III. It is necessary also, that all with whom we own communion as ministers, should be Christ's ambassadors, having then, when we hear them, and holding still their commission from Christ as king, and only head of his church: conveyed not only from church-officers, in a way that he hath revealed as the prophet of his church, but in a way of dependence upon, and subordination to Christ as king, who ascending far above principalities and powers, appointed and gave the gifts of the ministry, Eph. iv. 8, 11. and set them in the church, 1 Cor. xii. 28. and gave them commission to go and teach the nations, by virtue of that all power that was given to him in heaven and earth, Matth. xxviii. 18, 19. If then they take a new holding, and close with a new conveyance of the ministry, and of the power to exercise the same, from a new architectonic usurped power in the church, encroaching on Christ's royal prerogative, we dare not homologate such an affront to Christ, as to give them the respect of his ambassadors, when they became the servants of men, and subject even in ministerial functions to another head than Christ, for then they are the ministers of men, and by men, and not by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead, because they do not hold the head, Col. ii. 19. Hence those that receive and derive their church power from, and are subordinate in its exercise to, another head than Christ Jesus, should not be received and subjected to as the ministers of Christ in his church; but the prelates and their curates do receive and derive their church power from, and are subordinate in its exercise to, another head than Christ: therefore they should not be received, &c. The first proportion cannot be denied, the second is proved thus: Those officers in the church, professing themselves such, that derive their church power from, and are subordinate in its exercise to, a power truly architectonic and supreme in the church (to wit the magistrate) beside Christ, do derive their power from, and are subordinate in its exercise to another head than Christ Jesus; but so it is that prelates and their curates do derive, &c. Therefore——The major is evident; for whosoever hath a supreme architectonic power in and over the church, must be a head to the same, and the fountain of all church-power. The minor is also clear, from the foregoing historical deduction, manifesting the present prelacy to be gross erastianism; for the disposal of the government of the church is declared by law to be the crown-right, and and an inherent perpetual prerogative, and thereupon the bishops are restored to the episcopal function; it is expressly declared, that there is no church power in the church office-bearers, but what depends upon, and is subordinate unto the supremacy, and authorized by the bishops, who are declared accountable to the king for the administration; by virtue of which ecclesiastic supremacy, he put excommunication, and spiritual censures, and consequently the power of the keys, into the hands of persons merely civil, in the act for the high commission. Hence it is clear, that as the fountain of all church government, he imparts his authority to such as he pleases, and the bishops are nothing else but his commissioners in the exercise of that ecclesiastic power, which is originally in himself, and that the curates are only his under clerks. All the stress will ly in proving, that this monster of a supremacy, from which the prelates and their curates have all their authority, is a great encroachment on the glory of Christ as king; which will appear, if we will briefly consider these particulars. 1. It usurps upon Christ's prerogative, who only hath all undoubted right to this architectonic and magisterial dominion over the church, his own mediatory kingdom; not only an essential right by his eternal Godhead, being the everlasting Father, whose goings forth hath been of old, from everlasting, Isa. ix. 6. Mic. v. 2. in recognizance of which, we own but one God the Father, and one Lord, by whom are all things, and we by him, 1 Cor. viii. 6. but also a covenant-right, by compact with the Father, to bear the glory and rule upon his throne, by virtue of the counsel of peace between them both, Zech. vi. 13. A donative right by the Father's delegation, by which he hath all power given in heaven and in earth, Mat. xxviii. 18. and all things given into his hand, John iii. 35. and all judgment and authority to execute it, even because he is the Son of man, John v. 22, 27. and to be head over all things to the church, Eph. 1. 22. An institute right, by the Father's inauguration, who hath set him as King in Sion, Psal. ii. 6. and appointed him governor, that shall rule over his people Israel, Matth. ii. 6. An acquisite right, by his own purchase, by which he hath merited and obtained, not only subjects to govern, but the glory of the sole sovereignty over them in that relation. A name above every name, Phil. ii. 9. which is, that he is the head of the church, which is as much his peculiar prerogative, as to be Saviour of the body, Eph. v. 23. A bellical right by conquest, making the people fall under him, Psal. xlv. 4. and be willing in the day of his power, Psal. cx. 3. and overcoming those that make war with him, Rev. xvii. 14. An hereditary right by proximity of blood and promogeniture, being the first born, higher than the kings of the earth, Psal. lxxxix. 27. and the first born from the dead, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence, Col. i. 18. An elective right, by his people's choice and surrender, having a crown wherewith his mother crowned him in the day of his espousals, Cant. iii. last verse. By all which undoubted titles, it is his sole incommunicable prerogative, without a co-partner or competitor, co-ordinate or subordinate, to be judge, and only lawgiver, and king in spirituals, Isa. xxxiii. 22. to be that one lawgiver, Jam. iv. 12. who only can give the power of the keys to his officers, (which comprehends all the power they have) Matth. xvi. 9. to be that one Master over all church officers, who are but brethren, Matth. xxiii. 8, 10. in whose name only they must perform all church acts, and all parts of their ministry, and not in the name of any mortal, Matth. xxviii. 18, 19. Matth. xviii. 20. from whom only they receive whatever they have to deliver to the church, 1 Cor. xi. 23. to be the only instituter of his officers, who hath set them in the church, 1 Cor. xii. 28. and gave them to the church, Eph. iv. 11. whose ambassadors only they are, 2 Cor. v. 20. from whom they have authority for edification of the church, 2 Cor. x. 8. 2 Cor. xiii. 10. in whose name only they are to assemble, and keep and fence their courts, both the least, Matth. xviii. 20. and the greatest, Acts xv. But now also this is usurped by one who is not so much as a church-member, let be a church-officer, as such: for the magistrate is neither, as he is a magistrate, otherwise all magistrates would be church-members. Hence they that have all their power from a mere usurper on Christ's prerogative, who is neither member nor officer of the church, have none at all to be owned or received as his lawful ambassadors; but the prelates and their curates have all their power from a mere usurper on Christ's prerogative, who is neither member nor officer of the church: Ergo——2. It confounds the mediatory kingdom of Christ with, and subjects it to, the kingly government of the world, removes the scripture land-marks and limits between civil and ecclesiastic powers in making the governors of the state to be governors of the church, and denying all church-government in the hands of church-officers, distinct from and independent upon the civil magistrate: which clearly derogates from the glory of Christ's mediatory kingdom, which is altogether distinct from, and not subordinate to the government of the world, both in the old testament and in the new. For, they have distinct fountains whence they flow; civil government flows from God Creator, church government from Christ the Lord Redeemer, Head and King of his church, whose kingdom is not of this world, John xviii. 36. though for this end he came into the world, that he should have a kingdom there, verse 37. They have distinct objects: civil government hath a civil object, the outward man; church government a spiritual object, men considered as Christians; in the old testament, the matters of the Lord are clearly distinguished from the matters of the king, 2 Chron. xix. last verse. In the new testament, there are matters of church cognizance which do not at all belong to the civil magistrate; as, in the case of offence, they must tell the church, not the civil magistrate, Matth. xviii. 15, 20. In the case of excommunication, the church is to act by virtue of the power of the Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Cor. v. 4, 5. not by the magistrate's power; in the case of absolution, the church is to judge what punishment is sufficient, and what evidence of repentance is sufficient to remove it, 2 Cor. ii. 6, 7. So in the case of trial and ordination of ministers, &c. None of those belong to the magistrate. They have distinct natures: the civil is a magisterial, the ecclesiastic is a ministerial government; the one is the power of the sword, the other of the keys; the one put forth in political punishments, the other in ecclesiastic censures: In the old testament, the magistrate's power was coactive, by death, banishment, confiscation, &c. Ezra vii. 26. the church, but putting out of the synagogue, interdiction from sacred things, &c. In the new testament, the magistrate's power is described, Rom. xiii. to be that of the sword by punishment; the power of the church only in binding and loosing, Matth. xvi, 19. They have distinct ends, the end of the one being the good of the commonwealth, the other the church's edification: In the old testament, the end of the civil government was one thing, and of the church another, to wit, to warn not to trespass against the Lord, in that forecited, 2 Chron. xix. 10. In the new testament, the end of magistratical power is to be a terror to evil works, and a praise to the good, Rom. xiii. 3. but the end of church power is edification, 1 Cor. v. 5. 