all customes were the rule of decency but that some were and that there was no other rule but custome This I hope hath discovered the invalidity of his second argument section 42 His last argument because there is dicency in the first usage of some things falls upon that mistake of my words which I discoursed of and cleared at the beginning for I never said that a thing must be customary before it is decent in any kind knowing unquestionably that there is a natural decency but that the decency of any ceremony in Gods service wherein God and Nature have prescribed nothing particularly must be regulated according to those measures which the customes of any place do allow to be reverential among them Or in yet plainer words the civil customes of any Nation by which this or that sort of gesture is rendred a token of reverence are the onely rule by which the decency of indifferent gestures c. is to be judged of in order to God's service And so much for the last argument also and consequently for the first part of his exception that against my interpretation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decently section 43 But there is yet a second charge behind against my rendring of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to appointment which he hath managed in these words section 44 As for the other part of the words let all things be done in order Ames in the place forementioned sheweth that order requireth not such ceremonies as ours and he giveth this reason because order requireth not the institution of any new thing but onely the right placing and disposing of things which are formerly instituted and this he makes good from the notation of the word from the definitions of order which are given by Philosophers and Divines c. from the context of the chapter and from the usage of the word elsewhere But the Doctor that the words may give some countenance unto our ceremonies adventureth upon a new interpretation of them The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he literally import according unto appointment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifies to appoint as Mat. 28. 16. Act. 22. 10. and 28. 23. And we may here upon argue à conjugatis that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be sometimes rendred appointment But because it may sometimes be rendred appointment will it therefore follow that it must be so rendred in this place We may say as will as the Dr. that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 literally import according unto order as order is taken strictly for the right placing or ranking of things one before another after and this we have confessed even by Dr John Burgesse in his rejoynder unto Ames p. 78. a book published by the special command of the late King Moreover this sense is favoured by the coherence for v. 31. we have a particular instance of order in this acception of the word ye may all prophesie one by one c. and not all or many speake at once 2. We have the opposite of order taken in this sense 1. v. 33. confusion Let all things be done in order then is as much as let all things be done without confusion And I hope confusion may be avoided in the worship of God without such ceremonies as ours But we will for once suppose though not grant that the clear importance of the words is that all be done in the Church according to custome and appointment Yet the Dr hath a hard taske to performe before he can come nigh his conclusion that the words of Paul are a proofe of the more than lawfulnesse of prescription of such ceremonies as ours in a Church For he must prove that custome and order here are taken in such a latitude as that they include not onely the customes and appointments of the Apostolical Churches but also of all the Churches of God in succeeding ages and the performance of this he will find not to be so easie as he may imagine I am sensible that I have by this discourse provoked a very learned and formidable adversary but it is onely love of the truth hath ingaged me in so unequal an incounter and therefore I hope the Dr will pardon and excuse my boldnesse If he can by dint of argument prove the truth to be on his side I shall not be sorry or ashamed to be overcome by him section 45 To this my answer will be very briefe 1. by giving the reason of my rendring 2. by evidencing that if the vulgar were acknowledged the righter rendring yet my conclusion would very regularly follow thence and that therefore I have no need to contend with any gainsayer about my rendring section 46 For the first it is manifest to any that knowes but the elements of Greeke that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 literally and properly signifies according to ordination or appointment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies according to not in and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an ordinance or constitution millions of times in authors and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 orderly or in order lying more consonant with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no reason can be rendred why if that had been the designed meaning that word should not have been used there section 47 That it may so signifie Mr J. acknowledges and so I have obtained all I seek in my first proposal which was not that it must necessarily thus signifie but that this being the literal regular rendring of it I had sufficient reason to render it thus section 48 I proceed then to the second thing that if what he pretends to be possible also were indeed the