Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	law_n	nature_n	precept_n	1,292	5	9.1116	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62878	Væ scandalizantium, or, A treatise of scandalizing wherein the necessity, nature, sorts, and evills of scandalizing, are handled, with resolution of many questions thereto pertaining / preached at Lemster, in Herefordshire by Iohn Tombes ...	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1641 (1641)	Wing T1827; ESTC R21407	96,654	466

that which the Magistrate commands only mediately I answer Though it bee true that for this reason the thing which the Magistrate commands is not so strictly our duty as that which God commands the Magistrates commands belonging only to his owne subjects Gods commands to all the Magistrates constitutions binding us only in reference to a superiour authority and a superiour end the publique good and therefore when they are contrary to the law of God or nature when there is some pressing necessity that cannot bee avoyded by reason of which wee cannot doe the thing commanded if the necessity bee true and not fained and the not-doing of the Magistrates command be without contempt of authority or ill example to others or if the thing commanded should be in truth plainely contrary to the publique good as it may happen sometimes some commands may if strictly urged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the letter But Gods commands binde absolutely without limitation I say though for these reasons the thing which the Magistrate commands be not our dutty so strictly as that which God immediately commands yet when it is a duty as it is when it opposeth not Gods law the law of nature or the publique safety there is a necessity of obeying the command of the Magistrate as of obeying Gods immediate precepts nor may the one bee omitted to avoyde scandall any more then the other As for that which is said that the Magistrate cannot restraine our charity 'T is true for charity is an inward affection of the soule which none but God can command as none but hee can search and punish yet the Magistrate may restraine the shewing of our charity somewayes as in forbidding to relieve malefactors rebels vagrants c. so that hee should sin that should preferre such a worke of charity before a worke of obedience to the governour which is a worke of piety to a publique person and the Father of the countrey whereas the other is to a private person of common respect But the Magistrate cannot command our consciences Answ. That the commands of men doe in no sort bind the conscience cannot bee said without contradicting of S. Paul Rom. 13. 5. Ye must needes bee subject not onely for wrath but also for conscience sake They that say least for governours say they may by their lawes binde the conscience mediately and by vertue of Gods precept although not immediately and of themselves Now this is enough to prove that it is the duty of Christians to doe the lawful commands of the Magistrate As for that which is said that the danger of scandall is before the disobedience to the commands of men I suppose not for the evill by disobeying of the Magistrate is as certaine if not more certaine then the evill of scandall the evill of scandall more remediable then the evill that followes on the disobeying the Magistrates command for the one is likely onely some transeunt harme in the mind or conscience of the scandalized person the other a constant permanent harme in the common wealth such as many times overthrowes government and in fine dissolveth a commonwealth the one usually extends to few the other to the whole community And it is taken for a plain truth Praestat ut pereat unus quam unitas Or as Caiaphas once said It is expedient that one should dye for the people and that the whole nation perish not Io. 11. 52. Adde hereto that there is a scandalizing of the publique Magistrate and others by disobedience as § 17. was determined which is as regardable as well as the scandalizing of private persons unlesse too much partiall respect sway men that they will not judge righteous judgement 2. I argue thus If it be not determined that the obeying of the Magistrates command were to bee preferred before the declining of scandall that may happen by such obedience then it will follow that both the Magistrate is bound to revoke or suspend his lawes when there is likely-hood of scandall to follow For he is not to urge men to doe that which is evill Now this would make all governours that make conscience of their commands almost perpetually uncertaine whether they may command any thing or no or make their constitutions invalid sith they can seldome make any orders but that scandals will arise as experience in all ages hath proved And subjects also shall have power to neglect such constitutions and so to make them as no lawes in the same case The consequent of which being granted I suppose can bee no lesse then Anarchy and confusion The mischiefe of which is greater then I can expresse and such as the avoyding of scandalizing of some soules cannot countervaile wherefore as it is said in the case of exacting an oath of a persō that it's likely will forsweare himselfe Fiat justitia ruat coelum Let justice proceed though the heaven fall so say I let goverment stand though subjects bee scandalized 3. Lastly If a man in doing any lawfull thing make it knowne that hee must doe it by reason of the command of authority or it