West Port Experiment

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

CHAP. III. If any of the People of God may be carried away with grosse delusions.

From these doctrines several questions may be raised. And, 1. Whether any of the people of God may be carried away with such abominable errors in doctrine? We shall answer in the following assertions.

Assertion 1. There is no error so gross in its substance that believers may not fall into it. For although they have a promise that error shall not wholly separate Christ and them, nor that they shall finally be carried away by it, yet, seeing they have corruption capable of being tempted to every sin, and therefore to this among other sins, they cannot be absolutely exempted from it. Neither is there any promise by which they can expect absolutely to be preserved from heresy any more than from murder or adultery, which, together with this, are fruits of the flesh. Indeed, except for the sin against the Holy Ghost and final impenitence, there is no absolute exemption of the believer from any sin. The Lord has wisely ordered it so, that the believer may be kept from security even in reference to such temptations.

Besides, experience shows that grace does not exempt a person from error in judgment. For it is likely that Solomon, even if he did not actually commit idolatry himself, yet became too inclined toward it, as we may gather from what Scripture records concerning him. Neither can we altogether condemn, as to their spiritual state, those in Corinth, Galatia, and other Churches who were drawn away from the truth after their conversion, as though none but unregenerate professors had been so drawn away. Indeed, it is possible, if not probable, that some of those whom the Lord calls His servants, and who nevertheless were seduced in the Church of Thyatira, were not still in the state of nature.

Assertion 2. Although we dare not altogether say that it is impossible, yet we think it is more rare for a believer to fall into gross errors, and to continue in them for any considerable time so as to be accounted a heretic, than it is for him to fall into other scandalous practices. For, 1. Scripture more rarely mentions this than it does other sins of believers, which are more frequently recorded. 2. There are very special promises for preserving the elect from being seduced by false christs and false teachers. And although these promises do not hold universally in every particular, except insofar as concerns their everlasting state, yet they may in a good measure be extended even to seduction itself. We suppose this may be made clearer from the following considerations.

Becoming erroneous in such a manner does not ordinarily proceed from some sudden, surprising fit of temptation, as gross practices sometimes may, but implies a certain deliberateness in it. This is not so readily incident to a believer, nor can it so properly be called a sin of infirmity. Therefore Scripture continually describes teachers of false doctrine in the most abominable terms: as not serving the Lord Christ, but their own bellies, Romans 16:18; as enemies of the cross of Christ, Philippians 3:19; and as ministers of Satan, 2 Corinthians 11:15. Other unrenewed men are, as it were, common subjects and servants of the devil; but corrupt teachers are apostles to him and chief officers in his kingdom. Such titles cannot properly be applied to saints merely in respect of their infirmities. Therefore we think that, at least, it is more rarely incident to them to become carriers and promoters of corrupt doctrine.

This also appears from the fact that a heretic is said to be self-condemned, Titus 3:11. For before one can properly be so denominated, there must have been a rejecting of admonitions, which does not agree very well with the nature of a saint.

This consideration will also make it evident that Scripture speaks of repentance from, and recovery out of, corrupt doctrine as a very rare and uncertain thing. In Galatians 4:11 the Apostle fears that he has bestowed labor upon them in vain in this matter. And in 2 Timothy 2:25 the Apostle puts a perhaps upon it: “If perhaps God will give them”—that is, those who oppose themselves—“repentance unto the acknowledging of the truth.” There is not such a perhaps put upon recovery from every kind of sin. This shows that recovery from error must be more difficult than recovery from other sins, and therefore that believers ordinarily, at least, must in a special manner be preserved from it.

This confirms what has already been said: such delusion is a great spiritual plague, and is often the punishment, not of former sins of infirmity, but of failing to receive the love of the truth, and of hypocrisy and proud presumption. Although the Lord is not to be limited or restrained from chastening His own children with this rod, yet from the experience recorded in the Word, from the nature of the plague itself, and from other considerations, we may say that it is neither the ordinary spot nor the ordinary rod of His children. And if at any time it is so, it readily reveals much spiritual pride, self-seeking, lightness, security, wantonness of spirit, ignorance joined with conceitedness, lack of spiritual exercise, or some other thing of that kind. And, as we have hinted, when believers are overtaken in this way, we will not readily find in Scripture that such persons become leaders in promoting and carrying forward the design of error.

Assertion 3. When a believer falls into such an evil, the Lord usually chastens him either with grosser outbreaks of sin, with some sharp manner of restoration, or with removal under a cloud, without much visible evidence of recovery. We see something of this in the case of Solomon, who became in some way guilty of this evil. Scripture is very silent concerning his recovery, although his sin is fully recorded, and the remains of his idolatry are noted as continuing even into the days of Hezekiah. Indeed, there is little recorded in Scripture concerning the recovery of those who have been carried so far away, although we may charitably judge concerning some of them in general. The Lord wisely orders this, partly as a chastisement to them and partly as a warning to others, that all men, and especially believers, may fear and take heed lest they fall. For recovery is not easy, and even those who are spiritual may be tempted, Galatians 6:1.

Assertion 4. Those who spread error most frequently set themselves upon those who make some profession of religion, rather than upon others who do not walk under that name. For although the spreading of gross error does not carry away many who are truly godly, and finally carries away none of them, yet it often proves a most searching trial to them, and proves exceedingly strong and successful against many unhumbled professors.

There are two things comprehended here. 1. This temptation to error often prevails more among professors, and proves a greater stumbling block to them, than many other gross practices. They may stand firm against those practices and yet be overcome by this temptation.

2. It also comprehends this: that the temptation of error especially attempts to gain those who are eminent in profession, rather than those who have no such reputation, although such persons also may sometimes be carried away by it. We see that these Nicolaitans, false apostles, and the prophetess Jezebel are not teaching and seducing heathens, but the Church of Christ, and such as He calls His servants, Revelation 2:20. This may include even those who prominently professed themselves to be Christ’s servants. Indeed, it is clear that this error did not have such success among heathens as among Christians, nor did its teachers so much intend to draw away the heathen as they vehemently endeavored to corrupt the Church.

We see the same thing in other Churches. Was there any Church more distinguished by gifts than the Church of Corinth? Yet false apostles produced great divisions there and great opposition to the Apostle Paul, taking occasion from the giftedness and eminence of that Church above others to advance their design. Again, was there any Church that received the Gospel more warmly than those of Galatia? As we see from Galatians 4:14–15, they received Paul as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus, and would have plucked out their own eyes for him. Yet there is scarcely any Church so quickly shaken and infected by corrupt teachers, or so bewitched by them and their temptations, as we may gather from Galatians 1:6; 3:1–2; and throughout the Epistle.

It seems that the devil took occasion from their warmth immediately to set upon them before they were firmly settled, more than upon other places or Churches where such hopeful beginnings did not appear. And thus we see daily in experience that where profanity abounds, there are fewer assaults tempting men toward error, and less success from them, than where the Gospel has received a greater welcome and borne more fruit. It is as though the devil directs this temptation against the latter with greater vehemence and subtlety than against the former. For this we may give the following reasons.

1. His hatred is greatest against them, and he most desires to see them overthrown. 2. He has other baits more suitable to profane men; and so long as they are already his, he does not seek so earnestly to engage them by error, for that would bring him no additional gain. 3. Those especially who have a form of religion, while also being weak in knowledge, are in some respects most susceptible to a temptation toward error. Profane men care not, like Gallio, what is truth and what is error. But a poor soul who has some conscience is ready to debate these matters and desires to have the truth cleared. When such a person is not strong enough to disentangle himself, he is readily drawn away, like those silly women of whom Paul speaks in 2 Timothy 3:6–7, who were ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Because gross temptations to profanity, by which others are carried away, are not so attractive to such professors, the devil attacks them with error under the appearance of some truth, or of a new discovery of some stricter and holier way. This often prevails when the other kind of temptation would not.

Because it is greatly advantageous to error, and makes it more readily accepted by others, to have a person of reputation, ability, or piety supporting it. It is ordinary among most men to look more at those who maintain a particular opinion, and to ask what such a man thinks of it, than carefully to examine the thing itself. Therefore the devil drives this as one of his chief designs, whereby he may prevail over many. This has always been a great means used to draw men into error: that many who were accounted godly embraced it. This may be seen in the histories of the Novatians, Donatists, and others, who called themselves the pure and holy Church of martyrs and assumed similar titles in opposition to the orthodox Church, whom they accounted carnal. By this means they unsettled many.

He does this also so that he may divert the spiritual exercises of those who appear to be sincere away from self-examination, repentance, and similar duties. If he cannot get them actually engaged in error, he may at least bring them continually to dispute about truth. By this means he attempts either to extinguish their former convictions, to give those convictions a wrong shape before they are settled, or to keep them, as it were, occupied with the shell while he intends to rob them of the kernel. Thus, one way or another, even if he does not gain everything, he nevertheless disturbs and wearies them by continually raising questions.

CHAP. IV. How it is that grosse delusions may come to such height, as they often do.

It may also be asked, How is it that such absurd errors can rise to such a height and prevail so greatly against the Church? Or, by what means does the devil, through corrupt teachers, so delude professors?

There are some reasons that are more general, and others that are more particular and useful to consider in practice. That we may not be ignorant of the devil’s devices, we shall insist chiefly upon these. They may all be reduced to three heads. 1. The Lord’s overruling, holy, just, and wise, though often secret, way of punishing men’s ingratitude. 2. Something in the devil’s manner of carrying on the temptation. 3. Something in the distemper of Churches and persons themselves. These three, being taken together, will make it less strange that even the grossest and most absurd error should prevail.

For the first, the Lord has an overruling hand in such a design, partly to try His own, and therefore heresies must be, 1 Corinthians 11:19; and partly to punish a generation of ungrateful hypocrites who do not receive the love of the truth, as in 2 Thessalonians 2. In both He is to be glorified, either in His grace, or justice, or both. Now, these being the Lord’s designs, the more absurd the error is, the better in some respects it serves His end, and the more clearly it appears to be judicial. This is evident by comparing Isaiah 44:18–19; Romans 1:21, 25, 28, etc.; and 2 Thessalonians 2:10–12. All these passages speak not only of the grossest spiritual abominations, but also of the Lord’s judicial hand in them.

