Catechisme of which he knowes I spake And then what truth can be in his parenthesis unlesse it be only this that these are still retained in our Books which they have joyned to condemn though they be not retained in their offices but solemnly ejected by them Such equivocal answers or responses as these he knowes from what oracles they were wont to be delivered and therefore should not be imitated Sect. 12. The Diatribists change of my words his causlesse praise of himself and censure of others HIS 14th § is somewhat of the same making for when I spake of that deeper knowledge of some which was some degree above the vulgar ignorance and yet was observable to be impatient of sound doctrine to be ready to imbrace any thing that was novel and contrary to the ancient faith and Principles he answers that the impatience of sound doctrine and readiness to imbrace any thing that is novel is not to be found in those of deep or sound knowledge But why should he there insert the word sound can he imagine that I spake of those of sound knowledge when I spake of impatience of sound doctrine T was visible enough that I spake of those which while they lesse seemed to want such helps as Christmasse services and sermons to teach them the sound doctrine of Christ did yet most really need them to cure the vanity of their own minds and their itch of any thing that was novel By this t is also manifest how little temptation he had to break out into those Eulogies of himself and his friends to which certainly I never constrained him by those words that belonged not to the Pastors but only to their auditors who when they have attained to some measure of knowledge above the more ignorant are yet experimented to be very fickle and apt to fall off into new doctrines However let him not flatter himself as he doth that those that ejected these Festivities under pretence of Reforming abuses of superstition and profanenesse are the men only or chiefly that propugne and maintain sound doctrine when as he goes on very glibly those that were the greatest favourers of those Festivals are fallen into Arminianisme c. or do little appear to maintain the truth I wonder what a Pharisee could have said more in his solemnest Magnificat He forsooth and such as he are the men that only or chiefly propugn and maintain sound doctrine and who can doubt it when he hath thus affirmed it of himself and all others are but as this Publicane for so this new style of Arminian bears proportion with that ancient and whosoever will not think as this Diatribist doth that Festivals are forbidden in the 2d and the 4th Commandments that will favour slavish fear or mercenary obedience or suspect that grace may be received in vain must presently fall under that condemnation and then the best that can be said of them is that they doe little appear to maintain the truth Sect. 13. His 2d change of my words Gedeons golden Ephod not appliable to Feasts SO again when I had mentioned the designs of this solemnity no other then to teach us what we have received in Christ and assist us to render God a pious publick acknowledgement of it He is pleased not to understand this but to interpret it contrary to the express words of the design in the first instituters of this piece of service to Christ Jesus And to what purpose was this change why to make the example of Gedeon's golden Ephah applicable to it in the making of which saith he though Gedeon's design was very fair to leave a monument of his victory yet it proved a snare to him and his house and all Israel From which notable example no doubt it follows that every Festival or what ever else is designed as a publick pious acknowledgement of the Christians thankfulness to God is to be lookt on as a snare to all the people of God and so upon all reasons of piety to be abolished And there were no way of resisting this conclusion thus inferred if our common notions or Logick had not warned us that particular premises would never induce a conclusion and that examples are not always argumentative For then indeed the Lords day which is supposed to have been designed for all these good ends must upon the same account be abolisht also Sect. 14. Strictures on his 16th §. Our Festivals unfitly compared with the Romish How observation of Festivals may be a duty of the 5 t Commandment The fourth Commandment no way contrary to Christian Festivals Veniall sinnes All mistakes not sinnes Chemnitius not producible against me HIS 16th § is long in making good his charge of Superstition and Will-worship against this Festival And it is certain that I have been large enough on these subjects already as far as any thing that he could suggest appeared to have the least force either against ceremonies in general or particularly this of Festivals and therefore I shall not still bind my self and the Reader to that ungratefull penance of drawing the same Saw for ever Yet if any thing shall now be afresh objected I shall not omit to take notice of it As 1. When to free it from all appearance of Will-worship I say that those that retain the usage observe it in obedience to the Laws of the Church he hath great displeasure to this 1. Because I ought first to have proved that they which instituted that Festival had a Lawfull power to do it adding that the Papists may use the same argument for observation not onely of their Holy days but of their invocation of Saints adoration of images and the Mass it self But to this I answer 1. That my not proving of this was founded in my supposing it And the reason of that supposition elsewhere competently explained that as Magistrates in generall so particularly the Governors of a Church have an investiture of power from Christ to the Apostles whose successors they are to ordain and institute such circumstances of the publick worship of God as are times and place and gesture and the like in order to decency uniformity and the benefit of their Churches And 2. That this Diatribist can again think fit to compare this with the Papists observing their own holy days c. is interpretable as a far greater kindness to them then I have ever been guilty of For the plain inference is this 1. The Church may command in lawfull things therefore it may as well do so in unlawfull 2dly There is no more unreasonablenesse in besainting all those that are gotten into the Romish Legend and Calendar and consecrating several days to the commemorating of them then in commemorating the birth of Christ himself 3dly It is as lawful to invoke all the Romish Saints as publikely to pray to and praise Christ on the 25th of December 4thly It is as safe to adore images and the very bread in the Masse as to adore
