effect Sacram. l 2 cap. 31. Balthasar Chavassius l. 1. cap. 21. and l. 2. cap. 7. where from hence they dispute against Calvin by name â—ccius sayth Musculus upon this place In his Commune places in the title of humane traditions citeth these words of the Apostle let all things be done c. To justifie the traditioÌ„s of the Bishopâ— as authentick suâ—h as ought to be kept with a Câ—nsciencie of obedience but this praescript of the Apostle is not to be applied to any Episcopall traditions but the Apostles owne to wit such as he had delivered to the Churches Our Divines fâ—w of note excepted doe onely from hence conclude rites of mere order and decencie And some of the graver Papists Ad decentiam pertinet no mulieres in Ecclesia loquantur ad ordinem ne plure simul loquantur to this day can finde no more in it as Esius in his Comm. upon the place It belongs to decencie that women speak not in the Church to order that many speak not at once What is now become of All Fathers All Divines for one and the same conclusion M r. Hooker pag. 95. doeth directly oppose the Def. his conclusion contending that the Rules set downe in this place are the Rules of naturall reason and not of the Apostle or properlie of the Scripture For if this be true then that is false which the Def. so confidently averreth that the Apostle doeth here grant a generall license and authoritie to all Churches to ordeyne Ceremonies except the Apostle did give Churches licence and authoritie to doe that which by the law of nature they might doe and by the light of nature know they might 3. The Def. was requested to shew by what Logick he formeth his consequence from order decencie and aedification unto suche Ceremonies as ours The Rej. hath no other Logick to shew for it then this Sundrie Divines doe manifest the Consequence because the same particular circumstances woâ—ld not be comely and to aedification in all places and times the Churche must have power to institute and alter them But 1. this is not the consequence meant by the Repl. expressed by the Def. The Apostle sayth let all thinges be doen orderly decently and to aedification Ergo he granteth a generall licence and authoritie to all Churches to ordeyne any Ceremonies that may be fitte for the better sâ—rving of God 1. e. suche as ours are Neyther yet is the Consequence which the Rej. would have implied by the Def. upon supposition of the former The Apostle hath granted a generall licence and authoritie to all Churches to ordayne Ceremonies that may be fit for the better serving of God Ergo all Rites and Ceremonies which are beside the prescription of the word suche as ours are are not unlawfull It is in deed the very same sentence which the Rejoynder did so spurne from him pag. 72. when it appeared under the name of M r. Iacob in the distinction betwixt mere Circumstances Civill or Occasionall and Ceremonies meerly Ecclesiasticall What a miserable cause is this that our Opposites defende which deeply concerneth the Consciences of all that urge our Ceremonies or allow of their urging and yet cannot be fathered but on one onely place of Scripture and that with an invisible and inexplicable consequence Concerning an Argument against our Ceremonies out of 1. Corin. 14. Which is acknowledged to be the onely place in all the New Testament that can be alledged for their imposing 1. THe Replier seeing that all the cause on the imposers part dependeth on this place of Scripture finding nothing by any Logick could be drawne from it for our Ceremonies thought good to trie if there may not from the same place be formed a better argument against them This the Rej. calleth beating up of a new Hare and loosing the way as if all the Def. his Retortions and all the Rejoynder his paper shot which he maketh after the Repl. when he imagineth him ro flie or runne away were new Hares and exorbitations I know not else what privilege he hath to use a weight and a weight one for the Defend with him self and another for the Replier 2. The Argument is thus put together by the Rej. pag. 77. All that is left unto the Churches libertie in things pertayning to Gods worship is to order them in comely manner But to appointe and use the Ceremonies as wee doe is not to order in comely manner any thinge perteyning to Gods worship Therfore to appointe and use the Ceremonies as we doe is not left to the libertie of the Churche I. e. it is unlawfull The Rejoynder answereth first to the proposition and then to the assumption but so as he mingleth both together in many words Yet I will follow his order 3. First of all he denieth the proposition to be found in the Repl. his meaning But I can see no reason of this deniall 1. Hee sayth that Order and Ordering is taken sometime largely for all discipline or policie sometime strictly for rancking of persons and actions handsomely one before and another after and so is opposed onely to confusion as in this place 1. Cor. 14.40 Now this is farâ— from overthrowing the proposition in the Repl. his meaning For the Repl. meant order in the strict sense which maketh also for his purpose and this the Rej. granteth to be the meaning of the Apostle in this place 1 Cor. 14.40 Which place the same Rej. pag 75. confesseth to be the onely place in the N. Test. by which power is given to the Churche to constitute Cerem FroÌ„ both which layd together it necessarily followeth that all which is left unto the Churches power under the title of order is ordeyning in the strict sense 1. e. rancking of persons and actions handsomely as the Rejoynder expoundeth it Yet immediatly after he accuseth the Repl. for saying order to be the right placing and disposing of thinges instituted for time place etc. not shewing why this disliketh him or wherin differeth from his owne explication Onely he sayth that etc. often by the Repl. put to time and place is a blind Whiche is not so for by etc. is meant all circumstances of like nature with time and place as number measure vicissitude etc. How many Psalmes shall be sunge or chapter read what and how muche Scripture shall be at this or that assemblie expounded how one part of worship shall succeed another etc. without a blinde 4. In the next place the Rejoynder findeth a wrong meaning in the Repl. his use of the phraze in comely manner because afterward in the ende of the Assumtion he sayth that comelinesse is nothing but the seemelinesse of order For sayth the Rej. beside that comelinesse of order ther is other comelinesse Now this the Repl. professeth immediatly after the words quoted other where comelinesse may conteyne all naturall and civil handsomenesse etc. Neyther will I contend about this but it implieth so muche in this
non-residents Pluralists c. Neither is this denied by the Rej. so manifeâ—â— is the truth of it Onely that he may not be altogetheâ— silent he alledgeth that this being true yet the Def. his speech standeth unshaken viz. Theis Ceremonies are established by Canons But I thinke if the Convocations be such as have beene shewed the credit and authority both of them and their Canons is so shaken that they can affoard little establishment to the Ceremonies iâ— any free judgment CHAP. XI Sect. 2. Concerning the good and evill which our Convocations have done AMong the Objections mentioned against our Convocations one appendix was that in memory of man they never concluded any thing for the comâ—on good of the Church more than by others was better done 〈◊〉 their hands but much evill hath come from them and more â—ould if their commission had served thereto Now because â—his is a weighty charge and enough to sleight all their â—uthority if it be true t is worthy to be severally and diâ—igently considered what their Advocate can alledge to the contrary If in this point he be brought to a nihil diâ—it then let him for ever holde his peace about such Convocations 1. The first answer is that the accusation is not true unâ—esse the Agreement of the Articles of Faith and Religion were not good But 1. this being graunted to be good yet the accusation may be true because this Act of An. 1571. can hardly be sayd to have beene concluded within the memory of man 2. It may well be quaestioned whether in this our Convocation hath done that which was not better done to their hands To which purpose it shall not be extravagant nor unprofitable to compare a little the Articles as they were set forth in King Edwards dayes Anno 1552. with the edition which the Convocation of Anno 1571. hath left us In the former we find this Article De Gratia Gratia Christi seu Spiritus Sanctus qui per eundem datur cor lapideum ausert dat cor carneum ex nolentibus qua recta sunt volentes facit ex volentibus prava nolentes reddit The Grace of Christ or the Holy Spirit which is given by him takes away the heart of stone and gives an heart of flesh such as were unwilling to things lawfull he makes willing and such as willed things unlawfull he makes unwilling Which Article is I know not wherefore left out in the later edition This I am sure of that if the sayd Article had beene renued in the same manner as it was first set downe it had beene one barre more than now is found against those among us which follow Arminius and his Remonstrants one warrant for publique preaching against them Secondly in the Arâ—iâ—le of Iustification it was before sayd that the doctrine by sole faith in that sense in which it is explained in the Homily of Iustifâ—cation Eâ— sensu quo in Homilia de Iustifâ—catione explicatur is most certaine Now in the later edition this most certaine is left out and for co sensu is putt in an ambiguous terme ut Whatsoever was the occasion or meaning of this change the former words were more full against those that broach new doctrines about Iustification such as D r. Iackson doeth in his booke of Iustifying Faith Thirdly in the Article oâ— Sacraments the former editioÌ„ had that the efficacy of theÌ„ is not from the worke done Ex opere operato quâ— vox ut perâ—â—ira est 〈◊〉 lite is 〈…〉 minime â—â—um 〈◊〉 adnâ—dâ—m superstitusum which expression in their Latine as it is strange and not knowne in holy writt so it carrieth wâ—th it a sense savouring little of piety but much of superstition Which words if they had beene still retained as they are not some superstitious conceites about the SacrameÌ„â—s might by them have beene suppressed Fourthly In the Article De Coena Domini the olde edition had theis words Seing it is required to the true being of humaine nature Qâ—â—m naturae huâ—anae veriâ—as requirat ut umus etusdem aâ— homiâ—is corpus in multis locis simul esse non possit sed in uno aliquo definitâ— loco esse operteat ideirco Christi corpus in multis diversis locis eodem tempore praesens esse non potest Et quontam ut tradunt sacrae literae Christus in coelum fuit sublatus ibi usque ad finem seculi est permansurus non debet quisguam fidelium carnis eius sanguinis realem corporalem ut lâ—quuÌ„tur praesentiam in Eucharistiâ vel credere vel profiteri that the body of one and the same man cannot be in many places at â—â—ce but must be in some one definite place therefore the body 〈◊〉 Christ cannot be present in many and diverse places at the â—â—me time And because as holy Scriptures deliver to us â—hrist was taken up into heaven and is there to remaine unto â—he end of the world none of the faithfull ought to believe or â—rofesse any reall and as they speake corporall presence of his â—â—esh and bloud in the Sacrament In the new edition all â—his is blotted out which yet had good use against the â—utheran errour of ConsubstantiatioÌ„ Fiftly In the Arâ—â—cle of Traditions theis words not found in the former â—dition are conveyed into the later Every particular or â—ational church hath authority of instituting chaÌ„ging or abroâ—ating Cere or Ecclesiasticall rites instituted onely by humaine â—uthority so that all be done to aedification This addition â—emeth to be added for the better advauncing of huâ—aine Ceremonies Sixtly The Article about the books â—f forme is very much transformed to the wronging of â—ubscribers Quaelibet Ecclesia particularis sive nationalis authoritatem habet instituendi mutandi aut abrogandi Ceremonias aut â—itus Ecclesiasticos humanâ taÌ„tùm authoritate institutes modo omnia ad aedificationem fiant For formerly it affirmed onely that the â—ooke of service and that of Ordination of Ministers 〈◊〉 farr as câ—ncerned trueth of dâ—ctrine are good c. but â—â—ow in the later this limitation quoad doctrinae veritaâ—â—m is left out and in stead thereof is added Quoad doctrina veritatem that the â—ooke of Consecration and Orâ—ination containeth â—â—l things necessary thereunto and that it hath noâ—hing in it of it selfe either superstitious or impious and â—hat all that be consecrated and ordained according â—o it are orderly and lawfully consecrated and orâ—eined Theis changes well considered I thinke D. B. himselfe will confesse that there was no great good done in the second edition of the Articles concerning Faith and Religion Yet be it so that this was a good worke of our Convocation what a poore commendation is one good worke of a Mother-Church in a whole generation or age of her children Pauperis est tumerare peous T is for the poore to tell their store But for a shepheard in
eyther of faith or sanctimonie or necessitie Nor Bell. himself in that place Neyther is the question there handled of poyntes of faith or thinges absolutlie necessarie to sanctimonie All double treble Ceremonies reductively Sacramentall and worship are by the Rej. his owne dictates double sacred and that is it which Iunius meaneth by divine 3. Bell sayth that the addition forbidden Deut. 4. is of lawes contraâ—ie to the law of God Wherunto Iunius n. 10. answereth tâ—at any lawes at all added to Gods laws are contrarie to the law of God speaking of proper laws without any backing of Gods law binding the Conscience as he sheweth cap. 16. n. 86.8 Here 1. the Rej. left out those words of Iunius neyther cantrarie nor beside the word which if he had translated then the Readers memorie might have recalled how this place cited before for the defeÌ„ce of that phraze was but shifted by the Rej. p. 46. 2. It is to be marked that the Def. and Rej. there answer to Deut. 4. is the same with Bel. p. 134.3 That exposition of laws without backing is of the Rej. his owne forging No suche thinge is founde in the places quoted nor yet did Bel. professe to defeÌ„de any suche thing Of binding the Conscience enough hath been sayd in the head of Difference betwixt our Ceremonies and Popish 4. Iunius n. 12. answering to Bellarmines his saying that God in the N.T. gave onely the common laws of faith and Sacram. leaving the specialls to the Churche etc. affirmeth Gods laws to be perfect re ratione modo and those of the Churche to be but Canons and disposings of conveniencie for better observing of divine lawes Where note 1. an example of an etc. for a blinde or blindinge which the Rejoynder formerly tould of For in that ete is conteyned pro locorum temporum diversitate quia non possunt diversissimi populi conuenire in ijsdem legibus ritibus 1 e. for this cause speciall laws of rituall thinges are left to the Churches libertie because of varietie which falleth out now by occasion of times and places Which is the very thinge that the Rejoynder pawned his credite Bell. never sayde pag. 15.16 Note also 2. that Iunius doeth not in this place meÌ„tion Canons as the Rej. pleaseth to alter his words in reciting of them But Cautions and dispositions Now a Caution about the performance of any thing is not an institution of a new thing 3. Iunius is found to say as muche as he was alledged for and to the contrarie we have from the Rejoynder a nihil dicit 5. Iunius n. 13. sayth onely that Christ is the onely law-giver that is to give lawes that in themselvs and by the very authorite of the law-maker doe binde the conscience As if Iunius in confuting of Bell. did onely say the very same thing with him that he goeth about to confute for Bellarmine in that very place sayth Christ is the cheife law-giver who by his owne Authority can judge and make lawes Christus soluteâ—â— legislator crimaâ—us qui potest suâ propriâ authoritate judicare leges ferre Now out of all these allegations the Rejoynder maketh his interrogatories 1. Where be these words all that is requisite as spoken of Rites and Ceremonies Answer the sense of these words as spoken of all Ceremonies above mere order and decencie is cap. 16.86.2 Where finde you in IunÃus that the Churche may constitute no new thinge Ans. cap. 17. n. 9. this in things Divine is to turne aside Hoc in diviniâ— rebut est declinate for the Rejoynder his interpretation of those words that they mean poynts of faith and necessarie rules of sanctimonie is confuted by conference of Bellarmines words there opposed who in that place instanceth in Ceremoniaâ—l and Iudiciall laws and speaketh not at all of faith and necessarie sanctimonie 3. Where are those words ordering in seemly manner Ans. cap. 16. n. 86. those onely humane lawes are necessarie in the Churche which make that all thinges be doen decently and in order 1. Cor. 14.40 4. If the Churche may appoint no new thinge but onely see to decencie and order then sayth the Rej. what patent hath she to make particular ordinances for time and place unlesse these be no new things I Ans. 1. Time and place considered as mere occasionall circumstances are no more new thinges in Gods service then concreated time and place were new things in Creation distinct from the created world And Calvin inst l. 4. cap. 10. sect 22. severely censureth those that call suche kinde of determinations new lawes Quis nisi calumniator sic novam ferriâ—b ijs legem dicat quos constant duntaxat scandalis occuâ—rere quae sunt a Domino satis diserte prohibita If procuring that scandals be avoided be no new thinge then neyther is procuring that disorder and undecencie for time place etc. be avoyded any new thinge As for a patent to appoint double treble sacred Ceremonies it is a vayn thing for them to plead it that cannot shew it under the great Seal I doe not thinke that any earthly Kinge would have his subjects submit theÌ„selves to that power which is fetched out of a Patent invisible and onely avouched by conjectures 7. A reason was given of the foresaid proposition out of Iun. de Transl. Imp. l. 1. c. 2. n. 26.27.31 viz. that the Churche hath onely a Ministerie to observe suche thinges as Christ hath appointed not authoritie of appointing new thinges Here the Rejoynder 1. observeth that those words new things have no foot steps in Iunius As if new things could be appointed lawfully without authoritie of appointing Surely he that denieth all authoritie of appointing and leaveth onely ministeriall performance of things appointed he denieth appointing of new thinges 2. He argueth thus If the Churche have a ministerie to appoint and doe suche thinges as Christ hath commanded then must she needs have a Commission legative to appoint and use rites serving to order and decencie Adde to this onely and then it is not onely that but all that which we require 3. He crieth out of miserable perversion eyther by grosse negligence or mistaking And why so I pray Because forsooth all that Iunius sayth is good to prove that no Ecclesiasticall person hath any power by his calling over temporall Princes But this is nothing against their delegated dependant power by Commission But 1. these are very strange distinctions they have not any power by their calling but some by commission They have not any power over temporall Princes though they be members of the Churche but over the Churche they have 2. The Rejoynder maketh Iunius onely to denie that which Bellarmine never affirmed viz. absolute independent power of Ecclesiasticall persons as supreme Lords Nay Bellarmin answereth to Calvin in the very same manner that the Rejoynder doeth The Pope is not the cheife lawgiver but the vicar of Christ Pontisex non est legislator primarius â—ed Vicarius
