every ordinary impartial Reader must needs take to be more general 6. P. Martyr giveth for a Rule to the Ministers of Poland that such order in the administration of Sacraments is to be kept as differeth most from the toys and Ceremonies of Papists It is an excellent Rule sayth the Rejoynder but he sayd not that human Ceremonies abused unto superstition in Poperie are now unlawful for us to use As if he that sayth we ought to keep that order which differeth most from Popish toys and Ceremonies did not say we ought nâ—t to use Popish Ceremonies He speaketh without quaestion of an internall ougâ—t or sic oportet which the Rejoynder pag. 492. confesseth to binde the conscience The same P. Martyr sayth Certainly if we did from the heart hate superstition we would doe our endevour cleane to put out and deface all the footsteps and monuments therof He spake this answereth the Rejoynder when Missalattire Altars and Crucifixes were as yet remayning Now for Missal attire I know none then remayning which remayneth not now Altars also have ever since remayned in diverse Churches and are now for countenance of other Ceremonies comming up againe where they were abolished with an Idolatrous addition of bowing unto them Crucifixes will soon follow and that by good right if the Defender and Rejo their groundes be good For the doctrine being changed and the materials onely of Popish Crucifixes remayning what can be sayd to make them simplie unlawfull And for their conveniencie whoe may judge of that but those that have authoritie of praescribing and imposing matters of order and decencie But to let that passe P. Martyr spoke of that time when he supposed the doctrine reformed and manifestly riseth in his discourse from those specials to the general to all footsteps of superstition and not those onely But sayth the Rejoynder the same P. Martyr professeth no separation would be made for such matters He sayth so in deed of the Surplice pag. 1127. and so say we especialy upon the same condition that we may be suffered to abrogate them for our owne practise Ferremus nobis gratulando quod eas abrogaverimus To this the Rejoynder addeth diverse sentences of P. Martyrs somewhat favoring a toleration for a time of our Ceremonies especialy in M. Hoopers case To which I answer 1. that this was in perplexitie caused by the mischief of our Ceremonies which are therfor so much the more to be hated even that they have allways bred such trouble unto good men whoe should have troubles enough De vestibus quas vocant sacras fateor aliquid esse duâ—us quod meipsum nonnihil perturbet ut merer illas tam mordicus retineri though they were abolished Quaestions of this kind are to us somwhat difficult There is somwhat more hard I confesse of those garments they call holy which somwhat troubleth me that I woâ—dâ—r they are so strictly reteined He himself refused to wear the Surplice and that upon such ground as may move us to refuse it as he profâ—sseth When I was at Oxford I would never use those white â—arments in the Quire though I were at that time a Canon Ego cum essem Oxonij vestibus illis albis in Choro nunquaÌ„ uti volui quaÌ„vis essem Canonicus Mei facti ratio mihi constabat Quod verò me movit adhuc movet te sortasse movere poterit nempe id non esse facâ—endum quod ea confirmet quae conscientia mea non probes â— had a reason for it But that which mooved me then and â—â—ill doeth moove and perhaps may justly moove you is nameâ—y that that is not to be dâ—n which shâ—ll confirme what my â—onscience cannot allow of 3. He telleth us plainly â—hat these Ceremonies are merae Papatus reliquiae meere Popish reliques condemned by Bullinger and that he was upon hope of their abolishing onely tardior ad suadendum loath to persuade unto suffering of deprivation for hâ—m All these thinges are found in the places quoted by the Rejoynder Let any indifferent reader gesse by â—hem what was P. Martyrs judgement in his free and â—nperplexed thoughts Certainly it was not that which â—he Defender and Rejoynder have repâ—aesented unto us â—or theirs whoe accuse all those beside oâ—her faults many and great of â—uperstition that refuse them as unlawful they being Rites both orderly and also decent 7. Bezas wordes are that the footsteps of Idolatrie ought not to appear in the Church but to be utterly banishâ—d The Rejoynder answereth 1. that this toucheth not our Ceremonies in Bezas judgement Epist. 12. It touched our Ceremonies in the eyght Epistle of Beza but not in his twelf what difference was ther betwixt these two Epistles Onely this in the former he writte to a Bishop and so sheweth him the foulnesse of our Ceremonies plainly but in the later he speaketh to poor Ministers persecuted for those Ceremonies whose great affliction with the Churches detriment made him to conceal some part of his judgement Yet in that twelf Ep. he insinuateth the same judgement of our Ceremonies Qui cuperunt superstitiones co usque dâ—testart ut etiam illarum vestigia â—â—perint execrars quantoperà offenduntur They which began to hate superstitions so far as to curse their footsteps how greatly are they offended Ther is yet fresh superstition of the signe of the Crosse moâ—â— detestable They therefore have don wonderful well who have once banisht that rite out of the Church whereof for ouâ— parts we see no good Signs crucis est adhuc recens superstitio manimè execrabiâ—u Rectitissimè igitur fetisse arbitramur gus soâ—â—el istum â—itum ex Ecclesis expularunt cuius etiâ—â— non videmus quae sit utilitas Quoniam ex genius latione dum symbola accipintuur orta est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illa detestabilis adhue in multorum animis baerens me vito sublata esse vid tur Because by kneeling at receiving it sprung that most abominable Bread-worship and still cleaving to the minds of many is worthily abolished The Rejoynder noteth 2. that in Bezas judgement many thinges may and must be tolerated which are not rightly imposed Which is true but 1. let it be then openly confessed by the Rejoynder that our Ceremonies are not rightly imposed before he abuse this rule 2. Let him tell us if approving by subscription and use be a meer toleration 3. The same Beza telleth us Toleranâ— quaedaem putaemus quae omninò ferri non debent con Westph We think somthings may be tolerated which altogether may not be born In the 3. place it is added by the Rejoynder that Beza sayth of some that reteyne the Crosse they may use their owne libertie But in the next words he addeth If they have any just Causes of reteining this signe in their Churches So that he limiteth that libertie unto such causes as he was not privie to Nos cortè cur â—llud signum
for the holding of our places and when we have done all that depart against our wills with sorrow Non discedit a statione qui cedit invitus See M. Parker p. 1. c. 4. s. 14. But the Defendant undertaketh to prove that the cause of silencing is not in the Bishops that suspend and deprive us but in our selves He is as it seemeth a great adventurer For he commeth forth upon this peece of service with flying colours Know you well what you sâ—y sayth hee when you lay the cause of your silencing upon the Bishops Yes surely very well For a cause is that which bringeth force or vertue to the being of another thing Now the first vertue or rather vice which tendeth to silencing of Ministers in this case is in the Bishops canons they therefore are the first cause The second vertue is in the Bishops and their officers which are executioners of those unconscionable canons they therefore are the secondarie cause Non-conformity hath no vertue in it of it owne nature nor by Gods ordinance to bring forth such an effect as the silencing of Gods Ministers is though it be made an occasion by the perversenesse of our Prelats I know well what I say and will make it good against the Defendants vaine pretences The case standeth thus sayth he Titus it had been more proper to say Diotrephes the Bishop doth deprive Titius a factious and schismaticall minister that he may place Sempronius a peaceable and discreet man in his stead In this proceeding the intendement of Titus is not absolutely to deprive Titius as he is a Minister but as he was factious yet so onely respectively that Titius being deprived he may constitute Sempronius for the charge of a Bishop is not determinate to appoynt precisely this minâ—ster but indefinite to ordaine a minister so that the course of Gods plow is still preserved and continued But as for Titius who will rather be silenced then conforme it is evident that the cause of his silencing being his owne refractarinesse which is onely personall proper to himselfe and yet hath no faculty in himselfe to appoynt or admit of a successor he may be sayd to have properly caused his own suspension and deprivation This case needeth no long demurring on for there is not one sentence in all the length of it which doth not smell without any uncasing 1. are all those factious and schismaticall men that refuse to conforme was Hooper such a kynd of man was Peter Martyr and M. Perkins such when one at Oxford and the other at Cambridge refused to weare the Surplice was M r. Goodman M r. Deering M r. More M r. Rogers and such like heavenly men the lights glory of our churches were all these factious and schismaticall In the presence of God it is well knowne they were not But our Prelats have this prerogative they may dubb whom they please factious and schismaticall after that there is no redemption they must be such be they otherwise never so full of all grace 2. Are all peaceable discreet men which are placed in the deprived ministers stead For the best of them they are still as great eye-sores to our Bishops almost as the other because they reprove a great deale of Episcopall darknesse by their practises For the rest the congregations over whom they are sett cannot finde it the voyce of all the countrey is otherwise for many of them yet according to the Prelats measure who meat as it seemeth the vertues and vices of a minister by certaine ceremonies of their owne imposing it cannot be denied but the most of them are very peaceable and discreet Even so as many of the Bishops themselves were knowne to be afore they were Bishops and shew themselves to be still for Episcopatus plures accepit quam fecit bonos 3. What sence can this have The Bishop depriveth Titius respectively that he may constitute Sempronius Doth he know before-hand whom he shall constitute then there is grosse legerdemaine betwixt him and that Sempronius For with what conscience can one seek and the other assigne the place of him that is in possession This is but some time in those benefices which are fatter and whose patrons are more foolish Ordinarily the vilest minister that is to be found may succeed in the place of him that is deprived for ought the Bishop knoweth or for ought he can doe except he will endure a quare impedit which in case of morall unworthinesse hath scarce beene ever heard of 4. The charge which he sayth our Bishops have of appointing Ministers I wonder from whence they have it or by what conveyance They say that they themselves are the proper pastors of all the parishes in their Diocesse It is well if they have an ubiquitary faculty and will to performe the office of pastors to so great a people but who made them such Christ his Apostles never knew of ordinary pastors having charge of so many Churches But suppose they did by whom doth Christ call one of our Bishops By the Kings congedelier the Chapiters nominall election or by the Archbishops consecration There is none of these that can beare the triall of Scripture nor of the Primitive Churches example 5. Is the Bishops power of appointing a minister no wayes determinate to this or that minister then it seemeth his meere will determineth of the particular person without any just reason For if there be certaine causes or reasons which the Bishop is bound to follow in designing of this or that minister rather then another then is the Bishop determinate The Councell of Nice it selfe determined the authority even of Patriarches in this case viz. that the Elders should first nominate fitt men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secondly that the people should elect or choose out of that number per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thirdly that the Bishop should confirme the elected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. l. x. p. 177. What exorbitant power is this then which our Bishops doe now-a-dayes chalenge unto themselves All Classicall Divines do consent to that which Iunius setteth downe Conc. 5. l. 2. c. 6. n. 73. that no Bishop can send or appoint a Minister sine certa ac justa ecclesiae postulatione without the certaine fore-choyce of the Church Id enim esset obtrudere non mittere for that were to obtrude him not to send him 6. How is the course of Gods plow preserved when for the most part the succeeding Minister is thrust upon the people against their wills and so pernitious contentions arise of which the Bishop is cause procreant and conservant by depriving the people of their minister and obtruding his owne minister upon them and upholding him in all those courses whereby he grieveth the poore people 7. As the Minister hath no faculty in himselfe to appoint a successor so hath not the Bishop neither of himselfe and by himselfe Thus much for the Defendant his case Whereas he addeth
