PROPOSITION XV.

PROPOSITION XV.ConcerningSalutationsandRecreations,&c.[152]Seeing the chief End of allReligionis to redeem Men from the Spirit and vain Conversation of this World, and to lead into inward Communion with God, before whom if wefear alwayswe are accounted happy; therefore all the vain Customs and Habits thereof, both in Word and Deed, are to be rejected and forsaken by those who come to thisFear; such as taking off theHatto a Man, the Bowings and Cringings of the Body, and such other Salutations of that Kind, with all the foolish and superstitious Formalities attending them; all which Man hath invented in his degenerate State, to feed his Pride in the vain Pomp and Glory of this World: As also the unprofitable Plays, frivolous Recreations, Sportings, and Gamings, which are invented to pass away the precious Time, and divert the Mind from theWitness of Godin the Heart, and from theliving Senseof hisFear, and from thatevangelical Spiritwherewith Christians ought to be leavened, and which leads into Sobriety, Gravity, and godly Fear; in which as we abide, the Blessing of the Lord is felt to attend us in those Actions in which we are necessarily engaged, in order to the taking Care for the Sustenance of the outward Man.[152]Ephes. 5. 11. 1 Pet. 1. 14. John 5. 44. Jer. 10. 3. Acts 10. 26. Matt. 15. 13. Col. 2. 8.§. I.Having hitherto treated of the Principles of Religion, both relating toDoctrineandWorship, I am now to speak of some Practices which have been the Product of thisPrinciple, in those Witnesses whom God hath raised up in this Day to testify for hisTruth. It will not a little commend them, I suppose, in the Judgment of sober and judicious Men, that taking them generally, even by the Confession of their Adversaries, they are found to be free of those Abominations which abound among other Professors,such as areSwearing,Drunkenness,Whoredom,Riotousness, &c. and that generally the very Coming amongthisPeople doth naturally work such a Change, so that many vicious and profane Persons have been known, by coming to thisTruth, to become sober and virtuous; and many light, vain, and wanton Ones to become grave and serious, as our Adversaries dare not deny:[153]Yet that they may not want something to detract us for, cease not to accuse us for those Things which, when found among themselves, they highly commend; thus ourGravitythey callSullenness, ourSeriousness,Melancholy, ourSilence,Sottishness. Such as have been vicious and profane among them, but by coming to us have left off those Evils, lest they should commend the Truth of our Profession, they say, That whereas they were profane before, they are become worse,In being hypocritical and spiritually proud. If any beforedissoluteandprofaneamong them, by coming to the Truth with us, becomefrugalanddiligent, then they will charge them withCovetousness: And if anyeminentamong them forSeriousness,Piety, andDiscoveries of God, come unto us, then they will say, They were always subject toMelancholyand toEnthusiasm; though before, when among them, it was esteemed neitherMelancholynorEnthusiasmin an evil Sense, butChristian GravityandDivine Revelation. OurBoldnessandChristian Sufferingthey callObstinacyandPertinacy; though half as much, if among themselves, they would accountChristian CourageandNobility. And though thus by their Envy they strive to read all relating to us backwards, counting those Things Vices in us, which in themselves they would extol as Virtues, yet hath the Strength of Truth extorted this Confession often from them,That we are generally a pure and clean People, as to the outward Conversation.[153]After this Manner thePapistsused to disapprove the Sobriety of theWaldenses, of whomReinerius, a Popish Author, so writeth. “But this Sect of theLeonistshath a great Shew of Truth; for that they live righteously before Men, and believe all Things well of God, and all the Articles which are contained in the Creed; only they blaspheme and hate the Church ofRome.”But this,they say, is but in Policy to commend our Heresy.But such Policy it is, say I, as Christ and his Apostles made use of, and all good Christians ought to do; yea, so far hath Truth prevailed by the Purity of its Followers, that if one that is called aQuakerdo but that which is common among them, as tolaughand bewanton,speak at large, and keep not hisWordpunctually, or be overtaken withHastinessorAnger, they presently say,O this is against your Profession!As if indeed so to do were very consistent with theirs; wherein though they speak the Truth, yet they give away their Cause. But if they can find any under our Name in any of those Evils common among themselves (as who can imagine but among so many Thousands there will be some Chaff, since of twelve Apostles one was found to be a Devil) O how will they insult, and make more Noise of the Escape of oneQuaker, than of an hundred among themselves!§. II.But there are some singular Things, which most of all our Adversaries plead for the Lawfulness of, and allow themselves in, as no Ways inconsistent with theChristian Religion, which we have found to be no Ways lawful unto us, and have been commanded of the Lord to lay them aside; though the doing thereof hath occasioned no small Sufferings and Buffetings, and hath procured us much Hatred and Malice from the World. And because the Nature of these Things is such, that they do upon the very Sight distinguish us, and make us known, so that we cannot hide ourselves from any, without proving unfaithful to our Testimony; our Trials and Exercises have herethrough proved the more numerous and difficult, as will after appear. These I have laboured briefly to comprehend in this Proposition; but they may more largely be exhibited in these six following Propositions.Flattering Titles.I.That it is not lawful to give to Men such flattering Titles, as Your Holiness, Your Majesty, Your Eminency, Your Excellency, Your Grace, Your Lordship, Your Honour,&c.nor use those flattering Words, commonly called[Compliments.]Hat and Knee.II.That it is not lawful for Christians to kneel, or prostrate themselves to any Man, or to bow the Body, or to uncover the Head to them.Apparel.III.That it is not lawful forChristiansto use Superfluities in Apparel, as are of no Use, save for Ornament and Vanity.Gaming.IV.That it is not lawful to use Games, Sports, Plays, nor among other Things Comedies among Christians, under the Notion of Recreations, which do not agree with Christian Silence, Gravity, and Sobriety: For Laughing, Sporting, Gaming, Mocking, Jesting, vain Talking,&c.is not Christian Liberty, nor harmless Mirth.Swearing.V.That it is not lawful for Christians to swear at all under the Gospel, not only not vainly, and in their common Discourse, which was also forbidden under theMosaicalLaw, but even not in Judgment before the Magistrate.Fighting.VI.That it is not lawful for Christians to resist Evil, or to war or fight in any Case.Degrees of Dignity and Precedency allowed.Before I enter upon a particular Disquisition of these Things, I shall first premise some general Considerations, to prevent all Mistakes; and next add some general Considerations, which equally respect all of them. I would not have any judge, That hereby we intend to destroy themutual Relationthat either is betwixtPrinceandPeople,MasterandServants,ParentsandChildren; nay, not at all: We shall evidence, That our Principle in these Things hath no such Tendency, and that these natural Relations are rather better established, than any Ways hurt by it. Next, Let not any judge, That from our Opinion in these Things, any Necessity oflevellingwill follow, or that all Men must have Things incommon. Our Principle leaves every Man to enjoy that peaceably, which either his own Industry, or his Parents, have purchased to him; only he is thereby instructed to use it aright, both for his own Good, and that of his Brethren; and all to the Glory of God: In which also his Acts are to bevoluntary, and no Waysconstrained. And further, we say not hereby, that no Man may use the Creation more or less than another: For we know, That as it hath pleased God to dispense it diversly, giving to some more, and some less, so they may use it accordingly.Education differs accordingly.The several Conditions, under which Men are diversly stated, together with their Educations answering thereunto, do sufficiently shew this: TheServantis not the same Way educated as theMaster; nor theTenantas theLandlord; nor theRichas thePoor; nor thePrinceas thePeasant. Now, though it be not lawful for any, however great Abundance they may have, or whatever their Education may be, to use that which is merely superfluous; yet seeing their Education has accustomed them thereunto, and their Capacity enables them so to do, without being profuse or extravagant, they may use Things better in their Kind, than such whoseEducationhath neither accustomed them to such Things, nor their Capacity will reach to compass them.The lawful or unlawful Use of the Creation.For it is beyond Question, That whatever Thing theCreationaffords is for the Use of Man, and the moderate Use of them is lawful; yet,per accidens, they may be unlawful to some, and not to others. As for Instance, He that by Reason of his Estate and Education hath been used to eatFleshand drinkWine, and to be clothed with thefinest Wool, if his Estate will bear it, and he use it neither in Superfluity, nor immoderately, he may do it; and perhaps, if he should apply himself to feed, or be cloathed as are the Peasants, it might prejudice the Health of his Body, and nothing advance his Soul. But if a Man, whose Estate and Education had accustomed him to bothcoarser FoodandRaiment, should stretch himself beyond what he had, or were used to, to the manifest Prejudice of his Family and Children, no Doubt it would be unlawful to him, even so to eat or be clothed as another, in whom it is lawful; for that the