they answer Nay to this demand let us take heed to our selves that we presume not beyond commission Cut off those places before cited the Papists grant the perfection of the Word of God may well be concluded Our Writers do substantially prove the sufficiency of the Scripture in matter necessary to Salvation because we are forbidden to add ought to the Word written for of that the Teâ—â— is meant or to take ought from it and by the same reason the sufficiency of the Scriptures in matters Ceremonial is established for thse places must be understood of Ceremonies no less then other things Descrip q. 8. prop. 1. Zanchius thus urgeth this argument And lest any Papist saith he should except and say Neither do we think it lawfull to add to those things which pertain to Internall and so to Spirituall piety and worship of God but onely the Controversy is of external Ceremonies I pray you consider of what things the Lord speaketh in that Chapter Deut. 4. Of what Ceremonies sacred Rites and Judicial Laws for in the Hebrew it saith thus Hear now O Israel the Statutes and the Judgments That word Hachukim doth properly signify Ceremonious Rites of worship Therefore the Lord would teach that nothing is to be added not onely to the Moral Precepts and internal worship but also to the Ceremonial-Rites and Institutions which may be further confirmed against our Adversaries by the Authority of the vulgar Translation Interpreting it in Deut. 4.5 Ceremonies And the Opinion of Stapleton Relect. prin fid doct cont 4. q. 3. art 3. arg 10. Answ to the Adm. pag. 30. who making answer to that place alledged by our Divine to confirm the perfection of Scripture against unwritten traditions saith It is especially to be understood of the Ceremonies This is acknowledged by D. Whiteg God saith he in the old Law to his people prescribed perfect and absolute Laws not onely Moral and Judicial but Ceremonial also neither was there the least thing to be done in the Church omitted in the Law And therefore for them at that time and during that State it was not lawfull to add any thing nor take any thing away no not in Ceremonies and civill Laws Bill de Pont. Rom. l. 4. c. 17. The Jews saith another had a Prescription of particular Rites most fitly agreeing to the Polity of their Church and Common-wealth But what hath God left no greater liberty to the Church in the time of the Gospel to ordain significant Ceremonies than was before given unto the Synagogue of the Jews No surely both the Jewish and Christian Church are tyed to the direction of the Scriptures without which they might not presume to do any thing in these matters How can these places be alledged with truth of reason against our Adversaries to prove the perfection of Scripture in opposition to unwritten Traditions If the Church have authority now to ordain Ceremonies without direction of the Word which then she had not easily might they reply That that Injunction did not concern us at this day seeing more liberty is given to us touching the Institution of external Rites pertaining to the worship of God then was granted to the Jews And if we may add without warrant of the Word what and where they might not Surely the Scripture was a perfect rule to them In another manner than it is to us Zanchius therefore objecting in the name of the Papists That if these places must be understood of the Ceremonial Law then it pertaineth not to us inasmuch as the Ceremonial Laws are now changed maketh answer That that Precept doth pertain to us which is manifest saith he if you consider the end of the Commandment What end That we should obey those things and those things onely that God hath commanded adding nothing detracting nothing Therefore when the same God hath by his Son given Precepts concerning Ceremonies of the New Testament and willeth us simply to obey them the force of that Precept remains Thou shalt add nothing diminish nothing Matth. 28.19 20. Moreover Christ himself plainly commandeth the same Baptize them into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost teaching them to observe whatsoever I have commanded What is this but ye shall not add or diminish Again what is that that the Apostle saith I have received of the Lord what I have delivered unto you but that it is not lawfull to add nor diminish Then he concludes Therefore the force of the Precept in Deuteronomy Zanch. de secundo praec tit de ext cult q. 1. Tam igitur nobis non licet addere his vel detrahere quam eriam non licebat Judaeis addere vel detrahere de illis of not adding or diminishing any thing in the Precepts of God doth remain perpetual even concerning Ceremonies and holy Rites and pertains to us The Jews had liberty in certain matters of order pertaining to the service of God as we now have In matter of Ceremonies we are tyed to the Word of God as they were We have no Ceremonies but two the Ceremonies or Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper and we have as certain direction to celebrate them as they had to celebrate their Ceremonies and fewer and less difficulties can arise of ours than of theirs we have no special hour place or manner of celebration assigned for them the like may be said of many Jewish Ceremonies What hour had they for their ordinary and daily Sacrifices Jun. et Trem. in act 13.15 was not it left to the order of the Church what places were appointed in their several dwellings to hear the Word of God Preached continually when they came not to Jerusalem The Word was commanded to be Preached but no mention made in what particular method what manner of place Pulpit Seat or Chair they should have and yet they had these they had also forms of Burial and Marriage though nothing be commanded concerning them The liberty of the Christian Church standeth in freedome from the burthen of Jewish Ceremonies Beza annot in act 6. not in power to ordain new Rites at her pleasure when those which God himself instituted are abolished for then should our condition in the time of the Gospell be far worse in many respects then theirs was in the time of the Law for whereas it is the vertue of a good Law Arist ad Theod Ra. 1.3 to leave as little undetermined and without the compass of the Law as may be If we have no Word for divers things wherein the Jews had particular direction there was greater perfection in the Law given unto them then in the Word which is left to the Christian Church Again Calv. opus respons versipel pag. 413. the Ordinances of God which are ever behovefull are not so burthensome as are the unprofitable inventions of men it is far better to bear the yoak of God then to be in subjection unto the meer pleasure
of sinfull men And then If the Church of the Jews was to admit of no Ceremonies but what was prescribed unto her of the Lord whereas the Christian Church is to stand to the Arbitrement of her Guides and Governours the Bondage and Infancy of the Jewish Bel. de effect Sac. l. 2. c. 32. Bell. de Mon. l. 2. c. 13. arg 9. resp pont râ—m lib. 4. cap. 17. Chrysost hom 52. in Matth. cited by D. Whitak de sc q. 9. c. 14. is much to be preferred before the liberty and ripeness of the Christian Church It is replied that the adding and diminishing spoken of doth not mean addition of preservation but addition of corruption like as the fraudulent Coyner of Money doth not corrupt the Kings Coyn either by adding baser metral unto it or by clipping any silver from it and in both kinds he is a Traytor How little doth this differ from the Jesuites gloss upon this Text God commands saith he nothing to be added to his Precept to corrupt it but not some things which may perfect it Can humane devised Rites preserve the Ordinances of God from corruptions or rather are not all such additions manifest corruptions When God hath given to Moses particular determinations of all symbolical Rites pertaining to his worship had it not been an addition of corruption in him if upon his own head he had annexed any devised significative Rites unto them Bellarmine himself grants it had been when in his third answer he labours but to small purpose to put this difference betwixt the state of the old and New Testament †Petitur