would euer practise or command those things after that they were growne so bad after that hee had seene iust cause to inueigh against them and condemne them in that manner To this purpose also the Apostles resolution in not suffering Titus to be circumcised when hee saw what an abuse that Ceremonie was growen vnto and how dangerous an effect was like to follow it if hee had yeelded vnto it maketh very strongly notwithstanding any thing that hee would seeme to say to the contrary in his answere to the sixt obiction as shall further appeare in the discussing of the fourth point that hath bene obserued in the confirmation of this his assumption 3. If it were granted that the Ceremonies which the Apostles vsed and appointed had bin notoriously knowen to haue beene subiect to so great abuse of some and to haue had in them so euill effects euen before or at that time and in those places also where the Apostles inioyned them yet could not this haue proued them euery way as inconuenient and euill as ours are For ours are said and sufficiently proued also as they suppose who haue suffered depriuation or suspension for this cause to bee euill not onely because they haue beene grossely abused and very euill effects haue followed the vse of them for so much may be said also of some of Gods owne ordinances but for that they neuer were good nor can euer serue to any good vse Those as they were at the first the ordinances of God so they are here said by Maister Spr. to haue beene still inioyned to certaine Churches by the Apostles which if it be so then could no abuse that obstinate Iewes or other wicked men had put them vnto make the vse of them either vnlawfull or inconuenient vnto the faithfull that by Apostolicall that is diuine authoritie were required to vse them And here fitly commeth to bee examined whether that bee true which is affirmed by him in his second reason which he brings for the proofe of this point viz. that nothing in substance is obiected against our Ceremonies which might not haue been said aswell against those which the Apostles and Churches of their times did vse In handling of this point as he hath left out much of the force and substance of euery argument which in the Abridgement the booke which himselfe quoteth are set downe against our Ceremonies so hath hee affirmed much more against them which the Apostles then vsed then he is able to iustifie and make good The trueth is that though euery one of those foure arguments doth strike to the heart the ceremonies of our Church yet is there neuer a one of them that doth giue the least touch vnto those which the Apostles and Churches then did vse For first Ours are humane inuentions notoriously knowen to haue been of olde and still to bee abused to idolatry and superstition by the Papists and yet of no necessary vse in the Church Theirs as they were at first by diuine institution so were they not at that time when they vsed them notoriously knowen to haue been abused either to idolatrie or to the confirmation of false and pernicious doctrine and were at that time of necessary vse and though they had been neuer so much abused and had beene also in any other of no necessary vse yet because they were vsed by warrant of Apostolicall and diuine authoritie this first argument toucheth them not at all hee doth indeede denie all this and quoteth Scripture to proue that they were humane inuentions of no necessary vse and abused to superstition But it hath beene already shewed that all these Scriptures are misunderstood and applied by him no more shal need to be said for the conuincing of him in this point when that himselfe cleerely and strongly contradicting himselfe hath both elsewhere in this argument and euen in this very place affirmed For were they humane inuentions which himselfe here sayth were practised and taught by direction of the holy Ghost were they of no necessary vse which he in the proofe of his first proposition of his first argument Num. 8. affirmes to haue bin commanded by the Apostles as matters good and necessary in that case and brings for proofe thereof Act. 15. 28. 2. Ours are humane Ceremonies appropriated to Gods seruice and ordained to teach spirituall duties by their mysticall signification Theirs as they were not appropriated to Gods seruice so neither were they vsed or appointed by the Apostles to bee vsed for mysticall signification or if they had yet seeing as hath before beene shewed they were not humane Ceremonies this argument doth not concerne them It is true indeed that they were in their first institution significatiue and mysticall and thus much the places quoted by him here viz. Col. 2. 16. 17 Heb. 8. 5. 9. 8 23 10. 1. do proue But that either the Apostles vsed them or ordained them that they might teach some spirituall dutie by their mysticall signification that hee hath not so much as indeauoured to proue And surely if Paul did vse circumcision as a Sacrament Acts 16. 3. then by the force of Master Spr. argument heere which maintaineth it lawfull for vs to doe now what the Apostles or Churches in their time did it may be concluded that it is lawfull for vs to vse in Gods seruice other Sacraments then those which God hath ordained 3. Ours being but humane Ceremonies are esteemed imposed and obserued as parts of Gods worship Theirs cannot be proued to be obserued by them much lesse imposed vpon them as parts of Gods worship and if they had yet because they were not humane Ceremonies this argument maketh nothing against them For what is this to the purpose that heere hee takes vpon him to prooue That the Iewes esteemed imposed and obserued them as necessarie to saluation Acts 15. 1. 5 That the zealous Iewes were violently offended with Paul for teaching that Christians ought not to circumcise their children and to liue after the legall customes Acts 21. 27 That the Apostles ordained them as good and necessary Act. 15. 28. 29 That the Apostle conformed himselfe vnto them for their sakes and in their presence that esteemed them as worships of God Acts 15. 1. 5. 16. 3. 21. 26 Seeing the question betweene vs is not heere whether the Iewes obserued and imposed Ceremonies as bad as ours but whether the Apostles or any Church by their appointment did so Did the Apostles or any of them whose conformity of Ceremonies is now in question betweene vs vse any Ceremony as imposed by those Iewes he speaketh of here And what though the Apostles called those things that by their decree was inioyned good and necessary will it follow from thence that they imposed them as parts of Gods worship or can nothing be good and necessary but that which is a part of Gods worship Though the superstitious estimation the people among whō they are vsed haue of them be
the scandall of Papists or if they were conformed vnto by our depriued Brethren till libertie of Ceremonies were granted by the Magistrate Out of this reason thus I argue If the Apostles by direction of the holy Ghost and vpon reasons of common and perpetuall equitie did practise themselues and caused others to practise yea aduised and inioyned as matters good and necessary to be done Ceremonies as inconuenient and euill in many maine and materiall respects as the Ceremonies inioyned and prescribed in our Church are supposed to be then it followeth That to suffer depriuation for refusing to conforme to the ceremonies of our Church is contrary to the doctrine and practise of the Apostles But the former is true as hath beene prooued Therefore the latter followeth also So much of the first reason prouing that the doctrine practise of suffering depriuation for refusing to conform to our prescribed Ceremonies is contrary to the doctrine and practise of the Apostles so seemeth to be an error a sin The second reason proouing this point is this Because the same obiections in substance and for the most part which are brought forth against our Ceremonies to proue them simply and in nature sin may be obiected and applied to the practise and doctrine of the Apostles which was performed by direction of the holy Ghost for those Iewish Ceremonies were * Abridgement Lincoln fol. 17. 1. Humane inuentions for they left to be the commandements of God and are called the traditions commandements and doctrines of men Col. 2. 22. 21. 16. 17. Titus 1. 14. * Ibid. 2. Of no necessary vse seeing Christ was come which was the body and they the shadow of things to come Coloss 2. 16. 17. Heb. 10. 1. And Paul taught euery where that the Iewish Ceremonies must bee left Acts 21. 22. * Ibid. 3. Abused to superstition for they were abused to the confirmation of most false and pernicious doctrine iustification by workes Gal. 2. 3. 4. 12. 14. 15. 16. No saluation without them Acts 15. 1. vt sup * Abrid Lincol fol. 31. 4. Ceremonies significatiue or of mystical signification Yea sacramentall Ceremonies indeed and added to baptized persons For circumcision was a Sacrament and all the Ceremonies of the Law were shadowes of things to come Col. 2. 16. 17. Heb. 10. 1. Patternes shadowes similitudes of heauenly things Heb. 8. 