FIVE DISPUTATIONS OF Church-Government AND WORSHIP I. Whether it be Necessary or Profitable to the right Order or Peace of the Churches of England that we Restore the extruded Episcopacy Neg. II. Assert Those who Nullifie our present Ministry and Churches which have not the Prelatical Ordination and teach the People to do the like do incur the guilt of grievous Sin III. An Episcopacy desirable for the Reformation Preservation and Peace of the Churches IV. Whether a stinted Liturgie or Form of Worship be a desireable means for the Peace of these Churches V. Whether Humane Ceremonies be Necessary or Profitable to the Church By Richard Baxter LONDON Printed by R.W. for Nevil Simmons Bookseller in Kederminster and are to be sold by him there and by Thomas Iohnson at the Golden Key in St. Pauls Church-yard 1659. At 4. s. 6. d. bound To his Highness RICHARD Lord Protector OF THE Common-wealth of England Scotland and Ireland SIR THese Papers are ambitious of accompanying those against Popery into your Highness presence for the tender of their service and that upon the same account The Controversies here decided are those that have had a hand in most of the great transactions that of late years have here past and that still have a hand in the differences that hinder our desired peace I observe that the Nation generally rejoyceth in your peaceable entrance upon the Government And are affected with indignation if they hear but any rumors that troublesom persons would disturb their hopes And many are perswaded that you have been strangely kept from participating in any of our late bloody contentions that God might make you an Healer of our breaches and imploy you in that Templeâ—work which David himself might not be honoured with though it was in his mind because he had shed blood abundantly and made great wars 1 Chron. 22.7 8. I perceive also that some settlement of Church-affairs will be expected from you by the most And therefore it concerneth all our welfare that you be well acquainted with the state of those differences about which all will expect your judgement For my own part I think not that matters are half so far out of order in the Churches as most discontented men imagine But yet I know there is much to be mended wherein both God and most good men expect you should contribute a considerable part Some think there is no settlement in the Church till they are in the saddle and all their Brethren are become their servants and do them obeysance And alas we have those that take it for no settlement till they have the sword in their own hands or have engaged you to use it at their discretion and may again fill the Prisons or other Lands with their Brethren that are far better then themselves Those I mean that in their writings so glory that their predecessors hang'd the Puritans and lament that of late they were but silenced as being a less effectuall means Some would have no other settlement then we have or else would have Licentiousness settled by a Law and have unlimited Liberty in Religion Doubtless these are conscious what it is that they have need of If Heathens Infidels and Papists be but excepted out of the Toleration it displeaseth them And we can easily conjecture why If we grant them all the Liberty of their consciences that is of their mis-belief because alas we cannot cure it it satisfieth them not unless they may have also Liberty of tongue and Practise When I have heard and read the Reasonings of some of them against the Immortality of the soul and the Christian Religion it self I have wondered why they should take it for such a point of Liberty to have leave to draw others to their opinion when they seem to think that mens Happiness or Misery is no more concerned in it These are the men that tell the world that Magistrates have nothing to do with Religion but only with our Peace and Bodily welfare contrary to the fullest Testimony of the Scriptures Which is but to perswade men to esteem you as the dirt of the earth and to value the Ministry above the Magistracy as much as the Soul is better then the Body and as Heaven is better then this dunghill-world And for this odious doctrine they have no stronger reason then because that Heathen Princes are uncapable of deciding matters about Religion As if mens wilfull and wicked indisposition would change the office and disoblige both them and those that are guilty of no such unfitness from the obligations laid upon them by the Lord They may as wisely say that a sober Physitian is obliged to no more then a drunken one can perform or that a seeing man may do no more then the blind can do Or that a Learned Prince may not meddle with Learning because an unlearned Prince is unfit for it But any man that hath read Bellarmine Parsons Gretser or such like Jesuites may know the Fathers of this doctrine Nothing more familiar with them then that Princes have nothing to do but for our Bodies and the Common Peace but forsooth it is the Pope that must Rule all about our Souls The Libertines know whose cause they plead But verily men that regard the Interest of Christ and their salvation would set light by Princes if they believed them to be such terrestriall animals as Papists and Libertines would make them Some also there be that would have a settlement upon too rigorous terms though they would not have it executed with cruelty Most men would fain have their own opinions prevail and too many place too much of their Religion in censuring as Heterodox all that differ from