Thirty-Six Sermons
Thirdly, since we owe our standing to the hand of God, who holdeth us up; without whose restraint we should fall at every turn, and into every temptation: we cannot but see what need we have to seek to him daily and hourly to with-hold us from falling into those sins, whereinto either our corrupt nature would lead us, or outward occasions draw us. We may see it by the fearful falls of David and Peter, men nothing inferior to the best of us, how weak a thing man is to resist temptation, if God withdraw his support, and leave him but a little to himself. Which made David pray to God that he would keep back his servant from presumptuous sins. He well knew, though he were the faithful servant of God, that yet he had no stay of himself; but, unless God kept him back, he must on, and he must in, and he must in deep, even as far as to presumptuous sins. No man, though he be never so good, hath any assurance, as upon his own strength, though it be never so great, that he shall be able to avoid any sin, though it be never so foul. When a Heathen man prayed unto Jupiter, to save him from his Enemies; one that over-heard him would needs mend it with a more needful prayer, that Jupiter would save him from his Friends: he thought they might do him more hurt, because he trusted them; but as for his Enemies he could look to himself well enough, for receiving harm from them. We that are Christians, had need pray unto the God of Heaven, that he would not give us up into the hands of our professed Enemies: [and to pray unto God, that he would not deliver us over into the hands of our false-hearted Friends: but there is another prayer yet more needful, and to be pressed with greater importunity than either of both, that God would save us from ourselves, and not give us up into our own hands; for then we are utterly cast away. There is a way-ward old man that lurketh in every of our bosoms, and we make but too much of him: than whom, we have not a more spiteful Enemy, nor a more false Friend. Alas! we do not think, what a man is given over to, that is given over to himself: he is given over to Vile Affections; he is given over to a Reprobate Sense; he is given over to commit all manner of wickedness with greediness. It is the last and fearfullest of all other judgments, and is not usually brought upon men, but where they have obstinately refused to hear the Voice of God, in whatsoever other tone he had spoken unto them; then to leave them to themselves, and to their own counsels. [ My people would not hear my Voice, and Israel would none of me: so I gave them up unto their own hearts lust, and let them follow their own imaginations. ] As we conceive the state of the Patient to be desperate, when the Physician giveth him over, and letteth him eat, and drink, and have, and do, what, and when, and as much as he will without prescribing him any diet, or keeping back anything from him he hath a mind unto. Let us therefore pray faithfully and fervently unto God, as Christ himself hath taught us, that he would not, by leaving us unto ourselves, lead us into temptation, but by his gracious and powerful support deliver us from all those evils, from which we have no power at all to deliver ourselves.
Lastly, since this Restraint, whereof we have spoken, may be but a common Grace, and can give us no sound nor solid comfort if it be but a bare Restraint, and no more: though we ought to be thankful for it, because we have not deserved it; yet we should not rest, nor think ourselves safe enough, till we have a well-grounded assurance, that we are possessed of an higher and a better Grace, even the grace of sanctification. For that will hold out against temptations, where this may fail. We may deceive ourselves then, (and thousands in the world do so deceive themselves:) if upon our abstaining from sins, from which God with-holdeth us, we presently conclude ourselves to be in the state of grace, and to have the power of godliness, and the spirit of sanctification. For between this restraining grace, whereof we have now spoken, and that renewing grace whereof we now speak; there are sundry wide differences. They differ first, in their fountain. Renewing Grace springeth from the special love of God towards those that are his in Christ: Restraining Grace▪ is a fruit of that general mercy of God, whereof it is said in the Psalm, that his mercy is over all his works. They differ secondly, in their extent: both of Person, Subject, Object and Time. For the Person; Restraining Grace is common to good and bad: Renewing Grace proper and peculiar to the Elect. For the Subject; Restraining grace may bind one part or faculty of a man, as the hand or tongue, and leave another free, as the heart or ear: Renewing grace worketh upon All in some measure, sanctifieth the whole man, Body, and soul, and spirit, with all the parts and faculties of each. For the Object; Renewing grace may with-hold a man from one sin, and give him scope to another: Restraining grace carrieth an equal and just respect to all God's Commandments. For the Time; Restraining grace may tie us now, and by and by unloose us: Renewing grace holdeth out unto the end, more or less, and never leaveth us wholly destitute. Thirdly, they differ in their Ends. Restraining Grace is so intended chiefly for the good of human society, especially of the Church of God, and of the members thereof; as that indifferently it may, or may not, do good to the Receiver; but Renewing Grace is especially intended for the Salvation of the Receiver, though Ex consequenti it do good also unto others. They differ fourthly, and lastly, in their Effects. Renewing Grace mortifieth the corruption, and subdueth it, and diminisheth it; as water quencheth fire, by abating the heat: but Restraining Grace only inhibiteth the exercise of the corruption, for the time, without any real diminution of it either in substance or quality; as the fire wherein the three Children walked, had as much heat in it at that very instant, as it had before and after, although by the greater power of God, the natural power of it was then suspended from working upon them. The Lions that spared Daniel were Lions still, and had their ravenous disposition still; albeit God stopped their mouths for that time, that they should not hurt him: but that there was no change made in their natural disposition, appeareth by their entertainment of their next guests, whom they devoured with all greediness, breaking their bones before they came to the ground. By these two instances and examples, we may in some measure conceive of the nature and power of the restraining Grace of God in wicked men. It bridleth the corruption that is in them for the time, that it cannot break out; and manacleth them in such sort, that they do not show forth the ungodly disposition of their heart: but there is no real change wrought in them all the while; their heart still remaining unsanctified, and their natural corruption undiminished. Whereas the renewing and sanctifying grace of God, by a real change of a Lion maketh a Lamb; altereth the natural disposition of the soul, by draining out some of the corruption; begetteth a new heart, a new spirit, new habits, new qualities, new dispositions, new thoughts, new desires; maketh a new man, in every part and faculty completely New. Content not thyself then with a bare forbearance of sin, so long as thy heart is not changed, nor thy will changed, nor thy affections changed; but strive to become a new man, to be transformed by the renewing of thy mind; to hate sin, to love God, to wrestle against thy secret corruptions, to take delight in holy duties, to subdue thine understanding, and will, and affections, to the obedience of Faith and Godliness. So shalt thou not only be restrained from sinning against God, as Abimelech here was; but also be enabled, as faithful Abraham was, to please God: and consequently assured with all the faithful children of Abraham, to be preserved by the Almighty power of God through faith unto salvation. Which Grace, and Faith, and Salvation, the same Almighty God, the God of Power, and of Peace, bestow upon us all here assembled, With all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord, both theirs and ours: even for the same our Lord Jesus Christ's sake, his most dear Son, and our blessed Savior and Redeemer: To which blessed Father, and blessed Son, with the blessed Spirit, most holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity, be ascribed by us and the whole Church, all the Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory, from this time forth and forever.
AD POPULUM.
The Seventh Sermon.
At St. Paul 's Cross London, May 6. 1632.
1 Pet. II. 16.
T Here is not anything in the World more generally desired than Liberty: nor scarce anything more generally abused. Insomuch as even that blessed liberty which the eternal Son of God hath purchased for his Spouse the Church, and endowed her therewithal, hath in no Age been free from Abuses: whilst some have sinfully neglected their Christian liberty, to their own prejudice; and other some have as sinfully stood upon it, to the prejudice of their brethren. So hardly, through Pride and Ignorance, and other Corruptions that abound in us do we hit upon the golden mean, either in this, or almost in anything else: but easily swerve into the Vicious Extreams on both hands, declining sometimes into the Defect, and sometimes into the Excess. The Apostles therefore, especially St. Peter, and St. Paul, the two chiefest planters of the Churches, endeavored early to instruct believers in the true Doctrine, and to direct them in the right use of their Christian liberty, so often in their several Epistles as fit occasion was offered thereunto. Which we may observe them to have done most frequently and fully in those Two Cases, which being very common, are therefore of the greater consequence, viz. the case of Scandal, and the case of Obedience.
And we may further observe concerning these Two Apostles, that St. Paul usually toucheth upon this Argument of Liberty, as it is to be exercised in the case of Scandal: but St. Peter oftener, as in the Case of Obedience. Whereof on St. Peter 's part, I conceive the reason to be this; That being the Apostle of the Circumcision, and so having to deal most with the Jews, who could not brook subjection, but were of all Nations under heaven the most impatient of a foreign yoke; he was therefore the more careful to deliver the doctrine of Christian Liberty to them in such a manner, as might frame them withal to yield such Reverence and Obedience to their Governors, as became them to do. And therefore St. Peter beateth much upon the point of Obedience.
But he nowhere presseth it more fully than in this Chapter: Wherein after the general exhortations of subduing the lusts that are in their own bosoms, verse. 11. and of ordering their conversation so as might be for their credit and honesty in the sight of others, ver. 12. when he descendeth to more particular duties, he beginneth first with, and insisteth most upon, this duty of subjection and obedience to Authority, in the greatest remaining part of the Chapter. The first Precept he giveth in this kind, is set down with sundry Amplifications and Reasons thereunto belonging, in the next verses before the Text ( submit yourselves to every Ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: ) And then he doth by way of Prolepsis, take away an Objection, which he foresaw would readily be made against that and the following Exhortations, from the pretext of Christian liberty: in the words of the Text, ( As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. )
Conceive the words as spoken in answer to what those new converts might have objected. We have been taught, that the Son of God hath made us free, and then we are free indeed: and so not bound to subject ourselves to any Masters and Governors upon Earth, no not to Kings; but much rather bound not to do it, that so we may preserve that freedom which Christ hath purchased for us, and reserve ourselves the more entirely for God's service, by refusing to be the servants of men.
