properly because there is ceremoniall doctrine as vvell as morall or substantiall 4 To vvhich of these points vvill the Def referre the Hierarchie of Bishops or are they no points of Religion For the negatiue part of this answer that ceremoniall points of Religion are not revealed in the Scripture but left to the libertie of the Church it is too too nakedly set down for to beare any colour of truth vvith it For 1 vvas this true before the comming of Christ then all the ceremoniall law is Apocriphall 2 is this true universally as it is heere set down in the new Testament then vvater in baptisme and bread and wine in the Lords Supper are no ceremoniall points of Religion 3 the caution that is given Deut. 4. 2 and such like did they not conteyne in them ceremoniall points of Religion then it vvas lawfull for the Iewes to adde detract and alter the ceremonies according to their pleasure and doth not that law binde us as vvell as the Iewes then vve doe the Papists wrong in putting them to so much trouble as vve doe in finding out shifts to avoide the dint vvhich such places giue them But to leaue this mishapen distinction An answer is given at length to the place alledged out of Heb. 3. 2 concerning the comparison betwixt Christ and Moses sect 4 5. SECT IIII. IN this Section comparison is made betwixt Christ and Moses in reall faithfulnes as he calleth it But this sufficeth not to loose the knot For Moses vvas faithfull in all the house of God and Christ vvas not inferiour but in all parts of his office Propheticall concerning all points of Religion vvas no doubt as faithfull as Moses SECT V. HEre the Defendant can find nothing to bring out of Scripure for Christs faithfulnesse in rituall ordinances but as Moses appointed ceremonies so Christ removed them Is not this a proper explication of Scripture to interpret a similitude by a dissimilitude The Scripture maketh Christ like unto Moses this Defendant expoundeth the likenesse to be in this that Christ pulled down that which Moses had set up Out of M. Calvin Instit. lib. 4. c. 10. S. 30. he taketh upon him to decide this question But he should haue dealt more plainly and according to the scope of his author if he had cited Bellarmine de pont l. 4. c. 17. where the same words are according to his meaning For in that place of Calvin there is nothing at all which vvithout grosse aequivocation will serve the Defendants purpose For Calvins meaning was nothing lesse then to teach that Christ had given libertie unto men for to prescribe at their discretion mysticall signes in the Church but onely to dispose of such circumstances as in their kind are necessarie but in particular determination doe varie He instanceth in the next section in the circumstance of time vvhat houre the congregation should meet in the place how large or in what fashion the Church should bee built in meere order what Psalmes should be sung at one time and what another time These and such like circumstances of order and comelinesse equally necessary in civill and religious actions are understood by Calvin not significant ceremonies proper unto religious worship such as ours are now in controversie This allegation therefore borroweth all the shew it hath from the ambiguous meaning of the word ceremonies The same deceit is in the known case which the Defendant adjoyneth to Calvins words For if by Rites he meaneth such circumstances of order and decencie as were before mentioned then I grant all he saith but if by Rites he meaneth ceremonies properly of religious nature use and signification such as the crosse in baptisme and surplice are knowne to be then there is no reason in his speech For 1. there is no necessitie that in any nation the Churches should haue any religious ceremonie of spirituall signification beside those which Christ hath appointed to all and if the Defendant can shew any such necessitie then I would desire him also to shew by what rules and for vvhat cause these religious ceremonies imposed upon us in England are fitter for us or tend more to our edification then other ceremonies would or then they would in any other nation under heaven Except both these positions be proved the words of this section are all but wind and proved I am sure they never were nor will be SECT VI. VII THe second place of Scripture handled by the defendant is 2. Sam. 7. 7. Where I cannot but marvell why so resolute a disputer would passe by in silence Deu. 4. 2. 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. Lev. 10. 12. all which places are alledged by the Lincolnshire ministers against whom he professeth principally to write choose this place which they bring in after the former Was there not a cause But to take him as we finde him he professeth plainly that it vvas lawfull for David vvithout speciall vvarrant to build a house unto God and in this he is so peremptory that he condemneth the contrary opinion of notable precipitancie and presumeth to make this example a ground of confutation against his adversaries disputing as he pedantically speaketh first by extortion and then by retortion out of this place But if his extortion bee meere torting and torturing of the text we need not feare his retortion Now that the purpose of David vvas partly condemned appeareth plainly 1. because it vvas prohibited as here the Defendant in his answer expressely granteth 2. Because as honorable M. Calviâ— well observeth on Act. 7. 46. It was not lawfull for man to choose a place for Gods Name Ark but it was to be placed in that place which God himselfe should shew as Moses doth often admonish Neither durst David himselfe bring the Ark into the threshing floore of Arauna vntill the Lord by an Angel from heaven had witnessed unto him that that was the place chosen by himselfe 2. Sam. 24. 11. 3. Because it cannot bee absolutely excused from some mixture of rashnesse vvith zeal that he should resolue absolutely to build an house unto God before he knew either vvhat manner of house God vvould haue built or when or by whom seeing vvithout the especiall direction and assistance of Gods spirit nothing of this kind could bee well done How could David haue built a house except the Lord had filled vvith the spirit of vvisedome Bezaliel and Aboliab or some such The Arguments brought by the Defendant for the contrary opinion are nothing worth 1. Nathan sayth he had allowed the purpose of David v. 3. But iudicious Iunius answereth in his notes upon that place that so Samuel out of humane infirmitie said that Eliab vvas the man vvhom God vvould haue king 1. Sam. 16. 7. 2. God calleth Daâ—id his servant which hee never doth in reproofe Which is not true though the reproofe be for a thing simply evill as is plainly to be seen Isa. 1. 3 â—er 2. 13. and in many such places vvhere
A REPLY TO D R. MORTONS GENERALL DEFENCE OF THREE NOCENT CEREMONIES viz. The Surplice Crosse in Baptisme and kneeling at the receiving of the sacramentall elements of Bread and Wine Printed in yeare 1622. THE PREFACE SIR HOwsoever ther be many vnknown motiues which lead men in these dayes unto conformitie yet those which are openly professed may be referred either vnto M. Sprints way who confesseth the ceremonies to be imposed contrary unto the rules of Gods word and yet contendeth that they are to be used in case of deprivation Or else to D. Mortons way who avoucheth the sayd cerâ—monies to be agreeable unto the rules of Gods word and therfore sâ—ch as ought to be observed simply Now he that considereth wel of the maâ—ter shall find that there is no ground for the conscience to rest on in either of these wayes As for M. Sprint to speak nothing of his mis-alledging very many authors he hath but three main arguments and to all three he hath given sufficient answer himselfe His first argument is taken from the doctrine and practise of the Apostles about the Iewish ceremonies Now all the force of this reason doth depend upon that paritie or equalitie which is supposed to be betwixt our ceremonies and the Iewish our ministers warrant and the Apostles so that if this paritie faileth the whole argument falleth Yet M. Sprint himselfe confesseth pag. 250. 256. that those Iewish ceremonies were not every way so evill as ours are neither doth or dare he say that ministers now haue such particular warrant for conformitie as the Apostles had for applying themselves a little while unto some of the Iewish ceremonies His second reason is that a lesser dutie must yeeld unto a greater Now this case by his own coÌ„fession p. 30. doth not hold so as that a man should doe a thing formally simply and in nature evill for any good Now he knoweth as appeareth p. 45. that the ceremonies in controversie are esteemed such by most of these that now oppose them So that this reason can be of no force with them His third reason is because refusall of conformitie in case of deprivation tendeth to condemne in a manner all true Churches which haue taught and practised otherwise Hee meaneth by condemning accusing of error Now M. Sprint himselfe doth thus condemne all or the most of the Churches which he alledgeth to haue practised such ceremonies For in confessing our ceremonies to be inconvenient scandalous evill such as the urging of them cannot be justified and yet affirming that almost all Churches haue appointed and used such even out of the case of deprivation or such like necessitie doth he not plainly accuse all those Churches of error These things considered I thought is needless to spend much time in examining M. Sprints booke any further But according to your desire I will shew you mine opinion in briefe concerning the chiefe passages which are in Thomas Chesters or as he was wont to be called Doctor Mortons Defence of three ceremonies commonly used in our Churches which I doe the more willingly vndertake because divers things are therin handled of singular vse in divinitie whereof I profess my selfe a Student though in the ministerie I cannot find a setled station But before I come to the Defence it selfe first I would faine vnderstand the reason why three Ceremonies are onely defended seeing there be many threes of those things which stay many godly men from subscription and conformitie as is to be seen even in that abridgement which this Defender doth chiefly oppose Is it because our best Prelats haue onely a care to perswade if it may be those that are in the ministery to that conformity which is most of all noted not regarding in the meane time what becommeth of so many godly learned yong men who not onely for these but for divers other corruptions also are forced to turne away from the ministerie whereunto their education gifts and hearts did carry them while many lewd fellowes the chiefe spots and blots of our congregations doe possess their places I would know also what the reason should be that the innocencie onely of these ceremonies is defended Is this all that is required in ceremonies forcibly obtruded upon ministers and people even to the silencing excommunicating and uttter undoing of many hundreds Is this all I say that is required that such ceremonies be in some sence innocent or not hurtfull surely not scripture onely and sound reason but common sense will looke for some good necessarie use in such ceremonies and not innocencie alone And then what is the sence trow you in which these ceremonies may be called Innocent when Calvin whom the Defender calleth an honorable witnes would devise a charitable title for them he stiles them tolerabiles incptiae viz. tolerable fooleries or fopperies Epist. 200. 206. When he speaketh more out of iudgement hee not onely calleth them frivoulous and unprofitable but saith plainlie that their proper name is hurtfull noxious or nocent cleane contrarie to this Defendants language Surely one of these writers not differing onely but flatly opposing and contradicting the other must needs be farre wide Innocent indeed these ceremonies may be called in regard of their materials and the fashions also which they haue in their naturall being for the cloth of a Surpless and the fashion of it is innocent and so are all the idols of Papists and Heathens verie innocent so that this is no praise But if we look at the use whereunto they haue been applyed and wherein they haue beene a long time employed I may truely say by the devill not onely among the Papists but even in our Churches to the breeding of dissention and distraction among brethron to quenching of many and many a burning shining light to the grieving and unsetling of so many good soules and to the advancing of the Kingdome of darkeness If these things I say be considered then it is more then manifest that this licking them over with a fair word will make them no more innocent indeed then Pilats hands were when they were washed The fashion of a Surplice naturall or artificiall in another use as if a Porter or Baker weare such a garment is indifferent If it shall be said that notwithstanding these accidentall abuses yet the ceremonies are innocent in their own nature and use I answer first they having no necessary use otherwaies and these being the ordinary effects which haue followed on them there is no rule of Logick much less of zeale that will allow the Defendant simply to call them innocent 2 It is a shame for our Prelates to talk of the ceremonies innocencie when they cannot defend their own innocencie in obtruding and urging of them They are wont to say the practise and manner of urging we will not defend but the lawfulness or innocencie of the things themselues Indeed for a private man to stand upon such termes is tolerable but for the Prelates whose
must needs bee of other permission then the Defendant can chalenge to our ceremonies though he begg the question otherwise there should be no sence in his words 2. he sayth Wee may blush to speak of Tertullian in this case because hee professeth traditions in the same booke To which I answer that then all our writers may blush vvho alledge many things out of the fathers which they in other places gainesay 2. Wee blush not to make vse of truth where we finde it though error follow it at the heeles rather let our Idolizers of the Fathers blush vvhen they see their shame Yet of this answer wee shall haue occasion to make use hereafter SECT XV. IN this Section answer is made to some allegations brought out of Protestant Writers not unto all vvhich the Abridgement citeth for the perfection of the Scriptures where 1. the Defendant answereth for himselfe that his meaning was not of matters meerly ceremoniall And so say I the meaning of our argument vvas not of such meere ceremonies as the Defendant here describeth in the end of this Section if he meane by meere ceremonies mere order and decencie but our ceremonies are of another nature because they haue doctrine or teaching in them and therefore are doctrinall as he pleaseth to speak or mixt 2. confessing that in one place he speaketh of ceremonies he limiteth his speech to such ceremonies as are made essentiall parts of a sacrament as Milke in stead of Wine sopping in of bread into the cup and wringing in of the grape these ceremonies hee accounteth doctrinall But here I vvould faine heare a good reason vvhy sopping of the bread into the cup is more doctrinall or more against the vvord then the crosse in baptisme Bread and Wine were ordained by Christ to a holy use in the Church so is not the crosse sopping hath some agreement vvith reason crossing hath none sopping was vsed by Christ himselfe the same night and at the same table vvhere the sacrament was appointed crossing vvas never used by Christ or his Apostles In sopping there is no new materiall signe appointed but a new fashion onely of vsing the old in crossing a new signe is obtruded So that sopping seemeth to bee better then crossing If opinion of necessary use doth put a difference our men can easily conclude in the Convocation house that it is not the opinion of the Church of England and then all will be well If sopping seeme to bee a part of the sacrament crossing when it is done in the very act of sprinkling as many times it is maketh as much shew of bearing a part in baptisme But what if out of the Lords Supper a little before or a little after vvhile the prayers are making vvhich belong to the Supper there should be appointed such a sopping to bee used of all that communicate for mysticall signification I vvould know of the Defendant whether this were allowable or no by his doctrinall distinction If not vvhy should he shew more favour to the crosse In excusing of B. Iewel and D. Whitakers nothing is sayd by the Defendant which hath not formerly been confuted Now it might bee here expected that the Defendant should haue sayd something concerning those generall rules which God hath set downe in his vvord for the direction of the Church in rites and orders Ecclesiasticall mentioned by the Lincolne-shire Ministers in this argument p. 44. But neither here nor in any other place of this booke doth the Defendant so much as indevour to shew that our ceremonies are needfull and profitable for the edification of the people by the more comely and orderly performance of that service which hee hath expresly prescribed in his word This is a main matter vrged in the Abridgement vvithout which the ceremonies cannot be innocent in their vse and all that the Defendant hath hitherto endevoured to answer is in the Abridgement brought in to other end then to proue that no ceremonies are to be brought into the Church vvithout those conditions and yet for all this our ceremonies in this chiefe poynt are left destitute of all defence If therefore all were granted which the Defendants argumonts or answers in this booke maintaine yet the ceremonies wil be found nocent and to be rejected if it be but for their unprofitablenesse according to that of Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 SECT XVI THE Defendant here undertaketh to proue that God in the scriptures hath granted a generall licence or authoritie to all Churches to ordaine any ceremonies that may be fit for the better serving of God But what if this were granted what is it to the purpose what maketh it for our ceremonies in controversie except he can shew that they are fit for the better serving of God Now this he no where undertaketh to prove nor dare I thinke professe so much in writing without many vnwarrantable limitations The onely scripture he bringeth is 1. Cor. 14. 