Selected quad for the lemma: life_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
life_n	eat_v	flesh_n	meat_n	7,845	5	9.0841	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46699	A second part of The mixture of scholasticall divinity, with practical, in several tractates: wherein some of the most difficult knots in divinity are untyed, many dark places of Scripture cleared, sundry heresies and errors refuted ... Whereunto are annexed, several letters of the same author, and Dr. Jeremy Taylor, concerning Original Sin. Together with a reply unto Dr. Hammonds vindication of his grounds of uniformity from 1 Cor. 14.40. By Henry Jeanes, minister of Gods Word at Chedzoy in Somersetshire.	Jeanes, Henry, 1611-1662.; Taylor, Jeremy, 1613-1667.	1660 (1660)	Wing J508; ESTC R202621	508,739	535

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. Ubi dicitur inquit articulo 7 mo de scandalo pusillorum si autem 〈◊〉 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 reason 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 〈◊〉 esse actionem ex quâ scandalum accipiunt vel differendam donec ad saniorem mentem venerint Quòd solùm verum si actio omitti potest 〈◊〉 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 idest quod sine peccato fieri aut omitti possit sine maxima etiam aliqua penè intolerabili 〈◊〉 spectata quoque in hac conditione 〈◊〉 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 siremaneat in communi vitâ significat tamen se 〈◊〉 usurum potius suâ libertate quam ut fit insirmis offendiculo Nunquam 〈◊〉 licitus est usus nisi moderatus ad charitatis regulam This Hyperbole of Pauls you may Parallel with that of our Saviour 〈◊〉 5. 39 40 41. whosoever shall smite thee on thy right 〈◊〉 turne to him the other also And if any man will sue 〈◊〉 at the Law and take away thy coate let him have thy cloake also And 〈◊〉 shall compell thee to goe a mile goe 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 〈◊〉 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 scâdall thought to make use of it for the starving of the Christias and therefore in Antiochia and in the region round about he dedicated all the sountaines to the Goddesses of the Gentiles and caused all the victuall that was to be sold in market places to be sprinkled with Ethnick holy waters thinking that some would be scandalized at the drinking of the water of such fountaines and at the eating of such victuall and that the Apostles doctrine obliged all to forbeare any thing in the 〈◊〉 of scandall never-thelesse Christians without scruple of conscience dranke of the water that was in the

or a cart in a certaine way at a certaine time when it may be unwitting to the commander little children were playing in the way would any mans conscience serve him to doe it Avoiding of scandall is a maine duty of Charity May Superiours at their pleasure appoint how farre I shall shew my Charity towards my brothers soule Then surely an inferiour earthly court may crosse the determinations of the high court of heaven The superiours have no power given them for destruction but onely for 〈◊〉 If therefore they command scandals they goe beyond their Commission neither are we tied therein to doe as they bid but as they should bid If determination by superiours were sufficient to take away the sinne of a scandall Then they doe very ill that they do not so farrè as is possible determine all things indifferent that so no danger may be left in giving of offence by the use of them Then the Church of Rome is to be praised in that she hath determined of so many indifferents then Paul with the other Apostles might have spared a great deale of labour in admonishing the Churches how they should 〈◊〉 offences about some indifferent things A farre shorter way had been either to determine the matter fully or else to have given order that the Churches should among themselves determine it at home But say that 〈◊〉 Archbishop of Corinth for now I suppose such a one had called his convocation and with consent of his Clergie had 〈◊〉 that men might and for 〈◊〉 of liberty should at a certaine time eat of such and such meats which men formerly doubted of would not yet the Apostle have given the same 〈◊〉 he did Would not good Christians still have had care of their brothers consciences Can the determination of a superiour be a sufficient plea at the barre of Gods judgment seat for a man that by virtue or 〈◊〉 thereof alone hath done any 〈◊〉 that his 〈◊〉 telleth him will scandalize his brother Lastly I would 〈◊〉 know whether those superiours do not give a great scandall which take upon them determinately to impose unnecessary rites which they know many good men will be scandalized by Thus farre Ames But this opinion of Ames is I confesse to be understood cum gravo salis with many limitations which I shall lay downe fully in the Tractate that next followeth If the Prelates would have seriously laid to heart that golden saying of Paul 1 Cor. 8. 