this precept of St. Paul by giving scandal to the Church of God and to Superiors Civil and Sacred as by omission of them you must do The wisdom which is from above is impartial Yea do not many of you submit unto them when you find it necessary to avoid Civil and Church censures and to serve the interests of your party and shall these low concerns prevail more with you than the Churches Peace the procuring all those blessings which would ensue upon our unity and the prevention of those mischiefs which follow upon our divisions Pudet haec opprobria vobis c. § 9 Thirdly Consider that the Apostle to quell the Schisms and Disorders committed in the Church of Corinth informs them That God is not the God of confusion but of Peace as in all Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. 14.33 Now it is fully proved here and by others who have laboured to convince you of the mischief of your Separation 1. That upon the same principles by which you do excuse your Separation from us and your erecting opposite Communions you consequentially do excuse many of the Antient Schismaticks condemned by the Church you give to others an Apology not Answerable by you to separate from your selves And lastly you condemn the practice of the first and purest Ages of the Church and must have separated from Communion with her in what Age following the Apostles soever you had lived and so have made disturbance throughout all Churches of the world and therefore you may rest assured you do not act agreeably to the good pleasure of that God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is the God not of disturbance but of Peace And we may speak unto you in the language of Theophylact In locum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be you ashamed to contradict the customs of all Churches § 10 Fourthly 1 Cor. 7.12 15. Consider that the same Apostle forbids the believing Brother to separate from his Heathen Wife and the believing Wife to desert her unbelieving Husband for this very reason That God had called us to peace and yet he elsewhere shews how inconvenient it was to be thus yoked to unbelievers 2 Cor. 6.14 If then our being called to Peace will warrant and even sanctifie our yielding to so great an inconvenience and render it our duty to make no separation in our Families on those accounts will it not hallow our submission to some things inconvenient in the Church and render it our duty to make no separation from it on the account of such things § 11 Fifthly Consider that if all things indifferent be left so by your Governours the Minister who officiates must and therefore may impose upon you in many things relating to Gods Publick Worship for as I have already shewed he must chuse some place and time in which he will officiate he must do it in some habit he must chuse some Chapters to read some Psalms to sing some kind of Bread and Wine to Consecrate with many other things of a like nature and if they may do this why not the Magistrate If your Ministers may as Governours impose these things upon you why not the Bishops as their Governours upon them why not the Magistrate as the Supreme Ecclesiastick Governour upon both The seal of Government is finally resolved on them who have the power of imposing so that to deny the Ministers this power over the people or the Bishops over the Ministers is to make neither the one nor the other properly Governours § 12 Sixthly That God who hath established the Office Ministerial and Magistratical must have consigned that power to them which is sufficient to acquire all the ends for which it was designed these ends are among others the Peace the Union the Order the Edification of the body or society of Christians subject to them God therefore must have given to these Officers sufficient power for the acquiring of these ends as far as they are needful for the Church of God but without a power of silencing disputes when they arise and do disturb the Church and making Rules for Uniformity and Order when differences do arise and divisions multiply and confusion is introduced by variety of practice in indifferent matters it is apparent they cannot obtain these ends in Church or State and therefore 't is not to be doubted but God hath given them a power of making and imposing of such Rules in the forementioned cases to those ends Seventhly Consider that since it is for ever necessary that things should be done decently and in order and to edification and what is decent orderly and tending to edification will be ever subject to variety and to a relative uncertainty seeing that may be so in some place age and circumstances which may in others cease to be so 't is necessary that there should be perpetual judges of these things and they can be no other but the Rulers of the Church they therefore must have power to judge and to determine in those cases Eighthly Consider that it cannot reasonably be imagined that the God of Love and Peace who questionless delights to see men converse peaceably together Eph. 4.3 Rom. 14.19.12.18 and with one heart and mouth to glorifie him and who so strictly doth command us to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace to pursue the things which make for Peace and do as much as in us lyes in order to it should disapprove of what is so expedient and visibly conducing to this end if not expresly or by plain and immediate consequence forbidden by him or should approve of Separation and division upon trivial accounts Now how can we be said to do as much as in us lies in order to that end if we will not comply in order to the Churches Peace with constitutions of Superiors which are not evidently repugnant to his Law or to the dictates of our natural reason § 13 Ninthly Consider what is like to be the natural result of your refusal of Communion with us even no less than Excommunication which though perhaps the fault committed may not in it self deserve yet can I see no reason 1. Why you should not dread the Sentence seeing Pastoris sententia etiam injusta timenda est even the injust Sentence of Superiors may be dreaded when it doth actually deprive us of Church Priviledges and therefore we stand bound to do what lawfully we can even all that is not evidently sinful to avoid it 2. Nor can I see even why the Sentence may not be valid before God though not by reason of the moment of the things themselves yet for that disobedience to lawful Governours and violation of the Peace which is contained in our refusal to submit unto them I confess there is an opinion much received in the world that makes the censures of the Church only declarative which will excuse you from these fears for if the confirmation of these censures by
I shall first lay down plainly the Assertion or Doctrine of the Church of England in reference to the Perfection of the Holy Scriptures and from it give a direct Answer to this Objection 2ly I shall lay down the contrary Tenet of some Non-Conformists which is here asserted in this Argugument 3ly I shall endeavor to shew the Dangerousness of this Opinion and the Swarms of evil consequences which do naturally follow from it And 4ly That they who hold it did do many things repugnant to it And 5ly That it doth necessarily make the Holy Scripture an imperfect Rule 1. Then when we assert that Scripture is a perfect Rule we mean it thus that it doth perfectly contain all that is necessary to be believed or done in Order to our acceptance with God here or to our happiness with him hereafter not that it doth particularly prescribe what ever Circumstance of Order Decency or Convenience may be observed in the Service of God And this doth seem to me to be the true Distinction in this matter betwixt the Protestant of the Church of England and the Rigid Puritan that the Protestant of the Church of England asserts the Holy Scripture to be a full and perfect Rule of all the Articles of Christian Faith and Christian Piety but notwithstanding he maintains that Holy Scripture hath left it in the Power of the Church Governors Sacred and Civil to appoint such Rites and Ceremonies to be used in the Service of God as they shall judge convenient and conducing to the ends of Unity and Order Peace and Love Decency Uniformity and the Edification of the Church And that by virtue of these General Rules Follow after the things Rom. 14.19 Phil. 3.16 1 Cor. 14.40 which make for Peace and whereby we may edify one another Let us walk by the same Rule let us mind the same thing Let all things be done decently and in order Let all be done to Edification and to the Glory of God Give no offence to Jew or Gentile or to the Church of God c. They in the General are authorised to appoint such Rites and Ceremonies as they judge most conducing to these ends and that all Christian people who live under their Care and Jurisdiction are bound to yield obedience to them in matters of this Nature by vertue of those Seriptures which command them to obey those that Rule over them and to submit to them Hebr. 13.17 â— Pet. 5.5 Rom. 13.1 1 Pet. 2.13 To be subject to their Elders and to the higher Powers and to every Ordinance of man for the Lords Sake I say their Tenet is that by vertue of these Scriptures they are bound to yield obedience to them in all lawful things that is in all those things which God hath not forbidden in his Word for where there is no Law of God forbidding there can be no transgression and therefore to refuse obedience to our Superiors Civil or Sacred in those matters is to refuse obedience in things lawful and therefore to offend against the Precepts which call upon us to be subject and obedient to them So that we do assert in Answer unto this Objection 1. That the Scripture is a perfect Rule of all Ceremonies that are good Works antecedently to the Command of man so that in Scripture some express for them may be found but that it is not such a Rule of indifferent Ceremonies 2ly That 't is as perfect a Rule as it needs to be in reference to Ceremonies uncommanded in particular 1 By giving us the general Rules which should direct Superiours in the imposing of these things indifrent but not in a particular Prescription of them as this Objection doth suppose it being a plain contradiction that any thing should be to us indifferent and yet prescribed to us in the Word of God Dissenters therefore must deny that there is any circumstance of Worship be it Time Place Gesture or the Words in which it is to be performed left indifferent or that being so that circumstance must not be used in Gods Worship or else they must confess the weakness of the Argument produced And 2ly Because it doth command us to obey Superiors Civil and Sacred in all lawful matters and so instructs us to submit to what is not forbidden by Gods Word when by Superiors it is commanded This is our Tenet and this is a direct and a sufficient answer to this Argument But on the other hand the Tenet of some Nonconformists owned by this Argument is this That no Church Governors ought to ordain or introduce into the Service of God any other Rites or Observations than such as God hath in his Word commanded or Christ and his Apostles by their Examples which they esteem as Precepts hath approved and that if they enjoyn such things we must not yield obedience to them but must reject them as humane inventions superstition and will worship This is that Doctrine in which the Mystery of Puritanism doth consist and the pernicious consequences of it are so many that any person who doth weigh them seriously will if he be indeed a Lover of Christianity abhor and heartily renounce that Doctrine whence they so naturally flow And 1. This Doctrine casts a reproach upon Religion it gives just cause to Magistrates to scruple the admission of the Christian Faith and to the Atheist and the Polititian to represent it as the great instrument of sedition and disobedience For this opinion obliges men to thwart the Magistrate in all indifferent matters which he commands with a respect unto Gods Worship If he commands them to come to Church on the Lords-day at such a time in such a place they must stand bound in conscience by this Rule to refuse to do so because in Scripture God hath not determined how oft what hour or where they should assemble if he commands them to be uncovered in the House of God to stand or kneel whilst they are praying to sit whilst hearing or the like they must not do it because God hath not told them in his Word that they should be uncovered in his presence that they should kneel or stand whilst they do pray or sit when they do hear Now what a Scandal what a base impeachment is it to our peaceable Religion to say that it obligeth us to disobey Authority in matters God hath left us all to do or not to do at pleasure only because he doth command us so to do them as we might have performed them had he not commanded us and that nothing doth so much engage us to be refractory to the higher Powers as that perfect Law of Liberty which Christ hath left us 2ly Upon the same account it must be sinful to obey those Civil Laws which do concern those Laws of Justice Charity and Mercy towards our Christian Brother which cannot clearly be collected from the written Word For it is plain from Scripture that these are the more weighty matters of
and were permitted to separate from them and joyn in opposite Communions as oft as they imagined that others better did acquit themselves in Prayer or Preaching or in Administration of the Sacraments or any other duty which belongs unto the Ministerial Office Answ 5 Lastly this Text only engages Private Christians to separate from persons Guilty of such crimes as to familiar converse in things unnecessary but never to decline their presence so as to neglect the doing or receiving good to their own souls or bodies For 1. Divines agree in this that Christ and his Apostles do not in this or other places prescribe such separation as is injurious to any or takes off any duties which by the law of nature we do owe unto them or our Relation to them calls for A Wife must not by virtue of this Precept separate from her ungodly Husband no tho he be an unbeliever let her not leave him saith St. Paul 1 Cor. 7.15 A child must not deny subjection to a wicked Parent nor a Servant to an evil Master but must be subject with all fear not only to the good and gentle but also to the Froward 1 Pet. 2.18 If then this Precept will not oblige us to perform what is injurious to anothers temporals it cannot lay upon us an obligation to do that which is prejudicial to our own Spiritual concerns Much less what prejudicieth the concernments of the Church our Spiritual Mother and makes us disobedient to our Spiritual Fathers 2ly This Precept doth not bind in case of signal damage for I am not obliged to renounce his Company by whom my Trade is carried on my goods go off because I judge him wicked or Profane or to refuse a Customer because he is no Saint for then no Trade could lawfully be managed and there would be no living in the world I do not mean saith Paul to for bid your keeping Company as your occasions serve with the Fornicators Covetous Idolaters of the world for then you must go out of the world v. 9.10 If then as far as the concernments of our worldly callings warrant us we may enjoy their Company much more when this is necessary to the concernments of our Souls or our Spiritual Callings 3ly When I am called as a Guest where accidentally I meet with such a one I am not then obliged to depart and leave the Company because I find him there for this can be no evidence of my familiarity with him Much less am I obliged to depart on his account when I am graciously invited to this heavenly banquet and call'd to feast upon the Supper of the Lamb. And 4ly Our Lord did notwithstanding this duty of avoiding the Company of wicked men familiarly converse with Publicans and Sinners in order to their reformation and spiritual advantage Matt. 9 13. and justified his so doing by this Rule I will have mercy and not Sacrifice why therefore may not we by the same Reason justifie our converse with them in order to our own Spiritual Good But because this Objection of the want of Discipline is the great Scruple of Dissenters and some even among our selves seem to speak slighter of it than they ought to do I will endeavor in some few Propositions to shew how much it doth concern all Churches to endeavor to keep up their Discipline by the exclusion of notorious evil livers from the Church and how far the neglect thereof can be imputed to our Church and whether any separation from her can be justified on this account And therfore I assert That the Secluding of profane and wicked Persons who after admonition by the Church Prop. 1. continue such from the Communion of that Church of which they formerly were Members is the express Ordinance of Christ For 1. Matt. 18.15 16 17. Our Lord himself commanded that if by private admonition we cannot gain our Brother we should tell the Church and if he did neglect to hear the Church he should by Christians be esteemed as a Publican and Heathen adding that whatsoever ye the Church Governours shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven Whence it appears that as it is the Duty of the private Christian who cannot gain his Brother by the private admonitions prescribed by Christ to complain of him to the Church so is it the Duty of the Church to admonish and reprove and call him to repentance and if he will not hearken unto her voice to bind him here on Earth and that the Brother thus bound is afterwards to be looked upon as to Communion in sacris as a Heathen and a Publican And altho no express could be produced from Christ to this effect yet even the constitution of Church Government must necessarily infer it for Government in Church or State there cannot be without a power of punishing unruly Members now the Government of the Church being Spiritual her punishments can be only such even seclusion of her Members from spiritual things moreover there can be no Peace and Order under any Government without a Power of secluding by some means or other such Persons from that Government as obstinately persist in the disturbance of it and violation of its fundamental Laws On Luc. 6.22 And therefore as Grotius truly saith Christ having once constituted a Church and that to be a holy and undefiled Temple to himself must be supposed to command all those things without which this his Temple could not be kept pure But it is plain that a Power of censuring Offenders against this Pure and Holy Institution and of ejecting those who by their wicked conversations do defile this Temple is necessary for the preservation of the Church in purity And indeed I cannot understand how the Church should be a Society without Union or how she can have Union without some Rules of Government and Order or what those Rules can signifie without a Power to punish nor what Power of punishing the Church as such can have except it be by debarring of her Members from some or all of their Church Priviledges nor do I understand how it should be the Duty of Christians to withdraw from every Brother that walks disorderly if the Church Officers have not a power to pronounce such persons fit to be withdrawn from especially seeing not hearing of the Church must go before his being deem'd or treated as a Publican and Heathen Nor Lastly can I understand St. Pauls discourse unless he Argue thus Vide sclater in locum The whole body of the Christian Assemblies ought to be a new Lump and purged from old Leaven or from such Persons as notoriously commit such Crimes as manifestly are repugnant to the profession of Christianity and inconsistent with true piety he therefore who being call'd a Brother that is making profession of Christianity is guilty of such Wickedness should be cast out of the Society of Christians for as when the Paschal Lamb was offered among the Jews no Leaven was
