Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
sense_n catholic_n church_n communion_n 2,595 5 9.8911 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A79437 The Catholick hierarchie: or, The divine right of a sacred dominion in church and conscience truly stated, asserted, and pleaded. Chauncy, Isaac, 1632-1712. 1681 (1681) Wing C3745A; ESTC R223560 138,488 160

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

of a Gospel-nature cannot be alter'd from their nature by any subsequent Law of man thus appears To change religious Indifferencies into Necessities is to make a Law for Christs Worship that Christ never made nor gave any man power to make but none may make a Law for the Worship of Christ which he never made nor impowred any to make Ergo the Major is without doubt if the indifferency confessed be in the worship of God then when it 's by any Law made necessary it 's still in the worship of God and being appointed so by a Law becomes instituted Worship by a Law which Christ never made The Minor appears in that none may do so i. e. institute Worship or circumstances of Worship by a Law that is not Christ's 1. It 's his Prerogative to exercise a Legislative power in his Church 2. Christ knows onely how he will be worshipped and it must be founded on his revealed will which is our Law 3. None might adde to his Laws under the Old Testament Deut. 4.1 2. much less under the New where there is less of Ceremony and Circumstances Rev. CHAP. XIII Of the power of the Church in matters indifferent § 1. WHen we come to discuss the power of the Church it 's very requisite to unfold the meaning of the word Church there being no word under which lieth more Amphibology Many understand a Church a material building or place of meeting for the worship of God being consecrated and set apart for that use and for the Propriety and Antiquity of this usage and acceptation of Ecclesia learned Mr. Mead very much contends We shall not stay upon this sence because none that will oppose us in the present controversie will insist upon this sence so far as to say that the Legislative Power is to be found here A Church is also in other sences spoken of Some say every Nation where Christian Religion is owned by ruling Authority and by the generality of the people professed is a Church Some call a Province a Church a Diocess a Church a Parish a Church so that it 's more or less extended and comprehensive and it 's usually the sence of Protestants that assert a Churches Legislative Authority in matters indifferent Others say there is no national Churches under the Gospel though there be Churches in every Nation and that properly there are no particular Churches but such who freely and voluntarily combine together in bonds of Society for the worshipping of God according to his revealed will and walk accordingly Various are the Sentiments and Disputes about a Church and the nature of it the consideration of which will not be so much our concern at this time But there is another way of the usage of Church wherein there is greater ambiguity which is very much to the matter in hand that we rightly understand it viz the emphatical use of the word The Church so many mens Writings and Argumentations being filled and confounded with it now a days that who can tell what they mean by The Church The Romanists say the Church hath determined this or that and when we enquire what that Church is they say the Catholick Church which being rightly understood is the true meaning of the Church according to that rule Aequivocum per se positum stat pro famosiori significato the Emphasis putting the word upon the highest and largest signification but when we come to a farther disquision of their meaning they tell us the Church of Rome is the Church and all others that dissent or separate from the Church of Rome are not the Church or of the true Catholick Church Many Protestants also that speak of the Church do not understand the Church of Rome or the Catholick Church but some particular National Church viz. of France England Spain c. but when we enquire what this Church is they will tell us it 's the body of the Clergy met together in a Convocation by a few Representatives to make Laws and Canons and Ecclesiastical Constitutions the executive power whereof is in the Bishops and their Courts so that when these few men have made Laws or exercise Ecclesiastical power compose Forms of Prayer or establish Ceremonies at their pleasure they say the Church did it These two sorts of men make use of this great commanding Word the Church and by this equivocal term sounding so loud of an uncontroulable Prerogative they suggest unto poor well-meaning people on the one side that all that the Pope and the Church of Rome doth on the other hand that all that the Bishops and their Courts do is done by the Church as if it were the whole Vniversal visible Church It is not my present task here to enquire what is the true meaning of the Church according to the Scripture-acceptation or the most true Logical notion thereof whether it be a Genus or an Integrum or totum Aggregativum I shall onely in the ensuing Discourse apply my self to the most rectified sence of those that do defend the Legislative Authority of the Church and if they will not start from all right Reason and Rules of Logick their sence must be That the Catholick Militant Church is The Church whether it may be Organical according to Scripture-constitution we argue not now constituted of Subordinate parts first National or if you please Patriarchal before that of National made up of Provincial Provincial of Diocesan Diocesan of Parochial and this ought to be the sincere meaning of The Church without prevarication in the sence of those