thinges the first answer is that this was spoken in opposition to Bellarmines consecrating of creatures to signifie and worke supernaturall effects Whiche is very true but this must be added that in this seÌ„teÌ„ce he toucheth only the signification not the operation of those Cere as any that readeth his wordes may observe The second answer is that Daneus elsewhere alloweth some significant Cere But the Rej. should have doen well to name the place or places which he meant by elsewhere For we cannot by conjecture finde it This I am sure of that it is not Isagoge p. 3. l. 3. c. 11. where he sayth that the teaching under the law was 〈◊〉 signes earthly figures as a Schoolmaister speaketh to young children but under the Gospell open and manâ—fest as one dealeth with growen men They then that thrust in significant Ceremonies what doe they but confounde the most wise dispensation of God and make a mingle-mangle of those thinges which he hath separated asunder 6. Polanus misprinted or uncertainly printed in the Abrigement is sayd to allow some significant Ceremonies as feasts Fasts Gestures and his definition of Superstition is thought to make onely against Ceremonies Sacramentall not Morally significant The onely way therfore is to set down his wordes out of which his judgement about this pointe may appear of superstition he sayth thus Syntag. l. 9. c. 3. Superstition stands in chusing worship to God or exceeds measure therein True religion worships the true God in a manner prescribed by the word false that is to say Superstition worships God otherwise then he wills or enjoynes In another place whatsoever perteines to Gods worship must by him be required Againe it is a foolish ill zeale of the popish clergie to use such playerake apparrel in Divine service and by apparrel to be distinguished from laicks that difference and variety was in the old Testament typicall but the substance being come what meane they to require types any more Superstitio est in eligendo cultu Dei vel modum excedit in colendo Vera religio colit Deum verum modo verbo Dei prascripto falsa i.e. superstitio vâ—rum Deum aliter colit quam ipse vult mandat lib. 8. c. 1. Quicquid ad cultum Dei pertinet a Deo mandatum esse aportet lib 9. c. 38. Inopta est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cloeicorum Papistorum qui vestitu theatriâ—â— in sacris utuâ—tur et vestitu laicis distingui volunt Illa defiintio varieras erat in V. T. â—ypica veritate autem ixhibita quid amptiuâ— typos reguirunt 7. The next witnesse is Mr. Perkinse on Gal. 3. but by varietie of editions uncertaine what verse of the Chapter was designed The Rejoynder therfore guesseth that the wordes upon v. 2. or rather 1. were intended where Mr. P. condemneth the setting up of Images to be lay-mens bookes To which he answereth 1. That he also doeth blame the same 2. that Mr. P. in some persons and places preferreth dipping before sprinkling in Baptisme Now for the first of these if the Rejoynder when he writ these wordes condemne with Mr. P. suche images or pictures as are lay-mens bookes it is wonder he forgot or changed this judgement before he came to the seventh section of this very Chapter where he doeth defende them And this is plaine that if images be to be condemned as they are lay mens bookes or teachers then all humane signes ordeyned to be lay-mens teachers in religion are also to be eondemned with them The second is an affected flim-flam For dipping upon just occasion rather then sprinkeling is no more a humane Ceremonieâ— in Baptisme then drinking a convenient draft of wine rather then slight tasting is an humane significant institution But yet howsoever the Rejoynder upon conscience of the consanguinitie betwixt Images and significant Ceremonies did suppose this first verse of the Chapter to be meant by the Authors of the Abr. I thinke rather that they intended the foure and twentie verse where M.P. doeth distinguish betwixt Ceremonies significant and those of Order and sayth that the former sort were alsolutely abolished but the other onely in respect of their speciall determination 8. Maister Merburâ—e was cited out of a Manuscript as it seemeth as giving the same judgement of significant Ceremonies But in his later time he crossed not so muche others as himself in blotting out this sentence I leave therfore his name under that blotte and other like wherwith he soiled himself in his later times 9. D. Witgift him selfe is brought in by Abr. dissliking any praescript apparell should be used in Gods service for significatâ—on Def. pag 291. To this the Rejoynder answereth 1. that in the same place P. Martyr is alledged as approving white apparell for Ministers who are compared to Angels to use in signification of their office because Angel appâ—ared in white which should have put him at the least out of our Bill But it followeth not that therfore all testimonies of Martyrs must be put out of our Bill because he varieth from them in this In the other places he speaketh from good groundes of Divinitie but this reason of his hath no more force in it then if from the picture and apparation of Angels it should be gathered that no Minister should wear a black night-cap a black tippet or a blacke hood which our Canons doe commande or that every Minister should have sixe winges fastened to his body with certain vizard faces like unto the faces of Lions Eagles and open because Angels have so appeared Isa. 6. Ezech. 1. It is answered 2. that we should beleive the sayd D. Whitgift in this that our Surplices are not appointed for any morall signification But we cannot beleiv whatsoever one Prelat sayth of our Ceremonies for to avoyd the dint of Argument though it be against the common profession of our Churche in the very Service-book is presently to be beleived The 3 answer is that D. Whitgift did use defend and urge significant Ceremonies which is true with shame and all but many a man upon the racke of an Argument is brought to confesse that which other while he is woont to denie Finally this consequence is denied D. W. did not approve of the Surplice for signification ergo of no significant Ceremonie the reason of which consequence is given in the Abridgement p. 35. because no good reason can be given why the Churche may not injoine a prescript apparell for signification as well as any other Ceremonie Thus the Rejoynder hath tried what he could say to those testimonies which the Def. had omitted in this place and doeth so please himself therin that he beginneth a plaudite to himself saying that he hath openly whipped the Repliers friends he meaneth the Authors of the Abr. who were wonte to be his reverend friends also But this whipping of his is just as if a man should whippe thornes and prickes with his bare handes getting more gashes therby
his power soveraignty and holines appearing therin unto us This only makes a thing properly sacred but if things of any nature only so farr attend a religious either person thing or performance as that they help not in carying out the act to God and so tendering honor to him but stand only in a distance and subordination as things of necessity or in some conveniency presupposed to goe before a religious work in a common way to that as to other things in the like proportion and have the self same work in that sacred as in civill affaires this is not sacred at all So place and tyme a font will do as much to any civill action as to a sacred So that only religion applyeth and takes to it self that civill circumstance that it might put forth his owne act as upon a stage makes such things do as much for him as for any politike and naturall work Religion serve its turne upon these occasions In a word the ground lyes here The latter art ever useth the work of the former Aâ—s posteriot 〈…〉 tituâ— opeâ—â— How a thâ—ng may â—â—rve a sacred action or be used ecclesiastically yet not be sacred sometymes for necessity sometymes for conveniency and adjoining himself to it doth of it self do its owne work So that the thing is either a subject unto which the act of religion or policy is applyed or else that fitnes which such things have in subordination to have other things to be annexed to them is that common end which such things hould out indifferently by the â—ame rule to civill and sacred actions and ergo are common to them both but are neither properly Instance â—hus A magistrate of the common wealth A Generall in the feild A minister of a congregation they may successively stand upon the same hill the magistrate to deliver the law and judgment to the subject The Geâ—erall to give his charge to the souldiers The Minister â—o preach unto a congregation Is any man such a wiseâ—â—ker as to say this hill is a civill or politike hill a warlike hill a sacred hill because it serves all these actions of poâ—icy warr and religion so that to make the point plaine because we are forced to show forth the feeblenes of the Rej. dispute we will now from these grounds Reader reason and exemplifye that the meanest may understand If to be applyed to a religious affaire make a thing sacred then all things almost and all arts may be sacred because they may be applyed to a matter thing or person religious as the next object and end If the pulpitt be a sacred thing because it is applyed to support the minister preaching then is the ayre sacred it s applyed to his speech in speaking then is the light sacred it s applyed to his eye in reading then are his spectacles sacred for they are used by him reading his text then the two pottle potts which hould the wyne consecrated should be sacred potts Nay the ministers doublett that covers him yea if he was hoarse and tooke some oyle to help his voice they should now become sacred doubletts and sacred oyle The paper book which the preacher looked on when he is out in his sermon should be a sacred paper book and to follow the Rej. if putting on of ashes upon the head be sacred in the day of humiliation then by like proportion when God enjoines people in a fast to putt on their poorest and meanest attyre those ragged bands and ould Capps and Quoifes were sacred bands and Quoifes and Capps But do you laugh at these things masters when the Rej. is so violent in this cause that he breakes the bridle and flyes out against all that will not yeeld to him in this And I would wishe the reader to consider how righteous it is with God to suffer men to fall foully wheÌ„ they will follow their owne imaginations Erewhyle the Rej. made all things Cerem by the loosnes of his definition and now to help the Ceremo he would make all things sacred by the large compasse he gives to religious Cere The vanity of which expression I hope appeares sufficiently by that which hath beene sayd but yet that the meanest may feele with his finger the grossnes of this mistake A pregnant example confuting the falsneâ— of the forâ—eâ— ground I shall add one more instance The height of the sunne or the sound of a clock one the same may at the same tyme in the same city be a directioÌ„ for Protestants Papists Iewes Anabaptists all sects to assemble for religious service It may at the same tyme by the same sound be a direction for magistrats to meet for judicature for drunkards to meet to riott for gaimsters to meet to play for travelers to meet to sett upon their journey so that it hath relation to all these religious politike prophane practises at once I would fayne have the Rej. tell me what a kynd of Ceremony this is If he say religious I then demaund is it Anabaptisticall Papisticall Iudaicall Lutheran Protestant Arminian superstitious or truely religious cerem is it any one of these or all of these for to them all it serves in their intentions and purposed observation and by the institution of him that sett it up happely Nay it hath relation to many other affaires and so it shall be a politike civill cerem it serves to that end it may be called a riding a playing a drunken ceremo for it serves at once to all these purposes and in all their intentions and purposed observations hath equall relations unto all Againe those things whose end is immediatly Gods honour they must be able to cause that honour for each thing can reach his owne and immediate end in the course of nature or rationall institution one tyme or other But all things which only attend upon religious affaires can never attaine this end or cause the worship of God in lifting up his honour of this kynd are tyme and place being bare circumstances the like may be sayd of the font which is no more sacred then the mudd banks were that contained the water of IordaÌ„ wher baptisme was celebrated Thus of the definition in the generall some other specialls be in the explication whereof I shall desire the Rej. judgment and help a little that I may understand his meaning at his next returne When he sayth pag. 36. Pag. 36. If the next immediate use belong to religion as Ieroboams setting up of his calves that the people might worship there the action shall be construed religious whether true or falsely so called Ioyne to this the words of the eight corallary which goe thus It is not the same end and use which maketh a ceremony part of divine worship I desire a reconciliation of these two For That which makes actions such species of religious worship as Ieroboams bowing to the Calves that makes them parts of divine worship though false
on the true part and and the Replier on the false But when the practise of Religion is derided on stages and that derision applauded by so many spectators when those that make conscience of sinne be they never so conformable are scorned by so many as Puritans when in all Pulpits that are possessed of good Preachers warning is ordinarily given of scoffers and scorners at Religion I thinke the Rej. will not finde so many assenting to this negation as he shall to the point of Conformitie His meaning is such that by the same reason it may be sayd ther is no professed contemner of all Christian Religion among the Papists nor of all Religion among the Turkes Carnal proceedings in Spiritual Courts 10. The quaestion was if suche courses were in the Primitive Church The Rejoynder confesseth no. But sayth he for excuse they are not instituted nor allowed by our Church The confession I accept the excuse cannot be excused Are not those courses instituted or allowed which are every day practised in the Bishops Chancelours Commissaries and Officials Courts Is it not the Church that practizeth these things Doeth the Church neyther institute nor allow that which it continualy practizeth The Rejoynder in his Definition of a Ceremonie confoundeth Institution and Observation now constant observation is without any institution Is our Church a Medea in professing she alloweth better thinges and professedly practiseth worse meliora video proâ—oque deteriora sequor If this be true what need any man make any conscience of those Excommunications which sent from our Spiritual Courts flie about the wholle land to fetch in mony the Church doeth not â—llow them It is no scurrilitie I hope to repeate that which D. Andrues preached to the Convocation-house The Church-Censures now a-dayes do onely touch the purse Censurae Ecclesia solam jam crumenam pulsant Malefici ubs stipem persolverint dimittuntur impuniti Stipem si nulli numereut si nummus in promptu non est tum vero disringitur in eos mucro Episâ—opalis confestim uno ictu abscinduntur ab Ecclesia Sathama traduntur publicani ethnici anathema denunâ—iaâ—tur Ridiculis in rebus idque in optimum quemque volitant bruta fulmina soli metuenda crumena Evil doers when they have payd their fee returne scot-free If no money then have at the offendors with the Episcopal â—word praesently one blow they are cut off from the Church delivered over unto Satan proclaimed Publicans Heathens Anathema For the most ridiculous things and against every good man these brutish thunderbolts do fly up and downe and onely to be feared of the purse Taking of mony for Ordination Citations Absolutions Change of Paenance c. 11. Concerning any shew of these abuses in the Primitive Church our Rejoynder hath nothing to say He turneth himself therfor to denie or defend them 〈◊〉 our Church so well as he canne 1. No man with â—â— sayth he may take mony for Ordination To which I answer if may be understood of a lawfull may I think it iâ— true not onely of our Church but also of Rome as may be gathered out of the fift Session at Trent But such mays are kept in the pocket both there and heer wheâ— the contrarie may de facto appeareth publickly in the face and forehead If any one Minister be ordeyned oâ— instituted without giving of mony a hundred other may wonder at him and the Starre or Planet that was then over the place 2. As for Citations and Absolutionâ— they sayth the Rejoynder are things of industrie necessarily to be recorded and therfor mony may be taken for them As if ther were more industrie in Absolution then in Ordination in Baptisme or any other Ecclesiastical Act oâ—ther were more necessitie of recording Absolution then Ordination or Baptisme And if ther were such a difference or if all these required industrie in recording of them I hope the revenues and in-comings of our Bishops may suffize for that industrie without new exactions of mony 3. He affirmeth Commutation or Panance to be grounded on Exod. 21.29.30 where it is written that the price of an Oxe or Bull may be taken for he head and it is allowed addeth the Rejoynder by â— Ames Cas. Consc. lib. 5. cap. 54. num 48. where he â—â—yth that the party condemned to pay twenty pound fine may â—â—wfully pay it before it be required to escape the extorting â—f forty pound or a greater mischeif But if eyther this or â—hat make any thing for changing the publicke confesâ—ion of a scandalous sinne into paying of money I leave with this wholle comparison oâ— faces as the Rejoynâ—er doeth to the Iurie of discreet unpartial and honest â—en SECT 7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20 Councels and Ancient Writers THese testimonies were as illustrations breifly brought in of the Abrigers but largely ranked by the Defender into so many sections as 〈◊〉 the main burden did lye upon them The Replier â—â—erfore conjoined them in brief and so will I not pasâ—â—ng upon the Rejoynder his many words whoe sayth 〈◊〉 That in the Abrigement they fill seven whole pages â—hen as these answered by the Defend in 14. Sections make in the Abrigement litle more than one page 〈◊〉 He desireth us also to help their dulnesse whoe cannot â—istinguish betwixt testimonies and proofes To which â—hough it be but skornfully propounded of them that accuse us of dull Sophistrie cap. 2. sect 11. I answer that common use of speach doth shew a difference betwixt some testimonies or witnesses and proofs For all good Christians are sayd to give witnesse unto God and his truthe but not properly to prove eyther God or his Word 2. Out of a Carthaginian Synod two thinges were alleged 1. that certaine Altars in high wayes erecteâ— in memorie of Martyrs should be abolished 2. Thaâ— all reliques and monuments of Idolatry should be utterly destroyed In the first the Replier confessed that there is nothing expresse to our purpose because those Altar are noted which are destitute of Martyrs reliques Yeâ— sayth he there was as good reason for abolishing other as them No answereth the Rejoynder because by thâ—sâ— Altars destitute of reliques the Church was mocked And sâ— was the Church mocked say I by those which had reliques in them not onely because they had no certaine rule of discerning true reliques from false but also because they were by such meanes induced to place a speciall holinesse in those places and led-on to the invocation of Saints departed The second place is expounded by the Defend anâ— Rejoynd onely of Idols and immediate instruments of Idolatry which cannot bee true except all places groves anâ— greene trees there mentioned which had serued to the use of notorious Idolatry were immediate instruments And if that were so why not or were not once ouâ— Ceremonies as immediate Because sayth the Rejoynd they were rather subjects of superstition Which is a new nothing For subjects often are al one with objects and maâ—y objects of superstition
