A Mild and Just Defense of Certain Arguments, Tract · Part 3 · Argument 16
THE 16. ARGVMENT.
Epheſ: 2:14 15:As Chriſt Ieſus to make peace betwixt Iewes and Gentils, tooke away the Ceremonyes ordayned by God himſelfe, becauſe they had been a partition wall betwixt the ſayd Iewes & Gentils: and inſtituted no other in their places: ſo the Ceremonyes & other thinges now in queſtion, having been the meanes of much debate amongſt us, wherby the buildyng of the Church hath been greatly hindred, and the enimyes thereof ſtrenghtned; they ought in this reſpect to be removed. Ergo.
The Miniſters now moleſted for the ſayd thinges inqueſtion, ought to be ſpoken for and releeved, and that by the Parliament, becauſe none may doe it better.
The Marginall Notes.
G. Powela Hence appeareth what things they be, that the refractaryes are offended with, why then doe they pretend, the goſpell of Chriſt, reconciliation with God etc: Ad populum phaleras:
Reply.Theſe things being repugnant to the purity and ſincerity of ihe goſpell, under which God will not be worſhipped in any ſuch Ceremoniall ſorte,Iohn: 4:23: but in ſpirit and truth; Being alſo ſuch, as for which the Miniſtery of the goſpell is reſtrayned (upon the liberty wherof dependeth the ſalvation of the people and their reconciliation with God) There is no cauſe, why ſuch ſcoffing and frumping outcryes ſhould be made againſt us, as here & elſe where are made. Yea, though the miniſtery of the goſpell, were not for theſe thinges reſtrayned, yet being urged in the worſhip of God, they are unlawfull: and men ſtanding againſt them, and in all humility deſiryng them to be removed by lawfull authority, may well be ſayd to ſtand in Gods cauſe, and to plead for God.
G. Powelc O, Martin was an modeſt man.
Thanks be to God,Reply that you hauehave no other then Martin to upbrayd vsus with: who was unknowne what he was, and whoſe writing was never approved by us: and who alſo though he jeſted at ſome manners of your ſide, yet never wrote ſo bitterly as many of you now doe.
G. Poweld They will offend, and yet will not be told of it.
You hauehave not proved us to offend,Reply. in thoſe thinges wherein you impute moſt offence unto us. If we doe offend, we are more then told of it: yea our puniſhment is greater then our offence, becauſe it is greater both then the law appoynteth, and alſo then the puniſhment of other whoſe offences are greater.
G. Powele Heat of contention may carry men further then were expedient. But are the refractaryes mylder in this kind? Witnes all their Pamphlets and libels written againſt us.
The firſt parte of this note is plentifully juſtified, not onelyonly by the booke Scotiſh Genevating, Reply.by the moſt ſcurrilous booke of The picture of a Puritan, and by the anſwerers owne booke De Adiaphoris, but alſo by this preſēt anſwer, injoyned and allowed by authority: wherein (for ought I know) there are more rayling, ſcoffing, and untrue ſpeeches, then are in all the bookes here unjuſtly termed pamphlets and libells. If any notwithſtanding of us doe offēd in this kind, they are not iuſtified by the reſt: yet this is not to be forgotten, that they that be the looſers, and goe away with the blowes, may be the better borne withall, in their words.
G. Powelf A diſgracefull terme. But doe they acknowledge themſelues non conformitans and ſchiſmaticall?
Reply.If the word conformitan be a diſgracfull terme, is ther not diſgrace in Conformity and being conformed? For are not theſe words Conformed, conformity, and conformitans coniugata? Why then are we urged to conforme? Eyther therfore you juſtifie vsus in not conforming our ſelues (for who would diſgrace himſelfe?) or elſe you doe ill to ſay, we call you by a diſgracefull name, when we call you conformitans.
G. Powelg Suam ſcabiem affricant.
Reply.It needeth no anſwer. All men know and dayly heare, how they galle us in every ſermon, and how litle we deale with them.
