there are to be discussed The first whether a man may with a good conscience suffer himselfe to bee depriued or suspended of his Ministry for not conforming to the Ceremonies prescribed and established in the present Church of England Such as the Surplesse Crosse in Baptisme Kneeling at Communion Ring in Marriage and the like The second whether a man ought not rather of conscience to conforme to all the Ceremonies prescribed in the Church of England then to suffer himselfe to be depriued of his Ministry Answ 1 These questions depend the one vpon the other so that the answere of the one giueth answer to the other Therefore the former question I answer negatiuely That namely A man cannot as I suppose with a good conscience suffer himselfe to bee depriued of his Ministry for not conforming to the Ceremonies To the latter question I say that a man is bound in conscience rather to conforme to all the Ceremonies of the Church of England then suffer his Ministry to be suspended or depriued The reason of which answers stands in this Because he shall sin against God in not conforming and in suffering himselfe for that cause to be depriued of his Ministration in the Church That he shall sinne in so doing will appeare by these two reasons Reason 1 First that the practise of suffering depriuation for not conforming to the ceremonies of this our Church and the doctrine thereof is directly against the Word of God This also is proued by two points Because it is against the doctrine and practise of the holy Apostles of Christ Because it is against the grounds of Gods Word and they are two One ground is this where two duties doe meet a greater and a lesse whereof both cannot bee done at the same time the lesser dutie must yeeld vnto the greater But this doctrine of suffering depriuation for not conforming teacheth and the practise thereof causeth to neglect a greater duty for the performing of a lesser Therefore it seemeth to bee an errour in doctrine and a sin in practise A second ground is this All things must bee done in loue 1. Cor. 6. 14. But this doctrine and practise is against the royall Lawe of loue and therefore seemeth to bee vnlawfull Reason 2 The second maine reason is this For that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for not conforming to the Ceremonies of our Church or the like tendeth to condemne all true Churches all faithfull and sound teachers all sincere Christians of all times and places since the time of the Apostles of Christ which haue taught and practised otherwise These things being directly and plainely proued it will I doubt not appeare that to suffer depriuation or suspension for refusing to conforme to the Ceremonies prescribed is a sinne Whereupon will follow these conclusions That seeing those Ministers haue sinned at least a sinne of ignorance who haue suffered depriuation for refusing to conforme to the Ceremonies prescribed they ought of conscience to offer conformitie to the Ceremonies that they may returne to their Ministry againe That such as not conforming to the Ceremonies doe remaine in their places vndepriued are bound in conscience to conforme vnto the Ceremonies rather then to suffer themselues to be depriued or suspended That such as are profitably or probably fitted with gifts vnto the Ministry and doe withall desire to enter into that calling are also tied in conscience before God to promise and practise conformity to the Ceremonies prescribed rather then refusing so to doe to bee kept out of the Ministery That such Christians as doe make conscience of the Ceremonies as kneeling at the Communion admitting their children to be baptised with the Crosse hearing of publike prayer or preaching in a Surplesse are of conscience to admit of these things and to practise them rather then to absent themselues or to be depriued of the worships of God and that otherwise they shall sinne against God It remaineth therefore that the former reasons be proued which by Gods helpe I will performe in order Arg. 1 Reason 1 The doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation and losse of Ministry is directly against the Word of GOD which no man will deny to be sinfull and erronious This assertion is confirmed by the probation of two farther points Because such doctrine and practise is contrary to the doctrine and practise of the Apostles of Christ Because it is against the grounds of Gods Word Concerning the first point namely that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation especially vpon the reasons vrged against our Ceremonies is contrary to the doctrine of the holy and inspired Apostles and so by consequence is an errour and sin I proue it by two reasons Because 1 the holy Apostles with the whole Church at Ierusalem 2 by inspiration of the holy Ghost and commandement of God 3 did practise themselues 4 and caused others to practise 5 yea aduised one another 6 and inioyned or commanded 7 whole Churches the practise of 8 as euill and inconuenient Ceremonies 9 in sundry maine respects as in their iudgement ours are namely in number 10 nature 11 vse 12 and euill effects and 13 that for reasons equiuolent or inferiour to the auoyding of depriuation This proposition I thus proue in the seuerall members 1. The holy Apostles and whole Church at Ierusalem namely Peter Acts 15. 7. Iames Acts 15. 13. 21. 18. 21. 24. 25. Paul Acts 15. 2. 22. 18. 18. 21. 26. 1. Cor. 9. 10. Barnabas Acts 15. 2. 22. Iudas Sylas which were Prophets Acts 15. 22. 23. The Apostles all the Elders and whole Church Acts 15. 4. 6. 23. and 21. 18. 25. 2. By inspiration of the holy Ghost and commaundement of God as appeareth Acts 15. 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to vs. Also Iames and the Elders Acts 21. 18. that determined before one practise of conformity to Iewish Ceremonies Acts 21. 25. By inspiration of the holy Ghost Acts 15. 13. 28. did afterwards perswade Paul to another practise of conformity to Iewish Rites Acts 21. 23. 24. And the things written and determined by the Apostles euen concerning matters of order in the Church are the commandements of God 1. Cor. 14. 37. 3. Did practise themselues For Paul shaued himselfe and made a vow Act. 18. 18. Paul purified himselfe contributed and entred into the Temple declared the accomplishment of the dayes of the purification vntill that an offering should bee offered for euery one of them Acts 21. 24. 26. Paul vnto the Iew became as a Iew to the men vnder the Law as though he had been vnder the Law 1. Cor. 9. 20. 4. And caused others to practise For Paul circumcised Timothy Acts 16. 3. Paul took the men and was purified with them Acts 21. 24. 5. Aduised one another For Iames and the Elders perswaded Paul thus to conforme Doe this that we say vnto thee take them the votaries purifie thy selfe with them contribute with
do vnfit Ceremonies destroy the power efficacy thereof Seuenthly Because the dutie of preaching is simply necessary both in respect of Gods particular command and also in respect of the preacher who is attended with a woe if he neglect 1. Cor. 9. 16. Hos 4. 6. and in respect of the people who are ordinarily by this meanes gathered edified and saued Ephes 4. 11 12 1. Cor. 1. 21 and doe perish if they haue it not Prou. 29. 18 Hos 4. 6. But the vsing of conuenient Ceremonies is not simply necessarie onely secundum quid for the sake of preaching to further and vphold it in which respect scandelous and dangerous ceremonies may be necessary to be inioyned and practised Act. 15. 28. 29. And with inconuenient and hurtful Ceremonies a Church may be a true church as the Apostolical Church of Antioch was as the most part of primitiue churches were and of reformed Churches vsing far worse ceremonies then ours are pretended to be Also a Christian may haue the being of a true Christian may so remaine standing in the true practise of faith repentance loue patience c. and in the assurance of his election adoption iustification and in that state may finally be saued albeit hee liue and die in the practise of as euill ceremonies as ours are supposed who if he should continue without the meanes of preaching the Word might haue great cause to doubt of all Eightly Because of their subordination for Ceremonies as before is noted and the determination of them doe serue the ordinance of preaching the Word and are by the Church to be determined as may best serue for the furtherance thereof so they be not formally in their nature impious in which respects as before is said it may be expedient to admit of very inconuenient and accidentally hurtfull Ceremonies namely for the furtherance of the Gospel edification of the church Else the Apostles by direction of the holy Ghost sinned in their doctrine and practise But the ordinance of preaching doth at no time serue fit Ceremonies neither should giue place by laboring against vnfit Thus from the nature now from their effects it doth in like sort appeare that the duty of preaching tieth the conscience with a farre greater bond then the duty of refusing of the prescribed Ceremonies First on the better part The benefit of preaching the Word is incomparably greater then the benefit of auoyding these or the like inconuenient Ceremonies By the preaching of the Word the Church hath name and being yea though Ceremonies as is noted be very inconuenient and doe remaine in the Church as timber hay and stuble vpon Christ the foundation Ceremonies be they euer so well ordered without preaching are of no force to giue name or being to the Church Now farre greater is the Churches being the progresse and liberty of the Gospell the publike vse of the meanes of new birth faith and saluation and the visibility of Christ his kingdome vpon earth then the auoyding of offence and such other inconueniences accidentall not inherent neither purposed by Ceremonies in their nature not euill but meerely indifferent the one bringing a publike good to the whole Church the inconuenience of the other but priuate to a few who take offence and in this case by their owne default Besides experience sheweth how God hath prospered multitudes of latter times that haue entred by conformitie in euery place and such who standing in their places haue with a grounded conscience not by sinister respects conformed to preuent their depriuation or to redeeme it being lost The Lord hath done as much good by them as by any Minister depriued by the conuersion confirmation consolation reclamation excitation edification I say not refusing Ceremonies speaking against Bishops pleading for Church discipline but in the maine doctrines and duties of sauing grace and goodnesse Gods blessing hath beene on them as much as euer before the Papists and enemies of righteousnesse haue beene no lesse vexed and conuinced yea Saints no lesse comforted and confirmed the Church no lesse fortified and the truth of the Gospell no lesse propagated if not much more And the reason hereof is plaine because experience sheweth that the Church is not builded vp but destroied rather afflicted consciences nothing quieted but troubled rather doubtful mindes not setled but distracted rather zealous mindes not rectified but disordered rather Papists and Brownists not wonne or conuinced but rather driuen further backe by the doctrine practise endlesse disputations of discipline ceremonies constitution of Churches and the like but by the sound doctrine essentiall practise of repentance from dead works faith in Christ loue patience and good works which sauing points of the mistery of godlinesse are more taught and better practised by simple hearts when the stumbling blockes of these lesse pertinent questions as Mint and Cummin in respect of Mercy and Iudgement are remoued or more sparingly and peaceably debated Secondly on the worser part The mischiefe offence and inconuenience of the Ministers depriuation for not conforming to the Ceremonies seemeth in reason and hath appeared in experience to bee more by many degrees then the scandall and inconueniences arising of conforming to redeeming of their preaching which thing appeareth First because the Papistes doe more reioyce the Godly are much more grieued the Libertines doe much more triumph and so are like to doe as they haue all more cause to behold the Gospel interrupted the trueth obscured the Church weakened the Ministers of God throwne out the flocke of Christ scattered and the visible kingdome of Christ diuided and dessolued then they would be to behold some inconuenient Ceremonies these greater things of the law remaining entire whereby Antichrist and sinne is dayly discouered and wasted and by the which trueth and pietie doe more encrease and preuaile Admit that by inconuenient Ceremonies the Church should bee blemished and the consciences of many scandalized yet in depriuation of teachers without supply of as good the Church of God tendeth to dessolution and vtter ruine yea the soules of all the people are endangered to perish Prouerb 29. 18. Hos 4. 6. Math. 15. 14. For without the preaching of the worde there is no publique ordinary meanes of saluation left and so by consequence no ordinary meanes of the hope of saluation though all both Minister and people should abstaine from these inconuenient Ceremonies Wheras so long as the word and Gospel preached doeth remaine Christ the foundation doeth remaine both in sound and doctrine 1. Cor. 3. 11. Ephe. 2. 20. as also in assured presence Matth. 18. 20. and 28. 20. the infinite value of whose blood clenseth from all sin 1. Ioh. 1. 7. and 5 12 howsoeuer the stubble of corrupt doctrine Ceremonies do remaine withall and so the Church both Minister and people retaining and laying hold on the foundation may bee saued though as by fire 1. Cor. 3. 15. Secondly experience teacheth vs what a decay of
Christ and that from the reason for which Moses did permit this inconuenient precept which was the hardnesse of the Iewish nations heart Matth. 19. 8. Marke 10. 5. Also it is not lawfull for it is not good to cast away the good creatures of God which may serue for the life of man but they must bee preserued that nothing bee lost Matthew 15. 26. Iohn 6. 12. 13. yet in a case of necessitie to preserue life and preuent violent death a substantiall of the second table of greater reason Paul and the rest of his company which were in the Ship with him in danger of Shipwracke did lawfully cast with their owne handes the tackling and the wheate out of the Ship into the Sea where it was spoiled and destroyed Acts 27. 19. 38. Fourthly and lastly the substantials of the first table doe ouerrule the ceremonials of the first table which includeth the case in question It was vnlawfull in the law for the Priestes to admit or for the people to come vnto the Sacraments otherwise then as it was written though the failing was but a ceremoniall matter yet so did the people come and the Priestes admit the people in the time of Hezekias that the substantiall worship of God in the Passeouer should not bee hindred In which respect God layed not the breach of dutie to the charge of such as sought God in that Sacraments with their whole heart 2. Chron. 33. 18. 19. 20. likewise the substantiall worships of God requiring paines and labour of body such as the sacrifice of the law and other businesse to be done vpon the Sabboth meeting the precept of bodily rest vpon the Sabboth by which practise the Sabboth in respect of the rest is broken Mat. 5. 12. yet in respect of performance of the superior and substantiall worships they were blamelesse for breaking the Sabboth in the ceremoniall rest thereof The vnlawfulnesse of Iewish Ceremonies in many respects hath before appeared whereby was violated a ceremoniall circumstantiall dutie of the first Table which yet the Apostles we see did practise to further the substantials thereof namely the libertie of the Gospel and edification and peace of the Church of God By all which instances wee may see this conclusion prooued A matter euill by it selfe alone considered leaueth to be euill when a superior dutie commeth in place to ouerrule it whereby we may inferre that admitting the Ceremonies prescribed to bee euill in some sence yet in performance of a superior worke as to continue in preaching of the worke they leaue to bee a sinne Because the dutie of refusing of such like Ceremonies is a subordinate dutie to the practising of the word by preaching the one being a dutie circumstantiall the other an externall dutie substantiall Obiection To conforme to these Ceremonies prescribed is the violation of a negatiue precept now negatiue precepts doe bind ad semper and as Master Perkins saith Golden Chaine cap. 19. they bind at all times and to all times The affirmatiue bindeth at all times but not to all times A negatiue is broken by acting or doing a thing forbidden an affirmatiue is broken by omitting some dutie positiuely commanded as for example I may for a time omit preaching or prayer I am not bound continually to vse them but haue houres of omission But no sinne of adultery bowing to an idoll murther swearing prophaning of the Sabboth so neither of conforming to forbidden Ceremonies The negatiues are these Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any similitudes Exodus 20. 4. giue no offence to the Church 1. Cor. 10. 32. vse not the fashions of idolaters Leuit. 19. 27. 28. wherefore we may not neglect the refusing of Ceremonies to redeeme our dutie of preaching Answere 1 This rule is not rightly conceiued for Master Perkins saith not that all negatiues doe alway bind and in all cases so that in no case they may at any time be violated but only addeth that negatiues are of more force then affirmatiues which indeede is trew Also this rule is not generally true for these precepts were negatiue which yet were violated none but Priestes must eare sheaw bread let none of the people eate thereof not lawfull but onely for Priestes Matth. 12. 4. yet Dauid did lawfully violate it and they that were with him out of standing reason I will haue mercie not sacrifice Matthew 12. 7. thou shalt doe no worke Exodus 20. 10. yet the Priestes brake this and are blamelesse the Apostles violate it and are innocent by the former reason I will haue mercie and not sacrifice Matthew 12. 1. 2. 5. 7. In the the like case men doe lawfully feede and saue the life of their cattle Mat. 12. 11. 12. Lu. 14. 5. 6. and 13. 15. seruile labour is vsed as carrying of a bead Ioh. 5. 8. 9. 10. cast not bread to whelpes Matth. 15. 26. let nothing of Gods good creatures be lost Ioh. 6. 12. 13. yet Paul and his company doe lawfully cast away the goods in the Ship to saue their liues Acts 27. 19. 38. Let no murtherer liue let not thine eye spare a man hating and killing his neighbour Deut. 19. 11. 12. 13. Num. 35. 30. 31. 32. 33. yet Dauid suffered Ioab the murtherer of Amasa Abner Vriah all his dayes vpon this ground hee was to hard for Dauid 2. Samuel 3. 39. till after his death 1. Kings 2. 5. 6. neither was Dauid reprooued or the land plagued as it was threatned Numb 35. 33. Deut. 21. thou shalt not kill Exodus 20. 13. no not in heart or intention Matthew 5. 21. 22. yet Abraham sinned not but is commended and rewarded of God for purposing and setling himselfe to kill his onely sonne Genesis 22. 11. 16. grant no diuorce betweene man and wife for euery cause not for light cause Ab initio non fuit sic Matthew 19. 8. yet Moses is not blamed for permitting or commanding such a bill Matthew 19. 8. Deut. 24. 1. 2. but is iustified because hee did it for the hardnesse of their hearts Matthew 19. 8. Marke 10. 5. Let none bee vncircumcised after eight dayes Genesis 8. 11. 12. 13. yet for fortie yeeres there was not one circumcised Ios 5. 5. 6. 7. 9. let none legally vnsanctified be admitted to the Passeouer 2. Chron. 30. 18. Matth. 7. 6. yet in case of necessitie some were admitted and approued of God being internally sanctified 2. Chro. 30. 19. 20. hate not father mother brother sister wife life Exodus 21. 17. Pro. 20. 20. yet when Christ calleth vs to shew our loue to him and that the loue of these will not stand with our loue to Christ we must hate them indeede and testifie it by our outward practise Luke 14. 26. 33. Deut. 13. 6. 7. 8. 9. 2. Chro. 15. 16. for the better explication of this rule and to see how farre it holdeth and how smally it concernes our case I say first that this rule holds in the duties of the first table which
