be considered V. Ambr. de Abr. Patr. l. 1. c. 6. Drus in gen 18.3 V. Gen. 18.2 16. 22. that it is the usual practice even of the Holy Scriptures to call Angels by the name of such as they represent or resemble The two Angels that came to Sodom in the appearance of men are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men Gen. 19.12 The Angel that appeared to Manoah's Wife being asked if he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man who appeared to the Woman declared that he was Jud. 13.11 the Angel in the Sepulchre who gave tidings of the resurrection of Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a young man Mar. 16.5 and the two Angels who appeared at the Ascension of our Lord are called by S. Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men in white apparel Act. 1.10 Now it is not agreeable to religious piety to condemn such ways of expression as evil and sinful which are allowed in the holy word of God nor is it unseemly for an holy Angel to owne that manner of expression which the holy Spirit himself useth And besides this Estius in loc diffic Scrip. in Tob. that which is hinted by Estius may well be admitted that the name of Azarias the Son of Ananias might be taken by the Angel upon himself to express by the signification of these names what was the business he came to effect Azarias signifying the help of God and Ananias the grace and favour of God that by the Angel the help of God was vouchsafed which is the effect of the Favour of God Obj. 5. The last Objection from Tobit and the most considerable is Tob. 12.15 Where the Angel is reported to say I am Raphael one of the seven holy Angels which present the Prayers of the Saints and go in and out before the glory of the holy one For the clearing of this place touching the Phrase of the seven holy Angels which yet is neither in Munsters Hebrew Copy of Tobit nor in the Syriack it may be taken for an definite number as the like Phrase is used Mat. 12.45 Mede Disc on Zech. 4.10 And Mr. Mede's Notion is known who asserteth it as an evident truth in his judgment and for which he giveth considerable proof that there are only seven principal Angels or Arch-Angels to which these words refer But whether these words be understood definitely for seven only or indefinitely for an uncertain number we have the like expression in the Canonical Scripture Zec. 4. 10. Rev. 5.6 7. What is here said concerning Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints this being a point of truth or matter of belief may not be received accordin gto the judgment both of the ancient Church and our present Church upon the authority of an Apocryphal Book further than it is grounded upon the evidence of the Canonical Scripture and in such a ense only as is agreeable to the Doctrine of those holy Scriptures Indeed if these words be acknowledged to be the words of an holy Angel as they are related in this Book according to some versions then must they be as certainly true as if they had been spoken by a Prophet or Apostle But admitting that an holy Angel did converse with Tobit yet might his words be either misapprehended or in this passage misrepresented And that they are so may be hence with some probility conjectured because in this place Tob. 12.15 there is no mention of Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints either in the Hebrew Copy of Munster or Fagius or in the Syriack Version or in the Latin which S. Hierome translated out of the Chaldee but it is only expressed in the Greek which our Translation followeth and this very place was above 1400. Years ago thrice cited by Cyprian Cypâ—â— de Orat. Domin de Mortalitate Adv. Jud. l. 1. n. 20. without this clause on this manner Ego sum Raphael unus ex septem Angelis Sanctis qui adsistimus conversamur ante claritatem Dei Indeed in the twelfth Verse both according to the Greek the Hebrew and the Latin the Angel spake of his bringing the remembrance of their Prayers before the holy one but even there the Syriack mentioneth no such thing 8. But because these words are in our version and taken in a restrained sense have been ordinarily admitted as a truth by divers ancient Christian Writers I shall give a double account in what sense these words may be taken agreeably to the Canonical Scriptures and the anciently received Doctrine in the Christian Church who owned not the Angels as Mediators nor did allow that Prayers should be put up to Angels 1. They judged that the holy Angels who are frequently present with us do join in our Religious worship and Prayers to God and as all who join in Prayers do present those Prayers to God so particularly do the holy Angels who enjoy a nearer Communion with God then we have yet attained Cont. Cels l. 5. p. 273 238. Lib. 8. p. 401. So Origen who expresly declareth against praying to Angels or to any who do themselves supplicate addeth afterward that the Christians particular Angel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presenteth the Prayers joining in them P. 420. and in another place of the same Book V. D. Hammond Annot in 1. Cor. 11.10 saith that many myriads of Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do join in Prayer with them who pray to God And as holiness disposeth an Angel to be ever ready to join in glorifying God so love maketh them ready to desire our good Luk. 15.10 since there is joy in the presence of the Angels of God over one sinner that repenteth And S. John in his Vision of the Churches worship declareth the holy Angels about the Throne to join in their Amen thereto Rev. 7.10 11 12. 9. 12. That the holy Angels being Gods Messengers as their name imports are both Ministers of conveying much good to us from God which divine Providence could bbestow without their Ministry and of representing our state and desires to God as his Servants and our friends which are fully and immediately manifest to God who is Omniscient And this may be performed partly as they are testifiers and witnesses of our actions Ad fr. in Erem Serâ—â— 68. with desire of our good and such S. Aug. judgeth them certainly to be and S. Paul giveth Timothy a charge before the elect Angels 1. Tim. 5.21 and speaketh of their presence in the Church 1. Cor. 11.10 and if Satan be the accuser of the brethren before God Rev. 12.10 the holy Angels may well be thought truly to represent what is good and partly as they are ministring Spirits attending on God and desiring our good they declare our Prayers not as Mediators but as Ministers non quia Deum doceant as S. Aug. expresseth sed quia voluntatem ejus super his consulunt desiring to know what commands God will give them to
influence from these divisions is so considerable though the argument from them be not valuable Polit. lib. 9. c. 21. that Contzen relateth it as the complaint of a Protestant Writer of good account Papistae funestis Evangelicorum dissidiis absterrentur à Doctrina Evangelicorum ceu haereticâ Satanicâ seditiosâ That by the lamentable discords of the Protestants the Papists are frighted from the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches as if it was Heretical Satanical and Seditious and in the same place he speaketh his own thoughts We saith he can not approve the cause of the Protestants which always some part of themselves and sometimes the chief and most numerous part doth detest 4. Nor are their endeavours ordinarily wanting to blow up the Coals of contention that they may be advantaged by the smoak Letter to the Lord Treasurer in Fuller ubi supra That they did animate some dissenters from Conformity in the Queens days was asserted by Bishop Whitgift upon his own certain knowledge And that in these last thirty years and upwards they were promoters of our divisions is more than probable from the informations given to the Archbishop V. Biblioth Reg. p. 42. 1640. by Andreas ab Habernsfield a Bohemian of noble descent and from many particular passages concerning our late discords published by Mr. Prinne and Monsieur du Moulin together with diverse credible relations of known Romanists in the meetings of diverse Sects Mr. Baxter long since declared that he began to have a strong suspicion that the Papists had indeed an hand in the extirpation of Episcopacy Grot. Relig Sect. 66. and citeth Bishop Bramhal's words against Meliterius There was a Bishop in the World losers may have leave to talk whose privy Purse and subtil Counsels did help to kindle that unnatural War in his Majesties three Kingdoms 5. Agreeably hereto it was observed their Policy about two hundred years since to endeavour to extinguish the sparks of light in the Bohemian Church by dividing them asunder Comen Historiola Sect. 36. and as Comenius relateth admiscebant se personati quidam qui Papae causam promoturi dissentiones mutuas promovebant Bulleng adv Anabapt and Bullenger as he is cited by Bishop Whitgift in his exhortation before his Answer to the Admonition declared that the Anabaptists in Switzerland and the parts of Germany were animated by the subtil Papists 6. Yet if any will not so much as suspect that these seeds of division are either secretly sown or watered from these hands considerate men have found cause to conclude that they expect to reap an harvest by them This hath not only been expressed by some of themselves and discerned by others in the Churches of England Bohemia and Switzerland but the same hath been also apprehended in all other Protestant Churches Hubertus Languetus a man of great authority and at that time the Duke of Saxonies Embassador resident in the Emperours Court at Vienna as Comenius who relateth the words of his Epistle declareth writing to Andreas Stephanus a Bohemian Bishop declared what his observation had discovered almost an hundred years since saith he the Pope feareth nothing more than our consenting and joining in Vnity sed sunt inter nos insani quidam Theologi c. But there are amongst us some furious Divines who reject all right Counsels and thereby perform a work advantagious to the Popes interest 7. And even Beza in the life of Calvin declareth concerning the controversies in Saxony about adiaphorous rites as the Surplice c. that Calvin did at first dislike Ph. Melanchthon who perswaded to Conformity but afterwards he discovered that there was no reason so to do For at that time it did not appear saith Beza with what spirit that evil Genius and the whole Troop of the Flacians who disdained Conformity were hurried on which afterward caused so many troubles and still do hinder the work of God non aliter sane nec minus suriose impudenter quam si ab ipso Romano Pontifice magnas stipendiis esset conducta with no less impudence and sury saith he than if they had been hired by large salaries from the Pope of Rome Praef. in Apol. Catech And this contentious spirit of Flacius Illyricus who was in some other respects a man deserving commendation hath gained him this Character from Vrsin that he was one qui per complures annos praestantissimis atque veris Christianis Orthodoxis viris obtrectando multas non necessarias altercationes excitando plurimorum conscientias passim Ecclesias in Germania turbavit Who for divers years by his discrediting worthy and true Christians and Orthodox men and by stirring up many unnecessary contentions was a troubler of divers Consciences and Churches all over Germany 8. Nor is it hard to discover that these dissentions about our publick service are made an occasion by some others I might say by many others who are more careless than scrupulous in matters of Piety for their gross neglecting the worship of God and the duties of Religion as the disputes about the Lords Supper have in several places apparently caused a great carelessness of attending on that great Ordinance Letter to the Council ubi supra It was Bishop Whitgifts observation concerning our former times that in King Edwards time and the beginning of Queen Elizabeths before the heat of these contentions the Gospel mightily prevailed and took great encrease but since this schism and division saith he the contrary effects have happened And indeed no other can be well expected because hereby is manifestly wanting that forcible motive from the general joining in the service of God with readiness of mind and with one consent which might perswade them who are otherwise careless of Religion to be more serious by making them ashamed of their negligence 9. And doubtfulness of Religion in some and profaneness of life in others are the woful ordinary consequents of such differences When the Donatists who neither erred in the Faith nor appeared vitious in their lives made a great breach in the Church about matters of discipline Optatus noteth Opt. adv Parm. l. 5. that while they contended that their separation was lawful and the Orthodox Church decryed it as unlawful the common people were doubtful and at a stand in the practice of Religion Inter vestrum licet nostrum non licet nutant remigant animae populorum And that Apostolical man Clemens expresseth the fruits of the divisions in the Corinthian Church about their Governours to be these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your division hath perverted and turned aside many Ep. ad Cor. p. 61. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it hath discouraged many and made them despond 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it bringeth many into doubtfulness and us all to grief and sorrow 10. And besides divers others ways mentioned in the following Sections whereby Religion is disadvantaged by these oppositions it is upon this
