A GENTLEMAN'S RELIGION: WITH THE Grounds and Reasons Of It.
PART I.

I. SInce almost all Men (however different in other Opinions and Interests) have ever agreed in this, That there is a God, to whose Power all Things are subject; That the true Service and Worship of God (which is called Religi­on) [Page 2] shall be rewarded with Future Happiness; and, That the Neglect and Contempt of Religion shall be punished with Future Misery; Every Man surely has reason to be­lieve thus much at least, That what is so generally and firm­ly believed may be possibly, nay and is probably, a Truth. And wheresoever there is a possibility, and much more where there is a probability, of a great Good on the one hand, and a great Evil on the other; there certainly e­very Man is contented to en­quire into the reality of the thing; that he may not miss of the one, if it be attainable, nor fall into the other, if it be avoidable. I conclude there­fore, [Page 3] That it is a very great folly for any Man to give over searching after the True Reli­gion, untill he has found it; Ex­cept he were able to demonstrate, either that there is no God; or else, that there is no Worship or Service due to him.

II. In all Matters of great and serious Consequence, no Man that is wise, will act by chance, and at random, without be­ing able to give some Reason for what he does. For he that does any thing, and knows not why, is more likely to do himself Hurt than Good; be­cause there are more Ways to the former, than to the latter. Since therefore Religion is a thing of the greatest Moment and Importance that can be, [Page 4] I conclude, that no Man ought to chuse his Religion blindly, and by chance; but that every Man ought to have some Reason for what he professes. What­ever Religion, therefore, a Man is bred up in from his Youth, it certainly is very fit for him, when he comes to Years of Dis­cretion, to enquire into the Grounds and Reasons of it. For otherwise it is not possible for him to know whether he be in the Right, or the Wrong; in the way to Hea­ven, or Hell.

III. If there be a God, and if he requires any service or worship (i. e. any Religion) from us, it is undoubtedly for this End, that it may be a Trial of our Faith­fulness and Obedience to him. [Page 5] Now, whosoever has a mind to prove his Servant, whether he will be faithful and obedient, he will not give him such dark and intricate Commands, as shall puzzle him to find out the meaning of them; (For, how can a Servant approve himself faithful and obedient, if he be uncertain what it is that his Master requires from him?) But he will surely give him such Commands and Di­rections as are easie enough to be understood, however dif­ficult they may be to be en­terprized, or accomplished. I conclude therefore, That all the Duties of Religion, which God requires of any Man, must needs be easie enongh for him to understand, however hard they [Page 6] may be to be practised. For, otherwise, Religion would be a Trial rather of a Man's Wit and Cunning, than of his Faithfulness and Obedience. And therefore also I cannot but conclude, That most, if not all the Controversies about Religion, which at this Day distract the World, do not pro­ceed from any Difficulty in or about the Determination of all things necessary in Religion it self; but partly from the Pride of some Learned Men, who have loved to strat new and difficult Questions, and to im­pose their private Sentiments upon the World, that they might be admired for their Wit and Subtilty; partly from the Covetousness and Ambition [Page 7] of some, whether Learned, or Unlearned, who have found that their Worldly Interest will be better served by some Doctrins (no matter how false and precarious) than by others; and partly from the Prejudice of most Men, who are apt, with great Zeal and Eagerness, to contend for all those things which, from their Childhood, they have been taught to have a Reverence for. And I farther conclude, That whosoever has a sincere desire to embrace True Religion, must lay aside Pride, Ambition, Co­vetousness and Prejudice, which would mis-guide him; and follow his sober and unprejudi­cate Reason, which will ever lead him in the right Way.

[Page 8]IV. There are different sorts, or rather degrees of Assurance, which Men have concerning Things. Some things are evi­dent of themselves, without any Proof; some things we are assured of, by the Testi­mony of our senses; some things we receive as Truths, because we find them to fol­low from other Truths alrea­dy received; and some things we believe only upon the Te­stimony of others. Moreover, some things we are persuaded of, without any Doubt or Dif­fidence; whereas other things do seem, at best, to be but likely or probable, and that too in a different degree, ac­cording as their Evidence is stronger, or weaker. Now, [Page 9] every sober Man, where he has certain Evidence of a thing, there he acts with As­surance; where the Matter is but probable, there he pro­ceeds with Caution: But where a Man is under a Ne­cessity of doing one way or other, and where the Matter appears doubtful on both sides, there it becomes him to weigh the Reasons on both parts with due Consideration; and according as he finds the greater Probability to be on the one hand rather than the other, so to square his Acti­ons accordingly. Since there­fore every Man must necessari­ly either live religiously or not live religiously; I conclude, that if upon a serious Consideration [Page 10] of the matter, there appear to be more probable Reasons and Arguments for Religion than against it, every wise and so­ber Man must embrace Reli­gion. This I say, not but that I think there are even demonstrative Arguments for Religion; and not so much as one probable one against it: But because that which to me seems demonstrative, to another may appear but pro­bable, I thought it fit to note, That every Man in point of common Prudence is obliged to follow Religion, if it does but appear more likely and probable to him than Irreli­gion.

V. Whether it is possible for any Agent to produce a [Page 11] new Being purely out of no­thing, may with much shew of Religion be doubted: As also Whether meer Matter a­lone, without any other A­gent or efficient Cause, can ever be able to work it self into any different Species or Forms. But this appears as certain as any thing can can be; That where there is neither any Agent or efficent Cause to work, nor any Matter or Subject to be wrought upon, there it is utterly impossible for any thing ever to be pro­duced into Being. Since there­fore I find that there are many things which actually have a Being and Existence, I conclude, That of absolute necessity there must be some­thing [Page 12] or other which has been from all Eternity, and never had a Beginning. For other­wise, if we suppose that ever there was a time when no­thing at all did exist, it fol­lows, from what has been said, that it would be utterly impossible that any thing ever should be produced into Exi­stence.

VI. Since of necessity we must acknowledge something to have been Eternal, I can­not but conclude, That the Eternity of such a Being as God is described to be, is much more probable and fit to be be­lieved, than the Eternity of such a Being as I see this World to be. For when I go about to convince a Nation of the [Page 13] Eternity of the World (I mean in the like Posture that now it is in) there do occurr to my Mind such Difficulties, or rather Impossibilities, as I think no Man can digest. For he that affirms the World, as now it stands, to have been Eternal, must of Ne­cessity grant that there has been an Eternal Succession of Men, Beasts, and Vegetables, and that to a number actually infinite: (for if the number be not infinite, how can the Succession have been Eter­nal?) And yet a number actu­ally infinite to me appears to be a plain Contradiction. For that which is infinite cannot be made bigger, whereas there is no number but may be made [Page 14] bigger by the Addition of Units. Again if any one shall affirm that an infi­nite number is no Contradi­ction; and that there has been a Succession of such a num­ber of Beings in the World; then thus I argue, That if there has been a Succession of an infinite number of Men, Beasts, &c. then, by a Pari­ty of Reason, there has been also a Succession of an infinite number of Days and Nights; and if so, then likewise of an infinite number of Years too; (for if the number of Years can be limited, so can that of Days too, since every Year contains just such a cer­tain number of Days.) Now this I suppose must be granted [Page 15] me, That infinite numbers are equal: (for if one number be less than another, how can it be infinite?) And if so, then it must follow that in the E­ternity of the World the number of Years is equal to the number of Days, which is absurd; because every Year contains in its self a num­ber of 365 Days. These Dif­ficulties, or rather Impossibi­lities, I say, do make the notion of the World's Eter­nity (I mean as the World now is) to appear to me as an absurd and unreasonable Supposition. But then as to God, Although I confess it to be difficult, and perhaps impossible, for Man to com­prehend the manner, how he [Page 16] is, or can be, eternal with­out beginning; yet since the thing it self is so uncon­trollably evident that some­thing is so eternal, (though the manner how is to me in­comprehensible) I find no o­ther Scruple or Difficulty in admitting the Eternity of God. For though it seems contrary to all reason to af­firm an eternal Succession of divers things, one after ano­ther, without a Beginning; yet I can find no manner of Repugnancy in maintaining that there is one immutable Being (i. e. God) which ne­ver began to be.

VII. Whether the matter, of which this visible world is framed, has existed from all [Page 17] Eternity, or whether it were produced out of nothing by the Almighty Power of God, is a Question which reason alone, I think, can never de­termine. But when I con­template and consider the great Variety, Order, Beauty, and Usefulness, which do evidently appear in all the Parts of the World, as they are placed together, and an­swer one another; I cannot but conclude, That the whole World, and all its Parts, are con­triv'd, framed and fashioned, by a wise and powerful Being, whom we call God: As when I see a cu­rious Clock or Engine, I pre­sently conclude that it was made and contrived by some Artist; and should laugh at [Page 18] that Man who would offer to say that it was formed and fashioned only by chance.

VIII. That Miracles (i. e. wonderful Works, surpassing the ordinary course of Na­ture and Power of Art) have been wrought for confirma­tion of the Truth of Reli­gion, is a thing that I shall take for granted at present, because it will appear to be proved beyond any just Ex­ception in the Sequel of this Discourse; And from thence, I think I may most reasona­bly conclude, That there is a being Superiour to Nature, who can command and controll it as he pleases, i. e. in other Terms, That there is a God.

[Page 19]IX. The Histories of all Ages, and Travellers into all Countries, do universally con­curr in this Testimony, That there is no Nation or People, whether learned or unlearned, but what do own the being of a God. And those few Per­sons who have presumed to deny it, have ever been look'd on as Prodigies and Monsters of Mankind. Fur­thermore, even those few who have denied the Being of God, have ever beeen Men of such debauched and pro­fligate Lives, that we have great Reason to believe that they first have wished that there might be no God to punish them; and then, without any other ground or [Page 20] Reason, have believed, or ra­ther pretended to believe, what they have wished. For it is almost ever observed, that when debauched and atheisti­cal Persons do draw near to Death, they do either re­renounce their Atheism, own the being of a God, and make Supplication to him; or at least have their Minds possest with such doubts and fears, as plainly shew that they have still a strong Suspicion that there likely may be a God, for ought they know, who will call them to an Ac­count for all their Wicked­ness. Since then all sorts of Men, both learned and un­learned, and all Nations of Men, both civil and barba­rous, [Page 21] have always owned the Being of God; since his being has never been de­nied but by very few indeed; since that denial has rather proceeded from their Wishes and Desires, than from their Reason and Understanding; and lastly, since they have not been able wholly to ex­tinguish the Belief of a God out of their Minds although they have earnestly endeavou­red it; I conclude, That the Belief of a God, in Man, is neither the Effect of Chance, because 'tis Universal, nor of Ignorance, because it possesses the most Learned, nor of State-Policy, because 'tis received among the most barbarous and unciviliz'd People; but [Page 22] that there is a God, who has made all Men, and has (as a Token of his Work) stamped and engraved this his Mark and Character upon them.

X. There is no Man of common Sense, who builds a convenient and goodly Stru­cture, but he takes care like­wise to keep it in good Order and Repair, after it is built. And there is no Fabrick but, in Tract of Time, will visi­bly decay, if constant care be not taken of it. Since thefore, God has erected and framed this goodly Stru­cture of the World; and since in so long a time there is no Manner of decay to be found in it (as is abundantly proved by Hackwell, in his A­pology [Page 23] on this Subject) I con­clude, That God, not only made this World by his Power, but also governs it by his Provi­dence. And for the only Ob­jection, which seems to be of any Force against God's Pro­vidence; namely, that wicked Men do often thrive and pro­sper, whilst good and Vertu­ous Men are oppressed with Misery; it is most easily and naturally solved, by supposing, (what shall anon be proved) That there are abundant Re­wards for good Men, and sufficient punishments for the wicked, to be distributed in a Life which is to come; which will bring all things to be e­qual at the last.

[Page 24]XI. Every Parent, who be­gets and brings up a Child; every Master, who feeds and pays a Servant; every Prince, who governs and protects his Subjects; and every Bene­factor, who does any act of Kindness for another; may very reasonably, and do al­ways, expect a Return of Love, Obedience and Gra­titude, in due Proportion to the Benefits received from them. Since then God is more than a Parent to us, for he made us and our Parents too; since he is so kind a Master, who gives us our Food, and all the Conveniences of Life; since he governs and pro­tects us, by his over-ruling Providence, more effectually [Page 25] than any earthly Prince does his Subjects; And lastly; since he is our greatest and supreme Benefactor, who has given us all the good which we possess and enjoy; I can­not but conclude, that he ex­pects a return of Love, Obe­dience and Gratitude from us (I will not say proportionable to the Benefits received from him, for that, perhaps, may ex­ceed our Ability; but) proportio­nable unto our Ability or Capacity.

XII. That God is wise and powerful, I gather from his Work, which I contem­plate in the Visible World. And from thence I conclude, That he will sufficiently punish those Persons who despise him, so far as not to love, thank and [Page 26] obey him, according as he expects and requires from them. That he is also good and gracious, I gather from those good things which he has bestowed upon us, relating both to our Bodies and Minds. And from thence I conclude, That he will abundantly reward all those persons who take care to pay him that Love, Gratitude and Obe­dience which he expects.

XIII. That these Rewards and Punishments are not fi­nally distributed in this Life is very evident; Because we often see Men, that are noto­riously wicked, enjoy all the pleasures; and others, that are conspicuously vertuous, under­go almost all the Calamities of this World, even unto [Page 27] their very Graves, I conclude therefore, That there is ano­ther Life, after this, in which these Rewards and Punish­ments shall be duly distribu­ted.

XIV. When a Man is once convinced that there is a God, to whom there is a Service due; and that there are Re­wards and Punishments to be dispensed to all Men, accor­ding as they have performed or neglecting that Service; the grand Enquiry that every Man is concerned to make, is, What he must do to avoid these Punishments, and to be made Partaker of these Re­wards. And here I think I may most easily and natu­rally make these following [Page 28] Conclusions; viz. 1. He who does what God requires from him shall not be punished but reward­ed. 2. God requires from eve­ry Man that he should use his honest Endeavour, by all means, to know and understand his Will as perfectly as he can. For this is but Reason for eve­ry Master to expect from his Servant; much more for such a Master as God. 3. If a Man does his heartiest and best Endeavour, first to know and then to perform the Will of God; God will require no more from him. For to me it seems utterly inconsistent, with the Wisdom of God to expect, and with his Goodness to re­quire, any more from a Man than what he is able to per­form; [Page 29] i. e. any more than his best and most hearty Endea­vours.

XV. There are, in the ge­neral, but two ways of find­ing out, knowing the Will of God. The one is by the use of our natural Reason and Un­derstanding; the other is by attending to that Revelation which God has made of his Will, to the World. Here then I conclude, I must make it my Business, sirst to enquire into the Truth and Reality of this Revelation; and then, to make use of that, and my Reason together, in order to find out what is God's Will.

XVI. That there was such a Person as Jesus of Nazareth, in Galilee, in the time of Tibe­rius [Page 30] Caesar, the Roman Empe­tor; That he had a Company of poor Men for his Disciples; That He and his Disciples went about the Country of Judea, Teaching and Preaching; That he was put to death upon the Cross, after the Roman man­ner, under Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor of Judea; That after his Death, his Disci­ples went about into all, or most, Parts of the then known World, Teaching and Preach­ing that this Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, and Saviour of the World, and that he was risen from the Dead, and gone into Heaven; That in a few Years they con­verted a very great Number of People, in all places, to this [Page 31] Belief; That the Professors of this Belief were called Chri­stians; That they were most cruelly persecuted, and many Thousands of them put to death, and that with most ex­quisite Torments, for no other Reason, but because they were Christians; That these Perse­cutions were several times re­newed againg them, for the space of about Three Hun­dred Years; And yet, for all this, that the Number of Christians daily increased, and that not only Ideots and Un­learned Men, but great Scho­lars and Philosophers were converted to Christianity, e­ven in the Times of Persecu­tion; All this, being merely Matter of Fact, was never yet [Page 32] denied by the greatest Enemies of Christian Religion. And, indeed, these things are so a­bundantly testified by the Hi­stories, and other Writings, of those Times; and have been so generally receiv'd for Truth, as well by the Opposers, as Be­lievers of Christianity, by a con­stant, universal, and uninter­rupted Tradition, from those Days, even unto this Time; that a Man may as well deny the Truth of any, or of all, the Histories of the World, as of this. Now, since all Men generally have a strong Incli­nation to retain and stick to that Religion (whatever it be) in which both they and their Fathers have been brought up; and no less an Aversion to all [Page 33] causeless Innovations in Mat­ters of Religion; Moreover, since all Men, without ex­ception, who are in their Wits, have naturally a most earnest desire to preserve their Lives as long as they can, and to keep themselves free from Pain and Trouble; I think I may reasonably conclude, that there must have been some extraordi­nary strong, and even irresistable Motive, which could prevail up­on such Multitudes of People to forsake theirs and their Ance­stors old Religion, and to em­brace Christianity, which then had but newly appeared in the World, and which, in those Days, did seldom fail to involve its Proselytes in most grievous Troubles and Persecutions.

[Page 34]XVII. That this Motive could not be the Hopes of any Profit or Advantage in this Life, is most evident: Because Christianity was, in those Days, most commonly perse­cuted, even unto death. It must therefore, of necessity, be the hopes of some Benefit or Happiness which should ac­crue to them, after this Life was at an end. And this Be­nefit or Happiness could not seem small and inconsiderable to them; nor could the Hope which they conceived of it be weak, or doubtful: For there is scarce any Man, or ever was, in the World, who would run himself into certain Misery and Persecution, even to the losing of his Life, only upon a [Page 35] weak and doubtful Hope of some small and inconsiderable Benefit or Happiness to be en­joyed in a Life to come. I conclude therefore, That the Primitive Christians were un­doubtingly possessed with a strong Belief, and most firm Persuasion, That whosoever should truly em­brace, profess, and live accor­ding to, the Christian Religion in this Life, was certainly to be made Partaker of some great and inestimable Happiness in the Life to come.

XVIII. That this Belief and Persuasion did not proceed from any Frenzy, or Madness, (which sometimes possesses Man with very strong Imagi­nations,) is very evident; both because there was such a Mul­titude [Page 36] of them, who exactly agreed in the same Sentiments; and also, because it appears, both from the Writings and Actions of the Primitive Chri­stians, that they were Men of Reason and Sobriety, and some of them Persons of great Lear­ning. As evident also it is, that it could not proceed from the Force of any Argument. drawn from the Principles of bare Natural Reason, without Revelation. For, What Man in his Wits, without preten­ding some Revelation from Heaven, could ever be persua­ded, that the Embracing of the Religion taught by such a par­ticular Person, more than ano­ther, would make him happy in the Life to come? I con­clude [Page 37] therefore, That the Dis­ciples of Jesus, who preached Christianity abroad in the World, did convince and satisfie their Proselytes, that it was re­vealed by God from Heaven, that whosoever would believe on Jesus, and receive, and live ac­cording to, his Religion should be made very happy in the next Life,

XIX. The main Argument which the first Preachers of Christianity made use of, to convince the World that this was a Divine Revelation, was this; viz. Because that Jesus, in his Life time, did perform such and so many Miracles, and wonderful Works, as suf­ficiently shewed, that he had his Commission and Power [Page 38] from God; and because his Disciples (whom he had ap­pointed to teach his Religion to the World) for many Years after his Death, did likewise continue to work many Mira­cles in the Name of Jesus; Which shewed, that God was with them in what they did and taught. The things by them alledged to have been performed by Jesus, were such as these: That he healed all manner of Diseases and Distem­pers with a Touch, or barely with a Word speaking; That he gave Sight to the Blind, Hearing to the Deaf, Speech to the Dumb, and Strengh and Agility to the Lame and Maimed; That he raised se­veral Persons from the Dead; [Page 39] and that he himself arose from the Dead, after he had been Crucified, and a Spear thrust into his Vitals, and had lay'n dead in a Sepulchre unto the Third Day; And lastly, That, after his Resurrection, having several times appeared to his Disciples, and conversed with them, for the space of Forty Days, he was, at last, openly, and in their sight, taken up a­live into Heaven. The things alledged to have been done by his Disciples, were, The Hea­ling the Sick, the Lame, the Maimed, &c. and, in a par­ticular manner, their Speak­ing all Languages, although they never had learned them. That all these things were pre­tended by the first Preachers of [Page 40] Christianity, is confessed on all Hands. And, undoubtedly, they must needs, at least, pre­tend something that was very extraordinary, or else they ne­ver could have converted such vast Multitudes, under so ma­ny Disadvantages as they and their Religion laboured. That these things were not only pretended, but really and actually performed, is, to my Opinion, uncontrollably evin­ced from the Testimony of the Disciples themselves, Who de­clared these things for Truth unto the World; Who could not themselves be deceived in those Matters of Fact, of which they pretended to have been Eye-Witnesses; Who never would go about to impose a [Page 41] Lye upon the World, by which they could propose to themselves no manner of Ad­vantage in this Life, nor (if it were a Lye) in the Life to come; Who never would have exposed themselves to Pover­ty, to Racks, to Gibbets, to Fire and Faggot, (in a Word) to all sorts of Torments and Deaths, only for the sake of a fruitless and unprofitable Fa­ble; Who being Men of un­blameable Lives, for their Mo­rality, had, doubtless, more Honesty and Integrity, than to affirm those things for cer­tain Truths, which they must needs know to be meer Inven­tions; Who were too many in Number, and too void of Craft and Guile, to combine [Page 42] together in framing a false Story, and none of them e­ver to betray or discover the Cheat; Who could never hope to impose the Belief of such a Story upon a curious and in­quisitive Age (such as that was wherein they lived) if it had been false, and therefore would certainly never have attempt­ed it, if they had not known it to have been true; And, Lastly, who, instead of con­vincing such Multitudes as they did, must needs have been palpably discovered, and ex­posed to the World for a Com­pany of lewd Cheats and Im­postors, in pretending that such and such things were done in the Land of Judea and Jerusalem, (and done openly [Page 43] too, in the Face of the World,) when it was so easie a matter to go or send to the place, to make Enquiry, and so to find out the Cheat, if a Cheat it had been. But that these same Mi­racles, and wonderful Works, did far surpass both the Course of Nature, and the Power of Art, is very evident; That they were not perform'd by the Assistance of any wicked Spirit, does sufficiently ap­pear; because the very Intent and Design of them was to propagate a Doctrine in the World, which, by all, must be allowed to teach the purest, and most strict Morality; to which it cannot be imagined, that any Impure and Evil Spi­rit would contribute any help. [Page 44] It remains therefore, that these things must needs have been performed, either by the im­mediate Power and Assistance of God, (who is both the Fra­mer and Controller of Nature) or (which is the same thing in effect) by the Mediation and Ministry of good Spirits, who always act obediently to his Will. So that (whether me­diately, or immediately) it is God who is to be looked upon as the Original and Author of all those wonderful Things, which were done by Jesus, and his Disciples. Now then; Since God did interpose his Power, to work such strange and stu­penduous things, for the Pro­pagation and Confirmation of that Doctrine which was [Page 45] taught by Jesus and his Disci­ples; This I think, is a suffi­cient Demonstration, that their Doctrine was certainly true. For, Who can imagine that God should make use of his ex­traordinary Power, only to cheat and deceive the World into the Belief of a Lye? I conclude therefore, That the Primitive Christians had suffi­cient Reason to believe, that it was revealed by God from Hea­ven, that whosoever would be­lieve on Jesus, and receive, and live according to his Religion, should be made very happy in the­next Life; this very thing be­ing the grand Point of Do­ctrine, which Jesus and his Disciples taught and preached to the World. And if we are [Page 46] sure that the Primitive Chri­stians had Reason sufficient to believe this; from hence it fol­lows, That we have sufficient Reason to believe it also.

XX. But Jesus himself be­ing long since ascended into Heaven, and his Disciples, who first preached the Gospel, departed out of the World; here, I think, it is necessary to enquire, to whom, or to what I must apply my self, that (amidst the several Parties in the World, who all call themselves True and Orthodox Christians, each condemning all others but themselves) I may be truly and surely informed what is the true and genuine Religion or Do­ctrine of Jesus, which I ought to receive, and live according [Page 47] to, in order to my future Happi­ness. For, if I do not this, I must either reject the Doctrine of Jesus, and so lose my future Happiness; or else take it al­together upon Trust, and by chance, and then 'tis odds but I light upon the wrong, and must needs run a very great hazard. And though he who is in a Mistake, and cannot tell how to help it, will, doubt­less, find an easie Pardon from God; yet he who falls into Errour, for want of moderate Care and Diligence to find out the Truth, has, I think, no pretence either to Pardon, or so much as to Pity.