If it be asked, What hand can the Lord have in such a plague? Or, how may He be said to send it? We answer that it is not so much our purpose here to dispute the question of God’s providence in such actions. But, for clearing this reason, we may lay down the following grounds.

1. There are spiritual plagues by which God justly punishes the ingratitude and other sins of a people, just as there are external and bodily plagues. The places already cited—Isaiah 44:18–19; Romans 1:21; 2 Thessalonians 2:10–11; Revelation 7, 8, and 9, and indeed almost that whole book—confirm this. Only this distinction should be observed: ordinarily gross practices, such as adultery, murder, and uncleanness of every sort, are punishments for abusing the light of nature, as may be gathered from Romans 1:21, 25, 28. But to be given up to strong delusion and to believing lies is a plague which ordinarily follows the abuse of the light of the Gospel, as we may see from 2 Thessalonians 2:9–10.

This may be one reason why gross scandals and practices more commonly abound where the Gospel is absent, or at least where it has less power, while error prevails most where the Gospel has been present, or is present with greater clearness. For these are plagues respectively suited to such conditions. This, I say, is generally so, though not always and universally, especially where other circumstances concur to make a difference.

2. We say that the Lord is no less just, holy, and pure in punishing men with such plagues than when He makes use of other rods or judgments. Neither is anything in this to be attributed to Him which is unbecoming His absolute purity and holiness. For, 1. He punishes none with this plague except those who, by their former abuse of light and other misconduct, have justly deserved it. 2. He does not infuse any maliciousness into the heart, nor increase what was already there, but justly permits what is there to break forth, and overrules it for His righteous ends. 3. He does not force them into such a course, but makes use of their own willingness and their own free choice to follow such a way, for the glory of His justice. 4. He does not connive at or dispense with the sinful practice of any instrument, but truly abhors it and will also severely punish it.

Thus, as the same act has a twofold consideration—first, as it is sinful, and second, as it is penal—so it is differently to be ascribed. In the first respect it is to be attributed to man alone; in the latter, to God’s overruling providence, who can bring good out of evil. For there is nothing so evil that He cannot bring some good out of it and make it subservient to Him. Otherwise He who is omnipotent and only wise would never permit it to be.

3. We say that although the Lord is not, and cannot be, accessory to this delusion insofar as it is sinful—for this impossibility belongs to His infinite and blessed perfection—yet He has a just hand in the whole complex design, which greatly adds to the strength of the delusion.

As, 1. He may justly give the devil liberty to assault with his temptations at one time more than at another, and one person more than another, as by proportion we may gather from the case of Job.

2. He may furnish men with gifts which are in themselves good, and justly permit them to use these gifts for promoting error. This has often been exceedingly instrumental in furthering Satan’s design throughout all ages, in which he has made use of great scholars and men of subtle wit to oppose the truth and pervert the Scriptures of God, as is clear from the history of almost every heresy. And it is no less just in God to furnish with abilities an instrument of a spiritual plague than to give strength and power to those whom He employs in temporal judgments, who themselves may nevertheless be guilty before Him for abusing those gifts.

Hence, in 2 Thessalonians 2, there is not only a word and letter to shake the minds of people at such a time, but also a spirit or gift in an eminent degree; and therefore it is called in verse 10 “all deceivableness.” No doubt those who called themselves apostles, 2 Corinthians 11:13, and caused Paul’s gifts to be accounted weak in comparison with theirs, possessed more than ordinary gifts. In this respect the Lord sometimes says that a false prophet may foretell something which actually comes to pass, and so truly possess an extraordinary gift, while nevertheless the Lord’s design through such a person is to try the people’s adherence to Him, Deuteronomy 13:1–3.

Thus promoters of error may often be gifted with ability to reason, to raise questions, to evade arguments and passages of Scripture, to preach well, and to pray well, with a great deal of eloquence and freedom of plausible expression. Indeed, they may possibly not lack even what appear to be signs and wonders, as in the passage formerly cited, while nevertheless the Lord’s end is to try His people, as has been said. Of this sort are those spoken of in 2 Peter 3:16, who wrest or pervert Scripture to their own destruction. It is a striking expression: they are unlearned and unstable—and perhaps at the same time crying down learning in others—yet, says the Apostle, they have a certain dexterity in wresting the Scriptures and coining new interpretations, possibly never heard of before, to the admiration of others. And what is the consequence? Their own destruction. It would have been an advantage to many such persons, and to others also, if they had never possessed such a gift.

2. The Lord may also, in some sense, arm the devil as His executioner to carry on this design, by furnishing him with such instruments, giving him time, opportunities, and occasions to tempt, and permitting him in many things to prevail. Thus, in 2 Thessalonians 2, Satan is said to have power and to exercise it by bringing forth lying wonders. And no doubt the devil, when he is given liberty, may accomplish much. It is said that he put it into the heart of Judas to betray his Master, although Judas had been furnished with gifts and admitted into Christ’s own company by Christ Himself. All this was subservient to carrying forward the devil’s and the Pharisees’ design of betraying the Lord, which nevertheless ultimately tended to the greater ruin of Satan’s own kingdom.

3. In such a case the Lord also justly deprives those whom He intends to plague with delusion of those means which might have been useful for discerning and resisting it.

As, 1. He may remove outward restraints which ordinarily keep corrupt teachers from openly and professedly spreading their errors, and in His providence give them full liberty to multiply and openly pursue their design. This is to pull down the hedge, Isaiah 5, and to permit the winds to blow, Revelation 7. These are always great openings for this judgment of delusion, when, so to speak, a flood is spewed out and there is no earth to help the woman and dry up that flood.

2. He may remove leading lights and guides who are useful in keeping people right; or, if they remain, He may permit jealousy, division, and other things to intervene, so that their weight and authority are thereby diminished in the eyes of such persons. In this respect Ahab becomes jealous of Micaiah, thereby giving the devil an opportunity to make the lies of the false prophets more acceptable to him.

3. The Lord may withdraw the light which persons formerly possessed, and perhaps some common gifts of the Spirit also. Being deprived of these, they become more exposed to temptation, although they may imagine themselves wiser and more understanding than before. Thus the Apostle calls the Galatians foolish and bewitched, Galatians 3:1–2, as having fallen away from that light which they formerly possessed.

4. He may remove common convictions of the Spirit and the challenges of a natural conscience, so that they may proceed in their delusion without being challenged by conscience. Indeed, as John 16:2 says, they may even think that they are doing God good service. This is to have the conscience seared with a hot iron, 1 Timothy 4:2, which accompanies seducing spirits. Thus we see that the most vain and unreasonable confidence often accompanies the foulest errors, as in Isaiah 44:9–20. In Galatians 5:8 this is called a persuasion, in respect of its confidence, which nevertheless does not come from God.

And the Lord may justly deprive men not only of such common gifts, but even of ordinary reason and judgment, so that, at least in pursuing their errors, they become absurd and unreasonable. They become incapable of seeing the weight of an argument, receiving a conviction, or observing their own folly, and may conduct themselves without regard to reputation, honesty, good manners, or such things as are respected even among civil men. Indeed, sometimes they proceed without regard to their own estates or even their own persons, as we may see in the prophets of Baal, 1 Kings 18, and in many others in Antichrist’s kingdom.

Such persons are called by the Apostle in 2 Thessalonians 3:2 unreasonable, or absurd and brutish men, as though they lacked reason. This also accompanies delusion and is a part of God’s judgment, as is clear from Isaiah 44. The Lord sees fit, because of men’s abuse of light, to deprive them of reason, as He did Nebuchadnezzar. By this means the vilest and most absurd temptations gain access to men who otherwise may be reasonable, and carry them forward greedily, without reluctance or contradiction.

5. When men are thus justly deprived by the Lord and are then assaulted by the temptation which He has permitted to be let loose upon them, the Lord may in His providence order many circumstances which may be abused in carrying forward this judgment.

As, 1. He may order that such a person, exposed to such a temptation, should live in such a place, have such acquaintances, and meet with such circumstances. 2. He may order that such a temptation should arise at a time when there is no outward restraint to hold it back. Indeed, in His wisdom He may order matters so that there are then many occasions of stumbling among professors of the truth, whether through scandals in practice, divisions, or other distempers, so that the way of truth may be spoken against by many and the ordinances thereby made vile, as is said concerning Eli’s sons in 1 Samuel 2.

Sometimes He may order such temptations to meet with ignorant, unskillful, and inexperienced hands, who may rather hurt than help those whose doubts they attempt to remove. These and many similar circumstances the wise and just Lord may order in His providence, which may become snares and stumbling blocks to proud and secure hypocrites, who through their own corruption fall upon them. Indeed, sometimes the very ordinances and the exercise of them—the Word, sacraments, and discipline—may, through men’s corruptions, become greater occasions of stumbling than if they had not been present.

In this sense, when the Lord reproves the unfaithful prophets and priests in Jeremiah 6:14, and the people for not listening to His faithful prophets in verse 17, although they still retain the form of religion in verse 20, He threatens to lay stumbling blocks before them upon which they shall fall, verse 21. All these things, and many others—for sometimes following error has applause attending it, as in 2 Timothy 4:3; sometimes gain accompanies it, as in 2 Peter 2:3; 1 Timothy 6:10; Galatians 6:12; Philippians 3:19—being ordered together in the Lord’s just providence, have often, through men’s corruption, great influence in making delusion more successful.

6. Besides these things, there is the Lord’s judicial giving up of proud and corrupt men into the hands of such temptations. Thus, when the devil, as it were, assaults them with such a blast of wind and seeks to winnow particular persons, the Lord, as a just Judge, sentences them to be committed to him as the executioner of His justice. In this sense He is said to give them up. And in this respect such defection, considered as a punishment, is judicially permitted and ordered by Him. He willingly and purposefully sentences such persons to be so given up because of former sins, while others whom He does not so sentence are not carried away by the very same temptation.

Also, the Lord, who is wonderful in counsel and whose ways and judgments are past finding out, may have many other wonderful and inconceivable ways of carrying on this judgment. For if all His judgments are a great depth, much more are His spiritual judgments. It is upon this ground—namely, in considering the Lord’s just severity in concluding all under sin and unbelief, in the rejection of the Jews, and such things—that the Apostle cries out, “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!”

