The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity — Richard Hooker

The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity · Richard Hooker

The fourth Booke: Concerning their third assertion, that our forme of Church-politie is corrupted with popish orders, rites and ceremonies, banished out of certaine reformed Churches, whose example therein we ought to hauehave followed.

The matter conteined in this fourth Booke.

1 HOw great vse ceremonies hauehave in the Church.

2 The first thing they blame in the kinde of our ceremonies is, that wee hauehave not in them auncient Apostolicall simplicitie, but a greater pompe & statelinesse.

3 The second, that so many of them are the same which the Church of Rome vseth; and the reasons which they bring to proue them for that cause blame worthy.

4 How when they go about to expound what popish ceremonies they meane, they contradict their owne arguments against popish ceremonies.

5 An answere to the argument whereby they would proue, that sith wee allow the customes of our fathers to be followed, we therefore may not allow such customes as the Church of Rome hath, because we cānot account of thē which are in that Church as of our fathers.

6 To their allegation that the course of Gods owne wisedome doth make against our conformitie with the Church of Rome in such things.

7 To the example of the eldest Church which they bring for the same purpose.

8 That it is not our best politie (as they pretend it is) for establishment of sound Religion to hauehave in these thinges no agreement with the Church of Rome being vnsound.

9 That neither the papists vpbraiding vsus as furnished out of their store, nor any hope which in that respect they are said to conceiue, doth make any more against our ceremonies then the former allegations hauehave done.

10 The griefe which they say godly brethren conceiue, at such ceremonies as we hauehave common with the Church of Rome.

11 The third thing for which they reproue a great part of our ceremonies is, for that as we hauehave them from the Church of Rome, so that Church had them from the Iewes.

12 The fourth, for that sundry of them hauehave bene (they say) abused vntounto idolatrie, and are by that meane become scandalous.

13 The fift for that we retaine them still notwithstanding the example of certaine Churches reformed before vsus, which hauehave cast them out.

14 A declaration of the proceedings of the Church of England for the establishment of things as they are.

1 SVch was the ancient simplicitie and softnes of spirit which sometimes preuailed in the world,How great vse ceremonies hauehave in the Church. that they whose wordes were euen as oracles amongst men, seemed euermore loth to giuegive sentence against any thing publiquely receiued in the Church of God, except it were wonderfull apparently euill; for that they did not so much incline to that seueritie, which delighteth to reproue the least things it seeth amisse▪ as to that charity, which is vnwilling to behold any thing that dutie bindeth it to reproue. The state of this present age, wherein zeale hath drowned charitie, & skill meeknes, wil not now suffer any mā to maruel whatsoeuer he shal hear reproued by whōsoeuer. Those rites & ceremonies of the church therefore, which are the selfesame now that they were whē holy & vertuous men maintained thē against prophane and deriding aduersaries, her owne children hauehave at this day in derision. Whether iustly or no, it shall then appeare, when all thinges are heard which they hauehave to alleage against the outward receiued orders of this church. Which in as much as thēselues do compare vntounto mint and comin, Mat. 23.23. The doctrine and discipline of the Church, as the waightiest things, ought especially to be looked vntounto: but the ceremonies also, as mint & comin, ought not to be neglected. T.C. l. 3. p. 171.graunting thē to be no part of those things which in the matter of politie are waightier, we hope that for small things their strife will neither bee earnest nor long. The sifting of that which is obiected against the orders of the church in particular, doth not belong vntounto this place. Here we are to discusse onelyonly those generall exceptions, which hauehave bene taken at any time against them. First therfore to the end that their nature and vse whereunto they serue may plainely appeare, and so afterwardes their qualitie the better be discerned; we are to note that in eueryevery grand or main publique dutie which God requireth at the hāds of his Church, there is, besides that matter and forme wherein the essence therof consisteth, a certaine outward fashion whereby the same is in decent sort administred. The substance of all Religious actions is deliuered from God himself in few words. For example sake in the sacraments, VntoUnto the element let the word be added, and they both doe make a sacrament, saith S. Augustine. Baptisme is giuen by the element of water, and that prescript forme of words which the church of Christ doth vse; the sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ is administred in the elements of bread and wine, if those mysticall words be added thereunto. But the due and decent forme of administring those holy sacramēts, doth require a great deale more. The end which is aimed at in setting downe the outward forme of all religious actiōs, is the edification of the Church. Now men are edified, when either their vnderstanding is taught somewhat whereof in such actions it behoueth all men to consider; or whē their harts are moued with any affectiō suteable therunto, whē their minds are in any sort stirred vp vntounto that reuerence, deuotion, attention & due regard, which in those cases seemeth requisit. Because therfore vntounto this purpose not only speech, but sundry sēsible means besides hauehave alwaies bin thought necessary, & especially those means which being obiect to the eye, the liueliest & the most apprehensiue sense of all other, hauehave in that respect seemed the fittest to make a deepe and strong impression; from hence hauehave risen not onelyonly a number of praiers, readings, questionings, exhortings, but euen of visible signes also; which being vsed in performance of holy actions, are vndoubtedly most effectual to open such matter, as men when they know & remēber carefully, must needs be a great deale the better informed to what effect such duties serue. We must not thinke but that there is some ground of reason euen in nature, whereby it commeth to passe, that no nation vnderunder heauen either doth or euer did suffer publique actiōs which are of waight, whether they be ciuil and temporall, or else spirituall and sacred, to passe without some visible solemnitie; the very strangenes whereof and difference from that which is common, doth cause popular eyes to obserue and to marke the same. Wordes both because they are common, and doe not so strongly moue the phancie of man, are for the most parte but sleightly heard: and therfore with singular wisdome it hath bene prouided▪ that the deeds of men which are made in the presence of witnesses, should passe not onelyonly with words, but also with certaine sensible actions, the memory wherof is farre more easie and durable then the memorie of speech can be. The things which so long experience of all ages hath confirmed and made profitable, let not vsus presume to condemne as follies and toyes, because wee sometimes know not the cause and reason of them. A wit disposed to scorne whatsoeuer it doth not conceiue, might aske wherefore Abraham should say to his seruant, Put thy hand vnderunder my thigh and sweare: was it not sufficient for his seruant to shew the Religion of an othe,Gen. 24.2. by naming the Lord God of heauen and earth, vnlesse that straunge ceremonie were added? In contracts, bargaines and conueiances, a mans worde is a token sufficient to expresse his wil.Ruth. 4.7. Yet this was the auncient maner in Israell concerning redeeming and exchanging to establish all things; A man did pluck off his shooe, and gaue it his neighbour; and this was a sure witnesse in Israel. Amongst the Romans in their making of a bondman free, was it not wondred wherefore so great a doe should bee made? The maister to present his slaue in some court, to take him by the hand, and not onelyonly to say in the hearing of the publique magistrate, I will that this man become free, but after these solemne wordes vttered, to strike him on the cheeke, to turne him round, the haire of his head to be shaued off, the magistrate to touch him thrise with a rod, in the end a cap and a white garment to be giuen him. To what purpose all this circumstance? Amongst the Hebrewes how strange & in outward appearance almost against reason,Exod. 21.…. that he which was minded to make himselfe a perpetuall seruant, should not only testifie so much in the presence of the iudge, but for a visible token thereof hauehave also his eare bored through with a nawle? It were an infinite labour to prosecute these things so far as they might be exempplified both in ciuill and religious actions. For in bothe they hauehave their necessary vse and force. aDionis. p. 12… foreign.The sensible things which Religion hath allowed, are resemblances framed according to things spiritually vnderstood, wherunto they serue as a hand to lead and a way to direct. And whereas it may peraduenture be obiected, that to adde to religious duties such rites and ceremonies as are significant; is to institute new sacraments: sure I am they will not say that Numa Pompilius did ordaine a sacrament, a significant ceremonie he did ordaine, in commanding the Priests bLitt. …. 1. M… nu ad digitos vsque involutâ …em diuinā facere; significantes sidem tutandam, sedémque eius etiam in dextris sacratam esse.to execute the work of their diuine seruice with their handes as farre as to the fingers couered; thereby signifiing that fidelitie must be defended, and that mens right handes are the sacred seate thereof. Againe we are also to put them in mind, that themselues do not holde all significant ceremonies for sacramentes; in as much as imposition of handes they denie to be a sacrament; and yet they giuegive thereunto a forcible signification. For concerning it their words are these, cEccl. disci. 101.51.The party ordained by this ceremony, was put in mind of his seperation to the worke of the Lord, that remembring himselfe to be taken as it were with the hand of God from amongst others, this might teach him not to account himselfe now his owne, nor to doe what himselfe listeth; but to consider that God hath set him about a worke, which if he will discharge & accomplish, he may at the hands of God assure himselfe of reward; and if otherwise, of reuenge. Touching significant ceremonies, some of thē are sacramēts, some as sacramēts only. Sacraments are those, which are signes & tokēs of some general promised grace, which alwaies really descendeth from God vntounto the soule that duly receiueth thē: other significant tokēs are onelyonly as sacraments, yet no sacraments. Which is not our distinction but theirs▪ For concerning the Apostles imposition of handes,…ol. 25. these are their owne words; Manuum signum hoc & quasi sacramentum vsurparunt; They vsed this signe, or as it were sacrament.

2 Concerning rites and ceremonies, there may be fault, either in the kinde, or in the number and multitude of them.The first thing they blame in the kind of our ceremonies is, that we hauehave not in them ancient Apostolical simplicitie, but a greater pompe and statelines. lib. eccle. disci. & T.C. l. 3. p. 181. The first thing blamed about the kind of ours is, that in many thinges we hauehave departed from the auncient simplicitie of Christ and his Apostles, we hauehave embraced more outward statelinesse, we hauehave those orders in the exercise of Religion, which they who best pleased God and serued him most deuoutly neuer had. For it is out of doubt, that the first state of thinges was best, that in the prime of Christian Religion faith was soundest, the scriptures of God were then best vnderstood by all men, all parts of godlines did then most abound▪ and therefore it must needes follow, that customes lawes and ordinances deuised since, are not so good for the Church of Christ; but the best way is to cut off later inuentions, and to reduce thinges vntounto the auntient state wherin at the first they were. Which rule or canō we hold to be either vncertain, or at leastwise vnsufficient; if not bothe. For in case it be certain, hard it cannot be for them to shew vsus, where we shall finde it so exactly set downe, that wee may say without all controuersie, These were the orders of the Apostles times, these wholly and onelyonly, neither fewer nor moe then these. True it is that many things of this nature be alluded vntounto, yea many thinges declared, and many thinges necessarily collected out of the Apostles writings. But is it necessary that all the orders of the Church which were then in vse should be contained in their bookes? Surely no. For if the tenor of their writinges be well obserued, it shall vntounto any man easily appeare, that no more of them are there touched, then were needfull to be spoken of somtimes by one occasion and sometimes by another. Will they allow then of any other records besides?Tom. 7. de bap contra Dona…ist. l. 5. cap 23. Well assured I am they are farre enough from acknowledging that the church ought to keepe any thing as Apostolicall, which is not found in the Apostles writings▪ in what other recordes soeuer it be found. And therefore whereas S. Augustine affirmeth,T.C. l. 1. p. 31. If this iudgement of S. Augustine bee a good iudgement and sound; then there be some things commaunded of God, which are not in the scripture; and therefore there is no sufficient doctrine contained in scripture whereby we may be saued. For all the commaundements of God and of the Apostles are needfull for our saluation. that those thinges which the whole Church of Christ doth hold, may well be thought to bee Apostolicall, although they be not found written; this his iudgement they vtterly condemne. I will not here stand in defence of S. Augustines opinion, which is that such thinges are indeede Apostolicall; but yet with this exception, vnlesse the decree of some generall councell hauehave happily caused them to be receiued: for of positiue lawes and orders receiued throughout the whole Christian world, S. Augustine could imagine no other fountaine saue these two. But to let passe S. Augustine, they who condemne him herein, must needs confesse it a very vncertaine thing what the orders of the Church were in the Apostles times, seeing the scriptures doe not mention them all,Vid. Epist. 118 and other records thereof besides they vtterly reiect. So that in tying the Church to the orders of the Apostles times, they tie it to a maruellous vncertain rule; vnlesse they require the obseruatiō of no orders but only those which are knowne to be Apostolicall by the Apostles owne writings. But then is not this their rule of such sufficiencie, that we should vse it as a touchstone to trie the orders of the Church by for euer. Our ende ought alwaies to bee the same; our waies and meanes thereunto not so. The glory of God and the good of his Church was the thing which the Apostles aymed at, and therefore ought to bee the marke whereat we also leuell. But seeing those rites and orders may be at one time more, which at an other are lesse auaileable vntounto that purpose: what reason is there in these thinges to vrge the state of one onelyonly age, as a patterne for all to followe? It is not I am right sure their meaning, that we should now assemble our people to serue God in close & secret meetings; or that common brookes or riuers should be vsed for places of baptisme; or that the Eucharist should be ministred after meate; or that the custome of Church feasting should bee renued; or that all kinde of standing prouision for the ministrie should be vtterly taken away, and their estate made againe dependent vponupon the voluntary deuotion of men. In these thinges they easily perceiue how vnfit that were for the present, which was for the first age conuenient enough. The faith zeale & godlines of former times is worthily had in honour: but doth this proue that the orders of the Church of Christ must bee still the selfesame with theirs▪ that nothing may be which was not then, or that nothing which then was may lawfully since hauehave ceased? They who recall the Church vntounto that which was at the first, must necessarily set boundes and limits vntounto their speeches. If any thing hauehave bene receiued repugnant vntounto that which was first deliuered, the first things in this case must stand, the last giuegive place vntounto them. But where difference is without repugnancie, that which hath bene can be no preiudice to that which is. Let the state of the people of God when they were in the house of bondage, and their maner of seruing God in a strange land, be compared with that which Canaan and Ierusalem did afford, and who seeth not what huge difference there was betweene them? In Aegypt it may be they were right glad to take some corner of a poore cottage, & there to serue God vponupon their knees, peraduenture couered in dust and strawe sometimes. Neither were they therefore the lesse accepted of God; but he was with them in all their afflictions, and at the length by working their admirable deliuerance, did testifie that they serued him not in vaine. Notwithstanding in the very desert they are no sooner possest of some little thing of their owne, but a tabernacle is required at their handes. Beeing planted in the land of Canaan, and hauing Dauid to be their King, when the Lord had giuen him rest from all his enemies, it greeued his religious minde to consider the growth of his owne estate and dignitie, the affaires of religion continuing still in the former manner: Beholde now I dwell in an house of Cedar trees, 2. Sam. 7.2.and the Arke of God remaineth still within curtaines. What hee did purpose, it was the pleasure of God that Salomon his sonne should performe, and performe it in maner suteable vntounto their present, nor their auncient estate and condition. For which cause Salomon writeth vntounto the King of Tyrus;2. Chro. ….… The house which I build is great and wonderfull; for great is our God aboue all Gods. Whereby it clearely appeareth, that the orders of the Church of God may bee acceptable vntounto him, as well being framed sutable to the greatnes and dignitie of later, as when they keepe the reuerend simplicitie of aunciente… times. Such dissimilitude therefore betweene vsus and the Apostles of Christ, in the order of some outward things, is no argument of default.