XXI. The Roman Catho­licks do tell me, that I must apply my self to the Church. [Page 48] This Church they define to be, that Society of Persons who prosess Faith in Jesus Christ, and live in Subjection to, and Communion with the Pope, or Bishop of Rome. This Church they say is infallible; and not only does not, but cannot err in any Doctrine of Religion, Go then, say they, to this Church, and receive the Doctrine which she teaches; and there you have, certainly and infallibly, the true and pure Doctrine of Jesus Christ. But I cannot give my Assent to follow this their Direction, because I find such great Diffi­culties in my way as, I think, are insuparable; at least, I am sure, such as I am not able to o­vercome. For, First, Although [Page 49] it may be a certain Truth, that there shall always be a Church, that is to say, a Company of People, some where or other, professing the true Christian Religion, as long as the World shall last; yet what solid Proof can be brought, that this par­ticular Society of Men, who live in Communion with the Pope, or Bishop of Rome, are alone the true Church, and shall always keep and main­tain amongst them the true and uncorrupt Doctrine of Je­sus Christ? This Matter be­ing a Question of Revelation, and positive Institution, is un­capable of being proved by a­ny Argument drawn from Na­tural Reason. And, as for the Texts of Scripture which they [Page 50] alledge, it is even ridiculous to think, that any sober and un­prejudiced Person should be convinced by them; (as will evidently appear to any one, who impartially reads what the Romish and Protestant Divines have written on this Contro­versie:) For there are none of those Texts, but are fairly and naturally capable of another Interpretation; and must be very much strained and wrest­ed, to make them countenance the Romish Doctrine. Besides that, the Divines of the Church of Rome do generally teach, That no Man can be sure of the Authority or Sense of any Text of Scripture, (especially if it appear to be any way doubtful,) except he receives [Page 51] the Proposal and Interpretation thereof from this their Church, which they say is infallible. So that a Man must of necessi­ty believe the Infallibility of their Church, before he can a­ny way be sure of the Credit, or even of the Sense, of those Texts of Scripture which they bring to prove it. And then, What need is there of Scri­pture-Arguments to prove a thing, which must be acknow­ledged, before the Arguments can have any force, or even be as much as certainly under­stood? And if they tell me, that the Fathers, and ancient Christian Writers, do testifie thus much of the Church of Rome; I can only say, that the Protestant Divines (who [Page 52] seem to me to be Men of as much Learning and Integrity as the Romish) do declare, that it is far otherwise. Nor have I Skill enough in Language and Antiquity, to take upon me to judge of this Dispute. Neither do I understand, by what Authority the Writings of those Persons, who are ac­knowledged to have been sub­ject to Errours, should be ob­truded on me as a Rule of my Faith, or as a sufficient Argu­ment to determine my Assent in so weighty a Matter. Se­condly, Supposing, but not granting, that in the Church of Rome the true and pure Do­ctrine of Jesus Christ was pre­served; yet still it is granted, that particular and private [Page 53] Men, who live in the visible Communion of that Church, may teach false and corrupt Doctrine. Here then I de­mand, How shall I certainly distinguish the Doctrine of the Church, from the Opinions of private Men? And how shall I certainly know what is the true Meaning of the Church's Doctrine? They of the Church of Rome are not agreed who it is, that has Authority to de­clare and expound the Do­ctrine of their Church; whe­ther it be the Pope, or a Gene­ral Council; or neither alone, but both together. Or if they were unanimous in this Point, yet how shall I know whether such a particular Person, who possesses the Chair, be a true [Page 54] and lawful Pope; or such a par­ticular Assembly, a true and lawful General Council? Or, Suppose they could satisfie me in this Demand, yet there is no Council now sitting, nor, if there were, could I go to them, or to the Pope, to re­ceive Instruction; nor can the Pope, or a Council, be at lei­sure to satisfie the Demands of every private Enquirer. How then can I be sure that this or that particular Person does both rightly understand, and faithfully propose the Doctrine of the Church to me? Espe­cially, since there have been, and still are, eminent Mem­bers of the Church of Rome, who have accused each other of corrupt Doctrine, and even [Page 55] of Heresie it self. But, Third­ly and Lastly, There do ap­pear to me to be much stronger Arguments to prove that the Church of Rome has actually erred, and corrupted the Do­ctrine of Jesus Christ, (in the Case of Transubstantiation, and some other her Tenents,) than any that can be brought, to prove her to be infallible. And until I can be otherwise convinced, I cannot but con­clude, That to follow the Gui­dance of the Roman Church, is not the way to embrace the true and pure Doctrine of Jesus.

XXII. Some there are who tell me, that, to find out the true and genuine Doctrine of Jesus, I must have recourse to the Tradition of the Church: [Page 56] And thus they set forth the Matter. First, They suppose that the true and genuine Do­ctrine of Jesus was undoubted­ly taught by his Apostles, and first Disciples. Secondly, That if any one did, or should have gone about to spread any false or spurious Doctrine, whilst these Apostles and Disciples were yet alive; They who were sent on purpose, by Je­sus, to preach his Doctrine, and were owned, and submit­ted to accordingly by all Chri­stian Churches, both could and would immediately con­vince all Churches of the false­ness and spuriousness of such pretended Doctrine. Third­ly, That the Doctrine of Jesus being in all Churches publick­ly [Page 57] and constantly taught and preached, every succeeding Age and Generation must needs know, and could not possibly be ignorant, what their Fathers, and immediate Predecessors owned and taught as such. Fourthly, That there­fore, if, at any time whatsoe­ver, any new or spurious Do­ctrine was, or should be, ven­ted, by any Person or Persons, as the Doctrine of Jesus, all Christians must presently know that this was none of his Doctrine, because it was not taught them as such, by their immediate Predecessors. Fifthly, That therefore it is impossible that any new and spurious Doctrine could ever be broached in the World, as a [Page 58] part of the Doctrine of Jesus, but it must needs meet with great Opposition: For all Chri­stians do maintain, That it is a Sin to teach, or knowingly to own, any thing as the Doctrine of Jesus, which is not really so. Sixthly, That however some Men, out of Pride or Interest, may own and contend for any such novel Doctrines, yet it is impossible that any such Do­ctrine should ever come to be universally received by the whole Church, except we could suppose, either that the whole Church should joyn to­gether to involve themselves and their Posterity for ever in a Sin; or else, that a few Men, who first should vent an Opi­nion, could so impose upon the [Page 69] whole World, as to make them believe, that what they all must know to be a new and upstart thing (because they re­ceived it not from their Fa­thers and Predecessors) was a part of the ancient Doctrine of Jesus, which was all along, from Hand to Hand, delive­red down to them: Both which things are absurd to conceive or imagine. And Lastly, That no part of the Doctrine of Jesus, once deli­vered, could ever be oblite­rated, or wholly forgot in the World; because every Age of Christians, from the very first, who undoubtedly received the whole and entire Doctrine of Jesus, knew themselves to be indispensably obliged, both by [Page 60] God's Command, and also by that Love and Charity which they owed to their Posterity to teach the same full and en­tire Doctrine which they re­ceived, unto their Children and those who were to come after them. Go therefore to the Church (that is, to the Church of Rome, say the Pa­pists; to the Universal Church, i. e. to all Christians, say some Protestants,) and see what are the Doctrines which are, and have been universally main­tained; of whose Beginning no other Account can be given, but that Jesus and his Apostles taught them to the World: And there you have the entire and uncorrupted Doctrine of Jesus. But to this I answer, [Page 61] That, indeed, where there is an universal, or a very large and general Tradition concer­ning any thing; and where; from the nature of the thing it self, it appears to be highly ra­tional and probable, that there is not, or could not be, any Errour or Mistake in the mat­ter; in such a Case as this, no Man, I think, but an obstinate Sceptick, will offer to with­stand the Evidence of such a Tradition. But, let a Tradi­tion be ever so general, or even universal; yet, if it can be shewn, that there is not only a possibility, but also a fair like­lihood, and probability, that there may be a mistake in the business; then, I think, no Man can justly be blamed, if [Page 62] he refuses or suspends his As­sent, until the Testimony of such a Tradition be cleared and vindicated from those ra­tional Prejudices and Excepti­ons which may lie against it. Now, if it were so, that all Errours and Mistakes did ever immediately appear in their perfect Form, and full Growth, at their very Beginning; then it were most rational to con­clude, that all Men must needs take notice of their first Ap­pearance; and consequently, that, in all likelihood, any such Error must needs meet with many more Opponents, than Abettors. But, on the contra­ry; it may well be supposed, that Errours may have sprung up in the World, from such [Page 63] small beginnings, and by such slow and unperceivable de­grees, that, after some Ages, it may be impossible for a Man to discover them to be Errours, except he has some other Rule, besides Tradition, to try them by; viz. either the Rule of common Reason, or some an­cient and unaltered Writing. As for Example; It is not ra­tional to conceive, that, in the first Ages of Christianity, they who preached and writ popu­lar Discourses, might, very in­nocently, and to good purpose, make use of Rhetorical Flights, and Figurative Expressions, to strike the Fancies, and move the Affections of the People to Vertue and Piety? And is it not likely enough, That those [Page 64] who came after them, might not only strive to imitate, but also to out-do them, in bolder Flights, and more strained Schemes of Expression? And is it not also probable enough, That, in long process of Time, Ignorance, generally over­spreading the Face of the World, and being joyned with a profound Veneration for those ancient Preachers and Writers, might begin to inter­pret some of these Rhetorical and Figurative Expressions in a Literal and Logical Sence; and then conceive, that such their Interpretations were real­ly and truly the ancient Do­ctrines delivered down to them? Especially if we consi­der, that there may have been [Page 65] some Men of great Power and Repute in the World, who might have taken a pride and delight, or whose Interest it might have been, to amuze the People with mysterious Notions and Fancies, and to keep them ignorant of the Truth. And thus it appears to be, not only possible, but al­so probable enough, That Er­rours and Mistakes, as to the ancient Doctrine of Jesus, might come to be generally received, without any conside­rable or notorious Opposition given to them; or that such Opposition might soon be sup­pressed and over-ruled by the Power and Reputation of such prevailing Men. From all which I cannot but conclude, [Page 66] That though the general Tradi­tion or Testimony of the Church may be a good Help, yet it may not always be a certain Rule, to lead me to the entire, and unal­tered Doctrine of Jesus.

XXIII. Other there are, who tell me, That, to find out the true and entire Doctrine of Jesus, I must apply my self to the holy Scripture; that is to say, to the Books commonly called the Old, and the New Testament. And because I look upon this to be the right Way, I shall briefly and plainly deli­ver my Thoughts, in relation to these Books. And first, of the New Testament. That the New Testament, as it was ex­tant in the Greek Toegue, has been ever universally owned [Page 67] by all Christians, as contain­ing a true (though some deny it to be a full) Account of the Life and Doctrine of Jesus, is a thing so notorious, and so universally acknowledged, that I cannot find the least Ground or Reason to question it. Now the History and Doctrine of Jesus being so well known un­to the first Christians, by the Preaching of the Apostles and Disciples; and they being so ready, upon all Occasions, to lay down their Lives for the Truth of Christianity; it can­not be imagined that ever they would so readily and univer­sally receive and own such a Book, if it had contained any thing in it which was disso­nant from that Doctrine which [Page 68] they had received. It is con­fessed, indeed, that some of those Books which make up the Volume of the New Testa­ment, (that is to say, the Epi­stle to the Hebrews, that of St. James, the Second of St. Pe­ter, that of St. Jude, the Se­cond and Third of St. John, and the Revelations,) were not so soon, and so universally re­ceived, throughout the Chri­stian Church, as the rest of the Books were. The Reason of which, apparently, was not, That these Books contained a­ny thing in them contrary to what was delivered it the o­ther Books of the New Testa­ment, (for he that reads the whole, will plainly find, that there is a very compleat Agree­ment [Page 69] between them; the only seeming Discord, of St. Paul's Justification by Faith, and St. James's Justification by Works, being exactly and fully recon­ciled, by considering, That St. Paul means no other Faith, but such as worketh by Love, Gal. 5. 6. and St. James, no other Works, but such as pro­ceed from Faith, Jam. 2. 22.) But because it was not at first universally known, who were the Authors of them. Which abundantly shews the Care and Caution of the Christian Church, in not being hasty to receive and admit any Books, as authentick Records of their Doctrine, without very good Warrant for so doing. And therefore, since these same [Page 70] Books were, in a very little time after, received, and own­ed to be of equal Authority with the rest of the New Testa­ment; I cannot but from thence conclude, That those Churches which, at the first, doubted concerning those Books, did soon receive most full and am­ple Satisfaction in that matter, from those who had before re­ceived them. I conclude there­fore, That the Book of the New Testament, as it was extant in the Primitive Times, in the Greek Tongue, did contain a true Account of the Doctrine of Je­sus.

XXIV. That innumerable Copies of the New Testament were, in a very little time, dispersed through all places [Page 71] where Christianity was plan­ted; That it has heen, at diffe­rent times, and in very distant places, translated into all (or almost all) Languages; And that Copies, both of the Origi­nal, and many of the several Translations, have been pre­served with much Care, in a great many distant Parts of the World, is allowed by all, and denied by none. From whence I think we may ga­ther, First, That where the Gene­rality of the Greek Copies of the New Testament do agree in the very same Words, there we have, undoubtedly, the true and authen­tick Words of the New Testa­ment. For, although some Mistakes might creep into some Copies, either through [Page 72] the Wickedness or Negligence of some particular Men; yet, where so many Copies of a Book have been so carefully preserved, and in such distant Parts of the World, it is not to be imagined, that the self­same Errour, in any Expres­sion, should ever be propaga­ted through the Generality of them. Secondly, That where the Words or Expressions of di­vers Greek Copies do differ one from another; yet if the Sense and Meaning be exactly the same in all, or almost all; there we have certainly the true Sense and Meaning of the New Testa­ment. For it is easie to ap­prehend, that a Transcriber might, by a small Mistake, put one Word or Expression of the [Page 73] same Signification, in stead of another: But that the same Sense should be punctually preserved in all, or almost all, Copies is not to be imagined, except it were the true Sense delivered from the Beginning. Thirdly, That if there may be found any different Readings in divers Copies of the New Te­stament, which disagree in Sense, as well as in Words, (which scarce ever happens in any thing which is accounted a material Point of Religion) then it seems to be most fit and proper to admit of that Reading and Sense which best agrees with the Tenour of the whole; with the ancientest, and best esteemed Translations; and with the evi­dent Principles of sound Reason. [Page 74] And if any place be so obscure, as that none of these Ways will afford any Light into its Mean­ing, then I think that no stress ought to be laid upon it in any ne­cessary part of Religion.

XXV. But some will de­mand, How are we sure of the Sense and Meaning, even of those places of the New Testa­ment, where there is no diffe­rence about the Words? In Answar to this, I have already shewn, (§. 21.) that we are not to follow the Guidance of the Church of Rome, to know the true Doctrine of Jesus; Nor therefore, consequently, to know the true Meaning of the New Testament, in which his Doctrine is owned to be contained. I have shewn also, [Page 75] (§. 22.) That though general Tradition may be a good Help, yet may it not always be a cer­tain Rule to lead one to the unaltered Doctrine of Jesus; nor therefore, consequently, to the true and genuine Interpre­tation of the New Testament. Since therefore there is no o­ther way to be found, I con­clude, That the New Testa­ment is to be interpreted the same way that other Books are; that is, by considering the Sense and Property of the Words and Sentences, and the ordinary Figures of Speech, as they are commonly used in the same Book, and in others written in the same Lan­guage, and about the same, time; together with the Scope, [Page 76] Drift, Coherence, and Occa­sion of the Discourse. To which End, every Man that is learned, being bound to use his best Endeavour to know the Will of God, (as I have shewn, §. 14.) is obliged, according to the measure of his Learning, to consult Lexicons, Commenta­tors, and ancient Writers, and to use all other Helps; that he may both satisfie himself, and also be able to inform others.

XXVI. But perhaps I shall be told, That when a Man has done all this, to the best of his power▪ yet, after all, he may be mistaken; as it appears, that many Learned Men are; since [...] oppose and contradict one another about the Meaning of the New Testament. To this Ian­swer, [Page 77] That since I have shewn, (§. 3.) that all necessary things (whether as to Belief, or Pra­ctice) in Religion, are easie to be understood; I must from hence conclude, That a sober and honest Enquirer cannot easily be mistaken in the Interpretation of those places of the New Te­stament, which do contain any necessary part of Religion. And as for other parts and passages of it; if Men would be but peaceable, (which is plainly enough commanded in the New Testament,) their Mistakes about them could do no harm. And, again; Since I have shewn, (§. 14.) That God re­quires no more from a Man, but his best Endeavours to know and perform his Will; [Page 78] I do hence conclude, That if a Man be mistaken in his Inter­pretation even of any such place as contains some necessary part of Religion; yet, if this Mistake be purely an Errour of the Ʋn­derstanding, and does not pro­ceed from any Neglect, or wilful Fault of the Person so mistaking; God will never be offended with him for it. And then, What hurt can there be in such a Mi­stake as this?

XXVII. But it may be de­manded, What shall they do to find out the Meaning of the New Testament. who do not understand any thing of the Greek, which is the only au­thentick Language of this Book? Which is evidently the Case of much the greatest part [Page 79] of Mankind. I answer, That he who is ignorant of the Greek Tongue, being yet obliged to use his best Endeavour, (§. 14.) must do the best he can, by read­ing some Translation, or Tran­slations of it; (or, if he cannot read himself, by hearing them read;) and by asking and en­quiring from such of his Ac­quaintance as he believes to be Persons of Sincerity and Know­ledge, to know what is the Sense and Doctrine of the New Te­stament, and the Will of God therein contained. And, since God requires no more from any Man, but his best Endeavour, (§. 14.) it follows, That if such a Man be mistaken, and cannot help it, God will not be offended with him neither for it.

[Page 80]XXVIII. And one thing more let me add, for the sake of those who are not skilled in the Greek Tongue; viz. That since there have many Tran­slations been made of the New Testament, most of them by Persons well skilled in Lan­guages, of good Repute for their Honesty and Integrity, and who could not but know before-hand, that their Tran­slations would be narrowly sif­ted and examined by learned Men; (which must needs make them careful to commit as few Faults as they could;) and since all those things which God requires from Men, must needs be easie enough to be understood, (§. 3.) and therefore easie to be translated and ex­pressed [Page 81] in any Language; I cannot but conclude, That a so­ber and impartial Enquirer may be very well assured of the Do­ctrine of Jesus, even from the Translations of the New Testa­ment, though he does not under­stand the Greek Original. And, for as much as I can understand of the matter, if Men did stand only upon the honest and downright Sense and Meaning of plain Places, (which only can stive us good Assurance in Religion,) and would not quarrel about critical Niceties in such Texts as are confessed­ly obscure, I believe there is scarce any Translation of the New Testament so defective, but might be a sufficient Guide to any sober Man, to [Page 82] lead him to the Doctrine of Jesus.

XXIX. Having thus spoken what I designed of the New Testament, I come to say some­thing of the Old. And here, that the Jews, in the Days of Jesus, had among them a Book, written in the Hebrew, and some small part of it in the Chaldee-Tongue, which we now call the Old Testament, which they called the Holy Scripture, and esteemed as the Word of God, is a thing be­yond dispute. That this Book was owned and acknowledg­ed, quoted and referred to, and all People exhorted and encou­raged to search and study it, as the Word of God, both by Je­sus himself, and also by his Di­sciples, [Page 83] is most evident to any one who reads the New Testa­ment. From whence I must conclude, That the Doctrine of that Book, as it was then extant, is to be esteemed as part of the Doctrine of Jesus; and that those Laws and Commands which are there to be found, are to be kept and observed by all Chri­stians, the Followers of Jesus; except where it can be shewn that Jesus has freed us from the Ob­ligation of them.

XXX. Moreover, since this Book has been Translated into as many Languages, and as many Copies of the Original have been carefully kept, in distant Parts of the World, as of the New Testament; I do conclude, That the very same [Page 84] things which just now were said concerning the Words, the Mean­ing, and Way of interpreting the New Testament, will hold good concerning the Old Testament also, as far as they can be accom­modated to it.

XXXI. There are some cer­tain Books and Fragments, which among the Protestants are well known by the Name of Apocryphal, to which the Pa­pists give the Title of Deutero­canonical. These Pieces the Pa­pists contend to be a real part of the Old Testament, and of equal Authority with the other Books of it: But the Prote­stants will not allow their Au­thority to be sacred, although they grant that there are many useful and profitable things [Page 85] contained in them. Now, he that is not able to search into Antiquity, for the Resolving of this Controversie, may by another way be satisfied about it. For, since the Jews (from whom the Christians original­ly received the Scriptures of the Old Testament) do all of them, and ever did, unani­mously reject these same Apo­cryphal Books and Fragments, as being no part of their Holy Scripture; I think it may from hence be sufficiently conclu­ded, That, as to the Controver­sie about the Apocryphal Scri­pture, the Protestants are in the right, and the Papists in the wrong. And yet, if the Au­thority of those Pieces were as great as the Papists would [Page 86] have it, I see not how it could make any Alteration in my Religion. For I do not find any thing in them, but what is easily reconcilable with the rest of the holy Scripture.

XXXII. But there are some Difficulties which seem to arise concerning what I have dis­coursed, to which it will be necessary to give a full and satisfactory Answer. And, First, If all be granted that has hitherto been said; yet, how shall I be sure that the Book of the holy Scriptures contains, not only truly, but also fully and entirely, the Doctrine of Jesus; so that nothing is to be esteemed as a part of his Reli­gion, but what is contained in the Scripture? To this I [Page 87] might answer, That there are several Passages in the Scri­pture it self, which do give us to understand, that the whole Law and Will of God, as far as it is needful for Man to know them, are contained in those holy Writings; (as the Prote­stant Divines do sufficiently make appear, in the Manage­ment of this Controversie a­gainst the Papists.) But, wa­ving this, I think it is enough to say, That it is not, indeed, impossible in it self, but that Je­sus might have made known other Particulars of Doctrine, and of the Will of God, besides what is consigned to us by the Scripture. And if any Man can effectually prove, that any such Doctrine or Precept was delivered by him; [Page 88] I think, that whosoever is con­vinced of the Proof, ought to be­lieve that Doctrine, and obey that Precept, which appear to be so delivered. But he that does his hearty and sincere Endeavour to find out the Doctrine and Will of God, delivered to Man by Je­sus, and is not able, with all his Diligence, to discover any more of it, than what is recorded in the Scripture; if he faithfully keeps and observes as much of it as he is able there to discover, it is plain that God requires no more from him, (§. 14.) and therefore certainly will not punish him, for want of any thing farther.

XXXIII. Secondly, It may be objected, That in Reading these Books, there do appear to be some Passages which are in [Page 89] themselves absurd, and contra­ry to the plain Dictates of eve­ry Man's Reason and Under­standing; and some which are irreconcileable with one ano­ther. Now, that the Doctrine of Jesus is certainly true, must be allowed, because it is con­firmed by God. That both parts of a Contradiction can­not be true, is acknowledged by all Men: And no Man, I think, can own that for a Truth, which is contrary to the plain Dictates of his Rea­son and Understanding; which to every Man is, and must be, the Standard of all Truth whatsoever. For there can be no Reason why any Man receives and owns any thing for a Truth, but only because [Page 90] he apprehends it to be confor­mable unto the plain and self­evident Notions which are al­ready planted in his Mind. Here then it may be deman­ded how it canbe possible that these Scriptures should contain the true and uncorrupted Do­ctrine and Religion of Jesus? To this I answer: First, That I cannot find any appearance of a Contradiction, throughout the Holy Scriptures, in any Point of Doctrine, or Rule of Manners, but what is so easie and obvious to be reconciled, that no Man, I think, of Candour and Inge­nuity, but would be ashamed to object it. Secondly, And, as for those few seeming Discor­dances, which do occurr in the Circumstances of some Historical [Page 91] Narrations; though I, perhaps, am not able to reconcile them, yet it may be that the things themselves may not be absolutely irreconcilable. But suppose they were, yet it is no derogation to the Truth of the History, (as to the main substance of it, ) or of the Doctrine contained in the holy Scriptures, that some of the Sacred Writers have been mista­ken in the Relation of some small and inconsiderable Circumstan­ces. There are several Histo­rians and Chroniclers, which give an Account of the Life and Reign of many of our Kings of England; and al­though they differ in many Circumstances of things, yet this was never made an Argu­ment to doubt of the Truth of [Page 92] the main History, wherein they all agree. And why may not the Scripture-Historians be as favourably censured as all other Historians in the World are? Thirdly, There are ma­ny things which are above my Reason and Understanding which I cannot comprehend in my Mind, nor frame a clear and distinct Notion of; which yet I cannot say, are contrary to my Reason: Because (though they are above my reach, yet) I do not find that they do con­tradict any of those plain and self-evident Principles which are implanted in my Under­standing. For Example, I am not able distinctly to appre­hend how the smallest Particle of Matter, which can be as­signed, [Page 93] is yet in it self capable of being for ever divided; so that no part of Matter, though ever so small, can ever be so much as convinced to be abso­lutely invisible. And yet this is so far from being contrary to my Reason, that my Rea­son it self does fully satisfie me that the thing is so, though I am not able to comprehend the manner of it. The same thing also may be said concerning the necessity of some thing be­ing without any Beginning. (of which, see §. 5, 6.) Now if I meet with any thing in Scri­pture which is thus above my Reason, but not contrary to it, I cannot refuse my Assent unto it. (I mean always, upon a Sup­position that the Words do ap­pear [Page 94] evidently to carry such a Sense.) For I cannot conclude such a thing to be impossible: Because I do not find it contra­ry to my Reason, though a­bove it. And if it be a thing in my Apprehension possible, I must believe it to be true, when I find that God has de­clared it so to be. Other things, again, there are, which are directly contrary unto those self-evident Notions and Principles, which my Reason finds to be connatural with it self. For Example; That a Part is equal to the Whole; and such like Absurdities. Now, if any such Propositions as these, which are contrary to my Reason, should occurr to me in Scripture, I cannot possibly believe them to [Page 95] be true in a Literal Sense; (for that were to renounce the clear Dictates of my Reason and Understanding, upon which the Certainty of all things which I believe or know, is ul­timately built; and without which, I could have no Cer­tainty of the Being of God, or the Truth of any Religion;) and therefore I must needs under­stand them to be meant figura­tively. And that Figure which best agrees to such Words, ac­cording to the most common Custom of Speech, and is most conformable to common Sense and Reason, I think, is always to be preferred. I never read any Book, to my knowledge, but in it I found many Ex­pressions which, taken literally [Page 96] and strictly, were absurd and ridiculous; but, taken figura­tively, as 'tis evident they were intended, did contain very good Sense and Meaning. Since then the Holy Scriptures were written in such Words and Expressions as were com­monly used among Men in Speaking and Writing, why should we think that strange in them, which is so usual in all other Books?