which concerns Protestation and in stead therof to turne them unto Commendation Did ever any that writ for our Ceremonies write suche an Epistle as Zanchies unto Queen or Kinge Can they say so muche and doe as they doe Nay is ther any Bishop that dare license Zanchie his Epistles to Queene Eliz and B. Iewel both together for to be printed in English These thinges being so I leave it unto consideration unto whom the Rejoynder his affected censure belongeth Now wel-sare a good stomacke Hee cannot resist but hee will not yeeld SECT 20.21 Concerning Reasons against the Negative Argument from Scripture 1. THe Def. his first reason is Whatsoever is unlawfull is a trangression of some law revealed in the word Ergo against it Ergo not onely beside it The Repl. granteth all and sheweth that it is a meer fantasie before confuted as a cavill in the Replie and longe since by M r. Cartwrights 2. Rep. p. 56. not agreable to the very words of the Argument to which it is opposed Vpon this the Rejoynd powreth out words He turneth head O strange a Babe owned from the birth suckled by many Scriptures an ill favoured faced brat absurd contradictorie when he is taken in a snare he saâ—th he is mistaken And what reason hath he to back or bear out all these words with If the Scriptures sayth he condemne what soever is doen not onely against but beside tâ—e direction therof then doeth it condemne something as unlawfull for being onely beside it and not any way against it To which I answer that it doeth not follow because a thing may be onely beside the word some way and yet some way against it Onely beside the particular praescript of it and yet against the generall command of it If a Father charge his sonne or a Maister his servant first that for a certain time he doe nothing beside that which he shall bid him and then commande him for that time to read in a certain booke if that sonne or servant shall beside reading paint antick fâ—ces in his booke he shall doe onely beside the particular commande and yet against the generall charge both ways censurable Let the Rejoynder therfore spare his words and see better to his Argument or rather eat both that others be not troubled with them 2. The second reason brought by the Def. was Nothing that is indifferent can be pronounced simplie unlawfull But some Ceremonies of mans invention are indifferent Ergo not to be pronounced simplie unlawfull All whiche is granted of circumstances of Order if by invention be meant determination otherwise the Assumtion is denied Though it was added also exsuperabundante that thinges indifferent are sometime taken so generally that in that sense the proposition may be denied Against this I cannot discerne what materiall thinge is Rejoyned He sayth that it is easy to say the Assumtion is false and not to shew wherin But I have hitherto thought that it is sufficient for answer to any Argument to denie the Assumtion untill it be proved and that the falsitie of any sentence doeth consist in this that it pronounceth otherwise then the thinge is and therfore in saying an assumtion is false it is not needfull to shew wherin He sayth also that the largest sense of thinges indifferent doeth make no variation of thinges indifferent But the Author and place was named to him Sopingius in his Apologie ad lib. Anonym pag. 166. Where the case is very pertinent For Doctor Sibrandus was challenged by a Remonstrant who intituled his book Bona fides Sitrandi that as in an Epistle Dedicatorie to the Arche-Bishop of Canterbury he had to winne his favour the more against Vorstius and his declared his judgement of the Hierarchie and Ceremonies of England to be thinges indifferent so he spake of the Magistrates power under the same terme unfitly Sopingius a godly learned man whoe had beeÌ„ a Scholler under Sibrandus and so desired to help him out of this brier had no other way to doe it but by saying that all those thinges are sometime called indifferent which are not necessarie to salvation or without whiche a man may be saved Now in this sense the Repl. sayd the proposition might be denied viz. that nothing indifferent 1. e. not necessarie to salvation is unlawfull The Rejoynder â—it seemeth had not the booke and so ventured to contradict he knew not what 3. The third argument was There must needs allways be varietie of Ceremonies in severall Churches Ergo all are not praescribed The Repl. answereth that ther neyther need nor ought to be any varietie but onely in particular circumstances of order for time and place etc. Here the Rej. complayning of Coleworts and of not caring to say any thinge so it be in opposition bringeth in to the contrarie some examples of civill decencie variable according to times and places But all suche thinges the Repl. conteyned in his etc. He addeth also varietie of solemne feasts But before those can have place here it must be proved that suche feasts must needes be But sayth he never any Divine so spake before M r. Iacob And hath he soon forgotten what was even now recited by himself out of Iunius Suche kinde of Rejoynders will never be wanting 4. The Def. his fourth reason was that the Nonconformists like well that every Minister in his Parish should determine of Rites and Orders whence would follow varietie Ergo they holde some rites of humane invention and ordination lawfull To this the Rejoynder addeth as an explication in text and table that Non-Conformists set up Parish-omnipotence without referenâ—e to Bishops as some teache or to Synods as other Wherby a Minister and some of his Parishioners may ordeyne some Rites and Ceremonies for their use and the King and Churche under his authoritie may not Now before we come to the Repl. his answers unto the Def. his reason let us consider a litle the Rejoynder his addition 1. The malignant imputation of Parish omnipotencie ill beseemeth our Opposites except that they can shew more power to be given by us unto Ministers and Elders in their severall Congregations then by them is given to Bishops For untill they can shew this which they are as able to doe as to call effectually that which is not as if it were in accusing us of setting up Parish omnipotencie they confesse themselves to set up Diocesan omnipotencie Convocation-omnipotencie etc. 2. It worse beseemeth D. B. then most other except he wil confesse that he when he was Minister at the Hagh in Holland and with the consent of his people ordered thinges in that Congregation as to receyve the Communion sitting at the table to leave out the Crosse in Baptisme and Surplice in all Divine service did then and there set up Parish-omnipotencie 3. It is an injurie more then ordinarie to make us any way extoll the authoriâ—ie of a Minister above the authoritie of the Kinge in any matter of appointing
Sic fuit ah fuit Amesius Quid funere tanto Cum grege Papali Pelagianus ovat Quid rides Hierarcha Viri nos arma tenemus Astra animam tellus ossa sed os tabula A FRESH SVIT Against HUMAN CEREMONIES IN GOD'S VVORSHIP OR A Triplication unto D. BVRGESSE HIS REJOINDER For D. MORTON The First Part. Psal. 119 113. I hate vayn inventions but thy saw doe I love Printed Anno 1633. An ADVERTYSEMENT to the Reader Occasioned by the never enough lamented death of my deare freind the Authour of this Fresh suite VNderstand Christian Reader that with the comming forth of this booke into the light the learned and famous Authour D r. Ames left the light or darknes rather of this world His name for diverse reasons not needfull here to be recited hath been hitherto concealed and that which generally was but imagined before viz. that the Repl. and this fresh suit to D. B. Rejoynder to be his work now it is certainly known to be his that none need to doubt therof It pleadeth trueth succinctly yet perspicuously and with sinewy Answeres to B.M. and D. B. poore Sophisms as indeed his veinc in all his writings and discourses did most admirably lead him to do Concerning this matter I may not keep back what I heard him speake as in the sight of God that he was in his conscience more perswaded of the evill of these reliques of Popery and monuments of that superstition then ever and yet he never had seen good in them or come from them and that moreover if D. B. or any other of them would yet be daubing with suntempered mortar and not give over to paint rotten sepulchres he was by the grace of God resolved still to maintain the cause and while he liued never let fall the uit commenced this way not that he sought victorie to himselfe no That trueth might returne out of the feild with conquest was the highest pitch of his ambition And though this worthy of the Lord be with us no more yetGod I trust who is rich in mercy and hath more then one blessing will as need shall require supply the advantage trueth had and now hath lost in the losse of this glorious instrument Together with his life God hath put an end to all his travailes wherein he shewed himself a pattern of holines a burning and a shining light and lamp of learning Arts a Champion for trueth specially while for the space of 12 yeares at least he was in the Doctors Chaire at Franequer and having foughâ— the good fight of faith whereunto he was called professed a good profession before nyamwitnesses he hath now indeed layd hold on eternall life His spirit gon to the spirits of just men and his body committed to the ground we committ his labours to thy use wherein he being dead yet speaketh and his memorie we hope shall live for ever Fare well in Christ the Fountain of all welfare To the renovvned King EDVVARD THE SIXT And so To our present Soueraigne King CHARLES his Successor IOHANNES ALASCO a Godly Learned Polonian Baron and Superintendent of the Church of strangers at London in the Epistle Dedicatory of his tractate Concerning the Sacraments printed at London An o. 1552. WEll doth that Father and vvithout doubt diserueth praise vvho having a daughter a Virgin dravvne by the guile of panders into some levvd and dishonest house and there trimmed after the vvhorish guise doth presently rescue her thence and bring her home to his ovvne house before shee be utterly spoyled But the same Father if he be vvise thinks it not enough for the safty of his daughter and the honor of his house that he hath brought her home agayne vnles he take from her vvholly vvhatsoever he knovves to be accounted in those houses a vvhorish attyre Neyther doth he inquire vvhence such attyre came first but iudgeth it dishonorable to himselfe and so unvvorthy his daughter and vvhole family that any such thing at all as strompets haue vsed for dressings in their houses should appeare in his Neyther doth hee giue eare to their persvvasions vvho beare him in hand that all things are to bee Esteemed according to the Fathers mynd in his ovvne house and so thinke that the Fathers approbation can make that honest in his ovvne house for his daughter and vvhole family vvhich in another house is most dishonest for any daughters that regard their ovvne credits ascribing so much to the Fathers prerogatiue that vvhat soever he approues must be of others vvell liked of so farre as it concernes his ovvne house For he knovves full vvell that although all those things vvhich he hath authorized in his ovvne house be there vvell thought of yet that is not enough synce the honor of his daughter and his vvhole Family must not only hee cared for vvithin his ovvne house but also throughout the vvhole Citie that he may remoue all evill suspicions from his family among all his neighbours and is heedfull that the panders haue not the least occasion left them of challenging or laying clayme to the sayd daughter as hauing some of their vvhor-house-marks upon her Even so in the Church of God as in a city Magistrates and Ministers are in place of parents having the pure and right Administration of the Sacraments committed unto them of God for to be tended and tendered as their ovvne daughter It is therfore very commendable in these parents of the church as vvee may terme them if they rescue the lavvfull pure Administration of the Sacraments from the violence and tyrany of the Romish Panders by taking it into their ovvne care and Custody But heer they ought to remember Especially they vvho are called by the holy Spirit Eminent Ministers of God and Nursing Fathers of his church I.E. Christian Kings and Monarchs that it is not enough for them thus to have brought this daughter out of the Papists stevves home into their ovvne care and keeping unles they also put of from her all that dressing vvhich they knovv to be vvhorish in the sayd stevves that no such thing may be seene vvith them vvhich may be accounted vvhorish Especially in that citty vvhere there is great Variety of judgments the ouerruling vvherof by mans Autority is not to bee expected and vvhere there are so mamy hucksters for the stevves remayning Nor let them heare the delusions of those vvho suggest that such kindes of dressing from vvhence soeuer they bee taken may bee made good honest by Authoritye For vvell they knovv they are not set ouer the vvhole church of God but only one part of it as a Family in a Citty and that therfore though they could beare out such things at home by their Authoritye yet it is their dutye as they regard publike Chastity and honesty to procure the honor of their daughter and familye not only vvithin their ovvne vvalls but alsoe throughout the vvhole citty not suffring any thing to be seene vvithin
