is appointed vnto Diuine seruice So here likewise for there is not a more Diuine Seruice then vpon iust occasion the due and lawfull swearing by God This is a worship which God doth appropriate to himselfe Thou shalt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worship the Lord thy God how and sweare by his name The last point is the Ordaining of the Ceremony to teach any spirituall duty by mysticall signification And what more spirituall duty can you require than is the confidence in Christ the Messias who is the foundation and life of all Diuine Mysteries which by the iudgement of all ancient Fathers and for ought that euer I could learne of all their children the Orthodox Diuines of the Church after them is this viz. That Christ the Messias and Sauiour of mankind was to issue out of the thigh and loynes of Abraham according as God had promised vnto him saying In thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed The Moralitie then of the signe to the seruant was this that as he beleeued to haue any life by Christ the Author of life which was to descend from Abraham by Isaac and his seed so he would be faithfull vnto him So that this oath was vnto his seruant a signe as of his faith to God so of faithfulnesse towards Abraham his Master SECT X. Our second proofe to confirme the lawfulnesse of a signe of morall signification is from the Examples of the old Testament vnder the Law The Obiection of the Non-conformists In the time of the Law when God saw it good to teach his Church by significant Ceremonies none might be brought or receiued into the worship of God but such onely as the Lord himselfe did institute This reason is vsed against the Popish Ceremonies by M. Caluin Iunius Lubbertus and others Our Answer And this Reason is good against the Popish abuse of Ceremonies which is to bee discerned from our vse of such in these two points first in their significations whereby that Church doth commonly teach some new doctrine not warranted by Scriptures secondly in their application by her superstitious opinion of necessity and holinesse whereby they are made essentiall parts of Gods worship as by your witnesses will be manifestly shewen In the meane time we pursue this point by our seuerall examples SECT XI Our first kind of Examples is by instancing in the Ordination of Festiuall dayes 1. Instance in Mordecai and Ester Although God had assigned diuers solemne Feast-dayes for his more frequent worship yet did Mordecai appoint the Feast called by the Hebrewes the Feast of Pur that is of Lottes for a continuall and thankefull remembrance of their generall deliuerance from that cruell Massacre whereunto the heathen had then allotted and designed them And accordingly our State and Church hath ordained a set Feast-day which wee may likewise after the Greek call the feast of Pûr euen by the same word retained in our English Fyre wherein we celebrate the remembrance of Gods mercifull and miraculous preseruation of vs from that Fyery and Hellish Powder-plot machinated by the sonnes of Belial for the consuming of our most religious and gracious Soueraigne together with the whole state of the Kingdome SECT XII 2. Instance in the Feast of Dedication by Iudas Machabaeus 1. Machab. 2.59 There was appointed an anniuersary Feast of the dedication of the Altar ordained by Iudas Machabaeus And this Feast as your owne witnesse Danaeus confesseth seemes to be approued by our Lord Iesus in that he did grace it with his owne blessed presence Now all solemne Feasts of this kind are of a Ceremoniall nature and in asmuch as they haue their institution from man may rightly be called Humane neuerthelesse so farre as they serue to magnifie God for some speciall mercie as else to excite man vnto a thankefull commemoration of the singular fauours which he hath receiued at the hands of God in these respects they are truely called Diuine Hence therefore you see it is good cause why they ought to be called significant So then you haue by these Examples as it were the Anatomy of your proposition through euery ioynt viz. 1. A Ceremony of humane inuention by Iudas Machabaeus 2. Appropriated vnto Gods seruice in a solemne Feast 3. Ordained to teach a spirituall Duty of thankefulnesse 4. Significant for benefits or blessings receiued And all these as you see stand iustifiable by Analogie from the example alleged SECT XIII Their first Replie The Church may appoint holy-dayes in certaine cases but it is one thing to restraine part of the day and another to restraine the whole day Our Answer If any man shall require of you some euidence to prooue that Christ hath so cantled out his Churches high Commission for Ecclesiasticall causes as to affoord it a power to appoint one halfe of an Holy-day and to deny vnto it liberty of ordaining the other halfe I suppose you would alwayes remaine indebted for an answere For did not God vse to haue as well his Euening as his Morning sacrifice and shall it now be lawfull to serue God onely by halfes howsoeuer euen this halfe which you haue haue granted doth sufficiently establish the whole matter in question for if the Church in this case haue power to ordaine a Ceremony which doth implie a signification of the dutie of a thankefull remembrance how should any Ceremonies be onely therefore held vnlawfull because they are significant SECT XIIII Their second Replie Howbeit the example out of Ester 9. of the two dayes which the Iewes instituted in the remembrance of their deliuerance is no sufficient warrant for these feasts in question For first as in other cases so in this case of dayes the estate of Christians vnder the Gospell ought not to be so Ceremonius as was theirs vnder the Law Secondly that which was done there was done by a â—peciall direction of the Church of God either through the Ministery of the Prophets which they had or by some other extraordinary meanes which is not to be followed of vs. Our Answer Firsâ— vnto the first part of your Replie we say that if an institution of a new Ceremonie were lawfull vnder the estate of the Old Testament when the people of God were so pressed with Rites that the Apostle called them an importable Yoke then doublâ—sse the addition of one or two Ceremonies in the state of the Gospel may not so rigidly be iudged vnlawfull Your second Assumption which we may rather call a Presumption is that you imagine some speciall Direction from the spirit of God vnto them without any certificate reuealed to your selues for proofe thereof Whereunto I onely say as Saint Hierom speaketh of the like imagination Eâdem facilitate reijcitur quâ obijcitur SECT XV. Our second kind of Examples is from the like ordaining of Ceremonious Instruments belonging vnto the worship of God by 4. Instances 1. Instance is in the Altar Iosh. 22. We