This Objection the Apostle clearly taketh off in the Text, with much holy wisdom, and truth. He telleth them, that being indeed set at liberty by Christ they are not therefore anymore to enthral themselves to any living soul or other creature; not to submit to any Ordinance of man as slaves, that is, as if the ordinance itself did by any proper, direct and immediate virtue, bind the conscience. But yet, all this notwithstanding, they might and ought to submit thereunto as the Lord's free-men, and in a free manner; that is, by a voluntary and uninforced both subjection to their power, and obedience to their lawful commands. They must therefore take heed they use not their liberty for an occasion to the flesh, nor under so fair a title, palliate an evil licentiousness, making that a cloak for their irreverent and undutiful Carriage towards their Superiors. For albeit they be not the servants of men, but of God: and therefore owe no Obedience to men as upon immediate tie of conscience, and for their own sake, but to God only: yet for his sake, and out of the conscience of that Obedience which they owe to his command of honoring of father and mother, and of being subject to the higher powers, they ought to give unto them such honor and obedience, as of right belongeth unto them according to the eminency of their high places. ( As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. )
From which words thus paraphrased, I gather Three Observations: all concerning our Christian Liberty, in that branch of it especially which respecteth human • Ordinances, and the use of the creatures, and of all indifferent things. Either 1. in the Existence of it, [ As free, ] or 2. in the Exercise of it, [ And not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness ] or 3. in the End of it, [ but as the servants of God. ] The first Observation this; We must so submit ourselves to superior Authority, as that we do not thereby impeach our Christian Liberty: [As free. ] The second this; We must so maintain our liberty, as that we do not under that color either commit any sin, or omit any requisite office either of charity or duty: [ and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness. ] The third this; In the whole exercise both of the liberty we have in Christ, and of the respects we owe unto men, we must evermore remember ourselves to be, and accordingly behave ourselves as those that are God's servants: [but as the servants of God. ] The sum of the whole Three Points in brief this; We must be careful without either infringing or abusing our liberty, at all times, and in all things to serve God.
Now then to the several points in that order as I have proposed them, and as they lie in the Text: [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , As free. ] Which words have manifest reference to the Exhortation delivered Three Verses before the Text; as declaring the manner how the duty there exhorted unto ought to be performed: yet so as that the force of them stretcheth to the Exhortations also contained in the Verses next after the Text. Submit yourselves to public Governors both supreme and subordinate; be subject to your own particular Masters; honor all men with those proper respects that belong to them in their several stations: But look you do all this ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) not as slaves, but as free: do it without impeachment of the liberty you have in Christ. Of which liberty, it would be a profitable labor (but that I should then be forced to omit sundry other things which I deem needful to be spoken, and more nearly pertinent to the points proposed) to discover at large the Nature, and Parts, and Causes, and Effects, and Adjuncts; that we might the better understand the amplitude of that power which Christ hath settled upon his Church, and thence learn to be the more careful to preserve it. But I may not have time so to do; it shall therefore suffice us to know, that as the other branches of our liberty, whether of glory or grace; whether from the guilt of sin in our justification, or from the dominion of sin in our sanctification, with the several appendices and appurtenances to any of them: so this branch of it also which respects the use of indifferent things; First is purchased for us by the blood of Christ, and is therefore usually called by the name of Christian liberty. Secondly, is revealed unto us outwardly in the preaching of the Gospel of God and of Christ, which is therefore called the Law of liberty. And thirdly, is conveyed unto us inwardly and effectually by the Operation of the Spirit of God and of Christ, which is therefore called a free spirit (O stablish thou me with thy free spirit) because, where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty, 2 Cor. 3. 17.
Now this liberty, so dearly purchased, so clearly revealed, so firmly conveyed; it is our duty to maintain with our utmost strength in all the parts and branches of it, and (as the Apostle exhorteth) to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and not to suffer ourselves either by the devices of other men, or by our own sloth and willful default to be entangled again with the yoke of bondage. And namely in this particular branch whereof we now speak, whatsoever serviceable offices we do to any of our brethren, especially to those that are in Authority, we must perform our duty therein with all cheerfulness of spirit, and for Conscience sake: but still with freedom of spirit, and with liberty of Conscience; as being servants to God alone, and not to men. We find therefore in the Scriptures a peremptory charge both ways; that we neither usurp mastership, nor undergo servitude. A charge given by our Savior Christ to his Disciples in the former behalf, that they should not be called Rabbi, neither Masters; Matth. 23. and a charge given by the Apostle Paul to all Believers in the latter behalf, that they should not be servants of men, 1 Cor. 7.
God forbid any man of us, possessed with an Anabaptistical spirit, or rather frenesy, should understand either of those passages, or any other of like sound; as if Christ or his Apostle had had any purpose therein to slacken those sinews and ligaments, and to dissolve those joints and contignations, which tie into one body, and clasp into one structure, those many little members and parts, whereof all human Societies consist: that is to say, to forbid all those mutual Relations of superiority and subjection which are in the world, and so to turn all into a vast Chaos of Anarchy and Confusion. For such a meaning is contrarious to the express determination of Christ, and to the constant doctrine of St. Paul in other places: and we ought so to interpret the Scriptures, as that one place may consist with another, without clashing or contradiction. The true and plain meaning is this; that we must not acknowledge any our supreme Master, not yield ourselves to be wholly and absolutely ruled by the will of any, nor enthral our Iudgments and Consciences to the sentences or laws of any man, or Angel, but only Christ our Lord and Master in Heaven.
And this Interpretation is very consonant unto the Analogy of Scripture in sundry places. In Eph. 6. (to omit other places) there are two distinctions implied, the one in the 5. the other in the 7. Verses, both of right good use for reconciling of sundry Texts that seem to contradict one another, and for the clearing of sundry difficulties in the present argument. Servants (saith St. Paul there) be obedient to them that are your Masters according to the flesh. Which limitation affordeth us the distinction of Masters according to the flesh only, and of Masters after the spirit also. Intimating that we may have other Masters of our flesh, to whom we may (and must) give due reverence, so far as concerneth the flesh; that is, so far as appertaineth to the outward man, and all outward things. But of our spirits, and souls, and consciences; as we can have no Fathers, so we may have no Masters upon Earth, but only our Master and our Father which is in Heaven. And therefore (in Mat 23.) Christ forbiddeth the calling of any man upon Earth Father, as well as he doth the calling of any man Master. And both the prohibitions are to be understood alike, and as hath been now declared.
Again (saith St. Paul there) with good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men; which opposition importeth a second distinction, and that is of Masters, into supreme, and subordinate: those are subordinate Masters, to whom we do service in ordine ad alium, and as under another. Those are supreme Masters, in whom our obedience resteth in the final resolution of it, without looking farther or higher. Men may be our Masters, and we their servants, the first way; with subordination to God, and for his sake: And we must do them service, and that with good will: but with reservation ever of our bounden service to him, as our only supreme Sovereign and Absolute Master. But the latter way, it is high sacrilege in any man to challenge, and it is High Treason against the sacred Majesty of God and of Christ for us to yield to any other but them, the mastership, that is; the sovereign and absolute Mastership over us.
Briefly; we must not understand those Scriptures that forbid either Mastership or Servitude, as if they intended to discharge us from those mutual Obligations, wherein either in nature or civility we stand tied one to another, in the state Oeconomical, Political or Ecclesiastical; as anon it shall further appear: but only to beget in us a just care, amidst all the offices of love and duty which we perform to men, to preserve inviolate that liberty which we have in Christ; and so to do them service, as to maintain withal our own freedom 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as free.
A thing whereof it behooveth us to have a special care, and that for sundry and weighty respects. First, in regard of the trust reposed in us in this behalf. Every honest man taketh himself bound to discharge with faithfulness the trust reposed in him, and to preserve what is committed unto him by way of trust, (though it be another man's ) no less, if not rather much more carefully, than he would do if it were his own; that so he may be able to give a good account of his trust. Now these two, the Christian Faith, and the Christian Liberty, are of all other the choicest Jewels, whereof the Lord Jesus Christ hath made his Church the depository. Every man therefore in the Church ought earnestly to contend, as for the maintenance of the Faith, (as St. Jude speaketh) so also for the maintenance of the liberty, which was once delivered to the Saints: even eo nomine, and for that very reason, because they were both delivered unto them under such a trust. O Timothy, depositum custodi: St. Paul more than once calleth upon Timothy to keep that which was committed to his trust. He meaneth it in respect of the Christian Faith; which he was bound to keep entire as it was delivered him, at his peril, and as he would answer it another day. And the like obligation lieth upon us, in respect of this other rich deposition, this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Christian liberty: for which we shall be answerable to Christ, from whom we received it, how we have both kept it, and used it. And if by our default, and for want either of care or courage in us ( dolo vel latâ culpâ, as the Lawyers say) we lose or imbezel it (as she said in the Canticles, They made me the keeper of the Vineyard, but mine own Vineyard have I not kept: ) No doubt it will lie heavy upon us when we come to give in our Accounts. Rather we should put on a resolution (like that of Moses, who would not yield to leave so much as an hoof behind him) not to part with a jot of that liberty wherewith Christ hath entrusted us, by making ourselves the servants of men.
Especially since we cannot so do, Secondly, without manifest wrong to Christ; nor thirdly, without great dishonor to God. Not without wrong to Christ. St. Paul therefore disputeth it as upon a ground of right, 1 Cor. 7. Ye are bought with a price, saith he, be ye not the servants of men: and in the next Chapter before that, ye are not your own, for you are bought with a price. As if he had said, Though it were a great weakness in you to put yourselves out of your own power into the power of others, by making yourselves their servants: yet if you were your own, there should be no injury done thereby to any third person; but, unto whosoever should complain as if he were wronged, you might return this reasonable answer, ( Friend, I do thee no wrong; Is it not lawful for me to do as I will with mine own? ) But saith he, this is not your case: you are not your own, but Christ's. He hath bought you with his most precious blood; he hath paid a valuable (rather an invaluable) price for you: and having bought you, and paid for you, you are now his; and you cannot dispose yourselves in any other service, without apparent wrong to him.
Neither only do we injure Christ, by making ourselves the servants of men; but we dishonor God also: which is a third reason. For to whom we make ourselves servants, him we make our Lord and God. The covetous worldling therefore by serving Mammon, maketh Mammon his God: which made St. Paul two several times to set the brand of Idolatry upon covetousness, the covetous man which is an Idolater, Eph. 5. and covetousness which is Idolatry, Col. 3. And the voluptuous Epicure is therefore said to make his belly his God, Phil. 3. because he serveth his own belly, as the phrase is, Rom. 16. Neither can I imagine upon what other ground the Devil should be called the God of this world, than this, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the men of this evil world by doing him service do so make a God of him. For Service is a principal part of that honor that belongeth to God alone, and whereof in his jealousy he will not endure that any part should be given away from him to another: Ipsi soli servies, thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. We cannot serve any other, but to his great dishonor.
