Schism or sinful breach of Vnity only because he is void of charity and wanting in due Christian care 23. Nor can it possibly be true that if some thing be enjoined which divers persons who appear to be Religious and are supposed to have considerable abilities of judgment do upon professed enquiry both suspect and condemn that they may lawfully separate and not be guilty of Schism if their judgments herein be erroneous and ungrounded For though diligent enquiry where it is impartially made is in this case an excuse from the degree of the sin or from the precipitant or designed breach of Charity or Vnity yet where it is so ill managed as to take up with an errour and practice upon it it can not render that practice allowable For this would justifie almost every party which in judgment holdeth an errour for separating from that Church who either in her open practice or in her publick service requireth a profession of that truth which they oppose and they must be excused from Schism only because they acknowledge not the right rules of Religion and neither Donatists Novatians or Anabaptists could then be blamed for their distance from the Church provided it be founded in their distance from and disowning of the truth Yea if any persons be Arians Futychians or Nestorians Vbi supra p. 9 10. in opinion all which the author of this notion over-officiously excuseth from all Heresie and saith they were at the worst but Schisms they must also according to his notion stand excused from Schism in separating from the Church which holdeth the true doctrine and openly in her service requireth a profession of it concerning the person of the Mediator 24. This would set up the power of an erring judgment above the will of God to discharge persons from what is Gods command and would else have been their duty viz. Communion and to give them authority to do that as a lawful action which to others who err not is a grievous sin viz. separation from that Church which holdeth the truth meerly because it doth profess it as if the crrour of man could render necessary duties and divine commands to be of no obligation For though their errour may till it be removed entangle them in sin in joining with the Church because this encludeth a practising what they judge unlawful it can not justifie them from sin in separating from it but this errour as all other erroneous judgments do where good and evil are mistaken for each other doth in their practice every way ensnare them under sin until it be cured Lib. 2. c. 2 Sect. 3. But of the principal design of this notion I shall give a further account in considering things under scruples 25. From what hath been hitherto discoursed it appeareth that the consideration of Schism will make it necessary for him who undertaketh separation to be sure that he acteth upon unerring grounds and not upon mistakes because to make separation from a Church which however it be misunderstood and causelesly censured requireth nothing in it self absolutely unlawful to be believed professed practised or joined in is to be guilty of the great sin of Schism SECT V. Of the duty of obedience to Rulers and Governours and the due exercise of the Ministerial function which is in this case concerned 1. The opposing Conformity if managed upon insufficient grounds hath ordinarily involved the person opposing under the sin of disobedience and want of subjection in things lawful to Christian Governours and Rulers and their Laws and Constitutions which ought to be obeyed not only for wrath but for Conscience sake It is their duty in their places to shew themselves the servants of God and to promote his glory and to that end by their power and authoritative commands to take care for the promoting and preserving the Order Peace and Vnity of the Church of God and towards both Ecclesiastical and secular Rulers the divine Precepts do very plainly require our obedience Indeed if any thing any time commanded be really sinful the instructions given in the Church of England will direct us to believe undoubtedly Hom. of Obedience Part. 2. that we may not obey Kings Magistrates or any other though they be our own Fathers if they would command us to do any thing contrary to Gods Commandment But if the things be lawful which they command as in this case I hope to make appear to men of unprejudiced minds it is a sin of no low degree to disobey and the duty of obedience is so considerable that the Compilers of the Strasburgh Confession of Faith Conf. Argent c. 23. expressed it to be Inter primi crdinis bona opera in the highest rank and order of good works 2. Nor can this obedience be thought a matter inconsiderable which was enjoined of old in the first Commandment of the second table Phil. de Leg. Spepiailb and as Philo observed encludeth part of the first table and part of the second having directly a respect both to God in his Vice-gerent and also to man And this is earnestly pressed upon us in the Gospel doctrine as a means whereby we may bring honour to Religion and Christianity by S. Peter 1 Pet. 2.12 15. and as a necessary practice to express true conversion from the state of sin to the life of God by S. Paul Tit. 3.1 5. who also warneth against this sin with respect to the danger of damnation thereby Rom. 13.2 And this obedience to them who are over us in things lawful and under their authority is of so high and necessary a consequence that without it there can be no peace nor any regular and unconfused state in any Family City Realm or Church this being the practice of the grand Maxim for the upholding order in all Societies of the World which is evident by its own light and is a principle of the law of nature 3. Another effect of these disagreements about the established order of our Church hath been this that divers Ministers have declined the orderly regular and publick exercise of their Ministerial sunctions And considering the weightiness of their Commission with the greatness of their charge and account and the exceeding advantage to the Church yea to the honour of Christ and the salvation of men by their labours where they obtain success together with other their own concernments it becometh them to be well assured that they have had a warrantable plea to justifie those proceedings It was not without cause accounted a great miscarriage and default in Novatus Eus Hist Eccless l. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that before he openly became the head of a dividing party he was over-forward for want of a due zeal to Religion to have relinquished the office of Presbyter to which he was ordained and to betake himself to another kind of life 4. The ancient Church shewed its great dislike and distast of any Ministers declining the orderly execution
of corrupt minds who have by this means drawn Disciples after them For besides the consideration of Papists and other Sectaries abroad where multitudes of their followers have really believed their errors and with a misguided zeal opposed the truth as S. Paul did while he continued in Judaism we have also sufficient evidence hereof at home in our former times of licentiousness Saints Rest Part. 1. Ch. 7. Sect. 14. Insomuch that Mr. Baxter then complained that professors of Religion did oppose and deride almost all that worship of God out of Conscience which must then be grolly depraved and corrupted which others did out of prophaneness And the provincial Assembly as it was called at London then declared That there was scarce any truth of Christ but was charged in those unhappy times Jus div Min. Evangel Pas 2. c. 3. so they called them as Antichristians and that the Doctrine of the Trinity of Christ being equal with the Father of the immortality of the Soul of repentance humilitation sanctification and good works out of obedience to Gods commands with other Doctrines were condemned as Antichristian and also that the places where they met together to worship God the worship they there performed their Church-Government and Ministry was also say they called Antichristian Now if amongst other things opposed and condemned the most essential Doctrines of Christian Religion have not escaped these vehement and unjust censures it cannot be expected that the best Constitutions of the Church should be generally entertained without all scruple and suspition especially so long as through the itch of of dispute things ordered in the Church are thought blameable for being significant that is useful for all insignificant things are here useless and for being enjoined that is recommended by the highest authority which God hath set in and over 〈◊〉 Church 9. Assert 3. As all Ecclesiastical Constitutions must be in themselves certainly lawful not needlesly burdensom and such as the Governours of the Church judge to be unquestionably useful and expedient so where they are such their lawfulness would not be so much contended against as it is by them who are concerned to obey provided they humbly and calmly made use of the best rules to direct their own practice which rules are here the same which must be received in other practical controversies of Religion viz. First That he who hath sufficient capacity of understanding to judge clearly and solidly of the things questioned and of the strength of the arguments produced should without any prejudice or passion embrace and entertain what appeareth manifestly allowable and such an