Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	apostle_n	church_n	word_n	980	5	3.9234	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85048	Some necessary & seasonable cases of conscience about things indifferent in matters of religion, briefly, yet faithfully stated [a]nd resolved wherein the the [sic] just bounds of imposing on one hand, and of obeying on the other, are truly fixed, / by an indifferent hand.	Fullwood, Francis, d. 1693.	1661 (1661)	Wing F2517; Thomason E2270_1; ESTC R209648	43,257	226

by the Apostle was chiefly if not as an eminent person asserts onely unto sin And the great reason the Apostle gives why we must not use our liberty to the offence of our weak brother is lest we lay a stumbling-block Rom. 14. 13 15 20 21. 1 Cor. 8. 9 10 11 12 13. before him whereat he may fall that is least he presume after our example to do something against his Conscience and so sin against Christ and be likely to perish or to be destroyed the danger therefore the Apostle tells us lies not so much in offending our brother in the English sense as in one making him by our evil example to offend Wherefore the Apostle concludes If meat make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh c. 1 Cor. 8. 13. But now the offence that is most likely to ensue upon our conformity is quite of another nature there is litle fear of drawing our offended brethren to like the waies of Conformity by the practice of Conformists but rather they will like Conformity and the persons conforming so much the worse and grow the more bitter against them The reason of this difference I conceive lies thus In the time of the Apostle those were genera●ly looked upon as the strongest disciples that knew their liberty best and the others that were weak were aptest to be offended but now those that pretend offence are the strongest in their own opinion and they judge it a weakness in those that do conform and no doubt if any be likely to follow our examples in conformity out of an opinion of our ability to judg better then themselves they will as easily follow our Judgment too if we first use due means of satisfaction to them and then all the scruple is vanished and gone 2. Secondly let us weigh them one against another and compare the offence received by our weak brethren upon our obedience with that received by Authority upon our disobedience If we onely do that which we may lawfully do and which we are commanded to do we do not give our weak brother any offence though he take it there is not that per●se or naturally flowing out of the use of my liberty or the doing of my duty that would hurt my brother or tempt him to sin he takes occasion of himself not at all given by me But now by disobedience if the thing be lawfull that is injoined we give offence to Authority directly and properly so and as we have shewed we can hardly escape sin herein against the fifth Commandement which in every iota as well as all the rest our very liberty it self establisheth The sum is this by refusing to conform in such a lawfull case lest we should offend our weak brother seems directly to sin our selves to avoid an occasion of sin to him to offend God the King the Law the Church and conscience too by not doing our duty lest we should offend our brother by doing it Therefore we must distinguish betwixt things Indifferent that are not under the actual command of Authority and such as are before they are commanded things Indifferent are in our liberty and then the Apostles Rule holds we must not use our liberty to the offence of our brethren but what is required by Authority if it be no longer in our liberty we must minde our duty This Rule therefore greatly concerns Magistrates in th●ir Impositions who ought still to follow the weighty advice of Mr Calvin Let Charity submit to Faith and Liberty to Charity but Subjects must not sin that they may please their Prince much less their brother Besides we may distinguish of offence with respect to our brother offended if we offend him by doing our duty we one●y tempt him to do his duty though against his conscience on the other side if we omit our duty lest we offend our brother do not we offend him more in the Apostles sence by tempting him to continue in sin and to embolden himself in sin with a worse conscience CASE The Apostle hath laid down a Rule how we are to use our liberty in things Indifferent towards our weak brother can Man by his commands alter this Rule or take off the force of it Resol THe Apostles Rule is absolutely unalterable where the reason of it holds and the object is the same that is where the matter is still indifferent 2. Man cannot make things Indifferent to become necessary in their nature yet lawful Authority may and ought to judge when the exigencies of the Church make any thing necessary as to its present use or forbearance These necessary things saith that Councel Act. 15. though v. 28. they were not all necessary in their nature yet the Councel judged them necessary as to the present good of the Church 3. In such Cases for the publick good of the Church Governours may and ought to determine the use of Indifferent things by their prudent impositions It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us 28. to lay upon you no other burthen then these necessary things And no less remarkably we finde St Pauls power put forth in 1 Cor. 11. and o●her