fully agreed That When a thing appears to be a duty it is then not only lawful but necessary and it must supersede all dispute about the near lawfulnesse or expediency such a thing now not only may but must be dore Here we are not to make scruples or examine whether it be fit to be done because if a Duty it cannot be omitted without sin And without question a 〈◊〉 once supposedâ— Dâ—â—y is by the same supposed lawful expedient yea necessary and no imagined expedience may superâ—â—de a necessary duty Sect. 6 4. It is as clearly evident and granted by all That a Law made by a Lawful thougl Hâ—mâ—â— Aâ—â—â—ority â—â—yeth an Obligation upon the Conscience The Obe◠〈◊〉 a thing indifferent but in Conscience we are bould to yield it and if we refuse it we are under the guilt not only of the breach of an Humane Law but of sin against God whâ— gave the [i] Prov. 8.15.16 power to the Law makers and whose [k] Rom. 13.1.2.5 ordinance is despised in the contempt of those laws The powers have their authority from God They are ordained of God therefore to resist or disobey them is to resist and disobey God and the end is Damnation the proper [l] Rom. 6.21 23. fruit and end of sin and Therefore ye must needs be subject not only for wrath the fear of anger or punishment by those in Authority but for Conscience sake as obliged in Conscience to a duty which God requires 5. It is also I thinâ— unquestionable among all knowing and considering men That though no powers can oblige a Subject by any Law to what is materially evil Conscience being primarily bound [m] Nullaâ—st necessitas â—â—â—inquendi qâ—ibas una est necessitas nâ—n delinquendi not to sin by the Law of him who is God and Lord of all yet A just authority commanding that which was before a duty a new Obligation is laid upon the Conscience by this command of men added to the command of God so that Conscience is now tyed in a double bond even from God and Man and to disobey now would be a double sin yea farther Sect. 7 6. It cannot be divided That A just Authority commanding or forbidding that which was before lawful either to be done or forborn bringeth now an Obligation upon the Conscience of the Subject which was not obliged before so far that what I might lawfully do without sin now when commanded I am bound to do it and sin by the breach of an obliging law if I do it not and what I might lawfully forbear before now when forbidden I not onely may but must forbear and conscience is obliged in sin if I forbear it not e. g. Christians are undoubtedly bound to acts of Publick and solemn worship of God suppose particularly on the Lords day and it being perfectly indifferent at what hour of the day their publick meetings shall be it being beyond dispute that they may lawfully assemble at any hour but they being once by authority of Church or State determined to such an hour by that command they are bound to assemble at the time appointed it being a circumstance on all hands confessed where they may command and we may obey Again to Fast and humble our selves before the Lord upon occasion of our provoking sins or the presence or sear of some heavy judgements to implore pardon for the one and the removing or preventing of the other is without question a duty upon us by the law of God and so it is also to meet for publick Praise and Thanksgiving but the partic lar dayes and times are confessedly indifferent and none that I know ever doubted the power of humane authority to determine them and having so determined we are obliged to observe them Even those who yet scruple the religious observation of the constant Fasts and Feasts prescribed in this Church such as the Lent Fast Ember weeks Vigils and the observation of Saints dayes and the particular solemnities of Christs Birth Resurrection and Ascension c. yet grant in Thesi this to be true That it is in the power of the Magistrate to appoint dayes either of Fasting or Thanksgiving and that his law obligeth the Subject to observe them accordingly which is an infallible evidence that in things thus purely indifferent the law of a just Authority obligeth where before we were not obliged And those Reverend Divines commissioned by his Majesty to treat about the Alteration of the Liturgy making not this an exception against the Ceremonies imposed That because they are in themselves indifferent a law is not to be made concerning them or if made that we are not obliged but onely this they desire such a law not to be made because though they be indifferent in the judgement of the imposers yet they are not so in the judgement of the opposers but held by some of them to be sinful and unlawful in themselves and by others very inconvenient and unsuitable to the simplicity of the Gospel Which assures me that were they in their judgments lawful to be observed the command would not be a plea why they should not be observed I might give several other instances of such indifferencies It is without doubt lawful in it self to eat Fish or Flesh at any time but when upon just reasons or prudential motives a just authority shall command an abstinence from Flesh for such a season we are for that season obliged to forbear it so far as we are really able unlesse we have a dispensation by the same authority that made the law And indeed it concernes not Subjects to enquire the reasons why the law is made but whether the thing be lawfull the matter of that law be not evil and when it was lawful before it becomes a duty now For the lawes of a just authority come in [n] Prov. 8.15 Rom. 13.1 6. the Power of God and it is a duty to be subject for conscience sake as before was shewed and therefore to deny to do that which is commanded when it is commanded or because it is commanded is an high contempt of the ordinance of God a sin of an high nature before God Sect. 9 7. Hence it also undeniably followeth nor is it denied by any who understand the nature and obligation of a law That where a law made by such authority requireth our active obedience i. e. to do or not do such a thing and layeth a penalty on those who observe it not the conscience is obliged to the duty and it is not sufficient to submit to the penalty because the law engageth to the Fenalty onely secondarily and accidentally upon mens failures but obligeth conscience primarily and intentionally to the duty required The sanction or penalty being added to preserve the honour and authority of the law that it may not be contemned that when men do not or will not for conscience obey they may by the terrour of the punishment be
this Law it is this It enjoyneth all Ministers in the Church of England to usâ— this form of Confession Prayer Praises and Administration of Sacraments and the Rites therein prescribed in all the administrations of the publick worship of God Now there is no imaginable reason why any should refuse conformity to this Law but what may be referred to one of these two heads The unlawfulnesse or the inexpediency not of the constitution but of the practice And if I satisfie these two that it is neither unlawful nor inexpedient I am sure I shall do enough to justifie yea considering the Law upon us to prove the necessity of this practice to any rational man CHAP. III. The Liturgy examined and 1. That a prescribed form is not unlawful proved Sect. 1 THe first thing that we shall consider is the lawfulnesse of the use of this Liturgy for this is the main and this being cleared the matter of expediency considering the Law requiring it will soon be resolved Here then our enquiry is whether there be any thing in this form which is in it self evil or that may not be used without sin Sect. 2 Upon serious consideration with the best eyes and judgement which I have having also in view those many exceptions both formerly and of late made against it I must seriously professe that I can find nothing but what we may use and submit to without sin And really being convinced that we lawfully may do so as to any thing in the matter of it I must conclude we must do so in regard of the Law that enjoyns it In this case therefore for the satisfying of my self and others for we are not to obey as brutes but as rational Creatures who are to know what and to give a reason why they obey it is not proper for us to enquire whether it be well imposed but being imposed whether may we lawfully use it Not whether it were just or fit to make such a Law for of this we are not the Judges but the Law being made how far are we bound to obey it and this is our proper work 1. Sect. 3 The Question then so far as concerns our practice is not whether our Superiours may justly enjoyn this service and require this use of the Liturgy upon such severe penalties The Question truly stated as to our practice though I judge they may yet for me let every one abound in his own sense so as he publish nothing of it to disturb the peace of the Church or raise in men an evil opinion of their governours Negatively nor suffering their own hearts to despise or have a grudge against or ill thoughts of their Rulers or their Authority God having unquestionably bound all by his most righteous Law [a] Exed 22 28. Acts 23.5 not to revile the Gods or speak evil of the Judges and Rulers who are as Gods and this Law forbidding not only reproach and calumny by the tongue but the iniquity of the [b] Eccl. 10.20 thoughts also The same [c] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 word is used both in Moses and Solomon and signifies not only open rayling or blaspheming but in the primary and first Notion any vilifying contemning or slighting we may not openly rail on them like those impure Sectaries who [d] Jude 8. despise Dominion and blaspheme Dignities nor privily detract from them nor in our thoughts contemn or slightly regard them for they are [e] Psal 82.6 Gods and to be reverenced as well as obeyed Their names and honours are sacred as well as their persons Sect. 4 2. The Question only is this we see what is enjoyned by a Law that bears the undoubted stamp and character of a Law of England whether and how far are we bound to obey it or thus whether might these prayers and rites Positively And the Affirmation proâ—ed have been lawfully used by us had they not been commanded and so now this use become a duty being commanded for I take this to be undoubtedly true that what is lawful in it self becomes a duty when enjoyned even according to the principles of those Brethren who have declared [f] Due account c. to His Majesty p. 4. That it is the desire of their souls to contribute their parts and interests to the utmost for the promoting of Holinesse Vnity and OBEDIENCE to Rulers in all LAWFVL things And I am fully satisfied in the former that it had been no sin to use them considered simply in themselves had they not been enjoyned and therefore must conclude it now a duty to use them and a sin not to use them being enjoyned during the standing of that Law which enjoyns them Sect. 5 The consequence is clear upon the former principles that if it lawfully may be done then in obedience to a law it must be done for I have purposely waved here the term of indifferent which hath occasioned so much dispute and men have not agreed upon the meaning of the word some would have that to be indifferent which is a middle between lawful and unlawful absurdly enough when these lawful and unlawful are such as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they have no middle between them all things that can be done must be one or the other Others not so irrationally yet not very clearly account that indifferent which stands equally related to good and evil and neither one or t'other when it will be hard to find any one thing in matter of action which is not clothed with such circumstances as will denominate it either good or evil and the truth is I judge nothing to be indifferent to be done or forborn for of such things we speak which hath not some measure of goodnesse in it for I am sure no evil can be so it must be forborn it may not be done but there are many good things which either may be done or may be forborn at some times and places and this is properly indifferent and what may be done must be good so far as it may be done I take therefore an indifferent thing to be that which stands equally opposed or related to a necessary duty and to a sin such as we are not necessarily obliged to do nor sin if we do it not but for any thing in it self we may lawfully either do it or forbear it Now a Law coming and determining us either way though there be an indifferency in the nature of the thing yet there is no indifferency in our obedience to a Law And really if we acknowledge the thing required to be lawful we cannot deny but we may lawfully obey and if we obey not where we lawfully may neither God nor man will acquit us from the guilt of resisting an Ordinance of God as well as the Commands of Men. Sect. 6 The antecedent is only doubted whether this Liturgy or these Rites prescribed may without sin or lawfully be used I am clearly satisfied in the affirmative that
one too §. 20. Answ and we see by some the Reproach is laid high against the Church Whether it be justly taken or any reall occasion of such a Reproach or Scandall be given by the Church through this use of the Crosse we shall now consider § 21 1. That it cannot be given by particular Ministers in their use and therefore is the Scandall unjustly taken at us is evident because we are not free but by a Law determined ad hoc possibly were we every one left fully to our own liberty where the weaknesse of our Congregations would bear it but they would be ready to judge it Idolatrous and Superstitious I conceive we were bound by the law of charity so far as to condescend to their weaknesse as pro tempore during the time at least of their weakenesse ignorance or misprission untill they are betrer instructed informed and established to forbear such an use and not to lay any such occasion of Scandall before them But when we are bound up by a Law and a publick constitution the case is otherwise if any through weakenesse or mistake will judge evil of us we cannot help it the sin is theirs we give not the occasion but do our duty § 22 2. What then shall we lay the guilt upon the Church or her Governors or the Publicke constitution No in no wise To charge Scandall upon a Church and an established Law is a sin of an higher nature than men generally are aware of let us see if we cannot clear them also Scandall is indeed taken against the Church-constitution and Reproach is laid upon her Publick worship as being Superstition Idolatry or bordering upon Idolatry at least as using that which hath been abused to Idolatry and ought therefore to be abolished But hath the Church by her constitution or practice in this thing given any just occasion of these hard thoughts censures or Reproaches I thinke not which I shall manifest by applying these answers to the above mentioned arguments § 23 1. The Minor of the former argument that the Sign of the Crosse is abused by the Papists to Idolatry which is taken for granted is not perfectly true unlesse it be meant of the materiall Crosse which they worship indeed with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in their own language yea a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Signe of it as it is used in Baptisme they do not that ever I read that they abuse it to Superstition and to many ridiculous actions and odde ends we grant but to Idolatry may seeme too high a charge Let us as the proverb is give the Devill his due and not charge the Papists with more than they are really guilty of § 24 2. But the Major is evidently faulty and to be denyed for though we grant it not commanded of God and abused by the Papists yet the abuse among them proves not the use unlawfull among us For § 25 1. That some abuse or give Religious worship to a thing where it is not due this cannot make that thing an Idol generally to all but only to themselves who so worship it It may be an Idol there and Idolatry among them who worship it but it is no Idol nor Idolatry nor bordering upon Idolatry among those who worship it not but professedly and publickly condemne such an abuse or our Church openly and expressely both the Cannons and constitutions about the use of this Sign who though she leave it out of her Rubricks yet retaines it and publishes her mind sufficiently in her constitutions Were we guilty of this abuse had our Church ever worshipped or required us to worship the Crosse and so been guilty of Idolatry or Superstition in this use there had been somewhat to be grounded on that argument and some reason to remove the occasion But what they doe beyond the Seas what is done among the Papists whom we acknowledge a most corrupted Church how that should concerne us who are nothing at all concerned in their practice and have cast out their Superstitions I understand not Yea farther § 26 2. I conceive that had we also so abused this yet the former abuse is not a necessary ground of abolishing this Rite unlesse that abuse had still continued When corruption and abuse is so closely joyned and annexed to the use of a thing that we cannot separate the one from the other in the practice of men here we must abolish the thing that we may destroy the corruption But when the abuse may be separated yea and actually is separated from the lawfull use I see not why we may not retaine that thing and the lawfull practice I see no reason why a former abuse should make a present use unlawfull when we really see that abuse is taken away This hath our Church done in the use of the Crosse in Baptisme where cannot but much commend and reverence her practice in reforming her self from the Romish coruptions in these two things § 27 1. Her charity and love to Peace and communion that as many things as we may retaine fellowship and communion in with the Antient Church with them of Rome yea all Christians in the world all things that are lawfull to be used and where she can separate the corruption from the laudable and proper use these she retaineth to shew that though she reformed yet she cut not off her self from the body of Christians nor denied the communion of Saints nor forsooke the fellowship of the Church § 28 2. Her wisdome when she must differ from them and forsake them or forsake the uncrring rule which her Lord hath given her she knoweth when and where to differ When she findeth such an intollerable abuse in a Rite or Ceremonie which like f 2 King 5.27 Gehezies leprosie inseparably cleaveth to it and cannot be cured till the Ceremony it self die or be abolished here she will abolish the Ceremony that she may avoid the corruption but where she can make a separation and purge the Rite from all such abuse she knows how to retaine the Rite and banish the corruption from the use of it This we see evidently she hath done in this the Signe of the Crosse in the two Sacraments Take it in the Learned Huttons words 1. §. 29. Hutton Answ to Reas c. c. 26. p. 156 157. The Signe of the Crosse in the Lords Supper we allow not because neither so Antiently nor so genarally nor so simply received Not so Antiently for it came in but of late yeares in the Eucharist not so generally for it had not that publick approbation as in Baptisme not so simply applyed for it is rather taken from Sorcerers than good Christians and beholding to Heildebrand's Magick almost one thousand years after Christ The danger in the use of it there appeareth because it nourisheth the grounds of conjuring and odde principles in the mystery of the Black Art by Masse-Priests crossing the Bread and Wine both at once and
