Again,our Saviour Christ's commission to his Apostles and Disciples was to proclaim his kingdom,not present,but to come;and to teach all nations,and to baptize them that should believe;and to enter into the houses of them that should receive them;and where they were not received,to shake off the dust of their feet against them;but not to call for fire from heaven to destroy them,nor to compel them to obedience by the sword.In all which there is nothing of power,but of persuasion.He sent them out as sheep unto wolves,not as kings to their subjects.They had not in commission to make laws;but to obey and teach obedience to laws made;and consequently they could not make their writings obligatory canons,without the help of the sovereign civil power.And therefore the Scripture of the New Testament is there only law where the lawful civil power hath made it so.And there also the king,or sovereign,maketh it a law to himself;by which he subjecteth himself,not to the doctor or Apostle that converted him,but to God Himself,and His Son Jesus Christ,as immediately as did the Apostles themselves.
That which may seem to give the New Testament,in respect of those that have embraced Christian doctrine,the force of laws,in the times and places of persecution,is the decrees they made amongst themselves in their synods.For we read the style of the council of the Apostles,the elders,and the whole Church,in this manner,"It seemed good to the Holy Ghost,and to us,to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things,"etc.,which is a style that signifieth a power to lay a burden on them that had received their doctrine.Now "to lay a burden on another"seemeth the same as to oblige,and therefore the acts of that council were laws to the then Christians.
Nevertheless,they were no more laws than are these other precepts,"Repent";"Be baptized";"Keep the Commandments";"Believe the Gospel";"Come unto me";"Sell all that thou hast";"Give it to the poor";and "Follow me";which are not commands,but invitations and callings of men to Christianity,like that of Isaiah,"Ho,every man that thirsteth,come ye to the waters,come,and buy wine and milk without money."For first,the Apostles'power was no other than that of our Saviour,to invite men to embrace the kingdom of God;which they themselves acknowledged for a kingdom,not present,but to come;and they that have no kingdom can make no laws.And secondly,if their acts of council were laws,they could not without sin be disobeyed.But we read not anywhere that they who received not the doctrine of Christ did therein sin,but that they died in their sins;that is,that their sins against the laws to which they owed obedience were not pardoned.And those laws were the laws of nature,and the civil laws of the state,whereto every Christian man had by pact submitted himself.And therefore by the burden which the Apostles might lay on such as they had converted are not to be understood laws,but conditions,proposed to those that sought salvation;which they might accept or refuse at their own peril,without a new sin,though not without the hazard of being condemned and excluded out of the kingdom of God for their sins past.And therefore of infidels,St.
John saith not,the wrath of God shall come upon them,but the wrath of God remaineth upon them;and not that they shall he condemned,but that they are condemned already.Nor can it be conceived that the benefit of faith is remission of sins,unless we conceive withal that the damage of infidelity is the retention of the same sins.
But to what end is it,may some man ask,that the Apostles and other pastors of the Church,after their time,should meet together to agree upon what doctrine should be taught,both for faith and manners,if no man were obliged to observe their decrees?To this may be answered that the Apostles and elders of that council were obliged,even by their entrance into it,to teach the doctrine therein concluded,and decreed to be taught,so far forth as no precedent law,to which they were obliged to yield obedience,was to the contrary;but not that all other Christians should be obliged to observe what they taught.For though they might deliberate what each of them should teach,yet they could not deliberate what others should do,unless their assembly had had a legislative power,which none could have but civil sovereigns.For though God be the sovereign of all the world,we are not bound to take for His law whatsoever is propounded by every man in His name;nor anything contrary to the civil law,which God hath expressly commanded us to obey.
Seeing then the acts of council of the Apostles were then no laws,but counsels;much less are laws the acts of any other doctors or councils since,if assembled without the authority of the civil sovereign.And consequently,the books of the New Testament,though most perfect rules of Christian doctrine,could not be made laws by any other authority than that of kings or sovereign assemblies.
The first council that made the Scriptures we now have canon is not extant:for that collection of the canons of the Apostles,attributed to Clemens,the first bishop of Rome after St.Peter,is subject to question:for though the canonical books be there reckoned up;yet these words,Sint vobis omnibus Clericis &Laicis Libri venerandi,etc.,contain a distinction of clergy and laity that was not in use so near St.Peter's time.The first council for settling the canonical Scripture that is extant is that of Laodicea,Can.59,which forbids the reading of other books than those in the churches;which is a mandate that is not addressed to every Christian,but to those only that had authority to read anything publicly in the Church;that is,to ecclesiastics only.