understanding so proceeding can neither condemn the right way nor embrace the wrong because truth only can be clearly evidenced to an unbyassed and able judgment and for such a man to follow any authority whatsoever against this manifest evidence of truth is to put himself under the blind Leaders of the blind Secondly Men ought to be so humble as not to account their own judgments sufficient rationally to decide any matters of dispute or determine the force of any argument when they really are not and this will direct men of mean capacities not over-forwardly to engage in controversies above their reach nor violently to espouse what may be wrong or oppose what may be right but humbly to desire and seek for clearer apprehensions or the best directions and informations Thirdly That in these matters those whose own weakness of understanding is not able to conduct them through the mists of dispute ought to make use of the best and safest guides to direct and lead them and should follow their counsel and advice Aug. de Vtilit credendi c. 12. c. For it is manifestly the case of great multitudes of adult Christians in the World as hath been long observed that their judgments are not so strong and clear but that especially in divers matters of dispute which are no part of the Christian Creed they must and do follow the guidance of others and are led by their judgment direction and authority where themselves have not capacities to judge of the evidence of proofs But here as the man who chooseth an ill guide for his way or an ignorant Physician to advise for his health or an unskilful Lawyer for his Estate so he that followeth a bad Leader in matters concerning Religion must bear in some respects the consequents of his own bad choice 10. And whereas some would have persons to forbear practising in matters of dispute until themselves be able by the capacities of their own judgments throughly to solve the difficulties objected they ought to have considered that in most practical disputes as concerning Infant Baptism the observing rules of order and keeping Communion with a particular Church and obeying the commands of Rulers to forbear practising what ought to be performed is to yield to sin and with choice to act against a duty and to require this is also to proceed upon a principle which will leave such mens Consciences under inextricable difficulties For instance if men were taught that none ought to bring their Infant-Children to be baptized until they were able themselves judiciously to answer all that is urged to the contrary by the Anabaptists this if practised would tend to make considerable numbers of weak Christians whose heads are not capable of managing disputes to neglect their â—â—ry herein and in practice to close 〈…〉 â—abaptists But if again they were taught which must needs be as reasonable as the other that they may not safely chuse to forbear the bringing their Infants to Baptism because even that choice is a moral action unless they could clearly refute all those great arguments which prove this to be their duty it will be manifest that in this case there can be no way to disentangle the Consciences of such men of mean capacities but only by following the directions above given And the like may be said concerning other instances 11. But that such persons who cannot themselves search into disputes may not be dangerously misguided two rules are to be observed V. Aue. cont Crescon l. â— c. 33. First That for them to be directed by the general judgment principles and practices of the primitive Church where that can be evidently and without contradiction discovered by skilful and faithful relaters thereof is a more safe course in any matter of dispute which themselves cannot fathom than to be led meerly by the judgment and authority of any men or company of men who oppose the same because the greater authority is to be preferred before the less and by this rule many errours of Papists and Sectaries may be rejected Secondly That where such persons of weak judgments cannot clearly understand either the grounds of truth under present debate or the judgment and practice of the ancient Church whether through defect or diversity of information it is their best and surest way ordinarily to be directed and led by
this Apostolical Decree together with other Christian Precepts did bind the Gentile Christians to all the same observations And it might also have been said that the forbidding bloud seemed a Rite peculiarl typical of Christ to come it being forbidden to the Jews upon this account because God had then appointed it to be the means of making an atonement upon the Altar Lev. 17.10 11 12. But notwithstanding these things which are far from solid arguments and yet to an indifferent person may possibly seem as plausible as many exceptions used by some men in other Cases that Apostolical Sanction was both lawful and honourable yea though it concerned things indifferent and was established as many think by that Ecclesiastical authority which they committed to their Successors in the Church 15. Arg. 3. Because there are many Cases where somewhat is necessary in genere to be determined and yet every particular under that general is lyable to the like inconvenience of opposition Here I shall chuse to give a Foreign instance of that great unnecessary dispute about the use of leavened or unleavened bread at the Eucharist where the one sort is necessary to be determined before the administration or otherwise the Ordinance it self must be omitted This hath occasioned so great contest between the Greek Church who with the Ruthenick or Russian contend for Leavened bread and the Latin who would allow none other but unleavened bread Maxim Margunius in Dialogâ— adv Lat. Humbertus in Baron Tom. 11. in Appendice Rup Tuitien de Div. Offic. l. 1. c. 22. that they of the Greek Church have nick named the Latines Azymitas and give this difference as one account why they refused Communion with them and did at Constantinople denounce an Anathema upon the use of Unleavened bread The Latin Church did give many testimonies of its like fierceness for the use of Unleavened Bread only so far that Leo the Ninth undertook in this quarrel to excommunicale Michael the Patriarck of Constantinople The main grounds of this controversie waving some frivolous things mentioned in Gemma Animae Rupertus Tiâ—tiensis Durandux Casaub in Baron Exerc 16. and other Ritualists are these 1. The Greek Church in a peculiar notion as Casaubon relateth their opinion from Cedrenus and Xanthopulus think that Christ did eat the Passover and institute the Lords Supper the day before the Jews kept their Passover Durand Ration l. 4. c. 41. n. 10. and therefore they suppose he used leavened bread But though divers Christian Writers as Scaliger Casauhon Grotius Hospinian Kellet and others both ancient and modern referred to by them Hieroz P. 1. lib. 2. â— 50. have thought that Christ did not eat the Passover the same day with the Jews yet even that opinion is opposed by many others and the arguments for it are fully answered by Bocharius And however the strict prohibitions both of the Law Ex. 12.18 Num. 9.11 Maccoth c. 3. Sect. 2. Deut. 16.3 and of the Talmud against eating the Passover at any time with leavened bread are evidences sufficient that this sort of bread was not used by our Saviour 2. The Greek Church also urgeth that unleavened bread was one of the Ceremonial institutions of the Law of Moses Can. Ap. 70. Conc. Laod. c. 38. Con. Trul. c. 11. and several ancient Canons of the Greek Church have forbidden them to have so much Communion with the Jews as to eat of their unleavened bread as a Jewish Rite and Maximus Margunius a late Writer and Bishop of that Church out of a strange disgust supposeth that he smelleth the savour of many ancient Heresies in Vnleavened bread 16. So that here is a Case where some determination is necessary to the due order and the regular administration of Gods Ordinance where either leavened or unleavened Bread must be received both these have been hotly opposed the one side seeming to be favoured by the institution of Christ and the other by the abrogation of the law but neither of their arguments are conclusive against the lawfulness of the others practice In like manner to administer the Sacraments and other publick Offices with a form of Prayer may be opposed and scrupled by some and to perform this without a form may as reasonably be disliked by others And an Unform appointed gesture at the Sacrament and a decent fixed habit for Ministers may be suspected by some who are ready to take all occasions for suspition and the want of these things are deemed irreverent and disorderly and therefore unlawful by others Both the French and Dutch as well as other Protestant Churches have these things determined though both in the habit and gesture they differ from us and from each other and yet there may be objections and pretences of dislike raised against those particular habits and gestures as well as against ours as may in another place be shewed Wherefore either some things which may become or have been matters of dispute may lawfully be ordered by Ecclesiastical Authority or else there can be no security for the orderly exercise of Religion 17. To these arguments it may be added that the prudence of the Church would appear very contemptible to its adversaries if either its rules