OF the Devils practises against the Church, The Cohae­rence of the Text. which our Savi­our gives notice of, Mat. 13.25. while men slept, the enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way; the Corinthians were too true an example. For no sooner had S. Paul (after much paines taken to sowe the good seed of saving truth among them, and to make them one of Christs cornfields) departed from them to plow up other grounds, to plant other Chur­ches, but the enemy of Christ and his deare Church, began to sow the tares of ungodlinesse among them, which (as ill weeds for the most part doe) sprang up apace.

For they became 1. Sectaries, dividing them­selves among Christ, Apollos, Paul, and Cephas, 1 Cor. 1.11, 12. and making men the Lords of their faith and consciences, which they should have captivated to Christ alone.

2 They were Heretiques, denying a fundamen­tall Article, the Resurrection.

3 Polluters also of Gods sacred worship and or­dinances: First, by their base indecencies; Their wo­men sate before God with their heads uncovered, and the men with their hats on: 1 Cor. 11.4, 5: they min­gled intemperate and carousing bankets with the spirituall feast of the blessed Eucharist, ver. 21: their women, beyond the modesty that becomes that sexe, presumed to chat and talke their shares in the congregation, c. 14.34.

Secondly, By their disorders likewise; for they received not the holy Communion together, but by snatches, one before another came, cap 11.33: they in­terposed unseasonable questions, while their Mini­sters were preaching, and rudely interrupted them, in their discourse: cap 14.29.

Thirdly, By their empty and unprofitable assem­blies; for their trumpets made an uncertaine sound, they prayed in their Churches in a tongue they under­stood not.

All these were great scandalls.

1 Cor. 1.11.The Apostle therefore being informed by some of Cloes family, of their declined condition, like a loving pastor labours to remove these tares, and reduce this Church to its primitive purity. For the procuring of which hee takes a mixt course, [Page 3] that they might neither detest his severity, nor yet despise his lenity. One while he sharply reprooveth, another while he gently allureth; in one place hee punisheth, in another he prescribeth.

In this Chapter hee meeteth with two faults, disorder, and unprofitablenesse: and because contraria contrariis curantur, distempers are usually cured by remedies of a contrary nature; for the healing of their unprofitablenesse in the use of their religious exercises, he command, that all things bee done to edification, ver. 26: and for the removall of their indecencies and disorders; he requires that all things be done decently and in order. And so I am come to my Text.

In which (by the judgement of expositors) St. Paul investeth the Corinthians, The scope and parts of the Text, and the point insisted on. and in them all Christian Churches, with authority to ordaine Rites and Ceremonies appertaining to order and de­cency in the service of God Hinc appa­ret liberum esse Ecclesus, titus ordinare servi­entes ordini & decoro. Heming in hunc locum. ‘ Hinc aparet (saith Hemingius) hence it appeareth, that it is in the liber­ty of Churches to ordaine rites serving to order and comelinesse. Facit Eccle­siae p [...]testatem de decoro, et ordine ecclesi­astico liberò disponendi, et leges ferendi. Par in hunc loc. Facit Ecclesiae potestatem &c. He gives the Church (saith Pareus) power, freely to dispose of things belonging to Ecclesiasticall order and decency. Non potest haberi, quod Paulus hic exigit, ut decenter omnia, et ordine fiant, nisi additis constitutionibus, tanquam vinculis quibusdā, ordo ipse et decorum servetur. Cal. Instit. l. 4. c. 10. Non potest haberi, &c. That which St. Paul requires (saith Calvin) cannot be had, un­lesse there bee Canons made, by which, as by certaine bands, men and things may bee kept together in a comely order.’ Davenant. de Iudic. Cont [...]. fidei c. 16. p. 84. And the Reverend Bishop of Salisbury, having delivered a position, that the [Page 4] Prelates of the Church have power to appoint rites and ceremonies respecting the externall policy of the Church, prooveth it by my text, Let all things be done decently, &c.

These words therefore in the opinion of these men, and almost all writers on these words or point, containe the Churches Investiture: and may be cast into these two parts.

• 1. The Churches liberty, [...], let all things be done.
• 2. The Churches limits, [...], decently and in order.

Or else into these two.

• 1. Her Authority to make laws, Let &c.
• 2. The object about which her Authority is to move, matters of order and decency, decently, &c.

From both these ariseth the point, on which I purpose to build my present discourse, and which I will deliver in the words of our twentieth Arti­cle, — That the Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies.

In the handling of this conclusion, 1. I will ex­plaine the termes. 2. Prove the point. 3. Touch upon such consectartes, as the point doth naturally derive it selfe into. Of all these with what brevi­ty I can.

The termes explained. what is meant by Ceremo­nies and Rites.The termes are two, the Ceremonies and Church.

Ceremonies are externall acts and adjuncts anne­xed to sacred Services.

For in Religion there are two things considera­ble; Substantialls, and Circumstantialls.

Substantialls are of two sorts.

[Page 5]1. Matters of faith and manners, to be beleeved and done of necessity to salvation, conteined in the Creed and ten Commandements.

2. Sacraments ordained, for the bringing of men and women into the Church, and their conduct therein to everlasting happinesse. About these the power which the Church hath, is, to preserve them (as the Ark did the tables of the Law) to give an honorable testimony to them, to consecrate, to dispense them to her children, and to transmit them to posterity; in which respects she is called, [...], the Pillar, and ground of truth, 1 Tim. 3.15. Power to make, adde, alter, or diminish these she never had. Never durst any Prelates in the Church, but the Pope, take liberty to stamp new Articles of faith, or to joyne Traditi­ons to the writtē word of God, for supply of its im­perfection, which are of the same authority, Sess. 4. decre [...]. 1 and to be received (pari pietatis affectu) with the like re­ligious respect, as the Trent Councill hath deter­mined: never did any presume, but he, to curt all the Lords Supper, by taking away the cup from the people, or to transforme the Sacrament into a Sacrifice propitiatory for quick and dead, to the great injury of that alsufficient Sacrifice once of­fered upon the Crosse by our Lord himselfe.

In all these, manum de tabula, hands off: for they are all above the Churches power.

But, Secondly, there are besides these, some ce­remonialls and circumstantialls, necessary for the right ordering and cariage of Gods service, the trayning up of people in piety, and the preserva­tion [Page 6] of religion: for without ceremonies (saith Zan­chy) Sine Cere­mon [...]s, nec si­deles in unum convenne & co [...]lescere pos­sunt, nec Deo publice se [...]vire. Zanch de Re [...]. l 1. p 420. neither could the faithfull grow up together into one body, nor give God any publique worship. That God is to be worshipped by his owne rule, and with his owne prescribed acts and dutyes of religion, is Substance; but that this may bee well done, some circumstances of time, and place, per­sons, gestures, habites, &c. must bee determined. What therefore shall be the times, wherein Gods people must come together to worship him, and how farre they are to be sanctified; what are to be the places, wherein wee are to meet, and how to be adorned; in what order divine Service shall be celebrated; with what habit the Priest, when he commeth to minister before the Lord, should be clothed; what gestures of body, both Priest and people shall use in their publique devotions; and the times when this or that particular gesture of kneeling, standing, sitting, or bowing may be used with most comelinesse and profit; what kinde of places are fittest for Service and Sermon; what ta­bles, what chalices, what other ornaments doe best beseem that sacred mystery of the Lords Supper, &c: These, and such like circumstances, are the things permitted to the Churches liberty to deter­mine.

What we are to understād by Church.By Church, (which is my second terme) I meane; not private and inferior members of the Church, whose place is obedience, not government: for we should have a mad Church, and a miserable di­vine service, if every private spirit might have authority to order these things, as hee thinkes [Page 7] good. It would be (I feare me) like that mis-shapen Picture, which the Painter Polycletes made by the peoples direction, a very deformed one: a Church and Service, that could not be knowne or acknow­ledged for such, except a man should write upon it, (as under some rude draughts men use to doe) this is a church; or set a cryer, when people are worshipping God in his House, to proclaime and say, this is divine Service.

But by Church I meane, the Churches Pilots, who sit at the sterne, and are by their office to guide the Ship of the church through the Sea of this world to the haven of eternall happinesse: those whom the Apostle calleth Act. 20.28. [...], Bishops, and Heb. 13.17. [...], the Ru­lers and watchmen of the Lords army. For, as head and members divide the body naturall, and the members, with all things belonging to their comelinesse and welfare, are ordered by the head, and could not bee disposed of by the members without a schisme in the body, 1 Cor. 12: so, heads and members divide all bodyes, civill, and ecclesiasticall; and whatsoever is to bee done for matter of direction and government, hath alwaies beene, and must bee the sole prerogative of the heads of these bodyes, unlesse wee will have all common wealths and churches broken all to peeces.

And so I come from the termes to the point.

The power of the Magistrate is dignified with the name of Sword, Rom. 13. Hee heareth not the sword in vaine: the authority of the Church with the name of keyes, Mat. 16. To thee will I give the [Page 8] keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven. These keyes are twofold.

1. A Key of order, which is the priviledge of the whole Priesthood, and it is an Authority of admini­string the word and Sacraments, of remitting and retaining sinnes, in interiori foro, in the Court of Conscience.

2. A Key of Iurisdiction, which is, a power of binding and loosing men, in Foro exteriori, in the courts of justice; and of making lawes and orders for the government of Gods house. And this is peculiar to the Heads and Bishops of the Church; as will ap­peare, 1. by examples, 2. by consent of writers, 3. by reason.

Proved by examples of the Apostles.1. It appeares by Examples both of the Apo­stles, and Churches of God, who have in their se­verall generations put this Authority into execu­tion. It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay upon you no greater burthen than these necessary things; that ye abstaine from meats offered to Idolls, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication, say the Apostles in their letter to the Gentiles, Acts 15.28. In which words we see, 1. That they make a Canon, 2. That this Canon was concerning abstinence from some things that were indifferent, (for such were those Idolothytes, things strangled, & blood) 3. That they usurped not this authority, but had it from the Holy Ghost, whom therefore they joyne with themselves in their letter as President of their Commission, It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and to us.

Nor did they exercise this power onely when [Page 9] they sate in the Councill together, but when they were asunder also; for St. Paul doth often menti­on constitutions that hee made for divers Chur­ches. For the Churches of Galatia, hee made an order, That collections should bee made for the poore on every first day of the weeke; and meant to bring in the same custome into the Corinthian Church, 1 Cor. 16.1, 2.

He framed ordinances for Corinth, 1 Cor. 11.2. viz: that women should cover their heads, & men un­cover theirs in the Church, v. 6, 7. that men should not use long haire, but women should, ver. 14, 15. that they should tarry one for another when they come to receive the holy Cōmunion, v. 33. &c. And hee commends that people for keeping those his traditions, ver. 2. and promiseth when he came againe, to dispose of other things, which were not as yet well setled and ordered. ver. 34.

Some also hee made for the government of Thessalonica, 2 Thess. 2.15. where hee exhorts them to hold fast the traditions which he had taught them, both by word of mouth, and by letters; and 2 Thess. 3.14. where hee commandeth opposers a­gainst his determinations to be excommunicated.

But (perhaps) it will be said, Object. that their Tradi­tions were of divine authority, because they were Pen-men of the Holy Ghost, and did but convey those constitutions to the Churches, which the Holy Ghost did make and indite for their use.

It is true, Answ. that the Apostles spake by inspira­tion, and were imployed in writing downe Gods word for the good of the Church; but yet many [Page 10] things they spake and did, not as Secretaryes to the Holy Ghost, but as ordinary Pastors of the Church, Q [...]atenus erant ordinatii ecclesiae Re­ctores, de hasce titibus externis pro sua sapi­entia statue­bant, quod ad aedificationem ecclesia [...] facere videbatur. Dav [...]t. l. de Jud. Cont. c. 16. rat. 2. As appeareth most plainly by some speeches which St. Paul lets fall in 1 Cor. 7. I speake this by permission, and not of commandement, ver. 6. To the marryed I command, yet not I, but the Lord, ver. 10. To the rest speake I, not the Lord, v. 12. Concerning Virgins I have no commandement of the Lord; I give my judgement as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithfull. ver. 25. In all these passages, 1. He distinguisheth betweene authority divine and humane. 2. He affirmeth, that he did advise and command many things by his own pow­er, as a prudent pastor of the Church, for which he had no expresse and particular command from the Lord. Now if he did by his owne authority prescribe some things to be done for the guiding of people in point of manners and morality, much more did he take that liberty in point of or­der and ceremonies.