that Beza and M r. Cartwright determined with him in case of the Surplice I answer 1. they did not so for the crosse 2. they did not so for subscription to either 3. they did not so but by way of toleration requiring also that men did speake against the imposing of the Surplice 4. Beza was not throughly acquainted with the state of our Church M r. Cartwright as I have beene certainly informed by his owne sonne recalled that passage of his booke and desired that his revoking of it might be made knowne I thought good overseeing the Presse to confirme the Authors report by a more particular relation which I have received from a person of good credit set downe in writt as followeth MR. Cartwright being beyond the seas in printing the rest of his 2. Reply werein that indulgence is sent to the Ministers of England who sought reformation with him for their opinion of the use of the Surplice in case of deprivation 22. of whom met therabout of whom 19 joyntly agreed that it was simply unlawfull in any case but the other three sayd otherwise wherefore it was agreed by all that each part should write their opinion and their reasons to him which they did but the letter of the nineteene miscarried and that of the other three was delivered which he taking as the letter of the whole supposed their joynt consent had beene that the losse of the ministery altered the case of the unlawfulnesse so that they were all against him whereupon be mistrusting his owne judgement and being much perplexed thereabout suffered himselfe to be swayed unto what is there written but afterward understanding the right hee was much more perplexed yea as he sayd more then ever he was in that to the great prejudice of the truth he had suffered his conscience to be so defiled which was forbidden 1. Cor. 8.7 which hee bartily sorrowed to many professing that if he againe put penn to paper about that subject he would cleare the cause and blame himselfe praying them to signify the same freely in the meane tyme the which they did so that it ever since hath been currant among all his friends and constantly affirmed by them to all on due occasions and particularly affirmed to M. Sprint by a Gentleman in the presence of one Nobleman two Gentlemen 27. Ministers and many professors in his course in the scanning his booke then about to be printed divers yeares before it was printed sundry also of those ministers avouched the same some on their owne knowledge others vpon vndoubted testimony which yet is ready to be avouched in due case of need and should now be expressed were not the naming of the avouchers dangerous vnto them and so not to be done without their knowledge which now cannot be For the point it selfe when a man doth but stand in doubt betwixt using the ceremonies and suffering of dâ—privation it must needs be more safe patiently to suffer himselfe to bee thrust from his ministâ—ry then to reteine it and offend his conscience by using the Ceremonies For to bee restrained by authoriâ—y from his lawfull function because hee will not yeeld to the doing of that which to him is sinne is no more sinne in the sufferer then to surcease his publicke preaching whilest he is held in prison where he wanteth occasion Thus the use of that is avoyded which he disalloweth and the blame of leaving his standing is theirs who cast him from thence and not his So no sinn is committed eiâ—her in the use of that hee disalloweth or in susteining deprivation But to hold his place and to practise against conscience is to commit one great sinn at the least Thus having examined the Defend his adventurous charges of false presumptuous irreligious partiall and pernitious I finde them all to bee but rash words of distemper SECT XV. IN the last place the Defendant bringeth forth to answere the words of the Apostle 1. Thess. 5.22 Abstaine from all appearance of evill But as this argument is not found at all in that page of the Abridgment which he citeth so in the words or sence which he setteth downe I dare say it is not used either of them or any other against the ceremonies Yet let us heare his answer The Apostle speaketh sayth he of the opinions of private men But 1. what warrant hath he to restraine a generall praecept when the universalitie of it agreeth witâ— the law Abstaine from all appearance sayth the Apostle i. e. sayth the Def. from some private opinions 2. Why must appearance of evill be needs understood of opinions onely two or three interpreters indeed do understand it of doctrine most properly but the most otherwise and the word translated appearance signifying rather an object of seeing then of hearing leads us rather to the eye as in actions gesturs garments then to the ear in doctrines 3. For that which he addeth of private mens opinions there is no circumstance of the text nor any reason or authority that doth warrant such a glosse SECT XVII AMong his accusations wherein he chargeth us with manifold scandalls the first is that some weak ones by occasion of these differences stand amazed and so become more remisse in profession or religion Where 1. it is to bee observed that when wee spake of weake-ones sect 12. it was putt off with this pretence that they were such as we had catechised Now then who are these weak-ones I hope the Bishops provide that people of their Diocesses are well catechised whence then is this weaknesse 2. DiffereÌ„ces in matters of circumstance are not wont to breed scandall untill some authority injoyne uniformity as we may see in the primitive Churches 3. If differences be the occasion of this scandall surely those that differ from us may as well be accused therefore as we that differ from them especially when we urge nothing of ours upon them but they impose their owne devices upon us and so are causes of the differences 4. The amazement which some have wondring what will be the event of differences is no damnable error which by the Def. is required to a scandall sect 1. And if they grow remisse in religion upon it that is their sinne I am sure zeale against superstition and for pure and undefiled worship hath no fitnesse in it to work remissenesse in religion but urging of humaine devices in Gods worship tendeth directly thither SECT XVIII THe second charge of scandall is in respect of the Separatists Where 1. I aske if Gaius had made a separation from the Church wherein Diotrephes lived whether the Apostle Iohn had beene cause of that scandall because he condemned his abuse of excommunication Ioh. 3.9.10 2. If any separate from churches where Images are retained who is the cause they that dislike of Images or they that retaine them 3. The dislike of Ceremonies is not the cheife cause for which separation is made but the intollerable abuses which are in Ecclesiasticall
which was against Popish Recusancie of our Communion-booke and not against refusall of some few ceremonies contained therein I speake now of the Statute Law not of lawlesse canoÌ„s Or what if wee should stand upon that interpretation which fetcheth the obligation from the weight of the matter imposed which in our ceremonies is very little Some of these I am â—ure the Bishops must flye if they will defend their disuse of the Crosiers slaffe which they are bound by our lawes as well to use as the Ministers are surplusses But all this is needlesse because there can be no contempt in a conscionable forbearance of unlawfull impositions such as the ceremonies are sufficiently proved to be SECT XII HEre certaine Divines are brought in witnessing 1. that superstitions doe depâ—ive men of Christian liberty which we deny not but take their testimonies as making against our ceremonies because as I haue formerly shewed some of these superstitious opinions are inseparable from the imposing and using of them 2. That Christian liberty doth not consist in the use or disuse of things indifferent which we also willingly grant But I would haue the Defendant remember that all freedome is not in the minde conscience For where the minde is free the body may be bound else Christians should not taste so much of this worlds misery as they doe Now Christ hath left unto us not onely an inward liberty of minde and conscience but also an outward freedom of our bodies and outward man from such bodily rites in his worship as have not his stampe upon them and his Spirit and blessing promised unto them Of this the Defendant saith nothing at all Sect. XIII XIIII COncerning the profession of our Church so often brought in enough hath beene said before now it sufficeth to answer that no profession whatsoever can make humaine significant Ceremonies in Gods worship agree with Christian liberty As for superstition which the Defendant doth now the second time most ridiculously object I have answered in the beginning of this Confutation Now onely I note 1. how loosely he describeth that superstition which he calleth affirmative as if no man could use any thing superstitiously except he did hold that without it the faith of Christianity or the true worship of God could not possible consist Never was there such a description given by any man that considered what he said 2. How manfully he concludeth our negative superstition upon this ground that Christ hath left these ceremonies free which is the maine quaestion betwixt him and us 3. How he mis-reporteth our opinion in saying absolutely that wee hold a Surplice to have unholinesse and polluâ—ion in it whereas we hold that it is onely made more unfitt for Gods service then it was before through idolatrous abuse but yet unto other uses it may be applyed 4. That in stead of Scripture he bringeth forth the universall practise of men in the Church which yet hath beene formerly also refuted 5. That he can finde no Divine that calleth opposing of Ceremonies superstition but onely M. Calvin in one place speaking rhetorically as he useth to doe and not intending any definition or distributioÌ„ of that vice 6. How he corrupteth P. Martyrs words to have some colour for a new accusation P. Martyr taking there upon him the person of an adversarie unto Hoopers opinion with whom notwithstanding afterward he consented and recalled the counsell which then he gave as appeareth pag. 1125. saith that if we should refuse all things that the Papists used we should bring the church into servitude which assertion is most true because the Papists abused many necessary things even Christs own Ordinances the observing of which is liberty Now the Def. would have that precisely understood and that in the rigour of every word concerning the Surplice I have here subjoyned apart an Epistle of Zanchius who otherwaies was somewhat favourable to Bishops wherein the Reader may see his judgement concerning superstitious garments To the most renowmed Queene ELYZABETH Defendresse of the Christian Religion and most mighty Queene of England France and Ireland H. Zanchius sendeth greeting MOST gracious most Christian Queene we have not without great griefe understood that the fire of contention about certaine garments which we thought had beene quenched long agone is now againe to the incredible offence of the godly as it were raised from hell and kindled a fresh in your Majesties Kingdome and that the occasion of this fire is because your most gracious Majesty being perswaded by some otherwise great men and carried with a zeal but certainly not according to knowledge to retaine unity in religion hath now more then ever before resolved and decreed yea doth will and command that all †Zanchius it is like was misinformed for Bishops have bin the chief devisers and advisers Bishops and Ministers of the Churches shall in divine service putt on the white and linnen garments which the Popish Priests use now in Poperie yea that it is to be feared least this fire be so kindled and cast its flame so farre and wide that all the Churches of that most large and mighty kingdome to the perpetuall disgrace of your most renowned Majesty be sett on a flaming fire seeing the most part of the Bishops men greatly renowmed for all kinde of learning and godlines had rather leave their office and place in the Church then against their owne conscience admit of such garments or at the least signes of Idolatry and Popish superstition and so defile themselves wiâ—h them and give offence to the weak by their example Now what other thing will this be then by retaining of these garments to destroy the whole body of the Church For without doubt that is Satans intent by casting a seed of dissentions amongst the Bishops And that hee aimed at the infancie of the Church by stirring up discord betweene the East and West Churches about the Passover and other Ceremonies of that kind Therfore Irenaeus Bishop of Lions had just cause in his Epistle sent out of France to Rome sharply to reprove Victor the Pope of Rome because he out of a kind of zeale but not according to knowledge was minded to excommunicate all the Churches of Asia because they celebrated not the Passeover just at the same time as they at Rome did For this was nothing but by an unseasonable desire to retaine the same Ceremonies in all Churches to rent and teare a peeces the unity of the Churches I therefore so soone as I heard that so great a ruine hanged over the Church of Christ in that kingdome presently in respect of that dutie which I owe to the Church of Christ to your gracious Majesty and to that whole kingdom intended to write thither and to try by my uttermost endevor whether so great a mischiefe might possibly be withstood some that feare Christ and wish well to your Majesty exhorting me to the performance of this duty But when I had scarcely
to be worshipped in spirit and truth and where he would have few and very simple Ceremonies Also if God established by his Law that a woman may not putt on a mans apparrell nor a man a womans the one beeing so well of it selfe dishonest and contrary to nature as the other Why then should godly Bishops †Still misinformed and the servants of Christ be clothed or rather shamed and deformed with the garments of godlesse Priests and slaves of Antichrist Why should wee not rather as wee be of a divers religion from them so also be discerned from them at least in the performance of such duties as belong unto Gods worship by outward signes such as garments be Verily this was Gods will and he required of his people that it should be discerned from the prophane Gentiles as by other things so also by a divers sort of apparell and so should professe by this publicke signe that it would have nothing to doe with the Gentiles And why should not wee doe the same Are wee not the people of God abides not the equity of the same commandement And if the word honest be derived of honour what honour will it be for the church of Christ to have Bishops attired and disguised with Popish visors in the administration of the Gospell and Sacraments so as they shall rather be derided then be reverenced any whit by the people And what commendation shall it be for your gracious Majesty in true Churches and among true beleevers that you permit such trifles to be called back into your Church Therfore it standeth not with honesty that holy †Still misinformed Bishops be compelled to receive such visors neither is it indeed a matter worthy of honour and praise neither deserveth it the name of vertue For if your Majesty should command that all English men leaving that ancient and very grave and comely attire should weare Turkie coats or a souldiers weed as it is called who would ever approve this decree as honest And it is much lesse praise-worthy if godly Bishops be enjoyned laying aside or at least changing the honest and ancient apparell which the Apostles wore to wit that common and grave habit to put on the ridiculous execrable or accursed garment of godlesse Mass-priests Now concerning the third part of the Princes dutie there is nothing