§ 20. 'Tis true, very strict rules in many particulars the Judaicall law of the old Testament did prescribe, forbidding many in&rehy;different things, on this only ground, because the using them might seem a complyance with the heathen customes of Ido&rehy;laters. Such was that prohibition Ex. 34.26. thou shalt not seeth a kid in the mothers milk, in the sacrifice of the in-ga&rehy;thering; given no doubt in opposition to the Gentile practice of those which at the time of gathering in their fruits, solemn&rehy;ly used this custome of seething a kid in the dammes milk, and then in a Magicall way, sprinkled their trees and fields, & gar&rehy;dens with it to make them fructifie the next yeare, as Abrabe&rehy;nel, and others out of Jewish Writers have observed. Such was also the prohibition, Lev. 19.27. against rounding the corners of their heads, in reference to the hypotrochala keiresthai, or, perixyrein tous krotaphous the round cut used by the Arabians saith Hero&rehy;dotus Thal. c. 8., and thereupon forbidden the Jewes, and a woe pro&rehy;nounced Jerem. 9.26. epi panta perikeiromenon, &c. on every one that was so cut round, Si adjuverit tonsorem, saith Maimonides De Idol. c. 12., if he directed, or willingly permitted the Barber to put him into that heathenish guise: And many others in the Old Testament of the like nature, and the following Rabbins have added ma&rehy;ny more directions, if not percepts of the same nature. That one booke of Maimonides concerning Idolatry will furnish the Reader with store of examples: but some such as do not so well become the gravity of that author; as that, c. 3. If the Jew hath a thorne in his foot, when he is neer an Idoll, he must not stoope to take it out. c. 7. If a tree have been worshipt, or an Idoll set in it, it is not lawfull to sit in the shade of the trunke or body of that tree, though of the boughes or leaves it be lawfull; if there be any other way it is not lawfull to passe under it; if none, then he must run by it. Dionysius Vossius in his notes on that author hath added some parallel passages out of other Jewish writers as that of R. Menasse who being shewed an Idoll, did in contempt cast stones at it, which action of his, because the image was the image of Mercury (who was wont to be worshipt by the Heathens after that manner, by throwing stones at, or scatter&rehy;ing stones before him, to which custome or ceremony the Mercuriall Statues referre, saith Phornutus peri theōn) was therefore noted, accused, brought before the Judge, and by him pronounced to be unlawfull, because it was the proper wor&rehy;ship of that Idoll, though used in despight, not civillity by that man. So againe if there be but one way to an Idolatrous City, it is unlawfull to go that way, Aboda Zara c. 1. §.4. and so, saith he, the Hebrews in Rabot mention a tradition, that the reason why Mordochai would not bow to Haman, was, because there was woven in his garment the image of a false God.
§ 21. Some instances also might perhaps be brought out of the practice of the ancient Christian Church (mentioned by Ter&rehy;tullian de Cor. mil:) to this purpose of absteining from things indifferent, for feare of any appearing complyance with the Heathens. Of which yet it must be observed 1 that this was in things of no manner of spirituall use or profit, neither com&rehy;mendable, nor advantageous, in things of ancient Christian prescription, or practise of purer times. 2 that it was in mat&rehy;ters of such a quality, as that complyance would have seemed a dissembling or renouncing of the Christian faith, (and not of imitating of former purer Christians) and so contrary to that great Christian duty of confessing Christ be&rehy;fore men, which they could not be said to do, who when that confession was persecuted, did thus comply with or not professe open dislike of the actions of those persecutors. And so those instances will not be so proper to the matter of Scandall, as to that other head of Christian duty, the necessity of confessing of Christ before men, (those especially who are the greatest oppugners of him, to which matter also those other Judaicall instances do belong) unlesse that non-confessing of Christ, may by the example scandalize also. 3 That the same men thought it not a&rehy;misse, or unlawfull at other times to comply with other as great enemies of Christianity as the Gentiles, namely with the Jewes in observation of some of their out-dated ceremo&rehy;nies, nay thought themselves obliged so to do, when in pru&rehy;dence they conceived it more likely to gaine those enemies by that meanes, then to confirme them in their dislikes of Christi&rehy;anity, or drive others to those dislikes. 4. That even with the Heathen themselves they could in other things think fit to comply also, when prudence dictated that complyance as more instrumentall to Christian policy; and from these premises: 5 that this whole matter is to be referred to the Christians pious discretion or prudence, it being free to him either to absteine or not to absteine from any indifferent action (remaining such) according as that piety, and that prudence shall repre&rehy;sent it to be most charitable and beneficiall to other mens soules; and he that shall not thus regulate his actions by what he is convinced will be thus most conducing to that grand Chri&rehy;stian end, the saving or not destroying, or not suffering sinne upon his brother, shall not by me be excused from the guilt and blame of having Scandaliz'd his brother in this last new Te&rehy;stament sence, at lest in some other which is not farre distant from it; though after all this it must be observed, that he which thus is betrayed to, or confirmed in any sinne by conceiving me to have committed it, when I have not, (this easie prosti&rehy;tute seducible sinner who will thus sinne upon any, upon no occasion) is not Saint Pauls weake i.e., doubtfull-conscienc'd Christian of whom he takes such care that he should not be scandaliz'd.