places in determining many Indifferent things for order and decency in the Church of God 4. But what doth all this signifie if these Apostolical Injunctions have no force when a discontented person shall say he is offended Put case that after the decree of the Synod in Act. 15. a particular member should have been offended that his brother refused to eat meat offered to Idols pleading that it was superstition in him or a losing or betraying the Christian Liberty Or that others had been offended at those particulars of Decency and Order injoined by the Apostle to the Church of Corinth urging that they were not commanded of the Lord that therefore they were Humane Inventions New Ordinances Additions to Gods Word and Will-Worship Can any imagine that the rest of the people had been discharged of their duty either to that famous Synod or that excellent Governour the Apostle Paul or that they were bound to suspend their Obedience lest they should offend such scrapulous persons I cannot think it We must not oppose Liberty to Necessity Charity to Duty or the Offence of the Weak to the Higher Powers CASE I. But it is vehemently urged by my brethren in the Ministry that even their credit and reputation will not suffer them to conform they shall thus become vile to the people as men that will do any thing to save their Liveings and then their Ministry will be fruitless and do no good among them What is to be done in such a Case Resol 1. THis Case seems to arise from prudence and not conscience Herein we not pretend to fly from sin to suffering but from one sort of suffering to another that is judged rather to be chosen from suffering in our Reputation by Conformity to the Penalties of the Law for disobedience which when all

destroyed by the Builders or died of the Doctors My Dear Brethren let me breathe out my soul in St Augustines words Ut moneor ut doleo ut timeo procederem ad pedes vestros flerem quantum valerem rogarem quantum amarem nunc unumquemque pro seipso nunc utrumque pro altero pro aliis maximè infirmis pro quibus Christus mortuus est qui vos tanquam in Theatro vitae hujus cum magno sui periculo spectant ne de vobis ea conscribendo spargatis quae quandoque concordantes delere non poteritis qui nunc concordare nolitis 2. To my dissenting Brethren my humble and solemn Request is that if the case be like to be thus they would in season think it adviseable seriously to consider what they have to do to study that which is likely to be enjoyned with all severity and impartiality as they would do or suffer with knowledge and comfort The great Case will be Upon what grounds you may warrantably lay down your ministery and upon what Not or how farr you may lawfully obey the Imposition of Authority For your more ample satisfaction herein give me leave to say That after the Scriptures Bucer Calvin Melancthon Zanchy Polanus Beza c. are of undoubted credit in such a case as this and worthy to be conferred with as also St Augustine his 118 119. Epist ad Janu. If this poor Piece shall have the honour of your perusal I beseech you remember that by two Errours we are very apt to weigh things amiss 1. When we take up the scales weigh over-hastily 2. When one end of the ballance is heavier then the other perhaps by prejudice or something else that should not be there Do the Book no wrong do the Church no wrong do your selves no wrong For your own preservation your peoples edification the Churches peace prosperity and salvation be not averse to any just satisfaction Let no Society no Condition no Temptation with errour and suffering be more dear and pleasant with you then the Church of God the discharge of your trust the fulfilling of your Ministery with duty and liberty truth and felicity Farewell Twenty Four Necessary and Seasonable CASES of CONSCIENCE about things Indifferent in Matters of Religion CASE I. What are Things Indifferent Resol THINGS Indifferent have their place in the middle betwixt things Necessary and things Sinful things that ought and things that ought not to be done For as to their Simple and common Nature i. e. Considered nakedly without respect to such Circumstances as change their property and denominale them good or evil they are such things as may be done or left undone without sin They are of a Middle not a Mixt Nature not both good and bad that is Medium abnegationis a Contradiction not partly good and partly bad then the good can never expiate the bad for the least degree of evil renders the Action evil but neither good nor bad As they are Morally neither good nor bad so they are not made such by Scripture being neither commanded nor forbidden They are of an Indifferent Nature and may be Indifferently Used Yet very apt by reason of Circumstances to tend unto to swerve towards to become or appear either good or evil CASE II. Whether there is any thing Indifferent in the Exercise of Religion Resol FOR Our cleerer satisfaction herein let us consider Actions and Circumstances 1. Touching Actions I assert First That no one Action in Religious Exercises is of its own nature so Indifferent but that by its circumstances it easily becomes good or evil 2. No Action that is deliberate and hath an order to a certain end distinguished from Actions of fancy usually so called which are unobserved by the Agents Individually considered and as performed about the Worship of God can be truly