fitter to trouble the publicke peace of the Church then this counsell For every novelty especially in religion either by it selfe if it be evill disturbs and troubles a good peace or if it be good gives occasion of trouble by accident by causing contention betweene evill and good men But as in things which be good of themselves of which nature the reformation of the Churches according to the will of God is we are not to care for the troubling of that ungodly peace thâ—t is of the world for Christ came not by his Gospell to keep such a peace but rather to take it away to send a sword so assuredly by the urging of things indifferent to trouble the peace of Churches and to cause strife betweene good men and bad yea betweene godly men themselves is so wicked that it can by no meanes be defended so that Ireneus had just cause to reprove Victor Bishop of Rome for this cause as hath beene said afore For it must needs be that at such times the Churches be rent in peeces then which thing what is more hurtfull Many exemples in the histories of the Church prove this which I say How many and how great troubles arose in the Primitive Church betweene those who beside the Gospell urged also circumcision and the law and betweene those who upon good ground rejected them And how great evills would this dissention have brought to the Church of Christ had not the Apostles betime withstood them by that councell gathered together at Ierusalem by a lawfull examination and discussing of the cause by manifest testimonies of the Scriptures and by sound reasons If your gracious Majesty as you ought desire both to be and to seeme Apostolicke then imitate the Apostles in this matter Neither lay and impose this yoke upon the neckes of Christs Disciples your selfe nor suffer it to be imposed by others But if you see that the Bishops disagree about this matter among themselves assemble a Synod and cause this controversie to be examined by the Scriptures And then looke what shall be proved by plaine testimonies and strong reasons propound that to be observed by all and command by your decree that that be observed and so take disagreement out of the Church For your gracious Majesty ought to be very carefull that there be no innovation in religion but according to the word of God By this means shall a true peace concord unity of the Churches be preserved But if the proceeding be otherwise what other thing will it be then to take away unity and to trouble the Christian peace And this I may not passe over with silence that by this novelty of the busines not onely the publick peace shall be troubled in that kingdome but also many else-where out of that kingdome will have occasion given them to raise new contentions in Churches and that to the great hinderance of godlines and the more slow proceeding of the Gospell For all men know that the most part of all the Churches who have fallen from the Bishop of Rome for the Gospels sake doe not only want but also abhorre those garmeÌ„ts and that there be some Churches though few in comparison of the former which doe as yet retaine those garments invented in Poperie as they very stifly retaine some other things also because the reformers of those Churches otherwise worthy men and very faithfull servants of Christ durst not at the first neither judged they it expedient utterly abolish all Popish things But as the common manner is every man likes his owne best Now I call those things a mans owne not so much which every man hath invâ—nted as those beside which every man chooseth to himselfe receiveth retaineth and pursueth though they be invented to his hand by others But if there be also annexed the examples of other men they be more and more hardened in them and are not onely hardened but also doe their uttermost endeavour by word and writing to draw all the rest to be of their minde Therfore wee easily see what the issue will be if your gracious Majesty admit of that counsell which some doe give you to take on apparell and other more Popish things besides For some men who be not well occupied being stirred up by the example of your Majesty will write bookes and disperse them throughout all Germany of these things which they call indifferent to witt that it is lawfull to admit of them nay that they be altogether to be retained that Papists may be the lesse estranged and alienated from us and so we may come the neerer to concord and agreement
it vvas a root of bitteâ—nes or Godlines vvhence such things issue I leave it to the Almighty to judge to the vvise hearted to discerne These be the vvitnesses vvhich I haue to produce out of the Rej. his ovvne vvritings All that I desire is that their depositions may be impartially vveighed in this desire indeavour ther is no vvrong done to any rule of piety or charity VVe haue also the Rej. his open practise as an apparant evidence to contradict vvhat himself professeth in his Praeface touching the constancy of his opinion about the inconveniency onely of these Cerem hovveuer he beares the vvorld in hand to the contrary that vvith great confidence To vvhich purpose vve intreat the follovving Allegations may be indifferently heard from those vvho as vvitnesses can testify his vvalking by their experience That faythfull servant of Christ M r. Arthur Hildersham novv at rest vvith God upon his sicke bed vvith great regrate greif thus expressed himself to a fellovv Brother Doctor Burgesse his conscience knovves that I knovv he speaks untruly And that it may appeare these vvords vvere neyther spoken passionately by him nor forged by me he hath left the proof of them under his ovvne hand upon record vvhich I novv haue by me shall be bould for fuller satisfaction to sett dovvne his ovvne mynde in his ovvne vvords In the 19. pag. of the Praeface The Rej. expresseth him self on this manner I doe ingeniously confesse tvvo errors in that my Apology one that I trusted too much to the quotations of the Abridgement vvhich then I had in vvriting To vvhich M r. Hildersham thus replyes in his notes Hovv false the quotations are in the Abridgement vvill be seene hereafter But this is manifestly false that he vvas before the vvriting of his Apologye deceaved therby or that he had a Copy of it in vvriting before that tyme. For the Abrigdement vvas not made till after he vvas deprived therfore no man could haue any coppy of it either in print or vvriting Nay the large book vvhere of it is an Abridgement vvas not delivered to his Majesty before that day he vvas deprived the Abridgement vvas made sundry months after He proceeds Ibid 19. p. It s true that the Ministers vvere resolved to haue chosen him for one of those three that should haue disputed for them such profession he had made unto them of his full consent vvith them in judgement he had beene one of the disputants if that not the Deane of the Chappell but the King himself had not expressely in his message excepted agaynst him vvhich also argues that his Majesty did hold him to be fully of the mynd that the rest vvho had sent him the foresayd book vvere of In his notes of the 20. pag he hath these vvords That ther is no colour of truth in this that he sayth here i. e. That vvhen he vvas chosen to be one of those that should mayntaine their cause by disputation he professed to his Brethren that he could not speake against the things as unlavvfull but only as inconvenient may appeare evidently to any reasonable man For seing they had in their book delivered to his Majesty our Kings Father stated the quaestion not against the inconveniency but the unlavvfulnes of these things VVho vvill imagyne they Vvould euer haue chosen him to be one of the 3 to dispute for them if he had professed to them at that tyme that he had nothing to say agaynst the unlavvfulnes of them These be the dying vvords of that deare servant of God as I haue them to shovve in black vvhite If yet the vvitnes of the dead deserue no credit The Rej. may vvith some small consideration recall to mynd hovv after the Revolt or change of his former opinion in an occasionall concurrence meeting of many fellovv Brethren vvhen they out of humane Civility desired him to take his place according to his yeares gifts I say he may if he vvill bethink himself easily recall vvhat vvords he then openly uttered to this or like effect He told theÌ„ he vvas unvvorthy to sitt vvith them to haue respect from theÌ„ since he had betrayed them their cause Novv the cause vvhich they mayntayned vvas not inconveniency but unlavvfulnes in these things If the Rej. his memory serue him not about this particular let him repayre to Bambury syde to his auncient friends there they can testify so much to his face If then the construction that the King state made of his course the apprehension his fellovv Brethren had of his practise nay his ovvne profession may be trusted Lett all the vvorld D r. Burgesse his ovvne heart judge vvhether he hath changed his opinion yea or no In his praeface ther is not much that expects ansvver For to omitt his biting language devouring vvords vvhere vvith vve haue cloyed the Reader in the foregoing Catalogue and unto vvhich ranke many Gibes here may be referred as That pag. 5. These do commonly call any small company of their party The Church the Christians of such a tovvne As if Christ vvere I say not divided amongst us but vvholly taken avvay from us to them vvhat vvants this of Schisme in the heart And that pa. 9. The glory of suffering for as they call it the good cause And that pa. 12. Others ayme at Schisme Anabaptisticall delusions to lett passe these pangs of spleene other distempered cariages vvhich he himself cast upon some passionate people Strongly conceited All vvhich being justly blamed it neither hurts the cause against vvhich he vvrites nor helps that vvhich he defends since the most glorious Gospell of Christ hath such blotts cast upon it by reason of the sinfull vveaknesses of some vvho take up the profession therof Leaving I say all these as not vvorthy the consideration vve shall intreat the Rej. at his returne to giue some satisfaction to these quaeres 1. VVhy Atheists Papists prophane varletts brutish drunkards hellish blasphemers together vvith the accursed crevv of the most riotous vvretches yea the Generation of Nevvtralists morall formalists ignorant sotts of all sorts are so zealous for these Cerem Are so violent to urge so carefull to practise them vvho never had care of piety in all their liues 2. After the Lord hath cast in some saving illumination into the mynd convicted the conscience converted the hearts of scandalous sinners after such haue gayned svveet peace of conscience assured evidence of Gods loue sealed unto their soules vvhy do the hearts of such rise in some strong indignation agaynst these Popish reliques vvhen they haue never beene persvvaded therunto by teachers nor had tyme from their ovvne invvard troubles to consider of them That this is the disposition of many I can speake by proof I vvould haue the Rej. speake to the reason of it 3. VVhen it is notorious to all the English vvorld that the most of the
HEre we have the cheif hynges whereupon the doores and wyndowes of the Rej. doe alwayes both open and shutt brought as it were into one box by the examining of these therfore we shall perceave what strenght is in all the building The beginning of this doctrine is orderly taken from the definition of a Cerem Pag. 29.30 A Ceremony is an outward action designed and purposely observed and done in reference to some other thing to the substance whereof it is neither a cause nor a part I will noâ— here use Scalligers saying Nothing more unhappy then a Grammarian adventuring to define For this is not the fault of this DefinitioÌ„ Nihil infâ—â—licius Grammatico definiente that it is too Grammaticall because no Hebrue Greek or Latyn GraÌ„mar no nor Dictionarie neither hath any such word as beareth the sense of the thing here defined Let any man make triall and he shall fynde this true that there is no word Hebrue Greek or Latyn that hath any such meaning But I may well apply that rule of Lawyers A definition is a dangerous thing in law i.e. in those humaine lawes which have no ground but mans will such as those are wherby our Ceremonies have theire being The unhappines of this Definition is that as it is recorded of Doria the Admirall of Genua in a great Sea-fight against the Turkes he fetched his course so farr about to gayne the wynd that he could never come to strike one stroke before the fight was ended So this Rej. seeking to get some advantage of wyndye words doth in this definition goe so farr about that by this course he is not likely to come orderly unto the graple The vanity of the definition discovered in the generall An outward action may be designed or referred to another thing very many wayes now the Rej. taking in to his definition reference to another thing in generall and excepting nothing but causes and parts he maketh all other references as they are found in outward actions Cerem D. B. wrote this his Rej. in Reference to the Church of England his Diocesan and other ministers and people as also in reference to the Replyer neither is his book any proper cause or part of these shall we say therfore that his book is a Cerem of all these In reference to D r. B. many taylors shoomakers bookbynders Apothecaryes Chyrurgions Sextons Paritors Church-wardens and who not have performed many actions which yet were never esteemed his Cerem The Bishops corrupt and cruell dealing in troubling of many congregations and depriving many better then themselves have reference to the Ceremonies but are no proper cause nor part of them are they therfore the Cerem of Ceremonies To prosecute the wyldnes of the definition was too taedious a chase but yet we must consider how he explaineth the termes of it remembring alwayes that this explication is a Cerem to that definition and is no proper cause nor part of it Concerning the generall that a Ceremon is an action and externall Zwarez a great Master of the Ceremonies telleth us that a Ceremony is not only a transient action but also a permanent thing De Resig vol. 1. ar â— lib. 4. cap. 14. and that Ceremonies may be distinguished according to the number of the tenn predicaments of which action maketh but one and an externall action but half a one But let us heare the Rej. expresse himself The Crosse and Surplice are not Cerem but â—he wearing of the Surplice c. P. 30. Touching which we must understand Things are to be considered to make us coÌ„ceave a right of a Ceremony such outward things have a fourfold consideration 1. According to their nature as they arise â—ut of their principles