§ 22. For such is he only, that for want of knowledge of his just Christian liberty, thinkes it unlawfull to do those things, which being indifferent in themselves, are only unlawfull to him, which beleeves them so, or is not satisfied that they are lawfull; This weaknesse in faith, (a kind of disease of the minde, and so in the new Testament phrase astheneia) being on&rehy;ly want of knowledge or of orthodox instruction, as will ap&rehy;peare by comparing Rom. 14. with 1 Cor. 8. where the asthenōn tēi pistei in one, is all one with the ouk en pasin hē gnōsis in the other, weakenesse in faith, with want of knowledge.
§ 23. The only matter of question or difficulty behinde in this particular will be, why those who are in such Judaicall errors are sometimes appointed by Saint Paul to be so tenderly han&rehy;dled, not to be vilified, or set at naught Rom. 14.3. but care taken that they be not scandaliz'd in the end of that chapt: and 1 Cor. 8. and yet in the Epistle to the Galathians, they are by the Apostle reviled [O foolish &c.] c.3.1. and chid and re&rehy;proached out of their Judaicall performances, and no care ta&rehy;ken of not scandalizing them. The answering of this will re&rehy;quire us to consider the different estate of those Galathians from those Romans. The Galathians had beene formerly Gen&rehy;tiles, and (though as it seemes not improbable from Gal. 4.9. formerly converted to Judaisme, yet) by Saint Paul thorough&rehy;ly converted from thence and baptized into Christianity, as that is opposite both to Judaisme and Gentilisme also, i.e. ful&rehy;ly instructed by him in the nature of Christian doctrine, and liberty, and had given up their hearts as well as names unto it, only after they had beene begotten by Saint Paul in the Gos&rehy;pell, had begun in the spirit, Gal. 3.3. had come to an absolute abrenunciation of all their former Jewish perswasions, and to some good progresse in Christianity, some false Judaizing teachers began to corrupt and poyson them, Gal: 3.1. and 5.7. and to bring them backe againe to that yoke, that they had beene taught to cast off; and these taires the Apostle could hope by reprehensions and sharpenesse to root out without endangering the wheate, and therefore sets severely and hear&rehy;tily to it, thinkes not fit either in civility or charity to use a&rehy;ny complyances, or condescendings, or softer medicines, (knowing their errors to be contrary to the doctrine, to which they had beene baptized, and consequently that they might in reason give place unto it, and there was no feare that the rooting out of thee would root out Christianity with them, as it might probably do, if they had beene sowen or planted together) but imployes all his vehemence and bowells of kindenesse toward them, in conjuring out that evill spirit that had so lately got possession of them, and doubts not but Chri&rehy;stianity that was earlier planted in them, (and that by him who had begotten them in the Gospell, and so had a paternall authority with them) then these vaine legall dreames, that some false teachers had lately instilled into them, might be a&rehy;ble to survive them also. And in this case being to deale with adversaries and false teachers, not with weakelings but cor&rehy;rupters, had the Apostle used any compliance, had he circumcised Titus Gal. 2.3. (as at another time he did Timothy) had he then given place but for an houre v: 5. suspended the use of his liberty then, when liberty was decryed, this had beene scandalous in the Apostle, this had probably beene the con&rehy;firming of the erroneous, the incouraging of the adversary, the misleading the doubtfull, shaking the faithfull, and disturb&rehy;ing what he had before settled among them.
§ 24. Whereas on the other side the Romans at their first con&rehy;version to Christianity had not all of them beene taught to put off the opinion of the necessity of legall abstinences tē tou nomou katēchomenoi syneidēsei kai meta tēn pistin, saith Saint Chrysostome in proœm. ad ep. ad Rom. but continued their obligation to the law after receiving of the faith, being some of them (as may appeare by the matter of Saint Pauls discourse to them, in the former part especially of that Epistle) naturall Jewes, disper&rehy;sed thither; who could not be easily brought to assent to such doctrine, but would probably have refused to embrace Christianity, if it had beene offered to them on such hard con&rehy;ditions, some others of them (who were Gentiles by birth) being perhaps proselytes to Moses and Christ together, parta&rehy;kers of the infelicity of those who are mentioned, Act: 15.5. that by the doctrine of the Pharisee Christians (or beleevers of the sect of the Pharises) had their entrance on the faith, a necessity of receiving Judaisme also prest upon them. This Saint Paul testifies clearely of Saint Peter Gal. 2.14. that he constrained the Gentiles to Judaize, to receive the Mosaicall as well as Christian law, and himselfe durst not converse or eate with the Gentiles whilst any Jewish Christians were by, v. 12. by which whether doctrine or complyance of Saint Peter, it was no strange thing if it came to passe, that those which were by him converted to the faith, (as Eusebius and other Ecclesiasticke historians agree that the Romans were, vid Eccl. hist. l: 2.c.: 14. and 15.) although they were Christian in the positive part, acknowledging so much as was answerable to the now-articles of the Creed. &c: yet being not so in the negative, concerning the evacuating of the Judaicall law (but ra&rehy;ther perswaded of the contrary) could no more eat swines flesh, then a meere Jew could do, and therefore 'tis Saint Chryso&rehy;stome's opinion that these being so wedded to those Judaicall observances, rather then they would eate forbidden flesh, would in universum eate no flesh at all hōste mē ginesthai euphōratoi, tōn choireiōn apechomenoi monōn, pantōn hexēs apeichonto tōn kreōn, and so came to eate nothing but Herbes Rom: 14.2.
