meaneth by decency and order and saith among other things one end of decency is that while certain Rites are made use of to conciliate reverence to sacred things we should by such helps be the more excited unto piety Illyricus himself declareth this command to be a foundation Gloss Illyrici in Loc. first Frinciple or Rule upon which Church Government and Polity is to be built and according to which it is to be modelled Part. 2. Ch. 4. And the same commandment is produced by the London Ministers in their Jus divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici as giving allowance for the ordering the circumstantials of Church Government And then it must especially warrant the orderly determining things circumstantial concerning Ecclesiastical Assemblies and divine worship which is the special matter about which the Apostle treateth in that Chapter SECT IV. The practice and judgment of the Primitive and many Protestant Churches concerning Ceremonies 1. The third Argument is from the judgment and practice of the Church of God in all Ages both in its Primitive Purity and since the Reformation And as Christian Prudence and Sobriety requireth a reverend esteem of the judgment or the Vniversal Church so Christian Charity Humility and Modesty will forbid the rast censuring the generally received practices in the best times of Christianity In the Primitive times all their Canonical Constitutions of Synods supposed a liberty reserved to the Church of determining things expedient their observation of some Rites appointed by the Apostles is clear enough from the foregoing Section and of their use of the sign of the Cross of distinct Garments in Religious Worship of their gesture at the Communion and of imposition of hands in Confirmation and the Ring in Marriage Ch. 4. I shall give a particular account when I come to consider the particular Rites of our Church And that in the early times of Christianity they stood at Prayer on the Lords Days and from Easter to Whitsunday as professing the hope of the Resurrection that they prayed with their faces to the East while in the Jewish Temple Worship they always worshipped with their faces to the West that they used various impositions of hands on the Penitents and gave some initiatives Symbols as Salt Hony and Milk to the Catechumens and newly baptized persons with others of the like nature is so manifest that no man who hath read the ancient Writers can possibly make any doubt thereof And such Rites as were orderly and fitly established by Ecclesiastical Authority without any divine institution were frequently justified and defended by divers of the Fathers as Tertullian S. Ambrose Basil Austin as their testimonies might be largely produced 2. For instance sake I shall single out S. Austin who though he piously complained of the over-great number of Ceremonies in his time when they were indeed very numerous in his Epistle to Casulanus writing concerning fasting on the Saturday Aug. Ep. 86. he giveth this general Rule that in those things where the divine Scriptures determine nothing certainly the custom of the people of God or the institution of our Ancestors is to be reputed as a Law And afterwards he adviseth to be careful lest the clearness or calmness of Charity be about such things Clouded over with the tempests of contention and disputation Ep. 118. c. 2. And in his Epistle to Januarius after many other things to the same purpose he expresseth the advice of S. Ambrose which he always esteemed as a Divine Oracle that in things which neither opposed Faith nor a holy life every one was to conform to the Observations and Custom of that Church where he had his present abode cum Romae sum jejuno Sabbato cum hic sum non jejuno sic etiam tu ad quam forte Ecclesiam veneris ejus morem serva si cuique non vis esse scandalo nec quenquam tibi Ep. 119. c. 18. and in his next Epistle he giveth a like direction about the same matter which is by him called saluberrima regula And he saith he had oft perceived with grief and sorrow much disturbance of the weak per quorundam fratrum contentiosam obstinationem superstitiosam timiditatem through the contentious obstinacy and superstitious fearfulness of some brethren who stir up such contentious questions about Ecclesiastical Rites of an indifferent nature in particular Churches that they judge nothing right but what themselves do and in the same Epistle Ep. 118. c. 6. he defendeth the Custom of the Church in his time of receiving the Eucharist fasting which Christ instituted after meat but gave no command that it should be afterwards so celebrated 3. Amongst the Protestant Writers Calvin at Geneva Calvin Tom. 7. Ver a Ecclesiae Reform Ratio maketh this formal protestation Lest any man should raise a calumny I would have all pious Readers here to bear me witness that I do not contend about Ceremonies which do serve only for decency and order nor yet against such which are either Symbols of or incitements to that reverence which we bear to God Vrsin Eaepl Catec q. 103. Vrsin in the Palatinate asserteth the Ecclesiastical appointment of some Rites not only to be lawful but to be a duty potest saith he ac debet Ecclesia quasdam Ceremonias instituere Rivet in the Dutch Church saith that in the Church we use Ceremonies Cathol Orth. Tr. 2. q. 37. ut gestibus actionibus solennibus Ceremonies as gestures and actions of solemnity and concerning such things which are appointed for decency and order he declareth his approbation of that Rule of S. Austin above expressed from Ep. 118 c. 2. Among the Lutherans Kemnitius not only asserteth the Churches liberty Exam. Conc. Trid. de Sacram. Can. 13. in appointing adiaphorous Rates but also for order sake he disalloweth all liberty of varying from them Et sane ordinis decori gratia etiam in externis adiaphoris