3. The third condition of our actions is that they must be necessary.
First, the tradesman that gets his living by making foreign and fond fashions of attire which serve no use, except to be displayed as flags and banners, either of folly or pride, or wantonness. For 30 yes, by the very light of nature. And therefore those who live by selling and making them cannot be free from offense — indeed, their offense is greater. For if there were no inventers of vain novelties, they would not be so commonly used as they are. all such fashions are condemned by the word of God,
Secondly, here the Alchemist is to be reproved, who spends his time and substance laboring to change baser materials into gold, a thing that in truth is impossible. For it is a kind of creation to turn one kind of creature into a creature of another kind, as every metal is. And that which is said, or rather dreamed of, the 31 is but a fairytale and nowhere to be found except in Utopia. And there is no question but that one day an account must be made of the good time unprofitably spent in seeking it.
Philosopher's Stone, 3. The third condition of our actions is that they must be NECESSARY. We must consider the nature and quality of the works of our callings. In every calling there are two kinds of works. Some are principal, without which the calling cannot be maintained; and some less principal, which are not essential to the calling. Now, men must especially give themselves to practice the principal works of their callings. For example, the action of a Minister in his calling is to read and to preach the word of God. Now, reading is the less necessary work, and preaching is the most principal; and for this reason he must give himself especially to the practice of preaching. In this way we might go through the callings of all men and note the many needs in each. Magistrates in towns and corporations carry and draw the sword to maintain peace and civil order; it is well done, for it is a work of their calling; yet it is not the principal work, and they commonly fail in this: that they do not use the sword for this end, to urge men to keep the commandments of the first tablet, to practice pure religion (piety), and to keep the Sabbath day. This is the main
duty of the Magistrate who specially bears the sword for the good of men's souls. A Master of a family is to care not only for the bodies, but also for the souls of his household; for this is the principal duty; and most householders are faulty in this. For commonly they take on the lesser duties, and leave the principal one.
They care for the bodies of their wives, children, and servants while neglecting the means of the salvation of their souls. This is clean contrary to the rule in hand, which enjoins the practice of the principal duties in the first place; therefore all careless and ignorant masters of families are to be warned here, to have special care to provide for the saving of the souls of all those who live under their government. This also shows us the faults of many students, who setting themselves apart for the work of the ministry, first give themselves to study the Fathers and ancient writers. Whereas their first and principal duty is to be soundly instructed in the word of God, and to ground themselves in the main points of religion, so that they may be able to know what is true, what is false, what is to be done, and what is not to be done in all matters, whether they concern faith or manners. And when this good foundation is laid, then the foresaid helps may be added with good success.
Again, what I call necessary works are those which, upon due consideration, are not only lawful in themselves, and agreeable to our calling, but also expedient in the doers: for if they are not expedient, though otherwise lawful, they are not to be done.
Before I proceed any further, here is a necessary question to be handled:
Ques: Whether the works and actions of a calling done by a man who enters unlawfully into that calling, are nullities or not; that is, are his actions to be reputed as not done?
Ans: I answer that in things that are done, there are two kinds of faults; one is in the work, the other in the worker. A fault in the work is when the action itself is done amiss; and it may be done amiss in substance, or in circumstance. If the fault is in the SUBSTANCE of it, it
is indeed a nullity, and must be reputed as not done. Secondly, the fault of the WORKER is when an action of a lawful calling is done by one who is not lawfully called. Now then, when the fault of an action is not in the work itself, but in the person that works it, then it is not to be reputed a nullity, nor is it to be reversed as nothing.
For example, one called lawfully to the ministry baptizes infants in the name of the Father, and of the virgin Mary: here is a fault in the action done, and that is in the substance of the baptism; therefore there is no baptism here, but rather a profanation of the ordinance of God. Now put the case further, that the baptism is administered by a man who is called, though not lawfully; I say if there is no fault in the action, but only in the man, that baptism is not to be reputed a
nullity.
This doctrine is agreed upon by the common consent of Divines, and also by the laws and orders of kingdoms, as it may plainly appear in particular. Augustus Caesar, a Roman emperor, invaded the kingdom of the Jews, and brought it into a Province. And thus he was made king of the Jews, not by lawful means, but by intrusion. For all this, the actions done, and the commandments given by him, were the reputed commandments of a king, not revered by any Jew, but obeyed by all. For when he commanded that all the world, including the Jews, would be taxed, they yielded themselves to this commandment. Indeed, righteous Joseph and Mary went to their own town to be taxed.Luk 2.1 Caiaphas was honored as high Priest among the Jews;Mat 26.3 and though his entrance was by corruption and bribery, yet notwithstanding, the actions done by him in his office were not esteemed nullities, but valid actions.
And therefore, our Savior Christ allowed himself to be accused, arraigned, and judged by him; and he was also content to come into the Temple and worship God according to the manner of the Jews, even before Caiaphas himself. The Scribes and Pharisees that were the Teachers of the Jews,Joh 3.10 did not have many of their calling that came by succession from Aaron;Exo 29.9 and for judgment, they were also heretical in part, holding some things against the
foundation [of faith]; namely, justification by works, etc. Rom 9.32 And yet our Savior Christ, because they sat in Moses' chair, bids the Church of the Jews, and his disciples, to listen to them so far as they taught the doctrine of Moses.Mat 23.3 From this it is manifest that if there is no fault in the work, the defective calling of the worker does not make a nullity of the actions done. For however the worker sins in his unlawful entrance, and in that regard is not to be approved, yet the actions in the calling to which he has entered, are the actions of that calling; for though he is called amiss, yet he stands in the place of one lawfully called. And we are to differentiate between one who is called, though unlawfully, and one that has no calling at all. For the actions done without calling are indeed nullities; whereas, if there is any calling, even though the entrance is badly made, it does not make the action void. And whoever denies this ground of truth, overturns the regiment of kingdoms, Churches, states, and societies whatsoever.
By what has been said, a question is resolved concerning baptism.
Many of our ancestors were baptized by Mass-priests, and never received any baptism except in the Church of Rome.
Ques: Now the question is Whether that baptism was sufficient or not, and whether they must be re-baptized?
Ans: I answer thus: the Romish priest is no minister of God and Christ, but of Antichrist, in that he offers Christ as a real sacrifice for the quick and the dead, in which his office chiefly stands. Yet, because the priest has been and is designed by men to baptize, and he stands in the place of a lawful minister, his action is not void. For though he is not a minister lawfully called to baptize, yet he is not a mere private man, but is between both; that is, he is one called, though amiss, through ignorance and oversight of men.
Consequently, he is one that, in the act of baptizing, stands in the place of a right and lawful minister.
Obj: Again, it pleases some, carried more by affection than judgment, to dispute in this manner: There is no right and lawful