that were contradiction in adjecto but there is a wide difference betwixt forbidden and voluntary as wide as between unlawfull and lawfull all being lawfull which is not forbidden else there were not universal truth in the Apostles maxime that sin is a transgression of the Law I shall convince what I say by this plain instance Theophylact saith of many men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they exceed or transcend many of the commandments I demand Do they offend and sin and are nocent in so doing or did that holy man think they did T is evident he did not for he after his manner borrows from and transcribes Chrysostome and in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many he reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spiritual They saith he do many things with desire and appetite and manifest it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that they do even exceed the commands It appears therefore that to these two holy and learned men it seemed not what to Mr. C. it seems that there is contradiction in adjecto in affirming voluntary and uncommanded worship to be innocent A multitude of the like testimonies are put together in the Annotat. on Col. 2. which may be sufficient to justifie me from singularity that I discern not the phansied seeming contradiction But this affirmation again of the Diatribist will not want its proofs four that pretend to that title are here annexed For 1. saith he It 's expressely against the 2d. commandment which forbids all worship not expresly commanded by God I must not complain of my eyes or other faculties because they are the best that God hath given me but I may wish for such supplies as Mr. C. hath met with for else I am sure I shall never see the least glimpse of that which he mentions so expressely out of the 2d. Commandment What is expressely against the 2d. Commandment should me thinks oppose some expresse words in it and then it must follow that there are such expresse words there which forbid all worship not commanded by God and this not onely as by worship are meant the sorts and species of worship but the very accessaries and ceremonies of worship and all the expressions and emanations of the inward fulness of the religious heart But my Optick Glasse will not afford me any such prospect in the 2d. Commandement All sorts of graven images and such like I have there a fair view of and an express severe interdict of worshiping them but for all kinds and all circumstances of worship which are not commanded kneeling prostrating the body to the invisible true God the times and degrees of ardency of worship the abstinencies self-denyals atendant on it sure there is nothing said expressely there either to command or forbid them and for any general comprehensive phrase that can rationally contein a prohibition of all which is not commanded I can say no more but that the first verse of Genesis or any other in the Bible hath as much of this to my eye as the 2d. Commandment The business we are all this while upon is the discovering of causes of mistakes and therefore I must be excused again upon the score of the example before me if I once more attempt to shoot my shaft and by this first argument pass my conjecture of the cause of the prefacers mistake in this matter It is the solemn practise of some Casuists to reduce all sins in the world to some or other of the Commandments of the Decalogue wherin I am not sure that they have aim'd aright for separate gluttony and drunkenness as sure they may be separated and yet continue to be sins from some accidental consequences of them as wasting of health which may assign either of them to the 6t. Commandment and the like and you will hardly tell whither to reduce the intemperate use of the creature And so for that sort of lying or false speaking which is no way hurtful or designed to be hurtful to the neighbour and many the like instances might be given But on this I insist not with any concernment but leave it to prudent consideration what necessity there is that all laws natural and positive divine should be reduced to one or more of these 10. Commandments This is not that which I meant to say but farther to offer it to consideration whether it be not visible that those Casuists which have erred in judging the unlawfullness of some things have not easily been induced to reduce them to some or other of the Commandments as offences against the affirmative or negative part and if not against the words or sense yet against the Analogie of it According to this practice it is most necessarily consequent that he that hath been possest of the unlawfullness of ceremonies and worship uncommanded and hath not so far considered as to rectifie his judgement in that matter by weighing this one thing that whatsoever is not forbidden is lawful not whatsoever is not commanded is unlawful must whensoever he shall write cases of conscience or comment on the Decalogue reduce this to some interdict under one of the ten heads and all the other nine renouncing