or practices about matters of order should be as mutable and various as the uncertain and different thoughts of suspicious or scrupulous persons 18. And the practice of all the Protestant Churches who defended their established Orders both against Anabaptists and other opposers thereof do manifest their general judgment in this particular And amongst other Churches when divers persons especially the Flacians raised vehement disputes and contentions both against the Doctrine and the Ecclesiastical Ordinations or as Reuterus expresseth it Quirin Reuterus in Praefat. praefix Vrsini Oper. de rebus quibusdam externis received in the Reformation of the Palatinate Frideric the third in his Confessession of Faith contained in his last Will and Testament and received among the Corpus or Syntagma Confessionum declareth how he had with good success withstood these oppositions and maketh it in that his last Testament his principal admonition to his Sons after him to beware of such persons Casimir in Praef. Conf in Corp Conf. in Vrsin Vol. 3. in fol. with other earnest expressions both of his and of his Son Casimire 19. And besides all this this position that nothing may be established or imposed about which any persons pretend scruple is destructive of it self or inconsistent with it self For as its natural result tendeth to promote an Vniversal toleration of all practices and opinions about which any persons may pretend Conscience which would enclude all manner of Sects and Heresies so the urging such a toleration where Governours either of Church or state judge as they have reason to do that it would be sinful in them to admit it and countenance it is not only to undertake to impose upon their Governours what is scrupled and opposed by
haec ut plurimum adhibetur formula I say after this was established at Geneva Calv. Ep. 87. Calvin who composed it expressed his judgment to be for the strict use of set forms in his Letter to the Lord Protector in England Wherein he writeth to this purpose For so much as concerneth the form of Prayers and Ecclesiastical rites valde probo I much approve that it be determined so that it may not be lawful for the Ministers in their administrations to vary from it And this he judgeth necessary for these reasons that it may be an help to the weakness of some that it may be a testimony of the Churches consent and that it may slop the desultorious levity of those who are for new things 12. And these very expressions of Calvin are cited with great approbation by the Walachrian Classis of Zealand in what they wrote in the time of our late Wars to the Assembly at London and they further declare their great distast against them who condemn the use of forms in these words Consid Contr. in Angl. c. 7. qu. 2. Durum putamus omnes illas pias Ecclesias condemnare quae ab Apostolicis primitivae Ecclesiae temporibus usque ad hodiernum diem cultum Dei publicum ex praescriptis certisque formulis celebrarunt prâ—inde hominum illorum praecisam singularitatem arguimus qui omnes praescriptas formulas ex cultu divino eliminant Say they We account it grievous to condemn all those holy Churches which from the Apostolical times and the primitive Church unto this day have celebrated the publick worship of God out of prescribed forms Wherefore we blame the precise singularity of those men who would cast out all prescribed forms from divine worship So they And indeed it must be a rash sentence to condemn forms of Prayer as evil and sinful which were embraced by the ancient Church while it retained its soundness and before the corruptions and distempers of the Church of Rome took place and by the Protestant Churches since their recovery there from And in the determining what is expedient or inexpedient he had need have strong foundations to erect his high confidence upon who will oppose his own judgment with some very few persons besides against the concurrent judgment and practice of the Church of Christ in so many several Ages and Nations and against the determination of God himself under the Old Testament and our blessed Saviour under the New SECT II. Objections against set forms answered 1. What is opposed against the former Section must be here considered both concerning the antiquity lawfulness and expediency of set forms It is acknowledged that publick Prayer even at the Celebration of the Holy Communion was at the beginning of Christianity performed by the extraordinary and wonderful effusion of the gifts of the Holy Ghost when also prophesying and singing were performed by the same But some attempt hath been made to prove that there was no ordinary use of forms of Prayer in the three first Centuries and that they were not established till the end of the fourth Century 2 To this purpose Justin Martyr is first produced Apol. 2. prope fin p. 98. who declareth concerning his time that at the Communion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief Minister sendeth forth Prayers and Thanksgivings according to his ability or rather with all his might Now all the proof here dependeth on the use of the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Objectors understand according to his ability in composing a Prayer But this is a sense not consistent with the use of the same Phrase in another place of the same Apology where he discourseth also of their Prayers at the Eucharist p. 60. and speaketh of all Christians who were not all to compose Prayers according to their ability for that service that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praising God with Prayers and Thanksgivings with all their might that is with the greatest intention and fervency of heart and spirit and this is properly the sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as may be evinced from the use thereof in other places and from the use of like expressions referring to Prayer 3. It was Nazianzens exhortation Naz. Orat. 3. Let us being cleansed in soul and body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with all our might sing that song which the Israelites sung when the Egyptians were destroyed where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies affectionateness and earnestness of mind in the use of a set form of words Lex Rab. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Buxtorf noteth it as an expression used among the Jews that he who shall say Amen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with all his might which answereth to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gates of Paradise shall be opened to him but here could be no variety of expression but as he interpreteth it by this Phrase is meant omni intentione devotione a joining with all earnestness of intention and heartiness of devotion Linw. Prov. l. 3. Tit. 23. Sect. 1. About 450. years since was framed an English Canon requiring the daily publick Prayers and service to be performed religiously prout Deus dederit and again prout Deus inspiraverit which are Phrases as plausible and pregnant as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet these Phrases were used concerning the set diurnal and nocturnal offices requiring that they should behave themselves therein with Religious devoutness according as God should give them ability and breath by his spirit Wherefore this citation from Justin Martyr though managed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or with the utmost might will prove nothing but the weakness of the attempt of the Vndertakers 4. Another place objected is from Tertullian Apol. c. 30. who saith the Christians did pray sine monitore quia de pectore without a monitor or prompter because from their heart The sense of these words of Tertullian hath been variously apprehended by divers learned men some judging that they intend praying by heart as we call it and therefore by a form others that they expressed the readiness of Christians to put up hearty and devout supplications to God Bishop Bilson of Christian subjection Part. 4. from the Religious inclinations of their own spirits and some very worthy men have thought that sense of these words which is closed with in the management of this objection not to be improbable concerning Tertullians time And it is not much of be wondred if some obscure Phrases of so dark a Writer as Tertullian be either not well understood or sometimes misunderstood among this number I account this Phrase which I suppose to refer to an ancient custom in the Primitive Church But 5. In answer to this objection it might be sufficient to observe that sine monitore can in no propriety of speech be construct without a form since the Monitor must needs be a person not a Book whose words were to guide and
