vvell knowne that there are farre more Papists and Popishly affected in those places vvhere ceremonies are most observed then where they haue been disused 7. It is answered in the Abridgement pag. 47. 48. that ceremonies are not for the edification of the Papists but for the hardening of them And that Papists are not so much to be respected as brethren To the latter of vvhich words the Defendant replieth vvith 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 humane ceremonies vve 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 guiltie of two vvayes 1. comparatiuely in this section and then absolutely in the next The comparatiue accusation is that we for avoyding of offence towards our brethren grievously offend our mother in that wherin wee owe obedience unto her Where 1. the question is taken for granted for we deny that we owe obedience in the ceremonies to any man or societie of men 2. If our mother be somewhat angry that is not presently a scandall by his definition sect 1. but vvhen shee is provoked to a mortall errour Now what mortall errour doe vve 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-conformitie This indeed is a great errour and sinne of the Prelates but as vvas formerly shewed the beginning of it is in their irregular Canons and the ending of it in their cruell executions 3. by applying our selues to the will of the Prelates in these ceremonies vvee should though not anger yet greatly scandalize 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 congregatious of England the greattest 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 the lewish Proselites was great and the converted Gentiles few Acts 15. 2 A grosse assertion that after the doctrine of Indifferencie in eating of meats was made publicke by the Church then to haue sought by abstaining to avoyd the offence of some had been to the preiudice of Christian libertie and to the scandall of the Church The other accusation of contempt is onely objected sect 22. and varnished over with a few glosing words sect 23. and therefore may well bee answered vvith contempt But hee that will see a full refutation of this let him read Mr. 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 upbraideth the Ministers with liuing upon voluntary contribution 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 therfore tried against our Saviour himself when al other faild 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 vvith others 2 Neither all nor the most part of them against whom he writeth did liue upon contributions Though they need not haue been ashamed thereof if they had seeing not onely the primitiuâ— Pastors did so but even in our time M. Perkins and other such lights of our Church haue vvith that kinde of life done more good then all our Cathedrall men vvith their great revenues 3 Who are the cause that many are forced to liue upon contribution haue not the Lâ—iterers of Cathedrall Churchesâ— ingrossed a great part of that maintenance vvhereby labouâ—ing Preachers should be maintained Doe not our Pluralists and Non-residents cary away the fat of the greatest livings and leaue scarce a Serving-mans wages to their Curats so that either they must be supplyed by contribution 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 vvill take his Tithes and suffer them to procure and maintaine to themselues an honest Minister in his place haue 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 upon contribution if they had such accommodatiue consciences as this Def. surmiseth of them Some of them with serving the time and the addition of Simony might come to be Bishops the rest might be preferred by their meanes to some certaine in-comings CHAP. VI. SECT III. NOW vve are come to the sixt and last generall Argument viz. that the imposition of these ceremonies is opposite unto Christian liberty Here the Def. observeth firstâ— that the state of this question is about liberty from the necessary observation of such things as are in their own nature indifferent This saith he the Objector implyeth But I answer the Objector doth not imply it he speaketh of ceremonies lawfully appointed by man that these are to be used as things indifferent Neither if one private Obj. had granted it ought it therefore to be set down as the received state of the question seeing the Abridgment which in this defence is chiefly opposed doth every where deny the ceremâ— to be in their own nature indifferent But let that passe examine his resolution Ther be two kinds of necessities incident unto humane precepts and ordinances in the case of indifferencie one is necessitie of obedience to the command 〈◊〉 which can not properly prejudice Christiin 〈◊〉 the other is doctriâ—â— necessity when any of those properties which are essentiall unto divine Ordinances are attributed unto a humane constitution as I immediately to â—inde the conscience 2 to be a necessary meanes to salvation 3 to hold it altogether unalterable by the authority of man this is a presumption and prevaâ—ication not onely against Christian liberty but also against the soveraigntie of God himselfe But I vvhat meaneth this new distinction betwixt necessite doctrinall and obediential doctrinal before p. 3 was opposed unto ceremoniâ—â— now unto obedientiall both without a logick or