forbides sinne which by no circumstance can be amended but are formally euill and in nature and opposite to the puritie and immutability of Gods nature as in these Haue none other gods Commit not Idolatry Take not Gods name in vaine There is no time or occasion or duety superior wherein a man may violate the precepts they are sempiternally and irreuocably inuiolable without exception Duties also of the second table as resist not the Magistrate Rom. 13. 2. despise not thy parents Prou. 23. 22. commit not murther commit not adulterie steale not beare not false witnesse couet not neither may these duties in any case bee or for any superior reason violated neither haue they beene heretofore broken but onely in a case of exception and that is of Gods speciall command For in this case the common rule holdeth That a particular command of God vnto one person or more ouer rules a generall In which case the substantiall negatiues of the second table doe yeeld to the substantiall affirmatiues of the first as being all subordinate to the loue of God As the particular command of God to Abraham to kill and offer his sonne Isaack Gen. 22. 10. 12. ouerrules the generall command of God Thou shalt doe no murther and in Abraham it was no murther notwithstanding that command which else had beene The particular command of God to Iehu if not Ieroboam 1. Kin. 11. 35 37 38 and 12. 24. to smite the house of Ahab his master the Queene and the blood royall 2. Kin. 9. 6 7 9 10 10 15 16 17 30. which else had beene vtterly vnlawfull for him to doe So Gods particular command vnto the Israelites to borrow that of the Egyptians which they neuer paid and so spoyling them Ex. 3. 22 and 11. 2. and 12. 35. ouerswayd the general command Thou shalt not steale which else had bin theft in them Also the particular command of God vnto the Prophet Ezechiel not to mourne for his dead and most deere wife Eze. 24. 15 16 17 18. which else had beene argued want of naturall affection I will not giue instance of Gods particular command to Hosea cap. 1. 2. to marry a wife of fornications because the place is otherwise interpreted by the best iudgements as Zanchius Drusius Iunius Paraeus item Eman. Sad. in hunc locum though others vnderstand it otherwise that is litterally The like is of the Lord particular command of smiting the Prophet 1. King 20. 35 36 37. In which case it was no sinne to smite and wound the innocent Prophet and it was a good worke of obedience to smite him which without the particular command of God had beene a sinne Secondly this rule holdes excepting in a case of simple necessitie In which respect it was lawfull for Paul to cast the wheate into the Sea though otherwise it were not good to doe it Mat. 15. 26. and for Dauid to spare Ioab the murtherer in a case of necessity because he was too hard for him also Moses command for permission of diuorce is heereby iustified for the hardnesse of the Iewes hearts a case of necessitie Also the Apostles prescribing and practising the Iewish Ceremonies was vnlawfull but in a case of necessitie of like nature is Dauids eating the Shew-bread the Apostles rubbing of the eares of Corne vnder this kinde commeth the lawfull vse of all indifferent scandalous things ouerruled by necessitie and so is the conformity vnto the Ceremonies prescribed made lawfull for all the negatiue prohibitions whether one or other in this case of necessitie Thirdly this rule holdeth also in matters circumstantiall and ceremoniall excepting when a superior duety meetes with them to ouerrule them of this kind is the case of Dauids eathing Shew-bread and the Apostles practising and prescribing Iewish Ceremonies for the Churches peace and furtherance of the Gospel which hade not else beene lawfull to haue done and here is also an image of our case Here it is demanded whether an affimatiue substantiall of the first table meeting with a negatiue circumstantiall of the first table the former doeth ouerrule the latter I answere yea For such were the former cases of Dauids eating the Shew-bread of the Apostles practise of Mosaicall Ceremonies and the like By this also we haue an answere against the objection That we may lawfully omit good to doe some superior duety or to omit good for a time to preuent a mischiefe of sinne or harme to others or our selues as to conceale a trueth to saue ones life or to omit preaching to quench an house on fire But we may not commit an euill to purchase or procure any good Which obiection is both vntrue for Dauids eating Shew-bread the Apostles practising of Iewish scandalous and hurtful Ceremonies and the like instances before rehearsed were matters of commission not of omission and besides this obiection is incident into the former For omission is of duties affirmatiue and commission is against duties negatiue Obiect These Ceremonies are against the second Commandement which forbiddeth humane inuentions in Gods worship significatiue Ceremonies abused to superstition by Idolators and apt to be abused by vs also which commandeth vs all possible purity and simplicity in the worships of God Ergo our Ceremonies are vnlawfull simply and in nature euill as being idolatrous and may not be practised Answ This obiection is not wel vrged by any as yet that I know because it is vrged confusedly and distinguisheth not of the parts of this commandement neither declareth the degrees of the duties commanded or of the sinne committed against this command that so the reason might bee euident why and how farre these Ceremonies are against the second Commandement But I answere though a man should admit the antecedent that these Ceremonies in these respects are against the second commandement yet it followeth not therefore wee may not vse them to preuent depriuation or to redeeme the libertie of the Gospell and the reason is that as the reason of the refusing of such Ceremonies as ours are be commanded so also is the preaching of the Word commaunded in the second Commandement the former as a circumstantiall duety to which all Ceremonies are as a lesser worke to a greater The lesser may not commaund or ouerrule a greater if it bee sayde these Ceremonies are Species idoloatriae kindes or degrees of idolatry I answere that admit it were so yet it is such aspecies as the wearing of some apparrell a little too fine yet not being euill in it selfe or the smile of the wife of another man a little too familiar without euill intention may bee aspecies or gradus of adultery that is of the least degree thereof quatenus it may be an occasion and accidentall meanes of scandall in some and vncleanenessein others which is farre from making a diuorce or so much as sturring indignation in the husband But if we would make a paralell and equall cause betweene that case and ours it must be thus namely in a case
vniuersall doctrine of all sound Teachers of all times and places as appeareth else where in the following arguments yea it condemneth the very inspired Apostles of Iesus Christ and the Churches of their planting which for performance of greater duties did conforme themselues perswade others to conforme and commanded the same to others as a duty good and necessary All which inconueniences by conformity euen vnto inconuenient Ceremonies in the case of depriuation would bee wholy auoyded which by not conforming are needlessely maintained strengthened and vpholden It followeth therefore that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for refusing Ceremonies though in some respect inconuenient is opposite vnto the law of loue and so by consequence and error and a sinne * Touching the doctrine of this point and application thereof vnto the practise of like Ceremonies to ours in a like case looke Gual in act 16. 3. hom 106. fol. 199. Pâ—sc in act 15. 28. Idem in act 21. 20. Idem in act 16. 3 Calu. in act 15. 28. fol. 265. Idem in act â—8 18. Aret. in act 15. 28. fol. 72. Idem in act 16. 3. fol. 75. Beza annot in act 15. 29. in act 16. 4. 21. 20. 18. 18. Reason 2 Thus much of the first maine reason prouing that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for refusing to conforme to the prescribed Ceremonies is contrary to Gods word and therefore an error and a sinne Argu. 4 Now the second maine reason standeth in this because the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for refusing to conforme to the Ceremonies prescribed in the present Church of England or the like tendeth directly to condemne all true Churches of Christ Primitiue and latter and all sound teachers and sincere Christians of all times and places since the time of the Apostles which appeareth to bee an errour in doctrine and a sinne in practise For the further manifestation of this reason there must be proued these two points That to condemne all true Churches and sound Teachers of all times and places primitiue and latter for teaching error in any doctrine or maintaining or committing maintained sinne in practise is a sinne and error That this Doctrine and practise of suffring depriuation for refusing to conforme to the prescribed Ceremonies in our present Church of England or to the like doth condemne all true Churches and sincere Teachers of all times and places since the times of the Apostles Which points being prooued the conclusion will ineuitably follow that to suffer depriuation for refusing to conforme is a sinne and an error to be taught and practised Touching the former point That namely to condemne 1. Point all true Churches and sound teachers for teaching and maintaining false doctrine and sinne is both an error and a sinne First I say it is an error Because in condemning their doctrine for false doctrine euen in this point they condemned the inspired doctrine of the holy Apostles for false doctrine as before appeareth which must needes bee an error and a sinne of no light degree Because it condemneth their doctrine practise which are followers of the Apostles in their inspired doctrine and practise and which walke so as they haue them for an example which rule of doctrine and practise being commended as true and commanded as iust Phil. 3. 17. and 4. 9. the contrary thereto must needes be an error Because the true Catholike Church indefinitely taken for the company of the faithfull in all ages being as they are euer built on the foundations of the Prophets and Apostles and Christ the corner stone Eph. 2. 20. is the pillar and ground of trueth 1. Tim. 3. 15. but whatsoeuer is against the ground of trueth must needes be an error Because the true Church of all ages being defined truely ly to bee the congregation of the faithfull consisteth of a company of spirituall persons not of carnall blinde or prophaine persons or hereticall Idolatours and tiranious Popes or Prelates as the Papistes Now the spirituall man discerneth all things 1. Corinth 2. 15. euen the deepe things of God vers 10. by the spirit which God hath giuen him ver 12. how much more is the whole company of all the spirituall able to performe the same wherefore the contrary to their doctrine must needs be an error Because it condemneth the whole streame of the faithfull teachers and Churches of all ages of an hainous and damnable crime namely the breaking the lesser commandements of God and the teaching of men so to doe whereby they exclude them by necessary consequence out of heauen Matthew 5. 19. which must needes bee a grosse error and no small sinne Because no scripture is of priuate interpretation 2. Peter 1. 20. either of priuate spirits of carnall persons though they be many as the interpretations of the Romish Popes and Doctors or of other heretickes failing in the foundation or of a few Godly and well affected Persons against the Ocean and world of the faithfull but the iudgements of the English depriued Ministers being against the whole true Church of Christ is but as a litle streame vnto the Ocean or a small field vnto the world their opinion therefore against the whole Church is of priuate interpretation and an error Because it is against the rules of Gods word and meanes appointed of God for the finding out of the trueth euen in such like cases as this for a few Ministers and other persons be they otherwise neuer so faithfull to be opposite in iudgement to the whole Church 1 One meanes is for learners to obey their teachers Hebrew 13. 17. especially teaching secundum legem according to the law Deut. 18. 11. but the Fathers and Godly learned Doctors since them being the Ministers of the Church of Christ in all ages are the Teachers of all others specially if they teach secundum legem which must be hearkened vnto and obeyed and whosoeuer doth not hearken to them so teaching erreth 2 An other meanes and ordinance of God is this that two or three Prophets speaking the rest must iudge of that they speake and that the spirit of the Prophets must bee subiect to the Prophets 1. Cor. 14. 29. 32. When therefore a few English Ministers doe speake in the Church the will of God is this that the whole Church of all ages and places should iudge but for the whole Catholike Church of all ages and places to speake and a few Ministers of one only Prouince and of one time to iudge and censure them is the mother of confusion and an enemie to peace as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 14. 32. 33. and contrary to this rule and ordinance of God and therefore the way to error 3 An other meanes of Gods appointment euen in the like case with this that in matters of difference not onely about fundamentall points but also in matters of Ceremonies when the peace of the Church is broken about them the vnitie of brethren