2 Cor. x. 8. 2 Cor. xiii. 10. They have distinct courts of officers: in the old testament, the distinction of the civil and ecclesiastic Sanhedrim is known, where there were distinct causes, and persons set over them to judge them respectively, 2 Chron. xix. last verse. In the new testament, we find officers given unto the church, 1 Cor. xii. 28. with no mention of the civil magistrate at all, and church assemblies distinct from parliaments or senates (yea, when the magistrate was an enemy) determining questions that did not belong to the magistrate at all, Acts xv. we have rulers distinct from the rulers of the commonwealth, 1 Thess. v. 12. whom we are to obey and submit ourselves to as those who are accountable to Christ only, for to whom else can they give account of souls? Heb. xiii. 17. we have rulers inferior to labourers in word and doctrine, not to be honoured so much as they: sure these cannot be civil rulers, 1 Tim. v. 17. we have rulers commended for trying impostors, which were not magistrates, Rev. ii. 2. And others who are rebuked for suffering hereticks, ibid. ver. 14, 15, 20. which supposes they had authority to do it; yet distinct from and not depending on the magistrate. Besides it is from the confusion of the two governments together, and making the supreme magistrate to be supreme governor of the church, would follow many absurdities; as that they who are not church-members should be church-officers, even heathen magistrates; yea women should be church-officers; and none should be chosen for magistrates, but such as have the qualifications of church-officers. See Apol. Relat. Sect. 12. pag. 190. Rectius Instruen. Confut. 1. Dial. chap. 6. pag. 50. Hence, they that in deriving their authority do confound the two governments, civil and ecclesiastic, and take it all from a mere civil power, cannot be owned as having any authority of Christ's institution: but the prelates and their curates, in deriving their authority, do confound the two governments civil and ecclesiastic, and take it all from a mere civil power. This same argument equally militates against hearing the indulged ministers, who have taken a licence and warrant from the usurper of this supremacy: because it is highly injurious to Christ's headship; very contrary to presbyterian principles; clearly homologatory of the supremacy; plainly prejudicial to the power of the people; very much establishing erastianism; sadly obstructive and destructive to the good of the church; wronging our cause and ground of suffering; strengthening the prelates hands; contradictory to our covenants; prejudging the meetings of God's people; and heinously scandalous and offensive: as is clear by, and unanswerably proven in the history of the indulgence.
IV. There is a necessity that any man whom we may join with as a minister, must not only be a minister, and a minister clothed with Christ's commission then, when we join with him, but he must also have a right to administer there where we join with him. Else we can look upon him no otherwise than a thief and a robber, whom Christ's sheep should not hear, John x. 1-5. Now the prelates and curates, though they should be accounted and acknowledged ministers, yet they have not a right to officiate where they have intruded themselves. Hence we have several arguments, as 1. They who have no just authority, nor right to officiate fixedly in this church as the proper pastors of it, ought not to be received but withdrawn from: but the prelates and their curates have no just authority, or right to officiate in this church as her proper pastors: therefore they ought not to be received, but withdrawn from. All the debate is about the minor, which may thus be made good. They who have entered into and do officiate fixedly in this church, without her authority and consent, have no right so to do: but the prelates and their curates have entered into and officiate fixedly in this church, without her authority and consent: Ergo—The major is manifest: for if this church have a just right and power of electing and calling of ministers, then they who enter into and officiate fixedly in this church, without her authority and consent, have no just authority or right so to do: But this church hath a just right and power of electing and calling of ministers, as all true churches have. And, if it were not evident from what is said above, might be easily demonstrated from scripture. The minor, to wit, that the prelates and their curates have entered into and officiate fixedly in this church, without her authority and consent, is evident, from matter of fact: for there was no church-judicatory called or convocated, for bringing of prelates into this church; but on the contrary her judicatories were all cashiered and discharged, and all her officers turned out to let them in; and all was done immediately by the king and acts of parliament without the church; a practice wanting a precedent in this, and (for any thing we know) in all other churches: All that the curates can say is, that they came in by the bishop and patron, who are not the church, nor have any power from her for what they do; all their right and power is founded upon and derived from the supremacy, whereby the diocesan erastian prelate is made the king's delegate and substitute, only impowered thereto by his law. This is Mr. Smith's, 1st and 6th argum. If 'we suppose a particular congregation acknowledging their own lawful pastor, and a few violent persons arise and bring in a minister by plain force, and cast out their lawful pastor; are not the faithful in that church obliged to relinquish the intruder, and not only discountenance him, but endeavour his ejection?' This is our case, Naphtali, pag. 106. Sect. 5. first edition. 2. If we cannot submit to these curates, without consenting to the great encroachments made upon the privileges of this church, then we cannot submit to them without sin; but we cannot submit to them without consenting to the great encroachments made upon the privileges of this church: therefore we cannot submit to them without sin. The minor is all the question: but instances will make it out. As first, The robbing of the privilege of election of her pastors, and substituting the bondage of patrons presentations, is a great encroachment upon the privilege of this church: but accepting of curates as ministers lawfully called, notwithstanding that they want the election of the people, and have nothing for their warrant but a presentation from the patron, were a consenting to that robbery and wicked substitution. It will be of no force to say, Our forefathers did submit to this, and to a ministry who had no other call. This is answered above in the narrative; 'tis a poor consequence to say, The posterity may return backward, because their forefathers could not advance further forward. Secondly, The thrusting out of lawful ministers without any cause but their adhering to the covenanted work of reformation, and thrusting in others in their rooms who denied the same, is a great encroachment on the churches privileges; but embracing and encouraging curates by countenancing their pretended ministry, were a consenting to this violent extrusion and intrusion. The minor is proven thus. They who leave the extruded, and countenance the intruded, they consent to the extrusion and intrusion, and declare they confess the intruded's right is better than his who is extruded: but they who embrace and encourage curates by countenancing their pretended ministry, do leave the extruded, to wit, their old ministers, and countenance the intruded: Ergo——To say, that people, in this case, should protest against these encroachments is frivolous; for withdrawing is the best protestation: and if after their protestation they still countenance the encroachment, they should undo their own protestation. The same argument will militate against countenancing the indulged, or any that obtained authority to preach in any place by a power encroaching on the churches liberties. There is an objection to be removed here, from Matth. xxiii. 2, 3. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses chair; therefore whatever they bid you observe, that observe and do; therefore they who, without a title, usurp the office, may be heard. Ans. 1. The case is no-ways alike; for then the Lord had no other church in the world but that, which was confined in its solemnities of worship to that place, where they intruded themselves: he had not yet instituted the New Testament form of administration in its ordinances and officers. Therefore the head of the church being present might give a toleration, during pleasure: but it is not so now. But, 2. Our Lord's words bear no command for the people to hear them at all, but only not to reject sound doctrine, because it came from them: surely he would not bid them hear such, as he calls plants that his Father had never planted, whom he bids let alone, Matth. xv. 13, 14. and who were thieves and robbers whom his sheep should not hear.