§ 25. Of these therefore that were thus weake in faith, v. 1. that is either infirme, feeble, uninstructed Christians, babes not men; or else (as the fathers enlarge the sence, and as weaknesse astheneia mostly imports in the new Testament) sick and diseased in mind, brought up in this Judaicall error, the Apostle Ro. 14. gives these directions. 1. That the stronger healthfuller, i.e. more knowing and more Orthodox Christians should proslambanesthai (the vulgar read assumere) take them to them, first freindly to afford them communion, and not seperate from them for this errour, 2&lysup;. labour to cure their malady, get them out of their errour, and not leave them in the pride and folly of their owne hearts, to judge and censure those who have done nothing amisse, but rather desire their good (which Saint Chrysostome understands by proslambanesthai mē eis diakriseis dialogismōn, and so Saint Jerome also, intending it thus, Nolite secundum vestras cogitationes, quæ rex non judicat judicare, alius enim credit &c.) and from that verse observes, that though the Apostle exhorts the strong, yet he covertly reprehends, and on their backs as it were whips, the weak or erro&rehy;neous Judaizers, first in saying they are sicke, 2 in bidding proslambanesthe autous which is an evidence saith he, eschatēs arrhōstias that they are in very ill case, and 3 in mentioning diakriseis which notes (saith he) that they judge and censure those that least deserve it, and that are willing to communicate with them, and labour the curing of them; and indeed that these weake ones did so judge the strong is plaine v. 3. where the exhortation is distinct, let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth.) 2&lysup;. That the knowing againe should not vilifie or set at naught the weaker [mē exoutheneitō v. 3.] not call him Racha, empty sencelesse fellow, not reproach or scoff at his scrupulous conscience, but in charity suppose it to proceed from want of knowledge only, and consequently to have the excuse and benefit of that Gospell antidote, weakenesse or igno&rehy;rance to plead for it, 3&lysup;. That the stronger Christians (which although they have liberty, yet are not obliged alway to make use of it) absteine from those lawfull enjoyments which those weake ones, which count them unlawfull, may yet by their example be embolden'd against Conscience to venture on.
§ 26. But then on the other side, the weake or sicke erroneous Christian, that cannot with a good Conscience use that liberty himselfe, is commanded. 1 Mē krinein that he do not judge or censure the strong, upon 2 reasons: 1 because ho theos auton proselabeto v. 3 God hath by calling him to the faith, assumed or received the strong (as that strong had beene exhorted to do the weake v. 1.) eis philian to freindship or communion first, (as proslambanesthai is used Philem. 12.) then to helpe and cure him of his former defect or disease, and bring him to his perfect health and growth in Christianity: and 2&lysup;. because he is Gods servant and domesticke, and stands and falls to his owne Master v: 4. 2&lysup;. That he be sure never to do any thing against Con&rehy;science, or which he is not fully perswaded in minde, that it is lawfull for him.
§ 27. Having thus seene the state of those Romans, it will be superfluous to add much about the Corinthians in the almost parallell place 1 Cor. 8. This only difference will be worth noting betweene them, that (as there were two sorts of proselytes among the Jewes, one of Justice, or of those that un&rehy;dertooke the observation of the whole Iudaicall law; the other of the Gates, those that received only the precepts of the sons of Noah, of which the absteining from things offered to Idols was one, and as when the difference was betwixt the brethren, Act. 15. whether the Gentile-converts should be circumcised v: 1. i.e. be admitted proselytes of Justice, or only receive the 7 precepts of Noah, absteine from things offered to Idols &c. v:19. it was determin'd in the Counsell of the Apostles, that it should suffice, if they were proselytes of the gates, and there&rehy;fore they tell them that if they thus be entred, absteine from things offered to Idolls, &c. they shall do well, so) the Romans being either Iewes, or under the first head of Jewish proselytes, in Saint Chrysostomes opinion, and so thinking themselves bound to all legall Mosaicall abstinences, the Corinthians were only under the second, and so by their principles, which they had received of those, who converted, baptised, and begot them in the faith, (and that according to the result of that A&rehy;postolick consultation Act. 15.) did continue to thinke it un&rehy;lawfull to eate any thing offered to Idolls, or that came from an Idoll feast (which yet by the way Saint Paul resolves was but an errour in them, 1 Cor. 8.4. and by that judgement of his you see the unobligeingnesse of that interdict, Act. 15) and therefore (in like manner, as before) those, that were bet&rehy;ter instructed then they, ought to have that charity to them, as not to do any thing in their presence which might by the example draw them to venture on that which was against their conscience, especially considering, that they had not knowledge or understanding enough to judge how nothing an Idoll was v:7.
