ours are, from the rest of the body, if love and charity towards them remain. And again, where this love remains, and bears rule, it can as little be, that they who are unsatisfied with the way of worship that more generally obtains, should censure them that are satisfied as insincere, merely because of this difference. It cannot permit that we should think all the black thoughts we can invent of them, as if because they have not our consciences they had none, or because they see not with our eyes they were therefore both utterly and wilfully blind. To be here more particular, the most, you know, are for the public way of worship; and of these, some are for it as tolerable only, others as the best way, and think all other ways of worshipping God in assemblies (being forbidden as they think by a just law) sinful. Others, dissenting, are of several sorts. Some think the conformity required of ministers sinful, because of previous terms required of them which they judge to be so, but not that which is required of the people. Of which sort, some that think it not simply unlawful, find it however less edifying to them, and though they can therefore partake in it at some times, think themselves more ordinarily bound to attend such other means as they find more conducing to their spiritual profit and advantage, judging they have an undoubted right from Christ, anciently allowed from age to age in the best times of the Christian church, and never justly taken from them, of choosing the pastors to whose ordinary care and conduct they shall commit their souls. Others judge the public way simply unlawful, and therefore judge themselves bound to decline it wholly; and are the more averse to any participation in it, as apprehending it to have no suitableness or aptitude to profit their souls: wherein they are the more confirmed, that they believe not God will ever bless the means which he hath not appointed. Now how apt all these are unto very severe censures of one another, he knows not the age, that is ignorant. One sort censuring the other as humoursome, factious, schismatical; the others them back again, as formal, popishly affected, destitute of any savour of spiritual things, having nothing of God in them, or of the life and power of godliness. Now is this suitable to the love that should rule among Christians? or to the reverence we ought to have for that authority that forbids such judging? It ought to be considered both that all have not the same understanding, nor the same gust and relish of things. 1. Not the same understanding. And therefore where conscience hath the same rule, it cannot have with every one the same actual latitude, that rule, being so very diversely understood, which different estimate of consciences, the apostle hath express reference to, in that large and most healing discourse of his, Rom. xiv. One (saith he, ver. 2.) believeth that he may eat all things, another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Nor doth he, in reference to such doubted things, determine what all should do, or not do, by particular rules, concerning every such case, that was then depending, which it seems he reckoned was not necessary, or that might afterwards fall out, which was little to be expected. But he lays down one general rule, against judging one another, which he presses with that authority, and such awful reasons, as might make a Christian heart tremble to be guilty of it. And in reference to the mentioned differences among ourselves, (as well as others no nearer to the substantials and vitals of our religion,) there is somewhat else to be done than to conclude against a man's sincerity because of such differing sentiments and practices, and which certainly would be done, if truly Christian love, or even justice itself, did take place as they ought; i. e. it would be considered what these several differing parties have to say for themselves, what reasons they may allege, and whether though they be not sufficient to justify their several opinions and practices, (as all cannot be in the right,) they be not such as by which a conscientious man, a sincere fearer of God, may be swayed, so as to take the way which he is found in by the ducture of an upright (though misguided) conscience, and not as being under the government of depraved vicious inclination. As those that can, and do, yield the conformity that is required of ministers, though perhaps they wish some things altered, why may it not be supposed they sincerely think (though it should be mistakingly) that the things more liable to exception are capable of a sense wherein they are not unlawful? and not being so, they think themselves bound to take the opportunity which they this way obtain of doing good to the souls of men? others also apprehending it lawful, how possible is it to them from a certain reverence they have for antiquity, and for our own first reformers, to think it best and fittest to be continued! Nor is it unsupposable that many of the laity may upon the same grounds have the same apprehensions. Again, divers in the ministry judging the terms unlawful upon which only they can have liberty for the public exercise of it; is it not possible they may, with a sincere conscience, think themselves not therefore obliged wholly to renounce their calling and office, to which they were duly set apart, and had by their own solemn vow given up themselves; but to do so much of the work of it as they can have opportunity for? And whereas of the people, some may think the public forms and ways of worship not simply unlawful, but find them less edifying to them than other means which the providence of God affords them; and therefore do more ordinarily attend those, though sometimes also the other; why should it be thought on the