beforementioned § 2. Now the main thing in Debate between the Assertors of the Churches Authority and the Dissentors from it is Whether the Church may exercise such a Power as may change Indifferencies in the Worship of God into Necessities Which we hold in the Negative and say That Christ hath never granted such Power unto the Church he hath granted an Executive Power unto his Church but never a Legislative Power for all lawful power that any Church hath it must have it from the Lord Jesus Christ who hath all power given unto him in Heaven and Earth and is the peculiar King of his Church and hath taken care for the right Ordering and Governance of it in all things necessary as to Salvation so to Order and Discipline And therefore what is not derived from the Lord Jesus Christ cannot be allowed to be lawfully exercised 'T is true if it could be shewed where Christ ever granted it by his Charter to his Church that in some particular concerns she might exert a Legislative Power the dispute would soon be ended but no such Charter could ever be shewn § 3. If any such Power be granted by Christ it must be granted to the Catholick Church Militant or to particular subordinate Churches but 't is not granted to either of them Ergo. Not to the Vniversal Church because it is not organized with Officers capable of a Catholick Rule unless we
it is not to be doubted but that a Christian professing people gathered together in the Name of Christ injoying the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments in purity are a Church of Christ and uniform with all the Churches of Christ without any distinction by this or that Name of Singularity or any Ceremonial Appendixes § 12. And whereas it is pretended that a full and free Conformity in Ceremonies would be the only cure of all our Differences and Divisions Let all Ages witness if any will but impartially enquire what hath been the Grand Cause of all the Factions Breaches Divisions and Schisms in the Church yea and Ecclesiastical Persecutions ever since the Primitive Times it will be found to be the Usurpation of this aforesaid Legislative Power of Christ by some or other and still all the excuse that is made for it is that they assume this Power only in matters of Indifferency and what pretence can any make to a Legislative Power in things necessary already determined by Christ to one part there is no place for a Law in such things unless it be to ratifie or to null the Law so that what Legislative Power is exercised of this kinde must be in matters of Indifferency only i. e. which are so in relation to Christ's Law antecedently to man's Law but by the supervening of such a Church-Law it becomes in kinde Ecclesiastically necessary it being enjoyn'd as to practice under Penalties annexed and it 's no new thing with some sort of men to call necessary things indifferent and indifferent necessary and thereby take occasion to justifie their presumptions when they make Laws even abrogatory to the known Laws of Christ And if weak Brethren as they are apt in derision to call them either take any just exceptions against them pleading their Liberties or it may be from a mistaking judgment are apt to call indifferent things necessary and therefore out of tenderness of Conscience refuse to yield acts of Obedience they are so far from having compassion on their tenderness that they exact the said Law-penalty with greater violence and rigour than they do any that doth directly concern the Glory of Christ established by himself § 13. The greatest Plea that I know can be made for matters of this kinde is the power that Oecumenical Councils have taken upon them especially in the Primitive Times even in the Apostle days and in the first second and third Centuries of the Church especially To which I answer First If the Foundation of this Authority lie in Oecumenical Councels let never any of these Church-Statutes be made and imposed on the world but by them and let not every particular National Independent Church take upon her to make Penal Laws and gull the World into a submission to her Authority by her saying she is The Church as if she were the Catholick Church and mother-Mother-Church Secondly I question whether there were ever any true Oecumenical Council at all much may be said against the best that is pleaded for since the Apostles days and it is easie to prove that Assembly at Jerusalem held by the Apostles and Brethren to be none in the sence intended which is that the chief Officers and Representatives of every particular Church in the World meet together with a determinating Power in matters of Doctrine and with a binding Legislative Power in matters of Discipline and Ceremony Now it will appear that that Assembly was not so though there were more reason for its being so than for any other Assembly being so neither ever was there any Assembly so impowred in the world of that nature § 14. That that Assembly Acts 15.28 was no Oecumenical Council is easie to judge for there were but the Representatives of two Churches Jerusalem and Antioch and they of Antioch came to ask counsel and to be resolved in matter of doubt of the Apostles residing most of them at present in Jerusalem 2. The case in question was argued in foro Ecclesiae particularis and the Apostles making the minde of Christ manifest to that Church have the consent of the Brethren to their determination and sent it forth in and with the Authority of the Holy Ghost 3. The Apostles and Church of Jerusalem changed no Indifferencies into Necessities but enquired after and found out the Will of Christ concerning the present Infant-state of the Gospel-church in some matter of things necessary of two sorts some Absolutely and Morally so others expediently so