FOr the understanding and right stating of this Question, I will suppose these two things;

1. That a Christian may be a Magistrate; this I know many do deny, grounding themselves upon that Discourse of our Saviour to his Disciples, Ye know, saith he, Mat. 20.25. that the Princes of the Gentiles do exercise Dominion over them, and they that are great, ex­ercise Authority upon them. But it shall not be so much amongst you: from whence they inferre, that all who will be Christs Disciples, are thereby forbid any exercise of Temporall Sovereignty. And I remember amongst many other of the Primitive Writers, who were of the same opinion, Tertullian in his Apology doth expresly say, Nos ad omnem Ambitionis curam frigemus, &c. We 1. Christians, sayes he, have not the least Taint of Ambition, be­ing so farre from affecting Honours, that we look not after so much as the Edileship, which was the lowest Magistracy in Rome; and afterwards of Tiberius, Tiberius, sayes he, would have become a Christian, if either the world did not need, or it were lawfull for Christians to be Emperours. Many other expressions there are both in Tertullian, Cyprian and Origen, to the same purpose. But [Page 2] because the Practice of the Christian world, down from Constan­tines time, even in the most Reformed Churches, hath carried it in the Affirmative for Christian Magistracy; and the contrary Do­ctrine, besides the Gap it opens to all Civill Confusion, is built on­ly upon some remote Consequences from Scripture, rather than a­ny direct proof. I will therefore admit that a Christian may lawfully exercise the Highest place of Magistracy, only, as the Apostle saith in another case, in the Lord, i. not extending his Commission far­ther than the Word of God doth warrant him.

1. I will suppose that there are some things in their own Nature Indifferent, I mean, those Outward Circumstances of our Actions; which the Law of God hath left Free and Arbitrary, giving us on­ly generall Precepts for the Use of them either way: Such are, Do all things to the glory of God, And, Do what makes most for edifica­tion, and the like, which Rules whoever observes, may in things Indifferent, either do or forbear them, as he in his Christian Pru­dence shall think Convenient.

Of these Indifferent Things some are Purely so, as the Time and Place of meeting for Religious Worship; which seem to me, to be so very Indifferent, that they cannot without great violence, be wrested to any superstitious Observance; and therefore concern­ing these I do not dispute.

Other things there are commonly supposed Indifferent in their own Nature, but by Abuse have become occasions of Superstition: such as are, Bowing at the Name of Jesus, the Cross in Baptisme, Pictures in Churches, Surplices in Preaching, Kneeling at the Sacrament, set Formes of Prayer, and the like; All which seem to some Indifferent in their own Nature, and by any, who is per­swaded in his Conscience of the Lawfullness of them, without doubt may lawfully enough be practised; yet I hold it utterly unlawfull for any Christian Magistrate to impose the use of them. And that for these Reasons.

First, Because it is directly contrary to the Nature of Christian Religion in generall, which in every part of it is to be Free and Un­forced; for since the Christian Magistrate cannot, as I think now all Protestant Writers do agree, force his Religion upon any, but is to leave even those poore Creatures the Jews and Mahumedans, to their unbelief (though they certainly perish in it) rather than by Fines and Imprisonments to torture them out of it; then much [Page 3] lesse may he abridg his Fellow Christian, in things of lesser Moment, and which concerne not the substance of his Religion, from using that Liberty in serving God, which his conscience prompts him to, and the Nature of his Religion doth warrant him in. For God as he loves a chearfull giver, so likewise a chearfull Worshipper, ac­cepting of no more, than we willingly performe.

