Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	gain_v	jew_n	weak_a	10,116	5	11.7630	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A05347	A treatise of the authority of the church The summe wherof was delivered in a sermon preached at Belfast, at the visitation of the diocese of Downe and Conner the tenth day of August 1636. By Henrie Leslie bishop of the diocese. Intended for the satisfaction of them who in those places oppose the orders of our church, and since published upon occasion of a libell sent abroad in writing, wherin this sermon, and all his proceedings are most falsely traduced. Together with an answer to certaine objections made against the orders of our church, especially kneeling at the communion.	Leslie, Henry, 1580-1661.	1637 (1637)	STC 15499; ESTC S114016	124,588	210

shall even of that rule which he hath mentioned Abstaine from all appearance of evill As I shall shew in the proper place In the meane time I tell him that their sitting at the Communion will not abide the tryall of any of the rules of Gods word I have proved in my Sermon that it is an undecent and unreverent behaviour in Gods worship that it was never commanded seldome or never practised in any act of Gods service but onely upon occasion It carryes an appearance of evill a shew of profanenesse irreverence pride presumption It is flat contrary unto that rule of the Apostle Rom. XIV 19. follow these things which concerne Peace for by it the Peace of this Church is disturbed her Unitie rent It gives offence unto all sorts of men to their brethren to the Magistrate to the whole Church of God And therefore it doth not tend to the glory of God and aedification of his people The second Classe of the Disputers Arguments were taken from Christian libertie and the care wee should have to avoyd scandall to which purpose he alleadged Rom. XIV 3. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not c. ver 15. Destroy not him with thy mea● for Whom Christ dyed I. Cor. VIII 13. If meate offend my brother I will eate no flesh while the world standeth Vnto all which I gave a full and satisfactorie answer Albeit hee hath not the honestie to set it downe for it seemes he saw that hee had neyther strength to overthrow it nor so much ingenuitie as to yeeld unto the trueth when it is declared unto him I shewed that there was a great difference between their case and ours in two particulars first The things whereabout they did differ namely eating or not eating of things sacrificed unto Idolls were meerely indifferent not only in their owne nature but even for use it being free and arbitrary unto them to eate or not to eate forasmuch as there was no law either to command or to forbid the use of these meates And therefore the beleeving Romanes and the Corinthians not onely might but also ought sometimes to abstaine from such meates for the avoyding of scandall But it is not so with our Ceremonies albeit they be indifferent in their owne nature as neither being particularly commanded nor forbidden in Scripture yet they are not now indifferent unto us for the use nor left unto our choyce the observation of them being injoyned by lawfull authoritie and that the Magistrate hath power to make Lawes in things indifferent none will deny but an Anabaptist And therefore now though never so many should bee offended at our Ceremonies yet we can not forbeare to use them without a greater scandall in open disobedience to lawfull authority Before that Apostolicall constitution Act. XV. It was lawfull for a man either to eate or not to eate things sacrificed unto Idolls as hee found in his conscience most expedient for aedification there being no law divine or humane to rule his conscience but only the Iudgement of his owne minde and the generall law of charitie But after that constitution was made It was not lawfull for him to eate though in the presence of converted Gentiles who would perhaps bee offended at his forbearance because now though the matter bee indifferent in its owne nature yet it was not free and arbitrary for use at lest to those Churches for whom the constitution was made of Antioch Syria and Cilicia for it seemes that the eating of things sacrificed to Idolls was in some sort permitted the Church of Corinth if no man did challenge it I. Cor. X. 27. Whatsoever is set before you eate asking no question for conscience sake A second difference I observed betweene their case and ours that those whom the Apostle will not have us to offend by the use of our Christian liberty in things indifferent were weake brethren as shall appeare in all the places alleadged by the Disputer Rom. XIV 1. Him that is weake in the faith receive unto you v. 2. One believeth that he may eate of all things And another which is weake eateth herbes Whereupon followes immediatly Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not Chap. XV. 1. Wee which are strong ought to beare the infirmities of the weake I. Cor. VIII throughout the whole Chapter ver 7. Their conscience being weake is defiled and so ver 9.10.11.12 They were weake as being newly converted unto the faith as yet neither having meanes nor leisure to be fully instructed in their Christian libertie and therefore much was to be yeilded unto them lest comming newly from Iudaisme where they had learned to be zealous of the Law of Moses if they should see Christians not observe that Law they might be offended at the Christian Religion And withall it is to be praesumed that those to whom the Apostle graunts such Indulgence were willing to be instructed in the right way But those who take offence at our Ceremonies are not now to be esteemed weake They thinke themselves the onely illuminates even the very Gnostiques of this age in comparison of whom all others who are not of their faction are very Ignaroes whose minds the god of the world hath so blinded that they are destitute of heavenly knowledge Besides they have had a large time allowed them to informe their consciences and all meanes have been used to give them satisfaction But a foole despiseth his fathers Instruction Prov. XV. 5. And why The way of a foole is right in his owne eyes Prov. XII 15. So that those brethren whom the Apostle would not have others to offend in the use of their Christian liberty in things indifferent were only weake Ours are wilfull They timorous Ours obstinate Their offence proceeded from simple ignorance arising from the want of time and meanes of Instruction But the offence which our men take at the Ceremonies proceedes from affected error from pride prejudice singularity and the spirit of malice and contention And therefore I dare say that albeit his Majesty and all that are in authority over us would dispense with the present Lawes and leave it to our owne choyce whether to use or not to use the Ceremonies for feare of giving them offence Yet were we bound in conscience not to yeeld unto them in one jot by our forbearance in regard that thereby we should but bolster them in their error and confirme them in their obstinacy and opposition against the Church I am sure this was the practice of the Apostles At first they yeelded much to the weaknesse of Iewish Converts doing and forbearing many things to avoyd their offence But when they did pertinaciously persist in their error calling our Christian liberty in question the Apostles resolutely maintayned it not regarding their offence at all So S. Paul who circumcised Timothie to avoyd the offence of the weake Iewes would not circumcise Titus to please others who were perverse despisers of our libertie And he who did purifie himselfe to gaine a good opinion of the weake Iewes who were zealous of the Law