THE Protestant Reconciler PART II. Earnestly perswading the DISSENTING LAITY To joyn in FULL COMMUNION WITH THE Church of England And Answering all the Objections of the Non-Conformists against the Lawfulness of their Submission unto the Rites and Constitutions of that CHURCH By a Well-wisher to the Churches Peace and a Lamenter of Her Sad Divisions Anglicanam Ego Ecclesiam exoticis pravis superflitiosis cultibus erroribusque aut impiis aut periculosis egregiè ex scripturarum coelestium norma purgatam tot támque illustribus Martyriis probatam pietate in Deum in homines Charitate laudatissimisque bonorum operum exemplis abundantem laetissimo doctissimorum ac sapientissimorâ—m virorum preventu jam à Reformationis principio ad hodierna usque tempora florentem equidem es quo debui loco habui hactenus ac dum vivam habebo ejus nomen honos laudes semper apud me manebunt Dallaeus de cultibus Religiosis Latinorum part 2. l. 2. cap. 1. p. 97 98. LONDON Printed for Awnsham Churchil at the Black-Swan near Amen-Corner 1683. THE PREFACE TO THE Dissenting Laity The Contents of the PREFACE Six Arguments from the Book called the Protestant Reconciler to perswade the Dissenting Laity to submit to the conditions of Communion required of them by the Church of England viz. 1. That they stand bound to do what lawfully they may in order to it and that nothing unlawful is required of them § 1.2 Because they are to do to their Superiors as in like case they would be dealt with § 2.3 From the liberty they take of changing a Ceremony of Christ's own institution § 3.4 Because the mischiefs which will follow on their refusal to submit are greater than those which will ensue on their Conformity § 4.5 From the example of St. Paul § 5.6 From the pernicious nature of Schism § 6. Other Arguments produced 1. From that of the Apostle If any man will be contentious we have no such custom 1 Cor. 11.16 § 7. 2. From his command to give no offence to the Church of God § 8.3 Because God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace § 9.4 Because he requires the believing Wife not to desert her unbelieving Husband vice versâ because God hath called us to Peace § 10.5 Because were all things left indifferent the Minister must impose in some cases § 11.6 From the power committed to Church Governours and the necessity of submission to it § 12.7 From the sad result of their refusing this submission § 13. Two propositions conducing to this end 1. That no prejudices or scruples of Dissenters can excuse them from the guilt of Schism in separating from us till they have done all that lawfully they can for the removal of them § 14.2 That their imagination that the Magistrate exceeds or else unduly doth exert his power in commanding any thing will not warrant their refusal of Obedience to it § 15. Requests to them who cannot fully comply with us viz. 1. To comply so far as they declare either by words or actions that they lawfully may do it § 16.2 To refrain from censuring reproaching or speaking evil of their Governours in Church or State § 17.3 To abstain carefully from all Rebellious Principles and Practices and to confess ingenuously and heartily renounce what hath been done by men of their perswasions in that kind § 18. Brethren MY hearts desire and prayer to God in your behalf is this That you may fully be united to the Communion of the Church of England And in pursuance of this passionate desire I have composed the following Treatise containing a full Answer to all the scruples obstructing your Communion with us which I could meet with in the writings of our Dissenting Brethren And let me O my Friends entreat you by the love of God and your own souls of the Church of Christ which is his body and of her union peace edification by your concern for Christian Religion in the general and for the Protestant Religion in particular which I hope is very great by all the motives which Christianity affords to love peace unity by all the blessings it doth promise to the promoters and all the dreadful evils it doth threaten to the disturbers of them by the sad experience you have had already of the most fatal consequences of our Divisions and by your present fears of a more dreadful issue of them lastly by all that you are like to suffer in your souls and bodies by refractory persisting in your Separation let me I say beseech you on my bended knees by all these weighty motives to lay to heart what I have offered in this Book and in this Preface shall farther offer to engage you to conform and seriously to consider of it and act according to the convictions it may minister unto you as you will Answer your neglect to do so at the great and terrible day of the Lord. Now the considerations I would humbly offer to you are either 1. Such as are proper to induce you to the desired Conformity or 2. Such as may tend to keep you peaceable and conscientious though you do not Conform and may preserve you from doing any thing which may reflect on your Religion towards God or Loyalty towards your Soveraign § 1 1. Then to move you to the desired Conformity be pleased seriously to consider what hath been offered in a late Book stiled The Protestant Reconciler to that end In which Book as the Author pleads warmly for an indulgence or mitigation of some lesser things which do obstruct your full Communion with us which nothing but a due sense of the great danger and unsafe condition of your present state could have induced him to do and nothing but his fervent love to souls and his sincere desire of their Salvation can excuse so hath he many passages which seem most strongly to conclude for your desired submission to the injunctions of Superiors For First P. 34 35. He lays down this position That you stand bound in Conscience to do whatsoever lawfully you may for the prevention and removal of our Schisms and the occasions of them and for the healing our Divisions Which is a proposition evident in it self and there confirmed from plain Scripture testimony and the concern we ought to have for Christian Faith the Protestant Religion the welfare of the Nation and for the peace the order the edification of the Church Secondly He adds That nothing can be unlawful which is not by God forbidden 1 John 3.4 sin being the transgression of a Law and the Apostle having told us Rom. 4.15 P. 198. that where there is no Law there is no transgression whence he infers That Dissenters cannot satisfie their Consciences in their refusal to obey the commands of their Superiors unless they can shew some plain precept which renders that unlawful to be done by them which is commanded by Superiors And seeing God in Scripture hath enjoined
all persons to obey those that have the rule over them Heb. 13.17 and submit themselves Rom. 13.1.5 1 Pet. 2.13 and to be subject to the higher powers as to the ordinance of God and that for Conscience sake and the Lords sake He that can satisfie his Conscience in his refusal so to do must shew some Law of God as evidently forbidding his obedience to what Superious do enjoin P. 197. as do these Scriptures command obedience to them in all lawful things I having therefore in this Treatise answered all your pretences for such a prohibition of the Holy Scripture forbidding your submission to the Rites and Constitutions of the Church of England enjoined by Superiors have made it manifest that you can never satisfie your Consciences in your refusal to submit unto them nor can you or your Leaders return a satisfactory Answer to the Questions propounded by that Author to you in these words P. 58. Do they prefer mercy before Sacrifice or comply with the forementioned injunctions of Obedience to their Superiors who will not submit to Rites or Circumstances or to the use of things no where forbidden in the word to prevent Schism and all the dreadful consequences of it but rather will give cause to their Superiors to judge them scandalous Resisters of Authority and pertinacious Disturbers of the Churches Peace 59. Do not they scandalize offend and contribute unto the Ruine of Christs little stock who do involve them in a wretched Schism on the account of things which they may lawfully submit to Do not they shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men who forbid them to enter when they may Do not they impose heavy burthens also who say to their Disciples Hear not the Common Prayer Receive not the Sacrament Kneeling suffer not your Children to be signed with the Cross Communicate not with that Minister who wears a Surplice or with that Church which imposeth any Ceremonies or any Constitutions but concerning the time and place of performing Publick Worship If nothing doth so scandalize Christs followers as to find their Teachers at discord and divided can they act as becometh his Disciples who are not willing to procure Vnity and Concord and to avoid this scandal by their submission to things indifferent in their own nature and not forbiden in the law of God § 2 Thirdly He pleads for this submission from that great rule of equity which calls upon you to do to others as you would be dealt with putting the Question to you thus p. 187. Do not you expect obedience from your Children and Servants in like cases Should you command them to come at ten of the Clock into your Parlour to Family Devotions requiring them to come dressed and to kneel at their Devotions would you permit them to refuse to come at the time and to the place appointed because all times and places are indifferent to God or in the garb appointed by you because God regards not habits or to refuse to kneel because they may pray standing Would you not rather judge them contemners of your lawful authority and needlesly and sinfully scrupulous in those matters And must not you by the same Rule be guilty of contemning the lawful Authority of your Civil and Spiritual Fathers and of the Masters of Christs Family by your refusal to submit unto their Constitutions in matters of like nature upon the like accounts or can those Principles derive from him who is the God of order not of confusion 1 Cor. 15.33 which would so evidently should they obtain fill Families as well as Kingdoms and Churches with confusion and destroy their order § 3 Fourthly He argues ad hominem thus If notwithstanding the evidence produced p. 289. that Baptism by immersion is sutable both to the institution of our Lord and his Apostles and was by them ordained to represent our Burial with Christ and so our dying unto Sin Rom. 6.4 Coloss 2.12 and our conformity to his resurrection by newness of life as the Apostle clearly doth explain the meaning of that Rite I say if notwithstanding this Dissenters do agree to sprinkle the baptized Infant why may they not as well submit to the significant ceremonies imposed by our Church for since it is as lawful to add unto Christs institutions a significant ceremony as to diminish a significant ceremony which he or his Apostles instituted and use another in its stead which they did never institute what reason can they have to do the latter and yet refuse submission to the former and why should not the peace and union of the Church be as prevailing with them to perform the one as is their mercy to the Infants body to neglect the other And § 4 Fifthly The said Author shews that our divisions do highly prejudice the Christian Faith Chap. 1. that they gratify the Infidel and Sceptick and scandalize the weak and doubting Christian that they minister to the advantage of the Papist and to the prejudice of the true Protestant Religion that they are highly prejudicial to the State that they have a pernicious influence upon our selves by promoting strife enmity carnality and all the evils consequent upon them by obstructing the love peace unity order and edification of the Church and the benefit of our Prayers by hindring the efficacy of the means of Grace by depriving us of all the blessings of love and peace and by endangering our eternal peace And hence he strongly doth infer That if Dissenters do not think it better that all these evils should ensue than that they should comply or bear with those few ceremonies P. 22. and scrupled expressions of our Liturgy then must they in these matters submit to the commands of their Superiours And p. 29. he puts this serious Question to Dissenters Whether those ceremonies and those expressions in our Liturgy which they at present scruple be so plainly evil and so unquestionably forbidden that for preventing all these dreadful evils they may not be complyed with adding That if they be not so clearly and indispensably evil that these great ends of the promoting the salvation of mens Souls and the preventing of the forementioned evils which do inevitably ensue upon them cannot hallow them they cannot be excused from being accessary to those evils which ensue upon their separating from and their dividing of the Church on these accounts Now that Dissenters cannot rationally judge these things to be thus clearly and indispensably evil or think it better that all these mischiefs should ensue than that they should submit unto them he seems convincingly to prove from these considerations 1. Chap. 6. §. 1. from p. 167. to p. 170. That the duties of promoting Christian love peace unity and the edification of the Church and the preventing of Division Schism and the disturbance of the Civil Government are moral and essential duties which will admit no dispensation so that it is the duty
of all Christians to contend earnestly and strive together with one Soul for the promotion of these duties and the prevention of the contrary evils 2ly p. 176. That the preserving of what is most essential unto the welfare of the Church and to the interests of piety is more to be regarded than the omission of what is only circumstantial to them and that precepts which concern only Rituals p. 46. are to give place to those which do concern the welfare of mens bodies and much more to those which do respect the welfare of our Brothers Soul so that when both cannot together be observed we must neglect or violate the former to observe the latter Agreeably to which assertion Divines do generally lay down this as a certain rule concerning positive commands requiring things which it is not intrinsecally evil to omit viz. That all such things cease to be duties when they are inconsistent with others of a greater consequence there being greater reason and obligation when we cannot do both to do the latter with the omission of the former And this that Author doth confirm 1. From the example of God himself who suffered his own ceremonial institutions to be neglected upon accounts of lesser moment p. 171. viz. circumcision for the convenience of his peoples travels in the wilderness the celebration of the Passover in the 14th day of the first month when they were in a journey about their temporal concerns 2ly From the example and declarations of our Saviour who taught that in all such cases p. 171 172. God would have mercy and not sacrifice approved the action of David and his Servants in eating the Shew-bread which was by Gods prescription to be eaten only by Aaron and his Sons and who commanded the impotent man to take up his Bed and walk upon the Sabbath-day whence he seems evidently to infer 1. p. 173. That if God was pleased to suffer his own institutions in matters ceremonial to be neglected when that neglect was needful to promote some higher end if to preserve the life of man and beast he would permit men to do that which otherwise would have been deemed a breach of his own institution and a prophanation of his day it is not to be doubted but he will permit us to do those things which in their natures may be inconvenient when it is necessary to submit unto them for the promotion of the great ends of love peace unity and the advantage of poor Souls if our respect unto our Brothers life and health will warrant our neglect of many outward duties then surely our respect unto the Churches peace and unity and to the good of Souls may warrant our submission to those things for these good ends which God hath never plainly made it our duty to omit and our Superiours whom he most plainly doth command us to obey in lawful matters do enjoin 2ly p. 175. That if the duties mentioned be of an higher nature than any outward circumstance of worship it cannot be so much our duty to endeavour that Gods worship should be performed without those rites or circumstances as that these higher duties should be practised or to contend for the omission of them with loss or hazard of these more weighty matters if in these moral duties consists the life and substance of Religion and the essentials of true Piety whereas the matters which our Dissenters do contend for relate not to the being of Religion but as they think only unto the purer exercise of some religious duties certain it is they ought not so to contend for the omission of these external circumstances as to impair that charity and peace that unity and edification wherein the substance of Religion and the welfare of the Church consists which seems to be the very Argument St Paul insists on when he saith Rom. 14.17 19. the kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness and peace wherefore let us follow after the things which make for peace i. e. Let us not by doing or omitting of these things obstruct the Churches peace or hinder the promotion of those things in which Gods Kingdom more especially consists 3ly p. 176. He asks Whether Dissenters can with good conscience say that Gods glory is as much concerned in the administration of his worship rather in some other way than in that mode which now obtaineth in the Church of England as it is certainly concerned in the performance of those moral duties and in the honour and success of Christian Faith the salvation of Souls the welfare of the State and of the Protestant Religion and whether by joining with us in our publick Ordinances such mischiefs would ensue if not 't is certainly their duty rather to comply with the commands of their Superiors p. 177. though they conceive them burthensome and inconvenient than to administer by their refusal so to do occasion to the greater dishonour of their God and all these dreadful evils both to Church and State which do ensue on that refusal § 5 Sixthly This Author strongly seems to argue for this submission in prosecution of the ends forementioned from the example of St Paul who though he were free from all men 1 Cor. 9.19 20. yet made himself servant to all that he might gain the more to the Jew p. 145. becoming as a Jew that he might gain the Jew c. For sure saith he it well becometh our Dissenters to imitate this great example of St. Paul by conforming their wills as servants do unto the will of their Superiors and doing all that lawfully they can to please and testify their due subjection to them without respect to their liberty to do in order to their being serviceable to the Church in the promotion of the Gospel and the salvation of Souls as the Apostle did when he submitted to the circumcision of Timothy when he undertook a legal purification of himself and offered sacrifice against which actions it is easie to produce more plausible exceptions than they can bring against our Ceremonies especially if we consider that the Apostle did comply Acts 21.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 28.17 not only with the Law of Moses for this end but also with the traditions imposed by the Elders and so did yield unto the very thing which they are so afraid to do § 6 Seventhly This Author proves That Schism is a most pernicious evil Chap. 2. §. 1. this he makes good from Scripture from the concurring suffrage of all the Fathers of the Church from the mischievous and dreadful consequences of it and from the opposition that it bears to the great duties of Charity and Peace of Union and Edification Now certainly it highly must concern us in reason and in Conscience where our mistakes are like to prove of such a fatal consequence to our immortal souls and to expose us to such dreadful evils to be very wary
