IMPRIMATUR.  
C. Alston, R. P. D. Hen. Episc. Lond. à Sacris. Julii 13. 1693.   

A TREATISE relating to the Worship of GOD, Divided into SIX SECTIONS; CONCERNING 

I. The Nature of Divine Worship.  
II. The peculiar Object of Worship.  
III. The True Worshippers of God.  
iv Assistance requisite to Worship.  
V The Place of Worship.  
VI The Solemn Time of Worship.    
By John Templer, D.D.  
LONDON, Printed by R.N. for Walter Kettilby, at the Bishop's Head in S. Paul's Churchyard, 1694.   

TO THE READER.  
THE late Author of This Treatise, having sufficiently recommended himself to the World, when Living, by his indefatigable Labours in his Priestly Function, and by the Works he has already Printed; there will need the less to be said in behalf of this Posthumous piece. For whosoever had the happiness of being acquainted with the Author, will presently be apt to think, that nothing that is mean or unworthy of the Public, could proceed from a person of that True Worth and accomplished Learning; one whose excellent knowledge in all Church-Controversies rendered him fit to write of any: and the soundness of whose Judgement, and the sincerity of whose Life were sufficient demonstrations to all that throughly knew him, That he would Write of none, but what were most useful to the producing in the Minds of others a true love to Virtue, and a firm adherence to Truth. And altho' his long continuance in the Country, and constant residence at his Living, where he had not such frequent opportunities of conversing with the Learned in his own Profession, may give occasion to some to think, that his Parts and Genius must slag proportionably, and his Writings be tinctured with the rudeness of a Country Abode; and by consequence render him the less able to please and gratify the humours of this nice and critical Age: yet, I hope, whoever will impartially consider and read over this small Treatise, will be abundantly satisfied of the contrary. As a proof of which, I appeal to the Treatise itself; where, if the Judgement of Men of known Abilities may be trusted, there is solid Learning shown without any vain Ostentation of it; Truth vindicated with a native Simplicity that becomes it; and the Religious Duties of Christianity pressed with that Zeal and warmth, that so adorned the first Professors of it, and rendered the Author whilst living, the Joy and Admiration of his whole Flock. Nor had the Publication of it been thus long deferred (it being composed long before the Author's death) but that the native and uncommon kind of Modesty, which gave a Lustre to all his Actions, would not permit it in his Life time to see the light. He, tho' fraught with so much admirable Knowledge, strength of Parts, and solidity of Judgement in the opinion of all others; yet always was so diffident of any thing of his own composure, that nothing but the strict Command of his Superiors, or the passionate importunity of his Friends, could force him to appear in Print: So great an esteem had he of the censures of other Men, and so little, and low Thoughts of his own Worth. And altho' this is not altogether so commendable, where there is just reason to be satisfied with, as well as conscious of, a Man's own true Merit in respect of others (many on this account having deprived the World of many advantageous Books) yet if it be a fault, it is such an one as none but the best of Men have been, or can be guilty of; and for which likewise their deserts when made known, have become the more illustrious: Humility and Lowliness of Mind being Virtues of as great Excellency, as they are rare, and as apt to beget a due esteem of those, that are endued with them, as Pride and self conceit are to produce hatred and contempt.  
But lest I should hinder the Reader by too long an Epistle from the pleasure and advantage he may reap from the Author himself, or seem to allure his favour by a too tedious bespeaking of him; I shall wholly submit this Treatise (it having no other Patron) to his  Judgement; and hope, tho' it had not the Author's last hand, yet it may meet with so kind a reception, as to conduce something to the spiritual welfare and happiness of Mankind. And then I am sure it will answer to all the ends and purposes the Pious Author designed it, and be so far the more probable to show, who its Composer was; in that it will be always employed in doing good.   

THE CONTENTS.  

SECT. I. Concerning the Nature of Divine Worship.  
THE Introduction, from the importance of Divine Worship, men's proneness to mistake about it, and the Devil's readiness to cherish this proneness, pag. 1. The notion of Worship in geneneral, p. 5, its Objects and Kind's, p. 6. The acts of Divine Worship, either mediate, p. 7. or immediate, p. 10, these either internal, p. 11, or external, p. 13: And these again either natural, as Praying, Praising, Swearing, Vowing, ib. or instituted, as Preaching, Hearing, Reading the Scriptures, and receiving the Sacraments, p. 17. The perpetuity of the Sacraments, p. 20. Sacrifice no part of Divine Worship under the Gospel, p. 22.   

SECT. II. Concerning the Object of Divine Worship.  
THE Introduction, from the great and early mistakes of mankind about it; and consequently the great circumspection we should use in our inquiries concerning it, p. 29. To this purpose Five Propositions are laid down.  
1. Proposition, There is a God who made the World. This proved, First, from the World in general, p. 35. Secondly, from the particular parts of it; as the Heavens, p. 39 the Earth, p. 41. the Body, 44. the Soul of Man, 47. They who say they still want sufficient evidence of this Truth, should consider First, there is as much evidence for it, as for those things we doubt not of, 54. Secondly, as much as for the clearest axiom in Philosophy; nay Thirdly in some respects more, 55. And then Lastly, the familiar dictates of our Understanding will lead us to the acknowledgement of this truth, 57 The Objection that there must be some pre-existent matter to frame the World out of, answered, ib.  
2. Proposition, In the Godhead are Three Persons. For First, when God is spoken of in Scripture, sometimes the plural number is used, 59 Secondly, This Plurality is determined to Three in other places, ib. Thirdly, These three are not three manifestations only of God, 60. Nor Fourthly, three names only of the same God under divers inadequate conceptions, ib. For Fifthly, All things belonging to the nature of a person belong to each of them, 61. And then Sixthly, Such actions are attributed to each, as belong to none but a person, 62. The Spirit and Power, and the Spirit and the effects or gifts of it are distinguished, 64.  
3. Proposition, These Three Persons are One God. For Unity is essential to the Deity, 64. And the Scriptures say they are One, 65. as also that they have Unity of Essence; inasmuch as it attributes to each the Name, Properties and Attributes of the most high God, 66, etc. This truth acknowledged by all sorts of men; the Primitive Christians, 69. the Jews, 71. the Heathen, 72. Our not comprehending the difficulties of it, no reason against it, 73. Some considerations added to lead us through 'em, ib.  
4. Proposition, This One God is to be Worshipped. For First considered as essentially, his nature and perfections justly challenge the deepest veneration, 75. Then Secondly, considered personally, the Scriptures require him to be Worshipped, 76.  
5. Proposition, This God only is to be Worshipped. This shown, First, from Scripture, 78. Secondly, from Reason, 79. Thirdly, from Antiquity, 81. What the Papists say in opposition to this considered, with respect to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, Invocation of Saints, and Images, 84.  
1. As to the Eucharist; That the Papists pay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to it, ib. and thereby put the greatest affront upon Scripture, 91. upon the analogy of Faith, 94. upon Antiquity, 97. upon Reason, 106. and upon Sense, 108. The declaration of their Church in this matter, and the impossibility of an innovation considered, 110.  
2. As to Invocation of Saints; This injurious to the peculiar honour of God, 115. and of Jesus Christ the only Mediator, 116. and has not the same grounds and reasons, as our praying to each other here below. For First, the Saints and Angels are at a distance, 117. And then Secondly, 'tis the prerogative of Jesus Christ only to be our Mediator in Heaven, 118. as the Primitive Christians thought, 119. The Origine of Invocation, etc. 122.  
3. As to Images, 123. They who use them are of three sorts. First such as say they use them only as memorial to quicken their devotions; which has no kindly influence on Religion, 124. Secondly, such as say they give only inferior worship to 'em; which yet is either vain, or sinful, 125. Thirdly, such as profess to give the same worship to the Image as to the Prototype, in kind, though not in degree, i.e. relative or respective worship only, ib. the vanity of this distinction shown, 126. and that 'tis Idolatry, 128. contrary to the Second Commandment, 132. and unknown to the Primitive Church, 135.   

SECT. III. Concerning the True Worshippers of God.  
THE whole reduced to Three Inquiries, 142. I. Enquiry, Who they are that are obliged to Worship, ib. And they are in general all rational Being's; as Angels, 142. and Men, whether secular, 143, or (more especially) Ecclesiastical and consecrated to the performance of Religious Offices, 145. the necessity of these shown, ib. such have been in all ages, 147. before the flood, ib. between that and the Law, 150. that the Firstborn than were Priests, 151. such also there were from the giving the Law till Christ, 154. as appears from the Priests and Levites, ib. from the Schools of the Prophets, 155. from their studies there, 156, from their Ordination by imposition of hands, 157, from the place where they exercised their function, 159. such lastly there were under the Gospel, ib.  
II. Enquiry, How men are to Worship God, 163. This shown in several Propositions.  
1. Prop. We are to Worship him with all our Soul, and heart and strength; ib. and  
2. Prop. Outwardly with our Bodies, 165.  
3. Prop. All the modes of external Worship must be decent, orderly, and to edification, ib.  
4. Prop. Different deductions from this general rule are no just grounds for distinct Churches to differ among each other, and so violate the Unity of the Universal, 166.  
5. Prop. Yet in the same Church 'tis very expedient and desirable, That there should be the same external mode of Religion, 167, but yet  
6. Prop. If contests arise in the same Church about external modes, a ready way to compose them, is, to appeal to Primitive Order, and give the preference to those that come nighest to it, 169. And  
7. Prop. If it cannot be known what the Primitive Order therein was, the next step to Peace, is to make prudent condescensions on each side, before Authority has made any determinations, 171. Then  
8. Prop. If condescensions cannot be had, and yet a determination is necessary, all, both weak and strong, are obliged to acquiesce in such a determination, 173. which is neither against, nor inconsistent with the perfection of Scripture, as a rule, 174. nor prejudicial to our Christian Liberty, 175. nor yet induces any necessity of violating the Law about scandal, 176.  
III. Enquiry, What ends we are to propose in the acts of Religious Worship, ib. This shown in three particulars, First, and chief, The Glory of God, 177. Secondly, The Salvation of our Souls, 178. Thirdly, The good of the Community, 179. The tendency of Religious Worship to all these, shown under each.   

SECT. iv Concerning Assistance relating to Divine Worship.  
THE Introduction from the general and acknowledged depravation of our Natures; whereby we want Light to direct, and Strength to enable us in the Worshipping God a-right, and Merits to render our Services acceptable, 185.  
Against all these God has provided sufficient helps and remedies, in that 

1. We have the holy Scriptures to direct us, 186  
2. The Holy Spirit to communicate strength, 186  
3. The Merits of our Saviour to procure acceptance. 186    
All which are treated more largely of: And,  
1. Of the holy Scriptures to direct us; which that we have grounds to depend on, shown in several Propositions, as First, The Worshipping God is absolutely necessary to Salvation, 187. Secondly, Moses and the Prophets, Christ and the Apostles, did by Oral Tradition reveal all things necessary to this purpose, ib. Thirdly, What they spoke was evidenced to be the real mind of God by inward characters of Divinity, and external miraculous operations, ib. Fourthly, This word of God thus evidenced was faithfully committed to writing, 192. Fifthly, This Writing is digested into 24 books in the Old Testament, and 27 in the New, 193. Sixthly, These Books have been transmitted to us without corruption, 194.  
Two opinions inconsistent with what has been said, considered, 

1. That the Church of Rome, as being infallible, is to be our guide in matters of Religion, 206.  
2. That every one ought to rely upon the conduct of his own reason, ib.    
As to the First, Proved that the Pope is not infallible, 207. nor a Council, ib. nor the body of the People, 210. nor all these together, ib. nor are the reasons they urge here sufficient, such as, first, The peremptory necessity of such a Guide, 211. nor secondly, their having all reasonable evidence that the Church of Rome is such a Guide, 216. For they have not first, The evidence of Scripture, ib. shown as to the chief places they urge, 221. nor secondly, Universal Tradition, 228. nor yet thirdly, the motives of credibility, 232. shown particularly, as to Antiquity, Diuturnity, Amplitude, ib. uninterrupted Succession of Bishops, 235. Agreement in doctrine with the Primitive Church, 236. Union among themselves, 237. holiness of doctrine, 239. efficacy of it, 240. holiness of life, 242. Lastly, the glory of Miracles, 247. Nay greater motives of credibility on our side, That there is no such infallible Guide: as First, 'Tis no no where revealed by Jesus Christ, 251. Secondly, 'Tis inconsistent with the nature of an intellectual Being, 252. 'Tis Thirdly destructive of True Virtue, 253. Fourthly, It can be of no advantage in our present circumstances, ib. Fifthly, 'Tis not reconcileable to the divine intention in giving the sacred Oracles, 255. Sixthly, All the testimony for it comes only from the Church of Rome herself, 256. Seventhly, The Primitive Constitution of the Church plainly intimates that no one Guide was designed supreme over all the Churches of the World, 257. Eightly, No provision made of an infallible Guide in a case of like importance, 260. Ninthly, Such a Guide not easily reconcileable with the constitution of Civil Empires, 262. Tenthly, and lastly, There is a plain prediction in Scripture of one, that would pretend to be that infallible Guide, 264. Thus much in answer to the first opinion. Then as to the  
2 Opinion inconsistent with the Scriptures being our Guide, namely, That we ought to rely entirely upon the conduct of our own reason, shown First, that it would have its effects with respect to Religion and the Church, 269. Secondly, That 'tis not consistent with the interest of humane Society, 270. Thirdly, disagreeable to the propensity of humane Nature, 273. Fourthly, Prejudicial to the Souls of Men, 276. For speculative error in Religion is no such indifferent thing, as some think, in that First Error is inclusive of disobedience, 278. Secondly, Errors in Religion are not unavoidable, 279. Thirdly, 'Tis no uncharitableness to say, Error is danmable, ib. Fourthly, The reason why a just Catalogue of errors can't be given is, because one error may be damnable in one, that is not so in another, 280. Fifthly, The fault may be known by the guilty, if they take care to look back and fully examine things, ib. Sixthly, God doth not put us here into a state of mere probability, 281. Seventhly, An erroneous Conscience is not God's True Vicegerent, 282.  
2. As to the assistance God affords us by his Holy Spirit to enable us to Worship him; This is either general, or special; so as to leave men inexcusable, 283, as is more largely proved, to p. 293.  
3. Lastly, As to God's affording us the merits of our Saviour to procure the acceptance of our performance; This cleared by the following steps; First, The acceptance of our Worship and Service is not upon its own account, 294. Nor Secondly, Upon account of the favour of God, without the interposal of satisfaction for sin, 295. This agreeable to Scripture, ib. and the propensity of God's nature, 296. and cleared from the objections against it, 297. Thirdly, This necessary satisfaction Christ has performed, 300. for First, He suffered the punishment of our sins, ib. Secondly, What he suffered was in our stead, 311, whether it be considered as a Sacrifice, ib. or as a Ransom, 316. Thirdly, By what be suffered in our stead, the damage done by sin is repaired, und God appeased, and reconciled to us on the conditions of the New Covenant, 319. Crellius here answered, 322. Fourthly, Our acceptance with God is upon account of his meritorious satisfaction, 325. And Fifthly and lastly, upon acaccount of that only, 326.   

SECT. V Concerning the Place of Divine Worship.  
THIS Threefold according to the threefold capacity of Man may be considered in, First, any solitary place whatever, as he is one single private person, 331. or Secondly, The family, of which we are members, ib. Such family-worship reasonable, ib. practised by the Heathen, 332. agreeable to the Old Testament, ib. and the New, 333. Thirdly, Churches or places of Public Worship, as such, are members of an Ecclesiastical Community, 334. The reasons for such Assemblies shown, from the nature of a Church, ib. and from the practice of God's people in all ages; as before the Law, 336. under it, ib. and after it, 340.   

SECT. VI Concerning the Time of Divine Worship.  
BEsides our worshipping God daily, 348. and upon particular occasions and emergencies by fastings and thanksgivings, 349. there ought to be solemn set times peculiarly devoted to his honour, 350; as will be better understood by considering.  
I. God requires not only an inward, but an outward Worship, 351.  
II. This external Worship must not be only in private, but in public too, 352.  
III. The time for this public worship ought to be stated, ib.  
iv It is expedient it should be taken out of some part of the week, ib.  
V This part of the week can't in reason be less than one whole day, 353. whether we consider the Object of our Worship, ib: or the Nature of it, ib: or the pattern of the Triumphant Church, 354; or the practice of the Militant, ib; or the early division of time into weeks, 355; or lastly, the writings of the Heathens, 358.  
VI 'Tis highly reasonable to believe the setting out the just time should be left to God himself, 361.  
VII. This time is determined by God in the Fourth Commandment to one day in seven, as a proportion perpetually to be devoted to Religious Worship, 363. For First, It is one in seven, and not the seventh from the Creation, which is enjoined by the Fourth Commandment, ib. Secondly, The Sabbath of the Fourth Command, One in Seven, is perpetual, 372, for 'tis part of the Decalogue which obliges in all ages, ib: as may be gathered First, from its being distinguished in the Old Testament from those Laws, which the time of Reformation has put a period to, ib: Secondly, from many intimations in the New, that the Decalogue as delivered by Moses is to continue as a perpetual Rule to Christians, 373; all which is agreeable to the opinions of the Primitive Fathers, 378, and of our own Church, 379, some Objections answered, 380, etc. and others, 385, etc. Thirdly, This proportion of One in seven is by the Command to be devoted to Divine Worship, and not only to bodily rest, 395. shown from the order of the Commandments of the First Table, ib. from God's blessing the Sabbath day, 396. and from the practice of the Israelites, and the modern Jews upon the Sabbath, ib: some Objections by the Author of the Epilogue considered, 397, etc.  
VIII Propos. This proportion, One in Seven, was determined to the Jewish day by another Precept, which was to oblige only till the Jewish Oeconomy had a period put to it, 403.  
IX Propos. When the last of the Week had a period put to it, the First was substituted in the room of it, 414. as appears probable from the Law, ib. the Prophets, 415. our Blessed Lord, 420. the holy Apostles and Disciples, 425. and Lastly, the Testimony of the following Ages, 429.    

ERRATA.  
PAge 20. line 16. read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 58. l. 12, 13. r. in sensible, p. 84. l. 22. r. contrived, p. 189. l. 30. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 190. l. 6. r. coveted, p. 234. l. 9 r. enlarged, p. 294. l. 16. r. flaws, p. 302. l. 2. r. to induce, p. 315. l. 13. deal which, p. 318. l. 22. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 323. l. 31. r. are in, p. 345. l. 33. r. and the, p. 348. l. 21. r. used.  
The Reader is desired to amend with his Pen what lesser faults and mis-pointings he meets with.   

A TREATISE relating to the Worship of GOD.  

SECTION 1. Concerning the Nature of Divine Worship.  
HE, who will give himself leisure to ponder the importance of Religious Veneration, and the innate pronity in men to form incongruous Notions of it, and the restless attempts of the Infernal Spirit to cherish this inclination, and keep us from right conceptions about it, will easily be induced to justify the present Inquiry.  
Religious Worship is deservedly accounted by the Hebrews as one of the Pillars which support the World, and prevent its retirement into its primitive Abyss. It cannot be expected, that the Arm of Omnipotence, which bears up all Things, should continue to be so propitious, where the Homage due to Heaven is not paid. It is a provocation of the first magnitude to neglect the making our reverential acknowledgements to Him, to whom we are indebted for our Existence, and whatsoever contributes to our real Felicity. There cannot be a more open affront put upon the indispensable Law of Gratitude. If we reflect upon the Bounty of the Supreme Being, it will easily inform us, that some thankful return is to be made: and to Worship and solemnly own the infinite Excellency of our Benefactor, is all that we are in capacity to do. No real addition can accrue to boundless perfection.  
Of this Worship, which is so important; we are apt to entertain very unsuitable apprehensions. A sense of the Deity is deeply rooted in humane Nature: and by reason of the natural depravation it lies under, there is an universal belief of our being obnoxious to Divine Justice. This raiseth fears and jealousies, and puts the Soul upon devising ways, whereby the Supreme Being may be atoned. Invention is set upon the Rack, and as many reconciling methods thought upon, as there are diversities of Humours. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  This is the true fountain of that Superstition which we often meet with in the Writings of the Heathens. They upon a deliberate view and survey of themselves, finding that they were not in a temper agreeable to the Idea, which they had of a Sovereign Being, and likewise unable to contest with his power, which they had reason to believe their own delinquencies would not permit to be propitious unto them: They fell to contrive several ways of Worship in order to the procuring an Atonement. At first they Sacrificed Plants, afterwards Beasts, at last Men. The meanest creatures, as Apes, Onions, Garlic, they courted with Divine Veneration, 
Euseb. de laudibus Const. p. 645 Vales.  fearing otherwise they might neglect the giving their due regards to that transcendent power which appeared in the formation of them. They dressed up their Religion with all the Ornaments of Art, thinking by their pompous Addresses to reconcile the Deity, and induce him to favour them with a benign Aspect.  
To this we may add the uncessant endeavours of our Infernal Adversary to keep us from right conceptions of Worship. He invents several ways, and keeps up the credit of them by blending something with them, which he borrows from the divine Institutions.  
Correspondencies betwixt his Worship, and some rites recorded in the Bible, are evident demonstrations of this truth.  
The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Euseb. praep. Evan. l. 1. p. 37. Plut. Symp.  to which religious Addresses were made, exactly answer to the Pillar of Stone which Jacob erected in Bethel. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, at the solemn Feast of Bacchus is agreeable to the bearing of boughs at the Feast of Tabernacles. The garment embroidered with Gold worn by those, who were concerned in the Solemnity, bears some similitude to the Sacerdotal Vestment worn by the Highpriest. The two Stones, 
Pausan. in Arcad. Fel. Sel. p. 173. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. quasi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ignis Jehovae. Delft. Phoeni. c. 11. p. 115.  within which the Rites of Ceres were kept, are parallel to the Two Tables upon which the Decalogue was engraven.  
The eternal Fire in the Temple of Vesta wants not a resemblance of the Fire, which by the Law was always to burn upon the Altar.  
At the place where the infernal Oracles used to be given forth, there was a Curtain in imitation of the Tabernacle: A Tripos like to the Ark of the Covenant. A Holmus made after the manner of the propitiatory: A Table resembling that upon which the Shewbread was placed. 
Philost. vit. Apol. l. 3. c. 3. p. 11●.  The most sacred Oath amongst the Indians by a Well did derive its Original from Beersheba, the Well of the Oath, where Abraham swore to Abimelech. The Well they style 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Well of Conviction. A little way off was placed a Vessel of Fire, called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the fire of Pardon, where they purged themselves from involuntary sins. It is believed This was an imitation of John's Baptism by Water, and Christ's by Fire. The words of Tertullian concerning the Infernal Spirit are agreeable to all this, 
Praescr. p. 339.  Res Sacramentorum Divinorum in Idolorum mysteriis aemulatur. These instances make it obvious, that there has been in some particulars a similitude betwixt the Worship of Jehovah, and the Rites which have been practised in the Kingdom of Darkness. This agreement must happen either fortuitously, or else be designed by some intelligent Being. The first cannot be asserted with any good reason. It is not conceivable, how there should be a harmony in so many things of a positive nature, without the interposals of an intellectual Principle. If it was designed, than God must either intent an imitation of the Worship of the Devil, or the Devil the Worship of God: to assert the first is highly incongruous, God forbids his people to inquire into his Worship, and learn the ways he had seduced the Heathens into. It cannot be imagined, that he should teach them that, which he forbids them to learn. The Mosaical Law was enacted with a design to obliterate the memory of the Religion of the Idolaters: and therefore we cannot think that he would make any of their injunctions a part of his own. The Records of the Worship of Jehovah, are of a more early date than those which represent unto us the Worship of the Heathens. And we cannot conceive how the contents of the Ancient Record should be an imitation of what is contained in the Modern. The Author of the Maccabees says, 
1 Macc. 3.48.  that the Heathens set up Idols, which have some likeness to those things which are contained in the Law. And the Fathers of the Christian Church, generally accord in this, that the Ethnic constitutions did derive their Original from Moses.  
All this being considered, namely, the importance of Divine Worship, our aptitude to be mistaken about it, the policy of the Tempter to cherish our inclinations; it must necessarily be our concernment to gain a true Notion of it. In order to this end, the following particulars are to be well weighed.  
1. Worship in general, imports a reverential and humble acknowledgement of the supereminent worth and excellency which is in another. We may honour our inferiors or equals. But properly we Worship that only, which is vested in some eminency, which we ourselves are destitute of; and therefore the Act always supposes an humble submission in the Mind. This Excellency is not only power and authority, but goodness or any other perfection. We speak as congruously, when we say, We adore the Wisdom and Benignity of the Supreme Being as his sovereignty and dominion. Nebuchadnezar, who was in power superior to Daniel, yet worshipped him upon the account of his superlative understanding. Worship has several names according to the diversity of the acts, whereby the acknowledgement of worth is made: if it be by entertaining a high esteem of it in the mind, Internal Veneration; if by external acts appropriated by nature or institution to signify this esteem, as an humble bowing of the Body, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: serving and obeying; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
2. The Worth which is to be acknowledged is either finite or infinite. Finite, is that which is lodged in a limited Being: it is either Moral, as in those who are eminent for some Moral Accomplishments; or Civil, as in Parents and Magistrates. Both these challenge from us regards suitable to their Nature. The first a Moral, the second a Civil Worship.  
Infinite worth is that which is found only in the Supreme Being: and our agnitions of it must be made by such acts as are congruous to the nature and institution of him, in whom it resides.  
It is as natural for an intellectual Soul rightly polished, to make this reverential confession, as for a smooth body to make a reflection of the Sunbeams which fall upon it. The Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imports glory, signifies likewise a weight. The superlative glory of the Divine Nature (when duly apprehended) is to the Soul, what a weight is to the Body: it naturally produceth a succumbency, and works it into a religious prostration. Those who are most elevated in their imagination, when they meet with excellency infinitely transcending what they themselves are possessed of, cannot but be so just as to stoop and make their due acknowledgements. We never find it controverted in any Nation, whether honorary Addresses ought to be made to the Deity. All the Sons of Pride, upon discovery of boundless perfection, blush at the thoughts of competition, and study by submissive applications to make it propitious to themselves.  
3. The Acts, whereby an Acknowledgement of infinite Excellency is made, are either mediate or immediate. By mediate may be understood such as altho' they do not import an immediate acknowledgement of Divine Perfection, yet have an efficacious influence upon the production of those which do. That their nature may be the better discerned, the following particulars must be considered, 1. The World is form by the infinite power of the Supreme Being. The intellectual part of it increasing by his benediction, he has made it up into families, families augmenting, he has out of them constituted Kingdoms and Nations. By him Princes rule, and Subjects are obliged to give their due regards to them. 2. Whatsoever is of his formation, he hath made with a design to manifest the glory of his goodness and benignity. Every wise Agent propounds some worthy end to himself in all his operations; and there is no purpose, that we know of, more worthy of and congruous to the Divine Nature than this. 3. That which has an immediate connexion with the glory of his goodness and benignity, is the felicity of those whether particular persons, families, or kingdoms which are produced by him. The health of the Patient is the glory of the Physician. The prosperity of the Community the honour of the Prince. Much more the felicity of the creatures is the glory of him, from whom they received their Being's. 4. The felicity of Nations and Families consists in their flourishing estate, when they are in an enjoyment of all things which the nature of their constitution requires: The happiness of solitary persons in the inward tranquillity of their mind, when there is no mutiny among their faculties, but a transcendent contentment, springing from a sense of being employed in those operations which are suitable to the dignity of humane nature. 5. There are many actions, which have a peculiar tendency to promote this felicity. The flourishing state of Nations and Families is advanced, when the deportment of every member is agreeable to the best rules of Policy and Oeconomy. When Superiors impose just commands, Inferiors render a cheerful obedience, and every one moves as an Intelligence in his proper Orb. The inward tranquillity of private persons, when they bound their desire of sublunary gratifications with the rules of Temperance, are not transported with the smiling aspects, nor dejected with the severest frowns of Fortune; keep an equal temper amidst all those affronts, with which their Contentment is assaulted, do not transgress the just bounds of Magnanimity or Meekness, sweeten their conversation towards their enemies with gentleness and affability, abate the acrimony of Justice with mixtures of Equity; encourage beneficence with grateful returns, and are merciful to the objects of compassion. The Soul having a sense of a turpitude in some actions, and that while she is engaged in these, her demeanour is agreeable to the dignity of her nature, and the grand design of her formation: she is eminently delighted with them, ●nd arrives at the very top of moral felicity.  
These actions, accompanied with the benign influences of Heaven, being exerted, will introduce such a happy temper into the Community, as will highly conduce to the honour of the Supreme Rector, and excite all intellectual Being's to fall down before him, and make the most reverential acknowledgements of his infinite benignity and goodness. Upon this 〈◊〉, they are represented as acts of Religion, or Divine Worship. S. James says, 
C. 1. v. 27.  that Pure Religion and undefiled before God and the father, is this, to visit the fatherless and the widow, and to keep themselves unspotted from the world. Here is an abridgement of mediate Religion divided into two branches, the Duty of Man towards others, and himself. The first is expressed in these words, to visit the father less, etc. The second, to keep himself unspotted, etc. The principal part of it in relation to others, consisting in being compassionate towards those, whose condition requires his succour: towards himself, in being watchful, that he be not infected with the impure conversation of the world: these two by a Synecdoche are put for the whole, and styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pure and undefiled Religion or Worship.  
Upon this account the giving relief to those who are in distress, is represented under the notion of an Oblation. 
Ecclus. c. 35. v. 2. Act. 10.4.  He who giveth alms sacrificeth praise. Cornelius' Charity, like the smoke of the Altar, did ascend and come up for a memorial before God. S. Paul tells the Corinthians; that the things sent by them f●● his support, 
Phil. 4.18.  were an odour of a sweet smell 〈◊〉 sacrifice acceptable, well pleasing to God.  
4. Immediate Acts (wherein Divine Worship properly consists) are such as import an immediate acknowledgement of God, and are appropriated to his purpose. For unlimited perfection being peculiar to the Supreme Being: there must be peculiarities in the agnition of it. The acknowledgement 〈…〉 analogy to the thing acknowledged, therefore the object of the acknowledgement being in communicable, the agnition itself ought to be so. This appropriation must be not only in respect of degree, but the species. For infinite worth, being not only of a divers degree, but of a different species and kind from that which is finite, there must be not only a gradual, but a specifical difference betwixt the Worship which is terminated upon both. This makes it conspicuous, that the same Divine Honour, which is one species of Worship, cannot with justice be given to God and the Creature.  
5. These immediate and appropriate acts are either internal or external. By internal I mean the elicit acts of the Soul: By external the imperate acts of the Body. God having a peculiar interest both in the Soul and Body, upon the account of his Creation and Redemption of them: We lie under an obligation to make our acknowledgements by such acts as flow from both. External performances are eminently serviceable to the grand design of Religion. The actions of our bodies conduce to the increase of inward devotion. When we present them as a living sacrifice to God, this oblation has the same effect upon the mind, which the fat of the Sacrifice had upon the fire of the Altar: it communicates strength to our zeal, and a higher degree of ardency to our affections. It has an influence upon the engaging of others in a similitude of practice. The light of a Religious deportment shining before Men, will excite them to pay their tribute of honour to their Father in Heaven. Their understanding being illuminated with such divine rays, like a burning-glass, produceth an inflammation in the will, and puts all the faculties of the Soul into a due temper and motion. It likewise tends to the advancement of the glory of God. We glorify him when we manifest and fet forth his excellency. Corporal Worship, which is visible and obvious to sense, cannot with justice be denied a share in the promoting this work.  
6. Internal Acts are either such as have a general aspect upon the excellency of the Divine Nature: or else a more special upon some particular Attributes. The universal excellency of the Deity is acknowledged, when we frame an Idea of his infinite Majesty as exact, and agreeable to him, as our finite capacity will permit; and in a sense of it prostrate our Souls with all humility before him. The excellency of particular Attributes is owned by some particular Acts, which are suitable to their nature. Believing, as it imports an assent, is an owning of the veracity of God. When this Assent is so vigorous and efficacious, as to bow the will into a cordial compliance with the import of that truth which is assented to, and engage it in a cheerful obedience, it is a confession of divine dominion and authority: fearing, if it be mixed with servility, is an agnition of punitive justice; if sublimated into filial temper, of paternal goodness. That which Moses calls fear, Deut. 6.13. Christ terms adoration, Mat. 4.10. The Chaldee word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies both to Fear and to Worship. The loving of God is an acknowledgement of his Beneficence; Trusting in him, of his Power and Goodness.  
7. External Acts are either natural or instituted. God is pleased not only that our agnitions of him be made by such acts as we are led unto by natural light: but by such as have their foundation in positive institution. His 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is more signally owned by those performances, which depend upon his pure pleasure, than such as are the dictates of universal reason. In the last case, we own chief the reason of the thing: in the first the sovereign will and pleasure of God only.  
8. Natural, are either such as the whole Body is concerned in, as an humble flexure of it. This accompanied with due circumstances, all Nations look upon, as an indication of that esteem which we have of the worth of another; and therefore amongst the Greeks, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Worship is denominated from it. Or else such as some particular part is more immediately interested in. The Tongue is the great instrument in the external service of God. Four acts of Natural Worship I will enumerate, which are performed by it; namely, Praying, Praising, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Euthyph. p. 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Disser. 30. p. 300.  Swearing, Vowing.  
Praying. The Heathens which had only the light of Nature for their conduct, accounted vocal Prayer as a principal part of Religion. Holiness is defined by Plato, to be a Science of Sacrificing and Praying. Maximus Tyrius says, that the life of Socrates was full of Prayer. Simplicius has left a lively expression of his devotion upon record at the end of his Commentaries upon Epictetus. Arrian acquaints us with their usual form, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Romans thought this part of Worship to be so acceptable to their Deities, that they would deny nothing to those who pray unto them. For this reason they use to conceal the name of the Tutelar Genius of the City, lest their enemies being acquainted with it, 
Plin. l. 29. c. 2.  might draw him from them by their supplications. Both Greeks and Romans being strangers to the true God, that this honour might not miss of him, and be terminated upon some inferior power, it was their custom to direct their Petitions not exclusively to any particular Deity, but to leave their Compellations ambiguous, sive Deo sive Deae, as the Inscriptions at Athens and Rome do testify. Sanctity is styled by Plato, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an art of merchandising betwixt God and Man: the Vessel that sails from Earth to Heaven is Prayer. It imports those good things which are expedient for us; that which it exports is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Honour and Worship. This, the Philosopher says, is all, that God is capable of receiving from us. For this reason, Prayers are styled Incense, 
Rev. 5.8. Heb. 5.7.  and Christ is said to offer them up. They are as proper parts of Worship as Sacrifices and Oblations were under the Law. Upon this piece of Spiritual Homage an agnition of divine perfection is as conspicuous, as Caesar's Image upon the Roman Penny. When we pray for wisdom and holiness, we cannot give a more lively signification of our acknowledgement; that these perfections reside in God in a peerless degree.  
As Prayer, so Praises in Hymns and Psalms is a part of Natural Worship. All Nations have expressed their esteem of their Deities in this way. It was in use among the Greeks, as appears by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the first sung to the gods or goddesses, which they believed did favour them: the second, to those whom they accounted not to be propitious to them.  
Amongst the Romans, the same way of Worship obtained: as is evident by their Assamenta Junonia & Minervia, Poems composed in the Honour of those Deities whose names they bear. Amongst the Hebrews, as is manifest from the poetical compositions in the old Testament, the Christians, as is plain from the Apostolical exhortation to the Ephesians and Colossians; and Pliny's report to Trajan concerning their practice. Tho' Prayers and Praises may be directed to men upon a civil account; yet this doth not hinder them from being appropriate parts of the Worship of God. When we say, that they with other actions are by nature peculiar to the Deity, we mean not as they are taken materially. So they are of a common nature, like matter considered in the abstract, without any particular form. But we take them formally together with their individuating circumstances, which do determine and limit them. We may pray to men, but to do it when they are not present, for such things which none but the Supreme being can confer; in such an assembly as is met solely upon a Religious account, would be, by all impartial Expositors, interpreted an invading the right of Heaven, and an inexcusable injury to the Divine Glory.  
To Prayer and Praise we may add, the taking an Oath, the making a solemn Vow to God, as parts of natural Worship. All the Heathens, which had nothing to direct them but the light of Nature, were fully acquainted with them, as appears by clear testimonies in their writings, which to mention would be superfluous. They both involve a plain acknowledgement of the perfections of the Divine Nature. He who takes an Oath invocates God to be a witness and a revenger: which address includes a confession of his Omniscience, that he is privy to that which is secret, and unknown to others: his Veracity, that he takes pleasure in truth, and has a perfect detestation of that which is opposite to it: his Power, that he is able to take vengeance, and assert the dignity of the Law which is violated.  
He who makes a solemn Vow, if it be to engage himself to some expressions of gratitude, doth thereby declare his deep sense of the Divine Benignity: if to bind himself the faster to a loyal deportment in his conversation, the dominion of Heaven over him.  
If any doubt (notwithstanding what has been represented) whether this part of Worship is to continue under the Evangelical dispensation, he may satisfy himself by considering, that this is plainly foretold by the Prophet Isaiah, c. 19.21. The taking away of what was given to God by Vow is condemned by the Apostle, Rom. 2.22. and death was afflicted upon Ananias and Saphira for their miscarriage in this particular, Act. 5.5, 10. The devoting of things to God by Vow is grounded upon reason common to all ages; as well the times of the Gospel as the Law. The whole world is a Community under the regency of one supreme Monarch. This Community he has parcell'd out into Kingdoms, and committed the government of them to his Vicegerents. In every kingdom the members have their properties bounded and limited by Law. These rights they are so invested in, that they have withal a power of alienation. The natural signs of their will, when they exert this power, are promissory words. There is no reason why this way of exchange may not as well prevail in the universal Community betwixt the Supreme Rector and his Subjects, as in any particular betwixt his Vicegerents, and those who are under their regency. A Vow is nothing but a solemn promise made unto God.  
9 Instituted Acts are such as have their foundation in positive institution. For the right understanding of them, it must be premised, that the new Covenant, of which our blessed Lord is the Mediator, was made by the positive pleasure of the Divine Will. It is the product of free Grace, as is apparent by the case of the fallen Angels. They have no overtures of reconciliation made to them. Christ did not shed his blood to quench the fire of Hell for them. God having a design to publish and make known this gracious Covenant, he has made choice of his Word and Sacraments to do it by. The preaching, hearing, reading this Word and receiving the Holy Sacraments may be truly styled acts of instituted Worship, they become a duty to us by the positive institution of the new Covenant, and import an acknowledgement of the benignity and goodness of God to mankind.  
Preaching and publishing with integrity of heart, the methods of divine Grace in the work of redemption, is an undeniable expression of a serious and devout sense of the benignity of Heaven. Those who preach Christ, who is the brightness of the divine Glory, must necessarily by the same action give Glory and Worship to God. Tho' preaching the Gospel as it imports teaching, is a religious duty, and looks down upon men only: yet as it signifies the proclaiming before men the inestimable goodness of Heaven, it looks upwards to God, and may challenge a place amongst the parts of his Worship. Upon this account Ministers are said to be a sweet favour unto God, whether their Hearers will be saved or perish, admit or refuse their instructions. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alludes to the perfumed offerings under the Law, and intimates, that God is as really worshipped by the preaching of the Gospel, as he was by those Oblations. Upon this account the Apostle represents himself as one that sacrificeth the Gospel, 
2 Cor. c. 2. v. 14, 15.  Rom. 15.16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, S. Chrysostom interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He calls a Preacher, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Hom. 〈◊〉 Cor. 2. c. 3.  a royal censer upon which this spiritual oblation is offered. This is part of that pure offering which Malachi foretold, should in every place, as well among the Gentiles, as the Jews be tendered unto God. This Sacrifice is like the Peace-offerring, of which some was given unto God, and some to the people. It is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the sacrifice of Faith, Phil. 2.17. The Faith of the Gospel is of so excellent nature, that the Ministerial publishing of it implies a solemn oblation of Praise to him, who is the fountain of it.  
To this part of Worship, we may add Hearing, Reading, receiving the Sacraments. The Liturgy joins together the setting forth the Praise of God, and the hearing his Word; when we with holy reverence hearken to it, we set forth the Praise of his Wisdom and Goodness, which by our devout and serious attention, we acknowledge to be sufficient and ready to instruct us.  
He who reads the Scripture as the Word of the living God, with an intention to be made wise unto Salvation by it, doth thereby manifest his deep sense of the incomprehensible and profound understanding of the Author of it.  
When Proselytes are admitted into the Church by Baptism, and have the remission of their sins sealed unto them, upon the terms of the new Covenant; it is an evident indication of their humble resentments of the infinite goodness of God, in granting an act of Amnesty and pardon, after the violation of the first Covenant. Their being baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is an expression of a reverential acknowledgement of, and an entire devotion to the sacred and blessed Trinity.  
The receiving the Symbols of the body and blood of our Lord, imports a laudatory agnition of him. It is not an empty remembrance which is intended, but a solemn commemoration, attended with the most emphatical expressions of Praise and Gratitude. It is styled a showing forth, in allusion to the Jewish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was a declaration made in praise of the benignity of Heaven, in procuring redemption from the Egyptian servitude. The Wine is styled by S. Paul, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Cup of Blessing, and the Bread by Justin Martyr, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Bread of Thanksgiving.  
These two Sacraments were not designed for the primitive times only, but to continue to the last period of the World. The reason of their continuance is common to all Ages: we have now as much need to renounce our ghostly enemy, profess our repentance, promote sanctification, be received into the Church: commemorate the death of Christ, renew our covenant, gain a fuller Communion, as they which lived in the first age. And it is not now inexpedient, that we should be taught by some visible signs, our intellectual powers are in as much dependence upon sense as formerly. Were the attainments of the present Age equal to the state of Paradise, this way of instruction would not be disagreeable. Eden was not without Two Sacramental Trees.  
Their permanency is likewise ascertained to us by a Divine Revelation. In the Commission to Baptism, it is said, I will be with you to the end of the world. To interpret baptising nothing else but an initiating by Doctrine without Water, and the end of the world, the end of the age in which the Apostles lived, is to offer too much violence to the Text. The proper Notion of Baptism includes Water. We are not to departed from the proper signification of words, and comply with a Metaphorical, without a peremptory necessity. The Context is so far from obliging us to this departure, that on the contrary it holds forth a manifest discrimination betwixt baptising and initiating by Doctrine. 
v. 19 v. 20.  The first is expressed by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the second by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is of the same importance with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 13. v. 40. and there without controversy it signifies the last period of the world, when the Angels shall sever the wicked from the just. If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 import the Age, it must be remembered, that the Jews divided the time from the Creation, to the dissolution of all things into two Ages; the first expiring at the coming of the Messiah: the second, at the final period of the Universe, and so, I will be with you to the end of the age, is as much as, I will be with you to the end of the world. The Age before the coming of the Messiah, cannot be understood, he being in our nature when he spoke these words; therefore the age after must.  
When the Apostle says, as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye show forth the Lord's death till he come: He evidently declares, that the institution of the Supper is to continue till the last appearing of Jesus Christ. There are but four come of his usually spoken of. The First in the Flesh, when he assumed our nature: the Second in the Spirit to sanctify and rule his Church: the Third in his vindicative Justice to destroy Jerusalem: the Fourth in the last day to Judge the World. The two first cannot be understood. They were passed, when the Apostle wrote his Epistle. The Messiah was then come in the Flesh to all mankind. In the Spirit at the solemn feast of Pentecost, and in particular to the Corinthians; they were sanctified in Christ Jesus. 1 Ep. 1.2. But the coming which the Apostle aims at, is future, until I come. Neither can we understand his coming to destroy Jerusalem. For these words are inserted with a design to awake the Corinthians to a greater degree of circumspection in their preparations for the holy Communion, intimating that it shall continue, till Christ come to summon them before his Tribunal, and judge them for their unworthy Approaches. There was no summons of the Corinthians at the overthrow of Jerusalem, and therefore the last coming must be understood.  
These Acts which have been enumerated, some in savour of the Mass, would persuade us; that sacrificing is to be added as a part of Divine Worship under the Gospel. If this be so, it must be warranted by some Divine Law, and this must be either natural, or positive. Natural it is not, as will be evident by the following considerations. 1. A Sacrifice is an Oblation of some material thing unto God, and in the offering destroyed. The essential difference, whereby it is distinguished from other Oblations, is the destructive mutation. This change cannot reasonably be esteemed an act of Worship, but so far as it is an acknowledgement of some excellency appertaining to the Divine Nature as Sovereignty, Wisdom, Goodness, etc. In its self, before it has an institution enstamped upon it, it imports no such agnition. Were we left to the conduct of natural light, it would rather induce us to believe that the Godhead is dishonoured, than worshipped by a dissolution of the creature; in whose composure, divine Power and Wisdom are eminently conspicuous. 2. If the light of nature leads us to this practice, it must be, because it conduceth to the Honour of God; and if so, (we being under an obligation to honour him in the superlative and most exalted degree) the same reason will dictate, that mankind the most excellent part of the visible Creation, is to be singled out for this sacred purpose: Nay, that Abraham wanted not the warranty of a revelation for the offering up of Isaac: but was sufficiently instructed by the light of Nature in that concernment. The more esteemable the sacrifice is, the more honour must necessarily accrue to him, who has the tender of it. 3. The Law concerning Sacrifice is distinguist from the Laws of Nature in holy Writ. We find it placed in an inferior rank, Psal. 50.8. we must not think that sacrifices here, are put below the obligations of Nature, as offering ●●●●ks, paying Vows, calling upon God, v. 14, 15. because they were offered with unhallowed hands. The Psalmist speaks to holy Men, gather my Saints together, v. 5. Hear O my people, v. 7. The wicked are not spoken to, till the discourse concerning this matter is finished, v. 16. Parallel to this is what is expressed in the book of Jer. c. 7. v. 22. Burnt-offerings are represented as not primarily intended when the Law was given forth; but obedience to the voice of Heaven, which is an undoubted dictate of Nature.  
We never read that a conformity to the Laws of Nature is confined to particular persons or places, as the Law of Sacrificing is in the Old Testament. Nature being universal, under no such confinement, the duty to comply with her demands must be of the same latitude. 4. The Heathens in whom the Light of Nature was most refined did not account sacrificing to be of the Law of Nature. They marked the sacrificing of Grass, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 2. de Abst. p. 53. Porph.  and the more simple and natural Fruits of the Earth, with a note of error, as is evident by the words of Porphyry.  
They did so highly condemn the offering of Myrr, C●sia, Frankincense; that they pronounced a curse against those who deserted the primitive custom, and thought to please the Deity with such perfumes: for this reason they were styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imprecatio.  
They did inveigh against the offering up of brute-animals, as impious, unjust and hurtful. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus. prae. Evan. l. 4. c. 14 p. 153. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 2. p. 98.  Porphyry says, that all sacrifice is either for the honouring of the gods, or the expressing a grateful resentment of benefits received, or the procuring those things we stand in need of, and makes it appear, that the kill of animals has no congruity to any of these ends.  
They condemn the sacrificing of men. For this reason, the ancient custom at Rhodes of sacrificing an innocent person annually, was altered; and one adjudged to die for his crimes, substituted in his room. The King of Cyprus rescinded a Law of the same importance, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Amosis did the like in Heliopolis. Instead of three men, which use to be sacrificed to Juno, he appointed three images of wax equal to them to be offered up. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Euseb. l. 4. c. 16. p. 155.  Adrian by the same reason, was induced to abrogate all humane sacrifices.  
They disallowed the sacrificing of any thing which is of a material and sensible nature; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Porphyr. apud Euseb. praep. Eu. l. 4. p. 149. Porph. c. 2. p. 99 l. de sacrificiis. Euseb. l. 4. c. 13. p. 150.  asserting that there is nothing material, which is not impure to him who is immaterial.  
They expressly say, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a pure mind and soul free from exorbitant passion, is the most acceptable sacrifice, that can be tendered to the Deity.  
Apollonius Tianeus asserts, that the way to make God propitius to a man, is not to kindle fire, and sacrifice sensible things; but to offer up his mind in Prayer to him. These particulars being put together, it is evident, that the sacrificing material things, is not grounded upon the Law of Nature. If there be a positive institution for it, it must be either in the Old or New Testament. In the Old I grant it even before the Law was given from mount Sinai. This is evident from the general practice of men. Cain and Abel in the land of Eden, Abraham in the land of Canaan, Job in the land of Us, Jethro in the land of Midian. If there had been nothing in the case but arbitrary pleasure, and no settled institution even from the Creation: it cannot be conceived how persons of different tempers, inhabiting at a great distance one from another, should come all to conspire in the same practice. And if there was an institution, it could be from none but God.  
The grand design of Sacrifices, will contribute a further evidence to this assertion. They all from the beginning were types of the Sacrifice of Christ, the Lamb of God was slain in effigy from the foundation of the World. If the Oblation of Christ has its foundation in a divine institution, which all must grant, than sacrifices, which had always an aspect upon it, must have the same basis. He who designs the end, appoints the means conducing to it.  
The Faith of the Sacrificers is a further demonstration. Abel is said by Faith to offer up a more excellent Sacrifice than Cain, Heb. 11.4. Faith, in this chapter is mentioned several times, and is in every place of the same import. Now it is expressed that the Faith of Noah and Abraham was founded upon Revelation: the first was warned of God, the second called; therefore we have reason to conclude the same concerning the Faith of Abel, when he made his Oblation to the Divine Majesty. Lastly, God's acceptance of the Sacrifices then tendered, gives assurance, that the Sacrificers had the warranty of the Divine Will for what they did. The usual token was the descent of celestial Fire upon the Sacrifice: We never read of any such testimony that was given of divine complacency in mere arbitrary worship: but on the contrary, frequent condemnation of it. Tho the worship at Tophet, was highly culpable upon several accounts, yet they are all omitted, except this one: yet it never came into the heart of God to command it. Jer. 7. v. 21. c. 19 v. 5. Tho' all this be granted, it will not follow, that Sacrificing is to be continued under the New Testament; but on the contrary, we have a clear repeal of the old Law, as is manifest by the following considerations.  
1. The Place, to which the offering of Sacrifice was appropriated, is irrecoverably destroyed by the allowance of Heaven, as appears by the predictions of the Prophets, and the words of our blessed Saviour. When the Jews had obtained a grant from Julian to rebuild it, and spared no cost (their very shovels being of silver) in order to the accomplishment of their work: 
Theod. Hist. l. 3. c. 17. p. 103.  yet they were not able to perfect it. What they did in the day, was undone by an invisible hand in the night. Vast heaps of materials prepared for building were dissipated by violent Tempests. They not desisting, nowtithstanding these significations of displeasure; at last they were compelled by an Earthquake, and an eruption of Fire, which consumed many of them.  
2. The Priesthood, which was solely interested in the oblation of Sacrifice, is changed, Heb. 7.18. When it is said, The Lord swore and will not repent, thou art a Trust for ever, after the order of Melchisedeck, v. 〈◊〉 implies he did repent the setting up the Order of Aaron, that is, do as men use to do, when they repent, revoke, and disannual it. Josephus observes, that a little before the coming of Christ, the precious stones upon the shoulders and pectoral of the Priest ceased to shine. It is certain; that within a little while the glory of the Aaronical Priesthood was to disappear, and be swallowed up in the brightness of the Priesthood of the Messiah. And the Priesthood being changed, that there is made a necessity, a change of the Law concerning Sacrifice, which the Priest only had power to execute.  
3. The use, which Sacrifices were designed for, did cease at the death of Christ. They were intended as figures of his Sacrifice. Heb. 10.1. Now he having offered up himself really upon the Cross, all those shadows are vanished and become useless. This is agreeable to Daniel's prediction, that the Messiah would cause the Sacrifice and oblation to cease, c. 9, v. 27. and to the Author of the Hebrews, that they were imposed till the time of reformation, Heb. 9.10. 
Just. Mar. cum Tryph. p. 263.  They being not in the number of those things which are, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, good in their own nature, as Justin Martyr distinguisheth: but such as belong, ad secundam intentionem, as Maimonides glosseth upon Jer. 7. 
Maim. More Neb. p. 535.  v. 22. When Jesus Christ did reform the defects of the legal Constitution, they with other carnal Ordinances were laid aside.   

SECT. II. Concerning the peculiar Object of Divine Worship.  
THose early deceptions which have been in the World, about the Object of Religious Worship, may justly alarm us to use all the circumspection we can, in our scrutinies about it.  
Tho' before the flood, the protraction of Life to many hundred years, did furnish men with an eminent advantage, to acquaint their posterity with the True God, who created the World: and frustrate any attempts of innovation about the Object of Worship: yet afterwards, when their durance in this present state came to be contracted, a very surprising alteration followed.  
Noah and his three Sons, in a little time were better known to the World under the notion of Gods, than of Men. It is believed that Sarurn was Noah, Jupiter Ham, Neptune Japhet, Pluto Sem.  
The golden Age, in which Saturn ruled, is like the hundred years betwixt the flood, and the birth of Peleg, when Noah did paternally govern Mankind. The Fable concerning Saturn's devouring all his Sons except three, did derive its original from Noah's condemning the World in his holy Life and Doctrine, and the saving only three Sons with him in the Ark.  
Ham was worshipped in Africa. 
Eze. 30.15. LXX.  A Temple was dedicated to him in No a City of Egypt, styled Hammon No, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a City of Jupiter. Heaven was allotted to Jupiter for the place of his regency, because Africa the portion of Ham enjoys the more direct beams of the Sun, and was believed to be nearer the Celestial Throne, than other Countries.  
Japhet comes from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Niphal makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from which Neptune is derived. Neptune is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, answerable to what is expressed of Japhet. God shall enlarge Japhet Gen. 9.27. The Ocean was assigned to him for his Dominion; because that part of the world, which fell to Japhet, abounds with Sea and Islands.  
Sem, in whose Family True Religion was maintained, was hated by the profane posterity of Ham, and therefore tho' they acknowledged him to be a God; yet they placed him in the lowest rank. He was styled by them, Deus inferorum.  
This Art of translating Men into Gods, was very early. 
c. 14, 15.  The Author of the Wisdom of Solomon, believes that the affection of Parents to their Children untimely snateed away by death: Lactantius, 
De sals. relig. p. 46, 47  that the love of Subjects to their Princes deceased, gave the first occasion to the invention. When they could no longer enjoy the Original, they furnished themselves with Copies and resemblances: and instead of using of them as civil memorial, they made Idols of them, and courted them with religious veneration. Of this kind was Bel. Isa. 46.1. It was the effigies of a puissant Prince, known by the name of Belus. Nabuchadnezzar calls him his Progenitor, in his Speech to the Babylonians recorded by Megasthenes and Abydenus, as Eusebius relates. The plentiful provision made for his Table, argues him to be originally a man invested with supereminent dignity. Every day were spent upon him Twelve measures of fine Flower, Forty Sheep, six vessels of Wine. The words of Jeremy give some credit to this relation. I will punish Bel in Babylon, I will bring forth out of his mouth, that which he hath swallowed up. Jer. 51.44. The Romans were so propense to this kind of Idolatry, that they were willing to be deceived by Julius Proculus, who asserted, that Romulus after his death appeared to him, 
Lact. l. 1. de fall. Reli.  and commanded, that a Temple should be erected, and the people worship him under the name of Quirinus.  
Not only Men, but also the infernal Spirit, has been treated with a very early Veneration. He having imposed upon our first Parents in the form of a Serpent, everafter affected the disguise, and did induce many to Worship him under it.  
The Egyptians accounted a Serpent the most divine of all the Gods, and the great preserver of the World. Amongst their Hieroglyphics, they had a flaming Circle, with a Serpent drawn through the midst of it. The Circle did represent the visible system of Heauèn and Earth: The Serpent, the God which united the parts of it together, and secured them against a dissolution.  
They painted him with a Hawk-head, to express the quickness of his sight, and styled him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ala, to signify, he is always upon the wing, in a readiness to execute his designs.  
The Phoenicians called him a good Genius. Zoroaster says, 
Eus. prae. Eu. l. 1. p. 42  that he is the best of those which are good. The most Prudent of those that are Prudent. The father of Equity and Justice. Sanconiathon represents Taautus to be the first who attributed Divinity to him. 
Eus. prae. Eu. l. 1. p. 40   
This kind of Idolatry did insinuate itself into many Nations, Greeks, Romans, Indians, etc.  
When the Oracle was consulted in the behalf of Plilip father of Alexander, 
Plut. vit. Alex. p. 665  concerning the Dragon which he saw conversing with Olympias; The answer was, that it was a God which Philip had seen in the shape of a Dragon, and that it was his concernment to address himself to him with the deepest veneration.  
When the City of Rome was infected with the Plague, Ambassadors were sent to Epidaurus to fetch Aesculapius. 
Liv. Ep. l. 11.  The Inhabitants of the Town, being unwilling to lose their God; while they were consulting, what answer to return, a Serpent of a stupendious bigness came of his own accord, to the Roman Galley, which the Ambassadors judging to be Aesculapius, without giving any further trouble, sailed away with him to Rome, paying in their passage such respects to him, as are agreeable to the nature of a Deity.  
Maximus Tyrius speaks of a Dragon five hundred foot long, which the Indians worshipped. 
Diss. 38.  After the fatal blow given to this infernal Spirit by the Messiah; some attempts were made amongst those, who pretended to be in the number of his Disciples, to renew this kind of Worship. Epiphanius speaks of a sort of Heretics styled, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which use to keep a Serpent in a chest. At the celebration of their Mysteries, he did come forth and wind himself about the Bread, which was set upon the Table for that purpose. The Bread consecrated by such circumflections, they accounted their Eucharist, converting the Table of the Lord into the Table of Devils.  
To this Worship of the infernal Spirit, we may add the Worship of the Stars. For this we have evidence from one of the most ancient Records now extant. If I beheld the Sun when it shined, or the Moon walking in brightness, and my heart hath been secretly enticed, and my mouth hath kissed my hand, Job 31.26, 27. These words are spoken by him, who lived before the times of Moses. The design of them is not to purge himself from the imputation of arrogancy, when the Sun of prosperity shined upon him, but from the crime of Idolatry, which the generality of mankind was then infected with. We have here the Object of their Worship, the Sun; to whom they use to Sacrifice Horses, 2 Kings 23.11. 
Herodo●  The celerity of his diurnal motion made them believe, that those swift animals would be an acceptable oblation. We have also the Moon, to whom they presented Cakes with her essigies enstamped upon them, Jer. 7. v. 18.  
Here is likewise the mode of Worship, namely, Kissing the Hand. 
Lucian. Brisson. de form. l. 1.  This Ceremony was commonly used by those who addressed themselves to the Stars with Divine Veneration.  
These Luminaries, being the most conspicuous parts of the Universe, were very generally entertained as Deities. Maimonides believes, that many branches of the Law of Moses were designed to prevent the spreading of this Error. This species of Idolatry had got some footing in the family of Laban. 
Elias This. p. 273.  The Teraphin which Rachel stole, were Images made on purpose to receive the influences of the celestial Powers. We have a memorial of this Error in the golden Mice and Emerands which the Philistines sent along with the Ark. They believed the God of Israel to be a celestial Power, and that he would fill those Images, with such a benign virtue, as would effectually remove the grief they were affected with. These misapprehensions which so early prevailed about the Object of Divine Worship, aught to make us the more cautelous in our inquiries about it. What I have to say, I will reduce to the following Propositions.  

