The Account Audited and Discounted, Exercitation 2 · Section 42
Sect. 42. And here he confeſſes it's poſſible to offend, &c.
THat vertue (and ſo charity) conſiſts in a middle point, between two extremes, he cannot deny; but ſtill flies to his old refuge, not in an indiviſible point, there is a latitude of degrees, &c. To which enough hath been ſaid afore. All he excepts to, is, [That righteouſneſs of God, p. 206. n. 14doth not uſe to puniſh thoſe facts which have no Law obſervable by man to forbid them, &c.] I did not ſay, they had no Law obſervable by man; but thus, [If it ſwerve from that point, to either extreme, it is more or leſs a fault, though not obſerved, perhaps not obſervable by men.] My meaning was, that a man might eaſily ſwerve from the middle point, the ſtrait line, wherein vertue conſiſts, and very hardly obſerve the declinations: which yet is puniſhable, &c. eſpecially when ſome vices have the very ſimilitude of vertues. The Doctor ſeemes to think, that in natural men, the Law being blotted and blurred in their hearts, the Lord may not in juſtice puniſh them, for what they cannot now read; juſt like his other Divinity. I ſaid moreover, [Prudence it ſelf being a vertue, in our created nature, then certainly commanded to do what was fitteſt, and ſo it doth ſtill, that what is ſhort of the Rule, by our imprudence, is a fault, &c.] To which juſt nothing.
But enough to the next. I ſaid two things in anſwer to the objection propounded by him, p. 207. n. 15.[That it ſeemed to touch upon. 1. The mercenary. 2. The meritorious way of Romaniſts, &c.] To the latter he ſays little, yet ſure the Romaniſts do hold merit of good works, though required by the Law or Goſpel; how much more, of works, and perfections of vertues above the Law and Goſpel? wherein how the Doctor agrees with them, let him conſider: I can ſee no difference; but that the Doctor denies the word, merit, which they openly profeſs. For the other, I ſay it is too mercenary to look onelyonly, or firſt, at the reward, rather then at vertue; and to look at a greater reward for a work, or vertue, above a command, make it yet more mercenarie, and ſavours too much of merit. Did the Doctor never hear it ſpoken, [O derunt peccare boni virtutis amore? And that, a good man ſhould ſerve God for himſelf, though neither reward nor puniſhment, heaven nor hell?] No, this is ſome new modern Divinity ſure: As ancient as Clem. Alexand. Stromat. 4. who aſſerts, Virum bonum & perfectum nihil boni facere, propter metū poenae, vel ſpem mercedis, ſive ab hominibus, ſive ab ipſo Deo? And ſo Bernard, De diligendo Deo: Licet Deus ſine praemio diligi non poteſt, tamen non eſt ei, intuitu praemii, ſerviendum. Which cannot be abſolutely taken, n. 18.but as I have expreſt. As for merces ex pacto, or by way of promiſe, that's made to works under command; but there is no pactum, or promiſe of reward, to any works done, above the Law: or let us ſee the place. Where hath Chriſt promiſed a greater reward, to any ſuch work above the Law? That Matt. 5.12. is made to ſuch as ſuffer for him, but upon command, To take up their croſs. But where hath Chriſt promiſed a greater reward, to that perfect ſtate of Virginity, (as he calls it) then to honeſt and chaſte Marriage? It is therefore preſumption for any man to expect it, upon that notion, and (as he ſaid, ſ. 45. of Superſt.) [groundleſs, and folly, fastning ſome promiſe upon Chriſt, which he hath not made in the Goſpel; p. 208. n. 20.] which is no better then lying. But he ſays, [He ſuppoſed prudence to look either onelyonly, or firſt, on the greateſt perfection of vertue, as the way, to the moſt glorious reward.] I pray, what is that perfection of vertue, that he firſt looks at? It is either under command, or not. If under it, it cannot look for a greater reward, but by promiſe: If not under command (as he intends it, of Virginity, or voluntary Martyrdom) as it hath no promiſe, ſo it is no proper vertue, or perfection, (as ſhall be ſhew'd anon) and ſo no way to the moſt glorious reward hereafter. The Doctor is here even at the gates of Rome.