begun to thinke of this course behold our most illustrious Prince commanded me to doe it which command of his did not onely spurre me on who of mine owne accord was already running but laid a necessity of writing upon me Wherefore this my boldnesse will seeme the lesse strange unto your gracious Majesty seeing my writing proceedeth not so much from mine owne will and counsell of friends as from the commandement of my most Noble Prince who is one of your gracious Majesties speciall friends Now I thought I should doe a matter very worth the paines taking if first I should humbly admonish your most famous Majestie what your dutie is in this cause and secondly if as your humble suppliant I should beseech you for our Lord Iesus Christs sake to performe the same I beseech your gracious Majesty to take this my writing in good part for it proceedeth from a Christian love toward the Church and from an especiall reverend respect that I beare to your most gracious Majesty The Lord knoweth all things Now to the matter in hand Whereas the Apostle writing to Timothie commandeth that prayers be made for Kings and all other that be in authority and saith that the end wherefore they be ordained is that wee may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all that is perfect godlinesse and honestie he teacheth plainly enough what is the dutie of Godly Kings and Princes namely that they take care and bring to passe that first above all things true religion and the true worship of God where it is banished bee restored and being restored bee kept pure all things which smell of impiety being farre removed Secondly that men may live honestly and holily all kinds of uncleannesses beeing abandoned Lastly that publicke peace holy friendship be maintained among the subjects all occasions of contentions being as much as possible may be taken out of the way As the Apostle teacheth manifestly as we have seene so all learned men who bee of sound judgement concerning the Magistrats office doe with one consent affirme that these be the three chiefe parts of the office of the Prince and of every godly Magistrate Which thing being so I see not how your gracious Majestie can with good conscience propound againe the garments in question and other things of that kinde smelling as yet of Popish superstition and once banished out of the Churches to the consciences of the Bishops * Pauls Bishops hee meaneth or else as I sayd before he is misinformed to be taken on againe and so propound them that you should compell them by your commandement to receive them againe For first this is quite contrary to the first and chiefe part of the Princes office For if the Magistrate ought to have a chiefe care that the worship of God be kept pure and without mixture and if for this cause all things are to be abandoned which may any way either by themselves or by accident defile this worship and therefore all things are to be called backe as much as may be to the rule of God and to the former and Apostolicall and so the more pure and simple forme of religion Finally if as the Apostle commandeth we bee to abstaine not onely from all evill but also from all appearance of evill to what end I beseech you most renowned and most godly Queene should those things be brought againe into the Church of God by the Princes commandement which be contrary to the purity of the Apostolicall worship which smell of Popish superstition which bee neither availeable to the aedification of the godly nor to order nor for ornament except that which is whoorish which lastly can bring no profit but on the contrary many evills to the Church It is out of all doubt that by this law concerning apparrell all godly men will bee offended but the wicked will laugh in their sleeve and hereby be putt in hope to get many moe things as for those of the middle sort that is such as be newly converted and turned from ungodlines to godlines and be not as yet well grounded they will be in great danger and if we speake according to mans judgement they will rather looke back to the old superstition to which by nature wee are inclined then fixe and fasten their eyes upon true religion And therfore this is a decree which will bring no avancement at all to godlines but may much further ungodlinesse For though these garments be not evill and uncleane of and by themselves that is of their owne nature yet because of the former and late abuse they are not altogether free from uncleannesse Certainly it cannot be denied but that they will at the least give occasions of many evills and very grievous superstitions Now the very occasions also of evills are to be shunned To what end then should these be thrust upon the Church from whom no profit can be hoped very much evill may come for this is to tempt God Your famous Majesty may well remember that not without cause it was written Hee that toucheth pitch shall be defiled with it that the Apostle had reason to command that we should purge out the old leaven that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe And that Hosea did not foolishly reprove the Iewes because they translated and brought a yong graffe of superstitions out of Israel into their owne garden that is the true Church We ought most religious Queene to have nothing at all to doe with the Papists in matter of religion save in those things which they have common with the Apostles Why I beseech you were some kings otherwise godly reproved and blamed in the Scriptures that they had not taken away Churches or Temples for divine service in the mountaines which were built by holy Fathers ere the building of the Temple in which the Lord was wont to be worshipped Surely because the Temple being now builded and ordained for divine service God would not have any footsteps of any other chappell at all to be extant Therfore also when once the kingdome of Christ was manifested the Ceremonies and garments of Aaron ought not any more to take place For this cause the Apostles were upon good ground carefull that after Christs ascention they should so be taken away that no relickes of them remained And if they tooke them away holily unholily have the Papists called them back againe Now whether is the better to â—ollow the godly simplicity of the Apostles or the ungodly pompe of the Papists who is ignorant This recalling of such Popish garments your gracious Majesty may beleeve me will be a greater evill then peradventure it may be seene even to very wise men at the first blush For me thinkes I see and heare the Monks crying out with very loud voyces in the Pulpits both confirming their followers in their ungodly religion by the example of your gracious Majesty and also saying What doth not even the Queene of England also a most
people vvho liue in the bosome of the Church professe the fayth be vvholly taken up vvith conformity both approving practising of it countenancing those that do it VVhy is the Doctor so troubled that a fevv silly despicable people voyd of vvisdome nay if his former charges be true voyd of grace should distast the Ceremonyes vvhen I knovv no Iudicious Non-conformer is disquieted that the crovvde of the formall Gospellers should imbrace them vvhyle the Rej. is searching the reason of these things it may chance he may either search or see his ovvne heart somvvhat more clearely Leaving then these to his consideration Proceed vve a little to survay the praeface the substance of it may be referred to three heads 1. He chargeth Non-conformity to be cause of many mischeifes 2. He debates the cure administreth that vvhich he conceaved most meet for redresse 3. He makes a defense for himself vvriting Agaynst all vvhich vve eycept thus 1. That his charge is not just 2. His dealing in the cure not playne through 3. His defense in that vvhere the stresse lyes either not equall or not sufficient Come vve to skanne the particulars The mischeifs vvhich he conceaues to issue from Non-conformity are no lesse then Seperation prophanesse A heavy charge I confesse but the best is his reasons haue not the vvayt of a rush 1. That of seperation p. 5. is supported upon so slender a grounde that he bevvrayes only his desire to haue surpassed his povver therfore Rhetoricates in stead of reasoning If these sayth he be Idolatrous vvill vvorshipps hovv can you hovv dare you ioyne vvith us in those acts of Religion vvherein these are used VVherein he neither concludeth the quaestion because a man may refuse to ioyne in such acts vvithout sepera 〈…〉 or utter condemning renouncing allChurch-â—ommunion Neither doth he proue that vvhich he conâ—ludeth about joyning in such acts by any other argumeÌ„t â—ut only by hovv can you hovv dare you To vvhich â— ansvver vve so can darejoyne in good acts to vvhich â—omthing perticipating of Idolatry is added as Christ our â—eacher his Apost did joyne in the Ievvesvvorship unto vvhich vvere added many superstitions as unlavvfull as â—ve had our Cerem Nay I vvill add one thing further â—hat if D.B. be resolute in this poynt i.e. that he must â—eperate from all Churches Church actions in â—vhich any superstition is exercised then he must be one of the greatest Seperatists in the vvorld For â—e holding error of judgement to be superstition those â—uperstitious BrethreÌ„ that absteyne for conscience sake â—rom things lavvfull though only upon error in judgeâ—ent must upon the former ground seperate froÌ„ all those Churches in vvhose Religious acts any thing in his judâ—ement lavvfull is so absteyned from much more if â—ny thing in his opinion unlavvfull be put in practise â—rom one of vvhich faults fevv or no Churches vvill be â—ound vvholly free Yet I vvould haue another opinion â—f D. B. think that though he houlde bovving to â—he altar to be superstitious or Idolatrous yet vvould he not therfore seperate from the good prayers that follovv that ridiculous Ape of Idolatry That Other charge of prophanenesse p. 6. pretended to come from praecisenes is so strange a consequence that it can hardly vvith deliberation be fathered upon Non-conformity vvithout Non-conscience For strictnesse in matters of Cerem hath no more force to bring forth loosenes in matters of substance then zeale in matters of faith charity hath to bring forth carelessnes of both nay then pure Religion hath to breed Atheisme Goe vve to experience vievv the places vvhere Non-conformists liue the people vvhom they teach the vvayes of those vvith vvhom they vvalk vvho they be that haue reference to dependence upoâ— their persons or ministeryes I suppose the vvalls of the Churches the stones of the streets vvill giue testimony agaynst this accusation Nay I suppose I may speake it truly as I professe I think it that someone Non-conformable minister hath beene a meanes under God to bring more soules to grace heauen then all the Cloysters or Cathedralls in all England in the same time vvhere all Conformity hath beene the dayly diet liuelehood of the people Goe vve to reason the best that either the Rej. or any beside can make of our Cerem is that they are things indifferent Novv that vveake ones may doubt stagger about such That doubting they ought not to practise them 14. Rom last vers is made a duty That mens vvalking according to conscience should be the cause of others disobedience That keeping the lavv should be an occasion in it self of prophaning the lavv that stopping the very appearance of the least evill should sett open a gappe to the greatest I appeale to any reasonable man vvhether it be not a consequence voyd of common sense unlesse men haue a miraculous skill to soder quicksilver or tysande together or make heauen earth meet Last of all it is remarkable that Doctor Burgesse himself pa. 8. doth impute these mischeifes unto civill vvarr about Ceremonies vvhich if it be vvell vveighed it vvill manifest too much prejudice in his former discourse For in Civill vvarrs the mischeifs ensuing on them are not vvont to be charged upon one part alone that poore passive overpovvred obnoxious to the suffering of vvhat-soever pressures their opposites please to lay upon them vvhich is the Case of the Non-conformists in these Commotions Tell us I pray yovv if in your conscience the Praelats Canons courses Courts proceedings haue had no hand in vvorking mischeife nay diverse of these mischeifes vvhich you haue affectedly placed on the other syde If non-residents double treble beneficed men unable perverse scandalous half-Popish Ministers haue not had a finger in them If those trumpetours drummers vvho proclayme the innocency justnesse of our Prelats proceedings haue not brought something to the furtherance of these mischeifes If you speake your conscience it must needs say yes so confesse it vvas your passion not your judgement that obtruded all upon Non-conformity The state of this vvarr is this vvee as it becommeth Christians stand upon the sufficiency of Christs institutions for all kynde of vvorship and that exclusively the vvord say vve nothing but the vvord in matters of Religious vvorship The Praelats rise up on the other side vvill needs haue us allovve use certayne humane Ceremonyes of Religion in our Christian vvorship VVe desire to be excused as houlding them unlavvfull Christ vve knovv all that cometh from him vve are ready to imbrace But these human Cerem in divine vvorship vve knovv not nor can haue any thing to doe vvith them upon this they make feirce vvarr upon us yet by the penne of D. B. lay all the fault of this vvarr the mischiefes of it upon our backs Novv all yee that passe by consider judge vvhat aequity is used
up to heaven to lift up our hands and to bow our knees when we pray unto God Note also the varying of the phrase In civill cerem he requireth an immediate civill object end but in sacred he will have it enough that the immediate object and end be matter pertaining to religion There may be some purpose in this to excluâ—e all civill Cerem and so civility out of matters pertaining to religion that all things being counted religious humaine misticall Ceremo in religion may not be discerned from common observations which are equally and often used to the same immediate end both in civill and in religious matters These things reserved the substance of this partition may passe together with the illustrations of it Only one illustration I would have remembred for future use An action saith the Rej. imperated of religion or springing out of the feare of God may be civill and belong to the second table This is that which some of our Divines meane when they speake of mediate worship that is there be duties belonging to the second table imperated or governed by religion but not immediatly flowing from it This the Rej. taketh hould of in many places and maketh thus actions religious which here he calleth civill The conclusion drawen out of this partition is that they have the spirit of contradiction which say that the church may not ordaine Cer. meerely ecclesiasticall but only common because all Cer. in religious affaires are mâ—erely ecclesiastical And besyde the crosse surplice have ther civill use as a crosse for a shop signe c. But if one spirit crosse another Contradiction those spirits must be tryed saith the Apost and where ther is want of reason and good ground there is that spirit which the Rej. blameth and objecteth to others Now upon a short triall it may appeare where it waketh The Rej. tould us before that some ceremonies are mixt partly civill and â—artly sacred now he telleth us with the same breath that any ceremony in religious affayres is meerely sacred and ecclesiasticall And by proportion any Cerem in civill affaires must needs be meerely civill what then is become of the mixt or common sort here sure is a contradiction from what spirit soever it come 2. What â—n assertion is this any ceremony used in religious affayâ—es is meerely sacred If men and women come purposely in their best apparell to church if they compose themselves to a grave posture give the upper place to â—he cheifest persons and take such to themselves as they may heare the preacher in and yet have no exception taken against them for it if all the places and seats be made cleanly and fitt for a meeting to be held in a comely fashion all these are ceremo according to the Rej. his definition yet no man but out of contention â—ill affirme they are meerely religious or ecclesiasticall For all these in the same manner to the same immediate end the same persons would doe if the meeting were to heare the magistrate propound unto them a grave civill busines concerning the common wealth affaires And surely that which remaining the same may be civill Many Ceremonies are of common use in things civill ecclesiastick is not meerely and properly ecclesiasticall but common to both uses and rather meerely civill then meerely ecclesiasticall because civility is supposed and included in ecclesiasticall affaires but ecclesiasticall proceedings are supposed and included in civill D r. Iackson in his originall of unbeleef pag. 337. doth wel observe That decent behaviour doth change the subject only not alter its owne nature and forme whilest it s used in matters sacred Nor is the habit of civill complement or good manners such an unhallowed weed as must be layd asyde when we come into the sanctuary And indeed there is no more reason to shutt civility out of the church or sacred busines then to shutt religion out of the towne-house or civill affaires 3. That which is added of a civill use of the Ceremon in quaestion doeth nothing agree If a porter or baker weare a lynnen garment in the Church upon occasion as at other tymes no man will except against it or account it a ceremony ecclesiasticall or religious A crosse that is used for a shopp signe hath no ecclesiasticall or civill use in religion except ther be so many temples in one place that they must be distinguished by signes as shopps are As for the examples mentioned before of the Bishops in their formalities and the Clerks in their surplices at a funerall for civill use I answer the immediat end of such formalities is religious even in that they are characters of ecclesiasticall persons and their religious office Are not Rochetts and such like formalities ecclesiasticall ceremonies being signes of cheif ecclesiasticall officers as such The furnerall at which they are present doth no more make them civill then among the Papists it maketh all their superstition to become a civill order Nay by this it appeareth that both civill ceremonies may be used in ecclesiasticall affaires and ecclesiasticall cerem in civill affaires because both may be used in the same affaires To traverse these notioÌ„s more full I add these considerations These words matter pertaining to religion added in the explication of sacred cerem may cary a double sense Pag. 35. The definition of sacred ceremon discussed 1. That it is enough to make ceremonies sacred if this be their end to be serviciceable to some thing which is an ordinance or to some person in a holy function or performance of an ordinance and this seemes to be the Rej. meaning for his examples cary this meaning when wearing of blackes rending of garments in dayes of humiliation are made by him sacred cer as also by those words wherein he is so peremptory and expresseth his lordly censuring even of mens hearts in lusting after contradiction if they deny ceremonies used in religious affaires to be meerely ecclesiasticall but this we conceave to be false hope it hath in part and shall appeare to be more plainly in the following discourse Secondly it may cary this sense that is truely sacred when the object is God and his honour aymed at immediatly as when we kneele to God in prayer we do not kneele to the scripture or man praying but God directly or when the next object is a holy thing but so attended as by that or in the use of that we tender up honor to God and attaine that end As the minister preacheth the word to the people and they heare it preached but by both and in the virtue of both according to Gods appointment the heart is caried in holy affections and apprehensions to him and so both hould out Gods honor So Sacraments given and receaved excommunicatioÌ„ dispensed they hould out the spirituall government of God and his honor unto us bring our hearts under his hand to give that honour which is due to