Therefore we shall search no further into this. Only, from what has been said, we may see that the Lord has a just hand in overruling such delusions, and also that they cannot but be strong and successful when they are so guided as to become executioners of His justice. This should also make men tremble all the more, considering that the opening of the sluices to let in the flood of delusion is no less a judgment of God, and no less to be feared, than the sending of sword or pestilence, or the opening of the fountains of the great deep to bring a deluge upon the earth. And if men looked upon it in this way and were suitably affected by it, possibly such delusion might be much more restrained.

CHAP. V. How errour may be known to be a judiciall stroke. and why the Lord smiteth with it.

It may be asked here, 1. How error may be known to be a judgment, or judicial in character? And, 2. For what causes does the Lord most ordinarily send such a judgment?

We cannot insist upon every question that might arise. Yet, to the first, we say, 1. There is no error or delusion which may not in some sense be accounted penal and judicial, either in respect of the persons who fall into it and spread it, or in respect of others who may be infected by it, although with respect to some it may be only a trial. For blindness of mind was a fruit and consequence of the first sin, and follows upon all the children of Adam’s house not only as sin, but also as punishment. Therefore, as in some respect all subsequent sins may be accounted punishments of the first sin, this may be so in a special manner.

2. Besides this general consideration, error is often the punishment of particular sins, and in some cases is more evidently judicial and penal than in others. This may be gathered from the following marks. 1. When, in its own nature, the error is very absurd and unreasonable, as has been said concerning the delusions of the Nicolaitans. In such delusions the judgment of God especially appears, because they cannot reasonably be thought to arise in any ordinary way, or merely from common infirmity. 2. When the persons who spread the error are, in respect of their conduct, gifts, position, or profession, in some way eminent, as was formerly explained. In such a case the temptation seems, as it were, to be armed by the Lord, which ordinarily is not without some special purpose. 3. When it occurs at such a time, and with such circumstances, as have already been described; for such things do not happen by chance, but are ordered by providence.

3. When error breaks in violently, and perhaps carries away some whom men would never have suspected, it has a judicial appearance. It is as though the dragon, with his tail and subtlety, draws stars from heaven and surprises some who thought themselves beyond the reach of such a temptation. 5. It may also be known by the gifts, so to speak, of those who carry it on. For as, in advancing the work of the Gospel, the Lord furnishes His ministers with gifts and diligence when He has work for them to do, so, on the contrary, when He has a work of judgment upon the wheels, and the devil has a design of carrying forward delusion, the instruments may be proportionately fitted for it. There may be a zeal carrying them here and there, so that by all means they compass sea and land to make proselytes. There may be dexterity, quickness, and nimbleness in raising doubts, wresting Scripture, and such like; and there may be a sort of patience in enduring, boldness and confidence in attempting, together with some measure of success, as in the case of the false prophets against Micaiah, 1 Kings 22, and against Jeremiah, Jeremiah 29. When corrupt instruments are furnished with these and similar means, it is probable that the Lord intends something by them which they themselves do not intend.

It has a judicial appearance when it comes upon a people after they have enjoyed the truth and yet have remained unfruitful under it, because this seems to declare the very purpose of its appearance. This is especially so if there has been among the people an itching desire for novelties, or needless and affected stirrings and questionings concerning lesser truths. If, after this, a greater delusion arises, it has the appearance of a judicial stroke for their former unsettledness. This is to give men up to heap teachers to themselves, having itching ears, 2 Timothy 4:3. It is to give them teachers according to their own hearts, so that there may be like people, like priests, which the Lord often threatens. Thus of old, when the people began to miscarry in the wilderness concerning the second commandment, He gave them up to worship the host of heaven, and so to miscarry concerning the first, as is mentioned in Acts 7:41. 7. Error appears truly judicial when it actually does hurt, either by corrupting truth, disturbing unity, awakening divisions, or producing similar effects. These are among the consequences of the first four trumpets which bring spiritual plagues in Revelation 8. These and similar marks may sufficiently convince us that the Lord is angry.

4. To the second question we may answer more briefly. 1. We say that such a plague is not ordinarily the consequence of common outbreaks and sins of infirmity. Nor, 2. Is it ordinarily the consequence of ingratitude for, and abuse of, common mercies. Nor, 3. Is it ordinarily the punishment of gross sins of the flesh, so to speak; for such gross practices are rather themselves a fruit of another kind of judgment. But this plague especially follows upon, 1. The abuse of spiritual mercies, such as the light of the truth of the Gospel, slighted convictions, suppressed challenges of conscience, broken promises made for further reformation, and such like, as may be gathered from 2 Thessalonians 2:9–10.

2. It follows upon spiritual sins, such as spiritual pride, security, hypocrisy, and formality; keeping up the form without the power; possessing the truth without possessing the love of it, as in the passage formerly cited and elsewhere. 3. There are also some particular distempers which, more than others, tend especially to procure this judgment. As, 1. An itching disposition which begins to loathe the simplicity of truth. 2. A hasty and partial disposition which cannot endure sound doctrine unless it be dressed in some curious or novel form, especially if that doctrine reproves their misconduct. Both of these are spoken of in 2 Timothy 4:3.

3. There is a proud self-conceit, of which the Apostle speaks in 2 Timothy 3 and 4, when persons are self-centered, proud, boasters, and such like. These are a ready prey for such temptations. 4. Little respect for faithful ministers who preach the truth may procure this plague, so that people receive pastors according to their own hearts, and judgments which are not good, as the Lord threatens in Ezekiel 20. It is also threatened by the Lord in John 5:43: “I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.”

4. It may be procured by lightness and instability, when people vainly go beyond their proper reach to seek out or meet a temptation. The Lord may justly smite them with their own sin. Thus the reading of corrupt books, hearing corrupt preachers, conversing with corrupt men, and similar practices which the Lord has commanded us to avoid, may not only prove, in God’s righteous judgment, a snare and means of entangling persons, but may also become the procuring and deserving cause of their being given up to that delusion to which they made themselves vulnerable by going without His call. This may happen even though at first there was no positive affection toward that way, and perhaps even an aversion to it.

It is as if a man, contrary to the command, should hazard going near the door of the adulterous woman’s house, and for that reason should be given up to fall into her snare and enter, although at first he had no intention of doing so. Such passages as Proverbs 5:8 and 6:26–28 imply this, where it is said, to this purpose, that a man cannot take fire into his bosom and not be burned. And Proverbs 22:14 says that those who are abhorred by the Lord shall fall into that pit.

6. There is also a jangling and questioning disposition. This often brings on this evil, when all truths are not received, but people begin to reject the lesser truths. Such conduct procures delusion in a greater degree, as has been said, because every truth is precious; and when men become untender in the smallest truths, if any may properly be called small, it is just with God to deprive them of all. In the same way, smaller sins in practice, when tolerated, often bring on grosser outbreaks.

Thus the visible Church, by declining from the truth in the primitive times and becoming increasingly occupied with ceremonies and other unnecessary debates, eventually drew upon herself the delusion of Antichrist. Of the same kind are ignorance of fundamental truths arising from negligence; little love for, and delight in, the Word and ordinances; little mourning over the falls and miscarriages of others when we hear that they have been overtaken by such snares; and many similar things which might be named. But we shall not insist further.

We come then to the second thing proposed, namely, to consider how corrupt teachers carry on their design, and what means the devil uses through them to prevail upon poor souls, so as to make them reject the truths of God and drink in even the most absurd delusions. Although we cannot search out all of Satan’s depths, since he has much subtlety and many devices by which to carry on his design, as appears in 2 Corinthians 11:3, and since this is called in Ephesians 4:14 a cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive, yet we ought not to be ignorant of his devices, 2 Corinthians 2:11.

We shall therefore gather some things from Scripture which may be useful in arming us against them. And, that we may better understand his method, we may consider, 1. The instruments which he chooses. 2. The method which he follows in tempting through them. 3. The means which he uses, or the common grounds from which he draws his arguments. 4. The manner in which all these things are carried on.

CHAP. VI. By what means, and how Satan drives on this plague among people.

tan does not act in this design immediately, nor does he act indiscriminately by just any instrument, but has his special ministers, as it were, set apart for that end, as the Apostle speaks in 2 Corinthians 11:15. He has many subjects indeed, but besides these he has some special ministers for this design, just as our blessed Lord Jesus has ministers specially set apart in His Kingdom. Concerning these we may observe, 1. That he employs some more eminently to traffic, as it were, in this very employment, who, by compassing sea and land and traveling to and fro, may further his design. Such were those who were called false apostles, 2 Corinthians 11:13; Revelation 2 and 3. And in the history of Acts we find such persons coming from one place to another, as from Jerusalem to Antioch, Acts 15, and elsewhere, purposely to spread their errors, just as the Apostles traveled for preaching the truth. 2. He has particular instruments preaching in particular places, who are, as it were, his ministers within such and such bounds, as in the place cited. 3. Besides these, he has active underhand dealers who, though not appearing openly, yet creep into houses; and ordinarily he has some women who are especially employed in this. Thus he has Jezebel the prophetess in the Church of Thyatira, Revelation 2, and such he had in the primitive heresies, particularly among the Montanists, because such persons are often vehement in what they are engaged in, and have opportunities to pervert and seduce which others cannot so easily obtain. His assisting them also to speak sometimes to the admiration of others makes the thing appear still more wonderful. 4. Whoever he makes use of, they are in some way fitted, so to speak, for the designs in which they are employed, although their manner of carrying on those designs may differ, as experience shows.

2. In the method which he follows, we find this progression. 1. He sets himself by every means to make the ministers of the truth odious and contemptible. He does this either by crying down the ministry altogether, or by making everyone indiscriminately a minister, which in effect comes to the same thing. This was the fault of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, Numbers 16, which is applied to corrupt teachers in Jude 11. Or, if that fails, he endeavors to make the persons who occupy that office odious; thus we see even Paul traduced by the false teachers of Corinth and Galatia. The reason for this is, 1. Because ministers are appointed, and gifts are given to men by Jesus Christ, purposely to guard the Church from being tossed to and fro with corrupt doctrine through the deceitfulness of men, as in Ephesians 4:11–14. Therefore, that he may more easily have his way, Satan endeavors to bring the watchmen under suspicion and render them useless. 2. Teachers of truth and corrupt teachers cannot both possess the people’s affection at the same time, and no teacher will ordinarily have much weight if he does not have the affection of his hearers. Therefore Satan uses every means to traduce ministers so that, by excluding them, he may make way for his own emissaries. They are like two suitors seeking the affection of the same bride, so that both cannot possess her affection. To this purpose are the Apostle’s words in Galatians 4:17: “They zealously affect you, but not well; yea, they would exclude you.” In the original, and in the margin, it is, “They would exclude us,” that is, the true Apostles, “that you might affect them.” And considering the great opportunity the devil has to destroy when once ministers are brought into contempt, it is no wonder that he begins by removing this impediment out of his way. Seeing that he attempted this so often and so vigorously against the great Apostle Paul, it cannot be thought strange that he should seek to defame others.

