are call'd things not Commanded and not with respect to the latter 2. Indeed the Phrase not Commanded is only a Meiosis or Softer way of speaking when more is understood than express'd A Figure usual in all Authors and Languages that I know of and what is frequently to be met with in Scripture Thus it s given as a Character of an Hypocritical People they chose that in which I Delighted not which is but another Word for what was said in the verse before their Soul Delighted in their Abominations or Idolatries And when the Apostle would Describe the evil state of the Gentile World by the most Hainous and Flagitious Crimes such as Fornication Covetousness Maliciousness Envy Murder and what not he saith of these that they were things not convenient And it is as evident that the Phrase not Commanded is of the like kind when the things its applied to are alike Notorious and Abominable But it s further Objected that it s said in Scripture ye shall not add unto the Word which I Command you neither shall ye diminish ought from it And that our Saviour condemning the Practices of the Scribes in this kind concludes In Vain do they Worship me Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men. From whence it may be collected 1. That all things not Commanded by God in his Word are additions to it 2. That such additions are altogether unlawful To this I reply 1. If they mean by adding to the Word the doing what that Forbids and by diminishing the neglecting of what that requires as the next Words do intimate and is plainly the sense otherwhere when it s no sooner said What thing soever I Command you Observe to do it but it immediately follows thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it it s what we willingly condemn according to that of our Saviour Whosoever shall break one of these least Commandments and shall teach Men so he shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven 2. If they mean by adding the appointing somewhat else instead of what God hath appointed as Jeroboam did the Feast of the Eighth Month and by diminishing the taking away what God hath Commanded as Ahaz did the Altar and Laver c. This is what we condemn also and do blame in the Church of Rome whilst they feed the People with Legends instead of Scripture and take away both that and the Cup from the Laity 3. If they mean by adding the adding insolent expositions to the Command by which the end of it is frustrated This our Saviour condemn'd in the Pharisees Why do ye Transgress the Command of God by your tradition For God Commanded saying Honour thy Father c. but ye say whosoever shall say to his Father it is a gift c. Thus ye have made the Commandment of God of none effect by your tradition And this we condemn in the Church of Rome who do defeat the Commands of God by their Doctrines of Attrition and Purgatory c. 4. If they mean by adding the making of that which is not the Word of God to be of equal Authority with it This our Saviour condemn'd in the Pharisees when they Taught for Doctrines the Commandments of Men and esteem'd them as necessary to be obeyed and to be of equal force with what was Authorized by him nay it seems they had more regard to the Tradition of the Elders than the Commandment of God as our Saviour Insinuates verse 2 3. and has been observed from their own Authors This we also condemn in the Church of Rome which decrees that the Apocrypha and Traditions should be received with the like Pious regard as the Sacred Writ 5. If by adding they mean the giving the same Efficacy to humane Institutions as God doth to his by making them to confer Grace upon the rightly disposed and by diminishing that the Service is not complete without it This our Saviour condemn'd in the Pharisees when they maintained that to eat with unwashen Hands defiled a Man verse 20. And this we condemn in the Church of Rome in their use of Holy-Water and Reliques and Ceremonies Thus far we agree but if they proceed and will conclude that the doing any thing not Commanded in the Worship of God is a Sin though it have none of the ingredients in it before spoken of we therein differ from them and upon very good reason For therein they differ from our Saviour and his Apostles and all Churches as I have shewed Therein also they depart from the notion and reason of the thing For adding is adding to the substance and making the thing added of the Nature of the thing it s added to and diminishing is diminishing from the substance and taking away from the Nature of it but when the substance remains intire as much after this humane appointment as it was before it without Loss and Prejudice without Debasement or Corruption it cannot be called an addition to it in the sence that the Scripture takes that Word in Nay so far are we from admitting this charge that we return it upon them and do bring them in Criminals upon it For those that do Forbid what the Gospel Forbids not do as much add to it as those that Command what the Gospel doth not Command And if it be a Crime to Command what that Commands not it must be so to Forbid what it Forbids not And this is what they are Guilty of that do hold that nothing is to be used in the Worship of God but what is prescribed for if that be not a Scripture Proposition and Truth as certain it is not then what an addition is this A greater surely than what they charge upon us for all that is Commanded amongst us is look'd upon not as necessary but expedient but what is Forbid by them is Forbid as absolutely unlawful the latter of which alters the Nature whereas the other only affects the circumstances of things The second Commandment Thou shalt not make unto thee any Graven Image c. is frequently made use of to prove that we must apply nothing to a Religious Use but what is Commanded and we are told that the sence of it is that We must Worship God in no other way and by no other means or Religious Rites than what he hath prescribed The best way to answer this is 1. To consider what is Forbidden in this Commandment and 2. To shew that we are not concern'd in the Prohibition As to the former 1. In this Command it is provided that there be no act of Adoration given to any besides God By this the Heathens are condemned in their Plurality of Gods and the Church of Rome in the Veneration they give to Saints and Angels 2. That the Honour we give to God be sutable to his Nature and agreeable to his Will Sutable to his Nature and so we are not to Worship him