observing doth not proue the judgement of governours in imposing 3 that it is most likely that those people which thinke so are brought into that conceite by the opposition which it made against the ceremonies But first I would faine know of the Defendant vvhy he passeth by in silence not onely the testimony of Chemnitius cited by the Abridgement for confirmation of this part of the assumption but also the passages of Gods vvord and many of the best Divines vvhich are also alledged there in the proposition and applyed unto this part of the assumption by the Authors of the Abridgement surely this is not plaine dealing Secondly I answer that the opinion of a few may make that an action unlawfull vvhich the opinion of many other cannot make lawfull as is to be seen 1 Cor. 10 28 if any man say unto thee Thirdly it doth not appeare the most are otherwise minded For the most being used unto the ceremonies and not unto good teaching may well be thought to haue the same opinion of humane ceremonies vvhich they haue of divine Fourthly the Def. forgetteth vvhat vvas to be proved in this place for the question is not onely vvhether ouâ— ceremonies be so imposed but also vvhether they be so esteemed and observed as appeareth in the Abridgement Novv the opinion of the people proveth I hope in vvhat manner they are esteemed and observed And vvhile they are so observed they that still impose them in those places vvhere they are so observed may truely be interpreted so to impose them In actions of this kinde saith Hooker l. 5 p. 165 wee are more to respect what the greatest part of men is commonly prone to conceiue then what some few mens wits may devize in construction of their particular meaning Fiftly the last conceit is ridiculous that the opposing and condemning of ceremonies should make men thinke that the Sacraments are not sufficiently administred without them The popish people saith he haue no great conceit of our ceremonies Why is it then that Gretser and some other Iesuits call our Prelats Calvino-papistae Popish Calvinists How is it that by these ceremonies vve are borne in hand that the Papists are likely to be drawn unto coÌ„munion vvith our Church Whence is it that all our Church-papists are great maintainers of the ceremonies The rest saith he which are not of your disciplining are not so many O miserable out-facing of God and manâ— Who hath disciplined for this threescore yeares almost all the people of Wales Who but the Prelates and their creatures haue had the disciplining of all the Cathedrall Churches in England and all the poore Parishes that depend upon them Who are the Discipliners of all the Non-residents and Pluralists forlorne charges and who of the many ten pound cures Doe these seem a few in the Def. eyes SECT XIII THe omission of ceremonies is here alledged to be more sharply punished then many great sinnes against the law of God though it be vvithout so and all and contempt To this the Def. answereth first by denying the consequence viz. that if this be so then these ceremonies are preferred before the precepts of God and unlawfull But 1 vvhy saith he nothing to the Churches of Germanie to Melancton Martyr Chemnitius Bezâ— Iunius Lubbertus Polanus Bucanus Pilkinton Perkins and the whole Clergie of England brought in as allowing of this consequence in the Abridgement Are not all these worth one answer of the Defendants 2 The reason that he giveth for punishing more severely the omission of a ceremony then hainous sins is frivolous For the true peace of the Church doth more depend on the keeping of Gods lawes then of observing mans inventions especially of such things vvhich never brought peace vvith them to any Church but as fire from hell haue alwaies bred a combustion Neither yet can the Defendant justifie that vvhich he saith of civill governments that they lawfully at any time more severely punish that offence which is every way lesse then another vvhich is greater Howsoever he that hath but halfe an eye may see that it is but a sophisticall evasion common to our Prelates with the Papists I will not therfore insist in this if you please you may see more of this matter in M. Parker of the Crosse part 2 c. 1 s. 16 17. He answereth in the second place That it is not omission but contempt that is punished â—s if 〈◊〉 Counsellour should refuse to weare 〈◊〉 Lâ—â—yers gowne But â— meere omission hath been often punished with suspension 2 The Convocation house by their Canons haue provided and appointed punishments for meere omissions If those canons be not in all such points rigorously executed it is either some personall good vvhich is found in some Officers or else meere shame For though canons doe not blush yet the executioners haue some forhead left 3 There may be continued omission upon other causes beside contempt as ignorance conscience c. so that vvhile the Def. so peremptorily chargeth others for slandering the Church of God he manifestly slandereth them which for any thing I know are as much the Church of God as the Prelates Concerning this contempt see more in M. Parker p. 2c 1 s. 14. As for the Lawyers gowne it is not long enough to cover the nakednesse of this answer no though it be stretched to the length of one of our great Prelates long traines vvhich are carryed up after them For except the Counsellour would swear that he refused on conscience and that he could shew the judgement of the best Lawyers for his opinion condemning such a robe as unlawfull the case is not like and if the case be so put I account that Lawyer worthy to be turned over the bar that could not defend himselfe from contempt SECT XIIII IN the next place the same thing is confirmed by the particular indignities vvhich peaceable learned godly minded men doe suffer for but declaring of their contrary judgement as that they are accounted