before we venture upon that which is by most judicious persons in this Age and was by all the Primitive Fathers of the Church pronounced Schismatical as were all Altars set up in opposition to the Bishop of the Diocese wherein they were all Churches separating from and independent on his Government This therefore cannot prudently be done by us nor can we when we find it done by others safely join in Communion with them without plain evidence and full conviction of our freedom from that guilt And surely he must have a very good opinion of himself who confidently dares to say he hath plain evidence that what all Christians of former Ages and the most able and judicious persons of the present Age pronounce a Schism is indeed the duty of all good and pious Christians Now to confirm this motive let me request you to weigh these following Questions well Q. 1 If Schism in the general be of a dreadful and pernicious nature Whether the disturbance of the Churches Peace by erecting opposite Communions to the perpetuating Schism through all succeeding generations will not much aggravate the guilt of it and render it more dreadful to every peaceable and pious Christian consider therefore I beseech you that this if any is your Schism Q. 2 Who would not think it safer to yield to any imposition how heavy or how inconvenient soever provided that it were not plainly sinful than run the hazard of contracting such a pernicious guilt to chuse to hazard our exclusion from the body the Communion of Christs Church the priviledges of her Ordinances rather than yield unto a Constitution not directly sinful is certainly a great imprudence For seeing in matters of practice the dangerousness as well as the falsehood of an Assertion is very fitly and conscientiously to be considered especially when the danger is of offending God and ruining our souls Can it be prudent to venture upon that which if performed without good ground will certainly expose us to that danger where there appeareth no such evident conviction for the doing of it as can make amends for the danger of venturing on it Q. 3 Is it not reasonable to conceive that the wisdom of Christ should lay down Rules for the government and preservation of his body proportionably plain unto the moment of them and give us a full evidence in matters absolutely needful to be done or lest undone If then you only have some probabilities and plausible pretences for setting up or joining with these separate Communions or against joining in Communion with us but have no evident conviction of the necessity of the one or the unlawfulness of the other may you not rationally conclude that neither of them can be needful to be done in order to your everlasting welfare when then our actions tend so much unto the prejudice of our own souls and to the damage of the Church of Christ as doth our present Schism 't is Argument sufficient that God never intended to oblige us to it that he hath given us no clear conviction of that obligation Q. 4 Lastly Would any Prudent Legislator think it convenient for the publick that his greatest and most important commands should be neglected as often as there might appear some little probable evidence for some lesser duty that were inconsistent with them would he not think you be much better pleased with him that in such a case should stick to the greater duty and neglect the less than with him who should extreamly prejudice the publick by his adherence to his scruples about little matters And if so can it reflect dishonour upon God to presume him also pleased with that which we have reason to believe would please a good and prudent Governour in regard of its good influence on the publick for which he is especially concerned § 7 To these convincing Arguments collected from that Author I add these following conderations First That St Paul seems clearly to insinuate that a wilful departure from ordinary practice in such cases as these are doth argue a contentious disposition for when he treats of the dispute arising in the Church of Corinth whether their Women should be veiled or covered in the Church or not he argues for their being veiled from decency and the design of Nature in giving hair unto them for a covering and thus concludes his Argument if any man have a mind to be contentious so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth import it is sufficient to let him know that he contending for the appearance of Women in the Church unveiled contends against the custom of the Church 1 Cor. 11.16 for we at Jerusalem and all the other Churches of God have no such custom and if by this he will not be concluded he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a lover of contention Why therefore may it not be said to you if you are minded to contend for sitting at the Sacrament for Baptizing without the sign of the Cross and without God-Fathers and God-Mothers for Praying without a stinted Liturgy in publick and without a Surplice and for separating on the account of all or any of these things imposed we have no such custom neither the Churches of God And if by this you will not be concluded in these matters how will you scape the charge of being lovers of Contention And sutable to this determination of St Paul was both the practice and advice of the most Holy Fathers of the Church St Austin truly saith Ep. 86. ad Casulanum presb That in those matters concerning which the Scripture hath delivered nothing certain the customs of the people of God and the Statutes of our Ancestors are to be received as a Law Epist 118. And again All matters of this kind may freely be observed nor can a grave and prudent Christian observe a better discipline Ad quam fortè Ecclesiam veneris ejus morem serva si cuiquam non vis esse scandalo nec quenquam tibi Ibid. than in these maters to act according to that custom which is observed by the Church to which he cometh And thus St. Ambrose did himself practise advising others to whatsoever Church they came to observe its customs if they would neither give nor take offence § 8 Secondly Consider that the same Apostle commands all Christians to give no offence to Jew or Gentile or the Church of God that is 1 Cor. 10.32 as one well descants on the place whatsoever without prejudice to Christian piety you can perform or leave undone be careful for the avoiding of offence to Jew or Gentile and much more to the Church of God to do or to abstain from doing Now do not you my Friends conceive your selves obliged to abstain from doing of the things enjoyned though lawful in themselves because they minister unto the scandal of weak Brethren why therefore should you not much more conceive your selves obliged to do them on the like supposition that you may not transgress
lawful to Communicate with us in Prayer and hearing of the word and in Receiving of the Sacrament upon occasion stand bound in Conscience so to do as oft as by the Magistrate you are required so to do and it can only be pretence of Conscience which doth induce you to forbear such Communion with us at these times for seeing negative precepts do bind always and at all times so that no man at any time may do what is forbidden by God It follows that there can be no prohibition against doing that at other times which we can sometimes do and which cannot be more or less lawful or unlawful for being done at one time than another as clearly seems to be the case with reference to your occasional Communion It therefore is to be suspected that men only pretend Conscience against that Communion with us at all times which they at sometimes can maintain And yet I wish there were no instances of men of your perswasions who when they are presented or when they find it necessary to qualifie them for an Office or to give a vote in which they may do service to their party will attend upon the publick worship used in our Churches and will receive the Sacrament according to the order of the Church of England who before never did and afterwards neglect to do so Now whilst men do thus vary in their practice according as their interest and as their circumstances vary they tempt men shrewdly to suspect that they act rather out of interest than Conscience in these matters and that they notwithstanding all their pretence to Conscience have either none at all or a bad Conscience for if they thought Communion with us in those Ordinances unlawful by doing it in the forementioned circumstances they only must be doing evil that good may come and making Conscience and Religion stoop to interest which is the proper character of Hypocrites but if they did conceive it lawful their Separation and refusal of it cannot be excused from Schism or from transgression of the injunctions of St. Paul If it be possible as much as in you lies live peaceably with all men follow after the things which make for peace give no offence unto the Church of God obey Superiors and submit your selves Ah my Dear Brethren by doing of these things you have given greater scandal unto others than your submission to the Constitutions of the Church of England could have done and therefore if you do indeed abstain from our Commuon for fear of giving scandal to weak Brethren do you more carefully abstain from matters of this nature which carry with them such a plain semblance of Hypocrisie that no pretence can hide no Charity excuse it Under this head I cannot pass by your violence in Petitioning His Sacred Majesty against His Royal Proclamation to the contrary for be it granted that the Law did authorize or give permission to you to Petition sure I am it laid upon you no necessity to do so and so this might have been forborn in compliance with the pleasure of his Majesty And if you do Reply That then you may by Proclamations be abridged of that liberty the Law affords you Consider I beseech you what it is that you expect and call for from Superiors viz. That for your sakes and out of pity to your weakness they would abate the exercise of their own power and with what equity and justice can you expect they should do this if you at their request will abate nothing of that liberty and power which the Law allows you § 17 2. If you cannot conform let me intreat you Religiously to abstain from censuring reproaching or speaking evil of your Governours in Church or State For this undoubtedly you may do and it doth very much concern you so to do For they who being Christians do reproach and do speak evil of their Civil Governours do that which the Wiseman would not permit the Jew to think of for his command runs thus Eccles 10.20 Curse not the King in thy heart or Entertain not any light vain contemptuous or dishonourable thoughts of him Assemb Annot. wish thou no evil to his Person Crown or Dignity in thy most secret retirements They do what all good men should tremble to commit for of such men St. Peter gives this Character Presumptuous are they 2 Pet. 2.10 self-willed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they do not tremble when they speak evil of Dignities Such persons dare to offer that to Gods Vicegerents to those who bear his Name or Character on Earth which Michael the Archangel durst not offer to the vilest and the worst of Creatures Jude 8 9. for he contending with the Devil durst not bring against him a railing accusation and yet it well deserves to be observed that if this sin was capable of pardon or excuse in any case or circumstances it must have been so in the reproaching of the then present Governours they being by consent of all Historians the greatest monsters of mankind and the most bloody Persecutors of the Christian Faith Moreover they who offend in the like kind against their Ecclesiastical Superiors do that which blessed Paul when he had ignorantly done to a corrupt High-Priest acknowledged as a crime condemned in the Law of God I wist not saith he that he was the High-Priest Acts 23.5 for it is written thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people they do that which the Conscience of a Jew could not let pass without just indignation and reproof for when St. Paul had said God shall smite thee thou whited wall v. 3 4. they presently cry out Revilest thou Gods High-Priest There lies indeed no obligation on us to call evil good or flatter our Superiors in their sins or judge well of them against the clearest evidence of Sense or Reason but then we are obliged not to cherish evil thoughts or harbour groundless jealousies of our Superiors much less must we express our inward apprehensions of them by opprobrious language or disrespectful carriage towards them And yet 't is but too evident that both the Writings and Discourses of Dissenters are too often stuft with these malevolent reflections in which they take the liberty of speaking evil of the Rulers of the people and of blaspheming Dignities and representing the Reverend Bishops as Popish Antichristian and Ithacian Prelates § 18 Lastly Let me conjure you by that affection which you bear unto the Name and Doctrine of our common Lord and Saviour and to the credit of the Protestant Religion to abstain carefully from all Seditious and Rebellious Principles and Practices and to do all you can to clear your selves from all suspicion of maintaining or approving of them For to deal plainly with you this is one great fault among you that you have many of you vented and more of you have practised sutably to those Opinions which are Seditious and Rebellious and these Opinions
used by the Church from the 3d. Century at least unto this present Age. And thence to shew that our Dissenters do by condemning these things in the Church of England in effect condemn the Church of Christ throughout all Ages and all Places Def. of the principles of love p. 55. for as Mr. Baxter well observes they who condemn our Church for reasons common to all the Ages of the Church must virtually condemn all the fore-going Ages of the Churches But because Laymen are ignorant of what was practised by Antiquity and have been taught that Anti-christ began to work in the Apostles days and therefore have but little Reverence for Arguments of this Nature I shall endeavour to convince them of the lawfulness of holding Communion with us in these Ordinances by the Example of our Blessed Lord and Saviour who in like cases did yield Obedience and Submit to the Prescriptions of the Rulers of the Jewish Church And 2ly I shall endeavour to return a full and a perspicuous Answer to all the Arguments they urge from Scripture or from Reason to prove that 't is unlawful to submit unto the things required by the Church of England in order to Communion with her Beginning first with those Arguments which do suppose the things required by the Church of England as the Conditions of Lay Communion to be sinful in themselves or things forbidden by the Word of God And 2ly Proceeding to the Consideration of those Arguments which do allow the things imposed to be lawful in themselves but yet suppose it is unlawful for them to submit unto them 1. Because the Imposition of them is a Violation of their Christian Liberty 2ly Because by their Submission to them as they imagine they shall be indirectly guilty of the sin of the Imposers 3ly Because they have been abused to Idolatry and Superstition and therefore are become unlawful to be used And 4ly Because by using of them they may scandalize the Weak which God having forbidden no Precept of the Magistrate can oblige them to do § 2 And 1. The Practice and Example of our Lord is such a President as our Dissentors cannot reasonably except against nor can they justify their own Refusal to be Followers of Christ or to submit unto such Constitutions made by the Rulers of the Church of Christ as our Dear Lord submitted to being appointed by the Rulers of the Jewish Church or to hold Communion with such a Church as he became a Member of Now 1. Our Blessed Saviour was a Member of the Jewish National Church and of the Synagogue at Nazareth the Confirmation of this Assertion I shall deliver in the Words of Doctor Leightfoot who speaks thus Harm part 3. p. 124. What did Christ all the while he liv'd at Nazareth a private Man Did he never go to the Synagogue upon Sabbath and Holy Days and Synagogue-days Whilst others went to the Congregation and to the publick Service did he stay at home did he not appear before the Lord at the appointed Seasons in the place which he had chosen We are assured he did so for his Parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover and when he was twelve years old they went up to Jerusalem after the Custom of the Feast and the Child went with them 2. Luke 41 42 43. That he went up unto the Feast of Tabernacles we are informed Joh. 7 10. And being circumcised he became a Debtor to do the whole Law Gal. 5 3. being made under the Law Gal. 4.4 he was obliged to the Performance of those things which were enjoyned by it Now the great Business of these Feasts was to offer Sacrifice to rejoyce in the Assembly of Gods People to put up Prayers and Praises for all the Blessings they did then commemorate at these times all Israel met together Lam. 2 22. they heard the Reading of the Law Deut. 31 9 10. and they sang Praises to God Isai 30 29. Ye shall have a Song as in the Night when a Holy Solemnity is kept If then our Saviour did observe these Feasts if he did celebrate the Passover then certainly he did communicate with the Jewish Church for these Appearances were Ordinances and Symbols also of Communion § 3 2ly That Christ himself neglected not the times of publick Prayer that he declared it not unlawful nor did prohibit his Disciples to attend upon them is evident from this that he still owned the Temple as his Fathers House Joh. 2 16. the House of Prayer that his Disciples after his Resurrection continued daily in the Temple and went up to it at the hours of Prayer Act. 3 1. And they esteemed it a very commendable Action of the Widow Anna to serve God there continually with Prayer and Fasting Luke 2.37 Whence we may certainly conclude that Christ himself did not refuse nor did advise his own Disciples to refuse Communion with the Jewish Church in common Prayer but did approve Communion with them in that publick Service Now since the Jews themselves observed no time for Prayer no number of Prayers seeing no dayly Forms of Prayer were appointed by the Law of Moses Therefore saith Dr. Leightfoot Harm part 3. p. 217. the Sanhedrin in several Generations made Canons and Constitutions to decide and determin upon all these particulars as their own Reason and Emergences did lead them and give occasion as in one Generation they prescribed such and such times for Morning and Evening Prayer in process of time they found these times allotted to be too strait therefore the Sanhedrin of another Generation did give Enlargement as they thought good and so concerning the number of Prayers to be said dayly one Sanhedrin appointed so many but time and experience found afterwards that these did not answer such and such occasions as it seems was not observed when they were first appointed therefore the Sanhedrin of another Generation thought good to add more and more still as occasions unobserved before did emerge and so the number of their dayly Prayers grew at last to be eighteen To all which Additions to the Law of Moses our Lord and his Disciples did submit attending the publick Service of the Temple and the Synagogues where they were used And § 4 3ly That he was particularly a Member of the Synagogue at Nazareth is proved from that Passage of St. Luke Luke 4 16. who tells us that he came to Nazareth where he had been brought up and as his Custom was he went into their Synagogue on the Sabbath-day and stood up for to read for Illustration of which place observe that there were Seven Readers appointed in their Synagogues who Leightf Harm part 3 p. 125. when the Angel of the Church or Minister of the Congregation call'd them out did read Now that our Saviour was a Member of this Congregation may be argued thus ibid. p. 124. You find not in the whole Gospel tho Christ preached in
