wrought only by the omnipotent grace of God By this time I hope the Reader is sufficiently satisfyed that the active scandals of the most wicked and malitious are not to be contemned But yet there remaineth a great difficulty in the point to be cleared and that is when an active scandall is committed towards them in our duties and indifferencies First we actively scandalize them by our duties when they are not rightly circumstanced seasonably performed in due time and place when they are not expedient unto those ends for which God enjoyned them now when this is cannot be determined by any generall rule but every one must be left to be guided by his spirituall prudence and wisdome But for this hereafter I shall allot a peculiar digression by it selfe Secondly we actively scandalize them by our indifferencies when 't is probable they will occasion their passive scandall their falling into sin But now this generall rule is to be limited and I shall give you three limitations of it The first limitation this rule is to be understood when the use of our indifferencies is likely to prejudice and obstruct the propagation of the Gospell and the forbearance of them will in all probability conduce unto the advancement of the Credit of the Gospell and not otherwise ordinarily upon this account it would have been scandalous in Paul to have received maintenance from the Corinthians but t is now unscandalous in Ministers to accept and challenge that maintenance which is due unto them by the lawes of the land for a generall forbearance thereof now would soone be followed with the utter ruine of the Gospell A second limitation the forementioned rule is to be understood when the forbearance of our indifferencies is likely to win upon the wicked and malitious so as to further their conversion and not otherwise when it onely exposeth unto their contempt scorne and derision 1 Cor. 9.19 20 21 22. Though I be free from all men saith Paul yet have I made my selfe servant unto all that I might gain the more And unto the Jews I became as a Jew that Imight gain the Jewes to them that are under the law as under the law that I might gaine them that are under the Law To them that are without Law as without Law being not without Law to God but under the Law to Christ that I might gainâ— them that are without Law To the weake became I as weake that I might gaine the weake I am made all things to all men that I might by all meanes save some Here t is very remarkable that Paul was made in things indifferent all things unto all men only in order to their salvation to gaine their soules unto Christ and why should we abridge our selves in the use of our liberty in things that are of great expediency and conveniency unto us when such a restraint of our liberty is not a probable means of reaching the said end what reason can be given why we should incommodate our selves by forbearing all such indifferencies that wicked men are scandalized at when such forbearance is unprofitable unto their spirituall good and unlikely to bring them any jot the nearer unto God and Heaven A third limitation the forementioned rule hath not place when by the forbearance of our indifferencies at which some wicked men are scandalized there is incurred as great if not a greater scandall then that by their use as when they are hereby confirmed and hardned in their errour and sinne and others are hereby drawn into the like prudenter advertendum est saith Bernard scandalum scandalo non emendari qualis emendatio erit si ut aliis scandalum tollas alios scandalizas Thus you see how the rule is to be limited and without such or the like limitations rigidly to presse it would make against both the liberty and peace of conscience First against the liberty of Conscience for it would in great part evacuate and annull the grand charter of our Christian liberty in things indifferent it would as Peter saith in another case put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our Fathers were nor we are able to beare Acts 15.10 All things are lawfull for me saith Paul But I will not be brought under the power of any 1 Cor. 6.12 But now if we must forbeare all our lawfull conveniences at which wicked men perhaps will be purposely scandalized we should be brought under the power of them we should be little better then their slaves and what an unspeakable and intollerable vassalage would that bee (h) Quoties scandalum passivum alterius futurum est ex malitia nullus debet omittere opus quod nec est malum nec hâ—qet speciem mali propter malitiam alterius quando opus illud utile est temporaliter vel spiritualiter operanti quia non postulat ratio ut malitiae alterius cum damno nostro succurramus alias quilibet malitia sua possit nobis vocere ut omitteremus opus nobis utile malitia autem alterias nobis vocere non debet Lucssius Turrianus Secondly it would make against the peace of Conscience for it would so perplex mens consciences with doubts and uncertainties as that they would hardly know when and how to act in the use of things indifferent for wicked men are very prone to be scandalized at the lawfull conveniencies of the Godly and there is no doubt but many are so wicked as that they would of set purpose nourish and cherish such scandals in themselves if they thought that the Godly would hereupon forbeare such their conveniencies there be some people of such malevolent spirits against Ministers as that they are scandalized at the decent apparell of them their wives at their competent fare and moderate house-keeping and if they must make the humor and opinion of such men the rule of their walking in all things indifferent it will be a very difficult matter for them to know how herein to carry themselves But this doctrine that we are to forbeare all indifferencies at which wicked men are scandalized if it be unlimited would create perplexities not only unto Ministers but unto all sorts of men especially such as have any thing due unto them from others for grant this and how often will a Landlord be at a losse to demand his rent a Creditor his debts and the magistrate his tribute or contribution Adde unto this thirdly that this doctrine without limitation will tend unto the overthrow of publick peace and order and brings in nothing but anarchy and confusion for publique peace and order depends much upon the preservation of propriety and upon what a ticklish point would propriety stand if we must forbeare to exact or receive all such temporals at which wicked men are scandalized that can be forborne without sin unto what wrongs and injuries would this expose such as are well affected for there be some men so wicked and malitious as that