bee otherwise manifest that that is indeed the reason of his doing surely he that is offended is rather unrighteous and evill minded then weake that will think that lawes must bee broken to please him and therefore the scandalizing of such not regardable A twelfth question may be If it fall out that in the doing or omitting of a thing indifferent some will bee scandalized if it be done others if omitted some offended if it be done this way some offēded if not done this way so that there is apparent danger of scandall either way what is to be done in such a case Ans. D. Ames l. 5. de conscientia c. 11. § 18. denies the case and sayes nulla datur talis perplexitas ut necessarium sit pio homini sive hoc vel illu à faciat sive non faciat scandalum alicui dare There can bee no such perplexity that it should bee necessary for a godly man whether he doe this or that or not doe it to scandalize some one Which assertion of his is both against experience and reason Against experience For the contrary fell out in S. Peters case Gal. 2. 12. in which it is plaine in the carriage of that matter that if he did eat with the Gentiles he was in danger of scandalizing the Iewes if hee did not eate with them to scandalize the Gentiles And it falls out too frequently in our own dayes that in the use of some rites in themselves indifferent some are offended with the use of them as Popish some with the not using them as arguing the affectation of Novellisme and singularity Against reason For sith scandall ariseth from the opinion that is had of a thing indifferent when the action of him that offendeth dasheth against it and it is undoubted that even godly men may have opposite opinions of things indifferent one thinking

opinion to whom it happens that their use of their liberty may become the harme of their neighbour That which is evil for a subject of the King of England to doe may not bee evill to the subject of the King of Spaine who hath made no such law as the King of England And that vow that binds him that made it bindes not another which hath made no such vow and that opinion which one man hath and that harme of our brother which restraines one man from the use of his liberty restraines not another whose action would cause no such harme in whose mind is no such opinion Having premised these things I am next to enquire into the Apostles resolutions delivered Rom. 14. 1. Cor. 8. 9. 10. chapters concerning the forbearing of the use of our liberty in case of scandall which was then in agitation and determined by the Apostle in those chapters Which that wee may the better understand we are to take notice that as appeares by S. Lukes history of the Acts of the Apostles and likewise by other histories of Iosephus Suetonius Tacitus and others the nation of the Iewes was in those dayes wherein S. Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans dispersed over many countries of the world in Asia AEgypt Greece Italy and particularly that many of that nation dwelt in Rome In which citty at that time the great city which had dominion over a great part of the earth the Iewes retained the religion and rites of their nation prescribed by Moses and were for their Sabbaths Circumcision abstaining from swines flesh and such like rites derided by the Satyrists of those times famous at Rome Horace Iuvenall Persius and the rest Now of these Iewes at Rome it pleased God to convert some to the Christian faith as well as some of the Gentiles Wee are likewise to remember that while the Ceremoniall law of Moses was in force the Iewes conceived themselves as strictly bounde to the observances of meates and dayes and other ordinances of Moses as of the decalogue unlesse in such cases as wherein the observing of them was against a morall duty For then that of the Prophet took place I will have mercy and not sacrifice as our Saviour determines Mat. 12. 7. Whereupon the godly Iewes made conscience of obedience to the ceremoniall lawes as to other morall precepts When in a vision all manner of foure footed beasts of the earth wild beasts and creeping things and foules of the aire were presented to Peter to kill and eate he replyed not so Lord for I have never eatē any thing that is common or unclean Acts. 10. 14. Hence they thought thēselves bound rather to suffer any torment than to eat so much as a bit of swines flesh as appears in the example of Eleazar and the mother and her seaven sons in the historie of the Maccabees 2. Maccab. ch 6. 7. wherefore when the Gospell began to bee preached and the ceremonies of Moses his law to bee disclaimed and neglected much contention arose betweene the Christians that were of the Circumcision and those of the Gentiles concerning the necessity of observing Moses law in so much that it was thought necessary to call a counsell of the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem to decide this difference Acts. 15. So that although by Christs death the necessity of observing them was taken away and the Gospell being promulgated their observation became dangerous as we read Gal. 5. yet such esteem had the ceremonies of the law gotten partly by their originall institution and partly tractu temporis by a long tract of time in which they had stood in force that many Christians not sufficiently instructed in their liberty feared to neglect or break them after their initiation into Christianity as on the other side those that were well instructed in their liberty