one hand, or the other, that it is so little possible they should be guided by reasonable and conscientious considerations herein, that nothing but corrupt inclination must be understood to govern them? Is it not supposable, that accounting the public worship substantially agreeable to divine institution, though in some accidentals too disagreeable, they may think there is more to incline them at some times to attend it, than totally to disown it? For what worship is there on earth that is in all things incorrupt? And they may apprehend it fit to testify their union with the sincere Christians, that may be statedly under that form, and especially in a time when the contest is so high in the world, between them that profess the substance of reformed Christianity, and them that have so much deformed it; and may conceive it becoming them, at some times, to express their own unconfinedess to a party, and to use that liberty which, they think, should not be judged by another man's conscience, which yet they would have regard to, where there are not greater reasons to preponderate. They are indeed under a disadvantage (with them that are apt to use a greater liberty in their censures, than they do in their practice in these matters) when it falls out that their partial compliance is the means of their security from penalties; and their disadvantage is greater, whose judgment to this purpose hath not been formerly declared and made known. But they for shame ought to be silent whose total compliance gains them not only immunity, but great emoluments. And that perhaps yielded, not according to a former, but (at that time when the opportunity occurred) a new and altered judgment. They may however know themselves to be moved by greater ends than secular interest and so may these we now speak of, and yet may think the preservation of their earthly portion, wherewith they are to glorify God in this world, not too little an end to be designed and endeavoured by lawful means. It were a very uncouth and sinful thing to do a spiritual action for a carnal end, but if the thing sincerely and supremely designed be the glory of God, that is the most spiritual end: if it be not, that ought to be changed which is wrong, not that which is right; the unlawful end, not the lawful action, if it be lawful; if it be not, their good end will not justify their action, but it will their sincerity; which is all that this discourse intends. And then for such as decline the public worship totally, as judging it simply unlawful; is it not possible they may be led to that practice by somewhat else than humour and factious inclination? Have they not that to say, which may at least seem solid and strong to a conscientious man? How jealous God did heretofore show himself in all the affairs of his worship! How particular in the appointment even of the smallest things he would have appertain to it! How unsuitable multiplied ceremonies are to the mature state of the church! and how sensibly burdensome they were to the disciples of the first age as a yoke not to be borne; and that therefore God himself, when the season of maturity, and the fulness of time came, thought fit to abrogate those of his own former appointment, with no (probable) design to allow men the liberty of substituting others in their room. Why is it not to be thought that the fear of the great God withholds them from doing what they judge would offend him and that, if they err, it is for fear of erring? Why can nothing be thought on whereto to impute their practice, but peevish humour ? Especially if that be considered (which is common to these two last mentioned sorts of men) that they simply find other means more edifying to them, or expect them only to be so, if the other be thought unlawful. If they be thought merely lawful, and such as may therefore be used upon weighty reasons at some times, but are found less edifying, who can doubt but I ought to use for my soul (at least in an ordinary course) the aptest means that I can ordinarily have for the promoting its edification and salvation? Do we not reckon ourselves to owe so much even to our bodies? And what is an other man's opinion to signify against my sense and constant experience? Is there not such a thing as a mental idiosyncrasy (or peculiarity of temper) as well as a bodily? and whereto what is most agreeable, any man that is not destitute of ordinary understanding is the fittest judge himself: as every one, that is not a mere fool, is so much a physician as to know what diet suits him best. And if it be said against the former of these two sorts, Are they not at all times obliged to use the means which are most edifying? They may say, At all times when they have nothing to outweigh their own present edification. But it is not impossible that a conscientious judgment may esteem all the forementioned considerations concurring, to be of more weight than the greater advantage hoped to be gained in that one hour. Nor need any man be ashamed professedly to avow that which may seem the least of them, the saving of himself from temporal ruin. For he is to be accountable to God for what portion he hath intrusted him with of the good things of this life, and is not to throw it away without sufficient cause. Who sees not that more is allowed and ordinarily done without scruple or censure upon the like account? as, to omit the hearing of a sermon, if at that time one's house be on fire, yea, or if it be to save my neighbour's, or the plucking of an ox or sheep out of a ditch on the Lord's day, when I might have been employed at that time in the solemn worship of God to my spiritual advantage. A mere commutation unto less advantage upon an equally or more urgent necessity is less than omission. And they that shall have