Ductor dubitantium, or, The rule of conscience in all her generall measures serving as a great instrument for the determination of cases of conscience : in four books / by Jeremy Taylor ...

But Ecclesiastical laws must not be perpetual.

That is, when they are made,* 1.1 they are relative to time and place, to persons and occasions, subject to all changes, fitted for use and the advan∣tage of Churches, ministring to edification, and complying with charity. Now whatsoever is made with these conditions, cannot be perpetual: and whatsoever Ecclesiastical Law hath not these conditions, the Churches ought not to receive, because they are impediments, not advantages to the service of God. If they be thus qualified, no good man will refuse them; if they be not, they are the laws of Tyrants, not of Spiritual Fathers: For this whole affaire is fully stated in those words of our Blessed Saviour; reproving of the Pharisees and their Ecclesiastical laws, he says, they by their traditions did evacuate the Commandement of God, and they taught for doctrines the commandements of men. The full sense of which when we understand, we have the full measure of Ecclesiastical laws, not onely as they relate to the Churches and communities of Christians under distinct governments, but to every single Christian under his own governour and superior. These I say are the Negative measures: that is, Ecclesiastical laws are not good and are not binding if they be impos'd against the inte∣rest of a Divine Commandement, or if they be taught as doctrines. Of the first there is no doubt, and in it there is no difficulty: But in the latter there is a very great one.

For when our superiors impose a law of discipline,* 1.2 they say it is good, it is pleasing to God, it is a good instrument and ministery to some vertue, or at least it is an act of obedience, and that it is so, is true doctrine: what hurt can there be in all this? The commandements of men are bound upon us by the Commandement of God, and therefore when they are once imposed, they cease to be indifferent, and therefore may then become 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doctrines and points of religion; what then is that which our Blessed Saviour reproves? and what is our Negative measure of Ecclesiasti∣cal laws?

To this the answer is best given by a narrative of what the Pharisees did,* 1.3 and was reproved: for all was not repugnant to the law of God, neither is all that amisse which men teach to be done. For our Blessed Saviour commanded us to hear them that sate in Moses chaire, and to doe whatso∣ever

they commanded: not absolutely whatsoever, but whatsoever of a certain sort; that is, 1. whatsoever they taught by a probable interpre∣tation of what was doubtfull, 2. or by faithfull counsel concerning things belonging to piety and charity, 3. or by a determining to circumstances of time and place those things which were left to their choice and conduct.

Whatsoever was besides these,* 1.4 that is, 1. whatsoever had it's founda∣tion in the opinions of men, and not in something certainly derived from God, if brought into religion, and impos'd on mens consciences as a part of the service of God, this is the teaching for doctrines the commandements of men. But besides this 2. if what is deduc'd onely by probable inter∣pretation be obtruded as a matter of faith; or 3. if what is piously coun∣sel'd, be turned into a perpetual and absolute law; or 4. if that which was left to the choice and conduct of the governours, be handled not as matter of liberty, but of necessity; in all these cases the commandements of men are taught for doctrines.

The reason of these things is plain.* 1.5 For the first; If it have no founda∣tion in the law of God, but in humane opinions, and yet be taught for do∣ctrine, it is literally the thing that is here reproved. For the second. What∣soever is but probably collected is not the word of God, for that is always certain: it is true it is not probable in it self, but in it self is true of false; but to him it is but probable, and therefore to say this is the word or the Commandement of God, is more then the man can say; it is to say that it is true in it self, that is, it is a doctrine of God, when indeed it is but the word of Man for ought we know. * For the third; When God hath left it at liberty, if man turnes it into a commandement, and teaches it for the law of God, he does more then God would doe, and more then is true; for God never made it into a law, and man cannot make it to become God's law: for the Ecclesiastic order being but God's Minister and the publisher of God's will, must propose things as they received them from God; that which is law, as necessary, that which is Counsel, as highly rewardable. For the fourth; If it be left in the power of the Governours, then it is hoc ipso evi∣dent that it is not necessary, and therefore though it may minister to order and discipline, yet it must doe no more: it may be called obedience, so long as it is justly bound upon us with the cords of a man; but it must not in any other sense nor at any time be called religion. How these two last sorts may be made into laws I shall account when I speak of the positive mea∣sures of Ecclesiastical laws; but abstracting from that superinduc'd obliga∣tion, to teach these things as necessary which God hath not made so, is to doe as the Pharisees did, whom our Blessed Saviour so reproves.