V. They must not only be ministers, and acknowledged as such then and there, when and where we join with them; but they must be such as we can own church communion with in the ordinances administrated by them, as to the matter of them. Otherwise if they pervert and corrupt their ministry, by preaching and maintaining errors, either in doctrine, worship, discipline, or government, contrary to the scriptures, our confessions, and principles of our covenanted reformation, and contradictory to our testimony founded thereupon, and agreeable thereunto, maintaining errors condemned thereby, or condemning truths maintained thereby, we must withdraw from them. For if any seek to turn us away from the Lord our God, we must put away that evil, and not consent nor hearken to them, Deut. xiii. 5, 8. We must cease to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge, Prov. xix. 27. We must have a care of these leaders that will cause us to err lest we be destroyed with them, Isa. ix. 16. we must mark these who contradict the doctrine that we have learned, and avoid them, Rom. xvi. 17. If any man teach otherwise we must withdraw ourselves from such, 1 Tim. vi. 3, 5. If there come any, and bring not this doctrine, we must not receive him, nor bid him God speed, in that work of his preaching or practising against any of the truths, we have received from the word, 1 John x. 11. Hence we must not hear false teachers, who, in preaching and prayer, bring forth false doctrine contrary to the principles of our reformation; but the curates are false teachers, who, in preaching and prayer, bring forth false doctrine, &c. Therefore we must not hear them. The minor is certain, in that not only many of them are tainted with points of Popery and Arminianism; but all of them do teach false doctrine tending to seduce the hearers: when in their preaching they cry up the lawfulness of prelacy, and vent bitter invectives against presbyterian government, condemn the work of reformation, and inveigh against the covenant, and so teach and encourage people to follow them in open perjury, and condemning all our testimony, as nothing but treason and sedition; which we are persuaded is truth, and that therefore they are blasphemers: and in their prayers, stuffed with error, and larded with blasphemy, they reproach the work of reformation, and the power of godliness, and pray for a blessing on the prelates, and on their courses which are cursed; besides their parasitick prayers for the king, to be blessed in his government when stated in opposition to Christ, and several other things that tender consciences cannot go along with them therein. And yet if they hear them, they must go along and actively concur with them, as their mouth to God. If it be objected here, that this doth not strike against all, nor against any at all times, because some preach always sound doctrine, and all preach sometime sound doctrine, and the like may be said of their prayers: therefore sometimes at least they may be heard. I answer 1. This may be alledged for all hereticks, who do all at sometimes preach sound doctrine, and yet these scriptures are stringent against them at all times, which I have adduced; for by these fruits which they bring forth at sometimes, they shew themselves to be such as we must beware of at all times. 2. We cannot know when they will preach sound doctrine, seeing by their subjection to that government, they are obliged to maintain prelacy, and impugn our covenanted constitution.
VI. They must not only be such as we can join with in the ordinances as to the matter of them, but in the manner also they must be such administrators, as we are obliged in charity to think the Lord will approve of them, and their administrations, and of us in our communion with them; or at least, that, in their manner of dispensing ordinances, they be not such as we find are under a recorded sentence of dreadful punishment, both against them and their partakers: for if it be so, it is as sufficient a ground to withdraw from them, as for men to withdraw from a company staying in a house, that they see will fall and smother them in its ruin; yea it is as warrantable to separate from them, as for Israel to separate themselves from the congregation of the rebels who were to be consumed in a moment, Numb. xvi. 21. or for the Lord's people to come out of Babylon, that they receive not of her plagues, Rev. xviii. 4. Now we find that not only the prophets of Baal, and enticers to idolatry, and leaders to error upon the matter are threatened, and the people for adhering to them, but we find also (as is observed by Rectius Instruendum confut. dial chap. 1. pag. 21.) many terrible charges and adjurations laid upon ministers, in reference to a faithful diligence in their ministerial function, and a suitable testimony concerning the sin and duty of the time, that they are commanded to cry aloud and shew the people their sin, Isa. lviii. 1. and as they would not have the blood of souls upon them, to give faithful warning touching the peoples case and hazard, sin and duty, especially in times of great sin and judgment, when God is terribly pleading his controversy with them, Ezek. iii. 17. therefore they must be instant in season and out of season, 2 Tim. iv. 2. And for their negligence and unfaithfulness herein, we find many scripture woes and threatenings thundered against them. When in the deceit of their own heart they promise assured peace, when the Lord is pleading against a generation, they are threatened to be consumed with sword and famine, and the people to whom they prophesy shall be cast out in the streets, Jer. xiv. 13, 15, 16. therefore we dare not admit them to prophesy to us. When they strengthen the hands, and harden the hearts of evil doers, that none doth return from his wickedness, the Lord threatens to feed them with wormwood, and commands not to hearken to them, Jer. xxiii. 14.-16. their blood shall be required at their hands, Ezek. iii. 18. one builds a wall, and another daubs it with untempered morter, then ye, O great hailstones shall fall, and they shall be consumed in the midst thereof, Ezek. xiii. 10, 11, 14, 18, 22. we dare not join with either builders or daubers of such a work, as is carried on to the dishonour of Christ and ruining of reformation, nor by our countenance and concurrence strengthen either builders or daubers; lest we also be consumed in the midst thereof. When there is a conspiracy of the prophets, and the priests violate the law, and profane holy things, and shew no difference between the unclean and the clean, then the Lord will pour out his indignation upon all, Ezek. xxii. 25,—to the end. We would endeavour to keep ourselves free of having any hand in that conspiracy. These scriptures do give the perfect pourtracture of our curates, in the conviction of all that know them. Hence we draw a complex argument: such ministers as can do no good by their ministry, but a great deal of hurt to their hearers, and expose themselves and them both to the indignation of a jealous God, are not to be heard; but the curates are such as can do no good by their ministry, but a great deal of hurt to their hearers, and expose themselves and them both to the indignation of the jealous Lord: therefore they are not to be heard. The connexion of the major is clear from what is said above. The minor is also evident from the application of these scriptures, thus: they that in the deceit of their own heart promise peace to, and strengthen the hands of evil doers, and give them not warning, but seduce them by daubing their wickedness, and shew no difference between the unclean and the clean, &c. are such as can do no good by their ministry, but a great deal of hurt to hearers, and expose themselves and them both to the indignation of God; but the curates are such, and all others, who are so unfaithful as to give no warning against, but justify the sins of the times. To be short, the minor of both these foregoing arguments is evident from the experience of all that go to the curates, who wrong thereby their own souls, mar their edification; and run to cisterns without water. What blessing can be expected upon the labours of such, who having perjured themselves in taking on with the prelates, are prosecuting that course of defection, and making themselves captains to lead the people back to Egypt, encouraging profanity and wickedness, being themselves patterns and patrons of the times corruptions? And seeing a blessing cannot be expected upon their labours, but rather a curse, as daily experience maketh good, when instead of any work of conversion or conviction among people, there is nothing seen but a fearful hardening in profanity, ignorance and atheism: so that many that seemed to have somewhat like religion before, through hearing of them, are turned loose and lax in all duties: yea never can it be instanced these twenty-seven years, that they have brought one soul to Christ, from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God: but many instances might be given of their murdering souls, as indeed they cannot be free of it, who cannot warn nor declare the whole counsel of God. Hence these who cannot but be soul-murderers, may not be heard nor entertained as soul-physicians; but the curates cannot but be soul-murderers. Again, we can expect no good from them, but a great deal of hurt; seeing their ministry is not the Lord's ordinance, which he will approve, and no performances can be acceptable unto the Lord which are not, in manner as well as in matter, agreeable to his will: hence the wickedness even of the Lord's lawful priests, not only caused the people to abhor the offerings of the Lord, but even the Lord himself to abhor his sanctuary, and to account their incense an abomination, so that he could not away with the calling of their assemblies, which yet upon the matter were duties. Should not we then hate that which the Lord hates, and withdraw from that which he hath forsaken? But the meetings of the curates for administration of ordinances in their way, the Lord hates, and hath signally forsaken: therefore we should hate and forsake them. This is confirmed by what Mr. Durham says in that digression about hearing, Rev. 1. page 55. in quarto, 'Seeing edification is God's gift, can it be expected but in his way, or can that be accounted his way which he hath not warranted.'