Puritanes Schismaticks and by canon excommunicated ipso facto so as no Councell ever censured any heresie vvithout liberty of appeal vvhich is not denyed to great malefactors Conf. at Hampton p. 26 〈◊〉 6 98. In the repeating of this Argument I adde that out of the Abridgement vvhich the Def. for I know not vvhat reason omitted Now in his answer he neither denyeth antecedent nor consequence so that the judicious Reader may safely take all to be granted Yet that he might seeme to say somevvhat 1 he granteth that wee haue reason perhaps to wish that some penalties were released And haue we not reason then to think the Convocation vvhich set these penalties was nothing lesse then led by the spirit of God And if the Def. can thus shew his differing judgment from that Convocation in the penalties what disorder or exorbitancy is it for another to shevv his differing judgment from them and him in ceremonies Secondly closly sliding by the chiefest accusation of Puritanism
Def. translateth an addition of corruption is forbidden This I hope is another manner of symbolizing with Bellar. then that vvhich the Def. formerly objected to Non-conformists SECT IIII. HEre are two testimonies brought to confute the Non-conf his interpretation of Scripture wherby he would infer that all kinde of will-worship is unlawfull For that is here the question and nothing else The first Witnesse is Danaeus where the consequence lyeth thus if Danaeus in one place doth apply these Scriptures to grosser will-worship then our is then he doth not allow that they condemne all kind of wil-worship but the first is true ergo is not this a faire kinde of reasoning just as the Papist Gregorius de Valentia reasoneth abominable idolatry is condemned 1 Pet. 4. 3 therfore not all idolatry The other Witnesse is Zanchius in Col. 2 23 where beside that the like consequence is made as before I would desire any indifferent man to consider these vvords of Zanchie found in that verie place One kind of wil-worship is if any new worship wherby God is worshipped be invented and brought into the Church For God will onely be worshipped and onely with that worship which he himselfe hath appointed Deut. 6 Mat. 15 also those in 1 Thes. 1 9. By an idol in generall is meant whatsoever in Religion is brought in without the word of God He that looketh upon these words of Zanchie will scarce tell what to think of this Def his audacious alledging of this Author and the vaine triuÌ„ph which he groundeth upon him He thought it seemeth that few or none would ever take the paines to examine what he said In the fift Section there is nothing on either side but a dumb shew It shall passe for me therfore in silence SECT VI. HEere come the judgment of Protestants to be examined concerning this question Whether all parts of Divine worship invented by man be not to be condemned Where first the Defendant bringeth forth his wedge again distinguishing betwixt essentiall and accidentall worship as before but in other phrases for now he telleth us that essentiall worship is that wherein iâ— placed 〈◊〉 opinion of Justice sanctitie efficacie or divine necessitie and accidentall is any riâ—e which serveth for the more consonant and convenient discharge of that essentiall worship But these are but words For 1. worship doth not varie according to mens opinion but consisteth in the nature of the action it selfe Otherwise a man may goe to Masse conceiving a privat opinion to himselfe that he doth it not for justice sanctity efficacie or divine necessity but for some other cause Or at the least a convocation house may appoint us the grossest of all the ceremonies in Poperie and set another opinion upon it 2. Sanctitie cannot be separated vvholly from such ceremonies vvhich are proper unto religion i. appropriated unto religious persons actions and purposes onely in the solemne vvorship of God For they must either be holy or civill or prophane But civill they are not for then the bare omission of them vvould argue rudenesse and incivilitie nor prophane I hope in the Def. opinion therefore they must needs be holy 3. There is no judicious Divine that useth to call circumstances of meere order and decencie worship Where did the Def. ever read that a pulpit or a table or a faire cloath c. was pronounced or stiled vvorship Come vve therefore to the examination of witnesses in particular Calvins words are Instit. l. c. 10. sect 8. all humane constitutions in which the worship of God is placed are ungodly The Def. sayth that 1. Calvin meaneth not by worship circumstances of order Which is most true neither was any reader so sottish as ever tooke that to be his meaning For vvhat sence could there be in these words all humane constitutions in which the circumstances of order are placed 2. He telleth us that he meaneth the inward vertue of worship which consisteth in an opinion of holinesse and justice Where first I will not urge or grate upon the ill sound which these words have the inward vertue of worship consisteth in an opinion 2. How can an inward vertue be placed in an outward ceremonie 3. The proper nature of worship is not in holinesse and justice but in the honouring of God and all externall ceremonies vvhose proper use is the honouring of God are externall vvorship as all diuinitie sheweth This is therefore but an idle unlearned evasion to talk of holinesse and justice in opinion vvhen the question is of vvorship Calvin never thought of such toyes He amplifieth indeed his accusation against the Papists by such circumstances as those are according as the Def. sheweth but what Logick can thence conclude that nothing else is conteined in the generall rule Calvin himselfe professeth the contrary as directly as if he had undertaken to confute this defender of ceremonies For these are his words Epist. 