discretion reteined nothing but the name of auncient Professors like boxes in Apothecaryes shops vvhich cary fayre titles on the outsyde fill up roome but have not one healing or usefull drugge in them A third sort ther be 3 Sort. vvho at the first appearing of the gospel in a place are taken up vvith the strangnes and novelty eyther of the Doctryne or the manner of delivery ansvverablely vvith some affection make inquiry after it This vvas their practise vvhen Iohn Baptist came preaching in the vvildernes 3. Math. 5. Then vvent out to him Hierusalem all Iudea all the Region about Iordan This also our Saviour acknovvledged as ther indeavor Ihon. 5.35 Ihon vvas a burning a shining light you vvould have recoyced in him for a season It befalls the Gospell in this case as it doth vvith some strange commodity vvhen it first comes to vievv many see cheapen until the price proves too heavy then they depart vvill not buy So here vvhen our Saviour sets open the sale of the gospel in som obscure place many vvil be comers hearers Cheapners until they finde that the vvord grovves somvvhat high rated the conditions of the Gospel seeme too hard then they for sake it Herod vvelcomes Ihon Baptist observes him but at last murthers him 4. Fort of declyners Others lastly after some sad conviction of the truth revealed as also of the necessity and excellency therof hold it a poynt of honor to persevere in the defense maintenance of it and hence for their ovvne prayse may doe Suffer heavy persecutions as poverty Exile in the profession of the truth the povver vvher of they never approved in the exactnes of it Thus many in Queene Maryes dayes vvere exiled for the Gospel vvho aftervvard returned into England 13. Math. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposed yea persecuted the povver accuratnes practise of it For ther is a nick of temptation vvhich stuttes the humor of these temporizing hypocrites discovers them in their colours hence it is that these of Diotrephes his generation could endure banishment because that hyndred not but promoted their honor in that kynd of suffering yet vvhen they came into place of supremacy fell to beating of their fellovv brethren as conceaving the strictnes of their course caryed a condemnation of their carelesse and pompous sensuality VVe have seen the causes consider vve novv the excuses they vvould pretend for themselves Statist his pâ—aetense And heer as mens corruptions are diverse act more or lesse strongly their shifts cary more or lesse apperance vrith them Here first your statist is most grosse to vvhom his Religion is as his coyne Al that goes for currant gospel vvith him that is stamped vvith the authority allovvance of the State He is hovering betvvixt several Religions that he may take any for his turne vvaits eys to see vvhich syde is like to prosper that so he may be of the safest syde And he â—esseth him self vvith the name of a Christian Churche the substance of Religion And vvhat ever things are like to prove trouble some these he vvil make indifferent that he may take them or leave them as he likes best for his ease Discretion is they staâ—ists God Gospel He complaynes much of the restlesse strictnesse of mens Spirits vvho cannot see vvhen they are vvell put too great vveight upon things that are of no vvorth stand upon trifles He crieth out for Discretion as that vvhich vvould umpire determyne all doubts And therfor he can run vvith the hare hould vvith the houud Pranks plâ—yd under colour of discretion by discretion He vvill doe any thing rather then suffer any thing by discretion He can soder vvith the tymes vvinke at the synmes of men yea svvallovv them dovvne though vvith reluctance of conscience that he termes tolerating all by discretion Authority is in stead of all arguments to this man he enquires after no other ground or vvarrant The Temporary Gospeller having had some touch of Religion Temporary Professors pretence light of truth in his mynde can fynd no rest unto his conscience vnlesse he have some shevv of reason to allege for he remembers the charge of the Apostle ye are redeemed vvith a price be not the servants of men he recalls the limitation of Gods command 1. Cor. 7.23 1. Pâ—t 2.13 1. Cor. 11. obey in the Lord that vve ought to be follovvers of the Apostles no farther then they vver follovvers of Christ. That the utmost extent of our Saviours commission to teach for men to obey vvas That men should be taught 28. Math. to observe all that he commanded not that men commanded Resolving therfor to decline they seek to catch at any appearance vvhich they may plead for their declining A declining heart catchâ—th at any thing thâ—t it may plead for declining And because they are most led by example and sense these are the vveapons vvith vvhich they use to vvard them selves maintain their course Common example carries a persvvading povver vvith them it s a sufficient reason for their doing because they see it is don Here they take up their stand All men for the most part do so vvhy may not they Non quo eundum sed quo itur Thus like sheep they follovv the drove though it be to the shambles Especialy if they heare of any noted famous for piety godlines to goe in such a vvay they conclude forthvvith it is the right vvay reasoning thus They are vvise and godly think you they durst do it they vvould do it unlesse it vver good and pious vvhen the truth hath told us that all mâ—n are lyers 3. Rom. 4. eyther doe or may deceive or be deceyâ—â—d even the courses of the strictest saynts have ther crackings 2. Gall. 12.13 Peter vvas a good man yet dissembled and Barnabas vvas a good man Acts. 11.24 2. Gall. 13. yet vvas snatched avvay by example into the same dissimulation Vvhat madnes is it because a vvise man happily falls into the mire that vve should foule our selves vvallovv vvith him But the mayne bulvvark vvherby they beat back all assaults is if they can hould out some Ecclesiastical Canon The Church enjoynes it The authority of the Church theCanons of it like wind tyde cary the Temporizer to any coast are you vviser then The Church This stricks it dead no man must dare to dispute any further nay they count it unreasonale once to demurr or doubt any more but expect that al men should captivale their conceits presently put off reason plucke out their eys to see by other mens spectacles vvhich is intruth not only to cease to be Christians but to be men Not that I detract any due respect esteeme vvhich each man should
have both in opinion affection of the true Church of Christ The extent of the Churches authoritye I knovv she is the spouse of Christ yet but the spouse It is enough that she is next to her head the Lord Iesus she must not usurp to be head her povver is subordinat not supreme ministerium not imperium 28. Math. last she must deliver the lavves vvhich she hath receaved from her King not dare to make lavves And therfore vve must bevvare lest vvhyle for our ovvne es vve vvould honor the Church too much vve dishonor Christ vvrong greive both The praetensetaken from the authority dashed 1. because its a poysoned dâ—ug of popery To crush therfore the former Cavil objection I ansvver several things It is the Romish tenet to a hayre one of the most fulsom poynts loathsom dregs of the fylth of Popery The Iesuits themselves having no other bottom â—hey beare up or to biuld up their blynd obedience An opinion constantly unanimously opposed by all our Divines Chamier de votis 1. Bec it overthrovves the Soveranguty ofChrist his prophetical Kingly office lib. 11. cap. 11. abhorred by al Christian self denying and syncere-belleiving hearts For vvhat is it else but to jusle Christ out of his prophetical Kingly office to resolve our fayth obedience lastly into the determinations commands of men 2. VVhy are the Berreans commended for examining Pauls Doctrin Acts. 17. 1. Thess. 5.21 vvhy are all men enjoyned to trye all things to hold that vvhich is good If vve be bound to take our Religion upon trust from the authority of the Churche 3. If Paul an Apostle Doctor of the gentiles 3. The Apost would not chalenge this power disclaymes all such souveraignty as tyrannicall usurpation vvhat man or Church dare chalenge it But disclayme it he doeth 2. Cor. 1. last Not that vve have dominion over your fayth but are helpers of your joy for by fayth you stand 4. Had men or Curches povver to coyne Ecclesiastical Canons to forge nevv articles of fayth to make these senses of the Scripture Authentick vvhich suited their mynds and to charge these upon the consciences of men as necessary to be beleeved Beleivers should not stand by their fayth but they and their fayth should stand or fall according to the feeble determination of men 5. If the fayth of particular men depend upon the Church That the authority of the Church is not the rule the faâ—â—e rule which guides the Church doth guide each member upon vvhat doth the fayth of the Church depend Eyther they be the rule vvhich is too loathsome to affirme or else they are guided by the rule of the vvord in their determinations vvhich begets both saving light in their mynds sound faith in their hearts Eph. b. 20.10 Rom. 17. And if the vvord be ablé to give them light fayth vvhy not others as vvel as them 6. The authority of the Church unto vvhich vve must captivate our judgements Vniversale neâ— existit nec agit nâ—siâ—in individuis musteyther be the authority of the Vniversal Church vvhiche acteth nothing but in the particulars these have varied in opinion practise touching Ceremonies therfor cannot setle us in a certaine determination Or it must be the authority of a particular Churche but particular Churches have not only erred but departed from the faythe Vvho Lorded it oter the lavv did not the Church 14. Math. 10 vvho condemned crucifyd the Lord did not the Church vvho persecuted the Apostles forbad them to preach publish the Gospel did not the Church And this vvhich is sayd of Churches is true of Counâ—els of all kynds as experience of all ages hath made it good Others of this rank plead the love of their people 3. Plea of the Temporizer is the love of his pâ—ople preaching when indeed it is the love of him self living the necessity of preaching hope of doing good hovv precious mens paynes are vvhat need of laborers in the vynyard And therfore conclude if all men should sit do vvur in silence as some doe the ruyne of the Church must needs follovv They confesse its true indeed these popish reliques vvhich are the bane of the Churches peace being unprofitable needlesse nay scandalous offensive should be removed But vvhen they vveigh that heavy charge VVoe if I preach not the Gospel they are then vvilling to beare all rather then to deprive the Church of the benefit the soules of Gods people of the profit comfort of their ministerye Favour thy self is the serious arge whatever is alledged ito colour it with vvhereas alas al this pretence of mercy is a miserable mistake commonly that vvorldly vvatch vvord of favour thy self lyes closely covered under these curious florishes of care compassion for the common good For the quaestion is not vvhether preaching be precious or the paynes of faythful Ministers profitable But the doubt here is vvhether vve may come to doe lavvful things by unlavvful meanes To synne that vve may doe service As though the Lord had need of my lye or else that he could not bring his servants to his ovve haven vvithout the divels boate or that Christ could not upholde his ovvne kingdome vvithout the paynes preaching of some men novv I conceyve it is undeniably evident that the suffering in the tyme of Queene Maryes dayes did more setle enlarge the bounds of the Gospel then all the preaching did in King Edvvard the sixt his reigne A 4. plea of the temporizer Others speake out deale dovvne right professe it is agaynst the hayre their hearts to doe this drudgery but they are not able to undergoe the extreame pressure vvhich follovves the refusal of them Nay it s certayne some have openly protested that if it vvere but half an hovvres hanging I. speake but what I. know they vvould rather suffer it then subscribe But for them theirs to ly in the ditch to be cast into a blynd corner like broken vessels yea they their familyes to dye many hundred deaths by extreame misery before they could come unto their graves This they vvere not able to undergoe A condition I acknovvledge vvhich needs deserves a great deale of pity commiseration since it is true that some kinds of oppression make a man mad But oh that the God of mercy vvould put it into the mynds hearts of those vvhom it doth concerne that they vvould never suffer such refuse reliques longe to hazard not only the comforts but even the conâ—ciences happines of many distessed soules Ther is a thrid last sort of men more ingenuous then the former vvhoe vvhen they see The close hypocrite his excuses that such colours of excuses formerly propounded are not layd in oyle therfore vvillnot continue nor can give
sit Moll will take him up It seemes then there is no divine right in ordering the frame of the government of the Church and then wel-fare Amsterdam which our Hierachicall men do so much traduce and despise If he shall say that one is a Lord Pastor and the other a ministeriall Pastor inferior and subordinate to him especially in Iurisdiction then I would have him consider what D. Fulke saith against Allen of the Popes pardons Pag. 381. God hath made all Pastors stewards of his houshould and dispensers of his misteries And if every Pastor over his charge be a steward of Gods mysteries why hath he not the Key of Iurisdiction over his parish in as large and ample manner as the Bishop hath over his Diocesse or the Pope seing the Keyes are not given to one but to unitye as the fathers teach why should the Bishops and the Pope have two Keyes and they but one resolve these things sayth he to Allen and I to D. B. out of the Holy Scripture It might be here also required how a faithfull Pastor can defend a Bishop or Bishops in obtruding humaine ceremonies upon that church whereof he is pastor and so partake in the obtruding of them Certainly this is not agreeable to the commissioÌ„ of Pastors Quae mandavi ego non quae mandabitis non adinvenictis vos Cajetan in loc who are to teach only that which Christ hath commanded to observe Which I have commanded Matth. 28. not what ye shall commaund or invent Caietan upon the place Neither is it to preserve the Church from the dominion of usurpers CAP. II. Of the rise and proceeding of Ceremoniall contentions with variety of tenents about them THe first records the Rej. bringeth for contentions about Cerem are from Rom. 14. but he might and would also if it had served his turne have fetched it further from Math. 15. where the Pharisyes contend against Christ and his Disciples about their ceremoniall observations Or from the first authors of that Sect Sammay and Hilles prophane dissipators of Gods Law by their traditions as out of their very names Cardinall Baronius himselfe noteth Neither is that contention Rom. 14. agreeable to our Quaestion because the Ceremonies there quaestioned were not of humaine institution nor urged by authority of any Church or Prelates The second instance which the Rej. bringeth is about the feast of Easter whereabout he saith the world was set on fire And this indeed is worth the observing that so soone as Victor-Bishops begann to urge humaine cerem upon the Church of God all was presently in a fyre but were not these presumptuous Victors the kyndlers of that fyre The next stepp which the Rej. taketh over a thousand yeare wyde is to Illiricus about permitting the use of a surplice where it is to be noted that before Illyricus ther had beene effectual pleading against Ceremonies The first rise of the controveâ—sy of Ceremonies even Crosse and Surplice in Helvetia at Tigure wherupon they were removed as Zwinglius relateth de baptismo And a long tyme before that the Waldenses of whose blood were made torches to light us in the right way did contend against all humaine traditions as unlawful Omnes consuctudines Ecclesiae quas in Evangelio non legunt coÌ„temnunt Refut erroâ—uÌ„ Waldens anonyma in Biblioth Paâ—uÌ„ Cap. 13. error 7. Dicunt quod ea quae constitaunt ab Eâ—iscopis Praelate non sunt servandâ— eòque sum traditiones â—omaâ—mâ— non Dei. So Reinerus cap. 5. All customes of the church which in the Gospell they do not read they do contemne They affirme that those things which are appointed by the Bishops and Prelates are not to be observed because they are the traditions of men and not of God Where also the answer given by that refuter unto your Waldens is very observable for by that it will appeare that humaine Ceremonies in Divine worship were then impugned and defended after the same manner they are to this day Our allegations being the same with those which the Waldenses used and our adversaries answers the same which the Papistes opposed to the Waldenses Resp Ecclesia noÌ„ esâ— contenta his quae Chriâ—tu docâ—it ideo potuit compe eâ—tes constitutiones facere ut â—cclesia Iudaica Est. 9.1 Mac. cabae 2 4. Authorâ—tates haeteticâ—rum Deu. 10 13. non adâ—etis Resp. Iudaei noÌ„ debebâ—nt addere legi aliquiâ— ut insufficiens lex eo tempore videtur Ad Isay 29.13 Math. 15. Resp. Quod constitutiones Ecclesiae non sunt tantum hominum sed Dei. Ad Gall. 1.9 Resp. praeter id est contra id Answ the Church is not content with those things which Christ taught and therfore might make competent constitutions as the Church of the Iews in the 9. Est. 1. Maccabae 2. and 4. Touching the authorities alledged by the Haeretikes Deut. 10. and 13. you shall not add c. Answ is The Iews might not add any thing to the law least it might have seemed insufficient at that tyme. To that place Isay 29. Matth. 15. Answ is That the constitutions of the church come not only from men but God also To that of Gall. 1. Answ is beside the word that is against it 2. That Illiricus in this part stood against that which Calvin writt against and many excellent Divines â—ere silenced and deprived for 3. That this contenâ—â—on of Illiricus was not properly about the Surplice â—o Calvin Ep. 117. Quod dicis MagdeburgeÌ„ses de linea veste rixas movere quoâ— sum pertineat non video Linea enim vestis usum cum multis ineptiis taÌ„ apud vos quam apud illos hactenus retentuÌ„ esse arbitror Non agiâ—uâ— profecto de parvis rebus nec est necesse quosdam semper albaÌ„ vesâ—em pro exemplo istarium actionum sophistice imperitis proponere multae gravissimae plagae Ecclesâ—â—ae Christi per istas conciliationes infliguntur The Bishops and Rej. joyne wâ—th LutheraÌ„s about images That you affirme the Magdeburgenses to â—ove contentions concerning the lynnen garment I perceave â—ot what your purpose is in so speaking Since I suppose the use â—f the lynnen garment with many such fopperyes to be yet â—etayned amongst you and them So Illiricus himself proâ—esteth Asuredly we contend not about trifles nor is in needâ—ull that some men should alwayes cunningly propose a lynnen â—arment for instance of these proceedings to such as are unâ—cquainted with them many those most dangerous wounds â—re given to the Church of Christ by these reconciliations 4. That the ceremonies then controverted were imâ—osed by Papists with Popish intention which kynd of Ceremonies the Rej. doth seeme in all his book to disâ—layme 5. That in this Quaestion the Rej. under the â—ame of certaine reverend Divines doth seeme to joine â—im self with the Adiaphorists and the interim against which Calvin and Illiricus did contend 6. It may â—urther also be observed that the Rej.