26. 40. concerning order and decencie a place much profaned by the patrons of our ceremonies as shall be shewed This place is vsed sayth he by Fathers and all Divines for one and the same conclusion It is much used I grant and as much abused But 1. it is not used by all Divines to proue the institution of such ceremonies as ours lawfull For they are much mistaken vvhich think our ceremonies to be mere matters of order and as for decencie they haue been often proved to be farre from it which of it selfe to every indifferent eye is more then apparant 2. it is not used to this purpose by any that haue authoritie sufficient to perswade us that it will beare such a conclusion except they will shew us by what Logick they form their consequence which the Defendant is not able to doe for them 3. This scripture being rightly understood doth not onely not justifie such ceremonies as ours but plainly condemneth them For the manifesting of which assertion because it may seem strange to those eares that are accustomed to other sounds I will here distinctly set down an argument drawn out of these words against such ceremonies as ours are All that is left vnto the Churches liberty in things pertaining unto Gods worship is to order them in comely maner This is manifestly collected out of the place in question so the Defendant seemeth to grant so P. Martyr vnderstandeth it as is to be seen in his commentarie upon 1 Sam. 14. which judgement of his is cited and approved by D. Whitaker de Pont p. 841. 844. confirmed also by Iunius against Bell. cont 3. l. 4. c. 16. n. 86. 87. c. 17. n. 9. 10. 12. 13. where he sheweth that Christ is the onely law-giver that appointeth things in his Church and that he hath appointed all that are requisite and that the Church maketh no lawes properly so called to appoint any new things to be used but onely canons orders directions ordering in seemly maner those things which Christ hath
appointed and that if she addeth any thing of her own she doth decline The reason is because unto her is commited no authoritie of appointing new things but a ministerie to observe and doe such things which Christ hath appointed vide etiam Iun. de transl imper l. 1. c. 2. n. 26. 27. 31. This is also confirmed by sound reason both in respect of the wisdome required in all law-makers perfectly found in Christ and also in regard of the nature of such institutions For the former reason teacheth as Aristotle sheweth Rhet. 1. 3. that all which possibly may should be appointed in the law by the giuer of it and nothing left unto the ministerial iudges but that which must needs be left as matters of fact c. Now in the worship of God all but particular circumstances of order may easily bee appointed as in very deed they were by our law-giver Christ. As for the nature of such institutions that doth also require so much for whatsoever is aboue civilitie therein if it bee not a circumstance of order it is worship and therfore invented by man unlawfull will-worship For vvhatsoever is used or acted by him that worshippeth God in that act it must needs be either grounded on civill humane considerations and therefore civilitie or an act and means of worship and therfore worship or the ordering and manner of disposing those acts meanes and therefore lawfull if lawfully and fitly applyed or else at the least idle and vaine and therefore to be avoided according to that of Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A fift cannot be given By all this it may appeare that the authority of the Church is not to appoint what she will no not of things in their own nature indifferent and say they be in order or for order but onely to order those things vvhich God hath appointed Thus farre the proposition or first part of my syllogisme the assumption followeth But to appoint use the ceremonies as we doe is not to order in comely manner any thing pertaining to Gods worship The reason is because order requireth not the institution or usage of any new thing but onely the right placing and disposing of things which are formerly instituted This appeareth 1. by the notation which is given of the word it selfe which both in greek latine is taken from the ranking of soldiers in certain bounds limits of time place Dicebāt enim militibus tribuni hactenus tibi licet hic consistes eô progrediere huc revertere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inde ordo Scalig. and 2 by the definitions which are given therof by Philosophers and Divines Tull. off lib. 1 eadem vis videtur ordinis collocationis Ordinem definiunt compositionem rerum aptis accommodatis locis Locum autem actionis opportunitatem dicunt esse temporis Aug. de civit lib. 15 cap. 13 order is the disposition which fit places to things equall and unequall id est when things are handsomely ranked some to goe before and some to follow as P. Martyr expoundeth it loc com cl 4 c. 5. 3 The same also is confirmed by our Divines vvho usually giving instances of order doe infist in time place and such like circumstances making a difference betwixt mysticall ceremonies and order many times condemning the one and allowing the other as the divines of France and the low Countries in their observations on the Harmonie of Confessions Sect. 17 Beza Ep. 8. Iun. in Bell. append tract de cultu imaginum c. 7 n. 12 13 14. 4 By the context of the Chapter viz. 1 Cor. 14. it plainly appeareth that order is opposed to that confusion spoken of v. 33 and therfore importeth nothing but that peaceable proceeding vvhereby they that should speak speak one by one and the rest attend c. v. 30 31. So Basil expoundeth it shewing order to consist in sorting of persons some to this and some to that according to their office and in determining of time and place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 459. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and p. 530. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lastly neither Luk. 1 8 neither in any place of Scripture doth the word order import any more then hath been said As for comelinesse that is nothing but the seemlinesse of order For as P. Martyr saith in 1 Cor. 11 it is such a tempering of actions as vvherby they may more fitly atteine their end Otherwhere it may conteine that natural or civill handsomenesse which is spoken of ch 11 13 as it doth ch 12 23 and so includeth all that which is grounded on civility as a faire cloth and cup for the communion a faire and firme vessell for baptisme but not the appointing of new mysticall ceremonies for then such ceremonies were here commanded to all Churches vvhich the Def. I think vvill not say and then the Apostolick Assemblies should haue worshipped God uncomelily Thus we haue both proposition and assumption of our Argument against the ceremonies confirmed out of this place which the Defendant choose as the onely place that could be brought for them Now I hope vve may adde the Conclusion Therefore to appoint and use the ceremonies as we doe is not left to the liberty of the Church i. e. it is unlawfull SECT XVII COncerning the Fathers vve are told out of Zanchius that they had alwaies some universall ceremonies as certaine feast daies not appointed by God To this vve answer 1 If this alwaies bee taken in the largest extent to signifie from the beginning wee cannot beleeue the truth of this Assertion neither can the Defend proue it Who can think that presently upon the Apostles departure their disciples should presume to be vviser then their Masters 2 the first beginning of these feasts vvas not by canonicall imposition to binde men unto new ceremonies but a voluntarie accommodation in respect of the infirmity of some in the Church or comming towards it This appeareth by the variety vvhich was betwixt one Church and another in observing of them and by the testimonie of Socrates alledged and allowed by this Defend himselfe Apol. p. 2 lib. 2 c. 9. 3 The mischiefe that came in by these observations in that they so soone overshadowed obscured and justled out of dores the simplicitie of the Gospell and many ordinances of Christ do sufficiently shew that the fathers in these things had neither direction nor blessing from God But that which the ancient Churches of Christ did alwaies maintaine may not be deemed to derogate from the authority of holy Writ If alwayes include the Apostolicall times I grant If otherwise then let the Def. take to himselfe that vvhich he unreasonably cast upon us before of symbolizing with Bellarmine con l 4. c. 9. The same answer which our Divines giue there will serue here Wherunto may be added that vvhich M. Parker hath in his book of the Crosse p. 2 ch 9 s. 6 and de Polit. Eccles. l. 2. SECT XVIII FOr Protestant
Divines Bellarmines confession is alledged who saith That Protestants grant that the Apostles did ordaine certaine Rites and Orders belonging to the Church which are not set down in Scripture cont 1. lib. 4. cap. 3. To vvhich I answer 1 Rites and Orders may be ordained though such ceremonies as ours be unlawfull And Bellarmines meaning could not be of such Rites as our Ceremonies are except he spake against his conscience for he confesseth de cult sanct l. 3 cap. 7 that some of our Divines as Brentius by name condemne such as unlawfull 2 Bellarmine craftily bringeth in this confession of our diviues that he may make them contradict themselues as appeareth in the same place His Confession therefore in this place is not so indifferent as the Def. would haue it 3 our Argument is not from the Scriptures negatiuely against the authority of the Apostles which vvas all one with that of the Scriptures and therefore understood in our Proposition but against the ordinarie authority of the Church Except therfore the Def. can proue either that our ceremonies vvere the rites brought in by the Apostles or that our Convocation house hath the same authority vvhich the Apostles had this confession of Bellarmine is nothing to the purpose SECT XIX HEre the Protestants themselues are brought in confessing as much as Bellarmine said of them But the first witnesse Chemnitius saith nothing but that some Ecclesiasticall rites though they haue no commandement or testimonie in Scripture are not to be rejected vvhich in the sense now often expounded I willingly grant Yet the Def. should not in stead of Testimonie of Scripture haue put warrant of Scripture For testimonie neither in usuall acception nor yet in Chemnitius his own meaning is so large as warrant The place of Calvin hath been answered before Iunius is plainly of the same minde and so to be interpreted so also Zanchius Daneus and Whitaker But because Iunius is stiled here by the Def. vvith his deserved title of Iudicious it will not be amisse to shew his judgement fully about such additions as our ceremonies are To name therefore one place for all at this time because there he speaketh professedly his judgement and bindeth it with a solemn oath for the sincerity and impartialnesse of his conscience in that behalfe The place I meane is in his Ecclestasticus lib. 3 cap. 5. towards the end Where first he distinguisheth betwixt things necessarie and others not necessarie in the administration of the Church and concerning even the latter sort he modestly but throughly sheweth how little libertie is left unto men If any man saith he either by Civill or Ecclesiasticall authority will adde things not necessarie nor agreable to order wee would not pertinaciously contend with him but desire onely that he would seriously consider of three things 1 By what authority or example he is led to thinke that the holy Church of God and the simplicity of the mysteries of Christ whose voyce onely is heard by his sheep according to the commandement of the Father Ioh. 10 27 must be clad with humane traditions which Christ doth reject ◠2 To what end he judgeth that his things should be added unto those that are divine For if the end be conformitie with others it were more equitie that other Churches should conforme to those which come neerest to the word of God as Cyprians counsell is then that these should conforme to the other If the end be comelinesse what is more comely then the simplicity of Christ what is more simple then that comelinesse If there be no other reason beside will then that of Tertullian is to be thought of the will of God is the chiefe necessitie and that the Church of God is not tyed unto mans wills in things divine The 3 thing to be thought on it what event alwaies hath followed upon humane Traditions as daily experience doth shew This vvas the judgement of Iudicious Iunius vvherby it is manifest that he favoured not our ceremonies nor would haue pleaded for them as the Def. under colour of his name Because Zanchius also is brought in with his deserved Title of a profound Divine speaking nothing to the purpose in hand I will set down his judgement concerning this point out of that Epistle to famous Qu. Elizabeth vvhere he treateth expresly of ceremonies and of our ceremonies Est autem Ecclesia sicut in doctrina sic etiam in ceremoniis ad Ecclesiae Apostlicae regulam informanda The Church must be ordered by the rule of the Apostolicall Church as vvell in ceremonies as in doctrine What can be said more contrarie to the Def. his distinction SECT XX. AT length vve are come to Reason But if this reason were sound and certaine I see no cause vvhy it should not haue had the upper hand of humane testimonies 1 The first reason is grounded on the Defendants phantasie meerly For it supposeth that vve hold some points of Religion to be onely besides the Word and no vvay against it vvhich not onely I haue confuted before as a cavill but M. Cartwright long since in his Reply p. 56 the very vvords also of this argument which the Def. here opposeth doe shew that vvee hold such things condemned by the Scriptures and therefore against the generall rule of them though onely beside their particular prescription 2 The second reason concludeth nothing vvhich we will not grant in the sense formerly expressed viz. that by those some ceremonies be meant circumstances of meere order and by man◠invention be understood mans particular determination Otherwise the assumption is palpably false Beside the proposition also is untrue if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a thing indifferent be taken in such a generall sense as some time it is found used in by Divines Vide Sopingii Apologet. respons ad lib. anonym p. 166. 3 The third and last reason is taken from the difference of ceremonies vvhich may and must be in the Churches of Christ. The answer is that this difference ought to bee onely in determination of particular circumstances of order for time place c. SECT XXI THis sect is of al other most ridiculous For first it supposeth every circūstance to be of the like nature with the ceremonies in controversie Secondly it supposeth all circumstances to be of institution Thirdly it supposeth contrary circumstances ceremoniously to be practised by the same men as of institution for otherwise the cavillation hath no shew Now all these are conceited dreames But vvhat if vve should argue thus You say these ceremonies are divine and yet dare not deny but the rejecting of them in other Churches is divine You retaine these ceremonies as divine and yet haue rejected other ceremonies of like nature as divine as these What divinitie is in such courses SECT XXII AFter al this adoe about the proposition of the first argument now vve are told of an assumption out of the Abridgment and M. Hy. viz. that these Ceremonies haue no