prudential consideration Such I account was the Washing the Disciples Feet which was done by our Saviour in token of the Humility he was to be a president of and would have them follow him in and which it seems was obferved amongst them 1 Tim. 5. 10. and for a long time after continued in a sort in some Churches Such also were the Love-feasts at the Administration of the Lords Supper and the Holy-kiss used then amongst Christians if not as a constant attendant upon all publick Worship yet to be sure at Prayer Which and the like usages however taken up yet were in the Opinion of the Church no other than Indifferent and accordingly were upon the abuse of them as I observed before discarded From all which it appears that there was no such thing as Prescription expected before any Rite should be introduced into the Church or before it would be lawful for Christians to use it but that where it was not forbidden the Practice of the Church was to determine them and if Prescription had been thought necessary for every thing used in Divine Worship which was not Natural then certainly our Saviour and his Apostles would never have used or encouraged others to use any thing that wanted such Authority and that was not of Divine Institution Now if it should be objected that these usages of the Christian Church were Civil observances and used as well out of God's Worship as in it and therefore what there needed no institution for and might be lawfully used without I answer 1. That this doth justify most of the usages contended for and there would be nothing unlawful in using a White Garment c. in Divine Service since that as a sign of Royalty and Dignity was used in Civil as well as Religious cases and according to this Argument may therefore lawfully be used in Religious because it was in Civil Secondly They must say that either a Civil observance when used in Religious Worship remains Civil notwithstanding its being so applied or that it 's Religious whilst so applied if the former then Kneeling or Standing in the Worship of God would be no acts of Adoration and not be Religious because those postures are used in Civil matters if the latter then it must be granted that there may be Rites used in the Worship of God and to a Religious end which there is no Divine Prescription for Nay Thirdly It 's evident that these and the like were not used by the Christians as meer Civil Rites this I think is made evident as to Washing the Feet by a Learned Person and not only was the kiss of Charity called the Holy-kiss in Scripture but by the Fathers notwithstanding what is objected the Seal of Prayer and the Seal of Reconciliation and both consistent the one as it was an attendant upon that office the other as it was a testimony of their Charity and Reconciliation to each other in it Fourthly If the being Civil usages did make them which were originally so to be lawful in or at Divine Worship then there is nothing that is used out of Worship in Civil cases and affairs but may be introduced into the Church since if it be for that reason that any usages of that kind are defended the reason will as well defend all as one And then the Histrionical Practices of the Church of Rome might warantably be introduced as the rocking of a Babe in a Cradle at night at the Nativity time the Harrowing of Hell at Easter c. Then a Maypole may be brought into the Church for Children to Dance-about and Climb up on in sign of their desire to seek the things above and a stiff Straw put into the Childs Hand for a sign of Fighting against Spiritual Enemies as with a Spear And all the absurdities of that Nature charged injuriously upon our Proceedings would return with success upon themselves Since all these are fetched from Customs and Practices in Secular matters Fifthly If this be a reason to Defend the Use of Rites in the Christian Church because they are used out of it and in Civil cases then what will become of that position before spoken of and generally asserted by those who oppose us that nothing is to be used in the Worship of God without Prescription except the Natural Circumstances of Action for though Civil and Natural are sometimes coincident yet they may be and often are Separated for Feasting and Salutation are Civil usages but are no Natural Circumstances in Divine Worship and which that cannot be performed without And if these and the like were used in the Church and applied and annexed to Divine Worship then the reason upon which they were introduced and used doth wherever that reason is justify the like Practice and we are left still to choose and act according to the Permission and Allowance that is given us that is all such things that are not forbidden are just matter of our Christian Liberty and there is no Sin in a Prudent exercise of it 3. I shall further prove and strengthen the Proposition that things Indifferent though not prescribed may be lawfully used in Divine Worship from the ill consequences attending the contrary one of which is that if we hold all things not commanded to be prohibited we shall find no Church or Religious Society in the World but are Guilty and if the doing so makes Communion with a Church unlawful there is no Church we can hold Communion with There are some Churches that do maintain and use such things as the Scripture expresly condemns and do lay aside such as the Scripture requires as the Church of Rome in its Worshipping Saints and Angels and denying the Cup to the Laity c. And these things make it necessary for those to quit its Communion that are of it and for those to avoid it that are not in it But other Churches there are that are Guilty of no such Fundamental Errors and fatal miscarriages and may so far lawfully be Communicated with But even none of these are there but what either wittingly or unwittingly do take the liberty of using what the Scripture hath no where required It was notoriously so in the Ancient Church when some Customs did universally obtain amongst them as the Anniversary Solemnities of the Passion Resurrection and Ascension of Christ and Descent of the Holy-Ghost the receiving of the Lords Supper Fasting the Praying toward the East the Standing in their Devotions on the Lords Days especially from Easter to Whitsuntide the Dipping the Baptized thrice in Water c.. Now whatever some of the Fathers might plead for any of these from Scriptures misunderstood yet it 's plain that none of these are required in Scripture and if so a Person that holds it unlawful to use any thing uncommanded and to hold Communion with a Church so using must have separated from the Catholick Church since if there be Credit