the ancient Fathers have ordinarily used or it is approved by those Writings which only are of Divine Authority and by those which are in the Church of greatest humane Authority 6. The expression of his being a dear Brother doth only enclude a respect suitable to a Brotherly relation and expresseth that the Members of the Church of Christ had real desires of the welfare of such persons as are received into its Communion 7. That clause in committing the body to the ground in sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal life doth so evidently express the Faith and Hope of the general resurrection wherein all Christians are concerned when as it followeth he shall change our vile bodies and make them like to his glorious body that it cannot reasonably be understood with a particular restriction to the party deceased but it declareth that while this object of mortality is before our eyes the Faith of the Resurrection to Life remaineth fixed upon our hearts 8. When we give thanks to God that he hath delivered this our Brother out of the miseries of this sinful World it must be considered that the enâ—ling all troubles and miseries is an act of Gods mercy and ought to be so acknowledged though some men by their own neglect of the Christian life deprive themselves of the benefits thereof as the goodness of God in his patience ought to be owned though some aggravate their own misery by the mis-emprovement thereof And some regard may be had in this expression to the Christian hope of the future estate which is the more quickned by every instance of our present frailty And both this and the former expressions may be used with a particular confidence of the eternal bliss of any holy person deceased and with the exercise of the judgment of Charity in its proper object 9. There is only one expression in the latter Prayer which encludeth particularly our favourable thoughts of the person departed when we pray that we may rest in him as our hope is this our Brother doth In the use of which Phrase we may well express different degrees of hope according to the different evidences of Piety in several distinct persons But even where men were vitious in their lives there may be in ordinary cases some degree of hope that they knowing and professing the truth might at last become truly penitent though we have no evidence thereof For some degree of hope doth not enclude so much as the judgment of Charity and it may be exercised where ever we cannot certainly determine the contrary Yet if there should be any such extraordinary case where not so much as any degree of hope can be admitted it is far more desireable that this expression should be omitted in that singular case alone which would be very rarely found than that all ordinary expressions of the hopefulness of them who depart this life in Communion with so excellent a Church as this is should be expunged and disclaimed For as this would be an undertaking extreamly groundless and deeply uncharitable so the very sound thereof may be enough to affright Pagans from Christianity and Papists from the Reformation if our selves did not allow ordinarily any hopes of the happy estate of the Members of our Church 10. Yet that this may not be misunderstood and mis-emproved when it is applyed to such persons who have been wanting in the practice of due strictness of Christian life and too much swerved from the holy Rules and Doctrines delivered in the Gospel and received by our Church we ought to consider that this expression of hope is no encouragement to any others to be guilty of the like neglects For the bare expression of hope is below any degree of evidence and only expresseth that our judgments and understandings cannot conclude it absolutely certain that he was finally impenitent though his state may appear extreamly hazardous And whosoever liveth wickedly and dyeth without sufficient repentance of which god can certainly judge where man cannot it will be no advantage to him in the other World that his name was mentioned in the Church with some degree of hope or as the Author of the Constitutions expresseth it Const Apol. lib. 8. c. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the state of such a person is not the less miserable because frail men are not endued with that infallible judgment whereby they can conclude it utterly desperate 11. The Charity of the ancient Christian Church in expressing their hope of them who dyed in their Communion is very manifest and it is a great mistake which some have entertained that through the strictness of their Discipline no persons had their names honourably mentioned by the Church with hopes of their future happiness but such who had lived altogether free from any apparent sinfulness of life or had given severe testimonies of a strict amendment Indeed some rigorous Canons neither of general practice nor of long continuance in the Church would not allow some offenders whatsoever repentance they manifested to be reconciled to the Church or admitted to its Communion throughout their whole life no nor at the hour of death and yet these Canons have been conceived only to make them perpetual Poenitentes so that after their death their oblations were received or they all who were admitted as such Penitents were then owned among them who had relation to the Church Albasp Obs l. 2. c. 4. and of whom it had hope but amongst the ordinary rules of Primitive Discipline these were generally admitted 1. That whosoever came under any censure of the Church Cyp. Ep. 54. Can. Apost 52. whatsoever his crime was he might upon his supplication be admitted to be one of the Poenitentes or to be under the rules of penance 4. Con. Carth. c. 74. and the not admitting him hereto was accounted an heinous crime because non fas est Ecclesiam pulsantibus â—laudi 2. That if any of these Poenitentes were under dangerous sickness or approaching death Cyp. Ibidem Conc. Nicen c. 13. Ancyr can 6. Araus can 3. 4. Carth. c. 77. it was requisite they should be then admitted to the peace of the Church and its Communion 3. That even they who being under censure did only in the time of dangerous sickness desire to be admitted Penitents might thereupon forthwith be both admitted Penitents and receive reconciliation and Communion Conc. Araus c. 2. Leo. Ep. 91.4 Carth. c. 76. This is a consequent from the two former and is encluded in the Canon of Ancyra now mentioned and is manifest by divers other particular testimonies and it was grounded upon this reason because as Leo expresseth it we cannot limit the times nor determine the measures of Gods mercy 4. That all who were so received into the Church Dion de Eccles Hier. c. 7. with others who died in its Communion Cyp. Ep. 10. and even Penitents who dyed without the opportunity of obtaining
Baptism engaged them to acknowledge and worship the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Baxt. Disp of Gerem c. 2. Sect. 58. And whereas it is objected against the use of any such external signs that this is to set up something to work Grace in the same manner that the Sacraments do which do only objectively teach remember and excite and thereby work on the understanding will memory and affections all this is grounded upon manifest misapprehensions For the holy Sacraments do not only stir us up to the exercise of Grace already received but do tender to us a Communion with Christ and a Communication of further Grace from him which no humane Rites can do Artic. 25. Whence our Articles declare them to be effectual signs of Grace and Gods good will towards us by the which he doth work invisibly in us and doth not only quicken but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him In Sect. and agreeably hereunto is the Doctrine of all the Protestant Writers above-mentioned But to condemn all objective incitements to the exercise of Grace as humane Sacraments where there is no pretence of their being direct means of conveying further Grace from God would enclude a censuring any particular becoming actions gravity and due expression of affectionateness in the Minister or people in Christian Assemblies because it is a means to excite others to the greater reverence and Religious devotion and would condemn any actions as sinful and evil meerly from their being useful to promote good And for example hereupon he who looking into a Register Book where his Baptism is recorded shall only take notice of his Age should be commended but he who upon the sight of his name in that Book is put in memory concerning his Baptismal Covenant and excited to a care of answering that Covenant by a Christian and pious life should be guilty of grievous sin as if this was to make that Book to be a kind of Sacrament And they who reject all exciting signs as being Sacramental may find almost all the same pretences to dislike all words not instituted of God which do excite men to Religious Piety especially when they are accompanied with any outward action though it be but a gesture because not only Sacramental signs but Sacramental words in their Sacramental Use as in Baptism I baptize thee in the name c. do both exhibit and excite Grace as an essential part of that Sacrament and there is not much more reason to conclude all exciting signs to be Sacramental signs than to account all exciting words to be Sacramental words 15. Sixthly Other external things in Gods worship are properly significant of reverence towards him and of high esteem of him and his Ordinances Such are a humble and devout behaviour and gesture which are Hypocritical actions where no such signification is intended but when designed to this end they are truly religious but far from being Sacramental O◠this nature are the preparing and preserving decent structures and other things comely as Communion Table Cup c. which are set apart for Religious service And to this sixth head belongeth the use of the Ministerial Garments appointed in our Church as the use of the Cross in the Office of Baptism is of the nature of a memorative and exciting sign under the former head And to dislike these things solely