259. Si probe penitus inspicitur quid homines tantopere solicitet ad fabricandas ceremonias reperiemus ex hoc fonte omnes fluxisse quia quisque novum Dei cultum fingere ausus fueritâ— atqui fictitios omnes cultus non modo repudiat Deus sed etiam severe abominatur i. The originall of all ceremonies was that men would needs forge new worships of God whereas God doth not onely refuse such worships but also abhorreth them For Chemnitius the Defendant telleth us that hee condemneth onely a ceremony which is among the Papists made necessarie But he should shew two things if hee would answer soundly 1 that Chemnitius doth distinguish as he doth of will worship as some were lawfull and some onely unlawfull 2. hee should shew us at the least that there is some vvorship which is not necessarie for otherwise Câ—emnitius in condemning will-worship that is imposed as necessarie doth condemne all wil-worship Now we in our simple divinitie for so it will be accounted conceiue thus All worship of God is that honour dutie and reverence vvhich the reasonable creature doth owe to the creator and therfore cannot understand how such aâ—dutie is not necessary to be performed or how there can be a vvorship which being part of this tribute may rest in mans choyce vvhether it shall be paid or no. Perhaps this necessitie pertaineth onely to the vvorship commanded by God but in that vvhich man diviseth of himselfe there is more libertie there being no reason that voluntary service should be constreined If this be the cause then the vvorship appointed by man is no part of his love towards God nor any testification of it For if it vvere surely it should be necessarie seeing it is necessary to loue God vvith all our hearts vvith all our soules and vvith all our strength The third vvitnesse is P. Martyr loc com 770. vvhere he sayth concerning things in their own nature indifferent that speciall care must be had lest any such thing be thought to make towards the worship of God because divine
that those titular pillars vvere at the first onely set up for civill use because many statues vvhich afterward served onely for vvorship vvere at the first onely for civill respects and these had still a civill use for distinction of bounds But Calvin collecteth that no statue was heere condemned but that which was erected to represent God Calvin indeed hath those words but vvhat kinde of representation he meaneth he sheweth sufficiently before omnes picturas quibus corrumpitur spiritualis Dei cultus all pictures that corrupteth Gods spirituall worship And after quaecunque nos a spiritualieâ—us cultu abducunâ— whatsoever lead us from the spirituall worship of God Iacob erected a pillar for a religious monument saith the Def. Gen. 28 true but not after the Law vvas given against it so also he offered sacrifices and many other things in such sort as after the Law vvas not lawfull SECT IIII. THE third proofe in the Abridgement standeth thus the equity of these commandements is thus set down in Scripture 1 the detestation which the Lord our God being a jealous God beareth unto idolatry and all the instruments and tokens thereof as unto spirituall whoredome Exod. 20 5 6 Deut. 7 25 26. 2 that we cannot be said sincerely to haue repented of the idolatry or superstition whereby wee or our forefathers haue provoked the Lord unlesse we be ashamed of and cast away with detestation all the instruments and monuments of it 2 Chron. 33 15 Es. 1 29 2 20 30 22 2 Cor. 7 11 Cal. in Deut. serm 52 ep 86 p. 166 167. 3 that we shall be in danger to be corrupted Ex. 34 12 15 Deut. 7 4. 25. 26 Iud. 2 13 Gal. 2 5. 4. Wee shall harden Idolaters Ezech. 16 54 1 Cor. 6 10. 5. There is more danger in Popish ceremonies because the Pope is Antichrist and we converse more with Papists then with other Idolaters Now of all these reasons and allegations the Def. answereth directly to nothing but onely to those words see Calvin and yet not to them neither as they are cited in the Abridgement For there it is see Calvin in his 52 serm on Deut. and ep 87. Now on these places the Defendants eyes vvould not serue to looke or at least his heart would not suffer him to giue answer they are so pregnant If we haue any drop of good zeale in us it must needs vexe and grieue us to see the markes and signes of idolatry and that we must to the uttermost of our power deface them c. nothing upon pretence must be tolerated in the Church which came either from Satan or from Antichrist Yet the Def. saith he hath seen Calvin upon Exod. 23 24 and Numb 23 and Deut. 7 12 and findeth that Calvin holdeth these precepts of destroying Altars and Groues to binde the Iewes onely not Christians and he biddeth us see Calvin on these places Surely I haue looked and could finde no such thing If there had been any thing vvorth the knowing for maintenance of the ceremonies we should haue heard of the words of Calvin whereas now Calvin is brought in expresly affirming that we may use temples which haue been defiled vvith idoles which is nothing at all to the question of unnecessary ceremon But if the Def. would discusse this poynt out of Authors vvhether the lawes alledged out of the old Testament against the monuments of Idolatry doe not bind Christians why doth he not answer to the testimonies of Calvin Martyr Grineus Wolphius Visinus