other may be as much mortified, and have denied himself as much in coming down to that, which this aspires to, as he, in willing to be like him, aspires beyond what he either is able, or hath accustomed to do. The safe Place then is, for such as have Fulness, to watch over themselves, that they use it moderately, and rescind allSuperfluities;The Rich to help the Poor.being willing, as far as they can, to help the Need of those to whom Providence hath allotted a smaller Allowance.Let the Brother of high Degree rejoice, in that he is abased; and such as God calls in a low Degree, be content with their Condition, not envying those Brethren who have greater Abundance,knowingthey have received Abundance, as to the inward Man; which is chiefly to be regarded. And therefore beware of such a Temptation, as to use their Calling as an Engine to bericher, knowing, they have this Advantage beyond theRichandNoblethat are called, that the Truth doth not any Ways abase them, nay, not in the Esteem of the World, as itdoth theother; but that they are rather exalted thereby, in that as to the inward and spiritual Fellowship of the Saints, they become the Brethren and Companions of the greatest and richest; and in this Respect,Let him of low Degree rejoice that he is exalted.These Things premised, I would seriously propose unto all such, as choose to beChristiansindeed, and that inNature, and not inNameonly, whether it were not desirable, and would not greatly contribute to the Commendation ofChristianity, and to the Increase of the Life and Virtue of Christ, ifall superfluous Titles of Honour, Profuseness and Prodigality in Meat and Apparel, Gaming, Sporting and Playing, were laid aside and forborn? And whether such as lay them aside, in so doing, walk not more like the Disciples of Christ and his Apostles, and are therein nearer their Example, than such as use them? Whether the laying them aside would hinder any from being good Christians? Or if Christians might not be better without them, than with them? Certainly theSoberandSeriousamong all Sorts will say,Yea. Then surely such as lay them aside, as reckoning them unsuitable for Christians, are not to be blamed, but rather commended for so doing: Because that in Principle and Practice they effectually advance that, which others acknowledge were desirable, but can never make effectual, so long as they allow the Use of them as lawful. And God hath made it manifest in this Age, That by discovering the Evil of such Things, and leading hisWitnesses out of them, and to testify against them, he hath produced effectually in many thatMortificationandAbstractionfrom theLove and Cares of this World, who daily are conversing in the World (but inwardly redeemed out of it) both inWedlock, and in their lawful Employments, which was judged could only be obtained by such as were shut up inCloistersandMonasteries. Thus much in General.§. III.As to the first we affirm positively, Thatit is not lawful for Christians either to give or receive these Titles of Honour, as,Your Holiness,Your Majesty,Your Excellency,Your Eminency, &c.Titles.First, Because theseTitlesare no Part of that Obedience which is due toMagistratesorSuperiors; neither doth the giving them add to or diminish from that Subjection we owe to them, which consistsin obeying their just and lawful Commands, not inTitlesandDesignations.Under the Law and Gospel.Secondly, We find not that in the Scripture any suchTitlesare used, either under theLawor theGospel: But that in the speaking toKings,Princes, orNobles, they used only a simple Compellation, asO King!and that without any further Designation, save perhaps the Name of the Person, as,O KingAgrippa,&c.Lying Titles.Thirdly, It lays a Necessity uponChristiansmost frequently tolie; because the Persons obtaining theseTitles, either by Election or hereditarily, may frequently be found to have nothing really in them deserving them, or answering to them: As some, to whom it is said,Your Excellency, having nothing ofExcellency in them; and he who is called,Your Grace, appears to be an Enemy toGrace; and he who is called,Your Honour, is known to be base and ignoble.Patents do not oblige to a Lie.I wonder what Law of Man, or what Patent ought to oblige me to make a Lie, in callingGood, Evil; andEvil, Good? I wonder what Law of Man can secure me, in so doing, from the just Judgment of God, that will make me account forevery idle Word? And tolieis something more. Surely Christians should be ashamed that such Laws, manifestly crossing the Law of God, should be among them.Object.If it be said,We ought in Charity to suppose that they have these Virtues, because the King has bestowed those Titles upon them, or that they are descended of such as deserved them;Answ.Ianswer,Charitydestroys notKnowledge: I am not obliged byCharity, either to believe or speak aLie. Now it is apparent, and cannot be denied by any, but that those Virtues are not in many of the Persons expressed by theTitlesthey bear; neither will they allow to speak so to such, in whom these Virtues are, unless they be so dignified by outward Princes. So that such as are truly virtuous, must not be stiled by their Virtues, because not privileged by the Princes of this World; and such as have them not, must be so called, because they have obtained a Patent so to be: And all this is done by those, who pretend to be his Followers, that commanded his Disciples,Not to be called of Men, Master; and told them, Such couldnot believe, as received Honour one from another, and sought not the Honour which cometh from God only. This is so plain, to such as will indeed beChristians, that it needs no Consequence.Your Holiness,Your Grace, &c.Fourthly, As to those Titles ofHoliness,Eminency, andExcellency, used among thePapiststo thePopeandCardinals, &c. andGrace,Lordship, andWorship, used to theClergyamong theProtestants, it is a most blasphemous Usurpation. For if they useHolinessandGrace, because these Things ought to be in aPope, or in aBishop, how come they to usurp that peculiarly to themselves? Ought notHolinessandGraceto be in every Christian? And so every Christian should say,Your Holiness, andYour Grace, one to another. Next, how can they in Reason claim any moreTitles, than were practised and received by the Apostles and Primitive Christians, whose Successors they pretend they are, and as whole Successors (and no otherwise) themselves, I judge, will confess any Honour they seek is due to them? Now if they neither sought, received, nor admitted suchHonournorTitles, how came these by them? If they say they did, let them prove it if they can: We find no such Thing in the Scripture. The Christians speak to the Apostles without any suchDenomination, neither saying,If it please Your Grace,Your Holiness,Your Lordship, norYour Worship; they are neither called,My LordPeter, norMy LordPaul; nor yetMasterPeter, norMasterPaul; norDoctorPeter, norDoctorPaul; but singlyPeterandPaul; and that not only in the Scripture, but for some hundreds of Years after: So that this appears to be a manifest Fruit of the Apostasy. For if theseTitlesarise either from theOfficeorWorthof the Persons, it will not be denied but the Apostles deserved them better than any now that call for them. But the Case is plain, The Apostles had theHoliness, theExcellency, theGrace; and because they wereholy,excellent, andgracious, they neither used, nor admitted of suchTitles:Hypocrites want Titles.But these having neitherHoliness,Excellency, norGrace, will needs be so called, to satisfy their ambitious and ostentatious Minds, which is a manifest Token of theirHypocrisy.Fifthly, As to that Title ofMajesty, usually ascribed to Princes, we do not find it given to any such in the Holy Scripture; but that it is specially and peculiarly ascribed unto God, as 1Chron.xxix. 11.Job.xxxvii. 22.Psal.xxi. 5. and xxix. 4. and xlv. 3. and cxiii. 1. and xcvi. 6.Isa.ii. 10. and xxiv. 14. and xxvi. 10.Heb.i. 3. 2Pet.i. 16. and many more Places. Hence saithJude, Ver. 25.To the only wise God our Saviour, be Glory and Majesty, &c. not to Men. We find in Scripture the proud KingNebuchadnezzarassuming thisTitleto himself,Dan.iv. 30. who at that Time received a sufficient Reproof, by a sudden Judgment which came upon him. Therefore in all the Compellations used to Princes in theOld Testament, it is not to be found, nor yet in theNew.Paulwas very civil toAgrippa, yet he gives him no suchTitle: Neither was thisTitleused among Christians in the primitive Times.Eccles. Hist. L. 4. P. 445.Hence theEcclesiastical Historyof the Reformation ofFrance, relating the Speech of the LordRochefort, at the Assembly of the Estates ofFrance, held underCharlesthe Ninth, in the Year 1560, saith,Your Majestynot used; how taken Notice of in 1560.That this Harangue was well remarked, in that he used not the Word[Majesty]invented by Flatterers of late Years.And yet this Author minded not how his MasterCalvinused thisflattering TitletoFrancisthe First, King ofFrance; and not only so, but calls himMost Christian King, in the Epistle to hisInstitutions; though by his daily persecuting of theReformers, it was apparent, he was far from being such, even inCalvin’s own Esteem. Surely the Complying with such vainTitles, imposed and introduced byAntichrist, greatly tended to stain theReformation, and to render it defective in many Things.Lastly, All theseTitlesandStilesofHonourare to be rejected byChristians, because they are to seek theHonour that comes from above, and not theHonourthat is frombelow: But these Honours are not that Honour that comes from above, but are from below. For we know well enough what Industry, and what Pains Men are at to get these Things, and what Part it is that seeks after them, to wit, theproud, insolent, haughty, aspiring Mind.The proud Mind loves Titles.For judge, Is it themeekandinnocent Spirit of Christthat covets that Honour? Is it that Spirit that must be ofno Reputation in this World, that has its[154]Conversation in Heaven, that comes to haveFellowship with the Sons of God? Is it that Spirit, I say, that loves that Honour, that seeks after that Honour, that pleads for the Upholding of that Honour, that frets, and rages, and fumes, when it is denied that Honour?Lucifer’s Spirit.Or is it not rather the lordly insulting Spirit ofLucifer, thePrince of this World, he that of old affected and sought after this Honour, and loved not to abide in the submissive low Place? And so all his Children are possessed with the same ambitious proud Mind, seeking and coveringTitlesofHonour, which indeed belong not to them. For let us examine,[155]Who they are that are honourable indeed?