IT is necessary for a Minister to Conclusion. conforme to the Ceremonies prescri­bed in the Church of England, rather then to suffer Depriuation.

Quest. 1 Two questions touching this con­clusion there are to be discussed. The first, whether a man may with a good conscience suffer himselfe to bee depriued or suspended of his Ministry, for not conforming to the Ceremonies pre­scribed and established in the present Church of England: Such as the Surplesse, Crosse in Baptisme, Kneeling at Communion, Ring in Marriage, and the like?

2 The second, whether a man ought not rather of con­science to conforme to all the Ceremonies prescribed in the Church of England, then to suffer himselfe to be depriued of his Ministry?

Answ. 1 These questions depend the one vpon the other, so that the answere of the one giueth answer to the other: There­fore the former question I answer negatiuely: That name­ly, A man cannot (as I suppose) with a good conscience suffer himselfe to bee depriued of his Ministry, for not con­forming to the Ceremonies.

2 To the latter question I say, that a man is bound in con­science rather to conforme to all the Ceremonies of the [Page 2] Church of England, then suffer his Ministry to be suspen­ded or depriued.

The reason of which answers stands in this, Because he shall sin against God in not conforming, and in suffering himselfe for that cause to be depriued of his Ministration in the Church. That he shall sinne in so doing will appeare by these two reasons.

Reason 1 First, that the practise of suffering depriuation for not conforming to the ceremonies of this our Church, and the doctrine thereof is directly against the Word of God. This also is proued by two points.

1 Because it is against the doctrine and practise of the holy Apostles of Christ.

2 Because it is against the grounds of Gods Word: and they are two.

1 One ground is this: where two duties doe meet, a grea­ter and a lesse, whereof both cannot bee done at the same time, the lesser dutie must yeeld vnto the greater: But this doctrine of suffering depriuation for not conforming teacheth, and the practise thereof causeth to neglect a grea­ter duty for the performing of a lesser: Therefore it see­meth to bee an errour in doctrine, and a sin in practise.

2 A second ground is this; All things must bee done in loue, 1. Cor. 6. 14. But this doctrine and practise is against the royall Lawe of loue: and therefore seemeth to bee vnlawfull.

Reason 2 The second maine reason is this: For that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation, for not conforming to the Ceremonies of our Church, or the like, tendeth to condemne all true Churches, all faithfull and sound tea­chers, all sincere Christians of all times and places, since the time of the Apostles of Christ, which haue taught and practised otherwise.

These things being directly and plainely proued, it will (I doubt not) appeare that to suffer depriuation or suspen­sion, for refusing to conforme to the Ceremonies pre­scribed, [Page 3] is a sinne: Whereupon will follow these conclu­sions.

1 That seeing those Ministers haue sinned, at least a sinne of ignorance, who haue suffered depriuation for refusing to conforme to the Ceremonies prescribed, they ought of conscience to offer conformitie to the Ceremonies, that they may returne to their Ministry againe.

2 That such as not conforming to the Ceremonies, doe remaine in their places vndepriued, are bound in consci­ence to conforme vnto the Ceremonies, rather then to suf­fer themselues to be depriued or suspended.

3 That such as are profitably, or probably fitted with gifts vnto the Ministry, and doe withall desire to enter into that calling, are also tied in conscience before God to promise and practise conformity to the Ceremonies prescribed, ra­ther then refusing so to doe, to bee kept out of the Mi­nistery.

4 That such Christians as doe make conscience of the Ce­remonies, as kneeling at the Communion, admitting their children to be baptised with the Crosse, hearing of publike prayer, or preaching in a Surplesse, are of conscience to ad­mit of these things, and to practise them, rather then to ab­sent themselues, or to be depriued of the worships of God, and that otherwise they shall sinne against God. It remai­neth therefore that the former reasons be proued, which by Gods helpe I will performe in order.

Arg. 1 Reason 1 The doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation, and losse of Ministry is directly against the Word of GOD, which no man will deny to be sinfull and erronious. This assertion is confirmed by the probation of two farther points.

1 Because such doctrine and practise is contrary to the doc­trine and practise of the Apostles of Christ.

2 Because it is against the grounds of Gods Word.

1 Concerning the first point, namely, that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation, especially vpon the [Page 4] reasons vrged against our Ceremonies, is contrary to the doctrine of the holy and inspired Apostles, and so by con­sequence is an errour and sin: I proue it by two reasons.

Because ⁽¹⁾ the holy Apostles, with the whole Church at Ierusalem ⁽²⁾ by inspiration of the holy Ghost and com­mandement of God ⁽³⁾ did practise themselues, ⁽⁴⁾ and caused others to practise, ⁽⁵⁾ yea aduised one another, ⁽⁶⁾ and inioy­ned or commanded ⁽⁷⁾ whole Churches the practise of ⁽⁸⁾ as euill and inconuenient Ceremonies ⁽⁹⁾ in sundry & maine respects, as in their iudgement ours are, namely in num­ber, ⁽¹⁰⁾ nature, ⁽¹¹⁾ vse, ⁽¹²⁾ and euill effects, and ⁽¹³⁾ that for rea­sons equiuolent or inferiour to the auoyding of depriuati­on. This proposition I thus proue in the seuerall members. 1. The holy Apostles and whole Church at Ierusalem] namely Peter, Acts 15. 7. Iames, Acts 15. 13. & 21. 18. 21. 24. 25. Paul, Acts 15. 2. 22. & 18. 18. & 21. 26. 1. Cor. 9. 10. Barnabas, Acts 15. 2. 22. Iudas, Sylas, which were Pro­phets, Acts 15. 22. 23. The Apostles, all the Elders, and whole Church, Acts 15. 4. 6. 23. and 21. 18. 25. 2. By inspiration of the holy Ghost, and commaundement of God] as appeareth, Acts 15. 28. It seemed good to the ho­ly Ghost and to vs. Also Iames and the Elders, Acts 21. 18. that determined before one practise of conformity to Iewish Ceremonies, Acts 21. 25. By inspiration of the holy Ghost, Acts 15. 13. 28. did afterwards perswade Paul to another practise of conformity to Iewish Rites, Acts 21. 23. 24. And the things written and determined by the A­postles, euen concerning matters of order in the Church, are the commandements of God: 1. Cor. 14. 37. 3. Did practise themselues:] For Paul shaued himselfe, and made a vow, Act. 18. 18. Paul purified himselfe, contributed, and entred into the Temple, & declared the accomplishment of the dayes of the purification, vntill that an offering should bee offered for euery one of them. Acts 21. 24. 26. Paul vnto the Iew became as a Iew, to the men vnder the Law, as though he had been vnder the Law, 1. Cor. 9. 20. 4. And [Page 5] caused others to practise:] For Paul circumcised Timothy: Acts 16. 3. Paul took the men, and was purified with them, Acts 21. 24. 5. Aduised one another:] For Iames and the Elders perswaded Paul thus to conforme: Doe this that we say vnto thee, take them (the votaries) purifie thy selfe with them, contribute with them, that they may shaue their heads, Acts 21. 23. 24. 6. Enioyned or commanded the practise of Ceremonies:] For thus did the councell of Ieru­salem, They laide on them those necessary things, from which you shall doe well to keepe your selues, Acts 15. 28. 29. This constitution was called the Apostles and El­ders Decrees ordained by them: Acts 16. 4. Iames and the Elders say, Wee haue determined and written that they obserue no such things, but that they abstaine from bloud strangled, &c. Acts 21. 25. 7. To whole Churches] of diuers and farre distant Countries and Nations, namely to the Gentiles in Antiochia, Syria, Cilicia: Acts 15. 23. 8. As matters good and necessary in that case:] For it is sayde, it seemed good to the holy Ghost. These necessary things, Acts 5. 28. From which if you keepe your selues you shall do well, vers. 29. 9. And yet as euill and incon­uenient in sundry maine respects as they can imagine ours, namely in number] for they were diuers, namely circum­cision, Acts 16. 3. Shauing the head, Acts 18. 18. & 21. 24. Purifying, Acts 21. 24. 26. Vowing, Acts 18. 18. & 21. 23. Contributing, Acts 21. 24. Offering sacrifices for the per­sons purified, Acts 21. 23. Obseruation of the Iewish Sab­baoth, Acts 13. 14. 42. & 18. 4. & 17. 2. Abstaining from bloud, Acts 15. 29. Abstaining from strangled, Acts 15. 29 10. And in nature] for they are called by the holy Ghost, Needlesse shadowes, Col. 2. 20. Yokes not to bee borne, Acts 15. 10. Burthens, Acts 15. 28. Traditions burdening. Col. 2. 20. Ordinances of the world, Col. 2. 20. Commandements and doctrines of men, Col. 2. 22. Tur­ning from the truth, Tit. 1. 14, Voluntary religion or will worships, shewes of religion, Col. 2. 23. Impotent and beg­garly [Page 6] rudiments, Gal. 4. 9. 10. And for the further con­firmation of this member, looke the proofe of the next immediate reason proouing this first point. 11. In vse] First, for that they were most strictly pressed on the consci­ences of weake Christians by Iewish and contentious Bre­thren: for they were vrged ex necessitate salutis: Except ye bee circumcised after Moses maner yee cannot bee saued, Acts 15. 15. They would haue brought their consciences in bondage by them and yoaked them, Galat. 5. 1. 3. Acts 15. 10. They would haue condemned them for the not v­sing them, Col. 3. 16. Secondly, they were more dange­rously accounted necessary euen to saluation, Acts 15. 1. Thirdly, they were perniciously abused for confirmation of most false, hereticall, and impious doctrines, as much as euer our Ceremonies could bee, or were by the Papists; as namely, that men are iustified by the workes of the Law, Gal. 2. 14-15-16 and 5. 4. That euery Christian is bound strickly on his saluation to keepe the whole Law, Gal. 5. 3. That there is no hope of saluation without the vse of them, Acts 15. 1. That Christ the body was not yet come by con­tinuing the shadow, Col. 2. 16. 17. That they are to be con­demned who vse them not, Col. 2. 16. That the Kingdome of God standeth in them, Rom. 14. 17. Yea from Pauls preaching and practise it might bee argued by some, that a man may on occasion practise that, which practise he tea­cheth euery where against, Acts 21. 21. 23. 26. Fourthly, for the latitude and compasse of their spreading, it was both amongst them, neere and far from them euery where: Namely at Ierusalem, Acts 21. 17. 20. 21. Rome, Rom. 14. 2. 5. 17. Antioch, Acts 15. 23. Syria, Acts 15. 23. Cilicia, Acts 15. 23 Collossus, Col. 2. 16. 17. 20. 21. Creete, Tit. 11. 14. Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium, and those quarters, Acts 16. 1. 2. 3. 12. And euill effects,] For the vse and conti­nuance of them were the occasions of many pernicious ef­fects to such as abused them, which appeareth in this. First, they bondaged their Christian libertie, Gal. 4. 9. & 5. 1. 3. [Page 7] Secondly, they made Christ to profit them nothing, Gal. 5. 2. Thirdly, they made them to fall away from grace, Gal. 5. 4 Fourthly, they caused them to turne away from the truth, Tit. 1. 14. Galat. 2. 5. Fifthly, they hindered them from obeying the truth, Galat. 5. 7. Sixtly, they were occa­sion of condemnation to them as pressed them as necessa­rie Gal. 5. 10. Seuenthly, they leauenned the whole lumpe with sowernesse, Galat. 5. 9. Eightly, it occasioned Paul to feare least hee had bestowed his labour in vaine among his hearers Gal. 4. 10. 11. Ninthly, it occasioned Paul to wish them cut off which did disquiet the Church by them, Gal. 5. 12. Tenthly, they were occasion of Peters dissimulation, and Pauls iust reprouing of him, and were meanes to bring Barnabas, a man full of the holy Ghost, Acts 11. 24. and other Gentiles into their dissimulation, and to cause them not to goe the right way to the truth of the Gospell, Gal. 2. 11. 12. 14. Eleuenthly, they were fit meanes to put them besides their adoption and inheritance in heauen, Gal. 5. 10. 20. 21. 22. Lastly▪ they made as much stirre, strife, and con­tention among Brethren in the Church, yea much more then our Ceremonies haue done, if either wee respect the violence and bitternesse thereof, or the latitude and wide spreading of it in so many and farre distant Countries and Churches, Galat. 5. 10. 12. troubling and disquieting the Church. Act. 15. 24. 13. And for reasons equiuolent part­ly, and partly inferiour to the auoiding of depriuation:] For it appeareth that the Apostles vsed and inioyned the prac­tise of these Iewish inconuenient Ceremonies for these cau­ses. First, for the beleeuing Iewes, to keepe them from of­fence, being as yet zealous of the Law, and not rightly in­structed in the truth of the abrogation of the Legall Cere­monies by Christ, that they might not be occasioned to be drawne backe to Iudaisme, Acts 21. 20. 21. 24. For this cause hee circumcised Timothy, because of the Iewes, Acts 16. 1. 3. Secondly, for the vnbeleeuing Iewes, and that for two reasons. One reason was to winne them to the Gospell, [Page 8] 1. Cor. 9. 20. 21. 22. and to further their saluation, 1. Cor. 10. 32. 33. Another reason was to auoid the persecution of the froward and malicious Iewes, as also to redeeme the li­berty of his Ministry, and of the Gospell, which otherwise was like to be endangered, as fell out in the euent, Acts 21. 22. 27. 28. 30. 31. 32. Thirdly for necessitie, (for in that case they were necessary things, Act. 15. 28.) and expedient (for it seemed good to the holy Ghost, & in the practise of them in that case they did wel, Act. 15. 28. 29.) namely, to appease their bitter dissentions and vehement disputations in the Church, Acts 15. 2. 5. And to quiet the trouble and cum­ber of their mindes: as if one should say for the peace of the Church, Acts 15. 24. That thus the Churches might be established in the faith, and increase in number dayly, Acts 16. 4 5. As doubtlesse by Gods blessing ours would also doe, if either the Ceremonies might safely be remoued from the scandall of Papists, or if they were conformed vn­to by our depriued Brethren, till libertie of Ceremonies were granted by the Magistrate.

Out of this reason thus I argue;

If the Apostles by direction of the holy Ghost, and vp­on reasons of common and perpetuall equitie did practise themselues, and caused others to practise, yea aduised and inioyned (as matters good and necessary to be done) Cere­monies as inconuenient and euill in many maine and ma­teriall respects, as the Ceremonies inioyned and prescribed in our Church are supposed to be; then it followeth;

That to suffer depriuation for refusing to conforme to the ceremonies of our Church, is contrary to the doctrine and practise of the Apostles:

But the former is true as hath beene prooued:

Therefore the latter followeth also.

So much of the first reason, prouing that the doctrine & practise of suffering depriuation for refusing to conform to our prescribed Ceremonies, is contrary to the doctrine and practise of the Apostles, & so seemeth to be an error & a sin.

The second reason proouing this point is this: Because the same obiections in substance, and for the most part which are brought forth against our Ceremonies, to proue them simply and in nature sin, may be obiected and applied to the practise and doctrine of the Apostles, which was per­formed by direction of the holy Ghost, for those Iewish Ceremonies were Abridge­ment Lin­coln. fol. 17. 1. Humane inuentions:] for they left to be the commandements of God, and are called the tra­ditions, commandements and doctrines of men, Col. 2. 22. 21. 16. 17. Titus 1. 14. Ibid. 2. Of no necessary vse] seeing Christ was come which was the body, and they the shadow of things to come, Coloss, 2. 16. 17. Heb. 10. 1. And Paul taught euery where that the Iewish Ceremonies must bee left, Acts 21. 22. Ibid. 3. Abused to superstition:] for they were a­bused to the confirmation of most false and pernicious doc­trine, iustification by workes, Gal. 2. 3. 4. 12. 14. 15. 16. No saluation without them, Acts 15. 1. vt sup. Abrid. Lin­col. fol. 31. 4. Ceremonies significatiue, or of mystical signification:] Yea sacramentall Ceremonies indeed, and added to baptized persons,] For circumcision was a Sacrament, and all the Ceremonies of the Law were shadowes of things to come, Col. 2. 16. 17. Heb. 10. 1. Patternes, shadowes, similitudes of heauenly things, Heb. 8. 5. and 9. 23. The holy Ghost signified by them, Heb. 9. 8. And the signification of them, were inse­parable to the Iewes that beleeued not, as also to the weake beleeuing Iewes, who were not instructed throughly. Abrid. Lin­col. fol. 37. 5. Esteemed, imposed and obserued as parts of Gods wor­ship:] So they were by the Iewes esteemed, imposed, and obserued as necessary, Acts 15. 5. to saluation, Acts 15. 1. For which cause the zealous Iewes were violently offended with Paul, for teaching that Christians ought not to cir­cumcise their children, nor to liue after the legall customes, Acts 21. 21. 27. Yea, this argument might seeme to be pres­sed on the Apostles, who enioyned those burdensome Ce­remonies as good and necessarie, Acts 15. 28. 29. and conformed vnto them for their sake, and in the presence [Page 10] of such as did esteeme and hold them as worships of God, Acts 15, 1. 5. & 16. 3. & 21. 26. 44. 48. fol. 6. Swaruing from the generall rules and directions of the word for determining of Ceremonies,] not needfull or profitable to edification:] For how could Iewish ceremonies, which were antiquated, and either had no signification, being shadowes of things already come, or a false one, edifie the Church: nay, the euill doctrines which they established, and euill effects which they produced, serued rather to destroy, then to edi­fie the Church, yet their vse and yeelding serued to edifie by making way to the Churches peace, and furtherance of the Gospel. 44. 48. fol. 7 Not profitable for order:] For it had been most orderly to haue serued God by Legall Ceremonies vnder the Law, and Euangelical vnder the Gospel. It might seeme disorder to bring backe the Legall Ceremonies which were abolished, and to ioyne them with Gods worships in the Gospell: yet it was order to vse and practise them in that case, because it preuented the maine disorder and confusion that else might haue insued, namely discord of beleeuing Brethren, and suppressing of the Gospel. 44. 48. fol. 8 Not profitable for decency:] For what was more indecent, then for a Christian to vse idle, vnfruitfull, needlesse and beggarly ru­diments? For a Christian to bee shaued, circumcised, offer sacrifice, yet did this indecency vphold a higher decency, which was the establishment of faith, dayly increase of the number of Churches, Acts 16. 4. Which conformi­tie in our Ceremonies in the case of depriuation would also do. 45. 49. fol. 9. Offensiue many waies:] For first they might offend and grieue the beleeuing Gentiles, which neuer vsed them, and knew by the Apostles doctrine that they were to bee abolished, Acts 21. 21. Galat. 2. 3, 9, 12, 15. Secondly, they did so scandalize, and were such stumbling blockes to the beleeuing and weake Iewes, that they contended about them, as needfull to saluation, Acts 15. 15. And were violent against Paul in the defence of them, Acts 21. 21, 22, 27, 28. And ready to forsake the Christian faith about [Page 11] them, as perhaps some did. Thirdly, the hardned and vn­beleeuing Iewes might bee more hardened from Christia­nitie, and say, The Christian religion borroweth our Ceremonies, they decline and come backe to vs. Fourth­ly, the Apostles and the Church of God they were offen­ded, both in the violence of pressing the necessitie of these things by the Iewes, Acts 15. 24. As also in imposing that they did: For they were loath to lay any burthen, and the burthen that they layed was necessary for the state of the Church, Acts 15. 28. Besides they taught against the things they inioyned, that namely they ought not to bee vsed by Iewes and Gentiles, Acts 21. 21. Fiftly, to this we might adde, that they might tend, & in the euent did serue indeede, as meanes to infringe the Christian libertie:] For they were burdens, yokes, bondages, and opposite (as they were pressed by the Iewes) to the Christian libertie: Act. 15. 10, 28. Gal. 4. 9. 10. and 5. 1. yet the vse and practise of these things, by the direction of the Apostles, did procure the li­bertie of the Gospel, and the preaching thereof; like as con­formitie to our Ceremonies would doe to preuent or reco­uer the losse of their Ministery. To this adde againe, that those Ceremonies were very strictly inioined] by the Iewes as necessary to saluation: Act. 15. 1, 5. As ours are now; By the Apostles, as necessary for the peace of the Church, and freedome of the Gospel, Act. 15. 24, 28. and 21. 21, 27. In which respects the practise and conformitie to our Cere­monies may seeme necessary at this time for the appeasing of fraternall discord, and furtherance of the Gospel. And see­ing by the way these are the chiefest and maine arguments, which the depriued Ministers haue brought against the Ceremonies to proue them simply, and in their nature euil: let it be cōsidered by the iudicial & godly Reader, whether they might not vpon these grounds except against the Apo­stles prescription, and refuse the practise of those Iewish Ce­remonies, euen with the losse of ministry & interruption of the Church, as well as to suffer depriuatiō for refusing of the [Page 12] Ceremonies prescribed in the Church of England.