VII. As we would not partake of their judgment in countenancing of their administration of ordinances, so we would keep ourselves free from all participation of their sin; for we must not be partakers with any in sin, nor have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, that we must reprove, and that we find the Lord reproves and condemns, Eph. v. 7, 11. and not only ministers in ordaining, but people in hearing, may be in hazard of partaking of some mens sins, who enter into the ministry, 1 Tim. v. 22. we must keep at the greatest distance from sin: hence if we hear the curates without partaking of their sin, then we must not hear them; but we cannot hear the curates without partaking of their sin: therefore we must not hear them. The minor I prove. If hearing of them be a tessera of our incorporation with them, a test of our submission to them, a badge of our compliance with them, and sign of our approbation of them, then we cannot hear them without partaking of their sin; but hearing of them is such: the major cannot be denied, if prelacy and conformity therewith be sin, as is in part proven above: for if these be sins, then we must not incorporate with, nor submit to them, nor comply with them, nor approve them. The minor I prove by parts. 1. Hearing of curates is a tessera of our incorporation with them; for communion in sacred things doth infer an incorporation of the communicants or joiners in all cases, both in lawful and unlawful communions, 1 Cor. x. 17.-20. All partakers of the bread are one body, and they which eat of the sacrifices are partakers of the altar; and also they that partake of the sacrifice offered to devils, though they do not offer it so themselves, yet they are incorporate, and have fellowship with devils. And 2 Cor. vi. 14.-17. where they that do not come out, and are separate from unlawful communions, are expostulated with, as making an unequally yoked fellowship between righteousness and unrighteousness, light and darkness, Christ and Belial, the temple of God and idols: hence then, if we cannot partake of their sacred things, without partaking of their altar, and becoming one body with them, and making such an unequally yoked mixture with them, then we must be separate; but the first is true from these places. This argument concludes with equal force, against joining with any deeply engaged in the gross defections of the time. 2. Hearing of curates is a test of our submission to them, and compliance with them: for so it is required by law, as the acts themselves say, 'That a chearful concurrence, countenance, and assistance given to such ministers, and attending all the ordinary meetings for divine worship, is an evidence of a due acknowledgment of, and hearty compliance with his majesty's government ecclesiastical and civil, as now established by law within this kingdom,' Act of Parl. July 10, 1663. And themselves look on all such as obey this act as their friends. Hence, if this be sinful to submit to them, and comply with their establishment, in obedience to a sinful act of parliament, then it is sinful to hear them; but the former is true, as hath been shown: Therefore——3. Hence it follows, by native consequence, that hearing of curates is a sign of our approbation of them: for he that gives that which is required, and accepted, and interpreted as an evidence of a due acknowledgment, and of compliance with the government ecclesiastical, gives the sign of his approbation of it; but the hearer of curates does that in obedience to the act requiring accepting, and expresly interpreting it so: therefore, &c.
VIII. As we would be free of their sin, in approving of, and complying with their course; so we must endeavour to stand at the greatest distance from all appearance of sin in ourselves, either by commission or omission, in which our joining with them in these circumstances would involve us. For we must abstain from all appearance of evil, 1 Thess. v. 22. and from every thing that circumstances may make sinful: for otherwise, suppose a thing might be materially lawful and not sinfully sinful, yet circumstances may make it sinful, and a countenancing it so circumstantiated, doth infer a communion in these circumstances that makes it sinful. They that eat of the sacrifice are partakers of the altar, and if the altar be not of God's approbation, the thing offered, though otherwise lawful to be eaten, cannot justify the eaters, so circumstantiated. An idol is nothing, and that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is nothing, yet they who eat of it, when they know it is so circumstantiated, have fellowship with devils, 1 Cor. x. 18, 19, 20, 21. And it is called idolatry, comp. verse 14. which provokes the Lord to jealousy, verse 22. Especially when an action is so circumstantiated, that it would infer an omission of our duty, and a declining from or denying of our testimony, then it is clearly sinful. For whosoever shall deny the Lord before men, him will he deny before his Father, Matth. x. 33. And we must 'hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering,' Heb. x. 23. and 'keep the word of his patience,' if we would be kept in the hour of temptation, and hold it fast that no man take our crown, Rev. iii. 10, 11. 'All truth must be avowed, and practically avowed, on the greatest hazard: and as this testimony must be full so must it be also constant. It was Demas's shame, that the afflictions of the gospel made him forsake the apostle, after great appearances for Christ: and therefore whatever truth or duty is opposed, that becomes the special object of this testimony.' Rectius instruend. confut. 3. Dial. Chap. 1. Pag. 18, 19. Hence, if hearing of the curates would infer and involve us under the guilt both of commission of sin, and omission of duty, then we cannot hear them without sin; but the former is true; therefore also the latter. I prove the minor by parts. First, That it would infer and involve us under the guilt of commission of sin, all that is said above doth evince it; and besides, palpable breach of covenant, hereafter to be charged and cleared: and idolatry is a great sin of that nature; but the hearing of the curates doth infer this. Which may be made out thus; the breach of the second commandment is idolatry, (for to make the sins against that command odious, they are all comprehended under that odious name of worshipping images, as the sins against the seventh are called adultery, comprehending all unchaste thoughts, words, and actions); hearing of curates is a breach of the second command: Ergo——The minor I prove thus: Every worship, not according to Christ's appointment, is a breach of the second commandment; but hearing of curates is a worship not according to Christ's appointment. Which I prove thus: a worship enjoined by, and performed in obedience to a law, establishing a human ordinance in the church, besides and against the institution of Christ, is a worship not according to Christ's appointment; but the hearing of curates is a worship enjoined by, and performed in obedience to a law establishing a human ordinance, to wit Diocesan Erastian prelacy, with the curates their substitutes. Hence also the second doth follow by necessary consequence, that it would infer and involve us under the guilt of omission of duty. For, first, If reductively it may involve us under the guilt of idolatry and breach of the second commandment, then it will infer the guilt of omission of these necessary duties incumbent to the Lord's people with a reference to idolatry; to make no covenant with them nor with their gods, nor let them dwell in the land, lest they make us sin, Exod. xxiii. 32. 33. Exod. xxxiv. 14, 15. to overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and destroy the names of them out of the place, Deut. xii. 3. Judg. ii. 2. I do not adduce these precepts, to stretch them to the full measure of the demerit of the grossest of idolaters: for as there are degrees of breaches of the commandment, some grosser, some smaller, so there are also degrees of punishment, and as to the manner of destroying and extirpating all pieces of idolatry; but that the commands being founded upon a moral ground, lest they be sins and snares unto us, do oblige us to some endeavour of expelling, extirpating and overthrowing all pieces of idolatry, according to the word and our covenants; 'and that the true and right zeal of God should and would not only inspire all with an unanimous aversion against the profane intruding curates, but animate us as one man to drive away these wolves and thieves, and to eradicate these plants which our heavenly Father never planted,' Naph. Prior edit. pag. 108. The least duty that can be inferred is that of the apostles, flee from idolatry, 1 Cor. x. 14. which idolatry, there mentioned to be avoided, is to eat of the sacrifices offered to idols: whence we infer, that if to eat of things consecrated to idols be idolatry, then also to partake of sacred things consecrated by idols must be idolatry; as the curates dispensing of ordinances is consecrated by, and hath all its sanction from an idol of Diocesan Erastian prelacy; but we see the apostle expresses the former: therefore we may infer the latter. Further, It will also infer a declining from, and denying a necessary testimony, in the case circumstantiated. Even the smallest matter is great, when a testimony is concerned in it, were it but the circumstance of an open window; Daniel durst not omit it upon the greatest hazard. And now this is clearly come to a case of confession, when there is no other way to exoner our 'consciences before God and the world, and declare our non-conformity to this course of backsliding, no getting of wrongs redressed, or corruptions in the ministry removed, but by this practice; and certainly some way we must give public testimony against these courses, and there is no other way so harmless and innocent as this, though suffering follow upon it,' Apol. Relat. Sect. 14. 272, 273. And now there is no other way apparent, whereby the difference shall be kept up betwixt such as honestly mind the covenanted work of reformation, and the corrupt prelatical and malignant enemies; but this argument also will infer the expediency of withdrawing from all ministers, with whom our circumstantiate joining would involve us in a participation with their defections.
