and conducing unto their edification 3. Good in regard of our selves a duty that God requireth of us And from this we may inferre that the contrary hereof is by the rule of contraries morally evill it is displeasing unto God hurtfull unto the soule of thy Brother and sinfull in thy selfe In vers 22. The Apostle prevents an objection of the strong Hast thou faith have it to thy selfe before God He speaks not of a faith saith Chrysostome that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of doctrines and tenets to wit such as are fundamentall and necessary unto salvation but of a faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the subject matter here handled meats and dayes things indifferent a beliefe touching their lawfulnesse the strong amongst the Romans might be ready to obiect that their knowledg and perswasion of their Christian liberty in the matter controverted amounted unto a Divine faith for it was built upon a divine Revelation Each of them might say as Paul did above vers 14. I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is uncleane of it selfe The Lord Jesus hath taught me this liberty now is it not fit that my practise should be agreeable unto my beliefe that I should exercise my knowledg and act according unto my judgment seeing it is so well grounded why should I forbeare the doing of that which I know to be lawfull Unto this the Apostles answer is that they should not make a vaine ostentation or unseasonable discovery of their faith that is knowledg and perswasion unto the offence of their Brother the hazard of his soule but rather in such a case conceale it and content themselves with Gods knowledg and approbation of it who seeth in secret and will reward openly Matth. 6. Hast thou faith have it to thy selfe before God This prudent and charitable management of Christian liberty the Apostle exhorts the Corinthians unto in their carriage towards their Brethren touching things offered unto Idols 1 Cor. 8.9 take heed lest by any meanes this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weake In Chapt. 10. he determineth that it was lawfull to eat things consecrated to the Idols and he instanceth in two cases 1. When they were sold in open markets vers 25. 2ly When they were made use of at private fâ—asts But unto this his determination he subjoyneth the exception of scandall vers 28.29 If any man say unto you this is offered in sacrifice unto idols eat not for his sake that shewed it and for conscience sake The earth is the Lords and the fulnesse thereof Conscience I say not thine own but of the others for why is my liberty judged of another mans conscience This some understand of the unbelieving Idolater others of a weake brother And indeed this practise gives an wound unto both their consciences 1. The Idolater triumphes because he thinks it an honour unto his Idol and so he is confirmed and hardned in his Idolatry And then 2ly As for the weak Brother he supposeth that the meat is so polluted by Consecration and sacrifice unto Idols as that to eat thereof is a compliance with Idolatry and therefore altogether sinfull and hereupon the eating of these meats by the strong may occasion in the weak two scandalls 1. The example of the strong may intice them unto imitation and so they will sinne against their consciences 2ly The practise of the strong may provoke them unto rash and uncharitable judgment both scandals give a great blow unto the Conscience of the weake But that the Apostle speaks of the latter scandall I am induced to think by the words following Why is my liberty judged of another mans Conscience that is why doe I needlessely indiscreetly and unseasonably expose my Christian liberty unto the rash censures of a weake Brother who may be ready to traduce it as a prophane licentiousnesse why shall I drive him upon a sin which I may prevent by a prudent and charitable forbearance of the exercise of my liberty Liberty is a thing which men out of an excessive selfe love so much overvalue as that they are very impatient of any restraint to be put upon it at all But the Restraint that Charity prompts us unto is of all others most disregarded because there is nothing almost that is so much undervalued as the precious soules of our poore Brethren and therefore we make but little conscience how thick we throw scandals in their way I shall therefore briefly propound such weighty and pressing arguments as the Apostle useth to perswade the Romans and Corinthians to abstaine from a scandalous use of their liberty in things otherwise indifferent and lawfull and they are drawn either from the nature of things indifferent or from the nature of scandall 1. From the nature of things indifferent and here the first argument is Rom. 14.17 the kingdome of God is not meate and drinke It doth not stand in indifferent things for they are neither the way to the kingdome of Glory nor our duty under the kingdome of grace They are no part of Gods worship and service no matter of Religion the weale and safety of Gods people is in no wise wrapt up in them nay many times a rigid pressing and unseasonable practice of them is a great disturbance unto the peace and a great hinderance unto the edification of the Church the kingdome of Christ A second Argument from the nature of things indifferent is the great latitude of them Though some of them be scandalous yet there will still remaine an ample field of them besides 1 Cor. 10.28 If any man say unto you this is offered in sacrifice unto idols eat not for his sake that shewed it c. the earth is the Lords and the fulnesse thereof It is as much as if he had said though ye abstaine from things offered unto idols yet there is no doubt of want no feare of pinching your bellies for you have the earth and the fulnesse thereof for your supply And from the scandall by meats we may argue in like manner touching the scandall by recreation If cards dyce tables offend thy brother there is plenty enough of other sports bowling chesse draughts c. A second sort of arguments that the Apostle insists on are taken from the nature of scandall It is a sinne against that tender love which we owe unto our brethren And when ye sinne so against the brethren 1 Cor. 8.12 And that 't is no small but a very hainous sinne the next words evince And wound their weake consciâ—nce The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where as Beza well observeth the Antecedent is put for the consequent beating striking or smiting for the effect thereof wounding As weapons or whips wound the body so scandalls the conscience Unjustly to wound the body the face the eye of our Brother is a cruell and inhumane part but to wound so tender a piece as his conscience to wound a weake a sicklie a