Secondly, And more particularly. This Imposing of Things In­different, is directly contrary to Gospel-Precept. Our Saviour doth in many places Inveigh against the Rigid and Imposing Pharisees, Matth. 23. for laying yoakes upon othe [...]s, and therefore invites all to come un­to him for Freedome, Take my yoake upon you, saith he, Matth. 11. for it is easie, and my burden is light. And, If the Sonne set you Free, Ioh. 8.36. then are you Free indeed. Where by Freedome I do not only un­derstand Freedome from sin, but from all Humane Impositions; since the Apostle Paul doth seem to allude unto this place, in that Com­mand of his to the Galatians, Stand fast in the Liberty, where­with Christ hath made you free, and, Gal. 5.1. be not again entangled with the Yoake of Bondage; where, that I may prevent an Objection, I will grant, that by Yoake of Bondage, he understands Circumcisi­on and other Jewish Ceremonies; but from thence I will draw an unanswerable Argument against the urging of any other now upon a Christian Account; since that the Mosaicall Ceremonies which had so much to plead for themselves, upon the Account of their Divine Originall; and which, even after they were fullfilled by our Saviour, still remained indifferent in their Use, and were so practised by Paul; yet when once they were Imposed, and a Neces­sity pleaded for their Continuance, the Apostle Writes so sharply against them, exhorting the Galatians to stand fast in their Liberty, as part of our Saviours purchase. If this, I say, was the case with those Old Rits, then much lesse can any now Impose an inven­ted forme of Worship, for which there cannot be pretended the least warrant that ever God did Authorize it. And it seems alto­gether needlesse, that the Jewish Ceremonies, should, as to their Necessity at least, expire and be abrogated, if others might succeed in their roome, and be as strictly commanded, as ever the former were. For this only returnes us to our Bondage again, which is so much the more intolerable, Iac. 1.25. in that our Religion is stiled the Perfect Law of Liberty: which Liberty I understand not wherein it con­sists, if in things Necessary, we are already determined by God, [Page 4] and in things Indifferent we may still be tied up to Humane Ordinan­ces, and Outside Rites, at the pleasure of our Christian Magistrates.

To these Scriptures which directly deny all Imposition, may be added all those Texts, which consequentially do it, such as are Do to others, as you would have others do to you: And who is there that would have his Conscience Imposed upon? And, You that are strong, Rom. 14. bear with the Infirmity of the weak; Whereas this practise will be so farre from easing the Burden of the weak; that if men are at all scrupulous, it only laies more load upon them. These Scrip­tures, with many hundreds the like, show that this kind of Rigour is utterly inconsistent with the Rules of Christian Forbearance and Charity, which no Christian Magistrate ought to think himself absolved from: Since though as a Magistrate he hath a power in Civill things, yet as a Christian, he ought to have a care that in things of spirituall concernement he grieve not the minds of any, who are upon that Relation, not his Subjects, so much as his Brethren: and therefore since they have left their Natu­rall, and voluntarily parted with their Civill, they ought not to be entrenched upon in their Spirituall freedome: especially by such a Magistrate, who owning the same Principles of Religion with them, is thereby ingaged to use his Power, only to support, and not to ensnare them: to Bound perhaps, but not to abridg their Liberty; to keep it ind [...]ed from running into Licentiousness (which is a Morall Evill) but not to Shackle, Undermine and Fetter it, un­der pretence of Docency and Order. Which when once it comes to be an Order of constraint, and not of consent, it is nothing else but in the Imposer, Tyranny; in the person Imposed upon, Bon­dage: 1 Cor. 7.23. and makes him to be, what in things appertaining to Reli­gion we are forbidden to be, viz. The servants of men. Ye are bought, saith the Apostle, with a price, and manumitted by Christ, be you not the Servants of men: which prohibition doth not forbid Civill Service, for he said alittle before, Art thou called while thou art a Servant? Verse 21. care not for it; but if thou canst be free, use it rather, Implying, that Civill Liberty is to be preferred before servitude, yet not to be much contended for, but held as a matter Indifferent; but when once our Masters, shall extend their Rule over the Conscience, then this precept holds valid, be ye not the Servants of men.