passion and profession for him Abusively reductive sacred Cerem sayth the Rej. are Idolatrous superstitious Idolatrous respecting a wrong object Superstitious made divine in termes or in effect Impious casting-off Gods Cerem or obscuring the Gospell by representing the History and mystery thereof by dumbe showes as in the Pageants of the Masse Here againe the same fault is committed that opposite members of a distribution are made subordinate one to another and may be predicated or affirmed as Genus and Species which is an infinite feeblenes in a judicious disputer for are not idolatrous impious are not superstitious impious Ceremo as those which professedly crosse the first and second commaund wherein pyety is most properly placed and thus divisions fill up places and breed confusion CHAP. VI. Concerning the difference betwixt popish Ceremon and ours in regard of necessity holines and efficacy wherein how far we joyne with the Papists is fully discussed by the confession of papists themselves TO lett passe the first abuse of Idolatry Superstition is confessed to be present where the proper service of God or merit necessity holines and efficacy by the churches â—nstitution or the doers merit or when omission of them is â—ounted a synne without contempt or scandall as it is amongst â—he Papists sayth the Rej. We are now come by this distinction to discerne the differences betwixt the popish Cerem and ours theirs being condemned and abominated and that justly for â—hese evills which are found in them but ours are wholâ—y acquitted as though they shared not in the same guilt Lett us therfore enquire into this busines with that receaved caution heare the other syde Audi alteram Partem First as touching merit which is attributed to the doing of Ceremo by Papists the difference here lyes not firstly in Cerem in particular but about good works in generall the Papists making all good works of beleevers to be meritorious and we denying that presumption But set that controversye asyde our Prelates professed the observation of our Cerem to be good works of the same kynd that many of the learned Papists doe many of theirs The mainy enquiry lies about propriety of worship necessity holines efficacy And merit being excluded if these be found in ours as well as in those of the papists they will prove guilty as thers and with thers to be condemned How we joyne with Papists in giving propriety of worship to Cere Balthasar Chavasius Iesuita de notis verae religionis lib. â— cap. 2. sic dicit Minores Ceremoniae de respectu maâ—orum quod cum hae praecipui sunt momenti ac divinuÌ„ cultum per se directe respiciunt illae catenus tantum ad colendum Deum conferant quatenus ad ornatuÌ„ significationemque ejusmodi cultus vel praecipuarum ejus praetium conferant Enquire we then of the severalls 1. In the doctrine of worship I see not how or wherein the Iesuites doe differ from the Def. and Rej. about such Ceremonies as ours Balthasar Chavasius the Iesuite in his notes of true religion sayth thus Ceremonies are called lesser in respect of those which are tearmed greater because these are held of greatest consequence and to appertaine to divine worship of themselves and directely but those to witt such are cerem of lesser note they so farr conduce to the worshipping of God as they serve for the ornament signification of such worship or the speciall parts thereof which is so pat the Rej. Def. doctrine that they may seeme to have translated his words For necessity to salvation no learned Papist ever writt or taught any such thing of all their Cerem Darbyshyre Bonners Chapplyne and Kynsman professed to M r. Thomas Haukes Martyr that no Ceremon besyde those which Christ himself instituted are necessary to salvation but only for instruction whereupon M r. Haukes answered God send me the salvation and take you the instruction If necessity of observance be respected which the Def. ca. 6. sect 3. calleth obedientiall that is not only as great in our Cere as in any of the Papists and more also but advanced by D r. Covell to aequipage with the Decalogue and D r. B. by his silence yeelding unto him and imitating of him doth seeme to subscribe to his sentence and certaine it is that he writt with Achyepis allowance Ecclesiasticall constitution sayth he doth change the nature of indifferent things by vertue of the commaundement they become necessary Mens Lawes whyle they are in force commaunding or forbidding bynde the conscience as the Decalogut doth in his preface to the confutation of Dr. B. his Apologye The Rej. comes not far short of this plea pag. 42. where he sayth They are ordeyned to be used necessarily in respect of order and peace though in respect of judgment and immediate conscience to God freely How the Rej. and Papists agree touching the necessity of Ceremonies The former part of these words layeth more necessiâ—y upon our Cerem then the learned Papists do upon all theirs The latter doth take away no more then the like words of theirs do as by and by shall appeare In the meane tyme let him that can unriddle me this They are ordained to be used necessarily in respect of order and peace though in respect of Iudgment and immediate conscience to God freely Is there one conscience mediate and another immediate Is necessity of order and peace free in judgment and immediate Conscience Can any creature or is any so foolish as to say they can lay a bond upon conscience immediate to God Is it not a contradiction for men by their authority to bynd immediatly to Gods authority The truth is our convocation doth make our Ceremonies as necessary as they can either by ecclesiasticall Civill or Divine authority whereas the Papists say they can make many of theirs more necessary then they doe if they would And yet in all their highest pitch is they call them necessary Non ex necessitate salâ—tis sed ex institutione Ecclesiae Non ex necessitate sacramenti sed praecepti Bell. do effect Sacra cap. 21. propoâ— 2. â— Not out of any necessity to salvation but out of the churches institution and enjoyned the Sacramentalia not by any necessity of a sacrament but of a commaundement of the church and we do no lesse For making it synne to omitt these cere even without the case of scandall contempt 1. This no learned papist doth say of all their cer as you shall heare streight 2. Our practise doth say so much in that bare ommission where none are scandalized or contemned is made a fault punishable nay more then that when by the practise of them many are scandalized and great contempt doth follow to some users of them yet is it a capitall fault for them to omitt them so longe untill they may use them without scandall and contempt And what hath beene sayd of worship necessity and synne as that we
appointing positive observances do seeme to include the negations of them as of the same kynd Bapâ—ize not without crossing doe not divine service without surplice communicate not without kneeling so that â—y this meanes they are made guilty of double superâ—tition 2. The practise of superstitious persons in those dayes condemned here by the verdit of this place caries no proportion or resemblance with our cessation or negative absteining from cerem because there touch not â—ast not c. were taken up by virtue of mans imposiâ—ion and for the more speciall worship of God When baâ—e cessations of evill come to be worship in a more peculiar manner but we cease from ours by virtue of another rule with no such intent as to present any peculiar kynd of honor to God therby And thus absteining from our Ceremon as unlawfull upon conscience though they were lawfull cannot be superstition except first it be an elicited act of religion or worship Such worship it cannot be except either in the intention of the absteiner or in the nature of the forbearance it be used as a meanes to give unto God speciall honor that is other and more immediate honor then we do by acts of obedience common to the second table with the first But this is neither in our intention nor doth the nature of such forbearance as we use implye it For that common charge which usually occurrs in scripture cease to do evill Isay. 1. Absteine from all appearance of evill 1. Thess. 5. is a duty of obedience in generall common to both tables Now if it be onely materially determined upon a work of the second table not formally elicited from love or justice to our brother it is no act of love or â—ustice As if a man hating his neighbour should yet for feare of Gods judgment absteine from killing of him this was no act of love or justice toward him Even so absteining from our Cerem as evill for feare of offending God though it may materially be referred to the first table yet cannot it be an elicited act of worship except it floweth from religion or a desire to do speciall honor to God therby 3. These negative prohibitions were so plainly the Commaundements of men ver 22. that from hence our divines do commonly argue against such popish Cerem as ours are And therfore Papists in their commentaries as Estius ad Corn. de lapide c. upon that place do strive to putt-off that blow from their Cerem but yet are constrained to confesse unprofitable and superfluous Ceremo or instituted by a meere humaine spirit such as ours are to be in those words condemned If therfore this place be the plainest reason which the Def. and Rej. have of charging us with superstition it is plaine enough there was more affection and affectation then reason in this weighty charge 4. Whether any definition of superstition will beare up this weighty charge forced upon those that reject humaine Cerem the Rej. will not try by the Schoolemen because he loveth them not so well but only by a Definition which is found in D. Ames his Medulla but passing by the Schoolemen he might have found in our Divines Definitions very fitt for this triall as that of Vrsyne Tom. 1. in praecept 2. Superstition is that which â—dds humaine inventions to divine praecepts That of D r. Fulk in Act. 17. Sect. 4. A will worship is more then â— appointed by the law of God That of M r. Perkyns on â—he second commaund Superstition is worship of God â—ithout his commaundement c. For ther is not one â—f our writers who treateth of superstition and doth â—ot give such descriptions of it as from them it may â—e concluded that the rejecting of such Ceremon as â—â—urs are is so farr from superstition that it is the oppoâ—ing of superstition Yet let him choose by what Definiâ—ions the cause shall be tryed 5. The Definition which he maketh choice of is Superstition is that wherby undue worship is exhibited to God â—rom hence the Rej. collecteth and assumeth 1. that superstiâ—ion properly is in the opinion and mynd of the worshipper â— That a man may imagine himself to honor God in the use â—f such things as God hath not forbidden or condemned and â—hereupon forbeare even for conscience to God things lawfull â— That the very not doing of things prohibited in the first â—able if it be for conscience to God is worship Now the first of these is to fetch quidlibet ex quolibet any thing out of every thing For ther is nothing in the Definiâ—ion alledged from whence by any logick it can be concluded that superstition is properly in opinion and mynd 2. The assertion is as false as untowardly colâ—ected for though inward superstition be in the mynd or soule and springeth from an erronious opinion yet neither it nor any morall vice or virtue doth properly consist in opinion but rather in affection and disposition of the heart and will as all that consider of the matter will easily perceave and confesse And as for outward superstition that consisteth in outward observances 3. The second collection serveth nothing to the purpose Neither yet the conclusion drawne from it that there may be a negative superstition yet is it so intricately sett downe that it conteyneth a kynd of contradiction for the forbearing of things lawfull is termed the use of such things in what sense I cannot conjecture The last would prove something if it were generally true as it is not The avoyding of synne or things forbidden by God is an act of common obedience belonging as well to things forbidden in the second table as to those that are forbidden in the first And the terminanation of this act upon matters of the first table doth no more make it properly worship toward God then the like termination of it upon the matters of the second table doth make the same act properly justice oâ— charity towards men It may in this or that particular be imperated or commaunded by religion to God and in others by charity to men but it is not in that particular elicited or naturally flowing from either as worship doth from religion and bounty from charity The Def. and Rej. absteine every day upon conscience from innumerable things forbidden concerning Gods worship as from Popish Idolatries Mahometicall impostures all the rabble of those divillish divises which are among the Heathen Yet I doe not thinke that they themselves conceive their acts of dayly worship to arise in account unto such a number as is there to be found of such things forbidden The plaine truth is that an absteining froÌ„ this or that instituted or chosen to be observed in the worship of God for the honouring of God â—herby is a kynd of Cere worship But the mere absteining from this or that unlawfull action upon conscience of Gods commaund is no speciall worship nor was ever â—o esteemed 6. But out of D.A. who
sayth That Religion is an observaÌ„ce wherby we performe those things which directly belong to the giving of honour to God so much may be wruÌ„g â—s the Rej. meaneth viz. that if any observance be made of â—et doing any thing which God hath not forbidden of purpose directly to give honour to God in the not doing thereof this must needs be an excesse of religion a negative superstition Iust so as not observing is observance not doing a thing is â—erformance of it as the purposed absteining from that which â—ppeareth a dishonouring of God is a dirâ—ct giving of honour â—nto him 7. Neither is the other allegation out of D. A. to any better purpose than the former There is a suâ—erstitioÌ„ sometimes in absteining from certaine lawfull things viz. when some singular service honour is by that abstineÌ„ce â—ntended Did the Rep. ever deny this Nay doeth he not â—xpresly confesse as much in these words The superstiâ—ions excesse of religion doâ—th sometimes seeme to consist in a â—egation viz. when tâ—at very negation abstinence or forbearing is held for a speciall worship The Rej. indeed seemeth to finde a difference in that terme of singular But that is to finde a knott in a rush For by singulâ—r D r. A. meant the same thing which the Replyer meant by speciall according as theis termes are ofteÌ„ promiscuously used The descant therfore which the Rej. maketh upon this occasioÌ„ that we fancy our non-coÌ„formity so singular a piece of service a singular point of piety and of true syncerity this I say is but a declamatory venting of bitter but ungrounded surmizes We account our abstinence from theis Cerem no speciall or particular worship much lesse singular for degree of excellency nor doe we esteeme it a point of piety more singular than to absteine from swearing by the Masse Some point of sincerity there is in refusing theis mixtures but not worship or so singular in our opinion as the Rej. would perswade his readers to our singular prejudice wroÌ„g Many things are singular faults if they be admitted the leaving of which is no singular commendation What if some had rather never preach the Gospel or receive the supper than tell a lye for those endes Will the Rej. thence conclude that they make the absteining from a lye a more singular piece of worship and piety than either Word or Sacraments I would be loath to undertake the prooving of such a wilde consequence Divine and blessed Bradford refused to be admitted unto the Ministery by B. Ridley except he might be excused from the abusive formalities then and now in use yet Gardiner nor Boner neither did nor being asked would therefore as is probable have accused him of Superstition as esteeming the absteining from those abuses more singular service of God or piety than all he might doe and did afterward in the ministery 8. The examples brought by the Rej. are like unto his Reasons 1. The Pharisees did superstitiously restrainâ— labour on the Sabbath beyond that which God imposed this was a negative superstition True it was an humaine inâ—tituted Ceremony somethâ—ng like unto Popish holy â—ayes But the Pharisees absteining from the feasts of Bacchus Venus c. was no speciall worship 2. The â—hilasâ—ims not treading on Dagons thâ—eshold was negative â—uperstition True as the former It was an observation â—nstituted to honour Dagon by But their not-admitâ—ing of Circumcision was no superstition When thereâ—ore upon such wretched examples and reasons as theis â—re the Rej is so confident in laying his weighty charge â—f Superstition upon us as that he pronounceth all the â—ater of Nilus not to be sufficient to wash us from grosse suâ—erstition the understanding reader hath no cause to â—hinke otherwise but that even the Rej. may have a â—onfident full persuasion such as that he buildeth much â—n and yet but hollow empty supporters for the upâ—olding of it 9. Such also are his distinctions whereby as with a wett finger he dischargeth the Convocation of all suâ—erstition because they impose the Ceremonies not as â—hings directly properly immediatly but onely consequently â—nd mediately belonging to the giving of honour to God For 1. If they be consequently directed to God in â—eaching of men Gods will as the word doeth they are â—irect worship unlesse preaching be no worship 2. If â—hey be worship proper to this office they are proper worship 3. If they be worship belonging to the first â—able then they are immediately worship But all the former are true as was before shewed yet one thing more would be knowne what reason the Rej. hath to place the observance of our Cerem for the kynde of it in one degree of distance and latitude and the rejecting of them in another It seemeth to be as if the English day and night should be so disioyned that our night should be in England and our day in China When he further expounds himselfe we shall be more able to discerne his meaning 10. Last of all For ending of this quaestion about superstition I require a resolution of this not-unlike Quaere which with change of persons conteineth the same case Seeing there be different opinions concerning our Diocesan Bishops places and functions eveâ— among them that make benefitt of them some holding them to be of divine institution or else not lawfull so that as they say without this perswasion they would give over their Bishopricks to day before to morrow Others holding them onely of humaine Institution and yet lawfull Let him I say tell us plainly whether the Prelates of this later opinion may call the other Prelatâ— superstitious brethren or fathers for holding Ecclesiasticalâ— Bishops of Mans institution unlawfull If not let noâ— the Rej. nor his Diocesan be so liberall of this title to others that dissent from them about humaine Ceremonies as unlawfull except they either thinke Bishops cannot be superstitious or that we cannot be wronged with any odious imputation CHAP. X. Sect. I. Concerning Parliaments and Convocations answere to 70.71.72.73 of the Praeface BEcause the Def. objected the authority of Parliaments and Convocations for establishing of theis Rites it was opposed by the Rep. 1. that Prelates â—n theis matters have no respect unto the authority of â—arliaments as appeareth by the testimony of the Parâ—â—ament it selfe An. 1610. in the Records thereof 2. That â—o Parliament doeth allow subscription and Conforâ—ity to be urged as now it is by the Prelates Which also â—as shewed out of the same Parliament records 3. That â—he Prelates proceedings are so ag t. Parliament Lawes â—hat by them they are subject to a Praemunire Now see â—hat is rejoyned 1. The first fillip is that though the Prelates regard â—ot the authority of Parliaments yet that is no answer to â—his Objection theis Ceremonies are established by sundry acts â—f Parliaments Where the Rej. forgetteth that some arâ—uments and answers are ad hominem that is they reâ—pect the thing in quaestion not simply but as it comâ—eth
