IN the beginning of this Chapter we find St. Paul brought to his Tryal before Felix the Roman Governour, wherein (if we only except the unfitness of the Judge) all other things concurred, which could make such an action considerable, viz. the greatness of the cause, the quality of the persons, and the skill which was shewed in the management of it. The cause was not common and ordinary, such as were wont to be tryed before the Governours of Pro­vinces, but of an unusual and publick na­ture; [Page 2] not a question of words and names, as Gallio Act. 18. 15. thought it, but of a matter of the highest im­portance to the world: which being ma­naged by St. Paul, with that zeal and indu­stry, which was agreeable to it, gave occa­sion to his malicious Countreymen to ac­cuse him before the Roman Governour, as one guilty of Faction and Sedition. Under this colour, they hoped easily to gain the Governours good will to their design; being a person that more regarded the quiet of his Province, than all the concernments of Truth and Religion. But that this design might be carried on with the greater pomp and shew of Justice and Piety, they do not commit the care of it to the rage of the people, or some furious Zealots; but the High Priest and some members of the San­hedrin Ver. 1. go down on purpose from Hierusalem to Caesarea, and carry with them one of their most eloquent Advocates called Tertullus to manage the accusation against Paul. Who was no sooner called forth, but the Orator begins to shew his art, by a flattering insi­nuation, which is most apt to prevail with men of mean and corrupt minds; Seeing that by thee, saith he, we enjoy great quietness, and Ver. 2, 3. that very worthy deeds are done unto this Nation [Page 3] by thy providence; we accept it alwayes and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness: Having thus prepared his Judge, he present­ly falls upon the matter, and charges St. Paul with being a pestilent and seditious Ver. 5, 6. person, a disturber of his Nation in all parts, a prophaner of the Temple; but the main point of all, and in which the rest were comprehended, was, that he was a ring­leader of the Sect of the Nazarenes. (So the Christians were then called among the Jews, from our Saviour's abode in the Town of Nazareth.) But although the Writer of this History gives us only the short heads of his accusation; yet we may easily suppose by St. Pauls answer, that he insisted more largely on this, than on any of the rest: representing to Felix, ‘That when the Jewish Church had been at first esta­blished by God himself under Laws of his own making, when he had so settled the several orders and degrees of men among them, that the Priests lips were to Mal. 2. 7. preserve knowledge, and the Law to be sought at their mouths; when under this Govern­ment, their Religion had been preserved for many hundreds of years, and after many revolutions they enjoyed one com­mon [Page 4] and publick Worship among them, though there were several distinct Orders of Religious men (such as the Pharisees and Essens) yet all agreed in the same Divine Worship; but now at last to their great regret and horror appears one Jesus of Nazareth, a person of obscure paren­tage and mean education, who pretend­ed to discover many corruptions in the doctrine and practices of our best men; and without any Authority from the High Priest or Sanhedrin he gathered Disciples, and drew multitudes of people after him; till at last the wisdom of our Governours thought it fit to take him off, and make him an example for Reformers; notwith­standing this, his bold and forward Disci­ples after his death carried on the same design, pretending that the time of Reforma­tion was come; and accordingly have form­ed Heb. 9. 10. themselves into a Sect, vigorous and active, of high pretences, and dangerous designs, which if it continues and increases can end in nothing short of the ruine of our antient Jewish Catholick Church; which hath had so constant and visible a Succes­sion in all Ages; that hath had so many Martyrs and Confessors in it; so many [Page 5] Devout and Religious Persons as the Pha­risees are; so excellent an Order and Go­vernment, so much unity and peace before this new Sect of Nazarenes arose in oppo­sition to that Authority with which God had invested the High Priest and Rulers of the People. And among all the pro­moters of this new Sect, there is none more factious and busie than this Paul whom we here accuse; and whom some of our Nation found in the Temple profaning of it, and there we would presently out of meer zeal to our Religion have taken and destroyed; but he was violently rescued out of our hands, and sent hither to be tryed; and these things, which I have spoken, is the sense of all those who are come down as witnesses;’ for so we read, v. 9. And the Jews also assented and said, that these things were so. St. Paul being thus accused, and having leave given him to answer for himself, was so far from being daunted by the greatness Ver. 10. of his enemies, or the vehemency of their accusation, that he tells the Governour, that he did with all cheerfulness undertake his defence: and there being two parts of his accusation, 1. His tumultuous and profane carriage in the Temple; this he utterly de­nies, [Page 6] v. 11, 12, 13. and plainly tells them, they can never prove it against him. 2. But as to the other and main part of the Charge, his being a ringleader of the Sect of the Na­zarenes; although he would not, out of his great modesty, take upon himself to be one of the Heads or Chiefs among them, yet as to the owning of that way, notwith­standing all the imputations they had cast upon it, he doth it with the greatest free­dome and courage in the presence of his Judge and Accusers; and not only so, but defends himself therein, that he had done nothing contrary to the Laws of God, or the most antient Religion of his Countrey: all which particulars are contained in the words of the Text; But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresie, so worship I the God of my Fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets.

Wherein we have these three things con­siderable.

1. The Imputation which Christianity suffered under in its first appearance: After the way, which they call heresie.

2. The Way taken by St. Paul to remove this false Imputation; viz. by appeal to [Page 7] Scripture and Antiquity; So worship I the God of my Fathers, believing all things that are written in the Law and the Prophets.

3. The Courage of St. Paul in so freely owning his Religion in the presence of his greatest enemies, and when they were in hopes to destroy him for it: This I confess unto thee, that after the way, &c.

1. I begin with the false Imputation which Christianity suffered under at its first ap­pearance; After the way which is called heresie; the same Word which is translated Sect, v. 5. and although the Word be indifferent in it self, yet where it is taken for a combi­nation of men together against an establish­ed Religion and lawful Authority (as it was by the Jews when they charged the Christians under this name) then it im­plies in it a twofold accusation: 1. Of No­velty and Singularity. 2. Of Faction and Sedition.