An example of the first is the Pharisees teaching the washing of cups and dishes,* 1.6 because they said that if a Gentile or any unclean person had touch'd their vessel that touch'd their meat, the impurity would goe into their body that eat it, and from thence into their soul; and therefore they taught the doctrine or tradition of cleansing vessels and washing their hands,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as he said in the Greek Comedy; finding out a vain remedy to cure a phantastical disease. Thus in the Church of Rome, they exorcise salt and water to cast our Devils; they give

verses out of the Psalms or Gospels to charm witches; they ring the bells to appease tempests, and very many more such ridiculous devices. 2. Of the second we have examples enough in the Council of Trent, who drew into a body of articles, and declar'd those things, some of which are but probable at most, and some of them apparently false, to be articles of faith: and un∣der this those also must needs be involved, who persecute men for opinions and doubtfull disputations. 3. Of the third, they are very evil examples who to some whole orders of men lay an injunction of keeping Evangeli∣cal counsels: such who forbid the whole order of the superior Clergy to marry, and command them that are married to forsake their wives or their office and livelihood. 4. But they are guilty of the fourth kind of pre∣varicating of the words of our Blessed Saviour, who persecute the breakers of an Ecclesiastical Law with a severity greater then the violators of a Di∣vine Commandement. For if there be any liberty of any sort left after an indifferent action is made into a law of man, it is all destroyed by them who give lesse liberty to the transgression of that law then to the breach of God's law, under which there is left no liberty, but the liberty of a chearfull and voluntary obedience. For they that doe such things must needs at least say that such humane injunctions are as necessary as the Divine Com∣mandements; for else why are they more severely punished?

The summe is this;* 1.7 Not onely those who expressely teach that what they have invented is a Commandement of God, but all they that say any thing is a law of God which is not, though it be good, though it be proba∣ble, and all they which use arts and secret devices and little arguments and inforcements, and presse indifferent things up to the height and necessity of religion and a Divine Commandement, are guilty of this Pharisaisme, ob∣noxious to our Saviours reproof, and if it be in the matter of Ecclesiastical laws, have exceeded their measures and their power, and bind themselves, but not the consciences of their subjects. A Commandement is not onely then broken when we bid open defiance to it, but then also when we doe actions unlike the vertue of it, and actions tending to the violation of it; that is, there are degrees of violation of a Divine law: and an Ecclesiasti∣cal law that does in any degree break this law of our Blessed Saviour is therefore void, and is become intolerable.

Of these things I shall yet give two great examples,* 1.8 one of the Pha∣risees, and another of some that follow their example in this affair. God gave a Commandement to the Jews of keeping holy the Sabbath-day, their new Moons and some other solemnities. Now there were many par∣ticulars in the observation which were not determin'd in the Law; but 1. what was doubtfull was to be expounded by their Doctors. 2. Some things were left to the liberty of good people, and the measure of them was best determin'd by their Doctors and men learned in the Law. 3. There were some Canons Ecclesiastical which were outer guards and hedges to the law it self, that men might by those distances be kept farther off from sin; and in these things their Rulers also had power. Now though all this they could doe, and might pretend an authority from God to interpret the Law and to guide the Consciences, yet when they fell into ridiculous Com∣mentaries and uselesse Glosses, neither the law it self about which their in∣terpretations were imployed, nor their authority which they had from God could secure them from tyranny, and corruption, and doing violence

to Conscience, and imposing unequal burdens.

Thus we find that their Rabbins taught that upon a solemn feast-day it was not lawful to catch fish in their ponds, but they might hunt the hens and catch the geese in their yard. They might not blow the fire with a pair of bellows, because that was too like the labour of Smiths; but they might blow it through a hollow Cane. They might make a fire and set on their pot, but they must not lay on their wood like the structure of a house, that is, too artifici∣ally; and you must rost or boyle no more then was necessary: and if you made a fire, you might wash your feet with warm water, but not your whole body. You must not touch an egge that was laid that day; nay if you were doubtful whether it were laid that-day or no, yet you might not eat it, and if that were mingled with a thousand, you might touch none of them: but if you kill'd a hen, you might eat the perfect eggs that you found in her.