because of such signification is to account the actions of man who in Gods worship acts as a reasonable Creature to be the worse meerly because he is able to give a good and rational account why he doth perform them SECT II. Of Ecclesiastical appointments considered as imposed and enjoined 1. Having proved in the former Chapter the lawfulness of some external Rites and having shewed in this Chapter that they do not become unlawful by being significant we may hence infer that nothing can be said against the enjoining some such lawful Rites but what will equally oppose all Ecclesiastical Injunctions and Constitutions in things indifferent For if these things be in themselves both lawful and in their due circumstances useful as I have above shewed and if there be a power in the Church of enjoining lawful things to useful purposes then cannot the establishing these things thus directed be disallowed But to deny the lawfulness of Ecclesiastical Sanctions and Constitutions is to charge all the ancient famous known parts of the Church of Christ with a sinful usurpation of Authority in the Church for that they enjoined what they judged useful both in General and Provincial Synods is manifest from the Canons of the Code of the Universal Church and of the Roman and African Churches and from the more ancient Canons among those called the Apostles and from other Ecciesiastical Rules of Discipline frequently mentioned in Tertullian S. Cyprian and other ancient Writers And that this practice of the Church was used ever since the Apostles is not only manifest from the instances given in the former Chapter Sect. 3. but is also evident from the Synod at Jerusalem and its decisions concerning somethings indifferent mentioned Act. 15. 2. Concerning the Decrees of that Council at Jerusalem I shall Observe 1. That some part of the matter of them was not contained under the Divine Precepts of perpetual obligation but was enjoined only as Ecclesiastical laws of mutable Constitution I should willingly acknowledge that not only that part of the Apostolical Decree which concerned Fornication but that also which concerned things offered unto Idols did contain an immutable Law to all Christians and that what S. Paul writeth upon this subject in his first Epistle to the Corinthians did not at all invalidate or dispense with the Decree of the Apostolical Synod as divers worthy men have judged but only declareth how far that Decree intended to oblige That which renders this opinion probable is because it is evident by comparing Act. 15.20 with Act. 15.29 that the Apostles in commanding to abstain from meats offered to Idols designed only to prohibit the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pollutions of Idols and because after the writing the Epistles to the Corinthians it was still in as general terms as that Synod did express it accounted a duty to abstain from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or things sacrificed to Idols not only by divers particular ancient Writers but by one of the Canons of the Greek Code Conc. Gangr Can. 2. and even by S. John in the Revelations Rev. 2.14 But that that Decree concerning things strangled and bloud was no perpetually binding Law of God may be evinced from the general judgment of the Church of God Aug. cont Faust l. 32. c. 13. Binius in 4. Syn. Apost de Immolatis which doth not now account it binding some very few persons excepted from such general expressions of holy Scripture as that nothing is unclean in it self and to the pure all things are pure and from the Apostles expressing their Decree to be
their superiours who are over them in the Church in the things they command or the truths they recommend rather than by the opinions of any other persons whomsoever 1. Because God hath appointed them to be teachers leaders and guides to us and therefore it is against the duty of our relation to them and of the due submission we owe to them and inconsistent with the duty of honouring our Rulers to censure their appointments or instructions as evil meerly upon the credit of any other persons contrary opinion 2. Because they who disobey the Constitutions of their Superiours only out of respect to the contrary judgment of any other persons do not disobey out of Conscience but out of prejudice and disaffection because no principle of Conscience can ordinarily bind men who are not able to judge fully of the Case to conclude their superiours or Ecclesiastical Governours to be in the wrong and those who oppose them to be in the right and Gods command to obey them who have the rule over us cannot safely be overlooked out of respect to mens own prejudices and disaffections Disp of Cerem c. 15. Sect. 3. In this case it was well declared by Mr. Baxter that the duty of obeying being certain and the sinfulness of the thing commanded being uncertain and only suspected we must go on the surer side with much more to the same purpose Now the observing these rules abovementioned See Dr. Ferne's Considerations of concernment c. 1. will both preserve the true freedom of judgment and Conscience which when it proceedeth upon unerring evidence is to be preferred before any humane authority and it will also provide for the establishing of Truth Vnity and Peace in the Church and will be the best security to the Souls and Consciences of men because they who hold fast the Fundamentals of Christian Faith and Life though in matters of a lesser nature they should mistake where they sincerely design to practise their duty so far as they can understand of themselves or are instructed by their teachers without any willing neglect of duty towards God or Man such mistakes or errors are not destructive to Salvation 12. Indeed S. Paul telleth his Romans Rom. 14.23 that he that doubteth is domned or condemned which some expound self condemned if he eat and that whatsoever is not of Faith is sin But as the Rules above-expressed are means for the satisfying doubts so this Apostolical Rule requiring a full and well satisfied perswasion of a mans own judgment and knowledge in what he acteth must be applyed to the special case intended which is this That wheresoever the omitting any action is certainly free from sin and the practice of it appeareth to any person doubtful there to do that action is a very dangerous and evil practice because it containeth in it a chusing to run the hazard of sin which choice is always a sin in such a Case the Apostle alloweth no man to engage upon any such action until he be certainly perswaded by an undoubting knowledge of the lawfulness thereof And the same rule must take place when the practice of any thing is manifestly lawful and the omission doubtful But the Case is very much different when both acting and forhearing may be doubted of where the one of them is a duty and it is impossible that both should be forborn and such to some persons is the question above-mentioned concerning Infant Baptism obedience to Rulers c. Nor doth the Apostle in this place design in general that no Servant Child or Subject may eat any thing observe any time religiously obey any command or perform any other action till he hath obtained so much knowledge as to discern by an undoubting judgment how these actions in their particular circumstances are allowable by the rules of Christianity for then the ignorant person should be directed till he becometh knowing to be idle and do nothing and to be disobedient and under no command but would scarce be allowed to live so long as to obtain knowledge But God having commanded Superiours to rule and Inferiours to obey to suspend all action here is to perform an inward moral action of choice about a matter of duty which if it be not regularly managed is a sin And in this case so far as concerneth the obedience of a Child Servant or Subject they ought to account their superiours command to lay such an obligation upon them to duty that they must be guided thereby unless they be able to prove themselves bound to act the contrary 13. Assert 4. It is neither necessary nor possible that Ecclesiastical Constitutions should not be liable to be scrupled or suspected where those suspicions and scruples are admitted without sufficient evidence of evil in the things themselves Mr. H. Tract of Schism I know that some have asserted that the Church and its Officers are guilty of Schism if they appoint any thing not necessary or indifferent which is by others suspected But that things in themselves lawful and expedient may lawfully be commanded though they be groundlesly suspected or scrupled appeareth I. Because otherwise all rules of Ecclesiastical order would be unlawful where people are needlesly suspitious and scrupulous and a great part of the authority of Princes Parents and Masters would be abridged if it must be limited by all the unnecessary suspitions of inferiours 14. Arg. 2. From the Apostolical practice When S. Paul had directed his Corinthians that the men should pray uncovered and the women covered adding 1 Cor. 11.16 that if any man will be contentious we have no such Custom nor the Churches of God he doth plainly enough express that what is duly and orderly established in the Church must take place notwithstanding contentions and oppositions And when the Apostolical Synod required the Gentiles to abstain from bloud and things strangled even that constitution might have been scrupled and opposed especially considering that many Primitive Christians were not presently satisfied by the Declaration of the Apostles concerning Christian liberty as is manifest from Rom. 14.2 14 20. Had not Christians then been of another temper than many now are and made up more of Vnity humility meekness and peace than of heats parties and controversies they might have objected that this was an encroachment upon Christian liberty whereby they were free from the whole Yoke of Mosaical Ceremonies that it might seem to countenance the distinction of things clean and unclean and to give occasion to the Gentile Christians to Judaize as the Galatians did It might also have been said that that Decree had an appearance of establishing Christianity upon Judaism because the Jews had a sort of Proselytes called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Proselytes of converse Gemar Sanhedr c. 7. Sect. 5. Cocceius ibidem Buxt Lexic Rab. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who were not circumcised but only enjoined to observe the seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah to whom bloud was prohibited And