5. and 9. 23. The holy Ghost signified by them Heb. 9. 8. And the signification of them were inseparable to the Iewes that beleeued not as also to the weake beleeuing Iewes who were not instructed throughly * Abrid Lincol fol. 37. 5. Esteemed imposed and obserued as parts of Gods worship So they were by the Iewes esteemed imposed and obserued as necessary Acts 15. 5. to saluation Acts 15. 1. For which cause the zealous Iewes were violently offended with Paul for teaching that Christians ought not to circumcise their children nor to liue after the legall customes Acts 21. 21. 27. Yea this argument might seeme to be pressed on the Apostles who enioyned those burdensome Ceremonies as good and necessarie Acts 15. 28. 29. and conformed vnto them for their sake and in the presence of such as did esteeme and hold them as worships of God Acts 15 1. 5. 16. 3. 21. 26. * 44. 48. fol. 6. Swaruing from the generall rules and directions of the word for determining of Ceremonies not needfull or profitable to edification For how could Iewish ceremonies which were antiquated and either had no signification being shadowes of things already come or a false one edifie the Church nay the euill doctrines which they established and euill effects which they produced serued rather to destroy then to edifie the Church yet their vse and yeelding serued to edifie by making way to the Churches peace and furtherance of the Gospel * 44. 48. fol. 7 Not profitable for order For it had been most orderly to haue serued God by Legall Ceremonies vnder the Law and Euangelical vnder the Gospel It might seeme disorder to bring backe the Legall Ceremonies which were abolished and to ioyne them with Gods worships in the Gospell yet it was order to vse and practise them in that case because it preuented the maine disorder and confusion that else might haue insued namely discord of beleeuing Brethren and suppressing of the Gospel * 44. 48. fol. 8 Not profitable for decency For what was more indecent then for a Christian to vse idle vnfruitfull needlesse and beggarly rudiments For a Christian to bee shaued circumcised offer sacrifice yet did this indecency vphold a higher decency which was the establishment of faith dayly increase of the number of Churches Acts 16. 4. Which conformitie in our Ceremonies in the case of depriuation would also do * 45. 49. fol. 9. Offensiue many waies For first they might offend and grieue the beleeuing Gentiles which neuer vsed them and knew by the Apostles doctrine that they were to bee abolished Acts 21. 21. Galat. 2. 3 9 12 15. Secondly they did so scandalize and were such stumbling blockes to the beleeuing and weake Iewes that they contended about them as needfull to saluation Acts 15. 15. And were violent against Paul in the defence of them Acts 21. 21 22 27 28. And ready to forsake the Christian faith about them as perhaps some did Thirdly the hardned and vnbeleeuing Iewes might bee more hardened from Christianitie and say The Christian religion borroweth our Ceremonies they decline and come backe to vs. Fourthly the Apostles and the Church of God they were offended both in the violence of pressing the necessitie of these things by the Iewes Acts 15. 24. As also in imposing that they did For they were loath to lay any burthen and the burthen that they layed was necessary for the state of the Church Acts 15. 28. Besides they taught against the things they inioyned that namely they ought not to bee vsed by Iewes and Gentiles Acts 21. 21. Fiftly to this we might adde that they might tend in the euent did serue indeede as meanes to infringe the Christian libertie For they were burdens yokes bondages and opposite as they were pressed by the Iewes to the Christian libertie Act. 15. 10 28. Gal. 4. 9. 10. and 5. 1. yet the vse and practise of these things by the direction of the Apostles did procure the libertie of the Gospel and the preaching thereof like as conformitie to our Ceremonies would doe to preuent or recouer the losse of their Ministery To this adde againe that those Ceremonies were very strictly inioined by the Iewes as necessary to saluation Act. 15. 1 5. As ours are now By the Apostles as necessary for the peace of the Church and freedome of the Gospel Act. 15. 24 28. and 21. 21 27. In which respects the practise and conformitie to our Ceremonies may seeme necessary at this time for the appeasing of fraternall discord and furtherance of the Gospel And
the preaching of Gods Word 2. Tim. 4. 2. but vpon iust cause and draw the heauy woe vpon vs 1. Cor. 9. 16. Fourthly what good conscience may a man haue by breaking a greater duty to performe a lesser by committing a greater sinne to auoid that which in this case leaueth to bee a sinne to make conscience of that where none in this case is to be made and to make no conscience of that where great conscience is to bee made namely of continuing to feede the flocke committed to their charge Fifthly this obiection is answered before and holds in matters euill onely by nature not in things indifferent of nature and in vse onely inconuenient Reas 2 Because the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for inconuenient ceremonies is a great enemy to the edification of the Church which is a speciall property and effect of loue for loue edifieth Ephes 4. 16. 1. Cor. 8. 1. For by ineuitable consequence it ouerthroweth all the Churches and ministery of Christ in England yea al the reformed churches Zanch. in Phil. 1. fol. 45. b. Read the Question of Christendome at this houre yea all Churches since Christ and his Apostles Wherefore this doctrine and practise is opposite vnto the law of Loue. The ineuitable ouerthrow dissipation and destruction of all Churches by this doctrine and practise appeareth by this that followeth First wee must consider this that no Church since the Apostles time but hath practised inconuenient Ceremonies in some respect neither is there any true reformed Church at this houre in the Christian world German Danish Bohem Heluetian Dutch or French which doth not practise some inconuenient ceremonies some of them doe practise farre more then ours and more liable to exception all which is made euident in Argument the fourth Yea the Apostolicall Churches did practise inconuenient ceremonies that by the Apostles command and that as things good and necessary for the Church Act. 15. 28. 29. Secondly it therefore followeth by this doctrine of suffering depriuation for inconuenient ceremonies that all the Ministers of England yea of al Christendom must necessarily suffer depriuation for refusing their inconuenient ceremonies seing all Churches doe strictly tie their Ministers to the practise of their ceremonies yea the Apostles by this doctrine did very ill and committed sin to perswade others to conforme to inconuenient ceremonies Act. 21. 23. 24. yea to command them to conforme to them as good and necessary in that case Acts 15. 28. 29. Yea to practise this conformity on themselues Act. 21. 26. Yea and on others also Acts 16. 1. 3. Yea they should rather haue suffered their Apostleship to haue bene forfeited and left the preaching of the Gospel to haue bene suppressed the Churches of Christ to haue bene dissolued and desolated then to haue yeelded to this conformity of inconuenient ceremonies But to admit of this is apparantly absurd wherfore the reason followes and remaines in force Reas 3 Because this doctrine and practise doth needlesly on no ground or iust cause breed or produce sundry scandalls and offences against diuers sorts of persons which is against the law of loue as appeareth First it is the occasion of fraternall discord mouing the Ministers to â—udge and account of the reuerend Bishops as of Antichristian and tyrannous Prelates and the Bishops to esteeme of them as of pernitious and vnsufferable Schismatickes This disturbeth the Churches peace maketh the common enemy insult and blaspheme the Gospel at our mutuall discords and deuoureth our owne strength by biting one another and is Ergo against the law of loue 1. Thess 5. 13. Galat. 5. 13. 14. 15. Rom. 12. 