principium quia et hoc ipso contraria est quaelibet nova lex quod divina additur quandequidem iste sibi addi vetat Tilen de pot l. 4. c. 17. not 11. vise Lubbert de Pap. Rom. l. 8. cap. 10. That in the one all Rites pertaining to the worship of God were particularly determined but not in the other And when the Jesuite confesseth in his first answer to that Argument urged by our Divines against humane Laws binding Conscience Jun. ani in Bel. de Pont. Rom. lib. 4. cap. 17. that it is unlawful to add to the things commanded As to sacrifice two Lambs when God hath commanded onely one doth he not grant by necessary Consequence that when God hath appointed that Baptism should be administred with Water it is unlawfull to add thereto Oyl Cream Salt Spittle and such like Moreover to give Man Authority to add Rites of Information to the holy Ordinance of God what is it but to prefer the folly of Man before the Wisdom of God as though his sacred Institutions must borrow reverence or defence from humane Forgeries Doth not this Distinction open a wide gapp to let in manifold Abuses into God's Worship under the colour of Addition of Preservation Doth it not much impaire the perfection of Scripture when Rites Sacramental tending to preserve the purity and due regard of Christ's Institutions shall be esteemed lawful in the immediate Worship of God when they find no footing to stand on in the Word of God D. Lambard l. 4. dist 3. c. 1. D. Sp. pag. 32. D. Cov. against Per. pag. 123. D. Whitg Ans Adm. pag. 32. Preserve or keep carefully that which is committed to our trust 1 Tim. 6.20 Cajet interprets this place thus Inhibetur additio etiam pratextu Custodien di mandata Dei See Calv. in Mat. 15. The Synagogue of Rome doth not maintain her Addition to be of absolute necessity or essential parts of the Sacraments but instituted of the Church for signification and preservation and yet they are justly censured as unlawful and contrary to the Authority of the Holy Scripture The Lord chargeth that we do not add that so we may preserve it This Argument might here be shut up but that to prevent some Objections it is good to enquire what is an Addition to the Word The Patrons of significant Ceremonies say An unlawful Addition to any of Christ's Sacraments is onely that which either participates therewith in all or at least in the chief and proper ends thereof or is added for Complement thereof as necessary and so unchangeable To add to the Word is to ordain somewhat as a thing absolutely necessary and pertaining to the Essence of Worship Those add to the Word 1. Who teach or decree any thing either in matters of Faith or Ceremonies contrary to the Word 2. Those that make any thing necessary to Salvation not contained in the Word 3. Such as put any Religion or Opinion of merit in any thing that they themselves have invented besides the Word of God Last of all They add to the Word which forbid that thing for a thing of it self unlawful which God doth not forbid and make that sin which God doth not make sin But in all these definitions that is left out which Moses meant specially to comprehend which is not to do more nor to do lesse than he had commanded Every unlawful Tradition is contrary to the Word which forbiddeth all such Additions But as the Word contrary in strict sense is opposite to that which is besides the Word it reacheth not with the other particulars added to it to express what is an Addition prohibited The Lord Jesus is the sole Doctor of his Church whose Office it is to teach by word and sign and therefore whatsoever is devised by Man to instruct by outward resemblance and to admonish by striking the senses by way of Representation that is an unwarrantable Addition God is the only Sealer of his Promises Tho Aquin. pag. 3. q. 60. Cajetan ibid. Cerimonalis lex perfecta in Sc. traditur in libris Mosis ubi nulla Ceremonia ne minutissima quidem praetermissa est Wh. de Sc. q. 6. cap. 14. Quod uni Judaeorum populo per Mosen diligentersatis praescripta essent c. Jansen cond cap. 120. and Signifier of his Will by things sensible in the Sacrament and by words similitudinary in the Scripture to him it appertaineth to determine what signs must be used to signify In the time of the Law when signs reigned none were lawful but such as were shewed in the pattern upon the Mount much more in the time of the Gospel when shadows are abolished what God hath not instituted is to be abandoned Moses durst not add of his own head to those signs that were appointed of the Lord though to ends inferiour as profitable onely to signify not to exhibite as matters of expediency to explain and declare what was represented not of absolute necessity And what had been presumption in him is intolerable in us being delivered from the Pedagogy of the Law In those things God hath precisely determined in those actions the whole form whereof God hath of purpose set down to be observed we may not otherwise do than exactly as he hath commanded Herein what is not expressed or by good consequence enjoyned is
once admitted into the Worship of God did multiply and increase till they had obscured if not clean covered and abolished the simplicity and glory of God's Ordinances as bad weeds overgrow the Corn and secretly stollen the heart away from all due reverence and respect to the word of Life and seals of our Salvation For as a man is blind carnall impotent and yet a Lover of his own devices So are the signs devised by him dark vailing the brightness of the Gospel carnall not spirituall dead without Power and yet better affected more delighted in than the Sacraments themselves No sooner was the sign of the Cross added unto Baptism and made a sign like to the Lord's but it presently became greater than the Water which was Christ's sign and that in the Eyes of them who so advanced it Moreover admit Reason for an Umpire in this matter and Images cannot be kept out of the Church for no means is more profitable to inform the mind confirm the memory and move the affection than is the sight of a Picture artificially made cut or carved if a man may believe himself or give credit to his immagination If the Will of God be not unto us instead of all reasons we shall be hardly drawn to dislike that manner of teaching or worshipping A man that is enlightned with the knowledge of God's Will and the mystery of Salvation may lawfully in his meditations make use of diverse Creatures or things that are apt and fit to represent Spirituall things unto him but he must not take upon him to determine them to be used as signs for such an end and purpose for having no promise of God to come by that course he can expect no blessing from God in that practice but the contrary Seeing therefore man is himself ignorant and unwise neither able to receive the things of the Spirit nor discern that which pertaineth to the Kingdom of Christ nor yet being enlightned with the knowledge of the Truth according to godlinesse to devise any fit or acceptable means whereby God should be worshipped or his People taught in the wayes of holiness It followeth That in the worship of God signs not approved of him in his Word cannot be instituted or used in Faith and consequently are to be held unlawfull 5. Christ Jesus the great Doctor of his Church Mat. 23.8 10. Joh. 4.25 Acts 1.3 being called of his heavenly Father to teach to us perfectly and at once the whole Counsell of God and the things that did pertain to the Kingdom of God to the end of the World was faithfull in all his House as was Moses and made known unto his Disciples whatsoever he received of his Father Heb. 3.2 5. But Moses prescribed the form of God's worship in every particular Ceremony significant and brought in none Joh. 15.15 no not one into the Church which the Lord himself did not institute giving charge to the Church of the Jews That theâ— should neither add thereto Exod. 25.9 38 39 40 27 19 39 42 43. Deut. 12 32. nor take ought therefrom Therefore our Saviour Christ also taught his Disciples what Ceremonies significant ought to be used in the Church of God to whose Ordinance nothing must be added from whose Institution nothing ought to be diminished The old