deuided and the course of the Gospel hindred and interrupted to aske and seeke the iudgement of other true Churches and Teachers about the case in question As the Apostles did in Act. 15. 2 3 4 6. and the Primitiue ages following after their example also did imitate as their duty was Ph. 3. 17. and 4. 8 9. in which case if the iudgment of one two or twenty Churches be to be harkned to and not despised or contradicted rashly how much lesse the iudgement of all true Churches of all times and places Now for a few persons of one Prouince as of England and of one season to sway against all Churches to condemne their doctrine and practise of sinne and error is against this ordinance of God and the way to error Because the swaying against the iudgement and practise VIII of all Churches and Teachers is against the equity of many forcible and maine reasons For 1 Who are more likely to know the trueth euen in such a point as this then the whole company of such First who are indued with the most excellent gifts in the Church and greatest degrees of knowledge and vnderstanding of Gods word and with meanes tending thereunto doe not the best sights best iudge of colours Secondly who are and haue been endued with greatest degrees of euident sanctity Thirdly whose labours haue beene most of all blessed of God for the conuersion of soules for the ouerthrow of sinne and Antichrist and Heresies Fourthly who haue liued and died most comfortably in the Lord If a man should not rest in the iudgements of the whole company of such where should he rest or what peace or assurance shall hee haue to haue all these so many as all and so incomparable persons his aduersaries as in condemning such for sinners and false Teachers 2 No one point of error can be shewed which is established by this rule namely by the consent of iudgement and practise of all Churches primitiue and reformed latter For albeit some faithfull persons and some true Churches may differ from some other in sundry points and thereby there must needes bee error in one part or other yet it were hard for a few priuate persons to conuince them all of errour in a matter wherein they all agree if they were in errour is it not strange no age should bee able to discerne it 3 Such as haue wilfully and professedly differed from this rule haue beene found to haue beene New-fangles Heretickes Schismatickes and prophane persons such as Donatists Anabaptists Brownists Arians Famelists and the like and are of infinite varieties one from another and therefore all or the very most must needes bee an errour for there is but one trueth 4 By the reiecting of this rule euery Sect maketh a way open to their owne contempt For if the iudgement of so reuerend and so excellent lights and agreement of them all is to bee despised and reiected by any particular why should not others reiect and contemne them and their iudgement the matter being difficult and of disputable nature and themselues being so many thousand degrees behind the person whom they thus despise in their worth or number 5 It opens a doore to singularitie noueltie and of endlesse differences errors and contentions and leaues no rule of Peace or of ending dissentions in the Church of God For if one may vnder colour of trueth teach and practise what he list in his diuersitie why may not another do the like or what rule will there be to compose the dissention that doe and will arise in the Church which one part hauing the trueth may vrge vnto the other voyd of truth why should hee rather follow this part then that wherefore in this case wee are to note that no priuate person or persons may raise vp any new opinion and pretend Scripture for it and so propose it for a Doctrine and a truth in the Church though hee condemne the whole Church beside for an error and a sinne Because as the Scriptures are not of priuate interpretation so Gods Spirit is not priuate but generall to all the faithfull Thus wee see this doctrine of swaying against all true Churches and Teachers of all ages and places and condemning them of sinne and error is false doctrine Whereupon also it followeth secondly that it is a sinne which also appeareth further I Because Dauid doth iudge himselfe that he trespassed in that he being a priuate man condemned and censured all the generation of Gods children Psal 73. 13. 14. 15. Againe because God laieth a woe vpon the practise of taking away the righteousnesse of the righteous from him Esa 5. 23. or of condemning the iust Pr. 17. 15. But that doctrine practise which laieth a sin vnto the charge of all Gods Church takes away their righteousnes and condemnes them in that point Therefore it is a sinne euen of bearing false witnesse against the whole congregation of neighbours 2 Because the censuring of all true Churches for a sin or of false Doctrine is contrary to the Commandements of God who would haue the Teachers obeyed and hearkened vnto which doe teach and define secundum legem as aboue I noted Heb. 13. 17. Deut. 17. 9 10 11 12. and would haue the rest to iudge of the words of a few which prophesie 1. Cor. 14. 29. 32. and of the commandement of walking in the wayes of good men Pro. 2. 20. Phil. 3. 17. and 4. 9. It is also contrary to the practise of the holy Apostles who determined one Churches differences by another Act. 15. 2. as before I noted 3 Because this Doctrine is the ground and mother of schisme For S. Paul noteth that they cause diuision and offences that teach and practise contrary to the doctrine which the whole Church hath receiued especially from the Apostles Rom. 16. 17. Therefore this doctrine is a sinne Obiect Against this point it is alleadged first that it is a Popish ground to make the Church the ground of our Faith It contradicteth the Doctrine of our Churches against the Papists Answ This point includeth no Popish ground nor doeth it contradict the Doctrine of our Churches against the Papists For the Churches desire nothing so much against the Papists then that they would grant the elect and faithfull to bee the onely Church and then that they would stand to the iudgement determination and practise of such as are faithfull in all ages But that this may the better appeare to bee no Popish ground Wee are to note 1 The Papists vnderstand the Church to consist onely of persons in office and those often hereticall sacrilegious and prophane persons such as their Popes Cardinalls carnall Bishops Wee the only faithfull in all times and places whether in office or not 2 They vrge Apocriphall and basterd Fathers for the patronage of their errors Wee the vndoubted writings of the approued Fathers 3 They vrge the Fathers errors and things wherein they differ we their truth
would euer practise or command those things after that they were growne so bad after that hee had seene iust cause to inueigh against them and condemne them in that manner To this purpose also the Apostles resolution in not suffering Titus to be circumcised when hee saw what an abuse that Ceremonie was growen vnto and how dangerous an effect was like to follow it if hee had yeelded vnto it maketh very strongly notwithstanding any thing that hee would seeme to say to the contrary in his answere to the sixt obiction as shall further appeare in the discussing of the fourth point that hath bene obserued in the confirmation of this his assumption 3. If it were granted that the Ceremonies which the Apostles vsed and appointed had bin notoriously knowen to haue beene subiect to so great abuse of some and to haue had in them so euill effects euen before or at that time and in those places also where the Apostles inioyned them yet could not this haue proued them euery way as inconuenient and euill as ours are For ours are said and sufficiently proued also as they suppose who haue suffered depriuation or suspension for this cause to bee euill not onely because they haue beene grossely abused and very euill effects haue followed the vse of them for so much may be said also of some of Gods owne ordinances but for that they neuer were good nor can euer serue to any good vse Those as they were at the first the ordinances of God so they are here said by Maister Spr. to haue beene still inioyned to certaine Churches by the Apostles which if it be so then could no abuse that obstinate Iewes or other wicked men had put them vnto make the vse of them either vnlawfull or inconuenient vnto the faithfull that by Apostolicall that is diuine authoritie were required to vse them And here fitly commeth to bee examined whether that bee true which is affirmed by him in his second reason which he brings for the proofe of this point viz. that nothing in substance is obiected against our Ceremonies which might not haue been said aswell against those which the Apostles and Churches of their times did vse In handling of this point as he hath left out much of the force and substance of euery argument which in the Abridgement the booke which himselfe quoteth are set downe against our Ceremonies so hath hee affirmed much more against them which the Apostles then vsed then he is able to iustifie and make good The trueth is that though euery one of those foure arguments doth strike to the heart the ceremonies of our Church yet is there neuer a one of them that doth giue the least touch vnto those which the Apostles and Churches then did vse For first Ours are humane inuentions notoriously knowen to haue been of olde and still to bee abused to idolatry and superstition by the Papists and yet of no necessary vse in the Church Theirs as they were at first by diuine institution so were they not at that time when they vsed them notoriously knowen to haue been abused either to idolatrie or to the confirmation of false and pernicious doctrine and were at that time of necessary vse and though they had been neuer so much abused and had beene also in any other of no necessary vse yet because they were vsed by warrant of Apostolicall and diuine authoritie this first argument toucheth them not at all hee doth indeede denie all this and quoteth Scripture to proue that they were humane inuentions of no necessary vse and abused to superstition But it hath beene already shewed that all these Scriptures are misunderstood and applied by him no more shal need to be said for the conuincing of him in this point when that himselfe cleerely and strongly contradicting himselfe hath both elsewhere in this argument and euen in this very place affirmed For were they humane inuentions which himselfe here sayth were practised and taught by direction of the holy Ghost were they of no necessary vse which he in the proofe of his first proposition of his first argument Num. 8. affirmes to haue bin commanded by the Apostles as matters good and necessary in that case and brings for proofe thereof Act. 15. 28. 2. Ours are humane Ceremonies appropriated to Gods seruice and ordained to teach spirituall duties by their mysticall signification Theirs as they were not appropriated to Gods seruice so neither were they vsed or appointed by the Apostles to bee vsed for mysticall signification or if they had yet seeing as hath before beene shewed they were not humane Ceremonies this argument doth not concerne them It is true indeed that they were in their first institution significatiue and mysticall and thus much the places quoted by him here viz. Col. 2. 16. 17 Heb. 8. 5. 9. 8 23 10. 1. do proue But that either the Apostles vsed them or ordained them that they might teach some spirituall dutie by their mysticall signification that hee hath not so much as indeauoured to proue And surely if Paul did vse circumcision as a Sacrament Acts 16. 3. then by the force of Master Spr. argument heere which maintaineth it lawfull for vs to doe now what the Apostles or Churches in their time did it may be concluded that it is lawfull for vs to vse in Gods seruice other Sacraments then those which God hath ordained 3. Ours being but humane Ceremonies are esteemed imposed and obserued as parts of Gods worship Theirs cannot be proued to be obserued by them much lesse imposed vpon them as parts of Gods worship and if they had yet because they were not humane Ceremonies this argument maketh nothing against them For what is this to the purpose that heere hee takes vpon him to prooue That the Iewes esteemed imposed and obserued them as necessarie to saluation Acts 15. 1. 5 That the zealous Iewes were violently offended with Paul for teaching that Christians ought not to circumcise their children and to liue after the legall customes Acts 21. 27 That the Apostles ordained them as good and necessary Act. 15. 28. 29 That the Apostle conformed himselfe vnto them for their sakes and in their presence that esteemed them as worships of God Acts 15. 1. 5. 16. 3. 21. 26 Seeing the question betweene vs is not heere whether the Iewes obserued and imposed Ceremonies as bad as ours but whether the Apostles or any Church by their appointment did so Did the Apostles or any of them whose conformity of Ceremonies is now in question betweene vs vse any Ceremony as imposed by those Iewes he speaketh of here And what though the Apostles called those things that by their decree was inioyned good and necessary will it follow from thence that they imposed them as parts of Gods worship or can nothing be good and necessary but that which is a part of Gods worship Though the superstitious estimation the people among whō they are vsed haue of them be
Acts 15. that it was of matter of omission it maketh little to infring the practise of Saint Paul Because 1 They were Ceremonies of the Law aswell as the other 2 They were significatiue one as well as the other 3 They were abolished by the comming of Christ as well one as the other In which respect they were in their nature no lesse euill though they might be lesse in conuenient then the Ceremonies of practise in some respects To this obiection I answere a little the more sharpely because it sauours of a little to much insolence and small regard vn-the holy Apostles of Christ and I would shew the absurdity thereof let the reader take the lesse offence thereat And thus much of this point To the former argument let these Propositions following be added and obserued A Man may lawfully for the edification of the Church Proposition and furtherance of Gods substanciall worshippes and for the propagation of the Gospel Acts 16. 3. 1. Cor. 9. 23. Practise and obserue such Ceremonies which he preacheth euery where against that men should not doe Acts 21. 21. Neither hee himselfe in some other cases would doe Gal. 2. 5. 11. 14. Burdensome Ceremonies Acts 15. 28. For the edification and peace of the Church and vnitie of brethren Acts 15. 2. 5. 24. May lawfully bee imposed and inioyned on Churches euen by the minde of the holy Ghost Acts 15. 28. 29. Burdensome Ceremonies and many wayes inconuenient may be necessary in some cases to be imposed on such Churches as neuer obserued them before Acts 15. 19. 28. and 21. 25. It may bee expedient for Minsters in a case of superior reason to procure greater good vnto the Church and to auoyd greater mischiefe to perswad others Acts 21. 18. 23. 24. And to be perswaded by others to conforme Acts 21. 26. to such Ceremonies as in many respects are fit to bee preached against Acts 21. 21. as burdensome traditions Acts 15. 28. Col. 2. 20. impotent and beggarly rudiments Gal. 4. 9. and occasions of sundry euill effects Vt supra It may bee expedient and necessary for a Minister or other Christian in the like cases of superior reason to practise the like Ceremonies voluntarily of his owne free accord not being enioyned or commanded by authoritie there vnto Acts 16. 3. and 18. 18. 1. Cor. 9. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. and 10. 33. Those Ministers and people doe well Actes 15. 29. and according to the will of God and minde of the holy Ghost Acts 15. 28. who in a like case of necessitie and furtherance of the Gospel 1. Cor. 9. 23. do practise the like Ceremonies being enioyned them by authoritie Acts 15. 28. and 16. 4. and 21. 25. Paul to redeeme his Ministrie and to gaine liberty to the Gospel to adde soules vnto the Church and to winne the more vnto Christ Acts 16. 3. and 21. 20. 21. 1. Cor. 9. 20. 21. 23. might as well and lawfully haue worne a linnen Ephod or a linnen Surplesse as well as to haue purified and shaued himselfe vowed circumcised Timothy or to haue ioyned in offering sacrifice Paul might as well haue vsed the signe of the Crosse to a baptized person in a case of depriuation or of redeeming the Gospels libertie or of winning vnto Christ as to haue vsed the signe of circumcision to a baptized person as hee did to Timothy Acts 16. 3. And thus much of this argument being the first member of the maine reason Argu. 2 Now I proceede to the second member of the first reason which is this Reason 1 Because the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation is against the grounds of Gods word whereupon I conclude that such doctrine and practise is an error and a sinne The grounds of Gods word which are contraried by this doctrine and practise are two in number and they doe Minister two arguments which I will prosecute in order by the helpe of God The first ground is this When two workes or deuties commanded of God doe meete in one practise so as we cannot doe them both but one of them must of necessitie be done the other of necessitie must be left vndone in this case the worke or dutie of greater reason must be performed and that of lesser reason must bee neglected and omitted and it is a sinne to neglect the greater to performe the lesser Out of which ground I assume But the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for refusing to conforme doth cause men to neglect greater duties to performe the lesser Therefore the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for refusing to conforme to our prescribed ceremonies is an errour and a sinne For the confirmation of this argument there are two poynts to be prooued 1 That it is contrary to Gods word and therefore a sinne to passe by a greater worke or duety to performe a lesser 2 That to suffer depriuation for refusing to conforme vnto the ceremones prescribed in our Church is to passe by a greater worke or duety to performe a lesser whereupon the former conclusion must follow of necessity Touching the former poynt namely that it is contrary to Gods word and therefore a sinne to passe by a greater worke or duety to performe a lesser The which poynt although it be in it selfe euident and must needs bee graunted by euery sound diuine yet for illustration sake I make more manifest by these reasons Reason 1 First because the will of God is such then when mercy a greater duety and sacrifice a lesser duety doe meete so as both at the same time cannot bee done mercy must be done and sacrifice left vndone Mat. 12. 4. 7. I will haue mercy and not sacrifice Because hypocrites are reprooued of God for passing by greater dueties to performe lesser thus were the Scribes and Pharises reprooued by our Sauiour for letting passe the weightier matters of the Law and following the smaller As strayning at a gnat and swallowing of a Cammell Mat. 23. 23. 24. Luke 11. 42. For vrging sacrifice of ceremoniall dueties and for omitting and reproouing mercy Mat. 12. 7. Luke 13. 14. 15. 16. For offering sacrifices and oblations with the neglect of parents Matthew 15. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Because the Godly are excused and approued of God for passing by smaller dueties to performe greater thus were excused and reprooued First the Priests of the Law for breaking the Sabboths ceremoniall and strict rest by sacrificing and other businesse to performe Gods Publique worship a greater duety are pronounced blamelesse therein Mat. 12. 5. Secondly Dauid for eating shew-bread not lawfully for him to doe in a case of necessity hee and they who were with him were acquitted as innocent and blamelesse Mat. 12. 3. 4. Thirdly the Apostles of Christ for plucking rubbing and eating the eares of corne so violating the Sabbaths strict and Ceremoniall rest a lesser duety to satisfie hunger the necessity of nature a greater and morrall duety were called innocent Mat. 12.