to be given to the Fathers so reporting they all agreed in the use and practice of the things above recited And he that held all fixed Holy-Days of Ecclesiastical Institution unlawful and all Ceremonies not instituted by God to be prohibited must not have Worshipped with them who did not only thus do but thought it unlawful when universally Practised to do otherwise But again as there were some Rites universally held in estimation so there were others that were peculiar to some Churches and that were not thought to be obliging out of that Particular Communion as when in the Church of Rome it was the Custom to Fast on the Saturday and of most others to make no such distinction betwixt that and other days In the Church of Milain they Washed the Feet of those that were to be Baptized but in the Church of Rome they used it not Now if persons did believe such things unlawful they could have no Communion with any particular Church because no Church was without such Uncommanded Rites or if they could be so fond as to think the Rites of their own Church to be of Divine Institution yet how could they have Communion with a Church where the contrary Custom did prevail as in the cases abovesaid And as it was then so it is now with all stated and settled Churches in the World who do Practise against this Principle and either expect not or are not able to find a Command for every thing established amongst them and that Practise with as much contrariety to each other as the Church of Rome and Milain once did So in some Churches they receive the Lord's Supper Kneeling in some Standing in others Sitting In some they Sprinkle the Child in Baptism but once and in others thrice Now there would be no reconciling of these one to another and no possibility of holding Communion with them under these circumstances or of being a Member of any Church if we must have an institution for every thing done in the Worship of God and that we must joyn in nothing which has it not As for Instance what Church is there in the World which has not some form or forms of Prayer and whose Service for the most part generally speaking is not made up of them especially that doth not use them in the Administration of the Sacraments But now if a Person holds that whatever is not prescribed is unlawful and that forms of Prayer are no where prescribed then he cannot joyn with the Church so using but while in the body of the Church by residence he must be no Member of that Body in Communion Nay further if this be true then none must hold Communion with them who are of this Opinion since those that pretend most to it and urge it as a reason against Communion with us live in contradiction to it and do Practise and Use things which they have no more Authority nor can give more reason for than we do for the things they condemn and that is that they are lawful expedient and convenient As for Example let us consider the Sacraments in which if any thing we might expect particular Prescription because they are meer Institutions where do they find that the Baptized Person is necessarily to be Sprinkled What Command or Example have they for it or what reason more than the reason of the thing taken from expedience and the general Practice of the Church of God in colder Climates And yet this is as much used amongst them that pretend to keep exactly to the Rule of Scripture as it is amongst us that take a liberty in things Uncommanded but with this difference that they do it upon the supposition of a Command and so make it necessary and our Church leaves it as it is Indifferent Again where do they find a Command for Sitting at the Lord's Supper or so much as an Example For the Posture of our Saviour is left very uncertain Where again do they find a Command for the necessary use of conceived Prayer and that that and no other should be used in the publick Worship of God And that they must prove that maintain publick Forms unlawful Where again do they find it required that an Oath is to be taken by laying the Hand on the Gospel and Kissing the Book which is both a Natural and Instituted part of Worship being a Solemn Invocation of God and an Appeal to him with an acknowledgment of his Omniscience and Omnipresence his Providence and Government of the World his Truth and Justice to Right the Innocent and Punish the Guilty all which is owned and testified by Kissing that Book that God has declared this more especially in And if we more particularly descend to those that differ from us in this point Where do those of the Congregational way find that ever Christians were otherwise divided from Christians than by place or that they did combine into particular Churches so as not to be all the while reputed Members of another and might be admitted upon removal of place upon the same terms that they were of that they removed from or indeed that they were so Members of a particular as not to be Members of any or the whole Church of Christ upon their being Baptized Where do they find that Christians were gathered out of Christians and did combine into a Society Excluding those from it that would not make a Profession of their Faith and Conversion distinct from that at Baptism Where do we ever read that he that was a Minister of one Church was not a Minister all the World over as well as he that was Baptized in one was reputed a Christian and Church-Member wherever he came Again where do we read that its necessary that Ministers should be alike in Authority Power and Jurisdiction and that there is to be no difference in point of Order and Superiority amongst them Or that there are to be Elders for Governing the Church who are not Ordained to it and are in no other State after than they were before that Service both of which are held by the Presbyterians strictly so called And if it be said these respect Government but not Worship I answer the case is the same for if we are to do nothing but what is prescribed in the Worship of God because as they say it derogates from the Priestly Office of Christ and doth detract from the Sufficiency of Scripture then I say upon the like reason there must be nothing used in Church Government but what is prescribed since the Kingly Office is as much concerned in this as the Priestly in the other and the Sufficiency of Scripture in both Lastly Where do any of them find that position in Scripture that there is nothing lawful in Divine Worship but what is prescribed and that what is not Commanded is Forbidden And if there be no such position in Scripture then that can no more be true than the want of such a