1 Of Novelty. A Sect of Heresie in this sense implies in it, mens setting up with a new Doctrine which was not heard of be­fore; and making that theFoundation of a new Society separate and distinct from the established Church, and consequently they must charge the Church they are di­vided [Page 8] from with errors and corruptions, or they make themselves guilty of Schism, i. e. unnecessary separation. Now upon these two grounds the Jews laid the impu­tation of a New Sect upon the Nazarenes or Christians, 1. Because they could not shew a visible succession in all Ages: 2. Because they could not prove the Jewish Church to be guilty of such errors and corruptions as to need a Reformation.

1. They could not shew a Succession in all Ages of such persons who agreed in all things with them. ‘For where (say they) were the men to be found in for­mer Ages, that taxed the Jewish Church with such errors and corruptions as Jesus of Nazareth did? that bid men beware of the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees, i. e. of the most learned and holy men. Had not God alwayes a Visible Church among them? they could produce the names of their High Priests in every Age, and shew them all the marks of a Visible Church: Psal. 76. 1. Deut. 12. 11. 2 Kings 21. 7. 2 Chron. 7. 16. For in Judah was God known, and his Name was great in Israel. Hath not God said, that in his House at Hierusalem he would put his Name for ever; and his eyes and his heart should be there perpetually? How is it then [Page 9] possible but there must be a constant and visible Succession in all Ages? since God would alwayes have a people to dwell among; and that might be known to be his people by the outward marks and signs of a true Church. But if the Chri­stians pretences held good, God must for several Ages have wanted a Church amongst them. For none of those things which they charged the Jews with, were newly crept in among them, but had been delivered down to them by the Tradition of their Fore-fathers, in an uninterrupted manner, as they thought, from the very time of Moses. This was their Rule whereby they guided themselves in their actions of Religion, and in the sense of obscure places of the Law and the Pro­phets; and in that time after the cessation of Prophecy, when the Christians sup­posed these corruptions to have come in among them, they could draw down a constant Succession from the men of the great Synagogue, of persons eminent for Learning and Piety that never charged them with any such corruptions as Jesus of Nazareth and his Disciples did. Would God ever suffer such dangerous errors, [Page 10] hypocrisie, and superstitions to prevail in his own Church, and raise up no Persons to discover these things, till these new Teachers and Reformers arose? Were not Hillel and Shammai that so accu­rately discussed all the niceties of the Law, able to find out such gross and open corruptions, if any such had been among us? Might not we say, that not only the Teachers, but God himself had slept all V. Bell. de not. Eccles. l. 4. c. 5. §. praeterea. that time, if he raised up no one Person to discover the coming in of such errors and corruptions? Where had God then any true Church in the world, if not among his people of the Jews? And would he suffer that to be overspread with such a Leprosie, and send none of his Priests to discover it? And even by the confession of the Christians them­selves, they were once the beloved and chosen people of God, how or when was it that they ceased to be so? Do not themselves acknowledge, that they re­ceive the Law and the Prophets from our hands? And that to us were committed the Rom. 3. 2. Oracles of God, and that to us pertained the ado­ption, and the glory, and the Covenants, and 9. 4, 5. the giving of the Law, and the service of God [Page 11] and the promises, and that ours are the Fathers? How is it then possible after all these pri­viledges, to suppose this Church to fall into such a degeneracy, as at last to be cast off by God, and a new Church to arise out of the ashes of it?’ Thus we may reaso­nably suppose the Jews to have argued for themselves; and on the other side, they trampled upon and despised this new Sect of the Nazarenes,

Thus the Jews still believed themselves to be the only true, antient, visible Ca­tholick and infallible Church of God, and despised the poor Christians, as a novel and upstart Sect of Nazarens; which is the first imputation the Christians suffered under.

2. They suffered under the imputation of Faction and Sedition; which is the second thing implyed in the name of Sect or Heresie here mentioned; and that they charged upon them two wayes. 1. For not submitting to the Churches Authority. 2. For disturbing the peace and quiet of the People.