13. If meate make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh while the world 〈◊〉 lest I make my brother to offend This would supersede all further dispute of this argument for thence it is easie to evict that it is unlawfull for Church governours to command the observation of things indifferent when in all probability they will scandalize how dare they make that the matter of a Church Canon which Paul durst not adventure upon in his own personall practice He thought it unlawfull to do a thing otherwise indifferent to eat flesh in the care 〈◊〉 scandall and therefore doubtlesse he judged it unlawfull in such a case to impose any such matter upon others Greater was the importance of the flesh for borne by Paul unto his health and the comfort of his life then the profit of the controverted ceremonies can be unto the worship and service of God And besides the indifferency of eating flesh was a thing cleare and evident unto all that were well instructed in the Doctrine of Christian liberty whereas the indifferency of our ceremonies will at least be judged a very doubtfull matter and that by very indifferent men who shall thoroughly ponder the Arguments of Didoclave Parker Ames and others against them which to this day remaine unanswered The Prelates will not pretend unto such an ample authority in the Church of God as Paul had But though they be farre inferiour unto him in point of Authority they are not yet so humble as to imitate him in the condescention of his charity Pauls peremptorie resolve was to forbeare a thing indifferent whē it scandalized If 〈◊〉 makae my brother to offend I will saith he eat no flesh while the world standeth least I make my brother to offend 1 Cor. 8. 13. But what a wide difference nay contrariety was there betwixt this charitable resolution of Paul and the rigid practise of the Prelates For they were obstinately bent to presse the Ceremonies with all severity without any care or Conscience of the scandals ensuing nay their endeavour was daily to adde unto the heape of former ceremonies though they knew that thereby the scandals would be increased They spake a language quite contrary to that of Paul we will enjoyne say they the surplice crosse kneeling in the sacrament of the Lords supper while the world standeth as long as we have any power and authority in the Church of God Let who will be offended This their rigour brings unto my mind a cruel command of Vedius Pollio that was countermanded by Augustus Caesar supping with him A poore boy his slave had casually broken a Chrystall glasse and for this Pollio most inhumanely condemned him to be throwne into a great pond of Lampreys there to be devoured The boy escaping from those appointed for his execution prostrated himselfe at the feet of Caesar who then sup't with his master and desired not pardon but onely commutation of so horrid and unnaturall a death Augustus was extreamly transported with the strangenesse and novelty of so inhumane a cruelty and hereupon to prevent the like for the future he forthwith commanded all the Christall glasses of Pollio though his friend to be broken and the fishpond to be filled up for the breaking of a sorry glasse he thought it a disproportioned and too severe a punishment to have a mans bowels pluck't in pieces and torne asunder This spirit of Vedius Pollio breathed in many of our late Prelates The Ceremonies in comparison of mens soules were but as paltry trifles as glasses and feathers and yet by the maintenance of them they hazarded the soules of thousands In as much as in them lay they destroyed the worke of God they destroyed those for whom Christ died they scandalize Papists and separatists people and Pastours conformists and non-conformists as Mr Parker at large demonstrates Dr John Burgesse as I have often heard urged this story in a Sermon before King James to perswade him unto the abolition of the Ceremonies And King James had doubtlesse expressed a Christian and royall care of his people if he had broken these glasses in pieces if he had cashered these toyes out of the Church which had broken so many in their estates wounded so many in their consciences and endangered the salvation of so many soules and hereby have prevented those unspeakable griefes feares and scandalls which they formerly occasioned I proceed unto the third and last conclusion which is that 〈◊〉 actions of men which proceeds from deliberate reason if they be