1. There is a God who has made the World.  
2. In the Godhead, are Three Persons.  
3. These Three Persons are One God.  
4. This One God is to be Worshipped.  
5. This One God, is only to be Worshipped.   
1. There is a God who has made the World, Tho' his Existence is supposed in a Discourse of Divine Worship: yet the Atheism of the age, in which we live, makes it necessary to set it in as clear a light as possibly we can; which I will endeavour to do, First, by considering the World in general, Secondly, in its particular parts.  
First, in General. If there be no God which has given Being to it; than it is eternal in respect of Matter and Form: Or else the Matter is eternal, and in process of Time did work itself into the present Form: or else both Matter and Form did emerg and begin in time.  
The World, as it is now in respect of Matter and Form with all the changes and revolutions of it, could not be eternal; for then the springing and decay of Plants, the generation and corruption of Animals, the birth and death of Men, must be eternal: and if so, than all these things were always simultaneous; Death as early as Life, Autumn as the Spring, the decay of Plants, as the growth and flourishing of them. There is no inequality in respect of duration, amongst those things that are eternal. If this Hypothesis prevail, the Sun, Moon and Stars can no longer move; for their revolutions that are past, are either finite or infinite: finite they cannot be, if they be eternal, for every finite number has a first, and every first implies a beginning, and that which has a beginning is not eternal: if infinite, than no addition can be made to them. Infinity is uncapable of an increase. According to this assertion it would be a greater wonder that the Sun should persist in his diurnal motion, than that he should stand still in Joshua's days. To this we may add, that the most authentic Record extant, gives us an account of the beginning of the World; how it was made and who was the efficient cause of it. The credit of the relation did so far gain upon the belief of the generality of Mankind; Historians, Poets, Philosophers, that it seems to be agreed amongst them, that the World was made out of a rude Chaos, and digested by a Divine Hand into that order which is visible to us. The opinion of Aristotle bears no proportion to what is in the scale on the other side. If the World was eternal, how came it to pass, that there is a remembrance but of five or six thousand years since the beginning, when so many millions are past? or how Arts and Sciences should not be brought to perfection long before the Epocha, that is usually given to them? If men did eternally exist, nothing could have escaped their discovery by this time. Their eternal studies, must necessarily have conquered all difficulties, and set the most concealed mysteries of nature in the clearest light.  
If matter be eternal, and in process of time did work itself into its present form: this matter must be from eternity one entire body, or else be divided into several parts. If one; it cannot be imagined, how it should come to be broken into so many fragments, as are necessary for the composition of the Universe. It could not dissolve itself into particles; for its unity being eternal, must be natural; and nothing but violence will make any thing depart from its own nature. If the distinct particles were eternal, they must be at rest or in motion. If at rest, there must be some eternal cause to disquiet them, before the form of the World could be produced by them. It is natural for matter to persevere in the state in which it is, till it meet with such an agent. If they were in motion, this motion must be regulated by Laws, or else be casual and fortuitous. If by Laws, there must be an Intelligent Being to form and impress them upon the several particles, and this can be nothing but a God. If casual and fortuitous, it is not imaginable, (they having no Commander over them) how they should fall into their several ranks, and produce as beautiful an order, as the most accurate wisdom could have contrived. We may with less force to our understandings conceive, how millions of blind, deaf and dumb men in a vast desert, without any General over them, may fall into a military Order, march in their distinct ranks, keep to their proper colours, charge their enemies, fall back without the least confusion: as, how an innumerable company of material Particles ranging in an infinite space, without any intelligence to regulate their motion, should produce all the curious appearances with which the Universe is adorned. He must be exalted in his own fancy, who can persuade himself, how, after all the dances which these particles have had from eternity, they should at last come to embrace and clasp together, some in the shape of Dogs, snarling and barking; some in the shape of Horses, neighing and prancing; others in the shape of Men, talking and laughing together.  
How is it possible that the rational Soul which has no matter in it, should be made by a combination of such material ingredients. That faculty which has a perception of the habitudes, respects, and similitudes betwixt things, which make no impression upon matter, must necessarily have a spiritual and immaterial constitution.  
If the matter and form of the World did emerg and begin in time; they must either of their own accord, start out of the Abyss of nothing, or else be fetched from thence by the energy of some superior power. The first must not be asserted. Nothing can be the cause of itself, for than it would be before it was in Being, and by consequence, be and not be, at the same time. If the second, than that Superior Power must be lodged in some intelligent Being. This Being must have an Aseity, and be entirely from himself, without dependence upon any other; and therefore infinite in all perfection, there being nothing higher to limit and set bounds unto him. And this is that which we mean by a God.  
As from the World in general, it appears there is a Deity: so likewise from the several parts of which it consists, the Heavens, the Earth, the Body, the Soul of Man. There is not a Star in the Firmament, but it shows forth the glory of this Being. When we behold the heavenly Luminaries sailing in the fluid body of the Air, we must necessarily conclude, that there is a skilful Pilot at the stern. If one born and educated within the caverns of the earth, should be suddenly set upon the supersicies of it in a clear night to take a prospect, he would be inclined to ask the same question, which he did, who saw the first ship arrive at Colchos, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He who can persuade himself, that all these glorious Lights came there fortuitously, without the contrivance of an intelligent Being; may with as much ease believe, that passing through a City in a dark night, all the Candles which he meets with at every door, came there by chance.  
Indeed there are attempts made to salve the Celestial appearances with Matter, Figure and Motion. We are told, that Matter in distinct pieces being moved circularly, will by grinding one against the other, wear off the angular protuberances, and become perfectly circular: and that the angulose parts, which are broken off, will be of two sorts, the lesser, which are fit for motion: the greater, and more course, which by reason of their unevenness, are apt to entangle one within another, and not to make their rounds with the same degree of celerity as the lesser do. The finer sort is called the first Element. The globular pieces the second. The course rubbish the third. The first is supposed to constitute the Sun and fixed Stars. The second, with some irregular particles to fill up the triangular spaces betwixt them, the Heavens. The third, the Planets and Comets. It being natural to all matter in motion to move in a right line, there will be an endeavour in every part of it to recede from the Centre; and therefore that which is most solid and able to persevere in motion, will be at the greatest distance from the middle point.  
Yet all this doth not represent such a composition of the Heavens, as to exclude the interposals of an infinite Being. The Matter of which they consist, the Laws, whereby the motion of the matter is regulated, have notwithstanding a dependence upon some intelligent Agent. Matter cannot be of itself: when it is made, it has no more motion than what is communicated to it. The motion imparted could not produce so beautiful an Order, as is visible in the World, were it not for some Laws which the Creator has impressed agreeable to his own nature.  
This Hypothesis doth not only suppose a Deity as necessary upon the account of these particulars: but likewise in order to the preservation of the several Vortices within their due bounds and limits. For it represents the Heavens in a perfect state of War; one Vortex discharging its Globuli, shooting the thinner irregular Particles out of the Ecclypticks into the Poles, and constantly thrusting one against another. If this be true, it cannot be imagined, how the Heavens above five thousand years together, should continue with so few alterations as Astronomers have observed, in case there be no God, to limit every Vortex, and hinder the encroachment of the greater upon the less. No doubt, by this time, had not there been a Moderator to keep the balance equal, the greater would have swallowed up the rest; and the Star in the middle obtained an universal Monarchy. We have the more reason to believe that a divine hand is interested in this affair; because when the Vortex we live in, has sucked in any other, the Star which belongs to it, degenerating into a Comet, is always believed to be ominous, and prophetical of some great thing, which the supreme Being is about to bring to pass.  
As the Heavens, so likewise the Earth declares the existence of a Deity. When we consider so vast a body encompassed with nothing which is visible, but a fluid mass of Air; the curiosities of Nature locked up in the bowels of it; the various sorts of Plants which beautify the superficies; it is natural to conceive, that some invisible Power is concerned in these effects.  
Indeed it is said, that there are three Principles, known by the names of Sal, Sulphur and Mercury, which are formed in the interior Region of the Earth. The Mercury rarified by motion, being impatient of so close a confinement, takes its flight with the other two blended with it, into the upper region of the Earth, where they constitute Minerals, Plants, and whatsoever the earth we tread upon, is adorned with.  
This Hypothesis is no prejudice to us; for it supposeth an intelligent Being as the first Creator of matter, and Moderator of its motion. And when it is managed with the greatest dexterity, comes very short of giving true satisfaction about many terrestrial Phaenomena, how they are produced in a Mechanical way. In it no provision is made for any reasonble account of the variety of Plants; how it comes to pass, that out of one and the same soil should spring such great diversity as the earth is beautified with. If these did originally emerg out of a combination of various Particles ascending from the interior region of the Earth; there must be a continuation of the like emanations for the nourishing of them: and if so, it is unaccountable, how the several streams of Particles should be able to find out amidst such great variety, as is sometimes in a little spot of ground, all those roots which they properly belong to. Neither can any good reason be given, in case all these should be pulled up, and Wheat, or any other Grain sown in the room of them; how all those Particles, (of which some are supposed inflexible) when they miss of the roots, they are accustomed to, should presently change their figure, and become as nutritive of the new body, as they had been formerly of the old. To say the Succus of the Earth is modified by the figure of the Root or Seed, is contrary to the Hypothesis under consideration; for it is supposed in it, that the interior region of the Earth, is the shop where all the Particles are forged. But let it be so, it is but necessary that those who say it, should give some account in a Mechanical way, how the Seed came to be in such a mode or figure.  
This Hypothesis likewise leaves us as much at a loss, about the curiosities which appear in the composure of Plants. Whatsoever Particles may be drawn out of the bowels of the Earth, and elevated to the surface of it; yet it doth not appear by any Mechanical Law, how they should fall into such exact order, as to produce the elegant colours and curious proportions which are visible in them. Were Archimedes present with his Compasses: or Michael Angelo with his Pencil, their imitations would fall very short of that exactness which is obvious to every eye.  
There are as great difficulties about their various virtues. Whatsoever Succus ascends to the exterior part of the Earth; it is not conceivable, how it should cause a Plant to spring up, which is hot in its operation, and within an inch of it, another cold; one astringent, another laxative; one poisonous, another nutritive; one grateful, another displeasing to the palate. If this variety were the product only of some juice modified within the Earth, this juice must be Homogeneous, or Heterogeneous. NOt the first, because it could not be the cause of so much variety. Not the second, because the soil many times, where such Plants grow, is found in every part of it to be of the same Nature; as appears by its administering an equal nourishment (when the Plants are rooted up) to any kind of Seed which is sown in the room of them.  
Lastly, The Hypothesis we speak of, gives no account how a little kernel comes to be improved into the vast body of a Tree. How a grain of Mustard the least of all Seeds, should become the greatest of Herbs. Why the Thistle in Lebanon, should not be as tall as the Cedar, or the Oak in Bashan as low as the Hyssop upon the wall. It has not yet been made to appear, by what force the Succus ascends contrary to its own gravity: How it comes to climb in some Trees a yard, in others five: by what Law it is engaged to spread itself into Arms and Branches, and what Principle has set bounds which cannot be exceeded. So inscrutable is the Wisdom of him who framed the Earth; that the most profound inquiries into Nature are not able to discover all the methods of it. Something is industriously concealed, to teach us, that the Wisdom which form the Earth, far transcends all finite capacities.  
As the Earth; so the Men which inhabit it, declare the existence of a Deity in their Bodies and Souls. 1. Their Bodies: He who takes a deliberate view of the composure of them, must necessarily be convinced of the interposals of Wisdom in the contrivance. The usual indications of Wisdom are the aiming at some worthy design; the election of congruous means for the accomplishment of it; and the actual bringing to pass what is designed. All these are manifest to any who consider the frame of a humane Body. It is manifestly intended to be a convenient habitation for the Soul. This immortal Tenant, having a considerable term of time to spend in it, and being of an active and vigorous nature, delighted with variety of objects; it is necessary, that its dwelling should be repaired, be movable, and furnished with avenues, whereby it may entertain and perceive those objects it meets with.  
In order to repairs, there could not be a better provision of means contrived by all the Wisdom in the World. Two rows of Teeth are form to prepare the nourishment by Mastication: an acid humour in the Ventricle, for the conversion of it into Chyle: straight passages in the Intestines, for the separation of the purer part from the excrementitious: a conveyance for it to the common Receptacle: Ductus to derive it from thence into the Veins; where by the potency of the Blood it is converted into the same nature: Ventricles in the Heart, for the entertainment of it: Valvulae to prevent the recess, and the Hearts being charged with too great a quantity at one time, which might occasion a suffocation: a passage out of the Ventricle into the Lungs, where the Air through the Larynk communicates a temper to it: a passage out of the Lungs, into the left, and from thence, by the branches of the great Artery, into all the parts of the Body: anastomosis, or pores for the transmission of it out of the Arteries into the Veins again; that the circulation may be continued for the repetition of the same work.  
That every part of the body may move, there is likewise a wise and accurate provision. The immediate instruments of motion are the Muscles. Besides the Flesh which is predominant in their composition, they have Filaments or Fibres, which constitute the tendon or ligament, whereby the Muscle is tied to the part which it is designed to move. Besides the Fibres, there are Nerves, which serve as channels to convey the Spirits. For the providing matter for the generation of Spirits, a vast quantity of Blood is prepared far exceeding what is found in other Animals. The Blood in the body of Man, bears the same proportion to the other parts of it, as one does to ten: So that if a Man weighs two hundred pounds, the Blood makes twenty of them. Whereas in other Animals it is but as one to twenty. For the distiling and straining of the Spirits out of this matter, there is an elaboratory, namely the Brain, which in a Man is twice as much as in a Beast four times bigger in body. As Men are designed for more action than brute Animals: so the preparations conducing to that purpose are greater. these Spirits commanded by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Soul into any part of the Body, swell the Muscle, and cause it to attract, and pull the part, which it is tied unto.  
That the Soul may have a sensation of external objects, their preparations are not inferior to those for motion and nutrition. The Nerves, which arise in the Brain are dispersed into all the parts of the Body: So that no member can be touched by any object, but the impression is presently conveyed into the Head. Tho' there is great variety in the modification of the external Senses, yet there is nothing superfluous. I will instance only in the Eye. It is lapped about with two coats, to defend it against the injuries of the Air: the outward is diaphanous in the forepart, for the admission of the rays of light: The inward has an aperture for the same reason, which like a Curtain is movable, that the Pupilla may be greater or less according to the dimensions or distance of the object. These Coats are filled with three Humours, which refract the rays proceeding from the same point, and make them to meet again at the bottom of the Eye, which very much promotes distinct Vision. The Crystalline Humour has on both sides, the Processus Ciliares, which serve as Tendons to alter the figure of it, according as the object is nearer, or farther off.  
It will never enter into the belief of any intelligent Man, that this provision for nutrition, motion and sensation should be accidental; and if any Wisdom be interested in the contrivance of it, it must be our own, or our Parents, or the Wisdom of an invisible Being; neither we or they know any thing of it, and therefore there must be a Being in the World infinitely Wise, which can be no other, than what the true notion of a God imports.  
As the Body, so the Soul of Man evidently demonstrates the existence of a Deity. the Powers of it are Two, Understanding and Will. These Two are so linked together; that what conduceth to the perfection of the one, never tends to the prejudice of the other. The Will is no loser by any accomplishment of the Understanding: nor the Understanding by any thing which is of sincere advantage to the Will. If there be no God, the contrary will be true. For it is the perfection of the Understanding to know it, truth being its proper object; but the greatest damage to the Will. No immorality will be disgusted, when it comes to be informed; that there is no Supreme Being to punish Vice and reward Virtue. If the Understanding know it not, this ignorance is a blemish to it; but a true advantage to the Will: there being nothing more efficacious to confine it within the bounds of Sobriety, than this persuasion, that there is a God.  
The Principles, as well as the Powers of the Soul, give evidence in this matter. As the false gods, had their characters impressed upon the bodies of those, who worshipped them: So the True God has set his signatures upon the Soul. there is a Law and a Conscience in every Man, a Rule and a Judge: a Law which points out the difference betwixt Just and Unjust, Good and Evil, Virtue and Vice. This Rule is reduced in the Imperial Institutions to these Maxims. Nothing must be done which is a violation of Piety, Modesty, Reputation. We must not prejudice the estimation, liberty, and safety of others. We must give to every one that, which is his own. These Axioms have the immediate effect of a Law, which is to bind and take away our freedom to do that which is contrary. Every Man is sensible that he is not at liberty to oppose the sense of these Propositions in his conversation. In case he does (if there be any remains of humane nature in him) he finds himself under remorse, and is really punished in the loss of that contentment, which a sense of being employed in a good action is always accompanied with. There cannot be a stricter obligation than this; that a man must either do that, which the propositions import; or else lose his true felicity. If this rule has the effect of a Law, which is to bind, it must have the essence and nature: the operation is always a true indication of the nature of every thing: and if the nature, it must be made and impressed by some Sovereign Power. The Legislative Power is never vested in an Inferior. This Sovereign which made and impressed this Law, must have a dominion over all mankind; because all, whether Princes or Peasants, are sensible of their obligations in this particular. Therefore there must be a Superior and invisible Power in the World, which is that which we mean by the Deity.  
As there is a Law in the Soul which argues the existence of God; so likewise a Conscience. This signifies the judgement of every Man employed about his own actions, as they bear a proportion or disproportion to the Divine Law. Upon a discovery of guilt, condemnation presently passeth, and as great a consternation follows as that in a malefactor, when he hears the sentence of death denounced against him. Tho' in a time of prosperity, when all things are quiet and serene, the intellectual pulse may be very slow: yet when a storm ariseth, it is quickly awakened in the most exorbitant persons. Every clap of Thunder is believed to be a messenger sent from Heaven to serve an Arrest upon them. When they make the fairest appearance in the World, they are like a Tragedy bound up in guilt leather; without there is splendour, within tumults and murder. Their external Triumphs, like the Drums of Tophet, help only to drown the  reports of their uneasy Spirits. These direful fears, which haunt the Soul, when it is no way obnoxious to the animadversions of humane justice, evidently declare; that there is an invisible power in the World, which has impressed them; and stands prepared to give it a taste of the most severe animadversions of his displeasure. They cannot be imputed to melancholy; because persons of all humours, the most airy Tempers have been molested by them. The Poet speaks of all in general, 
But thinkest thou, 
Curtman ho● in a vas●sse pute●, etc.  they go free, whose conscience make  
Whips, that unheard, their guilty Soul doth shake.   
The Apostle asserts of the whole Community of the Gentiles, 
Rom. 2.  that their thoughts accuse them. Neither are they the injections of politic Princes to keep their Subjects in obedience: for then why are they as obnoxious to them as other men. When Adonibezek's thumbs and toes were cut off; his Conscience put him in mind, that God had done so to him; because he had done the same to threescore and ten Kings. When the Archers hit Saul, the Wound, formerly made in his Conscience, bled afresh. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tostatus.  The Amalekite told David, that before he died, he cried out, the embroidered garment (namely of the Priests which he had slain) hath taken hold of me. When Antiochus' Army was routed, this inward Monitor suggested to him; that the calamity was befallen him for the evils, that he had done to Jerusalem. 
Plut. Numa p. 75.  Tullus Hostilius, who had been a great despiser of the Deity, having his mind awakened by a tormenting disease, applied himself to Religion. If Princes at first out of policy terrified others, and propagated the consternation in all succeeding generations, what Politician terrified them? The fear they themselves are under the power of, argues the reality of what they make use of.  
If it be said, that it is natural to the Soul to be disturbed, when it perverts the order of Intellectual Nature, and acts contrary to its own judgement; this is in effect to grant all that is contended for. Nature doth not only work a trouble upon this occasion; but raises fears upon the account of a Deity, and a future state, in which the obliquities of this life are to be punished: All which would be in vain and to no purpose, did not such an Infinite Being exist: and it is usually entertained as a maxim, that Nature acts nothing in vain.  
As the Powers and Principles of Intellectual Nature argue the existence of a Deity: so likewise the universal practice of all who are endued with it. All Nations agree that there is a God, to whom they are obliged to pay their reverential and honorary regards: the Wisest, who have more understanding than to be imposed upon: the Foolishest, who have not so much as to give any just reason to think, that they act with a design to impose upon others. The Americans, who have been most suspected of not being concerned in the general acknowledgement, are upon a diligent inquiry, found to have their Caribee or Priests, which they believe do converse with Spirits, and think themselves under an obligation to give to those Spirits a Religious Worship. This consent and agreement amongst Nations at a great distance one from another, can have no other original, than an universal impression made upon them by a Divine Hand. No other cause can be conceived of an equal latitude to this effect.  
If in this universal practice all are under a deception, they must be imposed upon either by Spirits, or by Men, or by their own fancies.  
If by Spirits, they must be good or bad. The good will not be so injurious as to seduce Mankind. The bad are not so unpolitick, as to beget an error contrary to their own interest.  
If by Men, it must be before their dispersion, when they had opportunities of converse together. If then such a Notion was started, and ever since communicated from one generation to another, and received by all the people in the World, it is an evident testimony of some reality in it. The fire will not kindle, except the fuel be disposed. This notion would not have found so universal an entertainment, had not the Soul been prepared for it by an innate Principle and inclination. There is no fiction, of which there has been so universal a retention. Polytheism, which lays the highest claim to universality, was disowned by the wisest of the Heathens; as is evident by the Treatise ascribed to Just in Martyr, De Monarchia Dei, by S. Cyprian, de Idolorum vanitate, by Lactantius, de falsâ religione. Plato, Plutarch, Celsus, Porphyry, Hierocles, Julian, have plainly asserted, there is but one Supreme Being. When more gods are mentioned, we are to understand either Angels, or deified Men, or only various names of the Supreme Being, expressing the divers benefits, which Mankind receive from him. The Pagan Deity was either made, or unmade. The Heathens had many Gods, which were made: but they had but One, which was unmade, and usually known by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Lastly, All cannot be imposed upon in this particular, by their own Fancies. Imagination is always floating, and inclined to change. It is unaccountable, how all the World should come to fix upon the same fancy, and retain it with so much resolution in all Ages, as not to be dispossessed of it, by the most plausible insinuations: considering especially, that it has some opposition to our natural tempers, as we are finite, corporeal, sinful. A Finite Being is lost and swallowed up, when it applies itself to conceive of that which is Infinite. We are so enured to corporeal objects; that the Idea of an immaterial Being is with great difficulty impressed upon us.  
By Nature we are under such strong propensions to Sin; that we are unwilling to think of any thing, which may curb our enormous inclinations.  
If the belief of a Deity, was the product of Imagination, it is strange, that a Man, when besieged with the most potent arguments, and naturally disposed by a depraved temper to comply with them, should not surrender up this Fancy; but still persevere in its defence.  
If, nowithstanding all this, any shall complain of the want of evidence for the existence of a God; I desire them, in order to the getting lose from their unbelief, seriously to ponder the following considerations.  
1. We have as much evidence for it, as we have for those things, which we doubt not of. If we hear at a distance an Instrument of Music, we question not, but there is a hand which plays upon it, altho' we see it not. If we discern a Ship upon the Sea, bending its course towards the Heaven, we conclude there is a Pilot within, tho' he is not seen by us. We have as much reason to believe; when we seriously ponder the harmonious composure of the parts of the World, their regular tendencies, to their several ends; that there is an Intelligent Being within, altho' he does not immediately fall under the notice of any of our Senses. If we must believe nothing but what we see, we can have no assurance of the reality of our Souls. We never saw that incorporeal substance whereby we are animated. We must be as uncertain about the Principles of our Bodies, they are made (as all other matter is) of such minute particles, that when separated, are not big enough to make an impression upon the Instruments of Sensation. The greatest body may by division be reduced to such a state; that the parts cannot be seen, and yet we are assured, they are not annihilated. The Particles which constantly swarm about the Loadstone; the effluviums which issue out of some Bodies, and at their return apprehend, and fetch in the matter, which lies within the Sphere of their activity. We perceive not with any of our Senses, and yet the effects produced by them will not suffer us to doubt of their reality.  
2. We have as much assurance of the Truth of this Proposition (a Deity doth exist) as we have of the clearest Axiom in Philosophy. the ground of certainty is nothing but a necessary and evident connexion betwixt the Subject and Predicate. But there is no Maxim, whose Subject and Predicate are more closely united, than the parts of this Proposition. In the notion of a Deity necessary existence is included: and in the notion of necessary existence the nature of a Deity. God doth necessarily exist: and that which necessarily exists, can be no other but God. The parts of the Enunciation are reciprocal, which argues Truth in the highest Degree.  
3. This Proposition is not only equal to others: but has the advantage in some respects. If it be supposed that the existence of a Deity is possible, it will from thence follow that it is actual. For that is properly said to be possible, when there is no repugnancy at all, why it may not exist: and if there be no repugnancy to hinder the existence of a Deity, It is supposed, that there is a cause in Being, which is able to make it exist. A passive power in any thing to be what it is not, supposeth an active power, which is able to make the mutation. This active power cannot be lodged in the Deity itself, considered only as possible. No mere possible can be the subject of an active power. If in any thing distinct, it must be either an Inferior, or Superior, or that which is equal to the Deity. An Inferior can produce nothing which is more excellent than itself. There can be no Superior to that which is boundless in perfection. If in an equal, then there is something already in Being, which is infinite in power, which can be no other, but God.  
If it be supposed as impossible, that a Deity should exist, the same consequence will follow. For if it be impossible, than all Being's are naturally finite, and limited: and if so, the number of them must be either infinite or finite. An infinite number cannot be. The parts of all number being essentially finite, the product must be of the same nature. If finite, than it must have the common bounds, a first and a last. If a first, that first must be of itself without any dependence in point of causality: for Entity in order of Nature preceding Energy; if the first Being was produced by an operation, that action must slow from a pre-existent Being: and if it be of itself, it must be infinite. Whatsoever is finite, receives its bounds from some cause. Entity, considered as possible, being limitable divers ways, and indifferent to what species it is determined to: there can be no account given, why it should come forth into Act, and exist rather under one species than another, were there not some predetermining Cause. The thing itself cannot be this Cause; for than it had a Being, before it was finite: nor any other distinct thing; because the Being, we speak of, is supposed to be first. This Truth is so vigorous, that the depressing of it with this supposition, makes it like the Palm, to arise with the greater force.  
Lastly, If we do but consult the familiar dictates of our understandings, they will not fail to lead us into the knowledge of this Truth. They naturally suggest to us, that something must be Eternal. This Eternal must be either the present Systeme of the World, or the Cause of it. The first cannot be asserted as I have before demonstrated. If the second, this Cause must be either mere matter, or else an immaterial and spiritual substance. Matter it cannot be. In its productions the deepest Wisdom is discovered, which Matter is utterly uncapable of. If an immaterial and intellectual substance; then there is an eternal Spirit invested with supereminent Power and Wisdom, which is the true notion of a God.  
If it be objected, that such a Spirit cannot be the efficient of the World, because he had no matter to frame it out of; and it is universally acknowledged, that out of nothing, nothing can be made. I answer, that this Maxim must be limited to a finite power. A Being invested with that, which is infinite, must necessarily be able to create all things out of nothing. If an imperfect Being is able out of nothing, to make a new mode, as we daily see in the cogitations of the Mind, and in the motions of the Body, Much more must that, which is absolute in perfection, be able to form a new substance. He who eminently contains all things in himself cannot be denied a power to exert a transient action, and by it to give some outward expression of what is in himself, insensible and permanent effects. It is more difficult to conceive, how a thing should be eternal without any cause, which all grant to be true: than to apprehend, how a finite Being may be produced out of nothing by an Infinite Power.  
He who seriously ponders the evidence that is given for the existence of a Deity, and yet continues in his infidelity, has nothing to lay the blame upon, but his own obstinacy, or unwillingness to have any thing true, which may be a curb to his enormous inclinations. If he will not be persuaded that any thing is certain, but that, which is the object of his sense; all testimonies whether divine or humane, to him are made of no signification; and no place will be left for Faith, which is conversant about things not seen, and rests satisfied with testimonies, whose verity there is no just reason to suspect. Every thing is not capable of the same degree of evidence: but if it has so much, as its nature requires, common reason will condemn us, if we believe it not.  
Now I have finished the first Proposition; There is a God, who made the World.  
2. In the Godhead there are Three Persons. That we may the better arrive at the knowledge of this great Mystery, the following steps are to be taken.  
1. When God is spoken of in the Sacred Oracles, sometimes the plural number is used, Let us make man, Gen. 1.26. Behold man is as one of us, Gen. 3.23. Let us go down and confound their language, Gen. 11.7. This is not done in imitation of the stile of Princes, who to express their grandeur, make use of this number. If this mode of speaking had been occasioned by that custom, it would have been constantly used at the giving of the Law, when the Divine Majesty was displayed in the most awful circumstances: and yet then we meet with the singular number. Princes use it only in the first person. We Constantine, We Maximilian: In the Bible it frequently occurs in the third; and in such construction, as is not to be paralleled in any Record, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jos. 24.19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jer. 10.10. None speak of a Prince in the plural number but himself. In the holy Bible, others speak of God in that number.  
2. The plurality, intimated in these expressions, is determined to Three in other places of Scripture. There are three which bear record in heaven, 1 Joh. 5.7. They are represented under the name of The Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, Mat. 28.19. This was not so clearly revealed in the Old Testament: but reserved for a more mature state. The Jews being under strong propensions to Idolatry; this Doctrine was not then set in the fullest light, that no occasion might be from thence taken to confirm them in their error.  
3. These Three, are not three manifestations only of God. If they did import nothing more, no reason can be given, why the number should be thus confined. Since the Creation there have been many signal Manifestations of the Deity far exceeding this number. A manifestation supposeth some discovery of that which was secret before, and by consequence must be made in time: but the holy Scripture attributes Eternity to the Father, the Son, and the blessed Spirit.  
4. These Three, are not three names only of the same God under divers inadequate conceptions. For then, when it is said, that Christ was baptised, the Holy Ghost descended, a voice came from the Father, the meaning would be, that one name of God was baptised, another descended in the form of a Dove, a third uttered a voice; than which nothing can be more incongruous. Nay, when a command is given to baptised in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the sense will amount to no more than this: go and baptise in the name of three Names. This explication of the Trinity is not reconcileable with the scope of S. John, when he asserts, that there are three, which bear record in heaven. For the reason, why he mentions three, is to evidence, that there is a sufficient number of witnesses to testify, that Jesus is the Christ. Now if by the Three are meant only three names of the same person, the Apostle fails of his end, and is represented as guilty of a manifest collusion. He does, as if a man should undertake to prove Oratory an excellent Art by three witnesses, and produce only the three names of the Orator, Marcus, Tullius, Cicero.  
5. All things required to the constitution of a person, belong to them. A Person is an intelligent Being, which has a peculiar subsistence. This definition agrees to the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit. They have, all, Intelligence and Knowledge. The Father is said to know the Son, and the Son the Father. The Holy Ghost is styled a Spirit of Wisdom and Understanding. They have peculiar subsistence. The Father is without communication from another. The Son is from the Father. The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. His procession from the Father is asserted in express words, John 15.26. From the Son supposed in the Mission of the Comforter in the same Verse. For as the Father is sent of none, because he is of himself; the Son is sent of the Father, because he is of the Father: so the Spirit is represented as sent by the Father and the Son, because he proceeds from both. Now he who is begotten or proceeds, must necessarily be distinct from him, by whom he is begotten, and from whom he proceeds; and by consequence have a peculiar mode of subsistence. The Father's being in the Son, and the Son in the Father, doth not destroy this distinction. God is in every man, and every man in God. In him we live and move and have our Being, and yet the discrimination remains betwixt the divine and humane subsistence.  
6. Such Actions are attributed to these three as belong to none but a person. It will be superfluous to instance in those, which are ascribed to the Father and the Son. All the doubt is about the Spirit; and yet the Scripture is very clear in this particular. He is said to know, will, 
1 Cor. 2.10, 11. 1 Cor. 12.11. Job 33.4. Psal. 104.30.  create, preserve. These actions are undoubted indications of a person. Actions are attributed to things either properly or improperly. Whensoever they are attributed to them in the first sense, they are infallible Arguments of suppositality. Actiones sunt suppositorum. And it is apparent, that when they are attributed to the Spirit, it is not always in an improper and figurative sense. He is said to make intercession, Rom. 8. v. If this action be assigned to the Spirit improperly or tropically than it may be properly attributed to the Father, who, according to the Socinian notion, useth the Spirit as a power or virtue to produce what he designs, (even as those operations which are ascribed to Charity, in a tropical sense, 1 Cor. 13. properly belong to the Man which is endued with it, and makes use of it as a moral power or virtue.) But Intertercession, betwixt the Father and us, cannot with any congruity, be said to be made by the Father himself. The Father is one party, and we the other. Where there are two parties, Intercession supposes the interposition of a third person.  
All this makes it manifest, why the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are represented in Scripture, as Three Persons.  
The personality of the Father is mentioned, Heb. 1.3. The Son is said to be his express Image, which can import no less, than that he is a person like unto his Father. The Holy Spirit is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, another Comforter like unto the Son. He is set forth by the demonstrative Pronoun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an undoubted note of personality. If in any humane Writing, the matter of which was never drawn into controversy by the pride or prejudice of a Party, such expressions, as these, should occur. He shall teach you. He shall bring all things to your remembrance, He shall testify of me, He will reprove the World, He will guide you into all Truth, He shall glorify me, and that He, who is to do all this, proceeds from the Father, and is sent by the Son: We should account him a very absurd Interpreter: that should say, that the He so often repeated is not a person, nor personally distinct from him by whom he is sent, and from whom he proceeds. All this is asserted in the Scripture of the Holy Ghost. The Socinians willingly grant an eternal personality to the Father, but deny it to the Son and the Spirit. They say, that the Son is a Person but not eternal, that the Holy Ghost is neither a Person, nor eternal: but a Power and Virtue from God, or an effect produced by that Power: and yet the personality of the Son, must be as early as his Filiation, and his Filiation or Sonship is undoubtedly eternal. The Prophet Micha says, His go forth have been from old, from everlasting, c. 5. v. 2.  
The Spirit cannot always signify Power, or an effect produced by the Power. The Spirit and Power are plainly distinguished. Jesus is said to return in the power of the Spirit, Luk. 14. S. Paul prays, that the Romans may abound in hope through the power of the Holy Ghost, Rom. 15, 14. Mighty signs and wonders are said to be done by the power of the Spirit of God. If the Spirit in these places did signify no more than a divine power, the meaning would be, that Christ returned, the Romans abounded, miracles were wrought through the power of a Power.  
The Spirit is likewise evidently distinguished from effects or gifts. The Apostle says, that There are diversity of gifts, but the same Spirit, 1 Cor. 12.4. To one is given by the Spirit, the word of Wisdom, to another the word of Knowledge by the same Spirit, v. 8. And that all these worketh this one and the same Spirit. So that there can be nothing left in these Texts for the Spirit to signify but a Person: He being manifestly distinguished from the Divine Power, and the gifts and products of that Power. Now I have finished the second Proposition. In the Godhead there are Three Persons.  
3. These Three are One God. Unity is essential to the Deity, Plurality proceeds from the fecundity and fruitfulness of Causes: but God is of himself without dependence upon any Cause. If there be more Gods, there must be more Infinites in the same kind; which implies a contradiction, for one infinite Being contains all perfection, not only as considered in the general notion, but actually: and therefore there is none for any other Deity to be invested with, and possessed of, in the same manner. If there be more Gods, they must be distinct one from another. This distinction must arise from some diversity in Nature; to attribute such diversity to the Divine Nature, is to make a dishonourable reflection upon the simplicity of it. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are this One God. 1. The Scripture plainly asserts that they are one, 1 John 5.7. Tho' these words are not found in some Copies, yet they are extant in more than they are wanting in: and in that which is dubious, the decision is according to the suffrage of the major part. If such an addition has been made to the Text, it must be done before or after the two first General Councils. If before, it was either accidental, or intentional. Not Accidental through the inadvertency of the Scribe. For tho' a Scribe may mistake, and leave out letters and words; yet it cannot be imagined, that he should casually without any design, add a whole sentence; and not presently upon a review (which may be justly presumed in a Writing of such importance) discover and correct his error.  
Not Intentional; no good reason can be given, why any should industriously make such a spurious insertion, before the controversy concerning the Deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost did commence.  
Neither was the addition, which is pretended, made after the two first General Councils. Because the words we speak of, are found in those Copies, which the Fathers, who lived before those Councils, made use of. S. Cyprian asserts de Patre, Filio, etc. Of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, it is written, and these Three are One.  
This gives us just reason to believe, that the Copies in which these words are wanting, fell into the hands of the Arrians: and that a rasure was made by them. 2. As the words of S. John assure us; that The Father, the Son and the Spirit are One: so we are assured by other texts of Sacred Writ, that this Unity is in the Divine Essence. They have all one and the same infinite Nature. This is evident by the attribution of the Name, Properties, and peculiar Operations of the most High God to them. None doubt of this relation to the Father: The matter is likewise clear concerning the Son and the Spirit. Christ is called the mighty God, Isa. 9.6. God blessed for evermore, Rom. 9.5. The true God, 1 Joh. 5.20. The most high God, Psal. 58.17, 56. The most High which the Israelites tempted and provoked in the wilderness, is expressly called Christ, 1 Cor. 10.9. The name of God is never attributed, in the sacred Oracles, with such emphatical Epithets, to any finite Being. They are intentionally inserted, to signify, that Jesus is styled God, not upon the account of his Embassy from his Father, or a deification in the state of Glory; but his infinite Nature. He, who is made God, and is not so essentially, cannot be said to be the true, mighty, most High, God blessed for evermore.  
As the Name of God, so the Properties of the Divine Nature are attributed to him. Omniscience, Joh. 21.17. Immutability, Heb. 1.11. Omnipotence, Rev. 1.8. Eternity. He is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is, which was, which is to come, v. 4. Eternity comprehends all differences of time. Was he but a mere Creature, such perfections could not reside in him. A finite Being, under the greatest Elevation, has not a capacity large enough to entertain and receive such boundless excellencies.  
The peculiar Operations of God are likewise attributed to him, as Creation, Joh. 1.2. Coloss. 1.16. God is said to create all things by Jesus Christ, Eph. 3.9. The Son did concur with the Father and the Spirit in this great Work, as a  cause. The Nature of Creation will not admit the interposals of an instrument. There being no matter to prepare, a physical instrument has nothing to do in the case: And Christ is represented as more than a Moral. The infinite power, whereby all things are made, is often ascribed to him, which is never done to a mere moral instrument, such as the Apostles were in the production of Miracles.  
Conservation is likewise ascribed to him. He is said to uphold all things with the word of his power, Heb. 1.3. It was usual for the Jews to express the Deity by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power, and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here inserted to assure them; that Christ sustains the World, and prevents its relapse into its primitive Abyss by virtue of his Deity. Lastly, He is said to work Miracles. He made the blind to see, the lame to walk, the dead to revive. This he did not bring to pass by any mutuatitious power. When he healed the multitude, it is said, Virtue went out of him, Luk. 6.19. The power, whereby he did it, was not adventitious, but innate. When S. Peter wrought a miracle, that Christ by whose power it was effected, might not be deprived of the glory of it, he names him as the principal cause. His name through faith in his name hath made this man whole, Act. 3.16. As the name, properties and operations of the Divine Nature are attributed to the Son of God: So likewise to the Holy Ghost. The Spirit of the Lord, 2 Sam. 23.2. is styled the God of Israel. Ananias who lied unto the Spirit, Act. 5.3. is said to lie unto God, v. 4. The body, which is the Temple of the holy Ghost, 1 Cor. 6.19 is styled the Temple of God, 1 Cor. 3.16.  
He is Eternal, Heb. 9.7. Omniscient, 1 Cor. 2.10. Omnipresent, Psal. 139.7. The whole Creation is represented as the effect of his power. The host of Heaven, Psal. 33.6. Man the principal Work of God upon the Earth, Job 33.4. The Fish in the Sea, Psal. 104.3. are all of his formation.  
Before there was any Wind, 
Immeasusque Deus super aequora vasia meabat.  which is peculiar to the Firmament, a work of the second day, the Spirit of the Lord is said to move upon the Waters. The Chaos by his incubation was digested into Order, and brought to a state of Maturation.  
Certainly, God, who composed the Scripture, and declares in it, that he will not give his Glory to another, would never have assigned his name, nature and peculiar operations to the Spirit, had he not been of the same Essence with himself.  
To assert, that all this is attributed to the Spirit; because God makes use of him, as an instrument, to effect his Work, will not remove the difficulty. For there is some work attributed to the Spirit, to which no instrument can concur, as Creation. There are other operations, in doing of which God cannot be said to use the Spirit according to the sentiments of the Socinians; as to know, and search his deep things. For the Spirit in their apprehensions signifies a Divine Power: and it is very incongruous to say that God knows, and searches things by his Power.  
This Truth concerning the Trinity in Unity, hath been so fully discovered; that all sorts of men have taken notice of it.  
The Mind of the Christians, before Constantine, may be very well known by Athanasuis; 
Orat. 1.121 Ad Serapio. tom. 1. p. 366. de Spi. San●●o. Apol. 2.  who wanted no opportunity to be acquainted with their Writings. He expressly asserts, that there was nothing established by the Nicene Synod, but what was agreeable to them. S. Basil citys several Authorities of the first Centuries for the same purpose. In those Writings which are come to our hands, there are many evident expressions of this doctrine. Justin Martyr, speaking of the Father of righteousness, says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. him and the Son coming from him, and the prophetic Spirit we receive and adore. Athenagoras, in vindication of the Christians, whom the Heathens accounted Atheists, says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. who would not admire to hear them called Atheists, who own God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost. Clemens Alexandrinus ends his Paedagogus with very lively expressions of this Truth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. to the only Father, Son, etc. with the Holy Ghost, all in one, etc. There are Testimonies of the same importance in Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius. All these with many others agree; that there is but one God, and that there are Three which participate of the Deity: and that one of them is the fountain of the rest, from whence it inevitably follows; that they must be personally distinct. The fountain and the streams are always different one from the other.  
Indeed there are some things spoken in the explication of this Mystery, which are liable to an ambiguous construction; as is manifest in the discourse of Justin Martyr with the Jew, 
T●●●h.  and the Treatise of Tertullian against Praxeas. This Truth being not then encountered with so direct an opposition, as it was in the time of Arrius, some degrees of caution in point of expression are wanting, and too great a condescension made to the Sentiments of the Philosophers, by blending their notions with the ineffable Mystery; that it might gain a more ready entertainment among them. Such prudential accommodations must not be construed in such a sense, as to prejudice the Truth, which in other places of the same Authors is clearly acknowledged. The clear must not be expounded by that which is obscure: but the obscure by that which is clear.  
The Jews have not been without some knowledge of this Mystery. 
Pugio fidei, p. 397.  Raimundus Martini says that he scarcely ever conferred with any of them, who were in any estimation for Wisdom, who would not grant, that God was Trinus & Vnus. They have a Tradition, that when the Benediction, Num. 6.26. was pronounced by the Priest, he used, when he came to the word Jehova, to lift three fingers higher than the rest, to denote the Trinity.  
It was their manner to call the Father, Son, 
Voisin in Pug. fidei p. 400.  and Spirit, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistences: and to assert the unity of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the infinite God.  
Those words, The Lord our God is one God, are in Zohar applied to the Trinity. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is interpreted the Father, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Son, the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirit, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is added with a great letter in the Hebrew Text, to denote their Unity. The Hebrew Scholiast says, that the repetition of the name of God three times, Psal. 50.1, 2. is to denote the three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which created the World. These are styled inward persons. It is observed, that all the names of God have a plural termination, 
Voisin, p. 406. p. 400.  except Jehova his essential name; to import the plurality of Persons, and unity of Essence. It is a saying among the Cabalists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Ghost is God. Three in One, and One in Three. By the Abbreviature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Father, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Son. They say, they are put together, to express their Unity: and that the three Letters do signify the three Hypostases in one Essence. Tho' this Doctrine is very much disguised in the Writings of the Heathens: yet there is so much of it left unmasked, as it may be plainly discerned they were not totally strangers to it.  
The chief God among the Persians was styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, threefold, with relation to this Sacred Mystery. The first Hypostasis they called Oramas●les, the second Mithras, the third Arimanes. Plato likewise mentions Three, 
〈◊〉. 5. l. 1. l. 3. c. 15.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These by Plotinus are represented as the three Hypostases which are Principles, or first causes in the Universe. When Thulis King of Egypt went to the Oracle of Serapis to inquire, 
Saidas in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  who before him could do such exploits as he had done, and who would be after him: The Answer was,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, First God, after him the Word, and then the Spirit concurring with both. 
B●rnier's M●moirs, ●●m. 3. p. 130.  The Indians own Three in the Deity, known by the names of Brahma, Bischen, and Meha●den●. Dervis ●rsielebi a Mahometan acknowledged to a Christian, who was disputing with him about Religion: that at the commencement of all their Negotiations, 
Epito. de Turc. moribu●, c. 4. p. 130.  it was their custom to use these words, In the name of God, of Mercy, and of their Spirit.  
If any shall be so in love with his private Sentiments, as to deny this Truth, which has gained so universal a Testimony, upon the account of some difficulties, which our shallow Intellects cannot reach to the bottom of; he may with the same reason assert there is no such thing as the Ocean, because he cannot by his line find the depth of it in every place. If all this will not satisfy; let him exercise his reason about some difficulties in nature, and he will find the existence of things very plain where their contexture is so concealed, and intricate; that the greatest Wits are at a loss in their disquisition about it. If the intricacy of some modes in natural things be no reasonable inducement to deny the reality of the things themselves: much less is the ineffable union betwixt the Divine Essence and Subsistence, a justifiable plea for the denial of the Sacred Trinity. He that shall think fit to try the acuteness of his Intellect about some knots in Philosophy; will find the edge of his reason so much blunted in the encounter; that it will not be easy for him to persuade himself, that it is sharp enough to penetrate into all the Mysteries in Divinity.  
If this will not prevail, without an engagement with those difficulties, which this Truth is usually assaulted with, let a Catalogue be made of them, and it will not be difficult for him, to make his way through them, who is armed with the following considerations.  
1. Although there be Three Persons, or Subsistences in the Godhead: yet there are not three Essences. Every Person distinctly considered has an Essence: but every person has not a distinct Essence.  
2. Tho' one finite individual Nature cannot be communicated to Three Persons: yet an infinite may. If the whole Divine Essence is intimately in all created persons at the same time; there is no reason to think, but that it may be communicated to three increated. Whatsoever is alleged against this Communication, holds as strong against the Universal Presence, which all acknowledge, but those who deny the Deity.  
3. Finite and infinite, perfect and imperfect, are not proper predicates of Subsistence, but of Being. So that when we are interrogated, whether the three persons in the Holy Trinity are finite or infinite, perfect or imperfect: if by Person is meant only a mode of subsistence without the Nature, it is a very incongruous question. For infinity and finity, perfection and imperfection are but modes of Entity: and every mode imports variation; and one variation cannot properly be predicated of another. If by Person is understood the Divine Essence subsisting in a peculiar manner, than we answer, that every person distinctly is infinitely perfect: tho' every person has not a distinct infinite perfection.  
4. Although the three Persons have one and the same Nature: yet the Son cannot be said to be the Father, or the Spirit the Son. The same specifical Nature agrees to Joh, Moses and Daniel. Every one of them has the whole nature of Man; yet we have no reason to assert that Moses is Job, or Joh Daniel. As there is some thing not contained in the common Nature, which doth individuate them: So there is a characteristical property appertaining to the Father, the Son and holy Spirit, whereby they are distinguished; altho' they are all equally interested in the same infinite Essence.  
5. When it is said, that the only God is the Father, Jesus Christ is the only God, therefore Jesus Christ is the Father; the major proposition is peccant. For in every proposition the predicate is never less comprehensive than the subject; but always of a greater latitude, and therefore bears the title of the major term. But here the predicate, Father, is less comprehensive than the subject, the only God.  
Now I have finished the Third Proposition, The Three Persons are One God.  
4. This One God is to be Worshipped. If we consider him essentially, his peerless perfections do justly challenge the deepest veneration. They being infinite cannot admit of any additions. All that We are capable of doing is to own them with the decent significations of the most humble and submissive regards. It is an Article in the Jewish Creed, 
Fag. in Deut. c. 14. v. 1.  The Blessed God is worthy to be Worshipped. It is a principal part of the Confession of the Christian Church, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive Glory and Honour. It was usual among the Heathens to worship the Head of great Rivers. 
Sax. Will-worship.  He who considers God as the fountain of all that goodness which circulates in the veins of the Creation, can conclude no less than that the most profound veneration is due to him.  
If the Deity be considered personally, every person doth require Divine Worship to be directed to him. The Father, Jo. 4.23. The Son, Heb. 1.6. Psal. 2.12. Phil. 2.10. S. Stephen directed his Prayer to him, Act. 7.59. Ananias enjoined S. Paul to call upon him, Act. 22. v. 16. Salvation is promised to those, who express a conformity to this command, Rom. 10.13. When we say, the Son is to be Worshipped, we do not consider him without his humane Nature, but as a person consisting both of Divine and Humane. Supreme Adoration is given upon the account of the infinite excellency of the Divine Nature. This excellency is communicated to the Person which has assumed our Nature, and advanced it to the dignity of an Hypostatical union; but not to the nature itself. And therefore the Worship which is due, must not be terminated upon the nature considered abstractedly, but the person who is clothed with it. This induced Athanasius to say, 
Epist. ad Adelph.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Let them know (meaning the Arrians) that when we Worship the Lord in the flesh, we do not Worship a Creature: but the Creator clothed with a created body.  
Neither must our blessed. Lord be considered, without his Mediatorship. Tho' supreme Adoration doth not immediately terminate upon the relation of a Mediator: yet it doth upon him, who is invested with that Relation. Our Saviour in this respect is inferior to the Father, and nothing inferior to the Deity can challenge Supreme Adoration. The taking up the mediatory Office was an act of free Grace, and by consequence might not have been done. Now that which might have been, or not been, must be inferior to that necessary and immutable excellency, which is the proper Object of the highest Veneration. We must distinguish betwixt the foundation of Worship and the Motives to it. Tho' the free acts of the Divine Benignity, as redeeming, mediating, etc. are vigorous inducements to Worship: yet the sole foundation and immediate object is infinite excellency, which will not permit any thing which is inferior, to share with it in the same degree of Honour. A Subject may have many motives from the personal favours of his Prince, to pay the Rights which belong to the Crown: yet the formal object and reason of his so doing, is the Sovereignty, and dominion, which the Prince is invested with.  
As the Son, so likewise the Spirit is the Object of Adoration. He is placed in the same rank with the Father, and the Son, Mat. 28. v. 19 Jo. 1.5, 7. and honoured with the attribution of the peculiarities of the Deity, as Eternity, Immensity, Omniscience. The dishonour done to him by Blasphemy has as black a character in the Scripture, as the dishonour of the Father or Son. It is represented as a delinquency of the first magnitude, and excluded the benefit of pardon. He who is thus dignified, and secured by the most severe commination against dishonour, must necessarily of right challenge the same degree of Honour and Worship, which is due to the Father and the Son.  
The Adoration, given to them all, must be so directed; that we may worship the Trinity in Unity, and Unity in Trinity. The ground of divine Veneration is the unlimited and peerless perfection of God. The motives conducing to it are the benefits, which none but so transcendent a Being can confer. The same internal eminency is common to the Three Persons. Every external benefit is the product of their joint concurrence. They having all an equal interest in the foundation of Religion, and the motives conducing to it; it is very reasonable, when we direct an act of Worship to one; that we should not exclude the other. When we name the Son only, the Father and holy Spirit are to be understood: or the Father only, the Son and the Spirit: or the Spirit only, the Father and the Son. Consonant to this doctrine are the words of Nazianzen, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Let us Worship in Three one Deity: and the practice of the universal Church, which is apparent, by the Latin, and Greek Liturgies. Now I have done with the fourth Proposition, This One God is to be Worshipped.  
5. This God is only to be Worshipped. This is the express assertion of the Holy Scripture, the dictate of Reason, the sense of the Ancient Church.  
1. The assertion of Holy Scripture. It is the first of the moral Laws, Thou shalt have no other Gods but me: and placed in the front of the Gospel, Him only shalt thou serve. In a sense of this appropriate allegiance to Jehovah, the Angel did forbid S. John, and S. Paul and Barnabas the people of Lycaonia to pay them any Divine Veneration. Daniel's refusal of the portion of meat, which was first consecrated to an Idol, will easily induce us to believe, that he had an equal disgust of the Idolatrous worship, which was given to him. If Abraham's deportment, when the Angels appeared, had more than a moral or civil respect; The Son of God his being in the company will excuse him from Idolatry, one of them is expressly dignified with the incommunicable name of the Deity.  
2. The dictate of reason. Worship is either internal, or external. Internal includes a deep and reverential esteem, as an ingredient essential to its nature. This esteem must be of an elevation agreeable to the excellency of the Object it is terminated upon. There being no object, that can be a Rival with the Supreme Being in point of perfection, it is not possible, that the same esteem, which his transcendent dignity challengeth from us, should with justice be given to any other.  
External imports a declaration of inward esteem by some outward acts. As the Veneration terminated upon God is peculiar and appropriate: So must the Acts be, which are designed for the signification of it. Betwixt the sign and the thing signified there aught to be such a similitude; that the one may be known by the other. This cannot be done in the present case; except there be such an appropriation, as we speak of.  
The nature of Divine Supremacy requires in outward as well as inward Worship a discrimination from that which is given to the Creature. Earthly Monarches expect an agnition of their Sovereignty to be made by the payment of an appropriate homage. They have some Jewels in their Crown, which they will not permit any of their Subjects to wear. Tho' Moral and Civil regards may be tendered to a Creature: yet if they rise so high as to have any mixtures of those peculiarities, which are devoted by nature or institution to signify Divine Veneration: they are as distasteful to God, as it would be to a Prince to stand by, and see the Allegiance, which is due only to himself, given to another.  
This Truth is warranted with so much clear reason; that those, who have had no other advantage but the light of Nature, have taken notice of it. Among those instructions which Orpheus left with Musaeus, 
Lib. de Monarch. Det, p. 104, 108.  This is one, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Adore him alone, who is the King of the World. It was the advice of Menander, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to honour him alone who is Lord of all. 
Ad Antolycum. p. 122.  The Verses of the Sibyl in Theophilus Antiochenus are of the same importance.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
La●t. de ●●lsa Relig. p. 20.   
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
The Ruler of the World alone adore,  
Who ever was, and shall be ever more.  
3. The Sense of the Ancient Church. Among those Truths, which are owned by the most early Writers, this is of the first magnitude; that God only is to be Worshipped. They never mention the worshipping any thing else, as the Sacrament, the Cross, the Relics of Saints.  
When they delineate the rites appertaining to the Eucharist, there is not the least intimation of that Veneration, which, the Romanist; say, is due to the Sacrament. They were far from asserting, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quae debetur vero Deo, is to be given to it. Circumstances, purely accidental, as the time when the Institution was made, the place where, the mingling Water with Wine, are recorded. Those who had leisure to preserve the memory of these circumstances, would not have omitted a point so material, in case any such thing had been known to be agreeable to the mind of God.  
As for the individual Cross, upon which our blessed Lord suffered; there could be no Adoration directed to it, for the first three hundred years. It is confessed, that it lay concealed under ground till the time of Helena, mother to Constantine the Great. Neither is there the least signification of any religious addresses made to artificial imitations of it. When the Veneration of the Cross is objected by the Heathens, against the Christians, 
Mir●●. F●l.  it is answered by them, Cruces etiam nec colimus nec optamus. We neither Worship Crosses nor wish for them. Bellarmine indeed infers; that the objection implies, that some such practice was then in use: but he may by the same reason persuade us, that the Christians Worshipped the Head of an Ass: because their adversaries were as peremptory in this as the other charge. Tertullian reckons the report, that the Christians were Crucis religiosi, amongst those scandals, which were raised by malice, in order to the eclipsing their reputation.  
As for the Relics of Saints; we find no mention of any religious respect, which was paid to them. Those who have the greatest zeal for them, are usually mounted upon tradition: but finding it not able to carry them through the first Centuries in this particular, they think good to alight, and content themselves with some instances in Scripture, which are nothing to the purpose: as the hemm of Christ's garment, the shadow of S. Peter, the Handkerchiefs and Aprons, that touched the body of S. Paul. Because the Woman diseased with an issue of blood, was healed by touching the first: the sick were brought into the streets, that they might be overshadowed by the second: many were delivered from evil spirits by the third. They have a mind to persuade us without any good reason, that these particulars, with all Relics of an equivalent Nature, challenge religious veneration. No doubt, Peter himself was every way as valuable as his shadow; and yet when Cornelius made an attempt to worship him, he prevented him by an express prohibition. The Fathers in the ages next to the Apostles, were not such good husbands, as to make such an advantageous improvement of these instances: but on the contrary we find them charging the Heathens with Superstition of a like nature; as the worshipping the Monuments of the Dead: and we never read, that the Heathens did retort upon them their guilt in the same kind, which, no doubt, they would have done, in case there had been any such practice among them. Celsus, Lucian, etc. were not so dull as to overlook so signal an advantage. They which use to charge them with too much, would have paid them their own, in case there had been the least appearance of reason for it.  
As the most early Writers next to the Apostles never mention the Worshipping any else but God: so all the words, which import Divine Worship, are by them exclusively applied to him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by Justin Martyr, 
Apel. 2.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by Theophilus Antiochenus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by Tatianus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by Origen, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
L. 1. Cont. Cells.   
Servire by Irenaeus. Huic servire soli oportet discipulos Christi. Colere & adorare by Tertullian. 
Apol. c. 17. Inst. l. 1. c. 20.  Quod colimus unus Deus est. Praescribitur, ne quem alium adorem. Venerari by Lactantius, veneratio nulla alia nisi unius Dei tenenda est.  
Hitherto I have asserted the verity of this Proposition, God only is to be Worshipped: In the next place I will consider the opposition that has been made against it, by the Church of Rome, and those who adhere to Her.  
Maldonate makes no scruple to pronounce, 
n Mat. 5. v. 34.  that it is a wicked error to maintain, that religious Honour is to be tendered to none but God. The Inquisitors have blotted out such Words and Sentences out of Books as cast a favourable aspect upon this Doctrine. In a Sentence cited out of Gregory Nyssen by Antonius, in his mellifluous Sermons in these words, eam verò folummodò naturam, quae increata est, colere, & venerari didicimus, they condemn the word, 
Index Exp.  solummodò, to an expunction. The Index to Athanasius' Works Printed at Basil, has been treated with the same respect. These words, adorari solius Dei est, are not permitted to remain in it. The Gloss in the Margin of the Bible upon 1 Sam. 7.3. Prepare your hearts unto the Lord, and serve him only, has not escaped their severity. Their decree concerning it runs in these terms, deleantur illa verba, serviendum Deo soli. They have done with these Testimonies, as Caesar Borgia used to do with men, namely, contrive the death of those, who did impede the accomplishment of his designs. This practice doth evidently declare, that they are conscious, that their Worship cannot stand without this Principle be taken out of the way. The sense of it is opposed by them in many particulars; as the Worship of the Sacrament, the Invocation of Saints, the Adoration of Images, etc.  
1. The Worship of the Sacrament. The Church of Rome hath given too much occasion to believe, that the Accidents of the Bread and Wine, are to be honoured with supreme Veneration. The Council of Trent in plain words asserts, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (which is granted to signify supreme honours) is to be given to the Sacrament. It does not say to a part only of it; but useth the Word in general, which must necessarily imply the whole: and extend to all, which is appointed to be received. Now it is evident, that the Accidents are a part of the Sacrament, which is to be received. They constitute the outward and visible sign. 
L. 4. Sa●r.  Bellarmine represents them as the principal; ratio Sacramenti magis convenit speciebus, ut continent Corpus, quàm corpori Christi, ut est sub speciebus.  
The following words of the Council confirm this Interpretation, nec enim minùs adorandum, etc. neither is it (the Sacrament) to be less adored; because it hath been instituted by Christ the Lord that it may be taken: for him the same God we believe to be present in it, whom the eternal Father bringing into the World, saith, Let all the Angels adore him, etc. Here the Sacrament is represented as that in which our blessed Lord is present and contained under, and by consequence as distinct from it. That which contains any thing is always divers from that which is contained in it. Now what is there left for the Word Sacrament to import but the outward Elements, the signifying part, under which it is supposed, that the Sacred Body of our blessed Lord is latent. His Presence in the Sacrament is alleged as the reason of the Adoration given to it. Tho' this is not sufficient to justify the practice: (for then every thing, in which God is present, would be an adorable object, as the Sun and Moon, and whole Creation.) yet it leads us into the meaning of the Word Sacrament, as it lies in the Council, and assures us, that it imports some thing besides our blessed Saviour, which can be nothing but the outward Elements, whereby he is represented. A command to give civil honour to the Throne of a Prince, because the Prince himself sits in it, evidently implies, that the Throne and the Prince are distinct one from the other.  
To expound the Decree by the Canon, in which there is mention only of Worshipping Christ in the Sacrament, is very preposterous. They aim at two distinct things. The first obligeth us to Worship the Sacrament: the second, to Worship Christ, who is present in the Sacrament. These two are as different, as to Worship the Palace, in which the Prince resides, and to Worship the Prince residing in that Palace.  
To say that no Catholic is bound to believe more than that Christ in the Sacrament is to be Worshipped; because this is enjoined under a particular Anathema: the other of Worshipping the Sacrament not, is nothing to the purpose. The intent of the Decrees is, veritat●m dicere, to set forth the true doctrine of the Church, as the Council has declared. Every jot of this doctrine is to be received, whether there be a particular Curse denounced against the Refusers of it, or no. The Curse doth not make the obligation to comply with the doctrine; but shows only the danger which those incur, who refuse it. If the Church of Rome does not think fit always to set before us the danger in a particular Anathema, upon some prudential considerations best known to herself; yet the obligation to entertain her doctrine doth not cease, but remain in full force. Her Authority is as much in a Decree without an Anathema, as in a Canon with one: and it is her authority which creates the obligation.  
To say that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which the Council speaks of, falls upon the Accidents of the Bread and Wine in an inferior manner, cannot be reconciled with any good reason. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is either internal or external. Internal imports a superlative esteem in the mind of infinite Excellency. External, the doing some action or speaking such words, as are appropriated to signify this internal veneration. Neither of these can be terminated upon the Bread and Wine in an inferior manner. For what is outwardly done or spoken, being but an expression or indication of internal veneration; and the inward veneration being of the highest nature, if it falleth upon any thing in an inferior manner or degree, it ceaseth to be what it was: the superlative degree being essential to it, and not separable from it.  
Neither do they mend the matter, who assert, that Latria, as it is terminated upon the outward Elements is not absolute, but relative: Christ only under the Elements is adored per se, or absolutely: the Symbols by virtue of their relation to Christ; as the garments with which he was clothed, when he was upon the Earth, were worshipped, when adoration was given to his person.  
When the Council says, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is due to the Sacrament, absolute, and not relative Latria is intended. It is in express words, such a Latria quae debetur vero Deo, and that is undoubtedly absolute. Tho' there may be relative honour, yet (if we speak properly) there can be no such thing, as relative Latria. For it is agreed, that the word signifies that Veneration, which is peculiar to the Supreme Being: and if this be divided into two species Absolute, and Relative, than it may be predicated of both: for every Genus is predicated of its species: and if so, then either equally or unequally: not equally, for then the relative species will participate as much of the nature of the Genus, as the absolute: not unequally, because Latria (as I have before intimated) consists in a point, of which there can be no unequal participations. An inferior Latria is as much as an inferior Superiority. I grant an honour due to many things upon the account of their relation to God; but to make this honour equal to that, which is due immediately to God, is highly injurious. For the relation which the Creature has to the Creator is but a finite mode or accident. And a finite mode cannot merit the same species of Worship or Honour, which the infinite perfection of the Divine Nature does.  
When our blessed Lord was upon the Earth, 〈◊〉 garments were not worshipped by the same individual act, with which his person was. For Worship is an acknowledgement of excellency: and none will assert, that the same acknowledgement of excellency can without a palpable injury be terminated upon his Person, and his Garment.  
As the Accidents are worshipped, so likewise is the substance of the Bread and Wine.  
The Church of Rome believes, that by the Priest's pronouncing the words of Consecration, the Body and Blood of Christ become corporally present upon the Altar: that by the same words, in the same moment, the substance of the Bread and Wine is changed into them: that what the substance of the Bread and Wine is converted into, must have the same worship terminated upon it, which is peculiar to the person of Christ, God-man. Now if there be no such change, as is pretended, but the Bread and Wine retain their pristine nature: it must necessarily follow, that the substance of the Bread is Worshipped in the place of Christ. If it be said that this cannot with justice be charged upon a Romanist, because he believes that the substance of the Bread and Wine do not remain, and we must not impute the Worshipping of that to him, which he believes not to be in the Sacrament. I answer, that tho' this excuse, at the first sight, may appear plausible: yet upon a due examination it will be found to be of no validity. By the same method of Reasoning it may be concluded that a Jew reflects no dishonour upon the True Messiah, when in the Synagogue thrice a day, he curseth Jesus of Nazareth; because he believes that Jesus of Nazareth is not the True Messiah: or that the Persians do not Worship a creature, when they make their religious Addresses to the Sun; because they apprehend, he is the first Being, and maker of all things: or that the Heathens did not sacrifice to Devils, as they are accused in the holy Scripture; because they were far from believing, that their Idols were animated by infernal Spirits.  
It must be confessed, that an error springing from the nature of the object, may contribute something to an excuse. Suppose there had been a Man, when our blessed Lord was upon the Earth, every way like him in the features of his face, and all the lineaments of his Body, and another induced by that similitude, had given to him the veneration which is due only to Jesus Christ: it had been tolerable in him, to have pleaded his error, it deriving its original from that which it was not in his power to help. But wh●● the error springs from a voluntary distemper in the Subject, it can have no propitious influence upon his justification. And this we have too much reason to believe is the case of those, who adhere to the Community of Rome, who when they assert the Body of Christ to be corporally present in the Eucharist, and the substance of the Bread and Wine not, put the highest affront upon those Topics, from which we usually derive our assurance in all other points of Divinity, namely the Scripture, Antiquity, Reason, Sense.  
1. Scripture, They affirm that which is contrary to the Words of the institution, when Christ says, This is my Body, he means, This is a sign or memorial of it. To this interpretation we are led by the context, This do in remembrance of me. When he pronounces the demonstrative This, he points at that which he took and had in his hand; and this is called Bread: and therefore in the Latin Translation of the  Version these words occur, Hic panis Corpus meum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must import his dead body, as it is in the Syriack, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hoc cadaver meum. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a dead body, 1 Sam. 17.46. Isa. 14.19. These, we have reason to believe, were the words of our blessed Lord, who at the institution of the Sacrament did undoubtedly use that language which was then familiar to the Jews, and that was the Syriack, which by reason of its affinity with the Hebrew, is sometimes called by the same name. 
Joh. 19.13, 17. Act. 21.20.  Now it is evident, that what Christ gave at his last Supper, could not be his dead body in a literal sense: and therefore it must be so in a figurative, which will amount to this; This is a memorial of my Body as crucified for you. Christ's body in the Sacrament is not given as living, but dead upon our account, and his blood not as contained in his veins, but shed for our sins.  
We have not only the Words to justify our interpretation, but the scope aimed at by him that spoke them. It is agreed on all sides, that God did design by them the institution of a Sacrament. It is as unanimously asserted, that in every Sacrament there must be a visible Sign, and a Thing signified. There is nothing here to import the outward Sign, but the Demonstrative, This: or the Thing signified, but that which is predicated of it, my Body. Now the sign is never essentially, but always figuratively the thing which is signified by it. As when we say of the formal sign or picture of Augustus or Tiberius; This is Augustus, This is Tiberius; we do not mean their persons really, but representations of them.  
In the other part of the Sacrament, it is said, This Cup is the New Testament. This cannot be true, essentially, as tho' the Cup was changed into the nature of the New Testament: but figuratively only. We have just reason to believe the same concerning the Words under debate; that the Bread is no otherwise the Body of Christ, than the Cup is the New Testament. When this manner of Speech is used in relation to other Sacraments, as Circumcision and the Passover; Circumcision is my Covenant, the Lamb is the Lord's Passover, it constantly bears this sense. Neither Circumcision or the Lamb were really and essentially the things which are predicated of them, but signs and memorials only.  
The admitting a Trope in the Words is not contrary to the design of Christ in his last Will, which undoubtedly was to deliver his mind clearly. We may speak as plainly, when we use a Trope or Figure, as when our speech is without it. If we walk in a Gallery adorned with Pictures, and say this is Julius Caesar, this is Constantine the Great, we are as well understood, as if we had said, this is the Picture of such a Person. That is not obscure whether figuratively or literally spoken, which is expressed according to the manner, which is familiar to those, to whom the words are directed. The known custom at the time, when these words, [This is my Body] were used, was to speak after the like manner about the Passover, into whose place the Sacrament of the Supper came. It was the usual language of the Jews to call the Lamb the Body of the Passover. The Lamb being a Figure of Christ our Passover, and he putting a period to the old Institution, and substituting Bread in the room of it, to be a memorial, and Type of himself under the Gospel, he calls it by the same name. As the Paschal Lamb had been his Typical Body under the Old Testament: So now he declares, that the Bread shall be his figurative Body under the New.  
If a Trope makes the Words obscure, and unfit to be a branch of the last Will of Jesus Christ, than the interpretation of the Church of Rome is condemned by her own acknowledgement. For she believes, that when it is said, This is my Body, a living Body is meant: and therefore Body by a Synecdoche is put for the Body and Soul.  
The other part of the Sacrament is contained in his last Will as well as this: and yet in the words which set it forth, there is no less than two Tropes. This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood. The Cup is put for the Wine contained in it: and the New Testament for the Sacrament of the New Covenant.  
As the scope of our Saviour confirms the sense, which we have given: So likewise do the antecedents and consequences. Before these words, This is my Body, were spoken, it is said, Jesus took Bread, and blessed and broke it, etc. what can he mean by This, but that which he took into his hand and blessed and broke? and that is expressly called Bread. After Consecration, as that which is termed his Blood is styled the Fruit of the Vine: so that, which he named his Body, is by his Spirit in the holy Apostle said to be Bread. As often as ye eat this bread, 1 Cor. 11.26. Whosoever shall eat of this bread, v. 27. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of this bread, v. 28.  
If before and after Consecration that which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, This doth import, is called Bread, than no such mutation is made as is contended for, and the words must be interpreted in a Sacramental and Figurative Sense.  
We have not only the Antecedents and Consequences to favour our interpretation, but likewise the Analogy of Faith. This says, that Christ as man was made like unto his Brethren, Heb. 2.17. This car not be true, if he be corporally in the Sacrament. The bodies of his Brethren are naturally confined to a certain place. But according to this apprehension his Body may be in a thousand places at once, even upon all the Altars in the World. Wheresoever the Host is consecrated, it is wholly in the whole, and wholly in every part of it.  
The Analogy of Faith asserts; that Christ it gone to heaven in his bodily presence. I am no more in the world, Jo. 17.11. The interpretation which the Church of Rome gives of the words under debate, makes him to be more in the World, than when he conversed with his Disciples upon the Earth. For than he was but in one place at a time: but now, according to the Creed of the Romanists, he is the same moment, in Millions of places.  
The Analogy of Faith assures us, that the body or flash of Christ shall see no corruption, Act. 2.27, 31. But if it be in the Sacrament, than it is corporally eaten, turned into Chyle, and Nutriment, and subject to all the corruption, which the ingredients of a humane body are exposed unto. To what is received in the Eucharist, the primitive Church in relation to the body attributes the power of Nutrition.  
The Analogy of Faith obligeth us to believe, that God will not command inhumanity. But if the sense of the Church of Rome be true, the greatest inhumanity is practised according to his Will. What is more savage, than to eat the body of a living man? much more must it be to champ with our Teeth, and swallow down the living Body of our blessed Lord, to whom supreme Veneration is due. This made a Pagan to say, Who dost thou think, 
Cott. in Cicer. de nat. Decr. l. 3.  can be so mad as to believe that to be his God, which he eats? It was an abomination to the Egyptians to eat with the Hebrews, Gen. 43.32. The Chaldee paraphrast gives the reason, because the Hebrews eat those Cattle which the Egyptians use to worship. Those words, except ye eat the flesh of the son of man, etc. Joh. 6.55. give no countenance to what is asserted by the Church of Rome. By Flesh is meant the bread spoken of, v. 51. The bread that I will give you is my flesh: and by the Bread we are to understand our blessed Lord himself, I am the bread of life, v. 35. and by eating believing on him: as is evident by the consequent words, he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me, shall never thirst. As eating and drinking satisfy our natural appetite: so believing in Christ our spiritual. By faith we draw out of his fullness and plenitude a supply of our necessities. This spiritual Sense is pointed at, v. 56. and very agreeable to the manner of speaking amongst the Jews with whom Christ conversed, when he spoke the words under consideration. 
Maimon. More Nevo●. par. 1. c. 30.  The Hebrews use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comedere, not only to express the feeding upon that which conduceth to the nourishment of the body: but likewise the acquisition of Learning and Wisdom (such as faith imports) which tends to the nutrition of the Soul. 
Psal. 33. or 34 v. 2.  S. Basil says, that there is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an intellectual mouth of the inward Man. With this we receive the impressions made by external objects, and ruminate upon, and digest them by meditation. All this being considered, it is evident, that Transubstantiation is contrary to the Holy Scripture.  
2. Antiquity, Those who assert the Body of Christ to be corporally present in the Sacrament, and the substance of the Bread and Wine not, speak contrary to the sense of all the primitive Fathers.  
Ignatius, who lived in the first Century, 
〈…〉  calls that which is broken and given in the Sacrament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Justin Martyr in the second Century, 
Apol. 2.  styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and attributes to it a nutritive power in relation to the body.  
Tertullian in the third Century asserts, 
L. 4 cont. Marc.  that Christ made the bread, which he took, to be his body, that is, a figure of his body.  
Origen says, 
L. 8. cont. Celsum.  we have a symbol of thanksgiving to God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, bread which is called the Eucharist.  
S. Cyprian affirms, 
〈…〉.  that the Lord calls the bread compounded of many grains, his Body.  
Eusebius in the fourth Century terms, 
L. 1. ●emon, Evan. c. ult.  what is received in the Sacrament, symbols of the Body and blood of Christ.  
Cyril of Jerusalem styles it Bread and Wine, 
Catech. Mystagog. 1.3.  and compares the change which is made by consecration, to that in consecrated Oil, which doth not lose its old Nature; but is dedicated and set apart to a higher use and purpose.  
S. Ambrose affirms, 
L. 4. de Sa●. c. 4.  that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament, sunt a ●●●e panis & vinum, although changed into the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ.  
Gregory Nissen owns that which he calls the Body of Christ by the name of Bread, 
Orat. de San. Bapr.  and expresseth at large, that the Bread and Wine being Consecrated, retain their pristine nature: even as Baptismal Water, an Altar, a Priest do, after Consecration has passed upon them.  
Gaudentius represents the Sacrament as an image of the passion and figure of the Body and Blood of Christ. 
Tract 2. in Exo.   
S. chrysostom in the fifth Century useth these words. 
Epist. ad Cas●arium Monashum.  Before the Bread is sanctified, we call it Bread: when the Divine Grace hath sanctified it by means of the Priest, it loseth the name of Bread, and is held worthy to be called the Lord's Body: although the nature of the Bread doth remain in it, and is not called two bodies, but the body of the Son.  
S. Austin says, 
Ad Adamantum, ●. 12.  That the Lord doubted not to say, This is my Body, when he gave the sign of his Body.  
Cyril of Alexandria asserts, 
L. 4. c. 14. in Evang. Joan.  that our Lord gave fragments of Bread, saying, Take, eat, This is my Body.  
Theodoret affirms, 
1. Dial. count. Eutyc.  that our Saviour honoured the visible Symbols with the name of his Body and Blood, not changing the nature; but adding grace to nature.  
Gelasius is of the same mind. 
De duabus Christi naturis.  The Sacraments which we receive of the Body and Blood of Christ, are a divine thing, by means whereof, we are made partakers of the Divine Nature: and yet the substance of the Bread and Wine doth not cease to be.  
Bellarmine in his Polemical Discourse concerning the Eucharist, useth most of the names which I have mentioned, to a contrary purpose, and brings them into the field with a great deal of pomp. His policy seems to resemble that of a great Commander. When he had drawn up his Soldiers into a military order, and was ready to engage the enemy, a great part of them declared, they would not fight. He being not in a capacity to retreat with honour or security, told them, that the only kindness which he desired of them, was to march to a Hill a little way of, and there be Spectators of the courage and fate of their fellow Soldiers; hoping they might appear to the enemy as a Reserve, and prove as great a discouragement to them, as if they had actually engaged them. I cannot imagine, why these ancient Fathers, who have so positively declared in the Testimonies , that they will not fight, should be continued in view: except it be with the like design to impose upon the Faith of those, who are strangers to their intentions.  
To the Authorities, already produced, I might add many more, which do evidently manifest that the Church was a stranger to the doctrine of Transubstantiation for many hundred years. What might be alleged, I will sum up in the following particulars:  
1. They all agree in an imitation of the stile of Scripture, and call the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament the Body and Blood of Christ.  
2. They say, that they are not so essentially, but figuratively, and therefore style them signs, Symbols, Figures, Antitypes, Memorials. It is usual to call the sign and the thing signified by the same name.  
3. They affirm that after Consecration, the substance of the Bread and Wine remains; and the change made is only in respect of Use, Office, and Dignity.  
4. They say, That they nourish our flesh and blood, and have the same effect that other food has: and therefore they use to give the remains of the Euchariscical Bread to boys, and to abstain from the Communion upon Fasting days.  
5. They assert, that wicked men do not eat and drink the Body and Blood of Christ: but interpret the eating of his flesh, Jo. 6. the receiving of him in a spiritual manner, namely, by Faith.  
6. When they deny the Eucharist to be a figure or sign, they mean a bare sign. The Sacrament is more than so. It seals and exhibits. It is a means, whereby we receive the Body and Blood of Christ, not only the benefits of them, but Christ himself, in a spiritual manner as crucified for us, and is a real pledge to assure us thereof. Tho' the crucified body of Christ is in Heaven, yet that spirit which dwells in it, being communicated to a worthy Receiver in the Sacramental action (we are made to drink into one Spirit) it produceth such a union betwixt us and Christ Jesus, as lays a clear foundation of Communion with, and participation of him.  
7. When they say, there is a mutation in the nature of the Bread, they mean by nature the use and property only, as is manifest by their own explications. Before Consecration it was appropriated to the nourishment of the body: but now by Consecration it is exalted to a higher purpose. A new dignity is put upon it. It becomes a means, whereby a worthy Communicant gains Communion with our blessed Lord.  
8. When it's said, That the Senses are deceived, and no competent judges of the mutation: this may be very true, altho' the change be Sacramental only. The change is not the proper object of sense, but of faith. The knowledge of it, with its effects is conveyed to us by a Divine Testimony extant in the holy Scriptures.  
9 When it is affirmed, That under the species of Bread is given the Body, and under the species of Wine the Blood; by Species, we must not understand the Accidents without their proper subjects. This apprehension never entered into the thoughts of the ancient Fathers. They were perfect strangers to this kind of Philosophy. 
S. Aust. l. 4. call. ●● T●in. Serm. de Temp. 38. S. Ambr. l. 4. de Init.  By species they understand the specifical nature of a thing: and by the species of Bread and Wine, True Bread and True Wine, as is manifest to any who consult their discourses.  
10. Where it is said, That the Lord who changed Water into Wine, could change in the Eucharist Wine into Blood, the intention of Cyril is not to make these two conversions in every thing parallel, 
Jerus.  as is manifest by the words that follow; he presently asserts, That the eating of Christ's flesh must be understood spiritually, and calls the Table mystical and intellectual. And therefore all that his words can import is this: He who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, changed Water into Wine by a corporal mutation, changed at his mystical Table Wine into Blood, not corporally, but spiritually and mystically.  
Lastly, It must be acknowledged, that there are many Hyperbolical expressions in the Fathers, 
Hom 23. in Mat Par. 〈◊〉.  as S. chrysostom and others, in relation to the Sacrament. The design of them is to secure it from contempt, and to elevate and raise the devotion of Communicants. They being improper Speeches must not be expounded in such a sense as is inconsistent with what is elsewhere expressed by the same Authors in plain words without any figure. They all agree in this, in as clear expressions as can be desired, That the substance of the Bread and Wine remain in the Eucharist. Their Rhetorical flourishes cannot be interpreted to the prejudice of that which is plain and manifest. When S. chrysostom says, That Christ mingles himself with us, and not by Faith only, but indeed makes us to be his Body: His meaning is not, That there is any corporal mixture or immediate contact betwixt us and his body; but that when we receive the figure of his body which is in Heaven, the Spirit which dwells in it is communicated to the worthy Receiver, and produceth a union betwixt them; and therefore what we receive, 
●. 870.  he presently calls the Grace of the Spirit.  
Damascen, who lived in the eighth Century, was one of the first who deserted the Orthodox doctrine of the Fathers. He being concerned in the controversy concerning Images, and the opposers of them asserting, that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament were the only Image and representation, which Christ allowed of himself: he was transported with an intemperate zeal, and affirmed they were no image or figure at all. 
L. 4. c. sid. O●t ●  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Tho' in these words, he did not design any real conversion of the Elements: but rather a corporal presence, or consubstantiation: yet he gave occasion to some in the ninth Age, to dispute for a substantial mutation. Paschasius Ratbertus was the first who writ seriously and copiously about it, as Bellarmine asserts. His sentiments about this argument were received with a warm opposition. Rabanus Maurus, Bertram, Joannes Scotus Erigena, did strongly assert the contrary doctrine. In the tenth Age, which was a night of ignorance, all things fell asleep, controversies were laid aside. Darkness did reconcile them, as the want of light does various colours. In the eleventh Age Berengarius was awakened, and did with great perspicuity assert the Truth: Tho' the violence of his enemies, and infirmity of his nature induced him to submit to a recantation. The controversy all this while was managed with so much ambiguity, that Joannes Duns Scotus asserts, That it was not necessary for any to believe a substantial conversion or Transubstantiation, till the Lateran Council held under Innocent the Third, in the year 1215. and therefore the master of the Sentences, who flourished in the Century before, about the year 1145. useth these words: What kind of conversion it is, 
〈…〉 illa 〈…〉.  whether formal or substantial, I am not able to determine. The truth is, that Transubstantiation was brought forth by Paschasius, confirmed by Innocent the Third, and at last so firmly married to the See of Rome by the Council of Trent; that there was no possibility of a divorce; tho' there is just reason to believe, that the most Learned of that Community could hearty desire it. The issue produced by this unhappy conjunction, is the mutilation of the Sacrament, the Adoration of the Host, the Sacrince of the Mass. 
〈…〉 Christum esse in Eucharistia, vere, realiter, substanitaliter, ut Concilium reclè lequitur, non corporaliter, etc. imò contradici possit spiritualiter, ut Bernardus dicit in Sermone, etc. ubi affirmat in Sacram●nto exhiberi verron carnis substantiam sed spiritualiter, non carnaliter. L. 1. de Sac. Euch. c. 2. p. 351.  The consideration of these particulars makes Bellarmine to shrink (notwithstanding the great authorities he boasts of) when he comes to express his own thoughts about the Presence of Christ in the Sacrament, as appears by his own words.  
Therefore we will say Christ is in the Eucharist, truly, really, substantially, (as the Council rightly speaks) not corporally, etc. yea, on the contrary, it may be said, spiritually, as Bernard speaks in his Sermon, etc. where he affirms, that the true substance of the flesh is offered to us in the Sacrament spiritually, but not carnally.  
If the defenders of Transubstantiation did believe Antiquity to be favourable to them, what is the reason, why they use so many devices to keep us from the knowledge of it? S. Chrysostome's Epistle ad Caesarium Monachum, has been a great while suppressed by the Romanists, because of the opposition which it bears to their Sentiments about the Presence of Christ in the Sacrament. Peter Martyr found the Manuscript at Florence. Bigotius of late has done the same; and had published it, had he not been prevented by the interpoposals of some, more biased with a respect to the interest of Rome, than a sincere love to the Truth. It is at last come to light, tho' very imperfect and mutilated. If our Adversaries did know Antiquity to be propitious to them in this and other points of controversy, they would not use so much collusion as they do. In the Proposition presented to Prince Henry, when he had thoughts to erect a Royal Library, these words occur. The Pope gathereth all the Manuscripts he can, 
Fowlis p. 128.  into his Library the Vatican, and then useth them at his pleasure. One of his Tricks is notorious. They have men which can counterfeit any hand, and write the old hand 500 or 1000 years ago. Then they have artificial Ink, which within three days after the writing looks as if it had been written 500 years afore. Thus having altered and taken out all that makes for us, they suppress all the true Copies, and produce the new ones (they being written by themselves as before) as the Authentic Books. All this will manifest, that what the Church of Rome asserts concerning the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, is contrary to Antiquity.  
3. Reason. If the Bread be converted into the Body of Christ, let us suppose the conversion to be made in two places, at Paris and Rome; and the Body of Christ in one of these places to stand upon the Altar, and in the other to be carried in Procession. According to this Hypothesis, the same individual body is moved, and not moved at the same time: God, whose concourse is requisite to all motion, concurs and not concurs. His Will which is the spring of all concourse, consents to the motion and not consents. His Intellect, which has a knowledge of what he wills, knows and not knows the same individual: and all this at the same time. In a word, God is represented as making at the same instant two contrary declarations. Those who maintain the conversion under debate, say, That the Essences of things do not fall immediately under the notice of Sense; and the only way, which the Author of Nature has provided for us to come to the knowledge of them, is by their external modes, and accidents. If God declares in the Scripture, that what is in the Sacrament after Consecration is not bread, and yet suffers at the same time all the accidents to remain, which he has appointed to declare, that it is Bread; he makes two declarations the same moment diametrically opposite one to the other. Such contradictions are not reconcileable to his Nature. It is destructive of his Veracity to speak two things contrary to each other, the same instant, in relation to the same matter. Indeed it is said, That reason is not to be admitted to this debate, there being a clear revelation on the contrary side. The sacred Mystery of the Trinity is without hesitancy believed, altho' equal exceptions from reason lie against it. To which I reply; that there is no revelation of any such mutation in the Bread, as is contended for. Those words, This is my Body, import no such matter, as I have before demonstrated. S. Paul calls, what remains after Consecration in the Sacrament, by the name of bread, 1 Cor. 11.28. and we cannot have a better Interpreter of the mind of Christ, than he is. The Revelation pretended cannot be true in any sense, which is contradictory to reason. Tho' many things, before their manifestation, are beyond the discovery of Reason. Tho' after a disclosure is made, it is not in the power of reason to dive to the bottom of them: yet they are never contradictory to it. Reason and Revelation differ but as a lesser and greater light. The understanding which is the Candle of the Lord, is no more opposite to Revelation, than the Lights, which are known by that name to the Celestial Luminaries with which the Firmament is adorned. Tho' reason be not allowed in the sacred mystery of the Trinity to judge what is contradictory; yet it may in the present case. There the object is infinite, and far above the comprehension of our narrow faculties: but here sinite, and every way fit and proportionable to them. In the Eucharist we are conversant about a finite Body, the nature of which is very agreeable to our measures: In the Trinity about an infinite and incomprehensible Being. Reason is undoubtedly the gift of God. This gift is bestowed for some purpose. The apparent design of it is to discern the true nature of those objects which lie within its sphere. In this number we must necessarily reckon, what appears in the Sacrament: it being so far from exceeding the capacity of our intellect; that it falls under the notice of Sense. If Reason in this case may not he permitted to judge what is contradictory, the design in giving of it will be totally frustrated, and no certainty attainable in the most obvious matter. Thus it is evident, that Transubstantiation is contradictory to Reason.  
4. Sense. Our blessed Lord has manifested, that it is a competent judge in the present case by appealing to it concerning the reality of his Body, Luk. 24.39. Jo. 20.27. What appears in the Sacrament has all the conditions requisite to qualify it for sensation. The parts of it are big enough to move the Nerves. The distance from the object is very suitable and convenient. The space, through which the Species pass, is clear and perspicuous. If Sense, rightly disposed, may not be trusted 〈◊〉 certainty of all things will fail. There can be no evidence in Courts of Justice sufficient to ground a condemnatory Sentence upon. Eye-witnesses, tho' of the greatest integrity, will be of no signification, all will be left in a perfect state of Scepticism. The grand pillars which support Religion, will be utterly overthrown and demolished. How can we be assured that there is a God, but by his Word and Works? And how can we perceive the Contents of his Word, or be acquainted with his Works, without using our Senses? We cannot be sure that The Heavens declare the Glory of God, or that this Proposition, This is my Body, is contained in the New Testament, if we may not conside in our eyes. Miracles, the great Seals of Evangelical Verity, are rendered insignificant; if the Senses of those who were present, when they were wrought, may not be trusted to, their attestation will be of no value.  
Indeed we are told, that the Sense is not deceived in the Sacrament. The accidents of the Bread and Wine are its proper objects, and they remain there, according as they appear: but as for the Substance, that is miraculously changed, and Sense is no competent Judge about it. To which the reply is easy. Accidents alone are not the proper objects of Sense: but Accidents, together with those material subjects, in which they inhere. It is matter, which properly makes the impression upon our Nerves; the Particles of it are under divers modes and figures commonly styled Accidents. The Essence of these consists in inhesion. Accidentis esse, est inesse: So that if they be separated, they presently cease to be, and by consequence have no power to make any impulse upon Sense. They can have no more a solitary existence, than the height, breadth and length of a house, with all the colours and modes of every room, may remain after the whole fabric is demolished. If there be any miraculous change in the substance of the Bread and Wine, nothing can be more sit to discern it than our Senses. The essential effect of a Miracle is to work wonder and admiration: and nothing can produce this, but that which is manifest to our faculties. Tho' the mode of doing is latent: yet the thing done is clear, and accommodated to the apprehension of every Spectator.  
These four Topics, Scripture, Antiquity, Reason, Sense, standing in an irreconcilable opposition to the doctrine of Transubstantiation, nothing is left to support it, except these two pretences, the Declaration of the present Church, and an impossibility that what she declares should be an Innovation.  
As for the first: If by the Church we understand the Universal, no such thing is done by her. The Eastern Churches declare the contrary. The Greeks in their Liturgies have nothing of this nature expressed. They adhere to the seven first General Councils only, which are wholly silent in this matter. Tho' they have a proper word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to express Transubstantiation by, yet they never use it, when they speak of the Eucharist. When they call the Bread the Body of Christ, it is with an extenuating term, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quasi, or the like. After Consecration they give no adoration to it. They deny, that an unworthy Communicant receives the Body and Blood of Christ. Cyril Patriarch of Constantinople says, in the name of the Greek Church, 
Vid. Hotting. An. Appen. p. 422.  We confess and believe, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the true and firm Presence of our Lord Jesus, to wit, that which Faith offers and gives us, and not that which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the invented Transubstantiation doth inconsiderately teach. These are his words in his Oriental Confession of the Christian Faith. To say, notwithstanding all this, that Transubstantiation is the declared belief of the Universal Church, is to cut off the Greeks from being any part of it, altho' they receive the Holy Scriptures, embrace the ancient Creeds, submit to the seven first General Councils, have an uninterrupted succession of Bishops. If it be said, That Schism and Heresy has deprived them, and all other Churches of this privilege and dignity, who do not submit to the Papal Supremacy, this may be as easily denied as asserted. The Universality of jurisdiction, contended for, is a perfect usurpation, which can never be legitimated by length of time against the institution of our blessed Lord, who constituted all the Apostles in a parity. No Man can with justice be charged with Schism or Heresy for not owning of that, which bears an opposition to the appointment of the Supreme Head of the Church. If we must believe the declaration of the present Church in the point under consideration, what were those obliged to do, who lived in the time of Pope Gelasius, when there was a declaration diametrically opposite? The present Pope declares, That the Bread and Wine do not remain in the Sacrament. Gelasius, a person of equal Authority, and every jot as Infallible, declares, That they do. Both these we cannot be obliged to believe, they being contrary one to the other. If the present Church of Rome must be credited, whensoever she thinks sit to declare herself, How is this to be known? She has no peculiar promise made to her. That to the Universal is nothing to the purpose, she being but a part, and a very corrupt one too. All that the promise imports, is that there shall be always a people with their Pastors in the World, retaining all the points which are fundamental, and of peremptory necessity to Salvation, which may be, tho' the Community of Rome utterly cease. As for any Universal Tradition about this matter, it is but a futilous and vain pretence; as is evident by the contests betwixt the Roman and African Bishops. If the last had known of any such Tradition, and believed the first to be infallible, a sudden stop would have been put to all contradiction. No man will dare to oppose a Church, which he believes cannot err. Neither are there any motives of Infallibility efficacious enough to induce us to receive this doctrine. Bellarmine has reckoned up fifteen; but they are so far from evincing that the Church of Rome is Infallible in her declarations, that they will not amount to prove her a True Church, as will be manifest in the Fourth Section. As for the Second pretence, the impossibility of Innovation, it is in vain to allege it against so much evidence as may be produced for the matter of fact. The ancient Church, for many Centuries, did assert, That the substance of the Bread and Wine remains after Consecration, as I have already proved. The doctrine of the present Church of Rome is, That it doth not remain. Here is an undeniable change: To set up an imaginary demonstration against so clear a matter of fact, and to commend it to our belief with all the advantages of Art, is a method not unlike to that of Pericles, who, when he had received a fair fall by his Antagonist, attempted to impose upon his Spectators, with his Rhetorical flourishes, and persuade them that no such thing was done. Not only Bellarmine (as I have before intimated) but likewise Sirmondus acknowledge, That Transubstantiation was not exposed to a clear light before the Ninth Century. In the following Ages the profound ignorance of the people, and the ambition of the Priests gave a great advance to it. The Priests being desirous of deference and respect from the people, knew no method more expedient to promote their purpose, than to adhere to that doctrine, which has a direct aspect upon it. What could more readily commend them to the first place in the thoughts and opinion of the Vulgar, than to persuade them, that they were so highly favoured in Heaven, as from thence to be invested with a power to turn Bread into the body of Christ? This, if sincerely believed, must inevitably be as efficacious to secure to themselves an eternal veneration, as the doing the greatest miracle recorded in the Sacred Oracles. After all the commotions about this doctrine, and the definition of Innocent the Third in the Fourth Lateran Council, the greatest men for learning were at a loss what to six upon. Joannes Parisiensis did afterwards publicly maintain, That the Bread after Consecration really remains, as the humane nature of Christ does, after its being advanced to the dignity of the Hypostatical Union. At the Council of Trent, This business was brought to its perfection; yet, when the definition was to be made, the Dominicans and Franciscans could not agree, but fell into warm contests; insomuch, that at the last, the General Congregation did prudently resolve to use as few words as possible, and to make an expression so Universal as might be accommodated to the meaning of both parties. All this, (to which much more might be added) is sufficient to assure us of the novity of Transubstantiation, and to give us some light into the steps which it took, before it could arrive at the dignity of being an Article of Faith in the Church of Rome.  
Now if we will give ourselves leisure to sum up what has been spoken, we shall find too much reason to suspect, that the error of the Romanists about the Annihilation of the Bread and Wine, in the Sacrament, doth not arise from the nature of the Object, but a voluntary distemper in the Subject; and therefore can contribute little to an excuse from the Charge they lie under, of alienating the Divine Honour, when they give supreme Worship to the Sacrament. And now I have done with the first particular, the terminating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the Eucharist.  
2. Invocation of Saints. The Romanists in this, do that which is highly injurious to the peculiar Honour of God. When they direct Mental Prayer to the Saints, the action in its own nature imports an acknowledgement; That they understand the Heart, which is a privilege appropriated to the Supreme Being, in the Holy Scripture, Thou only knowest the hearts of the children of men, 2 Chro. 6.30. There is not a tittle in any part of Divine Revelation, whereby it appears, that God makes known our Hearts to them, but on the contrary, many clear intimations; That he reserves this knowledge entirely to himself. When Vocal Prayer is made to them for Grace and Glory, it involves a confession of a power residing in them to confer that, which is the gift of God alone, through Jesus Christ. If it be said, That they are invocated not as Authors, but Intercessors for these things, they contradict the stile of their Devotion: O Maria gratiosa, dulcis, mitis, & formosa, applica nobis gratiam. O Maria gloriosa, in deliciis deliciosa, praepara nobis gloriam. In the Psalter of the Virgin, all the Addresses made to God of whatsoever nature, are directed to Her. It is said, That God the Father has done for Her, what Assuerus promised to Esther, given one moiety of his Kingdom, namely, That of Mercy to Her, reserving the other of Justice to himself. But let it be so, That one thing is spoken and another meant, (which is not decent at any time, much less in the Worship of God) and the Saints are prayed unto as Intercessors: yet this action cannot be excused from the blame of usurping the Honour of the second Person in the Sacred Trinity, who is appointed to be the only Mediator betwixt God and Man. We know of no other in the Scripture: and it is not for mortal Man to appoint new Advocates in the Kingdom of Heaven, and make them Rivals with the great Master of Requests, who is of God's designation. An Earthly Prince looks upon it, as an insufferable insolence for Subjects, to appoint, who shall be his great Officers without his Order and Command.  
If it be said, That the Saints are invocated, not as  Intercessors, but subordinate to Christ, this will not much mend the matter. For whether they be the first or last, yet it is plain, that when one particular Saint is Invocated the same hour and instant in divers places for things of a different nature, a capacity is supposed in that Saint to hear all their Petitions at once, and by consequence to have an infinite Understanding. A Finite Intellect, tho' in the fruition of the greatest advantages, either from the Revelation of God, or Relation of Angels, can understand but one object at a time. To have an actual apprehension of more than one at the same moment, is a peculiarity belonging to an unlimited and infinite capacity.  
If it be added, that the Sense of the Church is, That we must have recourse to the Prayers of the Saints departed, as we have to them, while they are living here; this will not amount to any reasonable satisfaction. There is not the same reason for praying to Saints in Heaven, as there is for our desiring our Brethren here to pray for us.  
1. They are at a distance. These are present. If a man residing in England should fall upon his knees, and supplicate his friend in the Indies to assist him with his Prayers, the very Action in its own nature would import an attribution of an immensity to him, which is peculiar to God. If he should daily use his picture to excite his devotion, and kneeling before it, make such religious applications, as are usually made to the glorified Saints before their Images: every one would look upon him as a person doing that, which is highly prejudicial to the Divine Honour. There is as much reason to believe, that the Saints on Earth may hear our Prayers at a distance, as the Saints in Heaven. There is not one Syllable in the Bible to assure us to the contrary. Abraham is ignorant of us, Isa. 36. And if Abraham the Father of the Faithful is a stranger to our concerns, much more his Children, who are in his Bosom. God and Angels may reveal our necessities to our friends in any place: yet no man looks upon this possibility as a sufficient ground to pray unto them, when they are at a distance from us. The Prayer, which our holy Religion requires, must be made in Faith, Faith must be grounded upon a Divine Testimony. There is no Testimony of this nature to assure us, that our Prayers made upon the Earth, are known to glorified Spirits in Heaven. If there be any way, whereby they come to be acquainted with them: yet God has hid it from us, as he did the body of Moses from the Israelites, to prevent the occasion of an abuse.  
2. It is the prerogative of Jesus Christ to be the only Mediator for us in Heaven, to whom we are to make our applications. He is entered into the Holy of Holiest, and there alone offers to God our Incense, as the High Priest did here upon the Earth. Upon this account it is said, There is one God, and one Mediator betwixt God and man, the man Jesus Christ, 1 Tim. 2.5. The Mediator is here represented to be one as the Deity is one. As there is but one God, so there is but one Mediator for us to address unto, in the state of Glory. When he was about to leave the World, and enter into this Blessed State, he gave his Disciples instructions to pray in his name only, Joh. 14.13.16.23. He does not mention the name of any of the Saints. As he was alone in the Work of his Meritorious Satisfaction: So He is alone in the application of it by his Gracious Intercession. Therefore the Apostle says, Among the Gentiles there be Gods many, and Lords many. They had their Sovereign Deities, and likewise their baalim's, or Lords which they accounted as Mediators betwixt them and those Supreme Powers: but to us, who embrace the Christian Faith, There is but one God, and one Lord Jesus, Christ is the only Mediator for us in Heaven. This dignity he has purchased with the inestimable price of his blood. He humbled himself and became obedient to the death of the Cross: Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, Phil. 2.8. He sits at his right hand, appears in his presence for us, and lives for ever to make intercession. As the price which he gave for this dignity could not be paid by any but himself; so the office procured by it must be incommunicable, and peculiar to him. And therefore for any to set up other Mediators, whether of Redemption or Intercession, without a command from Heaven is an inexcusable injury to his prerogative. The Romanists do not only Invocate Saints, that they may make a charitable Interecession for them: but that by their Merits they would procure the favours, they are Petitioners for.  
This Truth concerning one Mediator is so evident, that the primitive Christians were unanimous in the reception of it. For three Hundred years no instance can be produced, out of any Authentic Record, that the Mediation of any in Heaven beside our blessed Lord, was made use of. Two are chief pretended to the contrary, and in both the Virgin Mary is concerned. In the first She is represented as the Advocate of Eve; in the second as invocated by Justina the Martyr. Irenaeus mentions the first, lib. 5. c. 19 Where he compares the obedience of Eve to the word of the Evil Angel, with the obedience of Mary, to the word of the Good. He asserts, that Eve was seduced; that she might fall from God. Marry obedient, that she might be the mother of our Lord. And adds this moreover as a further design of her obedience,  Virgins Evae virgo Maria steret Advocata. All this comes very short of what is designed to be proved by it. Advocata here is no more than Consolatrix. Because, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek (in which language, it is believed, Irenaeus wrote) signifies both an Advocate and Comforter: therefore advocare in the Latin Version is used for consolari, as appears, L. 5. c. 15. Ego vos advocabo, & in Jerusalem advocabimini. I will comfort you, and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem. So that his meaning will amount to no more than this. As Eve by being seduced by the Evil Angel fell from God, and brought sorrow, dishonour, and death upon her Sex: So the Virgin Mary by being obedient to the word, which was spoken by the Good Angel, did make a full compensation, and restore the Honour, that Eve and all her Sex were impaired in. This is the Consolation, which she is said to receive from the Virgin Mary. If this had been considered by Fevardentius, he would not have drawn so peremptory a conclusion as he has done. 
Ann. in. Iren.  Hinc evidentissimum est, etc. From hence it is most evident, That the ancient Fathers and Martyrs from the very times of the Apostles did Invocate the Virgin Mary.  
The other instance concerning Justina is in Gregory Nazianzen. The story is this, S. Cyprian before his conversion was enamoured with the beauty of Justina. In order to the obtaining his unchaste desires, he made use of Magic. She having a deep resentment of her danger, prayed to the Virgin Mary, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
To which I answer, Pontius the Deacon of S. Cyprian, who wrote his Life at large, speaks no such matter: but on the contrary, That Cyprian before his Conversion was studied in all good Arts, which tend to the utility of the Age: amongst which Infernal Magic can have no place.  
Indeed there was a Book extant in Nazianzen's time, styled Poenitentia Cypriani, and now to be seen in the Oxford Edition of Cyprian, in which Justina is mentioned: but it is accounted a fabulous relation, and was condemned under that notion by Gelasius. Nazianzen from thence probably did borrow the sum of what he has expressed. He using the freedom of an Orator, and not the exactness of an Historian, might be induced to make use of that, which he found made ready to his hand, without any strict examination, and set it off with some Rhetorical Flourishes; amongst which we may reckon the application of the Virgin Justina to the Virgin Mary. In this he did accommodate himself to the inclination of the Age in which he lived, which by frequent Apostrophe's made to Martyr's by some great Men in their Panegyrics, was disposed to think favourably of such Addresses. It is usual for Writers, when they relate what was done in former Ages, to dress it up in language and circumstances suitable to their own times. Of this we have an evident instance in Nazianzen himself, in his 22. Orat. Where he describes the Martyrdom of the seven Brethren, and the deportment of their mother, 2 Macc. 7. He says, She snatched the drops of blood, took the fragments of their members, worshipped the remains. If we consult the Author of the Maccabees and the History of Josephus, where their sufferings are described at large, no such thing is recorded. It cannot reasonably be believed, That a Woman, who encouraged her children to die, rather than to violate the Law of God, should at the same time openly break it, by touching the Dead, contrary to the Masaical Institution. So that the words of Nazianzen, can be nothing but an Oratorical excursion adapted to the circumstances of his own Age, in which the remains of the Martyrs were held in great estimation, sometimes expressed by such sort of Actions, as he attributes to the Mother of the seven Brethren; tho' nothing was intended which did exceed a civil deference and respect.  
The Invocation of Saints by degrees did creep into the Church. The First step was a belief, That the Saints departed did freely, without any ask, implore the Divine Majesty in the behalf of those which were left upon the earth, without any apprehension of a duty incumbent on them to address their Prayers to them. The Second was the practice of some, who, when the Martyrs were going out of the World, did before their departure entreat them, to remember them in Heaven. The Third was occasioned by the Rhetorical Expressions of some in the Fourth Age, who in their Panegyrical Orations made Apostrophe's to the Saints departed, in order to the moving the Passions of their Auditors: but withal did often insert such words, as plainly intimate, they had no assurance they were heard by them: So that all that can be made of them, are rather Oratorical Wishes, than proper Invocations.  
When these Flowers of Rhetoric were transplanted into the minds of the Vulgar, the badness of the Soil, made them to degenerate into Weeds. They not rightly understanding the meaning of the Orators, did by their ill construction encourage themselves to pray to Saints in their private Devotions: which practice is fully condemned by S. Austin and Epiphanius, and manifestly declared to be grounded upon the Superstition of the People, and not the Doctrine of the Church. The public Offices of the Church are the proper Standard, whereby we are to judge of the Worship of every Age: and none such are found so early, in which Prayer is directed to Saints in a state of separation.  
Now I proceed to the last particular, which is plainly injurious to the divine Honour, namely, the using of Images in the Worship of God. Those, who are concerned in this practice, may be reduced to Three sorts.  
1. Such as pretend, they give no Worship to Images: but use them as memorial to quicken their Devotion and excite in them the remembrance of what they represent. These do that which has no propitious influence upon Religion. It will be difficult for them to kindle the fire of their Devotion at an Image: and yet so to order the matter, that no sparks shall light upon the Image itself. It is not easy to conceive, how they should kneel, pray, burn incense before Images, and yet give no religious honour to them. This is contrary to the Cathecisme ad Parochos, p. 321. and the Decree of the Council of Trent, which say, That due honour and veneration is to be given to them.  
Material representations of the Deity, tho' not intended for exact similitudes, are very apt to indispose the mind, and produce apprehensions very disagreeable to the nature of an infinite Spirit. Tho' they are said to be Books adapted to the infirmity of the Vulgar, and very fit to instruct them: yet in the sacred Oracles they are represented as holding forth a doctrine of vanities, Jer. 20.8. and as teachers of lies, Hab. 2.18. They lessen reverential fear, and impress incongruous notions upon the mind. The mischief from them is greater than any good, that can reasonably be expected by them. When Books are more apt to lead us into error, than acquaint us with truth, it is better to lay them aside, than to use them. The humane nature of Christ in glory, and the spirits of just men made perfect, cannot be represented in colours by the most curious Artist. A blind man may as well draw a picture, as those, who have not seen them, make a true delineation of them. The Images, which are used, are as injurious to them, as a deformed picture would be to the greatest beauty. The hurt, which they do to the Understanding by impressing false Ideas upon it, is much greater than any advantage that can accrue to the Will and Affections by them: That heat, which is in the Affection, is of small moment, except it be produced by a true light in the Intellect.  
2. There are others, which confess, they give Honour and Worship to the Image: but say it is inferior to that which they give unto God. Now these aught to declare, whether this inferior Worship be Religious, or Civil only. If Civil, namely such a value, as a man has for the memorial of his friend, this nothing concerns the matter under debate; the dispute being wholly about Religious Worship, which ultimately terminates in God. If it be Religious, it is to be inquired, whether it stays in the Image, or only passeth through it to the Prototype. If the first, than God is not Worshipped by the Image, which is supposed in this discourse: for the Worship ends in the Image. If the second, a Worship is given to him inferior to that which is due: and so a double fault is committed. Too much is given to the Image, and too little to God.  
3. There are those, who profess to give the same honour to an Image which is due to the Prototype. They say, That the Saints and their Images are to be honoured with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Virgin Mary and her Image with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. God and his Image with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. When it is urged, That the Image of God is but a creature, and therefore not to be joined with him in the same kind of Worship: They endeavour to secure themselves against this inconvenience, by taking Sanctuary under some nice distinctions: They say that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 given to the Image is not terminative, but relative, not absolute but respective, such as is given to the Commissioner of a Prince It doth not stay in him, but redounds to the honour of his Master. Tho' it is a fault to give the same absolute honour to God and his Image; yet there is no hurt in giving the same relatiué.  
But this will not salve the matter. Absolute Worship is that, which is given to an Image absolutely considered: Relative, as it stands in relation to God. Now the relation which is the formal object of Worship, being but an accident or finite mode inherent in the Image, having no other foundation, but humane invention: There is as much hurt in giving the same Worship which is due to God, unto the Image upon the account of this relation, as if it was absolutely considered. The Image is a substance, the relation an accident appertaining to it. If it be an injury to God, to give his peculiar Honour to a finite substance, which is of his own formation; it can be no less to give it to a mode which is nothing but the product of imagination.  
As for what is said concerning the honour done to a Commissioner; it is true, it does not stay in him, but redounds upon the Prince, whose character he bears, provided, that it keeps its proper bounds, and has none of those peculiarities blended with it, which are peculiar to the Sovereignty. If Subjects should put a Crown upon the head of a Commissioner, and install him in the Throne with all the rites and ceremonies which are annexed to the Supremacy, and call it, not terminative, but relative Honour; the Prince would have more cause to suspect Treason was designed against him, than believe any honour accrues to him by such actions. The Gods on Earth are so far like him, who is higher than the highest, that they have their Regalia, which are incommunicable. If they should so far forget themselves, as to be willing to part with them, yet God cannot with his; not because his Power is less, but his Sovereignty greater. They are Sovereigns by positive institution only. His Sovereignty is essential and immutable. He can no more allow the derivation of his peculiar Honour to another, than he can deny himself. The holiness of his essence will not permit him to do that which is intrinsically evil. So long as the honour done to a creature, which is appointed to represent him, has no mixture of the peculiarities which belong to the Celestial Crown, it doth redound upon him, it being an act of obedience to his Will: but in case it has, it degenerates into a palpable injury to the rights of Heaven.  
Upon this account relative Worship is represented in the Scripture under the notion of Idolatry. Three sorts of Idolaters it acquaints us with. Either such as totally renounce the True God and his Law, and go after other Gods to serve them; Deut. 13.1, 5. Or else such as retain the fear and worship of the True God, and join strange Gods with him, 2 King. 17.33. Or lastly, those who profess to Worship only the True God, but do it by external Symbols and representations. This is nothing but relative Worship: and yet by the Penmen of the Sacred Oracles, it is accounted Idolatry: as is manifest in the Calf which Aaron made, which was designed for a Symbol of the presence of the True God. Whether it was erected in imitation of the Cherub, which Aaron a little before had seen in the Mount, or of the golden Bulls, the Symbols of Osiris, is not much material. So much is certain, That, (whatsoever was the reason of forming of it into this shape) none but the True God was intended to be represented by it. This will be evident, if we consider the ground of the people's desire. They were under an expectation, that in their travel in the Wilderness they should have a vilible Symbol of the presence of Jehova framed by Moses. He being so long absent in the Mount, that they were at a loss in their thoughts, what was become of him, they desired Aaron that he would act in his stead, and do it for them. Here is no intention to change the True God, with whom they lately entered into Covenant: but only to have a Symbol of his presence in the midst of those difficulties which the Desert might expose them to. Their own words demonstrate this to be their meaning. When they saw the Calf, they said, This is the God, which brought thee out of Egypt, Neh. 9.18. They could not be so senseless, as to think, That the Egyptian Deities had been propitious to them in their deliverance from thence, when it was manifest; That the True Redeemer had executed his judgements upon them, Exo. 12.12. and caused them to fall down, as Dagon did before the Ark. How is it possible (after Moses had told them the name of him, who was their deliverer, confirmed his commission by many undoubted signs, brought them to the Mount, where the Divine Majesty manifested himself in the most awful manner) to think that a strange God had set them lose from their servitude? The words of Aaron put the matter beyond dispute. When he saw the Symbol, he made Proclamation, and said, To morrow is a Feast to Jehova, at which time they offered their usual Sacrifices, which were so far from importing any honour to an Egyptian Deity; that the Egyptians accounted them abominations of the first magnitude. Those beasts, which the Israelites killed, were treated by them with Sovereign Veneration. The Egyptian Worship was principally terminated upon the Host of Heaven: The Sun was called Osiris, and the Moon Isis, both Deities of Egypt: But the Worship of the Golden Calf is plainly distinguished from it. 
Diod. Sicul, Bibl. Dionys. Voss, p. 5.  Act. 7. v. 12. The Israelites being given up to Worship the Sun, Moon and Stars is represented as the effect, and punishment of their Worshipping the Calf: and the effect is always divers from the cause.  
Parallel to this are the Calves at Dan and Bethel. They were designed only for Symbols of the True God. When Jeroboam erected them, it was no part of his thoughts to renounce the God of Israel, who a little before had acquainted him by his Prophet, That he should be vested in the Government over the Ten Tribes: His error lay, in setting up external Representations, and Worshipping the True God by them. 
2 Kin. 17. v. 28.  The Samaritans are said to fear the Lord, notwithstanding they Worshipped the Calves. 
2 Kin. 10.16, 29. 1 Kin. 12.28, 29.  Jehu had a zeal for the Lord, altho' he departed not from the sin of Jeroboam. Jeroboam, at the first erection, declares his intention to Worship that God, which brought them out of the land of Egypt. The Heathen Idolatry, 
1 Kin. 16.30, 32.  which Ahab fell into, is represented as distinct from the sin of Jeroboam. The Israelites are accounted as a Church, notwithstanding their gross miscarriage at Dan and Bethel: which could not have been, in case they had renounced the True God. They retained the Law, had Prophets to instruct them in it. When Elijah contested with the Prophets of Baal, he supposes the Israelites to Worship the True God, before they fell to the Worship of Baal, as is manifest by his words, 
1 Kin. 18.21.  How long will ye. halt betwixt two opinions, if the Lord be God, follow him; if Baal, follow him.  
To the Calves of Jeroboam, we may add Micha's Molten Image, which was nothing but a Symbol of the True God. 
Judg. 17.3.  The Silver of which it was made, was wholly dedicated to the Lord, which makes it evident, That the Worship, given to it, was not absolute but relative; directed indeed to the Image immediately, but with an intention to Worship the True God by it: yet notwithstanding this, it lies in Scripture under the imputation of Idolatry. Bellarmine is so sensible of the inconveniences which attend the doctrine of giving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to an Image, that he would have it by no means uttered before the people: his reason is very forcible, 
Cap. 22. de Imag.  Qui defendunt Imagines adorari latria, coguntur uti subtilissimis distinctionibus, quas ipsimet vix intelligunt, nedum populus imperitus. Those, who defend, that Images are to be worshipped with Latria, are compelled to use most subtle distinctions, which they themselves scarcely understand, much less the unskilful people.  
And now if we look back, and consider, that those, who use Images in Divine Worship, as memorial only, and instruments to excite devotion, do that which has a tendency to impress upon the mind Ideas, very disagreeable and injurious to the nature of the Deity: that Those who give an inferior Religious Worship to them, designing by so doing to honour and worship God, give too much to them, and too little to God: that Those who profess to give equal worship by what name soever disguised, whether terminative or relative, absolute or respective, put the highest affront upon the Deity, whose infinite nature will not permit a finite Being to be joined with him in the same act of Worship; we must be convinced from the reason of the thing, that the using Images in the Worship of God is undeniably prejudicial to the Honour of Heaven. We have not only the reason of the thing, but the express command of God to guide us in this concernment, which prohibits the worshipping of him by Images. Let our intentions be never so sincere, and our devotion screwed up to the highest degree, yet we must necessarily dishonour God, when we are doing that which is contrary to his precept. If Subjects set up a person to represent their King, in contradiction to his express injunction, and pay to him the honour due to a real Representative: The King will not think himself honoured by their act on, it being blended with an apparent disrespect to his Authority. Alexander the Great gave a command, that none but Apelles should draw his Picture: If any other had done it with the greatest exactness, and an unfeigned desire to honour him, the respect would not have redounded upon him, being utterly blasted by an act of disobedience to his order.  
That God has forbidden us to Worship him by Images is manifest by the Second Command, Where we are enjoined not to make any Images, whether carved or plain, either of any thing in Heaven above, or that is in the Earth beneath, or that is in the Water under the Earth, in order to the bowing down to them and to the worshipping and serving him by them. The First obligeth us to Worship no other God but Jehova. The Second not to worship him (as the Heathens use to do their Deities) by addressing our Veneration to external Symbols and Representations. This is plain from the explication of this Precept, Deut. 4.15, 16. Take ye therefore good heed to yourselves (for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day, the Lord spoke to you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire) lest you corrupt yourselves and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female. No graven Image or similitude in relation to the True God appeared in Horeb. Therefore, it is inferred, that none ought to be erected, in order to the worshipping and giving honour to him.  
It is no prejudice to this Interpretation, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated by the LXX. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for this word doth not always import an Image, or similitude of a False God. The golden Calf, which was a Symbol of the True, is styled by this name, Act. 7.41. Any resemblance (to which Religious Worship is given) whether of the True, or a False God, may without any incongruity, be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Images, either relating to the Worship of Jehova, or the Heathen Deities, must be here prohibited in the Second Command. The last cannot be, because this is sufficiently done in the First, Thou shalt have no other Gods before me. For if we may not serve the Heathen Deities, much less pay to their Images those reverential regards, which the nature of a Deity doth challenge.  
These Images comprehend not only the Images of God, but of any creature whether in Heaven above, or in the Earth beneath, form with a design to Worship God by them. The scope of the Precept, is to interdict the Worshipping the True God, after the manner in which the Heathens use to worship their Deities. They had two sorts of Numen, Sovereign and Inferior. They thinking it a presumption to make an immediate access to the First, made use of the mediation of the Second to procure their acceptance. The Images of these Mediators they worshipped, conceiving, that Honour and Worship, by their so doing, would accrue to the Sovereign Numen, whose Ministers they were believed to be. So that the Command forbidding the Worship of the True God after that mode, which the Heathens used in the Worship of their Deities, must comprehend the interdiction of all Images, whether of God himself, or any Mediators, which are supposed to intercede betwixt God and Men, provided that they be set up with an intention to be bowed down unto, and worshipped, that thereby God may be Worshipped and Honoured.  
God likes not, that the Worship, which is peculiar to him, should be strained through an Image, before it comes to him: but declares, that he is jealous in that case, and will not ●●●fer the appearance of an alienation of the Honour, which is appropriated to him, whatsoever the intention of the Worshipper may be.  
What is usually pretended concerning the Cherubims in the holy of holiest, and the Command of God to Worship his footstool, is not sufficient to justify the worshipping External Representations of him. The Cherubims over the Ark were not designed for objects of Worship. A Veil was interposed betwixt them and those, who came into the Temple. They were not so much as permitted the sight of them. When the High Priest once a year went into the Sanctum Sanctorum, we never read he gave them any adoration. God promised to commune with him from betwixt the Cherubims, Exod. 25. Which intimates, that his adoration was not terminated upon them, but the Supreme Being, who promised his special presence in the space betwixt them.  
There is no Command to worship his footstool, in the Hebrew it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Psal. 99.5.  which the Chaldee Paraphrast rightly interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the House of the Sanctuary. The like expression is used in the same Psalm v. 9 Worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at his holy Mountain. No man is so defective in his apprehensions, as to believe the Divine Worship was to be given to the Mountain.  
As the Second Command condemns the Worshipping God by Images: so likewise do all those who enjoyed the best advantages to understand it. The Ages next to the Apostles were perfect strangers to this practice; as is evident by the silence of their Adversaries in their contests with them.  
The Jews, who professed an enmity to this kind of Worship, ever since the captivity, and were careful to publish any thing which tended to the defamation of Christianity, never charge this crime upon the Primitive Professors of it. Amongst the errors objected against them in the conference with Tryphon, in the discourse of Tertullian, and many other disputations, we never read of the Adoration of Images. The Mishna, which is believed to be Written about Two Hundred years after Christ, is wholly silent in this matter, altho' the Composer had a convenient opportunity to speak of it in his Treatise concerning strange Worship. Their implacable enmity to the Laws of Christ, gives us the highest degree of assurance, that nothing could be the cause of their silence, but the innocence of the Christians. In the Gemara, which was finished about the time that Images were brought into Churches, a Christian Temple is styled a House of Idolatry.  
The Heathens, when they were accused by the Christians for worshipping Idols, never mention, in their vindication of themselves, the adoration of Images among Christians: which certainly they would have done, in case there had been any such practice. 
dal. de Imag.  When the Idols of the Americans were demolished by the command of Alphonsus Suasus, they sent four men to complain of the injury, who acquainted him, that they did not expect such usage from Christians, who gave Divine Honour to Images, and pointed to the Picture of Sebastian which hung in his chamber, and told him, That the same honour which he gave that Picture, they gave to their Idols. When he replied, That Christians did not worship such Pictures upon their own account, but as they were representations of glorified Persons in Heaven: They answered, Neither did they their Idols for their own sakes, but as they represented the Sun, Moon, and Stars.  
When Bernier told the East-Indians, That he was scandalised upon the account of their worshipping Idols: he received a like answer from some of the chief of them. 
Hist. of the Gent. of Indostan Vol. 3. p. 172.  We have indeed in our Deuras or Temples, store of divers Statues, as those of Brahma, Mehaden, Genick and Gavani, who are some of the chief and most perfect Deutas: and we have also many other of less perfection, to whom we pay great honour, prostrating ourselves before them, and presenting them Flowers, Rice, Scented Oils, Saffron, and such other things with much Ceremony: But we do not believe these Statues to be Brahma and Bechen, etc. but only their Images and representations; and we do not give them that honour, but upon the account of what they represent. They are in our Temples, because it is necessary for praying well to have some thing before our eyes to six our mind: and when we pray, it is not the Statue we pray to, but he who is represented by it. For the rest we acknowledge that it is God, that is absolute, and only Omnipotent Lord and Master.  
If these barbarous People were so quick as to make so apposite a retort when they were set upon by Christians, (the first expressly accusing them of the like practice: the second drawing a representation of their own religion exactly parallel to what they knew to be in use in the Roman Community:) No doubt Tryphon and Celsus, etc. would have done the like, in case in their time there had been the same reason.  
The Primitive Christians in many places were so remote from the worshipping Images, That they did not allow the making of them, as is plain by the words of Clemens and Tertullian. 
Strom. 5. de Specta. c. 23.  In case they were made, they would not permit them to be brought into Churches. When Adrian gave command, That Temples should be built without Pictures, it was taken for granted, that he intended them for the Worship of Christ. When Epiphanius found in a Church a Veil with the Picture of a Man painted upon it, he presently rend it in pieces, and defended his action, by alleging, that it was contrary to the Scripture, That the Picture of a Man should be hanged up in the Church of Christ. When Images were brought into Churches, the worship of them was utterly disallowed. Serenus was for the banishing them out to prevent danger. 
Greg. Mor. lib. 9  Gregory for the keeping them in, to instruct the illiterate. Both agree in this; That they are not to be adored. When Philippicus, (being transported with an intemperate love to the Monothelites) took down the Pictures of the first Six General Councils, and by this action provoked Rome to a greater measure of zeal for Images, than the adoration of them was thought upon. The hint that was expressed, gave an alarm to the Synod called by Constantius Copronymus, and occasioned the making a decree; That, to give religious veneration to Images is nothing else, but to revive the Superstition of the Pagans. When the Council under Irene. did rescind this decree, it is observable, that it did prohibit the making the Picture of God. This impiety than had no Umbrage from Authority.  
If we consult the Monuments of Antiquity, it will be apparent, That in the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Ages, there were hot disputes about the worship of Images: but no countenance given to the making or worshipping the Image of God. In the Three Ages immediately before, They are sometimes mentioned as Ornaments of Churches, and instruments to teach the ignorant, but not as the Objects of Worship. In the Three first Centuries there is no mention of them at all in the concerns of Religion.  
The Resemblance upon the Chalice, which Tertullian speaks of, was an Emblem of the Parable of the lost Sheep, and not a Picture of Christ, or any particular Saint. It was not drawn with a design to be Worshipped; but to signify, That those, who are gone astray, may, upon their repentance, be received into the Communion of the Church.  
The story in Eusebius, 
Eccl. Hist. l. 7. c. 18.  concerning the Statues of Christ, and the Woman cured by him of her issue of blood, is too dubious to lay a foundation for a clear testimony. Eusebius indeed asserts, That he saw two Statues of brass at Caesarea Philippi, but he doth not say, That they were the Statues of Christ and Woman; but that the people said so. Nothing is more familiar, than for them to be mistaken in their account of such public Monuments. It is incredible, that such famous testimonies of the Truth of Christian Religion, should remain in the open street untouched, for the space of Three Hundred Years, amidst the slames of the hottest persecutions; when the greatest privacy could not secure any thing appertaining to the Christians, from the rage and fury of the Heathens. Suppose all this was so, yet the Romanists will gain no advantage by it. For no Religious Addresses were made to these Statues. They were not in the Church but the street. Not erected to be Objects of Worship, but Memorials of a Miracle. That which was reputed to be the Statue of Christ, Philostorgius assures us, had no adoration given to it; and adds his reason, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, For it was not lawful to worship brass, or any other matter.  
All this, if duly pondered, will assure us; That there is no Commission from God for Image-Worship; but, on the contrary, an explicit prohibition. God has made a peremptory declaration, that he will make no such grant, My Glory will I not give to another, nor my Praise to graven Images, Isa. 42.8.48.11. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth exclude every thing from having any interest in his Glory, which hath an essence distinct from the Divine Nature. It is not reconcileable with his immutable Sanctity to condescend to any such Concession. To alienate his peculiar Worship and Glory is an act intrinsically evil. Indeed the Romanists say, They do no such matter. His peculiar Worship is always accompanied with an apprehension of infinite excellency residing in the Object, which it is terminated upon: and no such thing is believed by them concerning Images. To which we reply, That peculiar Worship is either internal or external. Tho' internal, which includes such an apprehension, is not given to Images, yet external is, which consists in outward signs appropriated by Nature or Institution to import and signify it. He is not only injurious to God, who alienates the whole, but he who exhibits any part of it to a Creature. He is accounted a Traitor, who pays part of the Tribute to another Prince, which is peculiar to his own. The Israelites, tho' they did not apprehend that Aaron and Jeroboam's Calves were invested with the incommunicable perfections of the Deity: yet they are charged with Idolatry, upon the account of the external Worship, they gave to them. The Arrians lie under the same imputation in the Writings of the Fathers, because they worshipped Christ, whom they believed not to be God. The Christians in Julian's time did think they had contracted the same guilt, when through fraud they were unwittingly induced to give external Honour to those Idols, of which they had in their hearts a perfect abhorrence.   