observe my Lâ—rd of Londons motion for a praying ministry as more needfull in a Church planted than preaching as his speeches since also have professed or that shall marke how some Canons are planted against Lectures in Market-townes whereby the light hath spread to many darke places and withall how skilfuâ—â—y all his Majesties godly purposes against the ignorant negligent and scandalous Ministers have beene not so much delayed as deluded and the offenders covered c. 5. If some little good had come from the Convocation about their Courts yet that being covered and overwhelmed with so great evill which came from thence as the remooving or excluding of a thousand good preachers the vexing and disturbing of tenne thousand good Christians I speake within compasse of trueth should â—e no more doing of good than the leaving or sticking â—owne of a feather was by him that stole the goose All theis things being will considered he that should â—reach to the Convocation may well take up and repeate M r. Latimers words uttered before the same Assembly in the 28. yeare of Henry 8. The fruite of your consultation shall shew what generation yee be of What have yee done hitherto I pray you What one thing that the people of England hath beene better for of an haire or you your selves either more accepted before God or better discharged toward the people committed unto your cure For that the people is better learned and taught now than they were in time past to whether of theis ought we to attribute it to your industry or to the providence of God and the foreseeing of the Kings Grace What did yee so great Fathers so many so long a season so oft assembled together wherby Christ is more glorified or his people made more holy I appeale to your owne consciences M r. Latimer in this charge excepteth two exploits of that Convocation One that they burned a dead man who had withstood their profit the other that they went about to rake another in the coales because he would not subscribe to certaine of their Articles Such like exceptions may be made for our convocation and those multiplied to a great number But he that should make them must looke for no other fee or thanks for such allegations than Latimer was rewarded with who not long after this Sermon preached was driven not only to cease from preaching but also to take up his lodging in the Tower CHAP. XII Sect. 2. Concerning worship answer to the Rej. premonition Pag. 123.124.125.126.127 WE here have the Rej. againe entrenching himself and raising up many distinctions and definitions as so many blinds as it were that the ignorant sort and such as are more weake in judgment might not perceave how the evidence and strenght of the arguments which are leveled directly against the Cerem come in upon them and prevaile against them As also that in the tumult and lumber of these distinctions being thus hurried and hurled together those answers which are lame and wounded may creepe away and escape in the crowd unseene and unsuspected by the most who either have not skill or will and care to examine things before they passe but are content rather to take these conceits which are accompanied with ease and quiet upon trust then to put them to the triall or themselves to trouble vexation if they prove not true And because this head is of wayght worthy the skanning we shall therfore take into further triall and examination what ever principles or authorities the Rej. hath sett downe either in the premonition to the second argument or in the beginning of his treatise touching kneeling at the Sacrament That we may therby discerne what succour the Rej. his cause is like to fynd when he thinks to shelter under these outworks which he hath reared up on â—urpose to be his sense Worship generally taken is thus by him defined Pag. 123.124 Worship is the performance of respect unto any thing or person according to the estimation and dignity therof The termes of which description are so loose and â—yde and so farr from laying out the bounds of the â—â—ing described that like a ship-mans hose you may apply â—â—em to what you will rather then to the purpose in â—nd A man hath aestimation of his life his goods his â—ood name answerable to the worth dignity of theÌ„ â—nd doth accordingly performe that respect that is fitt 〈◊〉 caring for them doth he therfore worship his house â—is goods his lands Nay any Christian heart esteemes â—nd performes respect to the worship of God doth he â—â—erfore give worship unto worship The Rej. therfore 〈◊〉 to be desired to make accurate descriptions if he deâ—â—re to give satisfaction to a Iudicious reader Lastly we â—ave here things persons made the object of worship â—nd yet in the division immediatly following we are â—aught that worship distinguished according to the object â—nd that truely is either of our fellow Citizens and so civill 〈◊〉 of our God and so divine In the definition things and â—ersons are the object And now in the division only â—ersons are the object and things not mentioned how this quicksilver will be sodered togeâ—her I see not Worship according to the degrees is divided into veneration which is a due respect of Gods ordinances or appâ—rtenances to his service or adoration which is due to God alone It s a receaved rule that degrees vary not the kynd of any thing but the quantity of it As the diverse degrees of heat or cold in severall things degrees of whytenes in severall walls none of these degrees declare diverse qualities for kynd but diverse quantities and measures of the same kynd of quality as one thing is more oâ— lesse hott but both have the like heat for kynd of it whence it followes from the Rej. his ground that veneration and adoration differing only as degrees of worship they are both of the same kynd and then veneration being due to the ordinances and appurtenances thereof the essence or kynd of true divine worship is due to some creature beside God which not only religion reason but all the world of Orthodoxe Divines deny and the Rej. I presume also in cold blood will do the same 3. Third division is Divine worship is either principalâ— or subordinate Principall is that holy reverence and respect of the Divine Majesty which is inwardly performed for his honor either by the understanding or will and affections And this may falsely be pretended but cannot be falsely performed I will not here be curious to pursue all the opeÌ„ weaknesses of these expressions Only let the Reader take notice that the Rej. makes those members of a distinction so such as should be opposite one unto another which are yet in subordination and that by his owne â—ermes for he makes one part principall and the other â—ubordinate to it and so in agreement with it which â—o reason will allowe As though one should divide
the doctrine we professe against the forged superstitions of the Papists that we undertake no work in the things which appertaine unto worship concerning which we have not an expresse commaund of God No man can boast of the performance of any worship unlesse he be wholly as it were clothed and confined within the compasse of the word Hitherto also is to be added that distinction which is last mentioned by the Rej. in the forenamed place in his premonition for kneeling at the Sacram. Chap. 3. Pag. 3.4 Immediate true extâ—rnall worship is so called in respect 〈◊〉 of the meanes or manner of worship and that which â—â—ecteth meanes is sayd to be grounded either on speciall â—â—mmaund which is properly in and of it self worship or upon 〈◊〉 allowance only as touching the particular which is â—â—rship per aliud by virtue of some thing else 1. But first ther is internall meanes and manner as â—ell as externall 2. the manner and meanes do deâ—â—nd on Gods commaund and allowance in that also Immediate worship in regard of the meanes of worâ—â—â—p is just as much as immediate mediate worship And is suiteth well with that distribution which we met 〈◊〉 in the former section of significant Ceremonies to significant and non significant 4. When as the Rej. 〈◊〉 much to this distinction of generall and partiâ—â—lar commaund he should have tould us whether he â—eaneth by the generall the Genus or the kynd imâ—ediate and next or any other how remote soever â—he former sense will not help our Ceremonies the 〈◊〉 will serve at a lift for many popish Ceremonies as â—â—ll as ours since Gods commaund doth not make any 〈◊〉 immediate worship in and of it self for then the 〈◊〉 of a murtherer should be worship in and of it 〈◊〉 5. What reason or sense is there that Gods comâ—â—und should make a thing worship of it selfe and Gods â—â—â—owance should make it worship by virtue of someâ—â—ing else when as the commaundement doth no more â—â—â—pect it self or other thing then the allowance 6. Alâ—â—wance of this or that in generall without allowance 〈◊〉 it to be worship maketh nothing at all to be worship All worship must have a commaund not allowance only 7. It may justly be quaestioned whether the Rej. 〈◊〉 this distinction of commaund and allowance do noâ— symbolize with the Papists in their distinction of commaunds and counsells For seing this Popish distinction cannot be avoâ—ded but by another betwixt a common precept and particular according to the circumstances Iun. Cont. lib. 2. To. 9. and no worship or good work can be without one of these precepts certainly this worship upoâ— allowance without any particular precept can neithâ—â— be worship nor good work 8. I aske whether that institution of worship which is grounded on allowancâ— be a work of obedience to God or not If it be theâ— surely it hath a commaund and not an allowance onlâ— If not then either let works of superarrogation be aâ—mitted or this institution cashyred The immediate externall true worship in regard of maâ—ner is sayd to consist in a reverend usage of prescribed woâ—ship according to order and decency Where observeâ— that worship being formerly defined by an action 〈◊〉 here specifyed by a manner whereas the manner of 〈◊〉 action is not an action at least every manner is not 〈◊〉 2. That in the manner here specifyed reverend usagâ— the usage of an action differeth not from the action bâ— only in reverence which is a common adjunct of a worship and therfore maketh not a distinct worshiâ— 3. That civility order and decency is required in thâ— usage of prescribed worship and so worship in regard 〈◊〉 the manner though it be religious may be called câ—vill yet let the Reader be admonished that under theâ—â— â—â—â—re words of reverend manner order decency of worâ—â—â—p much sacrilegious worship is mayntained by the â—â—pists As our Rhemists on Ihon 6.58 have discovered 〈◊〉 nature therfore of the things themselves should be â—â—nsidered and we should not suffer our selves to be â—used by words That which is quoted here out of D. 〈◊〉 will occasion the reader to looke upon the place â—â—edull lib. 2. c. 14. th 25. the words of that position 〈◊〉 these Although these circumstances of tyme place and â—er like are wont by some to be called rites or religious ecâ—â—esiasticall ceremo yet in their nature they have nothing 〈◊〉 is proper to religion and therfore religious worship doth 〈◊〉 properly consist in them however by neglect and contempt 〈◊〉 such circumstances the sanctity of such religious worship is 〈◊〉 some sort violated because the common respect of order 〈◊〉 decency which do equally agree to religious and civill â—â—tions cannot be severed from religious worship without diâ—inishing of the sanctity and dignity of it What can the â—ej gather from hence but that these circumstances â—re not worship being only so required to religious â—ctions as they are to civill If his argument be this they â—re not properly worship therfore worship it is ridicuâ—ous If it be thus framed they are commaunded in geâ—erall therfore in their generall nature in respect of â—heir utmost end they must be vouchsafed the title of â—ivine worship He may as well conclude that the office â—nd act of a Iustice of peace or Constable nay a Hangman must be vouchsafed the same title of divine worship for these are commaunded in generall and their utmost â—nd ought to be the honouring of God and sometime they may have reference to some thing done in the worship of God In the last place ther is a memorandâ—â— added that the same humaine Cere which is a worship in regard of manner may also be worship in respect oâ— a meane but not of and by it self This is as much to say That the last distinction betwixt meanes and manneâ— is not distinct and that a humaine Ceremony cannoâ— be grounded on Gods speciall commaund the lateâ— whereof no man ever doubt of and the former I doâ— easely assent unto SECT 2. Concerning the exâ—mplyfying of the former distinction of worship by instances and confirming of it by witnesses in the same treat Cap. 4. HAnna served God in fasting and prayer Luc. 2 3â— Fasting here was worship saith D r. B. in somâ— sense or else S. Luke was deceaved Whatsoever becommeth of this consequence the example fitteth not our Ceremo for though D. B. hath often exhorted his Auditors to worship God in fasting praying in the same phrase yet I dare say he never exhorted them or any ministers to whom he hath preached amongst others to serve God in Surplice and Prayer in crossing and baptizing how much soever he favoureth these Ceremonies The strange bleating such a phrase carieth with it would have amazed his people and affrighted the ministers and discredited his ministery by this alone it appeareth that the example of fasting is abused when it is paraleled with crosse and surplice 2. The consequence is all too peremptorily
followed or else S t. Luke was deceaved I should rather think that D.B. may be deceaved in his interpretation of S t Luke The phrase which S t. Luke useth doeth no more urge us to make fasting worship in any sense then S t. Paul his phrase Eph 6. Watching unto all supplication with perseverance doth constreyne us to make perseverance or watching a worship distinct from supplication Or then the same Pauls phrase Acts 20.19 serving the Lord with many teares and temptations doe make temptations a speciall kynd of worship 3. Fasting may be called worship by a trope as being a speciall adjunct of some extraordinary worship and yet not be a speciall kynd of immediate reductive worship or any other kynd 4. The truth is that fasting is such a help to extraordinary humiliation as moderate fasting is to extraordinary thanksgiving and therfore is no more worship then Christian fasting And to this purpose do our divines answer concerning this place which is ordinarily objected by every Papist as here by the Rej. See Chemnitius upon these words See Polanus Syntag lib. 9. cap. 8. Fasting is a help to prayer Ieiunium est adminiculum procationu signum humilitatis ac resipiscentia non autem cultus Dei a signe of humility and repentance but is not a worship of God 5. Fasting such as Annas was is not a humaine institution as our ceremonies are but partly naturall when the whole man is taken up with greater and more instant imployment exclusive of all ordinary refreshments and partly of Divine application in extraordinary humiliation so that it hath ground and example both in the O. N.T. which our Ceremonies are destitute of 2. M r. Cartwright many degrees and ages distant from S. Luke is brought in next acknowledging circumstantiall worship only allowed in the particular though commaunded in his kynd in the second commaund Now I have at hand only that edition of Mr. C. his Catechisme which was printed Anno 1611. and therin I fynd no such thing upon occasion I will seek for the other edition In the meane tyme I fynd there that all will worship how great a show soever it makes is condemned and images in speciall in Gods service even as lay-mens books which the defendant defende thand the Rej. rejoyneth for 2. Suppose he graunt a circumstantiall worship what is that to worship invented by man There is no doubt but some parts of Gods worship by himself instituted are comparatively circumstantiall but what is that to mans invention 3. There is a mighty distance betwixt the generall of kneeling at prayer such like gestures intended by M r. C. if he name circumstantiall worship and the generall of Crosse and Surplice as there is betwixt the generall of this and that father and the generall of all entia and things that have being This testimony therfore maketh nothing to the purpose The third witnesse is Chamyer Tom. 5. l. 20.4.5 affirming that arbitrary vowes are worship of God not per se of themselves but by accident and for some other thing where to omitt the translation of per se of themselves which should have beene by themselves betwixt which ther is a great difference as betwixt a body living of the soule and by it self Chamyer in that very place if his whole sentence be expressed which neglect if it had beene the Replyers we should have heard outcryes proclamations and invective accusations enough I say â—his whole sentence is contrary to the Rej. His words in summe are these To vow Vovere reddere sunt actus religionis eliciti quia per se propriè sunt religionis at actus qui voventur non nisi imperati pertinentes ad cultum non proprie sed pâ—r accident illi formaliter hi materialiter and to performe are elicited acts of religion because by themselves and properly they appertaine to religion but the actions that are vowed are imperated by religion and belong unto worship not properly but by accident those formally these materially He doth not speake of vowes in that part which the Rej. quoteth but of things vowed nor doth he acknowledge these worship otherwise then the matter of an action is an action It were not farr from his meaning if one should say this bakers bread and that vynters wyne is a Sacrament materialiter and per accidens Lastly he doth not speake of any worship elicitus per accidens such as immediate Ceremoniall worship is but only imperatus ordered and directed such as service to ones father or freind may be and is not this then a worshipfull testimony for Ceremonies invented by man and made formall immediate reductive worship Iunius in the fourth place is brought in testifying that the humaine feasts of the Nativity and Easter are not worship properly but it may be figuratively And what is that I wonder to immediate reductive worship of humaine invention Worship figuratively so called is any matter instrument subject adjunct effect or even similitude of worship Are all such things immediate reductive worship Iust as bread pottage wyne oyle or meat having touched the skirt of a holy garment are holy Hag. 2.12 Thus the words and wildernesses where Christians meet may be called worship figuratively or by a figure the place being putt for the thing done in the place thus the ringing of the Bell before the Sermon may be called worship figuratively because it is a signe civill to give notice that such a service will be And hence it is that Iunius doth in the same place affirme that such observations are only contingent accidents or adjuncts to worship The same Iunius doth explaine his owne meaning controv 5. lib. 2. c. 16. n. 18. warning us to distinguish betwixt actions of worship Actiones cultus ordinatâ—â— ad cultum Actiones cultus quaecunque non sunt a Deo praeceptae sunt vetitae nam de illis nihil detrahâ— addi aut mutari potest Nulla iusta disponendâ— Dei servos ad cultú Dei ratio ab hominibus investigari potâ—st nisi quam Deus prascripserit and such which are done in order unto worship adding moreover this Actions of worship what ever are not commaunded of God are forbidden for as touching such nothing can be detracted added altered and in Levit. 9. No right way of disposing Gods servants to his worship can be invented by man but that which God himself hath prescribed Polanus is next who saith the Rej. in his syntagme defineth true worship of God to be the performance of what he hath commaunded in obedience to him to his honour yet in his partitions pag. 128. he sayth that an ecclesiasticall rite or Cerem is outward worship of God not forgetting or crossing himself but taking the name of worship in one place properly and in the other improperly or reductively Where it is to be noted that Polanus sayth nothing of improper reductive worship but those termes are putt into his
â—outh or thrust into he speech by the Rejoyner 2. Poâ—â—nus writt his partitions when he was a young man 〈◊〉 divine but his Syntagme was his last work If â—â—erfore any crossing was found in these two wriâ—â—ngs his Syntagme was to be taken as his more mature â—â—dgment and preferred as his last will and testament 〈◊〉 In this his Syntagme lib. 8. c. 1. he hath not onely 〈◊〉 definition of worship contrary to the Rej. his tenet 〈◊〉 many other Items Pertinet ad boni operis substantia ut opuâ— illud sit a Deo mandatum perinde cultum Dei quicquid ad cultum Dei pertinet mandatum esse oportet Actiones adiaphora non sunt cultuâ— Dei c. It belongs to the substance of a good â—ork that it be commaunded of God and therfore its requiâ—e that the worship of God and every thing appertaining â—â—erunto be commaunded Actions indifferent are not the â—orship of God c. 4. In the place quoted out of his parâ—ons That an ecclesiasticall rite is outward worship he â—oth not crosse himself for what he there meaneth by 〈◊〉 ecclesiasticall rite he sheweth in the specialls which 〈◊〉 after setteth downe as sacrifices c. though he mingeth some humaine feasts with the ordinances of God â—or his method sake never intending to make such ceâ—emon as ours lawfull worship and therfore opposeth â—is ecclesiasticall rites to those duties that are perforâ—ed only by speech as Invocation confession thanksâ—iving 6. Fenner saith the Rej. maketh bowing the knee or â—ead lifting up the hands or eyes to the parts of externall â—orship But what consequence is there from naturall gestures to cerem instituted by man From actions parâ—icularly commended unto us in Gods word as outward worship to such as their patrons can fynd no alâ—owance for but in a remote transceÌ„dent racked Genus Tylenus a man that D r. B. should rather have written against for his errors then alledged against otherâ— for his authority is in the seventh place brought in saying that a vow of a thing not commaunded is worshiâ— only by accident Syntag. par 1. dis 42. th 17. Yet 1. 