Thirdly, It is contrary to Christian Practise, of which [Page 5] we have many remarkable Instances:

1. The first shall be that of our Saviour Christ, who was of a most sweet and complying disposition; he sayes of himself, that he came Eating and Drinking, i. e. doing the common Actions of other men; and therefore he never disdained to keep company with any, even the meanest and most despicable sinner; his retinue consisting for the most part of those the Jewes called, [...], i. sinners in an eminent and notorious manner; whom as a Physi­cian he not only cured; but as a mercifull Priest sought out to save. Yet when his Christian Liberty came once to be invaded, he laid aside his gentlenesse, and proved a stiff and peremptory Assertour of it. To omit many passages, of which his Story is full, I shall mention but one, Matth. 25. and that was his refusing to wash his hands before meat. This was not onely a thing in it self Indifferent, but like­wise had some Argument from Decency to induce, and a constant Tradition from the Elders or Sanhedrim to enforce it, who at this time were not only their Ecclesiastical, but their Civill Rulers: Yet all these Motives, in a thing so innocent and small as that was, would not prevaile with our Saviour to quit his Liberty of eating with unwashed hands. And in defence of himself, he calls them superstitious fools, and blind guides, who were offended at him; and leaves two unanswerable Arguments, which are of equall vali­dity in things of the like nature. As

1. That this was not a Plant, of his Fathers planting, and there­fore it should be rooted up; whereby our Saviour intimates, that as the Pharisees had no divine warrant to prescribe such a Toy as that was, so God would at last declare his Indignation against their Su­pererogatory Worship, by pulling it up Root and Branch. From whence I gather this Rule, That when once Humane Inventions become Impositions, and lay a Necessity upon that, which God hath left Free; then may we lawfully reject them, as Plants of mans setting, and not of Gods owning.

2. The second Argument our Saviour uses is, That these things did not defile a man, i. e. as to his mind and conscience. To eat with unwashed hands was at the worst, but a point of ill manners, and unhandsome perhaps or indecent, but not an impious or un­godly thing; and therefore more likely to offend nice stomacks, than scrupulous consciences. Whose satisfaction in such things as these our Saviour did not at all study. From whence I inferre, [Page 6] That in the Worship of God we are chiefly to look after the Sub­stance of things; and as for Circumstances, they are either not worth our Notice, or else will be answerable to our Inward Impres­sions; according to which our Saviour in another place, sayes, O blind Pharisee, Matth. 23.36. cleanse first the Inside of the Cup, and of the Platter, that so the outside may be clean; hereby implying, that a Renewed Heart, will be sure to make a changed and seemly behaviour; where­as the most specious outside is consistent with Inward Filth and Rot­tennesse. So that they who presse outward conformity in Divine Worship, endeavour to serve God the wrong way, and often times do only force Carnal and Hypocritical men to present God a Sacri­fice which he abhorres; while to others that are more Tender and Scrupulous, they make the Sacrifice it self unpleasant, because they will not l [...]t it be, what God would have it, a Free-will-offering.

2. My second Instance shall be the Resolution of the Apostles in that Famous and Important Quaere, concerning the Jewish Cere­monies, whether they were to be Imposed or not. After a long di­spute to find out the Truth ( [...], Acts 15. sayes the Text) Peter directly opposes those Rites Why, sayes he, do ye tempt God, by putting a Yoke upon the Neck of the Disciples? In­timating that to put a Yoke upon others (and to Impose in Things Indifferent is certainly a great one) from which, God hath either expresly freed us, by commanding the contrary: or else tacitly freed us, by not commanding them: This is nothing else but to Tempt God, and to pretend to be more Wise and Holy than he. Again, James decries those Ceremonies, upon this score, least they should ( [...]) be troublesome to the converted Gentiles; implying, that however men may think it a small matter, to Impose an In­different thing, yet indeed it is an infinite Trouble and matter of Disquiet to the Party Imposed upon, because he is thereby disabled from using his Liberty, in that which he knows to be Indifferent.

Upon the hearing of these two, the Result of the whole Councel was, that the Brethren should not be Imposed upon, although the Arguments for conformity were much stronger then, than now they can be; because the Jews in all probability, might thereby have been the sooner wonne over to the Christian Perswasion. The De­cree which that Apostolical, and truly Christian Synod makes is ve­ry observable,

[Page 7]1. From the Stile they use, It seems good (say they) to the holy Ghost, and to us, — so that whoever exercises the same Im­posing Power, had need be sure he hath the same Divine Au­thority; for feare he onely rashly assumes what was never gran­ted him.