matters of indifferency Whether ye eat or drinke v. 31. But now lest some should be ready to object unto Paul that which our Saviour said of the Scribes and Pharisees Matth. 23.4 that he did bind a heavy burden and grievous to be borne and lay it upon mens shoulders but he himselfe would not move it with one of his fingers the Apostle in the next verse sheweth how that his practice was conformable unto his precept Even as I please all men good and bad in all things that is in all indifferent things not seeking mine own profit but the profit of many that they may be saved 1 Cor. 10.33 In a second place the Fautors of our Ceremonies limit this restraint of our liberty in things indifferent by charity in the case of scandall onely unto things undetermined by Authority Where Authority hath determined our choice we must say they hold to their determination any scandall to the Contrary notwithstanding It seems then in case the magistrate command it we may wound the weake consciences of our Brother Destroy with our indifferencies the worke of God him for whom Christ died It is good saith Paul neither to eat flesh nor to drinke winâ— nor any thing whereby thy Brother stumbleth or is offended or is made weake Rom. 14.22 But our Prelatists determine quite otherwise if authority enjoyne it it is good say they to eat bread drink wine weare a surplice use the signe of the crosse in Baptisme though thereby never so many Brethren stumble or are offended or made weake The unreasonablenesse of this assertion Ames in his reply to Morton hath proved by many arguments That are as yet unanswered which I shall here transcribe A scandall in the nature of it is spirituall murder Now suppose a superiour should command a thing in it selfe indifferent whereupon murder were like to follow as to runne a horse or a cart in a certaine way at a certaine time when it may be unwitting to the commander little children were playing in the way would any mans conscience serve him to doe it Avoiding of scandall is a maine duty of Charity May Superiours at their pleasure appoint how farre I shall shew my Charity towards my brothers soule Then surely an inferiour earthly court may crosse the determinations of the high court of heaven The superiours have no power given them for destruction but onely for edification If therefore they command scandals they goe beyond their Commission neither are we tied therein to doe as they bid but as they should bid If determination by superiours were sufficient to take away the sinne of a scandall Then they doe very ill that they do not so farre as is possible determine all things indifferent that so no danger may be left in giving of offence by the use of them Then the Church of Rome is to be praised in that she hath determined of so many indifferents then Paul with the other Apostles might have spared a great deale of labour in admonishing the Churches how they should avoid offences about some indifferent things A farre shorter way had been either to determine the matter fully or else to have given order that the Churches should among themselves determine it at home But say that the Archbishop of Corinth for now I suppose such a one had called his convocation and with consent of his Clergie had determined that men might and for testifying of liberty should at a certaine 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 superiour be a sufficient plea at the barre of Gods judgment seat for a man that by virtue or force thereof alone hath done any actiâ—n that his conscience telleth him will scandalize his brother Lastly I would faine know whether those superiours do not give a great scandall which take upon them determinately to impose unnecessary rites which they know many good mâ—n will be scandalized by Thus farre Ames But this opinion of Ames is I confesse to be understood cum gravo salis with many limitations which I shall lay downe fully in the Tractate that next followeth If the Prelates would have seriously laid to heart that golden saying of Paul 1 Cor. 8.13 If meate make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh while the world standeth lest I make my brother to offend This would supersede all further dispute of this argument for thence it is easie to evict that it is unlawfull for Church governours to command the observation of things indifferent when in all probability they will scandalize how dare they make that the matter of a Church Canon which Paul durst not adventure upon in his own personall practice He thought it unlawfull to do a thing otherwise indifferent to eat flesh in the case of scandall and therefore doubtlesse he judged it unlawfull in such a case to impose any such matter upon others Greater was the importance of the flesh forborne by Paul unto his health and the comfort of his life then the profit of the controverted ceremonies can be unto the worship and service of God And besides the indifferency of eating flesh was a thing cleare and evident unto all that were well instructed in the