[156]Is it not therighteous Man? Is it not theholy Man? Is it not thehumble-hearted Man, themeek-spirited Man? And are not such those that ought to behonouredamongChristians? Now of these, may there not be poor Men, Labourers, silly Fishermen? And if so, how comes it that theTitlesofHonourare not bestowed upon such? But who are they that generally receive and look for this Honour? Are they not the rich Ones, such as have abundance of the Earth, as be like the rich Glutton, such as are proud and ambitious, such as are Oppressors of the Poor, such as swell with Lust and Vanity, and allSuperfluity of Naughtiness, who are the very Abomination and Plague of the Nations? Are not these they that are accounted honourable, that require and receive the Titles of Honour, proudHamans? Now whether is this the Honour that comes from God, or the Honour from below? Doth God honour such as daily dishonour him, and disobey him? And if this be not the Honour that comes from God, but the Honour of this World, which the Children of this World give and receive one from another; how can the Children of God, such as are Christians indeed, give or receive that Honour among themselves, without coming under the Reproof of Christ, who saith, Thatsuch as do cannot believe? But further, If we respect the Cause that most frequently procures to Men theseTitlesofHonour, there is not one of a Thousand that shall be found to be because of any Christian Virtue; but rather for Things to be discommended amongChristians: As by the Favour ofPrinces, procured by flattering, and often by worse Means. Yea, the most frequent, and accounted among Men most honourable, isFighting, or some greatmartial Exploit, which can add nothing to a Christian’s Worth: Since, sure it is, it were desirable there were noFightingsamong Christians at all; and in so far as there are, it shews they are not right Christians. AndJamestells us, ThatFighting proceeds from the Lusts. So that it were fitter for Christians, by theSword of God’s Spirit, to fight against their Lusts, than by the Prevalency of their Lusts to destroy one another. Whatever Honour any might have attained of old under theLawthis Way, we find under theGospelChristians commended forSuffering, not forFighting; neither did any of Christ’s Disciples,save one, offer outward Violence by the Sword, in cutting offMalchus’s Ear; for which he received no Title of Honour, but a just Reproof. Finally, if we look either to theNatureof thisHonour, theCauseof it, theWayit is conveyed, theTermsin which it is delivered, it cannot be used by such as desire to beChristiansin good Earnest.[154]Phil. 3. 20.[155]Jerome, in his Epistle toCelant, admonisheth her, That she was to be preferred to none for herNobility, for the Christian Religion admits not of Respect of Persons; neither are Men to be esteemed because of their outward Condition, but according to the Disposition of the Mind, to be esteemed either noble or base; he that obeyeth not Sin, is free; who is strong in Virtue, is noble,Let the Epistle ofJamesbe read.[156]1 Sam. 2. 30.§. IV.Now besides these generalTitlesofHonour, what gross Abuses are crept in among such as are calledChristiansin the Use ofCompliments, wherein not Servants to Masters, or others, with Respect to any such Kind of Relations, but others, who have no such Relation do say and write to one another at every Turn,Your humble Servant,Your most obedient Servant, &c. Such wicked Customs have, to the great Prejudice of Souls, accustomed Christians to lie; and to use Lying is now come to be accounted Civility. O horrid Apostasy! for it is notoriously known, that the Use of theseComplimentsimports not any Design of Service, neither are any such Fools to think so; for if we should put them to it that say so, they would no doubt think we abused them; and would soon let us know they gave us Words in Course, and no more. It is strange, That such as pretend toScriptureastheirRule should not be ashamed to use such Things; sinceElihu, who had not the Scriptures, could by theLight within him(which these Men think insufficient) say,Job.xxxii. 21, 22.Let me not accept any Man’s Person, neither let me give flattering Titles unto Men. For I know not to give flattering Titles; in so doing my Maker would soon take me away.A certain ancient devout Man, in the primitive Time, subscribed himself to a Bishop,Your humble Servant; wherein I doubt not but he was more real than our usualComplimenters; and yet he was sharply reproved for it.[157][157]This History is reported byCasaubonus, in his Book ofMannersandCustoms, P. 160. “In this last Age he is esteemed an uncivil Man, who will not either to his Inferior or Equal subscribe himselfServant. ButSulpitius Severuswas heretofore sharply reproved byPaulinus, Bishop ofNola, because in his Epistle he had subscribed himself his Servant, saying,Beware thou subscribe not thyself hisServant, who isthy Brother; for Flattery is sinful, not a Testimony of Humility to give these Honours to Men, which are only due to the One Lord, Master, and GOD.”But they usually object, to defend themselves,ThatLukesaith, Most ExcellentTheophilus;andPaul,Most NobleFestus.Ianswer, SinceLukewrote that by the Dictates of theInfallible Spirit of God, I think it will not be doubted butTheophilusdid deserve it, as being really endued with that Virtue: In which Case we shall not condemn those that do it by the same Rule. But it is not proved thatLukegaveTheophilusthis Title, as that which was derived to him, either from his Father, or by any PatentTheophilushad obtained from any of the Princes of the Earth? or that he would have given it him, in Case he had not been trulyexcellent: And unless this be proved (which never can) there can nothing hence be deduced against us.Concerning the TitlePaulgave toFestus.The like may be said of that ofPaultoFestus, whom he would not have called such, if he had not been trulynoble; as indeed he was, in that he suffered him to be heard in his own Cause, and would not give Way to the Fury of theJewsagainst him; it was not because of any outward Title bestowed uponFestus, that he so called him, else he would have given the same Appellation to his PredecessorFelix, who had the same Office; but being a covetous Man, we find he gives him no suchStile.§. V.TheSingular Numberto one Person used in theLatin.It will not be unfit in this Place to say something concerning the Using of theSingular Numberto one Person; of this there is no Controversy in theLatin. For when we speak to one, we always use thePronoun[TU,] and he that would do otherwise, would break the Rules ofGrammar. For what Boy, learning his Rudiments, is ignorant, that it is incongruous to say [vos amas,vos legis,] that is [you lovest,you readest] speaking to one? But the Pride of Man, that hath corrupted many Things, refuses also to use thisSimplicityof speaking in the vulgar Languages. For being puffed up with a vain Opinion of themselves, as if theSingular Numberwere not sufficient for them, they will have others to speak to them in thePlural. HenceLuther, in hisPlays, reproves and mocks this Manner of speaking, saying,Magister, vos es iratus: Which CorruptionErasmussufficiently refutes in his Book ofWriting Epistles: Concerning which likewiseJames Howel, in his Epistle to theNobilityofEngland, before theFrenchandEnglish Dictionary, takes Notice, “That both inFrance, and in other Nations, the Word [THOU] was used in speaking to one; but by Succession of Time,How the WordYoucame to be used to a single Person.when theRomanCommonwealth grew into an Empire, the Courtiers began to magnify the Emperor, (as being furnished with Power to confer Dignities and Offices) using the Word [You,] yea, and deifying him with more remarkable Titles;” Concerning which Matter, we read in the Epistles ofSymmachusto the EmperorsTheodosiusandValentinianus, where he useth these Forms of Speaking, “Vestra Æternitas, Your Eternity;Vestrum Numen, Your Godhead;Vestra Serenitas, Your Serenity;Vestra Clementia, Your Clemency. So that the Word [You] in the Plural Number, together with the other Titles and Compellations of Honour, seem to have taken their Rise fromMonarchical Government; which afterwards, by Degrees, came to be derived to private Persons.”The same is witnessed byJohn Maresius, of theFrench Academy; in the Preface of hisClovis: “Let none wonder (saith he) that the Word [Thou] is used in this Work toPrincesandPrincesses; for we use the same to God: And of old the same was used toAlexanders,Cæsars,QueensandEmpresses. The Use of the Word [You,] when one Person is spoken to, was only introduced by these base Flatteries of Men of latter Ages, to whom it seemed good to use the Plural Number to one Person, that he may imagine himself alone to be equal to many others in Dignity and Worth; from whence at last it came to Persons of lower Quality.”To the same Purpose speaketh alsoM. Godeau, in his Preface to theNew Testament Translation: “I had rather (saith he) faithfully keep to the express Words ofPaul, than exactly follow the polished Stile of our Tongue; therefore I always use that Form of calling God in theSingular Number, not in thePlural; and therefore I say rather [Thou] than [You.] I