; then it is iniust either in God or Man to condemn us as sinners, [ 2] for breaking the Law. The Colour: for why should that action be censured of sin, which so abundantly redoundeth to the glory of God? For if the Truth of God hath more abounded, through my lie, unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner? The third, and last, and worst Inference: [ 3] If so; then it is a good and a wise resolution, Let us sin freely, and boldly commit evil. The Colour: for why should we fear to do that, from which so much good may come? in this verse of my Text, And not rather, Let us do evil, that good may come.

This last cavilling Inference; the Apostle in this verse both bringeth in, and casteth out again: bringeth in, as an objection; and casteth out by his answer. An answer which at once cutteth off both it, and the former inferences. And the Answer is double: Ad rem, ad hominem. That concerneth the force and matter of the objection: this, the state and danger of the obiectors. Ad▪ rem, in the former part of the verse; And not rather (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us de evil, that good may come. Ad hominem, in the latter end; Whose damnation is just. In the former part, there is an Objection; and the Rejection of it. The Objection, And not rather, Let us do evil that good may come. The Rejection thereof with a Non sequitur; implying not only the bare inconsequence of it upon the Apostles Conclusion, but withal, and especially the falseness and unsoundness of it taken by it self; As we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say, Let us do evil, &c.

My aim at this present is to insist especially upon a Principle of practique Divinity; which by joint consent of Writers old and new; Orthodox and Popish, resulteth from the very body of this verse, and is of right good use to direct us in sundry difficulties, which daily arise in vita communi, in point of Conscience. The Principle is this; we must not do any evil, that any good may come of it. Yet there are besides this, in the Text diverse other inferior observations not to be neglected. With which I think it will not be amiss to begin, and to dispatch them first briefly; that so I may fall the sooner, and stay the longer upon that which I mainly intend.

Observe first the Apostles Method, and substantial manner of proceeding: how he cleareth all as he goeth; how diligent he is and careful, betimes to remove such cavils, (though he step a little out of his way for it) as might bring scandal to the Truth he had delivered. When we preach and instruct others, we should not think it enough to deliver positive truths: but we should take good care also, as near as we can, to leave them clear; and by prevention to stop the mouths of such, as love to pick quarrels at the Truth, and to bark against the light. It were good we would (so far as our leisure and gifts will permit) wisely forecast, and prevent all offense that might be taken at any part of God's truth: and be careful, as not to broach anything that is false, through rashness, error, or intemperance; so not to betray any truth by ignorant handling, or by superficial, slight, and unsatisfying answers. But then especially concerneth it us to be most careful herein; when we have to speak before such, as we have some cause beforehand to suspect to be, through ignorance, or weakness, or custom, or education, or prejudice, or partial affections, or otherwise contrary-minded unto, or at leastwise not well persuaded of those Truths we are to teach. If the ways be rough and knotty, and the passengers feeble-ioynted and dark-sighted: it is but needful the guides should remove as many blocks and stones out of the way, as may be. When we have gone as warily as we can to work, Cauillers (if they list) will take exceptions: it is our part to see we give them not the advantage, lest we help to justify the Principals, by making our selves Accessories. Those men are ill advised, how ever zealous for the Truth, that stir in controuersed points, and leave them worse then they found them. Stomake will not bear out a man without strength: and to encounter an adversary are required Shoulders, as well as gall. A good cause is never betrayed more, then when it is prosecuted with much eagerness, but little sufficiency. This from the method.

Observe secondly the Apostles manner of speech. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Translators render it; As we are wrongfully bla • ed, As we are slandered, As we are slanderously reported. And the word indeed from the Original importeth no more: and so Writers both Profane, and Sacred use it. But yet in Scriptures by a Specialty it most times signifieth the highest degree of Slander; when we open our mouths against God, and speak ill, or amiss, or unworthily of God, that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and properly the sin we call Blasphemy. And yet, that very word of Blasphemy, which for the most part referreth immediately to GOD, the Apostle here useth, when he speaketh of himself and other Christian Ministers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as we are slandred, nay as we are blasphemed. A slander or other wrong or contempt done to a Minister, qu • talis, is a sin of a higher strain, then the same done to a common Christian. Not at all for his Persons sake: for so he is no more God's good creature then the other; no more free from sins, and infirmities and passions then the other. But for his Callings sake; for so he is God's Ambassador, which the other is not: and for his works sake; for that is God's message, which the others is not. Personal Slanders and Contempts are to a Minister, but as to another man: because his person is but as another man's Person. But Slanders and Contempts done to him as a Minister, that is, with reference either to his Calling, or Doctrine, are much greater then to another man: as reaching unto God himself; whose Person the Minister representeth in his Calling; and whose errand the Minister delivereth in his Doctrine. For Contempts, Saint Paul is express elsewhere; He that despiseth, despiseth not Man, but God. And as for Slanders; the very choice of the word in my Text inferreth as much. The dignity of our Calling, enhaunceth the sin: and every Slander against our regular Doctrines, is more then a bare Calumnie; if no more, at least petty Blasphemy 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , As we are slandered, as we are blasphemed. That from the word.

Observe thirdly, the wrong done to the Apostle, and to his Doctrine. He was slanderously reported to have taught that, which he never so much as thought: and his Doctrine had many scandalous imputations fastened upon it, whereof neither he nor it were guilty. As we are slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say. The best Truths are subject to mis-interpretation: and there is not tha • Doctrine, how firmly so ever grounded, how wari •• so ever delivered; whereon Calumny will not fasten, and stick slanderous imputations. Neither John's mourning, nor Christ's piping can pass the pikes: but the one hath a Devil; the other is a glutton and a wine-bibber. Though Christ come to fulfill the Law, yet there be will accuse him as a destroyer of the Law▪ Math. 5. And though he decide the question plainly for Caesar, and that in the case of Tribute, Math. 22. Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's: yet there be that charge him, as if he spake against Caesar, John. 19. and that in the very case of Tribute, as if he forbade to give Tribute unto Caesar, Luke 23. Now if they called the Master of the house Beelzebub; how much more them of his household? If Christ's did not; think we the doctrine of his Ministers and his Servants could escape the stroke of men's tongues, and be free from calumny and cavil? How the Apostles were slandered as Seducers and Sectaries, and vain babblers, and Heretics, and broachers of new and false and pestilent doctrines; their Epistles, and the book of their Acts witness abundantly to us. And for succeeding times, read but the Apologies of Athenagoras, and Tertullian, and others: and it will amaze you to see what blasphemous, and seditious, and odious, and horrible impieties, where fathered upon the ancient Christian Doctors, and upon their profession. But our own experience goeth beyond all. The Doctors of our Church teach truly, and agreeably to unanswerable evidences of Scripture. The effectual concurrence of God's will and power, with subordinate Agents in every, and therefore even in sinful actions; God's free election of those whom he purposeth to save of his own grace, without any motives in, or from themselves; The immutability of God's Love and Grace towards the Saints, and their certain perseverance therein unto Salvation; The Justification of sinners by the imputed righteousness of Christ, apprehended and applied unto them by a lively faith; without the works of the Law. These are sound, and true, and comfortable, and profitable, and necessary doctrines. And yet that impudent Strumpet of Rome hath the forehead, I will not say to slander, my Text alloweth more, to blaspheme God, and his Truth, and the Ministers thereof for teaching them. Bellarmine, Gretser, Maldonado, & the Jesuits; but none more then our own English Fugitiues, Bristow, Stapleton, Parsons, Kellison, and all the rabble of those Romish hellhounds, freely spend their mouths in barking against us; as if we made God the author of sin: as if we would have men sin and be damned, by a Stoicall fatal necessity • sin whether they will or no, and be damned whether they deserve it or no: as if we opened a gap to all licentiousness and profaneness; let men believe, it is no matter how they live, heaven is their own cock-sure: as if we cried down good works, and condemned charity. Slanders loud, and false; yet easily blown away with one single word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . These imputations upon us and our doctrine are unjust: but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , let them that thus mis-report us, know, that without repentance their damnation will be just.