If it be asked how he prosecutes this design, we may observe these particular ways. 1. Although he does not question the ministry in general, yet he raises questions concerning the calling of particular men, whether they are duly called ministers or not. Thus Paul’s apostleship was questioned because he had not personally accompanied the Lord; and for this reason, in the Epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians, he is compelled at such length to vindicate his calling and apostleship, and to produce, as it were, not only his commission but also the seal of it, particularly in 2 Corinthians 3:2–3. The occasion for this is expressly stated in 2 Corinthians 13:3: “Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me.” 2. He endeavors to discredit their gifts, as though the matter spoken by them were commonplace, their expressions poor, and their manner base and contemptible. We see this in the case of that same great Apostle Paul, 2 Corinthians 10:1 and 11:6, where he is called rude in speech. 3. This is done especially by comparing them with the impressive appearance of corrupt teachers in their flourishing, spiritual, and seemingly ravishing discourses, which are called by many mysteries, and are called depths in Revelation 2:24. The Lord indeed calls them “depths of Satan,” but it is not to be thought that they themselves meant this when they gave them the name of depths. Sometimes incomprehensible nonsense will be admired, while plain truths and duties are despised. 4. They exalt their revelations and spiritual attainments, as though received in an immediate manner, beyond anything found in the ministers of Christ. Therefore, in 2 Corinthians 11 and 12, Paul is compelled to compare himself with them, particularly concerning revelations and extraordinary manifestations of God to him. 5. They endeavor to make the ministers of Christ be regarded as covetous, self-seeking, earthly-minded, and such like, because they receive wages for preaching the Gospel, as though they were making prey of the people. This is often objected against the Apostle and answered by him in the Epistles to the Corinthians. 6. When evidence fails, they raise suspicions concerning ministers’ craftiness and underhand dealings, as if in everything they were secretly seeking their own gain, which the Apostle answers in 2 Corinthians 12:16–17. 7. Whatever a minister’s conduct may be, they lie in wait to traduce it. If he is more meek and familiar in his conversation, they say he is a carnal man, a friend and lover of sinners and corrupt persons, as was said of our blessed Lord. If he is more austere in reproving their faults, or more withdrawn in avoiding their company, he is called intolerable and devilishly proud, as was imputed to John. If he receives wages or gifts, he is accounted greedy and covetous; if he refuses and abstains from them, it is interpreted as a lack of love and respect toward them, as was also said of Paul when he continued firm in his former resolution, 2 Corinthians 11:10–11. 8. Ministers are ordinarily accused of being proud, of exalting themselves above the people and despising them, and of taking too much upon themselves to the prejudice of the flock, whose liberty and privileges corrupt teachers ordinarily pretend to vindicate against the ministers’ tyrannous encroachments, as they call them. This was the pretense of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram against Aaron, and was revived and followed in the primitive times by those corrupters spoken of in Jude 11. 9. They endeavor to make the people suspicious of the minister’s love toward them, as in 2 Corinthians 11:11; yea, they represent all his freedom in dealing with them, and his speaking against their faults and errors, as bitterness, railing, and the like. The Apostle touches upon this in Galatians 4:16: “Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” 10. It is common to charge ministers with lightness and changeableness, and therefore to say that little weight should be laid upon them: “They think one thing this year,” it is said, “and alter it the next,” when perhaps edification itself has moved them to such a change. This was imputed to Paul in 2 Corinthians 1:17, purposely to make his word have little weight; and it is no wonder that the same method should be followed concerning others. For this end also, wherever there is any personal fault in a minister, it is not passed over but exceedingly aggravated. Indeed, though it occurred in his youth, before his conversion or entrance into the ministry, it is not forgotten if it can serve to defame the holy calling. For preventing this, ministers are required to be of good report even among those who are without; and it is likely that the false apostles did not spare to upbraid Paul with his former life and persecution. 11. Differences of judgment and divisions among ministers are much used for this end, even sometimes when they are only apparent. Thus Paul was said by the false teachers to preach another doctrine than those at Jerusalem, and therefore he is often compelled to show the harmony that existed between them, particularly in the Epistle to the Galatians. Josephus also observes that Ahab’s false teachers opposed Elijah’s prophecy, in which it was said that dogs would lick Ahab’s blood at Jezreel, to Micaiah’s prophecy that he should die at Ramoth-gilead. Likewise others hardened Zedekiah by alleging that Ezekiel had said he should not see Babylon, while Jeremiah said that he should be carried there. They treated these as contradictions, and thereby sought to defame the prophets and weaken men’s esteem of their prophecies. Although there was no real contradiction in these cases, yet they show how, and for what purpose, corrupt teachers lie in wait to aggravate the differences of God’s servants, even when they are only apparent. This should make ministers careful to avoid giving occasion for such things.

Again, secondly, although at first principal truths are not altogether and openly denied, yet by degrees Satan engages many in the following course. 1. He brings them to reject some less fundamental truths concerning government, communion with others in the ordinances, and such like. 2. He draws them to separate in practice from the fellowship of others, under the pretense of greater purity and spirituality. This seems to be expressed in Jude 19: “These are they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit,” although it is implied that they pretended to possess the Spirit. Indeed, this method was followed in the earliest heresies, which began with comparatively small matters, as in the Novatians, Donatists, and others, who at first separated only to avoid what they regarded as the impurity of promiscuous communion. 3. He then brings them to quarrel with expressions used by the orthodox, and to commend, as it were, a new kind of language. For this reason the Apostle commends the holding fast of “the form of sound words,” 2 Timothy 1:13. These corrupt teachers are said to speak great swelling words of vanity, and to use expressions that appear much more weighty than those formerly employed, Jude 16. Thus the Arians would not admit the word homoousios, or consubstantial, and a council had to be called concerning the matter. From questioning words they proceed next to questioning the truth itself, alleging that men are too confident in determining such matters, that the thing is not clear, that much may be said against it, and such like. Thus, under the pretense of doubting, they endeavor to awaken scruples in others so that they may be more disposed afterward to receive their conclusions.

Absurdities are laid down as consequences which supposedly follow from the truth. Thus the doctrines of Providence, Election, Reprobation, and such like are loaded with horrible consequences and absurdities alleged to follow from them. In the same way, the doctrines of God’s absolute sovereignty and justification by free grace were burdened in the Apostles’ times, as though Paul thereby taught that men might do evil that good might come; that the Law was wholly made void; or that men might sin securely because grace would so much more abound, as is clear from the second, third, and sixth chapters of Romans. 5. He endeavors to diminish men’s hatred and zeal against errors, even the most absurd opinions, so that he may either obtain some actual toleration for them, or at least prevent them from being judged too severely. For if this is gained at first, although error does not yet receive direct approval, a great point is nevertheless gained if he can persuade some to tolerate and others to hear it. This is condemned in the Church of Thyatira, where the officers suffered Jezebel to teach, and the people, who are there called Christ’s servants, countenanced and heard her. It seems also that something of this kind existed in Corinth, which causes the Apostle to say that evil communications corrupt good manners, and therefore men should not become cold or indifferent concerning error, although they themselves are not yet tainted by it, 1 Corinthians 15:33. Upon this ground the grossest heretics, both ancient and more recent, such as Socinians, Arminians, those of the Family of Love, and others of that kind, have maintained liberty in prophesying, a supposed uncertainty concerning the chief truths of the Gospel, and toleration in matters of doctrine, as principles useful for advancing their design. 6. He then proceeds to have the persons who are tainted with error greatly loved and esteemed by others, so that there may be more familiar access to converse with them and a greater readiness to receive their leaven. He does this sometimes by causing men’s gifts, quickness, and nimbleness to be commended; sometimes by the seeming gravity, austerity, and holiness of their conduct, for which reason they are said to be wolves in sheep’s clothing, Matthew 7, while Satan is said to transform himself into an angel of light and his ministers into ministers of Christ, 2 Corinthians 11:14. Sometimes he does it by flattery and by an appearance of sympathy and affection, for which reason the lying prophet is called the tail. And if by no other means, he does it through their reproaching honest and faithful ministers, perhaps even discovering some real faults among them, which is often far too pleasing to the carnal disposition of the generality of people, as is clear from the instances formerly given. Lastly, when this has been obtained, there is then easy access for the grossest doctrines and delusions to be drunk in, which at first would have been abhorred. By these degrees Antichrist’s delusion came to its height; and by such steps some who at first only separated with the Novatians and Donatists came at last to such a height of delusion as to become Circumcellions—a strange and wild kind of delusion—Anthropomorphites, and such like.

The means and arguments used to carry on this delusion are also to be observed, which are these or similar to them. 1. The conduct and conversation of those who promote it is made very plausible, fair, and apparently commendable, so that there may be no suspicion of the devil’s influence upon such a work. Therefore they are said to be transformed into ministers of Christ. Thus the Pharisees make long prayers, live austerely, and such like, thereby gaining reputation for their traditions. For the devil would destroy his whole design if he did not appear as an angel of light. Indeed, there will often be much seeming zeal, patience, and willingness to suffer in such persons, as may be gathered from 2 Corinthians 11:23; and experience shows that the grossest heretics in doctrine have often had, at least for a long time, a great appearance of holiness before others, as might be illustrated from the greatest deceivers.

It is useful for this design to have some who possess Church power and bear the name of officers engaged in it, so that they may come not under the name of ministers of Satan, but, as in 2 Corinthians 11, as ministers of Christ. Therefore, if no ordinary call can be alleged by them, they readily disclaim the necessity of such a call and yet pretend to have a calling to be preachers of Christ, of His Gospel, and such like. We see this in the false teachers of old, who called themselves apostles and prophetesses, pretending some extraordinary call from God, and thereby making way for their delusions.