confess indeed, That theCivility and Custom of this World requires him to be honoured after that Manner; but it is likewise on the contrary true, that the original Tongue of the New Testament hath nothing common with such Manners and Civility; so that not one of these many old Versions we have doth observe it. Let not Men believe, That we give not Respect enough to God, in that we call him by the Word [Thou] which is nevertheless far otherwise;The WordThou, a greater Honour to One thanYou.for I seem to myself (may be by the Effect of Custom) more to honour his Divine Majesty, in calling him after this Manner, than if I should call him after the Manner of Men, who are so delicate in their Forms of Speech.”See how clearly and evidently these Men witness, That this Form of Speaking, and these profane Titles, derive their Origin from the base Flattery of these last Ages, and from the delicate Haughtiness ofworldly Men, who have invented theseNovelties, that thereby they might honour one another, under I know not what Pretence ofCivilityandRespect. From whence many of the presentChristians(so accounted) are become so perverse, in commending most wicked Men, and wicked Customs, that theSimplicityof theGospelis wholly lost; so that the giving of Men and Things their own Names is not only worn out of Custom, but the doing thereof is accounted absurd and rude by such Kind ofdelicate Parasites, who desire to ascribe to this Flattery, and abuse the Name ofCivility. Moreover, that this Way of speaking proceeds from an high and proud Mind, hence appears, because that Men commonly use theSingular NumbertoBeggars, and to theirServants; yea, and in theirPrayers to God. Thus theSuperiorwill speak to hisInferior, who yet will not bear that theInferiorso speak to him, as judging it a Kind of Reproach unto him. So hath the Pride of Men placedGodand theBeggarin the sameCategory. I think I need not use Arguments to prove to such as know congruous Language, That we ought to use theSingular Numberspeaking to one; which is the common Dialect of the whole Scripture, as also the most Interpreters do translate it. Seeing therefore it ismanifest to us, that this Form of speaking to Men in thePlural Numberdoth proceed fromPride, as well as that it is in itself aLie, we found a Necessity upon us to testify against this Corruption, by using theSingularequally untoall. And although no Reason can be given why we should be persecuted upon this Account, especially byChristians, who profess to follow the Rule of Scripture, whose Dialect this is;Scripture Dialect the plain Language.yet it would perhaps seem incredible if I should relate how much we have suffered for this Thing, and how these proud Ones havefumed,fretted, andgnashedtheirTeeth, frequentlybeatingandstrikingus, when we have spoken to them thus in theSingular Number: Whereby we are the more confirmed in our Judgment, as seeing that thisTestimony of Truth, which God hath given us to bear in all Things, doth so vex the serpentine Nature in theChildren of Darkness.§. VI.Bowing to Men, &c.Secondly, Next unto this ofTitles, the other Part ofHonourused amongChristiansis theKneeling,Bowing, andUncovering of the Headto one another. I know nothing our Adversaries have to plead for them in this Matter, save some few Instances of theOld Testament, and theCustomof the Country.The first are, Such asAbraham’sbowing himself to the Children ofHeth, andLotto the two Angels, &c.But the Practice of thesePatriarchs, related as Matter of Fact, is not to be a Rule toChristiansnow; neither are we to imitate them in every Practice, which has not a particular Reproof added to it: For we find notAbrahamreproved for takingHagar, &c. And indeed to say all Things were lawful for us which they practised, would produce great Inconveniences obvious enough to all.The Custom of the Nations no Rule to Christians.And as to theCustoms of the Nations, it is a very ill Argument for a Christian’s Practice: We should have a better Rule to walk by than theCustomof theGentiles; the Apostles desire us not to be[158]conformed to this World, &c. We see how little they have to say for themselves in this Matter. Let it be observed then, Whether our Reasons for layingaside these Things be not considerable and weighty enough to uphold us in so doing.[158]Rom. 12. 2.First, We say,That God, who is the Creator of Man, and he to whom he oweth the Dedication both of Soul and Body, is over all to be worshipped and adored, and that not only by the Spirit, but also with the Prostration of Body. Now,Kneeling,Bowing, andUncovering of the Head, is the alone outward Signification of ourAdorationtowardsGod,and therefore it is not lawful to give it unto Man.Bowing is adoring, and is only due to God.He that kneeleth, or prostrates himself to Man, what doth he more to God? He that boweth, and uncovereth his Head to theCreature, what hath he reserved to theCreator? Now the Apostle shews us, That theUncovering of the Headis that which God requires of us in our worshipping of him, 1Cor.xi. 14. But if we make our Address to Men in the same Manner, where lieth the Difference? Not in the outwardSignification, but merely in theIntention; which opens a Door for thePopish VenerationofImages, which hereby is necessarily excluded.Secondly,Men being alike by Creation(though their being stated under their several Relations requires from them mutual Services according to those respective Relations)owe not Worship one to another, but all equally are to return it to God: Because it is to him, and his Name alone, that every Knee must bow, and before whose Throne the four-and-twenty Elders prostrate themselves. Therefore for Men to take this one from another, is to rob God of his Glory: Since all the Duties of Relations may be performed one to another without these Kind of Bowings, which therefore are no essential Part of our Duty to Man, but to God. All Men, by an inward instinct, in all Nations have been led to prostrate and bow themselves to God. And it is plain that this Bowing to Men took Place from aslavish Fearpossessing some, which led them to set up others as Gods; when also an ambitious proud Spirit got up in those others, to usurp the Place of God over their Brethren.Thirdly,We see thatPeterrefused it fromCornelius, saying, He was a Man. Are then thePopesmore, or more excellent thanPeter, whosuffer Men daily to fall down at their Feet, and kiss them?Peterand theAngelrefused Bowing.This Reproof ofPetertoCorneliusdoth abundantly shew, that such Manners were not to be admitted among Christians. Yea, we see, that theAngeltwice refused this Kind ofBowingfromJohn, Rev. xix. 10. and xxii. 9. for this Reason,Because I am thy Fellow-servant, and of thy Brethren; abundantly intimating that it isnot lawful for Fellow-servantsthus to prostrate themselves one to another: And in this Respect all Men areFellow-servants.Object.If it be said, Johnintended here a Religious Worship, and not a Civil;Answ.Ianswer, This is to say, not to prove: Neither can we supposeJohn, at that Time of the Day, so ill-instructed as not to know it was unlawful to worshipAngels; only it should seem, because of those great and mysterious Things revealed to him by thatAngel, he was willing to signify some more than ordinary Testimony of Respect, for which he was reproved. These Things being thus considered, it is remitted to the Judgment of such as are desirous to be foundChristiansindeed, whether we are worthy of Blame for waving it to Men. Let those then that will blame us consider whether they might not as well accuseMordecaiof Incivility, who was no less singular than we in this Matter.To forbearBowingto Men is no Incivility, nor Pride, nor Rudeness.And forasmuch as they accuse us herein ofRudenessandPride, though the Testimony of our Consciences in the Sight of God be a sufficient Guard against such Calumnies, yet there are of us known to be Men of such Education, as forbear not these Things for want of that they callgood Breeding; and we should be very void of Reason, to purchase thatPrideat so dear a Rate, as many have done the Exercise of their Conscience in this Matter; many of us having beensorely beatenandbuffeted, yea, and several Monthsimprisoned, for no other Reason but because we could not so satisfy theproud unreasonable Humours of proud Men, as touncover our Heads, andbow our Bodies. Nor doth our innocent Practice, in standing still, though upright, not putting off ourHats, any more than ourShoes, the one being the Covering of ourHeads,as well as the other of ourFeet, shew so much Rudeness, as their beating and knocking us,&c.because we cannotBowto them, contrary to our Consciences: Which certainly shews lessMeeknessandHumilityupon their Part, than it doth ofRudenessorPrideupon ours. Now suppose it were our Weakness, and we really under a Mistake in this Thing, since it is not alleged to be the Breach of anyChristian Precept, are we not to be indulged, as the Apostle commanded should be done to such as scrupled toeat Flesh? Anddothnot persecuting and reviling us upon this Account shew them to be more like unto proudHaman, than the Disciples or Followers of themeek, self-denying Jesus? And this I can say boldly, in the Sight of God, from my own Experience, and that of many Thousands more, that however small or foolish this may seem, yet we behoved to choose Death rather than do it, and that for Conscience Sake: And that in its being so contrary to our natural Spirits, there are many of us, to whom the Forsaking of these Bowings and Ceremonies was as Death itself; which we could never have left, if we could have enjoyed our Peace with God in the Use of them.Though it be far from us to judge all those to whom God hath not shewn the Evil of them, under the like Hazard; yet nevertheless we doubt not but to such as would provefaithful WitnessestoChrist’s Divine Lightin theirConsciences, God will also shew the Evil of these Things.