It would be time not ill spent, to discover the grounds of this observation, and to press the uses of it something fully. But because my aim lieth another way; I can but point at them, and pass. If seldom Truth scape vnslandered, marvel not: the reasons are evident. On God's part, on Mans part, on the Devils part. God suffereth, Man raiseth, & the Devil furthereth these slanders against the Truth. To begin ordine retrogrado, and to take [ 1] them backwards. First, on the Devils part: a kind of Contrariety and Antipathie betwixt him and it. He being the Father of lies, and Prince of darkness, cannot away with the Truth, and with the Light: and therefore casteth up slanders, as Fogs and Mists against the Truth to belie it, and [ 2] against the Light to darken it. Secondly, on man's part: And that partly in the Understanding; when the judgment either of it self weak, or else weakened through precipitancie, prejudice, or otherwise, is deceived with fallacies instead of substance, and mistaketh seeming inferences, for necessary and natural deductions. Partly in the Will; when men of corrupt minds set themselves purposely against the known truth, and out of malicious willfulness (against the strong testimony of their own hearts) slander it, that so they may disgrace it, and them that profess it. Partly in the Affections; when men overcome by carnal affections, are content to cheat their own souls by giving such constructions to God's Truth, as will for requital, give largest allowance to their practices, and so rather choose to crooken the Rule to their own bent, then to level themselves and their affections and lives according to the Rule. Thirdly, on God's [ 3] part; who suffereth his own Truth to be slandered and mistaken. Partly in his Justice; as a fearful [ 1] Judgment upon wicked ones, whereby their hard hearts become yet more hardened, and their most just condemnation yet more just. Partly, in [ 2] his Goodness; as a powerful fiery trial of true Doctors, whose constancy and sincerity is the more approved with him, and the more eminent with men, if they fly not when the Wolf cometh, but keep their standing, and stoutly maintain God's truth, when it is deepliest slandered, and hotliest opposed. And partly, in his Wisdom; as a rich occasion [ 3] for those, whom he hath gifted for it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to awaken their zeal, to quicken up their industry, to muster up their abilities, to scour up their spiritual armor, (which else through dis-use might gather rust) for the defense, and for the rescue of that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that precious truth whereof they are depositaries, and wherewith he hath entrusted them.

These are the Grounds. The Uses, for instruction briefly are, to teach and admonish everyone of us: that we be not either first, so wickedly malicious, [ 1] as without apparent cause, to raise any slander; or [ 2] secondly, so foolishly credulous, as without severe [ 3] examination, to believe any slander; or thirdly, so basely timorous, as to flinch from any part of God's truth for any slander. But I must not insist. This from the slander.

Observe fourthly, how peremptory the Apostle is in his censure against the slanderers or abusers of holy truths: Whose damnation is just. Some understand it with reference to the Slanderers; As we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say: Whose damnation is just: that is, their damnation is just, who thus unjustly slander us. Others understand it with reference to that ungodly resolution: Let us do evil, that good may come; whose damnation is just: that is, their damnation is just for the evil they do, who adventure to do any evil, under whatsoever pretence of good to come of it. Both expositions are good; and I rather embrace both, then prefer either: I ever held it a kind of honest spiritual thrift; where there are two senses given of one place, both agreeable to the Analogy of Faith and Manners, both so indifferently appliable to the words and scope of the place, as that it is hard to say, which was rather intended; though there was but one intended, yet to make use of both. And so will we. Take the first way: and the slanderer may read his doom in it. Here is his wages, and his portion; and the meed and reward of his slander; Damnation. And it is a just reward. He condemneth God's truth unjustly: God condemneth him justly for it, Whose damnation is just. If we be countable (and we are countable at the day of Judgment) for every idle word we speak; though neither in it self false, nor yet hurtful and prejudicial unto others: what less then damnation can they expect, that with much falsehood for the thing it self, and infinite prejudice in respect of others, blaspheme God and his holy Truth?

But if it be done of purpose, and in malice to despite the Truth, and the Professors thereof: I scarce know whether there be a greater sin, or no. Maliciously to oppose the known Truth, is by most Divines accounted a principal branch of that great unpardonable sin, the sin against the holy Ghost: by some, the very sin it self. I dare not say it is so; nor yet that it is unpardonable, or hath final impenitence necessarily attending it: I would be loath to interclude the hope of Repentance from any sinner; or to confine God's Mercy within any bounds. Yet thus much I think I may safely say; it cometh shrewdly near the sin against the holy Ghost, and is a fair (or rather a foul) step towards it, and leaveth very very little hope of pardon. That great sin against the holy Ghost, the Holy Ghost it self in the Scriptures chooseth, rather then by any other to express by this name of Blasphemy, Mat. 12. And whereas our Apost. 1. Tim. 1. saith, That though he were a Blasphemer, yet he obtained Mercy, because he did it ignorantly in unbelief: he leaveth it questionable, but withal suspicious, whether there may be any hope of Mercy for such as blaspheme maliciously, and against knowledge. If any man's be; certainly such a man's damnation is most just.