any man then make any tolerable apology for the tyranny of our late Prelates who commanded all to drive on with a furious career in the course of conformity without any the least stop though hereby were hazarded a world of soules purchased at no lower a rate than the divine bloud of our blessed Saviour It is the will and pleasure of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords that matters commanded by his affirmative precepts should be for a while forborne in case of the likelihood of scandall consequent but these men in imitation of him that exalted himselfe above all that is called God 2 Thes. 2. 4. could not be perswaded to dispense with a temporary forbearance of any ceremonies they enjoined though they well foresaw that the sequele of them was likely to be a very great and spreading scandall But now the non-conformists might spare all this discourse touching the obligation of humane lawes in generall because they hold that humane religious Doctrinall Ceremonies the matter in question cannot be lawfully determined by the authority of either Politicall or Ecclesiasticall superiours and for this they have two as I take it very convincing arguments First because all such Ceremonies are Sawcy additions unto the word and ordinances of God Deut. 4. 2. and cap. 12. 32. strange fire which the Lord commanded not Lev. 10. 8. Secondly because suppose they be indifferent which was a thing never granted yet they are unnecessary toyes and trifles and therefore it is not lawfull for our superiours to command them when from the practise of them it is very probable that scandall will arise For First every power is the Minister of God to thee for good Rom. 13. 4 the power of the Magistrate is like that of the Minister only for edification and not destruction 2 Cor. 10. 8. and cap. 13. 10. but now if he should have power to command humane symbolicall Ceremonies that may be well spared in Gods worship and service whenthere is likelihood of the consecution of Scandall then he should have power to do mischiefe to enjoine things hurtfull and destructive unto the soules of men Secondly our Saviours commination against scandall Matth. 18. 7. Woe to that man by whom the offence cometh reacheth Magistrates as well as private persons and we may say the same of the Apostolicall prohibitions of scandall both to the Romans and the Corinthians Rom. 14. 13 15 20 21. 1 Cor. 8. 9. and chap. 10. 32. Unto these prohibitions adde we Pauls resolution to avoid scandall arising from the use of things indifferent if meat make my brother to offend saith he I will eat no flesh while the world standeth lest I make my brother to offend 1 Cor. 8. 13. For From this resolution the unlawfulnesse of the injunction of such ceremonies as ours will undeniably follow To cleare this I shall presuppose that which cannot with any colour of reason be denied to wit that that which Paul held unlawfull for himselfe to practise in his own person upon a generall account belonging to all Christians could not by him be lawfully imposed upon others by an Ecclesiasticall Canon but now Paul held it unlawfull to eat flesh in case of scandall probably consequent and this was upon a generall reason belonging to all Christians and therefore he thought it utterly unlawsull to impose any such matter upon others when scandall was likely to follow From this thus premised I shall hence thus argue Syllogistically against our Prelates imposition of our Ceremonies If it were unlawfull for Paul to impose upon the Corinthians such ceremonies as ours then it was unlawfull for our Prelates to impose such upon us But it was unlawfull for Paul to impose such Ceremonies as ours upon the Corinthians Therefore it was unlawfull for the Prelates to impose such Ceremonies upon us The sequele of the major is evident because the Prelates could not pretend unto so much authority in matters Ecclesiasticall as Paul had for in each of the Apostles there was a greater 〈◊〉 of jurisdiction then in any that succeeded them As for the Minor that may be confirmed by this following Syllogisme If it were unlawfull for Paul to impose upon the Corinthians the eating of flesh when scandall was likely to ensue then it was unlawfull for him to impose upon them the use of such Ceremonies as ours But the former appeareth to be unlawfull by the 1 Cor. 8. 13. Therefore the latter was unlawfull also There is nothing here can be questioned but the Major and that is easily confirmed from a just comparison of flesh with such Ceremonies as ours First the eating of flesh was undoubtedly a thing more cleerly indifferent then the practise of such Ceremonies of ours Secondly flesh was necessary unto the maintenance of the life of man by disjunction that is flesh or some other meat but now such Ceremonies as ours are not necessary unto the worship and service of God by disjunction for God may be worshipped without them or any others in their stead a surplice saith Rutherford is not necessary by way of disjunction for neither is surplice necessary nor any other white or red habit that hath some mysticall signification