ConcerningSalutationsandRecreations,&c.

[152]Seeing the chief End of allReligionis to redeem Men from the Spirit and vain Conversation of this World, and to lead into inward Communion with God, before whom if wefear alwayswe are accounted happy; therefore all the vain Customs and Habits thereof, both in Word and Deed, are to be rejected and forsaken by those who come to thisFear; such as taking off theHatto a Man, the Bowings and Cringings of the Body, and such other Salutations of that Kind, with all the foolish and superstitious Formalities attending them; all which Man hath invented in his degenerate State, to feed his Pride in the vain Pomp and Glory of this World: As also the unprofitable Plays, frivolous Recreations, Sportings, and Gamings, which are invented to pass away the precious Time, and divert the Mind from theWitness of Godin the Heart, and from theliving Senseof hisFear, and from thatevangelical Spiritwherewith Christians ought to be leavened, and which leads into Sobriety, Gravity, and godly Fear; in which as we abide, the Blessing of the Lord is felt to attend us in those Actions in which we are necessarily engaged, in order to the taking Care for the Sustenance of the outward Man.

[152]Ephes. 5. 11. 1 Pet. 1. 14. John 5. 44. Jer. 10. 3. Acts 10. 26. Matt. 15. 13. Col. 2. 8.

§. I.Having hitherto treated of the Principles of Religion, both relating toDoctrineandWorship, I am now to speak of some Practices which have been the Product of thisPrinciple, in those Witnesses whom God hath raised up in this Day to testify for hisTruth. It will not a little commend them, I suppose, in the Judgment of sober and judicious Men, that taking them generally, even by the Confession of their Adversaries, they are found to be free of those Abominations which abound among other Professors,such as areSwearing,Drunkenness,Whoredom,Riotousness, &c. and that generally the very Coming amongthisPeople doth naturally work such a Change, so that many vicious and profane Persons have been known, by coming to thisTruth, to become sober and virtuous; and many light, vain, and wanton Ones to become grave and serious, as our Adversaries dare not deny:[153]Yet that they may not want something to detract us for, cease not to accuse us for those Things which, when found among themselves, they highly commend; thus ourGravitythey callSullenness, ourSeriousness,Melancholy, ourSilence,Sottishness. Such as have been vicious and profane among them, but by coming to us have left off those Evils, lest they should commend the Truth of our Profession, they say, That whereas they were profane before, they are become worse,In being hypocritical and spiritually proud. If any beforedissoluteandprofaneamong them, by coming to the Truth with us, becomefrugalanddiligent, then they will charge them withCovetousness: And if anyeminentamong them forSeriousness,Piety, andDiscoveries of God, come unto us, then they will say, They were always subject toMelancholyand toEnthusiasm; though before, when among them, it was esteemed neitherMelancholynorEnthusiasmin an evil Sense, butChristian GravityandDivine Revelation. OurBoldnessandChristian Sufferingthey callObstinacyandPertinacy; though half as much, if among themselves, they would accountChristian CourageandNobility. And though thus by their Envy they strive to read all relating to us backwards, counting those Things Vices in us, which in themselves they would extol as Virtues, yet hath the Strength of Truth extorted this Confession often from them,That we are generally a pure and clean People, as to the outward Conversation.

[153]After this Manner thePapistsused to disapprove the Sobriety of theWaldenses, of whomReinerius, a Popish Author, so writeth. “But this Sect of theLeonistshath a great Shew of Truth; for that they live righteously before Men, and believe all Things well of God, and all the Articles which are contained in the Creed; only they blaspheme and hate the Church ofRome.”

But this,they say, is but in Policy to commend our Heresy.

But such Policy it is, say I, as Christ and his Apostles made use of, and all good Christians ought to do; yea, so far hath Truth prevailed by the Purity of its Followers, that if one that is called aQuakerdo but that which is common among them, as tolaughand bewanton,speak at large, and keep not hisWordpunctually, or be overtaken withHastinessorAnger, they presently say,O this is against your Profession!As if indeed so to do were very consistent with theirs; wherein though they speak the Truth, yet they give away their Cause. But if they can find any under our Name in any of those Evils common among themselves (as who can imagine but among so many Thousands there will be some Chaff, since of twelve Apostles one was found to be a Devil) O how will they insult, and make more Noise of the Escape of oneQuaker, than of an hundred among themselves!

§. II.But there are some singular Things, which most of all our Adversaries plead for the Lawfulness of, and allow themselves in, as no Ways inconsistent with theChristian Religion, which we have found to be no Ways lawful unto us, and have been commanded of the Lord to lay them aside; though the doing thereof hath occasioned no small Sufferings and Buffetings, and hath procured us much Hatred and Malice from the World. And because the Nature of these Things is such, that they do upon the very Sight distinguish us, and make us known, so that we cannot hide ourselves from any, without proving unfaithful to our Testimony; our Trials and Exercises have herethrough proved the more numerous and difficult, as will after appear. These I have laboured briefly to comprehend in this Proposition; but they may more largely be exhibited in these six following Propositions.

Flattering Titles.I.That it is not lawful to give to Men such flattering Titles, as Your Holiness, Your Majesty, Your Eminency, Your Excellency, Your Grace, Your Lordship, Your Honour,&c.nor use those flattering Words, commonly called[Compliments.]

Hat and Knee.II.That it is not lawful for Christians to kneel, or prostrate themselves to any Man, or to bow the Body, or to uncover the Head to them.

Apparel.III.That it is not lawful forChristiansto use Superfluities in Apparel, as are of no Use, save for Ornament and Vanity.

Gaming.IV.That it is not lawful to use Games, Sports, Plays, nor among other Things Comedies among Christians, under the Notion of Recreations, which do not agree with Christian Silence, Gravity, and Sobriety: For Laughing, Sporting, Gaming, Mocking, Jesting, vain Talking,&c.is not Christian Liberty, nor harmless Mirth.

Swearing.V.That it is not lawful for Christians to swear at all under the Gospel, not only not vainly, and in their common Discourse, which was also forbidden under theMosaicalLaw, but even not in Judgment before the Magistrate.

Fighting.VI.That it is not lawful for Christians to resist Evil, or to war or fight in any Case.

Degrees of Dignity and Precedency allowed.Before I enter upon a particular Disquisition of these Things, I shall first premise some general Considerations, to prevent all Mistakes; and next add some general Considerations, which equally respect all of them. I would not have any judge, That hereby we intend to destroy themutual Relationthat either is betwixtPrinceandPeople,MasterandServants,ParentsandChildren; nay, not at all: We shall evidence, That our Principle in these Things hath no such Tendency, and that these natural Relations are rather better established, than any Ways hurt by it. Next, Let not any judge, That from our Opinion in these Things, any Necessity oflevellingwill follow, or that all Men must have Things incommon. Our Principle leaves every Man to enjoy that peaceably, which either his own Industry, or his Parents, have purchased to him; only he is thereby instructed to use it aright, both for his own Good, and that of his Brethren; and all to the Glory of God: In which also his Acts are to bevoluntary, and no Waysconstrained. And further, we say not hereby, that no Man may use the Creation more or less than another: For we know, That as it hath pleased God to dispense it diversly, giving to some more, and some less, so they may use it accordingly.Education differs accordingly.The several Conditions, under which Men are diversly stated, together with their Educations answering thereunto, do sufficiently shew this: TheServantis not the same Way educated as theMaster; nor theTenantas theLandlord; nor theRichas thePoor; nor thePrinceas thePeasant. Now, though it be not lawful for any, however great Abundance they may have, or whatever their Education may be, to use that which is merely superfluous; yet seeing their Education has accustomed them thereunto, and their Capacity enables them so to do, without being profuse or extravagant, they may use Things better in their Kind, than such whoseEducationhath neither accustomed them to such Things, nor their Capacity will reach to compass them.The lawful or unlawful Use of the Creation.For it is beyond Question, That whatever Thing theCreationaffords is for the Use of Man, and the moderate Use of them is lawful; yet,per accidens, they may be unlawful to some, and not to others. As for Instance, He that by Reason of his Estate and Education hath been used to eatFleshand drinkWine, and to be clothed with thefinest Wool, if his Estate will bear it, and he use it neither in Superfluity, nor immoderately, he may do it; and perhaps, if he should apply himself to feed, or be cloathed as are the Peasants, it might prejudice the Health of his Body, and nothing advance his Soul. But if a Man, whose Estate and Education had accustomed him to bothcoarser FoodandRaiment, should stretch himself beyond what he had, or were used to, to the manifest Prejudice of his Family and Children, no Doubt it would be unlawful to him, even so to eat or be clothed as another, in whom it is lawful; for that the other may be as much mortified, and have denied himself as much in coming down to that, which this aspires to, as he, in willing to be like him, aspires beyond what he either is able, or hath accustomed to do. The safe Place then is, for such as have Fulness, to watch over themselves, that they use it moderately, and rescind allSuperfluities;The Rich to help the Poor.being willing, as far as they can, to help the Need of those to whom Providence hath allotted a smaller Allowance.Let the Brother of high Degree rejoice, in that he is abased; and such as God calls in a low Degree, be content with their Condition, not envying those Brethren who have greater Abundance,knowingthey have received Abundance, as to the inward Man; which is chiefly to be regarded. And therefore beware of such a Temptation, as to use their Calling as an Engine to bericher, knowing, they have this Advantage beyond theRichandNoblethat are called, that the Truth doth not any Ways abase them, nay, not in the Esteem of the World, as itdoth theother; but that they are rather exalted thereby, in that as to the inward and spiritual Fellowship of the Saints, they become the Brethren and Companions of the greatest and richest; and in this Respect,Let him of low Degree rejoice that he is exalted.