These and many more such little doctrines they taught to be observed, as explications and manners of the observation of the Divine Commandement: but these I have here transcrib'd from the Jewes books, that we may perceive the sense of our Blessed Saviour's reproof by the in∣stances of their prevarication. He was pleased to speak to that of washing of cups and platters:* 1.9 but it is also s••••d there, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, there are many other things, such as that was which they have received and teach, some of which I have recited. Now we doe not find that the Pharisees taught these as divine Commandements, but they us'd them as if they were; they did them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they thought themselves the more holy for doing them, they accounted them profane that did not, they plac'd much of their religion and Pharisaisme or separation in them, esteem∣ing them a part of the divine worship: This was their case, and Christ gave their sentence.

The other instance which I promised is the law of the Roman Church in keeping of Lent;* 1.10 which it is certain was no law of Christ; not so much as the interpretation of a Divine law. Some of them pretend it was enjoyned by the Apostles; others of them say not, and these say true; so that it is a Commandement of men: but yet this they teach for doctrine in the cul∣pable and criminal sense, that is,

1. They value it more then some Commandements of God.* 1.11 I need no other proof but the words of Erasmus, Veluti parricida, penè dierim, rapitur ad supplicium,* 1.12 qui pro piscium carnibus gustarit carnes suillas, He that in stead of fish shall but tast a piece of pork is dragg'd to punishment almost as if he were a parricide. Gustavit aliquis carnes, clamant omnes, O coelum! O terra! O maria Neptuni! Nutat Ecclesiae status, &c. If they see a man eat flesh, they are amaz'd, they think the Church is in danger; they put men to death, to the sharpest death of burning alive, for eating flesh; they shut up the Butchers shambles, but leave open the publick Stews.

2. They account it to be a part of the service of God,* 1.13 not onely as it is an act of obedience to superiors, but in it self and without any relative consideration.* 1.14 Bellarmine saies they are not Christians that eat flesh in Lent: which words are extremely false, or else every one that disobeys an Ec∣clesiastical law hath forfeited his Christendome; or else he places the summe and life of religion in the keeping of Lent, and makes it a vital part, expressly prevaricating one of the most glorious propositions of Christi∣anity,

placing the Kingdome of God in meat and drink,* 1.15 not in righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost; and doing that which the Apostle hath forbidden,* 1.16 when he said to the Colossians, let no man judge you in meat and drink. If it were onely a question of obedience to the law, it were to be considered upon a distinct account, and were a sin or duty respectively according to the several dispositions of the person and the law: but no man saies that he is no Christian who at any time breaks any Ecclesiastical law; and therefore in this more is pretended, and it is to be reckoned amongst the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the commandements of men that are taught for doctrines.

3. They account the exterior action, the body of the injunction,* 1.17 the element of it to be a service of God; and for that part of it esteem them∣selves the more holy and the better Christians, as appears in their con∣tentions about it, using arguments to prove the very Fast to be a sacrifice, a pure oblation* 1.18. Now it is true that fasting is a good ministery to divers holy purposes, but it is no more; it is that which can be supplied by other ministeries as apt, and therefore that in kind is not necessary, nor requir'd; it is that whose work can be done without any ministery at all in some persons & some cases, even by love and by obedience, by hope and fear, which are of themselves direct graces, vertues and parts of the service of God. And therefore the Fathers of the Church press in their Sermons and exhorta∣tions to fasting, that they would take care to acquire the end of fasting, to be free from vice, to mortify the affections and lusts; according to that saying of Isidore, Fastings with good works are acceptable to God: But he that abstains from meat,* 1.19 and does evil, imitates the Devils, quibus esca non est, & nequitia semper est, They never eat, but ever doe wickedly and perversly. But he fasts well that fasts from maliciousness and secular ambitions. Take heed therefore,* 1.20 saies S. Hierom to Celantia, that when you begin to fast and use abstinence, you doe not think your self holy. For this strength adjumentum est, non perfectio sanctitatis, it is not the perfection of sanctity, but a help onely. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and there is no profit at all of fasting,* 1.21 unless all things else doe follow, saith S. Chrysostome; that is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an abstinence from sin intirely: and again, what gain is it if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 being void and empty of good works we have kept the fast? If therefore another saies, I have fasted all the Lent, say thou, I had an enemy, but I am reconcil'd; I had an evil Custome of detracting from my neighbours fame, but I have left it off; I had an ungodly custome of swearing, but it is now amended. The summe is this, which I represent in the words of Prosper,* 1.22 jejunia, abstinentiae, ac caetera hujusmodi, non pro justitia, sed cum justitia Deo sunt exhibenda, Abstinence and fastings are not to be given to God for good works, but with them. That is, they are of use in order to certain purposes, which when they doe effect they are good, when they doe not, they are useless troubles; and if they then be urg'd beyond their ministery, and instrumentality, and for themselves, then we return to the beggerly elements and rudiments of the synagogue: and if we suffer our selves to be brought under the power of these things by laws and affright∣ments and spiritual terrors, then we have lost our Christian liberty which was bought by the best bloud of the world.