But from this point I argue thus;

Whatsoeuer Ceremonies are of humane inuention, of no necessary vse, abused to superstition, of misticall and spiritu­all signification; esteemed, imposed and obserued, as parts of Gods worship, swaruing from the generall rules of Gods word, not profitable for edification, order, or decencie, of fensiue many wayes to the godly, weake and wicked; in­fringing Christian libertie, strictly inioyned as necessary: such Ceremonies by the doctrine of the Ministers refusing conformitie, are simply and in nature euill, and could not be practised by any persons, no not the Apostles themselues, and that through the direction of the holy Ghost with­out sinne.

But the Iewish Ceremonies prescribed and practised, by the Apostles through direction of the holy Ghost, were of this nature and qualitie, in euery one of the points aboue named.

Therefore by the doctrine of the Ministers refusing con­formitie, in the case of depriuation, the Iewish Ceremonies prescribed and practised, by the Apostles through direction of the holy Ghost, were simply and in nature euill, and could not by them be practised without sinne. Or thus;

Whatsoeuer doctrine and practise, tendeth to accuse and condemne the inspired Apostles, in their inspired practise and doctrine, of teaching the practise, and of practising Ceremonies, in sundry maine respects, as vnlawfull as ours are pretended to bee, tendeth to accuse and condemne the Apostles, in their inspired practise and doctrine, for teach­ing and for practising things simply euill.

But this doeth the doctrine and practise, of suffering de­priuation, for refusing to conforme to our prescribed Ce­remonies.

Therefore the doctrine and practise of suffering depri­uation, for refusing to conforme to our Ceremonies, doeth directly tend to accuse the inspired Apostles, in their in­spired [Page 13] practise for teaching, and practising things simply euill. Whereupon I thus conclude;

Whatsoeuer doctrine or practise, doeth directly tend to accuse and condemne, the inspired Apostles for practising, teaching, and prescribing things simply euill, such doctrine and practise is erronious and sinnefull:

So doeth the practise and the doctrine, of suffering depri­uation, for refusing to conforme vpon the grounds al­leadged, as hath beene prooued:

Therefore the doctrine and practise, of suffering depri­uation, for refusing to conforme vnto our Ceremonies, is erronious and sinnefull.

To this that hath beene here alleadged, there are certaine obiections made by certaine godly, graue, and learned de­priued Ministers, which here I thinke fit to make answere vnto.

Obiection. The Apostles might doe many things, which wee may not doe, in respect of their immediate authoritie from God. Those cases were decreed by the holy Ghost, ours not so, they did it by the direction of the spirit: there is no propor­tion betweene their case and ours: they guided by the spirit, we not so. The Apostles could not erre, we subiect to error. It is no good consequent to say, they vsed such and such things, therefore we may: they had warrant for what they did, the holy Ghost gaue them warrant.

Answere. First it is to bee noted, that they who thus obiect against this reason, must needes relinquish the excuses and accusati­on of the Apostles, which others make for vsing the Iewish Ceremomnies vnlawfully: For the one affirming their practise to be vnlawfull, the other granting it to bee done by direction of the spirit, doe mistically ouerthrow one ano­ther, so that both cannot stand as true. This being obser­ued, I answere; First, if the Apostles were immediatly from God authorized, and did those things by direction of the holy Ghost, as vndoubtedly they did, wee may be the bol­der to immitate them in their practise, and in their doctrine, [Page 14] and in so doing wee shall not erre: For in so doing wee may say, wee doe no more about matters of Ceremonies, then the Apostles haue done before vs. It is a point wee wish the Church of Rome could say. Secondly, though wee may not immitate the Apostles in things peculiar to their office, persons and times: yet we may follow them, and are bound in conscience so to doe, in matters of common equitie and generall reason. For as the Apostles had warrant from the holy Ghost, so wee haue warrant from the example of the Apostles, and from the reasons, for which the holy Ghost mooued them to do those things. For the holy Ghost being euer the same, teacheth, and ruleth the Church by one and the same reason reuealed in his word, as well now as then. Now the Apostles in this case, did vrge the practise of these Ceremonies, not from their immediate authoritie from God, nor from inspiration onely of the holy Ghost: but by reasons and rules of common and perpetuall equitie, name­ly expediencie; It seemed good to the holy Ghost and vs, Acts 15. 28. and necessitie: these necessary things, Acts 15. 28. also to winne more, 1. Cor. 9. 19, 20, 21, 22. to further and propagate the Gospel, 1. Cor. 9. 23. By the which rules the holy Ghost doeth teach the Church, in the like cases of the Church, to follow the like example by the same generall rules: namely to practise the same Ceremonies in the like case, or other Ceremonies of like nature in other cases: no lesse then he doeth teach the Church to pray, and singin a language vnderstood from the generall rule of edi­fication. [Let all things in the Church be done to edificati­on] 1. Cor. 14. 12, 26. And for Prophets to speake one after another, not many at once: and for women to hold their peace in the Church, to auoyd confusion: from the gene­rall rule of order and honesty. [Let all things bee done honestly, and by order in the Church] 1. Cor. 14. 27, 30, 31, 34, 35, 40. Which may the rather appeare, because they be all cases of one nature, namely of order, and Cere­monie in the Church and worship of God, which I thinke [Page 15] a sufficient answere to this obiection.

Obiection. There is a great difference betweene the Ceremonies of the Church of England, and those prescribed by the Apo­stles, Master Parker of the Crosse. part 2. sect. 13. fol. 69. and at first ordained of God, and must haue honoura­ble buriall: for that our Ceremonies are farre worse in many respects and circumstances; As being Antichristian, more scandalous, more hurtfull, more dangerous, more strictly inioyned, then sometimes Gods commandements, these the inuentions of men, yea of Antichrist, &c. stubble and straw, or rather straw when they are at the best.

Answere. I know and grant there is a great difference, in many circumstances betweene the Iewish Ceremonies, and the Ceremonies of this our Church, but for answere I say; there is agreement betweene them, in the most part of those many things, whereby our Ceremonies are vrged and ac­cused to be simply euill and vnlawfull, as before appeareth, so that this obiection is nothing to the pointin question, or to giue direct answere to this argument. For my allegation of these things doeth confirme thus much: Namely that it is good and necessary to practise inconuenient, scandalous, and hurtfull Ceremonies in a case of superior reason, name­ly of procuring the Churches peace, and libertie of the Gospel and the like: which no man will deny, and I seeke no more. For admit these Ceremonies with vs in contro­uersie to be inconuenient, hurtfull, and scandalous more or lesse, it skilleth not, so long as they bee of no other nature, then those Iewish Ceremonies prescribed, and practised by the Apostles; (as hath beene prooued they are not) how will it be auoyded, but that in case of superior reason, as of auoyding depriuation of the Ministrie, they may lawfully, and needfully be practised, and that according to the minde of the holy Ghost, and the direction of the holy Scripture.

Obiection. But the Church of England, hath not the like causes and reasons, to prescribe and enioyne the present Ceremo­nies, as the Apostles had to prescribe the Iewish.

Answere. First, this obiection is nothing to the poynt in hand: [Page 16] For the question is heere, not whether our Church doth well to prescribe these Ceremonies: But whether such Ce­remonies being prescribed, as the Church conformed to by the Apostles decree in a case of necessitie, ought not to be conformed to by our depriued Ministers in a case of like or greater necessitie.

Secondly, But the Church of England in prescribing Preface to the book of com­mon Prayer, tit. Of Cere­monies. these Ceremonies, professeth a respect of winning and pro­fiting two sorts.

First, Some thinking it a matter of great conscience to depart from a piece of the least of their Ceremonies.

Secondly some new fangled would innouate all things, and despise the old, nothing liking them, but that which is new: therefore they thought it expedient to take away some such as were most apt to bee abused to superstition, and to retaine others: and in their practise they tooke away so ma­ny ceremonies, as time would serue quietly to doe it, the rest were reserued to keepe order, and quiet decipline in the Church. Which is further noted to King Edwards an­swere to the Deuonshire and Cornishe rebells: who being Ans. to 3. Artic. Act & monument. Papistes would haue the Masse in Lattine: To whom the King replyeth, that the good things in the Masse-bookes were onely translated into English for their sakes, onely the superstition taken out.

Obiect: The Apostles, Acts, 16. 3. and 18. 18. and 21. 26. Did vse the Iewish ceremonies voluntarily without compulsion of any superior authority or Law, to stoppe a scandal with the weake brethren of the Iewes. If therefore that be pressed for the vse of our ceremonies, it will proue a necessitie of vsing them out of the case of depriuation, aswell as in that extre­mity, and that a man must practise them voluntarily with­out any compulsion or hazard of Ministry.

Ans: First though the cases of the Apostles practise in Act. 16. 18. 23. were voluntarily performed, that is, without com­maund of any superior authority: yet the case of practise in Acts, 15. 28. 29. Was inioyned, decreed, and commanded: [Page 17] Acts, 16 4. and 21. 25. And that by the rule of necessitie, then which there can hardly be a greater argument of com­pulsion. Act. 15. 28.

Secondly, and besides the very cases alleadged were done by compulsion also of preuenting the Iewes offence: yea in a case of danger also of depriuation to the Apostles, if they had not conformed, as appeareth by the tumult made by the Iewes, Acts. 21. 27 28, 29, 30. Vpon a supposition of those Iewes that Paul taught non-confirmitie vnto the Iewish ceremonies. Verse 21. By the which tumult they raised, it came to passe, that Paul was indeed depriued from any free vse of his Apostleship in Iudea, til he came to Rome, as appeareth in the sequell of the history. And if there were no Law for depriuation of Ministers, yet if the execution of their office were in hazard, I doubt not but they should con­forme; for compulsion may aswell be vsed without Law, as with Law.

Obiect. Those ceremonies were practised but once or twice vp­on extraordinary occasions: But ours are vrged for a per­petuity, and vpon an ordinary and standing reason, and are like to continue without euer remoouing them.

Answ. Neither doeth this obiection come neere the poynt in hand: which prooueth that such ceremonies as ours are in themselues not simply euill, nor of noe other nature, then those ceremonies enioyned and practised by the Apostles; which therefore in a case of necessity may bee practised by vs, yet I answere. Touching the ceremonies practised by the Apostles.

1 First, it is true they were not alwayes by them practised but vpon certaine occasions: Howbeit they were alwayes practised by them, when they met with the same occasion of necessity, and would oftner haue practised them if by the like necessity they had beene driuen to it, which shewes the necessity of conforming to inconuenient ceremonies, in the case of depriuation.

2 Secondly, when the Apostles decreed the abstaining from [Page 18] blood and strangled, it was inioyned without limitation of time: whereupon a man might haue made this obiection vnto their decree, and say They are vrged for a perpetuitie, and vpon an ordinary and standing reason, namely of ne­cessity and fitnesse, and are not euer like to be remooued.

Thirdly also, some of the prescribed Iewish ceremonies endured longer in the Church, then on the sudden may be imagined: For it is obserued that Christians abstayned from blood and strangled, till the time of Tertullian, Origen, Whitaker de Ro. pon. cont. 4. quest. 7. fol. 832. 833. Syrill, Eusebius, Councell of Ganga, yea of Augustine, 400. yeeres after Christ.

2 Concerning our ceremonies▪ it is vntrue, that they are vrged for a perpetuity: for the preface of the com­mon prayer booke expresly saith of the ceremonies prescri­bed thus [they are retained for a discipline and order, which vpon iust causes may be altered and changed, and therefore not to be esteemed equall to Gods Law] And for the con­tinuance of practise of our ceremonies, I suppose noe sound Protestant will pleade for the necessity of their practise, or continuance, longer then the reason of necessity doeth hold.

Our case is rather to be matched with the time of Pauls re­fusing Obiect. part. M Parker 2. sect. 14. fol. 71 to circumcise Titus, and of his reproouing Peter for his dissimulation in cōforming to the Iewes, Ga. 2. 3. 11. 13.

Answ. This can by noe meanes hold, as appeareth, because Paul in a case of hazard of his Ministry, disquiet of the Church, and interruption of preaching the Gospell (which is our case) did circumcise Timothy, Acts 16. 3. But did vtterly refuse (as also all the Apo [...]tles at Ierusalem) to circumcise Titus: Aretius in act. 16. 3. fol. 75. Gualter in act. 16. hom. 106. fol. 149. Beza annotat. in Gal. 2. 5. Because they were vrged as necessary to saluation, Acts 15. 15. Because by them false brethren laboured to bring their Christian libertie into bondage, Gal. 2. 3. 4. Be­cause by that practise in that sense he should teach iustifica­tion by workes, Gal. 2. 14. 15. 16. This case sorteth there­fore to the Papists, who teach that God is worshipped by them; That a man is iustified by practising of them; That [Page 19] a man is bound in conscience to vse them, as hee is the pre­cepts of God: al which false doctrines are in so many words disclaimed, both by oath, doctrine, and confession of the Church, in the booke of the Articles of religion, as also in Artic. 11. 20. 34. the preface to the booke of common Prayer, where the su­perstitious vse of these Ceremonies is disclaimed, as also the opinion of Gods worship by them, and the reasons set downe of prescribing these, namely the quiet and decent order in the Church. And that the conueniency or agree­ment of our case with the Apostles conforming, (not with the Apostles refusing the Iewish Ceremonies) may the bet­ter appeare, I haue added these paralells, which I desire may be considered.

The members therefore of eyther Church, may and ought equally to conforme to either Ceremonies, in a case of necessitie, and of superiour reason.

Againe.

Obiect. Others perceiuing more force in this argument then some haue done, to presse them to the practise of our Cere­monies in the case of depriuation, and yet remaining pe­remptory in their former iudgement, doe answere it ano­ther way, thus: Answ. That Saint Paul did euill in vowing, sha­uing himselfe, contributing, offering sacrifice, circumci­sing Timothy, because they were Ceremonies of practise: But the Apostles constitution, Acts 15. 28, was onely of Ceremonies of omission, of like nature with our abstaining from flesh on fasting daies, not of the Crosse, or Surplesse.

They who thus reply haue had, I confesse, a light of this their answer from some Hier. apud August. Epist. 19. Hierom. Ep. 89. Gualt. in act. 23. hō. 138. fol. 248. Bullin. in act. 21. M. Parker of the Crosse, part. 2. sect. 14 fol. 70. learned men, which vsually haue their differences from others according to the reasons mo­uing them, who thus did censure Saint Paul in these acti­ons. Yet Gaulter and Bulling doe onely doubt of the place, Acts 21. not of the rest: but to this I say;

1 We may probably see how these repliers, if they had [Page 21] liued in these dayes would haue behaued themselues to­wards the holy Apostle, at least they would haue reproo­ued him, and condemned him for committing a sinne, and would by all meanes haue disliked his doings: yea they would haue cast off a thousand weake beleeuing and obsti­nate Iewes, and suffered depriuation of a thousand mini­stries, rather then to conforme to that, which the inspired Apostle Paul did submit himselfe vnto. But withall we may consider, whether authoritie in practise were rather to bee esteemed theirs, or Saint Pauls. And indeed it is a miserable shift, when no better answer can be framed to accuse the in­spired Apostles in their doings, because their practise will not stand with the reasons, which themselues haue framed or vndertaken to maintaine the suffering of depriuation for refusing to conforme. A very feeble answer, as I suppose, which will not stand, but by heauing at the pillars of the Church of Christ.

2 Though they accuse the Apostles for this conformity, yet the Scriptures doe not so, and it may seeme to much boldnesse to speake, especially in so dangerous a case, of lay­ing sin vnto the charge of such and so great persons, where the Holy Ghost is silent.

3 But this practise of S. Paul may be easily and strong­ly iustified.

1. Because he was aduised to this practise by Saint Iames, and the Church of Ierusalem, Acts 21. 18, 20, 21, 23, 24. Which persons inioyning other Iewish Ceremonies in the like case were directed and inspired by the holy Ghost in so doing, Acts 25. 28, 29.

2. Because the Holy Ghost seemeth to iustifie the reason of Paul in circumcising Timothy, not onely in not condem­ning him in his practises, but in approuing of his reason in so doing, Acts 16. 3. Paul circumcised him, because of the Iewes of those quarters. For (saith the holy Ghost in the text) they knew all that his Father was a Grecian.

3. Because Paul iustifieth this practise of his in those [Page 22] Scriptures of his Epistles, wherein vndoubtedly he did not erre, as the 1. Cor. 9. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. and 10. 13. and giueth a maine reason thereof; because by his practise hee would winne the more vnto the liking of the Gospel, and be a meanes of their saluation.