And of the Iewish and Christian Churches.To these examples of the blessed Apostles, I may joine the practice of the Iewish Church; who though they had an externall forme of discipline prescribed them, and all things belonging thereto, even to the pinnes and barres of the Tabernacle, the broomes, ashpans, and snuffers of the Sanctuary; yet they tooke liberty to adde some things which were not expressely commanded. They annointed their dead with odours, and our Saviour was con­tent to be buryed after that manner. The Rube­nits built an Altar on the bankes of Iordan, Iosh. 22. which Ioshua and the heads of the people permit­ted [Page 11] to stand. Solomon built an Altar of himselfe by the brazen Altar, 1 Kings 8.64. And (which comes nearer to our purpose) the Iewes did insti­tute two great Festivalls to be solemnized every yeare; the Feast of Purim in memory of their deli­verance from the bloody conspiracy of Haman; and the feast of Dedication, for a memoriall of the Temples purification, after it had been polluted by King Antiochus. And this holy day set up by their own authority, our Saviour was so farre from disliking, or reproving, that he was pleased to ho­nour it with his gracious presence, Iohn 10.22. The order also of their burials, and the rites of their mariage, were most, or all of them made by their owne discretion. Had these Iews, to whom God had given a perfit platforme, this liberty; and have not Christian Churches, to whom no rule is in this case given, the same power in such things, and a far greater?

And this liberty have all the governours likewise of Christian congregations used in their severall Churches and ages, as I shall have occasion to in­timate by and by: All which examples are an evi­dent proofe of the Churches power in these exter­nall ordinances: because, 1. there is no Precept against these examples; for against an expresse command examples prove nothing. 2. The Apo­stles were more faithfull servants to their Lord, than to intrench upon his royall prerogative, and more humble than to goe beyond the bounds of their commission. 3. It cannot with reason bee imagined, that Christ would suffer his Church, [Page 12] throughout all ages, to sleep to securely in so great an error. The power of the Church proved by consent of writers. And therefore leaving this, I come to my second argument for the proofe of the Chur­ches power, [the Consent of Writers] which is an argument beyond exception, and able of it selfe to put the point in hand out of all question.

Calvin, whom all Sectaries make their Oracle in their plea against Ceremonies, hath these words. Calv Opus [...]. pag 344. Ne quis nos calumnietur nimis morosos, &c. Let no man thinke or say that we are so severe and harsh, as to take away all liberty in externall rites; I here give all readers to understand, that I contend not about ceremonies respecting order and decency in the Church: Our dispute is against those acts, where­by some thinke that God is truly, and properly worshipt. I deny that these are under the power of men. And in Idem Instit. l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 14 another place he saith, Ergo (inquies) nihil ce­remoniale rudioribus dabitur, &c? Therefore thou wilt say, shall nothing Ceremoniall be appointed for the instruction of the ruder sort? I say not so, for I know well enough that all such helps are profitable to them: only I contend, that in prescribing them, such a man­ner and measure be used, as may illustrate, not obscure Christ. And Calv [...]b. Sect. 30. in the same Chapter hee layes it downe for a conclusion: That Christ would not prescribe particularly concerning ceremonies, what we ought to follow, but referre us to the di­rection of generall rules.

We hold (saith Perkins) Perk. [...]es. Cat [...]ol. of Tra­ditions. con [...]l. 3. that the Church hath power to prescribe ordinances, rules or traditions tou­ching the time and place of Gods worship, and concer­ning order and comelinesse to be used in the same.

Peruse the Harmony of confessions, and see whe­ther this be not the judgement of all those Chur­ches. More particularly, for instance, take the Auspurge confession; Melancthon the contriver of it, directly for this power saith, Aug. confes. Art. ult. & Apol. ej [...]dem. Licet Pastori­bus & Episcopis, &c. It is lawfull for Bishops and Pa­stors to make Canons, that things be done in order in the Church: and he proves it by S. Pauls example, Sic Paulus ordinat, &c. So S Paul ordained, that wo­men should cover their heads, and confine their tongues in the congregation, &c. Only some Cau­tions he gives to this effect. 1. That these orders be not imposed as parts of Gods worship. 2. That they be not urged as things necessary in themselves. 3. That for their matter, they be not contrary to any Evangelicall truths; for if an Angell from hea­ven should preach unto us another Gospell, wee are to hold him accursed.

In all which cautions, he doth not deny, or abridge the power of Church-governours in these matters, but only remember them how to use their liberty therein, to that end for which they recei­ved it, the glory of God, and the Churches edifica­tion, according to that speech of S. Paul, This au­thority is given us for edification, and not for your de­struction. 2 Cor. 10.8.

But what need I stand upon particular instan­ces? Do we not all grant in our controversie with Papists about traditions; that there are 2. sorts of traditions, Apostolicall, and Ecclesiasticall, and that both these are under the power of the Church?

1. We yeeld that there are Apostolique traditi­ons, [Page 14] rituall and dogmaticall, which are no where mentioned, or not enjoyned in the Scriptures, but de­livered by word of mouth from the Apostles to their followers; for some of which these are re­puted, viz. the number of Canonicall bookes, the Apostles Creed, the baptisme of infants, the fast of Lent, the Lords day, and the great festivals of Easter and Whitsontide, These we justly take for theirs, grounding upon S. Austins rule, Quod uni­versa tenet ec­clesia, nec con­cil [...]s institutū, sed semper [...] ­tentum est, non nisi autho­ritate Apost [...] ­l [...] traditum rectissimè cre­ditur. Aug. de Pap. cont. [...]onat. l 4 c. 24. Those obser­vations which have beene of universall use in the Ca­tholique Church, and appeare not to have beene the Constitutions of generall Councils, we are in reason to hold for Apostolique traditions.

2. Besides these, wee confesse that there are and have been many ancient Ecclesiastique traditi­ons also; from which, as their foundations, grew those noted practise, of Tert. C [...]. [...]il c. 3. not fasting on the Lords day; of [...]t ib. saying their prayers not kneeling, but standing, during the whole festivity of Easter and Whitsontide, (which in those dayes continued, though in a remisse degree, full 50. dayes) Just [...] a [...]q. ad O [...]thod. Te [...]t. Apol. c. 16. Bas [...]d. [...]p [...]tu sancto c. 27. of praying to God, and adoring Christ with their faces toward the East: Naz in l [...]. Go [...] [...]a [...]. per. Leon [...]. p. 423 Aug. con. l. 9 c. 13 of prostration before the Al­tar; of Cyp [...] p. 56. ad T [...]t at id. l. de laps su [...] [...]n [...]t. signing the baptized person with the signe of the crosse, Tert Co [...]. mil. c. 3. of renouncing the devill, of tasting hony and milk before baptisme; Tert. de bapt. c. 13. of using God-fathers in the baptismes even of children, I [...]d. Hisp. l. 2. de div. o [...] 20. y [...] H [...] o­solan pro [...] co. of exorcising the parties to be baptized, A [...]al l. 1. de [...]ccla [...]. 2 [...]. Aug. S [...]m. 1 [...]7. de domin [...] [...] pas [...]. of put­ting a white garment upon them, which they were to weare for the space of 7. or 8. dayes (from the putting off of which, the Sunday after Easter was called Vi [...]. [...] [...]tiq. [...]t. [...] t [...]. 5. c. 12. dominica in Albis) Te [...]t. [...] of receiving the [Page 15] Eucharist fasting: Just. mar. q. ad orth. Cypr. ep. 56. & 63. of mixing water with the wine for the Communion; Cypr. ibid. of sending it to such as were absent: Cypr. l. de. laps. num. 89. Tert. l. de orat. sub sin. id. l. 2. ad ux. of eating the consecrated bread in the Church at the time of the holy Communi­on, or carying it home to their houses, and eating it when they thought good; Tert. l. de Cor. [...]il. c. 3. id. l. 2. ad ux. circa [...]l. of crossing them­selves when they went out, or came in, when they arose or went to bed, when they sate down to meate, when they lighted candles, and when they had any businesse of moment to doe. Ma­ny more customs the Church had in former times, which (doubtlesse) most of them drew their breath from some rules and constitutions establish­ed by their governours for their use. Now that Ceremonies and Rites of this nature are under the Churches power to ordaine, we generally grant our adversaries; and what is granted by all sorts of divines, cannot be called in question by any, without some note either of singular igno­rance, or arrogancy, or both.

And so I come to shew the reason of the point, The Chur­ches power proved by reason. No Church without Rites and rules. which may be thus declared.

No Church can consist without orders, no worship without rules, given and observed, concern­ing times, places, manner, &c. These (as I have shewed) are not of the essence of Gods worship, no more than a mans coat or skin is of the essence of a man; but yet such necessary appurtenances they be, that take them away, and you take away all publique worship.

But where are these orders to be found? where is this forme prescribed? In Gods Word are no [Page 16] such ordināces delivered, some indeed are menti­oned, w ^ch were given by the Apo: to some particular Churches, and by them observed in their sacred assemblies: but they were never intended to be of perpetuall right, nor for universall use; nor yet mentioned directly and purposely, but as the riots and disorders of particular congregations gave them occasion. It was not the Apostles drift (saith Socrat. eccles. hist. l. 5. [...]. 21. Socrates) to lay downe Canons concerning festivals and other ceremonies, but to become patterns of piety and godly life. Certainly the Christian Churches, through all her successions, should have been ex­treamly injurious to their first founders the Apo­stles, in antiquating many of those mentioned Ca­nons, had they been intended for perpetuall presi­dents to all Churches.

Three things doe clearly evince, that neither they, nor any other forme were propounded in Scriptures to be of perpetuall right.

No set forme of govern­ment prescri­bed for, or u­sed by the Churches.1. The impossibility of making such orders or regiment, as should fit all Churches in the world. In the time of the Law Gods people were but one, and they a small people; and therefore one kinde of discipline might well enough serve their turns. But now the Church is an heterogeneall body, con­sisting of severall nations, and of dispositions as dif­ferent as of countries; and therefore not to be yoked under the same laws and customs, Civill or Ecclesi­astique. It is as hard to make one government to fit the Church in her severall times and countries, as to make one shoo to fit all feete, or one coate to serve all bodies. And so saith Calvin (in effect) [Page 17] Calv. Inst. l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 30. Christ would not prescribe particular ceremonies to his Church, because it was impossible that the same ceremonies should be agreeable to all so different nati­ons as are in the world. To the same purpose it is, which Iunius speakes: Jun. Ani­madan Pell. cont. 1. l. 4. The Scriptures (saith he) containe in them all matters of doctrine belonging ne­cessarily to faith and good life; but they only set downe a generall law concerning ceremonies (Let all things be done decently and in order.) Therefore particular Rites appertaining to the Church, because they be mu­table and ambulatory, might well be omitted by the Spi­rit of God, and permitted to the conveniences of the Church.

Secondly, the impossibility of finding out such a forme, is an argument against it; such orders could never be found in the Scriptures (at least till this last over-weening age) never any could, or durst determine what the Lords discipline (as some call it) is, though many, with greater passion than dis­cretion, have earnestly called for it. Certainely, had God intended such a thing for his Church, or thought it necessary, he would have set it downe so plainly (for so he did the Iewish regiment which he meant they should live by) that every Church (without grosse ignorance) might have knowne what it was. But they are yet to learne what it is, and will be to the worlds end. Some talke of a Phoenix, and of a Philosophers stone, but who did ever see a Phoenix? or who did ever enjoy the Philosophers stone? Ab omnibus amatur, & ta­men virgo est; it hath had a great many suitors, but never any husband: An evident argument that [Page 18] these are but imaginary things. And so, that there is such a discipline, into whose mold, and by whose modell all Churches must be cast and squared, con­sidering that never any yet knew it, is but a meer Chimera.

3. The perpetuall variety of all Church- govern­ments doth sufficiently disprove it: for, if as there is one Lord, one Christ, one faith, and one baptisme, so there be one frame of government for Christs Kingdome on earth, why doe not all Churches stick to this, as they doe to them? Scarce three Churches in the whole Christian world do jump in every thing. It must follow therefore, that ei­ther all the Churches of God are blinded, and cannot see what lyeth before them in broad day light; or, which is worse, that they are all too proud to submit to their masters lawes; or, that the conceited platforme is a very Vtopian Common-wealth.

Two objecti­ons removed.Nor doth this argue (as some more fondly than truly imagine) any defect of love in God to the Church of the new Testament, or of fidelity in Christ to his Father, or of sufficiency in the Scrip­tures to direct us in our wayes.

Want of a set forme argues no want of love in God.1. No want of love in God to his Church now, in comparison of the Iews, can be hence inferred: for I hope, the cleare revelation of the mysteries of salvation, and the abundant grace bestowed on us above the Iews, may more truly shew the exube­rancy of Gods affection to us in comparison of them; than their prescribed platforme which wee want, his care of them more than of us.