2. From the Things they Impose, It seems good, &c. (say they) to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That you abstain from things offered to Idols, from Bloud, from things stran­gled, and from Fornication. Whence I observe,

1. That they call their Imposition [...], a weight, or bur­den; which is not unnecessarily to be laid on the shoulders of any.

2. They say, they forbid onely [...]— These very Necessary things, to show, that Necessary things only, and not In­different, should be the matter of our Imposition.

For whereas some gather from hence, that the Church, i. where a State is Christian, the Christian Magistrate, hath a power to ob­liege men to the doing of things he commands, though in their own Nature they be indifferent; because they suppose that the Apostles did so, as for example, in forbidding to eat Blood, there­fore consider.

1. That this is quite contrary to the Apostles scope, whose busi­nesse was to Ease and Free, and not to Tie up their Brethren; and therefore they say, they meerly do lay upon them things very necessary.

2. That all those things they forbid, were not Indifferent, but long before prohibited by God, not only in the Ceremonial, but in his Positive Law, and therefore obligatory, whereupon the A­postles call them Necessary, i. things necessary to be forborn, even before they had made any Decree against them. As

1. [...], i. The meat of things offered to Idols: To eat of them was not in all cases Indifferent; for to do it with conscience of the Idol, i. intending thereby to worship the Idol, this was a thing against the second Commandment. But if a man was convin­ced that the Idol was nothing, and therefore the meat, though consecrated, was Free to him: Yet if his weaker Bro [...]her was offended; he was then to abstain in observance of Christian Cha­rity and Condescension: But if the Eater himself did doubt, then was he to forbear for his own peace and quiet's sake, for to eate, [Page 8] while he was unsatisfied whether it was lawfull or not, was nothing else but to condemn himself, as the Apostle sayes, He that doubts, is (not damned, as we render it, but [...]—) condemned, i. Self-condemn'd if he eat, because he doth that which he inward­ly doth either not approve, or else at least suspects, that it is not lawfull: so that the Case of eating [...], being so nice, and so apt to be mistaken: the Apostles do make their Prohibition Universall, as that which was most safe, and least subject to scruple.

2. [...] and [...], Blood; i. e. Flesh with the blood; or, as some, Raw flesh; and Things strangled; to eat these was not indifferent, but prohibited long before by God, in his Law given to Noah. And therefore the Apostles Prohibition here, is not to be interpre­ted, as their giving a Temporary Law, with respect had to the then Constitution and oeconomy of the Jews (as some weakly and withou [...] ground from Scripture, imagine) but rather as a Revi­ving and Reenforcing an old Law, which being given by God to Noah, both then was, and still is Obligatory to all his Posterity, God having no where dispensed with it.

3. Lastly, [...], if you render it Fornication, then it is evi­dently contrary to those Precepts of Purity, Holiness and Perfe­ction, which God every where requires. But if you expound it, as many learned men do, Ʋnlawfull Copulations; then the Pro­hibition enforces upon us the observance of those Laws concerning Marriage, which are recorded in Levit. 18. and which is evident, are not in their own Nature indifferent, since marrying with our Mother, Sister, or Daughter, the Heathen Plato, and the Gre­cian Laws condemned even by the light of Nature. And God, there in that Chapter, calls the contrary Practices, Abominable Cu­stomes; for which he threatens to root even the Heathen out, — v. 27. ad sin.

From what has been said out of this Instance, I conclude, That since, 1. The Apostles, though divinely inspired, yet did not impose any Rites upon the Church, by their own proper Power, but joyn themselves with the Holy Ghost, as being Acted and Com­missioned by him. Since, 2. They use no Arguments from De­cency to justifie their imposition, nor lay any Unnecessary Burden upon any, by forbidding or enjoyning things purely Indifferent, but onely prohibit such things, as they call, and it is clear from [Page 9] what has been said, that they were Necessary. And lastly, since the Retaining some of the more Innocent and lesse Burdensome Ceremonies of the Jews, in point of Order and Convenience only, would in all probability have been the readiest means to bring [...]hat Precise and Superstitious People unto a Compliance with the Go­spel; and without doubt for that reason would have been enjoyn­ed, had the Apostles conceived they had any power to have medled with them. Hence I conclude for Persons, 1. Who have no such Au­thority. 2. In things much more indifferent. And lastly, Where the Necessity of conforming is nothing neer so pressing and urge [...]t. For such, I say, to take upon themselves an Arbitrary and an Imp [...] ­sing Power, it is altogether Ʋnwarrantable, and consequently sinfull.