learned as our Saviour directs, “what that means, I will have mercy and not sacrifice," will not condemn the guiltless. be considered how really difficult the controversy is about the ceremonies, and some other parts of conformity. Perhaps few metaphysical questions are disputed with more subtlety than that controversy is managed with, by Archbishop Whitgift, Bishop Morton, Doctor Burgesse, Doctor Ames, Cartwright, Calverwood, and others. And how very easily possible and pardonable is it to unlearned persons, or of weaker intellectuals, being obliged in order to their practice to give a judgment in reference to these things one way or other, to judge amiss! Why should we expect every sincerely pious man to be able to hit the very point of truth and right in matters that belong, as Bishop Davenant once said in another case, non ad fidem fundamentalem, sed ad peritiam Theologicum, et fortesse ne ad hanc quidem, sed aliquando ad curiositatem Theologorum-not to the foundation of our faith, but to the skill of divines, and perhaps not to this neither, but sometimes only to their curiosity. What were to be done in reference to so nicely disputable things made part of the terms of Christian communion, is more the matter of our wish than hope, till by a gracious influence God better men's minds, or by a more deeply felt necessity bring us to understand what is to be done. Our case is ill when only vexatio dat intellectum, when nothing but sorrow and suffering will make us wise; which is very likely from the righteous hand of God to be our common lot. In the mean time 'tis hard to think that he cannot be a sincerely pious man whose understanding is not capable of so difficult things, as to make a certainly right judgment about them. In absoluto et facili stat eternitas, and why should not the communion of persons going into a blessed eternity have the same measure? And besides the different size and capacity of men's understandings, and consequently of their conscientious determination, 2. There are also as differing relishes of these things, which Christian love would oblige a man to consider with equanimity, so as thereupon to refrain hard censures. Ali good men have not the same relish of the various forms and modes of dispensing the truths and ordinances of Christ. Some of our suffering brethren in Q. Mary's days are said to have found great spiritual refreshing by the Common Prayer. And, in our own days, some may profess to have their hearts warmed, their affections raised and elevated, by it. They are no rule to us; but it would less become us, hereupon, to suspect their sincerity, than our own. Others again cannot relish such modes of worship, when in the ministry of such as use them not, they find a very sensible delight and savour. And this, by the way, shows the great difference be Only such are concerned first to search well and between such things as have their evidence and goodness satisfied concerning the lawfulness of their action in itself, from God himself, and those that borrow their recom that they do it not with a self-condemning conscience, nor mendableness only from human device. All good men, with a groundlessly self-justifying one. And then especi- in all the times and ages of the Christian church, have a ally to see to it that their end be right; God's interest, constant value and love for the great substantials of renot their own, otherwise than in a due, entire subordina-ligion, which have in them that inward evidence and extion to his. We can never act innocently or comfortably cellency, as command and captivate a rectified mind and in any thing, till he be in every thing more absolutely our heart; whereas the mere external forms of it, the outward all in all; and have much more reason to be scrupulous, dress and garb, are variously esteemed and despised, and (if others knew our hearts) were much more liable to liked and disliked, by the same sort of men, i. e. by very censure, that, in our common affairs, he is so much for- sincere lovers of God, not only in divers times and ages, gotten, that we live not more entirely to him; which we but even in the same time. How different hath the little animadvert upon, and are very officious to cast esteem been of the liturgic forms with them who bear the motes out of our brother's eye, when this beam is in our same mind, full of reverence and love towards religion itself; as that habit is thought decent at one time, which in another is despicably ridiculous; whereas a person in himself comely and graceful, is always accounted so, by own. The design of mentioning these hints of reasons for so different judgments and practices, is not to show which are strongest, and ought to prevail, which cannot be the busi-all, and at all times. ness of so short a discourse as this, and so much of another nature; but, to show that while there is any thing colourable to be alleged for this or that way, true Christian love, compassion of common human frailty, and a duly humble sense of a man's own, would oblige him to think that conscience towards God may have a greater hand (though with some misguided itself) in guiding men the different ways they take, than is commonly thought. And to consider though such and such reasons seem not weighty to me, they may to some others, who are as much afraid of sinning against God as I, and perhaps their understandings as good in other matters as mine. It would Now this various gust and relish cannot but have influence, more remotely, upon the conscientious determination of our choice, concerning our usual way of worship, ping God. For how should I edify by what is disgustful to me? Though it be true that our spiritual edification lies more in the informing of our judgments, and confirming our resolutions, than in the