non est cuivis sine Ecclesiae judicio consensu permittendum ut ex petulâ—nlie pro libidine quid vis vel omittat vel permutet Ger. Conf. Cathol Lib. 1. Gener Par. 2. c. 5. de Traditionibus Gerard both acknowledgeth the Authority of the Church for the ordaining samethings about the external part of worship and yieldeth that not only the Church but even the Aposiles themselves did institute in the Church ritus quosdam liberos some free indifferent rites appertaining to order and decency which in specie and in particular are neither written nor imposed by a perpetual Law as necessary for the whole Church And in another place he sheweth that they readily receive these adiaphorous things for order and decency C. 12. de consuetudine Eccles etiamsi sola Ecclesiae consuetudine nitantur though they only depend upon the Custom of the Church Illyr Glos in 1. Cor. 11.16 And Flacius Illyricus himself when he was out of the humour of opposition did at last
indifferent and no direct parts of worship because these particular things are only of Ecclesiastical or humane constitution for since all instituted worship is directly appointed for the acceptable service of God which especially considering the fall of man must be in a way of Grace and not of Merit it must be God and not his Creature who must determine what Institutions will be pleasing to him Serm of good works Par. 2 Serm of Prayer Par. 2. And this is the Doctrine of our Homilies and the Book of Common Prayer speaking of Ceremonies expresly declareth that those which remain are for a Godly Discipline and Order which may be altered and changed and therefore are not to be esteemed equal with Gods law And our Articles assert Art 34. that the Church hath authority to change or abolish Ceremonies ordained by mans authority so that all things be done to edifying All which words shew that there is no holiness placed in these things nor are they of themselves made any part of the worship of God in the Church of England 5. Yet even the observation of things indifferent may by a secondary and consequential respect to other commands of God and duties of men though not directly from themselves render our services more acceptable unto God Thus that gesture of body which is not particularly determined as a necessary duty may be pleasing to God as it includeth a religious respect to those duties of glorifying God with our bodies and serving him acceptably with reverence and godly fear and the observing other decent rites may be pleasing to God as it expresseth a reverence of God and his Ordinances and service an obedient respect to that command that all things be done decently and in order a subjection to our Superiours in things lawful and a care of the Churches Peace Upon this account Vrsin truly said Vrsin Explic Catech q 96. Loc. Theol. in 2. Praecep Adiaphorae actiones possunt Deo placere liect aliter quam cuttus Dei proprie dictus that indifferent actions may please God but in a different manner from that which is properly and directly the worship of God To such general ends are those indifferent observations in our Church appointed which are called Ceremonies and hence it is with good reason declared in the Book of Common Prayer that they are as well for a decent Order in the Church as because they pertain to edification For as whatsoever exciteth reverend thoughts of God and his Ordinances is thereby useful for the Churches edifying so the Aposile requireth ruies of Order to be made for edification 1. Cor. 14.26 and S. Chrys in 1 Cor. Ch. 14.40 Chrysostome truly observed that good Order Peace and Love are the most useful things to promote edification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 6. But though external rites should be never so innocent in their own nature as being neither Jewish nor owned as parts of Christian Religion nor as operative means in themselves to convey Grace yet the introducing a great and unnecessary number of them would be disadvantageous to Religion by obscuring and darkning the spiritual duties and priviledges thereof by being needlesly burdensom to Christians and by diverting mens minds to attend chiefly unto such external observances Hence S. Aug. Ep. ad Januar c. 19. Augustin in his time as is observed in our Liturgy complained of the excessive number of such rites and the conditions which Protestant Writers require concerning Ceremonies are such as these that they be in their kind things indifferent in their number sew Kemnit Exam. Conc. Trid. de Tradition 7th genus Vrsin Ex. pl. Catech. ad qu. 103. and in their use godly and profitable for edification Now in our Church besides the use of expedient gestures in the fervice of God there is nothing which in common Custom of speech is called a Ceremony which in any proper part of worship is appointed in our Liturgy to be used by any other person besides the Minister And in our ordinary service the Minister is only required to use the appointed habit which though it be customarily called a Ceremony is no otherwise such than the Church Pulpit and the Vessels for the Communion and the Communion-Cloath are to be so esteemed which are only used in the service of God And in our particular Offices we have only the use of the Cross in the Office of Baptism of imposition of hands in Confirmation and the civil rite of the Ring in Marriage and therefore if the nature of these particular Rites be allowable which in due place will be considered there can be no dammage to Religion nor burden to Christians from the number of them SECT II. The first Argument for the lawfulness of Ecclesiastical Rites from the liberty herein allowed to the Jewish Church 1. Having hitherto endeavoured to prevent mistakes and mis-apprehensions about the subject of my present discourse I shall now lay down such Arguments as will