did neglect them securely they made no scruple of eating meates of neglecting new moones and the like Festivalls And thus was it among the Romans when S. Paul wrot this Epistle to them There were some that would not eat meats prohibited by Moses law but rather eat hearbes nor would they omit the observation of dayes as not knowing their liberty therein so that if it happened they did eat such meats or neglect such dayes it was with doubting and regrete of conscience These the Apostle calleth weake brethren weake in the faith Others there were among the Romans who made no question of eating any sort of meats nor regarded dayes as knowing they had lawfull liberty therein And these are called strong in the faith by the Apostle Now if this diversity had been onely in practise or opinion it had been somewhat tollerable But the difference in opinion and deformity in practise bred among them as usually it doth discord and division For whereas Christian charity and holy wisdome should have prevented all quarrell between them all harming each other contrariwise it so fell out that the strong despised the weak as more scrupulous then needed and the weak with an aggrieved mind judged the strong as licentious and unholy and whereas sometimes the weake by the example of the strong might bee induced to doe that which though lawfull they doubted whether it were so or not their consciences were thereby wounded To ease the Christians of this grievance the Apostle as an equall arbitrator thus decides the controversy In this case the strong should take to them the weake in faith shewing kindnesse love to them but not imprudently intangle them with disputes which bred more doubts in them while they sought to cure their errour about meats and dayes that they should not despise or sleight them for their weaknesse but shew them all respect as believers that they should enjoy their knowledge to themselves but not use their liberty to the grievance of their brethrē that they should not so looke to their own much content in the use of their priviledge as to damnifie their brethren and to would their conscience On the other side the Apostle admonisheth the weake that they neither censure nor judge their brethren in the use of their liberty nor yet venture upon the use of their lawfull liberty with doubting consciences but bee sure that they bee well resolved in their judgements afore they enter on the practise Concerning the other Scripture in which the Apostle sets downe his resolutions in point of scandals the case was thus Corinth was an eminent beautifull citty called by Tully lumen Graeciae the eye of Greece but a Pagan citty In which the people were wont to worship Idols of Iupiter Mars Minerva c. to these they built Temples and offered sacrifices of oxen and other beasts as wee read they would have done at Lystra Acts. 14. 13. Of these oxen and other sacrifices some part of the flesh the Priests of the Idols had for their share some part was eaten by the people that offered at the Feasts called Lectisterma

in manner of a prolepsis For whereas it might be urged if there be a necessity of offences then they are no faults nor punishable our Saviour seems to deny this consequence by telling us that though they be necessary yet they be voluntary in the scandalizers who are therefore culpable and punishable Woe unto him through whom they come Saint Hierome in his Commentary on Math. 18. conceives that in this speech our Saviour specially pointed at Iudas T is true that Christ doth pronounce a woe to Iudas Mat. 26. 24. But that these words in my Text should either aime at Iudas his particular fact or be restrained to his scandalous action agrees not with the words which speak of woe or evill redundant to the world by offences not one offence and of scandalizing indefinitely any of those litle ones that believe in him Wherefore the meaning is Woe that is misery or evill shall befall him by whom the offence cometh who ever he be And the conclusion that it affords is this That misery belongs to him that is the cause of scandalls or as in S. Mathew in that paralel place Mat. 18. 7. Woe shall be to that man by whom the offence commeth To declare which truth we are distinctly to expresse 1. What scandalizers this woe belongs to 2. What the woe is which is pronoūced against thē 3. Why it is that they incur this woe In answer to the first we are to consider that that by which scandall comes is not a bare object but a person woe be to that man as it is in S. Mathew and that as an agent in causing scandall 2. That sometimes a mā may be a scandalizer in overthrowing himselfe As is manifest by that speech of our Saviour Mat. 18. 8. If thy hand or thy foot scandalize or offend thee cut them off That is as Interpreters conceive if thy lust or will cause thee to sin deny them For mens own carnall reason the lusts of their own hearts doe ofttimes cause them to fall or to goe away An instance is the example of the Psalmist Ps. 73. 2. Whose feet were almost gone his foot-steps had wellnigh slipt For he was envious at the foolish whē he saw the prosperity of the wicked His own understanding had in a sort tripped up his heeles or scandalized him And this sort of scandalizing may not unfitly be called internall or immanent and is so far from being excluded here that our Saviour by subjoyning to the words Mat. 18. 