it force it in by some appearance of analogie to the 2d. Commandment And then it falls out that so many men disaffected to the Government and Ceremonies of the Church of England have written on the Commandments that it can be no more matter of wonder that uncommanded worship should be crowded in to the 2d. Commandment and there long agoe imbibed by the Diatribist and never questioned since then that Mr. Brightman should find the Church of England of this age among the seven Cities of Asia in St Johns time or that Mr. Parker should make the using the cross in Baptisme a breach of every one of the ten Commandments and branch a book in folio into the Atheisme as I remember I am sure the Idolatrie the c. till at last the concupiscence of the Cross And then I shall but ask this Diatribist whether he can heartily believe that the use of that ceremonie was really guilty of all those several transgressions of the Law of God and if he shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beseech him to examine over again his own affirmation here 1. Whether any one man hath said so fully what here he hath that voluntary and uncommanded worship is expressely against the 2d. Commandment they that onely reduce it thither fall short of him 2. Whether they that have thought fit to refer it thither by reduction have produced any cogent or satisfactory reason for so doing and the next time he affirmes this from them annex the reason such as may justifie a most rigid conclusion to the consciences of all others who may be concerned in it either in order to their own practice or the judging of others And I shall not farther exagitate this his first proof The 2d proof is the same we have had twice already for the asserting
be many acts of worship many circumstances of worship yea and many heights of Christian heroical virtue which may bear proportion with worship that are not under obligation from any particular command of Gods and so remain to be acts of the will or choise of man which are perfectly lawfull acceptable yea some highly rewardable by God and so far from the guilt which Mr. C. affixes of high indignity or affront to the divine Majestie What he addes of the simple word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they are but twice apiece used in the Book of Wisdome and alway in an ill notion which saith he is but little to the credit of the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might sure have been spared it being as certain and visible to him that the same word is used by St James c. 1. 27. in as good a sense as could be wisht with the epithets of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pure and undefiled before God added to it and v. 26. for the profession of Christianity though for want of actions bridling the tongue and the like that becomes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vain And as plain that the word is in it self equally applicable to the true as to the false indifferently to any religion to St Pauls religion among the Jews Act. 26. 5. the strictest sect of our religion to the worship of Angels Col. 2. 18. and so to the worship of Idols in the Book of Wisdome which yet can no more tend to the disadvantage of the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when that is not terminated on any prohibited object then the use of the Latine cultus sometimes for the worship of false Gods can prejudge voluntarius cultus voluntary worship when either the object is not specified or the mention of the one true God is added to it It being confest and supposed by both parties in this contest that the simple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or worship it self is not culpable save onely when the other part of the composition the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the interposition of the will or as he will style it the devise or appointment of man hath an influence upon it Sect. 3. His entrance on the view of Col. 2. answered The difference betwixt Commands of Magistrates and imposition of dogmatizers What t is which is said to have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 HIS 3d § is his entrance on the view of Col. 2. where onely the word Will-worship is to be found and in setting down his grounds of interpreting it 1. He citeth Beza and BP Davenant whose words are presently answered by adverting to the distinction formerly given between the essentials and circumstantials the parts and the ceremonies of worship 2dly He pretends to discover a mistake in me in that I observe from v. 22. that St Paul speaks not of commands but doctrines not of the prohibition of the Magistrate but of false teachers imposing them as the commands of God Whereas saith he the Apostle speaks expressely of these impositions that they were after the Commandments and doctrines of men v. 8. after the traditions of men to worship God by the observation of them Of which words of his if there be any shadow of force in them by way of exception against me the meaning must be that the Apostle there speaks of the commands or prohibitions of Magistrates in things of themselves perfectly indifferent and censures those commands under the style of Will-worship But then this hath no degree of truth in it for 1. The matter of the commands is no lawful matter but either the worship of Angels and that is criminous as the worshipping of a creature or the reducing of antiquated rites of Judaisme which ought not to be reduced being once cancelled and nailed to the cross of Christ 2. The commands were not commands of Magistrates but of men which had no authority to prescribe any thing especially so contrary to the doctrine which the Apostles had planted among them the Christian liberty from the Judaical yoke 3. The manner of imposing them was quite distant from that of the Magistrates giving laws Ecclesiastical