Part 3 — Quest. LXXXIII. May the people bear a vocal part in worship, or do any more than say, Amen? (continued 2)

Answ. It is not the name, but the thing which I speak of: choose whether you will call it an image of Christ secundum corpus, or an image of Christ's body. You cannot picture the soul of a man, and yet you may draw the picture of a man's body.

5. It is a great part of a believer's work, to have Christ's image very much upon his imagination, and so upon his mind.[360] As if he saw him in the manger, in his temptations, in his preaching, in his praying, watching, fasting, weeping, doing good, as crowned with thorns, as crucified, &c.; that a crucified Saviour being still as it were before our eyes, we may remember the price of our redemption, and the example which we have to imitate; and that we are not to live like a Dives or a Cæsar, but like the servants of a crucified Christ. A crucifix well befitteth the imagination and mind of a believer.

6. It is a great part of true godliness, to see God's image in the glass of the creation; to love and honour his image on his saints, and all the impressions of his power, wisdom, and goodness on all his works; and to love and honour him as appearing in them.[361]

7. It is lawful on just occasion, to make the image of fire or light as signifying the inaccessible light in which God is said to dwell, and the glory in which he will appear to the blessed in heaven.[362] For by many such resemblances the Scripture setteth these forth, in Rev. i. xxi. xxii. &c. And Moses saw God's back parts, viz. a created glory.

8. It is lawful to represent an angel on just occasions, in such a likeness as angels have assumed in apparitions; or as they are described in Ezekiel or elsewhere in Scripture; so be it we take it not for an image of their true spiritual nature, but an improper representation of them, like a metaphor in speech.[363]

9. It is lawful (seasonably and in fit circumstances) to use images, 1. For memory, 2. For clearer apprehension, 3. For more passionate affection, even in religious cases; which is commonly called the historical use of them. For these ends the Geneva Bible, and some other, have the Scripture histories in printed images; to show the papists that it is not all images, or all use of them, that they were against. And so men were wont to picture Dives in his feasting, with Lazarus in rags, over their tables, to mind them of the sinfulness of sensuality. And so the sacred histories are ordinarily painted, as useful ornaments of rooms, which may profit the spectators.

10. Thus it is lawful to honour the memory of learned, great, and virtuous persons, saints and martyrs, by keeping their images; and by the beholding of them to be remembered of our duty, and excited to imitation of them.[364]

11. It is lawful to use hieroglyphics, or images expressing virtues and vices, as men commonly make images to decipher prudence, temperance, charity, fortitude, justice, &c. and envy, sloth, pride, lust, &c. As they do of the five senses, and the four seasons of the year, and the several parts of man's age, and the several ranks and qualities of persons, &c.

12. Thus it is lawful to represent the devil, and idols, when it tendeth but to make them odious. For as we must not take their names into our mouths, Psal. xvi. 4; Exod. xxiii. 13; Eph. v. 3; that is, when it tendeth to honour them, or tempt men to it; and yet may name them as Elias did in scorn, or as the prophets did by reproof of sin; so is it also in making representations of them. Even as a drunkard may be painted in his filth and folly to bring shame and odium on the sin.

13. It is lawful to use hieroglyphics instead of letters, in teaching children, or in letters to friends; or to make images to stand as characters instead of words, and so to use them even about sacred things.

14. As it is lawful to use arbitrary professing signs even about holy things, which signify no more than words, and have by nature or custom an aptitude to such a use; while it is extended no further, than to open our own minds; so it may be lawful to use such a characteristical or hieroglyphical image to that end, when it hath the same aptitude, but not otherwise. As a circular figure or ring being a hieroglyphic of perpetuity, and so of constancy, is used as a significant profession of constancy in marriage; and so the receiving of each other's picture might be used. And so in covenanting, or taking an oath, the professing sign is left to the custom of the country; whether we signify our consent by gesture, words, action, writing. And as it is lawful to make an image on a seal which hath a sacred signification, (as a flaming heart on an altar, a Bible, a praying saint, &c.) as well as to write a religious motto on a seal; so it is lawful to put this seal to a subscribed covenant with God and his church, or our king and country, when we have a lawful call to seal such a covenant.[365] But if law or custom would make such a seal to be the common public badge or symbol of the christian religion, I think it would become unlawful.

As the crucifix for aught I know might thus have been arbitrarily used as a seal, or as a transient, arbitrary professing sign, as the cross was by the ancients at the beginning. If any man had scorned me for believing in a crucified Christ, I know not but I might have made a crucifix by art, act, or gesture, to tell him that I am not ashamed of Christ; as well as I may tell him so by word of mouth. But if men's institution or custom shall make this a symbol or badge of a christian, and twist it in baptism, or adjoin it, as a dedicating sign, and as the common professing symbol that every baptized person must use, to signify and declare that he is not ashamed of Christ crucified, but believeth in him, and will manfully fight under his banner against the flesh, the world, and the devil to the death: though he call it but a professing sign, and say, he doth but signify his own mind, and not God's act and grace; I should wish to distinguish between a private or arbitrary act of profession, and a common public badge and professing symbol of our religion; and tell him that I think the instituting of the latter belongs to God alone; and that he hath made two sacraments to that end; which sacraments are essentially such symbols and badges of our profession, and are dedicating signs on the receiver's part; and that Christ crucified is the chief grace or mercy given to the church, and his sacrifice is his own act: and therefore objectively, the grace, and act of God also, is here signified; and therefore on two accounts set together, I fear this use of the crucifix is a sin: 1. As it is an image, (though it should be transient,) used as a medium in God's worship, and so forbidden in the second commandment (for it is not a mere circumstance of worship, but an outward act of worship). 2. Because it is a new human sacrament, or hath too much of the essence of a sacrament, and so is a usurpation of his prerogative that made the sacraments: for as I said, it belongeth to the king to make the common badge or symbol of his own subjects, or any order honoured by him. And the general giveth out his own colours; and though one may arbitrarily wear another colour, yet if any shall give out common colours to his army, regiment, or troop beside his own, to be the symbol or badge of his soldiers, I think he would take it for too much boldness. Yet if only an inferior captain gave but subordinate colours, not to notify a soldier of the army as such, but to distinguish his troop from the rest, it were not so much as the other: so if a bishop or ruler did but make such a symbol by which the christians of his charge might be discerned from all others, and not as a badge of christianity itself, though I know no reason for such distinction, and it may be faulty otherwise, yet would it not be this usurping of sacramental institution, which now I speak of. All professing signs are not symbols of christianity. Christ hath done his own work well already; his colours, sacraments, or symbols are sufficient; we need not devise more, and accuse his institutions of insufficiency; nor make more work for ourselves in religion, when we leave undone so much that he hath made us.

15. All abuse of images will not warrant us to separate from the church which abuseth them; nor is all such abuse, idolatry. If the church or our rulers will against our will place images inconveniently in churches, we may lawfully be there, so that they be not symbols of idol worship, or of a religion or worship so sinful in the substance, as that God will not accept it; and so be it we make no sinful use of those inconvenient images ourselves. Though mere temptation and scandal make them sinful in those that so abuse them, and set them up; yet he that is not the author of that temptation or scandal, may not forsake God's worship, because that such things are present, nor is to be interpreted a consenter to them, while he cometh only about lawful worship (and perhaps hath fit opportunity at other times to profess his dissent).

16. It is lawful to preserve the honest and sober love to our friends, by keeping their pictures; or to show our love by decent monuments.

17. Where we may use creatures themselves to profit us by the sight, we may (ordinarily) use the images of those creatures. As the sight of trees, fruits, cities, &c. may delight us, and mind us of the power, wisdom, and goodness of God (or the sight of the sun, moon, stars, &c.); so may the pictures of the same things. And as a dead body, skeleton, or skull, may profitably mind us of our latter end; so may the picture of any of these, which we may more conveniently keep.

18. It is not unlawful to pray before or towards an image, in a room where images are placed only for ornament, and we have no respect to them as a medium or object of our worship (except by accident as aforesaid).

19. It is not unlawful to make an image (out of the cases of accidental evil before named) to be objectum vel medium excitans ad cultum Dei, an object or medium of our consideration, exciting our minds to worship God. (As a death's-head, or a crucifix, or an historical image of Christ or some holy man, yea, the sight of any of God's creatures, may be so holily used, as to stir up in us a worshipping affection, and so is medium cultus excitans vel efficienter.) But no creature, or image, (I think,) may lawfully be made the medium cultum vel terminus, in genere causæ finalis, a worshipped medium, or the terminus, or the thing which we worship mediately, on pretence of representing God, and that we worship him in it ultimately. And this I take to be the thing forbidden directly in the second commandment; viz. To worship a creature (with mind or body) in the act of divine worship, as representing God, or as the mediate term of our worship, by which we send it unto God, as if it were the more acceptable to him. So that it is lawful by the sight of a crucifix to be provoked to worship God; but it is unlawful to offer him that worship, by offering it to the crucifix first, as the sign, way, or means of our sending it to God.