Cheape-side do reverence unto it give they not cause to suspect some evill to cleave unto it The same meanes saith the Rejoinder are not alwaies requisite for prevention which must be used for recovery Yes truly about Idols if we judge out of the Scripture the very same meanes Burne then saith the Rejoinder all your Popish books lest they fall into the hands of Popelings to abuse them So will I certainly if you can shew me that they must be burned when Popelings have had them in their hands and abused them which here you grant concerning these Idols Here is nothing of the Rejoinder left unexamined but his quotation of the 2 Kings 18.5 and how impertinently that is alledged will appeare by comparison of it with 1 King 15.5 David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord and turned not aside from any thing that be commanded him all the daies of his life save onely in the matter of Vriah the Hittite For from this commendation of David we may as well conclude that his numbering of the people and his purpose and attempt to revenge himselfe of Nabal by destroying him and all his were lawfull as we may inferre from the praises of Hezekiah that his omission in not demolishing Solomons outlandish Idols must be unlawful See Rutherford pag. 90. Secondly wee must distinguish of places That which in some places carries a shew of evill elsewhere perhaps is not suspected thereof According to places therefore in indifferent matters wee may vary our practise It was the advice of Ambrose unto Austin and Monica respected by Austin as if it had been the answer of an heavenly oracle (b) Ad quamcunque EcclesiaÌ„ veneritis inquit ejus moneÌ„ servate si pati scandalum non vultis aut facere Aug. Ep. 86. unto whatsoever Church ye shall come observe the manner or custome thereof if ye will neither give nor take scandall Which advice if restrained unto things indifferent is very good and besides we have Pauls precept and president for it his precept 1 Cor. c. 10. v. 32. Give none offence neither to Jew nor Gentile which could not be done but by complying with them in indifferencies His president also answereth his precept To the Jewes he became a Jew to them that were under the Law as under the Law to them that were without the law as without the Law to the weake as weake 1 Cor. 9.20 21 22. Amongst the Jewes he shaved his head made a vow Acts 18.18 and (c) Circumcision was then indifferent but after the full promulgation of the Gospel it became to be not only mortua but mortifera not only dead but deadly as being an interpretative deny all of Christs coming in the flesh circumcised Timothy Acts 16.3 and yet amongst the Gentiles where these actions bore an appearance of Judaisme he withstood Peter for them even to his face Gal. 2.11 There be three other instances in the former edition which because they are questionable I shall wholy wave and passe on unto the examination of my vaine triumph over the non-conformists wherein as the Proverb is I reckoned without mine host Former Edition After these limitations of the duty of abstinence from all appearance of evill I cannot but wonder at our irregulars misapplication of it They hence eagerly cry down the laudable discipline and lawfull Ceremonies of our Church What fearefull outcries do they make concerning their appearance of Idolatry superstition will-worship and Popery Termes you see by the exceptions put to this precept Hooker as much too big for our innocent and harmlesse Ceremonies as Hercules shoe for a childs foot Indeed our Ceremonies for example the Surplice Crosse in Baptisme kneeling at the Lords Supper may have a materiall semblance with those that in Popery have been abused to Idolatry and superstition and so consequently taken materially in respect of their materialls may have an outward shew of Popish Idol try or superstition but consider them as imposed by our Church and generally used by her members so they are formally differ need from those which Papists have applyed to Idolatrous ends and purposes For our Church publickly professeth a quite contrary use or application end or intention of them And externall actions have their specification and consequently distinction from their end and intention from it they take their species or kind and accordingly are distinguished Now since all Popish whether superstitious or idolatrous abuses of our Ceremonies are publickly disclaimed and their right use explained who can justly imagine any shew of Popery in them An Israelite was not to be smitten for an Egyptian because for a while he once sojourned in Egypt if afterward he had his constant abode in Canaan The garment spotted with the flesh was no longer to be hated than spotted being once washed it might againe be used Our Ceremonies were defilâ—d in Egypt in Popery with superstition and Idolatrie but our Church God be praised hath washed them from both in her publique and professed use of them And therefore now they stand above either calumnie or suspicion Examination First our non-conformists will tell us that there was betwixt our Ceremonies and those of the Papists even a formall conformity inadequate and in part though not totall and adequate For though our Prelates disavowed many nay most of those superstitious and idolatrous ends unto which the Papists applyed our Ceremonies yet they still professed one end and intention of the Papists in the use of them to wit mysticall signification and this to be a Popish and superstitious end the non-conformists prove at large in their books Secondly a materiall conformity in Ceremonies carrieth many times a reall appearance of evill and scandalizeth actively It doth not appeare that the Altar which Vriah erected was formally the same with that Ahaz saw at Damascus that it had the same use and intention the worship of a false God The text mentioneth only a materiall conformity unto it and for this reason 't is condemned 2 King 16.10 11. Peters conformity with the Jewes Gal. 2. was only materiall not formall for a Jewish end and purpose and yet t is blamed by Paul as guilty of an active scandall vers 11 12 13 14. Suppose a timerous Protestant in Spaine or Italy go to Masse and there bow before their breaden God not out of any intent to honour the Idol but only for preservation of his life his presence and bowing will only be materially the same with that of Papists but will any man think that this can acquit him from the sin of Idolatry Indeed Aelian var. Histor lib. 1 cap. 21. excuseth Ismenias a Thâ—bane from adoring the King of Persia because though he stooped downe before him yet it was not to worship him but to take up a ring that he had for the nonce let fall at his feet but no rationall man will admit of this his apology because this stooping in common use was the adoration of