3 Yea but wee hauehave framed our selues to the customes of the Church of Rome;Our orders & ceremonies blamed, in that so many of thē are the same which the Church of Rome vseth. Eccles. discipl. fol. 12. T.C. lib. 1. p. 131. our orders and ceremonies are Papisticall. It is espied that our Church-founders were not so carefull as in this matter they should hauehave bene, but contented themselues with such discipline as they took from the Church of Rome. Their error we ought to reforme by abolishing all Popish orders. There must bee no communion nor fellowship with Papistes, neither in doctrine, ceremonies, nor gouernment. It is not enough that wee are deuided from the Church of Rome by the single wall of doctrine, reteining as we do part of their ceremonies, and almost their whole gouernment: but gouernment or ceremonies or whatsoeuer it be which is popish, away with it. This is the thing they require in vsus,T.C. lib. 1. p. 20. the vtter relinquishment of all thinges popish. Wherein to the ende wee may answer them according vntounto their plaine direct meaning, and not take aduantage of doubtfull speech, whereby controuersies growe alwaies endlesse; their maine position being this, that nothing should bee placed in the Church but what God in his word hath commaunded, T.C. lib. 1. p. 25they must of necessitie holde all for popish, which the Church of Rome hath ouer and besides this. By popish orders ceremonies and gouernment they must therefore meane in eueryevery of these so much, as the church of Rome hath embraced without commandement of Gods word: so that whatsoeuer such thing we hauehave, if the Church of Rome hauehave it also; it goeth vnderunder the name of those thinges that are Popish, yea although it be lawfull, although agreeable to the word of God. For so they plainely affirme saying:T.C. l. 1. p. 13…. Although the formes and ceremonies which they (the Church of Rome) vsed were not vnlawfull, and that they contained nothing which is not agreeable to the word of God; yet notwithstanding neither the word of God, nor reason, nor the examples of the eldest Churches both Iewish and Christian; do permit vsus to vse the same formes and ceremonies, being neither commanded of God, neither such as there may not as good as they and rather better be established. The question therefore is, whether we may follow the Church of Rome in those orders, rites and ceremonies, wherein wee doe not thinke them blameable; or else ought to deuise others, and to hauehave no conformitie with them, no not as much as in these thinges. In this sense and construction therefore as they affirme, so we denie, that whatsoeuer is popish wee ought to abrogate. Their arguments to proue that generally all popish orders and ceremonies ought to be cleane abolished, are in summe these? First whereas wee allow the iudgement of Saint Augustine, T.C. l. 1. p. 30.that touching those thinges of this kinde which are not commaunded or forbidden in the scripture, wee are to obserue the custome of the people of God, and decree of our forefathers: how can we retaine the customes and constitutions of the Papistes in such things, who were neither the people of God nor our forefathers? Secondly although the formes and ceremonies of the Church of Rome were not vnlawfull, neither did containe any thing which is not agreeable to the word of God; T.C. l. 1. p. 131.yet neither the worde of God, nor the example of the Eldest Churches of God, nor reason doe permit vsus to vse the same; they being heretiques, and so neare about vsus, and their orders beeing neither commaunded of God, nor yet such but that as good or rather better may be established. It is against the word of God, to hauehave conformitie with the Church of Rome in such things; as appeareth in that the wisdome of God hath thought it a good way to keepe his people from infection of Idolatry and superstition, by seuering them from idolaters in outward ceremonies; and therefore hath forbidden them to doe thinges which are in themselues very lawfull to be done: And further whereas the Lorde was carefull to seuer them by ceremonies from other nations; yet was he not so careful to seuer them from any, as from the Aegyptians amongst whom they liued, and from those nations which were next neighbours vntounto them, because from thē was the greatest feare of infection. So that following the course which the wisdom of God doth teach,T.C. l. 1. p. 132 Tom. 2. Br…. 73. it were more safe for vsus to cōforme our indifferent ceremonies to the Turkes which are farre off, then to the Papists which are so neare. Touching the example of the eldest Churches of God, in one councell it was decreed, that Christians should not decke their houses with baye leaues and greene boughes, because the Pagans did vse so to doe; and that they should not rest from their labours those daies that the Pagans did, that they should not keepe the first day of eueryevery month as they did. Con. Africa. cap. 27.Another councell decreed, that Christians should not celebrate feastes on the birth daies of the Martyrs, because it was the manner of the heathē. O saith Tertullian, better is the religion of the Heathen: for they vse no solemnitie of the Christians, neither the Lordes daye, neither the Pentecost, and if they knew them▪ they would hauehave nothing to doe with them;Lib. de Idololatria. for they would be afraide least they should seeme Christians: but we are not afraid to be called heathen. The same Tertullian would not hauehave Christians to sit after they had prayed,He seemeth to mean the feast of Easter day, celebrated in the memory of our Sauiours resurrection, and for that cause termed the Lords day. Lib. de Anima because the Idolaters did so. Whereby it appeareth, that both of particular men and of councels, in making or abolishing of ceremonies heed hath bene taken that the Christians should not be like the Idolaters, no not in those thinges which of themselues are most indifferent to b… vsed or not vsed. The same cōformitie is not lesse opposite vntounto reason; first in as much as Contraries must be cured by their contraries; and therefore Poperie being Antichristianitie is not healed, but by establishment of orders thereunto opposite. The way to bring a drunken mā to sobrietie, is to carry him as far frō excesse of drink as may be. To rectifie a crooked sticke, we bend it on the contrary side, as farre as it was at the first on that side from whence we drawe it; and so it commeth in the ende to a middle betweene both, which is perfect straightnes. Vtter Inconformitie therefore with the Church of Rome in these thinges, is the best and surest policie which the Church can vse. While we vse their ceremonies, they take occasion to blaspheme, saying that our religion cannot stand by it selfe, vnlesse it leane vponupon the staffe of their ceremonies. They hereby conceiue great hope of hauing the rest of their popery in the end, which hope causeth them to be more frozen in their wickednesse. T.C. l. 3. p. 178.Neither is it without cause that they hauehave this hope, cōsidering that which maister Bucer noteth vpō the 18. of Saint Mathew, that where these thinges hauehave bene left, Popery hath returned; but on the other part in places which hauehave bene cleansed of these thinges, it hath not yet bene seene that it hath had any entrance. None make such clamors for these ceremonies,T.C. l. 3. p. 17… as the Papists and those whom they suborne; a manifest token how much they triumph and ioy in these thinges. They breede griefe of minde in a number that are godly minded, and hauehave Antichristianitie in such detestation, that their mindes are martyred with the very sight of them in the Church. Such godly brethren we ought not thus to grieue with vnprofitable ceremonies, yea ceremonies wherein there is not onelyonly no profit, T.C. l. 3. p. 180.but also daunger of great hurt that may growe to the Church by infection, which popish ceremonies are meanes to breede. This in effect is the summe and substance of that which they bring by way of oppositiō against those orders which we hauehave commō with the church of Rome; these are the reasons wherewith they would proue our ceremonies in that respect worthy of blame.

That wheras they who blame vsus in this behalfe, whē reason euicteth that all such ceremonies are not to be abolished, make answere that when they condemne popish ceremonies their meaning is of ceremonies vnprofitable, or ceremonies in stead wherof as good or better may be deuised: they cannot hereby get out of the briers, but contradict and gainesay themselues; in as much as their vsuall maner is to proue, that ceremonies vncommaunded of God, and yet vsed in the Church of Rome, are for this very cause vnprofitable to vsus, and not so good as others in their place would be.4 Before we answere vntounto these thinges, we are to cut off that, wherunto they from whom these obiections proceed, do oftentimes flie for defence and succor, when the force and strength of their argumēts is elided. For the ceremonies in vse amōgst vsus, being in no other respect retained, sauing onelyonly for that to retaine thē is to our seeming good and profitable, yea so profitable and so good, that if we had either simply taken them cleane away, or els remoued them so as to place in their stead others, we had done worse: the plaine & direct way against vsus herein had bin only to proue, that all such ceremonies as they require to be abolished are retained by vsus with the hurt of the Church, or with lesse benefit thē the abolishmēt of thē would bring. But for as much as they saw how hardly they should be able to perform this; they took a more compendious way, traducing the ceremonies of our church vnderunder the name of being popish. The cause why this way seemed better vntounto them was, for that the name of Popery is more odious then very Paganisme amongst diuers of the more simple sorte; so as whatsoeuer they heare named popish, they presently conceiue deepe hatred against it, imagining there cā be nothing cōtained in that name, but needs it must be exceeding detestable. The eares of the people they hauehave therfore filled with strong clamor; The church of Englād is fraught with popish ceremonies: They that fauour the cause of reformatiō, maintaine nothing but the sinceritie of the Gospel of Iesus Christ: All such as withstand them, fight for the lawes of his sworne enemie, vphold the filthy reliques of Antichrist; and are defenders of that which is popish. These are the notes wherewith are drawn from the harts of the multitude so many sighs; with these tunes their mindes are exasperated against the lawfull guides and gouernours of their souls; these are the voices that fil thē with general discōtentment, as though the bosome of that famous Church wherin they liue, were more noysome then any dungeon. But when the authors of so scandalous incantations are examined and called to account how they can iustifie such their dealings; when they are vrged directly to answere, whether it be lawfull for vsus to vse any such ceremonies as the Church of Rome vseth,T.C. lib. p. 171. What an open vntruth is it, that this is one of our principles not to be lawful to vse the same ceremonies which the Papists did: when as I hauehave both before declared the contrary, and euen here hauehave expressely added▪ that they are not to be vsed when as good or better way be established? although the same be not cōmanded in the word of God; being driuen to see that the vse of some such ceremonies must of necessitie be granted lawfull, they go about to make vsus beleeue that they are iust of the same opinion, and that they only think such ceremonies are not to be vsed when they are vnprofitable, or when as good or better may be established. Which answer is both idle in regard of vsus, and also repugnant to themselues. It is in regard of vsus very vaine to make this answere, because they know that what ceremonies we retaine common vntounto the Church of Rome, wee therefore retaine them, for that we iudge them to be profitable, and to be such that others in stead of them would be worse. So that when they say that we ought to abrogate such Romish ceremonies as are vnprofitable, or els might hauehave other more profitable in their stead; they trifle and they beat the aire about nothing which toucheth vsus, vnlesse they meane that wee ought to abrogate all Romish ceremonies, which in their iudgement hauehave either no vse, or lesse vse then some other might hauehave. But then must they shewe some commission, wherby they are authorized to sit as iudges, and we required to take their iudgement for good in this case. Otherwise their sentences will not be greatly regarded, when they oppose their Me thinketh vntounto the orders of the Church of England: as in the question about surplesses one of them doth; If we looke to the colour, blacke me thinketh is more decent; if to the forme, a garment downe to the foote hath a great deale more cōlinesse in it. Ecclesi. discipl. fol. 100.If they thinke that we ought to proue the ceremonies cōmodious which we hauehave reteined, they do in this point very greatly deceiue themselues. For in all right & equity; that which the Church hath receiued & held so long for good, that which publique approbation hath ratified, must cary the benefit of presumption with it to be accompted meet and conuenient.T.C. l. 3. p. 176. As for your oft… ̄ repeating tha… the ceremonies in question are godly, comely & decent: it is your old wont of demaunding the thing in question, and an vndoubted argument of your extreme pouerty. They which hauehave stood vp as yesterday to challenge it of defect, must proue their challenge. If we being defendants do answer, that the ceremonies in question are godly, comely, decent, profitable for the Church▪ their reply is childish & vnorderly to say, that we demaund the thing in question, & shew the pouerty of our cause, the goodnes wherof we are faine to begge that our aduersaries would graunt. For on our part this must be the aunswere, which orderly proceeding doth require. The burthen of prouing doth rest on them. In them it is friuolous to say, we ought not to vse bad ceremonies of the Church of Rome, and presume all such bad as it pleaseth themselues to dislike; vnlesse we can perswade them the contrary. Besides, they are herin opposite also to themselues. For what one thing is so common with thē, as to vse the custome of the Church of Rome for an argument to proue, that such & such ceremonies cānot be good & profitable for vsus, in as much as that church vseth them? Which vsual kind of disputing, sheweth that they do not disallow onelyonly those Romish ceremonies which are vnprofitable,T.C. l. p. 174. but count all vnprofitable which are Romish; that is to say, which hauehave bene deuised by the Church of Rome, or which are vsed in that Church, and not prescribed in the word of God. For this is the onelyonly limitation which they can vse sutable vntounto their other positions. And therefore the cause which they yeeld, why they hold it lawfull to reteine in Doctrine and in Discipline some things as good, which yet are common to the Church of Rome, is for that those good things are perpetual commandements, in whose place no other can come; but ceremonies are changeable. So that their iudgement in truth is, that whatsoeuer by the word of God is not changeable in the Church of Rome, that Churches vsing is a cause, why reformed Churches ought to change it, and not to thinke it good or profitable. And least we seeme to father any thing vponupon them more thē is properly their owne, let them reade euen their owne words, where they complaine that we are thus constrained to be like vntounto the Papists in Any their ceremonies; yea they vrge that this cause although it were alone,T.C. l. 3. p. 177. And that this complaint of …urs is iust, in that we are thus constrained to be like vntounto th… Papists in any their ceremonies, and that this cause only ought to moue. …hem to whom that belongeth to do theirs away, for as much … they are their ceremonies: the Reader may further se… in the B. of Salisbury, who brings diuerse proofes thereof. ought to moue them to whom that belongeth to do thē away, for as much as they are their ceremonies, and that the B. of Salisbury doth iustifie this their complaint. The clause is vntrue which they adde concerning the B. of Salisbury; but the sentence doth shew, that we do them no wrōg in setting downe the state of the question betweene vsus thus; Whether we ought to abolish out of the Church of England all such orders, rites and ceremonies, as are established in the Church of Rome, and are not prescribed in the word of God. For the affirmatiue whereof we are now to answer such proofes of theirs as hauehave bene before alleaged.

5 Let the Church of Rome be what it will,That our allowing the customes of our fathers to be followed, is no proofe that we may not allow some customes which the Church of Rome hath, although we do not accōpt of them as of our fathers. let them that are of it be the people of God and our fathers in the Christian faith, or let them be otherwise, hold them for Catholiques, or hold them for heretiques, it is not a thing either one way or other in this present question greatly material. Our conformity with thē in such things as hauehave bene proposed, is not proued as yet vnlawfull by all this S. Augustine hath said, yea and we hauehave allowed his saying; That the custome of the people of God, and the decrees of our forefathers are to be kept, touching those things wherof the scripture hath neither one way nor other giuen vsus any charge. What then? Doth it here therfore follow, that they being neither the people of God nor our forefathers, are for that cause in nothing to be followed? This consequent were good, if so be it were graunted, that onelyonly the custome of the people of God & the decrees of our forefathers are in such case to be obserued. But then should no other kind of later laws in the church be good, which were a grosse absurdity to think. S. Augustines speech therefore doth import, that where we hauehave no diuine precept, if yet we hauehave the custome of the people of God, or a decree of our forefathers; this is a law and must be kept. Notwithstanding it is not denied, but that we lawfully may obserue the positiue constitutions of our owne Churches, although the same were but yesterday made by our selues alone. Nor is there any thing in this to proue, that the Church of England might not by law receiue orders, rites or customes from the Church of Rome, although they were neither the people of God nor yet our forefathers. How much lesse when we hauehave receiued from them nothing, but that which they did themselues receiue from such, as we cannot deny to hauehave bene the people of God, yea such as either we must acknowledge for our owne forefathers, or else disdaine the race of Christ?