But not all Slanders of God's truth are of that deep die: not all Slanderers, sinners in that high degree. God forbid they should. There are respects, which must qualify and lessen the sin. But yet allow it any in the least degree, and with the most favorable circumstances; still the Apostles sentence standeth good: Without repentance their damnation is just. Admit the Truth be dark and difficult, and so easily to be mistaken: admit withal, the man be weak and ignorant, and so apt to mistake; his understanding being neither distinct through incapacitie to apprehend and sort things aright, nor ye constant to it self through unsettledness and levity of judgment. Certainly his misprision of the Truth is so much lesser, then the others willful Calumnie; as it proceedeth less from the irregularity of the Will to the Judgment. And of such a man there is good hope, that both in time he may see his error, and repent expressly and particularly for it; and that in the mean time he doth repent for it implicit, and inclusively in his general contrition for, and confession of the massy lump of his hidden, and secret, and unknown sins. This Charity bindeth us both to hope for the future, and to think for the present: and Saint Paul's example and words in the place but now alleged, are very comfortable to this purpose. But yet full thus much is certain: He that through ignorance, or for want of apprehension or judgment, or by reason of whatsoever other defect or motive, bringeth a slander upon any divine Truth; though never so perplexed with difficulties, or open to cavil: unless he repent for it, either in the particular, (and that he must do, if ever God open his eyes, and let him see his fault,) or at leastwise in the general; it is still a damnable sin in him, His damnation is just. We have the very case almost in terminis laid down, and thus resolved in 2. Pet. 3. In which are some things hard to be understood, (observe the condition of the things, hard to be understood) which they that are unlearned, and unstable, (observe also the condition of the persons, unlearned, and unstable,) wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Where we have the matter of great difficulty, hard to be understood; the persons of small sufficiency, unlearned, and unstable: and yet if men, even of that weakness, wrest and pervert truths, though of that hardness, they do it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to their own destruction, saith Saint Peter there; to their own just damnation, saith S. Paul in my Text. This from the Censure in the first sense.

Take it in the other sense, with reference to this ungodly resolution, Let us do evil, that good may come: it teacheth us, that no pretension of doing it in ordine ad Deum, for God's glory, to a good end, or any other color whatsoever, can excuse those that presume to do evil; but that still the evil they do is damnable, and it is but just with God to render damnation to them for it. Whose damnation is just. And thus understood, it openeth us a way to the consideration of that main Principle whereof I spake, and whereon by your patience I desire to spend the remainder of my time; namely this: We must not for any good, do any evil. For the farther opening, and better understanding whereof, (since the rule is of infinite use in the whole practice of our lives:) that we may the better know when, and where, and how far to apply it aright for the direction of our Consciences and Actions; we must of necessity unfold the extent of this word, evil, and consider the several kinds and degrees of it distinctly and apart. We must not do evil, that good may come.

First, evil is of two sorts. The evil of fault, and the evil of punishment. Malum delicti, and Malum supplicij; as Tertullian calleth them: or as the more received terms are, Malum Culpae, and Malum Poenae. The evil we commit against God, and the evil God inflicteth upon us. The evil we do; unjustly, but yet willingly: and the evil we suffer unwillingly, but yet justly. In a word, the evil of sin, and the evil of pain. Touching evils of pain; if the Case be put, when two such evils are propounded, and both cannot be avoided, whether we may not make choice of the one, to avoid the other. The resolution is common and good from the old Maxim, e malis minimum, we may incur the lesser, to prevent the greater evil. As we may deliver our purse to a Thief, rather then fight upon unequal terms to save it: and in a tempest cast our wares into the Sea, to lighten the Ship that it wrack not: and endure the lancing and searing of an old sore, to keep it from festering and spreading. And this Principle in my Text is not a rule for that Case: that being propounded concerning evils of Paine; whereas my Text is intended only of the evils of Sin. We are herehence resolved, that we are not to do any evil, that good may come of it: for all which yet we may suffer some evil, that good may come of it. Although (to note that by the way) the common answer e malis minimum, even in evils of Paine is to be understood, (as most other practical conclusions are) not as simply and universally; but as commonly and ordinarily true. For (as one saith well) perhaps there are Cases, wherein two evils of Paine being at once propounded, it may not be safe for us to be our own carvers.

But I must let pass the Questions concerning evils of Paine, as impertinencies. The evils of sin are of two sorts. Some are evil formally, simply, & perse; such as are directly against the scope & purpose of some of God's Commandments: as Atheism against the first, Idolatry against the second, and so against the rest, Blasphemy, Prophanenesse, Disloyalty, Cruelty, Adultary, Injustice, Cal • mny, 〈◊〉 , and the like; all which are evil in their own nature, and can never (positis quibuscun{que} circumstantiis) be done well. Othersome are evil only respectively, and by accide • t: but otherwise in their own nature indifferent; and such as may be, and are done sometimes well, sometimes ill. To know the nature of which things the better, since they are of singular use for the resolution of many Cases of Conscience. We must yet more distinctly inquire into the different kinds (or rather degrees) of indifferent things; and into the different means, whereby things otherwise in nat • re indifferent, become accidentally evil for their use.

Indifferent things are either equally, or unequally such. We may call them for distinctions sake (and I think not altogether unfitly) indifferentia ad vtrumlibet; and indifferentia ad vnum. Indifferentia ad vtrumlibet, or equally indifferent things are such, as (barely considered) are arbitrary either way, and hang in aequilibrio between good and evil, without turning the Scale either one way or other, as not having any notable inclination or propension unto either rather then other: as to drink fasting, to walk into the fields, or to lift up ones hand unto his head, &c. Now concerning such things of these, if any man should be so scandalous, as to make a matter of conscience of them, and should desire to be resolved in point of conscience whether they were good or evil; as namely, whether he should do well or ill, to walk abroad into the fields a mile or two with his friend, the thing it self is so equally indifferent, that it were resolution enough to leave it in medio, and to answer him, there were neither good nor hurt in it: the Action of walking, barely considered, being not greatly either morally good, or morally evil. I say morally; for in matter of health or civility, or otherwise it may be good, or evil: but not morally, and spiritually, and in matter of conscience. And I say withal barely considered, for there may be circumstances, which may make it accidentally evil. As to walk abroad in the fields, when a man should be at Divine Service in the Church, is by accident morally evil; through the circumstance of Time: as on the contrary, not to walk, if we have promised to meet a friend at such a time and in such a place, who standeth need of our present help, is by accident morally evil, through the obligation of that former promise. But yet still, these and other circumstances set aside; barely to walk, or barely not to walk, and the like, are Indifferentia ad vtrumlibet, things in their own nature (and that equally) indifferent.