gusts and relishes of affection, yet who sees not that these are of great ase even to the other? and that it is necessary that at least there be not a disgust or antipathy? What is constantly less grateful, will certainly be less nutritive. That is usually necessary to nourishment; though, alone, it be not suffi cient; as it is in the matter of bodily repasts. Who can without great prejudice be bound to eat always of a food that he disrelishes, though he may without much inconvenience, for a valuable reason, do it at some time. And they that think all this alleged difference is but fancy, show they understand little of human nature, and ess of religion; though they may have that in themselves too which they do not so distinctly reflect upon, even that peculiar gust and relish, which they make so little account of. For, have they not as great a disgust of the others' way as they have of theirs? Would they not as much regret to be tied to theirs? Have they not as great a liking of their own? And doth not common experience show that there are as different mental relishes as bodily? How comes one man in the matters of literature to savour metaphysics? another mathematics, another history, and the like? and no man's genius can be forced in these things. Why may there not be the like difference in the matters of religion? And I would fain know what that religion is worth that is without a gust and savour, that is insipid and unpleasant? much more that would, being used in a constant course, this or that way, be nauseous and offensive? If indeed men nauseate that which is necessary for them, the Gospel, for instance, or religion itself, that is certainly such a distemper, as if the grace of God overcome it not, will be mortal to them; and we are not to think of relieving them, by withdrawing the offending object, which itself must be the means of their cure. But is there any parity between the substance of religion, which is of God's appointing, and the superadded modes of it, that are of our own? judging their brethren, upon every light occasion, reckon this chapter came by chance into the Bible. And that our Lord spake himself, at random, words that had no meaning, when he said, Matt. vii. 1. Judge not that you be not judged, &c. What man that fears God would not dread to be the framer of a new Gospel, and of new terms of salvation? It is a great solace indeed to a sincere mind but implies a severe rebuke, in the mean time, to such a self-assuming censorious spirit, that it may, in such a case, be so truly said, it is a much easier thing to please God than man. They that find this measure will have the better of it, if they can abstain from retaliating, when as the reason of it is the same on both sides. For they may say, You are to remember I differ no more from you in this matter, than you do from me; and if I judge not you about it, what greater reason have you to judge me? And they have little reason to value such a man's judgment concerning their duty in a doubtful manner, who cannot see his own in so plain a case. The matter for which they judge me may be very doubtful, but nothing can be plainer than that they ought not so to judge. 9. A due Christian love would oblige us, after competent endeavours of mutual satisfaction about the matters wherein we differ, to forbear further urging of one another concerning them. Which urging may be two ways: either by application to our affections, or to our reason and judgment. Some perhaps find it more suitable to their own temper and measure of understanding and conscience, to go the former way; and only vehemently persuade to do the thing, wherein the other shall comply with them, and in some sort justify the course which they have taken; without regard to the others' conscience, press them right or wrong to fall in with them; sometimes labouring to work upon their kindness, by flattery, sometimes upon their fear, by threats and meraces. Sincere love would certainly abhor to do thus. Would it let me violate another's conscience any way? The love I bear to a fellow-Christian, if it be true, having for its measure that wherewith I love myself, would no more let me do it than hurt the apple of mine own eye. An inspirited waking conscience is as tender a thing, and capable of a worse sort of hurt. If some have more latitude than I, and think what they may do, in present circumstances so far as they may, they must, would it not be the dictate of love patiently to admit it, especially when it comes to suffering. For let me put my own soul in his soul's stead; and would I be willing to suffer upon another man's conscience, and not upon my own? and forfeit the consolations which in a suffering condition belong to them who for conscience towards God endure grief? would I, if I loved them, be content they had the grief, and did want the consolation? There will be still found in a state of suffering, somewhat that will prove a common cause to good men wherein they will most entirely agree, whatsoever smaller things they may differ in. As the pious bishops Ridley and Hooper well agreed upon a martyrdom at the stake, in the same important cause, who before, had differed (somewhat angrily) about some ceremonies. Concerning which difference how pathetical is the letters of the former of these to the other, when both were prisoners (the one at Oxford the other at London) on the same account. But now, my dear brother, (saith he,) forasmuch as we thoroughly agree and wholly consent together in those things which are the grounds and substantial points of our religion; against the which the world so furiously rageth in these our days, howsoever, in time past, by certain by-matters and circumstances of religion, your wisdom, and my simplicity (I grant) have a little jarred: