quires of us nothing more than obedience. For this reason James says; "He that judgeth his brother, judgeth the law; but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge. There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy." (s) We hear that God asserts this as his peculiar and exclusive prerogative; to govern us by the empire and laws of his word. And the same sentiment had before been expressed by Isaiah, though in terms not quite so explicit; "The Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King, he will save us." (t) Both passages imply, that he who has authority over the soul, is the Arbiter of life and death; and James even clearly expresses it. No man can assume this to himself. It follows therefore that God ought to be acknowledged as the only King of souls, who alone has power to save and to destroy, or, in the language of Isaiah, as the King, Judge, Legislator, and Saviour. Wherefore Peter, when he admonishes pastors of their duty, exhorts them "to feed the flock, not as being lords over God's heritage," (v) or the company of the faithful. If we duly consider this point, that it is not lawful to transfer to man that which God appropriates solely to himself, we shall understand that this cuts off all the power which is claimed by those who wish to exalt themselves to command any thing in the Church, unsanctioned by the word of God.

VIII. Now as the whole argument rests here, that, if God is the sole legislator, it is not lawful for men to assume this honour to themselves; we ought also to bear in mind the two reasons which we have stated, why God asserts this exclusively to himself. The first is, that his will may be received as the perfect rule of all righteousness and holiness, and so that an acquaintance with it may be all the knowledge necessary to a good life. The second is, that with respect to the mode of worshipping him aright, he may exercise the sole empire over our souls, to whom we are under the strongest obligation to obey his authority and await his commands. When these two reasons are kept in view, it

(s) James iv. 11, 12. (1) Isaiah xxxiii. 22. (v) 1 Peter v. 2, 3.

will be easy to judge what constitutions of men are contrary to the word of God. Now of this description are all those which are pretended to belong to the true worship of God, and to be obligatory on men's consciences as necessary to be observed. Let us remember therefore, that all human laws are to be weighed in this balance, if we would have a certain and infallible test. The first of these reasons is urged by Paul in his Epistle to the Colossians, in opposition to the false apostles, who endeavoured to oppress the Churches with fresh burdens. In a similar argument, in the Epistle to the Galatians, he insists more on the second reason. In the Epistle to the Colossians, he contends that the doctrine of the true worship of God is not to be sought from men, because the Lord hath faithfully and fully instructed us how we ought to worship him. To prove this, in the first chapter he states that all the wisdom by which the man of God is made perfect in Christ, is contained in the gospel. In the beginning of the second chapter, he declares that "in Christ are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge;" from which he concludes that the faithful should "beware lest any man spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men." At the end of the chapter he still more confidently condemns all "willworship;" (w) this includes all those services which men either invent for themselves or receive from others, together ́with any of the precepts by which they presume to regulate the worship of God. Thus we have ascertained the impiety of all those constitutions, in the observance of which the worship of God is pretended to consist. The passages in the Epistle to the Galatians, in which he argues that chains. ought not to be imposed on consciences, which are subject to the government of God alone, are too plain to be mistaken; especially in the fifth chapter.(x) It will therefore be sufficient to have mentioned them.

IX. But as the whole of this subject will be better elucidated by examples, before I proceed any farther, it will be useful to apply this doctrine to our own times. We affirm

(TO) Col. i. 27, 28. ii. 3, 8, 23.

(x) Gal. v. 1-18.

that the Ecclesiastical Constitutions, with which the pope and his satellites oppress the Church, are pernicious and impious; our adversaries assert them to be holy and useful. Now they are of two classes; some regard rites and ceremonies, others have more relation to discipline. Is there just cause, then, to induce us to reject both? There certainly is juster cause than we would desire. In the first place, do not the authors of them explicitly declare that the very essence of the worship of God consists in them? To what end do they refer their ceremonies, but that God may be worshipped? And this arises not from the mere error of the uninformed multitude, but from the approbation of those who sustain the office of teachers. I am not yet referring to the gross abominations, by which they have attempted to overturn all piety; but they would never pretend a failure in any one of the most insignificant traditions to be such an atrocious crime, unless they made the worship of God subject to their inventions. Wherein are we guilty of any offence then, if we cannot bear in our day what was declared to be intolerable by Paul; namely, that the legitimate mode of worshipping God should be regulated by the will of men; especially, when they enjoin a worship "after the rudiments of the world," which Paul asserts to be not after Christ." (y) It is well known also, with what rigorous necessity they bind men's consciences to observe every thing that they command. In our opposition to this, we unite in a common cause with Paul, who would by no means allow the consciences of the faithful to be subjected to the bondage of men. (z)