3. My last instance shall be that of the Apostle Paul, who was of an Universally Complying carriage; he sayes of himself, That he became all things to all men, even to Jews as a Jew, 1 Cor. 9.19, 23 Act. 16. &c. with many more words to the same purpose. And to show his Liberty, he cir­cumcised Timothy, though a Greeke, that he might gain the Jews in those parts. But when once a Sect of men rose up, who be­gan to preach the Necessity of Circumcision, he doth in many pla­ces sharply inveigh against them, calling them doggs, evil workers, and in derision, [...], or the Concision; and concludes his Epi­stle to the Galatians, with bidding them to beware of such, as la­boured to boast in their flesh, i. sought to bring them unto a Con­formity in those outward Ordinances. Nay so jealous and precisely carefull was that Apostle of this great Christian Priviledge and Charter, viz. Freedome in Indifferent things; that he could not brook so much as Peter's suspicious carriage in that particular, but for his Dissimulation, and pretending to be lesse Free, than he was; Paul sayes, That he openly reproved him to his Face. Gal. 2. And for other False Brethren, who crept into their Assemblies, meerly to spie out their liberty, and without doubt, used the same Argu­ments for Conformity, which many do now; the Apostle sayes, He resisted them, and yeelded not to them so much as for a moment And that he might for ever preserve his Galatians from being en­snared, and brought under bondage again, he leaves them the Ca­veat, I mentioned before, Stand fast in your liberty, &c. From whence I inferre, that so long as a thing is left Indifferent, though there be some suspicion of Superstition in it, we may lawfully pra­ctise it, as Paul did Circumcision: But when any shall take upon [Page 10] them to make it Necessary, then the thing so imposed presently lo­ses not its Liberty only, but likewise its Lawfulness; and we may not, without Breach of the Apostles Precept, submit unto it: be­cause we thereby do own, that those whose injunctions we obey, had a power to i [...]pose; and so, by assenting, we become abetters and pro [...]oters of their Ʋsurpation.

4. My last A [...]gumen [...] against Impositions, shall be taken from the Inconveniences [...]hat attend such a practise. For though I lay little stress up [...]n [...]uch kind of Arguments (because Truth is to be tried by its Evidence, and not by its Consequences) yet because, 1. In Principles, on which moral Actions are grounded, the Inconveniences do use [...]o be weighed, and that Doctrin for the most part seems most True, at least most Plausible, which is attended by fewest Inconveni­ences: and because, 2. The Opposers of Liberty, have v [...]ry lit­tle else to urge for themselves, but by pretending the many incon­veniences tha [...] flow from it. Therfore I shall clearly prove that many more Absurd, and more Destructive and Fatal Consequences attend the Doctrin of Impositions, then the Doctrin of Christian liberty. As