Machabeus Zanchius Simlerus Zepperus Fulk our book of homilies alledged to this purpose in the Abridg. p. 24. SECT V. IN one place of Scripture yet viz. Dan. 1 8 the Def. thinketh he hath some advantage because Calvin interpreteth it otherwise then of ceremoniall pollution But therein the Abridgement followed that interpretation which is most generally received for which see Iunius in his Commentary upon the place And suppose that pollution vvas not ceremoniall or idolatrous yet I hope the Def. vvill not say but if the meat had been so polluted Daniel vvould haue absteyned from it Take therefore some other testimonies to proue your assertion saith the Def. So confidently as if he knew of no â—estimonies vvhich he had not answered What can one say to him that vvill not take that which is thrust into his hands and yet calleth for more as if he could finde none SECT VI. THE last thing vvhich the Def. vvill take knowledge of as alledged out of the Scriptures in this point is the example of Hezekiah 2 King 1â— in breaking down the brazen Serpent This example is so famous that he could not omit it yet he knoweth not vvell what to say unto it First he giveth fiue reasons for the abolishing of the brazen serpent As if any of us doubted but that Hezekiah had reason enough for that he did Or as if there could not be reasons enough alledged and those almost the very same for abolishing of our ceremonies Let them be abolished by publick authority and I vvill undertake reasons to justifie the action done vvill easily be acknowledged even of those that now can see none to perswade unto the doing of it Secondly he propoundeth as very observable that Hezekiah did not abolish the idols vvhich Salomon suffered to be set up because they were neglected But 1 it may vvell be thought that those idols vvere destroyed by Hezekiah and set up againe before the time of Iosiah as many other superstitions were 2 It cannot be doubted but they should haue been destroyed even though they were for the time neglected because either Hezekiah had as good cause to destroy them as Iosiah or else he might haue prevented that cause which Iosiah had and to prevent evill we are as well bound as to correct it Thirdly he citeth Zanchius to proue that this is not an universall remedy for all abuses of ceremonies The place in Zanchie I cannot finde neither skilleth it much I grant the conclusion it is not a remedy for all abuses of ceremonies viz. for such as Gods appointment hath made necessary to be retayned Besides the words of Zanchie heere cited by the Def. doe onely therfore seem to make for him because they are not full enough against him But in other places of the same book Zanchius judgement is plain enough as p. 649 vvhere from this example he reproveth those that keep the reliques of superstition in some holy places though they haue removed them out of Churches And if about this matter the Def. doth ascribe any thing to the judgement of our divines vvhy doth he not answer the testimonies of Augustine Calvin Martyr Wolphius Lavater Zanchius Sadeel Iewel Bilson Fulk Rainolds Andrews Perkins alledged to this purpose in the Abridgement p. 24 Fourthly and lastly vvhich onely in deed is to the purpose the Def. vvould shew us a disparity betwixt the idolatry of the Iewes and that of the Papists The first is that that idolatry of
as before I sayd for that and other causes But altars in the same place he condemneth which yet are retained in our Cathedrall Churches and I hope the crosse being an Idoll it selfe had as immediat commuâ—ion with Idolatry as Zepper or any reasonable Iudge would require for the cashiering of it As for Peter Martyr howsoever in one epistle to Hooper he setteth as good a colour upon the reliques of Idolatry as he could because he thought by a little yeelding of Hooper and such men the superstitions themselues might quickly be removed yet in another Epistle p. 1125. he giveth this peremptorie sentence Profecto si ex animo superstitiones edissemus vel ipsa eorum vestigia omnibus modis curaremus extirpanda 1. If wee hated superstition from the heart wee would abolish all the reliques of it To the same purpose he speaketh p. 1127. vvhere he sheweth that his conscience would never suffer him to weare the Surplice when he vvas Canon of Christ church in Oxford If this vvere not his reason hee had some other very much a kin to this Neither will the Defendant say hastily I hope that either Peter Martyr or Hooper were disorderderly exorbitant men in those times fit to be displaced that more discreet conformists might come in their places as now he pronounceth of those that refuse to conforme SECT XXX WHen all faile a contradiction must be found betwixt our conclusions and our confessions and practises but I assure my selfe there is not any reader so simple but if hee look over this section will presently see that he hath not brought one example of any humane ceremonie not necessarie notoriously known to haue been abused unto Idolatry that is allowed by us Why then should I spend ink and paper in labouring to unâ—wine such ropes of sand Onely I would ask the Defendant certaine questions 1. If a Temple a Bell or a Table-cloth haue such idolatry put uppon them by the Papists as the crosse hath 2 If his own heart do not tell him that there is a civill use of such things which cannot be imagined of the crosse 3 What superstition there was in the meere significations given by Durandus unto Bells and Bell-ropes vvhich is not to be found in the Crosse and Surplice 4 Whether the Pagan use of Bay-leaues vvhich was aboue a thousand yeares past doth cast such a reflection upon our civill use of bay-leaues as the Popish superstition doth upon our ceremonies 5 What sence he had to find fault with us for not altering the situation of Churches 6 If it be all one to call a ship by the name of Castor and Pollux as Paul doth Act. 28. 