Accusation that the first inuention thereof was Antichristian Our Answer Sect. 21. Their VI. Accusation that it hath bene Idolatrously abused Our answer Sect. 22. Their VII That it is still vsed as a part of Gods worship Our answer Sect. 23. Their VIII Accusation that This gesture of kneeling is Idolatrous in it selfe Prooued by Reasons I. Because before a Creature Our answer Sect. 24. II. Because a Relatiue worship Our answer Sect. 25. Their 1. Confirmation thereof Because this kind of worship was the worke of Idolatry Our answer Sect. 26. Their 2. Else why vse wee not the same in Baptisme Our answer Sect. 27. Their 3. Else why coÌ„demne we Papists in the worshipping of Images Our answer Sect. 28. Our Confutations of the Non-conformists and Iustification of our Church concerning Relatiue worship Sect. 29. I. By Reasons shewing our difference from the Relatiue worship of the Papists 1. Difference manifesting the Two Romish opinions Se. 30.31 32. 2. The Romish worship absolute of an Image Sect. 33. And of the Sacrament Sect. 34. Our contrary vse Sect. 35. Illustrated by a similitude Sect. 36.37 Our second ground of Confutation is taken from the Non-conformists owne Witnesses concerning the reuerent receiuing of this Sacrament Sect. 38. Our third Confutation of the Non-conformists from the confession of Bellarmine concerning the Protestants opinion of Adoration sect 39. 40. Our fourth Confutation of the Non-conformists is from the Non-conformists owne Practises I. From their Intentionall reuerence Sect. 40. II. From their Bodily presence in coÌ„municating with vs. sect 41. IIII. From their bodily reuerence at the receiuing both of their Corporal foode Sect. 42. And Sacramentall Sect. 43. PART I. A DEFENCE OF THE INNOCENCIE OF THE THREE CEREMONIES of the Church of England viz. Surplice Crosse after Baptisme and Kneeling at the receiuing of the B. Sacrament of the Lords Supper CHAP. I. The Arguments or rather Accusatâ—ons which are brought by the Non-conformists against our Ceremonies are either 1. Generall which are made ioyntly against them all Or 2. Particular by more speciall exceptions vnto each one of them seuerally SECT I. Our first defence of the Three Ceremonies is against their Generall Arguments MY endeauour is throughout this whole Treatise to furnish my Reader not onely with defensiue weapons by distinct and particular answers to all obiections but with offensiue also by generall coÌ„futations of their Arguments both which I assume to performe if God permit with as iust a combination of breuitie and perspicuitie as the nature of the cause shall require And now we put the matter vnto triall SECT II. The first generall Argument made by the Non-conformists against the three Ceremonies of our Church Maior The Scripture in many places condemneth not onely that which is done against the warrant and direction of the word but also that which is done besides it specially in the matters of Gods Seruice Minor But these Ceremonies of Surplice c. are without all warrant of Scripture either by expresse sentence or pregnaâ—â— consequence out of Law or Gospell Ergo by this our negatiue argument from Scripture they are to be accompted vnlawfull Our Answer That we may not seeme to affect any verball skirmage or contention we do readily accept of your distinction of warrant from Scripture the one by expresse sentence the other by pregnant consequence yet so that we still obserue the iust latitude of the second member This doth extend it selfe not onely vnto generall Precepts and Rules but also vnto permissions the law of common Equitie contained in Scripture for the iustifying of our Ceremonies as will plainly yea and confessedly appeare in our Defence Onely we wish some sufficient warrant from your selues that you would stand vnto this your owne distinction of a double warrant But you in exacting of vs by this your Negatiue argument a proofe of our Ceremonies from particular prescript which is the same with expresse sentence or euidence do so vtterly ouerthrow the second member which is the warrant by due consequence as if you had studied to confute your selues in your first entrance into this dispute which will more fully appeare in the proofe of your Maior Proposition SECT III. The Non-conformists confirmation of theâ—r Negatiue Argument from Scripture is pretended to be iustified by 1. Texts of Scriptures 2. Iudgment of ancient Fathers 3. Confessions of Protestant Diuines Their first place of Scripture for proofe of their Negatiue Argument from Scripture Heb. 3.2 Christ is said to be as faithfull in the house of God as Moses But Moses prescribed the forme of worship in euery particular Ceremonie Ergo we may not allow of any religious Ceremonie without commandement from Christ. Our Answer We distinguish Some points concerning Religion are Doctrinall and some meerely Ceremoniall And we say that all things which doctrinally belong to saluation whether appertaining to faith or morall conuersation of life or yet essentiall parts of Gods worship are sufficiently reuealed in Scripture but as for points meerely Ceremoniall being not the body but the garment of Religion they are left to the libertie of the Church Know therefore that this Scripture speaketh of Reals and not of Rituals Notwithstanding if we examine the cause by due comparison of both Christ will be found in both of these to be as absolute as Moses for faithfulnesse in Gods house yea and to exceede him in perfectnesse as much as his owne glorious bodie now ascended into heauen doth excell that of Moses putrified long since in the earth SECT IIII. I. Comparison betweene Christ and Moses in reall faithfulnesse First Moses by his bodily Rites did but onely prefigure mans redemption but Christ in his owne bodie performed it in that Consummatum est by his sacrifice on the Crosse. Secondly Moses had a veile ouer his face and deliuered the Gospell onely in shadowes and mysteries but Christ reuealed the blessed countenance of our gracious God vnto vs by the light of the new Testament expresly publishing our reconciliation with God by his owne death Thirdly Moses his office was principally to diuulge the Law deliuered in Thundering and earthquakes and a terrible voyce which made Moses himselfe to quake for feare But the Gospell of Christ was deliuered with Hymmes and Songs of Angels and promises of sauing Ioy to all people so that the difference betweene Moses and Christ is no lesse than Timor and Amor feare and loue Fourthly Moses notwithstanding he brought to the people the promises of the inheritance of but the earthly Canaan yet he died in the mount and was not suffered to passe ouer Iordan whereby was signified that the law of Commandements could neuer bring man to possesse the heauenly Canaan But Christ being dead to bring life to mankind raised himselfe from death ascended entred within the veile and hath taken possession of the Celestiall Mansions that where he is there his faithfull may be also And thus in all these respects Christ