IX. As we would endeavour to avoid sin in ourselves; so we must have a care to give no occasion of others sinning, by our taking liberty in a promiscuous joining in church communion, whereby we may offend and stumble the conscience of others: for to that, in this as well as in other things, we must have a special respect, and forbear things, not only for our own unclearness, but for the sake of others also. If therefore the hearing of curates be a scandal, we must refuse it, be the hazard what will: for 'whoso shall offend one of Christ's little ones, it were better for him that a milstone were hanged about his neck,' Matth. xviii. 6. 'No man must put a stumbling block, or an occasion to fall in his brother's way,' Rom. xiv. 13. They that 'sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, they sin against Christ,' 1 Cor. viii. 12. we must forbear some things for conscience sake. Conscience, I say, not our own, but of others, giving none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God,' 1 Cor. x. 28, 29, 32. and so 'cut off all occasion from them that desire occasion,' 2 Cor. xi. 12. 'These commands discharge whatever practice gives occasion of our brother's sinning, of calling truth in question, of acting with a doubting conscience, or which weakens his plerophory or assurance; and neither the lawfulness nor indifferency of the thing itself, nor mens authority commanding it, nor the weakness, yea, or wickedness of those in hazard to be stumbled, will warrant the doing of that out of which offence arises,' Rectius Instruend. Confut. 3. Dial. chap. 1. p. 19. Mr. Durham in that forecited place saith, 'It carries offence along with it; in reference to the party who runs unsent, it proves a strengthening and confirming of him, and so a partaking of his sin; in reference to others, either strengthens them by that example, to cast themselves in that snare, which possibly may be their ruin; or it grieves them, and makes them sad, who are tender of such things, or gives occasion to make all difference of that kind to be thought light of.' Hence, if hearing of the curates be an offence or scandal, both in reference to malignants, and in reference to the godly, and in reference to the posterity, then it must be avoided; but the former is true: which is evidenced by parts. First, in reference to malignants, it hardens and encourages them in their opposition to the work of God, and all backsliders and compliers with them in their apostacy; this strengthens their hands in their wicked courses, when they see how they are countenanced by all, and that there is no disrespect put upon them, nor dissatisfaction evinced against their courses, then they conclude that they are approven of all: and this hardeneth them, so that they never once think of the evil of their ways. Next, in reference to the godly, stumbles the truly tender, by encouraging them to do contrary to their light and conscience, even when they are not clear to hear them, then they are emboldened thereunto when they see others doing so; and so it tends to the wounding of their peace, and makes them halt in the ways of the Lord. Lastly, With reference to posterity, it would prejudge them very much: though now the honest party be not in a capacity to transmit the work of reformation unto their posterity, in such a manner as were to be wished: yet they should do something for keeping fresh the memory of the good old cause, by keeping up some footsteps of a standing controversy for Zion's interest against the common enemy: but now let all join with, and own the curates, what appearance of this shall the posterity see? shall not they conclude that the day is lost, and the cause is gone, when they see that this generation hath fled the fields, or rather sold and betrayed the cause, by owning, countenancing, and complying with the enemy, and no standing testimony against these corruptions? whereas if there were but this much of a standing difference, betwixt the people of God and the common enemies of God, to be seen, posterity shall in some measure be kept from being deceived, and shall see the interest of Christ not killed nor buried quick, but living, though in a bleeding condition, and this will occasion their engaging for Christ, and interesting themselves in the quarrel; and it is far better to see the cause of Christ owned, though by suffering and blood, than sold and betrayed by base flenching and complying with persecutors. This argument may also sound and infer a withdrawing from the addressing ministers, who, to the great scandal of presbyterians, give forth their addresses in the name of all of that persuasion.
X. Our duty to themselves, yea our greatest office of love we owe to them, in order to their conviction, does oblige us to withdraw from them. This may seem a paradox, yet it will be apparent, if we search the scriptures, to see what we owe to scandalous brethren. There we find it is a duty, to endeavour by all lawful means to shame them out of their sin; and it is an argument of hatred, when we do not rebuke our neighbour, or when we suffer sin upon him, Lev. xix. 17. If we consider them then as neighbours and friends, we must use endeavours to take away their sin from them; if we consider them not as such, but as enemies, then we must avoid them, and not be mingled with them, as I could adduce many scriptures for that. But I suppose all that will oppose my thesis, would have them considered as friends. Well then, if they be scandalous brethren, this is the way prescribed by the apostle to deal with them, in order not to suffer sin upon them, that we should withdraw from them our company; and if we must withdraw our company, then also a fortiori, we must deny them our religious communion: for that must either be included there, or necessarily inferred. He writes, not to keep company: If any man that is called a brother (mark that especially) be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or an extortioner, with such an one no not to eat, 1 Cor. v. 11. And I presume they that know them best will grant, that it would not be hard to prove, that all the curates in Scotland were chargeable with some of these, or at least partakers with them; and that if they were all impartially impannelled, they would be rare ones, whom an honest jury would not bring in guilty of this libel. Then we are expresly commanded 'in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw ourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the received tradition. And if any man obey not the word, to note him, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed,' 2 Thess. iii. 6, 14. Sure neither their office nor their innocency can exempt them from these rules. For either they must be considered as our brethren; or not; if not, then we own no church communion with them; for that is only among brethren that are so in sympathy and affection, and affinity, having one father and one mother, if they be brethren, then all scandalous brethren are to be withdrawn from; but they are scandalous brethren: therefore they are to be withdrawn from. The minor will not be doubted by any, but such as are strangers to them, who both in their ministerial and personal capacity are so scandalous to the conviction of all, that profaneness hath gone forth from them into all the land, and they as much as ever the profane sons of Eli, have made men to abhor the offering of the Lord, 1 Sam. ii. 17. But even strangers, that are unacquaint with their personal profligateness and ignorance, &c. cannot be altogether ignorant of the scandal of prelacy and erastianism, in which they are involved, of the scandal of apostasy, perjury, and breach of covenant, which is their brand, and the nation's bane, that hath countenanced them. And none can doubt, but if our church were duly constitute, and invested with the orderly power of Christ, and in capacity to exercise and improve it, they would soon be censured every soul of them as scandalous, as they have been also previously sentenced as such, by the acts of our general assemblies. This argument levels also against all complying, indulged, addressing ministers, who by these courses have incurred the character of disorderly brethren.