They pursue their designs under a pretense of advancing holiness and spirituality to a higher degree, of possessing a more humble manner of life, and of having advanced further in high attainments than other men can reach or are capable of. Thus some outwardly despise all pride and all giving of respect to men, and do so, as the Apostle says in Colossians 2:18, by a sort of voluntary humility and intruding into things which they have not seen, while in the meantime rejecting common and plain truths.

Another means is the pleasing of ears and itching dispositions with great swelling words, new notions, and long discourses of nonsense, delivered with great confidence. As the Apostle says in 1 Timothy 1:7, “They understand neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” Yet such discourses are often accounted sublime mysteries by the ignorant and by those who have come to loathe the simple truth.

They make use of a pretense of goodwill and advantage toward those to whom they speak. As Romans 16:18 says, by good words and fair speeches they deceive the simple. By pretending to wish their souls well, and to pity their blindness and the danger in which they stand, they creep into their houses and affections, 2 Timothy 3:6, and lead simple persons captive. By this pretense the serpent beguiled Eve at the beginning, promising some advantage from listening to him; and this method is still followed by corrupt teachers, as appears in 2 Corinthians 11:3.

Sometimes there is a pretense of much greater strictness, especially in outward things. Thus some of old added the observance of Moses’ Law to the Gospel, as though this were a more perfect and strict way; and upon this ground many traditions have been introduced into the Church.

There is a pretense of greater Christian liberty and freedom from the bondage of ordinances of every kind, so that men must not be tied to hearing sermons, keeping Sabbaths, praying, praising, and such like. These things, they say, are merely forms and burdens upon saints, and unbecoming that freedom and spirituality which mature believers ought to possess. Thus such deceivers, and those deceived by them, are said to promise liberty to those to whom they propose their delusions, while in the meantime they themselves are servants of corruption.

There is a great pretense of knowing Christ’s mind, together with confident appeals to the writings of His Apostles in a seemingly convincing manner. Thus, in 2 Thessalonians 2:2, Spirit, Word, and Letter are mentioned as though proceeding from Paul, while Paul himself expressly disclaims the interpretations which they put upon him.

They commonly allege the authority of men and oppose such authorities to those who oppose their errors. Thus the Pharisees alleged Moses, and the Nicolaitans Nicolas. It is likely also that the false apostles who came from Jerusalem opposed the authority of other Apostles to Paul, as though they preached nothing but what had been preached at Jerusalem. And very often the infirmities of some great men are stumbled upon and turned into arguments against the truth.

Many are stirred up to raise queries and captious questions, as the Pharisees often did by sending their emissaries to Christ, so that some advantage may be gained by this means and those who stand for the truth may be entangled.

Sometimes he makes use of human reason and cries down everything that does not appear consonant with it. Upon this ground the resurrection was denied by the Sadducees and by some of the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 15, and upon the same ground the most fundamental truths of the Gospel have been opposed by the Socinians and others even to this day. At other times, again, all use of reason, learning, or prudence is disclaimed; in which respect such men are called unreasonable, 2 Thessalonians 3, and brute beasts, 2 Peter 2 and Jude 10.

They endeavor by every means to gain the favor of civil magistrates, and especially to make ministers who are zealous against them hated and suspected by those magistrates. Gaining this has a double advantage for their cause, since it strengthens error and weakens the truth. We see the false prophets doing this of old, 1 Kings 22; Jeremiah 26; Amos 7:10. The Scribes and Pharisees likewise endeavored to engage the Romans against Christ and His Apostles. So also did the Arians and other heretics, and so have Antichrist’s emissaries continually endeavored to stir up civil magistrates against faithful ministers as though they were the most hateful of persons. They carry this on by such means as these. 1. They pretend to give greater submission to the magistrates, and charge faithful ministers with slighting their authority, knowing this to be something naturally pleasing to magistrates. Thus the faithfulness of honest ministers is called disobedience and hatred, while the lying flattery of such teachers is presented as respect and obedience. So it was in the case of Micaiah. 2. They cry out against faithful ministers as factious persons, turners of the world upside down, sowers of sedition, as in Acts 24:5, and troublers of the peace, who keep the people in continual agitation, oppose the magistrates’ designs, and hinder the absoluteness of civil authority. Thus Elijah is counted Ahab’s enemy and a troubler of Israel. 3. They spread many groundless calumnies against them, as though they were guilty of gross evils. Thus Athanasius and many others were charged by the Arians as murderers and adulterers, and some pretended proofs were even produced. Indeed, it was alleged to Constantine that Athanasius had interfered in civil affairs, derogatory to the Emperor’s authority, by prohibiting grain from being exported from Egypt. 4. They bring magistrates into conflict with Church-officers by appeals from Church judicatories to the civil authority, while seeming to plead for an absolute authority in magistrates concerning ecclesiastical matters. Thus heretics in every age have sheltered themselves under this pretense until magistrates declared against them; and then they cast off the magistrates also, as has been demonstrated in more recent times by the practices of the Socinians and Arminians. 5. They represent faithful ministers to magistrates as intolerable because of their plain threatenings, alleging that such persons ought not to be endured when they affront authority and weaken those who profess such great respect for it. Thus Amos is represented in Amos 7:10 by Amaziah, priest of Bethel, and Jeremiah was often represented in the same way by the false prophets of his time. 6. They represent faithful ministers as unwarrantably claiming a kind of infallibility for themselves, and thereby derogating from all others. Thus in 1 Kings 22 comes the challenge, “Which way went the Spirit of the Lord from me to speak unto thee?” By a certain audacious confidence they seek, as it were, to cast out faithful ministers as contemptible men unworthy of belief, as in the case cited and in Jeremiah 28 and elsewhere. By such means their insinuations and flatteries often prevail greatly in promoting their designs. Augustine charges the Donatists with this, that in their application to Julian they used this phrase, quoniam apud te solum justitia habet locum—“because with you alone justice has a place”—and this, he says, when they knew him to be an apostate, Epistle 48.

The last thing to be considered is the manner in which this design is carried on by such corrupt teachers. It is not always the same in every case, and may in part be gathered from what has already been said; yet we may name these particulars. 1. It is done covertly and subtly; therefore they creep in by insinuations, appearing very different from what they really are. 2. It is done hypocritically. In 1 Timothy 4 they are said to speak lies in hypocrisy, while pretending both to be religious and to be friends of religion and truth. 3. Sometimes it is carried on vehemently, as though knocking forcibly upon the hearts of hearers. It shakes them by the greatness of words, the peremptoriness of threatenings, the confidence of assertions, and the vehemence of the manner. Thus it possesses, as Scripture says, a kind of strength and power, and therefore is compared to a flood in Revelation 12 and called “strong delusion” in 2 Thessalonians 2. 4. It is carried on with all diligence, compassing sea and land and leaving no means unattempted. 5. It is carried on with a kind of seeming simplicity, zeal, and sincerity, together with many professions of these things, as may be gathered from the instances formerly given and from Galatians 4:17, where it is said, “They zealously affect you, but not well,” and from Romans 10:2. 6. It is carried on with great boldness. This appears, 1. In pretending to avoid no suffering and fear no danger that may follow from their opinion, even if it were to give their body to be burned, and perhaps in actually enduring much on this account. 2. It may be adhered to by them in sickness, even upon their deathbeds, as it is not unlikely was the case with Jezebel and some of her followers, Revelation 2:21–22; for neither is the devil silenced nor corruption removed merely by sickness or death. 3. It appears in confidently undertaking to dispute with anyone, and often even seeking occasions for dispute. Thus the Libertines arose and disputed with Stephen, Acts 6; and it is likely that the false teachers at Corinth, who said of Paul in 2 Corinthians 10:10 that his bodily presence was weak and his speech contemptible, would not have declined to dispute even with him. 4. It appears in their confident reliance upon their own judgments and their undervaluing of all others. 5. It appears in confidently asserting almost anything, and not only in reproaching private persons, but even officers and ordinances. As 2 Peter 2:10 says, “They are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.”

By these considerations we may in part see how delusion comes to such strength and height in respect of those who carry on corrupt doctrine. We come now to consider a third thing, namely, what contribution there is from the people’s side toward promoting it, which we may reduce to these three. 1. There is something sinful in a people’s former conduct by which delusion is exceedingly strengthened against them when it comes as a just plague for former misconduct. But concerning those sins we have already spoken.

A people’s present temper, or rather distemper, may have much influence upon this, and may exceedingly dispose them toward, and lay them open to, the temptation. As, first, lightness of mind and unsettledness in the truth; such persons Scripture calls “unstable souls,” 2 Peter 2:14. 2. There is an itching, novelty-loving disposition, desirous of some new thing and loathing simple doctrine, as in 2 Timothy 4:3. 3. There is too great a readiness to believe the spirits without trying them, which seems to have been the case in Galatia, whereby they were quickly drawn away to another Gospel and foolishly gave credit to certain insinuating teachers, as in Galatians 1:6 and 3:1. 4. A secure and carnal frame, lacking exercise of conscience, is dangerous. So also are proud and presumptuous persons, who have a high esteem of themselves, and those who are self-willed, mentioned in 2 Peter 2:10; such persons are in great danger from this temptation. The temptation will also sometimes take advantage of persons whose minds are unsettled and who are under some weight or heaviness, coming to them under the pretense of providing a remedy. There are many such distempers, some of which may be gathered from what has already been said concerning the sinful causes which procure this judgment. For that which meritoriously deserves such punishment often also proves a disposing means for receiving the temptation. But we forbear.

People often by their own conduct promote this plague of delusion against themselves, casting themselves into the snare. 1. By needless familiar conversation with such persons. 2. By going to hear them. 3. By purchasing or reading their books. 4. By venturing to entertain their doubts and to pursue their arguments and questions, pleading for their opinions and such like, while at the same time avoiding those means and ways which might recover them, and entertaining prejudice against those who would endeavor to do so. By such conduct that word of the Prophet is verified: “The prophets teach lies, and my people love to have it so.”

Now, if all these things be put together, can it be thought strange that the greatest delusion should prevail? We have insisted the longer upon these things, not only for confirming the truth already stated, but also for drawing together into one short view a little map, as it were, of those ways by which the devil carries forward his design through the cunning craftiness of those who lie in wait to deceive.

CHAP. VII. What is called-for as duty in such a case.