make humane significant ceremonies in Gods worship agree with Christian liberty As for superstition vvhich the Defendant doth now the second time most ridiculously object I haue answered in the beginning of this Confutation Now onely I note 1 how loosely he describeth that superstition vvhich he calleth affirmative as if no man could use any thing superstitiously except he did hold that without it the faith of Christianity or the true worship of God could not possible consist Never was there such a description given by any man that considered what he said 2 Hovv manfully he concludeth our negatiue superstition upon this ground that Christ hath left these ceremonies free which is the maine question betwixt him and us 3 How he mis-reporteth our opinion in saving absolutely that weâ— hold a Surplice to haue unholinesse and pollution in it wheras we hold that it is onely made more unfit for Gods service then it was before through idolatrous abuse but yet unto other usâ—s it may be applyed 4 That in stead of Scripture he bringeth forth the universall practise of men in the Church vvhich yet hath been formerlyly also refuted 5 That he can finde no Divine that calleth opposing of ceremonies superstition but onely M. Calvin in one place speaking rhetorically as he useth to doe and not intending any definition or distribution of that vice 6 How he corrupteth P. Martyrs words to haue some colour for a new accusation P. Martyr taking there upon him the person of an adversarie unto Hoopers opinion with whom notwithstanding afterward he consented and recalled the counsell which then he gaue as appeareth p. 1125 saith that if we should refuse all things that the Papists used vve should bring the Church into servitude which assertion is most true because the Papists abused many necessarie things even Christs own Ordinances the observing of which is liberty Now the Def. would haue that precisely uâ—derstood and that in the rigour of every word concerning the Surplice I haue here subioyned apart an Epistle of Zanchius who otherwaies was somewhat favourable to Bishops wherein the Reader may see his iudgement concerning superstitious garments To the most renowmed Queene Elizabeth Defendresse of the Christian Religion and most mighty Queen of England France and Ireland H. Zanchius sendeth greeting MOST gracious and most Christian Queene we haue not without great griefe understood that the fire of contention about certaine garments which we thought had been quenched long agone is new againe to the incredible offence of the godly as it were raised from hell and kindled a fresh in your Majesties Kingdome and that the occasion of this fire is because your most gracious maiestie being perswaded by some otherwise great men and carried with a zeal but certainly not according to knowledge to retaine unitie in religion hath now more then ever before resolved and dâ—câ—eed yea doth will and command that all Bishops and Mâ—nisters of the Churches shal in divine service put on the white and linnen garments which the Popish Priests use now in Poperie yea that it is to be feared least this fire be so kindled and cast its flame so farre and wide that all the Churches of that most large and mightie kingdome to the perpetuall disgrace of your most renowned Maiestie be set on a flaming fire seeing the most part of the Bishops men greatly renowned for all kinde of learning and godlines had rather leaue their office and place in the Church then against their owne conscience admit of such garments or at the least signes of Idolaâ—rie and Popish superstititon and so defile themselues with them and giue of fence to the weak by their example Now what other thing will this be then by retaining of these garments to destroy the whole body of the Churchâ— For without doubt that is Satans intent by casting a seed of dissentions amongst the Bishops And that hee aimed at in the infancie of the Church by stirring vp discord between the East and West Churches about the Passover and other ceremonies of that kind Therfore Ireneus Bishop of Lions had just cause in his Epistle sent out of France to Rome sharply to reproue Victor the Pope of Rome because he out of a kind of zeale but not according to knowledge was minded to excommunicate all the churches of Asia because they celebrated not the Passover just at the same time as they at Rome did For this was nothing but by an unseasonable desire to retaine the same ceremonies in all churches to rent and teare a peeces the vnitie of the Churches I therefore so soone as I heard that so great a ruine hanged over the Church of Christ in that kingdome presently in respect of that dutie which I owe to the Church of Christ to your gracious Maiestie and to that whole kingdom intended to write thither and to try by my uttermost endevor whether so great a mischiefe might possibly be withstood some that fear Christ and wish wel to your Maiestie exhorting me to the performance of this dutie But when I had scarcely begun to think of this course behold our most illustrious Prince commanded 〈◊〉 to do it which command of his did not onely spurre me one who of mine owe accord was alreadie running but laid a necessitie of writing upon me Wherefore this my boldnesse will seeme the lesse strange unto your gracious Maiestie seeing my writing proceedeth not so much from mine owne will and counsell of friends as from the commandement of my most Noble Prince who is one of your gracious Maiesties speciall friends Now I thought I should doe a matter verie worth the paines taking if first I should humbly admonish your most famous Maiestie what your dutie is in this cause and secondlie if as your humble suppliant I should beseech you for our Lord Iesus Christs sake to performe the same I beseech your gracious Maiestie to take this my writing in good part for it proceedeth from a Christian loue toward the Church and from an especiall reverend respect that I beare to your most gracious Maiestie The Lord knoweth all things Now to the matter in hand Whereas the Apostle writing to Timothie commandeth that praiers be made for Kings and all other that be in authoritie and saith that the end wherefore they bee ordained is that wee may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all that is perfect godlinesse and honestie he teacheth plainlie enough what is the dutie of godlie Kings and Princes namelie that they take care and bring to passe that first and aboue all things true religion and the true worship of God where it is banished bee restored and being restored bee kept pure all things which smell of impietie being farre removed Secondlie that men may liue honestlie and holilie all kinds of vncleannesses beeing abandoned Lastlie that publicke peace and holie friendship bee maintained among the subiects all occasions of contentious being as much as possiblie may be taken out of the way As the
shewed namely that to end in a word we all denying vngodlines and worldly lusts may liue soberly justly and godlily in this present world For this is the true and fairest garment of all other For which everie man ought to take care to wit that having put off the old man with his workes we put on the new man that is our Lord Iesus Christ neither are there any other true ornaments which become Christian Bishops besides those which the Apostle hath laid downe in his writings to Tim. and Tit. A Bishop must bee unreproveable the husband of one vvife vvatching sober modest harborous apt to teach not given to vvine no stryker nor given to filthy luere but gentle no fighter not covetous one that can rule his house honestly having children under obedience in all honestie not forward not angrie righteous holy c. For garments and ornaments of Aarons high Priest were types of these true ornaments those were the shadowes these be the bodie Wherefore let those bee gone and let these abide still And then at length shall we haue the whole Church and so the Bishops rightlie and trulie apparrelled Once againe I humblie beseech your gracious Maiestie that thinking no more of those outward garments you will mind and consider how these true and spirituall ornaments may be retained put upon and kept in the Churches And as I said in the beginning that according to your gracious Maiesties clemencie you will be pleased to pardon my boldnes in writing Our Lord Iesus Christ long preserue your gracious Maiestie safe and sound to vs and to the whole Church From Heidelberg 10. Septemb. 1571. THus good sir you see how I haue endevoured to satisfie your desire concerning the general part of the Defence If this doe not fully content you I vvill if it please God add vvhat is vvanting another time For it is fit vve should helpe one another in private concerning these things lest the publick sway of formalitie should make us forget or forgoe that sinceritie vvhich those men of God taught us in whom vvhen we vvere yet children we saw the power of godlines that made us loue their footsteps Blessed is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments lest he walke naked and they see his shame Apoc. 16. 15. I haue added to the Authors Reply but without his knowledge the advertisement following to fill up this page which without some purpose had otherwise been left blank WHEN you finde good Reader any straggling testimonies of some few forraine Divines alledged by the formalists which seeme to savour of toleration consider first that some did write in the dawning of the day of reformation and therefore could not so soone see distinctly and clearly every corruption which was in the Church 2. That notvvithstanding of greater light shining in the Church after the rising of the Sun aboue our Horizon the Divines treating upon many poynts could not bee exact in everie one or intending principally to beat downe such corruptions as did most assault their owne Churches no vvonder that there fell from their pens some sentences not ripely digested concerning other poynts 3. That howbeit these had purposely set themselues to consider the controversies of our Churches yet not being throughly acquainted with the particular state of the same might giue their iudgment in the generall case but could not so vvell in the particular as many worthy Divines in England haue done 4. They vvere but men and might erre in judgement and so appeareth by the vveak reasons subjoyned somtimes to their opinions And living in Churches vvhere some corruptions doe remaine they might the more readily stumble at the like in others 6. It hath been the practise of the English Prelates from time to time and is at this present houre not onely to offer preferment to Divines at home but also to send gifts to forraine Divines to blunt at least the edge of their zeale if they could not make them altogether their own as they haue done some For proofe of this their old practise I haue here subjoyned a few lines taken out of the friendly caveat to B. Sands then Bishop of London vvritten annâ— 1567. extant in the book intituled The Register Although you haue as much as in you lieth gone about to win credit and as it were to tie the tongues of Bullinger Gualter Zanchius and others with your bribes which you haue divers times sent them under the name of friendly tokens and remembrances yet when they shal be informed better of more then they were the last time and confirmed in the former satisfaction of these two last set forth bookes as well these that I haue named as divers more wil not bee ashamed like true and constant professors of the truth to answer your L. as Aristotle did Plato when he said Amicus Plato sed magis amica viritas that is to say openly to confesse not in privat meeting onely but in print also that English tiâ—ne English cloathes and English silver and gold are and shall bee welcome to them as long as they are not meant to stop them from the truth against both their conscience and their printed writings and confessions Yea if yee will look well on the matter Gualter hath condemned you and your splendida Pontificalia alreadie For in his last Epistle to you Lords he denieth not that those informations these two that he speaketh of delivered him were intollerable in the Church but trusting onely upon your words and beleeving your coloured lying informations too much would not credit them as tâ—o too monstrous things to bee in such a realme that hauâ— alway had so good a report for zealousnesse in religion and to be maintained of such men that in time of their banishment both hee himselfe and a great sort more knew to be godlie learned and earnest in religion MElanchton did write in the dawning of the day â—anchius in â—n Epistle to Bullinger reporteth that he was of a fearefull spirit and did many things which he did not approue His advices in the time of the Interim proved pernicious to the Germane Churches and grievous to all the godly Harder things if true are written concerning him P. Martyr freer in writing after he had left England then he was before in a letter to a certaine friend there confesseth his oversight in advisiâ—g rather to conform to Popish apparell then to leaue the Ministerie and that now with â—ullinger he was of another minde seeing the scandals which did arise unavoideably of them which he did not perceiue before He confesseth in another Epistle to a certaine friend there that he could not giue full and particular direction not being acquainted with all the particular circumstances Tu autem quiâ—â—es in ipso certamine consilia hic non expecta Valde quippe sumus à vobis procul In ipsa consultetis arena Which answer holdeth in other forraine Divines The Author of this sound Reply craving the removall or at least the free use of the ceremonies and that none be enthralled or saying if there Deanes Canons and Prebendaries will practise them in their Cathedrall Churches they will not contend with them providing the Prelates impose them not upon others is to be understood to speak onely of the English Church where they haue kept possession ever since the Reformation and as a man almost despairing of any cure after these fifty yeares contestation against them rather then resolving But all Writers condemn the reducing of corruptions into a Church specially after exile of many yeares Many worthies haue suffered much for Reformation what would they haue done to withstand the re-entry of Deformation FINIS Iunius here speaketh to our Defen who pag. 3. calleth his ceremonies The garments of Religion 〈…〉 malus conâ—us Mr. Fox †Zanchius it is like was misinformed for Bishops haue bin the chief devisers and advisers Pauls Bishops â—hee meaneth or els as I sayd before he is misinformed †Vntrue or misinformed †still misinformed †still misinformed In making 3 sorts of officers afterwards Bishops Seniors or Elders Deacons hee must take word Bishop in the scripture language as common to all Pastors