or Civil those are by way of Canon as of things indifferent in order to decency and the like without ever pretending them to be in themselves necessary as commanded by God these are imposed as from God when they are not so and that is the known sin of dogmatizing to which I formerly applied the place And the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commands signifies no more then so being joyned with and explicated by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doctrines i. e. such things as false teachers require all men to do in obedience to God or as if they were now commanded by him when some of them as abstinencies c. having once been required by God are now abolisht by Christ and the other the worship of Angels though it pretend not ever to have been commanded but onely to be acceptable to God is clearly forbidden by him So that here is a palpable mistake in the Diatribist who observes them to be commands meaning as he must if he censureth or opposeth me commands of Magistrates and not onely doctrines of false teachers when indeed commands and doctrines are all one both joyned together to signifie these dogmatizers pretending the things which they taught to be in force by Divine command by virtue of the Law given to Moses and not onely such as would be accepted by God as of the worship of Angels I suppose was pretended by those false teachers For this is to be remembred here once for all that the seducers spoken of in that Chapter were the Gnostick hereticks who made up their Theologie of Judaical and heathenish additions to the Christian truth from the Jews they had many abstinences such as were now abolisht by Christ and those they imposed as commands of God when they were not and from the heathens the doctrine of the Aeones or Angels as creators of this inferior world and so such as might with Gods good liking be worshipt by us Lastly Those commands of theirs are not censured by the Apostle as acts of Will-worship or blamed or put under any ill character for being such any more then for being acts of humility which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 joyned with Will-worship in that place v. 22. but as intrenchments on that liberty purchased for them by the death of Christ v. 20. which had cancelled these Judaical ordinances to all that were dead with him i. e. to Christians and had turned all Daemon worship out of their hearts but had no way bound up the hands of his Apostles or their successors the Governors of the Church from instituting ceremonies or festivals among Christians When the Diatribist addes of Will-worship that it had a shew of wisdome but no more t is but a begging the question or if it pretend to be concluded from that text it is without
are clearly Davids last Will and Testament but the last words 2 Sam. 23. 1. are the last words of prophesie that he delivered it being evident that he spake many other words after that as appears in the Chapter and the Book following 1 Kin. and of his prophesies it is and not of his other words that it there follows the Spirit of the Lord spake by me Sect. 5. Col 2. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Placing worship Christian liberty Marriage The Glosses put on the commands of men HIS 5 t § is an examination of what I have said for the interpreting of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col 2. 22. This phrase I have thus rendred and paraphrased These commands of abstinencies Touch not taste not handle not v. 21. are all to destruction or destructive by the abuse of them i. e. by imposing them on Christians as commands of God now when they are abolisht by Christ and for this I thought I had produced sufficient authority to vindicate the interpretation from the censure of singularity the plain words of S. Angustine and S. Ambrose or whosoever it is that wrote the Comments which bear his name Sunt in interitum c. they are to destruction and eternal perdition to them that believe them necessary to salvation and sunt omnia in interitum corruptionem per abusionem c. they are all to destruction and corruption by abuse c. But without adverting to the commodiousnesse of the interpretation or the authority of those ancient Fathers or giving any answer to what is said to recommend this interpretation he is pleased to take a much easier way to ask some questions and offer some exceptions First he asks why I refuse our translation of those words To this question I answer by rendring my reasons 1. because I think this other preferrable and I doubt not but when the Diatribist findes it useful he will do the like in this or any other controversie 2dly because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot by any propriety of speech or analogy of the like phrase signifie are to perish but either in an active sense are to corruption as that in false teachers may denote corrupting or seducing of others to their herefie and particularly to those abominable sins which by detesting of marriage the Gnosticks brought in exprest often in these Epistles by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corruption or else in a neutral sense ad interitum to destruction 3dly Because though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may possibly signifie use as well as abuse yet it is as easily replyed that it signifies abuse as well nay more properly and frequently then use In the Bible it is an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 never used either in the verb or in the substantive but in this place but in other authors 't is vulgarly used in opposition to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Plutarch of Alcibiades the Lacedemonians rather abused then used him and in Apophtheg that great men have good and ill friends 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they use some and abuse others and