I denied not, that it was lawful to make uſe of hope and fear, and ſo to look at rewards promiſed, or puniſhments threatned; p. 209. n. 23.yet the Doctor firſt makes [my Divinity here ſutable to what I gave a taste of, in that of ſlaviſh fear;] (which whether it be not better then his, the Reader may judge by what is ſaid about it above, ad p. 26.) and then jeeres me with the fable [of the womans firebrand and baſon of water; one to burn up heaven, the other to quench the fire of hell: to take away hope and fear, &c.] I believe I have ſaid as much in vindication of hope of reward, in a Sermon abroad, ſome years ſince, on 2 John ver. 8. as the Doctor hath ſaid, in his on *I ſuppoſe it ſhould be 2 Cor. 7.1. yet not among the Errata's.1 Cor. 7.1. which I never ſaw; or in his laſt Edition of his Pract. Cat. which I have not yet read: as perhaps, nor he mine.
He now ſpeaks out, p. 210. n. 26and ſays, [The higheſt degree of vertue, is, in this whole debate, denied by him, to be under command.] And he addes very angerly, n. 27.[It were a contradiction and madneſs in him, when he ſpeaks of perfection, which is not under command, to mean that which is required in the Commandments.] I have hitherto, I confeſs, thought it a contradiction, & little leſs then a ſpiritual madneſs in the Proctors of Rome, to hold, the greateſt perfection here, or the higheſt degree of vertue, to be under none, but above all command. Nor did I think the Doctor had been gone ſo far in this diſeaſe, that when he ſpake all along of Will-worſhip, uncommanded Worſhip, in Rites, and Ceremonies, and Feſtivals, he had intended them to be the highest vertues, or perfections, not under command, which now I perceive he does. We muſt therefore unravel all again, and ſearch further into this Romiſh myſtery: The Doctor ſomewhere above, charges me with a fallacy, plurium Interrogationum; but if he be not in this debate, more guilty of it himſelf, let the Reader judge. There are in it many queſtions, not yet determined; which muſt be reſolved, before this diſcourſe will paſs: as, firſt, [Whether there be any vertues, not under command. 2. Whether there be any perfection above command. 3. Whether there be any perfection in this life. 4. Whether there be any degrees in that perfection. 5. Whether Virginity, and voluntary Martyrdom, &c. be to be accounted vertues. 6. Whether there be a greater reward promiſed to ſuch, then to works commanded, or under the Law?] I ſhall ſpeak to then all.
Queſt. 1. Whether there be any virtues, not under command.
This Queſtion ſeems to me, to be all one with that of Papiſts, whether there be any Counſels, or works of Counſels, above command. Which they thus define, [A Counſel is a good work, not commanded by Chriſt, but commended.] So Bellarm. Or, [an exhortation to ſome good work, obedience to which, is laudable; but the tranſgreſsion inculpable.] So Alphonſ. de Caſtr. which will better appear, by the oppoſition of a precept; [Which is a Law or Rule, which bindes all, to whom it is given, ſo that he that diſobeyes it, is in danger of eternal damnation.] They differ (ſay they) many wayes, eſpecially in the end; [Which of a precept is, either reward or puniſhment; of a Counſel is, a greater reward to him that obſerves it, and no puniſhment to him that neglects it.] The Doctor (to avoid the odium, or ſuſpition of compliance with Papiſts) avoids the name of Councels, but yet, firſt, gives us another word, that is the genus of it, advice, or exhortation, foreign, opinion, foreign, juſt as in the caſe of ſingle life, pag. 192. n. 3. And 2. Talkes of vertues not under command, which is Counſels with Papiſts. And 3. Makes the obſervers of them capable of a greater reward, See ſuprd p. 93. n. 4. ſ. 4.and no puniſhment to the neglecters of them. The Apoſtle gives his advice, only in things indifferent, and ſo do Papiſts, and the Doctor; but herein they differ, that the Apoſtle aſſigns no reward (much leſs a greater) to the obſervers; or any loſs of reward, to them that neglect them, much leſs, puniſhment. If they would call Counſels, works in themſelves not evil, left to every mans free-will, and no more ado, we (ſays Chamier) would not deny them ſuch: as Paul Counſels Timothy, to uſe a little wine; and the Corinthians, to abſtain from Marriage, in that time of diſtreſs, ſuppoſing the gift of continency. But ſuch Counſels as theſe, as they incur no puniſhment, Good in an high degree. p. 93. n. 4.if neglected; ſo if obſerved, they have no reward in heaven. But it's evident, the Papiſts, and the Doctor with them, do not eſteem them opera non mala; but bona, good, yea better, then works commanded; and alſo make them virtues, higheſt virtues, and moſt acceptable, and rewardable. Now that there are no ſuch Counſels, or Vertues above the command of God; I thus ſhall prove.