was in the house of God as much yea and more perfect in faithfulnesse then Moses SECT V. II. Comparison betweene Christ and Moses in Rituall and Circumstantiall ordinances Come we to the Ceremonials Moses indeed was faithfull to deliuer all the lawes of Ceremonies expresly and particularly vnto the Israelites who were therefore schooled and exercised with a multitude of Rites lest they might cast their eyes vpon the ey-pleasing Ceremonies of the Gentiles who compassed them round about and so be inticed to Idolatrie Yet all that masse of Ceremonies is called by the Apostle A burthen importable But Christ howsoeuer he would haue Ceremonies in the Church yet as for number not manie so excepting the Sacraments which were of his own institution for vse not of absolute necessitie did therefore remoue the law of Iewish Ceremonies disburdened all Christians from the necessited vse of them And thus also was Christ faithfull as Moses But why do we compare the seruant of the house with the Lord and Sauiour thereof As for your obiection concerning Christ his fidelity in prescribing of all particular ceremonies which are not the formall parts of Gods worship but certaine appurtenances thereunto if as you seeme you shall be as willing to subscribe to the iudgement of M. Caluine as you are zealous from his iudgement to prescribe vnto others this question will be easily decided For that honorable witnesse hath iudiciously obserued that although our Lord Christ would haue all things comprized in the sacred Oracles of Scripture which are necessary to saluation whether they belong to the doctrine of faith or to the formall and essentiall parts of his worship yet concerning the externall forme of gouernement and Rites of the Church Quià in externa disciplinâ ceremonijs non voluit c. because Christ saith he would not prescribe singularly and especially concerning externall discipline and Ceremonies for that he foresaw these things were to depend on the occasions and opportunities of times nor did he thinke one forme to accord with all ages hereupon must we haue recourse saith M. Caluin vnto the generall Rules that all things whatsoeuer the necessitie of the Church shall require may be tried by them Finally he deliuered nothing expresly in these points because these things are not of necessitie to saluation but ought to be accommodated vnto the edification of the Church according to the different disposition and custome of times and countries So he very iudiciously and prudently Now this is a knowne case that the old Testament was deliuered vnto one onely people of the world but the commission of the Gospell was Go into all Nations and preach This nett was to ouerspread the whole world therefore the Iewes had a prescription of particular Rites most fitly agreeing to the politie of their Church and Common-weale but the whole world of people which are as different almost in nature as in Nations and languages were necessarily to haue the most common rules of Ceremonies with libertie of applying them according to the conditions of each countrey and the occasions thereof as they should best tend to their edification SECT VI. The second place obiected for proofe of their Negatiue Argument from Scriptures 2. Sam. 7.7 In all the places wherein I haue walked with the children of Israel spake I a word with any of the tribes of Israel saying Why build ye not me an house of Cedar Therefore shalt thou say vnto my seruant Dauid thus saith the Lord God of hosts c. This Scripturâ— sheweth that no Ceremonie may be inuented by man for Gods worship seeing that Dauids intendment and purpose of building a Temple vnto God is â—ere reprooued by God as vnlawfull which was the cause that God did prohibit him by Nathan in these words verse 5. Go tell my seruant Dauid saying Shalt thou build an house for me to dwell in whereas I haue not dwelt in any house c. Our first Answer God did not condemne the intent and purpose of Dauid to build a Temple to the Lord for first Dauid had consulted with the Prophet about it and Nathan gaue him his Fiat vers 3. Go saith he to Dauid do all that is in thy heart for the Lord is with thee Secondly the tenor of the prohibition was vers 5. Say to my seruant Dauid Shalt thou build me an house God neuer gaue any such honorable and gracious Title to any man as to call him My seruant in reproofe of any transgression Thirdly the reason rendred by Salomon why God prohibited Dauid and commanded Salomon to build him an house was because Dauid was yet in warres and Salomon had now rest on euery side The restraint then was not in respect of any vnlawfulnesse in the Actor but for the vnseasonablenesse of the Act. Lastly what can be more forcible to conuince these men of notable precipitancie in affirming that God condemned this holy purpose in Dauid than that God did commend it himselfe for so Salomon professed saying It was in the heart of Dauid my father to build an house for the name of the Lord God of Israel and the Lord said vnto Dauid my father Whereas it was in thy heart to build an house to my name thou didst well that it was in thy heart And can they require either a better commendation than the Lords or a plainer tenure thereof than this thou didst well SECT VII Our second Answer Our former Answer was as I may so say by way of extortion to draw from the Non-conformists a confession of their error but this second is by retortion returning against them the whole force of their owne argument from the same example which they haue obiected For if that this Act of Dauid without speciall warrant were commended by God then all institutions of Ceremonies by man belonging to Gods Seruice are not therefore to be condemned because they want that expresse warrant which they pretend SECT VIII The third place obiected by the Non-conformists for proofe of their Negatiue Argument from Scripture Ier. 7.22.23.31 For I spake not to your fathers nor commandâ—d them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Aegypt concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices But this thing commanded I them Obey my voice and I will be your God Ergo Ceremonies which are besides the speciall warrant of Scripture are vnlawfull Our Answer In this proofe you presume that the offering of burnt sacrifices was without warrant and besides Gods Commandement because God said in the first place I command them not in the day c. I answer First that God indeed did not make any mention of Sacrifices in that very day wherein he gaue them the law of Commandements yet neuerthelesse he had commanded sacrifices long before the deliuery of the morall law in Sina SECT IX His Reply That cannot appeare Our Answer Nay it cannot but appeare to them that will open their eyes and reade the