de ratione speciei conveniunt omni individuo sub tali specie sed si nullus est actus indifferens secundum speciem suam sub quo tamen sensu argumentum procedit Alio modo potest negatio importata per hoc quod est indifferens praeponi copulae verbali sub hoc sensu quod de ratione specificâ actus non est quod fit indifferenter vel determinate bonus vel malus sed tamen utrunque potest ipsi per aliud convenire sicut homo ex suâ specie non habet quod sit determinate albus vel determinate niger et tamen per aliud ei utrunque iftorum convenit Et hoc modo sunt multiactus qui sunt indifferentes secundum suam speciem nullus tamen secundum individuum quia individuum multa includit quoad existentiam suam quae ad rationem speciei non pertinent Lib. 2. dist 40. q. 1. Unto this objection Durand answereth by distinguishing of a twofold sense of this expression An act is indifferent secundum speciem according to it's kind The first is that indifferency is of the specifick nature of such an act And this sense which is the sense of the objection is false for then it would be impossible for any individuals of such an act not to be indifferent But now there is a second sense of the expression that the specifick nature of such an action doth not involve or imply in it's notion morall either goodnesse or ilnesse But is equally and indifferently abstracted from both And this sense is true It is not of the specificke nature of many actions to be determinately good or determinately evill though they may be either by circumstances As for the confirmation which is added * Morisan Ethic. Murc Physic The answer unto it is usually as followeth A thing may be said to agree unto another per se either positively or negatively 1. Positively when it is predicated in primo or secundo modo dicondi per se when it is either an essentiall predicate or proper passion And thus it agreeth unto man to be a sensitive creature to be indued with the powers of understanding willing laughing c And in this sense indifferency doth not agree per se unto any humane voluntary actions for then it would agree unto them alwaies and in all places so that it would be utterly impossible for the individuals of such actions to be morally either good or bad 2. Negatively When a thing of it selfe is not such although by accident it may be such And thus we may say of a man that per se he is not white he is not blacke he is not tawny he is not of an olive colour or the like because each of these colours considered separately are accidentall unto the nature of man considered in the generall and in it selfe And yet the individuals of the nature of man may some of them be white some blacke some tawny some of an olive colour or the like Even so we may say of divers voluntary rationall actions of man that per se considered as devested from all circumstances they are indifferent morally neither good nor bad because morall goodnesse and badnesse is accidentall unto the nature of such actions considered in themselves and yet the individuals of such actions are all of them either good or evil las shall be cleared by the next conclusion unto which before we proceed let us make some application of this second conclusion Against this doctrine of Indifferency there are two failings one in the defect Another in the excesse There are First some that faile in the defect who know not the full extent of indifferency and so either impose as necessary or condemne as sinfull things that are in their owne nature indifferent Thus in the primitive Romish Church there were some new converts who abstained from swines flesh and other meats prohibited by the ceremoniall law as unlawfull The use of which yet was indifferent and lawfull under the Gospell I know and am perswaded saith Paul by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing uncleane of it selfe Rom. 14.14 Thus also amongst the Corinthians there were some weake Christians that branded for Communion and fellowship with Idolaters all eating of things offered unto idols Though bought in the market or eaten at private meetings In both which yet Paul pronounceth in generall there was no unlawfulnesse 1. Cor. 10.25 27. Amongst us there are divers persons that are doubtlesse well affected in matters of Religion and yet are too rigid in censuring as sinnes divers innocent and harmlesse recreations This is an errour in and consequently a blemish unto the understanding Paul calls it a weaknesse in the faith Rom. 14.1 that is an imperfection in point of knowledg and that privative or blameable For the faith and conscience of indifferent things is never indifferent we are never to judg a thing indifferent to be either sinfull or necessary Our Saviours command John 7.24 Judge righteous judgment may be extended unto things and actions as well as persons Therefore as we are not to call good evill or evill good so neither are we to call things indifferent either evill or necessary This is injuriously to straiten the grand Charter of our Christian liberty and presumptuously to make the narrow way to heaven narrower then ever God made it Besides it openeth a gappe unto many mischiefes it filleth the Church of God with needlesse and endlesse disputes it perplexeth the minds of many conscientious people with unnecessary and unprofitably scruples it causeth many bitter and uncharitable censures and occasioneth many dangers In the believing Jewes that lived in the Church of Rome in Pauls time there was but a little mistake touching things indifferent meats and daies but how pernicious was the sequele hereof Hereupon the strong despised the weake and the weak judged the strong Rom. 14. And this was a great disturbance unto the peace of the Church and a great hinderance unto the comfortable communion of the Saints 2. Against this doctrine of indifferency there are some secondly that faile in the excesse who make things necessary or sinfull to be but indifferent There be some that hold observation of the Lords day preaching of the word in distinction from meer reading of it to be no ordinances of God but things meerly indifferent Erastians affirme that Church Government and Ecclesiasticall censures are onely matters of indifferency The Heathens in the Apostles times generally ranked fornication amongst things indifferent The like estimate some of the Corinthians had of eating things offered to Idols in the midst of an Idols temple at a religious feast of that Idol which was a palpable communicating with Devils and therefore a fact in it's own nature unlawfull And some Travailers that professe themselves Protestants have as large and loose Consciences as these Corinthians had for they have the same opinion of being present at an idolatrous masse and bowing to popish Idols Dr