8. Whereas if in the case of depriuation the Ministers did peaceably conforme this scandall would be cut off or exceedingly made lesse and mittigated of which sin the authors and accessaries are guilty before God Secondly it two fold more scandalizeth the Papist then conformity for hee doth farre more reioyce and insult to see a godly Minister thrust out and with him all the truth of the Gospel feruently and continually pressed the greatest enemy to Popery that can be then to see him weare a Surplesse in the face of our Church with his mouth opened and stomacke inlarged against Antichrist and his superstitions and will worships Thirdly it two fold more scandalizeth the Atheist and carnall Libertine and Epicure who by the painfull Ministers depriuall will exceedingly triumph to see a doore opened for him without resistance to liue in drunkennesse whoordome swearing oppressing to bring in securely wanton dancings Church-ales profane wakefeasts reuells vnlawfull sports and a thousand euills much more then to see the Minister though conforming to the ceremonies yet present to withstand disgrace and suppresse these sins and therein to glorifie God to further his kingdome to edifie his Church to propagate his Gospel with a Surplesse on his backe Fourthly it two fold more scandalizeth such one as doth truly feare the name of God who could bee more contented to enioy the meanes of his Faith and saluation and of the Communion of Saints and visible prosperity of Christ his kingdome vpon earth with a small inconuenience of some Ceremonies which hee grieueth at and is not guilty of then to lose his Pastor the Gospel and ordinary meanes of his sauing faith yea of his saluation and heereby to see if it so fall out loyterers and Wolues in sheepes clothing take the charge of the flocke of Christ and to behold the sheepe and lambes so deerely bought and heeretofore so well instructed to lie scattered vp and downe which were vnited in one fold together and led into the greene pastures of grace and life Fiftly it offendeth the Magistrate by prouoking him perswaded and resolued as hee is to disgrace these otherwise well deseruing Ministers and to strike them with the sword of authoritie and that in the dayes and light of the Gospel which would cease by conforming in this case And if wee should not offend a priuate person much lesse should we offend the Magistrate which is a publicke person about the vse of a thing indifferent If it be saide that therefore they abstaine from the Ceremonies that they might not giue offence to godly mindes I say againe that good mindes should not bee offended in this case which if they do we must neglect for that by refusall of conformity the Magistrate is prouoked to depriue them and such as are well minded haue farre more occasion of offence at the depriuation of a good teacher which is a mischeefe then at his conformity which is but a simple inconuenience at the most 6 Sixtly it vniustly condemneth the harmonie of all true Churches that euer were Primitiue and reformed for teaching false doctrine and many godly and most reuerend persons who in case of depriuation partly haue taught the doctrine of necessary conformity to inconuenient Ceremonies partly who aduised thereunto partly who practised the same themselues which hath bene an
Greeke and Latine Churches the euidence hereof as namely in Clemens Alexand. Tertull. Cyprian Basill Ambrose Hierom Augustine and others And for the latitude of this varietie it stretched very farre euen ouer the whole face of the Christian world Iraeneus in Euseb 5. 24. and Firmilianus in Cyprian Epist 75. doe shew the great difference and varietie of ceremonies betweene the Churches of Ierusalem and Rome that is of the Easterne and Westerne parts of the world and of the seuerall Prouinces among themselues And Augustine to Casulan Epist. 86. and to Ianuar. Epist 118. 119. declareth the difference of customes and rites in the Citie of Rome and Millaine and in multitude of other places of his dayes Quae diuer sorum locorum diuersis moribus saith hee innumerabiliter variantur Epist. 119. cap. 19. in as much as for the varietie thereof Socra 5. 22. affirmeth that a man could scarce finde two Churches retaining and following one order in both places and for the multitude thereof hee saith that to set downe in writing the diuers and innumerable ceremonies and customes dispersed throughout Cities and Countries would proue a very tedious piece of worke and hardly nay impossible to bee performed A taste whereof in both hee giueth largely in that place together with his censure The like doe Sozomen 7. 19. who mentioneth other diuersities The reasons of which varietie and number if wee would giue we must distinguish of their qualitie for if they were conuenient ceremonies rightly deduced out of the generall grounds of Gods Word their varietie and difference proceeded from the lawfull libertie which God hath left vnto all Churches to order and appoint fit ceremonies for themselues as they see to be most apt to further their owne edification if they were more studiously commended by them then was meet it was as Sadeele saith vt viam Schismaticis obstruerent De verb. Dei script cap. 5. fol. 32. Or if otherwise they were inconuenient friuolous and needelesse and as many of them proued to be euident occasion of following superstition contention The cause of them in generall is alleadged by Martyr Loc. com class 2. cap. 5. § 17. to bee this that the diuell did presently begin to sow his tares vpon the good seede which was sowed by Christ and his Apostles the particular reasons wherof shall be shewed in that which followeth 2 Touching the kinde and qualitie of the Ceremonies and traditions vsed by the Primatiue Churches if we would examine the particulars wee should finde them to haue beene farre more scandalous and hurtfull then ours can bee imagined to bee not onely in their abuse which I will note in the next member but also in their nature which to mention onely is to make euident as for examples sake I will giue instance of some part Touching Baptisme they vsed THe annointing of the Baptized Tertul. contra Marcion lib. 1. Distinc. 11. cap. 5. de consecr Dist. 4. cap. 87. 90. This Ceremonie signified vnto them that they were Christians and Champions fighting and contending for God Tertul. and was commended as Apostolicall Basil de spir sancto cap. 27. The putting of milke and hony into the mouthes of the Baptised commended as proceeding from the Apostles Tertul. contra Marcion de coron milit In some places also wine and milke without hony Hierom. contra Lucifer The arraying of the Baptized in a white garment Tertul. ibid. de consecratione dist 4. canon 91. 92. in token that they did put on innocency and puritie ibid. out of Ambrose and Rabanus The crossing of the childe in Baptisme Tertul. de resurrect carnis Caro signatur vt anima muniatur August tract 118. in Ioan. serm 55. saith that they vsed it in euery Sacrament and that else Baptisme was not performed after the rites and manner vnlesse the signe of the Crosse were made in the childes forehead To dippe the childe three times in token of the Trinity Basil de spir sancto cap. 27. Sozomen 6. 26. commended also as Apostolicall by Basil Turtul in other places they vsed to dippe the childes head onely and that three times Hierom. contra Lucifer cap. 4. and that in token and remembrance both of the Trinity as also of Christ his three dayes death and buriall in the graue as also of his resurrection which was performed the third day Tertul. ibid. de consecra dist 4. can 78. 80. 81. out of Augustine Hierom Gregorie in other places they dipped the childe but once onely Cyp. to signifie the vnity of Gods essence de consecr Dist 4. can 82. To Baptise only once in the yeere and that in the Easter holidayes Socra lib. 5. cap. 22. also three times in the yeere viz. on the dayes of Christs Natiuity Easter Whitsontide Zopper polit eccle lib. 1. cap. 12. fol. 76. They deferred the baptising of their conuerts two yeres after their conuersion to the faith Caranza summa concil in Elibert concil can 42. To absteine a weeke after Baptisme from washing Tertul. cont Mar. lib. 1. To renounce openly the Diuell and his Angels and to giue the Ministers the right hand Tertul. de coron milit commended by him as Apostolicall De consecrat dist 4. can 95. also Decre part 1. dist 11. cap. 5. ex Basil commended as Apostolicall To blesse the font with oyle ibid. Dist 11. cap. 5. ex Basil commended also by him as Apostolicall Touching the Lords Supper THey were accustomed to signe the elements with the signe of the Crosse for so was euery Sacrament signed August tract 118. in Ioan. Serm. 55. To mingle water with wine Cypr. l. 2. Epist 3. 63. and he calleth this Dominica traditio They also vsed onely water in steede of wine which persons so celebrating the Eucharist are in the fore alleadged place by Cypr. called Aquarij To giue the Eucharist to infants Cypr. serm de Lapsis To receiue the Lords supper euery day August Epist 118. cap. 2. thus it was receiued in Rome and in Spaine Hierom. Epist. ad Licin 28. in other places onely on the Lords day Socra 5. 22. In other places on Saturne day and the Lords day August Epist 118. cap. 2. To receiue the Lords supper in some places in the morning and that fasting but in other places after supper and that being well fed Socrates 5. 22. Cyprian lib. 2. Epist 3. Augustine Epist 119. cap. 6. commendeth the receiuing of the Lords supper fasting to be a tradition Apostolicall and that it was obserued in all the world They sent the Eucharist to other Churches for a token of their consent in the faith and of their loue to one another Eusebius 5. 24. They reserued part of the bread of the Eucharist and sent it to such as were absent Iustin Martyr The people caried the bread of the Eucharist home and kept it in a little boxe Cypr. de Lapsis Tertul. lib. 2. ad vxorem in other places they burned that which was left Origen in Leu. 7. Hesych in Leu.