Yea, and our own too; which may stand for a fourth reason. Ye see your calling brethren, saith the Apostle, 1 Cor. 1. 26. He would have men take notice of their Christian Calling (it is a holy and a high calling:) that so they might walk worthy of it, and carry themselves in every respect answerably thereunto. Now by our Calling we are Free-men: for Brethren, you have been called unto liberty, Gal. 5. or (which is all one) to the service of God. And being so, we infinitely abase ourselves, and disparage our Calling; when of free-men we become slaves; and make ourselves of God's, men's servants: incomparably more to our own dishonor, than if one that is free of a rich Company, and hath born Office in it, should for base respects bind himself Apprentice again with a Master of poor condition in some pedling Trade. It is diminutio capitis (as the Civilians call it) for a man to descend from a higher to a lower condition: of the three degrees whereof that is esteemed the greatest, ( maxima diminutio capitis ) which is with loss of liberty. Leo the Emperor therefore by special and severe constitution (as you may see it in The Novels ) forbad all Freemen within the Empire the sale of their liberties; calling it facinus in those that were so presumptuous as to buy them, and no less than folly, yea, madness ( dementia and vesania ) in those that were so base as to sell them: not without some indignation at the former Laws, for suffering such an indignity to be so long practiced without either chastisement or restraint. And if he justly censured them as men of abject minds, that would for any consideration in the world willingly forego their civil and Roman liberty; what flatness of spirit possesseth us, if we willfully betray our Christian and spiritual liberty?
Whereby, besides the dishonor, we do also (which is the fifth Reason, and whereunto I will add no more) with our own hands pull upon our own heads a great deal of unnecessary cumber. For whereas we might draw an easy yoke, carry a light burden, observe commandments that are not grievous, and so live at much hearts-ease in the service of God and of Christ: by putting ourselves into the service of men, we thrust our necks into a hard yoke of bondage, such as neither we nor any of our fathers were ever able to bear; we lay upon our own shoulders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , heavy and importable burdens; and subject ourselves to Ordinances, which are both grievous and unprofitable; and such are so far from preserving those that use them from perishing, that themselves perish in the using.
Now against this liberty, (which if we will answer the trust reposed in us, and neither wrong Christ, nor dishonor God, nor yet debase and encumber ourselves, where we should not) we must with our utmost power maintain: The Offenders are of two sorts: to wit, such as either injuriously encroach upon the liberty of others; or else unworthily betray away their own. The most notorious of the former sort are the Bishops of Rome; whose usurpations upon the Consciences of men, show them to be true successors of the Scribes and Pharisees, in laying heavy burdens upon men's shoulders which they ought not, and in rejecting the Word of God to establish their own Traditions; rather than the Successors of St. Peter, who forbiddeth dominatum in Cleris, in the last Chapter of this Epistle at Vers. 3, To teach their own judgments to be infallible; to make their definitions an universal and unerring Rule of Faith; to style their Decrees and Constitutions Oracles; to assume to themselves all power in Heaven and Earth; to require subjection both to their Laws and Persons, as of necessity unto salvation; to suffer themselves to be called by their Parasites, Dominus Deus noster Papa, and Optimum, maximum, & supremum in terris numen; all which and much more is done and taught, and professed by the Popes, and in their behalf: if all this will not reach to St. Paul 's exaltari supra omne quod vocatur Deus: yet certainly, and no modest man can deny it, it will amount to as much as St. Peter 's dominari in Cleris, even to the exercising of such a Lordship over the Lord's Heritage, the Christian Church, as will become none but the Lord himself, whose Heritage the Church is.
Besides these, that do it thus by open Assault, I would there were not others also, that did by secret underminings go about to deprive us of that liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, even then when they most pretend the maintenance of it. They inveigh against the Church Governors, as if they lorded it over God's Heritage; and against the Church Orders and Constitutions, as if they were contrary to Christian liberty. Wherein, besides that they do manifest wrong to the Church in both particulars: they consider not that those very accusations which they thus irreverently dart at the face of their Mother, (to whom they owe better respect) but miss it, do recoil pat upon themselves, and cannot be avoided. For whereas these Constitutions of the Church are made for Order, Decency, and Uniformity sake▪ and to serve unto Edification; and not with any intention at all to lay a tie upon the consciences of men, or to work their judgments to an opinion, as if there were some necessity, or inherent holiness, in the things required thereby; neither do our Governors, neither ought they to press them any further: (which is sufficient to acquit both the Governors from that Lording, and the Constitutions from that trenching upon Christian liberty, wherewith they are charged:) Alas that our brethren who thus accuse them, should suffer themselves to be so far blinded with prejudices and partial affections, as not to see, that themselves in the mean time, do really exercise a spiritual Lordship over their disciples, who depend in a manner wholly upon their judgments, by imposing upon their consciences sundry Magisterial conclusions, for which they have no sound warrant from the written Word of God. Whereby, besides the great injury done to their brethren in the impeachment of their Christian liberty, and leading them into error; they do withal exasperate against them the minds of those that being in authority look to be obeyed; and engage them in such sufferings, as they can have no just cause of rejoicing in.
For, beloved, this we must know; that as it is injustice to condemn the innocent, as well as it is injustice to clear the guilty, and both these are equally abominable to the Lord: so it is superstition to forbid that as sinful, which is in truth indifferent, and therefore lawful; as well as it is superstition to enjoin that as necessary, which is in truth indifferent, and therefore arbitrary. Doth that heavy woe in Isa. 5. appertain (think ye) to them only, that out of profaneness call evil good: and nothing at all concern them, that out of preciseness call good evil? Doth not he decline out of the way, that turneth aside on the right hand, as well as he that turneth on the left? They that positively make that to be sin, which the Law of God never made so to be; how can they be excused from symbolizing with the Pharisees and the Papists, in making the narrow ways of God yet narrower than they are, teaching for Doctrines men's Precepts, and so casting a snare upon the consciences of their brethren? If our Church should press things as far, and upon such grounds, the one way, as some forward spirits do the other way; if, as they say [it is a sin to kneel at the Communion, and therefore we charge you upon your consciences not to do it;] so the Church should say [it is a sin not to kneel, and therefore we require you upon your consciences to do it,] and so in all other lawful (yet arbitrary ) Ceremonies: possibly then the Church could no more be able to acquit herself from encroaching upon Christian Liberty, than they are that accuse her for it. Which since they have done, and she hath not; she is therefore free, and themselves only guilty.
It is our duty, for the better securing of ourselves, as well against those open impugners, as against these secret underminers, to look heedfully to our trenches and fortifications, and to stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, lest by some device or other we be lifted out of it. To those that seek to enthral us, we should give place by subjection, no not for an hour; lest we be ensnared by our own default, ere we be aware. For indeed we cannot be ensnared in this kind, but merely by our own default; and therefore St. Paul often admonisheth us, to take heed that none deceive, spoil, or beguile us; as if it were in our power if we would but use requisite care thereunto, to prevent it; and as if it were our fault most, if we did not prevent it. And so in truth it is, For we oftentimes betray away our own liberty, when we might maintain it; and so become servants unto men, when we both might and ought to keep ourselves free.
Which fault we shall be the better able to avoid, when we shall know the true causes, whence it springeth: which are evermore one of these two, an unsound head, or an unsound heart. Sometimes we esteem too highly of others, so far as either to envassal our judgments to their opinions, or to enthral our consciences to their precepts; and that is our weakness: there the fault is in the head. Sometimes we apply ourselves to the wills of others, with an eye to our own benefit or satisfaction in some other carnal or worldly respect: and that is our fleshliness: there the fault is in the heart. This latter is the worst, and therefore in the first place to be avoided. The most and worser sort, unconscionable men, do often transgress this way; when for fear of a frown or worse displeasure, or to curry favor with those they may have use of, or in hope either of raising themselves to some advancement, or of raising to themselves some advantage, or for some other like respects, they become officious instruments to others for the accomplishing of their lusts in such services, as are evidently (even to their own apprehensions) sinful and wicked. So Doeg did King Saul service in shedding the blood of fourscore and five innocent Priests: and Absalom 's Servants murdered their Masters brother, upon his bare command: and Pilate, partly to gratify the Jews, but especially for fear of Caesar 's displeasure, gave sentence of death upon Jesus, who in his own conscience he thought had not deserved it. In such cases as these are, when we are commanded by our superiors, or required by our friends, or any other way solicited to do that which we know we cannot do without sin; we are to maintain our liberty (if we cannot otherwise fairly decline the service ) by a flat and peremptory denial, though it be to the greatest power upon earth. As the three young men did to the great Nebuchadnezzar, Be it known unto thee, O King, that we will not serve thy God's, nor worship the golden Image which thou hast set up. And the ancient Christians to the heathen Emperors, Daveniam, Imperator: tu carcerem, ill gehennam. And the Apostles to the whole Council of the Jews, whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken to you, more than unto God, judge ye, Acts 4. He that will displease God to please men, he is the servant of men, and cannot be the servant of God.
But honest and conscionable men, who do not easily and often fail this way. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (as the word is, Rom. 16.) men that are not evil, are yet apt sometimes to be so far carried away with an high estimation of some men, as to subject themselves wholly to their judgments, or wills, without ever questioning the truth of anything they teach, or the lawfulness of anything they enjoin. It is a dangerous thing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as St. Jude speaketh, to have men's persons in admiration; though they be of never so great learning, wisdom, or piety: because the best and wisest men that are, are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , subject to the like infirmities as we are both of sin and error, and such as may both deceive others, and be themselves deceived. That honor which Pythagoras his Scholars gave to their Master, in resting upon his bare Authority ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) as a sufficient proof, yea, as a divine Oracle, many judicious even among the heathen altogether misliked, as too servile, and prejudicial to that libertas Philosophica, that freedom of judgment which was behooveful for the study of Philosophy. How much more then must it needs be prejudicial in the judgment of Christians to that libertas Evangelica, that freedom we have in Christ, to give such honor to any other man, but the man Christ Jesus only; or to any other Writings than to those which are in truth the Oracles of God, the holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament?
There is I confess much reverence to be given to the Writings of the godly ancient Fathers; more to the Canons and Decrees of general and provincial Councils, and not a little to the judgment of learned, sober and godly Divines of later and present times, both in our own and other reformed Churches. But we may not jurare in verba, build our faith upon them as upon a sure foundation, nor pin our belief upon their sleeves; so as to receive for an undoubted truth whatsoever they hold, and to reject as a gross error whatsoever they disallow, without farther examination. St. John biddeth us try the Spirits, before we believe them, 1 John 4▪ And the Bereans are remembered with praise fol so doing, Act. 17. We blame it in the Schoolmen, that some adhere pertinaciously to the opinions of Thomas, and others as pertinaciously to the opinions of Scotus, in every point wherein they differ; insomuch as it were grande piaculum, a heinous thing, and not to be suffered, if a Dominican should dissent from Thomas, or a Franciscan from Scotus, though but in one single controversed conclusion. And we blame it justly: for St. Paul blamed the like sidings and partakings in the Church of Corinth (whilst one professed himself to be of Paul, another of Apollo, another of Cephas ) as a fruit of carnality unbeseeming Christians. And is it not also blame-worthy in us, and a fruit of the same carnality, if any of us shall affect to be accounted rigid Lutherans, or perfect Calvinists; or give up our judgment to be wholly guided by the Writings of Luther or Calvin, or of any other mortal man whatsoever? Worthy instruments they were both of them of God's glory, and such as did excellent service to the Church in their times, whereof we yet find the benefit; and we are unthankful, if we do not bless God for it: and therefore it is an unsavory thing for any man to gird at their names, whose memories ought to be precious. But yet, were they not men? Had they received the spirit in the fullness of it, and not by measure? Knew they o • herwise than in part, or prophesied otherwise than in part? Might they not in many things, did they not in some things mistake and err? Howsoever the Apostles Interrogatories are unanswerable: what, saith he was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? Even so, was either Luther or Calvin crucified for you? Or were ye baptized into the name either of Luther or Calvin, or any other man; That any one of you should say, I am of Luther, or any other, I am of Calvin; and I of him, and I of him? What is Calvin or Luther, nay, what is Paul or Apollo, but Ministers by whom ye believed? That is to say, Instruments, but not Lord's of your belief.