SECT. III. Concerning the True Worshippers of God.  
WHat is to be spoken concerning this Head, I shall reduce to these Three Particulars, 

I. Who they be that are obliged to Worship.  
II. How they are to perform their duty.  
III. What end they are to propose to themselves in the doing of it.    
I. Who they are that lie under an obligation to Worship. Religion being a reasonable Service, those who are concerned in it, must be endued with Reason and Understanding: and these are either Angels or Men.  
The Angels, Enjoying the favour of being admitted to the Beatifical Vision, are under a willing necessity of being engaged in the highest acts of Religion. The constant disclosures of the Divine Glory do command from them the most reverential regards. They are styled Cherubims, to import, That they are always upon the Wing, prepared to execute the Divine Pleasure: and Seraphim, to denote their Zeal in the discharge of their obligations. Their conformity to the great command of Love, we have an Apodictical Evidence of in their rejoicing at the Conversion of a Sinner, and the Renovation of the Divine Image in him. They are so absolute in the performance of the Duties of Religion, that their Practice is propounded as the Pattern of our Obedience, Thy Will be done in earth as it is in heaven. When the Second Person in the Sacred Trinity was introduced into the World, that the infirmities of humane Nature, with which he was clothed, might be no temptation to them to make any abatement in their usual addresses, a special Command is given: Let all the Angels of God Worship him. Heb. 1.6.  
Men (Who are those, whom we here inquire after,) are either Secular or Ecclesiastical. Secular, are not exempted from Religious Worship. It is said, That the Earth has a double motion, one about its own Axis, another about the Sun. Secular men must imitate the Earth, besides their motion about their Earthly affairs, they must have another about their Celestial. The Lord who bestows the World upon them, has reserved a Rent to himself. Religion concerns every man, in whatsoever Function he is engaged. Particular Vocations, like Pharaoh's thin ears of Corn, must not devour the General. When any enter upon their Civil Employments, they do not cease to be Creatures invested with Reason: and so long as they continue in that capacity, they lie under an indispensable obligation, to pay a Religious Homage to that Eternal Spirit, by whose Incubation they were form. Neither do they cease to have a passionate desire for their own happiness, and no man can enjoy any measure of this, without a union with the Supreme Good; (the dissatisfactions which often emerge, while we are in the embraces of these sublunary fruitions, do openly proclaim them, not to be the seat of real Beatitude) and Union with the Supreme Good cannot be expected, except we with all integrity Serve and Worship God.  
Whatsoever our employment is, we continue to be Creatures of that Species towards whose redemption an infinite price has been deposited, and therefore must remain under the strictest obligations to be Religious. This is the Apostles argument, Ye are bought with a price, therefore glorify God. It is an hyperbole of ingratitude, not to be engaged in these actions, which have the most direct aspect upon his honour, from whom so signal a benefit is received. No worldly concern can cancel our obligations to him, who has parted with his own Son, in order to the procurement of our Redemption from the greatest Misery and Vassalage.  
Lastly, God is the Fountain of all that Wisdom, whereby any are fitted for their Callings. All from the Shovel to the Sceptre, from the lowest to the highest, are instructed by him. He teacheth Princes to Rule, and guides the Husbandman to manage the instruments of Agriculture. Those who have this dependence upon God, offend against the clearest dictate of Reason, if they refuse to intermit their labour, that they be employed in the most solemn agnitions of him. The noise in this sublunary state about secular matters, will make no harmony in the ear of the Supreme Being, except such Rests and Pauses be intermingled with it. Upon this account the Apostle adviseth, That every one abide in his Calling in which he is called with God. Let our Function require never so much of our attendance, yet God must not be excluded. Some time must be spared for the immediate acts of his Solemn Worship.  
As Secular Men are concerned in this Sacred Work: So likewise much more those who are Ecclesiastical. I mean such Persons as are solemnly Ordained and Consecrated to the performance of some Religious Offices. The necessity of them will be manifest, if we consider, that a part of that Service, which the Gospel requires; in particular, the being an Ambassador to the Son of God, is a work of such importance, that every capacity is not agreeable to it. It doth not become every one to stand in this relation to an Earthly Prince; much less to the Heavenly. Now men usually are not competent Judges of their own ability. The generality are very partial in their reflections upon themselves, are easily flattered into a belief, that the dominion of their Reason is as large as those Monarches have fancied their Territories, who by the strength of imagination have entitled themselves to the regency of the World, and expressed displeasure against Cosmographers for not allowing them a bigger space in their Tables. This unfitness in men to judge of themselves, devolves a necessity upon others to do it for them; otherwise the ends of the Ministerial Function will be disappointed by an intrusion of the unskilful, and confusion take place of all good order. Those who judge, must be persons of Learning and experience in the same employment. None can judge, but those who are fit; and none have such a degree of idoneity, as those who are thus qualified. The business of a Spiritual Pastor is not only to lead his flock into advantageous places to feed in it, but to defend it against the rapine of Wolves; not only to exhort, but convince gainsayers. Tit. 3.9. Many of those who contend against the Truth, making use of their improvements in humane Studies for the accomplishment of their end: it is but expedient, That they who are designed to enter the Lists with them, should have skill at the same weapon. This was perceived by Julian an irreconcilable enemy to the Faith of Christ, who commanded That the Christians should be deprived of all Books of Learning: to compensate which damage, Apollina the Elder turned the Books of Moses into Heroic Verse: the Younger, the Gospel into Dialogues, after the method of Plato. Of this skill which a Minister ought to be endued with, every Christian is not a competent Judge. Not only the Law but the Gospel, doth pronounce it reasonable, That every man should be tried by his Peers. The judgement, which they give, must not be concealed, but declared to the Church for her direction, That She may know whom to refuse, and whom to accept as Ministers. And it cannot be better declared than by some important actions, as Prayer, which has a tendency to invite from Heaven a Benediction upon the Heads and Hearts of those, who are found qualified; and Imposition of Hands, which solemnly points out unto the People, whom they are to entertain as their Pastors. These actions being exerted by one who is invested with authority, change the state of private Men, and translate them out of a Civil into an Ecclesiastical capacity. A Sense of the necessity of such Persons has been always so great, that there is no Age but will furnish us with instances of them.  
Before the Flood we meet with Preachers, which were solemnly Commissioned to dispense the mind of Heaven. Noah is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 2 Pet. 2.5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Person in Commission, constituted to proclaim the Will of his Prince. 
Didym. in Hom. ●●. 6. p. 183. Shrev.  The Scholiast upon Homer says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, every King has his proper Heralds. This Office doth not open to every one, who can persuade himself that he is endued with abilities agreeable to the importance of it, but is peculiar only to those who are ordained to it. Noah is styled the Eighth Preacher. It is more congruous to refer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, than to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He spared not the old World, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not the Eighth Noah, (there being none of the name before) but Noah the Eighth Preacher. This contributes evidence to the act of Divine Justice in drowning the World, which, (altho' eight eminent Preachers of Righteousness had been employed in order to the promoting a reformation) neglected them all, and entertained their advice with scorn and derision.  
These Eight are Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, Mathusala, Lamech, Noah.  
Enos challengeth the first place. Of his time it is said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then Preaching began in the name of the Lord. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may admit of this interpretation is evident, Jonah 3.2. It has a plain affinity with the Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived, and is in the Septuagint expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gen. 41.43. Exod. 32.5. Prov. 8.1. That which our Translation attributes to Men in general, the Greek and Latin assigns to Enos only. So that we are not destitute of authority, if we thus read the Text, Then Enos began to Preach in the name of the Lord. Namely, concerning the desolation, which the profaneness of Cain's posterity would certainly draw upon the World, if not prevented by a sincere and timely Repentance.  
The Second Preacher is Cainan. He was so eminent in this Sacred Function, that the Kenites, who were Scribes, and solemnly ordained to expound the Divine Law, 1 Chron. 2.55. received their denomination from him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
The Third Mahalaleel. The Character of his Office is legible in his name. He was set apart to Praise God and proclaim his Righteous Will.  
The Fourth Jared, which word imports humility, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 descendere. The humble God delights to teach, and he that is taught of God, is not unfit to communicate instruction to others.  
The Fifth Enoch. S. Judas represents him as a Prophet, declaring that the Lord was coming to execute judgement upon all, v. 14, 15. His name is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dedicate. He was devoted solemnly to the Ministry, and those words, He walked with God, argue that he exercised his Sacred Function. The Jerusalem Targum expounds them, He laboured in Truth before God, even as the Elders are said to labour in Word and Doctrine, 1 Tim. 5.  
The Sixth is Methusalem. He is the Son of a Prophet, and in his very Name did foretell the Flood. It is compounded of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to import that when he was dead, God would send a universal Deluge. He died according to this prediction in the beginning of the year in which the Flood was.  
The Seventh was Lamech. He gave an undoubted testimony of his being under the power of a Prophetic Spirit, by naming his Son Noah, and expounding the meaning of it in these words, The same shall comfort us concerning our work, and the toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed, Gen. 5.29. They plainly presage some signal consolation which would accrue to mankind by him.  
After the Flood, until the time of the Law, we are not without instances of a like importance.  
The Firstborn in every Family did execute the Sacerdotal Function.  
We read of Priests, before the order of Aaron was instituted, and young men sent by Moses to offer burnt offerings, which the Chaldee Paraphrase renders the firstborn, Exod. 19.22. This is the reason why the Apostle in his Epistle to the posterity of Heber, in allusion to this Institution, says, Ye are come to the Church of the firstborn. Esau is styled profane, because he slighted this sacred immunity. The Posterity of Levi, who ministered about holy things, are said to be taken in the room of the firstborn, Numb. 3.  
If there be any ambiguity in these Texts, Universal Tradition gives us no small degree of assurance, that we are not mistaken in that sense which we have chosen. It is the general belief of the Jews, and of the ancient Fathers of the Christian Church, That the firstborn were invested with the power we have attributed to them. Omnes primogeniti ex stirpe Noae, 
Epist. 126. ad Evag. Qu. Heb. A 1.  All the firstborn of Noah's stock were Priests, are the words of S. Jerome.  
What is usually produced by those who are of a contrary mind, is not sufficient to invalidate this Evidence.  
It is said, That the Young men, Exo. 24. were not Priests. They did not sprinkle the Blood upon the Altar. Esau is styled profane, for contemning his Primogeniture, because the primacy and a double portion were annexed to it by a divine institution. The Levites which were substituted in the room of the firstborn, were not Priests. The Firstborn were not consecrated to God, till the deliverance out of Egypt upon the account of their being preserved, when the firstborn of the Egyptians were destroyed. The Younger Brother is generally preferred before the Elder, as Jacob before Esau, Judah and Joseph before Reuben, as Theodoret notes. 
In Gen. Qu. 108.  To all which I reply in order.  
1. The Young Men mentioned, Exod. 24.5. are expressly called Priests, Exod. 19.22. The Order of Aaron was not then instituted: and who can they be, but those whom Moses employed to offer Sacrifice? The Sacerdotal Work is attributed to them, They are said to offer burnt-offerings, and sacrifice peace-offerings unto the Lord. A Priest was ordained for this very purpose, Heb. 5.1. If they had been Ministers to Moses, and brought only the beasts in order to the being offered up, the very act of Offering would not be ascribed to them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, indeed some have thought that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports only, 
LXX.  That the Young Men were appointed to bring the Sacrifices, but without any just reason, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when joined with Sacrifice by the Greek Interpreters, generally signifies to offer up. If it should here denote only to bring, it would not disappoint, what is designed to be proved by us; for it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they sacrificed, as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Tho' the Young Men did not sprinkle the Blood, yet there were other Sacerdotal actions which they were engaged in the performance of, as the Dedication of the Offering, and the Mactation and Oblation of it by Fire, which are sufficient to demonstrate that they were vested in a Sacerdotal Power: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports all these.  
2. Esau is styled profane, because he slighted something which was Holy. That is properly Holy which is dedicated unto God, and immediately related to him. The double portion and the power to govern the Family, had no such Dedication, They were Civil Matters, appertaining to the concerns of this Life, and therefore, there is reason to believe, that this Epithet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is given to him, not for the disvaluing of them, but the Priesthood, which was conversant about things appertaining unto God. Tho' a Divine Precept did entitle him to the Primacy and a double portion, yet it is not so proper to say, They were Holy and he Profane, for neglecting of them. By a Divine Command, every man is obliged to do his own business. Yet it is not very congruous to assert, that every Man's Worldly business is Holy, and he profane, who is idle, or meddles with other men's matters.  
3. When it is said, That the Levites were taken instead of all the firstborn, Num. 3.12. We may understand all which were descended from Levi, and then Aaron and his Sons will be included, which were undoubtedly invested in the Priestly Office.  
If Levites be taken only for all the Sons of Levi, except Aaron's Family, yet we have enough for our purpose. They were devoted to attend upon the Priesthood, and minister about Sacred Things, when the Priests were so few, That they could not slay all the burnt-offerings, they helped them, 2 Chron. 29.34. When one is said to be in the room of another, it doth not argue a similitude in every circumstance, but an agreement in the main. As the Firstborn were devoted to the ministry of holy things, so were the Levites.  
4. The preservation of the Firstborn of Israel, when the Firstborn of Egypt were destroyed, gave occasion to the renewal of an old Charter. Sanctify all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and beast, it is mine, Exo. 13.2. It is not said it shall be mine, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is mine. Which intimates some constitution, whereby the firstborn were devoted to God, antecedent to the sanctification, here spoken of. After the redemption from the Egyptian bondage, many of the Laws given to the people were declaratory only of former constitutions, as the Precept concerning clean and unclean beasts, blood, sacrifices, with many others. All these were ancient constitutions which the practices of the Zabiists gave occasion to renew: and why this concerning the Firstborn, might not be of the same nature, I see no reason to think.  
5. Tho' the Younger Brothers had the preference in some respects, yet not in those which did relate to the Primogeniture. Tho' Jacob was designed to be the object of the peculiar favours of Heaven: yet the right to the immunities of the firstborn was in Esau until his voluntary alienation. The same privilege was vested in Reuben till he forfeited it by desiling his Father's bed. The preference which Theodoret speaks of, was upon the account of the Unction and Graces which the Younger Brothers were endued with, and not the Function and Office. Those who are Superior in Office, may be Inferior in Gifts to those who are under an obligation of subjection.  
From the giving of the Law to the times of the Messiah, we have likewise sufficient evidence for Ecclesiastical Persons. It being the pleasure of God to be Worshipped in two places, the Temple and the Synagogue, there were persons solemnly set apart for the discharge of the duties of Religion required in both.  
To the Temple-Service the Sons of Levi were devoted. The Rites belonging to their Consecration are perspicuous in the Holy Scripture. These were divided into Priests, and those who were assistant to them. The Priests were of the house of Aaron, and their work to offer Sacrifice and to Bless in the name of the Lord. The Levites had their several offices allotted to them. After the Ark was fixed, and the work, which they were originally dedicated to, in part brought to a period, they were digested into several Classes. Some of them were employed to praise God upon instruments of Music, some to keep the doors of the Sanctuary, 
2 Chron. 25.6, 11. 2 Chron. 24.34. 2 Chron. 31.14.  some to attend upon the Priests, and do those things which were commanded by them. We read of their killing the Sacrifices, and pulling off their skins, the distributing the oblations.  
As for the Service of the Synagogue another provision was made. Some Persons were likewise set apart in a solemn manner for it. These are styled Prophets and Scribes. Of their Nature and Office we may gain a full information, if we consider the Schools of Learning erected for their Education. The Studies enjoined them in those Schools. Their Solemn Ordination after an improvement in those Studies. The places where they exercised the Function they were Ordained unto.  
First, The Schools of Learning. Of this nature was Jabez, where the Families of the Scribes dwelled, 1 Chro. 2.55. It was an University which did derive its name from Jabez, whose devotion is recorded, 1 Chro. 4.10. and whom the Talmudists represent as a Teacher of the Law. The Hill of Moreh, Jud. 7.1. and the Hill of God, 1 Sam. 10.5. were places of the same importance. The Chaldee Paraphrast calls Naioth in Rama 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a house of Learning. Samuel after his retirement from his regency, was Head of this Society. He is said to be standing as appointed over them, 1 Sam. 19.20. the Prophets being at his feet in the posture of Disciples. We read of the Sons of the Prophets in Gilgal, Bethel and Jericho: and express mention of a College in Jerusalem, 2 King. 22.14. If any credit may be given to Solomon Jarchi, there were no fewer than four hundred and eighty in the time of the Prophet Isaiah. 
Isa. 1.21.   
What kind of Studies they followed in these Colleges may be collected from the words of that Prophet. Where is the Scribe, Where is the Weigher, Where is he that counted the Towers, c. 33.18. At the time which the prediction has an aspect upon, the righteous were in a prosperous state, and that they might not fall into the usual temptations, which sublunary felicities are accompanied with, and be transported by the pleasure of them beyond the due measures of Sobriety, they are commanded to meditate upon their former terrors, as the most proper allay: and call to remembrance their calamities, when their circumstances were so intricate, that those who had devoted themselves to the study of Wisdom, were so far from offering the least expedient, that it was commonly said by way of reproach, Where is the Scribe? Where is the Weigher? Where is he, who telleth the Towers? Here are three sorts of Students. 1. Scribes, They studied to give the Sense of the Law, as Ezra did. In order to this end, they read over the Writings of former Prophets. Daniel was conversant in the books of Jeremy, Dan. 9.22. Justin Martyr says, 
2 Kin. 6. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 313.  That in the College which the Sons of the Prophets were building in the days of Elisha, They did design, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. Polemical Divines, These are styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Weighers. They did ponder and weigh in the intellectual balance, all arguments for and against the received sense of the Law. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is interpreted by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the disputer of this World. 3. Mystical Divines, These are styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tellers of the Towers. They applied themselves to find out the sublime mysteries of the Gospel, concealed under the shadows of the Law. S. Paul expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Wise. There is no greater degree of Understanding, than to arrive at a clear perception of the design of the Messiah, who is the Wisdom of God. This was the study of Heman, He was a Seer, in the words of the Lord, which did relate to the horn of Salvation, 1 Chr. 25.4, 5. That this was the principal inquiry of the Prophets, is evident, by the words of S. Peter. Of which salvation the Prophets have enquired and searched diligently into, 1 Pet. 1.10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Word, which imports the greatest degree of diligence and industry, such as those who dig in Mines use in the bowels of the earth, they had not all their knowledge by Inspiration, but took pains in their studies in order to the discovery of these Mysteries, which were locked up in the figures of the Law.  
After these Students were arrived at such a degree of maturity, as made them fit for a public sphere, they were ordained by a solemn imposition of hands. This was the usual rite, whereby the Doctors and Teachers of the Law were created.  
The Hebrews speak of a Threefold Ordination, 
Maimon. Selden. de Syn. p. 282.  either of such as were set apart only to teach and expound the Sense of the Law, which is styled Binding and Losing in the Talmudical Records: or of them who were Judges of the Law. Or lastly, Of those who had a faculty granted them, to do both these Offices. This doth make it evident, that the public teaching the Law, did not lie open to every bold pretender, but was appropriated to such as were solemnly Consecrated to that Sacred purpose.  
This power of Ordination, so fan as it did relate to the making Judges of the Law, might be exercised only within the confines of Palestine; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Maim. San. c. 4. Buxt. vo. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  and by him only who was Ordained before. This is the reason why Rabbi Jehudi Ben Baba, the only qualified person, who was left for the performance of this Work did contrary to the Imperial Edict ordain Five in the open Field, that the power of judiciary Ordination might not fail. The honour of which Heroic Action he wears in his Title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But the Power, so far as it concerned the constituting Teachers of the Law, might be exerted every where, as well without as within the confines of Canaan. Benjamin Tudelensis says, 
P. 73. C. Lemper.  That the Synagogues of Babylon did receive power from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Ordain a Preacher by the Imposition of Hands. 
Thesbites.  Elias Levita asserts the original of this Ceremony to be from Moses, who by the Imposition of Hands, made Joshua a Rabbi.  
After these Students were thus Ordained, the usual place, where they exercised their Sacred Function, was either an Academy styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the sitting of the Doctors there, to instruct their Disciples: or a Proseucha, and therefore termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a School of all Virtue, 
L. 3. de vit. Mosis.  by Philo Judaeus. Or else a Synagogue. The Scribes who had their Education in the Schools of the Prophets, are said to sit in Moses' Chair. This Chair was appropriated to the Minister of the Synagogue, and therefore styled Moses', because out of it, he used to Preach to the People the Law, which was delivered by Moses from Mount Sinai. To this is very consonant, what is represented concerning the Essaeans, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Philo Jud. l. omn. prob.  coming into the holy places called Synagogues, they sat down in ranks according to their age. The Younger sort under the Elders, with a becoming decency, being disposed to receive their instructions. Than one taking the Book readeth it, another of the most skilful afterwards expoundeth what was most difficult to be understood.  
Under the Gospel, we have equal evidence for the existence of Ecclesiastical Persons. Jesus Christ, the Apostle and High Priest of our Profession, was solemnly Anointed by the Holy Spirit, Act. 10. He Ordained Twelve Disciples to act in a subordination to himself, and afterwards Seventy, to be assistant to Him and Them. Tho' there were Priests, according to the Law, at that time, and Scribes in Moses' Chair: Yet he was pleased, before the old Fabric was taken down, to give them a Specimen of the New Order, and commend it by his own practice, to the perpetual use of the Church. The Two Sacraments were instituted, before a period was put to the Law, concerning Circumcision and the Passeover. Our Blessed Lord says, That the Kingdom of God is among you, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Fevard. in Iren. p. 325.  and the Fathers, That the Kingdom of Heaven began at the Baptism of John.  
After the Resurrection, we read of Three Orders, Apostles, Presbyters, Deacons. The Apostles were primary, or secondary. This distinction, S. Paul doth insinuate, when he says, I am not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles, 2 Cor. 11. v. 5. c. 12. v. 11. The Secondary were helps and suffragans to the first, in the promoting the concerns of Religion. That there were more Apostles than Twelve is plain. Christ is said to be seen of the Twelve, 1 Cor. 15.5. and then afterwards of all the Apostles, v. 7. These according to their Gifts had several Appellations, as Prophets and Evangelists: and yet they were all of the same order. Silas or Silvanus, who was a Prophet, Act. 15. and Timothy an Evangelist are said to be Apostles. They join with S. Paul in the Epistle sent to the Thessalonians: and of all of them it is affirmed we might have been burdensome as the Apostles of Christ, 1 Ep. 2. v. 6. 
Euseb. l. 3. 21. l. 5. 2 ●.  Philip the Evangelist is called an Apostle by Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus. These in the following ages had their Successors. None doubt of the succession of Presbyters and Deacons: and if we consult the Monuments of Antiquity, they will be found as clear for the succession of Apostles; as is evident from the words of Irenaeus, Tertullian, S. Cyprian. It is asserted by Theodoret, and Rabanus Maurus, That those who were styled Bishops in the ages in which they lived, were called Apostles in the first age. By reason of a disparity in Gifts, the Bishops thought it too much, ordinarily to assume the name, altho' they enjoyed their power of Order and Jurisdiction.  
The thing remained, altho' the name had many variations in divers ages. When the Empire was digested into Dioceses, As in Cities there were chief Governors, styled Defensores, in the Metropoles Proconsul's, in the Head Cities of Dioceses the Vicarii of the Four Praefecti Praetorio: So in every City there was a Governor in Ecclesiastical concerns, styled a Bishop, in every Metropolis an Archbishop, in the chief City of the Diocese, a Primate, except four, Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and there the Governor in Church-affairs was honoured with the name of Patriarch, in imitation of the four Praefecti Praetorio, which did always attend the Emperor, and govern in the head Cities of the Dioceses by their Deputies. This last Title is of no earlier a date than the Second General Council. Socrates' asserts, 
L. 5. c. 8.  That those of whom it consisted, did constitute Patriarches. This name was borrowed from the Jews. In their dispersion, in order to the preventing an utter dissolution, they constituted Governors in the Eastern Cities, and dignified them with this name. Their Authority continued till the Fourth Century, and then being taken away, the name was translated to Christian Rulers in Ecclesiastical affairs. This is the highest point of honour that ever Bishops did arrive at. The Ecumenical Power is a perfect usurpation, and hath been gainsayed in all ages, except by some few, which the Bishop of Rome did discipline, as Psapho did his Birds, and then send them forth to teach the people the same lesson. The Church did never attempt to imitate the Empire so far, as to set up one Supreme Bishop, as there was one Emperor. If a conformity had been carried so high, it would have been repugnant to the appointment of Christ, who constituted all the Apostles in a parity of power. No intimations of Superiority were directed to S. Peter, but such as the rest of the Apostles were equally concerned in. When Christ says, I will give thee the Keys, he doth not speak to him exclusively. The same thing is spoken to all the Apostles. When he commands him to feed his Sheep, the words cannot import any Superiority over the Apostles, who were Shepherds, and devoted to the same Work. When it is said, upon this rock will I build my Church, Here is nothing expressed peculiar to him. The Church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles, Eph. 2.20. The Wall of the Holy Jerusalem hath Twelve Foundations, and in them, the name of the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb, Rev. 21.4. The contention about superiority argues, That the Apostles knew nothing of the interpretation, which the Romanists now give. If the words relate to S. Peter, all that can be inserred from them, is, That he would be an eminent person, like a rock, constant and firm to death in the Faith of Christ, as many of the other Apostles were.  
II. Now I proceed to the Second particular, the manner, How men are to Worship God.  
The modes and circumstances of Divine Worship, we are not always obliged to justify with an express testimony out of the Sacred Oracles. It is sufficient for their vindication, That they are consentaneous to the general rules of the Bible, and bear no opposition to any particular injunction. In order to our direction in this concern, I will lay down the following Propositions.  
1. God must be Worshipped inwardly, with all our Soul, with all our Heart, with all our Might. Our intellectual faculty must be engaged in the performance. A material conformity to a Command without the knowledge of it, is no worship at all. A blind man, who hits the mark by chance, may as well be reputed a skilful Archer; as such a person a True Worshipper of God. If the understanding be not concerned, it is not a humane, much less a divine act. If the Intellect and Will, this present moment, concur to that which is truly good, and the next, the Mind altars, and the Will continues its pursuit; that which is now good in the appetitive faculty, will presently become evil, because it acts contrary to its immediate rule. Tho' there may be policy, yet there is but little piety in the practice of those, who persuade their Proselytes, That light puts out the fire of devotion, and an implicit belief is the perfection of Religion. The truth is, They are so conscious of the infirmity of the foundation they build upon, that they use their best endeavours to deprive others of their sight, that they may be in no capacity to discover it.  
As we must Worship with our Understanding, so likewise with our Will; that which is free, and of our own election, is most acceptable to God. Josephus says, That God rejected Cain, because he offered a Sacrifice which was extorted by force out of the earth; and accepted Abel, because his victim was free and natural. Tho' he miss of the true Reason, yet he hit upon a great Truth, That a free and uncompelled obedience is most agreeable to the Divine Will. God being a Spirit, is concerned chief in the frame of our Spirits, and disvalues that Service which doth not proceed from them. 
1 Kin. 6.4.  The windows of the Temple which Solomon dedicated to him were broad within and narrow without: his eye looks more within upon the temper and composure of our hearts, than without upon our external performances.  
All the faculties of our Soul must be screwed up to the highest pitch. In the Intellect there must be a superlative esteem of the Divine Majesty, in the Will the deepest devotion. Every sacred performance challengeth the most reverential regards. Although there may be culpable excesses in the imperate acts of the Body, yet there is no fear of them in the elicit operations of the Soul. It is impossible to value love, and obey God too much. An infinite good requires the utmost vigour of a finite Spirit, when it is conversant about it.  
2. God must be worshipped outwardly with the Body. It is to be presented as a living Sacrifice, 
Rom. 12.1.  holy and acceptable to him. We must not imitate them, who use to take to themselves all the flesh of their victims, and offer up nothing but the Blood and Soul to their Deities. Our Bodies being the Lords as well as our Spirits, and very proper instruments to commend the practice of Religion to others, they are not to be exempted from this Service. Outward profession, which cannot be without the acts of the body, is a duty as well as inward devotion. Adam did wear the skins of the beasts, which he sacrificed to God. The Scripture never censures bodily Service, but the want of the heart, and a right direction of the intentions in the performance of it. He who Worships God with his Body, and suffers his Soul at the same time to be under irrelative motions, is like a Soldier, who employs his Scabbard in the service of his Commander, and his Sword to some other purpose.  
3. All the modes of the Body must be decent, orderly, and tending to Edification. It is the pleasure of him, who is the Supreme Head of the Church, to give this general rule, and to furnish subordinate Governors with such discretion, as will enable them to make convenient deductions from it, in particular cases. Upon this account the Apostle appeals to Nature, that is, natural reason, when he treats about matters of order, 1 Cor. 11. and asserts, That disorder will administer occasion to unbelievers, to charge the Congregation with madness, that is, with a deportment contrary to the rule of common reason, 1 Cor. 14.  
4. Different deductions from this general rule, is no just ground for distinct Churches to commence a contest one against another, and by this means, violate the Unity of the Universal. Decency is not confined to a point, but has a certain latitude: Under a Genus there are more Species than one. The Carthaginian and Roman Army at Cannae, were not drawn up in the same form; and yet in both there was a mode agreeable to the rules of Military Order. Upon this account, the present Church has no quarrel with the ancient, altho' she differs from her in matters of this nature. Formerly it was thought to be very decent to stand at Prayer, on the Lord's day, in token of the Resurrection: To plunge three times, those who were to be Baptised, in signification of the Trinity; to  them, when they came out of the water, with a white garment. Although these customs are now laid aside: yet we are so far from reproaching those who did use them, that we highly value their authority in the important concerns of Religion. The several parts of the ancient Church, altho' they differed in things of this Nature: yet they had communion together. 
Euseb. l. 5. c. 24.  Irenaeus in his Letter to Victor, says, That some conceived that they were to fast but one day before the Passover, some Two, some Forty, nevertheless they had Peace. Those Churches which dissented in such matters, 
Sozom.  use to send the Sacrament one to another, as a token of their agreement in the Faith. They thought it a vain thing to be divorced, upon the account of some different customs, when there was a harmony betwixt them in the great concerns of Religion. Firmilianus asserts, 
Epist. ad Cypr.  That the same Rites were not at Rome, and Jerusalem: and the like differences were in other places: yet the Unity and Peace of the Catholic Church was not broken. S. Austin takes notice, 
Ep. ad Casulan, 86.  That in the garment of the King's Daughter, there is variety of work, to import, that there may be divers Rites in the Church, and yet all reconcileable with the Unity of the Faith.  
5. Tho' this variety is very excusable in different Churches, yet it is highly expedient and desirable, that in the same Church there should be the same external mode of Religion, Edification is the great design which ought to be aimed at in an Ecclesiastical Community. There is nothing which is more opposite to this end, than discord and contention; and nothing will sooner kindle and blow up the fire of contention, than differences of this nature. Tho' Men at distance do bear one with another in such variations, yet when they are near, and in frequent Communion, under the same constitution, they are apt to take great distaste. We like well the different fashions of another Country, and treat Strangers which are in them with significations of a due respect: yet if any of our own Community affect such an exotic Garb, they are usually the object of vulgar scorn and derision. The different dress of one, is a reproach to another, and charges him with folly and weakness, as tho' he was not able to discern what is convenient; and under such an imputation Men are commonly very uneasy, and break out into an exchange of the greatest unkindness. The animosity occasioned by a variation in Religious Rites, is usually more violent than that which ariseth from a diversity in Civil. The pretence of a Sacred Institution communicates an edge to the Spirits of those who are concerned for them. They are easily induced to believe, That they are engaged in the quarrel of the Deity, and that their zeal for them will render the Divine Power propitious to them. This consideration bushes them forward, and makes them as fierce as the Poet represents the Combites to be against the Tentyrites.  
An old grudge to immortal hatred turned, 
Juv. Sat. 15.   
Betwixt the Tentyrites and Combites burned,  
A wound in those adjacent towns past cure,  
Because that neither people could endure  
Their neighbour's Deities, or would have more  
Held to be Gods, than they themselves adore.  
Such heats are frequently attended with very direful consequences. 
Rev. 8.5.  They produce strong Convulsion-fits in the Community. Thundrings, Lightnings, and an Earthquake are represented as proceeding from the Fire of the Altar. The Fire which consumed the Senate-House in Constantinople began in the Church. 
Socr. p. 727.  Nothing can be safe, when Men are inflamed with a zeal for their own private Sentiments. They think every one is under an obligation to submit to them. The want of power is the only thing which gives a temper to their deportment. So soon as they are numerous and prevalent enough, nothing will satisfy but a complete Conquest, all must stoop to their persuasions. They account it an evidence of weakness, if they cannot; and of irreligion, if they will not settle that which they conceive to be best. And they believe they are not secure in the enjoyment of their power, except they suppress others, and bend them into a compliance with them.  
6. If Contests arise in the same Church about external modes, a ready way to compose them, is to appeal to Primitive Order, and give the preference to those who come nearest to it. If we view it as it lies in the Holy Scriptures, and those undoubted Records which are next in Antiquity, we shall find it to be, not pompous and theatrical, but grave and comely; not calculated for the gratification of the Sensitive but Intellectual part, not apt to divert the Intention from the import of Worship: and yet sufficient to secure it against the assaults of Rudeness and Contempt. The Ministerial part was appropriated to Three Orders of Men, Apostles, Elders and Deacons, persons sound in Doctrine, Sober and unspotted in their Conversation. Presbyters were ordained in every Church and City. The solemn time for Sacred Conventions was the first of the week.  
In the Assemblies, The Men were uncovered the Women veiled. The Minister began with Prayer. This he directed to God with the most important expressions of Devotion, without the help of such a Prompter as the Ethnic Priests use to have, lest they might forget the names of any of their Gods which were very numerous. After this, were read the Writings of the Apostles and Prophets. And because some things are hard to be understood, and those which are easy, ought not only to be entertained in the Head, but the Heart: in the next place followed Preaching, with the most pathetical Exhortations to Practice. When the Sermon was finished, all did rise from their seat, and join in Prayer. After this, succeeded the celebration of the Holy Communion, in which the Precedent poured forth Thanksgiving and Supplication with all his might, the People expressing their concurrence, by saying, Amen. All was concluded with a contribution for the relief of the Poor.  
Besides these circumstances, There were some Symbolical Rites in use, namely, The Love-Feasts, the Holy Kiss. As the laying of these aside in some time, doth plainly express, That the Church did not believe, they were grounded upon a perpetual institution, but taken up upon Prudential Considerations, in a Conformity to the general rules of Scripture: So the Practice of them in the purest Age, when Christian Simplicity was in its greatest vigour, doth manifestly teach us, That we have no just grounds to condemn our own Church, because she retains some Rites, not burdensome in their number, and as innocent in their meaning as They were.  
7. If by reason of paucity of records, or any obscurity in those which are extant, it cannot be agreed what was the Primitive Order: The ready way to Peace, before Authority has made any determination, is, for the several Members of the Church to make prudent Condescensions one to another, so as none may be nourished in their error, nor any have any just reason of offence administered to them. This was the condition of the Romans, when S. Paul did address his Epistle to them. Their contests were violent, Authority had not yet interposed. The Counsel of the Apostle has an entire aspect upon this purpose. Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him who eateth not, judge him who eateth. One man esteemeth one day above another, another man esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. Matters were not then ripe enough in that Church for a decision. The converted Jews had not a full insight into the liberty which Christ purchased for them. Therefore S. Paul doth not determine the case on either side, but adviseth every member to a prudent demeanour, and To follow the things which make for peace, and things with which one may edisie another.  
The Apostle suspending the exercise of his authority in these circumstances, cannot be brought into an argument against all determinations about things which are adiaphorous, for he in other Churches did decide this matter, as appears by his Epistles to the Galatians and Colossians. How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage, ye observe days, months, times and years, Gal. 4.9, 10. Let no man therefore judge ye in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the New Moon, or Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ, Col. 2.16, 17. Certainly, if the Apostle had believed, That all Churches are to enjoy a freedom, equal to that in which he left the Romans, he would not have been so positive as he is with these eminent Churches.  
8. If Condescensions cannot be procured, and circumstances become such, That Rulers believe it prudential to make a determination, both weak and strong, are bound to acquiesce in the decision. Such a determination is within the Sphere of humane authority. God has commanded all that is Good, and interdicted all Evil. The only things which are left to be the immediate object of Sublunary Power, are those which are neither. They may become useful or not useful, as circumstances happen, but in their own nature they are neither good or evil. If any apply themselves to the doing of them, for the sake of some intrinsic bonity, which they fancy to be in them, and others stand at a distance from them, upon the account of some imaginary obliquity, and by this means the Tranquillity of the Community is endangered, Rulers are undoubtedly concerned to keep the Peace, and prevent those mischiefs, which they cannot but have a prospect of, if such different practices continue. And this they cannot do without making a determination. If things be let alone, and every one enjoys a freedom to do that which seems best to him, the prevailing party will at last carry all, and force others to be vassals to their pleasure.  
Certainly, If God has invested Governors with a right to preserve the Peace of the Community, he does by the same grant, entitle them to the use of such means as have the most direct aspect upon this purpose; and nothing looks fuller this way, than a prudent determination. What can be more expedient to prevent the spreading of Fire, than to remove the fuel which foments it. And if those who are over us, have a power to make a decision, it must necessarily be a duty in us to submit to it. Otherwise their Authority will be in vain, and of no signification.  
What is objected against the Legality of such a determination, (That it accuseth the Scripture of imperfection, takes away our Christian Liberty, necessitates us to violate the Law concerning scandal) will be found to be of no moment, if duly considered.  
1. The perfection of the Written Word, is to be estimated by its sufficiency to accomplish those ends for which it was given. The end of the Penning of it, is to acquaint us in particular rules, with all the essential parts of Worship, and whatsoever is of peremptory necessity, in relation to our Eternal Beatitude in a Future State. As for the modes of Religious Veneration nothing more is intended for our direction than General Precepts, from which we may, by the aid of that Reason, with which God has endued us, collect what is expedient in particular cases. And when that Wisdom which presides over the Community, makes an inference from the General Rule, and tenders it to our observation, the dishonour of imperfection is not reflected upon the Bible; because nothing is done, but that which is agreeable to its intention. Of this, We have a manifest demonstration in the Old Testament. When the Law was so punctual as to name the very Pins belonging to the Tabernacle, the Liberty which we contend for was allowed. There were many constitutions in the Synagogues, which had nothing to countenance them from the Scripture, but General Commands.  
2. The determination of Authority is no prejudice to Christian Liberty. 
1 Ep. 2.14, 16.  S. Peter doth advise us to a submission to Governors, as free, which assures us, That freedom is consistent with a subjection to their determinations. Christian Liberty consists in a Manumission from that which our blessed Lord has abolished. That which he did annul was the Typical Law. It being designed, as a signification, That He was to come into the World, and transact the desired Work of Atonement and Reconciliation, when this great affair was accomplished, the shadows became useless, and none were obliged to believe that they were tied up unto them any longer, by a Divine Appointment. This is that which the Apostle has his eye upon, when he exhorts the Galatians, To stand fast in the liberty, 
Gal. 5. ●.  with which Jesus Christ had made them free. There were some amongst them, which did attempt to influence them, with this persuasion, That the Typical Precepts were still in force, and none could be justified without a compliance with them. Governors' now may determine some particular modes relating to Divine Worship, and yet deprive us of none of this Liberty, provided that they impress no such signification upon them, That the Messiah is yet to come; and that they impose them, without any necessity of believing, That they are of Divine Institution. And that the number of them be so small, as not to make them burdensome to us, and prejudicial to Religion. External Rites may be so multiplied, that altho' singly considered, They are innocuous, yet conjunctively, They may be hurtful, in darkening the spirituality of Divine Worship, and diverting the mind from the true import of it. A multitude of leaves is a frequent impediment to the maturation of fruits.  
Christ did put a period not only to the Ceremonial, but the Judicial Law; and by consequence, our freedom from the obligation of it, is a branch of Christian Liberty: and yet none will presume to assert, That this Liberty is lost, when Christians in every Country where they inhabit, submit to the judicial appointments of their Lawful Prince.  
3. The determination we speak of, puts no necessity upon us to violate the Law concerning scandal. The true meaning of that Law is, That we must comply with the infirmity of our weak Brother in adiaphorous matters, so long as we are left to our own freedom. But in case we come to be limited in the exercise of our freedom by the Authority which presides over us, That obligation in these circumstances is superseded. It is a greater duty to conform to Authority in lawful Things, than to comport with the weakness of these who are in a private capacity; and when two obligations meet, and both cannot be satisfied, the lesser always gives place and yields to the greater.  
III. Now I proceed to the Third Particular, The End we are to propose to ourselves in the acts of Religious Worship.  
To render our performances acceptable, Two Things are of peremptory necessity. The Act must be good, which we are engaged in: and our Intentions right in the doing of it. As to the present case, namely, The Worship of God, none doubt of the goodness of the Act. The most compendious way to discover how we are to direct our Intention in the performance of it, is to consider, what it has a a tendency to. The finis operis will lead us to the finis operantis.  
He who duly ponders the nature of it, will discover that it has a tendency to these Three Things: The Glory of God, The Salvation of the Soul, The Preservation of the Community.  
The Glory of God. This is Twofold, either Internal or External. Internal consists in the resplendent and peerless perfection of his Nature, and this can admit of no increase. It is boundless and infinite already.  
External imports a similitude to, and a declaration of this intrinsic excellency: and to this an addition may be made several ways, as in our Thoughts, Words, and Works.  
We do this in our Thoughts, When we entertain honourable apprehensions of the Divine Majesty, and form Ideas agreeable to the glorious Attributes he is invested with.  
In our Words, When we make such articulate sounds, as are appropriated to the signification of a sincere Confession and humble acknowledgement of his Superlative Perfection. The Psalmist calls the Tongue his Glory, because it is an Instrument adapted to this purpose: 
Ps. 10.31. Ps. 110.3. Ps. 148.13.  and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Glory, the Greek Interpreters expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Confession.  
The Works whereby he is glorified, are either his own or ours. The Heavens declare his Glory. All the productions of his hands, set forth his Power, Wisdom and Goodness. The Ark, with a Propitiatory, a lively Emblem of reconciling Mercy, is styled the Glory. His blessed Son, in whom shines forth the whole constellation of divine perfections, The Brightness of his Glory.  
We glorify him in our Works, When we are engaged in such as are Holy and Good. Their similitude to the Divine Will and Nature, may without any incongruity be called External Glory. They set forth what he is, and what he is most pleased and delighted with. In the number of such actions we cannot deny a place to Religious Worship, it being an humble acknowledgement of those boundless perfections which reside in him. Praise is an ingredient diffused through all the parts of Worship. In Prayer, Receiving the Sacraments; Reading, Hearing his Holy Word, we set forth his most worthy Praise: and Whoso offereth praise, glorifieth God, Ps. 50.23.  
It likewise has a propitious aspect upon The eternal Salvation of the Soul. The enjoyment of this felicity is to be expected only in Heaven, and God has appointed, That none shall enter into that blessed place, but those who Worship him in this present state. The way into the Holy of Holiest, by his unchangeable appointment lies through the Temple, where all the parts of Religious Worship are to be performed. The gate which opens into the Celestial Mansions, is not only straight, but so low that none can enter into it, but those who stoop, and are engaged here in humble and submissive agnitions of the Divine Excellency. The grand work in Heaven being to perform the most signal acts of Adoration. He that is not in some measure inur'd to them in this World, is destitute of an aptitude and fitness for that blessed employment. It would be as great a surprisal to any who are totally strangers here to the Hallelujahs and Praises, which are due to the most high God, to be placed in a moment in the midst of the Heavenly Choir, as it was to the Syrian host to be unawares in the midst of Samaria. Heaven instead of being a place of rest, would be a real disquiet to such unqualified persons.  
Lastly, Divine Worship has a tendency to promote The Preservation of the Community. It excellently disposeth Princes to govern. Their honorary addresses to him, who is higher than the highest, influence them with a due temper of mind towards their Subjects. They cannot but desire to comport with the pleasure of him, whom they in sincerity adore, and they must necessarily know, That it is his pleasure that they should imitate him, in the acts of his Clemency and Goodness. And such acts are the Cement, which unites the Hearts of the Prince and People together, and secures the most lasting conjunction to all the parts of the Community.  
It likewise disposeth Subjects to obey. They who in the integrity of their hearts, Worship the Supreme Being, can do no less than pay their acknowledgements to his Vicegerent. Infinite Sovereignty being the object of their Veneration; wheresoever they meet with the Type and resemblance of it, they cannot pass by it without an expression of their due regards for the prototypes sake.  
We may add to all this, That Worship rightly performed, draws a perpetuating blessing upon the Community. Such Princes as have been most careful to advance the due celebration of it, have been attended in their Government with signal Felicities. David who made it his first and last work to settle Religion, did thereby settle his Kingdom. His Subjects were united, his enemies dissipated, his friends increased. But Solomon who divided Divine Worship betwixt Jehova and other Gods, had his Kingdom divided: Then parts were given to his Servant, and but Two to his Son.  
These three particulars, The Glory of God, The Salvation of the Soul, The Preservation of the Community, Religious Worship having a tendency to promote, it must be our duty, when we are engaged in it, so to direct our intentions, as to cast our eye upon them. But that which challengeth the first place in our thoughts, is, The Glory of God. The reason of this order will be very conspicuous, if we consider, 1. The Obligations which we lie under to the Supreme Being. His favours are so constant and superlative, that they admit of no delay, but require in the first place, in every address to him, something to be returned in point of gratitude. It is an undervaluing of the kindness we every moment receive to prefer any other duty before it. Now by reason God is infinite in Perfection, and by consequence uncapable of receiving any thing from us, but a decent and becoming acknowledgement, and setting forth of his intrinsic Glory; this must necessarily take the upper hand of all other ends in our Intentions.  
2. The glorifying God is the first of those duties which are morally Good. It is the Form which constitutes and makes them to be what they are. All Good whatsoever, is either such, as God Wills, because it is so: or else so, because God Wills it. The Essence of the first lies in a similitude to the immutable perfection of the Divine Nature: of the Second, to the sacred determinations of his Blessed Will. This similitude in the Creature to God, is that which we mean by his External Glory. The whole Creation contributes to this purpose, so long as it retains such a composure, as lively represents his Goodness, Wisdom and Power. When any part degenerates into a frame, dislike to the Idea in the Supreme Being according to which it was made, than his Glory is eclipsed.  
3. The glorifying God, is the primary duty which Christian Religion devolves upon us. Whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God, 1 Cor. 10.31. Christ the Institutor of our holy Profession, was ushered into the World by the Heavenly Host with this Hymn, Glory be to God in the highest: when he was about to leave it, He prayed in these words, Father, glorify thy Name. The design of his whole Life was to annihilate all these imaginary excellencies, which impede the shining of the Divine Glory. The People which he has redeemed, 
1 Pet. 2.9.  are said to be A chosen generation; That they may show forth the Praises of him who hath called them out of darkness into his marvellous light. His Church is represented with the Moon under her feet, to signify her disgust of all selfish interposals which eclipse the Glory of the Sun of Righteousness.  
He hath made all things for himself, 
Prov. 16.4.  that is, with a purpose and design to set forth his intrinsic Glory. His Glory primarily consists in his peerless and transcendent Goodness. He has made his Creatures, as so many vessels to entertain the overflowings of it. The earth is full of the goodness of the Lord. 
Psal. 33.5.  The brightness and splendour of it is visible in all the productions of his hand. Tho' the Glory of his Wisdom, Power and Justice is likewise conspicuous; yet because his Goodness is the leading Attribute, and sets all these awork, his Wisdom to contrive the diversity of Creatures, his Power to fetch them out of the Abyss of nothing, his Justice to correct irregularities and preserve a due temper in the Universe; the Glory of all these in effect is nothing but the Glory of his Goodness. Indeed in Men it is esteemed a character of Vanity to mind their own glory, it having no real foundation to support it: if the Supreme Being withdraw himself, all sublunary excellency is in a dependence, and obnoxious to disappointment. But in God it is otherwise. His Goodness being boundless, and his excellency unchangeable, he cannot but take an infinite delight in it. And if it be no blemish to delight in the Original, it can be none to be pleased with the Copy, and to require it as a duty from us, to set forth his Glory in our Conversation; especially considering there is nothing more agreeable to the end of our Creation, and perfective of Intellectual Nature, than to be thus employed. 
Hieroc. p. 25  When he commands this from us, he enjoins us to be like unto himself, to imitate his Goodness, to lead a virtuous life, to abstain from all things which bear an opposition to his Nature and Will. And What can be more beneficial? This lays a sure foundation for our inward Peace, it derives upon us many external Benedictions, there is nothing more honourable than to be like unto God, and engaged in a Conversation, in which the resemblance of his Holiness is visible.  
If the Glory of God has all these advantages to commend it, we have enough to justify the order of our Thoughts, and induce us to believe, That it ought to have the chief room in them, in all our addresses to Heaven. When This has taken its place according to the dignity of its Nature, it is no infringement of any precept, to have an eye upon the other subordinate ends, in particular, upon eternal life. God has for this purpose exposed it to public view. He has brought Immortality to Light by the Gospel, and styled it, The prize of the high calling, 
Phil. 3.  in allusion to a custom at the Olympic Games, where the Prize was hung over the Goal, as an invitation to the Racers, to exert the utmost of their vigour. It can be no transgression in us to have an eye upon that, which God has set forth, that it may be looked upon. This practice is no prejudice to his Glory, which is so blended with our eternal interest, That he who aims at the one, must necessarily hit the other. If we may eat and drink with a design to preserve our Temporal Life, and yet not violate that injunction, Whether ye eat or drink, do all to the Glory of God; without controversy we may Worship with a purpose to gain Eternal Life, without contracting the guilt of an infringement. There is no fear of falling under the imputation of a mercenary Spirit, so long as we eye Salvation as an effect not of humane Merit, but divine Bounty: not as the Sovereign End, but that which doth minister and is subservient to The Glory of God.   