The Philosopher accused nature to be a stepda [...]e to man, and a kinde mother to other creatures, because these bring their coats upon their backs in­to the world, and are quickly made able to shift for themselves; whereas men come naked in, and are faine to depend long upon others for their sustenance; A simple accusation: Because the rea­sonable nature, wherewith men are beautified, and their dominion over all creatures, doe much over-ballance those defects, and argue more bounty be­stowed by nature on him, than on them. And it is a cavill no lesse silly, that if we be not provided for by God with a standing government in the Church, as the Synagogue was, Gods care of us now is nothing so great, as it was at that time of them; because those many things wherein by Gods bounty wee out strip them, are abundantly sufficient to countervaile that defect, if it be a de­fect. But I rather take it to be an honour to be free from such a burdensome yoke of many, and costly, and toilsome ceremonies, as was laid on their backs.

2. This is no derogation, neither, Nor of fideli­ty in Christ. to the fidelity of Christ to his Father. If we compare him with Moses, Gods servant in those times, Who was faith­full in all Gods house, Heb. 3.5: it is true, that hee did not all the particulars that Moses did, and yet he was never the lesse faithfull in his place. For the fidelity of a sonne or servant, is to bee measu­red, not by the number of acts which he doth, but by the conformity of his actions to his fathers, or masters commands; and so is our Saviours. God [Page 20] appointed Moses to make every thing belonging to that typicall and temporary dispensation, ac­cording to the pattern which he saw in the mount, Heb. 8.5. and if he had not done so, hee had not been faithfull. And he sent his Sonne to be Our high Priest, to sacrifice himselfe for the salvation of men; to be a Prophet also, to instruct them in all necessary truths; and to be a King, to protect his people in the world, and to bring them at last, maugre all their spirituall enemies, into his glo­rious kingdome. All these our Lord hath truly and fully done, who will deny it? But he never gave him in charge to prescribe externall laws for his Churches government, while warfaring here on earth.

Nor imper­fection of Scriptures.3. Nor doth this involve the Scriptures imper­fection: for the Scripture is an instrument, and the perfection of an instrument is only relative. We doe not say that a pen or an axe is naught, because they cannot doe all things; if a pen can write well, and an axe cut well, we take them for per­fect and good: So, wee must not say that Gods word is insufficient, if it reveale and prescribe not whatsoever we imagine it should: if it be able to make us wise to salvation, and compleatly furnisht to every good work (for which use and end only it was given, 2 Tim. 3.16, 17.) it must needs be granted that it is full and perfect, though it teach us not how the Church should be governed, otherwise than by generall rules, these in my text, and such other. It is with the Scriptures, as with nature; Non deficiunt in necessariis, nec abundant in superfluis, [Page 21] They are neither defective in necessaries, nor exces­sive in superfluous things, such as this is.

This passage I meane to close up with the Te­stimony of Beza, in his Epistle to Bishop Grindall, Bez ep. 8 ad Grindall ep. Lond. Proved by a Testimony of Beza. where first he mentions two sorts of men; one that would have all orders that had been of use in the Apostles times, brought back into the Church, and observed; and whatsoever succeeding ages have added to them, abolished: the other sort would have old Rites of use in the Church after the Apo­stles times, to be retain [...]d, as either necessary, or profitable, or for unities sake: And then saith, Quod ad me attinet, &c. As for my part, that the do­ctrine of the Apostles was exact and perfect I make no question, but I am of another opinion concerning Rites. For, first it is certaine, that (the Churches eve­ry day increasing) the Apostles could not ordaine whatsoever they held expedient, and therefore in their making of orders they proceeded by degrees, as by the institution of Deacons it appeares, tolerating for a while even many Iudaicall Rites, as we may see in the history of their Acts. Secondly, who seeth not, that in their externall constitutions they had very great re­spect to the present times, places, and persons? So that it is not probable that the same Rites were used in all pla­ces, as is evident enough by that famous Epistle of Ire­naeus to Victor. Besides, some of their ordinances, those love feasts for example, necessity it selfe aboli­shed. Therefore whatsoever was done by the Apostles concerning ceremonies, is not (in my conceit) either presently or absolutely to be made a rule. And I doe not wonder that the ancient Pastors of the Church, (ha­ving [Page 22] respect to their owne times) did antiquate some of those first injunctions, and set up new ones in their roome. Their fault was (that by their leave I may speake what I thinke) that they held not a meane in the number of their Rites, nor had so much regard to Christian simplicity and purity as was meet. In this discourse of his, Beza 1. delivereth his judgement plainly, that there is no forme of government left us by the Apostles, incompatible with additions, or detractiōs. 2. He proves his opinion by divers argu­ments, ¹ from its impossibility, the Church was then in motu, non statu in motion, not in its full & perfit state, and they were forced to proceed by degrees in their constitutions, answerable to the increase of the Church, and the tempers of such people as were made the Church: ² from the abrogation of Apostolique Rites by the Churches, as they saw cause; and of some of them even by the Apostles themselves, after they had ordained them: ³ Last­ly, he concludes that the faults of Church-gover­nours, in prescribing orders, have not stood in this, that they passed by the Apostles, and set up their owne laws, but that they exceeded in the number or quality of such Rites as they introduced into their Churches.

Quest. But perhaps it will be granted, that the Church hath power to decree such Rites and ceremonies as are decent and orderly; but what if the Rites de­creed doe want this externall forme and qualificati­on, and are neither comely nor orderly? doth not the Church then which ordaines such, exceed her commission? or how shall we know what cere­monies [Page 23] are agreeable to these rules?

1. Answ. Significancie or abuse, no mark of in­decent cere­monies. If any Bishops in the Church authorize Rites not suitable to these rules, they presume beyond their allowance, and shall give account to God who hath set them over his family the Church.

2. We must not judge of ceremonies by false rules. ¹ Some reject all ceremonies as uncomely that are significant; and yet those holy kisses given and taken by the Primitive Christians, were signi­fications of mutuall charity; the womens cove­rings, the mens bare heads were signes of womens subjection to their husbands, and the husbands sub­jection to Christ alone. And of ceremonies (saith Pet. Mart in 1. Cor. 11. vid. etiam Calv. Inst. l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 15 Peter Martyr) those are the most laudable, that are the most lively in signification. ² Some againe condemne all Rites that are or have been used by the Romane Church; when yet it is most certain, that not only Papists, but Pagans too, by the light of reason, may be competent judges of decency and order in externall Rites. ³ Others will allow this surname to none that have been abused to super­stition and Idolatry; but would have them all a­bolished as most uncomely for the service of God, but without reason; may not Churches be ac­counted fit places for publike worship, because they have formerly been polluted with Idolatry? may not that body which hath made it selfe a member of an harlot, become a glorious member of Iesus Christ, and a holy Temple for Gods Spi­rit to dwell in? Wise men have alwayes thought, that the separation of the use of a thing from its abuse, is very possible, and that the use of some [Page 24] things stript out of their abuses, is very commenda­ble. To take away the use of a Ceremony because formerly abused, Curatio quidem est, sed curatio carnisicis, non medici, (saith Cassand. Commonstr. viae, Circ. med. Cassander rightly) is a cure of the abuse indeed, but the cure of a hangman, who takes away diseases, disasters, and life and all at a clap, not of a physician, who so expells the dis­ease, as he saves the life.

These are all false Cards to saile by. By the best writers ceremonies are then judged to be con­formable to these directions.

1. When they are not elevated above their na­ture, neither used as true and proper acts of wor­ship, (as vowed chastity, poverty, and regular o­bedience among the Papists are,) nor as instru­ments to produce supernaturall effects, as holy wa­ter is sprinkled in the Church of Rome to wash away veniall sinnes, and the signe of the Crosse is used to drive away devils.

2. When for their multitude they be neither burdensome to the Church, making Iews of Christi­ans, and Law of Gospell; nor occasions of diverting their affections and thoughts from such religious acts and services as are substantiall.

And therefore such Rites as are not opposite to these rules, we are to hold for decent and or­derly.

Determina­tion of decen­cy belongs to Superiours.3. The determination of this decency belongs not to private persons; it is not for them to nomi­nate, and governours to chuse, or for them to bring the writing, and superiours to give the seale; this would be to make authority but a meere cypher, [Page 25] and the Bishops of the Church like those images in the Psalme, Which have eyes and see not, hands and handle not, &c. this were an utter vverturning of the body, a placing of the feete where the head should be. But our Rulers must be judges in these matters, the Kings majesty the supreme, and the Prelates of the Church the subordinate; for 1. this is the honour belonging to their places, as it is the honour of the head to judge what is fit and comely and conducible to the wel-fare of the body. 2. they are best fitted for this work of de­termining, both in respect of their learning and experience, and because of that divine assistance, which by their masters owne promise ( Loe I am with you to the end of the world, Mat. 28.20.) is usu­ally afforded them, though not so far as to secure them from all possibility of mistaking in their deci­sions. To their sentence in these things must in­feriours submit, if not their judgements (for per­haps they are not bound to beleeve at all times that they doe all things well) yet their practises, both for the honour that is due to their places, and the peace of Gods Church which every good member will pursue. In Deut. 17.8, 9, 10, 11, 12. God enjoyneth the people under the paine of death in all their doubts and controversies to stand to the sentence of the Priest, and to square their pra­ctises thereby: he thought it not fit then for the people to be judges of doubtfull cases, and doth he think it convenient now? I will therefore con­clude with the speech of Nazianzene. Greg. Naz in Orat. quâ se purgat. Presume not ye that are sheep, to make your selves guides of them [Page 26] that should guide you, neither seek to skip over the fold which they have pitcht about you, it sufficeth for your part, if you give your selves to be ordered. Take not upon you to judge, nor make them subject to your laws, who should be a law to you; for God is not a God of con­fusion, but of order and peace in all the Churches of the Saints, 1 Cor. 14.33.

And so leaving Rites and Ceremonies for their determination, to the heads of the Church, as peeces of coine which beare their image and super­scription; I passe from the point to the Consectaries resulting from it.

1. From hence we may see, that Laws or Canons concerning orders in the Church, are alterable, and binde to their use no longer than they that made them are pleased to urge them.

Matters of faith and morality will endure no addition, diminution or change, because their au­thority is divine; but matters of order and decen­cy doe, because their authority is humane.

Every particular, or nationall Church hath power to ordaine, change, and abolish ceremonies and Rites or­dained only by mans authority, so as all things be done to edification. Art. 14. It is the subscribed doctrine of our owne Church, and a proofe of the Consecta­ry. Upon this ground S. Ambrose in his owne Church abrogated an old custome of feasting at the Tombs of m [...]rtyrs [...]ud. [...]es in Aug de Civ. Dei. l. 8 c 27. S [...]d [...]c Am­brosi [...]s [...]r [...] ve­ [...]u [...]t, ne u [...] [...]oc­ [...]sio l [...] [...]o [...]sis se in­g [...]rg [...] andi, & q [...]ua illa qu [...]si parent l [...]a su­perst [...]m gen­ [...]li [...]m [...]s [...]t si [...]n [...]. lest occasiō of quaffing should be given thereby to drunkards, and because those parentalia, funerall feasts were very like to heathe­nish superstition. And how many Apostolique and ancient Rites have long since bidden the world [Page 27] good-night by the Churches pleasure only, on the same ground? Cassand. l de ossic. P [...] pag. 855. Cassander reckons up two sorts of old ceremonies; which because they were dif­ferent, have been differently dealt with.

1. Some there were, which are of perpetuall use to preserve the memory of Christs benefits, and to traine up Christian people in piety. Such were those famous festivals of Easter, Ascension, and Whitsontide; for by their anniversary solemnizations, and by the publique reading and explaining the histories sutable to those holy-dayes, people are put in minde of those Acts which Christ did for their redemption, and excited to shew their thankfulnesse to him by their love and obedience to his laws. Of this sort also have singing of Psalms, and sacred hymnes in the Church, reading of su­table prayers and Scriptures at the holy communion, silence of women in the congregation, and the fast of Lent been accounted. All these therefore have been religiously preserved without the least alte­ration.

2. Others of them were of an inferiour nature, and may be divided into three ranks.

1. Rites of no great moment for their matter or use; as their holy kisses, standing while they prayed on the Lords day, the tasting of hony and milk by the persons to be baptised, ad infantiae signifi cationem, to signifie their infancy in Christ, as S. Hie­rome saith, alluding to that speech of S. Peter, As new borne babes desire the sincere milk of Gods word, that ye may grow thereby. 1 Pet. 2.2.