direct others Now I suppose they who object this place would not from hence infer that in the publick Prayers of the Church there was no Minister who expressed the words of Prayer with which the rest joined in affection This is indeed most properly to pray sine monitore but this could not be practised in publick Prayers save only in the use of a known form in which they should all conspire with one heart and voice and according to this sense in which it is most fairly understood if it be referred to the publick Prayers of the Church this place is a considerable testimony for the use of set forms 6. But it seemeth to me very probable which I leave to the consideration of others that these words peculiarly concern the Stationary days of the ancient Church These days were the fourth and sixth days of the Week in which the Christians attended the publick Assemblies of the Church Albasp Obs l. 1. obs 16. beginning very early in the Morning and continuing till three a Clock in the Afternoon and these were accounted the chief days of Christian supplication and humiliation and the observance of them was esteemed the most effectual means to obtain Gods blessing and favour On these days besides their joining in publick Prayers which Tertullian intimateth to be performed about the hours of nine twelve and three a considerable portion of the days was allotted for their exercising themselves in private Prayers and inward and fervent supplications humbly performed upon their knees with fasting and tears in the place of publick Assemblies with regard to what was needful either to themselves in particular or to the publick welfare of the Church or Empire Of the ordinary use of these retired but solemn supplications and devotions in the Christian Church there are as I suppose divers sufficient testimonies 7. Tertullian who in his Book De Oratione De Orat. c. 13. hath peculiar respect to their Stationary days speaketh hereof Quid amplius referunt isti qui clarius adorant nisi quod proximis obstrepant imo prodendo petitiones suas quid minus faciunt quam si in publico orent Cyp. de Orat. Dom. v. Pamel in Cyprianum And S. Cyprian requireth them who are gathered together in the Assemblies with the brethren and do celebrate divine Sacrifices with Gods Priest that they would avoid indigested and tumultuous speaking and setteth before them the example of Hannah who prayed not by loud petition sed tacite modeste intra ipsas pectoris latebras precabatur That there were such Prayers used in the Jewish Church appeareth from the example of Hannah and of the Pharisee and Publican To understand this Phrase of Tertullian concerning such Prayers in the Christian Churches is most agreeable to the literal sense of these words sine monitore quia de pectore and to zephyrus thus paraphrasing upon it We do not conceive Prayers dictated by a Priest but all the Christian Assembly as if we all conspired together to express our desires with sighs and groans out of the very seat of our minds and spirit So that he understandeth this place of that inflamed devotion kindled from a fervency of inward heat which needed not the help of the wind without to blow it up or of those active desires which received not their efficacy from the breath or voice of another but from the inward motions of the soul 8. After these are produced the Council of Laodicea Can. 18.3 Conc. Carth. c. 23. and Conc. Milev c. 12. as if they gave the original to set forms of Prayer when they only established some sanctions concerning them The Laodicean Canon enjoineth the use of these services Morning and Evening The Canon of Carthage in one part of it requireth that quascunque sibi preces aliquis describit whatsoever Prayers any one shall transcribe for himself he shall not use them till he hath conferred with the understanding brethren Now tramcribing properly here intended supposeth a form and care is taken by this Canon that no Copy for the publick use of the Church which could then be only had by transcribing should be received until it was carefully examined V. Medes Christian Sacr. Sec. 3. The other part of that Canonrequireth that at the Communion where Christs offering up himself to the Father is commemorated their Prayers should always be directed to the Father This doth not suppose that there were no forms then in use but might well be intended either to put a stop to what was then entring or to regulate what was amiss in any of their set forms especially considering that in the vast territories of the Carthaginian jurisdiction various forms of Prayer were about that time used some of which were composed by Hereticks as is evident from S. Augustin Cont. Don. l. 6. c. 25. who was a member of that Council The Canon of Milevis declareth against the use of any other forms than those established by the Council but we may as well conclude from our Act of Vniformity as from any of these Councils that it gave the first Original to forms of Prayer because they are thereby established And thus having viewed these chief objections I may well conclude that the evidence for the great antiquity of set forms remaineth inviolable 9. The argument against the lawfulness of set forms because they limit the use of gifts needeth not much consideration since it is manifest that by the will of God bounds and limits were to be set even to the use of the extraordinary gifts of Gods spirit that the Church might be edifyed 1 Cor. 14.26 27 28 30 33. Whereas now no such miraculous emanation of the Holy Ghost can be pretended nor doth the establishing a form for the publick Offices of the Church deny the liberty in due place of using other Prayers according to the practice of our and the ancient Church 10. It is further objected that forms of Prayer are disadvantageous to piety and devotion and the Non-Conformists oft plead experience as a testimony that they are the cause of much deadness in mens spirits and the hindrance of the lively exercise of Religion Here on the other hand others by experience assert the advantage of set forms to promote devotion when attended without prejudice and with a Religious design of joining in Gods worship To discern the truth in this difference it may be useful to consult the judgment of such persons as are least partial in this Case and yet are able to make a true estimate of damage or advantage and then especially to consider the evidence of reason which may be produced 11. The Leyden Professors declare concerning set forms Synopl Purior Theol. Disp 36. Sect. 33. non tantum licitas sed valde uâ—â—les esse contendimus We defend against any persons that they are not only lawful but exceedingly advantageous and this they assert not only because every Christian cannot fitly conceive new Prayers upon
doth also add to the honour of that holy estate and therefore it may well be mentioned as a further excellency of that holy relation that God hath consecrated it to such an excellent mystery that in it is signified and repented the spiritual Marriage and Vnity between Christ and his Church SECT IX Of the Communion of the sick and the Office for Burial 1. The Communion of the sick is very allowable because the dying state may need the best supports of Christian Faith the highest encouragements of Divine Grace and the chief means to strengthen hope all which is encluded in this Ordinance of the Lords Supper it being a pledge and assurance yea a tender from Christ of mercy and forgiveness to them who truly repent and believe And though the celebrating this holy Communion in private places Conc. Laod. c. 58. standeth condemned in ordinary cases by the ancient Canons Conc. Nic. c. 13. yet in this extraordinary Case sick or dying persons were ordinarily allowed to receive it and the Council of Nice doth well approve of the sick persons desire thereof And though it be sufficiently proved by Albaspinus that the Viaticum frequently given to dying Penitents did not always enclude the Eucharist yet it is manifest that they did frequently partake thereof 4. Conc. Carth. c. 76 78. as is expressed not only in the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage but in the more ancient testimony of Dionysius Alexandrinus Eus Hist Eccles l. 6. c. 36. 