SECT. iv Concerning Assistance relating to Worship.  
OUR First Parent, by his fall from the Tree of Knowledge, did not only hurt himself, but his posterity. All, descended from him, are under an Hereditary distemper. How frequent is it for children to express an inclination to those impieties, which they never saw acted? If they were not under some sinful prepossessions, no reasonable account can be given, why a few bad Examples should be more efficacious in the impressing of Vice upon them, than the most Religious Education, of Virtue. If we look into the deportment of those who are come to a mature Age, we shall find them, generally, violating the eternal Order of the Divine Will, in giving precedency to the lesser Good, and degrading that which of right doth challenge the Priority. Nothing is more manifest, than an universal propension to such objects as are incongruous to intellectual Nature, and far below the dignity of an Immortal Spirit. This distemper is so manifest, that all sorts of men have taken notice of it. The Sacred Writers have set it forth in a very clear light. The Jews have a Tradition, That the old Serpent did infuse poison into Eve, whereby the nature of her offspring is vitiated: and That Circumcision was instituted as an Antidote. Therefore when a Child is Circumcised, it is the custom, to have one stand ready with a vessel filled with dust to receive the praeputium. This figure of Original corruption they mingle with the food of the Serpent, to signify, That through his contrivance, it was brought into the World. This they account not only a disease but a sin, which makes them obnoxious to Hell: and therefore in the form used at Circumcision, it is expressed, That that Sacrament delivers them, ab inferis; which cannot be, when they are but eight days old, in case they are not from their birth prepossessed with something, which makes them liable to that condemnation.  
In Pythagoras' verses, This hereditary disorder is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in Hierocles' Comment upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
By it we are deprived of an ability to Worship and serve God in an acceptable manner, and come to labour under several defects. We want light to direct us how to Worship him. Strength to perform, what we are directed to. Merit to procure acceptance of what we perform. Help is provided for us under all these necessities. We have the holy Scripture to give us light. The Holy Spirit to communicate strength. The blessed Merits of our Saviviour to procure acceptance. I will treat of these in their order.  
I. We have the Holy Scripture to direct us. This is a perfect Digest of the mind of Heaven concerning all things necessary to Salvation. We have in it not only the true measures of Faith, without which none can please God; but the exact rules of Holiness, without which none can see him. In order to the understanding the ground of our dependence upon this infallible Directory, the following Propositions are to be considered.  
1. The Worshipping of God is of peremptory necessity in order to Salvation. None can be admitted to a fruition of the beatifical Vision, but those, who have paid their due acknowledgements to him in this life.  
2. Moses and the Prophets, our blessed Lord and his Apostles did by Oral Tradition reveal all things necessary to Salvation. The design of their Sermons was nothing but a disclosure of the whole Counsel of God about this grand concernment.  
3. What they spoke, was evidenced to be the real mind of God, by inward characters of Divinity, and external miraculous operations. As the Supreme Being has set his Arms upon his Works, whereby it may be known, who is the Maker of them: So he has impressed his Signatures upon his Word. There are some particulars in it, which are evident demonstrations, That a Divine Hand is concerned in the composure of it.  
In the Prophetical part we have manifest indications of Divinity. It is peculiar to God, to foretell things to come. This in the most exact manner is frequently done. Josiah and Cyrus are by name expressed many years before they appeared in the World. Alexander's conquest, with his miraculous expedition is described by Daniel with as much clearness, as if he had been a Spectator of his Military Achievements. The time, place, and manner of the Birth of our blessed Lord is expressly foretold many Centuries, before it came to pass.  
In the Preceptive part, Laws occur concerning the inward motions of the Soul, with severe penalties to be inflicted upon transgressors, which can be framed by none but God himself. If by Men, they must either be Wise and Good, or Foolish and Bad. Not the first, because it is not consistent with the methods of a Wise Legislator to make a Law, and fortify it with a minatory Sanction about things, of which he is no competent Judge: Nor of a good Man, to ascribe a Divine Original to that, which, he knows, has no other beginning, than what it received from his own invention. Not the second, Because there is so much superlative Wisdom and Goodness resplendent in them, as will not suffer us to suspect, That they were the contrivance of ill Men, or such as were defective in point of Understanding.  
In the Dogmatical part, The desire of all Nations, together with the redemption of Mankind, by him, from that burden, under which the whole Creation groaned, is fully discovered. Tho' the greatest Wits spent themselves in their inquiries about it; yet they were as ignorant of the true Fountain of this Blessing, as of the Head of Nilus. They speak indeed, (in order to the atoning of the Supreme Being) of the Sacrifices of Plants, Beasts and Men: but the Sacrifice of him, who is both God and Man, never entered into their thoughts. After their best endeavours, without that success, which they hoped for, a discovery was made by the Prophets and Apostles. The wisest of Men did embrace it, and made it their choice rather to lose their lives, than to renounce the belief of it. It is natural for us to conceive That to be True, which such persons entertain with so resolved an assent: and that Truth to be disclosed by Divine Wisdom, which all humane Wisdom (tho' engaged in a diligent inquisition after it) could make no discovery of. This great Blessing, which God had prepared for them which love him, no eye had seen, nor ear heard, neither had it entered into the heart of any man to conceive, till a Revelation from Heaven was vouchsafed.  
In the Promissory part, We have a clear account of the Future State of Men. All the Heathens were very inquisitive about it. Every one of them desired life, and that their life might be happy, and this happy life Eternal. This put an edge upon them in their search: and yet they did not arrive at any true satisfaction. Socrates, who was not inferior in Wisdom to the best of them, was very dark in his apprehensions, as appears by his dying words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Just. Mar. Or. Coh. ad Graecos. p. 33.  etc. But now is the hour of going away, mine to die, yours to live; which of us shall be most happy, is unknown to all except God himself. This, which natural reason is so much puzzled about, The Doctrine of Christ has made a full disclosure of. Life and Immortality are brought to light by the Gospel, and represented in such clear colours, that many upon the discovery became impatient of a confinement in this sublunary State, and earnestly covet their Martyrdom, that they might be translated into an enjoyment of it. It is very agreeable to us to conceive, That where Reason did end in its inquiries about this matter, Revelation began: and that the Wisdom of Heaven is concerned in this acceptable disclosure. The lineaments of it, are as conspicuous in it, as the cotrivance of Joab in the speech of the Woman of Tekoa.  
As innate characters, so external miraculous operations evidence the reality of the Word of God. By reason of the slowness of Men to entertain it, it was the Divine Pleasure to quicken their belief by Miracles.  
Under the Old Testament, supernatural works were done by Moses and the Prophets: Under the New, by Christ and the Apostles. After their Preaching (in order to the confirmation of it) They did such things, as exceeded all the productions of Nature. There was no collusion in them. They did not vanish, so soon as they were done: but by their permanence did demonstrate their reality. They were not done in corners but openly, in the presence of the most critical Spectators. They were produced in an instant, at the speaking of a word. They were so evidently great, That sublimated malice had not confidence to attribute them to any thing less, than to him who has the regency in the Infernal Kingdom: Which calumny was sufficiently refuted by the reply of our Saviour; That no Man can with reason apprehend, that the Prince of Darkness would be accessary to the production of such works, as tend to the confirmation of a Doctrine calculated for the ruin of his Kingdom. These Miracles were the Credential Letters, whereby our blessed Lord did evidence, that both He and his Doctrine came from God. No Man can produce them without the influence of an extraordinary power: and it is not congruous to the Veracity and Goodness of the Supreme Being, to lend such a power to any person in order to the ratification of an error.  
It is vain to pretend, That Miracles can be of no use in the present case, because of the difficulty in discerning which are True, and which are False. It may be as well said, That the Broad Seal is no certain evidence of the Royal Authority, because there is a possibility, it may be counterfeited. A due consideration of all circumstances will quickly deliver us from the fear of being imposed upon. A diligent circumspection doth often discover that to be Brass, which is commonly received for current Coin. If Miracles were not discernible from lying Wonders, our Saviour would not so familiarly appeal unto them, as he doth, for the justification of his Doctrine. Tho' there may be some difficulty, yet not always: a Miracle is a work that exceeds the bounds of Nature. These bounds in many cases are not concealed, but obvious to every capacity. It is clear, That a finite Being is so limited, as not to be able by its own power to raise to life, one that has been four days dead, to give sight to one who is born blind, to cure Chronical diseases in a moment, at the speaking of a word. Where the bounds of Nature are clear, as they are in these instances, there can be no difficulty in discerning, when they are exceeded, and by consequence, when a true Miracle is produced.  
4. The Word of God with its Internal Characters, together with a perfect relation of the miraculous External effects whereby it was evidenced, are faithfully committed to Writing. Supernal direction was given not only about the matter, but the manner. S. Paul styles the letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and says that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of Divine Inspiration. The Men, employed about this Work, were perfectly acquainted with all circumstances. Their information was so exact, That had they been lest to the conduct of their own private Spirits, they could not have been mistaken through ignorance in setting down matters of fact. Neither have they made any misrepresentation out of design. If Moses had been instigated by private regards to compose the Pentateuch, he would not have recorded the infamy of his own family. If any fraud had been used in the Penning the New Testament, no doubt many enemies as well as friends, who were Spectators of the Miracles, and Auditors of the Doctrine, living to see the relation in Writing; would have discovered it. Yet we never read of any attempt of this nature: but on the contrary, Porphyry, Celsus and Julian, in their cavils against Christian Religion, suppose the matter of fact, That such Doctrine was Preached, and such Miracles done.  
5. This Writing in the Old Testament is digested into four and twenty Books: In the New into twenty seven, five Historical, one and twenty Epistolical, one Prophetical. For this number we have the most clear Tradition. Ezra having consigned the Canon of the Old Testament, S. John of the New, both of them persons inspired by the Spirit of God, and of great Authority amongst Men; The Tradition came in so full a stream from their hands, that in every age it has born down all the opposition which has been made against it. This Tradition we have just reason to embrace, altho' we reject others: because it adds nothing to the doctrine of the Bible, as the Pipe adds nothing to the Water, which is conveyed by it. It is virtually contained in the Scripture. It owes much of its universality to the intrinsic excellency of the Sacred Oracles, which upon the first consulting, commend themselves to the good opinion of every intelligent Reader. It is of greater latitude, than any other Tradition, which is not formally contained in the Scripture. As for others, the Romanists are able to produce only the testimony of their party: but for this we have not only the Testimony of all, which adhere to the Community of Rome, but that vast body of Christians, which appertain to the Greek, Protestant, and all the Oriental Churches. It must be acknowledged, That there was for a time some hesitancy in some persons, about some part of the New Testament. The Christians concerned being dispersed, and kept by persecution from holding correspondencies one with another, could not possibly have an information equally early about those Books which were last written. Upon this account, when they first arrived at their hands, they made some demur, as the Apostles did at Christ, when they believed him to be a Phantasin: but upon a deliberate view, consulting with those who had a more perfect intelligence, they corrected the error of their apprehension: Insomuch, That there is no instance, which can be produced of any Church, or Council, which in any Decree, or Canon has disallowed their Authority.  
6. These Books of the Old and New Testament, have been transmitted to us without corruption. We have the attestation of all sorts of men in every age for their passage through it. Councils have made them the foundation of their Theological divisions. The Father's appeal to them in their Concertations, as the most equal Arbitrators. Divines before their Homilies prefix a Text taken out of them. The Heretics in every age, have drawn from them, whatsoever they conceive may favour their Sentiments. porphyry's cavils at the Old Testament, Hierocles comparing the Life of Christ in the New, with the Life of Apollonius, Julian's spending his Winter-nights in the refutation of it, the Jews calling of it a volume of iniquity, argue, That they were extant, and passed by them in those ages in which they lived. Shimei's cursing, and throwing stones at David at Bahurim make it evident, that he went that way.  
As these Books of the Old and New Testament have passed through every age down to us: So in their passage they have escaped depravation. What is spoken concerning the Essential Word, may be applied to the Written. Thou wilt not suffer thy holy one to see corruption.  
If the Old Testament in any point material to Religion has been depraved, it must be by the common fate, which all humane Writings are exposed unto: or else out of design by the Jews, or by some unadvised neglect in those who copied it out.  
Not the first way. It is notorious, what a signal discrimination Divine Providence has made betwixt the Scripture, and other Writings in point of conservation. When the book of the Law was given forth, every Master of a family was obliged to have a Copy of it in his house. The Prince was bound (as is conceived) to Write it out with his own hand. Every Sabbath it was read in the Synagogues in the audience of the people. Peculiar Persons were appointed to prevent any mutation in Words or Letters. The Massorites who began in Ezra's time, did reckon up all the Verses, in every Verse the Words, in every Word the Letters, and have punctually expressed, how many times every Word is used, and which is the middle Verse, Word and Letter in every Book. It does not appear, That the like care has been used by Divine Providence for the securing any other Book from depravation. The event has been answerable to the care. The Writings of the Penmen of the Scripture which they composed by the aid and conduct of their own Spirits, have been corrupted, and at last are utterly perished, as Solomon's natural History. But what they composed by the help of the Divine Spirit, is preserved in its purity. In all Copies of the best account there is a miraculous harmony, in all material points. The burning of the Book of the Law by Antiochus is very reconcileable with the vigilancy of Providence which has been asserted. Tho' he was permitted to destroy some Copies: yet his rage was not suffered to reach to all. After this, The Israelites in Maspha, are said to lay open the book of the Law, 1 Macc. 3.47. This fire made the Jews more warm in the defence of the Scripture against injurious attempts. It is observed, That from this time they began to be more Critical about the Text. That which was designed for the ruin of it, was by the propitious influence of Heaven, improved into a security. The burning the sacred Oracles, like the burning the sibyl's books, did make the Copies, which remained, have the greater value set upon them. From that time the Jews divided the Prophets into Sections, 
Elia. Tisbi. vo. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and began to read them in their Synagogues.  
As the Books of the Old Testament have not been corrupted by that fate, which other Writings are exposed unto: So neither designedly by the Jews. If they had been guilty in this respect, it must be either before or after the coming of the Messiah. If before, this crime would not have been concealed in the New Testament: The Apostle, who has noted That the Oracles of God are committed to them, would undoubtedly have recorded their unfaithfulness in the discharge of their trust, in case any such thing had been. If it be said, That the Apostles have sufficiently discovered their thoughts touching this matter, in that they have waved the Hebrew Text in their citations out of the Old Testament, and made use of the Greek Version: I answer, That the Hebrew Text is never waved; if the words be not directly followed, yet the sense, which is the Soul of the Text, always is. If the Shell be wanting, yet we have the Kernel. The Penmen of the New Testament represent the sense of the Old, in such words, as seem meet to the Spirit of God. Those words being of great Authority, were put into the Margin of the Greek Version, as a good illustration of it, 
Disser. in Appen. ad Crit. Sacr. Capelli, p. 489.  and in process of time were inserted by the Transcribers into the Text itself. Several insertions of this nature are visible to those, who diligently peruse that Version.  
If the corruption pretended was made after the Age in which our blessed Lord, and the Apostles lived, it is very strange, That the Fathers should take no notice of it. They speak of the depravation of the Greek Text, but never of the Hebrew. It is unaccountable why the Corrupters should suffer those Texts to continue in the Bible unaltered, which are most pertinent for the refutation of their error. We desire no greater advantage against the Jews in our concertations with them, than what the Bible, as it is now pointed, will give unto us. None are able to nominate the Text, where this fraud has been committed. If any such deceit has been used, no doubt, but those Jews which were converted to the Christian Faith, would have disclosed it.  
As the Books of the Old Testament have not been corrupted out of design: So neither by any neglect of those, which copied them out. He who considers their accuracy about Transcribing the Law, will not be inclinable to charge them with this crime. They were careful that the Ink, which they used, might have no corrosive ingredients in it. The Parchment, which they wrote upon, was made of the skin of a clean beast, and prepared after the most exquisite manner. The Columns were measured, and a computation made, how many lines were to be drawn in every Column. These lines were accurately drawn out, and the distance betwixt every word and letter limited. Tho' many of them did remember the Law by heart; yet they did not write a word, till they looked upon it in the Authentic Copy. All this, being duly pondered, doth evidence, That the Books of the Old Testament are not depraved.  
Neither are the Books of the New. In order to the preventing corruption, Divine Providence has signally appeared in waving the methods of Art, which requires, That those things which are homogeneous be put together, and in dispersing the fundamental points throughout the whole Volume. By this disposition, all attempts to deprave it are easily detected. If we have several pieces of money, it is not difficult to know, by comparing of them together, whether any of them have been clipped. If the Truth should be razed out in one place, yet it will be preserved in another. It is the pleasure of the Divine Wisdom to divide the important Articles of our belief, as Jacob did his flock, that in case Esau smite the one, the other might escape.  
The divine care is equally conspicuous in ordering, That Versions should be made into several Languages, and communicated to the World. Every Nation is in a capacity to hear the Spirit of God speaking in their own tongue. All these people living at a great distance one from another, could never combine together to corrupt this sacred Canon. If any such attempt had been in any one Nation, the Copies preserved in others, would presently have discovered the fraud.  
The Premises being seriously considered, it will be evident, That it is our duty to entertain the Bible, both Old and New Testament, as the Word of God, and depend upon it for our primary conduct in Divine Worship. Tradition doth put it into our hand as a complete Directory in the concerns of Religion. The Testimony of the Church doth prepare, and quicken our minds to look into it, and begets a Moral certainty that it is the Word of God. There is no reason to question that which has been asserted with so much unanimity in all Ages. We may as well doubt of that, which we perceive with our senses, as that which has been the sense of the best and wisest of Men at all times. When we are thus prepared, and seriously consult the matter of the sacred Oracles, ponder the internal characters of Divinity, and the external Seals of the Verity of them, we find our Moral Certainty presently translated into a Divine Faith. When we receive a letter from a friend, we believe it comes from him, because it is so asserted by the bearer: but when we look upon the hand and seal, and find that both are his, we are prefently exalted to a higher degree of assurance. The inward characters are God's Hand, and the Miracles his Seal. Those who assert, We believe the things contained in the Scripture to be True, because God who is True has revealed them: and that we believe God has revealed them, because it is so affirmed by the Church in all Ages, make the foundation of Faith weaker than the superstructure. For the Revelation of God is more sure, than the Universal Tradition of Men. Those who assert, That this Proposition [The Bible is the Word of God] is capable of no other evidence, must ground their persuasion either upon the want of Power, or Will, in God, to impress such Characters upon it, as are sufficient to evidence the divine Original of it. We cannot reasonably affirm the first. For if by the impressions of reason upon a discourse, it may be known to be the composition of a Man of excellent Learning, why may not such words of Wisdom be spoken by God, as need nothing to attest their Original but their innate evidence? If God may be known by his Works, there is just cause to believe, that he may be so by his Words. He can imprint peculiar Characters upon the one, as well as upon the other. The second cannot be asserted. For when he gave forth his Word, he willed that it should be received as his. We cannot receive it as his Word, without a divine Testimony. There can be no Testimony of this nature but innate evidence. If any other revelation be asserted, how will it appear that it doth derive its original from God? If from another, the same doubt will return, and the enquiry be endless. So that if God did Will, That the Bible should be received by us under this notion as his Word, he did Will to impress upon it such evidence as is sufficient to convince every considerate person. For this reason it is compared to light, which doth not stand in need of any other thing to manifest its reality. Tho' there be many motives to communicate strength to our opinion; yet our Faith properly, is ultimately resolved into that divine and innate evidence, which has been asserted. If we compare it with those ideas of Goodness, Mercy and Justice, impressed upon our minds by a divine hand, and impartially consider their exact correspondencies, we are sensible of a powerful conviction, That the Scripture comes from God, and is designed for a sufficient directory in the great and necessary concerns of Religion.  
Indeed it's said, That altho' it may be so to Men of ready perceptions and elaborate improvements, yet it doth not follow, that it can be of the same conveniency to those who are engaged in secular affairs, and have not time to cultivate their minds with severe Study and Meditation. To which we reply, That God has so placed the necessary points of Religion in the Sacred Scripture; That not only persons of Learning, but very inferior capacities may arrive at the knowledge of them. What Philosophy uses to affirm, concerning the rational Soul, that it is wholly in the whole, and wholly in every part of the body, may be with a greater degree of Verity asserted concerning fundamental Truth, which is the Soul of the Sacred Oracles. It is disseminated through the whole body of the Scripture, and likewise it is to be found wholly in many particular parts, which are so small, that men of secular business, without any impediment to their particular vocations, may peruse them, and gain an understanding of those things which concern their Salvation. I will instance in the first Epistle of S. John. All things necessary to eternal Life are contained in it. He says, He writ it, That those who believe in the Lord Jesus, might know they have eternal Life. This they cannot know by a perusal of it, except all things requisite to the obtaining of future felicity be clearly expressed in it. Now I would willingly understand, why a Man, whose subsistence depends upon his daily labour, may not come to know the sum of what is contained in so small a volume. It consists but of five small Chapters. He may peruse them every day: if those intervals only be dedicated to this sacred purpose, which are usually spent about that which is irrelative to his secular business. By this means he may read the whole Epistle seven times every week, three hundred sixty five times every year. This frequent perusal can effect no less than a deep impression upon his memory: and if he will solicit the Supreme Being to open the Book, and lead him by his Spirit into a right perception of the importance of it, there is no doubt he may attain to the knowledge of that which is requisite to his everlasting beatitude. If a Letter from an infallible hand, in no clearer a stile than the Apostles, should be sent to one, whose livelihood depends upon his daily labour, to acquaint him with a great estate that belongs to him, and of the conditions which must be performed, before he can be admitted to an enjoyment: no doubt he would cheerfully apply himself to the doing as much as hath been expressed, and at last obtain a right notion of his duty. It is slothfulness and inconsideration, and not any defect in divine provision, that keeps men in their ignorance. If an incapacity to understand, what appertains to their future good, be contracted by an ill education, this must not be charged upon God, who has amply provided for the instruction of the meanest in his sacred Word. Experience teacheth us, how a Mechanic will dive into the mystery of his Trade, and comprehend all the intricacies of it. Tho' the mystery of godliness is much deeper in itself; yet if we consider the manner of the delivery of it to us in the sacred Scripture, it is not inferior in perspicuity to the methods of many professions.  
All this, which hath been spoken, doth not supersede the work of the Ministry, and render the direction of the Church unnecessary. Tho' the Bible, in that which has an inseparable connexion with eternal beatitude, has such a degree of Clarity, that he who is not defective in the use of those means, which lie within his sphere, may be his own Interpreter: yet (by reason there is a pronity in all to be seduced by their own fancies, blinded by the prejudices of Education, influenced into so much obstinacy, as to shut their eyes against the clearest light) The direction, explications and advice of the Church cannot be but of singular advantage, and absolutely necessary in this state of imperfection. Men are very backward to hearken to the most evident information, in case it tends to the abatement of their satisfactions in those sublunary fruitions and pleasures, which they are espoused unto. Tho' the Decalogue, given to the people by God himself, was obvious to every understanding rightly disposed, yet, for the reason specified, He was pleased to give them a Deuteronomy in which there is a repetition of the same Law, and a fuller explanation of it. Although S. Paul had acquainted the Corinthians in the clearest terms with the Gospel of Christ: yet by reason of the policy of the God of this World in blinding their minds, he was compelled to write two Epistles, to explain and impress that which before was fully made known unto them. The clearest water may be mudded by impure mixtures. The most beautiful Flowers may be obscured, and overgrown with poisonous weeds. Let things be never so manifest in themselves: yet the Church's help is highly necessary in order to the quickening the perceptive faculty, and the removal of all the impediments which may interpose, and lie in the way betwixt it and the object.  
The Members of the Church are either Secular or Ecclesiastical. The Secular have been sometimes of use in this particular. Some of them, like the Nethinims, have devoted themselves to hue, and make plain, many knotty Texts; and to draw the water of life out of the sacred Fountain.  
Ecclesiastical may be considered either alone, or as together in Synods. In their solitary capacity they resemble the Pillars in the way to the Cities of Refuge, erected on purpose to prevent those who were flying thither, from slipping into by-paths. Their direction is not only an act of Charity but Authority. The Key of Knowledge is committed to them, whereby they have a power to unlock the Mysteries of the Gospel, and open a passage into the true importance of them.  
If we consider them as congregated in Synods, so their Authority is more illustrious. As the Sun of righteousness immediately rules us in the day, that is, in all perspicuous places of Scripture: So these Luminaries are fit to govern us in the night, in all the dark and controversal passages. This we may learn from the holy Apostles, who (when the Controversy, whether God was to be Worshipped according to the Order of the Ceremonial Law did menace the Church with vexation) were gathered together with the Elders, and in a solemn Convention did determine the difference. This was no extraordinary Act, but that which they did design to commend to the imitation of the Church, as is evident by the method of their procedure. They did not appeal to any peculiar revelation, but by rational discussions, which are common to all men, prepare their way to a decision.  
There are Two Opinions of no good consistency with what has been asserted. The First is, That every man ought to be guided by the Church of Rome, in the concerns of Religion: The Second is, That every one ought to rely upon the conduct of his own Reason. Both which we will now examine.  
1. The Church of Rome is to be our Guide. If we ask the membes of it about a Guide, they presently name the Catholic Church. If we interrogate them, what they mean by the Catholic Church, they answer, That Community which submits to the Papal Power. If we object the notorious corruptions, which stain her reputation, and discourage us from putting confidence in her conduct, they reply, That her directions are not capable of error. Her rule is the Word of God. This Word is either written or unwritten: for the knowledge of this Word, which it is, and what is the Sense of it, we must depend upon her attestation. She is an unerring Judge, an authorized Guide, and therefore when she propounds her dictates, we have nothing to do, but assent. We must not chew, but, like Pills, swallow them whole, and for our encouragement to give them an easy passage, they are gilded over with the specious pretence of Infallibility.  
If it be so, That the Church of Rome is Infallible; by the Church must be meant either the Pope or a Council, or the body of the people which adhere to them, or all these together. If the Pope, how can Zepherinus' compliance with the error of Montanus, Foelix the 2d. his Arianism, Honorius' being a Monothelite, John the 23d. his denial of the resurrection and life to come, be reconciled with the presence, and influence of an unerring Spirit.  
If a Council? How comes it to pass, That one Council has contradicted another? The Council of Francford rescinded the Decrees of the second Council of Nice? Why are some General Councils approved, some disallowed, some partly approved, partly disallowed; some neither approved nor disallowed? 
Bellar. t●●. 2. c. 4. de Concil.  What is the reason of all the sinister methods which the Pope used, to obtain his designs in the Council of Trent? The divine Spirit doth not use to frequent such crooked and obliqne paths. The devices used in that Convention represent rather the wind of the Serpent than the motions of the Dove. They are thus expressed by one who was present in the Council in his Letter to Maximilian the Second.  
We daily saw hungry and needy Bishops come to Trent, 
Coun. of Trens. p. 841.  Youths for the most part given to luxury and riot, hired only to give their voice as the Pope pleased. They were both unlearned and simple, yet fit for the purpose, in regard of their impudent boldness. When these were added to the Pope's old slatterers, iniquity triumphed, it was impossible to determine of any thing, but as they pleased, who thought it to be the highest point of Religion, to maintain the Authority and luxury of the Pope. There was a grave and learned Man, who was not able to endure so great an indignity. He was presently traduced as no good Catholic, and was terrified, threatened, and persecuted, that he might approve of things against his will. In sum, Matters were brought to that pass, by the iniquity of those, that came fitted and prepared; that the Council seemed not to consist of Bishops, but of disguised Maskers, not of Men but of Images, such as Dedalus made, moved by Nerves, none of their own. They were hireling-Bishops, which, as country Bagpipes, could not speak but as breath was put into them. The Holy Ghost had nothing to do in the Assembly. All the Counsels given there, proceeded from humane policy, and tended only to maintain the Pope's immoderate and shameful domination, etc. He who considers the chief inducements to the determinations made in that Council, will not find himself under any propensity to disbelieve what has been represented. Priest's must not be allowed to marry, because having Wives and Children, their dependence would not be so much upon the Pope as the secular Prince, under whom they live. Their love to their Progeny would make them yield to any thing, never so prejudicial to the Church. Besides, This would be a temptation to them, to seek to make Benefices hereditary: and so in a short time, the Authority of the Pope would be confined within Rome.  
The Mass in the Vulgar Tongue must not be permitted, because then all would think themselves Divines. The Authority of the Prelates would be disesteemed. This resembles the policy of those, who to keep up the reputation of their Profession, Pen their instructions in a Language unknown to the common people.  
The Communion of the Chalice must not be granted, because then a gap would be opened to demand an abrogation of all positive Constitutions, by which only the Authority of the Church of Rome is preserved.  
A Determination must not pass, That the Institution of a Bishop is from Christ, for than it would follow, That the Keys were not given to Peter only, and that the Bishops were equal to the Pope, and a Council above him. The dignity of Cardinals would cease, Residence would be jure divino, and the Court of Rome come to nothing; and therefore special order was given to Laynez General of the Jesuits, to form an exact discourse to prove that Bishops are not jure divino, but Pontificio. Tho' the Pope did in a compliment so far humble himself to Heresy, as to invite Protestant Princes to the Council: yet there were such conditions made, as in particular, That nothing should be discussed, but what the Pope's Legates thought fit to propound: and so many ambiguities in the conduct that was promised them, that their journey could neither be safe, nor significant to any good purpose. To these intrigues may be added, The Oath of Fidelity to the Pope, (who was a party) imposed upon all the Members of the Convention, the continual directions by the mail from Rome, the vast number of Titulars and Pensioners sent from that Court, with many other devices, 
P. 18, 19, 20.  insomuch that a Romish Priest in his Letter to the Bishop of Ferns, says, That the Council was neither Ecumenical, nor Occidental, nor free. He who considers all this will be under no inclination to believe, That the Council of Trent was inspired with any thing besides the infallible Spirit of Worldly Policy.  
As for the People, They can make no just plea to infallibility. If the Head cannot justify his plea, much less the feet, which are guided by, and take their measures from him. If the Head and Members together are the recipients of it, (for it is not agreed, whether the Decrees of the Pope without a Council, or the Decrees of a Council without the Pope, or the Decrees of the Pope and Council without the acceptance of the whole body of the People be authentic. Some say one thing, some another. Their Language is confounded, that they may be hindered from building the aspiring tower of Infallibility.) it ought to be examined how this comes to be known. Two things are alleged, 1. There is a peremptory necessity for such a guide. 2. The Church of Rome has all the evidence, that can be reasonably desired; that she is such a one.  
1. The necessity is not apparent. It was necessary that the doctrine concerning Religion should be revealed by God, the first Proponents of it infallibly guided by the influence of the Divine Spirit: but there is no just reason, why such persons should be continued in the Church to the end of the World. The certainty of Religion may be secured without them. We have an infallible rule to steer our course by. The Books, in which it is contained, are conveyed to our hand, with all the desirable assurance, That they are not forged, but really such as they pretend to be. We have as much evidence for this, as the nature of the thing is capable of. The Tradition, whereby they are delivered to us, is so universal, That could the like be produced for those points, which are in controversy betwixt us and the Church of Rome, we should not be backward in the entertainment of them. We have far less evidence for many Writings, as Plato's, Tully's, Caesar's, which without any hesitancy we believe to be genuine. These are conveyed unto us, but by a very few hands in comparison: but the Books of the Scripture, being of general concernment, were perused by all sorts, and by this means have gained the most universal attestation. Porphyry and Julian, with other implacable enemies to the Christian Faith, did acknowledge those books to be composed by those whose names they bear.  
The Books being thus delivered, when we come to consult the doctrine contained in them, we find engraven upon it peculiar characters of Divinity agreeable to the impressions of the Deity made upon the Souls of all men, together with the broad Seal of Heaven annexed unto it, many Miracles which God never gives to any a power to do, for the confirming an error.  
In order to the gaining the true Sense and meaning of this doctrine, we have great advantage from the clearness of the stile, in all points of absolute necessity to Salvation. Truths of this importance are set in a very clear light. What is more manifest than the following particulars: There is a God; a peculiar Worship is due to him: in the Deity are Three Persons. The Second clothed himself with our Nature, that he might be in a capacity to transact the work of our Redemption. Those that would have a title to the benefits of his Redemption, must Believe, Repent, lead a holy Life. An eternal reward will be given to those that do these things, and an everlasting punishment inflicted upon those who neglect them. A day is appointed, when all must stand before the judgement seat of Jesus Christ. These particulars, with many others of alike nature. are written with the greatest perspicuity. If any complain of obscurity, it is in themselves, and not in the object. If men will divest themselves of their prejudices, dissipate those mists which are cast before them, they cannot remain long unacquainted with these Truths.  
If any controversy arise, we have visible Guides to advise with, who are devoted to the study of the Sacred Oracles, and solemnly set apart by a Divine appointment to this purpose: even as in secular concerns there is not only a Law to walk by, but Men wholly devoted to the search of the meaning of it, who are able in difficult cases to assist us. Tho' these Persons, whether alone or congregated in a Synod, are not infallible: yet when they are duly improved, sincerely Religious, free from the Bias of an irrelative interest, they give us a high degree of assurance, That their thoughts are agreeable to Truth, and just Reason, if we cannot internally assent, to keep our Faith to ourselves, and not to disturb the Peace of the Church, by an imprudent publication.  
We attribute to the Divine Spirit, speaking in the holy Scripture, supreme and infallible Conduct: To the Governors of the Church, Subordinate and Ministerial: To private Men, who are under their Government, we dare not deny the judgement of discretion. God requires of them a reasonable Service, 〈…〉 a compliance as is in brute creatures, who are entirely subject to the discretion of those who use them, and can give no account of the action they are directed to. He expects the concurrence of the Heart. He has endued us with a freedom to determine ourselves, and requires that our election be made upon such evidence; that in case our Rulers command us to do otherwise, than we apprehend to be right, we may be able to give a sober account of our dissatisfaction, an answer to every one, that asketh us a reason of the hope, which is in us, with meekness and fear. We are obliged to prove all things, try the Spirits whether they be of God. This Exhortation is not directed only to Fathers and Governors in the Church; but such as are styled young men and children, who are under their conduct.  
This liberty in point of discretion doth not lessen and impair the certainty of Religion. Those, who use it, have a rational power conferred upon them by the Supreme Being for the searching and finding out of Truth. They have visible Guides to make their application to, in order to the removing their scruples. They have the enjoyment of the public Ministry, which by Heaven is designed as the ordinary means to convey information to them, the promise of the divine Spirit, which doth accompany it, and will be assistant to them, if they do not resist it but expose themselves to its operations, a power to suspend their assent, till the matter be clear and evident. When the object is so, and the faculty duly prepared by the use of such means, as have been specified, it will be unreasonable to assert, That we may in such circumstances be imposed upon. He to whom veracity is essential, made the faculty. He form it with a design to find out Truth: He requires no other condition in any object, to qualify it for assent, but clearness. We have as much clearness in all points necessary to Salvation, as the nature of the thing will bear. So that in this case we have a security from the divine Veracity and Goodness, with which it is no reconcileable; That our faculty should be so form, as to be deceived, when the Proposition, we assent unto, is manifest and perspicuous. So that the ultimate resolution of our Faith is not made into the fallible testimony of a private Spirit, but a testimony given by an infallible attribute of the immutable nature of the Deity, which assures us not only, That what God has revealed, is true: but that those things are revealed by him in the Bible which are plain and manifest to a duly qualified mind.  
Error proceeds from the giving too hasty an assent to propositions upon such grounds as are irrelative to their Nature, as Education, Interest, etc. He who will divest himself of his prejudices, which way soever contracted, and sincerely apply himself to the use of such means as are of Divine designation, as Praying, Reading, Hearing, Meditating, consulting the living Guides, which God has set up in his Church, will certainly arrive at the perception of that, which is necessary to his Salvation. He has the highest degree of assurance, that this sublunary 〈…〉 ●●pable of. Nothing can be thought 〈…〉 an addition to it, but a new revelation; and if this was granted, as many difficulties would emerge about the meaning of it, as there are about the true importance of the old. No acquiescence in it could be obtained, but upon such considerations, as now induce us to believe the Bible, and the clear sense of it, to be the Word and mind of God. All this will evidence, That there is not a peremptory necessity for such a Guide as the Church of Rome contends for.  
2. It is not true: That the Church of Rome has all the evidence, that can be reasonably desired, that she is such a one. Three Topics are commonly made use of in this case, Scripture-promises, Universal Tradition, Motives of Credibility.  
As for the first, Let the Text be cited, where any such promise is made to the Church of Rome. S. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans is so far from insinuating any thing of this nature; that he gives them advice, which evidently imports the possibility of their fall. He acquaints them, if they boast against the branches, (as it is manifest they have done) and grow insolent, that they shall be cut off. To mention those promises, which respect the Universal Church, is wholly irrelative. The Church of Rome is so far from being the Universal, that she is but a part exceedingly degenerated. Pessimum acetum ex optimo Vino. She hath obtained the title Catholic by the same method, which Abimelech used, to make himself King, and Phocas Emperor. She attempts to murder the right Heirs, and true Sons of the Church, with the unjust imputation of Heresy; that she may enjoy the inheritance alone. Her deportment has been, as if one member of the body which has a distemper in it, should value if self upon that account, and pronounce all the other parts to have no interest in the whole, because they are not infected with it. Indeed it is said, That the Catholic Church is One and always visible, which can be applied to none, but the Church of Rome. But this may as easily be denied as affirmed. She has not been in any age, the One only Church. The Eastern Churches have had always an existence, as well as the Western: in which from the first age there has been the Baptism of Christ, the Creed of the Apostles, an uninterrupted succession of Bishops. In the Western, when abuses began to insinuate themselves, there was always a number not only of private, but public persons which gave their testimony against them, as will be manifest to any who have leisure to peruse the History of the Ages, betwixt Boniface the third, and Luther. These persons we have more reason to account the Church, which God has promised always to preserve, than those who were willing without any reluctancy to submit to the grossest innovations. Tho' they were not equal in number, yet there were enough of them to make the little flock, to which a Kingdom is promised.  
The Church of Rome, as it is now, has not been always visible. There was no such thing in the three first Centuries. Where was then the doctrine of Supremacy, Infallibility, Transubstantiation, worshipping of Images, Invocation of Saints, Praying in an unknown Language, keeping the Scripture from the People, mutilating the Sacrament, making the Apocryphal Books equal to the Bible? These are some of the Characteristical notes of the present Church, whereby she stands distinguished from others. Those Ages were utterly unacquainted with these Tenants. We dare appeal from the Church of Rome, as it is now, to the Church of Rome as it was then, and stand to her arbitration. In the following Ages, errors began more to show themselves, yet they did not grow to such a height, as to be received for the Faith of the Church. The infernal Spirit has been always busy to sow his tares: yet those Ages were not so blind, as to take them for wheat. Insomuch that we lawfully say, That there was not a man in those days, which may be properly called a Papist.  
As for the Promises, which respect the Universal Church; the utmost that can be made of them, is, That there shall always be upon the Earth a people owning the fundamentals of Religion, together with Teachers, which shall have a sufficient assistance in order to the directing and enabling them to discharge their duty. But there is no assurance given, that this aid shall be so efficacious, as to furnish them with such an universal Infallibility as the Church of Rome pretends to. Such help is promised, as is suitable to the exigencies of every Age. In the Primitive, it was necessary, That it should be so powerful, as to secure the first Proponents of our Religion from error. But in after ages this necessity did not continue. Greater skill is required to make an exact rule, than when it is made, to draw a line exactly conformable to it. The foundation of Religion being completely laid, and the rule of Faith and Worship given out by an unerring hand, such aid only is ordinarily to be expected as (if we be not wanting to ourselves, and prevent the effects of it by a voluntary neglect) will lead us into the sense of what is revealed. God has endued us with a faculty, whereby we are in a capacity to make a free choice of that which is propounded unto us. He helps us to do it by such means as are agreeable to an intellectual nature. He does always enough to enable us to make an advantageous election: and therefore error is charged in sacred Writ upon the Will, as the original of it.  
This doth not render Religion uncertain. Fallibility and certainty are not inconsistent. There may be an actual certainty, where there is no absolute infallibility. A Judge is not infallible, and yet he may be certain, that the sentence which he pronounceth, is right. A man may be sure of what he sees plainly demonstrated before him, altho' he is not out of the power, and influence of all deception. When a foundation is laid, and some build gold, silver, and precious stone upon it, others wood, hay, stubble, it is as easy for one who is not infallible to discern the difference betwixt these superstructures, as to distinguish a wall of marble form that which is made of brick. If there be no certainty without infallibility, Scepticism must be admitted, and a stop put to all proceed of Justice. No Man ought to be condemned to suffer a penalty, except it be certain, that he deserves it, and who are there, but fallible Men to give evidence, and judge of his demerits?  
If the Promises of Scripture have s●●●● sense as is contended for, how comes it to be known? It is a received principle amongst those with whom we are concerned, That they cannot be sure of the meaning of the Bible without the interpretation of an infallible Spirit; and by consequence we must be sure, that the Church is infallible, before we can be sure of the Sense of Scripture: and if so, the promise cannot be alleged as an argument to prove infallibility; for then there will be a perfect circle. The sense of the promise is justified by the infallibility of the Church, and the infallibility of the Church by the sense of the promise. From hence it is apparent, That the meaning of the promise may be known without the interpretation of an infallible Spirit: and if so, why not the sense of other places of Scripture?  
If we should enter upon an examination of the particular Texts of Scripture, which are pretended to favour the Infallibility which the Romanists contend for, they would be found no way answerable to that purpose for which they are produced. They are such as these, If he neglect to hear the Church, etc. Lo I am with you to the end of the world. He will guide you into all truth. He that heareth you, heareth me. It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and to us. The Church which is the pillar and ground of Truth. He, that will not hearken to the Priest, shall die. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. I have prayed, that thy faith fail not. Feed my Sheep. To all which, we briefly answer in order.  
1. When we are commanded To hear the Church, This Church may be the Greek, or Protestant, as well as the Roman: and hearing doth not imply the infallibility of it. Every Parishioner is commanded to hear the Minister which is set over him, and yet no body from thence will infer, that he is infallible. This Church, we are not to believe without making any scrutiny, but lie under obligation to try all things, and hold fast that which is good. The command of the Church doth not free us from sin in our conformity to it. The Jews contracted a deep guilt in compassing the death of our blessed Lord, tho' they did it in obedience to their Governors. Not only Pastors, but the Sheep know the voice of their supreme Shepherd, and are in a capacity to distinguish it from the voice of a stranger.  
2. When it is said, I will be with you to the end of the world, This assures us of the presence of Christ with his Ministers, so long as the world endures: but not that he will give the same measure of assistance, which the Apostles did enjoy. That which is sufficient in every Age is ascertained by this promise: but not that which is efficacious to such a degree, as will secure them from all error; for then every particular Pastor will be as Infallible as every Apostle was.  
3. When it is asserted, That when the Spirit of Truth is come, He will guide you into all truth, it cannot be proved, That this promise is made to any besides the Apostles. The context plainly appropriates it to them. I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. These words have an evident aspect upon the Disciples only. If we should grant, That not only the Apostles, but their Successors, are the objects of the promise; what is intended to be proved, will not follow, namely, Infallibility. The direction of the Spirit may be opposed. He gives in all ages a sufficient, but not an irresistible guidance. Many, tho' they are put into a right way by him, yet desert it, and follow their own erroneous apprehensions.  
4. Those words, He that heareth you, heareth me, are spoken of the Seventy Disciples, not assembled in a Council, but as going up and down from place to place to preach the Gospel. So that if they be construed in such a fence as to favour Infallibility, they will prove more than is desired, namely, That this privilege of not erring belongs to every Preacher, who has a lawful authority conferred upon him to publish the Gospel.  
5. Those words, It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and to us, do not argue, That the blessed Spirit will infallibly assist in all future Councils. They assert what was done at this present Convention, but hold forth no promise of the same degree of assistance in all Ages. The reason of this extraordinary aid was peculiar to those times. The Apostles than were to lay the foundation, to fix an unerring rule, both for the converted Jews and Gentiles. The rule being once settled, the necessity of the continuance of the same degree of assistance did cease. The Heavens did forbear to rain down Manna, so soon as the Israelites were in possession of a Country furnished with all convenient provision. It is no good consequence; That because the Sanhedrim in Moses' time was endued with an extraordinary Spirit, therefore the same favour must be indulged to all their Successors, even to the Council, which put the Lord of Life to death.  
6. In those words, The Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of Truth. The word Church must import, That in which Timothy is directed how to demean himself, and that undoubtedly was the Church of Ephesus, of which he had the Ecclesiastical inspection. That Church did hold forth the True Doctrine of the Gospel in its public Profession: even as pillars upon which the Edicts of Princes are fastened, expose them to the view of all that pass by. The expression alludes to the Temple of Diana, much celebrated for its magnificent Pillars, upon which the rules of the Religion of that Goddess were inscribed. The Apostle intimates, That those Columns were the Pillars of falsehood: but the Church of Christ, in the City, the Pillar of Truth, holding forth the True Doctrine of Heaven. The words do not speak the indefectibility of that Church, but the present state only. This Pillar began to decay in Domitián's time, Rev. 2.5. and is at this day utterly demolished.  
If it be granted, That the words under consideration have an aspect upon the Universal Church, no advantage will from thence accrue to the plea for Infallibility. She is not represented as the ground and pillar of all Truth, but of Truth in general, which may be limited to that which is fundamental. Tho' she cannot fail in this particular, (for then she will lose her essence, and cease to be) yet she may in other points very useful to be known.  
If by Truth, we understand all Truth, the words may set forth the duty of the Church, what she ought to do, and not the actual performance, what she always does. When the Disciples are styled the salt of the earth, this doth not argue an invincible quality in them whereby they are secured against the danger of losing their savour; but a constant obligation upon them to retain it, and season others with it.  
7. When it is said, 
Dent. 17.12.  That man that will not hearken to the Priest shall die, no advantage will from thence redound to the Bishop of Rome, except he can make it appear, That He is Successor to the High Priest under the Law, and vested in the same privileges, which he will never be able to do. If this was so, it would not amount to prove him infallible. The high Priest with the whole Sanhedrim was liable to mistake, as appears by the Sacrifice appointed for the expiation of their error, Lev: 4.13. He, that would not hearken, was to die. not because he was of a different opinion from the Priest, but by reason of his Pride and contempt of the Supreme Authority, which is plainly intimated in those words, That Man which will do presumptuously, etc. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  This is a common case in all Communities; 
In superbia;  where there is no such thing pretended to, as Infallibility. When a cause is under debate, and the Law requires the last appeal to be made to the Supreme Authority, and the person concerned so to do, turns his back upon it, arrogantly refuses a submission, and by consequence evidently endangers the Peace and Security of the whole Community, this is a fault of the first magnitude, and justly deserves the most severe animadversion. If it could be proved, That the Bishop of Rome with a Council called by him has as good Authority over All the Churches of the World, as the high Priest with the Sanhedrim had over the National Church of the Jews: Tho' from thence it would not follow, That he is exempt from error, yet none would doubt to assert, That his power is not to be treated with contempt.  
8. That Text, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it, is no more propitious to the Infallibility contended for, than those, which have been already considered. It is not agreed, Whether by the Rock is to be understood Peter himself, or Jesus Christ who is styled a Rock, or the confession which Peter made. The ancient Fathers incline to the two last. If they be preferred, the Church of Rome can from thence reap no advantage. If we should grant, That S. Peter is the Rock spoken of, it will not argue any Infallibility promised to him: but the declaration of a Divine purpose to make him a firm and successful instrument in the propagation of the Gospel, as the rest of the Apostles were, and many of their Successors. Here is nothing peculiar to S. Peter. The other Apostles are represented to be as intimately concerned in the foundation of the Church, as he. Eph. 2.20. Rev. 21.14. The following words, the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it, rather prove, That the Church shall never cease to be, than any universal indefectibility. It is certain, That, there shall be a Church upon the Earth, teaching all truth of peremptory necessity to Salvation, until the coming of our blessed Lord: But that it shall be exempt from error in all matters of Faith, is contrary to experience. It was once received as a truth, That Infants ought to have the Eucharist administered to them; and now it as unanimously exploded for a grand mistake.  
9 The Prayer of Christ, That the faith of Peter might not fail, argues rather, his not finally falling away, than a total exemption from error. He was under great misapprehensions after these words had been spoken to him. He believed, That Christ would continue upon the Earth, and in those days restore the Kingdom to Israel: That the Gentiles were not to be called in, and made partakers of the like privileges with the Jews. If it should be granted, That the Petition of our Lord did secure an Infallibility to Peter, this would be of no advantage to our adversaries in the present controversy. It cannot be made to appear, That the Bishop of Rome is concerned in all the Prayers which were made for S. Peter. There is in them no mention of any Successor. If there had, it would be difficult to prove, That the Pope is the person. Some doubt whether S. Peter was ever at Rome. The Scripture is silent in this matter. The first Asserters were but of a mean reputation. Many figments were devised to support the credit of their relation. The common fame, which by degrees did grow out of these beginnings cannot be accounted a demonstration, so long as there are Catalogues of errors which not only the Vulgar, but Persons of Learning have been surprised with. To erect Infallibility upon such a fluid foundation, is, as if an attempt should be made to build a Castle in the Air. If S. Peter was at Rome, and left the Bishop of that place to succeed him, this might be only in his ordinary power, and not in his extraordinary qualifications, as personal Infallibility, a power of doing Miracles. There is as much reason for the Pope to challenge to himself the last as the first: and yet I cannot understand, that he pretends to it. The Miracles in the Church of Rome are usually attributed to some persons, that cannot easily be spoken with, in order to the knowing the truth. If this power had been ascribed to the Pope, daily experience would have given the Asserters a flat contradiction.  
10. Those words, Feed my sheep, etc. do not import the conferring upon Peter any privilege above the rest of the Apostles, but only the insuring to him his interest in the general Commission given to them. They were commanded to teach all nations. It might lie as an objection against him, That he was not included in the number of those, who were thus commissioned. By his denial of Christ he had in appearance forfeited his right to the Apostleship: as Judas by betraying him fell really from it. To give him and others assurance, That he was one who by a Divine appointment (notwithstanding his notorious miscarriage) was to join with the rest of the Apostles in teaching all Nations, he is commanded by Christ, as many times to feed his flock, as he had denied him. All this will make it evident, That the Church of Rome has no promise made to her in the Scripture of Infallibility.  
As for Universal Tradition; That will be as hard to be found, as a Scripture-promise. It imports, the delivery of this doctrine from one age to another ever since the Apostles times, and an acknowledgement and reception of it in all places by all true Christians. The following particulars cannot be reconciled with such a Tradition. Many Heresies did emerge in the first Ages, by which the Church was exceedingly disquieted. Yet we never read in any authentic Record, that the Bishop of Rome did summon those which adhered to them, to appear in his infallible Consistory. If any such Judicatory had been then known, it is incredible, he should so far neglect his duty, as not to attempt the reducing of them to a sober and orthodox mind by his unerring Authority. The Bishops of that Church lived so near the Apostolical Age, that they could not be ignorant of the power which Christ had left with them; and they were so pious, and good, that it would be a manifest injury to their memory, to think that they would not exert it in matter of such importance. If these Heretics were summoned, (altho' no such thing is rècorded) and did refuse to submit to the Authority which is pretended, it is unaccountable, how it comes to pass that Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Theodoret, who have composed Catalogues of Heresies, with which the Church was then infested, should be so forgetful as not to reckon That in the number which those were guilty of, who would not acquiesce in the supposed Authority. This is now reputed an error of the first magnitude. All others are esteemed but trifles in comparison. If it had been so accounted then, it would not have been passed by in so profound a silence.  
The African Bishop's denial of a compliance with Sozimus, Boniface, and Celestine: Cyprian's refusal of a submission to Stephanus, Irenaeus' opposing the decree of Victor, do manifestly declare, That they knew nothing of the Tradition, which is pretended. Had they been acquainted with it, their integrity would not have suffered them to be engaged in so much disrespect towards the Church of Rome.  
When Tertullian and Vincentius Lirinensis apply themselves to prescribe the best method, how to prevent the spreading of Heresy, they speak not one syllable of an infallible Judicatory at Rome. If it had been known in their days, no doubt, they would not have failed to mention it, as the most sovereign expedient. If a Man sets himself to write a Book concerning the best way how to cure the Plague, and knows of one infallible remedy, it is not consistent with the rule of common honestly to pass it by in silence, and to entertain his Reader with some uncertain conjectures.  
It was anciently decreed, That Controversies should be determined in the Province where they did arise. If it had been believed, That there was then such an Oracular Judge, as is now asserted, this had been a very unjust decree. What can be more injurious, than to oblige men to acquiesce in the decision of those who may impose upon them, when they might (if left to their liberty) have had recourse to one, in whom there is no possibility of deception?  
A belief of this infallibility would have drawn such respects upon the Bishop of Rome, That no other would have dared to account himself his equal: and yet S. Cyprian treats him in such terms, as plainly import a parity. He styles him, Frater, Collega, Coepiscopus, S. Jerome says, That all Bishops are of an equal merit, and the same Priesthood, wheresoever they are, whether at Rome, Eugubium, Constantinople, Rhegium, etc. In the Communicatory Letters no more respect is expressed to him, than to others. The primacy which is some times spoken is not of jurisdiction, but order. He living in the City, where the seat of the Emperor was, when he did convene with other Bishops, some regard was signified upon the account of his relation to that place, but none upon the account of any Infallibility and Ecumenical jurisdiction, which he was believed to be invested with. When applications were made to him by those who were in distress, it was not done with an opinion, That he was inspired with an unnerring Spirit to determine their case: but because he was of the same Sentiment with them, and had great advantages, by reason of his residence in the Imperial City, to procure their relief. What he did in favour of such persons, as S. Athanasius and chrysostom, was not done juridically, but declaratively. He did not act as an authorised Judge, but a sincere and resolved Friend to that Truth, for which they were oppressed.  
The infirmity of these pleas for Infallibility makes the Defenders at last'to fly to the Motives to Credibility, as the securest Sanctuary.  
The chief of them are Antiquity, Diuturnity, Amplitude, uninterrupted succession of Bishops, agreement in Doctrine with the ancient Church, union of Members, holiness of Doctrine, efficacy of Doctrine, holiness of Life, the glory of Miracles.  
If we should enter upon a particular examination of these, they would be so far from proving the Church of Rome infallible, that they will not amount to prove her a True Church.  
The Church of Rome, in those points, which are peculiar to her, is not so ancient as is pretended. The novelty of those things, in which she differs from the reformed Church, is notoriously manifest: as Supremacy, the Worship of Images, Transubstantiation, etc. When she has screwed every thing to the highest pin, it will not appear, That any point of difference was, before the Mystery of Iniquity began to work.  
Diuturnity, may with as much efficacy induce us to believe, That the Mahometans are a True Church; for they have been a thousand years in the world, much longer than some Articles in the Roman Creed.  
Amplitude may as well prove the Community of Rome Apostatical, as Apostolical, Antichristian, as Christian. Antichrist is described as sitting upon many waters, and those Waters are interpreted, people and multitudes, Rev. 17.1, 15. Those who have taken the greatest care to survey the World, assert, That if it be divided into thirty parts, nineteen are inhabited by Polytheists. Of the eleven that remain, six be Jews and Mahometans. Of the space which is left, the greatest part is possessed by those who refuse a submission to the Bishop of Rome, as Protestants, Greeks, Nestorians, Jacobites. He who takes a deliberate view of the vast body of the first in Poland, Transylvania, Hungary, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Britain, France, and Ireland. Of the second, in Achaia, Epirus, Macedon, Thrace, Bugaria, Walachia, Podolia, Moscovia, Russia, Anatolia, Syria. Of the third, in Assyria, Mesopotamia, Parthia, Media, India, Tartary. Of the fourth, in Armenia, Egypt, Aethiopia; will be under no temptation to believe, That the Romanists have any such great cause to value themselves upon the account of the amplitude of their Community. I know, that it will be said, That all these are cut off from the Church by Heresy. But the best way to try, whether it be so or no, will be to examine the Confessions of their Faith, and compare them, with the unerring rule of Scripture. Upon an impartial inquiry, it will be found, That the worst of them has a much better consistency with the Primitive Standard, than the Creed of the Romanists has. The greatest fault which is found with the Protestants, is their compliance with the advice of S. John, Little children keep yourselves from Idols: with the Greeks, The believing the words of our Saviour, which evidently import an equality among the Apostles, and their refusing to stoop to the imaginary Supremacy of S. Peter. Indeed the denial of the procession from the Son is pretended, which altho' it be an error, yet was never accounted fundamental. The Pope has done with the Church of Christ, as, the Jews say, Herod did with the Temple of Solomon, enlarge the foundation. If the error of the Greeks be fundamental, it is not because it is opposite to the foundation, which a greater than Solomon laid, but the additional laid by the Bishop of Rome. Filióque in the Nicene Creed, is believed to be inserted by Nicolaus the first, about eight hundred and fifty years after Christ, when the animosities betwixt him and Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, were very high. Sguropulus has given assurance enough, That what was done in the Council of Florence, was brought to pass by the collusion of the Roman party: The Greeks being forced by their necessities, and tempted, by the most alluring promises, into such concessions as their whole Church was highly dissatisfied with. As for the Nest●rians, it is evident, by their Confessions, that they have abandoned that error, which was condemned by the Council of Ephesus. the Jacobites, 
Breerw. I●qu●. p. 15.4.  altho' they retain their denomination from Jacobus Sanzalus, a defender of the Eutychian Heresy, yet they renounce his doctrine. Leonard, Legate of Pope Gregory the Thirteenth, in those parts of the World, where the Jacobites live, hath recorded, that their Patriarch professed to him, That tho' indeed they held but one personate nature in Christ, resulting of the unity of the two natures, not personated: yet they acknowledge those two natures to be united in his person without any mixtion and confusion: and that they themselves differ not in understanding, but in terms from the Latin Church. From all this it is evident, That the Romanists have no reason to insist upon their amplitude, as a character of the Truth or Infallibility of their Church.  
the next Motive, is the uninterrupted succession of Bishops; by which is meant the coming of one Bishop into the place of another, from S. Peter to the present Bishop of Rome, without the interposition of any unduly qualified. Such a Succession they are never able to demonstrate. For those who are rightly qualified according to their own Principles, must be no Symonists, no schismatics, no Heretics, Men and not Women. And yet it is confessed, That some of them have obtained their dignities by Symoniacal contracts, as Alexander the Sixth, Sextus the First. Others have been under the guilt of Schism. The Council of Pisa deposed Benedict the Thirteenth, and Gregory the Thirteenth under that notion, and elected Alexander the Fifth, who continued in the place without deposition. the Council of Basil deposed Eugenius upon the like account: And yet after the Council was ended, he recovered his dignity without any Conciliary Act: And from him all to the present Bishop of Rome are descended. So that whether the Pope be above a Council, or the Council above the Pope, the Succession is interrupted.  
Some of them have been under the imputation of Heresy. Liberius was an Arrian, Anastasius a Nestorian, Vigilius an Eutychian, and it is believed by some, That one of them was a Woman: For this we have the unanimous consent of all the Romanists till Luther's time. They were so ingenuous as to confess the thing, till the Protestants began to urge it to their prejudice. To all this I may add, That those Churches, which have as good a Succession as they contend for, are notwithstanding branded with the infamy of Heresy; as our own, and the Greek Church. Therefore their Succession, which is only personal and not doctrinal, can be no motive to induce us to believe, That they are a True, much less an Infallible Church.  
As for their agreement in Doctrine, with the ancient Primitive Church, This would be a motive indeed, could they demonstrate any such harmony. Till they have reconciled their Doctrine of withholding the Cup from the Disciples of Christ, with the words of our Saviour, drink ye all of it. Concerning Prayer in an unknown Tongue, with the words of the Apostle, If I pray in an unknown tongue, my understanding is unfruitful: Concerning the Worshipping of Images with the Second Command, and the Primitive Christians not allowing so much as the making of them, we shall not easily believe that there is a consent in all things, betwixt their doctrine and the doctrine of the ancient Apostolical Church.  
The next Motive is the Union of the Members amongst themselves. He who well considers the Schisms betwixt the Anti-popes', as Novatianus and Cornelius, Foelix and Liberius, Vrsinus and Damasus, Eusebius and Bonifacius the second, Vigilius and Sylverius, etc. with many others: Six and Twenty in Bellarmine's account, Thirty according to Onuphrius; and thinks fit to enlarge his Meditations with the consideration of the divisions betwixt the Emperors and Popes, the last pretending a power from Christ to divest the former of their Authority, and with the differences betwixt the Popes and the Bishops about their Power, Whether it be derived immediately from the Pope or from Christ, the Bishops and Regulars, these pleading an exemption from their jurisdiction, the Regulars and the Parochial Priests, with all the diversities betwixt the Jansenists and Molinists, Franciscans and Dominicans, the Sorbonists and the followers of the doctrine of Lombard and Anquinas, together with the grand contest about the fundamental Article, Infallibility, some making it Canonical, some absolute; some saying it is in the Pope, some in a Council, will not find himself under any strong inclination to believe; That the Concord so much boasted of, is so perfect, as is pretended. Indeed, they say, Tho' they be not actually agreed, yet they have the most ready way that leads to it. They all acknowledge one visible Head, in whose judgement all are to acquiesce; So that when differences arise, they have nothing to do, but to speak with him. But this is nothing to the purpose. For the Motive is not potential but actual Union; not what may be, but what is. It is no good consequence, that they are United, because they have a way, whereby they may be brought into Union. When the parts of a Watch are asunder, they cannot be said to be in conjunction, because there is a hand which is able to put them together. Moreover, it is not true, That they have such a certain way to Unity. It is not agreed where the unerring Spirit resides. The Pope, who makes the most confident pretence to it, doth frequently decline a determination. When the parties on both sides are great, he is in fear, lest he may give distaste to either of them: and so make it his choice not to attempt their Union, but to couch down betwixt the two burdens. Some times his determinations are delivered with so much ambiguity, That the persons concerned are no nearer a reconciliation than they were before. His decrees like the answers of the Oracle, are so flexible, that they may be bend into a compliance with every humour. His Council at Trent was no stranger to this kind of policy. The sense of some Decrees was so doubtful, That Dominicus Soto, 
Rist. of the C●un. p. 229, 230.  and Catharinus, both present, did, during the Session, publish Books one against the other concerning the meaning of them. Were their way to union, and the product of it, as perfect as they pretend, yet it could be no motive to induce us to believe their Infallibility. A Unity of the greatest elevation cannot exceed that, which was betwixt the four hundred Prophets in the time of Ahab, or betwixt those who make war with the Lamb, Rev. 17.13. The infernal Spirit well knowing that his kingdom, if divided, cannot be assured of any permanency, useth the utmost of his activity to unite his subjects.  
The next inducement is Holiness of Doctrine. This can be no Motive, if we impartially ponder the following particulars.  
It teacheth us to be unjust towards God, and to alienate the Worship which is peculiar to him, and give it to the creature. The religious addresses made to Saints departed this life, Images, the Bread in the Sacrament, are evident demonstrations of this injury.  
It is highly prejudicial to the rights of his Vicegerents. Divers of the Roman Councils have declared, That the Pope may absolve Subjects from their Allegiance, and deprive Emperors and Princes of their Dominions. Several crimes are reckoned up by approved Authors, which render Princes obnoxious to this condemnation, and the Pope himself is made Judge, whether they are guilty of the crimes they are suspected for.  
It is destructive of True Devotion. This cannot be in Prayer, except the will and affections be engaged. And the will cannot be rightly concerned and say Amen to what is Prayed for, except it be duly informed concerning the matter of the Petition. True Zeal in the will is always the product of light and knowledge in the understanding, and the intellect can have no distinct knowledge, if Prayer must be made in an unknown tongue, as the Church of Rome teacheth.  
Lastly, It gives encouragement to a debauched life. According to the Papal Theology, a man of a lewd conversation, after he has spent his days in the gratification of his exorbitant lusts, if at last, he applies himself to a Priest, expressing a sorrow springing from a fear, That the badness of his life may expose him to everlasting torment, and obtains his Absolution; (which will of course be granted) he shall certainly be freed from eternal pains: and as for temporal, which are not remitted, but must be inflicted in Purgatory, he may in a great measure escape them too, if he be so rich, as to leave money enough behind him to oblige the Church to so much Charity, as to help him with their suffrages, and to celebrate frequent Masses for him: So that it is hard for none, let them be never so exorbitant, (except they be poor and indigent) to obtain a quick dismission out of Purgatory, and to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.  
The next Attractive is the Essicacy of their Doctrine.  
The Doctrine amongst them, is either such as is common to all Christians, or proper to their Community. The Essicacy of the first, is a good evidence of the reality of Christian Religion: but no demonstration of the Infallibility of Rome. The prevalency of the second is not so conspicuous as is pretended. The submission of multitudes to the Papal Yoke is to be imputed to the efficacy of ignorance and tyranny, and not to any transcendent virtue in their Faith. Had not there been better metal in their swords than their doctrine, they would not have proselyted so many Americans, as they did. The Inhabitants of that part of the World did not apply themselves to the Priests, as the Regions of Judaea did unto John the Baptist, but they were driven like herds of Cattle to the watering place. They were not persuaded, but by the most direful hostility affrighted into Religion. Their resentments of the Spanish cruelty were so great; That they made it their choice to kill themselves in order to the avoiding of it: and could not be prevailed with to desist from this inhumanity, until it was told them, That the Spaniards likewise intended to kill themselves and to follow them into the other World, and there be as great a torment to them, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  as they had been in this. In the East Indies, where their Power was less, their Policy was greater. They finding there a people very stiff in the maintenance of their Idolatry. They did not trust to the efficacy of their Doctrine to work conviction in them, but devised an expedient, how they might make them good Christians, and yet let them retain their old Religion. 
Mist. Jes. Let. 5. p. 83.  They enjoined them to hid under their  an Image of Jesus Christ, and mentally to direct their public adorations to it, which in outward appearance were terminated upon the Idols Chacim-coan, and Keum-fucum. Had they been assured of any eminent efficacy in their Doctrine, they would not have heen so prodigal of their reputation, as to slain it by the using so prodigious a method.  
As for Holiness of Life, When they make this a Motive, They mean either the internal or external part of it. The first cannot be a motive of credibility, because it is not seen: the second may be dissembled. The infernal Spirit may put on Samuel's Mantle. This Holiness which is so much boasted of, must be either in the lives of the body of the people, or else of some select branches, or else of the infallible Head.  
The first cannot pretend to it. Debauchery no where more prevails, than where the Papal Religion is entirely received.  
As for the second, I am not ignorant That great things are spoken of some select persons. Bartholomaeus de Pisis has not been afraid to compare Franciscus to Christ, 
Lib. Conform.  and in some things prefer him. His Sanctity has brought such a reputation to his Order, that it is verily believed, That no man can be damned, who dies, having his body wrapped up in a Franciscan habit.  
Of Dominicus, it is confidently affirmed; That he never committed mortal sin, from the day of his Birth. Ignatius (they say) was so much in favour with God, That he talked with him, as he did with Moses face to face. Yet for all this boasting, He that will impartially view the Lives of these Persons, and some others, as they are represented by their own party, and put all their external severities together, will find, they differ as much from true Holiness, as Jezebel's paint from Esther's beauty.  
As for the Heads of the Papal Community, some of them have had no more Sanctity than the Pillars which upheld the House, where the Philistines were gathered together. Their Pride, Murders, Usurpations, and all kind of debauchery and inhumanity gives sufficient evidence to this truth.  
1. Pride. Boniface the Third could give himself no contentment, till he obtained of Phocas an universal Supremacy, and changed the Apostolical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, into the Imperial Volumus, & Jubemus. Theodatus decreed, That Maurus Archbishop of Ravenna should not be honoured with the rights of Christian burial, because he refused to stoop to the See of Rome. Constantine the first, was pleased so far to humble himself, as to let Justinian the second enjoy the honour of kissing his feet. Gregory the seventh, made Henry the sourth, with his Empress and Son, to wait three days  in the extremity of Winter, before he would vouchsafe to give them Audience. Adrian the fourth was highly displeased with the Emperor Frederick the first, because he did not hold his Stirrup on the right side. Alexander the second, set his foot upon the neck of the same Emperor, using these words, super Aspidem & Basiliscum. By his appointment King Henry the Second of England received Fourscore Lashes upon his bare back, for his misdemeanour, in the case of Thomas Becket. Innocent the third, by his Legate Pundolphus, made King John kneel down, and resign up his Crown, which the Legate did keep five days. This transcendent humility has appeared more or less in most of them. It was not peculiar to Zachary the first to disallow of the Antipodes, and condemn Virgilius for maintaining their existence. None of the Popes could with any degree of Patience endure to hear of any which did walk opposite to them.  
2. Murders. John the Twelfth poisoned Leo and Stephen to make way for himself to the Papal dignity. Gregory the seventh dispatched no less than Six or Seven in order to the accomplishment of the same purpose. After he was Pope, he hired a miscreant to roll down a stone upon the head of the Emperor as he was at Prayers. Nicholas the third, raised the quarrel betwixt Peter of Arragon, and Charles of France, which occasioned the Sicilian Vespers. Pius the fifth, had a hand in compassing the death of Prince Charles of Spain, and the father of King James of Scotland. Gregory the thirteenth, procured the bloody Massacre at Paris, and testified his approbation by public Triumphs at Rome. When Clement had murdered Henry the third, Sixtus the fifth applauded the act, in a Speech to his Cardinals. His carriage in it resembles the motions of a Cat when she is possessed of her prey. Sometimes throws him up, as though he had a mind to extol him, and then presently throws him down again, with the imputation of Heresy. Some times he runs back from him, as though he was affrighted with so inhuman a spectacle; and then comes forward again, and by purring over he expresseth the highest degree of satisfaction. When Ravaillac had stabbed Henry the Fourth of France, the Abbot du Blois, who inveighed against the Jesuits, and expressed himself, but as the nature of the thing required, was invited by many specious pretences, to take a journey into Italy, and when he came to Rome, was imprisoned and murdered. If the death of this great Prince had not been highly pleasing to his Holiness, so loyal a Subject would not have been treated so unkindly upon his account.  
3. Usurpations. Gregory the seventh demanded fealty of William the Conqueror, and when the King had returned his answer, That he would give him none, because he had never promised it, nor did he find, That his Predecessors had ever performed it. He sent a Letter to Hubert his Legate, in which he complained, That none of the Pagan Princes ever presumed to attempt That against the Apostolical See, which the King had done without blushing. Paschalis made the like attempt upon Henry the first, and received as peremptory a denial. Alexander the third, s●nt an express to the Bishop of York and other Bishops not to anoint the Son of Henry the Second: which insolency the King so highly resented, That he caused all his Subjects from Twelve years old, to Sixty, to abjure the Pope's Obedience. Innocent the third, upon a distaste taken in the time of King John, who withstood his Usurpations, commanded, the Church-doors in England, for six years to be shut, Divine Service to be laid aside, the Bodies of the Dead to be carried into the field, and tumbled like dogs into ditches without Christ an Burial. These encroachments were so favourably thought on in these dark times, That the enemies of Edward the second, to make the way more facile to his deposition, raised a report, That John the 22d. had absolved his Subjects from their allegiance. Thomas of Arundel, That he might with the greater ease divest Richard the second of his regal dignity, produced the Pope's Bull, promising remission of sins to all, who would stand for Henry against him.  
The People in those days had generally drank so deep of the Cup of the fornication of Rome, that when they looked upon the Supreme Power, they saw double, and fancied one Sovereign in their own Country, and another at Rome.  
Lastly, I might add to what has been spoken (but that I take no delight in representing such deformities) all manner of Inhumanity and Debauchery. John the 13th. plucked out the eyes of divers of his Cardinals, and cut off their hands, for inclining to Otho the great. He deflowered Raynora, set Houses on fire, drank a health to the Devil. Boniface the 7th. stole away the Church-Treasure. Sixtus the 4th. provided for his Concubine Tyresia Shoes covered with Pearl, builded Stews at Rome. John the 23d. flayed a Bishop, and afterwards burnt him, because he had given him some distaste. Alexander the sixth, took money of Bajazet to murder Gemes his Brother, who fled to him for protection. He deflowered his own daughter Lucretia, and gave himself to the Devil. Leo the 10th told Cardinal Bembus, That Religion was but a profitable Fable. Paul the 3d. prostituted his sister to the lust of Alexander the sixth, that he might be made Cardinal, and committed incest with his daughter Constantia, poisoned her husband, That he might have the freer enjoyment of her.  
He who thinks fit to consult Platina, Onuphrius, Bellarmine, Baronius, and the History of the Popish Treasons and Usurpations with some others, which represent the Lives of the Popes, will see, That I have done them no injustice. By all this it is visible, of what elevation Holiness has been at Rome, and what little reason there is, to make it a motive of Credibility.  
The last is the glory of Miracles. By Miracles we must understand Works which are above the power and energy of finite Nature, and are plain and evident to the Sense. None but God can effect them, and when he doth them, they are produced openly, and all circumstances are so perspicuous, that there cannot be any reasonable suspicion of collusion. Such were the works of Jesus Christ. They are confessed by all to be above the energy of finite Nature, whether Angelical or Humane. All the Angelical Powers, had they conspired together, could not, by the speaking a word, have raised Lazarus from the dead, after he had been four days in the grave: or in a moment cured Chronical diseases which had been upon the distempered persons, some Twelve, some Eighteen, some Thirty Eight Years. These effects were produced in the clearest light. The Sun of righteousness did not light a candle to operate by. They were done not only before friends, who might be biased with inclinations to use their Microscopes, and magnify every thing beyond its just dimensions: but in the presence of the most implacable enemies, who were under the strongest propensities to eclipse the glory of them.  
Now we cannot learn, That such Miracles as these, are done by the Romanists. Many, which are pretended to, are discovered to be mere collusions. Those that they still continue to glory in, have not much evidence as is necessary to the nature of a Miracle. They tell of wonders, done by the remains of S. James at Compostella in Spain: by the Virgin Mary at Loretto in Italy in her Santa Casa: by the Sacred Vial of S. Mary Magdalen in S. Maximine's Church in France: But when we come to inquire not only into the Truth of what is pretended to be done, but likewise for the evidence which they have, That the Vial in the Church of S. Maximine's was Mary Magdalen's, and the blood boiling in it upon the Passion-day the blood of our Saviour: or, That the Santa Casa at Loretto is the Chamber where the Virgin Mary was born, and saluted by the Angel: or, That the Relics at Compostella are the real remains of S. James: Their account is so defective, That all Wise Men of their own party are ashamed of it. The best Testimonies, they have, are either dreams or visions and fables, devised by Men wholly devoted to the advancement of their own designs. There is a Table in the Church at Loretto in no less than Thirteen Languages for the edification of all Nations, in which is given an account of the Transportation of the Santa Casa by Angels. The whole certainly resolves itself at last into a dream, a vision, and the talk of two old Men.  
The best Evidence for the Miracles of Xaverius, are some posthumous relations framed after his death. He himself in several Letters, in which he makes a Narrative of his transactions amongst that People, speaks no such matter. Franciscus de Victoria, says, That he could hear of no Miracles which were done in those parts by the Emissaries of Rome. Fabulous inventions serve to buoy up the devotion of the common people. Their Zeal for such public Tales, is usually of the same elevation with that of Demetrius for his gainful Manufactures. If it should be granted, That Miracles have been done in the Church of Rome, there is no assurance, That the design of them is to confirm the Infallibility which that Community pretends unto. Miracles in the Gospel, are like Fines in the Common Law, they have Deeds to lead them, and declare their proper use. There is no authentic declaration from Heaven concerning this matter. We have more reason to think, if any such Miracles have been done, That God by them did intent the confirmation of the Truth in which Protestants and Papists do agree, and not the corrupt Additions, about which they differ. When a Miscellaneous People planted in Samaria by the King of Assyria, did not Worship Jehova according to his own order, and God in a miraculous manner, sent Lions amongst them to destroy them; it would have been very unreasonable in the Israelites to have asserted, That this Miracle was done to confirm the Idolatrous Worship of Dan and Bethel: Whereas God had his eye, not upon the justification of the corruptions, which the Israelites were stained with, but so much of the Truth as was retained by them.  
When the Papists have made the utmost, of what they can, of their pretended Miracles, they will find every jot as good amongst those, whom they will be very unwilling to grant to be infallible. False Christ's show great signs, Matt. 24.24. The coming of the man of sin, is with all power, 2 Thess. 2.9. The Beast which cometh out of the earth, doth great wonders, Rev. 
Socrat. l. 7.17.  13.13. When a Jew, who counterfeited Christianity was brought by Paulus a Novatian Bishop to the Font to be baptised, the water vanished. 
Tac. l. 4.  Vespasian restored strength to a Lame, and sight to a Blind man. 
Aust. de Civ. l. 10, 16.  One born blind received sight by touching the dead body of Adrian. The Images which Aeneas brought from Troy did locally move. 
Lact. l. 2. p. 105.  A vestal Virgin took up a Sieve out of Tiber full of Water. Accius Naeulus cut a whetstone in two with a Razor. These Wonders deserve as much consideration, as any which the Romanists pretend to. This may be sufficient to evidence, That the glory of Miracles can be no motive to induce us to believe, That the Church of Rome is infallible in her conduct in the concerns of Religion.  
Before I leave this particular concerning the motives of Credibility, I will lay down several on the other side, which may justly incline us to think, That no such guide was ever intended.  
1. It is not where revealed by Jesus Christ. If he had committed his Universal Church to the guidance of any one visible, and infallible Head, certainly it would have been expressed in the holy Bible. It is a matter of great importance, not to be settled in doubtful expressions. No Prince, who appoints another in his absence to govern his Subjects, does it in ambiguous terms: but gives him a commission in such clear words, That no man can have any just reason to dispute his Authority.  
The Texts usually pretended to countenance such a Guide, as is contended for, have been already examined, and found insufficient. There is more in that expression relating to S. Paul [That which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the Churches] than in any thing which is spoken of S. Peter: and yet no man pretends to collect from thence; That S. Paul was exclusively an Ecumenical Bishop, and the final decision of all points in Religion did belong only to him and his Successors.  
2. Such a Guide, as the Romanists would have, who must be followed blindfold, and his dictates received with an implicit faith without examination, is not consistent with the nature of an Intellectual Being. Our understanding is appointed to be our immediate Guide, insomuch, That if we act contrary to it, we pervert the order of Nature, and vitiate the action. It is designed by a divine institution to make scrutiny and search into that which is propounded to us. Therefore when there were infallible guides upon the Earth, the people were commanded to look into the facred Oracles, and make trial by them of what was tendered to them. They were not to rely only upon the words of them, who spoke, but examine their Authority by a standing rule, and inquire into the sense of what was spoken by them. 
Joh. 5. Act. 17.11.  Our blessed Lord directed the Jews to take this course, and the Beraeans are commended for the using of it. To suffer our understandings to be lapped up in an implicit belief, is to keep our talon in a napkin. Our Intellect was given to us to be exerted to the uttermost, that all the Acts of our Religion might become a reasonable Service.  
3. Such a Guide is destructive of true Virtue in the Acts of Religion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is defined by the Philosopher, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an elective habit. It disposeth us, when good and evil are set before us, to make a free election: to choose the good and reject the evil. Now the Guide supposed, who must be followed without scrutiny, deprives us of this liberty. He must be believed, whatsoever he propounds, whether right or wrong. If he commands us to believe that to be black, which appears white to our sense, we must not dispute his dictate. Amongst the Eighteen rules of the prevailing Order in the Church of Rome, the Thirteenth runs in these words,  ipsi Catholicae Ecclesiae omnino unanimes conformesque simus. Si quod oculis nostris albus apparet, nigrum illa definierit, debemus itidem quòd nigrum est, pronunciare. Bellarmine is very agreeable to this rule, as is manifest by the following expression, Si autem Papa erraret, praecipiendo vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes, teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona, & virtutes malas, etc. If the Pope should err in commanding Vices or prohibiting Virtues, the Church would be obliged to believe, Vices to be good and Virtues evil.  
4. Such a Guide can be of no advantage to us in our present circumstances. We have already an infallible Rule to walk by, the true sense of which, if we receive and comply with, we cannot err. Now this sense may as easily be obtained, as the sense of an infallible, Guide. If there was such a one, as is supposed, he could not be spoken with by one of a Thousand of those who are concerned in the meaning of his determination. And therefore they must receive it from the relation of others: or by some Writing under his hand. The Relators being fallible, and obnoxious to the like infirmities with other men, can give us no infallible assurance. They may be biased with partiality and irrelative respects. A Writing from him is liable to the same exceptions, which are usually form against the Scripture. We see that all parties among the Romanists pretend favour from the determinations of the Church. They are like Pictures, which seem to look upon every one in the room, where they hang. When interest is concerned, it will find out as many evasions, as the most subtle Adversary can devise to elude any text of Scripture. There are many divisions among the Romanists: yet all assert, the sense of the infallible Judge is on their side. Why may not we as well understand the sense of the Bible immediately, as the meaning of a Decree in Writing of such a Judge. The Scripture was written by an unerring hand, with a sincere purpose, that it might be understood. Clearness of stile is a necessary condition in order to this end, and therefore must be designed by the Composer. God undoubtedly is able to write with as much perspicuity, and with as manifest accommodations to the meanest capacity as men are. Thousands have had so firm a Faith grounded upon the sense which they immediately derived from his Word, That rather than they would departed from it, they have with alacrity endured the loss of their sublunary comforts, and cheerfully resigned up their lives to the inhumanity of their Persecutors. The Divine Spirit is ready to assist those who are sincerely desirous of true knowledge. Peculiar persons are devoted to the study of the Scripture in order to the dissipating of Clouds, and the clearing of what is obscure. Why a Writing composed by an infinitely Wife Being, and attended with these advantages, in order to the gaining the true meaning of it, may not be as easily understood as the decrees of a Pope, or the Canons of a Council, I could never discern any good reason.  
5. Such a Guide is not reconcileable to the Divine Intention, in giving us the sacred Oracles. These are evidently designed as a rule, which every one is obliged to consult. Blessed is he which readeth, Rev. 1.4. Reading is enjoined in order to the gaining understanding. Let the word dwell richly in you in all wisdom. The supreme Head of the Church commands us to search the Scriptures. S. Peter (whom the Romanists assert to have been his Vicegerent upon the earth) requires us to attend unto them, as unto a light, without suggesting the necessity of having recourse to himself or his Successors for interpretation. All this assures us, That we are to take our measures from the Bible, and judge for ourselves, what is to be done or not done with a judgement of discretion, that our conformity to the Divine Will, may be an act of our Understanding.  
Now a Guide, whose Dictates we are to swallow down without examination, is not consistent with the practice here enjoined us. To be bound to examine the rule with all diligence; and yet to resign up ourselves to the decrees of a Guide about the sense of it without any scrutiny, are two contrary obligations. If the first be intended, (as it is plain it is) the last cannot. God never wills, that we should be engaged to those things which are contradictory one to another. In a civil Community; where there is a Law and a Judge: If it be commanded, That every Subject read this Law, search it diligently, use his best endeavours to understand it, That his conformity to it may be an act of his own Reason, this would plainly signify, That the Judge is not to be followed blindfold, whether right or wrong, but his Decree is to be compared and fully considered. Tho' the Judge has the power of decision, which the subject is so far to acquiesce in, as not to disturb the public order by any inutinous demeanour: yet the judgement of discretion cannot be denied to him in this case, which if it happens to be contrary to the sentence of the Judge, he must bear without a tumultuous deportment the consequences of it.  
6. All the Testimony we have, That such a Guide is intended, is from the Church of Rome, which is the party concerned, and lays claim to this Dignity. If we ask how it comes to be known, that the is vested in this immunity, Scripture-promises are presently alleged. If we further demand, How we shall know, that this is the sense of the promise? We are told, That we must adhere to the interpretation of the Church, which understands it so. From which it evidently appears, That the ultimate ground and reason of our belief in this particular, is the Testimony of the Church of Rome. For no Community is permitted to have the denomination of a true Church, besides that which submits to the Papal Authority. If our Blessed Lord, the supreme Head of the Church, says, If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true, Joh. 5.31. Much more may this be applied to the Body, if it has no other evidence for this fundamental point, but what is derived from herself. The bare testimony of a party is not a sufficient foundation to build a legal determination upon in any Court of Law.  
7. The Primitive Constitution of the Church plainly intimates, That no one Guide was designed to be Supreme over all the Churches in the World. Our blessed Lord left the Apostles in a parity. Nothing was spoken to S. Peter, concerning any Ecclesiastical Power, but what the others were equally concerned in. These constituted Bishops over particular Churches in the same equality, they themselves were left in. Tho' in every Church there is a subordination of the Clergy and People to their own Bishop, yet there is none to any, which is foreign. It is true, There is one Catholic Church, but the unity of it consists in having one Lord, one Faith, and one Baptism, and not one Bishop and Head to interpret for all, and impose what dictates he pleaseth upon them. The ancient Churches did maintain correspondencies by Communicatory Letters; and when extraordinary cases did emerge, send their prudential Expedients as the effects of their Charity: But we no where read of the exercise of any pretended authority one over the other. If there had been any one authorised Guide in controversy for all Churches known in those early times, when Heresies and Schisms did arise, no question, a speedy application would have been made to him, for the curing of what was amiss: yet we read of no such matter. But on the contrary, Appeals were prohibited to any foreign Bishop, and an express order established, That differences should be decided within the Province, where they did emerge. S. Cyprian asserts so much in his Epistle to Cornelius. 