by Creatures as the Sun c. for that is to consider him as Finite nor by Images and External Representations for that is to consider him as Corporeal Agreeable to his Will and so we are Forbidden all other Worship of him than what he hath appointed It s in the last of these we are concerned for I believe there will be no attempt to prove that there is any thing in our Worship that doth derogate from the perfections of God and is unsutable to his Nature further than the defects that must arise from all Worship given by Creatures to a Creator And if we come to consider it as to what he hath revealed there can be nothing deduced thence to prove Rites instituted by Men for the Solemnity of God's service to be Forbidden and which for ought I see is not attempted to be proved from this Commandment or from Scripture else where but by crowding such Rites into and representing them as a part of Divine Worship This way goes one of the most industrious in this cause Ceremonies saith he are External Rites of Religious Worship as used to further Devotion and therefore being invented by Man are of the same Nature with Images by which and at which God is Worshipped In which are no less than three mistakes As 1. he makes whatever is used to further Devotion to be Religious Worship 2. he makes it a fault in External Rites in Religious Worship that they are used to further Devotion 3. he makes External Rites taken up by Men and used for that end to be of the same Nature with Images If I shew that these are really mistakes I think that in doing so the whole argument taken from the 2. Commandment falls with it 1. He mistakes in that he makes whatever is used to further Devotion to be Religious Worship The error of which will appear from this confideration that all things relating to Divine Worship are either Parts or Adjuncts of it Parts as Prayer and the Lord's Supper Adjuncts as Form and Posture Now Adjuncts are not Parts because the Worship is intire and invariable in all the Parts of it and remains the same though the Adjuncts vary Prayer is Worship whether with a Form or without and the Lord's Supper is Worship whether Persons Kneel Sit or Stand in the receiving of it And yet though the Adjuncts are no part of Worship they further Devotion in it This those that are for conceived Prayer plead for Their Practice and this also is pleaded by those that are for a Form This do they urge that are for Sitting at the Lord's Supper and this they say that are for Kneeling so that these and the like Adjuncts do further Devotion and are for Edification is an argument used by both Now if Adjuncts are not part of Worship and may be yet used to further Devotion then the furthering Devotion by any Rite doth not in it self make that Rite so used to be Worship I acknowledge there is False Worship as well as True True Worship is of Divine Institution and False Worship is of Humane Appointment and becomes Worship when either Divine Institution is pretended for it or it s used for the same special ends that God's Worship is instituted for that is as necessary to acceptance or as a means of Grace And so I confess Adjuncts may be made parts of False Worship as many Ceremonies are in the Church of Rome but this is not the case with any things used in the Administration of Worship in our Church we plead nothing of Divine Authority to enforce them use them not as necessary nor as means of Grace after the manner we do the Word of God and the Sacraments 2. It s another mistake that its charged as a fault upon Rites in Worship that They are used to further Devotion Without this end surely they are not to be used or at least not to be encouraged for Divine Worship being the acknowledgment of God and a giving Honour to Him should have all things about it Grave and Solemn that may best sute it and promote the ends for which it s used But if Rites are used in it that have no respect to such ends they become Vain and Trifling neither worthy of that nor our Defence And therefore we justly blame the Church of Rome for the Multitude of Ceremonies used in their Worship and for such that either have no signification or whose signification is so obscure as is not easie to be observed or traced and that rather hinder than further Devotion Surely it would not so well answer the end if the Hand in Swearing was laid upon another Book as when on the Gospel nor if the Love-feasts at the Lord's Supper had been only as a Common Meal without respect to Charity signified by it 3. It s another mistake that External Rites taken up by Men and used for the furthering Devotion are made to be of the same Nature with Images This there is no foundation for for the Religious use of Images is expresly contrary to the Command of God and Forbidden because it tends to debase God in the thoughts of those that Worship him by such mediums But there is nothing in the use of such External Rites as are before spoken of that fall under the censure of either of these but that we may lawfully use them and the use of which is not therefore at all Forbidden in the 2. Commandment If there be not a Rule for all things belonging to the Worship of God the Gospel would be less perfect than the Law and Christ would not be so Faithful as Moses in the care of his Church Heb. 3. 2. which is not to be supposed The sufficiency of Scripture and Faithfulness of Christ are not to be judged of by what we fancy they should have determined but by what they have It s a plausiable Plea made by the Church of Rome for an Infallible Judge in matters of Faith that by an Appeal to him all controversies would be decided and the Peace of the Church secured But notwithstanding all the advantages which they so hugely amplify there is not one Word in Scripture which in a matter of that importance is absolutely necessary that doth shew that it is necessary or were it so who the Person or Persons are that should have this Power or Commission And in this case we must be content to leave things as the Wisdom of God hath thought fit to leave them and to go on in the old way of sober and amicable debate and fair reasoning to bring debates to a conclusion Thus it is in the matter before us the pretence is very Popular and Plausible that Who can better determine things Relating to the Worship of God than God whose Worship it is And where may we expect to find them better determined than in his Word which is sufficient to all the ends it was writ for But when we come to enquire