apprehensions of other men it is very manifest that unless there be a complyance or submission to such determinations by the members of the Church they can not actually communicate in these administrations unless they could communicate in what they will not yield to join in Yet these things with us are not made the conditions of communion any other way than the submission to lawful determinations of those things which must be one way or other determined is necessary for them who will join in such an orderly Society 11. And they who urge this objection do themselves make their determinations of these things besides some other things peculiar to their way as much a condition of Communion in their Congregations as our determinations are with us They may possibly stamp a divine authority upon those usages of their own which really have it not and urge such things for laws of God which he hath not established but this being much of the same nature with teaching for doctrines the commandments of men can never render their communion the more acceptable And I suppose this following discourse will sufficiently manifest that the divine authority doth neither enjoin their way of service without all forms and other rites nor disapprove of ours And now the arguments brought in that Treatise to make good this exception will concern themselves to answer as well as others and may be easily solved For 1. P. 173. When Christ gave Commission to his Apostles to baptize all Nations and teach them to observe whatsoever he commanded he thereby enjoined all his doctrines and precepts to be received and obeyed of all men and especially of those who imbrace the Christian baptism but he doth not thereby forbid rules of decency and order which are required in the Scripture to be received in the Communion of Christians And 2. Lib. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 2 3. the Apostles practice and 3. their doctrine with a particular consideration of the fourteenth Chapter to the Romans will be evidenced in this Treatise to give both allowance and direction for Ecclesiastical constitutions of order 12. The fourth argument is from this instance of fact P. 191. When Victor Bishop of Rome excommunicated the Asian Churches for not observing Easter at the same time with the Roman Church this his action as fixing new bounds to Church-Communion was then disliked much by others and especially rebuked by one of the most holy and learned men then living which was Irenaeus Ans Well might Victors actions be censured by Irenaeus which was not only a directing and retaining that as a sixed rule of order for his own Church Eus Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was then the Roman Custom and practice and which Irenaeus and the French Churches as well as many others did allow and judge requisite in that very Epistle to Victor but it was the obtruding that which was no Apostolical command or institution to be so far Apostolical as to be thereupon a doctrine and practice necessary to be received in all parts of the Christian Church and that all other whole Churches who received it not were not to be owned in the Communion of the Catholick Church Ibid. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and upon this account he undertook to excommunicate the Asian Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being Heterodox or erring from the Faith But our Church can be charged with no such practices as these were for it declareth it self thus B. of Com. Prayer of Ceremonies In these our doings we condemn no other Nations nor prescribe any thing but to our own people only which words with other to the same purpose are prefixed to our Liturgy His fifth argument is P. 194. that hence it would follow that there is no certain rule of Communion amongst Christians fixed and determined by Christ To which I answer that in all doctrines of Christianity nothing can be required as necessary for Communion with any Church but what Christ hath determined yet even here every errour in judgment or miscarriage in practice doth not forfeit the right of Communion and concerning defaults they who have the power of the Keys which is managed with Ecclesiastical Prudence Albasp Observat l. 2. Obs 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18. are allowed to consider of times and other circumstances whence the Church of God hath unblameably used sometimes greater and other times less severity about the same crimes But that there should be different prudential rules of external order in the communion of different Churches hath generally been allowed and acknowledged in the ancient Church and pleaded for amongst the reformed Churches 13. P. 171 202. Indeed it is in the same Treatise urged as a thing included under this exception of Vnscriptural conditions of Communion that Ministers are required to express their approbation of the things injoined as the Liturgy Articles and Book of Ordination by their subscription or declaration But besides that these things are not intended for conditions of Christian communion but requisite for regular administrations and the preservation of order it is but reasonable that they who insist on this Plea before they blame us much more before they separate from us upon this account should themselves consider whether they would be willing to receive any persons to be Ministers of their Congregations who do not some way or other express their allowance of their way and order and particularly whether they would entertain him as their Minister who is resolved to perform all ministerial actions according to the order of the Liturgy If they be willing to entertain such a Minister and Ministration they must thereby justifie our way of order and communion by their submitting to the same terms of injoying Church-Communion But if they will admit no person to be a Minister in their Churches as indeed they will not before they are satisfied that he approveth and will continue in the way and order of their Churches while they herein blame our Church they should consider those words of the Apostle Rom. 2.1 Thou art inexcusable O man whosoever thou art that judgest for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self for thou that judgest dost the same things 14. But of the lawfulness of things as enjoined in the Church for order sake which is the main thing considerable in this exception and which hath been divers times sufficiently justified Bishop Whitgift Tr. 2. Hccles Folit l. 3. Lib. 2. c. 2. by Bishop Whitgift Mr. Hooker and many others since them I shall treat in another place more particularly and it will be sufficient here to add that God who hath appointed Rulers in his Church to guide and command hath also made it a duty to obey them who have the rule over us 15. Its second Plea Another Plea for separation from the Church of England is That the joining in communion
of others that they who err by mistake may attain to a right judgment and that those who act out of any spirit of opposition may have their hearts reformed and be made willing to mind their duty 7. And because among the other things required of Ministers who conform many dissenters have expressed themselves to be most dissatisfied about the clauses concerning the Covenant and some who have undertaken to make a Surveigh of these things Surveigh of Grand Case Case 6. though they may be mistaken in the measure of their ground have declared that this is the great mountain in their way to be removed by the Faith of miracles I shall in the first place take that into consideration and manifest that there is a ready safe and direct passage without any great difficulty or need of miracles over that which only appeareth to them to be a mountain if we be willing to walk in the plain paths to which we are directed by the Scripture rules 8. And whereas in the other particulars expressed there is nothing more if so much disliked and opposed than what is contained in the Liturgy and particularly the Ceremonies I shall endeavour in the remaining part of this Book to give a true account of these things the right understanding whereof may be very conducible towards the Churches peace and the general good CHAP. II. Of the Covenant SECT I. Of its being an unlawful Oath 1. THE acknowledgment to be made by Ministers concerning the Covenant being no permanent Constitution may require the shorter discourse Yet it is needful that so much be said as to manifest that while it is for the present continued and until it shall be withdrawn and abated it ought not to be an obstacle to any in the entrance upon Ecclesiastical administrations or civil offices To this end I shall first consider the Oath it self that it was n it self unlawful and then its obligation so far as that is concerned in this acknowledgment 2. Now an Oath may be accounted unlawful in it self with respect to the wholsom laws of the land and upon this account any Oath especially concerning publick affairs of Government is unlawful in it self where either the matter or the constitution and framing is unwarantable according to the law That the Covenant and its Imposition was in this respect unlawful will be easily admitted by all impartially considering persons who cannot be supposed to acknowledge that whatsoever either for or against their own interest obtaineth in any wise a vote in the two Houses but is not assented to but disallowed by the King hath a sufficient legal and warrantable constitution 13. Car. 2.1 And accordingly by the highest authoritative way of resolution this Oath is declared Vnlawful by a publick Act in our Statute Laws 3. And it s not having a legal Constitution besides what respecteth the particular matter thereof is sufficient to render it unlawful in it self according to the law of God which establisheth order commandeth obedience to Government and subjection to all wholsom humane laws For by the law of God the Oaths of Subjects against the will of their Rulers for altering matters of Government must be declared to be unlawful as not being according to the rule of righteousness And it is not the matter only which maketh an Oath or Promise Vnlawful in it self but all other necessary ingredients or attendents may have the like effect and influence as the consideration of the person who