Epist. 55. Pamel. Epist. 59 Oxon.  Nam cum statutum sit omnibus nobis, & aequum sit, etc. For when it is appointed to all of us, and it is both equal and just, That the cause of every one should be heard, where the crime is committed, and a portion of the Flock is assigned to particular Pastors, which every one must rule and govern, being under an obligation, to give an account to the Lord of what he does: It behoves those, whom we are set over, not to run up and down, nor break the firm concord of Bishops by their subdolous and fallacious temerity, but there to plead their cause, where the Accusers may have witnesses of their crime, etc. The fifth Canon of the first Council of Nice, is of the same importance, and is so interpreted by the next General Council held at Constantinople in the second Canon.  
As for the Canons of the Council of Sardica, which seem to favour Appeals, there is just reason to suspect, that they are forged. The Fathers of the sixth Council of Carthage knew nothing of them, tho' about Forty African Bishops were present at that Convention, as Athanasius testifies. A matter of such moment could not have been concealed from them, when so many of their own Countrymen, were witnesses to what was transacted. The attempt that was made to father them upon the Council of Nice, argues, That there was no fair dealing about them.  
If the Canons are genuine, it must be remembered, That they were made, not by a General, but a Provincial Synod. Tho' the Council was intended to be General, yet it proved otherwise by the Oriental Bishops withdrawing themselves, and refusing to act in it. The decrees of such a Convention have not efficacy enough to rescind and annul what was done before in the Council of Nice. An Inferior Authority cannot abolish, what is established by a Superior.  
If the Council had been General, yet if we look well into the Canons pretended to be framed by it, they will not amount to that which the Church of Rome thinks to make of them. Three things are conceded to the Bishop of that See, 1. A liberty in case of judgement already given, to deliberate, whether the matter ought not to be considered again. 2. If he thought so, whether he would send any to be present at the hearing of the Cause. 3. A freedom to appoint Judges out of the neighbouring Provinces finally to determine. Here is no bringing the cause to Rome, but the judgement is to be ended, where the difference did begin.  
If all this was as real, as it is pretended to be, it cannot be looked upon as any more than a prudent Expedient in that present juncture. The Arians very much prevailed. The Orthodox were highly oppressed. The Bishop of Rome favoured their cause. And to put him into a greater capacity of succouring them, such a determination might be condescended unto. But the words of the Synod plainly represent it as a novel thing, which the Church before was utterly unacquainted with. Neither the Institution of Christ, nor Primitive Tradition are alleged as the ground of it: but an honorary respect to the memory of S. Peter, the Bishop of Rome being at that time esteemed as his Successor, and very steadfast in that faith which he sacrificed his life for, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, are the words of Hosius of Corduba, who is represented as the person, who did steer all matters under debate in that Convention.  
8. No provision is made of one infallible Guide in a case of like importance. The whole World is one Community under God the Father, as the Church is one under Christ. All particular Kingdoms are united under some general Laws, as the several Churches are in the same rules of Belief and Worship. They have all the same light of Reason. There is a jus Gentium to which all the Empires of the Universe are obliged to submit. Peace is as desirable betwixt them, as Unity amongst the several parts of the Church. The records of every Nation give an account of the direful effects of Civil as well as Ecclesiastical discord. From hence ariseth the most desolating Wars, and the sudden ruin of millions of Men, who are taken off in the height of their fury, before they have time to settle their thoughts in relation to eternity. How are the innocent stripped of their enjoyments, and have nothing left them but a deplorable state of Misery. All this by inevitable necessity tends to the eclipsing the honour of the Supreme Monarch, the glory of his regiment being much more conspicuous in a peaceable order, than a polemical confusion. The image of the Sun cannot be distinctly seen in troubled waters. For this important reason, we are under the strictest obligations to follow peace with all men, and mutually to exchange acts of kindness and humanity. Although Peace betwixt distinct Nations be of such great moment, yet it is not the pleasure of the Supreme Rector to constitute one visible infallible Guide for the conservation of it. If this was a means of peremptory necessity, in order to the maintaining Unity and Concord; there is as much reason, why it should be appointed for the securing Unity in the several Kingdoms of the World, as the several Churches. No such constitution being made in relation to the preserving their amicable correspondencies, no argument can be drawn from the nature and necessity of the thing, that it must be established in the Church.  
9 If the Church has one suprme Guide vested in an authority to decide all controversies, it will not be easy to reconcile this appointment to the constitution of Civil Empires. The Militant Church cannot have an existence, but within the territories of some secular Sovereign Power. The Prince is undoubtedly invested by God, with authority to preserve the Peace of his Community. This Peace is often disturbed by Ecclesiastical discords. If he has not a power within his Dominion, (without addressing to foreign authority) to compose them; He has an end appointed to him, and yet is not allowed the use of the means which immediately conduceth to it. All things may break out into a combustion, and the Community be entombed in its own ashes, before the decision of a Foreign Power can be obtained. It would not be accounted any discretion, when a Prince's Palace is on Fire, to refuse the use of the River which runs by it: and send into Italy for water in order to the quenching of it. Every Sovereign within his own Dominions is the Supreme Moderator and Governor, in all Causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil; which cannot be, if there be one authorized Guide, for all the Churches in the World, to whose determination they are bound to submit, let it be never so contrary to the Will of their own Sovereign. Tho' Secular Princes have not a Power in Sacris, that is, to Ordain, Preach, Administer the Sacraments, Excommunicate, etc. yet they have an undoubted Authority, circa Sacra, that is, to defend the Church in the doing of these things, and see that the Governors rightly proceed in their administrations: and when controversies arise, which have a tendency to trouble the State, to convocate them, and ratify such resolutions, as conduce to the securing the concord of the Community. Tho' the Church is immediately constituted by Christ: yet it cannot be denied, That Secular Princes, within whose Territories it is planted, are designed as Nursing Fathers to it, which must necessarily import their duty, to see, That Poison be not administered instead of Milk, to cherish it, and put a period to those molestations, which will hinder the growth of it. If this power be vested in every Prince, there can be no foreign authorized Guide, who has right to command within his Dominions. These two constitutions are contrary one to the other, and instead of Peace must necessarily produce War. Subjects would not know to whom to pay their Allegiance, whether to submit to the Sword or the Keys. Whereas if there be a power within every Nation, to reform itself, and to put a period to all differences without the interposals of a foreign authority, the public Peace is secured as much as can be expected in this sublunary state.  
10. There is a plain prediction in the holy Scripture concerning one who will pretend to be such an infallible Guide as we speak of. He is described, as sitting in the Temple of God, showing himself, 
2 Thess. 2.4.  That he is God. God is undoubtedly infallible, and therefore he who sitteth in his Temple, namely the Christian Church, 1 Cor. 3.14. and carrieth himself as God, doth make a manifest claim to that indefectibility that is peculiar to the Deity.  
This Pretender to infallibility is represented to be a great Impostor. He is styled the man of sin, the son of perdition, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.  
The Character which is given of this Impostor exactly agrees to him, who now pretends to be such an Authorized, Ecumenical Guide.  
He is described as one professing the Christian Religion: as making a great defection from the reality of it: as arising out of a low condition: as having his growth in greatness impeded for a time by the Roman Empire: as exalting himself by degrees, (as that obstruction was removed) above Kings and Emperors, and all that is called God: as being invested with outward pomp and splendour: as, having his Seat in the City upon seven Hills: as treating those with the greatest severity, who refuse a submission to his Sentiments: as coming with all power, signs and lying wonders.  
How agreeable this Character is to him who now pretends to be an infallible Guide in the concerns of Religion, is undeniably evident. He is in profession a Christian, pretending to maintain the whole Doctrine which was delivered by our Blessed Lord. He is guilty of a great defection from it, by mixing many injurious additions with it, and declaring all to lie under the guilt of Heresy, who refuse to comply with them. He was in a low condition, so long as the Roman Empire stood in its full force, and power. He sometime styled himself, indignum famulum Imperatoris. As the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decayed, so he increased, and at last grew to such a height, as he challenged an authority over Princes and all that is called God. He made bold to depose them, to absolve their Subjects from their Allegiance, to dispense with the Laws of Heaven, and make them subservient to his worldly interest. He is attended with all outward splendour and glory. He is not contented with a single Crown, but assumes a Triple. He expects the most solemn adoration from those who apply themselves to him. When the Ambassadors of Sicily prostrated themselves at his feet, using these words three times, 
Molin. vates.  O Lamb of God, who taketh away the sins of the world, he was not displeased with the civility of the address. The place of his residence is in the City built upon seven Hills. He useth those, which descent from him, in the most savage and cruel manner. Miracles are one of the signs of that Church which he is the Head of.  
Indeed it is said, That the man of Sin is the same with him, who is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and he is expressed to be one, who denies the Father and the Son; which cannot be affirmed of him, who is the great pretender to infallibility. To which we reply, That tho' he owns them in words, yet in reality he denies them, by authorising that Worship which is peculiar to them, to be given to created Being's. Tho' a Subject does verbally own his True Sovereign; yet if he pays that homage to another, which is due only to him; he does in truth deny him, and will be treated by the Law as such a person. Actions are more faithful indications of the mind, than verbal expressions.  
As all this argues the agreeablenss of the Character of the Man of Sin to the great pretender to Infallibility: So we know of no other, to which it can with so much reason be applied. Three are pretended to have an interest in it. Caius Caligula, Simon Magus, and a Jew of the Tribe of Dan.  
As for Caius Caligula, He cannot be the person. Tho' he was a Man of Sin, yet he was not the Man, which the Apostle had his eye upon. He was come and gone before the writing of the Epistle to the Thessalonians, 
Baronius Capel. Appen. aed Histor. Aposto. p. 3913.  which was about the end of the Ninth, or the beginning of the Tenth year of Glaudius his Successor: and we must not so interpret S. Paul, as to make him prophecy of that which was already past. The same exception lies against Simon Magus. He was in his altitude and greatness about the beginning of Claudius. His flying in his fiery Chariot, and being brought down headlong by the Devotion of S. Peter, are usually believed to have happened about the Second Year of his Reign, about Eight Years before the Prophecy was extant. The Man of Sin was hindered from appearing in those times by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the Secular Power of Rome, as Tertullian, S. chrysostom and S. Austin assert. The first calls it Romanum Statum, the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The third Romanum Imperium. This was not taken away till some Hundreds of Years after: and then the great pretender to Infallibility did display himself in his proper colours. Indeed the Mystery of Iniquity began to work in the Apostles days. There were then many Antichrists. As Christ had his Types to represent him before his Manifestation in our Nature: So had his great Antagonist. In the number of these, Simon Magus may be reckoned: but to make him the person which the Apostle has in his eye, in his prediction concerning the Man of Sin, cannot be reconciled to any good reason.  
Lastly, it is said, That a Jew of the Tribe of Dan is the Person aimed at by the Apostle, who will abolish the Mass, oppress the Church, subdue the whole World in Three Years and a half; and then presently shall be the coming of Christ to the last judgement. But this is as easily denied as affirmed. There is not the least intimation of any such matter in the Holy Scripture. 
Gen. 49. Num. 2. Jer. 8. Rev. 2.  The Texts, which have been sometimes produced, are so irrelative, That the wisest of our Adversaries are ashamed to allege them. The Person which the Apostle aims at, must be a Christian in Profession, who in reality makes a great defection from the Doctrine of our Saviour: which cannot be asserted of a Jew, who is, and was always an open and professed enemy to it. There is an impossibility in the thing, That one should subdue all the World in Three Years and a half. It would be very difficult for him to visit every part (tho' very well mounted) in so short a time, much more to conquer it. In the times immediately preceding the last day, there will be worldly joy in the greatest altitude, Eating and Drinking, Marrying and giving in Marriage, which cannot be consistent with that Sorrow, which must be an inevitable product of the universal oppression and tyranny of an insatiable Conqueror. It does not appear, That there is any preparation for any such matter in any part of the Universe. The Tribe of Dan (for any thing we know) is utterly extinct. There is not a Jew now, that takes his denomination from it. It is strange, That the Mystery of Iniquity should begin to work in the Apostles days, and now altogether cease to make any progress. The infernal Spirit is as active, as ever. It is his chief design to set up the person, whom the Apostle describes. He cannot be imagined to be wanting in his endeavours to accomplish so grateful a purpose. The Jews, to requite the Advancers of this Hypothesis, say, That Antichrist shall be begotten in Rome, and his name called Armillus. 
Buxt. Rab. Lex. in voc. Armillus.   
Hitherto I have considered, the first Opinion, That the Church of Rome must be our Guide. The Second is, That this privilege belongs to every Man's Reason. By the Reason of every Man, we must understand, That Light which every one has in his Intellect. Tho' this be the immediate Guide, yet it is not the Supreme: and is no farther valuable for conduct in Religion, but so far as it is conformable to the Supreme Rule. This rule is the revelation of God contained in the Scripture. This was given to be a Lamp unto our feet, and a light unto our paths. Those Texts which respect our Salvation, and promise to us a security against the revenger of blood, like the Cities of Refuge in Palestine, are placed upon Hills, and made very conspicuous. There is no need of Four Hundred Camels (as the Jews speak) loaden with Commentaries to give them light. Matters of Faith and Worship necessary to the enjoyment of a future state of happiness, are clear in them.  
When it is said, That every Man must be guided by his own reason; if the meaning is, That he must be ruled by the light of his Intellect, from whatsoever Topic it is derived, without any limitation, many ill consequences will be unavoidable.  
1. Such conduct will necessarily produce an effect very disagreeable to the mind of the Supreme Being. If it be allowed, there will be as great a diversity of opinions and practices in Religion, as there is of tempers, educations and interests. These usually mould the Intellect, and make the most prevailing impressions upon it. From hence commonly proceeds the Light which the generality pretends unto.  
This variety will certainly suffocate the Spirit of Christian love. Men in their several apartments are naturally propense to meditate their own defence, and the justification of their separation. They usually believe, That the most compendious way to it, is to weaken the reputation of those, who differ from them. This creates on both sides the hottest jealousy, the most sinister interpretation of each others actions, an exchange of the greatest unkindness, and an utter suffocation of those breathe of Charity which the primitive Age was so eminent for. So long as divisions are productive of such bad effects, it is impossible that the Divine Nature should be atoned into an approbation of them. This is the reason of the Apostle's pathetical entreaties to speak the same thing to avoid divisions, to be perfectly joined in the same mind and judgement. Not only a unity amongst religious persons is required in this, That every one act according to his Conscience; but that every person have the same judgement and conscience.  
2. Such conduct cannot be agreeable to the interest of humane Society. It gives a fatal blow to the Ecclesiastical Community. For if every one may follow his private Sentiments, by whatsoever Topics they are impressed upon him, Ecclesiastical Rulers will have nothing to do. Those Precepts, Obey them that are over you, and submit yourselves, for they watch over your souls, Heb. 13.17. Know them that labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, 1 Thess. 5.12. are made insignificant.  
The Civil Society will likewise quickly feel the effects of this Doctrine. The diversity which is a natural consequence of it, will produce dislike amongst the several parties.  
This dislike by the fervour of Passion will quickly be boiled up into an Enmity. Enmity, when any party has potency enough to give some reasonable assurance of conquest, will break out into a combustion, and entomb the Society in its own ashes.  
Whereas it is said, That it is restraint that produceth commotion: it may be justly replied, That a prudent restraint cannot be charged with any such crime. The things of Religion are either clear, and visibly essential to Salvation: or else doubtful, and not of such peremptory necessity. A restraint in the first case, to hinder men from opposing the most important propositions, and as clear as the Sunbeams, is so reasonable, That it can administer no just occasion to the rational part of the World to be mutinous. It is but a discreet provision against Monsters in Morality and Divinity, who are obstinately resolved to dispute the clearest dictates of Reason. Such persons notoriously reflect upon the Divine Honour, do a manifest hurt to themselves, invite the displeasure of Heaven to fall down upon the Community. In the second case, a charitable forbearance, prudent condescensions are highly commendable. The speaking the truth in love will be more efficacious than all external violence. If Governors are necessitated to interpose their Authority, alloy the heat of debates, and prevent the mischiefs which may emerge from them: They must remember the spirit and temper of the Gospel, which forbids the calling down fire from Heaven, and the using sanguinary methods, for the reducing of those whom they conceive to be in error. Where such a temper prevails; if commotions arise, they must not be charged upon the Constitution, but the inordinate lusts of men, which transport them beyond their due measures, and will not permit them to persevere in a deportment suitable to their condition. Divine Wisdom has digested the Community into Two Orders: Governors and Private Persons. To the first belongs the judgement of Decision: to both the judgement of Discretion, That they may know what to do, agreeable to their station. If the restraint be from that which is evil, we ought cheerfully to submit, and be thankful to our Rulers for the preventing our precipitation into ruin. If from that which is really good, by reason of an antecedent obligation from God, we are to persevere in well doing; and in the preservation of our integrity, so quietly demean ourselves, as it may be apparent, That we are biased with the most tender regards to the Peace of the Community. If this Order was observed, Governors might restrain what they conceive to be amiss, and the world continue without Commotions. Wars arise from a violation of the Divine Order, and the not being contented with that condition, which the Providence of Heaven thinks fit to place us in.  
3. Such Conduct is not agreeable to the propensities of Intellectual Nature. Men are generally inclined, not to trust to the dictates of their own Reason in the concerns of Religion without supernal direction. It is natural to believe, That the Deity will be Worshipped, and Honoured by some actions, which have their sole dependence upon his Will. (By them the most emphatical acknowledgements of his Sovereignty are made) And the knowledge of such Actions can be conveyed to us in no other way but by revelation. This is the cause why all Nations have given a ready ear to those who have pretended converse with the Deity. We have an evident instance in the Sibyls, who were believed to be admitted to the Counsels and privacies of the Gods, the memory of which is still preserved in their name. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Aeolic Dialect, Deus, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consilium. When one of them presented some of their compositions to Tarqvinius, he committed them to the custody of the Duumviri. When the Regal power was taken away, this care was devolved upon Fifteen select Persons. When they were casually burnt with the Capitol, Three Ambassadors were dispatched abroad, to make inquisition for such Verses as did bear their name. The like was done by Augustus in many parts of the World in order to the reparation of this inestimable loss. Those Verses, that were found, were committed to a College of Priests, which continued to the time of Theodosius the first. They were of such esteem, That nothing out of them might see the light, without the allowance of the Senate. There was a fear upon Governors, lest the People wholly captivated by their Authority, should under pretences drawn from thence, attempt an innovation in Religion.  
An Honour, not inferior to this, was paid to the Oracles. Tho' Cato with some others did discern, That their Responses did proceed from infernal Spirits: yet the generality, who were not so quicksighted, through a natural proclivity, to give credit to revelation, had a superlative esteem for them. If it was so natural, as is pretended, to rely upon our Reason only for our Guide in the concerns of Religion, it cannot be imagined, how every Nation should be so disposed to a renunciation of their own Sentiments, and with so much cheerfulness acquiesce in this pretended Authority.  
Our Reason in its most refined state would be no competent Guide alone, much less in its present state of imperfection. As God has made Man for Religion, so he has furnished him with a double advantage, Reason and Revelation. Reason has a certain sphere, within which its activity is to be confined. If it transgresseth its limits, it becomes as prejudicial, as the Sea, when it rebels against its bounds and makes an inundation. The Eye of the Intellect has its Horizon as well as the Eye of Sense. Where Reason ends, Revelation gins. This is the Telescope, which interprets, and makes plain, what the eye before had but an imperfect discovery of: or else discloseth that, which before was under a total concealment. Therefore God designing Man for Religion, has, besides what he has discovered in the Law of Nature, divers ways and manners revealed himself in all Ages. In Paradise, by a Voice from Heaven conveyed in a Gale of Wind, styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Gen. 3. Aquil.  Afterward by the Vrim and Thummim, contained in the Sacerdotal Pectoral. Sometimes by Prophecy, by which the Jews understand an influence from Heaven transmitted, in a Vision, or dream, into the Soul, of which they make four degrees. The first is, when the influence is terminated upon the rational faculty only. The second, when the Imaginative is agitated: but the rational part retains the predominancy. The third, when both are kept in a just poise, and equally balance one another. The fourth, when the Fancy is uppermost, and it becomes difficult for the Intellect, to comprehend the import of the representation.  
Sometimes God has revealed himself by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 namely, a celestial influx, whereby Men, when they were awake, and had the ordinary use and vigour of their Senses, were enabled to utter words of Wisdom, far exceeding their ordinary strain. This is that, which is attributed by the Hebrews to those, who were concerned in the composure of the Hagiographal part of the Old Testament: and was certainly conferred upon the holy Men who framed the New.  
What God was pleased to reveal these several ways, He by his Providence communicated throughout the World. That which He discovered to Adam by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Adam communicated to his Sons and Daughters, from whom all mankind proceed. The thread of their lives was spun out to such a length, That Three of them, Methusalem, Sem, and Isaac, were in a capacity to carry on the Tradition, till a little before Jacob's going down into Egypt. What was discovered by prophecy was committed to a People, who had their habitation in the centre of the known World. From thence this celestial Light was communicated in the Greek Tongue to all parts of the circumference. Upon this account we read of devout Men at Jerusalem, out of every nation under heaven, Act. 2.5. The Queen of Sheba was not the only person which heard of the Wisdom of Solomon.  
What was revealed by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was blessed with an universal communication. Rom. 10.18. Coloss. 1.6. Insomuch, That if any place wants this revelation, we are not to accuse the goodness of God, but the impiety of Men, which provoked him to withdraw so signal a favour.  
4. Such Conduct will be prejudicial to the Souls of Men in relation to their future state. They are in a ready way to fall into the grossest errors. Those who have no other Compass to Sail by, but the light of their own Intellect, whatsoever Topic it is derived from, will quickly make shipwreck of Faith and a good Conscience. There is no superstition so barbarous, but they may be reconciled to the belief of the reasonableness of it, and think, they are obliged to a conformity unto it. It was a real trouble to the Votaries of Moloch, to abstain from murdering their children, and offering them up to that Idol. The Egyptians had no satisfaction in their own Spirits, if they did not make religious addresses to Apes and Crocodiles.  
He who is governed only by his own Reason will be apt to boggle at the peculiar Object of our Worship, the most blessed and sacred Trinity. This Mystery is too deep for the line of a finite understanding to reach to the bottom of. He will be under strong inclinations to raise objections against it, and err about that, which is necessary to his Salvation. And he who is tainted with this distemper, and obstinately perseveres in it, the Apostle says, is subverted and self-condemned, if not formally, yet virtually according to an equitable interpretation, even as those who thrust from them the Word, are said to judge themselves unworthy of eternal life.  
Indeed we are told, That Speculative Errors, about the Mysteries of Religion, have no hurt in them, and that we may be as safe on the lest as on the right side. Because there is no disobedience in them. They are unavoidable. It is uncharitable to think them damnable. A Catalogue of those which are so, cannot be made. The salt cannot be known by the guilty. The probability of Truth on both sides assures us, That God will not punish those that err. Such errors cannot be displeasing, which have their allowance from Conscience, the Vicegerent of God. To all which I will reply in order.  
1. Error is inclusive of Disobedience. We are under an obligation to submit our Intellects to Divine Revelation as well as our Wills, and we are commanded, not only to endeavour to find out the Truth, but actually to find it. Try all things, hold fast that which is good. To try, imports the search; to hold fast, supposeth the finding: the promise is made to those which are successful in their inquiry. This is Life Eternal to know, and not only to endeavour it. Is it not an act of disobedience, when God has given us the Light of his Word to walk by, to make it our free choice to neglect this infallible Guide, and prefer the Light of our own private judgement, which way soever communicated to us. He who refuses the Light of the Sun in the day time for his conduct, and travels only in the night by Moonshine, tho' he endeavours to the utmost to find his way by those dim emanations: yet in case he lose it, the fault is entirely to be resolved into himself, who might have enjoyed the benefit of a greater Light, which would have effectually secured him against deviation.  
2. Errors in Religion are not unavoidable. God has made a plentiful provision for our direction. The Scripture is the Pandect of the Divine Will, sufficient to instruct the Man of God, he, who errs, has nothing to charge but his own will, in whose power it was to have continued the scrutiny, till the object had been disintangled and set free from all real scruples. When the object is arrived at such a degree of clarity, there is no fear of deception, it being not reconcileable with the Divine Veracity, that our faculty should be so composed, as to be deceived in that case. Error proceeds from our giving our assent too hastily, before the proposition be clear to us. It being in the power of the Will to suspend the assent till that time, we can with justice charge nothing but the Will as the fountain of the aberration.  
3. It is no uncharitableness to say, That error is damnable. Faith and Charity go hand in hand. That Proposition which is the object of the first, cannot be inconsistent with the second. Now it is evident, That it is a branch of our Creed, that some errors are of this nature. Whosoever abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God, Jo. 2. ep. v. 7. There shall be false Teachers among you, who shall privily bring in damnable Heresies, 2 Pet. 2.1. If any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him, let him know, that he which converteth a sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death, 1 Pet. 5.19, 20. If conversion from error procures Salvation, perseverance in error must inevitably infer damnation. Heresies are reckoned amongst those things, which shut men out of the kingdom of Heaven. All sins whatsoever spring from error in the understanding. This is expressed in the names which the Scripture gives to sin. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 1.27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Heb. 9.7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an aberration from the mark. Sinners are styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unreasonable, 2 Thess. 3.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without understanding, Tit. 3.3. Fools, Act. 26.11. A deceived heart is represented as the root of all miscarriages, Is. 44.19, 20. If the fruit be damnable, it is no uncharitableness to think the root is so.  
4. The reason why a just Catalogue of errors damnable to all men cannot be made, is, because that error may be damnable to one which is not so to another. Obligations to believe, spring out of those advantages, which Men have to know the mind of God; therefore all not enjoying the same advantages, cannot lie under an equal obligation. Tho' this makes it difficult to give the number of errors: yet it is no impediment to the discretion of their quality. Number and quality are different modes, and fall under distinct perceptions. That kind of Locusts which destroyed the fruits of Egypt, were easily distinguished from others of the same denomination: and yet it was impossible to make a Catalogue of them.  
5. The fault may be known by the guilty, if they please to look back, after they have made that, which they call a mature search, and observe, how often they have given their assent, before there has been such a degree of clarity in the object, as could with justice lay a claim to it.  respects, and not the merit of the Cause, do usually prevail with Men to take up an Opinion: and when they have espoused it, the often repetition of that, which at first they knew to be an uncertainty, makes them at last to give credit to it in good earnest. Tho' they were Liars at the beginning, yet in the end became believers. The best way, to discover the deception, is to make a review, and to consider the first motives which did introduce their credence. They are usually some excentrical regards to the persons of some, which are under the same persuasion. The fallibility of such inducements will give us just reason to look back, withdraw our assent, and not to terminate it upon any thing for the future, but that which doth manifest its truth by undeniable evidence.  
6. God hath not put us into a state of probability. Truths of peremptory necessity are delivered to us in demonstrations. If they be hid, it is only to those whose eyes are blinded by the God of this World. The light of the glorious Gospel is plain and conspicuous enough in itself. If every thing must be esteemed probable only, against which some luxuriant wits may devise objections, the clearest propositions will not arrive at the honour of being accounted certain, but must be contented to take their place amongst probabilities It is as easy for a sceptical fancy to raise scruples, as for Travellers in dry weather to raise dust in the high way. It is reported of Car. 
Vedel. p. 27.  Perronius, when he had made an Oration before Henry the third of France, to prove the existence of the Deity, with the great applause of the Auditory, he made a tender to speak as much on the contrary side. There is nothing more visible to us than local motion, and yet the certainty of it has not been exempt from being encountered with opposition. Objections are like clouds, not all of them obscure the Sun, and render his light dubious: but those only which lie in a direct line betwixt that Luminary and the visive faculty. Many objections may be started on either side. but if the splendour of the object be so efficacious, as not to permit them to come in a direct line betwixt it, and the perceptive faculty, they ought not to make any abatement, and degrade the object from a state of certainty, to a state of probability.  
7. An erroneous Conscience is no more the true Vicegerent of God, than the Pseudo-Smerdis was the Brother of Cambyses: or Perkin Warbeck the Son of Edward the fourth. An erroneous Conscience is but a Counterfeit, and no more to be obeyed than those pretenders. If nothing falls under condemnation, which is done according to Conscience, S. Paul before his conversion was as unblameable, as he believed himself to be, when he expressed the highest degree of enmity to the Church.  
The Jews also by the same way of arguing will be discharged from all guilt, who thought it an acceptable service to God to shed the blood of his Servants, Joh. 16.3. Error in the Conscience is to be resolved into the Will as the spring of it: and therefore cannot sanctify those bad effects, which it doth naturally produce. Conscience is nothing but the Judgement: for the right information of which a sufficient provision is made. We then err, when we neglect to make use of this provision, and acquiesce in sudden dictates, grounded upon something which is  to the Cause, and do not persevere in our scrutiny, till matters be brought to such a degree of perspicuity, as duly qualifies them for assent.  
I have now finished the first particular. Our Light to direct us in the Worship of God, is to be directed from the Holy Scripture. I will proceed to the next.  
2. Our strength to perform, what we are directed unto, we must expect from the Holy Spirit. His assistance is either General or Special. General. Where the Gospel is preached, it is accompanied with a Divine Power, whereby the hearers are put into a capacity of complying with the demands of it. Upon this account it is styled the Administration of the Spirit, the Law of the Spirit of Life, the Power of God unto Salvation. And Christ is represented as waiting to see what improvement will be made of it. Behold I stand at the door and knock. And those who frustrate the Divine Call, are said to resist the Holy Ghost. And those who are obedient, to be begotten again by the Word, which is a work appropriated to the Spirit, as the principal Agent. Such persons have a power to know, That there is a Supreme Being, which governs the World: to discern their own iniquity in breaking those Laws, by which he governs; to be filled with consternation, upon the account of the eternal pains, which the Gospel threatens to the disobedient; to have some hope of Amnesty and forgiveness in consideration of the Evangelical Promises: and under these dispositions to cast themselves down before the throne of the divine benignity, and with all humility implore the communication of a higher assistance, That they may be enabled to serve God with a Spirit of love and delight, and with an Eye entirely fixed upon his Glory. Those who have made, by the help of this general grace, so near an approach to the Kingdom of Heaven, and have so far wrought out their Salvation with fear and trembling. It is the usual method of the Divine Spirit to communicate unto them a more special aid, to work in them to will and to do. Whereas the proud, who refuse to improve this talon are rejected: these humble persons find acceptance, and have a greater measure of grace communicated to them. Jam. 4.6. 1 Pet. 5.5. Is. 57.15. They are in the ready way to be impregnated with a principle which is styled, a new heart, Ezek. 36.26. the new creature, 2 Cor. 5.17. the new man. Eph. 4.24. the hidden man of the heart, 1 Pet. 3.4. the divine nature, 2 Pet. 1.4. the unction, 1 Jo. 2.27. And likewise to be excited by a supernal influence, to act according to this principle. Tho' the habitual gift is perfect as it descends from the Father of Lights: yet as it stands in relation to the Recipient, out of which it does not expel all the remains of the Primitive Apostasy, it being but imperfect, it has need of fresh influences to quicken it. Upon this account God is pleased, not only to enkindle the sparks of grace, but to prevent their decay by enlivening them with the breath of his Holy Spirit. He not only enstamps a new bias upon the Heart; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  but with his own hand puts it forward toward the mark. This influence is that, which David so importunately petitions for, show me thy ways, teach me thy paths, lead me in thy truth, Ps. 25.4, 5. Open mine eyes, Ps. 119.18. make me to understand the way of thy precepts, v. 27. Teach me the way of thy statutes, v. 33. Incline my heart unto thy testimonies, v. 26. Make me to go in the way of thy commandments, v. 35. order my steps in thy word, v. 133. This holy Man in these applications must aim at the obtaining of some thing, which he was sensible of the want of. At the time of this address, he was invested with a Religious Principle; and therefore must have his Eye upon a Divine Influence, whereby his heart might be excited, and drawn forth to action. To this is consonant what is expressed in Ezekiel 36.26, 27. I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my ways. The stony heart is not only removed, and a tractable temper placed in the room, which is styled a heart of flesh: but the Spirit is to be put into them, in order to the stirring them up to walk in the ways of God. The same thing is asserted in the Ep. to the Hebrews, c. 13.20, 21. The God of peace make you perfect in every good work, to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ. That which is most pleasing is the Act of Religion; it having a nearer affinity to the Divine Nature, which is a pure act, than the Power has. The working of this by a Celestial influence is petitioned for. Faith, which is the spring of Religious Worship is represented in the very act to be the gift of God, Bhil. 1. v. 29. To you it is given not only to believe, but to suffer, as, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports actual suffering: So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 actual belief: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which denotes the Act of Worship is expressed as the effect of the Divine Donation, Luke 1. v. 73, 74. Parallel to all this are the words of the Apostle, Phil. 2.13. It is God that worketh in you, to will and to do. It is not only the power to will and to do, which is represented as the product of Divine Grace, but the volition and action. The influence is so efficacious, That the acts, which are freely exerted by Men, are attributed to him from whom it proceeds, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth not only signify him that is able to work, but him who worketh: so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not import only a power to do, but the doing or action itself. Those, who are thus dealt with, are said to be drawn by the Father. Jo. 6.44. After they have gone through the preparatory work by the help of his general grace: This special effectually pulls their hearts, and brings them over to Christ. This is the usual method of God's proceeding with those who live under the Gospel. He puts a Talon into the hand of every one: and if it be rightly used, he secures to the improver by promise the communication of a more powerful assistance: So that if any want it, none are  for the defect, but themselves. He, who is unfaithful in the discharge of an inferior trust, cannot expect to be employed in a greater. He who hath a stock of a hundred pounds, and imbezleth it, may thank his own folly, That a greater sum is not committed to him. It is no prejudice to what has been asserted, That God deals sometimes otherwise with Men. S. Paul before his Conversion, was so far from being under any preparatory disposition, That he was employing his strength to destroy the Faith of Christ, at that time, when he was effectually called by him. There is no rule, but may admit of some exception. God has his chosen vessels of Mercy. The Captain General of our Salvation has, besides his other Regiments, 
Artic. 17.  one peculiar to himself. God hath chosen in Christ some out of Mankind. Helps are vouchsafed to many, which exceed the ordinary measures. In the family in Heaven and Earth, every Child's portion, tho' it be sufficient, yet is not equal. S. Paul was a special object of Divine dignation: and had extraordinary communications to secure his permanency amidst all the disanimating circumstances, he was cast into. He styles himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one suddenly, and not regularly brought forth, as Abortives use to be. The breathe of the Holy Spirit are like to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Winds, which by Geographers are divided into two sorts, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such are common to all places, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such as are proper to some. God having established Christ as a King for ever, he doth ascertain to him a people to rule over by the most efficacious motions of his holy Spirit, whereby their reluctancies are conquered, and minds bowed into a resignation and submission to the will of Heaven.  
As for those, who have not the Gospel preached unto them, the divine procedure with them is more concealed. As the Scripture doth industriously give an account of the Holy Seed, and but occasionally touch upon those generations, which are out of that line: So it gives a most distinct representation of the method of his operation with those to whom the Sacred Oracles are communicated, but not so full a disclosure of it with others, which are not admitted to a participation of that immunity. That, which is revealed is sufficient to demonstrate, That God is not wanting to them; and if they miscarry, their destruction is chargeable only upon themselves. It is manifest, That they with all others are naturally so much under the power of that corruption, which is contracted by the Fall: That the Image of God is obliterated in them, and they rendered unable to do any thing, which is spiritually good. The Second Adam has so far made a reparation, That the light of Reason, in some measure, discovering their obligations to their Creator is impressed upon them. He who is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lighteth every Man that comes into the World. That which may be known of God is manifest in them: not so much upon the account of the remains of the Divine Image, which they received in the state of innocency, as a secondary discovery, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for God hath manifested it unto them. There is a spirit in every man enclosed with darkness, and the effects of the Primitive Apostasy: but the inspiration of the Lord giveth understanding. When men had benighted themselves, it was the pleasure of the Lord to light a candle for them, Prov. 20.27. This light is not only received, but a power to comport with the meaning of it. For it is plain, they receive so much from God, that for their defect in the glorifying of them, they are rendered inexcusable, Rom. 1.20. If light had been imparted to discover their obligations, and a power denied to satisfy them; no fairer excuse could have been devised than this, That the Divine Benignity, since their Primitive Apostasy, whereby they lost their Light and Power; has been pleased to give them some Light again, to see their duty, but withhold a Power to discharge it.  
To all this we may add, That the fault is in themselves, that they enjoy no fuller a manifestation, and those assistances which accompany it. By not improvement of that, which they have, they are deprived of a just claim to that which is greater. The Sound of the Gospel, which went to the uttermost parts of the Earth, was drowned with the clamour of their exorbitances. Divine Providence notwithstanding these provocations, has placed the Candlestick at no such distance from them, as renders them uncapable of receiving benefit by it. They traffic with those in temporal concerns which are acquainted with it: And if their affection to him, who is the desire of all Nations, was not through a voluntary defect grown very languid, they may do the same in Spirituals.  
Tho' we are not able to delineate the manner of God's giving his aid to all in the concerns of Religion: Yet we have no inferior degree of assurance in the general, That all do receive such an assistance, as renders them inexcusable, if they do not perform, what he requires. To assert, That he withholds such help, makes a very dishonourable reflection upon him. It casts a cloud upon the glorious constellation of his Attributes: in particular, upon his Goodness, as tho' he was less kind under the Second Covenant, than under the First: His Justice, as tho' he did condemn men for that, which it was never in their power to prevent: His Mercy, in offering external means to those, who have no power to make use of them. It has a tendency to deface that idea which we naturally have of God in our Souls, and beget in the room of it very enormous conceptions: As tho' he did require the Lame to walk, and yet not furnish them with such supports as are of peremptory necessity to that motion. It leaves no matter for the Worm of Conscience to breed out of. If the damned knew, That a sufficient power, while they were upon the Theatre of this World, was not given to them to escape the Torment they are in, how can they reflect with indignation upon their own folly, for the misspending their time, and the loss of their opportunity, to gain a more easy state? No man is inclined to make pensive reflections upon himself, for the not bringing to pass impossibilities. It renders exhortation useless. Counsel supposeth a power in him, to whom it is directed, to comply with it. None will exhort a person, to see, who has irrecoverably lost his visive faculty, or one, who is dead, to move. It enervates the nature of repentance. Who will believe himself concerned to grieve for the omission of that, which was never in his power to do; or for the doing of that, which he never had power to omit?  
As God created Angels with a Will confirmed to that which is Good; brute Creatures with a Faculty determined to their proper Objects: So he has made Man in a middle state, not secured, as the supernal Spirits are, nor determined as inferior Animals. He has endued him with a sufficient power, which he may use, or abuse, improve or neglect. This is evident in the first Adam, who undoubtedly had a power to persevere in his innocency; and in those, who are converted by the grace of the second Adam, whom all confess to have a power to do more good than they do. He who worketh after the counsel of his will, is pleased, to make man after his image, and leave him in the hands of his own counsel, Ecclus. 15, 14. His concourse with him he adapts to his constitution. As the sinite Spirit, which animates the body, has its several Organs by which its operations are modified: So likewise the infinite Spirit, who by his omnipotent interposal sustains the Universe. All the Creatures are his Organs, some free, some necessary. Every one he useth according to its Nature. Those, which are necessary, he concurs necessarily with. Those which are free, he ordinarily accommodates himself to their freedom, and by this means keeps up the order which he has established.  
This assertion is not prejudicial to his prescience. It is manifest, that he knows, what Evil Men will do; although they determine themselves to the doing of it. By a parity of reason he must know the Good, altho' they use their own freedom in the doing of it.  
Neither is it injurious to his Sovereignty. He has the hearts of all Men in his own hand. He can interpose his determining influence. He can take away the power whereby he inables them to determine themselves. All their determinations he can so order, as to make them subservient to the design of his Providence.  
Neither doth it destroy the immediate dependence of the Will upon him. It is dependent in its Being for conservation: in its acts for his prevenient grace, and simultaneous concourse. Tho' God is the cause of every Being, yet not of all the modes of a free Agent, as is evident in the evil of sin, which is such a mode, and yet brought to pass without his efficiency.  
If any difficulty arise about the manner of God's operating with the Will, which we cannot comprehend, we must not let go the belief of that, which is clear, for that which is obscure. Things many times are very perspicuous, when the modes are concealed. He would be accounted very vain, who should attempt to deny, That there is any such thing as light, because it is difficult to explain the way of its emanation from the great Luminary of the World. Every Man is sensible of a determining Power within himself: That in the midst of his intellectual discussions, he has a liberty to make his election of such an object as he apprehends to be most agreeable to himself. To deny this, because we are not fully satisfied about every mode in the doing of it, is the same thing, as if we should affirm, That there is no such Sense as Seeing; because it is not yet agreed, whether the Eye perform its office by the entertainment of some Effluviums from the Object, or by the help of some pressure only upon the Optic Nerve.  
Now I have done with the second particular, namely, the strength, whereby we are enabled to perform what we are directed to. This we must expect from the Spirit of God. And now I proceed to the last.  
3. The acceptance of what we perform, is procured by the satisfaction and merit of Jesus Christ. In order to the clearing up of this Truth, the following steps must be taken.  
1. The acceptance of our Worship and Service is not upon its own account. There are great defects in the best of our performances. Our Faith, tho' it be unfeigned, yet it wants That firmness; our Love, tho' sincere, That fervour which the Law requires. The Law is natural and immutable, and can no more abate in its demands, than the fire can cease to be of a hot nature, or the Sun to be a lucid Body. If our most plausible actions were examined according to the rigour of it, many flames would be discovered in them. The Prophet tells us, 
Isai. 64.6.  All our righteousnesses are as silthy rags, The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tho' it be variously interpreted, yet all the Glosses agree in charging our most valuable services with imperfection. The precedent words justify the Exposition. We are all as an unclean thing. The fountain being impure, the streams which issue from it, will carry with them some signatures of the same impurity. The Apostle says, We know but in part; it is as sure, That we love and obey but in part. The Will being principally concerned in the Fall, must necessarily lie under a depravation equal to that of the Understanding. It is a saying among the Rabbins: 
Buxt. Rab. Lex. rad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 953. 1602.  So long as the just live, they are at war with concupiscence. They affirm, there are Three Sins, which daily every man is guilty of, Sinful Thoughts, want of attention in Prayer, evil words. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which they represent as the cause of these miscarriages, they tell us, That God will bring forth in the world to come, and slay before the righteous and the wicked.  
2. Acceptance is not upon the account of the favour of God, without the interposal of satisfaction for sin: by satisfaction we must understand the doing of something which repairs the damage, which is received by an injury, and the quieting thereby the mind of the injured, who is provoked by reason of the damage.  
A great injury is done by Sin to the Supreme Rector of the World. His Authority is trampled upon, and the Majesty of his Law diminished, his Government exposed to contempt, public Order unhinged, and by this means he is justly incensed. The ready way to repair the damage, and atone his displeasure, is to require, That the penalties due to the transgression, or such as are equivalent to them, be suffered; and in them to express his just indignation against Sin, and impress upon all such a fear and reverence, as the Laws of Heaven do challenge.  
That this should be done antecedently to Pardon and Acceptance, is evidently the Will of God, declared in the Holy Scripture. There we find, That there is no acceptance without remission, and there is no remission without the shedding of blood, and that this blood is the blood of a Mediator, through which we must have redemption, Rom. 3.24. Eph. 4.7. This is the reason why the Divine Amnesty, from the time of the Primitive Apostasy, has had a constant aspect upon this blood. When the Apostle asserts concerning the Mediator, if he had been to offer up himself often, as the Highpriest entered into the Holy of Holiest every year with the blood of others, then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the World. He plainly intimates, That from the beginning the Father has had a regard to the blood and sufferings of his Son in the remission of Sins. Tho' satisfaction was not then made, yet it was promised. Captives are frequently set free, in consideration of the ransom promised, before it be actually paid.  
As satisfaction is certainly agreeable to the Will of God: So it seems to be suitable to the propensity of his nature. Supposing the Creation, it is necessary that he have a Sovereignty and Dominion over it: and if he be a Sovereign Lord over the Creation, he must actually govern it. It is a defect to be invested with Power, and not to exercise it in relation to the Community: and if he governs, it must be by Law. Government supposeth Obedience. Obedience in the Intellectual part of Creation, must be an act of the Understanding. The Understanding cannot act, except it has a knowledge of the Will of him who governs. His Will published and made known is a Law. If there be a Law, it must be holy, it being enacted by him, who is infinite in purity, and sanctity: and if it be holy, he cannot but love it, the same necessity which doth oblige him to love himself, will engage him to love the resemblance. And if he love his Law, he cannot but hate sin which is opposite to it. Hatred to that which is contrary to Holiness, must be as natural to him, as to love and delight in Holiness. And if it be natural to terminate his hatred upon sin, by an equal necessity he is obliged to punish it. For hatred is never found in any without a peremptory desire to do evil to that which is its object: and such a desire, when it is in one, who wills nothing rashly, who is armed with sufficiency of power to execute, whatsoever he wills, who cannot be diverted from execution by any unseen emergency, must necessarily take effect, and whatsoever evil is done to sin by him who cannot err in his administrations, must have the formality of punishment, all evil being either the evil of sin or the evil of punishment. This penalty must either be inflicted upon the Offender, and then there will be no place left for Pardon and acceptance; or else upon some person, who is willing to become a surety for the Delinquent, and is able by his sufferings to restore that honour, which public order has been impaired in, and by this means content the mind of the Supreme Rector, and this is properly satisfaction.  
What is usually said, That if the nature of God doth oblige him to punish sin, than he is by the same necessity engaged to punish it in the offender, is of no moment. His hatred being not primarily terminated upon the person, but the sin; if the guilt be transferred by imputation to a Surety, it is not incongruous to assert, That the sin may be punished in him. Some acts which are in general natural to God, are free and undetermined in respect of the modification. To Govern the World (supposing the Creation) is essential to him: yet the mode, whether he will do it immediately by himself only, or make use of the Ministry of Men is his free choice. So tho' to punish Sin is natural, yet the manner of doing of it, whether in the person offending or his undertaker, is at his election.  
If it be further added, That if it be natural to punish, it must be done, so soon as the transgression is committed, and in the extremity. That which is natural, admits of no delay. The reply is easy, This is true of that which is natural in Creatures which want freedom and life: but it is otherwise in the Creator, who is an Intellectual Being. Supposing the Creation, it is natural to him to do good: and yet it is free for him to time his bounty as he pleaseth, and to communicate it in what degrees and methods he judgeth most convenient. It is natural for him to give a Law to his Creature: but he is not determined to the circumstances of publication, whether by innate Ideas only, or by revelation. The necessity, he is under, is intellectual, which admits of the interposal of Counsel about the modes, and circumstances of his actions. If it be replied, That what is natural in God, tho' it may be free in these respects, yet it must be always expressed in some measure or other, which cannot be affirmed of his punishing sin. I answer, That Sin in some measure is always punished, 
Jans. Augtom. 2. l. 3. cap. 3.  so soon as it is committed: from the first moment, the Transgressor is deprived of that contentment, which doth naturally emerge from a sense of a compliance with the Law of Creation. The Worm of Conscience presently grows out of the feculency and pollution, the Soul is defiled with. The serenity of mind, wherein our present beatitude consists, is instantly lost; and the anticipations of future torments succeed. The sparks of infernal fire are quickly kindled. A sense of the just judgement of God, That he, who doth such things, is worthy of death, fills the Soul with horror and the deepest consternation. Those blessings, which before, the Delinquent was encircled with, are Metamorphised into curses, Ploughshares converted into Swords. Pruning-hooks into Spears, every thing assumes a direful shape and menacing aspect.  
If it be added, That punishment is a debt, and every one has power freely to remit his debts. I answer this is not true of all kinds of debt. There is a debt of Active Obedience, which we own to God, from which he cannot give us a full discharge. The Law of Nature is as unchangeable, as his Essence. Those who are guilty of open defamation are indebted to the defamed, and obliged by pensive agnitions to reinvest them with that honour, they have rob them of. This debt the persons injured, have no more right to remit, than they have to murder themselves: their credit being as valuable as their lives. Sin deprives God of his glory, which he can by no means part with, and therefore in justice must require restitution by some convenient satisfaction, before he remit the penalty due to the Transgressor, and receive him into favour.  
This satisfaction, which is so necessary, before we can have an interest in the divine acceptance, Jesus Christ has made. He has repaied the damae which public order and the Laws of Heaven received from our Sins: and fully contented the mind of the Supreme Rector, who in justice was obliged to vindicate the honour of his appointments. This will be manifest if we consider the following particulars. Jesus Christ has suffered the punishment of our sin. What he suffered, was in our stead. The damage done by sin is repaired, and the mind of the Supreme Rector fully appeased and reconciled unto us, upon the terms of the New Covenant.  
1. Christ Jesus has suffered the punishment of our Sin.  
It is plain to every one who consults the Sacred Oracles, That his sufferings were of the highest nature, if we consider the words, by which they are represented. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sets forth the extremity of his grief, ad satietatem usque, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaks his sorrow to be so great, That it produced a stupefaction in him. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports nothing short of these two words, his Soul was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, beseized on every side, with grief. Heaven above did forsake him, in his apprehension. Hell below did conspire against him. The Jews on the one hand, stood ready to betray him: The Gentiles on the other were prepared to crucify him. Nothing but occasions of grief were administered to his Senses. His Eyes beheld the fury of his adversaries. His Ears were filled with their blasphemies. The most Nervous parts of his body were pierced with instruments of cruelty. The drops of Blood which fell from his sacred Body argue, That nothing was wanting to consummate the most exquisite torment. The circumstances of his Passion were so amazing, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  That Dionysius in Egypt (when he saw the Sun in mourning at his crucifixion) used these words, Either the Divinity suffers, or sympathizeth with him that does.  
For all this, there must be some important reason. It cannot be imagined, That he who was interested in the highest degree of the Love of his Father; That never had done any thing to merit the least unkindness, should be treated with so much severity upon some unnecessary grounds.  
The could be no motives of an inferior Nature, which did induce the eternal Father, to suffer his only Son the Lord of Life to die. The Lord of Glory to be obscured with the clouds of ignominy and reproach. There must be something in the case, which could not be accomplished in any other method. All confess that, What the Socinians allege as the reason, might have been brought to pass upon far easier terms. They tell us, That Christ suffered to confirm the Covenant, induce us to perform the conditions of it, to make way for his ingress into Heaven in order to the performing the Office of a Priest.  
The First of these might have been done by the working of Miracles, which are the broad Seal of Heaven. What can any reasonable Man desire more, than a clear revelation concerning the terms upon which God will be reconciled, and an assurance given by miraculous operations, That there's no collusion in the Declaration.  
The Exemplary Life of our Blessed Lord, is sufficient to invite us to be agreeable in our Conversation to the conditions of the New Covenant. His Death, with all the terrifying circumstances attending it, have a tendence to affright Men from embracing his Doctrine. No Man is naturally inclined to espouse that way, which may expose him to so much sorrow. Was there no more intended in the Death of Christ, than what Socinus asserts, He might after his Immaculate Life spent in this World, like Enoch and Elias, have been immediately translated into Heaven, and there with as much advantage, as if he had suffered the pains of death, have transacted all those things appertaining to our reconciliation, which they attribute unto him. He was above Thirty Years in this sublunary state, contesting with the anxieties of humane Life, and therefore must necessarily be touched with a fence of our infirmities. His whole Life was meritorious, and therefore, there is no reason to think, That the most easy way to Heaven would have been denied him, had his sufferings imported no more than what our Adversaries in this Cause affirm. The God of Nature and Grace doth not use to do any thing in vain.  
Lastly, The reasons of the sufferings of our Blessed Lord, which must be granted to be of more importance than any thing which has been alleged by the Socinians, the Holy Scripture resolves into our sin, and represents his Passion as the Punishment of it.  
Man violating the Law of his Creation, if nothing did interpose to prevent the infliction of Punishment, our condition would be a state of desperation, destructive of that which is most essential to Religion, and pleasing unto God. No place would be left for the emanations of his benignity, which he is eminently delighted with. He being propense to pardon; and his hatred to Sin, and love to his Law, inclining him not to do it, without some severe expression of his detestation first made against the violation of his Command: in order to the reconciling of these propensities, and making way for his clemency to exert itself, his eternal Son has freely offered himself to bear the penalty due to us upon the account of Sin. For this reason, he is said to be made a curse, Gal. 3.13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That he might redeem us from the curse, He has freely without any compulsion derived it upon himself.  
Crellius tell us, That the word here cannot be taken in this fence, because he, who is properly accursed, is the object of Divine Hatred, which cannot be asserted of the Son of God: and the curse which he suffered, was the death of the Cross; but the curse of the Law is Eternal death.  
To which I reply, He which is accursed upon his own account, is the object of Divine Hatred: but he, That is so upon the account of another, freely bearing the curse in order to the satisfying Divine Justice, and the vindicating the authority of the Law is not. The hatred is terminated upon the Sin which is ours, and not upon the Person who undertakes to bear the demerit of it, and by so doing, accomplish the ends which are highly agreeable to the desires of the Supreme Rector.  
The Death of our Blessed Lord upon the Cross, tho' it was not the same with Eternal Death; yet it was equivalent. The want of eternity was compensated by the dignity of the Person, who was so contumeliously treated. The degrees of suffering, are usually estimated by the quality of the person who suffereth. A Magistrate suffers more by a contumelious usage, than a private Man: The Supreme more than he who is subordinate. Therefore if he who suffers be infinite in dignity, as the Son of God is, his punishment must have an infinity in it. And an infinite punishment is equipollent to that, which is eternal.  
Parallel to this, are the words of S. Peter, Who his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree, 1 Ep. 2.24. Christ is said to bear our sins, that is, The punishment of them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, tulit sursum eundo. When he was upon the Cross, he had the burden of them, upon his shoulders. Crellius, in order to the disappointing the force of this Text, says, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth not necessarily denote to bear, it may as well be translated to take away: but supposing it doth, yet it does not follow, That the pain he bore was a punishment: one may be said to bear the sins of another, who falls into any calamity occasioned by them, altho' there be nothing of the formality of punishment in it. To which I answer, That to bear, is the proper signification of the word, and we are not to departed from the proper import, except the circumstances of the place put a necessity upon us. The Context is so far from obliging us to any such thing; That, in case it may be allowed to arbitrate, it will determine us to the signification of bearing. The scope of the Apostle is to exhort those, to whom he writes, to bear with patience the sufferings, which the profession of the Gospel might expose them to. In order to this end, he draws an argument from the pattern of our Blessed Lord, who did patiently bear the penalty of our sins in his Body on the Tree, without any menacing returns to the Authors of his Crucifixion. The word in conjunction with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but once more found in the New Testament; and, there it has evidently the fence we contend for. So Christ was once offered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to bear the sins of many, and to them which look for him, he shall appear the second time without sin, Heb. 9.28. Here are two appearances of Christ set opposite one to the other, the last without sin, that is, without bearing the burden of it, and therefore the first was with sin. He was burdened with it, and did bear the demerit. This fence is favoured by the Context, He appeared to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself, v. 26. A Sacrifice did bear the punishment due to him for whom it was offered.  
Crellius overthrows himself, in saying, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, here signifies, to take away: for this taking away, must be performed upon the Tree. But Christ according to his notion did not take away Sin upon the Cross. His suffering was but preparatory to his ingress into Heaven, where he was first invested with a power to forgive sin. S. Peter in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, has a manifest aspect upon the Prophecy of Esaias, c. 53.11. He shall bear their iniquities, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a word too stiff to be bend into a compliance with the Socinian persuasion. It constantly signifies to bear or carry, and for this reason is interpreted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matt. 8.17. He bore their sicknesses, that is, He did undergo much trouble and pains in the curing of them. He had no respite all the day: and when the even was come, (at which time others compose themselves for rest) he was pressed upon by the multitude, and did attend this great work.  
What Crellius says in the second place, (if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to bear, it doth not follow, That he did bear the punishment of sin. He might accidentally undergo sorrow, which was occasioned by our sins, in which there was nothing of the nature of punishment in relation to him) is of no validity.  
If it be granted, That it signifies to bear, the thing born must be the punishment of sin. Punishment imports a natural evil inflicted by one in authority, That the party offended, by the commission of some moral evil, may receive satisfaction, and the ends of government be secured. All this agrees to the Sufferings of Christ. They import a natural evil. They were displeasing to humane Nature. They were inflicted by the Supreme Rector of the World. It pleased the Lord to bruise him. The design of his Passion, was to make Satisfaction to the injured. Our Sins rob God of his Glory. This was restored by the Sufferings of his Son. He was set forth to be a propitiation to declare his Righteousness. The ends of Government are eminently secured. His Sufferings must necessarily strike a consternation into all. If such things were done in the green Tree, what may be expected in the dry? If he, who had no sin of his own, was so severely treated, what can we look for, if we persevere in our provocations?  
If all things appertaining to the nature of a penalty, agree to the Sufferings of Christ, there is no reason but to believe, when Christ is said to bear our sins, that the meaning is, That he did bear the punishment of them.  
It is true, A Man may be said to bear the miscarriages of another, who accidentally falls under any disaster occasioned by them. But the case here is quite otherwise. Nothing was fortuitous. The Person suffering was delivered into the hands of his Crucifiers according to the determinate Counsel of Heaven. The intent of his Passion, was to accomplish all those ends, which are intended in punishment. And that which makes an affliction to be a penalty in a proper sense, is nothing but the end, which is aimed at.  
Consonant to this, is what S. Paul has expressed, 2 Cor. 5.21. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.  
He was made sin for us, that is, Put under an obligation to suffer the punishment which our sins had deserved. God laid upon him the Iniquity of us all. The Transgressions of those who lived in the most opposite parts of the Terrestrial Globe, did all meet together upon him. He is the centre, upon which the burden of them did settle.  
Crellius tells us, That when Christ is said to be made Sin, the meaning is, That he was by wicked Men, reputed and treated as a sinner. But if this was the meaning, than Christ was made sin by his Crucifiers; whereas the action is ascribed unto God. When he is said to be made sin, something must be understood, which is peculiar to him. But if Crellius' sense of the words prevails, the Martyrs may be said to be made sin when they were punished under the notion of Malefactors by their inveterate enemies. The Antithesis betwixt being made sin, and knowing no sin, is a clear justification of our interpretation. Christ knew no sin, that is, was guilty of none, by any deviation of his own. Therefore when it is said, He was made sin, the meaning is, He was made guilty of ours by imputation, and by his own consent, together with assent of his Father, brought under an obligation to suffer the penalty of it. It is manifest from the Text, That he was so made sin for us; as we are made righteousness, or righteous in him. Now it is manifest, That upon our performing the conditions of the New Covenant, we are made righteous in consideration of his meritorious satisfaction: and therefore he was made sin for us, in consideration of our demerit, which he undertook to make expiation for. That which induceth the Socinians to endeavour the elusion of the evidence of the Texts which are produced, is a persuasion, That the fence, we contend for, is repugnant to reason. There can be no punishment, but where there is guilt: there can be no guilt, where there is innocency; and there was nothing but innocency in the Immaculate Lamb of God. But it must be remembered, That the proper notion of guilt is nothing but an obligation to punishment. And it is not disagreeable to reason, That such an obligation should be contracted by an Innocent Person, in case he be willing to stand in the place of the Nocent, and suffer the penalty due to him. If he be one, who has power to dispose of his own life, as our Blessed Lord had; he may by an act of his Will, as well engage himself to lay down his life, as to lay down a sum of Mony. Every Man may do with that, which is in his power, what he pleaseth. Tho' it be essential to punishment to be inflicted for sin: yet it is not essential to be inflicted upon the sinner. The merit of Virtue, is as personal and incommunicable, as the merit of sin: yet it as not essential to the reward, to be always conferred upon the person meriting. Chimham was rewarded by David for Barzillais' kindness. Children frequently far the better for their Parents deservings. There is no reason to believe, That it is unjust in all cases to punish one for the crime of another. God, who is not obnoxious to error in his administrations, has done it. When he tells the people, That they should have occasion no more to use this Proverb, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge: he intimates, That they had formerly occasion so to do: and what was now said in this matter, was but a particular favour granted to them at this time: and not to be a standing rule in all succeeding generations. It is most evident, That Judah suffered in the reign of Josiah for the provocations of Manasses, 2 Kin. 23.26. Tho' they had sins of their own to irritate Divine Justice: yet they were not the cause of their suffering. He, who punisheth a Nocent Person in that respect in which he is Innocent, doth the same thing, as if he punished one, who is perfectly Innocent.  
It is evident by the Second Command, That the iniquity of the fathers is visited upon their children. If such Children are only understood, who imitate their Parent's transgression, no reason can be given of the limitation to the third and fourth generation.  
That one may be punished for another was not accounted unjust amongst those, who were governed by the light of Nature; as is evident by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or sureties in capital matters, which did engage life for life. There can be no pretence of injury, where the person suffering freely consents, and has a dominion over his own life, he having power to dispose of himself, in his submission to the greatest passion, he does no injury to any other; and he consenting upon the clearest considerations, no injury is done to himself. When the understanding is weak, and not a competent guide, an injury may be done, altho' the party concerned be willing. But the case before us is quite otherwise. Our Blessed Lord, upon the clearest dictate of reason, became willing to bear our sins. He did in this comply with the propensities of his own benignity; serve the necessities of Mankind; justify public Order; and assert the Majesty of the Law, against all that contempt which our Sins had exposed it unto.  
The Premises, being well considered, will make it manifest, That Christ suffered the punishment of our Sins.  
2. What He suffered was in our stead. This will be evident, if we consider his blood which he shed, either as a Sacrifice, or a ransom: as a Sacrifice. The offering which he made to God, was expiatory, a Sacrifice for sin, Heb. 10.20. This oblation must necessarily have the nature which is common to all offerings under the Old Testament of the same kind. They were figures of this great Oblation: and there must be an agreement betwixt the Type and the thing typified, in that which is essential to the nature of the Type. Now, it is manifest, That all the expiatory offerings in the Old Testament, were in lieu of those persons, for whom they were offered. The Law did require death of every one, that did not remain in the obedience of it. The offences against it were of two sorts, either such as were punished with the death of the offender, as Murder and Idolatry, etc. without the benefit of Sacrifice: Or else such, for the expiation of which, a Sacrifice was appointed, and slain in the room of the Transgressor. The blood of the beast, in which the life consists, was given upon the Altar to make atonement for the Souls of Men, Leu. 17.11. As the Law was satisfied by the death of the offender in the first case: So likewise, by the death of the Sacrifice in the second. The sin of the Delinquent was symbolically derived upon the Piacular Sacrifice, and therefore he which carried the skin and flesh without the Camp, to be burnt, did, by touching of them, contract pollution, and might not be admitted into the Camp again, before he had washed his , and bathed his flesh in water, Leu. 16.28. This was the cause, why he, for whom the offering was made, was obliged to lay his hand upon the head of it. Theodoret says, That the hand did import action, and signify, That the actions of the Transgressor were laid upon the Sacrifice. This was the apprehension of the ancient Jews, as is evident by the form of words used, when a sin-offering was made, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haec sit expiatio mea, which they expound thus, The evil, which I have deserved, let it fall upon the head of the Sacrifice.  
Now, If the expiatory offerings under the Mosaical Oeconomy, were Types of the offering of Jesus Christ, and it was essential to them, to be slain in the room of the Transgressor, we have just reason from hence to infer, That our blessed Lord suffered not only for our good and advantage, but in our stead, and place.  
In order to the disappointing the force of this argument, Crellius says, That Christ was not a Priest till he came into Heaven; and that those Sacrifices only, which were offered for the whole Congregation, and at some stated times, especially, That upon the day of expiation, were Types of his oblation: and that those which were designed for this use, did not represent him in his mactation; but in that one action only, whereby their blood was carried into the holy place, and sprinkled before the Lord. To all which I will reply in order.  
1. Christ did execute the office of a Priest here upon the earth. The Apostle says, he gave himself as an Offering and Sacrifice unto God, Eph. 5.2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports such a Sacrifice as is put to death, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Jo. 10. v. 10. Reconciliation the proper effect of a Sacrifice, is attributed to the blood of the Cross, Col. 1.20. His purging our sins did precede his sitting down on the right hand of the Majesty on high, Heb. 1.3. His having obtained eternal redemption, is antecedent to his entering into the holy place, Heb. 9.12. He is said to be once offered up, Heb. 9.28. And after this to sit down at the right hand of God, Heb. 10.12. If this offering has been in Heaven, it would not have been said to have been once done. The representation of this oblation there is every day. He continually makes intercession. The offering, upon which the Apostles words have an aspect, imports passion. For he says, in case it was to be repeated, than Christ must have often suffered since the foundation of the World: but the Passion of Christ was over, before he entered into Heaven.  
Those words, If he were on earth, he should not be a Priest, Heb. 8.4. do not imply, That he did not execute his Sacerdotal Function, when he was upon the earth. All, that can be collected from them, is, That if after he had made an offering upon the Cross, he had remained upon the earth, he could not have been our Highpriest: Because, He, who was to bear this office, was not only to die for us upon the Earth, but to appear in Heaven, and there by presenting the merit of that oblation, which was made here below, procure those aids which we stand in need of.  
2. Those Sacrifices, which were offered for the whole Congregation at some set times, were not the only Types of the offering of the Messiah. The Apostle, when he tells us, That the Sacrifice of Christ was substituted in the room of the Legal Offerings; and that the first was taken away, that the second might be established, Heb. 10.9. He must necessarily have his eye upon such oblations, which as if they were shadows, which, when the body came, did disappear and vanish. Now it is plain, That the Apostle there, has his eye upon more Sacrifices, than those which were offered for the whole Congregation. He useth so many words as can comprehend no less than all the Mosaical Oblations, as Sacrifice, Offering, Burnt-offerings, Offering for sin.  
3. It is not true, That those Sacrifice which typified Christ, did represent him only in that action, whereby the blood was carried into the holy place, and sprinkled before the Lord. The Apostle says, That the very burning their bodies without the Camp, was a Type of him. Heb. 13.11, 12. for the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high Priest for sin, are burnt without the Camp. Therefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the Gate.  
There was nothing in the ceremonial constitution less probable to be in the number of the Types of the Law, than this circumstance of place. The mactation has a more obvious correspondence with the design of our Redeemer. And if that, which has the least appearance of being in that number, was notwithstanding prefigurative and typical, much more that which has a greater.  
Now I have considered Christ under the notion of a Sacrifice. In the next place, if we look upon him as a Ransom, it will be evident that what he suffered, was in our stead.  
By Sin we brought ourselves into a state of bondage, under an obligation to undergo the penalty of the Law. The sentence of condemnation was denounced against us, and we juridically bound to suffer. In order to the redeeming of us from this condition, Jesus Christ has been pleased to lay down a sufficient price in our stead agreeable to the expectation of the Law. This is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which includes both a commutation and a compensation. It was laid down in the place of that which was due from us. Our Blessed Lord redeemed us from the Curse of the Law by being made a curse. He suffered that which was a valuable consideration, and did answer all the ends of the legal Sanction.  
The Socinians, to disappoint the strength of this Argument, say, That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not taken properly. Moses is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and yet he laid down no price, when he redeemed the Israelites out of Egypt. Every proper price is paid to some body. It could not be paid to God, because he procured it: and those, who are redeemed by it, are bought for his service. He, for whom the redeemed are purchased, and who procures the price of redemption, doth not use to receive it. A price in a proper sense would destroy the nature of remission.  
To which I reply,  
1. If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be not taken properly, than the blood of Christ is styled a price only, because the effusion of it intervenes, before we are delivered from our bondage, as a price doth; altho' it hath no such influence, as a price, upon our redemption. And if so, than some reason ought to be given, why our redemption is attributed more to the blood and death of Christ, than to his Doctrine, Miracles, Promises, the blood of Martyrs. All these have an influence upon our Salvation of the same nature with that which Crellius attributes to the blood of Christ. The Doctrine of Christ doth show us the way to it. His Miracles confirm the truth of that way. His Promises excite us to walk in it. The blood of Martyrs, and their Heroic Patience, eminently conduce to the establishment of our Faith. If the blood of Christ did not contribute to our redemption, in some peculiar way, which is not common to these things, why is it never attributed to them?  
2. Moses is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Act. 7.37. because he was a Type of the true Redeemer, and the blood of the Paschal Lamb, a Type of the price of redemption which he laid down. It is no good consequence, because Moses did not pay a price properly so called, therefore Christ did not. The similitude betwixt the figure and the thing prefigured must not be extended beyond the bounds intended in the institution, to every punctilio. Jonah in the Fish's belly was a Type of Christ in the grave. Because Jonah was alive, it doth not follow, That Christ in the grave was not dead. The Brazen Serpent, when it was lifted up, was a Type of Christ Crucified. From thence we must not infer, That Christ's blood was not shed upon the Cross, because none did slow from the Brazen Serpet.  
3. The price of our redemption was paid unto god. He held us captive. The Apostle says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we were kept, (as prisoners in a garrison) under the Law, Gal. 3. v. 23. By whose warrant, we were committed to this prison, is expressed in the precedent verse, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Scripture hath concluded, or shut up all under sin. This Warrant was written with God's own hand. Parallel to this is what is expressed in the Epistle to the Romans, God hath shut up all under disobedience, c. 11.32. We were imprisoned for our delinquency, and by a divine appointment under an obligation to suffer punishment.  
4. Tho' God procures the price, and the redeemed are ransomed for his service; yet it doth not follow, That the price was not paid to him. When a Subject violates the Law of his Prince, and by his enormous deportment precipitates himself into a state of thraldom; and it cannot be reconciled with the interest of the community, and the immutable rule of justice to set him at liberty, without satisfaction first made to the Law: the Prince out of his benignity may contrive, how this may be done; and when it is done, accept it, and release the person, with a design, that he may be in capacity to serve him.  
5. The price of Redemption, properly taken, doth not destroy the nature of Pardon and Remission. He, on whom the Pardon is conferred, contributes nothing of his own towards the meriting of it. The debt is canceled, without any payment made by him to the Creditor. Forgiveness is an entire act of Divine Benignity. It is no diminution of the bounty of Heaven, to make choice of such a way to do it in, as hath a consistence with Wisdom and Justice. There is more grace expressed in pardoning in and through Christ, than in pardoning without him. Immediate Remission is but a single favour, Remission in and through Christ, a double. For God doth not only pardon sin, but give his own Son for the procuring of it in such a method, as contributes no inferior degree of glory to every attributed in the Divine Essence; and is equally advantageous to the transgressor.  
All this, duly considered, will evidence, That our Blessed Lord suffered in our stead.  
3. By what, He suffered in our stead, the damage done by sin is repaired; and the mind of the Supreme Rector fully appeased and reconciled unto us upon the terms of the New Covenant. The damage is repaired. By punishment Laws are vindicated, and their just authority asserted. The greater the punishment is, the clearer is the vindication. There cannot be a greater penalty, than That, which was suffered by the Son of God. Penalties are estimated according tot he dignity of the person, who suffers. It is a higher punishment for a Prince to have marks of disgrace fastened upon him, than for a Peasant. Our Blessed Lord infinitely transcending all others in dignity, there must be a kind of infinity in that penalty, which was laid upon him. Now what can be more efficacious than this, to remove all contempt from the Laws, and put a check upon that aptitude which is in Men, to take encouragement from a bad example, to violate them. Who dare lightly think of that, the vindication of which cost no less than the Death of the Lord of Life? That Authority will not easily be disvalue, when it is manifest, That the crime, in neglecting of it, was expiated upon no easier terms, than the Passion of the Son of God. Who will not be afraid to affront that Order, which the Divine Wisdom has established; when he considers, the drops of Blood, which fell from the face of our Blessed Lord; the wounds, which were made in the most nervous parts of his Body; the greatness of the Agony which he suffered.  
As the damage done by Sin to the Laws is repaired by the Passion of Christ; so likewise the mind of the Supreme Rector is fully appeased and reconciled. A Reconciliation is attributed to his sufferings in the Holy Scriptures. This reconciliation must import a reconciliation of God unto us. The Apostle in his Epist. to the Romans speaks of our receiving the atonement, c. 5. v. 11. We then receive it, when we lay aside our enmity, and are converted unto God; and therefore this atonement must be made, before our enmity be deposited. The thing received is always antecedent to the act of receiving, and by consequence it can import nothing but God's reconciliation to us by the Blood of Christ, provided we comply with the terms of that Covenant, of which he is the Mediator. For this reason, mention is made of a reconciliation through the blood of the Cross, Col. 1.20. And then after follows another reconciliation, when we cease to be enemies in our minds to God, v. 21. parallel to this is what is expressed 2 Cor. 5.19. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself. And then v. 20. We pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled unto God. Here are evidently Two Reconciliations, One of God unto us, in case we perform the conditions of the New Covenant: The Other of us unto God, when we are converted. Then that Reconciliation, which was before conditional, becomes absolute, and we fully stated in the possession of the Divine favour. Now this reconciliation of God unto us, can import no less, than that his mind is fully satisfied, and his displeasure appeased in consideration of the Sufferings of Christ. Upon this account our Blessed Lord is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rom. 3. He is a cover to the Law, and prevents the Penal part of it from being executed upon us. He is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a propitiation for our sins. God is made by his precious blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hilaris, or cheerful in his countenance, when he looks upon a sinner. He who before was angry, is now propitious. His righteousness being declared, and the authority of his Law, as fully vindicated by the Passion of Christ, as if we had suffered: He is satisfied and contented upon the terms of the Gospel to make us the objects of his favour.  
Crellius in opposition to what has been asserted, affirms, 1. That the Apostle in his Ep. to the Romans speaks of Conversion; and because Conversion expresseth only the amicable temper of our minds towards God, he useth the word, Reconciliation, to import, That if there be a friendship wanting on God's part by reason of our hostility to him in an unconverted state, it is then when we are converted, fully completed. 2. The Apostle in his Epistle to the Celossians cannot speak of a reconciliation of God unto us in a proper sense, because in the reconciliation there mentioned things in Heaven are concerned, namely, Good Angels, who were never in a state of enmity to God. 3. When the Apostle says in his Epistle to the Corinthians, That God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; 
2 Ep. 5.18, 19  the meaning is, That God did promote Conversion by the preaching of Jesus Christ; as afterwards he did by the Preaching of the Apostles. 4. When Christ is said to be a Propitiation, the word cannot import any placation of the Divine Anger. The love of God in sending Christ, evidently demonstrates a reconciliation antecedent to the mission and coming of Christ into the world.  
To all which I reply in order. 1. The granting, That the word Reconciliation is used with a design to express, That if there be any friendship wanting on God's part, it is completed at our Conversion, is a concession of the whole cause. The Spirit of God, doth not use to speak conjecturally. He has a full comprehension of all the Mystery of Godliness. Had he not known, That there is a reconciliation of God unto us, as well as of us unto God, he would not have used a word with a design to express so much. Now this reconciliation is not imputed to conversion, but the Death of the Son of God as the procuring cause: and therefore to receive the atonement can be nothing but to receive the reconciliation and friendship of God, which is merited by the sufferings of Jesus Christ. 2. By Things in Heaven there is no necessity to understand Angels. There were Men in Heaven, as well as Angels, who had been in a state of enmity to God. These, God was reconciled unto, by the Blood of his Son, when they were upon the earth; and now they were in a state of fruition, reaping the advantages of his atonement. 3. When the Apostle says, God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, something more must be meant, than the promoting Conversion by the preaching Christ. Our Blessed Lord did not preach unto the World, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. If the reconciling by Christ did import no more, than the converting of Men by his Preaching, than it might have been as well said, That God was in the Apostles reconciling the world unto himself. It will be difficult to prevail with any to believe, That there is not something peculiar in this expression, which cannot with justice to the honour of our Redeemer be attributed to any other. 4. The Love of God in sending Christ is no argument of a reconciliation in God antecedent to the sufferings of Christ. When so much love was expressed to Eliphaz and his two friends, as to appoint Job to be an Intercessor for them, and to direct them to offer up Seven Bullocks and Seven Rams: at that very time the wrath of God was kindled against them. The Plague, an undoubted testimony of divine displeasure, was at that time upon Israel, when God sent his Prophet to instruct David, how to stop the spreading of the Contagion. All, which can be reasonably deduced from the mission of Christ, is a design or purpose to be reconciled, and not an actual reconciliation.  
And now if we look back, and consider That Christ suffered the punishment of our sin; what he suffered was in our stead: By his Sufferings, the damage done by sin is repaired, and the mind of the Supreme Rector fully reconciled, the verity of the third Proposition will be evident, That a full and complete satisfaction is made by Jesus Christ.  
4. Our acceptance with God is upon the account of this meritorious satisfaction. It sets believers free from the Curse of the Law. The Curse of the Law doth include the loss of the Divine Favour. That which frees us from this malediction, must necessarily restore us to our acceptation with God. The ransom laid down by our Redeemer as it has an aspect upon the justice of Heaven, is said to satisfy; as it stands in relation to those benefits, it procures for us, to merit: So that our acceptance is upon the account of the meritorious satisfaction of our Blessed Lord. Therefore, S. Paul asserts, That God hath made us accepted in the beloved, Epb. 1.6. and S. Peter represents our Spiritual Services to be acceptable to God through Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. 2.5. Of this truth there are very early significations. 
Psal. 80.15, 18.  David prays God, That he would visit the vineyard which he had made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter Regem Messiam, as the Chaldee Paraphrase expounds it. 
c. 9.17.  Daniel prays, That God would shine upon the Sanctuary for the Lord's sake. The Israelites use to pray with their faces toward the Temple, 
Rev. 21.22.  it being a Type of the blessed Messiah, which they had a great expectation of. When Ezekias turned his face to the wall and prayed, 2 Kin. 20.2. Jonathan in his Targum says, He turned it to the wall of the house of the Sanctuary. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  At the hour of Prayer, 
Act. 10.9.  it was usual to go to the house top; That they might have the fairer prospect that way. The Hebrews say, That in the fire, whereby God did declare his acceptance of their Sacrifices, there was the appearance of a Lion, to signify, That it was the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, which procured them an interest in the Divine Favour.  
5. Our acceptance with God is only upon the account of the meritorions satisfaction of his Blessed Son. As he has trodden the Wine-press alone: So the honour of meriting for us is peculiar to him. The Romanists indeed speak of the merits of Saints, and are not contented to attribute to them, so much only, as is expedient for themselves: but assert an overplus, which being blended with the surplusage of the merits of Christ, and laid up in a Treasury, are the ground and foundation of the Papal Indulgencies. But he who considers the true notion of Merit, will easily discover all this to be but a fiction. It imports a dignity in the work adequate to the reward. In the choicest of those services, which they perform, who arrive at the greatest degree of Sanctity, no such worth can be found. If it may, it must be either innate, or derived from without. It cannot be the first, for the reward is no less than God himself, under the fullest disclosures of his Goodness; and none of the most Heroic performances, can indignity be equal to him. 
Gen. 17.  If the Passions and Sufferings of this Life are not worthy to stand in competition, and be compared with the Glory which shall be revealed, much less the actions. There can be no action more noble, than with alacrity of mind, to suffer what the profession of Religion may expose us to.  
If it be acquired Worth, derived from something without, it must be either from the Habit of Grace, the Spirit of God, the Merit of Christ, or the Promise. All these are pretended by the Romanists as the fountain of it.  
1. Not from the Habit of Grace. Although as it descends from the Father of lights, it is a good and perfect gift; yet considered with relation to the Recipient, into which it descends, and out of which it does not expel all the remains of the Primitive Apostasy, it is but imperfect. Now it acting as a quality of this subject, it is impossible, that it should invest its operations with the highest degree of perfection. Nothing can communicate to another That, which it has not in itself.  
2. Not from the Spirit, which excites and moves the Soul to act according to the Habit. If any such value be imparted, the Spirit in the communication must act as a necessary, or a free Cause. Not as a necessary; for then every Religious action will be meritorious: there is no good, but the Spirit of God contributes to the production of it, and a necessary cause is uniform in all its effects. Not as a free cause; For if it is not the will of the Holy Spirit to invest us in this life with such a measure of Grace, as will prevent all sinful defects: We have more than a usual presumption, That it is not his pleasure to impress such a dignity upon our services, as is proportionable to the eternal reward in the life to come.  
3. Not from the Merit of Christ. If he has merited, That we may merit; then his deservings communicate to our Services either a finite, or infinite value. If a finite only, than they cannot merit that infinite love, which our acceptance supposeth. Finite worth is not commensurate to an unlimited and infinite reward. If infinite, than the works of Holy Men are not inferior in perfection to the Works of Christ; infinity will admit of no degrees. A work which is finite in respect of the Principle, from whence it proceeds, has not capacity enough to receive and entertain boundless dignity. The Ocean may as well be included within the confines of a small vessel. Christ has procured for us a power to do well, and acceptance for those actions, which flow from that power; but not a power to merit. The nature of a mere creature is not reconcileable with such an immunity. It cannot under the greatest elevation do any service, but that, which God may challenge as a just debt, and the notion of Merit includes and imports something which is not due.  
4. Not from the Promise. The Promise doth not communicate any excellency to the Work, but supposeth it to be in its perfection. In the Old Covenant, Do this, and live; Do, which imports the work, is the Antecedent, Live, which is the promise of compensation, the Consequent. The Consequent cannot be the Cause of any thing in the Antecedent. If the Promise raises the value and dignity of the Work, than the larger the Promise is, the greater will the value of the Work be: which assertion runs the maintainers of it upon an inevitable contradiction, for the more large the Promise is, the greater is the Mercy of Heaven: and the more value there is in the service, the less mercy and kindness there is in the reward. Now if the amplitude of the Promise adds a value to the performance, Mercy will be the least, where it is the greatest. All this doth manifest, That there is no Merit in us to be a rival with the meritorious satisfaction of Christ in procuring the acceptance of our persons and services with God. And if there be no merit at all in the Saints, there cannot be an overplus to be laid up by the Church in a Treasury. We cannot expect a tide, where there is no water. We may with as little violence to our reason believe, That one drop of water in a deep channel may swell above the banks and fill the ditches on all hands; as that the works of Men may overflow the bounds of the Law, and fill the pretended Repository.  
What is usually said, concerning the overplus of the Merit of Christ, is of no moment to help the Romanists in the present case. His infinite Merit is not of such a nature, as that part of it may be expended one way, and the rest laid up in a Treasury. For that, which may be divided, has parts, and every part must be either finite or infinite. If the merit of Christ may be divided into finite parts it is compounded of them: and that, which is composed of finite, cannot be infinite. If into infinite, than every part is equal to the whole. There is nothing bigger than that which is infinite. The truth is, every good Man is accepted and saved by the whole merit of Jesus Christ. As infinite Merit is sufficient to procure the Divine Favour for the whole World: So no less will purchase it for any particular person. Omnipotence is requisite for the creating of the Firmament, and no less is necessary to the making of one Star. A Romanist may with as much reason conceive, because the infinite power, whereby this World is made, is sufficient to make a thousand more; That he may treasure up the overplus, and issue it forth at pleasure, for the creating another World: as, because the infinite Merit of Christ is sufficient for the redeeming and procuring favour for more, than it does; therefore some of it may be laid up in a reconditory at Rome. The Papal Repository is not unlike the Tomb of Semiramis, which Darius Hystaspis opened with a great expectation of Treasure. It promiseth much without, but when looked into, nothing will be found but vacuity and emptiness.  
All this doth demonstrate, That indulgence and favour from God is to be expected only upon the account of the meritorious satisfaction of Jesus Christ. The evidence for this doctrine is so clear, That Bellarmine who set forth, like the Son of Peor, with a full purpose to curse it, was forced to bless it with a tutissimum est, That it is the most safe to rely only upon the Merits of our Blessed Lord.   