Indifferent but by reason of its circumstances is good or evil 3. No Action considered as a part of Divine Worship can possibly be Indifferent for either it is such as God himself hath appointed and therefore necessary or invented by men and superstitious 4. Yet Fourthly There are divers Actions that are no part but circumstances of worship though Actions in themselves before they are exerted and clothed with their circumstances that are properly Indifferent both as to their Nature neither good nor bad as to the Scripture neither commanded or forbidden and consequently as to our use neither necessary nor unlawful and lastly in comparison with other Actions that might as lawfully serve in the same stead of neither more or less necessity as I might instance in lifting up or casting down our eyes in lifting up or spreading abroad our hands in prayer c. But thus much for Actions 2. As for Circumstances properly so called It is not doubted I think by any but there are some viz. time place habit that are purely indifferent I mean befo●e they are determined and in a generall consideration abstracted from conveniency and not complicated with other accidents that may vary the Case I shall not burden this unexceptionable Point with needless Authority which were very easie if not needless I shall only instance the reasonableness of it under one part of Divine Worship viz. the Sacrament in the judgment of Mr. Calvin So Calv. I●sti lib 1. Sect. 43. much saith he as concerns the outward form of Ministring the Sacrament viz. Whether the faithful receive into their hand or not Whether they divide it or every one eat that which is given him Whether they put the Cup into the hand of the Deacon or deliver it to the hand of the next Whether the Bread be Leavened or unleavened Whether the Wine be red or white it maketh no matter these things be Indifferent and left to the liberty of the Church Thus he and we might adde almost so many more of the like nature about every other Ordinance if occasion required CASE III. Whether may things Indifferent be Imposed and required by Authority Resol DOubtless they may For 1. The Word of God hath not particularly taught us what that decency and order is that is required Yet the Ruling part of the Church ought not only to require but to take care and see according to the Apostles example that all things be done decently and in order 2. Then plain Reason demonstrates that if it be the duty of Rulers to see That all things be done decently and in order they must also by their own discretion or advice with others judge and prescribe what is such 3. The Great Apostle therefore took upon him not only to press the general command of decency 1. Cor. 14. 34. 11. 4. 17. 1 Tim. 2. 8. 9. 1 Tim. 2. 12. 1 Cor. 7. 10. and order but to reprove particular disorders and to direct unto and command particular parts of order and comelinesse in the Churches 4. Yea that Famous Synod and truly Apostolical in Acts 15. did by their

ipsi sicut par est suâ libertate But lastly Admit that our Rulers ought to abolish the thing that hath been so used to superstition but do not think fit to do it injoyn us by their commands to leave the superstitious use and to use it as we lawfully may it need not enter into a Question Whether we ought not to forsake the superstition and also to obey Authority in the lawful use of that thing without fear of superstition CASE III. Whether the imputing of significancy to things imposed render them Superstitious Resol TRuly some Reverend and Learned men seem so affrighted at the very mention of sacred mystical Ceremonies significant symbolical Rites of humane Institution that I cannot but fear rhat they have apprehended some very great danger in them Should we once grant that Ceremonies of humane Institution might be appointed to signifie the favour of God or the grace of the Sacraments or to be a means of receiving any blessing from God no doubt there is so much danger in it that if corrupt and superstitious men should at any time rule the Church we may quickly have not onely Seven but Seventy times seven if not intire yet Semi-Sacraments the Church and service of God being thereby obnoxious to all the antick and conceited crotchers that the vain imaginations of over-curious men can cumber them with untill they become stench in the nostrils of all sober and staid men and of God himself with the Church of Rome But if by Rites and Ceremonies we mean onely the Circumstances of Divine Worship by Scripture left to the liberty and prudence of the Church and by the significancy of them we intend nothing but that they are fitted to commend the exercise with order and decency to express the gravity and devotion of the Worshippers tending also as such things are capable to unity and edification if this be all truly I cannot discover so much danger Yea give me leave to add that to quarrel with them because they are such seems to be angry with these Ceremonies which are better and because they are better then others and to quarrel with their very fitness and their conformity to the general Rules of Scripture by which alone they ought to be measured Again if nothing that is so purely Indifferent as to be of no use or service and not to be more expedient then inexpedient ought to be imposed as all moderate men allow and according to the opinion in hand Nothing that hath its use or significancy