To sum up, and to conclude this first point then. To do God and ourselves right, it is necessary we should with our utmost strength maintain the doctrine and power of that liberty wherewith Christ hath endowed his Church, without either usurping the mastery over others, or subjecting ourselves to their servitude: so, as to surrender either our judgments or consciences, to be wholly disposed according to the opinions or wills of men, though of never so excellent piety or parts. But yet lest while we shun one extreme, we fall into another, as (the Lord be merciful unto us) we are very apt to do; lest while we seek to preserve our liberty that we do not lose it, we stretch it too far, and so abuse it: the Apostle therefore in the next clause of the Text putteth in a caveat for that also, ( not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness: ) whence ariseth our second observation. We must so maintain our liberty, that we abuse it not: as we shall, if under the pretence of Christian liberty, we either adventure the doing of some unlawful thing, or omit the performance of any requisite duty. (As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness. )
The Apostles intention in the whole clause will the better appear, when we know what is meant by Cloak, and what by Maliciousness. The Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which is nowhere else found in the whole New Testament but in this verse only; signifieth properly any Covering: as the covering of Badger • skins, that was spread over the Tabernacle, is in the Septuagint's Translation called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . An it is very fitly translated a cloak, (though it do not properly so signify;) in respect of that notion wherein the word in our English Tongue is commonly and proverbially used: to note some fair and colorable pretence, wherewith we disguise and conceal from the conusance of others, the dishonestly and faultiness of our intentions in some things practiced by us. Our Savior Christ saith of the obstinate Jews that had heard his Doctrine, and seen his Miracles, that they had no cloak for their sin, John. 15. he meaneth they had no color of plea, nothing to pretend by way of excuse. And St. Paul professeth in the whole course of his Ministry not to have used at any time a cloak of covetousness, 1 Thess. 2. that is, he did not under color of preaching the Gospel, endeavor to make a prey of them, or a gain unto himself. In both which places the Greek word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which signifieth a fair show, pretence, or color, which we use to call a cloak.
It is a corruption very common among us; whatsoever we are within, yet we desire 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to make a fair show outwardly, and to make bright the outside of the platter, how sluttish soever the inside be. We are loath to forbear those sins, which we are ashamed to profess: and therefore we blanch them, and color them, and cloak them; that we may both do the thing we desire, and yet miss the shame we deserve. A fault of an ancient original, and of long continuance: ever since Adam first patched together a cloak of fig-leaves, to cover the shame of his nakedness. Since which time, (unless it were some desperately profane Wretches, that being void of shame as well as grace, proclaim their sins as Sodom, and hide them not, but rather glory in them:) what man ever wanted some handsome cloak or other to cast over the foulest and ugliest transgressions? Saul spareth Agag, and the fatter cattle, flat contrary to the Lord's express command: and the offering of sacrifice must be the cloak. Jezebel by most unjust and cruel oppression murdereth Naboth to have his Vineyard; and the due punishment of blasphemy must be the cloak. The covetous Pharisees devour Widows houses, and devotion must be the cloak: So in the Church of Rome, Monkery is used for a cloak of Idleness and Epicurism; The seal of confession for a cloak of packing treasons, and diving into the secrets of all Princes and Estates: Purgatory, Dirges, Indulgences, and Jubilees, for a cloak of much rapine and avarice. Seneca said truly of most men, that they studied more excusare vitia, quàm excutere, rather solicitous how to cloak their faults, than desirous to forsake them: and St. Bernard 's complaint is much like it, both for truth and elegancy, that men did not set themselves so much colere virtutes, to exercise true virtue, and the power of godliness, as colorare vitia, to mask foul vices under the vizard of virtue and godliness. Alas, that our own daily experience did not too abundantly justify the complaint in the various passages of common life; not needful being so evident; and being so many, not possible to be now mentioned. We have a clear instance in the Text, and it should grieve us to see it so common in the world: that the blessed liberty we have in Christ, should become 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a cloak, and that of maliciousness.
You see what the Cloak is: see now what is Maliciousness. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the word; which is properly rendered by malice or maliciousness. And as these English words, and the Latin word malicia, whence these are borrowed; so likewise 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Greek, is many times used to signify one special kind of sin, which is directly opposite to brotherly love and charity, and the word is usually so taken, wheresoever it is either set in opposition to such charity, or else ranked with other special sins of the same kind, such as are anger, envy, hatred, and the like. And if we should so understand it here, the sense were good: for it is a very common thing in the world to offend against brotherly charity, under the color of Christian liberty; and doubtless our Apostle here intendeth the remedy of that abuse also. Yet I rather conceive that the word maliciousness in this place is to be taken in a larger comprehension, for all manner of evil, and of naughtiness, according to the adequate signification of the Greek and Latin Adjectives, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and malus, from whence the substantive used in the Text is derived. Of which maliciousness so largely taken, that special maliciousness before spoken of, is but a branch. The Apostles full purpose then in this clause of the Text, is to restrain all that abuse of Christian liberty, whereby it is made a cloak for the palliating of any wicked or sinful practice in any kind whatsoever. And so understood, St. Peter 's admonition here is paralleled with St. Paul 's elsewhere; Brethren (saith he) you have been called unto liberty; only use not your liberty for an occasion to the flesh, Gal. 5. 15. To use liberty for an occasion to the flesh, and to use liberty for a cloak of maliciousness; is the very same thing, and it is a very great sin.
For the proof whereof I shall need to use no other Arguments, than the words of the Text will afford. First, every act of maliciousness is a sin: and secondly, to cloak it with a fair pretence, maketh it a greater sin: but then thirdly, to use Christian liberty for the cloak, giveth a farther addition to it, and maketh it a greater sin. First, it is a sin to do any act of maliciousness. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 we know are conjugata, and do mutually infer each other. It is a superfluous thing, and such as we might well enough be without 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 superfluity of maliciousness, I am. 1. Nor so only, but it is an hurtful thing, and of a noxious and malignant quality, as leaven souring the whole lump of our services to God; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the leaven of maliciousness, 1 Cor. 5. It is a thing to be repented of; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , repent of this thy wickedness or maliciousness, saith St. Peter to Simon Magus, Acts 8. It is a thing to be cast away from us, and abominated as a filthy garment or polluted cloth: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , laying aside or casting away all maliciousness, saith the same Apostle again in the first verse of this Chapter.
It is evil then to do any act of maliciousness: but much worse when we have so done, to cloak it with a fair pretence. For besides that all things howsoever cloaked and covered from the eyes of men, are naked and open unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do; this cloaking of our sins is but a farther evidence of our hypocrisy in his sight: who as he is a God of pure eyes, and therefore cannot but hate all sin; so is he a God that loveth a pure heart, and therefore of all sins hateth hypocrisy. They that by injustice and oppression devour widows houses, shall certainly receive damnation for that, but if withal they do it under the color of devotion, and of long prayers, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , they shall receive the greater damnation for that also.
But if men will need be hypocrites, and must have a cloak for their maliciousness, they might yet at least bethink themselves of somewhat else of lighter price to make a cloak of; and not to use to so base a purpose so rich a stuff, as is this blessed liberty which the Son of God hath purchased with his most precious blood. As in nature, corruptio optimi pessima: so in morality, by how much better anything is in the right use of it, by so much is it worse in the abuse. As the quickest spirited Wine hath the sourest lees, and the best wit misgoverned is the most pernicious; and an Angel when he falleth becometh a Devil; so to use this liberty which is a spiritual thing, for an occasion to the flesh, to take this liberty, which (if I may so speak) is the very livery-cloak of the servant of God, and to make it a cloak of maliciousness for the service of sin; must needs be presumption in an high degree, and an unsufferable abuse.
Now we see how great a sin it is thus to abuse our liberty, it will be needful in the next place to inquire more particularly, wherein this abuse consisteth, that so we may be the better able to avoid it. We are therefore to know, that Christian liberty may be used, or rather abused for a cloak of maliciousness, these four ways following. First, we may make it a cloak of maliciousness, if we hold ourselves by virtue thereof discharged from our obedience, either to the whole morallaw of God, or to any part of it. Where, to omit those that out of the wretched profaneness of their own hearts, pervert this branch of Evangelical doctrine, as they do all the rest, to their own destruction. As a Spider turneth the juice of the sweetest and most medicinal herbs into poison: so these turn the grace of God into wantonness, and the liberty they have in Christ into a profane licentiousness. Great offenders this way are the Libertines and Antinomists who quite cancel the whole Law of God, under the pretence of Christian liberty, as if they that were in Christ, were no longer tied to yield obedience to the Moral Law: which is a pestilent error, and of very dangerous consequence; Whereas our blessed Savior himself, hath not only professed that he came not to destroy the Law, but expressly forbidden any man to think so of him. ( Think not that I came to destroy the Law, I came not to destroy it, but to fulfil it. ) And St. Paul rejecteth the consequence with an absit, as both unreasonable and impious, if any man should conclude, that by preaching the righteousness of faith, the Law were abolished, Do we then make void the Law through faith? God forbid: yea (saith he rather) we establish the Law, Rom. 3.