them and think it an evidence of their Godliness that they are Uncharitable and seeing many minds and waies they think that punishment must heal them all Not that they would be driven to their Brethren but all their Brethren must be driven unto them In the midst of all these cross expectations if you will consult with and obey the Lord I dare boldly tell you it is past all doubt that you must avoid extreams and keep as tenderly the golden mean in this point as in any that concerns you If you give Liberty to All that is called Religion you will soon be judged of no Religion and loved accordingly If you so far close with any Party of them that walk in the faith of Christ and the fear of God as to deal rigorously with the rest you will be hated by them as a Persecutor And if men be oppressed in that which they value above their lives it will tempt them to neglect their lives for their relief If you joyn with no Church in the Lords Supper and other holy Communion lest you seem to espouse the party that you joyn with you will by most be judged to be carnally wise self-seeking and irreligious or one that is yet to seek for your Religion If you restrain all that
by another that could not have any power to Rule him without that consent of his own and voluntary Condescension 5. As for the fifth sort that is The standing President of a Classis having no Negative voice I should easily consent to them for order and Peace for they are no distinct Office nor assâ—me any Government over the Presbyters And the Presbyterian Churches do commonly use a President or Moderator pro tempore And doubtless if it be lawful for a Month it may be lawful for a year or twenty years or quam diu se bene gâ—sserit and how many years had we one Moderator of our Assemblies of Divines at Westminster and might have had him so many years more if death had not cut him off And usually God doth not so change his gifts but that the same man who is the fittest this month or year is most likely also to be the fittest the next 6. And for the sixth sort viz. A President of a Classes having a Negative voice I confess I had rather be without him and his power is not agreeable to my Judgement as a thing instituted by God or fittest in it self But yet I should give way to it for the Peace of the Church and if it might heal that great breach that is between us and the Epâ—scopal Brethren and the many Churches that hold of that way but with these Cautions and Limitations 1. That they shall have no Negative in any thing that is already a duty or a sin for an Angel from heaven cannot dispense with Gods Law This I doubt not will be yielded 2. That none be forced to acknowledge this Negative vote in them but that they take it from those of the Presbyters that will freely give or acknowledge it For its a known thing that all Church-power doth work only on the Conscience and therefore only prevail by procuring Consent and cannot compell 3. Nor would I ever yield that any part of the Presbyters dissenting should be taken as Schismaticks and cast out of Communion or that it should be made the matter of such a breach This is it that hath broken the Church that Bishops have thrust their Rule on men whether they would or not and have taken their Negative voice at least if not their sole Jurisdiction to be so necessary as if there could be no Church without it or no man were to be endured that did not acknowledge it but he that denyeth their disputable Power must be excommunicated with them that blaspheme God himself And as the Pope will have the acknowledgement of his Power to be inseparable from a member of the Catholike Church and cast out all that deny it so such Bishops take the acknowledgement of their Jurisdiction to be as inseparable from a member of a particular Church and consequently as they suppose of the universal and so to deny them shall cut men off as if they denyed Christ. This savoureth not of the humility that Christ taught his followers 4. Nor would I have any forced to declare whether they only submit for Peace or consent in approbation nor whether they take the Bishops Negative vote to be by Divine Institution and so Necessary or by the Presbyters voluntary consent contract as having power in several cases to suspend the exercise of their own just authority when the suspension of it tendeth to a publike Good No duty is at all times a duty If a man be to be ordained by a Presbytery it is not a flat duty to do it at that time when the President is absent except in case of flat necessity why may not the rest of the Presbyters then if they see it conducible to the good of the Church resolve never to ordain except in case of such Necessity but when the President is there and is one therein which is indeed to permit his exercise of a Negative vote without professing it to be his right by any Institution It is lawful to ordain when the President is present it is lawful out of cases of Necessity to forbear when he is absent according therefore to the Presbyterian principles we may resolve to give him de facto a Negative voice that is not to ordain without him but in Necessity and according to the Episcopal principles we must thus do for this point of Ordination is the chief thing they stand on Now if this be all the difference why should not our May be yield to their Must be if the Peace of the Church be found to lye upon it But 5. I would have this Caution too that the Magistrate should not annex his sword to the Bishops censure without very clear reason but let