rejoynder of Dr John Burgesse The sixth and last restraint which I shall mention that is to be put upon the outward exercise of our Christian liberty in things indifferent is by Charity and that 1. Vnto our selves 2. Vnto others 1. Vnto our selves He that truly loves himselfe will deny himselfe the use of things indifferent if he think it will hazard the health of his better part his spirituall and immortall soule He will forbeare those sports and Pastimes he most delights in if he find that they usually tempt him to Choler or covetousnesse He will not so much as step into a Taverne Inne or Alehouse if he find himselfe prone unto excesse According unto the advice that Solomon gives in the like case Prov. 23.2 Put a knife unto thy throat if thou be a man given unto appetite Our Saviour exhorts us to pluck out our right eye and to cut off our right hand when they offend us Matth. 5.29 30. And Maldonate supposeth that he speaks literally of a true eye and hand indeed neither saith he is there any absurdity in such a sense because the plucking out of the right eye and the cutting off the right hand is mentioned only in a way of hyperbolicall exaggeration In which there is understood such an exception as is usuall in the like cases if it might be if it were lawfull He parallels it with a hyperbole of the same nature in Gal. 4.15 I beare you record that if it had been possible yee would have pluckt out your own eyes and have given them unto me If it had been possible that is as Estius glosseth it si natura permitteret If nature would give way unto such a mutilation Our Saviour therefore signifieth that we must incurre the greatest losse rather then expose our selves unto the danger of sinne And from this we may conclude that we must cast away our most beloved indifferences when once they scandalize us that is when they prove occasions of and incentives unto sinne 2. Charity towards others should put a restraint upon the use of our Christian liberty in things indifferent and make us to forbeare all indifferent things whatsoever that may destroy the soules weaken or wound the Consciences of others 1 Cor. 8.12 Vse not liberty for an occasion to the flesh but by love serve one another Gal. 5.13 Where the Antithesis implied in the particle but plainly sheweth that we use our liberty for an occasion unto the flesh if we do not by love serve one another in the exercise thereof Knowledg puffeth up but charity edifieth 1 Cor. 8.1 that is a firme and full knowledg of our liberty in things indifferent if it be separated from Charity is apt to swell the mind with pride and make men to despise or set at naught weak doubting and scrupulous Brethren But Charity edifieth that is it is carefull to build up others as living stones in the spirituall house of God the Church It inclineth to promote their graces and gracious practises and to avoide whatsoever is of a destroying nature unto their soules that is every thing that may occasion their fall into sin Now that indifferent things may sometimes be of an unedifying and destroying nature the Apostle affirmeth 1 Cor. 10.23 All things are lawfull for me but all things edifie not do not build up our brethren in truth faith and holinesse do not farther them in their Religion charity and justice for that the Apostle speaks of the edification of others is plaine by what followeth in the next verse Let no man seek his own that is only but every man anothers wealth that is spirituall the edification and salvation of anothers soule And therefore indifferent things are to be forborne in case of scandall when they prove to be of a destructive nature unto the soules of men when they weaken their graces hinder their duties and lead them into sin This course the Apostle prescribes unto the Romanes in the case of things legally uncleane before the coming of Christ Those that were strong in the faith among them well instructed in the doctrine of Christian liberty knew very well that the legall uncleanesse of meates and drinkes all Jewish festivalls and fasts were removed by Christs death and that nothing was now of it selfe uncleane but all things indifferent and lawfull yet the Apostle would have them in the use of this point of Christian liberty not to scandalize those that are weak in the faith that is such as being newly wonne from Judaisme to Christianity were as yet uninstructed about the cessation of Ceremonialls Rom. 14.13 Judge this rather that no man put a stumbling block or occasion to fall in his brothers way that is in the use of meats and drinkes that were before the Gospell Levitically uncleane and neglect of Jewish Festivalls and fasts the observation of which was for a while indifferent untill the interrement of the Ceremoniall law For however the words run generally yet if we look to the coherence backwards the foregoing part of the chapter speaks onely of such things meates drinkes and daies and if we look to the coherence forwards it speaks onely of such things meats and drinks vers 15. Destroy not him with thy meate for whom Christ died ver 17. for the kingdome of God is not meat and drinke v. 20. for meate destroyes not the worke of God it is evill for that man who eateth with offence It is evill not simply in it selfe but accidentally by scandall And therefore I shall conclude that the place is in a speciall manner appliable against scandalizing by abuse of liberty in things indifferent Interpreters ghesse at three things wherein the practise of the strong amongst the Romanes might scandalize the weake 1. It might unsettle them in and distast them against the Christian Religion for they might hereupon think it to be contrary unto the Law of Moses which they so highly reverenced and so at last it might occasion their relapse unto Judaisme 2. It might embolden them to sinne against their consciences by eating that which they thought to be uncleane And 3dly it might grievously exassperate them and provoke them to powre out many a bitter uncharitable and sinfull censure upon the actions and state of those that were strong in the faith In vers 21. The Apostle proceedeth to inlarge his doctrine touching this particular beyond the controversy that occasioned this his discourse for as Estius well noteth He teacheth that to avoid the scandall and offence of our Brethren we are to abstaine not onely from things prohibited by the law but also from things not prohibited from flesh wine and any indifferent thing whatsoever It is good neither to eat flesh nor to drinke wine nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth or is offended or is made weake It is good that is it is morally good 1. Good in regard of God a thing very acceptable and pleasing unto him 2. Good in regard of our Brethren profitable