4. But not onely the exterior and instrumental act is absolutely urged and taught as necessary,* 1.23 but a circumstance, a manner and forme of that ex∣terior

instrument is enjoyned. It is enjoyn'd not that we fast totally; but that we fast so: you may dine if you will eat at the Merchants hours, after twelve or one of the clock, but you may not eat flesh; you may eat sweet-meats, the most delicious fish, the Sturgeon and the Scarus, the Lamprey and the Oyster, the Eele and the Salmon, and all the delicacies of Nature, so you doe not touch the fillets of a Veal, nor eat an Egge or Milk, Curds or Cheese, or any thing that comes from a beast or bird. Now what can be the meaning of this, when it comes to be expounded by wise and sober men that can judge of the causes and differences of things? For if abstinence and fasting be the thing that is requir'd, this is nothing of it: if we may dine, if we may fill our bellies with wine and delicacies, if we may eat and, as Adam might, of all the garden of Eden, it is no great matter as to tem∣perance and abstinence, as to mortification and austerities, if we abstain from one; it may be something as to our health, and so certainly it is to very many bodies. It may be an instrument of vexation, but it cannot edify. Is any man cur'd of his lust by eating nothing but fish and broaths for forty daies? He may indeed be made sick by it, and so very many are, but the interest of no vertue is serv'd by it, but by the other permissions it may be more destroyed; and by fishes and broaths and artificial meats provisions may be too abundantly made for the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof. What therefore is in this manner of the law, but something of the beggerly reli∣gion of meats and drinks? In the daies of Prosper they abstain'd from the flesh of beasts, but not of birds; and his sentence of that kind of fasting is this,

But they that abstaining from the flesh of four-footed beasts, enjoy the flesh of Phesants and other precious birds or fishes,* 1.24 seem to me not to cut off the delights of their bodies, but to change them, and to cast away the common and cheap delicacies of flesh, that they may fill their pleasures with more delicious and more precious flesh; not for absti∣nence, but because some flesh is unclean, or rather, as I suppose, for the tenderness of their wanton stomacks: since the nature of any flesh is not to be condemned, if it be intended for mans use and appointed by God; but the lusts of the flesh are to be avoided, which the Devil hath superin∣duc'd and offers to our senses. But they that would seem to themselves more abstinent, and by it acquire same and noises, doe so abstain from flesh, that they fill their vast appetite with rare fruits and curious broaths: but spiritual abstinence perswades not to refrain the use of cer∣tain meats, but the restraint of the lust and the desire; and they are ra∣ther to be esteem'd abstinent, who forbid not to themselves the use of some meats, but the delights of the body.

] And indeed let it be consi∣dered; if a man pretending to mortify his body shall abstain from wine, and will nevertheless drink sherbets and delicious beurages, strong ale and Spirits, I suppose his body will not by that discipline be dead to sin: and so it is in the abstinence from flesh, unless he also abstain from all nourish∣ment but what is necessary and made pleasant by want. For thus the holy Primitives when they had gotten the custome of the Lenten fast, for two daies, or six daies, or ten daies, or fifteen daies, according as the humor in∣creased, they did generally abstain from flesh; but so they did also from fish, and wine, and all delicacies, and eat a drie diet, bread and water, herbs and common fruits, turneps and berries, flies and nuts: and yet this they did without making it a religion not to eat a bit of flesh; but upon occasion would eat a meale of flesh, but not very delicious; and when their fasts were of many daies, they were not continual but intermitted. This latter