for that time First Absolutely such as Abstinence from Fornication and things offered to Idols Secondly Respectively only and that in the behalf of the believing Jews coming lately from that Pedagogy that they might not be scandalized or grieved at the freedom of the Gentiles and therefore that the Gentiles should then abstain from things strangled and Blood Now no sound Interpeter will say that this Canon was binding to the Church semper ubique but in behalf only of th Jews who could not so easily at present be brought off from the whole of Judaisme and 't is likely by this concession the Apostles got off the Jewish Believers from many Ceremonious Observations which they stood upon besides or at least abated their edge towards them And therefore the Decree was but as to a necessary Expediency for a time which the Apostle Paul fully explicates who was well acquainted with the Minde of Christ and the Judgments of the Apostles Elders and Brethren in these matters § 15. As we have little evidence for an Oecumenical Council exercising a Legislative Jurisdiction in the Church so we have as little ground for such sorts of Officers as are contended for in the Church of which such Councils as they are pleaded for should principally consist which are Patriarchs Metropolitans Archbishops Bishops Priests and there being not such Officers in the Church by Christ's Institution there is no such Power to be exercised in the said way and manner of Legislation neither may they jure proceed so far as to Execution of any Laws established by Christ being not lawfully commissionated with a Gospel-power If this Assertion be proved I doubt not but it will be granted that there is no Legislation to be exercised in the Church the present Assertors whereof challenging this Power only on the behalf of the said Officers I lay down two things by way of proof 1. That there is no such Officers to be found in the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour as a Pope a Patriarch a Metropolitan an Archbishop a Diocesan Bishop a Parish-Priest no Dean Prebends Canons c. the Scriptures are altogether strangers to all those Ecclesiastical creatures Christ and his Apostles knew nothing of them but prophetically in the foresight of the rise of the Kingdom of Antichrist In this Point I should deal with two sorts of men the Papists and the Protestants As for the Papists the case hath been fully managed over and over against them that there is no such Supreme Officer in
Catholick unless it be in the visible universal Head and if it be said that a National Church may positively determine in this kind then why not a Provincial as well the one being a subordinate Church as well as the other But if the Decree be onely National as many various interpretations and sences may be put on a place of Scripture as there are Nations which will lay an ample foundation for variety of Sects Schisms Heresies c. Whereas if all National Churches were bound to one Catholick determination there must needs therehence ensue the admirable effect of Uniformity in Doctrine and Practice all Churches believing as the Vniversal Church believes and that as the Head doth Besides if it be of such dangerous consequence for Christians as private persons to put their interpretation on Scripture in laying the foundation of variety of Sects Schisms Heresies c. how much more dangerous for particular Churches because the determination of a Church reacheth further and is more attended unto and more become seduced and leavened with errour thereby if it be erroneous Hence to believe as the Catholick Church believes hath more concern in it than those imagine that endeavour to blast it with the ridicle of the Colliers Faith for it 's not as the National Church believes but as the Catholick Church believes Neither is it an implicit Faith in any things but controversal and dubious matters above ordinary scrutiny and vulgar capacity and therein we had better rest satisfied in Catholick Authority than run the risk of adhering to the Opinion of private persons and Churches which must be done also by an implicite Faith and who is likely to have the most unerring Spirit a Church or particular Person and if a Church the most Catholick is the most unerring § 13. Thirdly From the Necessity of a Catholick determination of Decency and Order That is decent which by the Universality is reputed and judged so for one Countrey doth usually call that decent which others repute undecent And there are no Protestant Prelates but have do and will say That Christ hath left it to the Church to determine all matters of Decency and Order and 't is absurd to say that this or that Church may do it when no such is the Church eminently When 't is said the Church determines Decencies What Church is that Is it a Parish-Church Nay then Parish-Churches should rule Diocesan by a Law Again if Diocesan Churches should have power to determine their Decencies either Provincials must be subject to some one Diocesan which might regulate all the rest or else Diocesan Churches would differ so much in their decencies that there would be no Uniformity in the Provincial Church And if Provincials might determine each one its Decencies and Order it must needs break Vniformity in National Churches But I know where the Protestant Prelate will be he will say presently it 's the National Church that he means when he speaks of the Churches determination of Decency and Order To which I reply that he may with as good ground say that he means a Parish-Church and that by giving this power to a National Church he gives a greater advantage to Schism and lays a greater bar against Vniformity For the more comprehensive the Church is in which the Schism is the greater it is and