4 Because it cannot bee immagined, that Paul was ignorant if it were a sinne, for hee was at the Synod at Ieru­salem, Chap. 15. where circumcision & other Ceremonies were denied in other cases: and if he knew it to bee a sinne, it were strange hee should so many times fall into a relapse, Acts 16. 18. and 21. and obserue the Iewish Sabboth so continually, Acts 17. 8. and 18. 4. and 13. 14. 44.

5 Aretius giueth another reason, to iustifie this fact of Paul: Aretius in cap. act. 21. fol. 95. Antiocheia ecclesia bona parte constabat ex gentibus, itaque maior pars non erat offendenda in gratiam paucorum: Hic vero Ierosolymis maior pars, imo omnes Iudaei sunt quos Paulus debuit considerare. And of his iudgement are the best interpreters, namely, Augustine, Caluin, Beza, Aretius, Piscator, Gualter, Zanchius, Iunius, Bucanus; who with one consent doe hold these things indifferent; which indiffe­rent things should serue for the edification of the Church.

4 Touching the Apostles constituion, Acts 15. that it was of matter of omission, it maketh little to infring the practise of Saint Paul: Because,

1 They were Ceremonies of the Law aswell as the other.

2 They were significatiue one as well as the other.

3 They were abolished by the comming of Christ, as well one as the other: In which respect they were in their nature no lesse euill, though they might be lesse in conueni­ent then the Ceremonies, of practise in some respects. To this obiection I answere a little the more sharpely, because it sauours of a little to much insolence▪ and small regard vn-the holy Apostles of Christ: and I would shew the absurdity thereof; let the reader take the lesse offence thereat: And thus much of this point.

To the former argument let these Propositions following be added, and obserued.

1 A Man may lawfully for the edification of the Church, Proposition. and furtherance of Gods substanciall worshippes, and for the propagation of the Gospel. Acts 16. 3. 1. Cor. 9. 23. Practise and obserue such Ceremonies, which he preacheth euery where against, that men should not doe, Acts 21. 21. Neither hee himselfe in some other cases would doe. Gal. 2. 5. 11. 14.

2 Burdensome Ceremonies. Acts 15. 28. For the edifi­cation and peace of the Church, and vnitie of brethren. Acts 15. 2. 5. 24. May lawfully bee imposed and inioyned on Churches, euen by the minde of the holy Ghost. Acts 15. 28. 29.

3 Burdensome Ceremonies, and many wayes inconue­nient, may be necessary in some cases to be imposed on such Churches, as neuer obserued them before, Acts 15. 19. 28. and 21. 25.

4 It may bee expedient for Minsters, in a case of superior reason, to procure greater good vnto the Church, and to auoyd greater mischiefe, to perswad others. Acts 21. 18. 23. 24. And to be perswaded by others to conforme, Acts 21. 26. to such Ceremonies, as in many respects are fit to bee preached against, Acts 21. 21. as burdensome traditions, Acts 15. 28. Col. 2. 20. impotent and beggarly rudiments, Gal. 4. 9. and occasions of sundry euill effects, Vt supra.

5 It may bee expedient and necessary, for a Minister or other Christian in the like cases of superior reason, to practise the like Ceremonies voluntarily, of his owne free accord, not being enioyned or commanded by authoritie there vnto. Acts 16. 3. and 18. 18. 1. Cor. 9. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. and 10. 33.

6 Those Ministers and people doe well, Actes 15. 29. and according to the will of God, and minde of the holy Ghost, Acts 15. 28. who in a like case of necessitie, and fur­therance [Page 24] of the Gospel, 1. Cor. 9. 23. do practise the like Ce­remonies, being enioyned them by authoritie, Acts 15. 28. and 16. 4. and 21. 25.

7 Paul to redeeme his Ministrie, and to gaine liberty to the Gospel, to adde soules vnto the Church, and to winne the more vnto Christ, Acts 16. 3. and 21. 20. 21. 1. Cor. 9. 20. 21. 23. might as well and lawfully haue worne a linnen Ephod, or a linnen Surplesse, as well as to haue purified, and shaued himselfe, vowed, circumcised Timothy, or to haue ioyned in offering sacrifice.

8 Paul might as well haue vsed the signe of the Crosse, to a baptized person, in a case of depriuation, or of redeem­ing the Gospels libertie, or of winning vnto Christ, as to haue vsed the signe of circumcision, to a baptized person, as hee did to Timothy. Acts 16. 3. And thus much of this ar­gument, being the first member of the maine reason.

Argu. 2 Now I proceede to the second member of the first reason, which is this, Reason 1 [Because the doctrine, and practise of suffe­ring depriuation, is against the grounds of Gods word] whereupon I conclude, that such doctrine and practise, is an error and a sinne.

The grounds of Gods word, which are contraried by this doctrine and practise, are two in number, and they doe Minister two arguments, which I will prosecute in order by the helpe of God. The first ground is this;

When two workes, or deuties commanded of God, doe meete in one practise, so as we cannot doe them both, but one of them must of necessitie be done, the other of necessi­tie must be left vndone, in this case the worke or dutie of greater reason, must be performed, and that of lesser reason must bee neglected and omitted, and it is a sinne to neglect the greater to performe the lesser: Out of which ground I assume:

But the doctrine and practise, of suffering depriuation, for refusing to conforme, doth cause men to neglect greater duties, to performe the lesser.

Therefore the doctrine and practise of suffering depriua­tion for refusing to conforme to our prescribed ceremo­nies is an errour and a sinne.

For the confirmation of this argument there are two poynts to be prooued.

1 That it is contrary to Gods word, and therefore a sinne to passe by a greater worke or duety to performe a lesser.

2 That to suffer depriuation for refusing to conforme vnto the ceremones prescribed in our Church, is to passe by a greater worke or duety to performe a lesser; whereupon the former conclusion must follow of necessity.

Touching the former poynt, namely that it is contrary to Gods word and therefore a sinne to passe by a greater worke or duety to performe a lesser: The which poynt al­though it be in it selfe euident, and must needs bee graun­ted by euery sound diuine, yet for illustration sake I make more manifest by these reasons.

Reason 1 First, because the will of God is such, then when mer­cy (a greater duety) and sacrifice (a lesser duety) doe meete, so as both at the same time cannot bee done, mercy must be done, and sacrifice left vndone. Mat. 12. 4. 7. I will haue mercy and not sacrifice.

2 Because hypocrites are reprooued of God for passing by greater dueties to performe lesser: thus were the Scribes and Pharises reprooued by our Sauiour, for letting passe the weightier matters of the Law, and following the smal­ler: As strayning at a gnat, and swallowing of a Cammell, Mat. 23. 23. 24. Luke 11. 42. For vrging sacrifice of cere­moniall dueties, and for omitting and reproouing mercy, Mat. 12. 7. Luke 13. 14. 15. 16. For offering sacrifices and oblations with the neglect of parents, Matthew 15. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

3 Because the Godly are excused, and approued of God for passing by smaller dueties to performe greater: thus were excused and reprooued.

First, the Priests of the Law for breaking the Sabboths ce­remoniall, and strict rest by sacrificing and other businesse to performe Gods Publique worship (a greater duety) & are pronounced blamelesse therein. Mat. 12. 5.

Secondly: Dauid for eating shew-bread (not lawfully for him to doe) in a case of necessity, hee and they who were with him, were acquitted as innocent and blamelesse. Mat. 12. 3. 4.

Thirdly, the Apostles of Christ, for plucking, rubbing, and eating the eares of corne, so violating the Sabbaths strict and Ceremoniall rest (a lesser duety) to satisfie hunger, the necessity of nature (a greater and morrall duety) were called innocent. Mat. 12. 2. 3. 4.

Fourthly, Iesus Christ preferring the healing of the sicke a greater duety, before the strict keeping the Ceremoniall rest a lesser duty, and commanding a kind of seruile labour viz. the carying home of a bed in some case vnlawfull. Io. 5. 8. 9. proueth it not onely by a peculiar reason, proper vnto himselfe, that hee is Lord of the Sabbath, and there­fore might ouerrule in this case. Mat. 12. 8. But euen by reasons of Common equity, namely; First because it is lawfull, (by not strictly keeping ceremoniall rest) to doe (morrally) well on the Sabbath day, omitting sacrifice to doe mercy. Mat. 11. 12.

Secondly, because the end is superior to the meanes: for the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, Mar. 2. 27.

4 Fourthly, because it is contrary to the inspired examples in the Scripture, which are of common equity and reason, and to the practise of the faithfull Saints of God, namely (besides the forenamed examples of the Priests, of the A­postles, of Dauid, of our Sauiour) first of Salomon, who in a case of necessity, did offer vpon another Altar then the Altar appointed for the worship of God: because it was not able to receiue the offrings. 2. Chro. 7. 7. but was to little for that end. 1. King. 8. 64. Whereas they were to offer [Page 27] sacrifice, and to burne incense vpon one onely Altar in the Temple. 2. King. 23. 12. It being a Type of Christ, the on­ly sacrifice and mediator. Heb. 13. 10. 2. of Hezekias, who to set forward the mayne and substantiall worships of God did admit of many to the Passeouer, albeit they were not ceremonially sanctified, but legally vncleane: and did not receiue the same as it was written in the Law, nor according to the purification of the Sanctuary; yet with a true heart seeking the Lord, they were accepted, namely in a case of superiour reason. 2. Chron. 30. 17. 18. 19. 20. Thirdly of Paul who to saue his life (a greater duety) did with his owne hands cast away into the Sea the good creatures of God, which otherwise should haue beene preserued, and so for that cause neglected a lesser duety, Act. 27. 30. Fourthly, of the inspired Apostles of Christ, who (as before is noted) did practise on themselues: Act. 21. 26. and vpon others: Acts 16. 3. and did aduise: Act. 21. 23. 24. yea ordaine, inioyne, and command the practise of Iewish ceremonies, as circumcision, shauing, purifying, abstayning from blood, and strangled meate, and that as a duty good and necessary, Act. 15. 28. which to auoide, and not to vse was a duety re­quired of God: which to vse and practise in other cases was reprooued by the holy Ghost: Acts 15. 10. and 21. 21. Gal. 4. 9. 10. 11. and 2. 12. 13. 14 and 5. 2. 3. 4. Colo. 2. 20. 21. 22. 23. and were needlesse shadowes, Col. 2. 20. Ordinances of the world. Col. 2. 20. Commandements of men turning from the trueth Col. 2. 12. Titus 1. 14. Impotent and beg­garly rudiments, Gal. 4. 9. 10. And of sundry perillous, and perniciouse effects: yet this they did admit (albeit the vio­lation of a duety) to doe a greater duety of superior reason, namely, to procure the vnity of brethren: Act. 15. 2. 4. 6. 7. 24. The wyninng of strangers to the faith: 1. Cor. 9. 19 20. And to propagate the Gospell. 1. Cor. 9. 23. To preuent the scandall of weake beleeuers, Act. 16. 3. and 21. 20. And the danger of interruption or depriuation of the Ministery, by the violent Iewes persecution, Act. 21. 12. 24. 27. 28. Thus [Page 28] is the first point confirmed; to the which doctrine sundrie godly learned men, euen so many as I haue reade of this point, doe also consent both in the same words and proofes. viz. vid. Caluin: in Mat. 12. 1. 3 fol. 260. Vrsin. cat. part. 3. fol. 707. im­mediat. ante praecept. 1. impress. Cantabridg: anno. 1585. Piscator in Mat 12. 1. 2. 3. in analisi. fol. 190. & in ob­seruat. ad eun­dem locum. fol. 205. 106. 107 Idem in obseruat. in Mat. 9. 13. fol. 156. Idem. in obser. ad Mat. 15. 3. 4. 5. 6. fol. 243. Polan. syntagm. Theolog. lib. 9 c. 29 fol. 4077. 4078. Martyn in summula. verbi dei cap. 2. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. fol. 47. 48. de-calo­go. Mr. Per­kins vol. 1. of his workes treatise of conscience Cap. 2. fol. 520. Yet to this poynt or proposition howsoeuer firme it bee in it selfe, as hath appeared, and is approoued by the best diuines, yet some obiections haue beene layd against it, which I will heere set downe.

Ob. Where it is sayd in the former proposition [when two dueties doe meete at one time] it is obiected that they can­not bee dueties both at once. For if they were both dueties they would both bind, and so a man must needes commit a sinne, seeing hee is straitned betweene two dueties, and must omit the one, this therefore is not well proposed.

Ans. The mentioning of these two duties meeting together at one time in our practise doeth not intend that they doe both of them bynd the conscience at the same instant, but they are called dueties as they are considered apart; being both workes are commanded of God in two seuerall com­mandements: Which two workes being dueties considered apart, doe sometimes offer themselues to our practise at one instant; As to heare a Sermon at the Church on the Sab­both, and to tend a sicke person ready to die at home at the sametime, both are duties being cōsidred apart, but meeting together, and offering themselues to our practise at one time, there is indeede but one duety, because both cannot be performed in one instant; In which case the greater worke is the duety, the lesser bindes not for that present: In like case for a minister to refuse inconuenient ceremonies, albeit it be a duty being cōsidered apart from the duty of preaching the word; yet when it meeteth with the duty of preaching, so as preaching the word will not stand with refusing inconueni­ent ceremonies, this refusing of ceremonies bindeth not the cōscience, but leaueth to be a duty. There are not two duties at that instant, but only one, which is to preach the word of God: In which case the refusing of inconuenient Ceremo­nies is no duety, neither is their practise a sinne, yea the [Page 29] practise of them is a duety, if otherwise they cannot preach the Word; this obiection therefore needeth not.

Obiection. The doctrine included in that point or proposition is not true [because there may be a greater duetie neglected for the performance of a lesser] which may then be done, when the performance of the lesser keepeth him frō sin, as for exam­ple: A Preacher enioyned to preach naked, ought to neglect preaching. Besides it is contrary to the rule of the Apo­stle, Rom. 3. 8. The least euil must not be done, that the grea­test good may be performed. For when I cannot doe it with­out sinne, it is no duety, and therefore you should propose the matter thus; It is necessary to performe a lesser sinne for to performe a duety that is greater.

Answere. First, the doctrine of the proposition remaineth true notwithstanding this obiection. For the case is proposed not of a sinne and a duetie, but of two dueties being con­sidered a part, being both commanded of God, and there is no such case wherein a greater duetie is to bee neglected for the performance of a lesser, which also is in reason absurd.

Secondly, to the instance of preaching in a naked man­ner I say, that in this case there are two things to bee con­sidered: Necessitie, and Decency: if then he cannot preach naked but with the perill of his life, he ought to refuse prea­ching, it being a case of necessity, and mercy is better then sacrifice. But if his life will consist with his naked prea­ching, hee ought to preach notwithstanding the scandall or indecencie, if there bee no other meanes admitted for his preaching.

1 Because a mans naked body, being considered as it is naked, it is the good creature of God, and is not indecent to be looked on but to vncleane and vaine mindes, it is decent enough to the pure.

2 Because the gayning of soules and meanes of mans saluation, is a duety of farre greater reason and waight, then the auoyding of an inconuenient circumstance of scandall, [Page 30] or of seeming indecencie, arising only by accident, not from the nature of the obiect: and the like case is of the practise of our Ceremonies to redeeme the libertie of preaching, to the place. Rom. 3. 8. which sheweth that we may not doe the least euill to compasse the greatest good: I say, that to the present purpose wee may consider euill two manner of wayes.

For first, euill is either that which is formally simply, and in nature euill, which no circumstance can amend: As to redeeme preaching vpon condition of blaspheming God, Inuocating the Deuill, committing of idolatry, periury, idultery, teaching of heresie, or the like, the which kind of euill, is intended by the Apostle, and may not bee done at any hand for the gayning of the greatest good.

2 Againe, euill may bee taken for that which is onely circumstantially, ceremonially or accidentally euill: which kind of euill may in some cases bee practised without sinne, namely, in case of superior reason, at what time it is impro­perly called euill. That this is so, appeareth in the Priests, who brake the Sabbath: in Dauid, who did that which was not lawfull for him to doe, and yet were blamelesse and in­nocent. Mat. 12. 4 5. 7. Also in the practise of Iewish in­conuenient, and many wayes euill Ceremonies, which pra­ctise was so farre from being euill in that case, that it was good and necessary. Act. 15. 28. 29. touching this obiection see more at the end of the argument.

Obiect. Mordecay refused to bow, and performe the gesture of reuerence to Haman, yea though hee were commanded by the King. Hest. 3. 1, 2, 3. by which refusall of obedience to a ceremoniall, hee violated two greater dueties: One was the Kings command: and the other was the hazard of his life, and destruction of the Church of the Iewes, and thereby for performance of a lesser duetie hee did violate a greater.

Answ. Either this gesture was Spirituall or Ciuill: if the former, hee ought to auoide spirituall adoration to a creature, an [Page 31] heathen, a wicked person, an Amalekite, and an enemy of the Church, which is a sufficient and the true answere, and thus doe all interpreters vnderstand this place: thus the Hebrew glosse, thus the Apocryphall prayer in the additi­ons to Hester, Lyra, Ʋataplus, Iunius, Drusius, Merlyne vpon these places. If the latter, either his action was euill or good; if euill in disobeying the Magistrate in a thing indif­ferent, it is impertinently alledged: if well the reason is vn­knowne and not expressed, wee cannot iudge of the qua­litie of the dueties compared, if he did refuse this reuerence.

1 Because hee was of the Amalekites, which were especially cast out by God. Exod. 11. 14. Deut. 25. 7. Num. 24. 7.

2 Because an open prophane person, a malitious and professed aduersary of Gods Church.

3 Because himselfe was a better man then Haman, be­ing the Queenes Vncle, it may bee considerable, whether hee did not well, euen in this respect to refuse this reuerence. Touching the hazard of his life, and ruine of the Church it was vnknowne to Mordecai; for Haman practised it be­cause he did refuse it.

Obiect. Daniel neglected a greater duety to performe a lesser, for hee continued to pray three times a day, kneeling vpon his knees, his window being open towards Ierusalem, not­withstanding that he knew that he should die for doing it: so hee preferred the ceremonie and circumstance of prayer which was a smaller duetie, before the safety of his life which was a greater: Dan. 6. 10. Also the Iewes chose ra­ther to die then to eate Swines flesh. 2. Mac. 7. 1. and 6. 8. preferring obseruance of a ceremoniall duetie before their life.

Answ. To these instances I first demaund whether these bee brought therefore to conclude, that therefore Ministers should rather die, then to vse the Ceremonies prescribed in our Church. And let it bee considered seriously by eue­ry person truely fearing God: whether they thinke it fit for [Page 32] another, or could resolue himselfe to loose this life by be­ing at a stake for none other cause, then for refusing the pre­scribed Ceremonies, especially in a true Church of Christ, wherein there are otherwise a true confession of faith, and sufficient meanes of their saluation. If it should fall out that they would not die in such a case, I would know further, how then they could loose their Ministery for not vsing them, seeing it were better for a Minister to loose his life, then to loose the comfort of his Ministerie, Act. 20. 24. 1. Cor. 9. 15. If they would rather suffer death then vse the Ceremonies, let them shew the ground and comfort they should haue before the Lord in this proceeding. If they al­leadge these instances, I wil shew to how small purpose they serue therein: therefore I say, that their cases doe farre differ from the case in question.