6 The rites and orders wherein we follow the Church of Rome,That the course which the wisedome of God doth teach, maketh not against our conformitie with the Church of Rome in such things. are of no other kind thē such as the Church of Geneua it selfe doth follow thē in. We follow the church of Rome in moe things; yet they in some things of the same nature about which our present controuersie is: so that the difference is not in the kind, but in the number of rites only, wherein they and we do follow the Church of Rome. The vse of wafer-cakes, the custom of godfathers & godmothers in baptisme, are things not commanded nor forbidden in scripture; things which hauehave bene of old, & are reteined in the Church of Rome euen at this very hower. Is conformity with Rome in such things a blemish vntounto the Church of England, & vntounto Churches abroad an ornament? Let thē, if not for the reuerence they ow vntounto this Church, in the bowels wherof they hauehave receiued I trust that pretious and blessed vigor, which shall quicken thē to eternall life; yet at the leastwise for the singular affection which they do beare towards others, take heed how they strike, least they wound whom they would not. For vndoubtedly it cutteth deeper thē they are aware of, whē they plead that euē such ceremonis of the church of Rome, as cōteine in thē nothing which is not of it selfe agreeable to the word of God, ought neuerthelesse to be abolished; and that neither the word of God, nor reason, nor the examples of the eldest Churches, do permit the Church of Rome to be therin followed. Heretiques they are, & they are our neighbors. By vsus and amongst vsus they lead their liues. But what then? Therfore no ceremony of theirs lawfull for vsus to vse? W… …ust yeeld and will that none are lawfull,T.C. lib. 1. p. 89. & 131. if God himself be a precedēt against the vse of any. But how appeareth it that God is so? Hereby they say it doth appeare, in that God seuered his people from the Heathens, but specially from the Aegyptians, and such nations as were neerest neighbors vntounto them, by forbidding them to do those things,Leuit. 18.3. which were in themselues very lawfull to be done, yea very profitable some and incommodious to be forborne: such things it pleased God to forbid them, only because those Heathens did them, with whom conformity in the same things might hauehave bred infection. Thus in shauing, cutting, apparell wearing, Leuit. 19.27. Leuit. 19.19.yea in sundry kinds of meates also, swines flesh, conies, and such like, they were forbidden to do so and so, because the Gentiles did so. And the end why God forbad them such things was, Deut. 22.11. Deut. 14.7. & Leuit. 11.to seuer them for feare of infection by a great and an high wall from other nations, Ephes. 2.14.as S. Paul teacheth. The cause of more carefull separation from the neerest nations, was the greatnesse of danger to be especially by them infected. Now Papists are to vsus as those nations were vntounto Israell. Therefore if the wisdome of God be our guide, we cannot allow conformity with them, no not in any such indifferent ceremonie. Our direct answer hereunto is, that for any thing here alleaged we may still doubt, whether the Lord in all such indifferēt ceremonies as those whereof we dispute, did frame his people of set purpose vntounto any vtter dissimilitude, either with Aegyptians, or with any other nation else. And if God did not forbid them all such indifferent ceremonies; then our conformity with the Church of Rome in some such is not hitherto as yet disproued, although Papists were vntounto vsus as those heathens were vntounto Israell. After the doings of the land of Aegypt, Leuit. 18.3.wherein you dwelt, ye shall not do, saith the Lord; and after the maner of the land of Canaan, whether I will bring you, shall ye not do, neither walke in their ordinances: Do after my iudgements, and keepe my ordinances to walke therein: I am the Lord your God. The speech is indefinite, ye shall not be like them: It is not generall, ye shall not be like them in any thing, or like vntounto them in any thing indifferent, or like vntounto them in any indifferent ceremony of theirs. Seeing therefore it is not set downe how farre the bounds of his speech concerning dissimilitude should reach; how can any man assure vsus, that it extēdeth farder then to those things only, wherin the nations there mentioned were idolatrous, or did against that which the law of God commandeth? Nay doth it not seem a thing very probable, that God doth purposely adde, Do after my iudgements; as giuing therby to vnderstād, that his meaning in the former sentence was but to bar similitude in such things, as were repugnant vntounto the ordinances, lawes and statutes which he had giuen▪ Aegyptians and Cananites are for example sake named vntounto them, because the customes of the one they had bin, and of the other they should be best acquainted with. But that wherein they might not be like vntounto either of them, was such peraduenture as had beene no whit lesse vnlawfull, although those nations had neuer bene. So that there is no necessitie to thinke, that God for feare of infection by reason of neernes forbad them to be like to the Cananites or the Aegyptians, in those things which otherwise had bene lawfull enough. For I would know what one thing was in those nations, and is here forbidden, being indifferent in it self, yet forbidden onelyonly because they vsed it. In the laws of Israel we find it written,Leuit. 19.27. ye shal not cut round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou teare the tufts of thy beard. These things were vsuall amongst those nations, & in themselues they are indifferent. But are they indifferent being vsed as signes of immoderate and hopeles lamentation for the dead? In this sense it is that the law forbiddeth them. For which cause the very next words following are,Leuit. 21.5. ye shal not cut your flesh for the dead, nor make any print of a marke vponupon you; I am the Lord. The like in Leuiticus, where speech is of mourning for the dead,Deut. 14.1. They shal not make bald parts vpō their head, nor shaue off the locks of their beard, nor make any cutting in their flesh. Againe in Deuteronomy, ye are the children of the Lord your God; ye shal not cut your selues, nor make you baldnes betweene your eyes for the dead. What is this but in effect the same which the Apostle doth more plainly expresse,1. Thes. 4.13. saying, Sorrow not as they do which hauehave no hope? The very light of nature it selfe was able to see herein a fault; that which those nations did vse, hauing bin also in vse with others, the ancient Romane laws do forbid. That shauing therefore and cutting which the law doth mention, was not a matter in it selfe indifferent, and forbidden onelyonly because it was in vse amongst such idolaters as were neighbours to the people of God; but to vse it had bin a crime, though no other people or nation vnderunder heauen should hauehave done it sauing only themselues. As for those laws concerning attire,Leuit. 19.19. There shall no garment of linnen & wollen come vponupon thee;Deut. 22.11. as also those touching food and diet, wherein swines flesh together with sundry other meates are forbidden; the vse of these things had bene indeed of it selfe harmelesse and indifferent: so that hereby it doth appeare, how the law of God forbad in some speciall consideration, such things as were lawful inough in themselues.Deut. 14.7. But yet euen here they likewise faile of that they intend. For it doth not appeare,Leuit. 11. that the consideration in regard whereof the law forbiddeth these things▪ was because those nations did vse them. Likely enough it is that the Cananites vsed to feed as well on sheepes as on swines flesh; & therefore if the forbidding of the later had no other reason thē dissimilitude with that people, they which of their own heads alleage this for reason,Leuit. 19.19. can shew I think some reason more thē we are able to find, why the former was not also forbiddē. Might there not be some other mystery in this prohibition then they think of? Yes, some other mystery there was in it by all likelihood. For what reason is there which should but induce,Deut. 14. Leuit. 11. and therefore much lesse enforce vsus to thinke, that care of dissimilitude betweene the people of God & the heathen nations about thē, was any more the cause of forbidding them to put on garments of sundry stuffe, then of charging them withall not to sow their fields with mesline; or that this was any more the cause of forbidding them to eate swines flesh, then of charging them withall not to eate the flesh of Eagles, Haukes, and the like? Wherefore although the Church of Rome were to vsus, as to Israell the Aegyptians and Cananites were of old;Eph. 2.14. yet doth it not follow, that the wisedome of God without respect doth teach vsus to erect betweene vsus and them a partition wall of difference, in such things indifferent as hauehave bene hitherto disputed of.

7 Neither is the example of the eldest Churches a whit more auaileable to this purpose.That the exā ple of the eldest Churches is not herein against vsus. Notwithstanding some fault vndoubtedly there is in the very resemblance of Idolaters. Were it not some kind of blemish to be like vntounto Infidels and Heathens,T.C. l. 1. p. 132. The Councels although they did not obserue themselues alwaies in making of decrees this rule, yet hauehave kept this consideration continually in making of their lawes, that they would hauehave the Christians differ from others in their ceremonies. it would not so vsually be obiected; men would not thinke it any aduantage in the causes of Religion, to be able therewith iustly to charge their aduersaries as they do. Wherefore to the ende that it may a little more plainely appeare, what force this hath, and how farre the same extendeth; we are to note howe all men are naturally desirous, that they may seeme neither to iudge, not to do …misse; because eueryevery errour and offence…s▪ staine to the beauty of nature, for which cause it blusheth thereat, but glorieth in the contrary. From thence it riseth, that they which disgrace or depresse the credit of others, do it either in bothe or in one of these. To hauehave bene in either directed by a weake and vnperfect rule, argueth imbecillity and imperfection. Men being either led by reason, or by imitation of other mens example; if their persons be odious whose example we choose to follow, as namely if we frame our opinions to that which condemned heretiques thinke, or direct our actions according to that which is practised and done by them; it lieth as an heauy preiudice against vsus, vnlesse somewhat mightier then their bare example, did moue vsus to thinke or do the same things with thē. Christian mē therfore hauing besides the common light of all men so great helpe of heauenly directions from aboue, together with the lampes of so bright examples as the Church of God doth yeeld; it cannot but worthily seeme reprochfull for vsus, to leaue both the one and the other, to become disciples vntounto the most hatefull sort that liue, to do as they do, onelyonly because we see their example before vsus and hauehave a delight to follow it. Thus we may therefore safely conclude, that it is not euill simply to concurre with the Heathens either in opinion or in action: and that conformitie with them is onelyonly then a disgrace, when either we follow them in that they thinke and do amisse, or followe them generally in that they do, without other reason then only the liking we hauehave to the paterne of their example; which liking doth intimate a more vniuersall approbation of them then is allowable. Faustus the Manichey therfore obiecting against the Iewes,To. 6. cont. Faust. M…nich. lib. 20. cap. 4. that they forsooke the Idols of the Gentiles, but their temples, & oblations, & Altars, and Priesthoods, and all kinds of ministery of holy things, they exercised euen as the Gentiles did, yea more superstitiously a great deale; against the Catholike Christians likewise, that betweene them and the Heathens there was in many things little difference, From them (sayth Faustus) ye hauehave learned to hold that one onelyonly God is the Author of all, their sacrifices ye hauehave turned into feasts of charitie, their idols into Martyrs whom ye honour with the like religious offices vntounto theirs, the ghosts of the dead ye appease with wine and delicates, the festiuall dayes of the Nations ye celebrate together with them and of their kind of life ye hauehave verily changed nothing: S. Augustines defence in behalfe of bothe is, that touching the matters of action, Iewes & Catholique Christians were free frō the Gentiles faultines, euen in those things which were obiected as tokens of their agreemēt with the Gentiles; & concerning their consent in opinion, they did not hold the same with Gentils because Gentils had so taught, but because heauen & earth had so witnessed the same to be truth, that neither the one sort could erre in being fully perswaded thereof, nor the other but erre in case they should not consent with them. In things of their owne nature indifferent, if either Coūcels or particular mē hauehave at any time with sound iudgement misliked conformity betweene the Church of God & Infidels, the cause therof hath bin somwhat else then only affectation of dissimilitude. They saw it necessary so to do,T.C. l. 1. p. 132. Also it was decreed in …nother Councell, that they should not decke their houses with bay leaues & greene boughes, because the Pagans did vses…; and that they should not rest from their la…or those daies that the Pagans did, that they should not keepe the first day of eueryevery monethmonth as they did. in respect of some speciall accident; which the Church being not alwaies subiect vntounto, hath not stil cause to do the like. For exāple, in the dangerous daies of trial, wherein there was no way for the truth of Iesus Christ to triumph ouer infidelitie, but through the constancy of his Saints whom yet a naturall desire to saue themselues from the flame, might peraduenture cause to ioyne with Pagans in externall customes, too farre vsing the same as a cloake to conceale themselues in, and a mist to darken the eyes of Infidels withall: for remedy hereof, those lawes it might be were prouided, which forbad that Christians should decke their houses with boughes as the Pagans did vse to do, or rest those festiuall dayes whereon the Pagans rested, or celebrate such feasts as were, though not Heathenish, yet such that the simpler sort of Heathens might be beguiled in so thinking thē.T.C. l. 3. p. 132 Tertul. saith, O sayth he, better is the religion of the Heathen; for they vse no solemnitie of the Christians, neither the Lords day, neither, &c: but we are not afraid to be called Heathen. As for Tertullians iudgement concerning the rites and orders of the Church, no man hauing iudgement can be ignorant how iust exceptions may be taken against it. His opinion touching the Catholike Church was as vnindifferent, as touching our Church the opinion of them that fauour this pretended reformation is. He iudged all them who did not Montanize, to be but carnally minded, he iudged them still ouer-abiectly to fawne vponupon the Heathens, and to curry fauour with Infidels. Which as the Catholique Church did well prouide that they might not do indeed, so Tertullian oueroften through discontentment carpeth iniuriously at them, as though they did it euen when they were free from such meaning. But if it were so that either the iudgement of those counsels before alleaged, or of Tertullian himselfe against the Christians,T.C. l. 1. p. 133. But hauing shewed this in generall to be the politie of God first, and of h… people afterwards, to put as much difference as can be commodiously betweene the people of God and others which are not; I shall not, &c. are in no such consideration to be vnderstood as we hauehave mentioned; if it were so that men are condemned as well of the one as of the other, onelyonly for vsing the ceremonies of a religion contrary vntounto their owne; & that this cause is such as ought to preuaile no lesse with vsus then with them; shall it not follow that seeing there is still betweene our religion and Paganisme the selfe same contrarietie, therefore we are still no lesse rebukeable, if we now decke our houses with boughes, or send New yeares-gifts vntounto our friends, or feast on those dayes which the Gentiles then did, or sit after prayer as they were accustomed? For so they inferre vponupon the premises, that as great difference as commodiously may be, there should be in all outward ceremonies betweene the people of God and them which are not his people. Againe they teach as hath bene declared, that there is not as great a difference as may be betweene them, except the one do auoide whatsoeuer rites and ceremonies vncommanded of God the other doth embrace. So that generally they teach, that the very difference of spirituall condition it selfe betweene the seruants of Christ and others, requireth such difference in ceremonies betweene them, although the one be neuer so farre disioyned in time or place from the other. But in case the people of God and Belial do chaunce to be neighbours; then as the daunger of infection is greater, so the same difference they say is thereby made more necessary. In this respect as the Iewes were seuered from the Heathen, so most especially from the Heathen neerest them. And in the same respect we, which ought to differ howsoeuer from the Church of Rome, are now they say by reason of our meerenesse more bound to differ from them in ceremonies then from Turkes. A straunge kind of speech vntounto Christian eares, and such as I hope they themselues do acknowledge vnaduisedly vttered. We are not so much to feare infection from Turkes as from Papists. What of that? we must remember that by conforming rather our selues in that respect to Turkes, we should be spreaders of a worse infection into others▪ then any we are likely to draw from Papists by our conformity with them in ceremonies. If they did hate as Turkes do, the Christians; or as Cananites of old did the Iewish religion euen in grosse; the circumstance of locall neernes in them vntounto vsus, might happily enforce in vsus a duty of greater separation from them, then from those other mentioned. But for as much as Papists are so much in Christ neerer vntounto vsus then Turkes, is there any reasonable man trow you, but will iudge it meeter that our ceremonies of Christian religion should be Popish then Turkish or Heathenish? Especially considering that we were not brought to dwell amongst them (as Israell in Canaan) hauing not bene of them. For euen a very part of them we were. And when God did by his good Spirit put it into our hearts, first to reforme our selues, (whence grew our separation) and then by all good meanes to seeke also their reformation; had we not onelyonly cut off their corruptions, but also estranged our selues from them in things indifferent; who seeth not how greatly preiudiciall this might hauehave bene to so good a cause, and what occasion it had giuen them to thinke (to their greater obduration in euill) that through a froward or wanton desire of innouation, wee did vnconstrainedly those thinges, for which conscience was pretended? Howsoeuer the case doth stand, as Iuda had beene rather to choose conformity in things indifferent with Israell when they were neerest opposites, then with the farthest remoued Pagans: So we in like case, much rather with Papists then with Turkes. I might adde further for more full and complete answere, so much concerning the large oddes betweene the case of the eldest Churches in regard of those Heathens, and ours in respect of the Church of Rome, that very cauillation it selfe should be satisfied, and hauehave no shift to flye vntounto.

8 But that no one thing may deteine vsus ouer long,That it is not our best policy for the establishment of sound religion▪ to hauehave in these thinges no agreement with the Church of Rome being vnsound. I returne to their reasons against our conformity with that Church. That extreme dissimilitude which they vrge vponupon vsus, is now commended as our best & safest policie for establishment of sound religion. The ground of which politique position is, that Euils must be cured by their contraries; & therfore the cure of the Church infected with the poyson of Antichristianity, must be done by that which is therunto as cōtrary as may be. A medled estate of the orders of the Gospell & the ceremonies of popery, is not the best way to banish popery. We are cōtrarywise of opiniō, that he which will perfectly recouer a sicke, and restore a diseased body vntounto health, must not endeuor so much to bring it to a state of simple cōtrariety, as of fit proportion in contrariety vntounto those euils which are to be cured.T.C. l. 1. p. 132 Common reason also doth teach, that contraries are cured by their contraries. Now Christianity, and Antichristianity, the Gospell and Popery▪ be contra…ies, and therefore Antichristianitie must be cured, not by itselfe, but by that which is (as much as may be) contrary vntounto it. He that will take away extreme heat, by setting the body in extremity of cold, shall vndoubtedly remoue the disease, but together with it the diseased too. The first thing therefore in skilfull cures, is the knowledge of the part affected; the next is of the euill which do affect it; the last is not onelyonly of the kind, but also of the measure of contrary things whereby to remoue it. They which measure religion by dislike of the Church of Rome, thinke eueryevery man so much the more sound; by how much he can make the corruptions thereof to seeme more large. And therefore some there are, namely the Arrians in reformed Churches of Poland, which imagine the cancre to hauehave eaten so far into the very bones and marrow of the Church of Rome, as if it had not so much as a sound beliefe, no not cōcerning God himselfe, but that the very beliefe of the Trinity were a part of Antichristian corruption; and that the wonderfull prouidence of God did bring to passe, that the Bishop of the Sea of Rome should be famous for his triple crowne; a sensible marke whereby the world might know him to be that mysticall beast spoken of in the Reuelation, to be that great and notorious Antichrist in no one respect so much, as in this that he maintaineth the doctrine of the Trinity. Wisdome therefore and skill is requisite to knowe, what parts are sound in that Church, and what corrupted. Neither is it to all men apparant which complaine of vnsound parts, with what kind of vnsoundnesse eueryevery such part is possessed. They can say that in Doctrine, in Discipline, in Prayers, in Sacraments, the Church of Rome hath (as it hath in deede) very foule and grosse corruptions: the nature whereof notwithstanding because they hauehave not for the most part exact skill and knowledge to discerne, they thinke that amisse many times which is not, and the salue of reformation they mightily call for; but where and what the sores are which need it, as they wote full little, so they thinke it not greatly materiall to search. Such mens contentment must be wrought by stratageme: the vsuall methode of art is not for them. But with those that professe more then ordinary & common knowledge of good from euill, with them that are able to put a difference betweene things naught, & things indifferent in the Church of Rome, we are yet at controuersie about the maner of remouing that which is naught: whether it may not be perfectly helpt, vnlesse that also which is indifferent be cut off with it, so farre till no rite or ceremony remaine which the Church of Rome hath, being not found in the word of God. If we thinke this to extreme,T.C. l. 1. p.132. If a man would bring a drunken man to sobrietie, the best and nearest way is to carry him as farre from his excesse in drinke as may be: and if a man could not keepe a meane, it were better to fault in prescribing lesse them he should drinke, thē to fault in giuing him more then he ought. As we see to bring a sticke which is crooked to be straight, we do not only how it so farre vntill it come to be straight, but we bend it so farre vntill we make it so crooked of the other side, as it was before of the first side; to this end that at the last it may stand straight, and as it were in the midway betweene both the crookes. they reply that to draw mē frō great excesse, it is not amisse though we vse them vntounto somewhat lesse then is competent; & that a crooked stick is not stieightned vnlesse it be bent as farre on the cleane contrary side, that so it may settle it selfe at the length in a middle estate of euennes between both. But how can these cōparisons stand them in any steed? When they vrge vsus to extreme opposition against the Church of Rome, do they meane we should be drawne vntounto it onelyonly for a time, and afterwards returne to a mediocrity? or was it the purpose of those reformed churches, which vtterly abolished all popish ceremonies, to come in the end back againe to the middle point of euennesse and moderation? Then hauehave we conceiued amisse of their meaning. For we hauehave alwaies thought their opinion to be, that vtter inconformity with the Church of Rome was not an extremity wherunto we should be drawne for a time, but the very mediocrity it selfe wherein they meant we should euer continue. Now by these comparisons it seemeth cleane contrarie, that howsoeuer they hauehave bent themselues at first to an extreme contrariety against the Romish Church, yet therin they wil continue no longer then only till such time as some more moderate course for establishmēt of the Church may be concluded. Yea, albeit this were not at the first their intent, yet surely now there is great cause to leade thē vntounto it. They hauehave seene that experience of the former policie, which may cause the authors of it to hang downe their heads. When Germany had strickē off that which appeared corrupt in the doctrine of the Church of Rome▪ but seemed neuerthelesse in discipline still to reteine therewith very great conformitie: Fraunce by that rule of policie which hath bene before mentioned, tooke away the Popish orders which Germany did reteine. But processe of time hath brought more light vntounto the world; whereby men perceiuing that they of the religion in France hauehave also reteined some orders which were before in the Church of Rome, and are not commaunded in the word of God; there hath arisen a sect in England, which following still the very selfe same rule of policie, seeketh to reforme euen the French reformation, and purge out from thence also dregs of Popery. These hauehave not taken as yet such roote that they are …able to establish any thing. But if they had, what would spring out of their stocke, and how farre the vnquiet wit of man might be caried with rules of such policie, God doth know. The triall which we hauehave liued to see, may somewhat teach vsus what posteritie is to feare. But our Lord of his infinite merciemercy, auert whatsoeuer euill our swaruings on the one hand or on the other may threaten vntounto the state of his Church.