Things unequally indifferent are such, as though they be neither vntuersally good, nor absolutely evil; yet when barely considered, sway more or less rather the one way then the other. And that either unto good; or unto evil. Of the former sort are such outward actions, as being in Moral precepts indefinitely commanded, are yet sometimes sinfully and ill done: as, giving an Alms, hearing a Sermon, reproving an offender; and the like. Which are in themselves good; and so to be accounted, rather then evil, though some unhappy [ 2] circumstance or other may make them ill. Of the later sort are such outward actions, as being in Moral precepts indefinitely prohibited, are yet in some cases lawful, and may be well done: as, swearing an oath, traveling on the Sabbath day, playing for money; and the like. Which are in themselves rather evil, then good, because they are ever evil, unless all circumstances concur to make them good. Now of these actions, though the former sort carry the face of good, the later of evil; yet in very truth both sorts are indifferent. Understand me aright: I do not mean indifferent indifferentiâ contradictionis, such as may be indifferently either done, or not done; but indifferent only indifferentiâ contrarietatis, such as (suppose the doing) may be indifferently either good or evil: because so they may be done, as to be good, and so they may be done also, as to be evil. But yet with this difference, that those former, though indifferent, and in some cases evil, are yet of themselves notably and eminently inclined unto good rather then evil; and these later proportionably unto evil rather then good. From which difference it cometh to pass, that to the Question barely proposed concerning the former actions, whether they be good or evil; the answer is just and warrantable, to say indefinitely they are good: and contrarily concerning the later actions, to say indefinitely, they are evil.

Which difference well weighed (to note that by the way) would serve to justify a common practice o •• ost of us in the exercise of our Ministry, against such as distaste our doctrine for it, or unjustly otherwise take offense at it. Ordinarily in our Sermons we indefinitiuely condemn as evil, swearing, and gaming for money, and dancing, and recreations upon the Sabbath day, and going to Law, and retaliation of injuries, and Monopolies, and raising of rents, and taking forfeitures of Bonds, &c. and in our own co • t Non-residency, and Pluralities, &c. Most of which yet, and many other of like nature, most of us do or should know to be in some cases lawful; and therefore in the number of those indifferent things which we call Indifferentia ad vnum. You that are our hearers should bring so much charitable discretion with you, when you hear us in the Pulpits condemn things of this nature; as to understand us no otherwise, then we either do or should mean, and that is thus: that such and such things are evil, as nowadays, through the corruptions of the times, many men use them; and such as therefore should not be adventured upon without mature & impartial disquisition of the uprightness of our affections therein, and a severe trial of all circumstances, whether they carry weight enough with them to give our consciences su • ficient security, not only of their lawfulness in selves, and at large, but of their particular lawfulness too unto us, and them. But this by the way.

Now to proceed. There are diverse means whereby things not simply evil, but in themselves (either equally or unequally) indifferent, may yet become accidentally evil. Any defect or obliquity, any unhappy enteruening circumstance, is enough to poison a right good action, and to make it stark naught. I may as well hope to grasp the Sea, as to comprehend all those means. I make choice therefore to remember but a few of the chiefest; such as happen oft and are very considerable. Things not simply evil, may accidentally become such, as by sundry other means; so especially by one of these th • e • : [ 1] Conscience, Scandal, and Comparison. First, Conscience, in regard of the Agent, though the thing be good, yet if the Agent do it with a condemning, or but a doubting Conscience, the Action becometh evil. To him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is v • eleane, and he that doubteth, is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith, verse. 14. & 23. [ 2] of this Chapter. Secondly, Scandal • , in regard of other men. Though the thing be good, yet if a brother stumble, or be offended, or be made weak by it, the action becometh evil. All things are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offense, [ 3] ver. 20. Thirdly Comparison, in regard of other actions. Though the thing be good, yet if we prefer it before better things, and neglect or omit them for it, the action becometh evil. Go and learn what that is, I will have mercy and not sacrifice, Math. 9.

The stuff thus prepared, by differencing out those things, which vndistinguished, might breed confusion: our next business must be, to lay to the Rule, and to apply it to the several kinds of Evil, as they have been differenced. I foresaw we should not have time to go thorough all that was intended: and therefore we will content our selves for this time, with the consideration of this Rule, applied to things simply evil. In them the Rule holdeth perpetually, and without exception. That which is simply evil, may not for any good be done: We know not any greater good (for there is not any greater good) then the glory of God: we scarce know a lesser sin (if any sin may be accounted little) then a harmless officious lie. Yet may not this be done; no not for that. Will you speak wickedly for God, and talk deceitfully for him? Job 13. 7. If not for the glory of God; then certainly not for any other inferior end: not for the saving of a life; not for the conversion of a soul; not for the peace of a Church; and (if even that were possible too) not for the redemption of a world. No intention of any end can warrant the choice of sinful means to compass it.

The reasons are strong. One is; because sin in its own nature, is de numero ineligibilium: and therefore as not eligible propter se, for it self sake, (there is neither form nor beauty in it, that we should desire it;) so neither propter aliud, with reference to any farther end. Actus peccati non est ordinabilis in bonum finem; is the common resolution of the Schools. In civil and popular elections, if men take choice of such a person, to bear any office or place among them; as by the local Charters, Ordinances, Statutes, or other Customs which should rule them in their choice, is altogether ineligible: the election is de iure nulla, naught and void; the incapacitie of the person elected, making a nullity in the act of election. No less is it in moral actions and elections: if for any intended end we make choice of such means, as by the Law of God (which is our rule, and must guide us) are ineligible; and such is every sin.

Another reason is grounded upon that Principle, Bonum ex causa integra, Malum ex partiali. Any partial or particular defect, in Object, End, Manner, or other Circumstance, is enough to make the whole action bad; but to make it good, there must be an universal concurrence of all requisite conditions in every of these respects: As a disfigured eye, or nose, or lip, maketh the face deformed; but to make it comely, there is required the due proportion of every part. And any one short Clause, or Prouiso, not legal, is sufficient to abate the whole writ or instrument, though in every other part absolute, and without exception. The Intention then, be it granted never so good, is insufficient to warrant an Action good; so long as it faileth either in the object, or manner, or any requisite circumstance whatsoever. Saul pretended a good end, in sparing the fat things of Amalek; that he might therewith do sacrifice to the Lord: but God rejected both it and him, 1. Sam. 15. We can think no other, but that Uzzah intended the safety of God's Ark, when it tottered in the cart, and he stretched out his hand to stay it from falling: but God interpreted it a presumption, and punished it, 2. Sam. 6. Doubtless Peter meant no hurt to Christ, but rather good; when he took him aside, and advised him to be good to himself, and to keep him out of danger: yet Christ rebuked him for it, and set him packing in the Devils name, Get thee behind me, Satan, Mat. 16.