XXXIV. Thirdly, It may be objected, That this Doctrine which I have taught, leaves every Man entirely to his own Reason and Understanding, to find out the true Religion, and the Way to Heaven. Now, since there is so great a diffe­rence between the Notions and [Page 97] Sentiments of different Men, it must needs follow, that, all Men being left wholly to themselves, there must neces­sarily be great Variety, and e­ven Contrariety, of Opinions among them concerning Reli­gion. And if God requires no more from every Man, but to do his best Endeavour, and to chuse that way which he thinks to be the truest; from hence it will follow, That two Men who are contrary one to another in the Point of Reli­gion, may yet both be in the right Way to Heaven; and a Turk, or a Heathen, may be sa­ved, as well as a Christian, if they are but strongly persua­ded that they are in the right. I answer; First, That if the [Page 98] Objection means, that I leave every Man to his own Reason and Understanding, without any other help, to find out the Trut of Religion, it is a mis­take. For I have asserted, That every Man, according to the Measure of his Learning, ought to make use of all the Means and Helps he can, to understand the Scriptures, and the Will of God. (See §. 14. and §. 25.) But if the Meaning be, That I leave every Man to chuse that Religion which, after a serious Enquiry, appears to him to be the best; (which is all that I contend for;) In this I say no more than what all Men must, and do, say, as well as I. For, either a Man must never enquire into the [Page 99] Truth of his Religion at all, (and then he chuses his Reli­gion by mere chance; and since there are many false Re­ligions, and but one true, 'tis great odds but he lights upon a wrong one;) Or, if he does enquire. either he must chuse that which he thinks not to be the best, (and then he acts against his Conscience,) or that which he thinks is the best; Which is what I assert, and what every Man of Sense professes himself to do. Se­condly, As there are many Dif­ferences in the Notions and Sentiments of Men, concern­ing those things which are, in some measure, abstruse and ob­scure; so, on the other side, there are many things so appa­rent, [Page 100] and evident, that Men who are sincere and unbyassed, if they have but common Sense, can never differ about them: Amongst which, I think, I may reckon all those things which God requires of necessity to any Man's Salva­ton (§. 3.) And whereas the World has, for these many Years, found, that compelling Men to this or that Religion, contrary to their own Senti­ments, has been so far from be­getting Unity of any sort, that, on the contrary, it has even di­stracted Mankind, not only with Variety of Opinions, (each Party taking a delight to thwart other,) but also with War and Confusion; If every Man were left to himself, to [Page 101] follow what Religion he plea­ses, (as he shall answer to God for his Sincerity,) it is very probable that most Men, ha­ving no Worldly Interest to serve by this or that Religion, would in time, be brought to agree in all the great and ne­cessary Truths of Religion; which are plain and evident to every sober and inquisitive Per­son. And as for things not ab­solutely necessary, and of an inferiour sort, (as I have said, §. 26.) if Men would be but peaceable, their Mistakes, and consequently their Differences about them, could do no great harm. But if Men will still differ even about the essential and necessary Parts of Reli­gion, I know no Remedy for [Page 102] it upon Earth; but must re­fer the Matter wholly to the Judgment of God in Heaven. Thirdly. I do not maintain, That he who is in an Errour, that is, a Turk, or an Heathen, (whatsoever the strength and sincerity of his Persuasion may be,) is in as sure a Way to Heaven and Salvation, as he who is an Orthodox-Man, and a Christian. How God will deal with those that are mista­ken, and cannot help it, I do not determine. All that I would insinuate (§. 14.) is, That he will not punish any Man for any Errour, or Mis­take, which he falls into, through a pure Desect of his Understanding, and not through any Fault or Neglect [Page 103] of his Will. But how far he will reward such a Person for his good Meaning, is more than I can tell.

XXXV. Fourthly, It may be objected, That this Doctrine does, in effect, undermine and enervate the Force and Power of all Civil Government, by opening a Way for all Male­factors to escape Punishment, how great soever their Crimes may be. If such a Person should plead thus for himself, That he was fully persuaded in his Mind and Conscience, that it was the Will of God, that he should commit such a Thest, or Murther, of which he is accused; and that there­fore, according to this Do­ctrine, it was his Duty, in the [Page 104] sight of God, to act according to this Persuasion; The Ma­gistrate, who knows not the Hearts of Men, can never be able certainly to discover, but that this is a real Truth, that he was so persuaded. And if every Man, in all the Duties of Religion, is bound to act ac­cording to his own Sense and Persuasion of Things; with what Conscience can a Magi­strate punish such a Person for that Fact, which, for ought he knows, it was his Duty to commit? I will not say, but that it may so fall out, that a Man may think it to be his Du­ty to commit the most horrid Villanies, since Jesus Christ himself assures his Disciples, That the Time would come, [Page 105] that whoso killed them, would think he did God Service, Joh. 16. 2. And how far God Al­mighty will be merciful unto such Persons who commit such Facts out of pure Ignorance, and not out of Malice, I had rather St. Paul should deter­mine than I. (See 1 Tim. 1. 13.) But to the Objection, I think it sufficient to answer, That the Civil Magistrate, as well as other Men is bound to act according to the clearest Conviction, and strongest Per­suasion of his own Mind. If therefore, upon the Examina­tion of all Circumstances, he be well satisfied, and really be­lieves, that such a Plea from a Malefactor is no real Truth; but only a mese Trick, and Pre­tence, [Page 106] in hopes to escape Pu­nishment; he ought to take no notice of it, but to pro­nounce his Sentence according to the Law. But that which comes up close to the Obje­ction, and which, I think, is the fullest and truest Answer, is this; viz. That the Civil Magistrate has nothing to do to enquire or regard how the Mat­ter stands between God and the Conscience of the Transgressor of the Law of the Land; so as to be thereby any way influenced in the Passing his Judgment. It is enough to him, if he be well and throughly convinced, that the Laws by which he acts are no way contrary to the known Law of God. There are many Cases where­in [Page 107] a Man offends highly a­gainst the Law of God, in which the Civil Magistrate has no Power to inflict any Punishment on the Offender; because the Fault which he may have committed, does not, it may be, any way tend to the damage or disturbance of the Civil Society; Which, and which only, is committed to the Care of the Magistrate. Such, for Example, are many Acts of Covetousness, or of Prodigality, and other Sins; against which it is not possi­ble to provide by any Humane Laws. And, on the other side, There are some Cases, where­in a Man may stand absolved before the Tribunal of God, and yet be very justly condem­ned [Page 108] by the Magistrate. Thus, for instance, If a Man has committed Theft or Murther, and, upon a sincere and hearty Repentance, has obtained the Pardon of his Sins from God; yet, nevertheless, if such a Per­son be accused, and legally convicted, of such Crimes be­fore the Civil Magistrate; He not only may, but ought to put the Law of the Land in Exe­cution agninst him, though he believes him to be ever so pe­nitent; That it may be a Ter­rour unto others. For, if this ought not to be done, every Malefactor, by a pretence of Repentance, (which cannot certainly be discovered by any but God,) might escape the Lash of the Law: By which [Page 109] Means all wicked Men would be encouraged to commit all sorts of Crimes. Thus also when the Children of Israel were commanded by God to conquer the Land of Canaan, we read how they sent Spies to make a Discovery of the Land, that they might the more easily invade it. Now it is most certain, that these Spies did nothing but what they had God Almighty's Warrant for; and yet, if they had been ta­ken by any of the Canaanitish Magistrates, and legally con­victed of their Design; Who doubts but that it had been lawful for them to have pu­nished them, according to the Law of War, and the Law of Nations? For it is none [Page 110] of the Magistrates Business, to enquire who keeps or trans­gresses the Laws of God; (for the Law of God extends to many Cases, where the Magistrate's Authority has nothing to do;) but they who transgress the Laws of the Land, and thereby disturb the Peace of the Common­wealth, are, upon a due Con­viction, to be punished by the Magistrate, (without any farther Enquiry;) it being his Business to do every thing which appears to be necessa­ry for the Preservation of the Weal-Publick, provided that he does nothing which is con­trary to the known Laws of God, who is the supreme King and Lord of all.

[Page 111]XXXVI. But Fifthly, it will be objected, That what­ever becomes of the civil Ma­gistrate's Power, yet this Doctrine which here is taught, must certainly defeat and can­cel all that Authority with which the Church is endowed and invested. For, though the civil Magistrate has no more to look after but only the Peace and Preservation of the Common-Wealth; yet surely it is the Duty of the Church to take Cognizance of those things which are com­mitted merely against the Law of God. But how can the Church call any Man to an Account for any Sin or Transgression, when a Man may plead for himself, That he [Page 112] thought it was his Duty; which Plea, if really true (and who but God can disprove it?) is sufficient according to this Doctrine, to justifie him be­fore God; and consequently to indemnifie him from all Censures of the Church. To this I answer, That the Au­thority of the Church (i. e. of a Christian Society) is two­fold: viz. Either that Au­thority wherewith it is inve­sted immediately by God, or that which is conferred on it by the civil Laws and Consti­tutions of the Kingdom or Commonwealth. The latter of these is a civil Authority, though exercised by Ecclesi­astical Persons, because it is derived altogether from the [Page 113] civil Power, And therefore, the Consideration of it must be referred to what is but now said touching the civil Magi­strate. But as for that Au­thority which is given to the Church immediately by God; it is evidently no more than this, viz. An Authority to preach the Gospel, and to per­swade Men every where to receive it; and an Authority to exclude those Men out of the Society (that is, out of the visible Communion of it) who do not profess the true Chri­stian Faith, and live accor­ding to the Christian Law. Other Authority than this does not appear to be given to the Church by God. And no­thing that I have said, does in [Page 114] the least tend to abridge them any way as to the Exercise of this Power. The Church may and ought to preach the Gospel, and perswade men to embrace it. And however any Man may be excused before God by invin­cible Ignorance, yet he is not to be suffered in the visible Commu­nion of the Church, if he does not believe and live as a Chri­stian.

XXXVII. Sixthly, it may be objected that I have several times in this Discourse made use of a Distinction, which Distinction is nevertheless ren­der'd altogether useless and impertinent by the main De­sign of the Discourse it self. The Distinction is between necessary Matters of Religion [Page 115] and such as are not necessary. (which is referred to, [...]. 26. and elsewhere) But if no Man can be obliged in any Matter of Religion, any farther than to do his best Endeavour, from thence it must follow, That all things are alike neces­sary in Religion. For whatso­ever is within a Man's Power, according to this Doctrine, is necessary for him; and what­soever is not within his Power is not necessary; so that the very same thing may be ne­cessary in Respect of one Man, and not necessary in Respect of another; which confounds the Distinction and renders it useless. To this I answer, That by things necessary I mean all such as it is a Sin for a Man [Page 116] to be ignorant of, if the Know­ledge of them be within his Power. Such as are, That Je­sus is the Son of God, That God is to be worshipped, &c. By things not necessary, I mean, Such as a Man is not obliged so much as to search after; the lg­norance whereof shall not be ac­counted sinful before God, al­though it might have been in a Man's Power to have known them. Such are a great many curious Speculations, which Divines do trouble themselves and the World with; which they themselves do yet con­fess, are not necessary to any Man's Salvation; and conse­quently, which a Man is no more obliged to trouble his Head with, than with any [Page 117] Problems, either in Geometry, or Natural Philosophy.

XXXVIII. Seventhly, It may be objected, That this Doctrine must needs encou­rage Men to continue in their Ignorance, and not to take any Care or Pains to inform themselves concerning the Truth of Religion, or any of the Duties of it. For, Why should a Man take any Pains to get more Knowledge, (which will, it may be, bring Trouble in the Practice of it,) when Ignorance is no manner of Bar to his Salvation? For, let him but live according to the Knowledge which he al­ready has, and God, it seems, requires no more from him. To this I answer, That for a [Page 118] Man to act according to the best of his Knowledge, will not serve his turn; except he has used his best Endeavour, by all Means, to know and understand the Will of God as perfectly as He can. (as I have shewn, all Men are bound to do, §. 14.) Which, though it is a Comfort to those who are ignorant, and cannot help it; yet is no man­ner of Encouragement or Ex­cuse for those whose Igno­rance is their own Fault or Neglect.

XXXIX. My Reason ha­ving thus brought me to em­brace the Christian Religion, and directed me where and how to seek for the parti­cular Doctrines of it; it fol­lows now, that I should put [Page 119] this Speculation into Practice; that I would search the Scri­ptures with all the diligence I can, and set my Mind, with all its Faculties, on work, to find out as much as I am able of the Will of God, that I may the better conform my self unto it. This, with God's help, I design speedily to do: And the Re­sult of my Thoughts shall be published to the World, if what I here write prove acceptable. But in the mean time, I think it not improper here to add some general Con­siderations, which may serve as Rules and Guides to me, or to any other Person, who shall set himself upon such an Enquiry; to direct our [Page 120] Judgments aright, to the true Doctrine of Christianity, and to keep us from all Mistakes about it.

XL. First, Then, I take it for granted, That the Chri­stian Religion is calculated for Men of Reason and Un­derstanding; that is, That it is fit to satisfie and convince every sober Man, who se­riously considers the Argu­ments on which it relies; and is not led astray by Pas­sion, by Prejudice, or World­ly Interest. That this is so, appears very evidently from hence; Because both Jesus and his Appostles do appeal to the common Reason and Understandings of Men, to judge of what they taught. [Page 121] Yea, and why, even of your selves, judge ye not what is right? says Jesus, Luk. 12. 57. Prove all things, hold fast that which is good, says St. Paul, 1 Thes. 5. 21. Be ready always to give an An­swer to every one that asketh you a Reason of the Hope that is in you, says St. Peter, 1 Pet. 3. 15. Believe not every Spirit; but try the Spirits, whether they are of God, says St. John, 1 Joh. 4. 1. Hence then I conclude, That there can be nothing in Christian Religion, which contradicts the clear and evident Principles of Natural Reason. For other­wise, a Rational Man could not be a Christian. (See §. 33.)

[Page 122]XLI. Secondly, It appears plain to me, that Christian Religion was calculated, not only, nor chiefly, for Men of great and deep Learning; But also for those of ordina­ry, plain, and mean Capaci­ties: That is to say, That there is nothing necessary in Christianity, but what may be as well understood by e­very ordinary, illiterate Man, as by the greatest Schollars. If this were not so, it would not be possible for an un­learned Man to be as good a Christian as one that is learned: Whereas the con­trary is most apparently de­clared in the New Testament. I thank thee, O Father, be­cause thou hast hid these things [Page 123] from the Wise and Prudent, and hast revealed them unto Babes, says Jesus, Matth. 11. 25. To which, the Words of St. Paul do exactly agree, 1 Cor. 1. 19. to Vers. 7. of the Second Chapter. And the same St. Paul gives us a Caution, That Philosophy should not corrupt our Chri­stianity, Col. 2. 8. And warns Timothy against Science, false­ly so called, 2 Tim. 6. 20. But there is nothing so much as intimated throughout the whole Bible, that Philoso­phy, or any other Humane Learning, will qualifie a Man ever the better, to become a Christian. I confess, indeed, That, as things stand at this time in the World, it is [Page 124] highly convenient that the Teachers and Preachers of Christianity should be com­petently skilled in Humane Learning; that they may be the better able to defend their Religion, and the Pu­rity of it, against those who use so much Art and Skill, either to corrupt, or oppose it. But where a Man sets up, not for a Teacher, but only for a true Believer, it is evident, from what has been said, that he has no need of Scholarship; but on­ly of a plain and sober Un­derstanding, to make him ca­pable of all necessary Instru­ction for a good Christian. Or else, Why should the Go­spel be preached so particularly [Page 125] to the Poor, Matth. 11. 5. who are commonly illiterate? And how should the Poor in this World become so rich of Faith, as St. James tells us? Jam. 2. 5. From whence I think I may conclude, That all such Doctrines, the Ʋnder­standing and Proof whereof de­pend either on the subtile Spc­culations of Humane Philoso­phy, or the Niceties and Cri­ticisms of Grammatical Lear­ning, or the curious Know­ledge of History and Antiqui­ty, are not to be esteemed as necessary Parts of Christiani­ty.

XLII. Thirdly, It is no less evident to me, that the main Design of Jesus, and of his Disciples, whom he sent [Page 126] to preach the Gospel, was, to make Men, not wiser as to Matters of Speculation; but better, and more ver­tuous, as to their Lives and Actions. Knowledge puffeth up; but Charity edisieth, saith St. Paul, 1 Cor. 8. 1. Thus also, Chap. 13. of the same Epistle, he gives us to under­stand, that the Gift of Tongues and of Prophecy, the Understan­ding of all Mysteries, and all Knowledge, and Faith, are of no value before God, with­out Charity. And that by Charity, he means a Life led in the Practice of Ver­tue and Piety, susficiently appears by the Sequel of that Chapter. The same St. Paul tells us, Tit. 2. 13. That the [Page 127] Grace of God that bringeth Salvation, hath appeared unto all Men; (For what End? To make them more wise, more learned, or more losty in their Speculations? No such thing: But,) teaching us, That, denying Ʋngodliness, and Worldly Lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and Godly in this present World. And, to omit a multitude of Texts, which might be al­ledged in so plain a Mat­ter; I shall only add what we are told, Rom. 2. 6, &c. That God will render unto e­very Man according to his Deeds, &c. Which is a plain Demonstration, that it is our Deeds, that is, our Practices, our Live and Conversations, [Page 128] that we are chiefly obliged to take care of. I grant, indeed, that God may, if he pleases, command things that are pure­ly Ceremonial, and such as have no manner of Influence up­on Vertue and Morality; As undoubtedly he did unto the Children of Israel: And if he does command any such things, 'tis certain that we owe Obedience to them by virtue of that Authority which God has over us. He may also reveal such Truths as are merely specu­lative, and have nothing pra­ctical in them: And who­soever is convinced of any such Revelation, is undoubt­edly bound to give his As­sent to the things so revea­led, [Page 129] although they are be­yond the Reach of his Un­derstanding; (as I have said, §. 33.) But from what I have here said, I think I may conclude, That since Vertue and Morality are un­doubtedly the chief Design of Christianity, they ought to be chiefly regarded, and attended to by all Christians. Nor ought any thing which is purely Ce­remonial, or Speculative, to be reckoned as a necessary Part of Christian Religion; except it appears very evidently, that God has revealed, or comman­ded it. Very evidently, I say: For, when a thing is con­ceived in dark and doubtful Expressions, it is very liable to be mistaken; and he that [Page 130] is guilty of such a Mistake, can very hardly be charged with a Fault.

XLIII. Fourthly, That the Knowledge of God Almigh­ty, his Attributes, and his Law, may, in part, be ga­thered from the Light of Na­ture (antecedent to any Re­velation) is evident from Reason, and acknowledged by St. Paul. For the invisi­ble things of him from the Creation of the World are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; even his Eternal Power and Godhead. Rom. 1. 20. (See Psal. 19. 1. ) And when the Gentiles, which have not the Law, do by Nature the thiugs contained in the Law, these [Page 131] having not the Law, are a Law unto themselves; which shew the Work of the Law written in their Hearts, their Con­science also bearing Witness, and their Thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another, Rom. 2. 14, 15. Now although all things re­lating to Religion, which may be known by the Light of Nature, are, I think, a­gain repeated and farther ex­plained by the Holy Scrip­ture; Yet because it may be that this will not appear so plainly to every one, I think it necessary here to Note, That we are obliged to give our Assent to those Truths, and our Obedience to those [Page 132] Laws of of Religion which we are able to discover by our Natural Reason, although the same should not appear to us to be again repeated in Scrip­ture. For, for this very reason St. Paul pronounces the an­cient Gentiles to be without Excuse, because that when they knew God, that is, had some Knowledge of him by their natural Understanding, they glorified him not as God, by owning and obeying him. Rom. 1. 20, 21, &c. And what is it else but an Appeal to the natural Notions of Mankind, when he exhorts us, That whatsoever things are true, what­soever things are honest, whatso­ever things are just, whatsoever [Page 133] things are pure, whatsoever things are Lovely, whatsoever things are of good Report, if there be any Vertue, and if there be any Praise, we should think on these things, Phil. 4. 8.

XLIV. Fifthly, He that writes a Treatise upon any Subject, whatsoever he has a Mind that his Reader should particularly observe and be con­vinced of, he will be sure to lay it down plainly as a main Con­clusion; nor will he fail (if he be discreet) as often as Occasion requires, to repeat and referr to it, that the more Notice may be taken of his Meaning and Design. Such things as are mentioned only occasionally and colla­terally [Page 134] and not as any part of the main Subject of the Dis­course, are not always ex­pressed with so much Care and Exactness, but that of­ten even the meaning of them may be misunderstood. Nor can we be always cer­tain what is the true Sense and Opinion of a Writer, from such accidental Expres­sions; (which sometimes may be used figuratively, some­times by way of Allusion or Accommodation, sometimes with Reference to the Ca­pacity of People, with­out any Regard to the lit­teral Truth of them) except he gives us fome farther Ex­plication of his Mind. From [Page 135] whence I think I may conclude, That the neces­sary Doctrines and Precepts of Christian Religion, are not to be gachered from those collateral and occasional Ex­pressions which are scattered up and down in the Scriptures; but from the main Scope and De­sign of the whole Bible in general, and of each Book of it in particu­lar.

XLV. I have thus briefly and plainly given, I hope, a rational Account of Reli­gion; and of Christianity in general. If I find that what I have here writ is likely to do any good in the World, I shall proceed, with God's Assistance, to draw out and [Page 136] publish a particular Account of the Doctrines to be be­lieved, and Duties to be pra­ctised, by a Christian.

THE CONTINUATION OF A Gentleman's Religion.
Being the Second PART.

1. THE Holy Scriptures being the only au­thentick Record that I am able to find of the Christian Religion, I take it for granted that they do ex­press Divine Matters really and truly as the things are in them­selves: And therefore I can­not [Page 2] but believe that all the Do­ctrin therein delivered is most­certainly true, altho many times I am not able to under­stand the Design and. Mean­ing of some Expressions and Passages which do occur there­in. I think it indeed to be ve­ry proper, that Men of any reasonable Learning and Pru­dence should modestly offer their Thoughts to the World, in order to the explaining of such Places of the Scriptures as appear to be abstruse and diffi­cult: But he who speaks his own Words (and not those of Scrip­ture) can therein only offer his own Apprehensions; to which no Man can be obliged to sub­scribe, any farther than as he is in his own Reason convinced [Page 3] of the Truth of them, and their Consonancy with the Scriptures.

2. I do not apprehend that an implicit Faith is due to the Church of Rome which chal­lenges it (Part 1. §. 21.) much less sure to any other Church which does not re­quire it. When, therefore, any Church, much more when any private Men, do offer me any Do­ctrin of Religion in their own Words, I think I ought to consi­der, First, Whether what they say is intelligible: (For tho we may be obliged to believe such things as are above our Un­derstanding to comprehend, (Part 1. §. 33.) yet it is im­possible for any Man to give an explicit Assent to any Form [Page 4] of Words, if he does not Know the meaning of them.) Secondly, Whether it is agreea­ble to the self-evident Principles of Reason, for, If I apprehend it to be otherwise, it is impos­sible for me to believe it. (Part 1. §. 33.) Nor must a­ny Text of Scripture be inter­preted above the Level of plain and self-evident Reason, what­ever the literal Sense may seem to be. And, Thirdly, whether the Truth of it can be proved by any solid Argument, either from Reason or Scrip­ture: for tho a Doctrin be both intelligible and possible, yet still it may be false; and therefore is not to be believed except it can be proved. These Rules I have endea­voured [Page 5] strictly to observe in the Trial of those Doctrins which I am now about to pro­pose; and I desire my Reader carefully to make use of the same, in the Examination of all that I shall offer unto him. But here I must desire him to take notice, that I do fuppose him to be well acquainted with the Holy Scriptures, and also with the common Arguments, upon which the several Parties of Christians do ground and maintain their Opinions: And therefore, for his Ease, as well as my own, I shall save my self the Labour of mentioning such Argu­ments and Places of Scripture, as are usually brought to prove those Points which are gene­rally [Page 6] acknowledged by all Christians, and even in those Points which are controverted between different Parties, I shall ordinarily think it enough to hint at some of those Texts, and Arguments, which are used on either side; of which I can scarce suppose any Man to be ignorant that is but mo­derately acquainted with the Principles of Christianity, and the several Parties that profess it.

3. To believe what God makes known, and to do what he com­mands, is what all Men call Religion: But things that are impossible, 'tis certain that God requires from no Man (Part 1. §. 14.) When there­fore Damnation is denounced [Page 7] in Scripture against those who receive not the Gospel, it must needs be understood only of them in whose Power it was to have received it; and not of such who are invincibly ignorant; either for want of Capacity, John 9. 41. or of the means of Knowledge, Joh. 15. 22. But for a Man who has both the Capacity and Means of Know­ledge, through Negligence, to continue in Ignorance of God's Will, my Reason tells me is a very great Sin; be­sides all those Places of Scrip­ture which do require us dili­gently to seek after Know­ledge.

4. That there is a God, is sufficiently to be proved from our own Reason and Observa­tion: [Page 8] But fully to comprehend his Nature, or declare in all Points what he is, is by all al­lowed to be impossible to us.

5. That God never had a Begin­ning, I think I have sufficient­ly concluded (Part 1. §. 6.) And, if the holy Scripture had not told me that he is from Everlasting to Everlasting; yet my own Reason would have inferred that he is subject to no Decay, nor ever shall have an Ending.

6. The Nature of every Material Being seems necessa­rily to imply a Possibility of having its Parts disjoyned and separated one from another; and consequently of being dissolved and destroyed: And theresore I conclude, that the [Page 9] eternal God does not consist of Matter; and that Being which is intelligent, and does not consist of any material Parts, I call a Spirit: And this is what I mean when I say that God is a Spirit. As for those Expressions the Eyes of the Lord, the Arm of the Lord, and such like, which do oc­cur sometimes in Scripture, and seem to imply Bodily Parts, it is manifestly obvious that they must be purely me­taphorical.

7. Our Experience does suf­ficiently testifie that whatsoe­ver is visible to us, is ever ma­terial. Since therefore God does not consist of Matter, I conclude that he is invisible to Mortal Eyes, as the Scripture [Page 10] positively declares him to be: And all those Texts which seem to say, that he has been seen by Man, I think must of necessity be interpreted some other way, viz. either, 1. Of an Angel appearing in a glori­ous and majestatick manner: Or 2. Of the eternal Son of God assuming a Bodily Appear­ance, as after he took our Na­ture upon him: Or, 3. Of some visible and extraordinary Signs and Tokens that the in­visible God was there present in an extraordinary Manner: Or, 4. Of those mystical and Hieroglyphical Representati­ons which God has sometimes been pleased to make of him­self, not to the Senses, but to the Imagination and Under­standing [Page 11] of his Prophets, in their extatick Dreams and Vi­sions.

8. Amongst all those things which I can conceive possible to be done, i. e. to imply no Contradiction, I can find no­thing which to me appears more difficult, than what God has already done in the Stru­cture of the Universe: And therefore I conclude, that God can do whatsoever in its self is possible to be done, which is what I mean when I say, that he is Almighty: Nor is there any one, sure, who will venture to say, that God can do such things as imply a Contradiction, either in them­selves, or to his own Nature and Attributes.

[Page 12]9. That God, who made all things, should be ignorant of any thing, appears to me most absurd to imagine. But when I say, that God is Om­niscient; If there is any thing, the Knowledge of which would manifestly imply a Contradiction, it could surely be no greater Irreverence to say, that God could not know, than that he could not do such a thing. But whether the Knowledge of a future Contingent would imply a Contradiction or not, is a ve­ry abstruse and metaphysical Dispute; and except the con­trary can very clearly be made appear, I know not how to imagine that God is, or can be ignorant of any thing [Page 13] past, present, or to come, however contingent.