I have already proved; but that even in Lent the Primitive Christians did not abhorre flesh, appears beyond dispute in the case of Spiridion Bishop of Cyprus, who when a traveller came to him in the time of Lent very weary and faint, and there was no cold provisions in the house ready dress'd, it being a time of fasting, bids his daughter to boyle some pork which was in the house powder'd for the use of the family: she did so, and her Father the Bishop eat of it, and bade his guest doe so too; who refus'd, saying that he was a Christian. The Bishop replied, therefore the rather you ought not to refuse; because the word of God hath said, To the pure all things are clean.* 1.25 So Sozomen tels the story. By which it is apparent, that then it was not the custome for Christians to eat flesh in Lent, for they eat no∣thing that was pleasant, but they abstain'd because it was pleasant, not be∣cause it was flesh; for of this they made no religion, as appears in the fact and exhortation and argument of Spiridion. And of the same considera∣tion was that law of Justinian, in whose time, which was in the middle of the sixth Age, the Custome of abstaining from flesh in Lent did prevaile much; but because it hapned in Constantinople to be great scarcity of other provisions, the Emperor commanded the shambles to be open and flesh to be publickly sold.* 1.26 But Nicephorus tells that the people would not buy any, for they began to think it to be religion not to touch, not to tast, not to handle. But the Emperor and the wise men knew no religion against it. And that which Marcian said to Avitus in the like case is very considerable, We know that charity is better then fasting;* 1.27 for charity is a work of the Divine law, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but fasting, is a thing urbitrary and of our own choice. * Since therefore to eat flesh or not to eat it, may become good or bad as it is us'd, and does not serve the end of fasting, and such fasting does not serve the end of the spirit, not onely to make fasting to be religion, to which it does but minister, but to call that fasting which they who first be∣gan Lent would call feasting and luxury, and to make that to be essential to that fast, and that fast necessary to salvation in the ordinary way of necessity, is not onely to teach for doctrine the Commandements of men, but to make the impotent, fantastick and unreasonable devices of men to become Commandements.

5. That this may be an exact parallel with the practice of the Phari∣sees in that folly which our Blessed Saviour reprov'd;* 1.28 the Commande∣ment does so little regard the true end of fasting, and that fasting so little advance the use and interest of any vertue, that they spend themselves even in the circumstances of some circumstances, and little devices of supersti∣tion, taking care not to eat a turnip if boyl'd in a vessel in which flesh was put, not to cut their bread with a knife that had carv'd flesh, not to tast it, but to wash their mouth after a little whey or broath, if by chance it hath been touch'd: which things because they can serve no end of religion, the law that requires such things must needs be foolish or superstitious; it must either play with mens consciences as with a tennis-ball, or intimate some pollution and unholiness at that time to be in the flesh, or else at least must pretend to greater strictness then God does in the observation of his positive laws; and it certainly introduces the greatest tyranny in the world, destroys peace, and is the most unwarrantable of all the follies which can be incident to the wiser part of mankind, I mean to them that govern others.

I will not instance in the ridiculous and superstitious questions which they make about the keeping of this Ecclesiastical law;* 1.29 as whether it be a dinner or a supper if we eat after Even-song said at high noon; whether a mornings draught does break the Ecclesiastical fast; whether a man may eat a bit of bread with his drink, and yet be a good son of the Church; whe∣ther a Cook that dresses meat for sick persons may lawfully lick his fin∣gers; whether he that eats one bit of flesh, sins anew if he eats another; and whether or no he may not at the same rate eat flesh all the Lent after; whether the wet nurse may eat flesh, because her baby may have good milk; whether it be lawful to eat birds and fowls, because they were pro∣duc'd out of the water: which doughty reason did incourage some to doe it, of whom Socrates speaks,* 1.30 and is mention'd by Peter Comestor the Master of the scholastical history. Which questions, if they that make them be in their wits, and think other men are so too, they must needs believe that the keeping of Lent is so sacred, so principal a point of religion, so great a ser∣vice of God in the very letter and body, in the crust and outside of it, that the observation of it must consist in a mathematical point: it is like the De∣calogue, the very letters of which are numbred; and if a haire be missing, religion suffers diminution: and which of all these it be, yet in every one of them they doe what the Pharisees did and what Christ reprov'd in them, and therefore forbids in all men, they teach for doctrines the Commandements of Men.

6. To return to the particular of the Rule,* 1.31 They make an Ecclesiastical law, which is of a relative use and nature, to be periodical and perpetual, which is unreasonable, and may be sometimes unjust, and very often un∣charitable, and therefore not the fit matter of an Ecclesiastical law. For this is certainly the greatest deletery of the liberty of Christian Churches, and a snare to Consciences, and is of it self apt to introduce superstition and the opinion of direct religion into the discipline.