they would be scandalized at their temporals for the nonce to deprive them of them I shall conclude this particular with the resolution of Aquinas 2. 2dae q. 43. art 8. Propter eos qui sic scandala concitant non sunt temporalia dimittenda quia hoc noceret bono communi dar tur enim malis rapiendi occasio noceret ipsis rapientibus qui retinendo aliena in peccato remanerent Vnde Greg. dicit in Moral Quidam dum temporalia à nobis rapiunt solummodo sunt tolerandi quidam verò aequitate servata prohibendi non solae cura nè nostra subtrahantur sedne rapientes non suae semet ipsos perdant But what if this imaginary appearance of evill flow from the supposall of a weak one yet an holy one Why then it must be omitted but with this caution so it may be without sin or as the ordinary glosse upon that 15 of Matth. v. 12 13 14. resolves it Salvâ triplici veritate vitae Justitiae Doctrinae so the threefold verity of life justice and doctrine be preserved safe Nam per hanc triplicem veritatem saith Gregory de Valentia intelligitur omnis rectitudo immunitas à peccato in actionibus humanis Veritas namquevitae continetur in actionibus rectis quas quis in seipso exercet convenienter rectae rationi appetitui recto atque adâ—o verè veritate quadam practicâ Veritas autem justitiae rectis actionibus quae exercentur erga alterum similiter convenienter rectae rationi prout verè absque peccato oportet veritas denique doctrinae continetur fide verâ minimè erroneâ By this triple verity is understood all the rectitude and freedome from sinne that is in humane actions for the verity of life is contained in those regular actions which any one exerciseth in and towards himselfe agreeably to right reason and a well governed appetite c. The verity of justice consists in those regular actions which are performed towards another likewise sutably to right reason as it behoveth truely and without sinne And to conclude the verity of doctrine consists in a true regular and unerring faith if these three verities be kept inviolate every thing must be abstained from upon which followes scandalum pusillorum a scandall springing from either the ignorance or weaknesse of our brother but because this resolution may be thought both too generall and obscure the Schoole-men themselves sumbling much about its explication we will therefore goe to worke more distinctly and particularly Consider whether or no the action in which this appearance of evill is imagined to be is necessary or indifferent If it be necessary and commanded by God it must not be omitted though all the world be offended For evill must not be done that good may come thereof (m) Galvin l. 3. Inst c. 19. Sect. 13. Calvin telling us regard ought to be had of charity limits how farre usque ad aras that is so for our brothers sake we offend not God I may adde so for our brothers sake we endanger not our own soules (n) Scandalum quod oritur ex rebus perse bonis necessariis non licet evitare quia non est faciendum malum ut eveniaâ— bonum Bonum enim est expetendum qâ—atenus bonum est non expetitur autem quatenus bonum est si malum simul expetitur Nam qui expetâ—t bonum abhorret à maloâ—qui autem abhorret a malo qua malum est is nullo malo quodcunque sit non potest allici Jam vero nullae sunt res planè necessariae praeter eas quae sunt in se bonae atque eiusmodi ut nisi voluntas illas expetat à suo vero proprio obiecto abhorret it a que ut maximè tumultuetur mundus tamen omnia etiam extrema quaeque subeunda sunt ut fiet illibata Dei gloria Cameron in electiora quaedam N. Test loca Tom. 2. in Math 18.7 To prevent scandall and sin in our brethren we may not runne upon sin our selves for a well ordered charity as Aquinas gives the reason 2. 2dae q. 43. a. 7. beginneth ever at home making a man cheifly desire and endeavour the salvation of his ownsoule and consequently more sollicitous to avoid sinne in himselfe then to prevent it in other I may not then omit or neglect necessary duties because to some they seem but needlesse niceties I must not fly true holinesse and the power of Godlinâ—sse because unto the world it appeares but braine sick peevishnesse and an irrationall precisenesse others errour should not be seconded and countenanced with mine impiety and disobedience Scandalum nisi fallor non bonae rei sed malae exemplum est aedificans ad delictum Bonae res neminem scandalizant nisi malam mentem Si bonum est modestia verecundia fastidium gloriae soli Deo captans placere agnoscant malum suum qui de tali bono scandalizantur Quod enim si incontinentes dicant se à continentibus scandalizari continentia revocanda est Tertullian Here it will not be an unprofitable A Digression nor much impertinent digression to give you the summe of what Thomas and his Interprerers say upon this Question An bona spiritualia sint propter scandalum dimittenda Not to mention their rotten distinction between matters of counsell and matters of precept we will only out of them take notice that there is a difference between transgression of a precept and a temporary partiall or occasionall forbearance of the matter commanded by a precept No preâ—ept whatsoever whether of the Law of Nature or else but pâ—sitive is for eschewing the scandall of any whether weake or malitious to be truly broken or transgressed And a precept is transgressed whensoever what is enjoyned in it is omitted at such a time and in such a case when all the particular circumstances which we ought to regard being considered we are tyed to all performance of it But yet however upon emergency of scandall that which is commanded by some precepts (p) Opera diviâ—â— praecepti affirmativi quod non pro semper obligat debent aliquando deferri pro aliquo tempore quando causarent pusillis scandalum donee illi sint melius instructi sed circumstantiae illius scandali sint mutatae ita ut conting at praeceptum affirmativum etiam iuris quasi naturalis aliquando hic nunc non obligare propter concursum negativi praecepti de non ponendo offendiculo pusillis Joanâ—â—es Wiggers may pro hic nunc in some times and at some places be omitted may for a while be forborne untill the scandall taken thereby can be removed by information or instruction or untill the circumstances of the scandals be some way or other changed Promulgation of a truth and Christian reproofe are duties commanded by God and yet are to be sometimes abstained from for scandals taken by not onely the weake but all