Doctrine of Christian liberty whereas the indifferency of our ceremonies will at least be judged a very doubtfull matter and that by very indifferent men who shall thoroughly ponder the Arguments of Didoclave Parker Ames and others against them which to this day remaine unanswered The Prelates will not pretend unto such an ample authority in the Church of God as Paul had But though they be farre inferiour unto him in point of Authority they are not yet so humble as to imitate him in the condescention of his charity Pauls peremptorie resolve was to forbeare a thing indifferent whâ— it scandalized If meate make my brother to offend I will saith he eat no flesh while the world standeth least I make my brother to offend 1 Cor. 8.13 But what a wide difference nay contrariety was there betwixt this charitable resolution of Paul and the rigid practise of the Prelates For they were obstinately bent to presse the Ceremonies with all severity without any care or Conscience of the scandals ensuing nay their endeavour was daily to adde unto the heape of former ceremonies though they knew that thereby the scandals would be increased They spake a language quite contrary to that of Paul we will enjoyne say they the surplice crosse kneeling in the sacrament of the Lords supper while the world standeth as long as we have any power and authority in the Church of God Let who will be offended This their rigour brings unto my mind a cruel command of (h) Cum Augustus coenaret apud Vedium Pollionem Fregerat unus ex seâ—vis ejus cry stallinum rapi eum
secondly it may be objected that if the obligation of the naturall precept of eschewing scandall ceaseth upon occurrence of but a positive precept why then it seems this positive precept detracts or derogates from the naturall precept of avoiding scandall as being of greater force and validity In no wise onely it takes away a circumstance requisite to make the precept of avoiding scandall obligatory quare cum dicimus saith Vasquez non esse omittendum praeceptum positivum propter vitandum scandalum proximi non dicimus praeceptum naturale derogari pracepto positivo tanquam fortiori sed dicimus occursu praecepti positivi cessare quandam circumstantiam necessariam ut â—bligâ—t praeceptum de vitando scandalo etiamsi naturale sit But all this labour would have been saved if the question had been rightly stated for whereas it is said that one circumstance necessarily requisite to make the precept of eschewing scandall bind us is that there occurre not any other precept either naturall or positive this is to be understood cum grano salis with this limitation in case such precepts bind all circumstances considered to the performance of what they enjoyne hic nunc at such a particular time and place for then omission of what they enjoine would be sinfull and we are not sinfully to omit any thing for prevention of scandall in our brother Unto the proofe of which the reason of Vasquez and Bâ—canus may be applyed But the obligation of affirmative precepts is not universall ad sempâ—r but only lâ—co tempore debitis and therefore what they enjoyne may sometimes in the case of scandall be prudently omitted but perhaps this which I say is all that Vasquez and Becanus aime at and then they have no adversary that I know of Every one will grant unto them that one circumstance necessarily requisite to make the precept of eschewing scandall bind us hic nunc in such a time and place is that there occurre not any other precept binding us to what it enjoyneth at that very instant time and place for it is evident unto all that upon occurrencie of such obligations though scandall ensue it would not be on our parts a culpable scandall an active scandall But it may be thought that I have staied too long upon this digression to returne therefore where we left Secondly if the action in which this appearance of evill is supposed to be be but indifferent why then the best direction that we can have will be from what the Apostle Paul writes unto the Romans chap. 14. and unto the Corinthians 1 Cor. 8. and chap. 10. of converts amongst the Romans there were some strong and knowing ones that were well principled and so knew very well their deliverance from the yoake of the mosaicall Law and hereupon without any scruple did eat such meats as were prohibited thereby perhaps Swines flesh or the like Now at this their practise severall weak Christians who were as yet ignorant and uninstructed touching the latitude of their Christian liberty were in severall regards scandalized as I have shewen in a foregoing treatise But yet here the practise of the strong was a thing indifferent in it selfe vers 14.20 and the appearance of evill to wit a prophane and irreligious contempt of the Law of Moses was only imaginary arising from the ignorance and errour of the weak who thought that Law of Moses to be still in force and unabrogated and the scandall consequent hereupon was only pâ—r accidens flowing not from the nature of the action in it selfe but from the misapprehension of the weake and yet the Apostle blames the strong for scandalizing the weake and therefore in this their action though indifferent in it selfe there was an active scandall a scandall culpably given as well as taken The Apostle gives the same resolution unto the Corinthians concerning things offered unto Idols to eat them at the Pagan religious feast and in the temple of an Idoll carrieth a reall appearance of communion with and approbation of an Idolatrous worship of the Idoll and so is scandalous per se of it selfe and in its own nature 1 Cor. 8.10 cap. 10. vers 20,21 But now to eat these same meats when sold and bought in the shambles or set before them in private meetings the Apostle resolves to be a thing lawfull and indifferent 1 Cor. 10. v. 25 26 27. And indeed it could not carry a reall but only an imaginary appearance