Testament was indeed delivered unto one People only of the World The Commission of the Gospel was Go teach all Nations But the liberty of Instituting Rites significant was no greater to the Christian Church Vis Jun. Animad in Bell. lib. 4. de pont Cap. 17. than to the Church of the Jews They had a prescription of particular Ceremonies most fitly agreeing to the polity of their Church and Common-wealth and dispensation of those times So hath the Christian Church also to which we are as precisely bound as ever was the Church of the Jews to the Ordinances appointed for that time and state as hath been shewed before in Circumstantiall matters concerning Time Place and Order of divine Service And several Christian Churches have liberty according to the generall Rules of Scripture to constitute what is most agreeable to the condition of the Country and doth best tend to Edification And in these things the Jews had Authority no less than the others In Ceremonies and Rites significant annexed to the Worship of God the Jews were tyed to the written Law of Moses and the Prophets nor may any thing be attempted lawfully by the Christian Church in things of this Nature more than was or ought to have been by them Though men be as different almost in Nature as in Nations and Languages yet must they of necessity submit themselves to the use of Baptism and the Lord's Supper which two Ceremonies onely are commanded by Divine precept and are to be received of all Christians that in truth and soundness professe the Gospel And seeing Christ Instituted no signs but these the Apostles commended no other to the severall Churches planted and dressed by them What necessity is there that difference of People to which the Gospel is now preached should inferr a liberty of inventing new Signs or Rites never seen or allowed of Christ Those that God prescribed for the Jews were fit for that Time and for that People none else might be devised those that Christ hath ordained for all Churches are sufficient most fit for them what shall be brought in besides and annexed to them doth want both his Approbation and Blessing As Moses was faithfull in the House of God as a Servant both in thing reâ—ll and rituall as some distinguish So was Christ also as a Son Neither did his faithfulness stand in removing the Law of Jewish Ceremonies and disburdening all Christians from the use of them but in prescribing Laws and Ordinances whereby the Church is to be ordered and instructed untill his second coming and that as particularly and expresly as Moses had done unto the Israelites To stand upon comparison betwixt Moses and Christ in perfection or reall faithfulness as some call it is not to this purpose for his perfection is one thing his faithfulnesse another and whom He did exceed in perfectnesse He did every way equalize in faithfulnesse in the House of God He did not onely teach a more excellent Doctrine than Moses but more full and perfect He did not onely antiquate what Ceremonies were to be shadows of good things to come and figures of man's Redemption by his Sacrifice upon the Crosse but he ordained also with what visible Signs and Tokens his Church should be nourtured and assured of his love and favourâ— As he died to bring Life to mankind raised up himself from Death ascended entred within the Vail and hath taken possession of the heavenly Mansion for us So did he give direction to his Apostles and in them to all Churches by what Statutes and Laws his People should be Governed by what Signs and Ceremonies they should be taught and confirmed
in Faith Do we then leave nothing to the Arbitrament of the Church Nothings but what was left to the Power and Authority of the Jewish Church for we have a Canon as perfect a direction as exact and particular as ever they had Many honourable witnesses of God's truth have judiciously observed That Christ in holy Scripture hath not singularly and specially prescribed concerning externall Discipline and Ceremonies for that he foresaw these things were to depend upon the occasions and opportunities of times which must be determined by generall Rules given for direction in these cases whose Judgment we imbrace with reverence acknowledg consonant to the words of wholesome Doctrine so it be understood according to their true intent and meating Of matters meetly accidentall circumstanâ—iall or naturall concerning Discipline or Worship But thence to infer a liberty to ordain in substantial matters of Discipline significative Ceremonies whatsoever shall seem good in our own eys without the approbation and warrant of Gods Word is more than the Learned grant or the Truth it self will permit As touching the Church saith Martyr she altereth not her form Loc. Com. part 1. c. 11. Sect. 12. It is alwayes one manner of Common wealth nothing is hid from the understanding of God the Author of the Laws The Lord of the house was not inferiour to the servant in fidelity What our Saviour Christ heard and saw of the Father that he manifested to his Disciples charging them to teach the Church to observe it What they received of the Lord that they delivered in great simplicity without any addition of new doctrine to his Doctrine or of devised symbolical signs to his Signs never once intimating in their Epistles or Writings any liberty that the Church should have to multiply Rites or Ceremonies for mysticall signification and to annex them to the holy things of God And when we can neither hear from Moses Christ nor his Apostles that the forging and inventing of such observations is allowed before God what warrant can we have to bear us out therein If Cities and Towns-Corporate plead Immunities and Exemptions from the Law and assume to themselves authority to make Decrees of this or that sort being impleaded by the King's Attorney for it either they must shew their Charter to warrantize such Priviledges or incur Censure for their sawciness and presumption So they that challenge priviledg to devise significant Rites in the Worship of God and annex them to the Signs which God Himself hath established must either shew their Charter signed with the authentique Seal of the Court of Heaven or be cast in Judgment when they be impleaded at his Barr. 6. If God be the only Teacher of his Church to instruct it by Word and Sign then no Ceremonies significant may be admitted into the solemn Worship of God for doctrine and instruction but such as bear his stamp are marked with his Seal are warranted by holy Scripture For the chaste Spouse of Christ who knowes the voyce of her Beloved will not acknowledg unwritten Traditions for the Word of God But God is the only Teacher of his Church both by Word and Sign Jam. 4.12 Matth. 23.8 Act. 3.32 As the doctrine which is taught must be from above so the means whereby it is taught must be of God both he that teacheth new doctrines and he that deviseth strange means to instruct the people of God in the knowledg of the truth according to godliness doth run upon his own head Mic. 7.16 Hos 14.1 It is a truth without controversie That as to forgive sins receive into favour and bless with spiritual blessings in Jesus Christ is proper to the Lord alone so it is his peculiar Esay 7.14 38.7 to institute signs and seals of his Covenant and Mercy For none can sign a Lease who hath not power to let and demise it nor annex a seal to any promise that hath not authority to make it and to confer the good promised Jewel Treat of the Sacr. But it seems as lawful to devise new seals of Divine promises as Symbolical signs of spiritual duties seeing to teach the way to heaven and to prescribe what service man should perform to God doth belong to him that hath Power and Soveraignty of life and death who is able to save and to destroy And if we may be bold to invent signs to teach man his duty and link them to the means of God's Worship so long as they signifie no other thing but what the Scripture teacheth Bellar. de Sacr. l. 1. cap. 24. Sect. de Sacr. Why may we not bring in signs also to assure us of the truth of Gods promises when nothing is thereby assured and sealed but what is promised in the written Word As the Duty taught and the Promise