We should consider what is duty in such a time or case, when delusion in greater or lesser measure prevails, or is very likely to prevail. It cannot be denied that something is called for, and is necessary, where the danger is so great; and it is also evident that something more than ordinary is necessary, because the evil is more than ordinary. The remedy, therefore, must be proportionate and timely; for “a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump,” Galatians 5:9. And experience proves that such evils fret and corrupt as a gangrene does, 2 Timothy 2:17. The difficulty lies in determining what is to be done, in which not only the piety, zeal, and conscience of men will have exercise, but also their prudence and abilities.

The resolution of this question will relate to three ranks of men. 1. To Church-officers, especially ministers. 2. To magistrates. 3. To people in private stations. Yet before we say anything positively, we shall, 1. Show what is not the remedy called for. 2. Show what is called for, but is not sufficient. 3. Show what seems to be called for as sufficient.

As to the first, there are two extremes to be avoided, which we shall lay down in two assertions.

Assertion 1. An absolute and unlimited forbearance and toleration of all errors, and of those who promote them, is not the proper remedy called for in such a time, in reference to such evils. This, I suppose, is clear, even if there were nothing more in Scripture than what is contained in these Epistles, Revelation 2 and 3. For, 1. The angel of Ephesus is commended, chapter 2:2, because he could not bear or endure those who were evil, namely, the false apostles. This enduring of them, then, cannot be the duty, seeing Christ commends the contrary. 2. He reproves Pergamos, verse 14, because they had among them those who held the doctrine of Balaam, that is, because they suffered them. 3. This is still more clearly expressed in the Epistle to Thyatira, verse 20: “I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel to teach and seduce My servants.” Nothing can be clearer than this.

And it is the more observable that this not-forbearing is commended in Ephesus, where things in their own particular condition were not altogether right; while the other Churches are reproved for neglecting this, even when their own particular conditions were right. This shows that the Lord loves zeal against such scandals and abhors the toleration of them. What was formerly said in the doctrine, what is clear in the practice of Scripture both from examples and commands given in reference to this, and what may afterward be said in the positive part of this direction, will further confirm it.

And whatever human prudence and carnal faintheartedness may suggest concerning such a course, as though it were best to deal with persons in such a distemper in no other way than absolutely to forbear them, at least insofar as relates to these distempers as such, yet it is clear that this is not God’s ordinance, nor the remedy appointed by Him. Therefore there is no promise by which we may expect His blessing upon it. Although sometimes the Lord, who is absolutely sovereign, may condescend, even without such means, to dry up and restrain a flood of error when men themselves are guilty of sinful forbearance, yet the effect is not to be attributed to their forbearance, but to God’s gracious condescension.

Assertion 2. We say, on the other hand, that an indiscriminate, rigid, and equal pursuing of everything that is an error, or an equal refusal to endure every person who may in some measure be tainted with error, is not the suitable remedy or duty called for in such a case. For, as neither all errors nor all persons are alike, so neither is the same way at all times to be followed; because what may be edifying in one case may be destructive in another. And as there is therefore a prudent difference to be made in reference to scandals in practice, and persons are to be dealt with differently according to different scandals, yea, even according to different dispositions, so it is also to be here. Men are to walk in such a way as they may most probably attain the great end, namely, edification, which ought to be the aim in this as in all other ordinances. Therefore no peremptory rule can be framed which will meet every case and every person, as has been said.

We see even the Apostles making a difference between persons and scandals according to the several cases. Sometimes they excommunicate, as in the instance of Hymenaeus and Philetus. Sometimes they instruct doctrinally, as Paul does the Church-members of Corinth and Galatia. Others he threatens, and yet does not actually sentence them, as he does the false teachers in those Churches. Sometimes again, no single Apostle decides the question judicially by himself, although doctrinally he might have done so, but a Synod is called judicially and authoritatively to determine the matter, as in Acts 15.

The reason for the first is that the errors of Hymenaeus and Philetus were in themselves gross, destructive of the faith, and obstinately and blasphemously adhered to. 2. Paul instructs and expostulates with the people of Corinth, and does not proceed to the highest censure. 1. Because they were not seducers, but were themselves seduced by others. 2. They could not yet be accounted obstinate, but might be thought to have sinned through infirmity; therefore gentler and softer means were to be applied for reclaiming them. 3. They were a numerous body, and therefore excommunication or cutting off could not be expected to attain its proper end. 4. They were in a present distemper, questioning the Apostle’s authority. He therefore seeks rather to be acknowledged again by them, so that both his word and his rod might have weight; whereas, if he had struck them while they were in that distemper, they might have broken off still further from their subjection. These things are clear, besides what might be said concerning the nature of the scandal or error itself.

He threatens the corrupt teachers with cutting off because they were leaders and seducers, and therefore deserved to be dealt with more severely than those who were seduced by them, although possibly they were themselves as drunk with the same errors. Yet, though he threatens them, he spares for a time to strike, not out of any respect to those corrupt teachers, nor from any connivance at their error, but out of respect to the poor seduced people. For their edification Paul forbore, even when the weapons were ready to avenge all disobedience. He abstained, I say, because such people, having a prejudice against him and being bewitched by these teachers, might in that distemper have more readily cleaved to them and forsaken Paul, which would have proved still more destructive to them. He therefore seeks first to have their obedience manifested; and so he not only forbears the people, but even those corrupt teachers for a time, for the people’s edification, as may be gathered from 2 Corinthians 10:6 and 12:19.

Lastly, I said that sometimes Synods or Councils are called, as in Acts 15, which in other cases we do not find. 1. Because that error was then new, and it is likely did not lack support from many within the Church. Therefore a Council of officers joined together to decide it, which is not necessary again after that decision has been made; but ministers are doctrinally and by discipline to maintain the same conclusion, as we see Paul does in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, maintaining the conclusion of that former Synod. 2. This Synod was convened not for lack of light, for any of the Apostles, as such, were infallibly inspired to decide the matter, and had already determined it in their preaching, but that the decision might have greater weight with others, and therein become a precedent for us. 3. It was a spreading error which did not affect one place only, but many Churches; and it is likely that many believers were in danger of being shaken by it. Therefore the most weighty remedy was called for. 4. There was need not only of light to determine the doctrinal questions, but also of directions to help people know how to conduct themselves in such times, so as to avoid the snare of error on the one hand and the giving of offense on the other, as we may see from the decrees of that Synod.

Therefore, in such cases, men should not only severally endeavor to perform the duty of their own stations, but should also jointly concur and meet, judicially or extra-judicially as occasion calls, to deliberate and consult concerning matters of such great and common concern. For, seeing the Church is one city and one lump, a little fire may endanger all, and a little leaven corrupt all; and unwatchfulness at one part or post may let in enemies to destroy the whole. It is necessary, therefore, that in some cases there be mutual concurrence, although it is not necessary at all times to have a judicial meeting, nor is any present duty at any time to be suspended by any person merely because no such meeting can be obtained. What has been said demonstrates that a difference is to be made in reference to errors, persons, and cases.

CHAP. VIII. When some errours are to be forborn.

If it should be asked how this difference is to be made, or how it may be known when there may be some forbearance without guilt, and when not, we answer: this is indeed difficult, and we will not undertake to be either fully satisfying or peremptory in every particular. Yet we suppose that considering these general distinctions will be helpful, and that applying them is necessary in this case. 1. We should distinguish between some errors and scandals and others, both in respect of their grossness and their evidence. For some errors are, as Peter calls them in 2 Peter 2:1–2, pernicious and damnable, as striking against the special truths of the Word of God, or bringing gross practices along with them, as the error of the Nicolaitans did, and endangering the souls of those who maintain them, not merely as other sins of infirmity do, but because of the principles implied in them. Of this sort are many errors and practices. Again, other things may be errors, and contrary to truth, yet not destructive of, nor altogether inconsistent with, the foundation. They may be such opinions as many true saints may possibly be taken with, and yet still have access to God and enter heaven, even though they should die holding them. Of this sort are many things debated among orthodox divines; for indeed there is nothing which does not have either truth or falsehood in it, yet all things are not of equal necessity and weight. Of the first sort was the error which the false apostles endeavored to introduce, namely, adding the practice of the ceremonial law to Christ in justification, and mixing moral and ceremonial works into it, as may be gathered from the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. Of the second kind was the debate concerning meats and other things mentioned in Romans 14 and in the Epistles to the Corinthians. Of the first sort, we say, there ought to be no toleration. Therefore the Lord reproves it here; and in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians Paul plainly and powerfully refutes and reproves such errors, even when this was exceedingly ill taken and they were ready to count him an enemy because he told them the truth, Galatians 4. Yet he will not forbear, because a little leaven of that sort will leaven the whole lump and hazard the making of his labor among them to be in vain.

Of the second sort, we say that moderation is called for, and ministers are not always called either doctrinally or judicially by discipline to reprove or censure such things. I will not say that it may not sometimes be proper to uncover even the least error, or that by circumstances it may not be so aggravated that it becomes necessary judicially to take notice of it, as when it is joined with offense and is ready to breed schism or scandal, or in similar cases. In this respect there are some things mentioned in the decree of Acts 15 which are not very material in themselves, such as eating things strangled. Yet we say it is not simply and always necessary for ministers to press the conviction of all who maintain something different from the truth, or something supposed by them to be so, if the matter is extra-fundamental and has no direct or obvious influence upon the violation of faith or the corruption of manners, much less to censure them merely for maintaining it. For it is not of such things that these Epistles speak. And we see in Romans 14 and in the Epistles to the Corinthians, in the debates concerning meats, eating things sacrificed to idols, and such like, that although there was still a right side and a wrong side, yet the Apostle rather presses the forbearing of these debates than the entering deeply into them, not always binding men to follow this side or that, provided it be done without breach of unity and charity. Hence it is that, although there are some things to which he will give no forbearance, but authoritatively and ministerially decides them, yet in the same Epistles there are other things among the saints which he seeks rather to heal and to procure mutual forbearance concerning than peremptorily to decide. See Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8; 2 and 3; Philippians 2 and 3.

There are some truths and practices which are evident, and which by the light of the Word may be solidly demonstrated to an impartial and unbiased searcher; and there are some contrary errors and scandals which are obvious at first sight, perhaps even to a natural conscience, to be such. Thus, although men may use evasions and say, as Hymenaeus and Philetus did in 2 Timothy 2:17, that there is no resurrection yet to come because Scripture speaks of a spiritual resurrection which in the believer is already past, and although many deluded persons who will not admit reasonable distinctions in such a case may be drawn away by them and still adhere to them, yet these things can be convincingly demonstrated from sound grounds in Scripture even to those of ordinary capacity.