doth on the other â—art joyne with Illiricus in defence of images for religious use even in temples for about these images did â—lliricus write against the reformed churches as is to be â—eene in Vrsine Par. 2. Pag. 45. where he is confuted by name and accused to have too large a conscience in esteeming such images indifferent yet both D. Morton â—nd D. Burgesse are now come to the same largenes that they may fynd roome for significant Ceremonies in Gods worship as appeareth in this Rej. cap. 3. sect 7. For the Protestants most receaved opinion of humaine Ceremonies Cassander whose stepps the Def. and Rej. follow in this cause is a good witnes They have not only omitted these Ceremonies as lesse profitable Non modo illas ut minus utiles supervacaneas omiserunt sed ut ineptas ludicras ridiculas imo noxias perniciosas plerique damnandas profligandas ducunt Pag. 8532. superfluous but the most have esteemed them as foppish babish and ridiculous yea that they were to be condemned and abandoned as noxious pernitious And our Martyr book doth give sufficient testimony how diverse of the Godly Martyrs did absolutely condemne all humaine Ceremonies in Gods worship To name one for all This was the first occasion of Mr. Tho. Hawkes his persecution and this he defended unto the death against Bonner Harpsfeild Fecknam and Chadsye No ceremonies saith he but those which Christ hath appointed In which story it is to be marcked What opinion the martyrs had of our Ceremonies that Bonners Chaplayne and Kynsman Darbyshyre graunted as our Def. and Rej doe that their humaine Ceremonies were not necessary to salvation but only to instruction In this cause of Cerem saith Dr. Willet Richard Gibson gave up his life pa. 111. Synop. In the beginning of Queene Elizabeth Reigne ther was a company of honest men that for the Ceremonies refused to joine with the Parish assemblyes at London as appeareth in the examinatioÌ„ of Iohn Smyth W. Nyxson c. exstaÌ„t in the book called part of a Register will any man think that they esteemed those Cere for which they made a kynd of seperatioÌ„ to be lawfull The first example then of humaine Ceremonies by any orthodox church imposed upoÌ„ Gods people which the Rej. brings is in the Church of Engl. And here he â—eginneth with famous Queene Elizabeths dayes â—hough he fetch that very story out of the History of â—ranckford troubles which were in Queene Maryes â—ayes about the same Cerem and before that in King Edwards To say nothing of the manyfold testimonies of Martyrs against such corruptioÌ„s before King Edward â—s this any illustration of your Quaestion to be debated Now for the Tenets which have beene and are about â—hese Cerem the Rej. noted out of T. C. that the ould â—enet of those who opposed our Cerem was to hold â—hem inconvenient only not unlawfull But 1. he sheweth no such thing about the Crosse 2. Nay the contrary appeareth in D.B. himself who pag. 16. confesseth that 39. yeares agoe he did at the least doubt that the Crosse was unlawfull and for that cause not for scandall as he did the Surplice he refused it even to Deprivation He would not have us think I am sure that he had then a singular new Tenet by himself but inclined to the ould 3. M r. Hooker P. 246. observeth that the first pleadings of T. C. against other Cerem either inferred unlawfulnes or nothing 4. The last rules T. C. his judgment of Cerem significant and resolutions of T. C. doe evidently speake of unlawfulnes of all significant Ceremonies Although the Cerem of Crossing were indifferent and convenient yet to rayse a doctrine of it is unlawfull for as much as it is not enough to teach the truth unlesse it be truely taught and that is only out of the word of God 2. Reply P. 227. This was his judgment in these and we have no other Tenet of significant Ceremonies untill this day Now if in the Hypothesis of one or two signif Cerem he swarved a little there froÌ„ out of extrinsecall considerations yet that doth not make his tenet such as the Rej. would have it but rather it is to be held as an occasionall declinatioÌ„ from his Tenet which also he is sayd by faithfull witnesses to have coÌ„fessed as an error before his death 4. That tenet of inconveniency or inexpediency was never yet sufficiently explayned and therfore had beene fitt work for it The commoÌ„ Protestant tenet was alwayes as M r. Fox Mart. P. 4. expresseth it that it is reproveable to adde unto Christs intention new found rites and Phantasyes of men And M r. Burgesse in an Epistle to King Iames in the beginning of his Raigne witnesseth that in those dayes many hundred worthy ministers thought our cer unlawfull and would surely dye rather then use them which worthy men surely were not the first authors of that Tenet If they were why did he call them worthy who now judgeth otherwise of us for maintaining the same sentence 5. That tenet of incoÌ„veniency or inexpediency without unlawfulnes in such Cer. was never yet sufficiently explained And therfore had beene fit work for the Rej. Civill incoÌ„venience or incommodity may stand with lawfulnes But how a thing morally inconvenieÌ„t or inexpedient whyle it remaineth such may be lawfull is not so cleare Nothing is thus inexpedient to morall or spirituall good but it is impedient or an impediment to it and all such impediments of good whyle they are such â—eeme to be opposite to good in that regard evill I remember I heard it once defended in Cambridge Quicquid noÌ„ expedit quatenus noÌ„ expedit non licet in these termes What ever is morally inexpedient so far as it is such is unlawfull 6. This Tenet of the Cere to be inexpedient but yet lawfull hath confounded the thoughts of many made them to doe that with greif which they were ashamed of M r. Hooker P. 246. maketh a speech in their persons which I will here write out because I remember my self at the first reading to have beene much affected as it were bafled out of that contenance which stood somewhat that way Conformers of that sort are fayned thus to declare their mynds excuse their practise Brethren our hearts desire is that we might enjoy the full liberty of the Gospell as in other reformed churches they doe else where upoÌ„ whom the heavy hand of authority hath imposed no great burden But such is the misery of these our dayes that so great happines we cannot looke to attaine unto were it so that the equity of the law of Moses could prevaile or the zeale of Ezekias could be found in the hearts of those guidâ— governours under whoÌ„ we live or the voice of Gods owne prophets could only be heard or the example of the Apostles be followed yea or their precepts be answered with full
WaldeÌ„ses who first reformed their churches purged out all their popish leveÌ„ renouÌ„ced all such humaine Cer. or Traditious as unlawfull as manifestly appeareth by all Papists and Protestants that have sett downe their confession practise 4. If Analogically Sacramentall Cere be impious aemulators of Gods holy Sacraments as the Rej. confesseth what can be sayd why humaine significant Cer. analogicall to divine significaÌ„t should not by parity of reason be esteemed impious aemulators of Gods holy signes Is it forbidden to aemulate Gods Sacra only not all his holy ordinances After all these come in morall significaÌ„t Cer. which are only to expresse some benefitt whiâ—h God giveth us or to notify professe or expresse some duty which we owe to him or one to another But I do not see wherein these differ froÌ„ reductive Sacra Cer. except it be in this that it may so fall out that these sometymes are not affixed to SacrameÌ„ts This head therfore seemeth to be added only because D. Morton had used it before and for his sake let us a little further weigh it when therfor the Rej affirmes that morally significant are ordeined to expresse some benefitt on Gods part some duty on ours By some benefitt or duty he must meane any spirituall benefitt or duty besyde the covenant which he professedly mentioneth excepteth How the Rej. divisionâ— interfere and croâ—â—e one the other for if one benefitt may be signifyed why not any one this morally significant are religious or sacred significant in the generall the Species as large as the Genus Hence againe morally significant will be a genus to sacramentall reductively significant for that is but a particular signification of some benefitts duties in the Sacrament which are included under this Generall so one species of the distributioÌ„ shall become a Genus to the opposite member contradistinct species If it be here replyed that reductive significative sacramentall is annexed to the Sacrament I answer that is nothing to the nature of the significancy for take use a crosse out of baptisme in the same manner to the same end as in it it will be the same in the specificall nature of significancy only so much the worse because it is sett cheek by jole with baptisme 2. I aske what he meanes by those words expresse professe is it barely to declare if so then let him show who is his adversary unlesse he will fall out with his shadow for do not all his opposites graunt that signâ— indicantia or showing sygnes are lawfull but not symbolica Lastly when he affirmes that these Cerem morally significant are not to signifye the covenant of grace The crosse sâ—gnifyes the covenant of grace I reply if they may signifye any other spirituall duty or benefitt if they may signifye the severall essentiall duties of the covenant of each syde why may they not signifye the whole covenant 2. If the crosse signifyeth the consecration of the child to God and so entrance into the covenant the relation of a souldier to a Commaunder a servant to a master and so is continuance and faythfull perseverance in that profession to Christ and his respect and regard of us according to those relations then doth it signify the covenant By this which hath beene sayd it appeares that the quaestion is falsely stated for these Ceremo are more then holy by application in his sense formerly opened they are pressed as necessary and are used as analogically sacramentall as well as properly morall â—he state of â—â—e quaestion and in signification do pertake somthing of the proper nature of Sacraments as also in the significative teaching and stirring up the heart when it s sayd they are used in worship they are externall acts of Gods worship falsely appointed by man and serve not for order nor decency nor aedification CHAP. VIII Concerning a nationall Church answ to the 60.61.62 of the Preface OF the faythfull congregations wherein we were borne baptized and nourished up in fayth there is no quaestion made but they are our loving and beloved mothers Yet much quaestion ariseth concerning that which the Rej. teacheth viz. Pag. â—0 6â— That all those churches together have one mother and so we have a grandmother that is the Church of England considered as one church and that by way of representation as the convocation house 2. by way of association and combination into one profession worship and discipline which includeth the orders and officers that is the Hierarchye pertaining therunto but not by any other collective consideration 1. I never read either in Scripture or in any orthodoxe writer of a visible particular Church either grandmother of Christians or mother of other Churches if the Rej. hath he should do well to informe us where we may fynd this doctrine explained 2. I would willingly know whether Christians Christian churches also were not in England before this great grandmother I think the Rej. will not denye it nor yet flye for succour to his phisitians who have found out an herb which is called of them Sonne before the Father Filius antâ— Patrem to justifye his intention of Daughter before the Mother Filia antâ— Matrem He must confesse that this Grand-motheâ— is onely a mother in law The nature of a representative church and that law also to be mans not Gods 3. All the churches of England may as well be considered as one in unity of profession without any new motherhood as all the Latine Scholes of England one in the unity of the same Grammar or all Gallenicall or Platonicall Scholes one in their kynd 4. A Representative mother is the image of a mother and an image with commaunding authority in religion without Gods commaund Quod ecclesia siâ—is repraesentativa libeÌ„ter credâ—mus vera enim non estu Sed â—sten aâ—te qâ—aso â—â—de â—orâ—â—ec nomen Qui hoc nomintâ—◠〈◊〉 Quis â—acundâ— ceâ—spirandi â—obis potestatem dedit Qâ—is coÌ„deâ—di Canones decreta verbo Des disâ—â—â—miâ—iâ— vobiâ—tus fecit Quiâ— ut ista humeâ—is hominum impeâ—eretiu permisâ—t Qâ—is consitentia ut siâ— gravareitâ— vebis persw sit Vt dicâ—â—etis bâ—num malum malum benum quâ—â— iussit 〈…〉 â—â—clesia 〈◊〉 qâ—a nihil 〈◊〉 al et sed picta ceâ—iâ—la â—mnia Scanâ—n estâ— ecclesia riâ—a sâ—â—sa Christo â—râ—ua qua seâ—a veâ—it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dei 〈◊〉 is an Idoll It was well therfore to this purpose sayd of Zwinglius Explan arti 8. That you be a representative church we willingly beleeve for you are not the true church But show I beseech you whence you had this name who styled you with this title who gave you power of meeting and combyning together who graunted you authority of coyning decrees and Canons differing from the word of God who suffered you to impose these upon men who perswaded you thus to burden Consciences who enjoyned you to call evill good and
good evill You are therfore an hypocriticall church which hath nothing sound in it and substantiall but all things fayned and paynted But you are not that true church that bride beseeming our Saviour who stayes her self upon the truth alone and the Spirit of God He speaketh these things of thâ—se which under the name of Representative churches imposed their inventions upon true churches without Scripture which is a true representation of our representative convocation 5. The Rej. confesseth that this Hierarchicall convocation is humaine and not divine and he will not denye but Christians and Christian congrâ—gations are Divine Now what a monstrous and preposterous generation then doth he make as it were in a Chymaericall dreame of Divine Children proceeding from humaine mothers and grandmothers Our Saviour was of another mynd when he made these two opposite from earth and from heaven The Rej. hath found out so great consent betweene these two that earth may be the mother and grandmother of heaven Besyde the humaine mother of Divine children is not of their heavenly fathers choise nor by him appointed to beare the person of their true mother But she was first putt into this office by the presumption of men and afterward authorised by the Archmother of Rome continuing her profession by sleight might to represent those from whom she can show no other letters of credence for the power she usurpeth then she maketh her self or hath gotten by stealth from civill power 6. This representative mother is very seldome exstant viz when ther is a Parliament which now we have not had these diverse yeares And when she appeareth she can give no milk to her children further then she hath commission from man None of her children can have accesse unto her only she appointed many yeares since certaine servants of hers with restraint of their fathers allowance to dyet them with drye ceremonies and scourge them with silencing deprivation excommunication if they fynd fault with that provision which is very pap with a hatchet Is not such a mother worthy grand titles and honor 7. The examples of such motherhood which the Rej. fetcheth from the assemblyes of Israell Scotland and our Parliament have no agreement For 1. we read of no assemblyes of Elders by office in Israell from whence all other were excluded stiled either Mothers of Israell or all Israell Neither was there in any such assemblyes this motherly authority exercised of appointing humaine sacred Ceremo unto Israell 2. The assemblyes of Scotland before