1. [Every proper vertue acted, is an act of obedience; But vertues above command, acted, are no acts of obedience; ergo,] The Minor is evident thus: Every act of obedience, preſuppoſes a command; for obedience and a command are relata; therefore without a command, there can be no obedience. The Major is proved thus; every vertue acted, preſuppoſes a Rule, to which it holds conformity; but conformity, to a Rule, is an act of obedience; and conſequently not above command.
2. [There is no vertue, but hath it's oppoſite vices: It's the nature of vertue, to ſtand in the midſt, between two extremes: But Counſels or Vertues above command, have no oppoſite vices, in the exceſs or defect.] Not an exceſs, for they are the higheſt perfections: not a defect, becauſe there is no prohibition of neglect or omiſſion of it; and ſo the neglect or tranſgreſſion of them, is no ſin, and then no vice in the defect: See p. 93. n. 4.So the ſay, neglect of a Counſel, is no ſin.
3. [If there be any virtue above command, then there is ſome vice, under no prohibition of the Law. The conſequence is good, for there is parratio of vice and vertue: But there is no vice or ſin, below, and not under a prohibition of the Law] This is clear, from the definition of ſin; which is a tranſgreſſion, or inconformity to the Law. Yet I remember the Doctor above, quarrell'd with them, that reduced all ſins to the Law of the Decalogue: Sure every fault or vice muſt be a tranſgreſſion of the Law. p. 222. n. 3.It may be upon deſign; that if there be any ſins not reducible to the Law, he might introduce alſo ſome virtues not reducible to the Law; that is, above command: And I adde, if ſin or vice, be an foreign, which properly ſignifies not ſo much a tranſgreſſion, as an inconformity to the Rule of the Law; then every vertue muſt be a conformity to ſome Law; which may be added to ſtrengthen the firſt argument.
4. [That which is under no Law, precept or prohibition, is a thing left indifferent:] Now to do a thing indifferent, is not capable of praiſe; or neglect it, of diſpraiſe, of reward or puniſhment. But the doing of a Counſel, (ſay they) is very commendable, yea rewardable; as the higheſt vertue, or perfection; therefore it is no thing indifferent, and then it muſt be under command or prohibition, which is a contradiction to their aſſertion, that theſe vertues, are under no command. More might be added, but theſe may ſuffice at preſent.
Queſt. 2. Whether there be any perfection above command.
This depends upon the former, and ſtands or falls with it; for the perfection the Doctor means, is of vertues above command, or (in his own words) uncommanded degrees of vertue. And here the Doctor muſt hold out a new coin'd diſtinction, of perfection of virtues, under the Law, and perfection of virtues above the Law: for ſo he does, in effect, when he ſays, [A man may come to the perfection, which the Law requires, and yet come ſhort, or go beyond it; to an higher degree of perfection, in uncommanded degrees of virtues.] Nay more, [The latitude of vertues under command is ſo large,] (like the diſtance, between the Tropicks) that a man may tumble up & down, & arrive at the leaſt degree of perfection, required by the Law; be yet more perfect if he arrive at an higher degree, not commanded by the Law; though (which is a contradiction) under the command of the Law. This may be gathered from n. 10, 11. by his eight degrees of perfection; and the fractions in every degree: Let the Reader turn back, and conſider if it be not ſo. But beſides this, there are degrees of perfection, (beyond the Tropicks) in uncommanded vertues, above the Law, I know not how many: and thoſe we now are to conſider; One or two Arguments may ſuffice to ruine this opinion. [1. If there be no virtues above command, then there is no perfection above command.] The conſequence is clear, becauſe the Doctor by perfection here, underſtands uncommanded virtues, or above command: The Antecedent is proved by four arguments, to the former queſtion; ergo. 2. [If the Law be the abſolute and onelyonly Rule of perfection, then there can be no perfection above command: But the firſt is true, Pſal. 19.7. Jam. 1.25.] The conſequence is evident, and needs no proof. The Doctor then muſt finde out ſome diſtinctions to evade this; either, firſt, That of Papiſts, [There is a two-fold perfection; firſt, perfect, according to the Law; or imperfect, ſutable to our frailty;] Which ſeems a contradiction in adjecto, an imperfect perfection: yet ſo they ſpeak. 