confirmed are both from one Supream so the sign of Instruction and the seal of Confirmation do challenge the same authour require the same authority This will the better appear if we shall consider That signs do not become seals by any special institution whereby they are distinguished from signs in regard of the efficient cause but in respect of the thing that they are appointed to sign or signifie Signs of Divine promises are seals true or false vain or behooveful even from this that they are determined to signifie such a thing whether the Institution be of God or Man Signs of mans duty be signs only from what authour soever they have their ordination The reason is because duties are only taught not assured as duties but promises represented by signs are thereby sealed What is a seal Basting Cate. q. 66. of the Sacram. but a sign sealing up a thing promised or a print whereby a thing promised by Covenant is signed Therefore if the Church may not presume to add new seals to the promises of God but is bound to rest contented with them that are commended unto her by the Lord himself She may not devise symbolical signs in the worship of God for the instruction of her children in the wayes of holiness It may further be added That a sign is a visible word and therefore if no voyce must be heard in the Congregation but the Lords alone no teaching signs must be admitted in his worship but such as he hath licensed to speak and stand in place Syntag tom 2. l. 6. c. 38. Polanus saith Those things are impious which are directly opposed to the Commandement of God of which sort are many Traditions of the Papists as the abuse of the Lords Supper the Mass Invocation of dead men worshipping of Images the law concerning Single life Festival dayes dedicated to Saints Images made for religious uses that is that they might serve for the use of Religion either that they might be worshipped or that holy things might be represented by them or that God be worshipped by them For God willeth not this end of Images but will have
SOME TREASURE Fetched out of RUBBISH OR Three short but seasonable Treatises found in an heap of scattered Papers which Providence hath reserved for their Service who desire to be instructed from the Word of God concerning the Imposition and Use of Significant Ceremonies in the Worship of God viz. I. A Discourse upon 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in Order Tending to search out the Truth in this Question viz. Whether it be lawful for Church-Governours to command indifferent decent things in the Administration of God's Worship II. An Enquiry Whether the Church may not in the Celebration of the Sacrament use other Rites significative than those expressed in the Scripture or add to them of her own Authority III. Three Arguments Syllogistically propounded and prosecuted against the Surplice The Cross in Baptism And Kneeling in the Act of receiving the Lord's Supper Every Word of God is pure Add not thou unto his Word lest he reprove thee and thou be found a Liar Prov. 30.5 6. Prove all things hold fast that which is good Abstain from all appearance of evill 1 Thes 5.21 22. Let every man be fully perswaded in his own mind For whatsoever is not of Faith is sin Rom. 14.5 23. LONDON Printed in the Year 1660. To the Reader THese ensuing Treatises were found laid by the Walls and covered with dust in the study of an old Non-Conformist there being diverse Copies of each under several unknown hands And as Armour Treasure and other things usefull hidden in the time of our late Wars have since been brought forth for profitable Imployment The like is hoped of these Papers which have so long been kept in darkness if seriously perused by men of sober minds The fileings of Gold are precious and the Charge of Christ is considerable Joh. 6.12 Gather up the Fragments that are left that nothing be lost Which Speech of his may both warrant and encourage the collecting publishing of the precious divine Truths penned by Gods faithful Embassadours for the edification of his Church Mr. John Cotton that faithful Servant of Christ famous in both Englands was the known Author of the first Discourse and as it s verily believed of the second also Mr. Robert Nichols studiously composed the third who was a man though less known yet deservedly famous for his great Abilities and profitable Ministry in Cheshire for many years where his memory is still very precious When Reverend Dr. Morton was Bishop of Chester hâ— required in writing of those Ministers in his Diocess who did not conform to the Ceremonies the Reasons of this their refusal Thereupon these three Arguments were by Mr. Nichols presented unto him attested by his own hand and afterwards defended in dispute with that learned Bishop before many Witnesses The Bishop being hereby convinced of the good mans Ability and Ingenuity was his friend to his dying day The publishing of these Papers is for the preventing of the imposition and practice of sapless superstitions Ceremonies which good end now designed may hopefully be effected if the Lord will give men herein concerned to study these Controversies with unbyassed hearts It is notorious that the pressing of these Ceremonies in former time occasioned woful Divisions in the Church of Christ with much affliction unto men famous both for their parts and piety in their Generations and men of truly tender Consciences and unblamable Conversation And it is much to be questioned whether ever any reall spirituall advantage come to Christian Soul by the pressing or by the observing of them If the Lord would grant that Issue unto this Publication which is sincerely intended and heartily prayed for many thanks would be given unto his Majesty through Jesus Christ with comfort unto them that love Truth and Peace A DISCOURSE UPON 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in Order Tending to search out the Truth in this QUESTION viz. Whether it be lawful for Church Governors to command indifferent decent things in the Administration of God's Worship ALL which that place holdeth forth touching this Point may be summed up for ought I can discern in these particulars 1. That the whole Church and every Member thereof are to perform all the Duties of God's Worship in a decent and orderly manner 2. What the Church and Members thereof are to do in this kind that the Church-Governours may and ought to see it to be done 3. It being the duty of Church-Governours to see that all things be done decently and orderly in the Congregation It is therefore their part in eminent measure to be able to discern and judge what is decent and undecent orderly or disorderly When I say it is their part I mean it is their duty their Place and Authority requireth it Not that they alwayes have a Power or Spirit of discerning to judge aright in this case For it seemeth the High-Priests and Prophets yea and David himself all of them thought it decent to bring back the Ark of God upon a new Cart which afterwards David himself saw and confessed it was not done after due order 1 Chron. 15.13 From whence it appeareth since they also are subject to errours in this kind that it will not be safe for them to judge and declare the decency of things by no better Rule than their own Will and Pleasure but by such Rules as the Holy Ghost directs us unto in this case which are Scripture Nature Civil Custom yea and I willingly admit the lawful Custom of the Church or Congregation in which a man liveth for to judge of decency by all these Rules we have Warrant in Scripture 1 Cor. 11.14 16. 14.33 And indeed they who are to approve themselves in all their proceedings as Paul did and all Church-Ministers ought to do to every Man's Conscience in the sight of God It is not for them to give the ground of their proceedings only from their own Will and Pleasure but from such Rules as every good Conscience may see approvable 4. This place in hand holdeth forth also this further Truth That what things the Church seeth by the former Rules to be indifferent and decent or which Church-Governours shall declare so to be those things may lawfully be done For the further clearing hereof and the better discerning of the Power of Church-Governours in these matters It may be observed that of decent things lawful to be done in God's Church some things are 1. Indifferent and decent As to preach in a Gown or Cloak whereof the one is no more necessary or expedient than the other 2. Expedient and decent As to abide in single life or to enter into Marriage of which though Marriage in time of Persecution be indifferent yet single life is much more expedient to prevent trouble in the Flesh 3. Necessary and decent either alwayes as a Woman to keep silence in the Church or at least Hic nunc so as the neglect thereof would be uncomely to the