2. 3. 4. Fourthly Iesus Christ preferring the healing of the sicke a greater duety before the strict keeping the Ceremoniall rest a lesser duty and commanding a kind of seruile labour viz. the carying home of a bed in some case vnlawfull Io. 5. 8. 9. proueth it not onely by a peculiar reason proper vnto himselfe that hee is Lord of the Sabbath and therefore might ouerrule in this case Mat. 12. 8. But euen by reasons of Common equity namely First because it is lawfull by not strictly keeping ceremoniall rest to doe morrally well on the Sabbath day omitting sacrifice to doe mercy Mat. 11. 12. Secondly because the end is superior to the meanes for the Sabbath was made for man not man for the Sabbath Mar. 2. 27. 4 Fourthly because it is contrary to the inspired examples in the Scripture which are of common equity and reason and to the practise of the faithfull Saints of God namely besides the forenamed examples of the Priests of the Apostles of Dauid of our Sauiour first of Salomon who in a case of necessity did offer vpon another Altar then the Altar appointed for the worship of God because it was not able to receiue the offrings 2. Chro. 7. 7. but was to little for that end 1. King 8. 64. Whereas they were to offer sacrifice and to burne incense vpon one onely Altar in the Temple 2. King 23. 12. It being a Type of Christ the only sacrifice and mediator Heb. 13. 10. 2. of Hezekias who to set forward the mayne and substantiall worships of God did admit of many to the Passeouer albeit they were not ceremonially sanctified but legally vncleane and did not receiue the same as it was written in the Law nor according to the purification of the Sanctuary yet with a true heart seeking the Lord they were accepted namely in a case of superiour reason 2. Chron. 30. 17. 18. 19. 20. Thirdly of Paul who to saue his life a greater duety did with his owne hands cast away into the Sea the good creatures of God which otherwise should haue beene preserued and so for that cause neglected a lesser duety Act. 27. 30. Fourthly of the inspired Apostles of Christ who as before is noted did practise on themselues Act. 21. 26. and vpon others Acts 16. 3. and did aduise Act. 21. 23. 24. yea ordaine inioyne and command the practise of Iewish ceremonies as circumcision shauing purifying abstayning from blood and strangled meate and that as a duty good and necessary Act. 15. 28. which to auoide and not to vse was a duety required of God which to vse and practise in other cases was reprooued by the holy Ghost Acts 15. 10. and 21. 21. Gal. 4. 9. 10. 11. and 2. 12. 13. 14 and 5. 2. 3. 4. Colo. 2. 20. 21. 22. 23. and were needlesse shadowes Col. 2. 20. Ordinances of the world Col. 2. 20. Commandements of men turning from the trueth Col. 2. 12. Titus 1. 14. Impotent and beggarly rudiments Gal. 4. 9. 10. And of sundry perillous and perniciouse effects yet this they did admit albeit the violation of a duety to doe a greater duety of superior reason namely to procure the vnity of brethren Act. 15. 2. 4. 6. 7. 24. The wyninng of strangers to the faith 1. Cor. 9. 19 20. And to propagate the Gospell 1. Cor. 9. 23. To preuent the scandall of weake beleeuers Act. 16. 3. and 21. 20. And the danger of interruption or depriuation of the Ministery by the violent Iewes persecution Act. 21. 12. 24. 27. 28. Thus is the first point confirmed to the which doctrine sundrie godly learned men euen so many as I haue reade of this point doe also consent both in the same words and proofes viz. * vid. Caluin in Mat. 12. 1. 3 fol. 260. Vrsin cat part 3. fol. 707. immediat ante praecept 1. impress Cantabridg anno 1585. Piscator in Mat 12. 1. 2. 3. in analisi fol. 190. in obseruat ad eundem locum fol. 205. 106. 107 Idem in obseruat in Mat. 9. 13. fol. 156. Idem in obser ad Mat. 15. 3. 4. 5. 6. fol. 243. Polan syntagm Theolog. lib. 9 c. 29 fol. 4077. 4078. Martyn in summula verbi dei cap. 2. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. fol. 47. 48. de-calogo Mr. Perkins vol. 1. of his workes treatise of conscience Cap. 2. fol. 520. Yet to this poynt or proposition howsoeuer firme it bee in it selfe as hath appeared and is approoued by the best diuines yet some obiections haue beene layd against it which I will heere set downe Ob. Where it is sayd in the former proposition when two dueties doe meete at one time it is obiected that they cannot bee dueties both at once For if they were both dueties they would both bind and so a man must needes commit a sinne seeing hee is straitned betweene two dueties and must omit the one this therefore is not well proposed Ans The mentioning of these two duties meeting together at one time in our practise doeth not intend that they doe both of them bynd the conscience at the same instant but they are called dueties as they are considered apart being both workes are commanded of God in two seuerall commandements Which two workes being dueties considered apart doe sometimes offer themselues to our practise at one instant As to heare a Sermon at the Church on the Sabboth and to tend a sicke person ready to die at home at the sametime both are duties being cōsidred apart but meeting together and offering themselues to our practise at one time there is indeede but one duety because both cannot be performed in one instant In which case the greater worke is the duety the lesser bindes not for that present In like case for a minister to refuse inconuenient ceremonies albeit it be a duty being cōsidered apart from the duty of preaching the word yet when it meeteth with the duty of preaching so as preaching the word will not stand with refusing inconuenient ceremonies this refusing of ceremonies bindeth not the cōscience but leaueth to be a duty There are not two duties at that instant but only one which is to preach the word of God In which case the refusing of inconuenient Ceremonies is no duety neither is their practise a sinne yea the practise of them is a duety if otherwise they cannot preach the Word this obiection therefore needeth not Obiection The doctrine included in that point or proposition is not true because there may be a greater duetie neglected for the performance of a lesser which may then be done when the performance of the lesser keepeth him frō sin as for example A Preacher enioyned to preach naked ought to neglect preaching Besides it is contrary to the rule of the Apostle Rom. 3. 8. The least euil must not be done that the greatest good may be performed For when I cannot doe it without sinne it is no duety and therefore you should propose the matter thus It is necessary to performe
externall circumstances actions or Ceremonies for the more orderly fit and decent performance of the substantialls as obseruation of fit time as either night or day and this or that houre in either place publike or priuate site of body as sitting standing kneeling high or low singing saying and the like The which degrees and differences of duties are thus distinguished vnto vs by the holy Ghost himselfe who hath taught vs to seuer the loue of God a substantiall of the first Table and iudgement mercy fidelitie substantialls of the second Table from the tithing of mint cummin annisse rue and all manner of hearbes a ceremoniall Law which yet was a duty being commanded and must be done calling the one sort of duties the weightier matters of the Law Matthew 12. 23. Luk. 11. 43. separating them by that title from the other which must be lesse weightie or as they called the lesser commandement Matthew 25. 19. Calling the one mercy the other sacrifice Matthew 12. 7. the one the knowledge of God the other burnt offerings Hosea 6. 6. the one Gods kingdome the other not so Rom. 14. 17. betweene the which he teacheth vs to put as much difference as betweene a Cammell and a Gnat Matth. 23. 23. 24. himselfe accepting the former without the latter Marke 16. 15. 16. but not the latter without the former tying the promise of saluation simply to the greatest but not to the inferiour without the greater Consider that there is a subordination of these duties of the Law whereof there are these forenamed degrees as namely that the greater duties such as haue in them greatest reason and band doe tye the conscience doe ouerrule the lesser and command obedience with the neglect of the other for that present when they meete together So as the neglect of the lesser leaueth to bee a sinne for the performance of the greater as the neglect of obeysance to a noble man or inferiour person is no offence in presence of a King and this subordination is generall to all the duties of the Law except the supremest of all other then which there is none higher as the highest duties vnto God feare loue confidence repentance which must neuer be commanded ouerruled by other duties inferior whatsoeuer they be and the reason is because the supremacy of God and the immediate proximity betweene these duties and God which also in respect of the immutable nature attributes of God which must leaue to be God and deny his titles of iustice of mercy goodnesse truth c. if hee should dispence with them Now the truth of this subordination I wil in order manifest in 4. propositions following First the substantiall duties of the first Table doe ouerrule Propos 1. the substantialls of the second Table Loue of Christ a substantiall of the first Table ouerruleth the loue of parents of wife children friendes brethren substantialls of the second Table Matthew 10. 37. yea so farre must the one yeeld vnto the other that for the loues sake of Christ the loue of parents must bee turned into hate Luke 14. 26. 33. and tokens thereof Deut. 13. 6. 7. 8. 9 13 Psalme 139. 21. 22. 2. Chronicles 19. 2. Obedience to good meeting the obedience to the Magistrate ouerruleth it Acts 4. 19. and 15. 29. This was the case of the three children of Daniel praying and of the Iewes refusing Swines flesh who disobeyed the Magistrate to obey GOD and neglected life a substantiall of the second Table to professe GODS trueth and to refuse Idolatrie substantialls of the first Table Secondly The substantialls of the second Table doe ouerrule the ceremonialls of the first Table so to sustaine nature in prouiding and eating corporall food meeting with the strict ceremoniall rest of the Iewish Sabbaoth the one a substantiall of the second Table the other a ceremoniall appendix to the first Table the former ouerrules the latter in which case GOD sayth I will haue mercy and not sacrifice Matthew 12. 47. Also workes of necessitie implying seruile labour as the carrying whom of a bed Iohn 5. 8. 9 10 mercie to a man sicke and diseased Matthew 12. 10. 12 13 Luke 13. 14. 15 16 mercie to a beast to saue his life Matthew 12. 11. 12 to giue him necessaries Luke 14. 5. 6 and 13 15 meeting at the same time with a ceremoniall obseruation of the Sabbaoth though commaunded in the Law and a dutie Exodus 20. 10. and 31 15 16 and 35. 3. The former ouerrules the latter by the reason yeelded by our Sauiour That the Sabbaoth was made for man and not man for the Sabbaoth Mark 2. 27 and it is lawfull though violating ceremoniall rest to doe morrally well vpon the Sabbaoth Matthew 12. 12 for in these cases God will haue mercy and not sacrifice Thirdly the substantials of the second table of greater reason do ouerule the substantialls of the second table of lesser reason Thus it is a duty of Magistrates to put wilfull murtherers to death Gen. 9. 6. Exo. 21. 12. 14. Leuit. 24. 17. Deut. 19. 11. 12. 13. Num. 35. 16 without recompence or dispensation Numb 35. 31. 32. the not executing of which law draweth on the whole land the heauy plagues of God Numb 35. 33. Deut. 21. 8. 9. And this was a substantiall dutie of the second table yet this dutie is ouer ruled by a case of necessitie for the safetie of the policie of the kingdome and state of the Church so Ioab the wilfull murderer of Abner 2. Sam. 3. 27. of Amasa 2. Sam. 12. 10. and that in the time of peace 1. Kin. 2. 5. and of Vriah 2. Sa. 11. 16. 17. is suffered to liue all the time of King Dauid viz. because he was being Captaine of the host too hard for him 2. Sam. 3. 39. which implyed the safetie of himselfe and of all the whole state which was a substantiall of the second table of greater reason then the other neither is Dauid reprooued or the land plagued for this thing neither was it repented because it was no sinne in him to passe by lesser worke commanded for the performance of a worke of greater reason Againe it is a breach of a substantiall dutie of the second table Exo. 10. 14. and euen of the law of nature for ab initio non fuit sic Mar. 10. 6. 7. 8. 9. Math. 19. 8. for the Magestrate or the Church Mat. 19. 3. 4. 8. Mar. 10. 6. 7. 8. 9. to command Deut. 24. 1. 2. Mar. 10. 3. 5. Mat. 19. 7. or to permit Matth. 19. 8. husbands to put away their wiues for euery cause Matth. 19. 3. as namely for some filthynesse espied in them Deut. 24. 1. yet this did Moses to preuent the breach of an higher precept namely many grieuious inconueniences in the whole policie of the Iewes arising from the obstinacie and cruelty of an obdurate people such as were the Iewes In which respect Moses is not reproued for this thing by our Sauiour
of the Law not in the time of the Gospel in as much as being pressed by the blinde and wilfull Iewes they were called the commandements of men Col. 2. Tit. 1. I would know here of my Brethren what maine difference there is betweene the inuentions of men and the commandements of men Seconly because they were abused to superstition and false doctrine many wayes and had very many euill and pernicious effects as I haue proued in the first reason of my first argument Numb 11. 12. which cannot be denied with any shew of contradiction Thirdly because they were notoriously knowen to haue bin so abused euen whersoeuer the Christian faith was planted in Italy Graecia Asiaminor Syria Coelosyria Iudaea Creta and may wee thinke that the famous controuersie and Councel at Ierusalem for deciding thereof about the false opinion about Circumcision was not notoriously knowen vnto all the Christian Churches which also prescribed some Iewish Ceremonies on occasion of abuse of other as also the tumult made on Paul by the furious Iewes at Ierusalem In a word wheresoeuer the Iewes were as they were scattered almost in euery part and new Iewish conuerts there must needes be knowen their notorious abuses of the legall Ceremonies and I much admire that my Brethren should denie this Fourthly Because they are of no profitable vse because of no vse at all I meane in themselues and in their nature being considered being as shadowes without a body weak rudiments without signification shewes without substance types and similitudes without an antitype yea resemblances of nothing Though I denie not but they were of necessary and very profitable vse in the Apostles practise but that was not in respect of any power in themselues or of any vertue which the Apostles gaue them by their iniunction but as meanes and weapons of necessitie to defend the Church from mischiefe and the Gospel from interruption which by no meanes they would haue practised without such necessitie the like I say of our Ceremonies These things being so cleere and euident it must needs follow that these Ceremonies in their nature must bee tainted with that formal and inseparable euil which the arguments of the depriued Ministers doe fasten on our Ceremonies so farre forth as they agree in these Circumstances alleadged which my Brethren fearing are faine to runne into their old and onely refuge That though they had been neuer so much abused and had been also in any other respect of no necessary vse yet this aagument toucheth them not because they were vsed by warrant of Apostolicall and diuine authoritie But that I may driue my Brethren from this their vltimum refugium I say their answere is of no force at all which appeareth by these reasons 1. Because the answere of our Brethren is barely affirmed without all shew of proofe or reason which is sufficiently confuted with a bare deniall and matter of this nature Eâdem facilitate comtemnitur qua probatur as the olde saying of Hierome is yea the Holy Ghost is silent and giueth not the lest touch to intimate that this action was peculiar to the Apostles and how can my Brethren speake so confidently where the Holy Ghost is silent 2. Because of the equall necessity of the Church in all ages and like care which God hath of his Church in giuing equall remedy who doth not onely command and inioyne duties for the purity and comely order of the Church but also prouideth remedies against the diseases thereof Now is there not a necessity for other things aswel as for these Primitiue Churches to appease dissentions schismes tumults interruption of the Gospell depriuation of Ministers arising from inconuenient and abused Ceremonies Must all other Churches besides these for euery inconuenient Ceremony or other thing of like nature with the Iewish Ceremonies suffer the Church to bee ouerthrowne and the Gospell interrupted did God giue them onely priuiledge thus to conforme and not to others in other cases or did he giue remedy to their euills and take it from vs If it seemed good necessary to the Holy Ghost in one cause for the good of the Church to giue way to the practise of inconuenient Ceremonies of this nature by what reason should it not bee still as good and necessary for other Churches in the like case in the sight of the same blessed spirit to practise the like Ceremonies 3. Because Saint Paul rehearsing his practise of conforming to the Iewish Ceremonies doth draw his practise thereof out of a generall doctrine 1. Corinthians 9. 