2. That of his own; [Perfection is capable of a double notion: either it may ſignifie unſinning obedience; or any higher degree of exerciſe of any particular vertue, chaſtity, mercy, &c.] Of which more, when we come at it. p. 214. n. 37. OnelyOnly ſaying now, that theſe diſtinctions are almoſt the ſame, with that of our Divines, that perfection is either legal, which is properly perfection; or Evangelical, improperly called ſo, by Divine indulgence and acceptance. But this will ſtand him in no ſtead here; the queſtion being, [whether there be any perfection above command,] above the Law; not whether there be any other perfection in the Goſpel above the Law. And this would have fitted the Doctor better, who holds, that Chriſt hath perfected the Law, and brought in an higher degree of perfection, then was required by the Law: as we ſhall hear ere long: in this ſenſe, he might ſay, there is a perfection above the Law; that is, in the Goſpel: but this is not to the purpoſe; for even that perfection, is under the command of Chriſt; and ſo not above command. 3. Adde this one argument more, that which is under obligation on men to do, is not above, but under ſome command (the reaſon and proof of this is, becauſe obligation to do any thing ſuppoſes a command.) But the moſt Heroical vertues, or works, are under obligation to be done: This is proved thus, thoſe works which are done by ſome ſpecial gift and ſtrength from God, are, co nomine, under ſome obligation to be done; but thoſe high works are done by ſome ſpecial gift and ſtrength from God (and cannot be done without it.) The Minor is evident and needs no proof: the Major is proved by that maxime univerſal of our Saviour, [To whomſoever much is given, of him much is required, and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more, Luke 12.48.] But to thoſe heroical workers, much and more is given; therefore much and more will be required, and ſo they are not above command. For this we have the Doctors own conceſſion: [Whatſoever degree of perfection, either by doing or ſuffering, we can aſpire to, it is ſtill the work of Gods good grace and ſtrength in us, (for what hast thou which thou hast not received? and then what place for glorying? p. 224. n. 3.] Let him conſider how he will reconcile himſelf to himſelf, who above allowed of boaſting, ad p. 185. n. 5. 6.
Queſt. 3. Whether any perfection at all, in this life.
This is alſo taken for granted by the Doctor, but never proved; but our Divines, generally deny it, and oppoſe Papiſts, who affirm it. They ſay, [There is no perfection in this life, but onelyonly in that to come, when God ſhall be all in all.] It may be ſaid, in this our peregrination, ſome are more perfect then others, or rather more truly and properly, more or leſs imperfect, as there is a progreſſion in the love of God and our neighbour; under which heads is contained, what ever perfection can be propounded to any man: to which all Chriſtians are to aſpire, but cannot attain it here. And this the Doctor dare not deny, or if he ſhould, may eaſily be refuted: firſt, by Scripture, [Who liveth, and ſinneth not: If we ſay we have no ſin, we ſin by lying.] And ſecondly, by reaſon, from Scripture: If in many things we ſin all, then we reach not to the Rule of perfection, the Law. 3. The reaſon of it is, we know but in part, and believe but in part, and ſo practice but in part. 4. Saint Paul as high toward perfection as any man, denies it of himſelf, Phil. 3 12. [Not as though I were already perfect.] If the Doctor ſhall ſay, as he will anon; he means it not of unfinning perfection, of the Law, he muſt be told again, he varies and deſerts the queſtion, which is of perfection above command, which is, above the Law.
Queſt. 4. Whether any degrees of perfection.
A man would think this were reaſonably denied; there are degrees toward perfection, but perfection it ſelf knows no degrees: yea, degrees to perfection, and progreſs in grace, to which the beſt are exhorted, argues Imperfection; but here the Doctor will fly to his Latitude and degrees of vertues: to which enough hath been ſaid already.
Queſt. 5. Whether Virginity, voluntary Martyrdome, &c. be vertues or states of perfection.