taketh the Oath with respect to his capacity and authority and many other such like things which the Canonists have expressed in this distick Sayr Clav. Reg. l. 5. c. 3. Sit jusjurandum licitum decerne notato Quis cui quid per quid ad quid cur quomodo quando Martin Margarit Decret Filiuc Trac 25. n. 204. Agreeable hereunto Filiucius a Casuist maketh an express distinction between pomissio illiciâ—a ex parte materiae and promissio illicita per seipsam telling us that a promise made by a Son against the prohibition of his Father may be a lawful promise as to the matter of it but yet it is an unlawful promise in it self as encluding in it self an unlawful thing that is disobedience to his Father 4. But touching the matter of the Covenant being unlawful I might note that that clause expressing them who take the Covenant to be of one reformed Religion and that they had before their eyes the glory of God and the honour of the King was either not so true or not so well known concerning one another as that they might safely express it in a warrantable Oath And what concerned the doctrine worship discipline and Government of Scotland and Ireland was that which could not be understood as the matter of an Oath should be by ordinary persons in England who were required to take it And that clause declaring that this Covenant was made according to the commendable practice of these Kingdoms in former times did not only require them who took it to be well skilled in History but also declareth former open combinations of Subjects by Oath against the mind and will of their Prince to alter the affairs of Government to be commendable practices which is to assert what is contrary unto truth 5. And how much it was in the matter of it Unlawful by its designed tendency to promote a civil War even against the King may also be considered For though the King was known to oppose this Oath yet the Covenant engaged them who took it according to their places and callings to assist and defend all those that entred into this League and Covenant in the maintenance and pursuing thereof And also that they should all the days of their lives coniinue therein against all opposition And that this phrase according to our places and callings was not understood nor intended in the Covenant and by the contrivers thereof in the due limited sense though many private persons did so take it is manifest by considering what kind of assistance to each other was by them practised before at and after the taking the Covenant and also because the taking this phrase in such a strict restrained sense would have been utterly inconsistent with what is joined therewith viz. the assisting and defending all those that enter into this League and Covenant in the maintaining and pursuing thereof to continue therein against all opposition and not to be withdrawn from it by whatsoever perswasion or terrour since all this was against the Kings known command and open Proclamation 6. As this Covenant had respect to the affairs of the Church it appeareth unlawful upon a double account 1. That endeavour intended in the Covenant for the alteration of Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government was in the nature thereof an Unlawful endeavour for thereby Subjects did undertake of themselves though without legal authority and without and against the Kings consent to alter oppose and expel what was established by the
1. Cor. 14.16 But the very phrase of blessing and giving of thanks makes it probable that this Text is to be understood as Mr. Thorndike expoundeth it of the Consecration of the Communion And at that time the people did ordinarily answer Amen and nothing more as appeareth from the early testimonies of Justin Martyr and Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria 2. But if this sense be not admitted this Text of the Apostle doth neither mention nor in the context more nearly refer to Prayer than to singing in which latter the peoples bare saying Amen is not contended for nor allowed as a constant rule for the Churches practice though it was probable the usual method in the Christian Assemblies in those Apostolical days when the duty of singing was performed by the immediate inspiration of the spirit upon some particular persons and that these extraordinary motions of Gods spirit in those times were only vouchsafed to the Clergy or Ministry is not probable from the contents of that very Chapter And therefore this place of Scripture doth not confine the whole vocal service of God excepting an Amen to the Ministry the people being altogether debarred and excluded 5. But that all the servants of God may allowably be interested where the due rules of order and edification are observed in the outward joint expression of praise and Prayer to God is very agreeable to the holy Scriptures where the holy Angels are represented to cry one to another and say Holy holy holy is the Lord of Hosts the whole Earth is full of his glory Is 6.3 and all Israel praised God and said For he is good for his mercy endureth for ever 2. Chr. 7.3 And as S. Paul exhorteth that with one mind and one mouth Christians should glorifie God Rom. 15.6 S. John in his Vision beheld and heard the four living things the Elders the Angels and every Creature in Heaven and Earth expressing blessing honour glory and power unto God Rev. 4.8 11. Ch. 5 8. 14. and a great multitude whom no man could number crying with a loud voice and saying Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne and to the Lamb. Rev. 7 9 10. and he heard also the voice of the 144000. who were with the Lamb on Mount Sion as the voice of many Waters and as the voice of a great thunder singing a new Song Rev. 14.1 2 3. and these places last mentioned are the more considerable because they contain representative Visions of the service acceptably performed to God in the Christian Church 6. If we consult Ecclesiastical practice there is very probable evidence that under the Old Testament the people did vocally join by responsals in the ordinary service of God in the Sanctuary and Synagogues V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 6.13 Both the Joma and other Tracts of the Talmud mention the people in the period of their Prayers expressing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Blessed be the name of the glory of his Kingdom for ever and ever In Ch. Par. in Deut. 10.16 And the particular responsals used by the Jews at Circumcision are expressed by Fagius The use of alternate singing among the Essens is sufficiently known but that this was of very ancient use in the Jewish Church is very likely because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth to answer is an usual expression of singing even in the holy Scriptures And there appeareth considerable evidence from Ex. 15. v. 1. v. 20. that that Song of Moses and the Children of Israel Phil. de Vit. Mos l. 3. was uttered as Philo Judaeus averreth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with responsal melodies alternately repeated 7. In the Christian Church the Original of the Antiphona or the alternate singing of Hymns by two quires is ascribed by Socrates to Ignatius the like use of Davids Psalms is declared by Theodoret to have had its beginning at Antioch from Flavianus and Diodorus Their Original in the Latin Church is referred by Platina to Damaseus and by Walafridus Strabo to S. Ambrose Is Hisp de Eccl. Offic. l. 1. c. 7 8. but both Isidorus Hispalensis and Rabanus Maurus do testifie that long before this the Responsoria wherein the whole Quire answered to one Man Rab. Maur. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 50 51. were known by that name and used in the Latin Church And sometimes the whole Assembly joined in their Hymns and Psalms sometimes they were sung by one alone all the rest joining to eccho forth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or end of the Hymn Conc. Laod c. 15 and by the Laodicean Council the wholy Assembly were not allowed to join in their publick singing which was required to be performed by the appointed singers only Thus the Ecclesiastical practice hath varied according to what was thought prudent and convenient 8. Concerning Prayers and Confessions S. Basil declareth it to have been in his time the ordinary practice of divers Eastern Churches Bas Ep. 63. that every man by his own words did profess repentance and make confession Naz. Or. 3. And Gr. Nazianzene acquainteth quainteth us that Julian in imitation of the Christians did appoint amongst the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a form of Prayer to be said in parts or by way of Responsals Hierom also relateth that populus cum sacerdote loquitur in precibus the people did speak with the Priest in the Prayers and Gregory the great noteth Gr. Ep. l. 7. c. 63. that in the Greek Church the Lords Prayer was ordinarily said by all the people together and as anciently as we can meet with any parcels of Liturgy or particular Offices the use of responsals may be easily discerned even as far as S. Cyprians sursum Corda and Habemus ad Dominum Wherefore the use of responsals and the people joining in some expressions in the publick service of god was a thing thought useful by the ancient Church as well as by our own and is allowable by the rules of the Scripture and the Order of the publick worship of God and whosoever assert that the vocal joining of the people in any expressions of Prayer in the publick Assembly is as Vzziahs action was an intrenching upon the Priests Office doth set up such Bars about the service of God which do keep Gods people at a greater distance from the throne of Grace than the nature and priviledge of Christian liberty will allow Yet the composing or directing particular Prayers for the publick use of Christian Assemblies is the proper work of the Church Officers who are to be the guides thereof as also teaching and instructing being an act of authority doth ordinarily belong to the Ministers of the Church and this is that speaking which is forbidden to Women in the Church because it is an act of authority 1. Cor. 15.34 1. Tim. 2.12 Whereas the joint expressing some words of confession or supplication is wholly an act of humility and is not forbidden