G. Powelh A malicious lye. There are fewe or none in the Church of England, ſo ignorant and ſo ſcandalous in the Miniſtery, as here the ſuppliants inſinuat: and if any ſuch be amongſt us, ſure I am that (upon complaint and intimation otherwiſe) they are ſeverely cenſured and puniſhed for it. Yet I muſt giuegive them to underſtand, that ſcandalous Miniſters for life, are more tolerable in the Church, then ſuch as be factious, Schiſmaticall, or ſcandalous for doctrine, and phanaticall conceits. Plus enim nocent doctrinae ſcandala, quam morum delictae.
Reply.Neither malicious, nor lye. All men, good & bade doe too well knowe, too many both ignorant and ſcandalous to be in the Miniſtery. If it might pleaſe his moſt excellēt Majeſtie, or his moſt Honorable Councell, to ſend out Commisſions into all Countryes, and to appoynt indifferent Commisſioners (neither Biſhops nor any other Prelaticall perſons, becauſe ſuch are partyes, but religious Noble men and gentlemen) to inquyre of this matter, the truth would much better appeare to the everlaſting reproch, of all thoſe that doe ſo juſtifie the preſent ſtate of the Miniſtery. For the reſt of the former note, who knoweth not, that one lewd perſon (how baſe and abject ſoever) may, and dayly doth procure & worke more trouble to a good Miniſter, and doth more eaſily prevaile to his ejection, then twentie good men (though of never ſo good credit) yea, then ſomtymes the whole Pariſh beſids (though never ſo great) can doe for the good and peace, of the beſt Miniſter? That alſo for a man, not to were a ſurplice, or make a croſſ in the ayre (or I cannot tell wher or how) etc: ſhould be leſſe tolerable, then many great ſinnes expreſly forbidden by God himſelf, is very ſtrang, yea lamentable, yea fearefull to thinke: much more to ſpeake and write: moſt of all to print, for all the world, yea for all poſterity to behold. Eſpecially, that a learned man, a divine and Miniſter of the word ſhould ſo thinke, ſpeake, write, and publiſh. If this be not to preferre the authority of mortall and frayle man, before the authority of the immortall and moſt mighty God,Mar. 7:13: yea to make the word of God of no authority by traditions which men hauehave ordeyned, I know not what is. As for falſe doctrine, or phanaticall conceits, which of you all, can juſtly charge us with them, as many conformitans may be with divers poynts of Popery, with toyes in the pulpit (more fit for a ſtage, then for Moſes chayre) with fooliſh allegoryes, and with ſuch pleading for Ceremonyes, as that the people are not onelyonly not edified, but alſo corrupted and infected: yea & the minds of thoſe that are judicious, and hauehave any taſt of goodnes, exceedingly wounded? The like commisſion, that before I ſpake of, would ſheew the trueth of theſe things alſo.
G. Poweli An impudent and lowd lye.
What an exclamation and accuſation is this, upon the Printers fault, in ſetting Conformitans for unconformitans? If mallice had not overſwayed reaſon, he might eaſily hauehave ſeen it to be ſo, by the ſcope of the author. I hauehave alſo ſeene (and ſo many other) divers copyes corrected heerin, with the authors owne hand.
The notes with (k) l) and m) are often anſwered. The Greeke word of the next note, the Printer for want of Greeke letters, was fayne to omit. For which reaſon alſo all the fallacies in the end of every anſwer, are left out: the reſt of the note followeth.
G. Poweln The tyme of the old Teſtament beyng expired, Chriſt aboliſhed the Ceremoniall law, and ordeyned the New Teſtament: what will they conclude from hence?
ReplyThat no Ceremonyes being inſtituted by God himſelfe ſince the death of Chriſt whereby the former were abrogated, God is therfore now to be worſhipped in ſpirit & truth; and that no man or Church whatſoever hath power to ordeyne Ceremonyes for the worſhip of God.