him make the best of his pure spiritual Authority that he can we should have kept peace with Bishops better if they had not come armed and if the Magistrates had not become their Executioners 7. As to the seventh sort viz. A President of a Province fixed without any Negative voice I should easily admit of him not only for Peace but as orderly and convenient that there might be some one to give notice of all Assemblies and the Decrees to each member and for many other mattters of order this is practised in the Province of London pro tempore and in the other Presbyterian Churches And as I said before in the like case I see not why it may not be lawful to have a President quam diu se bene gesserit as well for a moneth or a year or seven years as in our late Assembly two successively were more as I remember so that this kind of Diocesan or Provincial Bishop I think may well be yielded to for the Churches Order and Peace 8. As to the eighth sort of Bishops viz. The Diocesan who assumeth the sole Government of many Parish Churches both Presbyters and People as ten or twelve or twenty or more as they used to do even a whole Diocess I take them to be intolerable and destructive to the Peace and happiness of the Church and therefore not to be admitted under pretence of Order or Peace if we can hinder them But of these we must speak more when we come to the main Question 9. As for the ninth sort of Bishops viz. A Diocesan Ruling all the Presbyâ—ers but leaving the Presbyters to Rule the People and consequently taking to himself the sole or chief Power of Ordination but leaving Censures and Absolution to them except in case of Appeal to himself I must needs say that this sort of Episcopacy is very ancient and hath been for many ages of very common reception through a great part of the Church but I must also say that I can see as yet no Divine institution of such a Bishop taken for a fixed limited officer and not the same that we shall mention in the eleventh place But how far mens voluntary submission to such and consent to be ruled by them may authorize them I have no mind to dispute
doubt Prop. 2. It is as certain that common prudence required them to make a convenient distribution of the work and not go all one way and leave other places that while without the Gospel But some to go one way and some another as most conduced to the conversion of all the world Prop. 3. It is certain that the Apostles were not armed with the sword nor had a compulsive coercive power by secular force but that their Government was only forcible on the Conscience and therefore only on the Conscientious so far as they were such unless as we may call mens actual exclusion by the Church and their desertion and misery the effect of Government Prop. 4. It is most certain that they who had the extraordinary priviledge of being eye-witnesses of Christs Miracles and Life and ear-witnesses of his Doctrine and had the extraordinary power of working Miracles for a Confirmation of their Doctrine must needs have greater Authority in mens Consciences then other men upon that very account if there were no other So that even their Gifts and Priviledges may be and doubtless were one ground at least of that higher degree of Authority which they had above others For in such a Rational perswasive Authority which worketh only on the Conscience the case is much different from the secular power of Magistrates For in the former even Gifts may be a ground of a greater measure of Power in binding mens minds And here is the greatest part of the difficulty that riseth in our way to hinder us from improving the example of the Apostles in that it is so hard to discern how much of their power over other Presbyters or Bishops was from their supereminency of Office and Imperial Authority and how much was meerly from the excellency of their Gifts and Priviledges Prop. 5. It s certain that the Magistrates did not then second the Apostles in the Government of the Church but rather hinder them by persecution The excommunicate were not punished therefore by the secular power but rather men were enticed to forsake the Church for the saving of their lives so that worldly prosperity attended those without and adversity those within which further shewes that the force of Apostolical Government was on the Conscience and it was not corrupted by an aliene kind of force Prop. 6. Yet had the Apostles a power of Miraculous Castigation of the very bodies of the Offenders at least sometimes which Peter exercised upon Ananiaâ— and Sapphyra and Paul upon Eâ—â—mas and some think upon Hymenaeus and Philetas and those other that were said to be delivered up to Satan certainly Paul had in readiness to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10.6 which its like extendeth somewhat farther than to meer censures But it s most certain that the Apostle used noâ— this power oâ— hurting mens bodies ordinarily but sparingly as they did other Miracles perhaps not according to their own wills but the Holy Ghosts So that this did not corrupt their Government neither and destroy the Spirituality of it Yet this makes it somewhat more difficult to us to improve the Apostles example because we know not how much of their power upon mens Consciences might be from such penal Miracles Prop. 7. The Apostles had power to Ordain and send others to the work of the Ministry But this only by the consent of the ordained and of the people before they could be compleat fixed Pâ—stors for they forced not any to go