may be required who sees not but the Church is crucified between two Opinions that openly rob her of all power about things indifferent Some very wise and unsuspected persons have freely declared themselves not to discover any such danger in the bare significancy of the Rites of the Church as others are affrighted with It is not lawfull saith Peter Martyr to Hooper to deprive the Church of that liberty that she should not by her actions and Rites of the Church aliquid significare signify something Yea further saith he the very Apostle himself used that liberty when he taught ut illis signis that with those signes they should be admonished of their duty Again Rerum significationes c. the significations of things call to our minds quid nos deceat what is expedient Ministri magis memores sint sui officii Vid. Aret. in 1 Cor. 10. 10. 16. 16. Pet. Mart. in 1 Cor. 16. 26. Geneva Annotations in 1 Cor. 16. 20. Perkins Case Consci cap. 3. Sect. 3. Calvin also is nothing Calv. Instit lib. 4. c. 10. 28 29. fearful to de iver his minde in the point There are saith he Rites which draw Veneration to holy things c. with such little helps we are provoked to piety They are adapted to the reverence of holy Mysteries thereby the exercise is suited to holin●ss They are not without fruit Thereby the faithfull are admonished with what modesty and religion they are to worship God Kneeling saith Beza when we receive the Signes hath a shew of Godly and Christian Veneration CASE IV. Whether it be a sinfull betraying our Christian liberty to obey the Law in things Indifferent in the Worship of God Resol THis Question seems to engage God and Cesar and to cause a quarrel betwixt Duty and Liberty which neither God or Cesar Duty or Liber●y will own or defend The doubt apparently results out of a too gross mistake of the nature of true Gospel-Liberty the Internal part whereof though it indeed free us from Inward Bondage yet binds us the faster in Service to God so the external part thereof doth also deliver us from outward slavery to the lusts of men yet it the more obligeth us in duty to Superiors Polanus placeth External Christian Liberty which indeed is properly Christian as it may be distinguished from Gospel-Liberty in two things A Liberty from the Law of Moses 2. A Liberty in the use of Indifferent things Now though the first branch may not be touched yet he doubts not in the least but that the latter may be determined upon just occasion of the Churches order by lawfull Authority Libertas Christiana est duplex à Legibus Mosis in Adiaphoris quales sunt Ceremoniae humanâ autoritate institutae boni ordinis causâ Christian liberty saith Polanus is twofold from the Laws of Moses and in things indifferent of which sort meaning things Indifferent are Ceremonies appointed by humane Authority for orders sake Now neither of these branches of Christian Liberty can be soberly thought to make void the Law as Moral or Natural in any one jot or tittle of it which our Saviour came to fulfill Matth. 5. and establish Rom. 3. ult but to assert that Rulers have no power in things Indifferent because of Christian liberty seems to weaken he arm of Authority Ecclesiastical Civil Political Oeconomical and even to raze out the fifth Commandement of the Moral Law yea what unnatural consequences of all disorder are like to ensue in Church in State in Families and all Societies in the world the beauty and comliness of all which lies not a litle in the due order of things Indifferent Yea how often is the Apostle himself the great Assert of Christian Libertie thus made an Invader of it how Injuriously did that famous Synod Act. 15. binde the Church to those indifferent things What Council Father Scholman Church nay what wise man was ever of this opinion or who is that solid Writer in any age almost that hath not declared the contrary Give me leave therefore to repeat it the nature of Christian Liberty is much mistaken It is not only consistent with but it even consisteth in the determination of things indifferent by lawful Authority It is one part of this liberty as Calvin asserts Libertas aufertur ablato Jure Legibus that the Church hath power to regulate the Circumstantes of Worship for peace and unity order and decency

and it is no doubt another great part of the said Liberty that the members of the same may without sin obey their Rulers in such determinations It is most worthily observed by the Apostle that is a part of our Freedom as Christians that we may be the Lords free-men in our 1 Cor. 7. 20 22. publick capacity and yet servants in our private our Christian liberty being not infringed by our outward duty Moreover that for the good of Society the preservation of our selves from legal penalties for our maintenance and livelihood we may be subject to the commands and laws of men I take to be a very valuable part of our liberty also provided nothing be required or acted against the Supremacy of our Lord Paramount in Heaven But let us a little more 1 Cor. 7. 