19. The generall doctrine is this That though hee were free from all men as euery faithfull Minister is yet he made himselfe the seruant of all men as in this sense euery faithfull Minister should doe to winne the more From this ground he deduceth his particular practise vers 20. of becomming a Iew vnto the Iewes that is of practising the Iewish Ceremonies for the Iewes sake to auoide their scandall and to winne them to the Gospel shewing and declaring that out of this generall doctrine any godly and sincere Minister of the Gospel might lawfully and ought needfully to conforme to the like Ceremonies of the Iewes in the like case to win them and to gaine liberty to the Gospell Therefore I conclude the Apostles practise of Iewish Ceremonies was not peculier to them as arising from meer Apostolical authority and that the practise of like inconuenient ceremonies in the like case is lawful needful 4. Because the same Apostle declaring his withstanding of the practise of Iewish Ceremonies in other cases doth specifie the reasons thereof namely 1. They would compell men vnto it Galat. 2. 2. and bondage their Christian liberty Galat. 2. 4. with Act. 15. 1. 5. 10. 19 3. And it was not the right way to the truth of the Gospel Galat. 2. 14. Therefore I conclude they practised the Iewish Ceremonies by a certaine and standing reason and not alone by Diuine or Apostolicall authority If they had not beene Apostles by these reasons they would haue practised them in these cases or the like 5. Because by this means any shifting disputant may shift off al necessity of the practise of any part of Apostolical discipline and order namely of excōmunication of obstinate offenders because a matter peculiar to the Apostles as Erastus Erast de excom in Thes fol. 46. Thes 58. others doe or of the Churches meeting on the First day of the weeke as many Libertines and Sabbatarians do things of like nature yea also of our particular assurance of true grace iustification remission of sinnes and saluation which we vsually ground from the example of the Apostles Rom. 8. 38. 39 Gal. 2. 20. 1. Tim. 1. 1. 15. which yet the Papists put off with this our Brethrens answer It was peculiar to the Apostles it was of speciall reuelation For Bellarm. de iustificat lib. 3. cap. 9 in resp ad 7. testimon Staplet de Iustific l. 8. c. 24. f.
a lesser sinne for to performe a duety that is greater Answere First the doctrine of the proposition remaineth true notwithstanding this obiection For the case is proposed not of a sinne and a duetie but of two dueties being considered a part being both commanded of God and there is no such case wherein a greater duetie is to bee neglected for the performance of a lesser which also is in reason absurd Secondly to the instance of preaching in a naked manner I say that in this case there are two things to bee considered Necessitie and Decency if then he cannot preach naked but with the perill of his life he ought to refuse preaching it being a case of necessity and mercy is better then sacrifice But if his life will consist with his naked preaching hee ought to preach notwithstanding the scandall or indecencie if there bee no other meanes admitted for his preaching 1 Because a mans naked body being considered as it is naked it is the good creature of God and is not indecent to be looked on but to vncleane and vaine mindes it is decent enough to the pure 2 Because the gayning of soules and meanes of mans saluation is a duety of farre greater reason and waight then the auoyding of an inconuenient circumstance of scandall or of seeming indecencie arising only by accident not from the nature of the obiect and the like case is of the practise of our Ceremonies to redeeme the libertie of preaching to the place Rom. 3. 8. which sheweth that we may not doe the least euill to compasse the greatest good I say that to the present purpose wee may consider euill two manner of wayes For first euill is either that which is formally simply and in nature euill which no circumstance can amend As to redeeme preaching vpon condition of blaspheming God Inuocating the Deuill committing of idolatry periury idultery teaching of heresie or the like the which kind of euill is intended by the Apostle and may not bee done at any hand for the gayning of the greatest good 2 Againe euill may bee taken for that which is onely circumstantially ceremonially or accidentally euill which kind of euill may in some cases bee practised without sinne namely in case of superior reason at what time it is improperly called euill That this is so appeareth in the Priests who brake the Sabbath in Dauid who did that which was not lawfull for him to doe and yet were blamelesse and innocent Mat. 12. 4 5. 7. Also in the practise of Iewish inconuenient and many wayes euill Ceremonies which practise was so farre from being euill in that case that it was good and necessary Act. 15. 28. 29. touching this obiection see more at the end of the argument Obiect Mordecay refused to bow and performe the gesture of reuerence to Haman yea though hee were commanded by the King Hest 3. 1 2 3. by which refusall of obedience to a ceremoniall hee violated two greater dueties One was the Kings command and the other was the hazard of his life and destruction of the Church of the Iewes and thereby for performance of a lesser duetie hee did violate a greater Answ Either this gesture was Spirituall or Ciuill if the former hee ought to auoide spirituall adoration to a creature an heathen a wicked person an Amalekite and an enemy of the Church which is a sufficient and the true answere and thus doe all interpreters vnderstand this place thus the Hebrew glosse thus the Apocryphall prayer in the additions to Hester Lyra Vataplus Iunius Drusius Merlyne vpon these places If the latter either his action was euill or good if euill in disobeying the Magistrate in a thing indifferent it is impertinently alledged if well the reason is vnknowne and not expressed wee cannot iudge of the qualitie of the dueties compared if he did refuse this reuerence 1 Because hee was of the Amalekites which were especially cast out by God Exod. 11. 14. Deut. 25. 7. Num. 24. 7. 2 Because an open prophane person a malitious and professed aduersary of Gods Church 3 Because himselfe was a better man then Haman being the Queenes Vncle it may bee considerable whether hee did not well euen in this respect to refuse this reuerence Touching the hazard of his life and ruine of the Church it was vnknowne to Mordecai for Haman practised it because he did refuse it Obiect Daniel neglected a greater duety to performe a lesser for hee continued to pray three times a day kneeling vpon his knees his window being open towards Ierusalem notwithstanding that he knew that he should die for doing it so hee preferred the ceremonie and circumstance of prayer which was a smaller duetie before the safety of his life which was a greater Dan. 6. 10. Also the Iewes chose rather to die then to eate Swines flesh 2. Mac. 7. 1. and 6. 8. preferring obseruance of a ceremoniall duetie before their life Answ To these instances I first demaund whether these bee brought therefore to conclude that therefore Ministers should rather die then to vse the Ceremonies prescribed in our Church And let it bee considered seriously by euery person truely fearing God whether they thinke it fit for another or could resolue himselfe to loose this life by being at a stake for none other cause then for refusing the prescribed Ceremonies especially in a true Church of Christ wherein there are otherwise a true confession of faith and sufficient meanes of their saluation If it should fall out that they would not die in such a case I would know further how then they could loose their Ministery for not vsing them seeing it were better for a Minister to loose his life then to loose the comfort of his Ministerie Act. 20. 24. 1. Cor. 9. 15. If they would rather suffer death then vse the Ceremonies let them shew the ground and comfort they should haue before the Lord in this proceeding If they alleadge these instances I wil shew to how small purpose they serue therein therefore I say that their cases doe farre differ from the case in question First they were controuersies depending betweene the heathen and professed enemies of Gods Church and betweene the people of Gods couenant and members of the Church our controuersies are in the Church and betweene professed louers and beleeuers in Christ Secondly they were cases of confession wherein they were called to confesse the trueth and religion of God amongst Gods enemies as also the necessitie of inuocation of Gods name and of obedience to Gods precepts With vs the doctrine of Ceremonies is true and according to Gods word and the parts of our generall confession in the Booke of Articles is agreeable to the word of God Thirdly the dueties were of exceeding great moment for the performance whereof they should haue hazarded and lost many liues Daniel stood in obedience of a maine substantiall duetie not Ceremoniall or circumstantiall of the first commandement namely prayer to God and praysing of his name
dutie tying the conscience with a greater band then the dutie of refusing to conforme or the like These two points therefore being thus confirmed it followeth That for a Minister to suffer himselfe to be depriued of his Ministery for refusing to conforme to the prescribed Ceremonies is contrary to Gods word and so an error in doctrine and sinne in practise Now I will answere the obiections which are brought against this poynt Obiect The Ceremonies prescribed in our Church are vnlawfull as they are prooued by sundry reasons by the depriued Ministers therefore wee may not conforme vnto them but rather suffer depriuation for wee may not doe euill that good may come thereof Rom. 3. 8. Answ If it should be granted which they cōtend for It followeth Answ not that because they be vnlawfull in some respect therefore they may or bee conformed vnto because a man may doe that which is vnlawfull in some respect and yet not sinne against God as appearth by these instances out of Scripture A man may breake the Sabboth It is our Sauiours phrase in some respects and yet be blamelesse before God Mat. 12. 5. A man may doe that in some case which by Gods Law is not lawfull for him as our Sauiour Christ speaketh to doe and yet bee innocent Matth. 12. 3. A man may in some cases performe some circumstances in a substantiall worship of God not as it is written and yet performe that worship in Gods acceptation and with his blessing 2. Chron. 30. 18 19 20 21 25 26. A man may in some case practise lawfully and necessarily Act. 15. 19 20. such Ceremonies which in some other cases to practise were impotent and beggarly rudiments Gal. 4. 9. will worships traditions commandements and doctrines of men Collos 2. 20 21 22 23. and in many maine respects euill and vnlawfull Againe vnto the Apostles saying I further say that a man may bee sayde to doe some euill to doe some good Which answere will appeare out of the sayde places For to breake the Sabboth was euill yet to breake the Sabboth in some duetie to further a greater duetie in Gods worship which was good made the Priests blamelesse To doe a thing not lawfull was euill yet to preserue life which is good made Dauid innocent before God To performe Gods worship not as it was written was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a sinne yet to further Gods substantiall worships which was a good thing was not regarded of God To practise antiquated and superannuated vnprofitable yea very hurtfull Ceremonies was vnlawfull yet to purchase the libertie of the Gospell and vnitie of brethren which was good made their practise good and necessary So that this rule of the Apostle must bee limited and in some cases holdeth not for that as wee see a man may bee sayde to doe some euill that some greater good may come thereof the reason whereof is included in the foregoing argument the summe whereof is this Because the relinquishing of obedience to a lesser duty leaueth to be a sinne when a greater duety commeth in place which yet were euill if the greater duety were absent As for example to violate sacrifice namely to breake the Sabbath by rubbing eares of corne to eate that which is expresly forbidden him of God and so to doe a thing not lawfull is noe sinne when mercy and necessity comes in place which if mercy or other superior worke and duety were away were sinne In a word a man may doe a thing euill in vse circumstance and by accident so it be not simply and in nature euill also a man may violate a duety ceremoniall to further or accomplish a morrall good thing in which case the euill of the action ceaseth and this was the Apostles in the practise of the Iewish ceremonies Obiect But the ceremonies prescribed in our Church are not onely euill in the vse or inconuenient but are in their nature simply euill especially in their vse as appeareth by the reasons made against them in sundry writings of the depriued Ministers Ergo by noe meanes may they bee conformed vnto to procure the greatest good An. 1 The reasons alleadged by the depriued Ministers to prooue these ceremonies to be simply euill are very weake and friuolous because as it is noted in the first argument they al of them or the most part be applied to the Iewish ceremonies practised enioyned by the inspired Apostles and therefore either the practise and prescription of such ceremonies in a case of necessity leaueth to bee a sinne or else the Apostles must be accused for practising of such things as were simply a sinne and it is not in Apostolicall power to make a matter simply and in nature sinne to be noe sinne at all Howsoeuer these ceremonies bee now iudged in their nature simply euill by the depriued Ministers yet they were neuer so iudged of in the church of christ in any age or place by any sound teacher or wel grounded Christian the most curious sights among them that most stand for reducing of the Church to the primitiue purity in discipline ceremonies that euer looked on them in these dayes though they wished them to bee abolished as being many wayes inconuenient yet they iudged of them in their nature as things indifferent not onely as they are considered in themselues but as they are in vse with vs. Thus iudged they of a surplesse or linnen garment in the worship of God In a surplesse there is no impious thing per se noe not Bucer in the vse of it Script Anglican fol. 79. Hoopero These garments are not impure of themselues speaking also of their vse idem in his Epistle to Io. Alasco In the English litargie there is nulla manifesta impietas Epist Caluin P. Martyr 200. fol. 336. Per se sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these garments are of themselues indifferent Loc. com fol. 1085. amico cuidam The vse of them not impious or pernitious per sese aut sua natura verbo dei contrariae ibidem 1086. Hoopero These garments are not per se impiae impious of themselues that a Minister should rather leaue his Ministry then Beza vse them Epist 12. fol 98. I graunt them to bee indifferent being considered in themselues It is adiaphoron natura in the vse a matter indifferent in nature Enchirid. Tit. 1. de Adiaph Clas 3. cap. 16. Hemingius fol. 375. It is liberum per se a free matter of it selfe to vse or not Zanchius to vse de redempt lib. 1. cap. 16. fol. 445. yea magis deceret vestis linea quam lanea It is an indifferent thing Lo. 33. Quaest. 13. fol. 382. Bucan It is a thing indifferent in vse in Ezech. cap. 44. fol. 807. Polanus The surplesse in the owne nature indifferent meaning Cartwright in the vse for hee perswaded to the vse in the case of depriuation Rest of the second reply fol. 262. Thus also