hands are chiefe in this trespass to cover their owne guiltiness under figleaved innocencie of three ceremonies is too too grosse If Thomas or D. Morton in times past had pleaded for the ceremonies innocencie it might haue been well interpreted but for Thomas Chester Thomas Lichfild or any that bearâ—th a Cathedrall name to write of the innocencie of three ceremonies passing by three hundred foule nocencies which are plainly to be seen in the Prelates urging and managing of these ceremonies this is somewhat like as if Samson when he had sent Foxes with fire-brands in their tailes among the corn should then haue written unto the owners of that corne a long letter concerning the innocencie of Foxes and Fire-brands Thirdly and lastly it is sufficiently proved and shall by Gods grace be further maintained against this Defendant that these three ceremonies are not innocent or lawfull in their â—se This I had to say concerning the Title Now before I come to the book it selfe some few things are to be questioned in the Epistles which are three according to the number of the ceremonies defended In the first Epistle to the Marquis â— I would willingly learn what that Church is which is the mother of the Non-conformists it must of necessitie be either the faithfull Congregations which are in England collectiuely considered or else the Hierarchie consisting of Archbishops Bishops and their Officers If the â—ormer â—â—here understood then this Defence is begunne with a Slander For neither is the Non-conformist an adversarie impugning those Congregations nor doe they defame their religious worship nor infringe their wholesome libertie nor contemne their just authoritie but of all these things are the Prelates manifestly guiltie For they in their Lordly humours doe scorne and defame the most religious people as Puritanes they hinder the people from hearing of Sermons in another parish though they haue none or worse then none at home they are enemies to that preaching wherby the godly people finde themselues most edified they inslaue both Minister and people not onely to themselues but even to their Chancellors Commissaries officials and such like officers of their own making to whom not Christ onely but all the Primitiue Church saith plainely Depart from me I know you not they denie anie authoritie at all to be either in the Congregations or in their Ministers except it be a little of courtesie from the Ordinarie These things are so well known that they need no proofe If by the Church heer be meant the Hierarhie then wee profess plainely we acknowledge no such mother She is a Step-dams usurping this title and authoritie without all warrant from God our Father Shee is a creature of mans making and may more lawfullie be removed when it pleaseth man then ever she was by him crected Secondly I marvaile with what conscience this man can spend a great part of his Epistle in stirring up a Courtier unto the opposing of Non-conformists As if this were a great point of admirable wisedome and zeale as he calleth it and the Courtiers such as stood in most need of instigations to the zeale of Formalitie being otherwise for substance such as they should be Thirdlie what agreement is there in this Argument to conjure a man by the obligation of his Baptisme to stand for the defence of certaine ceremonies was he baptized into the faith of the cermonies or is he bound to maintaine everie ceremonie which men haue brought into that Church where he was baptized If he were conjured by his Bishoping to such things as these there would be more reason in the consequence Fourthlie what need is there that great men should be called to aide and assist the Prelats against Non-conformists haue they not power enough in their own hands can they not at their own pleasure suspend depriue excommunicate what almost they please Do they not tread these poore men under their feet Is it because that the Prelats cannot yet sufficientlie prevaile against theÌ„ in the consciences of men and therfore call for further help in vaine Or is the meaning that such men should be helped unto great Bishoprickes as are most Zealous against Non-conformists If this be the matter I dare say the Petition shall be granted and yet the Petitioner except he make great progresse in this eagerness will hardlie get beyond Lichfild at least not to Canterburie In the second Epistle to the Non-conformists manie things are jumbled together which afterward must be examined but here cannot For this Epistle taketh the whole book for unanswerable and therefore should rather haue been set at the end then at the beginning oneâ—ie one ridiculous piece of Rhetorick is to be touched wherein forsooth the Non-conformists aboue all their other faults wherewith they are usuallie charged and loaded are now as it were lovinglie intreated to acknowledge themselues guiltie of superstition The reason is rendred because there is a negatiue superstition the formall cause whereof is the forbearing and forbidding of things lawfull as unholy and profane and the Non-conformists haue such negatiue opinions as kneel not cross not weare not c. All this is nothing else but a trick of prevention usuall with craftie men who choose to lay that upon their adversaries which they know more properly to belong unto themselues But I would that this Defendant or rather Accusant had given us some plaine reason of his new opinion there is no definition of superstition properly so called that will father this conclusion The Schoolemen doe with one consent place superstition in a kind of excess of Religions worship Thom. 2. 2. q. 92. art 1 from whom in this point our Divines doe not dissent Now though this excess do seem sometims to consist in a negation yet 〈◊〉 excess or errour in negation is never called by any author that ever writ I dare say superstition when he meaneth to speake properly except that very negation abstinence or forbearing be held as a special worship Now in the Non-conformists there is no such thing to be found they doe not abstaine from these Ceremonies but as they doe from other unlawfull corruptions Suppose they erre yet everie erronious deniall of things lawfull is not superstition The Defendant therefore heere being overhastie to charge his adversaries considered not well what weapon he choose But if he had well remembred what is said of superstition not onely by our Divines but even by some of the Papists themselues he would haue forborne to make mention of this word For our Divines let honourable Calvin speak Iust. l. 1 c. 12. s. 1 Inde mihi videtur dicta superstitio quod modo praescripta ratione non contenta supervacuam rerum congeriem accumulet Papists thus Superstitio est saith Azorius Inst. mor. l. 9 c. 11 cum quis Deo cultuâ— tribuit inanem vanum scil commentitia futili aliqua caeremonia eum venerando vel cum quis Deum honorat falsis vanis frivolis ceremoniis
id est As Swarez doth in a manner interpret it quando honor Dei in iis rebus ponitur quibus revera non colitur ut in caeremoniâ—s superfluis ad salutem animae nihil conferentibus If this touch not the Defendant I would desire him to peruse what Mr. Parker hath written concerning the superstition of the Crosse and giue some answer to the same before he threaten any more such kindness as this is upon the Nonconformists Another thing also is by a figure of praetermition insâ—nuated in this Epistle not unworthie consideration viz. that many Parliaments and Convocations haue established these rites To this I answer 1 the Prelats in such matters as these haue no respect unto the authoritie of Parliaments For they frame Canons urge and excute them withâ—ut the consent of any Parliament nay flatly against them For so wee reade in the Records of that worthie Parliament which was ann 1610. Among the Canons late made by the Clergie of England in their Convocation it vvas thought that some of their Canâ—ns did extend to charge the bodies lands and goods of the subjects of the Realme further then vvas lawfull and meet We therefore made a good law to make voide such Canons as doe charge the bodies lands and goods of the subjects unlesse that the same canons vvere confirmed by Parliament 2 The Defendant cannot bring forth one Act of Parliament now in force that doth allow of Subscriptions and Conformitie to be urged as now it is by the Prelats This appeareth by the judgement of the foresaid Parliament in those words of their petition where they complaine That diverse painfull and learned Pastors that haue long travelled in the vvork of the Ministery vvith good fruit and blessing of their labours vvho vvere ever readie to performe the legall Subscription appointed by the Statute of 13 Eliz. which onely concerneth the Confession of the true Christian Faith and doctrine of the Sacraments yet for not conforming in some points of Ceremonies and refusing the Subscription directed by the late Canons haue been removed from their Ecclesiasticall livings being their freehold and debarred from all meanes of maintenance to the great griefe of sundry well-affected Subjects 3 It is well known that the Prelates themselues in their proceedings about these matters doe so farre violate the Statutes of Parliament that they are by law subject unto a Praemunire Now as for Convocations not to dispute here what manner of Synods they be 1 It is well known that they consist now of a Faction and that in memorie of man they never concluded any thing for the common good of the Church more then by others was better done to their hands but much evill hath come from among them and more would but that many times their commission serveth not but onely to giue Subsidies and then to tell the clock 2 They are servile to those on whom they depend and tirannicall over the poore that are subject unto them 3 there are verie few that haue place in them which are not gross offenders against the most ancient Canons As for example it was observed that in that Convocation which established and revived these corruptions of 300 or 400 there were not aboue twise three which were not or had not been gross Non-residents or Pluralists D. Morton himselfe in a Latine Sermon had before a Convocation some 8 yeares since described well the most part of them though he did not speak distinctlie of the number to be unsavorie salt For he gaue us three notes whereby corrupt Ministers in England might be discerned 1 That they studied chieflie and stuft their Sermons with Friers and Iesuits 2 that they sought occasions to disgrace Calvin and 3 that if anie neighbour Minister be more diligent and conscionable then they they brand him straight with the name of Puritan These notes are well known to agree unto most of our convocated Prelates 4 The authoritie of this Convocation either against or without consent of Parliament is not to be regarded much less against the Scriptures In the Epistle to the Reader this onelie I would inquire of what is the reason that seeing he choose to himselfe for Cheife Opposites the Lincolneshire Ministers he doth not deale with all their Arguments nor the twentieth part of their Allegations but onelie with such as he thought fittest for his purpose Of this I will not saie all But this I maie not omit that considering he knew how much hath been said against the Ceremonies by them and others especiallie by M. Parker which he never attempted to answer neither hee nor others for him had anie cause to triumph in this booke as in a compleate Defense A Reply to Doctor MORTONS GENERAL DEFENCE OF THREE Nocent Ceremonies CAP. I. SECT II. VVHATSOEVER is objected in this Section for the All-sufficiencie or perfect fulnesse of the Scripture I will take for granted because nothing is denyed by the Defendant It is granted therefore at the first entrance that the Scripture condemneth whatsoever is done not onely against the vvarrant and direction of the Word but also that vvhich is done beside it SECT III. BVT that which before the Defendant durst not denie now he commeth to oppose in the proofes of it Which is a strange course in him especially that professeth a distinct logicall proceeding In the propounding of our confirmation I note two things once here in the beginning for all following occasions to be marked 1 this Defendant doth us wrong in distributing our confirmations into those vvhich are taken from Scriptures and those that are from the Fathers and those that are from Protestant Divines as if these were in our estimation of the same kinde Wheras we professe that vvee ascribe no force unto any testimony of man as if it vvere a proofe but onely bring such allegations in as illustrations in regard of our adversaries perverse prejudice 2 He vvrongeth us likewise in that difference vvhich he insinuateth betwixt the Fathers and our Divines calling their testimonies Iudgements and the other onely Confessions we acknowledge no such imparitie If this vvere nothing but idle rhetorick in the Defendant it may be passed by In the answer brought to Heb. 3 2 vve haue this distinction given us some points concerning religion are doctrinall and some meerly ceremoniall The former are sufficiently revealed in Scripture but the latter are left to the libertie of the Church But 1 vvhy is that denyed here by a distinction which passed vvithout deniall or distinction in the former section 2 vvhat kind of distinction is this vvhich doth not distinguish of any terme vvhich is in the objection 3 the Defendant should haue done vvell to haue explained and confirmed his distinction For doctrinall opposed to ceremoniall in the formall signification of these vvords I never heard of before that I remember and sure I am no sound reason vvill allow Ceremoniall is opposed to Morall and sometime to substantiall but to doctrinall it cannot