many the like 4thly Because the Notion which the Diatribist from the civil Lawyers out of Estius gives of the Latin abusus is that of consuming use whereas it is both improbable that S. Paul should take it from the civil Law much more probable that he should take it in the sense in which we finde abusio sometimes among Divines for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abstinence or not using at all So Prosper de vit contempl l. 2. c. 22. veraciter abstinentes escarum non naturas sed concupiscentias damnent ac voluptates suas desiderati cibi vel potus abusione mortificent which sense also the words here would bear well enough and be a more punctual character of the Gnosticks abstinence from marriage by which they brought in all abominable villanies and if he did it would as fitly comply with mine as with his notion of it for thus it signifies abolition or wearing out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 usu attero obsolefacio and to that agrees Phavorinus rendring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Suidas by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destroying and then this would be the rendring these impositions of Touch not c. which were once in force under the Jewish state but now abolisht under Christ are thereby to destruction or to ruin of souls as when the Apostle tells them in one place of these ceremonies that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb 8. 13. nigh to vanishing away to abolition and upon that account in another place that if they look upon them as things still in force among Christians Christ shall profit them nothing But this I do not really think to be the notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because those that render it using generally apply it to the meats which are consumed by eating and by the way Oecumenius that understood it in this sense read it not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word which denotes casting out of excrements which yet most evidently belongs to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doctrines of abstinence not to meats and indeed the antecedent to which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all which referres is Touch not taste not handle not which denotes other abstinencies beside that of meats particularly that of marriage which these Gnosticks prohibited and taught to be abominable and that is not capable of this notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by using for sure marriage doth not perish by using And the like may be said of unclean things the leper the dead that Judaizers would not touch which yet did not perish were not consumed by using And though in the next place the Diatribist leave it indifferently betwixt meats add ordinances of abstaining which are contrary enough yet the notion of using is no way applicable to the latter for what the Diatribist sets for the interpretation of it now being out-dated they perish with the using without any spiritual advantage is sure very short it being evident by other places of Scripture that the imposing these out-dated observances is not only not advantageous but moreover hurtful those being as the Fathers generally resolve not only mortua dead and so profitlesse but also mortifera deadly destructive and sure that is the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to perishing or destruction whether it denote damnation it self or those horrible or unnatural sins and the seduction of the Gnosticks which certainly induce it In the 3d place he quarrels with my interpretation for supposing that these abstinencies were imposed and taught by the false teachers as divine obliging precepts whereas saith he there is little or nothing in the text to import that What will with him when produced against his sense and interests be accounted great I know not but that there is something in the text to incline it this way will soon be
he cites not In all reason this defect must be supplied by Salmeron who cited in the margent August lib. de verâ rel lib. 2. de doctr Christ c. 25. and Thomas 2a. 2 ae qu. 93. art 1. What place in Augustines book de vera relig it is to which he referres we have no direction and so are left to guesse that it is cap. 55. Non sit nobis religio in phantasmatibus nostris Melius est enim qualecumque verum quà m omne quicquid pro arbitrio fingi potest Let not our religion be placed in our fantasmes for any thing which is true is better then whatsoever can be feigned at our own pleasure And as to the truth of this position I give full consent that all fictitious false worship is to be avoided not only as he contents himself to say unfit to compare with true so I no where undertake to be advocate for any false or fictitious or fantastick religion The commemorating the birth of Christ on the 25th of December I hope is not such nor any Ceremony admitted into use in our Church The other place out of the 2d de doctr Christ c. 55. stands thus Having at the 20th Chapter defined Superstitiosum superstitious to be whatsoever was instituted by men for the making or worshipping of Idols and that either belonging to the worshipping any Creature or part of a Creature as God or to consulting or making any pacts with Devils c. and having fallen on the several sorts of divinations c. 20 21 22 23 24. he begins his 25th ch quibus ampuâ—atis atque eradicatis ab animo Christiano deinceps videndae sunt institutiones hominum non superstitiosae i. e. non cum daemonibus sed cum ipsis hominibus institutae the former being lopt off and eradicated from a Christians minde let us farther view such institutions of men as are not superstitious i. e. are not made with Devils but with men themselves And having added somewhat of such vain institutions which sure no way concern the matter now in hand he comes to those which are useful