20. Yet a creature may be honoured or worshipped with such worship as is due to him, by the means of such a representing terminus or image. If the king command his subjects to bow towards his image or throne when he is absent, as an act of honour, or human worship to himself, it is lawful so to do, God having not forbid it. But God hath forbid us to do so by himself, because he hath no image, and is confined to no place, and to avoid the danger and appearance of idolatry.

21. Yet is it lawful to lift up our hand and eyes towards heaven, as the place of God's glory; and I condemn not the ancient churches that worshipped towards the east. But it was not heaven, or the sun, or east that they worshipped, or to which they sent their worship, as any terminus medius, or thing mediately worshipped; but only to God himself, whose glory is in the heavens.

Quest. CXIV. Whether stage-plays, where the virtuous and vicious are personated, be lawful?

Because this is a kind of imagery, the question may be here fitly handled. But I have said so much before of stage-plays, and the sin that is used in them, part i. chap. 18, that I have nothing more to say here, but only to decide this particular case of conscience concerning them.

As I am not willing to thrust any man into extremes, nor to trouble men with calling those sins, which God hath not forbidden; so I have reason to advise men to go, in doubtful cases, on the safer side, much more to dissuade them from undoubted sin, and especially from great and multiplied sins; and therefore I must thus decide the question.

1. It is not absolutely unlawful to personate another man, nor doth the second commandment forbid such living images in this extent. I pass by the instance of the woman of Tekoah, 2 Sam. xiv.; because the bare history proveth not the lawfulness. But Paul's speaking as of himself and Apollos the things which concerned others, was approvable; and as Christ frequently taught by parables, so his parables were a description of good and evil, by the way of feigned history, as if such and such things had been done by such persons as never were. And this fiction is no falsehood; for the hearer knoweth that it is not meant as an historical narrative, but a parable; and it is but an image in words, or a painted doctrine. And if a person and action may be feigned by words, I know not where it is forbidden to feign them by personal representation. Therefore to personate another is not simply a sin.

2. To personate good men in good actions, is not simply unlawful; because, 1. It is not unlawful as it is personating, as is showed. 2. Nor as lying; because it is not an asserting, but a representing; nor so taken.

3. To personate a bad man, in a bad action, is more dubious; but seemeth not in all cases to be unlawful. To pass by David's feigning himself mad, (as of uncertain quality,) it is common with preachers, to speak oft the words of wicked men, as in their names or persons, to disgrace them: and Prov. v. 11, 12, &c. cometh near it. And whether Job be a history, or a dialogue personating such speakers, is doubted by the most learned expositors.

4. I think it possible to devise and act a comedy or tragedy, which should be lawful, and very edifying. It might be so ordered by wise men.

5. I think I never knew or heard of a lawful stage-play, comedy, or tragedy, in the age that I have lived in; and that those now commonly used, are not only sins, but heinous, aggravated sins; for these reasons.

1. They personate odious vices commonly viciously; that is, 1. Without need, reciting sinful words, and representing sinful actions; which as they were evil in the first committing, so are they in the needless repetition. Eph. v. 3, 4, 12, "But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, (or lust,) let it not be once named among you as becometh saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient; but rather giving of thanks.—For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret." 2. Because they are spoken and acted commonly without that shame, and hatred, and grief which should rightly affect the hearers with an abhorrence of them; and therefore tend to reconcile men to sin, and to tempt them to take it but for a matter of sport.

2. There are usually so many words materially false (though not proper lies) used in such actings of good and evil, as is unsavoury, and tendeth to tempt men to fiction and false speaking.

3. There are usually such multitudes of vain words poured out on the circumstantials, as are a sin themselves, and tempt the hearers to the like.

4. They usually mix such amorous or other such insnaring expressions or actions, as are fitted to kindle men's sinful lusts, and to be temptations to the evils which they pretend to cure.

5. A great deal of precious time is wasted in them, which might have been much better spent; to all the lawful ends which they can intend.

6. It is the preferring of an unmeet and dangerous recreation, before many fitter; God having allowed us so great choice of better, it cannot be lawful to choose a worse. The body which most needeth exercise, with most of the spectators, hath no exercise at all; and the mind might be much more fruitfully recreated many ways, by variety of books, of converse, by contemplating God and his works, by the fore-thoughts of the heavenly glory, &c. So that it is unlawful, as unfitted to its pretended ends.

7. It usually best suiteth with the most carnal minds, and more corrupteth the affections and passions, as full experience proveth: those that most love and use them are not reformed by them, but commonly are the most loose, ungodly, sensual people.

8. The best and wisest persons least relish them, and are commonly most against them. And they are best able to make experiment, what doth most help or hurt the soul. Therefore when the sensual say, We profit by them, as much as by sermons, they do but speak according to their sense and lust. As one that hath the green-sickness may say, coals and clay and ashes do more good than meat; because they are not so fit to judge, as those that have a healthful state and appetite. And it seldom pleaseth the conscience of a dying man, to remember the time he spent at stage-plays.

9. Usually there is much cost bestowed on them, which might be better employed, and therefore is unlawful.

10. God hath appointed a stated means of instructing souls, by parents, ministers, &c. which is much more fit and powerful; therefore that time were better spent.[367] And it is doubtful whether play-houses be not a stated means of man's institution, set up to the same pretended use as the church and ministry of Christ, and so be not against the second commandment. For my part I cannot defend them, if any shall say that the devil hath apishly made these his churches, in competition with the churches of Christ.

11. It seemeth to me a heinous sin for players to live upon this as a trade and function, and to be educated for it, and maintained in it. That which might be used as a recreation, may not always be made a trade of.

12. There is no mention that ever such plays were used in Scripture times by any godly persons.

13. The primitive christians and churches were commonly against them; many canons are yet to be seen, by which they did condemn them. Read but Dr. J. Reignolds against Albericus Gentilis, and you shall see unanswerable testimonies, from councils, fathers, emperors, kings, and all sober antiquity against them.

14. Thousands of young people in our time have been undone by them; some at the gallows, and many apprentices who run out in their accounts, neglect their masters' business, and turn to drunkenness, and whoredom, and debauchery, do confess that stage-plays were not the last or least of the temptations which did overthrow them.

15. The best that can be said of these plays is, that they are controverted and of doubtful lawfulness; but there are other means enough of undoubted and uncontroverted lawfulness, for the same honest ends; and therefore it is a sin to do that which is doubtful without need.

Upon all these reasons, I advise all that love their time, their souls, their God and happiness, to turn away from these nurseries of vice, and to delight themselves in the law and ordinances of their Saviour, Psal. i. 2, 3.

Quest. CXV. Is it ever unlawful to use the known symbols and badges of idolatry?

Answ. 1. Ordinarily it is unlawful, as being the thing forbidden in the second commandment. For he that useth them, 1. Is corporally idolatrous, whatever his secret thoughts may be. 2. And he is interpretatively an idolater, and actually persuadeth others to be so.

2. But yet though no man may ever use such symbols of idolatry formaliter, qua tales, as such; yet materially he may use them in some cases.

As, 1. When an idolater will take an ordinance of God, and an appointed duty, and turn it into a symbol of his idolatry (as in the foregoing instance of the Mahometans). We may not therefore forsake that duty; but we must do it in such a manner, as may sufficiently disclaim the idolater's use of it. As if any idolaters will make a symbol of some Scripture texts, or of the Lord's day, or of the sacramental bread and wine, &c. we must not therefore disuse them.

2. When a thing indifferent is made an idolatrous symbol or badge, though I must not use it as idolaters do, yet if any act of Divine Providence make it become necessary as a moral duty, I may be obliged to use it, disclaiming the idolater's manner and end: and then it will be known that I use it not as their symbol. As if a man, by famine or a swoon, were dying in an idol's temple, I might give him meat and drink there to save his life, though such as was a badge of their idolatry, while I disclaim their ends and use. The reason is, 1. Because at such a time it is a natural duty, and therefore may not be omitted for fear of scandal, or seeming sin, which at that time is no sin. 2. Because Christ hath taught us in the instance of himself and his disciples, that positive commands give place to natural, cæteris paribus. And that the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath; and that we must learn what this meaneth, "I will have mercy and not sacrifice." And if we must break the rest of the sabbath for the life, yea, the feeding of an ox or ass, much more of a man:[368] and the positives of the second commandment must be regulated as the positives of the fourth. 3. And the scandal in such a case may be avoided, by declaring that I do disclaim their use and ends.