the more uniform the Schismatical Church is of the more dangerous consequence it is to the Catholick Church In vain do men plead for Vniformity in the Church who in asserting the principles of Vniformity in a National Church do thereby extirpate Vniformity in the Catholick for National Vniformity unless it be Catholick is but Vniformity in a Schism For if every National Church may determine of Decency and Order there will be as great a diversity if not contrariety in several Churches affairs as in the affairs of several States one Nation determining that Ceremony to be decent which another determines to be undecent absurd and disorderly and so Churches will be as divers in their Fashions as English Dutch Spaniard c. And there will be no end of Ceremonies and new-fangled Garbs in the Church if a Nation may of themselves and when they will constitute ordain and appoint them at their pleasure alter and null old Ceremonies and invent new and shall have as great difficulty intricacy and multiplicity of Church-Laws as State-Laws if at every Convocation Decency and Order may be determined § 14. From the necessity of a Catholick composure of Church-Prayers the more private and singular the conception of Church-prayers are the more Schismatical And divers Liturgies in one and the same National Church may not be allowed neither that every Province and Diocess compose their own Liturgy as being a matter of dangerous consequence to the National Church How then comes it to pass that our National Church may compose its own Liturgy distinct from another Is not this of as dangerous consequence to the Catholick Church And is' t not more conducing to the Peace Beauty Uniformity and Honour of the Church to have a Catholick Liturgy Whereas otherwise every Nation will be setting up the price of their own prayers above others whence ariseth heart-burning Divisions and Schisms National in the Catholick Church were it not much better that all Nations should bring their Liturgies and lay them down at the feet of Mother-Church and submit them to her Judgment in the Supreme Head from whose blessed hands she may receive one of such Catholick composure that might produce a perfect Harmony in the affections and petitions of all the Churches in the world in good assurance of a Catholick Amen attending the conclusion of all Besides if a National prayer be more available than a Provincial or Diocesan Why should not a Catholick Church-prayer be most of all available § 15. Fifthly The necessity of a Catholick Canonization of Saints For supposing the Necessity of the Observation of Saints days as the Protestant Prelates zealously assert it is requisite to enquire who or what Church Canonized the Saints which are already honoured with Saintship Titular and Days devoted to their remembrance and who dedicated and consecrated Churches on the same account was it not the Catholick Church by her Catholick Pastors If every Church suppose National should have the like liberty to canonize Saints at their pleasure all the days in the Year yea in an Age would be little enough for All Hollan-tide And if the observation must be Anniversary there would be a necessity of robbing Peter to pay Paul which would be doing evil that good may come of it it being as great a sin to rob Peter of his fishing-nets as to rob Paul of his cloak and parchments Besides this Absurdity would fall in that one Nation would canonize that for a Saint which another would anathematize to the Devil As for Example Michaelmas-day is devoted to St. Michael the Archangel which Feast was instituted by Felix the Third the 48th Oecumenical
Bishop Now the Church of England hath presumed to alter this Title and Institution making it a Festival to St. Michael and all Angels which hath these gross Absurdities in it 1. That St. Michael is greatly detracted from in that all other Angels are introduced as sharers in the Solemnity of the day and all Angels may be understood of Bad as well as Good so that the Devils hereby become Canonized Saints Now whereas it may be alledged that there be some Saints-days not of Catholick Observation but only National as St. Denis for France St. George for England St. Taffy or Wales and St. Patrick for Ireland it bears no weight against us for the Canonization is Catholick and questionless the Observation ought to be so also though there is a more peculiar and more proper Remembrance and Honour due from those Nations to which the Saints are appropriate which peculiar Homage is enjoyn'd by the Church catholick Moreover it is meet that so solemn a matter should be ratified by Catholick Authority as the canonizing a Saint and instituting a Festival day to be sacred to his Remembrance because the Catholick Church as she will be most impartial and wise in such appointments so her Authority will make deeper impressions on the minds of men to oblige them to the consciencious observance whereas particular Nations are liable to Errour and Partiality each one being apt to be byassed by proper Interests and to prefer the products of their own Soyl. Besides the gross Schism that it causeth in the Catholick Church dividing the Churches in their Prayers at the same time when one Nation shall observe that day to one Saint and another to another and a third to none at all Whereas nothing is more honourable and necessary than Vniformity in this kinde That as all say the same Prayers they should do it at the same Hours canonically appointed use the same Ceremonies observe the same Holidays and such as are Anniversary should at least be of Catholick Appointment And though some Saint-days are more appropriate to one Nation than to another by reason of the relation of this or that Saint to this or that Nation in particular