9 That the Church of Rome doth hereby take occasion to blaspheme,That we are not to abolish our Ceremonies, either because Papists vpbraide vsus as hauing taken from them▪ or for that they are sayd hereby to conceiue I know not what great hopes. and to say our religion is not able to stand of it selfe, vnlesse it leane vponupon the staffe of their Ceremonies,T.C. l. 3. p. 178. By vsing of these Ceremonies, the Papists take occasion to blaspheme; saying that our religion cannot stand by it selfe, vnlesse it l…ue vponupon the staffe of their Ceremonies. is not a matter of so great momēt, that it did need to be obiected, or doth deserue to receiue answer. The name of blasphemy in this place, is like the shoe of Hercules on a childs foote. If the Church of Rome do vse any such kind of silly exprobration, it is no such ougly thing to the eare, that we should thinke the honour and credite of our religion to receiue thereby any great wound. They which hereof make so perilous a matter, do seeme to imagine, that we hauehave erected of late a frame of some new religion; the furniture whereof we should not hauehave borrowed from our enemies, least they relieuing vsus might afterwards laugh and gibe at our pouerty: whereas in truth the Ceremonies which we hauehave taken from such as were before vsus, are not things that belong to this or to that sect, but they are the auncient rites and customes of the Church of Christ; whereof our selues being a part, we hauehave the selfe same interest in them which our fathers before vsus had, from whom the same are descended vntounto vsus. Againe in case we had bene so much beholding priuately vntounto them, doth the reputation of one Church stand by saying vntounto another, I need thee not? If some should be so vrine and impotent, as to marre a benefite with reprochfull vpbraiding, where at the least they suppose themselues to hauehave bestowed some good turne; yet surely a wise bodies part it were not, to put out his fire, because his fond and foolish neighbour, from whom he borrowed peraduenture wherewith to kindle it, might happily cast him therewith in the teeth, saying, were it not for me thou wouldest freeze, and not be able to heate thy selfe. As for that other argument deriued from the secret affection of Papists, with whom our conformitie in certaine Ceremonies is sayd to put them in great hope, that their whole religion in time will hauehave reentrance;T.C. l. 1. p. 179. To proue the Papists triumph and ioy in these things, I alleaged further that there are …o…e which make such clamors for these ceremonies, as the Papists and those which they suborne. and therefore none are so clamorous amongst vsus for the obseruation of these Ceremonies, as Papists and such as Papists suborne to speake for them, whereby it clearely appeareth how much they reioyce, how much they triumph in these things; our aunswere hereunto is still the same, that the benefite we hauehave by such ceremonies ouerweigheth euen this also. No man which is not exceeding partiall can well deny, but that there is most iust cause wherefore we should be offended greatly at the Church of Rome. Notwithstanding at such times as we are to deliberate for our selues, the freer our minds are from all distempered affections, the sounder & better is our iudgemēt. When we are in a fretting mood at the Church of Rome, and with that angry disposition enter into any cogitation of the orders & rites of our Church; taking particular suruey of them, we are sure to hauehave alwayes one eye fixed vponupon the countenance of our enemies, and according to the blith or heauy aspect thereof, our other eye sheweth some other sutable token either of dislike or approbation towards our owne orders. For the rule of our iudgement in such case being onelyonly that of Homer, foreignThis is the thing which our enemies would hauehave; what they seeme contented with, euen for that very cause we reiect; & there is nothing but it pleaseth vsus much the better, if we espy that it gauleth them. Miserable were the state & condition of that Church, the waighty affaires whereof should be ordered by those deliberations, wherein such an humor as this were perdominant. We hauehave most heartily to thanke God therefore, that they amongst vsus to whom the first consultations of causes of this kind fell, were men which aiming at another marke, namely the glorie of God and the good of this his Church, tooke that which they iudged thereunto necessary, not reiecting any good or conuenient thing, onelyonly because the Church of Rome might perhaps like it. If we hauehave that which is meere and right, although they be glad, we are not to enuie them this their solace; we do not thinke it a duty of ours, to be in eueryevery such thing their tormentors. And whereas it is said,T.C. l. 3. p. 179. Thus they conceiuing hope of hauing the rest of their poperie in the end▪ it causeth them to be more frozen in their wickednesse, &c. For not the cause, but the occasion also ought to be taken away, &c. Although let the reader iudge, whether they hauehave cause giuen to hope that the tails of Popery yet remaining▪ they shall the easilier hale in the whole body after: considering also that Maister Bucer noteth, that where these things hauehave bene left, there Popery hath returned: but on the other part in places which hauehave bene clensed of these dregs, it hath not bin seene that it hath had any entrance. that Popery for want of this vtter extirpation hath in some places taken roote and florished againe, but hath not beene able to reestablish it selfe in any place, after prouision made against it by vtter euacuation of all Romish ceremonies; and therefore as long as we hold any thing like vntounto them, we put them in some more hope, then if all were taken away; as we deny not but this may be true, so being of two euils to chuse the lesse, we hold it better, that the friends and fauorers of the Church of Rome, should be in some kind of hope to hauehave a corrupt religion restored, then both we and they conceiue iust feare, least vnderunder colour of rooting out Popery, the most effectuall meanes to beare vp the state of religion be remooued, and so a way made either for Paganisme, or for extreme barbāritie to enter. If desire of weakening the hope of others should turne vsus away from the course we hauehave taken; how much more the care of preuenting our owne feare withhold vsus from that wee are vrged vntounto? Especially seeing that our owne feare we knowe, but wee are not so certaine what hope the rites and orders of our Church hauehave bred in the hearts of others. For it is no sufficient argument thereof to say, that in maintaining and vrging these ceremonies none are so clamorous as Papists, and they whom Papists suborne; this speech being more hard to iustifie then the former, and so their proofe more doubtfull then the thing it selfe which they proue. He that were certaine that this is true, must hauehave marked who they be that speake for Ceremonies; he must hauehave noted who amongst them doth speake oftnest, or is most earnest; he must hauehave bene both acquainted throughly with the religion of such, and also priuy what conferences or compacts are passed in secret betweene them and others; which kinds of notice are not wont to be vulgar and common. Yet they which alleage this, would hauehave it taken as a thing that needeth no proofe, a thing which all men know and see. And if so be it were graunted them as true, what gaine they by it? Sundry of them that be Popish are eger in maintenance of Ceremonies. Is it so strange a matter to find a good thing furthered by ill men of a sinister intent and purpose, whose forwardnesse is not therefore a bridle to such as fauour the same cause with a better and sincerer meaning? They that seeke, as they say, the remouing of all Popish orders out of the Church, and reckon the state of Bishop in the number of those orders, do (I doubt not) presume that the cause which they prosecute is holy. Notwithstanding it is their owne ingenuous acknowledgement, that euen this very cause which they terme so often by an excellency, The Lords cause, is gratissima, most acceptable vntounto some which hope for pray and spoile by it, and that our age hath store of such, Ecclesi. dis… fol. 94.and that such are the very sectaries of Dionysius the famous Atheist. Now if hereupon we should vpbraide them with irreligious, as they do vsus with superstitious fauourers; if we should follow them in their owne kind of pleading and say, that the most clamorous for this pretended reformation, are either Atheists, or else proctors suborned by Atheists; the answer which herein they would make vntounto vsus, let them apply vntounto themselues, and there an end. For they must not forbid vsus to presume, or cause in defence of our Church-orders, to be as good as theirs against them, till the contrary be made manifest to the world.

10 In the meane while sory we are,T.C. l. 3. p. 180. There be numbers which hauehave Antichristianitie in such detestation, that they c…not without griefe of mind behold them▪ And afterwards, such godly brethren are not easily to be grieued, which they seeme to be when they are thus martyred in their minds, for ceremonies which (to speake the best of them) are vnprofitable. The griefe which they say godly brethren conceiue, in regard of such Ceremonies as we hauehave common with the Church of Rome.that any good and godly mind should be grieued with that which is done. But to remedy their griefe, lieth not so much in vsus as in themselues. They do not wish to be made glad with the hurt of the Church: and to remoue all out of the Church, whereat they shew themselues to be sorrowfull, would be as we are perswaded hurtfull, if not pernitious thereunto. Till they be able to perswade the contrary, they must and will I doubt not find out some other good meanes to cheere vp themselues. Amongst which meanes the example of Geneua may serue for one. HaueHave not they the old Popish custome of vsing Godfathers and Godmothers in Baptisme; the old Popish custome of administring the blessed Sacrament of the holy Eucharist with Wafer cakes? Those thing… the godly there can digest. Wherefore should not the godly here learne to do the like, both in them and in the rest of the like nature? Some further meane peraduenture it might be to asswage their griefe, if so be they did cōsider the reuenge they take on them, which hauehave bene, as they interpret it, the workers of their continuance in so great griefe so long. For if the maintenance of Ceremonies be a corrosiue to such as oppugne them; vndoubtedly to such as mainteine them, it can be no great pleasure, when they behold how that which they reuerence is oppugned. And therefore they that iudge themselues Martyrs when they are grieued, should thinke withall what they are when they grieue. For we are still to put them in mind that the cause doth make no difference; for that it must be presumed as good at the least on our part as on theirs, till it be in the end decided who hauehave stood for truth and who for error. So that till then the most effectuall medicine and withall the most sound to ease their griefe, must not be (in our opinion) the taking away of those things whereat they are grieued, but the altering of that perswasion which they hauehave concerning the same. For this we therefore both pray and labour; the more because we are also perswaded, that it is but conceipt in them to thinke, that those Romish Ceremonies whereof we hauehave hetherto spoken,T.C. l. 3. p. 171 Although the corruptions in them sticke not straight to the heart, yet as gentle poysons they consume by little and little. are like leprous clothes, infectious vntounto the Church, or like soft and gentle poysons, the venome whereof being insensibly pernicious, worketh death, and yet is neuer felt working. Thus they say: but because they say it onelyonly, and the world hath not as yet had so great experience of their art in curing the diseases of the Church, that the bare authoritie of their word should perswade in a cause so waightie; they may not thinke much if it be required at their hands to shewe, first, by what meanes so deadly infection can growe from similitude betweene vsus and the Church of Rome in these thinges indifferent; Secondly, for that it were infinite if the Church should prouide against eueryevery such euill as may come to passe, it is not sufficient that they shewe possibilitie of dangerous euent, vnlesse there appeare some likelihood also of the same to follow in vsus, except we preuent it, Nor is this inough, vnlesse it be moreouer made plaine, that there is no good and sufficient way of preuention, but by euacuating cleane, and by emptying the Church of euerie such rite and Ceremonie, as is presently called in question. Till this be done, their good affection towards the safety of the Church is acceptable, but the way they prescribe vsus to preserue it by must rest in suspense. And least hereat they take occasion to turne vponupon vsus the speech of the Prophet Ieremie vsed against Babylon, …. …1.9.Behold we hauehave done our endeuour to cure the diseases of Babylon, but she through her wilfulnesse doth rest vncured: let them consider into what straights the Church might driue it selfe, in being guided by this their counsell. Their axiome is, that the sound beleeuing Church of Iesus Christ, may not be like Hereticall Churches in any of those indifferent things, which men make choyce of, and do not take by prescript appointment of the word of God. In the word of God the vse of bread is prescribed, as a thing without which the Eucharist may not be celebrated: but as for the kind of bread, it is not denied to be a thing indifferent. Being indifferent of it selfe, we are by this axiome of theirs to auoide the vse of vnleauened bread in their Sacrament, because such bread the Church of Rome beeing Hereticall vseth. But doth not the selfe same axiome barre vsus euen from leauened bread also, which the Church of the Grecians vseth; the opinions whereof are in a number of things the same, for which we condemne the Church of Rome; and in some things erroneous, where the Church of Rome is acknowledged to be sound; as namely in the Article proceeding of the holy Ghost? And least here they should say that because the Greeke Church is farther off, & the Church of Rome nearer, we are in that respect rather to vse that which the Church of Rome vseth not; let them imagine a reformed Church in the Citie of Venice, where a Greeke Church and a Popish both are. And when both these are equally neare, let them consider what the third shall doe. Without eyther leauened or vnleauened bread, it can hauehave no sacrament: the word of God doth tye it to neither; and their axiome doth exclude it from both. If this constraine them, as it must, to grant that their axiome is not to take any place, saue in those things only where the Church hath larger scope; it resteth that they search out some stronger reason then they hauehave as yet alleaged; otherwise they constraine not vsus to thinke that the Church is tyed vntounto any such rule or axiome, no not then when she hath the widest field to walke in, and the greatest store of choice.