〈◊〉 doth not say Cultus nisi per accideÌ„s Dei cultus vocari potest Quatenus ad cultura illum â—lique modo refertur ut medium arbitrarium contingeÌ„â— â—diaphorum it is worship but that it cannot be called worshiâ— but by accident 2. He giveth this limitation so farr as 〈◊〉 may some way be referred to worship as an arbitrary contingent indifferent meane Such as in prayer the choosinâ— of the word forgivenesse rather then pardon is in thâ— petition of remission of synnes 3. The worship 〈◊〉 speaketh of is not immediate in his opinion as appeâ—reth disp 40. th 16. as it is in the Rej. his divisions Naâ— Tylenus is so wise as to say that the most proper anâ— immediate acts of religion do not respect God per se 〈◊〉 and of themselves Ibid. th 18. is it any wonder then 〈◊〉 graunteth a worship not in and of it self but by accâ—dent only Bucanus is the eight witnes and yet nothing out of hiâ— is brought but that ecclesiasticall rites are not worship 〈◊〉 themselves and as a work done Did any of us ever affirmeâ— they were such worship May be the Rej. would gatheâ— from thence that ther is a worship which is not of iâ—self and as a work done such which though it cannoâ— be gathered from that phrase with better reason theâ— if from this that fayth doeth not justifye of it self anâ— as a work done he should conclude that some gracâ— ther is which justifyeth of it self and as a work done yet we may well graunt of false worship But see how unhappy the Rej. is in his wrested allegations Bucanâ—◠〈◊〉 the place quoted Loc. 43. q. 20. giveâ—h 1. this caveat 〈◊〉 lawes appointed for order and comlines sake only Ne leget deceris ordims tantum causa latae sint divini cultus partes 2. Ne pro gravi honestâ— utilique ordine inutilla inepta ridicula histrionica instituaÌ„tur qualia sunt quae Pontificij praecipiunt dâ— dierum vestiuÌ„ desâ—rimine Ad soluÌ„ verbum Dei quod ad cultum attinet non ad humanas traditiones attendeÌ„dum Nullam obedientiam deberi ritibus quaruÌ„ alij sunt inepti inanes ludicri alij vel per so vel ob aliud superstitiosi crucis fabricationem aquam lustraleÌ„ consecrationes altariuÌ„ magistrales determinationes Non per se sed lege charitatis Ceremoniae noÌ„ humanae sed filij Dei authoritate institutâ— mandata adhibeantur are 〈◊〉 of divine wâ—rship 2. It should be provided that in 〈◊〉 of a grave seemely and profitable order those things be 〈◊〉 instituted which are unprofitable foolish ridiculous stageâ—y like And of this sort are those which the Papists comâ—â—und concerning the difference of dayes and garments 〈◊〉 the same Bucanus Loc. 33. q. 15. In things appertaiâ—â—â—g to worship we must attend for direction only unto the 〈◊〉 of God and not to humaine traditions No observance 〈◊〉 to rites whereof some are foppish vayne and light 〈◊〉 either in regard of themselves or some other thing suâ—â—â—stitious amongst which he reckoneth the maâ—ing of the 〈◊〉 holy-water the consecration of altars and magistrall â—â—â—erminations And that lawfull rites of order are to be â—â—served not in regard of themselves but by the law of chaâ—â—â—y where he plainly sheweth that per se is not alwayes 〈◊〉 to relation ad aliud as the Rej. understands 〈◊〉 The same Buc. also Lo. 47. qu. 65. giveth this rule 〈◊〉 humaine ceremonies ought to be used but those which are â—â—â—ointed and commaunded by the authority of the sonne of 〈◊〉 The last witnesse is Melanchton who fayth in one place 〈◊〉 man may not institute any worship of God i.e. works â—â—ich God so alloweth that he holdeth himself to be honored them of themselves or whose immediate end is that God 〈◊〉 be honored by them As if we did hold the contrary 〈◊〉 is not this testimony wisely alledged that all men 〈◊〉 his opposites may graunt and the graunt of it neiâ—â—er hurts them or helps him Nay take away that clause Gods allowance and holding himself honored which no humaine institution can inferr we say that our Cerem are such for it is as an immediate end of all misticall teaching rites to honor God by them and in them as of the word so farr as it preacheth the same vertues that Ceremon do teach And so much is taught by thâ— Rej. in these very dictats when he reduceth these reductive ceremonies under the head of immediate worship for nothing can be immediate worship whose immediate end is not that God may be honored by thâ— performance of it The same appeareth out of thâ—â— which the Rej. pag. 313. affirmeth viz. that the propeâ— end of preaching is aedification of men if that be joyned which he every where teacheth that the propeâ— end of
warrant as that it is any where in Scripture revealed ther should be a Crosse and Sirplice and that the places of Scripture which seem to forbid them could never yet be otherwise cleared and then see how it maketh for the Rejoynder his cause SECT 12. Concerning that phraze Ier. 7.31 etc. You doe that which I commanded not THat which the Rejoynder out of his abundant leysure would needs inlarge most vainly about sect 8.9.10 11. I passe over with sileÌ„ce because the Repl refused to mainteyne that which is there objected out of unprinted and uncertayn papers 1. In the twelf section we are to inquire whether and how that consequence in Gods worship be good I have not commanded this therfor you may not doe it The Def. and Rejoynder say it is not good except by not commanding be undeâ—stood forbidding as Lev. 10.1 Deut. 17.3 Which is thus farr true that except some forbidding be included or as the Rejoynder speaketh imported in that not commanding not commanding câ—nnot mâ—ke a thing unlawfull But that is the very quaestion whether in thinges proper to religion not commanding doeth not include some kinde of forbidâ—ing 2. The place mentioned by the Rejoynder out of Lev. 10.1 doeth most strongly make against him For the sonnes of Aron are there condemned for bringing strange or ordinarie fire to Gods worship as doeing that which God had not commanded and yet had not otherwise forbidden then by providing fire proper to his worship and not apponting any other to bee used in the tabernacle and this is the very plea which wee make against Ceremonies of humane institution in Gods worshâ—p The scope of that text we are taught by an English Bishop Babington in his notes upon that place Wee may hence learne and setle in our heartes with what severiâ—ie the Lord challengeth and defendeth his authoritie in laying downe the way and manner of his worship not leâ—ving it to any creature to meddle with but according to praescription and appoâ—nâ—ment from him Content he is that men shall make lawes for humane matters etc But for his Divine worship hee oneâ—y will praesâ—ribe it himself and what hâ—e appointed that must be doen and that onely or else Nadâ—b and Abibu their punishment expected that is Gods wâ—ath expected in suche manner as he shall please Hee was taught this by Calvin who upon the place sayth God forbad other fire etc. to be used that he might exclude all adventious rites and teach that he detested whatsoever was come from elswhere Let us therefore learne so to attend to the Commandment of God that we desile not his worship with any far fetched devises Alium ignem sacris adhâ—beri vetuit Deus ut adventitios omnes ritus excluderet ac doceret se detestaâ—i quicquid aliundè profectum erat Discamnus ergo siâ— attendere ad Dei mandatum 〈◊〉 ejus cultum ullis extraneis commentis vitiemus M r. Attersoll also in his learned and grave Commentarie upon Numb 3.4 doeth largely declare out of this example how God disliketh and disclaimeth mens devises in his service as trash trumperie and mere dotage instancing among other devises in Ceremonies added unto Baptisme 3. Our reason was propounded in the words of Calvin upon Ier. 7.31 Seeing God under this title onely condemneth that which the Iews did because he had not commanded it them therfore no other reason need to be sought for the confutation of superstitions then that they are not by commandement from God To which the Rejoynder answereth that M r. Calvins conceit holdeth true in proper points of religious worship which are all praescribed of God himself but not in matter of rites not praescribed of God Now if this be not a miserable conceit that Gods not commanding doeth forbid that which he hath praescribed or commanded but not that which he hath not praescribed or commanded let any man of sense judge Other meaning I cannot gather eyther out of these words or out of the Rejoynder his doctrine of worship which was before distinctly weighed in the head of Worship M r. Cartwrites conjecture as the Rejoynder calleth it is the very same with that which he calleth Calvins conceit The Rejoynder his answer also is the same for substance that it is true in matterâ— particularly determined by God but not in matters of order and ceremonie of which God hath not determined particularly The sense of which is that we must depend upon God so farr as he hath determined particularly but in other things we must depend upon men and in England upon the Convocation house But to depend upon God and his mouth being to follow onely his determination and what sense then is this you shall onely follow Gods determination in those things which he hath particularly determined but if you please to doe any thing in his woâ—ship which he hath not determined particularly you may therin depende upon whom you pleaâ—e For matter of Ceremonie enough hath beeÌ„ spokeÌ„ before and of order wee shall after dispute 4. The rest of this 12. section is spent about the Def his wonderfull wondring at our symbolizing with Bellarmine and other Papists because that as they distinguish sinnes into mortal and veniall so wee sayth he make a distinction of against and beside the word About which the Rejoynder granteth that Chrysostom did well use this distinction in matters of doctrine yet he sayth it is not to be extended unto matters of Ceremonie But the question being onely about the distinction it is in the Def. and Rejoynder their opinion farr more appliable to ceremonies then to doctrines because they holde many Ceremonies lawfull beside the word which are not against it though they holde no suche difference of doctrines Now this distinction was used by us according to their conceit more then our owne The like is acknowleged of Iunius that he distinguisheth well betwixt beside and against the Word in the question of traditions devised for divine worship 1. e. essentiall worship particularly determined by God Which is not so for in that place Cont. 3. l. 4. c. 17. an 10. Iunius hath no question eyther about essentialls or worship or traditions but onely about Ecclesiasticall laws binding the conscience And if he had yet that clause particularly determined by God would spoile all because in suche thinges ther can be nothing eyther against or beside the Word But if it were true what is the difference betwixt Iunius and us The Rejoynder sayth that wee confounde rites with worship and yet confesse rites not to be particularly described as the other Which is neyther so nor so except he meane those rites which he calleth double or treble ceremonies and therin we have Iunius so for us that not onely in other places but also in the words next goeing before this in quaestion he sayth generally in divine things to coyne new lawes is nothing but to decline In divinis rebuâ— novas leges ferre nihil abâ—ud
that his holy supper should be receyved and used as a supper notadored They have provided that all men shall kneel in the receyving of it for a Cabinet like to the former 3. Cardinal Cajetans interpretation was by the Repl. alledged addition is forbidden even with the prâ—etext of keeping the commaundements of God as more judicious Inhibetur additio etiam pratextucustodiendi mandatâ— Dei. and religious The Rej. answereth that Cajetan doeth allow the distinction of additions into corruptive and praeservative in Thom. p. 3. q. 6. a 8. and that in the alleged wordes meaneth additions corrupting though pretented for keeping Now this is as true an interpretation of Cajetans meaning and ours also as can be invented onely that is wanting whichCajetan with us intended that all additions for preservation are but pretenses But as for Cajetan his allowing this questioned distinction in 3. q. 60. for 6. was an error whosoever will looke upon the places shall finde that neyther in Thomas not in Cajetan is any mention of addition preserving which here is the onely question They speak in deed of adding words to the forme used in Baptisme and note some words doe corrupt the sense and some doe not but not a word of adding Ceremonies preservative The wordy additions which they speak of are as Thomas hath it I Baptize thee in the name of the Father the Sonne the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Marie or as Cajetan hath it I baptize thee Sexton what is a clocke in the name of the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost If these be additions of preservation let any Christian that regardeth Baptisme judge 4. It was wished that the Def. had set downe some examples of preservative additions The Rejoynder undertaking it for him nameth for the Text diverse readings marginall notes etc. and for the sense interlineary glosses notes marginall references and commentaries and then readings by sections building and ordering of Synagogues and a thousand suche And in deed he might as well name diverse thousands as these But 1. if so many thousand Ceremonies may be added lawfully to Gods law what meant Augustine and all our Divines out of him to complaine of suche an intollerable burthen of Ceremonies in regard of their number 2. Diverse readings are no more additions then Coningstable and Constable are to the Statute of Constables Marginall notes no more then an exposition is to the text which kinde of addition the Papists doe wickedly allege for their doctrinall traditions Interlinearie glosses notes marginall references Commentaries of the same nature Reading by sections building and ordering are evidently thinges of meer order of which if any man shall say they are additions then if he be a poor man he may make great addition to the litle mony he hath by dividing it into sections placing it fitly and disposing of it orderly a hundered ways to the increase as it were of a hundred folde which would be a welcome doctrine if it were true to many a poor man and even to those which are impoverished by the Bishops silencings deprivations and excommunications for not allowing of additions to Gods worship 5. It was also justly questioned if ther were not a deminution or taking from for preservation as well as an addition of that kinde because in the Text they are joined together as drawing in one yoke The Rejoynder answereth no. And denieth the consequence by example of hardning and shewing mercy joined together without the same mertiorious cause But 1. the example doeth not agree because the question was not of a meritorious cause but of a finall And in the cheif or last ende hardning shewing mercie doe agree 2. I can easily finde out a detraction as of good praeservation as the addition of a Cabinet with locke and key For from a sword or any other yron weapon a man may well detract rust for the preservation of it From an aguish man bloud may be detracted for the preservation of his life nay sometime a leg or an arme may be cutte off for praeservation of the bodie So that all thinges considered the Rejoynder will upon second thoughts eyther cashier in Gods worship his addition of preservation or else adde unto it a detraction or deminution of preservation Calvin in his nineteenth sermon upon Deutrinomie hath this remarkable sentence Let us assure ourselves we shall ever be unruly and wild-headed untill our Lord hath tamed us by long handling and made us sticke to this grounde that it is no more lawfull for us in any wise to adde any thinge to his law then it is lawfull for us to take any thinge from it 6. It was likewise observed that this praetence hath been allways the shoeing-horne to draw on superstition with For as Calvin noteth on Matt. 15 Legislatoris ipsi non jactabant se novum quicquam tradere sed tantum addâ—re cavendi formulas quae media ossent adminicula ad servandam Dei legem The olde Maisters of Ceremonies praetended always that they meant onely to bringe-in additions of preservation Like enough sayth the Rejoynder But this very inlet of superstitious thinges under the praetence of bringing in onely preservative meanes doeth witnesse that suche additions as are preservative were allways allowed by Gods people as confirmation of error by Scripture doeth shew the dignitie of holy Scripture This is in deed as faire a praetence for an inlet of superstition as can be made But withall it is manifest from thence that is is no sufficieÌ„t but a very suspicious answer for Ceremonies accused of superstition to say and not to prove that they are preservations Yet these Ceremonie-mongers had all their pretense properly from meanes of preservation which are and were always allowed by God and his people not from additions Our Parliament statutes made for establishing of true religion are a meanes of praeserving it in England but I thinke that Hon. Assemblie would take it ill if the Rej. should publish to the world that their Laws are additions to the word and worship of God The Rejoynder addeth that Calvin in the place alledged doeth account these praetented additions to have been corruptions from the first Now though this is not heer but in another place after to be handled let the Reader gesse of Calvins account by these his words Afterward there came teachers who did not think themselves should be esteemed acute enough unlesse they did patch something of their owne to the word of God Superveneranâ— doctâ—res quâ—se non â—utaâ—ant satâ—s acutos haâ—itum â—ri nisi aliquid assuerent vervo Dei Nulla tollerabilis est ad legem Dei accessio Secundarie illae leges a curiosis hominâ—bus inventae sunt quasi simplex Dei mandatum non sufficeret Novas ablutiones comminisci otiosa vanitatis fuit Si acqutevissent in legâ— Dei magis illi probata suisset modestia quam scrupulosa anxietaâ— Yet no addition to that word is tolerable Those secondarie lawes are devised of
essentiall false worship he should therfore have tolde us what error he meant The Def. nameth opinion of justice sanctitie efficacie or divine necessitie and the Rejoynder mentioneth often suche and such opinion held of the Papists concerning all their Ceremonies Of this enough is sayd Manud sect 7. For the present I denie that suche an erronious opinion by it self and of it self doeth not make essentiall false worship Opinion is but an adjuvant efficient cause of that affective act wherin the essence of internall worship consisteth and the externall acts of worship though efficiently differenced by opinion or faith are essentially distinguished by their forme and ende A man may have an opinion that is just holy efficacious and necessarie to performe diverse workes of the second Table nay upon some occasions to tell a lie even against the second Table Yet none speaking properly will call that essentiall false worship which is a sinne directly against the first Table Hitherto therfore I see no monster of the Repl. his making And if we consider his reason well which the Rejoynder made to it the mishaping of thinges will be found on the other side If sayth the Repl. worship did varie occording unto mens oppinions then a man may goe to Masse conceyving another privat opinion to himself then Mas-mongers use to have and our Convocation may appoint us the grossest of all Popish Ceremonies if they set another opinion upon it The Rejoynder his answers are diverse and some of them strange ones 1. His first is that goeing to masse may be a sinne of scandall and presumtion though a man goe not thitherto worship By goeing to Masse acording to the use of our speache is meant doeing all those externall actions which Mas-mongers use to performe Now the question is whether he that performeth all those externall actioÌ„s intending onely to save his life therby as having no opinion of any other good in so doeing doeth onely sinne of scandall and praesumtion or else over and beside this is guiltie of externall false worship the Rejoynder seemeth to say no he is not guiltie of false worship But when the Christians of the Primitive Churche did with suche an opinion lay but a litle incense upon the Heathens Altars they were by all Orthodoxe censured for Idolatrie The storie of Origen is well knowen how he delivered Palme to those that offered it to the image of Serapis with this expression of his intention come and receyve the bows not of the image but of Christ. Yet was he therfore censured as a worshipper of that Idol Calvin writing of purpose concerning this very case of goeing to Masse with suche an opinion accuseth them that doe so of externally professed idolatrie and therin was justified by Melanchton Bucer Martyr Opus de vitandis superstitionibus And if this be not right then all externall acts and reall professions whether symbolizing with Papists or with Turkes or Heathens may be in themselves set scandall and danger aside easily excused So Calvin argueth in the forenamed treatise and in a Homilie Opusc pag. 532. he sheweth that those wise men which thinke otherwise would have derided the simplicitie of Sidrac Misach and Abednego if they had then lived in suche a fashion Miserable men yow may doe that externall act which is required of you it is no worship so long as you have no faith trust or devotion to that idol 2. His second answer is that those which are present at false worship by violence are not false worshipers and upon this he triumpheth with fie man fie I may better say alas alas that good D. B. I speak as I thinke should be driven to suche extremities in defense of those Ceremonies which he never loved nor doeth at this day For goeing to Masse or doeing all those externall acts which Masmongers use to performe implieth more then violent carying thither and deteyning there 3. His third is that nothing but opinion doeth make humane inventions essentiall worship of God Which is an essentiall denying of the conclusion 4. For that which was inferred of the Convocation house he sayth first it is a flinge Let it be so yet it may hit that Ceremonious Goliah as it is suche in the fore head He addeth that the grossest rites of Poperie cannot posâ—iblie be washed from their opinion Which is not for a Rite being an externall thing or act any Rite may be separated from any internall opinion The last is that some other Popish rites might be lawfull if they could be clensed though we need them not As if the grossest might not be lawfull if they could be clensed or the Rejoynder had shewed that we more need the Crosse then those other 2. Because the Def. placed so muche in opinion of sanctitie the Repl. in the second place opposed that Sanctitie cannot be separated from suche Ceremonies as are proper unto Religion onely used in the solemne worship of God because they are neyther civill nor prophane and therfore holy Heer the Rejoyndâ—r being put to his shifts as before answereth that they are in deed holy by applicatioÌ„ but not with inhaerent or adhaerent holinesse in them or their use as those which God hath sanctified nor so as they sanctifie the actors and actions which is proper to Gods ordinances Now how many strange thinges are here 1. That Ceremonie whose essence consisteth in application and use is holy by application and yet not by any holinesse that doeth adhere to them or their use Holinesse is an adjunct receyved by the thing that is holie and therfore eyther inhaerent or adhaerent 2. Is this a good reason they are not holy truely as Gods ordinances therfore they are not by men made holy 3. Have any outward ordinances of God inhaerent holinesse in them 4. If God hath no way sanctified our Ceremonies who can make them holy 5. Doe not Ceremonies teaching holinesse sanctifie the actors actions or spectators after the same manner that the teaching word doeth sanctifie them 3. Vpon occasion of the other part in the Def. his distinction that Accidentall worship is any rite which serveth for the more consonant and convenient discharge of essentiall worship the Repl. wheras he might have sayd that this is a mishapen definition of Accidentall worship in generall as it may be divided into true and false good and bad opposeth onely this that no judicious Divine useth to call circumstances of mere order and decencie which notwithstanding serve for the more consonant and convenieÌ„t discharge of essentiall worship that is a Pulpit a Table a faire-Cloath etc. Worship The Rejoynder answereth that in deed the Ceremonies themselvâ—s cannot be called worship without madnesse but onely the use and application of suche circumstances and rites Now 1. marke here how the Rejoynder who defineth a Ceremonie it is an action etc. and laffeth at the Repl. because he sayd some Ceremonies may be put to other good use as if all Surplices were turned into poor-folkes under-garments