§ 28. Having thus compared the Romans and Corinthians with the Galathians, and given some account of the reason of their different usage, it will not be amisse to add what Saint Chryso&rehy;stom observes to be the cause of the like difference in Saint Pauls behaviour to the Colossians from that fore-mentioned to the Romans. It is a speciall passage in his proœme to the E&rehy;pistles. Where having mentioned the order wherein the E&rehy;pistles were written, different from the order of setting them in our bookes, concludes that this was no unprofitable disquisition, for thereby many passages in the bookes would be interpreted: As, that Rom. 14. he condescends to the weake bre&rehy;thren, but not so Col: 2. which saith he was for no other reason, but because, that to the Romans was written before the other, and therefore as Phisitians and Masters deale not so sharpely with Scholers or patients at first as afterwards, so the Apo&rehy;stle in the beginning synkatabainei Ioudaizousi, meta de tauta ouk eti, adding that he was not so familiar with the Romans as yet, having never beene amongst them at the time of writing that Epistle to them, as appeareth Rom. 1.15.
§ 29. By all this 'tis cleare indeed, that those which are thus weake (either in the notion of babes or sick men) so that they are not able to discerne lawfull from unlawfull (as the Idoll to be nothing 1 Cor: 8.7.) meerely for want of sufficient in&rehy;struction, or somewhat proportionable to that principles of understanding, or the like; but especially if they received those errors or mistakes together with their Christianity from the Apostle or from the Church which gave them baptisme, they must then, 1 in meekenesse be instructed, and cured of their ill habit of soule: 2 not be vilified or reproacht: yea thirdly be so charitably considered, that till they have received satisfaction of conscience and reformation of errour, we are not to do any thing in their presence, that may by the example bring them to do what their conscience is not perswaded to be lawfull, or if we do, we are said to scandalize a weaker brother, i.e. an erroneous Christian. But then withall 'tis as cleare: 1 That those who have first received the true doctrine, and are for some good time rooted in it, that are otherwise taught by the Church that gave them baptisme, are not within the compasse of this the Apostles care, but, (as the Galathians) to be re&rehy;prehended, chid, and shamed out of their childish errours, these diseases of soule that their owne itching eares have brought upon them: 2 That they that have knowledge in other things, nay are able to distinguish as critically as any, even to divide a person from himselfe, and obey one when they assault the o&rehy;ther, (and by their subtlety in other matters demonstrate their blindnesse in this one to be the effect of malice, of passion, of lusts, of carnality, and not of any blamelesse infirmity or im&rehy;potence,) are againe excluded from the Apostles care: and so thirdly that they that are come to these errours by the infusi&rehy;ons of false teachers, which not the providence of God but their owne choice hath helpt them to, preferring every new poyson before the ancient dayly food of soules, have no right to that care or providence of the Apostle, any farther then every kinde of sinner hath right to every thing in every fellow&rehy;Christians power which may prevent or cure his malady, i.e. by the generall large rule of charity, and not the closer particular law of Scandall. Nay fourthly, that the case may be such, and the adversaries of Christian liberty, the opposers of the use of lawfull ceremonies so contrary to weake blamelesse mi&rehy;stakers, that it may be duty not to allow them the least tempo&rehy;rary complyance, but then to expresse most zeale in retaining our lawfull indifferent observances, to vindicate our liberty from enslavers, when the truth of Christ would be disclaimed by a cowardly condiscending, the adversaries of our faith con&rehy;firmed and heightened, and the true weakling seduced, (a copy of which we read in Saint Peters apostolē, Gal. 2.12. and Barnabas and the Jewish converts being carryed away with it v. 13. falling by his example into the same fault of dissimula&rehy;tion, pusillanimity, non-profession of the truth) which is a most proper kind of scandall, as frequent, and incident, as any, and so being as dangerous, as fit also to be prevented. To which I might add a fifth proposition also, That the Apostles speech of scandall Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. hath beene thought by holy men among the ancients to have much of civility in it, at the most to be but an act of Apostolicall care for those weak ones, (proportionable to those which in other places he pre&rehy;scribes for every other kind of sinner) both which are farre enough from being able to inferre any claime or challenge of those weake for themselves, any farther then what the first part of it amounts to, that of instruction; or at least the second, that of not being vilifyed, as the sicke hath right to the Phy&rehy;sitian, to cure him and not to reproach him, civilly to get him out of his malady, i.e. to rectifie not to scoffe at his mistake. For, that he should challenge any right to the third part of that care, that he should restrain me frõ the use of my lawfull liber&rehy;ty, because else he will sin against his own conscience, do after me what he resolves unlawfull to do, supposes a willfull sinne of his to be to him a foundation of dominion over me, & so that every man that will thus damne himselfe, doth for that merit and acquire command over me, which if it be supposed, is sure as wilde an extravagant irregular way to power, as that of its being founded in gratia, or any that these worst dayes experi&rehy;ence hath taught us.