1. For not submitting to the Churches Authority: not, that the Disciples of our Lord did out of humour, or fancy, or only to make a party, break with the Jews in matters meerly of order and indifferency: no, on the contrary we find them extreamly cautious of giving any offence in such matters, which temper they learnt of their Lord and Master, who complyed with ma­ny things, that others might not take advan­tage by his omission of them, to slight and contemn them; thus when others were bap­tized Mat. 3. 15. of John, he would be so too; not, that he had any need of washing away of sin: but he would not make use of a particular priviledge [Page 15] to bring any discountenance upon a general duty. Thus we see, he went up at the solemn Feasts to Hierusalem as others did; and not only was present in the Temple, but vindicated by a Miracle the order and decency of it, by driving out the buyers and sellers from the outward parts of it, although they had a fair pretence of being ready at hand to serve the necessities of such as Mat. 21. 12. were to sacrifice to God in the Temple; nay, St. Mark tells us, that he would not suffer any vessell to be carried through the Temple: and this he did Mar. 11. 16. not upon any reason peculiar to the Levitical Law, but because it was a House of Prayer. And this example his Apostles followed, who after they had the Holy Ghost poured upon them, yet they attended the Temple at the hours of pray­er. Acts 3. 1. But most remarkable to this purpose, is the instance of St. Paul at that very time when he was seized upon, and like to be destroyed by the fury of the Jews. For, understanding at Hierusalem from St. James, that there were many thousands of believing Jews that were still zealous of Acts 21. 20, 21. the Law, and were informed that St. Paul among the Gentiles slighted circumcision and the Levitical Customs; he to give them all reasonable satis­faction that he intended to make no unneces­sary breach among them about indifferent matters, submits himself to a legal purification in the Temple for seven dayes together; before Ver. 7. [Page 16] the end of which, the Jews made a tumult and seized upon him, and so he was brought to an­swer the accusations against him in this Chap­ter. Thus careful St. Paul was to give no ground for suspicion that he delighted in disor­ders and separations; this example he did leave to all prudent Christians, rather to submit to things which they have no great value for (as no doubt at this time St. Paul had very little for the Levitical Customs) than to hazard the breaking the peace of the Church for such matters. But notwithstanding all this care of the first Christians, they could not avoid the imputation of Faction; because they would not entirely submit their judgements to the Authority of the Jewish Church. For this was the great pre­tence they stood upon, that they were the Go­vernours of the Church by Gods own institution, that they were to explain and interpret the Law and the Prophets; and this was expressed in the be­ginning of their Law, That in all cases of diffi­culty they were to go up to the place which the Lord their God should chuse; and to go to the Priests, and the Le­vites, and to the Judge, and they shall shew thee the Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. sentence of judgement. And thou shalt do according to the sentence which they of that place (which the Lord shall chuse) shall shew thee, and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee; and the man that will do presumptuously, and will not bearken to the [Page 17] Priest, (that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God) or unto the Judge, even that man shall dye, and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel. Upon this place, they might certainly much better establish the infallibility of their own Church, than others draw an argument for Infallibility in the Christian Church from it. However, absolute obedience would serve their turn, to charge the Christians with Faction, in not submit­ting to their Authority. ‘For, was not this a matter of difficulty, whether the Messias were to be a temporal Prince or not? concerning what time, and place, and person the Prophe­cies were to be understood? Who were the competent Judges in this case, but those whom God had established by his Law? If the Scribes and Pharisees were charged with false glosses, and corrupting the Law by their Traditions, the Christians were not to take upon them­selves to judge of them; but to appeal to the High Priest and the Sanhedrin, who were the only lawful Judges in these matters: Their duty was submission and patience; but by no means ought they upon their own Authority to begin a new Church, and to broach new Doctrines directly contrary to the judgement of the High Priest and Sanhedrin; yea, after they had pronounced Sentence against Jesus of Nazareth, and condemned him [Page 18] to death; and excommunicated his follow­ers, and punished as many as they could get into their power; what could it (in their opi­nion) be but the Spirit of Faction and diso­bedience thus to oppose the Authority of their Church, in believing contrary to its de­crees, and reforming without any power de­rived from it?’ We see in our Saviours time how severely they checked any of the people who spake favourably of Christ and his Do­ctrine; As though the poor ignorant people were fit to judge of these matters! to under­stand Prophecies, and to know the true Messias, when he should appear! And therefore when some of their Officers that had been sent to ap­prehend him, came back with admiration of him, and said, Never man spake like this man, they take them up short and tell them, They must believe as the Church believes; what, they take upon them to judge of such matters! No, they must submit to their Governours: Have any of the Rulers, or Pharisees believed on him? but this people which know Joh. 7. 46, 47, 48, 49. not the Law are cursed. i e. When they set up their own judgement in opposition to the Authority of the Church. And after our Saviours death at a solemn Council at Hierusalem, when Peter and John were summoned before them; the first Question they asked was, By what power, or by what name have ye done this? They never enquired, Acts 4. 7. [Page 19] whether the Miracle were wrought or no, or whether their Doctrine were true; all their Question was about their Mission, whether it were ordinary or extraordinary; or what au­thority they could pretend to, that were not sent by themselves; but let the things be never so true, which they said, if they could find any flaw in their Mission according to their own Rules and Laws, this they thought sufficient ground to forbid them to preach any more, and to charge them with Faction if they disobeyed.

2. They charged the Christians with Faction in being so active and busie to promote Christianity to the great disturbance of the Jews in all parts. This Tertullus accused St. Paul of, that he was a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the Ver. 5. world; and accordingly the Jews at Thessalonica take the Christians by force and carry them to the Rulers of the City, crying, Those that have turned the world upside down are come hither also. This Acts 17. 6. they knew was the most effectual course to ren­der them odious to all Governours, who are apt to suspect all new things as dangerous, and think no truth can compensate the hazard of alterations. Thus it was especially among the Roman Governours, who had learnt from the counsel given to Augustus, to be particularly jea­lous of all innovations in Religion; and had much rather the people should continue quiet [Page 20] under an old error, than have the peace disturb­ed for the greatest Truth. This was really the greatest difficulty in the way of Christianity, it came no where, but people were possessed be­fore hand with quite other apprehensions of Re­ligion, than the Christians brought among them. The Jewish and Pagan Religions were in pos­session in all places, and the people were at ease in the practice of them. What then must the Christians do? Must they let them alone and not endeavour to convince them of the truth of their own Doctrine? If so, they are unfaithful to their trust, betrayers of truth, and false to the Souls of men: if they go about to perswade men out of their Religion, they know, such is the fondness most men have for their own opi­nions, especially in Religion, that where they might hope to convince one, they might be sure to enrage many; especially of those whose interest lay in upholding the old Religion. How little doth Reason signifie with most men, where Interest is against it! Truth and falshood are odd kind of Metaphysical things to them, which they do not care to trouble their heads with; but what makes for or against their Interest, is thought easie and substantial. All other mat­ters are as Gallio said, questions of names and words, which they care not for; but no men will soon­er offer to demonstrate a thing to be false, than [Page 21] they who know it to be against their interest to believe it to be true. This was the case of these great men of the Jews that came down to accuse Paul; they easily saw whither this new Religion tended, and if it prevailed among their people, farewell then to all the Pomp and Splen­dour of the High-Priesthood at Hierusalem; farewell then to the Glory of the Temple and City whither all the Tribes came up to worship thrice a year; farewell then to all the riches, and ease, and plea­sure which they enjoyed: And what was the greatest Truth and best Religion in the world to them, in comparison with these? These were sufficient reasons to them to accuse Truth it self of deceiving men, and the most peaceable Doctrine of laying the Foundation of Faction and Sedition. Thus we have considerd the false imputations which were cast upon Christianity at first, implyed in these words, After the way which is called heresie.

2. I now come to the way taken by St. Paul to remove these false imputations, which he doth,

1. By an appeal to Scripture, as the ground and rule of his faith, Believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets.

2. By an appeal to the best and purest Anti­quity, as to the object of Worship; So worship I the God of my Fathers, not bringing in any new Reli­gion, but restoring it to its primitive purity.

[Page 22] 1. By an appeal to Scripture as the ground and rule of his faith. The Jews pleaded Possession, Traditi­on, Authority of the present Church: against all these St. Paul fixes upon a certain and unmoveable Foundation, the Law and the Prophets. He doth not here insist upon any particular revelation made to himself, but offers the whole matter in dispute to be tryed by a common Rule that was allowed on both sides. And his meaning is, if they could prove that he either asserted, or did any thing contrary to the Law and the Prophets, then they had some reason to accuse him of in­novation, or beginning of a new Sect; but if the foundation of his doctrine and practice lay in what themselves acknowledged to be from God, then they had no cause to charge him with in­troducing a new Sect among them.