into the case we find no such thing done no such care taken no such particular directions as they had under the Law and therefore its certain that neither the sufficiency of Scripture nor Faithfulness of Christ stand upon that foundation And if we do not find the like particular prescriptions in Baptism as Circumcision nor in the Lord's Supper as in the Passover nor in Prayers as in Sacrifices its plain that the sufficiency of Scripture and Faithfulness of Christ do respect somewhat else and that they are not the less for the want of them Christ was Faithful as Moses To him that appointed him in performing what belonged to him as a Mediator in which respect Moses was a Type of him and discovering to Mankind in Scripture the method and means by which they might be Sav'd and the sufficiency of Scripture is in being a sufficient means to that end and putting Men into such State as will render them capable of attaining to it And as for modes and circumstances of things they are left to the prudence of those who by the Grace and the Word of God have been converted to the Truth and have received it in the Love of it I have been the larger in the consideration of this principle viz. that Nothing but what is prescribed may be lawfully used in Divine Worship that I might relieve the consciences of those that are Insnared by it and that cannot be so without subjecting themselves to great inconveniences For if nothing but what is of that Nature may be used or joyned with and that the second Commandment doth with as much Authority Forbid the use of any thing not Commanded as the Worshipping of Images If Nadab's and Abihu's Strange Fire and Vzza's touching of the Ark be examples Recorded for caution to us and that every thing Uncommanded is of the like Nature attended with the like Aggravations and alike do expose to God's Displeasure If the use of any thing not prescribed be such an addition to the Word of God as leaves us under the Penalty of that Text If any Man shall add unto these things God shall add unto him the Plagues that are Written in this Book we cannot be too cautious in the Examination of what is or what is not prescribed But withall if this be our case it would be more intolerable than that of the Jews For amongst them every thing for the most part was plainly laid down and though the particular Rites and Circumstances prescribed in their Service were many yet they were sufficiently describ'd in their Law and it was but consulting that or Those whose Office and Employment it was to be well versed in it and they might be presently inform'd and as soon see it as the Book was laid open This they all agreed in But it is not so under the Gospel and there is no greater proof of it than the several schemes drawn up for Discipline and Order by those that have been of that Opinion and made some attempts to describe them And then when things are thus dark and obscure so hard to trace and discover that it has thus perplexed and baffled those that have made it their business to bring these things within Scripture Rules how perplexed must they be that are not skilled in it And as I have above shewed must all their Days live in the Communion its likely of no Church since though a Church should have nothing in it but what is prescribed yet it would take up a great deal of time to examine and more to be satisfied that all in it is prescribed 3. I shall consider How we may know what things are Indifferent in the Worship of God I may answer to this that we may know what is Indifferent in the Worship of God by the same Rule that we may know what is Indifferent out of Worship that is if the thing to be enquired after be neither required nor Forbidden For the Nature of Indifferency is always the same and what it is in one kind or instance it is in all and if the want of a Law to Require or Forbid doth make a thing Indifferent in Natural or Civil matters it doth also the same in Religious And in things Forbidden by Humane Authority the not being required in Scripture and in things required by Humane Authority the not being Forbidden in Scripture is a Rule we may safely determine the case and judge of the Lawfulness and Indifferency of things in Divine Worship by But I confess the Question requires a more particular Answer because things in their Nature Lawful and Indifferent may yet in their use and application become unlawful As it is in Civil cases and Secular matters to be Covered or Uncovered is a thing in it self Indifferent but to be Covered in the presence of such of our Betters as Custom and Law have made it our Duty to stand bare before would be unlawful and it would be no excuse for such an Omission and Contempt that the thing is in it self Indifferent And then much more will this hold where the case is of an higher Nature as it is in the Worship of God where things in themselves Indifferent may become Ridiculous Absurd and Profane and argue rather contempt of God than reverence for him in the Persons using them Again the things may though Grave and Pertinent yet be so numerous that they may obscure and oppress the Service and confound and distract the Mind that should attend to the Observation of them and so for one reason or another are not to be allowed in the Solemnities of Religion Therefore in Answer to the Question I shall add 1. That things Indifferent are so called from their general Nature and not as if in practice and use and all manner of cases they always were so and never unlawful for that they may be by Accident and Circumstance being lawful unlawful expedient or inexpedient as they are used and applied 2. I observe that there are several Laws which things Indifferent do respect and that may be Required or Forbidden by one Law which is not Forbidden or Required by another and that may be Indifferent in one State which is Unlawful in another and by passing out of one into the other may cease to be Indifferent and therefore when we say things are Indifferent we must understand of what Rank they are and what Law they do respect As for example Humane Conversation and Religious Worship are different Ranks to which things are referred and therefore what may be Indifferent in Conversation may be unlawful in Worship Thus to Enterchange Discourse about Common Affairs is a thing lawful in it self and useful in its place but when practised in the Church and in the midst of Religious Solemnities is Criminal This distinction of Ranks and States of things is useful and necessary to be observed and which if observed would have prevented the objection made by some that if a Church or Authority may