as the lynnen cloth of a Surplice â—he wood of a crucifixe 2. That artificiall frame or â—ashion that appeareth in these 3. The impression or â—rdination which is put upon these to this or that end â— The using of these or stirring up the heart by these â—n practise So in the brasen Serpent we may attend â— the brasse or metall out of which it was made 2. the â—ashion of it 3. the impression of God in or by this so â—ashioned to such a purpose 4. the using of this erecâ—ing of it up by Moses the seing and beholding of it by â—he people whence it is easy to see the deceit of the Rej. his assertion Things in the second third senses formerly mentioned are by all writers truely called cerem either not attending yea excluding in our consideration the fourth respect which is the use Namely that habitude or impression which was imprinted upon a crucifix or brasen Serpent by which they had a morall fitnes either lawfully or unlawfully putt upon them for their severall ends are Cerem lawfull or unlawfull Thus the current of writers Papisticall confesse the church hath power to make and appoint Ceremonies and enjoine the using of them so that they are ceremonies befor they be used their high Altar is a ceremony yea holy all the tyme before it be used in bearing the unbloody sacrifice Thus all Interpreters terme the types of the ould law cerem for that spirituall disposition they have and typicalnes which the Lord set upon them as well when no man used them as when they were used The Brasen Serpent being once sett up had beene a Ceremony in the wildernes though the people would never looke upon it yea I ask whether the massing vestments of Papists such which carry a consecrating virtue with them are not ceremonies when they are kept as well as when they are worne All men so speake so write so judge and the like may be said of our Surplice c. In a word These which were properly types were properly Ceremonies but Legall institutions rites amongst the Iewes were properly rites as well before and after they were used as in the using And therfore they were properly ceremonies â—ome â—hâ—â—gs are Ceâ—emoâ— tâ—â—â—gh they be â—ot actâ—alâ—y used as well when they were not used as when they were in use in the night as in the day when men are in sleepe and cannot use them as when they were awake and did imploy them in worship 2. If we be truely and properly said to use Cerem then Cerem are properly such besyde their use Some things are Ceremon though they be not actually used True it is some Cere consist in actions and all actions being in motion when the actions cease the Ceremonies grounded upon them must needs cease but it is not because they are Cerem but because they be such Cerem whose foundations are in actions In summe then it appeares that the being or existence of the fashionablenes of the brasen serpent and the morall impression or appointment to its end this being or existence I say is a ceremony when it is not used by any and therfore some being or existence is a ceremony poynt blank to the
interpreted by that sense which is given by the Rej. of Doctrinall and Rituall substantiall circumstantiall worship that must be essentiall which is commaunded in the word that is accidentall which is not commaunded but permitted Then the Rej. in affirming essentialls to be determined and accidentalls not sayth nothing else but that which is determined is determined and that which is not determined is not determined 4. If he meane by accidentall formes circumstances of â—yme number place and occasionall course of proceeding then he accuseth unjustly not only us but the Anabaptists themselves of opposing so manifest a truth by all men confessed 5. It would be worth a little paines of his to declare how and in what sense our Hierarchye is accidentall to the church and discipline of England The Bishops are efficient causes even in a high ranke of our Discipline they are principall members of our Diocesan churches they have an Ecclesiasticall rule and commaund over the parâ—icular congregations within their Dominion by them and in their name the essentialls of ordination institution introduction suspension deprivation excommunication c. are dispensed and disposed of who will say that these things can agree to accidentall formes 6. Concerning edging upon Anabaptists in this point it may with better reason be objected to those that maintaine Diocesan Bishops then to those that oppose them for it is well knowen that the Anabaptists in Holland Zeland and Frisland have their Bishops which have care of many congregations within a certaine circuit in all of them though ther be others that teach they only at their visitations performe some mayne things belonging to the pastorall office 7. The position that our Bishops are humaine creatures of mans making is not only to us but to many of themselves sufficient to condemne their office some of them having publikely protested that if it were so they would not keepe their places one day CHAP. IX Concerning Superstition answere to 64.65.66.67.68 of the Preface Novum crimen Iudicis â—nte hunc diem â—anditâ—m BEhold a new crime O yee Iudges and unheard of before this day These who hould the reliques of Popish confessed superstition unlawfull are in that very name indited of superstition Nay they must be content to have it for their solemne style in publique writings for so D r. Morton hath dubbed them To his superstitious brethren the non-conformists and D r. Burges will maintaine it If any man take it ill and say that such a title doth rather beseeme those which allow of religious holy water images circumcision c. besyde crosses and surplices as these two D rs doe hee is straight way scurlous But let us inquire into the Inditement 1. It was noted by the Replyer as a ridiculous peece of Rhethoricke Pag. 64. and a trick of prevention usuall with crafty men The Rej. answereth these two titles suite not well and the charge is weightye which is very true they suite not well neither to them they were intended unto nor yet betwixt themselves and the charge of superstition if it be in good earnest and upon ground is weightye But not well suting do meet often times in affected accusations and so doe here ridiculous Rhetorick and craftinesse Shee that hasted to call her party whore in the beginning of their scoulding fray for feare she should be prevented with that salutation as more deserving it was therin crafty and yet if she called her whorish Sister it was ridiculous Ridiculous I account a new unexpected toy which bringeth some admiration with it Now this accusation is such for untill now it hath scarce beene heard of The Iesuites want neither invenâ—ion nor good will in accusing such as reject their ceremonies with all kynd of reproaches and yet they could never yet hitt upon this imputation to charge them with superstition for that cause Nay Balthasar Chavasius a Iesuite lib. 2. cap. 7. s. 54. though he would fayne have â—astened some such thing upon us yet seing it would not â—ake but be accounted ridiculous even by his owne â—reinds he doth so much as say he durst not do it for â—hame We must not expect sayth he Non est quoae a Pseudoevangelicis reformatos puta superstitiones multas indebitâ— cultus expectemus ut pote quae observationes quaedam inanes ac superflua esse solent illi antâ— ceremonias poenè omnes insectantur many superstitious exâ—ressions of undue worship from those who are falsely called Evangelicall professors considering thâ—se superstitions are â—ont to be certaine vaine and superfluous observations but â—hey meaning the reformed churches do bitterly inveigh almost against all Ceremonies So our Rhemists on Acts â—7 Sect. 4. discharge us of superstition whereupon D r. Fulk saith we accept of your restimbnie as the witnesse of our adversaries And is it not admirable then that our Def. and Rej. should goe beyond the Iesuites in their owne element and teach them how and in what sense they may here after better accuse Calvin and those that agree with him of superstition then of rash irreligious or profane innovation for rejecting so many Ceremonies of theirs which not only they but also our Divines if we may beleeve the Def. and Rej. esteeme easily reformable to good use not simply unlawful And by the same reason Non-residents Pluralists Tot Quots common swearers of diminitive oaths dicers standing upon the lawfulnes of their practise may upon that supposition call those that gaynesay them superstitious brethren 2. For the exploiding rather then answering or confuting of the foresaid ridiculous accusation it was alledged That superstition is a kynd of excesse of religious worship and that an excesse or error in a negation was never called by any author superstition when he meant to speake properly except that very negation be held as a speciall worship That we doe not absteine from these Ceremo but as from other unlawfull corruptions even out of the compasse of worship That every erroneous deniall of things lawfull is not superstition and that all sorts of definitions which are given of superstition doe touch upon our Cerem rather then on the deniall or condemning of them All this could not stay the Rej. but he must maintaine and renue this weighty charge as he calleth it and pronounce that if we can avoyd it it is our witt as if he would say our book hath saved us Lett us therfore consider what the accuser can say to bringe us to this extreame passe 3. There can be no plainer reason of this accusation saith the Rej. then that out of Coll. 2.23 where will worship is instanced in negative observances Pag. 65. answere to the praface Answer to Coll. 2 23. touch not tast not handle not c. But 1. we teach no negative observances so called for observances are ceremoniall Tho. 1.2 q. 101. art 4. we make no ceremonies of our negations but make them morall duties The Prelates on the other syde
numbring of his flock to see them brought to one head what should he say but bemoane himselfe with Alas and wee l a day 2. The second answer is that Convocations doe good sometimes in confirming what was decreed before Which is sometime true viz. If the things decreed before were of themselves good and had need of the Convocations confirmation But sometime such confirmations are onely for fashion-sake As when the Councell of Trent confirmed the Holy Scripture the Apostolicall Creed c. and then there is very little or no good done more than was formerly done to their hands Any other confirmation of good I doe not know our Convocations to be guilty of nor can I understand when whence and how the Convocation had Commission to confirme any thing without making of new Canons A Law of Confirmation is necessary to Canons but Canons of confirmation are not necessary to Lawes established Neither can it be shewed that so much hath beene given or committed to the Convocation Nor if it were could that be done without Canons in some respect new And so much it seemeth D r. B. knew from whence it is that he addeth Or if they have done nothing â—ecause they have had no commission to which they are limited â—y Act of Parliament where lyeth the blame If they have â—one nothing What a miserable supposition is this To â—oe nothing in so long a time is to be no Synode no Mother-Church nor good Milk-nurse but a dead Carâ—asse bearing an empty name of both If they had no â—ommission to doe good they had no commission to be â— Mother-Church If the Parliament hath limited them â—o a commission it was because they durst not trust â—hem without Yet the blame of not doing good cannot â—ye upon the Parliament because they never sought to â—t or by it for a commission of doing any good Nor yet of the Kings Majesty where the Rej. seemeth to leave â—t except they have declared what necessity there was â—hey should doe some good and to that intent made petition for a commission Let it lye therefore upon the convocation it selfe which repraesenteth as an Image or maketh shew of some good but doth none at all 3. The third answer is That in the booke of Canons were many good provisions for more plentifull preaching and â—edressing the abuses of Ecclesiasticall Courts which would have done much good if they had beene as carefully executed as they were made But 1. so there was also in the Councell of Trent many Canons of Reformation at most of their sessions nay such as without any straining goe farre beyond those that are found in our Canons As for example in the fift Session under Paulus 3. it was decreed that expounding of the Scripture should be diligently observed in all Cathedrall Churches and also in other places where any stipend was or may be had and that Praebends for that cause absent from their Chapiter should enjoy their dividents as if they were present And that all Parish Priests should be compelled to teach their people at the least on the Lords day and in solemne feasts In the sixt session the Auntient Canons are revived which were made against Bishops that buisy themselves in Princes Courts or other where with secular affaires and so are either non residents or non-praedicants In the seventh it is ordered that all collations of benefices be upon able men and such as will be resident upon the same under great penalties Pluralities also are abolished or made nullities In the fift session under Pius 4. all taking of money for Orders for letters testimoniall for seales by Bishops is condemned as simony Nay the Notaries or Secretaries are forbidden to take any thing except they have no wages then also not above the tenth part of one Crowne under great penalties It is also under like penalties decreed that none be ordeined except upon necessity and then with patrimony or pension sufficient to live on which have not an Ecclesiasticall Benefice or specialâ— charge Moreover it is decreed that honest unlearned Parish-Priests should have learned Coadjutors adjoyned to them upon their charges and that scandalous Priestâ— should be either reformed or removed In the seventh Session non-residency both of Bishops and Curates is againe condemned as a mortall sinne And which D. Bancroft would have called English Scotizing or Scottish Genevating if it had beene but mentioned in his Convocation it was appointed that the names of those which â—esired to be ordeined should be the moneth before â—ubliquely proclaimed in the Church and diligent inâ—uisition made concerning their life and manners It â—â—so confirmed that none should be ordeined that is â—ot designed to a certaine place of ministery In the â—ight Session it is injoyned to Bishops as their principall â—ffice to preach diligently in their Churches and that â—n all Parishes at least thrice a weeke there should be preaâ—hing And that one man should have but one Benefice â—equiring residence c. With what syncerity theis and â—uch Canons of Reformation were propounded is to â—e seene in the History of that Councell But in verball provisions it is evident that that Conventicle was not behinde our Convocation but rather ledde her the way taught her how to dissemble as if shee had set downe among other Canons Who knowes not how to feigne Qui nosciâ— simulare noscit regnare he knowes not how to reigne Secondly That provision which is here added if those Canons had beene carefully executed is as bald as any of the Canons For 1. the quaestion being of doing good we are tolde they proceeded so farre that they had done some good if they had come to execution that is to doing of good and not pretending it onely 2. To whom did it belong to see good Canons executed but to Archbishops Bishops Deanes Arch-deacons which were the makers of them Had they commission both to make badde Canons and execute them but to make onely good and so leave them without execution 3. This whole Plea is as if for the cursed figtree which brought forth no fruite one should have alleadged that it brought forth leaves and so made good provision for fruite if fruite had followed answerable to the leaves 4. What provision was made for preaching if it were fully â—xecuâ—ed D. B. in his Apology in the 67. page of D. Covel sheweth thus By the Canons no piece of the service must give way to a Sermon or any other respect which computed with the accessory occasions of Christenings Burialls Mariages and Communions which fall out all at some times some at all times in many Congregations doeth necessarily pretend if not a purpose yet a consequence of devouring of preaching and so not widowes houses but Gods house under pretense of long prayers while neither the time nor the ministers strength nor peoples patience can beare that taske of reading and preacâ—ing too Of which intention if we be affraid who can marvell that either shall