SECT. V Concerning the Place of Divine Worship.  
THose who Worship God, may be considered under a Threefold respect, either as alone, or else as parts of a Family, or as Members of an Ecclesiastical Community.  
I. Alone, And so we may Worship in any solitary Place. I will that men pray every where lifting up holy hands, 1 Tim. 2.8. Isaac went out into the field 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies both to Meditate and to pray. Daniel prayed in the Lion's den. Ionas in the Whale's belly. S. Peter upon the House top. We have a stated rule for private Worship. When thou prayest, enter into thy Closet. There we may take an impartial account of our sincerity. The Eye of the Spectator, like a Burning-glass, doth often kindle the fire of public Devotion.  
II. As parts of a Family, And so we are obliged to join with those with whom we live in an Oeconomical state. Every Master of a Family is invested with a Domestic Power. His Authority over his Children is founded in generation: over others in a tacit or explicit compact. This Power he is bound to use to the utmost, in promoting the Glory of the Supreme Being. In every Society the chief Governor lies under the strictest obligations to advance this end. He cannot be said to do this, except he exerts it sometimes in the engaging those who are under his inspection to perform such duties as have the most direct and immediate aspect upon the Divine Honour. And there is no way more compendious to do this in, than the joining with them in Prayers and Supplication to Almighty God. Upon this account we read of Family-Worship amongst those, who had only the conduct of Natural light. The Heathens had their Penates, which were placed in the innermost part of the house, to which their Devotion was daily directed. Demipho in Terence says, Ego Deos penates hinc salutatum domum divortar. I will from hence step aside to salute the household-gods. Salutatum, Donatus interprets adoratum prece, to adore by Prayer. They likewise had their Lares. Lar is a God, qui domi à familia colebatur, 
Cat. de re rust. c. 3.  who was worshipped at home by the family. In the domestic Chapel of Alexander Severus, were the Images of Abraham, Christ, Orpheus, Apollonius, to which he daily addressed himself with a Religious regard. 
Lamprid.   
In the Holy Scriptures we read of a signal act of Religion in the first family. Cain and Abel brought their Sacrifices. This is recorded as a pattern to future generations. The firstborn of Noah's posterity was devoted to this sacred purpose. Under the Law every House had a solemn consecration. Deut. 20.5. Two Schedules were fixed upon the Posts of the door, one containing part of the 6. c. of Deut. from the 4th. to the 9th. ver. The other, part of the 11th. c. from the 13th. to 21. places chosen out on purpose to inculcate the duty of Masters of Families, which is to sharpen and instruct those, in the Law, who are under their inspection, and engage them in a conformity to its demands. This custom Jonathan Ben Vziel has in his Eye, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  when he interprets those words, and hath not dedicated it, & non fixit in ea posts, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put Metonymically for the Parchment fastened to the posts of the door, in which those portions of the Law were written.  
In the New Testament we have plain indications of this duty. S. Paul, after he has declared the engagements incumbent upon those Relations which constitute a Family, as Husbands, Wives, Parents, Children, Masters, Servants, he subjoins this exhortation, continue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving, Col. 4.2. And that we may understand, it is not solitary Prayer only, which he means, it is added in the 3d. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, praying together: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answers to the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is an Adverb of Place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell together, Gen. 13.6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Cow and the Bear shall feed together, Es. 11.7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, We should live together with him, 1 Th. 5.10.  
This Family-devotion S. Peter has his Eye upon, than he enjoins the Husband to give honour to the wife, as the weaker vessel, lest their prayers be hindered, 1 Pet. 3.7. To this Apostolical rule, the practice of Constantine the Great is very agreeable. His Palace was a lively resemblance of a Church, in it He, together with all his Royal Retinue, did offer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Euseb. l. 4. de Vit. Con. c. 17. Vales.  as Eusebius relates.  
III. As Members of an Ecclesiastical Community, and so we are obliged to join with the Church in public places of Worship. The reason of such Assemblies will be very evident, if we consider the following particulars.  
1. The Nature of the Church.  
Every one who is admitted into it, enters into a Corporation. The Church is styled a Body, 1 Cor. 12. The Members of every Corporation are not only to be engaged in such solitary acts, as relate to themselves in a private capacity: but lie under an obligation to meet together for the performance of such common offices, as concern the utility of the whole. There is no Community, that has not some solemn place appointed for the Convention of the Members of it. 2. Christ's appointment of public Pastors and Teachers. The design of this Ordination is to edify his body; if the several parts of this body do not convene, in order to the receiving the instruction of these Teachers, the end of this Holy Institution will be totally disappointed. 3. His Ordinances, as Baptism, The Supper of the Lord, Excommunication, Absolution; All these suppose the Duty of assembling publicly. By the First, We gain a right to External Communion. In the Second, We have an enjoyment of it. The Third imports an exclusion from it. The Fourth, a readmission to it. 4. The security of his Disciples. Those who conscientiously frequent public assemblies have a promise, That God will be a sun and a shield to them, Psal. 84.11. They have the protection of good Angels. The Walls of the Temple were carved with Cherubims, to signify their surrounding them as a Guard to defend them from danger. They are not so much exposed to the assaults of the Infernal Spirit. The Devil made choice of the Wilderness as the most advantageous place to set upon our Saviour in. When we are united with others, we are not with so much facility broken by the force of an adversary, as when alone. Such assemblies are a good security against Apostasy. The Apostle insinuates, Heb. 10.25. That the deserting the Church, is the next door to the desertion of the Faith. The Zeal of those, whom we have Communion with, is of excellent use to repair the decays of our Love. Coals put together keep one another alive, which asunder would quickly die. 5. The Glory of God. We then glorify him, when we manifest and set forth the peerless perfections of his Nature. The fuller this manifestation is, the more Glory must necessarily accrue to him. It cannot but be more full and clear in a joint performance of Religious duties, than in solitary devotion. This made it so desirable to David to go with a multitude to the House of God. The practice of the People of God in all Ages, Before the Law, Under the Law, After the Law.  
1. Before the Law, We read of Public Places set apart for this Sacred purpose. Abraham erected an Altar betwixt Aai and Bethel, 
Gen. 13.4.21.33.33.20.35.7.  and planted a Grove in Beersheba, where He called upon the name of the Lord. Rebecca went out to inquire of the Lord, which implies a known place, where God use to manifest himself to his people. Jacob built an Altar at Salem and Bethel. 
Fag. in loc.  Moriah is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the land of Divine Worship by the Chaldee Paraphrast, Gen. 22.2. All the Hebrews assert, That it was the place where Noah, etc. offered Sacrifice to God.  
2. Under the Law, Mention is made of the Tabernacle, High Places, Temple, Proseuchas, Synagogues.  
Tabernacle. This was set up at Shilo, Jos. 18.1. And because of the assembling of the People, styled the Tabernacle of the Congregation. This together with the Ark, remained there from the fourteenth year of Joshua's government, until the death of Eli, the Highpriest. When the Ark was taken captive, and profaned by the unhallowed hands of the Philistines, a liberty was granted for the erection of Altars upon high places, like to that which Gideon built upon a Rock, upon an extraordinary occasion, Jud. 6. v. In Ramoth the City of Samuel there was such a high place where the Sacrifice of the People was offered up If this had been contrary to the mind of God, no question but Samuel, who as a Prophet had knowledge to understand his Will, and as a Judge Power to execute it, and is upon record as a person who was faithful in the discharge of his duty, would have exerted his authority in the demolition of it. The like we read of in Gibeon, where the Ark and Tabernacle were, which Moses made in the Wilderness. The censure passed upon Solomon and the succeeding Kings of Judah upon the account of the high places, doth not imply, That it was a sin to frequent them in Samuel's time, and part of David's reign. For when the Israelites were infested with the Plague, David was directed to rear an Altar in the threshing Floor of Araunah in order to the appeasing of the Divine displeasure. When he had done what he was enjoined, and was blessed in his action with that success which he desired, he being under the guidance of the Holy Spirit declared, That was the place of the divine Schecina. This is the house of the Lord God, and this is the offering for the  offering of Israel, 1 Chro. 22. v. 1. From that time it became a fault to have recourse to the High Places. Solomon being young, when this command was given, did forget it when he went to Gibeon: His offence, tho' recorded, yet was pardoned, and his request fully answered.  
After the Tabernacle we read of the Temple. In order to the performance of the Service of God in it, the Priests were digested into Four and Twenty Courses, in their several Courses they gave their attendance for a whole week together. There they Prayed, Sang Praises, read the Commandments, Offered up the daily Sacrifice for all Israel. As one Course did enter upon the Sabbath, the other went forth, 1 Chron. 11.5, 7. So that within less than the space of half a year it came to the turn of the same Persons to wait. It was lawful for all the Courses to be present together at the Three great Feasts, with this caution, That they only to whom it did appertain to attend that Week, might offer up the  Offerings, and the Daily Sacrifice.  
The Hebrews say, as the Priests, so the Body of the People was divided into Four and Twenty Stations. The Daily Sacrifice being offered for all Israel, 
●ev. 1.3. c. 3.2, 8.  and the Law requiring, That those for whom the Sacrifice was offered, should be present, and put their hands upon the head of it, and there being an impossibility, That every Man should appear in his own Person, it was appointed, That the several stations should appear in their turns, as the representatives of the whole Community. These Maimonides styles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Men of the station. Those which were near to Jerusalem belonging to such a station, constantly appeared in their course, according to what was appointed. Those who lived at a greater distance, 
Vid. Temp. Service, 62.  used to assemble themselves in Synagogues, and to pray and read the Law, that they might maintain Communion with their Brethren at Jerusalem.  
Besides the Temple, the Jews had their Proseucha's and Synagogues. By the express words of the Law, the Males were obliged to appear thrice a year at Jerusalem. The same Law obliging them to the celebration of a Sabbath every week, their reason did lead them to make choice of such places, where they might conveniently assemble for that purpose. These are styled Proseucha's and Synagogues. Such was the Sanctuary in Sichem, Jos. 24.26. And the place of Prayer in Mizpeh, 1 Sam. 7.6. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Macc. 3. ● 40.  And the houses of God, Ps. 74.8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aquila translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Jerusalem itself was not without them, as is evident from S. Paul's words. He making an Apology for his behaviour there, says, They neither found him in the Temple disputing with any man, nor raising up the people, neither in the Synagogues, nor in the City, Act. 24.12. Tho' there is some distinction usually made betwixt a Proseucha and a Synagogue: as that a Proseucha was in the Field, a Synagogue in the City: The Proseucha open at top, The Synagogue covered: The Proseucha built in some place near a River, The Synagogue in the highest place of the City: The Proseucha might entertain the least number, The Synagogue no fewer than Ten: yet we find the words promiscuously used by Philo Judaeus. He calls the Synagogues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
De vita M●sis, l. 3.  It is probable where the Magistrate would not permit the Jews the exercise of their Religion in Cities, that they built places in the Fields equivalent to them, where they might convene for the Worship of God: So that tho' a Proseucha and a Synagogue might differ in some external modes, yet they did agree in the main end.  
After the Law, when the Messiah was come, these places were frequented for some time. Notwithstanding there was corruption in the public administrations, yet our Blessed Lord did not forsake them. The Scribes and Pharisees Ministers in the Jewish Church were chargeable with many personal defects; by their procurement, unnecessary Rites were blended with the Worship of God. The persons, which they ministered unto, were so enormous in their conversion, That the Temple upon the account of their presence is styled a Den of Thiefs. Yet for all this, our Saviour did not withdraw himself from their Assemblies. Into this Church he was admitted by Circumcision, 
Luk. 4.16.  did frequently celebrate the Passeover with them, honour their Synagogues with his presence every Sabbath, and commands his Disciples to hear the Scribes and Pharisees. 
Jo. 11.49.  Tho' there was an innovation about the Priesthood (the Office of the High Priest which was perpetual by the Law of God, was made annual by the Law of Man) yet when he had cured the Leper, he sends him to the Priest, 
Mat. 8.4.  He continued in a Proseucha, praying all night, Luke 6.12.  
After his Death his Disciples did tread in his steps. So soon as he was ascended, the principal of them, which were a Hundred and Twenty, did presently gather together in an upper room belonging to the Temple, and continued in Prayer and Supplication. When such multitudes of Converts were added to the Church as one room would not contain them, they made use of divers. They continued in the Temple and brake Bread, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from room to room. S. Peter and S. John went up to the Temple, at the hour of prayer, Act. 3.1. The Disciples were all with one accord in Solomon 's Porch, Act. 5.12. The Apostles are bid to speak in the Temple to the people, Act. 5.20. S. Paul preached Christ in the Synagogues, Act. 9.20. At Antioch in Pisidia, he and Barnabas did repair thither on the Sabbath day, Act. 13.14. This was his practice at Iconium, Thessalonica, Corinth, Ephesus, and so much a general custom; That the assembling of Christians together is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Heb. 10.  
This Communion of the Christians with the Jews, continued as long as their circumstances were reconcileable with it. Afterwards they held their Assemblies apart, and had peculiar places, for their Sacred Conventions, known by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. When ye come together in the Church, 1 Cor. 11.18. Here is first, a coming together, which makes the Congregation, and then, the place is expressed where the Congregation is met, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The word imports something antecedent to, and distinct from the Assembly. Upon this account the Church is opposed to private houses. Have ye not houses to eat and drink in? or, despise ye the Church of God? Let the women keep silence in the Churches, and if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home, 1 Cor. 14.34.  
As Houses and home signify private dwellings; so the rule of opposition will justify us in asserting, That the Church, or Churches which are opposed to them, must signify public, set apart for Religious Conventions. Such were the Houses of Nymphas, Philemon, Priscilla and Aquila. 
Col. 4.15. Rom. 16.  Priscilla and Aquila. We read of the Church in them, that is, The Congregation which use to meet there for the Worship of God, these persons having set apart some part of their dwelling for that sacred purpose. If by the Church, in their Houses, we must understand only the members of their families which were converted to the Faith, no good reason can be given, why the same form of salutation should not be addressed to others as well as to them. 
Rom. 16. ●. 10, 11.  There were many others, as Narcissus and Aristobulus, who had in their households those who did embrace the Doctrine of Christ.  
We are not destitute of very early Testimonies to the same effect in Ecclesiastical Writers. 
L. 8. c. 1. ●u. l. 2. c. 17. Lamprid.  Eusebius styles the Church's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ancient edifices. Several of them were in Alexandria in S. Mark's time. Alexander Severus upon a controversy did adjudge such a public place to the Christians.  
Irenaeus, and Clemens Alexandrinus use the word Ecclesia in the sense which we contend for. Such a place is styled Domus Dei in Tertullian, and Dominicum in S. Cyprian. These words import a resignation of the right which the owner was vested in, and a solemn appropriation to the service of our Blessed Lord.  
There is all the reason imaginable, why there should be such conveniences for the Christians in those early times. They were passionate in their desires to propagate their Religion. Known places for their Assemblies were signally conducing to this end. Every one might have recourse to them, to gain instructions in the Faith.  
The severity of the Age, was not such as always to hinder them from building. It was as great against the Jews. At first, The Disciples were persecuted under that name, Act. 18.2. And yet they had their Synagogues in divers places. From Julius to Constantine the Great are reckoned above Forty Emperors and Ten Persecutions. In the intervals betwixt these violent storms, there is no reason to believe, but that the Christians might erect appropriate places for the Worship of Christ. The Greeks at this day, tho' they live under severities not unequal to those, which the Primitive Christians were exercised with: yet have their Churches allowed them.  
The several steps which the Penitents were to take before they could be admitted to the Communion, is an evident demonstration of that which we argue for. First, They must stand without the doors of the Oratory, and there with the greatest importunity, beg the Prayers of those, who went in and came out of it. These were named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. After this part of their penance was finished, they were admitted within the doors, and stood in the place called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Ad Longinum, not. p. 12.  and heard the Scriptures read and preached, these were styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The next step was to that part of the Church which was behind the Ambo, or Pulpit. These did hear as the former, and went out with the Catechumen, and were termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The next step was their standing and remaining together with the Faithful, and communicating in Prayers, and Psalms: but not in the Holy Sacrament. These were known by the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. All this can argue no less than, That the Christians did not promiscuously meet in any place, but had peculiar Edifices, digested into parts suitable to these ends. This way of discipline was earlier than the times of Gregory Bishop of Neo-Caesaria. He speaks of it as a thing which the Church had been familiarly accustomed to, and He flourished about the middle of the Third Century.  
The Concession of Origen, Minutius Foelix, Arnobius, Lactantius, That the Christians had no Temples, is no prejudice to what has been asserted. These Authors lived within the Third Century. In that age we have evident Testimonies for peculiar places dedicated to Christian Worship. Therefore by the Temples which the Christians had not, must be understood such as were in use amongst the Heathens, namely, Edifices in which some Daemon was enclosed, and kept from wand'ring abroad by Magical incantations.  
After the Three first Centuries were passed, we have a cloud of Witnesses. Churches were then made more conspicuous by a greater magnificence in the structure of them. Constantine made a Law to build the Oratories higher, and to enlarge both in breadth and length the Churches of God. Eusebius says, 
Eus●de vita Con. l. 2. c. 44. Hist. l. 10. c. 2.  That Churches than were more splendid than those which had been demolished by the Impiety of Tyrants.  
There was likewise a more solemn Consecration, than the Imperial Laws did permit before. 
Theod. Ecc. His. l. 1. c. 31.  When Constantine was settled in the Throne, he sent his Commands on every side, to the Bishops, to Consecrate the Temples which were built by him.  
The Historian says, That when Dedications were made according to this Imperial Edict, it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Eus. Eccl. H. l. 10. c. 3.  to all Christians a desirable Spectacle. This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in a little time, gained so high a reputation, That it was thought to be an error, to meet in any Church which had not been first solemnly Dedicated. 
Athan. Apol. ad Const. tom. 1. p. 682. Seld de Syned. l. 3. c. 15. p. 343.  The Arrians accused Athanasius upon the account of his meeting in the great Church in Alexandria, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, before it was perfected by Consecration.  
In after ages, None doubt whether there were such places, or no. All the question is, Whether they may be used now, by reason of those abuses, which have been formerly practised in them, the too much Sanctity which some continue to attribute to them.  
To which I reply, 1. Former abuses can be no just ground for our not frequenting of them. The corruptions are removed by the Reformation, as the Buyers and Sellers were whipped out of the Temple.  
Superstition doth not like the Leprosy in Houses, so cleave to the Walls, as not to be separated without pulling them down. The introduction of the True Worship of Christ, doth as naturally remove it, as Light expels Darkness. If this principle of not using that which has been abused, was throughly followed, it would lead us into Vaults and Caverns, and persuade us to make our perpetual abode there; lest the light of the Sun, which to this day is stained with the Idolatry of some Nations, should be useful to us.  
Bethaven is changed into a Bethel, when God is worshipped there in a right manner. The place which is styled the Mount of Corruption, when abuses were removed, is called Mount Olivet.  
The Censers of Korah and his Company were made into broad Plates for a covering of the Altar. 
Num. 16. v. 38.  Gideon offered a  Sacrifice unto the Lord with the wood of an Idolatrous Grove. Constantine the Great converted Heathen Temples into Christian Churches.  
The Command to demolish Idolatrous Altars in Canaan, and break the Brazen Serpent, is not applicable to the case in hand. The First was enjoined, because the Law did allow but one Altar. The Second, Because the abuse was grown so high, as to make the Serpent, the Object of the Supreme Veneration; and the use, for which it was at first designed, had a period put unto it.  
As for the Sanctity which some attribute to Churches, they allege in justification of themselves, the following Considerations.  
They are Holy, not upon the account of any inherent quality, but a Relation.  
This Relation is produced by a Solemn Dedication. This Dedication is countenanced by that general Command, Prov. 3.5. Honour the Lord with thy substance. When Men expend their Estates in the erecting such Edifices, and devote them to be places for the Celebration of Religious Worship, They lay out their substance in that way, which has a tendency to promote the Divine Honour.  
The Jews did attribute this kind of Sanctity to their Synagogues, and yet Jesus Christ and his Apostles, 
Seld. de Syn. l. 3. c. 16.  did not decline the use of them.   