But they interpret those words of Christ in this sense, He came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it: that is, he came not to destroy it without fulfilling it first, but by fulfilling it in his own person, he hath destroyed it unto the person of every believer: and therefore is Christ said to be the end of the Law to everyone that believeth, Rom. 10. Whence it is that the faithful are said to be freed from the Law, delivered from the Law, dead to the Law, and to be no longer under the Law, and other like speeches there are many everywhere in the New Testament; I acknowledge both their Expositions to be just, and all these allegations true, yet not sufficient to evict their conclusion. Not to wade far into a controversy, which I had not so much as a thought to touch upon, when I fixed my choice upon this Scripture; it shall suffice us to propound one distinction, which well heeded, and rightly applied, will clear the whole point concerning the abrogation and obligation of the Moral law under the New Testament, and cut off many needless curiosities, which lead men into error. The Law then may be considered either as a Rule, or as a Covenant. Christ hath freed all believers from the rigor and curse of the Law, considered as a Covenant; but he hath not freed them from obedience to the Law, considered as a Rule. And all those Scriptures that speak of the Law as if it were abrogated or annulled, take it considered as a Covenant; those again that speak of the Law as if it were still in force, take it considered as a Rule. The Law as a Covenant, is rigorous; and under that rigor we now are not, if we be in Christ: but the Law as a Rule is equal; and under that equity we still are, though we be in Christ.
The Law as a Rule only showeth us, what is good and evil, what we are to do, and not to do. ( He hath shown thee, O man, what is good, and what the Lord requireth of thee; ) without any condition annexed either of reward if we observe it, or of punishment if we transgress it. But the Law, as a Covenant exacteth punctual and personal performance of everything that is contained therein, with a condition annexed of God's acceptance, and of blessing, if we perform it to the full; but of his wrath and curse upon us, if we fail in anything. Now by reason of transgression, we having broken all that Covenant, the Law hath his work upon us, and involveth us all in the Curse: so as by the Covenant of the Law no flesh living can be justified. Then cometh in Christ: who subjecting himself for our sakes to the Covenant of the Law, first fulfilleth it in his own person, but in our behalf, as our surety; and then disannulleth it, and instead thereof establisheth a better Covenant for us, even the Covenant of Grace. So that now as many as believe, are free from the Covenant of the Law, and from the Curse of the Law; and set under a Covenant of Grace, and under promises of Grace. There is a translation then of the Covenant: but what is all this to the Rule? That is still where it was, even as the nature of good and evil is still the same it was. And the Law considered as a Rule, can no more be abolished or changed, then can the nature of good and evil be abolished or changed. It is our singular comfort then, and the happiest fruit of our Christian liberty, that we are freed by Christ, and through faith in him from the Covenant and Curse of the Law: but we must know that it is our duty, notwithstanding the liberty that we have in Christ, to frame our lives and conversations according to the Rule of the Law. Which if we shall neglect under the pretence of our Christian liberty; we must answer for both: both for neglecting our duty, and for abusing our liberty. And so much for the first way.
The second way, whereby our liberty may be used for a cloak of maliciousness; is, when we stretch it in the use of things that are indeed indifferent beyond the just bounds of sobriety. Many men that would seem to make conscience of their way, will perhaps ask the opinion of some Divine, or other learned man, whether such or such a thing be lawful or no; and if they be once persuaded that it is lawful, they then think they have free liberty to use it in what manner and measure they please: never considering what caution and moderation is required even in lawful things to use them lawfully. St. Gregory's Rule is a good one, Semper ab illicitis, quandoque & à licitis: things unlawful we must never do; nor ever lawful things, but with due respect to our Calling, and other concurrent Circumstances. Wine, and Music, and gorgeous Apparel, and delicate Fare, are such things as God in his goodness hath created and given to the children of men for their comfort; and they may use them lawfully, and take comfort in them as their portion: but he that shall use any of them intemperately, or unseasonably, or vainly, or wastefully, abuseth both them and himself. And therefore we shall often find both the things themselves condemned, and those that used them blamed in the Scriptures. The men of Israel for stretching themselves upon their Couches, and eating the Lambs out of the flock, and chaunting to the sound of the Viol, and drinking Wine in bowls, Amos. 6. and the women for their bracelets, and ear-rings, and wimples, and crisping-pins, and their other bravery in Isa. 3. And the rich man for faring deliciously, and wearing fine linen in the parable, Luk. 16. Yea, our Savior himself pronounceth a woe against them that laugh, Luke 6. And yet none of all these things are or were in themselves unlawful: it was the excess only, or other disorder in the use of, them, that made them obnoxious to reproof. Though some in their heat have said so, yet who can reasonably say, that horse-matches, or playing at cards or dice, are in themselves wholly unlawful? And yet on the other side, what sober wise man, because the things are lawful, would therefore approve of that vain and sinful expense which is oftentimes bestowed by men of mean estates, in the dieting of Horses, and wagering upon them, or of that excessive abuse of gaming, wherein thousands of our Gentry spend, in a manner, their whole time, and consume away their whole substance: both which ought to be far more precious unto them? I might instance in many other things in like manner. In all which, we may easily err either in point of judgment, or practice, or both; if we do not wisely sever the use from the abuse. Many times because the abuses are common and great, we peevishly condemn in others the very use of some lawful things. And many times again, because there is evidently a lawful use of the things, we impudently justify ourselves in the very abuses also. That is foolish preciseness in us; and this profane partiality: by that we infringe our brethren's liberty; by this pollute our own. The best and safest way for us in all indifferent things is this: To be indulgent to others, but strict to ourselves; in allowing them their, liberty with the most, but taking our own liberty ever with the least.
But is not this to preach one thing, and do another? Ought not our Doctrine and our Practice to go together? It is most true, they ought so to do: Neither doth anything I have said, make to the contrary. What we may doctrinally deliver to be absolutely necessary, we may not in our own practice omit: and what we may doctrinally condemn as simply unlawful, we are bound in our own practice to forbear. But things of a middle and indifferent nature, we may not ( doctrinally ) either impose them as necessary, neither forbid as unlawful; but leave a liberty in them both for other men and ourselves to use them, or not to use them, as particular circumstances, and occasions, and other reasons of conveniency shall lead us. And in these things both we must allow others a liberty, which for some particular reasons it may not be so fit for us to take; and we may also tie ourselves to that strictness for some▪ particular reasons, which we dare not to impose upon others. It was a foul fault, and blame-worthy in the Scribes and Pharis • es, to tie heavy burdens upon other men's shoulders, which they would not touch with one of their fingers: but if they should (without superstition, and upon reasonable inducements) have laid such burdens upon themselves, and not imposed them upon others; for anything I know, they had been blameless. There are many things which in my conscience are not absolutely and in Thesi necessary to be done; which yet in Hypothesi for some personal respects I think so fit for me to do, that I should resolve to undergo some inconveniency rather than omit them; still reserving to others their liberty to do as they should see cause. There are again many things which in my conscience are not absolutely and in Thesi unlawful to be done; which yet in Hypothesi, and for the like personal respects, I think so unfit for me to do, that I should resolve to undergo some inconvenience rather than do them: yet still reserving to others the like liberty as before, to do as they should see cause. It belongeth to every sober Christian advisedly to consider, not only what in itself may lawfully be done or left undone; but also what in godly wisdom and discretion is fittest for him to do, or not to do, upon all occasions, as the exigence of present circumstances shall require. He that without such due consideration will do all he may do at all times, under color of Christian liberty, he shall undoubtedly sometime use his liberty for a cloak of maliciousness. And that is the second way, by using it excessively.
It may be done a third way, and that is by using it uncharitably, which is the case whereon I told you St. Paul beateth so often. When we use our liberty, so as to stumble the weak consciences of our brethren thereby, and will not remit in anything the extremity of that right and power, we have in things of indifferent nature, to please our neighbor for his good unto edification, at least so far as we may do it without greater inconvenience; we walk not charitably: and if not charitably, then not Christianly. Indeed the case may stand so, that we cannot condescend to his infirmity without great prejudice either to ourselves, or to the interest of some third person. As for instance; when the Magistrate hath positively already determined our liberty in the use of it the one way; we may not in such case redeem the offense of a private brother with our disobedience to superior authority in using our liberty the other way: and other like cases there may be. But this I say, that where without great inconvenience we may do it; it is not enough for us to please ourselves, and to satisfy our own consciences, that we do but what we lawfully may: but we ought also to bear one another's burdens, and to forbear for one another's sakes what otherwise we might do, and so to fulfil the Law of Christ. St. Paul, who hath forbidden us in one place to make ourselves the servants of any man, 1 Cor. 7. hath yet bidden us in another place by love to serve one another, Gal. 5. 13. And his practice therein consenteth with his doctrine (as it should do in every teacher of truth) for though he were free from all, and knew it, and would not be brought under the power of any, yet in love he became servant to all, that by all means he might win some. It was an excellent saying of Luther. Omnia libera per fidem, omnia serva per charitatem. We should know, and be fully persuaded with the persuasion of faith, that all things are lawful: and yet withal we should purpose and be fully resolved for charity's sake to forbear the use of many things, if we find them inexpedient. He that will have his own way in everything he hath a liberty unto, whosoever shall take offense at it, maketh his liberty but a cloak of maliciousness by using it uncharitably.
The fourth and last way, whereby we may use our liberty for a cloak of maliciousness is, by using it undutifully, pretending it unto our disobedience to lawful authority. The Anabaptists that deny all subjection to Magistrates in indifferent things, do it upon this ground, that they imagine Christian liberty to be violated, when by human Laws it is determined either the one way or the other. And I cannot but wonder, that many of our brethren in our own Church, who in the question of Ceremonies must argue from their ground (or else they talk of Christian liberty to no purpose) should yet hold off, before they grow to their conclusion: which to my apprehension seemeth by the rules of good discourse to issue most naturally and necessarily from it. It were a happy thing for the peace both of this Church and of their own consciences, if they would in calm blood review their own dictates in this kind; and see whether their own principle (which the cause they are engaged in, maketh them doat upon) can be reasonably defended; and yet the Anabaptists inference thence (which the evidence of truth maketh them to abhor ) he fairly avoided. Yet somewhat they have to say for the proof of that their ground: which if it be sound, it is good reason we should subscribe to it; if it be not, it is as good reason they should retract it. Let us hear therefore what it is, and put it to trial.
First, say they, Ecclesiastical Constitutions (for there is the quarrel) determine us precisely ad unum in the use of indifferent things, which God and Christ have left free ad utrumlibet. Secondly, by inducing a necessity upon the thing they enjoin, they take upon them as if they could alter the nature of things, and make that to become necessary which is indifferent, which is not in the power of any man (but of God only) to do. Thirdly, these Constitutions are so far pressed, as if men were bound in conscience to obey them, which taketh away the freedom of the conscience: for if the conscience be bound, how is she free? Nor so only, but fourthly, the things so enjoined, are by consequence imposed upon us as of absolute necessity unto salvation, forasmuch as it is necessary unto salvation, for every man to do that which he is bound in conscience to do; by which device, kneeling at the Communion, standing at the Gospel, bowing at the name of Jesus, and the like, become to be of necessity unto salvation. Fifthly, say they, these Constitutions cannot be defended but by such Arguments as the Papists use for the establishing of that their rotten Tenet, that human Laws bind the conscience as well as Divine. Than all which premisses, what can be imagined more contrarious to true Christian liberty?