also from sin and their whole man from destruction And in this sense if this Petition should be supposed to enclude which in the proper sense of the words it doth not even Traitors and Robbers can we be blamed to pray even for them that God would preserve them from further sin and so keep them that they may have time and grace for repentance and that thereby they may be preserved from eternal destruction according to Mat. 5.44 12. That Petition that God would have mercy upon all men is condemned by some but is certainly commanded by S. Paul requiring us to make Prayers for all men for nothing can be prayed for which doth not enclude Gods mercy But such light objections which are easily made against the best words that the wisdom and piety of man can devise I think not worthy the further naming but shall now proceed to some other matters of greater moment SECT V. Considerations concerning the publick reading Apocryphal Chapters 1. The reading the Apocryphal Chapters in our Church hath been severely censured as if it was a forsaking the holy Scriptures which are the waters of life to drink of other unwholsom streams but that this matter may be rightly understood without prejudice or mistake it will be requistie to take notice of these following considerations 2. Cons 1. The excellent authority of the Canonical Books of Holy Scripture as they are distinguished from the Apocryphal is fully and clearly acknowledged by this Church in her Articles Art 6. where it declareth concerning the Apocryphal Books that the Church as S. Hierome saith doth read them for example of life and instruction of manners but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine which Article plainly disclaimeth them from being accounted Canonical Books of the Holy Scripture That the Jews do not owne these Books as any part of the Old Testament is manifest from their Bibles which contain them not and the particular evidences from the Jewish Rabbins against every one of those seven Books of the Apocrypha which are forged to be Canonical by the Council of Trent are some of them exhibited by Hollinger Thes Phil. l. 2. c. 2. Sect. 1. And that neither the ancient Church of the Jews before the destruction of Jerusalem nor Christ and his Apostles nor the several Ages of the Christian Church till some late Romish Councils did acknowledge or make use of these Books as Canonical is solidly and learnedly evidenced by the Bishop of Durham Schol. Hist of Can. of Scripture throughout with reference to the sixth Article of this Church Wherefore though it would be injurious to the holy Scriptures that any other Books which are not of divine inspiration should be accounted of equal authority with them yet it is far from being a dishonour either to them or to they holy Spirit who indited them if either these Apocryphal or any other good Books be esteemed useful and profitable and acknowledged to contain things that are true and good 3. Cons 2. It was can usual practice in the ancient Christian Church that some of these Apocryphal Books and other good writings besides the holy Scriptures were publickly read as instructive Lessons in their Assemblies but with such variation as the prudence of every Church thought meet In the second Century both the Fpistle of Clemens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the then ancient Custom In Eus Hist l. 4. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and some other Ecclesiastical Epistles were publickly read even on the Lords days for their instruction as Dionysius of Corinth testifieth And in Euscbius his time as well as before it Ibid. l. 3. c. 15. was the Epistle of Clemens publickly read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greatest number of Churches Aug. de Civ Dei l. 22. c. 8. Hom. de Sanct. de S. Steph. Ser. 7. In the African Church in S. Augustins time the Histories of the passions of Martyrs v. Hom. 26. inter 50. and accounts of miraculous works by the efficacy of Christian Prayer were read in their Churches which Custom though it was very pious in the beginning was at last intolerably abused to the bringing in legend stories And more particularly the publick reading several Apocryphal Books as Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees was ordered in one of the Carthaginian Councils in S. Augustins time 3. Carth. c. 47. Cont. Carth. c. 27. and that Canon was taken into their Code and besides what S. Hierom oft speaketh of these Books being read in the Church but distinguished from their Canon Ruffinus his contemporary who was first his friend and then his adversary having given first an acount of the Canonical Books proceedeth to these Books which he saith are not Canonical but Ecclesiastical Ruff. in Symb. as Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Tobit Judith c. and declareth the judgment of the ancient Fathers before his time concerning them quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesiis voluerunt sed non proferri ad auctoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam that they would have them all to be read in the Churches but not to be produced as of authority to confirm any matters of Faith And that in after Ages these Books were read in the Church Isid de Eccl off l. 1. c. 11 12. Rab. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 53. is evident from Isidonss Hispalensis and in the very same words from Rabanus Maurus and might be shewed from very many others if that was needful 4. Cons 3. These Books called the Apocrypha have been greatly esteemed both in the ancient Church and by the chief Protestant Writers as very useful though not divine writings Divers of the ancients have cited them under the title of the holy Scripture using that Phrase in so great a latitude as to signifie only holy writings though not divinely inspired The Council of Carthage above-named doth there call them Canenical Books as doth also S. Augustin who was in that Council De Doct. Christ lib. 2. c. 8. using the word Canonical in a large sense for it is manifest from that and divers places of S. Aug. that they were not esteemed of equal authority with those Books properly called Canonical And therefore Cajetan for the interpretation of the right sense of there words Caj Com. in Esth in fin hath well declared concerning these Books Non sunt Canonici i. e. regulares ad firmandum ea quae sunt fidei possunt tamen dici Canonici hoc est regulares ad aedificationem fidelium or they are not Canonical as containing a rule to direct our faith an belief though they may sometimes be called Canonical as containing rules to better our lives In the Greek Church where they were not at least so much publickly read as in the Latin they were accounted useful for instruction as appeareth besides the Citations of the Greek Fathers from that very Epistle of Athanasius Fragm Epist 39. in
indifferent and no direct parts of worship because these particular things are only of Ecclesiastical or humane constitution for since all instituted worship is directly appointed for the acceptable service of God which especially considering the fall of man must be in a way of Grace and not of Merit it must be God and not his Creature who must determine what Institutions will be pleasing to him Serm of good works Par. 2 Serm of Prayer Par. 2. And this is the Doctrine of our Homilies and the Book of Common Prayer speaking of Ceremonies expresly declareth that those which remain are for a Godly Discipline and Order which may be altered and changed and therefore are not to be esteemed equal with Gods law And our Articles assert Art 34. that the Church hath authority to change or abolish Ceremonies ordained by mans authority so that all things be done to edifying All which words shew that there is no holiness placed in these things nor are they of themselves made any part of the worship of God in the Church of England 5. Yet even the observation of things indifferent may by a secondary and consequential respect to other commands of God and duties of men though not directly from themselves render our services more acceptable unto God Thus that gesture of body which is not particularly determined as a necessary duty may be pleasing to God as it includeth a religious respect to those duties of glorifying God with our bodies and serving him acceptably with reverence and godly fear and the observing other decent rites may be pleasing to God as it expresseth a reverence of God and his Ordinances and service an obedient respect to that command that all things be done decently and in order a subjection to our Superiours in things lawful and a care of the Churches Peace Upon this account Vrsin truly said Vrsin Explic Catech q 96. Loc. Theol. in 2. Praecep Adiaphorae actiones possunt Deo placere liect aliter quam cuttus Dei proprie dictus that indifferent actions may please God but in a different manner from that which is properly and directly the worship of God To such general ends are those indifferent observations in our Church appointed which are called Ceremonies and hence it is with good reason declared in the Book of Common Prayer that they are as well for a decent Order in the Church as because they pertain to edification For as whatsoever exciteth reverend thoughts of God and his Ordinances is thereby useful for the Churches edifying so the Aposile requireth ruies of Order to be made for edification 1. Cor. 14.26 and S. Chrys in 1 Cor. Ch. 14.40 Chrysostome truly observed that good Order Peace and Love are the most useful things to promote edification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 6. But though external rites should be never so innocent in their own nature as being neither Jewish nor owned as parts of Christian Religion nor as operative means in themselves to convey Grace yet the introducing a great and unnecessary number of them would be disadvantageous to Religion by obscuring and darkning the spiritual duties and priviledges thereof by being needlesly burdensom to Christians and by diverting mens minds to attend chiefly unto such external observances Hence S. Aug. Ep. ad Januar c. 19. Augustin in his time as is observed in our Liturgy complained of the excessive number of such rites and the conditions which Protestant Writers require concerning Ceremonies are such as these that they be in their kind things indifferent in their number sew Kemnit Exam. Conc. Trid. de Tradition 7th genus Vrsin Ex. pl. Catech. ad qu. 103. and in their use godly and profitable for edification Now in our Church besides the use of expedient gestures in the fervice of God there is nothing which in common Custom of speech is called a Ceremony which in any proper part of worship is appointed in our Liturgy to be used by any other person besides the Minister And in our ordinary service the Minister is only required to use the appointed habit which though it be customarily called a Ceremony is no otherwise such than the Church Pulpit and the Vessels for the Communion and the Communion-Cloath are to be so esteemed which are only used in the service of God And in our particular Offices we have only the use of the Cross in the Office of Baptism of imposition of hands in Confirmation and the civil rite of the Ring in Marriage and therefore if the nature of these particular Rites be allowable which in due place will be considered there can be no dammage to Religion nor burden to Christians from the number of them SECT II. The first Argument for the lawfulness of Ecclesiastical Rites from the liberty herein allowed to the Jewish Church 1. Having hitherto endeavoured to prevent mistakes and mis-apprehensions about the subject of my present discourse I shall now lay down such Arguments as will manifest that some decent external observations in the Church though they be not particularly instituted of God are allowably ordered and appointed The first Argument is from the pactice of the Jewish Church which I shall consider in a threefold respect 2. First in their Temple worship For though they might not lawfully appoint any Sacramental Rite which was the the nature of divers of the Temple Rites and though Solomons Temple as well as Moses his Tabernacle 1. Chr. 28.12 19. was built according to the pattern which God directed and divers other external things were determined by divine appointment yet even here were some things left to the liberty and determined by the Authority of the Jewish Church or the Rulers and Governours thereof I shall not here insist upon Solomons offering Burnt-Offerings in the middle of the Court and not only upon the Altar 1. Kin. 8.64 nor upon Hezekiahs proclaiming a general Passover on the second Month 2. Chr. 30.2 because these were extraordinary Cases which were only allowable by the weightiness of the present occasions when Ceremonial Commands of God might be dispensed with in cases of greater concernment upon which account it was also lawful for David and them who were with him to cat the shew bread But it must be acknowledged that such extraordinary Cases are no more a sufficient ground for constant and ordinary Constitutions than the constant keeping a vein open can be concluded allowable because it may be expediently at some times opened for the preserving life or health 3. The first instance of this liberty among the Jews concernâ—th the Passover which was after the building the Tabernacle and Temple a proper Tabernacle or Temple Rite Phil. l. 3. de Vita Mos Lib. de Decalog Lib. de Septen Festis Deut. 16.6 and though Philo Judaeus doth in several places express the Passover to be sacrificed by all the people of Israel and not to be presented to the Priests as other Sacrifices were both the Talmud