But what will we say (and let that stand for a third reason) if our pretended good intention prove indeed no good intention? And certainly, be it as fair and glorious, as we could be content to imagine it, such it will prove to be, if it set us upon any sinful or unwarranted means; indeed no good intention, but a bad. For granted it must be, that the Intention of any end doth virtually include the means: as in a Syllogism, the Premises do the Conclusion. No more then can the choice of ill means proceed from a good intention; then can a false Conclusion be inferred from true Premises: and that is impossible. From which ground it is, that the Fathers, and other Divines do oftentimes argue from the intention to the action, and from the goodness of the one, to the goodness of both: to that purpose applying those speeches of our Savior, in the twelfth, and in the sixth of Matthew, Either make the tree good, and his fruit good: or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: And, if thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light: but if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. The light of the body, is the eye; and the work, the intention. No marvel, when the eye is evil, if the whole body be dark; and when the intention is evil, if the whole work be naught. That which deceiveth most men in judging of good or bad intentions is, that they take the end, and the intention, for one and the same thing: betwixt which two there is a spacious difference. For the end, is the thing propter quid, for which we work, that whereat we aim in working, and so hath rationem causae finalis: but the intention is the cause à qua, from which we work, that which setteth us on working; and so hath rationem cause efficientis. Now between these two kinds of causes, the final and the efficient, there is not only a great difference, but even a repugnancy; in such sort, as that it is impossible they should at any time coincidere, which some other kinds of causes may do. It is therefore an error to think, that if the end be good, the intention of that end must needs be good: for there may as well be a bad intention of a good end, as a bad desire of a good object. Whatsoever the end be we intend, it is certain that intention cannot be good, which putteth us upon the choice of evil means.

Me thinks the Church of Rome should blush, (if her forehead died red with the blood of God's Saints, were capable of any tincture of shame,) at the discovery of her manifold impostures, in counterfeiting of Relics, in coining of Miracles, in compiling of Legends, in gelding of good Authors by expurgatory Indexes; in iuggling with Magistrates by lewd Equiuocations, &c. Practices warrantable by no pretence. Yet in their account but p • aefraudes; for so they term them, no less ridiculously, then falsely: for the one word contradicteth another. But what do I speak of these, but petty things, in comparison of those her louder impieties? breaking covenants of truce and peace; dissolving of lawful, and dispensing for unlawful marriages; assoyling Subjects from their Oaths and Allegiance; plotting Treasons, and practicing Rebellions; excommunicating and dethroning Kings; arbittarie disposing of Kingdoms; stabbing and murthering of Princes; warranting unjust invasions; and blowing up Parliament houses. For all which, and diverse other foul attempts, their Catholic defense is the advancement (forsooth) of the Catholic Cause: Like his in the Poet, Quocunque modorem, is their Resolution: by right, or wrong, the State of the Papacie must be upheld. That is their vnum Necessartum: and if heaven favor not; rather then fail, help must be had from hell, to keep Antichrist in his throne.

But to let them pass, and touch nearer home. There are (God knoweth) many Ignorants abroad in the world: some of them so unreasonable, as to think they have sufficiently non-plusit any reprover; if being admonished of something ill done, they have but returned this poor reply, Is it not better to do so, then to do worse? But alas, what necessity of doing either so, or worse; when God's law bindeth thee from both? He that said, Do not commit adultery; said also, Do not kill: and he that said, Do not steal; said also, Do not lie. If then thou lie, or kill, or do any other sin; though thou thinkest thereby to avoid stealth, or adultery, or some other sin: yet thou art become a transgressor of the Law; and by offending in one point of it, guilty of all. It is but a poor choice, when a man is desperately resolved to cast himself away; whether he should rather hang, or drown, or stab, or pine himself to death: there may be more horror, more pain, more lingering, in one then another; but they all come to one period, and determine in the same point; death is the issue of them all. And it can be but a slender comfort for a man, that will needs thrust himself into the mouth of hell by sinning willfully, that he is damned rather for lying, then for stealing, or whoring, or killing, or some greater crime: Damnation is the wages of them all. Murder can but hang a man; and (without favor) Petty-Larceny will hang a man too: The greatest sins can but damn a man; and (without God's mercy) the smallest will damn a man too. But what? will some reply: In case two sins be propounded, may I not do the lesser, to avoid the greater? otherwise must I not of necessity do the greater? The answer is short and easy: If two sins be propounded, do neither, E malis minimum, holdeth as you heard (and yet not always neither) in evils of Paine: But that is no Rule for evils of sin. Here the safer Rule is, e malis nullum. And the reason is sound; from the Principle we have in hand. If we may not do any evil, to procure a positive good: certainly much less may we do one evil, to avoid or prevent another.