by Nativity by Heroick Actions or Meritorious Sufferings therein yet is it not meet that all Churches should rejoyce and keep Holy-day with one that rejoyceth If the Rule of rejoycing with them that rejoyce reach particular Christians then much more Churches And how can an Englishman but be mightily ravished with an holy Sympathy to see a Welshman zealously affected with the honour of St. Taffy strutting up and down with a green feather in his Cap can he forbear the plucking up all the Leeks in his Garden and calling all the Fidlers in the Town about him And is it not fit that St. Thomas à Becket's day should be honourably observed by all other Churches as well as England who engaged in and suffered for the common Catholick Cause opposed in this Church If the Devoted day be peculiar to a Nation as an Anniversary Memorial of some great Deliverance supposed it 's fit it should have its Sanction from the Catholick Church otherwise National Churches may run into absurd and Schismatical Observation of days under such pretences to the great Scandal and Injury of the Catholick Church as for instance the Fifth of November a day Annually observed by a National Church to the great Scandal and Blemish of the Catholick Church and Oecumenical Pastor in the sence of the Romanists § 16. But some I hear will be ready to say in order to these necessary establishments there will be no need of a Catholick Pastor they may be done well enough by Oecumenical Councils To which I reply That then the Church acteth not as a Body Politick subordinately knit together but as totum aggregatum or as an Assembly of Independent Pastors by way of Association whence many Absurdities will follow 1. That all the convened Pastors of what Order or Degree soever are co-ordinate at least in the power pleaded for and a Primate or Patriarch's Vote is no more than a Diocesan's 2. That the Church in the utmost resolution of its power is but Aristocratical which undermines Episcopal Principles 3. If because matters of greatest concern in the Catholick Church are managed by an Oecumenical Council therefore there needs no Oecumenical Pastor then by the same reason all matters of the greatest concern in a National Church being handled in a National Synod there should be no need or use of a Primate and sic deinceps to Provinces and Diocesses and so all Church-power would consequently become co-ordinate in the hands of particular Pastors 4. What course could be taken in the Intervals of Councils for the Churches Government in its Catholick state 5. Divisions and Schisms have and will follow hereupon in the Church for suppose the Council be equally divided in their voting about Scripture Interpretation Tradition Ceremonies or Decencies who shall determine in such case 6. Suppose the lesser part divide from and declare against the greater and its proceedings What Supreme Power is there Authoritatively to conclude them Ecclesiastically to admonish and reduce the Erring part 7. Oecumenical Councils cannot easily and presently be convened in case of emergent Church-difficulties as in the sudden Defection of a National Church or Pastor to Schism or Heresie in the starting up of new Sects Canonization of new Saints c. An Errour may spread itself soon over a whole Nation before such a Council can be called and any remedy applied 8. It is needful every Church do exercise its power in an unity and not in a multiplicity therefore there are National Provincial and Diocesan Pastors Therefore there should be a Catholick Pastor to the Church catholick for the avoiding the like Rocks and Precipices that other Churches would split upon if they had not their particular Heads and Pastors § 17. Sixthly We argue from the Necessity of calling and convening of Ecclesiastical Councils In whose power is it to call an Oecumenical Council if there be no Oecumenical Pastor in the Church For first the Assemblies of every Church are to be convened only by the Pastor of the said Church as in a Diocess Who can authoritatively convene the Clergy but the Bishop of the Diocess In a Province Who can convene the Diocesan Bishops but the Archbishop In a Nation Who hath power Ecclesiastically to convene a National Synod besides the Metropolitan or Patriarch so in the Catholick Church who hath power Ecclesiastically to convene an Oecumenicul Council but the Oecumenical Pastor It being a Pastoral charge to convene or dismiss Church-Assemblies and it is done by an Office-power Object Supreme Magistrates may call Oecumenical Councils Answ They cannot by any Ecclesiastical Right for considered as such they cannot exercise any Pastoral Office And an Oecumenical Council being the most eminent Church-Assembly it is not to be convened in a more irregular or exotick way than the inferiour Assemblies of
Righteousness for he is a Babe v. 14. but strong meat belongs to them that are of full age i. e. have attained a measure of skill and understanding in the word of Righteousness even those that by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both good and evil to determine between things truely lawful and unlawful The weak walks by a dimmer light either by his own opinion or tradition of his Predecessors or by the example or opinion of others and therefore more apt to fall upon such actings whereby his Conscience is wronged and defiled by doing such things as absolutely or circumstantially prove sin unto him he is as a Candle newly lighted a bruised Reed a smoaking Flax soon extinguished or having at best but a smoaky dim light that none can walk by and he himself is confused by in his Christian conversation he is called a Babe that hath very tender Bones and Sinews which are soon wrenched and put out of Joynt hence depends sometimes