XI. Our faithfulness to God, and to one another, engaged in our covenants, doth oblige us to turn away from them who have broken it, and so classed themselves among these truce breaking traitors, who make our times perilous, from whom we must turn away, 2 Tim. iii. 1,—5. It appears from the foregoing deduction, how solemnly these nations were engaged, both to keep out and put out this generation of prelatists, now prevailing; the obligation of which yet lies upon all the inhabitants of the land, with a binding force, both in regard of their form, and object and end. Hence, if the curates be covenant-breakers, and we also in owning them, then we cannot own them without sin; but the curates are covenant-breakers, and we also in owning them: Ergo——The minor may be manifest by an induction of all the articles of the solemn league and covenant, broken by them, and all that own them. 1. That doctrine, worship, discipline and government in the 1st article, sworn to be preserved and propagated, was the presbyterian then established, which our church was in possession of, which they have opposed, and their owners refiled from, and have not maintained. 2. We are engaged in the 2d article, to endeavour the extirpation of prelacy, and its dependents; which is diametrically opposite to owning of curates: can we own them whom we are bound to abhor? and submit to them whom we are bound to extirpate? Surely this were to rebuild what we have destroyed, see Napht. p. 104. and since in relation to popery, heresy and schism, this article obliges us to disown, and not to hear papists and schismatics, why not also in relation to prelatists, who are greatest schismatics? 3. They have established and homologated an erastian supremacy, to the prejudice of true religion, and the liberties of the church and kingdom; and their owners have abetted and countenanced the same, and not preserved either the liberties of church or kingdom, contrary to the 3d article. 4. They have not only concealed and countenanced malignant enemies to this church and kingdom, but have themselves been real incendiaries, hindering the reformation of religion, making factions and parties among them contrary to this league and covenant: and their hearers are so far from bringing them to condign punishment, that they have strengthened their hands in their avowed opposition to the covenants, contrary to the 4th article. 5. They have broken our conjunction in firm peace and union, and yet their hearers have not marked and avoided these causers of divisions, contrary to scripture, and the 5th article. 6. Instead of assisting and defending all these that entered into this league and covenant, &c. they have been the greatest persecutors of all them that adhered to it; and their owners have suffered themselves, by combination, or persuasion, or terror, to be divided and withdrawn from their suffering brethren, and have made defection to the contrary part, and given themselves to a detestable indifferency in this cause, contrary to the 6th article. 7. Instead of humbling themselves for their sins, and going before others in the example of a real reformation, they have obstinately defended their breach of covenant, and have been patrons and patterns of all deformations; and their owners and hearers have not repented of that neither, when they countenance such covenant-breakers and profane persons, nor of their not labouring for the purity and power of the gospel when they seek it from such impure hands: neither do they go before others in reformation, when they are such bad examples of defection, contrary to the conclusion of the covenant. This argument will also strike against hearing of such ministers, that have made themselves guilty of the same, or equivalent breaches of covenant.
XII. Finally, for union's sake, and to avoid schism in the body, we must withdraw from them. This may seem another paradox; but it is apparent, if we consider, 'That there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care one for another,' 1 Cor. xii. 25. And that for to prevent and remeid this, the apostle 'beseeches us to mark them which cause divisions and offences, contrary to the doctrine which we have learned, and avoid them,' Rom. xvi. 17. Now then, if the prelates and their curates be schismatics and separatists, and dividers, then we must avoid and withdraw from them, but so it is, that the prelates and their curates are schismatics and separatists, and dividers: therefore we must avoid and withdraw from them. The minor I prove from all the constituents of a formed schism, separation and sinful division. 1. They that start out from under due relations to a church, and from her ministry, are schismatics, separatists and dividers; but the prelates and their curates have started out from under due relations to the covenanted church of Scotland, and from her ministry, in being so unnatural rebellious children, as have broken their mother's beauty and bands, order and union, and razed her covenanted reformation in doctrine, worship, discipline and government. 2. These who withdraw from the communion of a true church, and therefore are censurable by all her standing acts, are schismatical separatists; but the prelates and their curates have withdrawn from the communion of the true church of Scotland, and therefore are censureable by all her standing acts, in that they have made a faction and combination repugnant to the communion of this church, and all her established order. 3. Those who separate from a church, whose principles and practices are subservient to that church's true union and communion, and right establishment, are properly schismatics; but the prelates and their curates have separated from this church, whose principles and practices are subservient to its true union and communion, and right establishment: for they could never yet impeach or challenge any principle or practice, contrary to the word of God, or not subservient to true union and order, but their principles and practices are stated in opposition to her purity and reformation. Those who innovate the worship and government, owned and established in a true church, are schismatics; but the prelates and their curates have innovated the worship and government of the true church of Scotland, in bringing a doctrine new and odd, and not the voice of this church; and their worship, over and above the corruption adhering to it, is the worshipping of an innovating party, contrary to our church's established order. 5. They that make a rent in the bowels of the true and genuine church, are the schismatics; but the prelates and their curates have made a rent in the bowels of this church, and have caused all the divisions in this church. 6. Those that divide themselves from the fellowship of a pure church, either in her ministry, lawful courts and ordinances, are the schismatics; but the prelates and their curates have divided themselves from the fellowship of this pure church, in her ministry, lawful courts and ordinances, in that they have caused the ejection of her ministry, dissipation of her assemblies, and subversion of her pure ordinances. 7. Those that break union with such, to whom they were under obligations to adhere, are schismatical dividers; but the prelates and their curates have broken union with such to whom they were under obligations to adhere, both from the antecedent morally obliging duty, and from the superadded obligation of the covenants, neither could they ever pretend any thing that might loose the obligation. 8. That party in a reformed church, which having overturned her reformation, hath shut out, laid aside, and persecute away sound adherers thereunto, both ministers and professors, and will not admit ministers to officiate, but upon the sinful terms of compliance with their way, are schismatics; but the prelates and their curates are that party in this reformed church, which having overturned her reformation, hath shut out, laid aside, and persecute away sound adherers thereunto, &c. therefore they are the schismatics to be withdrawn from, and their way is the schism, which we are bound to extirpate in the covenant.
The sufferings of many for refusing to own the tyrant's authority vindicated.
The other grand ordinance of God, magistracy, which he hath in his sovereign wisdom, justice, and goodness, appointed, ordained, and consecrated, for the demonstration, illustration, and vindication of his own glory, and the communication, conservation, and reparation of the peace, safety, order, liberty, and universal good of mankind, is next to that of the ministry of great concern: wherein not only the prudence, policy, property, and liberty of men, but also the conscience, duty, and religion of Christians, have a special interest. And therefore it is no less important, pertinent, profitable, and necessary for every one that hath any of these to care and contend for, keep and recover, to inquire into and understand something of the institution, constitution, nature, and boundaries of the sacred ordinances of magistracy, than into the holy ordinance of the ministry; so far at least as may consist with the sphere of every one's capacity and station, and may conduce to the satisfaction of every one's conscience, in the discharge of the duties of their relations. Every private man indeed hath neither capacity, concern, nor necessity, to study the politics, or search into the secrets, or intrigues of government, no more than he is to be versed in all the administrations of ecclesiastical policy, and interests of the ministry; yet every man's conscience is no less concerned, in distinguishing the character of God's ministers of justice, the magistrates, to whom he owes and owns allegiance, that they be not usurping tyrants, everting the ordinances of the magistracy, than in acknowledging the character of Christ's ministers of the gospel, to whom he owes and owns obedience, that they be not usurping prelates or impostors, perverting the ordinance of the ministry. The glory of God is much concerned, in our owning and keeping pure and entire, according to his will and word, both these ordinances. And our conscience as well as interest is concerned in the advantage or hurt, profit or prejudice, of the right or wrong, observation or prevarication, of both these ordinances; being interested in the advantage of magistracy, and hurt of tyranny in the state, as well as in the advantage of the ministry, and hurt of diocesan, or erastian supremacy in the church; in the advantage of liberty, and hurt of slavery in the state, as well as in the advantage of religion, and hurt of profaneness in the church; in the profit of laws, and prejudice of prerogative in the state, as well as in the profit of truth, and prejudice of error in the church; in the profit of peace and true loyalty, and prejudice of oppression and rebellion in the state, as well as in the profit of purity and unity, and prejudice of defection, and division or schism in the church. So that in confidence, we are no more free to prostitute our loyalty and liberty absolutely, in owning every possessor of the magistracy; than we are free to prostitute our religion and faith implicitly, in owning every pretender to the ministry. This may seem very paradoxical to some, because so dissonant and dissentient from the vulgar, yea almost universal and inveterate opinion and practice of the world, that hitherto hath not been so precise in the matter of magistracy. And it may seem yet more strange, that not only some should be found to assert this; but that any should be found so strict and strait laced, as to adventure upon suffering, and even to death, for that which hath hitherto been seldom scrupled, by any that were forced to subjection under a yoke, which they had no force to shake off, and wherein religion seems little