20 21 23. distinctly consider the Apostle Let every one abide in the same calling private wherin he is called that is to be a Christian Art thou called a servant c. Whence briefly note 1. Are not all that are called to be Christians called to the liberty of Christians 2. Doth not the Text assure us that this liberty to which we are called is truly consistent with the Condition in which we are called otherwise why should we abide in it 3. Is not the state of all persons called to be Christians except supream Magistrates a state of subjection and servitude 4. Doth it not then most cleerly follow that Christian liberty consisteth with and obligeth unto all kind of duty to all kind of Governours to Fathers Masters Husbands as the very Quakers acknowledg Pastours Kings and to God himself as all good Christians have cause to glory and that upon the firmest bonds and ties imaginable of Wrath of Conscience and the Lords sake Nam etsi conscientias proprie solus Deus ●ig●● c. For saith Beza although Bez. ep 20. God alone can properly bind the conscience yet so fat as the Church with respect to Order and Decency and thereby to Edification doth rightly enjoyn or make Laws concerning things Indifferent those same Laws are to be observed by all pious Persons and they do so far bind the conscience as that no man Sciens prudens rebellandi animo wittingly and willingly with a purpose to disobey can either do what is so forbidden or omit what is so commanded absque peccato without sin CASE III. What are we to do in case such things are commanded us as though we judg them lawful yet others judge them sinful and will be offended at our doing of them Resol VVE have already considered what is to be done if things sinful in themselves or judged so by us be injoyned We are arrived to the ultimate scruple touching the offence that others may be likely to take at our practice who conceive those things which are injoyned to be unlawful and that we shall sin if we do them And the Question is What is to be done in this Case The scruple is evidently grounded in the Apostles Directions about scandal the sum of which is that we must not use our liberty in indifferent things to the offence of our weak brother For satisfaction to this great and present doubt we must have liberty a little to distinguish 1. We must distinguish of the object of scandal it may be such as offends only one way and it may be such as offends both ways that is first the doing of a thing may offend some when the not doing of it offends none This was the Case in the Apostles time the taking of meat offered to Idols was apt to offend the weak brethren but the not eating of such meat was not likely to offend any body In such a Case 't is evident we ought not to eat to the offence of our brother But in some Cases there is a necessity of offence whether we do the thing or whether we do it not as in case of Conformity our very case some you say that are weak will be offended if we do conform and you cannot say but that some whom you judg weak also will be offended if we do not Now in this case there is no remedy seeing I must do one or other conform or not but to fly to that excellent Rule of Polanus and to consider the persons offended on both sides and to weigh the nature of the offence Hereupon we must rest satisfied in this issue where most and of most consideration are offended and where the nature of the offence is most haynous there we must forbear to use our liberty and either do or not do the thing in question and so on the contrary Let us then apply and faithfully answer our selves whether the doing a lawful thing enjoyned by Authority that will offend our weak brethren be likely to offend more persons and persons of more consideration and give offence of a more heinous nature than the not doing of that lawfull thing against the command of Authority Here seem to be three branches of the Comparison 1. Where more are likely to be offended 2. Where more considerable persons 3. Where the nature of the offence is foulest Truly I soberly think that Conformity in such lawfull things need not fear to compare with Non conformity in any one of these three 1. If the Question be Whether Conformity or Non-conformity be likely to offend most individual persons in the Nation it will not be difficult to answer It s possible the imposing of such things 〈◊〉 offend many more then t●● not practising but when things are once imposed so wise a Nation will I conceive leave little room for the comparison betwixt the extent of scandal by Obedience and by Disobedience 2. And much more if the Question be touching the considerableness of the persons offended on both sides 'T is too true that Obedience in such a case is likely to stirr up trouble envy discontent murmuring in the mindes of many of the ordinary sort of people but whether as to the great ends of the peace and good of the Church the ordinary sort be the more consi●●●able will hardly brook 〈◊〉 inquiry Whereas our Disobedience besides the offence of ordinary people is too likely to offend the King the Court the Councell the Parliament the Bishops the Lawyers the Nobility the Gentry or beyond controversie the greater part of them all but even thus farr the Argument is invincible à Minore ad Majus If we must forbear our liberty in case of offence to our weak brother much more in case of offence to Authority 3. Especially if we consider the nature of the offence also on both sides Where first we may compare the offence on both sides with the offence the Apostle mentions and then weigh them one against another 1. First comparing the scandal likely to happen upon our obedience with the scandal of the weak mentioned by the Apostle there seems to be this great difference the scandal mentioned