all humane Ceremonies be unlawfull 3. If God hath left rules for direction of his Churche in rites and orders Ecclesiasticall then he hath not determined of them in his word 4. The Defender hath mainteyned that our Ceremonies are agreable to the rules of Gods word so as no Friar dare denie it nor the Replier professing his name In all which there is nothing of any moment For 1. though it were graÌ„ted that the Def. was not tied to the Abridg order yet he may be tied to their matter if he meant to give them a full answer 2. Though it be needlesse to speak of directive rules in unlawfull Ceremonies as they are simplie unlawfull yet seing rites of order and decencie which are confessed lawfull are by the Def. and others confounded with Cerem by others esteemed unlawfull it is very necessarie that at least the conditions of lawfull Ceremonies should be Demonstrated to agree unto suche Ceremonies as are defended to be lawfull 3. Though God hath left rules for rites of order and decencie yet he hath determined of all Ceremonies significant by institution 4. If the Def. had mainteyned our Ceremonies to be agreable unto these rules of Gods word it had been the most compendidious way for the Rejoynder to have shewed where and how For that of the Friar I easily beleive it For not one friar of a thousend dare say that any allegation for Popish Ceremonies though it be out of a leadeÌ„ legend is not as plaine a demonstration as any is in all Mathematickes As for the Repliers concealing his name that is a poor imputation For I dare undertake that the Rejoynder may have names enough for that which is sayd and upon second thoughtes he may professe his owne name among them except he can shew where and how the Def. hath indevored to prove our Ceremonies agreable to those rules about which this question is moved If the Def. had performed this before what need the Rejoynder to have made here a solemne digression touching the rules for Ceremonies Which digression of his shall now have a hearing Concerning Rules for Ceremonies 1. IN the first place he taketh great exception against one rule propounded by T. C. Rep. 2. pag. 62. that Ceremonies offend not any especialâ—y the Churche of God To this D. Witgifts mayne answer was that it was a rule for private men not for the Churche Of this the Rejoynder seemeth ashamed and therfore seeketh after other exceptions The first is that the buisinesse for which this rule is given 1. Cor. 10.32 was no matter of Churche Ceremonie but of conversatien Where he should have considered 1. that some Churche Ceremonies had of ould their place in ordinarie conversatioÌ„ so these two are not apposite one to the other 2. that the eating of thinges offered to idols was a heathenish Ceremonie and therfor the absteining from it required in Christian Ceremonies 3. that howsoever this rule is in this place applied yet Rom. 14.15.20 it is by the same Apostle applied to some kinde of Iewish Churche Ceremonies The second exception is that this rule is morall and generall belonging to all our actions not particular for Ceremonies But if by particular he meaneth proper then he overthroweth by this exception all those rules by himself acknowledged for good edification comelinesâ—e and order because none of these are proper unto Ceremonies The third is that a negative suche as not to be scandalous may well be a caution but not a rule About which I will not contende It is sufficient for our purpose if it be a caution strictly to be observed in Ceremonies for suche a rule as is Thou shall not murder 2. Another rule urged by T. C. that Ceremonies tende to the glorie of God is also rejected by the Rejoynder as the former But no new reason is brought but onely that it is a comon rule not proper to Ceremonies which in many words is inlarged Now for this being the same with that formerly objected about not scandalizing the same answer which before was given is sufficient Yet this moreover is to be observed for both these rules that though they be not proper to Ceremonies our Divines notwithstanding doe usually apply these and suche like generall rules unto Ceremonies because the breache of these rules is common to and as it seemeth inseparable from humane significant Ceremonies proper to religion taken from Papists They tende not in their nature to Gods glorie but rather to the glory of them from whom they have receyved their being They are scandalous both to Protestants and Papists as afterward is declared So Vrsine tom 1. pag. 365. giveth one rule for Ceremonies that they be not impious which is not proper to Cerem as Bucanus among the receyved rules of Cer. maketh this one that they be not opposite to the analogie of faith Because many of the Popish Ceremonies are impious and opposite to faith And the same Vrsine addeth among other rules that they be not scandalous Iunius also in his Hidelberg theses de tradit th 58. requireth in a good Ceremonie that it be to the glorie of God So others many D. Willet in his Synopsis pag. 110. giveth 4. rules for Ceremonies two of which are 1. that all thinges be doen to the glory of God 3. that all thinges ought to be doen without offence Yet these rules in T. C. are suche as may not passe without the Rejoynder his censure layd out in divers digressing pages Lastly the Rejoynder himself when he would give a rule for distinguishing good Ceremonies from bad useth to make this one that they be free from opinion of merit etc. And yet he will not say that suche opinions are proper to Ceremonies 3. H. I. is in the last place brought in as not holding the rules of T. C. Whiche were it true is litle materiall or to the purpose But what is noted out of H. I. repugnant He injoineth the same rules to be observed in the determining of mere Circumstances eyther Civill or occasionall but denieth the Churcâ—e to have any power of appointing Ceremâ—nies meerly Ecclesiasticall And this is in effect to take those rules away removing the Ceremonies which should be framâ—d by them Nay rather this in effect and cause both to acknowlege the rules and onely to point out the true objects to be ruled by them and to give warning of abusive objects which have crept in under the colours of those true Whether this discretion of his betwixt Circumstances and properly religious Ceremonies be justifiable or no that question belongeth not to this digression but to three wholle chapters of this dispute But if the Rejoynder would know who doeth directly take these rules and the other also which he acknowlegeth as they are Scripture Rules it is one to whome both he and the Defend are muche beholding to M r. Hooker by name whoe p. 95. sayth plainely of one as well as of other they are Rules and Canons of that law
which the times favour and therfore strive to make somthing of that which maketh nothing for them In the former section when Order Decencie and Edification should have been handled as Rules according to the title of the digression the Rejoynder soddainly breaketh off referring them to a fitter place Now here in this place he was constreined to touche upon them but so softly and sparinglie that it appeareth he founde this no fitter place then the former for those reserved considerations When shall we come to the fitter place SECT 17. Concerning the ancient Fathers allowing of Humane Ceremonies 1. OF these the Repl. answered it cannot be proved nor is probable that from the first beginning of the Primitive Churche they brought in any new inventions Vpon this the Rej. accusing not him alone but others also that they can beleive no trueth crosse to their opinion because they seeke honour one of another praesume of their new traditions as if the spirit of trueth had come onely to them or from theÌ„ alone answereth that it is a matter of fact proved by Records of Churches against which nothing can be sayd But if he could keep-in his passion so longe as to hear this onely word that there are no sufficient Records of any suche thing exstant from the beginninge then he might see that sufficient answer is given unto the name of all Fathers allways Yet I will adde one conjecture to shew that those observations which seem to have been universall in the Primitive Churche were not so in deed without exception Praying toward the East hath as ancient testimonie as any other humane Rite Tertullian Apol. cap. 16. witnesseth that that was one cause why the Christians were esteemed to worship the Sunne And yet Socrates lib. 5. cap. 22. doeth witnesse that at Antioche which was the first Churche of Christians by name they used not to place their Mysteries which directed their posture of prayer toward the East but rather toward the West And why may we not conceyve the like of Easter as well as of this East observation 2. It was secondly answered that those Feasts which the Primitive Churche is sayd to have observed were not by Canonicall imposition but voluntarie accommodation to the infirmitie of some as appeareth by the varietie of their observation and Socrates his testimonie Marke now what a Rejoynder is given 1. Hee telleth us of a strange conjecture of his even from this answer viz. that the Churches held it not onely lawfull but also convenient to impose upon themselves suche Feasts As if occasionall accommodation were all one with imposition or voluntarie joining in action for the good that is in it were always a certaine argument of holding that opinion which others doe affixe unto it But if they had thought them so coÌ„venieÌ„t yet that Arg. would be of litle force For many Ceremonies were thought then convenient which longe since are universally thought otherwise of therfor left off though no reason of inconvenience can be shewed which did not agree to those times as well as to succeeding times except further abuse which cannot be denied of our Ceremonies in question as religious use of milke hony absteyning from washing ones hands for certayn days after Baptisme etc. 2. That which was mentioned of infirmitie occasioning this accommodation the Rej. after his manner crieth downe as a fiction boldly delivered without proof or colour meerly for opposition sake Wheras notwithstanding it is so clear that the infirmitie of men newly converted from Iudaisme and Gentilisme did bringe into Christian Churches customes like unto those in use amonge Iews and Gentils that Cardinall Baronius from that ground mainteyneth many Ceremonies Quid mirum si imolitat apud Gentiles adde etiam Iudaeos consuetudines a quibus eos quamvis Christiani effecti essent penipus posse divelli impossibile videretur easdem in Dei cultum transferri sanctissimi Episcopi cineessetunt ad an 58. p. 606. What wonder if the growen customes among the Gentiles and we may add the Iewes also were such as from which tho they were converted to Christianisme they were yet so hardly taken that it might seeme impossible to putt them quite off what wonder I say then if the most holy Bishops have graunted them place in the worship of God Doctor Iackson in his Originall of Idolatrie sect 4. chap. 23. sheweth the first occasion of Superstition in Christians to have been the infirmities wherby it came to passe that heathenish and Iewish Rites wherto men had been longe accustomed could not easily be extirpated Where also about suche accommodations he hath this remarkable observation To outstrip our adversaries in their owne policies or to use meanes abused by others to a better ende is a resolution so plausible to wordly wisedome that even Christians have mightilie overreached and intangled themselves by too muche seeking to circumvent or goe beyond others About the Varietie which was of olde in the observation of these feasts the Rejoynder answereth that it notwithstanding the agreement for the thinges themselves was universall Which if he would take with a graine of salt viz. that after some space of time it was for ought we know universall but not upon any Ecclesiasticall imposition nor upon any knowne groundes out of Gods word it is the same that the Repl. affirmeth and Socrates lib. 5. cap. 22. laboreth to confirme 3. Mention was further made of the mischeife that came in by those humane observations To which the Rejoynder answereth that the Anniversarie solemnities have not obscured but praeserved that simplicitie of the Gospel And if they had so doen by accident Satans malice and mans frailtie that is nothing but what may be affirmed of Divine ordinances But 1. the Def. his position was in generall of universall Ceremonies by humane institution and not Feasts alone Now those first Ceremoniall observations are guiltie of opening that gate for all the humane praesumtions to enter into Gods house which pressed in after them which gate could never be shutte from that day to this 2. Those very Feasts made a composition or mixture of humane institutions with divine and therfore did not praeserve simplicitie They also were from their first rise not onely aequalled unto but also extolled above the Lords day Easter brought in a superstitions Lent to attend upon it made Baptisme wayt for her Moon and conformed our Lords Supper unto the Iewish Passeover in unleavened bread etc. It was the first apple of contention amonge Christians the first weapon wherwâ—â—h the Bishop of Rome played his prises against other Churches after slew so many Briâ—tons with by Austin the monke Holie-days in honor of Christ invited unto them Saints holy Days etc. 4. It is praesumtion to make mens inventions as guiltlesse of evill consequences as Gods holy ordinances They are active efficacious occasions given of evill these are onely passive occasions taken Neyther is ther any corruption of Gods ordinances whose originall