idle and vayne or superfluous worship is condemned by Christ Mat. 15. let these testimonies and reasons be wel considered The Preists had brought in many Novelties tho Moses with great terrour had threatned them not to ad any thing Plurima nova introduxerant sacerdotes quamvis Moses magno cum terrore comminatus suerat no quid adderent ex quibus illasuere de lotiâ—nibus Duplex fuit culpa Nam innovatio ipsa non parvum erat crimon quia illas observationes magis curabant quam mandata Dâ—â— Crimen illud prius non statim aâ—guit Chirstus non â—rivolum id esse atque superfluum dicit ne inflammarentur Tolet upon Lic c. 11. annot 84. Altora causa propter quam has lotiones sprevit fuit illorum superstitio Pharisai induxerant has lotiones non ob civileÌ„ quandam naturalem decenriam mun diâ—iem sed quasi ad religionem pertinentes ut qui contemnerent contra Dei cultum agere â—enserentur quivero servarent Deum in eis colore viderentur Hoc autem eis non licebat quibus proh bituÌ„ erat à Deo Deut. 4. no quid adderent Obid quasi superstitiosas lotiones hujusmodi Christus rejeciâ— Quam causam indicat Matheus cap. 15. Omnis plantatio quam non plantavit Patermeus eradicabitur Similiter Marcus cap. 7. in vaâ—um me colunt dâ—â—entes doctrinas praecepta hominum c. Qua propria inventione constituâ—nt contra Dei mandatum of which number of additions were those things of washing There was a double fault for the innovation it selfe was not a slight metter and then this that they stood more upon those observations of their owne then they did on the Commandements of God 1. That first offence Christ doeth not praesently reproove them for saying it was a frivolous and superfluous thing lest they should have been inflamed Another cause for which he despised these washings was their superstition The Pharises had put in the sayd washings not for any naturall and civill decentie or cleanelinesse but as perteining to religion who so did contemne theÌ„ were judged to offend against Gods worship and who so did observe them seemed cheifly to regard Gods worship in them But this was in no wise lawfull for them to doe who were so streightly charged of God Deut. 4. that they should add nothing For this Christ rejected these washings as superstitious which reason Mat. 15. ch intimates when he sayth Every plant which my heaveÌ„ly Father hath not planted shall be rooted out And Marc. ch 7. In vaine do they worship me teaching the Doctrines and praeceps of men c. Such things as men sett up of themselves against any Commandement of God Estius in Tit 1.1 Mandâ—ta homanum ad piâ—tatem nihil conducentia intelliguntur Mat. 15 Mar 7. in loâ—ionibus multis supervacuis In Mat. 15. Marc. 7. the Commandments of men do meane such Commandments which conduce nothing at all to piety as those Superfluous washings 5. In the fift place another reason or charge was brought out of Mr. Hy. his papers that the Ceremonies imposed are for their use and practise preferred before principall parts of Gods worship because this is the Pralats Canons wear a Surplice or preache not Crosse or baptize not This the Def. accused of dull Sophistrie because by this meanes onely an orderly discreete preacher is preferred before one that is factious and exorbitant Of this base Bonnerly speache the Repl. shewed his just detestation For which he is censured by the Rejoynder of casting it out of the mouth of his stomacke of malice intemperat railings and a furious spirit All which I leave to the readers judgement Onely this I observe that he would excuse all or most of the Prelats from willing silencing any able and godly ministers for omission of our Cerremonies and doeth absolutely denie that the Def. ever silenced any Minister willingly or unwillingly for onely omission of Ceremonies Concerning which termes willingly and onely omission some light of explication were needfull For onely omission of Crosse or Surplice by oversight or other accident the Pope himself will not silence a Preist as all Popish Divines tell us in affirming that to be no mortall sinne And how those which make Canons for silencing upon purposed continued omission and execute the same partly by themselves and partly by their instruments can be sayd to doe it unwillingly this requireth interpretation which will certainly be found tardy For clearing of this charge from the imputation of dull Sophistrie the Repl. first propounded it in this manner an able godly Minister without the use of these Ceremonies is not suffered in the Ministerie wheras an unable ungodly one with the use of them is suffered therfore they are praeferred before maine thinges Vpon this the Rejoynder 1. observeth that from hence doeth not follow that conclusion therfore our Ceremonies are made parts of Gods worship As if this conclusion were once named by Mr. Hy. or by the Def. in this charge If he will make it supposed he must shew us Mr. Hy. his concealed papers for the proof of that supposition He addeth 2. that all Prelats are to be charged with this practise and that they have no suche power for depriving of bad as they have for depriving of good Ministers To which I answer the question is not here of all but of that which standeth by our Canons and Canonicall practise Yet neyther any authors nor any defenders of the Canons can be excused from partaking in this practise no not the Rejoynder himself And as for those Praelats which have great power to doe evill and litle or none to doe good or which is all one power effectually to hinder good and not evill they have a very dangerous standing dangerous I say as well for others as for their owne selves Yet when our Prelates procured that authoritie of doing evill they might as easily and more lawfully have procured the other of doeing good not to say that none of them doe so muche for reforming or removing of bad Ministers Estius in Ti. 1.1 Manâ— honunum piâ—tatem conducentia intelliguntur Mat. 15 Mar 7. â—â—ionibus â—tic superv as is in their power to doe eyther by themselves or by other meanes Nay is it not knowen how suche kinde of catle are not onely borne with but borne up by the Prelates in bad causes The third Rej. is of a calumniation because some inconformable Ministers are suffered and some unable and ungodly deprived But 1. this calumniation concerning some inconformable suffered for a time extraordinalie besides nay against Canonicall order 2. He can scarce name one that he hath knowen deprived for that he was unable 3. The Turkes and Infidels would cashier their Preists for some ungodlinesse What a poor rejoinder is this A fourth consideration is that a farre lesse offence defended is more punishable then a greater confessed and that certayn evills in themselves
no other errour but their opposition against Romish Ceremonies as vaine and superstitious as the Defender doeth Concerning this 1. This therefore was not mentioned by the Replier because Suarez himselfe testifieâ—h that it is concluded in the former Which errour cannot be founded but vpon one of the three above rejectâ—d errours Qui error non potest nisi aliquo ex supra rejectis tribus scil illis fundari 2. Suarez also addeth that these men of whom he in these wordes speaketh say nothing against all their Ceremonies but onely that they are used with intention of worship qâ—oda nobis fiunt intentione cultus tanquam pertinentes ad virtutem Religionis as pertaining to the vertue of Religion that they are done by us with intention of worship and as pertaining to the vertue of Religion This they hold Superstitious For though in the Sacraments we are to observe a measure and due circumstances yet this they will onâ—ly have as a certeine humane politie not out of intention of worship and religion for this they say is Superstitious Hoc sâ—â—e stitiosum esse dicunt quia licet in Sacramentis oporteat servare modum debitas circumstantias tamen hoc solum esse volunt propter quandam humanam politiam non vero ex intentione cultus râ—ligionis nam hoc dicunt esse superstitiosum Out of these two observations I make these two conclusions 1. If this error be necessarily founded on those three mentioned as Suarez sayth and sheweth then suche Protestants as hold this among whome the Rejoynder professeth the Defend and his owne name holde also those 2. If Protestants holde this tenet that it is Superstition for to intend worship in humane Ceremonies as Suarez sayth then our Defender and Rejoynder in this point are by Protestants found guiltie of Superstition For they place speciall immediat though improper accidentall and secondarie worship in humane Ceremonies as is to be seen in this Rejoynder pag. 125.127 c. Heer they cannot â—scape by alleging as they use to doe that the Papists place proper essentiall worship in all their Ceremonies For Suarez in the same place expoundeth the Popish tenet concerning worship just as they doe theirs Sacramental Ceremonies belong to secondarie worship not onely because they conteine External worship but also in the very Externall worship it selfe they are as it were accidents of other more noble actions Ceremoniae sacramentales pertinent ad cultum secundarium non solum quia continent cultum ixternum sed etiam quia in ipsomet externo cultu sunt veluti accidentia aliarum aâ—tionum nobiliorum 6. Hitherto we have had noting directly answered concerning the three errors which the Replier sayd Suarâ—z imputed to Protestants about Ceremonies in generall Nor is any other given but this that Suarez chargeth those errors not on Protestants but on Anabaptists whoe hold this negative argument whatsoever is not commanded in the Word is unlawfull This the Anabaptistes and not the Protestants houlde fanatically even about rites and formalities c. To which I replie 1. that if Suarez his wordes be taken as before they were recited not as the Rejoynder doeth ill-translate them then no man is conversant in the Protestant writings or have read over that which is formerly cited out of them in these three generall Arguments but must needs confesse the very same sense is to be found in most of our principall Divines and the same words in many Non licere Deum colere alto externo cultu nisi illo qui in Scriptura nobis praeceptus est Inventae bumana quae absque Divino praecepto vol authoritate in Scripturis contenta esse reprehendenda It is not lawfull to worship God with other external worship save with that which is in Scripture praescribed us And humane inventions withouâ— warrant from God in Script are to be reprehended 2. If all things be Ceremonies which are circumstances of order and decencie as the Defender and Rejoynder doe not onely affirme but make their cheif Anchor then whatsoever Gui de Erâ—s discourseth of one furious companie of them muche injurie is doen to the Anabaptists in making them to holde that all Ceremonies are unlawfull whiche are not conteyned in the Word For it is well knowen that they have certain times places of meeting for worship certain order of preaching praying nay in Baptizing of men-growne more formalities then many Protestant Churches and even Bishops over divers Congregations for order sake as they say D. B. having lived in Holland can scarce be ignorant of these thinges 3. To put it out of doubt that Suarez under the name of Heretickes in this place meant Protestants let any man look upon his book de Religione Volume 1. treatise 3. lib. 2. cap. 1. and there he shall finde these wordes to the same purpose The Heretiques of these times say every ceremonie and all worship not praescribed of God or not conteined in the Gospel is Superstition yea and Idolatrie They stand much upon Deut. 12. Haeâ—etici huius temporu dicunt omnem Ceremoniam omnem cultum a Deo ipâ—o non praceptum seu in Euangelio non contentum Superstitionem esse imo Idololatriam vocant Fundantur praecepue in Deut. 12. Now 1. this cannot be understood of the Anabaptists because they make no suche account of Deutronomie or the olde Testament as that they found any doctrine cheifly on that 2. Suarez himself in the same Chapter sheweth plainely that he there meant Protestants For he sendeth the Reader for confutation of these Heretickes to Gregorius de Valentia tom 3. disp 6. q. 11. p. 1. where he disputeth against Herbrandus a Protestant not an Anabaptist to Lessius de just jure l. 2. cap. 43. dub 4. where he disputeth about this quaestion against Calvin And lest any man should thinke he meant one kinde of Heretickes there and another in this place quaestioned he there referreth his reader for further satisfaction about that quaestion unto this very place in 3. tom 3. disp 15. What can be more clear When as therfore the Rejoynder upon suche sandie groundes concludeth that we are somewhat encamped in the Trenches of Anabaptists because we doe not jumpe with Suarez in condemning these three Errors we may better conclude that he and the Def. by rash undermining of us have unawares broken into the workes of Papists because they doe condemne with Suarez those three Protestant trueths And withall seing so great a School-Papist as Suarez in stating of the controversie maketh no mention of merit necessitie efficacie number or holinesse eyther inhaerent or adhaerent it is but an evasion of the Defend and Rejoynder upon every occasion to flie unto these as onely differences betwixt us and Papists about Ceremonies And so we have more cleared then that for which Suarez his testimonie was produced by the Replier namely that learned Papists have no opinion of all
that the Vaile was neither Apostolicall nor meerely of humane institution nor of instituted signification nor yet appropriated unto Gods worship but a civill order of decencie used as well out of Gods worship as in it And the Rejoynder granteth that it was a civill custome but addeth that it is as absurd from thence to conclude that it was in religious worship civill and not religious as to affirme this of blowing of Trumpets in the new Moones c. Where first hee should have remembred that we are heere in answering not in prooving and concluding which is the Def. his part Secondly The Replier said it was a civill order of decencie expressing the immediate end which it had as well in as out of worship which will well beare this concluâ—ion that it was no more religious then Womens proper apparell long garments c. to which Chrisostome upon 1. Cor. 11. compareth the Vaile as one part to another or their shooes or slippers are 3. Concerning Trumpets in some use of them wee have their instituted signification expresly set downe in the Word Nunb 10. shew the like for going to Church in shooes or Vailes and then we will confesse a paritie of reason 2. The Def. proceeding by interrogatories maketh this the first whether the Vaile was not significant of some good thing To which the Repl. answered yes it did declare or argue a good thing as indeed all civill apparrell of modest fashion doeth For this hee is checked and bidden to stand by with his answer while his elders speake As if we were now in the High-Commission and hee as Commissioner might prescribe us when and how much we may speake for our selves though much without ground be spoken against us and interrogatories propounded to the prejudice of our cause 3. He asked secondly what it did signifie Answer was made that it signified subjection to superior power Then a morall dutie was professed by it sayth the Rej. just so as modesty and shamefastnesse gravity and care of not offending are professed by all apparell of modest honest fashion And yet I never heard all modest apparell called a mysticall religious Ceremonie Theophilact in Cor. 11. maketh a mans beard like and equall unto his uncovering in signification And will the Def. and Rej. say that Beards are religious mysticall Ceremonies 4. The Def. added that it had some relation unto God To which it was answered that so there is in an upper Seat of an Heathen Magistrate sitting in judgement which yet is no mysticall Ceremonie of religion The Rej. altering first the case into a throne set up to that end to represent the Soveraignty of God for religious cognizance and document affirmeth the Seat of a Heathen Iudge to be a mysticall Ceremonie of Religion Now set aside his changing of the question and take him as answering that everry Seat of judgement among all Heathen is such a Ceremonie and then let any man consider if hee hath not brought his pigges to a faire market Seats of Iustice are religious Ceremonies even among those that know not what religion meaneth what is become of intended immediate though improper worship which he is wont to require as necessarie unto a religious Ceremonie of mysticall signification Hee may as well say that such vailes as Tamars was wherewith she deceived Iuda even unto incest was religious Ceremonies among the Heathen because a Vaile in the nature of it declareth a morall duty For many of those Seates in their nature tending to justice are but vailes of injustice as Tamars was of uncleannesse If those High-seates bee religious Ceremonies then the bowing of inferiours unto them kissing of their feet or foot-stooles must be such also Why then did the Def. seeke as with a candle and lant-horne in every darke corner for instances or examples of religious significant Ceremonies of mans appointing every civill meeting every Company of Soldiers every Schoole of Children can afford examples enough and more then enough 5. It was added by the Repl. that the Def. allegeth nothing out of Divines which may not as well bee applied to the Iudges Bench as to the Vaile of Women Yes this sayth the Rej. that the one used in civill actions is religious in use onely not in state the other used in religious actions is religious both in state and use which is saith he M r. Parkers distinction Now 1. there was no such distinction as this alleged by the Def. out of our Divines so that this contradicteth not that which the Repl. affirmed 2. This distinction as it is heere explained was never used by M r Parker or as I thinke by any reasonable man before now A circumstance used in civill actions is religious in use the like used in religious actions is religious in use and state Is the Criers O wize Religious in use because or as it is used in civill actions And is the Paraters citation religious in state because or as it was used in Spirituall Courts 3. What if â—udges have a peculiar Seat in the Church as in divers places they have Is that Seat therefore religious in state as an Altar a Crosse the Chaire of Peter c. 6. The Repl. also observed that the Vaile was of the same nature with long haire such as becommeth women and therefore no religious mysticall Ceremonie No saith the Rej. because long haire is of nature and the Vaile of institution which to a Ceremonie is essentiall To which I oppose 1. the true observation of P. Martyr the Def. his chiefe witnesse about this instance A woman ought seeing her haire is given her of God to follow this his institution and to imitate her Maker and cover her head which if she will not doe as much as is in her she throwes off the naturall vaile Debet mulier cum dat asit ipsi coma à Deo hoc illius institutum sequi imitari factorem suum ut caput conteâ—at quod si sacere nolit quantum in ipsae est naturale tâ—gmen exâ—usit c. where he sheweth that it is so naturall that it cannot be imitated without some violation of nature by any woman though no new institution impose it upon her 2. Chrisostome upon the same place hath this That is from nature it selfe Illud à natura institutum est quod scilicet velaremus caput mulieres non velaremus viri Natura ut mulier regeretur voluit ut inde docta regeretur that we women should cover our heads and we men should uncover our heads Nature would that women should bee covered she is taught to be covered even from thence 3. Paul himselfe saith not only that nature it selfe hath taught women to use a vaile but also that the disguising of it is all one with shaving so that long haire and a vaile according to the Apostle is all one for the ground of it If therefore speciall institution above nature be essentiall to a Ceremonie then certainely vailing