The Doctor ſpeaking of uncommanded degrees of vertues, expreſſes it in four particulars; p. 210. n. 27.[Virginity, Auſterities, abundant Laborings, and Martyrdom it ſelf.] For the firſt of thoſe, the Doctor ſhould have told us, what he intends by it; whether he mean chaſtity, for ſo Papiſts do; as if there were no Chaſtity in Marriage; or Caelibate and ſingle life: If he take Virginity for Chaſtity, that's an improper inſtance, for it's under command, and he is ſpeaking of uncommanded vertues. He muſt then underſtand it of ſingle life, or an unmarried ſtate; which I gather, becauſe he ſpeaks of undertaking thoſe courſes be it of Virginity, &c. and elſewhere ſays, [It is not commanded, but looked on as the greateſt degree of perfection] I wonder he did not except Martyrdome, for reaſons which he knows, but let it paſs. Take it then, for ſingle life; I would make bold to ask, how is ſingle life a vertue? and if it be, is not Marriage a vertue too? they are but differing ſtates of life: [Gerſon (ſays Doctor Hall) hath taught us not to call Virginity a vertue; though couſin germane to a vertue.] But ſure that muſt be, when Virginity, that is ſingle life, is attended with chaſtity of body and ſpirit: elſe it's far enough from vertue. But by the ſame reaſon, Chaſte Marriage may as well be called, a vertue, or of kin to a vertue: both improperly enough. Does he then place the vertue, in the undertaking, or vowing of it, as Papiſts do? That ſeems his meaning: But that is no vertue, the vertue is rather in keeping of the vow, then making it. Then again, how is his Virginity, or ſingle life, perfection, or the greateſt degree of perfection? Why marriage ſhould not be a ſtate, and as great a ſtate of perfection, as ſingle life, I ſee no reaſon; ſeeing God himſelf brought the firſt couple, from Virginity to a Married ſtate; and hath pronounced it honourable, which he ſaid not of a ſingle life. Let him take it in what ſenſe he pleaſe; I ſhall prove it is neither vertue, nor higher degree of perfection.
1. It is no vertue, that's proved by ſome of the arguments to the firſt queſtion; firſt, [Every virtue is under ſome command; but Virginity or ſingle life is under no command.] The Minor, is the Doctors main aſſertion: The Major is proved in the firſt: A vertue muſt be under ſome Rule, that guides it's conformity, &c. As then, every vice is under ſome prohibition, ſo, every vertue muſt be under ſome precept. Secondly, if Virginity be a vertue, it hath its oppoſite vices, (as was ſaid in general above.) But virginity, or ſingle life hath no oppoſite vices: or what ſhall they be: what the exceſs? what the defect? I hope he will not ſay, Marriage is either of the extremes. Thirdly, things in themſelves indifferent, are neither vertues nor vices; nor yet the uſing or not uſing of them, vertuous, or ſinful: But ſingle life (as alſo marriage) are in themſelves, things indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but left free, to the qualifications of the perſons; ergo, they are no vertues, nor vices. Fourthly, No vertue can ever be a vice or ſinfull: but it may be ſinful for ſome to undertake ſingle life; that is, ſuch as have not the gift of continency. Laſtly, that which may fall under a command, may not be called as uncommanded vertue: But ſingle life may fall to ſome, to be under a command; of which in the next.
2. It is no high, or higher perfection, then Marriage. This is proved. 1. [Becauſe it is no vertue, as hath been proved,] and of the perfection of vertues, we are ſpeaking. 2. Marriage is an honourable Ordinance of God, Virginity is but an impoſition of a man: Now it ſeemes abſur'd, that a voluntary inſtitution of man, ſhould be a more perfect ſtate, then an Ordinance of God? 3. The undertaking of a thing indifferent, is not commendable in it ſelf, as the neglect of it, is no diſhonour, and ſo no high perfection to undertake it. But Virginity, or ſingle life, is a thing indifferent, onelyonly commendable in the end of undertaking it, the greater glory, or ſervice of God, which may be and ought to be our ends in all uſe of indifferent things; [Whether eat, or drink, &c.] 4. The undertaking a thing, that may be under command, is no high perfection, but a duty: But ſingle life may fall under a command. For thus I argue; [A man either hath the gift of continency from God, (for it is a ſpecial gift) and then God calls him to a ſingle life, to be freer to his ſervice; and ſo it will prove a duty: or he hath not the gift, and then it is his duty to marry,] (as was ſaid long ago.) If he ſhall ſay, though a man hath the gift of continency, yet the Apoſtle, 1 Cor. 7. leaves it free for him to marry; and then if he voluntarily abſtain, that's the vertue, and high degree of perfection, which he ſpeaks of: I anſwer, that is denied by ſome; [That he that knows he hath the gift, may marry, but it his duty not to marry (as above,) Qui poteſt capere, capiat, is ſay they, a charge to the able.] And the Doctor himſelf ſays in this very place, n. 27. [I hope it is not every mans duty, but at the utmoſt his, who can receive it.] Where he inclines to think it is a duty to him that can receive it: and then it's no perfection, much leſs a great one. 5. To place vertue, or perfection, in any thing, or ſtate of life, which God hath not placed in it, is ſuperſtitious and ſinful: ſo the Doctor Superſt. Sect. 45. But God hath not (though the Doctor hath) placed vertue, a high and more perfection, in ſingle life, then in Marriage; ergo, The Doctor and Papiſts with him, are ſinfully ſuperſtitious. And now I come to the laſt queſtion.