light of Nature Scripture Custom As a Woman to be veiled in the Congregation in the Eastern Countries So to abstain from Blood whilest the eating of it was offensive to the Jew Now of such things as are necessary and decent Church-Governours have Power to give Order and Commandment as did the Synod at Hierusalem touching those things they called necessary to wit necessary during the time of the offence of the Jew which was necessary to be avoided Act. 15.28 Of such things as are expedient and decent the Church-Governours have Power to declare the decency and expediency of them yea and to advise and perswade the practice thereof but yet not to give an Order or Law to bind the People thereunto further than themselves shall find it decent and expedient for themselves Thus in Point of abiding in single Life in time of the Churches distress the Apostle gave his Judgment and Advice 1 Cor. 7.25 40. and perswaded to it for avoiding trouble in the Flesh Ver. 26 28. But would not bind them to it neither in Point of Conscience nor of outward practice as having no Commandment for it from the Lord Ver. 25. In which respect he calleth such a Commandment if he had given it a snare Ver. 35. And herein the Power of Church-Governours falleth far short of the Authority of Civil Magistrates who may in civil matters make binding Laws for any thing expedient to publick weal which Subjects are readily to submit unto 1 Pet. 2.13 But it may be objected Paul had Power to command Philemon that which was convenient therefore he might make a Law commanding the Church expedient decent things It followeth not For 1. It is one thing to give a Command for one thing another to make a Law to bind him alwayes to do the like 2. It 's one thing to command a particular Person who may owe himself to a Church-Governour as Philemon did to Paul another to command yea to give a standing Commandment a binding Law to a whole Church to whom he professeth himself a Servant 〈…〉 2 Cor. 4.6 over whom he hath no Authority but stewardly or oeconomical to wit when he speaks in his Master's Name not in his own The Steward in a Family hath not power over his Master's Spouse but when he speaks his Master's commands and directions not his own But of such things as are onely indifferent and decent I do not find in Scripture that ever Church-Governours did advise and perswade them much less charge and command them least of all make Laws to determine them And that this place in hand 1 Cor. 14.40 doth not give them any such Power though it be much urged to this end may appear from these Reasons 1. The place speaks not of indifferent decent things but of necessary decent things the neglect whereof was undecent by the light of Nature and Scripture and Custom As for men to pray with long haire Women bare-headed and for Women to speak in the Congregation and for many men to speak at once 2. The words of the place run not thus Let all decent things be done or Let all things judged and declared by the Church to be decent be done but thiâ— Let all things to wit that are done in the Church whether Prayer or Propesying or other Ordinance of God be done decently or in that decent manner which Church-Governours will appoint or in some other That the Apostle limiteth not but onely requireth that all be done decently which if it be so done his Rule here prescribed is followed and fulfilled 3. The same may appear out of this place by this Argument If this place of the Apostle did give Power and Authority to Church-Governours to command indifferent decent things then he that should transgress the Commandment of the Church should also transgress the Commandment of the Apostle As look what Order or Acts of Justice any Civil Governour doth by the Commission of the King he that violates such Acts or transgresseth such Orders transgresseth also against the Commission of the King But it appeâ—reth to be otherwise in this case If the Church-Governours command a Minister to preach alwaies in a Gown it being indifferent and decent so to do he that shall now and then preach in a Cloak transgresseth the Command of the Church but not of the Apostle For he that preacheth in a Cloak preacheth also decently which is all that the Rule of the Apostle requireth in this Point But because this Point is of great Consequence both for Church-Governours and others to be truly informed in give me leave to clear the same from some other Arguments That it is not in the power of Church-Governours to command indifferent decent things by Order of Law 1. That which exceedeth the bounds of Apostolical Authority and streightreth the bounds of Christian Liberty that is not in the Power of any Church-Governour But to command indifferent decent things by Order of Law exceedeth c. The former appeareth from the Apostle's Commission granted to them Matth. 28.20 where our Saviour giveth them Commission to teach all Nations to observe all things whatsoever he hath commanded them Now all things whatsoever Christ hath commanded them are necessary not indifferent for the People to observe If therefore the Apostles over and above the Commandments of Christ which are necessary should teach the People to observe indifferent things also which Christ hath not commanded they should exceed the bounds of their Commission It will be in vain to except Our Saviour speaketh here onely of matters of Doctrine and Faith not Government and Order unless it could be proved that our Saviour did else-where enlarge this Commission and gave them a more illimited Power in matters of Government and Order or Indifferency which for ought I see no man goeth about to do unless it be from this place of the Epistle to the Corinthians which hath already been cleared from such meaning As for the second part of the Assumption That to command indifferent decent things streightneth the bounds of Christian Liberty is of it self evident For whereas for example a single Man or Woman are at Liberty to marry where they will 1 Cor. 7.39 If the Apostle had bound them from Marriage by any Commandment of his he had streightned and deprived them of this Liberty It is wont to be objected against this That Christian Liberty standeth not in the freedom of outward Actions but in the freedom of Conscience As long therefore as there is no doctrinal necessity put upon the Conscience to limit the use of outward things Christian Liberty is preserved though the use and practice of outward things be limited Whereto I answer The Apostle in this case leaveth the People of God at liberty not onely in point of Conscience for lawfulnesse to marry or not to marry but even in outward action and practice Let him do saith he what he will he sinneth not let them be married For a second Reason it