secondly it may be objected that if the obligation of the naturall precept of eschewing scandall ceaseth upon occurrence of but a positive precept why then it seems this positive precept detracts or derogates from the naturall precept of avoiding scandall as being of greater force and validity In no wise onely it takes away a circumstance requisite to make the precept of avoiding scandall obligatory quare cum dicimus saith Vasquez non esse omittendum praeceptum positivum propter vitandum scandalum proximi non dicimus praeceptum naturale derogari pracepto positivo tanquam fortiori sed dicimus occursu praecepti positivi cessare quandam circumstantiam necessariam ut â—bligâ—t praeceptum de vitando scandalo etiamsi naturale sit But all this labour would have been saved if the question had been rightly stated for whereas it is said that one circumstance necessarily requisite to make the precept of eschewing scandall bind us is that there occurre not any other precept either naturall or positive this is to be understood cum grano salis with this limitation in case such precepts bind all circumstances considered to the performance of what they enjoyne hic nunc at such a particular time and place for then omission of what they enjoine would be sinfull and we are not sinfully to omit any thing for prevention of scandall in our brother Unto the proofe of which the reason of Vasquez and Bâ—canus may be applyed But the obligation of affirmative precepts is not universall ad sempâ—r but only lâ—co tempore debitis and therefore what they enjoyne may sometimes in the case of scandall be prudently omitted but perhaps this which I say is all that Vasquez and Becanus aime at and then they have no adversary that I know of Every one will grant unto them that one circumstance necessarily requisite to make the precept of eschewing scandall bind us hic nunc in such a time and place is that there occurre not any other precept binding us to what it enjoyneth at that very instant time and place for it is evident unto all that upon occurrencie of such obligations though scandall ensue it would not be on our parts a culpable scandall an active scandall But it may be thought that I have staied too long upon this digression to returne therefore where we left Secondly if the action in which this appearance of evill is supposed to be be but indifferent why then the best direction that we can have will be from what the Apostle Paul writes unto the Romans chap. 14. and unto the Corinthians 1 Cor. 8. and chap. 10. of converts amongst the Romans there were some strong and knowing ones that were well principled and so knew very well their deliverance from the yoake of the mosaicall Law and hereupon without any scruple did eat such meats as were prohibited thereby perhaps Swines flesh or the like Now at this their practise severall weak Christians who were as yet ignorant and uninstructed touching the latitude of their Christian liberty were in severall regards scandalized as I have shewen in a foregoing treatise But yet here the practise of the strong was a thing indifferent in it selfe vers 14.20 and the appearance of evill to wit a prophane and irreligious contempt of the Law of Moses was only imaginary arising from the ignorance and errour of the weak who thought that Law of Moses to be still in force and unabrogated and the scandall consequent hereupon was only pâ—r accidens flowing not from the nature of the action in it selfe but from the misapprehension of the weake and yet the Apostle blames the strong for scandalizing the weake and therefore in this their action though indifferent in it selfe there was an active scandall a scandall culpably given as well as taken The Apostle gives the same resolution unto the Corinthians concerning things offered unto Idols to eat them at the Pagan religious feast and in the temple of an Idoll carrieth a reall appearance of communion with and approbation of an Idolatrous worship of the Idoll and so is scandalous per se of it selfe and in its own nature 1 Cor. 8.10 cap. 10. vers 20,21 But now to eat these same meats when sold and bought in the shambles or set before them in private meetings the Apostle resolves to be a thing lawfull and indifferent 1 Cor. 10. v. 25 26 27. And indeed it could not carry a reall but only an imaginary appearance of evill for they were the good creatures of God and so uncapable of any morall pollution and they had no religious use and so did not reflect any glance of the least honour credit or countenance to the Idoll The scandall then accrewing by them was only per accidens and yet they were by the Apostles advise to be forborne if such scandall were likely to ensue upon the use of them But if any wan say unto thee this is offered in sacrifice unto Idols eat not for his sake that shewed it and for conscience sake 1 Cor. 10.28 Here we have a generall rule together with three limitations thereof First a generall rule if any man imagine evill and sin to be in an indifferent action and hereupon be scandalized that action is to be abstained from if any man say unto thee this is offered in sacrifice unto Idols eat not for his sake that shewed it But now here are couched three exceptions First we are not bound to abstaine from things indifferent unlesse the scandall consequent be probable if any man say unto you this is offered in sacrifice unto Idols c. if he say nothing but smother his opinion and dislike in his owne brest we may be guiltlesse and blamelesse And indeed if we are to forbeare all indifferent things in which there is only a meer possibility of scandall we should be at an utter losse and uncertainty in our actings in things indifferent and never know what to doe we are obliged then to abstain from things indifferent only in the case of (q) Quando attentis etiam omnibus ciâ—cumstantiis actus inordinatus unius non est ta lis ut prâ—babiliter putarâ— possitasteri futurus occasio ruinae non eriâ— peccatum scandali nec distinctum nee non distinctum ut sentit etiam Bannes hic art 4. in fine Nam tune nonpotest quis censeri causa moralis ruinae alterius Gregor de Valentiâ tom 3. q. 18. punct 2. scandall probable and not in the case of scandall meerely possible and so much is observed by Calvin upon the 1 Cor. 8.13 Deinde non jubet nos Paulus divinare nunquid offendiculo futurum sit quod facimus nisi cum est praesens periculum A second exception is that we are not required to abstaine from things indifferent in which our weake brethren imagine that there is evill and sin and thereupon are scandalized unlesse they have some probable ground for their imagination for though the eating of the Idolothytes at a