others would choose Sitting as the dissenting Parties amongst us and some Forreign Churches others be for the Posture of Kneeling used in ours and many more and all with some shew of reason In these different cases it may not perhaps be so easy for a Person Educated in a different way from what is Practised and Prescribed to Judge of the Decency or Edification but if he find it not Indecent or Destructive of Piety and of the ends for which the Ordinance was Instituted he is therewith to satisfy himself St. Austin puts a like case and gives the like answer Some Churches Fast on the Saturday because Christ's Body was then in the Grave and he in a State of Humiliation Others do Eat on the Saturday both because that Day God Rested from his Work and Christ Rested in the Grave And how in such a case to Determine our selves both in Opinion and Practice that Father thus directs If saith he what is injoyned be not against Faith or good Manners it is to be accounted Indifferent And I may add if it be not Indecent Disorderly and Destructive of Piety its lawful 3. If the case be not apparent and we cannot easily find out how the things used and injoyned in a Church are Decent c. we are to consider that we are in or Obliged to be of a Church and that these things do respect such a Society and therefore are to be Cautious how we Condemn this or that for Indecent Confused and Inexpedient when we see Christians agreeing in the Practice of them and such whom for other things we cannot Condemn When we find if we argue against it they argue for it and produce Experience against Experience and Reason against Reason and that we have a whole Church against our particular conceptions of things of this Nature we should be apt to think the Fault may be in our selves and that it s for want of Understanding and Insight for want of Use and Tryal and by Reason of some Prejudices or Prepossessions that we thus differ in our Judgment from them We see what little things do Determin Men ordinarily in these matters how addicted some are to their own Ways and Customs and forward to Like or Condemn according to their Education which doth form their conceptions and fix their inclinations how Prone again others are to Novelty and Innovation So St. Austin observes some warmly contend for an usage because its the Custom of their own Church as if they come suppose into another Place where Lent is observed without any Relaxation they however refuse to Fast because it s not so done in their Country There are others again do like and are bent upon a particular Rite or Usage Because saith he they observ'd this in their Travels abroad and so a Person is for it as perhaps he would be thought so much the more Learned and Considerable as he is distant or doth disagree from what is observed at home Now when Persons are Prone thus to Judge upon such little Reasons and may mistake in their Judgment and do Judge against a Church which they have no other Reason against it would become them to think again and to think that the case perhaps requires only time or use to wear off their Prejudices and that by these ways they may as effectually be reconciled to the things Practised in a Church as they are to the Civil Usages and the Habits of a Nation which at the first they looked upon in their kind as Indecent and Inexpedient as they can do of the Usages of a Church in theirs As suppose the Dispute should be about Forms of Prayer or the use of responsals in it we see that Decency Order and Edification are pleaded by the Parties contending for and against but when a Person considers that whatever Opinion he therein hath yet if he be against them he is at the same time against all formed Churches in the World he may conclude safely that there is a Decency Order and Expediency in the Publick use of them and as St. Austin saith of a Christian living in Rome where they fasted upon the Saturday that such a one should not so praise a Christian City for it as to Condemn the Christian World that was against it so we should not be so Zealous against a Practice as to Condemn those that are for it and be so addicted to our own Opinion as to set that against a Community and a Church nay against all Churches whatsoever This will give us reason to suspect its a Zeal without Knowledge when we presume to set our Judgment Reason and Experience against the Judgment Reason and Experience of the Christian World Which brings to the Fourth General 4. How are we to determine our selves in the use of Indifferent things with respect to the Worship of God For resolution of which we are to consider our selves in a threefold Capacity 1. As particular Persons solitary and alone 2. As we are in Ordinary and Civil Conversation 3. As we are Members of a Publick Society or Church In the first capacity every Christian may chuse and act as he pleaseth and all Lawful things remain to him as they are in their own Nature Free He may eat this or that chuse this day or another and set it apart for the Service of God and his own soul. In this state where there is no Law of man to require he may forbear to use what is Indifferent where there is no Law to forbid he may freely use it In the second capacity as in Conversation with others he is to have a regard to them and to use his Liberty so as shall be less to the prejudice and more to the benefit of those he converses with So saith the Apostle all things are lawful for me but all things are not expedient all things are lawful for me but all things Edify not In this capacity Men are still in their own Power and whilst it s no Sin they may safely act and where it s no Sin they may forbear in complyance with those that are not yet advanced to the same Maturity of Judgement with themselves as the Apostle did Though saith he I be free from all Men yet have I made my self Servant unto all that I might gain the more And unto the Jews I became a Jew c. In such a case the strong should not despise affront or discourage the weak nor the weak censure and condemn the strong In the third Capacity as we are Members of a Church and Religious Society so the use of Indifferent things comes under further consideration since then the Practice of a Church and the Commands of Authority are to be respected And as what we may lawfully do when alone we are not to do in Conversation because of Offence So what we may allowably do when alone or in Conversation we must not do in Society if Forbidden by the Laws and