Perth had no such state as our convocation nor power of commaunding but only advized of and directed those things which God had appointed and the churches were knowen to desire yet might their judgment be well called the judgment of the church of Scotland because they pronounced nothing but that which all the churches of Scotland did publikely professe even in their solemne confession 3. Our Parliament is not stiled the Mother common wealth of England yet in civill affaires more liberty is left for stile and power unto publike assemblies then in religious But if the lower house of Parliament were not more freely chosen and of greater power then the poore lower house of Convocation a quaere might be made whether the state or common wealth of England were there or no. Now for the second way of one church by association and combination of all particular churches into one profession worship and discipline This is good thus farr and the very same with that collective consideration which the Repl. mentioned and the Rej. termed a new mistie inexplicable nothing except combination doth mistyly cover under it the swallowing up of particular congregations by Nationall Provinciall Diocesan churches But â—s for that clause that this must needs include such orders and offices as our Hyerarchye this is either a begging or a stealing of the mayne quaestion For 1. this Hierarchye consisteth of officers and orders by the Rej. owne confession humaine not divine now associaâ—ion of profession worship and discipline may certainly be had by officers and orders divine 2. The reformed churches of France have their association and combinaâ—ion without any Hierarchye 3. The Hierarchye doth not associate churches under it but subdue all to it self so that as the Pope is sometyme esteemed the Church of Rome and sometyme he with his assistants so is our Hierarchye in England Beza de ecclesia notis paulo ante finom Ego Pontifieijs libâ—nter relinquo totum istuÌ„ Episcopatuâ— gradum cuius aperté dicâ— Spiritum Sanctum non suissâ— authorem sed humanam prudentiam cui nisi animadvertimus Deum maledixissâ— corte nihil nâ— nunc quidem videmus viperam insinu fovemus quae tursus matrem neâ—abit Beza in his notes of the church not farr from the end giveth warning of this I most willingly leave the wholl frame of Episcopall authority to the Papists of which I openly professe the Holy Spirit of God was never the author but humaine policy which if we do not observe to be accursed by God we certainly as yet see nothing at all and nourish we do a viper in our bosomes which will kill the mother This prophecy is too true of the Hierarchye as in other respects so in this that it seemeth to devoure our mother churches title liberty right and power and in a great part hath prevailed 9. It was added by the Replyer that the Hyerarchye is a creature of mans making and may more lawfully be removed when it pleaseth man then ever she was by him erected To this the Rej. answereth confessing that sundry offices and orders in our church are humaine and not divine adding that accidentall formes of discipline are not determined in the word of God but left in the churches liberty to devise as all but Anabaptists and such as edge too neare upon them consent Which words are worthy of a note or two For he 1. acknowledgeth our Hierarchye of Archbishops Bâ— Deanes Archdeacons c. to be creatures of mans making not divine Now of these principally consist our convocated mother church as it s well knowen a few ministers being added to her for fashion sake so that this church is a church of man not of God by his owne confession and this church is sayd to be devised by the church now it soundeth strangly A church of the churches devising Nor know I well what the devising church of England can be The Rej. telleth us that there be but two wayes of considering the Church of England as one either in the convocation house or in that combination which must needs sayth he include the orders and officers pertaining therunto Now in both of these wayes Hierarchicall orders and officers are supposed and included so that the Church of England neither of these wayes could possibly devise these orders and officers 3. The distinction used betwixt the essentialls of discipline and the accidentall formes thereof is oâ—scure And if these termes may be
sayth That Religion is an observaÌ„ce wherby we performe those things which directly belong to the giving of honour to God so much may be wruÌ„g â—s the Rej. meaneth viz. that if any observance be made of â—et doing any thing which God hath not forbidden of purpose directly to give honour to God in the not doing thereof this must needs be an excesse of religion a negative superstition Iust so as not observing is observance not doing a thing is â—erformance of it as the purposed absteining from that which â—ppeareth a dishonouring of God is a dirâ—ct giving of honour â—nto him 7. Neither is the other allegation out of D. A. to any better purpose than the former There is a suâ—erstitioÌ„ sometimes in absteining from certaine lawfull things viz. when some singular service honour is by that abstineÌ„ce â—ntended Did the Rep. ever deny this Nay doeth he not â—xpresly confesse as much in these words The superstiâ—ions excesse of religion doâ—th sometimes seeme to consist in a â—egation viz. when tâ—at very negation abstinence or forbearing is held for a speciall worship The Rej. indeed seemeth to finde a difference in that terme of singular But that is to finde a knott in a rush For by singulâ—r D r. A. meant the same thing which the Replyer meant by speciall according as theis termes are ofteÌ„ promiscuously used The descant therfore which the Rej. maketh upon this occasioÌ„ that we fancy our non-coÌ„formity so singular a piece of service a singular point of piety and of true syncerity this I say is but a declamatory venting of bitter but ungrounded surmizes We account our abstinence from theis Cerem no speciall or particular worship much lesse singular for degree of excellency nor doe we esteeme it a point of piety more singular than to absteine from swearing by the Masse Some point of sincerity there is in refusing theis mixtures but not worship or so singular in our opinion as the Rej. would perswade his readers to our singular prejudice wroÌ„g Many things are singular faults if they be admitted the leaving of which is no singular commendation What if some had rather never preach the Gospel or receive the supper than tell a lye for those endes Will the Rej. thence conclude that they make the absteining from a lye a more singular piece of worship and piety than either Word or Sacraments I would be loath to undertake the prooving of such a wilde consequence Divine and blessed Bradford refused to be admitted unto the Ministery by B. Ridley except he might be excused from the abusive formalities then and now in use yet Gardiner nor Boner neither did nor being asked would therefore as is probable have accused him of Superstition as esteeming the absteining from those abuses more singular service of God or piety than all he might doe and did afterward in the ministery 8. The examples brought by the Rej. are like unto his Reasons 1. The Pharisees did superstitiously restrainâ— labour on the Sabbath beyond that which God imposed this was a negative superstition True it was an humaine inâ—tituted Ceremony somethâ—ng like unto Popish holy â—ayes But the Pharisees absteining from the feasts of Bacchus Venus c. was no speciall worship 2. The â—hilasâ—ims not treading on Dagons thâ—eshold was negative â—uperstition True as the former It was an observation â—nstituted to honour Dagon by But their not-admitâ—ing of Circumcision was no superstition When thereâ—ore upon such wretched examples and reasons as theis â—re the Rej is so confident in laying his weighty charge â—f Superstition upon us as that he pronounceth all the â—ater of Nilus not to be sufficient to wash us from grosse suâ—erstition the understanding reader hath no cause to â—hinke otherwise but that even the Rej. may have a â—onfident full persuasion such as that he buildeth much â—n and yet but hollow empty supporters for the upâ—olding of it 9. Such also are his distinctions whereby as with a wett finger he dischargeth the Convocation of all suâ—erstition because they impose the Ceremonies not as â—hings directly properly immediatly but onely consequently â—nd mediately belonging to the giving of honour to God For 1. If they be consequently directed to God in â—eaching of men Gods will as the word doeth they are â—irect worship unlesse preaching be no worship 2. If â—hey be worship proper to this office they are proper worship 3. If they be worship belonging to the first â—able then they are immediately worship But all the former are true as was before shewed yet one thing more would be knowne what reason the Rej. hath to place the observance of our Cerem for the kynde of it in one degree of distance and latitude and the rejecting of them in another It seemeth to be as if the English day and night should be so disioyned that our night should be in England and our day in China When he further expounds himselfe we shall be more able to discerne his meaning 10. Last of all For ending of this quaestion about superstition I require a resolution of this not-unlike Quaere which with change of persons conteineth the same case Seeing there be different opinions concerning our Diocesan Bishops places and functions eveâ— among them that make benefitt of them some holding them to be of divine institution or else not lawfull so that as they say without this perswasion they would give over their Bishopricks to day before to morrow Others holding them onely of humaine Institution and yet lawfull Let him I say tell us plainly whether the Prelates of this later opinion may call the other Prelatâ— superstitious brethren or fathers for holding Ecclesiasticalâ— Bishops of Mans institution unlawfull If not let noâ— the Rej. nor his Diocesan be so liberall of this title to others that dissent from them about humaine Ceremonies as unlawfull except they either thinke Bishops cannot be superstitious or that we cannot be wronged with any odious imputation CHAP. X. Sect. I. Concerning Parliaments and Convocations answere to 70.71.72.73 of the Praeface BEcause the Def. objected the authority of Parliaments and Convocations for establishing of theis Rites it was opposed by the Rep. 1. that Prelates â—n theis matters have no respect unto the authority of â—arliaments as appeareth by the testimony of the Parâ—â—ament it selfe An. 1610. in the Records thereof 2. That â—o Parliament doeth allow subscription and Conforâ—ity to be urged as now it is by the Prelates Which also â—as shewed out of the same Parliament records 3. That â—he Prelates proceedings are so ag t. Parliament Lawes â—hat by them they are subject to a Praemunire Now see â—hat is rejoyned 1. The first fillip is that though the Prelates regard â—ot the authority of Parliaments yet that is no answer to â—his Objection theis Ceremonies are established by sundry acts â—f Parliaments Where the Rej. forgetteth that some arâ—uments and answers are ad hominem that is they reâ—pect the thing in quaestion not simply but as it comâ—eth
is that the use of some Iewish rite without any Iewish opinion as Circumcision and Easter In which answer nothing is found that toucheth any terme of the Argument Yet upon the occasion of it the Def. was asked how a Iewish Rite can be used without some part of a Iewish opinion The Rejoynd answereth materially but not formally and in use But he should have remembred that the Argument is of significant rites using and the Def. his answer is of Iewish significant rites using so that in his grant ther must needes be granted some formall use for signification Beside in all using of humane mysticall rites upon due consideration ther is some part of a Iewish opinion I prove it thus All they that consideratly use carnall beggerly rudiments in Gods service have this opinion that suche rites as the Iewish set praefiguration aside which no Christian ever admitted are good in the Christian Churche But all that so use humane mysticall rites use carnall beggerly rudiments in Gods service Ergo. The assumption I prove thus All that use mysticall rites wherto there is no Spirit annexed by God as unto the Euangelicall institutions of the new Testament use carnall beggerly rudiments in Gods service But they whiche use humane mysticall rites use mysticall rites wherto there is no Spirit annexed by God Ergo. The Proposition cannot be denied untill a better definition of suche rites be given nor the assumption except an Euangelicall promise can be shewed of Spiritual blessing upon the use of humane mysticall rites Concerning Circumcision 4. Because the Def. for an example of a Iewish rite lawfull for Christians to use named Circumcision the Repl. concluded that belike he houldeth Circumcision as it is used under Prester Iohn to be lawfull The Rej. therfore resolveth us that He doth so and also chalengeth the Repl. for saying nothing to disprove him Vpon this provocation it is necessarie to say some-thing against these patrones of Circumcision Where it is to be marked that the quaestion is of Ecclesiasticall Ceremonies devized by man for signification of morall duties whether it be lawfull for a Churche repraesentative suche as our Convocation to appoint and urge Circumcision in this kinde and to this purpose upon those Christians whoe are under their power 5. Now of this quaestion in the formal state of it I finde not that scarce any doubt was amonge understanding Christians before this Def. and Rej. being urged therto by direct consequence from their principles have now found it necessarie to mainteyne the affirmative part for defence of our beggerly Ceremonies Ther was some difference betwixt Hierome Augustine about observing of legall Rites in speciall about Circumcision as appeareth out of the Epistles which passed betwixt them yet exstant but both of theÌ„ agreed on this that as well to Iew as Gentile all religious use of Circumcision for Ceremonie c. is now after due publication of the Gospel unlawfull or deadly All that have written since agree about the same trueth except Caietan in one place who is forsaken opposed therin by all Papists the Iesuites themselves not excepted Our Divines are so confident of this that from the unlawfulnesse of Circumcision they usually dispute against other humane Ceremonies and the Iesuits in answering are forced to flie unto this which must be our Def. and Rej. their answer that the Ceremonies of the olde Testament are not absolutely abrogated but onely in regard of their speciall manner end intention Greg. Valent. tom 2. disp 7. quaest 7. punct 7. Bellar. de effect Sacr. l. 2. c. 32. whiche answer is called by D. Fulke ag Saund. of images pag. 672. a beastly doctrine But because it were an infinite and needlesse labor to allege the testimonies whiche may be easily alleged against Ceremoniall Circumcision amonge Christians as unlawfull I will passe on to reasons against it that the Rej. may no more say You say nothing to disprove it 6. First The onely place in the New Testament by which all Divines as the Rejoynder speaketh pag. 75. prove a power in the Churche to constitute Ceremonies is 1. Cor. 14.26.40 Edification decencie order But the Apostle in that chapter doeth no way give leave eyther unto our or any other Churche to constitute Circumcision for a Ceremonie Therfore no Churche hath power to constitute Circumcission for a Ceremonie For Order and Decencie no man in his right wits will say that Circumcision commeth under their notion And as for Edification it hath been formerly shewed that it doeth not require new instituted significant Ceremonies muche lesse a rejected or abrogated Ceremonie but onely is the ende of orderly and decent cariage of thinges instituted by God 7. Secondly no part of the partition wall betwixt Iewes and Gentiles may by any Convocation-house or other Churche be reared up againe But Circumcision is a part nay a principall corner-stone of that partition-wall howsoever it be interpreted so it be appointed Ergo. 8. Thirdly Circumcision cannot be esteemed more lawfull to be instituted for a significant Ceremonie then a Paschall lambe and they two being brought into the Churche what shall hinder if it please our Convocation house but the greatest part of the olde Ceremoniall law may in like manner follow For the Rejoynder cap. 2. sect 6. acknowlegeth no other limites or boundes for nomber of suche Ceremonies then the judgement of those to whose discretion it belongeth to judge therof 9. In the fourth place It is not lawfull for any Churche to impose Ceremoniall burdens upon Christians But Circumcision is a great burden to them upon whome it is imposed as our Convocation men would confesse if it were imposed upon them Ergo. 10. Fiftly It is not lawfull for any Churche or Convocation-house to usurpe authoritie over the bodies of men especially unto bloud But appointing of Circumcision is usurping of authoritie over mens bodies to the shedding of bloud Ergo. Adde unto this that the Convocation-house may better appointe that all English men should have their lippes or their eares pared or theyr eares nayled to theyr Parish-Churche dore for signification of that dutie which they are bounde to performe with their eares and lippes then suche Circumcision as is in use with the Iewes and Prester-Iohn These thinges considered I thinke ther is no reasonable man but will sooner reject our Ceremonies for bringing suche a foul tayle after them as that our Convocaâ—ion may cause all English-men to be Circumcized then admitte of Circumsicision for love of our paultrie Ceremonies 11. Presently after the Def. had excused Iewish Rites if they were used without Iewiâ—h opinion he coÌ„fesseth without distinction that all Iewish-Rites are abolished Wherin the Repl. noted a contradiction But the Rejoynder to helpe at a dead lift distinguisheth betwixt Iewish Ceremonies as they were typicall or figurative and necessarie and Iewish Ceremonies as they are morally significant and free Now for necessitie and freedome enough hath been spoken in the first part In