in his Gloss published from Strasburgh 1570. upon those words of the Apostle If any man seem to be contentious we have no such Custom nor the Churches of God write thus The Apostle saith he rejecteth morose and contentious answerers shewing that profitable rites received by grave authority ought by no means to be contemned or plucked in pieces though they be not built on solid demonstrations But if any man will be stiff in his opinion the Apostle will not contend any longer with him but will acquiesce in the Custom of Godly and worthy men and of the Churches of God themselves idemque saith he alios omnes pios facere debere and that all pious men ought to do the same is acknowledged there to be an Apostolical direction by Illyricus when he was out of the heat of contention in a cool and calm temper 4. If we view the pulick writings of the Reformed Churches Conf. Bohem Ars. 15. the Bohemian Confession declareth them to teach that humane Traditions Rites and Customs which do not hinder Piety are to be preserved in the publick Christian Assemblies And in their account of the Discipline and Order of their Churches they divide the matters of Religion into three heads the Essentialia which contain the matters of Faith Love and Hope the Minisierialia which enclude the means of Grace as the word of God Rat. Difc Ord. c. 1. the Sacraments and power of the Keys and the Accidentalia by which they say they mean what others call Adiaphora or external Ceremonies and Rites of Religion In these matters Adiaphorous they say they may have some things in use among them which are different from other Churches and yet are they not willing upon any small occasions to allow any alteration therein neque ob leves causus quicquam mutare aequum putamus nemini apud nos licet insuetas ceremonias inahoare Ibid. c. 2. And in their Ordination both of their Bishop and their Consenior who is designed to represent the Chorepiseopus in some ancient Churches whose Office is like that of our Arch Deacon and their Minister and their Deacon those of the same Order give to the person then ordained their right hand of fellowship and those of the inferiour Order when one is ordained to any of the higher degrees give him their right hand in token of subjection testified and assured by that external Rite 5. The Augustane Confession in several expressions asserteth it lawful for the Bishops or Pastors Conf. August de Eccâ—◠〈◊〉 Artâ—â—â— 21 de descrimine cibor to appoint things for Order in the Church and declareth that they do retain many ancient Rites or Ceremonies though they complain also of the abuse of others in the Romish Church as the Church of England doth and it asserteth also ritus illos servandos esse qui sine peccato servari possunt ad tranquillitatem bonum ordinem Ecclesiae conducunt Conf Saxon de Tradition The Saxon Confession treating of Rites appointed in the Church by humane Authority declareth that nothing ought to be appointed against Gods word or in the way of superstition but that some blameless Rites for good order both ought to be and by them are observed ritus aliquos honestos boni ordinis causa factos servamus servandos esse docemus And the Ceremonies most opposed in the Church of England with more besides them are retained both in that and in other Lutherane Churches Conf. Helv. c. 27. The Helvetick Confession asserteth that the Church hath always used a liberty about Rites as being things of a middle or indifferent nature The French Church alloweth that there be singulis locis peculiaria instituta Conf. Gallic c. 32. prout commodum visum fuerit peculiar Constitutions for several places as it shall appear profitable And the Strasburgh Confession discoursing about humane Traditions or external Rites and Observations which conduce to profit though they be not expressed in the Scriptures Conf. Argent c. 14. saith that many such the Church of God at this day doth rightly observe and as there is occasion doth make new ones adding these sharp words quas qui rejecerit is non hominum sed Dei cujus traditio est quaecunque utilis est authoritatem contemnit that whosoever rejecteth these things doth not contemn the authority of men but of God of whom is every profitable Constituion Wherefore he who will yet disclaim all Ceremonial Rites under Christianity and will esteem them to be a pestilential and dangerous Contagion in the Church must undertake to affix both to the ancient and latter most famous Churches a Miserere nostri SECT V. The ill consequences of denying the lawfulness of all Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions in things indifferent observed 1. Though the condemning the practice and rule of the Church in all Ages and even in the time of the holy Apostles and Prophets be inconvenience sufficient for any opinion to stand charged with yet besides this which hath been evidenced in the two former Sections the denying the lawfulness of any external Rites 1. Debarreth the Church of what is really advantagious unto it for some fit external Rites of order and decency provided they be not over-numerous do promise solemnity in the service of God and tend to excite a greater degree of seriousness reverence and attentiveness It was S. Austins observation De Curia pro mortuis c. 5. that in Religion the outward actions of bowing the knee stretching forth the hands and falling on the ground though they be not performed without the preceding actions of the Soul do much encrease the inward affections of the heart In the common affairs of the World the boaring his Ear with an Awle who was willing to undertake a perpetual service the giving possession among the Jews by the pulling of the shoe and amongst us by divers other ways of livery and seisin the delivering some ensign of authority at the enstallment of a Magistrate and the giving the hand as a pledge of fidelity have by the common prudence of men been judged useful Rites to render those undertakings and actions the more solemn and observable Nor can there be any reason why some external actions may not obtain the like effect in matters of Religion especially considering that both Prophets and Apostles in delivering their extraordinary Messages from God thought fit frequently to make use of visible representations that their words might thereby take the deeper impression Thus Ezekiel carried out his stuff in their sight and Isaiah walked naked without his ordinary Garments when they denounced Captivity and Agabus foretelling the imprisonment of S. Paul bound himself with his girdle Act. 13.51 Mar. 6.11 and the Apostles according to the commandment of Christ shook of the dust of their feet as a testimony against those Cities who received them not V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 10.14 which was a rite
and whether this position will not go far toward the condemning Religious and devout behaviour in Christian Assemblies because it is an outward and visible expression of a pious frame of mind whereas such external actions rightly used with a due significancy are testimonies and incentives of Piety and Religion but without such a signification are either Hypocritical or at least vain and empty 5. But some distinguish here between such things which have a natural significancy as Religious gestures and such things as signifie by humane Constitutions and consent the former they do admit but not the latter But this distinction is to little purpose partly because there can be no sufficient reason given why the latter should be universally disallowed while the former are approved partly because most things supposed to have a natural significancy did derive their original signification from humane custom and consent as reverent gestures and uncovering the head and partly because divers particular things above-mentioned which cannot be disapproved cannot be pretended to have a natural signification to which laying the hand on the Book in an Oath and others more may be added 6. Cons 3. The disallowing all external significative Rites in Gods service is a thing opposite to the general sense of the Church of God in all former Ages That divers signfiicative Rites were lawfully used in the Jewish Church without any divine Institution is sufficiently manifest from the instances given in the former Chapter and such were also the Apostolical Rites of the Love-kiss the Feasts of Charity and the having mens heads uncovered and not veiled The judgment of Calvin and Zanchy approving such Ceremonies of Ecclesiastical appointment were also in that Chapter produced and the same may be observed in Vrsin Explic. Catech. q. 103. and P. Martyr Ep. Hoopero Art 15. The Bohemian Confession teacheth that such Rites by whomsoever they were introduced ought to be preserved which advantage Faith the worship of God and other things that are good amongst Christians with which agreeth the Strasburgh Confession Cap. 14. Some significative Rites of the Ancient Christian Church were also mentioned in the foregoing Chapter to which may be added the frequent use of the Trinal Mersion in Baptism as a profession of the Trinity and of Conformity to the Death of Christ which continued three days and this is used in divers Protestant Churches at this day they also sometimes purposely used the single Merscon to testifie the Unity of the Godhead In c. 2. q. 1. c. legum Sometimes as appeareth by the words of Hincmarus the person to be baptized supposing him adult was to give up his name in writing to signifie by that action his willingness and desire to undertake Christianity and to obtain Baptism And very anciently the person receiving Baptism did then change his Garments arraying himself in white as an admonition to him that he then changed his state and undertook the innocency of the Christian profession De Consecr Dist 4. c. post baptismum Accepisti this Custom was observed by Gratian from Rabanus and S. Ambrose and is thought by a learned man of our own Nation to be as ancient as the Apostles themselves and to be alluded unto in the use of those Scripture Phrases Mr. Thorndike Right of the Church c. 4. of putting of the old man with his deeds and putting on the new man Col 3.9 10. 