out of the Church What sayth the Rej. even Sitting at the Communion and a communion-Table Yea say we even these if they can be prooved to bee Ceremonies of mans invention 3. From the former consideration the Defen was challenged for having gone about to deceive us often times before by confounding all circumstances of order and decency with properly called Ceremonies whereas now in the winding up of all he confesseth that they cannot be properly called Ceremonies except they be significant The Rejoynder his answere is that all such circumstances are some way significant though not symbolically because they signifie some way what is to be done or where or when or why or how Now though every circumstance doeth some way argue that whereof it is a circumstance and so in a large sense may bee called a signe of it yet 1. every circumstance is not a signe of what is to be done because some have no place untill the thing be done 2. Both the Def. and Rej. have hitherto confounded indicant and symbolicall signes except onely one place where for a shift the Rej. sayth Beza differing in phraze from other Divines meaneth by Symbolicall Sacramentall signes pag. 264.265 Heere therefore to distinguish them is to confesse their former dealing not faire 4. If all circumstances belonging to time place person instruments or manner of actions sacred be sacred significant Ceremonies then not the Clocke onely but the leaden weights of it not the ground onely upon which men stand in worship but the Rushes also strowed by occasion upon it or the Besome wherewith it is swept not the Preachers voyce onely but his black Cap his comely heard not the Communion Table-clothe onely but the colour of it not distinct speaking onely but every Preachers proper Tone are sacred significant ceremoniall Weights Rushes Bezomes Caps Beards Colours Tones c. See what an argument the Def. made against us according to the Rej. his explication If Signes Indicant that is such as by the nature of the things themselves without any religious signification put upon them by institution are lawfull then Symbolicall signes that is those which teach a spirituall duty by their mysticall instituted signification cannot be unlawfull In striving to helpe the Def. out of the water hee hath sunke and followed him deeper in then before he seemed to bee plunged 5. Calvin said the Def. and some other doe accuse some Popish Ceremonies because they are dumbe They accuse them also answereth the Repl. for speaking as the Scripture doth condemne images both for being dumbe and also for teaching lies Well said saith the Rej When the Ceremonies are altogether dumbe they condemne them for not speaking when they speake idly or falsely they condemne them for speaking amisse But you condemne them simply for not being dumbe But heer is a great mistaking of the Rejoynders For we condemne humane Ceremonies for speaking idely that which Gods Ordinances doe sufficiently speak and falsely also for their manner of speaking as if they had just commission to speake in Gods name when they have not When an image of the blessed Virgine spake in the Church to Bernard good morrow Bernard good morrow Bernard answered 〈◊〉 Madam you forget your Sexe it is not lawfull for a woman to speake in the Church The Scriptures also condemned the same image for standing at other times dumbe in the Church Even so we condemne humane Ceremonies both for standing in the Church dumbe and unprofitable and also for speaking in such a place idely and above that which beseeme their Sexe or degree I repeat therefore againe not as a meere jest in which name the Rejoynder putteth it off but as a sad and serious trueth that which the Replier concluded this Argument withall Lay all together which our Divines say and you shall finde that in their judgements Humane Ceremonies in Gods worship are like a foole in a place of honor who whether he speaketh or holdeth his peace still sheweth himselfe unworthy of that place CHAP. 4. Concerning Idolatrous Ceremonies SECT 1. About the forming of this argument and the generall answer given thereto IN the former Argument as being most essentiall I suffered my pen to run a larger course then in the beginning I intended Heere I purpose to hold it shorter Passing over therefore by-matters 1. The Argument was thus propounded in the Abridgement It is contrary to Gods word to use much more to command the use of such Ceremonies in the worship of God as man hath devized if they bee notoriously knowne to have beene of olde and still to be abused unto Idolatrie and Superstition by the Papists especially if the same be now of no necessary use in the Church But our Ceremonies are such Ergo. The Def. his answer was so set downe that by the Rej. his owne confession no sense could be discerned in it But the said Rej. after three patchings of the words and the distinctions about abolishing abused and necessary bringeth for account this answer out of all If by abolition be meant Abscission and not Cure the Proposition being meant of things indifferent is false But if in the exception of things necessary be meant not an absolute but a convenient necessitie the Assumption is false which sayth that our Ceremonies are of no necessary use in the Church Heere we have three distinctions betwixt 1. abscission or cutting off and curing 2. things evill in their nature and indifferent 3. necessity absolute and convenient Now 1. see how they agree among themselves In the first the Ceremonies are considered as members of our Religion or worship which must be eyther cut off or cured for so the Def. explaineth it of cutting off the members by the joynts whereas they were never members joynted to our religion or worship but to the Harlot of Rome In the second they are considered as no members but things indifferent and in the third at the best onely convenient 2. For the first it is well knowne that they are cloutes which have lien vpon the plague-soares of Idolaters many hundreds of yeares and what wise Physition or Surgeon was ever knowne to goe about the curing of such clouts 3. For the second it is a meere affectation of casting a myst before the Readers eyes For both the Def. and Rei knew well that the Authors of this Argument holde our Ceremonies not indifferent but unlawfull in their nature and yet upon supposed indifferency undertake to make good their Proposition as having all sense on their side namely that things otherwise meerely indifferent receive some difference by their notorious abuse to Idolatry 4. For the last The Ceremonies are heere onely in a blinde distinction as it were in a parenthesis affirmed to be of convenient use in our Church Now let any man consider of this dealing whether it be not more necessary for the Def. and Rej. then convenient for the Reader In the Abridgement pag. 42. and 43. c. it is largely prooved
Licuit quae apud Gentes superstitioso cultu impid agerentur eadem expiata sacto ritu ad pietatem transferre ut majori Diaboli contumelia quibus ipse colâ— voluerit Christus ab omnibus honoraretur Eâ licentiâ qua Deorum delubra in Ecclesias Christianorum sunâ— laudabiliter commutata alij quoque ritus Gentilium à nobis benedictionibus expiati divino sunt cultui consecrati though their doctrine in generall were against such Ceremonies yet from their practise so pregnant testimony may be brought for divers superstitious Ceremonies that the Church rueth the pregnancy of them unto this day Baronius ad an 44. in the end bringeth many examples and from them concludeth It was lawfull to apply those things which the Gentiles had abused in superstitious worship and purged from uncleannesse by holy worship unto pious uses that Christ to the greater dishonour of Satan might be honoured with those things wherewith Satan himselfe sought to be worshipped By the same reason whereby the Temples of the Heathenish gods were laudably turned into the Churches of Christians other rites also of the Gentils cleansed by our prayers are rightly turned to holy use And ad an 58. about the midle he hath upon the same examples these words What wonder is it if holy Bishops did consent that those wonted customes of the Gentiles from which it was impossâ—ble to draw them utterly even after they were professed Christians should be changed into the worship of God Venerable antiquity changed superstition into religion and brought to passe that what was spent upon Idols should be carefully converted into the worship of God Quid mirum fiâ—inolitas apud Gentiles consuctudines à quibus not quamvis Christiani effecti essent penitus divelli impossibile videretur easdem in Dei cultum transferri sanâ—ct fimi Episcopâ— concesserunt Venetanda antiquiâ—as superstitionem in religinem conversit effecitque ut quod impendebatur Idolis provide in Dei cultum converteretur Sylva quaedam Iudaicarum Gentilium Cerâ—moniarum paulatim agrum Domini occupavit From hence it came as Polidore de Invent. in the preface sayth that A vast forrest of Iewish Ceremonies did by little and little invade and possesse the Lords fielde A true reason and censure also of these practises is given by Doctor Iackson Originall of unbeliefe Section 4. chapter 23. in these wordes To outstrip our adversaries in their owne pollicies or to use meanes abused by others to a better end is a resolution so plausible to worldly wisedome which of all other fruits of the flesh iâ— for the most part the hardliest and last renounced that almost no sect or profession in any age but in the issue mightily over-reached or intangled themselves by too much seeking to circumvent or goe beyond others A notable example we have of this pollicy in Gregories direction unto Augustine the Monke then in England lib. 9. ep 71. which was that sacrificing of Oxen with feasting in the Idol Temples should be turned into slaying of Oxen for fasting about those Temples made Christian by holy-water 2. In that which the Replier collected out of the Defender his allegations it is confessed ther is litle or nothing to the purpose The Rejoynder therfor accusing the Replier for picking the Defender his purse undertaketh to restore it unto him againe by making this new collection 1. If the celebritie of the Feast of Easter was held by many to be lawfully kept on the same day which the Iews superstitiously as then observed 2. If they avoyding Pagan Fasts and Feasts did freely institute other 3. If superstitious habits were lawfully reteyned 4. If Circumcision after it became a meer human Ceremonie was lawfully used Then the anciâ—nt Fathers and Churches were of opinion that godly men may lawfully use some Human Ceremonies abused by others But this is a meer empty purse not worth the picking which the Rejoynder sticketh into the Defender his pocket as his owne For 1. It hath not in it our quaestion of Ceremonies devised by man not necessarie notoriously knowen to have been abused unto Idolatrie or superstition 2. In the first instance ther is onely many noted from whence cannot be concluded in a kinde of generalitie the Fathers and Churches opinion 3. Easter was by them that kept it not held as a meer human invention but as Apostolical tradition as all knowe 4. Easter was not invented by men but onely by men superstitiously continued 5. The second Argument stifles it self For if they so carefully avoyded Pagan Fasts and Feasts though they might have pleased many professed Christians and drawn on other by retayning of them it seemeth they held them unlawfull because of the Idolatrie wherwith they had been defiled 6. We absolutely denie with all Divines that Circumcision after the Date of it was fully expired which was in the Apostles time was ever lawfully used as a religious Ceremonie 7. Concerning Ceremonious habits the Defender bringeth no proof at all The Rejoynder 1. allegeth Tertullian de Corona mil. as allowing the use of a white linnen garment he meaneth for a Ceremonie wheras Tertullian onely sheweth that our Saviour did lawfully use a linnen towell in washing his Disciples feet Ioh. 13. notwithstanding linnen garments had been abused to Idolatrie In the 2. place he referreth us to B. Iewel his Defence for our belly-full of instances And it is true that godly learned man par 3. cap. 5. div 1. allegeth divers instances and Authorities neyther would he have omitted that of Tertullian if he had esteemed it But because it is necessarie I will set downe the examination of them which I finde in certayn papers of M r. Brightman one Author of the Abrigement neyther ungodly nor unlearned wherby it shall appear that they doe not so fill our Bellies but that we can well digest them The learning of it will answer for the length to every studious Reader M. BRIGHTMANS ANSWER TO B. IEWELS ALLEGATIONS FOR THE ANTIQVITIE OF DIstinct Ceremonious apparel used by Ministers in their Ministration IVSTINE MARTYR preached the word of God in a Philosophers habit which was his ordinary garment such as our students at Vniversitie and Innes of Court weare no Surplice nor any such ministringe attire But concerning the Bishops brouch which M. Iewel saith Iohn the Euangelist did weare as if he had bene a Bishop of the Iewes I take it it was no material brouch but a figurative speech onely For Polycrates describinge Iohn first by the singular love our Lord bore him in whose bosome he leaned at his last supper then of the great holines wherein this noble disciple excelled he contented not himselfe to declare the same properlye but allegorically said of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was the Prâ—ist that carried the brouch not that he ever used any such thinge but that he expressed by his holy conversation the force of that Sanctitas Iehovae written in that golden plate which the high Preist carried
that our rites are not the ceremonies of Papists because they are purged from superstition But 1. that they are not purged from all superstitioÌ„ hath sufficiently beene declared before 2. This plea of transubstantiating of Ceremonies by the breath of our Convocation is a meere shift contrary not onely to the language of all our Divines and to that which every mans senses doe tell him but also to the publicke profession of the Church of England in the preface to our service-book as it is cited by him pag. 127. For there we are told 1. that an abatement is made of the excâ—sse of Popish Ceremonies All therefore are not abolished but some remaine And which be they if these in quaestion be not 2. That some of the old Ceremonies doe remaine What sense can be given of these words if our Ceremonies be not the same with those which were of old among the Papists if it were meant of old ceremonies not used among the Papists then they doe not remaine nor are retained but restored 3. That none are devised anew therefore they must needs be taken from the Papists or from the Fathers but of the Fathers surplice or kneeling at the communion no instance can be given and as for the crosse the Def. himselfe will not defend I thinke all that use which the Fathers putt it to 3. The Papists owne words doe sufficiently manifest how they are hardened by the imposition and use of our ceremonies For as it is shewed in the Abridgement p. 25. they seek to justifye their superstition by this that we have borrowed our ceremonies from them And some of them thence conclude as there is shewed that our Governours like well of their superstition Beside Gretser a principall Iesuit saith that in these ceremonies our Ministers are as Apes of Popish Priests Apol. pro Gregor 7. pag. 8. and in his defence tom 2. lib. 4. cap. 16. saith that our Convocation house in imposing these Ceremonies doe crosse the judgement of our best Divines Lastly the respect of that Popish superstition wherewith our people were then generally infected was the chiefe if not the onely cause why these ceremonies were retained by our first Reformers See more of this in M. Parker p. 2. c. 6. sect 10. SECT XI THe second instâ—nce is that the prophane will draw many argumâ—ntâ— heâ—ce to bâ—â—sse himselfe in his contempt of all Relâ—gâ—on The Defen aâ—keth from whence I answer from hence 1. that Religious rites are invented by men and aâ—pointed to be used in Gods woâ—ship even after the same manner that Gods Ordinances are or at least were of old 2. That trifles are urged to the increasing of contention 3. that many place such holines in these things which they know to be mens devises 4. that other cerâ—monies are cryed down as if they were against Religion which yet are every way as good as these 5. that religious men are more molested for thâ—se toyes then they are for their profanenesse SECT XII THe third instance of scandall is in weak brethren who will be drawne to yeeld unto the ceremonies against their consciences or else doubtingly and some also will grow to dislike some Ministers for these things and so be hindred from profiting by their ministery To this the Def. answereth in many words but the summe of all he saith is that these are not weake brethren because they have beene diligently catechised by Non-conformists But 1. the Corinthians no doubt were diligently catechised yet there were many weak among them 2. The Def. I hope taketh order or else he may be ashamed that all his Diocesse be diligently catechised yet I thinke he will not say but there are many weak soules in that circuit 3. The Catechisers he speaketh of have had enough to doe to teach the people the maine points of Religion as for instructing them concerning the lawfulnesse of humaine ceremonies they left that to those that impose them or to their servants 4. After long teaching sufficient knowledge there may be still a weaknesse in regard of some things through many circumstances required unto strength beside bare knowledge Lastly we confesse that upon supposition that the Def. his doctrine be found in these points we are yet weak in these points as we are also in some other wherein our adversaries are so strong that they can beare many Churches and such like things upon their shoulders without feeling any burthen of them which we cannot See M. Park cap. 6. sect 18. SECT XIII THe fourth instance is thus sett downe in the Abridgement pag. 50. As there is danger in the use of these ceremonies in all Congregations so especially if they shall be brougâ—t backe againe unto those where they have beene long out of use In this case Calvin Brentius Bucer Hemingius Beza Grinaeus and other great Divines esteeme them wicked and unlawfull To all this the Def. giveth no answer but onely taketh occasion to make a frothy comparison betwixt the lawes and power of particular Congregations and the whole Convocation house Which because it neither pertaineth to the present purpose nor containeth any thing of moment I leave as I found though it may be easily proved that many particular Congregations can tell better what is fitting for their edification in some things then all our Nationall Convocation Nay I dare boldly say there is no Towne of note in all England but twelve men may be chosen out of which would finde out Canons more to the edification of all the Congregations in England then those are which B. Bancroâ—t with his Clergie concluded SECT XIIII A Fift instance or rather an inlargement of the former is in respect of the Ministers who have formerly refused the ceremonies for whereas the Minister is bound to lead his people forward unto perfection and to provide by all good meanes that his ministery be not despised by this meanes he shall draw them back againe unto the liking of superstition or at least not to dislike it so much as they have done and give them evident occasion to bâ—ame his Ministery and to call in quaestion the truth of all his doctrine Here the Defen commeth upon them with open mouth avouching peremptorily that this is a false presumptuous irreligious partiall and pernicious pretense and all this he will prove If he can we shall the easilyer beare these great words But why is it false forsooth because most of the Non-conformists have once subscribed the contradicting of which subscription is no lesse a matter of discredit then returning unto conformitie What kind of proofe is this because they were subject to another discredite therefore this is no discredit Beside it doth not appeare nor is likely that most of these Ministers did ever absolutely subscribe neither is it likely because it is well knowne how easie and how ordinary it was in Queene Elizabeths dayes to enter into the Ministry without passing under that gallowes If the most had yet how would this prove
