A reply to Dr. Mortons general Defence of three nocent [sic] ceremonies viz. the…A reply to Dr. Mortons generall Defence of three nocent [sic] ceremonies viz. the…

IN all these Sections, the Def. goeth about to teach us the doctrine which concerneth binding of mens consciences. In the first his conclusion is good and sound, God therefore and not man doth properly and directly bind the conscience of man. It is sufficient therefore to note that it is an improper phrase to say that mens laws do bind mens consciences, in respect that God commandeth to obey the just laws of men: for so, as Gerson observeth, the Physicians prescripts should also bind a sick mans conscience, in respect of Gods vvill, whereby a sick man is tied to follow the good and wholesome counsel of his Physician.

IN all these Sections, the Def. goeth about to teach us the doctrine vvhich concerneth binding of mens consciences. In the first his conclusion is good and sound, God therfore and not man doth properly and directly binde the conscience of man. It is sufficient therefore to note that it is an improper phrase to say that mens lawes doe binde mens consciences, in respect that God command•th to obey the just lawes of men: for so, as Gerson observeth, the Phisitions praescripts should also binde a sick mans conscience, in respect of Gods vvill, whereby a sick man is tied to follow the good and wholesome counsell of his Physition.

In the 8 Section two of our Divines are brought in to prove that men are bound in conscience to observe the just laws of Magistrates, which none of us ever doubted of.

In the 8 Section two of our Divines are brought in to proue that men are bound in conscience to obserue the just lawes of Magistrates, which none of us ever doubted of.

The 9 Section is spent in proving, that Ecclesiastical laws have as great force in respect of conscience as politic. Which if it be granted, yet nothing can from thence be concluded for the advantage of ceremonies unlawfully imposed. But 1 it is diligently to be observed, that the Church hath no commission for to make any laws properly so called: as I have formerly showed in cap. 1 sect. 16. 2 the common received opinion of all our Divines is contrary to that which the Defendant here saith: as may be seen in Bellarmine de Pont. Rom. l. 4 c. 15, and Junius, Whitkers, with the rest, who writing against Bellarmine do not deny but defend that which he saith, Lutherani & Calvinistae omnes docent. 3 The interrogatories which the Defendant ministereth unto us in this case doth not prove his Assertion. For the Church is a Society, but not complete, if it be considered as not comprehending Christ the Head and only Law maker of it. Breach of peace is not a sin against an Ecclesiastical, but a divine law. Obedience is to be yielded unto lawful Ecclesiastical Governors, when they bring the charge of Christ whose Ministers they are. See D. Whitakers de pont. Rom. cont. 4 q 7 c. 2 ad 12. The Kings stamp, but with an act of Parliament maketh a law in England. As for Apostolical constitutions (to which our canons are as like as Apples are to Oysters) the same answer which Doctor Whitakers, contra 4 q. 7 c. 2 ad 5. with other of our Divines giveth to Bellarmine, may serve for our Defendant.