7. The main Objection peculiarly directed against signisicant Ceremonies is that such things have a resemblance of Sacraments but no Ecclesiastical Authority nor any person below Christ himself can constuâ—â—te or appount a Sacrament Cont. Faust l. 10. c. 16. Indeed S. Augusline sometimes speaketh of Sacraments as being nothing else but verba visibiliâ— visible words and other where saith Ep. 5 Marc. that signs referring to divine things are called Sacraments but these expressions were noted by Kemnitius as instances to shew Kemnit Exam. de Sacram. Can. 1. that S. Augustine used the word Sacrament in a great latitude of sense this being an Ecclesiastical word not always taken in the same strictness of signification And S. Aug. doth there peculiarly speak of a certain kind of signs viz. the Jewish Ceremonies appointed by the Divine Law which I have above observed to enclude somewhat Sacramental 8. But that we may rightly apprehend 〈…〉 significative signs are lawfully 〈…〉 in the Church I shall distinguish 〈◊〉 signs referring to matters of Religion into so many several ranks or Classes as may be sufficient for the clearing my present enquiry Wherefore 9. First Some external signs are appointed to ratifie seal and confirm the Covenant of God and to tender and exhibit the Grace of that Covenant or Christ himself unto us And these signs are properly Sacraments according to the definition thereof in our Church Catechism to be outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual Grace given unto us ordained by Christ himself as a means whereby we receive the same and a pledge to assure us thereof Accordingly Baptism as a means of Grace doth exhibit remission of sins Act. 22.16 and Salvation 1 Pet. 3.21 and the Lords Supper exhibiteth the New Testament in Christs bloud and is the Communion of the body and bloud of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 Ch. 11.25 And Rabanus Maurus describing a Sacrament saith De Instit Cler. l. 1. c. 24. that therein sub integumento rerum corporalium virtus divina secretius operatur salutem And that this is the common Doctrine of the Protestant Writers concerning Sacraments which they defend against the Calumnies of the Papists who charge them with asserting the Sacraments to be only significative signs but not exhibitive and also against the fond opinion of the Anabaptists and other Sectaries accounting Sacraments to be chiefly professing signs may be evidenced by perusing Bishop Cranmer in his Preface to his Book of the Sacrament Bishop Ridley de Coena Dom. p. 28 29. Bishop Jewel Apol. Reply Art 8. Dr. Whitaker de Sacr. Qu. 1. c. 3. Bucer Conf. de Euchar. Sect. 45. Epist ad Michael N. Hispan Kemnit Exam. de Sacr. Can. 5 6 7. Vrsini Apol. Catech. ad 3 m Calumn adv Anabapt Chamier de Sacram l. 1. c. 10. Sect. 13. Rivet Cath. Orth. Tr. 3. q. 1. with many others Now none can appoint any such sign as this but he who hath power of giving the Grace exhibited thereby and if any humane authority constitute any sign to this end and purpose it would therefore be an high intrenchment upon the Soveraignty of God and the authority of Christ and the expecting this Grace from any such sign is great superstition 10. Secondly There are signs appointed not to exhibit and tender the Grace of Gods Covenant but to testifie in Gods name the certainty of some point of Faith as the Star in the East was a witness of Christs Birth and an assurance thereof to the Wise men or to tender some particular
to have Kings her nursing Fathers and a duty to all Rulers upon earth to acknowledge their subjection to Jesus Christ And yet even in the Apostles times there were corporal punishments miraculously inflicted to awaken men to mind the practice and careful exercise of Christianity not only in the particular instances of Saul going to Damascus of Ananias and Sapphira and of Elymas but the delivering a person to Satan hath been ordinarily observed to enclude with the sentence of the Church a giving him over to some outward bodily calamities to be inflicted on him by the evil spirit of which a particular instance is given concerning the Servant of Stilico Paulin in Vit. Ambr. prope fin by Paulinus in the life of S. Ambrose 13. But that this Question may be resolved we must note 1. That it concerneth only secular authority when it is rightly informed in these matters of Religion about which such Laws are established For according to the Rules of Conscience as no authority upon earth may lawfully countenance or join in the profession of an errour so neither may it by commands constitutions or penalties design to advance it But it is as unreasonable that the use of secular authority to advance what is good and commendable should hence be condemned as that the holy action of Abraham Gen. 18.19 commanding his Children to keep the way of the Lord should be disliked because it is certainly unlawful for any Parents to command and enjoin their Children to entertain sin and embrace errour For it is every mans duty to close with that which is good and to favour and prefer it but it is his sin to oppose it or to make use of his interest in the behalf of that which is evil 2. Bishop Whitgifts Defence of his Ex. to Magist ion fin Nor is this Question about the lawfulness of designing the ruine and destruction of any persons only because they err in matters of Religion which is a thing by no means allowable and not only the use of Fire and Faggot for pretended Heresie but the inflicting capital punishments for the sole crimes even of real Heresie or notorious errours in Religion have been sufficiently disclaimed by the great defenders of our Political and Ecclesiastical Constitutions 14. 3. To establish such Laws backed with penalties about good and useful matters Ecclesiastical which may be a proper and fit motive respect being had by the prudence of Superiours to the nature of the things enjoined and to the temper of the persons to be dealt with to excite men to consider and mind their duty is not only allowable but it is the natural result of Rulers discountenancing evil designing their subjects good being careful of the Churches welfare and of serving God in the use of their authority and is contained under that Apostolical Rule Rom 13.4 If thou do that which is evil be affrâ—â—d of the power But if any shall to word that outward punishments are no way useful to direct mens minds to a sense of their duty he must contradict the common experience of a considerable part of Mankind and must disclaim any advantage for amendment of life from paternal correction the constitution of Magistracy and divers providential chastisements of God against the frequent expressions of holy Scripture And he must also undertake to assert that the condition of Israel was not better when all the people engaged themselves to the service of God moved by the zeal for true Religion in their Kings attended with their denouncing temporal punishments on them who neglected or refused than when every one 〈◊〉 and professedly walked in the 〈◊〉 of his own heart 15. And whereas several expressions 〈◊〉 Writers speak against the use of external force in matters of Religion divers of them are intended against the Pagan or Heretical powers oppressing the truth others against over-rigorous severities and extremities towards some persons under errour some were the expressions of those who were themselves abetters of Schism as Socretes was and there are some few expressions of others who were men of greater affection than consideration whose words may be over-ballanced both by reason and other Authorities SECT III. Of Ecclesiastical Constitutions about things scrupled 1. That such things which some persons scruple oppose and dispute against may be practised without sin by them who discern and are well satisfied of their lawfulness is a thing that needeth not much proof For if this be denyed Christianity must be accounted a state of bondage where every mans mistaken apprehensions would lay an obligation on the Consciences of others Wherefore in that Case when some Christians judged it unlawful to eat all sorts of meat S Paul allowed him who discerned his liberty to make use thereof Rom. 14.2 6. Yet because both in that Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans and in 1 Cor. 10. he giveth command to Christians to beware of grieving and offending their brethren the general case of Scandal in things Indifferent will in this place come under some consideration concerning which it may be sufficient to observe three things 2. First That the offending others prohibited in those places by the Apostle consisted not in displeasing others only but in performing such actions which tended to occasion some to fall from Christianity or others not to embrace it This sense of these Precepts Right of the Church c. 4. is observed as a thing manifest by Mr. Thorndike Thus S. Paul declareth the using liberty about things offered to Idolls so as to be a stumbling block to the weak 1 Cor. 8 9. to consist in emboldning them towards the Idol v. 10. whereby the weak Brother perisheth v. 11. And though the Apostle sometimes mentioneth this sin of offending others under the name of grieving them Rom. 14.15 he thereby intendeth an occasioning them to disgust the Christian Religion and therefore in the same verse commandeth Destroy not him with thy meat c. And when he recommendeth in this Case the pleasing of others it is in designing their profit that they may be saved 1 Cor. 10.33 Yet it must be further acknowledged that according to the expressions of other Scriptures it is a sinful scandal or giving offence when any one by the use of his liberty doth knowingly induce others to the commiting any sin being under no obligation to determine this use of his liberty for according to S. Hierome that is scandal where a man dicto vel facto occasionem rui nae cuiquam dederit 3. But the meer displeasing or grieving others about matters indifferent is not always a sin for our Saviour himself greatly grieved his Apostles when he told them that one of them should betray him but as yet concealed the man Mat. 26.21 22. Yet Christianity will not allow a morose and pievish temper but directeth men to be loving amicable and kind and to be ready to please others where duty or prudence do not otherwise engage us but out of
that such Confirmation with Imposition of hands might be restored 9. But it remaineth to be inquired how the Church can certifie the persons confirmed by the sign of Imposition of hands of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them For the answering of which waving other considerations I shall observe two things First that as this imposition of hands is a testimony of admitting persons to a higher rank of Christian Professors who ratifie their baptismal Covenant by their own action intimating also an approbation of this profession it includeth the power of the Keys whereby the Officers of the Church are enabled by Gods authority to declare particularly his favour and gracious goodness to them who embrace the conditions of Christianity and to direct them thereunto and to this purpose was Imposition of hands on the Penitents at divers times used in the ancient Church And to testifie Gods gracious acceptance either by our words or actions of mens undertaking the exercise of Christianity is a thing greatly different from the tendering the divine grace of Gods Covenant as exhibited by any sign as a means to convey the same which is the proper nature of a Sacrament 10. Secondly This Imposition of hands is a sign of a Benediction in Gods name from the Officer of Gods Church The Levites and especially the Priests under the Law were required to bless the people in the name of God Deut. 10.8 1 Chron. 23.13 which blessing was performed in a way of benedictory prayer or supplication Numb 6.23 and this blessing in Gods name was a testimony of Gods giving his blessing to them supposing them not to render themselves uncapable thereof Num. 6.27 The external testimony of their general blessing all the people Targ. Jonath in Num. 6.23 was most probably by lifting up their hands towards them as is declared by one of the Chaldee Paraphrasts and is observed by Baronius Baron Annal Eccl. An. 34. n. 220. and we have an instance of this Rite attending the Priestly benediction Lev. 9.22 and our Saviour made use of the same Luk. 24.50 But in their solemn particular benedictions in the Old Testament they used Imposition of hands of which we have an example Gen. 48.14.16 in Jacobs blessing the Sons of Joseph this Rite was also used in their Ordination of their Elders and the constant use hereof in the particular benedictions by persons of great eminency among the Jews is reasonably esteemed the cause why the Jews brought little Children to Christ that he might put his hands on them and pray Mat. 19.13 Gret in Mat. 19.13 And from the frequent practice of this Rite Junius and Tremellius have ventured to admit a Paraphrase into their Translation concerning the Priestly benediction wherein they express the use of Imposition of hands in Num. 6.27 which can only be allowed concerning particular benedictions The end and design of imposition of hands in benediction 〈…〉 voc 〈◊〉 Jâ—n in Num. 6. c. 7. is declared by Ravanellus to be in testimony of the help favour and grace of God to be given to him who receiveth imposition of hands and Junius saith by this sign they were to testifie to the people Gods grace which are Phrases much like those in this Prayer at Confirmation in our Liturgy Yet this Rite was only a sign of Gods favour in this use with respect to the Benediction or Prayer for that person supposing and hoping him to be duly qualified for the receiving the benefit therein desired and therefore is of no Sacramental nature 11. Now â—lessing including nothing Ceremonial and peculiar to the Law and the Ministry of the Old Testament is very suitable to the Gospel which is in an especial manner a Dispensation of Blessing And this benediction or praying 〈◊〉 for Gods blessing was the 〈…〉 designed in this Apostolical 〈◊〉 of hands with prayer and from their time this use hath been continued in the Christian Church as hath been shewed and it would be a strange unreasonable and uncharitable thing if those who come to renew their baptismal Covenant might not receive the Churches blessing in Gods name with prayer for their Christian growth and perseverance And the dignity of Office in the Church chiefly giving authority to bless according to that rule of the Apostle Heb. 7.7 without all contradiction the less is blessed of the greater this solemn benediction at Confirmation hath thereupon been justly reserved to the Bishop or chief Officer of the Church by whom alone it was performed in the time of S. Cyprian and S. Hierom. 