But the great Question here is, ‘What ground St. Paul had to decline the Authority of the present Church? Since God himself had appointed the Priests to be the interpreters of the Law; and therefore in doubtful cases resort was to be made to them; and not the judgement left to particular persons about the sense of Scri­pture;’ and yet in this case it is apparent St. Paul declined all Authority of the present Church; for at that very time the High-Priests and Elders came down to accuse him, and he takes not the least notice of their judgement in this [Page 23] matter. I shall therefore now shew that St. Paul had very great reason so to do, and to appeal only to Scripture.

1. Because the Authority of the present Church was more lyable to error and mistake, than the Rule of Scripture was.

2. Because it was lyable to more partiality, than that was.

1. Because it was more lyable to error and mi­stake, than the Rule of Scripture was. It was agreed on both sides, that the Law was from God, and that the Prophets spake by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost; all that was now left was only to find out the true meaning of them, and to compare Prophecies with events. As in the case of the Messias, if the circumstances foretold by the Prophets had their exact accomplishment in Christ, as might appear to those who carefully compared them; If he were born at Bethlehem, of the Tribe of Judah, when the Scepter was departed from it, and during the second Temple, and all other cir­cumstances agreeing; then though the ordinary judgement concerning true Prophets belonged to the Sanhedrin, yet it was far more reasonable to believe that they were mistaken, than that all the Prophecies should be accomplished in a per­son that was not the true Messias. For those Pro­phecies were not intended only for the Priests and Rulers, but for directions to the People, that [Page 24] they might be able to judge of the accomplish­ment of them: otherwise when the Authority of the Jewish Church condemned our Saviour, the Peo­ple could have no reason to believe him to be the Messias; if they were bound in the sense of Scripture to submit their judgement wholly to the Churches Authority. It is plain then, that the sense of Scripture may be so evident to pri­vate capacities, that they are not to submit in it to the present Authority of a Church. For notwith­standing all the promises made to the Jewish Church, and the command of submitting to the sentence of their Priests and Rulers, in a matter of the highest concernment, viz. concerning the true Messias, men were bound to believe directly contrary to the present Authority in the Church. For the people were bound to believe Christ to be the true Messias; although the High Priest and Elders had condemned him for a deceiver and male­factor. But besides this particular case, there may be several others wherein men may law­fully reject the Authority of the present Church; and those are, when that Authority shall go about to overthrow those things which must be supposed antecedent to the belief of any such Autho­rity: as, 1. The common sense of man­kind. 2. The force of a divine Law. 3. The liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood. All these must necessarily be sup­posed [Page 25] before any Authority of a Church; but if any Church goes about to overthrow these, it thereby forfeits its own Authority over men.

1. If it requires things contrary to common sense; as in that instance wherein some of the Jewish Rabbies required submission to their Autho­rity, viz. in believing the right hand to be the left, or the left to be the right, if they determi­ned so; or supposing the Jews to have re­quired the people to deny that they ever saw any Miracle wrought by Christ; or in the Miracle of the Loaves, that what they saw and handled, and tasted, to be bread was true bread; or to say, that the same individual body might be in a thousand places at once, or that things whose nature it is to be in another, can subsist without their proper subject; what Church soever requires such things as these from its members to be believed, gives them just rea­son to reject its Authority.

2. If it requires things contrary to the force and reason of a divine Law: as the Jews them­selves would have acknowledged, if any Autho­rity among them had gone about either to have left out the second Commandment, or made it lawful to give Religious worship to Images, un­der any distinctions whatsoever: or if the Priests had taken away from the people their share in the sacrifices, under pretence of the unsanctified [Page 26] teeth, or the long beards of the Laity, which were not fit to touch what had been offered in sacrifice to God. But we need not put cases among them, for our Saviour therefore bids men have a care of the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees, because by Mat. 15. 6. 16. 6. their traditions they made the Commandment of God of none effect: as in their Corban, if they made a vow to God they thought themselves excused from relieving their Parents; and in this way our Sa­viour generally deals with them, shewing that though they pretended to keep the letter of the Law; yet by their corrupt additions and false glosses they overthrew the scope and design of it: which he thought sufficient reason to reject their Authority; and therefore when he bids his Disciples, observe and do what soever the Scribes and Pharisees bid them; it must be supposed to be Mat. 23. 3. only while they keep to the letter and reason of the Law; for if he had intended an absolute obedience, he would never elsewhere bid his Disciples beware of their Doctrine. Màt. 16. 12.

3. If it takes away all liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood in Religion. For this is a natural right which every man hath to judge for himself: and they that take this away, may as well command all men to put out their eyes, that they may better follow their Guides. But the other is so much worse, because it is an assault upon our understandings, it is a robbing [Page 27] us of the greatest talent God hath committed to our management, it is a rape upon our best fa­culties, and prostituting them to the lusts of Spi­ritual Tyrants; it is not captivating our under­standings to the obedience of faith, but en­slaving them to the proud and domineering u­surpations of men; wherein they would do by us as the Philistins did by Sampson; they would put out our eyes, that we might grind in their pri­son, and make them sport. I would not be mi­staken, it is the liberty of judgement I plead for, and not of practice; that may be justly restrain­ed by the Laws of the Church, where the other is allowed; because the obligations to peace and unity are different from those to faith and inward assent. And that no absolute submissi­on of judgement could be required by the Law of Moses, notwithstanding the command of out­ward obedience in the cases mention'd, Deut. 17. 8, 9, &c. is most evident from hence, because that Law makes provision for a sin-offering in case Lev. 4. 13. the whole Congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the Assembly, or Supream Council, and they have done something against the commandment of the Lord: which had been a Law made to no purpose, if it had been impossible for their chief Authority to have er­red or been mistaken in their judgement. From hence we see St. Paul had great reason to appeal [Page 28] from the High Priest and Elders to the Law and the Prophets, because they were subject to errour and mistake, but these are not.