Act. XXI v. 20. 26. Gal. 11 1●5 yet when certain false brethren crept in privily to spy our liberty he gave not place unto them by subjection for an houre And whenas S. Peter for feare of offending the Iewes at Antioch forbare to eate with the Gentiles he reproved him for it to his face interpreting that fact of his to be an effectuall seducement albeit he did not preach Iudaisme Why compellest thou the Gentiles to Iudaize ver 14. As hee would not yeeld to any thing to displease those who were wilfull despisers of our liberty no more should we to please those men who are resolved never to be satisfied I am sure the tenderest hearted man amongst them will not forbeare the eating of a fat Capon upon Good-Friday for feare of offending a Papist And why should we forbeare either Surplis Crosse or Kneeling because they are offended at it In these two particulars I shewed in the Court the difference between the things whereof the Apostle speaketh and our Ceremonies so plainly that it was thought sufficient to satisfie any but those in whom affection partiality have put out the eye of reason And upon these two cases I dare now venture the cause first that we are no-where commanded to forbeare the use of a thing indifferent even where we are left to our owne choyce for feare of offending the willfull despisers of our libertie but only to avoyd the offence of weak brethren who are willing to learne the right way have not had leysure and meanes to be informed Secondly that if the Magistrate interpose his authoritie commanding the use of a thing in it selfe indifferent wee are not to forbeare the doing of it for feare of offending any whatsoever they be whether wilfull or only weak And that it is so shal appeare unto him who reades these two Chapters whereunto the Disputer did appeale studies not the syllables but the sense of them And to make this same yet more manifest I will recommend unto the Reader that is desirous of satisfaction these considerations following I. When the Apostle chargeth us to avoyd the offence of our weake brother he gives this reason that we should not please ourselves but our neighbour to aedification Rom. XV. 1.2 Whereby it is evident that he speakes only of these things which are not commanded but left to our own liberty to doe or not to doe in which case he wil have us to please our neighbour if he be a weake brother rather then our selves But if the Magistrate have interposed his commaundement in a thing indifferent then as we can not forbeare it to please our neighbour if he be a weake brother so wee doe it not to please our selves but to please him whom God hath cōmanded us to obey not only for wrath but for conscience sake II. A thing in it selfe indifferent being injoyned by lawfull authority becommeth necessary unto us for the use So the Apostles speaking of things in themselves indifferent as abstinence from meates offered to Idols c. When once they had made a constitution touching them call them Necessarie things Act. XV. 28. And the Apostle sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. XIII 5. It is necessary that you bee subject And surely there is nothing wherein wee can shew our obedience unto the Magistrates authoritie but only in things indifferent which God hath left in our power for those things which God hath commanded wee must doe whether the Magistrate command them or no yea albeit hee should forbid them And those things which God hath forbidden wee must not doe whether the Magistrate forbid them or no yea albeit hee should command them so that there is no scope left either unto the Magistrate to command or unto us to obey but only in things indifferent III. If wee should not obey the Magistrate in a thing indifferent when some men take offence at it then we shall never obey him at all there shall be no order no constitution for there can be no publicke action order or constitution which some men will not dislike IV. Obedience to the Magistrate is a greater duty then the pleasing of a private person and consequently the evill of disobedience greater then the evill of scandall V. If our obedience to the Magistrate in a thing indifferent offend any the evill is not in us but in him who is scandalized for as Tertullian saith Res bona neminem offendit nisi malam mentem It is scandalum acceptum not datum he ought not to be offended being bound to obey the Magistrate as well as we now were it not a strange if I should forbeare to doe my duty because another man is resolved not to doe his VI. As it is a sinne to disobey lawfull authority and no sinne in us if another bee offended at our obedience so there is farre greater danger both to our selves and to all the whole Church in disobedience then can be in the offence of a few brethren Lastly If wee refuse those things that are injoyned we cannot avoyd disobedience But if we observe them we may prevent or remove the offence that is taken at them by informing the people aright that they are things in themselves indifferent whereunto Christian liberty doth extend and that the Magistrate ough● to be obeyed in these things But our brethren are so farre from teaching such doctrine that they teach nothing else but disobedience II. Sam. XX. ● like Sheba the sonne of Bichri blowing a trumpet to sedition insomuch that some who are now questioned for frequenting their conventicles being examined upon Oath could not remember any one point of Christian Instruction in all their Sermons but that they preached against keeping of Holy-dayes and kneeling at the Communion If so much paynes had beene taken to teach them obedience to lawfull authority the scandall might have beene removed long erenow Whosoever will be pleased to consider these particulars shall finde that what the Apostle hath spoken of Christian liberty of giving offence makes nothing against our Ceremonies but every way for them Besides those two differences which I have observed betweene their case of whom the Apostle speakes and ours It were easie to shew many other things wherein they are most unlike namely the eating and not eating of meates are private actions in a mans owne power to doe or not to doe But our case is concerning the publicke Ceremonies of the Church which no private man can dispense with The Apostle by forbearing flesh did prejudice none but himselfe But wee in refusing the Ceremonies should prejudice the authority of the Prince The Apostles for bearance did further the course of his ministery and therefore he became all unto-all But our refusall of the Ceremonies should loose us the liberty of ours and that most justly for