But what if both cannot be avoided, but that one must needs be done? In such a strait may I not choose the lesser? To thee; I say again, as before, Choose neither. To the Case, I answer; it is no Case: because; as it is put, it is a case impossible. For Nem • angustiatur ad peccandum: the Case cannot be supposed, wherein a man should be so strai • ned, as he could not come off fairly without sinning. A man by rashness, or fear, or frailty, may foully entangle himself; and through the powerful engagements of sin drive himself into very narrow straits, or be so driven by the fault or injury of others: yet there cannot be any such straits, as should enforce a necessity of sinning; but that still there is one path or other out of them without sin. The Perplexity that seemeth to be in the things, is rather in the men; who puzzle and lose themselves in the Labyrinths of sin, because they care not to heed the clue that would lead them out, if it were well followed. Say, a man through heat of blood make a wicked vow to kill his brother: here he hath by his own rashness brought himself into a seeming strait, that either he must commit a murder, or break a vow; either of which seemeth to be a great sin, the one against the fifth, the other against the third commandment. But here is in very deed no strait or perplexity at all: Here is a fair open course for him without sin. He may break his vow; and there an end. Neither is this the choice of the lesser sin; but only the loosening of the lesser bond: the bond of charity being greater, then the bond of a promise; and there being good reason that (in terms of inconsistency, when both cannot stand,) the lesser bond should yield to the greater. But is it not a sin for a man to break a vow? Yes, where it may be kept saluis charitate & iustitia, there the breach is a sin: but in the case proposed, it is no sin. As Christ saith in the point of swearing, so it may be said in the point of breach of vow, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Never was any breach of vow; but it was peccatum, or expeccato: the breaking is either it self formally a sin; or it argueth at least a former sin, in the making. So as the sin, in the case alleged, was before in making such an unlawful vow; and for that sin the party must repent: but the breaking of it now it is made, is no new sin; (rather it is a necessary duty, and a branch of that repentance which is due for the former rashness in making it,) because a hurtful vow is, (and that virtute praecepti) rather to be broken then kept. The Egyptian Midwiues, not by their own fault, but by Pharaohs tyrannous command, are driven into a narrow strait, enforcing a seeming necessity of sin: for either they must destroy the Hebrew children, and so sin by Murder; or else they must de • ise some hansome shift to carry it cleanely from the Kings knowledge, and so sin by lying. And so they did; they chose rather to lie, then to kill: as indeed in the comparison it is by much the lesser sin. But the very truth is, they should have done neither: they should flatly have refused the Kings commandment, though with hazard of their lives; and have resolved rather to suffer any evil, then to do any. And so Lot should have done: he should rather have adventured his own life, and theirs too, in protecting the chastity of his Daughters, and the safety of his guests; then have offered the exposall of his Daughters to the lusts of the beastly Sodomites, though it were to redeem his guests from the abuse of fouler and more abominable filthiness. Absolutely; there cannot be a case imagined, wherein it should be impossible to avoid one sin, unless by the committing of another. The case which of all other cometh nearest to a Perplexity, is that of an erroneous conscience: because of a double bond; the bond of God's Law; which to transgress, is a sin; and the bond of particular conscience, which also to transgress, is a sin, Whereupon there seemeth to follow an inevitable necessity of sinning; when God's Law requireth one thing, and particular conscience dictateth th • flat contrary: For in such a case, a man must either obey God's Law, and so sin against his own conscience; or obey his own conscience, and so sin against God's Law. But neither in this case is there any Perplexitie at all in the things themselves: that which there is, is through the default of the man only, whose judgment being erroneous mis-leadeth his conscience, and so casteth him upon a necessity of sinning. But yet the necessity is no simple, and absolute, and unavoidable and perpetual necessity: for it is only a necessity ex hypothesi; and for a time, and continueth but stante tali error. And still there is a way out betwixt those sins, and that without a third: and that way is dep • nere erroneam conscientiam. He must rectify his judgment, and reform the error of his Conscience, and then all is well. There is no perplexity, no necessity, no obligation, no expediency; which should either enforce, or persuade us to any sin. The resolution is damnable, Let us do evil, that good may come.

I must take leave, before I pass from this point, to make two instances; and to measure out from the Rule of my Text an answer to them both. They are such, as I would desire you of this place to take due and special consideration of. I desire to deal plainly; and I hope it shall be (by God's blessing upon it) effectually, for your good, and the Churches peace. One instance shall be in a sin of Commission; the other, in a sin of Omission.

The sin of Commission wherein I would instance, is indeed a sin beyond Commission: it is the usurping of the Magistrates Office without a Commission. The Question is; whether the zealous intention of a good end may not warrant it good, or at least excuse it from being evil, and a sin? I need not frame a Case for the illustration of this instance: the inconsiderate forwardness of some hath made it to my hand. You may read it in the disfigured windows and walls of this Church: Pictures, and Statua's, and Images; and for their sakes the windows and walls wherein they stood, have been heretofore, and of late pulled down, and broken in pieces and defaced: without the Command, or so much as leave of those who have power to reform things amiss in that kind. Charity bindeth us to think the best of those that have done it: that is, that they did it out of a forward (though mis-governed) zeal; intending therein God's glory in the farther suppression of Idolatry, by taking away these (as they supposed) likely occasions of it. Now in such a case as this, the Question is, whether the intention of such an end, can justify such a deed? And the fact of Phinehas, Numb. 25. (who for a much like end, for the staying of the people from Idolatry, executed vengeance upon Z • mri & Cozbi, being but a private man, and no Magistrate;) seemeth to make for it.

But my Text ruleth it otherwise. If it be evil; it is not to be done, no not for the preventing of Idolatry. I pass by some considerations otherwise of good moment; as namely first, whether Statua's and Pictures may not be permitted in Christian [ 1] Churches, for the adorning of God's House, and for civil and historical uses, not only lawfully and decently, but even profitably? I must confess, I never yet heard substantial reason given, why [ 2] they might not. And secondly, whether things either in their first erection, or by succeeding abuse superstitious, may not be profitably continued, if the Superstition be abolished? Otherwise, not Pictures only, and Crosses, and Images; but most of our Hospitals, and Schools, and Colleges, and Churches too must down: and so the hatred of Idolatry should but Usher in licentious Sacrilege, contrary to that passage of our Apostle in the next Chapter before this, Thou that abhorrest Idols, committest thou Sacrilege? And [ 3] thirdly, whether these forward ones have not bewrayed somewhat their own self▪ guiltiness in this Act, at least for the manner of it, in doing it secretly and in the dark? A man should not dare to do that, which he would not willingly either be [ 4] seen when it is a doing, or our own, being done. To pass by these; consider no more but this one thing only, into what dangerous and unsufferable absurdities a man might run, if he should but follow these men's grounds. Erranti nullus terminus: Error knoweth no stay, and a false Principle once received, multiplieth into a thousand absurd conclusions. It is good for men to go upon sure grounds, else they may run and wander in infinite. A little error at the first, if there be way given to it, will increase beyond belief; as a small spark may fire a large City, & a cloud no bigger then a man's hand, in short space overspread the face of the whole Heavens. For grant, for the suppression of Idolatry, in case the Magistrate will not do his office, that it is lawful for a private man to take upon him to reform what he thinketh amiss, and to do the part and Office of a Magistrate (which must needs have been their ground, if they had any, for this action:) there can be no sufficient cause given, why by the same reason, and upon the same grounds, a private man may not take vpō him to establish Laws, raise Powers, administer Justice, execute malefactors, or do any other thing the Magistrate should do; in case the Magistrate slack to do his duty in any of the premises. Which if it were once granted (as granted it must be, if these men's fact be iustifyable;) every wise man seeth, the end could be no other but vast Anarchy and confusion both in Church and Common-weal: whereupon must vnauoidably follow the speedy subversion both of Religion and State. If things be amiss, and the Magistrate help it not; private men may lament it, and as occasion serveth, and their condition and calling permitteth, soberly and discreetly put the Magistrate in mind of it: But they may not make themselves Magistrates, to reform it.