manifest that some decent external observations in the Church though they be not particularly instituted of God are allowably ordered and appointed The first Argument is from the pactice of the Jewish Church which I shall consider in a threefold respect 2. First in their Temple worship For though they might not lawfully appoint any Sacramental Rite which was the the nature of divers of the Temple Rites and though Solomons Temple as well as Moses his Tabernacle 1. Chr. 28.12 19. was built according to the pattern which God directed and divers other external things were determined by divine appointment yet even here were some things left to the liberty and determined by the Authority of the Jewish Church or the Rulers and Governours thereof I shall not here insist upon Solomons offering Burnt-Offerings in the middle of the Court and not only upon the Altar 1. Kin. 8.64 nor upon Hezekiahs proclaiming a general Passover on the second Month 2. Chr. 30.2 because these were extraordinary Cases which were only allowable by the weightiness of the present occasions when Ceremonial Commands of God might be dispensed with in cases of greater concernment upon which account it was also lawful for David and them who were with him to cat the shew bread But it must be acknowledged that such extraordinary Cases are no more a sufficient ground for constant and ordinary Constitutions than the constant keeping a vein open can be concluded allowable because it may be expediently at some times opened for the preserving life or health 3. The first instance of this liberty among the Jews concernâ—th the Passover which was after the building the Tabernacle and Temple a proper Tabernacle or Temple Rite Phil. l. 3. de Vita Mos Lib. de Decalog Lib. de Septen Festis Deut. 16.6 and though Philo Judaeus doth in several places express the Passover to be sacrificed by all the people of Israel and not to be presented to the Priests as other Sacrifices were both the Talmud
from Suetonius Sueton. in Tiberio n. 36. who declareth that Tiberius commanding all Jews to depart from Rome forced them Religiosas vestes comburere to burn their garments which they used in their Religious services which at Rome could be none other than their Synagogue Worship or School Assemblies Phil. de Cherubim and Philo Judaeus speaketh of their attendance thereupon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arrayed in white apparel Phil. de Vit. Contempl And declareth the same concerning their Religious Feasts 12. A third instance is their practices and injunctions of decent gestures in their Religious Assemblies At the reading of the Law Neh. 8.5 Ezra opened the Book in the sight of all the people and when he opened it all the people stood up And when they praised and gave glory to God the Levites commanded the people Neh. 9.5 stand up and bless the Lord your God for ever and ever 13. A last instance I shall here give is in the admission of their chief Proselytes or Members of the Jewish Church from amongst the Gentiles where besides Circumcision which God particularly enjoined in this very Gase Ex. 12.48 and Sacrifice whereby they declared themselves professedly to communicate with the Temple Service and to be partakers of the Altar Selden de Syn. l. 1. c. 3. they also made use of washing or a kind of Baptism in initiating these Proselytes Hor. Hebr. Mat. 3.6 of which we have a large account in divers modern Authors This rite among the ancient Jews did principally express the defilement and pollution of the Gentile World which could alone be cleansed by undertaking the true Religion and the right service of God And though there might be some rational ground for the expediency of this practice because washing was under the law of frequent use in many particular Cases of uncleanness as being a means appointed for their cleansing yet neither from hence nor from Moses sprinkling the Israelites to confirm Gods Covenant to them Ex. 24.8 which place the Jewish Writers do much urge though that action was not performed with water but with the bloud of the Covenant which had water mixed therewith Heb. 9.19 do contain any special command of God that washing the Proselytes should be a rite attending their Circumcision nor do we find that when Abraham and his Family received Circumcision that any such Attendant rite was joined therewith And yet it hath been frequently acknowledged that our Saviour chusing washing or Baptism to be the initiative rite under the Gospel did shew thereby some allowance and approbation of this way of admission under the Law 14. Buxt Syn. Jud. c 5. c. And it is manifest from Buxtorf Synagoga Judaica that the Jewish practice did receive divers other Synagogal Rites even such whereof some were questionable and doubtful and other manifestly vain and ridiculous But even these miscarriages under the degeneracy of their Religion cannot render those other observances unallowable which have so considerable testimonies of their approbation in the holy Scriptures And thus in their Synagogue Worship from the instances I have mentioned to which more might be added we have evidence of the lawful use of external Rites which may conduce to preserve the order of Church Society to the distinction and Ornament of Ministers reverend behaviour in the service of God and some expression of solemnity in the sacramental admission into the Church 15. Thirdly We may consider the natural worship among the Jews or Hebrews or their general Religious profession which was neither appropriated to their Synagogues or Schools Bux Syn. Jud. c. 2. where they were ordinarily Circumcised as Buxtorf observeth nor to their publick Ceremonial or Temple worship where divers instances may be produced 16. First in the taking an Oath Abrahams Servant used the Rite of putting his hand under his