10. If God were or could be confined to, or circumscri­bed in any determinate Space or Place, it would be hard to conceive that his Knowledge and Power should be infinite, and extend to all Places. But I cannot suppose God to be present in all Places aster the same manner, as the Air is every where present through­out its Region, or the Light throughout its Hemisphere, for that would imply local Ex­tension; and consequently, that he were a material Being, contrary to what I have said, §. 6. But that God can in an instant exert his Power in any, or all Places, whenever he plea­ses, [Page 14] (as the Soul can on a sud­den move the extreamest Joynt of the Body) is, I think, an evident Consequence of his Omnipotence; and that man­ner of Existence whereby he is able to do this, I call Omni­presence; and this is all that I am able to conceive when I say that God is every where pre­sent.

11. That God is most wise, that is to say, most perfectly knows what is always fittest and best to be done, and which is the properest way to bring what he pleases to pass, is an evident Consequence from his Omniscience, or ra­ther indeed a Branch of it.

12. From God's Wisdom it necessarily follows, that his [Page 15] Counsel is unchangeable. For he who alters or repents of any thing, which he has once positively determined, plainly shews his Foresight to be im­perfect, and his Wisdom de­fective. When therefore we meet with some Passages in Scripture which seem to sug­gest that God has decreed one thing, and yet afterwards done another; we must of necessi­ty understand such Decrees to have been not absolute, but merely conditional (a Condi­tion being in many Cases im­plied, and supposed, where it is not in Words expressed.) And when he is said to have repented of some things which he has done, or to have been grieved thereat, we must [Page 16] needs interpret such Places in a metaphorical Sense, with an Allusion to those Motions and Passions in Mankind; just as Hands, Arms, Eyes, &c. are on the same account some­times ascribed unto him, tho really he has no such Mem­bers, no more than he has the Passions, which belong to Men.

13. I do most evidently find in my self a Power to choose at all times what I please, and to determine my own Actions as I will my self: And this I look upon to be a great­er Perfection in me, than if I were absolutely necessitated and determined by somewhat without my self, in every thing which I should do. [Page 17] Since therefore I derive this Perfection originally from God, who is the Contriver and Author of my Being, (Part 1. §. 7.) I cannot but ascribe the same in the highest Degree to him, who must be the Fountain of all Perfection. And therefore I most readily believe that God is a free A­gent; and worketh all things after the Counsel of his own Will.

14. How Justice, in a strict Sense, is to be ascribed unto God, who ows nothing to any one, and has a supreme and most absolute Dominion over all things, as having made them purely at the Mo­tion of his own Will, I look upon to be a nice and useless [Page 18] Disquisition: But the com­mon Rules of Justice, which Men are obliged to observe one to another, to me do ap­pear to be so very reasonable, that I cannot apprehend why any one, of Knowledge and Understanding, should ever va­ry from them, except there­by he might propose either to advance his Interest, compass his Pleasure, or wreck his Malice; neither of which I can imagine to have any Place in God. I therefore conclude that God is Just, even accor­ding to the common Rules of Justice and Equity, as far as they can be applied to him.

15. Veracity to me appears to be no less agreeable to Rea­son [Page 19] than Justice, if it be not rather a Part of it: And since I am able to imagin no Shadow of a Reason why God should declare any thing which were false; I cannot but believe that he is most true in all that he says.

16. That God should hate those Creatures which he has made (except they by their evil Actions and Disobedience do deserve it) is not to be con­ceived: And as he who loves another is always ready to pardon his Faults (especially if they have any way proceed­ed only from Frailty and In­firmity) upon his true and sincere Repentance; so if the Person beloved continues ob­stinate and incorrigible in his [Page 20] Transgressions, he, with all the Reason that can be, sorseits that Love which he once en­joyed, and justly incurs such Penalty as may be suitable un­to the Obligations which he has broken, and the Quality of the Person he has offended. I therefore conclude, That God has originally a Love for all Mankind, and that he will be always merciful unto such Sinners as are truly penitent; but strict and severe in the Punishment of those who go on in the Breach of his Laws without Repen­tance.

17. Nor are those Calamities which so often follow us in this Life, or God's visiting the Sins of the Fathers upon the Children (which can be understood on­ly [Page 21] of temporal Afflictions) or his punishing the wicked with ex­treme and everlasting Misery, any manner of Derogation, ei­ther to his Justice, or his Love and Mercy towards Mankind, since temporal Afflictions may well be looked on as the Ef­fects of his Love, as being de­signed to wean and purge us from the Love and Filth of this World, and to make us more fit for Heaven; and Eter­nal Damnation (of which we have fair warning given us, and may therefore avoid it if we please) is as little as can be threatened (and often is but too little) to keep us back from all manner of Sin and Wickedness.

[Page 22]18. That some sort of Acti­ons are eternally and essenti­ally good, that is to say, to be approved of by every im­partial rational Being (e. g. to love him from whom we derive our Existence, to per­form our Promise, and such like) and that the contrary Actions hereunto are therefore essentially and eternally evil, is to me from hence sufficient­ly evinced, because that if all Beings, which are endowed with Reason and Understand­ing, should universally set themselves to do those things which now are accounted evil, and to omit those things which now are esteemed good; the Consequence of this must necessarily-be uni­versal [Page 23] Confusion and Misery. Now that God loves and ap­proves of all Actions that are good, does evidently appear, because such Actions do tend to the general Happiness of his Creatures, whom he loves, §. 16. and for the contrary Reason it will follow, that he hates and abhors all Actions that are evil. And this is what I mean when I say, That God is most holy.

19. All possible Excellency or Perfection that I can con­ceive, is reducible unto these Five Heads, viz. 1. Perfecti­on of Being, which consists in perpetual Duration, with­out any Decay or Infirmity. 2. Perfection of Understand­ing, which consists in such [Page 24] Knowledg and Wisdom as is free all Mistake or Igno­rance. 3. Perfection of the Will, which consists in a free Liberty to choose or refuse, without any Constraint or fatal Necessity. 4. Perfection of Power, which consists in an Ability to do every thing. And 5. Moral Perfection, which consists in an inflexible Resolution always to do and encourage that which is mo­rally good, and to avoid and discourage whatsoever is mo­rally evil. Now, since all these Perfections are in God in the most absolute manner; as I think I have shewn in the foregoing Paragraphs, from hence it will follow, That God is most absolutely perfect.

[Page 25]20. And since he who is ab­solutely perfect can stand in need of nothing; it must also follow, that God is most per­fectly happy in Himself.

21. As my Reason do's e­vidently demonstrate unto me the Being of a God, so does it not in the least suggest to me any Argument to conclude that there is any more but One God: And it is absurd and un­reasonable to multiply Beings without any Ground or Rea­son for it.

22. That there is a real, and not only a nominal Distin­ction, between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost or Spirit; that they are fre­quently spoken of in the Holy Scriptures in such Terms as [Page 26] we ordinarily use when we speak of Three Persons (al­tho sometimes this Expressi­on, Holy Ghost or Holy Spi­rit, may be put to signifie not so much the Person, as the Power, Effect or Energy of God's Spirit) That, altho the Son be often spoken of as re­ally and truly a Man, yet many things are said of him which cannot agree to a meer Man, or to any created Being whatsoever; and that there are such things also spoken of the Holy Ghost, as cannot be ac­commodated unto a Crea­ture: Moreover, that the Son derives his Being from, and always depends upon the Fa­ther, as the Holy Ghost does from, and upon the Father [Page 27] and the Son: All these things, I say, in my Opinion, are not to be denyed by any one, who will but interpret the Holy Scriptures according to the or­dinary Sense and Signification of the Words thereof, and not according to his own Preju­dices or preconceived Opini­ons. And altho the Socini­ans do clearly enough expound some of those Texts of Scrip­ture, which, with more Zeal than Reason, are sometimes urged against them; yet, as to the principal Passages, which are alleged to prove what I have now asserted. I think their Interpretation of them not only to be harsh and strained (which in a manner is acknowledged even by their [Page 28] own acute and brief Histori­an, in the last Paragraph of his second Letter) but also, many times, to be utterly ir­reconcileable unto the Words and Context. And now (to explain those Conceptions which arise in my Mind upon the Consideration of the Texts here hinted at, as well as, in a Matter so abstruse and remote from my Senses, I am able) since I cannot find a more proper Term to express the Distinction of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost by, I call them Three Persons; and, not know­ing what other Title to give a Divine Person who is no Crea­ture, I call each Person God: But I give the Title of God in a more emphatical manner unto [Page 29] the Father than unto the Son or Holy Ghost, because the Father depends on none, but they do depend on him: And, since both my Reason and the Holy Scriptures do teach me to own no more than one God, I am of necessity compelled to say that these Three are so uni­ted together (tho in such a man­ner as is above my Under­standing) as to be but one God. And altho it argues a great deal of Imperfection in Hu­mane Speech, that, for want of other fit and proper Terms, we are forced to give the same Appellation to each Per­son singly, and to the Three conjointly; yet this does not imply any manner of Contra­diction, as some do object; [Page 30] because, when we apply the Word God to one single Per­son, it has not the same ex­act and adequate Signification, as when we ascribe it unto the Three Persons conjointly (for that would imply that each single Person were, at the same time, the Three Per­sons; and so confound that Distinction which the Holy Scriptures do so often and ap­parently make between them:) And this analogical Difference, in the Signification of the Word God, will easily solve most of those Objections which the Socinians do bring against the Doctrin of the Tri­nity. And because I know no better Word to express that Unity which I apprehend to [Page 31] be between the Three Per­sons; I therefore say, that they are One in Essence or Sub­stance. For Unity of Con­cord or Consent alone, does not seem enough to me to deno­minate them to be One God. And because I find that the Son is said to be begotten, and the Holy Ghost to proceed, or be sent, or emitted; I therefore make use of these Terms, without pretending to assign the Difference between Gene­ration and Procession: And altho the Son and the Holy Ghost, being each of them God, are, and must needs be, of the same Nature, and, upon that ac­count, equal with the Father; yet it is manifest that this Equality must be understood [Page 32] with an Allowance for the ab­solute Independence of the Father, and the Dependence of the Son and Holy Ghost upon him.

23. All the Objections that I can remember to be made against the Doctrin of the Trinity thus stated, I think, are easie enough to be solved by what I have now said, ex­cepting Two, which must be particularly answered. The first is taken from Joh. 10. 33. &c. But tho our Saviour did not here assert his Divinity when there seemed to be occa­sion for it, yet it will not fol­low, that therefore he is not God: Especially if we consi­der, that it was not always his Custom to give full and [Page 33] compleat Answers unto such captious Questions and Ob­jections as were put to him: But sometimes he contented himself only with shewing the Unreasonableness of those who proposed them; of which we have one Instance, Mat. 21. 23. &c. and ano­ther Joh. 8. 3. &c. and, as some think, another, Mat. 22. 17. &c. And we may as well conclude, that he had no Authority for what he did, because he did not declare it when the Chief Priests and El­ders questioned it, Mat. 21. 23. as deny his Divinity, be­cause he did not expresly maintain it, when on that ac­count he was charged with Blasphemy. The other Ob­jection [Page 34] is drawn from Mar. 13. 32. But to it I answer, That our Saviour's Design, in that Place, being only to represent the Day there spoken of as a Secret not to be made known unto Men until it should come upon them; that they might always stand upon their Guard, watch, and prepare for it: Let but the Word know be taken to signifie to make known (which fully an­swers the Design of the Place, and, as it is evident, St. Paul uses the same Word, 1 Cor. 2. 2. Idetermined, says he, not to know, that is, not to make known or teach, any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified: and then the most natural Paraphrase [Page 35] of that Place will be this, But that Day and Hour there is no one who shall or can make known unto you; no not the Angels which are in Heaven; (who may be supposed to be ignorant of it themselves) nor even the Son himself (who altho he know­eth all things, Joh. 21. 17. yet can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do, Joh. 5. 19. And who speaketh not of himself, but the Father which sent him gave him Commandment what he should say, Joh. 12. 49.) But the Father only shall in his own time, make it known by bringing it to pass. And this Exposition of this Place of Scripture (which is the only Text that seems to press very hard upon us in this Contro­versy) [Page 36] I am sure, is much more easie and natural, than many of those Interpretations, which the Socinians do ad­vance, of the principal Passa­ges which we urge against them. But if any one shall tell me, that this whole Mat­ter concerning the Trinity, is very obscure and difficult to be apprehended; and there­fore, that it is unreasonable to require the explicit Belief of such Doctrin, as necessary, either to Salvation or Church­communion: As to the Ob­scurity, it is not to be ex­pected that it should be other­wise, since, in this Life, we know but in part, and prophesie in part, and see but through a Glass darkly, or in a Riddle, as [Page 37] the Margin has it Word for Word from the Original, 1 Cor. 13. 9, 12. As to Church­communion, I shall speak of it hereafter in its proper Place: And as touching Salvation, I refer my Reader to what I have said, §. 3. and Part 1. §. 14. and §. 26.

24. Either the Matter of this visible World did from all Eternity coexist together with God, or else it was produced from Nothing by him, there being no Third Way to be as­signed: Now both these Ways being above, tho nei­ther of them contrary to my Reason; my Reason alone can never solidly determine which of them is the right. But the later of these making [Page 38] most, in my Opinion, for the Honour of God (of whom, as being the most perfect Being, I think I ought to entertain the most glorious Thoughts that possibly I can;) and the Holy Scriptures so often as­cribing Eternity without Be­ginning unto God, in an em­phatical manner, as his alone peculiar Attribute, I am there­by brought to believe, that the Matter of this World is not eternal, but was at first created by God from Nothing; and con­sequently, that God can again annihilate it, or any Part of it, if it should so please him.

25. That God did contrive, frame and fashion this World, and every part of it, and also that he still preserves and go­verns [Page 39] it by his Providence, I have formerly concluded, Part 1. § 7. and §. 10. And tho every ignorant Person is not able to dive into, and fa­thom the Counsels of a great and Sovereign Prince; yet this is no Argument that he does not manage and rule his Dominions with due Care and Wisdom: Nor could the making, nor can the Govern­ment of the World be any manner of Trouble to God (as the Epicureans objected) since he is absolutely Omnipotent, and needs no more but to speak the Word and the thing is done.

26. It is very evident that the Heathen World its self was generally and strongly ad­dicted [Page 40] to the Belief of certain Beings (some good and some evil) superiour in Nature to Man, but subject to, and Mi­nisters of the Will and Plea­sure of the supreme God. But the Holy Scriptures do give us a more full and perfect Ac­count of this Matter, viz. that God created certain Spiri­tual Beings, called Angels; that is to say, Messengers, as being sent forth by him to execute his Will upon all Occasions that he thinks fit; and parti­cularly to minister for them who shall be Heirs of Salvati­on (not that God has any need of their Assistance or Mi­nistry, any more than he has of the Worship and Service of Man; but only thought fit to [Page 41] create them of his own good Will and Pleasure: and pro­bably that they, as well as Man, might be Objects for him to exercise his Goodness and Beneficence upon.) But whether every particular Per­son, State and Kingdom have their proper Guardian Angels, appointed them by God, is not, as I can find, upon any sure Grounds to be determin­ed. But we are farther in­formed, that of these Angels some sinned, and therefore kept not their first Estate, but were cast down into Hell, and deli­vered into Chains of Darkness, to be reserved unto Judgment; the Chief, or Prince of whom is called the Devil, the great Dra­gon, the old Serpent and Sa­tan, [Page 42] and is, together with his Angels, permitted by God to range to and fro in the Earth, to tempt even the Godly, but to prevail and work in the Children of Disobedience.

27. That an eternal Suc­cession of Men, or any other Beings, without a Beginning, is absolutely impossible, I have, I think with Reason, already said, Part 1. §. 6. That Man at first was not fashioned by any blind and un­designed Chance, is to me very evident, as well from the wonderful Frame of his Mind, as from the great Va­riety, Regularity and Useful­ness of all the Parts of his Bo­dy, and particularly his Or­gans of Sensation: And that [Page 43] he did not at first spring up out of the Earth by any Force of Nature, distinct from the Power of God, I think needs no Proof, because the contrary Supposition is not only without any Ground of Evidence, but also liable to so many monstrous Improbabilities as do render it hightly extrava­gant to imagine. I therefore must conclude, That (at the least) the first Male and Female of Mankind were immediately framed and fashioned by God; and that all the rest of them were and are derived from those two by the way of natural Generation (Christ Jesus excepted, who tho born of a Woman, was not begotten of a Man) is the plain Voice of the Holy Scrip­ture.

[Page 44]28. That Man, tho made a little lower than the Angls, is yet by Nature far more ex­cellent than any other living Creature, is sufficiently appa­rent. The Holy Scripture tells us, that God made Man after his own Image: But this Expression cannot be under­stood with respect to the Shape and Structure of the Hu­man Body (God being both incorporeal and invisible) but is, as I apprehend it, to be in­lation to those Faculties which are implanted in the Mind of Man, and that internal Up­rightness in which he was at first created; which do carry in them an evident Similitude and Analogy unto some of [Page 45] those Attributes and Perfecti­ons which are in God himself. That the Body of Man is made o­riginally of the Earth, by which it is nourished, and into which it is again resolved, is obvious to be collected from Reason: And if I had never been told that God breathed into his No­strils the Breath of Life, where­by he became a Living Soul, yet those Powers and Faculties which I find in my self, of Thinking, Judging, Draw­ing Consequences (and those sometimes in a very long Train) reflecting back upon my own Thoughts, and de­termining my own Actions as I please, together with that inward Satisfaction which I reap from doing what is mo­rally [Page 46] good, tho naturally and to my Body painful and unea­sy; and the Trouble which I find upon the doing of any thing which is morally evil, tho otherwise never so plea­sant and delightful, would, I think, have sufficiently taught and assured me, that there is a Principle within me, which, tho united to my Bo­dy (and thereby affected with its Delights or Pains) yet is really distinct from it, and of a different Nature and more noble Original, which I call my Soul.

29. That God, who has originally a Love for all Man­kind, §. 16. should have cre­ated any Man with an Intent to make him eternally and [Page 47] unavoidably miserable, is to me a Contradiction: And since, on the contrary, he has naturally implanted in every Man a vehement and unex­tinguishable Desire of being Happy, and of always re­maining so, I cannot but con­clude, that God intended Man at his first Creation unto eternal Happiness. For that he should implant the Seed and Princi­ple of such a Desire in us all, which never fails to spring forth and shew its self in eve­ry Man who comes to Years of Knowledge; and this to be only a Torment to us, with­out any Possibility either of suppressing or satisfying it; is, I think, not to be conceived, except we should suppose that [Page 48] at the first he made us to be Objects, not of his Love, but Hatred.

30. As even by the Ruins of a noble Structure we may be able to give a Guess how goodly the Building was at its first Erection; so when I at present consider how distorted the Nature of Man is (his Lusts and Passions always strugling with, and often get­ting the Victory over his Rea­son, which evidently was de­signed for the superiour Facul­ty) own my Understanding a­lone methinks suggests to me, that Man was at first created in a more perfect and upright State and Condition than what he is in at present: But how our Na­ture was so far perverted, as [Page 49] that all our Reason and En­deavours cannot again reduce it to that firm and perfect Re­gularity, in which we are sen­sible it ought to be, and there­fore have cause to believe that it was at first framed by God, is what of our selves we never could have collected from any Suggestions of our own Un­derstanding.

31. Whether the second and third Chapters of the Book of Genesis are all to be understood literally, or whe­ther an allegorical Interpreta­tion is in some parts to be ad­mitted, I think my self not much concerned to debate. But, which way soever we take, the plain Result will be, that whereas God placed our [Page 50] first Parents, at their Crea­tion, in a state both of Inno­cency and Happiness; they by transgressing his Law, and thereby incurring his Displea­sure, sell both from the one and the other. Now that they, by their sin, might de­prave their own Natures, and vitiate their Constitutions, is no way irrational to suppose: And that from the depraved Nature and vitiated Constitu­tion of Parents divers incon­veniences may be entailed up­on their Posterity (who do derive not only their bodily Temper and Complection, but frequently also their Pas­sions and Inclinations from those of their Parents) is what common Experience does dai­ly [Page 51] testifie. When therefore the Holy Scripture assigns the sin of our first Parents, as the Cause of the Corruption of the Nature of Mankind, I see nothing there­in which is not very reason­ably to be allowed.

32. He who grants a Fa­vour to another, barely and on­ly of his own free will and pleasure, may without any violation of Justice, whenever he pleases, withdraw that, which he is under no Obliga­tion to continue any longer than he thinks fit. Nor is it any way to be reckoned as un­merciful or cruel, to cease the continuance of a purely volun­tary kindness, if the stopping of it does not render the Per­son actually miserable with­out [Page 52] any fault committed by him. If therefore God had thought fit, even for no other reason but his own Pleasure, to divert the stream of his kindness from Man; and that altho he had continued in a State of Innocency, provided he had not put him into a state of unavoidable Misery; who could have any just reason to complain, or find fault with him for doing what he should please with his own? Much more then will it follow that, If upon the occason of our first Parents Transgression, and the Corruption of our Nature which thereupon ensued, God had resolved to cut us all for­ever off from the inheritance of those Blessings to which [Page 53] Man was designed at his first creation, but now rendred na­turally unfit for, by this ori­ginal pollution; even in this there had been nothing con­trary to the strict Rules of Justice or Mercy: Especially if we consider, that all the World have ever thought it reasonable that, in some cases, Children should, on account of their Parents Faults, lose some benefits and advantages which otherwise they would have enjoyed. But actually to in­flict a positive Punishment up­on any one for a Fault which he never committed, nor any way voluntarily concurred to, nor was at all capable of hin­dering in him who committed it, being so directly contrary, [Page 54] not only unto Mercy, but also to the common Rules of Ju­stice; I can not but conclude, that tho' the original Corruption of our Nature may be reckoned as a just occasion why God might. if he had pleased, have exclu­ded us all for ever from the Joys of Heaven; Yet that alone is not to be assigned as a Cause why he will doom any Man to the Tor­ments of Hell, who does not otherwise deserve it, by his own actual sins and Transgres­sions.

33. That by the Corrupti­on of our Nature we are all of us mightily inclined to things that are evil and immoral, is most evident from our con­stant Experience: But that we have not thereby lost all [Page 55] knowledge and power of do­ing that which is good, I think is no less apparent from the Writings and Examples of so many brave Heathens; Who having no other Divine Law but that which was writ­ten in their Hearts by the Sug­gestions of their natural Un­derstanding, yet both taught and did so many of the things contained in the written Law of God. But curiously to dis­tinguish and assign the Bounds between Nature and Grace (which are both the Gifts of God; the one in an ordinary, the other in an extraordinary way) and to pretend to shew how far we may go by the bare strength of Nature, and where it is that we just stand [Page 56] in need of supernatural Assist­ance, I look upon to be a work of very little use or be­nefit; but of extraordinary difficulty, and perhaps impos­sible for any, but God him­self, to perform. Moreover, how God will deal with those who have no other Guide to follow but the Light of Na­ture; How far he will punish their Sins, be merciful to their Ignorance or Infirmities, or re­ward their endeavours to do good, is a Secret of which we are no way able to give any particular account. But it may suffice us to know, that the Generation of Mankind by reason of the Corruption of their Nature being apparently in a worse condition in respect of eter­nal [Page 57] Salvation, than what they o­therwise would have been; God was pleased to determine that he would not deal with them ac­cording to that absolute Sove­reignty which he had over them, nor according to the strict and ri­gorous Rules of Justice, which might have justified the great­est Severities; but according to the inclinations of his Mercy and Loving kindness. Of which way of Gods proceeding with us, I come now to give an ac­count.

34. That God might, if he had pleased, without the vio­lation of any of his Attributes, have freely forgiven all the Sins of Mankind, and even re­stored our Nature again to its primitive Integrity and Up­rightness, [Page 58] seems naturally to follow both from the Ab­soluteness of his Authori­ty, and the Almightiness of his Power: And even the strictest Justice, tho it fully al­lows, yet does not compel any one to exact a Debt where he is the only Creditour, or a Punishment where he is the only party injured or offended. But if God has thought fit to deal after another manner with us; and rather offers to help our In­firmities, as occasion requires, than wholly to repair our pervert­ed Nature; and chooses to have an Expiation made for our Sins, rather than to remit them without any such consideration; Altho his Will and Pleasure is e­nough to silence all our Excep­tions, [Page 59] and justifie his proceed­ings; yet may there some probable Considerations be urged in order to make us clearly apprehend the Wisdom of God in the fitness and rea­sonableness of this his Dispen­sation: As namely, that here­by we are, or ought to be made more continually sensible of our constant Dependence upon him, of his great Mercy and Compassion for us, of his perfect Hatred and Abhor­rence of sin.

35. It cannot, I think, be doubted but that, at the very time of the Fall of man, God, who is infinitly wise and know­ing, and therefore stands in need of no time to deliberate, had fully determined what he [Page 60] would do in order to the Expi­ation of our Sins, and the help­ing of our corrupted Nature, so as that we might be again in some capacity of recover­ing that Happiness to which we were at first designed, §. 29. And that this work of our Re­demption was to be performed by the Means and Mediation of an extraordinary Person, who was to be sent into the World, un­der the Title of the Messiah, or the Christ, is abundantly evident, both from the Old and New Testament; espe­cially if we compare them and expound them one by another. But it is certain, that Christ did not immediately come into the World; nor was there any one for some Thousands of [Page 61] Years after the Fall, who so much as pretended to that Title or Office; Whether it were, that God thought it fit by some previous Dispensa­tions to prepare the Minds of Men for the reception of so ex­traordinary a Person, or for what other reason, I pretend not to determine; but think my self obliged intirely to sub­mit to the Wisdom of God, who thought fit so to order it, that the Messiah should not appear until that fulness of time which he had appointed for it. In the mean while, altho the great Light was not yet to come into the World, yet God suffered it not to be who­ly overspread with Darkness; But besides the Light of the [Page 62] visible Creation, which de­clares the Glory and eternal Power of God; and besides the natural Light which arises in every Mans Understanding, whereby they who have no o­ther Law, are a Law unto themselves, unto which their own Conscience is a Witness beyond exception; God was pleased in a supernatural way to reveal himself unto divers persons (to the intent that they might teach the Know­ledge of him to others) as to Enoch, Noah, Melchizedek, Job, and probably to many more than we read of (Amongst whom, why Baalam should not be reckoned, I can see no reason; altho Covetousness and the hopes of worldly Ad­vancement [Page 63] tempted him to make but an ill use of the good Gifts of God) And also to chuse out unto himself a pecu­liar People, namely that of Is­rael, and to vouchsafe unto them a more than ordinary knowledge of Himself and his Laws, by his Servants Moses and the Prophets: And lastly by his Providence to order the matter so, that the Writings of Moses and the Prophets should many years before Christs coming, be translated into the Greek tongue (which was then the most universal Language) that by them all Nations might have the more Instruction, and so be the bet­ter prepared to receive the Messiah, whenever he should [Page 64] be made known unto them. And for this reason also it seems to be, that God so long before the Mosaick Law, or­dained and appointed the Sa­crificing of Beasts; whereby it became the common practice of the Gentiles, as well as Jews: Not that he had any esteem or value for the Blood of Bulls or of Goats; but only that by this practice the Minds of Men might be the more easi­ly and readily disposed to own and rely upon that great Sacri­fice, which Christ was one day to make of Himself for them.