onely possible or by way of supposition but not concession if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did really import no more than in order as that is opposed to disorder or confusion yet I say it will soon appear that the Apostles commanding such order or orderlynesse and forbidding all confusion in ecclesiastical affaires must by consequence be interpreted to command the instituting and observing uniformity of ceremonies in a Church This I thus deduce section 49 First there is no possibility of worshipping God externally and publickly without use of some ceremonies or circumstances of time place and gesture c. Secondly there is no possibility of order in a multitude without uniformity in the same circumstances Thirdly there is as little possibility of Vniformity among many without either agreement one with another or direction of some superior to them all what shall by all be uniformely performed Fourthly the agreement one with another if it be onely voluntarie and such as by which none are obliged no way secures the end but if it be such an agreement that every single person is obliged to observe then still is that a law of that body as of a Councel c. and as truely so as the constitution of a single Praelate can be thought to be And so the conclusion regularly followes that
ΕΚΤΕÎΕ'ΣΤΕΡΟΠOR The Degrees of Ardency IN CHRISTS PRAYER Reconciled with His fulnesse OF HABITVAL GRACE In Reply to the Author of a Book intituled A mixture of Scholastical Divinity with Practical By H. HAMMOND D. D. LONDON Printed for R. ROYSTON at the Angel in Ivie-lane 1656. The Degrees of ardency in Christ's Prayer c. § 1 I Was very willing to hearken to the seasonable advice of many and to wholly withdraw my self à foro contentioso to some more pleasing profitable imployment but discerning it to be the desire of the Author of the Book Intituled A mixture of Scholastical and Practical Divinity that I should reply to his examination of one passage of mine against Mr. Cawdrey I shall make no scruple immediately to obey him not only because it may be done in very few words but especially because the doctrine which he affixeth to mee seems and not without some reason to be contrary to the truth of Scripture which I am to look on with all reverent submission and acquiesce in with captivation of understanding and so not assert any thing from my own conceptions which is but seemingly contrary to it section 2 The proposition which he affixes to mee is this That Christs love of God was capable of farther degrees and that he refutes as being contrary to that point a truth of Scripture which he had in hand viz. The dwelling of all fulness of habituall grace in Christ section 3 By this I suppose I may conclude his meaning to bee that I have affirmed Christs love of God meaning thereby that habituall grace of divine Charity to have been capable of further degrees so as that capacity of further degrees is the denyall of all fulness of that habitual grace already in him section 4 And truly had I thus exprest my self or let fall any words which might have been thus interpretable I acknowledge I had been very injurious not onely to the verity of God but also to my own conceptions and even to the cause which I had in hand which had not been supported but betrayed by any such apprehension of the imperfection of Christs habitual graces section 5 This I could easily shew and withall how cautiously and expresly it was fore-stall'd by mee But to the matter in hand it is sufficient that I professe I never thought it but deem it a contrariety to expresse words of Scripture in any man who shall think it and in short that I never gave occasion to any man to believe it my opinion having never said it in those words which he sets up to refute in mee never in any other that may be reasonably interpretable to that sense section 6 First I said it not in those words which he undertakes to refute These are p. 258. of his Book thus set down by him This point may serve for confutation of a passage in Dr. H. against Mr. C. to wit That Christs love of God was capable of farther degrees section 7 These words I never said nor indeed are they to be found in the Passage which he sets down from mee and whereon he grounds them which saith he is this Dr. H. p. 222. In the next place he passeth to the inforcement of my argument from what we read concerning Christ himself that he was more intense in Prayer at one time than another when yet the lower degree was sure no sin and prepares to make answer to it viz. That Christ was above the Law and did more then the Law required but men fall short by many degrees of what is required But sure this answer is nothing to the matter now in hand for the evidencing of which that example of Christ was brought by mee viz. That sincere Love is capable of degrees This was first shewed in severall men and in the same man at several times in the severall rankes of Angels and at last in Christ himself more ardent in one act of Prayer than in another section 8 Here the Reader findes not the words Christs love of God is capable of further degrees and when by deduction he endeavours to conclude them from these words his conclusion falls short in one word viz. further and 't is but this That the example of Christ will never prove D. H. his conclusion unlesse it inferre that Christs love of God was capable of degrees section 9 This is but a slight charge indeed yet may be worthy to be taken notice of in the entrance though the principal weight of my answer be not laid on it and suggest this seasonable advertisment