and the very Leauen of the Pharises from whence there issued a Religious reuereuerence far exceeding that respect which we shall hereafter proue to be lawfully attributed vnto our Ceremonies SECT XI Their third Reason These Ceremonies imposed are for their vse and practise preferred before necessarie duties and principall parts of Gods worship as to weare a Surplice or Preach not vse the signe of the Crosse or Baptize not practise other Ceremonies or els you shall not exercise any other ordinance of God Our Answer This is but dull sophstry for who seeth not that this is not a preferring of wearing a Surplice before preaching as you fondly imagine but to preferre an orderly and discreet Preacher before one that is factious and exorbitant If the Lord Chancellour hauing appointed a commission for his Maiesties seruice and designing a place most conuenient for that purpose afterwards vnderstanding some one or other of the Commissioners to be so peremptorily selfe-willed as to refuse to sit with the rest of the Commissioners in the place appointed shall exempt that party and put him out of the Commission placing another in his stead should it not argue want of common reason to inferre heereupon that the said Lord Chancellour had hereby preferred the circumstance of a place before his Maiesties seruice SECT XII Their fourth Reason They are knowne to be imposed as parts of Gods worship for many people in all parts of the Land are knowne to be of this mind that the Sacraments are not rightly and sufficiently administred or receiued without them Our Answer This your Argument if it be rightly examined will not proue so strong as strange For to conclude thus Many people within the state of this Kingdome do hold these Ceremonies to be necessary parts of Gods worship Ergo they are imposed and obserued as necessary parts of Gods worship may by as good or rather better reason be retorted vpon your selues thus Most people in the Land hold them not to be necessary parts of Gods worship Ergo they are not imposed as essentiall and necessary parts thereof Secondly you ought to haue made a difference betweene the iudgement of the Gouernours in imposing and the opinion if yet there be any such of some people in obseruing of them as necessary For this your Reason can make no better Logicke then if one would cōclude that Vsury the State not punishing the taking of ten in the 100 iustifiable by the Law of God because some people make the like collection But to collect what is the minde of Gouernours from the fancy of some inferiours is but to tell vs that if the legge do halt the lamenesse thereof must be said to be in the braine And because you do commonly obiect the multitude of people tell vs in good sadnesse of what sect you suppose this people to be that hold the necessity of these things Are they Popish But these haue not so great a conceit of our Ceremonies as they are knowne to be administred in our Church Or are they of your owne disciplining who by your calumniations are taught to thinke that the Church hath imposed these Ceremonies in an opinion of necessity so as to make them Essentiall parts of Gods worship Then must we tell you that the seducement of the Scholler is the sinne of the Maister Or lastly are they some of the people who are otherwise conformable Then doubtlesse these if yet there be any such will not be found to be many as you suppose but the same people may be thought to fall into that misconceit not so much by the imposition of the Church vpon you as by your vehement opposition against the Church whereby some such simple people are brought to beleeue that your imputation although most calumnious is true to wit that these Ceremonies are imposed as necessary parts of Gods worship But forbeare you this slander and those people will soone relinquish their errour SECT XII Their fift Reason The omission of them euen without the case of scandall and contempt is more sharpely punished then any other sinnes committed against the Law of God as periury or adultery Our Answer What therefore Ergo for this is your marke they are preferred before the precepts of God and made parts of Gods Worshippe This consequence is not necessarie for it falleth out herein as vsually it doth in the like case in all weal-publiks where we see more exact and grieuous prosecution of Iustice against a pilferer than against a swearer against a false Coyner of money than a man-slayer Not that hereby Christian Common-wealthes do professe that the other Sinnes are in their owne nature lesse hainous or that they do not professedly preferre Gods glorie before all other respects But because stealth of mens goods and adulterating or corrupting of Coine do more immediatly worke the ruine of the common peace therefore the commonwealth as euery sensible thing naturally doth affect is bent immediatlie to seeke the preseruation of it selfe that so it may be more able to establish those things which concerne the glory of God by repressing of more hainous crimes whether by temporall punishment or els by the spirituall censures of the Church And so it sometimes falleth out in the proceeding of the Church it selfe which seeketh by these censures to preserue her owne peace and integritie against those who do vniustly defame her Furthermore suffer me to deale plainely and to tell you that your Parenthesis which complaineth that you are so grieuously punished for onely omission of those Ceremonies euen without the case of scandall and contempt is no better then an open slander against the Church of God for you cannot instance in any one Minister that hath beene so grieuously punished for the bare omission of a Rite without his persisting opinionatiuely refractarily that publickly in flat contradiction against the Church If that the practisioners in the Law should obstinately refuse to weare the ordinary Gowne of a Counsellour or party-coloured habite of a Sergeant would the graue Iudges of the Land passe it slightly ouer as a bare omission and not rather iustly punish it as an intollerable contempt SECT XIIII The contrary-minded albeit neuer so peaceable learned or godly minded if they shall declare their contrary iudgement are accounted Puritans and Schismatickes and by Canon if they shall offend censured as excommunicate Our Answer Although perhaps you haue reason to wish the release of some yet ought you specially to consider your owne deserts and know that Schisme which is the diuiding of affections taketh beginning from the difference of opinions albeit in points of lesse moment and then reckon the multitude of Separatists who haue had their first principles of opposition against our Church out of your Schoole of contradiction by your vile aspersion of no lesse a crime then Idolatry it selfe And after iudge whether there be not some cause to call your opinion Schismaticall as still nourishing the cause of a