2. Because the Law and the Prophets are less liable to partiality, than a living Judge, or the Authori­ty of the present Church. I have oft-times won­dered to hear men speak so advantageously of a living Judge, before an Infallible Rule, in order to the end of Controversies. If all they mean be only that an end be put to them no matter how, I confess a living Judge in that case hath much the advantage, but so would any other way that per­sons would agree upon, as the judgement of the next person we met with, or Lottery, or any such thing; but if we would have things fairly examined and heard, and a judgement given ac­cording to the merits of the cause, the case will be found very different here from what it is in civil causes. For here the Judge must be a party concerned, when his own Authority and inte­rest is questioned; and lyable to all those passi­ons which men are subject to in their own cases. Which will be notoriously evident in the case before us, between the High Priest and Elders on one side, and St. Paul on the other: They plead­ed, that if any difficulty arose about the sense of the Law, it belonged to them to judge of it; St. Paul declines their judgement, and appeals only to the Law and the Prophets: had it been rea­sonable [Page 29] in this case for Felix to have referred the judgement to them who were the parties so deeply concerned? A living Judge may have a great advantage over a bare Rule to put an end to controversies; but then we must sup­pose impartiality in him, freedom from pre­judice, an excellent judgement, diligence and patience in hearing all the evidence, and at last delivering sentence according to the sense of the Law; if any of these be wanting, the controversie may soon be ended, but on the wrong side. I suppose none of those who would have controversies in Religion ended by a living Judge, will for shame say, they would have them ended right or wrong; but if they would have Truth determined, they must give us assurance, that these Judges shall lay aside all partiality to their own interests, all prejudice against their Adversaries, shall diligently search, and examine, and weigh the evidence on both sides, and then shall deter­mine according to the true sense of the Law. How likely this is will appear by the living Judges in our Saviours time; Was there ever greater partiality seen than was in them, or more obstinate prejudice, or more wilful er­rors, or a more malicious sentence than came from them in the cause of our Lord and Sa­viour? They would not believe his Mira­cles, [Page 30] though told them by those that saw them; when they saw them, they would not be­lieve they came from God, but attributed them to the Devil; they would not so much as enquire the true place of his Nativity, but ran on still with that wilful mistake, that he was born in Galilee; and by this they thought to confound Nicodemus presently, Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no Prophet. If they had search­ed John 7. 52. and looked themselves, they would have found, that Christ was born in Bethlehem, and not in Galilee. But where men are strongly pre­judiced, any thing serves for evidence and de­monstration; whereas all the arguments on the other side shall be despised and contemned. How captious were they on all occasions to­wards our Saviour, lying in wait to entrap him with questions, to pervert his words, and draw blasphemy out of the most innocent expressions? And when none of all these things could do, they use all the wayes of fraud, malice and in­justice to destroy the Saviour of the world as a Malefactor and Blasphemer. Was not here now a mighty advantage, which the Authority of the present Church among the Jews of that time had, above the guidance of the Law and the Pro­phets? And the knowledge St. Paul had of the same temper being in them still might justly make him decline their judgement, and appeal [Page 31] only to the Law and the Prophets, for the ground and Rule of his faith.

2. For the object of his worship, he appeals to the best Antiquity, I worship the God of my Fathers. i. e. I bring no new Religion among you, but the very same in substance with that which all the Jews have owned; so some render [...] Deo Patrio, the God whom all my Brethren acknow­ledge, but he rather understands it of the same God that was worshipped by Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, quem majores nostri coluerunt; so St. Peter in his preaching to the people concerning the resur­rection of Christ, to avoid the imputation of No­velty, saith, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Acts 3. 13. Jacob, the God of our Fathers hath glorified his Son Je­sus; and again to the Sanhedrin he saith, the God of 5. 30. our Fathers raised up Jesus; and St. Paul, the God of our Fathers hath chosen thee; in the use of which expres­sions 22. 14. they purposely declare that they had no thoughts of bringing in any new Religion among them, contrary to what God had of old declared to the Patriarchs. The main things in which the Jews objected innovation to them, did either concern the bringing in some new doctrine, or the reformation of corruptions among them.

1. For their doctrine; that either concerned the Messias, or a future state. For the doctrine of the Messias it was as antient as the records of any revelation from God were. It was the great pro­mise [Page 32] made to the Patriarchs long before the Law of Moses; and even Moses himself speaks of him, as St. Steven proves to them; and David, and Isaiah, Acts 7. 37. and Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, and Daniel, and Micah, and Malachi, as the Apostles at large prove in their writings. Why should this then be accounted any new doctrine which they all believed and re­ceived? If the Question be only whether Christ were that Messias or no; for that, they desire no­thing more than the testimony of the Law and the Prophets, and the Miracles wrought by him; but they had no reason to quarrel with them upon their belief, for such an alteration of the state of things which themselves believed must be when the Messias came; for in him not only the Nation of the Jews, but all the Nations of the earth were to be blessed; which was inconsistent with supposing the Ceremonial Law to continue in its force and obligation; being particularly suited to one peo­ple lying within such a compass as they might three times a year attend upon the service in the Temple at Hierusalem. If their quarrel was, con­cerning a future state, as though that were a new doctrine, St. Paul adds in the next Verse, that them­selves also allow, that there shall be aresurrection of the dead both of the just and the unjust. And in his defence before Agrippa he saith, And now I stand and am judged Acts 26. 6, 7. for the hope of the promise made of God unto our Fathers, unto which promise our twelve Tribes instantly serving God [Page 33] day and night hope to come. So that the Apostle pro­duces Antiquity, Universality and Consent in these Fundamental Articles of the Christian Religion; only a late busie and Politick Faction of the Sad­ducees opposed this doctrine; but why should their opposition signifie any thing against so full a stream running down from the first and purest Antiquity? Thus much for the positive part of their faith and doctrine.