may be this They who are not to judge or censure one another in differences about circumstantial things or matters of indifferency they may not make a binding Law that all men shall be of one mind or of one practice in such things But the former is true Rom. 14.3 Let not him that cateth despise him that cateth not c. If it be said The place onely speaks of private Christians not of Church-Governours The place speaks of all Christians publick and private seeing it reserveth and referreth the Judgment of our Brethren in such things not to publick Persons but onely to Christ in the 4th 10th Verses 3. They who did accommodate themselvs in the use of indifferent things according to the judgment and practice of all Christians wheresoever they came they did not make any Laws to bind Christians to follow their Judgment and Practice in the use of things indifferent But the Apostles of Christ did accommodate themselves in the use of indifferent things according to the Judgment and Practice of the Christians wheresover they came As appeareth from the Apostle's Example 1 Cor. 9.20 21 22. To the Jews I became as a Jew c. But it may be said Though the Apostles chose rather to use their Liberty than their Authority in these things indifferent wheresoever they came yet if they had pleased they might have used Apostolical Authority binding all Christians to their Judgment and Practice in such things 1. Doubtless if they had received any such Authority they would in some place at some time or other have claimed it and practised it A Sword never used rusteth in the Scabbard And frustra est potentia quae nunquam venit in actum is a true Axiome whether we speak of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. The Apostle himself cleareth this Point when he confesseth he did thus accommodate himself even to the weakness of Christians lest he should abuse his Authority in the Gospel Ver. 18 19 20. Oh that such Church-Gouernours as plead their succession from the Apostles and do challenge in sundry passage of Government Apostolical Authority would also be pleased to study and emulate an Apostolical Spirit For a fourth Argument let it be this If the Apostles and Presbyters and Brethren at Jerusalem did reach their Authority no further than to lay upon the Disciples necks the yoak and burthen of necessary things and that onely during the time while they continued necessary then may not any succeeding Synod reach their Authority to lay upon the Church Commandments and Canons of indifferent things For the Synod at Jerusalem was the pattern and precedent of all succeeding Synods For primum in unoque genere est mensura reliquorum And our Saviour teacheth us to confute Alterations from Primitive Patterns with this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nou sic fuit ab initio But the Synod at Jerusalem reached their Authority no further than to lay a Commandment upon the Disciples onely touching necessary things Act. 15.28 Necessary I say either in themselves as abstaining from Fornication or at least in respect of present offence as Abstinence from blood c. 5. Let me conclude with this Argument taken from the Apostle Paul his enter-course with the Apostle Peter If the Apostle Peter was to be blamed for compelling the Gentiles by his example to observe the indifferent Ceremonies of the Jews then other Church-Governours will be to blame for compelling Christians by Law and by grievous Censures to observe the Ceremonies in Question though they were indifferent But the Apostle Paul telleth us Peter was to be blamed in this case Gal. 2.11 14. I suppose No man will here except as is wont to be excepted against such Arguments as plead for the refusing of our Ceremonies upon such grounds as Paul urged against yielding to the Jewish Ceremonies as they were urged by the false Apostles viz. with Opinion of necessity unto Salvation For Peter's yielding at that time to the Jewish Ceremonies was not out of opinion of their necessity to Salvation but only out of fear of offence and care to prevent it Ver. 12. The Sum of all this will lead us by the hand one step further If it be a sin in Church-Governours to command especially upon so strict panalt◠indifferent decent things it shall be a sin also in Ministers and other private Christians to subscribe ex animo and to yield Obedience to such Command although the Ceremonies commanded were indeed as good as they be pretended which I believe are not indifferent decent things For doth not such voluntary Subscription and Conformity to them build up our Church-Governours yea and with them the Soveraign Civil Magistrate also in this confidence that such Commandments are as well lawfully given by them as received and obeyed by us Now to build up or edify a Brother unto sin is no better than to offend a Brother For the proper definition of an Offence is That which edifies a Brother unto sin as the original word expresseth it 1 Cor. 8.10 And so to sin against my Brother is to wound his Conscience yea and as much as in me lyeth to cause him to perish for whom Christ dyed which is no better than spiritual Murther even the Murther of his Soul Now if thus to edify my Brother unto sin be so hainous an Offence how much more hainous an Offence is it to edify our Governours to the giving and urging of such Commandments yea to the sharp censuring of all others as refractory and factious Persons who choose rather to undergo the loss of the greatest-Comforts they enjoy in this World than to wound the Consciences either of themselves or their Governours It is true by forbearing Obedience to these Commandments we offend the Spirits of our Governours and make them to be though causlesly offended with us but by yielding Obedience to these things we should offend their Consciences in edifying them unto Sin and provoke the Lord to be offended with them and us It is not for Christians much less for Ministers to redeem our peace and liberty at so dear a price as the hazard of the blood of so many precious Soul especially of our Governours in highest place Now I shall proceed to answer another great Question for clearing the Point in hand May not the Church in the Celebration of the Sacraments use other Rites significative than those expressed in the Scriptures or add to them of her own Authority No but she is to rest in the use of those Seals God hath appointed For all signs of mens devising cannot teach or stir up true devotion but delude and nourish Superstition Besides to do any thing which doth derogate from the Seal of Kings and their Prerogative therein we know how dangerous it is in the Common-wealth so certainly to joyn Seals with God's Seals in his Church is a Point will hardly be answered It beseemeth us to acknowledge God so wise in the Signs that
so to distinguish unless it can be shewd which yet hath not been done that the distinction hath footing in the Word of God The Papists and Lutherans do in this manner plead for the Use of Images in their Churches Images are Lay-men's Books by them they are put in mind of the Death and Passion of Christ they may see more at once represented by them than they can read in many hours What Answer do our Divines return unto them but this That the Word and Sacraments were appointed of Christ to teach Conc. Seno sense Harm Conf. Helver cap. 4. fol. Synt. Tom. 2. l. 6 7. 19. in secundo praec Par. in Gen. 28.18 De secundo praec tit de Imag. c. 15. resp ad Arg. 9. 10. Faith cometh by hearing not by seeing or gazing Jew art ador div 10. Mart. in 1 Reg. 7. Gualter in Heb. 2.18 and that to add to them is presumptuous against the Lord inâ—urious unto his Ordinances that teaching to the Eye is sufficiently performed by the Sacraments and that the Lord for Instruction of his People commanded his Ministers to preach not to paint Faith saith Zanchius is to be promoted but by what means such as God hath ordained viz. The Word and the Sacraments God would have us to be taught divine things and all men as well vulgar as others to know things belonging to their Salvation But whence or of what Instructors Of those that he hath given to be Teachers unto us not of those that do please our selves He hath given unto us the Book of the Creatures whence we may know many things of God He hath given us the Book of the Scripture which he would have continually to be read and to be explained in the Church What canst thou desire more He hath given Sacraments Glasses of divine mysteries He hath instituted us a Ministry and â—â—arged us to exercise our selves daily in the Law of God Ought not these Books and Teachers to be sufficient for us Now a significant Ceremony is an Image or a Representation to teach by striking the sense and what is said against Images must necessarily hold against them also so that either we must take part with the Lutherans and Papists against the Worthies of our Church or acknowledge the former distinction to be vain and of none effect Nay let this distinction be