12. Confirmation in our use thereof is called by Bishop Whitgift Bishop Whitg Defence p. 785. Eccl. Pol. l. 5. Sect. 66. The Bishops benediction by laying on of hands by Mr. Hooker This special benediction the Rite or Ceremony of Confirmation and when Confirmation was restored in Scotland in the fourth Article of the Assembly of Perth it was declared concerning children who had been catechized that the Bishop should bless them with prayer for the increase of their knowledge and the continuance of Gods heavenly grace with every one of them And the ancient Confirmation was accounted a Benediction by Tertullian Tertul. de Bapt. c. 8. Conc. Eliber c. 77. and a Benediction of the Bishop by the Council of Elvira And since the Gospel-dispensation is a Ministration of Blessing and the great blessing of the Gospel is to receive the promise of the Spirit Gal. 3.14 This benedictory prayer upon a solemn occasion for the grace and strength of that Spirit was suitably accompanied in the practice of the Apostles and the Christian Church with the ancient and proper token of benediction the Imposition of hands 13. Presbyt Except p. 29. But it hath been urged that the Articles of our Church declare imposition of hands in Confirmation to be a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice and that Confirmation hath no visible sign appointed by God Artic. 25. and therefore Imposition of hands cannot therein certifie children of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them and thus contradictions are injuriously imposed upon the Church The words of the Article to which they refer are these Article 25. Those five commonly called Sacraments that is to say Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimony and Extreme Vnction are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures but yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lords Supper for that they have not any visible sign or Ceremony ordained of God The sense of the former part of which words is That the Church of Rome accounting Confirmation Penance Orders and Extreme Vnction for proper Sacraments of the Gospel their errour herein proceedeth from their corrupting those things which were practised by the Apostles but their esteeming Marriage to be a Sacrament is a mis-representing a state of life allowed in the
Scripture to be a Gospel-Sacrament 14. The latter clause of those words of the Article do manifestly alike deny Confirmation and Ordination to have any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God or that God hath not appointed in them any such properly Sacramental sign as Baptism and the Lords Supper hath For in both these the Imposition of hands is immediately a representation of a benediction and of being thereby received into a higher degree among Christians by the ministerial power of the Church and though further grace from God is needful in this higher degree and humble and devout persons may receive grace from God suitable to whatsoever state he calleth them yet grace is in these cases to be expected in the use of Prayer and from the Promises of Gods assistance to and presence with his people and his Ministry but not immediately from God by the use of Imposition of hands as an outward sign whereby that grace is directly exhibited and conveyed and moreover proper Sacraments are seals of Gods whole Covenant and means whereby he conveyeth both pardoning and satisfying grace And I further add that the acknowledging the sign of Imposition of hands in Confirmation not to have any divine institution or immediate command hindreth not its being of Apostolical practice and that in the use thereof we may both follow the example of the Apostles and certifie Gods favour and gracious goodness to persons confirmed according as is above expressed SECT IV. Of the Ring in Marriage And the Conclusion 1. The Ring was by the old Nonconformists called a Sacramental Sign and a new Sacrament and others since have expressed some fear lest the use of these words with the delivery of the Ring In Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost should favour them who account Marriage a Sacrament But if this was an intimation of a Sacrament a last Will and Testament beginning In the Name of God c. and being signed and sealed must be accounted a Sacrament And even among the Romanists who esteem Marriage for a Sacrament the Ring is not fixed upon for the sign or matter thereof but some fix upon the persons contracting others upon all those words and actions whereby consent is signified others as Estius speaketh doubt which of these to close with Bellarm. de Matrim Sacr. c. 6. and Bellarmine admitteth them both 2. Now though Marriage be in some sense a Religious Constitution as having its original institution from God yet both the nature of this society and the end of it speak it a civil state of Gods appointment even as the state of Government and Subjection is and therefore as other civil contracts are established by words of consent ordinarily attended with real signs or tokens as with us some Livery and Seisin is used in the passing over an Estate and by the general consent of the World an Earnest attendeth ordinary Bargains so by a large consent of Nations hath a Ring been thought fit to establish the Matrimonial contract as a pledge or earnest thereof Whence it was an ordinary custom among the Jews to use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ring of Espousing the manner of its use among the modern Jews is expressed by Buxtorfe in his Synagogua Judaica Syn. Jud. c. 28. and the ancient practice thereof is mentioned in the Talmud in Kiddushin Buxt Lex Radbin in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among the ancient and laudable customs of the Roman Empire Tertul. Apol c. 6. Tertullian reckoneth this for one that women then wore gold only on that one finger quem sponsus oppignorasset annulo pronubo where the Bridegroom had put the pledge of the Matrimonial Ring Baron An. 57. n. 51. and Pamelius upon that place of Tertullian and Baronius also observeth the like use of the Ring to be expressed by Pliny to which purpose also are the words of Juvenal who describing Marriage saith Et digitis pignus fortasse dedisti Juven Sat. 6. and Theosebius in Photius calleth the Ring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conjoyner of conjugal society But though the use of this Rite in Marriage was very ancient Tertul. de Idolatr c. 16. even among the Pagan Nations Tertullian assureth us it was no part of their Paganism saith he Neque annulus neque conjunctio maritalis de alicujus idoli honore descendit but this pledge and other common earnests were prudently used long before the time of Christ and are still continued under Christianity 3. And that the principal use of this Rite is under the Christian state continued to be an earnest of this Matrimonial Contract is not only manifest from those ancient ritual words mentioned by Durantus Durandus and many others Annulo suo subarravit me sibi Dominus but from S. Augustin Aug. Tr. 2. in 1. Ep. Johan who calleth it arram sponsi the pledge or earnest of the Husband and the same intent hereof is expressed in several testimonies cited in Gratians Decretum c. 30. q. 5. c. nostrates Foeminae V. Gloss in c. 27. q. 2. si quis And in our Liturgy the giving and receiving a Ring is declared to be a pledge of the Vow and Covenant made between the persons who enter upon this state of Marriage And whereas these words In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost have some relation to the pledge of Wedlock by the Ring in our Office of Marriage as it is a testimony of consent to the Covenant of Marriage the sense and design thereof is to express thus much That this Contract of Marriage in the Church is undertaken with respect to the Rules of the Christian Doctrine and the Institution of God concerning Marriage and by Authority therefrom and in Subjection thereunto and that by reason of this institution the expressed consent of the persons contracting must stand firm and inviolable and therefore it is fitly and solemnly declared to be In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost in that being now joyned together by God no man can put them asunder 4. But besides this principal end of the Ring the delivery thereof did also include a giving authority to the Wife to command and take care of the goods of the house and the provisions which the ancient Romans usually sealed and hence the Ring given in Marriage was a Seal-ring Paed. l. 3. c. 11. Thus Clemens Alexandrinus calleth it a Ring of Gold given to the Woman but not for ornament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to set a seal upon what requireth safe custody and in the same Chapter he saith that the care of the house is fitly committed to the Wife and those who have no wives may use the Seal-ring themselves So he expresseth this ancient usage of giving a Seal-ring which may also not improbably be designed in the comprehensiveness of Tertullians language Tertull. ad Vxor l. 2. c 9. by his Phrase of