2. For the negative pare, or the reformation of abuses and corruptions among them; this was S. Pauls plea; Let them shew where the God of our Fathers imposed any of those heavy burdens which the Scribes and Pharisees place so much of their Re­ligion in. What ground is there in the Law and the Prophets, for the Pharisaical Superstitions, and Vows, and severities to themselves in fetching blood and knocking their heads against the walls, and different garbs and dresses to appear more holy unto men, with many other customs of theirs, the observation of which was made so great a part of the Religion of their devoutest men? And it is a strange thing they should think it impossible such things should come in among them, without great notice being taken of it; for although sudden and violent changes may have all the circumstances known, yet it is not to be expected in more in sensible & gradual alterations. A man may tell when a violent Feaver seized up­on [Page 34] him and inflamed his blood, but he cannot do so by a Hectick or a Consumption; must he therefore believe himself well, because he cannot tell the punctual time when he fell sick. We may casily describe the circumstances of a Landflood which overflows the banks, and bears all before it, but we cannot do so by the coming in of the Tide, which steals in secretly and insensibly, and no man can assign the place where the salt and fresh water first mix together. Superstition is a Hectick Feaver to Religion, it by degrees con­sumes the vitals of it, but comes on insensibly, and is not easily discovered till it be hard to be cured. At first, it may be some devout but in­discreet men made way for it, who love to find out some Modes of devotion different from the rest of the world, which are greedily embraced by such who admire and follow them; this ex­ample taking, another begins and sets up for a more refined way than the former; and so the design spreads, till at last true piety and goodness be swallowed up by superstitious fopperies. Which is the most probable account of all the Pharisaical corruptions; some of whose obser­vations might be begun at first with a good mind, and by the devout persons of that time; but after­wards, every one that had a sowrer look and a worse nature than ordinary, thought it not enough to follow the example of others, but like [Page 35] a great Physician he must have his Nostrum's, some­thing of his own finding out, a new garb, or ce­remony, or posture of devotion, whereby he may be taken notice of, and admired for his sanctity. Thus that fardle of superstitious rites was ga­thered up among the Scribes and Pharisees in our Saviours time, whom he most severely upon all occasions rebukes for their hypocrisie, in placing so much of their Religion in them. And thus much for the way taken by St. Paul to vindicate Christianity from the imputations of being a new Sect or Heresie, by an appeal to Scripture and the best Antiquity.

3. There remains only, the freedom and courage expressed by him in owning his Religion, not­withstanding these false imputations. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which is called he­resie, &c. He abhorred that mean and base-spi­rited principle, which makes it lawful for men to deny their Religion when it brings them into danger; he studied no secret arts of complyance with his Adversaries to securehimself; he did not decline appearing, though to the hazard of his life, in so just a cause. He valued his Religion beyond his own safety, and regarded not all the calum­nies and reproaches of his enemies, as long as he made this his constant exercise, to keep a conscience Ver. 16. void of offence, both towards God and towards men. And this he elsewhere saith afforded him more inward [Page 36] comfort and satisfaction, than all the crafts and policy in the world could give him. For our re­joycing 2 Cor. 1. 12. is this, saith he, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wis­dom, but by the grace of God we have had our conversation in the world. There is nothing inspires men with so much courage, as integrity and uprightness of mind doth; and such persons who have the com­fort of that, have not only better hopes as to ano­ther world, but oft-times escape better as to this, than others do; for even their enemies cannot but esteem them: whereas the fawning, sneak­ing and flattering hypocrite that will do or be any thing for his own advantage, is despised by those he courts, hated by good men, and at last tormented by his own conscience, for being false to God and Religion. But we may see here in St. Paul a great instance of true Christian magnani­mity; he was sensible how great both the malice and quality of his enemies were; he knew he was to answer before a Judge, that regarded no­thing either of Justice or Religion; yet he nei­ther flatters his Judge, nor betrayes any distrust of him: he doth not bespatter his enemies, nor discover any fear of them; but with a modest freedom and manly courage owns the main part of their accusation, and effectually vindi­cates his own innocency and his Religion toge­ther. For even Felix himself, although a man [Page 37] otherwise very capable of being wrought up­on by some wayes of address, of which we read, Ver. 26. yet the High Priest and the El­ders with their eloquent Tertullus were forced to return as they came, and leave St. Paul under the name of a Prisoner, but enjoying the conve­niencies of liberty, ver. 23.

I have now gone thorough all the parts of the Text, with a respect to St. Paul and the Au­thority of the Jewish Church, which was enga­ged against him; it may now be justly ex­pected that I make Application of what I have said to our own State and Condition. Thanks be to God, we are not brought to such a tryal as St. Paul was, we enjoy the liberty of speaking for our selves and our Religion, and not only speaking for it, but professing and owning it. And, may we ever do so! But we have busie and restless Adversaries abroad, the factors of the High Priest and Elders at Rome, who have as much spight and malice against us, as ever those of Hierusalem had against St. Paul; and they have their Tertullus's too, men of art and insinuation, and who manage their cause against us just as he did against St. Paul, they charge us with bring­ing in new Sects under the pretence of Refor­mation; or with rejecting the Authority of the present Church which we were bound to obey, [Page 38] and thereby laying the Foundation of Faction [...]nd Schism. These are heavy charges, but they are no other than those the High Priest and the Elders made against St. Paul; and thanks be to God, his Defence and Vindication is ours too, for we appeal to Scripture and the best and purest Antiquity; and desire to be judged according to these. These three things therefore I shall speak to, before I con­clude.

1. That the same reasons which they pro­duce against the Reformation would have held against the spreading of Christianity at first.

2. That the same Defence which St. Paul made for Christianity will justifie the Refor­mation.

3. That we have all reason to follow the courage of St. Paul in owning and defending our Religion, not with standing the imputations which are cast upon it.

1. That the same reasons which they pro­duce against the Reformation would have held against Christianity at first. What have all the clamours of our Adversaries for above a hun­dred years come to, but the very same which I have already mentioned as the Jews Obje­ctions against Christianity, viz. Novelty, and Faction? ‘Where was your Church before the Reformation? produce your succession [Page 39] in all Ages of persons who agreed in all things with you. Where were those distinct bodies of men who found fault with those corruptions that you pretend to reform? Our Church hath had a constant and glori­ous succession of Bishops, and Martyrs, and Consessors, and Religious Orders of Men, Virgins, and Widows. But supposing such a distinct succession were not necessary, yet shew how it was possible for so ma­ny errors and corruptions to come into the Church, and no one take notice of them and discover them. Where was the watch­full eye of Providence over the Church all this while? What, all the Pastors asleep at once! or all conspiring together to de­ceive their posterity! Besides, how can the Protestants ever answer their rejecting the Authority of the present Church which they lived under? and to whom God had promi­sed his infallible Spirit? how can they clear themselves from faction and disturbing the peace of the Christian world, which lived in so great unity and peace before?’ This is the summ of their Objections against the Reformation, which are the very same we have mention'd before, as produced by the Jews against Christianity. If the arguments are good now, they were so then; if they were [Page 40] good then, for all that I can see the High Priest and Elders were in the right, and St. Paul in the wrong; if they were not good then, but are now, some remarkable disparity must be shewed between their case and ours; and that must lye in shewing these three things.