the Age next succeeding the Apostles which may be a very probable Argument at least if not demonstrative of such a thing in the Apostles dayes too unless we find something in their practice and writings which may evidently prove the contrary which yet is not done and withal confessing the wisdom of the Church that brought in Bishops though they judge they were not there before if upon no other account yet for the maintenance of peace and remedy of Schism according to that known testimony of St. Hierom so much stood upon in this controversie Sect. 11 Now when thus much is fairly yielded and so willingly assented to when those who yet think themselves in conscience obliged by that Covenant which they have sworn for the extirpation of that Episcopacy with the appendices established among us yet judge themselves not obliged against Episcopacy nor against their Superiority and Jurisdiction as such but think they have fully satisfied their Obligation in the acceptance of and compliance with Episcopacy as reduced by Bishop Usher where yet that Superiority and Jurisdiction is still retained Methinks here is a fair step towards compliance an happy door of hope opened that we may agree The distance is not so wide as at first it did seem to be here are no terms now of Vsurpation Tyranny and Antichristianism assix't to Episcopal Authority Sect. 12 And what should now hinder a perfect compliance when men are satisfied that they may freely and chearfully go thus far what should hinder them but that they may make some steps farther And we all whether of the one or the other perswasion may account our selves so much concerned to promote the peace of the Church as to submit so far to the established government as the Laws under which we live require that we should 1. Except Is it that the Bishops are conceived to take too much upon them and do more than they should or are called to do Or 2. Is it that they will not suffer us to take our due and to do that which we should or that we are called and have authority to do for under these two heads must be comprised all that can with any shadow be pretended why we should not comply and submit so far as the Laws require Sect. 13 Now to give a full answer to both these I shall first premise these two things 1. That it is not the design of these papers and therefore none are here to expect it to enter upon the whole controversie of government or the jus divinum of this in particular nor here to undertake a full justification of all the particulars in the constitution or exercise of it for enough hath been already written pro and con on that subject My whole design here is not to revive but to do my part if God see us yet fit for such a blessing to put an end to disputes of this nature 2. Sect. 14 But all that I have here to do is howsoever the case stand whether there be truth or no in the charge against Bishops or Episcopacy which here I meddle not with and in the following sheets may possibly in a great measure take off to consider How far we of the inferior Orb who if we exercise our ministery in England are bound by the standing Laws of England to be under them may submit to their power obey and conform to these established Laws Now that I may give full satisfaction in this case I shall first lay down these two general conclusions which I must take as granted 1. Sect. 15 This I make one Postulatum and require it to be granted me which I think no intelligent considering man will deny Viz. That in order to the conduct of our consciences and the regulating of our actions we are not to enquire what is the calling office charge or duty of another but what is the charge office and duty incumbent upon our selves Particularly it concerns not us who are not called to this authority in the Church to be curious in examining whether the Bishops do or do not undertake a charge too great for them to manage what their power or what their duty and sins are or whether it be fit they should be established in such authority by a Law this is to go out of our sphere and to meddle where we are not concerned But They being in possession of this power and established in that authority by those Laws under which we live made by the unquestionable Supremacy and Legis-lative power in the Kingdom and to whom (a) Rom. 13.5 we must be subject Our business now only is to satisfie our selves and others whether and how far we are bound to conform to these Laws in our owning and submitting to that Episcopal authority which they have established Or how far we lawfully may do so and indeed what we lawfully may do we are in duty bound to do when by a just authority we are commanded to do it This I am sure is most necessary to gain and preserve our peace And therefore I cannot but condemn that preposterous course of some Ministers who had no way to commend their zeal to the world but by preaching to one Auditory the duties of another or inveighing against their sins Some preaching in the Court against the sins of the Country and before the Magistrate ripping up the irregularities of the Subject Others with equal yea possibly more bitterness inveighing before the people against the licentiousness of the Court the Pride of the Bishops and the sins of their Governours And what Beautifiers such men have proved we need not turn over the Annals of many ages to witness Sure I am this was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rightly to divide the word of truth (b) 2 Tim. 2.15 like that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a workman that needs not be ashamed of whom St. Paul speaks nor like the faithful and wise Steward of whom our Saviour (c) Luk. 12.42 to give to every one his own proper portion of meat in due season And when men have thus made it their business to consider (d) Mat. 7.3 the Motes in the eyes of others and neglect the Beam in their own To judge censure and condemn the carriages of their brethren and look over their own When Subjects and inferiors set themselves to examine the calling office duty and carriage and to dispute the Place authority and commands of their Superiors in Church or State The fruit of this can be nothing but Sedition or Rebellion schism or faction and mutual animosities hatred and contempt But could we learn every man to do what becomes himself if others be irregular let the sin lie upon them while we are careful to look to our own steps and faithfully to discharge the duties of our own place with how much chearfulness content and peace might we live together 2. Sect. 16 Another Postulatum I require likewise to be granted which I judge no conscientious
and Nation Lastly To the King and Nation In bringing or at least being an occasion of an evil report upon both for when such Laws are established such things required and yet so many so noted so eminent persons refuse to yield obedience and it may be others of more unquiet and turbulent Spirits will be too ready to raise Commotions about them The King cannot in Justice and Honour but maintain his Laws it cannot be expected but the Penalty of the Laws will be in some measure executed upon the Disobedient now especially if many should disobey and consequently suffer what a noise will this make in the world and according to the different judgements and humours of men that hear it how will it bring a reproach upon both In some mens accompts The King shall be a Tyrant not a Father to the Church who makes such Laws which his consciencious Subjects cannot obey for fear of sin against God and are yet punished for disobedience even persecuted for Conscience sake Among others when they see so many disobey and be so unquiet under the Laws The whole Nation shall lie under the reproach of a troublesome disquiet discontented factious people delighting still in Sedition and Rebellion as if they would indeed make good that By-word that the King of England hath such a people to rule as he may fitly be termed Rex Diabelorum Pudet haec opprobria nobis Sect. 16 Let no man think me so voyd of all sentiments of Piety and Charity as to judge these Brethren indeed guilty of all these scandals as by them willingly given or justly and necessarily drawn from their practices for I seriously professe my only design is to intreat my Brethren duely to consider whether some occasions of stumbling be not by their practices laid in the way of such who are thus scandalized and to consider what some corrupt minds or well-meaning but weak men may be too apt to draw from thence and to beseech them to shew so much love to and zeal for the honour of their King and Country of this Church and State so much tenderness for the interest of Religion Piety Unity and Peace as to put forth themselves to the utmost to promote all these Not so much to consider how to maintain or uphold the reputation of a party or cause but how far they may go what they may without sin do in the use of those things which the Laws command That as much as in us lyeth we may by no mistake miscarriage or indiscretion of ours be in the least an offence nor give any occasion of offence to any to friend or foe to the righteous or ungodly to Papist or Protestant to weak or strong to those within or without the Church [g] 1 Cor. 10.32 33. Neither to Jew nor Greek nor to the Church of God Cordially seeking not our own profit but the profit of many that they may be saved CHAP. II. Some General undoubted Maximes concerning the Obligations of Humane Laws applied to the particular Case of the Liturgy c. Sect. 1 AS for the use of the Liturgy to which the Lawes of this Church and state of unquestionable Authority do undoubtedly bind us let us consider whether there be any thing in it which a conscientious christian who