every Synagogue where he came that he read in any of them but in this and altho strangers were permitted sometimes to preach in Synagogues yet none did publickly read there but he that was a Member of it we find not any Instance to the contrary in all the Jewish Records saith the Learned Leightfoot who was a diligent Peruser of them Moreover the next Verse tells us that there was delivered to him the Book of Esaias as was the manner of the Master of the Synagogue to do unto the Reader which is a farther Argument to shew he was a Member of the Synagogue Ibid. p. 28. for had Christ gone about to read beside or contrary to the common Custom of the place it cannot reasonably be conceived that the Minister of the Congregation would so far have complyed with him to give him the Book that he might read irregularly or besides the Custom and lastly had Christ intended only to rehearse the Passage of Esaiah to be the Ground of his Discourse there was no need of giving to him any Book but only because he was the Reader of the second Lesson that Day in the forementioned Congregation And § 5 4ly Seeing Christ entred into the Temple both as a private Man Joh. 18 20. and as a Publick Minister since he was dayly teaching in the Temple as he himself informs us it must hence follow that he observed the Customs which by the Jewish Canons were prescribed and in obedience to those Prescriptions were observed by all who did resort unto the Temple Now as the Rulers of our Church by vertue of that Precept of doing all things decently and in order do impose their Ceremonies as thinking they conduce to the more decent and orderly performance of Gods Service so did the Rulers of the Jewish Church by virtue of that Precept Thou shalt reverence my Sanctuary make diverse Canons and Constitutions which they supposed to conduce unto the greater Reverence of God or of that Temple where he dwelt as v. g. That no man should go into the Temple with a Staff Vide Leightf Temp. Serv. p. 115. it being thought unfit that Instruments of striking should be brought into the place of Peace on which account saith Doctor Leightfoot our Saviour drove not out the Merchandizers and Money-changers with a Staff Joh. 2 15. but with a Scourge of small Cords 2. p. 116. That none should come into the Temple with his Shoes on that being Holy Ground and putting off the Shoes being with them a sign of Reverence like to our putting off the Hat 3ly ibid. That none who came to worship there should use a Scrip or bag purse or come with Money tyed up in a purse or come into the Temple till they had wiped the dust off from their Feet to teach them to shake off all Worldly Thoughts and all Incumbrances when they came to worship 4ly p. 118. 119. That none must spit in the Temple nor use an irreverent Gesture there but go gravely to the place where they were to stand and there continue not sitting leaning lying but standing only because that was a Praying Posture Now had not Christ submitted to these Customs we cannot rationally think he would have found so free an entrance into the Temple as he did and they would have been ready to retort upon him when he censured their Irreverence toward this House of Prayer that he also by his neglect of these Particulars was guilty of as great Irreverence had he not put off his Shee s as even Kings were wont to do when they came thither for to Worship they would have made this an exception against him that he refused to do what even Kings and Priests and Prophets did for that this very Ceremony was used in our Saviours time we learn from that of the Poet Exercent ubi festa mero pede Sabbatha Reges and from that appellation given to their Sacred Service that they were Nudipedalia Sacra or Barefooted Solemnities And it deserves to be observed that Christ not only did not charge the Rulers of the Jewish Church with Superstition in these Matters but he himself in Reverence to that Place of Worship would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the Temple Mark 11.16 § 6 5ly Seeing Christ was a Reader in their Synagogue and oftentimes a Preacher too it may deserve to be considered that he did readily comply with the Rules prescribed by the Sanhedrin or those who sate in Moses Chair to be observed by those who should perform the foresaid Offices Leightf Harm part 3. p. 125. as v. g. the Reader by their Canons is bound to stand in Honour of the Law Accordingly the Scripture doth expresly say that as his Custom was Luke 4 16. Christ went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath-day and stood up for to read ibid. p. 138. It also was the Custom of the Teacher to sit down when he instructed others and sutably the Scripture saith that our Saviour closed the Book and sate down v. 20. Yea throughout all the Gospel we never find that he taught the people standing but on the contrary that he continually used the sitting posture as v. g. in his Sermon on the Mount seeing the multitude he went up into a Mountain and when he was set Matt. 5 1.2 he opened his Mouth and taught them when he taught them out of a Ship Matt. 13 2. he sate and spake to them in Parables saith Matthew he sate in the Sea and taught them saith St. Mark Mark 4 1. he sate down and taught the people out of the Ship saith Luke Luk. 5 1. Joh. 8 2. when all the People came unto him in the Temple he sate down and taught them this was his constant Custom in that place as he takes care to let us know saying I sate dayly with you teaching in the Temple Matt. 26 55. so far was Christ from scrupling the observation of this Custom and Institution of the Rulers of the Jewish Church § 7 6ly Our Lord thrice celebrated the Paschal Feast with his Disciples besides his constant Celebration of it with his Parents whilst he continued with them and in this Celebration of it it may deserve to be considered 1. That our Lord did not observe the Passover in all its Circumstances according to the Primitive Institution of the Law of Moses For 1. Exod. 12 3.6 Whereas the Institution expresly doth require that every man should take up the Paschal-Lamb on the 10th day and keep it up till the 14th day of the same month the Jewish Doctors taught that this was not required of the future Generations after Leightf Temp. Serv. p. 127. nor was it done but at the Passover in Aegypt only at least it was not done by the Masters of Families but by the Priests in our Saviours time who provided Lambs for the people taking them up in the Market
of any excellency in or Attribute of God but partly for distinction partly for decency and uniformity and partly for their Antiquity and lastly as being apt to put us in mind of our duty they cannot be supposed by commanding of them to these ends to make them parts of Worship 5ly External and Bodily Worship is either Substantial or Circumstantial and Ceremonial the Substantial parts of Gods outward Worship are vocal Prayer Praises hearing of the Word not as the word of Man but of God receiving of the Sacraments as they import an entering into Covenant with God and an Eucharistical Oblation of our Souls and Bodies to him Those Bodily Acts which be performed by us in pursuance of these substantial parts of Worship and whereby we do signifie either our Reverence of that God in whose presence we are or with whom we have to do as standing uncovering the head kneeling at Prayer bowing of our Body at our entrance into the place of Gods Worship prostration lifting up our Hands or Eyes to Heaven or whereby we do make profession of our Faith in God as standing up at the Creed to profession of our Faith in a Crucified Saviour on which account the Ancients used the sign of the Cross or lastly whereby we enter into Covenant with God according to his institution as by receiving of the Sacramental signs All these are Ceremonial or Circumstantial parts of Worship 6ly These Ceremonial parts of Worship are in the general commanded by God and they are natural signs of Reverence required by the second Commandment for that forbidding all outward Religious Worship to be given to that which is not God and that because it is that Worship which is due to God the affirmative part of that precept must be supposed to be this Thou shalt give unto me that outward Worship when therefore our Church Commands her subjects to Kneel at their receiving of the Sacrament with Prayer and doth exhort but not Command them to Worship God when they do enter into the place of Worship or bow unto the blessed Jesus who is God blessed for evermore when they are by his Name put in Remembrance of that great Salvation which he hath wrought for us she only doth appoint that to be done at such a time which God hath in the general Commanded to be done and so doth institute no uncommanded part of Worship 7ly When any thing is by God Commanded to be done in his own Worship which doth not primarily directly and immediately tend to express or signifie our sense or apprehension of his excellency or his Attributes the doing of it in its own Nature is no part of Worship but only the doing of it in Obedience to the Command of God for all obedience is an acknowledgment of Gods Sovereign Power and the subjection which we owe unto it Thus v. g. to receive the person that is to be Baptized to give the Bread and Wine to the Communicants are no parts of outward Worship because they are not directly and immediately designed to express any excellence of God but only done in order to the Baptising of the person to be received into the Church or the convenience of the Communicants receiving Sitting at the receiving of the Sacrament can be no part of Worship in those Churches which retain the gesture because it is retained only as a most fitting Table gesture and all those things which God enjoyned to be done in his own Temple the use of the Snuffers and the Tongs the cleansing of the Candlesticks the lighting up of the Candles the bringing in of the Wood for the Burnt offerings with infinite things of a like Nature could be no parts of Worship otherwise than as they were performed directly in obedience to a Divine Command Now hence 't is easie to return an Answer to the forementioned objections For 1st Hence it appears that the proper use of those Ceremonies of the Church of England which are not Natural or Instituted parts of Worship is not the Honouring of God by the acknowledgment of any of his excellencies which is sufficient refutation of the first Argument 2ly Hence it appears that they are not meer and immediate Acts of Religion or formally elicited from Religion as the second Argument supposes 3ly Hence it is evident that all the means that God hath appointed to teach Obedience are not Acts of Divine Worship as Preaching Reading of the Word pious Discourse good Advice and good Example which is sufficient Answer to the third Argument which also falsly doth suggest that our Ceremonies are devised to that end 4ly Hence it appears that it is no part of Gods Worship to teach his Worship teaching being an Action directed not immediately to God but Men nor are our Ceremonies devised to be means of Spiritual instruction by their Mystical signification nor are such signs necessarily essential parts of Worship unless afflictions which are signs of Gods displeasure designed to be means of Spiritual instruction be also parts of Divine Worship as the fourth Argument supposeth 5ly Hence it is manifest that the teaching and reading of the Scriptures for edification of the Church is no part of Gods Worship for the reason mentioned before on which false supposition doth the fifth Argument proceed 6ly Nor are all Actions whereby Spiritual duties are taught in Gods Solemn Worship Acts whereby God is Worshipped as is suggested in the sixth Argument 7ly Nor was the use of Jewish Ceremonies in the Solemn Worship of God any part of his true and immediate Worship unless they were such Jewish Ceremonies as did express or signifie some Divine Excellency or the acknowledgment thereof in those that used them as the seventh Argument suggest but doth not prove 8ly Nor are our uncommanded Ceremonies performed directly to God as is supposed Argument the eighth 9ly Nor are all special things done in the Service of God parts of his Worship as is asserted Argument the ninth 10ly Nor must all special Actions done in the Service of God bring special Honour to him viz. by the signification of any of his excellencies not the snuffing of the Candles not the bringing of the Wood to the Temple as the tenth Argument supposeth such Actions are indeed performed in order to those things which do bring Honour to God even as submission to the Ceremonies prescribed by the Church is done in order to the free Preaching of the Word and to the demonstration of our Obedience to Superiors and to the preservation of the Churches Peace by which things God is highly Honoured 11ly All Civil Ceremonies or all the Circumstances of them are not parts of Civil Worship not the taking of the Cup by the Cup-bearer but the Kneeling with it not the filling out of the Wine but the tendring it in that humble posture In a word only those Ceremonies whereby we do express our sense of some excellency in our Civil Superiors or which by Nature or by Custom signifie some excellency in
the person to whom they are performed are parts of Civil Worship And so also is the case with reference to Religious Worship Nor are our Ceremonies Religious but only Ceremonies used in Religion 12ly Nor would the Command of God to use a Surplice or sign with the Cross to signifie to the Congregation the Reception of the Baptized Person into the Society of Christians make these Ceremonies parts of Divine Worship any otherwise than the doing of them would be an Act of Obedience to Gods Command and therefore the doing of them without that Command can be no Worship and therefore no false Worship Nor is all that God tieth in a particular manner to his Worship any part thereof Obj. 4 To bring in any Ceremonies of Ordained and Mystical signification appropriated to the Worship of God without any License from Christ himself is to Trespass against his Kingly Office for he is the only Law-giver to his Church and hath committed to her no Authority of appointing new things but a Ministry to observe and do such things as Christ hath appointed with order and decency unto Edification It also is a derogation from the fulness of Christs Prophetick Office For Christ is the only Teacher of his Church and the Appointer of all means whereby we should be taught and admonished of any holy Duty and whatsoever he hath thought good to teach his Church and the means whereby he hath perfectly set down in Holy Scripture so that to acknowledg any other means of teaching and admonishing us of our Duty than such as he hath appointed is to receive another teacher into the Church besides him and to confess some imperfection in the means he hath ordained to teach us by This I would learn saith Ames how we can acknowledg and receive any means of Religious teaching with Faith except it appear to be appointed by an Authentick Teacher and Law-giver and how our Prelates in appointing means of Spiritual teaching which Christ appointed not can be accounted therein Ministerial Teachers under him as their and our only Authentick Teacher As also if Christ be our Authentick Teacher in all good that we learn about Religion who taught our Prelates so good manners as to put Fescues of their own making into his hand and so appoint him after what manner and by what means he shall Teach us To this objection I Answer Answ 1 That this Argument is grounded upon this false supposition that the Rulers of our Church have instituted any Ceremonies to teach Spiritual Duties by their Mystical significations or to be Authentick means of Spiritual Teaching whereas I know no Ceremonies appointed to be used to that end so that both the use of the Ceremony and the end are matter of the Churches Precept and it were folly for her to make such Constitutions for since the Church cannot discern whether I have learnt that Spiritual Duty by using of her Ceremonies or not She cannot punish the Offenders against such an Ordinance and so must vainly make it She hath indeed appointed such Ceremonies as she conceiveth apt to stir up the dull mind of Man to the remembrance of his Duty Preface to the C. prayer of Cer. c. by some notable and special signification and therefore hath enjoyned them because she so conceiveth of them but she hath no where said that she enjoyns them to Teach Spiritual Duties or assigned any