Other things, again, may be truths, and there may be a possibility for some persons to reach them by many consequences drawn from Scripture, yet they are not so clear to many. From this it comes that men, yea, even learned and godly men, differ in their apprehensions of several truths, the Lord thinking it good thereby to restrain men’s tempers and let us see the necessity of humility and sobriety. And this may occur even in matters that seem very small. These the Apostle in Romans 14:1 calls doubtful disputations, as being matters in which there is not such evidence attainable, at least to many, as to settle the minds of ordinary people or to refute every contrary assertion of an adversary. Of this sort are genealogies and other things which Paul mentions to Timothy in 1 Timothy 1:4, calling them endless, because there is no settled ground upon which to rest, but one question generates another; and the very principle that must be laid down for clearing one matter to one person is itself disputed by another, as much as the matter to be proved. Men know only in part, even those who are eminent, so that universal harmony in such matters cannot well be expected.

In reference to this, we say that greater peremptoriness is required in the first sort than in the second, in which, because of the practice of the Apostles in Scripture, yea, and from necessity itself, some forbearance is required. Yet we should beware of partiality in accounting truths either evident or disputable, as men are too apt to do according as they themselves judge them. It is therefore better to try such matters by the common judgment which godly and learned men have had concerning such truths in all ages, asking whether there has continually been difference and yet moderation in those differences. Nor should this be tried only by one age or time, in which a point may be more agitated than at another time, but more generally, especially when the arguments on either side lack that evidence which the reasons brought for other truths possess, while those other truths are so clearly set down in Scripture that among godly and learned men in all ages there has been general agreement.

Again, 3. We should distinguish between errors and the consequences of them, or the practices which follow upon them. There may be some things which are truly errors and which may and should be forborne in themselves, while their consequences ought not to be forborne. This also may be more necessary to observe at one time and in one Church than at another, because consequences such as schism, faction, division, and the like may sometimes follow upon the smallest errors. And seeing these are always enemies to edification, even when they arise from the smallest grounds, they are never absolutely to be forborne.

For one to say, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” or for one to think one man a better preacher than another, may seem in itself to be no great matter; yet when it begins to rend them and create factions in Corinth, it is not to be forborne, but reproved. And in the former difference concerning meats, the Apostle always condemns the offense and schism which followed from it, although he does not peremptorily determine men’s practice in every case, nor censure them merely for the opinion itself. Thus one might think that the first day of the week is not jure divino, and this might possibly be forborne; but if he were pressing the changing of it, refusing to observe it, or venting his opinion so as to offend others, that would be intolerable.

Thus also the differences and errors concerning Church-government by bishops, and in the Congregational way, may, we conceive, be forborne in persons where they are not spread so as to shake and draw away others. But if they are pressed in practice to the rending of a Church, and preferred or made equal to the true government established by the Word, in that case they are not to be forborne, because then truth must be vindicated and obstructions to edification, in the rending or distracting of a Church, must be removed. This may be required at one time more than at another, according as such an offense awakens schism and disturbs order and union in one Church or at one time more than another. Hence we see in Acts 15 that some things are put into that decree in reference to that time, simply for preventing schism and scandal, while the doctrine concerning the abolition of the ceremonial law was not yet so clear. And some things were forborne among the Gentiles which for a time were not so among the Jews, such as circumcision and all the ceremonies of the law, which the Jews nevertheless continued to observe for a season. Experience and reason make the matter clear, according to Paul’s words, “To the Jews I became as a Jew,” and “I became all things to all men,” etc. This does not show counterfeiting, or any trifling with necessary truths, but rather the ordering of his practice in lawful things according to the different cases of those with whom he had to deal. This principle applies both to persons and Churches.

We should distinguish also between things and persons. Sometimes it will be proper to censure a fault or error in persons, as Paul does in the Corinthians and Galatians, while it is not yet proper to censure the persons themselves. He does indeed threaten them, but forbears for a time, lest thereby he should hurt more by a subsequent division than he would cure by his stroke. Persons also are to be distinguished: some only err themselves, while others teach others to do so; and in that respect they become heretics and schismatics, which, had the opinion remained only their own private judgment, could not have been imputed to them in the same way. These latter cannot plead for the same forbearance which ought to be shown toward the former.

A distinction is also to be made in the manner of forbearance. It is one thing simply and altogether to forbear a person who is infected with error and spreads it; it is another thing to forbear him only in some respect, such as in respect of censure alone, or perhaps only in respect of the degree of censure. Something may be more gently censured and yet not altogether forborne. One may also ministerially reprove a fault and person by the key of doctrine in applying the Word, while nevertheless for a time forbearing the exercise of discipline and censure. Thus, in the place formerly cited, Paul reproves the false teachers in Corinth while for a time sparing the rod; and likewise he wishes that some in Galatia were cut off, while not immediately doing it.

This does not arise so much from respect to the persons of those teachers as from respect to the Church and to the multitude of their followers, whom hasty censures might rather have stumbled than edified. Edification is the great end of discipline, as of all other ordinances. Therefore Paul seeks first to recover the people, and then to bring them again to acknowledge his authority, and thereafter to exercise the weapons which he had in readiness for avenging all disobedience, when their obedience should be made manifest, 2 Corinthians 10:6. He would not do this before that time, lest they, being attached to those teachers, should have sided with them against his authority, and so the result should have proved both more hurtful to them and to the Church than edifying. By this end of edification alone he is governed.

These and similar considerations being kept in view, ministers by Christian prudence are to gather when to be silent and when to speak, when to censure and when to forbear. But by all means they are always to be watchful lest the grounds which sometimes plead for forbearance for the Church’s edification on the one hand be stretched so broadly as to foster our lukewarm temper, coldness, and faint-hearted cowardice in the things of God. There is much need to try from what such moderation flows, and whether even then the heart is hot with holy indignation against such errors. On the other side, true zeal must be guided toward the end of edification, lest that duty of exercising discipline which is acceptable to God and useful to the Church should be rejected by Him because it proceeds from our own spirits, and should prove more hurtful than edifying in its effects. A few instances of this have given occasion to some to speak evil of this ordinance of Jesus Christ, who at all times lie in wait to seize upon anything that may be twisted to its reproach. But, to conclude this without insisting upon particulars, there must be a sincere, impartial, and prudent walking, so as to attain edification and enable men to answer to Jesus Christ for their trust, having an eye especially to those things which most contribute to edification.

But, 1. If what is spread is blasphemous and destroys the foundations of the faith, that does not come within this debate, as is clear from Paul’s dealing with Hymenaeus and Alexander in 1 Timothy 1:20. For zeal for the Majesty of God and love to the salvation of souls, which contain the substance of the two great commandments of the Law, will admit of no forbearing in such a case. 2. If it corrupts or defaces the Church and makes her a reproach to the profane, it is not to be forborne. 3. If the things are unbecoming to the ordinances of Christ, but reflect dishonor upon them, and consequently upon Him whose ordinances they are, they are not to be connived at. 4. If such things endanger the public beauty, order, and government of the Church, without which the visible face of a Church cannot be maintained, they are not to be overlooked. 5. If they impair the union and love which ought to exist in the Church, which are to be preserved and everything which may destroy them removed, they ought not to be tolerated. 6. If they become offensive and scandalous, either by causing the ways of the Lord to be evil spoken of, 2 Peter 2:2, by grieving the godly, or by infecting others, they are not the proper objects of forbearance, unless some circumstance concurs, as has formerly been said, in which case it cannot properly be called forbearance. By these and similar considerations it may be tried when an error is to be forborne and when not. In this judgment consideration must be given both to the nature of the error and to the person who holds it, as also to the condition of the Church and people, who may be either edified or harmed by the forbearing or censuring of such a person.

What is necessary, but not sufficient, will appear when we come to consider what is positively called for; for whatever falls short of what is required must necessarily be defective and insufficient. Thus it is necessary that men not only keep themselves free from error, but also that by admonition and exhortation means be used to reclaim those who have fallen. Yet these are not sufficient if there is no public means employed. Indeed, even though there were public authoritative preaching and the exercise of the key of doctrine, that is not sufficient if there is not also censuring by discipline and an exercise of the key of jurisdiction. And in some cases every lesser censure will not be sufficient unless it is extended to the utmost; for Christ has not given that key to His Church in vain in reference to all her scandals, nor are men discharged of their duty until they reach to the utmost extent required within their own stations. But this will appear more fully afterward.

CHAP. IX. What is called-for from Church-officers in the case of spreading errour.

If it should be asked how this difference is to be made, or how it may be known when there may be some forbearance without guilt, and when not, we answer: this is indeed difficult, and we will not undertake to be either fully satisfying or peremptory in every particular. Yet we suppose that considering these general distinctions will be helpful, and that applying them is necessary in this case. 1. We should distinguish between some errors and scandals and others, both in respect of their grossness and their evidence. For some errors are, as Peter calls them in 2 Peter 2:1–2, pernicious and damnable, as striking against the special truths of the Word of God, or bringing gross practices along with them, as the error of the Nicolaitans did, and endangering the souls of those who maintain them, not merely as other sins of infirmity do, but because of the principles implied in them. Of this sort are many errors and practices. Again, other things may be errors, and contrary to truth, yet not destructive of, nor altogether inconsistent with, the foundation. They may be such opinions as many true saints may possibly be taken with, and yet still have access to God and enter heaven, even though they should die holding them. Of this sort are many things debated among orthodox divines; for indeed there is nothing which does not have either truth or falsehood in it, yet all things are not of equal necessity and weight. Of the first sort was the error which the false apostles endeavored to introduce, namely, adding the practice of the ceremonial law to Christ in justification, and mixing moral and ceremonial works into it, as may be gathered from the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. Of the second kind was the debate concerning meats and other things mentioned in Romans 14 and in the Epistles to the Corinthians. Of the first sort, we say, there ought to be no toleration. Therefore the Lord reproves it here; and in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians Paul plainly and powerfully refutes and reproves such errors, even when this was exceedingly ill taken and they were ready to count him an enemy because he told them the truth, Galatians 4. Yet he will not forbear, because a little leaven of that sort will leaven the whole lump and hazard the making of his labor among them to be in vain.