each of us following the abundance of his own sense and judgment. Now, I say, be you assured, that even with my whole heart, God is my witness, in the bowels of Christ, I love you in the truth, and for the truth's sake, which abideth in us, and as I am persuaded shall, by the grace of God, abide in us for evermore. Upon the whole, nothing is more agreeable, either to this divine principle of love, nothing (within our compass) more conducible to our end, the ceasing of our differences, (which are most likely to die and vanish by neglect,) or their ceasing to be inconvenient to us, than to bear calm and placid minds towards one another under them, to banish all hard thoughts because of them. If I can contribute no way else to union, from this holy dictate and law of the spirit of love, I can at least abstain from censuring my fellow-Christians. It is the easiest thing in the world one would think not to do; especially not to do a thing of itself ungrateful to a well tempered mind; and a great privilege not to be obliged to judge another man's conscience and practice, when it is so easy to misjudge and do wrong. Most of all, when the matter wherein I presume to sit in judgment upon another is of so high a nature, as the posture of his heart God-ward: a matter peculiarly belonging to another tribunal, of Divine cognizance, and which we all confess to be only known to God himself. And if I would take upon me to conclude a man insincere, and a hypocrite, only because he is not of my mind in these smaller things that are controverted among us, how would I form my argument? No one can, with sincerity, differ from that man whose understanding is so good and clear, as to apprehend all things with absolute certainty, just as they are; and then go on to assume, (and a strange assuming it must be,) But my understanding is so good and clear as, &c. 'Tis hard to say whether the uncharitableness of the one assertion, or the arrogance of the other, is greater; and whether both be more immoral, or absurd. But the impiety is worst of all; for how insolently doth such a man take upon him to make a new Gospel! and other terms of salvation than God hath made! when his sentiments and determinations of things which God hath never made necessary, must be the measure and rule of life and death to men! How is the throne and judicial power of the Redeemer usurped which he hath founded in his blood! Rom. xiv. 4. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up; for God is able to make him stand. Ver. 9. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. Ver. 10. But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ. Ver. 11. For it is written, as I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. One would think they that lay no restraint upon themselves in this matter of g Fox. Martyr. Again, if others have less latitude; it would be far from us to add to the affliction they are liable to, upon that very account, by a vexatious urging and importuning them. Especially to do it with insulting threats and menaces, and labour to overawe their brethren, against their consciences, | necessary are most plain. Must we always, in matters of into the embracing of their sentiments and way. Is it possible a Christian should not understand how necessary it is to every one's duty and peace, that he exactly follow that direction of the apostle's, and esteem it most sacred, Rom. xiv. 5. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind? and that we firmly resolve never to do any thing with regret or a misgiving heart, at least. Not against a prevailing doubt, for in very doubtful cases to be rid of all formido oppositi or suspicion that the matter may be other-protestant churches abroad; some, of more prudent and wise, is perhaps impossible to me; but to do any thing against the preponderating inclination of my judgment and conscience, were great wickedness, and such as, if it were known, would make me unfit for any communion whatsoever. And I do here appeal to you who most severely blame any of us for our dissent from you, whether if we should thus declare to you, "That 'tis truly against our consciences to communicate with you upon your terms, we believe we should greatly offend God in it, and draw upon us his displeasure, but yet to please you, and prevent our temporal inconvenience, or ruin, we will do it." I appeal to you, I say, whether we should not hereby make ourselves incapable of any Christian communion with you or any others This is then the plain state of the case, and you do even put these words into our mouths: "If we follow the dictate of our consciences, we must decline | you; if we go against it, you must decline us; supposing we declare it, if we declare it not, we have nothing to qualify us for your communion but hypocrisy and dissimuJation and what do you gain by such an accession to the church? You have gained, in any such case, not half the man, the outside, the carcass only, or the shadow of the man, i. e. when you have debauched our consciences, when you have spoiled us, and made us worth nothing, then we are yours, wherein you show nothing of love, either to us, or to yourselves!" confessedly little moment, be inculcating the same thing, Others again, that are themselves men of more reason and conscience, take the somewhat more manly and Christian course, and bend themselves by argument to convince the reason, and satisfy the consciences, of such as differ from them. But herein also there may be an excess that is unprofitable and grievous to those they would work upon by this course, and from which therefore Christian love, studying the peace and quiet of their brethren, would restrain them. I say, from the ungrateful excess of such an endeavour; for I would fain know, can there not herein be