2. Divers Protestant Churches besides our own Rat. Disc c. 3. have retained the use thereof and amongst them the Bohaemian Syn. Petric Sect. 5. the Polonian with the consent of the Ministry of the three several Confessions Form Visit Aegr in Bucer and that of Strasburgh as it was in Bucers time And though this was not practised at Geneva Calv. de quibusd Ritib Aug. 12. 1561. Calv. Oleviano Cal. Dec. 1563. yet Calvin did in several places and even towards the end of his life testifie his allowance thereof and also that there were divers weighty causes which constrained him to judge that it ought not to be denied 3. But against this it is objected that some persons who have led vitious lives may earnestly desire the Communion in their sickness and yet not be truly penitent for their sins and therefore cannot worthily partake of those holy Mysteries To which I answer that even in this Case Christian Charity must encline to the more favourable part and since man hath no certain evidences to judge of sincere repentance the infallible discerning thereof must be reserved to the judgment of God And if this person hath lived vainly and exorbitantly the Minister may acquaint him with the nature if need be of true Faith and Repentance and the necessity thereof both to a dying Man and to a Communicant and if he appear so far as is in him desirous to practise and exercise those Christian Graces and to obtain the help of Jesus Christ and his Grace to deny him this Sacrament would be to deny him a testimony in Gods name that he will upon these conditions bestow grace and remission of sins and to shut up the means of Grace and remission from a Sinner who seeketh after it and certainly it cannot agree with the Ministers Office to reject those persons who in a dying state declare they would come to Christ And in the strict times of Primitive Discipline he was thought worthy to be deposed from his Ministry who either rejected or did not receive any Sinner upon his return and a peculiar Charity towards dying persons was expressed in divers ancient Canons 4. In the Office for Burial several expressions are misliked as being thought unmeet to be spoken of every person dying in the Churches Communion Where a first expression to be considered is That Almighty God of his great mercy hath taken to himself the Soul of the person departed When yet we cannot assert that every person dying in our Communion is eternally saved Ans Besides what may be said of the judgment of Charity the wise man telleth us Eccl. 12.7 that the Spirits of dying men return to God who gave them that is to be disposed of according to his righteousness and our Church in this place acknowledgeth the mercy of God through the grace of Christ who now hath the Keys of Hell and Death that dying persons do not forthwith go into the power of the Devil who had the power of Death Heb. 2.14 but do immediately go into the hands of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ to be disposed of by him according to the promises and conditions of the Gospel Covenant This is that which all Christians must acknowledge to flow from the great mercy of God towards man and that this is the sense intended in this place I am induced to believe because in the ancient Offices of Burial they magnified the Divine Power whereby the unjust and tyrannous power of the Devil was overcome and our Lord receiveth us Dioniss de Eccles Hier. c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto his peculiar and most righteous judgment Yet even this sense doth express a general and firm confidence of the future happy state of all them who heartily embrace the Christian Faith and life as being consequent upon the gracious mediation and Soveraign Dominion of Jesus our Saviour 5. And whereas this Office calleth the deceased person Our Brother and Our dear Brother these Phrases may undoubtedly be applyed to every person who professing Christianity dyeth in the Churches Communion And that extensive sense of those words is sufficiently warranted by the use thereof in Scripture when it commands us to love our Brother not to put a stumbling block before our Brother not to defraud our Brother 1. Thes 4.6 to forgive our Brother Mat. 18.34 and when it speaketh of the Brother that walketh disorderly 2. Thes 3.6 and of admonishing him as a Brother v. 14. and of thy Brother trespassing against thee and if he hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother Chrys in Heb. 11. Hom. 25. Mat. 18.15 and if any man that is called a Brother be a Fornicator 1. Cor. 5.11 from which place S. Chrysostom observeth that every Christian man baptized by the laver of regeneration is there called a Brother Tertullian in a general sense as they are men alloweth even the Heathen to be accounted Brethren Apol. c. 39. though they be Mali fratres evil Brethren but in a more special sense he so esteemeth of all Christians Praep. Evang l. 1. c. 4. who acknowledge one God the Father and much to the same purpose writeth Eusebius Cyr. Hier. Praef. And Cyril telleth all those who gave up their names to Christianity that they become the Sons and Daughters of one Mother V. Albasp Obs l. 1. c. 19. So that this manner of expression in this Office is the same which the Scriptures and
complyance to the mind of others to neglect due reverence to God or Rules of order in the Church of God is not allowable And there lieth a much higher obligation upon us to please others where we are engaged thereto by the bond of justice subjection and obedience than where we are only enclined thereto by the influence of love and common kindness whence the Child or Servant who will provoke his Father or Master by acts of disobedience contrary to his duty meerly to please other persons acteth irregularly and sinfully and upon the same account he who will displease and disobey his Rulers and Governours whether Civil or Ecclesiastical to gratifie other persons of inferiour capacity acteth contrary to Christian duty 4. Secondly The Plea of scandal must then necessarily be ill used when what is undertaken under pretence of avoiding offence doth it self become the greater offence In the Case mentioned in the Epistles to the Romans and the Corinthians there was no giving offence to the Jews Gentiles or the Church of God by their present forbearance of any sort of meat under the circumstances in which they then were and therefore this forbearance out of charity to others became a duty But when S. Peter and Barnabas at Antioch did for a time forbear to eat with the Gentiles which seemingly encluded an urjust censure of the way of Christianity as it was embraced among the Gentiles and was like to be a great offence to the Gentiles this action though undertaken out of an appearance of charitable respect to the Jews that they might not be offended was sinful and contrary to the Gospel And upon the like account the disobeying Ecclesiastical Constitutions but of respect to some other persons while it encludeth an appearance of ungrounded censuring of our Rulers who appointed them and the Church who practiseth them and a want of care of its order Peace and Unity besides other ill consequents above expressed is not allowable nor can it be justified by the rules of Religion but by the bad example of neglect of duty it giveth the greatest occasion of offence 5. And if any persons shall in such a case take offence so far as to distast the Religious worship of God V. Tertullian de Virgin Vel. c. 3. because others observe established Orders this is an offence taken but not given For in matters indifferent and left altogether to our liberty he who without any care of his Brothers good acteth what he knoweth will occasion him to fall is guilty of a scandal against the rule of charity but he who acteth nothing but what is his duty lawfully commanded by his superiour or undertaken with respect to the greater good and order of the Church is guilty of no scandal nor breach of charity though others may take occasion to fall thereby 22 ae qu. 43. Art 2. It is well resolved by Aquinas that every scandal or offence encludeth sin that which is a scandal given or an active scandal is the sin of him who giveth the occasion but the scandal taken or the passive scandal is the sin of him only who taketh the occasion to fall Thus there were divers things which our Saviour spake and did at which the Pharisees were offended the sin of which must be charged upon themselves in being alienated thereby from the Doctrine of Christ 6. Thirdly The duty of forbearing the use of some things lawful and expedient because others account them sinful hath likewise peculiar respect to that case when the erring persons have not had sufficient opportunity of being fully instructed and stedfastly established in the truth Thus in the time of the Apostles when the Doctrine of the Gospel was first divulged the Jews could not be presently satisfied concerning the liberty and freedom of Christians from the rites of the law of Moses and many of the Gentiles were not so firmly established in all the Doctrines of Christianity that they might not be led aside by mistaking the practices of other Christians and in such cases the use of things lawful and indifferent must be restrained from the consideration of others weakness But where there hath been sufficient means and opportunity for better instruction if some still retain their erroneous opinions they who understand the truth are not obliged in this case to