§ 30. Having thus farre expatiated on this last kinde of scandall, and taken in that which is proper to it, and also that which is more distant from it, I shall now resolve it necessary to add yet one thing more, instrumentall to the understanding of this kinde of Scandall in the stricter notion of it, by way of far&rehy;ther caution and restraint, and 'tis this, that
§ 31. This being offended, stumbling and falling in this third and last sence, is not to be extended to all kinds of sinnes, which a man may commit upon occasion of another mans indifferent action; but only to that one kinde, that consists in doing that af&rehy;ter him, either doubting or against Conscience, which he did with an instructed Conscience; or at most to this other kind al&rehy;so, of doing some unlawfull thing which anothers lawfull acti&rehy;on was yet by mistake conceived to give authority to; and which that man probably would not have done, had not that mistaken example thus emboldened him. For if all sinnes that by any accident might be occasioned by my indifferent Action, should come under the nature of being offended or scandaliz'd, consequently I must be interdicted all indifferent actions at all times, because at all times each of them may occasion (by some accident) some sinne in another: and 'twill be impossible for me to foresee or comprehend all such accidents that may occa&rehy;sion such sinnes. An action of mine may by accident produce a contrary effect; my fasting from flesh, may move another (that dislikes me) by way of opposition to me, to eate flesh, though in Conscience he be perswaded he ought not; as in phi&rehy;losophy there is a thing call'd Antiperistasis (by which exces&rehy;sive cold produces heat) and æquivocall generations, as when living creatures are begotten of dust and slime: and for such acidentall, perhaps contrary productions, no law makes provision, no care is effectuall; only for those effects, that per se, of their owne accord are likely to follow (as transcribing a Copy is a proper consequent only to the writing of it) these the law of the Apostle belongs to, and to them our care and spirituall prudence must be joyned, so that we do nothing, though to us never so lawfull, which we have reason to feare, that another who thinkes it unlawfull, may yet, without satisfying his Conscience, be likely to do after us, or on occasion of which he may probably do something else, which other&rehy;wise he would not venture to do.
§ 32. Having thus farre dealt in the retaile and gone over all the kinds of scandall single, we may now ascend to the considera&rehy;tion of all in grosse, and then also these Corollaries will be found true, that from all kinds of Scandall it is cleare. 1, That no man is offended or scandaliz'd, but he that falls into some sinne, and therefore to say I am scandalized, in the Scripture sense is to confesse I have done that which I ought not to have done: and then my onely remedy must be repentance and a&rehy;mendment.
§ 33. 2. That to be angry, grieved, troubled at any action of another, is not [to be offended] in the Scripture sense, nor consequently doth it follow, that I have done amisse in doing that which an&rehy;other man is angry at, unlesse my action be in it selfe Evill. For if it be not, then 1 he is angry without cause, and that is his fault, not mine; yea and krinei adelphon, he judges or cen&rehy;sures his brother that hath done no hurt, which the weake is forbid to do. Rom. 14.3. And secondly, he is of all men most unlikely to do after me, which he is angry at me for doing, and therefore I have least reason to feare, or possi&rehy;bility to foresee, that he will be Scandaliz'd in the Scripture phrase: which feare or foresight were the only just motive to me to absteine from any justifiable indifferent action.
§ 34. The occasion of the mistake (or in the Philosophers stile the aition tou pseudous) the reason that men think it a fault to do any indifferent thing that another is angry or displeased at, is first the equivocallnesse of the English phrase to be offended for that in English signifies to be displeased: but in Greeke (the language wherein the new Testament is written) it sig&rehy;nifies no such matter, unlesse by accident, when being displeas&rehy;ed with Christ, makes a man deny him and forsake him: but then also 'tis not the being displeased, but the forsaking or denying him that is meant by being offended, that is Scandaliz'd.
§ 35. Or Secondly the use of a word that sounds like this in that notable chapter concerning Scandall Rom. 14. for there indeed v: 15. this phrase is used, [if with thy meate
i.e. with thy eating, thy brother is greived
, or made sorry.] Where yet 1. I hope 'twill be much more just that that one single word should receive its importance from the whole context, then the whole context from that one word. The whole context from the 13. to the last verse belongs to the 3 sort of Scandall when a weak brother seeing me eate what is lawfull for me, because my Conscience is instructed, followes me, and eates too, though it be with a doubting or resisting Conscience, and so falls into sinne; as appeareth v. 14. to him that thinketh a thing uncleane or unlawfull, to him it is so, and therefore if he shall do it, he sinnes by so doing, and v. 23. he that doubteth is damned if he eate, and therefore in all probability that must be the meaning of the 10 verse also. [Is greived] i.e. wounded, or falls into sinne.] explained by 3 words v. 21. stumbling being offended, and being weake or sicke. And so it may easily be resolv'd to signifie. For secondly lype, greife, may be taken for the cause of greife, a disease, or wound, or fall &c. as feare in Scripture signifies danger, which is the cause of feare, ac&rehy;cording to a vulgar Hebraisme ordinary in the new Testament, where for want of the conjugation hiphil, which in Hebrew signifies [to make to do any thing] the Greeke is faine