determinate signification of them v. g. she hath enjoyned her Ministers to wear a Surplice when they Officiate but hath not said that she enjoyns it to Teach them Innocence or Purity or any other Spiritual Duty Rubr. after the Communion She enjoyns her People to Kneel at the Sacrament and tells us that we should signifie thereby our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ but then she doth not say that she designs thereby to Teach us Humility and Gratitude for those benefits but only calls upon us to express that humility and gratitude which she supposeth we have learnt already In a Word these Ceremonies are not by her appointed to signifie at all much less to signifie what being used without her institution they would not signifie but they are appointed to be used as being apt when used to mind us of or bring into our minds our Duty or as fit to excite within us Pious meditations and reflections Answ 2 2ly I answer that if it be no derogation from Christs Kingly or Prophetick Office to stir up our minds to the performance of our duty by things apt to stir them up unto it or to express and signify our duty by things apt to express and signify it then can it be no encroachment on those Offices to impose or require such things as have an aptness thus to signify and mind us of our duties for in it self it cannot be unlawful to require what may be lawfully performed tho it be not required Now if it be a derogation from Christs Prophetick or his Kingly Office to use such things as are apt to put us in mind of our duty it must be unlawful to toll a bell to put us in mind of going to Prayers to keep by us a skull or skeleton to mind us of our Mortality or a pare of Leathern Breeches as Dr. Prideaux did to mind us of our former low Condition to have our vaults or burying places ready fitted and prepared as the Eastern Nations had and some great persons have because these things are apt to mind us of our latter ends or to set apart a closet in our Chambers for private devotions that so our coming thither may mind us of our duty Moreover then the ingenious Meditations of pious Mr. Boyle and Quarles his Emblems and all the History of the five Books of Moses graven in Stone in the Chapter House of Sarum and all things of like Nature which are apt to bring to our Remembrance good things and are not by our Lord in Scripture appointed to be used to these ends must be all Sacrilegious usurpations upon Christs Kingly and Prophetick Office Again then must that pack of Cards which Contains the whole History of the Popish Plot and our deliverance from it be guilty of this Crime because they were designed to stir up our minds to an abhorrence of their wickedness and a Thanksgiving to the Author of our Deliverance and we with equal reason may ask that profound Question of Dr. Ames who taught the Author of them such good manners as to put Fescues of his own making into our hands to mind us of these things Lastly Upon the same account it must be a derogation from Christs Prophetick and his Kingly Office to require men to come gravely into the House of God or be uncovered there or to kneel at their devotions because these things are apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the Remembrance of the Majesty and Greatness of that God with whom he hath to do By these and
many other Instances of a like nature it appears that tho it may be doubted whether our Ceremonies be indeed apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the Remembrance of his duty to God yet cannot it be rationally doubted but what is apt to do so may be both practised and imposed without any derogation from the Kingly or Prophetick Office of our Lord. Answ 3 3ly Hath Christ set down in Scripture all things that may any way conduce to excite good affections in us or give occasion to any pious Meditations or hath he not if he hath not then is not the assertion true on which the Argument is grounded viz. That Christ in Scripture hath set down all things by which we lawfully may be admonished of our duty If he hath then 't is not possible that any man should have a good affection or pious meditation stir'd up within him by any other means or object then such as is expresly contained in the Word of God Than which assertion nothing can be be more false Who knows not that memorable Story of the Cook who from consideration of the heat of his own Fire was moved to reflect on the excessive torments of Hell-Fire and thereby to abstain from that iniquity which would expose him to them Should a Dissenter in his discourse with one of this calling or in his writings advise him to make this reflection would he usurp upon Christs Regal or Prophetick Office Answ 4 4ly Tho this Objection speaks only of Mystical significant Ceremonies yet doth it with equal strength conclude against all Ceremonies and against the Appointment of time and place for publick worship for if this be a good Argument Christ is the only Lawgiver to his Church and therefore the Rulers of the Church may make no Laws concerning Ceremonies of Mystical Signification why is not this as good Christ is the only Lawgiver to his Church and therefore they may make no Laws touching the time and place of publick worship And if Christ hath committed to his Church no Authority of appointing new things but only a Ministry to observe and do such things which Christ hath appointed then either Christ hath appointed time and place or she hath no Authority to appoint them To this Dr. Ames answers that time and place are no new things But I hope to appoint new time and place is to appoint new things and to make Laws determining a time and place not determined before is to make a new Law about them Again if this Argument be good Christ is the only Lawgiver to his Church and therefore the Rulers of the Church may make no Laws concerning Ceremonies c. why is not this as good Christ is the only Lawgiver to his Church and therefore the Civil Magistrate may make no Laws concerning the Payment of Tythes or allowance of maintenance to Ministers or of making charitable Provisions for the Poor or touching any other Christian duty But must leave every man to his Freedom in these matters as Christ did Answ 5 5ly 1 Cor. 14.40 10 31 32. Christ having by his Apostles given Commandments which only primarily concern the Rulers of the Church viz. That all things in the Church be done decently and orderly to the Glory of God Rom. 14.19 and so as to give none Offence that Christians should follow after the things which make for Peace and whereby they may edify one the other I say this being so all the Injunctions made by the Rulers of the Church pursuant to the ends of Decency and Order the Glory of God the avoiding Scandal the preservation of Peace Unity Edification and for prevention of the Contrary are done by virtual Commission from this one Law-giver and therefore can be no Entrenchment on his Legislative Power And if Superiours should mistake in Judging that such things did really conduce unto the decency and orderly performance of Gods Service or to the other ends forementioned when indeed they do not so yet would not their imposing of them for these ends be any usurpation upon Christs Legislative Power any more than a Law made by Civil Rulers which proveth inexpedient or burthensome to the people tho by the Makers of it it was intended for their good usurps upon the Legislative Power of the God of Heaven For as it is judiciously said by Mr. Disp 5. Chap. 2. §. 29. Baxter if just Authority shall injuriously he should have said mistakingly determine of such things it may be the Subjects duty to obey because these are not matters alien to their Power and without their line but only this is an imprudent overdoing in a work that belongeth to them When St. James saith that there is one Lawgiver he most plainly speaks of such a Law-giver who is able to save and to destroy or pass the Sentence of Absolution and Condemnation upon others whence he infers that they who take upon them to censure and condemn their Brethren usurp his Prerogative but he speaks not about the Laws of Decency and Order and therefore cannot be supposed to condemn them And whereas Mr. Answ to the Commissioners p. 65. Baxter doth plausibly object against the Imposition of our Ceremonies that they are equally useful to the Church Universal in all Ages as to any Particular Church or Age and therefore should be the Matter of an Universal Law if of any and so should be the Work of the Universal Law-giver if of any I answer This if granted will only prove that there is no such positive decency Expedience or Edification in these Ceremonies as is conceived by our Rulers that should render them fit to be imposed but doth not prove that they usurp upon Christs Legislative Power by imposing of them to these ends But 2ly This way of Arguing will necessarily condemn the Church of Christ throughout all Ages she having always used and by her Canons and Constitutions imposed such Ceremonies as were equally useful in all Ages and all Churches as in any as v.g. standing upon the Lords-day at Prayer receiving of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper fasting and all the Ceremonies anciently annexed to baptism to omit many others of like Nature before mentioned Now saith he in another place I dare not think or assert that for truth which will condemn all the Christian Churches in the World throughout most Ages of it Disp 5. Chap. 2. from §. 7. to the 24. 3ly The same Judicious Person gives us many instances of matters relating to the Service of God which Christ hath not determined by Law as v. g. What utensils to employ about the Publick Worship of God whether we shall receive the Lords Supper at a Table of Wood or Stone whether we shall sing in Rythm or Metre or in Prose what Order shall be observed in Reading of the Scripture or how much of it shall be read at a time what Method we shall use in Preaching what Words in Prayer or what Gesture with
already in many instances of things no where determined by the Law of Moses and yet enjoyned by them 't is also contrary to the Apostles Practice who forbad the using of things strangled and blood tho they not only were things in themselves indifferent but things required by that Ceremonial Law from which our Lord had freed his Servants and therefore more might have been pleaded against submitting unto that Decree than to the Constitutions of the Church of England concerning other things indifferent Lastly St. Paul requires that all things which relate unto Gods Publick Worship of which he there discourseth should be done decently and orderly but how shall Rulers be able to order matters so if it be an Infringement of our Christian Liberty to have any thing imposed upon us by our Governours for decency and orders sake Particular Rules being not given us in Scripture about this matter which to be sure would have been done were they not left to the determination of the Rulers of the Church Wherefore to give a brief but a sufficient Answer to the Objections mentioned § 4 1. From what hath been discoursed it is evident that Christian Liberty cannot be violated by these Impositions because the Conscience is obliged by them that is 't is bound to yield obedience to them when they are imposed for if this maketh the Commands of our Superiors to violate our Christian Liberty Then 1. All the Commands of Masters Parents and Superiors respecting things indifferent civil or sacred must be repugnant to that Liberty because we are if Servants Children or Subjects obliged to obey them in all lawful matters even for Conscience sake 2ly Then our own vows and resolutions concerning any thing indifferent must violate our Christian Liberty because we are obliged in Conscience to perform them 3ly Then can we not abstain from any thing indifferent in case of Scandal as St. Paul Commands us without infringing of our Christian Liberty because our Conscience is then bound for fear of Scandal to abstain from what is in it self indifferent 2ly It also is exceeding evident that Christian Liberty cannot be violated by requiring Persons to do that of which their Conscience being erroneous doubts or which it doth Condemn as is insinuated in the fourth Objection For were this so Then 1. our Laws must violate true Christian Liberty when they command the Quaker to pay Tythes for he not only doubts the lawfulness thereof but peremptorily pronounceth it unlawful so to do Then 2ly our Laws Commanding all Papists to come to Church to obey the King in opposition to the Pope to take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy must violate his Christian Liberty because he doubts the lawfulness of yielding obedience to them 3ly By the same Rule my Christian Liberty must be infring'd much more when Magistrates Command me to abstain from what my Conscience tells me I should do now seeing an Erroneous Conscience may urge Men to the greatest wickedness since it may make them verily believe they ought to do many things contrary to the Name of Jesus Acts 26.9 and that by killing his Disciples they would do God Service Joh. 16.2 no Laws according to this Doctrine can be laid on Men whose Conscience is Erroneous to bind them not to do the worst of Evils 3ly In Answer to that passage of St. Paul we are bought with a Price 1 Cor. 7.23 and therefore must not be the Servants of Men. I say 1. That it is only an advice unto those Christians who being Slaves to Heathens had once bought their Liberty or by the bounty of their Friends had been redeemed from Slavery not to sell themselves again or to return to the condition of their former Servitude but to continue in that Liberty it therefore should be thus Translated are ye bought with a Price Be not ye the Servants of Men To make this clear consider that the Apostle is there instructing Christians how to behave themselves in their particular stations and callings and not upon pretence of Christianity to think themselves obliged to alter their condition or to neglect those Duties their proper station did require thus from v. 12th to the 16th he requires the believing â—usband not to desert the unbelieving Wife and the believing Wife not to part from her unbelieving Husband but to abide in that condition in which the Lord had called them In the 18th and 19th verses he advises the Circumcised Christian not to desire to be Uncircumcised vice versa but to abide as they were from v. 21. to v. 24. he gives advice to those who were believing Servants thus Art thou called being a Servant care not for it think it not a disparagement to Christianity that thou art still a Bondman but if thou maist be made Free prefer Freedom before Bondage Are you bought with a Price as by the Charity of Christians many believers then were be not then the Servants of Men return not any more to the condition of your former Slavery This without doubt is the true import of the words But 2ly according to the ordinary reading and interpretation of them viz. ye are bought with a Price even with the Blood of Christ be ye not the Servants of Men it giveth no Commission to the Christian to refuse obedience to his Superiors in lawful matters for to be the Servants of Men which is the thing forbidden to Christs Servants is only not to yield obedience to Men in any thing repugnant to that Service which they owe to Christ and therefore it is so far from being prejudicial to that obedience we owe unto Superiors for the Lords sake that for this very reason we are required to obey them in all lawful things because 't is part of that obedience which Christ requires from us as his Servants and which we are required to do for the Lords sake So Col. 3.20 Children obey your Parents in all things for this is well pleasing to the Lord and v. â—â— Servants obey your Masters in all things and whatsoever you do do it heartily as to the Lord for in serving them you serve the Lord Christ it being his ordinance that you obey in yielding to them in all lawful things And again 1 Pet. 2.13 16. Submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lords sake as the servants of God So that you see our being bought with a Price being that which maketh us Christs servants even when we are free from Slavery to Men it must engage us the more strictly to Obedience to Masters Parents and Superiors this being that we owe unto them in all lawful matters for the Lords sake and which we are obliged to perform as the servants of Christ. Lastly In Answer to that enquiry of St. Paul If you be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the World Coloss 2.20 wherefore as living in the World are ye subject to Ordinances Touch not taste not handle not c. I say 1. That the