that he which undertakes to refute any saying of another must oblige himself to an exact recital of it to a word and syllable Otherwise he may himself become the onely Author of the Proposition which he refutes section 10 The difference is no more than by the addition of the word further But that addition may possibly beger in the Readers understanding a very considerable difference section 11 For this proposition Christs love of God was capable of further degrees is readily interpretable to this dangerous sense that Christs love of God was not ful but so farre imperfect as to be capable of some further degrees than yet it had And thus sure the Author I have now before mee acknowledges to have understood the words and accordingly proposeth to refute them from the consideration of the all-fulness of habitual grace in Christ which he could not doe unlesse he deemed them a prejudice to it section 12 But those other words which though he findes not in my papers he yet not illogically inferres from them that Christs love of God was capable of degrees more intense at one time than at another are not so liable to be thus interpreted but onely import that Christs love of God had in its latitude or amplitude severall degrees one differing from another See magis minus all of them comprehended in that all-full perfect love of God which was alwayes in Christ so full and so perfect as not to want and so not to be capable of further degrees section 13 The Matter is cleare The degrees of which Christs love of God is capable are by me thus exprest that his love was more intense at one time than at another but still the higher of those degrees of intensness was as truly acknowledged to be in Christs love at some time viz. in his agonie as the lower was at 〈◊〉 and so all the degrees which are supposed to be mentioned of his love are also supposed and expresly affirmed to have been in him at some time or other whereas a supposed capacity of further degrees seems at least and so is resolved by that Author to inferre that these degrees were not in Christ the direct contradictorie to the former Proposition and so that they were wanting in him the but seeming asserting of that want is justly censured as prejudiciall to Christs fulness Here then was one misadventure in his
proceeding section 14 But this is but the proaemial part of my Reply there is another more material branch of it still behind which may yet seem necessarie to be added viz. to mind him of what he well knowes the distinction between habits and acts of virtues or graces and that love the Genus doth equally comprehend both these species and that his discourse of all fulness belonging to the habitual grace of Christ I speak distinctly of another matter viz. of the degrees of that grace discernable in the several acts of it section 15 This distinction I thought legible enough before both in the Tract of Will-worship and in the Answer to Mr. Caw section 16 In the former the Refuter confesseth to finde it reciting these words of mine It is possible for the same person constantly to love God above all and yet to have higher expressions of that love at one time than another Where the expressions at one time and at another must needs referre to the severall acts of the same all-full habituall love Onely I guesse not what temptation he had to choose that expression which he there makes use of viz. That there D. H. minceth the matter and speaketh more cautelously adding that what he there saith is nothing to the matter now in hand Whereas 1. those of Will-worship being the First papers written on that subject are sure very pertinent to ascertain him of the meaning of the latter written in defense of them and secondly the early cautelous speaking there might have made further later caution unnecessary and 3ly I could not be said to mince which to vulgar eares signifies to retract in some degree what I had said before and again speak more cautiously when that was the first time of my speaking of it section 17 Mean-while it is manifest and his own confession that there these were my words and those so cautious that this sense of the words which he undertakes to refute could not be affixt on them And this I should have thought sufficient to have preserved my innocence and forstalled his Vse of Confutation section 18 But the answer to Mr. C. which occasioned it was I think as cautious also 1. In the words recited by the Refuter viz. that Christ himself was more ardent in one act of prayer then in another 2. In the words following in that answer but not recited by him viz. that the sincerity of this or that virtue exprest in this or that performance is it we speake of when we say it consists in a latitude and hath degrees where the this or that performance are certainly Acts of the virtue consisting in a latitude and the having degrees viz in that latitude no way implies him that hath that virtue in that latitude viz. Christ to want at present and in that sense to be capable of farther degrees section 19 I am willing to look as jealously as I can on any passage of my own which falls under any mans censure and therefore finding nothing in the words set down by him as the ground of the Refutation which is any way capable of it I have reviewed the whole section and weighed every period as suspiciously as I could to observe whether I could draw or wrest that consequence from any other passage not recited by him section 20 And I find none in any degree liable except it should be this in the beginning of the Sect. Where setting down the argument as it lay in the