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. I. ad X.

THE Authours of the Abridgement framed a strong Argument against our ceremonies from the rules of ce∣remonies prescribed in the Word, p. 43 &c. with this Argument vvhen the Defendant vvas not able to grap∣pell, as it stood in the parts combined, he thought good to sever some parcels of it, and try vvhat he could say to them apart. Thus out of this one Argument he hath taken that which he cal∣leth our first: and out of the same he hath made up this fift: and yet hee hath quite left out a great part of the sinewes wherewith that one reason is knit together in the Abridge∣ment.

The argument is taken from the scandall or offence vvhich the imposing and using of these ceremonies do bring unto divers sort•• of men.

The Defendant heere maketh great flourishing in nine whole Sections, defining, dividing, and subdividing a scandall, as if he would make all cleare before him: but at the end of all this pre∣paration, he maketh no application of these Rules unto the mat∣ter in hand at all: but onely, telleth his Reader, p. 154, That these divisions and subdivisions will expedite all difficulties, so that out of them he may collect the true and false sense of Scriptures alledged. It vvere sufficient therefore either to deny this power to be in his divisions: or else to set down as many other subdivisions of scandall (vvhich vvere easie to doe) and then tell him that these vvill expedite the controversie, and that from them hee may collect the errours of his answer. But I will notwith∣standing briefly shew my opinion concerning some of these dictates.

The definition vvhich he onely alloweth of as accurate is, that a scandall is a wilfull offence against Christians, in provoking of them unto any damnable errour or sinne, by any sensible externall meanes: Sect. 1. Wherein notwithstanding many faults may be found. For 1 every scandall is not wilfull, except the word be taken more largely then use of speech will allow. 2 Every scandall is not against Christians. 3 A scandall is not onely by provoking to sinne, but also in hindring from good. 4 what doth he meane to put in the word damnable? the occasioning of any sin, sufficeth to make up a scandall.

Among his subdivisions, the first thing I except against is, section 5, vvhere he distinguisheth so betwixt persons and causes,

either determined or undetermined, that in matters determined by the Church (as he teacheth) obedience is to be given without respect of scandall: and onely in matters undetermined there is a charitable consi∣deration to be had of other mens consciences. This is a new and a tic∣kle point of Divinity touching the tenderest part of our spirits, even our consciences, and other mens also. It ought therefore ei∣ther not to haue been propounded, or else to be well confirmed ei∣ther with testimonies, or vvith reasons drawn out of Scripture. But alas the Def. thrusteth it upon us without any such vvarrant. The peace of the Church (saith he) is to be preferred before the grie∣vance i. e. scandall of any sort of men. As if the peace of the Church did not more consist in avoyding of scandals, then in observing of humane ceremonies! it is not the peace of God which is bro∣ken by a charitable care of avoyding offences, but by rushing in∣to them.

A scandall in the nature of it is spirituall murder. Now sup∣pose a Superiour should command a thing in it selfe indifferent, whereupon murder vvere like to follow, as to runne a horse, or a cart, in a certain way, at a certaine time, when it may be unwit∣ting to the commander, little children were playing in the way, vvould any mans conscience serue him to doe it?

Avoyding of scandall is a maine duty of charity. May Supe∣riours at their pleasure appoint how farre I shall shew my charity towards my brothers soule? Then surely an inferiour earthly court may crosse the determinations of the high Court of hea∣ven.

The superiours haue no power given them for destruction, but onely for edification. If therefore they command scandalls, they goe beyond their commission: neither are we tyed therein to doe as they bid, but as they should bid.

If determination by superiours vvere sufficient to take away the sin of a scandall. Then they doe very ill that they doe not (so farre as is possible) determine all things indifferent, that so no dan∣ger may be left in giving of offence by the use of them. Then the Church of Rome is to be praysed in that she hath determined of so many indifferents; then Paul with the other Apostles might haue spared a great deale of labour in admonishing the Churches how they should avoyd offences about some indifferent things. A farre shorter way had bene either to determine the matter finally, or else to haue given order that the Churches should among them∣selues determine it at home.

But say that the Archbishop of Corinth (for now I suppose such a one) had called his Convocation, and vvith consent of his Clergie had determined that men might, and for testifying of

liberty should at a certaine time eat of such and such meats which men formerly doubted of: would not yet the Apostle haue given the same direction he did? would not good Christians still haue had care of their brothers consciences? Can the determina∣tion of a superiour be a sufficient plea at the barre of Gods judge∣ment seat, for a man that by vertue or force thereof alone, hath done any action that his conscience telleth him will scandalize his brother?

Lastly, I vvould faine know whether those superiours doe not giue a great scandall, vvhich take upon them determinately to im∣pose unnecessary rites vvhich they know many good men will be scandalized by?

The second notorious flaw vvhich I finde in the Defendant his subdivisions is sect 9, where he granteth that much indulgence in∣deed is to be used in things indifferent towards weake persons, whose in∣firmity proceedeth onely from simple ignorance: but that onely till such time as the doctrine concerning such things haue been sufficiently declared: because a scandall doth alwaies presuppose a meer weakenesse for want of due meanes of knowledge. For 1 Paul had sufficiently declared that it vvas lawfull for him to take wages, yet he would not, 1 Cor. 9, he had given sufficient reasons for the lawfulnesse of eating all kind of meats, yet he abstayned, and so counselled others, for feare of scandall, Rom. 14 1 Cor 9. 2 There can be no certaine set time for all sorts of men vvhen they are sufficiently taught. 3 Who is this Def. that he dare judge so many of his fellow ser∣vants, that in such indifferencies as our ceremonies are held to be, they take offence not upon weakenesse, but upon presumption? 4 What authority haue our Prelats to obtrude unnecessary cere∣monies upon the Church, vvhich must be declared before they can be used? Is it fit that the people should be troubled with the declararion of mens inventions, vvhen they are hardly brought to heare willingly the maine things of the Gospell? 5 Is it not more agreeable to the wisedome of God, Ex. 21. 33, to fill up the pit, then to set one by for to warne the passengers they fall not in∣to it? 6 There vvas never yet sufficient declaration of this do∣ctrine of ceremonies throughout England. In many places there is no preaching at all. Many preach so, that they declare nothing almost to the people but their own folly. Many are ashamed, or at least unwilling to declare unto the people mens devices. Many declare them so corruptly that the scandall thereby is not remo∣ved but increased. And among those that goe about vvith some good mind to declare this kind of doctrine, there is almost as great variety of declarations as there is of declarers: while some will haue them significant some not: some say they are good and pro∣fitable

to edification, and others condemning them as altogether unfit, declare them to be tollerable for avoiding of a greater mis∣chiefe: Some will haue them onely civill, and others Eccle∣siasticall: some excuse all but the crosse, and some extoll the crosse aboue all. Are not such declarations (thinke you) likely to informe well the consciences of poore men who doubt more whom they should take for a good Declarer, then they did at the first of the things themselues?