G. Powelo VVhat? Not any? No Sacraments? No other Ceremonyes?
ReplyNot any. No Sacraments. No other Ceremonyes. For the Sacraments that now are, were ordayned before Chriſts ſufferings, and before the abrogation of the Ceremoniall law upon his Croſſ. Theſe words goe teach all Nations, Coloſ: 2:14: math. 28:19 Rom. 3.2: Pſal. 1 47.19:26baptisſing them etc. doe but ratifie and confirme that which was before inſtituted: as alſo make for the commucating of the word and Sacraments to the Gentils, which before had been peculiar to the Iewes. All other things now in the Church for the goverment thereof, differing from thoſe that were under the law, were ordeyned by Chriſt (or at leaſt he had given commaundement for them to the Apoſtles) before his pasſion, and therefore before the abrogation of the Ceremonyes. For Chriſt commanded his Apoſtles to teach onelyonly ſuch things, as he had commā ded them: Mat: 28:20: Ioh: 14:26.and the Holy Ghoſt was onelyonly to teach them althinges, and to bring althinges to their remembrance, which he (Chriſt himſelfe) had told them.
The (p) hath been anſwered in the marginall note with h) of the 5 Argument.
G. Powelq Falſe. They are the bonds of ſociety, beſids other uſes for edificatiō.
Then, where there is no Croſſe and ſurplice,Reply. there is no ſociety; or at the leaſt but looſe and weake ſociety. But perhaps he meāeth no Lordly Epiſcopall ſociety, becauſe no Ceremony, no Biſhop. He may alſo meāe ſociety betwixt a Miniſter and his benefice. So ſome hauehave found it true. Touching the other uſes for edification, we deſire to ſee them.
G. Powelr If the ſupplicants requeſt were granted in the Ceremonyes, yet would the refractary Miniſters be reſtles ſtill, untill they had altogeather brought in their New Diſcipline: and (peradventure) more reſtles then, then ever they were before:
As the newes of Chriſt birth at the firſt troubled all Ieruſalem, Reply.ſo it troubleth all Papall Prelats to thinke of Chriſts cōmyng, in the Diſcipline that he hath ordeyned. Theſe wordes, their Diſcipline and new Diſcipline, are but marginall Mathematicall fictions. None of us deſire any thing of our owne, but onelyonly the ordinances of Chriſt Ieſus: which cannot be otherwiſe called newe, then his commandement for loving one another, Iohn 13.34is called a new commandement.
This Diſcipline we hauehave never attempted to bring in, by any unduetifull meanes, but by all humble ſupplication to the ſupreame authority, to which we acknowledge the eſtabliſhment thereof to belong. Therefore, that we will be more reſtles eyther before or after the obteyning therof then becommeth us, is but his owne imagination, frō the experience (perhaps) of the reſtleſnes of ſome Prelats, till they be Biſhops, and afterward till they come to be Archbiſhops. Yea thē alſo, till they get ſome further honor, yea till they hauehave ſuppreſſed all thoſe, that they think doe any wayes diſlike of ſuch places. If it might pleaſe his Majeſtie and the other States of this Kingdome, but to permit it in ſome places where it might be moſt conveniently, it ſhould much more clearely appeare, both how we would content our ſelues with all humble thanks to his Majeſtie and to the other States in that behalfe: and alſo how much better this would agree with all Civill Magiſtracy, then their preſent Hierarchicall and Eccleſiaſticall goverment doth: yea how farre more beneficiall it would be to the Common wealth: and finally how untrue many other imputations are, whereby it is commonly diſgraced. If any ſhould abuſe the ſame, or himſelfe in the execution therof, we never denyed, but that ſuch offenders ſhould be ſubject to the cenſure of his Majeſtie, or of any his inferior officers.
G. Powels Sound and ſolid peace, will never be wrought, but by recalling the refractary Miniſters from Schiſme and faction unto perfect obediēce.
Reply.You muſt firſt proue us to be in a ſchiſme and faction. In the meane time, ſound and ſolid peace would a thowſand tymes better be made by removing all humane Ceremonyes, by a more free preaching of the goſpell of peace: If all Miniſters ſhould conforme themſelues, yet if the goſpell ſhould be ſincerely preached, (though never any word ſhould be ſpoken againſt the Ceremonyes, and other thinges in controverſie particularly) certeynly, the Ceremonyes and other matters now in queſtion, would be as odious, and in as great diſgrace as now they are. It is therefore a vayne thing to labor for peace, without removing of thoſe thinges. Touching obedience it can never be perfect to man, where it is not ſound towardes God. The eſtabliſhing of Gods ordinances, will teach & worke perfect obedience unto men, to whom obedience is due.