desires faithfully to discharge his duty to God and the Church may not submit and conform to And if it may lawfully be used I shall be confident that no rational man or peaceably minded Christian will say that the adding of a command to that which was before lawfull should now make it unlawfull or that we should sin in doing a thing when commanded which we might do without sin if not commanded And if we may do this without sin I shall presume there is that zeal in all that love the Church to its peace that will engage them to do it if upon no other account yet for Peace sake Sect. 2 We shall here to prepare the way consider how far there is a perfect agreement among all sober men of both perswasions in reference to the Obligation of Lawes upon conscience and applying these to the particular case of the Liturgy we shall see how really little the matter of difference is and labour to remove that that there may bee a perfect conformity so far as the Lawes oblige Sect. 3 1. I take this as an unquestionable truth granted and pleaded by all sides That our First Great and Principal Obligation is to Law and Will of God So that whatsoever we are to do in this or any others case must not be repugnant to this viz. it must be in it self lawful Not evil or sinful in the matter of it for we are ingaged to God in an higher Obligation than we can be to any Laws of men whatsoever And in case of a thing materially evil this must be our rule [a] Acts 5.29 That we obey God rather then men We must not be scrupulous to refuse an active obedience to the Laws of men who have no power but by Commission from and subordination to God when in obeying them we should manifestly sin against the eternal God who is the onely [b] Jam. 4.12 Supreme Law-giver and who is able to save and to destroy [c] Mat. 10.28 both soul and body In this case those two Apostles Peter and John [d] Act. 4.19 appealing to the Consciences of their very Persecutors Sect. 4 2. I take it also as undoubted on all hands that the things which we do must not only be lawful in themselves but expedient also in reference to the several circumstances and accidents that may occurre for many things may be in themselves lawful to be done there being no evil in the matter of them which yet upon the several emergencies and from the circumstances of Time Place Persons Scandal he may neither be convenient nor expedient but the contrary and so during these emergencies they become at least accidentally for those persons at such times unlawfully to be done as it is evident in the case of meats offered to Idols [e] 1 Cor. 10.25.31 Whatsoever was sold in the Shambles a man might buy and eat though it was probable some of it had been offered to Idols it yet was nothing to him who knew the [f] 1 Cor. 8.4 Idol was nothing nor the meat offered to Idols in that regard of any esteem with him but he eateth and giveth God thanks But in case of Scandal [g] v. 7 8 9 10. all having not the same knowledge where another might be offended or encouraged by such an example to eat in Conscience to the Idol He should sin who would not abridge himself of his own lawful liberty for the profit of the weak Here the Apostles Rule is [h] 1 Cor. 10.23 24. All things are lawful for me but all things are not expedient Let no man seek his own but every man anothers welfare Sect. 5 3. It is as
dayes and meats wherein the Christians had perfect liberty and he that knew his liberty might do as he saw expedient being not bound by any Law he was free as to himself but onely bound in charity in case of scandal to his brother But when we are tyed up by a Law we are not free to act as we please The case is different and the scandal cannot be charged upon as who do but our duty in obeying a Law which we are bound not to resist Again 2. § 6 In this present case as the minds of men now are it is not possible for us so to walk or to practice either way but some occasions of offence will be given by us or taken by others Some are for some are against this use of the Crosse Our Superiours command it our Laws enjoyn it some of our Brethren oppose it and are offended at it if we use it we offend these Brethren if we use it not we offend our Superiours we despise a publick Law In this case what is to be done without doubt we must compare the offences and since that unavoidably we must do one then è malis minimum of evils choose the least Compare the scandals whether given or taken avoid the greater when ye cannot avoid both One is publick the other private one is a scandal to Authority to our Superiours against a publick Law the other only a scandal to some particular doubting weak Brethren Now certainly the sinne is greater to offend a Community than to offend a private person If scandal be taken by some particulars we cannot help it we are obliged to obey and to disobey would be a scandal of an higher nature a sin of a far deeper dye But farther 3. § 7. The nature of scandal opened Howsoever some of our Brethren may take offence yet it is unjustly For by our use of the Crosse as enjoyned there is no scandal nor by any thing in this use occasion of scandal given by us Let us consider a little the notion of scandal as the Scripture useth the word and then apply it to the present case I know but two words used in Scripture to expresse this The one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which though it be scarce found in the ancient pure Greek Authors yet it is very frequent and familiar in the Hellenists and the Greek of the holy Text. The Septuagint use this word to interpret sometimes the Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c Psal 50 20. reproach or slander sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 d Josh 23.13 Jud. 2.3 8.27 1 King 18.22 Psal 69.22 106.35 140.5 141.9 an halter or snare sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 e Psal 49.10 which they seem to have mistook for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which is from the same roote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f Levit. 19.14 1 Sam. 25.31 Psal 119.165 a stumbling-block or occasion of falling or tripping And in the New Testament we meet it every where almost If we consider the notation of the word in its primary signification whether it be deduced from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by an easie mutation made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to halt though this may seem also to come from the Hebrew Radix it comes all to one it is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifies a stake or such like piece of Wood sharpned and g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesych etymol. ex Hom. Pl. v. v. 564. burnt at one end and so hardened by the fire which they used instead of a Dart c. but afterwards it was used more generally for any thing lying in the way that we are apt h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eustath to trip or stumble upon or be hindred by in our going hence i Per suros praeacutos offendicula incedere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to walk among sharp stakes or stumbling blocks such a thing is scandalum such a stumbling block in the way or as others say some crooked piece of wood bearing up a trap or a grin whereon who so happens to trip he falls into the snare or is taken by the trap by means whereof he halteth or falleth The other word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any thing that lyeth in the way that men stumble upon or trip against Now then being translated to a metaphorical and moral sense that is a scandal or matter of offence which any way is an occasion to interrupt our even and free progresse in our Christian course That then is a scandal 1. § 8 Which is occasion of sin which being laid before men occasions them to stumble and fall Thus there is a scandal 1. By corrupt Doctrines These are scandalous when they encourage to loosenesse and k Ezek. 13.22 strengthen the hands of the wicked c. 2. By evill example Thus our sins are scandalous when by our example others are encouraged to sin so with us thus was Peters dissembling a scandal l Gal. 2.8 to Barnabas 3. By indiscreet managing of our Christian liberty Doing that which in it self is no sin to us who know the indifferency before others who know it not by which means they also either 1. Do so and sin because they mistake the end Such was the scandal of eating meat offered to idols The well instructed Christian knew an m 1 Cor. 8.4 8. Idol was nothing and meat nothing he regarded no such thing but n 1 Cor. 10 25 27. ate whatsoever was sold in the Shambles and gave God thanks But when this was declared to be o 1 Cor. 10.28 8.7 13. meat offered to idols he was to abstain least others should be scandalized i. e. stumble by his example and eat also and sin by eating in conscience to the idcl Or 2. They do so and sin because they do it doubting fearing they may not do it p Rom. 14.21 22 23. not in faith onely drawn by example Or 3. They being weake and knowing not our liberry are induced to judge q Rom. 14.10 15. and condemn us and our way and so sin by rash or uncharitable censures 2. § 9 Scandal it is when the thing which we do interrupts and hinders and troubleth our brother in his way though it occasion not his sin or falling yet it hinders his free chearfull and peaceable progresse that he cannot go on with that alacrity as otherwise he would So is the word in the Psalmist r Psal 119.65 Nothing shall offend them or be a stumbling block to interrupt their peace Thus was the coming forth of ſ Judg. 11.35 Jephtha's Daughter accidentally a scandal as the Septuagint render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or such a stumbling block