11. and to use a religious ceremonie in Gods worship vvhich is taken from these Idolls 7 If it be one thing to change copes into cushions and to use a Masse vestiment in Gods worship 8 If it be not a kind of slander to say that the Church of Geneva imposeth a round wafer cake like the Papists to be used in the Lords Supper when as onely unleavened bread is used because custome in that part more prevailed then the grave advice of Calvin Farel Viret and the other excellent pastors And if it bee not a wide leap to bring in the practise of Geneva for an instance of the Non-conformists practise in England By that time these questions be truely answered the Defendant vvill haue but a small harvest out of our confessions and practises CHAP. V. SECT I. ad X. THE Authours of the Abridgement framed a strong Argument against our ceremonies from the rules of ceremonies prescribed in the Word p. 43 c. with this Argument vvhen the Defendant vvas not able to grappell as it stood in the parts combined he thought good to sever some parcels of it and try vvhat he could say to them apart Thus out of this one Argument he hath taken that which he calleth our first and out of the same he hath made up this fift and yet hee hath quite left out a great part of the sinewes wherewith that one reason is knit together in the Abridgement The argument is taken from the scandall or offence vvhich the imposing and using of these ceremonies do bring unto divers sortâ— of men The Defendant heere maketh great flourishing in nine whole Sections defining dividing and subdividing a scandall as if he would make all cleare before him but at the end of all this preparation he maketh no application of these Rules unto the matter in hand at all but onely telleth his Reader p. 154 That these divisions and subdivisions will expedite all difficulties so that out of them he may collect the true and false sense of Scriptures alledged It vvere sufficient therefore either to deny this power to be in his divisions or else to set down as many other subdivisions of scandall vvhich vvere easie to doe and then tell him that these vvill expedite the controversie and that from them hee may collect the errours of his answer But I will notwithstanding briefly shew my opinion concerning some of these dictates The definition vvhich he onely alloweth of as accurate is that a scandall is a wilfull offence against Christians in provoking of them unto any damnable errour or sinne by any sensible externall meanes Sect. 1. Wherein notwithstanding many faults may be found For 1 every scandall is not wilfull except the word be taken more largely then use of speech will allow 2 Every scandall is not against Christians 3 A scandall is not onely by provoking to sinne but also in hindring from good 4 what doth he meane to put in the word damnable the occasioning of any sin sufficeth to make up a scandall Among his subdivisions the first thing I except against is section 5 vvhere he distinguisheth so betwixt persons and causes either determined or undetermined that in matters determined by the Church as he teacheth obedience is to be given without respect of scandall and onely in matters undetermined there is a charitable consideration to be had of other mens consciences This is a new and a tickle point of Divinity touching the tenderest part of our spirits even our consciences and other mens also It ought therefore either not to haue been propounded or else to be well confirmed either with testimonies or vvith reasons drawn out of Scripture But alas the Def. thrusteth it upon us without any such vvarrant The peace of the Church saith he is to be preferred before the grievance i. e. scandall of any sort of men As if the peace of the Church did not more consist in avoyding of scandals then in observing of humane ceremonies it is not the peace of God which is broken by a charitable care of avoyding offences but by rushing into them A scandall in the nature of it is spirituall murder Now suppose a Superiour should command a thing in it selfe indifferent whereupon murder vvere like to follow as to runne a horse or a cart in a certain way at
his defence tâ—m 2 lib. 4 cap. 16 saith that our Convocation house in imposing these Ceremonies doe crosse the judgement of our best Divines Lastly the respect of that Popish superstition wherwith our people were then generally infected was the chiefe if not the onely cause why these ceremonies vvere retained by our first Reformers See more of this in M. Parker p. 2 c. 6 sect 10. SECT XI THE second instance is that that the prophane will draw many arguments hence to blesse himselfe in his contempt of all Religion The Def. asketh from whence I answer from hence 1 that Religious rites are invented by men and appointed to be used in Gods worship euen after the same manner that Gods Ordinances are or at least vvere of old 2 That trifles are urged to the increasing of contention 3 that many place such holines in these things vvhich they know to be mens devises 4 that other ceremonies are cryed down as if they vvere against Religion vvhich yet are every vvay as good as these 4 that religious men are more molested for these toyes then they are for their profanenesse SECT XII THE third instance of