But this is to be understood of such laws which are intended for dis∣cipline,* 1.32 and are 1. a burden, and 2. of a nature relative to the future, and 3. of an alterable use. For if a law were made that every man at a certain time of the year should doe a certain discipline to mortify his lust, it were a foolish law; for the man at that time, it may be, needs it not, or he hath another remedy, or he is sufficiently contrite for his sins, and does his penance by internal sorrow, or it may be he cannot at that time mourn, or it may be the cause is alter'd, or a greater cause intervenes, and that ought to be serv'd, and therefore not this, for if you serve both, you tire obedience, and make religion to be a burden: but which is most of all, a law of burden if it be perpetual, makes the willing to be slaves, and tempts the unwilling to be rebels; and because it is intended to minister to things contingent and infinitely alterable, if the law be not so too, it must pass into an opinion of being a Divine worship and religion, or else into more then an opinion and imagination of tyranny. Adde to this, that laws of bur∣den are alwaies against charity, if they be not done in great necessity, or not effective of a good greater then the evil; and therefore to impose such laws with a perpetual obligation upon Churches, when it cannot be of perpetual use, and at all times good, or just at such times necessary, is against the equity & charity of that power which Christ intrusted in the hands of them whom he made stewards of his houshold, feeders of his flock, and Fathers of his family.

But if the laws be relative to what is past,* 1.33 and no burden, but mat∣ter of ease or benefit, or comes from a perpetual cause, or that which is un∣alterable, then the law may be such which will be perpetually consented to, and kept for ever. Thus the Catholic Church keeps the Lords day, not by an everlasting ordinance, but by a perpetual consent, and for a never-failing reason; and that which makes it necessary now to keep that day, and will doe so for ever, is because the reason of it is always the same; and in this case that which was fit at first, will be so at last, and all the way: and things are in that constitution and conjunction, that no man can despise that day, without being carelesse to return thanks for the resurrection of Christ, and to separate a just portion of his time to the more solemn ser∣vice of God. But for all this, this is not a perpetual law impos'd upon all Churches; for God did not impose it, and no man hath power to doe it; for no mans power can last longer then his life: and therefore no Bishop can oblige his successors by any Canon, without the Civil power supervenes and fixes that law by continuation. And therefore although God did enjoyn the Jews an annual fast for ever, and although the Rulers of the Jews did add some more, and they were observed for ever: yet this will not infer that therefore now this may be done in a law of the Church. For God who is a law-giver does abide for ever, and therefore his laws are to remain as long as he please: & the Rulers of the Jews had both the powers, Civil and Ec∣clesiastical, conjunct, and they by a current legislation still caus'd their fasts to be observed; but yet the succeeding ages had been at liberty, and the Sanhedrim might have chang'd those solemn days, but that they were established by Prophets and by those whom they believ'd to speak the will of God: all which make their case special, and not to be drawn into ex∣ample and warranty in the sanction of Ecclesiastical laws in the Christian Church. * To which let this be added, that the Jews might keep and ob∣serve a religion of days and meats, and it not being against the analogy of their manner of serving God, their Rulers had an equal power to make laws in the difference of days and meats, as in any other matter whatso∣ever. But the laws of the Church must minister to piety and holinesse, and to nothing else; and they must be exacted with prudence and charity, and in no other manner; and they must be obeyed in love and liberty, and by no other measures: but the day or the meat must ever be the lesse principal in the constitution; they may be the circumstances, but no part of the Reli∣gion, and therefore cannot be perpetual; but just as a Venice glasse may, that is, if there be nothing to break it, it may abide for many ages, but every thing that strikes it can break the glasse, & every requisite of reason or charity can put a period, or take off the necessity of that portion in the law, which because it must be lesse principally regarded, must accordingly be imposed and exacted, but cannot be universal and perpetual.

The result of these considerations is this;* 1.34 1. Ecclesiastical laws may be made by particular Churches, to prevail in their own governments, and to passe on their own subjects, but may not by one Church be imposed upon another, much lesse from one to passe upon all.

2. Ecclesiastical laws may be made and continued by any authority so long as that power lasts,* 1.35 and so long as the reason of the law does last: but it can be no longer a law then it hath influence from the remaining power who is to establish it according to the remaining usefulnesse.