Aharonicall garments but onely in obedience to the King his Maiestie and those with whom God hath left authoritie to determine of externall Rites of the Church yet according to Gods word and further that they doe it to auoid the scandall of troubling the publike order and agreement and last of all testifying to godly men that euery creature of God is good and therefore all Christians may vse such things godly howsoeuer others haue impiously abused them Idem ibid. in Epistol ad Cranmer fol. 682. Againe I can by no meanes affirme these garments by Antichrists abuse to bee so defiled that they are not to bee permitted to any Church notwithstanding that that Church knoweth and worshippeth Christ and withall knoweth and practiseth the Christian libertie of all things Neither doe I see any Scripture whereby I may defend this condemnation of the good creature of God Ibid. in Respons ad liter as Hooperi de re vestiariaÌ„ fol. 707. To make it impium perse an euill thing in nature for a man to vse these garments in Gods seruice in any respect I see no Scripture to permit or affirme so much ibid. fol. 709. § Againe I verely as I haue confessed vnto you and declared to our Countreymen had rather that no kind of vesture which the Papists vsed were reteined amongst vs for the more full detestation of the Antichristian Priesthood for plainer aduouching of Christian libertie for the auoyding of dangerous contention among the Brethren Yet I cannot be brought by any Scriptures as farre as to see hitherto to denie that the true Ministers of Christ his Church may vse without superstition and to a certaine edification of faith in Christ any of those vestures which the Antichristians abused Idem in Epist Io. Alasco at the ende of the examination a booke so named and written in answere of a booke called the vnfolding of the Popes attire Againe I know very many Ministers of Christ most godly men who haue vsed godly these vestures and at this day doe vse them So that I dare not for this cause ascribe vnto them any fault at all much lesse so hainous a fault as communicating with Antichrist For the which fault wee may vtterly refuse to communicate with them in Christ Ibid. Peter Martyr Seeing these garments are things in different and in themselues good they neither make any man godly nor wicked yet as you also thinke I iudge it rather expedient that these garments and other things of that kind be remooued when conueniently they may that matters of the Church may much more simply bee perfourmed Loc. com ad finem inter Epist. Amico fol. 1085. Againe the reasons by you Bishop Hooper alleadged perswade me not to holde the vse of these garments to bee pernitious or in their nature contrary to the word of God which I suppose to be altogether indifferent being not ignorant of this that things indifferent may sometimes be vsed and sometimes should bee remooued Ibid. Hoopero fol. 1086. Againe albeit I doe but slenderly approue these of garments yet I perceiue somtimes that some indifferent things albeit troublesome and burde some yet must needs bee borne with thus farre foorth as wee cannot doe otherwise lest if it be contended more bitterly then it ought to be it prooue to be an hinderance vnto the Gospel and by our vehement contention we teach those things to be impious which in their nature are indifferent Ibidem Againe surely to mee it should bee farre more pleasing as I haue often testified that wee might onely doe those things which Christ himselfe practised and deliuered to his Apostles Howbeit if some indifferent things be added such as the Surplesse I would not haue men too eagerly to contend about this matter especially when we see those by whom the light of the Gospel is much furthered in England and may yet more bee furthered to oppose themselueâ— to vs heerein Ibid. fol. 1085. Againe First I exhort that you withdraw not your selfe from your calling to the Bishopricke which is offered you in regard of the wonderfull penury of able Ministers Whence this mischieâ—e will come that if you that are the pillars of the Church pull backe and refuse to execute the Ecclesiasticall affaires both the Churches will bee distitute of faithfull Pastours and you shall giue toome to Wolues and Antichrists after Concerning the square Cappe and externall Apparrell of Bishops I suppose that it ought not much to bee disputed of seeing it is free from superstition and may haue a ciuill reason especially in this Kingdome of England Touching the holy Garments as they call them I wonder that they bee so strictly retained For I wish that all things in Gods worship may be perfourmed with greatest simplicitie Howbeit when I thinke with my selfe that if reconcilement in points of doctrine might be made betweene the Saxon Churches and ours there would be no separation for such garments as these For albeit wee like them not a whit yet wee would beare with their vse among them and gratulate our selues that wee haue abolishâ—d them Wherefore you may lawfully vse these garments either in preaching or in administring the Lords Supper yet so as you proceed to speake and teach against the inconuenience in the vse of them Idem ibid. fol. 1127. amico in Angliam Caluin of Bishop Hooper As I commend his constancy in refusing vnction and annealing so I had rather that hee had not so exceedingly contended de pileo veste linea about the square Cap and Surplesse Epist 120. fol. 217. Againe to Melancth To that you say the Magdeburg Ministers doe moue brawles about a linnen garment onely I see not whereto such brawles of theirs did appertaine or tend a little before It may be some will vrge some things as in contentions it came to passe will odiously ventilate some ceremonies wherein there is not so much euill as they pretend Epist. 17. fol. 213. Also although at first Caluin being demanded his iudgement de rebus adiaphoris of things indifferent in the Saxon Churches such as Surplesse c. did freely manifest his iudgement and admonish Melancthon whom some accused as to soft and too remisse for hee perswaded to conformitie rather then to suffer depriuation vt superius yet saith Beza they accused him immerito quidem very vndeseruedly as afterwards Caluin knew more thorowly For then it was not known with what intention that euill spirit and whole troope of Flaccians which perswaded rather to be depriued then conforme which after occasioned so many tumults and now saith Beza at this time doth hinder the worke of God against the Papists with that impudency and fury as if he had beene hired with large summes vnto it by the Pope of Rome Beza in vit Caluin anno 1540. Beza But if any man demand whether nothing at all of those things which are indifferent in themselues may bee retained at least for the sake of the weake and whether I thinke the ministry rather
423. Name of Priest by the Latine word Sacerdos Heming ibid. Against which Ceremonies albeit the said Beza doeth by many pregnant reasons shew his dislike yet doeth he and Hemingius conclude them to be things of their owne nature adiaphora indifferent howsoeuer in vse inconuenient also the obseruators on the harmony of confessions doe mention other Ceremonies such as the vse of Ecclesiasticall discipline in Sect. 8. August obseruat 6. Of Excommunication in Sect. 10. Bohem. 3. in Sect. 11. Anglic. 1. Of Suspēsion in Sect. 17. Gallic 1. Of priuate Absolution in Sect. 8. Bohem. 1. and Saxon. 1. and Wirtemberg 1. and in Sect 11. Bohem. 8. Putting on of hands on the head of the baptised in Sect. 13. obseruat 1. Imposition of hands on the head of the Minister in Sect. 11. Heluet. prior obseru 2. All of the which they doe not simply condemne but doe leaue them to be done or not at the libertie of euery Church vpon two conditions First that the libertie of other Churches of different practise being kept entire not preiudiced Secondly that the inconueniences of such Ceremonies bee carefully preuented So that we see here the vnitie of iudgements of the godly learned to bee opposite vnto the doctrine of suffering depriuation for not vsing or conforming to our inconuenient Ceremonies or to the like Secondly also after the suruay of their iudgement we will take a view of their practise also what it hath beene in this respect In Geneua about Wafer-bread in the Lords Supper This Church in the reformation thereof vsed common bread in the Lords Supper and had abolished the vse of the Wafer-cake as also their fontes to be baptised in and all their holy dayes except the Lords day Now it fell out that the Church of Berne assembling a Synod required a restoring of these things vnto the Churches of Geneua Caluin Coraldus and Farell refusing to consent vnto them or to administer the Sacrament in such maner they were banished therupon the Citie of Geneua and within three dayes after their refusall were depriued of the vse of their Ministery in that place the great part commanding ouer the better Now in their absence sundry godly persons were so offended with this change from common bread to the Wafer-cake as that they thought best for them to abstaine from the Lords Supper and to separate from their Ministry rather then vse the same with the sayd Wafer-bread Whereupon Caluin seriò monuit ne ob istud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 litem mouerent seriously admonished them that they would not raise contention about this indifferent matter which is set downe in his Epistle 17. fol. 37. 38. 39. 