1. The first Inconvenience is, the Impossibility to fix a point where the Imposer will stop. For do but once grant, That the Ma­gistrate hath power to impose, and then we lie at his mercy, how farre he will go. For the Marriage of Ministers, holy Ʋnction, Consecrating the Host, &c. are as indifferent in their own nature, as Using the Cross, or Surplice. And if the Magistrate hath indeed lawfull power to Impose, he may as well Command those, as these: especially if he be convinced that they are either Decent or Conve­nient; at which door have entred in all those gross Fooleries, which are in the Popish worship: any of which, take them singly, and apart from the Circumstances which determine them, so they are Indifferent, and may, for ought I know, be conscientiously obser­ved. N But put them together, and consider the Power which Impo­ses, and the End which continues them, so they are the grossest Idolatry, and the vilest Tyranny that ever yet was practised. For we are for the most part mistaken in the Notion of Popery, if we see a Surplice, or a Cross, or Organs, or Bowing, we presently cry out. Po­pery: M wheras I think it a more manifest sign of Popery to forbid these things, as we do, under Penalties, than to practise them with Freedome. If I understand any thing of Antichrist, his Nature seems to me to consist in this, That he Acts in a way contrary to [Page 11] Christ, i. e. in stead of a spiritual, he brings in a Devised Worship; and in stead of Freedome, layes a Constraint even upon our De­votion. So that, as John in his Revelation sayes of him, Rev. 13. Men shall neither buy, nor sell, who have not his mark; i. who do not serve God in that outward way, which he commands. So that whoever doth own the Doctrine of Imposition, though in the smallest cir­cumstance of Worship, he brings in the Essence, though not the Name of Popery; and layes down that for his Foundation, on which all the Will-worship, which this day reigns in the world, is bottom­ed. For what ever opinions we have concerning the Necessity of Bowing, Kneeling, or the like, while they stand confined to our pri­vate practises, they are at worst but Hay and stubble, 2 Cor. 3. which will perish at the day of account, though he that doth them may very well be saved. But when once a man goes further, and not con­tent. with his Perswasions, envies his Brother that Liberty, which he himself desires to enjoy; and seeks to obtrude his Conce [...]s up­on others, who perhaps are not so well satisfied as he is: Whoever doth this, becomes Impious to God, by invading his Sovereignty, and lording it over another mans Conscience; and likewise inju­rious to men, by pressing such things, as are only Baits to the Carelesse, and Traps for the Conscientious. I know very well, that the Argument is specious, and often urged— Why should men be so scrupulous? Most pleading for Ceremonies, as Lot did for Zoar, Are not they little things? But I answer, 1. That a little thing un­warrantably done is a great sinne. 2. That a little thing unjust­ly gained, makes way for a greater: and therefore we should not let the Serpent get in his Head, how beautifull soever it seems, lest he brings in his Tail, and with that his sting.—How curious even almost to Superstition, our Saviour and his Apostles, especially Paul, were, I have already mentioned; by whose Example we are lit [...]le profited, if we do not learn, that in Imposi [...]ions we are not so much to consider how small and inconsiderable the thing im­posed is, as how lawfull it is: Not, what it is in it self, as whether it tends, and what will be the Consequence of its Admission. For the smaller the thing imposed is, the more is our Christian Liberty invaded, and cons [...]quently the more injurious and sinfull is its im­position.

2. The second Inconvenience is, that it quite inverts the Nature of Christian Religion; not only by taking away its Freedome, but [Page 12] likewise its spirituality, our Saviour sayes, that God will now be worshipped not in show and Ceremony, but in spirit, and in truth; whereas this D ctrine of Impositions, places it in such things, in the obs [...]rv [...]nce of which, Superstition will be sure to out-do De­votion. But true Religion like the spirits of wine or subtle essen­ces, when ev [...]r it comes to be Opened and Exposed to view, runs the [...]azard of being presently dispirited, and lost. In the service of God there is a vast difference, between Purity and Pomp, between spirit and splendour, whereas [...]he Imposer only drives at and improves the [...]a er; but on the former is altogether secure and carelesse, as is evid [...]t in those places, where Ʋniformity is most strictly pra­ctised.

3. Thirdly, This Doctrine making no provision at all for such as are scrupulous and tender, supposes the same measure of Faith in all; whereas nothing is more clear than, as the Apostle sayes concerning Things offered to Idols, so concerning Ceremonies, I may say, that All have not knowledge. But to this day many there are utterly unsatisfi­ed with the Lawfulnesse of any, and most are convinced of the Ʋse­lesnesse of them all. Whose Consciences, how erroneous soever, yet are to be Tenderly and Gently dealt with; least by our Rigid com­manding what they can by no means comply with, we bring them unto that Dangerous Dilemma, either of breaking their Inward Peace and comfort, by doing outwardly what they do not inwardly approve of: or else of running themselves upon the Rocks of Po­verty and prejudice, by disobeying what is commanded. For though we are upon all occasions to suffer gladly, yet let not Reuben smite Ephraim; let us not receive our wounds in the house of our friends; for then our sufferings will be sharpned from the consideration of the Unkindnesse; that our Brethren should put us upon the Trial of our Faith and Patience, especially in such things, which while the Imposor calls Indifferent, he thereby acknowledges, that they may very well be spared.