Queſt. 6. Whether there be a greater reward promiſed to ſuch, then to Marriage, or works commanded by the Law.
That a Counſel differs from a Precept in this, that the one obſerved brings a reward, neglected, a puniſhment; (that's the latter) and the other, (the Counſel) brings no puniſhment if neglected, and a greater reward if obſerved, is the doctrine of Papiſts: the Doctor ſpeaks the ſame language for the latter part, for his uncommanded vertues; that they are more commendable, more acceptable, more rewardable, then works done, that are under command. This he hath twenty times, I think, at leaſt, aſſerted, and making Virginity the greatest degree of perfection, far higher then honeſt and honourable Marriage, muſt conſequently ſay the ſame of it; [It is more commendable, acceptable, rewardable, then Marriage.] Which words would beſeem a Papist better then a Proteſtants pen. But to the point, Whoſoever hath learned to remove corruption (from marriage) ſhall finde the crown of Matrimonial chaſtity, no leſs glorious then that of ſingle life. Dr. Hall. Decad. 5. ep. 9. f. See Contempl of Jepthe, ad finem.I once more deſire to ſee the place of Scripture, where this promiſe is made; and if it cannot be ſhewn (as I am confident it cannot) then I would firſt argue thus, ad hominem, & ad rem; [To faſten a promiſe upon Chriſt which he hath no where made, is a ſuperstitious vanity, and more, a plain belying of Chriſt and the Scripture: But to ſay, that Virginity or ſingle life, is more acceptable, and rewardable, then honeſt Marriage; is to faſten a promiſe on Chriſt, which he hath no where made; ergo,] The Major is the Doctors own aſſertion: Of Superst. ſ. 45. The Minor is ſtrong, till the place be produced. 2. To ſay, that a thing or work done, not under command, is more acceptable, commendable, rewardable, then a thing or work done under command; is high preſumption, for men to take upon themſelves, to diſtribute their own honor and rewards: But this the Doctor does preſumptuouſly do, together with Papiſts: the Major is proved by this, that God hath promiſed rewards to them that obey his commands, and they may faithfully expect them; but he hath made none ſuch, to things done, beſide or above commands, and therefore it is high preſumption to expect them. 3. A thing in it ſelf indifferent, if not done, it is no fault, if done, it deſerves no commendation; much leſs then may it expect more acceptance, and greater reward, then a thing done upon command; but Virginity is a thing indifferent; ergo. And for a cloſe of this diſcourſe, it muſt be remembred, that the Doctors ſubject in this debate was Will-worſhip, uncommanded worſhip, ſuch as are Rites, and Ceremonies and Feſtivals: ſutable to thoſe Free-will-offerings which were parts, or degrees of Worſhip; and he fell off from that to things of common life; works of mercy, and ſtates of life, which are not parts of Worſhip, nor can be called Will-worſhip, becauſe they are no Worſhip. Now marke the iſſue of this diſcourſe; either the Doctor muſt make Virginity, voluntary Martyrdome, and the reſt, Worſhip; (elſe they cannot be Will-worſhip) or elſe he muſt ſay, that his Rites and Feſtivals, appointed by men, &c. ſo obſerved, are more commendable, more acceptable, and more rewardable, then the very inſtitutions of Chriſt himſelf, being duly obſerved by Chriſtians; which if he will ſay, no Papiſts can ſay worſe. And this may ſuffice to be ſpoken to the firſt, that of Virginity.