40. so saith Beza the vse of the Wafer-bread tooke place and was established about the which Caluin after he was restored to his Ministry againe Nunquam contendendum putauit minimè tamen dissimulans quid alioqui magis esset probaturus did not thinke it meete to contend yet not dissembling his minde what otherwise he did meane to approue Beza in vita Caluini anno 1538. In Germany about excommunication and discipline Bullinger There was neuer any contention about excommunication betweene our Church of Zuricke and the Church of Geneua most beloued of vs Apud Erast de excom fol. 365. also in another place In the meane space wee neuer condemned the Church of Geneua which hath her discipline albeit we haue none Ibid. fol. 350. About the Surplesse It being inioyned to the Ministers of Sueuia they vtterly relinquished their Ministery rather then they would conforme vnto it this practise did Melancthon and Pomeranus vtterly dislike and perswaded the Ministers of Marquesse Albertus dominions to conforme rather then to suffer depriuation which they yeelded vnto for the most part Consil Melancth part 2. fol. 91. About an Altar There is a history related of two great persons a Prince and an Earle the one a Lutheran the other a reformed Protestant The Earle supposing that hee had more iurisdiction in a certaine Church then the Prince had commanded an Altar in the Church to bee pulled downe and a table to be erected in the place The Lutheran Prince vnderstanding thereof commanded the table to bee taken downe and the Altar to bee againe set vp The Earle repeated his practise the second time so did the Prince at last the Earle in a matter of that nature let alone the Altar in the Church suffered the contentious Prince to haue his will Colloqu Mompelgart fol. 424. In the Low-countries about breaking bread of Lords Supper A certaine person was accused to the generall Synod of the Low-countries gathered at Midleborough 1581. That hee would not haue the bread in Lords Supper to bee cut as the manner is of those Churches but would haue it broken out into parts out of the whole loaues the which Ceremonie of breaking is doublesse the more agreeable to the institution of Christ who brake the bread Mat. 26. 26. and to the analogie it had to Christ his Passion whose body was broken 1. Cor. 11. 24. howbeit it was demanded of the Synod what was to be done and practised in this case It was answered by the Synod that they must remaine in the receiued custome of the Belgicke Churches and if any should doe against the custome they must be admonished to desist and leaue of that their practise In actis Syn. inferioris Germ. partic interrogat numb 76. apud Schul Anachrys Hierar l. 9. In America When Villagagno transported the French Coloniae into Brasil anno 1555. vnder direction and protection of Gasper Colignius Admirall of France there was a question on occasion moued touching the elements of the Lords Supper whether in defect of Wine and so of Bread of Wheate they might administer the Sacrament in the Bread of Rootes and common drinke of the Americans made also of Roots Hereof there was difference in iudgement some holding that it were better to abstaine from the Lords Supper then to administer or receiue it seeing Christ mentioneth expresly Mat. 26. 16. Marc. 14. 25. of the fruit of the Vine Others on the other side thought that our Sauiour speaking of Bread and Wine mentioned them onely as the common or vsual meat drinke not as determining those very elements To which cōtrouersie Ioan Lerius the reporter that was then present inferreth Albeit quoth he the greater part inclined to the latter iudgement yet because there was not so great scarcitie of the things questioned as then the controuersie rested to bee determined by further iudgement yet this peaceable disputation was cause of no kinde of discord among vs who by the grace of God remained most neerely knit in our affection in as much as I could willingly desire and wish that there were so good agreement betweene all those which doe professe the true Christian Religion as there was at that time among vs Ioan. Lerius Histor. nauigat in Brasil cap. 6. fol. 69. In England About Episcopal garments and
that so great lights bring so weake grounds For example The Fathers did with one consent teach a refusall of all Ceremonies which were contra fidem bonos more 's and therefore seeing our Ceremonies are contra fidem bonos more 's it followeth that the doctrine and practise of refusing our Ceremonies agreeth with the doctrine of the Fathers as for their practise if it were contrary to their doctrine in that part it was their ignorance we must leaue their practise and follow their doctrine Mat. 23. 2. Answ 1 Neither doeth this obiection touch the question which is whether all Churches and faithfull teachers doe vniformely teach conformitie to such Ceremonies as ours in case of depriuation yet I answere that these allegations of theirs must bee produced and better sifted before it will bee granted that they ouerthrow themselues with their owne grounds which when it is performed I will further answere if I can It is petitio principij or a begging of the question to conclude without any further proofe that our Ceremonies are contra fidem bonos more 's and I thinke verely that our brethren themselues which doe thus obiect will not say that they are fundamentall or ouerthrowing Christ which they should doe if they were contra fidem bonos more 's Let this be soundly proued and then I will yeeld the whole cause but then with all it must bee concluded that no Church can bee a Church which retaineth fundamentall errors No conformer to them without repentance can be saued the practise of the Ceremonies ouerthrow faith a good conscience and let it be considered how farre this will stretch euen to the Apostles and all Churches and faithfull teachers since the time of Christ Obiect Many of the things alleadged touch not our cause they might haue beene spared Answ Though some things concerne not the peculiar cause of the Ministers depriued yet all which I haue alleadged do touch the question proposed which euery intelligent disputant is to follow and intend neither is there any thing that I know proposed which may not serue as a true medius terminus or pregnant argument tending directly to proue this conclusion that all true Churches teachers since the Apostles did teach practise conformitie rather then they would suffer depriuation or seperation from the Church But if any among so many things as are alleadged bee impertinent let it bee shewed and put out with my good liking there is enough besides which is without all controuersie to the purpose Obiect The times are different there may bee a matter fundamentall now which was not then in respect of the most cleere manifestation of the trueth thereof now which was not then Therefore their iudgement though pure is no rule for vs to follow now It is no true arguing They thus iudged therefore we must thus iudge of these Ceremonies as for example It was a trueth that Christ should be borne at Bethleem and of the Virgin Mary this trueth being fundamentall now was not so before Christ was borne and manifested Cornelius was a faithfull man before hee belieued in Christ the sonne of the Virgin Mary yet hee had the faith of the Messias in generall sufficient to his saluation but after it was reuealed by the Apostles to him euen this was also fundamentall Answ This obiection containeth a trueth but it faileth in the application therof vnto the case in question For there must bee proued these two points that this obiection may bee firme First that the vse of these Ceremones is growne to be a matter fundamentall which sometimes it was not and the sound reasons thereof must be alleadged which as yet they are not it is not knowen as yet by any light that euer I preceaued or heard of how these Ceremonies here questioned should be rather fundamentall now then before when by the same reasons they were opposed as they are now Secondly that the refusall of the Ceremonies questioned bee a matter of that waight and nature with the instance brought of belieuing in Christ the sonne of the Virgin Mary betweene which I confesse there seemeth to me to be so great and so reall a difference as that I suppose it to be brought in quite besides the point When these two points bee solued I will answere as occasion is offered further Obiect You haue omitted some things in this your argument or reason whereunto wee must also conforme Besides conformitie is not sufficient wee shall be required to subscribe and further these our ceremonies are nowe farre more strictly enioyned and imposed then euer before Answ The question is of what in this case we may lawfully conforme vnto if there be any thing besides which may be proued simply vnlawful euen in this case of depriuatiō to conforme vnto let it be soundly discouered wisely and zealously eschewed and a reformation humbly laboured vnto by authoritie or prayed for to God In the meane time let vs consider whether in this case our consciences be not tied to conforme to redeeme the libertie of the Ministerie Touching the vrging or pressing of these Ceremonies it is true they haue been imposed with some vehemencie yet they are not imposed nor pretended so to bee vpon the conscience as the worships of God or needfull to saluation but they are taught as variable and free things and in their nature indifferent but as they are commanded by authoritie and so imposed Obiect The force of your argument lieth in this that rather then we should suffer depriuation we should receiue and vse Ceremonies as inconuenient hurtfull and scandalous as were the Iewish Ceremonies and those which the fathers imbraced but the Iewish Ceremonies were holden necessary to saluation Act. 15. 