11 Against such Ceremonies generally as are the same in the Church of England and of Rome, we see what hath bene hetherto alleaged.Their exception against such Ceremonies as we hauehave receiued from the Church of Rome, that church hauing taken them frō the Iewes. Albeit therefore we do not finde the one Churches hauing of such thinges, to be sufficient cause why the other should not hauehave them: neuerthelesse in case it may be proued, that amongst the number of rites and orders common vntounto bothe, there are particulars the vse whereof is vtterly vnlawfull, in regard of some speciall bad and noysome qualitie; there is no doubt but we ought to relinquish such rites and orders, what freedome soeuer we hauehave to retaine the other still. As therefore wee hauehave heard their generall exception against all those thinges, which being not commanded in the word of God, were first receiued in the Church of Rome, and from thence hauehave bene deriued into ours, so it followeth th…t now we proceede vntounto certaine kinds of them, as being excepted against not only for that they are in the Church of Rome, but are besides either Iewish, or abused vntounto Idolatry, and so growne scandalous. The Church of Rome they say,Eccles. discisol. 98. And T.C. l. 3. p. 181. Many of these popish ceremonies fault by reason of the pompe in them; where they should be agreeable to the simplicitie of the Gospel of Christ crucified. being ashamed of the simplicitie of the Gospell, did almost out of all religions take whatsoeuer had any faire & gorgeous shew, borrowing in that respect frō the Iewes sundry of their abolished Ceremonies. Thus by foolish and ridiculous imitation, all their Massing furniture almost they tooke from the law, least hauing an Altar and a Priest, they should want vestments for their stage; so that whatsoeuer we hauehave in common with the church of Rome, if the same be of this kind we ought to remoue it. Constantine the Emperour speaking of the keeping of the feast of Easter saith, That it is an vnworthy thing to hauehave any thing common with that most spitefull company of the Iewes. And a little after he saith, that it is most absurd and against reason, that the Iewes should vaunt and glory that the Christians could not keepe those thinges without their doctrine. T.C. l. 1. p. 132. Euseb. l. 3. c. 17. Socr. 1. lib. c. 9. To. 1. Concil. Laod. can. 38.And in an other place it is said after this sort; It is conuenient so to order the matter, that we hauehave nothing common with that nation. The councell of Laodicea, which was afterward confirmed by the sixt generall Councell, decreed that the Christians should not take vnlea…ened bread of the Iewes, or communicate with their impietie. For the easier manifestation of truth in this point, two things there are which must be considered; namely the causes wherefore the church should decline from Iewish Ceremonies; and how farre it ought so to doe. One cause is that the Iewes were the deadliest and spitefullest enemies of Christianitie that were in the world, and in this respect their orders so farre forth to be shunned, as we hauehave already set downe in handling the matter of heathenish Ceremonies. For no enemies being so venemous against Christ as Iewes, they were of all other most odious, and by that meane least to be vsed as fit Church paternes for imitation. An other cause is the solemne abrogation of the Iewes ordinances; which ordinances for vsus to resume, were to checke our Lord himselfe which hath disanulled them. But how farre this second cause doth extend, it is not on all sides fully agreed vponupon. And touching those thinges whereunto it reacheth not, although there be small cause wherefore the Church should frame it selfe to the Iewes example, in respect of their persons which are most hatefull; yet God himselfe hauing bene the author of their lawes, herein they are (notwithstanding the former consideration) still worthy to be honoured, and to be followed aboue others, as much as the state of things will beare. Iewish ordinances had some things naturall, and of the perpetuitie of those things no man doubteth. That which was positiue, wee likewise knowe to hauehave bene by the comming of Christ partly necessary not to bee kept, and partly indifferent to be kept or not. Of the former kinde Circumcision and sacrifice were. For this point Stephen was accused; and the euidence which his accusers brought against him in iudgement was, This man ceaseth not to speake blasphemous words against this holy place and the lawe, Act. 6.13, 14.for we hauehave heard him say that this Iesus of Nazaret shall destroy this place, and shall change the ordinances that Moses gaue vsus. True it is that this doctrine was then taught, which vnbeleeuers condemning for blasphemie, did therein commit that which they did condemne. The Apostles notwithstanding from whom Stephen had receiued it, did not so teach the abrogation, no not of those things which were necessarily to cease, but that euen the Iewes being Christian might for a time continue in them. And therefore in Ierusalem the first Christian Bishop not Circumcised was Marke;Vide Niceph. lib. 3 .cap. 25. & Sulpit, S… uer. pag. 149. in edit. Plant. Act. 1…. and he not Bishop till the daies of Adrian the Emperour, after the ouerthrow of Ierusalem, there hauing bene fifteene Bishops before him which were all of the Circumcision. The Christian Iewes did thinke at the first not onelyonly themselues, but the Christian Gentiles also bound, and that necessarily, to obserue the whole lawe. There went forth certaine of the sect of Pharises which did beleeue, and they comming vntounto Antioch, taught that it was necessary for the Gentiles to be circumcised, and to keepe the lawe of Moses. Whereupon there grew dissention, Paul and Barnabas disputing against them. The determination of the Councell held at Ierusalem concerning this matter was finally this,Act. 21.25. Touching the Gentils which beleeue, we hauehave written & determined that they obserue no such thing. Act. 15.24.Their protestation by letters is, For as much as we hauehave heard that certain which departed frō vsus hauehave troubled you with words, and combred your minds, saying, Ye must be circumcised and keepe the lawe; knowe that we gaue them no such commandement. Paule therefore continued still teaching the Gentiles, not onelyonly that they were not bound to obserue the lawes of Moses, but that the obseruation of those lawes which were necessarily to be abrogated, was in them altogether vnlawfull. In which point his doctrine was misreported, as though he had eueryevery where preached this, not only concerning the Gentiles, but also touching the Iewes. Wherfore comming vntounto Iames and the rest of the Cleargie at Ierusalem, Act. 21.20.they tolde him plainely of it, saying, Thou seest brother how many thousand Iewes there are which beleeue, & they are all zealous of the law. Now they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Iewes which are amongst the Gentiles to forsake Moses, and sayest that they ought not to circumcise their children neither to liue after the customes. And hereupon they gaue him counsell to make it apparent in the eyes of all men, that those flying reports were vntrue, and that himselfe being a Iew, kept the lawe euen as they did. In some thinges therefore wee see the Apostles did teach, that there ought not to be conformitie betweene the Christian Iewes and Gentiles. How many things this lawe of inconformitie did comprehend, there is no need we should stand to examine. This generall is true, that the Gentiles were not made conformable vntounto the Iewes, in that which was necessarily to cease at the comming of Christ. Touching things positiue which might either cease or continue as occasion should require,Act. 15.28. the Apostles tendering the zeale of the Iewes, thought it necessary to binde euen the Gentiles for a time to abstaine as the Iewes did, frō things offered vntounto idols, from bloud, frō strangled. These decrees were eueryevery where deliuered vntounto the Gentiles to bee straightly obserued and kept. In the other matters where the Gentiles were free,Act. 16.4. and the Iewes in their owne opinion still tied, the Apostles doctrine vntounto the Iewe was, Condemne not the Gentile; vntounto the Gentile, Despise not the Iewe:Rom. 14.10. the one sorte they warned to take heed that scrupulositie did not make them rigorous, in giuing vnaduised sentence against their brethren which were free; the other that they did not become scandalous, by abusing their libertie & freedome to the offence of their weake brethren which were scrupulous. From hence therefore two conclusiōs there are which may euidently be drawne; the first, that whatsouer conformitie of positiue lawes the Apostles did bring in betweene the Churches of Iewes and Gentiles, it was in those things only, which might either cease or continue a shorter or a longer time, as occasion did most require; the second, that they did not impose vponupon the Churches of the Gentiles any part of the Iewes ordinances with bond of necessary and perpetuall obseruatiō, (as we al both by doctrine and practise acknowledge) but only in respect of the conueniencie and fitnes for the present state of the Church as thē it stood. The words of the Councels decree cōcerning the Gentiles are, It seemed good to the holy Ghost & to vsus, to lay vpō you no more burden sauing only those things of necessitie, abstinence frō Idoll-offrings, frō strangled & bloud, and frō fornication. So that in other things positiue which the cōming of Christ did not necessarily extinguish, the Gentils were left altogether free. Neither ought it to seeme vnreasonable, that the Gentils should necessarily be bound & tied to Iewish ordinances, so far forth as that decree importeth. For to the Iew, who knew that their differēce frō other nations which were aliens & strangers frō God, did especially consist in this,Lib. qui Seder Olam inscribi… tur. that Gods people had positiue ordināces giuen to thē of God himself, it seemed maruelous hard, that the Christiā Gentils should be incorporated into the same common welth with Gods owne chosen people, & be subiect to no part of his statutes,foreign more then only the lawe of nature, which heathēs count thēselues boūd vntounto. It was an opiniō constātly receiued amongst the Iews, that God did deliuer vntounto the sonnes of Noah seuē precepts; namely to liue in some form of regimēt vnderunder 1 publique lawes; 2 to serue & call vpō the name of God; 3 to shun Idolatry; 4 not to suffer effusiō of bloud; 5 to abhor all vncleane knowledge in the flesh; 6 to commit no …apine; 7 finally, not to eate of any liuing creature whereof the bloud was not first let out. if therefore the Gentiles would be exempt from the lawe of Moses, yet it might seeme hard they should also cast off euen those things positiue which were obserued before Moses, and which were not of the same kinde with lawes that were necessarily to cease. And peraduenture hereupon the Councell sawe it expedient to determine, that the Gentiles should according vntounto the third, the seuenth, and the fift of those precepts, abstaine from things sacrificed vntounto idoles, from strangled and bloud, and from fornication. The rest the Gentiles did of their owne accord obserue, nature leading them thereunto. And did not nature also teach them to abstaine from fornication? No doubt it did. Neither can we with reason thinke,Heb. 13.4. 1. Cor. 5.13. Gal. 5.19. that as the former two are positiue, so likewise this, being meant as the Apostle doth otherwise vsually vnderstand it. But very marriage within a number of degrees, being not onelyonly by the lawe of Moses, but also by the lawe of the sonnes of Noah (for so they tooke it) an vnlawfull discouerie of nakednes; this discouerie of nakednesse by vnlawfull marriages, such as Moses in the lawe reckoneth vp,1. L…uit. 18. I thinke it for mine owne part more probable to hauehave bene meant in the wordes of that Canon, then fornication according vntounto the sense of the lawe of nature. Words must be taken according to the matter wherof they are vttered. The Apostles commaund to abstaine from bloud. Conster this according to the lawe of nature, and it will seeme that Homicide only is forbidden. But conster it in reference to the law of the Iewes about which the question was, and it shall easily appeare to hauehave a cleane other sense, and in any mans iudgement a truer, when we expound it of eating, and not of sheading bloud. So if we speake of fornication, he that knoweth no lawe but only the lawe of nature, must needes make thereof a narrower construction, then he which measureth the same by a lawe, wherein sundry kindes euen of coniugall copulation are prohibited as impure,…. Cor. ….1. vncleane, vnhonest. Saint Paule himselfe doth terme incestuous marriage fornication. If any do rather think that the Christian Gentiles themselues through the loose and corrupt custome of those times, tooke simple fornication for no sinne, and were in that respect offensiue vntounto beleeuing Iewes which by the law had bene better taught; our proposing of an other coniecture, is vntounto theirs no preiudice. Some thinges therefore we see there were, wherein the Gentiles were forbidden to be like vntounto the Iewes; some things wherin they were commanded not to be vnlike. Againe, some things also there were, wherein no lawe of God did let, but that they might be either like or vnlike, as occasion should require. And vntounto this purpose Leo sayth, Apostolicall ordinance (beloued) knowing that our Lord Iesus Christ came not into this world to vndo the law, Leo in Ieiun. mens. sep… Ser. 9.hath in such sort distinguished the mysteries of the old testament, that certaine of them it hath chosen out to benefit euangelicall knowledge withall, and for that purpose appointed that those things which before were Iewish, might now be Christian customes. The cause why the Apostles did thus conforme the Christians, as much as might be, according to the patterne of the Iewes, was to reine them in by this meane the more, and to make them cleaue the better. The Church of Christ hath had in no one thing so many and so contrary occasions of dealing as about Iudaisme; some hauing thought the whole Iewish lawe wicked and damnable in it selfe; some not condemning it as the former sort absolutely, hauehave notwithstanding iudged it either sooner necessary to be abrogated, or further vnlawful to be obserued then truth can beare; some of scrupulous simplicitie vrging perpetuall and vniuersall obseruation of the law of Moses necessary, as the Christian Iewes at the first in the Apostles times; some as Heretiques, holding the same no lesse euen after the contrary determination set downe by consent of the Church at Ierusalem; finally some being herein resolute through meere infidelitie, and with open profest enmitie against Christ, as vnbeleeuing Iewes. To cōtrowle slaunderers of the law and Prophets, such as Marcionites and Manichees were, the Church in her liturgies hath intermingled with readings out of the new Testament, lessons taken out of the lawe and Prophets; whereunto Tertullian alluding,Tertull. de praescript. aduers. haeret. saith of the Church of Christ; It intermingleth with euangelicall and apostolicall writings, the law and the Prophets; and from thence it drinketh in that faith, which with water it sealeth, T.C. l. 3. p. 171 What an abusing also is it to affirme, the mangling of the Gospels and Epistles to hauehave bene brought into the Church by godly and learned men?clotheth with the spirit, nourisheth with the Eucharist, with martirdom setteth forward. They would hauehave wondered in those times to heare, that any man being not a fauourer of heresie, should terme this by way of disdaine, mangling of the Gospels & Epistles. They which honor the law as an image of the wisdome of God himselfe, are notwithstanding to know that the same had an end in Christ. But what? was the lawe so abolished with Christ, that after his ascention the office of Priests became immediatly wicked, & the very name hatefull, as importing the exercise of an vngodly function? No, as long as the glory of the temple continued,T.C. l. 1. p. 216 Seeing that the office and function of Priests was after our sauiour Christs ascēsion naught & vngodly; the name whereby they were called which did exercise that vngodly function, cannot be otherwise taken then in the euil part. and till the time of that finall desolation was accomplished, the very Christian Iewes did continue with their sacrifices and other parts of legall seruice. That very lawe therefore which our Sauiour was to abolish, did not so soone become vnlawfull to be obserued as some imagine: nor was it afterwards vnlawful so far, that the very name of Aultar, of Priest, of Sacrifice it selfe, should be banished out of the world. For thogh God do now hate sacrifice, whether it be Heathenish or Iewish, so that we cannot hauehave the same things which they had, but with impietie; yet vnlesse there be some greater let then the onelyonly euacuation of the law of Moses, the names thē selues may (I hope) be retained without sin, in respect of that proportion which things established by our Sauiour hauehave vntounto them which by him are abrogated. And so throughout all the writings of the auncient fathers we see that the words which were do continue; the onelyonly difference is, that whereas before they had a literall, they now hauehave a metaphoricall vse, and are as so many notes of remembrance vntounto vsus, that what they did signifie in the letter, is accomplished in the truth. And as no man can depriue the Church of this libertie, to vse names whereunto the lawe was accustomed; so neither are wee generally forbidden the vse of things which the lawe hath; though it neither commaund vsus any particularitie, as it did the Iewes a number; and the waightiest which it did commaund them, are vntounto vsus in the Gospell prohibited. Touching such as through simplicitie of error did vrge vniuersall and perpetuall obseruation of the lawe of Moses at the first, we hauehave spoken already. Against Iewish heretikes and false Apostles teaching afterwards the selfe same, Saint Paul in eueryevery Epistle commonly either disputeth or giueth warning. Iewes that were zealous for the lawe, but withall infidels in respect of Christianitie, and to the name of Iesus Christ most spitefull enemies, did while they flourished no lesse persecute the Church then Heathens. After their estate was ouerthrowne, they were not that way so much to be feared. Howbeit because they had their Synagogues in eueryevery famous Citie almost throughout the world, and by that meanes great opportunitie to withdraw from the Christian faith, which to doe they spared no labor;Concil. Laod. Can. …7.38. T.C. l. 1. p. 132. this gaue the Church occasion to make sundry lawes against them. As in the Councell of Laodicea; The festiuall presents which Iewes or Heretikes vse to send must not be receiued; nor Holy dayes solemnized in their company. Againe, From the Iewes men ought not to receiue their vnleauened, nor to communicate with their impieties. Which Councell was afterwardes indeede confirmed by the sixt generall Councell. But what was the true sense or meaning both of the one and the other?T.C. l. 3. p. 176 Were Christians here forbidden to communicate in vnleauened bread, because the Iewes did so being enemies of the Church? Hee which attentiuely shall waigh the wordes, will suspect that they rather forbid communion with Iewes, Concil. Constantinop. 6. cap. 11.thē imitation of them: much more, if with these two decrees be compared a third in the Councell of Cōstantinople; Let no man either of the Clergie or Laitie eate the vnleauened of the Iewes, nor enter into any familiaritie with them, nor send for them in sicknes, nor take phisicke at their hāds, nor as much as goe into the bath with them, If any do otherwise being a Clergie man, let him be deposed; if being a lay person, let excommunicatiō be his punishment. If these Canons were any argumēt, that they which made them did vtterly cōdemne similitude betweene the Christians & Iewes, in things indifferent appertaining vntounto religiō, either because the Iewes were enemies vntounto the Church, or else for that their ceremonies were abrogated; these reasons had bin as strong & effectual against their keeping the feast of Easter on the same day the Iewes kept theirs, and not according to the custome of the West Church. For so they did frō the first beginning till Constantines time. For in these two things the East & West churches did interchangeably both confront the Iewes, and concur with thē: the West church vsing vnleauened bread, as the Iewes in their passouer did, but differing frō them in the day whereon they kept the feast of Easter; con…ariwise the East church celebrating the feast of Easter on the same day with the Iewes, but not vsing the same kind of bread which they did. Now if so be the East Church in vsing leuened bread had done wel, either for that the Iewes were enemies to the Church, or because Iewish ceremonies were abrogated; how should we think but that Victor the B. of Rome (whom all iudicious mē do in that behalf disallow) did well to be so vehement & fierce in drawing thē to the like dissimilitude for the feast of Easter? Againe, if the West Churches had in either of those two respects affected dissimilitude with the Iewes in the feast of Easter, what reasō had they to drawe the Easterne Church herein vntounto them, which reason did not enforce them to frame themselues vntounto it in the ceremonie of leauened bread? Differēce in rites should breed no cōtrouersie between one church & an other: but if controuersie be once bred, it must be ended. The feast of Easter being therfore litigious in the daies of Cōstantine, who honored of all other churches most the Church of Rome, which Church was the mother from whose breasts he had drawn that food, which gaue him nourishmēt to eternall life; sith agreement was necessary, and yet impossible, vnlesse the one part were yeelded vntounto; his desire was that of the two the Easterne church should rather yeeld. And to this end he vseth sundry perswasiue speeches. When Stephen the Bi. of Rome going about to shew what the Catholique Church should do, had alleaged what the heritiques themselues did, namely that they receiued such as came vntounto them, and offered not to baptise them anew: S. Cyprian being of a contrary mind to him about the matter at that time questiō, which was, Whether heretikes conuerted ought to be rebaptised yea or no, answered the allegatiō of Pope Stephen with exceeding great stomack, saying, To this degree of wretchednes the church of God and Spouse of Christ is now come, that her wayes she frame…h to the example of heretikes;Cyp…. ad pompe…. lib. cont. epist. Stephani. that to celebrate the sacramēts which heauēly instructiō hath deliuered, light it self doth borrow frō darknes, & Christians do that which Antichrists do. Now albeit Cōstantine hauehave done that to further a better cause, which Cyprian did to countenance a worse, namely, the rebaptization of heretiques; and hauehave taken aduantage at the odiousnesse of the Iewes, as Cyprian of heretiques, because the Easterne Church kept their feast of Easter alwayes the fourteenth day of the MonethMonth as the Iewes did, what day of the weeke soeuer it …el;Socr. Ecclesiast. hist. lib. 5 cap. 21. Plerique in Asiā minore antiquitus 14. die mensis, nullâ ratione die… Sabbati habitâ hoc …estum obseruarunt. Quod dum faciebant, cum aliis qui aliam rationem in codem festo agendo sequebantur vsque cōnequaquam dissenserunt, quoad Victor Episcopus Romanus supra modum iracundiâ inflammatus, omnes in Asiâ qui erant foreign appellati excommunica…erit. Ob quod factum Irenaeus Episcopus Lugduni in Victorem per Epistolam grauiter inuectus est. Euseb. de vita Constant. lib. 3. ca. 17. Quid praestabilius, quidue augustiu… esse poterat, quàm veboc festum per quod spem immortalitatis nobis often tatam habemus, vno modo & ratione apud omnes integ…e sincereque obseruaretur? Ac primum onmium indignum planè videbatur, vt ritum & consuetudinē imitantes Iudaeorum, (qui quoniam sua… ipsorum manus im…ani scesere polluerunt, meritò, vt scelestos decet, coeco animorum errore tenentur irretiti) istud festum sanctissimum ageremu…. In nostrâ enim situm est potestate, vt illorum more reiecto, veriore ac magis sincero instituto, (quod quidem vsque à primâ passionis die hactenus recoluimus) huius fetti celebrationem ad posterorum seculorū memoriam propagemus. Nihil igitur sit nobis cum Iudaeorum turbâ omnium odiosâ maximè. or how soeuer Constantine did take occasiō in the handling of that cause to say, It is vnworthy to hauehave any thing common with that spitefull Nation of the Iewes; shall eueryevery motiue argument vsed in such kinde of conferences, be made a rule for others still to cōclude the like by, cōcerning all things of like nature, when as probable inducements may leade them to the contrary?▪ Let both this and other allegations suteable vntounto it, cease to barke any longer idlely against that truth, the course and passage wherof it is not in them to hinder.