SECT. VI Concerning the Time of Divine Worship.  
THE only excuse, why we are not constantly employed in those actions which have the most direct aspect upon the Divine Honour, are the necessities of this present Life. Now there is no person of what quality soever, so encumbered, but he, without being wanting to his secular concerns, may spare some intervals every day, and dedicate them to this sacred purpose. 
Deut. 17.19.  Princes who are exercised with the most important affairs, are required daily to read in the Book of the Law. David was Seven times a day concerned in the Praises of God. 
Psal. 119. v. 164.  Alphred the Saxon King dedicated Eight Hours of every day, to the concerns of Religion. Charles the Fifth (after his retirement) was so frequent in his Devotion, that it is said of him, That he spoke oftener with God than with Men. The Jews use to repair to their devotion in their Synagognes' or Schools Three Times a-day in the Morning from Sunrising, till about the Fourth Hour. This they styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Afternoon about the Ninth Hour, 
Leo Moden. p. 32.  which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the Evening at the beginning of the Night, this they name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Cyprian represents the Christians as being always ready to give their adoration unto God. 
De Orat. Dom. p. 154   
Besides these Daily addresses, there are many occasional ones, which we are to make to Heaven. The Supreme Moderator who rules the World, is various in the methods of his government. He is pleased sometimes to interrupt the usual course, and administer just occasion either of extraordinary joy and triumph, or else of the deepest sorrow and dejection. The light of Reason has directed all Nations to dedicate some portion of their Time to the remembrance of such signal emergencies, and the honour and worship of him, by whose interposals they are brought to pass. Of this kind are the Feasts of Purim, 
Jo. 10.22.  and Dedication: The First occasioned by the signal disappointment of Haman's Policy: The Second by the Purification of the Temple by Jndas Maccabaeus. To these we may reduce the Festival of the Law, Nehem. 8.9. which the Jews still observe upon the Three and Twentieth day of Tisri, They style it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the account of their joy for having finished the reading of the five books of Moses, according to the division of them into so many Sections, as there be weeks in the year. They had their Fasts likewise in the Tenth Month, occasioned by the besieging of Jerusalem, in the Fourth, by the taking of it; in the Fifth, by the overthrow and burning of the Temple; in the Seventh by the kill of Gedaliah. Parallel to this, is the practice of the ancient Christians, who weekly fasted upon the days, when Christ was betrayed and Crucisied, yearly before the Passeover. There were likewise in use among them Solemn Days appointed to perpetuate the Memory of the Martyrs, and the goodness of God in furnishing them with magnanimity, to give so signal a testimony of the reality of the Christian Faith.  
Besides these stated days occasioned by some particular dispensations, reason doth suggest unto us, That there ought to be a solemn time peculiarly devoted to the honour of Jehovah.  
If S. Peter and Paul have their particular days set apart to preserve their memory, and those honourable thoughts in us, which their holy and exemplary conversation deserves: certainly God doth justly challenge a peculiar time to be Consecrated to the remembrance and Adoration of his peerless Perfection, transcendent Dominion, and unparallelled Goodness.  
The Wise Man tells us, 
Eccl. 3.1.  To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven. And if to every purpose, then certainly to the Solemn Worship and acknowledgement of the matchless Excellency, and unlimited Sovereignty of the Supreme Being. For this is the great purpose which God designs in the New Creation; That he may have a chosen Generation, to show forth the Praises of him, Who hath brought them out of darkness, into his marvellous light.  
Upon this account the Israelites had not only their daily Sacrifice Morning and Evening, their Yearly Solemnities where the Males appeared: but likewise a Solemn Day every Week, when all of both Sex were obliged to own the Sovereignty of Jehovah, and their relation as Subjects to him. Therefore their Sabbath is represented as a sign, That Jehovah was their God, Ezek. 20.20. Earthly Princes are not only owned by the daily respect which the Court gives unto them, by the occasional obeisance of their Subjects, upon the account of some particular favours: but likewise there is usually a fixed and stated Time for the payment of that homage whereby their Supremacy is owned. It is as reasonable, that there should be as solemn and peculiar Times for all the Subjects of Jehovah to make their due acknowledgements, and render their tribute of Honour and Worship to him.  
The Heathens by the light of Nature, 
Macrob. Saturn. l. 1. c. 16. p. 226  were directed not only to appoint the dies intercisi, which were but in part devoted to the honour of their Deities, but likewise a more solemn time, which was entirely dedicated to this purpose.  
That this most Solemn Time may be the better understood, I will lay down the following Propositions.  
1. God requires, That we give to him, not only a Mental and inward Worship, but that we express it by external actions. Our Bodies as well as our Souls being made and redeemed by him: we cannot but lie under an indispensable obligation to Worship and Glorify him with both.  
II. Our external acknowledgements of the Divine Majesty must not only be in private, but in public: Not only when we are alone, but in Communion and conjunction with others. For we undoubtedly are bound to Worship the Fountain of all our Blessings in such a way, as hath the most direct and efficacious influence upon the promotion of his Honour. His Honour is more advanced by the joint and united performances of his Servants, than by their solitary devotions. For the more manifest and full, our Religious acknowledgements are, the more Honour must necessarily accrue to him. And we cannot but believe, that the Agnition is more full, and apert, when holy Men join together in their Sacred Addresses, than when they act asunder, and confine themselves to their several apartments.  
III. The Solemn Time for these joint performances of Religion ought to be stated and fixed by some known constitution, otherwise, How shall the several members of the Ecclesiastical Community know, when to convene in order to the discharge of their duty?  
iv It is expedient, That it should be taken out of some part of a Week. For our Souls naturally being under an indisposition to the concerns of Religion, the sooner the time for Solemn Worship returns, the more useful it will be, in preventing that deadness, which will be apt to surprise us, before a larger Circle (such as a Year, or Month) can come about.  
V It cannot in reason be less than one whole Day every Week, which will be evident, if we consider, 1. The Object of our Worship. Were we to live the days of Methusalem, he might challenge every moment of our time, as a just debt: and if all be due, reason will not allow, That so considerable a portion, as a Week, should pass without a solemn dedication of a Seventh part of it, to his service. Let us suppose one man to owe unto another's, as much or more, than his whole estate is worth, the rule of equity will not allow him to offer less than the Seventh part in order to the compounding his debt, and the just satisfaction of his Creditor. 2. The Nature of Worship. In it the Glory of God, the eternal happiness of the Soul, the temporal felicity of the Community are highly interested. The difficulty in the right discharge of it is equal to the importance. The Prince of this World, makes it his work to hinder it. The natural tempers of Men, furnish him with a signal advantage to compass his design. There is an inbred Love in us to sensible objects, which are apt to ingenerate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Athenagoras speaks. 
Leg. 〈◊〉 Christianis p. 30.  This is the reason why the Second Commandment, which relates to Worship, is fortified with so many inducements to obedience. One taken from the power of God to punish offenders, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Another from his will to exert his power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. A Third from the execution of his Will upon the offspring of those which offend, visiting the iniquity, etc. A Fourth from his kindness to the obedient, showing mercy, etc. Had it not been difficult to confine ourselves within the bounds of this Precept, the fence, which is set about it, would not have been so strong. If the Worship of God be a matter of such difficulty, and of the greatest importance, than it requires a very large proportion of our time, to be spent in the performance of it: and if so, was it left to our own disposal, we could not in justice, allot less than the Seventh part. 3. The pattern of the triumphant Church. In Heaven a perpetual Sabbath is celebrated. The glorified Spirits are constantly employed in worshipping him, who liveth for ever and ever, Rev. 4.10. This heavenly example the Church Militant must makes as near an approach unto as the circumstances of this present life will permit, she being obliged to endeavour, That the will of God may be done on earth, as it is in heaven, Matt. 6. v. 10. Those who are most exercised with the encumbrances of this world, have nothing to plead in their own behalf, why they may not come up so nigh to this celestial pattern, as to devote One Day of every Week to the concerns of Religion. 4. The practice of the Militant Church, not only under the Law but before. From the beginning of the Creation, the Time for Solemn Worship was no less than One whole Day every Week, as is evident from the testimony of the Author to the Hebrews, altho' the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spoke in a certain place of the Seventh Day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day, from all his works, Heb. 4.3, 4. Here is an evident remembrance of a day of rest, not only to God but to Men. For the design of the Apostle is to prove, out of the 95. Psal. That there remains a rest to the people of God under the Gospel. In order to this purpose, he shows it is not the rest of the Seventh from the Creation which the Psalmist had his eye upon. If the Seventh here mentioned, had not been a rest to the people of God, but only to God himself, there would have been no necessity of such care to distinguish it from that other rest, which is concluded still to remain to the people of God. 2. That time is expressed when this rest commenced, from the foundation of the world. The works then finished are represented as the ground, upon which the Sabbath was instituted. It cannot with reason be imagined, That the foundation should be laid at the beginning, and the superstruction not built upon it (as some think) till above Two Thousand years after.  
This Assertion receives a great deal of strength from the early division of Time into Weeks. Noah had his eye upon the Hebdomadal Cycle, Gen. 8.10, 12. A Week is represented as a period familiarly known in Jacob's time, Gen. 29.27. God himself did point out this division by his own example, distinguishing the Six Days by peculiar Works, the Seventh by rest. A universal consent prevailed amongst all the Eastern Nations about this particular. The testimony of Joannes Philoponus is known, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 7. c. 14.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. It is agreed amongst all Nations, That there are Seven Days, which by a constant revolution constitute all time. Georgius Syncellus in his Chronology, which gins with Adam, and ends at Dioclesian, asserts, That the Patriarches divided their time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that the division into Months and Years, is of later date. Josephus against Appion says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. There is no City, whether Greek or Barbarian, to whom was unknown 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. If the division of Time into Weeks was from the beginning, and a week consisted of seven days, and one of those were a Sabbath, or a day of rest, the Sabbath must needs be from the beginning. There is no record, which makes mention of a week, that doth not suppose the Sabbath to be a part of it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the Greeks is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Hebrows, which Theophilus Antiochenus says, 
E. z. ad Autol. p. 91.  All Men had knowledge of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Sacred Oracles sometimes is put for a week, the denomination of the whole being taken from the principal part, Leu. 23.15. In the book entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it is expressed, That for many weeks the Seventh Day was celebrated as a day of rest. The Chaldee Paraphrast upon the Title of Psalm 92. useth these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Song which the first Man sang on the Sabbath-day, and upon the first verse of the Canticles, the first Song Adam spoke at the time when his sin was pardoned, and the day of the Sabbath came and protected him. Cain and Abel are said to bring their Sacrifices 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the end of days, by which we must understand theh period of a year or a month, or some other term: there being no division of time so early as that into Weeeks, and nothing here can be so well understood by the end of Days, as the end of a Week, which was the Sabbath.  
Indeed it is objected; That if the Sabbath was so early, as hath been represented, it would have been observed by the Patriarches, and the celebration of it recorded in the book of Genesis: and that the Jews are generally of opinion that it was not instituted, till after the Israelites were delivered out of Egypt. To which, I reply, That Genesis is but a short History, and it cannot be expected, That all things done by those Holy Men should be recorded in it. 
Mat. 19.8.  The Law against Polygamy was from the beginning, and yet it is passed over in silence in that History, and not to be found, but in obscure expressions throughout the Old Testament. There is no doubt, but there was a positive Law concerning Sacrifice, as early as the day of Abel, who is said by Faith to offer up his oblation, Heb. 11. And yet the memory of it is not extant in Genesis.  
Tho' many of the Hebrews assert the Sabbath to be instituted after the coming out of Egypt. Yet others every jot as considerable, as they, give it an earlier date, as the Chaldee Paraphrast, Josephus, Philo Judaeus, Manasse Ben Israel, and upon far better reasons.  
It is not always the Major part (where we have a freedom of judgement) but the Senior, which must be our guide: and which is so, we may discern by the solidity of the grounds, which the testimony is built upon.  
From all this it appears, That the solemn time for Worship, before the coming of Christ, even from the beginning, was no less, than one whole Day in a week: and if it was so frequent before his manifestation in our Nature, the signal effusion of the Spirit, when the Sun of Righteousness was not many degrees above the Horizon, it ought not to be less frequent among us, who are blessed with the enjoyment of fuller disclosures. It is a rule which S chrysostom gives, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. It behoveth us to show forth the more virtue, because the grace of the Spirit hath been poured out in larger measures.  
It would be a bad requital, If we who have the fruition of more Spiritual Blessings than the Jews, should be less frequent than they were in those acts, which have the most direct aspect upon the Divine Honour.  
Lastly, That no less than the Seventh part of a Week ought to be devoted to the Solemn Worship of God, we may collect from the writings of the Heathens. They speak of a Seventh Day every Week, which they accounted Sacred. Testimonies of this nature are produced out of Linus by Aristobulus, 
Euseb. praep. Evan. l. 13. c. 12, 13.  and out of Callimachus, by Clemens Alexandrinus. This Seventh Day, they accounted Sacred, not as the Dies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were: but in the same sense, as the Jewish Sabbath. Aristobulus a Jew, speaking of it, says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Homer and Hesiod plainly declare (having derived their knowledge from our Bibles) that the Seventh Day is Sacred. Therefore it must be according to his opinion Holy, as it lies in those Authors, in the same sense, as it is accounted Sacred in the Bible. Clemens Alexandrinus affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 
Stromd. 5.  only the Hebrews but the Greeks know the Seventh to be Sacred. This Seventh day is not (as some would suggest) the seventh of the Month, but of the Week. Clemens, and Eusebius cite the forementioned Authors to prove, That a weekly Sabbath was known to the Heathens, and not a Monthly, and they were much more competent Judges of their meaning, than any now can be. 
De Opisic.  What Philo asserts concerning the Seventh of the Week, is very agreeable to their thoughts, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. It is not a feast only of one City, and Region, but of all, and may be properly and worthily styled a universal solemnity, and the Birthday of the World. Although at the first the Gentiles did derive this notion from the Hebrews by Tradition; yet had it not been very consonant to the light of reason, it would not have met with so universal an entertainment. The Testimonies produced out of Tacitus, 
Selden de jure Nat. & Gen.  Ovid, Martial, etc. to evince That the Gentiles did look upon the weekly Sabbath, as a rite peculiar to the Jewish Nation, are very reconcileable with what is asserted. At the time when those Authors wrote (tho' it had been common anciently) it was proper and peculiar to the Jews, in Two regards, 1. In respect of the particular Day, it was the last of the week, whereas the Day amongst the Gentiles was the first. When the several days of the week came to be dedicated to the Planets, That Day which was devoted to the Sun, did outstrip the rest, and in the thoughts of the Gentiles, as much outshine them, as the Sun doth the other six Planets. Upon this account Phoebus is styled by Aeschylus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Seld. p. 435.  Venerandus septenarii princeps. He being the chief among the Seven, and courted in a peculiar manner with religious veneration. 2. In respect of observation. The Jews than were under a great degree of Superstition, and placed the celebration of their Sabbath principally in bodily rest. The Romans, who had conquered them, finding their Religion, in worshipping one God, was a condemnation of their addresses to a plurality of Deities, they were highly exasperated against them, and fastened upon this particular of bodily rest, to disgrace them, representing as tho' the seventh part of their time was spent in sloth and idleness, Septima quaeque dies turpi damnata veterno, Tanquam l●ssati mollis imago Dei. These Two considerations make it plain, That altho' the Heathens did devote one day every week to the honour of their Supreme God, yet they might represent the Jewish Sabbath as a rite peculiar to a Jew: the Jewish day being not the same with theirs, and the manner of the celebration quite different. This may be the cause, why the Lord's-day was by those of them who were converted to the Christian Faith, received without the least scruple, an ancient custom had made it familiar to them; the alteration was only in the object. Before it was dedicated to the Sun: now to the Sun of Righteousness.  
And now I have finished the Fifth Proposition, The chief Solemn Time for Worship, aught to be no less, than One whole Day in every Week.  
VI It is highly reasonable to believe, That the setting out the just Time should be left to the Supreme Being. Tho' he has granted to the Church a liberty to appoint days for Mourning, and Rejoicing, upon occasional emergencies, as is evident by the practice of all Ages: Yet there is all the appearance of reason to incline us to think, That he has reserved to himself the appointment of the chief Solemn Time for the agnition of his Sovereignty, and Dominion over us. He alone set forth this Time at the beginning. Tho' he might have created the World in a moment: Yet, for our instruction, and better information about this great concern, he was pleased to work Six Days and rest One, and set it apart for his Worship and Service. This peculiar right he challengeth to himself in the Fourth Precept of the Decalogue. Six Days shalt thou labour, but the Seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, That is a Day of his own designation and appointment. In the New Testament our Blessed Saviour is declared to be Lord of the Sabbath, which can import no less, than that he has an absolute power to determine it, and that none have authority to alter what he is pleased to do. It is an evident injury to attempt to meddle with that, of which another is the Lord, without his leave and privity. God created Man, He best knows his strength and ability, He has a clear prospect of the molestations and necessities, this sublunary state will expose him to. He fully understands, what time is fit to be spent in worldly business, and what in the concerns of Religion. Men have no certain rule, to determine by, for all People and Nations. If it had been left to them, the result of such a concession would have been nothing but ataxy and confusion. Their secular employments are very various, some are more encumbered than others. Some live in plenty and ease: some are exposed to penury and severe labour. It cannot be expected, That they shall all agree about this time, being their condition is so different. God, who is only able to increase supplies, and give more strength, where more work is required, must necessarily be the most convenient Arbitrator in this case, to set out, how much time is ordinarily to be allowed to Men for their terrestrial affairs, and what proportion is to be reserved for their celestial.  
VII. This Time, which reason tells us, aught to be left to the Divine designation, is determined in the Fourth Command to one in Seven, as a proportion perpetually to be devoted to Religious Worship.  
Here Three Things are to be proved, 1. That it is one in Seven, and not the last of the Seven, which is enjoined by the Fourth Command. 2. That the Sabbath of the Fourth Command, one in Seven, is perpetual and not to continue, only during the Jewish Oeconomy. 3. This proportion is by the Command to be devoted to Worship, and not only to corporal rest.  
1. It is one in Seven, and not the Seventh from the Creation, which is enjoined by the Fourth Command. If we fully ponder the words, nothing else can be concluded from them.  
Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy. It is not said, Remember the Seventh day from the Creation: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a day of rest. All that the expression signifies is, That a whole day must be set apart, and devoted to the honour of the Supreme Being. And lest we should be at a loss, how often it must be done, the quotum is set out, Six days shalt thou labour, and do all that thou hast to do, but the seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. The Seventh, not the seventh from the Creation; but the Seventh with relation to the Six days of labour: and as the Six do not signify those precise days on which the World was made, but such a proportion of time as is fit for the dispatch of secular concerns: so the Seventh, which follows, must be taken in the same sense, not for the Seventh precisely from the formation of the World; but for one in seven, whether the first, or the last, as God shall please to appoint. Even as the fifth part of the increase of Egypt, which Pharaoh was to have, Gen. 47. v. 24. doth not signify the Fifth in order, but the Fifth in proportion, that is one of five, the fruits being equally divided into so many portions.  
After the proportion is thus set forth, the reason is expressed: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the seventh. The force of this reason lies not in the priority, or order of these days. God in the first six days created the World, and rested the seventh; but in the quotum or number, God took six days, neither more nor less, for the production of the Universe, and rested one: Therefore thou shalt work six days, and observe one as a day of rest unto the Lord. Thus the harmony betwixt the reason and the concession of six days for labour is very plain. For if the World was created within six days, than the same allowance of time is sufficient (with the Divine Benediction upon men's endeavours) to preserve it, and make a provision of all things necessary for life This is not so conspicuous, if we lay the Emphasis upon the first six days, and as they are taken, so must the Seventh be. So that altho' it was the Seventh pricisely from the creation on which God rested, yet the Seventh here is not intended to signify that precise day: but the quantity and proportion of time only, which is contained in it. The rule of S. Austin is applicable to the present case, propter illa, 
Bellarm. tom. 2. p. 683.  quae aliquid significant, illa, quae nihil significant, adferuntur.  
The conclusion deduced from these premises, gives us a further evidence. Wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it. Here is no mention of the seventh, but a Sabbath day, a general word which may be applied as well to the first, as the last of the week. This makes a clear discovery, That the particular day, on which God rested is not intended in the reason of the Command. For if that had been the design of it, no place had been more convenient to express it in, than the conclusion, which is nothing but the result of what went before. In other places the Seventh is mentioned, but here only a Sabbath-day. Why the Spirit of God, who is not obnoxious to any defect of memory, should change the phrase, cannot be imagined, except he intended by using this general word, to give a greater latitude, and not to confine the Sabbath to the particular Seventh from the Creation.  
Nothing can be drawn from the words to discountenance this interpretation; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put without an article, whereas Exod. 16. v. 26. where the particular day is set forth, the article is prefixed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the six days for labour are expressed without any Emphatical character, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and as the six days are taken, so must the seventh be.  
What is objected, That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remember, intimates, That the Precept enjoins that Sabbath which was given before, and that was the last of the week, and that the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 determine them to the signification of that day only, doth not merit any great consideration.  
One in Seven was enjoined long before. It bears the same date with the last of the Seven. Now the Spirit of God being about to set out this proportion alone, as a rule for all ages, as well under the Gospel as under the Law, and looking back upon the great neglect of it in Egypt, and foreseeing the oppositions it would meet with, tending to extinguish the memory of it, he is pleased in the very front of the precept, which enjoins it, to place tins word Remember.  
As for the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing can be necessarily collected from it, to enforce our belief that the last of the Seven is designed in the Precept: for this article is many times found, where it has no such determining influence, as Deut. 8.3. Man doth not live by bread only, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here doth not signify, this or that kind of Bread, but leaves it in its general signification, Leu. 18.5. Which if a man do, he shall live in them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is without any Emphasis: and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without awe article, Rom. 10.5.  
When this article is Emphatical, it must be collected from the reason of the thing, or the circumstances of the place. When the Holy Spirit doth design a peculiar determination by it, it is often joined with a separated Pronoun, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speak to this young man, Zach. 2.4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the self same day, Gen. 7.13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this house and this City. Now we have nothing of this nature in the Fourth Command to oblige us to believe such a determining Emphasis in it: but on the contrary, the reason of the thing, and all circumstances duly considered highly favour the sense which has been given. The Fourth Commandment is encompassed with Moral Laws, and placed in the very Centre of a perpetual rule of righteousness. Our interpretation gives the most intelligible account, why it should have this situation. It is generally asserted, That the last of the week was Typical: but none have discovered the least tittle of Ceremoniality in one in seven. This is reducible to the Laws of Nature, which are usually reckoned to be of Two sorts, either such as are discovered by the Light of Nature, or else such as being made known by revelation, are approved of by that Light. 
Institut. Justinian. Arnold. vin. come. p. 52.  Although the equity of devoting just One in Seven to the Worship of God is not so manifest as generally to be pitched upon, without the aid of revelation: yet it being disclosed to be the mind of God, it finds a very ready entertainment. All agree, That some time is to be set a part, and what proportion can be more equal and convenient, 
Gell. l. 3. ●. 10. not. At. de Etruriae originibus. Seld. de jur. Nat. & Gen. p. 376. Queen 69. p. 432.  than the Seventh. Varro made it his business to discover an excellency in this number above others. Postellus observes, That anciently at Rome, one day in seven was sacred, tho' not the same with the Jewish day. The Author of the Question and Answer ad Orthodoxos, ascribed to Justin Martyr, takes notice of some peculiar marks of honour upon this number, and says, it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, more valuable and eminent than others. Now if the observation of one in seven appertains to the Moral Law, and the last of the seven to the Ceremonial, we ought to interpret the Fourth command, for one in seven, and not the last: For the whole Decalogue being designed for a Royal Law, an everlasting rule and standard for all ages, certainly every Command in it, is to be construed in such a sense, as doth most fully comply with this intention in the Lawgiver.  
This interpretation makes the fourth Precept like to the others, it stands in conjunction with, for they do not descend to any particulars. The First Command doth not name Saturn, Mars or Mercury, but keeps in the general, Thou shalt have no other Gods. The Second doth not mention the image of any particular Deity. The Third doth not name assertory or promissory Oaths. The Fifth doth not nominate any individual, which stands in the relation of a Father or Mother. So the Fourth doth not express the particular day of Worship, but confines itself to that, which is more general, One in Seven, whether it be the first or last, as God shall please to appoint. It is not difficult to discern the temper of this Law, by the genius of the other precepts, which are its companions.  
Lastly, There are many very considerable for Learning and Judgement, who favour the interpretation which has been given.  
S. chrysostom, glozing upon these words, 
Hom. 16. Gen. 88 p. Fron. Duc.  God rested the seventh day and sanctified it, says, From hence we are taught to set apart 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one day in the circle of week for the exercise of spiritual duties.  
Aquinas affirms, That the last of the seven is not contained in the Fourth Command, Preceptum de observatione Sabbati est secundum aliquid morale, etc. & secundum hoc inter praecepta Decalogi computatur, non autem quantum ad taxationem temporis, quia secundum hoc est ceremoniale. 
P. 2. Q. 100 art. 3.22. Q. 112. art. 4.  The Precept concerning the observation of the Sabbath, is in some respect moral, and in that sense it is accounted amongst the Ten Commandments, and not as it sets out the particular time, because that was ceremonial.  
In the Homily of Time and Place, these words occur. By this Command (meaning the Fourth) we ought to have a time, as one day in the week, wherein we ought to rest, yea, from our lawful and needful works. For like as it appeareth by this Commandment, That no Man in the six days ought to be slothful and idle, but diligently to labour in that state wherein God hath set him: even so God hath given express charge to all Men, That upon the Sabbath-day, which is now our Sunday, they should cease from all weekly and work-day labour, etc.  
Mr. Hooker asserts, 
Eccl. pol. l. 5. p. 378, 379.  That we are bound to account the Sanctification of one day in seven a duty, which God's immutable Law doth exact for ever.  
Mr. Mede speaking of the Fourth Precept, 
Diatr. of the observation of the Sabbath, etc. p. 240.  says, Where it is called in the Command the Seventh day, that is in respect of Six days, and not otherwise: and therefore whensoever it is so called, those six days of labour are mentioned with it. The Seventh therefore is the Seventh after six days of labour, nor can any more be inferred from it: The example of the Creation is brought for the quotum, One day in Seven, as I have showed, and not for the designation of any certain day for that Seventh.  
Curcellaeus is of the same mind, 
De Esu. Sangu. p. 64.  Notare oportet nihil aliud in Decalogo praecipi, nisi, ut unam diem è septem à labour feriemur (quod plerique Theologi morale & immutabile esse agnoscunt:) quis verò sit septimus ille, non designari, etc. It is to be observed that nothing else is commanded in the Decalogue, except that we abstain from labour, and keep holy one day of seven, (which many Divines confess to be moral and immutable) but which of the days that Seventh is, it is not expressed.  
Against this interpretation it is objected, 
Epilogue.  That then it follows, That the Jews were not tied by the Fourth Command to keep their Sabbath, or if they were, common sense cannot understand, how Christians by the same Command should be tied to keep the First of the Week. To which I reply, That supposing the sense to be true, which is given, there is no difficulty in conceiving how all this may be done. The Command requires One day of every Week to be observed, as the Lord shall appoint. He appointed by another Law Saturday to be that One day during the Jewish Oeconomy, and when a period was put to that constitution, he did substitute the First of the Week in the room of it. Common sense can do no otherwise than conceive, That the Last of the Week during the Law must be obligatory to the Jews, by virtue of the Fourth Command, it being one of seven of God's appointment: and likewise the First of the Week to Christians, so soon as the Last was discharged, and that appointed in the place of it. There is no greater mystery in the apprehending of this, than there is to understand how the Fifth Command, which did oblige the Jews to honour, Hezekias as thè Father of their Community, should bind Christians to pay the same respects to Constantine the Great.  
The Eighth Precept did forbid a Jew to invade the right of another; what was his right, the judicial Law did determine. Tho' that Law is at an end, and the rights of Christians, settled by the Laws of the Country where they live: yet the Eighth Commandment doth as much oblige them, as it did formerly the Jews.  
Now I pass to the Second branch of the Proposition. The Sabbath of the Fourth Command, One in Seven is perpetual, and not to continue only during the Jewish Oeconomy. This will be manifest if we consider, it is part of the Decalogue, which is intended to oblige in all ages. 1. In the Old Testament, it is plainly distinguished from those Laws which the time of Reformation has put a period to. The Decalogue was published without a restriction to any particular place. The ceremonial and Judicial Laws are confined to the Land of Canaan. 
Deut. 10.14. Deut. 5.31.  The Decalogue was given immediately by God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the mouth of power, as the Talmudists speak, he being accompanied upon the Mount with his Angelical retinne, as witnesses to the promulgation. The temporary Commandments were delivered by the ministration of Moses. 
Abarb. fol. 209. Col. 2.  The Decalogue was written upon Tables of stone, to point out the durableness of it; and delivered without any ceremonial solemnity. The other Precepts were written by Moses in a Book, which was sprinkled with the blood of Calves and Goats, 
Exod. 24.8. Heb. 9.19.  with Water, Scarlet, Wool and Hyssop. When Moses went up into the Mount to receive the Two Tables, on which the Decalogue was written, he was attended with Joshua, Exo. 24.13. When he received the other Precepts, with Aaron and Nadab, etc. v. 1. to import that the Decalogue must be observed under the Gospel, in times of Jesus, as well as Moses. The other Precepts only during the Priesthood of Aaron. An Ark was prepared for the preserving of the Decalogue. No such provision was made for the ceremonial Law. The Ark where the Decalogue lay, was separated for many years from the Tabernacle, where all the ceremonial service was performed, and never joined again to that which was of Moses' erection: but David made a new Tent for it, at Jerusalem, 
2 Chron 3.4.  and left the old in Gibeon, to show that when Moses' Tabernacle, with all the ceremonial constitutions were laid aside, and a more perfect Tabernacle erected by the Son of David, the Ten Commandments would retain their force and vigour. He who will seriously consider, what is upon record in the Old Testament, cannot but discern a very plain difference put betwixt the Ten Commandments, and those Laws which were to be annulled in the time of the Gospel. 2. In the New Testament, We have many evident intimations, That the Decalogue as delivered by Moses is to continue as a perpetual rule to Christians, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, Matt. 5. By the Law we must understand the Ten Commandments. Such a Law is spoken of, as is antecedent to the times of Christ, and this must be the Law of Nature, as published by the Light of Reason, or the Law as delivered by Moses. The first cannot be here designed. For our Blessed Lord had that in his Eye, which the Scribes and Pharisees had a zeal for. They endeavoured to influence the Disciples with a persuasion, That the intent of their Master was to destroy this Law, v. 17.20. The Law which was the object of their fervour, was unto the Law of Nature, as it lies out of the Scripture, but the Law of Moses. This Law of Moses doth not import one single Precept, but a System or Combination, for that which is here called Law, is styled Commandments, v. 19 There are but three Systems of Commands in the Pentateuch, The Ceremonial, The Judicial, and the Decalogue. The Two first cannot be understood, for the Law here is such as none might break, and teach Men so to do. The words have an aspect upon the future time, when the Kingdom of Heaven or the Gospel-state should be more fully set up, which was not till the Pentecost, when the Apostles were anointed by the Spirit, and set upon their Thrones: but at that time it was lawful to act contrary to the judicial and ceremonial Systeme, and teach others so to do. Therefore by the Law, nothing is left to be understood, but that Combination of Precepts, styled, The Decalogue: and that we may know, it is That in every particular which is here established, it is expressed, That one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from it, all shall continue in full vigour and power: and that we may have further assurance, That the Fourth Comandment, which is usually reputed the least, is in the number of the Precepts here ratified, it is added, Whosoever shall break one of these least Commandments, etc. to intimate, That not only the great, such as are purely natural, and discoverable without revelation, but the lesser, such as the Fourth Command is accounted to be, are here included.  
To the words of Christ, we may add the words of the Proto-Martyr, when he was about to Seal the Faith of the Gospel with his blood. He asserts, That Moses received the lively Oracles to give unto us, Act. 7.38. The lively Oracles are the Ten Commandments. They are styled Oracles, because they were laid up in the place from whence God used to give forth his Oracles: and lively in opposition to the dead Oracles of the Heathens, which were observed to languish and fail about the time of the manifestation of Jesus Christ: whereas the Ten Commandments were then in their full vigour. These Precepts Stephen, a sincere Convert to the Faith of Christ, says, Moses received, That he might deliver them to us. In this number, he includes himself, as standing in the relation of a Christian, the whole Chapter being intended as an Apology for that profession. Therefore, the Decalogue concerns us not only by virtue of the matter of it, but the Tradition and delivery by Moses.  
To this are very consonant the words of S. Paul. Honour thy Father and thy Mother, which is the first Commandment with promise: That it may be well with thee, and thou mayst live long on the earth, Eph. 6.2, 3. This Promise is here mentioned with a design to quicken those, who were Christians and no Israelites by birth, to give a cheerful obedience to the Fifth Command. The Apostle endeavours, That it may have this effect upon them, by declaring their particular interest in it. This is the first Commandment with promise, as well to you Ephesians, as those who are Jews. If his meaning had been, That this is the first Command which was given with promise to the Jews only, therefore do you who are Ephesians, conform to it, the strength of the argument had been lost. It is no good consequence, That because length of days was promised to the Jews, That therefore the Gentiles should enjoy the same privilege. Many temporal blessings were entailed upon that people, which Christians can make no just claim to. The Gospel is a more refined dispensation: under the Law there was less of the Spirit, and more of Temporal things. While Christians are in the Sea of this world they cannot expect that the tide of external blessings should be as great, as it was under the Judaical Oeconomy. Now there is nothing in the whole Decalogue, which in appearance is more appropriated to the Israelites than this Promise. Those words, That thy days may be long in the Land, seem to have a particular aspect upon the land of Canaan: and if that in the Decalogue which seems to be most appropriated, is notwithstanding not so, but common to Christians, then that which seems to be less appropriated is likewise common to them, and by consequence the whole Decalogue. It is a known rule, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. If that which has a greater appearance of being, is not, neither is that which has less.  
Lastly, The words of S. James are of the same importance, For he that said, do not commit adultery, said also, do not kill, c. 2.11. These two Commands are perpetual, and oblige all Christians. The reason of their obligation is not taken from their intrinsic nature, but the authority of him who published them in the time of Moses. That that time and place is aimed at, is evident from v. 8. Fulfil the royal law according to the Scripture, that is, The Scripture and Writings of Moses, where the Law is laid down, and the manner of its being spoken by God upon the Mount related. This reason, whereby these Two Commands become obligatory under the Gospel, extends to every particular precept in the Decalogue. He that said, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, said likewise, Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. All these were spoken at the same time, in the same manner, immediately by the mouth of God unto the People, which cannot be affirmed of any of the Laws, which are not contained in that Combination. And if there be the same reason for the obligation of the whole Decalogue amongst Christians, as there is for the Sixth and Seventh Precepts, than the whole doth oblige them, and will continue so to do to the World's End.  
Very consonant to this is the Testimony of Theophilus Antiochenus, who, speaking of these Two Laws, which S. James mentions together with the other parts of the Decalogue, which he styles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, useth these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Moses the servant of God was a Minister of this divine Law to all the world. In this he asserts no more, than what the Apostle had done before him, Rom. 3.19. What things soever the Law saith, it saith to them which are under the Law, that all the world may become guilty before God. By the World we must understand, not only Jews but Gentiles, as most evidently appears by the ninth verse. It is impossible that the whole World should be obnoxious to guilt, upon the account of disobedience to the Moral Law, as it lies in the Old Testament, had it not been intentionally given to it. The Constitutions which go under the name of Clemens Romanus, 
Constit. Apost. l. 6. c. 19  represent the Decalogue, as a complete and perfect Law appertaining to Christians. Irenaeus speaks of two sorts of Divine Precepts, 
L. 4. c. 26. p. 344.  particularia, which are appropriated to the Old Testament, and eminentiora & summa, which are common to the Old and New. The Scholiast upon the place, reckons the Decalogue amongst the last, it being designed by God, as a perpetual rule for his people in all ages. For this Gloss he had authority enough from Irenaeus himself, 
L. 4. c. 39 c. 31.  who afterwards represents the Decalogue, as the Law of Nature, and at the coming of Christ to receive extension and enlargement, but no dissolution.  
To these Testimonies, we may add the consent of our own Church, which she has sufficiently discovered in her placing the Ten Commandments, as delivered in the Twentieth chap. of Exodus, in the very Catechism which Children are to learn, and obliging the people in the Liturgy, after the reading of every Precept, to use such words as import, That it is a Law obligatory to them. To say, That She, by the word Law, understands sometimes the Law only in the mystical and Spiritual sense, is very incongruous: for she makes no discrimination, but enjoins the continuation of the same form of Speech to the last Command. A Precept without the Letter, is no Law at all. It is a known rule, That when the literal sense of a Law is repeated, the whole Law is abrogated. For the Letter is the foundation, whatsoever is besides, is the superstructure. The superstruction must necessarily fall, when the foundation is removed. Tho' the spiritual sense of a Law may be of use, when the Letter is discharged: yet it is not to be accounted as the sense of that which is now a Law, but of that which was formerly so. The spiritual sense of the Ceremonial Law is still of use, yet because the Literal is decayed and vanished, we say the whole Law is annulled. The Law and the Letter of it always fall together.  
Therefore, If the Church had not believed every Law in the Decalogue, in the Letter to be binding to us, she would not have called every one of them a Law, in that known form, Lord, incline our hearts to keep this Law.  
Against all this it is objected, 
Epilog. l. 3. c. 21. p. 194.  That the first and last Command of the Second Table, are by the terms of them appropriated to God's ancient People. The Land of Promise in the Letter belongs to none but Israelites. The Tenth Command forbiddeth to covet another man's wife, altho' adultery was forbidden before; and therefore to covet another man's wife, is to compass another man's wife, which might be done, where the Law alloweth divorces, as Moses' Law doth.  
To which I reply, 1. If these words, appropriated to the ancient People of God, import no more than the being delivered with some accommodation to them, it is no good consequence, because the first and last Precept in the second Table, are thus appropriated, That therefore they concern no body else. The ritual Law was adapted to the circumstances of those Israelites, 
More Nevochim, p. 46.  which were in being at the time when it was enacted. The Law whereby the eating of blood is interdicted, was therefore given, because the Zabiists thought blood to be the food of infernal Gods, and conceived the way to contract an acquaintance with them, was to eat of it. The Law which forbiddeth the eating of the fruits of the first three years, was occasioned by an Idolatrous custom of the same People, who use to offer part of the First-fruits of Trees to their Idol, and to eat the other part in their Idol-Temple, being possessed with an apprehension, That the Trees would whither and die, in case this custom was intermitted. The preceptive part of the Writings of the Prophets, is plainly accommodated to the Nation of the Jews. Many parts of the New Testament are adapted to the condition of the Primitive times. S. John's Gospel was intended to affront the assertions of Ebion and Cerinthus. S. Paul's Epistles are proportioned to those distempers, which some particular Churches conflicted with. The Sermons of Christ were preached to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Both his Sacraments are not without their peculiar aspects. In Baptism there is a special regard to the Jews, who were no strangers to the custom of admitting Proselytes by Water. Some rites in the Eucharist were derived from their Passeover. Because the Law had a particular aspect upon the circumstances of the Israelites, then living when it was first enacted, it is no good consequence, That it was not obliging to future generations, which were in a different condition: Or, Because the Prophets were chief sent to the Jews, That therefore Christians are not concerned in the mandatory part of their Writings: Or, Because the New Testament in the doctrinal and sacramental part of it, was calculated for a Meridian different from that which the Church is now under; That therefore it does not oblige the Church in her present state. We see the same art which is used in undermining the perpetuity of the Decalogue (should it prevail) would be as forcible against the Old and New Testament. Dominicus à Soto, who maintained the principle, did likewise own the consequence, so far as it concerns the Old Testament. 
Bellarm. de justif. l. 4. c. 6. p. 930.  He did assert, Nullum testimonium ex libris Veteris Testamenti, quoad vim obligandi adduci posse Christianis.  
If those words, appropriated to the ancient people of God, be taken strictly, it does not appear from any thing which has been produced, that there is any such appropriation of those two Commands.  
The first runs in these terms, Honour thy father and thy mother, This is the whole which appertains to the Precept properly taken; what is annexed, is a Promise, and not of the essence of the Mandatory part of the Decalogue. Neither is the Promise so peculiar to the Jews, but that it may be applied unto others, which will be evident, if we consider the words, That thy days may be long in the land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee. Long life was not only the reward of obedience amongst the Jews, but likewise the Gentiles. 
Iliad. 4.  Homer says, That the life of Simoisius was short, because he did not cherish his loving Parents. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a word very general, and may import any land, where the sons of Adam dwell. The Lord did not only give Canaan to the Israelites, but Mount Seir to the children of Esau, and Are to the children of Lot. The Earth being the Lord's, what any Prince or People enjoy, it is by his donation. This title was so well known, that the Heathens used to stand upon it. Wilt not thou possess that which Chemosh thy God giveth thee to possess, Judg. 9.24. This being manifest, there is no Nation in the World, but may lay a claim to this promise, upon a supposition of obedience to the Precept.  
As for the last Command, I cannot find the least appearance of an appropriation in it. The sense of what the Epilogue asserts, must amount to this.  
Because under the Law Divorce was allowed, and for that reason Men might be induced to attempt the getting another man's wife from him, by suggesting something against her, which might occasion a Bill of Divorce; therefore God enjoined in the Tenth Command, That no Man should covet another's Wife.  
If this was so, How comes it to pass that S. Paul represents this Command as in force among Christians, who are not concerned in the Law of Divorce. Why is it said not only that, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, but his maid-servant, which was never married, and his ox and his ass? If the Law of Divorce was the only reason which did induce the supreme Legislator to give out this Law, it must necessarily follow, That a Man might give a Bill of Divorce not only to his Wife, but likewise to his Ox or his Ass, which supposeth him to be married to them.  
I cannot see how to covet, should signify to compass. For to compass or procure is an external act: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate to covet, is an internal, and therefore it is interpreted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to put the mind upon an object. The mind being conversant about that which is evil, either it passeth through it without consent, or else it is entertained with some unadvised delight, or else it procures not only a sudden delight, but a full and perfect consent. In the first place, the mind doth not sin, in the second and third it doth, and this is that which is interdicted in the Tenth Command, altho' Adultery is prohibited before. In the Precept concerning Adultery the outward act is forbidden explicitly, the inward implicitly only. Now, because of that inclination which is in Men to believe, That the inward acts of the Soul are no further sinful, but as they break out into external, it is the wisdom of the supreme Lawgiver in the conclusion of those Laws which are intended as a perpetual rule of righteousness, to annex one relating to these inward acts, on purpose to undeceive, and to leave us without the least pretence, if we be not concerned in the reformation of them.  
All this being duly considered, it will be evident, That the Sabbath of the Fourth Command, One in Seven, is therefore perpetual, because it is a part of the Decalogue, which is designed to be a rule of our obedience in all ages.  
It is said indeed, That this Precept cannot have the same privilege with the rest, to bind always. Because, to all mankind it can import no more than a circumstance of time, which is not of such consequence as to challenge a place amongst the Moral Laws of God: Whereas to the Jews, it did import the Creation of all things, by the True God; and their deliverance out of Egypt.  
The maintaining the Morality of it gives a scandal to those who have been seduced by it, to keep Saturday as their Sabbath.  
It is plainly a ceremonial Law, the Rest of it was instituted to commemorate the Egyptian servitude, and the deliverance from it, Deut. 5.15. We cannot be bound to the Precept, and not to the same measure of rest which the Precept limiteth. It forbids not only servile work, such as was prohibited on the first and last days of the Passeover: but all work, such as kindling fire, dressing meat, which ought to be done on the Passeover-day. To all which I will reply in order.  
1. Mankind may be divided into Jews and Gentiles. Gentiles are such as are converted to the Christian Faith, or not converted. Those who are, be the persons here concerned. Whatsoever did make the Fourth Command a matter of moment to the Jews, will make it of the like importance to them. As for the Creation of the World by the True God, they are every jot as much concerned in it, and do as sincerely believe it, as the Jews. As for the deliverance out of Egypt, if it be considered, That they are accounted as Abraham's Seed, engrafted into the same stock with the Jews, and become one people with them, the partition-wall being taken down by Christ, it will follow, if the Jews were concerned in that mercy, the converted Gentiles must be so too. Tho' they were aliens formerly, yet after a naturalisation is passed upon them, their concernments are the same with those who were born subjects. The Christian Church is divided into Twelve Tribes, 
Dial. cum Tryph. p. 353.  Rev. 7.4. Justin Martyr speaking of himself, and others which keep the Commands of Christ, says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. We are called, 
p. 365.  and are the true children of Jacob, and Israel, and Juda, and Joseph, and David, and God: and afterwards, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, We are the true stock of Israel. Lactantius gives the reason, quia in illorum locum adoptione successimus, because we succeed, 
L. 4. de verâ Sapient. p. 277.  and come into their place by adoption.  
2. The maintaining of the morality of the Fourth Precept, gives no scandal. If there be any in the case, it is taken and not given: What if they who keep Saturday for their Sabbath, ground their practice upon the perpetuity of it? Must we believe the ground is not good, because that which is built upon it by such persons is bad? An infirm house may stand upon a good soil. Had the Apostle any reason to dislike his foundation, because some did build wood, hay and stubble upon it? If any scandal be given, upon inquiry it will be found that the contrary doctrine doth administer it in far greater measures. Those who defend the Morality of the Command, deny Saturday to be contained in it. Their reasons I have already laid down. The Epilogue which denies the Morality, asserts that Saturday is expressly contained in it. Now when those who are inclined to keep Saturday as a Sabbath, find it granted to their hand, That that very day is enjoined by the Precept; and then consider, That this very Precept is placed in the very heart of those Laws which were immediately given by God, written upon Tables of Stone, preserved in the Ark, confirmed by Christ, 
Bellar. l. 4. de just. c. 6. p. 930.  and commended by the Apostles, received by the Church, and inserted into her Liturgy and Catechism. It is more than an even wager, That they will instantly fall upon the observing Saturday as their Sabbath. It had been good, That the contriver of this objection had considered the words of Origen, before he had so deeply charged his adversary, 
L. 6. cont. Cel. p. 313.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. It is a very great fault in disputing, if any accuse others of opinions as unsound, when their own Sentiments are chargeable with the same crime.  
3. The Fourth Command is no ceremonial Law. I willingly grant, That the Jewish day was Typical: but no such thing appears concerning the Sabbath enjoined by this Precept. The reason taken from the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt, and their deliverance from it, Deut. 5.15. doth not demonstrate any such thing. All that can be concluded from thence, is, That the rest required is a commemoration of that condition, and their being taken out of it. The thing commemorated being passed, and a ceremony, a shadow of a thing to come: The rest of the Fourth Precept cannot be ceremonial upon this account. If it be said, That the deliverance out of Egypt was Typical, and therefore the rest, designed to commemorate it, must be so too. I answer, That blessings may be considered in a twofold respect, either as a benefit which was past, or as a shadow of that which was to come. The rest commanded was to commemorate the deliverance in the first sense. For the Law being given to all, certainly the end of the rest was to commemorate the benefit which was obvious to all, and not the shadow which was understood by few or none in comparison at that time. Now this deliverance, as a real mercy, being of concernment to the Gentiles, after their inoculation into the Jewish stock, I cannot see how the command is in danger of being discharged upon the account of its relation to this favour. Upon the same ground we may say, That the whole Decalogue is annulled because this kindness is expressed in the Preface of it, as a motive to Obedience. The reasons of the Fourth Command are either Primary or Secondary. The Primary is, That God may have a fit time for his Solemn Worship. The Secondary, are to commemorate the Creation and deliverance out of Egypt. The first is essential to it, and cannot be divided from it. The secondary are  and separable; and therefore the whole command is said to be repeated, [These words the Lord spoke, and added no more, Deut. 5.22.] Although the reason taken from the Creation of the World, Exo. 20. is totally omitted. If the absence of this reason makes no alteration upon the Precept, but the whole Law is said to be spoken, although it be wanting: then the presence of a new reason taken from the deliverance out of the Egyptian servitude, cannot have any influence upon it, either to make it Ceremonial or Moral. The secondary reasons of a Ceremonial Command, may be Moral; and of a Moral, Ceremonial and Positive. It is to be observed, That the reason we speak of, has relation but to one particular in the Command, namely, the enjoining of Masters to make the Sabbath a day of rest unto their Servants, as well as to themselves. Now to make the whole Command Ceremonial, upon the account of an  and secondary reason, relating only to one circumstance in it, I leave it to every  mind to determine, whether it be agreeable to the usual rules of discourse.  
4. There is no inconvenience which will follow, if we assert, That as we are bound to the Fourth Command, so likewise to the same measure of rest, which that Precept limiteth. A rest only in general is required, and that in order to the keeping of One Day in a Week Holy. This being the end, and the end always modifying the means, we have assurance, That such a measure of rest is only understood as has a tendency to promote this purpose. All who believe the Lord's day to be grounded upon Apostolical authority must necessarily grant, that we are bound to rest upon it from all those works, which are not reconcileable with the end of the institution, namely, The devoting of the whole day to the honour and worship of Christ. If there be any stricter measures of rest, enjoined upon the particular Seventh from the Creation, by any other Law, it nothing concerns us, no more than the day itself. It is not true, That the Fourth Command doth forbid all work whatsoever. For if this was the sense of it, it would be repugnant to the Law of Nature, which requires, That works of necessity, piety and mercy be done at all times. There was a Law amongst the Heathens, That no work should be done on their feast days, when Vmbro and Scaevola were consulted about the meaning of it, they, notwithstanding the strictness of the words, made answer, That such work might be done which did relate ad Deos, ad urgentem vitae utilitatem, quod praetermissum noceret. What kind of work the Fourth Command prohibits, may be collected from the words of it: Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work, but the Seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, in it thou shalt not do any work, that is, any which appertains to thy particular calling or function, which might with equal advantage have been dispatched in the week time. Therefore when servile work is expressly forbidden on the Passeover. etc. and dressing of meat allowed; but on the Sabbath, in the Fourth Command all work: all work imports no more than servile. Therefore the Chaldee Paraphrast expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opus servile, and that which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Leu. 23.7. is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only, Ex. 12.16. Deut. 16.8. All the difference is, That what is expressed in more general terms in the Fourth Precept, is more explicitly and particularly set down in the Law touching the Passeover, etc. This will be very evident, if we consider, That the Passeover sometimes happened to be upon the Sabbath, as in the year when our Blessed Lord was crucified: and therefore by reason of these Two Solemnities meeting together, That Sabbath is styled a high day, Jo. 19.31. If on the Passeover, all servile work is forbidden, and dressing of meat allowed but on the Sabbath, all work whatsoever, whether servile or not servile: then by the Law of God the Jews were bound to contradictions, when the Passeover fell upon the Sabbath, they were bound and not bound to dress meat, by the Law of the Sabbath they were bound not to do it. By the Law of the Passeover they were bound to do it. For the Lamb by a divine Precept was to be roasted with fire.  
Irenaeus and S. Cyprian limit the work prohibited in the Fourth Command to servile work. The Alexandrian Edition of the LXX. 
L. 4. c. 19 c. 20. Cypr. de Sp. San.  interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opus servitutis, Num. 29.7.  
It cannot in reason be thought, That the Fourth Command prohibits the dressing of meat, or kindling of fire on the Sabbath, which speaks nothing of these particulars: When as those particular Laws which carry a much fairer and more probable appearance of such an interdiction, upon an exact inquiry, will be found to import no such matter.  
As for the dressing of meat, the words usually alleged are these. To morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord, bake that which will bake to day, and seethe that which will seethe, and that which remaineth, lay up for you to be kept until the morning, Exod. 16.23. This Text speaks of the Manna, of which a double portion did descend from Heaven on the day preceding the Sabbath. Of this portion, one they might bake and seethe and eat that day, the other part they were to lay up unbaked and unsodden. Bake that which you will bake, and seethe that which you will seethe, and that which remaineth, not of what was baked or sodden, but of what was gathered over and above the daily proportion, That lay up to be kept till the morning. This is plain from the miracle expressed in the next verse. They laid it up till the morning, and it did not stink, neither was there any worm in it. If it had not been raw, the glory of the miracle had been celypsed. Before they reserved some, which they had gathered contrary to God's Command, and it was putrified in the morning; and now they reserve a portion according to his Command, and no putrefaction is in it. If it had been baked or sodden, it would have been thought, That that was the reason, why it was not corrupted as before. Indeed in the fifth ver. it is said, On the sixth day they shall prepare that which they shall bring in, that is, If any have a mind not to eat it raw, but to prepare it for food, whether by grinding it in Mills, beating it in a Mortar, 
Num. 11.8.  or any other toilsome way, all such elaborate preparations must be finished upon the Sixth day, they containing too much servile work for a Sabbath. Yet notwithstanding all this, it does not appear from the Text, but that upon the Sabbath they might do in order to a more immediate preparation of it, what Christians usually do about their food on the Lord's day.  
As for the kindling of fire, it is manifest, That the Text commonly alleged, Exod. 35.3. must undergo some restriction, for the Priests were bound to bake the Shewbread, and set it hot upon the Table every Sabbath, Leu. 24.5, 8. 1 Sam. 21.6. And to offer up the Sacrifice of the Sabbath, which could not be done without the kindling of fire. Although the fire which came down from heaven, was constantly upon the Altar, and so continued till it came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the house of eternity or Temple, where it was renewed: yet it is plain, That it was daily maintained by a supply of new fuel. The Priest was to lay wood every morning on it, Leu. 6.12. And so soon as the old fire had disjoined the particles, and put them into motion, new fire must necessarily be kindled. This is taken notice of by Munster upon the Text, Judaei hoc praeceptum, etc. The Jews think this Precept is to be observed in the Letter, and therefore they hire Christians to kindle their fire on the Sabbath, not considering it was lawful for the Priests to make a fire on the Sabbath, for the daily Sacrifice. All this doth manifest that the Text, which is under consideration, must not be taken in that latitude, which it seems to have at the first view: and if it must have some limitation, it cannot be better restrained than to what is expressed in the Context. The thing treated of is the work of the Tabernacle, tho' many cautions had been given concerning the forbearance of servile work on the Sabbath, upon any private account: yet some might be apt to think, That work tending to the preparing of materials for the composing that Sacred Tent was lawful. For the prevention of such thoughts, before the description of what was requisite is entered upon, this Precept is laid down, That in order to any such work, whether the melting of Silver, Gold, or any other metal, which might be necessary about the Sanctuary, not so much as a fire should be kindled.  
And now I have finished the second branch of the Proposition, That the Sabbath of the Fourth Command One in Seven is perpetual, and not to continue only during the Jewish Oeconomy.  
I will proceed to the Third. This proportion One in Seven is by the Command to be devoted to Divine Worship, and not only to corporal rest.  
Besides Bodily rest, there is mention likewise of a Sanctification of the Sabbath, as a thing distinct from it. Sanctification is represented as the end, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. The rest as a means to advance this work, In it thou shalt do no work, Corporal labour being an impediment to the exercise of Religion. If the end and the means are always distinct, than Sanctification must import something different from the rest of the day, and this can be nothing but the devoting of it to the Solemn Worship of God. This we may collect, first, From the order of the Commands, in the First is prescribed, who we must Worship. Thou shalt have no other Gods but me: In the Second, How we must not Worship him, Thou shalt not make any graven image of him: In the Third, How we must, with holy reverence, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: In the Fourth, We have the solemn time when this Service must be performed, Remember the Sabbath to sanctify, or set it apart for this Sacred Work. Upon the account of the relation which this Command has to the other Three Precepts of the first Table, The keeping of it is put for the observation of them all, Isa. 56.2. And the Jews have a saying, That the Sabbath is equivalent to all Commands. Secondly. The Blessing of the Sabbath. God blessed the Sabbath-day. Here is something contained in these words, which imports a special benediction. It is no such Emphatical Blessing for a day to be devoted merely to idleness. That day is most blessed, on which God is most honoured. But God has more honour by the honest actions of Men in those vocations in which he has placed them, than he can have by mere sloth, and a total cessation from labour, without any respect to his Sacred Worship. Thirdly, The practice of the Israelites upon the Sabbath, They had a holy Convocation, Leu. 23. Reading and Preaching out of Moses and the Prophets, Act. 15.21. Luk. 4.16, 17. Solemn places to resort unto, for the performance of these sacred duties, 
Leo Modena, p. 114.  Ps. 74.8. To this the practice of the modern Jews is very agreeable, and believed by them to be grounded upon the Fourth Command, as is manifest by the words of Manasse Ben Israel, 
Concil. p. 149.  in his Comment upon that Precept. Notabilis error est putare otii ergo Sabbatum institutum esse, etc. It is a remarkable error to think, That the Sabbath was instituted for rest. For idleness being the mother of all vice, upon this supposition more hurt than good will come from the Sabbath, Quare statuere omnino opertet, etc. Wherefore it is necessary to assert, That the Sabbath was instituted that man might readily (all worldly cares being laid aside) apply himself to the study of the Law, have recourse to Synagogues, and Academies, consult his Teachers about weighty portions of Scripture, and hard Questions, which he is ignorant of. Maimonides says, 
Huls p. 240  Five Precepts are necessary to be complied with, in order to a due observation of the Sabbath. The first is, to rest on the Seventh; the Second, to Sanctify the day. So that in his thoughts to rest from bodily labour, and to sanctify or keep holy the Sabbath, are two distinct things. Philo Judaeus says, That the Fourth Command enjoins that the Seventh day be spent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, these words import more than a sitting still. The Rabbins generally believe, that Divine Worship is contained in it. 
L. 4. c. 30. Hist. l. 1. c. 4.  Irenaeus and Eusebius are of the same mind. So that I cannot see what reason there is for that conclusion which we meet with in the Epilogue. I conclude therefore that which will seem strange to unskilful people, 
L. 3. c. 21. p. 192.  That the only thing commanded by the Letter of the Fourth Command is to rest from bodily labour upon the seventh day of the week, in which God rested, from whence it is called a Sabbath.  
The grounds of this persuasion are these, The Precept extends to Cattle, which are in no capacity to do any thing appertaining to a Sabbath, but rest from their labour: and likewise to strangers, that is, such as were not circumcised, but Converts from Idols, and Proselytes of the Gate. As the Israelites were bound to see their Cattle they did not work, so likewise to these strangers: They of themselves were under no obligation, being tied only to the Seven Precepts which the Sons of Noah received from him, of which number the Sabbath was none.  
To keep holy the Sabbath, signifies only to sit still on the Seventh day. There is as much holiness in this, as in offering a brute beast unto God, being stamped with a divine Command, and the Rest of the Body, signifying the Rest of the Soul from sin, as the Sacrifice did the holiness of Christ. This is the substance of what is asserted by the learned Author of the Epilogue. To which I reply,  
1. It is no good consequence, because the Precept extends to Cattle, which are in no capacity to do any thing appertaining to the Sabbath, but only cease from bodily labour; That therefore nothing but bodily rest is enjoined in it. The Decree of the King of Niniveh concerning the Fast did reach to Cattle; yet it is not true, That nothing was commanded the Inhabitants of the City, but what might be performed by Cattle. We must take notice, That a part only of the Command extends to Cattle. It is required of the Masters of them, That they shall not be employed in that usual work they are designed for in the week-time: but not that they keep holy the Sabbath-day. To assert, That Cattle are concerned in the whole Precept, because they are in one part, is as if we should affirm, That Jacob's sons Cattle had all Egypt for their pasture, because they had Goshen which was a part of it.  
As for Strangers they were capable both of resting and sanctifying the Sabbath. If we suppose they were tied only to the Seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah, how doth it appear, That the Sabbath of the Fourth Command was not contained under one of them? It is believed to belong to the Second, 
Mede Diat. p. 85.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Munster upon Jos. 9.7. useth these words, nec poterant Israelitae cum Gibeonitis inire foedus, nisi hac conditione; ut observarent septem praecepta filiis Noae data, hoc est, Eliminarent Idololatriam, observarent Sabbatum, abstinerent ab incestu, execrarentur homicidium, etc. The Israelites could not enter in covenant with the Gibeonites, but upon this condition, That they would observe the Seven Precepts given to the Sons of Noah, that is, cast out Idolatry, observe the Sabbath, abstain from Incest, execrate Murder, etc. Here the observation of the Sabbath is reckoned amongst the Seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah.  
If the Sabbath was none of them, yet it must be remembered, That the Tie was made not by a divine, but a humane appointment.  
Tho' the Precepts materially considered are in the Scripture: yet they are not in that form and order in which they are delivered by the Talmudists: Nor is there any intimation given, that it was the Will of God, That Proselytes or Converts from Idols should be obliged to these and no other. I doubt not but this was a decree of the Jewish Church, and that it might have the greater reverence paid to it, the Rabbins generally ascribe it to God. If Proselytes or strangers were tied only to these Seven Precepts by the will of Men: yet they might be obliged to the observation of others, in particular the Sabbath of the Fourth Command by the Will of God. A Stranger for the sin of ignorance was bound to offer up a she-goat of the first year, Num. 15.27, 29. which injunction is no part of the Seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah.  
2. It is not true, That to keep holy the Sabbath, signifies no more, than sitting still upon the Seventh Day. Besides the figurative holiness, there is something discernible in a Sacrifice, which is not to be found in such a slothful posture. The earth being the Lord's, and he granting the use of it to Men, for a supply of their necessities, the giving back some part of it by way of oblation, was accounted a piece of Homage, and an expression of their agnitions of his Sovereignty over the whole. 
Judith c. 2. v. 7. Herodotus  To this end the Persians use to present their Kings with Earth and Water, to signify and acknowledge, That they were Lords of Land and Sea.  
Aquinas was so well pleased with this reason, 
22. Q. 55. art. 1.  That he asserts sacrificing in general to be of the Law of Nature: Tho' the determination of it, to this or that species of things be variable, and grounded only upon positive institution. All this cannot be asserted of sitting still, which gives nothing to God, but implies the withholding and suppression of those actions, whereby the Body is in any capacity to honour him. If there had been nothing in Sacrifice but a figurative holiness, no account can be given why it should meet with so general and ready entertainment among the Heathens who were strangers to the figure. Porphyry, 
De Abstin. l. 2. p. 70.  who applies himself to condemn the Sacrifice of Beasts, yet acknowledgeth the universality of the custom, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Inhabitants of Lystra are no sooner possessed with a belief of the divinity of S. Paul and Barnabas, but they make an attempt to Sacrifice Oxen to them, Act. 14.13. Whereas sitting still could never gain the least approbation among them. The Jews who were grown into a very superstitious practice in this particular were rather made the object of their derision. They represent them as persons who spent the Seventh part of their time in idleness. Tho' I am far from believing, That the oblation of material things unto God, accompanied with a destruction of them, is warranted by the Law of Nature; as I have expressed in the first Section: Yet it is manifest from what has been spoken, That more reason may be alleged in savour of it, than for sitting still.  
3. Sitting still on the Seventh day was never stamped with the authority of Heaven. If this was the meaning of the Fourth Precept, than God repeated it, so soon as it was enacted by him in these particular Laws, in which he appointed, That upon the Sabbath there should be a holy Convocation, and the offering up of Sacrifice. The People could not convene nor the Priest's Sacrifice without bodily motion. When it is said, Let no man go out of his place on the Seventh day: 
Exod. 16.29.  It must be understood with relation to the gathering of Manna, and the doing such unnecessary work as might have been dispatched in the week-time.  
4. It doth not appear, That the Rest of the Body enjoined in the Fourth Command, is designed as a figure to signify the Rest of the Soul from sin. There is no Text of Scripture, which imports any such matter. And if fancy be permitted to make Types and figures as it pleaseth, where there is no direction from Heaven to steer our apprehensions by, there will be no end of them: a figure being the effect of a positive institution cannot be discovered without the knowledge of the cause of it.  
If the Rest of the Body is a Type of the Rest of the Soul from sin, than it signifies Rest from some, or from all sins. Not from some only. The Bible gives no intimation of any particular delinquency, which the Rest of the Sabbath of the Fourth Command typifies our cessation from. Not from all. For betwixt the Type and the thing signified, there ought to be some resemblance which is not discernible betwixt the Souls Rest from some enormities, and the Rest of the Body. The Soul than rests from sins of omission, when it is conversant about the discharge of those duties which are devolved upon it. This kind of Spiritual Rest consists in operation, and the Rest of the Body bears no resemblance to the operations of the Soul.  
Now I have finished the Seventh Proposition, the solemn Time for Worship, which ought to be no less than One Day every Week; determined in the Fourth Command to One in Seven, as a proportion perpetually to be devoted to Divine Worship.  
VIII. This proportion One in Seven was determined to the Jewish day by another Precept, which was to oblige only, till the Jewish Oeconomy had a period put to it.  
Here are Two things to be evinced, 1. That the Jewish Sabbath was set out by a Law distinct from the Fourth Command. 2. That this Law was to continue no longer than the Jewish Oeconomy.  
1. The Jewish Sabbath was set out by a Law distinct from the Fourth Command.  
This Law we find, Exod. 16.23. To morrow is the rest of the Sabbath, and likewise, Exod. 31.15. In the seventh is the Sabbath of rest. Here in both places, the word is double, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rest of the Sabbath, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Sabbath of rest: but in the Fourth Command it is single 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which can import no less than some difference, and distinction betwixt the Two Laws. The reason of the duplication may be this. The Jews being under a twofold Command, the Law concerning the particular Day, and the Law touching the Proportion: They had a double Sabbath, namely, the last of the Week, and the Sabbath of the Fourth Command which is One Day in a Week. The Fourth Command enjoining only vagum quid, One in Seven, and this vagum taking up its rest for a time in the particular Jewish day, That day is styled Sabbatum Sabbati, the rest of the Sabbath of the Fourth Command. The calling afterwards the Tenth Day of the Seventh Month, and the Seventh Year of release by the same name doth not weaken this observation. The name is first given to the Jewish weekly Sabbath upon the grounds expressed, and then afterwards applied unto those times to signify, That the Jews ought to make the Rest of the Sabbath, the pattern of their Rest on those Solemnities, and therefore when the day of expiation is so styled, Leu. 23.32. in the LXX. these words occur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, You shall sabbatise or imitate, in the observation of this yearly solemnity, the Rest of the weekly Sabbath. When the year of release is so named, Leu. 25. The Vulgar Latin plainly points at this imitation, Sabbatizes Sabbatum.  
This Law is likewise mentioned, Nehem. 9.13, 14. In the Thirteenth verse, We have an account of the whole Decalogue, under these names, Right judgements, true laws, good statutes and commandments. That by these we are to understand the Ten Commandments and nothing else, is clear, in that it is said, That God himself gave them from Mount Sinai. God gave there immediately by himself the whole Decalogue and no other Laws. After the Ten Commandments are thus expressed, of which number the Fourth is one: it is said in the next Verse, And thou madest known unto them thy holy Sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, and statutes and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant. Here the particular Jewish day is expressed as a thing distinct from the Sabbath of the Fourth Command, and reckoned amongst the Precepts, Statutes and Laws which were given by the hand of Moses. Therefore there must be some distinction betwixt the Sabbath as it lies amongst the Ten Commandments, and the particular Jewish day.  
The Tradition of the Jews is not disagreeable to what has been represented. The Fourth Command reacheth to the stranger within the gate, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Solomon Jarchius glosseth. The particular Jewish Sabbath according to the common opinion, extends no further than to those of their own nation. 
More Nevo. P. 2. c. 30. pag. 283. P. 3. c. 43. pag. 471  Maimonides intimates, That there was a Sabbath given to them in particular, and a Sabbath likewise given to all: the scope of which was, That the Seventh part of the life of a Man might be free of toil, and dedicated to the remembrance of the Creation. In the Six Hundred and Thirteen Precepts commonly reputed by the Rabbins to have been given to Moses upon Mount Sinai, the Sabbath according to the collection of Abraham Ben Kattani as it lies in Exod. 20.8. makes the Twenty Seventh: as it lies in Exod. 23.12. makes the Seventy Ninth. Now the Sabbath in the 23. of Exod. is undoubtedly the last of the week, therefore the Sabbath in the Twentieth must be something else. Nothing can be so properly thought upon, as the proportion of time, the immutable rule of the Church's rest in all ages.  
2. This Law concerning the particular day, on which the Jews rested, was to continue no longer than the Jewish Oeconomy.  
The day of the resurrection of our Blessed Lord put a period to it. Upon the Sabbath immediately preceding, it is said, That the Women which came with Christ from Galilee, rested according to command, Luk. 23.55, 56. Tho' the Disciples had observed many of the Jewish Sabbaths before: yet this expression, according to command, is never used till now, which intimates, That there must be some special reason for it: and what can this be but only to show how far the Disciples might go in the celebration of the old day according to Precept, namely, to the Resurrection of Christ? If they went any further, it was without command, That being designed to continue no longer. Indeed the Apostles did afterwards frequent the Synagogues upon the Jewish Sabbath, but it is never said that they entered into them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to custom, Act. 17.2. It was a custom for them for a while to comply with the Jews in some things which were in reality abrogated, and to seek the gaining of them by prudential condescensions and accommodations to their weakness. After this time was in some measure over, and ignorance of the liberty procured by Christ from the rites of the ceremonial, became less excusable, we find the Jewish Sabbath by degrees fully declared against, as an antiquated rite. It is represented, 1. As a day equal with others, 2. As a beggarly element, 3. As a shadow, that was vanished away.  
1. As a Day equal with others.  
One man esteemeth one day above another, another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind, he that regardeth a day, regardeth it to the Lord; and he that regardeth not a day, regardeth it not to the Lord, Rom. 14.5, 6.  
By a Day here we must understand the Time then in controversy. Tho' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has an indefinite sound: yet the Apostle doth not intent that it should signify any day, and by consequence include the Lord's day. As his representing meats and drinks to be indifferent, ver. 2, 3. doth not depretiate the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper, and sink them into an equality with our common bread and drink: so neither doth his putting days upon the same level, make all days of the same rank with the Lord's day. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aught to be limited to the matter in hand. That which occasioned the Apostle to write thus, were the different opinions among those who were converted to the Christian Religion. He, who was formerly a Jew had an esteem for the old Sabbath-Passeover, etc. above other days. The Converted Gentile had an equal regard for them. The old Sabbath in particular was earnestly contended for by the Ebionites. Those who regarded not this day, are set upon equal terms with those who did. If this day in the Apostle's apprehension had not been equal with others, no account can be given, why he, that did not regard it, is so gently treated; and not rather sharply reproved for his contempt. The reason, why he who had a respect for it, is so tenderly handled, is because he was brought up under the Mosaical Oeconomy, and it could not be expected, that he should in an instant be disengaged from those impressions which his education had made upon him. The Apostle was glad, That he had entertained the rudiments of Christian Religion, and used all the tenderness imaginable towards him, that he might invite him into a more intimate acquaintance with it. Lest this accommodation should seem to import a compliance with his error, he styles him weak, v. 1. And lest too great an advantage might be given to the Gentile, who was inclined to set him at nought upon the account of this difference, v. 10. He (so far as prudence would permit) draws at concealment over his own inclination to either party, and exhorts them to ripen their minds to a Plerophory. Let every one be fully persuaded in his own mind.  
2. As a beggarly Element. How turn you again to the weak and beggarly elements, ye observe days, months and times and years, Gal. 4.9, 10. The Apostle writing to those, who were of greater growth, deals more roundly with them. He tells them, That he was afraid of them, upon the account of their adhering to the old Sabbath, which was now antiquated. That this very time is intended, is plain from the word Days. Here are words enough besides to import all other seasons which were set apart by the Law, as Months, Times, Years. Months, Their New Moons: Times, Their Passeover, Pentecost, Feast of Tabernacles, with other Solemnities: Years, The Year of Release and the Year of Jubilee. Therefore nothing is left for Days to signify but their weekly Sabbaths. These days are styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beggarly elements with relation to Ebion's name, which signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a beggar, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Eusebius notes. 
Hist. l. 3. c. 21.  So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are as much as elements formerly belonging to the Church in her minority, and taken up by Ebion. In the number of those things, which he, and his complices maintained; 
Eus. Hist. l. 3. c. 12.  we find the Jewish Sabbath to be one, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they observed the Sabbath.  
The Days here mentioned being put indefinitely, must be interpreted of the choicest of Days in the Jewish account; in the thoughts of those who adhered to the ceremonial rites, none were comparable to their weekly Sabbaths. It was a common saying amongst them, That he who denieth the Sabbath, is like to him who denieth the whole Law; and he who observeth the Sabbath, altho' he should worship Idols, his sins would be forgiven.  
Philo Judaeus calls the weekly day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Tract. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  and the Rabbins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Queen, attributing to it a Sovereignty over other days. 
Gem. Sanhe. c. 7.  In the Talmud, Turdnnus Rufus (who is conceived to be the same with Titus the Emperor) is represented as ask Rabbi Akiba, why the Sabbath was more excellent than other days. This question could arise from no other ground, but that unusual esteem, which he observed the Jews to entertain of it.  
Lastly, Days do signify such as the Jews were formerly in bondage to. This is clear from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage, v. 9 There were no days, to which that people were so much in bondage, as their Saturday-Sabbaths. They were under such a degree of servitude, That they durst not use the liberty Nature allows every man in his own defence. They and their City were taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Dio Hist. l. 56.  on the day of Saturn making no resistance. They were bound and tied by their Superstition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Plutarch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  as if they had been in a net. The Five radical Precepts, which Maimonides recites as necessary to be submitted unto in order to a due celebration of the Sabbath, they did beat out into an infinite number of niceties, and to each of them they were so much in bondage, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Huls. p. 242.  that they believed, That the not observing of them had hitherto hindered the coming of the Messiah. This being duly considered, will release us from that fear which some have been possessed with, as tho' the pressing this Text might prove prejudicial to the Lord's-day; for it is manifest, That such days only are here condemned, as the Jews had formerly been in bondage to, which cannot be asserted of the Lord's day, which was never owned by them.  
3. As a shadow which is vanished. Let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new-moons, or Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ, Coloss. 2.16.  
In order to a right understanding of this place, it is to be premised, That many things under the Mosaical Law were of a figurative and typical Nature. The Apostle treating of some of them, says, These things happened to them for types, 1 Cor. 10.11. and the Law has a shadow of good things to come, Heb. 10.1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, are properly the first lineaments of an effigies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that which is drawn in its full perfection. God having an intention to give us Christ, the express image of his person under the Gospel, was pleased according to the methods of Art, to furnish the Jews with the first lineaments of this image under the Law. Amongst these shadows the old weekly Sabbath is here reckoned. Let no man judge you in respect of Sabbath-days, which are shadows, etc.  
That by the Sabbath-days here we are to understand, the Jewish Saturdays will appear, from the several words of the Text, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can import no less than the early Feasts and Solemnities: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their monthly; and therefore there is nothing left for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify, but their weekly Sabbaths. It is believed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answers to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Talmud, which, if true, 
Isaaci Casaub. ep. 24. Carolo Labbaeo, p. 23.  communicates a great deal of strength to our assertion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the lesser Sections or parts, into which the Talmudical Treatises are divided. The first division is into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordines. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are divided into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Books or Treatises, The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sections or Chapters. From hence the Doctors which did expound, 
Justin. in Nou. de Hebr. 146.  and give the meaning of them are styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the chief and most eminent of them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
In the Second Seder of the Mishna, there are several Treatises, one is entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all these have their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sections. The words of the Text are exactly agreeable to these titles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a feast day, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the beginning of the year, which was always in novo lunio, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So that when the Apostle says, let no man judge you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. his meaning must be, give no occasion to any to condemn you for the observation of what is contained in any Section of the Treatise or Book called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Now the Treatise or Codex called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expressly treats of the Jewish day, and enjoins the celebration of it. Therefore in this phrase, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Jewish weekly Sabbath must be included.  
That which lies against this conjecture, is, That the Mishna was not so early as S. Paul's Epistles; and therefore he could not have any respect to the Sections in it. To which I reply, that Maimonides tells us, That the Head of the Sanhedrim had a private Copy of the Traditions, as they were delivered from the mouth of those, who were Doctors in Israel, long before the times of Rabbi Jehuda, the compiler of the Mishna, and the Author of Halicoth Olam; That the Disciples, for memory sake, wrote the Oral Law in Characters. The Book written by them they might not divulge, and therefore called it the Book of Secrets. S. Paul being trained up at the feet of Gamaliel, and in the deepest mysteries of their Religion, no doubt had the perusal of it, and might very well have an eye upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sections of it, in the words which are under debate. That which Rabbi Jehuda did, was to join together what lay scattered in private hands, and to make a publication of it in one entire Volume.  
There is no just cause of fear, lest from this Text, the Sabbath of the Fourth Command should receive any prejudice. Clear evidence has been already produced for the Morality of it: Whereas the Sabbath here is represented to be of a figurative nature. The Fourth Command enjoins only a Religious observation of One in Seven every week. If the Apostle had condemned this, he had condemned himself, and the whole Christian Church, which did devote the First of the Week, which is One Day in Seven, to the Honour and Worship of the Supreme Being.  
And now I have done with the Eighth Proposition. The Proportion, One in Seven set out by the Fourth Command, was determined to the Jewish day by another Precept, which was to continue no longer than the Jewish Oeconomy.  
IX. When the last of the Week had a period put unto it, The First was substituted in the room of it.  
This Substitution is favoured by the Law, Prophets, our Blessed Lord, the Holy Apostles, the Testimony of the following Ages.  
1. The Law, The Hebdomadal observation of the Lord's day assures us, That the Primitive Christians had their Eye upon the Law in the keeping of it. This Weekly observation, which universally prevailed, could proceed from nothing but a sense of some rule which they were all acquainted with. They might have celebrated it once a Fortnight, or once a Month, or once a Year; as Easter is, had they been left to their own conduct. Their general agreement in a weekly observation doth evidently argue a respect, which they had, to the proportion of time set out by the Law under the Old Testament.  
And if they had their Eye upon it, they could not but discern, what is literally contained in it, and act in a conformity to it.  
The old Sabbath being abrogated, the Letter of the Fourth Precept declares, That the First of the Week must come into the place of it. For in it is required one day perpetually, for Divine Worship, Six for Secular concernments: and that the Six days come all together. Six  shalt thou labour, not one or two, and then rest; but upon Six days together, according to the example of God himself, who in the space of six days without any interruption did create the World. These two things being granted, which the very words of the Command will extort from us, the determination of One in Seven to a particular Day, must necessarily fall upon the First of the Week. For if upon any other, as the Second, Third, Fourth or Fifth following the abolition of the old day, than the six days for Secular employment could not come together. If the determination was deferred till the second week following the abrogation, than a whole week was passed without any Sabbath, contrary to the plain sense of the Precept, which requires One Day every Week to be perpetually observed as a Sabbath.  
2. The Prophets, They represent the First of the Week either expressly under the notion of a Sabbath, or else in such terms, as are equivalent. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness: from the womb of the morning thou hast the dew of thy youth, Ps. 110.3. Here is a particular day in the time of the Messiah, styled the day of power which the Holy Ghost prophesyeth of. The whole Psalm has an evident aspect upon our Blessed Lord. This is manifest from the New Testament, and the records of the ancient Jews, who generally account it, 
Just. Mart. Dial. cum Trip. p. 309.  as a prediction concerning the Kingdom of the Messiah. It appears likewise That this day of power must be celebrated as a Sabbath. Upon it the people shall be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 populus devotionum, a people wholly devoted to the Lord, than they shall offer to him their solemn Services, and voluntary oblations, styled by the Hebrews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. We have likewise the place where this devotion shall be, in the beauties of holiness: So the Sanctuary is styled, Psal. 29.2. This day of devotion must be the Resurrection-day, and by consequence the First of the Week: It is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the day of thy power, which intimates such a day; as in the time of Messiah is most eminent for the manifestation of a Divine Power, there is no day equal in this respect to the day of Resurrection. In the raising Christ from the dead, was put forth the exceeding greatness of his power, the operation of the might of his strength, Eph. 1.19, 20. When he was raised, All power was given to him, both in heaven and earth, Mat. 28.18. Tho' these words were not spoken upon the Resurrection-day, yet the power mentioned in them was then conferred. At the conclusion of that day we read of the effects of it, in giving a Commission to the Disciples To teach all nations; and preach the Gospel to every creature, Mark: 16.15. It is not strange that the day of Solemn Worship should be styled a day of Power and Strength. The Seventh Month, which answers to our September, is called Ethanim mensis fortium, 1 Kings 8.2. from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 robur. The Jews give the reason, because in that Month the Solemn Worship of God, which is the safeguard of the Community was more frequent than in any other. On the First Day was the Feast of Trumpets, on the Tenth the Feast of Expiation, on the Fifteenth the Feast of Tabernacles, on the Three and Twentieth Festum retentionis. The Hebrews did account their Sabbath as a day of Power. They say Circumcision was deferred to the Eighth day, That the Child might have the advantage of a Sabbath, to strengthen it against that Time.  
As the Title, so the action appropriated to this day, argues it to be the First of the Week, namely, The generation of the Son of God. It is said of the Resurrection-day, This day have I begotten thee, Acts 13.33. Then was he declared to be The Son of God with power, Rom. 1.3. The same thing in a Poetical manner is affirmed to be done upon the Morning of this day of Power. From the womb of the morning, thou hast the dew of thy Youth. This Morning must be related to some day, and to what day better than the day of Power. These words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou hast the dew of thy youth, the Septuagint interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or, I have begotten thee. This exposition being Literal has some encouragement from the common rule, That in the expounding of Scripture, we are not to let go the proper, and adhere to an improper sense, except we are compelled to it from some other Text. Other Scriptures are so far from putting this necessity upon us, That they conspire to cast a favourable aspect upon the interpretation which is given.  
The next Prophetical Testimony is in the 118. Psal. v. 24. This is the day which the Lord hath made, we will rejoice and be glad in it.  
Here is mention of the Resurrection-day: For upon the day here spoken of, The stone which the bvilders refused, became the head of the corner, v. 22. The same thing is said to be done on the day, on which Christ risen from the dead, Act. 4.10, 11. The stamp of divine Authority is impressed upon this day. This is the Day which the Lord hath made, not by Creation, so he has made every day, but by a special Institution. Here is the end for which it is made, That we may joy and be glad in it. The Worship of God is always to be performed with Spiritual rejoicing at this time for the Mercies of the Messiah. 
Gangrene. Syn. Can. 18.  The ancient Church did never appoint a Fast upon the Lord's-day, mourning being not reconcileable with the reason of its Institution. Lastly, Here is the place where this day is to be observed, the Sanctuary, Open to me the gates of righteousness, into which the righteous shall enter, v. 19, 20. The gates of righteousness import, as under the Law the doors of Tabernacle, Temple, Synagogue; so under the Gospel the doors of Churches into which the Righteous are to enter upon the First of the Week to Worship God, and express their grateful acknowledgements of the love of Christ in the work of Redemption.  
To this we may add the prediction of Isaiah. From one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord, Is. 66.23 This Prophecy has an evident aspect upon the times of the Gospel. God promiseth the bringing in a People to Christ. They shall bring all your brethren for an offering to the Lord, saith the Lord, v. 20. He promiseth Ministers to instruct this People under the name of Priests and Levites, v. 21. Evangelical Ordinances under the name of new heavens and new earth, v. 22. The time is foretold when this People are to attend upon these Ordinances, From one new moon unto another, and from one Sabbath to another. As there will be Festivals confined to certain months: So likewise a solemn day every week under the Gospel, when all flesh shall come to Worship. What can this be but the Lord's day, which all Christians, whether formerly Jews or Gentiles, did devote to the acts of Religious Veneration. If the words may be read as they are in the Margin of our Bibles; from Sabbath to his Sabbath, which is very agreeable to the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a great advantage will accrue to the Cause we maintain. For as the People here spoken of are the People of Christ; the Ministers, the Ministers of Christ; the Ordinances, the Ordinances of Christ: So by his Sabbath, we must understand the Sabbath of Christ. According to this interpretation it is predicted, That all would departed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the old Sabbath, and come together upon a new one, called his Sabbath, to Worship God.  
3. Our Blessed lord For the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day, Matt. 12.8. Our Saviour here assumes unto himself a title of Power, He calls himself Lord of the Sabbath. This power was communicated unto him, He had it as he was Son of Man.  
This Communication was not made without a design, and some ponderous reason. The only design visible to us, is, That he might make some alteration about the Sabbath. He is said, not only to be Lord, but Lord even or also, which imports, That he has a power over something else in this place, besides the Sabbath; and that his power over the Sabbath is to the same purpose with that power over those things whatsoever they be. The things mentioned in the former Verses, are the Shewbread, and Sacrifices, which he put a period to, and did erect other constitutions in the room of them. We have already proved, That the old day is annulled by him. The First of the Week is styled the Lord's day: what can 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be, but an effect of that power, which the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was invested with?  
Pray, That your flight be not on the Sabbath-day, Mat. 24.20. It appears from hence, That a Sabbath would be observed about Forty Years after these words were spoken: for the flight mentioned in them was upon the account of the Roman Army, styled, the abomination of desolation, which about that time besieged, and took Jerusalem, called the holy place. It is not said, Pray that you be not put upon this extremity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, on the Sabbath then in use, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a general word which may be applied to the first as well as the last of the Week. This Sabbath is to be celebrated by the Disciples, for he treats them privately, v. 3. and we cannot think he would use such an emphatical expression, which has a tendency to beget an awful regard to the Sabbath here mentioned, in case they had not been concerned in the observation of it: about the time which Christ had his Eye upon, no other Sabbath was observed by the Disciples, but the First of the Week. About Two and Twenty Years after his Death, we find it kept in a very full Assembly, Act. 20.7. After which there is not the least mention of the celebration of the Jewish day in the New Testament: but on the contrary, S. Paul condemns the observation of it, Coloss. 2.16. This Epistle was written not long before his Martyrdom, when he was in his bonds at Rome, c. 4. v. 18. Therefore we have reason to believe, That our Blessed Saviour had his Eye upon the First of the Week, when he exhorted the Disciples to pray, That their flight might not be on the Sabbath day. As a Winter-flight would have been prejudicial to their bodies: So likewise to fly upon the Sabbath, when they were to be engaged in the most solemn addresses to the Divine Majesty, would be really disadvantageous to their Souls.  
Indeed it is pretended, That our Saviour's words were occasioned, either by the foresight of some trouble to the Disciples from the superstitious Jews, who would certainly hinder them in their flight upon their Sabbath: or else of some molestation in their own Consciences, arising from their being not fully weaned from the observation of the Ceremonial Rites. To which I reply, That no such thing could in reason be feared, as the being hindered by the Jews; because, before the time which is spoken of, they had laid aside their Superstitious conceits about sitting still, or the going only a Sabbath-days journey, when they were in capital dangers, and received it as a Maxim, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  That when life is exposed to hazard, the rest of the Sabbath may be dispensed with. Tho' the Essenes' refused to submit to this rule, yet they being a very inconsiderable party in respect of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and without any power of inflicting penalties, they could be no impediment to the Christians in their flight. As for the trouble arising from their own Consciences, That cannot be supposed, because they had full instructions before this time about the abolition of the Ceremonial Appointments. All S. Paul's Epistles, in which there are clear expressions about this matter, were written before the destruction of Jerusalem. If his Doctrine was not prevalent with them, yet it cannot be imagined, that they should be more superstitious in this particular than the Jews, which were not converted: and they made no scruple before this time, either to fight or fly upon the Sabbath, in case of danger, as I have already intimated.  
I pass from the words of Christ to his Actions; as his Resurrection, his appearing after his Resurrection; the particular Acts done by him at his appearance.  
The old Sabbath being discharged, and the Fourth Command still for One in Seven, as is evident by the premises, we have a fair indication, from the Resurrection, of our duty to put a peculiar honour upon the First of the Week above all other days, and account it the Christian Sabbath. All days in themselves are equal, That which altars this equality and advanceth one day above another, is the eminence of the work which is done upon it. The Resurrection of Christ being the consummation of the new Creation and of our redemption from the direful effects of the primitive Apostasy, is the most eminent performance the World has been acquainted with. Were we left to our own conduct, what day could we make choice of to be the day of our Solemn Worship, and rest from those labours which are not reconcileable with it, 
Euseb. de laud. Const. Euseb. vit. Const. 628. Vales. l. 4. c. 18. Nazian. 〈◊〉 43. Basil. Hexam. Hom. 2.  but this which is ennobled with so transcendent a work? Upon this account the ancient Christians styled it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 really the first, the highest of all, the first-fruits of days. Samuel made it an argument, That Saul was chosen King, because there was none like him, a man higher than the people from the shoulders upwards. The First of the Week being advanced by the Resurrection, and made much taller than any other of the Seven, we may truly say, Behold the Day which the Lord hath chosen to be the Queen of Days, as Ignatius styles it.  
As the rising of Christ from the dead upon the First of the Week, promotes our belief, that it is the day which God has appointed in the room of the old Sabbath. So likewise his appearing upon it after the Resurrection, no less than five times upon the selfsame day, once to Mary Magdalen, 
Mat. 28.9, 10, 11. Luk. 24.33, 34. Jo. 2.19. v. 26.  then to the Women, the third time to the Two Disciples, the fourth to Peter, the last to the Eleven. Eight days after taken inclusively, he appeared again, when the Disciples were met, which was punctually upon the First of the Week. This day was singled out by him for the first and last most eminent manifestation of himself by his Spirit. The first to the Disciples at Pentecost, when the Holy Ghost descended upon them in cloven Tongues. 
Rev. 1.10.  The last to S. John, to whom the future state of the Church was revealed. For what end were all these appearances, but to inform future ages, That the First of the Week is a day most acceptable to him, and to assure them of his special presence when they convene upon it for his solemn Worship? To all this I might add, the particular acts which he did at his appearance. He invested his Disciples with power to exercise the Ministerial function, employed Peter to Preach, and by his Sermon at the Third Hour converted Three thousand, at the Ninth hour Five Thousand. He held the Angels of the Asian Churches in his right hand, and out of his mouth went a two-edged sword, the Sword of the Spirit, namely, the Word of God. All this is very agreeable to the nature of a day wholly devoted to Religion.  
4. The Holy Apostles and Disciples.  
Upon the First of the Week, when the Disciples came together to break Bread, Paul preached to them, Act. 20.7.  
Here are actions very suitable to the design of a Sabbath, Preaching and Administering the Holy Sacrament. The Time when these actions were performed, is the First of the Week, This was a constant custom, we never read that the Apostle in any place, where he found none but Disciples, did upon the old Sabbath, communicate with them in those Ordinances, which the Gospel has appointed.  
Now as touching a Collection for the Saints, as I have given order to the Churches of Galatia, so do ye. Upon the first of the week, let every one of you lay up by him in store, 1 Cor. 16.1, 2.  
The duty here enjoined, is a Collection for the Saints. The Apostle did design, That it should be very liberal, according to the estate of every Man. Why he should wave the second, third, fourth, fifth day of the Week, and pitch upon the First, for the doing of this generous and pious Work, cannot be conceived; except upon the First of the Week the Disciples of Christ use to meet and be engaged in such Religious performances, as have a tendency to excite the mind to Christian liberality. These were the thoughts of S. chrysostom, 
Hom. 43.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. There was an idoneity and fitness in the day to dispose and lead them to the acts of Charity. This custom was not only amongst the Corinthians, but all other Christians. The Epistle is addressed to all who in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ, 1 Cor. 1.2. and it was not only upon one or two First days, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the First day of every Week.  
There remaineth therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the keeping a Sabbath to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his works, as God did from his, Heb. 4.9, 10.  
These words are directed to the Hebrews, who were inclinable, through the efficaey of former impressions, to disvalue the institutions of the Gospel. That the Apostle might prevail with them to yield a cheerful conformity to those appointments. He demonstrates That Christ is more valuable than Moses, and styles their deserting the Gospel, a departure from the living God, and citys Psalm 95. which has a peculiar aspect upon the state of the Church under the Messiah. In it are described his Disciples under these names, the People of his pasture, the Sheep of his hand. Their solemn meeting to Worship, O come let us worship: the duties performed at this meeting, as Prayer, Let us kneel before the Lord our maker, v. 6. Singing of Psalms, Let us make a joyful noise unto him with Psalms, v. 2, 3. Hearing the word, if you will hear his voice, v. 7. a particular day, on which all these duties are to be performed, To day if you will hear. This day being intended for a Sabbath, at which time all spiritual advantages are administered, which tend to the bringing the Soul into truest satisfaction and rest, an exhortation is given to the People not to harden their hearts, as the Israelites did in the provocation, lest they be deprived of this rest, as the Israelites were of theirs in the land of Canaan. Now because there are several sorts of rests recorded in the Scripture. The heavenly rest in the world to come, the rest of the old Sabbath, rest in the land of Canaan, the Apostle makes it manifest, that it is none of these which the Psalmist means, but the rest of a Sabbath under the Gospel. Not the heavenly; for the rest here spoken is confined to a certain day, v. 7. Whereas the rest above is every day without interruption. Not the rest of the old Sabbath; for that was at the beginning, when the works were finished, from the Creation of the World. But the rest mentioned by the Psalmist is some future thing under the Gospel, as I have sworn, if they shall enter. Not the Rest in the land of Canaan. If Jesus had given them rest then, he would not afterwards have spoken of another day. From these premises it is concluded; there remaineth therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the keeping a Sabbath day to the people of God under the Gospel. And that we may know this Sabbath is the Resurrection-day, and by consequence, the First of the Week: it is added, for he which entered into his rest, hath ceased from his works, as God did from his. God the Father upon the Last of the Week ceased from his works, and made it a day of rest unto his people. Therefore God the Son has done the like with the First of the Week, he then putting a period to his state of Humiliation, and ceasing from his labour and trouble which he did undergo in the accomplishment of the work of our redemption.  
I was in the Spirit upon the Lord's day, Rev. 1.10.  
By the Lord's day we can understand no less than a day appointed by our Blessed Lord, and devoted to his Honour and Worship. This day must necessarily be the First of the Week. For S. John in expressing this circumstance of Time, designs a credit to his relation, and therefore must necessarily mean some day, which was very well known by this name, at the writing of the Revelation. It is manifest by Ignatius, who was his contemporary, That the common name then given to the First of the Week was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This day God was pleased to signalise by a communication of the Holy Ghost in some extraordinary measures: S. John was in the Spirit upon it. In the words there is an allusion to the manner of speaking amongst the Hebrews, who say that a man besides the Soul which he is ordinarily endued with, has another Spirit given to him upon the Sabbath, which they style 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an excellent Soul. 
Manass. Ben. Is. reconc. Buxt. Syna. Jud. c. 11. p. 288.  Such allusions we have in the very Context. The Seven Spirits, v. 4. have a plain aspect upon the Seven Angels, which, the Jews say, do constantly attend the throne of God. And the Governors of the Asian Churches are called Angels, with respect to the Rulers in the Synagogues, which were known by that name.  
5. The testimony of the following ages. He who consults the Writings, which are extant, will meet with these four Things, which being laid together, will amount to what has been asserted.  
1. That the First of the Week was owned by Christians as a Day of Worship. 2. As a Sabbath day. 3. As a Day preferred before the old Sabbath. 4. As a Day instituted by Christ in the place of the old Day.  
The First is manifest from Justin Martyr, 
Apol. 2. p. 99 Apol. c. 39  who says, That all Christians use to meet together upon it for the Worship of God.  
Tertullian gives an account of the whole Solemnity of the day. Eusebius says, 
Hier. de Script. Ecc. Euseb. l. 4. c. 22.  That it was celebrated by all Christians dispersed throughout the World.  
If it had not been universally observed, no account can be given why the Ebionites, who did keep Saturday in a conformity to the Jews, should celebrate the Lord's day, That they might be agreeable in their practice to the Christians: and why the contest grew so high about Easter, whether it should be upon the Lord's day. There had been no ground for this dispute, in case the First of the Week had not then been honoured above all other days. If this day was so generally devoted to Religion, than there was a cessation upon it from all those secular employments, which are not reconcileable with so sacred a purpose: and such a cessation is an ingredient essential to the constitution of a Sabbath.  
Secondly, We find sometimes the First of the Week to be expressly called a Sabbath-day, as appears by the words of Gregory Nyssen. He styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
De resurr. Christitom. 2. p. 814. Par. Ed. In Psalm. explan. Prologus p. 335. De temp. p. 257.  and represents this as the reason, because the only begotten Son of God rested upon it from all his works. S. Hilary owns it by the same name, Nos octauâ die, quae & ipsa prima est perfecti Sàbbati, festivitate laetamur.  
S. Austin speaking, How the glory of the old Sabbath was transferred to the First of the Week, concludes in these words, Sic quoque ritè sanctificamus Sabbatum Domini.  
Isychius says concerning the Resurrection-day, 
In Leu. 23.  Haec est altera dies Sabbati.  
The name whereby the Lord's day was anciently called amongst Aethiopian Christians, 
Scaliger de emend. tem. l. 7. p. 645.  is Sanbath Zachristos, the Sabbath of Christ.  
The Rhythms concerning a Jew in the time of Henry the Third, make it manifest, That this name was familiarly applied to the First of the Week. The Jews words to those who offered him their help to pull him off the Jakes upon Saturday, were, Sabbata nostra colo, de stercore surgere nolo. 
Mat. Par.   
Our Sabbath I so highly prize,  
That from this dung I will not rise.  
The Christians did reply, the Lord's day being next, Sabbata nostra quidem, Solomon, celebrabis ibidem.  
Then, Solomon, it must be thy fate,  
Our Sabbath there to celebrate.  
It is styled by our own Church the Sabbath-day in the Ecclesiastical Constitutions. 
Can. 70.   
Thirdly, It is represented as a day much preferred by Christians, before the Jewish Sabbath. It had so much the pre-eminence, That the Last of the Week by Spectators out of the Church, and the better and sounder part of those within, had little or no notice taken of it, or deference paid to it.  
The Jews observing the singular regard the Christians had for the First of the Week, called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the day of the Nazarites. 
Avodah Zar. Hor: Hebr. 320.  It was a common maxim among them, On the day of the Nazarites, a Jew must not negotiate with a Christian.  
The Gloss interprets a Nazarite to be one, who follows the error of him, who commanded his Disciples to keep holy the First of the Week. 
Buxt. L. Rab. 1384. In voc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Rab. Bechai commenting upon that expression, behind one in the midst, Is. 66.7. says, That it either denotes the cross of the Edomites, or their solemn Feast-day. By the Edomites, he means Christians. For the Jews in their private records, where they give a greater indulgence to their blasphemous humour, assert, That the same Soul which was in Esau, 
Lex Rab. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  did pass into Christ: from thence his followers are called by this name. The Feast-day, which he terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fixed or stated time for Christian Worship, is no other but the Lord's day.  
When Pliny attempts to represent the crimes, which the Christians were guilty of, he sets this in the front, Quod soliti essent stato die ante lucem convenire, carmenque Christo tanquam Deo dicere, That they were wont to meet upon a certain day, and to sing a Hymn unto Christ, as unto God. If it had been usual for them to meet upon the old Sabbath, as well as the Lord's day; Pliny who made it his business to inquire into their practice would have discovered it: and then it would have been, statis diebus, not stato die. Here is only mention of one particular day. That this was the Lord's day, is apparent from Ignatius, 
Ad Magnes.  who lived in the time of Trajan, to whom Pliny wrote. He represents the Jewish Sabbath as a working day, and attributes to the Lord's day a dominion over it. The celebration of Sunday was so constant amongst the Christians, that the Heathens conceived, That they gave some veneration to the Sun. Which misapprehension occasioned the words of Tertullian, Diem Solis laetitiae indulgemus, aliâ longè ratione, 
Cor. M●l.  quàm religione Solis. The Heathen Inquisition use to put this question to the Martyrs, Dominicum seruâsti? hast thou kept the Lord's day. The answer was, I am a Christian, I cannot intermit it.  
Ignatius calls the First of the Week the Queen of days, and if it was the Queen, it had a Sovereignty over all other days, and would not permit the old Sabbath to sit in the same Throne with it, Non benè conveniunt, nec in unâ sede morantur Majestas & Amor.  
Queens and Lovers will not agree,  
In the same Throne long to be.  
Justin Martyr asserts, That the old Sabbath is of no use after the time of Christ: Whereas when he speaks of the Lord's day, he says, That all Christians meet upon it, hear the Prophets read, have a word of Exhortation spoken to them: and the whole performance is concluded with Prayer, and a collection for those who are in distress. These duties use to be discharged in the Synagogues upon the Old Sabbath, but that being abrogated, they are now translated to the New. The Council of Laodicea declares, That Christians ought not to rest on the Jewish Sabbath, but work, preferring the Lord's day before it. The Church anciently was so far from having any respect to the old day; 
Or. 29. p. 282. H●er. 30.31. Hist. Eccl. l. 4. c. 22. Buxt. l. Rab. vo. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  that those who believed, That they were under an obligation to observe it, were branded with the infamy of heresy, 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Nazianzen, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiphanius, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Eusebius, They are the same which the Rabbins call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sahbatharii.  
Lastly, The First of the Week is represented as a day instituted by Christ in the place of the Jewish Sabbath. For this we have the plain words of Athanasius, 
Hom. de Sement.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Lord hath translated the day of the Sabbath to the Lord's day.  
In the Homily of the Place and Time of Prayer, Sunday is Three times called the Sabbath, and it is plainly asserted, That there is both the Example and Commandment of God for the celebration of this day: That this Example and Commandment the godly Christians began to follow immediately after the Ascension of our Lord Christ; That we are bound to keep the same day not only for that it is God's express Commandment, but also to declare ourselves to be loving children in following the example of our gracious Lord and Father.  
And now if we look back, and consider, what has been represented from the Law, Prophets, our Blessed Lord, the Holy Apostles, the Christians which lived in the following Ages, we may find just reason to believe, That when the Old Sabbath was abrogated, the First of the Week was substituted in the room of it.   
FINIS.   