of abolishing the use of the Crosse with us who so abuse it not but condemne such abuses is a most illogicall way of arguing whereas were there abuses yet wise Reformers will consider first whether they can remove them and not destroy the subject to which they cleave To cure alwayes by Abscission doth seldom commend the Chirurgeon or is pleasing to the patient He cureth best that can 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so restore the part ill affected that it still shall continue an Ornament or Grace to the body as it was before To use a thing ill and not to use it at all are both extremities and to be avoided he rightly makes a redresse who stripping off the abuse preserveth the good use of a thing There is an error both on the Right and on the Left and ſ Prov. 4.27 both to be shunned It is a madnesse for the avoiding of a few drops to plunge over head and eares in water to t Incidit in Scyllam cupiens vitare Charybdin shun a gulfe and strike upon a Rock to u Dum vitant stulli vitia in contrariia currunnt avoid one vice and embrace another Blessed are those pious holy humble and peaceable spirits that know how and take care to do so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make streight steps and turne aside neither to the Right hand nor to the Left Neither sinning against charity by giving occasion of offence when they can avoide it nor against duty and Justice by disobeying a Law under which they live when the matter commanded is lawfull to be done such as is this Rite the Signe of the Crosse which being enjoyned by a Law is cleared also to be no just occasion of this kind of Scandall nor matter of just Reproach to us or the Church Object 3. §. 35. The Crosse no Scandall as justly Grieving a Brother There remaines but one notion of Scandall more and that is as it doth interrupt the peace and joy of our Brother being matter of Trouble or Griefe to him Here I think no sober dissenter will be so uncharitable as to charge it so high as a Crime or Abomination equall to the Lies of those Prophetesses in Ezekiel x Ezek 13.22 which made the heart of the Righteous sad which God would have not made sad But it is indeed charged with such a Scandall as was given by eating of some meats among the Romans and it is thus argued If when a weake Brother was grieved with that use of their liberty in eating such meats as the Law made uncleane they y Rom. 14.15 might not eat them then if our Brother be grieved by the Signe of the Crosse we may not use it c. But howsoever it be urged §. 36. Answ the same answer will serve both And the answer which I shall make I shall take from those hints which I have seen in a transcript of a private letter written long ago and was in many hands said to be that most judicious Doctor now Bishop Saundersons in reference to the use or forbearance of the publick Liturgy during the late troubles and the violent extrusion of it out of the Church about the nature of Scandall and the vilidity of the Argument drawn from thence which will be very applicable to our present case Now then § 37 1. I must premise this That the use of the Crosse is expressely required of us by a Law which for any thing in the matter of it hath been proved may lawfully be complied with But yet some out of weaknesse or misprission judge otherwise of it and are offended or grieved by such an use The only question is now what are we to do in this case Are we to obey the Law though some be offended Or are we so far to condescend to the weaknesse of these as for their sakes to disobey the Law Is this Argument of Scandall sufficient to oblige us to or justifie us in forsaking the Publick constitutions § 38 2. This premised I give these particular answers 1. It seemes a very unreasonable thing in such cases as these when we are not left to our owne acts or discretions but bound up by a positive Law that the fear of Scandalizing our weak brother which is only Debitum Charitatis should lay upon us such a peremptory necessity of complying with their weaknesse as that for their sakes we must disobey the Law whatsoever inconveniences or mischiefs may ensue thereupon whereas the duty of obedience to our known and legally established Governours which is Debitum Justitiae and therefore obligeth more imposeth upon us a necessity of doing that which if we should not do we should sinne against God who hath commanded us to be subject and to obey z Rom. 13.5 for Conscience-sake Besides § 39 2. Arguments drawn from Seandal in things neither in themselves unlawfull nor setting onely this matter of Scandal aside inexpedient such as our use of the Crosse is presumed to be as they are subject to many frailties otherwise so are they manifestly of no weight at all when they are counterpoysed with an apparent danger of evill consequents and equal yea greater Scandal on the other side for in such cases there is commonly equal if not more danger of Scandal to be taken the quite contrary way We may see it clear in the case in hand It is alledged on the one side if we use the Crosse many weak scrupulous Christians will be offended and grieved at us and judge ill of us and our worship But on the other side it is apparent if we do not use this Sign as the Law requireth then 1. Our Governours are offended the Church scandalized because her publick constitutions are violated And 2. Men that are not over-scrupulous will when they see us take liberty of disobeying in one thing be encouraged to take a greater liberty in dispensing with the Laws in other things to the despising both of the Laws and Governours yea and Government it self And 3. By our denying or disputing against this use of an Innocent Rite men that have tender Consciences or scrupulous Spirits will be induced to entertain scruples where they need not nor is there cause of them sometimes possibly to their own undoing and to the damage of the people under their charge and Ministery And really these Scandals are so much the greater as they are too manifestly given and are more than probable occasions of those sinnes and stumblings whereas the former sort though taken by others is not given by us § 40 3. But what cometh home to the matter and taketh off the Objection fully is this That in judging cases of Scandal we are not to look so much at the event what it is or may be as at the cause whence it comes For sometimes there is just cause of Scandal and yet no Scandal followeth because it is not taken Sometimes Scandal is taken and yet no just cause given
we now speak of a Parish though the Diocess were not so large as in succeeding times Sect. 14 Answ 4 4. But grant every tittle of the exception That the Diâ—cess is by much too large c. What then may we not submit if any undertake a charge which he is not able to manage let him look to it he must give up his own account not we for him If any of us be called or invited to or offered such a place or power if we judge it too much for one man and the account too heavy on Gods name let us refuse it no man will enforce any to be a Bishop against his will But what is this to our obedience The extent of their charge may be occasion of sin to them who undertake what they cannot perform but can be no plea for us why we should not obey when we are required Had the Bishop none to govern but some ten or twenty of us which he might do we were then bound to obey him and though more be under his charge this exempts not us from our particular duty Sect. 15.3 Partic. Ex ∣ cept 3. Another exception is That though the Bishop hath authority over the flock yet being in eodem ordine he hath no power over others of the same order i. e. over other Presbyters which yet he challengeth and where he hath no authority to command there we have no obligation to obey And therefore 1. They cannot justly require nor are we bound to yield that Canonical obedience which we are required to promise at our Ordination and to swear at our institution into a Benefice 2. Nor have they any power to silence or suspend us from our ministery nor may we lay down the exercise thereof upon their pleasure Sect. 16 Answ Gener. 1 Answ 1. To all this I answer in general 1. If the Bishop be a distinct order then there is no place for this exception But this I shall not now dispute 2. But though a Bishop and a Presbyter be yielded to be not different Orders of Ministery as Presbyter and Deacon are yet one may be in a degree of eminency in the same order above the other And if it be but 1. For the conveniency of Administration and to keep peace and unity in the Church Or 2. That the King or Supreme Governour so is pleased to order the external Oeconomy either of these is enough to oblige an humble Christian to a peaceable submission though he were not convinced of the Divine right of the Superiority For where he hath no authority but only a possession we may ober for Peace and where he hath if not a Divine yet a Civil authority we must obey (q) Rom. 13.5 for conscience akâ— Sect. 17 Answ partic 2 Answ 2. But as to the two particulars I give this Answer 1. 