In a country where kneeling or being uncovered to the prince is a civil, honouring custom, if the prince should be a Caligula, and command the subjects to worship him and his image as a god, and make bowing, kneeling, or being uncovered the badge or symbol of it; here I would ordinarily avoid even that which before was a duty, because it was but by accident a duty, and now interpreted a heinous sin. But in case that the life of any man lay on it, or that the scandal on religion for my denying civil honour to the prince, would be greater and of more perilous consequence, than the scandal of seeming idolatry, I would perform that civil honour which I did before, and which God enjoineth me to perform to my prince. But I would avoid the scandal, by open protesting (seasonably) against the idolatry.

Quest. CXVI. Is it unlawful to use the badge or symbol of any error or sect in the worship of God?

Answ. 1. It is unlawful to use it formally as such.

2. But not materially, when, 1. There are just and weighty reasons for it. 2. And I may disown the error.

Every sect of erring christians accordingly useth to err in worship, and have some badge and symbol of their sect and error.

For, 1. All sects and erroneous persons may turn holy words and duties into symbols of their errors. 2. All christians in the world being imperfect, do sometimes err in matter or manner in their worship. And he that will materially avoid all the badges or symbols of their errors, shall have no communion with any church or christian. 3. As we must do our best so to avoid all their errors, that we choose them not, and make them not formally our own practice; (as tautologies, vain repetitions, disorders, unfit phrases, &c. We must ourselves when we are the speakers do as much better as we can;) so we must not therefore separate from them that do use them, nor deny them our communion when they use them; else we must separate from all others, and all others from us. 4. But when we are present with them, our minds must disown all the faults of the holiest prayer in the world which we join in: we may be bound to stay with them, and join in all that is good and warrantable, and yet as we go along, to disown in our minds all that we know to be amiss.

Quest. CXVII. Are all indifferent things made unlawful to us, which shall be abused to idolatrous worship?

Answ. You must distinguish, 1. Of the symbol of idolatry before spoken of, and other by-abuses. 2. Of an abuse done in former ages or remote countries, and in our own age and country. 3. Of the reasons inviting us to use them, whether necessary or not.

1. The case of symbols or badges is not here spoken of, but other abuses.

2. An abuse committed in the age and place we live in, or any other, which will by the scandal imbolden others to the like, may not be complied in, without so great reason, as will notably preponderate the evil consequents.

3. But yet in many cases such abused, indifferent things, may after be lawfully used by believers. For instance:

1. Names may be things indifferent, abused to idolatry, and yet lawfully used by us: as the name God, Deus, Lord, holy, just, good, temple, altar, sacrifice, priest, heaven, sun, moon, Jupiter, Saturn, and a hundred such; I mean these letters and syllables in these languages. That these names are all in themselves indifferent appeareth in that they are neither naturally necessary, nor by God's institution, but arbitrary signs of human invention and choice: for we may easily and lawfully make new words to signify all the same things that these do: and that they are abused to idolatry is notoriously known: and that yet they are lawfully used, the practice of all christians, English and Latin, even the most scrupulous themselves, doth judge.

2. And the use of temples (these individuals which have been used to idolatry) is lawful.

3. So also of bells, pulpits, cups, tables, and fonts, and other utensils.

4. The Bible itself, as it is this individual book rather than another, is a thing indifferent, yet it may be read in after it hath been abused to idolatry.

5. If the king would not only give the garments, but the money, lands, lordships, houses, which have been consecrated or otherwise abused to idolatry, to any poor people, or most of the scrupulous, they would think it lawful to receive and use them; yea, it is lawful to dedicate the same lands and money afterwards to holy uses, and to maintain religious worship.

6. Otherwise it were in the power of any idolater whenever he pleased, to deprive all the christian world of their christian liberty, and to make nothing indifferent to us, seeing they can abuse them all.

7. Yea, almost nothing is then already indifferent, there being few things that some person in some time and place hath not abused to idolatry.

8. If the question be only of all individual things abused to idolatry, the decision now given will hold good; but if it be also of all species of such things, it will be a dishonour to a man's reason to make a question of it.

Quest. CXVIII. May we use the names of week days which idolatry honoured their idols with; as Sunday, Monday, Saturday, and the rest? And so the months?

Answ. 1. It were to be wished that the custom were changed; 1. Because the names have been so grossly abused; 2. And we have no need of them; 3. And as the papists say, Our monuments, temple names, and other relics among you prove ours to be the old religion, and keep possession for us till it be restored; so the heathens say to all the christians, Your very names of your days and months prove our religion to be elder than yours, and keep possession for us till it be restored.

2. It is meet that we wisely do our duty toward the reformation of this abuse.

3. But yet long custom and sound doctrine hath so far taken away the scandal and ill effects, that rather than be an offence to any by seeming singularity, it is as lawful still to use these names, as it was to Luke to use the names of Castor and Pollux, Jupiter and Mercury, historically.

4. In such cases the true solution of the question must be by weighing accidents and foreseen consequents together wisely and impartially; and he that can foresee which way is likely to do most good or hurt, may satisfactorily know his duty.

Quest. CXIX. Is it lawful to pray secretly when we come first into the church, especially when the church is otherwise employed?

Answ. 1. This is a thing which God hath given us no particular law about; but the general laws must regulate us, "Let all be done decently, in order, and to edification."

2. Our great and principal business in coming to the church assembly is to join with them in the public worship; and this is it that accordingly, as our great business, we must intend and do.

3. In a place where superstition makes ignorant people think it a matter of necessity, so to begin with secret prayer, when the church is otherwise employed, the use of it is the more scandalous, as encouraging them in their error.

4. It is the best way to come before the public worship begin, and then they that think it most decent may do it without scruple or just offence.

5. But as a man's heart may put up a short ejaculation as he walketh up the church, without losing what else he might hear, so a man may on his knees be so brief, as that his loss shall be but small; and whether his profit preponderate that little time's loss, he can judge better than another. Therefore though I like best keeping to concord with the assembly in our devotion, yet these are things in which it ill beseemeth christians to judge or despise each other; and I shall take on either side the judging and despising of those that differ from us, to be a far greater sin, than the doing or not doing of the thing.

Object. Is it not called in Eccles. v. 1, 2, "The sacrifice of fools who know not that they do evil?"

Answ. No: I have wondered to hear that text so ordinarily thus perverted. The text is, "Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to offer the sacrifice of fools.——" Which is no more, than that it is the imagination and custom of fools to think to please God by their sacrifices, and bringing somewhat to him, while they refuse or neglect to hear his commands and obey him. Whereas obedience is better than sacrifice; and the sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to the Lord: and he that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, his prayer is abominable: and because they hate instruction—they shall cry and God will not hear them. Therefore be first careful to hear what God saith to thee, and to learn his will and do it, and then bring thy sacrifice to him: leave thy gift at the altar, and go and be reconciled to thy brother: obey first, and then come and offer thy gift. This is all the meaning of the text. See also Psal. l. 8, and compare these cited texts, 1 Sam. xv. 22; Prov. xv. 8; xxi. 17; Matt. v. &c. But whether we should begin with prayer or hearing when we enter into the church, God hath left to prudence to be decided by the general rules.

Quest. CXX. May a preacher kneel down in the pulpit, and use his private prayers when he is in the assembly?

Answ. This will have the same answer with the former; and therefore I shall trouble the reader with no more.

Quest. CXXI. May a minister pray publicly in his own name singly, for himself or others? or only in the church's name, as their mouth to God?

Answ. It is good to be as exact in order and decency as we can; but they that would not have other men's ceremonies brought in on that pretence, should not bring in their own made doctrines.

1. It is certain that all the assembly come thither, not only to hear a prayer, but to pray as well as the minister; and therefore the practice of all churches in the world (as is seen in all the liturgies) is for the minister to speak in the plural number, and usually to pray in the church's name. And so he is both their guide and mouth in prayer. Therefore even when he prayeth for himself, it is usually fittest (or very fit) for him rather to say, We beseech thee, give the speaker thy assistance, &c. than I beseech thee.

2. And even subjectively it is not inconvenient to speak of himself in the third person, Give him, or Give the speaker thy help, instead of Give me.

3. But they that will place a necessity in either of these, and make the contrary a sin, must have more knowledge than I have to be able to prove it.

For, 1. In the latter case the minister doth not pray in his own person, but only for his own person, when he saith, We beseech thee, give me thy help, &c.

2. And I know no word of God that saith, either that the minister is only the mouth of the people, or that he is to speak only in their names, or that he may not pray for himself or them in his ministerial capacity in the first person.[369]

For, 1. He is a minister of Christ for the church, and not the minister of the church properly. And he is subordinate to Christ in his priestly office, as well as in his teaching and ruling office: and the priests did always take it for their office, not only to speak as the people's mouth, but as sub-mediators or intercessors for them to God; and as then they were types of Christ by standing between God and the people, so they were his officers as well as types; and so they are his officers to this day: and as they teach and rule in his name by office, so do they intercede in his name: all men confess that they may do this in private; and where is it forbidden to be done in public?