non asperguns se aquâ â—ustrali quandò Templum ingrediuntur They sinn not who without contempt do not Sprinkle themselves with Holy Water when they enter the Church Iunius his wordes are so full and plaine that they admitte no answer no humane ordination can make it good 6. The Rep. conclusion that suche sprinkling of water as the Def. alloweth may perhaps be called Iâ—wish but not Christian without taking Christs name in vayne cannot be eluded by the Rejoynder his comparatively Christian no more then some uncleannesse may be called Christian in comparison of filthinesse contrarie to nature 9. In the following passages concerning abuse oâ— imposing humane Ceremonies and P. Martyrs judgement nothing is worth the answering which hath not been formerly cleared Onely about that which the Def. affirmeth concerning the shutting up of the gap which was sayd to be opened by this doctrine of humane significant Ceremonies in Gods worship something must be answered unto the Rejoynder his fierce accusations 1. The Rejoynder asketh If any more significant Ceremonies have been brought-in this threescore yeares To whiche I answer first that ther have been of late more bringing in of Altars with bowing unto theÌ„ then was before and at Durrham the third Seat of our Def. more superstitious observations are now sayd to be urged then in threescore yeares before Secondly it is wel knowen that in threescore yeares ther have scarce any generall significant Ceremonies been newly brought into the Churche of Rome yet Chamier tom 2. pag. 1299. answereth to the like evasion We are to regard not onely what is brought in but what may be brought in For while such authority is challenged the â—oke ìs not certaine but wavering Rituum non tantum inductorum habenda est ratio sed eâ—rum qui induci possunt 〈◊〉 enim authoritas talis vindicatur ingum non est câ—rlum sed in flâ—xu 2. Because the Replier sayd that the gap is every day made wider and wider by suche defences as this is which allow of Images themselves for some religious use because by this meanes any Crucifixe may come in that is not greater then the Churche doore the Rejoynder accuseth him of a steeled conscience if he doeth not bleed for suche an injurious jest of falshood tending to bring them into suspicion and hatred so that in his charitie we can no longer be accounted syncere men And I pray you why Forsooth the Def. doeth not allow all Images and in Churches too and for religious use Now if his heat be over let him consider the Def. his wordes cited allowed and mainteyned by himselfe pag. 291. the use of Images onely in regard of superstitious adoration is to be called Popish and not true What distinction is heer betwixt Images though he was not by the Replier accused as favouring all Images but onely a Crucifixe And let him tell us if he doeth or can by his groundes disalow of all Crucifixes or if ther be no use of suche Images in Churches but onely for superstitious adoration or if ther be no religious use of a significant Image beside adoration The case is so plaine that every man may see the Rejoynder in this place breaking out into an intemperat passion for want of a reasonable answer to that which he was ashamed to confesse 3. The Rejoynder confessing that our Prelates can when they please open the gap to many other Ceremonies like to these which now they urge upon us addeth notwithstanding that the Replier his spirit in saying so transported him to involve his Maiestie and the State by an uncharitable surmize And that this gap shall never be opened unlesse our janglings and our sinnes bring Gods displeasure upon our land Now alas what involving is this of Civill powers to say that the Prelats by their permission may bring in threescore Ceremonies as well as three And what humane religious Ceremonies can be brought into England without our sinnes desert As for his intermixing of our janglings as a possible cause it is not worth any jangling Concerning the second Commandement 10. One Argument is yet to be handled eyther omitted or as the Rejoynder sayth put off unto another place by the Defendant The Argument standeth thus The second Commandement forbiddeth to make unto our selves the likenesse of any thinge whatsoever for religious use as Bucer Iuel Fulke Andrews and Bilson doe interpret it Therfore to make appoint or use significant Ceremonies of mans devizing is unlawfull The Rejoynder answereth in general that Religious use by these fore-named Authors is taken 1. For worship to the Image 2. Worship to God by the Image and not simply that whiche may any ways conferre to the furtherance of Religion Wherin he sayth nothing but trueth and yet no trueth at all to the purpose except he understandeth in the that which he affirmeth onely 1. e. that they meant no more but worshiping to and by and in that he denieth by simply no difference betwixt any of those thinges that help forth or further Religion as if civill circumstances and instituted religious Ceremonies were all one And if this be his meaning it requireth more then his simple testimonie to confirme it 11. For the backing of this Argument it was first observed by the Replier that the word likenesse used in the second Commandement is generall and comprehendeth under it all religious similitudes because they are homogeneall to Images there expresly forbidden To this the Rejoynder answereth nothing but onely sayth that our Ceremonies are not religious similitudes in suche a sense as the Commandement intendeth and Divines understand And that the Replier speaketh ignorantly because the Commandement doeth as expresly forbid suche similitudes as any graven Images Now the first of these sayinges we cannot understand untill the Rejoynder explaineth him self what that sense is in which the Commandement intendeth to forbid all religious similitudes As for the second to leave the Repliers ignorance unto the readers judgemeÌ„t more in it is granted then was demanded viz that all religious similitudes are expresly forbidden in the second Commandement 12. It was secondly added by the Replier that significant Ceremonies are externall actes of religious worship even as they are used to further devotion Suarez in 3. q. 65. ar 4. Bell. de Eff. Sacr. lib. 2. cap. 29 and 31. and therfore being invented by man of the same nature with Images by which and at which God is worshiped The Rejoynder here for want of a better answer flieth to his olde Sanctuarie of meritorious necessarie and immediat worship grosly held by Papists of their Ceremonies whether thâ—y be significant or not significant But he hath in the former part of this writing been so beaten out of this burrow that we need not againe spend time in digging about it Let any man looke upon the places quoted and he shall finde that merit necessitie and immediatnesse set a part significant Ceremonies are externall acts of religious worship which was all that
way of authority and if he can doe this he may also perswade us that we are for refusing them excluded suspended deprived excommunicated fined imprisoned without any way lawfull or vnlawfull of authority Concerning necessity in conscience see the first part chap. 6. Another answere of the Rejoynders is notorious Bellarmine saith he allegeth this feast of Dedication to proove the Dedication or Consecration of Churches which is nothing to our question of significant Rites Now surely if Dedication and Consecration of Churches bee nothing to our question of significant Rites the Def. and Rej. say nothing to the purpose when they prove this question of signifying Rites by the Maccabees Feast of Dedication And if that Feast of Dedication doeth not proove humane Dedications lawfull much lesse doeth it prove the lawfulnesse of other significant Ceremonies such as ours are 3. The Defendant for backing of this instance added that our Saviour seemeth to approve that humane Feast by his presence Ioh. 10. To which it was replied that he seemeth onely because we onely read that he walked in Solomons Perch at that Feast which he might doe without observing or approoving of it This is Iunius his answer to Bellarmine alleging that Christ by his presence honoured that Feast Non sestum proprie honorawit Christus sed coetum piorum convenientium festo nam omnes ejusmodi occasiones seminandi Evangelij sut observabat capiebaâ— Christus Con. 3. l. 4.6.17 an 6. So Peliâ—anus in Mac. 1. cap. 4. Nec aliud in his Encoenijs Christus egisse legitur quam praedicasse in Templo Christ did not properly honour the Feast but the Congregation of the faithfull at the Feast For Christ tooke all such occasions then to wit before those solemnities were abolished of sowing the seed of his Gospel Nor did Christ ought that wee read at those times but preach in the Temple And sure I am that neither walking in the Porch nor declaring that he was that Christ belonged properly vnto the solemnity of that Feast If hee had preached of Dedications and Consecrations with allowance that had beene something The Rej. objecteth 1. That we plead Christs approbation of marriage by his presence This indeed added vnto evident grounds addeth some honour unto that state especially in that a miracle was wrought to the furtherance of a marriage feast if wee had no other plea for lawfulnesse of marriage but that meere presence I for my part would as soone separate from my wife as the rejoynder saith he would from the Church of England if he were of our minde about Ceremonies that is to day before to morrow His 2. objection is that Christ whipped the buyers and sellers out of the Temple Ioh. 2. Ergo. Which maketh directly to the clearing of this cause For there were two whippings of these Merchants out of the Temple the first whereof was this Ioh. 2. in the begining of his preaching the other toward the end of it a little before his passion so that it appeareth plainely they were not so driven out but they came in againe and continued their merchandise there and yet in the meane space our Saviour was often present in the Temple without allowance of that their practise So had he often condemned the traditions of men in Gods worship and yet was present some time where they were observed Beside because the Def. and Rej. are wonte to accuse the Iewes for placing holinesse necessity efficacy and proper essentiall worship in humane traditions whereby they would avoid the dint of that generall censure which our Saviour giveth of them Mat. 15. Mar. 7. c. I would faine learne of them how it appeareth or may be conjectured that they placed not as much holinesse necessity efficacy c. in this and such like humane Feasts as in washing of hands before meat If they did as any man will thinke then how can they say that our Saviour condemned the one and allowed the other The following 13. and 14. Sections are spent about some objections taken out of M r. Cartwrite But because the slitenesse of this Instance is already sufficiently discovered I will not cloy nor deteyne the Reader about them at this time but passe on to the next Instance SECT 15. and 16. Concerning the Altar of Iordan Iosh. 22. 1. IT is the Def. and Rej. their fashion to produce Instances without proof of their fitnesse and so exspect from us that they should be disproved whiche is all one as if Iohn a Stiles should in a great traverse bringe forth against Iohn a Nokes some instrumens for evidence of his cause which few or none beside himself can read at least so as to discerne any thing in it making for him and plead that in them was evidence enough except Iohn a Nokes could prove the contrarie So it is heer about the Altar of Iordan no demonstration is first made how it agreeth to the purpose but we are chalenged to shew how it disagreeth Yet yeelding them this libertie we have enough to oppose 2. And first of all we answer that this Altar of the two Tribes was not in the state or use religious as the Crosse is by the confession of an English Bishop Babington on the 2. Commandement The Rejoynder 1. opposeth out of M r. Parker par 1. sect 34. and 36. that religious in use is that which hath a religious ende and religious in state which is Ecclesiasticall belonging to Gods service Ergo. But M r. Parker in those sect tould him that religious in a sense common or mixâ—ly all thinges are that are doen to an holy ende and religious in sense speciall or in state all those thinges are that have Order Obligation and a kinde of Immobilitie in Gods service Now the quaestion is not of the former common mixt sense but of the later speciall state according to which no man can say the Altar of Iordan to have been religious upon ground of Scripture or reason Let any man judge then whether partialitie did put out M r. Parkers eyes as the Rej. speaketh or blear theirs that see not the vanitie of this allegation 3. B. Babingtons words on the 2. Commandement are these They erected that Altar not for religion but in deed for a civil use as you may see Iosh. 22. The Rejoynd answereth that he calleth the Altar civill Analogically because it was ordeyned by consent of fellow-Citizens which is as meer a shift as any yet invented by the Rejoynder For 1. he calleth not the Altar but the use civill 2. He opposeth this civilitie not unto Divine Institution as the Rejoynder would have him but unto the same fellow-Citizens erecting of an Altar for Religion 3. What he meaneth appeareth plainly by his third Proposition there set downe in these termes It is lawfull to make pictures of thinges which we have seen to a civill use but not to use them in the Churche and for Religion 4. To passe over circumstantiall passages the Def.