of necessitie that a man must either goe naked and so impaire his health or indanger his life and goe after an vnseemely fashion or else hee must weare some inconuenient apparrell in the wearing whereof some good mindes will bee offended with him in the vse others will take it as an occasion by the fashion to bee vnlawfully inamored with his person and so may be an occasion to draw them to actuall adultery in thought desire intreatie or attempt suppose also that other men doe vse the same fashion or finenesse to pride and intention of adultery take away the necessitie and I confesse euen the least occasion of these scandalles were vnlawfull but with the necessitie it leaueth to bee a sinne in the wearing thereof because a greater dutie comes in place nay it were a sinne to neglect health by leauing the apparrell and compare this case with ours it may as well bee say de to bee adultery as this idolatrie it being a violation of a negatiue precept as well as this is supposed to be for all the occasions of the sinne are forbidden with the sin that a sinne of commission as well as this is conceiued to bee and the redeeming of preaching the Word the meanes of mans life spirituall and celestiall may be paralled and put in ballance with the redeeming of our health and naturall life in comparision of the other other comparisons may bee made out of other precepts but this sufficeth Secondly This Obiection doeth ineuitably accuse the Apostles of idolatry in prescribing and practising Ceremonies scandalous significant abused and apt to bee abased to superstition and in many other respects in conuenient yea what Church in the world shall escape censure for prescribing and practising Ceremonies of the like nature which euer in the purest Churches haue beene vsed more or lesse yea if this hold how can any manioyne to the Church of England or to any primitiue or reformed Church of any age seeing by this they may all be sayd to be Churches practising and maintaining of idolatry and so idolatrous Churches How can any depriued Minister communicate in any assembly in England where kneeling at the Communion is if kneeling at Communion be idolatry albeit hee sit himselfe seeing he communicateth with an idolatrous Church and with a company of idolators and so must needes be driuen to separate from England with the Brownists and from all the most and best reformed Churches primitiue and latter For we must come out from idolators and touch no vncleane thing 2. Cor. 6. 17. Rom. 18. 4. By which reason also our Sauiour Christ himselfe his Mother his Apostles al the faithfull of those times could not escape the gilte of a sinne for communicating with the Word Sacraments inuocation and Ministery of such a Church as proposed some Ceremonies of meere humane inuention as the worships of God and necessary to saluation Mat. 5. 8. 9. Lastly it takes away saluation from the Apostles the Martyrs and all faithfull teachers which communicate with such like ceremonies both because Idolators shall neuer enter 1. Cor. 6. 11. Gal. 5. 19. 20. 21. Reu. 21. 8. as also because presupposing it to be a breach of the lowest degree thereof yet breakers of the least commandement and teaching so cannot be saued Mat. 5. 19. Obiect Admitting the ceremonies of our Church to bee indifferent yet we may not by the vse of any indifferent thing offend or scandalize our brethren rather wee must neuer vse it 1. Cor. 8. 9. 12. 13. 10. 28. Rom. 14. 15. 16. 21. Answ True we may not vse any indifferent thing by which our weake brother is offended if the not vsing or vsing thereof be voluntary within our power as that indifferent thing seemeth not to be the vse whereof is commanded by a Magistrate or publique law whom therefore wee must obey whosoeuer bee offended and the offence that any doth take in this case is Scandalum acceptum non datum A Magistrate onely commandes my outward man and inflictes an outward penalty whom albeit I am commanded to obey and that of conscience in a thing indifferent yet if I disobey him not of purpose or contempt but with a conscionable and charitable respect of not offending weake or godly Christians that so I may not destroy my brother Ro. 14. 15. 20. 1. Cor. 8. 10. 11. neither wound his conscience neither sinne against Christ 1. Cor. 8. 12. I doe not sin against God but am onely lyable to the penalty enioyned my conscience is not herein touched before God because I respect and follow a greater duety 2. A Magistrate cannot command me to vse a thing whereby either purposely or by accident I shal offend my weake brother sin against Christ 1. Chro. 8. 12. though he should yet God commands me to auoyde it and tells me it is a sinne against Christ 1. Cor. 8. 1◠a superior command and of superior reason better obey God then man Answ All this is in some sence true howbeit al this holdeth onely in case of outward and ciuill penalty where I ought to beare some corporall paine or externall losse to violate the magistrates command in not offending the godly weake brother But it holdeth not in a case of spirituall publique generall penalty as of depriuation of the ministry which to auoyd by vsing a thing indifferent is a duty of superior reason then by not vsing a thing indifferent to giue offence where in that case it should not be broken which apeareth two wayes First by the greatnesse of in conuenience for it is ten times more in conuenient by not vsing of the ceremonies things indifferent in nature to suffer depriuation of ministery the Gospell to be hindred suppressed the whole Church visible kingdome of Christ to be vtterly dissolued and dissipated then by vsing them to redeeme these benefits to offend some few who in this case should not be offended and that they are is meerely their sinne Secondly by the proportion of offence and scandall For the Papist Athiest will much more triumph and reioyce and a Godly Christian wil much more grieue be troubled to see a worthy painefull and profitable minister be depriued and silenced then to weare a surplesse vse some few ceremonies the one being a smal in cōuenience but the other a deadly mischiefe to the Church of Christ so much of the second argument of the first reason Argum. 3 Now followeth the third prouing That to suffer depriuatiō for the refusing to cōforme to the prescribed ceremonies is contrary to Gods word and therefore a sin because it is contrary to a second ground of Gods word namely the royall law of loue for the further euidencing of this reaso there are two points to be considered and proued First that to do any thing that is contrary to the law of loue is contrary to the word of God Secondly to refuse conformity to the prescribed ceremonies in case of depriuation
rerum nouarum inuentione cederet Some were deceiued by Heretickes who to couer their pernicious heresies did studiously broach traditions vnder the Apostles names and authoritie so did Artemon Basilides Valentius Marcion Eusebius 5. 25. Clemens Strom. lib. 7. And thus Tertullian is noted to haue been deceiued by Montanus his Paraclet and inspiration as appeareth in his booke de veland virgin Some are noted to haue ascribed too too much vnto traditions So did Papias Clemens Origen and they cite Apocryphall booke to countenance them and commend very sory matters both of doctrine and of practise to themselues and others So did Papias Clemens and Origen and Basil and Epiphanius of which point looke Chemnitius examp parte 1. de tradition fol. 85 86 87. and what they could not sound from any true originall sundry of them did vsually ascribe to the Apostles So Hierome Epiphanius and Ambrose doe affirme Lent to bee an Apostolicall tradition So Aug. Epi. 86. makes report of such as alleadged Iames Iohn and Peter the Apostles for fasting on the Sabbath the vrging of which kinde of ground or allegation hee saith is interminabilis contentio generans lites non finiens quaestiones So the Easterne Churches did referre their obseruations of Easter to Saint Iohn and the Churches of the Westerne parts vnto Saint Peter and Saint Paul But heereof sayeth Socrates 5. 22. Sozomen 7. 19. There is no euidence in writing and therefore hee noteth them most likely to arise from custome rather then from Canon Some of the ancient Bishops gouerning at seuerall times in diuers places did commend the traditions which they liked or fancied themselues to their posterities for lawes And this is Socrates obseruation ibid. a president whereof a man may see Dist. 12. cap. 5. Ridiculum and other places see Caluin instit 4. 10. 18. quia periculum c. And their posteritie were no lesse superstitiously obsequious in obseruing then they in prescribing for Sozomen saith that in those dayes in Cities and Villages very many customes which for reuerence of those which brought them in at first or of those which succeeded the bringers in they who had beene trained vp in them did by no meanes holde lawfull or tollerable to violate which very thing fell out vnto men in this very feast of Easter lib. 7. cap 19. Some of the Fathers did bring in the Ceremonies with no superstition or opinion of merit or necessitie but with a good intention namely to stirre vp the more reuerence and admiration towards the Sacraments and to stirre vp a kind of deuotion in the minds of men which going further and further and increasing tooke strength vntill at last they turned to that manifest impiety idolatry and superstitions as wee see in that supposed Church of Rome this day Zepperus de Politia eccl lib. 1. cap. 10. fol 55. Some were deriued from the Gentiles and though sometime they were vsed yet they were afterward abolished such as the yeerely offering for the birth day Sadeel Some of the Ceremonies were brought in vpon occasion such as the signing of a mans selfe with the Crosse which was vsed on occasion of the Pagans mocking of the Christians crucified God that they might testifie vnto them that they were Christians and not ashamed of the Crosse of Christ this Martyr Loc. class 2. cap. 5. § 20. noteth out of Augustine de verbis Apostoli ser 8. which after grew to superstition So the not fasting one the Sabbath was established on occasion that the Maniches did in ioyne fasting on that day to their disciples August Epist 86. so the gloria Patri and as some suppose the threefold dipping of children in Baptisme was brought in by way of opposition to the Arians and Antitrinitarians Sozom. 6. 26. All or the very most part of these their ceremonies were significatiue as before appeares many of them in the euent were holden opperatiue such as the imposition of hands signe of the crosse anointing with oyle Tertullian de resurrectione carnis Caro vngitur vt anima consecretur Caro signatur vt anima muniatur Caro manus impositione adumbratur vt et anima spiritu illuminetur looke more in Bellarm. Tom. de Imag lib. 2. cap. 29. They were in processe of time increase of superstitions as many little streames meeting in along tract doe end in an Ocean So multiplied for number and burthen that to the more sincere and prudent Fathers the estate of the Iewes seemed more tolerable and easie then the estate of the Christians of those times Augustine Epistle 119. cap. 19. Some of them were very eager and inexorable for the obseruation of them it was accounted nefat on the Lords day to kneele in prayer Tertull. cont Marcion lib. 1. de coron mil. and who hath not heard of thē foule coile which Victor the Romish Bishop kept or at least began to keepe against the Churches of the Easterne world whom onely for not obseruing the order of the Westerne Churches hee would haue excommunicated and giuen them all vnto the Diuell at a clap which audacious and frantike attempt of that turbulent and boisterous Prelat albeit it be cogingly blanched ouer by a Sanderus visib Monarch lib 7. num 22 23 24 25 fol. 246 247 248. Sanders b Bellarm de Rom pont l. 2. c. 19. Bellarmine c Baron Annal Tom. 1. anno 198. Baronius d Genebrard Chronol lib. 3 anno Christi 206 fol. 389. Genebrard fit dawbers of so tottring a wall as if it had beene by him as by the primacy of the Romish Sea yet it is farre otherwise reported in the records of antiquity for first it is plainely said by Irenaeus that this excommunication was flat against the minds and practise of the most reuerend Fathers such as Policarp the disciple of Saint Iohn and other Romish Bishops his predecessors such as Amicetus Pius Higynus Telesphorus Xistus who in the like difference gaue not the like example neither did they hold this odds of such trifles as Irenaeus calls them a matter of that quality to breake communion but held fast the band of loue and vnity Euseb 5. 24. Socrat. 5. 22. That this censure of the man was done in excessiue heate or in a pelting chafe on his part as Socrates affirmeth 5. 22. that Irenaeus Bishop of Lions did put Victor in remembrance of his duety Eusebius 5. 24 sharpely reprooued him ibidem and bitterly inueighed against him and contested with him by letters Socrates 5. 22. that all the Easterne Bishops still kept their old by as from the Romish Sea for all the threates of Victor euen vnto the time of the Nicaene Council when all agreed without any absolution at all from Victors thunder-clappe yea that Policrates the president of the Easterne Bishops and all the rest which were very many were not moued an haire at these rattles set vp to fright them Euseb 5. 23. Where by the way wee may vnderstand two points First what