7. Woe to that man by whom the offence commeth presently in the 8. ver If thy hand scandalize thee cut it off which is meant of this inward scandall seemes to have plainely intended it And therefore S. Chrysostome in his Homily on Math. 18. 7 calls the scandals here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all hinderances of the right way whether from within or without And indeed a Woe doth undoubtedly belong to all such as by their own vaine imagination their own evill affections doe overthrow themselves when as S. Iames speaks a man is drawn away of his own lust and entised for as it followes then when lust hath conceived it bringeth forth sinne and sinne when it is finished bringeth forth death Accordingly occasion might be taken hence to consider the waies of selfe-scandalizing which are in a manner infinite and to shew the woe consequent to them and to give directions to prevent this danger But this is besides my purpose in handling this text and an immense taske it must be to shew the deceites of every sinne its manner of working c. and therefore letting this thing passe only with this admonition that it behooves every Christian to be jealous of his own heart and to watch it narrowly lest it prove a Iudas to him and how deare so ever his lust or imagination be to him yet it must be cut off that it scandalize him not remembring the Counsell of our Saviour that it is better without them to enter into heaven then with them to be cast into hell fire 3. That sometimes and that most commonly scandalizing is a transeunt action and he is said to cause offence that harmes another by his action and this may be called externall or transeunt scandall And this is undoubtedly here meant for he speaks here of scandalizing one of these litle ones that believe in him and of such scandall as whereby a woe comes to the world that is to the societies rankes of men And this sort of Scandalizing is it which I intend to treat of 4. That of this sort of scandalizing diverse definitions are given There is this definition or description in Tertullian his book de velandis virginibus where he defines scandall Exemplum rei non bonae aedificans ad delictum an example of a thing not good building to sin which description though it doe not unfitly expresse what is the scandall which is by evill example yet doth it not sufficiently comprize all sorts of scandalizing another v.g. not the scandalizing by abuse of our liberty in things indifferent nor that which is by persecution That definition which the schoole-men as Aqu. 2a. 2ae q. 43. art 1. doe cōmōly follow taken from S. Hierome comment in Math. 15. is more fit to comprize all sorts of scandall to another Scandalum est dictum vel factum minùs rectum praebens alteri occasionem ruinae that is Scandall is a saying or deed lesse or not right occasioning ruine to another This definition is good enough saying that the terme of ruine being a metaphor and according to Aristotles rule in his Topicks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All metaphors are obscure is unfit for a definition till explained wherefore it is needfull we should shew more plainly what is meant by ruine in this definition By ruine or falling is doubtlesse meant here not corporall ruine or falling of the body but spirituall ruine or the falling of the minde Now this spirituall ruine is primarily understood of falling into sinne whether it be greater as Apostacy from the faith heresy infidelity Idolatry or the like or lesser as by causing a slower progresse in Religion unchearfulnesse therein impediment to any other duty a Christian or an unbeliever should doe If any be asked whether any griefe or displicency of mind or anger which are the effects of Scandall as is before shewed may be called ruine of another according to this definition whereto I answer The griefe displicency or anger that ariseeth from another mans saying or deed is sometimes just and necessary when the words or deeds be manifestly evill such was the griefe of the Corinthians for the scandall of the incestuous person our Saviours indignation at the hardnesse of the Pharisees hearts such was the griefe or vexation of righteous Lot in hearing and seeing the ungodly deeds of the Sodomites Davids griefe because men kept not Gods Law And this griefe is a necessary duty in them that

the use of our liberty Now that a man may be guilty of sinfull scandall by the omission of a duty I determined before c. 3. § 3. To which I adde that sith the lawfull Magistrate hath power about indifferent things to restraine or require our use of our liberty for the publique good and we are bound to make conscience of obeying such cōmands not for the things sake so commanded for that is in it selfe indifferent but by reason of the authority to which God hath made us subject and the end for which such orders are established which all members of a common-wealth ought to seeke therefore the omission of doing such things commanded is an omission of a duty rebus sic positis and the scandall consequent upon it a scandall of the first sort to wit of sinfull example Moreover for a punctuall answer to the present question I conceive that there may be scandall by the forbearing the use of our liberty when that forbearing though otherwise lawfull occasions men to conceive some alienation of affection some evill intentions some superstition or the like evill in them who doe forbeare it our Saviour Math. 17. 