36. There are several Pro­phecies dispersed up and down through the Old Testament, plainly designed to foretel the [Page 65] coming of the Christ or Mes­siah, what sort of person he should be, and what he should do and suffer: As that he should be the Seed of the Wo­man, of the Progeny of Abra­ham, of the Family and Line­age of David, born in Bethle­hem, and born of a Virgin: That he should come into the World about the time that the Scepter and the Law-giver, that is to say, the force and power of civil Authority, should cease from the Tribe of Judah, and should finish his Work in the compass of the last seven Years of those Four hundred and ninety, which are pointed out by the Prophet Daniel; That by many he should be despised and reject­ed, [Page 66] should be a Man of Sor­rows, and acquainted with Griefs, be oppressed and af­flicted, yet bear it most pa­tiently, and at last be wound­ed and cut off, not for him­self, but for our Transgressi­ons. And yet for all this he is foretold to be a person won­derful, a Counsellour, the mighty God, the Prince of Peace, of the increase of whose Government there should be no end, and unto whom the gathering of the Nations should be. Now altho there may some Difficulties be start­ed as to the Interpretation of some of those and such like Prophecies, which do occurr in the Old Testament (which is no great wonder, considering [Page 67] how the Jews, who are ene­mies to Christianity, have en­deavoured to obscure and per­plex them) yet if we do con­sider that there is evidently a fair, consonant and reasonable Application of all these Pre­dictions to be made unto Jesus of Nazareth, and that there is not, nor ever was any other person to whom they could be applied, besides himself; and since it is not possible for any one, but God, to foretell a thing with so many circumstances so long before it comes to pass, I think I may very well from hence conclude, not only against the Jews, who ac­knowledge, but also against all others, who may perhaps at first deny the Authority of [Page 68] the Old Testament, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ or Messiah, whom God had pro­mised to send into the World: And if to this we add the great­ness of his Miracles, and the transcendent Goodness of his Doctrine (of which see Part 1. §. 19) I think the Argu­ment will have the force of a Demonstration.

37. In the Holy Scriptures I find such things spoken of Christ as do plainly shew him to have been a true and real Man; in all things like unto us, sin only excepted: Other Expressions also I find fre­quently applyed to him, which cannot possibly agree to any Man, or created Being whatsoever, but only unto [Page 69] God; as I have already said §. 22. And altho there is a plain Distinction made be­tween his Divine and Humane Nature, yet is he always spoken of but as one person. Here then I know not better how to express my Sentiments than by saying, that in the one and single Person of Christ, there is a Conjunction of both the Divine and Humane Na­ture, and consequently that Christ is really and truly both God and Man. And if the same Objection be made a­gainst this Doctrine as is a­gainst that of the Trinity, viz. that it is very obscure and difficult to be apprehended; I shall also return the same Answer, as I have already [Page 70] done to that in the latter end of §. 23. to which I refer my Reader.

38. He who acknowledges Christ to be God, to be sure will allow of his eternal Exist­ence, as to his Divine Nature; And, as to what concerns his Humane Nature; that he was Conceived by the Power of the Holy Ghost, Born of the Virgin Mary; and that, after some years spent in preaching and doing good, he was, thro the Malice of the Jews, and at their vehement desire, con­demned by Pilate the Roman Governour, to be crucified; which was accordingly done, and a Spear thrust into his Side; That being dead he was buried, and lay in the Sepulcher unto [Page 71] the third day; upon which he rose from the dead, and aster se­veral times conversing with his Disciples for the space of Forty days, that he was visibly taken up from them, and re­ceived into Heaven unto infinite and eternal Glory, where he is our perpetual Mediatour and In­tercessour at the Throne of God: All this, I say, is so evidently and without Controversy testi­fied by his Disciples (whose Veracity I have asserted, Part 1. §. 19) and recorded in the Scriptures of the New Testa­ment (whose Authority I have proved Part 1. §. 23. &c,) that no reasonable Man, I think, can now deny, or so much as doubt of any part of it: And altho there are one or two [Page 72] passages of Scripture, from whence it is inferred, that Christ before his Resurrection did descend into Hell, yet will I not venture, nor do I think it necessary, to determine whether by the word Hell is meant the state of the dead on­ly, or the place of the damned; or (if the latter signification be to be chosen) for what end and purpose it was that he descended thither. Only I conclude certainly, that it was not to suffer any thing there; because I do not find the least intimation throughout the Scripture of any suffering of Christ, which he did or was to endure, beyond the shedding of his Blood and yielding up his life upon the Cross.

[Page 73]39. What God might have done (had he so pleased) with­out any other consideration, but only by virture of his own abso­lute Authority; if he has rather chosen to do it for the sake of Jesus Christ, and in considerati­on of that Obedience which he performed, and those Suf­ferings which he underwent, who shall dare to find fault with him, or pretend to be wiser than he? Now that it is for the sake of Christ, and of his Obedience and Sufferings, that God vouchsafes to us the Pardon of our Sins, and makes us the offer of everlasting Hap­piness, is so plainly declared in many places of the Holy Scriptures, that nothing can be more. And since I find [Page 74] God's sending of Christ to be set forth as an instance of his Love, not to some few parti­cular persons only, but even to the whole World; and since Christ is said to have died for all, and to have been a Propitiation for the sins of the World, without any ex­ception; I cannot but con­clude, that all men who ever were, or are, or shall be, might have been, or may be the better for Christ and his Sufferings, if through their own default they have not, or shall not forfeit that Benefit which was designed them. And as it is not disputed, but that the ancient Patriarchs, who by Faith foresaw the coming of Christ, had a share [Page 75] in that Redemption which he wrought, altho they died be­fore he came into the World; so to me it seems to stand with a great deal of reason, that even those persons who never heard any thing of Christ, may yet for his sake find Mer­cy from God; because God, who perfectly knows the most secret Inclinations of all Hearts, may clearly foresee, that if the knowledge of Christ had been proposed and offered unto them, they would have owned him, and submitted unto his Gospel; which our Saviour tells us, was the very case of Tyre and Sidon; and for which reason he declares that they should receive a milder Doom than Chorazin [Page 76] and Bethsaida in the day of Judgment, Mat. 11. 21, 22. And how far this may extend to all such as labour under very strong Prejudices, altho not strictly invincible, I think that God is the only proper Judge.

40. But however God may think fit to deal with those, who are either ignorant of, or strongly prejudiced against the Christian Religion; yet the manner of his proceeding with true Believers is plainly enough declared. All those who receive and own the Christian Faith are not to be looked upon as so many sepa­rate persons; each of them be­lieving such and such Do­ctrines; but are always re­presented [Page 77] in Scripture as Joyn­ed together in one Society or Body, which is called the Church, of which Christ Je­sus is the chief or Head; and under an obligation to live in communion and fellowship one with another, under those Laws and Constitutions which Christ has given them; but not, that I can find in Scrip­ture, obliged to joyn with, or submit to, any one person, as the Vicar of Christ and the visible Head of the Church upon Earth. For if Christ had appointed any such person as his Deputy upon Earth, he must either have declared a matter of such consequence with great plainness and evi­dence, or else it would be very [Page 78] hard to find fault with any man for being mistaken in it: Where­as the Arguments which those of the Church of Rome bring to prove, either that such a Vicar there must be, or that St. Peter the Apostle was the Man, or that the Pope or Bishop of Rome (and not the Bishop of Antioch) is the Successour of St. Peter both in his Bishop­rick and Authority; are all so weak and precarious, so forced and perplexed, and so fully confuted by the Protestant Di­vines, that nothing in my Opinion but Blindness of Un­derstanding, or worldly Inter­est can prevail with the Mem­bers of that Church, still to in­sist upon them Now that Christ instituted but one Church, in [Page 79] which all true Believers and good livers, are for ever to be comprised, is very plain. And altho, through the Mistakes and Perverseness of Man, this Church is rent and divided in­to opposite, and contending parts, and parties; yet this does not hinder but that according to its true and primitive Con­stitution, it is, or ought to be one (as a Kingdom or Com­mon-wealth by its Laws and Constitutions is but one Socie­ty, altho there may arise Fa­ctions and different Interests in it) nor shall any Man be e­steemed as a Member of the Church before God, who is not ready and willing, accord­ing to the best of his power and knowledge, to maintain [Page 80] the Unity of it, and that upon those very Terms, and none other, which Christ has ap­pointed, as near as possibly he can find and apprehend them. Moreover, that all the Laws and Constitutions on which Christ has founded the Church, and by which he would have it regulated, are exactly agreeable unto the Rules of sound Morality, and the Will of God, cannot be so much as doubted; and there­fore it is truly said, that the Church is Holy, altho every particular Member thereof has both his frailties and his sins; which yet he must repent of, and so become holy as the Church is holy, or else he violates one of the main and [Page 81] fundamental Laws, and so be­comes as it were an Out-law of the Church, and forfeits his part in all the Privileges that belong unto that Society. And whereas, before the com­ing of Christ, the People of Israel did enjoy more of the Favour of God, and had great­er privileges and advantages, on the score of their being God's chosen and peculiar Peo­ple, than any, or all other Na­tions of the World; The Gos­pel of Christ, on the contrary, now looks upon all as equally entitled unto God's Favour (and the advantages thereon depending) who take care duly to qualifie themselves for it. So that whereas formerly the Church (that is, the cho­sen [Page 82] People of God) might have been said to be particu­lar, as being in a manner limited to one Nation or Peo­ple; now on the contrary, it is Catholick, that is to say, uni­versal, as being no way con­fined to one place or Nati­on; all People being equally chosen by God in Christ, who will receive and love accord­ing to the Gospel.

41. In those several Revela­tions which God was pleased to make of himself after the Fall of Man, unto Adam, to Abraham, and to the People of Israel, there was still a plain intimation given them, that in the time to come there should an extraordinary Per­son arise in the World, who [Page 83] should yet more clearly make known the Will of God to Mankind. But when Christ, who was That Person, did accordingly come, and send his Apostles to preach the Gos­pel over all the Earth; he neither suggested to them, nor they unto the World, that any other Revelation was e­ver after to be expected; But always gave them to under­stand, that God had in the Gospel compleated and finish­ed all that declaration which he intended to make of Him­self, or his Will, unto Mankind, until the general Judgment and Dissolution of the World. If therefore the Holy Scripture had given me no manner of assurance of the perpetuity of [Page 84] the Church; my own Reason would have been enough to make me conclude, that God in his Providence will so order the matter, as that the Christi­an Religion, being the only known and ordinary means of eternal Salvation, shall ne­ver be wholly extinguished while the World lasts, so as to stand in need of any new Revelation to revive and restore it. But that there shall always be a certain Company of Men, e­vidently conspicuous to the World, teaching and profess­ing the true Christian Religi­on, without any Errour or Corruption in Doctrine or Worship, is what I can no where find promised or fore­told, either by Christ or any [Page 85] of his Apostles. On the contra­ry, there are several passages in the New Testament, which do plainly seem to foretell that, in process of time, most pernicious Doctrines and pra­ctices should prevail and take place, even amongst the ge­nerality of those who should profess themselves to be Disci­ples of Christ. And whoso­ever shall but lightly com­pare the state of Christianity for several Centuries before the Reformation, with that Draught of it which is left us by Christ and his Apostles in the Holy Scriptures, must, if he be impartial, I think be fully convinced of the truth of those Predictions.

42. Whether or no God has, [Page 86] or does at any time commu­nicate or bestow any extraor­dinary Grace or Assistance upon those, who are no visible Members of the Church, but altogether strangers unto that Revelation which he has made of himself, is a question which the virtuous lives and heroick actions of some brave Hea­thens make it hard positively to determine in the negative. But that he will give so much Grace and strength to every one who shall become a Member of Christ's Church, as that there­by they may (if the fault be not their own) sufficiently qualifie themselves for eternal Happiness, by the perform­ance of those things which he requires on their part to be [Page 87] done, is what I think no man can doubt of, who does but in general consider the Mercy and Love which God design­ed, even unto all men, but more especially unto the Church, in sending our Savi­our Christ Jesus into the world; altho there were not any particular Promises of this nature in the Gospel: And that this Grace and ability to do good is in Scripture ascribed un­to the Ministry and Influence of the Holy Ghost upon the hearts and minds of true Believers, is plain and generally owned by all Christians. But that this influence of God's Spirit does not work so uncontrollably, but that it may be resisted, and even wholly rejected and [Page 88] lost, is I think sufficiently ob­vious, as well from Reason and Experience, as form those passages of the Holy Scripture wherein we are exhorted not to quench the Spirit, but to walk in, and be led by, the Spirit, and the like; which were apparently needless and to no purpose, if the operations of the Holy Spirit upon our Hearts were so strong as that we could not chuse but com­ply with them. Now the things which God requires to be performed on our part, in or­der to life everlasting, are ap­parent, and can be no more but to believe those Truths which he has made known, which is called Faith; and to observe those Precepts which [Page 89] he has commanded, which is called Obedience. And as I have already shewn that these things are required from no man beyond the measures of possibility, Part 1. §. 14. So does the Scripture most fully assure us, that God will in them make a very sufficient allow­ance for the ignorance and frailty, and even for the per­versness of our Nature; and will not only be merciful unto our Weaknesses and ordinary Failings, but will pardon and forgive even our greatest and most wilful Sins, upon our true and hearty Repentance, which is a part of our Obedience: And as for the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is said to be ab­solutely unpardonable, I do [Page 90] not think it needful to enquire here into the Nature and Con­sequence of it, but shall refer my Reader to that excellent Sermon of Dr. Tillotson, the late Arch-Bishop of Canter­bury, upon that subject. But here it is highly necessary that we should all take that Cauti­on, which both Reason and the Holy Scripures do give us, viz. That we should not pre­sume so much upon God's Mer­cy and Lenity, as from hence to take occasion of going on in our Wickedness: For Kind­ness thus abused will certainly turn into the highest Wrath, and much increase the Dam­nation of a Sinner.

43. I am inclined to think, that those Arguments which [Page 91] are drawn from the nature of the Humane Soul it self are not by themselves suffici­ent to prove that it is immor­tal; but on the contrary, that the eternal duration of any created Being depends not so much upon its own Nature, as upon the Will of God, who created it. But as Reason a­lone suggests unto us, that there is a Life to come after this, Part 1. §. 13. And that Man was at first designed by God unto life eternal, (Part 2. §. 29.) so does the Holy Scripture most clearly assure us, that they who perform what God requires, shall be happy to all Eternity; and they who do not so, shall be miserable without end. The reconcilableness of [Page 92] which with God's Justice and Mercy I have accounted for §. 17. But wherein this Happiness of the righteous shall consist, we can but very imperfectly tell; and whether the Punish­ment of the wicked shall literal­ly be in everlasting Fire, or whether that expression be on­ly made use of Metaphorical­ly, to signifie the greatness of the Torment, I think it not necessary to determine. But both my own Reason and some places of Scripture do seem strongly to suggest, that neither the Reward of good men, nor the Punishment of the evil, shall be equal unto all; but greater or less according as they have exceeded one another in the Holiness or [Page 93] Wickedness of their Lives.

44. That all Men are mor­tal, is sufficiently testified by out daily Experience: But that the Souls of Men imme­diately upon their separation from their Bodies are not in a state of Insensibility; but are straitway conveyed into a state, either of Joy or Misery, seems very apparent to me from St. Paul's desire to be dissolved that he might be with Christ; from our Savi­ours Promise unto the Thief upon the Cross; and from the Story or Parable of the Rich man and Lazarus; as also from some other intimations which the Holy Scripture gives us. But since there is, one day, to be a general Judg­ment [Page 94] of all mankind before the Tribunal of Christ, where eve­ry man must receive his Sen­tence for eternal, either Hap­piness or Misery (as the Holy Scripture does assure us) It seems not irrational to judge, that neither the righteous nor the wicked do receive their full and final portion until that Judgment be passed upon them. I know not therefore how to condemn those, who anciently took up the Custom of praying for their deceased Friends, who had lived holily and died piously, that they might find favour and accep­tance at the general Judgment, and have their portion of Glo­ry augmented; But I can by no means approve of those, [Page 95] who upon such pitiful sugge­stions have presumed to deter­mine that there is such a place as Purgatory, where the Souls of men are to be purged and suffer a tempora­ry Punishment before their admission into Heaven. And altho I look upon their pray­ing for the dead to be a mi­stake, rather than a sin, yet their taking of Mony for so doing, and raising such a Re­venue upon that Fund, I look upon to be a most ungodly Cheat and Imposition upon the People.

45. Altho I do not appre­hend that there is any natu­ral decay in the general frame and structure of this World, yet it is certain, that by the [Page 96] Power of God, who made it, it may, whenever he pleases, be destroyed and dissolved; and the Scripture assures us, that it shall be so at the time of the general Judgment; at which time also there shall be an uni­versal Resurrection of the Bodies of all those who have died, and a change of those who shall be then alive. But whether all the same individual Particles of each mans Body which have been laid down in the earth, shall be raised and reunited a­gain to their Souls, I look up­on to be a needless Enquiry. What St. Paul says upon this Argument, 1 Cor. 15. 35. does abundantly satisfie me; the purport of whose words I take to be this, viz. That [Page 97] God, who being the Author of Nature, has given such a vegetative power to a Grain of Corn, that when it is thrown into the Ground, and there macerated and dissolved, it springs up again, and brings forth a Body suitable and pro­per to its self; that that same God, I say, both can and will at the last day, from the dead and dissolved Bodies of Men, raise up such Bodies, as shall please himself. And as there is a continual and great change of Particles in the Humane Body, between the Birth and the Grave; so I see not what Absurdity would follow if we should allow also that there is a like change between the Grave and the Resurrection.

[Page 98]46. And thus I have en­deavoured to give a brief and plain account of that part of Christianity which is purely or chiefly doctrinal; which upon the most strict search that I have been able to make, I think is exactly agreeable to the tenour and main design of the Holy Scriptures, and no way contradictory to the Principles of plain and sound Reason. And if in many o­ther Points of Speculation, which by some are adopted into Religion, I am either wholly ignorant, or perhaps doubtful and undetermined, or, it may be, mistaken; Yet if to the Belief which I have here professed, I do superadd a virtuous and Christian course [Page 99] of life, I hope there is no mo­derate Christian, who does not in effect make it a part of his Religion to be un­charitable, but will allow that I may be saved. But wherein this virtuous and Christian life consists, and what are the Duties which the Gospel obliges us all to perform (whether they are the Duties of pure Morality, as to love God and our Neigh­bour; or those of positive in­stitution, as to be Baptized, to receive the Holy Communion &c.) is to be the subject of the Third and last part of this small Work; to which there­fore, I now proceed.

A Gentleman's Religion.
PART III.

1. ALL the Commands of God, and conse­quently all the Duties of a Christian, are reducible to these Two; viz. To abstain from that which is evil, and to do that which is good, according to his ability. Those actions I call good, which either are eternally agreeable unto the nature, circumstances and mu­tual relations of Persons and [Page 101] Things, and therefore for e­ver to be approved of by eve­ry impartial rational Being (as I have said Part 2. §. 18.) for which we must appeal to every mans Reason (as we do to his Eyes, without any o­ther Demonstration, to prove that the Sun shines) or else are expresly commanded by God, of his own positive will and pleasure (to whom, as being his Creatures, we all owe an intire Obedience) for which we must have our re­course to the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament only; all the positive Institutions and Ordinances of the Mosaick Law, which were given by God to the People of Israel, being abrogated, and the Ob­ligation [Page 102] of them annulled by our Saviour Christ; Altho the moral part of it, which con­tains the Precepts and Rules of eternal good and evil, and wherein the very life and soul of that Law consisted, be not only abetted and confirmed, but also very much improved by him. And such actions as are contrary to good, that is to say, either disagreeable to the nature and circumstances of Things and Persons, or else positively forbidden by God; I call evil. I am indeed of opinion, that in the Holy Scriptures we have not only the positive Commands of God, whereby some things, which otherwise would have been indifferent, are enjoyned [Page 103] or forbidden; but also, either in particular, or at least in ge­neral, a sufficient account of all those actions which are eternally good or evil, and therefore to be done or avoid­ed by us; And this designed by Almighty God for the di­rection and instruction of those Men, who have not ability to dive into, and discover those things by the strength of their Reason. And therefore, in order to describe the whole Duty of a Christian, it might be enough for me to collect the Precepts and Prohibitions which God has given us in his Word, and to vouch no other Authority or reason, but his Will for them. But because every mans Duty will pro­bably [Page 104] make the greater impres­sion upon his mind, when he is satisfied, as to the reason­ableness of it, as well as con­vinced of its obligation; I shall endeavour, as I proceed, first to infer as much of our Duty as I can, from the na­ture and circumstances of Things and Persons; and then to superadd, where there is occasion, what God has posi­tively ordained and command­ed as to any point; And this with the same conciseness that I have observed in my Second Part, neither enlarging upon those Arguments, nor recit­ing those Texts of Scripture, which I suppose my Reader to be able to call to mind up­on the least hint of them,

[Page 105]2. To begin then: Since God is the most perfect and excel­lent Being in Himself; and so loving and beneficent to Us, It follows, that we ought to love him in the highest de­gree that possibly we can; And true and compleat Love, as it is an act of one person exerted towards another, as its object, consists in an unseigned desire, First, of always doing what may be truly grateful and ac­ceptable to the person be­loved; and Secondly, of en­joying and being with him as much as may be. The more ardent and zealous we are in our love to God, the better undoubtedly it is; And we should strive to engage our Affections, as well as our Rea­son [Page 106] and our Will, unto him from whom we have received all things: But yet this Love is not to be measured, or judged of, by the earnestness of those suddain motions, which sometimes may arise within us, upon the contem­plation of God's Excellency and Goodness; because to be thus Passionately affected is not wholly in our Power; and somtimes least so, when we most earnestly desire it. But the true and certain way of judging whether we love God, or not, is by examining whe­ther we are stedfast in our Re­solutions, and accordingly di­ligent in our Endeavours, con­stantly to obey him, and keep all his Commandments; [Page 107] which is the only way to please, and consequently to enjoy and for ever be with him: And where the Love of God is thus firmly rooted in the Will, and brings forth plenty of Fruit in the life and actions, it is certainly never­theless acceptable to him, al­tho it does not so passionately move our Affections as we could wish or desire: And as all the Duties which we owe unto Almighty God, are de­rived from, and do depend upon that, of loving of him; or rather indeed are contained in it, so is it very evident, that they are all to be judged of by the same forementioned Rule; that is to say, not so much by the strength of an in­ward [Page 108] Impulse upon the Mind (which is a thing not under our Command) as by the steady agreeableness of our Will and Actions, unto all such Principles, as are right and good.

3. Since God is the most excellent and perfect, and con­sequently the most worthy, of all Beings, that are, or can be; from hence it will follow, that we ought to honour him with the greatest Honour that may be. Now to honour any person is, in other words, in­wardly to esteem, and out­wardly to shew our Respect to him. Our inward Esteem of God consists in a due Ac­knowledgment of his Being and Attributes; and our out­ward [Page 109] Respect to him, is to be shewn, as well by abstaining from all actions which may savour of any Neglect or Ir­reverence towards him, as by performing all such as may appear to be suitable, both to his own Excellency and our Dependence upon him.

4. Since God is present in all places, and knows all, e­ven the most secret things; and therefore cannot possibly be deceived, or imposed on; We should, on this considerati­on, be very watchful and care­ful, upon all occasions, how we behave our selves in his Pre­sence: And, methinks, it is a most shameful and deplorable thing, that Men commonly scruple, not to do those things [Page 110] in the sight of God, which they would be afraid, or a­shamed it should be known, or even suspected, of them, by Men like themselves.

5. Since God is most true; from hence it will follow, that we ought to believe what soever he says or makes known, how im­probable soever otherwise it might seem to us. But the true estimate of such belief is not to be made by the clearness and strength of our specula­tive Assent unto those Truths, which he has proposed to our Understanding (for to receive a Truth without any Doubts or Scruples, which sometimes do unaccountably force them­selves upon us, even in the clearest cases, is not always in [Page 111] our power) But rather by the constant suitableness of ourlives unto the profession of such Doctrines as we receive and own. And he who has but a weak Faith, and yet leads a good life, altho he is not qualified for doubtful Dispu­tations, is nevertheless a true Believer; because his Belief answers the main end and de­sign of the Gospel; which I have shewn to be Virtue and Morality, Part 1. §. 42. Nor can there (for example) be a better Evidence, that a man does really and sufficiently Believe the Truth of a life to come, than when he is indu­strious and diligent in prepar­ing for it; whatever Doubts or Scruples he may have, in [Page 112] point of Speculation, about it.

6. Since God's Power is in­finite, and his Authority un­controlable; it follows, that we ought to fear him (and so much the more, because of our natural propensity to sin) be­cause he has it always in his Power to make us miserable here, and eternally so hereafter. But he cannot be said to fear God most (that is, most tru­ly) who is possessed with the greatest dread and terrour at the thoughts of his Wrath or Judgments; for then the De­vils, who tremble, or wick­ed Wretches, who despair of God's Mercy, would be the best performers of this Duty: But he is the truest Fearer of [Page 113] God, who always takes the greatest care not to offend him; the Fear of him being never originally designed to torment and disquiet our Minds, but only to be such a Check upon us, as to keep us in due Awe and Obedience.