from Suetonius Sueton. in Tiberio n. 36. who declareth that Tiberius commanding all Jews to depart from Rome forced them Religiosas vestes comburere to burn their garments which they used in their Religious services which at Rome could be none other than their Synagogue Worship or School Assemblies Phil. de Cherubim and Philo Judaeus speaketh of their attendance thereupon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arrayed in white apparel Phil. de Vit. Contempl And declareth the same concerning their Religious Feasts 12. A third instance is their practices and injunctions of decent gestures in their Religious Assemblies At the reading of the Law Neh. 8.5 Ezra opened the Book in the sight of all the people and when he opened it all the people stood up And when they praised and gave glory to God the Levites commanded the people Neh. 9.5 stand up and bless the Lord your God for ever and ever 13. A last instance I shall here give is in the admission of their chief Proselytes or Members of the Jewish Church from amongst the Gentiles where besides Circumcision which God particularly enjoined in this very Gase Ex. 12.48 and Sacrifice whereby they declared themselves professedly to communicate with the Temple Service and to be partakers of the Altar Selden de Syn. l. 1. c. 3. they also made use of washing or a kind of Baptism in initiating these Proselytes Hor. Hebr. Mat. 3.6 of which we have a large account in divers modern Authors This rite among the ancient Jews did principally express the defilement and pollution of the Gentile World which could alone be cleansed by undertaking the true Religion and the right service of God And though there might be some rational ground for the expediency of this practice because washing was under the law of frequent use in many particular Cases of uncleanness as being a means appointed for their cleansing yet neither from hence nor from Moses sprinkling the Israelites to confirm Gods Covenant to them Ex. 24.8 which place the Jewish Writers do much urge though that action was not performed with water but with the bloud of the Covenant which had water mixed therewith Heb. 9.19 do contain any special command of God that washing the Proselytes should be a rite attending their Circumcision nor do we find that when Abraham and his Family received Circumcision that any such Attendant rite was joined therewith And yet it hath been frequently acknowledged that our Saviour chusing washing or Baptism to be the initiative rite under the Gospel did shew thereby some allowance and approbation of this way of admission under the Law 14. Buxt Syn. Jud. c 5. c. And it is manifest from Buxtorf Synagoga Judaica that the Jewish practice did receive divers other Synagogal Rites even such whereof some were questionable and doubtful and other manifestly vain and ridiculous But even these miscarriages under the degeneracy of their Religion cannot render those other observances unallowable which have so considerable testimonies of their approbation in the holy Scriptures And thus in their Synagogue Worship from the instances I have mentioned to which more might be added we have evidence of the lawful use of external Rites which may conduce to preserve the order of Church Society to the distinction and Ornament of Ministers reverend behaviour in the service of God and some expression of solemnity in the sacramental admission into the Church 15. Thirdly We may consider the natural worship among the Jews or Hebrews or their general Religious profession which was neither appropriated to their Synagogues or Schools Bux Syn. Jud. c. 2. where they were ordinarily Circumcised as Buxtorf observeth nor to their publick Ceremonial or Temple worship where divers instances may be produced 16. First in the taking an Oath Abrahams Servant used the Rite of putting his hand under his Masters thigh which Aben Ezra observed to be also a Custom among the Indians Nehemiah upon the like occasion did shake his lap desiring God so to shake out every man from his house and his labour who performed not that promise Petit. Var. lect l. 1. c. 16. Fag in Gh. Par. Ex. 23.1 Exceptâ—ex Hom. Chrys de Juram Tom. 6. Fr. Duc. Neh. 5.12 13. At other times lifting up the hand was used in that solemn and Religious invocation Gen. 14.22 And it hath been observed that it was an ordinary Rite among the Jews in taking an Oath to lay their hand upon the Book of the Law as the ancient Christians even in S. Chrysostomes time laid their hand upon the Book of the Gospel But he must be satisfied with very little evidences who thinketh that he hath found a divine institution for these observations which are only outward signs of Religious invocation as our words are and therefore such expressive signs so far as expediency and due solemnity shall require may be lawfully used though they be not particularly determined by a Divine commmand 17. Secondly we may observe Rites of Memorial Thus we not only read of Samuel setting up a stone as a Monument of Gods praise and a token of remembrance that he had helped them 1. Sam. 7.12 but Laban and Jacob erected a heap to be a solemn memorial and testimony of their Oath Gen. 31.46 47. and when Joshua made a Covenant with the people of Israel to serve the Lord he set up a stone under the Oak by the Sanctuary of the Lord to be a witness and memorial of their duty and engagement Jos 24.26 27. 18. To these might be added the use of sackcloath and ashes as a testimony of humiliation and repentance the use of imposition of hands in their ordinary benediction which also our Saviour practised and I shall in another Chapter shew that the Ring in the contract of Marriage was used among the Jews And yet none of these things were enjoined in the Law of Moses further than what concerneth the Priestly benediction of Aaron with hands lifted up which some conceive to be a rite appointed in the Law 19. And from what I have hitherto observed it may be reasonably concluded that it is no encroaching upon or opposing the Authority of God if some indifferent and expedient things be determined and received in the Church as things useful but not as Divine Sanctions And he who will deny the lawfulness hereof in the Christian Church must also assert and prove that the coming of Christ hath deprived his Church of a very considerable part of that liberty and authority which the Jewish Church always possessed But against the rashness of any such positions the following Sections will be a sufficient defence SECT III. Shewing Ecclesiastical Constitutions particularly concerning Ceremonial Rites to be warranted by the Apostolical Doctrine and practice 1. The second main argument is deduced from the Apostles practice and doctrine Now though what they appointed in the Church about any matters external cannot be easily proved to be determined by humane prudence and
Ecclesiastical Authority because they were so wonderfully inspired and guided by the holy Spirit yet if it can be shewed that the Apostles themselves appointed external Rites attendant on the service of God which were of an alterable and mutable nature this will manifest that the use of such things is well consistent with the Gospel worship and thence it will follow that the Christian Church hath liberty as well as the Jewish Church had to determine such observations since God hath give no special command to abridge that liberty Here I shall consider 2. 1 The holy kiss or kiss of Charity It was a common friendly salutation for men to kiss each other both among the Jews and in other Eastern Countries as hath been observed from Xenophon and Herodotus and was also used in the Western parts of the Empire in the time of Tiberius But both S. Paul Rom. 16.16 and and S. Peter 1. Pet. 5.18 required the practice of this holy kiss as a peculiar Christian Rite and observation but when and how it was used we must discover from the relation of the ancient Christian Writers That it was used at their publick Assemblies at the time of their solemn Prayers Grot. in Rom. 16. c. 16. is proved by Grotius from the testimonies of Justin Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian who calleth it signaculum orationis the seal of Prayer and speaking of it as it was their ordinary expressive attestation of Unity Peace Tertul. de Orat. c. 14. and Love he saith Quae oratio cum divortio Sancti sâ—uli integra What Prayer can be perfect which is separated from the holy kiss Cassand Liturg. c. 39. And Cassander hath evidenced from S. Austin Innocent and divers other particular Authors and ancient Offices that it was especially used at the time of the holy Communion sometimes before but for the most part after the Consecration of the elements and before their distribution by which Ceremony Christians expressed their consent to those administrations and their love to each other and of this kiss at the Lords Supper Calvin supposeth S. Paul to speak Calv. in 1 Cor. 16. â—0 when he commandeth the Corinthians to greet one another with an holy kiss Indeed several modern Ritualists being willingly so short sighted as to discern no further than the dusky and false light of the Romish Decretals doth discover do ascribe the use of the kiss 〈◊〉 the Communion to a later original some from Leo the second others from Innocent the first but this appeareth to be a fond and vain imagination because this Custom was not only mentioned by S. Chrysostome but evidently referred to by the Laodicean Council Conc. Laod. Can. 19. Just Mart. Ap. 2. and is also expressed by Jestin Martyr in his Apology written within less than an hundred years after the Apostolical Epistles of S. Paul and S. Peter Yet that this was an external mutable Rite is so far agreed upon and acknowledged as that it is generally disused because through the vanity of mens minds it was discovered at length to promote impurity and obscenity rather than holiness and Christian love And the Romish Custom introduced instead hereof of kissing the tabellam pacis or the Table of Saints Pictures is quite another thing from the Apostolical Rite and cannot be excused from superstition from the relation it beareth to their Doctrine of the Adoration of Saints And if we enquire how this ancient use of the holy kiss was most ordinarily practised it is manifest from the testimony of the Author of the Constitutions Const Apost l. 8. c. 11. concerning the more early times of Christianity and from Amalarius describing its use about 800. Years ago Amalar. de Deccl Offic. l. 3. c. 32. that it was not promiscuously used by men and women towards each other but separately and distinctly by men towards one another and by women among themselves alone 3. 2. Their Agapae or Feasts of Charity which were appointed in part for the relief of the poor Zonar in Conc. Trul. 74. Gang. 11. Chrys in 1 Cor. but especially to express continue and increase Christian love and fellowship which is also one great design of the Lords Supper were in and after the Apostles times used either immediately before as some affirm concerning some Churches or immediately after it as others assert and which was the more general practice and even in the places of publick Assemblies That they were celebrated at the same time and place with the Lords Supper hath been usually observed and collected from 1. Cor. 11.20 23. and from Act. 2.42 46. and from thence appeareth to have been used as an Ecclesiastical Rite The use of these Feasts of Charity was mentioned with approbation by S. Jude v. 12. and according to some Greek Copies by S. Peter 2 Pet. 2.13 and amongst the ancient Writers by Ignatius Ep. ad Smyr Tertullian Apol. c. 39. Clemens Alexand. Paedag l. 2. c. 1. Orig. Cont. Celsum l. 1. Conc. Gangr c. 11. and by S. Chrysostom Augustine and divers others some placing them as the Passover was eaten before the Lords Supper others comparing them to the Jewish Feasts eaten after the Passover But when these Feasts of Charity became greatly abused the Canons both of Provincial and general Councils Conc. Laodic c. 28.3 Carth. 30. Trul. 74. excluded them from the publick places of Church Assemblies and as Baronius observeth they were abolished in Italy by S. Ambroses Authority as they were also not long afterwards in Africa by S. Augustine and the other Bishops of the Carthaginian Province Baron an 377. n. 14 Aug. Ep. 64. and they became generally disused though some appearances thereof may possibly be discerned in later times in the Communion upon Maundy Thursday in divers Churches and in the practice of the Greek Church upon the day of the Resurrection or Easter Day Cassand Liturg. c. 4. when as Cassander relateth after the holy Communion allatis in Ecclesiam epulis communiter convivantur they have a common Banquet brought into the Church of which they all partake 4. But against that part of this observation that the Agapae were anciently joined with the holy Communion it may be objected Albasp Obj. lib. 1. Obj. 18. that Albaspinus doth on purpose undertake to prove that in Tertullians time the Agapae and the Eucharist were not observed together but that the former was celebrated at night from Tertul Apol. c. 39. and the latter in the Morning from Tertul. lib. 2. ad Vxor c. 5. and de Coron Mil. c. 3. But in answer to this we may consider that in that very observation Albaspinus himself admitteth with a Non inficias iverim that the Agapae were in the time of the Apostles celebrated with the Eucharist and concerning the time of Tertullian he neither undertaketh to prove that there were no Agapae in the Morning nor no Communion in the Evening for those very words of Tertullian de