scandall is in vveak brethren who will be drawn to yeeld unto the ceremonies against their consciences or else doubtingly and some also will grow to dislike some Ministers for these things and so be hindred from profiting by their ministery To this the Def. answereth in many words but the summe of all he saith is that these are not weake brethren because they haue been diligently catechised by Non-conformists But 1 the Corinthians no doubt vvere diligently catechised and yet there were many weak among them 2 The Def. I hope taketh order or else he may be ashamed that all his Diocâ—ffe be diligently catechised yet I thinke he will not say but there are many vveak soules in that circuit 3 The Catechisers he speaketh of haue had enough to doe to teach the people the maine points of Religion as for instructing them concerning the lawfulnesse of humane ceremonies they left that to those that impose thâ—m or to their servants 4 After long teaching and sufficient knowledge there may be still a weaknesse in regard of some things through many circumstances required unto strength beside bare knowledge Lastly we confesse that upon supposition that the Def. his doctrine be sound in these points we are yet weak in these points as we are also in some other wherein our adversaries are so strong that they can beare many Churches and such like things upon their shoulders without feeling any burthen of them which we cannot See M. Park ca. 6 sect 18. SECT XIII THE fourth instance is thus set down in the Abridgement pa. 50 As there is danger in the use of these ceremonies in all Congregâ—tions so especially if they shâ—ll be brought backe againe unto those where they haue been long out of use In this case Calvin Brentius Bâ—cer Hemingius Beza Grinaeus other great Divines esteemâ— them wicked and unlawfull To all this the Def. giveth no answer but onely taketh occasion to make a frothy comparison betwixt the lawes and power of particular Congregations and the vvhole Convocation house Which because it neither pertaineth to the present purpose nor containeth any thing of moment I leaue as I found though it may be easily proved that many particular Congregations can tell better vvhat is fitting for their edification in some things then all our Nationall Convocation Nay I dare boldly say there is no Towne of note in all England but twelue men may be chosen out of vvhich would finde out Canons more to the edification of all the Congregations in England then those are which B. Bancroft with his Clergie concluded SECT XIIII A Fift instance or rather an inlargement of the former is in respect of the Ministers who haue formerly refused the ceremonies for whereas the Minister is bound to lead his people forward unto perfection and to provide by all good meanes that his ministery be not despised by this meanes be shall draw them back again unto the liking of superstition or at least not to dislike it so much as they haue done and giue them evident occasion to blame his Ministery and to call in question the truth of all his doctrine Here the Def. commeth upon them vvith open mouth avouching peremptorily that this is a false presumptuous irreligious partiall and pernicious pretense and all this he will proue If he can vve shall the easilyer beare these great words But why is it False forsooth because most of the Non-conformists haue once subscribed the contradicting of which subscription is no lesse a matter of discredit then returning unto conformitie What kind of proofe is this because they were subject to another discredite therefore this is no discredit Beside it doth not appeare nor is likely that most of these Ministers did ever absolutely subscribe neither is it likely because it is well known how easie and how ordinary it vvas in Qu Elizabeths dayes to enter into the Ministry without passing under that gallowes If the most had yet how would this proue it a falle pretence in the rest If all had done so yet this vvas no act of their Ministerie nor known it may be to their people and therfore the crossing of it did not so directly tend to the discrediting of their Ministery as the crossing of their publick doctrine Lastly that which is done before a man be setled in the Ministery at one time without any great deliberation is not of such note as that which a man hath long professed perswaded by reasons taken from the word of God By all this it appeareth that this first accusation of falsehood vvas rather an adventure as the Def. himselfe calleth it theâ— a grounded assertion He did but adventure neither to call the same plea presumptuous For he can finde no other reason to beare up this charge withall then that they seeme to arrogate to themselues a prerogatiue proper to the Apostles How can this be I wonder seeing they follow herein the direction of the Apostle himselfe Tit. 2 15. Let no man despise thee What this prerogatiue is he doth not plainly tels us but compriseth it in two places of Scripture 1 Cor 15 Gal. 2 18 the first vvherof is nothing at all to the purpose For the Apostle doth not say as the Def. maketh him If we be found false witnesses then is your faith in vaine but if Christ be not risen then are we false Witnesses and your faith is vaine Which also any preacher of the Gospell may say vvithout falshood or presumption to his people The second place If I build againe that which I haue destroyed I make my selfe a prevaricator is applyable to any Minister that hath taught the truth against Popish superstition This very doctrine M. Perkins gathereth out of the words Proculcavimus superstitionem Papisticam c. I hope the Def. doth not thinke he may build up any