12 But the waightiest exception, and of all the most worthy to be respected, is against such kind of ceremonies, as hauehave bene so grossely & shamefully abused in the Church of Rome, Their exception against such Ceremonies as hauehave bene abused by the church of Rome, and are said in that respect to be scandalous.that where they remaine they are scandalous, yea they cannot choose but be stumbling blockes and grieuous causes of offence. Concerning this point therefore we are first to note, what properly it is to be scandalous or offensiue; secondly what kinde of Ceremonies are such; and thirdly when they are necessarily for remedie therof to be taken away, and when not. The common conceipt of the vulgar sort is, whensoeuer they see any thing which they mislike and are anrgy at, to thinke that eueryevery such thing is scandalous, and that themselues in this case are the men concerning whome our Sauiour spake in so fearefull manner, saying,Matth. 18.6. Whosoeuer shall scandalize or offend any one of these little ones which beleeue in me [that is as they conster it, whosoeuer shall anger the meanest and simplest Artizan which carrieth a good minde, by not remouing out of the Church such rites and Ceremonies as displease him] better he were drowned in the bottom of the sea. But hard were the case of the church of Christ if this were to scandalize. Men are scandalized when they are moued, led, and prouoked vntounto sinne. At good thinges euill men may take occasion to doe euill;1. Pet. 2.…. and so Christ himselfe was a rock of offence in Israel, they taking occasion at his poore estate, and at the ignominie of his crosse, to think him vnworthy the name of that great and glorious Messias, whom the Prophets describe in such ample & stately terms. But that which we therfore terme offensiue, because it inuiteth mē to offend, and by a dumb kind of prouocation incourage, thmoueth, or any way leadeth vntounto sinne, must of necessitie be acknowledged actiuely scandalous. Now some thinges are so euen by their very essence and nature, so that wheresoeuer they be found, they are not, neither can be without this force of provocation vntounto euill; of which kinde all examples of sinne and wickednes are. Thus Dauid was scandalous in that bloudie acte, whereby he caused the enemies of God to be blasphemous: thus the whole state of Israell scandalous, when their publique disorders caused the name of God to be ill spoken of amongst the nations.2. Sam. 1….14. Rom. 2.24. It is of this kind that Tertullian meaneth; Offence or scandall, if I be not deceaued saith he,Ezech. 36.20. Tertul. lib. de virgin▪ veland. is when the example not of a good but of an euill thing, doth set men forward vntounto sinne. Good things can scandalize none saue only euill mindes: good things hauehave no scandalizing nature in them. Yet that which is of it owne nature either good or at least not euill, may by some accident become scandalous at certain times, and in certaine places, and to certaine men, the open vse thereof neuerthelesse being otherwise without daunger. The verie nature of some rites and Ceremonies therfore is scandalous, as it was in a number of those which the Manichees did vse, and is in all such as the law of God doth forbid. Some are offensiue only through the agreement of men to vse them vntounto euill, and not else; as the most of those thinges indifferent which the Heathens did to the seruice of their false Gods; which an other in heart condemning their idolatrie, could not doe with them in shew and token of approbation, without being guiltie of scandall giuen. Ceremonies of this kinde are either deuised at the first vntounto euill; as the Eunomian Heretiques in dishonour of the blessed Trinitie, brought in the laying on of water but once, to crosse the custom of the Church, which in Baptisme did it thrise: or else hauing had a profitable vse, they are afterwards interpreted and wrested to the contrarie; as those Heretiques which held the Trinitie to be three distinct not persons but natures, abused the Ceremonie of three times laying on water in Baptisme vntounto the strengthning of their heresie. The element of water is in Baptisme necessarie: once to lay it on or twice is indifferent.Epist. ad Lean drum Hisp. For which cause Gregorie making mention thereof, sayth; To diue an infant either thrice or but once in Baptisme, can be no way a thing reproueable; seeing that both in three times washing, the Trinitie of persons; and in one, the Vnitie of Godhead may be signified. So that of these two Ceremonies, neither being hurtfull in it selfe, both may serue vntounto good purpose; yet one was deuised, and the other conuerted vntounto euill. Now whereas in the Church of Rome certaine Ceremonies are said to hauehave bene shamefully abused vntounto euill, as the Ceremonie of Crossing at Baptisme, of kneeling at the Eucharist, of vsing Wafer-cakes, and such like; the question is, whether for remedie of that euill wherein such Ceremonies hauehave bene scandalous, and perhaps may be still vntounto some euen amongst our selues, whome the presence and sight of them may confirme in that former error whereto they serued in times past, they are of necessitie to be remoued. Are these or any other Ceremonies wee hauehave common with the Church of Rome, scandalous and wicked in their verie nature? This no man obiecteth. Are any such, as hauehave bene polluted from their verie birth, and instituted euen at the first vntounto that thing which is euill? That which hath bene ordeyned impiously at the first, may weare out that impietie in tract of time; and then what doth let, but that the vse thereof may stand without offence. The names of our monethes and of our dayes, wee are not ignorant from whence they came, and with what dishonour vntounto God they are said to hauehave bene deuised at the first. What could be spoken against any thing more effectuall to stirre hatred, then that which sometime the auncient Fathers in this case speake? Yet those very names are at this day in vse throughout Christendome, without hurt or scandall to any.Hom 11. de Pasch. Idololatriae consuetudo in tantum homines occoecauerat; vt Solis, Lunae, Martis atque Mercurii, louis, Veneris, Saturni, & diuersi… elemētorum ac Da…monū appellationibus dies vocitarent, & luci tenebra…um nomen imponerent. Beda de ratione temp. cap. 4. Octauus dies idem primus est, ad quem reditur, inde que ru…sus heb…omada inchoatur. His nomina a planetis Gentilitas indidir, habere se credentes à Sole Spiritum; à Luna corpus, à Marte sanguinem, à Mercurio inge…um & linguam, à louelove temperantiam, à Venere voluptatem, à Saturno tarditatem: I sid. Hisp. lib. …. Etymol. ca. 30. Dies dicti à Diis, quorum nomina Romani quibusda… ▪ syderibus sacrauerunt. Cleare and manifest it is; that thinges deuised by Heretiques, yea deuised of a very hereticall purpose euen against religion, and at their first deuising worthy to hauehave bene withstood, may in time growe meete to be kept; as that custome the inuentors wherof were the Eunomian Heretiques. So that customes once established and confirmed by long vse, being presently without harme, are not in regard of their corrupt originall to be held scandalous. But cōcerning those our Ceremonies, which they reckon for most Popish, they are not able to auouch that any of them was otherwise instituted; thē vntounto good, yea so vsed at the first. It followeth then that they all are such, as hauing serued to good purpose, were afterward conuerted vntounto the contrary. And sith it is not so much as obiected against vsus, that we reteine together with them the euil, wherwith they hauehave bin infected in the Church of Rome; I would demand who they are whom we scandalize, by vsing harmles things vntounto that good end for which they were first instituted. Amongst our selues that agree in the approbation of this kinde of good vse, no man wil say that one of vsus is offensiue and scandalous vntounto another. As for the fauorers of the church of Rome, they know how far we herein differ & dissent frō them; which thing neither we conceale; & they by their publike writings also professe daily how much it grieueth them; so that of thē there will not many rise vp against vsus, as witnesses vntounto the inditement of scandal, whereby we might be cōdemned & cast, as hauing strengthned thē in that euil wherwith they pollute themselues in the vse of the same Ceremonies. And concerning such as withstād the Church of England herein, & hate it because it doth not sufficiently seeme to hate Rome, they (I hope are far enough frō being by this meane drawne to any kind of popish error. The multitude therfore of them, vntounto whom we are scādalous through the vse of abused ceremonies, is not so apparēt, that it can iustly be said in general of any one sort of mē or other, we cause thē to offend. If it be so that now or thē some few are espied, who hauing bin accustomed heretofore to the rites & ceremonies of the Church of Rome, are not so scowred of their former rust, as to forsake their auncient perswasiō which they hauehave had, howsoeuer they frame thēselues to outward obedience of laws & orders: because such may misconster the meaning of our ceremonies, and so take thē as though they were in eueryevery sort the same they hauehave bin, shal this be thought a reason sufficiēt wheron to cōclude, that some law must necessarily be made to abolish al such ceremonies? They answer that there is no law of God which doth bind vsus to reteine thē. And S. Pauls rule is, that in those things frō which without hurt we may lawfully absteine, we should frame the vsage of our libertie with regard to the weakenes and imbecillitie of our brethren. Wherefore vntounto them which stood vponupon their owne defence, saying, All things are lawfull vntounto me; he replyeth,1. Cor. 6.12. But all things are not expedient in regard of others. All things are cleane, all meates are lawfull; but euill vntounto that man that eateth offensiuely. If for thy meates …ake thy brother bee grieued,Rom. 14. Rom. 15.1. thou walkest no longer according to charitie. Destroy not him with thy meate for whome Christ dyed. Dissolue not for foodes sake the worke of God. Wee that are strong, must beare the imbecillities of the impotent, and not please our selues. It was a weakenesse in the Christian Iewes, and a maime of iudgement in them, that they thought the Gentiles polluted by the eating of those meates, which themselues were afraid to touch for feare of transgressing the lawe of Moses; yea hereat their hearts did so much rise, that the Apostle had iust cause to feare, least they would rather forsake Christianitie, then endure any fellowship with such, as made no cōscience of that which was vntounto them abhominable. And for this cause mention is made of destroying the weake by meates, and of dissoluing the work of God, which was his church, a part of the liuing stones whereof were beleeuing Iewes. Now those weake brethren before mentioned are said to be as the Iewes were, and our ceremonies which hauehave bene abused in the Church of Rome, to be as the scandalous meates from which the Gentiles are exhorted to abstaine in the presence of Iewes, for feare of auerting them from Christian faith. Therefore as charitie did bind them to refraine frō that for their brethrens sake, which otherwise was lawfull enough for them; so it bindeth vsus for our brethrens sake likewise to abolish such Ceremonies, although we might lawfully else retaine them. But betweene these two cases there are great oddes. For neither are our weake brethren as the Iewes, nor the ceremonies which we vse as the meates which the Gentiles vsed. The Iewes were knowne to be generally weake in that respect; whereas contrariwise the imbecillitie of ours is not common vntounto so many, that we can take any such certaine notice of them. It is a chance if here and there some one be found; and therefore seeing we may presume men commonly otherwise, there is no necessitie that our practise should frame it selfe by that which th' Apostle doth prescribe to the Gentiles. Againe their vse of meates was not like vntounto our of Ceremonies; that being a matter of priuate action in common life, where eueryevery man was free to order that which himselfe did;Vide Harmenop. lib. 1. …it. 1. §. 28. but this a publike constitution for the ordering of the Church: and we are not to looke that the Church should change her publique lawes and ordinances, made according to that which is iudged ordinarily and commonly fittest for the whole, although it chance that for some particular men the same be found incōuenient; especially whē there may be other remedy also against the sores of particular inconueniences. In this case therefore where any priuate harme doth growe, we are not to reiect instruction, as being an vnmeete plaster to apply vntounto it; neither can wee say that hee which appointeth teachers for phisitians in this kind of euill,T.C. l. 3. p. 178 is as if a man would set one to watch a childe all day long least he should hurt himselfe with a knife, whereas by taking away the knife from him, the daunger is auoyded, and the seruice of the man better imployed. For a knife may be taken away from a childe, without depriuing them of the benefite thereof which hauehave yeares and discretion to vse it. But the Ceremonies which children doe abuse, if we remoue quite and cleane, as it is by some required that wee should; then are they not taken from children onelyonly, but from others also; which is as though because children may perhaps hurt themselues with kniues, wee should conclude that therefore the vse of kniues is to bee taken quite and cleane euen from men also. Those particular Ceremonies which they pretend to be so scandalous, we shall in the next booke hauehave occasion more throughly to sift, where other things also traduced in the publike duties of the Church whereunto each of these appertaineth, are together with these to be touched, and such reasons to be examined as hauehave at any time beene brought either against the one or the other. In the meane while against the conueniencie of curing such euils by instructiō,T.C. l. 3. p. 177. It is not so conuenient that the Minist…r hauing so many nec…ssary points to bestow his time in, should bee driuen to spend it in giuing warning of not abusing them, of which (although they were vsed to the best) there is no profite. strange it is that they should obiect the multitude of other necessary matters, wherin Preachers may better bestow their time, then in giuing men warning not to abuse Ceremonies; a wonder it is that they should obiect this, which hauehave so many yeares together troubled the Church with quarels concerning these things, and are euen to this very houre so earnest in them, that if they write or speake publiquely but fiue words, one of them is lightly about the dangerous estate of the Church of England in respect of abused ceremonies. How much happier had it bene for this whole Church, if they which hauehave raised contention therein about the abuse of rites and Ceremonies, had considered in due time that there is indeede store of matters fitter and better a great deale for teachers to spend time and labour in? It is through their importunate and vehement asseuerations, more then through any such experience which we hauehave had of our owne, that we are forced to thinke it possible for one or other now and then, at leastwise in the prime of the reformation of our Church, to hauehave stumbled at some kinde of Ceremonies. Wherein for as much as we are contented to take this vponupon their credite, and to thinke it may be; sith also they further pretend the same to be so dangerous a snare to their soules, that are at any time taken therein; they must giuegive our teachers leaue for the sauing of those soules (bee they neuer so fewe) to intermingle sometime with other more necessary thinges, admonition concerning these not vnnecessarie. Wherein they should in reason more easily yeelde this leaue, considering that hereunto we shall not neede to vse the hundreth part of that time, which themselues thinke very needefull to bestowe in making most bitter inuectiues against the ceremonies of the Church.