1. To the matter of Canonical obedience To that That they require of us Canonical obedience which we are to Promise at our Ordination and to swear at our Institution to a Parochial charge which it is said they cannot justly require nor are we bound to yield I answer Answ 1 Sect. 18 Answ 1. Why may they not justly require it Is it for want of authority in their place No certainly Authority they have if as some judge they are the Primigenial Apostolical constitution yea founded in the very Apostolical Office without question they have it then à Deo And if it should be made appear to us when our great account comes to be given to have been so what shall we answer for our denial of it But if they came in afterwards by the Prudence of the Church to govern for the prevention of faction and schism still they are continued in the Authority And such a prudential constitution gives them power enough as to this nor can we be acquitted of Schism if we obey it not Or Is it because this obedience which they require is not to be required not this neither For obedience is a duty of inferiors to superiors and they being made superiors whether by God or the King it makes no difference in this case it is due to them they may require it and we are then bound to yield it Besides what is it that they require of us is it not that we do the duties of our places in the Church This we are bound to do whether they require it or no and sure it becomes not sin to us then only because it is required Sect. 19 Answ 2 2. But suppose we are not bound to yield this Canonical obedience yet may we not lawfully do it May a man lawfully do no more than by an express Law he is bound to do without doubt he may Exigua est bonitas ad legem esse bonus Were men proved to be never so much Usurpers yet I never knew any Casuist determine it unlawful to obey him in those things which we might lawfully do and wherein we prejudiced not the right of nor did break our Allegiance to our lawful Prince It is one thing what we are bound to do another what we lawfully may do Were the Bishops proved the greatest Usurpers as some men clamour yet I could never see any that durst say our obedience to them in lawful things was unlawful or that in obeying them we should disobey Christ where we are to do but the duties which Christ hath laid upon us or at least such as He hath not forbidden us And beyond this All the Canonical obedience required of us or promised by us extendeth not For what is it that we promise even this (r) See Form of Order Priests Reverently to obey our Ordinary and other chief Ministers unto whom the Government and charge is committed over us following with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions and submitting our selves to their godly judgements What is here promised that a good Christian may not yield What do we promise more in the intent of the Law than to obey those who are set over us in licitis honestis in things lawful and honest and not repugnant to Gods Word They require no more we promise no more And this I am sure we may lawfully do so long as the Government is committed to them whether it be directly by Divine institution or only by the Authority of the King which even their greatest enemies must grant that it is it matters not as to this particular the lawfulness of our obeying thus far 2. Sect. 20.2 To the matter of silencing or suspending As to the other part of the exception There is indeed a great cry in the world against the Bishops for silencing and suspending Ministers which they are said to have no authority to do and it is pleaded that we may not submit here nor lay down the exercise of our Ministery upon their pleasure but that the (s) Act. 4 19. 5.29 Answer of the Apostles to those High Priests Rulers and Elders
therefore need not this admonition The one argument is as weak and to little purpose as the other See we not daily how Atheisme aboundeth The time was when Gentiles became Christians and now Christians turn Gentiles yea many and more profane scoffers and deriders of the Crosse of Christ and that exceeding glory in that honourable service than ever was Julian that gross Apostata So he But 4. § 9 Had we no other reason but this ancient Practice for this use of the Crosse this were not inconsiderable viz. that we might testifie our full Communion with the antient Church By using this Rite confessed in it self lawfull we professe that we are Christians as they were believing in the same Christ professing the same Faith walking in the same way and not ashamed of the Crosse wherein they gloried Upon these accounts the avowed practice of the antient Christians and this not contrary to the sacred Rule may well be an argument to a sober minded man of not the least weight to sway him to a compliance in this thing § 10 2. The ends for which our Church hath established this are not Superstitious but holy just and Good For § 11 1. Our Church as it doth confesse in her Canons y Can. 30. That the Sign of the Crosse was greatly abused in the Church of Rome especially after that corruption of Popery had once possessed it So she declareth That the use of this Sign in Baptisme was ever accompanied here with sufficient Cautions and Exceptions against all Popish Superstition and Error as in like cases are either fit or convenient § 12 2. Having denied and provided against the abuse she retaineth the use of the Crosse onely upon those true Rules of Doctrine concerning things indifferent which are consonant to the Word of God and judgement of the antientest Fathers professing it a Rite perfectly indifferent in it self onely made necessary as to our present practice during the standing of a positive Law which we are to obey and requiring this practice chiefly and only on these two grounds § 13 1. To shew our Communion with the Christian Church in the former ages and dayes of old For so are her words 1. It is observed that though the Jews and Ethnicks derided both the Apostles and the rest of the Christians for Preaching and believing on him who was crucified upon the Crosse yet they all were so far from being discouraged from their profession by the ignominy of the Crosse that they gloried rejoyced and triumphed in it Yea the holy Ghost by the mouthes of the Apostles did honour the name of the Crosse being hatefull among the Jewes so farre that under it he comprehendeth not only Christ Crucified but the force and merits of his Death and Passion with all the comforts fruits and promises which we expect thereby 2. The honour and dignity of the name of the Crosse begat a reverent estimation even in the Apostles times this we see was the judgment of our Church of the Sign of the Crosse which the Christians shortly after used in their actions thereby making an outward shew and profession that they were not ashamed to acknowledge him for their Lord and Saviour who died for them upon the Crosse And this Sign they did use among themselves with a kind of Glory when they met with any Jews and Signed therewith their Children when they were Christned This Sign being used in the Primitive Church both by the Greeks and Latines with one consent and great applause When if any had opposed themselves against it they would have been censured as enemies of the name of the Crosse and consequently of Christs merits the Sign whereof they could no better endure All this doth our Church declare why but to shew her consent to the Doctrine and perfect Communion with the Christian Church in those first and purest ages yea and not to forsake the Churches of later dayes in any thing wherein we might lawfully hold Communion For so she declares in the same Canon So farre was it from the purpose of the Church of England to forsake or reject the Churches of Italy France Spain Germany or any such like Churches in all things which they held and practised that as the Apology of the Church of England confesseth it doth with reverence retain those Ceremonies which do neither endamage the Church of God nor offend the minds of sober men and onely departed from them in those particular points wherein they were fallen from themselves in their antient integrity and from the Apostolical Churches which were their first founder And this I am so far from accounting a crime that I judg it a duty and I think have proved it so § 14 2. Another end is by this to make a solemn profession as well signal as verbal of our faith in a crucified Christ to signifie what we believe and to teach us that we have no reason to be ashamed of the Crosse of Christ which is our glory and our joy So are the words used at the application of it In token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confesse the Faith of Christ crucified As the Christians of old by this made open profession even to the astonishment of the Jews that they were not ashamed to acknowledge Him Lord and Saviour who died on the Crosse as it is in the Canon And the lawfulnesse and expediency of such a professing Sign Mr Baxter himself hath acknowledged as we have seen 3. Let me adde Though we place no efficiency or efficacy in the Sign of the Crosse as indeed we do not neither doth our Church allow but condemn it yet upon the account of the end for which it was applyed the remembrance of such a thing applied to us in our Batipsme may be and is an argument to keep the soul constant to Christ and consequently a bar against Apostacy It was so of old The Fathers z See Cyprian in the place before cited used it as an argument to that purpose and being recovered to the right use may be so still Baptisme it is true is Sacramentum Militiae The Souldiers Oath there we have engaged our selves there have we taken our Prest-money to serve under our a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 12.2 Captain General Jesus Christ against the World the Flesh and the Devil This is strong and effectual to engage our constant obedience to Christ and to challenge any one that shall afterwards revolt to the service of sin and Satan But we are too apt to be drawn aside but then as when a Souldier comes into the field and seeth his Colours he now remembreth himself whose he is and whom he ought to serve and against whom he ought to fight and these after-circumstances though they are nothing in themselves to bind him for he is bound by Oath already yet are an outward inducement they put him in mind of his duty and are a means to preserve his Loyalty So Baptisme is