argument is the cheife foundation of Illyriâ—us Calvin Chemnitius and â—thers Of Bellarmines answer the Rejoynder makâ—th an Argument against our Divines whoe have confuted that answer and so sufficiently answered his Argument long before he framed it which yet he taketh no knowledge of but nakedly propoundeth it as if this were the first time of beating it off the stage It is sayth he onely sayd of the Apostles not of the Churches that they did ordâ—yn Elders Act. 14.23 So say I it is onely sayd of the Apostles and not of the Churches in the very same verse that they did pray and fâ—st doeth it follow from hence that the Churches had no hand part or consent in prayer and fasting If not then neyther doeth the onely mentioning of the Apostles in creating Presbyters exclude the peoples formal choise much lesse their consent If any man desires large and full clearing of the place he may find it in Iâ—nius his Notes on Bellarmine Contr. 5. lib. 1. cap. 7. annot 59.63.64 where the Conclusion is that Bellarmine doeth in this argument nugari nothing but trifle disioyning thinges that ought to be conjoined as if ther were a contradiction betwixt these two Propositions The Apostles ordeyned the Churches ordeyned If the Rejoynder would have brought a fitting example he should have shewed us that Paul or Barnabas being at Ierusalem ordeyned a Minister and sent him to Antioche Iconium or Lystra signifying by letters that such a man was appointed their Pastor though they never knew or heard of him before For that had been something like unto the practise of a Bishop whoe upon the Patrons praesentation whersoever he be sendeth his Minister from the place or Palace of his residence unto a Congregation 20.30 or 40. miles of which poor despized People must be content with towling of a Bell as sufficient notice given of their Ministers fitnesse and their necessitie to â—cknowledge the same 3. In the second place Tit. 1.5 wheras our translation hath that Titus was to ordeyne Ministers the Rejoynder turneth ordeyning into apâ—ointing and I may better turne it into setting or placing Now which soever translation be admitted the Rejoy â—is argument is lighter then a feather except it be supâ—osed that Titus could not effect that Ministers should be in every Church of Creete neither by nor with the Churches consent which is too absurd a proposition for â—ny resonable man to father Take the Rej his translation in ordinary rigour Our King doeth appoint Bishops and yet they are not placed in their Seats without some kinde of consent and election of others And yet I hope the Rej. himselfe will not say that Titus tooke so much upon him as this commeth to 4. As for choosing Ministers by Prophesie that was very extraordinary and therefore hath no place in the question of ordinarie calling Yet 1. Prophesie did no lesse require the concurrence of the Churches consent in an ordinary Minister then it did the Presbyteries ordination in Timothies person 1. Tim. 4.14 It was onely an extraordinary cause of that consent which otherwise should have beene grounded on the persons qualification Prophesie also or Vision did sometime follow the Churches election as in Celerinus of whom Cyprian Epist. 34. ed. Goulart recordeth Cum consentire dubitaret Ecclesiae in visione per noctem compulsus est no negaret When hee wavered about consenting to the Church by a vision of the night he was forced to assent 5. As for election by lot I do not thinke any example can be given of it wherein the Churches election of divers persons betwixt whom the lot should designe with their consent did not concurre 6. As for the Primitive Churches tenet of Divine authority nothing can be prooved out of the Councell of Laodicea which was after Iulians time The Synod of Africa Epist. 68. Cypr. ed. Goul. doeth informe us thus The people it selfe hath power both to chuse worthy Priests and to refuse unworthy ones The which also we see to come from Divine authority Plebs ipsâ— maxime habet potestatem vel aligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi Quod ipsum videmus de Divina autheritate descendere c. Yet Calvin answereth that even that Laodicean Councell did not restraine from election but onely from disorderly electing by themselves And is therin learnedly seconded against Bellarmines rejoynder by Iunius in Bell. Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 7. 7. As for implicit consent in Parliament it maketh nothing to the question And yet it cannot be prooved that every thing decreed by Parliaments have the Churches implicit consent For then the Church did implicitly consent unto all the alterations of religion in King Henries King Edwards Q. Maries and Q. Elizabeths dayes how opposite soever they were one to another neither can it be shewed lawfull for the Churches of Christ to leave their priviledges which Christ hath given them to the pleasure of any Parliament 8. To say that the Patrons and Bishops sending without the Churches consent is as good or better then the Churches free consent well ordered and directed is all one as to say it is as good or better that Women should be married without their consent then with it 9. As for the finall answer I referre the Reader partly to that already sayd and partly to D. Ames his answer unto Bellarmine tom 2. lib. 3. cap. 3. Ministers going to law for their places 6. The question is if this was knowne in the Primitive Church It is rejoyned 1. that Bishops were often inquestion at Synods about their title to their places which was as much But 1. This was not in the Apostles time 2. Questioning before Synods about Ecclesiasticall affaires is of Ecclesiasticall nature going to law not so In Synods all things ought to be determined by Gods Word at the Kings Bench and Assizes the Iudges pronounce sentence by mans law Yet the good ancient Bishops were so farre from seeking a title to their places by Synodicall judgement that they withdrew themselves as being afraid to have such a title put vpon them either by Churches or Synods examples of which modesty we have even in declining times Basil Gregorie c. A law we finde also Cod. de Epist. Cler. mentioning the same disposition Tantum ab ambitu debet esse sepositus Antistes ut quaeratur congedus rogatus recedat invitatus effugiat sola illis suffragetur necesittas excusandi Profecto enim indignus est sacerdotio nisi ordinatus fuerit invitus The Prelate ought to be so farre from ambition that nothing but compulsion should draw him though he be desired let him give backe and when invited let him shift c. For certainely he is unworthy the office of Priesthood unlesse he be ordained unwillingly Certainely these men would never have sought those places by course of law which they hardly accepted being obtruded upon them 2. The Rejoynder sayth Lawing about places ariseth upon the title
it a false pretence in the rest If all had done so yet this was no act of their Ministerie nor known it may be to their people and therfore the crossing of it did not so directly tend to the discrediting of their Ministery as the crossing of their publick doctrine Lastly that which is done before a man be setled in the Ministery at one time without any great deliberation is not of such note as that which a man hath long professed and perswaded by reasons taken from the word of God By all this it appeareth that this first accusation of Ialshood was rather an adventure as the Def. himselfe calleth it then a grounded assertion He did but adventure neither to call the same plea prâ—sumptuous For he can finde no other reason to beare up this charge withall then that they seeme to arrogate to themselves a preâ—ogative proper to the Apostles How can this be I wonder seeing they follow herein the direction of the Apostle himselfe Tit. 2.15 Let no man despise thee What this prerogative is he doth not plainly tell us but compriseth it in two places of Scripture 1. Cor. 15. Gal. 2.18 the first whereof is nothing at all to the purpose For the Apostle doth not say as the Def. maketh him If we be found false witnesses then is your faith in vaine but if Christ be not risen then are we false witnesses and your faiâ—h is vaine Which also any preacher of the Gospell may say without falshood or presumption to his people The second place If I buiâ—d againe that which I have destroyed I make my selfe a prevaricator is applyable to any Minister that hath taught the truth against Popish superstition This very doctrine M. Perkins gathereth out of the words Proculcavimus supâ—rstitionem Papisticam c. I hope the Def. doth not thinke he may build up any superstition and not be accounted therefore a prevaricator if he doe or though he doe not let him consider where the presumption lyeth But why irreligious because it is persisting in an errour for the preservation of their owne credit But 1. who taught the Def. to make that which is in quaestion the ground of an accusation in dispute First let him prove that it is an errour before he take it so for granted that upon that ground he will challenge mens reasons as irreligious 2. It is not their credit but the credit of their Ministery which they speake of 3. Is it such an irreligious thing to desire that certaine ceremonies may not bee imposed upon them lest their Ministery be by that meanes prejudiced Why partiall because men should rather yeeld to confoâ—mitie for the credit of the Church i. e. for the credit of the Convocation house Alas the credit which a great part of that generation doth seeke for is that they may rejoyce in our flesh But suppose they meant sincerely would the Def have men discredit and prejudice their Ministery to bring some credit unto other mens decrees Or doth the forbearing of some ceremonies bring such discredit to the Authorizers of them surely then they are more for the honour of mortall men then for the honour of God For Gods honour and worship is no wayes prejudâ—ced by their absence The last charge is pernitious And here many words are used to give countenance unto that one The maine ground is Woe to me if I preach not the Gospell and Simon lovest thou mee then feed my sheep Whereupon he gathereth that it is a pernicious thing for a Minister to putt himselfe unto silence But 1. what is this to the quaestion of diâ—crediting ones Ministry 2. Although we were most worthy to have these remembrances out of Scripture rubbed upon us yet the Prelates are altogether unworthy and unfitt to doe it Let any man conceive with himselfe B. Bancroft or any other in the end of the Convocation after all the Canons were concluded comming forth as Prolocutor and speaking thus to the Ministers assembled together before him Men and bretheren the reverend fathers of this Convocation as thâ—y alwayes meditate on the law of God and every part of it both day and night so especially doe they lay to heart those passages of holy Writ which properly concerne their office as woe unto me if I preach not the Gospell and Simon lovest thou mee feed my sheep Out of thâ—se considerations being carryed with a fervent zeale both of preaching themselves in their severall places also of procuring more faithfull Preachers more fruitfull preaching throughout the land they have â—ver and above the institutions of Christ appointed certaine ceremonies strictly to be observed of every Minister so that whosoever shall hereafter upon any pretense refuse to observe the same they shall be esteemed factious scâ—ismaticall disorderly exoâ—bitant men and for that cause by their orâ—inary suspended and deprived Now for the preventâ—ng of such a mischiefâ— your tender mother would have you to understand by my mouth that if any man bee thrust out of the Ministery for not yeeldâ—ng to these câ—nstitutions howsoevâ—r they may seeme unâ—o him such as the Church cannot lawfully appoâ—nt nor hee observe yet is he author of his owne silencing and therefore you must all be exhorted to consider wâ—ll of those parcels of Scripture which have so much prevailed with your carefull mother Woe is me if I preach not the Gospell Simon lovest thou mee feed my sheepe Would not he that heard such a speech as this from a Prelate be forced to call for a bason and after he had recovered himselfe he might well give answer in these words I heare the word of a deceitfull tongue Behold thou art called a Bishop and glâ—riest in that title thou perswadest tâ—y selfe thou art a chiefe guide and father of the Church thou therefore that teachest another teachest thou not thy selfe Thou that sayest it is a woefull thing not to preach the Gospell doest thou neither preach Christ faithfully nor suffer those that would Darest thou by thine owne authoriâ—y and for tâ—ine owne pleasure hinder so many able men from preaching thou that professest the flocke must bee fed doest thou thrust oâ—t feeders and keep in starvers Therefore thou art inexcusable O Prelat whosoever thou art that condemnest another for that whereof thou art both beginning and ending Thirdly the Apostles woe 1. Cor. 9. belongeth to negligent slothfull and carelesse ministers properly such as our Prelats know where to find enough who yâ—t neither feele nor feare that woe from the Bishops which mâ—ny faithfull preachers are wrapped-in from time to time Fourthly the Apostle doth not pronounce any woe for not preaching where imprisonment doâ—h hinder Now hee whose conscience is against the ceremonies or doubteth of them is spiritually imprisoned so that he cannot by using of them make his way to the pulpit Fiftly it is a meere jest though a bitter one to say that we leave our ministeries when we doe all that our consciences will suffer us to doe
upon contribution if they had such accommodative consciences as this Def. surmiseth of them Some of them with serving the time and the addition of Simony might come to be Bishops and the rest might be preferred by their meanes to some certaine incomings CHAP. VI. Sect. III. NOw we are come to the sixt and last generall Argument viz. that the imposition of these ceremonies is opposite unto Christian liberty Here the Def. observeth first that the state of this quaestion is about liberty from the necessary observation of such things as are in their owne nature indifferent This saith he the Objector implyeth But I answer the Objector doth not imply it he speaketh of ceremonies lawfully appointed by man that these are to be used as things indifferent Neither if one private Obj. had granted it ought it therefore to be sett downe as the received state of the quaestion seeing the Abridgment which in the defence is chiefly opposed doth every where deny the cerem to be in their owne nature indifferent But let that passe and examine his resolution There be two kinds of necessities incident unto humaine precepts and ordinances in the case of indifferencie one is necessity of obedience to the commandement which cannot properly prejudice Christian liberty the other is doctrinall necessity when any of those properties which are essentiall unto divine ordinances are attributed unto a humaine constitution as 1. immediateâ—y to binde the conscience 2. to be a necessary meanes to salvation 3. to hold it altogether unalterable by the authority of man this is a presumption and prevarication not onely against Chrisâ—ian liberty but also against the soveraigntie of God himselfe But 1. what meaneth this new distinction betwixt necessity doctrinall and obedientiall doctâ—inall before pag. 3. was opposed unto ceremoniall now unto obedientiall both without logick or sound reason 2. He should have told us what kynd of necessitie obedientiall he meaneth for Bellar. de pont rom l. 4. c. 17. useth the same pretence of obedience and alledgeth the same places of Scripture for it and yet is confuted by Iunius Whitakers and our Divines 3. If there be doctrinall necessity in all those humaine constitutions which have properties attributed unto them essentiall unto divine ordinances then our ceremonies in controversie not onely have such a mysticall signification attributed unto them as is proper unto Divine Ordinances but also that they are imposed as parts of Gods worship 4. For the three properties which the Def. mentioneth they are such as Papists in imposing of their ceremonies which yet by the judgement of all our Divines deprive men of Christian liberty doe disclaime As for immediate binding of mens consciences no learned Papist useth such a phrase Azorius a Iesuit instit mor. parte 1. lib. 5. cap. 6. sayth expresly that humaine lawes doe not bind directe proxime perse directly immediately of themselves Bellarmine also de Rom. pont l. 4. cap. 20. ad arg 9. sayth as much Leges humanae non obligant sub poena mortis nisi quatenus violatione legis humanae offenditur Deus i. e. they doe not immediately binde mens consciences For necessity to salvation the same Bellarmine de verb. non script c. 11. sayth plainly That those things which are simply necessary unto salvation are sett downe in Scripture