of any weight and the Papists must be acquitted in their Oyl Cream Salt Spittle Crosses Lights Tabers and the rest of their rotten Customs wherewith they have besmeared and defiled the Ordinances of God for none of these be held by them to be of absolute necessity A second Answer there is given to this Argument of no more strength than the former viz. That to devise Signs of spirituall things is unwarrantable but not to ordain Ceremonies that shadow forth some moral duty which Man oweth to God But this is barely spoken not proved by any passage of holy Writt and may as easily be cast off as it is brought forth The Scripture doth not teach it lawful for Man to devise mystical Signs appropriated to the solemn Worship of God to represent moral duties when it forbiddeth by any devised Sign of that Nature to shadow forth spiritual duties and what we learn not thence in matters of this kind we dare not receive When the Lord was pleased to instruct his Church by Types and Figures he himself appointed not onely those that did prefigure Christ but such also as served by their signification to teach moral duties All mystical Rites the Lord himself precisely prescribed Exod. 25.9.38.39 39.42.43 1 Chro. 28.12.19 2 Chro. 29.25 1 Chro. 24 19. 2 Chro â— 8.14 laying a strict charge upon Moses to make all things according to the pattern shewed him which Rule was religiously observed by all religious and worthy Reformers of Religion afterwards not one adventuring without special direction from the Word of God to add any thing thereto or alter ought therein Again Duties moral and spiritual are parts of God's inward worship and Ceremonies ordained to teach either of them by mystical Representation are parts of his outward Worship and Service and so the matter is one whether the Sign doth shaddow forth a morall or spiritual duty for it is not the particular good thing signified by the Sign but the Institution of it to that end that makes the Worship true or false If it be appointed of God it is true Worship let the signification be moral or spiritual if of men it is false Worship whatsoever it be set a-part to represent or teach in our intention in the solemn Worship of God In defence of Images it is objected that Paulinus Nolanus Bishop commanded the History of the Old and New Testament to be painted in his Church and that to this end that the People might be drawn from surfetting and drunkenness when they met together to banquet in that place being busied in viewing and beholding Images See Jewel's Apol. par 5. cap. 3. div 1.2 Our Divines reply that the Authority of man ought not to seem any thing against the plain and manifest Word of God and Nolanus and his followers did offend the more grievously Martyr part 2. c. 5. S. 23. that they adventured to do that which the former Fathers did alwayes disallow whereby we see what the judgment of Ancient and Modem Divines is touching Images setup in the Church to represent or put in mind of Moral duties And if Images must be abolished significant signs of mens devising by the same reason remain under condemnation for they are Images that is certain figures having relation to the exemplar or certain pictures with relation of representations 3. No Act Ordinance nor Institution contrary to a general Negative Commandment is lawfull unless that Act Ordinance or Institution be in special warranted by the Word of God for the Scripture should not be sufficient to make the man of God that is the Minister or Prophet perfect to every good work if an Act in special might be lawful without particular approbation which is in general condemned as unjust and evill If we find that holy men of God did some particular things 1 Sam. 7.17 1 King 18.32 Dâ—â—â—â— 2.5 6 7 13 14. which were generally forbidden in the Law as Samuel built an Altar at Ramath Elias the Prophet on Mount Caâ—mel when by the Law it was not lawfull to offer any Sacrifice but before the Lord in the place which he should chuse We must know they did this by special direction and extraordinary instinct The Lawyers say Generi per speciem derogatur Sext. de lib. 5. tit de regulis Juris 33. Digest l. 50. tit 17. regul 80. That a particular doth derogate from the general And in these places where a special fact doth not agree with a general Precept there the Scripture is not repugnant unto it self but by the special it is derogated from the general But though it
hath varied and changed somewhat from out immediate fore-fathers the Papists from whom it cometh to us yet they did not remove it from Ecclesiasticall Places and Services or instituted a civil or ordinary use of the foresaid Vestment Doth not the Stature in the first year of Queen Elizabeth appoint such Ornaments in the Church to be retained as were in the Church of England by Authority of Parliament in the second year of Edward the sixth Cap. 2. untill other Order be taken by the Authority of the Queen c. at the time of the Communion and other administration c. Was Order taken No. We must judge then for what kind of use the Surplice by the Stature of King Edward the sixth was instituted and allowed The words of the Book of Common-Prayer in the second year of his Reign are these Upon the Day and at the time appointed for the Ministration of holy Communion the Priest that shall execute that holy Ministery shall put on him the Vestures appointed for that Administration c. If the use of the Surplice stand by Statute it is for any thing that I know by this which declares it to be retained for meer Ecclesiastical use If it be so as Dr. Sparks saith in his Perswasion to uniformity Cap. 5. pag. 20. 21. That Queen Elizabeth by vertue of the said Statute by the consent of the Arch-Bishop and High Commissioners in the seventh year of her Reign appointed the Surplice to be worn instead of the Albe yet it hindreth not but proves what I say in this Section Can. Eccles 14. 17. But because this I think is confessed I pass to the second Head in the Assumption That the Surplice is significant of spiritual Duties is clear 1. All our Ecclesiasticall Ceremonies are such In the Treatise of Ceremonies prefixed to that Book They are neither dumb nor dark saith the Book of Common-Prayer but apt to stirr up the dull mind of man to a remembrance of his Duty by some notable and special signification Mr. Hooker saith Ceremonies destitute of signification must be vain also he calleth them visible Signs Eccl. Pol. Lib. 5. Sect. 55. Ibid. Lib. 4. Sect. 1. which are undoubtedly most effectuall to open such matter as when men know and remember carefully they must needs be a great deal the better informed Thus much also Dr. Covell doth avouch against the Plea of the Innoc pag. 58. 2. To omit that the Papists say All their Priestly Garments have mysticall signification Bell. de miss lib. 6. cap. 14. And that the Priest must be cloathed in White to signifie innocency and purity Lindan de Câ—lebr miss ob reverentiam Salvatoris totius Coelestis curiae quam Sacraâ—â—into altar consiciende confecto non est dubium interesse Those Learned men who were set awork in the dayes of King Edward the Sixth and since and who therefore were most likely to know the meaning of our Church in imposing have avouched That it is Hook Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 29. and ought to be continued for signification Bucer opera Anglican pag. 682. Pet. Mart. Loc. Comman pag. 1088. Now concerning the third Head The Surplice in that foresaid use and signification is without warrant of the Word of God It may thus be proved 1. The Surplice being a garment of a special nature and use in that it is a meer Ecclesiastical and Mystical Rite ought to have a special Divine Institution as such garments have had in the Church of the Jews for Reason requires that the ground be suitable to the nature of the thing But such a ground it hath not neither can any shew any special Institution 2. There is not so much as any general warrant for it in the Book of God First there is none in the Old Testament The Priestly garments were tyed only to the place of Ceremonies Exod. 28.43 Ezek. 42.14 Mornaeus de Eucharist not used in any of the Synagogues of the Land nor in any of those 460 which are reported to be in Jerusalem Were typical wherein it stands not with the nature of the times of the New Testament to mitigate them Ezek. 42.13 14. 