like unto Surplice So kneeling to the elements is neither necessary nor any the like religious honouring of them by prostration before them or kissing them But against this accusation of our Ceremonies for scandall there are objected two Comparisons First of the duties of justice and Charity together the duties of justice are more obligatory then the duties of charity as being not only a morall but a legall debt Now to hinder the scandall of the weak is a duty of charity only a morall debt to obey the lawfull command of authority in things indifferent a duty of justice a legall debt and therefore of the greater obligation and moment I shall the rather insist on this argument because it is of late so much stood on by Dr Sanderson in his last Sermons printed 1656. pag. 249. where we are not saith he able to discharge both debts of justice are to be paid saith he before bebts of charity Now the duty of obedience is debitum justitiae and a matter of right my superiour may challenge it at my hands as his due and I doe him wrong if I withhold it from him But the care of not giving offence is but debitum charitatis and a matter of but courtesie I am to performe it to my brother in love when I see cause but he cannot challenge it from me as his right nor can justly say I do him wrong if I neglect it It is therefore no more lawfull for me to disobey the lawfull command of a superiour to prevent thereby the offence of one or a few brethren then it is lawfull for me to do one man wrong to do another man a courtesie withall or then it is lawfull for me to rob the Exchequer to relieve an Hospitall For answer First if this argument

by doing that which tends unto his damnation Christ parted with his life to save him and wilt not thou for that end abridg thy selfe of thy liberty in a few indifferent things 2. From Gods creation of their soules for meat destroy not the worke of God Rom. 14. 20. that is the soule of thy brother for that is stiled Gods worke in a way of 〈◊〉 because it was one of the choycest chiefest and most eminent workes of the Creation made as it were with the consultation of the whole Trinity and had in it engraven the very Image of God himselfe Therefore not only the defacing but the very attempting to deface this would redound very much unto the dishonour of the worker God And he will doubtlesse accordingly resent the despising of his workmanship Some interpreters expound the place of the work of Gods grace in the sanctification or regeneration of the soule wherein faith is begotten and that faith in a peculiar manner is the worke of God we have Christs own testimony John 6. 29. Jesus answered and said unto them this is the worke of God that ye believe on him whom he hath sent But even so the words display the horrid malignancy of scandall for they shew that he who scandalizeth his brother fighteth against God that he goeth about to demolish that which hath God alone for the builder It was a part of Christs character not to breake a bruised reed nor quench the smoaking flax Mat. 12. 20. How unsuitable unto this is the disposition of those by whom offences come For they doe what lieth in them to quench the very beginnings of grace and goodnesse Indeed the worke of Gods grace is so all-powerfull as that it will finally prevaile against all resistance If God have begunne a good worke he will performe it untill the day of Jesus Christ Phil. 1. 6. And the gates of hell shall never be able to prevaile against it Matth. 16. 18. But yet the gates of hell will be ever hindering of it and in especiall by the spreadth of scandals And this very opposition is a warre against heaven in the language of the Scripture a destroying of the worke of God There is one sequele more of active scandals of this nature that our Apostle mentioneth Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 10. which deserveth also our consideration and it is the blot of infamy which they will contract unto our names and the very Christian liberty which we abuse A scandall in this case tending unto sinne is usually accompanied with a scandall tending unto disgrace or defamation And how carefull we should be to decline scandall even in this English sense of the word the vehemency of the Apostles interrogations will sufficiently informe us 1 Cor. 10. 29 30. Conscience I say not thine own but of the others for why is my liberty judged 〈◊〉 mans conscience for if I by grace be a partaker why am I evill spoken of for that for which I give thanks Unto these interrogations adde we the Apostles precept also Rom. 14. 16. Let not then your good be evill spoken of that is give none occasion for this great priviledg of your Christian liberty to be traduced Before I take my leave of this restraint of our liberty by Charity in the case of scandall I shall examine the restraints that some have put upon it without any warrant from scripture Those in which they most confide are two 1. They limit it unto the scandall of the weake and 2. Unto matters that are undetermined by Authority 1. 