an excess? Is it not supposable that they who differ from me, in such lesser things, may be sometime arrived to a settlement and fixedness of judgment in them, as well as I? Is it not possible they have weighed the moments of things as much as I have done? Is such a cause infinite? Is it not possible that all may have been said in it which is to be said, and the matter have been sifted to the very bran? So that all my further arguings may serve but to argue my vain self-confidence, or abcundingness in my own sense, as if all wisdom were to die with me. Or what if they serve at length but to show the incapacity of the subject to be wrought upon, and the different complexion of his mind I am treating with. All cannot receive all things: we cannot make our sentiments enter with every one. Perhaps they show the weakness of his understand ing: and then hath that direction of the apostle no authority with us? Him that is weak in the faith receive, but not to doubtful disputations, Rom. xiv. 1. He whom we account our weaker brother, and of slower understanding, must be received, (not cast out of our communion,) and because God himself hath received him, as ver. 3. (q. d. Is he thought fit for God's communion, notwithstanding his unsatisfied scruple, and is he unfit for yours?) and he is not to be vexed and importuned with continual disputation, if that apostolical precept be of any value with us. Some-participants in a communion, that can seem desirable, or is time at least, we should think, we have tried in such a case as far as is fit, and driven the nail as far as it will go. Is it not possible such a matter may be agitated beyond the value of it, and that more time and pains may be spent upon it than it is worth? The obscurity and perplexity of the controversy show the less necessity. Things most 10. Sincere love restored and exercised more among us, would certainly make us forbear reviling and exposing one another, and the industrious seeking one another's ruin. For such as can allow themselves to do any thing that hath this tendency; not to preserve public order, but to gratify their private ill-will, not in a sudden heat and pas sion, but deliberately, and so as to pursue a formed design to this purpose; if such men were capable of being rea soned with, (though it were to as good purpose to talk to a storm, or reason with a whirlwind, or a flame of fire.) I would ask them, "What are you altogether unatoneable? will nothing divert you from this pursuit? If any thing, what will? What more gentle thing than our destruction do you seek, or will content you? Is it our communion? And do you so recommend yourselves? Do you not know Cain is said to have been of that wicked one who slew his brother? 1 John iii. 10. And that whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer; and that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him? Is it not said, John viii. 44. That such are of their father the devil, and the lusts of their father they will do, who was a murderer from the beginning? And in the forementioned 1 John iii. 10. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil; whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother? If all were like you, under what notion were we to unite with them?" The apostle tells us, 1 Cor. x. 20, 21. I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils, ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils; ye cannot be partaker of the Lord's table and of the table of devils. And in good earnest, incarnate devils (though that text do not directly speak of such) have too much of devil in them, to be likely to be grateful to serious Christians. I must avow it to all the world, it is not this or that external form I so much consider in the matter of Christian union and communion, as what spirit reigns in them with whom I would associate myself. How can I endure to approach those holy mysteries, wherein all are to drink into one spirit, and declare ponatur, ut Christiana charitas, et animorum fraterna conjunctio revocetur. Mandat. Hen. Reg. Navar. Jacobo Siguræ Legato suo, &c. Apud Gol dastum. with great emphasis, The riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgment of the mystery by God, and of the Father, and of Christ. Such as whereby, 1. Our understandings are duly enlightened so as mentally to entertain aright the doctrine of the Gospel, i. e. 1. Distinctly to apprehend the meaning and design of this mysterious revelation of God in Christ. 2. And to be fully assured of the truth of it. their union with the God of love, with the Emmanuel, 2. Such again, as whereby our hearts are overcome, so as practically and vitally to receive it, i. e. to acknowledge, receive, resign, intrust, and subject ourselves unto God in Christ revealed in it. 1. Hereby we should apprehend the things to be truly great wherein we are to unite. That union is not like to be firm and lasting, the centre whereof is a trifle. It must be somewhat that is of itself apt to attract and hold our hearts strongly to it. To attempt with excessive earnestness a union in external formalities that have not a value and goodness in themselves, when the labour and difficulty is so great, and the advantage so little, how hopeless and insignificant would it be! The mystery of God, even of the Father, and of Christ, how potently and constantly attractive would it be, if aright understood and acknowledged! Here we should understand is our life and our all. 2. Hereby we should, in comparison, apprehend al! things else to be little. And so our differences about little things would languish and vanish. We should not only know, but consider and feelingly apprehend, that we agree in far greater things than we differ in: and thence be more strongly inclined to hold together, by the things wherein we agree, than to contend with one another about the things wherein we differ. 