to use the active to do. An observation which Hugo Grotius makes use of to explaine that Phrase (I shall not enquire how truly) Mat. 19.9. and resolves that there moichatai [committeth a&rehy;dultery] must signifie [maketh her from whom he divorceth to commit adultery] parallell to what we read, Mat. 5.23. So also penthein, to bewaile 2 Cor. 12.21. signifies to punish, to use sharpenesse, which will cause greife, or wayling in them that suffer it. The word is very neare this other of which now we speake, and therefore Hesychius (the best glossary for the new Testament,) renders penthos both by symphora calamity, and lype greife: i.e. greife and the cause of greife; which is also very bservable in the use of this very word lype or lypein in the Septuagint; the word tonod which signifies infirme, or weak, or sicke, being rendred lypeisthai Lam. 1.22. hē kardia mou lypeitai, where we render my heart is faint, and so Is. 1.15. pasa kardia eis lypēn, the whole heart is faint, by faintnesse meaning sicknesse: which is the cause of greife; and therefore the same Hebrew word, is in other places rendred odynē, affliction, or pain, and nosos Disease Deut. 7.15. agreeable to the 21 verse of that Ro. 14. where stumbling or being offended is explained by being made weake, which phrase is not to be taken in the sense that weakenesse is used in, v: 1,2. that of infirmity or errour (for such he is, before stumbling) but in this other as weakenesse and disease, i.e. sinne, are all one. So also another Hebrew word rkh' which signifies perdition, and destruction, and is frequently rendred by apōleia, is once interpreted lypē Prov: 31.6. hoi en lypais, for which our English read ready to perish; very agreeable to which doth Saint Paul here interpret, greiv&rehy;ing the brother by destroying him. i.e. bringing him into some snare or sinne; the notion of Scandall, which all this while we speake of. From all which observations, and analogies it will be no rashnesse to conclude, that lypeitai, being greived, in that place, is perfectly synonymous with asthenei (which we there render is make weake, and in divers places of the new Testa&rehy;ment signifies koinōs disease, or sickenesse, and is so rendred by us, James 5.14. athenei tis is any man sicke) and with apoleitai o adenōn 1 Cor. 8.11. in the same matter, thy brother is weake, and dyeth, or perisheth through weakenesse, and with the like phrase in this chapter also, in the end of verse 15. All which clearely denotate the disease or perishing of the soule i.e. sinne, which will destroy, if repentance and mercy intervene not.
§ 36. The 3 (which is indeed the maine) occasion of the mistake, is an ordinary but an unjustifiable humour of men, to accuse and condemne all whom they do not like i.e. a desire to lay some crime to the charge of them, with whom they are angry, if it be but se defendendo, that they may not be said to be angry without a cause, and when they cannot finde any such reall crime, then they fly to the case of Scandall, and mistaking that for offending, or displeasing, or occasioning anger and dislike, their being angry with them, must make them with whom they are angry, criminous; which what a circle it is, first to be angry without a cause, and then to make that a cause of anger, (i.e. a sinne in the other) because I am angry, I conceive will not be hard for any to understand.
§ 37. I will only adde, that if another mans displeasure or anger at my indifferent action, should make that my indifferent action a sinne against him, then any mans sinne of uncharitablenesse a&rehy;gainst me must make me to be uncharitable, for so I should be, if I sinned against him in scandalizing him: but if I were not so before, his sinne (being utterly accidentall and extrinsecall to me) shall not, I hope, make me to be so now.
§ 38. To all which I shall here insert this appendage, that even for proper-scripture-scandalls, the criminousnesse of them is not to be measured by the event, but by the naturall scanda&rehy;lousnesse, or aptnesse to give Scandalls inherent in them; for I conceive God passes Judgement upon sinners by intuition, not by prevision, by seeing what the sinne is in it selfe, and in the aggravating circumstances that are inseperable from it (as that it is apt to give scandalls &c.) not by the casuall conse&rehy;quents that may possibly either follow or not follow. And I conceive, that that opinion of the Papists (on which they lay part of the foundation of their Purgatory) that men may after their Deaths sinne, and have more acts of sinne lying on them, (by reason of other men sinning by the scandall which they gave in their lifes) then they had at their Death, and so require in just recompence, some punishments increaseable above what they could be adjudg'd to at their death, is but a phansy or Schoole-notion, that hath some shew of truth, but little sub&rehy;stance, seeing God punisheth every man by the verdict of his owne Conscience; and therefore that other sinne, which my sinne is apt to produce in another, will be by way of aggrava&rehy;tion, layed to my charge by God, that sees my heart, and the inherent scandalousnesse of that action of mine, (though that other man by the grace of God do resist the Temptation which my Scandall gave him,) as much as if he had not resisted it, and so as his not sinning shall not excuse and lessen my fault which was apt to have brought him to sinne; so in like manner, if he do not resist the temptation, or if by occasion of it, he fall by accident (i.e. by the motion of some other part of his temper) into some other sinne, to wit that of causlesse anger (which no action of another can be said apt to produce; for if it might, the anger would cease to be causlesse) this accidentall fall of his shall not adde to the sinnefulnesse of my act, any more then his former not sinning did detract from it, nor consequently make it sinfull, if of it selfe it were not so.