BOOKS Printed at the Theatre in Oxford, and Sold by Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's Head in S. Paul's Churchyard.  

1. INstitutiones Grammaticae Anglo-Saxonicae, & Maeso-Gothicae. Auctore G. Hickesio Ecclesiae Anglicanae Presbytero. Quarto.  
2. Chr. Wasii Senarius, sive de Legibus & Licentia veterum Poëtarum, Quarto.  
3. Misnae Pars: Ordinis primi Zeraim Titul septem. Latinè verrit & Commentario illustravit Guiliel. Guisius. Accedit Mosis Maimonidis Praefatio in Misnam Edu. Pocockio Interpret. Quar.  
4. A Reply to two Discourses lately printed at Oxford concerning the Adoration of our B. Saviour in the Holy Eucharist. Quar.  
5. Some Reflections upon a Treatise called Pietas Romana & Parisiensis, lately printed at Oxford. To which are added, I. A vindication of Protestant Charity, in Answer to some Passages in Mr. E. M's Remarks on a late Conference. II. A Defence of the Oxford Reply to two Discourses there printed, A.D. 1687. quar.  
6. Animadversions on the Eight Theses laid down, and the Inferences deduced from them in a Discourse Entitled Church-Government. Part V lately printed at Oxford. Quar.  
7. Reflections on the Historical part of Church-Government, Part V Quar.  
8. An Answer to some Considerations on the Spirit of Martin Luther, and the Original of the Reformation; lately printed at Ox. quar.  
9 Of the Unity of the Church; a Discourse written 1430 years since, in the time of Decius the Persecuting Emperor. By Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage and Martin. Most useful for allaying the present Heats, and reconciling the Differences among us.  
10. The Judgement and Decree of the University of Oxford passed in their Convocation July 21.1683. against certain pernicious Books and damnable Doctrines, destructive to the Sacred Persons of Princes, their State and Government, and of all Humane Society; rendered into English, and published by Command. Fol.  
11. Diadascaloeophus, or the Deaf and Dumb Man's Tutor. To which is added, A Discourse of the Nature and Number of double Consonants. Both which Tracts being the first (for what the Author knows) that have been published upon either of the Subjects. By G. Dalgarno. Oct.  
12. The Depth and Mystery of the Roman Mass laid open and explained, for the use of reformed and unreformed Christians. By Dan. Brevint, D. D. Twelve.   

There are lately Printed for Walter Kettilby these following Books.  
Dr. Burnet's Theory of the Earth, the two last Books; concerning the Conflagration of the World, and the new Heavens, and the new Earth. Fol.  
— Answer to Mr. Warren's Exceptions against the first Part.  
— Consideration of Mr. Warren's Defence.  
— Relation of the Proceed at , upon occasion of K. James II. his presenting a Papist to be admitted into that Hospital, in virtue of his Letters Dispensatory. Fol.  
— Telluris Theoria Sacra, Libri duo posteriores de Conflagratione Mundi & de futuro rerum statu. Quarto.  
— Archaeologiae Philosophicae: Sive Doctrina antiqua de Rerum Originibus. Libri Duo.  
Bishop Overal's Convocation Book, 1606. concerning the Government of God's Catholic Church, and the Kingdoms of the whole World. Quarto.  
Mr. Nicholl's Answer to an Heretical Book called The Naked Gospel. Quarto.  
Turner de Lapsu Angelorum & Hominum.  
Mr. Lamb's Dialogues about the Lord's Supper. Octavo.  
Mr. Raymond's Pattern of pure and undefiled Religion. Octavo.  
— Exposition on the Church Catechism. Oct.  
Animadversions on Mr. Johnson's Answer to Jovian in Three Letters. Octavo.  
Mr. Dodwell's Two Letters of Advice about Susception of Holy Orders, etc.  
Mr. Milbourn's Mysteries in Religion Vindicated: Or, Filiation, Deity, and Satisfaction of our Saviour, asserted against Socinians and others; with occasional Reflections on several late Pamphlets. Octavo.  
Bishop of Rath and Well's Reflections on a French Testament printed at Bourdeaux. Quar.  
Dr. Sharp's (now A. B. of York) Sermon before the Queen, April 11. 1690. on Gal. 15.13.  
— Fast Sermon before the House of Commons, May 21. 1690. on Deut. 5.21.  
— Farewell Sermon at S. Giles', June 28. 1691. on Phil. 4.8.  
— Sermon before the House of Lords, November, 5. 1691. on Rom. 10.2.  
— Sermon before the King and Queen on Christmas-day, 1691. on Heb. 19.26.  
— Sermon on Easter-day, 1692. on Ph. 3.10.  
— Sermon of the Things that make for Peace, before the Lord Mayor, Aug. 23. 1674. on Rom. 14.19.  
— Sermon before the L. Mayor, Jan. 1675. on 1 Tim. 4.8. both new Printed.  
Archbishop of York's Thanksgiving Sermon before the King and Queen, Novem. 12. 1693.  
Dr. Grove's (now L. Bishop of Chichester) Sermon before the King and Q. June 1. 1690.  
Dr. Pelling's Sermon before the King and Queen, Dec. 8. 1689.  
— Vindication of those that have taken the Oaths. Quarto.  
Dr. Hooper's Sermon before the Queen, Jan. 24. 1690.  
Kelsey Concio de Aeterno Christi Sacerdotio.  
— Sermon of Christ crucified, Aug. 23. 1691.  
Dr. Hickman's Thanksgiving Sermon before the House of Commons, Octob. 19 1690.  
— Sermon before the Queen. Oct. 26. 1690.  
Mr. Lamb's Sermon before the King and Queen, Jan. 19 1689.  
— Sermon before the Queen, Jan. 24. 1690.  
Dr. Worthington, of Christian Love. Octavo.  
Faith and Practice of a Church of England Man. Twelve. Fourth Edition.  
Mr. Jeffery's Religion the Perfection of Man. Octau.  
Dr. Scot's Sermon before the Q. May 22. 1692.  
Mr. Marriot's Sermon before the L. Mayor, on Easter-day, 1689.  
— Sermon of Union, at the Election of the L. Mayor. Mich. 1689.  
Mr. Stainforth's Serm. Jan. 30. 1688. at York.  
Dr. Lynford's before the Lord Mayor, Feb. 24. 1688.  
Mr. Young's Sermon of Union, May, 20. 1688.  
The Protestant and Popish Way of interpreting Scripture in Answer to Pax vobis.  
Dr. Resbury's before the Lord Mayor, Oct. 21. 1688.  
Amiraldus of Divine Dreams.  
Discourse of the Nature of Man, both in his Natural and Political Capacity, both as he is a Rational Creature and member of a Civil Society; with an Examination of some of Mr. Hobbs' opinions relating hereunto: both by J. Loud, Rector of Vttrington in Yorkshire, sometime Fellow of Clare-Hall in Cambridge.  
True Conduct of Persons of Quality, Translated out of French.  
The Interest of England, considered in an Essay upon Wool, our woollen Manufactures and the Improvement of Trade, with some Remarks upon the Conceptions of Sir Josiah Child.  
Mr. Young's Sermon concerning the Wisdom of Fearing God, Preached at Salisbury, Sunday July 30. being the time of the Assizes. Printed at the request of the Lawyers.  
A Sermon Preached before the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor of the City of London and the Court of Aldermen, at Guild-Hall Chapel, on Sunday Aug. 20. 1693. By Ionas Warly, M. A. Vicar of Witham in Essex.  
A Sermon Preached before the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor, aldermans and Livery-men of the City of London, in the Parish Church of S. Lawrence-Jewry on the Feast of S. Michael, 1693. at the Election of the Lord Mayor for the year ensuing, by William Strengfellow, M. A. Lecturer of S. Dunstan's East.   
FINIS.