Signe of the crosse in Baptisme kneeling at the Communion are not per se Idololatrica matters of themselues Idolatrous Ibid. Epist 12. fol. 99. 100. Heming It is adiaphorum natur â a matter indifferent in nature to performe holy things as Baptisme and the Lords Supper in a linnen garment Enchirid. tit de Adiaph class 3. cap. 10. fol. 375. Zanch It is liberum per se a free matter of it selfe to vse or not to vse a linnen garment De redempt lib. 1. cap. 16. fol. 445. Bucan Indifferēt things are said to be such actions which are neither precisely commanded in the Law or word of God neither yet expresly forbidden to be done as to eate flesh or this or that kinde of meate or not to eate it on this or that kinde of day to be clothed in this fashion or colour or not to be clothed Loc. 33. quaest 13. fol. 382. Cartwright The Surplesse is a thing in its owne nature indifferent In the rest of the 2. reply fol. 262. Polanus The vse of a linnen garment is a thing indifferent In Ezec. 44. fol. 807. Obiect Your common prayer Booke is framed like the Romish Masse booke This obiection was made by such as Alexander Alesius calleth optimi veritatus studiosissimi Answ Alesius To this obiection albeit they giue answere which framed the Common prayer Booke themselues in the Preface of ceremonies yet we also may say truely that it is best in all changes and alterations as little to digresse or differ much from those things which are in vse as possible may bee because sodaine and great alterations are euer very perillous And it is much more safe to follow the commendable consent of some few then casting all away to begin and ordaine another altogether new The errors and faults of the Masse bookes are not therefore approoued if something be defended which those errors haue defiled so the errors be remoued Neither doth the Phisitian flatter the disease if presently he cut not off and cast not away the member which laboureth with a recouerable euill This whether ye call it wisedome or moderation or timorousnesse or whatsoeuer I say it neither serueth neither gratifieth the impiety of any but doth performe a necessary duety warily and circumspectly and with the feare of God and serueth God and the Church in professing and defending and keeping the heauenly trueth and doeth glorifie the Sonne of God which will be worshipped by holinesse and righteousnesse before God and adored by the holy Ghost This moderation will not content him that is more hot of nature yet let such a one looke what hee doth and whither he goeth Let him looke that he be not ouer-wise more then he ought to be wise Let him not cauill at other mens godly and temperate reasons neither let him insolently condemne others lesse stout and confident For all must stand before the tribunall of God to giue an account of the things they haue done Let not therefore the high minded too curiously pry into all the sayings and doings of the more humble Let him beare with some things let him slaunder none Let him not hope by wrangling or brauling that it is possible to giue helpe to things out of order but rather to all agreement making to bring two necessary affections one of knowing the state another of pardoning the faults Iudgement is a great and high thing This by how much the businesse is greater is by so much the more diligently intended and opinion is lesse rashly to be giuen The cause ought to be euident not ambiguous and of great weight and by no meanes to be dissembled for the which one brother should accuse another much lesse that it hold a right affection to condemne him Let euery one therefore looke that hee be not swift to speake but rather attentiue to know and inclined to pardon wheresoeuer he may lawfully do but of this sufficient Inter. Script Anglic. Buceri fol. 374. Obiect Bishop Hooper Holy significatiue signes are vnlawfull Answ Bucer 1. When as God by his word hath sanctified all things by our prayers and hath made all things pure to the pure what cause can wee alleadge out of the word of God to deny that God will not blesse the vse of such signes whereof we speake that it should not be effectuall to that Church to some commendation of the Ministrie and thereof also to some edification of the faith For how can it be but that hee which promised to blesse the workes of our hands which we take in his name wil deny his blessing to these signes seeing he hath no where forbidden such an vse of them as we haue expounded and hath made vs Lords of the Sabbath and all other things in the world In Epist. Ioan. Alasco 2. Let vs consider what the Holy Ghost teacheth of the signification of a womans vaile and couering of the mans head 1. Cor. 10. wherefore doeth hee particularely mention the bright garments of the Angels The Holy Ghost doeth nothing rashly and doeth by all creatures preach the saluation of his which consisteth in the faith of the Gospel Script Anglican fol 709. Hoopero Petre Martyr The Ministers of the Church are the Angels and Messengers of the Church as Malachy witnesseth and the Angels all wayes for the most appeared as apparelled in white garments This hee calleth honesta iusta significatio a Scripturis non aliena an honest and fit signification of the Surplesse not disagreeing or strang from the Scripture How shall wee depriue the Church of this libertie that it may not signifie some thing by her actions and Ceremonies so as the people of Christ bee not burdened with Ceremonies and better things be not hindered ye will say let them declare themselues to be Angels indeed let them not signifieit But this might be replied as well on Saint Paul when hee appointed among the Corinthians that a woman should haue her head couered a man haue his head open 1. Cor. 11. 5. for he only presseth the reason of signification to confirme this Ceremonie Now any man of the Corinthian Church might here reply vpon him thus let the man declare himselfe indeed to be the head of the woman and let the woman shew her selfe subiect to her husband by their deeds and life let them not striue to declare it by signes But the Apostle saw that euen this might profitably be done not onely that wee liue rightly but also that by words and signes we be admonished of our duetie Loc. com fol. 1089. Epist Hoopero Zanchius Albeit a garment linnen or wollen for a Minister be numbred among indifferent things yet for the signification magis deceret vestis linea quà m lanea a linnen garment were more decent then a wollen for a Minister to weare in the administration of the Sacrament for that it is the Symbole or type of innocencie and holinesse Hence in the Apocalips white garments are giuen the Saints De redempt cap. 16.
any one of those Ceremonies which hee saith they did inioyne were as inconuenient and euill as ours are And for this point hee is to be referred to that which hath beene answered vnto the two former partes of his Assumption 2. Though he had proued that they did inioyne vnto some one or some few persons such Ceremonies as were both for number and for nature as bad as ours yet vnlesse hee had shewed that they had inioyned them vnto whole Churches hee hath not concluded that which he tooke in hand And therefore that which hee brings of Pauls circumcising of Timothy or Iames perswading Paul to purifie himselfe is nothing to the purpose 3. Hee hath not proued nor euer will bee able to doe that the Apostles did ioyne the practise of any one of those Ceremonies to any one Church or to any one person eitheir by inspiration of the Holy Ghost For as for circumcision of Timothy though it be true that Paul did it did it well yet it would be a harsh speach and vniustifieable to say that he compelled or inioyned or commanded Timothy to be circumcised And for that which Iames and the Elders said to Paul concerning his purifying besides that it cannot hastily bee called a commandement or iniunction because no Church or Apostle had so much authority ouer Paul as to command him any thing 2. Cor. 11. 5. Gal. 2. 6. 9. Maister Spr. knoweth well that some are ‖ Magdaburg Centurion 1. lib. 2. p. 603. Gualt in act 21. hom 139. Zanch. de red p. 491. b. great Diuines who haue plainely affirmed that Iames and the Elders did ill in pressing Paul so farre in this matter †Caluin in act 21. 22. 23. others stand in doubt whether they did well in it or no sure it is hee can neuer soundly proue either out of this or any other place of Scripture that they did it by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost or commandement of God The place which hee puts most confidence in for the proofe of this third point is Acts 15. for there we read indeed of a decree sent by the Apostles vnto sundry Churches and that decree was made by the inspiration or direction of the Holy Ghost But to this place it may bee answered that things mentioned in this decree were so farre from being so many Ceremonies or so bad as ours are which hee must still bee put in minde that hee should haue proued that in very deed they were no Ceremonies at all neither euer came into the minde or purpose of the Apostles when they made that decree to inioyne the vse of any Ceremonies to the Churches For to omit this that the meere abstaining and forbearing the vse of many things can with no good shew of reason bee called the vse or practise of a Ceremonie though the abstinence from bloud strangled were once a ceremoniall dutie while the law was in force yet it was now inioyned by the Apostles to the Gentiles not as a ceremoniall but as a morall dutie that they should absteine from their libertiy in the vse of these indifferent things when they saw the vse of them would offend their weake brother And surely seeing the reason and end of this abstinence was not any such misticall signification as it had vnder the law but onely to auoide the offence of the Iew it could no more bee called a Iewish Ceremony then if either out of a naturall loathing of those meates or respect had to their health or some such like consideration they had forborne the same Neither let Mr. Spr. thinke it strange that the same thing which being cōmanded in the law was a Ceremonie should now being commanded by the Apostles alter the nature and become no Ceremonie Let him consult with the best Diuines and Interpreters of the Scripture and he shall finde that though circumcision was a Sacrament vnder the Law yet Timothy his circumcision Caluin in Act. 16. 3. was no Sacrament and that all the Ceremonies of the law were so abrogated by the death of Christ as that though some vse of them did remaine for a time yet they did no longer belong to the worship of God nor were figures of spirituall things nor were obserued in conscience of obedience to the ceremoniall law In which things consisteth the very life and essence of a Iewish Ceremonie and without which nothing can in good propriety of speach bee called a Ceremonie But what neede any more bee said of this matter when the Apostles themselues speaking of this decree affirme that they that said the Gentiles ought to keepe the law did in saying so seeke to subuert their soules that they had written and concluded that the beleeuing Gentiles should obserue no such thing as vowing shauing of the head purifying c. saue only that they keepe themselues from things offered to idols and from blood and from strangled and from fornication By which wordes also they doe plainely intimate that this abstinence which they inioyne in this decree was no such thing but of another kinde and nature as vowing purifying shauing of the head offering c. and consequently was not inioyned by them as any Ceremony of Moses Law The fourth and last point in the confirmation of his assumption is this that the Apostles and Churches were moued thus to enioyne and practise such Ceremonies so many so inconuenient and euill vpon reasons of no greater weight then the auoiding of depriuation is with vs. This hee prooueth by specifying the causes and reasons that moued the Apostles to practise and enioyne those Ceremonies which hee sayth were these three First for the beleeuing Iewes that they might not bee offended nor occasioned to turne backe to Iudaisme Acts 16. 1 3. and 21. 20 21 24. Secondly for the vnbeleeuing Iewes that they might be wonne to the Gospel and saued 1 Cor. 9. 20 22. and 10. 32 33. Thirdly to auoyd the persecution of the malicious Iewes and so to redeeme the libertie of the ministerie which otherwise was like to be indangered Act. 21. 22 27 28 30 31 32. For answere vnto all this it may be said that if the Apostles had practised inioyned such as are euill Ceremonies as ours are they had farre greater reason so to doe then the auoiding of depriuation is with vs. For first as their ministery was of more great excellencie then ours whether we respect the extraordinary gifts wherewith they were indued or the wonderfull power of God which did accompany them and giue successe and fruit to their labours so the redeeming of the liberty of their ministery if that were any cause as he here supposeth it was was and ought to haue been of much more weight to moue them to doe as they did then the continuance of vs in our ministery can be to perswade vs to the vse of our Ceremonies What one Minister of the Gospel is there that dare to bee so presumptuous as to say that his preaching and
Apostle did practise some legall Ceremon◠though in his owne purpose not as a legall Ceremony or in obedience to the Law ceremonial or as a yoke and burden but in other materiall respects in sometime and on some person after that it appeared to him and was euident that the same Ceremony among other persons and at other times was a yoke and a burden And is it not strange that my Brethren should not see this but impute it to me as a strange thing But they enioyned none such Ceremonies as were yokes and burdens admit of that the question is of practise of Ceremonies to auoide depriuation not of inioyning Next they affirme that they could not bee called ordinances of the world commandements or doctrines of men or voluntary religion neither could they be termed impotent and beggarly rudiments I say againe yes they might be so termed and that lawfully For the holy Ghost in the Apostle doth expresly terme them so in the same words both the obseruation of dayes moneths times and yeres Gal. 4. 9. 10. Holy-daies new Moones Sabboth daies Colos 2. 16. 22. as also abstinence from meates Touch not taste not handle not Col. 2. 10. 21. 22. 23. which was the very thing enioyned by the Apostles Act. 15. 28. If the Holy Ghost called them so we may be bold to terme them such But my Brethren say that they could not be termed such so long and so far forth as the Apostles did vse or inioyne them The which I answere by distinguishing betweene there nature and the vse that the Apostles had of them In their nature they were such as they were called yokes burdens or burdening traditions impotent and beggarly rudiments not onely in respect of the vnbeleeuing or ignorant beleeuing Iewes abuse but vnto the godly and best instructed Christians also for which of them would willingly haue vsed them without occasions of necessity to auoide a further incouenience yea considering them also in themselues for seeing Christ himselfe was come the body of what sound vse or erudition could they be what could they teach but Christ to come which was already come which also was an vntruth or what comfort could they minister to the Gentiles to whom they were inioyned or to Timothy and Paul by whom they were practised but as yokes and burdens only the comfort of their practise was the good purpose which they serued for the winning of the Iewes or retaining of them in the loue of the Gospell as the reasons alleadged by my Brethren out of Acts 21. 20. 24. 1. Cor. 9. 20. doe shew which were the causes of the Apostles vse of them made their practise lawfull But this much is sufficient to prooue the point in question For this sheweth the nature of those ceremonies to agree with the nature of ours As the Iewish ceremonies so likewise ours barely considered in thēselues which the Papists many professed Protestants abuse may be accounted in a sort yokes burdens burdening traditions commandements and doctrines of men voluntary religion impotent and beggerly rudiments c. yet as the Ceremonies practised by the Apostles so also ours by the same analogy in a case of necessity of expediency to redeeme the liberty of the Gospel in the Ministry of many good Teachers they are good and necessary and the commandements of God to practise 2. The second member of this Section affirmeth That it will neuer be prooued by me and if not then nothing is said to the purpose that when and where the Apostles or those Churches vsed them they had beene notoriously knowen to haue beene so abused or to haue wrought such euill effects as I there speake of And my answere is That it is true these ceremonies were not at all abused by any well grounded Christians at any time or place But it is not possible but my Brethren should know that the ceremonies well vsed by the Apostles Churches and other godly persons were knowen by them to haue been grossely abused euen as I alleadged in my first reason by the refractary and weake Christian Iewes euery where euen then when as they practised them like as we know that our Ceremonies haue been and are abused by Papists and weake Brethren notwithstanding which abuse knowledge thereof they persisted to vse them as often as necessity enforced and iust occasiō was offred For Paul knew how the Iewes abused circumcision to establish an opinion of the necessity thereof vnto saluation Act. 15. 1. yet after this knowledge he vsed it Act. 16. 3. and when S. Paul circumcised Timothy for the Iewes sake is it not euident that the Iewes had a false and abusiue opinion and practise of circumcision to preuent whose vniust offence Paul did it notwithstanding which the Apostle practised Circumcision on Timothy Likewise S. Paul his reprouing of Peter for abuse of Iewish ceremonies in causing of Gentiles to conforme vnto them Gal. 2. 11 12 14. whether wee referre the time thereof to Paraeus in Gal. 2. 104. Act. 11. 26. or as Paraeus doth to Act. 15. 30. 35. was before his circumcising of Timothy and his vowing and shauing of himselfe Act. 18. 21. Lastly was it not knowen to the Apostles when they obserued the occasion of the Iewish Sabbath to preach vnto them that the Iewes had an opinion of necessity of obseruation of that day as they had Ioh. 9. 16. Luc. 13. 14. Matt. 12. 2. Or could Paul and the Apostles bee ignorant that vowing offring contributing shauing dueties of the ceremoniall Law were abused by the Iewes both before they practised them and where they practised them and euen by occasion of their practise which doeth easily appeare by the violence which the Iewes vsed on a bare suspition that Paul was a professed enemie vnto the Legall rites Act. 21. 21 27 29. As for that which my Brethren alledge concerning Paul who hauing vsed circumcision and other Ceremonies doth after with great bitternesse reprooue and condemne the vse of them Gal. 4. 9 10. and 5. 12. Tit. 1. 14. I will omit that which some ‖ Gual in Gal. 2. Hom. 10 fol. 29. b. Codoman annal s Scriptur Ambros Chrysostomus learned men obserue that the Epistle to the Galat. was written before the Councill of Ierusalem Act. 15. and then those reproofes of his must goe before the circumcising of Timothy and shauing of himselfe Act. 16. 18. because it is controuerted and holden otherwise by †Paraeus prolegom in Ep. ad Rom. fol. 48. 49. Idem pro. em in Epist ad Gal. fol. 22. 23. other godly learned men But to it I say that that reproofe of Paul was not vsed in respect of the time after but in respect of the different case it was a case of confession that is hee was called to confesse a fundamentall truth in Titus case which he was not in the case of Timothy For the false Brethren would haue compelled Titus to haue beene circumcised meaning his conscience as