and that the rest are not simply necessary And it is plaine enough that they doe not hold them altogether unalterable by that authority which brought them in for beside that no reasonable man can deny so manifest a truth they have altered many ancient Rites as all the learned know So that the Defendant his distinction is proved nothing else but a confusion common to him with the Papists to our ceremonies and theirs SECT IV. V. IN the 4. Section the Def. objecteth to himselfe under the name of the Abridgement the words of the Apostle 1. Cor. 7.35 This I speake to your profite not that I might cast a snare upon you shewing that the imposition of necessity upon things indifferent is a very snare of mens consciences Now though these words are not in the Abridgement yet because as D. Whitakers sayth de pont cap. 4. qu. 7. aureus hic locus est nostrae libertatis vindex This is a golden charter of liberty therefore it is worthy of due consideration The summe of the Def. his answer is that to impose a neceessity where God hath left a liberty is indeed a snare but this necessâ—ty is not taughâ— in our Church I answer it is taught in our church now a dayes that ecclesiastical canons do binde mens coÌ„sciences It is taught in our church that maÌ„s will is a sufficieÌ„t reason for these Canons about Cer. It is taught in our church that Sacraments may not be administred or God publickly served without these cerem that Ministers called and allowed of God for these ceremonies must be silenced that they are to be excommunicated ipso facto and accursed which oppose themselves unto them It is taught also that though a man doubteth in his conscience of the lawfulnesse of them though evident scandall will follow upon the using of them yet they may not be omitted If this be not necessity enough to insnare a mans conscience I know not what then is In the fift Section two places are objected out of the Abridgement viz. Gal. 5.1 Col. 2.20 and one of them after a fashion answered The first answere is that the Apostle there speaketh onely of Iewish rites which is Bellarmines answer just de eff sacr c. 32. loquitur Paulus de servitute Iudaica qua servierant illi sub antiqua lege The second answer is that the Apostles meaning was of such an observation of these ceremonies as had an opinion of necessity overthrowing the new Testament and establishing the old So Bellarmin ibid. Illi cum circumcidi vellent excidebant à gratia Christi simul obligabant fe ad omnem legem servandam quod prorsus erat redire ad statum veteris testamâ—nti We on the other side with Danaeus against thaâ— place of Bell. say generale est Pauli dictum praeceptum the words are generall belonging to all parts of ChristiaÌ„ liberty though principally ther applyed to one Now the servitude from which Christ hath made us free is not onely in those things which the Def. speaketh of but also as Iun. cont 3. l. 4. c. 17. n. 19 21. sheweth in subjection of our consciences unto elements of mans appointing Gal 4.10 and unto the will of men 1. Cor. 7.23 which place Beza well noteth is to be understood of superstitions which some doe foolishly call indifferent things It is not onely therfore a freedome from Iewish Ceremonies but also and even therfore as D. Whitakers gathereth from all humaine ceremonies that binde or presse our consciences Whit. de rom pont q. 7. c. 3. ad 5. But it is in vaine for me to alledge our Divines in this quaestion the Abridgement alledgeth diverse
begun to thinke of this course behold our most illustrious Prince commanded me to doe it which command of his did not onely spurre me on who of mine owne accord was already running but laid a necessity of writing upon me Wherefore this my boldnesse will seeme the lesse strange unto your gracious Majesty seeing my writing proceedeth not so much from mine owne will and counsell of friends as from the commandement of my most Noble Prince who is one of your gracious Majesties speciall friends Now I thought I should doe a matter very worth the paines taking if first I should humbly admonish your most famous Majestie what your dutie is in this cause and secondly if as your humble suppliant I should beseech you for our Lord Iesus Christs sake to performe the same I beseech your gracious Majesty to take this my writing in good part for it proceedeth from a Christian love toward the Church and from an especiall reverend respect that I beare to your most gracious Majesty The Lord knoweth all things Now to the matter in hand Whereas the Apostle writing to Timothie commandeth that prayers be made for Kings and all other that be in authority and saith that the end wherefore they be ordained is that wee may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all that is perfect godlinesse and honestie he teacheth plainly enough what is the dutie of Godly Kings and Princes namely that they take care and bring to passe that first above all things true religion and the true worship of God where it is banished bee restored and being restored bee kept pure all things which smell of impiety being farre removed Secondly that men may live honestly and holily all kinds of uncleannesses beeing abandoned Lastly that publicke peace holy friendship be maintained among the subjects all occasions of contentions being as much as possible may be taken out of the way As the Apostle teacheth manifestly as we have seene so all learned men who bee of sound judgement concerning the Magistrats office doe with one consent affirme that these be the three chiefe parts of the office of the Prince and of every godly Magistrate Which thing being so I see not how your gracious Majestie can with good conscience propound againe the garments in question and other things of that kinde smelling as yet of Popish superstition and once banished out of the Churches to the consciences of the Bishops * Pauls Bishops hee meaneth or else as I sayd before he is misinformed to be taken on againe and so propound them that you should compell them by your commandement to receive them againe For first this is quite contrary to the first and chiefe part of the Princes office For if the Magistrate ought to have a chiefe care that the worship of God be kept pure and without mixture and if for this cause all things are to be abandoned which may any way either by themselves or by accident defile this worship and therefore all things are to be called backe as much as may be to the rule of God and to the former and Apostolicall and so the more pure and simple forme of religion Finally if as the Apostle commandeth we bee to abstaine not onely from all evill but also from all appearance of evill to what end I beseech you most renowned and most godly Queene should those things be brought againe into the Church of God by the Princes commandement which be contrary to the purity of the Apostolicall worship which smell of Popish superstition which bee neither availeable to the aedification of the godly nor to order nor for ornament except that which is whoorish which lastly can bring no profit but on the contrary many evills to the Church It is out of all doubt that by this law concerning apparrell all godly men will bee offended but the wicked will laugh in their sleeve and hereby be putt in hope to get many moe things as for those of the middle sort that is such as be newly converted and turned from ungodlines to godlines and be not as yet well grounded they will be in great danger and if we speake according to mans judgement they will rather looke back to the old superstition to which by nature wee are inclined then fixe and fasten their eyes upon true religion And therfore this is a decree which will bring no avancement at all to godlines but may much further ungodlinesse For though these garments be not evill and uncleane of and by themselves that is of their owne nature yet because of the former and late abuse they are not altogether free from uncleannesse Certainly it cannot be denied but that they will at the least give occasions of many evills and very grievous superstitions Now the very occasions also of evills are to be shunned To what end then should these be thrust upon the Church from whom no profit can be hoped very much evill may come for this is to tempt God Your famous Majesty may well remember that not without cause it was written Hee that toucheth pitch shall be defiled with it that the Apostle had reason to command that we should purge out the old leaven that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe And that Hosea did not foolishly reprove the Iewes because they translated and brought a yong graffe of superstitions out of Israel into their owne garden that is the true Church We ought most religious Queene to have nothing at all to doe with the Papists in matter of religion save in those things which they have common with the Apostles Why I beseech you were some kings otherwise godly reproved and blamed in the Scriptures that they had not taken away Churches or Temples for divine service in the mountaines which were built by holy Fathers ere the building of the Temple in which the Lord was wont to be worshipped Surely because the Temple being now builded and ordained for divine service God would not have any footsteps of any other chappell at all to be extant Therfore also when once the kingdome of Christ was manifested the Ceremonies and garments of Aaron ought not any more to take place For this cause the Apostles were upon good ground carefull that after Christs ascention they should so be taken away that no relickes of them remained And if they tooke them away holily unholily have the Papists called them back againe Now whether is the better to â—ollow the godly simplicity of the Apostles or the ungodly pompe of the Papists who is ignorant This recalling of such Popish garments your gracious Majesty may beleeve me will be a greater evill then peradventure it may be seene even to very wise men at the first blush For me thinkes I see and heare the Monks crying out with very loud voyces in the Pulpits both confirming their followers in their ungodly religion by the example of your gracious Majesty and also saying What doth not even the Queene of England also a most
As if forsooth the Papists though we for peace sake admitted of all those things would ever amend their Doctrine and banish out of their churches or at any hand lay down their false and godlesse decrees manifest and abhominable superstitions and idolatries and there will be some who will answer such bookes once dispersed So of this English fire there will rise a a new burning flame in Germanie and France on which hot coles the Papists as so many Smiths a forging will sprinkle cold water to make the flame the more vehement And is not this a goodly benefite Who therefore doth not see that this counsell tends to the troubling of all Churches To conclude that golden saying of a certaine learned man is very true and certaine and approved by long experience that indifferent things that is the question about indifferent things is that golden apple of contention So much shall suffice to have spokeÌ„ of the troubling of publick peace what should I say of the consciences of private beleevers It is manifest that they are greatly troubled with this commandement to put on these linnen garments For they doe so greatly complain that their lamenting voyces and grones doe reach unto and are heard in Germany Now how grievous and distastfull an offence it is to trouble the consciences of the godly the holy Scripture sheweth partly when it commandeth that we make not the holy Spirit sad neither offend the weak ones partly when it threatneth griveous punishments against those who feare not to do these things partly also when it propoundeth the examples of the Saints and specially of Paul who speakes thus If meat offend my brother I le eat no flesh while the world standeth that I may not offend my brother For in those words he giveth a generall rule by his example taken out of the doctrine of Christ to wit that no indifferent thing is to be admitted and yeelded unto much lesse to be urged upon others and least of all to be commended by decree if in the admitting urging and commanding of it the minds of good men and consciences of the faithfull be offended for a tender conscience which feareth God is a thing most pretious and acceptable to God How therefore can that counsell be approved which would have a law established and proclaimed by the Princes command for the use of garments to be used by Ministers in the ministery For to speak many things in few words if such garments be to be propounded to the faithfull they are to be propounded either as indifferent or as necessary if the later wee doe ungodlily because we make those things necessary which Christ would have to be free If the former then are they to be left free to the Churches But by commanding and compelling we make things that be free and indifferent to be necessary and so fall into the same trespasse Moreover either they be ordained of God by Moses or they be delivered by Christ God manifested in the flesh or they be ordained by the holy Ghost working and speaking in the Apostles or they are of men either godly or wicked Those Ceremonies Leviticall garments which were ordained of God by Moses ought all of them to have an end after the death of Christ as the Scriptures shew plainly especially the Epistles of Paul to the Coloss. and Hebr. therfore they cannot be revoked and called back without the transgression of Gods will It cannot be sayd that Christ taught them because there is no word extant to that end but rather he taught plainly oftentimes that all Moses his Ceremonies were ended And the same I affirme concerning the Apostles It remaines therefore that they be sayd to be of men If they be from godly men then were they ordained of them either to edification or for order and comelines But they availe not to edification that is to further comelines but rather tend to the overthrow of it as we saw before neither for any good order but rather they tend to disorder for there is a confusion of godly wicked Bishops wheras it is meet and equall that one of them be discerned from another even by their garments also Neither doe they make Christs spouse comely as we shewed a little before Therfore we ought not to yeeld unto them And such things as have beene invented by men voyd of Gods Spirit doe nothing appertaine to us Lastly the Apostles used not these garments For we have no authenticke testimony Now the church is to be fashioned after the rule of that Apostolicall Church in Ceremonies and garments as well as in Doctrine What doe wee then with these garments in the Church By whose authority can they be approved What profit or wholsome use can the Christian people have by them But on the contrary we have shewed that godlinesse is weakened by them the pure worship of God is violated Popish superstiâ—ion is by little and little called back the godly be offended the wicked be confirmed and hardened in their ungodlinesses the weak in faith are brought into hazard of their salvation there are occasions of many evills given Monkes and other Popish preachers are hereby helped to confirme their followers in their superstition the wrath of God is provoked against us those things which God would have to be destroyed are hereby builded againe by us the whole face of the Church is defiled and disgraced there is a foule sinne committed against honest and good lawes forbidding the putting on of strange outlandish garments and so the whole Church is dishonoured Besides the publicke peace of the Church yea of many churches is troubled one Bishop is set against another the consciences of the godly are troubled and the minds of good men are offended Gods spirit is made sad in them and this apple of contention is cast as it were upon the table of the Gods Now seeing the matter stands thus most gracious Queene not onely I but all my fellow-ministers and all the godly prostrate before you intreat your Majesty and for Iesus Christs sake whom we are perswaded you love from your heart we humbly beseech your Majesty not to embrace that counsell aforesayd neither to give eare to such counsellors For these counsells most godly Queene are not for the good of that your church and kingdome nor for the honor of your Majesty seing they neither serve to the increase of godlinesse nor to the retaining of the honesty of the Church neither to the preservation of publick peace but rather very greatly weaken all these good things In making 3 sorts oâ— officers afterwards Bishops Seniors or Elders and Deacons hee mâ—st take the word Biâ—hop in the scriâ—tuâ—◠〈◊〉 as 〈…〉 which your Princely Majesty ought chiefly to stand for Let your Majesty rather bend all your thoughts authority and power hereunto that first and above all you may have Bishops who be truly godly and well exercised in the holy Scriptures as by the blessing of God