The next is, the undertaking of Auſterities, (n. 27. p. 210. n. 27.) ſuch I ſuppoſe, as Faſtings, and Watchings, and the like, not ſparing of the body: (I hope he does not mean Eremitical, Monaſtical, Ridiculous Penances and Pilgrimages, which are part of Romiſh Auſterities) I know not well, what he means by them; onelyonly I ſuppoſe he intends it of that foreign, in the text ſo long before us; making that as good, as his foreign, and humility; parts of his Will-worſhip, which Papiſts themſelves condemn, Vide Eſtium in locum. The like may be ſaid of his abundant labourings; which muſt be meant by him, of one that labours in Preaching and propagation of the Goſpel, not onelyonly above other men, but more then he is commanded (for he is ſpeaking of uncommanded degrees of vertues.) For this I ſhall onelyonly ſay; this man that is ſo abundant in labours, either hath gifts and abilities, (together with opportunities) of body and minde, and that's a virtual command: (ſuch talents, are given to be uſed) or he hath not; and then, as he is under no command, to labour more abundantly then other men, that have them, ſo he cannot do it, if he would; the former is under command, and ſo no Free-will-offering. Paul that laboured more then all the Apoſtles, ſayes, [Not I, but the grace of God with me:] and if he had more grace then they, he was thereby bound to labour more; [To whom more is given, of him more required.] Laſtly, for his Martyrdome; he means it of voluntary, ſpontaneous Martyrdome, offering himſelf to it, when he hath no call, but liberty to avoid it: p. 211. n. 28.this he calls the moſt perfect ſtate, (having ſaid before, that Virginity was the higheſt perfection.) Yet ſomething may fall out [that may binder, and make it unlawful, to aſpire to the moſt perfect ſtate,] n. 30.even the precept of God may interpoſe, viz. When ſome diſcharge of known duty, or ſome greater good calls us another way.] Then obedience is better then the richeſt ſacrifice.] Before I go further, I will conſider this, what reaſon is there for this, that a ſmall known duty, ſuppoſe to our ſelves or neighbour, ſhould hinder the offering of the richest ſacrifice? when the glory of God ſtands in competition with a duty to man; is it not fitter, that the latter ſhould give place to the former? nothing can bring more glory to God, then true Martrydome: And what good can be greater, then the greateſt glory of God, to call us off another way? & make it unlawful to aſpire to the moſt perfect state? nothing can be ſaid, but this, [That obedience is better then ſacrifice, the richest ſacrifice,] as was ſaid to Saul. But then I would proceed to ſay, that when ever a man hath not a ſufficient call to ſuffer, he is under ſome command to avoid it; ſuch as that is, [When they perſecute you in one city, fly to another, &c.] which was practiſed both by Chriſt and Paul, and others; who held themſelves bound to avoid it, while they had poſſibility to eſcape, and no direct call of God to ſuffer; whence it will follow, that if he ſhall offer himſelf to ſuffer, when he may lawfully avoid it, he ſins againſt that command, and againſt his owne life, in the ſixth Commandment. The iſſue then will be this, if God call him to ſuffer (which he does, when he precludes his eſcape) then it is a duty, and under command, and ſo no Free-will offering: If God offer him a way to eſcape, he ſins if he neglect it, againſt more commands then one; and then he is no Martyr. I refer the Doctor to his own words, p. 109. Of Will-worſh. but he takes no notice of them, I ſhall therefore here ſet them before him? Pract. Gat. p. 98. [What is to be ſaid of thoſe, that rather then offer to Idols, did kill themſelves? It will be ſafeſt to affirm that this was a fault in them.] And thoſe others that offered themſelves and their children, to the fire and rage of perſecutors, unleſs he will help them, by ſome inſtinct or incitation of God, as he does Sampſon, which was a virtual call and command, cannot be excuſed, and ſcarcely deſerve the name of Martyrs. Affected Martyrdome, is no vertue, no perfection, and ſo, though it may finde pardon from God, can in that reſpect expect no great reward from God: Yet this is the Martyrdome he pleads ſo much for; a *When it may poſſibly, and without ſin be avoided, &c. See pag. 96. numb. 6.Voluntary Martyrdome, without a command or call from God: which is the Doctrine of Papiſts, and their practice is according to it; when Prieſts and Jeſuites deſperately offer themſelves to death, for ſedition, rebellion, &c. and call it perſecution in the Magiſtrate, and themſelves accounted Martyrs. And this is that which I ſaid, was the Doctrine of Papiſts, n. 30. p. 211.which I believe all Orthodox Proteſtants will diſclaim, a voluntary affected Martyrdome.