1. That the Christian Church hath greater infallibility promised than the Jewish had.

2. That the first Christians had greater rea­son to reject the Authority of that Church, than the Reformers had, as to the Church of Rome.

3 That the Causes of corruptions in the Jewish Church, could not hold in the Christi­an. But if none of these can be made good, then the case will appear to be the ve­ry same.

1. It cannot be proved that the Christian Church hath greater infallibility promised than the Jewish had. Of which we have this plain evidence, that one of the strongest arguments produced for the infallibility of the Christian Church is taken from the Promises made to the Jewish. How often hath Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10. been made Use of to prove infallibility in the Christian Church? If they had any better ar­guments in the New Testament, would they ever run so far back to a Command that most evidently relates to the Jewish constitu­tion? [Page 41] Where hath ever God promised that he would dwell in St. Peters at Rome, as he did, that he would dwell in his Temple at Hieru­salem? What boastings and triumphs would there have been, if any such words had been in the Gospel concerning Rome, as there were of old concerning Hierusalem; viz. that God had 2 Chron. 7. 16. sanctified it, that his Name might be there for ever; and his eyes and his heart should be there perpetually? What pittiful proofs in comparison of this, are all those brought out of the New Testament for the Authority and Infallibility of the Roman Church? What are all the pro­mises of the Spirit made to the Apostles, and remarkably accomplished in them, to this plain promise of Gods particular presence in that place for ever? Suppose St. Peter had priviledges above the rest of the Apostles; how comes the entail to be made to all his succes­sors, and only at Rome and no where else? Where are the Deeds kept, that contain this gift? Why are they not produced during all this contest? And yet we see in the Jewish Church where such a promise was made to a particular place, no such thing as Infallibility was implyed in it.

2. It cannot be shewed, that the first Chri­stians had greater reason to reject the Autho­rity of the Jewish Church, than our Refor­mers [Page 42] had to reject that of the Church of Rome. I know here it will be presently said, That the Apostles saw the Miracles of Christ, and wrought ma­ny themselves, and received an immediate Commissi­on from Jesus Christ in whom the Churches Infalli­bility was then seated. All which I grant to be true in it self, but cannot be pleaded by them who contend for absolute obedience to the present Churches Authority as infallible. My reason is, because upon this principle they could not believe Christ to be the true Messias; for his being the true Messias depended up­on two things, viz. the fulfilling of Prophecies, and the truth of his Miracles; now according to their principles, no man could be certain of either of these without the Authority of the Church; for the fulfilling of Prophecies de­pended upon the sense of many obscure places of Scripture, about which they say there is a necessity of an infallible Judge; and for Miracles, they tell us, that there is no certain way of judging true and false, but by the Authority of the Church. Now if these things be so, what ground could the first Christians have to believe Christ to be the true Messias, when in both these, they must oppose the Au­thority of the present Church?

3. They can never prove, that the same causes of corruptions do not hold as to the [Page 43] Christian, which did as to the Jewish Church. For the Christian Church in those Ages which we charge with introducing the corruptions, was degenerated into greater Ignorance, Barba­rism, Luxury and Superstition, than the Jewish Church in the time of its darkness from the cessation of Prophecy till the coming of Christ. Our Adversaries themselves confess, that for a long time, there was nothing either of Learn­ing or Humanity among them; nothing but ease, and luxury, and ambition, and all man­ner of Wickedness among the Chief Rulers among them; nay, even at Rome there was a succession of fifty of their High Priests, so re­markable for their wickedness, that Annas and Caiaphas (setting only aside their condemn­ing Christ) were Saints in comparison of them. And is it now any wonder that such errors and corruptions should come into that Church, as those we charge them with? Nay, rather the greatest Wonder seems to be, that any thing of Christianity should be preserv­ed among them. But besides the sottishness of those times, we have many other causes to assign of the corruptions introduced among them; as, a Complyance with Gentilism in many of their Customs and Superstitions; Affectation of new Modes of Devotion, among indiscreet Zea­lots; Ambition and constant endeavour to ad­vance [Page 44] the Authority and Interests of the Priest­hood above all Secular Power; and when for a long time these had been gathering the rude materials together, then the Moorish Phi­losophy happening to creep in among them, the Monks began to busie themselves therein, and by the help of that, a little better to di­gest that Mass and heap of corruptions, and to spend the wit they had to defend and im­prove them.

2. But against all these, we stand upon the same defence that St. Paul did: we appeal to Scripture, and the best and purest Antiquity. We pretend to bring in no new Doctrines, and therefore no Miracles can be required of us; which the Apostles wrought to confirm Christs being the true Messias who was to alter that State which God himself had once appointed: All that we plead for, is that the Religion established by Christ may serve our turn, and that which is recorded by the Apostles and Evangelists; to these we make our constant appeal, and have the same reason to decline the Authority of the Roman Church, that St. Paul had as to the High Priest and Elders, when he appealed to the Law and the Prophets: Nay, we have somewhat more reason; be­cause God had once appointed the High Priests and Rulers of the People among them, but the [Page 45] Supremacy of the Roman Church was a meer Usurpation begun by Ambition, advanced by Forgery, and defended by Cruelty. But we do not only believe all that is written in the Law and the Prophets, but we worship the God of our Fathers; of the Fathers of the first and purest Ages of the Christian Church; we are not only con­tent to make use of their Authority in these matters, but we make our appeal to them; and have begged our Adversaries ever since the Reformation, to prove the points in diffe­rence between us, by the testimony of the first six hundred years; but from that time to this, they are as far from proving any one point, as ever they were.

