Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A61518
|
A peace-offering an earnest and passionate intreaty, for peace, unity, & obedience ...
|
Stileman, John, d. 1685.
|
1662
(1662)
|
Wing S5554; ESTC R12102
|
300,783
|
364
|
no transgression if no Law commanded them we were not bound to use them and to what purpose then should we make a stir and raise Disputes about them But 2. Suppose no particular Law or Act of Parliament to establish these in specie yet we cannot properly say they were forced if forced without Law for there was a standing Law an Act of Parliament in force untill 17. Car. 1. impowering the King to call together and commissionate the Bishops and Clergy to consult and determine about the affairs of the Church and this confirmed by the Royal Assent to be valid and binding So that if these things were Imposed by the Bishops so assembled with the Authority of the King we cannot call them illegal because they are clearly founded in the Law This therefore was no ground of dislike where the things Imposed are confessed not to be simply evil But § 6 2. They were disliked also saith he because the way of those things did cause men to suspect that somewhat worse was intended to be brought in by such preparations Here I cannot but take notice of the much want of Christian Charity that should be in men who study the interest of the Gospel and Religion It is not the property of Charity to be suspicious for as it c 1 Cor. 13.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thinketh i.e. plotteth or casteth no evil so it suspecteth none causelesly d Vers 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it believeth all things hopeth all things it believeth all good hopeth all good of our neighbour untill it evidently see the contrary It could not be well done to be suspicious of worse when the things enjoyned were confessed not bad Object But the way of those times did give ground of suspicion § 7 Sol. But what was the way of those times was it not in these very disliked things the Name and Form of an Altar the Rails Adoration c and these all acknowledged not evil in se and how then were they the cause of suspicion of worse of these we have this full expression e Baxt. ibid. For the Name and Form of an Altar no doubt it is a thing indifferent and the Primitive Churches used the names of Sacrifice Altar and Priest and I think lawfully for my part but Metaphorically as the Scripture doth 2. §. 8. Adoration and Bowing towards the East As to Adoration or Bowing towards the East c. hear again the same Mr Baxter f Baxt. ibid. §. 17. God who hath commanded us to express our minds in several cases about his worship as Profession of Faith Confession of Sins c. hath by that means made it our duty to signifie our consent by some convenient sign And the special sign is left to our own or our Governours Determination g Id. ibid. §. 18. And to this end and on these terms saith he among some other things there mentioned was Adoring with their faces toward the East used heretofore by Christians as a signification of their own mind instead of words This then also is lawfull in his judgment 3. As to Organs and Church-Musick §. 9. Organs and Musick the same Author speaks as much as is desired and thus far consonant to truth h Baxt. ibid. §. 22. He that hath commanded us chearfully to sing his Praises hath not told us whether we shall use the Meeter or any melodious tune to help us or whether we shall use or not use a Musical Instrument or the help of more artificial Singers and Choristers These are left to our reason to determine c. And again i Id. ibid. §. 45. The Organs or other Instruments of Musick in Gods Worship being an help partly natural and partly artificial to the exhilerating our spirits for the Praise of God I know no Argument to prove them simply unlawfull but what would prove a Cup of Wine unlawful so the Tune and Meeter and Melodie of Singing unlawfull But these things are but the particular practises of some certain places and if enjoyned yet not generally only in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and Chappels We need not therefore busie our selves in Disputes of this nature when they are not nor are like to be matters of general imposition § 10 2. But the main of our enquiry is into those Ceremonies which are generally Imposed and by the Law required in all our Assemblies and these are of two sorts 1. One purely Civil though used in a sacred Action §. 11. Of the Ring in Marriage this is the Ring in Marriage What imaginable scruple can be in this I cannot divine Hear by Mr Baxter himself k Baxt. ibid. §. 23. In Civil Actions that are Religious only finally and by participation it is lawfull to use Symbolical Rites that are in their kind near of kin to Sacraments in their kind and may be called Civil Sacraments such as the sealing and delivering of Indentures or other Covenant-Writings the delivery of Possession of an House by a Key of the Temple by a Book and Bellrope of Land by a Turfe or Twig and of Civil Government by a Crown Scepter or Sword c. And again l Id. ibid. §. 43. For the Ring in Marriage I see no reason to scruple the lawfullnesse of it for though the Papists make a Sacrament of Marriage yet we have no reason to take it for an Ordinance of Divine Worship any more than the solemnizing of a Contract between Prince and People The Ceremonies of a Kings Coronation might as well be scrupled as those of Marriage c. The truth is I could never yet see any thing that had a shadow of reason against this use nor can I imagine what any sober Christian who hath not a mind to quarrel can have to say against the use of such a Symbolical Rite as the use of a Ring in such a businesse as Marriage I passe this therefore as not worth a Dispute But § 12 2. Other Rites there are enjoyned to be used in Actions purely Religious prescribed in the offices and parts of Divine Worship These are they which are the matters of most doubt and made the Subjects of the sharpest contentions and they are The Surplice Kneeling at the Lords Supper and the Crosse in Baptism For two of these we have enough yielded but the third stiffely opposed Let us examine them severally 1. §. 13. The Surplice justified For the Surplice I cannot but wonder what any rational man should in this make a matter of scruple when any garment of any colour is a thing perfectly indifferent by the confession of all and perfectly lawfull in genere to be worne and therefore if a particular garment in specie be determined and prescribed to some persons in some actions how should the use of that become unlawfull when the constant practice and custome of all times persons and places hath justified in some cases such a determination We never scruple the use