3. All Ecclesiastical laws in the matter of meats and drinks and days must be wholly relative to religion,* 1.36 and the effect of graces and proper du∣ties, and must not at all be imposed with any regard to themselves, but to the ends of their ministery, and must live and die according to the nature of Relative beings: but cannot be perpetual, but where neither the cause nor the subject alters.

4. All Ecclesiastical laws must be imposed with liberty:* 1.37 not with li∣berty of the subjects to obey or not to obey, but with the liberty of the whole Church, to change them or to continue them, to exact or to relax them, to bind or to loose, as may best stand with prudence and charity, with the interests of vertue or the good of the subject.

5. Ecclesiastical laws must serve religion,* 1.38 but must never pretend to be religion or a direct service of God. It is true that all religious laws of our just superiors rightly imposed in order to any vertue are adopted into the society of that vertue; as a law of fasting does also enjoyn a duty of temperance; a law of Christian festivity, in order to our joy in God, and praising his Name, and paying him thanks, promotes all these graces, and therefore he that keeps that day to these purposes, besides his obedience, does an act of all those graces. Yet it is to be observed that the observa∣tion of these laws can never formally be reckoned to be actions of those graces; they are but ministeries and instruments, and they not necessary, but usefull onely: and therefore he that does not observe that day, though it may be he sins against obedience, yet he is not to be judg'd as if he were intemperate, or unthankfull, or unmindfull of God's benefits; because though these appointments are made for the services of these graces, yet these are not the adequate ministeries of them, they may be done by other ways at other times, and they may at that time be omitted without any neglect of such graces. If there be a just cause to omit the observation, then the omission is neither disobedience, nor intemperance, nor unthank∣fullnesse: but if there be no just cause, it is disobedience; and may be any of the other as it happens, but is not certainly so. But though in these re∣spects to obey an Ecclesiastical law may be a doing an act of vertue toge∣ther with the obedience, and so a serving of God; yet because it is onely in regard of the concomitant act of vertue, which is served by the law, if that law doe not serve that vertue, but by any cause be destitute of it's purpose, that external action which the law enjoyns is so far from being a service of God, that if it be urg'd imperiously, or acted for it self, and delighted in upon the Natural account, it enters into religion, with which it hath nothing to doe, and so passes into superstition.

6. Ecclesiastical laws if by any means they be taught for doctrines and Commandements of God,* 1.39 they become unlawfull in the imposition, though the actions of themselves be lawfull; that is, they are unlawfull laws, and doe not bind the Conscience, for they are such things in which no man can have authority, for they are a direct destruction to Christian liber∣ty, which no man ought to take from us. If they once pretend to a ne∣cessity besides the equal necessity of obedience, they doe not oblige the sub∣jects of any government; but if they pretend to a necessity of obedience, they doe not oblige any Churches besides that whose Governours have made the law.

Notes

• * 1.1

  7.
• * 1.2

  8.
• * 1.3

  9.
• * 1.4

  10.
• * 1.5

  11.
• * 1.6

  12.
• * 1.7

  13.
• * 1.8

  14.
• * 1.9

  Mark 7. 4.
• * 1.10

  15.
• * 1.11

  16.
• * 1.12

  Epist. ad Epis. Basil.
• * 1.13

  17.
• * 1.14

  Lib. 2. de bonis operib. c. 9. § tertio addit.
• * 1.15

  Rom. 14. 17.
• * 1.16

  Coloss. 2. 16.
• * 1.17

  18.
• * 1.18

  Beliar. ubi supra c. 11. § item.
• * 1.19

  Lib. 2. Senten. cap. 44.
• * 1.20

  Epist. 14.
• * 1.21

  Homil. 3. ad pop. Antioch. & hom. 4. & hom. 16.
• * 1.22

  L. 3. de vita contemplat. cap. 10.
• * 1.23

  19.
• * 1.24

  Lib. 2. de vit. contempl. cap. 23.
• * 1.25

  Lib. 1. hist. 11.
• * 1.26

  Lib. 17. cap. 32. hist.
• * 1.27

  Theodoret. hist. relig. in Mar∣ciano.
• * 1.28

  20.
• * 1.29

  21.
• * 1.30

  Lib. 5. hist. cap. 21.
• * 1.31

  22.
• * 1.32

  23.
• * 1.33

  24.
• * 1.34

  25.
• * 1.35

  26.
• * 1.36

  27.
• * 1.37

  28.
• * 1.38

  29.
• * 1.39

  30.