First, they were controuersies depending betweene the heathen and professed enemies of Gods Church, and be­tweene the people of Gods couenant and members of the Church: our controuersies are in the Church, and betweene professed louers and beleeuers in Christ.

Secondly, they were cases of confession, wherein they were called to confesse the trueth and religion of God a­mongst Gods enemies, as also the necessitie of inuocation of Gods name, and of obedience to Gods precepts: With vs the doctrine of Ceremonies is true, and according to Gods word, and the parts of our generall confession in the Booke of Articles is agreeable to the word of God.

Thirdly, the dueties were of exceeding great moment, for the performance whereof they should haue hazarded and lost many liues. Daniel stood in obedience of a maine substantiall duetie (not Ceremoniall or circumstantiall) of the first commandement, namely prayer to God, and pray­sing of his name: for which a man should rather die then intermit for the pleasure of any mortall man: and the cere­monie of his praying toward Ierusalem in farre distant place, was such as specially did exercise his faith, and to [Page 33] which the promise of audience was tyed, 2. Chron. 6. 34. The Iewes refusing the eating of Swines flesh, did confesse the whole religion of God and faith of the Church, and totall obedience to all Gods Commandements, which was that which Antiochus did aime at, as appeareth, 2. Mac. 6. 2. 7. and 18. 24. and 7. 1. 2. 4.

Lastly, to both cases, the meere commandement of a Ma­gistrate and an idolater, was opposed to the especiall com­mandement of God, Dan. 6. 7. 9. 10. 2. Mac. 7. 30. In which respect God must of necessitie bee obeyed before man, Act. 5. 29. There being no such materiall circumstance in the case in question, whereby it also appeareth, that they did not neglect a greater dutie to performe a lesser, but passed by an inferior dutie to performe a farre greater. And thus much of obiections to the first point, which being answe­red, I proceede vnto the second point which is this:

That to suffer depriuation for refusing to conforme, is the neglecting of a greater duetie to performe the lesser.

For the proofe and clearing this point, two trueths must be confirmed:

The first that two duties, both commanded of God, doe offer themselues in the questioned case to bee obserued: where one of the two cannot be done, and therefore must be left vndone: The former dutie is to preach the word, the which duety is commanded to all the Ministers of Christ, Mat. 28. 19. 20. 2. Tim. 4. 2. 1. Pet. 5. 1. 2. 1. Cor. 9. 16. and is included in the second Commandement: Now this duety cannot bee done with vs ordinarily, as things doe stand, if Ministers doe not conforme: for by order they are to be de­priued of their Ministery, as very many wee see haue beene. Lincol. Apo. arg. 1. against the ceremo­nies: Except. 2 fol. 17. & arg. 4 excep. 2. fol. 45. 49.

The other duty, is to refuse Ceremonies, as they pretend, incōuenient in their vse, though in their nature indifferent, which is commanded in the second cōmandement, Ez. 14. 7, as also to auoid occasions of superstition. And to preuent sundry offences, and other inconueniences, arising from the [Page 34] vse of things in different commanded, 1. Thes. 5. 21. Iude verse 23. 1. Cor. 10. 32. and 8. 9. 12. Rom. 14. 3. 4. 10. 15. 16. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. The which deuties, in respect of di­uerse and sundry persons, which will take offence in the vse of them, cannot be well performed, if Ministers doe con­forme vnto the Ceremonies.

The second point is this, that for a Minister to continue in preaching, is a greater deutie of superior reason, and of higher bond to tye the conscience, then the dutie of la­bouring vnto fit Ceremonies, or of refusing inconuenient Ceremonies, such as ours are presumed to be. And this ap­peareth by reasons, drawne first from their nature, and secondly, from their effects.

First, from the nature of either worke or dutie: it is manifest that the dutie of preaching, is a duty of farre greater moment, then the dutie of performing fit Cere­monies, or of refusing inconuenient Ceremonies, such as they pretend ours are, or the like. First, because the dutie of preaching the Gospel, is a matter simply good in nature, but the refusing of such Ceremonies as ours are, supposing them to be inconuenient, or the practise of other Ceremo­nies in their steede supposing them to bee more fit, is a la­bouring about matters in their nature simply indifferent, as before is manifest, and after appeareth further, so that in this case there is a refusall, of a thing simply good, as preach­ing of the word, and propagation of the Gospel. Secondly, because the dutie of preaching the Gospel, is a substantiall externall worship of God: the dutie of vsing fit Ceremo­nies, or of refusing vnfit (so they be not impious) is a matter ceremoniall, and circumstantiall: For the Ceremonies are but circumstances, tending to the better performance of the substantiall worshippes, and doe serue those substantiall worships of God: that is, they must be so ordered, as they may best serue to edifie, and further the substantiall wor­ships of God, and meanes of edification. Wherefore to o­mit preaching, is the violation of a dutie substantiall, the [Page 35] conforming to inconuenient Ceremonies, is but the viola­ting of a dutie circumstantiall. It is better suffering an vn­toward handmaide in the house, then by thrusting out the handmaide, to thrust the mistresse out of dores. Thirdly, be­cause preaching the word is a dutie particularly comman­ded in the word: but the dutie of the practise of fit Cere­monies, or of refusing the practise of vnfit (so they bee not simply and in nature euill) is included onely vnder generall rules of necessitie, of edification, expediencie, &c. Fourthly, because the dutie of preaching is pressed on the Church, as a dutie perpetuall to the worlds end, Matth. 28. 19. 20. till we all meete, Ephes. 4. 11. 12. till the appearing of Christ. 1. Tim. 6. 14. But the performance of Ceremonies are va­riable, as appeareth by the frequent and lawfull variation of them: as in the chang of the time of the Lords supper from night to morning abolishing of the kisse of loue: and of the feast of charitie; sometimes in some Church Ceremonies burdensome and scandalous are needefully imposed and practised as Iewish rites by the Apostles: sometimes in o­ther Churches, others more needfull and they pernitious, Galath. 2. 3. 5. and 4. 9. 10. and 5. 2. Colloss. 2. 20. 21. Besides all Churches differ in their Ceremonies one from another, and that in such like Ceremonies as ours are: The Primitiue from the reformed, and all among them­selues, some vsing more, others lesse conuenientrites and ceremonies. But the preaching of the Gospel, which giueth life and being to the Church, is perpetuall and vniforme for the substance thereof in all true Churches of all times and places; They all agree therein. Fifth­ly, Because the preaching of the Word, is an essentiall and inseparable marke of the true Church, without the which a Church cannot consist, fit ceremonies are no marke of the Church, neither doe vnfit and inconueni­ent ouerthrow the being thereof: and to this I adde that by continuance of preaching (by which the Church is ga­thered and vpholden) the danger of the ceremonies, what­soeuer [Page 36] it would be preuented and auoyded by the purity of doctrine: but the purity of ceremonies, or the refusing incō ­uenient ceremonies will not counteruaile the losse of prea­ching. Corrupt ceremonies deface the wals, & perhaps may in time impaire some part of the out house: But the nullity of preaching ouerthroweth the whole Church, walls, co­uering, ornament, foundation, and all.

Sixthly, Because the preaching of Gods Word is the or­dinary meanes of new birth, faith, hope, and of all grace, and finall saluation, 1. Cor. 1. 21. 1. Tim. 4. 16. Rom. 10. 15. 17. Eph. 4. 12. Fit Ceremonies are no such meanes, neither do vnfit Ceremonies destroy the power & efficacy thereof.

Seuenthly, Because the dutie of preaching is simply ne­cessary, both in respect of Gods particular command, and also in respect of the preacher, who is attended with a woe if he neglect, 1. Cor. 9. 16. Hos. 4. 6. and in respect of the people who are ordinarily by this meanes gathered, edified and saued, Ephes. 4. 11, 12, 1. Cor. 1. 21, and doe perish if they haue it not, Prou. 29. 18, Hos. 4. 6. But the vsing of conuenient Ceremonies is not simply necessarie, one­ly secundum quid, for the sake of preaching to further and vphold it, in which respect scandelous and dangerous cere­monies may be necessary to be inioyned and practised, Act. 15. 28. 29. And with inconuenient and hurtful Ceremonies, a Church may be a true church (as the Apostolical Church of Antioch was, as the most part of primitiue churches were, and of reformed Churches vsing far worse ceremonies then ours are pretended to be:) Also a Christian may haue the being of a true Christian, & may so remaine standing in the true practise of faith, repentance, loue, patience, &c. and in the assurance of his election, adoption, iustification, and in that state may finally be saued, albeit hee liue and die in the practise of as euill ceremonies as ours are supposed; who if he should continue without the meanes of preaching, the Word might haue great cause to doubt of all.

Eightly, Because of their subordination, for Ceremo­nies [Page 37] (as before is noted) and the determination of them doe serue the ordinance of preaching the Word, and are by the Church to be determined, as may best serue for the fur­therance thereof, so they be not formally & in their nature impious, in which respects (as before is said) it may be expe­dient to admit of very inconuenient, and accidentally hurt­full Ceremonies namely for the furtherance of the Gospel, & edification of the church: Else the Apostles by direction of the holy Ghost, sinned in their doctrine and practise. But the ordinance of preaching doth at no time serue fit Cere­monies, neither should giue place by laboring against vnfit.

Thus from the nature, now from their effects it doth in like sort appeare, that the duty of preaching tieth the con­science with a farre greater bond, then the duty of refu­sing of the prescribed Ceremonies. First on the better part: The benefit of preaching the Word is incomparably grea­ter, then the benefit of auoyding these or the like inconue­nient Ceremonies. By the preaching of the Word, the Church hath name and being, yea, though Ceremonies, as is noted, be very inconuenient, and doe remaine in the Church as timber, hay, and stuble vpon Christ the founda­tion: Ceremonies be they euer so well ordered without preaching, are of no force to giue name or being to the Church. Now farre greater is the Churches being, the progresse and liberty of the Gospell, the publike vse of the meanes of new birth, faith and saluation, and the visibility of Christ his kingdome vpon earth, then the auoyding of offence, and such other inconueniences accidentall, not in­herent, neither purposed by Ceremonies in their nature not euill, but meerely indifferent: the one bringing a publike good to the whole Church, the inconuenience of the o­ther but priuate to a few, who take offence, and in this case by their owne default. Besides experience sheweth, how God hath prospered multitudes of latter times, that haue entred by conformitie in euery place, and such who stan­ding in their places haue with a grounded conscience, not [Page 38] by sinister respects conformed to preuent their depriuati­on, or to redeeme it being lost: The Lord hath done as much good by them, as by any Minister depriued, by the conuersion, confirmation, consolation, reclamation, exci­tation, edification, I say not refusing Ceremonies, speaking against Bishops, pleading for Church discipline, but in the maine doctrines and duties of sauing grace and goodnesse: Gods blessing hath beene on them as much as euer before, the Papists and enemies of righteousnesse haue beene no lesse vexed and conuinced; yea Saints no lesse comforted and confirmed; the Church no lesse fortified, and the truth of the Gospell no lesse propagated if not much more. And the reason hereof is plaine: because experience sheweth, that the Church is not builded vp, but destroied rather, afflicted consciences nothing quieted, but troubled rather, doubtful mindes not setled, but distracted rather, zealous mindes not rectified but disordered rather, Papists and Brownists not wonne or conuinced▪ but rather driuen further backe by the doctrine, practise, & endlesse disputations of discipline, ceremonies, constitution of Churches, and the like: but by the sound doctrine & essentiall practise of repentance from dead works, faith in Christ, loue, patience, and good works, which sauing points of the mistery of godlinesse are more taught and better practised by simple hearts, when the stumbling blockes of these lesse pertinent questions (as Mint and Cummin in respect of Mercy and Iudgement) are remoued, or more sparingly and peaceably debated.

Secondly, on the worser part: The mischiefe, offence, and inconuenience of the Ministers depriuation, for not conforming to the Ceremonies, seemeth in reason, and hath appeared in experience, to bee more by many degrees, then the scandall, and inconueniences arising of confor­ming to redeeming of their preaching, which thing ap­peareth;

First, because the Papistes doe more reioyce, the Godly are much more grieued, the Libertines doe much more tri­umph, [Page 39] and so are like to doe (as they haue all more cause) to behold the Gospel interrupted, the trueth obscured, the Church weakened, the Ministers of God throwne out, the flocke of Christ scattered, and the visible kingdome of Christ diuided and dessolued, then they would be to behold some inconuenient Ceremonies: these greater things of the law remaining entire, whereby Antichrist and sinne is dayly discouered and wasted; and by the which trueth and pietie, doe more encrease and preuaile. Admit that by inconuenient Ceremonies, the Church should bee blemish­ed, and the consciences of many scandalized: yet in de­priuation of teachers, without supply of as good, the Church of God tendeth to dessolution, and vtter ruine: yea the soules of all the people are endangered to perish. Prouerb. 29. 18. Hos. 4. 6. Math. 15. 14. For without the preaching of the worde, there is no publique ordinary meanes of saluation left: and so by consequence no ordina­ry meanes of the hope of saluation, though all both Mi­nister and people, should abstaine from these inconuenient Ceremonies: Wheras so long as the word and Gospel preached doeth remaine, Christ the foundation doeth re­maine, both in sound and doctrine, 1. Cor. 3. 11. Ephe. 2. 20. as also in assured presence, Matth. 18. 20. and 28. 20. the infinite value of whose blood clenseth from all sin, 1. Ioh. 1. 7. and 5, 12, howsoeuer the stubble of corrupt doctrine, & Ceremonies do remaine withall, and so the Church, both Minister, and people retaining and laying hold, on the foundation may bee saued, though as by fire, 1. Cor. 3. 15.

Secondly, experience teacheth vs, what a decay of grace, and backe sliding of many most forward professors of re­ligion, what increase of Popery, and all prophanenesse in euery corner of the Land, and euen in sundry of the places, where the depriued Ministers were placed, haue ensued this their suffering of themselues, to be thus put besides their Ministrie. And being thus depriued, what good haue they done vnto the Church? Or what good vse haue they im­ployed [Page 40] their talent, in more then to some few priuate fami­lies, wherein some of them haue beene exercised? Verily in sundry others, especially the younger and more vnstaied sort, especially of them which draw neere the brincke of Brownisme, it hath falne out, that after the losse and lea­uing their Ministrie, small other fruite hath happened in them, then to make the Churches rent the wider, to speake euill, and scoffe at persons in authoritie, which had more neede to haue beene prayed for in these dangerous times: to breede distraction in the hearts of the people, to vilifie their Godly breathren, which haue submitted themselues to conformitie, to swell in scorne and pride against them, and to prepare the mindes of vnstable persons, of tender consciences, and shallow knowledge to schisme and sepe­ration, and in the meane time, to neglect the maine dueties of true Godlinesse, as meekenes, mercie, tender heartednes, patience, visiting the sicke, comforting the feeble minded, instructing the ignorant, chatechising children, perswading of Papists to the trueth, reproouing raigning sinnes in wise­dome, loue, and meekenesse: conference of godlines to edifi­cation, prouoking to loue, to good workes, painefull labou­ring in some honest trade of life, to preuent the eating of the bread of idlenesse: which I write not in reproach, but in so­bernesse, and tender hearted greife, declaring that which I haue seene not in a few. And further to this end, it may be profitably noted, what degrees of grace doe appeare in such as are violently carried this way: surely it is common­ly seene, that the more eager people are against the Ceremo­nies, and for reformed discipline, their zeale is so exercised, and their affections carried to things without them, as that they finde small leasure to looke into Gods kingdome with­in them: their tongues, pennes, practise are carried this way together with their hearts, so that they commonly neglect mercy, iudgement, fidelitie, and loue of God, mortification of sinne, moderation of affections, holy guidance of the tongue, fruites of loue, and conscience in [Page 41] their walking before men, and are brought at last so neere vnto their practise, who were taxed by our Sauiour that they can hardly escape their reproofe, viz. To straine at a Gnat, and swallow a Cammell. Let the Brownists and such as draw neere vnto them, witnesse for themselues, both in their owne practise and report of faithfull witnesses, and in the dismall proceedings of such fierie spirits, whom Arianisme, Familisme, Anabaptisme, Libertisme, or plaine prophanenesse haue swallowed and vndone at last. For it is a true maxime in Theologie, That when men bestowe more zeale vpon circumstantialls or ceremoni­alls, matter right or wrong, one way or another, for them or against them, then they doe vpon substantialls, they are vndoubtedly setled in the high way to hypocri­sie. Lastly, this poynt will the rather appeare by the enumeration of sundrie inconueniences, which are by some alleadged to arise from the prescribed Ceremonies, and comparing of those euills, with the euill or inconueni­ences, which would arise from the generall doctrine and practise of suffering Depriuation, by refusing to conforme.

Obiect. The prescribed Ceremonies, doe blemish the worships of God, viz. the Word, the Sacraments, and the pure ad­ministration of them.

Answ. But Depriuation of all preaching Ministers ouerthrow­eth them quite: Vtrum horum?

Obiect. The continuing in the practise of these Ceremonies, will be occasion of future superstition.

Answ. They will much more so doe, when all preaching is ta­ken away, which should teach the people the true nature of them.

Obiect. It is most expedient to reduce the Church from humane mixtures & burdens, to Apostolicall simplicitie and purity.

Answ. But if it be not in the power of priuate persons, shall we all giue ouer, and let all alone, & the whole Church fall downe on the ground, because we cannot doe all the good that we would?

Obiect. The Ceremonies prescribed, doe hinder the true know­ledge of Christ, and sincere worships of God, and the maine duetie of godlinesse: the mindes of ignorant people being led aside by these, so that they put religion, and Gods worship in them.

Answ. How much more will the knowledge of Christ be obscu­red, the sincere worship of God, and duties of pietie bee neglected, and these Ceremonies turned into will worship, if the generall preaching of the Word (which is our directi­on) should be interrupted.

Obiect. These Ceremonies, are vailes and shadowes to couer Antichrist, and the mysterie of iniquitie, from the eyes of the people, that they cannot so well discerne, detest, and flee from Popery, as is enioyned by Gods expresse Com­mandement.

Answ. Generall depriuation of Preachers, is the high way, not so much to hide, as to bring in Antichrist againe, with all his abhominations.

Obiect. The Ceremonies doe disgrace our Church, and hinder the growth thereof.

Answ. Generall suffering of depriuation, kills the Church, and ouerthroweth not the growth and grace, but the life and being thereof.

Obiect. The continuing of Ceremonies, doeth take away all hope of future reformation.