44.15 17 19. 1 Chron. 15. Spark perswas to uniformity cap. 5. pag. 22. Neither were they used in the Peoples sight except once extraordinary by occasion of the presence of the Ark before the People So that if there had been any further use of them viz. for glory and comeliness as one saith Spark Ibid. not considering that in the use also they were typicall yet they cannot possibly warrantize Vestiments in the sight of the People If the Prophets did use ordinarily any apparel whereby they might be known from other men which doth seem doubtfull to some that read 1 Sam. 9.18 1 King 20.41 yet that which they did wear was of common and daily use worn in Town and Field c. 2 King 1.8 Esay 20.2 Zach. 13.14 So that it matters not in this case Whitg def tract 7. cap. 2. pag. 262. though the Prophets were discerned by a peculiar form of Cloke seeing it was not of Ecclesiastical and Mystical signification and withall was extraordinary as their Function was Our Divines condemn the Popish Massing Garments because they are Jewish To seek ground for the Surplice out of the Levitical Law is it not then to overthrow our own grounds Further Matth. 3.4 in the New Testament there is no ground for the Surplice The habit of John Baptist was daily and common not Ecclesiastical and Mystical That Christ or his Apostles did use or institute any Mystical or Ecclesiastical attire none can shew by the holy Scriptures and the relation of other Histories is but humane and fallible not the ground of faith The Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 14.40 requiring all things to be done decently and in order in the Assemblies of the Saints did give commandment for the right and seemly performance of such Ordinances as were before established but laid no ground for the institution of mystical Rites in religious services This speech of the Apostle is a Precept and hath a Divine binding power which not to obey is death How can this concern the institution of the Surplice which is no such matter but reputed indifferent by the Urgers What the Apostle commands is necessary and indispensable by Man But the Surplice and other Rites are arbitrary and may be dispensed with and utterly abolished D. Morton in Protest Appeal lib. 1. cap. 3. Sect. 2. numb 3. pag. 54. The Surplice is confessed to be but an humane tradition Spark Perswas to Uniform cap. 5. pag. 21. Who can prove hence that there is any better ground for the Surplice than for the 15 Priestly Robes used in the Church of Rome Thus doth it appear that the Scripture affordeth not any warrant for the Surplice in our use I know many Testimonies are cited forth of the ancient Writers but their
scandall because it afford no hurtfull conclusion which may be naturally and necessarily thence deduced except as much and more may be deduced from some Conformities that do not use the Ceremonies so oft as the Law requireth The rayling Inferences of some malicious Papists are but meer inconsequences and do not proceed from our forbearance but from their malice 3. The use of Ceremonies ought to be free This the Law seemeth probably to import Jewel of the private Mass tract 2. div 9. in the end of his answ Stat. 13. Eliz. cap. 12 which enjoyneth subscription with this exception to the Articles of Religion which onely concern the confession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments This practice onely limits subscription to the things expressed leaving as it may seem other things at liberty Neither was there any hurt that came to the Church of God by the free use of the Ceremonies in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign Sir Edward Cook his speech at Garnet's Arraignment P. Mart. Epist cuidam in Angl. Scripta an 1559 Vide loc com p. 1225. Bucer censura Mr. Casaubon Mr. Hooker Eccles Pol. 1. Lib. 5. Sect. 67. For the space of 10 years Papists came generally to the Church but since the urging of these Rites they have not been so forward This God hath not blessed the imposing of them as the leaving of them free 4. Worthy men the maintainers of these Rites in the Dayes of King Edward viz. Peter Martyr and Bullinger upon better con-consideration did retract their Judgments Forraign Divines disallow these Rites and may not we be suffered to doubt of them 5. Since the urging of these Ceremonies these Points have sprung up for the defence of them viz. The Churche's Authority binds the Conscience That it 's not to be enquired into whether Christ be present in the Sacrament by Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation and that it doth no way hinder or further us however it standeth That relative adoration of God before a Creature with respect unto it without speciall Warrant may be lawful c. May not this breed some doubt of the quality of the cause that is by great Schollars thus maintained 6. As yet we have nothing to settle our doubting-consciences upon but thâ—se two Points which yet are not without some doubt 1. That the Rites imposed are indifferent 2. That in such things the Churche's or Magistrate's Authority binds the Conscience Yet are we taught that no individual Action is indifferent Thom. Mort. Apolog. Lib. 1. Cap. 47. indifferency resting in the general Nature Aquin. 1.2 18. Artic. 97. That particulares Magistratuum leges mullum habent in conscientias dominatum Whitak contra Duraeum Lib. 8. Sect. ultim That no man incurreth the guilt of Damnation but by breaking the Laws of God Dr. Pield of the Church Lib. 4. Cap. 33. to which purpose some other Worthies do write Perkin's Treatise of Conscience Cap. 2. Sect. 7. in the end If it should be said that the use of the Vail 1 Cor. 11. may afford Warrant unto us for such Rites as are in Question We are to consider That the use of the Vail was in ordinary use not in meer Ecclesiastical use Gen. 24.65 Also it was not not a Symbolicall Sign but a Natural indicant Sign of modesty This considered doth not our humble suit seem reasonable that till these Propositions be better cleared we may be foreborn 7. Resolution in matter of Ceremonies is not easy because the holy Scriptures which in weightier matters is clear is more dark in things of lesser moment So that the Media to be used in Argument either for Calvin instit Lib. 4. Cap. 10. Sect. 8. Beza Epist 24. Zanch. de operib Redemp cap. 4. de cultu â—â—tern qu. 4. Dr. White 's defence p. 287. or against the Ceremonies are difficult to be found out Hence it is That from the beginning there have been great Controversies and that among the greatest in matter of Ceremonies as Bellarm. saith De effect Sacram. Lib. 2. Cap. 3. 8. Are learned Protestants deceived or not when they say Popish Ceremonies are to be condemned because there is an opinion of holiness necessity and worship annexed wherewith they are urged Or can our's be freed from this holiness or necessity seeing they are reputed religious Rites and urged under a great penalty both upon Minister and People as the Canons shew 9. Lastly If this Proposition be true that is given and agreed of by the Learned Rites of meer humane Invention of no necessary use antiently abused to Idolatry now superstitiously used among many ignorant persons are to be abolished It is a worthy labour to resolve us that our Ceremonies be not such We are taught Dr. Willet Synops 2. Gen. Contr. qu. 3. part 2. p. 110. Edit 1614. Tho Rogers his expos of the 39. artic Act. 20. pag. 101. 102. that Ceremonies to be in the Church must not be in nature impious in use superstitions for their weight not over heavy and grievous to be born that for their worthiness in the eyes of the Ordainers they be neither of an equall prize nor of more account then the Ordinances of God so as for the performance of them the Law of God must be left undone that they be not against the liberty of Christians or any way contrary to the Commandment of God but tend both to the nourishing and increase of Love friendship and quietness among Christians and retaining of God's People in God's holy fear c. FINIS