In which Objections (before I come to their particular answer) I cannot but observe the unjust (I would we might not say unconscionable) partiality of the Objectors. First, in laying the accusation against the Ecclesiastical Laws only; whereas their Arguments (if they had any strength in them) would as well conclude against the Political Laws in the Civil State, and against domestical orders in private Families, as against the Laws Ecclesiastical; yet must these only be guilty, and they innocent, which is not equal. Let them either damn them all or quit them all; or else let them show wherein they are unlike, which they have not yet done, neither can do. Secondly, when they condemn the things enjoined as simply and utterly unlawful upon quite other grounds; and yet keep a stir about Christian liberty, for which argument there can be no place without supposal of indifferency, (for Christ hath left us no liberty to unlawful things) how can they answer this their manifest partiality? Thirdly, if they were put to speak upon their consciences, whether or no, if power were in their own hands, and Church-affairs left to their ordering, they would not forbid those things they now dislike, every way as strictly, and with as much imposition of necessity, as the Church presently enjoineth them; I doubt not but they would say Yea: and what equity is there in this dealing, to condemn that in others, which they would allow in themselves? Fourthly, in some things they are content to submit to the Ecclesiastical Constitutions notwithstanding their Christian liberty, which liberty they stiffly pretend for their refusal of other some: whereas the case seemeth to be every way equal in both; all being enjoined by the same Authority, and for the same end, and in the same manner. If their liberty be impeached by these; why not as much by those? Or if obedience to those may consist with Christian liberty. why not as well obedience to these? in allowing some, rejecting others, where there is the same reason of all: are not they very partial?
And now I come to answer their arguments, or rather flourishes, for they are in truth no better. That first allegation, that the determining of anything in unam partem taketh away a man's liberty to it, is not true. For the liberty of a Christian to anything indifferent consisteth in this; that his judgment is thoroughly persuaded of the indifferency of it: and therefore it is the determination of the judgment, in the opinion of the thing, not the use of it, that taketh away Christian liberty. Otherwise not only Laws Political and Ecclesiastical, but also all Vows, Promises, Covenants, Contracts, and what not, that pitcheth upon any certain resolution de futuro, should be prejudicial to Christian liberty: because they do all determine something in unam partem, which before was free and indifferent in utramque partem. For example: if my friend invite me to sup with him, I may by no means promise him to come; because the liberty I had before to go, or not to go, is now determined by making such a promise: neither may a young man bind himself an Apprentice, with any certain Master, or to any certain Trade, because the liberty he had before of placing himself indifferently with that Master, or with another, and in that trade, or in another, is now determined by such a contract. And so it might be instanced in a thousand other things. For indeed to what purpose hath God left indifferent things determinable both ways by Christian liberty, if they may never be actually determined either way without impeachment of that liberty? It is a very vain power, that may not be brought into act, but God made no power in vain. Our Brethren, I hope, will wave this first argument, when they shall have well examined it: unless they will frame to themselves under the name of Christian liberty, a very Chimaera, a non ens, a mere notional liberty; whereof there can be no use.
That which was alleged secondly, that they that make such Laws, take upon them to alter the nature of things, by making indifferent things to become necessary, being said gratis without either truth or proof, is sufficiently answered by the bare denial. For they that make Laws concerning indifferent things, have no intention at all to meddle with the nature of them; they leave that in medio as they found it: but only for some reasons of conveniency to order the use of them; the indifferency of their nature still being where it was. Nay, so far is our Church from having any intention of taking away the indifferency of those things which for order and comeliness she enjoineth; that she hath by her public declaration protested the contrary: wherewith they ought to be satisfied. Especially since her sincerity in that declaration (that none may cavil, as if it were protestatio contraria facto ) appeareth by these two most clear Evidences among many other; in that she both alloweth different Rites used in other Churches, and also teacheth her own rites to be mutable: neither of which she could do, if she conceived the nature of the things themselves to be changed, or their indifferency to be removed by her Constitutions.
Neither is that true, which was thirdly alleged, that where men are bound in conscience to obey, there the conscience is not left free; or else there would be a contradiction: For there is no contradiction, where the Affirmative and Negative are not ad idem, as it is in this case; for Obedience is one thing, and the Thing Commanded another; The Thing is commanded by the Law of Man, and in regard thereof the conscience is free: but Obedience to men is commanded by the Law of God, and in regard thereof the conscience is bound. So that we are bound in conscience to obedience in indifferent things lawfully commanded; the conscience still remaining no less free in respect of the things themselves so commanded, than it was before. And you may know it by this; In Laws properly human (such as are those that are made concerning indifferent things) the Magistrate doth not, nor can say; this you are bound in conscience to do, and therefore I command you to do it; as he might say, if the bond of obedience did spring from the nature of the things commanded. But now when the Magistrate beginneth at the other end, as he must do, and saith, I command you to do this or that, and therefore you are bound in conscience to do it; this plainly showeth, that the bond of obedience ariseth from that power in the Magistrate and duty in the subject, which is of Divine Ordinance. You may observe therefore that in human Laws not merely such (that is, such as are established concerning things simply necessary; or merely unlawful; ) the Magistrate may there derive the bond of obedience from the nature of the things themselves. As for example, if he should make a Law to inhibit Sacrilege or Adultery; he might then well say, You are bound in conscience to abstain from these things, and therefore I command you so to abstain; which he could not so well say in the Laws made to inhibit the eating of flesh, or the transportation of Grain. And the reason of the difference is evident, because those former Laws are rather Divine than Human (the substance of them being divine, and but the sanction only human ) and so bind by their immediate virtue, and in respect of the things themselves therein commanded; which the latter being merely human (both for substance and sanction ) do not▪
The consideration of which difference, and the reason of it, will abundantly discover the vanity of the fourth allegation also: wherein it was objected that the things enjoined by the Ecclesiastical Laws are imposed upon men, as of necessity to salvation: which is most untrue. Remember once again, that obedience is one thing, and the things commanded another; Obedience to lawful Authority is a duty commanded by God himself, and in his Law, and so is a part of that holiness without which no man shall see God: but the things themselves commanded by lawful Authority, are neither in truth necessary to salvation, nor do they that are in Authority impose them as such; only they are the object (and that but by accident neither and contingently, not necessarily) about which that obedience is conversant, and wherein it is to be exercised. An example or two will make it plain, We know, every man is bound in conscience to employ himself in the works of his particular calling with faithfulness and diligence; and that faithfulness and diligence is a branch of that holiness and righteousness which is necessary unto salvation. Were it not now a very fond thing and ridiculous, for a man from hence to conclude, that therefore drawing of wine, or making of shoes, were necessary to salvation, because these are the proper employment of the Vintners and Shoemakers Calling, which they in conscience are bound to follow: nor may without sin neglect them? Again, if a Master command his servant to go to the Market, to sell his corn, and to buy in provision for his house, or to wear a livery of such or such a color and fashion: in this case, who can reasonably deny but that the servant is bound in conscience to do the very things his Master biddeth him to do; to go, to sell, to buy, to wear? And yet is there any man so forsaken of common sense, as thence to conclude, that going to market, selling of corn, buying of meat, wearing a blue coat, are necessary to salvation? Or that the Master imposeth those things upon the servant as of necessity unto salvation? The obligation of the servants conscience to do the things commanded, ariseth from the force of that divine Law which bindeth servants to obey their masters in lawful things. The master in the things he so commandeth, hath no particular actual respect to the conscience of his servant, (which perhaps all that while never came within his thoughts,) but merely respecteth his own occasions and conveniences. In this example as in a glass let the objectors behold the lineaments and features of their own Argument. Because kneeling, standing, bowing, are commanded by the Church, and the people are bound in conscience to obey the Laws of the Church; therefore the Church imposeth upon the people kneeling, standing and bowing, as necessary to salvation.
If that which they object, were indeed true, and that the Church did impose these Rites and Ceremonies upon the people, as of necessity to salvation, and require to have them so accepted: doubtless the imposition were so prejudicial to Christian liberty, as that every faithful man were bound in conscience for the maintenance of that liberty, to disobey her authority therein, and to confess against the imposition. But our Church hath been so far from any intention of doing that herself, that by her foresaid public declaration she hath manifested her utter dislike of it in others. What should I say more? Denique teipsum concute. It would better become the Patriarchs of that party that thus deeply (but untruly) charge her; to look unto their own cloaks, dive into their own bosoms, and survey their own positions and practice: if happily they may be able to clear themselves of trenching upon Christian liberty, and ensnaring the consciences of their brethren, and imposing upon their Proselytes their own traditions of kneel not, stand not, bow not, (like those mentioned Col. 2. of touch not, taste not, handle not ) requiring to have them accepted of the People, as of necessity unto salvation. If upon due examination they can acquit themselves in this matter, their accounts will be the easier: but if they cannot, they shall find when the burden lighteth upon them, that it will be no light matter to have been themselves guilty of that very crime, whereof they have unjustly accused others.
As for consent with the Papists in their doctrine concerning the power that men's Laws have over the conscience, which is the last objection, it ought not to move us. We are not ashamed to consent with them, or any others, in any truth; but in this point we differ from them, so far as they differ from the truth: which difference I conceive to be, neither so great as some men, nor yet so little as other some men would make it. They teach that Human Laws, especially the Ecclesiastical bind the consciences of men, not only in respect of the obedience, but also in respect of the things themselves commanded, and that by their own direct immediate and proper virtue. In which doctrine of theirs, three things are to be misliked. First, that they give a preeminence to the Ecclesiastical Laws above the Secular in this power of binding. We may see it in them, and in these objectors; how men will run into extremities beyond all reason, when they give themselves to be led by corrupt respects. As he said of himself and his fellow-Philosophers. Scurror ego ipse mihi, populo tu: so it is here. They of Rome carried with a wretched desire to exalt the Papacy, and indeed the whole Clergy, as much as they may, and to avile the secular powers as much as they dare; they therefore ascribe this power over the conscience to the Ecclesiastical Laws especially, but do not show themselves all out so zealous for the Secular. Ours at home on the contrary, out of an appetite they have to bring in a new platform of Discipline into the Church, and for that purpose to present the established Government unto the eyes and the hearts of the people in as deformed a shape as they can; quarrel the Ecclesiastical Laws, especially for tyrannizing over the conscience, but do not show themselves so much aggrieved at the secular. Whereas the very truth is, whatsoever advantages the secular powers may have above the Ecclesiastical, or the Ecclesiastical above the secular in other respects; yet as to the powe • •• binding the Conscience, all human Laws in general are of like reason, and stand upon equal terms. It is to be misliked; secondly, in the Romish Doctrine, that they subject the conscience to the things themselves also, and not only tie it to the obedience; whereby they assume unto themselves ( interpretative ) the power of altering the nature of the things by removing of their indifferency, and inducing a necessity; for so long as they remain indifferent, it is certain they cannot bind. And thirdly and principally, it is to be misliked in them, that they would have this binding power to flow from the proper and inherent virtue of the Laws themselves immediately and per-se; which is in effect to equal them with the divine Law: for what can that do more? Whereas human Law • in things not repugnant to the Law of God, do bind the conscience indeed to obedience, but it is by consequent, and by virtue of a former Divine Law, commanding us in all lawful things to obey the superior powers.