§ 39. You will best judge of this truth by an example. That He&rehy;liodor a Bishop committed a fault, first in writing, then in set&rehy;ting forth an amorous light fiction or Romance, and then im&rehy;proving that fault by choosing rather to loose his Bishopricke then to subscribe the condemnation of his worke, is and may be reasonably acknowledged; That some men also by reading that Author have since beene transported to the com&rehy;mission of some sinnes, may not improbably be imagined; but having granted all this (and withall that the aptnesse to give such Scandall, was matter of aggravation to his sinne) let me now suppose, that immediately after his death that booke had beene burnt (as before his death it was condemn'd) when he was no longer able to preserve it, would the Councells con&rehy;demning and committing that execution upon that worke, a&rehy;ny whit have mitigated his Sentence in Heaven? to affirme that, were to suppose Purgatory, or somewhat like it, or else that God by his foresight of that act of the Councell should have allowed him that mitigation at the day of his particular judge&rehy;ment, i.e. imputed the casuall future actions of others to the present acquitting of him; and then, besides the many incon&rehy;veniences that might attend such concessions, it must also fol&rehy;low, that every reprinting of that booke since that time, hath beene a damnable sinne (not only of giving Scandall to such as have beene since infected by it, but especially) of uncharitable&rehy;nesse to that poore dead Bishop, in increasing his Torments, or making them capable of increase ever since, by giving him a capacity of corrupting more readers; which humanity and charity, and our great obligations to the nature of which we partake, would not permit any good Christian to do willingly; and besides though our prayers may not be allowed to be able to fetch soules out of Purgatory, yet such a not reprinting of his booke might do somewhat like it, prevent the enlargement of his paines, though not make expiation for him. So againe when those obscene pictures that historians mention (as I re&rehy;member in Tiberius his time) after the Authors death were burnt, and not permitted liberty to corrupt the eyes of poste&rehy;rity, but Aretynes have had the lucke to do it, it would by that Schoole reason follow, that Aretyne though in the worke and the designe but equall sinner, were yet by this mishap of not perishing, become farre more criminously guilty, then that other Author; which sure to affirme were a very irrati&rehy;onall nicety.
§ 40. 3. A third Corollary, from the veiw of all the places to&rehy;gether will be this, that to give Scandall is then most criminous, when it signifies by my example to bring another man to a sinne, especially if this scandalous action of mine be of it selfe a sinne, abstracted from the sinne adherent of Scandall; and then let any indifferent man judge in what degree may those be truly said to scandalize or offend others, (or indeed how they can be excused from that crime) who by being angry with me with&rehy;out a cause, and so committing that sinne against Christs law, Mat. 5.22. do also by so doing not only provoke and tempt me to anger back againe, which is a sinne in me, if I yeild to it, and that more then accidentally caused by them that provoke me, Eph. 5.4. but give other men, who have a good opin&rehy;ion of their Judgement and sanctity, a plaine paterne of that sin of uncharitablenesse to transcribe and copy out, I mean, to sinne also by causlesse anger.
§ 41. 4. That the great sinne of Scandall in the use of things indif&rehy;ferent, that Saint Paul so speakes of, and resolves against, Rom. 14. is the sinne of uncharitablenesse, or pride in despising and not condescending to the weake brother; meaning by the weake bro&rehy;ther not every one that may fall into any sinne (for so every one living will come under that title) but particularly him that is asthenēs tēi pistei, weake and ignorant, and unsettled in the faith; as it is opposed to the strong, i.e. the knowing Christian.
§ 42. And then let any judge whether this can belong to them who professe themselves leaders of others, and would be unwilling to be counted ignorant, and particularly who in the points wherein they professe themselves to be offended, are so knowingly resolv'd, that they will never be induced to do that after me which they affirme themselves scandalized at: which you may discerne, because they are angry and inveigh against me for doing of it, and do not so much as pretend that they are by my example enclined to do what I do, and so scandalized; but only angry at me, or my Action, and so offended.
§ 43. Meane while I cannot but confesse that any mans willfull sinne, though it cannot be called weakenesse in our vulgar no&rehy;tion; yet in the other notion of weakenesse, for disease of soule, it may well passe; and deserve to be the object of my charity and compassion, as much or more then weakenesse is: and there&rehy;fore the uncharitablenesse of my brother or his causles anger a&rehy;gainst me being such, I conceive myselfe bound to use any law&rehy;full meanes which I can hope may be able to prevent any such sinne in him, or to get or recover him out of it; especially if that sinne of his may become probably over and above his un&rehy;charitablenesse, a meanes to stoppe or hinder him in his course of reformation, or farther growth in piety; as probably it will be, if I against whom he is thus unjustly wrath, he is lawfull Pa&rehy;stor; for then that causlesse anger or rage of his against me may, through his farther default, occasion in him some vow or re&rehy;solution, never to heare me, never to be moved or perswaded by me in any thing, that out of the Pulpit or in private reason&rehy;ing or exhortation, I shall (never so convincingly) propose unto him.
§ 44. In this case it may be demanded whether I ought in charity to absteine from this indifferent action, which I foresee will be the matter, though not the cause of all this sinne in him, of uncharitablenesse and non-proficiency in his Christian course, and whether if I do not so absteine, this be not to scandalize my brother? To which I breifly answer, 1 That this anger or uncharitablenesse of his, is not the being scandaliz'd in the scripture sence, nor consequently in that respect my Action a Scandall, though it be the matter of the anger, or that which he is angry with.
§ 45. Secondly, 'Tis true indeed that his revolving against my preaching, is in him to be Scandaliz'd, i.e. to fall and be stopt in the service of God: but this only in a generall sense; as eve&rehy;ry other such hard-hearted obdurate resisting of Gods grace is, or may be called also: and that which occasions this being Scandaliz'd, is not my indifferent action, but his anger or un&rehy;charitable conceit of me for it, unlesse æquivocally, or remote&rehy;ly, as my action is the object of that anger, which anger is the Author of that profane resolution.