27. would have tribute mony paid for himselfe Peter though he were free and that because the not-paying would offend them S. Peters not-eating with the Gentiles was a scandall to Barnabas Gal. 2. 13. Frequent experience confirmes it that the forbearing of some actions which are in their kind indifferent at some times doth grieve weak brethren and offend others when they are apt to conceive such forbearance to arise out of a malevolent minde superstitious opinion humour of singularity contempt of others or the like cause A tenth question may be whether a community a nation the publique Magistrate may be scandalized Ans. The use of excommunicatiō presupposeth that scandall may be of the whole Church by sinfull actions of one member Yea further it is determined art 34. of the Church of England Whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly breake the traditions and ceremonies of the Church which bee not repugnant to the word of God and be approved and ordained by common authority ought to be rebuked openly that other may feare to doe the like as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren Moreover experience shewes that whole nations or societies are sometimes offended with those who observe not their customes or orders which are in their use indifferent and not confirmed by any publique ordinance but by use only received and that such varying from them occasions anger enmity and such like evills An eleventh question may be Whether sith the Magistrates authority is one way of restraining or requiring the use of our liberty and the danger of scandall another upon supposition that the lawfull Magistrate cōmands the doing or omitting of that which is indifferent on the other side there is danger of scandalizing the question is which of these respects I am to be ruled by Ans. There is no doubt but that a good and wise Magistrate will remit in many cases the rigour of discipline to avoide scandall as I said before § 4. As the love-feasts kisse of peace vigils at the tombes of Martyrs and other orders of the Church were in processe of time evacuated when they occasioned scandall But if the Magistrate doe not suspend his cōmands then it is a hard case For either on the one side there is danger of nullifying the power of the Magistrate or on the other side of wounding or destroying our brother Possibly it may so fall out that a mans cōscience may without much difficulty winde it selfe out of this streight by finding some circumstances prepōderating either one way or other As for ininstance if the Magistrats command bee about a matter of great consequence for the safety of the Common-wealth to avoid a present evill or if it be in a smaller matter if urged peremptorily vehemently on the other side the effect of the scandall be not likely to bee plain Apostacy or the like great sinne but some grievance of mind or discontent of the party scandalized it is without doubt that then the Magistrates command is to be performed On the contrary if the Magistrates command be in a smaller matter not bringing any great evil nor likely to infringe the power of authority though the command be not followed if it be not peremptorily and strictly but remissely urged on the other side the effect of scandall of the greatest sort of evills very probable and in a manner present giving no time to finde a way to redresse it then in this case the danger of scandall may prevaile for that time But if we make the scales even and propound the case thus what if the danger of scandall be great and manifest on the one side and the Magistrate peremptory in his command and the thing commanded of great moment on the other side the doubt is whether of these two is to bee regarded I determine that the Magistrates command should in this case sway our consciences and that for these reasons following 1. Because by the Magistrates command the thing required is made a necessary duty though in it selfe indifferent For the command that ties every soule to bee subject to the higher powers Rom. 13. 1. requires obedience to them which is the chiefest part of subjection And this obligation of obedience is antecedent to the consideration of the scandall For the sanction of the law precedes the accident of scandall Now in things that are our duties wee must not omit them or neglect them for feare of scandals Therefore the Magistrates command in the case propounded is not to be neglected for feare of scandall Against this argument Dr Ames lib. 5. de consci c. 11. § 16. seems to except in these words Nulla authorit as humana c. No authority of man can either take away the nature of scandall from that which otherwise should bee scandall or the nature of sinne from scandall given For no man can command our charity and consciences Vel periculum scandali dati praestare which I render thus or countervaile or be preferred before the danger of scandall given Whereto I reply that it is not true that the lawfull authority of the Magistrate may not in things indifferēt make the doing of that action not to bee a scandall given which otherwise might bee For if it may make the thing commanded a duty by vertue of the command the scandall consequent will bee passive or taken not active or given As we determine of preaching and many other duties that they are to bee done though scandall follow so we are to say of obedience to the Magistrate in that wherein God hath made us subject to him wee are to obey him though scandall follow If it bee said that preaching is a duty immediately enjoyned by God the doing of