3. Hereby our religion would revive and become a vital powerful thing; and consequently more grateful to God, and awful to men. I know many are apt to justify themselves in their animosity and bitterness of spirit towards others, upon a pretence that they bear the same disaffected mind towards them. But besides that it is the most manifest and indefensible injustice, if they charge the innocent, or such as they are not sure are guilty, if their own wrath and enmity be so potent in them as to enable their tainted vicious imagination to create its object, or so to disguise and falsely clothe it, as to render it such to themselves, as whereupon they may more plausibly pour out their fury. I say, besides that, how contrary is this vindictive spirit to the rules and spirit of the Christian religion! Is this to love our enemies, to bless them that curse us, and despitefully use us, &c.? How unlike the example of our blessed Lord when, even in dying agonies, he breathed forth these words and his soul almost at once, Father, forgive them, &c. or of the holy martyr Stephen, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge! How unlike is that aptness to the retaliating of injuries, to the Christian temper which the renowned Calvin discovers in an epistle to Bullenger, speaking of Luther's severity towards him. If Luther a thousand times (saith he) call me devil, I will acknowledge him for a famous servant of God; which passage both Bishop Moreton, and Bishop Davenant magnify him for; and the former saith, he herein spake so calmly, so placidly, so indulgently, as if it were not a man, but humanity itself, that uttered the words. Yea, and such retaliation is what paganism itself hath declaimed against. A noted philosopher urges that against it, that, one would think, should not need to be suggested to Christians, somewhat so prudential as might not only work upon the principle of love to others, but even that of self-love, that then the evil must perpetually circulate, and so must again and again return upon ourselves. As indeed if that must be the measure, to revile them that revile us, and render evil for evil, railing for railing, we should never have done. It were a course which once begun, could, by that rule, never find an end. This then is the first part of the answer to the proposed question, What may be most hopefully done, &c. The endeavour of having our hearts knit together in love would surely do much towards it. And this is agreeable to any the most private capacity. No man can pretend his sphere is too narrow (if his soul be not) for the exercise of love towards fellow-Christians. And I hope 'tis agreeable to all our principles. Sure no man will say 'tis against his conscience to love his brother. And the same must be said of, 2. That other expedient, the endeavour to have our souls possessed with a more clear, efficacious, practical faith of the Gospel, which was to make the other part of the answer to our question. And though this is the more important part, it is also so very evident, that we do not need to make this discourse swell to a bulk too unproportionable to the rest it is to be joined with by speaking largely to it. Although we have not the name of faith in this text, we have the thing. It is not named, but it is described, so as that it may easily be understood, both what it is, and how necessary to our purpose. 1. What it is, or what measure and degree of it, that would be of such great use in such a case. We are told k Maxim. Tyr. Dissert. 2. 1. More grateful to God, who is not pleased with the stench of carcasses, or with the dead shows of religion instead of the living substance. We should hereupon not be deserted of the divine presence, which we cannot but reckon will retire, when we entertain him but with insipid formalities. What became of the Christian interest in the world, when Christians had so sensibly diverted from minding the great things of religion to little minute circumstances, about which they affected to busy themselves, or to the pursuit of worldly advantages and delights? 2. More awful to men. They who are tempted to despise the faint languid appearances of an impotent, inefficacious, spiritless religion, discern a majesty in that which is visibly living, powerful, and productive of suitable fruits. Who that shall consider the state of the Christian church, and the gradual declining of religion for that three hundred years from Constantine's time to that of Phocas, but shall see cause at once to lament the sin and folly of men, and adore the righteous severity of God? For as Christians grew gradually to be loose, wanton, sensual, and their leaders contentious, luxurious, covetous, proud, ambitious affecters of domination, so was the Christian church gradually forsaken of the Divine presence. Inasmuch as that at the same time when Boniface obtained from Phocas the title of universal bishop, in defiance of the severe sentence of his predecessor Gregory the Great, sprang up the dreadful delusion of Mahomet.m And so spread itself to this day, through Asia, Africa, and too considerable a part of Europe, that where Christians were twenty or thirty to one, there was now scarce one Christian to twenty or thirty Mahometans or grosser pagans. And what between the Mahometan infatuation, and the popish tyranny, good Lord! what is Christendom become? when by the one, the very name is lost, and by the other, little else left but the name? 4. Hereby we shall be enabled most resolvedly to suffer, being called to it, when it is for the great things of the Gospel, the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of 11 Pet. ii. 23. chap. iii. 9. m Berewood's Inquiries. |