But whether mediately, or immediately, may some say, whether directly or by consequent, whether by its own or by a borrowed virtue; what is it material to be argued, so longas the same effect will follow, and that as entirely to all intents and purposes, the one way as well as the other? As if a debt be alike recoverable; it skilleth not much whether it be due upon the original bond▪ or upon an assignment. If they may be sure to be obeyed, the higher powers are satisfied: Let Scholars wrangle about words and distinctions; so they have the thing, it is all they look after. This Objection is in part true, and for that reason the differences in this controversy are not altogether of so great consequence as they have seemed to some. Yet they that think the difference either to be none at all, or not of considerable moment, judge not aright; for albeit it be all one in respect of the Governors, whence the Obligation of Conscience springeth so long as they are conscio • ably obeyed, as was truly alleged: Yet unto inferiors, who are bound in conscience to yield obedience, it is not all one; but it much concerneth them to understand whence that Obligation ariseth, in respect of this very point whereof we now speak, of Christian liberty, and for two weighty and important considerations.
And so is the second also, if not much more; which is this.
By these Answers to their Objections, you may see what little reason some men have to make so much noise as they do about Christian liberty. Whereupon if I have insisted far beyond both your expectations, and my own first purpose: I have now no other thing whereby to excuse it, but the earnestness of my desire, if it be possible, to contain within some reasonable bounds of sobriety and duty, those of my brethren, who think they can never run far enough from superstition, unless they run themselves quite out of their allegiance. There are sundry other things, which I am forced to pass by, very needful to be rightly understood, and very useful for the resolution of many cases of conscience which may arise from the joint consideration of these two points, of Christian Obedience, and of Christian Liberty. For the winding of ourselves out of which perplexities, when they may concern us, I know not how to commend both to my own practice and yours, a shorter and fuller rule of direction, than to follow the clew of this Text: Wherein the Apostle hath set just bounds both to our obedience and liberty. Bounds to our obedience; that we obey, so far as we may without prejudice to our Christian liberty; in all our acts of obedience to our superiors still keeping our consciences free, by subjecting them to none but God, Submit yourselves &c. but yet as free and as the servants of God, and of none besides. Bounds to our Liberty; that (the freedom of our judgments and consciences ever reserved) we must yet in the use of indifferent things moderate our liberty, by ordering ourselves according unto Christian sobriety, by condescending sometimes to our brethren in Christian Charity, and by submitting ourselves to the lawful commands of our Governors in Christian duty. In any of which respects if we shall fail, and that under the pretension of Christian liberty: we shall thereby quite contrary to the express direction of both the Apostles, but abuse the name of liberty, for an occasion to the flesh, and for a cloak of maliciousness.
[ As free, but not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. ]
And so I pass from this second to my third and last Observation; wherein, if I have been too long or too obscure in the former, I shall now endeavor to recompense it, by being both shorter and plainer. The Observation was this: In the whole exercise both of the liberty we have in Christ, and of those respects we owe unto men, we must evermore remember ourselves to be, and accordingly behave ourselves as those that are God's servants: in these last words, ( But as the servants of God, ) containing our condition and our carriage. By our condition, we are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the servants of God: and our carriage must be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as the the servants of God, I shall fit my method to this division; and first show you sundry reasons, for which we should desire to be in this Condition, to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the servants of God: and then give some directions, how we may frame our carriage answerably thereunto, to demean ourselves 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as the servants of God.
For the first: We cannot imagine any consideration, that may be found in any service in the world, to render it desirable; which is not to be found, and that in a far more eminent degree, in this service of God. If Justice may provoke us, or Necessity enforce us, or Easiness hearten us, or Honor allure us, or Profit draw us, to any service: behold here they all concur; the service of God and of Christ is excellently all these. It is of all other the most just, the most necessary, the most easy, the most honorable, the most profitable service. And what would you have more?
First, It is the most just service; whether we look at the title of Right on his part, or reasons of Equity on ours. As for him, he is our Lord and Master pleno jure, he hath right to our best services by a threefold title, like a treble cord, which Satan and all the powers of darkness cannot break or untwine. A right of Creation. ( Remember O Jacob, thou art my servant, I have formed thee; thou art my servant, O Israel, Isa. 44.) Princes and the great ones of the world expect from those that are their Creatures (rather that are called so, because they raised them, but in truth are not so, for they never made them;) yet they expect much service from them, that they should be forward instruments to execute their pleasures, and to advance their intentions: how much more may the Lord justly expect from us who are every way his Creatures, (for he raised us out of the dust, nay▪ he made us of nothing) that we should be his servants to do his will, and instruments to promote his glory? Besides this Ius creationis; he hath yet two other Titles to our services, Ius redemptionis, and Ius liberationis. He hath bought us out of the hands of our enemies, and so we are his by purchase: and he hath won us out of the hands of our enemies, and so we are his by conquest. We read often in the Law, of servants bought with money, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . and it is but reason, he that hath paid a valuable consideration for a man's service, should have it. Now God hath bought us and redeemed us, not with corruptible things, as silver and gold, but with his own, most procious blood. And being bought with such a price, we are not our own, to serve the lusts of our own flesh; nor any man's else, that we should be the servants of men; but his only that hath bought us and paid for us, to glorify him both in our bodies and souls, for they are his jure redemptionis by the right of Purchase and Redemption. Again, when we were mancipia peccati & diaboli, The Devils Captives, and Slaves to every ungodly lust: in which condition if we had lived and died, after a hard and toilsome service in the mean time, our wages in the end should have been eternal death: God by sending his Son to live and die for us, hath conquered sin and Satan, and freed us from that wretched thralldom; to this end,
That being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve him in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our lives. ( I am thy Servant, I am thy servant, and the Son of thine handmaid; thou hast broken my bondsin sunder, Psal. 116.) That is jus liberationis, the right of conquest and deliverance. Having so many and so strong titles thereunto, with what justice can we hold back our services from him? It is the first and most proper act of Justice, jus suum cuique to render to all their dues, and to let everyone have that which of right appertaineth unto him. And if we may not deny unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, it is but right we should also give unto God the things that are God's, by so many, and just Titles.
It is secondly, the most necessary service. Necessity first, because we are servi nati, of a servile condition, born to serve. We have not the liberty to choose whether we will serve, or no: all the liberty we have, is to choose our Master; (as Joshua said to the people, Choose you whom you will serve. ) Since then there lieth upon us a necessity of serving, it should be our wisdom to make a virtue of that necessity, by making choice of a good master; with his resolution there, I and my house will serve the Lord. It is necessary secondly, for our safety and security: lest if we withdraw our service from him, we perish justly in our rebellion, according to that in the Prophet ( The nation and kingdom that will not serve thee, shall perish. ) It is necessary thirdly, by our own voluntary act: when we bound ourselves by solemn vow and promise in the face of the open Congregation at our Baptism, to continue Christ's faithful soldiers and servants unto our lives end. Now the word is gone out of our lips▪ we may not alter it; nor after we have made a vow, inquire what we have to do. Thus the service of God is a necessary service.
It is thirdly, (which at the first hearing may seem a Paradox, yet will appear upon farther consideration to be a most certain truth ) of all other the most easy service: in regard both of the certainty of the employment; and of the help we have towards the performance of it. He that serveth many Masters, or even but one if he be a fickleman, he never knoweth the end of his work: what he doth now, anon he must undo; and so Sisyphus -like he is ever doing, and yet hath never done. No man can serve two Masters: not serve them so, as to please both; scarce so, as to please either. And that is every man's case, that is a slave to sin: ( Tot Domini, quot vitia. Every lust calleth for his attendance; yea), and many times contrary lusts at once, (as when Ambition biddeth, Let fly▪ and Covetousness crieth as fast, Hold: ) whereby the poor man is infinitely distracted, between a loathness to deny either, and the impossibility of gratifying both. St. Paul therefore, speaking of the state of the Saints before conversion, expresseth it thus, Tit. 3. ( We ourselves also, were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures; ) and that diversity breedeth distraction. But the servant of God is at a good certainty; and knoweth before hand both what his work must be, and what his wages must be. As is the Master himself, so are his Commandments, Yesterday, and today the same, and forever▪ without variableness, or so much as shadow of turning. ( Brethren I write no new Commandment unto you, but the old Commandment which ye had from the beginning, 1 Joh. 2.)
It is some ease to know certainly what we must do; but much more to be assured of sufficient help for the doing of it. If we were left to ourselves for the doing of his will, so as the yoke lay all upon our necks, and the whole burden upon our shoulders: our necks, though their sinews were of Iron, would break under the yoke; and our shoulders, though their plates had the strength of brass, would crack under the burden. But our comfort is, that (as St. Austin sometimes prayed, Da, Domine, quod jubes, & jube quod vis: ) so he that setteth us on work, strengtheneth us to do the work ( I can do all things through him that strengtheneth me, Phil. 4.) Nay, rather himself doth the work in us, ( Yet not I, but the Grace of God in me, 1 Cor. 15.) The Son of God putteth his neck in the yoke with us, whereby it becometh his yoke as well as ours; and that maketh it so easy to us; and he putteth his shoulder under the burden with us, whereby it becometh his burden as well as ours; and that maketh it so light to us; ( Take my yoke upon you; for my yoke is easy, and my burden is light ) Iuvat idem, qui jubet. What he commandeth us to do, he helpeth us to do; and thence it is, that his Commandments are not grievous. Thus the service of God is an easy service.
It is fourthly, the most honorable service. Caeteris paribus, he goeth for the better man, that serveth the better Master. And if men of good rank and birth think it an honor for them, and a thing worthy their ambition to be the Kings servants, because he is the best and greatest Master upon earth: how much more then is it an honorable thing, and to be desired with our utmost ambitions, to be the servants of God, who is Optimus-Maximus, and that without either flattery or limitation, the best and greatest Master, and in comparison of whom the best and greatest Kings are but as worms and grasshoppers. It is a great glory to follow the Lord, saith the Son of Sirac, Sirac 23. And the more truly any man serveth him, the more still will it be for his own honor. For them that honor me I will honor, saith God, 1 Sam. 2. and Christ, John. 12. If any man serve me, him will my Father honor. Thus the service of God is an honorable service.