forbear their practising according to their true principles in matters of indifferency and Christian liberty because this practice is in this case a profession of truth against errour and the forbearance thereof may frequently be interpreted a complyance with errour Vrsin Loc. Theol in 3m. Prac. And it is truly observed by Vrsin that it is scandalum datum in rebus adiaphoris errores in animis infirmorum confirmare to add confirmation to erroneous opinions in the minds of the weak about indifferent things is a giving offence or being guilty of an active scandal Upon this account though our Saviour knew that his heating and commanding the man who was healed to take up his bed on the sabbath day his eating with Publicans and Sinners and his Disciples eating with unwashen hands were things in the highest manner offensive to some of the Jews he practised and allowed these things in opposition to the Scribes and Pharisees who in their censures of him proceeded upon erroneous and corrupt Doctrines vented by them for divine dictates 7. But it may deserve a more full enquiry whether Ecclesiastical Constitutions and legal Injunctions may be allowed concerning things which either are or may become matter of dispute and opposition Commis Papers passim because this is a thing which is in the substance of it much insisted upon In order to the resolution hereof I shall assert 1. The peace and Vnity of a Church which must both respect the Union of its members among themselves and with the Vniversal Church is of so great value that to that end it would be very desirable that any particular constitution about matters meerly indifferent should be altered where peace with a well ordered state of the Church can only by that means be firmly secured because the principal end of them is to promote Unity order and edification 8. Assert 2. Where minds are prone to raise disputes and entertain prejudices and jealousies about matters of Gods worship the most innocent things cannot be long secured from being opposed and scrupled For in this case when men of greater parts do without just cause propound doubts and arguments against a thing which may easily be done about any subject men of lesser understanding if they have also unsetled and unestablished minds are apt either out of weakness of judgment to take their fallacies to be solid reasons or from the earnestness of their affections to esteem such persons to be the ablest and faithfullest guides And he who observeth the World will discern that there is scarce any truth of Religion even in matters most Fundamental which hath not been disputed and opposed by men
them but even to urge them to approve and allow what is really sinful and is rightly so esteemed by them 20. But the main objection to be here considered is that S. Paul Rom. 14.1 c. commandeth to receive them who are weak in the Faith but not to doubtful disputations Commiss Papers p. 70. and alloweth no judging or despising one another for eating or not eating meats and for observing or not observing days and hence it is urged that no such things indifferent ought to be imposed but to be made the matter of mutual forbearance Now it must be granted that Christian Charity requireth a hearty and tender respect to be had to every truly conscientious person so far as it may consist with the more general interest of the Church of God yet it is manifest that the Apostle is not in this Chapter treating about and therefore not against the rules of order in the service of God But in order to a right understanding of this place I shall note three things 21. First that these directions given by the Apostle in the beginning of this Chapter so far as they give allowance to the different practices therein mentioned have a peculiar respect to those times only of the first dawning of Christianity when most of the Jews who believed in Christ did as yet zealously retain the Mosaical Rites abstaining from certain meats as judging them unlawful and unclean Rom. 14.2 14. and observing Jewish days and times out of a peculiar esteem for them v. 5. and yet this for a time was in this Chapter allowed and indulged by the Apostle But afterwards the Rules and Canons of the Church severely condemned all Christians whether of Jews or Gentiles August Ep. 19. Conc. Gangr c. 2. Conc. Laod. c. 29. who observed the Mosaical Law and the Rites and distinction of meats contained therein out of Conscience thereunto yea S. Paul himself vehemently condemned the Galatians who were Gentiles for observing such distinctions of days out of Conscience to the Law Gal. 4.10 11. and passeth the like censure upon the Colossians who distinguished meats upon the same account Col. 2.20 21 22. Wherefore we must further observe that in the Apostles times and according to the Rules they delivered to the Church The Gentile Christians were in these things with others prohibited the observation of the Law of Moses and its Ceremonies though many of them as the Galatians and Colossians were prone to judge this to be their necessary duty Act. 21.25 Gal. 5.2 The Jews among the Gentiles who did not yet understand that the Law of Moses was abrogated were allowed to observe its Rites and to practise according to the Jewish Customs Act. 21.21 24. Gal. 2.12 13. Act. 16.3 But the Jews who lived in Judea and S. Paul himself when he was there were obliged or enjoined to observe the Mosaical Rites though they were satisfied that the binding power of the Law was abrogated Act. 21.24 Gal. 2.12 Now in these different practices allowed determined and ordered by the directions and rules given by the Apostles as temporary provisions for the several sorts or different Churches of Christians the Apostle requireth the Romans to receive and not to judge one another 22. 2. When the Apostle commandeth them to receive them who are weak in the Faith he thereby intendeth that they ought to be owned judged as Christians notwithstanding these different Observations v. 1. And when he commandeth that he that eateth should not despise him that eateth not and that he that eateth not should not judge him that cateth v. 3. he forbiddeth the weaker Jews to condemn the other Jews or Gentiles as if they were not possessed with the fear of God because they observed not the Law of Moses and prohibiteth those others from despising or disowning these weaker Jews as not having embraced Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 3. signifying here so to despise as withal to reject and disclaim as Mar. 9.12 Act. 4.11 1 Cor. 1.28 because they observed the Rites of Judaism And to this sense are manifestly designed the Apostles Arguments whereby he enforceth these Precepts V. 3. For God hath received him v. 4. to his own Master he standeth or falleth for God is able to make him stand v. 6. he acteth with Conscience to God and v. 10. Why dost thou judge thy Brother or why dost thou set at naught thy Brother We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ So that the main design of this part of this Chapter is this To condemn them who press their own practices or judgments in things unnecessary as being the essential and necessary points of Religion and Christianity and thereupon do undertake to censure all those who differ from them in such lesser things as having no true Religion or inward relation to or Communion with Jesus Christ though they live never so conscientiously and act according to the best apprehensions they can attain Aug. Exp. prop. 78. ad Rom. To this purpose S. Austen expounded these words Non ferre audeamus sententiam de alieno corde quod non videmus Beza in Loc. and Beza saith upon them Rudes non debent ut extra salutis spem positi damnari And this which is the true intent and scope of the Apostle in that place doth in no wise impugn the use of Ecclesiastical Authority in appointing what is orderly and expedient about things indifferent but he will by no means allow that lesser things should be esteemed the main matters of Religion and Christianity to which purpose he layeth down that excellent Rule in v. 17. The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost 23. 3. The considering the Apostolical practice in making Decrees at the Council of Jerusalem in S. Pauls setting orderly bounds to the use of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit in the Church of Corinth or limiting the exercise thereof to avoid confusion and his not allowing S. Peter Barnabas and other Jews to practise without controul what agreed with their present apprehensions under those circumstances but was the way to disadvantage the peace and welfare of the Church and his giving commands for order and decency with things of like nature do evidence that it is a great misunderstanding of the Apostles Doctrine in this place to conceive that he condemneth the establishing useful rules for the order and edification of the Church though they do not always comply with every particular persons apprehension 24. But if it be further objected that if those things may be commanded or enjoined which some persons though through mistake judge unlawful either they must practise against their own judgments which would be sinful or their being conscientious will be their disadvantage which is not desireable To which I answer 1. That if in some particular things certain persons through meer mistake accompanied with humility and designs of peace should judge things