Sometimes both cause of Scandal given and Scandal thereat taken But no man is concerned in any scandal that happeneth to another by occasion of any thing done by him nor is chargeable with it farther than he is guilty of having given it If then we give Scandal to others and they take it not the whole guilt is ours and they are faultlesse If we give it and they take it we are to bear a share in the blame as well as they and that a deeper share too for vae homini a Matth. 18.7 Woe to that man by whom the Scandal or offence cometh But if they take offence where we give none it is a thing we cannot help and therefore the whole blame must lye upon them and not upon us The guilt of Scandal is no more chargeable upon us who give not the occasion than upon Christ who was to the Jew b 1 Pet. 2.8 a stone of stumbling and rock of offence but through their unbelief and disobedience or than the guilt of those c Matth. 10.34 35. divisions of Father against Son c. are chargeable on Christ or the Gospel by which corrupt men took occasion though neither Christ nor the Gospel gave any occasion of such things Wherefore if at any time any doubt shall arise in the case of Scandal how far the danger thereof may or may not obliege us to the doing or not doing of any thing proposed the resolution will come on much the easier if we shall but rightly understand what it is to give Scandal or how many wayes a man may become guilty of scadalizing another by his example The wayes I conceive are but these four 1. §. 41. Four wayes of giving Scandal When a man doth something before another which is in it self evil unlawfull and sinnefull In which case neither the intention of him that doth it nor the event as to him that seeth it done is of any consideration For whether the doer had an intention to draw the other into sinne or no the very matter or substance of the action being evill and done before others this is sufficient to render the doer guilty of having given Scandal though he never had any intention so to do nor was any other scandaelized thereby Because whatsoever is of its own nature evill is of it self and its own nature scandalous and of ill example Thus did the d 1 Sam. 2.17 22. sons of Eli give Scandal by their wretched prephanenesse and greedinesse about the sacrifices of the Lord and their shamelesse abusing of women at the door of the Tabernacle Thus did David give great Scandal also e 2 Sam. 12.14 in the matter of Vriah Here the Rule is Do nothing that is evil for fear of Scandal § 42 2. When a man doth something before another with a direct intention and formal purpose of drawing him to commit sinne In which case neither the matter of the action nor the event is of any consideration For it makes no difference as to the sin of Scandal whether any man be enticed thereby to commit sin or not or whether the thing done were unlawfull or not So as if it had but f 1 Thes 5.22 an appearance of evil and from thence an aptitude of drawing another to the doing of that by imitation which would be really and intrinsecally evill The wicked intention alone whatsoever the effect prove or what means so ever be used to promote it sufficeth to induce the guilt of giving Scandal upon the doer This was Jeroboams g 1 Kings 12 27-32 sinne in setting up the Calves with a formal purpose and intention thereby for his own secular and ambitious ends to corrupt the purity of Religion and to draw the people to his idolatrous worship For which cause he is so often stigmatized with it as with a note of infamy to stick on his name while the world lasteth being scarce ever mentioned in Scripture but with this addition h 1 King 14.16 15.26 16.19 22.52 2 King 10.31 13.2 6 11. 15.9 and many more The son of Nebat who made Israel to sin Here then the Rule is Do nothing either good or evil with an intention or purpose to give Scandal § 43 3. When a man doth something before another which in it self is not evil but indifferent and so according to the Rule of Christian-liberty lawfull for him to do as he shall see cause yea perhaps otherwise commodious and convenient for him to do so yet whereat he probably foreseeth the other will take Scandal and be encouraged thereby to do evil In such cases if the thing to be done be not in some degree at least prudentially necessary for him to do but that he might without very great inconvenience or prejudice to himself or any third person leave it undone he is bound in Charity i Rom. 14.15 to his brothers soul for whom Christ died and for the avoiding of Scandal to abridge himself in the exercise of his Christian-liberty for the time so far as rather to suffer some inconvenience himself by not doing it than by doing of it to cause his brother to offend or be grieved as will appear by these many Texts k Rom. 14.13 21. 15.1 2 3. 1 Cor. 8 7-13 9.12 15 19 22. 10 23-33 wherein the Apostle handles this case Here the Rule is Do nothing that may reasonably be forborne-whereat Scandal may be taken § 44 4. When a man doth something before another which is not only lawfull but according to the exigency of present circumstances pro hic nunc very behovefull and even prudentially necessary for him to do but foreseeth that the other will be like to make an ill use of it and take incouragement thereby to commit sinne if he be not carefull withall as much as in him lieth to prevent the Scandal that might be taken thereat for he l Qui non prohibet peccare quando potest jubet who hinders not sinne when and so farre as he can doth encourage and command it In such case the bare neglect of his brother and not using his utmost endeavour to prevent the evil that might ensue makes him guilty Upon which consideration stands the equity of that judicial Law given to the Jews which ordereth that in case m Exod. 21.33 34. a man dig a pit for the use of his Family and looking no farther than his own convenience putteth no cover over it but leaveth it open whereby it happens that his neighbours beast falleth thereinto and perisheth the owner of the pit shall make it good in as much as he was by his carelesnesse the occasion of that losse to his neighbour which he might and ought to have prevented Here then the Rule is Order the doing of that which may not be left undone in such sort that so far as you can help it no Scandal may be taken thereat § 45 These are