or any people to entertain them And it seemeth they did not Ordain singly but many together Acts 14.23 Timothy had his Gift by the laying on of Pauls hands and of the hands of the Presbyterie 1 Tim. 4.14 and 2 Tim. 1.6 Prop. 8. It seems that each Apostle did exercise a Government over the Churches which were once planted but this was principally in order to well setling and confirming them Prop. 9. No one Apostle did appropriate a Diocess to himself and say Here I am sole Governor or am chief Governor nor did they or could they forbid any others to Govern in their Diocess though as is said they did agree to distribute their work to the publike advantage and not to be all in one place at once but yet successively they might Prop. 10. Nay it s certain that they were so far from being the sole Bishops of such or such a Diocess that they had usually some more unfixed general Officers with them Paul and Barnabas went together at first and after the Division Barnabas and Mark Paul and Silas and sometimes Timothy and sometime Epaphroditus and sometime others went together afterward And others as well as Iames were usually at Ierusalem and all these had a general power where they came And it cannot be proved that Iames was Ruler of Peter Paul and the rest when they were at Ierusalem nor that he had any higher power then they Prop. 11. Yet it seems that the several Apostles did most look after those same Churches which themselves had been the instruments of gathering and that some addition of respect was due to those that had been spiritual Fathers to them above the rest 1 Cor. 4.15 Prop. 12. It was therefore by the General Commission of Apostleship that they Governed particular Churches pro tempore while they were among or neer them and not by any special Commission or Office of being the Diocesan or Metropolitane of this or that place 1. It was below them and a diminution of their honor to be so affixed and take the charge of any particular Churches 2. We find not that ever they did it 3. If they had then all the disorders and ungovernedness of those Churches would be imputable to them and therefore they must be still with them as fixed Bishops are seeing they cannot govern them at such a distance as makeâ— them uncapable 4. When Peter drew Barnabas and many more to dissimulation and almost to betray the liberties of the Gentiles Paul doth not say This is my Diocess and I must be the Ruler here nor doth Peter plead this against him when Paul and Barnabas fell out whether Mark should be taken with them or not neither of them did plead a Ruling Authority nor say This is my Diocess or I am the superior Ruler but they produced their reasons and when they could not agree concerning the validity of each others reasons they separated and took their several companions and waies Prop 13. It was not only the Apostles but multitudes more that were such general unfixed Ministers as the seventy Barnabas Silas Epaphroditus Timothy and many others And all these also had a Power of Preaching and Ruling where they came Prop. 14. None of these General Officers did take away the Government from the fixed Presbyters of particular Churches nor kept a Negative vote in their own hands in matters of Government for if no fixed Bishop or Presbyter could excommunicate any member of his Church without an Apostle then almost all
not so much as a ground to conjecture at any probability Sect. 20. But he saith that we may know that some Pastors at least are true or else God had forsaken his Church Aâ—sw But what the better are we for this if we know not which they are that are the true Pastors nor cannot possibly come to know it Sect 21. But he saith that Quod Christi locum tenent quod debemus illiâ— obedientiam may be known and thereupon he saith thaâ— Certe sumus certitudiâ—â— infallibili quod isti quos videmus sine veri Episcopi Pastores nostri Nam ad hoc non râ—quiritur nec fides nec Character Ordinis nec legitima Electio sed solum ut habeantur pro talibus ab Ecclesia From all this you may note 1. That they are veri Episcopi Pastores nostri that were never ordained if they are but reputed such by the Church 2. That we may know this by infallible Certainty 3. And that we owe them obedience as such So that as to the Church they are true Pastors without Ordination and consequenâ—ly to the Church a succession is unnecessary Sect. 22. Yet of such Usurpers he saith Eos quidem non esse in se veros Episcopos tamen donec pro talibus habentur ab Ecclesia deberi illis obedientiam cum conscientia etiam erroâ—â—a obliget So that they are not veri Episcopi in se and yet they are veri Episcopi Pastores nostri if Bellarmine say true And the words have some truth in them understood according to the distinction which I before gave Chap. 1. Sect. 5 6. He hath no such Call as will save himself from the penalty oâ— usurpation if he knowingly be an usurper but he hath such a Call as shall oblige the Church to obey him as their Bishop or Pastor Sect. 23 But his reason Cum conscientia etiam erronea obliget is a deceit and neither the only nor the chieâ— reason noâ— any reason Not the only nor chief reason because the obligation ariseth from God and that is the greatest Not any reason 1. Because indeed it is not an Erroneous Conscience that tells many people that their usurping Bishops or Pastors are to be obeyed as true Ministers For as it is terminated on the Pastors act or state it is no act of Conscience at all and therefore no error of conscience For conscience is