13 But to come to the last point of all,Our ceremonies except…d against, for that som… Churches reformed before ours hauehave cast ou… those things, which wee notwithstanding their example to the contrary do reteine still. the Church of England is grieuously charged with forgetfulnesse of her dutie, which dutie had bene to frame her selfe vntounto the patterne of their example,T.C. l. 1. p. 1…3. that went before her in the worke of reformation. For as the Churches of Christ ought to be most vnlike the synagogue of Antichrist in their indifferent ceremonies; so they ought to be most like one vntounto an other, and for preseruation of vnitie to hauehave as much as possible may be all the same Ceremonies. 1. Cor. 1….1.And therefore S. Paul to establish this order in the Church of Corinth, That they should make their gatherings for the poore vponupon the first day of the Saboth (which is our sunday) alleageth this for a reason, that he had so ordained in other Churches. Againe, as children of one father and seruants of one family, so all Churches should not only hauehave one dyet in that they hauehave one word, but also weare as it were one liuerie in vsing the same Ceremonies. Thirdly, this rule did the great Councell of Nice follow, when it ordained, Can. 20.that where certaine at the feast of Pentecoste did pray kneeling, The Canon of that Councell which is here cited, doth prouide against kneeling at prayer on Sundayes, or for fiftie dayes after Easter on any day, and not at the feast of Pentecost onelyonly.they should pray standing; the reason whereof is added, which is, that one custome ought to be kept throughout all Churches. It is true that the diuersitie of Ceremonies ought not to cause the Churches to dissent one with another; but yet it maketh most to thauoyding of dissention, that there be amongst them an vnitie, not onelyonly in doctrine, but also in Ceremonies. And therefore our forme of seruice is to be amended, not onelyonly for that it commeth too neare that of the Papistes, but also because it is so different from that of the reformed Churches. T. C. lib. 3. p. 182.183.Beeing asked to what Churches ours should conforme it selfe, and why other reformed Churches should not as well frame themselues to ours; their answere is, That if there be any Ceremonies which wee hauehave better then others, they ought to frame themselues to vsus; if they hauehave better then we, then we ought to frame our selues to them; if the Ceremonies be alike commodious, the later Churches should conforme themselues to the first, Rom. 16.5.7.as the younger daughter to the elder. For as S. Paul in the members, where all other things are equal, noteth it for a marke of honor aboue the rest, that one is called before another to the Gospell; 1. Cor. 14.37.so is it for the same cause amongest the Churches. And in this respect he pincheth the Corinthes, that not being the first which receiued the Gospell, yet they would hauehave their seuerall maners from other Churches. Moreouer where the Ceremonies are alike commodious, the fewer ought to conforme themselues vntounto the moe. For as much therefore as all the Churches (so farre as they know which pleade after this manner) of our confession in doctrine, agree in the abrogation of diuers things which we reteine; our churches ought either to shew that they hauehave done euill, or else she is found to be in fault that doth not conforme her selfe in that, which she cannot denie to be well abrogated. In this axiome that preseruation of peace and vnitie amongst Christian Churches should be by al good meanes procured, we ioyne most willingly and gladly with them. Neither denie we but that to th' auoyding of dissention it auaileth much, that there be amongst thē an vnitie as well in ceremonies as in doctrine. The only doubt is about the manner of their vnitie, how far churches are bound to be vniforme in their ceremonies, & what way they ought to take for that purpose. Touching the one, the rule which they hauehave set down is; that in ceremonies in differēt all churches ought to be one of them vntounto another as like as possibly they may be. Whcih possibly we cannot otherwise conster, thē that it doth require them to be euen as like as they may be, without breaking any positiue ordinance of God. For the ceremonies wherof we speake being matter of positiue law; they are indifferent, if God hauehave neither himselfe cōmanded nor forbidden thē, but left thē vntounto the Churches discretion. So that if as great vniformitie bee required as is possible in these things, seeing that the law of God forbiddeth not any one of thē; it followeth, that from the greatest vntounto the least they must be in eueryevery Christian Church the same, except meere impossibilitie of so hauing it be the hinderāce. To vsus this opinion seemeth ouer extreame & violent: wee rather incline to thinke it a iust and reasonable cause for any Church, the state whereof is free and independent, if in these things it differ from other Churches, only for that it doth not iudge it so fit & expedient to be framed therin by the patterne of their example, as to bee otherwise framed then they. That of Gregorie vntounto Leander is a charitable speech and a peaceable; In vnâ fide nil officit Ecclesiae sanctae consuetudo diuersa, Where the faith of the holy Church is one, a difference in customes of the Church doth no harme. That of S. Augustine to Cassulanus is somewhat more particular, and toucheth what kinde of ceremonies they are, wherein one Church may vary from the example of an other without hurt; Let the faith of the whole church how wide so euer it hauehave spred it selfe be alwaies one, although the vnitie of beliefe be famous for varietie of certain ordinances, Respon. ad Media….wherby that which is rightly beleeued suffereth no kind of let or impediment. Caluin goeth further, As concerning rites in particular let the sentence of Augustine take place, which leaueth it free, vntounto all Churches to receiue their owne custome. Yea sometime it profiteth and is expedient that there be difference, least men should thinke that religion is tyed to outward ceremonies. Alwayes prouided that there be not any emulation, nor that churches delighted with noueltie affect to hauehave that which others hauehave not. They which graunt it true that the diuersitie of Ceremonies in this kind ought not to cause dissention in churches, must eyther acknowledge that they graunt in effect nothing by these words; or if any thing be granted, there must as much be yeelded vntounto, as we affirme against their former strict assertion. For if Churches be vrged by way of dutie to take such ceremonies as they like not of; how can dissention be auoyded? Will they say that there ought to be no dissention, because such as are vrged ought to like of that whereunto they are vrged? If they say this, they say iust nothing. For how should any Church like to be vrged of dutie, by such as hauehave no authoritie or power ouer it, vntounto those things which being indifferent it is not of dutie bound vntounto them? Is it their meaning, that there ought to be no dissention, because that which Churches are not bound vntounto, no man ought by way of dutie to vrge vponupon them; and if any man doe, he standeth in the sight both of God and men most iustly blameable, as a needelesse disturber of the peace of Gods Church, & an author of dissention? In saying this they both condemne their owne practise, when they presse the Church of England with so strict a bond of dutie in these thinges, and they ouerthrowe the ground of their practise, which is that there ought to bee in all kinde of ceremonies vniformitie, vnlesse impossibilitie hinder it. For proofe whereof it is not enough to alleage what S. Paul did about the matter of collections, or what Noble-men doe in the liueries of their seruants, or what the Councell of Nice did for standing in time of prayer on certain daies: because though S. Paule did will them of the Church of Cori…th,T.C. l. 1. p. 133. And therefore S. Paul to establish this order in the Church of Corinth, that obey should make their gatherings for the poore vponupon the first day of the Saboth, (which is our sunday) alleageth this for a reason that he had so ordained in other Churches. eueryevery man to lay vp somewhat by him vponupon the Sunday, and to reserue it in store, till himselfe did come thither to send it vntounto the Church of Ierusalem for reliefe of the poore there; signifying withall that he had taken the like order with the Churches of Galatia; yet the reason which hee yeeldeth of this order taken both in the one place and the other, sheweth the least part of his meaning to hauehave bene that, whereunto his wordes are writhed.1. Cor. 16.… Concerning collection for the Saintes, (hee meaneth them of Ierusalem) as I hauehave giuen order to the Church of Galatia, so likewise doe ye, (saith the Apostle) that is, in eueryevery first of the weeke let each of you lay aside by himselfe, and reserue according to that which God hath blessed him with, that when I come collections be not then to make; and that when I am come, whom you shall choose, them I may forthwith sende away by letters to carrie your beneficence vntounto Ierusalem. Out of which word… to conclude the dutie of vniformitie throughout all Churches in all manner of indifferent ceremonies will bee very hard, and therefore best to giuegive it ouer. But perhaps they are by so much the more loth to forsake this argument, for that it hath, though nothing else,T.C. li. 3. pag. 133. So that as children of one father, and ser…ants of one master, he wil hauehave al the Churche… not onelyonly hauehave one dyet in that they hauehave one word, but also we are as it were one liuery in vsing the same ceremonies. T. C. l. 1. p. 133 This rule did the great coun…ll of Nice follow, &c. Die Dominico & per omnem Penticostem, nec de geniculis ado…are, & iciunium soluere. De Coro. …. yet the name of Scripture, to giuegive it some kinde of countenance more then the next of liuerie coates affordeth them. For neither is it any man… dutie to cloth all his children or all his seruants with one weede; nor theirs to cloath themselues so, if it were left to their owne iudgements, as these ceremonies are l…ft of God to the iudgement of the Church. And seeing Churches are rather in this case like diuerse families; then like diuers seruants of one family; because eueryevery Church, the state whereof is independent vponupon any other, hath authoritie to appoint orders for it selfe in thinges indifferent; therefore of the two we may rather inferre, that as one familie is not abridged of libertie to be clothed in Fryers gray, for that an other doth weare clay-colour; so neither are all Churches bound to the selfe same indifferent Ceremonies which it liketh sundry to vse. As for that Canon in the Councell of Nice, let them but read it and waigh it well. The auncient vse of the Church throughout all Christendome was, for fiftie dayes after Easter (which fifty dayes were called Pentecost, though most commonly the last day of them which is Whitsunday be so called) in like sort on all the Sundayes throughout the whole yeare their manner was to stand at praier, whereupon their meetinges vntounto that purpose on those dayes had the name of Stations giuen them. Of which custome Tertullian speaketh in this wise; It is not with vsus thought sit either to fast on the Lordes day, or to pray kneeling. The same immunitie from fasting and kneeling we keepe all the time which is betweene the Feasts of Easter and Pentecost. This being therefore and order generally receiued in the Church; when some began to be singular and different from all others, and that in a ceremonie which was then iudged very conuenient for the whole Church euen by the whole, those fewe excepted which brake out of the common pale: the Councell of Nice thought good to inclose them againe with the rest, by a lawe made in this sort: Because there are certaine which will needs kneele at the time of praier on the Lordes day, and in the fiftie dayes after Easter, the holy Synode iudging it meet that a conuenient custome be obserued throughout all churches, hath decreed that standing wee make our praiers to the Lord. Whereby it plainely appeareth that in things indifferent, what the whole Church doth thinke conuenient for the whole, the same if any part doe wilfully violate, it may be reformed and inrayled againe by that generall authority whereunto ech particular is subiect, and that the spirit of singularitie in a few ought to giuegive place vntounto publike iudgement; this doth clearely enough appeare: but not that all Christian Churches are bound in eueryevery indifferent ceremonie to be vniforme; because where the whole hath not tyed the parts vntounto one and the same thing, they being therein left each to their owne choyce, may either do as other do or else otherwise, without any breach of dutie at all. Concerning those indifferent thinges, wherein it hath beene heretofore thought good that all Christian Churches, should bee vniforme, the way which they now conceiue to bring this to passe was then neuer thought on. For till now it hath bene iudged, that seeing the lawe of God doth not prescribe all particular ceremonies which the Church of Christ may vse, and in so great varietie of them as may be found out, it is not possible that the lawe of nature and reason should direct all Churches vntounto the same thinges; each deliberating by it selfe what is most conuenient: the way to establish the same things indifferent throughout them all, must needs be the iudgement of some iudiciall authoritie drawne into one onelyonly sentence, which may be a rule for eueryevery particular to follow. And because such authoritie ouer all Churches, is too much to be granted vntounto any one mortall man; there yet remaineth that which hath bene alwayes followed, as the best, the safest, the most sincere and reasonable way, namely the verdict of the whole Church orderly taken, and set downe in the assembly of some generall councell. But to maintaine that all Christian Churches ought for vnities sake to be vniforme in all ceremonies, & then to teach that the way of bringing this to passe must be by mutuall imitation, so that where we hauehave better ceremonies then others they shall bee bound to followe vsus, and we them where theirs are better; how should we thinke it agreeable and consonant vntounto reason? For sith in things of this nature there is such varietie of particular inducements, whereby one Church may be led to thinke that better, which another Church led by other inducements iudgeth to be worse: (For example, the East Church did thinke it better to keepe Easter day after the manner of the Iewes, the West Church better to do otherwise; the Greeke Church iudgeth it worse to vse vnleauened bread in the Eucharist, the Latine Church leauened; one Church esteemeth it not so good to receiue the Eucharist sitting as stāding, another Church not so good standing as sitting; there being on the one side probable motiues as well as on the other:) vnlesse they adde somewhat else to define more certainely what ceremonies shall stand for best, in such sort that all Churches in the world shall know them to be the best, and so know them that there may not remaine any question about this point; we are not a whit the neerer for that they hauehave hitherto said. They themselues although resolued in their owne iudgements what ceremonies are best, the foreseeing that such as they are addicted vntounto, be not all so clearely and so incomparably best, but others there are or may be at least wise when all things are well considered as good,T. C. l. …. p. 183. if the cerem… nies be alike …ommodio…, th… later Churches should conforme themselues to the first, &c. And againe, The fewer ought to conforme themselues vntounto th… …. knewe not which way smoothly to rid their hands of this matter, without prouiding some more certaine rule to be followed for establishment of vniformitie in ceremonies, when there are diuerse kinds of equall goodnesse; and therefore in this case they say, that the later Churches & the fewer should conforme themselues vntounto the elder and the mo. Hereupon they conclude, that for as much as all the reformed Churches (so farre as they know) which are of our confession in doctrine, hauehave agreed already in the abrogation of diuerse things which we reteine: our Church ought either to shew that they hauehave done euill, or else she is found to be in fault for not conforming her selfe to those Churches, in that which she cannot deny to be in them well abrogated. For the authoritie of the first Churches, (and those they accompt to be the first in this cause which were first reformed) they bring the comparison of younger daughters conforming themselues in attire to the example of their elder sisters;Rom. 16.5. wherein there is iust as much strength of reason as in the liuery coates before mentioned. S. Paul they say, noteth it for a marke of speciall honor, that Epaenetus was the first man in all Achaia which did embrace the Christian faith; after the same sort he toucheth it also as a speciall preeminence of Iunias and Andronicus, 1. Cor. 14.36.that in Christianity they were his auncients; the Corinthians he pincheth with this demaund, Hath the word of God gone out from you, or hath it lighted on you alone? But what of all this▪ If any man should thinke that alacrity & forwardnes in good things doth adde nothing vntounto mens commendation; the two former speeches of S. Paule might leade him to reforme his iudgement. In like sort to take downe the stomacke of proud conceited men, that glorie as though they were able to set all others to schoole, there can be nothing more fit then some such words as the Apostles third sentence doth containe; wherein he teacheth the Church of Corinth to know, that there was no such great oddes betweene them and the rest of their brethren, that they should thinke themselues to be gold and the rest to be but copper. He therefore vseth speech vntounto them to this effect: Men instructed in the knowledge of Iesus Christ there both were before you, and are besides you in the word▪ ye neither are the fountaine from which first, nor yet the riuer into which alone the word hath flowed. But although as Epaenetus was the first man in all Achaia, so Corinth had bene the first Church in the whole world that receiued Christ: the Apostle doth not shew that in any kind of things in different whatsoeuer, this should hauehave made their example a law vntounto all others. Indeed the example of sundry Churches for approbation of one thing doth sway much; but yet still as hauing the force of an example onelyonly, and not of a lawe. They are effectuall to moue any Church, vnlesse some greater thing do hinder; but they bind none▪ no not though they be many; sauing onelyonly when they are the maior part of a generall assembly, and then their voyces being moe in number must ouersway their iudgements who are fewer, because in such cases the greater halfe is the whole. But as they stand out single each of them by it selfe, their number can purchase them no such authority, that the rest of the Churches being fewer should be therefore bound to follow them, and to relinquish as good ceremonies as theirs for theirs. Whereas therefore it is concluded out of these so weake premisses,T.C. l. 3. p. 183. Our Church ought either to shew that they hauehave done euill, or else shee i… found to be in fault that doth not conforme her selfe in that which she cannot deny to be well abrogated. that the reteining of diuerse things in the Church of England, which other reformed Churches hauehave cast out, must needs argue that we do not well▪ vnlesse we can shewe that they hauehave done ill; what needed this wrest to draw out from vsus an accusation of forraine Churches? It is not proued as yet that if they hauehave done well, our duty is to followe them, and to forsake our owne course, because it different from theirs, although indeed it be as well for vsus eueryevery way, as theirs for them. And if the proofes alleaged for conformation hereof had bene …ound, yet seeing they leade no further then onelyonly to shew, that where we can hauehave no better ceremonies theirs must be taken; as they cannot with modesty thinke themselues to hauehave found out absolutely the best which the wit of men may deuise, so liking their owne somewhat better then other mens, euen because they are their owne, they must in equitie allow vsus to be like vntounto them in this affection; which if they do, they case vsus of that vncourteou… burden▪ whereby we are charged either to condemne them, or else to followe them. They graunt we need not followe them, if our owne wayes already be better. And if our owne be but equall, the law of common indulgence alloweth vsus to thinke them at the least halfe a thought the better because they are our owne; which we may very well do, and neuer drawe any inditement at all against theirs,A declaration of the proceedings of the Church of England, for establishment of things as they are. but thinke commendably euen of them also.