Masters thigh which Aben Ezra observed to be also a Custom among the Indians Nehemiah upon the like occasion did shake his lap desiring God so to shake out every man from his house and his labour who performed not that promise Petit. Var. lect l. 1. c. 16. Fag in Gh. Par. Ex. 23.1 Exceptâ—ex Hom. Chrys de Juram Tom. 6. Fr. Duc. Neh. 5.12 13. At other times lifting up the hand was used in that solemn and Religious invocation Gen. 14.22 And it hath been observed that it was an ordinary Rite among the Jews in taking an Oath to lay their hand upon the Book of the Law as the ancient Christians even in S. Chrysostomes time laid their hand upon the Book of the Gospel But he must be satisfied with very little evidences who thinketh that he hath found a divine institution for these observations which are only outward signs of Religious invocation as our words are and therefore such expressive signs so far as expediency and due solemnity shall require may be lawfully used though they be not particularly determined by a Divine commmand 17. Secondly we may observe Rites of Memorial Thus we not only read of Samuel setting up a stone as a Monument of Gods praise and a token of remembrance that he had helped them 1. Sam. 7.12 but Laban and Jacob erected a heap to be a solemn memorial and testimony of their Oath Gen. 31.46 47. and when Joshua made a Covenant with the people of Israel to serve the Lord he set up a stone under the Oak by the Sanctuary of the Lord to be a witness and memorial of their duty and engagement Jos 24.26 27. 18. To these might be added the use of sackcloath and ashes as a testimony of humiliation and repentance the use of imposition of hands in their ordinary benediction which also our Saviour practised and I shall in another Chapter shew that the Ring in the contract of Marriage was used among the Jews And yet none of these things were enjoined in the Law of Moses further than what concerneth the Priestly benediction of Aaron with hands lifted up which some conceive to be a rite appointed in the Law 19. And from what I have hitherto observed it may be reasonably concluded that it is no encroaching upon or opposing the Authority of God if some indifferent and expedient things be determined and received in the Church as things useful but not as Divine Sanctions And he who will deny the lawfulness hereof in the Christian Church must also assert and prove that the coming of Christ hath deprived his Church of a very considerable part of that liberty and authority which the Jewish Church always possessed But against the rashness of any such positions the following Sections will be a sufficient defence SECT III. Shewing Ecclesiastical Constitutions particularly concerning Ceremonial Rites to be warranted by the Apostolical Doctrine and practice 1. The second main argument is deduced from the Apostles practice and doctrine Now though what they appointed in the Church about any matters external cannot be easily proved to be determined by humane prudence and
Ecclesiastical Authority because they were so wonderfully inspired and guided by the holy Spirit yet if it can be shewed that the Apostles themselves appointed external Rites attendant on the service of God which were of an alterable and mutable nature this will manifest that the use of such things is well consistent with the Gospel worship and thence it will follow that the Christian Church hath liberty as well as the Jewish Church had to determine such observations since God hath give no special command to abridge that liberty Here I shall consider 2. 1 The holy kiss or kiss of Charity It was a common friendly salutation for men to kiss each other both among the Jews and in other Eastern Countries as hath been observed from Xenophon and Herodotus and was also used in the Western parts of the Empire in the time of Tiberius But both S. Paul Rom. 16.16 and and S. Peter 1. Pet. 5.18 required the practice of this holy kiss as a peculiar Christian Rite and observation but when and how it was used we must discover from the relation of the ancient Christian Writers That it was used at their publick Assemblies at the time of their solemn Prayers Grot. in Rom. 16. c. 16. is proved by Grotius from the testimonies of Justin Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian who calleth it signaculum orationis the seal of Prayer and speaking of it as it was their ordinary expressive attestation of Unity Peace Tertul. de Orat. c. 14. and Love he saith Quae oratio cum divortio Sancti sâ—uli integra What Prayer can be perfect which is separated from the holy kiss Cassand Liturg. c. 39. And Cassander hath evidenced from S. Austin Innocent and divers other particular Authors and ancient Offices that it was especially used at the time of the holy Communion sometimes before but for the most part after the Consecration of the elements and before their distribution by which Ceremony Christians expressed their consent to those administrations and their love to each other and of this kiss at the Lords Supper Calvin supposeth S. Paul to speak Calv. in 1 Cor. 16. â—0 when he commandeth the Corinthians to greet one another with an holy kiss Indeed several modern Ritualists being willingly so short sighted as to discern no further than the dusky and false light of the Romish Decretals doth discover do ascribe the use of the kiss 〈◊〉 the Communion to a later original some from Leo the second others from Innocent the first but this appeareth to be a fond and vain imagination because this Custom was not only mentioned by S. Chrysostome but evidently referred to by the Laodicean Council Conc. Laod. Can. 19. Just Mart. Ap. 2. and is also expressed by Jestin Martyr in his Apology written within less than an hundred years after the Apostolical Epistles of S. Paul and S. Peter Yet that this