3. What then follows from all this, but that we should imitate St. Pauls courage in owning and defending our Religion, not­withstanding all the false imputations which are cast upon it. What a shame would it be for us, meanly and basely to betray that Cause, for which our Ancestors sacrificed their lives? Is the Romish Religion any thing better than it was then? What error in Do­ctrine, or corruption in Practice have they ever reformed? Nay, have they not rather established and confirmed them more? Are they any thing kinder to us than they have been? No. Notwithstanding all their late [Page 46] pleadings for Evangelical Peace and Charity, they can at the same time tell us, That the Statutes Advocat of Conscience-Liberty, p. 236. 247. against Hereticks are still in force against us, as condemned Hereticks; and we are not so dull, not to apprehend the meaning of that; viz. that were it in their power they could law­fully burn us to morrow. And is not this the height of Evangelical Love and Sweetness? Who can but admire the perswasiveness of such arguments to Gospel-meekness, and melt at the tenderness and bowels of an Inquisition? Let us not deceive our selves; it is not the mean complyance of any in going half way to­wards them, will serve their turn: there is no chewing their Pills, all must be swal­lowed together, or as good in their opinion to have none at all. For not only plain Hereticks, but the favourers and suspected of He­resie are solemnly excommunicated every year in the famous Bull of Coena Domini; and Lind­wood Lindwood Provinc. l. 5. tit. de haeret. p. 162. 2. their English Canonist, tells us whom they account suspected of Heresie, viz. All that shew common civility to Hereticks, or give Alms to them, or that once hear their Sermons. This last indeed hath been mitigated by a considerable party among them; for notwithstanding the opposition of the Jesuits in this matter, and seven Briev's obtained by their means from several Popes forbidding all Roman-Catholicks [Page 47] to come to our Churches; yet the Secular Priests have contended for it as a thing law­ful for them not only to come to our Pray­ers, and hear our Sermons, but to partake of Vertum. Rom. p. 104, 105. our Sacraments too. Which they may al­low, while they hope to carry on their inte­rest better that way; but if once, (which God forbid) the Tide should turn with them, then the old Laws of their Church must pre­vail, and nothing will be thought so whol­some as an Inquisition. Which it is strange, their Advocates for Liberty of Conscience, should call only, Laws in Catholick Countreys Advoc. for Lib. p. 24. against Hereticks, and not Laws of the Church, when there are extant above a hundred Bulls and Briev's of Popes establishing, confirming, and enlarging the Inquisition. Since then no V. Append. ad Nicol. Eyneric. Director. Inquisit. Ven. 1607. favour is to be expected from their Church (for whatever they pretend, all the severity comes from thence, all the favour and mitiga­tion from the clemency and Wisdom of Princes) let us endeavour to strengthen our selves, by a hearty zeal for our Religion, and using the best means to confirm and uphold it. And since the Children of this world are in their Generation wiser than the Children of light; there are some things practised among them which may deserve our imitation: and those are,

[Page 48] 1. A mighty Industry and Zeal in promo­ting their Cause; they have learn'd of their Predecessors to compass Sea and Land to gain one Proselyte. They insinuate themselves into all companies, stick at no pains, accommodate themselves to all humours, and are provided one way or other to gratifie persons of all inclinations; for they have retirement for the melancholy, business for the active, idle­ness for the lazy, honour for the ambitious, splendour for the vain, severities for the sowre and hardy, and a good dose of pleasures for the soft and voluptuous. It is not their Way, but their Zeal and Industry I propound to our imitation; I know not how it comes to pass; but so it often happens, that they who are most secure of truth on their side, are most apt to be remiss and careless; and to comfort themselves with some good old say­ings, as God will provide, and Truth will prevail, though they lye still, and do nothing to­wards it; but certainly such negligence is in­excusable, where the matter is of so great importance, the Adversaries so many, and an account must be given shortly in another world, of what men have done or suffered for their Religion in this.

[Page 49] 2. Submission and Obedience to their Spi­ritual Governours; the greatest strength of that prevailing Faction lyes in the close union and cohesion of all the parts together, by a settled subordination of one to another; which though not alwayes effectual, yet the contri­vance is so laid, as if there were as much Truth and Reason as Policy in it, cannot be deny­ed to be fit for upholding the interest of a Church. But we plead not for their blind and absolute obedience; but sure the Apostles had some meaning when they bid the Christians obey them that had the rule over them, and submit themselves, for they watched for their souls; and Heb. 13. 17. 2 Thess. 5. 13. esteem them very highly in love for their Works sake: not, be ready on all occasions to reproach and contemn them, and be glad of any idle stories wherewith to bespatter them. If men would once understand and practise the du­ties of humility, modesty, and submission to the Government which God hath set over us, we might have greater hopes to secure the interest of our Church and Religion, than without it we can ever have. For spiritual pride, conceitedness in Religion, and a Spirit of contradiction to Superiours are to be rec­koned among some of the worst Symptoms of a declining Church.

[Page 50] 3. Lessening of differences among them­selves; for although with all their care they cannot prevent them, yet they still endeavour to extenuate them, as much as possible, and boast of their Unity among strangers to their Churches affairs. The great wisdom of the Court of Rome lyes in this, that as long as per­sons are true to them in the main points where­in the difference lyes, they can let them alone in smaller differences among themselves; and not provoke either of the dissenting parties, unless they are sure to suppress them, lest they give them occasion to withdraw from their communion. They can allow different Rites and Ceremonies in the several Orders of Religion among them, and grant exemptions and priviledges in particular cases; as long as they make them serviceable to their common interest by upholding and strengthning them. Would to God we could at last learn this Wis­dom from our enemies, not to widen our own differences by inveterate heats, bitterness and animosities among our selves; but to find out wayes whereby even the dissenters in smaller things may be made useful for the maintain­ing the common interest of our Church and Religion. And it is a vain thing in any to go about to separate these; or ever to hope [Page 51] that the Protestant Religion can be preserved among us without upholding the Church of En­gland. For if once that Bullwark be demolish­ed, our Adversaries will despise all the lesser Sconces and Pallisado's; they will be but like Romulus his Walls, which they will easily leap over at their pleasure. I pray God then (and I hope you will all joyn with me in it) that he would vouchsafe to our Governours the Spi­rit of Wisdom and Peace, to find out the most proper means for the establishment of our Church and Religion; and I pray God give us all a Spirit of knowledge to understand the things which belong to our peace, and of Love and Unity to endeavour after them.