〈◊〉 limit it unto the scandall of the weake for the scandall of the malicious and presumptuous persons The scandall of Pharises say they may be neglected Mat. 15. 12 14. whether in our Ceremonies there was an active scandall a scandall given will be largely disputed in the next treatise for the present therefore we shall only prove that we are to avoid such an active scandall in the malicious as well as the weake For First Such a scandall is of soule destroying nature Destroy net him with thy meate Rom. 14. 15. And who so wicked and malicious upon the face of the earth whose soule a true Christian charity will exclude from it's care mercy and compassion 〈◊〉 The Apostles motive reacheth unto the wicked and malicious Destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ died Rom. 14. 15. for they may be in the number of those for whom Christ died who for their present state and condition may be most wicked and malicious such as oppose themselves such as are in the snare of the Devill taken captive by him at his will 3. The Apostles prohibition 1 Cor. 10. 32. extendeth unto the malicious as well as the weake Give none offence neither to the 〈◊〉 nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God where Jewes and Gentiles are distinguished from the Church of God and therefore by them are meant such as were unconverted and as yet enemies unto the faith of Christ and Church of God And the things wherein the 〈◊〉 would have their offence to be avoided were matters of indifferency Whether ye cat or drinke 〈◊〉 31. But now lest some should be ready to object unto Paul that which our Saviour said of the Scribes and Pharisees Matth. 23. 4. that he did bind a heavy burden and grievous to be 〈◊〉 and lay it upon mens shoulders but he himselfe would not move it with one of his fingers the Apostle in the next verse sheweth how that his practice was conformable unto his precept Even as I please all men good and bad in all things that is in all indifferent things not seeking mine own profit but the profit of many that they may be saved 1 Cor. 10. 33. In a second place the Fautors of our Ceremonies limit this restraint of our liberty in things indifferent by charity in the case of scandall onely unto things undetermined by Authority Where Authority hath determined our choice we must say they hold to their determination any scandall to the Contrary notwithstanding It seems then in case the magistrate command it we may wound the weake consciences of our Brother Destroy with our indifferencies the worke of God him for whom Christ died It is good saith Paul neither to eat flesh nor to drink wine nor any thing whereby thy Brother stumbleth or is offended or is made 〈◊〉 Rom. 14. 22. But our 〈◊〉 determine quite otherwise if authority enjoyne it it is good say they to eat bread drink wine we are a surpliee use the signe of the 〈◊〉 in Baptisme though thereby never so many Brethren stumble or are offended or made weake The unreasonablenesse of this assertion Ames in his reply to Morton hath proved by many arguments That are as yet unanswered which I shall here transcribe A scandall in the nature of it is spirituall murder Now suppose a superiour should command a thing in it selfe indifferent whereupon murder were like to follow as to runne a horse

be applied unto our Ceremonies there will be in such application a meer begging of the question for that our Ceremonies were things indifferent the command of them lawfull the practise of them a duty of justice a legall debt is the maine thing in controversy betwixt the conformists and non-conformists and therefore all this should be proved and not barely presupposed as it is But Secondly the fore mentioned rule is to be understood with this limitation caeteris paribus if the termes of the comparison be equall and equall they are not when the minims of justice are put into the ballance with the weightiest duties of charity and so 't is in the present comparison though we suppose our Ceremonies to be indifferent and the practise of them a dutie of justice for of what importance is such practise in comparison of the not scandalizing of our Brother Who that is not extreamly transported with prejudice will think that the commands of the Prelates to weare the surplice to signe children with the signe of the Crosse in Baptisme c. carry any tolerable proportion with those precepts of the Apostle destroy not him with thy meat thy indifferencies for whom Christ died for such things destroy not the worke of God Rom. 14. 