It is fifthly and lastly, the most profitable service. We are indeed unprofitable servants to him, but sure we have a very profitable service under him. They that speak against the Lord with stout words, saying, It is vain to serve God, and what profit is it that we have kept his Ordinances? Mal. 3. or, as it is in Job 21. What is the Almighty, that we should serve him? and what profit should we have if we pray unto him? speak without all truth and reason; for verily never man truly served God, who gained not incredibly by it. These things among other, the servants of God may certainly reckon upon, as the certain vails and benefits of his service, wherein his Master will not fail him, if he fail not in his service: Protection, Maintenance, Reward. Men that are in danger, cast to put themselves into the service of such great Personages as are able to give them protection. Now God both can and will protect his servants from all their enemies, and from all harms. ( Of thy mercy cut off mine enemies, and destroy all them that afflict my soul, for I am thy servant, Psal. 143.) Again, God hath all good things in store both for necessity and comfort, and he is no niggard of either; but that his servants may be assured of a sufficiency of both, when others shall be left destitute in want and distress, ( Behold my servants shall eat, but ye shall be hungry; behold my servants shall drink, but ye shall be thirsty; behold my servants shall rejoice, but ye shall be ashamed; behold my servants shall sing for joy of heart, but ye shall cry for sorrow of heart, and howl for vexation of spirit, Isa. 65.) And whereas the servant of sin, (besides that he hath no fruit nor comfort of his service in the mean time) when he cometh to receive his wages at the end of his term, findeth nothing but shame or death; shame, if he leave the service, and if he leave it not, death: (What fruit had ye then in those things, whereof ye are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.) The servant of God on the contrary, besides that he reapeth much comfort and content in the very service he doth in the mean time, he receiveth a blessed reward also at the last, even eternal life. He hath his fruit in holiness, (there is his comfort onward) and the end everlasting life, there is his full and final reward; a reward far beyond the merit of his service. And so the service of God is a profitable service.
And now I pray you, What can any man allege or pretend for himself if he shall hang back, and not with all speed and cheerfulness tender himself to so just, so necessary, so easy, so honorable, so profitable a service; Methinks, I hear every man answer, as the Israelites sometimes said to Joshua with one common voice, God forbid, that we should forsake the Lord, to serve any other: Nay, but we will serve the Lord, for he is our God, Josh. 24. But beloved, let us take heed we do not gloze with him, as we do one with another: we are deceived, if we think God will be mocked with hollow and empty protestations. We live in a wondrous complemental age, wherein scarce any other word is so ready in every mouth, as your servant, and at your service, when all is but mere form, without any purpose, or many times but so much as single thought, of doing any serviceable office to those men, to whom we profess so much service. However we are one towards another, yet with the Lord there is no dallying: it behooveth us there to be real. If we profess ourselves to be, or desire to be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the servants of God; we must have a care to demean ourselves 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in all respects as becometh the servants of God. To which purpose, when I shall have given you those few directions I spake of, I shall have done. Servants owe many duties to their earthly Masters in the particulars; but three generals comprehend them all, Reverence, Obedience, Faithfulness. Whereof the first respecteth the Masters person, the second his pleasure, the third his business. And he that will be God's servant in truth, and not only in title, must perform all these to his heavenly Master.
Reverence is the first; which ever ariseth from a deliberate apprehension of some worthiness in another more than in a man's self; and is ever accompanied with a fear to offend, and a care to please, the person reverenced: and so it hath three branches; whereof the first is Humility. It is not possible, that that servant who thinketh himself the wiser, or any way the better man of the two, should truly reverence his Master in his heart. St. Paul therefore would have servants to count their own Masters worthy of all honor, 1 Tim. 6. 1. he knew well they could not else reverence them, as they ought. Non decet superbum esse hominem servum, could he say in the Comedy; A man that thinketh goodly of himself, cannot make a good servant either to God or man. Then are we meetly prepared for his service, and not before, when truly apprehending our own vileness and unworthiness, both in our nature, and by reason of sin; and duly acknowledging the infinite greatness and goodness of our Master; we unfeignedly account ourselves altogether unworthy to be called his servants.
Another branch of the servants reverence is, fear to offend his Master. This fear is a disposition well becoming a servant, and therefore God as our Master, and by that name of Master challengeth it, Mal. 1. ( If I be a Father, where is my honor? And if I be a Master, where is my fear? saith the Lord of Hosts. ) Fear and reverence are often joined together, and so jointly required of the Lord's servants. ( Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice to him with reverence, Psal. 2.) and the Apostles would have us furnished with grace, whereby to serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear, Heb. 12.
From which fear of offending, a care and desire of pleasing cannot be severed: which is the third branch of the servants Reverence to his Master. St. Paul biddeth Titus exhort servants to please their Masters well in all things. So must God's servant do; he must study to walk worthy of him unto all pleasing: not much regarding how others interpret his doings, or what offense they take at him, so long as his Master accepteth his services, and taketh his endeavors in good part. Whoso is not thus resolved to please his Master, although he should thereby incur the displeasure of the whole world besides, is not worthy to be called the servant of such a Master. ( If I yet sought to please men, I should not be the servant of Christ, Gal. 1.) And all this belongeth to Reverence.
Obedience is the next general duty ( Servants be obedient to your Masters, Eph. 6. Know you not, whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey? Rom. 6.) As if there could be no better proof of service than obedience: and that is twofold, Active, and Passive. For Obedience consisteth in the subjecting of a man's own will to the will of another: which subjection, if it be in something to be done, maketh an Active; if in something to be suffered, a Passive Obedience. Our Active Obedience to God, is the keeping his Commandments, and the doing of his will: as the people said, Josh. 24. The Lord our God will we serve, and his voice will we obey. And this must be done in auditu auris, upon the bare signification of his pleasure, without disputing or debating the matter: as the Centurions servant, if his Master did but say, Do this, without anymore ado, did it. So Abraham the servant of the Lord, when he was called to go out into a place which he should receive for an inheritance, obeyed, and went out, though he knew not whither. Nor only so, but in the greatest trial of Obedience that ever we read any man (any mere man ) to have been put unto, being commanded to sacrifice his only begotten Son, of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy Seed be called: he never stumbled (as not at the promise through unbelief, so neither) at the command through disobedience, but speedily went about it; and had not failed to have done all that was commanded him, had not the Lord himself, when he was come even to the last act, inhibited him by his countermand. If mortal and wicked men look to be obeyed by their servants upon the warrant of their bare command, in evil and unrighteous acts; ( When I say unto you, Smite Amnon, then kill him, fear not: have not I commanded you? saith Absalom to his servants, 2 Sam. 13.) Ought not the express command of God much more to be a sufficient warrant for us to do as we are bidden, none of whose commands can be other than holy and just?
That is our Active obedience. We must give proof of our Passive obedience also, both in contenting ourselves with his allowances, and in submitting ourselves to his corrections. He that is but a servant in the house, may not think to command whatsoever the house affordeth at his own pleasure; (that is the Masters prerogative alone:) but he must content himself with what his Master is content to allow him; and take his portion of meat, drink, livery, lodging, and every other thing, at the discretion and appointment of his Master. Neither may the servant of God look to be his own carver in anything; neither ought he to mutter against his Master (with that ungracious servant▪ in the Parable) complaining of his hardness, and austerity, if his allowances in some things fall short of his desire: but having food and raiment, be it never so little, never so coarse, he should be content with it; nay, though he should want either or both, he should be content without it. We should all learn of an old experienced servant of God, St. Paul, what grace and long experience had taught him, In whatsoever state we are, to be therewith content.
We are to show our Obedience to our heavenly Master yet further, by submitting to his wholesome Discipline, when at any time he shall see cause to give us correction. Our Apostle, a little after the Text, would have servants to be subject even to their froward Masters, and to take it patiently when they are buffeted undeservedly, and without fault. How much more ought we to accept the punishment of our iniquity (as we have the phrase, Lev. 26.) and with patience to yield our backs to the whip; when God, who hath been so gracious a Master to us, shall think fit to exercise some little severity towards us, and to lay stripes upon us? Especially, since he never striketh us: First, but for our fault, (such is his justice:) nor Secondly, (such is his mercy) but for our good. And all this belongeth to that Obedience, which the servant of God ought to manifest, both by doing and suffering according to the will of his Master.
The third and last general duty is Fidelity, ( Who is a faithful and wise servant? Well done thou good and faithful servant, ) as if the wisdom and goodness of a servant consisted in his faithfulness. Now the faithfulness of a servant may be tried especially by these three things: by the heartiness of his service, by being tender of his Masters honor and profit, and by his quickness and diligence in doing his business. A notable example whereof we have in Abraham 's servant, Gen. 24. in all the three particulars. For first, being many miles distant from his Master, he was no less solicitous of the business he was put in trust withal, than he could have been, if he had been all that while in the eye of his Master. Secondly, he framed himself in his speeches and actions, and in his whole behavior to such a discreet carriage, as might best set forth the credit and honor of his Master. Thirdly, he used all possible diligence and expedition; losing not any time, either at first for the delivery of his message, or at last for his return home, after he had brought things to a good conclusion. Such faithfulness would well become us in the service of God in all the aforesaid respects.
The first whereof is Heartiness in his service. There are many servants in the world, that will work hard, and bustle at it lustily for a fit, and so long as their Masters eye is upon them; but when his back is turned, can be content to go on fair and softly, and fellow-like. Such 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Apostle condemneth, Col. 3. and elsewhere, admonishing servants whatsoever they do to do it heartily, and to obey their Masters not with eye-service, but in singleness of heart. Towards our heavenly Master, true it is, if we had but this eye-service, it were enough; because we are never out of his eye: his eyes are in all corners of the earth, beholding the evil and the good; and his eye-lids try the children of men; he is about our beds, and about our paths, and spieth out all our goings. And therefore if we should but study to approve ourselves and our actions before his sight; it could not be but our services should be hearty, as well as handy; because our hearts are no less in his sight than our hands are. We cannot content our Master, nor should we content ourselves, with a bare and barren profession in the service of God; neither with the addition of some outward performances of the work done: but since our Master calleth for the heart▪ as well as the hand and tongue; and requireth truth in the inward parts no less, rather much more, than show in the outward: let us but join that inward truth of the heart, unto the outward profession and performance; and doubtless we shall be accepted. ( Only fear the Lord, and serve him in truth with all your heart, 1 Sam. 12.)
Secondly, We must show our faithfulness