1 3. and the Ceremonies of the Fathers were holden operatiue your argument ergo concludeth a necessitie of receiuing Ceremonies though euen holden necessary and operatiue rather then to suffer depriuation for refusing such Thus may wee also dispute for all other Popish Ceremonies as for the shauen Crowne Exorcisme White garment in Baptisme Soot Spittle Creame holy Water Answ 1. My argument concludeth onely for conforming to the Ceremonies which are prescribed in the case of depriuation and for none other from an argument drawen from the consent of all true Churches and faithfull teachers of all ages and places which did rather conforme to more and worse then ours are pretended to bee argumento à maiori ad minus ducto which holdeth strongly for conforming to our Ceremonies which are farre more tolerable and lesse inconuenient and burdensome then theirs Neither can my argument bee farther drawen or racked then I vrge it 2. Touching the Iewish Ceremonies they were holden necessary to saluation by refractary Iewes not by the Apostles and the godly well grounded Christians So our Ceremonies are holden by the Papists but not by vs therefore that instance concerneth vs no more thē the Apostles and the faithfull of those times 3. Touching the Ceremonies
ministery can bee of that necessity and vse for the glory of God and good of his Church as was the ministery of any Apostle The worke whereunto the Lord hath called and separated the Apostles viz. the planting of the Church and preaching of the Gospel to all nations was such as could not haue beene performed by any other but the Apostles alone But in the depriuation of our Ministers that refuse conformitie there is no such danger and of their preaching there can bee no such necessitie imagined though they preach not the Gospel is preached stil and that soundly and fruitfully And how then can Master Spr. say that the auoiding of depriuation with vs is a reason either superior or aequiualent vnto that which mooued the Apostles to doe as they did if hee had said there is great similitude and analogie betweene these two cases he had spoken probably but to maintaine a paritie betweene them he hath no colour of reason at all 2. The Apostles in vsing and inioyning those Ceremonies might bee well assured that they should greatly further the successe of the Gospel thereby the beleeuing Iewes would bee preserued from Apostasie the vnbeleeuing many of them would be gained and that they should not onely obtaine libertie and freedome for their Ministerie by this meanes among the Iewes but that the very vsing of these things would edifie them Now our Ministers haue no reason that is either Superior or aequiualent vnto this to perswade them to the vse of our Ceremonies for they cannot be assured that the vsing of our Ceremonies would doe any good at all no they are well assured by many reasons long experience that they would doe much hurt euery way both vnto the belieuer and to him that is not yet called to the faith And should not he thinke you haue great cause to brag of this bargaine who after that he had purchased the liberty of his ministry by yeelding vnto conformity should finde euer after a wofull experience that he hath done much more hurt by his conformity then good by his ministry 3. The Apostles in vsing inioyning those Ceremonies if they had enioyned any and the Churches also in obseruing them by their appointment if any such thing had bin were well assured in their consciences they did that which was not onely lawfull but necessary for them to doe and that they had sinned if they had not done so for they had diuine authority to warrant command to do as they did Will Master Spr. say that the auoiding of depriuation with vs is a reason either superiour or equiuolent vnto this our Ministers can discerne no such warrant for the vse of our ceremonies but are fully assured they haue this commandement expresly to the contrary And will any man perswade them that for the auoiding of depriuation or a far greater penalty though indeede that be very great they may do a thing which they are assured is euil in the sight of the Lord. For a conclusion to this answere vnto his first maine argument it shall not be amisse to set downe and repeat sundry materiall differences betweene the case of the Apostles and Churches in their times and ours now 1. They vsed such Ceremonies only as both at the first were diuine ordinances and the vse whereof was warranted vnto them by diuine authority We are required to vse such as are inuentions not humane onely but Antichristian 2. They vsed them in this perswasion of their conscience that they might in that case and ought to be vsed neither did they euer inioyne them to any that held them vnlawfull ours are imposed vpon such as are perswaded in their conscience they cannot vse them without sinne 3. They vsed them but once or twice vpon extraordinary occasion we are required to vse ours constantly and continually in the ordinary exercise of our ministery 4. They neuer vsed them but when they saw euidently that the vse of them would preuent scandall and tend vnto edification we are required to vse ours though we see euidently the vse of them would hinder edification and giue offence many waies ¶ A Reply to the Answere of my first Reason for Conformitie in case of Depriuation LEst the answeres of my reasons should hold me void of charity which is not suspitious or to be carried on with euill surmising I will omit that sending an answere to me which am the second person from them they giue answere as to a third Neither will I insist vpon the Ironies which may seeme too palpable among godly minds needed not especially in disquisition of a truth of so great consequence Onely I put my brethren and my selfe in minde for our better prosecuting of this question that piety is meeke and gentle equalling her selfe to the lower sort it scorneth not such as are differing from it in iudgement it is not prouoked to anger but in euidence and demonstration of the truth approueth her selfe to euery mans conscience in the sight of God Now as there is none end of making many bookes so Gods wisedome should instruct vs by contention not to leingthen controuersies for which cause I haue purposed to be short in reply Touching the Preface or generall answere made before the Answere to particulars it might as I suppose haue been well spared as being to small purpose and quite besides the point in question For 1. The Answerers could not be ignorant and my Conclusion drift in handling matter manner whole course of prosecuting in euery Argument doe plainely stretch no farther then to enforce Conformity in case of Depriuation Therfore this caution is but a voluntary and studious wandring from the question Neither doe these arguments labour to make the world beleeue that all depriued Ministers haue sinned in suffring Depriuation but so many onely as for not conforming haue suffred depriuation Therefore this speech of theirs is either an vntrue surmise or a scornefull Ironie 2. Though the Answerers should bee ignorant that any Minister should suffer Depriuation for onely refusing to conforme yet all the faithfull Ministers of these our parts doe know the contrary of sundry my selfe doe know it of my selfe and others And who can be ignorant that diuers Ministers haue been depriued only for not conforming by inditements at Assise and Sessions as well as by the Bishops and doe perpetually stand liable to that censure and is a cause ouer-ruled as appeareth in the Lo. Cookes reports Againe it is well knowen that for these later 5. or 6. yeeres subscription hath not been vrged to Incumbents or setled Ministers but meere conformity And Bishops haue acknowledged being put in minde by men of learning in the Lawes that they could not vrge Subscription either by vertue of the Statute or the booke of Canons to such as were already placed and setled in their charges It was therefore vnaduisedly and vntruely affirmed to say no more that M. Sprint surely bestowed his time very ill and spent a