2. And there are some cases in which it is fittest that it should be so. That is, when it is supposed that the congregation doth not join with him. As, 1. When the whole church is fallen into some error of judgment, (as who hath not many,) and he knoweth that they differ from him, it is fitter for him to pray as a sub-intercessor for them in his own person, than to speak as in their persons, who he knoweth join not with him. For that hath a plain untruth in it. 2. If the whole church be fallen into some little sin, which seduction yet hindereth them from repenting of, he were better confess it, and profess sorrow for it, in his own person, than in theirs that join not with him in it. 3. When he prayeth for somewhat for himself and them, that is above their understanding, (as for direction in some difficult controversies, &c.) I know not that he is bound to speak in their names that understand him not.

Therefore this is no business for christians that are not possessed with a proud, peevish, self-conceited, quarrelsome humour, to censure or despise a minister for; nor should any introduce that false doctrine of man's invention into the church, that the minister is only to pray in public as the people's mouth. But the power of prejudice is great.

Quest. CXXII. May the name, priests, sacrifice, and altars, be lawfully now used instead of, Christ's ministers, worship, and the holy table?

Answ. 1. He that useth them in design to bring in the popish transubstantiation and real sacrifice of the mass, doth heinously sin in such a design and use.

2. In a time and place where they may not be used without scandal, or tempting or encouraging any to their errors, the scandal will be a grievous sin.

3. The New Testament useth all the Greek names which we translate, priests, sacrifice, and altars, therefore we may use the same in Greek; and our translation and English names are not intolerable. If priest come from presbyter I need not prove that; if it do not, yet all ministers are subordinate to Christ in his priestly office as essentially as in the rest. And Rev. i. 6; v. 10; xx. 6, it is said, that we are or shall be made priests of God, and unto God. And 1 Pet. ii. 5, we are "an holy priesthood," and ver. 9, a "royal priesthood:" if this be said of all, then especially of ministers.

And the word sacrifice is used of us and our offered worship, 1 Pet. ii. 5; Heb. xiii. 15, 16; Phil. iv. 18; Eph. v. 2; Rom. xii. 1.

And Heb. xiii. 10, saith, "We have an altar whereof they partake not," &c. And the word is frequently used in the Revelation, chap. vi. 9; viii. 3, 5; xvi. 7, &c. in relation to gospel times. We must not therefore be quarrelsome against the bare names, unless they be abused to some ill use.

4. The ancient fathers and churches did ever use all these words so familiarly without any question or scruple raised about them, either by the orthodox or any heretics, that at present I can remember to have ever read of, that we should be the more wary how we condemn the bare words, lest thence we give advantage to the papists to make them tell their followers, that all antiquity was on their side; which were very easy for them to prove, if the controversy were about the names alone. Extremes and passionate imprudence do give the adversaries great advantages.

5. The names of sacrifice and altar, were used by the ancient churches, not properly, but merely in allusion to the Jewish and heathen sacrifices and altars, together with a tropical use from the christian reasons of the names.

As the Lord's supper is truly the commemoration of Christ's sacrifice; and therefore called by protestants, a commemorative sacrifice; so that our controversy with the papists is not, whether it may be called a sacrifice, but whether it be only the sacrament of a sacrifice, or a sacramental, commemorative sacrifice, or also a real, proper sacrifice of the very body and blood itself of Christ. For we acknowledge, that This is a sacrifice, is no more tropical a speech, than This is my body and blood.

6. Yet it must be noted, that the Scripture useth the word sacrifice about ourselves, and our thanksgivings, and praises, and works of charity, rather than of the Lord's supper; and the word priests, of all men, lay or clergy, that offer these foresaid sacrifices to God. Though the ancient doctors used them familiarly, by way of allusion, of the sacrament and its administrators.

7. In a word, as no christian must use these or any words to false ends or senses, or deceiving purposes, nor yet to scandal; so out of these cases, the words are lawful: and as the fathers are not to be any further condemned for using them, than as the words (which they foresaw not) have given advantage to the papists, to bring in an ill sense and doctrine; so those that now live in churches and countries, where the public professed doctrine doth free them from the suspicion of a popish ill sense, should not be judged nor quarrelled with for the terms; but all sober christians should allow each other the liberty of such phrases without censoriousness, or breach of charity or peace.

Quest. CXXIII. May the communion table be turned altar-wise, and railed in? And is it lawful to come up to the rails to communicate?

Answ. The answer to this is mostly the same with that to the foregoing question. 1. God hath given us no particular command or prohibition about these circumstances; but the general rules, for unity, edification, order, and decency; whether the table shall stand this way or that way, here or there, &c. he hath not particularly determined.

2. They that turn the table altar-wise and rail it in, out of a design to draw men to popery, or in a scandalous way which will encourage men to or in popery, do sin.

3. So do they that rail in the table to signify that the vulgar or lay christians must not come to it, but be kept at a distance; when Christ in his personal presence admitted his disciples to communicate at the table with himself.

4. But where there are no such ends, but only to imitate the ancients that did thus, and to show reverence to the table on the account of the sacrament, by keeping away dogs, keeping boys from sitting on it; and the professed doctrine of the church condemneth transubstantiation, the real corporal presence, &c. (as ours doth;) in this case christians should take these for such as they are, indifferent things, and not censure or condemn each other for them; nor should any force them upon those that think them unlawful.

5. And to communicate is not only lawful in this case, where we cannot prove that the minister sinneth, but even when we suspect an ill design in him, which we cannot prove; yea, or when we can prove that his personal interpretation of the place, name, situation, and rails is unsound; for we assemble there to communicate in and according to the professed doctrine of christianity and the churches, and our own open profession, and not after every private opinion and error of the minister. As I may receive from an anabaptist or separatist notwithstanding his personal errors; so may I from another man, whose error destroyeth not his ministry, nor the ordinance, as long as I consent not to it, yea, and with the church profess my dissent.

6. Yet, cæteris paribus, every free man that hath his choice, should choose to communicate rather where there is most purity and least error, than with those that swerve more from regular exactness.

Quest. CXXIV. Is it lawful to use David's psalms in our assemblies?

Answ. Yes: 1. Christ used them at his last supper, as is most probable; and he ordinarily joined with the Jews that used them; and so did the apostles.

2. It is confessed lawful to read or say them; therefore also to sing them. For saying and singing difference not the main end.

3. They are suitable to our use, and were the liturgy of the Jewish church, not on a ceremonial account, but for that fitness which is common to us with them.

4. We are commanded in the New Testament to sing psalms; and we are not commanded to compose new ones; nor can every one make psalms, who is commanded to sing psalms. And if it be lawful to sing psalms of our own or our neighbour's making, much more of God's making by his Spirit in his prophets.[370]

Object. They are not suitable to all our cases, nor to all in the assembly.

Answ. 1. We may use them in that measure of suitableness to our cases which they have. You may join with a man in prayer who expresseth part of your wants, though he express not all. Else you must join with no man in the world.

2. If ungodly men are present when the faithful speak to God, must we not speak our proper case, because they are present? The minister in church administrations speaketh principally in the name of the faithful, and not of hypocrites. Must he leave out of his prayers all that is proper to the godly, merely because some wicked men are there? No more must the church do in singing unto God.

3. They that cannot speak every word in a psalm just as their own case, may yet speak it as instructive; otherwise they might not read or say it.

But the sectarian objections against singing David's psalms are so frivolous, that I will not tire the reader with any more.[371]

Quest. CXXV. May psalms be used as prayers, and praises, and thanksgivings, or only as instructive? even the reading as well as the singing of them?

Answ. The sober reader who knoweth not what errors others hold, will marvel that I trouble men with such questions. But I have oft been troubled with those that (having no other shift to deny the lawfulness of written and set forms of prayer) do affirm that psalms are neither to be read or sung at all as prayers, but only as doctrinal scriptures for instruction.[372] But that this is false appeareth,

1. In that those that are real, material prayers, and praises, and thanksgivings, and were penned for that very use, as the titles show, and those that were so used by the Jewish synagogues where Christ was ordinarily present, may be so used by us: but such are the psalms both as said and sung.

2. And those that we are commanded to sing as psalms, and have Christ's example so to use, (who sung a hymn or psalm of praise at his last supper,) we also may so use: but, &c.

3. And those that are by God's Spirit fitted for use in prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, and never forbidden so to be used, may by us be so used: but such are the psalms, &c. I will weary you with no more.