These Things premised, I would seriously propose unto all such, as choose to beChristiansindeed, and that inNature, and not inNameonly, whether it were not desirable, and would not greatly contribute to the Commendation ofChristianity, and to the Increase of the Life and Virtue of Christ, ifall superfluous Titles of Honour, Profuseness and Prodigality in Meat and Apparel, Gaming, Sporting and Playing, were laid aside and forborn? And whether such as lay them aside, in so doing, walk not more like the Disciples of Christ and his Apostles, and are therein nearer their Example, than such as use them? Whether the laying them aside would hinder any from being good Christians? Or if Christians might not be better without them, than with them? Certainly theSoberandSeriousamong all Sorts will say,Yea. Then surely such as lay them aside, as reckoning them unsuitable for Christians, are not to be blamed, but rather commended for so doing: Because that in Principle and Practice they effectually advance that, which others acknowledge were desirable, but can never make effectual, so long as they allow the Use of them as lawful. And God hath made it manifest in this Age, That by discovering the Evil of such Things, and leading hisWitnesses out of them, and to testify against them, he hath produced effectually in many thatMortificationandAbstractionfrom theLove and Cares of this World, who daily are conversing in the World (but inwardly redeemed out of it) both inWedlock, and in their lawful Employments, which was judged could only be obtained by such as were shut up inCloistersandMonasteries. Thus much in General.

§. III.As to the first we affirm positively, Thatit is not lawful for Christians either to give or receive these Titles of Honour, as,Your Holiness,Your Majesty,Your Excellency,Your Eminency, &c.

Titles.First, Because theseTitlesare no Part of that Obedience which is due toMagistratesorSuperiors; neither doth the giving them add to or diminish from that Subjection we owe to them, which consistsin obeying their just and lawful Commands, not inTitlesandDesignations.

Under the Law and Gospel.Secondly, We find not that in the Scripture any suchTitlesare used, either under theLawor theGospel: But that in the speaking toKings,Princes, orNobles, they used only a simple Compellation, asO King!and that without any further Designation, save perhaps the Name of the Person, as,O KingAgrippa,&c.

Lying Titles.Thirdly, It lays a Necessity uponChristiansmost frequently tolie; because the Persons obtaining theseTitles, either by Election or hereditarily, may frequently be found to have nothing really in them deserving them, or answering to them: As some, to whom it is said,Your Excellency, having nothing ofExcellency in them; and he who is called,Your Grace, appears to be an Enemy toGrace; and he who is called,Your Honour, is known to be base and ignoble.Patents do not oblige to a Lie.I wonder what Law of Man, or what Patent ought to oblige me to make a Lie, in callingGood, Evil; andEvil, Good? I wonder what Law of Man can secure me, in so doing, from the just Judgment of God, that will make me account forevery idle Word? And tolieis something more. Surely Christians should be ashamed that such Laws, manifestly crossing the Law of God, should be among them.

Object.If it be said,We ought in Charity to suppose that they have these Virtues, because the King has bestowed those Titles upon them, or that they are descended of such as deserved them;

Answ.Ianswer,Charitydestroys notKnowledge: I am not obliged byCharity, either to believe or speak aLie. Now it is apparent, and cannot be denied by any, but that those Virtues are not in many of the Persons expressed by theTitlesthey bear; neither will they allow to speak so to such, in whom these Virtues are, unless they be so dignified by outward Princes. So that such as are truly virtuous, must not be stiled by their Virtues, because not privileged by the Princes of this World; and such as have them not, must be so called, because they have obtained a Patent so to be: And all this is done by those, who pretend to be his Followers, that commanded his Disciples,Not to be called of Men, Master; and told them, Such couldnot believe, as received Honour one from another, and sought not the Honour which cometh from God only. This is so plain, to such as will indeed beChristians, that it needs no Consequence.

Your Holiness,Your Grace, &c.Fourthly, As to those Titles ofHoliness,Eminency, andExcellency, used among thePapiststo thePopeandCardinals, &c. andGrace,Lordship, andWorship, used to theClergyamong theProtestants, it is a most blasphemous Usurpation. For if they useHolinessandGrace, because these Things ought to be in aPope, or in aBishop, how come they to usurp that peculiarly to themselves? Ought notHolinessandGraceto be in every Christian? And so every Christian should say,Your Holiness, andYour Grace, one to another. Next, how can they in Reason claim any moreTitles, than were practised and received by the Apostles and Primitive Christians, whose Successors they pretend they are, and as whole Successors (and no otherwise) themselves, I judge, will confess any Honour they seek is due to them? Now if they neither sought, received, nor admitted suchHonournorTitles, how came these by them? If they say they did, let them prove it if they can: We find no such Thing in the Scripture. The Christians speak to the Apostles without any suchDenomination, neither saying,If it please Your Grace,Your Holiness,Your Lordship, norYour Worship; they are neither called,My LordPeter, norMy LordPaul; nor yetMasterPeter, norMasterPaul; norDoctorPeter, norDoctorPaul; but singlyPeterandPaul; and that not only in the Scripture, but for some hundreds of Years after: So that this appears to be a manifest Fruit of the Apostasy. For if theseTitlesarise either from theOfficeorWorthof the Persons, it will not be denied but the Apostles deserved them better than any now that call for them. But the Case is plain, The Apostles had theHoliness, theExcellency, theGrace; and because they wereholy,excellent, andgracious, they neither used, nor admitted of suchTitles:Hypocrites want Titles.But these having neitherHoliness,Excellency, norGrace, will needs be so called, to satisfy their ambitious and ostentatious Minds, which is a manifest Token of theirHypocrisy.

Fifthly, As to that Title ofMajesty, usually ascribed to Princes, we do not find it given to any such in the Holy Scripture; but that it is specially and peculiarly ascribed unto God, as 1Chron.xxix. 11.Job.xxxvii. 22.Psal.xxi. 5. and xxix. 4. and xlv. 3. and cxiii. 1. and xcvi. 6.Isa.ii. 10. and xxiv. 14. and xxvi. 10.Heb.i. 3. 2Pet.i. 16. and many more Places. Hence saithJude, Ver. 25.To the only wise God our Saviour, be Glory and Majesty, &c. not to Men. We find in Scripture the proud KingNebuchadnezzarassuming thisTitleto himself,Dan.iv. 30. who at that Time received a sufficient Reproof, by a sudden Judgment which came upon him. Therefore in all the Compellations used to Princes in theOld Testament, it is not to be found, nor yet in theNew.Paulwas very civil toAgrippa, yet he gives him no suchTitle: Neither was thisTitleused among Christians in the primitive Times.Eccles. Hist. L. 4. P. 445.Hence theEcclesiastical Historyof the Reformation ofFrance, relating the Speech of the LordRochefort, at the Assembly of the Estates ofFrance, held underCharlesthe Ninth, in the Year 1560, saith,Your Majestynot used; how taken Notice of in 1560.That this Harangue was well remarked, in that he used not the Word[Majesty]invented by Flatterers of late Years.And yet this Author minded not how his MasterCalvinused thisflattering TitletoFrancisthe First, King ofFrance; and not only so, but calls himMost Christian King, in the Epistle to hisInstitutions; though by his daily persecuting of theReformers, it was apparent, he was far from being such, even inCalvin’s own Esteem. Surely the Complying with such vainTitles, imposed and introduced byAntichrist, greatly tended to stain theReformation, and to render it defective in many Things.