Customs of it For the same reason if there was no more that Restrains or Determines us in Conversation is as much more forcible in Society as the Peace and Welfare of the whole is to be preferred before that of a part And if the not grieving a Brother or endangering his Soul makes it reasonable just and necessary to forego our Liberty and to Restrain our selves in the exercise of it then much more is the Peace of a Church upon which the present Welfare of the whole and the Future Welfare of many depend a sufficient reason for so doing and to Oblige us to act or not to act accordingly The Apostle saith Let every one of us please his Neighbour for his good to Edification that is to his Improvement in Knowledge or Grace or Christian Piety and the promoting of Christian Concord and Charity Now Edification is eminently so with respect to the whole as the Church is the House of God and every Christian one of the living Stones of which that Spiritual building is compacted and so he is to consider himself as well as he is to be considered as a part of it and to study what may be for the Edification of the whole as well as the good of any particular Member of it And how is that but by promoting Love Peace and Order and taking Care to Preserve it So we find Edification Opposed to Destruction to Confusion to Disputacity and Licentiousness And on the contrary we find Peace and Edifying Comfort and Edification Union and Edification joyned together as the one doth promote the other And therefore as the Good and Edification of the whole is to be always in our Eye so it s the Rule by which we ought to act in all things lawful and to that end should comply with its Customs observe its Directions and Obey its Orders without Reluctancy and Opposition Thus the Apostle resolves the case Writing about publick Order and the Custom newly taken up of Worshipping Uncovered if any Man seem or have a mind to be contentious we have no such Custom neither the Churches of God looking upon that as sufficient to put an end to all Contentions and Debates that whatever might be Plausibly urged against it from the Jewish Practice and the Representation even of Angels adoring after that manner and from the reason of the thing as a signification of Shame and Reverence or from the Practice of Idolators that did many of them Worship Uncovered yet he peremptorily concludes We have no such Custom c. The Peace of the Church is to a Peaceable Mind sufficient to put an end to all Disputes about it and the Peace of the Church depending upon the Observation of its Customs that is infinitely to be preferred before Scrupulosity and Niceness or a meer inclination to a contrary Practice For in publick cases a Man is not to go his own way or to have his own mind for that would bring in Confusion one Man having as much a right as another There must be somewhat Established some Common Order and Bond of Union and if Confusion is before such Establishment then to break that Establishment would bring in Confusion and where that is likely to ensue it is not worth the while for the trial of a new experiment to decry and throw down what is already Established or Used in a Church because we think better of another for saith a Grave Author and well Skill'd in these matters The very change of a Custom though it may happen to profit yet doth disturb by its Novelty Publick Peace is worth all new Offers if the Church is Disquieted and its Peace Endangered by them though in themselves better and it is better to labour under the infirmity of publick Order than the mischief of being without it or what is next to that the trial of some Form seemingly of a better Cast and Mould that hath not yet been experimented I say it again Infirmity in a Church is better than Confusion or Destruction which is the Consequent of it And I had rather choose that as I would a House to have one with some Faults rather than to have none at all And if I cannot have them mended when tolerable I think my self bound not only to bear with them but to do all I can for its preservation though with them and to observe all things that are lawful for its suppore and encouragement In doing thus I serve God and his Church my own Soul and the Souls of others promote Religion and Charity in the World For God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace in all the Churches of the Saints In things which neither we nor the Worship are the worse for but the Church the better for observing Peace and Order is far to be prefer'd before Niceties And certainly neither we nor the Service of God can be the worse for what God hath concluded nothing in What the Gospel looks at is the Main and Essential parts of Religion in Doctrine Worship and Practice And if these be Secured we are under no Obligation to contend for or against the modes and circumstances of things further than the Churches Order and Peace is concerned in them So the Apostle Let not your Good be Evil spoken of For the Kingdom of God is not Meat and Drink but Righteousness Peace and Joy in the Holy-Ghost the promoting Love and Charity and substantiul Righteousnes He that in these things Serveth Christ is acceptable to God and approved of Men. The Beauty of the Kings Daughter is within saith St. Austin and all its observations are but its vesture which though various in different Churches are no prejudice to the Common Faith nor to him that useth them And therefore what he and his Mother received from St. Ambrose and looked upon as a Divine Oracle is worthy to be recommended to all That in all things not contrary to Truth and good Manners it becometh a Good and Prudent Christian to Practise according to the Custom of the Church where he comes if he will not be a Scandal to them nor have them to be a Scandal to him And if the Custom and Practice of a Church should be thus taken into consideration by a Good Man then certainly much more ought it so to be when that is Established and is made a Law and is backed by Authority For then to stand in Opposition is not only an Offence but an Affront and to insist upon the Gratifying our own Inclination against publick Order is to contend whether we or our Superiours shall Govern whether our Will or the publick Good and Order must take place And what can be the Issue of such a temper but the distraction if not Dissolution of Government which as it cannot be without Governed as well as Governours so cannot be preserved without the submission of the Governed in all lawful things to