of evill for they were the good creatures of God and so uncapable of any morall pollution and they had no religious use and so did not reflect any glance of the least honour credit or countenance to the Idoll The scandall then accrewing by them was only per accidens and yet they were by the Apostles advise to be forborne if such scandall were likely to ensue upon the use of them But if any wan say unto thee this is offered in sacrifice unto Idols eat not for his sake that shewed it and for conscience sake 1 Cor. 10.28 Here we have a generall rule together with three limitations thereof First a generall rule if any man imagine evill and sin to be in an indifferent action and hereupon be scandalized that action is to be abstained from if any man say unto thee this is offered in sacrifice unto Idols eat not for his sake that shewed it But now here are couched three exceptions First we are not bound to abstaine from things indifferent unlesse the scandall consequent be probable if any man say unto you this is offered in sacrifice unto Idols c. if he say nothing but smother his opinion and dislike in his owne brest we may be guiltlesse and blamelesse And indeed if we are to forbeare all indifferent things in which there is only a meer possibility of scandall we should be at an utter losse and uncertainty in our actings in things indifferent and never know what to doe we are obliged then to abstain from things indifferent only in the case of (q) Quando attentis etiam omnibus ciâ—cumstantiis actus inordinatus unius non est ta lis ut prâ—babiliter putarâ— possitasteri futurus occasio ruinae non eriâ— peccatum scandali nec distinctum nee non distinctum ut sentit etiam Bannes hic art 4. in fine Nam tune nonpotest quis censeri causa moralis ruinae alterius Gregor de Valentiâ tom 3. q. 18. punct 2. scandall probable and not in the case of scandall meerely possible and so much is observed by Calvin upon the 1 Cor. 8.13 Deinde non jubet nos Paulus divinare nunquid offendiculo futurum sit quod facimus nisi cum est praesens periculum A second exception is that we are not required to abstaine from things indifferent in which our weake brethren imagine that there is evill and sin and thereupon are scandalized unlesse they have some probable ground for their imagination for though the eating of the Idolothytes at a
diseased conscience is the very height of inhumanity To wound the soule of a Brother with sorrow is a breach of charity If thy Brother be grieved with thy meat now walkest thou not charitably Rom. 14.15 And hence we may reason in a way of comparison à minori ad majus that to wound the soule of a Brother with sinne violates Christian love in a farre higher measure for the wound of the least sinne is in its own nature mortall and therefore scandall is not onely of a wounding but of a killing and destroying nature it is a soule murder Destroy not him with thy meat Rom. 14.15 Indeed the weak that were scandalized might by Gods mercy and Christ's merit escape an actuall destroying and damning But the Apostles meaning is that the strongs scandalizing of them carried in it's nature a tendency towards their destruction for it drew them into sinne and sinne without repentance will destroy the soule This malignant and destructive efficacy of scandall the Apostle urgeth also unto the Corinthians Epistle 1. chapt 8. v. 11. And through thy knowledg shall thy weake brother perish that is through thy scandalous abuse of thy knowledg of thy liberty in eating things offered unto idols thou shalt doe what lieth in thee to farther the perishing of thy weake Brother This cruelty that is in scandall towards the soules of our Brethren is aggravated from Christs Redemption Gods Creation of their soules 1. From Christs Redemption of their soules Destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ died Rom. 14.15 And through thy knowledg shall the weake brother perish for whom Christ died But when ye sin so against the Brethren and wound their weak conscience ye sinne against Christ 1 Cor. 8.11 12. In the judgment of charity thou art to rank thy weake Brother in the number of those for whom Christ dyed Christ died for his salvation and how darest thou oppose his worke by doing that which tends unto his damnation Christ parted with his life to save him and wilt not thou for that end abridg thy selfe of thy liberty in a few indifferent things 2. From Gods creation of their soules for meat destroy not the worke of God Rom. 14.20 that is the soule of thy brother for that is stiled Gods worke in a way of eminency because it was one of the choycest chiefest and most eminent workes of the Creation made as it were with the consultation of the whole Trinity and had in it engraven the very Image of God himselfe Therefore not only the defacing but the very attempting to deface this would redound very much unto the dishonour of the worker God And he will doubtlesse accordingly resent the despising of his workmanship Some interpreters expound the place of the work of Gods grace in the sanctification or regeneration of the soule wherein faith is begotten and that faith in a peculiar manner is the worke of God we have Christs own testimony John 6.29 Jesus answered and said unto them this is the worke of God that ye believe on him whom he hath sent But even so the words display the horrid malignancy of scandall for they shew that he who scandalizeth his brother fighteth against God that he goeth about to demolish that which hath God alone for the builder It was a part of Christs character not to breake a bruised reed nor quench the smoaking flax Mat. 12.20 How unsuitable unto this is the disposition of those by whom offences come For they doe what lieth in them to quench the very beginnings of grace and goodnesse Indeed the worke of Gods grace is so all-powerfull as that it will finally prevaile against all resistance If God have begunne a good worke he will performe it untill the day of Jesus Christ Phil. 1.6 And the gates of hell shall never be able to prevaile against it Matth. 