Quest. CXXVI. Are our church tunes lawful, being of man's invention?

Answ. Yes: they are a lawful invention, allowed us by God, and fitted to the general rules of edification. Scripture is no particular rule for such modes and circumstances.

Object. They breed a carnal pleasure by the melody, which is not fit for spiritual devotion.

Answ. 1. It is a lawful sensitive pleasure, sanctified to a holy use, not hindering, but greatly helping the soul in spiritual worship.

Either you call it carnal, because it gratifieth the sinful, corrupt inclinations of man; or only because it is sensitive, or a pleasure in the imagination and lower faculties. If the former, 1. There is nothing in it which is a necessary cause of any sinful pleasure, nor any impediment to spiritual pleasure. 2. But a lustful person will turn all sensitive pleasure into sin; our meat, and drink, and clothes, and houses, and friends, and health: the bread and wine in the sacrament may be thus abused.[373]

2. But you must know, that as our bodies are here united to our souls, so they act together, and while the sensitive part is subordinate to the rational, it is serviceable to it, and not a hinderance: when you come to have souls that are separated from the body, you shall use no bodily instruments; and yet even then it is uncertain to us, whether the sensitive powers of the soul do not accompany it, and be not used by it. But certainly in the meantime, he that will not use sense, shall not use reason. And he that acteth not sensibly, acteth not as a man: it is not a sin to be a man; and therefore not to see, to hear, to taste, to smell, &c. Nor is it a sin to taste sweetness in our meat or drink; nor is it a sinful pleasure for the eyes to behold the light, or the variety of the beauteous works of God, or to take pleasure in them. "His works are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure therein," Psal. cxi. 2.

You know not what it is to be a man, if you know not that God hath made all the senses to be the inlets of objects, and so of holy pleasure into the soul. Would he have given us eyes, and ears, and appetites, and made his creatures sweet and beauteous, that all might either be sin or useless to us? No: all things are sanctified, and pure to the pure.[374] The sense is the natural way to the imagination, and that to the understanding; and he that will have no sensible and natural pleasure, shall have no spiritual pleasure: and he that will have none but sensitive pleasure, were better have none at all. It is therefore a foolish pretence of spirituality, to dream of acting without our senses, or avoiding those delights, which may and must be sanctified to us. Harmony and melody are so high a pleasure of the sense, that they are nearest to rational delights, if not participating of them, and exceedingly fitted to elevate the mind and affections unto God.

And as it is the very nature of true holiness, to be so suited to holy things, as that they may be our delight, and he is the genuine saint, and the best of christians, who most delighteth in God and holiness; so that is the best means to make us the best christians, which helpeth us best to these delights; and if any thing on earth be like to heaven, it is to have our delight in God. And therefore if any thing may make us heavenly, it is that which raiseth us to such delights. And therefore a choir of holy persons, melodiously singing the praises of Jehovah, are likest to the angelical society, Psal. cl.

Quest. CXXVII. Is church music by organs or such instruments, lawful?[375]

Answ. I know that in the persecuted and poorer times of the church, none such were used (when they had not temples, nor always a fixed meeting place). And that the author of the Quest. et Resp. in Justin Martyr speaketh against it (which Perkins and others cite to that purpose). And I grant,

1. That as it is in the power of weak, diseased christians, to make many things unlawful to their brethren lest we be hurtful to them, and to deprive us of much, not only of our liberties but our helps; so in abundance of congregations, church music is made unlawful by accident, through their mistake. For it is unlawful (cæteris paribus) by an unnecessary thing to occasion divisions in the churches; but where one part judgeth church music unlawful, for another part to use it, would occasion divisions in the churches, and drive away the other part. Therefore I would wish church music to be no where set up, but where the congregation can accord in the use of it; or at least where they will not divide thereupon.

2. And I think it unlawful to use such strains of music as are light, or as the congregation cannot easily be brought to understand; much more on purpose to commit the whole work of singing to the choristers, and exclude the congregation. I am not willing to join in such a church where I shall be shut out of this noble work of praise.

3. But plain, intelligible church music, which occasioneth not divisions, but the church agreeth in, for my part I never doubted to be lawful. For, 1. God set it up long after Moses' ceremonial law, by David, Solomon, &c.

2. It is not an instituted ceremony merely, but a natural help to the mind's alacrity: and it is a duty and not a sin to use the helps of nature and lawful art, though not to institute sacraments, &c. of our own. As it is lawful to use the comfortable helps of spectacles in reading the Bible, so is it of music to exhilarate the soul towards God.[376]

3. Jesus Christ joined with the Jews that used it, and never spake a word against it.

4. No Scripture forbiddeth it, therefore it is not unlawful.

5. Nothing can be against it, that I know of, but what is said against tunes and melody of voice. For whereas they say that it is a human invention; so are our tunes (and metre, and versions). Yea, it is not a human invention; as the last psalm and many others show, which call us to praise the Lord with instruments of music.

And whereas it is said to be a carnal mind of pleasure, they may say as much of a melodious, harmonious concert of voices, which is more excellent music than any instruments.

And whereas some say that they find it do them harm, so others say of melodious singing; but as wise men say, they find it do them good. And why should the experience of some prejudiced, self-conceited person, or of a half-man that knoweth not what melody is, be set against the experience of all others, and deprive them of all such helps and mercies, as these people say they find no benefit by.

And as some deride church music by many scornful names, so others do by singing (as some congregations near me testify, who these many years have forsaken it, and will not endure it; but their pastor is fain to unite them, by the constant and total omission of singing psalms). It is a great wrong that some do to ignorant christians, by putting such whimsies and scruples into their heads, which as soon as they enter, turn that to a scorn, and snare, and trouble, which might be a real help and comfort to them, as it is to others.

Quest. CXXVIII. Is the Lord's day a sabbath, and so to be called and kept, and that of divine institution? And is the seventh-day sabbath abrogated? &c.

Answ. All the cases about the Lord's day (except those practical directions for keeping it, in the Economical part of this book) I have put into a peculiar treatise on that subject by itself; and therefore shall here pass them over, referring the reader to them in that discourse.

Quest. CXXIX. Is it lawful to appoint human holy days, and observe them?

Answ. This also I have spoke to in the foresaid treatise, and my "Disput. of Church Government and Cer." Briefly, 1. It is not lawful to appoint another weekly sabbath, or day wholly separated to the commemoration of our redemption: for that is to mend (pretendedly) the institutions of God; yea, and to contradict him who hath judged one day only in seven to be the fittest weekly proportion.

2. As part of some days may be weekly used in holy assemblies, so may whole days on just, extraordinary occasions, of prayer, preaching, humiliation, and thanksgiving.

3. The holy doctrine, lives, and sufferings of the martyrs and other holy men, hath been so great a mercy to the church, that (for any thing I know) it is lawful to keep anniversary thanksgivings in remembrance of them, and to encourage the weak, and provoke them to constancy and imitation.

4. But to dedicate days or temples to them in any higher sense, as the heathen and idolaters did to their heroes, is unlawful; or any way to intimate an attribution of divinity to them, by word or worship.

5. And they that live among such idolaters must take heed of giving them scandalous encouragement.

6. And they that scrupulously fear such sin more than there is cause, should not be forced to sin against their consciences.

7. But yet no christians should causelessly refuse that which is lawful, nor to join with the churches in holy exercises on the days of thankful commemoration of the apostles, and martyrs, and excellent instruments in the church; much less petulantly to work and set open shops to the offence of others; but rather to persuade all to imitate the holy lives of those saints to whom they give such honours.

Quest. CXXX. How far are the holy Scriptures a law and perfect rule to us?

Answ. 1. For all thoughts, words, affections, and actions, of divine faith and obedience (supposing still God's law of nature). For it is no believing God to believe what he never revealed; nor any trusting God, to trust that he will certainly give us that which he never either directly or indirectly promised; nor any obeying God, to do that which he never commanded.

2. The contents will best show the extent; whatever is revealed, promised, and commanded in it, for that it is a perfect rule. For certainly it is perfect in its kind and to its proper use.

3. It is a perfect rule for all that is of universal moral necessity; that is, whatever it is necessary that man believe, think, or do, in all ages and places of the world, this is of divine obligation. Whatever the world is universally bound to, (that is, all men in it,) it is certain that God's law in nature, or Scripture, or both, bindeth them to it. For the world hath no universal king or lawgiver but God.

4. God's own laws in nature and Scripture are a perfect rule for all the duties of the understanding, thoughts, affections, passions, immediately to be exercised on God himself; for no one else is a discerner or judge of such matters.[377]

5. It perfectly containeth all the essential and integral parts of the christian religion; so that nothing is of itself, and directly, any part of the christian religion which is not there.