was an external mutable Rite is so far agreed upon and acknowledged as that it is generally disused because through the vanity of mens minds it was discovered at length to promote impurity and obscenity rather than holiness and Christian love And the Romish Custom introduced instead hereof of kissing the tabellam pacis or the Table of Saints Pictures is quite another thing from the Apostolical Rite and cannot be excused from superstition from the relation it beareth to their Doctrine of the Adoration of Saints And if we enquire how this ancient use of the holy kiss was most ordinarily practised it is manifest from the testimony of the Author of the Constitutions Const Apost l. 8. c. 11. concerning the more early times of Christianity and from Amalarius describing its use about 800. Years ago Amalar. de Deccl Offic. l. 3. c. 32. that it was not promiscuously used by men and women towards each other but separately and distinctly by men towards one another and by women among themselves alone 3. 2. Their Agapae or Feasts of Charity which were appointed in part for the relief of the poor Zonar in Conc. Trul. 74. Gang. 11. Chrys in 1 Cor. but especially to express continue and increase Christian love and fellowship which is also one great design of the Lords Supper were in and after the Apostles times used either immediately before as some affirm concerning some Churches or immediately after it as others assert and which was the more general practice and even in the places of publick Assemblies That they were celebrated at the same time and place with the Lords Supper hath been usually observed and collected from 1. Cor. 11.20 23. and from Act. 2.42 46. and from thence appeareth to have been used as an Ecclesiastical Rite The use of these Feasts of Charity was mentioned with approbation by S. Jude v. 12. and according to some Greek Copies by S. Peter 2 Pet. 2.13 and amongst the ancient Writers by Ignatius Ep. ad Smyr Tertullian Apol. c. 39. Clemens Alexand. Paedag l. 2. c. 1. Orig. Cont. Celsum l. 1. Conc. Gangr c. 11. and by S. Chrysostom Augustine and divers others some placing them as the Passover was eaten before the Lords Supper others comparing them to the Jewish Feasts eaten after the Passover But when these Feasts of Charity became greatly abused the Canons both of Provincial and general Councils Conc. Laodic c. 28.3 Carth. 30. Trul. 74. excluded them from the publick places of Church Assemblies and as Baronius observeth they were abolished in Italy by S. Ambroses Authority as they were also not long afterwards in Africa by S. Augustine and the other Bishops of the Carthaginian Province Baron an 377. n. 14 Aug. Ep. 64. and they became generally disused though some appearances thereof may possibly be discerned in later times in the Communion upon Maundy Thursday in divers Churches and in the practice of the Greek Church upon the day of the Resurrection or Easter Day Cassand Liturg. c. 4. when as Cassander relateth after the holy Communion allatis in Ecclesiam epulis communiter convivantur they have a common Banquet brought into the Church of which they all partake 4. But against that part of this observation that the Agapae were anciently joined with the holy Communion it may be objected Albasp Obj. lib. 1. Obj. 18. that Albaspinus doth on purpose undertake to prove that in Tertullians time the Agapae and the Eucharist were not observed together but that the former was celebrated at night from Tertul Apol. c. 39. and the latter in the Morning from Tertul. lib. 2. ad Vxor c. 5. and de Coron Mil. c. 3. But in answer to this we may consider that in that very observation Albaspinus himself admitteth with a Non inficias iverim that the Agapae were in the time of the Apostles celebrated with the Eucharist and concerning the time of Tertullian he neither undertaketh to prove that there were no Agapae in the Morning nor no Communion in the Evening for those very words of Tertullian de
in his Gloss published from Strasburgh 1570. upon those words of the Apostle If any man seem to be contentious we have no such Custom nor the Churches of God write thus The Apostle saith he rejecteth morose and contentious answerers shewing that profitable rites received by grave authority ought by no means to be contemned or plucked in pieces though they be not built on solid demonstrations But if any man will be stiff in his opinion the Apostle will not contend any longer with him but will acquiesce in the Custom of Godly and worthy men and of the Churches of God themselves idemque saith he alios omnes pios facere debere and that all pious men ought to do the same is acknowledged there to be an Apostolical direction by Illyricus when he was out of the heat of contention in a cool and calm temper 4. If we view the pulick writings of the Reformed Churches Conf. Bohem Ars. 15. the Bohemian Confession declareth them to teach that humane Traditions Rites and Customs which do not hinder Piety are to be preserved in the publick Christian Assemblies And in their account of the Discipline and Order of their Churches they divide the matters of Religion into three heads the Essentialia which contain the matters of Faith Love and Hope the Minisierialia which enclude the means of Grace as the word of God Rat. Difc Ord. c. 1. the Sacraments and power of the Keys and the Accidentalia by which they say they mean what others call Adiaphora or external Ceremonies and Rites of Religion In these matters Adiaphorous they say they may have some things in use among them which are different from other Churches and yet are they not willing upon any small occasions to allow any alteration therein neque ob leves causus quicquam mutare aequum putamus nemini apud nos licet insuetas ceremonias inahoare Ibid. c. 2. And in their Ordination both of their Bishop and their