16.18 But yet the gates of hell will be ever hindering of it and in especiall by the spreadth of scandals And this very opposition is a warre against heaven in the language of the Scripture a destroying of the worke of God There is one sequele more of active scandals of this nature that our Apostle mentioneth Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 10. which deserveth also our consideration and it is the blot of infamy which they will contract unto our names and the very Christian liberty which we abuse A scandall in this case tending unto sinne is usually accompanied with a scandall tending unto disgrace or defamation And how carefull we should be to decline scandall even in this English sense of the word the vehemency of the Apostles interrogations will sufficiently informe us 1 Cor. 10.29 30. Conscience I say not thine own but of the others for why is my liberty judged of another mans conscience for if I by grace be a partaker why am I evill spoken of for that for which I give thanks Unto these interrogations adde we the Apostles precept also Rom. 14.16 Let not then your good be evill spoken of that is give none occasion for this great priviledg of your Christian liberty to be traduced Before I take my leave of this restraint of our liberty by Charity in the case of scandall I shall examine the restraints that some have put upon it without any warrant from scripture Those in which they most confide are two 1. They limit it unto the scandall of the weake and 2. Vnto matters that are undetermined by Authority 1. They limit it unto the scandall of the weake for the scandall of the malicious and presumptuous persons The scandall of Pharises say they may be neglected Mat. 15.12 14. whether in our Ceremonies there was an active scandall a scandall given will be largely disputed in the next treatise for the present therefore we shall only prove that we are to avoid such an active scandall in the malicious as well as the weake For First Such a scandall is of a soule destroying nature Destroy not him with thy meate Rom. 14.15 And who so wicked and malicious upon the face of the earth whose soule a true Christian charity will exclude from it's care mercy and compassion Secondly The Apostles motive reacheth unto the wicked and malicious Destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ died Rom. 14.15 for they may be in the number of those for whom Christ died who for their present state and condition may be most wicked and malicious such as oppose themselves such as are in the snare of the Devill taken captive by him at his will 3. The Apostles prohibition 1 Cor. 10.32 extendeth unto the malicious as well as the weake Give none offence neither to the Jewes nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God where Jewes and Gentiles are distinguished from the Church of God and therefore by them are meant such as were unconverted and as yet enemies unto the faith of Christ and Church of God And the things wherein the Apostle would have their offence to be avoided were
dictum est polluitur peccato dum videlicet contra conscientiam quam idolothyto habent existimantes edentes contaminari de illo edunt Estius in locum Conscience of the Idoll i e. bâ—ing resolved in mind that it is not lawfull to eat or taste of any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 part or portion of the Idol-feast whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the idol table or having bought it at the shambles as it seems was the fashion of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be sold there at second hand chap. 10.25 accounting it unlawfull to eat any meat consecrated to that use do yet eat that which is of this nature and by so doing their weake i. e. uninstructed Conscience is polluted i.e. they sin against their Conscience do that which they are perswaded they may not doe which although it be never so innocent and harmlâ—sse thing in it selfe an Idoll being simply nothing yet to them which do it when they thinke it unlawfull and all have not knowledge saith he in the beginning of the verse i. e. are not sufficiently instructed in their duty it is pollution or sin I shall proceed unto the fourth and last conclusion The only way then for a man to rescue himselfe out of these difficulties is to rectify his Conscience to depose and correct the errour thereof so he shall escape contempt of the judgment of his own Conscience on the one hand and breach of either Gods or mans lawes on the other This Rayunaudus from whom I know none do dissent expresseth as followeth Moral disc dist 4. q. 3. art 1. n. 247. Vnum igitur illud subsidium superest ut judicium de malitiâ vincibilitèr errans abjiciatur Si enim neque adhaerere ei licet ut primo loco monstravimus neque illi obsistâ—re ut nunc diximus non aliud superesse potest quà m ut homo errorem depellat quod posse supponitur alinmque de malitiâ sensum induat alioqut quocunque se vertat in culpâ erit An imaginary appearance of evill issues Secondly from the supposals of not only our selves but others that censure it whose judgments are either misled by ignorance and weaknesse or else blinded through pride and prejudice such was that in the moving of Hannah's lips not afforded by her fact but only fastned on it by old Eli his hasty censoriousnesse no other appearance of evill was there in our Saviours healing the diseased his Disciples plucking and eating of the eares of corne on the Sabbath day 't was not grounded on their actions but onely fancied by the Pharisees swelling uncharitablenesse What other was that appearance of evill with which the Gentiles charged the primitive Christians lifting up of their hands in prayer when they accused them for adoration of the Clouds as appeareth by Tertullian and by a Poet of their own qui puras nubes coeli numen adorant (i) Parker parâ— 2. pag 63. This imaginary appearance of evill proceeds from either supposals of willfull or weake ones The censures and supposals of wilfull proud and wicked ones and the scandals thence arising scandala Pharisaeorum I determined in my first Edition of this booke that we might slight our warrant said I is our Saviour's president Whâ—n his Disciples told him that the Pharisees tooke offence at his speech he made no reckoning thereof but answered let them alone Matth. 