What do our Doctors clatter and fable to us of a right of Justice that mortall Rulers have to command in things indifferent from which the destruction of soules doth arise for these commandements of Rulers Kneele religiously before bread the Vicegerâ—nt image of Christ crucified keepe humane holy dayes Crosse the ayre with your thumb above a baptized infants face at best are but positive Commandements not warranted by Gods word But shall they be more obligatory by a supposed band of Justice that Prelates have over us to command such toyes than this divine Law of God and Nature Rom. 14. For indifferent dayes meates surplice destroy not him for whom Christ dyed All the Casuists and Schoolemen Navarra Sylvester Sanchez Raphael dela Torre Meratius Duvallius Thomas Scotus Bonaâ—entura Suarez Vasquez Greg de valentia Albertus Richardus Biel Corduba Angelus Adrianus Alphonsus Becanus Yea and all the hâ—st of our Divines cry with Scripture that mercy and the precepts of love and of the Law of nature are more obligatory than sacrifice burnt offerings and Gods owne positive Lawes yea and that positive Lawes loose their obligatory power and cease to be lawes when the lawes of nature and necessary dutyes of mercy and love as not to murther our brother not to scandalize standeth in thâ—ir way I might weary the Reader here with citations and be wilder my selfe also but it is a point of Divinity denyed by none at all 3. What we owe of Justice to our Superiours is indeed both a morall debt of obedience and a debt of Justice and law which Rulers may seeke by their place and ex jure as Aristotle saith but this right is limited Rulers have no right to seeke absolute obedience but onely in the Lord not against charity And though the place of Rulers be authoritative yet their commanding power as touching the matter of what they injoyne is only Ministerial and they cannot but in Gods place exact that which is Gods due and seing God himselfe if he should immediatly in his owne person Command he would not urge a positive commandement farre lesse the commandement of light and vaine Ceremonies against and beyond the precept of love not to destroy a soule for whom Christ dyed Ergò Superiours under God who borrow all their light from God cannot have a higher right than God hath 4. The comparison of a man who oweth moneys to a Creditor and oweth moneyes to the poore is close off the way for he is obliged to pay the Creditour first but the case hâ—re is farre otherwise the debt of practising indifferent feathers and straws such as kneeling crossing wearing Surplice is neither like the dept owen to the poore nor to the Creditor For natures Law and Gods word 1. Cor. 10.18.19 maketh the Non-practise non-murthering obedience to God when the practise of indifferent things is a soule stumbling to the weake and the practising is but at ' its best obedience to a positive Law and ought to stoope and goe off the way and disappeare when natures Law murther not doth come in ' its way When the Doctors put Loyalty above Charity they suppose obedience to Commandements commanding scandalizing of soulès to be loyalty to Superiours which is questioned it being treason to the soveraigne of Heaven and Earth to destroy his Image it is taken as loyaltie by our Doctors but not proven to be loyaltie and so a vaine question here whether Loyalty be above Charity or not This dispute of scandall is annexed unto his divine right of Church Government which was published 1646. since that Dr. Sanderson 1656 as I shewed you but now propounds the argument a new with a great deale of triumph but without any considerable reinforcement and withall he takes no notice of Rutherford his answer from whence I gather that he never read it and indeed it is a thing very incident unto the greatest Schollars of that party to censure but never to reade their adversaries Thirdly to say something unto Dr. Sanderson as well as unto the Duplyers I must needs confesse that I am transported with a just admiration that so great a schollar should so extenuate as he doth the guilt of an active scandall for he makes the care of not giving offence to a brother to be a matter but of courtesy he cannot saith he justly say I do him wrong if I neglect it But first the Apostle Paul speakes another language in his account to make brethren to offend is to sin against them to wound their weake consciences and so to sin against Christ 1 Cor. 8.12 Compared with ver 11.13 and Rom. 14.15.20 he resolves that 't is a destroying of a brother for whom Christ died a destroying of the worke of God in him whereupon Divines generally determine that 't is soule-murther Now in wounding the weake conscience of our brother in murthering his immortall soule there is doubtlesse some wrong committed against him not to destroy him for whom Christ dyed c. is more than a matter of meer courtesy unto him Secondly suppose the care of not giving offence be in respect of our brother but debitum charitatis yet in regard of God 't is debitum justitiae a legall debt he may and doth challenge it as due and we do him wrong if we disobey him Our Saviour thundereth a woe against such disobedience Woe to him through whom offences come Luk. 17.1 and in the second verse this woe is aggravated by comparison with a very grievous punishment it were better for him that a Mill-stone were hanged about his neck and he cast into the sea then that he should offend one of these little ones But to proceed unto the second comparison on which I insisted out of Bishop Morton and Dr Sanderson a Comparison betwixt a scandall given to a Magistrate and a scandall given to one who is only a brother I demand whether or no the offence given to or taken by a Magistrate who is a brother and withall a Magistrate be not greater than that which is given to or taken by one who is only a brother an impartiall Judg will soone determine that the double relation of brother and Magistrate weigheth down the single and naked relation of a brother c. ut suprà For answer unto this distinguish we of a two 〈◊〉 acception of scandall Primary and Secundary First Primary and so t is an occasioning culpably the fall of another into sin Secondly Secundary and so 't is only the angring vexing displeasing of another This distinction premised the comparison may be understood either of the scandall of a Magistrate in a secundary acception with a scandall of one who is onely a brother in a secundary acception of the word too or else of the scandall of a Magistrate in a secundary acception with the scandall of a brother in a primary acception or 3. of the scandall of a Magistrate in a primary acception with the scandall of a brother in a primary acception also