on the guidance of others which he takes to be stronger than himself and it may be casts himself on the judgement of the blinde and so they fall both together And sometimes presumes to go by his own strength further than he is able whereby he is precipitated into many inconveniencies difficulties and dangers § 5. These two sorts of Believers differing onely in strength are both the same in Specie as a Childe and grown man having both Faith v. 1. both received by Christ v. 3. and Christ died for them v. 15. both walking conscientiously according to their light towards God The Apostle's great care is to warn them both to be very wary and circumspect how they walk towards each other according to those degrees of light which they have received with all charity and wisdom That which he insists most on in this Chapter of Rom. 14. is charitable walking 1. He would not have them walk at a distance one with another but the strong to receive the weak to communion without making doubtful things the terms of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Syr. Arah and Aethiop render in the sence of Helping date manum adjuvate sublevate but that 's the signif of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is plain where it 's used and this word by the opinion of the best Interpreters is fitter rendred by assumite receive viz. into your society and so used most frequently in the New Testament Matth. 16.22 Act. 17.5 ch 18.26 Philem. 12 and 17. So for taking meat Act. 27.33 34 36. receive them but not to the judgement of controversal points or disputable matters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Reasonings or disputings and so ought in most places where it 's used to be rendred and though it 's often rendred thoughts yet there it 's to be understood of arguing and reasoning thoughts such the Apostle would not have them received to i. e. he would not have your or their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or judgement of disputable points to be the terms of your receiving of them Whatever your opinion or theirs is in these matters receive them say not that they must be of this or that judgement and practice in these things or else they are not to be of your communion the strong or he that reputes himself so whether he be so or no the rule of charity for the strong is to receive him that he reputes weak is to receive the weak as Christ hath v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used there for Christ's receiving As Christ receives them with all love tenderness and condescention so ought every stronger Believer not to hurry and worry them beyond their strength of Knowledge and Judgement by rigorous proceedings of Magisterial injunctions and compulsions but carry them as Lambs and gently lead them as God Isai 40.11 doth by the illuminations of the Word in the exercise of much patience and forbearance towards them condescending in all things possible for their good and edification Rom. 14.19 in whatever he may not offend Christ he ought rather to please his Brother than himself As for Example one that calls himself the strong it may be he is Magistrate or Minister and by his place ought to be so saith it would be much more contentment to him if one of his Subjects or Hearers would yield to conform to some few little things which he affirms to be but indifferent in themselves c. and the Subject and Parishioner says No to obey you is Will-worship God's own Ordinances are but little indifferent things in themselves but by vertue of his Commands they become great and weighty so your Commands about small indifferences makes them great and weighty to my Conscience And therefore I desire to be excused in coming up to any such Commands lay aside these and I am willing to enjoy the benefit of your Communion Suppose them to be meats gestures or Garments c. I say he ought much rather to lay aside the pressing of this or that indifferent thing for the communion with and edification of his poor Brother But for him to retain his resolution of pressing this as he calls it indifferent action on the Conscience and practice of his Brother not admitting any other terms of communion and upon his refusal to call him Heretick Schismatick Rebel c. can be accounted nothing less than deliberately and studiously to lay a Stumbling-block in his Brothers way for him to fall over at least in the true sence of falling and then when he is down to beat him and trample upon him Secondly In this charitable walking the Apostle saith after they are in communion there ought not to be judging or despising each other Rom. 14.10 The weak they are very apt to judge the strong for taking too much power upon himself or liberty to himself and to say he walks not according to his Light and that his actions are not agreeable to the rule of the Gospel that he is a scandal to Religion c. when indeed it may be he useth but that lawful liberty in indifferent things which Christ hath granted him and the other understands not Such judging as this is ought not to be in the weak and remarkable it is that the judging part is put upon the weaker side the weak Christian is usually the most censorious and many live with such weakness as this almost all their days But the strong is also apt to trespass on the rule of Charity in despising his weak Brother i. e. he that is strong in gifts and parts or in respect of place and dignity and advantages in the world he is apt to think slightly of him and to speak so and call him a simple froward Fanatick a man humoursome and a contentious Fellow a weak-brain'd Coxcomb one that makes Conscience and Preciseness onely a pretence to carry on rebellious Designes against Church and State and though he pretend Conscience so