12.13 14. and we warranted by his example may thâ—n be secure and regardlesse of many calumnies and groundlesse exceptions against the govâ—rnment discipline and ceremonies of our Church for thâ—re hath been so much spoken and written concerning these subjects as that the pretence of weaknesse is quite taken away from those that are capable of information First here my censure of the non-conformists to be wilfull proud and Pharisaicall was very rash and uncharitable all that I can say in excuse for my selfe is that when I wrote this I was a very young man and conformity vnto the Ceremonies established by Law was then generally embraced without any of the least contradiction for ought I knew nay stoutly and zealously pleaded for by men whom I admired for the generall report that went of their sanctity and Learning v.g. Dr John Burgâ—sse Dr Sclater Dr Sanderson and others And then I had read but one side being an utter stranger unto what the Inconformitants could say for themselves and their adversaries represented their objections and answer to be so weaks and ridiculous as that 't is no great wonder that I was prejudiced against them But about the beginning of the long Parliament being awakened with the generall complaint of the Godly against the Ceremonies I began to thinke a new of the controversy and out of my former prejudice intended a full vindication of the discipline and Ceremonies of the then Church of England and in order hereunto I read all such books of the non-conformist's as I could procure for I knew well by experience that a controversy can never be well handled unlesse all dissenting opinions thereabouts be weighed but upon perusall of the non-conformists I soone found that their adversaries most disingeniously misrepresented all that they said that they resused to joine issue with them in the state of the Question that they came not up to an orderly grapple with their arguments and that they seldome regularly replyed unto the solutions which were given unto their objections and this quickly produced an alteration in my judgment and I believe it will do so too in all that will make such an impartiall search into the matter as I have done But Secondly to come unto the examination of that aspersion that the scandals of the malitious of Pharisaicall and willfull spirits are not to be regarded so as to forbear that by which they are scandalized Gregory de Valentia though he lay downe the affirmative in the generall yet afterwards he delivers it to be his opinion that we are to doe what lyeth in us to prevent the scandals of even Pharisees so it may be done without any great losse or notable damage unto our selves Existimo etiam si quis cum nullo suo vel pene nullo detrimento posset impedire scandalum proximi Pharisaicum aliquid faciendo vel omittendo debere ipsum facere Nam ut tradidimus suprà in quaest de correctione fraternâ etiam is qui ex malitiâ â—eccaturus alioqui est est in aliquali necessitate spirituali ac proinde ut illic vidimus debet ex charitate corrigi vel aliter à peccati scandaâ—o impediri quandoâ—id sine detrimento proprio fieri potest tom 3. disp 3. q. 18. punct 4. For the better stating of this Question I shall premise some distinctions of scandall a scandall is either active or passive An active scandall is in all such words or deeds as culpably occasion the fall of another into sin and this is againe by Gregory de Valentia tom 3. disp 3.
private feast was not an action in it selfe scandalous or inductive unto sin as being free from both sin and all reall appearance of it yet the Corinthians scandalized hereat had a probable ground why they conceived it to be unlawfull and sinfull the late morall or religious relation that the Idolothytes had unto an Idoll this is offered in sacrifice unto Idols Mr Rutherford in his treatise of scandall pag. 53 54. expresseth this limitation as followeth we read not of scandals culpable in Gods word but there be some morall reasons in them and he apply eth it unto the offence that is taken at tolling of bells at a ministers gowne when he preacheth there is no apparent morall reason why the tolling of a Bell or a ministers gowne should scandalize for they are of meere civill use and have no morall influence in the worship for the same tolling of bells is and may be used to convocate the people to a Baron Court to heare a declamation to convocate souldiers This exception that I have laied downe is I conceive grounded as upon what the Apostle saith so also upon the reality and truth of our Christian liberty in things indifferent which otherwise would signifie nothing for if we are to abstaine from all indifferent things in which another without probable ground imagineth that there is sin the servitude of Christians under the Gospell would be farre greater and more intolerable then that of the Iewes under the mosaicall administration A third exception which we may gather hence is in great part coincident with the first and 't is that the abstinence unto which we are obliged in things indifferent in the case of scandall is not universall and totall but limited ad hic nunc those times and places in which there is danger or likelyhood of scandall the Corinthians were in their private feasts to forbeare eating