4. The last Inconvenience is, that by Impositions, esp [...]cially when the Penalty is severe, we seem to lay as much weight and stress upon these Indifferent things, as upon any the most material parts of our Religion. This Rigid Irrespective obtruding of small things, makes no diff [...]rence at all between Ceremony and Substance. So that a man who were not a Christian at all, would find as good, nay per­haps better usage from the Imposer; than he who labouring and [Page 13] endeavouring to live up to other parts of Christian Faith, shall yet forbear to practice these Ceremonies: Which is not only Harsh and Cruel, but very Incongruous dealing, that a Jew or Mahumedan, shall be better regarded, than a we [...]k and scrupulous Christian. This is nothing else, but to deal with Christians, as Jephtha did with the Ephraimites, to kill them for no weightier crime, than because they cannot pronounce Shibboleth.

To those Inconveniencies I might adde the certain decay of the growth of Religion as to its inward Purity, while there is this Dis­guise and Mask of needlesse Ceremonies upon it to keep it under; but those which I have already urged, are so great, that those which are commonly insisted upon by men of another Perswasion, are not at all to be put into the Balance with them; as will appear by this brief Answer to their main Objections.

1. They object that this will be the way to beget all manner of Disorder and Confusion; that every man will have a several Fashi­on and Custom by hims [...]lf; and for want of Ʋniformity and Ce­remony, the Ʋnity and Essence of Religion will perish. But I an­swer,

1. Doth any plead for Baal? He that will abuse the Principle of Liberty, to justifie his Licentiousnesse of life, let him know that the Magistrate bears not the Sword in vain, but has it to cut off such of­fenders. If you suffer as Christians, saith the Apostle, r [...]j [...]yce at it; 2 Pet. 1.4. But let none suffer, as a Thief, Murderer, [...]. i. a seditious per­son, or State-Incendiary, or as a busie Intermedler in other mens m [...]t­ters: for he that doth these things suffers justly; nor can he plead any thing from the Gospel, which is a Rule of strictnesse to exempt him from Punishment. But

2. This Disorder, which is so vehemently and so Tragically aggra­vated, and for the prevention of which, Ceremonies must be invented and forced, is indeed nothing else but a Malicious and Ill sounding name, put upon an excellent and most comely thing, i. e. variety. For as God, though he be a God of Order, hath not made all men of one countenance, and in the world hath given several and divers shapes to many things, which yet are the same for substance; so in the As­semblies of his people, who all come to Honour him, and agree in the Essence of his Worship, why should we doubt, but God will be well pleased with their variety in Circumstances? The exercise of which not only their Consciences do prompt, but God himself [Page 14] doth induce them to, because in his Word he hath not prescribed any one outward Form, that all should necess [...]rily agree in; but in such things hath left them to the Dictates of thei [...] own Spirits, and the guidance of Christian prudence; which Variety is so far from be­ing a Confusion, that nothing can be more Comely and Harmonious, as serving to set out the Indulgence of God, the indifferent Actings of the holy Spirit, and the Liberty of the Saints, who preserve Ʋnity in mind, without Ʋniformity in Behaviour.

2. The second Objection is, the practice of the Jewish Princes, who as soon as ever they were installed in their Kingdoms, set upon refor­ming the House of God, and imposing upon all a Form of Worship: which since all Scripture is written by Divine Inspiration, and for our Instruction, Rom. 16. se [...]ms to be a leading case that Christian Princes should imitate them, and do so likewise. But I answer.

1. Though Arguments taken from Analogy are of very little weight, when Positive Precepts are required, yet I will grant, that the Piety of the Jewish, is, and ought to be exemplary to the Christian Magistrates,—but withall I deny the Inference, since the Jewish Princes, when they Reformed Religion, they therein followed a Di­vine Law, which did command it from them, and which, in the mi­nutest circumstances, had provided for uniformity of Worship: from which Rigor and Restraint all Christians are absolved, and therefore it is very unconcluding to Argue from the Jews, who had; to the Christian Magistrate, who wants Divine Authority. To this is also object [...]d.