Lastly, All theseTitlesandStilesofHonourare to be rejected byChristians, because they are to seek theHonour that comes from above, and not theHonourthat is frombelow: But these Honours are not that Honour that comes from above, but are from below. For we know well enough what Industry, and what Pains Men are at to get these Things, and what Part it is that seeks after them, to wit, theproud, insolent, haughty, aspiring Mind.The proud Mind loves Titles.For judge, Is it themeekandinnocent Spirit of Christthat covets that Honour? Is it that Spirit that must be ofno Reputation in this World, that has its[154]Conversation in Heaven, that comes to haveFellowship with the Sons of God? Is it that Spirit, I say, that loves that Honour, that seeks after that Honour, that pleads for the Upholding of that Honour, that frets, and rages, and fumes, when it is denied that Honour?Lucifer’s Spirit.Or is it not rather the lordly insulting Spirit ofLucifer, thePrince of this World, he that of old affected and sought after this Honour, and loved not to abide in the submissive low Place? And so all his Children are possessed with the same ambitious proud Mind, seeking and coveringTitlesofHonour, which indeed belong not to them. For let us examine,[155]Who they are that are honourable indeed?[156]Is it not therighteous Man? Is it not theholy Man? Is it not thehumble-hearted Man, themeek-spirited Man? And are not such those that ought to behonouredamongChristians? Now of these, may there not be poor Men, Labourers, silly Fishermen? And if so, how comes it that theTitlesofHonourare not bestowed upon such? But who are they that generally receive and look for this Honour? Are they not the rich Ones, such as have abundance of the Earth, as be like the rich Glutton, such as are proud and ambitious, such as are Oppressors of the Poor, such as swell with Lust and Vanity, and allSuperfluity of Naughtiness, who are the very Abomination and Plague of the Nations? Are not these they that are accounted honourable, that require and receive the Titles of Honour, proudHamans? Now whether is this the Honour that comes from God, or the Honour from below? Doth God honour such as daily dishonour him, and disobey him? And if this be not the Honour that comes from God, but the Honour of this World, which the Children of this World give and receive one from another; how can the Children of God, such as are Christians indeed, give or receive that Honour among themselves, without coming under the Reproof of Christ, who saith, Thatsuch as do cannot believe? But further, If we respect the Cause that most frequently procures to Men theseTitlesofHonour, there is not one of a Thousand that shall be found to be because of any Christian Virtue; but rather for Things to be discommended amongChristians: As by the Favour ofPrinces, procured by flattering, and often by worse Means. Yea, the most frequent, and accounted among Men most honourable, isFighting, or some greatmartial Exploit, which can add nothing to a Christian’s Worth: Since, sure it is, it were desirable there were noFightingsamong Christians at all; and in so far as there are, it shews they are not right Christians. AndJamestells us, ThatFighting proceeds from the Lusts. So that it were fitter for Christians, by theSword of God’s Spirit, to fight against their Lusts, than by the Prevalency of their Lusts to destroy one another. Whatever Honour any might have attained of old under theLawthis Way, we find under theGospelChristians commended forSuffering, not forFighting; neither did any of Christ’s Disciples,save one, offer outward Violence by the Sword, in cutting offMalchus’s Ear; for which he received no Title of Honour, but a just Reproof. Finally, if we look either to theNatureof thisHonour, theCauseof it, theWayit is conveyed, theTermsin which it is delivered, it cannot be used by such as desire to beChristiansin good Earnest.

[154]Phil. 3. 20.

[155]Jerome, in his Epistle toCelant, admonisheth her, That she was to be preferred to none for herNobility, for the Christian Religion admits not of Respect of Persons; neither are Men to be esteemed because of their outward Condition, but according to the Disposition of the Mind, to be esteemed either noble or base; he that obeyeth not Sin, is free; who is strong in Virtue, is noble,Let the Epistle ofJamesbe read.

[156]1 Sam. 2. 30.

§. IV.Now besides these generalTitlesofHonour, what gross Abuses are crept in among such as are calledChristiansin the Use ofCompliments, wherein not Servants to Masters, or others, with Respect to any such Kind of Relations, but others, who have no such Relation do say and write to one another at every Turn,Your humble Servant,Your most obedient Servant, &c. Such wicked Customs have, to the great Prejudice of Souls, accustomed Christians to lie; and to use Lying is now come to be accounted Civility. O horrid Apostasy! for it is notoriously known, that the Use of theseComplimentsimports not any Design of Service, neither are any such Fools to think so; for if we should put them to it that say so, they would no doubt think we abused them; and would soon let us know they gave us Words in Course, and no more. It is strange, That such as pretend toScriptureastheirRule should not be ashamed to use such Things; sinceElihu, who had not the Scriptures, could by theLight within him(which these Men think insufficient) say,Job.xxxii. 21, 22.Let me not accept any Man’s Person, neither let me give flattering Titles unto Men. For I know not to give flattering Titles; in so doing my Maker would soon take me away.A certain ancient devout Man, in the primitive Time, subscribed himself to a Bishop,Your humble Servant; wherein I doubt not but he was more real than our usualComplimenters; and yet he was sharply reproved for it.[157]

[157]This History is reported byCasaubonus, in his Book ofMannersandCustoms, P. 160. “In this last Age he is esteemed an uncivil Man, who will not either to his Inferior or Equal subscribe himselfServant. ButSulpitius Severuswas heretofore sharply reproved byPaulinus, Bishop ofNola, because in his Epistle he had subscribed himself his Servant, saying,Beware thou subscribe not thyself hisServant, who isthy Brother; for Flattery is sinful, not a Testimony of Humility to give these Honours to Men, which are only due to the One Lord, Master, and GOD.”

But they usually object, to defend themselves,ThatLukesaith, Most ExcellentTheophilus;andPaul,Most NobleFestus.

Ianswer, SinceLukewrote that by the Dictates of theInfallible Spirit of God, I think it will not be doubted butTheophilusdid deserve it, as being really endued with that Virtue: In which Case we shall not condemn those that do it by the same Rule. But it is not proved thatLukegaveTheophilusthis Title, as that which was derived to him, either from his Father, or by any PatentTheophilushad obtained from any of the Princes of the Earth? or that he would have given it him, in Case he had not been trulyexcellent: And unless this be proved (which never can) there can nothing hence be deduced against us.Concerning the TitlePaulgave toFestus.The like may be said of that ofPaultoFestus, whom he would not have called such, if he had not been trulynoble; as indeed he was, in that he suffered him to be heard in his own Cause, and would not give Way to the Fury of theJewsagainst him; it was not because of any outward Title bestowed uponFestus, that he so called him, else he would have given the same Appellation to his PredecessorFelix, who had the same Office; but being a covetous Man, we find he gives him no suchStile.

§. V.TheSingular Numberto one Person used in theLatin.It will not be unfit in this Place to say something concerning the Using of theSingular Numberto one Person; of this there is no Controversy in theLatin. For when we speak to one, we always use thePronoun[TU,] and he that would do otherwise, would break the Rules ofGrammar. For what Boy, learning his Rudiments, is ignorant, that it is incongruous to say [vos amas,vos legis,] that is [you lovest,you readest] speaking to one? But the Pride of Man, that hath corrupted many Things, refuses also to use thisSimplicityof speaking in the vulgar Languages. For being puffed up with a vain Opinion of themselves, as if theSingular Numberwere not sufficient for them, they will have others to speak to them in thePlural. HenceLuther, in hisPlays, reproves and mocks this Manner of speaking, saying,Magister, vos es iratus: Which CorruptionErasmussufficiently refutes in his Book ofWriting Epistles: Concerning which likewiseJames Howel, in his Epistle to theNobilityofEngland, before theFrenchandEnglish Dictionary, takes Notice, “That both inFrance, and in other Nations, the Word [THOU] was used in speaking to one; but by Succession of Time,How the WordYoucame to be used to a single Person.when theRomanCommonwealth grew into an Empire, the Courtiers began to magnify the Emperor, (as being furnished with Power to confer Dignities and Offices) using the Word [You,] yea, and deifying him with more remarkable Titles;” Concerning which Matter, we read in the Epistles ofSymmachusto the EmperorsTheodosiusandValentinianus, where he useth these Forms of Speaking, “Vestra Æternitas, Your Eternity;Vestrum Numen, Your Godhead;Vestra Serenitas, Your Serenity;Vestra Clementia, Your Clemency. So that the Word [You] in the Plural Number, together with the other Titles and Compellations of Honour, seem to have taken their Rise fromMonarchical Government; which afterwards, by Degrees, came to be derived to private Persons.”

The same is witnessed byJohn Maresius, of theFrench Academy; in the Preface of hisClovis: “Let none wonder (saith he) that the Word [Thou] is used in this Work toPrincesandPrincesses; for we use the same to God: And of old the same was used toAlexanders,Cæsars,QueensandEmpresses. The Use of the Word [You,] when one Person is spoken to, was only introduced by these base Flatteries of Men of latter Ages, to whom it seemed good to use the Plural Number to one Person, that he may imagine himself alone to be equal to many others in Dignity and Worth; from whence at last it came to Persons of lower Quality.”