Consenior who is designed to represent the Chorepiseopus in some ancient Churches whose Office is like that of our Arch Deacon and their Minister and their Deacon those of the same Order give to the person then ordained their right hand of fellowship and those of the inferiour Order when one is ordained to any of the higher degrees give him their right hand in token of subjection testified and assured by that external Rite 5. The Augustane Confession in several expressions asserteth it lawful for the Bishops or Pastors Conf. August de Eccâ—◠〈◊〉 Artâ—â—â— 21 de descrimine cibor to appoint things for Order in the Church and declareth that they do retain many ancient Rites or Ceremonies though they complain also of the abuse of others in the Romish Church as the Church of England doth and it asserteth also ritus illos servandos esse qui sine peccato servari possunt ad tranquillitatem bonum ordinem Ecclesiae conducunt Conf Saxon de Tradition The Saxon Confession treating of Rites appointed in the Church by humane Authority declareth that nothing ought to be appointed against Gods word or in the way of superstition but that some blameless Rites for good order both ought to be and by them are observed ritus aliquos honestos boni ordinis causa factos servamus servandos esse docemus And the Ceremonies most opposed in the Church of England with more besides them are retained both in that and in other Lutherane Churches Conf. Helv. c. 27. The Helvetick Confession asserteth that the Church hath always used a liberty about Rites as being things of a middle or indifferent nature The French Church alloweth that there be singulis locis peculiaria instituta Conf. Gallic c. 32. prout commodum visum fuerit peculiar Constitutions for several places as it shall appear profitable And the Strasburgh Confession discoursing about humane Traditions or external Rites and Observations which conduce to profit though they be not expressed in the Scriptures Conf. Argent c. 14. saith that many such the Church of God at this day doth rightly observe and as there is occasion doth make new ones adding these sharp words quas qui rejecerit is non hominum sed Dei cujus traditio est quaecunque utilis est authoritatem contemnit that whosoever rejecteth these things doth not contemn the authority of men but of God of whom is every profitable Constituion Wherefore he who will yet disclaim all Ceremonial Rites under Christianity and will esteem them to be a pestilential and dangerous Contagion in the Church must undertake to affix both to the ancient and latter most famous Churches a Miserere nostri SECT V. The ill consequences of denying the lawfulness of all Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions in things indifferent observed 1. Though the condemning the practice and rule of the Church in all Ages and even in the time of the holy Apostles and Prophets be inconvenience sufficient for any opinion to stand charged with yet besides this which hath been evidenced in the two former Sections the denying the lawfulness of any external Rites 1. Debarreth the Church of what is really advantagious unto it for some fit external Rites of order and decency provided they be not over-numerous do promise solemnity in the service of God and tend to excite a greater degree of seriousness reverence and attentiveness It was S. Austins observation De Curia pro mortuis c. 5. that in Religion the outward actions of bowing the knee stretching forth the hands and falling on the ground though they be not performed without the preceding actions of the Soul do much encrease the inward affections of the heart In the common affairs of the World the boaring his Ear with an Awle who was willing to undertake a perpetual service the giving possession among the Jews by the pulling of the shoe and amongst us by divers other ways of livery and seisin the delivering some ensign of authority at the enstallment of a Magistrate and the giving the hand as a pledge of fidelity have by the common prudence of men been judged useful Rites to render those undertakings and actions the more solemn and observable Nor can there be any reason why some external actions may not obtain the like effect in matters of Religion especially considering that both Prophets and Apostles in delivering their extraordinary Messages from God thought fit frequently to make use of visible representations that their words might thereby take the deeper impression Thus Ezekiel carried out his stuff in their sight and Isaiah walked naked without his ordinary Garments when they denounced Captivity and Agabus foretelling the imprisonment of S. Paul bound himself with his girdle Act. 13.51 Mar. 6.11 and the Apostles according to the commandment of Christ shook of the dust of their feet as a testimony against those Cities who received them not V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 10.14 which was a rite
Declaration of its true intent and end which is therewith expressed 11. I know that some persons have asserted as from Irenaeus Iren. adv Haer. l. 1. c. 1. that the Original use of the sign of the Cross was received in the Church from the Valentinians who used it as the fan of Christ to purge away sin but these things are much misrepresented there being nothing at all in Irenaeus to this purpose Only concerning the Valentinians who indeed were no Christians but by a strange medley from names used in Christianity and Gentilisme and from their own fancies they framed a Theogonia of Aeones which they called their Pleroma Irenaeus with whom Tertullian agreeth Tertul. adv Valentin c. 9. saith that the Keeper of this Pleroma was Horus who among other names was also called Stauros or Crux Lytrotes or Redemptor and of him they interpreted those words of S. Matthew his fan is in his hand So that all this referred