§ 46. Yet Thirdly, if I might foresee that my indifferent action would occasion, though unjustly, his anger, and his anger pro&rehy;duce the effect before mentioned, I thinke I should do well to absteine from that indifferent action, in charity to him.
§ 47. But that with these cautions, 1. Unlesse my indifferent acti&rehy;on be ordinable to some good Christian use, and designed by me to it; for then, as the Jewes resolve that a tree set for fruit though it chance to be worship't, is not made unlawfull by that meanes, so that indifferent usefull action of mine will not be made unlawfull by the possibility of that ill consequent: Maimon: de Idol: c. 5. Or secondly unlesse that action in it selfe indifferent, by lawfull authority be commanded, and so cease to be indifferent to me who am under that authority: Or thirdly, unlesse my abstein&rehy;ing may as probably prove matter of anger to some other of contrary perswasions: Or fourthly, unlesse that my absteining, or receding, or undoing what before I had done, be more likely to confirme him in his errour (which otherwise in time being not yeilded to, he may foresake) then to prevent or allay his causlesse anger and those effects of it. Or fifthly, unlesse I use some meanes in prudence not only sufficient, but probable to prevent this sinne of unjust anger in him before, or to re&rehy;forme it afterward.
§ 48. But if my absteining be like to fall into all or any of these inconveniences, then sure I ought not thus to absteine; because when these consequences do attend my absteining, they are nearer and more immediate to my absteining, then his resolv&rehy;ing against my preaching, is to my doing of it.
§ 49. And another consideration also may be taken, that he that will so causlessely be angry and resolve against the ordinary meanes of his salvation, will by the suggestion of the Devill or temptation of his owne corrupt humour, be likely to finde out some other matter of quarrell against me and my preach&rehy;ing. i.e. against his owne salvation, though I by absteining from that particular action, deprive him of that.
§ 50. And lastly, though I shall not define, yet I would have it con&rehy;sidered, whether he that is so disposed in soule and affection, that so gives up the raines of his passions, as upon every or no occasion to breake out into causlesse anger, uncharitablenesse, and the effects of it forementioned, be at all the more innocent or lesse culpable in the sight of God by the not committing of some one act of that sinne, only through wanting that or any other one occasion of committing that act. For as in good things God accepts the will for the deed (if it be a firme and ratified will, a full actuall intention, & want nothing but oppor&rehy;tunity to shew it selfe) & againe accepts him that hath exprest that will by ten only acts, being by want of opportunity deprived of a possibility of adding one act more to the number, as&rehy;well as him, which having the opportunity that the other wanted, hath exceeded him in the number of outward acts. So there may be some reason to feare, that an unresisted, unre&rehy;strained propension or consent to evill, that wants nothing, but an occasion to actuate it, will be as criminous in the sight of God, as if (without any improvement or change, but only by meeting with that occasion) it breake forth into act: or that an habituall inclination to sinne in one man ten times actua&rehy;ted in the members, having no more occasions to actuate it, shall be as sadly punished, as the same degree of inclination and intention through presence of occasion once more actu&rehy;ated.
§ 51. The same Consideration will be proper to other particulars incident to the matter of Scandall. As when any thirsty drunkard actually importunate in the pursuite of his espous&rehy;ed sinne, shall by occasion of my feast fall into an open act of that sinne, (and a hundred the like.) The question then may be, whether supposing him bent to excesse, and not only ha&rehy;bitually guilty of it, but actually Intent upon it, and only kept off by want of Occasion, He would have had lesse guilt upon his soule, if I had not then invited him. I conceive it hard to maintaine the affirmative, for though with men, who see not the heart, no sinne is punishable but that in the members (un&rehy;lesse in case of Treason) yet with God the sinne of the heart and the hand seemes to be equally great, the act of the mind and the act of the body; And the minutely preparations of that to sinne as punishable, as the minutely execution of this. As in the Schoolemens resemblance the pressing of the stone to the ground is as great when it is with-held by my hand, as when it is actually moving toward the center.
§ 52. I confesse there is somewhat to be said, and perhaps with probability, on the other side. And I thinke Saint Augustine somewhere expresseth his opinion, that though in good things God mercifully accepts the will for the deede, yet out of the same mercy and indulgence he punisheth not so in evill things; Yet because Saint Augustine may perhaps meane the incom&rehy;pleate and not perfect act of the will, (which though we yeild to be lesse then the outward act, yet the compleate act of the will, wanting nothing but opportunity of execution, may still be as great,) Or however, because there are not such de&rehy;monstrable grounds of resolution, as to yeild cleare convicti&rehy;on to all in this matter, and too assure the Christian that such an Addition of any outward act of sinne shall make the punish&rehy;ment the heavier to the habituall sinner, and so the absence of that outward act alleviate it; therefore, although I said I thinke he should do well to absteine, I dare not yet affirme that he is bound in charity to do so; Nothing but charity binding him to it, and the man that still hath that propension unresist&rehy;ed, being (upon this supposition, which we have made not improbable) like to reape little profit from that charity.
As free, and not using your liberty for a Cloake of Maliciousnesse , but as the servants of God.
1 Pet. 2.16.
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the Judgement.
Mat. 5.22.
FINIS.