the knowledge of our own affairs And as it is terminated on our own Duty of obeying them it is not Erroneous but right For it is the will of God that for order sake we obey both Magistrates and Pastors that are setled in Possâ—ssion if they rule us according to the Laws of Christ at least if we do not know the Nullity oâ— their call 2. And its false that an Erroneous Conscience bindeth that is makes us a Duty For at the same instant it is it self â— sin and we are bound to depose it and change 〈◊〉 and renounce the eâ—ror It doth but intangle a man in a Necessity of sinning till it be laid by But it is God only that can make our duty and cause such an obligation Sect. 24. From the adversaries Concessions then an uninterrupted succession or present true Ordination is not of Necessity to the being of the Ministry Church or Ordinances quoad Ecclesiam for the Church is bound to obey the usurpers and that as long as they are taken for true Pastors Which is as much as most Churches will desire in the case Sect. 25. And the consequence is easily proved For where God obligeth his Churches to the obedience of Pastors though usurpers and to the use of Ordinances and their Ministration there will he bless the Ministry and those Ordinances to the innocents that are not guilty of his usurpation and that obey God herein And consequently the Ordinances shall not be Nullities to them God would never set his servants upon the use of a means which is but a Nullity nor will he command them to a duty which he will blast to them when he hath done without their fault It s none of the Churches fault that the Bishop or Pastor is an usurper whâ—le they cannot know it and that any of his Predecessors were usurpers since the Apostles dayes And therefore where God imposeth duty on the Church and prescribeth means as Baptism Prayer the Lords Supper Church-Government c. it is certain that he will not blast it but bless it to 〈◊〉 obedient nor punish the Church so for the secret sin of I know not who committed I know not where nor when perhaps a thousand years ago Sect. 26. Argument 6. As other actions of usurpers are not Nullities to the innocent Church so neither is their Ordinanation and consequently those that are Ordained by usurpers may be true Ministers If their Baptizing Preaching Praises Consecration and administration of the Eucharist binding and loosing be not Nullities it follows undenyably on the same account that their Ordinations are not Nullities and consequently that they are true Ministers whom they ordain and succession of a more regular Ordination is not of Necessity to the Ministry Church or Ordinances Sect. 27. Argument 7. If such uninterrupted succession be not Necessary to be Known then is it not Necessary to the Being of the Ministry or Validity of Ordinances administred But such a succession is not Necessary to be known therefore The Consequence of the Major is plain because the Being or Nullity of Office and administrations had never been treated off by God to men nor had it been revealed or a thing regardable but that we may know it Nor doth it otherwise attain its ends And that it is not necessary to be known I further prove Sect. 28. If this succession must be known then either to the Pastor or to the Church or both but none of these therefore 1. If it must be known only to the Pastor then it is not Necessary as to the Church And yet it is not Necessary to be known to the Pastor himself neither For as is shewed its impossible for him to know it so much as by a Moral Certainty His Predecessors and their Ordinations were strange to him 2. Not to the Church For it is not possible for them to know it Nor likely that they should know as much as the true Ordination of their present Pastor according to the Prelatical way when it is done so far out of their sight Sect. 29. If the foresaid uninterrupted succession be necessary to the being of our Ministry or Churches or Ordinances then is it incumbent on all that will prove the truth of their Ministery Churches or Ordinances to prove the said succession But that is not true for then none as is aforesaid could prove any of them Either it is meet that we be able to Prove the truth of our Ministry Churches and administrations or not If not then why do the adversaries call us to it If yea then no man
word 2. Or 〈◊〉 the Churches are all called One that are under one Christian Magistrate I will confess the thing to be true that is pretended to be the reason of the name All the Churches do owe obedience to the Magistrate But he is no Essential part or Ecclesiastical Head of the Church and therefore it is very improperly denominated from him or called One on that account No more then all the Schools are one because he is their Soveraign It is the Common-wealth that is specified and individuated by the Magistrate as the Soveraign Power and not the Churches But yet it is but an improper word to call all the Churches one Church on that account which we contend not about § 7. But it is the Thing that we stick more at then the name A General Head doth properly specifie and individuate the Body Prove either 1. That the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other 2. Or an Assembly of Bishops or Presbyters is properly an Ecclesiastical Head having Authority from Jesus Christ to be the chief Ruler of all the Churches in the Land and then I will confess that we have properly and strictly a National Church But no such thing can be proved § 8 As for an Assembly I have already