To the same Purpose speaketh alsoM. Godeau, in his Preface to theNew Testament Translation: “I had rather (saith he) faithfully keep to the express Words ofPaul, than exactly follow the polished Stile of our Tongue; therefore I always use that Form of calling God in theSingular Number, not in thePlural; and therefore I say rather [Thou] than [You.] I confess indeed, That theCivility and Custom of this World requires him to be honoured after that Manner; but it is likewise on the contrary true, that the original Tongue of the New Testament hath nothing common with such Manners and Civility; so that not one of these many old Versions we have doth observe it. Let not Men believe, That we give not Respect enough to God, in that we call him by the Word [Thou] which is nevertheless far otherwise;The WordThou, a greater Honour to One thanYou.for I seem to myself (may be by the Effect of Custom) more to honour his Divine Majesty, in calling him after this Manner, than if I should call him after the Manner of Men, who are so delicate in their Forms of Speech.”

See how clearly and evidently these Men witness, That this Form of Speaking, and these profane Titles, derive their Origin from the base Flattery of these last Ages, and from the delicate Haughtiness ofworldly Men, who have invented theseNovelties, that thereby they might honour one another, under I know not what Pretence ofCivilityandRespect. From whence many of the presentChristians(so accounted) are become so perverse, in commending most wicked Men, and wicked Customs, that theSimplicityof theGospelis wholly lost; so that the giving of Men and Things their own Names is not only worn out of Custom, but the doing thereof is accounted absurd and rude by such Kind ofdelicate Parasites, who desire to ascribe to this Flattery, and abuse the Name ofCivility. Moreover, that this Way of speaking proceeds from an high and proud Mind, hence appears, because that Men commonly use theSingular NumbertoBeggars, and to theirServants; yea, and in theirPrayers to God. Thus theSuperiorwill speak to hisInferior, who yet will not bear that theInferiorso speak to him, as judging it a Kind of Reproach unto him. So hath the Pride of Men placedGodand theBeggarin the sameCategory. I think I need not use Arguments to prove to such as know congruous Language, That we ought to use theSingular Numberspeaking to one; which is the common Dialect of the whole Scripture, as also the most Interpreters do translate it. Seeing therefore it ismanifest to us, that this Form of speaking to Men in thePlural Numberdoth proceed fromPride, as well as that it is in itself aLie, we found a Necessity upon us to testify against this Corruption, by using theSingularequally untoall. And although no Reason can be given why we should be persecuted upon this Account, especially byChristians, who profess to follow the Rule of Scripture, whose Dialect this is;Scripture Dialect the plain Language.yet it would perhaps seem incredible if I should relate how much we have suffered for this Thing, and how these proud Ones havefumed,fretted, andgnashedtheirTeeth, frequentlybeatingandstrikingus, when we have spoken to them thus in theSingular Number: Whereby we are the more confirmed in our Judgment, as seeing that thisTestimony of Truth, which God hath given us to bear in all Things, doth so vex the serpentine Nature in theChildren of Darkness.

§. VI.Bowing to Men, &c.Secondly, Next unto this ofTitles, the other Part ofHonourused amongChristiansis theKneeling,Bowing, andUncovering of the Headto one another. I know nothing our Adversaries have to plead for them in this Matter, save some few Instances of theOld Testament, and theCustomof the Country.

The first are, Such asAbraham’sbowing himself to the Children ofHeth, andLotto the two Angels, &c.

But the Practice of thesePatriarchs, related as Matter of Fact, is not to be a Rule toChristiansnow; neither are we to imitate them in every Practice, which has not a particular Reproof added to it: For we find notAbrahamreproved for takingHagar, &c. And indeed to say all Things were lawful for us which they practised, would produce great Inconveniences obvious enough to all.The Custom of the Nations no Rule to Christians.And as to theCustoms of the Nations, it is a very ill Argument for a Christian’s Practice: We should have a better Rule to walk by than theCustomof theGentiles; the Apostles desire us not to be[158]conformed to this World, &c. We see how little they have to say for themselves in this Matter. Let it be observed then, Whether our Reasons for layingaside these Things be not considerable and weighty enough to uphold us in so doing.

[158]Rom. 12. 2.

First, We say,That God, who is the Creator of Man, and he to whom he oweth the Dedication both of Soul and Body, is over all to be worshipped and adored, and that not only by the Spirit, but also with the Prostration of Body. Now,Kneeling,Bowing, andUncovering of the Head, is the alone outward Signification of ourAdorationtowardsGod,and therefore it is not lawful to give it unto Man.Bowing is adoring, and is only due to God.He that kneeleth, or prostrates himself to Man, what doth he more to God? He that boweth, and uncovereth his Head to theCreature, what hath he reserved to theCreator? Now the Apostle shews us, That theUncovering of the Headis that which God requires of us in our worshipping of him, 1Cor.xi. 14. But if we make our Address to Men in the same Manner, where lieth the Difference? Not in the outwardSignification, but merely in theIntention; which opens a Door for thePopish VenerationofImages, which hereby is necessarily excluded.

Secondly,Men being alike by Creation(though their being stated under their several Relations requires from them mutual Services according to those respective Relations)owe not Worship one to another, but all equally are to return it to God: Because it is to him, and his Name alone, that every Knee must bow, and before whose Throne the four-and-twenty Elders prostrate themselves. Therefore for Men to take this one from another, is to rob God of his Glory: Since all the Duties of Relations may be performed one to another without these Kind of Bowings, which therefore are no essential Part of our Duty to Man, but to God. All Men, by an inward instinct, in all Nations have been led to prostrate and bow themselves to God. And it is plain that this Bowing to Men took Place from aslavish Fearpossessing some, which led them to set up others as Gods; when also an ambitious proud Spirit got up in those others, to usurp the Place of God over their Brethren.

Thirdly,We see thatPeterrefused it fromCornelius, saying, He was a Man. Are then thePopesmore, or more excellent thanPeter, whosuffer Men daily to fall down at their Feet, and kiss them?Peterand theAngelrefused Bowing.This Reproof ofPetertoCorneliusdoth abundantly shew, that such Manners were not to be admitted among Christians. Yea, we see, that theAngeltwice refused this Kind ofBowingfromJohn, Rev. xix. 10. and xxii. 9. for this Reason,Because I am thy Fellow-servant, and of thy Brethren; abundantly intimating that it isnot lawful for Fellow-servantsthus to prostrate themselves one to another: And in this Respect all Men areFellow-servants.

Object.If it be said, Johnintended here a Religious Worship, and not a Civil;

Answ.Ianswer, This is to say, not to prove: Neither can we supposeJohn, at that Time of the Day, so ill-instructed as not to know it was unlawful to worshipAngels; only it should seem, because of those great and mysterious Things revealed to him by thatAngel, he was willing to signify some more than ordinary Testimony of Respect, for which he was reproved. These Things being thus considered, it is remitted to the Judgment of such as are desirous to be foundChristiansindeed, whether we are worthy of Blame for waving it to Men. Let those then that will blame us consider whether they might not as well accuseMordecaiof Incivility, who was no less singular than we in this Matter.To forbearBowingto Men is no Incivility, nor Pride, nor Rudeness.And forasmuch as they accuse us herein ofRudenessandPride, though the Testimony of our Consciences in the Sight of God be a sufficient Guard against such Calumnies, yet there are of us known to be Men of such Education, as forbear not these Things for want of that they callgood Breeding; and we should be very void of Reason, to purchase thatPrideat so dear a Rate, as many have done the Exercise of their Conscience in this Matter; many of us having beensorely beatenandbuffeted, yea, and several Monthsimprisoned, for no other Reason but because we could not so satisfy theproud unreasonable Humours of proud Men, as touncover our Heads, andbow our Bodies. Nor doth our innocent Practice, in standing still, though upright, not putting off ourHats, any more than ourShoes, the one being the Covering of ourHeads,as well as the other of ourFeet, shew so much Rudeness, as their beating and knocking us,&c.because we cannotBowto them, contrary to our Consciences: Which certainly shews lessMeeknessandHumilityupon their Part, than it doth ofRudenessorPrideupon ours. Now suppose it were our Weakness, and we really under a Mistake in this Thing, since it is not alleged to be the Breach of anyChristian Precept, are we not to be indulged, as the Apostle commanded should be done to such as scrupled toeat Flesh? Anddothnot persecuting and reviling us upon this Account shew them to be more like unto proudHaman, than the Disciples or Followers of themeek, self-denying Jesus? And this I can say boldly, in the Sight of God, from my own Experience, and that of many Thousands more, that however small or foolish this may seem, yet we behoved to choose Death rather than do it, and that for Conscience Sake: And that in its being so contrary to our natural Spirits, there are many of us, to whom the Forsaking of these Bowings and Ceremonies was as Death itself; which we could never have left, if we could have enjoyed our Peace with God in the Use of them.Though it be far from us to judge all those to whom God hath not shewn the Evil of them, under the like Hazard; yet nevertheless we doubt not but to such as would provefaithful WitnessestoChrist’s Divine Lightin theirConsciences, God will also shew the Evil of these Things.

Back to Index Next