Answ. The discontinuing of Preaching, doeth take away the hope of the continuing of the Gospell, yea the ordinarie meanes, of the hope of our saluation.

Obiect. The Ceremonies doe take from many good christians a great part of the comfort of their consciences in the seruice of God.

Answ. Suffring depriuation, taketh away the ordinary meanes of saluation and bringeth a greater discomfort in the place.

Obiect. The Papists, & other enemies of godlines & religion wil reioyce greatly, to seevs conforme, and draw neere to them.

Answ. But will they not more reioyce to see you depriued: and [Page 43] being emptied of Preachers, will they not thinke the places fitter for their Masse-priests?

Obiect. The Papists by those Ceremonies are shrouded, are con­firmed by them in superstition, are occasioned by them to commit superstition, they kindle in them, an hope of letting Popery in againe.

Answ. All these things are tenne times more effected by generall depriuation of the Word.

Obiect. Very many godly mindes, are vexed and grieued in their consciences, at the Ceremonies in the Church, much more if their Pastors doe conforme.

Answ. But will they not be much more troubled and grieued to be vtterly depriued of them?

Obiect. It wil be very inconuenient for the Minister to conforme in many respects.

Answ. And in many more, it will bee inconuenient for him to suffer depriuation, to loose the comfort of his labour, to bid farewell to his deere neighbours, and hearers, to bee tur­ned with his wife and children, from his house and meanes of liuing, into silence, contempt, and beggery. Thus is this second point confirmed, viz. that the duty of preaching the Word, is a greater dutie, tying the conscience with a greater band, then the dutie of refusing to conforme, or the like. These two points therefore being thus confirmed it follow­eth: That for a Minister to suffer himselfe to be depriued of his Ministery for refusing to conforme to the prescribed Ce­remonies, is contrary to Gods word, and so an error in do­ctrine, and sinne in practise.

Now I will answere the obiections, which are brought a­gainst this poynt.

Obiect. The Ceremonies prescribed in our Church, are vnlaw­full, as they are prooued by sundry reasons, by the depriued Ministers: therefore wee may not conforme vnto them, but rather suffer depriuation: for wee may not doe euill, that good may come thereof, Rom. 3. 8.

Answ. If it should be granted which they cōtend for: It followeth [Page 44] Answ. not, that because they be vnlawfull in some respect, there­fore they may or bee conformed vnto: because a man may doe that which is vnlawfull in some respect and yet not sinne against God, as appearth by these instances out of Scripture. A man may breake the Sabboth (It is our Sa­uiours phrase) in some respects, and yet be blamelesse before God, Mat. 12. 5. A man may doe that in some case, which by Gods Law is not lawfull for him (as our Sauiour Christ speaketh) to doe, and yet bee innocent, Matth. 12. 3. A man may in some cases performe some circumstances in a substantiall worship of God, not as it is written, and yet performe that worship in Gods acceptation, and with his blessing, 2. Chron. 30. 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 26. A man may in some case practise lawfully and necessarily, Act. 15. 19, 20. such Ceremonies, which in some other cases to practise were impotent and beggarly rudiments, Gal. 4. 9. will worships, traditions, commandements, and doctrines of men, Collos. 2. 20, 21, 22, 23. and in many maine re­spects, euill and vnlawfull. Againe, vnto the Apostles say­ing, I further say, that a man may bee sayde to doe some euill to doe some good. Which answere will appeare out of the sayde places; For to breake the Sabboth was e­uill, yet to breake the Sabboth in some duetie, to further a greater duetie in Gods worship, which was good, made the Priests blamelesse. To doe a thing not lawfull was e­uill, yet to preserue life, which is good, made Dauid in­nocent before God. To performe Gods worship not as it was written, was [...], and a sinne: yet to further Gods substantiall worships, which was a good thing, was not re­garded of God. To practise antiquated, and superannua­ted, vnprofitable, yea very hurtfull Ceremonies was vn­lawfull: yet to purchase the libertie of the Gospell, and vnitie of brethren, which was good, made their pra­ctise good and necessary. So that this rule of the A­postle must bee limited, and in some cases holdeth not: for that as wee see a man may bee sayde to doe [Page 45] some euill, that some greater good may come thereof; the reason whereof is included in the foregoing argu­ment, the summe whereof is this; Because the relin­quishing of obedience to a lesser duty leaueth to be a sinne, when a greater duety commeth in place, which yet were e­uill if the greater duety were absent. As for example, to violate sacrifice, (namely to breake the Sabbath by rubbing eares of corne: to eate that which is expresly forbidden him of God, and so to doe a thing not lawfull) is noe sinne, when mercy and necessity comes in place, which if mercy or o­ther superior worke and duety were away, were sinne. In a word a man may doe a thing euill in vse, circumstance, and by accident, so it be not simply and in nature euill: al­so a man may violate a duety ceremoniall to further or ac­complish a morrall good thing, in which case the euill of the action ceaseth, and this was the Apostles in the practise of the Iewish ceremonies. Obiect. But the ceremonies prescribed in our Church are not onely euill in the vse or inconueni­ent, but are in their nature simply euill, especially in their vse, as appeareth by the reasons made against them in sun­dry writings of the depriued Ministers. Ergo by noe meanes may they bee conformed vnto, to procure the grea­test good.

An. 1 The reasons alleadged by the depriued Ministers to prooue these ceremonies to be simply euill are very weake, and friuolous, because (as it is noted in the first argument) they al of them, or the most part be applied to the Iewish ce­remonies practised & enioyned by the inspired Apostles, and therefore either the practise and prescription of such cere­monies in a case of necessity leaueth to bee a sinne, or else the Apostles must be accused for practising of such things as were simply a sinne: and it is not in Apostolicall power to make a matter simply and in nature sinne to be noe sinne at all.

2 Howsoeuer these ceremonies bee now iudged in their nature simply euill by the depriued Ministers, yet they were [Page 46] neuer so iudged of in the church of christ in any age or place by any sound teacher, or wel grounded Christian, & the most curious sights among them that most stand for reducing of the Church to the primitiue purity in discipline & ceremo­nies that euer looked on them in these dayes, though they wished them to bee abolished, as being many wayes incon­uenient, yet they iudged of them in their nature as things indifferent, not onely as they are considered in themselues, but as they are in vse with vs. Thus iudged they of a surplesse or linnen garment in the worship of God.

In a surplesse there is no impious thing per se, noe not Bucer. in the vse of it. Script. Anglican fol. 79. Hoopero.

These garments are not impure of themselues speaking also of their vse. idem in his Epistle to Io. Alasco.

In the English litargie there is nulla manifesta impietas. Epist Caluin. P. Martyr. 200. fol. 336. Per se sunt [...]; these garments are of themselues indifferent. Loc. com. fol. 1085. amico cuidam.

The vse of them not impious or pernitious per sese, aut sua natura verbo dei contrariae. ibidem. 1086. Hoopero.

These garments are not per se impiae impious of them­selues, that a Minister should rather leaue his Ministry then Beza. vse them. Epist. 12. fol 98. I graunt them to bee in­different, being considered in themselues.

It is adiaphoron natura, in the vse a matter indif­ferent in nature. Enchirid. Tit. 1. de Adiaph. Clas. 3. cap. 16. Hemingius. fol. 375.

It is liberum per se, a free matter of it selfe to vse or not Zanchius. to vse. de redempt. lib. 1. cap. 16. fol. 445. yea magis deceret vestis linea quam lanea.

It is an indifferent thing. Lo. 33. Quaest. 13. fol. 382. Bucan.

It is a thing indifferent in vse, in Ezech. cap. 44. fol. 807. Polanus.

The surplesse in the owne nature indifferent, meaning Cartwright in the vse, for hee perswaded to the vse, in the case of de­priuation. Rest. of the second reply. fol. 262.

Thus also iudged they of the Crosse in Baptisme, and of [Page 47] kneeling at Communion, & the rest, which afterward shalbe alleadged. The reasons prouing this poynt are these.

1 Because they are neither expresly Commaunded nor forbidden of God. Bucanus vbi superius, this rule also of a thing indifferent hath Polanus Syntag. lib. 6. cap. 38. fol. 3036. Paraeus Colleg. 2. cap. 31. sect. 15. fol. 274. Illyricus claue Scriptur. fol. 22. part. 1. Adiap. And are distinguished from things simply good, which are ex­pressely Commaunded, from things simply euill which are expressely forbidden of God, being in their na­ture neither morrally good or euill, neither Comman­ded nor forbidden of God, and by accident may bee both good and euill. Exerc. part inter. Thes. fol. 826.

Obiection. Beza contra Sarauiam cap. 25. fol. 200. saith indifferent things I call which are neither expressely nor secretly Commaunded, nor forbidden by the word, neither maketh vs the better being vsed, nor the worse if wee vse them not. But our ceremonies are forbidden in the word in generall, and in particular in our vse. Ergo.

Answere. So may be said of the Iewish ceremonies rather then of ours: both they and these are in nature indifferent not im­pious, and in the case of depriuation or necessity are not forbidden any way, but commaunded rather: because wee must vse indifferent things for the furtherance of the Churches edification, and not refuse them, (though they seeme to vs inconuenient,) to the Churches destruction; And as for Beza with all other sound writers, that are of other mindes concerning our ceremonies they hold them in their nature indifferent, and not forbidden in the word, especially in our vse, and in the case of simple necessity.

2 Because in some cases a man may vse them and not sinne: which, a thing in nature euil, he can neuer vse, but he shal in­cuitably sin: of this nature are Idolatry, adultery, blasphemy, periury: which sins no circumstance can euer amend. Beza cont: Saraui. cap. 25. fol. 199. Indifferentia sunt, quorum vsus modo bonus, modo illicitus prout viz bene vel male illis vtitur, quae [Page 48] naturam habeant neque ad bonum neque ad malum determi­natam.

3 Because in some respects, and in some vse they may bee good: a thing in nature euill, can neuer bee put to any profitable vse: Peter Martyr saith, Adiaphoris bene vel male vti possumus: L. Clas. 4. cap. 4. fol. 707.

4 Because in some respects and in the same vse they may bee good and necessary, as the Iewish rites were in the A­postles practise.

5 Because they are of the same nature with the Iewish rites, practised by the Apostles. Of this opinion is Peter Martyr Loc: cum. inter Epist. fol. 1087. Zanchius in Philip. 1. fol. 45. Polanus in Ezech. 44. fol. 807. which ceremonies by the streame of all sound writers are holden as indifferent in nature in the case wherein they vsed them.

6 Because a man vsing them all the dayes of his life, as they are prescribed in our Church, and that without repen­tance, for such vse of them, may still remaine a godly and good man, and presupposing him otherwise to walke in holinesse, may in that estate bee saued, whereas one sinne in nature, as to liue in fornication, 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Being con­tinued in especially if it should bee pleaded for, and defended, Mat. 5. 9. Cannot stand with his saluation. So Bucer. script. Anglican. 1458. Martyr inter Episto. fol. 1085. Amico cuidam. Aretius sayth that indifferent things are such as are in equall respect to good and to bad, Prob. cap. 83. de Adiaph. fol. 266.

7 Because if they were in nature euill, a godly person could not communicate with a good conscience with our Church (which doth prescribe and practise them, and re­moueth them not being admonished) neither in the Mini­stery or any worship of God. Bucer Epist. Io. Alasco. Martyr. fol 1086. Hoopero.

8 Because all such as haue continued in the vse of them, and defended, the same might be iudged impiouse and wic­ked, such as are the Martyrs and other worthy persons of [Page 49] our Church, and other Churches also: yea the Apostles and all faithfull teachers and Churches since their time should be condemned; yea it might bee taught as a doc­trine, that such as vse them with continuance, or main­taining them, could not be saued, which I suppose none of the Ministers which are depriued will iustifie, Martyr. fol. 1086. Hoopero.

3 Simply euill may be taken for any thing particularly for­bidden of God, or the omission of a thing particularly commanded of God: sundry things of which kind, though in themselues considered are euill, may bee done lawfully for a superior good, and in that case doe leaue to be simply euill, as to doe seuile labour on the Sabbaoth day, to eate such bread as God had forbidden to the persons which did eate thereof, to come, or admit commers in a legall vnsanctified estate to the Sacraments, and the like, which shall bee after mentioned more fully: therefore to this purpose I distinguish of euill (as before) which may bee two wayes considered: either for that which is intrinsi­cally, formally, and in the nature thereof euill, not onely because God hath forbidden it, or commaunded the con­trary, which kinde of euill is immutabiliter malum, as mur­ther, periury, adultery, &c. Being against the immutabili­tie of Gods nature, no circumstance can make them good, though by circumstances they may bee lessened or made greater: of this nature our Ceremonies are not, neither can they bee euills of this kinde; or else euill is taken for that, which being indifferent in nature, yet by accident is euill, namely in vse, when offence will be taken there­at, by diuers persons in diuers respects, or rather incon­ueniences will arise, which were euill therefore to vse, if it lay in mans power to refuse them: Againe, for that which being particularly forbidden of God in his Word, is therefore vnlawfull to doe.

The euill of both which latter kinde may by circum­stances bee amended, and the practise thereof may leaue [Page 50] to be a sinne, namely in a case of superiour reason, when a dutie of greater band doth tie the conscience; which that it may be the better manifested, we may obserue two points.

First the degrees; Secondly, the subordination of duties commanded in the Law of God. Consider first, that there are degrees of duties of both Tables of the Law, which ap­peareth in reason: for there are duties substantiall, and du­ties circumstantiall. Substantiall duties are both internall of the first Table, as loue, knowledge, feare, and confi­dence in God: of the second Table, as loue, reuerence, pa­tience, kindnesse, compassion, iustice, &c. Substantiall externall also of the first Table, standeth in the maine wor­ships of inuocation, preaching, and hearing of the Word, receiuing of the Scraments, lawfull swearing, &c. Of the second Table, as outward reuerence, obedience, helpe, and tribute to superiours, kindnesse and thankfulnesse shewed to equalls, almes, reward, correction, and instruction to in­feriours: The circumstantiall duties of either Table are ex­ternall circumstances, actions, or Ceremonies, for the more orderly, fit, and decent performance of the substantialls: as obseruation of fit time, as either night or day, and this or that houre, in either place publike or priuate, site of bo­dy, as sitting, standing, kneeling, high or low, singing, saying, and the like. The which degrees, and differences of duties are thus distinguished vnto vs by the holy Ghost himselfe, who hath taught vs to seuer the loue of God, a substantiall of the first Table, and iudgement, mercy, fide­litie, substantialls of the second Table, from the tithing of mint, cummin, annisse, rue, and all manner of hearbes, a ceremoniall Law, which yet was a duty being comman­ded, and must be done, calling the one sort of duties, the weightier matters of the Law, Matthew 12. 23. Luk. 11. 43. separating them by that title, from the other which must be lesse weightie, or (as they called) the lesser com­mandement, Matthew 25. 19. Calling the one mercy, the other sacrifice, Matthew 12. 7. the one, the knowledge of [Page 51] God, the other burnt offerings, Hosea 6. 6. the one Gods kingdome, the other not so, Rom. 14. 17. betweene the which he teacheth vs to put as much difference, as betweene a Cammell, and a Gnat, Matth. 23. 23. 24. himselfe ac­cepting the former without the latter, Marke 16. 15. 16. but not the latter without the former: tying the promise of saluation simply to the greatest, but not to the inferiour without the greater. Consider that there is a subordination of these duties of the Law (whereof there are these forena­med degrees) as namely, that the greater duties, such as haue in them greatest reason and band, doe tye the consci­ence, doe ouerrule the lesser, and command obedience with the neglect of the other for that present, when they meete together. So as the neglect of the lesser leaueth to bee a sinne, for the performance of the greater: as the neglect of obeysance to a noble man, or inferiour person is no of­fence in presence of a King: and this subordination is ge­nerall to all the duties of the Law, except the supremest of all other, then which there is none higher; as the highest duties vnto God, feare, loue, confidence, repentance, which must neuer be commanded & ouerruled by other duties inferior, whatsoeuer they be: and the reason is, because the supremacy of God, and the immediate proximity betweene these duties and God: which also in respect of the immutable nature, & attributes of God, which must leaue to be God, and deny his titles of iustice, of mercy, goodnesse, truth, &c. if hee should dispence with them. Now the truth of this subordi­nation I wil in order manifest in 4. propositions following.

First, the substantiall duties of the first Table, doe ouer­rule Propos. 1. the substantialls of the second Table. Loue of Christ (a substantiall of the first Table) ouerruleth the loue of parents, of wife, children, friendes, brethren, substan­tialls of the second Table, Matthew 10. 37. yea so farre must the one yeeld vnto the other, that for the loues sake of Christ, the loue of parents must bee turned into hate, Luke 14. 26. 33. and tokens thereof, Deut. 13. 6. 7. 8. [Page 52] 9, 13, Psalme 139. 21. 22. 2. Chronicles 19. 2. Obedi­ence to good meeting, the obedience to the Magistrate o­uerruleth it, Acts 4. 19. and 15. 29. This was the case of the three children, of Daniel praying, and of the Iewes refusing Swines flesh: who disobeyed the Magi­strate to obey GOD, and neglected life, a substanti­all of the second Table, to professe GODS trueth, and to refuse Idolatrie, substantialls of the first Ta­ble.

2 Secondly, The substantialls of the second Table, doe ouerrule the ceremonialls of the first Table: so to su­staine nature in prouiding and eating corporall food, mee­ting with the strict ceremoniall rest of the Iewish Sab­baoth, the one a substantiall of the second Table, the other a ceremoniall appendix to the first Table, the for­mer ouerrules the latter: in which case GOD sayth, I will haue mercy and not sacrifice, Matthew 12. 47. Also workes of necessitie, implying seruile labour, as the car­rying whom of a bed, Iohn 5. 8. 9, 10, mercie to a man sicke and diseased, Matthew 12. 10. 12, 13, Luke 13. 14. 15, 16, mercie to a beast to saue his life, Matthew 12. 11. 12, to giue him necessaries, Luke 14. 5. 6, and 13, 15, meeting at the same time with a ceremoniall obseruation of the Sabbaoth, though commaunded in the Law, and a dutie, Exodus 20. 10. and 31, 15, 16, and 35. 3. The former ouerrules the latter, by the reason yeelded by our Sauiour, That the Sabbaoth was made for man, and not man for the Sabbaoth, Mark. 2. 27, and it is lawfull (though violating ceremoniall rest) to doe morrally well vpon the Sabbaoth, Matthew 12. 12, for in these cases God will haue mercy and not sacrifice.