And as to the act of Phinehas: though I rather think he did; yet what if he did not well in so doing? It is a thing we are not certain of: and we must have certainer grounds for what we do, then [ 2] uncertain examples. Secondly, what if Phinehas had the Magistrates authority to enable him to that attempt? It is not altogether improbable (to my apprehension) from the fifth Verse of the chapter where the Story is laid down, Numb. 25. 5. especially paralleled with another Story of much like circumstances, Exod. 32. 27. that as there the Levites, so here Phinehas drew the sword in execution of the express command of Moses the supreme [ 3] Magistrate. If neither thus, nor so: yet thirdly, (which cutteth off all plea, and is the most common answer ordinarily given by Divines to this & the like instances drawn from some singular actions of God's Worthies;) Men of Heroicall spirits and gifts, such as were David, Samson, Ehud, Moses, Elias, and some others, especially at such times as they were employed in some special service for the good of God's Church, were exempt from the common rules of life: and did many things, (as we are to presume) not without the secret motion and direction of God's holy and powerful Spirit, which were therefore good in them (that secret direction being to them loco specialis mandati, like that to Abraham for sacrificing his son) but not safe, or lawful for us to imitate. Opera liber • spiritus, say Divines, non sunt exigenda ad regulas communes, nec trahenda in exemplum vitae. The extraordinary Heroicall Acts of God's Worthies are not to be measured by the common rules of life, nor to become exemplary unto others. Of which nature was David's single combat with Goliath; and Samsons pulling down the house upon himself and the Philistines; and Moses slaying the Egyptian; and Ehud’s stabbing of King Eglon, ; and Elijah's calling down for fire from Heaven upon the Captains and their fifties, and diverse others recorded in Scripture. Of which last fact we have our blessed Saviors judgment, in Luke 9. that it was done by the extraordinary and peculiar instinct of God's Spirit, but is not to be imitated by others, without particular certain assurance of the like-instinct. Where when the Disciples would have called down for fire from Heaven upon the Samaritans, and alleged Elias for their precedent; Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from Heaven and consume them, as Elias did? His answer was with a kind of indignation (as both his gesture and speeches show) Nescitis cuius spiritus estis; You know not what manner of spirit you are of. Elias was endued with an extraordinary spirit, in the freedom whereof he did what he then did: but it is not for you or others to propose his example, unless you can demonstrate his Spirit. And if Phinehas Act also was (as most think it was) such as these: it can no more justify the usurpation of Magistracy; then David's act can bloody Duels, or Samsons selfemurther; or Moses's secret slaughter, or Ehud’s King-killing, or Elijah's private revenge. I have stood the longer upon the discovery of this sin, that men might take right judgment of it; and not think it either warrantable, or exc • sable by any pretension of zeal, or of whatsoever other good: and that both such as have gone too far this way in their practice already, for the time past, may acknowledge their own oversight, and be sorry for it; and others seeing their error, may for the time to come forbear such outrages, and keep themselves within the due bounds of Christian sobriety, and their particular Callings. And thus much of the former instance; in a matter of Commission. I am to give you another, in a matter of Omission.

Every omission of a necessary duty is simply evil, as a sin. But affirmative duties, are but sometimes necessary; because they do not obligare ad semper: as, being many, it is impossible they should. And many times duties otherwise necessary; in case of Superior reason and duties cease to be necessary pro hîc & nunc: and then to omit them, is not to do evil. Among other necessary duties this is one, for a Minister furnished with gifts and abilities for it; to acquaint God's people with all material needful truths, as he can have convenient occasion thereunto. And (such conveniency supposed) not to do this, is simply evil. Now then, to make the Case and the Question. The Case thus: A Minister hath just opportunity to preach in a Congregation, not his own; where he seeth or generally heareth some error in judgment, or outrageous sin in practice to be continued in with too public allowance: He hath liberty to make choice of his Text and theme, and leisure to provide in some measure for it; and his conscience telleth him, he cannot pro hîc & nunc direct his speech with greater service to God's Church, then against those errors or sins. He seeth on the other side some withdrawments: his discretion may perhaps be called in question, for meddling where he needed not; he shall possibly lose the good opinion of some, with whom he hath held fair correspondence hitherto; he shall preserve his own peace the better, if he turn his speech another way. This is the Case. The Question is, whether these later considerations, and the good that may come thereby, be sufficient to warrant unto him the omission of that necessary duty?

The rule of my Text resolveth it negatively: they are not sufficient. The Duty being necessary, pro hîc & nunc, it is simply evil to omit it; and therefore it may not be omitted for any other good. I deny not, but a Minister may with good discretion conceal many truths from his flock; at least the opening and amplifying of them: if they be not such, as are needful for them to know, either for the stablishment of Faith, or practice of Life; as not only many nice School-points and Conclusions are, but also many Genealogies, and Levitical rites, and other things even in the Scriptures themselves. Nay more, a Minister not only in discretion may, but is even in Conscience bound, at least in the public exercise of his Ministry, to conceal some particular truths from his Auditory; yea though they be such as are needful for the practice of life, and for the settling of men's consciences: if they be such withal, as are not fit to be publicly spoken of; as are many Resolutions of Cases appertaining to the seventh Commandment (Thou shalt not commit adultery;) and some also appertaining to the eighth (Thou shalt not steal.) Our men justly condemn the Popish Casuists, for their too much liberty in this kind in their Writings: Whereby they reduce vices into an Art, under color of reproving them; and convey into the minds of corrupt men, Notions of such prodigious filthiness, and artificial Leger-du-main, as perhaps otherwise they would never have dreamed on, or thirsted after. The loose writings of the unchaste Poets are but dull tutors of Lust, compared with the authorized Tomes of our severe Romish Votaries. There be enourmous sins of this rank, which a modest man would be ashamed so much as to name, especially in public. Now of these, only the generalities would be touched in the public; the specialties not unfolded, but in the private exercise of our Ministry: nor yet that promiscuously to everyone, that should out of curiosity desire satisfaction in them; but only to such men, (and that but only so far,) as they may concern in point of Conscience, and of practice: Besides these, there are other Cases many, in which it may be more convenient to conceal, then to teach some divine truths at sometimes, and in some places.