Christian liberty in things indifferent would in these our times come to be just nothing nay our servitude would be greater and more unsupportable than that of the Jewes under the Leviticall Ceremonies However yet information doth not alwaies alter the nature of scandall for the scandall of the weake may sometimes last Postquam reddita est ratio facti after a reason of the fact whereat they are scandalized is rendred to them For by reason of their extreame ignorance and slownesse of understanding they may be utterly incapable of information and instruction or else some opinion or practise whereunto they have been long accustomed may cast such a mist before their weak judgments as that they may not be able presently to apprehend the reason that is given of the action at which they stumble And we should so farre pitty the simplicity of such poore soules as to abstaine from that which scandalizeth them if by such abstinence there accrue not to us any great losse or inconvenience This is observed by Cajetan upon Aquinas 2. 2 dae q. 43. art 7. Vbi dicitur inquit articulo 7 mo de scandalo pusillorum si autem post redditam rationem hujusmodi scandalum duret jam videtur ex malitiâ esse adverto quod author non assertivo verbo utitur sed opinativo dicendo jam videtur ex malitiâ esse potest siquidem contingere quod pusilli non sint capaces rationis redditae vel propter pristinam consuetudinem quae facit apparere dissonum quod veritati consonat vel propter rationem apud eos magis apparentem vel aliquod hujusmodi tunc quia malitia non facit scandalum sed ignorantia vel infirmitas quamvis reddita sit ratio cessandum est ab hujusmodi spiritualibus non necessariis Cajetan in 2.2.0.43 c. Whereas it is said in the 7th article touching the scandall of the weak if after a reason given the scandall do still remain it seemeth to be of malice you must note the Author doth not use verbo assertivo sed opinativo saying it seemeth to be of malice For it may fall out that the weake are not capable of the reason that is rendred either by reasen of his former Custome which maketh that to appeare discordant with the truth or for some reason which in his eyes is more apparent or by reason of some such like cause and then it is not out of malice that he is offended but out of ignorance and infirmity After Cajetan Petrus de Lorica doth roundly and fully expresse the matter Verum est saith he quod Cajetanus advertit scandalum pusillorum perseverare posse adhuc postquam reddita est ratio facti vel quia rationem non capiunt ob mentis tarditatem vel ob consuetudinem diu firmatam in quo casu docet Cajetanus omittendam esse actionem ex quâ scandalum accipiunt vel differendam donec ad saniorem mentem venerint Quòd solùm verum si actio omitti potest sine jacturâ nostrae utilitatis Si enim magna utilitas temporalis vel spiritualis interveniat contemni potest scandalum pusillorum postquam sufficienter admoniti sint In the next place I will recite a limitation of Gregory de Valentia that comes under this head and is very remarkable Having laid downe a rule that for avoiding the scandall of our neighbour which springeth either from his ignorance or weaknesse it behooveth us by the obligation of Charity to do or omit that which may be done or left undone without sin he afterwards puts this exception Est autem animadvertendum hanc regulam intelligi debere de omni eo quod sine peccato fieri aut omitti possit non quom docunque sed moralitèr attentâ suavitate quae est in jugo legum divinarum id est quod sine peccato fieri aut omitti possit sine maxima etiam aliqua penè intolerabili difficultate spectata quoque in hac conditione personae c And indeed me thinks he speaks reasonably For improbable seems it that the sweet moderation which is in the yoake of divine lawes should consist with so great a rigour as in all matters whatsoever not simply unlawfull to exact not only a brotherly but also a servile compliancy with every supposed weak one whose weaknesse may be but pretended by those that are willing to speake favourably of them For the humouring and contenting of every supposed weakling in all matters at which he takes offence I conceive not my selfe bound to endanger my life to hazard my estate and fortunes or to incurre any other great or notable inconvenience for that would truly be durus sermo an hard saying who were able to beare it But now against this may be objected the resolution of the Apostle 1 Cor. 8.13 if meat make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh while the world standeth lest I make my brother to offend flesh is of great expediency for the nourishment of mans life and yet Paul resolves upon a perpetuall abstinence therefrom in case of scandall Consequent and this example of Paul is obligatory unto all Christians For answer first this flesh may be understood only of such as was sacrificed unto Idols for words in scripture usually are to be restrained unto the subject matter spoken of and the meat and flesh here spoken of in the Context was such as had been offered unto an Idoll Secondly Calvin resolveth that 't is an Hyperbole est inquit hyperbolica locutio quia vix possibile est ut quis à carnibus totâ vitâ abstineat si remaneat in communi vitâ significat tamen se nunquam usurum potius suâ libertate quam ut fit infirmis offendiculo Nunquam enim licitus est usus nisi moderatus ad charitatis regulam This Hyperbole of Pauls you may Parallel with that of our Saviour Matth. 5.39 40 41. whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheeke turne to him the other also And if any man will sue thee at the Law and take away thy coate let him have thy cloake also And whosoever shall compell thee to goe a mile gee with him twaine Thirdly Paul is to be understood only upon supposition that the Gospell should not be fully promulgated and brethren should remain uninstructed concerning the nature of Christian Liberty for usually 't is in this case only that to eat flesh involves in the guilt of an active scandall makes a brother to offend hence the Apostle exhorts the strong amongst the Romans to abstaine from meats forbiden by the Law of Moses for prevention of the scandall of the weake but amongst the Galathians and Colossians he dislikes such an abstinence and dehorts from it the reason of this his different carriage was because the weak amonst the Romans were not fully taught the doctrine of Christian liberty the Galathians Colossians were Julian mistaking the Apostles doctrine of scádall thought to make use