shewed which Bishop Vsher asserted to me that they are not superior Governors nor instituted graâ—ia Regiminis but gratia unitatis having no more Rule over particular Bishops then a Convention of Schoolmasters over a particular Schoolmaster If they say that Kings and Parliaments give Power to Convocations I answer that can be but such as they have themselves which we shall speak of anon and is nothing to this place § 9. And as for a Primate or Archbishop of Canterbury e. g. 1. It will be a hard task to prove Archbishops as such to be of Divine Institution 2. And it will be harder even Impossible to prove Archbishops of the English species as such to be of Divine institution 3. And certainly Christ hath nowhere told us that every Nation shall have such a Head nor every Province nor every County nor told us whether there shall be one over ten Nations or ten over one Their limits are not to be found in Scripture supposing there were such an office there known 4. Nor is it anywhere determined that such a City shall have the preheminence and Canterbury v. g. be Ruler of all the rest All these are of meer humane institution And therefore that which the imposers of Ceremonies call the Church of England is a meer humane thing which therefore can bind us no further then the Magistrate can authorize them to do § 10. But the stronger pretence will be that the particular Bishops of England were severally officers of Christ authorized to Govern their several flocks and therefore a Convâ—cation of these Bishops binds us in conscience gratia unitatis The People they oblige as their Rulers and the several Presbyters also as their Rulers and the several Bishops gratia unitatis for avoiding of schism § 11. Answ. This also is an insufficient evidence to prove our Consciences obliged to their Ceremonies eo nomine because of their Canons or commands For though we acknowledge a sort of Episcopacy to be warrantable yet that this sort that made the Canons in question is not warrantable I have proved at large in the former Disputation on that question Such Pastors of a Diocess as our Bishops were have no word of God to shew for their office further then as they are Presbyters but we have shewed already that their office is unlawfull And therefore though their actions as Presbyters may be valid yet their actions are Null which were done by pretence of this unlawfull sort of office they being no other way enabled thereto On this ground therefore we are not bound § 12. If it could be pretended that at least as Presbyters the Convocation represented the Presbyters of England and therefore thus their Canons binds us to the use of ceremonies Common prayer c. I should answer that 1. Even Synods of Presbyters or the Lawfullest sort of Bishops oblige but gratia unitatis 2. That the late Synod at Westminster was as truly a Representative of the Presbyters of England as the Convcaotion where such consent if any were given was retracted 3. By actuall dislike signified by disuse the Presbyters of England for the most part have retracted their Consent 4. Yea most that are now Ministers never gave such Consent 5. Even â—ll particular Pastors and Churches are free and may on just reason deny consent to such impositions § 13. There remains nothing then that with any shew of strength can be pretended as continuing our obligation to Ceremonies from Authority but that of the Civil Power that commanded them But to that I say 1. So much as was lawfull we confess that we were bound to use while we had the command of the Civil power But nothing unlawfull could be made our duty by them 2. the Civil Power hath repealed those laws that bound us to these ceremonies The Parliament repealed them the late King consented at least for the ease of tender Consciences as he spoke that men should have liberty to forbear them And the present Rulers are against them whom we see even the ceremoniouâ— obey in other matters § 14. Let those then that would subjugate our Consciences to their ceremonies make good their foundation even the Authority by which they suppose us to be obliged or they do nothing If all their impositions were proved things indifferent and lawfull that 's nothing to prove that we must use them till they prove that lawfull authority commandeth them The Civil Powers do not command them And the Ecclesiasticks that command them prove not their authority over us In the matters of God we will yield to any man that bids us do that which God hath bidden us do already But if they will exercise their power by commanding us more then God commands us and that unnecessarily we must crave a sight of their commission § 15. And if men that have no Authority over us shall pretend Authority from God and go about to exercise it by Ceremonious impositions we have the more reason to scruple obeying them even in things indifferent lest we be guilty of establishing their usurpation and pretended office in the Church and so draw on more evils then we foresee or can remove CHAP. XI Prop. 11. The Commands of Lawfull Governors about Lawfull Ceremonies must be understood and obeyed with such exceptions as do secure the End and not to the subverting of it § 1. THE proof of this is obvious These humane Ceremonies are appointed but as means to a further end But that which would cross and overthrow the end doth cease to be a Means and cannot be used sub ratione medii § 2. Order and Decency are the pretended ends of the Imposed Ceremonies and the right worshiping of God and the good of mens