observing doth not proue the judgement of governours in imposing 3 that it is most likely that those people which thinke so are brought into that conceite by the opposition which it made against the ceremonies But first I would faine know of the Defendant vvhy he passeth by in silence not onely the testimony of Chemnitius cited by the Abridgement for confirmation of this part of the assumption but also the passages of Gods vvord and many of the best Divines vvhich are also alledged there in the proposition and applyed unto this part of the assumption by the Authors of the Abridgement surely this is not plaine dealing Secondly I answer that the opinion of a few may make that an action unlawfull vvhich the opinion of many other cannot make lawfull as is to be seen 1 Cor. 10 28 if any man say unto thee Thirdly it doth not appeare the most are otherwise minded For the most being used unto the ceremonies and not unto good teaching may well be thought to haue the same opinion of humane ceremonies vvhich they haue of divine Fourthly the Def. forgetteth vvhat vvas to be proved in this place for the question is not onely vvhether ouâ— ceremonies be so imposed but also vvhether they be so esteemed and observed as appeareth in the Abridgement Novv the opinion of the people proveth I hope in vvhat manner they are esteemed and observed And vvhile they are so observed they that still impose them in those places vvhere they are so observed may truely be interpreted so to impose them In actions of this kinde saith Hooker l. 5 p. 165 wee are more to respect what the greatest part of men is commonly prone to conceiue then what some few mens wits may devize in construction of their particular meaning Fiftly the last conceit is ridiculous that the opposing and condemning of ceremonies should make men thinke that the Sacraments are not sufficiently administred without them The popish people saith he haue no great conceit of our ceremonies Why is it then that Gretser and some other Iesuits call our Prelats Calvino-papistae Popish Calvinists How is it that by these ceremonies vve are borne in hand that the Papists are likely to be drawn unto coÌ„munion vvith our Church Whence is it that all our Church-papists are great maintainers of the ceremonies The rest saith he which are not of your disciplining are not so many O miserable out-facing of God and manâ— Who hath disciplined for this threescore yeares almost all the people of Wales Who but the Prelates and their creatures haue had the disciplining of all the Cathedrall Churches in England and all the poore Parishes that depend upon them Who are the Discipliners of all the Non-residents and Pluralists forlorne charges and who of the many ten pound cures Doe these seem a few in the Def. eyes SECT XIII THe omission of ceremonies is here alledged to be more sharply punished then many great sinnes against the law of God though it be vvithout so and all and contempt To this the Def. answereth first by denying the consequence viz. that if this be so then these ceremonies are preferred before the precepts of God and unlawfull But 1 vvhy saith he nothing to the Churches of Germanie to Melancton Martyr Chemnitius Bezâ— Iunius Lubbertus Polanus Bucanus Pilkinton Perkins and the whole Clergie of England brought in as allowing of this consequence in the Abridgement Are not all these worth one answer of the Defendants 2 The reason that he giveth for punishing more severely the omission of a ceremony then hainous sins is frivolous For the true peace of the Church doth more depend on the keeping of Gods lawes then of observing mans inventions especially of such things vvhich never brought peace vvith them to any Church but as fire from hell haue alwaies bred a combustion Neither yet can the Defendant justifie that vvhich he saith of civill governments that they lawfully at any time more severely punish that offence which is every way lesse then another vvhich is greater Howsoever he that hath but halfe an eye may see that it is but a sophisticall evasion common to our Prelates with the Papists I will not therfore insist in this if you please you may see more of this matter in M. Parker of the Crosse part 2 c. 1 s. 16 17. He answereth in the second place That it is not omission but contempt that is punished â—s if 〈◊〉 Counsellour should refuse to weare 〈◊〉 Lâ—â—yers gowne But â— meere omission hath been often punished with suspension 2 The Convocation house by their Canons haue provided and appointed punishments for meere omissions If those canons be not in all such points rigorously executed it is either some personall good vvhich is found in some Officers or else meere shame For though canons doe not blush yet the executioners haue some forhead left 3 There may be continued omission upon other causes beside contempt as ignorance conscience c. so that vvhile the Def. so peremptorily chargeth others for slandering the Church of God he manifestly slandereth them which for any thing I know are as much the Church of God as the Prelates Concerning this contempt see more in M. Parker p. 2c 1 s. 14. As for the Lawyers gowne it is not long enough to cover the nakednesse of this answer no though it be stretched to the length of one of our great Prelates long traines vvhich are carryed up after them For except the Counsellour would swear that he refused on conscience and that he could shew the judgement of the best Lawyers for his opinion condemning such a robe as unlawfull the case is not like and if the case be so put I account that Lawyer worthy to be turned over the bar that could not defend himselfe from contempt SECT XIIII IN the next place the same thing is confirmed by the particular indignities vvhich peaceable learned godly minded men doe suffer for but declaring of their contrary judgement as that they are accounted Puritanes Schismaticks and by canon excommunicated ipso facto so as no Councell ever censured any heresie vvithout liberty of appeal vvhich is not denyed to great malefactors Conf. at Hampton p. 26 〈◊〉 6 98. In the repeating of this Argument I adde that out of the Abridgement vvhich the Def. for I know not vvhat reason omitted Now in his answer he neither denyeth antecedent nor consequence so that the judicious Reader may safely take all to be granted Yet that he might seeme to say somevvhat 1 he granteth that wee haue reason perhaps to wish that some penalties were released And haue we not reason then to think the Convocation vvhich set these penalties was nothing lesse then led by the spirit of God And if the Def. can thus shew his differing judgment from that Convocation in the penalties what disorder or exorbitancy is it for another to shevv his differing judgment from them and him in ceremonies Secondly closly sliding by the chiefest accusation of Puritanism
Iesuit in Thom. p. 3 q. 65 a 4 propoundeth onely three errours as he calleth them vvherin Protestants differ from Papists concerning ceremonies in generall wherof the first is that onely those things which are written ought to be retained and used in the Church The second is that no outward worship of God is lawfull but onely that which is appointed by God The third and last is that the Church hath not power of commanding and ordeyning those things hee meaneth mysticall ceremonies which are necessarie for the convenient celebration of the Sacraments Now there is none of these three points vvherin Swarâ—z and the Defâ— doth not jumpe SECT XI THE next example is the day vvhich Mordecaâ— and Ester appointed Est. 9 concerning vvhich I answer 1 it was no mysticall ceremonie but a circumstance of order When Bellarmine objecteth the same example to like purpose against the Protestants de cult sanct lib. 3. c. 10. Iunius answereth praeceptum fuit politicum it was a precept of order And some of our owne Writers at home that it was appointed for a civill use a day of rejoycing SECT XII THE Feast of Dedication ordained by Iulas Maccabeus is also alledged by Bellarmine de cult sanct li. 3 c. 5. de Rom. pontâ—li 4 c. 17 but we need not be so carefull of excusing Machabeus and those times from all fault Christ seemeth saith hee to approue that feast Ioh. 10 22 but seemeth onely say I. It is said that Christ vvho had been before that time resident in Ierusalem vvas walking in Salomons porch at the Feast of Dedication when some Iewes came to aske him vvhether he was the Christ or no doth it follow that he observed the Feast As for Danaeus hâ—â—re cited it hath been shewed before how well he liked of significant ceremonies ordained by man SECT XIII XIIII HEere M. Cartwright is brought in as answering the former objections out of the Machabees and Ester But M. Cartwright p. 197 doth professe that there is as great difference betwixt these two as is betwixt heaven and earth And in his Confutation of the Rhemists vvho urge the feast of Dedication as this Def. doth in Ioh. 10 22 he answereth plainely that this Feast was unduely instituted and ungroundedly by the Machabees Which also he proveth by such reasons as neither the Rhemists nor this Dâ—f vvill ever answer Yet let us heare vvhat he hath chosen out of M. Cartwright to answer The Church may appoint holy daies in certaine cases but it is one thing to restraine part of the day and another to restraine the whole day Where 1 M. Cartwright is vvronged by the Def. for he confesseth in the places quoted expresly that upon some extraordinary cases the Church may restraine a whole day as at a solemne fast 2 He should let us see vvhat mysticall signification is in the times appointed as he striveth to doe in other significant ceremonies if he vvould haue a more particular answer otherwise they are alledged heere to no purpose to proue significant ceremonies The other vvords quoted out of M. Cartwright are that the exâ—mple out of Ester is no sufficient warrant for our Holy daies 1 because our estate ought not to be so ceremonious as theirs 2 That was done by a speciall direction of the spirit of God To this the Def. answereth first that if then when the ceremonies were so many one might be added much more now Which consequence vvere good caeâ—eris parâ—bus if all other things did agree but this is that very thing vvhich M. Cartwright denyed He answereth in the second place that it is presumption to imagine a speciall direction where none can be proved But how shall vve trust this man in relating the Arguments and Answers of the Ministers in private conference vvhen now the second time as it vvere in one breath he so unjustly accuseth M. Cartwright as giving no reason for that he saith vvhose printed booke doth confute him for so it followeth in M. Cartwright immediately upon the vvords by him quoted p. 194. This may appeare by another place where the Iewes changed their fasts into feasts onely by the mouth of the Lord through the ministerie of the Prophet For further proofe whereof I take the 28 ver where it appeareth that this was an order to endure alwayes even as long as other feast daies which were instituted by the Lord himselfe so that what abuses soever were of that feast yet as a perpetuall decree of God it ought to haue remained whereas our Churches can make no such decree which may not upon change of time and other circumstances be altered For the other proofe hereof I take the last verse For the Prophet contenteth not himselfe with that that he had râ—hearsed the decree as he doth sometime the decree of profane Kings but addeth precisely that as soone as ever the decree was made it was registred in this booke of Ester which is one of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture declaring therby in what esteem they had it If it had been of no further authority then our decrees or then a canon of one of the Councels it had been presumption to haue brought it into the Library of the Holy Ghost SECT XV. XVI IN the title of these two Sections the Defendant promiseth an instance of a ceremonious instrument belonging unto the vvorship of God But he bringeth none saue the Altar of the two tribes mentioned Iosh. 22 vvhich hee cannot shew to haue been any instrument of Gods worship so that he seemeth meerely to haue forgotten his title But for the thing it selfe M. Parker long since p. 1 c. 2 s. 33 hath given this answer 1 that we may better argue from the Altar of Damascus 2 King 16 against the crosse then they can from this Altar for it 2 that this Altar of the two Tribes vvas not in state or use religious as the Crosse is vvhich he confirmeth by the confession of B. Babington on the second Com. and by the testimony of Lavater on Ios. hom 61 3 that in this our men say nothing vvhich the Papists alledge not for their superstitions and the Lutherans for their images as probably as they Masiâ—â— and Chitreus upon this place To the same purpose tendeth the answer vvhich the Def. hath set downe in the name of certaine Ministers Let us here therefore his Reply 1 He proveth the setting up of this Altar to haue beene humane which no man that I know ever doubted of 2 He would proue that it vvas appointed to Gods service But alas he can bring no colour for that It was a patterne saith hee of the Lords altar which was a chiefâ— instrument of Gods worship as our crosse is a resemblance of the crosse of Christ. Where 1 vvhy doth he compare the crosse vvheron Christ did suffer vvith the Lords Altar that crosse vvas no more holy then the souldiers that nailed Christ to it or then Iudas that betrayed him into their hands and therefore the
therefore cannot be signified partly by naturall signes common to loue Cleanlinesse in the celebration of the sacraments is the same that it is at another feast though in regard of that application it may be called Christian or holy cleanlinesse or decencie Thirdly he sayth it was used in time of holy worship So no doubt was giving of the upper place unto the Elders c. in token of reverence and yet it was no religious instituted signe of mysticall signification such reasons as these bewray more confidence then good consideration SECT XXVIII THe third and last example vvhich is brought out of Scripture is the covering and uncovering of the head at divine service 1. Cor. 11. to vvhich I answer as before that it was a civill order of decencie used as well out of Gods worship as in it But here the Def. taketh paines to make many collections and confirme the same by divers witnesses Because as he sayth this poynt is of some moment though the other were of none let us therfore briefly consider what they be 1. I would first learne sayth he whether this ceremonie of covering and vncovering were not significant of some good thing I answer that this fashion which he abusiuely calleth a ceremonie was significant in a generall sence that is it did declare or argue a good thing 2 I would ask what thing it is that is hereby signified I answer subjection and superiour power But there is a relation also to God sayth the Def. I answer there is in mans superioritie a kind of resemblance of Gods soveraignite and so there is also as Calvin observeth in omni principatu in all superiour power so that this maketh covering and uncovering no more a religious significant ceremonie then the upper seat of a heathen Magistrate sitting in judgement for by that seat is signified a superioritie in which there is some image of Gods sovoraigntie There is nothing alledged out of our Divines by the Defendant which may not as well bee applied to the Iudges bench as to this covering and uncovering And the Apostle doth shew plainly that the vaile he speaketh of vvas of the same nature vvith long haire So that by the Def. reason mens short and vvomens long haire must be accounted religious mysticall ceremonies 3 Our third demand sayth he is whether these ceremonies of covering and uncovering were not instituted to bee observed in Gods publicke worship I answer it was required that they should be observed in holy Assemblies But 1. it was not onely required in Gods publick vvorship but also as Calvin upon the place granteth In quovis graviore coetu aut matronarum aut virorum in any graue meeting of men and women And instit lib. 4. cap. 10. sect 29. ne mulieres in publicum nisi velatae procedant â— Whensoever they goe into publicke places 2. It was not instituted primarily and principally for Gods worship If it were I aske vvhen and by whom Paul surely did not institute a new ceremony in this place for v. 14. he groundeth his admonition upon nature i. as Calvin well expoundeth it vpon a received vse and ancient custome in those parts which some through lightnesse began unseemly to transgresse There is nothing alledged out of Martyr or Chrysostome against this answer 4. Fourthly sayth he wee desire to know whether this matter were not a thing indifferent I answer it is indifferent in the generall nature of it yet at that time and in that place they sinned that did otherwise even before Paul or any of their overseers gaue them charge about it Lastly sayth he it is worthy our inquirie to learne how farre other Churches may be directed by this example I answer so farre just as the Apostles rule stretcheth 1. Cor. 14. 40. Let all things be done comely Now the Defendant hath a direct answer to all and every one of his demands let him cast up his summe and he shall finde that he hath proved just nothing Hee could find but three examples in all the New Testament vvhich had any colour so as they might bee alledged for mysticall ceremonies appropriated to Gods vvorship by mans institution The Loue-feasts the kisse of peace and the vaile of women And yet there is not one of these three as any indifferent man if he hath common sense may see by that vvhich hath been said that can be shewed either to be of mysticall signification other then nature giveth it nor appropriated unto Gods worship more then to civill occasions nor yet ever instituted by any man in the Church of God Is it not a marvellous thing that men should presume so as they doe to domineere in words and deeds over poore men in such things as they can shew neither precept nor patterne for in all the Scriptures We will descend lower saith the Def. And that I assure him is his best course for so long as he wadeth in the pure waters of holy Scripture he doth but striue against the streame descending lower to humane vvritings he may finde the vvaters troubled and so bring some fish to his net Yet having the Scriptures on our side vvee need not feare to follow him vvhether soever he pleaseth to leade us SECT XXIX HEere is alledged the universal custome of the ancient Church even from the Apostles times for confirmation of humane mysticall ceremonies in Gods vvorship To vvhich I answer 1 of the first and purest times next after the Apostles this cannot be proved nor is likely because it is not to be thought that all Churches vvould immediately admit of any thing vvhich they had not received from the Apostles 2 For the next ages it may easily be shewed that the best Writers taught many generall rules concerning the perfection of Scripture and the purity of Gods worship vvhich cannot stand vvith these humane inventions howsoever in their practise they vvere carried away unto other customes 3 The infinite troubles of those times against Infidels and Heretickes about the chiefe grounds and maine foundations of faith vvould not suffer them to examine these points of lesse moment as they should And in deed they vvere so taken up with those conflicts that they neglected many usuall truths So that if all should be received vvhich the Fathers practised neither any thing understood but by their interpretations vve should be destitute of much truth and overcharged vvith the burthen of humane presumptions as Augustine complained in his time ep 119 4 the Lord in justice vvould haue Antichrist to prevail which mysterie could never haue grown to any ripenesse had the worship of God been preserved sincere That corruption begot him and the reformation thereof must be his utter ruine It is sufficient that the lamentable experience of fifteen hundred yeres hath declared unto us vvhat fruit of significant ceremonies brought by man into Gods worship are wont to affoord unto those that affect them To fetch authority in this case from their practise by which hath insued such