2. Rites of very good use, while their equity con­tinued, [Page 28] but yet fitted only to the present times. Such an one was the abstinence from Idolothytes, things strangled, and blood, imposed on the Gentiles by Apostolique authority, Acts 15. For this as it was enjoyned only in favour of the peevish Jews, who counted some meats uncleane, and were kept off from Christ because those abominable meats (as they thought them to be) were eaten by the Christians; so it was to live no longer than the scandall continued. Of this nature was the custome of baptising people that were to be entred into the Church, at the two great festivals of Ea­ster and Whitsontide only: (except in case of pre­sent necessity) and in the mother Churches of their severall countries, and no where else. This order was a very good one during those times, both in respect of that Sacrament, which hereby became the more reverend and sacred; and of the persons to be baptized, who had liberty by this, to pre­pare the better for their journies to those mother Churches (which sometimes were very far from their dwellings) and to get themselves sufficient­ly catechized in the Christian religion, that they might be able to give an account of their faith, before they received their baptisme. Nor was this custome prejudiciall to any of them, because being for the most part men and women, they were not subject to sudden death, as tender infants are, and if by sicknesse or any casualty they were brought into danger of death, they found the fa­vour to be baptized. But the equity of this cu­stome continued no longer than the conversion [Page 29] of Gentiles lasted; and therefore, extincta gentili­tate, when Paganisme was almost swallowed up of Christianity, and the only persons to receive this badge, were children borne in the Church, who by reason of their tender infant age, were uncapable of instruction, and subject to manifold deaths and dangers, and so might frequently have ended this life before they had received the Sacrament of another life, (should they have been deferred and put over to those two times) this order began to expire.

3. A third sort, were such Rites as were chast­ly used at their first institution, but afterward, by the licentiousnesse of people, did seeme to be ac­companied with inseparable abuses; of this sort were those [...] mentioned Iude 12. feasts of charity; and those meetings together in the night, which they called vigills, because they were wont to watch together in prayer even till midnight, (especially in the night before Easter.) All these the Church hath abolished, though in a different way. Some were suddenly and in an instant remo­ved, as the use of pictures in the Church, by the Elibert. Counc. Elibertine councill, Ne quod colitur, in parieti­bus depingeretur, that that which was to be worship­ed, might not be painted upon walls: and the three­fold dipping by the fourth Toletane councill, be­cause abused by the Arrians, Conc [...] Tolet. 4. c. 5. others were suffered like old buildings to run to ruine by degrees, till they fell of themselves. Some she hath clean cashiered; others she hath only chan­ged into somewhat else not unlike them, as vigills [Page 30] into fasting dayes, and live feasts into collections for the poore. Now, though the causes why these have been abrogated, were particular, yet the ground on which the Church did it, and by which she must be justified in so doing, was the nature and quality of those Rites, being all humane constitutions; and her authority over things of that nature, either to make or marre, as occasion serveth; for the hand that gives them life, may strike them dead.

Nor may the Church only alter and abolish old ceremonies, but adde new, either for the begetting of an honourable respect to Gods ordinances, or the stirring up of our dead devotions in his service. So [...]. eccl. hist [...]l. 6. c. 8. Socrates tells us, that the custome of singing Anthems in the Church, was brought in by S. Ig­natius the Bishop of Antioch; because having heard some Angels in a vision chanting out the praises of God with interchangeable notes, hee thought it would be a good exercise for Gods earthly Angels in their publique assemblies, which are [...], a heaven on earth. And S. Ambrose, because hee made account that singing had no small efficacy in it ad commovendum ad pictatem animum, to move the minde to godlinesse, (saith S Aug ep. 1 [...]9 Austin in one place) and lest the people being heavily afflict­ed with the Arrian persecution, Moeroris tadio contabesceret, should pine away with too much sorow, (saith the same Father in another Aug conses. l. 9 c 7. place) ap­pointed singing to be used in the Oh: of Milan. And from these two Bishops drew that custome of sing­ing in the Easterne and Westerne Churches its origi­nall.

What was Ignatius and S. Ambrose, if we look at their authority, more than other Bishops of the Church? that liberty therefore which they had, to make new orders, when they saw cause, have all other Prelates in their Churches, so far as the laws of the lands in which they are, will permit.

It is an envious outcry therefore which is made among us, that Popery is comming in, Alteration of ceremo­nies no argu­ment of Po­pery. and Gods true religion going out, because some seeming al­terations are made in our ceremonies, and some new ones are, by the examples of Superiours commended to our use; or rather, some ancient customes, which have been continued in our mother Chur­ches, revived in others. A heavy charge it is, and had need be well proved by them that thus cla­mour, or else it is a foule slander, and so indeed it is. For what are ceremonies to doctrine? What is the use of the Churches liberty in these things, to Popery? May not the apparrell alter, and the body remaine the same? May not ceremonies, which are the clothing of the Spouse, admit some changes, and the doctrine remaine inviolate? Must Anti­christ needs peep in, because our Bishops doe use the liberty which they ever had?

A rumour it is, that argues either ignorance, or envy, or vain-glory.

In some, perhaps, but ignorance. 1. Of the diffe­rence between substance and ceremony doctrine and discipline. 2. Of the Churches power to adde, with­draw, and make a change in these things, if cause be offered. And I would wish all such to labour to be better instructed, and till they be, to hold [Page 32] their peace, and neither trouble themselves, nor others with things they understand not.

But Envy, I am afraid, and ill-affectednesse to­ward those that are above them in the Church, is the cause of this outcry in too many; because their eyes are too weak to look upon the lustre of those Stars in the Church, or their wills untaught to keep their laws, or beare their censures, therefore they dart their bitter and biting words upon them, like those Salvages, who shoot their arrows at the Sun, because he scorcheth them with his beams.

Let such take heed, lest while they resemble the devill in his sinne, and maligne the happinesse of others, they be not made like him in punish­ment and lose their owne.

If this envious [...] be no cause, yet [...], vainglory, with which too many are inebriated, may occasion these uncharitable reports; Absalons ambitious traducing of his fathers blessed govern­ment to advance his owne, doth plainly enough shew, that the slandering of governours for the getting of a private name, is a trick and peece of artifice as old at least as Absalon. Who sees not, that this is a ready way for men to get a great opi­nion among the people? either of singular pru­dence, that they are able to discerne Antichrist in his swadling clouts, and descry him, while he is but putting in his head at the doore; or of admi­rable zeale and piety, that they are such as cannot behold the declining of the Gospels purity, and the sad approach of superstition, without com­plaints and outcryes.

But let me tell them: 1. That this odious ru­mour having no sufficient ground to stand upon, is but a slander; and which is worse, Scandalum magnatum, a blaspheming of dignities, a sin, which S. Peter attributeth to notorious presumption, [...], they tremble not to speak evill of dignities: 2 Pet. 2.10. 2. That a slander is not the right way to true honour; never was true zeale kindled at a kitchin fire, nor ever sweet name built on the ruine of a private mans, much lesse of a whole governments reputation. Once Herostra­tus set fire on the glory of the world for a building, Diana's magnificent Temple, to get a name: and a name he hath gotten; but what name? a name of obloquy and disgrace to the worlds end. And such a name (I beleeve) wil be the portion of all those, Qui ex incenso Dei Templo gloriam quaerunt (as Cal­vin speakes) who seek their owne glory by such seditious and incendiary slanders.

And so I come to the second Consectary. 2. Consectary

Churches are not tyed to the same orders: Each Church hath her liberty, either to take such as are made ready to her hand by others, or to make new Canons of her owne for the government of her people. And so our Church teacheth us to judge in her 34. Art. 34. Article. It is not necessary (saith the Article) that ceremonies and traditions be in all places one, or altogether alike: for at all times they have been divers; and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times and maners. See­ing all Rites and ceremonies (saith Zanch. de Red l. 1. p. 764. Zanchy) are in­stituted for the edification of the Church, it is manifest [Page 34] that in these things liberty is to be left to Churches, that every Church may so cary her selfe in these mat­ters, as she thinkes best for the good of her beleevers.

On these conclusions of our owne Church, and that learned writer, Socr. l. 5. eccl. hist. c. 21. Socrates may serve for a comment, for he reckons up many severall Chur­ches, all enjoying their severall orders.

The Greek Church gave the Communion in leavened bread, the Latines in unleavened: the Greeks kept their Easter, quartâ decimâ lunâ, on the fourteenth day of that moneth exactly, fall when it would; but the Latins alwayes on the first day of the week, the resurrection day. In Rome they fa­sted on Saturdaies, in Milan not so: in Rome their Lent was wont to begin but three weeks before Ea­ster, in Greece and Illyrium, sixe weeks, and in other Churches seven. Among the Eastern Churches, their fasting was a totall forbearing of all kinde of food till Sun set; but in some Western Churches, it stood onely in delectu ciborum, in abstinence from flesh only, and brake up at three first, then at twelve a clock. In Antioch the altar stood in the West part of the Church, in others alwayes in the East. In Hellas, Ierusalem, and Thessaly, and among the Novatians also at Constantinople, Evening pray­er was read by candle light; and S. Hier. ep. ad vigilant. Hierome gives the reason, Non ad fugandas tenebras, sed ad signum laetitiae demonstrandum, not to drive away darknesse, (for at those houres it was light enough) but to represent the spirituall rejoycing of Christians: but in other Churches it was read by day light. At Alexandria they admitted Catechumenists to the [Page 35] office of reading, and expounding the Scriptures in the Church; in other places none were appointed to those functions, till they were baptized. In some Churches the Communion was celebrated eve­ry Sunday, in others, not so often. Among some people, it was given to children, as well as to men and women, (as S. Cypr. de lap. num. 89. Cyprian tells us) and Aug. Epist. 107. ad Vitalem. S. Augustine saith, that there was such a custome in his time: but this was not the maner of other Churches, as Pam. in loc. cit. Cypriani. Pamelius observes in these words. Quia apud alios authores rarissima fit illius mentio, &c. because there is but little mention made of that custome in other authors, therefore I suspect that it was neither universall, nor of any long continuance after S. Austins time. In the African and Spanish Chur­ches for a great while together, they never gran­ted the Churches peace to such as fell into the cri­mina majora, the fouler sort of crimes after baptism; but in other Churches they were more indulgent to offenders upon their true repentance, as Petav. in Epiphan. Pe­tavius hath noted.

We see by these examples that great was the variety of Church-customs and constitutions. And yet for all this diversity, the Churches held the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace; none of them being either so proud as to prescribe to o­thers, nor so uncharitable, as to wrangle among themselves about those differences. Only once Euseb. Victor Bishop of Rome presumed to excommu­nicate all Asia for differing from the Latins in ob­serving Easter. But Irenaeus of Lions in France, in the name of his fellow Bishops, did sharply rebuke [Page 36] him for it; alledging against him the examples of former Bishops, and in particular of Polycarpus of Smyrua, and Anicetus of Rome, who notwith­standing they differed in this observation, yet they held a friendly communion together. Calv. ep. 18 ad Farel. Cal­vin tells Farell, that as for himselfe, he was some­what sparing of ceremonies, Luther liberall, Bucer indifferent; yet they all maintained very good correspondency, and judged those differences in ex­ternall Rites to be no just cause why they should breake amity. And indeed they are not, no more than difference in apparell is a good reason why the children of the same father should maintaine a contention. Dissonantia jejunii fidei consonanti­am non tollit; difference in fasting (saith Irenaeus) takes not away agreement in faith: and, In una fide ni­hil officit ecclesiae sanctae consuetudo diversa, saith S. Gregory; Outlandish Church-or­ders no rule to us. Different Church customs bring no preju­dice to their one most holy faith. Nay it is good (saith S. Austin) that there should be this variety, for this is that raiment of needle-work wherewith the Kings daughter is clothed and beautified.