or nothing concerned; for not owning the authority of the present possessors of the place of government: which seems to be a question not only excentric and extrinsic to religion, but such a state-question, as for its thorny intricacies and difficulties, is more proper for politicians and lawyers to dispute about, (as indeed their debates about this head of authority, have been as manifold and multiplied as about any one thing) than for private christians to search into, and suffer for, as a part of their testimony. But if we will cast off prejudices, and the tyranny of custom, and the bondage of being bound to the world's mind in our inquiries about tyranny, and suffer ourselves to ponder impartially the importance of this matter; and then to state the question right; we shall find religion and conscience hath no small interest in this business. They must have no small interest in it, if we consider the importance of this matter, either extensively, objectively, or subjectively. Extensively considered, it is the interest of all mankind to know and be resolved in conscience, whether the government they are under be of God's ordination, or of the devil's administration? Whether it be magistracy or tyranny? Whether it gives security for religion and liberty, to themselves and their posterity? Or whether it induces upon themselves, and entails upon the posterity, slavery as to both these invaluable interests? Whether they have matter of praise to God for the blessings and mercies of magistracy, or matter of mourning for the plagues and miseries of tyranny, to the end they may know both the sins and snares, duties and dangers, cases and crisis, of the times they live in? All men, that ever enjoyed the mercy of a right constitute magistracy, have experienced, and were bound to bless God for the blessed fruits of it: and, on the other hand, the world is full of the tragical monuments of tyranny, for which men were bound both to search into the causes, and see the effects of such plagues from the Lord, to the end they might mourn over both. And from the beginning it hath been observed, that as people's sins have always procured the scourge of tyranny; so all their miseries might be refounded upon tyrants encroachments, usurping upon or betraying their trust, and overturning religion, laws and liberties. Certainly mankind is concerned in point of interest and conscience, to inquire into the cause and cure of this epidemic distemper, that hath so long held the world in misery, and so habitually, that now it is become, as it were, natural to ly stupidly under it; that is, that old ingrained gangrene of the king's evil, or compliance with tyranny, that hath long afflicted the kingdoms of the world, and affected not only their backs in bearing the burden thereof; but their hearts into a lethargic stupor of insensibleness; and their heads in infatuating and intoxicating them with notions of the sacredness and uncontroulableness of tyranny; and their hands in infeebling and fettering them from all attempts to work a cure: or else it hath had another effect on many that have been sensible of a touch of it; even equivalent to that, which an ingenious author, Mr. Gee, in his preface to the divine right and original of the civil magistrate, (to which Mr. Durham is not absonant) expounds to be the effect of the fourth vial, Rev. xvi. 8, 9. when in these dog days of the world, power is given to the sun of imperial, especially popish, tyranny, by their exorbitant stretches of absolute prerogative, to scorch men with fire of furious oppressions, they then blaspheme the name of God which hath power over these plagues, in their male-content complaints, grumblings, grudgings, and murmurings under the misery, but they do not repent, nor give him glory, in mourning over the causes promeriting such a plague, and their own accession in exposing themselves to such a scorching sun, nakedly without a sconce. Certainly this would be the remedy that conscience would suggest, and interest would incite to, an endeavour either of allaying the heat or of subtracting from it under a shelter, by declining the oblique malignity of its scorching rays. But will the world never be awakened out of this dream and dotage, of dull and stupid subjection to every monster that can mount a throne? Sure at length it may be expected, either conscience from within as God's deputy, challenging for the palpable perversion of this his excellent ordinance, or judgments from without, making sensible of the effects of it, will convince and confute these old inveterate prejudices. And then these martyrs for that universal interest of mankind, who got the fore-start and the first sight of this, will not be so flouted as fools, as now they are. And who knoweth, what prelude or preparative, foreboding and presaging the downfal of tyranny, may be in its aspirings to this height of arbitrary absoluteness, and in the many questions raised about it, and by them imposed upon consciences to be resolved. If we consider the object of this question; as conscience can only clear it, so in nothing can it be more concerned. It is that great ordinance of God, most signally impressed by a very sacred and illustrious character of the glorious majesty of the Most High, who hath appointed magistracy; in which, considering either its fountain, or dignity, ends, or effects, conscience must have a very great concern. The fountain, or efficient cause of magistracy, is high and sublime. The powers that are, be of God, not only by the all-disposing hand of God in his providence, as tyranny is, nor only by way of naked approbation, but by divine in-institution; and that not only in the general, by at least a secondary law of nature, but also the special investiture of it, in institution and constitution, is from God; and therefore they are said to be ordained of God, to which ordinance we must be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake: which is the great duty required in the fifth commandment, the first commandment with promise; that hath the priority of place before all the second table, because the other commandments respect each some one interest, this hath a supereminent influence upon all. But tyrannical powers are not of God in this sense. And it were blasphemy to assert they were of the Lord's authorization, conscience cannot bind to a subjection to this. Again, the dignity of magistracy, ordained for the maintenance of truth and righteousness, the only foundations of people's felicity, whether temporal or eternal, including the bonds and boundaries of all obedience and subjection, for which they are intended, and to which they refer, is supereminent; as that epithet of higher, added to the powers that are of God, may be rendered; making them high and sublime in glory, whose highest prerogative is, That, being God's ministers, they sit in the throne of God, anointed of the Lord; judging not for man, but for the Lord, as the scripture speaks. To this conscience is concerned in duty to render honour as due, by the prescript of the fifth commandment; but for tyranny, conscience is bound to deny it, because not due, no more than obedience, which conscience dare not pay to a throne of iniquity, and a throne of the devil, as tyranny may be called, as really as magistracy is called the throne of God. Next, conscience is much concerned in the ends of magistracy, which are the greatest, the glory of God, and the good of mankind. And, in the effects of it, the maintenance of truth, righteousness, religion, liberty, peace, and safety, and all choicest external blessings; but the ends and effects of tyranny are quite contrary, domineering for pleasure, and destroying for profit. Can we think that conscience is nothing concerned here, that these great ends shall be subverted, and the effects precluded; and to that effect, that tyranny not only be shrouded under a privilege of impunity, but by our subjection and acknowledgement of it, as a lawful power, encouraged into all enormities, and licensed to usurp, not only our liberties, but God's throne by an uncontroulable sovereignty? But if we consider the subjective concern of conscience, it must be very graat, when it is the only thing that prompts to subjection, that regulates subjection, and is a bottom for subjection to lawful powers. If it were not out of conscience, men that are free born are naturally such lovers of liberty, and under corruption such lusters after licentiousness, that they would never come under the order of this ordinance, except constrained for wrath's sake: but now, understanding that they that resist the power, resist the ordinance of God, and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation, they must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. If conscience were not exercised in regulating our duty to magistrates, we would either obey none, or else would observe all their commands promiscuously, lawful or unlawful, and would make no difference either of the matter commanded, or the power commanding: but now, understanding that we must obey God rather than man, and that we must render to all their dues, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour, conscience regulates us what and whom to obey. And without conscience there is little hope for government to prove either beneficial or permanent; little likelihood of either a real, regular, or durable subjection to it. The discernible standing of government upon conscientious grounds, is the only thing that can bring in conscience, and a conscientious submission to it; it being the highest and most kindly principle of, and the strongest and most lasting obligation to any relative duty. It will not be liberty of conscience, (as saith the late declaration for it) but reality of conscience, and government founded upon a bottom of conscience, that will unite the governed to the governors, by inclination as well as duty. And if that be, then there is needful a rule of God's revealed preceptive will, (the only cynosure and empress of conscience), touching the founding and erecting of government, that it have the stamp of God's authority. It must needs then follow, that conscience hath a very great concernment in this question in the general, and that before it be forced to an abandoning of its light in a matter of such moment, it will rather oblige people that are conscientious to suffer the worst that tyrants can do; especially when it is imposed and obtruded upon conscience, to give its sufferage and express acknowledgment that the present tyranny is the authority of God, which is so visible in the view of all that have their eyes open, that the meanest capacity that was never conversant in laws and politics can give this verdict that the constitution and administration of the government of the two royal brothers, under whose burden the earth and we have been groaning these twenty-seven years past, hath been a complete and habitual tyranny, and can no more be owned to be magistracy, than robbery can be acknowledged to be a rightful possession. It is so plain, that I need not the help of lawyers and politicians to demonstrate it, nor launch into the ocean of their endless debates in handling the head of magistracy and tyranny: yet I shall improve what help I find in our most approved authors who have enlarged upon this question, (though not as I must state it) to dilucidate the matter in Thesi, and refer to the foregoing deduction of the succession of testimonies against tyranny, to clear it in Hypothesi. Whence we may see the occasion, and clearly gather the solution of the question, which is this:
Whether a people, long oppressed with the encroachments of tyrants and usurpers, may disown their pretended authority; and, when imposed upon, to acknowledge it, may rather choose to suffer than to own it?
