Ceremonies and Conformity, Part 1 – Part 10
The Judgment of Mr. BAXTER, concerning Ceremonies and Conformity in the Points in Difference betwixt the Church of England, and the Diſſenters.
Novv Published in Vindication of the Moderate and Learned Part of the Presbyterians, to let the VVorld ſee that they are not ſo irreconcilable to the Diſcipline of the Church of England, as ſome People vvould have us believe.
Licenſed and Entered according to Order
The Judgment of Mr. Baxter, concerning Ceremonies and Conformity.
Diſp. 4 p. 361. THoſe Modes or Circumſtances of Worship, which are neceſſary in genere, but left undetermined by God in ſpecie, are left by God to human prudential Determination; (elſe an Impoſſibility would be neceſſary) But many ſuch there are, that are neceſſary in genere, but left undetermined of God in ſpecie; therefore many ſuch are left to human prudential Determination.
Diſp 5. p. 400. Sect. 5. Yet it is in the power of man to determine of ſuch Modes and Circumſtances as are neceſſary to the performance of that Worship which God hath inſtituted in his Word; and therefore lawful Governors may in ſuch caſes bind us by their Command.
P. 400.1. It is left to human Determination, what Places the Publick Aſſemblies shall be held in.
P. 401.2. It is left to man to determine of the Time of Holy Duty, except only where God hath determined to the contrary.
Ibid. 3 It is left to the determination of human Prudence, what Utenſils to employ about the Publick Worship of God.
Here therefore vve muſt conclude.
P. 423.1. That every miſordering of ſuch great Affairs is the ſin of them that do it.
2. But yet that the Subject is not exempted from Obedience, by every ſuch miſtake of the Governour, but by ſome he is.
Ibid. Sect. 67. If the miſchuſing ſome Circumſtances by Church Governours, be but an inconvenience, and do deſtroy the ordinance it ſelf, or fruſtrate the ends of it, we are to obey.
1. He is the Judge of his own work, not we.
2. The thing is not ſinful, tho' inconvenient.
3. Obedience is commanded to our Lawful Governours.
P. 424. We muſt obey in all things Lawful.
And when we do obey in caſe of miſcommanding, it is not a doing of evil, that good may come of it, as ſome do miſconceive; but it is only a ſubmitting to that which is ill commanded, but no evil in him that doth ſubmit; it is the determiner that is the cauſe of the inconvenience, and not the obeyer: Nor is it inconvenient for to obey, tho' it be worſe perhaps to him that commandeth. While he ſinneth in commanding, he may make it my duty to obey.
P. 396 Sect. 6. diſt, 4. We muſt diſtinguish between Ceremonies impoſed by a Lawful Magiſtrate or Church-Governours, and ſuch as are impoſed by Uſurpers, or men without Authority.
P. 398. Sect. 25. prop. 12. It may be very ſinful to command ſome Ceremonies, which may lawfully, yea, muſt in duty be uſed by the Subject, when they are commanded.
Sect. 27. prop 14. Yet certain things which are commonly called Ceremonies, may lawfully be uſed in the Church, upon human Impoſition; and when it is not againſt the Law of God, no perſon should diſobey the commands of their Lawful Governours in ſuch things.
Of ſet forms, and the Book of Common-Prayer.
Diſp, 4. p. 358, Prop, 1. A ſtinted Liturgy is in it ſelf Lawful.
A ſtinted Liturgy in ſome parts of publick Holy Service, is ordinarly neceſſary.
3. In the parts where it is not of neceſſity, it may not only be ſubmitted unto, but deſired, when the peace of the Church requires,
P. 359. Prop 7. The ſafeſt way of compoſing ſuch a publick form, is to take it all, for matter and words, out of the Holy Scripture.
8. Yet is not this of ſuch neceſſity, but that we may joine in it, or uſe it, if the form of words be not from Scripture.
Prop 1. A ſtinted Liturgy is in it ſelf Lawful; and it is thus proved.
Arg. 1, That which is not directly, nor conſequentially forbidden by God, remaineth lawful; a ſtint…d Liturgie, is not directly, or conſequentially forbidden of God, therefore it remaineth Lawful.
The major is undoubted, becauſe nothing but a prohibition can make a thing unlawful: Sin is the tranſgreſsion of a Lavv; vvhen there is no Lavv, there is no Tranſgreſſion. And yet I have heard very reverend Men anſwer this, That it is enough that it is not commanded though not forbidden which is plainly to deny both Scripture and Civil Principles.
P. 361. Now for the minor, That a ſtinted Liturgy is not forbidden, we need no other proof than that no prohibition can be produced.
P: 364. Arg. 6 If it be lawful for the People to uſe a ſtinted form of words, in publick Prayer, then is it in it ſelf lawful for the Paſtors; but it is Lawful for the People; for the Paſtor's Prayer (which they muſt pray over with him, and not only hear it) is a ſtinted Form to them, even as much as if he had learnt it out of a Book; they are to follow him in his method and words, as if it were a Book-Prayer.
Arg. 7. It is lawful to uſe a Form in Preaching, therefore a ſtinted Liturgy is lawful.
1. Becauſe Preaching is a part of that Liturgy.
2. Becauſe the Reaſon is the ſame for Prayer as for that, in the main.
Argument 8. That which hath been the Practice of the Church in Scripture-times, and down to this day, and is yet the practice of almoſt all the Churches of Chriſt on Earth, is not like to be unlavvful but ſuch is the uſe of ſome ſtinted Forms of Publick Service. There fore &c. That It vvas ſo in the Jevvs Church, and approved by Chriſt I have shevved; That it hath been of ancient uſe in the Church ſince Chriſt, as it is at this day in uſe in Affrick, Aſia, Europe; Even among the Reformed Churches in France, Hòlland, Geneva, and is ſo vvell knovvn, that I think I need not ſtand to prove it: yea thoſe fevv that ſeem to diſuse it, do yet uſe it, in Pſalms and other parts of Worship.