not to the sign of the Cross but to an imaginary person who was an Idol of Valentinus his brain 12. But though the true original of the Christian use of this sign be above expressed Justin Apol. 2. adv Tryphon Tertul. de Bapt. c 8. Adv. Jud. c. 10. Barnab Ep. p. 136. what is produced by the ancient Writers of this sign being prefigured in the Old Testament by the roasting the Paschal Lamb the Serpent upon the Pole the form of the hands of Jacob in blessing the Sons of Joseph and of Moses hands being lifted up which Barnabas expresseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is far more considerable than the mistaken matter of this objection And whereas the mark upon the forehead Ezek. 9.4 was accounted by Theodotion and by Aquila as Origen relateth by the Vulgar Latin and the ancient latin Version used by Tertullian to be the mark of the Letter Thau which is the word there used in the Hebrew both S. Hierom who himself understood the Samaritan Character which was anciently used by the Jews and Origen from the relation of a converted Jew declare that the old form of 〈…〉 Thau was in the figure of a 〈◊〉 And though Scaliger in his learned â—â—â—â—dversions upon Eusebius averreth Animad v. p. 117. that this was their mistake concerning the Samaritan Character yet the truth of what they asserted may appear from the old Alphabet collected out of their ancient Medals by Bishop Walton which is different from the Vulgar Characters And I may add that the Aaronical Priesthood under the Law which prefigured Christ Kerith f. 5. in Buxt Lex Rab. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 received their Vnction in the form of a Cross or the Greek Chi as both the Talmud and all the Jewish Rabbins do declare those Rabbins who seem to dissent being reconciled to this assertion by the reasonable interpretation of Simeon de Muis. S. de Muis Var. Sacr. in Abarb. in Ex. 30. Sozom. l. 7. c. 15. Baron an 389. n. 99. Just Mart. Apol. 2. Sylburg ibidem And the form or sign of a Cross was an Hieroglyphick of the life to come among the Aegyptians and a character of wisdom among the Platonists And all these things speaking an honourable use of this sign before the time of Christ though they were not chief reasons of the Christians usage might well be providentially ordered for the advantage of Christianity it being particularly related by Sozomen that the Conversion of divers Pagans was occasioned thereby 13. Obj. 2 As for them who would charge this Rite because of its signification with being a new Sacrament I have sufficiently discovered the palpable erroneousness of that conceit in a former Chapter Ch. 2. Se. 1. 14. And whereas some disapprove this sign because it hath been abused by the Church of Rome I have given a sufficient answer to this in the fourth Section of the same Chapter And he who would censure an useful and piously ordered sign of admonition and memorial because a superstitious operative use of the same transient sign is not allowable must condemn things greatly different as if they were the same As if because Gideons Ephod was abused when it was made an Idol the use of an Ephod by Samuel and David for the decent service of God must be also insufferable and because the image of Caesar set up to be worshipped is abominable therefore his image stamped upon the Coin must not be tolerated And there is as much reason to condemn wholesom and profitable words from some persons making an ill use thereof as to condemn useful actions and gestures for the same cause 15. They who censure this Rite because it is used so soon after Baptism it self as an attendant thereupon supposing that no significative rite may be lawfully received so nearly attending upon any Sacrament they also build upon a very false and groundless supposition as if the Love-kiss and the Agapae were not so used in the Apostolical times with reference to the Lords Supper and the trinal mersion in Baptism both in the Primitive and most reformed Churches Yea I would appeal to every indifferent mans Conscience whether if a Father being solicitously careful of the eternal welfare of his Son and having nurtured him in the fear of God and lived to see him receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper should give his Son some token so soon as be cometh from that Sacrament requiring him to keep the same as a memorial of his Fathers charge upon him to mind the service of God and the Christian life and Unity to which he is further obliged by the receiving that Sacrament I say I would appeal to such a man whether he durst condemn this action as sinful meerly because this charge and token hath some reference to the Sacrament And this rite of our Church hath many advantages above this instance both in the higher authority of the Church the greater simplicity of the rite it self and the relation it beareth to the pattern and example of Primitive Christianity 16. Among the Protestants the Lutheran Churches retain not only this but some other Rites in the office of Baptism which are not received in the Church of England And though many other Reformed Churches do not use this sign yet they condemn it not nor do they herein censure either the Church of England or those of the Augustane Confession It hath been observed partly by Mr. Hooker and partly by Mr. Durel Goulart in Ep. 56. Cypr. c. 7. that Goulartius declared this Ceremony to be indifferent in its nature but said it was not necessary now for all Christians to observe it by those words rather modestly defending the practice of Geneva as Mr. Hooker expresseth it in a way of excuse than expressing any dislike of them who without superstition do retain it Exercit. in Bar. 13. n. 33. Isaac Casaubone when he wrote his exercitations expresseth an approbation of this Rite in the Church of England Buc.