should our Governours be guilty yet it will be a greater error and sin in us of an higher nature to break the peace of the Church for such inconsiderable things For though the things are light in themselves and the use or not use of an indifferent ceremony be of no weight in it self yet obedience in a duty disobedience to a lawfull Authority where we might without sin obey is a crime and it will be our sin that we put a light ceremony in the scale against our obedience and duty together with the peace of the Church therein concerned Let us then learne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to put a due distinction and discerne between things that differ and accordingly walke be zealous where only we should be zealous and in things of a lower nature bear with and forbeare one another and not contend and we shall have peace 4. § 15 If we carefully avoide all profane janglings needlesse and unprofitable disputes about questions of little or no concernment It was a tart motto which that Learned a Sr. H Wâ—tton Knight gave Pruritus disputandi est scabies Ecclesiae but it is true enough For Cui bono to what purpose but to fill the braine with notions and empty speculations and so to fit men for wrangling I never knew any other fruit of such aiery disputes about questions of Rites Habits Formes c. than that while the head is warmed by the heate of of these contentions the heart and affections grow cold in their love to God zeal for piety and the Power of Godlinesse Such questions are the bones which the Devill throwes in to divert the souls of men from those truly Divine studies and spirituall speculations that should inflame them with an holy zeal for the glory of God and the sober and faithfull practice of Christian duties This effect we find in the b Joh. 4.18 woman of Samaria when Christ is convincing her of sin and shewing her adultery she presently finds a way to divert the discourse to circumstance of the place of worship whether it be tyed to Jerusalem or may not as well be in that mountaine The like we see in our daies let Ministers presse the duties of Repentance and Mortification of Piety and Peace and go about to convince men of their sin of Rebellion Schisme and uncharitablenesse presently men have a way to put off these discourses Questions and disputes shall be started about Church-Government Liturgy Ceremonies and Rites circumstances and things of so low a consideration that a good Christian may believe either way and not prejudice his salvation and were it not for the publicke constitutions and matter of Scandall might practice either way without sin These are Questions and disputes which the Devill scatters among us to interrupt our peace to fill the Church with divisions that he may rule more freely among us They are at the best as they are managed but as those questions mentioned by the c 1 Tim. 4 5 6. Apostle which tend not to Godly edifying but make men turn aside to vaine janglings and to swerve from that Christian charity which is the great duty of the Gospell and the whole end of the Commandement Let us avoide such Questions silence such disputes whose product is Strife whose fruit is contention and we shall have Peace If we would seriously set our selves to practice that Apostolicall rule d 2 Tim. 2.22.23 Flee youthfull lusts and follow after Righteousnesse Faith Charity Peace with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart but foolish and unlearned or e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unsavoury and undefying questions avoid for they gender strife Then should we soone see f Jsa 66.12 our Peace run like a river and our glory as a following streame Then shall all places of the Church be no longer as a barren wildernesse but abound in Grace and Goodnesse Righteousnesse and uprightnesse * Jsa 32.15.16 17. Then shall judgement dwell in the wildernesse and Righteousnesse in the fruitfull field Then shall the fruit be Peace Joy Prosperity and Tranquillity The worke of Righteousnesse shall be Peace and the effect of Righteousnesse quietnesse and assurance for ever 5. § 16 If we seriously study that Christian Grace of Humility and conscionably make it our worke g Mic. 6.8 to walke humbly with our God For really the Originall and source of all our contentions is cheifly the Pride and Presumption in man that some are so conceited of themselves and their own spirituall parts that they can content themselves with their own private devotions and suppose they can as well yea better and more holily sanctifie a Sabbath by Reading Praying Meditating apart by themselves and in their own way than by being present at the Publick worship which they like not or joyning with the Publick Assembles of Gods people whom they proudly censure as Formall Superstitious worshippers a Prophane mixture at least not h Isa 65.5 so holy as themselves A spirit far different from that truly Pious inlightned heavenly yet Humble spirit of David though i 1 Sam. 13.14 a man after Gods own heart and had the word of God not only dwelling plentifully in him the k Col. 3.16 Apostles phrase is but flowing abundantly from him as l Joh. 7.38 Christ promised his Saints Able not only m Psal 16.7 to admonish himself but n Psal 32.8 34.11 5.13 to instruct direct and edifie others also not to sing only but himself to make and compose Hymnes of Prayer and praise for the use of the Church being the o 2 Sam. 23.1 sweet Psalmist or songster of Israel Yet it was the p Psal 122.1 joy of his heart when he was at home to repaire to the Temple to the publick assemblies there held q Psal 42.4 to go to the house of God with the voice of joy and praise among those who kept holy day and nothing made his Banishment and exile more bitter than that he was deprived of the opportunity of those publick devotions and kept from joyning with the Church in those holy duties and services there performed Those Psalmes r Psal 27.4 Psa 42. 63. 84. penned by him during those restraints shew how bitterly he bewailes this his great unhappynesse and instantly sueth to God for his freedome and liberty to returne to those Assemblies It is the Pride of man that fills him with a delight in and applause of his own conceptions and will not suffer him to admit that another may be more intelligent judicious and holier than he and having now entertained notions though never so strange or paradoxall and of never so light moment yet they shall be maintained Hence arise those eager contentions and oppositions though this knowledg which they so much pretend to and are Å¿ 1 Cor. 8.1 2. puffed up with is no true genuine sound knowledge not properly but t 1
must condemn also the other § 23 Object No. For Sitting is now the Table posture and succeedeth the Tricliniary Gesture 1. Sol. The Standing at least is as unlawfull and indifferent from the Prime patterne and first examplar as Kneeling but yet this posture is allowed by all where it thwarts not a Publick setled practice of a Church and practised by many of our Brethren at home and the French Churches abroad when yet the same Argument that condemnes Kneeling condemnes that 2. § 24 But how came Sitting to be the Table Gesture now is it not by a silent custome among Nations and it is strange that the silent custome of a Nation should be enough to change the Gesture at our ordinary Tables and yet a Positive Law of the same Nation should not suffice in such a case at the Sacred Table If a Custome without Authority can so prevaile that what was before not Decent should now be Decent and what was before Decent should now be not so cannot a Law made by publick Authority established by an expresse consent of the people and allowed by daily use prevaile that what was upon no sound reason ever found unlawfull should be esteemed lawfull now for the time to come Custome is enough to satisfie us in our ordinary Tables why should not both Law and Custome together suffice for Satisfaction here when if there were no Custome but Custome and Law did seeme to oppose each other yet as to a Case of Conscience it may be soberly concluded that Custome should rather give place to Law than Law to Custome These things and much more to this purpose may he that please see in that Reverend Bishop in the place before cited where he solidly and largely handles the Question of the obligation of Christs example in this case § 25 2. For that exception that Kneeling was not used by the Church for many hundred yeares after Christ this signifieth as little for even in their Prayers Kneeling sometimes was not publickly in use yea expressely forbidden the Custome being as it is by Mr Baxter h Baxt. five Disp Disp 5. chap. 2. §. 41. confessed both Antient and Universall in the Church and every where observed and established afterwards in the last Cannon of the Councell of Nice and renewed by others That none should Kneele in publick worship on the Lords day no not in Prayer No wonder then that we find not this practice there where they Kneeled not at all in the publick worship But as they worshipped so they communicated the manner of receiving being i See Account of proceed Answ to §. 