things but only whether what they do Command tho it should exceed the power given them by God may without sin be done and if they find it may they cannot without sin refuse obedience no not in case of accidental Scandal Obj. 4 If determination of Superiors were sufficient to take away the sin of Scandal then they do very ill that they do not so far as is possble determin all things indifferent that so no danger may be left of giving of offence by the use of them Then the Church of Rome is to be praised in that she hath determined so many indifferents then Paul with the other Apostles might have spared a great deal of Labour in admonishing the Churches how they should avoid offences about some indifferent things a far shorter way had been either to determin the matter fully or else to have given order that the Churches should among themselves determin it at home Answ 1. We do not say that the determination of Superiors will always take away the sin of Scandal but that it certainly will do it when upon that determination an equal Scandal follows on the other hand 2ly It will not follow hence that they do ill in not determining all things indifferent that so no danger may be left of giving of offence by the use of them Because the remedy may be much worse than the Disease as being 1. To bring a Yoke of bondage on the necks of Christians which they could hardly bear for if the Council at Jerusalem thought fit to stile their Imposition of a few necessary things a Burthen how well might the determination of all things indifferent deserve that appellation And 2ly As tending to distract Mens devotions by their attendance to such a multitude of Ceremonies as must be then imposed and as are actually imposed by the Church of Rome 3ly As tending to Minister occasion to endless divisions in the Church and scruples in the minds of her weak Members for if three Ceremonies determined by the Church are so much scrupled if by occasion of their Imposition such Divisions and Separations have so long continued as we by sad experience see what might be then expected should all indifferent circumstances be determined by her and for these reasons it by no means will follow that the Church of Rome is to be praised in that she hath determined so many matters of this Nature Nor 3ly Will it follow that the Apostles might have spared a great deal of Labour in admonishing the Churches how they should avoid offence about some things indifferent even by determining them fully or by giving order that the Churches should among themselves determin them for this which he here stiles a shorter way might have been far more dangerous by Ministring to great contentions in the Church and causing the weak Jews to flie off from the profession of the Gospel or from Communion with their fellow Christians and so that course would not have hindred the perishing of the weak Brother but rather would have tended to the promotion of his ruin Obj. 5 But say that the Arch-Bishop of Corinth for now I suppose such a one had called his Congregation and with consent of his Clergy had determined that Men might and for testifying of Liberty should at a certain time eat of such and such meats which Men formerly doubted of would not yet the Apostle have given the same direction he did Would not good Christians still have had care of their Brothers Consciences Can the determination of a Superior be a sufficient Plea at the Bar of Gods Judgment seat for a Man that by virtue or force thereof alone hath done any action that his Conscience telleth him will Scandalize his Brother I Answer 1. That no Mans Conscience can tell him certainly that he will but only that he may Scandalize his Brother by conforming to the Commands of his Superiors and it may also tell him that he is in danger to Scandalize them more by not conforming and in this Case the Plea holds good the Scandal being equal on both sides I durst not disobey Superiors against a plain Command and to the manifest dividing and disturbing of the Church to avoid the Scandal of a weak Brother arising not from my action but his ignorance And 2ly Hence I return an Answer to the Questions contained in the Objection to the first viz. Would not St. Paul in case of the determination of the Arch-Bishop of Corinth that all Meats should indifferently be eaten have given the same direction as he did Answ Had he so done there would have been no obligation on the Corinthians to obey their Arch-Bishop in opposition to St. Paul because the power Apostolical was much Superior to that of Bishops and Arch-Bishops they must have therefore in this case obeyed St. Paul by virtue of the general Command to obey Superiors but whether in this case St. Paul would have delivered the same direction is uncertain but this is certain and a sufficient Answer to the Question that St. Paul would have considered where the Scandal would have been greatest both with respect unto the number of Persons offended and the destructive Nature and consequences of the offence and would accordingly have given his directions and and so accordingly do we To the second Question Would not good Christians still had care of their Brothers Consciences Answer They would have shewed their care both of their Brothers Conscience and their own by giving him by their example no occasion to disobey those that Ruled over them in Lawful matters to the dividing and the disturbing of the Churches Peace To the third Question Can the determination of Superiors be a sufficient Plea at the Bar of Gods judgment seat for doing any action that his Conscience telleth him will Scandalize his Brother I Answer Why not if doing of his Duty will be a Plea sufficient But on the other hand can the pretence of Scandalizing a weak Brother be a sufficient Plea for disobedience to Gods Vice-Gerents in a Lawful matter and for dividing and disturbing of the Churches Peace and thereby ministring a greater Scandal both to Superiors and to all peaceable Conformists Obj. 6 I would fain know whether those Superiors do not give a great Scandal which take upon them to impose unnecessary Rites which they know many good Men will be Scandalized by Answ Good Mr. Doctor it concerns you more to know and practise your own Duty then to be censuring and curiously searching into the actions of Superiors for which not you but they must Answer if they do offend Obj. 7 It seems then in case the Magistrate Command it we may wound the weak Conscience of our Brother and destroy with our indifferences the work of God and him for whom Christ died Answ True we may do that which hath an accidental tendency to these unhappy ends As v. g. suppose the Nonconformists are grieved at our Preaching and submission to Superiors and our continuance
that account is never in the least insinuated this therefore Principles of love p 44. saith Mr. Baxter to his dissenting Brethren you may observe that no one Member is in these Scriptures or any other commanded to come out and separate from any one of all these Churches as if Communion with them in Worship were unlawful and therefore before you separate from any as judging Communion with them unlawful be sure that you bring greater reasons for it than any of these recited were And to confirm this Answer it deserves to be considered that we find in the New Testament express injunctions directed to the whole body of the Christian Churches requiring them to refuse Communion in their private conversations with such persons or to renounce familiarity with them not to company with them 1 Cor. 5.9 Not to eat with them v. 11. To mark them who cause divisions and scandals contrary to the Doctrine which they had received and avoid them Rom. 16.17 To withdraw from every Brother that walks disorderly Thess 2.3 6. To have no company with them that they may be ashamed v. 14. We also find the Angels or Officers of the Church oft blamed for this neglect by Christ and his Apostles as in the case of the Incestuous Person the case of Pergamos and Thyatira where they were suffered who taught the Doctrins of the Nicolaitans of Balaam and of Jezebel that is both spiritual and carnal fornication This I have against thee O Thyatira that thou permittest Jezebel Vid. Synops in locum quod eam non coerces censuris Ecclesiae that thou doest not execute the censures of the Church upon her this against thee O Pergamos that thou hast those who teach the Doctrine of Balaam whereas thou being the Angel of the Church shouldst have fought against them with the Spiritual Sword as did the Angel who resisted Balaam because his way Numb 22.22 23. Hebr. 12.15 was perverse before God We find them call'd upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to execute the Office of a Bishop by looking diligently that no such persons be among them and warned of the great danger that the Whole lump might be exposed to by such Soure Leaven We lasty find our Saviour praising the Angel of the Church of Ephesus that he could not bear them but never do we find our Lord or his Apostles calling the People to come out from them or to be separate but only in such cases as did oblige them to touch the unclean thing 2 Cor. 6.17 that is to joyn in their Idolatries or partake with them in their Sins From which Considerations Rev. 18.4 it follows as Estius well notes that the Governors of the Church which tolerate Such Persons in the Church offend and that the People who use familiar converse with them do likewise offend but it by no means follows that they who do perform the publick duties of Religion where they are present do offend and as the Reverend and Learned Dr. Unreas of Sep. p. 217. Stillingfleet well notes There be many Reasons to break off private familiarity which will not hold as to Publick Communion and which may render it the Christians duty to do the first and not the latter For our Communion in Publick is a thing which Chiefly Respects God and is a necessary duty of his own appointing the benefit whereof depends upon his promises and all the Communion we have with other men therein is only that of Christ and his Apostles with Judas at the Paschal Supper joyning together for the performance of a Common Religious duty But private familiarity is a thing which wholly respects the persons we converse with it is a thing of meer choice and of much danger it being hardly to be imagined without approbation at least if not imitation of their wickedness And to this the concurrent judgment of the Old Nonconformists who did not think this want of Discipline sufficient cause of separation from Communion with us for having laid this as a foundation that no man ought to separate from a true Church requiring nothing sinful of him Grav confut p. 18. in order to Communion with them they add that altho it were Granted that we wanted both the exercise of the Churches Censures and some of those Officers which Christ hath appointed to exercise them by yet might we be a true Church notwithstanding as there was a true Church in Judah all the days of Asa and Jehosaphat yet was not the Discipline reformed there till the latter end of Jehosaphats Reign The Church of Corinth was a true Church even when the Apostle blamed them for want of Discipline the Congregation of Samaria is called a Church before the Discipline was established there and even in Jerusalem there was a famous visible Church of Christ long before Sundry parts of the Discipline for want whereof they condemn us were established there yea it is evident that by the Apostles themselves divers Churches were Gathered some Good space of time before the Discipline was setled or exercised by all which it is manifest that howsoever those parts of the Discipline which we want be necessary to the beauty and well being and perservation of the Church yet are they not necessary to the being thereof but a true Church may be without them 2ly They add Ibid. p. 51.52 That it doth not belong to private persons to set up the Discipline of the Church against the will and consent of the Christian Magistrate and Governors of the Church yea they declare that in so doing they should highly offend they are bound saith Giffard P. 59 95 100 101 102. by the bands of Conscience and the fear of God from presuming to take upon them publick Authority And if so it is evident that they cannot chuse Pastors for themselves and set up other Churches and Church Governors to exercise the Churches Discipline because they do conceive it is neglected by the Christian Magistrate and other Governors of the Church Yea lastly let me ask our dissenting Brethren if on account of this supposed neglect of Discipline they think themselves obliged to desert Communion with the Church of England whether will they go The Church of Rome they know besides her other errors is more Guilty of this crime than we men may be any thing in their Communion provided that they be not Hereticks and still be owned as Genuine Members of their Church The rest of the Reformed Churches are as loose as we their Members Generally are as corrupt in manners as ours are the same may be affirmed of the Eastern Churches they therfore must acknowledge that they cannot lawfully maintain Communion with any other Church on this account and that there always was even since the reformation a necessity of separation from all Christian Churches in the world for this neglect of Discipline or that they notwithstanding this supposed neglect may hold Communion with the Church of England now have
tho Accidentally and by Performing their own duty occasion to the Sin of Eli's Sons What therefore I may do for the procuring the Spiritual Good of others from whom I am commanded to withdraw may be more certainly performed for the procuring of my own Spiritual Good by my participation of the Ordinances of Christ from Persons authorized by him and his Vicegerents to administer them what may be done in order to their welfare who are unworthy of Communion with us that may much more be done in order to the Churches Good for the promotion of her Peace and Unity and the prevention of those Schisms by which she is so much endangered and if those words I will have mercy and not sacrifice will warrant our Communion with wicked persons with whom we are forbid to eat when it may be a means of their conversion why then may it not warrant our Communion with them in Sacred things when this Communion is a means of our salvation and of the Churches Peace which is one of the chiefest ends of Discipline If Christians were not call'd to separate on the account of those impure Gnosticks who did feast among them and eat at the Lords Table with them why should they separate from the same Ordinances on the account of some profane Professors who are mix'd with our Assemblies And lastly If the People did transgress who came not up to Shilo to offer their accustomed oblations there tho they to whom they were to be presented and by whom they were to be offered were Sons of Belial and they alone did sanctifie and offer the Peace-offerings of which the People were afterwards to eat I fear they also will transgress who upon less pretences will not come unto our Shilo's the places of our publick Worship It may be doubted whether all those men whose presence with us in our Church Assemblies doth so much offend Dissenters Prop. 9. deserve immediately to be secluded from Communion with us seeing they seem not to have been both privately and publickly admonish'd by the Church for how can it be said they will not hear the Church when they have never been admonished by her to reform or threatned with her censures if they will not do it they therefore cannot be esteemed contumacious or such as will not hear the Church and so they are not presently to be excluded by Excommunication from Communion with her Mr. Baxter having cited Principles of love p. 87.88.89 Matt. 18.15 16. Tit. 3.10 Saith thus Note here that no sin will warrant you to cast out the sinner unless it be seconded with impenitency it is not simply as a Drunkard or a Fornicator that any one is to be rejected but as an Impenitent Drunkard or Fornicator Note 2ly That it is not all impenitency which will warrant their rejection but only impenitency after the Churches admonition Note 3ly That no private person may expect that any Offender be cast out either because his sin is known to him or because he is commonly famed to to be guilty till the thing be proved by sufficient witnesses Note 4ly That the admonition given him must be proved as well as the fault which he committed Yea lastly If all The town do know him to be guilty and witness prove that he hath been privately admonished he may not be rejected till he be heard speak for himself and till he refuse also the publick admonition This is Christs order whose wisdom mercy and authority are such as may well cause us to take his way as best Now were this doctrine true without exception it would 1. Answer the Objection by shewing that Dissenters do unreasonably separate for the Non-execution of the Churches Censures upon them who at the present are not the proper objects of them And 2. It would in a great measure cast the blame of this neglect of Discipline on the Complainants for if they know of any such why do they not first privately admonish them and if they cannot by so doing gain their Brother why do they not then tell it to the Church But if they do not know of any such nor ever told the Church of any such that she might know and knowing might admonish them and if they should refuse to Hear her might proceed to censure them why do they then complain But to confess the truth ingenuously this Doctrin contradicts the general practice of the Church of Christ whilst Discipline remained among them more especially the practice of the most Primitive and Purest Ages of the Church when all Notorious Offenders of what degree soever were without farther admonition immediately censured and separated from the faithful See Dr. Cave 's prim christian part 3. cap. 5. p. 367. till by long and strict penances of fasting and mortification by which they evidenced their sorrow for and their reformation of their crimes they were thought fit to be again admitted to the peace of God and of his Church This doctrine therefore must admit of some restriction to make it consonant to truth 1. Therefore if the crime be such as is consistent with Christianity and doth not prove the Author of it to be Carnal this admonition must precede the censures of the Church because in such a case 't is not so much the fact it self as the ensuing contumacy which deserves her censure 2ly If the crime committed be private and brings no infamy to the Church and the offender shew good signs of penitence the crime being not committed before many it seems not reasonable that it should be punished before many unless where such a publick censure may do good to many in which case that of the Apostle seemeth to take place them that sin rebuke before all that others also may fear 3ly 1 Tim. 5.20 If it be an act of injustice to some private person for which full satisfaction may be made and admonition may prevail upon him so to do which seems to be the case in which our Lord requires a threefold admonition adding that if our admonition do prevail our Brother is Gained and so the Church hath no occasion to proceed to censures Or 4ly If it be an offence of judgment and not of practice against judgment in which case the Apostles words are plain for a first and second admonition I say in all these cases this previous admonition seemeth reasonable But 2ly If the Crimes committed be of an heinous nature Tit. 3.10 and Christians cannot well be ignorant that they are so as in the cases of Apostasy Murther Incest Adultery c. Or if they be so publickly committed as to give scandal to the Church and the Crime be notorious or confessed then without farther admonition I suppose the Criminal should be excluded from the Communion of the Church till by repentance and mortification they have made satisfaction to the Church and have made reparation for the Scandal of their sin These Propositions do fully Answer this Objection even upon