of the Law not in the time of the Gospel in as much as being pressed by the blinde and wilfull Iewes they were called the commandements of men Col. 2. Tit. 1. I would know here of my Brethren what maine difference there is betweene the inuentions of men and the commandements of men Seconly because they were abused to superstition and false doctrine many wayes and had very many euill and pernicious effects as I haue proued in the first reason of my first argument Numb 11. 12. which cannot be denied with any shew of contradiction Thirdly because they were notoriously knowen to haue bin so abused euen whersoeuer the Christian faith was planted in Italy Graecia Asiaminor Syria Coelosyria Iudaea Creta and may wee thinke that the famous controuersie and Councel at Ierusalem for deciding thereof about the false opinion about Circumcision was not notoriously knowen vnto all the Christian Churches which also prescribed some Iewish Ceremonies on occasion of abuse of other as also the tumult made on Paul by the furious Iewes at Ierusalem In a word wheresoeuer the Iewes were as they were scattered almost in euery part and new Iewish conuerts there must needes be knowen their notorious abuses of the legall Ceremonies and I much admire that my Brethren should denie this Fourthly Because they are of no profitable vse because of no vse at all I meane in themselues and in their nature being considered being as shadowes without a body weak rudiments without signification shewes without substance types and similitudes without an antitype yea resemblances of nothing Though I denie not but they were of necessary and very profitable vse in the Apostles practise but that was not in respect of any power in themselues or of any vertue which the Apostles gaue them by their iniunction but as meanes and weapons of necessitie to defend the Church from mischiefe and the Gospel from interruption which by no meanes they would haue practised without such necessitie the like I say of our Ceremonies These things being so cleere and euident it must needs follow that these Ceremonies in their nature must bee tainted with that formal and inseparable euil which the arguments of the depriued Ministers doe fasten on our Ceremonies so farre forth as they agree in these Circumstances alleadged which my Brethren fearing are faine to runne into their old and onely refuge That though they had been neuer so much abused and had been also in any other respect of no necessary vse yet this aagument toucheth them not because they were vsed by warrant of Apostolicall and diuine authoritie But that I may driue my Brethren from this their vltimum refugium I say their answere is of no force at all which appeareth by these reasons 1. Because the answere of our Brethren is barely affirmed without all shew of proofe or reason which is sufficiently confuted with a bare deniall and matter of this nature Eâdem facilitate comtemnitur qua probatur as the olde saying of Hierome is yea the Holy Ghost is silent and giueth not the lest touch to intimate that this action was peculiar to the Apostles and how can my Brethren speake so confidently where the Holy Ghost is silent 2. Because of the equall necessity of the Church in all ages and like care which God hath of his Church in giuing equall remedy who doth not onely command and inioyne duties for the purity and comely order of the Church but also prouideth remedies against the diseases thereof Now is there not a necessity for other things aswel as for these Primitiue Churches to appease dissentions schismes tumults interruption of the Gospell depriuation of Ministers arising from inconuenient and abused Ceremonies Must all other Churches besides these for euery inconuenient Ceremony or other thing of like nature with the Iewish Ceremonies suffer the Church to bee ouerthrowne and the Gospell interrupted did God giue them onely priuiledge thus to conforme and not to others in other cases or did he giue remedy to their euills and take it from vs If it seemed good necessary to the Holy Ghost in one cause for the good of the Church to giue way to the practise of inconuenient Ceremonies of this nature by what reason should it not bee still as good and necessary for other Churches in the like case in the sight of the same blessed spirit to practise the like Ceremonies 3. Because Saint Paul rehearsing his practise of conforming to the Iewish Ceremonies doth draw his practise thereof out of a generall doctrine 1. Corinthians 9. 19. The generall doctrine is this That though hee were free from all men as euery faithfull Minister is yet he made himselfe the seruant of all men as in this sense euery faithfull Minister should doe to winne the more From this ground he deduceth his particular practise vers 20. of becomming a Iew vnto the Iewes that is of practising the Iewish Ceremonies for the Iewes sake to auoide their scandall and to winne them to the Gospel shewing and declaring that out of this generall doctrine any godly and sincere Minister of the Gospel might lawfully and ought needfully to conforme to the like Ceremonies of the Iewes in the like case to win them and to gaine liberty to the Gospell Therefore I conclude the Apostles practise of Iewish Ceremonies was not peculier to them as arising from meer Apostolical authority and that the practise of like inconuenient ceremonies in the like case is lawful needful 4. Because the same Apostle declaring his withstanding of the practise of Iewish Ceremonies in other cases doth specifie the reasons thereof namely 1. They would compell men vnto it Galat. 2. 2. and bondage their Christian liberty Galat. 2. 4. with Act. 15. 1. 5. 10. 19 3. And it was not the right way to the truth of the Gospel Galat. 2. 14. Therefore I conclude they practised the Iewish Ceremonies by a certaine and standing reason and not alone by Diuine or Apostolicall authority If they had not beene Apostles by these reasons they would haue practised them in these cases or the like 5. Because by this means any shifting disputant may shift off al necessity of the practise of any part of Apostolical discipline and order namely of excōmunication of obstinate offenders because a matter peculiar to the Apostles as Erastus Erast de excom in Thes fol. 46. Thes 58. others doe or of the Churches meeting on the First day of the weeke as many Libertines and Sabbatarians do things of like nature yea also of our particular assurance of true grace iustification remission of sinnes and saluation which we vsually ground from the example of the Apostles Rom. 8. 38. 39 Gal. 2. 20. 1. Tim. 1. 1. 15. which yet the Papists put off with this our Brethrens answer It was peculiar to the Apostles it was of speciall reuelation For Bellarm. de iustificat lib. 3. cap. 9 in resp ad 7. testimon Staplet de Iustific l. 8. c. 24. f.
forbides sinne which by no circumstance can be amended but are formally euill and in nature and opposite to the puritie and immutability of Gods nature as in these Haue none other gods Commit not Idolatry Take not Gods name in vaine There is no time or occasion or duety superior wherein a man may violate the precepts they are sempiternally and irreuocably inuiolable without exception Duties also of the second table as resist not the Magistrate Rom. 13. 2. despise not thy parents Prou. 23. 22. commit not murther commit not adulterie steale not beare not false witnesse couet not neither may these duties in any case bee or for any superior reason violated neither haue they beene heretofore broken but onely in a case of exception and that is of Gods speciall command For in this case the common rule holdeth That a particular command of God vnto one person or more ouer rules a generall In which case the substantiall negatiues of the second table doe yeeld to the substantiall affirmatiues of the first as being all subordinate to the loue of God As the particular command of God to Abraham to kill and offer his sonne Isaack Gen. 22. 10. 12. ouerrules the generall command of God Thou shalt doe no murther and in Abraham it was no murther notwithstanding that command which else had beene The particular command of God to Iehu if not Ieroboam 1. Kin. 11. 35 37 38 and 12. 24. to smite the house of Ahab his master the Queene and the blood royall 2. Kin. 9. 6 7 9 10 10 15 16 17 30. which else had beene vtterly vnlawfull for him to doe So Gods particular command vnto the Israelites to borrow that of the Egyptians which they neuer paid and so spoyling them Ex. 3. 22 and 11. 2. and 12. 35. ouerswayd the general command Thou shalt not steale which else had bin theft in them Also the particular command of God vnto the Prophet Ezechiel not to mourne for his dead and most deere wife Eze. 24. 15 16 17 18. which else had beene argued want of naturall affection I will not giue instance of Gods particular command to Hosea cap. 1. 2. to marry a wife of fornications because the place is otherwise interpreted by the best iudgements as Zanchius Drusius Iunius Paraeus item Eman. Sad. in hunc locum though others vnderstand it otherwise that is litterally The like is of the Lord particular command of smiting the Prophet 1. King 20. 35 36 37. In which case it was no sinne to smite and wound the innocent Prophet and it was a good worke of obedience to smite him which without the particular command of God had beene a sinne Secondly this rule holdes excepting in a case of simple necessitie In which respect it was lawfull for Paul to cast the wheate into the Sea though otherwise it were not good to doe it Mat. 15. 