To clear this question: I shall premit some concessions, and then come more formally to resolve it.
1. It must be granted the question is extraordinary, and never so stated by any writer on this head; which makes it the more difficult and odious, because odd and singular, in the esteem of those who take up opinions rather from the number of votes than from the weight of the reasons of the asserters of them. It will also be yielded, that this was never a case of confession for Christians to suffer upon. And the reason of both is, because, before these seven years past, this was never imposed upon private and common subjects to give an account of their thoughts and conscience about the lawfulness of the government they lived under. Conquerors and usurpers sometimes have demanded an acknowledgment of their authority, from men of greatest note and stroke in the countries they have seized; but they never since the creation urged it upon common people, as a test of loyalty; but thought always their laws and power to execute them on offenders, did secure their subjection. Or otherwise to what purpose are laws made, and the execution of them committed to men in power, if they be not thought a sufficient fence for the authority that makes them; except it also have the actual acknowledgment of the subjects to ratify it? Men that are really invested with authority, would think it both a disparagement to their authority, and would disdain such a suspicion of the questionableness of it, as to put it as a question to the subjects, whether they owned it or not. But the gentlemen that rules us, have fallen upon a piece of unprecedented policy; wherein they think both to involve the nation in the guilt of their unparalelled rebellion against the Lord, by owning that authority that promotes it; and so secure their usurpations, either by the suffrage of all that own them, or by the extirpation of the conscientious that dare not, with the odium and obloquy of being enemies to authority; by which trick they think to bury the honour of their testimony. Yet in sobriety without prophesying it may be presumed, at the long run, this project will prove very prejudicial to their interest: and herein they may verify that Scots proverb, 'o'er fast o'er loose,' and accomplish these divine sayings, 'He disappointeth the devices of the crafty, he taketh the wise in their own craftiness, and the counsel of the froward is carried headlong.' For as they have put people upon this question, who would not otherwise have made such inquiries into it, and now finding they must be resolved in conscience to answer it, whenever they shall be brought before them; upon a very overly search, they see terrible tyranny written in legible bloody characters almost on all administrations of the government, and so come to be fixed in the verdict that their conscience and the word of God gives of it; so it may be thought, this question now started, for as despicable beginnings it hath, yet ere it come to a full and final decision, will be more enquired into through the world, and at length prove as fatal to tyranny, as ever any thing could be, and then they may know whom to thank. But however, though the question be extraordinary, and the sufferings thereupon be unprecedented, and therefore, among other contradictions that may be objected, that neither in history nor scripture we can find instances of private people's refusing to own the authority they were under, nor of their suffering for that refusal; yet nevertheless it may be duty without example. Many things may be done, though not against the law of God, yet without a precedent of the practice of the people of God. Though we could not adduce an example for it, yet we can gather it from the law of God, that tyranny must not be owned, this will be equivalent to a thousand examples. Every age in some things must be a precedent to the following, and I think never did any age produce a more honourable precedent, than this beginning to decline a yoke under which all ages have groaned.
2. It will be also granted, it is not always indispensibly necessary, at all times, for a people to declare their disclaim of the tyranny they are under, when they cannot shake it off; nor, when they are staged for their duty before wicked and tyrannical judges, is it always necessary to disown their pretended authority positively; when either they are not urged with questions about it, then they may be silent in reference to that; or when they are imposed upon to give their judgment of it, they are not always obligated, as in a case of confession, to declare all their mind, especially when such questions are put to them with a manifest design to entrap their lives, or intangle their conscience. All truth is not to be told at all times; neither are all questions to be answered when impertinently interrogate, but may be both cautiously and conscientiously waved. We have Christ's own practice, and his faithful servant Paul's example, for a pattern of such prudence and Christian caution. But yet it were cruel and unchristian rigour, to censure such as, out of a pious principle of zeal to God and conscience of duty, do freely and positively declare their judgment, in an absolute disowning of their pretended authority, when posed with such questions, though to the manifest detriment of their lives, they conscientiously looking upon it as a case of confession. For where the Lord hath not peremptorily astricted his confessors to such rules of prudence, but hath both promised, and usually gives his Spirit's conduct, encouraging and animating them to boldness, so as before hand they should not take thought how or what they shall speak, and in that same hour they find it given them, it were presumption for us to stint them to our rules of prudence. We may indeed find rules to know, what is a case of confession; but hardly can it be determined, what truth or duty we are questioned about is not, or may not be, a case of confession. And who can deny, but this may be in some circumstance, a case of confession, even positively to disown the pretended authority of a bloody court or council? when either they go out of their sphere, taking upon them Christ's supremacy, and the cognizance of the concerns of his crown, whereof they are judges noways competent; then they must freely and faithfully be declined. Or when, to the dishonour of Christ, they blaspheme his authority, and the sacred boundaries he hath prescribed to all human authority, and will assert an illimited absolute authority, refusing and discharging all offered legal and scriptural restrictions to be put thereupon, (as hath been the case of the most part of these worthy though poor martyrs, who have died upon this head) then they must think themselves bound to disown it. Or when they have done some cruel indignity and despite to the Spirit of God, and to Christ's prerogative and glory, and work of reformation, and people, in murdering them without mercy, and imposing this owning of their king, by whose authority all is acted, as a condemnation of these witnesses of Christ their testimony, and a justification of their bloody cruelties against them, which hath frequently been the case of these poor people that hath been staged upon this account: in this case, and several others of this sort that might be mentioned, then they may be free and positive in disowning this test of wicked loyalty, as the mark of the dragon of the secular beast of tyranny. And in many such cases, when the Lord gives the spirit, I see no reason but that Christ's witnesses must follow his pattern of zeal in the case of confession, which he witnessed before Pontius Pilate in asserting his own kingship, as they may in other cases follow his pattern of prudence. And why may we not imitate the zeal of Stephen who called the council before whom he was staged stiff-necked resisters of the Holy Ghost, persecutors of the prophets, and betrayers and murderers of Christ the just one, as well as the prudence of Paul? But, however it be, the present testimony against this pretended authority lies in the negative, which obliges always, for ever and for ever; that is to say, we plead, that it must never be owned. There is a great difference between a positive disowning and a not owning; though the first be not always necessary, the latter is the testimony of the day, and a negative case of confession, which is always clearer than the positive. Though we must not always confess every truth, yet we must never deny any.