our Prelates suche good manners as to put fescues of their owne making into his hand and so appoint him after what manner and by what meanes he shall teache us P. Mart. in Reg. 8. thus disputeth For as much as God is most wise he needs not our devise for instrumeÌ„ts to stirre up faith in us which also no tradesman in his kind would indure Cum Deus sit sapientissimus non opus babet ut nostro cogitatu illi parâ—mus instrumenta ad fidem in nobis excitandam quod etiam quisquam Artifex in sua facultate minime serret se dipsomat velles suâ— arbitratu sibi deligere but would chuse to himselfe at his owne plâ—asure what he should think most fitt Nay I would be resolved of this doubt whether this be not a doctrine religious in England The signe of the crosse doeth signifie unto us that we should not be ashamed of Christ crucified etc. If it be as no Conformist can denie then I would know whether and where Christ our onely Authentique teacher doeth teache this doctrine or if our Prelates may bringe in a new doctrine into the Churche and cause Ministers to preache it He leaveth out of our proof that Christ is the onely appointer of meanes as also that those meanes are limited to admonition of a holy dutie and in stead of our conclusion he bringeth in another of ordeyning as necessarie The support also of our collection he omitteth to acknowlege any other meanes of teaching and admonishing us of our dutie then suche as Christ hath appointed is to receyve another teacher into the Churche beside him and to confesse some imperfection in the meanes by him ordeyned Yet in the middest of this shufling and cutting he telleth us that our collection is absurd His reason is not by manifesting the fault of our consequence but onely by objecting some instances and those also nothing to purpose Then sayth he it should not be lawfull to use any helpe of Art Memorative nor to set up a gybbett or a traytors head on a pole to give men warning against murder or treason Had he so soon forgotten that the question is of Ceremonies appropriated to Gods service teaching by ordination or Ãnstitution If he had not what did he mean to instance in thinges that were never called Ceremonies before this Rejoynder made all things in the world in some respect Ceremonies by his wilde definition of a Ceremonie thinges that have no use in Gods service muche lesse appropriated therto thinges not teaching by vertue of any ordination or institution but onely by their naturall relation nay things not teaching at all any spirituall dutie directly and immediatly Characters and suche like helps of memorie doe no otherwise teache trueh then error and haeresies no more spirituall duties then carnall lusts as experice doeth teache One of the ancientes and learnedest SchoolmeÌ„ of our Countrie Alex. AleÌ„sis p. 4. q. 1. m. 1. teacheth us Literae significantes sacras sententias non significant eas in quantum sacra sunt sed in quantum suâ— tres that Letters that signifie sacred sentences do not signifie them as they are sacred but as they are things And if it be lawfull to institute significant Ceremonies for all things that we may note in characters for memorie sake theÌ„ certainly our Convocation may instituteCeremonies properly Sacramentall even suche as doe signifie and seale the Covenant of grace For ther is no doubt but that we may note in characters or writing all that belonge to that Covenant Gibbets traytors heads besides the former exception out of Alex. Hales are remembrances of death inflicted upon suche malefactors but neyther to be appointed by any without that authoritie by which death is inflicted nor in their use imposed upon any nor determined by institution to the teaching of any thing which they would not otherwise teache not yet suche remembrances as may be brought into Gods worship Nay from them some good Divines doe reason against images in Churches and suche like significant Ceremonies D. Fulke against Sanders of images hath these words Images sayth Sanders are profitable because they bring us in remembrance of good thinges I denie this argument because nothing is profitable in religion but that whâ—ch is instituted by God For otherwise wee might bringe the gallows into the Churche which bringeth us in remembrance of Gods justice 4. To passe by those exceptions of the Repl. against the Def. which the Rej. calleth wranglinges though they be defensible enough The first proof of our proposition is taken from Mar. 7. and Matth. 15. where as we allege our Saviour by this argumeÌ„t among others condemneth the Iewish purifijnges and justifieth himself and his Disciples in refusing that Ceremonie because being the praecept of men it was taught and used as a doctrine by way of significatioÌ„ to teache what inward puritie should be in them and how they ought to be clensed from heathen pollutions To this the Rej. supplying againe that which the Def. had forgotten answereth that this reason among others of signification is our fiction Now though these places of Scripture have formerly been handled in the second chapiter let any man considerthis observation wee finde in our Saviours answer three reasons of reprehending the Pharisies 1. That their washing was praeferred before the Commandements of God 2. That it was hypocriticall 3. That it was a vaine worship therefore sinne If any say it was not vayne as significant wee replie it could be no outward worship but as religiously significant For washing without signification had been meer civill And Marc. 7.4 The Pharisies are reproved for meer undertaking to observe washinges no mention being made of any other reason but onely that observance which must needes be understood of all observance which was not civill but by institution intention religious 5. For this interpretation and collation many good Divines were cited as fathering the same They are all abused sayth the Rej. Now of Chrysostome enough hath been sayd in the former chapter D. Whitakers his approbation of the same sentence is shifted of with binding of conscience and holinesse placed in them But these shiftes are sufficiently discussed in the former part of this book To the Confession of Witenberge it is answered 1 That it doeth not so muche as give anie glance at Marc. 7. Which how true it is may appear by these their wordes Non liceâ— vel vetâ—res legis vitus restaurare vel novâ—s comminisci ad adumbrandam veritatem Euangelicam jam patefactum quales sunt Uti vexillis crucibus ad significandam victoriam Christs per crucem quod genus est universa panopliae vestium missalium quam aiunt adumbrare totum passionem Christi multa id genus alia Da hoc â—enere Ceremoniarum sacrorâ—m Christus ex Isaia concionatur fâ—ustra inquiens colunt me docâ—ntes doctrinas praecepta hominum Nor is it lawfull to restore either
institution admonitorie Sacramentalia non operantur remissionem peccatorum venialium nequè instituta sunt ad cam significandam sed ad excitandum animum in detestationem illorum Howsoever a principall Iesuit may professe as muche at Rome of Popish Ceremonies as the Rejoynder doeth here of ours So Vasquez in 3. Disp. 128. cap. 5. ar 4. Sacramentals do not work remission of venial Sins nor are instituted to that end but to stir up the mind to detest them 6. It was in the conclusion of this passage granted by the Repl. that neyther Augustine nor other fathers did constantly in doctrine and practise reject humane mysticall Ceremonies Wherupon the Rejoynder inferreth that Augustine therfore is wronged and wee are mere Navalists But here he forgat that all our Divines and also our English Articles of confession with our Apologie doe reject divers thinges as prayer to for the dead mens falling from grace etc. which those Fathers did not constantly in doctrine and practise reject and yet are neyther to be esteemed mere Novalists not yet accused of wronging those Fathers when they cite some testimonies out of their writings against those errors Concerning Ceremonies it is the commune sentence of our Divines which Beza expresseth ad Bald winum It is not to be doubted but that most of your ancient Bishops were somewhat too busy in devising rites etc. but unhappy was the Counsel Extra controverâ—iam est in excogitandos vitibus ple rosque veteres Episcopoâ—â—lus aquo fuisse soliâ—itos etc. Hoc autem confilium fuit infelix 7. To make an ende of this one testimonie which it pleased the Defend to take into so large consideration for advantage Augustine Epist 119. ad Ian. is cited by all as condemning the multitude of humane Ceremonies which were then crept into the Churche and worship of God and therin without all doubt he sayd that out which many other godly men did inwardly conceyve yet neyther he nor they did constantly reject that multitude nor he declare his minde but when he was urged by Ianuarius The stream of the times bearing toward Poperie made him with others despairing of reformation yeeld too muche unto suche abuses Yet in that famous place Epist. 119. not onely the number but even the nature of suche Ceremonies is condemned 1. For the manifesting wherof I note these passages 1. He noteth these Ceremonies that they were instituted ut quasi observatio Sacramenti sint i. e. so that they partaked the nature of Sacrament For as quasi contractus and quasi peculium castrense doe in the Civill law note participation of the nature of suche thinges to which they are quasi so doeth quasi Sacramentum 2. He professeth that by reason of times he durst not speake against suche Ceremonies so freely as his judgement did lead him liberius improbare non andeo 3. He calleth them servilia onera and humanas presumptiones servil burdens and humane praesumtiones 4. He accounteth the Churche in regard of them to be troubled with muche chaffe tares inter multam paleam multaque zizania constitutam 5. He sayth that suche Ceremonies though they were tolerated yet they were not to be allowed of but upon the first oportunitie to be cashiered resecanda yea though it were not discerned how they made against faith or good manners Let any man now judge if Augustine did in this his clear sentence about Ceremonies agree with our Def. and Rejoyner SECT 4. The judgement of Protestant Divines concerning significant Ceremonies 1. THe Rejoynder was not so large in the former section about one Divine but he is as brief in this about many For first in generall he would perswade us with wordes that the Def. in answering fower testimonies had answered all in one worde that no Protestant Divine except Beza hath spoken absolâ—tely against signes symbolicall and meerly significant Which kinde of rejoynding had had some sense if mere denying of a conclusion were a sufficient answer to an argument drawn from diverse testimonies alleged for the proof of it But yet not trusting to this kinde of answering he adventureth to clear the particular allegations which was more then the Def. would undertâ—ke One would have expected that here he should have answered that which is so pertineÌ„t to the purpose found in the Abridgement pag. 32. because he put it of before pag. 247. with a tale of boy and promised after to shew that it is nothing to the purpose The allegation is this To them that say Images may stand in Churches as helpes to stirre up devotion and to put men in remembrance of good thinges with whome the Def. and Rejoynder consent it is answered by P. Martyr Gwalter Lavater Vrsine Polanus and others that the Lord himself hath appointed meanes enough to doe that and that no meanes may be used to that ende but suche as he hath ordeyned This certayne was to the Rejoynder as it were a noli me tangere that no meanes must be used to stirre up devotion and to put men in remembrance of good thinges but onely those which God hath ordeyned He was therfore contented to passe it over without medling with it And he that with â—is answers to the other allegations may thinke that the beâ—ter way for him had been to deal in like manner with all This will appear in the examining of them one by one 2. In the first place therfore we exspect his answer to that which is founde in the Harmonie of Protestant Confessions generally approved by Reformed Churches About which he is very brief as his cause required The Divines of Witenburge sayth he and those of France and the Lowe Contries viz. that they speake onely of those significant Ceremonies which serve to shadow out the Mysteries of the Gospell or to supplie the office of true Sacramentes Now for the present we will not stand muche upon those phrases shadowes of the Mysteriâ—s of the Gospel supplying of the true Sacraments office It shall be sufficient to reciâ—e the wordes which he hath so easily and often answered The Wittenburge Confession sect 17. sayth thus It is not lâ—wfull eyther to restore the olde Ceremonies of the lawe or devise new to shadow forth the trueth allready layd open and brought to light by the Gospell as in â—he daylight to set up câ—ndels to signifie the light of the Gospell or to cary banners and crosses to signifie the victorie of Christ through his Crosse. Of which sorte is all that Massing attire which they say doeth shadow out the wholle passion of Christ and many other thinges of that kinde etc. The other wordes are these No Mysticull rites that is which cary some mysterie or signification in them though not otherwise impious as namely suche as should be partes of Gods doctrine or kindes of Sacraments but onely suche lawes as pertayne to order and decencie are lawfull Let any man that undetstandeth English and reason judge if these wordes ought or
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.