15 20. What lawes of any earthly wight whatsoever concerning ceremonies can be more obligatory than the Commands of God touching the externalls of his worship and service and yet it is his will and pleasure that these externals of his worship should be laid aside for the performance of outward works of mercy I will have mercy and not sacrifice Matth. 12. 7. Thus are we to leave our prayers both publique and private to forsake a Sermon for to save the life 〈◊〉 our neighbours to quench the firing of his house to helpe his cattle out of the ditch now if the sacred Ordinances of God are to give way unto works of mercy unto the bodies of men surely then much more is the trash of humane inventions to yeild unto a worke of mercy towards the soules of men This answer which I now give was made by 〈◊〉 in his dispute of scandall unto the Duplies of the Doctors of Aberdeen pa. 50 51 52 53. his discourse there is so satisfactory as that I have thought fit to transcribe what he saies and I hope the reading of it will not be irksome unto the Reader It is true these duties which we owe to others by way of justice are more obligatory then those which we owe only by way of charity caeteris paribus 〈◊〉 duties of the Law of nature and morall Law are compared together then indeed the duties which we owe both by the tye of justice and charity are more obligatory then the duties that 〈◊〉 owe onely by the tye of charity As for example My Father is in danger before mine eyes to be drowned in one 〈◊〉 water and before my 〈◊〉 also my neighbour or friend is in danger of the like kind the two 〈◊〉 and bands of justice and charity both by the fifth and sixt Commandements are more obligatory hic nunc and do more strictly oblige that I run to succour and preserve the life of my Father than the life of my neighbour for the obligation to my neighbour is only Charity by the obligation of the sixth Commandement which obligation ceaseth hic nunc at this time when my fathers life is in hazard and thus farre the Doctors argument goeth for strong as School-men Casuists and Divines teach But it is not to a purpose for the Doctors for all offices and duties generally and universally of what ever kind which we owe by way of Justice are not more obligatory than duties which we owe only by way of charity as when duties of a positive commandement of God 〈◊〉 by our superiours and duties which we owe by charity only are compared together then the Doctors Major proposition is not cleare of it selfe as they dreame neither do Casuists or Amesius or Divines say with them but truth and all our Divines say against them Let us suppose that the King and Convocation and Assembly of Priests and Prophets of Israel make a Canon according to Gods word That no manner of man presume to eat shew-bread save the Priests only All men owe obedience to this both because it is Gods expresse Law and by the band of Justice the 〈◊〉 and assembly of the Ancients have forbidden it But if our Doctors argument st and strong David at the point and hazard of famishing for hunger sinned in eating shew-bread yet Christ acquitteth him of all sinne and saith Matth. 12. 5. he and his followers are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blamelesse Now David was under a duty by mercy and love to his own life and the lives of his followers to eat shew bread and he was under the band of Justice by the Law of the Ancients of Israel and Gods law not to eat Therefore in some cases when our superiours commandements are only positive Lawes they are not more obligatory than duties of Charity only commanded in the Law of nature I cleare it further thus I see my neighbour in danger before my eyes of drowning and my father commandeth me to goe and labour or sow his farme in that time while I am to preserve the life of my neighbour in present danger to loose his life in a great water By the Doctors maxime I am under the higher obligatory tie of Justice to obey my father who commandeth a thing both lawfull and necessary by vertue of the higher commandement to wit the first of the second Table than I am obliged by the sixth Commandement and of charity only to give present succour and helpe to my dying neighbour so I must let my neighbour dye in the waters to give a duty of Justice to my father of farre lesse necessity I would not commit my Conscience to such Casuists as are the Doctors of Aberdeen But if the Doctors would see with some new light of reason it is cleare that not only the tye of justice maketh the precept more obligatory but also the 〈◊〉 of the thing commanded yea and if the positive Commandements of the Lord our God who of Justice and Kingly soveraignty hath right to aske obedience of us above all earthly Superiours do yeild and cede as lesse obligatory then commandements of love only that are commanded in the Law of nature 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 〈◊〉 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