Tr. of Will-wor I say t is possible for the same person which so loves God i.e. with all the heart to love him and expresse that love more intensely at one time than another as appeared by the example of Christ section 21 If this be thought capable of misapprehension by reason of the and disjoyning love from the expressions of it and so the expressions belonging to the acts the love be deemed to denote the habitual love I must onely say that this is a misapprehension for that by loving with all the heart in the first place I certainly meant the sincere habit of Love by love in the latter place the inward acts of love and by the expressions of love the outward expressions of those inward acts and of those acts onely I speak and of those expressions when I say they are more intense at one time then another section 22 The word love as I said is a genus equally comprehending the two species habitual and actual love and equally applicable to either of the species to the acts as well as habit of love And so when I say love is capable of degrees the meaning is cleare The generical word love restrained to the later species i. e. considered in respect of the acts of love gradually differenced one from the other is that respect capable of degrees both inwardly and in outward expressions that act of love that poured out and exprest it self in the more ardent prayer was a more intense act of love then another act of the same habitual love which did not so ardently expresse it self section 23 I shall explain this by the Refuters own Confession The death of Christ saith he was an higher expression of Christs love of us then his poverty hunger or thirst To this I subjoyn that such as the expression was such was the act of inward love of which that was an expression it being certain that each of these expressions had an act of internal love of which they were so many proportionably different expressions And from hence I suppose it unavoidably consequent that that act of internal love exprest by his dying for us was superior to those former acts which onely exprest themselves in his poverty and so the same person that loved sincerely did also love and expresse that love more intensly at one time then at another which was the very thing I had said in another instance But this I have added ex abundanti more then the Refuters discourse required of me section 24 It now onely remaines that I consider whether this Refuter have in the process of his discourse added any thing wherein I may be any whit concern'd section 25 And 1. saith he the falsehood of such an assertion is evident from the point there handled and confirmed the absolute fulnesse of Christs grace which by the general consent of the Fathers and School-men was such as that it excluded all intensive growth section 26 But to this the reply will bee easily foreseen from the premisses that as the point by him handled and confirmed was distinctly the all-fulness of habituall grace in Christ so his proofs of it by the consent of Fathers and School-men belong still to that fulness of habitual grace section 27 Witness one for all Aquin. is Ser. 3. qu. 7. art 12. ad secundum licet virtus divina possit facere aliquid majus melius quà m sit habitualis gratia Christi non tamen though the divine power may
be they never so loud but hypocritically zealous prayers section 39 The ardency in Christ was sincere ardency accompanied with acts of love and trust of the same temper and the heightning it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was an addition of degrees to that act of ardency and so of prayer and proportionably of love and trust in God above either what there was or what there was occasion for at other times section 40 Of this I shall hope it is possible to finde some instances among men of whose graces it can be no blasphemie to affirm that they are capable of degrees suppose we a sincerely pious man a true lover of God and no despiser of his poor persecuted Church and suppose we as it is very supposeable that at some time the seas roar the tempest be at its hight and the waves boat violently upon this frailbrittle vessel may it not be a season for that pious mans ardency to receive some growth for his zeal to be emulous of those waves and poure it self out more profusely at such then at a calmer season I hope there be some at this time among us in whom this point is really exemplified if it be not it is an effect of want not fulness of love But I need not thus to inlarge It is not by this Refuter denied of the person of Christ and that is my intyre 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in reference either to Mr. C. or to him the utmost that I undertook to demonstrate then or to justifie now section 41 And so I shut up this hasty paper hoping that he which invited and promised it a welcome in case it were given him in a fair and Scholastical way having nothing to accuse in it as to the first Epithet will abate somewhat in reference to the second and allow it a friendly though being unqualified it pretend not to a more hospitable reception The end ἘΥΣΧΗΜΌÎΩΣ ΚΑῚ ΚΑΤᾺ ΤΆΞΙΠOR THE GROUNDS OF UNIFORMITY From 1 Cor. 14. 40. Vindicated from Mr JEANES'S exceptions to One passage in the View of the DIRECTORY By H. Hammond D. D. LONDON Printed by J. G. for Richard Royston at the Angel in Ivy. Lane M.DC.LVII 1 Cor. 14. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Decently and according to appointment section 1 SInce the publishing that Answer to Mr J. concerning the degrees of ardency in Christ's prayer I am advertised of another passage in that volume in which I am concern'd relating to some words of mine in the view of the Directory pag. 19. on the head of Vniformity in Gods service and particularly respecting my rendring of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. 40. Let all things be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 section 2 These indeed I thus rendred decently and according to order or appointment and affirmed the importance of that place to be that all be done in the Church according to custome and appointment rendring this reason of the former because it was implied in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decently custome being the onely rule of decency c. and of the latter because the words do literally import this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. according to order or appointment section 3 To the former of these he makes his first exception thus He dares not affirm that this is the immediate sense of the place but onely that it is implied It cannot be denied but that decency doth imply such customes the omission of which necessarily infer indecency but that the omission of such ceremonies as ours doth infer undecency the Doctor all his party can never make good What undecency can the Doctor prove to be in the administration of Baptisme without the Cross as also in publick prayers and preaching without a Surplice But of this see farther in Ames in the places but now quoted The Doctor may perhaps look upon him as an inconsiderable adversary But we shall think his Arguments considerable until the Doctor or some other of his party give a satisfactory answer unto them In the mean while let us examine the proof that the Doctor brings for this sense and it is because custome is the onely rule of decency This propâ—sition though very strange is prooflesse and therefore we might as well reject it as the Doctor dictates it But I shall add a confutation of it from these following arguments 1. If custome be the onely rule of decency then nothing else can be a rule thereof besides custome but this is false for the light and law of nature is also a rule thereof and that infallible 2. Nothing can be undecent that is agreeable unto the onely rule of dicency But divers things are undicent which yet can plead custome and this is so evident as that I will not so much undervalue the Doctors judgment as to endeavour any proofs thereof It is impossible that the onely rule of decency should be undecent But yet it is very possible that many customes should be undecent and therefore I shall conclude that custome is not the onely rule of decency 3. Lastly unto custome as you may see in both Aristotle and Aquinas the frequent usage of a thing is required But now there may be decency or handsomeness in the first usage of a thing and of this decency custome is not the rule and therefore it is not the onely rule of decency section 4 The first thing here charged on me is timidity that I dare not say what I said not and this attended with a concession in a limited sense of the truth of what I did say the second is the impertinence or unsufficiency of that in that limited sense to prove what he conceives I would have from it viz. that the omission of our ceremonies doth infer indecency And the proof of this charge twofold 1. by way of question founded in two instances the Crosse in Baptisme and the Surplice in publick prayer and preaching 2. by reference to Ames and resolving to think his arguments considerable till a satisfactory answer be given them And his third charge is my using an unsufficient proof to prove my interpretation viz. this because custome is the onely rule of decency which he confutes by three argument section 5 These three charges I shall now very briefly examine and if I mistake not clearly evacuate the first by assuring him 1. that I did dare to say and indeed said as I then thought perspicucusly the full of what I meant but that it was no way incumbent on me to say either what I did not mean or what Mr J. or any other should be justly able to charge of want of truth in the least degree And 2. if what I said cannot as he confesses be denied to have truth in it in one sense I demand why must it be a not daring which is wont to signifie timidity or cowardice that I affirmed it not in another sense wherein be doth not consent to it section 6 To make short and prevent all possibility of his or any
mans farther mistaking my words I shall hasten to tell him the full of my meaning in that passage that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decently implies according to custome viz. that in such things as these of which then I spake gestures habites and the like circumstances of Gods publick service wherein the Apostle prescribes care of decency 't is necessary to observe the customes of the place wherein we live This I then thought sufficiently explicated by exemplifying in mens wearing long hair which the Apostle proved indecent by its being against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith Suidas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a custome of some continuance in that place which yet in women there and in men in other places where that custome prevail'd not had nothing indecent in it section 7 But this exemplification of my meaning he thought fit to conceal from the Reader and supply that vacuity onely with an c. yet reciting at length to a word what was immediately before and after it His design in so doing I judge not but shall endeavour to undeceive the Reader for the future by farther inlarging on it