therefore certain that God will give his Grace and Spiritual aid to all who do sincerely promise and engage to live according to their Baptismal Vow and this Sign being apt to signifie that aid and favor and used throughout so many Ages to that end I see not why the Bishop may not certifie the confirmed person of this truth by such a Sign And 2. It being only an indicatory Sign or Adumbration of this grace not an exhibitory Sign cannot be properly a Sacrament Having thus Answered the Objections against those Ceremonies which have been scrupled most and with most color and pretence of Reason by Dissenters it will be easy to Answer or to shew the vanity of their remaining scruples by attending to these following Propositions That the laudable Customs of the Catholick Church which are of present observation Prop. 1. Bishop Taylor Duct Dubit l. 3. c. 4. R. 15. §. 1. are fit to be observed by all Christians This we learn from St. Paul who reproves the Contentiousness of those who against the usages of Christians and of the Places where they lived would wear long hair with this We have no such Custom 1 Cor. 11.16.14 36. and pleads for order from the practice of all Churches of the Saints And also from the evidence of Reason for in such cases where there is no law the manners of Christians introduce a Law so far that we cannot recede from it without some probable cause i. e. we cannot do it without scandal and indeed it is an act of love to conform to the Customs of Christians with whom we do converse who either will think you blame their Customs or despise their persons if you comply not And that you look upon them as a company of ignorant persons who know not what they should do or as wicked persons who inconsiderately will do what they should not Besides it is a piece of Singularity to thwart and Cavil at and to refuse complyance with the Customs of the Churches where we are which have in them no apparent evil now Singularity is only laudable in matters that are excellent and pious never in matters of indifferency And therefore This is sufficient reason for the Custom of our Church in delivering the Sacramental Elements into the hand of the Communicant and Speaking to them severally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ap. 2. p. 97. E. For Justin Martyr declareth that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bishop having given thanks those who were called Deacons did distribute to every one that was present Bread and Wine mixt with Water and Tertullian informs us that they receiv'd the Eucharist non de aliorum manibus quà m presidentium De Cor. mil. c. 3. from the hands of no other persons than those who presided in the Church Moreover it was the Custom of the Priest to say to every on of them The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. August Resp ad Ores q. 49. Ambros de sacram l. 4. c. 5. And of the People severally to say Amen when they received it this was said every where saith Austin and so the Custom of distributing to all and of receiving severally by all must be the constant custom of the Church of Christ 2ly This is sufficient Reason for the retaining of God-Fathers and God-Mothers Compan part 3 p. 400. for in the Primitive Church the use of them was so early saith the Learned Dr. Comber that 't is not easie to fix the time of their beginning the most Ancient Fathers who speak of Baptism do mention them under the name of Offerers of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Justin Martir 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Susceptores as Donysius Areop of Sponsores as Tertullian of Fideijussores or Suretys as St. Austin 2ly p. 399. This Custom was derived from the Jews as also was that of Infant Baptism for it is certain that the Rector of the house of judgment was to take care to Baptize the Infants of Proselytes and accordingly was to be called their Father And there was one appointed to hold the Child in Circumcision called the Master of the Covenant and by the Modern Jews who still retain this custom the Surety And very learned men believe this custom to be as ancient among the Jews as the times of Isaiah it being highly probable that those Witnesses mentioned chap. 8.2 at the naming of his Son were of the same nature with those we call God-Fathers God-Mothers And 3ly Tho one of the Reasons which made them the more necessary in the first Ages of the Church viz. those persecutions which cut off the Parents and so left the poor Infants uncapable of Christian education without the help of Sureties hath long since ceased yet are they still continued for Good ends As 1. 'To convenant in behalf of those Infants who cannot enter into covenant by themselves 2ly For the Security of the Church that the Children may be brought to Confirmation and own their covenant hereafter whence they are called Sureties 3ly That every Christian may have a Monitor who was present and concerned in his Vow whence they are stiled Witnesses And 4ly Whereas some object that the use of Sureties is made a necessary condition in our Lyturgy of administring Baptism to Infants because it is said This Infant must also faithfully for his part promise by you that are his Sureties The contrary to this is evident because no Sureties are required at the administration of private Baptism where our Baptismal Office declareth the child to be lawfully and sufficiently Baptized and so those words can only intimate that this which is in it self a thing expedient must be practised according to the Order and Constitution of the Church And 5ly Whereas it farther is objected that by these Sponsors the Parents are excluded and the Child is not admitted to Baptism in the Parents right Answer To this it is judiciously Answered by the Excellent Dr. Still Vnrens of Sâ—pâ— p. 381. That the Church by requiring Sponsors doth not exclude any title to Baptism which the child hath by the right of his Parents for the Sponsors may be supposed to appear in a threefold Capacity 1. As representing the Parents in offering up the Child to Baptism and so whatever right the Parents have that is challenged when the Child is brought to be Baptized 2ly As Representing the Child in the Answers that are made in Baptism And 3ly In their own Capacity when they promise to take care of the Good Education of the Child in the Principles of the Christian faith 3ly Ibid p. 404. This is sufficient Reason for the Answering of the Sureties in Baptism For as it is judiciously observed by Dr. Comber ' the Baptismal covenant was always made by Question and Answer which is taken notice of by many of the Ancients and seems to have been the Method in the Apostles days because St. Peter calls Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
perform these outward acts of reverence to our Superiors on earth in token of the honor which we owe to them much more ought we to do so to the Majesty of Heaven Hence then it naturally follows Coroll that whatsoever is a proper act of outward Worship and fitly doth express our inward Reverence of God by any outward gesture of the body may very laudably be required by Superiors seeing by these injunctions they only do require us to do in this or that particular what is in general our duty And therefore 1. To require us to Kneel at Prayer and at the Absolution which concludes with Prayer and at the Commandments and Imposition of hands and at the Receiving of the Sacrament is only to require us to pay to God the Worship due unto him to use that posture in our Devotions which our Saviour used at Prayer Luk. 22.41 and which doth properly express our Reverence to him to whom we pray and which was saith Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 5. c. 5. the Common Custom of the Christian from whence their Prayers had the name of Ingeniculations 2. To require us to bow at the name of Jesus is only to require us to pay that Service in that instance to him to whom God hath declared that all knees shall bow Rom. 10.11 and to whom on account of his Divinity Worship is due by virtue of our obligation to Glorifie him with our Bodys which are his To require us to do this at the name of Jesus rather than at the name of Christ or Saviour when we design to recognize him as our only Saviour by that act of worship seems also reasonable seeing the name of Christ doth rather signifie his unction to his office than the blesings which accrue unto us by the execution of it The name of Saviour is also common to him with the Father whereas the Name of Jesus is appropriated to our Lord. 3ly To require us to uncover our Heads in the House of God and whilst we wait upon him in his presence is only to require us to pay that Reverence unto the Majesty of Heaven which we yield to his Vicegerents here on Earth 4. Since 't is a part of Christian duty by which our God is glorifyed to make publick Profession of our Faith and this is done as well by other signs as Vocal by the sign of the Cross as well as by the Tongue proclaiming our belief of Christ crucified by standing up at the Rehearsal of the Creed as well as by saying these words I believe the standing Gesture is very suitable at such a solemn declaration of the Articles of Christian Faith in token of our Cordial assent and Resolution to stand firm unto it And indeed this is so properly signified saith Mr. Lab. Eccles p. 459. Faulkner by the standing Gesture according to the general apprehensions of the World that both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek which words express the standing Gesture are used in Scripture to signifie an asserting with resolution Deut. 25.8 1 Chron. 34 32. 1 Cor. 16.13 2 Thess 2.15 And the like Idioms of Speech are in some other Languages as well as our own whence stare dictis in the Latin to stand to our words in our Dialect Lastly To give you hence some rational account why standing up at the Gospel is required rather than at the Epistle I must proceed by these degrees 1. That in the devouter times both of the Jewish and the Christian Church the People to manifest their Reverence unto the Word of God the Message sent from God unto them did hear it standing thus when Ezra opened the Book of the Law all the People stood up Nehem. 8.5 and the Children of Israel stood up in their places to read the Law of the Lord Neh. 9.3 2ly When the Gospel was read in the Assemblies of the Christian Church the People were required to stand up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When the Gospel is read let all the Presbyters and Deacons L. 2. C. 57. L. 7. C. 19. and all the People stand say the Constitutions of St. Clement And Sozomen speaks of it as a peculiar usage of the Bishop of Alexandria the like to which he had not seen or heard of that he stood not up at the Reading of the Gospel See to this purpose Philostorgius l. 3. Cap. 5. Chrysostom de Circo Isid Pelusiota l. 1. Ep. 136. Niceph. l. 9 18 12 34. If you have the curiosity to ask why at the Gospel rather than the Epistle I answer that this custom was used out of an especial respect to our Lord and Saviour whose words are ordinarily rehearsed in the Gospel to express I say an higher respect to Christ himself speaking there than to his Apostles who were sent by him on which account Ignatius saith the Gospel hath this excellency in it viz. the Presence of our Saviour Jesus Christ Epist ad Philadelph and his Suffering and Resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 9 it hath something more excellent in it than the Writings of the Prophets though they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all very good In Joh Tom. 1 P. 4. C. And Origen that the Epistles were not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of equal esteem among Christians with those Writings of which it was said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this saith the Lord. If you ask further Why then do we not stand up at the Second Lesson as well as at the Gospel in the Second Service I answer That out of tenderness unto the weakness and infirmity of many Christians v. Mr. Faulkner 's Lib. Eccles p. 146. 462. liberty was granted to them to hear the longer Lessons sitting provided they would shew the Reverence when a less portion of it was read at second Service § 12 Lastly Whereas some doubt the lawfulness of our observing the Festivals appointed by the Church of England I shall endeavour to give them satisfaction in the point in some few Propositions laid down by Mr. Divine appoint of the Lord's Day C. 13. Baxter in that case and then proceed to Answer the Objections which he and others make against them And 1. p. 148. Few saith He question but that whole days of Humiliation and of Thanksgiving may and must be kept upon great and extraordinary occasions of Judgments and of Mercies and that many Churches may agree in these and I know no just Reason why the Magistrate may not with Charity and Moderation to the weak impose them and command such an Agreement among his Subjects 2ly Few saith he doubt but the Commemoration of Great Mercies or Judgments may be made Anniversary and of long continuation p. 149. as the observation of the Fifth of November is made annual among us to preserve the Memorial of the deliverance from the Powder Plot the Second of September for the Anniversary humbling Remembrance of
Such also was undoubtedly the gift vouchsafed to Timothy such were prophecy teaching exhortation 1 Cor. 12.10 29.14.3 such also was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ministry for the Deacons were to be men full of the Holy Ghost and Wisdom Acts 6.3 and they most likely are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 helps mentioned among spiritual gifts 1 Cor 12.28 and if so all these places must be impertinently alledged to prove that ordinary gifts may not be stinted Answ 3 These precepts cannot rationally be supposed to enjoin the use of any of these gifts farther than may consist with order and edification the peace and union of the Church and with subjection to the Prophets and then they cannot so enjoyn their exercise as to disturb her order peace and union and to oppose our selves to the prescriptions of her Prophets especially considering that the Church doth not wholly lay restraint upon the use of this supposed gift no not in publick but doth permit us to exercise it in our Prayers before and after Sermon Object 4 4ly It is objected thus That God promised under the Gospel times to pour out upon his people the Spirit of grace and supplication Zech. 12.10 and such a Spirit being given as are all the gifts of God for the edification of the Church must not be hindred Answ 1 There is no certain evidence that God here speaketh any thing of Prayer for what we render supplication is by divers Interpreters the Chaldee Paraphrast the Septuagint the Syriack and Arabick Versions agreeably to the derivation of the word rendred mercies and compassions by others the spirit of lamentation Answ 2 There is no evidence that God here promiseth the gift of praying fluently by the immediate assistance of the Holy Spirit for the effect of what is promised here is not Spiritual Hymns or Prayers not that they shall fluently express themselves in prayer but that they shall look on him whom they have pierced and shall mourn so that men may with equal reason argue hence for extemporary sorrow and against such considerations as serve to work this sorrow in us as for extemporary prayer and against such considerations as may prepare us to put up our addresses duly to the God of Heaven Answ 3 There is no evidence that if the Spirit of prayer be promised here this promise doth respect our Age and men may argue with equal reason from the promise made by Joel Joel 2.28 that in the latter days God would pour out his spirit upon all flesh c. that we may now expect Prophetick Visions Dreams and Prophesyings as from this promise of the Prophet Zechary that we may now expect the miraculous assistance of Gods Spirit in prayer Object 5 It is said 1 Cor. 14 15. I will pray with the spirit § 2 now though there is no shadow of an Argument in these words to countenance extemporary prayer yet may it be useful for undeceiving some of our Dissenters to observe 1. That there was when this Epistle was endited a spiritual gift of prayer which Christians exercised in their Assemblies by the immediate assistance and operation of the Holy Spirit For the Apostle in the 12th Chapter of this Epistle propounds to treat touching spiritual gifts beginning of his treatise thus concerning spiritual gifts 1 Cor. 12.1 Brethren I would not have you ignorant and this discourse he carries on to the end of the 14th Chapter where in the 15th v. we read these words I will pray with the spirit I will pray with the understanding also to pray then with the spirit is to pray with this spiritual gift for of those Gifts the Apostle speaketh in the whole discourse and forasmuch as he applyeth this spiritual gift to prayer saying I will pray with the spirit 't is certain he affirms that there was then a spiritual gift in the Church enabling them to whom it was given to pray in words suggested by the holy spirit or to make and utter upon the sudden a new prayer suiting the condition of the then present Church of God 2ly It is extremely evident that praying with the spirit then was using of the gift of tongues in prayer as is apparent from these words if I pray with an unknown tongue my spirit prayeth v. 14. i. e. my spiritual gift is exercised And 2ly because the Idiot could not say Amen to him that prayed by the spirit because he understood not what he said v. 16. 3ly From these words of the Apostle I speak with tongues more than you all and yet had rather speak five words in the Church with my understanding that I might teach others than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue v. 18 19. Moreover that it was also praying what he understood not is evident 1. Because praying with the understanding is opposed to it 2. Because the mind of him who prayed by the Spirit was unfruitful v. 14. 3. V. 13. Because he is bid to pray that he may interpret if then Dissenters desire thus to pray let them do it let us hear them pray in unknown tongues and when they do so they will only pray after the Roman manner disapproved of by St Paul who commands such persons to be silent in the Church vers 28. 3ly When this Spiritual Gift was exercised the Apostle plainly saith that it was better to pray with the understanding i. e. with words that might be understood by others than to pray with this spiritual Gift V. 19.28 where there was no Interpreter and in that case commands them who enjoined this Gift to keep silence in the Church And hence it follows unavoidably that in some cases it was not only lawful but even necessary in order to edification that they should stint this Gift if therefore the immediate operations of the Holy Spirit may be stinted in the Church much more the Gift of Elocution Moreover these Gifts were to be stinted by a Revelation made to another person vers 30 by subjection to the Prophets vers 32. by the Rules of order vers 33 40. and they were to give place to Charity and the edification of the Church vers 1 4 12. if therefore Charity Edification Order were to be preferr'd before these Gifts of the Good Spirit much more should Charity the Peace the Vnion the Order of the Church prevail to cut off our pretences to the exercising of this meanest of all Gifts if blessed Paul so undervalued that Praying by the Spirit which was the fruit of his immediate assistance that he preferred Edifying the Church a thousand degrees beyond it I suppose he would have preferred the edification of the Church before that Praying by the Spirit which men usually learn and do obtain to by the help of Dr. Wilkins's Discourse upon the Gift of Prayer Now sure 't is matter of concern towards the Edification of the Church to obey Superiors to preserve Peace Order Union in the Church as much as may be to consent