the Iewes was done publickely and generally and in the bowels of the same Church but the Papists is not so To which I answer 1 these circumstances are not rendred as reasons of the abolishing in the text but invented by the Def. 2 private particular idolatry is to be removed as well as publick and generall 3 all these circumstances did more then agree to our ceremonies in the beginning of our reformation And sure they are not grown better since by any good that they haue done The second difference vvhich the Def. imagineth is that there was no other meanes to cure the idolatry of those times but now there is I answ 1 this is the very question whether there be any other sufficient meanes to cure the disease of humane ceremonies idolatrously abused beside abolishing 2 It is a vaine imagination vvhereby this difference is confirmed and no reason at all In the Dominions of our Ezekias saith the Def. this disease would be found curable without any such extremity But the experience of 50 or 60 yeares shew that hitherto it is not cured neither in Ireland nor Wales to say nothing of England Surely our Prelates are miserable Phisitions that in a disease so easie to be cured suffer the patients to languish under their hands unto death Especially saith he in this our most truely reformed Church which doth most liuely expresse the face and full body of her primitiue mother Church This he hath now 3 or 4 times repeated as if he did desire to make a question of it and here propounds it vvith a doubt if you will allow It is not sit heere to make a long digression about this matter In short therefore thus vve allow with all thankefulnes that our Church is to be called a reformed Church in regard of the main points of faith which are purely and freely taught among us vvith publick approbation and also in regard that the grossest superstitions are by publick authority cast out of our Assembles But if our Ecclesiasticall government be considered and some ceremonious superstions wee deny utterly that vve haue such a reformation therin as may represent the face of the primitiue Church Let the Defendant tell us if ever the primitiue Church had such chanting idol service as is every day to be seen in our Cathedrall Churches If there were in the primitiue Church Chancellors Commissaries Officials under the Bishops which executed the censures of that Church If he can shew any primitiue pompous Bishops that had sole authoritie of ordination excommunication If any Minister was called in the primitiue Ch. without expresse consent of the congreg over which he vvas set if Ministers vvere then vvont to goe to law for their places if the Primitiue Church ever heard of Pluralists Non-residents or dumb ministers If either in primitue or else in Popish Church almost simony was ever so ordinary as it is with us If ever so many prophane men openly known to be contemners of Religion vvere members of any primitiue Church as are of ours If ever he read of such carnall proceedings about Ecclesiasticall affaires in primitiue times as are every day practised in our spirituall-courts who tooke money for ordination citation absolution or change of pennance I will not insist on these things because they are beside our present question but onely desire the Def. to behold this face which I haue described in a right glasse and see if it be the face of the pure primitiue Church SECT 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. THE testimonies of Councels and Fathers alledged in the Abridgement about this point are largely ranked by the Def. into 14 Sections as if the maine burden of this Controversie did lye upon their authority vvheras in the Abridgement they are briefly mentioned as illustrations I vvill therefore according to the intent of those vvhich alledged them consider all together 7. In the fift Councell of Carhage it is true that he saith those Altars vvere onely expresly appointed to be abolished vvhich were set up vvithout reliques of Martyrs But let the Def. shew any reason why those also were not to haue the same measure vvhich had reliques of martyrs in them Surely the Councell seemeth to aime at a perfect reformation but stayed at this because of the superstition vvhich then prevailed among the peoples as they shew in that parenthesis si fieri potest if it may be and in the next Canon 8 In the next canon saith the Def. they would onely haue immediate instruments of Idolatry then brought into publicke use abolished But how doth he gather this glosse out of the Text Or wherein doth this glosse excuse our ceremonies especially as they were in the beginning of our reformation and since they haue mended as soure Alâ— doth in summer 9 To the decree of the Councell of Bracara forbidding men to decke their houses c. in such manner and at such time as idolaters did the Def. answereth nothing that hath any shew of reason in it For our ceremonies differ nothing from the Papists in place persons time but onely in some opinion Now the Councell there doth not forbid the opinion but the ceremony even to them vvhich were of a better opinion 10 The Councell of Affrick doth giue a reason why they condemned certaine feasts because they were drawn from the errours of the Gentiles Heerein I am sure it maketh against our ceremonies 11 To Tertullian de Coron the Def. saith lesse then nothing For he doth not speake of the same individuall habite which was used to idolatry as the Def. vainely pretendeth nor of that kind which was onely used in idolatrous worship For in the same book c. 13 he saith this habit of a garland vvas used in most base places as playes stewes jakes c. 12 The like answer is given unto Tertullian de Orat. 1 in generall it is said that Tertullian doth not condemne these ceremonies meerly for resemblance with idolaters but for opinion of efficacie and necessity wheras the contrary is plaine in Tertullian for he saith expresly Propterea in nobis reprehendi meretur quod apud idola celebratur Therefore it is to be blamed in us because it is used before Idols And B. Iewel Def. Apol. vvith many other of our best Writers against the Papists doe urge these testimonies of Tertullian meerely in regard of resemblance 2 In washing saith the Def. some did then hold an opinion of efficacie and necessitie If they did that is nothing to the purpose for they might be condemned in that behalfe and yet meerely also for resemblance vvith idolaters But no such thing appeareth in Tertullian he telleth us plainely that the vvashing before prayer vvas a significant sign in remembrance of Christs delivering unto the Iewes by Pilate when he had washed Cum scrupulose percontarer rationem requirerem compeâ—i commemorationem esse in domini deditionem c. 11 so that I doe not see but that this vvashing vvas
as before I sayd for that and other causes But altars in the same place he condemneth which yet are retained in our Cathedrall Churches and I hope the crosse being an Idoll it selfe had as immediat commuâ—ion with Idolatry as Zepper or any reasonable Iudge would require for the cashiering of it As for Peter Martyr howsoever in one epistle to Hooper he setteth as good a colour upon the reliques of Idolatry as he could because he thought by a little yeelding of Hooper and such men the superstitions themselues might quickly be removed yet in another Epistle p. 1125. he giveth this peremptorie sentence Profecto si ex animo superstitiones edissemus vel ipsa eorum vestigia omnibus modis curaremus extirpanda 1. If wee hated superstition from the heart wee would abolish all the reliques of it To the same purpose he speaketh p. 1127. vvhere he sheweth that his conscience would never suffer him to weare the Surplice when he vvas Canon of Christ church in Oxford If this vvere not his reason hee had some other very much a kin to this Neither will the Defendant say hastily I hope that either Peter Martyr or Hooper were disorderderly exorbitant men in those times fit to be displaced that more discreet conformists might come in their places as now he pronounceth of those that refuse to conforme SECT XXX WHen all faile a contradiction must be found betwixt our conclusions and our confessions and practises but I assure my selfe there is not any reader so simple but if hee look over this section will presently see that he hath not brought one example of any humane ceremonie not necessarie notoriously known to haue been abused unto Idolatry that is allowed by us Why then should I spend ink and paper in labouring to unâ—wine such ropes of sand Onely I would ask the Defendant certaine questions 1. If a Temple a Bell or a Table-cloth haue such idolatry put uppon them by the Papists as the crosse hath 2 If his own heart do not tell him that there is a civill use of such things which cannot be imagined of the crosse 3 What superstition there was in the meere significations given by Durandus unto Bells and Bell-ropes vvhich is not to be found in the Crosse and Surplice 4 Whether the Pagan use of Bay-leaues vvhich was aboue a thousand yeares past doth cast such a reflection upon our civill use of bay-leaues as the Popish superstition doth upon our ceremonies 5 What sence he had to find fault with us for not altering the situation of Churches 6 If it be all one to call a ship by the name of Castor and Pollux as Paul doth Act. 28. 11. and to use a religious ceremonie in Gods worship vvhich is taken from these Idolls 7 If it be one thing to change copes into cushions and to use a Masse vestiment in Gods worship 8 If it be not a kind of slander to say that the Church of Geneva imposeth a round wafer cake like the Papists to be used in the Lords Supper when as onely unleavened bread is used because custome in that part more prevailed then the grave advice of Calvin Farel Viret and the other excellent pastors And if it bee not a wide leap to bring in the practise of Geneva for an instance of the Non-conformists practise in England By that time these questions be truely answered the Defendant vvill haue but a small harvest out of our confessions and practises CHAP. V. SECT I. ad X. THE Authours of the Abridgement framed a strong Argument against our ceremonies from the rules of ceremonies prescribed in the Word p. 43 c. with this Argument vvhen the Defendant vvas not able to grappell as it stood in the parts combined he thought good to sever some parcels of it and try vvhat he could say to them apart Thus out of this one Argument he hath taken that which he calleth our first and out of the same he hath made up this fift and yet hee hath quite left out a great part of the sinewes wherewith that one reason is knit together in the Abridgement The argument is taken from the scandall or offence vvhich the imposing and using of these ceremonies do bring unto divers sortâ— of men The Defendant heere maketh great flourishing in nine whole Sections defining dividing and subdividing a scandall as if he would make all cleare before him but at the end of all this preparation he maketh no application of these Rules unto the matter in hand at all but onely telleth his Reader p. 154 That these divisions and subdivisions will expedite all difficulties so that out of them he may collect the true and false sense of Scriptures alledged It vvere sufficient therefore either to deny this power to be in his divisions or else to set down as many other subdivisions of scandall vvhich vvere easie to doe and then tell him that these vvill expedite the controversie and that from them hee may collect the errours of his answer But I will notwithstanding briefly shew my opinion concerning some of these dictates The definition vvhich he onely alloweth of as accurate is that a scandall is a wilfull offence against Christians in provoking of them unto any damnable errour or sinne by any sensible externall meanes Sect. 1. Wherein notwithstanding many faults may be found For 1 every scandall is not wilfull except the word be taken more largely then use of speech will allow 2 Every scandall is not against Christians 3 A scandall is not onely by provoking to sinne but also in hindring from good 4 what doth he meane to put in the word damnable the occasioning of any sin sufficeth to make up a scandall Among his subdivisions the first thing I except against is section 5 vvhere he distinguisheth so betwixt persons and causes either determined or undetermined that in matters determined by the Church as he teacheth obedience is to be given without respect of scandall and onely in matters undetermined there is a charitable consideration to be had of other mens consciences This is a new and a tickle point of Divinity touching the tenderest part of our spirits even our consciences and other mens also It ought therefore either not to haue been propounded or else to be well confirmed either with testimonies or vvith reasons drawn out of Scripture But alas the Def. thrusteth it upon us without any such vvarrant The peace of the Church saith he is to be preferred before the grievance i. e. scandall of any sort of men As if the peace of the Church did not more consist in avoyding of scandals then in observing of humane ceremonies it is not the peace of God which is broken by a charitable care of avoyding offences but by rushing into them A scandall in the nature of it is spirituall murder Now suppose a Superiour should command a thing in it selfe indifferent whereupon murder vvere like to follow as to runne a horse or a cart in a certain way at