With what warrant then doth Cartwright or any of his followers, strive to bring us to out-lan­dish customs, and make a schisme from us, or a fa­ction among us, for maintaining the liberty where­with Christ hath honoured us, of making and li­ving by our owne rules? Graviter peccant &c. They are guilty of a great fault Zanch. l. de Red. p. 765. Graviter pec­cant, qui prop­ter has indiffe­rentes ceremo­nias turbant ec­clesias, dam­nant alios prin­cipes & magi­stratus: haec­cine pietas quam jacta­mus? haecci [...]e charitas, quam debemus eccle­si [...]s & fractibus? (saith Zanchy) who for these indifferent ceremonies doe disturb the Churches, and damne all other magistrates and rulers, because they use their liberty in these things: is this [Page 37] the piety which is boasted of? is this the charity which we owe to the Churches of God? If they want piety and charity, who trouble and contest with other Churches about ceremonies, much more doe they lack it, who in this quarrell trouble the quiet of their owne, because she will not prostrate her selfe before their Idoll, and be servant to their humors. Came the word of God from them, or came it to them only? (that I may speak in the Apostles language, 1 Cor. 4.36.) Are they the Ioseph to whom the Sun and Moon and Stars must bow? all Churches must strike sail? Calvin indeed was too highly conceited of his owne invented discipline (as Pigmalion of his image) and having made it, did give too honourable a style to it: but did his friends so mightily esteem it? Vide Calv. ep. ad Pullinger. It. ep. ad Tigur. minist. It. ep. Bullinger. ad Calvin. Was it not op­posed by his owne Senate and Citizens? was not he glad for the upholding of it to beg the appro­bation of Bazil, Zurich, and other Helvetian Churches? And when (to gratifie him) they gave it a testimony, was not this the greatest praise they could afford it, that those consistoricall laws of his were good ones, and such as were agreeable to the word of God, and might well be tolerated: not such as were of necessity to be received into their or other Churches? To goe no further than Beza, Calvins inward friend and scholar; Bez. in vit. Calvin. He in the life of Calvin, speaking of the cause why Calvin did so earnestly contend for the continuance of it, saith, it was, Quod eam urbem videret his fraenis in­digere, because he saw that that City (being then it seems somewhat licentious) had need of such a [Page 38] bridle; by which we see, that he derived not its pedegree as high as heaven, nor maintained it to be the Lords discipline, nor prescribed it imperiously to other Churches. Nor doe her owne divines esteem it The government: for when occasions have brought them among us, they have with sin­gular respect conformed and submitted themselves in practise to our received orders. Herein obser­ving S. Austins rule which he gives in one of his Epistles. Aug. ep. 118. ad Januar. Quod ne (que) contra fidem, &c. That con­stitution which is neither against faith or good maners, is to be reckoned of, as in it selfe indifferent, and to bee observed according to the company with whom we con­verse. And againe, Ad quam cun (que), &c. To what Church soever thou shalt come, follow their customs, if thou meanest neither to give nor take offence. Herein also imitating S. Pauls example, who became all things to all men, 1 Cor. 9.20. and that of S. Am­brose, Aug. ep. ad Casulan. who though in his owne Church of Mi­lan he kept no Saturday fast, yet when he came to Rome, where it was the custome, hee fasted as they did; by that demeanour giving occasion to that proverb which hath been long in use. Si fueris Romae, Romano vivito more, if you come to Rome, live as Romans doe.

Our owne men are only they, our English pa­pists are the greatest admirers of Rome and the pa­pall power, because they live a great way from them, and know them only in imagination (which too often like a false glasse, is a deceitfull repre­senter) so are our owne disciplinarians the onely men, that do so much adore that Geneva platform, [Page 39] because they never had any practicall knowledge and experience of it. And it is the unhappy chance of our Church to have her bowells eaten out by her owne children whom she hath caried in her womb, nursed at her breasts, and fed with her favours and preferments.

A destiny too bad for a well-reformed, nay (with­out prejudice to other Churches be it spoken) the best reformed Church in the world; a Church (I appeale to all Church-stories) which in her re­formation and government commeth neerest the pattern of pious and reverend Antiquity. A go­vernment so moderate, and full of respect to those elder Saints (who were in Christ before us, and are now triumphing in heaven, while we are militant yet on earth, and fighting for our Crown) Confer. ad Hampt. Court. pag. 38. that a French Embassadour in the beginning of our last Kings raigne of blessed memory, upon the view of our solemne service & ceremonies at Canterbury and at Court, gave out; That if the reformed Chur­ches in France had kept the same orders among them that we have, he was assured there would have been in that countrey many thousand Protestants at that time, more than there were. But alas poore mother, it is thy lot to be despised by thine owne sons, and if there be no remedy, thou must beare it; Time and chance (saith Salomon) happeneth to all men, and so it doth to all Churches, Hor. l. 1. Carm. Ode 24. Levius sit pati­entia, quicquid corrigere est nefas. Patience is a means to make that burden easie, which must be endured with­out remedy.

And so I come to the third Consectary.

3. Consectary Persons that spurne at Church-ordinances, may be justly punished by Church-governours: their power to make orders implies a power to censure disor­ders in whomsoever they finde refractary. For, every law supposeth in the Law-maker, a power directive to make it, and a power coercive to re­strain transgressors of it; as S. Paul implies, Rom. 13.4. where (speaking of the Magistrate) he saith, He beareth not the sword in vaine. First, he beareth a sword, hath authority to punish as well as to pre­scribe. Secondly, he beareth it not in vain, hath authority to smite with that sword, and to put his power in practise upon evill doers.

There is one Law giver (saith S. Iames, cap. 4.12.) who is able to save and to destroy: in which words is given us by consequent to understand, that it be­longs to all Law-givers to doe either of these, as occasion requires.

And the reason why they are to have this pow­er as well as the former, is, because it is a back to the former; without this that other would be un­profitable; for Morinus de cens. eccles. c. 2. Inermis authoritas, non authoritas dicenda est, sed authoritatis larva: unarmed authori­ty is rather a mask and semblance of authority, than au­thority indeed.

Into all creatures God hath put two faculties.

1. A concupiscible, by which they are caryed to seek out whatsoever things are needfull for their preservation.

2. An Irascible, by which they are inabled ad omnia contraria eliminanda, to expell by slight or re­sistance, at least in endeavour, whatsoever threa­tens [Page 41] their destruction. And without this last the for­mer would not be sufficient to keep the creature in being. Answerable to this, there is in governours a concupiscible faculty of making good orders for the maintenance of that body, wherof themselves are a part: and an Irascible, of resisting and executing ven­geance on such irregular persons, men of Belial, as assault that body, those orders; and without this that other of making laws, is not only weak and of little use, but oft times a snare to law-makers, who otherwise would be (like the log in the fable) fa­bula vulgi, a scorne to the rude, unruly multitude.

But lest some may think, that this last power is peculiar to the civill magistrate, A coactive power neces­sary to Chu: governours. and belongs not to Bishops and governours of the Church; their Canons being but councells, and their authority only to perswade; as V. d. Ʋrsin. catech. some of note, to the disparage­ment of their learning, doe not stick to say: Par. Orat. de Q. anleges magist. obligent Consc. pag. 13. Cast your eyes on Timothy and Titus two Bishops of the Church. S. Paul armeth them both with this dou­ble authority. Command and teach (saith he to Timo­thy, 1 Tim. 4.11.) There is a power directive given him: Them that sin rebuke before all, that the rest also may feare, 1 Tim. 5.10. there is his power coactive. And to Titus he saith, These things speak and exhort, and rebuke with all authority, Tit. 2.15. Teach, there is his authority to informe and direct; but is this all? No, Rebuke too, there is power to censure the diso­bedient. But how rebuke? not with weak words on­ly, for that belongs to the inferiour Clergy; but with all authority; that is, with censures & deeds, e­ven to the stopping of mouths, if need be, as we may [Page 42] see, Tit. 1.11. Nor doth S. Paul give these his Bi­shops any greater allowance, than he knew his ma­ster would warrant; for he was not ignorant of what with his owne mouth he had uttered, Mat. 18.17, 18. Goe tell the Church, and if he neglect to heare the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man, and a publican. Verily, verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall binde on earth, shall be bound in heaven, &c. In which words, 1. Our Lord ere­cteth a Tribunall in the Church, to which offenders against the Church must be cited, and by it censu­red, Goe tell the Church. 2. He ratifies and setleth it: whatsoever ye binde on earth, &c. [...]i. whomsoe­ver you cast out for neglect, or contempt of that authority which I have given you, shall be repu­ted an outcast in the kingdome of heaven: and by consequent, whatsoever other punishment you justly inflict, shall be authorized in the highest Court, by the highest judge. What will you (saith S. Paul, 1 Cor. 4.21.) shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love and in the spirit of meeknesse? that is, will you be perswaded by faire words, or shall I exer­cise my Iudiciall authority over you, shall I punish you? For, as the rod of Christ signifies his autho­rity to rule his servants, and subdue his enemies, and therefore is called the rod of his strength, Psal. 110.2. So doth the rod of S. Paul here signifie his punishing power, as S. Chrysostome and S. Austin expound the place. And (which is a thing that should work with us) this is also the doctrine of our owne Church, to the truth of which wee (my brethren) of the Clergy have subscribed.

Whosoever (saith the Article) by his private judgement, willingly and purposely doth openly breake the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the word of God, and be approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, (that others may feare to doe the like) as he that offendeth a­gainst the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the magistrate, and woundeth the con­sciences of weak brethren.

And shall we not thinke that the Church hath need of this latter power, as well as the common­wealth? Are people so well affected to the orders of the Church, that they will obey them if they be but barely propounded, or at most, by a few perswasions commended to their obedience? Is the Church so setled by divine goodnesse, that no un­ruly windes within her bowels can make her quake? Or is the King of the Church so carelesse of his flock which he hath purchased with his owne blood, that he hath given it weaker supports than Kingdomes and civill States enjoy? and hath set over it shepheards indeed, but yet lame ones, that cannot or must not strike if there be oc­casion?

Certainly, this earthly Paradise would soon be entred and wasted, were not those Angels that are set to keepe the doore, armed with a flaming sword of vindicative power, to keep out, or drive out all those that either professedly, or secretly have evill will to Sion. And therefore we cannot think with reason that Church-governours have the place of commanding, but no power of compel­ling [Page 44] and urging obedience to their commands.

The Lords of the Gen­tiles, &c. no argument a­gainst the Churches primitive power.But they that would have a parity in the Church, and would make Church governours to be but empty Cyphers, alledge the speech of our Saviour to his disciples ( contending among them­selves for superiority) Mat. 20.25, 26, 17. The Lords of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great, exercise authority over them: but it shall not be so among you. But whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister, and whoso­ever would be chiefe among you, let him be your ser­vant, &c. And say, that Christ here compares the world and his Church, and forbids the use of that power to the Pastors of the one, which belongs to the Princes of the other, and that is principally a punitive and coactive power.

For the removall therefore of this Gorgons head, which doth so amaze the vulgar, and make them think that Bishops should use no punish­ments for the safeguard of their determinations, two things are to be noted.

• 1. The persons which are here compared and distinguished.
• 2. The drift and purpose of our Saviour in this comparison.

1. For the persons, we are to know, that they are not Aaron and Moses, the Clergy and the Laity, but Christian and Pagan governours, as appeares by the notation of the word; for where doth [...] signifie lay men, men distinguished by their callings in the Church, not nations divided from the Church? It is alwayes opposed to the Chri­stian [Page 45] Church, and men living therein, whether ministers or people, and is as much in significati­on, as the Hebrew word [...]: for the Septua­gint doe alwayes translate [...] by [...], as we may see Esay 11.10. Psal. 2.1. &c. Now Goijm signifies all nations that were not Iews, all such, as they esteemed to be out of the Church: and ther­fore the Buxtorf. le­xic de vocab. [...] Iudaei ap­pellant Christi­anos [...], quasi Gentem abommabilem, affectu proisus malitioso. Iews doe at this day call the Chri­stians, because they account them the greatest ali­ens from the common-wealth of Israel, Goijm, unbe­leeving people.

Besides, if we looke into the new Testament, we shall see that [...] and [...] are never used, but where Gentiles are mentioned, and must be under­stood. Mat. 4.15.10.5. Luke 2.32. Act 4.27.9 15.13 46. Rom. 2.24.3.9 &c. Our Saviour therefore must have spo­kenhere very improperly, and far otherwise than the language did lead him, had he by Gentiles in this place meant lay men.

The comparison therefore which is here made, being between Infidels, and the Church indefinite­ly (as it includes all her members and magistrates civill and Ecclesiasticall) it followeth, that the re­straint here given doth not respect the Prelates of the Church determinately, but equally all that beare rule in Christian Common-wealths; and so can be no argument for the clipping of the Churches wings, more than for the limiting of civill autho­rity.

Secondly, for the scope of our Saviour, it was not:

1. To forbid magistracy among Christians (as the Anabaptists would have it) for then, there would be a plain contradiction between him and [Page 46] his Apostles, who taught that the higher powers are ordained by God, and that they were to be obeyed by all that were under them Rom. 13.1. 1 Pet. 2.13, 14, 17, &c.: and this would have brought the whole world into confusion long since, there being no possibility of its consistence without government.

Nor secondly, was it his purpose to forbid a superiority of some over others in the Church; for,

1. He forbids that only which himselfe did re­fuse, propounding his owne practise as an example of that doctrine which he taught them: It shall not be so among you, for I am among you, as he that ser­veth. But did he ever renounce authority over his disciples while he lived among them? did not he rather behave himself as a commander and master, enjoyning them from time to time what he would have them doe? and did not he willingly accept that title of Lord and master, which his disciples gave him? John 13.13. Yee call me master and Lord, and ye say well; for so I am.