6. It instituteth those sacraments perfectly, which are the seals of God's covenant with man, and the delivery of the benefits, and which are the badges or symbols of the disciples and religion of Christ in the world.

7. It determineth what faith, prayer, and obedience shall be his appointed means and conditions of justification, adoption, and salvation. And so what shall be professed and preached in his name to the world.

8. It is a perfect instrument of donation or conveyance of our right to Christ, and of pardon, and justification, and adoption, and the Holy Spirit's assistances, and of glory. As it is God's covenant, promise, or deed of gift.

9. It instituteth certain ministers as his own church officers, and perfectly describeth their office, as instituted by him.

10. It instituteth the form of his church universal, which is called his body; and also of particular holy societies for his worship; and prescribeth them certain duties, as the common worship there to be performed.

11. It determineth of a weekly day, even the first, to be separated for and used in this holy worship.

12. It is a perfect general rule for the regulating of those things, which it doth not command or forbid in particular. As that all be done wisely, to edification, in charity, peace, concord, season, order, &c.

13. It giveth to magistrates, pastors, parents, and other superiors, all that power by which they are authorized to oblige us, under God, to any undetermined particulars.

14. It is the perfect rule of Christ's judging, rewarding, and punishing at last, according to which he will proceed.

15. It is the only law that is made by primitive power.

16. And the only law that is made by infallible wisdom.

17. And the only law which is faultless, and hath nothing in it that will do the subject any harm.

18. And the only law which is from absolute power, the rule of all other laws, and from which there is finally no appeal.[378]

Thus far the holy Scripture with the law of nature is our perfect rule. But not in any of the following respects.

1. It is no particular revelation or perfect rule of natural sciences, as physics, metaphysics, &c.

2. It is no rule for the arts, for medicine, music, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, grammar, rhetoric, logic; nor for the mechanics, as navigation, architecture; and all the trades and occupations of men; no, not husbandry by which we have our food.

3. It is no particular rule for all the mutable, subordinate duties of any societies. It will not serve instead of all the statutes of this and all other lands, nor tell us, when the terms shall begin and end, nor what work every parent and master shall set his children and servants in his family, &c.

4. It is no full rule in particular for all those political principles which are the ground of human laws; as whether each republic be monarchical, aristocratical, or democratical; what person or of what family shall reign; who shall be his officers and judges, and how diversified; so of his treasury, munition, coin, &c.

5. It is no rule of propriety in particular, by which every man may know which is his own land, or house, or goods, or cattle.

6. It is no particular rule for our natural actions; what meat we shall eat; what clothes we shall wear; so of our rest, labour, &c.

7. It is no particular law or rule for any of all those actions and circumstances about religion or God's own ordinances, which he hath only commanded in general, and left in specie or particular to be determined by man according to his general laws; but of these next.

Quest. CXXXI. What additions or human inventions in or about religion, not commanded in Scripture, are lawful or unlawful?

Answ. 1. These following are unlawful. 1. To feign any new article of faith or doctrine, any precept, promise, threatening, prophecy, or revelation, falsely to father it upon God, and say, that it is of him, or his special word.[379]

2. To say that either that is written in the Bible which is not, or that any thing is the sense of a text which is not; and so that any thing is a sin or a duty by Scripture which is not. Or to father apocryphal books, or texts, or words upon the Spirit of Christ.

3. To make any law for the church universal, or as obligatory to all christians; which is to usurp the sovereignty of Christ; for which treasonable usurpation it is that protestants call the pope, antichrist.

4. To add new parts to the christian religion.

5. To make any law, which it did properly belong to the universal Sovereign to have made, if it should have been made at all: or which implieth an accusation of ignorance, oversight, error, or omission, in Christ and the holy Scriptures.

6. To make new laws for men's inward heart duties towards God.

7. To make new sacraments for the sealing of Christ's covenant and collation of his benefits therein contained, and to the public tesseræ, badges or symbols of christians and christianity in the world.

8. To feign new conditions of the covenant of God, and necessary means of our justification, adoption, and salvation.

9. To alter Christ's instituted church ministry, or add any that are supra-ordinate, co-ordinate, or derogatory to their office, or that stand on the like pretended ground, and for equal ends.

10. To make new spiritual societies or church forms which shall be either supra-ordinate, co-ordinate, or derogatory to the forms of Christ's institution.[380]

11. Any impositions upon the churches (be the thing never so lawful) which is made by a pretended power not derived from God and the Redeemer.[381]

12. Any thing that is contrary to the church's good and edification, to justice, charity, piety, order, unity, or peace.[382]

13. Any unnecessary burden imposed on the consciences of christians; especially as necessary either to their salvation, communion, liberty, or peace.

14. And the exercise of any power, pretended to be either primitive and underived, or infallible, or impeccable, or absolute.

15. In general, any thing that is contrary to the authority, matter, form, obligation, honour, or ends of the laws of God, in nature or Scripture.

16. Any thing which setteth up those judaical laws and ceremonies which Christ hath abrogated, in that form and respect in which he abrogated them.

17. Where there is a doubt among sober, conscionable christians, lest in obeying man they should sin against God and disobey his laws, and the matter doubted of is confessed unnecessary by the imposers: so infinite is the distance between God and man, and so wholly dependent on him are the highest, that they should be exceedingly unwilling to vie with the authority of their Maker in men's consciences, or to do any thing unnecessary which tendeth to compel men to tread down God's authority in their consciences, and to prefer man's. Much more unwilling should they be, to silence the sober preachers of Christ's gospel upon such accounts.

Quest. CXXXII. Is it unlawful to obey in all those cases, where it is unlawful to impose and command? Or in what cases? And how far pastors must be believed and obeyed?

Answ. I must entreat the reader carefully to distinguish here, 1. Between God's law forbidding rulers to do evil; and his law forbidding subjects or private men.

2. Between obedience formally so called; which is, when we therefore obey in conscience, because it is commanded, and the commander's authority is the formal reason and object of our obedience: and obedience material only, which is properly no obedience, but a doing the thing which is commanded upon other reasons, and not at all because it is commanded.

3. Between formal obedience to the office of the ruler in general, and formal obedience to him, as commanding this very matter in particular.

4. Between such authority in the ruler as will warrant his impositions before God for his own justification; and such authority as may make it my duty to obey him. And so I answer,

1. We shall not be judged by those laws of God which made the ruler's duty, but by that which made our own. It is not all one to say, Thou shalt not command it, and to say, Thou shalt not do it.

2. Whatever God absolutely forbiddeth men to do, we must not do, whoever command it.

3. There are many of the things forementioned absolutely and always unlawful, as being evil of themselves, which no man may either command or do; and there are some of them, which are only evil by accident, which may not be commanded, but may be done when contrary, weightier accidents do preponderate.

4. Many such things may be done materially on other reasons, (as for the church's good, the furtherance of the gospel, the winning of men to God, the avoiding of scandal, or of hurt to others or ourselves, &c.) when they are not to be done in formal obedience, out of conscience to the authority imposing (as if it be commanded by one that hath no just power).

5. Our actions may participate of obedience in general, as being actions of subjects, when they are not obedience in the full and perfect formality as to the particular. The last leaf of Richard Hooker's eighth book of Eccles. Polit. will show you the reason of this. He that hath not just power to command me this one particular act, yet may be my ruler in the general, and I am bound to honour him in general as my ruler; and to disobey him in a thing lawful for me to do, though not for him to command, may be dishonouring of him, and an appearance of disobedience and denial of his power.[383] A parent is forbidden by God to command his child to speak an idle word, or to do a vain and useless action (much more a hurtful). Yet if a parent should command a child to speak an idle word, or do a vain action, the duty of obedience would make it at that time not to be vain and idle to him; yea, if he bid him throw away a cup of wine, or a piece of bread, which is evil when causeless, the child may be bound to do it: not only because he knoweth not but the parents may have lawful ends and reasons for their command, (as to try and exercise his obedience,) but also if he were sure that it were not so; because he is a subject, and the honouring of a parent is so great a good, and the dishonouring him by that disobedience may have such ill consequences, as will preponderate the evil of the loss of a cup of wine, &c. Yet in this case, the act of obedience is but mixed: it is an act of subjection or honour to a parent, because in general he is a governor: but it is but materially obedience in respect of that particular matter, which we know he had no authority to command.

6. In this respect, therefore, a ruler may have so much power as may induce on the subject an obligation to obey, and yet not so much as may justify his commands before God, nor save himself from divine punishment.

I add this so distinctly, lest any should misapply Mr. Rich. Hooker's doctrine aforesaid, Eccl. Pol. lib. viii. p. 223, 224. "As for them that exercise power altogether against order, though the kind of power which they have may be of God, yet is their exercise thereof against God, and therefore not of God, otherwise than by permission, as all injustice is.—Usurpers of power, whereby we do not mean them that by violence have aspired unto places of highest authority, but them that use more authority than they did ever receive in form and manner, before mentioned.—Such usurpers thereof, as in the exercise of their power, do more than they have been authorized to do, cannot in conscience bind any man to obedience."

