A reply to Dr. Mortons generall Defence of three nocent [sic] ceremonies viz. the surplice, crosse in baptisme, and kneeling at the receiving of the sacramentall elements of bread and wine.

SECT. XVI.

THE Defendant here undertaketh to proue, that God in the scriptures hath granted a generall licence or authoritie to all Churches, to ordaine any ceremonies that may be fit for the better serving of God. But what if this were granted? what is it to the purpose? what maketh it for our ceremonies in controversie, except he can shew that they are fit for the better serving of God? Now this he no where undertaketh to prove, nor dare, I thinke, professe so much in writing, without many vnwarrantable limi∣tations.

The onely scripture he bringeth is, 1. Cor. 14. 26. 40. concerning order and decencie, a place much profaned by the patrons of our ce∣remonies, as shall be shewed. This place is vsed (sayth he) by Fathers and all Divines, for one and the same conclusion. It is much used, I grant, and as much abused. But 1. it is not used by all Divines, to proue the institution of such ceremonies as ours lawfull. For they are much mistaken vvhich think our ceremonies to be mere mat∣ters of order: and as for decencie, they haue been often proved to be farre from it: which of it selfe to every indifferent eye is more then apparant. 2. it is not used to this purpose by any that haue authoritie sufficient to perswade us that it will beare such a con∣clusion, except they will shew us by what Logick they form their consequence, which the Defendant is not able to doe for them. 3. This scripture being rightly understood, doth not onely not ju∣stifie such ceremonies as ours, but plainly condemneth them. For the manifesting of which assertion, because it may seem strange to those eares that are accustomed to other sounds, I will here di∣stinctly set down an argument drawn out of these words, against such ceremonies as ours are.

All that is left vnto the Churches liberty in things pertaining unto Gods worship, is to order them in comely maner. This is manifestly collected out of the place in question: so the Defendant seemeth to grant, so P. Martyr vnderstandeth it, as is to be seen in his commentarie upon 1 Sam. 14. which judgement of his is cited and approved by

D. Whitaker de Pont p. 841. & 844. confirmed also by Iunius against Bell. cont. 3. l. 4. c. 16. n. 86. 87. &c. 17. n. 9. 10. 12. 13. where he sheweth that Christ is the onely law-giver that appointeth things in his Church: and that he hath appointed all that are requisite: and that the Church maketh no lawes (properly so called) to appoint any new things to be used, but onely canons, orders, directions, ordering in seemly maner those things which Christ hath appointed: and that if she addeth any thing of her own, she doth decline. The rea∣son is, because unto her is commited no authoritie of appointing new things, but a ministerie to observe and doe such things which Christ hath appointed. vide etiam Iun. de transl. imper. l. 1. c. 2. n. 26. 27. 31. This is also confirmed by sound reason, both in respect of the wisdome required in all law-makers, & perfectly found in Christ, and also in regard of the nature of such institutions. For the former reason teacheth, (as Aristotle sheweth Rhet. 1. 3.) that all which possibly may, should be appointed in the law by the giuer of it, and nothing left unto the ministerial iudges, but that which must needs be left, as matters of fact, &c. Now in the worship of God, all but particular circumstances of order, may easily bee appointed (as in very deed they were) by our law-giver Christ. As for the nature of such institutions, that doth also require so much: for whatsoever is aboue civilitie therein, if it bee not a circumstance of order, it is worship, and therfore invented by man, unlawfull will-worship. For vvhatsoever is used or acted by him that worshippeth God, in that act, it must needs be either grounded on civill humane consi∣derations, and therefore civilitie: or an act and means of worship, and therfore worship: or the ordering and manner of disposing those acts & meanes, and therefore lawfull, if lawfully and fitly ap∣plyed: or else, at the least, idle and vaine, and therefore to be avoi∣ded, according to that of Basil, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: A fift cannot be given. By all this it may appeare, that the authority of the Church is not to appoint what she will, no not of things in their own nature indifferent, and say they be in order, or for order: but onely to order those things vvhich God hath appointed.

Thus farre the proposition, or first part of my syllogisme: the as∣sumption followeth.

But to appoint & use the ceremonies as we doe, is not to order in comely manner any thing pertaining to Gods worship. The reason is, because order requireth not the institution or usage of any new thing, but onely the right placing and disposing of things which are formerly instituted. This appeareth 1. by the notation which is given of the word it selfe, which both in greek & latine is taken from the rank∣ing of soldiers in certain bounds & limits of time & place. Dicebāt enim militibus tribuni, hactenus tibi licet, hic consistes, eô progrediere, huc

revertere, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, inde ordo Scalig. and 2 by the definitions which are given therof, by Philosophers and Divines. Tull. off. lib. 1 eadem vis videtur ordinis & collocationis. Ordinem definiunt composi∣tionem rerum aptis & accommodatis locis. Locum autem actionis, oppor∣tunitatem dicunt esse temporis. Aug. de civit. lib. 15 cap. 13 order is the disposition which fit places to things equall and unequall, id est, when things are handsomely ranked, some to goe before, and some to follow, as P. Martyr expoundeth it, loc. com. cl. 4 c. 5.

3 The same also is confirmed by our Divines, vvho usually gi∣ving instances of order, doe infist in time, place, and such like circumstances, making a difference betwixt mysticall ceremonies and order, many times condemning the one, and allowing the o∣ther: as the divines of France and the low Countries, in their ob∣servations on the Harmonie of Confessions Sect. 17 Beza Ep. 8. Iun. in Bell. append. tract. de cultu imaginum c. 7 n. 12 13 14.

4 By the context of the Chapter, viz. 1 Cor. 14. it plainly ap∣peareth, that order is opposed to that confusion spoken of v. 33, and therfore importeth nothing but that peaceable proceeding vvhereby they that should speak, speak one by one, and the rest attend, &c. v. 30 31. So Basil expoundeth it, shewing order to consist in sorting of persons, some to this, and some to that accor∣ding to their office, and in determining of time and place, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: p. 459. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. and p. 530. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Lastly, neither Luk. 1 8, neither in any place of Scripture doth the word order import any more then hath been said.

As for comelinesse, that is nothing but the seemlinesse of or∣der. For as P. Martyr saith in 1 Cor. 11: it is such a tempering of actions as vvherby they may more fitly atteine their end. Other∣where it may conteine that natural or civill handsomenesse, which is spoken of ch. 11 13, as it doth ch. 12 23, and so includeth all that which is grounded on civility, as a faire cloth and cup for the communion, a faire and firme vessell for baptisme: but not the appointing of new mysticall ceremonies, for then such cere∣monies were here commanded to all Churches, vvhich the Def. I think vvill not say: and then the Apostolick Assemblies should haue worshipped God uncomelily.

Thus we haue both proposition and assumption of our Argu∣ment against the ceremonies confirmed out of this place, which the Defendant choose as the onely place that could be brought for them. Now I hope vve may adde the Conclusion.

Therefore to appoint and use the ceremonies as we doe, is not left to the liberty of the Church, i. e. it is unlawfull.