26. and for Dauid to spare Ioab the murtherer in a case of necessity because he was too hard for him also Moses command for permission of diuorce is heereby iustified for the hardnesse of the Iewes hearts a case of necessitie Also the Apostles prescribing and practising the Iewish Ceremonies was vnlawfull but in a case of necessitie of like nature is Dauids eating the Shew-bread the Apostles rubbing of the eares of Corne vnder this kinde commeth the lawfull vse of all indifferent scandalous things ouerruled by necessitie and so is the conformity vnto the Ceremonies prescribed made lawfull for all the negatiue prohibitions whether one or other in this case of necessitie Thirdly this rule holdeth also in matters circumstantiall and ceremoniall excepting when a superior duety meetes with them to ouerrule them of this kind is the case of Dauids eathing Shew-bread and the Apostles practising and prescribing Iewish Ceremonies for the Churches peace and furtherance of the Gospel which hade not else beene lawfull to haue done and here is also an image of our case Here it is demanded whether an affimatiue substantiall of the first table meeting with a negatiue circumstantiall of the first table the former doeth ouerrule the latter I answere yea For such were the former cases of Dauids eating the Shew-bread of the Apostles practise of Mosaicall Ceremonies and the like By this also we haue an answere against the objection That we may lawfully omit good to doe some superior duety or to omit good for a time to preuent a mischiefe of sinne or harme to others or our selues as to conceale a trueth to saue ones life or to omit preaching to quench an house on fire But we may not commit an euill to purchase or procure any good Which obiection is both vntrue for Dauids eating Shew-bread the Apostles practising of Iewish scandalous and hurtful Ceremonies and the like instances before rehearsed were matters of commission not of omission and besides this obiection is incident into the former For omission is of duties affirmatiue and commission is against duties negatiue Obiect These Ceremonies are against the second Commandement which forbiddeth humane inuentions in Gods worship significatiue Ceremonies abused to superstition by Idolators and apt to be abused by vs also which commandeth vs all possible purity and simplicity in the worships of God Ergo our Ceremonies are vnlawfull simply and in nature euill as being idolatrous and may not be practised Answ This obiection is not wel vrged by any as yet that I know because it is vrged confusedly and distinguisheth not of the parts of this commandement neither declareth the degrees of the duties commanded or of the sinne committed against this command that so the reason might bee euident why and how farre these Ceremonies are against the second Commandement But I answere though a man should admit the antecedent that these Ceremonies in these respects are against the second commandement yet it followeth not therefore wee may not vse them to preuent depriuation or to redeeme the libertie of the Gospell and the reason is that as the reason of the refusing of such Ceremonies as ours are be commanded so also is the preaching of the Word commaunded in the second Commandement the former as a circumstantiall duety to which all Ceremonies are as a lesser worke to a greater The lesser may not commaund or ouerrule a greater if it bee sayde these Ceremonies are Species idoloatriae kindes or degrees of idolatry I answere that admit it were so yet it is such aspecies as the wearing of some apparrell a little too fine yet not being euill in it selfe or the smile of the wife of another man a little too familiar without euill intention may bee aspecies or gradus of adultery that is of the least degree thereof quatenus it may be an occasion and accidentall meanes of scandall in some and vncleanenessein others which is farre from making a diuorce or so much as sturring indignation in the husband But if we would make a paralell and equall cause betweene that case and ours it must be thus namely in a case
of necessitie that a man must either goe naked and so impaire his health or indanger his life and goe after an vnseemely fashion or else hee must weare some inconuenient apparrell in the wearing whereof some good mindes will bee offended with him in the vse others will take it as an occasion by the fashion to bee vnlawfully inamored with his person and so may be an occasion to draw them to actuall adultery in thought desire intreatie or attempt suppose also that other men doe vse the same fashion or finenesse to pride and intention of adultery take away the necessitie and I confesse euen the least occasion of these scandalles were vnlawfull but with the necessitie it leaueth to bee a sinne in the wearing thereof because a greater dutie comes in place nay it were a sinne to neglect health by leauing the apparrell and compare this case with ours it may as well bee say de to bee adultery as this idolatrie it being a violation of a negatiue precept as well as this is supposed to be for all the occasions of the sinne are forbidden with the sin that a sinne of commission as well as this is conceiued to bee and the redeeming of preaching the Word the meanes of mans life spirituall and celestiall may be paralled and put in ballance with the redeeming of our health and naturall life in comparision of the other other comparisons may bee made out of other precepts but this sufficeth Secondly This Obiection doeth ineuitably accuse the Apostles of idolatry in prescribing and practising Ceremonies scandalous significant abused and apt to bee abased to superstition and in many other respects in conuenient yea what Church in the world shall escape censure for prescribing and practising Ceremonies of the like nature which euer in the purest Churches haue beene vsed more or lesse yea if this hold how can any manioyne to the Church of England or to any primitiue or reformed Church of any age seeing by this they may all be sayd to be Churches practising and maintaining of idolatry and so idolatrous Churches How can any depriued Minister communicate in any assembly in England where kneeling at the Communion is if kneeling at Communion be idolatry albeit hee sit himselfe seeing he communicateth with an idolatrous Church and with a company of idolators and so must needes be driuen to separate from England with the Brownists and from all the most and best reformed Churches primitiue and latter For we must come out from idolators and touch no vncleane thing 2. Cor. 6. 17. Rom. 18. 4. By which reason also our Sauiour Christ himselfe his Mother his Apostles al the faithfull of those times could not escape the gilte of a sinne for communicating with the Word Sacraments inuocation and Ministery of such a Church as proposed some Ceremonies of meere humane inuention as the worships of God and necessary to saluation Mat. 5. 8. 9. Lastly it takes away saluation from the Apostles the Martyrs and all faithfull teachers which communicate with such like ceremonies both because Idolators shall neuer enter 1. Cor. 6. 11. Gal. 5. 19. 20. 21. Reu. 21. 8. as also because presupposing it to be a breach of the lowest degree thereof yet breakers of the least commandement and teaching so cannot be saued Mat. 5. 19. Obiect Admitting the ceremonies of our Church to bee indifferent yet we may not by the vse of any indifferent thing offend or scandalize our brethren rather wee must neuer vse it 1. Cor. 8. 9. 12. 13. 10. 28. Rom. 14. 15. 16. 21. Answ True we may not vse any indifferent thing by which our weake brother is offended if the not vsing or vsing thereof be voluntary within our power as that indifferent thing seemeth not to be the vse whereof is commanded by a Magistrate or publique law whom therefore wee must obey whosoeuer bee offended and the offence that any doth take in this case is Scandalum acceptum non datum A Magistrate onely commandes my outward man and inflictes an outward penalty whom albeit I am commanded to obey and that of conscience in a thing indifferent yet if I disobey him not of purpose or contempt but with a conscionable and charitable respect of not offending weake or godly Christians that so I may not destroy my brother Ro. 14. 15. 20. 1. Cor. 8. 10. 11. neither wound his conscience neither sinne against Christ 1. Cor. 8. 12. I doe not sin against God but am onely lyable to the penalty enioyned my conscience is not herein touched before God because I respect and follow a greater duety 2. A Magistrate cannot command me to vse a thing whereby either purposely or by accident I shal offend my weake brother sin against Christ 1. Chro. 8. 12. though he should yet God commands me to auoyde it and tells me it is a sinne against Christ 1. Cor. 8. 1◠a superior command and of superior reason better obey God then man Answ All this is in some sence true howbeit al this holdeth onely in case of outward and ciuill penalty where I ought to beare some corporall paine or externall losse to violate the magistrates command in not offending the godly weake brother But it holdeth not in a case of spirituall publique generall penalty as of depriuation of the ministry which to auoyd by vsing a thing indifferent is a duty of superior reason then by not vsing a thing indifferent to giue offence where in that case it should not be broken which apeareth two wayes First by the greatnesse of in conuenience for it is ten times more in conuenient by not vsing of the ceremonies things indifferent in nature to suffer depriuation of ministery the Gospell to be hindred suppressed the whole Church visible kingdome of Christ to be vtterly dissolued and dissipated then by vsing them to redeeme these benefits to offend some few who in this case should not be offended and that they are is meerely their sinne Secondly by the proportion of offence and scandall For the Papist Athiest will much more triumph and reioyce and a Godly Christian wil much more grieue be troubled to see a worthy painefull and profitable minister be depriued and silenced then to weare a surplesse vse some few ceremonies the one being a smal in cōuenience but the other a deadly mischiefe to the Church of Christ so much of the second argument of the first reason Argum. 3 Now followeth the third prouing That to suffer depriuatiō for the refusing to cōforme to the prescribed ceremonies is contrary to Gods word and therefore a sin because it is contrary to a second ground of Gods word namely the royall law of loue for the further euidencing of this reaso there are two points to be considered and proued First that to do any thing that is contrary to the law of loue is contrary to the word of God Secondly to refuse conformity to the prescribed ceremonies in case of depriuation