7. Since every sin is an Of­fence, both against a gracious and a powerful God, and of every dangerous consequence to the person who commits it; And since nothing can pos­sibly be concealed from God, it follows, that we ought to be deeply concerned, and truly sorrowful for every sin which we commit, and by no means to palliate or frame Excuses for them, but freely to own and confess them to him. But the [Page 114] truth of this Sorrow is not to be measured by the Passion­ateness of it, or the Tears which it produces (which, tho sometimes good signs, yet, too often produce but little effect) but by the hearty re­formation of life that follows: And he only can be said, to any purpose, either to be sor­ry for his sins, or to confess them to God; who is careful for the time to come to forsake them.

8. Since God is Almighty, he is certainly able; and since he loves us, he cannot but be willing, to do every thing that is best and fittest for us, if we, by our own faults, do not provoke him to the con­trary: From whence it fol­lows, [Page 115] that, as long as we serve him faithfully, we ought, in all our wants and exigencies, to trust and relie upon him. And if he does not relieve or help us in such a manner as we de­sire; we ought to bear whatever Afflictions we lie under, patient­ly and contentedly; as well knowing, that God takes no delight in grieving us; but only corrects and keeps us un­der, in order to our eternal good. And to demonstrate our Trust in God, and sub­mission to his chastising hand; we must never attempt, by any unlawful means, to sup­ply any of our Wants, or free our selves from any, even the most grievous pressures: Al­tho, at the same time, honest [Page 116] labour and industry (yet still with submission to God's Will) for the compassing of any thing which is lawlful and good, is not only allow­ed, but commended and re­quired.

9. But since God is a free Agent, and since all the good which we have, or are capable of, comes from him, and de­pends altogether on his Power and over-ruling Providence; we ought to pray to him for whatsoever we stand in need of; and that he would bless all our honest Labours with success. But because, often, if we had the very things which we de­sire, they would, at the last, tend to our hurt; and because he knows what is fit for us, [Page 117] much better than we our selves; therefore we ought al­ways to pray, that his Will should ever take place rather than our own. And since we can have no reason to doubt of his Love, we ought to assure our selves, that we shall receive either the very things we pray for, or else that which is altogether as good for us, if our sins ob­struct it not.

10. And the very same con­siderations, which prompt us to make our Prayers to God in all our wants, do sufficient­ly demonstrate, that we ought to return Thanks unto him for all the Blessings which we have received: Amongst which those Afflictions which have at any time reclaimed us from sin, [Page 118] and brought us to a sense of our Duty, ought, I think, to be placed in the chiefest rank: And the only Demonstration of a truly thankful Heart to God, is the making a pious and honest use, to his Glory, of all those Blessings which we daily receive from him: Nor can there be any thing more absurd, than for a man to pretend to give God Thanks with his Lips, who does not also do it, more to the purpose, in his Life.

11. As God's Justice and Veracity are a reason beyond exception, why we should with­out Anxiety depend on all his Promises; so the great Pro­mise which he has made us, being that of everlasting Hap­piness; [Page 119] for our more effectual attaining unto which, he has sent his Son our Saviour Christ Jesus to suffer for us; It is therefore accordingly our Duty to hope for eternal Salvation; that is to say, to expect the performance of what God has promised, and the enjoyment of what Christ has purchased for us. But this hope is to be shewn not by the strength of our Confi­dence that we shall be saved (in which it is very possible that a man may deceive him­self) but by our constant care in duly performing what God requires, on our parts, in or­der to Salvation: For he only who is diligent in doing the work, does, with any rea­son, [Page 120] expect, or hope for the promised Reward.

12. As we are obliged to pray unto God for all that we want, and to hope for eternal Salva­tion from him; so the Holy Scripture directs us, to ground all our hopes of Happiness upon the Sufferings of Jesus Christ, and to offer up all our Prayers in his Name, as hoping only for his sake to be accepted, who is represented as our on­ly Mediatour and Intercessour with God. Whosoever there­fore offers to joyn the Merits, Mediation or Intercession of any Saint, together with Christ Jesus, either to strength­en his hopes of Salvation, or to make his Devotions more surely to be accepted by God; [Page 121] as he seems to distrust the Me­diation of Christ, as if, alone, it were imperfect and insuffici­ent; so he acts not only with­out any Warrant from, but even contrary to the plain tenour of the Holy Scrip­tures.

13. That it is absurd to attempt, and impossible to make, any bodily or visible Picture or Image to represent God, who is both incorporeal and invisible, is most evident beyond doubt or denyal: And when any such Representati­ons are made with that design, and exposed to the view of the People, the natural conse­quence of them, must needs be to beget wrong Notions of God in the Minds at least of [Page 122] the more ignorant sort: For such as any thing is represent­ed to them, such they will be apt to conceive it in all points to be. My Reason therefore alone would suffici­ently conclude, that it is un­lawful to make any sort of Picture or Image to represent God, altho he had not so positively for­bid it in the Holy Scripture; nor so expressly declared him­self a jealous God in that par­ticular.

14. In all Cases where one man may deceive another to his great damage; it is reason­able that he, who apprehends such danger, should not de­pend upon another man, ex­cept he first has good security given him of his Truth and [Page 123] Fidelity. Now many times the best, or indeed the only, security which can be given in such cases, is a solemn Ap­peal to Almighty God (who is the Searcher of all Hearts, and the Punisher of all Wick­edness) as expecting and free­ly offering one's self to his Wrath and Vengeance, in case he prevaricates in what he asserts or promises: And this is what we call by the Name of an Oath. And since he who takes an Oath (I mean with due seriousness and con­sideration) does therein make an evident acknowledgment of some of the principal Attri­butes of God; viz. his Omni­science, Justice, Truth, and Power; it follows that an [Page 124] Oath, duly taken, is an act of Honour and Reverence to­wards God; and consequent­ly, is not, in its self, unlawful or evil: But if an Oath be taken rasbly, or unadvisedly, or un­necessarily, or in trivial cases; it is a lessening and underva­luing of the Divine Majesty (which ought always to be treated with the profoundest Reverence) and, consequent­ly, sinful and unlawful. And this is all that I can conceive to be forbidden by our Blessed Saviour, Mat. 5. 34. Nor can I apprehend that, that place contains an universal prohibi­tion of all swearing whatso­ever: For, besides that the very Context in the preced­ing Verse does most evidently [Page 125] limit the discourse to such Oaths as are purely voluntary, and therefore altogether un­necessary; There is neither Reason nor Precedent to in­duce any one to believe that our Saviour would universal­ly forbid any thing which has nothing of Evil or Malignity in its nature: And some even of the best of Men, not only before, but since the coming of Christ, and even the Blessed Angels themselves, we are as­sured in Scripture, have sworn upon some occasions with great solemnity. Nor do the Holy Scriptures, in other places, where mention is made of the taking of an Oath, speak of it as a thing unlaw­ful, or forbidden, or any way [Page 126] universally evil in its self, but altogether the contrary: Nor did our Blessed Saviour, that we can find, design to deprive Princes or Magistrates of any part of that lawful Power which they had over their Subjects before his coming; who, every where, were in­vested with a Right of ex­acting an Oath from Them, when it should be necessary, either for the peace and se­curity of the Common-wealth, or for the ending of Differences between private parties. And as for that passage of St. James 5. 12. which is by some urged against swear­ing in any case whatsoever; It, being no more but a re­capitulation of our Saviours [Page 127] words which were just now mentioned, needs no other Answer than what I have al­ready given. But since the very nature and design of an Oath is to invoke God, that thereby a Man may give as­surance to another of his truth and fidelity; it follows, that to affirm any thing upon Oath, beyond what the Man, who swears, knows to be true; or not to perform what he has up­on his Oath promised, is a sin. And since he who imposes up­on another by doubtful and equivocal words, does as much deceive him, as he who speaks a down-right Falsity; from hence it will follow, that such a deceitful Oath is altogether as contrary to the [Page 128] nature and design of an Oath, and consequently as unlawful as a false one. But altho an Oath lays an obligation upon a Man to do whatever he has sworn, yet if a Man swears to do any thing which is a sin, and con­trary to some former Obligati­on, under which he indis­pensably lyes to God or Man, he can not in this case be obliged to keep his Oath, but is bound to repent of it. For, besides that it is not reasonable, that any mans own act should free him from any Obligation un­der which he lyes to another; it is plain, that an Oath can neither alter the nature of a sin, nor make it lawful to com­mit it. And since the design of an Oath in its own nature [Page 129] is to oblige him to perform­ance that takes it; and since the Name of God ought ne­ver unnecessarily to be invok­ed; it follows, that where a Man ought not to keep an Oath, he ought, not on any account to take it.

15. According to the Cu­stoms of different places, there have divers Ceremonies and Forms of words been intro­duced in the taking of an Oath; some of them ground­ed upon Reason, and others taken up through mistake in imitation. Thus, probably, whereas it may have been a Custom in some places in an Oath to invoke the Vengeance of God upon ones head; from hence, likely, might arise [Page 130] that Form of swearing by the Head; and, in imitation thereof, by the Hand, or o­ther parts of the Body. And whereas it was usual to take solemn Oaths, in extraordi­nary cases, in the Temple, or at the Altar, and, with us at this time, laying the Hand upon the Holy Scriptures; from hence might arise the Forms of swearing by the Temple, the Altar, the Bible, &c. But here it must be no­ted, that the nature of an Oath being for assurance, and consisting therefore altogether in the intention of the parties, viz. as well of him who re­quires it, as of him who gives it; He may be said really and truly to snear, not only who [Page 131] makes use of such a Form and Ceremony as is accustomed or prescribed in any certain place, but he who any ways signifies to another an intention to oblige himself under the penalty of God's Wrath and Vengeance: And for the same reason the joynt intention of both parties, as it appears fairly to be sig­nified (without any place for Fraud or Collusion) must needs be the true measure of the obliga­tion of every Oath.

16. When a Man promises a thing, and obliges himself thereto, not to any other Man, but only to God alone; this is what is commonly cal­led a Vow; and, comes so ex­actly under the same Rules with a Promisory Oath (as will pre­sently [Page 132] appear to whosoever reads the two foregoing Se­ctions) that I need not again particularly repear them. But it is a very necessary caution to be observed in all Oaths, and more especially to be taken care of in Vows; that a Man should never voluntarily oblige himself to any thing but what he is well assured is with­in his power to perform; I mean with the help of that common Asistance and Grace which God has promised to all that seek it. For if a Man goes beyond this, and tyes such Burdens upon him­self as he is not sufficiently sure of strength to bear; be­sides the presumption of the thing, it must needs involve [Page 133] his Conscience in many Dif­ficulties and Perplexities.

17. Since there is no other Being whatsoever, which for Power, Goodness, or excel­lency of Nature can any way be equalled to, or compared with, Almighty God; from hence it will follow, that all these foregoing Duties, which we owe unto God on the account and supposition of the Trans­cendency of his Nature and Attributes, are not any of them to be paid unto any Thing or Per­son besides himself. For that would be in effect to set up somewhat else as a God, or in the place of God, unto our selves. Let them then who seem either to love, or fear, or trust in, any Thing or [Page 134] Person as much or more than God; and who offer up their Prayers and Devotions unto any Saints or Angels; which seems to suppose their Omni­sciences, and that they know the Secrets of Mens Hearts; and to argue some distrust of God's Goodness and Readi­ness to hear us; Let them, I say, and such like persons, consider well with themselves, how, they can answer these things to God, who is a jea­lous God. But since every Man, who is sincere in Re­ligion, must necessarily suit his Worship and Duty to God ac­cording to the apprehensions which he has of the Deity; He who is convinced of the distinction [Page 135] of Persons in the Unity of the God head (of which I have endeavoured to give my Thoughts Part 2. §. 22.) can­not, I think, but make the Fa­ther, the Son and the Holy Ghost, the joynt Objects of his Service and Devotion. And why it should not be both lawful and proper to invoke the Son and Holy Ghost, together with the Father, in our Pray­ers, as well as to be Baptized, and to Bless, in their Names, together with him (which are both I think acts of Di­vine Worship) I confess I can see no sound reason that can be given. But if any man shall tell me, that, in the Worship of God, he dares pro­ceed no farther than the Holy [Page 136] Scriptures will expressly war­rant, and therefore that he can not invoke the Holy Ghost in his Prayers, because he there finds neither Precept for, nor Example of it (Judg­ing no Man, but leaving every Man to stand or fall to his own Master) for my self I answer, that since God has made us reasonable Creatures, I can not but think that a clear, and rational Conse­quence from Scripture is as good a Warrant for any reli­gious action, and lays as great an Obligation upon him that is convinced of it, as the most express Text: And if the Per­sonality and Divinity of the Holy Ghost be admitted (as I here suppose) to me, no [Page 137] Consequence seems to be clearer than that he is to be invoked and worshiped, toge­ther with the Father and the Son.

18. Since the end to which God designs all Men, is etern­al Happiness in another life; Part 2. §. 29. To a capacity for which we are again, after our Fall, restored by Jesus Christ, Part 2. §. 33, &c. It follows, that we ought not to do any thing whereby we may miss of this end, or be diverted from the prosecution of it; But on the contrary, that the whole course of our actions and endea­vours should ever be bent on the pursuit of it.

19. No Man will ever be diligent in the pursuit of any [Page 138] thing of which he seldom thinks, and rarely considers the benefit of obtaining, and the evil of missing it. If there­fore we are obliged to be di­ligent in our endeavours after eternal Happiness; we ought to make the Joys of Heaven and the Torments of Hell the subject of our frequent Thoughts and Meditations.

20. He who places his Happiness, or any part of it, upon a wrong Object, will never be so diligent as he ought in the pursuit of that true Happiness, to which he is designed by God; because the stream of his Thoughts and Endeavours must needs, in the whole, or in part, be diverted, according as he ap­prehends [Page 139] his Happiness to lie another way. Now that there is nothing in this World (ex­cept a good Conscience, and the hope of eternal Life, which, tho they may be had in this World, yet are not of the World) that can any way make up a part of our real Happiness, is abundantly de­monstrable from the vanity, uncertainty and shortness of all worldly Joys. He there­fore who places any part of his Happiness upon any thing belonging to this World, most certainly, places it upon a wrong Object. But whatso­ever a Man proposes to him­self as the ultimate End of any of his actions, it is certain that, therein he places some [Page 140] part, at least, of his Happi­ness: For that which is the ultimate End of any action of a Man, must be proposed as the final satisfaction of some of his Desires (for as far as any one's Desire extends, so far off must be the End he aims at) and no Desire of any Man can ever be finally satis­fied, till it meets with that wherein he supposes his Hap­piness (in whole or in part) to consist. From hence then it will follow, that altho there are some Pleasures and Satis­factions in this World, which may innocently be enjoyed, yet No man ought to propose any worldly enjoyment as the ulti­mate End and Design of any of his Actions. For this would [Page 141] be a placing his Happiness, or some part of it, upon a wrong Object, and thereby a hinderance of his pursuit of the true Happiness for which God designs him. To illu­strate this, which otherwise may seem obscure, by an Ex­ample or two. A Man may lawfully, without doubt, re­lish the Meat he eats (for to what other end did God give us the Sense of Tasting) but the reason of his eating, at all times, ought to be to preserve his Life and Health, that he may be the better able to do all those things which God re­quires from him in order to his Salvation; this being the End for which God designs him, and which he therefore [Page 142] ought always to pursue. But he who in eating designs no more than to gratifie his sen­sual Appetite, or to pamper his Body that he may have the greater enjoyment of the rest of the Pleasures of this World; acts below, or rather contrary to, the End he is de­signed for; and may justly be compared to the Beasts that perish. Thus also a Man may innocently be pleased to have the Garment he wears, decent and comely, because the Eye is naturally gratified with the beauty of any Object: But if a Man wears Cloths which are more fine and costly than some others, his reason ought to be that he may not (ac­cording to the humour of the [Page 143] world) be contemned for the Meaness or Sordidness of his Apparel; but endeavour, by all fair ways, to preserve such a Respect among Men (who are very apt to judge by the outward appearance) as may enable him to do the more good in the world: But he who cloths himself like the Lillies of the Field, or Solomon in all his Glory, only that he may admire himself, or be taken notice of by others, for his remarkable Finery, is a vain person, and acts as foolish­ly as the Crow in the Fable, who clad himself in the Pea­cocks Feathers. And what I have here said concerning Food and Raiment, may also be applyed to Riches and [Page 144] Honour, and to all Pleasures, which are not absolutely un­lawful; and to every thing which Men aim at, or value in this World; which they may lawfully seek after and take delight in, as far as they may be Instruments of doing Good, or are consistent with their Christian Duty; but they must not place their Hap­piness, or any part of it, in them; for that would make them forgetful of Heaven, and necessarily involve them in the sins of Ambition, Covetousness, Voluptuous­ness, &c.

21. As we are obliged to do whatsoever God commands, and patiently to suffer whatso­ever he, in his Providence, [Page 145] shall think fit to lay or inflict upon us; so, for the same rea­sons, are we certainly bound to continue in this both doing and patiently suffering, until such time as he shall be pleas­ed, of his own Will, to free and dismiss us from it. From whence, it follows, that no man ought, upon any account, to lay violent hands upon him­self, or voluntarily contribute to the shortning of his own Life, because he knows not but that God might be willing to exer­cise him yet farther, with Suf­ferings or other tryals, to his Glory, and the good of his own Soul. Nor ought any Servant, without leave or li­cence, to withdraw himself from the Service of his Ma­ster. [Page 146] And the same reason which forbids us to destroy our Lives, should also keep us from putting them to any un­reasonable or unnecessary ha­zard.

22. He who in Duty is ob­liged to any thing, lies also, of nedessity, under an Obli­gation to qualifie himself as well as he can, and to seek after, and make use of all such Means and Instruments as are necessary for the better exceuting and compassing that same thing to which he is so obliged. Since then Health of Body, Knowledge and Ʋnder­standing, and a competency of Riches, Power and Authority, are necessary Qualifications and Instruments for the better [Page 147] performance of many of those Duties, to which we stand ob­liged by God's Law; it fol­lows, that these are things which every man, according to his capacity, ought to seek and endeavour after. But we must not strive nor seek for any of these things by Ways or Means that are unlawful and wick­ed; for that would be, be­forehand, to destroy and fru­strate the very End and De­sign, for which alone they are to be sought and desired: namely Virtue, Piety and the Service of God.

23. On the other side; Whatsoever is an impediment or obstacle to the performance of any necessary Duty, we are bound, as far as we are [Page 148] able, to suppress or remove it out of the way. Now our Reason being that which first leads us to the Knowledg of Religion, and always enables us rightly to understand and judge of our Duty; And since all violent Passions, and over­eager Affections, do disturb our Reason, and very much hinder the free use and exer­cise of it; It follows, that we ought always so to govern our Passions and restrain all our Af­fections, as that they may be wholly subservient to, and never over-rule or mis-lead, our Reason.

24. Since God is the Crea­tour, and therefore also the absolute Lord of all things; every thing certainly ought [Page 149] by us to be always put and applyed to that very same end and use (and no other) for which it was intended by him, as far as we have any intimation of his design, ei­ther from Reason or Revela­tion. Hence then it will fol­low, that those Creatures which God has given us, to feed, sustain and keep us in health, that we may be the better able to do our Duty, and labour in our several Cal­lings, ought not at any time (much less ordinarily) to be used to Excess, so as to im­pair our Health, or discom­pose our Reason, or any way hinder us in the performance of any Duty: And that Fa­culty of Generation, which [Page 150] God has endowed us with, in order to the propagation of Mankind, ought not to be a­bused for the sake of filthy sensual Pleasure. Nor ought that plenty of Creatures, which God has bestowed up­on us for the service of all Men, without exception, to be engrossed into the hands of any certain Men, so as that others should want the Ne­cessaries of Life, whilst they abound in Superfluity. By which it appears, that Glut­tony and Drunkenness, Lust and Covetousness are sins, and al­ways to be avoided; and therefore, on the contrary, that Temperance, Chastity, Cha­rity, and Liberality are Duties, and always to be practised.

[Page 151]25. Experience assures us, that the Spirit of Man is of an active nature; and, rather than be altogether idle, will be apt to employ its self in that which is evil. Nor does a man ever lie more open to Temptation than when he has nothing at all to do. He therefore that would keep him­self innocent, must be careful al­ways to avoid Idleness. For besides that Idleness would prove a Snare to us; It is a shame and a sin. When there is so much of God's work to be done in the world (for the promoting of his Glory and the Publick good of Mankind) that any man, who pretends to be his Servant, should stand still, and not put his [Page 152] helping hand to the carrying of it on. But as we cannot say that a Man is idle, when he lies down to sleep; that, being thereby refreshed, he may be the better able again to labour; so must we by no means pass that Censure on him, who now and then spends some small portion of his Time in some pleasant and innocent Recreation; that, having his Thoughts hereby a little relaxed and diverted, he may be the fitter to return to Business of moment and con­sequence. But as for those persons, whose whole life al­most is nothing else but Di­version; and who scarce ever set themselves to any employ­ment, whereby either God is [Page 153] glorified, or others benefited; what can they expect but the same Sentence which is pro­nounced upon the idle and un­profitable Servant, Mat. 25. 26. And if, to be altogether idle and unemployed is not to be excused or justified; how much more are they to be con­demned who are so frequent­ly employed in such things as are evil and scandalous?

26. Since the right know­ledge of our Duty arises chief­ly from a true judgment con­cerning the circumstances and qualifications of Things and Persons, it follows, that every Man should endeavour, as far as he is able, to inform himself rightly, and to frame true Notions, in all points, of and [Page 154] concerning God, Himself, and o­ther Men; to whom there are Duties owing; and also of all those things which are the sub­jects of any of those Duties, and in the true management whereof, such Duties do con­sist. For if he be mistaken in his Judgment concerning ei­ther of these, he must of ne­cessity take wrong Measures in his actions. Thus, for Example, if a Man should not believe God to be eternal, most good, wise and power­ful, &c. it would not be pos­sible for him to love, honour and fear him in that degree that he ought to do; And if we do not always remember ourselves to be frail Creatures, subject to Passions and In­firmities, [Page 155] of short continuance in this World, and that, whatever Excellency we may seem to have, we derive it wholly from God and his Pro­vidence, and not from our selves; we shall never be able so effectually as we ought, to govern our Passions, and re­strain our Affections from the things of this World, and pur­sue that End for which God has designed us. And if we do not consider that other Men (whatever accidental Differ­ences there may be between us) are equal to us in nature, that their Souls are as preci­ous in God's sight as ours, that Christ died for them, as much as for us, &c. We shall not be inclined to be­have [Page 156] our selves to them with that Justice, Charity and Hu­mility which do evidently ap­pear to be our Duty. And, lastly, if we do not frame a true Notion of the Vanity of the things of this World, and the Excellency of the Joys of Heaven; we shall never be able to prefer the later before the former, in such a measure as we ought to do.

27. Altho the chief Happi­ness of Mankind is reserved by God to be enjoyed in another life, by those who heartily strive for it whilst they are in this; yet can I find no rea­son to think that he has de­creed us all, or any of us, to be absolutely miserable whilst we remain in this World. On [Page 157] the contrary, since God has originally a love for all Man­kind in general, Part 2. §. 16. I cannot but conclude, that he always (even in this life) designs at least some share or beginning of Happiness for every Man; and never af­flicts, or suffers any Man to be afflicted, but only in order to his greater Happiness here­after; until such time as he thinks it proper to pour out his Vengeance and final De­struction upon such as have by their Wickedness altoge­ther forseited his Love and Favour. Since then God ori­ginally designs some measure or commencement of Happi­ness to all Men, even in this life, as well as eternal Happi­ness [Page 158] hereafter; it follows, that we (who ought as much as we can to be subservient to all God's Designs) should en­deavour as much as in us lies, to promote the Happiness of every Man, both in relation to this World, and of that which is to come. Or in o­ther terms, that every Man should endeavour to do as much good to all others as he can, and to hurt no man whatsoever, if he can avoid it.

28. But if every Man al­ways kept singly by himself, without any Society or Inter­course with others; it would be impossible to do any good one to another: And there­fore I conclude, that it is the Will of God that Mankind [Page 159] should live each with other in a state of Society. And to make us all the more sensible of the necessity and obligation that lies upon us thus to live with, and do good to others, God has so ordered the state and condition of all Mankind, that it is not possible for any Man long to subsist, much less to enjoy any sort of Comfort or satisfaction in this Life, with­out the good will and assi­stance of others; which he has no reason to expect, ex­cept he be ready upon all oc­casions to retaliate what he himself so continually stands in need of. And since God's original Love to Mankind is not confined to some certain persons, but universally ex­tended [Page 160] to all; I must needs conclude, that he designs not only the Comfort and Happi­ness of some particulars; but universally of all Men what­soever. And since the more universal the Society between Men is, the more universal the Happiness which thence re­sults will be; it will evident­ly follow, that it is God's Will that every Man should behave himself after a sociable and friendly manner, to every other Man, without excepti­on. And since there is no Man in the World, however weak and poor, or at never so great a distance from me, but it is possible that things may fall out so as that, one time or other, I may, in my [Page 161] Distress, stand in need of his Help and Friendship, my Rea­son tells me, that it is my In­terest, as well as Duty, as much as I am able, before­hand to oblige every Man who comes in my way, by doing Offices of Civility and Kindness to him, as occasion offers.