But we have here a new diſtinction of perfection according to the Comandments; [There is one, which is according to, that is, required by the Commandments: Another, that is allowed by the Commandments of the Goſpel very well, though they require it not of every man, or lay it under precept, and ſuch is that of Martyrdome,] which he ſpake of before. But I think I may ſafely ſay, [There is nothing allowed by the Commandments of the Goſpel, which is not alſo required by the Law.] That of [requiring of it of every man,] is a very blinde: For neither Law nor Goſpel require every duty of every man, or of the ſame man, at all times. He knowes affirmative precepts binde not ad ſemper; but when ſuch and ſuch circumſtances meet, to bring him under the obligation of thoſe commands: And he knows alſo, that there are particular commands, for men in ſuch a ſtation, or relation. A command to a Miniſter bindes not any of his people: that to a maſter, bindes not a ſervant, and ſo of the reſt: That of ſhewing mercy bindes not the poor, that wants ability to exerciſe it: Or if he have ability, it bindes not where there is no object of mercy. Now put it to his caſe of Martyrdome; himſelf ſaid, numb 27. [When either I am not competently furniſhed with ſtrength, from God, to go through with it, or have not any reaſon to perſwade my ſelf that I ſhall be ſo furniſhed; then the undertaking ſuch heights may prove treacherous, &c.] He might have ſaid alſo when I have no call from God, but an offer rather to eſcape, then it may be treacherous to undertake it: for then hath he no reaſon to perſwade himſelf, he ſhall be furniſhed with ſtrength to go through with it. [What is not of faith is ſin?] God hath promiſed to give ſtrength in trouble, which he calls us to, but if we will voluntarily thrust our ſelves into ſufferings, (though of Martyrdome) we have no promiſe (witneſs Peter profeſſing to die with his Maſter, and ruſhing into danger) of ſtrength or aſſiſtance; and we do not trust, but tempt God. Now God does not call all men, or at all times, p. 212. n. 31.to Martyrdome: [This (ſays he) is the evincing of my aſſertion againſt himſelf; for upon that I infer, therefore Martyrdome, which is the higheſt degree of perfection, is not under any command.] Take out but thoſe words (which is the higheſt degree of perfection, which is proved falſe) and ſee what a demonſtration he hath made: [God calls not all men to be Martyrs, therefore Martyrdom is not under command.] Does it not as well follow, [God at ſometimes, calls ſome men to be Martyrs, therefore Martyrdom is then under command,] and then it's a duty, and no ſuch perfection, as he talks of. And on the other ſide, if any man without a call, ſhall ruſh into a conceited Martyrdome, it is much leſs an high perfection, but an imperfection rather, to ſay no worſe. But will it follow, Martyrdome is under no command, becauſe it is not ſo to all? or at all times? when it is not under command, it is no vertue or perfection; and when it is a vertue or perfection, it is under ſome command.
But I had like to have forgot the Doctors Sarcaſme, and the glory of his Martyrdome. The Reformation old, n. 30.or new, doth not pleaſe the Dr. and therefore he flings fire and arrows at it, and ſayes, Am I not in ſport? for thus he ſays, [I never thought that our Engliſh Reformation, ſealed by the blood of many Martyrs, had lookt on Martyrdom, as a conceited Popiſh perfection. And if this be the priviledge of the preſent deformation, to exclude Martyrdom out of the catalogue of virtues, is the Martyrs and Saints out of the Kalendars; if the Diatribiſt, he now one of that triumphant Church, &c.] (n. 30.) Good Sir, whom doth this concern? The old and new Reformation honour true Martyrs as much as Papiſts, or your ſelf; though they do not approve of your voluntary Martyrdom, which is proved both Popiſh and conceited; and though they do not dedicate Holy-days to them, and make them as holy as, if not holier, then the Lords day, our Chriſtian Sabbath: And if you be guilty of this piece of Popery, you may have free leave for me. But ſee how fain the Doctor would be a Martyr, at leaſt a Confeſſor; p. 212. n. 30[He is well pleaſed to ſuffer this ſword of the tongue, till God ſhall pleaſe to call him to any higher trial.] It cannot be denied but the perſecution of the tongue, for righteouſneſs ſake, is a leſſer Martyrdome, Matth. 5.11. but there hath no ſword of the tongue touched the Doctor, but the ſword of the Spirit; which hath ſmitten thoſe opinions, wherein he complies with Papiſts in their errours: and if he will needs be counted a Martyr for this ſuffering, he may go and joyn the Papiſts as Martyrs with him, for being confuted by our Reformed Divines, in the ſame opinions and errours. And now let him glory in this his voluntary Martyrdom.
For a number or two, the 31. and 32. there is nothing found that hath not been ſpoken to, about *He takes for granted, I allow degrees of perfection; which I twice there deny.degrees of perfection (I ſaid degrees to perfection) acknowledging none in, or of perfection; to which enough afore: onelyonly I obſerve on paſſage; [When the precept bindes to no more, then to be merciful in ſome degree, it is evident it bindes not to be merciful in the higheſt degree, &c.] This is that which I noted above; if the precept binde to no more but to ſome degree of mercy, then he that ſhews the leaſt degree, fullfills that commandment, though he be able to give more, and the party needs much more; and ſo this man is perfect in mercy, though there be not the higheſt degree of mercy or perfection. This doctrine I am perſwaded will pleaſe covetous men exceedingly well; the Commandment bindes to no more, then to be merciful in ſome degree. But I leave it, and proceed.