Idolothytes only in the presence of persons apt to be scandalized and might elsewhere use their liberty without regret of Conscience Unto these exceptions insinuated here by the Apostle we may adde divers others of which some may be collected from what we above said touching the scandall of the wicked in things indifferent mutatis mutandis and by and by I shall adde others but first I shall examine some restrictions which I gave in a former edition of this booke Former Edition But now if the action in which this appearance of evill is supposed to be be but indifferent then these two following things must be pondered First whether or no it be annexed with a necessary duty or not Secondly whether or no it be undetermined left to our owne liberty and choice or else by authority either Oeconomicall Politicall or Ecclesiasticall If it be annexed to a necessary duty we must not omit this to abstaine from that So to fly the shadow of sin we should embrace the body of sin a sinne really so a sinne of omission for what is not good if to omit a duty be not bad Good must not be left undone though evill per accidens come from it much lesse when only an appearance of evill is joined to it We must not then shun the Lords table because some weaker judgments have imagined in the act of kneeling a shew of Idolatry So to avoid but an imaginary appearance of evill unto men we shall appeare indeed unto God to be evill A Minister must not neglect the discharge of his duty because some have supposed a shew of superstition in some harmelesse Cerem nies annexed to its performance So to avoid mâ—ns unjust censures he should incurre a just woe and curse from God woe be to me saith the Apostle if I prâ—ach not the Gospell Answer This first limitation I borrowed from Dr Sclatâ—r upon the text for the examination of it we must distinguish of humane Ceremonies they are of two sorts Circumstantiall or Doctrinall First circumstantiall such are the Circumstances of time or place matters of order decency and the like Now these are necessary in the generall and the particulars may be determined by the Magistrate or Church-officers v. g. that the publique assemblies be at such a convenient time of the day in such a place and that they be convocated by tolling of bells that the Minister officiate in a grave habit gowne cloake or coate c. Now though some of these may be by some causelesly imagined to be evill yet they are not therefore to be forborne if they be by lawfull command of the Magistrate or Church to be annexed with necessary duties for necessary duties are not to be omitted for meere circumstances connexed with their performance Thus we are not to forsake or refraine our publick assemblies because some think there is some superstition in the places of them our Churches and the Convocation of them by bells upon this ground that both our Churches and bells have been abused by Papists Dr Heylin in a former edition of his Geography relates this following story of Peter Du Moulin that hearing how diverse English Ministers scrupled to officiate in a Surplice he said that he would willingly preach at Paris in a fooles coate if leave could not be gotten of the King upon any other condition If this great light of France ever dropped such words he had in them doubtlesse a very good devout and zealous meaning but yet under correction I cannot see how his resolution can be accorded with that rule of the Apostle Let all things be done decently for it cannot as yet sink into my foolish head how that a fooles coat is a decent garment to preach in But this on the bie To proceed unto a second sort of Ceremonies which we may call for distinction sake humane Doctrinall Ceremonies such as men institute by their morall signification to teach v.g. the Crosse Surplice c if these might lawfully by any humane authority whatsoever be unavoidably annexed with necessary duties we should then soon resolve that we are not then to abstaine from them but the non-conformists ever held that no mortall wight whatsoever could lawfully urge or presse the unavoidable connexion of such Ceremonies with necessary duties and indeed they have very good reason against the Command of such a connexion because it would have been against religion and against charity First against religion they never granted them as is still supposed to be indifferent but alwaies arraigned them as guilty of superstition and will-worship and so manifest transgressions against the second commandement presumptuous additions unto the word and ordinances of our Lord Jesus Christ a setting of mans threshold by Gods threshold and their posts by Gods posts Ezek. 43.8 and the justice of their accusation will be soon confessed by all learned and unprejudiced men that will with patience and impartiality reade the reenforcement of their arguments by Parker Didoclave and Ames against all answers and replies whatsoever The Prelates connexing of humane symbolicall ceremonies with duties and ordinances
that are necessary and commanded by the word of God brings into my mind an artifice of Julian the Apostate in the market places of Cities he set up his own image with the Effigies of the gods of the Heathen pictured round about to the end that whosoever should do civill reverence to the Emperours Image might also seem to worship the gods of the Gentiles and by the contrary they who would not bow to the Gods of the Gentiles might seeme also to refuse all due reverence to the Emperour Thus the Prelates of their own heads most presumptuously have set up in Gods worship and service their own inventions and have commanded them to be joined with the ordinances of Christ so that hereby they drave many conscientious Ministers into a great strait if out of a lothnesse to loose the exercise of their Ministry they conformed unto their Ceremonies this they interpreted to be an approbation of them