29. That God has given to Mankind in general the free Liberty to make use of all o­ther Creatures for their sup­port and sustenance, my Rea­son, as well as the Holy Scrip­ture, does assure me; because without some of them we could not preserve our selves in being; and if we had not liberty to destroy others of them for our use, they would [Page 162] in time so over-spread the Face of the Earth, as that we could not have any safe or con­venient Habitation upon it. But if all these Creatures were always to remain in common, so that no Man should have a Right to take possession of any part of them to his own prticular use and disposal, and to exclude others there­from; the Consequence must needs be perpetual Discord and Confusion. For when I had prepared Food to sustain my Hunger, or Rayment to defend me from the Cold; if every other Man should have still as good a Right thereto as I, any one might lawful­ly take it away from me; and if my Right were as good as [Page 163] any others, I might also law­fully Defend my Possession; from which state of things Contention and Strife must eternally and unavoidably a­rise. I therefore conclude, that there must be some Laws of Property and Right; and that every man must yield to o­thers that which is their own, or else there can be no such thing as Society and Bene­ficence preserved and kept up amongst Mankind. Now in order to discover these same Laws of Right and Property, whereby every man is to know what is truly his own, I lay down this general Rule, as a thing most reasonable, That, Whereas originally eve­ry Mans Right and Title to [Page 164] every thing may be esteemed equal (God having given us all the Creatures in common, and not, by any act of his, divided to each Man his se­veral Property) If there be any apparent, or but prob­able, ground why such or such a particular thing should be the Property of one Man rather than of another, that ought so to determine the matter as to oblige all other Men quietly to yield and suf­fer him to enjoy and use that same thing, whatever it be, as his own. For where the Ballance stands exactly even, a small matter is enough to turn the Scale to one side. Now in these following Ca­ses there seems to be great [Page 165] Reason for determining a Pro­perty in a thing to particular persons, viz. 1. When a Man is the first that takes actual Possession of a thing, and con­verts it to his own use. For such a Possession is an additi­on to his general Right be­yond what any other Man, who never was in Possession, can pretend. And why should I part with my Possession to any other, or he demand it from me, except he were able to make out a better Title than I to the thing in dispute? 2. When a Man takes Posses­sion of a thing, which is actu­ally rejected and deserted by him, who last had the Right to, and Possession of it. For his Case seems to be much [Page 166] the same with his who first takes Possession of a thing, 3. When a thing is given, or in Exchange made over, to another by him who had be­fore a just Right thereto: for it is highly reasonable, that every Man should have liber­ty to dispose of his own, 4. When a Company of People do by an Agreement make a Partition of what was before in Common amongst them all, it is reasonable that every Man should acquiesce in that share which upon such a Di­vision, shall fall to his Lot. 5. When a Man takes care and pains to produce and rear any thing for his own use or profit, it is reasonable that he (and not another Man against [Page 167] his Consent) should enjoy the benefit, of his own Labour. And lastly, where a Society of People do submit their Pro­perties unto a legislative Power which is erected amongst them, it is reasonable that herein they should always be concluded and determined by the Laws of that Community, of which they are Members. And if there be any other Rules for determining the Rights of Men to particular things, it is most evident, that due care must be taken to keep and observe them, or else farewel all Order and So­ciety.

30. Where Fidelity is want­ing, Society cannot be truly kept and preserved. I there­fore [Page 168] conclude, that every man is obliged faithfully to perform whatever he Promises; except the person to whom the Pro­mise is made, do freely acquit and discharge him from it. But if a Man promises to do a thing which is sinful, he ought not to keep such a Pro­mise as that; as I have al­ready shewn in the Case of an Oath.

31. And the same Reasons which oblige us to hurt no Man, to yield to every Man his Right, and to keep our Promises, do plainly shew, that he who wrong fully hurts an­other, or deprives him of his Right, or breaks his Promise made to him, ought, as far as he is able, to make full Restitu­tion [Page 169] and Satisfaction to the per­son whom he has thus injured. For he that makes a Breach in humane Society, is doubt­less obliged, as far as he can, to repair it.

32. Where a Proposition is literally false, and yet spoken with no manner of intention to deceive another, it is not to be called a Lye: But he who as­serts any thing for a Truth, with an intent to make ano­ther believe it, which is, or for ought he knows may be, false, he only is to be esteem­ed a Lyar. Now some have doubted whether the sin of a Lye consists in the bare Un­truth, or only in the Injustice of it; and from thence have been inclined to believe, that [Page 170] such a Lye as does no hurt to any one, not draws any man­ner of evil consequence after it, is not to be looked on as a sin; and so much the less, if it be told with a real design only to do Good, or prevent Mischief. The Niceties of this Controversy I leave to be dis­cussed by others. But since humane Society cannot be up­held without, in many cases, a dependence upon one ano­thers Veracity, I may surely venture thus far to conolude; viz. That, not only such a Lye as tends to the damage of ano­ther; but also such a Lye, how­ever otherwise innocent, as gives occasion to render a Mans Truth suspected in other cases, is to be reputed unlawful, if for [Page 171] no other Reason, yet at least fore this, because it is injuri­ous to humane Society. And the same Reason will hold as strongly against all mental Re­servations and equivocal Ex­pressions: For what is humane Society at any time the better for the literal Truth of what a Man says, if others who are therein concerned, do not un­derstand his true meaning by the words which he speaks to them?

33. It is highly reasonable that every Man should have such an Esteem and Respect shewed him, as may be pro­portionable to his Virtues and good Qualities: And as it is proper enough for a Man, by lawful ways, to assert his own [Page 172] Reputation whenever it is un­justly aspersed; so he ought to take especial care in the ma­nagement of all his Words and Actions, that he may not seem to exalt or magnifie him­self, or to despise or underva­lue others beyond what is not only just and true, but also necessary, either for the bring­ing about something that is good, or the preventing something that is evil. For there is scarce any thing that gives greater disgust, or helps to render a Man more odious to the World, than an over­forwardness to praise and magnifie himself, and to un­dervalue others, if he be not necessitated thereto by some very just Reason: And on [Page 173] the contrary, there is scarce any thing which reconciles a Man more to the Favour and Good Will of People, than when he is not over apt to as­cribe much to himself, but is ready to give the utmost Honour and Respect to all o­thers that in reason can be thought due. I conclude there­fore, that Pride is a Sin, and Humility a Duty, because the former tends to disturb, but the latter strengthens and con­firms humane Society.

34. What is incumbent up­on him to do, who has done wrong to another, I have just now shewn: But if another Man wrongs, or any way endeavours to Injure me; As it is lawful for me (so for [Page 174] every Man) to stand upon my defence, and use my ut­most endeavours to save my self from Wrong, or recover that which is my Right; (for otherwise all the good and honest Men in the World would continually lie exposed to the Wrongs and Insults of any evil Man, who might have a mind to destroy them) so I, and every Man ought to be ready at any time to be re­conciled to an Adversary or Ene­my; provided it may be upon such terms as are consistent with our own Safety: Nor ought any Man upon any oc­casion to do any greater harm to his keenest Enemy, than what he apprehends to be absolutely neces­sary to his own preservation. [Page 175] For since Society and Peace among Mankind is the Will and design of Almighty God; If a breach be made therein by another, I ought for my part to do nothing which may make it wider; but ever to be ready to give a helping hand to the closing and mak­ing up of it.

35. Hitherto I have endea­voured to lay down the main and fundamental Rules of that Duty, which every Man is obliged to pay and perform to God, to Himself, and to all o­ther Men. Now to deduce all the particular branches of Virtue and Piety from these main Principles; and to shew how Morality is improved and refined by the Gospel to [Page 176] the highest degree of perfecti­on, is a thing not dificult to be done, but yet inconsistent with my designed Brevity: For which therefore I must refer my Reader to some of those Books of Christian Pie­ty, wherein each Particular of our Duty is, at large, des­cribed and pressed. But in the mean time if we would have a shorter Abstract of our Duty than what I have now been giving; The Holy Scrip­ture furnishes us with three Rules (two exprest, and one implied) from which every thing that we can be obliged to do, is easily dedueed; And they are, 1. That we should love God with all our Heart Soul and Strength. 2. That we [Page 177] should truly love our Selves, that is to say, so as always to aim at and pursue our true and chief Happiness: And 3. That we should love others as we do our Selves: Not with the same degree of Love; for that is not only unreasonable, but impossible; but with the same Reality and Sincerity; or, in other terms, that we should ever do unto all other Men what we would think rea­sonable that they should do unto us, if we were in their Cir­cumstances and they in ours. But besides these general Du­ties, which are indiscriminate­ly incumbent upon all Men; there are divers particular ones, which do arise from those several Relations which [Page 178] Men may contract and bear to others, of which it is fit that I give some brief Ac­count.

36. That God would have the Generation of Men con­tinued and increased upon the Earth, is very evident; as well from the natural inclina­tion which he has implanted in them (as in all other liv­ing Creatures) to propagate their Kind; as from that Love and Affection which is com­mon to them with other Creatures towards those who spring from them. But if Mankind were propagated only by the exercise of wild and wandering Lust, without confinement to any setled Rules or Laws; this would [Page 179] bring in such a Deluge of Con­fusion and disturbance, as would unavoidably deprive them of the greatest part of those satisfactions which at the present they do, or may, enjoy. For if there were no such thing as setled Marri­ages, we can hardly suppose that ever there would be any sort of setled Families, which are the first beginnings of So­ciety and regularity amongst Men; Fathers would not know which were their own Children, and consequently would take no care to bring them up, or provide for them; and not only the pain of bear­ing, but the whole trouble of nourishing reating and pro­viding for Children, would [Page 180] lie, wholly upon the Female Sex, who by themselves could but very imperfectly perform that work as it should be done. Since therefore God in­tends the Comfort and satis­faction of Men, even whilst they are here upon Earth, I conclude, that it is his Will, that Mankind should be propa­gated no other way but by setled Marriages, that is, by a Com­pact and Agreement between the Male and Female, and that under such Rules as are fit and proper to promote the general Happiness of Man­kind, which being his great design, ought ever also to be ours.

37. That a Woman should have more than one Husband [Page 181] at a time, is notoriously con­trary to the design of Marri­age, and therefore directly unlawful: And that a Man should have more than one Wife, at a time, the experi­ence of many, in former Ages; and, at this time, in the Eastern Countries, does suf­ficiently testifie to be contrary to that peace and quietness which is necessary to the Comfort and Happiness of e­very Family; and therefore not so agreeable to that uni­versal Friendship which ought ever to be preserved amongst Men; but especially among those who are so nearly allyed together. Moreover, if Men and their, Wives should have liberty to part one from the [Page 182] other, whenever they please (besides the Confusion and disturbance which this also must breed in Families, espe­cially where there are Chil­dren in the case) Marriage would hardly differ from that wild and wandering Lust, a­gainst which I have spoken in the preceding Paragraph. I conclude therefore, that al­tho, before the coming of Christ, if a Man took more Wives than one, not for Lust (which is unlawful §. 24.) but meerly for Propagation; it might in some cases be dis­pensed with; yet it ever was most pleasing to God, that a Man should have but one Wife at a time; and that no­thing but Death should ever [Page 183] part a Man and his Wife; ex­cept the evil Behaviour of one party should make the continuance of the Marriage Compact and Cohabitation, not only something uneasy (for that for peace and quiet­ness sake should be born pati­ently) but down-right into­lerable. But these things which Reason may perhaps but im­perfectly suggest, the Gospel has passed and established in­to Laws; viz. that, as every Woman is to have but one Hus­band, fo no Man must have more than one Wife at a time; nor must any thing part Man and Wife but Death, except it be the case of Adultery: And better, much it is, that parti­cular persons should some­times [Page 184] be forced to labour under some Inconvenience, than that any such Liberty should be allowed as tends to disturb and distract the World.

38. We generally find, that all Men, even Heathens as well as Jews and Christians, have conceived a more than ordinary abhorrence against the Marriage of such persons as were very nearly Allyed together within some certain Degrees of Relation. And since the World is wide e­nough for a Man to chuse a Wife, or a Woman a Hus­band; those general Rules which are given to us, in Scripture, of providing for things honest, not only in the [Page 185] sight of God, but of Men al­so; and of taking care, not on­ly about such things as are just and honest, but also about such as are lovely and of good report; should teach us that no person should engage in such a Marriage as is by wise men commonly reputed to be incestu­ous and unlawful.

39. Since the relation of Husband and Wife, is wholly owing to the mutual Compact and Agreement which is made between them at their Mar­riage; the Duties which re­sult from that Relation can be no other but the faithful keep­ing and observing of that same Compact and Agreement, the Conditions of which, may be more or fewer according as [Page 186] the parties shall think conve­nient. But these are always necessary, and must never be wanting; viz. that the Hus­band and Wife must sincerely love each other; must be strict­ly faithful to each others Bed (without which, mutual Love can never be preserved in­tire) and Christianity express­ly adds, what Reason per­haps does also obscurely sug­gest, that the Wife must be sub­ject and obedient to her Hus­band.

40. When Children are be­gotten and brought forth into the World, it is not reason­able, nor agreeable to God's design, that they should per­ish and dye for want of care to be taken of them. Nor are [Page 187] there any Persons upon whom a greater obligation can lye to bring up Children, than upon those who begat them, and were the cause of their being: And since God intends not the Misery and Affliction; but generally the Comfort and satisfaction of Mankind upon Earth, as well as their Hap­piness hereafter in Heaven; I conclude, that it is ever the Duty of Parents to take the best care they can to bring up their Children, and to promote their true Happiness, both in this World, and that which is to come. For which reason we must needs suppose them to be vested with a lawful Power of governing and chastising them, as far as is necessary to [Page 188] keep them in good and regu­lar order.

41. And on the other side, since Children are beholding to their Parents, even for their very Being, whereby they are capacitated, not only for the enjoyment of the Satisfactions of this Life, but also for etern­al Happiness in the World to come; it is highly reasonable, that they should love their Pa­rents with a very high degree of Affection; and should always be ready to make them the best returns of Duty and Ser­vice that they can. And ac­cording as Parents have been careful in bringing up and making Provision for their Children, so the Childrens Love and Affection ought [Page 189] still more and more to be re­turned and expressed towards them.

42. Where Parents, by Death or otherwise, are ren­dred uncapable of nourishing and breeding up a Child; or where they utterly forsake and expose him to the wide World, before he is able to provide for, or take care of himself; If another person takes him, and maintains and puts him in a way of living, such a Child is in all reason ob­liged to pay a proportionable share of filial Love and Duty to him who has performed the part of a Parent to him.

43. It is not pretended, that ever any Person or Fa­mily, by name, were ever, [Page 190] by God's particular and re­vealed Appointment, invested with the Power of governing over such or such a certain People; excepting only the case of the People of Israel; I therefore conclude, that how­ever the Magistracy which is lawfully established throughout the World, is ordained of God; it is not by immediate Revelati­on from Heaven.

44. Whether a Parent by the Law of Nature has the Power of a supreme Magi­strate over his own Children, is not necessary here to en­quire. But I see no ground in Reason or Nature, to judge that the eldest Son of any Kin­dered successively should have the same Power over his Bro­thers [Page 191] and Sisters (who are no way beholding to him for their Being, nor, it may be, for their well-being) and much less over his Fathers Brothers and Sisters; as the common Pa­rent of a whole Family may have over all that spring from him. I conclude therefore, that lawful Magistracy is not to be derived by the Law of Nature from the alone right of Primo­geniture; Nor do we ever meet with any Prince in Hi­story, who derived his Au­thority from this only Foun­tain; and if this were the true Right and Title of Ma­gistracy, it would follow, that all the World ought to be but one Monarchy; and Adam's Heir Male the Em­perour [Page 192] thereof; and all the Kings and Emperours that e­ver were, whose Titles were originally bottom'd upon ano­ther Foundation, were no bet­ter than meer Usurpers.

45. Where one Man con­quers another; that is to say, by force of Arms, or by Stra­tagem, gets him so into his Power, as that he can destroy or kill him at his pleasure; the conquered person indeed, being obliged to do all that honestly he can for the pre­servation of his own Life, ought, on that account, to use his best endeavours by an obsequious Demeanour to as­swage and pacifie the Fury of the Conquerour. But, far­ther than he finds necessary to [Page 193] his own Preservation, he is not obliged to obey the Con­querour; except he binds him­self thereto by some act of his own; there being no Law of God or Nature which lays any farther Obligation on him in that case but only to pre­serve himself, without doing wrong to another. Since then all the World does allow that a Subject is bound to obey the Magistrate, who is lawfully set over him, even in those cases where no danger, in this world, would attend his Disobedience, or, as the Apo­stle expresses it, not only for Wrath, but also for Conscience sake. It will follow, that Con­quest alone, without any Com­pact or Agreement, does not [Page 194] establish the Conquerour a lawful Magistrate over the conquered People. For if it did, there could be no difference between a Liege Subject, and a Priso­ner of War.

46. If any man unjuslly invades the Property, or at­tempts the Life of another, It is lawful for him, to whom the Wrong is offered, to de­fend himself the best he can; And if he has no other way of securing himself, nor can prevail with his Enemy to desist from his evil Design, the necessity of preserving himself from Death, or (which may be as bad, or worse) from Ruin, will certainly ju­stifie the Killing of him. For otherwise the Lives and For­tunes [Page 195] of all honest Men must for ever be exposed to the arbitrary pleasure of every lawless and wicked person, which is contrary to that comfort and satisfactory state, which we suppose God ge­nerally to design for Men, e­ven in this Life. And that which is allowable for every single Man to do for himself, is surely no less lawful for a Society of Men combining to­gether, to do for their joynt and mutual Safety. More­over, if in such a Society any person be taken in, or after, such an unlawful Attempt, it is lawful for them to punish him in such a manner (whe­ther by death or otherwise) as may be necessary to terrifie [Page 196] others from doing the like for the time to come: For with­out this, there could be no security against evil doers; who might contrive to act their Mischief so secretly, as not to be killed, or even resist­ed in the very fact it self. But if such a Society have not cer­tain Laws and Rules to pro­ceed by in all such cases, and some certain persons to put those Laws in execution; e­very Man would take upon him to be his own Judge; and what might feem fit and reasonable to one, might ap­pear otherwise to another of a contrary interest, from whence perpetual Factions and Confusion must needs fol­low. But there is no reason [Page 197] that any one, or more of such a Society, without the con­sent of the rest, should take upon them to make Laws for, or exercise Authority over the whole Community. For if it were in every Mans power to make himself a Magistrate, all might set up to be Rulers, and few or none would be Subjects; which would bring in Confusion, and destroy the Society. But when the whole Society do agree and consent, that such certain persons shall have the exercising of such cer­tain Powers (which original­ly are in the Body of the So­ciety it self) it is then law­ful for those persons to act ac­cordingly; and they who have consented to their Authority [Page 198] are, by virtue of that Consent, obliged to pay Obedience to them. I conclude therefore, that the Original of Magistrates is from the Consent of the Peo­ple, since there is no other so­lid ground, that I can find, up­on which to establish them. And when once a legislative and executive Power is thus setled and established by the consent of a People, who acquiesce in it, and upon all occasions take shelter under its Protection; it is to be looked upon as rati­fied and confirmed by God's own appointment; and Sub­jection and Obedience is accord­ingly to be paid to it by every particular person who abides within the precincts of its Ju­ridiction. For this was the [Page 199] very case of the Roman Go­vernment, which was in St. Paul's time; and there is ex­actly the same reason for it in all other Kingdoms and Com­mon-wealths whatsoever.

47. Since then Magistracy derives it self wholly from the Consent of the People; from hence it will follow, that the Original Rule of the Magistrates Power and the Subjects obedi­ence, is that Consent which the People has given; or, in other terms, those Laws and Constitutions of the place, in which the Body of the Nation have acquiesced: Beyond which neither any Magistrate ought to command, nor is any Sub­ject bound to obey. For where there is no Law, there [Page 200] can be no Transgression, nor any Obligation to Obedience; nor consequently any Right to Command.

48. But if the legislative Power of any Nation do enact any thing which is contrary to the express Law of God, or the eternal Laws of good and evil; No particular Man can be bound to obey such a Constitution. For the Authority of God ought to weigh more with us, than that of any Community what­soever; And it is expressly ruled in Scripture, that we ought to obey God rather than Man.

49. And the same Reason (viz. Self-preservation) which allows a Society, thus setled into a Government, to pu­nish [Page 201] Malefactors within them­selves; must also justifie them, it by force of Arms they de­fend themselves against any foreign Enemy, which would wrong or oppress them; or endeavour to recover their Right from those who have taken it from them, and refuse to restore it. For otherwise it were in vain for a Com­munity to hope to subsist by maintaining good Order and Discipline at home; if all the while they must, without re­medy, lye continually expo­sed to the Wrongs and Insults of every Enemy which may assault them from abroad. I conclude therefore, that War, whether defensive or offensive, may in many cases, be very just and [Page 202] lawful: Nor is there the least word throughout the Holy Scriptures, which may re­present the Profession of a Soldier, who fights under a lawful Authority, as any way contrary to Religion and a good Conscience: Tho such a Man certainly ought not only to exercise his calling with as much Mildness and Humanity as can be consistent with the ser­vice of his Country; but also e­ver to satisfie himself first of the lawfulness of the Cause in which he engages, before he draws his Sword in the Quarrel: For as we are obliged to do no hurt to any Man whatsoever, if we can avoid it; so, for the very same reason, ought we not to become instrumental in [Page 203] any Wrong or Injustice which another Man (let him be who he will) intends to do.

50. That an humble De­meanour, together with a reason­able Diligence, and an honest Fidelity to his Master, is the Duty of every Servant, is most apparent; because if a Ser­vant be either haughty, neg­ligent, or unfaithful, he ceases in effect to be a Servant. And on the other side, that Justice and Humanity are no less the Duty of a Master towards his Servant is altogether as clear, because where these are not observed, the Condition of a Servant must be intolerable, and contrary to that comfort­able state which we suppose God to design for all Men; [Page 204] and therefore for Servants, who are as much Men, and as much valued by God, and for whom Christ died, as well as for their Masters.

51. That all Christians are, or (according to Christs In­stitution) ought to be, combined together into one Society, which is called the Church, I have al­ready said Part 2. §. 40. Now in all such incorporated Socie­ties these three things are ever to be considered, 1. What is the Design of the person or persons, who first gather and institute them? 2. What Ad­vantage accrues to those who become Members of them? And 3dly. what are the Laws and Rules to be observed by the whole Body, and every [Page 205] Member of it? The Design of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who, at the Will of his heaven­ly Father, instituted and em­bodied the Christian Church, was to purifie unto himself a peculiar People zealous of good works, or, in other terms, by this Incorporation so made, more effectually to promote the practice of Vir­tue and Godliness in the World. The benefit and ad­vantage which every true Member of this Church may propose to himself, is the par­ticipation of God's Grace and assistance here for the better performance of his Duty, and the enjoyment of everlasting Happiness hereafter; both which are promised to us by [Page 206] God in and through Christ Jesus our Saviour. And last­ly, the Laws of the Christian Church are either, 1. The general Laws of Piety and Morality, of which I have hitherto been giving an ac­count; or, 2. Such particular Constitutions as are proper to it, considered as a congregated and incorporated Body of Men; which I have reserved to be treated of in the last place of all.

52. The first thing which is incumbent on every Man, as (or rather, in order to become) a Member of the Christian Church, is to be baptized in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: Which Ce­remony is intended to put us [Page 207] in mind of that Purity and Cleanness from sin to which we ought to bring our Souls by a virtuous and holy life: And altho to wet or wash the Body with Water, may seem but a slight and inconsiderable thing; yet since our Saviour Christ has expressly appoint­ed and commanded it, and since his Apostles were always most careful to perform it; insomuch that even they who had received the extraordina­ry Gift of the Holy Ghost from Heaven, were yet re­quired to be Baptized, in or­der to become visible Mem­bers of the Church; This Ceremony, I think, ought not to be left off, or discon­tinued. Altho whether it be [Page 208] performed by dipping the Body under the Water, or by sprinkling the Water upon it, to me seems to be altogether indifferent; and to be regu­lated only by Prudence, or the Custom of particular places. For neither does the word Baptize signifie any more than to Wash; which may be done either way; nor does it appear that the Apostles dip­ped all those whom they bap­tized Moreover, since sprink­ling, as well as dipping, may sufficiently denote the wash­ing and cleansing of the Soul from sin; and since Baptism is not expressly, in the Holy Scripture, determined to ei­ther of these ways, to the exclusion of the other; I con­clude, [Page 209] that God has left the matter (so far) indifferent to us; and to be ordered accord­ing to Prudence, as the Cir­cumstances of things and per­sons shall at any time direct: And as long as the Substance and Design of his Command is carefully retained, I see no necessity of being so very so­licitous about a Circumstance of it; except it could evident­ly be made appear, that he had appointed and determined it.

53. Since then Baptism is as the Entrance or Door of Admittance into the Church of Christ, it will follow, that all they, and they only who are duly qualified to be Mem­bers of his Church, are fit to [Page 210] have Baptism administred to them. If any person has been brought up out of the Chucrh, until he comes to years of un­derstanding and knowledge; he is then, and only then, qualified to be a Member of the Church, when, having repented of all his former sins, he believes and owns that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and consequently re­ceives and professes that Faith and Doctrine which he has taught and authorized, and obliges himself to live ac­cording to all those Laws and Rules which he has pre­scribed to us; this being the very Condition which our Saviour indespensably requires from his Church, and every [Page 211] Member of it, according as they are capable of perform­ing it. But if a Child be born of Christian Parents, or is so in the hands of Christian Guardians, as that it is in their power to bring him up in the true Religion; and they do promise and engage so to educate him; such a Child as this, even before he comes to any knowledge of things, is yet qualified to be a Member of the Church of Christ (upon the presump­tion that he will perform what God requires from him when he comes to be capable of it) and so to continue, if, by Apostacy or wickedness, he does not, in process of time, separate himself again [Page 212] from it. For this, beyond dispute was the case of In sants, before the coming of Christ, who at eight days old (if Males) were to be Cir­cumcised, and thereby ad­mitted into the Church of God, and within his Cove­nant, if they were either the Sons, or Servants born in the House, of believing persons, and who, as well as their Pa­rents, are expressly said to enter into Covenant with God, which is but another expression for becoming of his Church: And no one surely will offer to say, that the Case of Infants is made worse than it was, by our Saviours coming into the World; especially, since he [Page 213] has expressly commanded, that little Children should come unto him, and not be forbidden; for that of such is the Kingdom, that is, the Church of God. I conclude therefore, that not only adult persons, who make a due profes­sion of their Faith and Repen­tance; but also such Infants as are in a way of being brought up in the Christian Religion, are, without any Obstacle, to be admitted to Baptism.

54. There are some pas­sages in the New Testament, which seem plainly to sug­gest to us, that it was a con­stant Custom with the Apo­stles of Christ, to lay their Hands upon all such as had been Baptized (which laying [Page 214] on of Hands was undoubted­ly accompanied with Prayer to God) in order to their re­ceiving the Gifts and Graces of the Holy Spirit of God: But that this was a thing positively prescribed, and commanded, I do not find clearly proved: And there­fore, altho I dare not hasti­ly condemn those particular Churches, where this same Custom is disused or intermit­ted; yet since the Grace and Assistance of the Holy Ghost, in order to the leading of a good life, and obtaining e­ternal Happiness, is for ever continued unto the Church, as I have said Part 2. §. 42. and therefore ought ever to be sought for (altho the work­ing [Page 215] of Miracles and speaking of all Languages, without learning them, be ceased from amongst us) I cannot but con­clude, that the laying on of Hands upon persons that have been baptized, together with Prayer to God for their growth and continuance in Grace, which is commonly called Confirmation, is a pru­dent and godly Custom, and e­ver fit to be continued in the Church.