docendo monendo aliquem habent which haue saith he some vse in teaching and admonishing the Reader Yet Pictures you know haue no other property then signification And Luther saith Chemnitius held Images which did represent the Histories of Acts done as things indifferent which might be had both for ornament and for remembrance without superstition according to the rule of Scripture Which kind of Pictures as Zepperus holdeth them from the decree of the Councell of Franckford may be kept in the Church without impiety to the same purpose namely ad refricandam rerum praeteritarum memoriam which notwithstanding doth no whit aduantage the Romish superstition in their manner of Adoration Iunius likewise speaking of the Festiuall daies of Pentecost anciently celebrated in the Christian Churches answereth that they did serue Ad iustam quandam c. For the due commemoration of that speciall benefite of God which happened to the Church as vpon that day And is not this also Symbolicall And this Symboll of Feasts was formerly witnessed by Danaeus in the feast day of the Dedication of the Altar Furthermore Chemnitius Apud vetustissimos quidem puriores Scriptores legimus c. saith Wee reade in the most ancient and purer Writers that their Rites did signifie something and admonished men of the doctrine of the Sacrament comprehended in the word of God But wheresoeuer there is in these ancient Writers any mention that by Exorcisme or Exsufflation the euill spirit is driuen out of the party Baptized and likewise that by vnction and imposition of the hands of a Bishop after Baptisme the holy Spirit is giuen These things which the Fathers vnderstood to be done significatiuely That is by way of signification were afterwards peruerted by others and held as operatiue in an opinion of efficacie and power for such effects In these words Chemnitius approueth of the Fathers significant Ceremonies and condemneth the Popish superstition of more then significant Now although these Testimonies may suffice to confute and condemne the generall Argument of the Non-conformists against Significant Ceremonies yet when as in our answer to the particular exceptions against our foresaid Ceremonies of white garments and Crosse in Baptisme we shall proue in these Ceremonies from the direct acknowledgment of P. Martyr Chemnitius B. Iewell and Zanchius an approbation of their Morall signification of Puritie of life and constancie in the faith respectiuely I hope our Opposites will abate something of their Contradictions against our Rites at least in respect of signification whereof yet more remaineth to be said in our last proofe In the interim we approach to that which followeth in the next place SECT XXXI Our fourth Proofe for the Confutation of the last generall Argument of the Non-conformists against our Ceremonies and for the Confirmation of Morall signification in such Rites is as from the confession of witnesses so especially from the Practise of the Non-conformists themselues Our first Instance is in the forme of an Oath After much sayling in this Sea of dispute hauing thus farre passed through the Maine I now direct my course home-ward to the Narrow Seas of our Non-conformists by instancing in such particular Ceremonies wherein either our Opposites are found to be ordinary Actors or else their Witnesses are become Approvers of some Symbolicall Ceremonies God commanding in his Law saying Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and sweare by his Name sheweth sufficiently how sacred a thing an Oath is which is an immediate Invocation of God and how it is appropriated vnto the honour of God which God himselfe doth challenge as a part or at least proper cognizance of his supreme worship Now the outward forme of an Oath as it is enioyned by Law and assumed and practised by the Non-conformists themselues is this to lay their hand vpon the book of God and to kisse it swearing by the Contents thereof that is by the way of stipulation pledging and pawning all the promises of saluation in Christ which are recorded in that booke vpon that truth which they do professe to performe in Swearing Then their kissing and handling of that booke is the visible Signe that the taking of an Oath is the worship of God in it selfe whereby we adore the Author of that booke of blessednesse And lastly the end of all this is a vow to averre the truth of their own conscience vnto man In all which you haue 1. The handling and kissing of the booke a Ceremonie of mans Institution 2. The end to expresse our faith toward God and truth to man which are of Morall signification 3. The manner by an Invocation of God in calling him to witnesse and so appropriating it to Gods worship which is fully as much as this cause can challenge at our hands If any should bee so scrupulous as to doubt of the lawfulnesse of this kinde of Oath he may take his warrant from the example of Abraham in that Ceremoniall forme of Swearing which he prescribed vnto his seruant before the Iewish and Leviticall Law of Ceremonies was enacted by God SECT XXXII Our second Instance is in the Obseruation of the Lords day You may if it please you consider the three Ceremoniall points of our Saboth by a three-fold figure The first was to signifie a Rest from Sin which is a Spirituall Saboth The second to note the Resurrectiō of Christ for which cause the day of the Iewish Saboth was changed into the day of Christ his Resurrection whence it hath the denomination to be called The Lords Day The third is the euerlasting Saboth whereof the Apostle speaketh saying There remaineth Sabatismus a time of Saboth or Rest for the people of God What Christian man is there religiously affected towards God as he ought who in the celebration of the Lords Day doth not call to remembrance the Resurrection of Christ vpon that day and also why may lie not in his religious discretion from the Analogie betweene this our bodily Saboth here on earth and that Rest in heauen entertaine a contemplation of the euerlasting Saboth and rest of Blessednesse thus prefigured in the Temporall and accordingly make to himselfe for his better edification a double Mysticall vse of the Lords Day To which purpose Zanchius saith of our Churches the places of Gods worship Sicut Tabernaculum Templumque Salomonis typi fuerunt corporis Christi sic nostra tēpla typi sunt vmbra coelestis templi vbi coelestes spiritus animique fidelium collecti laudant Deum sicut nos hic in terrenis hisce templis colimus Debentque haec terrena ad illud coeleste animos nostros subleuare Vsus hic contemnendus non est quià vtilia haec sunt That is As the Tabernacle and Temple of Salomon were types of the body of Christ so our Temples are types and shadowes of the celestiall Temple where the heauenly spirits and soules of the faithfull are assembled for the praysing of God