Lest any should gather hence that they are never bound in conscience to obey their parents, their king, their pastors, in any point wherein they exercise more power than God gave them, I thought meet to speak more exactly to that point, which needed this distinguishing. For the ground is sure that There is no power but of God;[384] and that God hath given no man power against himself, his laws and service; but yet there are many cases in which God bindeth children and subjects to obey their superiors, in such matters as they did sinfully command.

7. It greatly concerneth all sober christians therefore to be well studied in the law of God, that we may certainly know what those things are which God hath absolutely forbidden us to do, whoever command them, and to distinguish them from things that depend on mutable accidents; that as the three witnesses and Daniel, Dan. iii. vi. we may be true to God whatever we suffer for it; and yet may obey men in all that is our duty to them.

Thus the apostles knew that no man had power from God to silence them, or persecute them for the gospel. Therefore they would not obey those that forbad them to preach; and yet they would appear before any magistrate that commanded them, and obey their summons; and so we may do even to a usurper, or a private man.

8. The principal and most notable case, in which we must obey when a ruler sinfully commandeth, is, when the matter which he commandeth is not such as is either forbidden us by God, or out of the verge of his place and calling at all to meddle with and command, nor yet such as is destructive of our duty to God; but such as in general belongeth to his office to determine of according to God's general rules; but he misseth it in the manner and goeth against those rules; yet not so far as to destroy the duty we owe to God, or the end of it.

For instance, it is not in the ruler's power to determine whether there shall be preaching or none, true doctrine or false, &c. But it is in his power to regulate the circumstances of time, place, &c. (next to be recited). Now if he do these to order, unity, and edification, I will obey him formally and fully for conscience sake. If he so do it as is destructive to the end, (as is aforesaid,) as to say, You shall meet only at twenty miles' distance, or only at midnight, &c. I will obey him no further than necessity and the common good requireth me. If he do it only with a tolerable inconvenience, (as to say, You shall meet no where but in the open fields, &c.) I will obey for conscience sake, as I am in general a subject bound to honour the magistrate; but not as he nameth an unmeet circumstance, in that respect my obedience shall be but material.

I need not handle it as a distinct question, Whether pastors are to be believed or obeyed any further than they show a word of God revealing and commanding the particular thing? Divine faith and obedience is one thing, and human is another. 1. If as a preacher he shall say, This is God's word, believe it and obey it as such, you must believe with a human faith that it is liker that he knoweth what he saith, than you do, (unless, (1.) You see evidence; (2.) Or the consent of more credible persons to be against him, and then you are not to believe him at all). Even as a child believeth his teacher in order to learn the things himself, so you are so far to take his word while you are learning to know whether it be so or not. But not to rest in it as certain, nor to take your belief of him and obedience to him, to be a believing and obeying God formally, though a duty.

Quest. CXXXIII. What are the additions or inventions of men which are not forbidden by the word of God (whether by rulers or by private men invented)?

Answ. This is handled under the directions for worship; to which I refer the reader, as also for part of the answer to the former cases. Yet here I shall trouble you with so much repetition, as to say, that,

1. Such inventions and additions are lawful as God hath commanded men (rulers, pastors, parents, or private persons) to make under the regulation of his general laws.

2. All such additions are lawful as are merely subordinate and subservient to God's laws and orders, and not forbidden by him, among the forementioned prohibited additions.

Instances are many. 1. All such modes of a duty as are necessary in genere, or one way or other to be determined of, but left to human prudence as to particulars. As, 1. Whether I shall (this week or month) publish the gospel by speaking, or by writing, or by printing. 2. Whether I shall use this method, or that, or another method in this sermon. 3. Whether I shall use these phrases and words, or other words. 4. Whether I shall use notes for my memory or not. And whether large ones or short ones. 5. Whether I shall be an hour or two in preaching. 6. Whether I shall preach with a loud voice or a low. 7. Whether I shall at this time more endeavour explication or application, comfort or terror, reprehension or direction, &c. All which are to be varied by man's lawful invention according to God's general rules.

2. It is also lawful and needful, that our own invention or our superior's according to God's general laws, do determine of the particular subjects of our office; which Scripture doth not particularly determine of, viz. 1. Scripture telleth not ministers what country, parish, or church they shall bestow their labours in. 2. Nor to how many they shall be a pastor. 3. Nor what text or subject they shall preach on. 4. Nor what singular persons they shall apply comfort, counsel, or terror to, this or that. 5. Nor whom they shall admit to the sacrament (but by the general rule or description). 6. Nor whom they shall openly rebuke or excommunicate. 7. Nor whom they shall absolve. It telleth them not whom the persons be to whom the Scripture character doth belong, in any of these cases. 8. Nor whether the witnesses say truly or falsely who accuse a man. 9. Nor whether the accused be to be taken as guilty of heresy, scandal, or schism, &c.

3. It is also a lawful invention of man, to find, choose, and use, such natural helps, as are useful to further us in the obedience of God's laws, and the practice of his worship, and are not forbidden by him. Yea, in genere they are commanded, and yet never particularly determined of in the Scripture: as, 1. What will clear a preacher's voice, to speak audibly. 2. The advantage of a pulpit to be above the people. 3. The use of spectacles to them that need them to read the Scripture. 4. The translating of the Scriptures into our native language. 5. Which translation of many we shall use in the churches. 6. The printing of the Bible. 7. The dividing it into chapters and verses. 8. The printing of good books, to expound and apply the Scripture; commentaries, sermons, &c. 9. The forms of school exercises, disputations, &c. to prepare students for the ministry; and what books of divinity tutors shall read to their pupils, or every student shall have in his library. 10. The manner and tune of singing psalms in the churches. 11. What version or metre to use, this or that. 12. What form of catechism, (verbal, written, or printed,) to use among many, in the church or family. 13. Whether to pray in the same words often, or in various. 14. Whether to use words of our own composing or invention primarily, or of other men's; and that by direction, persuasion, or command. 15. To use a written or printed form, or neither; to read it on the book, or speak it by memory. 16. To use Scripture forms only, of prayer, praise, psalms and hymns, or those that are of later composure also. 17. To print the Bible and use it with marginal notes, and contents, or without. 18. To baptize in a river, well, pool, or font. 19. To have sponsors or witnesses of the parents' trustiness, and the child's covenant, or not. 20. At how many days old children shall be baptized. 21. Whether they shall be named in baptism, or before, or after. 22. Whether one of the ministers shall be a tutor or teacher to the rest that are younger. 23. How far the rest shall submit their judgments to one that is eldest and ablest, and be ruled by him. 24. Whether there shall be any deaconnesses in the church. 25. Whether a church shall have one minister, two, or more. 26. Who shall be the men. 27. What space of ground shall be the church bounds, for the cohabitation of the members. 28. How many neighbour churches shall make a synod; and which be they. 29. How many members a synod shall consist of. 30. Who shall be president. Or whether any. And who shall gather the votes. 31. Who shall record their acts, as scribe. 32. What messenger shall carry them to the churches. 33. What letters for correspondence and communion shall be written to the churches. 34. When pastors shall remove from one church to another; and to which. 35. Who shall be ordained ministers to preach, baptize, and gather churches. 36. How many the ordainers shall be. 37. Whether there shall be any music by instruments in the church or house, for the praises of God; and what. 38. Who shall lead the psalm. 39. Who shall read. 40. What words the church's profession of faith shall be expressed by. 41. By what signs the church shall signify their consent; whether lifting up the hand, standing up, bowing the head, or by voice, or writing. 42. By what sign or ceremony men shall take an oath; whether lifting up the hand towards heaven, or laying it on a book, or kissing the book, &c. 43. Whether the people at the sacrament sit near the table, or keep farther off. 44. Whether it be put into each person's hand, or they take it themselves. With many more such like.

4. And it is a lawful invention to determine of mere circumstances of time and place which God hath not determined of in Scripture: as, 1. At how many times in the year or week, baptism shall be administered. 2. At what age persons be admitted to the Lord's supper. 3. On what days and hours of the week there shall be lectures, or church assemblies. 4. How oft and when ministers shall catechise and instruct the people privately. 5. On what hour the church shall assemble on the Lord's days, and receive the sacrament. 6. How long prayer, reading, and sermon shall be. 7. At what hour to end the public exercises. 8. At what hours to pray in families or in secret. 9. How often disciplinary meetings shall be held, for the trial of accused members. 10. How often synods shall meet; and how long continue. Of holy days before.