X. Moreover this worst of consequences ensues; that when men have begun to place religion in such vain fragments, that perversion is immediately followed by another execrable corruption, with which Christ reproached the Pharisees. "Ye have made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." (a) I will not combat our modern legislators with my own words; I will grant them the victory, if they can vindicate themselves from this accu(y) Col. ii. 8. (2) Gal. v. 1. (a) Matt. xv. 6.

sation of Christ. But how can they vindicate themselves, while they esteem it infinitely more criminal, to have omitted auricular confession at a stated time of the year, than to have lived a most iniquitous life for a whole year together; to have infected the tongue with the least taste of animal food on a Friday, than to have polluted the whole body by committing fornication every day; to have put a hand to any honest labour on a day consecrated to any pretended saint, than to have continually employed all the members. in the most flagitious actions; for a priest to be connected in one lawful marriage, than to be defiled with a thousand adulteries; to have failed of performing one vow of pilgrimage, than to violate every other promise; not to have lavished any thing on the enormous, superfluous, and useless magnificence of Churches, than to have failed of relieving the most pressing necessities of the poor; to have passed by an idol without some token of honour, than to have insulted all the men in the world; not to have muttered over at certain seasons a multitude of words without any meaning, than to have never offered a genuine prayer from the heart? What is it for men to make the commandment of God of none effect by their traditions, if this be not? When coldly and carelessly recommending the observance of the commandments of God, they insist on an exact obedience of their own, with as much zeal and anxiety as if the whole essence of piety consisted in them; when avenging the violation of the Divine law with slight penalties of satisfactions, they punish the smallest transgression of one of their decrees with nothing less than imprisonment, banishment, fire, or sword; when less severe and inexorable against the despisers of God, they persecute the despisers of themselves with implacable hatred even to death; and when they instruct all those whom they hold in the chains of ignorance in such a manner, that they would feel less concern at seeing the subversion of the whole law of God, than the violation of the smallest tittle of the commands of the Church? In the first place, here is a grievous error, that on account of things of no importance in themselves, and left free by God, one man despises, condemns, and rejects another. Now

as if this were not bad enough, "the beggarly elements of the world," (b) as Paul calls them, are esteemed of more force than the celestial oracles of God. He who is absolved in adultery, is condemned in meat; he who is allowed a harlot, is interdicted from a wife. This is the fruit of that prevaricating obedience, which recedes from God in proportion as it inclines to men.

XI. There are also two other faults, far from small ones, which we charge on these Constitutions. The first is, that they prescribe for the most part useless, and sometimes even foolish observances. The second is, that pious consciences are oppressed with the immense number of them, and being carried back to a species of judaism, are so occupied with shadows as to be prevented from coming to Christ. When I call these observances, useless and foolish, I know this will not be admitted by the wisdom of the flesh, which is so pleased with them, as to consider the Church altogether deformed where they are abolished. But these are the things which Paul describes as "having a show of wisdom in willworship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." (c) This is certainly a most salutary admonition, which ought never to be forgotten by us. Human traditions, he says, deceive under a show of wisdom. It is inquired whence they have this appearance? I reply, that being contrived by man, the human mind recognizes them as its own, and recognizing them, embraces them with greater pleasure than it would any thing of the greatest excellence, but less agreeable to its vanity. A further recommendation of them is, that as they keep the minds of men depressed to the ground under their yoke, they appear well adapted to promote humility. Lastly, they are regarded as the expedients of prudence, from their supposed tendency to restrain corporeal indulgence, and to subdue sensuality by the rigour of abstinence. But what does Paul say to these things? Does he strip off such disguises, that the simple may not be deluded by false pretences? Satisfied that he had said enough to refute them, when he had called them

(b) Gal. iv. 9. Col. ii. 8.

(c) Col. ii. 23.