to humane society and resolves that such are not to be avoided by a Christian imò etiam quantum satis est intuenda memoriaeque retinenda but in a competent manner to be observed and retained and this how little it belongs to the present purpose to the proving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be here used in an ill sense is already so apparent that I need adde no word more to the clearing of it As for the place of Aquinas 2a. 2 ae qu. 93. art 1. It is the very same which long ago we considered in the former part of this Tract ch 3. § 3. n. 5. and to the view of it there presented I refer the reader finding nothing more in that whole place art 1. which was not there punctually considered unlesse it be a citation out of the Glosse Col. 2. quòd superstitio est quando traditioni humanae religionis nomen applicatur that it is superstition when the name of religion is applied to the tradition of men which words have nothing in them which I am not ready to acknowledge being sufficiently assured that dogmatizing is a sin and consequently that so good a name as religion ought not to be pretended for or applied to it What he addes by way of answer to my fourth reason hath I think nothing of moment in it but what hath oft been spoken to already unlesse it be that he saith he hath not observed any such difficulty or obscurity in that text Col 2. 20. c. but dares say the Doctors exposition makes the greatest obscurity that ever he met with But of this there is no disputing I must not expect that he shall acknowledge my interpretation to be clear when he dislikes it or discern the involutions or difficulties of that other which he hath espoused when if he did he were obliged to forsake it Sect. 12. The fifth reason vindicated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesychius corrected twise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adverbially 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesychius's Glossary concordant to th Scripture use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 5. 4. TO my fifth reason taken from Hesychius's rendring it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voluntary piety or worship and the notion which he had of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in composition to signifie that which a man did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voluntarily and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his own accord agreeably to which the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freewill-offerings are rendred by the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voluntary performances his answer is brief that this is no advantage to my cause for the words may both signifie well-devised worship in an ill sense And though in humane authors the derivatives and compounds of this word expresse the Freewillingnesse of the person yet that will not help the Doctor who doth not understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in respect to the willingnesse of the person in a commanded worship of God but voluntary worship i. e. worship not commanded by God but offered to him by the free will of man To this I reply 1. that I willingly confesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as capable of an ill sense as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. that when the worship is forbidden or false then being ill the voluntarinesse of it can infuse no goodnesse into it as when it is of it self good the uncommandednesse cannot make it ill And therefore 2dly this was not it on which I laid the weight only I thought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had not been so likely to hear ill with gainsayers as this other which I saw was fallen under great prejudice with some but rather that which followed of the other compounds of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifie no more but doing somewhat voluntarily or of their own accord without any necessity to doe it 3dly Then I say that acknowledging it my notion of the word to signifie worship not commanded by God the authority of Hesychius and the other Greek Glossaries which concur with or follow him is clear and home to confirm that to be the meaning of it If that which is said already be not sufficient to lay the parallel directly betwixt Will-worship and voluntary oblations or performances of things not commanded then adde 1. from Hesychius again that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voluntary proceeding from his own will and that sure is distant enough from the will or command of another The words in Hesychius are certainly false printed as much of that book is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It must questionlesse thus be mended either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or else in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adverbially for so Suidas fetcheth that word out of approved authors and which way soever it is the sense