that Beza and M r. Cartwright determined with him in case of the Surplice I answer 1. they did not so for the crosse 2. they did not so for subscription to either 3. they did not so but by way of toleration requiring also that men did speake against the imposing of the Surplice 4. Beza was not throughly acquainted with the state of our Church M r. Cartwright as I have beene certainly informed by his owne sonne recalled that passage of his booke and desired that his revoking of it might be made knowne I thought good overseeing the Presse to confirme the Authors report by a more particular relation which I have received from a person of good credit set downe in writt as followeth MR. Cartwright being beyond the seas in printing the rest of his 2. Reply werein that indulgence is sent to the Ministers of England who sought reformation with him for their opinion of the use of the Surplice in case of deprivation 22. of whom met therabout of whom 19 joyntly agreed that it was simply unlawfull in any case but the other three sayd otherwise wherefore it was agreed by all that each part should write their opinion and their reasons to him which they did but the letter of the nineteene miscarried and that of the other three was delivered which he taking as the letter of the whole supposed their joynt consent had beene that the losse of the ministery altered the case of the unlawfulnesse so that they were all against him whereupon be mistrusting his owne judgement and being much perplexed thereabout suffered himselfe to be swayed unto what is there written but afterward understanding the right hee was much more perplexed yea as he sayd more then ever he was in that to the great prejudice of the truth he had suffered his conscience to be so defiled which was forbidden 1. Cor. 8.7 which hee bartily sorrowed to many professing that if he againe put penn to paper about that subject he would cleare the cause and blame himselfe praying them to signify the same freely in the meane tyme the which they did so that it ever since hath been currant among all his friends and constantly affirmed by them to all on due occasions and particularly affirmed to M. Sprint by a Gentleman in the presence of one Nobleman two Gentlemen 27. Ministers and many professors in his course in the scanning his booke then about to be printed divers yeares before it was printed sundry also of those ministers avouched the same some on their owne knowledge others vpon vndoubted testimony which yet is ready to be avouched in due case of need and should now be expressed were not the naming of the avouchers dangerous vnto them and so not to be done without their knowledge which now cannot be For the point it selfe when a man doth but stand in doubt betwixt using the ceremonies and suffering of dâ—privation it must needs be more safe patiently to suffer himselfe to bee thrust from his ministâ—ry then to reteine it and offend his conscience by using the Ceremonies For to bee restrained by authoriâ—y from his lawfull function because hee will not yeeld to the doing of that which to him is sinne is no more sinne in the sufferer then to surcease his publicke preaching whilest he is held in prison where he wanteth occasion Thus the use of that is avoyded which he disalloweth and the blame of leaving his standing is theirs who cast him from thence and not his So no sinn is committed eiâ—her in the use of that hee disalloweth or in susteining deprivation But to hold his place and to practise against conscience is to commit one great sinn at the least Thus having examined the Defend his adventurous charges of false presumptuous irreligious partiall and pernitious I finde them all to bee but rash words of distemper SECT XV. IN the last place the Defendant bringeth forth to answere the words of the Apostle 1. Thess. 5.22 Abstaine from all appearance of evill But as this argument is not found at all in that page of the Abridgment which he citeth so in the words or sence which he setteth downe I dare say it is not used either of them or any other against the ceremonies Yet let us heare his answer The Apostle speaketh sayth he of the opinions of private men But 1. what warrant hath he to restraine a generall praecept when the universalitie of it agreeth witâ— the law Abstaine from all appearance sayth the Apostle i. e. sayth the Def. from some private opinions 2. Why must appearance of evill be needs understood of opinions onely two or three interpreters indeed do understand it of doctrine most properly but the most otherwise and the word translated appearance signifying rather an object of seeing then of hearing leads us rather to the eye as in actions gesturs garments then to the ear in doctrines 3. For that which he addeth of private mens opinions there is no circumstance of the text nor any reason or authority that doth warrant such a glosse SECT XVII AMong his accusations wherein he chargeth us with manifold scandalls the first is that some weak ones by occasion of these differences stand amazed and so become more remisse in profession or religion Where 1. it is to bee observed that when wee spake of weake-ones sect 12. it was putt off with this pretence that they were such as we had catechised Now then who are these weak-ones I hope the Bishops provide that people of their Diocesses are well catechised whence then is this weaknesse 2. DiffereÌ„ces in matters of circumstance are not wont to breed scandall untill some authority injoyne uniformity as we may see in the primitive Churches 3. If differences be the occasion of this scandall surely those that differ from us may as well be accused therefore as we that differ from them especially when we urge nothing of ours upon them but they impose their owne devices upon us and so are causes of the differences 4. The amazement which some have wondring what will be the event of differences is no damnable error which by the Def. is required to a scandall sect 1. And if they grow remisse in religion upon it that is their sinne I am sure zeale against superstition and for pure and undefiled worship hath no fitnesse in it to work remissenesse in religion but urging of humaine devices in Gods worship tendeth directly thither SECT XVIII THe second charge of scandall is in respect of the Separatists Where 1. I aske if Gaius had made a separation from the Church wherein Diotrephes lived whether the Apostle Iohn had beene cause of that scandall because he condemned his abuse of excommunication Ioh. 3.9.10 2. If any separate from churches where Images are retained who is the cause they that dislike of Images or they that retaine them 3. The dislike of Ceremonies is not the cheife cause for which separation is made but the intollerable abuses which are in Ecclesiasticall
to be worshipped in spirit and truth and where he would have few and very simple Ceremonies Also if God established by his Law that a woman may not putt on a mans apparrell nor a man a womans the one beeing so well of it selfe dishonest and contrary to nature as the other Why then should godly Bishops †Still misinformed and the servants of Christ be clothed or rather shamed and deformed with the garments of godlesse Priests and slaves of Antichrist Why should wee not rather as wee be of a divers religion from them so also be discerned from them at least in the performance of such duties as belong unto Gods worship by outward signes such as garments be Verily this was Gods will and he required of his people that it should be discerned from the prophane Gentiles as by other things so also by a divers sort of apparell and so should professe by this publicke signe that it would have nothing to doe with the Gentiles And why should not wee doe the same Are wee not the people of God abides not the equity of the same commandement And if the word honest be derived of honour what honour will it be for the church of Christ to have Bishops attired and disguised with Popish visors in the administration of the Gospell and Sacraments so as they shall rather be derided then be reverenced any whit by the people And what commendation shall it be for your gracious Majesty in true Churches and among true beleevers that you permit such trifles to be called back into your Church Therfore it standeth not with honesty that holy †Still misinformed Bishops be compelled to receive such visors neither is it indeed a matter worthy of honour and praise neither deserveth it the name of vertue For if your Majesty should command that all English men leaving that ancient and very grave and comely attire should weare Turkie coats or a souldiers weed as it is called who would ever approve this decree as honest And it is much lesse praise-worthy if godly Bishops be enjoyned laying aside or at least changing the honest and ancient apparell which the Apostles wore to wit that common and grave habit to put on the ridiculous execrable or accursed garment of godlesse Mass-priests Now concerning the third part of the Princes dutie there is nothing fitter to trouble the publicke peace of the Church then this counsell For every novelty especially in religion either by it selfe if it be evill disturbs and troubles a good peace or if it be good gives occasion of trouble by accident by causing contention betweene evill and good men But as in things which be good of themselves of which nature the reformation of the Churches according to the will of God is we are not to care for the troubling of that ungodly peace thâ—t is of the world for Christ came not by his Gospell to keep such a peace but rather to take it away to send a sword so assuredly by the urging of things indifferent to trouble the peace of Churches and to cause strife betweene good men and bad yea betweene godly men themselves is so wicked that it can by no meanes be defended so that Ireneus had just cause to reprove Victor Bishop of Rome for this cause as hath beene said afore For it must needs be that at such times the Churches be rent in peeces then which thing what is more hurtfull Many exemples in the histories of the Church prove this which I say How many and how great troubles arose in the Primitive Church betweene those who beside the Gospell urged also circumcision and the law and betweene those who upon good ground rejected them And how great evills would this dissention have brought to the Church of Christ had not the Apostles betime withstood them by that councell gathered together at Ierusalem by a lawfull examination and discussing of the cause by manifest testimonies of the Scriptures and by sound reasons If your gracious Majesty as you ought desire both to be and to seeme Apostolicke then imitate the Apostles in this matter Neither lay and impose this yoke upon the neckes of Christs Disciples your selfe nor suffer it to be imposed by others But if you see that the Bishops disagree about this matter among themselves assemble a Synod and cause this controversie to be examined by the Scriptures And then looke what shall be proved by plaine testimonies and strong reasons propound that to be observed by all and command by your decree that that be observed and so take disagreement out of the Church For your gracious Majesty ought to be very carefull that there be no innovation in religion but according to the word of God By this means shall a true peace concord unity of the Churches be preserved But if the proceeding be otherwise what other thing will it be then to take away unity and to trouble the Christian peace And this I may not passe over with silence that by this novelty of the busines not onely the publick peace shall be troubled in that kingdome but also many else-where out of that kingdome will have occasion given them to raise new contentions in Churches and that to the great hinderance of godlines and the more slow proceeding of the Gospell For all men know that the most part of all the Churches who have fallen from the Bishop of Rome for the Gospels sake doe not only want but also abhorre those garmeÌ„ts and that there be some Churches though few in comparison of the former which doe as yet retaine those garments invented in Poperie as they very stifly retaine some other things also because the reformers of those Churches otherwise worthy men and very faithfull servants of Christ durst not at the first neither judged they it expedient utterly abolish all Popish things But as the common manner is every man likes his owne best Now I call those things a mans owne not so much which every man hath invâ—nted as those beside which every man chooseth to himselfe receiveth retaineth and pursueth though they be invented to his hand by others But if there be also annexed the examples of other men they be more and more hardened in them and are not onely hardened but also doe their uttermost endeavour by word and writing to draw all the rest to be of their minde Therfore wee easily see what the issue will be if your gracious Majesty admit of that counsell which some doe give you to take on apparell and other more Popish things besides For some men who be not well occupied being stirred up by the example of your Majesty will write bookes and disperse them throughout all Germany of these things which they call indifferent to witt that it is lawfull to admit of them nay that they be altogether to be retained that Papists may be the lesse estranged and alienated from us and so we may come the neerer to concord and agreement
yet they are onely naturall beinges It was further added that clothes cups meeting places etc. are of the same use out of Gods service that they are in it This is occasion of admiration and exclamation to the Rejoynder But he might have considered that the immediat ende of a clothe is to cover of a cup to drinke out of meeting places to meet in and then where is the strangenesse of this assertion Is ther not the same immediat use of a mans eyes in reading one booke as another of a mans eares in hearing one voyce and another how soever the subject seen or heard may differ in nature or kinde A distinction was likewise used betwixt appropriation of this or that individuall and of the kinde To this it is rejoined 1. that the individualls are neverthelesse appropriated Whiche is not so because appropriation of the kinde and individuall both is more then of the individuall alone Individuals may be extrinsicallie accideÌ„tally appropriated the kinde remayning intrinsically common indifferent 2. That some individualls without all their kinde have been appropriated to holie uses Of whiche no man doubteth because one individuall may be so used without other But is ther therfor no difference betwixt extrinsecall accidentall appropriation of one Levite to the Ministrie and the whole tribe 3. Not all kinde of linnen garments or crosses are appropriated to religious uses .. As if the question were of linnen garments simplie though they were used without any suche institution as a Surplice hath onely for the naturall conveniencie of it or of crossing the fingers upon occasion to drive away flies that come crosse upon a mans face Ther was in the last place mention made of the significancie of our Ceremonies which maketh them in their intrinsecall nature as suche without any further expectation of occasionall application to be proper to religion But of this our Rej. would not hear in this place Let it therfore passe to the next chapter 4. A fourth confirmation wholly dependeth on Matth. 15. Where the Def. would have it that our Saviour condemneth not the act of washing that is sayth the Rej. the monitorie significant signe of washing used by the Pharisies but their intention opinion in attributing legall and operative sanctitie to that their owne invention Now concerning monitorie significancie enough hath been spoken in the head of Ceremonies and it remaineth to be discussed in the following chapter For the present it was first noted by the Repl. that some intention and opinion of holinesse cleaveth to our Ceremonies This is denied by the Rej. and yet in his whole dispute he maketh them worship though accidentall arbitrarie and improper Neyther can any man impose a double or treble religious Ceremonie without intention and opinion of some holinesse belonging to it more then to that which is not so religious It was in the second place observed that more holinesse was attributed to those washings then is by many among us to the crosse cannot be proved out of the text ther being no one circumstance in it which may not fitly be applied to our Ceremonies To whiche the Rej. sayth 1. that those are blinde superstitious persons which attribute suche thinges to the Crosse not the Church imposing Iust as Bellarmine in the place by and by to be cited answereth Calv. about the same matter Si qui sunt inter Catholicos rudioras c. Eos corrigendos putamus c. If there be any more rude among hir Catholiques we hold them worthy to be corrected But are not our blinde Protestants and those rude Papists hardened in their superstition by the imposing urging of those thinges which they superstitiously dote on The Pharisies addeth the Rej. were so strongly conceyted of this washing that they thought without it the very creatures of God should defile them But that of the very creatures defiling is not in the text It is but probablie collected out of our Saviours following discourse that they estemeed some defiling to follow upoÌ„ the eating of the creature not as it was a creature but as it was so used against the tradition of their Elders And are are there not many to be found in England that their very Baptisme is deficient unsufficient and so defiled if it want the Crosse For further answer it was alleged by the Repl. that not onely Calvin in Mat. 15. but also Bellarmin himself de eff Sacr. l. 2. cap. 32. sayth that the Pharisies washing was condemned as vaine and unprofitable setting aside intention and opinion of legall operative holinesse The Rejoynder answering first for Bellarmine sayth he is abused because forsooth he speakes that falsely to defend the Popish Ceremonies As if it were not the common notion of all Christians that vayne and unprofitable Ceremonies are to be condemned or as if Bellarmine alone sayd this or as if this could defend the Popish Ceremonies which are more easily defended from any other charge then they can be from this that they are vayne and unprofitable Who would have thought that D.B. would defende vaine and unprofitable Ceremonies in Gods solemne worship But Chemnitius sayth he observâ—s that Christ condemned not these washings simply as prophane fopperies nor as simplie unlawfull but in respect of religion placed in them Not simplie profane fopperies that is voyde of all shew from Scripture or reason nor simplie unlawfull if the actes in themselves be considered or abstracted from all relations by institution added unto them but in respect of religion placed in them 1. e. superstition adjoyned unto them Now ther is superstitio not onely pernitious but also vaine and superfluous Filucius tract 24. cap. 2. And chemnitius in the same place affirmeth the Pharisies washinges to have been condemned for that notwithstanding their vanitie and want of Divine institution they were made some part of Gods worship As for Calvine the Rej. doeth not denie but that passage alleged is found in the place the inventing of Ceremonies was an idle vanitie before the high opinion of Religion was added unto it Yet sayth he 1. he cleareth our Ceremonies which was cast upon the Iewish superstitious washings From some of that blame it may be granted but not from all For then those wordes which the Rejoynder confesseth him to set downe should have beeÌ„ a contradiction to the other 2. This shread added he is falsely alleged as touching the intention And why so I pray Because forsooth Calvins meaning was that to devize new washing to the like ende and with the like opinion of them as of those which God had set wa of idle vanitie But if this were his meaning how can that meaning agree with the meaning of these wordes It was of idle vanitie before the high opinion of Religion was added unto it Was there any higher opinion of Religion added unto those washinges theÌ„ to the washinges which God had set Extremitie drives men to hard shifts For the fuller clearing of this reason that