2. He prohibites not what he supposed; but hee supposeth that there was to be a sub and supra, a subordination and superiority among them, as the words maximus and minimus, greatest and least here used doe import.

Neither was it, in the third place, to hinder the annexion of civill authority to the Church, and to restraine Church-men from being Iustices of peace, or privy Counsellours, &c. For Christ doth use this speech to his disciples to disswade them from striving about superiority: but if this had been his meaning, that the disciples should not [Page 47] be ambitious of temporall power, it would not have reached home, nor been a sufficient argument for that purpose; for they might have reasonably replyed: Sir, we strive not to be Kings or Princes, or Counsellers of State, let us have authority in the Church, and we ask no more.

What then was our Saviours intent in this pro­hibition? The true meaning of that Text. It was to prevent the vicious customs of heathen Kings and Lords in Christian Govern­ments, whether spirituall or temporall.

Their vices or faults in government were espe­cially two.

1. Their ruling by their owne wills in stead of laws.

2. Their ruling for their owne ends, without respect to the peoples good, as if the lives, and goods, and children, and servants of their subjects had been made only to serve their turnes, and maintaine their pomp.

This was their chiefe fault, and thus did they governe, as appeares by the speech of Samuel 1 Sam. 8.11 This will be the custome of the King that shall raigne over you; He will take your sons and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, for his horsemen, &c. and your daughters for his confectionaries, cookes and ba­kers, &c., who sought to deterre the people from desiring a King, by describing [...], the custome and fashion of their King treading in the steps of his neighbour princes, who were all Ethnicks. And so much doth the Originall word, by which their manner of governing is here described, import, which [...], they play the Lords, they domineere over their people, as if they had all that soveraignty over them that can be imagined. This potestatem [...], this vicious and unrea­sonable manner of ruling, our Lord would have [Page 48] his disciples and all Christians to take heed of al­lowing them in the meane time, potestatem [...], a fatherly kinde of power over their inferiours, to governe as parents doe their children, with an eye on their good, and consequently, to correct and punish them when they prove bad children and unruly.

The Shepherds of the Church may governe their flocks, but not with force and cruelty, as they did in Ezekiels time, Ezek. 34.4. they may take the oversight of Gods heritage, 1 Pet. 5.2. but not as absolute Lords, [...], over-ruling them (saith the translation in the margine) for their owne, either covetous, or ambitious ends.

Lay these two things then together. 1. Christ compareth the Gentiles and Christians in their kinde of governing: and 2. His intent is to barre all Christian Princes and Prelates from exercising a tyrannicall rule over their inferiours, and to win them to that Moderatio­nem Apostoli­cae potestatis, & illius rectum usum ad divi­nae voluntatis praescriptum ea verba docent. Pilson. de eccl. Guber. c. 6. p. 91. moderation in their government, that becomes his people; and it will appeare, that this place makes nothing at all against the Hierar­chy of the Church or that vindicative power w ^ch the mildest and most indulgent parents that are, doe use upon their children for their good; and Church, as well as civill magistrates, may exer­cise upon disobedient persons for the preservati­on of publique peace and unity.

Punishments imposed on non-confor­mers, no per­secutions.Let no man therefore say, when Bishops correct opposers of their orders and authority, that the of­fenders thus punisht are martyrs, and the poore persecuted sheep of Christ; and the governours that [Page 49] punish them are wolves and persecutors, as some il-affected ones stick not to mutter.

S. Cyprian writing to Rogatian a Bishop, who had been abused by a sawcy deacon, Cypr ep. ad Bogat. 65. Ma­gis [...]ptamus & cup [...]nes con­tumel [...]s & in­ [...]u [...]s singulo­rum clementi pattentia vin­cere, quam sa­ce [...]d [...]tali licen­tia vind [...]e. 1. commends him because he had sought to reforme him by Christi­an clemency, rather than Episcopall authority: then he adviseth him, if the Deacon continued in his misdemeanour, to curb and punish him by deposi­tion or excommunication, P [...]o Epis­copatus vigore, & cathedrae au­thoritate. according to his pow­er and place. For if S. Paul said to Timothy, Let no man despise thy youth; how much more might thy fellow Bishops (saith S. Cyprian) say to thee, Let no man despise thy age: Was this uncivill Dea­con a Martyr, or S. Cyprian a persecutor.

When Vigilantius a Priest had much misbeha­ved himselfe in point of doctrine and manners, Hier. ep. ad Vigil. S. Hierom wondereth that the Bishop, in whose diocesse he lived, did not Virga Apostolica & fer­rea confringere vas inutile, break that unprofitable peece with the iron rod of his Apostolique authority, Et tradere in interitum carnis, ut spiritus salvus fiat, and deliver him to the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved, .i. excommunicate him. 1 Cor. 5.5. And a little after, turning his speech to Vigilanti­us, he cryes out (somewhat too passionately like himselfe) O praecidendam linguam medicis, O tongue worthy to be cut out by spirituall physitians; ut qui lo­qui nescit, discat aliquando reticere; that he who knows not how to speake aright, might learne at last to hold his peace. Was the delinquent here a martyr, and his pursuer S. Hierom a persecutor?

Goulartius and the rest of the Geneva Consistory [Page 50] deprived Rotarius one of their ministers, and thrust him out of their City, and (which is more) they hunted him by their letters out of a town not far from thence, which had entertained him for their Pastor. And why did the Consistory so severe­ly prosecute this man? for giving the Cup in his owne Church with his owne hands, and not permit­ting a lay man to deliver it. This fact of his was the breach of a Church- custome only, but of no ca­non, and yet thus sharply did they punish it. Were Goulartius and the Presbitery persecutors, and that good man a martyr?

Or were the Vid. Morin. de cons [...]eccl. decrees made by sundry anci­ent councills for the suspension, deposition, and ex­communication of unruly ministers, persecutions? I thinke our scrupulous mindes will not say so, for Non omnis qui parcit amicus est, nec omnis qui verberat inimicus; Every one that spares is not a friend, nor every one that punisheth an enemy. But if any can so cast off modesty, as to brand these wholsome judiciary Acts and Canons with the disgracefull name of persecutions, our Reverend Fathers may the more contentedly put up the like aspersions, considering that this affliction that befalls them, hath been accomplished in their elder bre­thren.

Object. 1 O, but the ministers usually suspended, are good men, and therefore, we may well say, they are persecuted.

Answ. 1. Some of them, no doubt, are so; and if they be, Inconformity is accidental­ly a great sin. they shall reap the profit of it another day; it is possible sometimes for good men to tread [Page 51] awry, being caryed away with the streame of po­pularity, and mis-led by the hope of gaine or glory.

2. Whether they be all good or no, I leave it to be decided by the searcher of all hearts; only thus much in the generall I am sure of, that Multi sunt in sanctorum catalogo, qui non sunt in consortio, many are now accounted Saints, which will not goe for Saints at that day when all secrets shall be manifested.

3. It is not their goodnesse that is punished, but their badnesse; S. Peter intimates, that a Chri­stian may be detected and punished for an evill doer, 1 Pet. 4.15, 16. If good men will have their hands in bad causes, their goodnesse must not make them law-proofe, and beare them off from the stroke of justice. Causa, non poena, (I may adde nec persona) facit martyrem, it is the cause, not the punishment (no nor the person neither) that makes the martyr. Inexpiable and great is the sinne of schisme and discord in the Church (saith S. Cypr. de unit. Eccl. Inexprabi­lis & gravis cul­pa discordiae, nec passione purgatur. Cypri­an) and cannot be purged even with martyrdome. And a Ardeant licet slammis & ignibus, tra­diti vel objecti bestus animas suas ponant; non [...]t illa fi­dei co [...]ona, sed poena perfidiae; nec religiosae virtutis exitus gloriosus, sed d [...] [...]onis [...]nte [...]tus. Oc­ci [...] [...]alis potest, cotona [...]i non potest. little after, speaking of such as lived contenti­ously in the Church, he saith, Ardeant licet slam­mis, &c. Though they breath out their soules at a stake, or under the teeth of wilde beasts, their goodnes is not crowned, but their persidiousnesse punisht. Occi­di talis potest, coronari non potest. Such a man may bee killed, but crowned he cannot be. Martyrs are they (saith S. Aug. ep. 50. Austin) which suffer, not for disorder, and the ungodly breach of Christian unity, but for righ­teousnesse sake: for Hagar was persecuted by Sarah, and yet she that did impose was holy, and she was the unrighteous person that did beare the burden: If things [Page 52] be rightly scanned (saith he) Hagar did persecute Sa­rah more by proud resistance, than Sarah her by infli­cting deserved vengeance.

Object. 2 Yea, but the fault of inconformity (if it bee a fault) is but a small one, & yet more grievously cen­sured, than swearing, drunkennesse, uncleannesse, per­jury, and many other sinnes which farre exceed this; want of proportion therefore between the fault and the penalty, maketh those punishments to be no better than persecutions.

Answ. Sinnes or faults may bee considered in their nature, or in their manner of committing, and those ill consequents that spring from them: and a sinne that is little and least in the first, may bee great and greatest in those last respects; and so is this sinne of which we are speaking. If we looke upon it in its owne nature, it is nothing so foule a sinne as is murder, adultery, perjury, &c. for this is a sinne by accident, because against the com­mand of authority; those other essentially and for­mally, because damned by the light of nature. But if we behold it in the manner of committing, it is a greater; this being seldome committed, never punisht, without wilfulnesse and obstinacy, they many times breaking out through meere weak­nesse and infirmity. And so it is in respect of its dangerousnesse in the issue. For,

1. It is a bold faced sinne, that Ionah-like stands alwayes upon its justification, and pleads not guilty, and casts a blemish upon that authority that dares censure it. These other are sinnes (as more foule, so) more modest, lesse confident; like the Here­tique [Page 53] in Titus 3. [...], self-convicted and self-condemned, and meet with fewer Patrons.

2. Those sinnes fight against Church- govern­ment by consequent only, this directly; and if it be not in time restrained, brings confusion and Anar­chy into the Church. Like Peters dissimulation, Gal. 2. it sowreth a multitude in a moment: like a gangren, if it seize, and be permitted to settle but on one limb, it speedily runnes over, and ruines all the body; men too sinfully affecting (since the fall) to be Domini suorum actuum, Lords over their owne actions in all things, and to shake off the yoke of government.

3. Those sinnes goe many times alone, this ne­ver; but like a fury brings a troope of mischiefes af­ter it. It makes divisions and breaches in other­wise peaceable congregations; begets discords, con­tempts in people of their learned, able, and wel-deserving Pastors. It breeds emulations also be­tween brethren of the same Tribe, ministers of the same Christ; even to the sharpning of tongues and pens against each other, till like the Cadmean bre­thren, mutuis vulneribus confossi cadunt (as Erasmus speakes) they fall to the ground by their own un­brotherly wounds.

This makes some stand neuters and look on, o­thers turne Apostates and deride; this makes our friends lament us, and our adversaries triumph over us, while they hope to see our Church dissolved, without either plots or pens of theirs, by our own unnaturall broyles and contentions. And there­fore it is many wayes a greater sinne than they, [Page 54] and worthy of condigne punishment.

To conclude this point, take an estimate of this sinne from God himselfe: Did not he reveale his wrath from heaven even against Miriam, and smite her with leprosie, & excommunication for a time, for opposing but with one weak word, or two, the authority of her brother Moses, Num. 12? was not Korah and his seditious company consu­med with fire from heaven, and made Horrenda victima nil miserantis orci, a lamentable sacrifice to the gaping earth in a moment? and why, but for denying obedience to Moses and Aaron, and ma­king a rent in the congregation? Quis dubitat sce­leratius esse commissum, quod gravius est punitum? Who doubts (saith S. Hierome) that the sinne which was so fearefully punished, was as highly detested?

Leave off therefore these scandalous crimina­tions, which have in them neither truth nor mo­desty, Cypr. de unit. [...]l. Q [...]d fa­ [...] [...] p [...]o [...] C [...]no [...] ­p [...] [...] & [...]um [...] that seq [...] & [...]? g [...]atul [...] lum e [...], [...] l [...] [...]r. [...] C [...]st [...] [...] & [...]nata [...]g [...]ne p [...]ar. and seek not to make justice odious with such nick-names of tyranny and persecution. As great a woe is due to such as call good evill, as to them that call evill good.

Quid facit in pectore, &c. What doth the wild­nesse of wolves, and the madnesse of dogs (saith S. Cy­prian) in Christian breasts? the poyson of serpents, and the cruelty of beasts, why should they lodge there? Would ye be counted Saints? what have Saints to doe with such angry and uncharitable passions? tant aene animis coelestibus irae? would ye be estee­med men of the spirit? what fellowship hath the meek Spirit of God with the malicious spirit of the devill? Spiritus Dei nec mendax, nec mordax, the [Page 55] Spirit of God, neither belies nor bites, as they doe who call deserved punishments persecutions: Hier. ep. ad Vigil. for Nonest crudelitas pro Deo pietas, Zeale for God and the Churches peace, is no cruelty, saith S. Hierome.