55. As every particular Man whatsoever is obliged, in his own private person, to ho­nour and worship God; so the Church, being a Society in­corporated for the better serving of God, is under an Obligation to do the same in her associ­ated [Page 216] capacity, that is to say, to assemble together for his wor­ship. And because the whole Number of Christians, which are dispersed over the Face of the Earth, are not capable of meeting together in one place; the Universal Church there­fore lies under a necessity of subdividing it self into parti­cular Churches; and those a­gain into particular Congre­gations, according as they find to be most convenient for the pursuing that same end for which they are so incorpora­ted. Moreover, since all these particular Churches and Con­gregations are still, or ought to be, but Parts and Members of that One Catholick Church which our Saviour Christ has [Page 217] appointed and founded, it fol­lows, that none of them ought to constitute or act any thing amongst themselves, which may give a just occasiou for the breaking of that Union and Concord which he de­signed, and has commanded always to be maintained a­mongst them. But on the contrary, Matters ought e­very where so to be ordered, as that if a Member of any one particular Church should tra­vel into any other part of the World, he may meet with nothing in any Christian Con­gregation, where he comes, which justly should be a hin­derance to him from assem­bling or communicating with it.

[Page 218]56. The particular acts to be performed in these Christian As­semblies, are all such as tend to the Edification of the People in Virtue and Godliness (which is the design of their Incor­poration) and consequently, to the promoting of each mans eternal Salvation (which is the end that every Christi­an is supposed to pursue.) All which are reducible to these Two Heads, viz. Devotion towards God, which includes Confession of sins, Prayer for all things necessary, both for themselves and others, and Praising of God, as well for his own Excellency and Per­fection, as for his Love and Beneficence to all Mankind: And 2. the Instruction of the [Page 219] People which are assem­bled; which is to be done by Reading and Explaining the Holy Scriptures, Catechizing, Preaching, &c. But there is one act of Devotion towards God to be performed in such publick Assemblies, which is commonly known by the name of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, or the Holy Communion; of which it will be fit to say something more particularly, because it is an Ordinance altogether of positive Institution, as well as Baptism, of which I have al­ready spoken.

57. As our Saviours Death and Passion, which he under­went for the sins of the whole World, should ever out of [Page 220] Gratitude, be remembred by us in the most emphatical and affecting manner; so except we have, every one of us, a share and interest in that A­tonement which he thereby made to God for us, we cannot, by the Terms of the Gospel, hope for eternal Salvation. In order then to both these Ends he himself before his Death ap­pointed it, as a perpetual Ordi­nance, for ever to be continu­ed in his Church, that Bread should be blessed, broken, and eaten; and a Cup also blessed, distributed and drank, in such assemblies as should meet toge­ther in his Name, not only as a Remembrance of his Suffer­ings for us, which are there­by shewn forth and represen­ted; [Page 221] but also as the Commu­nion, that is to say, the exhi­bition of his Body and Blood unto, and the participation of them, by all faithful and good Christians. To say with the Roman Church, that the Substance of Bread and Wine, being blessed or consecrated in this Ordinance, are transub­stantiated or turned into the very, real Substance, of the Body and Blood of Christ, so as that that very same Body of his which was crucified, and that Blood which was shed, are wholly and intirely received into the bodily Mouth, and swallowed down by every Communicant, does not only draw after it such monstrous Absurdities, as no Man, I [Page 222] think, without renouncing his Reason, can digest, nor can be inferred from any pas­sage of Scripture interpreted according to the Rules which I have laid down, Part 1. §. 25. and 33. But is also direct­ly contrary even to the Let­ter, as well as Meaning of the New Testament; in which the Bread, in this Holy Insti­tution, is plainly called Bread (and by the same Rule the Wine must still remain Wine, as to its natural substance) e­ven after the Blessing or Con­secration of it. As therefore I must needs conclude, that the Body and Blood of Christ are not received by the Mem­bers of his Church after that manner, which they of Rome [Page 223] do define; so must it also fol­low, that their Worshiping of the Host and pretended Sa­crifice of Christ in the Mass, together with their depriving the Laity of the Cup (which besides other Absurdities do wholly depend upon the Do­ctrine of Transubstantiation) are none other than meer hu­man and unlawful Inventions and practices. But since a Man may then be said truly to receive and partake of any thing, tho at never so great a distance from him, when he has a real Interest in it, and enjoys the Benefit and Advan­tage of it (as a Man may have an Estate, and reap the Profits of it, tho it lies in a far distant Country) I do [Page 224] therefore conclude, that the way whereby we do receive, or communicate in, the Body and Blood of Christ, by this Ordinance, is by being made Partakers of those Benefits which by the Crucifying of his Body, and the shedding of his Blood do accrue to us; and that whosoever eats of this Bread, and drinks of this Cup in such a manner as Christ has appointed, has thereby as­suredly a share of those Bene­fits held forth and conveyed unto him.

58. How often this Ordi­nance is to be practised and re­peated in every Congregation, is not expressly determined, either by Christ or his Apo­stles; and therefore can only [Page 225] be regulated by the Prudence of the Church it self: But common Reason will tell us, that it should be so often at least, as may be sufficient to pre­serve a fresh and lively Remem­brance of the Sufferings of our Saviour in the minds of the Peo­ple; this being one main End of its first Institution And so often therefore ought every Christian, who is arrived to years of understanding (for such only are capable of do­ing any thing in remembrance of another) to come and be partakers of it. For to con­temn or neglect this Ordi­nance, which Christ has ap­pointed for such a peculiar End, argues a great slight and disregard of his Death and [Page 226] Passion (besides the Disobedi­ence to his Command) and therefore is justly to be look­ed on as a very great and hein­ous sin.

59. As it is a great Affront, and even a Mocking of God, for a Man to draw near to him in any of his Ordinances, with­out a sincere and well-mean­ing heart (for which Reason Hypocrisy in Scripture is re­presented as most odious, and the Prayer and Sacrifice of a wicked Man, whilst he conti­nues such, is said to be an A­bomination unto God) so does he seem to resent such a Pra­ctice in no instance more than in this of the Holy Communi­on; of which he who eats and drinks unworthily, is expess­ly [Page 227] said by the Apostle to be quilty of the Body and Blood of Christ, and to eat and drink damnation to himself: Which Expressions altho they are dif­ferently interpreted by divers persons, yet in whatever sense we take them, they do abundantly shew, that God is in a particular manner offen­ded with those, who any way profane this sacred Instituti­on. It therefore is the Duty, and ought very much to be the concern, of every Christian first, to examin himself, and to make the best trial and enquiry that he can, whether he be truly sincere in his resolutions of serving and obeying God faith­fully all his life-long (for any person who is thus disposed, [Page 228] and none other, is ever ac­ceptable to God) And then with Devotion and Reverence suit­able unto such Sincerity, to come and eat of this Bread, and drink of this Cup: That as, on the one side, he may not neg­lect what Christ has com­manded and required; so, on the other, he may not incur the Penalty which is threat­ned to an unworthy Receiver.

60. He that worships or prays to God by himself alone, may do it as well by offering up only the inward Thoughts and Desires of his Mind, which are clearly seen and known un­to God, as by expressing him­self outwardly by Words; which tho even in our private Devotions they may be very [Page 229] proper to keep our Minds in­tent upon what we are about, yet are no way necessary to in­form God of what we think or wish for. But when a So­ciety of Men do meet to joyn together in God's worship, their Devotion must of neces­sity be outwardly expressed in Words; because there is no o­ther way of keeping their Thoughts (wherein their Worship does consist) united and joyned together. And since Words not understood are in effect the same with no Words at all; I conclude, that the Language wherein the Wor­ship of any Church or Congre­gation is offered up to God, must always be such as is well under­stood by the Assembly of the Peo­ple [Page 230] who meet together. Nor does even the Doctrine of Tran­substantiation amaze me more than that the Church of Rome should own the 14th. Chapter of St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians to be the Word of God, and yet have all their publick Services every where performed in the Latine Tongue only, which is not now understood by the ge­nerality of any Nation in the World.

61. As Peace and Ʋnity, mutual Love and good Agree­ment amongst the Members of every Society, together with Or­der and Decency in all that is transacted amongst them, absolutely necessary to the be­ing and continuance, or at [Page 231] least to the well-being of the Society it self; so are they carefully prescribed and in­culcated by Christ and his A­postles, as things to be always preserved and maintained in the Christian Church. And as he, who first occasions the violati­on of any of them, is plainly guilty of a very great sin; so in all Matters that are not par­ticularly and clearly deter­mined by God's Law, we can­not propose a better and safer Rule to our selves, than al­ways to do that which tends most to the advancement and preservation of them.

62. If some certain time be not determined for Christians to meet together for God's Worship, which every Man [Page 232] may know of before it comes, and accordingly prepare him­self for it by laying aside, for that time, his worldly Busi­ness; Disorder and Confusion (which is the natural Conse­quence of Uncertainty) must needs follow. That one Day at least, in seven was express­ly required by God, under the Mosaick Law, to be sanctified and set a part for his Service, is beyond dispute. That the Observation of the Jewish Sab­bath, or the last Day of the Week is not required from the Christian Church, to me seems very evident from St. Paul's reckoning it amongst the tran­sitory Shadows of the old Law, Col. 2. 17. But that we Chri­stians ought not to be behind­hand [Page 233] with the Jews, in setting apart a proportion of our time for God's Service, I think will follow as well from the great Mercies which we have re­ceived from him; for which we, no less than they, ought to shew and express our Thankfulness; as also from that general Rule which our Saviour has given us, that our Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees. And that accordingly one Day in seven, namely the First Day of the Week (which in Scrip­ture is therefore called the Lord's Day, Rev. 1. 10.) has ever been so set apart for the Service of God in all Christi­an Churches, I presume will [Page 234] be denied by none; As also, that the Reason of the Apo­stles making choice of this par­ticular Day, was in remem­brance of our Saviour's glori­ous Resurrection, which on that Day was performed, and whereby their Faith in him, which began to waver, was confirmed and raised above all doubt or diffidence. Now since no Reason can be given, or so much as imagined why this Day should be changed for any other Day of the Week; I do from what has been said conclude, that the Lord's Day, or First Day of the Week, ought for ever to be kept holy in the Christian Church; and par­ticularly dedicated to the Service of God. And where either [Page 235] the Church universal, or any particular Church has set a­side any other days to be kept holy, in remembrance either of any of God's Mercies to us; or of the Martyrdom of any of his chosen Saints, who sealed the Truth of the Gospel with their Lives, and transmitted it so confirmed down unto us; or as Days of Fasting or Absti­nence, in order to humble our selves before God for our Sins; since in all this there is no­thing contrary to God's Law; nor any thing but what may be well consistent with, and serviceable to, true Piety; It will follow from what I have said, § 61. That every Mem­ber of such a Church is obliged to keep and observe these same [Page 236] other Holy Days, so far as no way to give Scandal, disturb the Order, or break the Peace of the Church which has e­stablished them.

63. Order and Decency ne­cessarily require that all the outward circumstances of Wor­ship, which God himself has not determined by his own Law, should be so setled by the Church, as that all Confusion and Unseemliness therein may, as much as is possible, be a­voided. But care on the o­ther side ought ever to be taken, that Modes and Cere­monies be not so multiplied as to become uneasy and burden­some, or distract the Devoti­on of the People. Now there being no such fixed and de­monstrable [Page 237] Rules of Decency and Order, but what will have a different relish with different Men, according to their several Educations, and Customs to which they may have been used; it will be ve­ry difficult, if not impossible, for any Church so to regulate these external matters as to please every Mans Fancy, and give disgust to none: For what some may think to be but decent, others may take to be too formal or pompous; and what these may appre­hend to be suitable to the Sim­plicity of Christianity, ano­ther sort may look on as mean and jejune. As therefore the Church in this case can do no more, but act according to [Page 238] the best of her Prudence; so since every Man cannot ex­pect to have his particular Fancy in these things pleased and gratified; It will evident­ly appear to be the Duty of each private Christian, so far to com­ply with every such constitution of the Church where he dwells (provided there be nothing in it which is sinful) as not to break the Peace and Unity, or disturb the Order of the Church on that account. But if any Church shall offer to impose any Ceremonies or practices whatsoever (which God has not prescribed, and which therefore are in themselves in­different) not for Decency and Order; but as things in themselves Holy, or absolute­ly [Page 239] necessary to Salvation (as some of old would have done by the Jewish Ceremonies) with such Impositions as these no Christian ought at all to comply; nor suffer his Reli­gion or Conscience to be thus burthened: But every Man must stand fast in that Liberty wherewith Christ has made us free; tho at the same time he must be very careful not to pretend, or use this Liberty as a Cloke of Maliciousness.

64. Since different Opini­ons in matters of Religion are generally apt to beget Dissen­sions and Animosities between those who entertain them, as our dayly Experience does a­bundantly testifie; It ought to be the Church's, and every [Page 240] private Christian's endeavour, that all Men may become of one and the same Judgment, or at least, that there may be as few Differences amongst them as is possible. When therefore any religious Dispute arises, whereby the Church's Peace and Unity is like to be endangered, It is free and pro­per for (Nor is there any thing which should hinder) either the Church universal, or any particular Church, or even any prudent Men whatsoever, to declare and publish their sense of the matter in debate. But as no Man can be obliged to be­lieve the Determination of any Church or party whatso­ever, any farther than he is convinced and satisfied of its [Page 241] agreement with Reason and the Holy Scriptures, Part 2. §. 1, and 2. so is not any Man bound to oppose or dispute e­ven against an Error it self; except there be something in it which is injurious to Christian Faith or practice; and consequently which may prove pernicious to Men's Sal­vation. And therefore if such a Mistake, which may have prevailed in any Church, can­not well be rectified without endangering the breach of Peace and Charity (because they who hold it, it may be, are obstinately wedded to it) I think it is the Duty of us all to be very tender in such a case, and to permit every Man freely to abound in his own [Page 242] Sense, until such time as God shall think fit to bring them to a clearer sight of the Truth. And by no means to renounce the Communion of any Church on the account of any Error that is not damnable; and much less on account only of such Terms or Expressions as are but ab­struse or of doubtful significa­tion. For otherwise since the Apprehensions of Men are so very different (especially in such things as being remote from our Senses are matter on­ly of rational Speculation) if Difference of Opinion upon such theological Questions, as do not immediately concern our Salvation, were a suffici­ent ground for Separation in point of Communion, there [Page 243] would soon be probably al­most as many Churches as Men in the World. But if any Church shall require from a Man, either to comply with, or practise, any thing, which is, not only against his Fancy in point of Decency or Conve­nience, but also against his Conscience in point of Law­fulness; or that he should not only be silent and not oppose, but also explicitly profess the Belief of, any such Doctrines as he judges to be false (how­ever innocent the Belief of them may be to them who think them true) and if such a Church shall refuse and de­ny her Communion to all those who will not joyn with her upon these Terms; We [Page 244] must rather be contented to be excluded from such a Church's Communion, than to purchase it by solemnly telling a down right Lye be­fore God and the World, or by the violation of any other of God's Commands: For if we offer to do Evil that Good may come of it, St. Paul has declared us to be in a state of Damnation.

65. For the due regulation of every Society, it is neces­sary that it have a Power, somewhere or other vested in it, over its own Members, either to compel them to live orderly, according to its Laws and Constitutions, or, if any of them are disobedient and refractory, and will not, [Page 245] upon due admonition, be re­claimed; wholly to exclude them from the Body of the Community. For, otherwise, if the Members of any Society may at their pleasure break its Constitutions, and violate its Laws without control, this would be wholly to pull down the Enclosure, and lay all open and common, as be­fore; and consequently, in effect to dissolve the Society it self. And accordingly our Saviour has given the Church a Power to admonish and rebuke those who give any scandal by their ungodly and unruly Be­haviour; and if upon this they do not repent and reform, of rejecting and cutting them off from her Communion. Which [Page 246] Authority must ever be exer­cised with due mildness and caution, for the edification, and not with heat and fury, which in the end would more probably tend to the destru­ction of the Church. But if any Church shall go beyond this to punish or persecute Men, with Fire and Sword or with Fines and Imprison­ment, only for being of a different persuasion from, and refusing to communicate with, her; In my Opinion she herein acts contrary to that Mildness and Gentleness which the Gospel upon all oc­casions prescribes; and par­ticularly in the case of dealing with those who oppose them­selves to it, 2 Tim. 2. 24. [Page 247] Altho at the same time it can­not be de [...]yed, but that if any Man, under the pretence of Conscience, or Religion, shall advance such Doctrines or do such acts as are destru­ctive to the peace or safety of the civil State or Common­wealth; the civil Magistrate may, and ought to punish such a person according to the Laws of the Land, not­withstanding all his pretences. For if the Plea of Conscience (the truth of which can only be known to Almighty God) be sufficient to save any Ma­lefactour from Punishment, no civil Society can ever be safe, and all humane Laws and Magistrates would be wholly useless. See Part 1. §. 35.

[Page 248]66: And as Almighty God in his Mercy is pleased not to cut the greatest sinners off from all hopes of pardon; but is ready at any time, up­on their true and sincere Re­pentance, to receive them a­gain into his Favour, so has he committed unto the Church the ministry of Reconciliati­on; which Church therefore accordingly ought not only to endeavour to bring sinners to Repentance by Preaching. Ad­monition and Exhortation; but also wherever she sees evident Marks and Tokens of it in any person (of which yet there ought to be good assurance) for his greater comfort and ease of Conscience, to remit or absolve him from his sins, [Page 249] and restore him again to the be­nefit and privilege of Christian Communion, of which I sup­pose that he has, or ought to have, been deprived: And whatever Sentence of thus binding or loosing, remitting or retaining of Men's sins is duly and regularly pronoun­ced by the Church upon Earth, our Saviour assures us it shall be ratified and confirmed by God in Heaven. But that a Man is obliged to make a particular Confession of all his sins unto any other person, except God, in order to ob­tain the Pardon of, or Abso­lution from them; as I no where find it asserted in the Holy Scripture; so the rea­son which the Roman Divines [Page 250] do allege for it, is very weak and unconcluding: For it is not the particular Confession of a Man's sins (which may be performed by the most hardened impenitent) but his Contrition, and the visible re­formation of his life (which may sufficiently appear with­out a particular Confession) that only can enable the Church or her Ministers to judge whether he truly re­pents of his sins or not, and consequently whether he be a proper Object of God's Mer­cy and the Church's Favour. Altho I deny not but that in some cases it may be very proper for a Man to make known the diseases of his Soul to a prudent Spiritual [Page 251] Physician, that he may have his advice for the cure of them. And his Duty also to make an open Confession of his sins whenever it is necessary for God's Glory, or to repair any publick scandal which has been given by him.

67. That Almighty God, even where he has pardoned a Man's sins upon his true Re­pentance, may yet, on the score of those very sins which he has so pardoned, lay some sharp and severe temporal Afflictions upon the penitent, either to keep him more ef­fectually from sinning for the time to come, or that it may be a Terror to others; or for many other reasons best known to himself, is a thing [Page 252] that cannot be disputed. But from hence to infer, that these temporal Afflictions, if not laid on us in this World, are to be undergone in Purgatory, and that therefore, for the preventing them, it is fit and necessary that Penance should be imposed by way of satisfaction, or Indulgences granted by way of Remission; and all this with­out any Warrant from the Holy Scripture, save only a faint and forced Consequence from some few perverted Texts; is a thing so ground­less and precarious, that it a­mazes me to think how Men can suffer themselves to be so grossly imposed upon. And whosoever shall duly consider upon what weak grounds the [Page 253] Pope and his Prelates do pre­tend to a Power of dispensing and distributing the Merits of Christ unto the People by way of Indulgence (as if they alone had the keeping of that Treasure under Lock and Key; and to which, tho, in­finite, they have yet added the Merits of the Saints to make their Treasure more a­bundant) will, I think, very much wonder that their Peo­ple should be so free to part with their earthly Treasure in purchasing these Indulgen­ces upon no better security.

68. That the Apostles of Christ, when they were first sent abroad to preach the glad Tidings of the Gospel, did a­noint many sick persons with [Page 252] [...] [Page 253] [...] [Page 254] Oyl, and thereby miraculous­ly heal them, we are plainly told by St. Mark, c. 6. v 13. And that in this they did no more than what Christ him­self had expressly commanded them, is most reasonable and probable to suppose. Moreo­ver, that the anointing with Oyl, which is mentioned by St. James, c. 5. v. 14. was intended for the very same purpose; viz. the raising up the sick person and restoring him to Health, is as apparent as any thing can be form the very Context. But as we do not find that this anointing of the sick was appointed either by Christ or his Apostles, as a standing and perpetual Ordi­nance for ever to be used in the [Page 255] Church; so since Experience shews, that the miraculous effect of healing thereby is now wholly ceased; I can see no reason why the practice it self should be any longer con­tinued. But what just ground the Church of Rome can have from either of these, or any other place of Scripture for the divine Institution of their Extreme Unction, which they make use of for a far different end, namely the preparing thereby of persons who are past hopes of recovery, for their passage into the next life, is more than I am able to find out.

69. As the Body natural would be but a confused and useless Lump, if it were not [Page 256] distinguished into the several Members, which are necessary for its own Service and pre­servation: And as the Body­politick would be but a dis­orderly Rabble, if there were not Magistrates setled to rule and govern, and ministerial Officers appointed to perform all necessary Functions in and about it; so the Holy Scrip­ture, as well as Reason, as­sures us (and the practice of the apostolical Church, which is there recorded, confirms it) that the like Appointment and distinction of Offices are no less necessary in the Church; in order to the regular and orderly government of it, and the due execution of all its Laws and Constitutions. But [Page 257] how far these Offices are li­mited and appointed by the Law of God, or how far left to be setled, and determin­ed by the Prudence of the Church, according as Cir­cumstances may render it con­venient, is what I shall not take upon me to pronounce my Sentence in. But whate­ver Polity or ecclesiastical Con­stitution is setled and acquiesced in, either by the whole Church in general, or by that of any Na­tion or Country in particular, I think, ought quietly to be sub­mitted to by every one who would be a Member of such respective Church, except there appears to him to be either something therein, which is not only uncommanded, but even con­trary [Page 258] to the Law of God; or else something wanting, which God requires, and therefore is absolutely neces­sary to be maintained and kept up in all Churches. Nor can I apprehend that any less Warrant can be sufficient for breaking or endangering the Peace or Unity of the Church (the preservation of which is so often and so earnestly re­commended to us in the Holy Scripture) besides the abso­lute necessity of obeying the Positive Command of God himself. And therefore, since the Government of the Church by Bishops, that is to say, by certain persons having in their several Districts a Pri­ority among, and in some re­spects [Page 259] a Superiority over, the Presbyters; has for so many Ages been universally setled amongst, and acquiesced in by, all Christians in all parts of the World; I cannot find how they can be excused, who (without any necessity for so doing) have so earnest­ly set themselves, not only to retrench the Exceffes, and rectifie the Abuses of the e­piscopal Power; but also to pull down, and wholly abo­lish, the very Order it self; to the no small scandal of those who think that so universal a Constitution, every where taking place, even in the pri­mitive Church, could be grounded on no less than an Apostolick Ordinance (of [Page 260] which there seems to be some, not obscure, Foot-steps in the Scriptures of the New Testament) and that most probably in conformity to that Imparity which Christ himself established between the Apostles and the seventy Disciples; who were yet both commissioned by him to preach the Gospel.

70. How far a case of ne­cessity may, upon some oc­casions, excuse or justifie a Man for taking on him an Office which regularly does not belong to him, especially if his design therein be truly honest and sincere, I know not. But no Man certainly ought to intrude into any ecclesi astical Function; or exercise any [Page 261] such Office, who is not called and admitted thereunto by the lawful Authority, and according to the established Constitutions of the Society. For if this be not carefully observed, the distinction of Offices and Fun­ctions in the Church is in ef­fect wholly taken away; and a wide Door opened for Con­fusion and Anarchy. But then on the other side, good care ought ever to be taken by the Church, that no persons be entrusted with any sacred Of­fice, but such as are duly qua­lified for it; And that such a Maintainance be provided and setled for every such person, as that he may not be neces­sitated to neglect the publick Service of God and the due [Page 262] exercise of his Function, by being constrained to bestow and spend overmuch of his Time and Labour in getting a Living for himself and his Family.

71. I have now gone through what I at first designed; and have not, that I know of, o­mitted any one thing which I could judge to be a material or necessary part of Religion; Altho I have on purpose en­deavoured to avoid the use of some Words, which do fre­quently occur in all or most Systems of Divinity that I have met with; And the rea­son why I have so done, is not that I find fault with the Words themselves; but be­cause I would have my Rea­der [Page 263] take notice that Religion does not consist in Terms of Art or forms of expression; but in the belief and practice of such things as God has made known, and requires from us; And it is too common among Men to wrangle about Words, before they have clear­ly fixed and agreed upon the meaning of them. I have not, for example, made use of this Term Justification; But yet I have endeavoured to shew up­on what conditions a sinner obtains the Pardon of his sins and Mercy at the hand of God; which is the same thing: Nor have I said any thing of the nature or number of Sa­craments: But I have spoken what I thought might be ne­cessary [Page 264] concerning Baptism, the Holy Communion, and those other things which the Church of Rome calls by that name. And if once I am sa­tisfied touching any thing, how far God requires it from us, and whether or no it be necessary to Salvation; I can­not see why I should trouble my self much in enquiring, whether such a thing may properly be called a Sacra­ment or not, which to me seems no more but a dispute about the meaning of a Word. True indeed, it is, that in the Do­ctrine of the Trinity, which I have delivered, Part 2. §. 22. I have expressly made use of the Terms person, substance, &c. because I could find none o­thers [Page 265] so fit and proper to ex­press my Thoughts; Nor durst I venture in so sublime a matter to apply new Words to those things of which I can have but very imperfect and obscure Conceptions. And having thus said all that I in­tend upon this occasion, I free­ly submit the Whole to the Judgment and Censure of e­very Reader; leaving him to that liberty which I my self always desire to enjoy; and being ready to retract any thing that I have said, when­soever I am convinced that I have been therein mistaken.