P. 421. As for the Common-Prayer it ſelf, I never rejected it becauſe it was a forme we thought ſimply unlawful, becauſe it was ſuch a form; but have made uſe of it, and would do again in the like caſe.
Of Ceremonies.
The Ceremonies controverted amongſt us, vvere, ſpecially the Surplice, the Geſture of Kneeling in receiving the Lords Supper, the Ring in Marriage, Laying the hand upon a Book in taking an Oath, the Organs; and Church-Muſick, Holi-days, Altars Rails, and the Croſs in Baptiſm.
Of the Surplice.
P. 409 Some decent Habit is neceſſary; either the Magiſtrate, or the Miniſter himſelf, or the Aſſociated Paſtors muſt determine vvhat; I think neither Magiſtrate nor Synod should do any more then hinder undecency; but yet if they do more, and tye all to one habit (and ſuppoſe it vvere an undecent habit) yet this is but an imprudent uſe of power; it is a thing vvithin the Magiſtrates reach, he doth not an aliene work, but his ovvn vvork amiſs; therefore the thing in it ſelf being lavvful, I vvould obey him, and uſe that Garment, if I could not be diſpenſed vvith, yea though, ſecondarily, vvhiteneſs be to ſignify Purity and ſo it be made a teaching ſign, yet vvould I obey.
Of kneeling at the Sacrament.
P. 411. But yet as ſinful as this Geſture vvas impoſed, for my part I did obey the impoſers, and vvould do, if it vvere to be done again: rather than diſturb the peace of the Church, or be deprived of its Communion; for God having made ſome Geſture neceſſary, and confined me to none, but left it to human determination, I shall ſubmit to Magiſtrates in their proper work, even vvhen they miſs it in the manner; I am not ſure that Chriſt intended the example of himſelf, and his Apoſtles, as obligatory to us that shall ſucced; I am ſure it proves ſitting lavvful, but I am not ſure that it proves it neceſſary, (tho' very convenient) but I am ſure he hath commanded me obedience and peace.
Of the Ring in Marriage.
P. 401. As for the Ring in Marriage, I ſee no reaſon to ſcruple the lawfulneſs of it, for tho' the Papiſts make a-Sacrament of Marriage. yet we have no reaſon to take it for an Ordinance of Divine Worship, any more than the ſolemnising of a Contract between a Prince and People; all things are ſanctified and pure to the pure.
Of Organs and Church Muſick.
P. 412. As for Organs, or other Inſtruments of Muſick in God's Worship, they being a help partly Natural, and partly Artificial, to the exhilerating of the Spirits, for the praiſe of God, I know no Argument to prove them ſimply unlawful, but what would prove a Cup of Wine unlawful, or the tune and Meeter, and Melody of ſinging, unlawful.
Of Holy-dayes.
P. 412.413. Nor for my part do I make any ſcruple to keep a day in Remembrance of any Eminent Servant of Chriſt, or Martyr, to praiſe God for their Doctrine, or Honour their Memorial.
But the hardeſt part of the Queſtion is, Whether it be lawful to keep days in Celebrating the Memorial of Chriſt's Nativity, Circumciſion, Faſting, Transfiguration, Aſcenſion, and ſuch like.
P. 416. And yet for all this, I am reſolved, If I live where ſuch Holy-Days as theſe are obſerved, to cenſure no man for obſerving them. nor would I deny them Liberty to follow their Judgment, if I had the power of their Liberties, provided they uſe not reproach and violence to others, and ſeek not to deprive them of their Liberties,
P. 417. Yea more, I would not only give men their Liberty in this, but if I lived under a Government that peremptorily commanded it, I would obſerve the outward reſt of ſuch a Holy-day, and I would preach on it; and join with the Aſſemblies in God's VVorship on it: Yea, I would thus obſerve the day, rather than offend a weak Brother, or hinder any man's Salvation, much more rather than I would make any Diviſion in the Church.
Of Altars and Rails.
Ibid. As for the next Ceremony, the Name and Form of an Altar; no doubt but it is a thing indifferent, whether the Table ſtand this way or that way; and the Primitive Churches commonly uſed the Names or Sacrifice, and Altar, and Prieſt, and I think lawfully; for my part I shall not be he that shall condemn them.
Ibid. I conceive that the diſlike of theſe things in England (the Form and Name of an Altar and Rails about it) was not as if they were ſimply evil.
P. 401, 402. VVhether we shall receive the Lords Supper at a Table, or in our Seats; or whether the Table shall be of VVood or Stone; whether it shall be Round, Long, or Square; whether it shall ſtand in the Eaſt or VVeſt end of the Temple, or in the middle; whether it shall have Rails or no Rails, all theſe are left to humane Prudence.
Of the Croſs in Baptiſm.
P. 417. But of all our Ceremonies, there is none that I have more ſuſpected to be ſimply unlawful, than the Croſs in Baptiſm.
P. 418. Yet I dare not peremptorily ſay, That it is unlawful, nor will I condemn either Ancients or Moderns that uſe it; nor will I make any diſturbance in the Church about it, more than my own forbearance vvill make.
I preſume not to cenſure them that judge it lavvful, but only give the Reaſons that make me doubt, and rather think it to be unlavvful, tho' ſtill with a ſuſpicion of my own Underſtanding, and a love and honour to Diſſenters.
Printed at London, and Re-printed at Edinburgh, 1689.
End of the text · Richard Baxter, Ceremonies and Conformity (1689)