14 To leaue reformed Churches therefore & their actions for him to iudge of, in whose sight, they are as they are, and our desire is that they may euen in his sight be found such, as we ought to endeuour by all meanes that our owne may likewise be: somewhat we are inforced to speake by way of simple declaration, concerning the proceedings of the Church of England in these affaires▪ to the end that men whose minds are free from those partiall, cōstructions, wherby the only name of difference frō some other Churches is thought cause sufficient to condēne ours, may the better discerne whether that we hauehave done be reasonable, yea or no. The Church of Englād being to alter her receiued laws cōcerning such orders, rites and ceremonies, as had bene in former times an hinderance vntounto pietie and Religious seruice of God, was to enter into consideration first, that the change of lawes, especially concerning matter of Religion, must be warily proceeded in. Lawes, as all other things humaine, are many times full of imperfection, and that which is supposed behoofefull vntounto men, proueth often-times most pernicious. The wisedome which is learned by tract of time, findeth the lawes that hauehave bene in former ages establisht, needfull in later to be abrogated. Besides that which sometime is expedient, doth not alwaies so continue: and the number of needlesse lawes vnabolisht, doth weaken the force of them that are necessarie. But true withall it is, that alteration though it be from worse to better hath in it inconueniences and those waighty; vnlesse it be in such laws as hauehave bene made vponupon special occasions, which occasions ceasing, laws of that kind do abrogate themselues. But when we abrogate a law as being ill made, the whole cause for which it was made still remaining; do we not herein reuoke our very owne deed, and vpbraid our selues with folly, yea all that were makers of it with ouer sight and with error? Further if it be a law which the custome & continuall practise of many ages or yeares hath confirmed in the minds of men, to alter it must needs be troublesome and scandalous. It amazeth them, it causeth thē to stand in doubt, whether any thing be in it selfe by nature either good or euil, & not al things rather such as men at this or that time agree to accōpt of them, whē they behold euen those things disproued, disanulled, reiected, which vse had made in a maner naturall. What hauehave we to induce mē vntounto the willing obedience & obseruation of lawes, but the waight of so many mēs iudgement, as hauehave with deliberate aduise assented thereunto; the waight of that long experience, which the world hath had thereof with consent & good liking? So that to change any such law, must needs with the common sort impaire and weaken the force of those grounds, whereby all lawes are made effectual. Notwithstanding we do not deny alteration of laws to be sometimes a thing necessary; as when they are vnnatural, or impious, or otherwise hurtfull vntounto the publique community of mē, and against that good for which humaine societies were instituted. When the Apostles of our Lord & Sauiour were ordained to alter the lawes of Heathnish Religion receiued throughout the whole world; chosen I grant they were (Paule excepted) the rest ignorant, poore, simple, vnschooled altogether and vnlettered men; howbeit extraordinarilie indued with ghostly wisedome from aboue before they euer vndertooke this enterprise, yea their authoritie confirmed by miracle; to the end it might plainely appeare that they were the Lords Ambassadours, vntounto whose Soueraigne power for all flesh to stoope, for all the kingdomes of the earth to yeeld themselues willingly conformable in whatsoeuer should be required, it was their duty. In this case therefore their oppositions in maintenance of publique superstition against Apostolique endeuours, as that they might not condemne the wayes of their ancient predecessors, that they must keepe Religiones traditas, the rites which frō age to age had descended, that the ceremonies of Religion had beene euer accompted by so much holier as elder, these and the like allegations in this case were vaine & friuolous. Not to stay longer therefore in speech concerning this point, we will conclude, that as the change of such lawes as hauehave bene specified is necessary, so the euidence that they are such must be great. If we hauehave neither voice frō heauen that so pronounceth of them; neither sentence of men grounded vponupon such manifest and cleare proofe, that they in whose hands it is to alter them may likewise infallibly euen in hart & conscience iudge them so; vponupon necessitie to vrge alteration is to trouble and disturbe without necessitie. As for arbitrary alterations, when laws in themselues not simply bad or vnmeet are changed for better and more expedient; if the benefit of that which is newly better deuised be but small, sith the custome of easinesse to alter and change is so euill, no doubt but to beare a tolerable soare is better then to venter on a dangerous remedy. Which being generally thought vponupon, as a matter that touched neerly their whole enterprise; whereas change was notwithstanding concluded necessary, in regard of the great hurt which the Church did receiue by a number of things then in vse, whereupon a great deale of that which had bene was now to be taken away and remoued out of the Church; yeat sith there are diuerse waies of abrogating things established, they saw it best to cut off presently such things, as might in that sort be extinguished without danger, leauing the rest to be abolished by disusage through tract of time. And as this was done for the manner of abrogation: so touching the stint or measure thereof, rites & ceremonies and other externall things of like nature being hurtfull vntounto the Church, either in respect of their quality, or in regard of their nūber; in the former there could be no doubt or difficulty what should be done, their deliberation in the later was more hard. And therefore in as much as they did resolue to remoue only such things of that kind as the Church might best spare, reteining the residue; their whole counsell is in this point vtterly cōdemned, as hauing either proceeded from the blindnes of those times, or from negligence, or from desire of honour and glory, or from an erroneous opinion that such things might be tollerated for a while, or if it did proceed (as they which would seeme most fauourable are content to thinke it possible) from a purpose partly the easilier to draw Papists vntounto the Gospell, by keeping so many orders stil the same with theirs,T.C. l. 2. p. 29. It may well be their purpose was by that temper of Popish ceremonies with the Gospell, partly the …asilier to draw the Papists to the Gospell, &c. partly to redeeme peace thereby. and partly to redeeme peace therby, the breach wherof they might feare would insue vponupon more thorow alteration, or howsoeuer it came to passe; the thing they did is iudged euill. But such is the lot of all that deale in publique affaires whether of Church or cōmonwealth, that which men list to surmise of their doings be it good or ill, they must before hand patiently arme their minds to indure. Wherefore to let go priuate surmises, whereby the thing in it selfe is not made either better or worse; if iust and allowable reasons might leade thē to do as they did, then are these censures al frustrate. Touching ceremonies harmelesse therfore in thēselues, & hurtful onelyonly in respect of number: was it amisse to decree, that those things which were least needfull & newliest come should be the first that were taken away, as in the abrogating of a nū ber of saints daies and of other the like customes it appeareth they did, till afterwards the forme of common prayer being perfited, articles of sound Religion and discipline agreed vponupon, Catechismes framed for the needfull instruction of youth, Churches purged of things that indeed were burthensome to the people, or to the simple offensiue and scandalous, all was brought at the length vntounto that wherein now we stand? Or was it amisse, that hauing this way eased the Church as they thought of superfluitie, they went not on till they had pluckt vp euen those things also, which had taken a great deale stronger and deeper roote; those things which to abrogate without constraint of manifest harme thereby arising, had bene to alter vnnecessarily (in their iudgements) the auncient receiued custome of the whole Church, the vniuersall practise of the people of God, and those very decrees of our fathers, which were not only set downe by agreement of generall councels, but had accordingly bin put in vre and so continued in vse till that very time present? True it is that neither councels nor customes, be they neuer so ancient and so generall, can let the Church from taking away that thing which is hurtfull to be retained. Where things hauehave bene instituted, which being conuenient and good at the first, do afterwards in processe of time waxe otherwise; we make no doubt but they may be altered,T. C. l. 3. p. …0. yea though councels or customes generall hauehave receiued them. And therfore it is but a needles kind of opposition which they make who thus dispute, If in those things which are not expressed in the Scripture, that is to be obserued of the Church, which is the custome of the people of God and decree of our forefathers; then how can these things at any time be varied, which heretofore hauehave bene once ordained in such sort? Whereto we say, that things so ordained are to be kept, howbeit not necessarily any longer, then till there grow some vrgent cause to ordaine the contrary. For there is not any positiue law of men, whether it be generall or particular, receiued by formall expresse consent, as in councels; or by secret approbation, as in customes it commeth to passe, but the same may be taken away it occasion serue. Euen as we all know, that many things generally kept heretofore,Aug. epist. 11… are now in like sort generally vnkept and abolished eueryevery where. Notwithstanding till such things be abolished, what exception can there be taken against the iudgement of S. Augustine, who saith, that Of things harmelesse whatsoeuer there is, which the whole Church doth obserue throughout the world; to argue for any mans immunitie from obseruing the same, it were a point of most insolent madnes. And surely odious it must needs hauehave bene for one Christian Church, to abolish that which all had receiued and held for the space of many ages, & that without any detriment vntounto Religion so manifest and so great, as might in the eyes of vnpartiall men appeare sufficient to cleare thē from all blame of rash & inconsiderate proceeding, if in feruour of zeale they had remoued such things. Whereas contrariwise so reasonable moderation herein vsed, hath freed vsus from being deseruedly subiect vntounto that bitter kind of obloquie, wherby as the Church of Rome doth vnderunder the colour of louelove towards those things which be harmelesse, maintaine extremely most hurtfull corruptions; so we peraduenture might be vpbraided, that vnderunder colour of hatred towards those things that are corrupt, we are on the other side as extreme, euen againts most harmelesse ordinances. And as they are obstinate to retaine that, which no man of any conscience is able wel to defend: so we might be reckoned fierce and violent, to teare away that, which if our owne mouthes did condemne, our consciences would storme and repine thereat. The Romanes hauing banished Tarquinius the proud, and taken a sollemne oath that they neuer would permit any man more to raigne, could not herewith content themselues, or thinke that tyrannie was throughly extinguished, till they had driuen one of their Consuls to depart the Citie, against whom they found not in the world what to obiect, sauing onelyonly that his name was Tarquine, and that the common-wealth could not seeme to hauehave recouered perfect freedome, as long as a man of so daungerous a name was left remaining. For the Church of England to hauehave done the like, in casting out of Papall tyranny and superstition; to hauehave shewed greater willingnes of accepting the very ceremonies of the Turke Christs professed enemie,T. C. l. 1. p. 131 For indeede it were more safe for vsus to conforme our indifferent ceremonies to the Turkes which are farre off, then to the Papists which are so neare. then of the most indifferent things which the Church of Rome approueth; to hauehave left not so much as the names which the Church of Rome doth giuegive vntounto things innocent; to hauehave eiected whatsoeuer that Church doth make accompt of, be it neuer so harmelesse in it selfe, and of neuer so auncient continuance, without any other crime to charge it with, then onelyonly that it hath bene the hap thereof to be vsed by the Church of Rome; and not to be commanded in the word of God; this kind of proceeding might happily hauehave pleased some fewe men, who hauing begun such a course themselues, must needs be glad to see their example followed by vsus. But the Almightie which giueth wisedome and inspireth with right vnderstanding whō soeuer it pleaseth him, he foreseeing that which mans wit had neuer bene able to reach vntounto, namely what tragedies the attempt of so extreme alteration would raise in some parts of the Christian world, did for the endlesse good of his Church (as we cannot chuse but interpret it) vse the bridle of his prouident restraining hand, to stay those eager affections in some, and to settle their resolution vponupon a course more calme and moderate; least as in other most ample and heretofore most flourishing dominions it hath since fallen out, so likewise if in ours it had come to passe, that the aduerse part being enraged, and betaking it selfe to such practises as men are commonly wont to embrace, when they behold things brought to desperate extremities, and no hope left to see any other end, then onelyonly the vtter oppression and cleane extinguishment of one side; by this meane Christendome flaming in all parts of greatest importance at once, they all had wanted that comfort of mutuall reliefe, wherby they are now for the time susteined, (and not the least by this our Church which they so much impeach) till mutuall combustious bloudsheads and wastes (because no other inducement will serue) may enforce them through very faintnesse, after the experience of so endlesse miseries, to enter on all sides at the length into some such consultation, as may tend to the best reestablishment of the whole Church of Iesus Christ. To the singular good whereof it cannot but serue as a profitable direction, to teach men what is most likely to proue auaileable, when they shall quietly consider the triall that hath bene thus long had of both kinds of reformation, as well this moderate kind which the Church of England hath taken, as that other more extreme and rigorous which certaine Churches elsewhere hauehave better liked. In the meane while it may be, that suspence of iudgement and exercise of charity were safer and seemelier for Christian men, then the hote pursute of these controuersies, wherein they that are most feruent to dispute, be not alwayes the most able to determine. But who are on his side and who against him, our Lord in his good time shall reueale. And sith thus farre we hauehave proceeded in opening the things that hauehave beene done, let not the principall doers themselues be forgotten. When the ruines of the house of God (that house which cōsisting of religious soules is most immediatly the pretious temple of the holy Ghost) were become not in his sight alone, but in the eyes of the whole world so exceeding great, that very superstition began euen to feele itselfe too farre growne: the first that with vsus made way to repaire the decayes thereof by beheading superstition, was King Henry the eight. The sonne and successour of which famous King as we know was Edward the Saint: in whom (for so by the euent wee may gather) it pleased God righteous and iust to let England see, what a blessing sinne and iniquitie would not suffer it to enioy. Howbeit that which the wise man hath sayde concerning Enoch (whose dayes were though many in respect of ours, yet scarse as three to nine in comparison of theirs with whome hee liued) the same to that admirable child most worthily may be applyed, Though he departed this worlde soone, yet fulfilled he much time. But what ensued? That worke, which the one in such sort had begun, and the other so farre proceeded in, was in short space so ouerthrowne, as if almost it had neuer bene: till such time as that God, whose property is to shew his mercies then greatest when they are neerest to be vtterly despaired of, caused in the depth of discomfort and darknes a most glorious starre to arise, and on her head setled the Crowne, whome him selfe had kept as a lambe from the slaughter of those bloudie times, that the experience of his goodnes in her own deliuerance, might cause her mercifull▪ disposition to take so much the more delight in sauing others, whom the like necessity shold presse. What in this behalfe hath bene done towards nations abroad, the parts of Christendome most afflicted can best testifie. That which especially concerneth our selues in the present matter we treate of, is the state of reformed religion, a thing at her comming to the Crowne euen raised as it were by miracle from the dead, a thing which we so little hoped to see, that euen they which behelde it done, scarcely belieued their own senses at the first beholding. Yet being then brought to passe, thus many years it hath continued, standing by no other worldly meane but that one only hand which erected it, that hand which as no kinde of imminent daunger could cause at the first to withholde it selfe, so neyther hauehave the practises so many so bloudie following since beene euer able to make wearie. Nor can we say in this case so iustly, that Aaron and Hur the Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill states hauehave sustained the hand which did lift it selfe to heauen for them; as that heauen it selfe hath by this hand sustained them, no ayde or helpe hauing thereunto bene ministred for performance of the worke of reformation, other then such kind of helpe or ayde as the Angell in the Prophet Zacharie speaketh of, saying, Neither by an armie nor strength, but by my spirit saith the Lord of Hostes. Which grace and fauour of diuine assistance, hauing not in one thing or two shewed it self, nor for some few daies or yeares appeared, but in such sort so long continued, our manifold sinnes & transgressions striuing to the contrarie; what can we lesse thereupon conclude, then that God would at leastwise by tract of time teach the world, that the thing which he blesseth, defendeth, keepeth, so strangely, cannot choose but be of him? Wherefore if any refuse to beleeue vsus disputing for the veritie of religion established, let them beleeue God himselfe thus miraculouslie working for it, and wish life euen for euer and euer vntounto that glorious and sacred instrument whereby he worketh.

FINIS

An Aduertisement to the Reader▪

I HaueHave for some causes, (gentle Reader) thought it at this time, more fit to let goe these first foure Bookes by themselues, then to stay both them and the rest, til the whole might together be published. Such generalities of the cause in question as here are handled, it will be perhaps not amisse to consider apart, as by way of introduction vntounto the bookes that are to follow concerning particulars. In the meane while thine helping hand must be craued, for the amendment of such faultes committed in printing, as (omitting others of lesse moment) I hauehave set downe.

Pag.	line	Fault▪	Correction	Pag.	line	Fault	Correction
25	37	be ordained	he ordained	138	19	still	stay
31	23	if any	of any	139	19	It is for nothing	It is not for nothing
51	mar.	foreign	foreign	157	33	wash	waste
55	mar.	foreign	foreign	162	32	pretious should	pretious body should
64	mar.	foreign	foreign	180	43	meerenes	neerenes
66	19	manifest reason	manifest law of reasō	183	39	vrine	vaine
83	12	or that	of that	184	ma.	foreign	foreign
87	24	ase such	are such	185	18	do (I doubt) not presume,	do(I doubt not) presume
91	44	holy worke	holy word	186	mar.	sticke	strike
130	38	seuerally	seueraltie.	202	3	worde	world

End of the text · Richard Hooker, The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity (1604)

The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book 4

p. 167The fourth Booke: Concerning their third assertion, that our forme of Church-politie is corrupted with popish orders, rites and ceremonies, banished out of certaine reformed Churches, whose example therein we ought to hauehave followed.

The matter conteined in this fourth Booke.

An Aduertisement to the Reader▪

The fourth Booke: Concerning their third assertion, that our forme of Church-politie is corrupted with popish orders, rites and ceremonies, banished out of certaine reformed Churches, whose example therein we ought to hauehave followed.