Further anſwer to the 16. Argument.
G. Powel1 If the queſtion be but ſubſcription, croſſ etc: wherefore then, hauehave they maynly cryed out that it was the cauſe of God etc:
All this is often anſwered.Reply The leaſt tranſgresſion of Gods word, and the leaſt obedience to Gods word, is the cauſe of God, as well as the greateſt. I wonder the anſwerer was not aſhamed, ſo often to repeate the ſame things.
G. Powel2 VVe hold not Subſcription Ceremonyes, etc. abſolutly neceſſary to ſalvation, nor to be impoſed upon every Church (for why ſhould not other Churches uſe their liberty?) Yea our Church hath power to alter theſe particulars, yet we know ſome ordinances neceſſary for gathering aſſemblyes, eſtabliſhing of a Church, and be as it were bonds and links of ſociety.
How doth the firſt poynt of this anſwer agree with that that ſome of the great Prelats hold,Reply that their authority is Apoſtolicall, and the Ceremonyes matters of order and decency? Are not thinges Apoſtolicall and decent, common to all Churches? Or may our Church, alter that that is Apoſtolicall? Or why ſhould theſe ceremonyes, be more neceſſary for our Church, then for other Churches? Or not decent for other Churches, and yet decent for ours? If alſo Eccleſiaſticall juriſdiction, be in veſted into the crowne, except the King and with him the officers of the crowne, be only the Church; our Church hath no power to alter them, having no Eccleſiaſticall iurisdiction reſident in it ſelfe. The latter part of this anſwer is needles, our aſſemblyes beyng already gathered. What a fooliſh & groſſ abſurditie alſo is it, to inſinuate that an inviſible croſſ, or a ſmockiſh ſurplice, ſhould be of any effecacy for gathering of aſſemblyes?
G. Powel3 Yea theſe particulars, Subſcription, Ceremonyes etc, being jmpoſed by the Church and commaunded by the Magiſtrate, are neceſſary to be obſerved under payne of ſinne, ſeeing he that reſiſteth authority, reſiſteth the ordinance of God.
ReplyWhat if they be commanded onelyonly by the Chriſtian Magiſtrate, not jmpoſed by the Church? Or jmpoſed by the Church onelyonly, the Magiſtrat beyng an infidell, or a perſecuter of the Church? Can payne of ſinne alſo be without payne of damnation? Are not thoſe things that are to be obyed,contradictiō under payne of damnation, neceſſary to ſalvation? Hence alſo it followeth, that things once commaūded by the Church or Magiſtrat (eſpecially by both) are as holy, as the jmmediate commandements of God. The particular inconveniences and abſurdities heerof are infinit. What alſo is heere ſayd, that was not wont to be ſayd by the Papiſts againſt the Martyrs?
G. Powel4 That they are thinges indifferent etc. and may be uſed without ſinne we hauehave proved in a booke De Adiaphoris.
Reply.Alas M. Powell, make not ſuch account of your booke De Adiaphoris, then which, there never came more ſimple ſtuffe from any man reputed learned. You had neede to recant your blaſphemous poynt therein, againſt the authority of Chriſt Ieſus for making lawes in his Church. Uerily you might as well hauehave denyed him to be a King, and a redeemer. To the 5 part of this anſwer unto this 16. Argument, reply hath often been made. That thes things are become bones of contention, is onelyonly the fault of the Prelats, that ſtriue with might and maine for them. They acknowledge that they hauehave power to alter and remoue them, and the ſee great reaſon ſo to doe: neither can they giuegive any reaſons but childiſh for continuance of them, and yet to the great diſhonor of God, and to the greefe of thowſands of the godly, they reteyne them. For our parts, if we were not troubled for them, we would be ſo farre from contending about them, that we would never aske after them, neither would we care if we never ſaw them.