And so I come to my last Consectary.

Ceremonies and orders imposed by Church gover­nours on inferiour ministers and people, 5. Consectary must be obey­ed: For power in them to enjoyne, by the law of Relatives inferres in us a necessity to obey.

There are 3. sorts of things and actions (saith Aug. l. 3. de lib. Arb. c. 18, 19 S. Austin.)

1. Some intrinsecally and essentially good, which cannot bee evill at any time; such are vertues and vertuous acts; which, though they may be accom­panied with evill ends, and so non redundare in per­sonam, not redound to the good of the doer, can never be bad.

2. Some internally and essentially evill; which are not therefore evill, because prohibited, as the eating of the forbidden tree, and Sauls sparing of the Amalekites were; but prohibited because evill, as perjury, murder, adultery, and other sins against the light of nature.

3. Other things there are of a middle nature, neither good nor evill in themselves, but easily changeable into good or evill by concomitant cir­cumstances. Of this sort are Rites and ceremonies, ordained by the Church to bee used in or about Gods service. In themselves, they are like fastings, watchings, and such other bodily castigations, which (considered in the naked act) are affirmed to bee unprofitable, and distinguished from true godlinesse, [Page 56] 1 Tim. 4.8. neither pleasing nor displeasing to God: yet, sub mandato, as they are by lawfull au­thority enjoyned, they become necessary, and attin­gunt conscientiam, lay an obligation of obedi­ence on the conscience. For we reade, that Idolo­thytes, things strangled, and blood, though they were in themselves indifferent meates, and might be ea­ten or not eaten without offence of conscience; yet when they had the stamp of a negative com­mand upon them, and were for certaine reasons prohibited by the Apostles, they were called neces­sary things, Acts 15.28. It seemes good, &c. to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; Necessary, for the avoiding of scandall; necessary through the command of the Apostles, restraining their use for the time, though in themselves indif­ferent. And S. Paul exhorting to obedience of authority, saith, Ye must be subject, not because of wrath only, but for conscience sake, Rom. 13.5. gi­ving us to understand, that even these smaller things, when they are once commanded, doe reach the conscience, and cannot be omitted without some violation of it. Necessity of obedience ariseth sometimes ex natura rei, from the nature of the thing commanded, as in all morall precepts; some­times ex vi mandati, from the power by which they are enjoyned, as in all positive laws and commands, whether civill or ceremoniall. And so it doth here, to wit, from a double power.

• 1. The power of the Governour commanding these things to be done.
• 2. The power of God authorizing him to com­mand, [Page 57] and obliging inferiours to obey.

Obedience then to these smaller things of the law, these appendices of Gods service, ( Surplesse, Hood, standing up at the Creed, kneeling at the Communion, the Crosse in baptisme, and bowing at the name of Iesus) is no arbitrary and indiffe­rent thing. But it is the part of ever private man, Ca [...]. 30. both minister and other, reverently to retaine the true use of these things prescribed by publique authority; considering, that things of themselves [...] different, doe in some sort alter their natures, when they are either commanded or forbidden by a lawfull magistrate; and may not be omitted at every mans pleasure, contrary to the law, when they be commanded; nor used when they are prohibited. They are the last words of our 30. Canon, and a confirmation of my point.

Let every soule (saith S. Paul) be subject to the higher powers; the words are not permissive, Rom 13. let eve­ry one that will, subject himselfe to authority, but imperative, let every one as he ought, submit himselfe. And, let every soule; here is no liberty for libertinisme in any: none must think himselfe too great, or too good to yeeld obedience to his superiours, all without exception, or exemption, must doe their commands. And therefore I won­der how those that seem to make a conscience of other sinnes, can make no conscience of this, but rather make it a point of conscience to lye under this guilt, and be rebellious against their lawfull Pastors in these things. Obey them (saith the same Apostle, Heb 13.17.) that have the rule over you, and submit your selves: the persons here pointed [Page 58] at, are Bishops and Prelates of the Church, as the following words doe shew, (for to them alone doth the care of mens soules directly and properly belong) and the duty which all inferiours owe to them, is obedience, which therefore S. Paul doth not barely commend, but peremptorily charge upon them. But a place that may be instead of all others to inforce obedience to the laws of the Church, and a full and ample obedience also to all good laws is, that Text in S. Matthew, where our Saviour saith: The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seate: Mat. 23 2. all therefore whatsoever they bid you ob­serve, that observe and doe, &c. These words there­fore must a little be examined, and pressed upon our refractory brethren. First then, who are the persons to whom subjection is here injoyned? the Scribes and Phrisees; but who were they?

What is meant by Scribes and Pharisees. Scribe in Scripture is a name of office or calling, and signifies 3. sorts of men. 1. A Scrivener, one that liveth by writing, so Psal. 45. 1. My tongue is the tongue of a ready writer. 2. A Secretary of State, in this sense Shebna is called a Scribe, Esay 36.3. 3. An officer in the Church, an expounder and tea­cher of the Scriptures; in this sense Ezra the Priest is said to be a ready Scribe in the Law of Moses, Ezra 7.6. .i. a skilfull interpreter: so it is also ta­ken Mat. 13.52. Every Scribe which is instructed to the kingdome of heaven, &c. And in this last sense it is to be taken here.

Pharisee, is a name of Sect or Order, and the Pharisees were a fraternity among the Iews, that li­ved by peculiar rules, and in a stricter manner [Page 59] than did others. As we may see Acts 26.5. where S. Paul sayes, After the straitest sect of our religion, I lived a Pharisee. Of these Pharisees some were Clergy-men, Scribes, and expounders of the law, as it appeares, Iohn 3.10, 11. where Nicodemus is called a Pharisee, and a master or teacher in Israel, and Acts 5.34. where Gamaliel is called a Pha­risee, and a Doctor of the law, .i. an expounder of the Scripture. So that these two differed, as the Secular and Regular Priests, they lived after a diver, manner yet both of them were Teachers, and in spirituall things Rulers and Masters of the people.

We see who the persons are to be obeyed. But why must they be obeyed? because, saith Christ, They sit in Moses seat. ¹ We reade of a twofold seate, peculiar to persons of quality and eminency of place.

1. A seate of civill government, What is meant by Moses chayre. belonging to Kings and Iudges, as may be seen Psal. 122.5. There are set Thrones of judgement.

2. A seate of doctrine and spirituall Iurisdiction, proper to the Priests and heads of the Church; for such were wont to sit when they taught the peo­ple, and gave judgement, as our Saviour intimates, Mat. 26.55. I sate daily among you, teaching in the Temple.

The first of these seats was usually called the Throne of David, because he was the first establisht King, to whom God had appointed a succession of children to be Kings after him: but this latter seat, the Chaire of Moses, because he was the first that [Page 60] received the law from God, and published it to the people.

2. To sit in these seats is, to succeed these per­sons in authority; to sit in Davids Throne, is to suc­ceed him in his kingdome, and therefore Salomon is said to sit in the throne of David his father, be­cause hee did succeed him in his royall govern­ment: and to sit in the chaire of Moses, is to have the place and office of instructing and governing the people in things concerning God. So that our Saviours reason to urge the people to obedience is, the Scribes and Pharisees are the authorized tea­chers and masters of Israel; therefore you must bee ruled by them, and submit unto them.

Authority how far to be obeyed.But thirdly, how far were the people to obey them? Whatsoever they bid you observe (saith Christ) that observe and doe.

These words though in their forme they be uni­versall, yet in their sense they are particular, and must be restrained by their matter. The Papists take them without any limitation, in a most ample sense, to gain credit to the Popes infallibility. Others in opposition to them girt them up too short, and say, that our Saviours meaning was, that the peo­ple should obey them in all things which they taught out of the law of Moses. But if this were all the meaning, then they had been bound to heark­en to these Doctors sitting in Moses chayre, no further than to every Iustice sitting on the bench, than to every Taylor sitting on his shopboard, yea, and then the flock were no more bound to obey their Pastor, than the Pastor were to obey his flock; [Page 61] for if they admonish them to do any thing which is commanded in Moses law, they were bound to obey it; not because they said it, but because Mo­ses did say it before. And if we thus construe the words, then what shall become of this illation of our Saviour, because they sit in Moses seate, there­fore whatsoever they bid you doe, doe it? But what then is the meaning of these words? viz. That they should obey them in all things belonging to the place and authority of Moses his successours; In omnibus ad Cathedram pertinentibus, in all things which the chaire ought to prescribe them: as when servants and children are commanded to obey their masters and parents in all things, Col. 3.20, 22. It is meant, In omnibus quae pertinent ad jus domina­tivae potestatis, saith Aug. 22. q. 104. art. 5. ad 1. Aquinas, in all things which appertaine to masters and parents, right and autho­rity to command. Now they had authority to command:

1. Whatsoever was within the verge of their owne calling.

2. Whatsoever was not repugnant to superiour laws of God, or the State in which they lived, to which being but subordinate and delegated rulers, themselves were subject as well as their people.

Put all these now together, and the meaning of our Lord will appeare to be, That in all things belonging to their office and authority, the people were to obey the Scribes and Pharisees, who were their spi­rituall Pastors and Governours, because the office of instructing and prescribing was committed to them.

And from this charge resulteth most evidently [Page 62] this faire conclusion, that it is the duty of people to submit themselves to the directions and prescripti­ons of their Bishops and spirituall rulers, who suc­ceed a greater than Moses, Christ and his Apostles, in the oversight and government of the Church, in all such things as they perswade or prescribe not con­trary to the word of God, and the established go­vernment wherein they live. And consequently, it belongs to us that are inferiours (whether mi­nisters or people) to submit to those orders and Ceremonies in the Church, which are in the power and hands of our Prelates to prescribe.

Quest. But what if they passe their bounds, and com­mand us things not lawfull.

Answ. Our Ceremo­nies are rightly qua­lified.I answer, 1. If wee bee sure that at any time they doe so, we are not to obey them; for whether it be better to obey God or man, judge yee, saith S. Pe­ter, Acts 4.19.

2. In determining Rites and Ceremonies (which are the subject of our discourse) there is no just cause to feare that.

1. Because the constitution and specification of things of this nature, (as hath been proved,) ap­pertaines to Ecclesiasticall power; and by the Kings Prerogative Royall, and supreme authority in causes Ecclesiasticall) was granted and confirmed un­to the Bishops of our Church under the great seale of England, as we may see in his last Majesties De­claration set downe before and after the booke of Canons.

2 Because the Rites in use among us, have all those conditions in them, with which lawfull and [Page 63] comely ceremonies ought (as I have said) to bee qualified. They are but few, such as have beene least abused, such as may be altered when authori­ty sees cause, and therefore not esteemed of equall rank to the law of God: such also as are neither dark nor dumb ceremonies, but carry their signifi­cation in their foreheads, and therefore not easily li­able to any great abuse: they are such too, as are imposed on us, without contempt or prejudice to other Churches, that use them not; as our Church hath been pleased, for the preventing of idle ca­vils, and the satisfaction of scrupulous mindes, with much wisdome and tendernesse, Whether they must be obey­ed with a doubting of conscience. Quest. 2 Answ. to declare her selfe in the Preface before our book of Common-prayer.

But what if we doubt (may some say) whether these Rites be lawfull and good, or no, must wee then obey?

1. After so long a time, and such good meanes of information, it is not fit that any should doubt, nor likely that many do doubt without much wil­fulnesse. Confer. at Hamp. Court. pag 66. It is to be feared that some of them which pretend weaknesse and doubting, are strong enough, if not head-strong, and such as thinke themselves able to teach the King, and all the Bishops of the Land: they are not my words, but the speech of a King, even our late Soveraigne Lord of happy memory.

