2, It is contrary unto that great ride, " Whatsoever is not of faith is sin," Rom. xiv. 23 ; for that any thing which a man doth in the worship of God may be of faith, it is necessary that he be convinced or persuaded that it is his duty so to do, Matt, xxviii. 20; Isa. i. 12; Deut. iv. 2,
It is no rule in the worship of God, that we should do what we can, or that we have a liberty to do this or that, which we yet sup- pose, all circumstances considered, that we are not divinely obliged to do. In all things in general, and in particular duties or instances, we must have an obligation on our consciences from the authority of God that so we ought to do, and that our not doing of it is a neglect of a duty, or it is not of faith. The performance of any thing in the worship of God hath in it the formal nature of a duty, given it by its respect unto divine authority ; for a duty to God that is not an act of obedience with respect unto his authority is a contradiction.
Wherefore, no man can (that is, lawfully and without sin) go to and attend on this kind of religious worship but he who judgeth his so doing to be a duty that God requireth of him, and which it would be his sin to omit, every time he goes unto it. God will not accept of any service from us on other terms. Whether this be the judg- ment of those who make the inquiry as unto what they do, they may do well to consider,
3. It is contrary to the rule delivered, Mai. i. 13, 14, " Ye brought that which was torn, and the lame, and the sick; thus ye brought an offering : should I accept this of your hand ? saith the Lord. But cursed be the deceiver, which hath in his flock a male, and vow- eth, and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing: for I am a great King, saith the LoRD of hosts." We are obliged, by all divine laws, natural, moral, and positive, to serve God always with our best. The obligations hereunto are inseparable from all just conceptions of the divine nature, and our relation thereunto. No man can think aright of God, and that it is his duty to serve him, but must think it to be so with the best that he hath. To offer him any thing when we
AN ANSWER UNTO TWO QUESTIONS. 243
have that which is better, or which we judge to be better, is an act of profaneness and not obedience. In all sacrifices the blood and the fat were to be offered unto God. Wherefore, he that attends unto this service doth avow to God that it is the best that he hath ; and if it be not so, he is a deceiver.
If it be objected, hereon, that " by virtue of this rule, so under- stood as that we are always obliged to the use of that which we judge best in the worship of God, we are bound to leave this or that ministry or church, if we judge that the administrations are better amongst others," it is answered, that the rule respects not degrees, where the whole administration is according to the mind of God, but different kinds of worship, as worshipping by a limited pre- scribed form and worshipping by the assistance of the Spirit of God are.
4 It is contrary unto that rule, " Let all things be done unto edi- 'fying," 1 Cor. xiv. 26. Whatsoever doth not promote edification is excluded out of the worship of the church by virtue of this rule, nor can it be a duty in us to give countenance thereunto or to make use of it. It is said that "prayer is the worship of God; these forms of it are only a determination of the manner of it, or an outward means of that worship." Let it be supposed so; although it be certain that, as prescribed, they are parts of the service. They are therefore means that are a help and furtherance unto edification in prayer, or they are an hinderance of it, or they are of no use or signification one way or the other. If it be said that " they are a help unto edifica- tion, and are found so by experience, in the exclusion of any other way of worship," then I ask why they are not constantly used? — why do we at any time, in any place, refuse the aid and help of them unto this great end of all things that are done in the church? But this can be pleaded only by those who contend for the constant use of them in the worship of God, with whom at present we are not concerned. If it be acknowledged that " indeed they are an hinderance unto edification, which is more promoted without them, yet are they not in themselves unlawful," I say, as before, that is not the present ques- tion; we inquire only whether the use of them by those who judge them hinderances unto edification be not contrary to the rule men- tioned, " Let all things be done unto edifying." For the things of the third sort, that are of no use nor signification at all, they can have no place nor be of any consideration in the worship of God.