section 8 All people I think in the world have some outward significations and expressions of Reverence but all have not the same but according to Topical customes some different some contrary to others We of this and all our neighbour Nations express reverence by uncovering the head the Turkes do the contrary Again among Christians 't is customary for men so to express their Reverence but for women saith the Apostle it is not but the contrary and so still it is among us Nay it was once among some hethens that worshipt Mercury in act of the highest reverence even of adoration to throw stones at their God among others to cut themselves with lances when they were a praying to him And it can be no news to Mr J. that these customes were not observed by other countreys the Jews that threw stones at Christ and the Damoniack that cut himself with them were neither of them interpretable to worship him section 9 This therefore was no dark but visible foundation of what I said In affigning any rite or ceremony for the service of God decency saith the Apostle was to be observed the onely rule to judge of that is say I to consider the customes of that particular place of which we consult Where bowing the knee or kneeling on the ground is customarily used as a token of reverence where putting off or keeping off the hat there the choice of ceremonies must be made with respect to those particular customes Here 't is evident that I mean not the frequent usage of that ceremony in opposition to a first usage of it as Mr J. is willing to mistake me and sound one of his arguments on that mistake but the standing custome of the place by which as by an argument or evidence such a ceremony is demonstrated to be a reverential respect and so for the service of God to whom all reverence is due decent in that place though in Nature or in the estimation of all other men it be not so section 10 Certainly this is so evident in it self and so undeniably the importance of my words that there can be no need farther to inlarge on it much lesse to examine the weight or meaning of his concession that it cannot be denyed but that decency doth imply such customes the omission of which necessarily infers indecency section 11 This saying of his some Readers may look on with Reverence as not readily comprehending the importance of it others may chance to despise it under the appearance of a tautologie But upon pondering it will appeare that the Author had a meaning in it which he designed should bring in some advantage to his cause and without which he was not likely to advance far or succeed in it section 12 Some customes we know there are which are so highly decent as that the omission of them necessarily infers indecency But what are they why such as the law of at least Lapst nature prescribes covering of nakednesse and the like of which t is evident among all that have not learnt of Carneades industriously to rase out all natural measures of honest and dishonest that the omission of them inferres indecency yea and necessarily inferres it this sort of decency being natural to all men that ever were or shall be in the world born and educated in what nation or inured to what customes soever and this the very first houre after our first parents fall before any custome had been contracted which might recommend it to them section 13 And as of these his Rule is true that the omission of these necessarily inferres undecency so it is in a manner proper to these and belongs not to any other sort of things whose decency flowes but from some positive command though it be of God or custome or command of men To such things whose decency flowes from any command either of God or man this rule cannot be fully applied for that command might have been not given or there might be a space before it was given or a people to whom it was not given and then in any of those cases the omission would not be indecent to whom the law was not given and so it doth not necessarily and absolutely but onely dependently on that law and conditionally inferre indecency so in like manner the Rule holds not in those things whose decency is introduced onely by custome for that as Mr. I. truely saith arising from frequency of actions it must again be granted that there was a time when that which now is custome was new and so not custome and again there are or may be nations with whom that custome whatsoever can be inflanced in hath not prevailed which prejudges still the necessity spoken of that such omission should inferre indecency section 14 And so we see the summe of Mr I. his liberal concession viz that decency implies naturall decency or such customes which are naturally decent and so the omission of them naturally indecent and if the Dr. or his party do not prove or make good that the administration of baptisme without the crosse is against the law of nature that the preaching without the surplice beares analogy to the disclosing of Nakednesse he is utterly refuted by Mr I. in his interpretation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or notion of decency section 15 That this is indeed his meaning though somewhat darkned in that his expression will appear but consequent to the two things which he hath premised in this matter from Amesius his notion of decency p. 64. in Marg 1. that decency requires not that any sacred things be instituted de novo but onely that those things which are instituted by God be used in that manner which is agreeable to the dignity of them 2. that as order so decency belongs to civil offices as well as sacred things in