subiect to seducement when they fall to haue any priuate parle and communication with that subtile Tempter And which is the third point we know that the very office of Preaching much more that of Sacrifizing is flatly denyed to that Sexe So that I may iustly call this your Comparison friuolous did it not better deserue to be termed calumnious first inasmuch as you indeauour to controll the Ceremonies appointed by the deliberate aduice of the religious Gouernours of our Church and to confute them by obiecting Ceremonies deuised by priuate persons in their clanculary meetings according to their rude fancies Secondly to oppose vnto Ceremonies which are celebrated by men the destinate Ministers of Christ set apart as you your selues are for such a diuine ministratioÌ„ the practize of women who are euen by reason of the frailty of their Sexe interdicted by Scripture to intermeddle in such kind of seruice Thirdly to compare Ceremonies of outward gesture which may be lawfully applyed otherwise than immediately vnto God with Ceremonies of Sacrifizing which cannot euen so much as in the outward Act be performed but directly to God without the guilt of Idolatry And fourthly to condemne Rites of false and Idolatrous inuentions by matching them with Ceremonies of godly and Christian significations what could you else meane by all this but as it were to suborne a fellon to condemne an innocent SECT XV. Their ninth instance concerning Paganish Ceremonies Augustine himselfe also prescribing a direction how to winne the Pagans hath these words If you aske how the Pagans may be wonne how they may be inlightened how they may be called to saluation Let vs leaue all their solemnities and forsake their toyes Our Answer Wee might easily haue vnderstood the meaning of Saint Augustine by Saint Augustine himselfe if you had not broke off his speech at the middest for his words immediately following are these Vt si non consentiant veritati nostrae erubescant paucitati suae i. That if they consent not to that truth professed by vs they may bee ashamed meaning the fewnesse of their followers of their own paucity Wherby he instructeth the Christians not to conuerse together with Pagans in any of their Heathenish Rites Euen as our Church doth likewise forbid her people to assemble together with Papists in their superstitious solemnities and not that onely but doth also what would you haue more condemne and punish those that shall partake with them in such fooleries I should furthermore aske you why you skipped ouer that last clause of Saint Augustine Vt si non c. whereby you haue made your selues like to that man Qui toto deuorato boue defecit in cauda Hitherto we haue heard of your Instances in excepting against the Ceremonies of Pagans SECT XVI Their second kind of Obiection for the remouing of Ceremonies that haue beene abused is in obiecting Iewish Rites Their first Instance In the Councell of Nice it was decreed that Christians might not keepe the Feast of Easter at the time nor in the manner as the Iewes did Let vs say they in nothing agree with that detestable roote of the Iewes Our Answer First you cannot be ignorant how that there was a time when it was lawfull for some Christians to keepe the Feast of Easter the very same day wherein it was celebrated of the Iewes For your Authour whom you alleage doth fully relate that All the Churches in Asia according to their old custome did celebrate the Feast of Easter the 14. of the Moone which was the very day wherein the Iewes were commanded to solemnize their Passeouer Then he bringeth in that famous Bishop Polycrates mentioning Polycarpus Thraseus Sagarus all Bishops and holy Martyrs besides Papyrius Melito and seuen other Bishops of his owne kindred who by ancient Tradition did all obserue the Iewes festiuall day of Easter Secondly afterwards it was decreed by the Councell of Nice that Easter should be celebrated as you haue truly alleaged differently from the custome of the Iewes but yet you haue omitted the causes there specified by Eusebius whereof one was the hatred of the Christians against the Iewes who had defiled their hands with the bloud of the Son of God and remained still inthralled in the blindnesse and madnesse of their errour Another reason was because of the insolent insultation that the Iewes then made vpon the Christians as though that Christians could not haue kept any obseruation of that feast sine ipsorum disciplinae subsidio without the helpe of their discipline A third reason there mentioned is that by vniformitie of this one custome they might bring the Christian Churches vnto vnitie which by diuersitie of opinions concerning the time of the obseruation of the same feast had been distracted into contrarie factions These were the principall Reasons which moued the Fathers of that Councell to alter the Iewish Feast of Easter and to translate it vnto our Lords day not absolutely as you pretend for the auoiding of all resemblance that it had with the Iewish custome for then must they haue condemned all the godlie Byshops and holie Martyrs of Asia who obserued the same time of Easter with the Iewes but because of the after-obstinacie and insolencie of the Iewes vpbraiding the Christians for imitating of them vpon an opinion of necessity and also for the reducing of Christian Churches agreeing in one faith vnto an vnity of one affection You see then that the comparing as commonly you haue done the practise of Churches in admitting or reiecting of Iewish or Heathenish customes without their speciall Reasons is no better discretion than if you would argue some men to be wiser than others by comparing their bodies together without any regard of their reasonable soules Otherwise you might haue easily perceiued that neither we can haue like cause of hatred against Papists who are professed Christians as they had against the obstinate Iewes the murtherers of the Lord of glory nor yet the Papists the like cause of insultation against our Church for imitation of them seeing that she holdeth none of their Rites without a professed difference of opinion and with a detestation of their superstition SECT XVII Their third kind of Obiection is by instancing in Ceremonies abolished because of the abuses of Heretikes Their first Instance The Councell of Gangris Can. 18. Anno 324. ordained that none should fast on the Lords day because the Manichees had taken vp that day to fast on Our Answer And they had iust cause so to ordaine but so had not you to conceale the cause which is deliuered by Leo Bishop of Rome in these words The Manichees denying that Christ was borne in the true nature of man obserue the Lords day in pensiue fasting which the Resurrection of Christ hath consecrated vnto vs to be celâ—brated with ioy which custome of fasting they deuote vnto the Sonne that they may altogether dissent from vs in the vnity of faith Thus much being