3 Thirdly, the substantials of the second table, of greater rea­son do ouerule the substantialls of the second table of lesser reason. Thus it is a duty of Magistrates to put wilfull mur­therers to death Gen. 9. 6. Exo. 21. 12. 14. Leuit. 24. 17. Deut. 19. 11. 12. 13. Num. 35. 16, without recompence or dispen­sation, [Page 53] Numb. 35. 31. 32. the not executing of which law draweth on the whole land, the heauy plagues of God, Numb. 35. 33. Deut. 21. 8. 9. And this was a substantiall dutie of the second table, yet this dutie is ouer ruled by a case of necessitie: for the safetie of the policie of the king­dome and state of the Church, (so Ioab the wilfull murde­rer of Abner, 2. Sam. 3. 27. of Amasa, 2. Sam. 12. 10. and that in the time of peace, 1. Kin. 2. 5. and of Vriah, 2. Sa. 11. 16. 17. is suffered to liue all the time of King Dauid, viz. be­cause he was (being Captaine of the host) too hard for him, 2. Sam. 3. 39. which implyed the safetie of himselfe, and of all the whole state, which was a substantiall of the second table, of greater reason then the other: neither is Dauid re­prooued, or the land plagued for this thing: neither was it repented, because it was no sinne in him, to passe by lesser worke commanded for the performance, of a worke of greater reason. Againe it is a breach of a substantiall dutie of the second table, Exo. 10. 14. and euen of the law of nature, for ab initio non fuit sic, Mar. 10. 6. 7. 8. 9. Math. 19. 8. for the Magestrate or the Church, Mat. 19. 3. 4. 8. Mar. 10. 6. 7. 8. 9. to command, Deut. 24. 1. 2. Mar. 10. 3. 5. Mat. 19. 7. or to permit Matth. 19. 8. husbands to put away their wiues for euery cause, Matth. 19. 3. as namely for some filthynesse espied in them, Deut. 24. 1. yet this did Moses to preuent the breach of an higher precept: namely many grieuious inconueni­ences in the whole policie of the Iewes, arising from the ob­stinacie and cruelty of an obdurate people, such as were the Iewes. In which respect, Moses is not reproued for this thing by our Sauiour Christ, and that from the reason, for which Moses did permit this inconuenient precept, which was the hardnesse of the Iewish nations heart, Matth. 19. 8. Marke 10. 5. Also it is not lawfull, for it is not good, to cast away the good creatures of God, which may serue for the life of man, but they must bee preserued that nothing bee lost, Matthew 15. 26. Iohn 6. 12. 13. yet in a case of necessitie to preserue life, and preuent violent death, a substantiall of the second table of greater reason, [Page 54] Paul and the rest of his company which were in the Ship, with him in danger of Shipwracke, did lawfully cast with their owne handes the tackling, and the wheate out of the Ship into the Sea, where it was spoiled and destroyed. Acts 27. 19. 38.

4 Fourthly and lastly, the substantials of the first table, doe ouerrule the ceremonials of the first table, which in­cludeth the case in question. It was vnlawfull in the law for the Priestes to admit, or for the people to come vnto the Sacraments, otherwise then as it was written, though the failing was but a ceremoniall matter: yet so did the people come, and the Priestes admit the people in the time of Hezekias, that the substantiall worship of God in the Passeouer should not bee hindred: In which respect God layed not the breach of dutie to the charge of such as sought God in that Sacraments with their whole heart, 2. Chron. 33. 18. 19. 20. likewise the substantiall worships of God, requiring paines and labour of body, such as the sacrifice of the law, and other businesse to be done vp­on the Sabboth, meeting the precept of bodily rest vpon the Sabboth, by which practise the Sabboth in respect of the rest is broken, Mat. 5. 12. yet in respect of performance of the superior and substantiall worships, they were blame­lesse for breaking the Sabboth in the ceremoniall rest there­of. The vnlawfulnesse of Iewish Ceremonies, in many respects hath before appeared: whereby was violated a cere­moniall circumstantiall dutie of the first Table: which yet the Apostles we see did practise to further the substanti­als thereof, namely the libertie of the Gospel, and edificati­on, and peace of the Church of God. By all which instances wee may see this conclusion prooued: A matter euill by it selfe alone considered, leaueth to be euill when a superior dutie commeth in place to ouerrule it, whereby we may in­ferre, that admitting the Ceremonies prescribed to bee euill in some sence, yet in performance of a superior worke, as to continue in preaching of the worke they leaue to bee a sinne. Because the dutie of refusing of such like Ceremonies, [Page 55] is a subordinate dutie to the practising of the word by preaching, the one being a dutie circumstantiall, the other an externall dutie substantiall.

Obiection. To conforme to these Ceremonies prescribed, is the vi­olation of a negatiue precept, now negatiue precepts doe bind ad semper, and as Master Perkins saith, (Golden Chaine. cap. 19.) they bind at all times, and to all times: The affir­matiue bindeth at all times but not to all times: A negatiue is broken by acting or doing a thing forbidden: an affirma­tiue is broken by omitting some dutie positiuely comman­ded, as for example; I may for a time omit preaching or prayer, I am not bound continually to vse them, but haue houres of omission: But no sinne of adultery, bowing to an idoll, murther, swearing, prophaning of the Sabboth, so neither of conforming to forbidden Ceremonies. The negatiues are these; Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any similitudes, Exodus 20. 4. giue no offence to the Church 1. Cor. 10. 32. vse not the fashions of idolaters, Leuit. 19. 27. 28. wherefore we may not neglect the refusing of Cere­monies to redeeme our dutie of preaching.

Answere. 1 This rule is not rightly conceiued, for Master Perkins saith not, that all negatiues doe alway bind, and in all cases, so that in no case, they may at any time be violated, but on­ly addeth, that negatiues are of more force then affirma­tiues, which indeede is trew.

Also this rule is not generally true: for these precepts were negatiue, which yet were violated, none but Priestes must eare sheaw bread: let none of the people eate thereof [not lawfull but onely for Priestes, Matth. 12. 4.] yet Dauid did lawfully violate it, and they that were with him out of standing reason, I will haue mercie not sacrifice, Matthew 12. 7. thou shalt doe no worke, Exodus 20. 10. yet the Priestes brake this and are blamelesse: the Apostles violate it and are innocent by the former reason, I will haue mercie and not sacrifice, Matthew 12. 1. 2. 5. 7. In the the like case men doe lawfully feede and saue the life of [Page 56] their cattle, Mat. 12. 11. 12. Lu. 14. 5. 6. and 13. 15. seruile labour is vsed as carrying of a bead, Ioh. 5. 8. 9. 10. cast not bread to whelpes, Matth. 15. 26. let nothing of Gods good creatures be lost, Ioh. 6. 12. 13. yet Paul and his company doe lawfully cast away the goods in the Ship, to saue their liues, Acts 27. 19. 38. Let no murtherer liue▪ let not thine eye spare a man hating and killing his neighbour, Deut. 19. 11. 12. 13. Num. 35. 30. 31. 32. 33. yet Dauid suffered Ioab the murtherer of Amasa, Abner, Vriah all his dayes, vp­on this ground hee was to hard for Dauid, 2. Samuel 3. 39. till after his death, 1. Kings 2. 5. 6. neither was Dauid reprooued, or the land plagued as it was threatned, Numb. 35. 33. Deut. 21. thou shalt not kill, Exodus 20. 13. no not in heart or intention, Matthew 5. 21. 22. yet Abra­ham sinned not, but is commended and rewarded of God, for purposing and setling himselfe to kill his onely sonne, Genesis 22. 11. 16. grant no diuorce betweene man and wife for euery cause, not for light cause, Ab initio non fuit sic. Matthew 19. 8. yet Moses is not blamed for permit­ting or commanding such a bill, Matthew 19. 8. Deut. 24. 1. 2. but is iustified, because hee did it for the hardnesse of their hearts, Matthew 19. 8. Marke 10. 5. Let none bee vncircumcised after eight dayes, Genesis 8. 11. 12. 13. yet for fortie yeeres there was not one circumcised, Ios. 5. 5. 6. 7. 9. let none legally vnsanctified be admitted to the Passe­ouer, 2. Chron. 30. 18. Matth. 7. 6. yet in case of necessitie some were admitted and approued of God, being internally sanctified, 2. Chro. 30. 19. 20. hate not father, mother, bro­ther, sister, wife, life, Exodus. 21. 17. Pro. 20. 20. yet when Christ calleth vs to shew our loue to him, and that the loue of these will not stand with our loue to Christ, we must hate them indeede, and testifie it by our outward practise, Luke 14. 26. 33. Deut. 13. 6. 7. 8. 9. 2. Chro. 15. 16. for the better explication of this rule, and to see how farre it holdeth, and how smally it concernes our case, I say first, that this rule holds in the duties of the first table, which forbides sinne which by no circumstance can be amended, [Page 57] but are formally euill, and in nature, and opposite to the puritie and immutability of Gods nature, as in these, Haue none other gods, Commit not Idolatry, Take not Gods name in vaine. There is no time, or occasion, or duety superior, wherein a man may violate the precepts, they are sempiternally, and irreuocably inuiolable, without excepti­on. Duties also of the second table, as resist not the Magi­strate Rom. 13. 2. despise not thy parents. Prou. 23. 22. com­mit not murther, commit not adulterie, steale not, beare not false witnesse, couet not, neither may these duties in any case bee, or for any superior reason violated: neither haue they beene heretofore broken, but onely in a case of exception, and that is of Gods speciall command. For in this case the common rule holdeth: That a particular command of God vnto one person or more ouer rules a generall; In which case the substantiall negatiues of the second table, doe yeeld to the substantiall affirmatiues of the first, as being all subordi­nate to the loue of God: As the particular command of God to Abraham, to kill and offer his sonne Isaack, Gen. 22. 10. 12. ouerrules the generall command of God, Thou shalt doe no murther: and in Abraham it was no murther, notwithstan­ding that command which else had beene. The particular command of God to Iehu, if not Ieroboam, 1. Kin. 11. 35, 37, 38, and 12. 24. to smite the house of Ahab his master, the Queene, and the blood royall. 2. Kin. 9. 6, 7, 9, 10, & 10, 15, 16, 17, 30. which else had beene vtterly vnlawfull for him to doe. So Gods particular command vnto the Israelites to borrow that of the Egyptians, which they neuer paid and so spoyling them, Ex. 3. 22, and 11. 2. and 12. 35. ouerswayd the general command, Thou shalt not steale, which else had bin theft in them. Also the particular command of God vnto the Prophet Ezechiel not to mourne for his dead and most deere wife, Eze. 24. 15, 16, 17, 18. which else had beene argu­ed want of naturall affection. I will not giue instance of Gods particular command to Hosea, cap. 1. 2. to marry a wife of fornications, because the place is otherwise interpreted by [Page 56] [...] [Page 57] [...] [Page 58] the best iudgements, as Zanchius, Drusius, Iunius, Paraeus, item. Eman. Sad. in hunc locum, though others vnderstand it otherwise, that is litterally. The like is of the Lord parti­cular command of smiting the Prophet, 1. King. 20. 35, 36, 37. In which case it was no sinne to smite and wound the innocent Prophet, and it was a good worke of obedi­ence to smite him, which without the particular command of God, had beene a sinne. Secondly, this rule holdes, ex­cepting in a case of simple necessitie: In which respect, it was lawfull for Paul to cast the wheate into the Sea, though otherwise it were not good to doe it, Mat. 15. 26. and for Da­uid to spare Ioab the murtherer, in a case of necessity, because he was too hard for him: also Moses command for per­mission of diuorce, is heereby iustified, for the hardnesse of the Iewes hearts, a case of necessitie: Also the Apostles pre­scribing and practising the Iewish Ceremonies was vnlaw­full, but in a case of necessitie: of like nature, is Dauids ea­ting the Shew-bread, the Apostles rubbing of the eares of Corne: vnder this kinde commeth the lawfull vse of all in­different scandalous things, ouerruled by necessitie: and so is the conformity vnto the Ceremonies prescribed, made lawfull, for all the negatiue prohibitions, whether one or o­ther in this case of necessitie. Thirdly, this rule holdeth also in matters circumstantiall and ceremoniall, excepting when a superior duety meetes with them, to ouerrule them: of this kind is the case of Dauids eathing Shew-bread, and the Apostles practising and prescribing Iewish Ceremonies, for the Churches peace and furtherance of the Gospel: which hade not else beene lawfull to haue done, and here is also an image of our case. Here it is demanded, whether an affima­tiue substantiall of the first table, meeting with a negatiue circumstantiall of the first table, the former doeth ouerrule the latter? I answere yea: For such were the former cases of Dauids eating the Shew-bread, of the Apostles practise of Mosaicall Ceremonies, and the like. By this also we haue an answere against the objection; That we may lawfully omit [Page 59] good, to doe some superior duety, or to omit good for a time, to preuent a mischiefe of sinne, or harme to others or our selues: as to conceale a trueth to saue ones life, or to o­mit preaching, to quench an house on fire. But we may not commit an euill, to purchase or procure any good. Which obiection is both vntrue, for Dauids eating Shew-bread, the Apostles practising of Iewish, scandalous, and hurtful Cere­monies, and the like instances before rehearsed, were mat­ters of commission, not of omission, and besides, this ob­iection is incident into the former: For omission is of du­ties affirmatiue, and commission is against duties negatiue.

Obiect. These Ceremonies are against the second Commande­ment, which forbiddeth humane inuentions in Gods wor­ship, significatiue Ceremonies, abused to superstition, by Idolators, and apt to be abused by vs also, which comman­deth vs all possible purity and simplicity, in the worships of God; Ergo our Ceremonies are vnlawfull, simply, and in na­ture euill, as being idolatrous, and may not be practised.

Answ. This obiection is not wel vrged by any as yet, that I know, because it is vrged confusedly, and distinguisheth not of the parts of this commandement, neither declareth the degrees of the duties commanded, or of the sinne committed a­gainst this command, that so the reason might bee euident, why, and how farre these Ceremonies are against the se­cond Commandement. But I answere, though a man should admit the antecedent, that these Ceremonies in these respects are against the second commandement, yet it fol­loweth not, therefore wee may not vse them to preuent de­priuation, or to redeeme the libertie of the Gospell; and the reason is, that as the reason of the refusing of such Ceremo­nies as ours are, be commanded, so also is the preaching of the Word commaunded in the second Commandement: the former as a circumstantiall duety, to which all Cere­monies are as a lesser worke to a greater. The lesser may not commaund or ouerrule a greater: if it bee sayde these Ceremonies are Species idoloatriae kindes or [Page 60] degrees of idolatry: I answere, that admit it were so, yet it is such aspecies, as the wearing of some apparrell a little too fine (yet not being euill in it selfe) or the smile of the wife of another man, a little too familiar, without euill intention may bee aspecies, or gradus of adultery, that is of the least degree thereof, quatenus, it may be an occasion, and acci­dentall meanes of scandall in some, and vncleanenessein o­thers, which is farre from making a diuorce, or so much as sturring indignation in the husband: But if we would make a paralell and equall cause, betweene that case and ours, it must be thus, namely, in a case of necessitie, that a man must either goe naked, and so impaire his health, or indanger his life, and goe after an vnseemely fashion, or else hee must weare some inconuenient apparrell, in the wearing whereof, some good mindes will bee offended with him in the vse, others will take it as an occasion by the fashion, to bee vnlawfully inamored with his person, and so may be an occasion to draw them to actuall adultery in thought, desire, intreatie, or attempt: suppose also, that other men doe vse the same fashion or finenesse to pride, and in­tention of adultery, take away the necessitie, and I con­fesse, euen the least occasion of these scandalles were vn­lawfull: but with the necessitie, it leaueth to bee a sinne in the wearing thereof, because a greater dutie comes in place: nay it were a sinne to neglect health, by leauing the ap­parrell; and compare this case with ours, it may as well bee say de to bee adultery, as this idolatrie, it being a vio­lation of a negatiue precept as well as this is supposed to be, for all the occasions of the sinne, are forbidden with the sin, that a sinne of commission as well as this is conceiued to bee, and the redeeming of preaching the Word, the meanes of mans life spirituall and celestiall, may be paralled, and put in ballance, with the redeeming of our health, and naturall life, in comparision of the other: other comparisons may bee made out of other precepts, but this sufficeth. Secondly, This Obiection doeth ineuitably accuse the [Page 61] Apostles of idolatry in prescribing and practising Ceremo­nies scandalous, significant, abused, and apt to bee abased to superstition, and in many other respects in conuenient: yea, what Church in the world shall escape censure, for pre­scribing and practising Ceremonies of the like nature, which euer in the purest Churches haue beene vsed more or lesse? yea if this hold, how can any manioyne to the Church of England, or to any primitiue or reformed Church of a­ny age; seeing by this they may all be sayd to be Churches, practising and maintaining of idolatry, and so idolatrous Churches? How can any depriued Minister communicate in any assembly in England, where kneeling at the Com­munion is, if kneeling at Communion be idolatry, albeit hee sit himselfe, seeing he communicateth with an idola­trous Church, and with a company of idolators? and so must needes be driuen to separate from England, with the Brownists, and from all the most and best reformed Chur­ches, primitiue and latter? For we must come out from ido­lators and touch no vncleane thing, 2. Cor. 6. 17. Rom. 18. 4. By which reason also our Sauiour Christ himselfe, his Mo­ther, his Apostles, & al the faithfull of those times, could not escape the gilte of a sinne, for communicating with the Word, Sacraments, inuocation, and Ministery of such a Church, as proposed some Ceremonies of meere humane inuention, as the worships of God, and necessary to saluati­on, Mat. 5. 8. 9. Lastly it takes away saluation from the Apo­stles, the Martyrs, and all faithfull teachers which commu­nicate with such like ceremonies, both because Idolators shall neuer enter, 1. Cor. 6. 11. Gal. 5. 19. 20. 21. Reu. 21. 8. as also because presupposing it to be a breach of the lowest de­gree thereof: yet breakers of the least commandement, and teaching so cannot be saued. Mat. 5. 19.

Obiect. Admitting the ceremonies of our Church to bee indif­ferent, yet we may not by the vse of any indifferent thing offend or scandalize our brethren, rather wee must neuer vse it. 1. Cor. 8. 9. 12. 13. & 10. 28. Rom. 14. 15. 16. 21.

Answ. True, we may not vse any indifferent thing, by which our weake brother is offended, if the not vsing or vsing thereof be voluntary & within our power, as that indifferent thing seemeth not to be, the vse whereof is commanded by a Ma­gistrate, or publique law: whom therefore wee must obey whosoeuer bee offended, and the offence that any doth take in this case, is Scandalum acceptum, non datum.