opportunity but of some other preachers in other Churches where this Festival was not observed such as Andrew Rivet in the Low Countreys who as I have been informed constantly preacht on that day to his auditors which was a civility fit to be mentioned to those that will now perform that office on any day of the week rather then on that Sect. 10. Ejecting festivals Separation from the purest times even those of the Apostles Our Churches departure from Rome unjustly paralleld with the departure of sons from our Church MY 3d consideration was that the rasing this Festivity out of the Calendar is an act of separation from the Church of England and the universal Church of all ages especially of the first and purest times To this he answers by denyal of both parts Not the latter having proved as he saith that the first and purest ages of the Church did not observe it Not the former unlesse I yield that the Reformation of the Church of England was a division and separation from the Church of Rome or the reformation in Luthers time a separation from the Catholike Church as Papists say it was But for the former of these it is sufficient to reply by way of demand where it is that he hath so proved this of the first and purest ages not observing festivals that he can affirm it certain that this of disusing or laying them down is not separation from the Church of those ages Truly my eyes or my memory very much fail me or he hath not as yet proved it in any degree much lesse so demonstrated it that a Corollary deduced from thence and depending on that probation should deserve to be pronounced certain Nay sure there hath yet been no occasion offered him at least made use of by him to attempt so impossible a thing as is such a negative probation Of this I am sure that for this Festival and that other of Easter the reason must be the same and I have already made it as clear as the day that that was observed by the Apostles of Christ by Philip and Iohn on the Iewish day and by Peter and Paul on the annual Dominical And if through the dimnesse or want of stories of those times this be not so evident of this particular Feast of Christmasse yet the analogy holding directly betwixt the one and the other the argument remains as firm that the laying aside either this or that festival is a separation from the Apostolick and those sure are the first and purest times Besides I have as clearly shewed that the solemnities and festivities commemorative of the Martyrdome of Ignatius and Polycarp two Bishops that lived in the Apostles times were observed from the very times of their deaths and that in compliance with other the like festivals of the Church before them which must needs come home to the observation of festivals in the Apostles days And then how can this Diatribist flatter himself that he hath proved the contrary to this when he hath not so much as offered either the least answer to these or any the least reason or proof of his negation For the latter I reply that there is no analogie betwixt the Church of Englands departing from Rome and the Diatribists departing from the Church of England I might instance in many t will be sufficient that I shew it in two particulars 1. the Church of England in the Reformation departed not from their lawful superiors being as the Diatribist acknowledges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and owing no subordination to the Church of Rome when she departed from her whereas the persons then spoken of by me and the Diatribist for one were certainly members that ought a Christian obedience to the Church of England as inferiors to superiors and so departed from their lawful superiors wherein Schisme doth principally consist as hath elsewhere been shewn Those things wherein the Church of England reformed and departed from the Romish opinions and practices were none of them such as this of festivals now appears to be i. e. common usages of the Vniversal ancient especially of the Primitive purest Church but innovations unduely brought in by them and imposed on all Christians And as even now so again this Diatribists confession here is more to the advantage of the Romish Church then any thing that he could likely have said no way clearing his fact from Schisme nor offering the least colour to it and yet acknowledging that the Church of Englands reformation and so Luthers reformation also was as truely an act of Schisme from Rome as is theirs from the Church of England But I must put in my protestation of dissent to this proposition also and that is all I need to say to that answer Sect. 11. The profanenesse objected to the Festival Casting out the Creeds HIS answer to the 4th consideration is so slight and therein so little on which to fasten any reply that I may safely intrust the Reader with it and only minde the Diatribist 1. that till he hath more solidly proved the observation of this Festival among us to be superstition then hitherto he hath done t will be great uncharitableness thus to accuse it and greater injustice to destroy the innocent for this if it were true yet but accidental and removable crime imagined to be adherent to it And 2. till he hath written as full a tract of profaneness as he hath done of Superstition and been more successefull in his evidences that this Festival is guilty of it shewed that that is derived from super statutum also or evinced the same thing by some more sensible way of probation t is but a pitiful begging of the question thus irrationally to accumulate crimes on innocency to adde the Profanenesse to the Superstition to suppose the Festival able to work miracles to reconcile the most contrary extremes as if in the vein of declaiming he should call the same man first Papist then Socinian for such he knows are Superstition and Profanenesse In stead of which it were much more seasonable for him sadly to inquire which is most liable to the charge of profanenesse the setting apart a festival from common uses to the commemorating the birth of Christ in Prayer Praises Eucharist hearing the word read and preached and profiting by all these or the fastidious refusing to joyn with the Church of God in all or any of these offices at that time following the Plough or attending the Shop in stead of it And I shall with the same seriousnesse desire him to review his words p. 147. Where in answer to my mention of disusing the Creeds and Catechisme he saith in a parenthesis that the Creed is still to be retained in and with the Catechisme and demand whether he doth not know that the same Tempest that carried away the Festivals swept away more then one the three Creeds received from the ancient Church and retained in our Liturgie and together with them the Church