5. The same is to be said for the places of holy exercises. 1. What edifices the church shall have for such uses? 2. In what places they shall be situate? 3. Where the pulpit shall stand? 4. And where the font? 5. And where the table? 6. Where each of the people shall sit? 7. Where synods shall meet? 8. How many temples shall be in a city? &c.

6. The same is to be said of all accidental, subordinate officers; as lecturers, clerks, door-keepers, churchwardens, and many before mentioned.

7. The same is to be said of church utensils; as table, cups, linen, pulpits, fonts, clock, hour-glass, bells, seats, decent habit of clothes, &c.

8. The same may be said of decent gestures, not particularly commanded; as what gesture to preach in, standing or sitting? What gesture to read in? What gesture to hear in? What gesture to sing psalms in? Whether to be covered or bare-headed? In what gesture to receive the Lord's supper? (In which Scripture no more regulateth us, than of the room, the hour of communicating, the number of communicants, the place; in all which Christ's example was not a particular law.)

9. The same may be said of order. 1. Whether the pastor shall begin with prayer, reading, or exhortation? 2. Whether the people shall begin with prayer or ejaculations privately? 3. Whether we shall make but one or two long continued prayers, or many short ones? 4. Whether we shall pray before sermon immediately, and after, in the pulpit or in the reading place? 5. When the psalms shall be said or sung, and how many? 6. How many chapters shall be read? and which and in what order? 7. Whether baptism shall be before, or after, or when? 8. When the catechumens and learners shall be dismissed, and the proper eucharistical church exercises begin? 9. When collections made? &c.

But, O Lord, have compassion on thy scattered flock, who are afflicted and divided by the imperiousness of those pastors, who think it not enough for the exercise of their domination, to promote all thine own holy laws and doctrines, and to make their own canons in all these cases, or such like; but they must needs make more work than all this cometh to, for themselves and for their flocks, even unto those distractions, and dissipations, and fierce persecutions and contentions, which many hundred years have exercised the Greek and Latin churches, and many more throughout the world.

Quest. CXXXIV. What are the mischiefs of unlawful additions in religion?

Answ. Alas! many and great. 1. They tend to dethrone Christ from his sovereignty, and legislative prerogative. 2. And to advance man, blind and sinful man, into his place. 3. And thereby to debase religion, making it but a human or a mixed thing (and it can be no more noble than its author is). 4. And thereby they debase also the church of God, and the government of it, while they make it to be but a human policy, and not divine. 5. They tend to depose God from his authority in men's consciences, and to level or join him there but with man. 6. They tend to men's doubtfulness and uncertainty of their religion; seeing man is fallible, and so may his constitutions be. 7. They tend to drive out all true religion from the world, while man that is so bad is the maker of it; and it may be suspected to be bad, that is made by so bad an author. 8. And it taketh off the fear of God, and his judgment: for it is man that must be feared, so far as man is the maker of the law. And it destroyeth the consolation of believers, which consisteth in the hopes of a reward from God; for he that serveth man, must be rewarded by man; and though they do not exclude God, but join him with themselves, yet this mixture debaseth and destroyeth religion, as the mixture of God and mammon in men's love, and as mixed and debased metals do the sovereign's coin. 9. It hardeneth infidels and hindereth their conversion; for they will reverence no more of our religion than we can prove to be divine: and when they find one part of it to be human, they suspect the rest to be so too, and contemn it all; even as protestants do popery, for the abundance of human trinkets and toys with which we see them exercise and delude their silly followers. 10. It is the great engine of dividing all the churches, and breeding and feeding contentions in the christian world. 11. And because men that will command, will be obeyed, and they that are absolutely subjected to God, will obey none against him, whatever it cost them, (as Dan. iii.; vi.; Heb. xi.; Luke xiv. 26, 33; Matt. v. 10-12,) therefore it hath proved the occasion of bloody persecutions in the churches, by which professed christians draw the guilt of christian blood upon themselves. 12. And hereby it hath dolefully hindered the gospel, while the persecutors have silenced many worthy, conscionable preachers of it. 13. And by this it hath quenched charity in the hearts of both sides, and taught the sufferers and the afflicters to be equally bitter in censuring if not detesting one another. 14. And the infidels seeing these dissensions and bitter passions among christians, deride, and scorn, and hate them all.[385] 15. Yea, such causes as these in the Latin and Greek churches have engaged not only emperors and princes against their own subjects, so that chronicles and books of martyrs perpetuate their dishonour, as Pilate's name is in the creed; but also have set them in bloody wars among themselves. These have been the fruits, and this is the tendency of usurping Christ's prerogative over his religion and worship in his church.

And the greatness of the sin appeareth in these aggravations. 1. It is a mark of pitiful ignorance and pride when dust shall thus (like Nebuchadnezzar) exalt itself against God, to its certain infamy and abasement.

2. It showeth that men little know themselves, that think themselves fit to be the makers of a religion for so many others: and that they have base thoughts of all other men, while they think them unfit to worship God any other way, than that of their making; and think that they will all so far deny God as to take up a religion that is made by man.

3. It shows that they are much void of love to others, that can thus use them on so small occasion.

4. And it showeth how little true sense or reverence of christian religion they have themselves who can thus debase it, and equal their own inventions with it.

5. And it leaveth men utterly unexcusable, that will not take warning by so many hundred years' experiences of most of the churches through the world? Even when we see the yet continued divisions of the eastern and western churches, and all about a human religion (in the parts most contended about); when they read of the rivers of blood that have been shed in Piedmont, France, Germany, Belgia, Poland, Ireland, and the flames in England, and many other nations, and all for the human parts of men's religion? He that will yet go on and take no warning, may go read the eighteenth and nineteenth of the Revelation, and see what joy will be in heaven and earth, when God shall do justice upon such.

But remember that I speak all this of no other, than those expressly here described.

Quest. CXXXV. What are the mischiefs of men's error on the other extreme, who pretend that Scripture is a rule where it is not, and deny the foresaid lawful things, on pretence that Scripture is a perfect rule (say some, for all things)?

Answ. 1. They fill their own minds with a multitude of causeless scruples, which on their principles can never be resolved, and so will give themselves no rest.

2. They make themselves a religion of their own, and superstition is their daily devotion; which being erroneous, will not hang together, but is full of contradictions in itself; and which being human and bad, can never give true stability to the soul.

3. Hereby they spend their days much in melancholy troubles, and unsettled distracting doubts and fears; instead of the joys of solid faith, and hope, and love.

4. And if they escape, this their religion is contentious, wrangling, censorious, and factious, and their zeal flieth out against those that differ from their peculiar superstitions and conceits.

5. And hereupon they are usually mutable and unsettled in their religion; this year for one, and the next for another; because there is no certainty in their own inventions and conceits.

6. And hereupon they still fall into manifold parties, because each man maketh a religion to himself, by his misinterpretation of God's word; so that there is no end of their divisions.

7. And they do a great deal of hurt in the church, by putting the same distracting and dividing conceits into the heads of others. And young christians, and women, and ignorant, well meaning people, that are not able to know who is in the right, do often turn to that party which they think most strict and godly (though it be such as our quakers). And the very good conceit of the people whom they take it from, doth settle so strong a prejudice in their mind, as no argument or evidence scarcely can work out; and so education, converse, and human estimation breedeth a succession of dividers, and troublers of the churches.

8. They sin against God by calling good evil, and light darkness, and honouring superstition, which is the work of Satan, with holy names.[386]

9. They sin by adding to the word of God; while they say of abundance of lawful things, This is unlawful, and that is against the word of God, and pretend that their Touch not, taste not, handle not, is in the Scriptures.[387] For while they make it a rule for every circumstance in particular, they must squeeze, and force, and wrest it, to find out all those circumstances in it which were never there; and so by false expositions make the Scriptures another thing.

10. And how great a sin is it to father Satan's works on God, and to say that all these and these things are forbidden or commanded in the Scripture, and so to belie the Lord and the word of truth.

11. It engageth all subjects against their rulers' laws and government, and involveth them in the sin of denying them just obedience; while all the statute book must be found in the Scriptures, or else condemned as unlawful.

12. It maintaineth disobedience in churches, and causeth schisms and confusions unavoidably; for they that will neither obey the pastors, nor join with the churches, till they can show scriptures particularly for every translation, method, metre, tune, and all that is done, must join with no churches in the world.

13. It bringeth rebellion and confusion into families, while children and servants must learn no catechism, hear no minister, give no account, observe no hours of prayer, nay, nor do any work, but what there is a particular scripture for.

14. It sets men on enthusiastical expectations, and irrational, scandalous worshipping of God, while all men must avoid all those methods, phrases, books, helps, which are not expressly or particularly in Scripture, and men must not use their own inventions, or prudence, in the right ordering of the works of religion.