a certaine time when it may be unwitting to the commander little children were playing in the way vvould any mans conscience serue him to doe it Avoyding of scandall is a maine duty of charity May Superiours at their pleasure appoint how farre I shall shew my charity towards my brothers soule Then surely an inferiour earthly court may crosse the determinations of the high Court of heaven The superiours haue no power given them for destruction but onely for edification If therefore they command scandalls they goe beyond their commission neither are we tyed therein to doe as they bid but as they should bid If determination by superiours vvere sufficient to take away the sin of a scandall Then they doe very ill that they doe not so farre as is possible determine all things indifferent that so no danger may be left in giving of offence by the use of them Then the Church of Rome is to be praysed in that she hath determined of so many indifferents then Paul with the other Apostles might haue spared a great deale of labour in admonishing the Churches how they should avoyd offences about some indifferent things A farre shorter way had bene either to determine the matter finally or else to haue given order that the Churches should among themselues determine it at home But say that the Archbishop of Corinth for now I suppose such a one had called his Convocation and vvith consent of his Clergie had determined that men might and for testifying of liberty should at a certaine time eat of such and such meats which men formerly doubted of would not yet the Apostle haue given the same direction he did would not good Christians still haue had care of their brothers consciences Can the determination of a superiour be a sufficient plea at the barre of Gods judgement seat for a man that by vertue or force thereof alone hath done any action that his conscience telleth him will scandalize his brother Lastly I vvould faine know whether those superiours doe not giue a great scandall vvhich take upon them determinately to impose unnecessary rites vvhich they know many good men will be scandalized by The second notorious flaw vvhich I finde in the Defendant his subdivisions is sect 9 where he granteth that much indulgence indeed is to be used in things indifferent towards weake persons whose infirmity proceedeth onely from simple ignorance but that onely till such time as the doctrine concerning such things haue been sufficiently declared because a scandall doth alwaies presuppose a meer weakenesse for want of due meanes of knowledge For 1 Paul had sufficiently declared that it vvas lawfull for him to take wages yet he would not 1 Cor. 9 he had given sufficient reasons for the lawfulnesse of eating all kind of meats yet he abstayned and so counselled others for feare of scandall Rom. 14 1 Cor 9. 2 There can be no certaine set time for all sorts of men vvhen they are sufficiently taught 3 Who is this Def. that he dare judge so many of his fellow servants that in such indifferencies as our ceremonies are held to be they take offence not upon weakenesse but upon presumption 4 What authority haue our Prelats to obtrude unnecessary ceremonies upon the Church vvhich must be declared before they can be used Is it fit that the people should be troubled with the declararion of mens inventions vvhen they are hardly brought to heare willingly the maine things of the Gospell 5 Is it not more agreeable to the wisedome of God Ex. 21. 33 to fill up the pit then to set one by for to warne the passengers they fall not into it 6 There vvas never yet sufficient declaration of this doctrine of ceremonies throughout England In many places there is no preaching at all Many preach so that they declare nothing almost to the people but their own folly Many are ashamed or at least unwilling to declare unto the people mens devices Many declare them so corruptly that the scandall thereby is not removed but increased And among those that goe about vvith some good mind to declare this kind of doctrine there is almost as great variety of declarations as there is of declarers while some will haue them significant some not some say they are good and profitable to edification and others condemning them as altogether unfit declare them to be tollerable for avoiding of a greater mischiefe Some will haue them onely civill and others Ecclesiasticall some excuse all but the crosse and some extoll the crosse aboue all Are not such declarations thinke you likely to informe well the consciences of poore men who doubt more whom they should take for a good Declarer then they did at the first of the things themselues SECT X. AMong the instances of scandall arising from the ceremonies that vvhich in the Abridgement hath the third place is set first by the Def. viz that the superstitions Papist will be hardened in the liking of his abominable Religion from which he seeth wee borrow our ceremonies and increase in his hope of the full restoring of it againe To this the Def. answereth that our rites are not the ceremonies of Papists because they are purged from superstition But 1 that they are not purged from all superstition hath sufficiently been declared before 2 This plea of transubstantiating of ceremonies by the breath of our Convocation is a meere shift contrary not onely to the language of all our Divines and to that vvhich every mans senses doe tell him but also to the publicke profession of the Church of England in the preface to our service-book as it is cited by him p. 127. For there we are told 1 that an abatement is made of the excesse of Popish ceremonies All therefore are not abolished but some remaine And vvhich be they if these in question be not 2 That some of the old ceremonies doe remaine What sense can be given of these words if our ceremonies be not the same with those vvhich were of old among the Papists if it were meant of old ceremonies not used among the Papists then they doe not remaine nor are retained but restored 3 That none are devised anew therefore they must needs be taken from the Papists or from the Fathers but of the Fathers surplice or kneeling at the communion no instance can be given and as for the crosse the Def. himselfe will not defend I thinke all that use vvhich the Fathers put it to 3. The Papists own words doe sufficiently manifest how they are hardened by the imposition and use of our ceremonies For as it is shewed in the Abridgement p. 25 they seek to justifie their superstition by this that we haue borrowed our ceremonies from them And some of them thence conclude as there is shewed that our Governours like vvell of their superstition Beside Gretser a principall Iesuit saith that in these ceremonies our Ministers are as Apes of Popish Priests Apol. prâ— Gregor 7 pag. 8 and in
Apostle teacheth manifestlie as we haue seene so all learned men who bee of sound judgement concerning the Magistrates office doe with one consent affirme that these bee the three chiefe parts of the office of the Prince and of everie godlie Magistrate Which thing being so I see not how your gracious Maiestie can with good conscience propound againe the garments in question and other things of that kinde smelling as yet of Popish superstition and once banished out of the Churches to the consciences of the Bishops to be taken on againe and so propound them that you should compell them by your commandement to receiue them againe For first this is quite contrarie to the first and chiefe part of the Princes office For if the Magistrate ought to haue a chiefe care that the worship of God be kept pure and without mixture and if for this cause all things are to bee abandoned which may anie way either by themselues or by accident defile this worship and therefore all things are to bee called backe as much as may be to the rule of God and to the former and Apostolicall and so the more pure and simple forme of religion Finallie if as the Apostle commandeth we bee to abstaine not onelie from all evill but also from all appearance of evill to what end I beseech you most renowned and most godlie Queen should those things bee brought againe into the Church of God by the Princes commandement which be contrarie to the puritie of the Apostolicall worship which smell of Popish superstition which bee neither availeable to the edification of the godlie nor to order nor for ornament except that which is whoorish which lastlie can bring no profit but on the contrarie manie evills to the Church It is out of all doubt that by this law concerning apparrell all godlie men will be offended but the wicked will laugh in their sleeve and hereby be put in hope to get manie moe things as for those of the middle sort that is such as bee newlie converted and turned from ungodlines to godlines and be not as yet well grounded they will be in great danger and if we speake according to mans judgement they will rather looke back to the old superstition to which by nature wee are inclined then fixe and fasten their eyes upon true religion And therefore this is 〈◊〉 a decree which will bring no advancement at all to godlines but may much further vngodlinesse For though these garments bee not evill and vncleane of and by themselves that is of their owne nature yet because of the former and late abuse they are not altogether free from uncleannesse Certainlie it cannot bee denied but that they will at the least â—giue occasions of manie evills and verie grievous superstitions Now the verie occasions also of evills are to bee shunned To what end then should these bee thrust upon the Church from whom no profit can bee hoped verie much evill may come for this is to tempt God Your famous Maiestie may well remember that not without cause it was written Hee that toucheth pitch shall bee defiled with it that the Apostle had reason to command that we should purge out the old leaven that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe And that Hosea did not foolishly reprove the Iewes because they translated and brought a yong graffe of superstitions out of Israel into their owne garden that is the true Church We ought most religious Queene to haue nothing at all to doe with the Papists in matter of religion saue in those things which they haue common with the Apostles Why I beseech you were some kings otherwise godly reproved and blamed in the Scriptures that they had not taken away Churches or Temples for divine service in the mountaines which were built by holy Fathers ere the building of the Temple in which the Lord was wont to bee worshipped Surely because the Temple being now builded and ordained for divine service God would not haue any footsteps of any other chappell at all to bee extant Therfore also when once the kingdome of Christ was manifested the ceremonies and garments of Aaron ought not any more to take place For this cause the Apostles were upon good ground carefull that after Christs ascention they should so be taken away that no relickes of them remained And if they tooke them away holily unholily haue the Papists called them back againe Now whether it be better to follow the godly simplicitie of the Apostles or the ungodly pompe of the Papists who is ignorant This recalling of such Popish garments your gracious maiestie may beleeue me will bee a greater evill then peradventure it may bee seene even to very wise men at the first blush For me thinkes I see and heare the Monks crying out with very loud voyces in the Pulpits both confirming their followers in their ungodlie religion by the example of your gracious Maiestie and also saying What doth not even the Queene of England also a most learned and a most prudent Princess beginne by little and little to come back to the religion of the holy Church of Rome the most holy and sacred vestments of the Clergie men being taken on againe we are to be in good hope that the day will come wherein she will a length though now they be thought to be dead recall also all the other rites and sacraments of the holy Church of Rome These and such like words no doubt most prudent Queene the Monkes and Iesuites will use in the Pulpits For they take all occasions to confirme their superstitions Therfore to recall these stinking garments and other rubbish of the Popish Church into the Church of Christ at this time what is it but to giue the Papists an occasion and the best that may bee to confirme and harden themselves and theiâ— in their superstitions and also to helpe them in this businesse But let us heare what the Prophet sayd to Iehosaphat King of Iuda when he helped Ahab Darest thou helpe the wicked and loue those vvho hate the Lord For this thing the vvrath of the Lord is vpon thee And what other thing will this bee then even to call backe the weake from the studie of pure Religion and to giue them a privie warning to looke backe and returne into Aegipt It is an easie matter for us weake men who of our owne nature are prone to superstition to slide backe to impietie Therefore occasions of sliding backe to vngodlinesse ought to be taken away and at no hand to bee given And what else I pray you meant God in forbidding to plow with an Oxe and an Asse to sow the same field with diverse kinds of seeds and to weare a garment woven of linnen and wollen together It is an odious and detestable thing with God that the same field of the Lord should bee tilled by ungodlie and godlie Bishops together If in the same Church Popish Doctrine be taught with the Doctrine of
it is much lesse praise-worthy if godly Bishops be enioyned laying aside or at least changing the honest and ancient apparrell which the Apostles wore to wit that common and graue habit to put on the ridiculous and execrable or accursed garments of godlesse Mass-priests Now concerning the third part of the Princes duties there is nothing fitter to trouble the publicke peace of the Church then this counsell For everie noveltie especially in religion either by it selfe if it bee evill disturbs and troubles a good peace or if it bee good gives occasion of trouble by accident by causing contention betweene evill and good men But as in things which be good of themselves of which nature the reformation of the Churches according to the will of God is we are not to care for the troubling of that vngodlie peace that is of the world for Christ came not by his Gospell to keep such a peace but rather to take it away and to send a sword so assuredly by the urging of things indifferent to trouble the peace of Churches and to cause strife between good men and bad yea between godlie men themselues is so wicked that it can by no meanes bee defended so that Ireneus had just cause to reproue Victor Bishop of Rome for this cause as hath been sayd afore For it must needes bee that at such times the Churches be rent in peeces then which thing what is more hurtfull Many examples in the histories of the Church proue this which I say How many and how great troubles arose in the Primitiue Church between those who beside the Gospell urged also circumcision and the law and between those who upon good ground reiected them And how great evills would this dissention haue brought to the Church of Christ had not the Apostles betime withstood them by that councell gathered together at Ierusalem by a lawfull examination and discussing of the cause by manifest testimonis of the Scripturâ—s and by sound reasons If your gracious Maiestie as you ought desire both to be and to seeme Apostolicke then imitate the Apostles in this matter Neither lay and impose this yoke upon the neckes of Christs Disciples your selfe nor suffer it to be imposed by others But if you see that the Bishops disagree about this matter among themselves assemble a Synod and cause this controversie to be examined by the Scriptures And then looke what shall be proved by plaine testimonies and strong reasons propound that to be observed by all and command by your decreeâ— that that be observed and so take disagreement out of the Church For your gracious Maiestie ought to be verie carefull that there be no innovation in religion but according to the word of God By this means shall a true peace concord and unitie of the Churches bee preserved But if the proceeding be otherwise what other thing will it be then to take away vnitie and to trouble the Christian peace And this I may not passe over with silence that by this noveltie of the busines not onely the publick peace shall be troubled in that kingdome but also manie else-where out of that kingdome will haue occasion given them to raise new contentions in Churches and that to the great hinderance of godlines and the more slow proceeding of the Gospell For all men know that the most part of all the Churches who haue fallen from the Bishop of Rome for the Gospels sake doe not onely want but also abhorre those garments and that there be some Churches though few in comparison of the former which doe as yet retaine those garments invented in Poperie as they verie stifly retaine some other things also because the reformers of those Churches otherwise worthy men and verie faithfull servants of Christ durst not at the first neither iudged they it expedient vtterly abolish all Popish things But as the common manner is every man likes his owne best Now I call those things a mans owne not so much which everie man hath invented as those beside which every man chooseth to himselfe receiveth retaineth and pursueth though they be invented to his hand by others But if there be also annexed the