2. Obedience must be yeelded to things com­manded (and consequently to these) notwithstan­ding doubting. If a doubt be only speculative, of the lawfulnesse of such things as lie in a mans own liberty to do or forbeare, then it is the safest course [Page 64] not to doe them; for as (according to the Italian proverb) that meate which a man doth not eate, will not hurt him; so such things as he forbeares, will not offend his conscience: nay, in such a case, to doe any thing doubtingly is a sinne, as the Apostle tells us, Rom. 14.23. He that doubteth is damned if he eate, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith, is sinne. But if the doubt be practicall and the matter of it a thing commanded by superi­ors (as these things are, of which we are now spea­king) that doubting doth neither infer nor excuse our disobedience. Such a man as is troubled with this kinde of doubting, if he have time and means, should expell the doubt, that he may yeeld obedi­ence where he oweth it, with cheerefulnesse. But if he will not, or cannot expell it, the things en­joyned he must doe, the doubt remaining. For, that lawfull authority is to be obeyed, is certain, that this or that thing commanded by that authority is unlawfull, is doubtfull: Now when a doubt stands in competition for mastership with a cleare case, the doubt in all reason must yeeld, and that which is cleare and certaine must be done; for è malis mini­mum, of two hard choyces the best and safest is to bee made. Aug. ep. 86. ad Casul [...]a. Episco­po tuo in hisce noli resistere, & quod facit ips [...], sine ullo scru­pulo sectare. And therefore what S. Austin sayes to Ca­sulanus, I say to every one, Episcopo tuo in hisce, &c. withstand not thy Diocesan in these things, but what he doth, without scruple imitate; what he commands, obey.

But what doe I talke of obeying in this licenti­ous age; it being such, that it is almost accounted a fault unpardonable to preach for subjection to the [Page 65] Churches Hierarchy; and he esteemed the purest man that is the greatest stickler against it. But the spirit of contention will not alwayes raigne; it is pitty it should: and therefore in hope to pre­vaile (at least with some) I say againe, in the words of S. Hierome, Esto subjectus Pontifici tuo, & quasi animae parentem suscipe. Be subject to thy Bishop, and reverence him as the father of thy soule.

Three sorts I should here perswade to obedience; Our selves of the Clergy, our Church-officers, and our people. But because the submission of the two last, for the most part stands and falls in ours, I should hope I might the more easily winne them, if I could but prevaile with you (my brethren) for a compleate and cheerfull conformity.

Omne malum ab Aquilone, Disobedience to Church-governours begins at the Clergy. if there be disaffecti­on in our people, it begins too often at the San­ctuary, for like priest, like people, saith the Prophet. The forming of childrens mindes is much in the power of the nurse or mother, who gives them suck, and brings them up; and so are our peoples manners in these things sutable to our molds.

If we shall take liberty to break unsavory jests upon the reverend Fathers of our Church, and their officers, and to make our selves and others merry with talking of the Idolatry, the adultery, the murder and the felony of the Crosse, and other ce­remonies, as sometimes Parker, (whether more foolishly or prophanely) did: if we make our Pulpits Pasquills, in them presuming with a sad face of seeming piety to traduce our Superiours, and cast our humorous and discontented aspersions in [Page 66] their faces; if wee leave out the crosse when wee Christen (to pleasure a friend, or gain a bribe) and the surplesse when we come to minister before the Lord, and omit such other ceremonies as require our personable and exemplary obedience; will not our people that hang upon our hands and lips, and see and heare what we doe, doe likewise? If our breasts shall daily runne downe with such infecting stuffe, what can be expected, but that our people which lye sucking at them, should prove a crazie generation?

And can it be thought, that if we (who are the watchmen of our people, and if we spie a lion com­ming upon them, a sinne ready to ensnare them, should tell them so) do either dissemble, or, which is worse, incourage the sin of perjury in our Church-wardens for our owne bad ends, their bills should give in true evidence, and make a faithfull report of Parish-disorders? It cannot bee, and therefore some, whom it too much concernes, may well complaine, and cry out with the Prophet, O my peo­ple, they that leade thee, cause thee to erre, Esay 3.12.

Not at the people except first perver­ted.But me thinkes I heare Aaron charging the peo­ple with his sin, the people, thou knowest, are set on mischiefe, Exod. 32.22.

And Ieremy complaining, that the Prophets pro­phesie falsly, and the people love to have it so, Ier. 5.31. It should seeme, the root of inconformity lyes in them.

True it is, some ministers deny, or curtall their conformity, and the people love to have it so. But what people? a people Juven Sat. 14.— Velocius & citius nos Corrumpunt vitiorum ex­amp [...] domesti­ca magnis Cum subeant ani­mos authori­bus. marred in their making, [Page 67] catechized by their parents, or Pastors with false principles, and taught to beleeve, that the Bishops are limbs of Antichrist, the Surplesse a rag of Popery, Conformity a mark of the Beast; that every good man must abhorre them, and pray to the King of the Church to sweep them out of his sanctuary: such people love to have it so. And therefore it con­cernes us ministers, who should be examples to our flocks in all good things, as S. Peter saith, 1 Pet. 5.3. 1 To looke to our own conformity. 2 To teach our people throughly the point of obedience.

1. We must looke to our owne conformity, Considerati­ons perswa­ding to con­formity. and begin the reformation of disorder at our selves; and to this, three things (me thinkes) should move us:

1. Our subscription to the Articles of our Church, and the booke of common prayer, by which wee have (ex animo) confessed two things: 1. that it is in the power of the Church, (and consequently of ours) to decree Rites and ceremonies: 2. that our service book containes nothing in it repugnant to the word of God, nothing that may not be lawfully used, and by every one submitted to: and that which follows upon this, is, that our Ceremonies and orders, justified and imposed in the booke of common-prayer, are agreeable to Gods word, and to be used by us. If we now after our often subscription to these things, shall refuse or omit the use of them in our practises, will not there be a grosse in­consistency between our judgements and behaviours? doe we not condemne our selves in that which we allow? a course which God will never blesse, as [Page 68] we may see Rom. 14.22. Blessed is he that condem­neth not himselfe in that which he alloweth.

2. That voluntary and speciall obligation which we have brought upon our selves in our ordinati­ons, should likewise work with us. For in the book of ordination (which wee have also by our subscription approved) to the Priests and Deacons ready to be ordered, is put this Question; Will you reverently obey your Ordinary, and other chiefe ministers to whom the government and charge of you shall be committed, following with a glad minde and will their godly admonitions & judgements, &c? The answer is affirmative and promissory; We will, the Lord being our helper: and this promise wee doe not only make, but ratifie in the oath of Ca­nonical obedience, which on sundry occasions we take. So that every one of our tribe is held with a double bond. 1 A common bond of subjection to superiours, as we are subordinate and inferiour per­sons: ² A particular bond of oath and promise, as wee are ministers. Now if to break that generall bond of obedience which lies on all inferiours, be a violation of authority, a sin to which the guilt of damnation is annexed, Rom. 13.2. to breake that awfull tye of a vow and voluntary promise, must needs be a greater sinne, and accompanied with a heavier guilt. Solemne and deliberat promises are not like Samsons green cords, easie to be snapt a­sunder; but strongly binde, either to performance, or punishment.

Thirdly, if we fling off these considerations yet let respect to our peoples welfare (over whose souls [Page 69] we are set to watch, and for whom we must give an account) win us to obedience. How can the dis­gracing and impugning of good orders, and the ma­king of factions and divisions in the Church, stand with their good? Was it well with the Iews, when Korah and their Levites affronted their Prince and Priest, Moses and Aaron? Did not the flame of Gods fiery indignation break out upon them for their disloyalty and schisme, Numb. 16. to the destruction of a great part of the congregation? Can it bee well with the body, when the principall members con­spire against their Heads, and will not be guided by them?

Schisme hath ever been the bane of Churches, and irregularity the beginner of Schisme, yea of He­resie too, and all kinde of confusion, if S. Cyprian may be beleeved, who attributes all the mischiefs that usually befall Churches to this Fury. Hac sunt initia haereticorum, Cypr. cp. ad Ro­gat. (saith the Father) & orius at (que) conatus schismaticorum malè cogitantium, ut sibi placeant, ut praepositum superbo tumore contemnant. Self-pleasing pride, and scornfull despising of the heads of the Church, is the viper from which both schismes and heresies draw their first breath. Let us therfore by our submission to our Churches Rites commend that humble obedience to our people, which they owe to their Fathers in Christ, their rulers in the Church.

Next, we must looke to our people, People per­verted hard­ly perswaded to obedience. and winne them to a reverent respect, as of God and his laws, so of Gods Vicegerents in the Church, and their ordinances. It is a hard task I confesse, to [Page 70] draw a perverted, and prejudging multitude to a love and liking of such things as crosse their Cate­chisme. Some nobler spirits (perhaps) will be con­tent dediscere benè quod didicerunt non benè, (as Ly­rinensis speakes) to unlearne bad lessons which they have been taught: but weaker mindes are (for the most part) too obstinate retainers of the precepts and practises of their first breeders; as the Javen [...]at. 14.— V [...]us & al [...], Forsitan [...] spernant juvenes quibus [...]e benign [...]— — [...]t meliore luto sinxit prae­cordia Titan: Sed reliqu [...]s fu­gienda patrum vestig [...]ducunt, Et monstrata diu veretis u [...] ­hit orbita cul­pae. Poet could see, who therefore Id ibid. — Nil dictu faedum, vis [...] (que) haec [...]mi [...] [...]ng v—l [...]a qu [...] pu [...] est. and —Maxima deb [...]tur pu [...]ro [...]everent [...], &c. counsells parents to be very carefull of what they say or do in the pre­sence of their children. Wee use to say, that quartane agues, and hypocondriack diseases, are lu­dibria medicorum, the reproaches of Physitians; be­cause by reason of the stubborn humours that be­get them, and the firm footing which they have taken in the body, they are seldome cured. What is said of them, may as truly bee said of this evill sicknesse of faction and undutifulnesse; for where by the power of bad presidents, the poyson of bad principles, and its owne congruity to our proud and lawlesse dispositions, it hath gotten head, it will not easily yeeld up its possession. Yet as Physiti­ans give not over such patients, but by contempera­ting Juleps first, and by gentle purgatives next, lead out that stubborn stuffe which foments these maladies: Yet must be attempted. so must the servant of the Lord (whose duty is with patience and gentlenesse to instruct the refractary, and waite, if God at any time will give them repentance, 2 Tim. 2.24, 25.) First by perswa­ding more moderate and honourable conceits up­on their people of governours and government, and then by convincing them with substantiall [Page 71] reasons, of the decency of our prescribed Rites, and the necessity of using them being enjoyned; endeavour to conjure out the evill spirit of presumption, and to bring in the meek and good spirit of obedience.

This is the ready way to bee ill thought of, (may some peradventure think or say) and (which is worse) to be ill provided for too, and therefore Diana must not downe, disobedience must be wincked at.

It is most true indeed (witnesse experience) that if a man once shew himself in the cause & quarrell of the Church, and doe but heartily wish for an unity & unifor­mity of opinion & practise, that friends, maintenance, respect, all forsake him. And this is the cause why some cannot see the truth, others dissemble their opinions in this particular. How can ye beleeve (saith Christ) who seek for honour one of another? Ioh. 5. Implying, that po­pularity is a blinder; it makes men unwilling to study such doctrines as are in esteeme with the people, lest they should see their falshood, & be forced to forsake them; and it perverts their understandings, and makes them judge with favour the Diana's of the people, and with rancour the contrary. As it puts out the eyes, so it ties the tongue, as we may see, Joh. 12.42, 43. Many of the chiefe rulers beleeved on him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confesse him, lest they should be put out of the Synagogue. For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. As it made these rulers, so it makes a great many in our dayes dissemble their judgement, and let their people go on in their heady and disobe­dient practises. But God keep filthy avarice and vain-glory from his own Portion. If by doing our duties, and seeking our peoples good and the Churches peace, we [Page 72] can get either name, or means, let us esteeme it a preci­ous oyntment & a blessing of God; but if we must lose them, except we will dissemble our opinions, deny our obedience, & let our people run to ruine for want of warning and instruction, let them goe; the interest is too great, and he that makes this match, will be a loser in the end; lucrum in crumenâ, this gain in the purse, will be damnum in conscientiâ, losse in the conscience. We are the servants of Iesus Christ by speciall commission, & must not therefore be guided in our doings & sayings by popular humours; for Christ and the world are con­trary masters; & if we should yet please men, we cannot bee the servants of Christ Gal. 1.10.. It is a kinde of martyrdome to lose any thing in a good cause, dulce est & decorum est pro patria mori, it is an honourable thing to die for ones countrey, much more noble is it, for the good of the Church, mori mundo, to die to the world, and the vani­ties of it. And therefore with the woman in the Revela­tion, trampling Lunā & sublunaria, the moon & all things beneath it under our feet, & sacrificing credit & profit to truth and peace, let our best endeavour be to restore our ill-affected brethren & people as obedient children to the Church, that so wee may serve the Lord (as the Prophet phraseth it) with one shoulder, & live together under our present happy government (which God of his mercy long continue) a peaceable and quiet life in all godliness & honesty. Which God grant for his Sons sake. To whom with thee O Father, & blessed Spirit, three glorious Persons, and one eternall God, be rendred (as is most due) all honour, praise, and glory for Ever­more.