and if to avoid their Ceremonies they did forbeare to baptize to administer the Lords supper c. then they accused them for neglect and contempt of Gods Ordinances Secondly it was against charity for the Prelates so rigidly and peremptorily to presse their paultry Ceremonies as that unlesse men observed them they would not suffer them by their good wills to enjoy the precious Ordinances of Christ Jesus and this can reasonably be denied by none who think that the soules of men may be damnified by the want of such ordinances But to proceed unto a second restriction in the former edition Former Edition If we are not secondly nostri juris but restrained and determined by authority we must not disobey that to satisfiea Brother transgresse duty to expresse charity So to please men we should displease God So we should doe evill that good might come thereof When the Obligation of two precepts seemingly lyeth upon us at the same time and impossible for both to be at once obeyed in such a case because there is no clashing between Gods precepts neither doth God by them impose upon his creatures any necessity of sinning therefore one of these precepts must give place unto the other to wit that which enjoyneth a lesse duty unto that which prescribes a more weighty and pressing one Now the duties of Justice as a learned Inconformitant even Amesius himselfe med Theol. lib. 2. cap. 16. § 62 63 will tell us are of stricter obligation then those of charity We are more bound to pay our debts then to distribute Almes He that hath trespassed against another is more strictly tyed to sue for reconciliation then the party who hath received the injury Now to hinder the scandall of the weake is a duty of Charity to obey the lawfull commands of authority a duty of justice and therefore of the greater obligation and moment unto it then the other must give place I would have travelled farther in this argument but that I am anticipated by the learned and reverend Professors of Aberdene in their Duplies to the second answers of the Covenanting ministers who from pag. 65. unto 75. have purposely discussed this very question whether the precept of obedience to Superiors or the precept of eschewing scandall be more obligatory and have there proved by many unanswerable arguments that the former precept that of obedience to Superiours is of the twaine more Obligatory Those then that desire larger satisfaction concerning this matter I shall referre unto the perusall of them How ever in the meane while let it not be thought troublesome if I insert what I judge in them if not most yet very râ—markeable 'T is this Debitum obedientiae the debt of obedience which we owe unto superiours is say they pa 74 not only debitum morale a debt or duty unto which we are tyed by morall honesty and Gods Commandment but also debitum legale or debitum justitiae quod viz fundatur in proprio jure alterius a a debt grounded upon the true and proper right which our Superiours have to exact this duty of us so that they may accuse us of injury and censure us if we performe it not There is a great difference bâ—twixt these two sorts of debts the last is farr more obligatory than the first as for example A man oweth monâ—y to the poore by a morall debt but to his Creditour he oweth them by legall debt or debt of justice and therefore he is more strictly obliged to pay his creditor than to give almes So by morall honesty and Gods precepts also a man oweth to his neighbour a pious carâ—fulnesse to hinder sinne in him by admonition instruction good example and by omission even of things lawfull when he foreseeth that his neighbour in respect of his weaknesse will be scandalized by them But his neighbour hath not such a right to exact these things of him neither can he have action against him for not performing of them as our lawfull superiours have for our due obâ—dience Thus they Hence then may we shape an answer unto that same frequent clamour of some tumultuous spirits that our conformity forsooth is wondrous offensive to many of our weake brethren First suppose it be so better they without thy fault be offended scandalizâ—d at thee than that the Magistrate be with thy fault disobeyed by thee It is no safe course to provide for the peace of thy brothers conscience by wounding thine own with the sinne of disobediâ—nce against authority to which for conscience sake thou art to yeild subjection we must not to comply with mens humours resist the ordinance of God despise the voice of the Church rather than a weake brother should be offended scandalized we may and sometimes must part with our own right but we ought not to rob the Church of hers by bâ—reaving her of her power by denying her our obedience Nay farthâ—r I confesse that rather than a weake brother should be scandalized we may pro hic nunc in some particular times and places pretermit what superiours prescribe provided they take no distast thereat and others by our example be not encouraged to contemn their persons callings commands for so a greater and more pernicious scandall will be incurred than was declined But we are not upon occurrence of any scandall whatsoever taken by whomsoever either absolutely to deny and utterly râ—fuse obedience to the lawfull injunctions of our publique governours whether temporall or ecclesiasticall or so much as contemptuously and scandalously for a while omit the practise of what they enjoine And omission of what they require is than contemptuous when they pâ—remptorily urge the practise of it then scandalous when it heartens others to a contempt of their authority To grant any of these lawfull what were it alasse but to licence confusion both in Church and Common-wâ—alth Secondly I demand whether or no the offence given to or taken by a Magistrate who is a broâ—her and withall a magistrate be not greater than that which is given to or taken by