3. That since things Necessary to the worship of God, be already determin [...]d by God, and over them the Magistrate has no power; if likewise he should have no Power in Indifferent Things, then it would follow, that in things appertaining to Religion, the Christian Magistrate had no power at all—which they think to be very Ab­surd—so the Reverend and Learned M ^r Hooker, and D ^r Sanderson. But I answer,

1. That it is no Absurdity at all, that Princes should have no more power in ordering the things of God, than God himself hath al­lowed them. And if God hath no where given them such an Im­posing Power, they must be content to go without it. But in this case, where will the Christian Magistrate find his Warrant, the Scriptures being utterly silent, that he is now to take such Authori­ty upon him, which, b [...]cause the thing concerns not man, but the [Page 15] Worship of God, had it been thought necessary and Fit, would cer­tainly not have been omitted.

2. It is so far from being an Argument for Impositions, to urge that the thing Imposed is Indifferent, that there cannot be a stronger Argument against them: since it is as requisite to Christian Pra­ctice, that Things Indifferent, should still be kept Indifferent, as Things Necessary, be held Necessary, — As I have already proved.

Lastly, It is much more suited to the Nature of the Gospel, that Christian Princes should reform Religion, rather by the example of their Life, than by the severity of their Laws; and if they may show their power at all in this case, it should rather be by Substra­cting, then by Adding. — By taking away all impertinencies, which may hinder the Progress of it, rather than by obtruding un­warrantable Methods, to tye all men up to such Outward Forms; as may make Piety suspected only for Policy disguised.

Much more might be said for this from Authority, but I willing­ly wave it. For i [...] Scripture and Reason will not prevail to hinder Impositions, I have no cause to expect that any sentences from Anti­quity should. — Only this is certain, that all the Writings of the Christians for the first three hundred years, are full of nothing else but such Arguments as evince a Liberty, more Absolute and Uni­versall than I contend for. And likewise it may be of some weight, that the Churches Doctrine was then more pure, their Discipline more strict and severe than now; and yet they had nothing but Mutuall Consent, either to Establish or Protect it, the Magi [...]trates being all against them. — But when once Constantine took upon him to manage the Affairs of the Church, and by Penall Laws, rati­fied and confirmed Church-Orders. — He laid that foundation of Antichristian Tyranny, which presently after him, his Son Constan­tius exercised against the Assertors of the Trinity: and, the Church­es worldly power encreasing as fast, as the puri [...]y of Rel [...]gion did decrease, the Bishops of Rome within a few years, gained to them­selves, and have ever since practised severely against such, whom th [...]y call Hereticks, i. Deniers of their Factious Doctrine; and op­posers of their most Ungospel-like, but indeed most Politick and Prudentiall impositions.

Whose furious and bloudy-Tenets have, like subtle Poison, run through the Veines of almost all Professors; scarce any sort even [Page 16] of Protestants, allowing to others that Liberty of Religion; which at the beginning of their Sects, they justly challenged to themselves. Nor is there any Hope, that the world should be freed from Cruel­ty, disguised under the name of zeal, till it please God to informe all Magistrates, how far their Commission reaches, that their pro­per Province is only over the Body, to repress and correct those morall vices, to which our Outward man is subject: But as for Chri­stian Religion, since it is so Pure and Simple, so free from State and worldly magnificence, so Gentle and Complying with the meanest Christian, and withall so remote from Harshness, Rigour, and Se­verity; there the Magistrate most consults Gods honour and his own duty, it being strict to himself, he leavs all others in these Out­ward Ceremonies, to their Inward Convictions. Which Liberty, is so far from weakning, that it is indeed the security of a Throne; since besides gaining the Peoples Love (especially the most Consci­encious and sober of them) it doth in a speciall manner entitle him to Gods Protection: Since in not pretending to be wiser then God, he gives Religion the free and Undisturbed Passage, which our Sa­viour seems by his Life and Death to have opened for it.