of Alexandria makes mention of the Hymns used by the Christians in his time now these were Forms of Prayer or Praises De Orat. Dom. p. 152. That Cyprian doth sufficiently intimate the use of some Forms in the Carthaginian Church by describing the entrance or beginning thereof saying Sursum corda Lift up your hearts and the people Answering Habemus ad Dominum We lift them up unto the Lord. That Eusebius informs us concerning Constantine that he would take Books in his hands for the expressing with his Court 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De vita Constant l. 4. c. 17. the appointed Prayers and that he by so doing ordered his Court 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the manner of the Church of God That the Council of Laodicea decreed that there should be always the very same Service of Prayers Morning and Evening i. e. that there should be the same Morning Service Can. 18. and the same Evening Service continually And to assure us that the Council had a particular respect to FOrms of Prayer then in use in the next Canon Can. 19. it gives an account of some part of the order of that Service viz. that after the Sermon or Homily they had first the Prayer for the Catechumeni then the Prayer for the Penitents then three Prayers for the Faithful And that this Canon was received into the Code of Canons of the universal Church which was cited confirmed and established in the General Council of Chalcedon A. D. 451. Can. 1. That the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the three prayers of the faithful were then so well known L. 2. cap. 59. that in the constitutions of the Apostles they are represented as saying the three Prayers standing every Lords Day without reciting what they were That when Paulus Samosatenus about the year 262. Euseb ubi supra took away the Psalms and Hymns which had been used to be sung in the Church pretending they were new and made by men of later date by a numerous Council called at Antioch he was censured for it and cast out of the Church of God Lastly that whereas the Constitutions Apostolical were first composed saith our incomparably Learned Bishop Pearson from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vindic. Ignat. p. 60 61 62. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the instructions orders and constitutions made by Apostles and Apostolick men much changed indeed and interpolated in the seventh and eighth Books of those Constitutions we find Forms of prayers under their names for all Church Offices for the Catechumeni the Baptized the Penitents the Faithful the Ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons the Celebration of the Lords Supper So that unless this whole eighth Book be wholly spurious and not only interpolated Haer. 45. n. 5.11 12.80 n. 7. we must have evidence of Forms of prayer like ours still used in the Church not only from the Fourth Century when Epiphanius cites thess constitutions but even from the days of the Apostles and haply these were the Liturgies of the Apostles so much spoken of and since so much encreased § 8 Moreover to convince men from plain evidence of reason in this matter it only will be needful to advertise them 1. That all premeditated Prayer in which we do consider what to say and in what words we should express our thoughts to God is in effect a stinted prayer for it is not the Writing or the Printing but the ordering and composing of the words which makes the Prayer a Form if therefore this be be done before we pray our prayer must be a Form 2. This being so the true state of the Question can be only this whether in our addresses to the most immense infinite eternal God we should use consideration or pray and praise him inconsiderately Whether we should deliberate and take good heed that we offend not with our tongues or speak without deliberation whatsoever cometh first into our thoughts Hos 14.2 Whether we should take unto our selves words and speak unto him as the Prophet Hoseah doth advise or should present our selves before him not knowing what to say And for our better satisfaction the Wise man doth advise us Eccles 5.2 not to be rash with our mouths nor let our hearts be hasty to utter any thing before God and that for an eternal reason viz. because God is in Heaven and we are on Earth Now what man in the world is hasty to offer any thing before God if he be not who prays ex tempore or who speaks rashly with his mouth if he doth not who speaks without deliberation or consideration what to say Secondly our own experience will inform us how natural it is to all mankind to take such good advice before hand when they present their thanks or their petitions to an Earthly Prince as may secure them that they deliver their requests in grave and decent Forms of words and can it therefore stand with the reverence we owe to the most Glorious Majesty of Heaven and Earth to use to him what we durst not present unto a Prince or prudent Governour in such a serious matter as ought to be the subject of our Prayers This is the Argument by which God pleads against the lame and the imperfect sacrifices of his people saying if ye offer the blind for sacrifice is it not evil and if you offer the lame and sick is it not evil Mal. 1.8 offer it now unto thy Governour will he be pleased with thee or accept thy person implying that the great King of Heaven and Earth must be served with the best sacrifices we can tender to him and therefore with the best prayers and praises which we can conceive and that what earthly Princes may slight as beneath them must be unworthy to be offered to the King of Kings Moreover if we compare together both these kinds of prayer by Form and by extemporary effusions we shall find the former to be more expedient in our publick Worship for several momentous reasons concerning both our selves and others For 1. The Apostle doth require us 1 Cor. 14.15 and even reason doth inform us that we should pray with the understanding and that we cannot say Amen to that Prayer we understand not now what assurance can the people have in joining with a Minister who prays ex tempore and oft in mystical expressions of the Old Testament that he shall understand the meaning of his words whereas if constant Liturgies be used we may be well assured by our own reading or by the information of others of the meaning of them 2ly The Apostle intimates that 't is the duty of the hearer to say Amen to the Prayers offered up in publick and indeed otherwise we cannot well be said to join with the Minister in Prayer now this we cannot do sincerely unless we do approve the matter of the Prayer now what assurance can the people have in that great difference of
judgments and opinions that there is among us and that great liberty men take to vent their private sentiments in Prayer when they are not restrained that they shall honestly be able to say Amen to a conceived Prayer whereas in a set Form of Liturgy this inconvenience is avoided seeing we know before hand to what we are to say Amen and therefore if we do not like it may absent our selves 3ly How can we sollicite any persons or perswade any strangers to come to our Churches or join in Communion with us where we cannot promise them that the Devotions to be used there shall be innocent we cannot shew them how we worship God and thereby put them in a condition to judge for themselves or promise them as in the Primitive Church they might whilst prayer by the Spirit lasted that all our prayers shall be agreeable unto the mind of God or how can this be done without producing some prescribed Form by which we pray This seems to be one reason why all the Churches of the World have had their publick Forms of prayer that they might let every-body know how God is served by them And why the best men in the Reformed Churches have wished those happy days might come Thes Salm. de Liturg. part 3. n. 46. in which the same Form of Divine Worship might be observed in the Church and all her members with one heart and mouth might glorify God that so the unity of the spirit and charity among Believers might be preserved as far as may be 4ly By set Forms many mischiefs are prevented to which conceived prayer doth stand obnoxious for hereby care is taken that nothing through the ignorance of some or the negligence of others should be offered up to God which is contrary to the Faith or unworthy of his Divine Majesty on which account it was long since resolved by the Milevitan Council Cap. 12. that no prayers should be used in the Church but those which had been weighed by the most prudent or approved in a Synod And this the wisdom of the Heathens saw whence Plato adviseth De. Legibus l. 7. that whatsoever prayers or Hymns the Poets composed to the Gods they should first shew them to the Priests before they published them lest they should ask evil things instead of good L. 4. c. 17. And Alexander ab Alexandro saith that the Gentiles read their prayers out of a book before their sacrifices ne quid preposterè dicatur that nothing might be spoken preposterously which two may pass for Christian Reasons as seasonable with us as they were among them these times being very subject to these infirmities as our experience hath too sadly found 5ly Our Saviour saith Matt. 18.19 20. where two or three were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agreeing in the same voice to request any thing it should be granted and the Apostle prays Rom. 15.6 that with one mouth as well as heart we may glorify God now sure there is more Symphony in a good Form of prayer jointly put up by a whole Nation than there would be in mens extemporary effusions and in it we may be better said to glorify God with one mouth than by the great variety of prayers conceived and so the use of well composed Forms in publick Worship are upon this account to be preferred before extemporary effusions And Lastly To confess my own infirmities I find one great advantage in a form of prayer that being naturally thoughtful and apt to make deductions from what I read or hear I very often make some observations from the Psalms and Lessons of the day as I attend unto them and my thoughts eagerly pursuing them my Devotions are too often interrupted with wandring thoughts which though they may be pious in themselves yet must be my infirmities as far as they withdraw my heart from diligent attention to the prayers then put up to God Now when this happens to me whilst others are using their conceived prayers I know not what are the desires I have neglected and so I cannot when I recal my self offer up those desires to God begging his pardon for my wandrings but when I find my thoughts thus wandring in any part of the Church Service I presently recollect where they began to wander what the petitions were which thus escaped me and either presently if I have any opportunity or when I make up my accounts with God in my retirements I humbly offer them up to God beseeching his forgiveness of my wandring thoughts This to me seems a kind of satisfaction made to my good God and is a satisfaction to my mind and therefore whatsoever others may think of it it seems to me no small advantage of a Form above a new conceived prayer though no man that I know of hath taken any notice of it since therefore by the use of Forms we may best pray with understanding and more securely and assuredly may join with him that doth officiate and say Amen to his petitions since hereby others may be assured beforehand that they can join sincerely with us in the publick service and may particularly prepare their hearts beforehand so to do Seeing hereby the benefit which is promised to the Church from the Symphony of her petitions is best acquired and both people and Ministers may be relieved best against their various distractions and seeing hereby all unbecoming scandalous expressions which disturb the most devout and minister occasion of derision to the looser Christian are in the most considerable and solemn parts of Divine Worship best prevented seeing a Form may be used no probability of any prohibition of them being made apparent and Christians stand bound to yield obedience to their Superiors in lawful matters seeing a Form must be used in our publick Prayers by virtue of our Lords command to say Our Father and in our publick Hymns and Psalmody by reason of our inability to conceive them suddenly and lastly seeing the whole Church of God hath constantly used Forms in the performance of her publick service for thirteen hundred Years upon all these accounts I think it is highy convenient that they should be retained in the Church of God especially if we consider that our Church doth not wholly exclude the use of any Ministers pretended gift in this kind but gives him liberty to use it both before Dr. Whitnal of Gifts in publick Worship p. 48. and after Sermon provided we acknowledge this habit to be what it is and use it according to the Laws of God with reverence to the Divine Majesty and care we speak not unadvisedly of him or to him according to the Laws of the Church with sobriety modesty peaceableness and order so as not to disturb or divide the Church by bringing thereby the publick and stated order into disesteem and finally with justice to our selves and the common Christianity so as not to make this the sole way of praying in a due or
saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 36. in 1 Ep. ad Cor. p. 487. l. 3.24 484. l. 5. that one may be said to sing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though all sing after him so that the voice comes as it were from one mouth all which testimonies sufficiently convince us that what we do in this particular is sutable to the practice of the whole Church of God in Antient times 3. This custom doth commend it self unto us from the consideration of the benefit which may accrue unto us by it For 1. We hereby shew that Symphony which Christ requires in our prayers Matt. 18.19 that they may be prevailing and that we fully do agree to the Petitions that are made in our behalf Rom. 15.6 and praise God with the Minister not only with one heart but with one mouth 2. Our attention is hereby both quickned and engaged which might be apt to stray the more if we should bear no part in the whole Service for when the people bear a share in the performance of this duty Combers Comp. part 1. p. 177. They must expect before it come that they may be ready when it is come they must observe that they may be right and after take heed to prepare against the next Answer they are to give How pious therefore and prudent is this order of the Church thus to intermix the peoples duty that they may be always exercised in it or preparing for it and never have leasure to entertain those vain thoughts which will set upon us especially in the house of God if we have nothing to do Object 3 Our Saviour reprehends the vain Repetitions of the Heathens in these words When you pray § 3 use not vain repetitions as the Heathens do for they think to be heard for their much speaking be not ye therefore like unto them Matt. 6.7 8. Now of these vain repetitions the Common Prayer seems to be guilty say Dissenters 1. In the frequent use of the Lords Prayer that being there appointed to be used four times in the Morning Service viz. after the Absolution the Creed the Litany and in the beginning of the Communion Service 2. In those words used in the close of the Litany O Christ hear us Lord have mercy upon us Christ have mercy upon us Lord have mercy upon us and in the frequent repetitions of the Gloria Patri To this Objection I Answer Answ 1 That our Saviour cannot be supposed to reprehend such repetitions as these are proceeding from a fervency of Spirit 1. Because he himself used the like expressions when He prayed most fervently for the Evangelist St. Luke informs us That being in an Agony he prayed more earnestly Luk. 22.44 And Matthew doth assure us that He repeated thrice the same Petition for he saith Matthew prayed the third time saying the same words Chap. 26. vers 44. This therefore cannot be vain Repetition unless our Lord himself did practise it in contradiction to his own command Moreover our Saviour sung an Hymn with his Disciples at the conclusion of the Sacrament according as the Jews were wont to do at their Paschal Supper Censent viri eruditi cantatos à Christo hymnos qui paschate cani solerent à Psal 113. ad Psal 118. inclusivé Synopsi Cum in plurali dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inde colligi ipsos una hymnum omnibus notum cecinisse quomodo Christo accinere potuissent discipuli si ille novum insuetum hymnum cecinisset Buxt de coen Dom. §. 84. which Hymn began at Psal 113. and ended with the 118 Psalm This saith the Learned Buxtorf was a very Antient custom mentioned in the Jewish Talmud and there delared to be prescribed by the Prophets Now that our Saviour sung this very Hymn is highly probable say the Learned because he did in other things comply with the Rites used by the Jews in celebrating of the Paschal Supper and therefore may be well supposed to have done so also in this Case Now in this Hymn Psal 118. we find the same words in the four first Verses viz. for his mercy endureth for ever parallel to those in the end of our Litany and in the last Verse we find the same words again and indeed the whole Psalm is full of Repetitions as you may see v. 8 9 10 11 12. as also Psal 115.9 10 11 12. The sweet Singer of Israel affords us many like Examples so Psal 119. we have this Prayer teach me thy statutes v. 26 64 68 124 135. teach me the way of thy statutes v. 33. teach me thy judgments v. 108. O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes v. 5. make me to go in the path of thy commandments v. 35. let my heart be sound in thy statutes v. 80. so that upon the matter we find him ten times repeating the same thing Six times in the same Psalm he prays that God would quicken him according to his word and loving kindness viz. v. 37. 88. 107. 149. 156. 159. And he professes his love of and delight in Gods Law in the same Psalm as oft as there be Letters in the Alphabet In Psalm 42 43. which are assuredly twins their matter being alike and they having no title to distinguish them we find the same thing thrice repeated viz. why art thou cast down O my soul c. Psal 42.5 11.43.5 In Psal 107. we find this Prayer four times repeated Oh that men would therefore praise the Lord for his goodness viz. v. 8 15 21 31. and lastly in Psalm 136. we find these words O Give thanks unto the Lord for his mercy endureth for ever four times repeated and that Clause for his mercy endureth for ever twenty six times To these Examples it is Answered Reply Presb. Comission p. 85. that there is a great difference betwixt what is unusual and what is our daily course of worship Answer Be it so nevertheless once usage is sufficient to shew that the thing cannot be unlawful or forbidden by the Text forementioned since Negative Precepts always do oblige and so that which they forbid can never be done without sin 2. The Assemblies Annotations tell us that some of these were common constant forms as well for ordinary daily praises in divine service as for extraordinary occasions and this appears from 1 Chron. 16.34 where it is said that Heman and Jeduthun and other men were chosen to give thanks to the Lord because his mercy endureth for ever So also 2 Chron. 5.13 they praised the Lord saying Psalm 136. for he is good for his mercy endureth for ever So Ezr. 3.1 they sang together in course praising and giving thanks to God because he is good for his mercy endureth for ever And Jer. 33.11 is mention made of them that should say praise ye the Lord for the Lord is good for his mercy endureth for ever from all which places it seemeth evident that Psalm 136. as well as