proving this Altar to be appointed unto Gods service because it was a patterne of the Lords Altar as our Crosse is a resemblance of Christs Crosse was 1. reproved by the Replier because the Crosse wheron Christ did suffer was no more holy then Iudas and so not to be compared unto the Lords Altar To this the Rejoynder in many wordes maketh shew of saying something but I leave it to the Reader if he sayth any thinge I for my part can not discerne what it is 5. The Replier also in the second place alleged that every resemblance of a holy thing is not therfor holy because then every Ale-house picture taken from holy thinges mentioned in Scripture should be holy and a modell of the Temple caried by a Tyrian workman into his countrie for newes should have been holy To this the Rejoynder after a few wordes of course answereth that this is to separat the resemblance of a thing from the use of it As if the Def. had not argued simply meerly from the resemblance making as yet no mention of the use If ther be any Sophistrie in this argument as the Rejoynder sayth ther is it is first found in the Defender his uncouth reason 6. The Defender went about to prove first that this Altar did mystically signifie a spirituall dutie in respect of the Gileadites then living viz to teache that the Lord was God To this it was replied that it doeth not appear out of the text that ther was intended any use for the praesent age that then lived nay the contrarie may be gathered out of the 24. and 25. verses We have doen it for fâ—ar of this thing saying In time to come your children might speak unto our children c. So shall your children make our children cease from fearing the Lord. The Rejoynder opposeth that ther is afterward mention made of us and you But that is nothing because it noteth onely that the generations to come may denie us on this side Iordan not to have been joint Tribes with you on the other side of that River Vpon this the Repl. concluded that this Altar was no direct helpe unto devotion To which is rejoyned that it was not a direct that is immediat help unto devotion but immediatly significative collaterally for devotion it was Suche distinctions I never heard nor read Any man may see that a Ceremonie directly and immediatly signifying a spirituall dutie is a direct immediat help to devotion To what other help this help was collaterall I would fain know A further reason of this conclusion was added viz then most of the other Tribes should have had use of it and also reason to have set up Altars of devotion at every three-way-leet as Crosses stand The Rejoynder is 1. that the other Tribes no doubt had use of it as of a witnesse that the Lord is God Now let any man consider whether they which ordinarily resorted to the Tabernacle and Altar of God had need of a humane Altar farre remooved from their sight to put them in minde that the LORD was God And whether the two Tribes and a halfe without the consent or knowledge of the chiefe Priests the chiefe Magistrates the farre greater part of people and power to appoint vnto all Israel a solemne significant Ceremonie for their common use The Rej. addeth in the 2. place that all are not bound to the same helpes to devotion and the other tribes needed no such monument or patterne having the Altar it selfe in possession Where 1. except he holdeth the two Tribes and a halfe bound to set up this Altar hee maketh in that no difference if hee so holdeth then it is no instance of a meere Arbitrarie Ceremonie 2. The two tribes had the Lords Altar in present possession as well as divers of the other so that by this reason they also for the present need no such monument and patterne which is the very point in this place questioned 7. The Replier affirmed that in regard of posterity the immediate ende of this Altar was to testifie that those Tribes beyond Iordan belonged to the same people and so had right to the same worship with those of this side Iordan which is nothing to a Ceremony of state and immediate use in the speciall solemne worship of God The Rejoynder asketh if this were not a holy religious ende I answere It was so holy and religious as every Land-marke of a Parsons Glebe-land or every signe of a Parish-bound is holy and religious but not so as mysticall Ceremonies B. Andrewes against Perone p. 18. giveth some light to this by the ancient use of Lights and incense There were lights saith he there was incense used by the Primitive Church in their service not for any mysticall meaning but as it is thought for this cause that where the Christians in time of persecution had their meetings most commonly in places darke and so needing lights and dampish and so needing good savours they provided lights against one and incense against the other After the Churches retained these things to shew themselues the successours of those ancient Christians c. the After-ages devized meanings and significations of their owne which from the beginning were not so If this be so as it is thought then there may be signes of succession unto religious fore-fathers without any mysticall meaning which is all that by us is pleaded about this Altar of Iordan And for further manifesting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it was so in this Altar let it be well considered what Iosephus one of the learnedest and most ancient Iewes now exstant saith Antiq. lib. 5. cap. 4. They placed an Altar on the banke of the river as a memorable signe of the neerenesse and affinity of them that dwelt beyond Iordan viz. with them within Canaan Againe it was not placed for worship but symbolically and as a memorandum of their relation to you 8. The Rejoynder as having sufficiently confuted all other answers bringeth in one made to himselfe in conference though he hath not found it in print as a grand absurdity namely that the Gileadites did ill in erecting this Altar and the rest also in allowing of it Now as for allowance by the High Priest Princes and all the Congregation of Israel which he speaketh of I finde it not evident in the Text. About the other I finde this 1. that D. Fulke no absurd Divine against Sanders of Images pag. 649. writeth thus in print The two Tribes and a half Iosh. 22. made not an Image but an Altar for a memoriall and yet their fact was not commendable though it was in some sort excusable 2. I finde also that Calvin before him upon Iosh. 22. sayth thus Duae tribus â—um dimidia non leviter peccarunt c. The two tribes and a half did very ill Which is the great absurditie that the Rejoynder had heard in conference but not seen in print before now SECT 17.18.19.20.21
that these Ceremonies in controversie are not convenient The Def. professing a full answer to all that is objected giveth no answere to any thing there alleged to that purpose When he was challenged by the Repl. for not shewing them convenient the Rej. pag. 167. accuseth him of more impudencie then hee would have expected from any Friar and yet directeth us not to the place where he hath gone about any such matter The Rej. himselfe undertaking to manifest their conveniencie by the Rules of Gods Word suddenly breaketh off pag. 74. and referreth that demonstration to a fitter place which place hitherto he could not finde nor ever will Beside the Rej. confesseth a multitude of godly learned men among whom were Calvin Beza Martyr Bucer Hooper Iewel Fulke Rainolds Whitakers Humphrie Perkins c. to have held our Ceremonies inexpedient or inconvenient at the least Nay he himselfe hath beene in the same haeresie All this notwithstanding he thinketh it not significent in one word to say for a shift without any proofe or declaration that they are convenient for our Church Conveniency is esteemed when as a thing after the consideration of all circumstances isfound to bring more good at the least then evill with it And I dare appeale to the Rej. his owne conscience whether our Ceremonies have beene causes or occasions of more good then evill They may doe hurt saith Beza but they can doe no good God knoweth sayth M r. Foxe they bee the cause of much blindenesse and strife among men Let this by the way be well observed out of this generall answer that the particular answers following in this argument are nothing worth but onely upon this supposition that our Ceremonies are not onely curable and indifferent but also convenient for our Church which neyther Def. nor Rej. nor any for them will ever bee able with any shew of reason and honestie to demonstrate while the world standeth So that this whole fourth Argument is heere in the first section sufficiently yeelded For all that we desire is plainely granted concerning the unlawfulnesse of all such human Ceremonies in Gods worship as are notoriously knowne to have beene and be abused unto Idolatry and Superstition if they bee now of no convenient necessary use in the Church SECT 2. Concerning the second Commandement Lev. 18.3 and 19.19.27.28 Exod. 23.24 Deut. 14 1. and 12.4 and 30.32 2. Cor. 6.14.18 Rev. 18.4 1. THe second Commandement was heer alleged in the Abridgement as forbidding all provocation unto spirituall fornication as the seventh doeth unto that which is carnall This the Def. passed by in silence and therein is defended by the Rej. because according to his method in one particular argument he taketh knowledge of it par 2. c. 2. s. 2. As if Iohn a-Stiles his plea for 3. akers of ground were sufficiently answered by Iohn a-Noxe if he cold with any shew ward it off from 1. aker His owne answer is that as the seventh Commandement doeth not forbid the use of all such things as accidentally doe or may provoke some men to base uncleannesse but onely such as in and of themselves are working incitements thereto so neither doeth the second Commandement forbid the use of all such things as the lust of some Idolaters may turne to spirituall fornication but onely of such as have in themselves or in such use of them an habitude or aptnesse to provoke thereto But 1. Our Divines generally teach as Zanchy de Red. lib. 1. cap. 14. briefely expresseth their meaning The summe of the second Commandement is that in the worship of God or Ceremonies thereabout wee are to devise nothing of our owne braine or borrow ought of Heathenish idolatrous rites Summa est secundi pracepti in externo cultu qui Deo debetur seu in Ceremonijs nihil nobis esse ex nostrâ— capite comminiscendum neque ex ritibus gentium Idololatrarum adhibendum c. 2. Let this be so the question yet remaineth whether our Ceremonies the Crosse for example hath not some habitude and aptnesse to provoke towards Idolatry I thinke it will not be denied but the Crosse is an Idol at Paris at Calis and among the Papists in England Now suppose a knowne harlot to be brought out of the Stues at Paris or Calis unto Dover and lodged there in an honest mans bed or bed-chamber as the Crosse is in the bed of our Religion the holy Sacrament would any man say that there were no habitude nor aptnesse in such a harlot and her lodging to provoke even an honest man and much more a dissolute companion unto filthy folly Difference I know none but onely that the spirituall folly may be more secretly and mystically provoked and exercised then carnall can The Rej. should have done well if hee had given us a certaine rule whereby wee might have distinguished betwixt those monuments or reliques of Idolatry which have an habitude or aptnesse in them to provoke unto Idolatry and those which have not For then more might have beene said therefrom eyther for or against our Ceremonies Now we cannot tell where to take holde saving onely in this that habitude and aptnesse of provoking towards Idolatry is in every consenting relation that any Ceremony otherwise unnecessary hath to any Idol and all such relation of our Ceremonies to Idols cannot be denied neither can their necessity to true Religion be with any shew of reason or honesty mainteyned Beside what jealous or wise husband if his wife should receive any thing from a knowne adulterer who hath also gone about to under-myne her honesty and keepe it alwayes in her bosome would take this for a sufficient excuse that such a thing hath not in it selfe any habitude or aptnesse of prouoking unto Adultery And doeth not God tell us that hee is in like sort a Iealous God From hence it is that M r. Perkins with divers others in writing on the second Commandement doctrinally without speciall medling with controversies making one head of things therein forbidden the monuments and reliques of Idolatrie 2. To Lev. 18.3.4 and 19.19.27 the Def. his answer was according to the Rejoynder his extraction that these places doe not proove the abolishing of things indifferent in nature meerely for the abuse of them to Idolatry which was saith he the point to be prooved because cutting off the flesh for the dâ—ad was evill in it selfe and sowing with divers seeds in one field was forbidden for a typicaâ—l documâ—nt of that syncerity which God required in his people Where 2. he mistaketh or perverteth the question which was not of things indifferent but not necessary nor of all things not necessary but of Ceremonies 2. Cutting off the flesh for the dead with a good meaning nor was nor is more evill in it selfe then Circumcission which both the Def. and Rej. allow as lawfull under Prester Iohn pag. 285.3 That typicall doctrine of syncerity forbiddeth plainely all mixing of Idolaters reliques with Gods holy