Replic. A Magistrate onely commandes my outward man, and inflictes an outward penalty, whom albeit I am comman­ded to obey, and that of conscience in a thing indifferent: yet if I disobey him not of purpose or contempt, but with a con­scionable and charitable respect of not offending weake or godly Christians, that so I may not destroy my brother, Ro. 14. 15. 20. 1. Cor. 8. 10. 11. neither wound his conscience, nei­ther sinne against Christ▪ 1. Cor. 8. 12. I doe not sin against God, but am onely lyable to the penalty enioyned, my con­science is not herein touched before God, because I respect and follow a greater duety. 2. A Magistrate cannot com­mand me to vse a thing, whereby either purposely, or by ac­cident I shal offend my weake brother, & sin against Christ 1. Chro. 8. 12. though he should, yet God commands me to auoyde it, and tells me it is a sinne against Christ, 1. Cor. 8. 1 [...]. a superior command and of superior reason, better obey God then man.

Answ. All this is in some sence true, howbeit al this holdeth one­ly in case of outward and ciuill penalty, where I ought to beare some corporall paine, or externall losse, to violate the magistrates command, in not offending the godly weake brother. But it holdeth not in a case of spirituall, publique & generall penalty, as of depriuation of the ministry, which to auoyd by vsing a thing indifferent is a duty of superior rea­son, then by not vsing a thing indifferent to giue offence, where (in that case) it should not be broken, which apea­reth two wayes. 1 First by the greatnesse of in conuenience; for it is ten times more in conuenient by not vsing of the cere­monies (things indifferent in nature to suffer depriuation of ministery, the Gospell to be hindred & suppressed the whole Church, & visible kingdome of Christ to be vtterly dissol­ued [Page 63] and dissipated, then by vsing them to redeeme these be­nefits, to offend some few, who in this case should not be of­fended, and that they are is meerely their sinne. 2 Secondly, by the proportion of offence and scandall. For the Papist & Athiest will much more triumph and reioyce, and a Godly Christian wil much more grieue & be troubled, to see a wor­thy, painefull, and profitable minister be depriued and silen­ced, then to weare a surplesse & vse some few ceremonies, the one being a smal in cōuenience, but the other a deadly mis­chiefe to the Church of Christ, & so much of the second ar­gument of the first reason.

Argum. 3 Now followeth the third prouing, That to suffer depriuatiō for the refusing to cōforme to the prescribed ceremonies, is contrary to Gods word, and therefore a sin; because it is con­trary to a second ground of Gods word, namely the royall law of loue: for the further euidencing of this reaso, there are two points to be considered and proued. 1 First that to do any thing that is contrary to the law of loue, is contrary to the word of God. 2 Secondly to refuse conformity to the pre­scribed ceremonies in case of depriuation, is contrary to the law of loue. 1 The first point is of it selfe cleere ynough without any further proofe, howbeit it appeareth by these reasōs, that namely it is cōtray to Gods word to do any thing cōtrary to the law of loue. 1 First because if loue be the fulfil­ling of the law, Ro. 13. 8. 12. thē the violatiō of this law, is the violatiō of the law of God, which is a sin. 1. cor. 16. 14. al our things must be done in loue. 2 Secondly because of the fulfil­ling of the law of loue, according to the scrip. by wel doing; for the Apost saith, If ye fulfil it ye do wel, Iam. 2. 10. thē the violatiō of the law is euil doing, which is sin. 3 Thirdly because the violation of the law of loue is a breach of the end of the cōmandemēt, 1. Tim. 1. 5. 6. which is a sin. 4 Fourthly because the violatiō of the law of loue is a breach of the law of loue to God, Io. 3. 17. & 4. 20. 21. & 5. 1. therefore a sin. 5 Fiftly Be­cause the violation hereof putteth out the infallible and true badge in vs of being ture christians, * Ioh. [...]3 35. 1. Ioh. 4. 7. & 13. 10. 19. which is a sin. 6 Sixtly be­cause the violatiō of this law putteth out the internall assu­rance of regeneratiō, & of being the childrē of God, *& that [Page 64] wee be translated from death to life, which is a sinne.

The second point is also prooued thus, namely, That to incurre and suffer depriuation for refusing to conforme, 2 Poynt. is contrary to the royall law of loue. The reasons are these;

Reason. 1 First, because this doctrine and practise is a greate enemy to mans saluation, which is a breach of this law of loue in the highest degree. Rom. 14. 15. This appeareth, because it doeth by abstaining from a thing in nature indifferent (such as our ceremonies are prooued to be) needlesly depriue him of the ordinary meanes of his saluation, which is the prea­ching ministry of the word of God, and of the Sacraments. For as things doe stand, all such as doe not conforme vnto the ceremonies, are to be depriued without exception.

Obiect. A man may haue the ministry of others, though some be depriued.

Answ. Surely very hardly: For where almost in any place ma­ny thousands of persons fearing God, in this land, enioy a preaching minister, hauing lost their faithfull teachers by this doctrine of suffering depriuation for refusing confor­mity to our ceremonies, which haue no teachers neerethem in a greate compasse, and are tyed by necessitie of outward meanes that they cannot remooue their dwelling, where they may enioy this ordinary meanes of their saluation. Secondly this obiection is nothing to the point in hand: for in that some preachers remaine for the comfort of Gods people, is Gods extraordinary blessing and grace, of whose mercy it is, that wee are not consumed, because his com­passion fayles not. Howbeit this is no thanke to this doc­trine of suffering depriuation for indifferent ceremonies, which if it might preuayle according to their minde, would leaue noe preacher in England at this houre, but sweepe them all away at once, which I thus manifest. 1 First our Soueraigne King and the Ecclesiasticall gouernors vn­der him with the whole state (as appeareth by the Statutes yeat in force) doe remaine resolued and vnremooued to maintaine the practise of ceremonies prescribed indifferent, [Page 65] and that it is not a conuenient thing, neither yet safe, nei­ther standing with the credit of the Church, or common­wealth, to remoue these things, which they hold to haue bin at first with mature aduice established; and this resolution of theirs, experience in the losse of many woorthy prea­chers hath taught vs. 2 Secondly, the doctrine of suffering depriuation for inconuenient ceremonies, if it bee truth, as they suppose it be, who haue beene for that cause depriued, doth tie all Ministers alike, so that if it tie the conscience of one, it tieth also the conscience of another, yea of a thou­sand besides, not one excepted. Wherefore no man (if wee presuppose the state of things to remaine as they doe) may by that doctrine without sinne, conforme to redeeme his Ministery, not onely at this time, but not in any po­steritie heereafter: and so this doctrine doth vniuersally depriue all places of this Land at all times (things stan­ding as they doe) of the ordinary meanes of their saluati­on, which is the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments.

Obiect. God blesseth the priuat meanes of priuat reading, catechi­sing, instruction, reproofe, comfort, exhortation, and in­uocation, in the absence of the publike.

Answ. True vnto such persons, as are not cause of depriuing themselues needlesly of the publike meanes: in which case I know God accepteth a man according to that he hath, and not according to that he hath not. But what is that to the Ministers, that doe not on iust cause, but needlesly suffer de­priuation for refusing to conforme? whereby it seemeth that they incurre the danger of two mischiefes. One by needles­ly suffering the light of Gods publike ordinance to be quen­ched, they create to themselues iust feare that hee will not blesse their priuat meanes to them, being guilty of the need­lesse leauing of the publike. The other, that they may also feare least they haue done (though in ignorance & purpose of well doing) as much as in them lay, needlesly to destroy the flocke committed to their charge, by denying further instruction to them, and publike ordinary meanes of their [Page 66] saluation, which they might haue with good conscience continued in, to the comfort & conuersion of many a soule.

Obiect. Wee must so loue our neighbour, as that wee must loue Christ aboue our deerest friends, Matth. 10. 37. Luk. 14. 26. Secondly, loue reioyceth in the truth, not in iniquity, 1. Cor. 13. 6. Thirdly, wee must so loue our neighbour, as that we offend not God, by breaking his will. Fourthly, wee must so loue our neighbour, as that we offend not God, by violating a good conscience, and breaking our peace, Heb. 13. 18. Fifthly, we must not doe euill, that good may come thereof: wherefore wee must not vse the ceremonies, though wee suffer depriuation, and by this practise wee breake not the law of loue, but keepe it.

Answ. First wee loue Christ, when we keepe his Commaunde­ments, Ioh. 14. 21. 24. who hath commanded his Ministers to preach his Word to the worlds end, Matt. 28. 19. 20. he breaketh not Christs commandement, that doth practise in­different ceremonies, though in some respects accidentally inconuenient, to redeeme the fulfilling of his greater duty of teaching the Gospel to the flocke, which is a great argu­ment of our loue to him, Ioh. 21. 15. 16. 17. Secondly, the truth is this, wherein true loue reioyceth, that for tender loue vnto the sheepe of Christ, that Ministers must con­forme and practise euen inconuenient ceremonies, that the Gospell may haue a free passage, which truth is proued, Act. 16. 1. 3. & 15. 28. 29. & 21. 23. 24. 25. 26. Thirdly, we breake the will of God, if we neglect the preaching of Gods Word, 2. Tim. 4. 2. but vpon iust cause, and draw the heauy woe vpon vs, 1. Cor. 9. 16. Fourthly, what good conscience may a man haue by breaking a greater duty, to performe a lesser? by committing a greater sinne, to auoid that which in this case leaueth to bee a sinne? to make conscience of that, where none in this case is to be made, and to make no conscience of that, where great conscience is to bee made, namely of continuing to feede the flocke committed to their charge. Fifthly, this obiection is answered before, and [Page 67] holds in matters euill onely by nature, not in things indiffe­rent of nature, and in vse onely inconuenient.

Reas. 2 Because the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for inconuenient ceremonies, is a great enemy to the edifi­cation of the Church, which is a speciall property and effect of loue: for loue edifieth, Ephes. 4. 16. 1. Cor. 8. 1. For by ine­uitable consequence, it ouerthroweth all the Churches and ministery of Christ in England, yea al the reformed church­es Zanch. in Phil. 1. fol. 45. b. Read the Question. of Christendome at this houre yea all Churches since Christ and his Apostles. Wherefore this doctrine and pra­ctise is opposite vnto the law of Loue. The ineuitable ouer­throw, dissipation, and destruction of all Churches by this doctrine and practise, appeareth by this that followeth. 1 First wee must consider this, that no Church since the Apostles time, but hath practised inconuenient Ceremonies in some respect: neither is there any true reformed Church at this houre in the Christian world, German, Danish, Bohem, Heluetian, Dutch, or French, which doth not practise some inconuenient ceremonies: some of them doe practise farre more then ours, and more liable to exception; all which is made euident in Argument the fourth. Yea, the Apostoli­call Churches did practise inconuenient ceremonies & that by the Apostles command, and that as things good and ne­cessary for the Church, Act. 15. 28. 29. 2 Secondly, it there­fore followeth by this doctrine of suffering depriuation for inconuenient ceremonies, that all the Ministers of England, yea of al Christendom, must necessarily suffer depriuation for refusing their inconuenient ceremonies (seing all Churches doe strictly tie their Ministers to the practise of their cere­monies:) yea the Apostles by this doctrine did very ill, and committed sin to perswade others to conforme to inconue­nient ceremonies, Act. 21. 23. 24. yea to command them to conforme to them, as good and necessary in that case, Acts 15. 28. 29. Yea to practise this conformity on themselues, Act. 21. 26. Yea and on others also, Acts 16. 1. 3. Yea, they should rather haue suffered their Apostleship to haue bene [Page 68] forfeited, and left the preaching of the Gospel to haue bene suppressed, the Churches of Christ to haue bene dissolued and desolated, then to haue yeelded to this conformity of inconuenient ceremonies. But to admit of this is apparantly absurd: wherfore the reason followes and remaines in force.

Reas. 3 Because this doctrine and practise doth needlesly, on no ground or iust cause, breed or produce sundry scandalls and offences against diuers sorts of persons, which is a­gainst the law of loue, as appeareth. 1 First, it is the occasion of fraternall discord, mouing the Ministers to [...]udge and ac­count of the reuerend Bishops, as of Antichristian, and ty­rannous Prelates, and the Bishops to esteeme of them, as of pernitious and vnsufferable Schismatickes. This disturbeth the Churches peace, maketh the common enemy insult and blaspheme the Gospel, at our mutuall discords, and deuou­reth our owne strength, by biting one another, and is Ergo against the law of loue, 1. Thess. 5. 13. Galat. 5. 13. 14. 15. Rom. 12. 8. Whereas if in the case of depriuation, the Mi­nisters did peaceably conforme, this scandall would be cut off, or exceedingly made lesse and mittigated: of which sin the authors and accessaries are guilty before God. 2 Second­ly, it two fold more scandalizeth the Papist, then conformi­ty: for hee doth farre more reioyce and insult to see a godly Minister thrust out, and with him all the truth of the Gos­pel, feruently and continually pressed (the greatest enemy to Popery that can be) then to see him weare a Surplesse in the face of our Church, with his mouth opened, and sto­macke inlarged against Antichrist, and his superstitions, and will worships. 3 Thirdly, it two fold more scandalizeth the Atheist, and carnall Libertine and Epicure, who by the painfull Ministers depriuall, will exceedingly triumph to see a doore opened for him without resistance, to liue in drun­kennesse, whoordome, swearing, oppressing, & to bring in securely wanton dancings, Church-ales, profane wakefeasts, reuells, vnlawfull sports, and a thousand euills, much more then to see the Minister, though conforming to the ceremo­nies, [Page 69] yet present to withstand, disgrace and suppresse these sins and therein to glorifie God, to further his kingdome, to edifie his Church, to propagate his Gospel, with a Surplesse on his backe.

4 Fourthly, it two fold more scandalizeth such one as doth truly feare the name of God, who could bee more conten­ted to enioy the meanes of his Faith and saluation, and of the Communion of Saints, and visible prosperity of Christ his kingdome vpon earth, with a small inconuenience of some Ceremonies, which hee grieueth at, and is not guilty of, then to lose his Pastor, the Gospel and ordinary meanes of his sauing faith, yea of his saluation: and heereby to see (if it so fall out) loyterers and Wolues in sheepes clothing, take the charge of the flocke of Christ, and to behold the sheepe and lambes, so deerely bought, and heeretofore so well instructed, to lie scattered vp and downe, which were vnited in one fold together, and led into the greene pastures of grace and life.

5 Fiftly, it offendeth the Magistrate, by prouoking him (perswaded and resolued as hee is) to disgrace these other­wise well deseruing Ministers, and to strike them with the sword of authoritie, and that in the dayes and light of the Gospel, which would cease by conforming in this case. And if wee should not offend a priuate person, much lesse should we offend the Magistrate, which is a publicke per­son, about the vse of a thing indifferent. If it be saide, that therefore they abstaine from the Ceremonies that they might not giue offence to godly mindes, I say againe, that good mindes should not bee offended in this case, which if they do we must neglect, for that by refusall of conformity the Magistrate is prouoked to depriue them; and such as are well minded haue farre more occasion of offence at the depriuation of a good teacher, (which is a mischeefe) then at his conformity (which is but a simple inconueni­ence at the most.)

6 Sixtly, it vniustly condemneth the harmonie of all true Churches, that euer were Primitiue and reformed, for teaching false doctrine, and many godly and most re­uerend persons, who in case of depriuation partly haue taught the doctrine of necessary conformity to in­conuenient Ceremonies, partly who aduised thereunto, partly who practised the same themselues: which hath bene an vniuersall doctrine of all sound Teachers, of all times, and places: (as appeareth else where in the following ar­guments) yea it condemneth the very inspired Apostles of Iesus Christ, and the Churches of their planting, which (for performance of greater duties) did conforme them­selues, perswade others to conforme, and commanded the same to others as a duty good and necessary. All which in­conueniences by conformity, euen vnto inconuenient Ce­remonies, in the case of depriuation would bee wholy auoyded: which by not conforming are needlessely main­tained, strengthened and vpholden. It followeth there­fore, that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for refusing Ceremonies, though in some respect inconue­nient, is opposite vnto the law of loue, and so by conse­quence, and error and a sinne. Touching the doctrine of this point, and applicati­on thereof vn­to the practise of like Cere­monies to ours in a like case, looke Gual. in act. 16. 3. hom. 106. fol. 199. P [...]sc. in act. 15. 28. Idem in act. 21. 20. Idem in act. 16. 3 Calu. in act. 15. 28. fol. 265. Idem in act. [...]8. 18. Aret. in act. 15. 28. fol. 72. Idem in act. 16. 3. fol. 75. Beza annot. in act. 15. 29. & in act. 16. 4. & 21. 20. & 18. 18.

Reason 2 Thus much of the first maine reason, prouing that the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation, for refusing to conforme to the prescribed Ceremonies, is contrary to Gods word, and therefore an error and a sinne.

Argu. 4 Now the second maine reason standeth in this: because the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for re­fusing to conforme to the Ceremonies prescribed (in the present Church of England) or the like, tendeth directly to condemne all true Churches of Christ, Primitiue and latter: and all sound teachers and sincere Christians of all times and places since the time of the Apostles, which appeareth to bee an errour in doctrine, and a sinne in practise.

For the further manifestation of this reason, there must be proued, these two points.

1 That to condemne all true Churches, and sound Tea­chers of all times and places, primitiue and latter, for teach­ing error in any doctrine, or maintaining or committing maintained sinne in practise, is a sinne and error.

2 That this Doctrine and practise of suffring depriuation, for refusing to conforme to the prescribed Ceremonies, in our present Church of England, or to the like, doth con­demne all true Churches, and sincere Teachers, of all times and places, since the times of the Apostles.

Which points being prooued, the conclusion will ineui­tably follow, that to suffer depriuation for refusing to con­forme, is a sinne and an error to be taught and practised.

Touching the former point: That namely to condemne 1. Point. all true Churches and sound teachers for teaching, and maintaining false doctrine and sinne, is both an error and a sinne: First, I say it is an error:

1 Because in condemning their doctrine for false doctrine, euen in this point they condemned the inspired doctrine of the holy Apostles for false doctrine (as before appeareth) which must needes bee an error and a sinne, of no light degree.

2 Because it condemneth their doctrine & practise, which are followers of the Apostles in their inspired doctrine and practise, and which walke so as they haue them for an ex­ample: which rule of doctrine and practise, being com­mended as true, and commanded as iust, Phil. 3. 17. and 4. 9. the contrary thereto must needes be an error.

3 Because the true Catholike Church indefinitely, taken for the company of the faithfull in all ages, being as they are euer built on the foundations of the Prophets, and A­postles, and Christ the corner stone, Eph. 2. 20. is the pillar and ground of trueth, 1. Tim. 3. 15. but whatsoeuer is a­gainst the ground of trueth, must needes be an error.

4 Because the true Church of all ages being defined true­ly, [Page 72] ly, to bee the congregation of the faithfull, consisteth of a company of spirituall persons, (not of carnall blinde or prophaine persons, or hereticall Idolatours and tira­nious Popes or Prelates as the Papistes:) Now the spiri­tuall man discerneth all things, 1. Corinth. 2. 15. euen the deepe things of God, vers. 10. by the spirit which God hath giuen him, ver. 12. how much more is the whole company of all the spirituall, able to performe the same: wherefore the contrary to their doctrine must needs be an error.