it is much lesse praise-worthy if godly Bishops be enioyned laying aside or at least changing the honest and ancient apparrell which the Apostles wore to wit that common and graue habit to put on the ridiculous and execrable or accursed garments of godlesse Mass-priests Now concerning the third part of the Princes duties there is nothing fitter to trouble the publicke peace of the Church then this counsell For everie noveltie especially in religion either by it selfe if it bee evill disturbs and troubles a good peace or if it bee 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 vngodlie peace that is of the world for Christ came not by his Gospell to keep such a peace but rather to take it away and to send a sword so assuredly by the urging of things indifferent to trouble the peace of Churches and to cause strife between good men and bad yea between godlie men themselues is so wicked that it can by no meanes bee defended so that Ireneus had just cause to reproue Victor Bishop of Rome for this cause as hath been sayd afore For it must needes bee that at such times the Churches be rent in peeces then which thing what is more hurtfull Many examples in the histories of the Church proue this which I say How many and how great troubles arose in the Primitiue Church between those who beside the Gospell urged also circumcision and the law and between those who upon good ground reiected them And how great evills would this dissention haue 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 testimonis of the Scripturâ—s and by sound reasons If your gracious Maiestie 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 decreeâ— that that be observed and so take disagreement out of the Church For your gracious Maiestie ought to be verie carefull that there be no innovation in religion but according to the word of God By this means shall a true peace concord and unitie of the Churches bee preserved But if the proceeding be otherwise what other thing will it be then to take away vnitie and to trouble the Christian peace And this I may not passe over with silence that by this noveltie of the busines not onely the publick peace shall be troubled in that kingdome but also manie else-where out of that kingdome will haue 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 haue fallen from the Bishop of Rome for the Gospels sake doe not onely want but also abhorre those garments 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 verie stifly retaine some other things also because the reformers of those Churches otherwise worthy men and verie faithfull servants of Christ durst not at the first neither iudged they it expedient vtterly 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 everie man hath invented 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 bee more and more hardened in them and are not onely hardened but also doe their uttermost endevour by word and writing to draw all the rest to be of their minde Therfore wee easilie see what the issue wil bee if your gracious Maiestie admit of that counsell which some doe giue you to take on apparrell and other more Popish things besides For some men who be not well occupied being stirred up by the example of your Maiestie will write bookes and disperse them throughout all Germanie of these things which they call indifferent to wit that it is lawfull to admit of them nay that they be altogether to be retained that Papists may bee the lesse estranged and alienated from us and so we may come the neerer to concord and agreement As if forsooth the Papists though we for peace sake admitted of all those things would ever amend their Doctrine and banish out of their Churches or at any hand lay downe their false and godless decrees manifest and abhominable superstitions and idolatries and there will bee some who will answer such bookes once dispersed So of this English fire there will rise a new burning flame in Germanie and France on which hot coles the Papists as so many Smiths a forging will sprinkle cold water to make the flame the more vehement And is not this a goodly benefite Who therefore doth not see that this counsell tends to the troubling of all Churches To conclude that golden saying of a certaine learned man is verie true and certaine and approved by long experience that indifferent things that is the question about indifferent things is that golden apple of contention So much shall suffice to haue spoken of the troubling of publick peace what should I say of the consciences of privat belevers It is manifest that they are greatly troubled with this commandement to put on these linnen garments For they do so greatly complain that their lamenting voyces grones doe reach vnto and are heard in Germany Now how grievous and distastfull an offence it is to trouble the consciences of the godly the holy Scripture sheweth partly when it commandeth that we make not the holy Spirit sad neither offend the weak ones partly when it threatneth grivous punishments against those who feare not to doe these things partly also when it propoundeth the examples of the Saints and specially of Paul who speakes thus If meat offend my brother I le eat no flesh while the world standeth that I may not offend my brother For in those words hee giveth a generall rule by his example taken out of the doctrine of Christ to wit that no indifferent thing is to be admitted and yeelded unto much less to bee urged upon others and least of all to be commended by decree if