15. e ◠Auge in Psal 98. Cyril Gatech Onystag 5 more adorantium so that there can be nothing drawn from their practice against Kneeling at the Communion which is not also as strong against Kneeling at any other parts of publick worship even Prayer also § 26 3. As to the fear of justifying the Papisticall adoration of the Elements as Christ corporally present we are sufficiently secure for our Kneeling tendeth to no such thing We are informed clearly enough of the Doctrine of our Church by what is expressely set down in the Rubrick Printed in the Common-Prayer-Book of Edw. 6. at the end of the Communion though since left out whether as some say by negligence or for what other reason it matters not when still we maintaine the same Doctrine and our Church doth publickly declare it in our established Articles sc Art 28. in that Rubrick there is this expression concerning Kneeling We do declare that it is not meant thereby that any adoration is done or ought to be done either unto the Sacramentall Bread or Wine there bodily received or unto any reall or essentiall presence there being of Christs naturall flesh and blood For as touching the Sacramentall Bread and Wine they remain in their very naturall substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithfull Christians and as concerning the naturall Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ they are in heaven and not here for it is against the truth of Christs naturall body to be in more places than one at the same time But further § 27 Let it be observed the order prescribed in our Church is that the people Kneel not only at the receiving of the Elements but during the whole ministration which as it cannot be said to adore a corporall presence which is not there nor by the Papists pretended to be there untill the Vm the very last sillable of the Hoc est cropus meum i. e. this is my body be pronounced so it sheweth us why we Kneel and whom we adore viz. That in all humble devotion we present our selves before God and with humility of soul confesse our sins begge his mercy offer him praise for his benefits especially his unspeakable gift of Jesus Christ for the life of the world and with all reverence receive from the hand the Seales of his Covenant assurances of our pardon and peace and life upon our unfained faith sincere repentance and persevering obedience and put our Seales to the same Covenant solemnely engaging our selves to those duties and expecting mercy only on those Evangelicall termes And thus the forenamed Rubrick which is still the sence of our Church informes us that this thing viz. the Communicants Kneeling was well meant for a signification of the humble and gratefull acknowledgement of the benefits of Christ given unto the worthy receivers and to avoide the prophanation and disorder which about the holy Communion might ensue it § 28 Having now answered these exceptions I shall adde but these two things 1. Let this one Argument be weighed he that receiveth the Communion Kneeling either sinneth in that act or sinneth not if any say he sinneth let him shew wherein every sin is a transgression of some Law but here is no Law transgressed not a Law of the Church for that commandeth it not a Law of God for there is neither any precept in the Decalogue nor any precept in the Gospell that forbideth it let any man produce any such and we yeeld and the example of Christ is no more an obliging Law in this than in the Place Time and Habit as before was shown and there is acknowledged no obligation in these But if in this act men sin not what imaginable reason can there be produced why it should be unlawfull to do it when by a just Authority they are required 2. § 29 In Dubiis tutissimum c. In doubtfull things we must choose the safest Now suppose this a matter of doubt yet which is the safest way for us to goe it is easily to judge for we are sure it is our duty and we are obliged by command to partake in the Communion to receive this Sacrament we are sure that we are obliged to maintain the peace and keep in the Communion of the Church we are sure that we are bound to obey
a just Authority in all lawfull things we are sure that Kneeling is in it selfe lawfull and in genere as free as any other Gesture or Posture whatsoever we are sure we must not lay aside a necessary duty upon some meere doubts of an unnecessary circumstance or accessary we are not sure that every particular Gesture or Action of Christ doth oblige us to imitation yea we are sure of the contrary Now then whether it be safe to forsake Communion to keep from the Lords Table and refuse the Sacrament where we are beyond all controversie obliged upon a plea of a Gesture to which we are not sure that we are obliged yea indeed we may be sure that we are not obliged let any sober conscientious man that mindeth the peace of his own soul judge § 30 But I need not enlarge we have enough yeelded Our Brethren who in the conference disputed against the imposition professe that yet some of them would Kneel rather than be deprived of the benefit of that Sacrament And Mr Baxter though he pleades high against it as a sinfull imposition yet saith that when it was imposed k Baxt. five Disp disp 5. c. 2. §. 42. he did obey the imposers and would if it were to do again rather than disturbe the peace of the Church or be deprived of its Communion For saith he God having made some Gesture necessary and confined me to none but left it to humaine determination I shall submit to Magistrates in their proper work even when they misse in the manner I am not sure saith he and it is worth our noting that Christ intended the example of himselfe or his Apostles as obligatory to us that shall succeed I am sure it proves sitting lawfull I am not sure it proves it necessary But I am sure He hath Commanded me Obedience and Peace § 31 Let these be observed Obedience and Peace which are acknowledged as indeed most unquestionably they are certain commands and indispensible duties of the Gospell and our peace will be sufficiently secured and our disputes and contentions about these extrinsecall circumstances soon be superseded CHAP. III. The Signe of the Crosse in Baptisme examined and its lawfull use justified and 1. Proved to be no sinne against Piety 3. §. 1. The Crosse in Baptisme challenged as sinfull THere remains now only one Rite or Ceremony more which will by no meanes be allowed lawfull viz. The Crosse in Baptisme This indeed is made the grand Stone of Stumbling as a Isa 8.14 1 Pet. 2.8 Defended as lawfull Christ Crucified is said to be but not from any nature of the thing but from the weaknesse or misprision of them that take it so This is that which we find still pleaded against as sinfully imposed yea and unlawfully used The Church charged as incroaching upon the Royalty and Soveraignty of Christ instituting new Rites and Covenanting signes which God hath not commanded and the People skared with apprehensions of Idolatry and Abomination § 2 I have been serious and in earnest examining what I have found objected against it not being willing yea being much afraid to be guilty of sin in the use of any thing that may have the appearance of so much impiety as this is charged with but sincerely in the presence of God I must professe that I can yet find nothing that can in the least convince me of sin in this so far as our Church doth practice or require the use of it The maine objections I shall answer hereafter in the mean time these things have satisfied me and I have some hopes they may give the like satisfaction to others also § 3 1. The various use of the Crosse in the Church of Antient times both in and out of the holy Ordinances and this not condemned but for those times approved Cyprian exhorting to Martyrdome in the time of persecution among the rest presseth this Argument from the signe of the Crosse which they had received b Cypr. l. 4. ep 6. Muniatur frons ut signum Dei incolume serveâ—ur Arm your forheads with all boldnesse that the signe of God may be kept safe By this they were encouraged to bear up their heads and glory in the service of a Crucified Christ which the world so much despised and persecuted c In parte ubi pudoris signum est c. Aug. de verb. Apost The Signe being set in that place where shame soonest appears viz. the forehead Again in the forenamed Cyprian we read this passage that d Cyprian de unit Eccl. Ozias in fronte percussus offenso Domino c. Vzziah was smitten in the forehead the Lord being offended even in the same part of the body wherein others are signed that do please the Lord. These passages do evidently prove at least thus much a confessed and known practice of Signing the forehead with the Crosse in those dayes But besides these I find a e Hutton answ to reasons for refuse of subscript pag. 162. See also Cent. Magd Cent. 4. c. 6. p. 258. c. Hieron ad Rustoch ad Demetrian Prudent Hym. ante somnum Ruffin l. 2. c. 19. Learned man calling into witnesse this these many more Justin Martyr Cornelius cited by Eusebius Turtullian Cyprian Oirgen Ambrose Austin Jerom Chrysostome Athanasius Epiphanius Cyrill Basill the Latin and Greek Fathers of those higher ages and of this saith he there is no doubt f Hutt ibid. ex Concluding with these two passages out of Saint Austin giving the reason of this use 1. g Aug. de verb. Apost Because of the Gentiles and Pagans Scoffing 2. h Aug. de catech rud Because Christians would be no way inferior to the Jewes who marked their doores with the blood of the Paschall Lamb in token of their deliverance out of Egypt therefore the Christians would and did also marke their foreheads in token of their Redemption Not to dispute the force of these reasons they are sufficient to prove the practice and this too in Baptisme in immortali lavaco i Act. of proceed answ to §. 14. as is acknowledged § 4 And this practice I find not condemned but approved in them and us also not by Papists onely but by the Pious Reformers of the later ages Musculus upon that action of Jacob Crossing his hands when he blessed Ephraim and Manasseh saith k Musc in Gen. 28. Adumbrabatur Mysterium crucis in quo est omnis benedictionis fons est origio Herein was shaddowed the Mystery of the Crosse in which is the fountain and beginning of all true blessing If we will take learned Bucers judgement of the use of the Crosse in our Church of England he telleth us l Non tam quod usûs in Ecclesiâ antiquissimi sed quod est admodum simplex Buc. inter Anglic. Script it is neither uncomely nor unprofitable Not so much because it is of most ancient use in the Church as because it