5 Because it condemneth the whole streame of the faith­full teachers, and Churches of all ages, of an hainous and damnable crime, namely the breaking the lesser com­mandements of God, and the teaching of men so to doe: whereby they exclude them, by necessary consequence out of heauen, Matthew 5. 19. which must needes bee a grosse error, and no small sinne.

6 Because no scripture is of priuate interpretation, 2. Peter 1. 20. either of priuate spirits of carnall persons, though they be many as the interpretations of the Romish Popes and Doctors, or of other heretickes failing in the foundation: or of a few Godly and well affected Persons, against the Ocean and world of the faithfull: but the iudge­ments of the English depriued Ministers, being against the whole true Church of Christ, is but as a litle streame vnto the Ocean, or a small field vnto the world: their opinion therefore against the whole Church is of priuate interpre­tation, and an error.

7 Because it is against the rules of Gods word, and meanes appointed of God for the finding out of the trueth, euen in such like cases as this, for a few Ministers and other persons, be they otherwise neuer so faithfull, to be opposite in iudge­ment to the whole Church.

1 One meanes is for learners to obey their teachers, Hebrew. 13. 17. especially teaching secundum legem, accor­ding to the law, Deut. 18. 11. but the Fathers and Godly learned Doctors, since them being the Ministers of the [Page 73] Church of Christ in all ages, are the Teachers of all others, specially, if they teach secundum legem, which must be hear­kened vnto and obeyed, and whosoeuer doth not hearken to them so teaching, erreth.

2 An other meanes and ordinance of God is this, that two or three Prophets speaking, the rest must iudge of that they speake: and that the spirit of the Prophets must bee subiect to the Prophets, 1. Cor. 14. 29. 32. When therefore a few English Ministers doe speake in the Church, the will of God is this; that the whole Church of all ages and places should iudge: but for the whole Catholike Church of all ages and places to speake, and a few Ministers of one only Prouince and of one time to iudge and censure them, is the mother of confusion, and an enemie to peace, as the Apostle saith, 1. Cor. 14. 32. 33. and contrary to this rule and ordi­nance of God, and therefore the way to error.

3 An other meanes of Gods appointment euen in the like case with this: that in matters of difference, not onely a­bout fundamentall points, but also in matters of Ceremo­nies, when the peace of the Church is broken about them, the vnitie of brethren deuided, and the course of the Gospel hindred and interrupted: to aske and seeke the iudgement of other true Churches and Teachers, about the case in que­stion: As the Apostles did in, Act. 15. 2, 3, 4, 6. and the Pri­mitiue ages following after their example, also did imitate as their duty was, Ph. 3. 17. and 4. 8, 9. in which case if the iudg­ment of one, two, or twenty Churches be to be harkned to, and not despised or contradicted rashly, how much lesse the iudgement, of all true Churches, of all times and places. Now for a few persons of one Prouince (as of England and of one season, to sway against all Churches, & to condemne their doctrine, and practise of sinne and error, is against this ordinance of God, and the way to error.

Because the swaying against the iudgement and practise VIII. of all Churches and Teachers, is against the equity of ma­ny forcible and maine reasons: For:

[Page 74] 1 Who are more likely to know the trueth, euen in such a point as this, then the whole company of such? First, who are indued with the most excellent gifts in the Church, and greatest degrees of knowledge and vnderstanding of Gods word, and with meanes tending thereunto? doe not the best sights, best iudge of colours? Secondly, who are and haue been endued with greatest degrees of euident sanctity? Thirdly, whose labours haue beene most of all blessed of God, for the conuersion of soules, for the ouerthrow of sinne, and Antichrist, and Heresies? Fourthly, who haue li­ued and died most comfortably in the Lord? If a man should not rest in the iudgements of the whole company of such, where should he rest? or what peace or assurance shall hee haue to haue all these (so many as all and so incomparable persons) his aduersaries: as in condemning such for sin­ners and false Teachers.

2 No one point of error can be shewed, which is establi­shed by this rule: namely, by the consent of iudgement and practise of all Churches, primitiue, and reformed latter. For albeit▪ some faithfull persons, and some true Churches, may differ from some other in sundry points, and thereby there must needes bee error in one part or other: yet it were hard for a few priuate persons, to conuince them all of er­rour, in a matter wherein they all agree: if they were in errour; is it not strange, no age should bee able to dis­cerne it?

3 Such as haue wilfully and professedly differed from this rule, haue beene found to haue beene New­fangles, Heretickes, Schismatickes, and prophane per­sons; such as Donatists, Anabaptists, Brownists, Ari­ans, Famelists, and the like: and are of infinite varie­ties, one from another, and therefore all, or the very most, must needes bee an errour, for there is but one trueth.

4 By the reiecting of this rule, euery Sect maketh a way open to their owne contempt. For if the iudgement [Page 75] of so reuerend, and so excellent lights and agreement of them all, is to bee despised and reiected by any particular: why should not others reiect and contemne them and their iudgement, the matter being difficult, and of disputa­ble nature, and themselues being so many thousand degrees behind the person whom they thus despise, in their worth or number?

5 It opens a doore to singularitie, noueltie, and of endlesse differences, errors and contentions, and leaues no rule of Peace, or of ending dissentions in the Church of God: For if one may vnder colour of trueth, teach and pra­ctise what he list in his diuersitie: why may not another do the like? or what rule will there be, to compose the dissenti­on, that doe and will arise in the Church! which one part hauing the trueth, may vrge vnto the other voyd of truth: why should hee rather follow this part then that? wherefore in this case wee are to note, that no priuate person or per­sons, may raise vp any new opinion, and pretend Scripture for it, and so propose it for a Doctrine and a truth in the Church, though hee condemne the whole Church beside for an error and a sinne. Because as the Scriptures are not of priuate interpretation, so Gods Spirit is not priuate, but ge­nerall to all the faithfull.

Thus wee see this doctrine of swaying against all true Churches and Teachers of all ages and places, and condem­ning them of sinne and error, is false doctrine. Whereupon also it followeth secondly, that it is a sinne: which also ap­peareth further.

I Because Dauid doth iudge himselfe that he trespassed, in that he being a priuate man condemned and censured all the generation of Gods children, Psal. 73. 13. 14. 15. Againe because God laieth a woe vpon the practise of taking away the righteousnesse of the righteous from him, Esa. 5. 23. or of condemning the iust, Pr. 17. 15. But that doctrine & practise which laieth a sin vnto the charge of all Gods Church, takes away their righteousnes and condemnes them in that point. [Page 76] Therefore it is a sinne, euen of bearing false witnesse against the whole congregation of neighbours.

2 Because the censuring of all true Churches, for a sin, or of false Doctrine, is contrary to the Commandements of God: who would haue the Teachers obeyed and hear­kened vnto, which doe teach and define secundum legem: as aboue I noted, Heb. 13. 17. Deut. 17. 9, 10, 11, 12. and would haue the rest to iudge of the words of a few which prophe­sie, 1. Cor. 14. 29. 32. and of the commandement, of walking in the wayes of good men, Pro. 2. 20. Phil. 3. 17. and 4. 9. It is also contrary to the practise of the holy Apostles, who de­termined one Churches differences by another, Act. 15. 2. as before I noted.

3 Because this Doctrine is the ground, and mother of schisme: For S. Paul noteth, that they cause diuision and offences, that teach and practise contrary to the doctrine which the whole Church hath receiued especially from the Apostles, Rom. 16. 17. Therefore this doctrine is a sinne.

Obiect. Against this point it is alleadged, first, that it is a Popish ground, to make the Church the ground of our Faith: It contradicteth the Doctrine of our Churches against the Papists.

Answ. This point includeth no Popish ground; nor doeth it contradict the Doctrine of our Churches against the Pa­pists: For the Churches desire nothing so much against the Papists, then that they would grant the elect and faith­full to bee the onely Church: and then that they would stand to the iudgement, determination, and practise of such as are faithfull in all ages. But that this may the better appeare to bee no Popish ground, Wee are to note:

1 The Papists vnderstand the Church, to consist onely of persons in office, and those often hereticall, sacrilegi­ous, and prophane persons such as their Popes, Cardinalls, carnall Bishops: Wee, the only faithfull in all times and pla­ces, whether in office or not.

[Page 77] 2 They vrge Apocriphall and basterd Fathers, for the patronage of their errors: Wee the vndoubted writings of the approued Fathers.

3 They vrge the Fathers errors, and things wherein they differ: we their truth, so farre foorth onely as they a­gree and consent.

4 They alleadge the vngrounded opinions of some priuate fathers: we their trueth, so farreforth as they agree to Gods word, and examples of the Prophets of Christ and his Apostles.

5 They insist vpon Fathers further from the Apostles, & from Apostolicall and Primitiue purity, wee most of all insist on those who were most neere to the Apostles, as be­ing most pure and free from Antichristian contagion.

6 They are only for the former Fathers we bring the consent of all our later worthy Fathers and teachers of the most reformed and purest Churches of the world.

Obiect. This were to giue and to ascribe as much to man as to God, to make them the grounds and iudges, of our faith or practise: yea it is so farre from being a sinne, to sway from all iudgements, that it is a sinne to iudge that all iudgements should bee the rule of our consciences.

Answ. This obiection is both vnfit and vntrue: It is vnfit be­cause the argument concludeth not that they are, or that we should make them the grounds and iudges of our faith and practise: But that it is an errour and a sinne to condemne the whole Church of Christ, for teaching errour, and for practising and maintaining sinne. Next it is an vntruth to call the whole company of Saints and spirituall persons, (Man) opposed vnto God. Which appeareth further by con­sidering the aequiuocation of the word (Man). For man is taken either for meere man ( ⁱ) a carnall man, or to the poynt, a company of carnall men, prophane, ignorant and erronious, which cannot know nor perceiue the things of God, because they are spiritually discerned, 1. Cor. 2, 14. and so it is true, if the case were thus, that wee should put [Page 87] the iudgement of this thing, to a company of carnall per­sons, for in this case, it is sayde that all men are lyers, Rom. 3. 4. But there is also the spirituall man which hath vnder­standing to iudge what other men do say, 1. Cor. 10. 15. and discerneth all things, euen the deepe things of God, Psal. 25. 14. 9. 1. Cor. 2. 15. 10. 12. Dan. 12. 10. Iohn 7. 17. 1. Iohn 2. 27. The consent in iudgement of which com­pany, is not to be termed a company of men opposed against God: But such as being built one the foundati­on of the Prophets, Apostles, and Christ, the corner stone, Eph. 2. 20. are also called by holy the Ghost in this respect the pillar and ground of trueth, 1. Tim. 3. 15.

Obiect. A priuate man may see a truth which a great many Godly men may not discerne.

Answ. Though a priuate man may see more into some trueth, and explicate or confirme it better than many other: yet it were absurd to say, that one man might see more then all the faithfull, all godly learned Teachers, all true Churches that euer were in the world, for the rule is good which Lyrinensis giueth, Nouè non noua: The Papists take the Church, for onely persons in office, as Pope, Cardinall, Bishops, and Abbots, and other Doctors gathered in a Councill: and it was well maintained by Gerson, that a priuate man, by the light of Gods word, may see more then they all: And the reeson is plaine. First, because those persons haue many wayes prooued themselues to be carnall, and prophane, and not able to discerne the things of God, which are spiritually to be discerned. And againe, because they iudge not as it was inioined to the Priest in the law, Secundum legem Deut. 17. 11. and so there can be no light in them, Esa. 8. 20. But the case in question is quite opposite to this, in either part, and therefore this obiection toucheth not the point.

Obiect. The whole Church of God may erre in some circum­stantiall matters: All visible Churches may erre in matters, not fundamentall: The consent of Churches and of the faithfull teachers, according to Gods word, a rule of fun­damental [Page 79] truths; that is of al such truths as may quiet a mans conscience, it is not so in matters of circumstance.

Answ. 1 Wee hold rightly against the Papists that all particu­lar Churches may erre: whereupon wee assume and inferre: But the Roman Church is a particular Church: There­fore it may erre. But that the Catholique Church taken in the sence, that our part doe explicate it, ( ⁱ) for the com­pany of the faithfull in all ages, it was neuer holden by any sound diuine: But the cleane contrary.

2 Though the iudgement of all true Churches in mat­ters fundamentall, be infallible, because without fundamen­talls, they could not be Churches: and againe albeit all par­ticular Churches may erre in matters circumstantiall and ceremoniall: yet it is an hard speach to say that the generall or Catholique Churches, or company of the faithfull, in all ages haue generally consented in an error, neither can there possibly on instance be shewed of such a point, no not of a circumstantiall point.

3 The depriued Ministers hold it a sinne in nature to practise the ceremonies prescribed in our Church or the like: but sinne in nature is a thing substantiall, in the prac­tise whereof a mans conscience cannot bee quieted, and therefore if the iudgements of all Churches bee brought a­gainst them, either they must confesse their doctrine in this point, to be an error: or else that the whole general Church, since Christ haue erred fundamentally, which is not farre from haeresy and blasphemy, and I earnestly do pray them to consider of this poynt.

Obiect. Churches and fathers haue exceedingly differed among themselues in all times: heere should wee make their iudgement, and consent to bee a rule of our doctrine and practise.

Answ. This is soone answered because I speake not of their dif­ferences or of the things wherein they are deuided: but on­ly of such things wherein they all consent and agree: as namely they all agree that the Christian Sabbath must bee [Page 80] sanctified, and that from the ground, and in memoriall of Christ his resurrection: for they agree that al the bookes of Scripture are the word of God: and in the point in question, they agree that Churches may vary in their ceremonies and discipline, and yet retaine their peace one with another. And that ceremonies, as inconuenient (as our ceremonies are sup­posed to be,) & in some respect, fit to be abolished, yet may they be retained, and ought to be practised to preuent the diuision of brethren: disquiet of the Church, & hinderance of the Gospel; and there are few points wherein they agree more constantly then in this.

Obiect. We are commanded to call no man our teacher vpon earth, because one is our Doctor and teacher, euen Christ, Mat. 23. 8. 10. there is one law giuer, Iam. 4. 12.

Answ. This obiection is much vrged by Brownists, as some of the others are. But what will they conclude from hence? surely if any such thing, it must be this. Therefore we may not make the iudgement of the Fathers or whatsoeuer men in earth, a rule of our conscience. And indeed I say that it is wel concluded, neither verely would I nor any other, that I know of sound iudgement hold otherwise. But that it may appeare how little to the purpose it is alleadged, I say:

1 If they will apply this to our Church in respect of our ceremonies prescribed: then may they conclude against the Apostles, for prescribing Iewish ceremonies, notwithstan­ding the end and accomplishment of them all, by the death and consummatum est, of Christ.

2 The Primitiue auncient and latter reformed Churches, are all of them deficient this way: either in disipline or cere­monies, they are faulty and doe faile more or lesse; yet they will not accuse them for denying Christ, to be their teacher and Prophet.

3. They onely deny Christ to be their Prophet and tea­cher, who doe preach another Gospell to the Church, Gal. 1. 6. 7. which teach any thing besides, Gal. 1. 8. 9. Ro. 16. 17. [Page 81] otherwise, 1. Tim. 6. 3. Contrary to the word of God, Tit. 1. 9. diuers and strange doctrines, Heb. 13. 9. Heresies, Tit. 3. 10. which will not heare him in all things whatsoeuer hee shall say, Act. 3. 22. Mat. 28. 20. Ioh. 3. 36. & 10. 5. All which our Church with all other reformed Churches doe vtterly disclaime, and are free from: and namely in prescribing and vsing of these ceremonies, or the like, as appeareth by considering; First, the matter which is taught, which is of two sorts, some things are fundamentall and of greater moment, some things circumstantiall and of lesser: againe some things are specially commaunded, others included vnder generall rules and are left free to euery Church to bee determined, as shall best serue for the edification there­of, sometimes after one manner, and at other times after some other: where we are to obserue that our Church (as other reformed Churches) doe teach nothing fundamen­tall, which is not expresly taught in the Word, neither doth it teach any thing contrary to that which is expresly com­manded by Christ in his Word; onely it varieth the cir­cumstantialls or ceremonialls, according to the liberty left vnto all Churches, and practised by all Churches, which the gouernours doe suppose best to further or edifie the sub­stantialls. Secondly, consider we the manner of our Chur­ches proposing of these things. The fundamentall points, and speciall precepts of Christ shee proposeth as binding the conscience vnder paine of condemnation to euery wil­full and impenitent transgressour. The circumstantialls or ceremonialls determined by her, out of the generall rules of the Word, she proposeth and inioyneth as free, not bind­ing the conscience in themselues, as variable not perpetuall, as accidentall not as necessary. In which case our Church cannot bee saide to deny Christ for her onely teacher and Prophet, but rather to confesse him, seeing shee teacheth nothing but that Christ hath commanded. In which re­spect hee is with our Church by promise, ad finem sae­culi, Matthew 28. 19. 20. and hee that heareth the tea­chers [Page 82] thereof thus teaching heareth Christ, Luke 10. 16. Ioh. 13. 20.

And thus the first point is confirmed: The second fol­loweth Point. 2. to be spoken of: which is this, [That the doctrine and practise of suffering depriuation for refusing to con­forme to the prescribed Ceremonies, doth tend to con­demne all Churches and godly teachers, Primitiue and lat­ter, of teaching false doctrine, & of practising a maintained sin:] Which point is thus made euident: Because such Mini­sters as haue suffered depriuation for refusing to conforme, or doe hazard their ministery for the same, doe account and conclude it to bee a sin simply to conforme vnto the Cere­monies proposed in the present Church of England, or the like: and that all that doe conforme in any case vnto them, shall therein commit a sinne against God: and further that whosoeuer teacheth the contrary, they stand out to confute them and conuince them of an er­rour. But all true Churches of Christ, and all true Or­thodoxall Teachers, both auncient and latter of all times and places, without exception of any one, haue vni­formely and constantly taught this conclusion: That it is a truth and no errour to teach; a dutie and no sinne to practise the prescribed Ceremonies of the present Church of England, or the like, rather then to violate and breake the peace of the Church, or that a Minister should suffer depriuation, and so the preaching of the Gospell should bee interrupted, or that a Minister, or a­ny other Christian should separate themselues, or suffer themselues to bee separated from the publike worships of God in a true Church: Wherefore it must needes follow, that they who iustifie the former must needs condemne the latter.

Now, that it may appeare that all Orthodoxall Chur­ches and Teachers of all ages and places, since the time of the Apostles of Christ, are of this iudgement and prac­tise and not of the other: I will first begin with the Primi­tiue [Page 83] Churches, before the Reuelation and raigne of Anti­christ, and next in order of the latter reformed Churches, since the restauration of the Gospell, and declination of Antichrist.

Deo soli sit Gloria.