the Governours and the permitting them to choose and determine in things of that kind as they shall see meet It s pleaded That there should be a Liberty left to Christians in things Vndetermined in Scripture and such things indeed there are that Christians may have a Liberty in and yet hold Communion as in Posture c. though Decency would plead for Uniformity in those things also but there are other things which they must agree in or else there can be no publick Worship or Christian Communion which yet they differ in as much as the other As now whether Worship is to be celebrated with or without a Form whether the Lord's Supper is to be received in the Morning or Evening whether Prayers should be long or short c. Now unless one of these disagreeing Parties doth Yield to the other or there be a Power in Superiours and Guides to determine for them and they are to submit to them in it there will be nothing but confusion And why Superiours may not then Command and why Inferiours are not to obey in all things of the like kind In Posture or Habit as well as the time above specified and Forms I understand not To conclude this if we find any thing required or generally practised in a Church that is not Forbidden in Scripture or any thing Omitted or Forbidden in a Church that is not required in Scripture we may and ought to act or to forbear as they that are of its Communion do generally act or forbear or the Laws of that Communion require and in such things are to be determined by the publick Voice of the Communion that is Authority Custom or the Majority But to this it will be said If we are thus to be determined in our Practice then where is our Christian Liberty which being only in different things if we are restrained in the use of them we are also restrained in our Liberty which yet the Apostle exhorts Christians to stand fast in 1. This is no argument to those that say there is nothing Indifferent in the Worship of God for then there is nothing in it matter of Christian Liberty 2. A restraint of our Liberty or receding from it is of it self no violation of it All persons grant this in the latter and the most scrupulous are apt to plead that the Strong ought to bear with the Weak and to give no Offence to them by indulging themselves in that Liberty which others are afraid to take But now if a Person may recede from his Liberty and is bound so to do in the case of Scandal and yet his Liberty be not thereby infringed why may it not be also little infringed when restrained by others How can it be supposed that there should be so vast a difference betwixt restraint and restraint and that he that is restrained by Authority should have his Liberty prejudiced and yet he that is restrained By anothers Conscience as the Apostle saith should keep it intire And if it should be said this is Occasional but the other is perpetuated by the Order perhaps of a Church I answer that all Orders about Indifferent things are but temporary and are only intended to bind so long as they are for the good of the Community And if they are for continuance that alters not the case For though the Apostle knew his own Liberty and where there was Just Reason could insist upon it yet he did not suppose that could be damnified though for his whole life it was restrain'd For thus he resolves If meat make my Brother to offend I will eat no flesh while the World standeth which certainly he would not have condescended to if such a practice was not reconcileable to his Exhortation of standing fast in that Liberty c. 3. Therefore to find out the tendency of his Exhortation its fit to understand what Christian Liberty is and that is truly no other than the Liberty which Mankind naturally had before it was restrain'd by particular Institution and which is call'd Christian Liberty in opposition to the Jews which had it not under their Law but were restrain'd from the practice and use of things otherwise and in themselves Lawful by severe Prohibitions Now as all the World was then divided into Jews and Gentiles so the Liberty which the Jews were before denied was call'd Christian because by the coming of Christ all these former restraints were taken off and all the World both Jews and Gentiles did enjoy it And therefore when the Apostle doth exhort them to stand fast in it it was as the Scope of the Epistle doth shew to warn them against returning to that Jewish state and against those who held it necessary for both Jew and Gentile still to observe all the Rites and Orders of it Now if the Usages of a Church were of the same kind or had the same tendency or were alike necessarily impos'd as those of the Mosaical Law then Christians would be concerned in the Apostles Exhortation but where these reasons are not our Liberty is not at all prejudiced by compliance with them As long I say as they are neither peccant in their Nature nor End nor Number they are not unlawful to us nor is our Liberty injured in the use of them And so I am brought to the last General which is V. That there is nothing required in our Church which is not either a duty in it self and so necessary to all Christians or else what is indifferent and so may be lawfully used by them By things required I mean such as are used in the Communion and Service of our Church and imposed upon the Lay-members of it for these are the things my Subject doth more especially respect This is a Subject too Copious for me to follow through all the particulars of it and indeed it will be needless for me to enlarge upon it if the foundation I have laid be good and the Rules before given are fit measures for us to Judge of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of things by for by these we shall soon bring the Cause to an Issue I think there is nothing to be charged upon our Church for being defective in any Essential part of Divine Worshipâ— as the Church of Rome is in its Half-Communion nor of any practice that is apparently inconsistent with or that doth defeat the ends of any Institution as the same Church doth offend by having its Service in an unknown Tongue and in the multitude of its Ceremonies I think it will be acknowledged that the Word of God is sincerely and freely Preached the Sacraments intirely and truly Administred the Prayers for matter inoffensive and good And therefore the matter in dispute is about the Ministration of our Worship and the manner of its performance and I think the things of that kind Objected against refer either to Time or Forms or Gesture To Times such are Festivals or Days set apart for