297. Rhem. in Rom. 8. 38. what is the difference betweene their answere and the answere of my Brethren being both alike pressed without reason or rather contrary to sound reason 6. Because all godly learned iudgements before my Brethren haue iudged as I iudge hereof Therefore their answere is against all godly learned iudgements with whom if I erre not obstinately as seeing no better reason I shall retaine my peace The Scriptures that I quote to prooue the Iewish ceremonies practised by the Apostles to haue been in themselues of no necessary vse humane inuentions and abused to superstition my Brethren disalow and say that they are mis-vnderstood and mis-applied by mee as they haue shewed the trueth whereof appeareth in my Answere to that shew of theirs And they say further that I contradict my selfe cleerely and strongly and therewith they conuince mee But why Because I distinguish of their different titles nature and vse in different respectes namely that in some respects I said that they were called commaundements of men and ordinances of the world impotent and beggerly rudiments shadowes of things already come and therefore fit to be abolished as being of no necessary vse but very hurtfull and offensiue in sundry maine respects and because the Apostles taught against their not necessary vse and yet in other respects were practised and taught by the direction of the Holy Ghost as matters good and necessary Act. 15. 28. then both which members of affirmation what can be more cleere vnlesse my Brethren will say which I am assured they will abhorre to say that the Holy Ghost doth contradict himselfe in the Apostles for that I herein say no more then I am taught to say by the Holy Ghost in the holy Scriptures by all classicall writers The second sort of difference which my Brethren make betweene our ceremonies and the Ceremonies of the Apostles practise sheweth that our Ceremonies being humane ceremonies are first appropriated to Gods seruice Secondly ordaind to teach spirituall dueties by their mysticall significations which theirs were not To the first of which I say First That some of the ceremonies practised by the Apostles albeit they were not appropriated to Gods seruice that is his immediate worships yet they might seemes to be appropriated thereunto such as circumcising offring vowing For what were these things being performed as God required but the immediat seruices of God or else as shewes thereof If hee did them as shewes onely of Gods seruices and not as seruices there might seeme to bee a taking of Gods Name in vaine or if he did by them serue God when they were out of vse and left to be commanded of God there might seeme to be some fault in Pauls action Well then how shall wee cleare Saint Paul of one or other errour Verily not as my Brethren would doe who would say that hee did it by meere diuine authority and nothing else as if God should for a time command these Ceremonies a new vnto the practisers thereof But my answere is this that if Saint Paul and the Apostles did not appropriate the practise of Gods seruice one way that is to his immediate woorship yet did they appropriate the practise of them vnto the seruice of God another way that is for the libertie of the Gospel the appeasing of fraternall discord the winning of the more the compassing of which in the performance of these Ceremonies were the true seruices of God Wherefore euen the Ceremonies of the Apostles practise were appropriate to the seruice of God But these were not humane inuentions but I haue shewed that they left in themselues to be Gods commandements and should not haue beene practised without necessitie that is of doing seruice to God in these fore-named endes And touching signification some man might thus argue that either the Iewish Ceremonies practised by the Apostles had a signification in their intention or none at all If none then they might seeme needlesse and vnprofitable and so the Apostles might seeme to be the practisers of idle actions which say I is most true were it not by their practise to wine the more and to furder the Gospel which made them actions very fruitfull and to good purpose But if they had signification in their intentions then this signification was either true or false not any false as of Christ to come which was their old and decaied signification Col. 2. vnlesse they might haue still a kinde of lawfull and yet vntrue signification of Christ to come in their mindes which expecting the Messias with an vpright heart belieued not as yet in the Messias come therefore they must haue some true signification if any at all imposed on them but this we read not therefore we cannot affirme as I suppose that they had any signification at all Wherefore I maruell my brethren would giue instance of the vse of other Sacraments such a trifle to play withall as knowing that in the Apostles it might imply an absurditie in vs an euident impietie But it will bee demanded I know that if I grant the Ceremonies of the Apostles practise to bee void of signification in their intention what then is this vnto our Ceremonies which are ordained to teach spirituall duties by their misticall signification But my brethren should remember that the question here is not of the lawfulnesse of imposing signification on Ceremonies not of Gods ordaining but of the lawfulnesse of the vse of Ceremonies in a case of necessitie on which signification signification is imposed by others And thus these Ceremonies will accord to the point in question For seeing those Ceremonies had a signification of the superstitious and not well informed Iewes before whom they were vsed by the Apostles and for whose sakes some of them were inioyned to the Gentiles the question is whether an Apostle in a case of superior reason as to redeeme Ministerie might conforme vnto them or to the like in the like case lawfully notwithstanding that ineuitable scandall that hee should occasion vnto the beholders namely to apprehend by them I say not a true signification in which respect our significatiue Ceremonie of the Crosse seemeth more tolerable but a false namely to signifie to them Christ to come which was already come And if he might lawfully doe this as it is euident he might then let my brethren tell me wherefore a Minister of the Gospel now may not lawfully vse such a Ceremonie which being no commandement of God is by others ordained and imposed to teach spirituall things by their mysticall signification and not intentionally or approuedly in the minde of the vser As for that which is included in the third difference I must needes confesse it hath more waight then any thing I know alleadged against our Ceremonies if my brethren can soundly proue that namely our Ceremonies are esteemed imposed and obserued as parts of Gods worships whereby first of all I doubt not but my brethren doe meane essentiall parts of
iudged they of the Crosse in Baptisme and of kneeling at Communion the rest which afterward shal be alleadged The reasons prouing this poynt are these Because they are neither expresly Commaunded nor forbidden of God Bucanus vbi superius this rule also of a thing indifferent hath Polanus Syntag. lib. 6. cap. 38. fol. 3036. Paraeus Colleg. 2. cap. 31. sect 15. fol. 274. Illyricus claue Scriptur fol. 22. part 1. Adiap And are distinguished from things simply good which are expressely Commaunded from things simply euill which are expressely forbidden of God being in their nature neither morrally good or euill neither Commanded nor forbidden of God and by accident may bee both good and euill Exerc. part inter Thes fol. 826. Obiection Beza contra Sarauiam cap. 25. fol. 200. saith indifferent things I call which are neither expressely nor secretly Commaunded nor forbidden by the word neither maketh vs the better being vsed nor the worse if wee vse them not But our ceremonies are forbidden in the word in generall and in particular in our vse Ergo. Answere So may be said of the Iewish ceremonies rather then of ours both they and these are in nature indifferent not impious and in the case of depriuation or necessity are not forbidden any way but commaunded rather because wee must vse indifferent things for the furtherance of the Churches edification and not refuse them though they seeme to vs inconuenient to the Churches destruction And as for Beza with all other sound writers that are of other mindes concerning our ceremonies they hold them in their nature indifferent and not forbidden in the word especially in our vse and in the case of simple necessity 2 Because in some cases a man may vse them and not sinne which a thing in nature euil he can neuer vse but he shal incuitably sin of this nature are Idolatry adultery blasphemy periury which sins no circumstance can euer amend Beza cont Saraui cap. 25. fol. 199. Indifferentia sunt quorum vsus modo bonus modo illicitus prout viz bene vel male illis vtitur quae naturam habeant neque ad bonum neque ad malum determinatam 3 Because in some respects and in some vse they may bee good a thing in nature euill can neuer bee put to any profitable vse Peter Martyr saith Adiaphoris bene vel male vti possumus L. Clas 4. cap. 4. fol. 707. 4 Because in some respects and in the same vse they may bee good and necessary as the Iewish rites were in the Apostles practise 5 Because they are of the same nature with the Iewish rites practised by the Apostles Of this opinion is Peter Martyr Loc cum inter Epist fol. 1087. Zanchius in Philip. 1. fol. 45. Polanus in Ezech. 44. fol. 807. which ceremonies by the streame of all sound writers are holden as indifferent in nature in the case wherein they vsed them 6 Because a man vsing them all the dayes of his life as they are prescribed in our Church and that without repentance for such vse of them may still remaine a godly and good man and presupposing him otherwise to walke in holinesse may in that estate bee saued whereas one sinne in nature as to liue in fornication 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Being continued in especially if it should bee pleaded for and defended Mat. 5. 9. Cannot stand with his saluation So Bucer script Anglican 1458. Martyr inter Episto fol. 1085. Amico cuidam Aretius sayth that indifferent things are such as are in equall respect to good and to bad Prob. cap. 83. de Adiaph fol. 266. 7 Because if they were in nature euill a godly person could not communicate with a good conscience with our Church which doth prescribe and practise them and remoueth them not being admonished neither in the Ministery or any worship of God Bucer Epist. Io. Alasco Martyr fol 1086. Hoopero 8 Because all such as haue continued in the vse of them and defended the same might be iudged impiouse and wicked such as are the Martyrs and other worthy persons of our Church and other Churches also yea the Apostles and all faithfull teachers and Churches since their time should be condemned yea it might bee taught as a doctrine that such as vse them with continuance or maintaining them could not be saued which I suppose none of the Ministers which are depriued will iustifie Martyr fol. 1086. Hoopero Simply euill may be taken for any thing particularly forbidden of God or the omission of a thing particularly commanded of God sundry things of which kind though in themselues considered are euill may bee done lawfully for a superior good and in that case doe leaue to be simply euill as to doe seuile labour on the Sabbaoth day to eate such bread as God had forbidden to the persons which did eate thereof to come or admit commers in a legall vnsanctified estate to the Sacraments and the like which shall bee after mentioned more fully therefore to this purpose I distinguish of euill as before which may bee two wayes considered either for that which is intrinsically formally and in the nature thereof euill not onely because God hath forbidden it or commaunded the contrary which kinde of euill is immutabiliter malum as murther periury adultery c. Being against the immutabilitie of Gods nature no circumstance can make them good though by circumstances they may bee lessened or made greater of this nature our Ceremonies are not neither can they bee euills of this kinde or else euill is taken for that which being indifferent in nature yet by accident is euill namely in vse when offence will be taken thereat by diuers persons in diuers respects or rather inconueniences will arise which were euill therefore to vse if it lay in mans power to refuse them Againe for that which being particularly forbidden of God in his Word is therefore vnlawfull to doe The euill of both which latter kinde may by circumstances bee amended and the practise thereof may leaue to be a sinne namely in a case of superiour reason when a dutie of greater band doth tie the conscience which that it may be the better manifested we may obserue two points First the degrees Secondly the subordination of duties commanded in the Law of God Consider first that there are degrees of duties of both Tables of the Law which appeareth in reason for there are duties substantiall and duties circumstantiall Substantiall duties are both internall of the first Table as loue knowledge feare and confidence in God of the second Table as loue reuerence patience kindnesse compassion iustice c. Substantiall externall also of the first Table standeth in the maine worships of inuocation preaching and hearing of the Word receiuing of the Scraments lawfull swearing c. Of the second Table as outward reuerence obedience helpe and tribute to superiours kindnesse and thankfulnesse shewed to equalls almes reward correction and instruction to inferiours The circumstantiall duties of either Table are