examples of other men they bee more and more hardened in them and are not onely hardened but also doe their uttermost endevour by word and writing to draw all the rest to be of their minde Therfore wee easilie see what the issue wil bee if your gracious Maiestie admit of that counsell which some doe giue you to take on apparrell and other more Popish things besides For some men who be not well occupied being stirred up by the example of your Maiestie will write bookes and disperse them throughout all Germanie of these things which they call indifferent to wit that it is lawfull to admit of them nay that they be altogether to be retained that Papists may bee the lesse estranged and alienated from us and so we may come the neerer to concord and agreement As if forsooth the Papists though we for peace sake admitted of all those things would ever amend their Doctrine and banish out of their Churches or at any hand lay downe their false and godless decrees manifest and abhominable superstitions and idolatries and there will bee some who will answer such bookes once dispersed So of this English fire there will rise a new burning flame in Germanie and France on which hot coles the Papists as so many Smiths a forging will sprinkle cold water to make the flame the more vehement And is not this a goodly benefite Who therefore doth not see that this counsell tends to the troubling of all Churches To conclude that golden saying of a certaine learned man is verie true and certaine and approved by long experience that indifferent things that is the question about indifferent things is that golden apple of contention So much shall suffice to haue spoken of the troubling of publick peace what should I say of the consciences of privat belevers It is manifest that they are greatly troubled with this commandement to put on these linnen garments For they do so greatly complain that their lamenting voyces grones doe reach vnto and are heard in Germany Now how grievous and distastfull an offence it is to trouble the consciences of the godly the holy Scripture sheweth partly when it commandeth that we make not the holy Spirit sad neither offend the weak ones partly when it threatneth grivous punishments against those who feare not to doe these things partly also when it propoundeth the examples of the Saints and specially of Paul who speakes thus If meat offend my brother I le eat no flesh while the world standeth that I may not offend my brother For in those words hee giveth a generall rule by his example taken out of the doctrine of Christ to wit that no indifferent thing is to be admitted and yeelded unto much less to bee urged upon others and least of all to be commended by decree if
in the admitting urging commanding of it the minds of good men and consciences of the faithfull be offended for a tender conscience which feareth God is a thing most pretious and acceptable to God How therefore can that counsell be approved which would haue a law established and proclaimed by the Princes command for the use of garments to be used by Ministers in the ministerie For to speak many things in few words if such garments be to be propounded to the faithfull they are to be propounded either as indifferent or as necessary If the later wee doe vngodlily because we make those things necessarie which Christ would haue to be free If the former then are they to be left free to the Churches But by commanding and compelling we make things that bee free and indifferent to be necessarie and so fall into the same trespasse◠Moreover either they be ordained of God by Moses or they be delivered by Christ God manifested in the flesh or they be ordained by the holy Ghost working and speaking in the Apostles or they are of men either godly or wicked Those ceremonies and Levitical garments which were ordained of God by Moses ought all of them to haue an end after the death of Christ as the scriptures shew plainly especially the Epistles of Paul to the Coloss. and Hebr. therefore they cannot be revoked called back without the transgression of Gods will It cannot be sayd that Christ taught them because ther is no word extant to that end but rather he taught plainly oftentimes that all Moses his ceremonies were ended And the same I affirme concerning the Apostles It remaines therefore that they be sayd to be of men If they be from godly men then were they ordained of them either to edefication or for order and comelines But they avail not to edification that is to further comelines but rather tend to the overthrow of it as we saw before neither for any good order but rather they tend to disorder for there is a confusion of godly and wicked Bishops whereas it is meet and equall that one of them bee discerned from anothe◠even by their garments also Neither doe they make Christs spouse comelie as we shewed a little before Therfore we ought not to yeeld unto them And such things as haue been invented by men voyd of Gods spirit doe nothing appertaine to us Lastly the Apostles vsed not these garments For we haue no authenticke testimonie Now the Church is to be fashioned after the rule of that Apostelicall Church in ceremonies and garments as well as in Doctrine What doe wee then with these garments in the Church By whose authoritie can they be approved What profit or wholsome use can the Christian people haue by them But on the contrarie we haue shewed that godliness is weakned by them the pure worship of God is violated Popish superstition is by little and little called back the godlie be offended the wicked be confirmed and hardened in their ungodlinesses the weak in faith are brought into hazard of their salvation there are occasions of many evills given Monkes and other Popish preachers are hereby helped to confirme their followers in their superstition the wrath of God is provoked against us those things which God would haue to bee destroyed are hereby builded againe by 〈◊〉 the whole face of the Church is defiled and disgraced there is a foule sinne committed against honest and good lawes forbidding the putting on of strange and outlandish garments and so the whole Church is dishonored Besides the publick peace of the Church yea of many Churches is troubled one Bishop is set against another the consciences of the godly are troubled and the minds of goood men are offended Gods spirit is made sad in them and this apple of contention is cast as it were upon the table of the Gods Now seeing the matter stands thus most gracious Queene not onely I◠but all my fellow-ministers and all the godly prostrate before you intreat your Maiestie and for Iesus Christs sake whom we are perswaded you loue from your heart we humbly beseech your Maiestie not to embrace that counsell aforesayd neither to giue eare to such counsellors For those counsells most godly Queene are not for the good of that your Church and kingdome nor for the honor of your Maiestie seeing they neither serve to the increase of godliness nor to the retaining of the honestie of the Church neither to the preservation of publick peace but rather verie greatly weaken all these good things which your Princely Ma◠ought chieflie to stand for Let your Ma◠rather bend all your thoughts authoritie and power hereunto that first and aboue all you may haue Bishops who be trulie godlie and well exercised in the holie scriptures as by the blessing of God you haue very many and that you make much of and giue eare to them Secondlie that you bee carefull that with all diligence they may discarge their office watching over the flock teach sound doctrine confute heresies driue away Wolues keepe everie man in his own calling and exhort and stirre up everie man to lead a life beseeming a Christian. The Elders also and Deacons are to be admonished that everie one be diligent in his own office and if need be they are to be compelled by your gracious Ma◠authothoritie that neither the former by their sleeping and winking at the misdemeanors of the flock suffer the reines to be loosed to all licentiousnes and to the lusts of the flesh neither that the later by reason of their immoderate care for their own private businesses neglect the poore people of the Church and omit such other things as belong to their office For these three sorts of men bee the verie sinewes of the Church upon whom the salvation or destruction of the Church doth chieflie depend Furthermore your gracious Ma◠ought to vse great care and diligence that the Vniversities and in them good and godlie teachers bee well looked to cherished liberally maintained and preserved for these are as the mothers and nurses of the Churches in which and by which those are to be fashioned borne brought up and adorned who being fit may be called from time to time to rule and governe the Churches Last of all such things as cannot be corrected amended by the word and discipline of the Church as it is necessarie that according to Gods word they be cut off and taken away by the sword of the Magistrate so your gracious Maiestie is to take care of them as adulteries blasphemies and other capitall crimes of that sort For God hath given the Magistrate the sword for this end that ungodly seducers filthy knaues and unquiet men being restrayned the rest may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlines and honesty This is the matter most gracious Queen whereon you are to spend your thoughts hereabout are your counsells to be occupied here is all your strength to be
the consequence let us heare his Defence The objection which he frameth is this If these ceremonies do not take away our Christian liberty and insnare the consciences of men by their imposition how shall not the Popish ceremonies be excusable and free from accusation in this behalfe His answer is that Popish ceremonies doe infringe Christian liberty both in regard of their nature and also in regard of their number And of both these M. Calvin giveth witnesse I answer 1 for the nature it hath been shewed before that a multitude of Popish ceremonies haue no other nature and necessity allowed unto them by the learned Papists then ours haue by the Defendant himselfe See for this Bellarmine de effect sacr c. 30. That which M. Calvin saith of this point is true notwithstanding in regard of the conceit which is commonly among the simple Papists fostered by unlearned Monkes Friers and other Priests for filthy lucre sake 2 The comparisons which M. Calvin use viz. That it is held among the Papists a greater wickednesse to omit auricular Confession then to liue impiously eat flesh on fasting daies then to liue in fornication to worke on Saints holy-dayes then to act mischiefe c. These he gathereth principally from that practise of the Papists whereby they punish more severely the breach of their ceremonies then of Gods law Now this is not onely practised by our Prelates but also maintained by this Defendant chap. 2 sect 12 vvith such faire pretence as the Papists may well use for the defense of their practise 3 As for the multitude of ceremonies among the Papists that maketh their bondage greater theÌ„ ours but doth it make ours none at all Besides when a few mysticall humane ceremonies are admitted the gate is let open for a multitude even untill the Convocation will say there be too many For Bellarmine himselfe will grant that ceremonies are not to be multiplyed over much Fatemur ceremonias non esse nimis multiplicandas de eff sacr c. 30 but what is too much that must be left to the judgement of the Church or Convocation saith he and the Defendant both SECT VII VIII IX X. IN all these Sections the Def. goeth about to teach us the doctrine vvhich concerneth binding of mens consciences In the first his conclusion is good and sound God therfore and not man doth properly and directly binde the conscience of man It is sufficient therefore to note that it is an improper phrase to say that mens lawes doe binde mens consciences in respect that God commandâ—th to obey the just lawes of men for so as Gerson observeth the Phisitions praescripts should also binde a sick mans conscience in respect of Gods vvill whereby a sick man is tied to follow the good and wholesome counsell of his Physition In the 8 Section two of our Divines are brought in to proue that men are bound in conscience to obserue the just lawes of Magistrates which none of us ever doubted of The 9 Section is spent in proving that Ecclesiasticall lawes haue as great force in respect of conscience as politicke Which if it bee granted yet nothing can from thence be concluded for the advantage of ceremonies unlawfully imposed But 1 it is diligently to be observed that the Church hath no commission for to make any lawes properly so called as I haue formerly shewed in cap. 1 sect 16. 2 the common received opinion of all our Divines is contrary to that which the Defendant heere saith as may be seene in Bellarmine de Pont. Rom. l. 4 c. 15 and Iunius Whitâ—kers with the rest who vvriting against Bellarmine doe not denie but defend that which he saith Lutherani Calvinistae omnes docent 3 The interrogatories vvhich the Defendant ministreth unto us in this case doth not proue his Assertion For the Church is a Society but not compleat if it be considered as not comprehending Christ the Head and onely Law maker of it Breach of peace is not a sinne against an Ecclesiasticall but a divine law Obedience is to be yeelded unto lawfull Ecclesiasticall Governours vvhen they bring the charge of Christ vvhose Ministers they are See D. Whitakers de pont Rom. cont 4 q 7 c. 2 ad 12. The Kings stamp but vvith an act of Parliament maketh a law in England As for Apostolicall constitutions to vvhich our canons are as like as Apples are to Oisters the same answer which Doctor Whitakers contra 4 q. 7 c. 2 ad 5. vvith other of our Divines giveth to Bellarmine may serue for our Defendant In the 10 sect he setteth downe nothing but that vvhich he knoweth we all grant SECT XI AGainst the Accusation of contempt there vvas as it seemeth alledged by M. Nic. that by the same reason that Non-conformitie is contempt bowling disusing of capps and such habites prescribed should be contempt Heere the Defendant first bringeth divers interpretations out of the Casualists and then taketh one for granted vvithout rendring of any reason that he may by it excuse bowling and disuse of cappes But vvhat if vvee take hold of another interpretation esteeming the obligation by the intent of the Law-makers vvhich vvas against Popish Recusancie of our Communion-booke and not against refusall of some few ceremonies contained therein I speake now of the Statute Law not of lawlesse canons Or what if wee should stand upon that interpretation vvhich fetcheth the obligation from the vveight of the matter imposed vvhich in our ceremonies is very little Some of these I am sure the Bishops must flye if they vvill defend their disuse of the Crosier staffe vvhich they are bound by our Lawes as vvell to use as the Ministers are surplusses But all this is needlesse because there can be no contempt in a conscionable forbearance of unlawfull impositions such as the ceremonies are sufficienaly proved to be SECT XII HEere certaine Divines are brought in witnessing 1 that superstitious opinions doe depriue men of Christian liberty vvhich we deny not but take their testimonies as making against our ceremonies because as I haue formerly shewed some of these superstitious opinions are inseparable from the imposing and using of them 2 That Christian liberty doth not consist in the use or disuse of things indifferent vvhich we also vvillingly grant But I would haue the Defendant remember that all freedome is not in the minde and conscience For vvhere the minde is free the body may be bound else Christians should not taste so much of this vvorlds misery as they doe Now Christ hath left unto us not onely an inward liberty of minde and conscience but also an outward freedom of our bodies and outward man from such bodily rites in his worship as haue not his stampe upon them and his Spirit and blessing promised unto them Of this the Defendant saith nothing at all SECT XIII XIIII COncerning the profession of our Church so often brought in enough hath been said before now it sufficeth to answer that no profession whatsoever can