which maketh a man fall either into dangerous errours in doctrine or else some sinfull act of conuersation Thirdly by weakenesse they interpret such an hinderance whereby a Christian is made onely more slow and remisse in the profession and course of Christianity Which three phrases are notwithstanding expounded more pertinently by others to be set downe thus seuerally not by way of distinction but for exaggeration of the sinne of wilfull offence against Christians in prouoking of them vnto any damnable errour or sinne by any sensible externall meanes And in this last sence do we proceed to discusse this Argument concerning scandall SECT II. Our second Answer is by distinction of the kindes of scandall I. Diuision That distinction of scandall will best fit our purpose whereby it is vsually diuided into these two members the one is called Actiue the other Passiue SECT III. Our I. Subdiuision of Actiue Scandall is in respect of the partie Agent direct indirect The Actiue is in respect of the partie Agent who by an Act which he doth shall willingly prouoke another to any euill And this kind admitteth many Subdiuisions First than an Actiue Scandall is either directly euill or onely indirectly The direct manner of scandall is when the Act is euill in it selfe Thus the Act of Dauids murther was scandalous And this kind of scandall is no way excusable being euill ratione obiecti which is properly sinne The Indirect scandall is seene in Acts which are in their owne nature good or at least not euill but yet because either in respect of time or place or of some other Circumstance the act doth occasionally fall out to be scandalous as did the eating of things offered vnto Idols which was therfore forbidden being a sin either more or lesse according to the diuerse affections of the Offender For this indirect scandall may happen to be after two sorts sometime without the intention of the Agent who hath no meaning to giue any such offence of which kind we may reckon the fact of Saint Peter when he did so partially apply himselfe vnto the Iewes to the scandall of the Gentiles And this we call the lesse sinne The other maner of indirect scandall is that which sometimes proceedeth from the wicked intent in the Scandalizer and such was the sinne of many Heretikes who would vse Fasts and other Ceremonies of deuotion and austerity to draw disciples after them and to seduce men from the truth of Christ. Thus much in respect of the partie Agent SECT IIII. Our 2. Subdiuision of Actiue scandall in respect of persons offended either weake strong The second Subdiuision hereof is in respect of the persons that are offended for it is either perfectorum hominum of men throughly grounded or pusillorum of weake and more simple Concerning the Perfect the Stumbling blocke is on their part that gaue scandall albeit the parties that are offended are not thereby scandalized that is not so offended as to stumble and fall And thus it may be said that Peter did scandalize Christ himselfe when wishing Christ to fauour himselfe and not to die he receiued that answer from Christ Satan thou art a scandall vnto me For albeit this motion proceeded from a good and most friendly intent in Saint Peter who was the speaker for it was onely that Christ should fauour himselfe for the preseruation of his life yet did Christ discerne therein a wicked purpose of the suggester the diuell for the which cause Christ called Peter Satan because in Peters seeking to hinder the death of Christ Satan sought to hinder mans redemption But Christ preferring mans saluation before his owne life taught vs by his owne example to deale with all such scandals or blockes which are temptations to hinder vs in our course of Christianitie euen as a man would do with a blocke that lyeth in his way that is to Cast it behind him for so said Christ in his answer Get thee behind me Satan As for the Pusilli weake ones our Sauiour speaketh in their behalfe saying He that offendeth one of these little ones that beleeueth in me it were better c. Thus much in respect of the Parties SECT V. Our 3. Subsidiuision of Actiue Scandall in respect both of persons and cause either Determined Vndetermined A third subdiuision is both in respect of the cause and of the persons in cases of indifferencie For sometime this case is determined by the Church and sometimes it happeneth not to be publiquely defined When such a matter is once fully concluded by the Church whether in part or in whole so that it doth not euidently appeare to be against the Word of God so far forth it greatly cōcerneth all such persons to conforme themselues thereunto according to the doctrine of S. Paul in a question of Ceremony If any seeme to be contentious we haue no such custome nor the Church of God For indeed all men are bound in conscience to preserue aboue all things the regard of the generall peace of Gods Church before the grieuance of any sort or sect of men Which the Apostle also doth expresly teach saying Giue offence to no man neither to the Iew nor to the Gentle nor which the Apostle addeth in a further speciality to the Church of God Because such a Scandall is so much the more heinous than others by how much more pernicious a thing it is to the endangering of the health of the whole body than to weaken or lame any one limb or member thereof But if the case be either not at all or but onely in part determined by the Church then is there a charitable consideration to be had of other mens consciences who are not perswaded of the lawfull vse of indifferent things Then the generall rule is that so farre as a man may vse indifferent things without offence of others he need not to forbeare them Eate saith the Apostle making no question for conscience sake Why Because God hath giuen man a liberty to vse such things or not to vse them And the Apostles reason is this For the earth is the Lords But in case of offence against others the Rule is Not to eate namely in the behalfe of another mans conscience This was the cause that the Councell of the Apostles giuing libertie to vse such meates as had bene formerly accounted vncleane did notwithstanding make a restraint from eating of Strangled and Bloud and things offered vnto Idols lest thereby they might giue offence to the Iewish Proselites newly called to the faith And for the same cause the Apostle in great circumspection did circumcise Timothie to auoyde the Scandall of the Iewish new Conuerts and lately called to the faith of Christ but at another time would not circumcise Titus lest he might giue way to false Apostles who defended an absolute necessity of Circumcision to the preiudice of the liberty of the Gospell Thus much in respect of both Cause