Of the second sort, we say that moderation is called for, and ministers are not always called either doctrinally or judicially by discipline to reprove or censure such things. I will not say that it may not sometimes be proper to uncover even the least error, or that by circumstances it may not be so aggravated that it becomes necessary judicially to take notice of it, as when it is joined with offense and is ready to breed schism or scandal, or in similar cases. In this respect there are some things mentioned in the decree of Acts 15 which are not very material in themselves, such as eating things strangled. Yet we say it is not simply and always necessary for ministers to press the conviction of all who maintain something different from the truth, or something supposed by them to be so, if the matter is extra-fundamental and has no direct or obvious influence upon the violation of faith or the corruption of manners, much less to censure them merely for maintaining it. For it is not of such things that these Epistles speak. And we see in Romans 14 and in the Epistles to the Corinthians, in the debates concerning meats, eating things sacrificed to idols, and such like, that although there was still a right side and a wrong side, yet the Apostle rather presses the forbearing of these debates than the entering deeply into them, not always binding men to follow this side or that, provided it be done without breach of unity and charity. Hence it is that, although there are some things to which he will give no forbearance, but authoritatively and ministerially decides them, yet in the same Epistles there are other things among the saints which he seeks rather to heal and to procure mutual forbearance concerning than peremptorily to decide. See Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8; 2 and 3; Philippians 2 and 3.

There are some truths and practices which are evident, and which by the light of the Word may be solidly demonstrated to an impartial and unbiased searcher; and there are some contrary errors and scandals which are obvious at first sight, perhaps even to a natural conscience, to be such. Thus, although men may use evasions and say, as Hymenaeus and Philetus did in 2 Timothy 2:17, that there is no resurrection yet to come because Scripture speaks of a spiritual resurrection which in the believer is already past, and although many deluded persons who will not admit reasonable distinctions in such a case may be drawn away by them and still adhere to them, yet these things can be convincingly demonstrated from sound grounds in Scripture even to those of ordinary capacity.

Other things, again, may be truths, and there may be a possibility for some persons to reach them by many consequences drawn from Scripture, yet they are not so clear to many. From this it comes that men, yea, even learned and godly men, differ in their apprehensions of several truths, the Lord thinking it good thereby to restrain men’s tempers and let us see the necessity of humility and sobriety. And this may occur even in matters that seem very small. These the Apostle in Romans 14:1 calls doubtful disputations, as being matters in which there is not such evidence attainable, at least to many, as to settle the minds of ordinary people or to refute every contrary assertion of an adversary. Of this sort are genealogies and other things which Paul mentions to Timothy in 1 Timothy 1:4, calling them endless, because there is no settled ground upon which to rest, but one question generates another; and the very principle that must be laid down for clearing one matter to one person is itself disputed by another, as much as the matter to be proved. Men know only in part, even those who are eminent, so that universal harmony in such matters cannot well be expected. In reference to this, we say that greater peremptoriness is required in the first sort than in the second, in which, because of the practice of the Apostles in Scripture, yea, and from necessity itself, some forbearance is required. Yet we should beware of partiality in accounting truths either evident or disputable, as men are too apt to do according as they themselves judge them. It is therefore better to try such matters by the common judgment which godly and learned men have had concerning such truths in all ages, asking whether there has continually been difference and yet moderation in those differences. Nor should this be tried only by one age or time, in which a point may be more agitated than at another time, but more generally, especially when the arguments on either side lack that evidence which the reasons brought for other truths possess, while those other truths are so clearly set down in Scripture that among godly and learned men in all ages there has been general agreement.

Again, 3. We should distinguish between errors and the consequences of them, or the practices which follow upon them. There may be some things which are truly errors and which may and should be forborne in themselves, while their consequences ought not to be forborne. This also may be more necessary to observe at one time and in one Church than at another, because consequences such as schism, faction, division, and the like may sometimes follow upon the smallest errors. And seeing these are always enemies to edification, even when they arise from the smallest grounds, they are never absolutely to be forborne. For one to say, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” or for one to think one man a better preacher than another, may seem in itself to be no great matter; yet when it begins to rend them and create factions in Corinth, it is not to be forborne, but reproved. And in the former difference concerning meats, the Apostle always condemns the offense and schism which followed from it, although he does not peremptorily determine men’s practice in every case, nor censure them merely for the opinion itself. Thus one might think that the first day of the week is not jure divino, and this might possibly be forborne; but if he were pressing the changing of it, refusing to observe it, or venting his opinion so as to offend others, that would be intolerable. Thus also the differences and errors concerning Church-government by bishops, and in the Congregational way, may, we conceive, be forborne in persons where they are not spread so as to shake and draw away others. But if they are pressed in practice to the rending of a Church, and preferred or made equal to the true government established by the Word, in that case they are not to be forborne, because then truth must be vindicated and obstructions to edification, in the rending or distracting of a Church, must be removed. This may be required at one time more than at another, according as such an offense awakens schism and disturbs order and union in one Church or at one time more than another. Hence we see in Acts 15 that some things are put into that decree in reference to that time, simply for preventing schism and scandal, while the doctrine concerning the abolition of the ceremonial law was not yet so clear. And some things were forborne among the Gentiles which for a time were not so among the Jews, such as circumcision and all the ceremonies of the law, which the Jews nevertheless continued to observe for a season. Experience and reason make the matter clear, according to Paul’s words, “To the Jews I became as a Jew,” and “I became all things to all men,” etc. This does not show counterfeiting, or any trifling with necessary truths, but rather the ordering of his practice in lawful things according to the different cases of those with whom he had to deal. This principle applies both to persons and Churches.

We should distinguish also between things and persons. Sometimes it will be proper to censure a fault or error in persons, as Paul does in the Corinthians and Galatians, while it is not yet proper to censure the persons themselves. He does indeed threaten them, but forbears for a time, lest thereby he should hurt more by a subsequent division than he would cure by his stroke. Persons also are to be distinguished: some only err themselves, while others teach others to do so; and in that respect they become heretics and schismatics, which, had the opinion remained only their own private judgment, could not have been imputed to them in the same way. These latter cannot plead for the same forbearance which ought to be shown toward the former.

A distinction is also to be made in the manner of forbearance. It is one thing simply and altogether to forbear a person who is infected with error and spreads it; it is another thing to forbear him only in some respect, such as in respect of censure alone, or perhaps only in respect of the degree of censure. Something may be more gently censured and yet not altogether forborne. One may also ministerially reprove a fault and person by the key of doctrine in applying the Word, while nevertheless for a time forbearing the exercise of discipline and censure. Thus, in the place formerly cited, Paul reproves the false teachers in Corinth while for a time sparing the rod; and likewise he wishes that some in Galatia were cut off, while not immediately doing it. This does not arise so much from respect to the persons of those teachers as from respect to the Church and to the multitude of their followers, whom hasty censures might rather have stumbled than edified. Edification is the great end of discipline, as of all other ordinances. Therefore Paul seeks first to recover the people, and then to bring them again to acknowledge his authority, and thereafter to exercise the weapons which he had in readiness for avenging all disobedience, when their obedience should be made manifest, 2 Corinthians 10:6. He would not do this before that time, lest they, being attached to those teachers, should have sided with them against his authority, and so the result should have proved both more hurtful to them and to the Church than edifying. By this end of edification alone he is governed.

These and similar considerations being kept in view, ministers by Christian prudence are to gather when to be silent and when to speak, when to censure and when to forbear. But by all means they are always to be watchful lest the grounds which sometimes plead for forbearance for the Church’s edification on the one hand be stretched so broadly as to foster our lukewarm temper, coldness, and faint-hearted cowardice in the things of God. There is much need to try from what such moderation flows, and whether even then the heart is hot with holy indignation against such errors. On the other side, true zeal must be guided toward the end of edification, lest that duty of exercising discipline which is acceptable to God and useful to the Church should be rejected by Him because it proceeds from our own spirits, and should prove more hurtful than edifying in its effects. A few instances of this have given occasion to some to speak evil of this ordinance of Jesus Christ, who at all times lie in wait to seize upon anything that may be twisted to its reproach. But, to conclude this without insisting upon particulars, there must be a sincere, impartial, and prudent walking, so as to attain edification and enable men to answer to Jesus Christ for their trust, having an eye especially to those things which most contribute to edification.

But, 1. If what is spread is blasphemous and destroys the foundations of the faith, that does not come within this debate, as is clear from Paul’s dealing with Hymenaeus and Alexander in 1 Timothy 1:20. For zeal for the Majesty of God and love to the salvation of souls, which contain the substance of the two great commandments of the Law, will admit of no forbearing in such a case. 2. If it corrupts or defaces the Church and makes her a reproach to the profane, it is not to be forborne. 3. If the things are unbecoming to the ordinances of Christ, but reflect dishonor upon them, and consequently upon Him whose ordinances they are, they are not to be connived at. 4. If such things endanger the public beauty, order, and government of the Church, without which the visible face of a Church cannot be maintained, they are not to be overlooked. 5. If they impair the union and love which ought to exist in the Church, which are to be preserved and everything which may destroy them removed, they ought not to be tolerated. 6. If they become offensive and scandalous, either by causing the ways of the Lord to be evil spoken of, 2 Peter 2:2, by grieving the godly, or by infecting others, they are not the proper objects of forbearance, unless some circumstance concurs, as has formerly been said, in which case it cannot properly be called forbearance. By these and similar considerations it may be tried when an error is to be forborne and when not. In this judgment consideration must be given both to the nature of the error and to the person who holds it, as also to the condition of the Church and people, who may be either edified or harmed by the forbearing or censuring of such a person.

What is necessary, but not sufficient, will appear when we come to consider what is positively called for; for whatever falls short of what is required must necessarily be defective and insufficient. Thus it is necessary that men not only keep themselves free from error, but also that by admonition and exhortation means be used to reclaim those who have fallen. Yet these are not sufficient if there is no public means employed. Indeed, even though there were public authoritative preaching and the exercise of the key of doctrine, that is not sufficient if there is not also censuring by discipline and an exercise of the key of jurisdiction. And in some cases every lesser censure will not be sufficient unless it is extended to the utmost; for Christ has not given that key to His Church in vain in reference to all her scandals, nor are men discharged of their duty until they reach to the utmost extent required within their own stations. But this will appear more fully afterward.