But yet as the Case is here proposed, if it be a truth questioned; about which God's people are much distracted in their opinions; much mistaken by some through error in judgment; much abused by sinful, especially public practice; occasioning Scandals and offenses among brethren; likely to be overwhelmed with custom, or multitude of those that think or do against it; and be otherwise of material importance: I take it, the Omission of it upon seasonable opportunity, is a grievous sin, and not colorable by any pretence. Beloved, the Minister is not to come into the Pulpit, as a Fencer upon the stage, to play his prize, and to make a fair flourish against sin, (Here he could have it, and there he could have it, but hath it no where:) but rather as a Captain into the Field, to bend his forces especially against the strongest troupes of the enemy; and to squander, and break thorough the thickest ranks; and to drive at the fairest. It is not enough for a Prophet to cry aloud, and to lift up his voice like a trumpet, and to tell Judah and Israel of sins, and of transgressions at large: but if he would whet them up to the battle, he must give a more certain sound; he must tell Judah of her sins, and Israel of her transgressions. If there be in Damascus, or Moab, or Ammon, or Tyrus, or Judah, or Israel; three transgressions, or four, more eminent then the rest: it is fit, they that are sent to Damascus, and Moab, and Ammon, and Tyrus, and Judah, and Israel, should make them hear of those three or four, more then all the rest. Sins and Errors, when they begin to get head and heart, must be handled roughly Silence in such a case is a kind of flattery: and it is almost all one, when sins grow outrageous, to hold our peace at them, and to cry Peace, Peace unto them. Our Apostle in Act. 20. would not have held himself sufficiently discharged from the guilt of other men's blood; if he had shunned (as occasion was offered) to have declared unto them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , even the whole counsel of God.

In my Application of this Instance and Case, blame me not, if I do it with some reference to my self. Being heretofore by appointment, as now again I was, to provide myself for this place against such a meeting as this is; as in my conscience I then thought it needful for me, I delivered my mind, (and I dare say, the Truth too, for substance) something freely, touching the Ceremonies and Constitutions of our Church. And I have now also with like freedom, shown the unlawfulness of the late disorderly attempts in this town; and that from the ground of my present Text. I was then blamed for that; I think unjustly; (for I do not yet see what I should retract of that I then delivered:) and it is not unlikely, I shall be blamed again for this, unless I prevent it. You have heard now already, both heretofore, that to judge any man's heart; and at this time, that to slander any truth, are (without repentance) sins justly damnable: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they that offend either in the one, or the other, their damnation is just. To preserve therefore both you from the Sin, and myself from the Blame; consider, I pray you, with Reason and Charity, what I shall say.

You that are our hearers, know not with what hearts we speak unto you: that is only known to our own hearts; and to God, who is greater then our hearts, and knoweth all things. That which you are to look at, and to regard, is, with what truth we speak unto you. So long as what we preach is true, and agreeable to God's Word, and right reason: you are not, upon I know not what light surmises or suspicions, to judge with what spirits, or with what dispositions of heart we preach. Whether we preach Christ of envy, and strife, or of good will; whether sincerely, or of contention; whether in pretence, or in truth, it is our own good, or hurt: we must answer for that; and at our peril be it, if we do not look to that. But what is that to you? Notwithstanding every way, so long as it is Christ, and his truth which are preached, it is your part therein to rejoice. If an Angel from heaven should preach any untruth unto you, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Let him be accursed: but if the very Devil of hell should preach the truth, he must be heard, and believed, and obeyed. So long as Scribes and Pharisees hold them to Moses Text and Doctrine, let them be as damned Hypocrites, as Scribes and Pharisees can be: yet all whatsoever they bid you observe, that you are to observe and do.

Let me then demand: Did I ever deliver any untruth? It had been well done then to have shown it, that I might have acknowledged, and retracted it. Did I speak nothing but the truth? with what conscience then could any that heard me say, as yet I hear some did; That I preached factiously, That I came to cast bones among them, That I might have chosen a fitter Text, That I might have had as much thanks to have kept away? For Faction; [ 1] I hate it: my desire and aim, next after the good of your souls, was, above all, the Peace of the Church, and the Unity of Brethren. [ 2] For casting bones (if that must needs be the phrase) they were cast in these parts long before my coming by that great enemy to peace and unity, and busy sower of discord, the Devil: otherwise I should not have found at my first coming such snarling about them, and such biting and de • ouring one another, as I did. My endeavor was rather to have gathered up the bones, and to have taken away the matter of difference, (I mean, the error in judgment about, and inconformity in practice unto the lawful Ceremonies of the Church) that so if it had been possible all might have been quiet, without despising or judging one another for [ 3] these things. For thanks; I hold not that worth the answering: alas it is a poor aim for God's Minister, to preach for thanks.

[ 4] For the choice of my Text and Argument, both then and now: how is it not unequal, that men, who plead (so as none more) for liberty and plainness in reproving sin, should not allow those that come amongst them that liberty and plainness against themselves and their own sins? I dare no • appeal to yourselves. Have you never been taught that it is the Ministers duty, as to oppose against all errors and sins in the general, so to bend himself (as near as he can) especially against the apparent errors and sins of his present auditory? And do you not believe it is so? Why then might I not nay, how ought I not, bend my speech, both then against a common error of sundry in these parts in point of Ceremony; and now against the late petulancy, (or at least oversight) of some mis-guided ones? The noise of these things abroad; and the scandal taken thereat by such as hear of them; and the ill fruits of them at home in breeding jealousies, and cherishing contentions among neighbo • rs: cannot but stir us up, if we be sensible (as every good member should be) of the damage and loss the Church acquireth by them, to put you in mind and to admonish you (as opportunities invite us) both privately and publicly. Is it not time, trow ye, to thrust in the sickle, when the fields look white unto the Harvest? Is it not time our Pulpits should a little echo of these things, when all the Country far and near ringeth of them?

For my own part; how ever others censure me, I am sure, my own heart telleth me, I could not have discharged my Conscience; if being called to this place, I should have balked what either then or now I have delivered. My conscience prompting me, all circumstances considered, that these things were pro hîc & nunc necessary to be delivered, rather then any other: if for any outward inferior respect I should have passed them over with silence; I think I should have much swerved from the Rule of my Text, and have done a great evil, that some small good might come of it. But many thousand times better were it for me, that all the world should censure me for speaking what they think I should not; then that my own heart should condemn me for not speaking what it telleth me I should. And thus much of things simply evil.

I should proceed to apply this Rule, We must not do evil, that good may come; unto evils, not simply, but accidentally such: and that both in the general, and also in some few specials of greatest use; namely, unto evils which become such through Conscience, Scandal, or Comparison. In my choice of this Scripture, I aimed at all this: & had gathered much of my provision for it. But the Cases being many and weighty; I foresaw I could not go onward with my first project, without much wronging one of both: either the things themselves, if I should contract my speech to the scantling of time; or you, if I should lengthen it to the weight of the matter. And therefore I resolved here to make an end; and to give place (as fit it is) to the business whereabout we meet. The Total of what I have said, and should say; is in effect but this: No pretension of a good end, of a good meaning, of a good event, of any good whatsoever; either can sufficiently warrant any sinful action to be done, or justify it being done: or sufficiently excuse the Omission of any necessary duty, when it is necessary. Consider what I say, and the Lord give you understanding in all things. Now to God the Father, Son, and holy Spirit, &c.