Wolphius Lavater Sadeel Iewel Bilson Fulke Rainolds Andrues and Perkins To all these it was unseasonable sayth the Rejoynder to answer at full in this place We must therfor wayt though in vayne for a place which will seeme seasonable 6. The Defender in fine noted two disparities betwixt the brasen Serpent and our Ceremonies 1. That the Idolatrie of the Iews about that was publicke generall and in the same Churche which is not so with our Ceremonies 2. That ther was no other meanes to cure the Idolatrie of those times as now ther is To the former it was answered 1. that these circumstances are not rendred as reasons of abolishing the brazen serpent in the Text but invented by the Def. True saith the Rej. yet any man may conceive that they might be reasons But for generality I cannot conceive how it can be prooved and the publike abuse though it might be a reason yet not such a one as that with it abolishing should be used or suspended But our Ceremonies addeth the Rej. must in comparison be likened to the brazen Serpent used well at Ierusalem which ought not to have beene abolished for such another in relation to that set up at Bethel and made an Idol Wherein he mistaketh much For first our Ceremonies were never good or well used Calvin is allowed of by the Def. and Rej. for his moderation about them Let him therefore speake I answer the turne-coate What is there in the Papacy unlike the brazen Serpent except onely the originall Epist. 265. The Popish Ceremonies are naught from the beginning Resp. ad Versipellem Quid in Papatu non simile serpenti aneo prater originem Epist. 265. Ceremoniae Papales à suo principio vitiosa sunt 2. The Papists did not take these Ceremonies from us but we from them 3. It may be very well questioned whether the serpent at Ierusalem considered as no way commanded of God should not have beene abolished if the ten Tribes should have taken occasion by it of Idolatry It was answered 2. that private idolatry is also to be remooved as well as publike That cannot be de facto saith the Rejoynder Yet thus farre it may be very well de facto that nothing be used in publike which is knowne to nourish idolatry in private It was answered 3. That all these circumstances did more then agree to our Ceremonies in the beginning of our reformation To this it is rejoyned 1. that our Ceremonies were never the object of grosse idolatry which he would not have said if he had thought of the Crosse or that the proper meanes of idolatry are as well to be abolished as the objects The 2. rejoynder is that though they ought to have beene remooved in the beginning of reformation yet now not which is as if a debter should pleade that he owed indeed so much money to his creditour long agoe but now though it hath beene every yeare called for he is quit by deferring the payment Sure sayth the Repl. our Ceremonies are not growne better since the reformation by any good they have done That is not heere considered answereth the Rejoynder but if they bee not growne to lesse abuse As if lesse superstition with much mischiefe were not enough to cashiere such Ceremonies as doe no good To the second disparitie it was replied that this is the very quaestion whether any other meanes be sufficient to cure the disease of human Ceremonies idolatrously abused beside abolishing This sayth the Rej. you make a quaestion of And was not the Defend disputing against us what reason then had he to make ouâ— quaestion an argument or answer against us It was replied also that experience haâ—h shewed the disease of our Ceremonies is not cured in the Dominions of our Hezekia Yet sayth the Rej. the meanes without abolishing may be sufficient if they were well applied that is given and receyved As if the same meanes would not have been in like manner sufficient in Hezekias time against the Idolatrie of the Serpent if they had been well applied i. e. given and receyved Heerin certainly is no disparitie A peice of a Comparison betwixt the Primitive the praesent English Churche 1. Because the Def. 3. or 4. times repeated and urged as much making for his cause that our Churche is so truely reformed that it doeth most lively expresse the face full body of her Primitive Mother-Churche the Repl. therfor at last was forced to say somthing to this especially in this place where it is quaestioned if we will allow it to be called a reformed Churche He answered therfor in generall that in the maine pointes of doctrine and the grossest superstitions our Churche is reformed but in regard of Ecclesiastical government and some Ceremonies it is not To this it is rejoyned 1. That by face and body was meant onely doctrine and religion not governement or Ceremonies The Defend therfor understood this terme as Cardinall Perone and the Replier as D. Andrues whoe in the beginning of his answer hath these wordes Points of faith seeme rather to pertayne to the inward parts then to the face It is the Agend of the Churche â—e should have held him to In that is the face of the Churche c. After this the Rejoynder making all the Primiâ—ive Church that was within divers hundreds of years afâ—er the Apostles age out of the Centurie-writers and others gathereth a catalogue of errors and defects in doctrine and observances which by little and little began in those times and thence concludeth that our doctrine is purer then it was in the Primitive Church and also some observances Now 1. this extention of the Primitive Church is taken without leave 2. Those errors of doctrine may no more be attributed to the Primitive Church then the errors of M r. Mountague and others like him who are neither few in number nor meane for power as things goe may be to the English Church 3. In the other matters of Ecclesiasticall Policy and Ceremonies we hold that for which the Rejoynder formerly objected unto us as a spirit of singular singularity pag. 384. and now confesseth to be true namely that the Apostolicall purity began presently after to be corrupted and so proceeded in defection more and more Yet all this doth not hinder but divers corruptions may be found among us which were not knowne in the first primitive ages Nay let it be marked well how strange an assertion is made up by this reckoning of the Rejoynders In Hezekias time saith the Defendant the idolatry about the Serpent could not be cured but by abolishing the Serpent but in our most truely reformed Church which doth most lively expresse the face and full body of her Primitive Mother-Church this disease would be found curable without any such extremity The meaning is according to the Rejoynder his interpretation the disease of idolatry is more easily cured in that Church which doeth lively expresse the face and full body of those
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
Courts by which it commeth to passe that many poore men being troubled at the first for a small thing afterward are driven to flye the countrey and flying with a hatred of such courses are ready to receive that impression which is most opposit unto them The thing it selfe is plaine enough to all indifferent men that Ecclesiasticall corruptions urged and obtruded are the proper occasion of separation SECT XIX XX. IN the next place the Papists are alledged as persons offended by Non-conformity because they aâ—e utterly unperswadeable to entâ—r into a Church where all ancient rites are professedly rejected But 1. the refusing of conformity by the Ministers doe not I hope make these ancient rites much lesse all to be professedly rejected by our Church For then we may plead the profession of our mother as well as the Defendant which he I am sure will not grant 2. This assertion which is given as a reason is evidently false For in Scotland France the Low countries and such like Churches where none of these ceremonies are retained the power of Gods word which doth not depend on humaine Ceremonies is as effectuall to the conversion of Papists as in England 3. How doth this agree with that which the Defendant hath so often told us that our ceremonies are not the same with the Papists Ceremonies and that the Papists have no great conceit of our ceremonies cap. 2. sect 11. 4. If our contentions about these things bee a scandall to the Papist let them looke to it that cast these apples of contention into the Church under the pretense of peace and uniformity 5. One minister without conformity as old M. Midsâ—y of Ratsdell who was after silenced for his labour hath converted more Papists then any I might say then all of the Bishops in England with all his Ceremoniall observations 6. It is well knowne that there are farre more Papists and Popishly affected in those places where ceremonies are most observed then where they have beene difused 7. It is answered in the Abridgement pag. 47.48 that ceremonies are not for the aedification of the Papists but for the hardening of them And that Papists are not so much to be respected as brethreÌ„ To the latter of which words the Defendant replyeth with a descant upon the tearme brethren sect 20. but sayth nothing at all to the purpose 8. What manner of converts they are usually who are addicted to humaine ceremonies we may see in the Archbishop of Spalato and such others SECT XXI THe greatest scandall of all sayth the Defend is against the Church Now this Non-conformists are made guilty of two wayes 1. comparatively in this section then absolutely in the next The comparative accusation is that we for avoyding of offence towards our brethren grievously offend our mother in that wherein wee owe obedience unto her Where 1. the quaestion is taken for granted for we deny that we owe obedience in the ceremonies to any man or society of men 2. If our mother be somewhat angry that is not presently a scandall by his definition sect 1. but when shee is provoked to a mortall errour Now what mortall errour doe we provoke the Church to Our desire and scope is that the Ceremonies should be either wholly removed or else left free to use or disuse this is no mortall errour I hope The event by accident is the silencing depriving excluding and molesting of us for Non-conformity This indeed is a great errour and sinne of the Prelates but as was formerly shewed the beginning of it is in their irregular Canons and the ending of it in the cruell executions 3. By applying our selves to the will of the Prelats in these Ceremonies wee should though not anger yet greatly â—candalize them by confirming them in a sinne of making their owne will a rule to the Churches even in mysticall ceremonies of superstitious worship contrary to their and our daily prayer Thy will be done 4. The convocation doth not carry herselfe like a mother toward us neither doe we acknowledge any such honour to belong unto it As for the faithfull congregations of England the greatest part of them would willingly be rid of these burthens The rest of this Section is nothing pertinent yet two things may bee noted in it 1. An errour that the number of Iewish Proselites was great and the converted Gentiles few Act. 15. 2. A grosse assertion that after the doctrine of Indifferency in eating of meats was made publicke by the Church then to have sought by abstaining to avoyd the offence of some had beene to the prejudice of Christian liberty and to the scandall of the Church The other accusation of contempt is onely objected Sect. 2â— and varnished over with a few glosing words Sect. 23. and therefore may well bee answered with contempt But hee that will see a full refutation of this let him read M r. Parker chap. 5. sect 11.12 I am wearie of wrastling with the winde yet one unworthy and unchristian taunt I cannot passe by that hee upbraidâ—th the Ministers with living upon voluntary contribuâ—ion and feare of offending their maintainers For 1. when as he confesseth he hath no windowes to look into mens consciences by what rule of religion will permit him to cast upon his brethren such a suspition contrary to their profession of practising and speaking against their consciences for gaining of a poore contribution Is there not farre more cause to thinke that great livings and worldly honors one of the choicest darts that Satan hath in his quiver and therefore tried against our Saviour himselfe when all other failed Mat. 4.8 9. is it not more likely I say that these promotions beare more sway in the mindes of our great Prelates then a poore supply of necessaries with others 2. Neiâ—her all nor the most part of them against whom he wâ—iteth did live upon contributions Though they need not have beene ashamed thereof if they had seeing not onely the primitive Pastors did so but even in our time M r. Perkins and other such lights of our Church have with that kynde of life done more good then all our Cathedrall men with their great revenues 3. Who are the cause that many are forced to live upon contribution have not the Loiterers of Cathedrall Churches ingrossed a great part of that maintenance whereby labouring Preachers should be maintained Doe not our Pluralists and Non-residents cary away the faâ— of the greatest livings leave scarce a Serving-mans wages to their Curats so that either they must be supplied by contributioÌ„ or else by begging Nay doe not the people in divers places take it for a great courtesie at the Non-residents hands if he will take his Tithes and suffer them to procure and maintaine to themselves an honest minister in his place have not our honourable Parliament offered to provide some competent maintenance for the Ministers if the Clergie would forbeare their sinfull excesses 4. Why should the Ministers depend so much
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