which they giue vnto God Our Answer But our Church vsing that Signe of the Crosse with no such superstition either by vsing it as a speciall Badge of any Idolatrous Religion or by ascribing vnto it any miraculous power of driuing out diuels or of curing Diseases or by sanctifying persons that are marked therewith or yet by offering the worship of Latria yea or so much as Dulia vnto it And contrariwise professing that she hath purged this Signe from all Popish superstition and errour and to vse it onely as primitiuely it was vsed that is onely as a Token whereby there is protestation made of a future constancie in the profession of Christianity You your selues could not but discerne hereby as great a difference betweene the Church of England and the Church of Rome as betweene religous deuotion and blind superstition light and darkenesse God and Belial I passe ouer the maine Argument taken from the former Abuses and Scandall which are said to be occasioned by this Signe because I will not trouble my Reader with needlesse repetitions of that Answer which hath more then once bene giuen to this kind of Obiection SECT IX Their fourth Accusation against the vse of the Signe of the Crosse about the time of Baptisme is from the consequent Licence of ordinary Crossings of the body in other parts and vpon other occasions If crossing vpon the fore-head be lawfull then that which is lesse ill is lawfull viz. the crossing vpon the breasts c. which is the manner of the Papists Our Answer I perceiue that if we had no other Aduocates to pleade our cause against the Papists than such Obiectors then might the Papists presume of a victorie not so much by their owne strength as by your imbecillity For it had bene an easie matter for you to haue answered the Papists by telling them that there is a great difference betweene the manner of Protestants crossing the foreheads of Infants and the Papists crossing their Breasts c. because euen if there were no other oddes the practise of the Protestants is ioyned with an interpretation of their meaning shewiâ—g to what end the Crosse is vsed namely in a Morall Token of Christian courage that the child shall not be ashamed of the Crosse of Christ c. which declaration of the godly vse and end thereof may be a sufficient instruction vnto the people to free them from that superstition But the other kinde of crossing the breast practised by Papists without any words of Interpretation to manifest their meaning except it be to nourish their superstitious confidence therein may easily draw ignorant men into some Idolatrous conceits As it is a farre greater safety and security for a Trauellour passing through any Desart to reade written on Marble Stones or Pillars in a High-way according to the custome of some Countries the direct path from Citie to Citie than if he shall be left wholy vnto his owne imagination voyde and destitute of any direction Otherwise if that the people were fully instructed in the right vse of Crossing their breasts according to the primitiue vnderstanding thereof to keep themselues in a Christian moderation this also could not be iustly excepted against whereof we are to speake in the 13. Section SECT X. Their fift Accusation against the Crosse vsed in the time of Baptisme is from the pretended Authour thereof whom they name to haue bene Valentinus Irenaeus saith that the Heretique Valentinus was the man that first aduanced the Crosse to any religious vse Our Answer Sooner shall you be able to extract Lead out of a Marble-stone than to draw any such saying yea or sence out of Irenaeus This Father discouering the hereticall speculations of this grand Heretique Valentinus among others reckoneth his opinion concerning that Crosse whereof he speaketh which some times he called Stauros Crux and sometimes Horos terminus attributing thereunto a double vertue one Confirmatiua that is of confirming and strengthning a Christian in his profession the other Diuisiua that is of diuiding and separating him from the world The first vertue Valentinus gathered out of the words of Christ He that taketh not vp his Crosse and followeth me is not worthy of me signifying that the Crosse doth establish a Christian and ioyne him vnto Christ in following him The other diuisiue vertue he collected out of that speech of Christ He hath his fanne in his hand and will purge his floore and gather his Wheate into his Garner but the Chaffe will he consume in vnquenchable fire noting what the nature of persecution is namely to separate and distinguish the faithfull Professor from the Hypocrite In all this here is not any mention or meaning at all Vel ligni vel signi Crucis either of the Wood or of the Signe of the Crosse but onely of the persecution of Christians for the name of Christ which Christ himselfe called a Crosse. This is most euident by the verie place of Irenaeus For first Christs words alledged by Valentinus concerne euery Christian man to take vp a Crosse but not that whereupon Christ did suffer for then the words of Christ should haue stood thus Except a man take vp crucem meam my Crosse c. Which were to make euery true Christian a Simon of Cyrene who was compelled to take vp Christ his Materiall Crosse. But the words are these Qui non tollit crucem suam He that takâ—th not vp his Crosse that is his owne Crosse of suffering persecution for the name of Christ whensoeuer occasion shall require cannot be accompted the disciple of Christ. This meaning of Valentinus is yet more manifest by the second vertue of that same Crosse which he calleth diuisiua that is a power of diuiding in which respect Christ did call persecution Ventilabrum a fanne to winnow and seuer the chaffe from the wheate Now Valentinus saith Irenaeus Ventilabrum illud crucem interpretatur Doth interprete that Fanne to be the Crosse whereof he spake Who then can be so silly or senselesse as not to discerne at the first sight that this Fanne doth signifie no other Crosse than persecution SECT XI Their Reply There was some cause why Irenaeus did reprehend the Heretique Valentinus whom he reproued saying Talia enim c. Such things the Valentinians speake seeking to apply the good speeches of Christ vnto their owne wicked Inuentions Therefore the words of Valentinus had some euill meaning concerning the Crosse. Our Answer The reproofe which Irenaeus vseth against Valentinus doth more fully conuince you of an egregious abuse of your Authour because Iraeneus doth plainly iustifie the former sayings of Valentius concerning the Crosse of persecution calling them Benè dicta Good sayings and how shall they be otherwise being the very words of Christ himselfe but he condemneth onely the application of those sentences saying of the Valentinians Bene dicta adaptare cupiunt hijs quae malè sunt ab ipsis inuenta