Libertas Ecclesiastica OR A DISCOURSE Vindicating the lawfulness of those things which are chiefly excepted against in the Church of England especially in its LITVRGY and WORSHIP And manifesting their agreeableness with the Doctrine and practice both of Ancient and Modern Churches By WILLIAM FALKNER Preacher at St. Nicholas in Lyn Regis LONDON Printed by J. M. for Walter Kettilby at the Bishops-Head in St. Pauls Church-Yard 1674. IMPRIMATUR Jan. 23. 167â— â— Sam. Parker TO The most Reverend Father in God Gilbert by Divine Providence Lord Archbishop of Canterbury Primate of all England and Metropolitan and one of His Majesties most Honourable Privy Council c. May it please your Grace YOur Grace being a Person of such singular Eminency in the Church of England I humbly crave leave to present to your hands this following Discourse which contains a Vindication of the Publick Worship of our Church from those Exceptions which by Dissenters have been made against it And the main Design of this Treatise being to promote Christian Vnity by representing the evil consequences of such unnecessary Discords and Schisms and the great unreasonableness of those pretences which have been alledged for their Justification it will nâ—t I hope be judged incongruous that it should address it self to your Grace whose high Office in the Church tendeth to advance the Vnity thereof and entitleth you to the publick Patronage of Peace and Truth I cannot doubt your Graces approbation of this design which is at all times useful but more especially in this present Juncture of Affairs if God please to grant success which is my earnest prayer For as all good men who prefer Truth and the sincere practice of Piety before their own prejudices wills and passions cannot but approve of such honest endeavours to rectifie mistakes and compose the minds of men to peace so all who are pious and wise cannot but discern a greater necessity and a more particular obligation at this time to silence all these little janglings and quarrels if they have any respect to the main interest and concerns of the Reformed Profession And I hope My Lord that the late Alarum we had from our common Enemies may open mens eyes to see the mischief of rending the Church into so many Factions and may dispose them to receive just and reasonable satisfaction And though what hath been excellently performed by former Writers upon this Subject be sufficiently satisfactory yet my labour herein may not be wholly useless considering the humour of this Age which is more apt to read new Books than to seek for old ones But though the cause I have undertaken deserves your Graces Patronage yet my own personal defects might justly have discouraged me from presenting this discourse to one of so high Dignity and so great a Judgment had not the cause it self been so good that it needed no Art and Colours to set it off but is sufficiently justified when it is rightly represented and understood and your Graces Candour and Clemency so well known as to encourage me to hope for a favourable Acceptance which is the only thing I beg in this humble Address unto your Grace favourably to accept of this small Present from him who unfeignedly prayeth for your Graces prosperity and is intirely devoted to the service and interest of Truth and Peace and Humbly honoureth your Grace with all due Observance W. Falkner THE PREFACE TO THE READER Christian Reader THE design of this discourse being to remove or at least to allay those fierce contentions about the external forms of worship to which we owe all those unhappy Schisms which good men so heartily bewail it was necessary in order to this end to rectifie those mistakes and prejudices which abuse well-minded men who have not throughly consider'd things and to correct those corrupt passions that quarrelsom and contentious humour which perverts others To these two causes we owe most of our present disorders it is too evident what hand the latter of these has had in them while divers Persons wanting a due sense of the evil and danger of these discords and a due regard to the Peace and Unity of the Church have been too zealous and forward to maintain and promote such dissensions thereby to serve the Interest of their own parties and to oppose the settlement of the Church upon sure and lasting principles now I had no other way of dealing with these men but to convince them of the great evil of such contentions and how much it is the duty of every Christian to study Peace and Unity For there is nothing more evident than that mens minds are strangely byassed by their affections and Interests and clouded by passion and therefore while they are so peremptorily resolved upon their way while they are so fond of their own Inventions while they are devoted to the service of a Party and account those men their Enemies who should rule and govern them and inform them better there is no expectation that reason and argument should prevail with them And if those arguments which I have made use of for this purpose should be effectual to calm the passions of men and to work in them a Christian and peaceable temper of mind I can easily foretel the success of my following discourse the design of which is to rectifie those mistakes and misapprehensions which some men labour under which either concern the particular Rites and offices of our Church or the General rule of duty or Ecclesiastical liberty by which the Church must be directed and guided in matters of order The first hath occasion'd various exceptions against some Rites and Ceremonies and particular passages in our forms of Prayer and I have spent great part of this Treatise in answering such objections by which I hope it will appear what little reason there is to disturb the Peace of the Church and to separate from our Communion upon such pretences Concerning the General Rule which ought ever to be observed in the Church about matters of order there are some who will allow nothing except some few circumstances to be determined by the Authority of the Church unless it be directly enjoined by a particular divine Institution and for a more plausible colour they reject all such rules of order or regular administration under the terms of unscriptural conditions of Communion But in answer to this I have made it appear to be an unjust and unreasonable exception against the establisht order of any Church that there are some things determined and appointed by the Authority of Superiours which have always been accounted of an Indifferent nature and are indeed the proper matters of Ecclesiastical Liberty And I hope I have abundantly proved to the satisfaction of all sober inquirers that prudent and well ordered Ecclesiastical Constitutions and appointments for the promoting order and decency and the advancement of Religion and Piety are very allowable and unblameable nay that it is impossible that
influence from these divisions is so considerable though the argument from them be not valuable Polit. lib. 9. c. 21. that Contzen relateth it as the complaint of a Protestant Writer of good account Papistae funestis Evangelicorum dissidiis absterrentur à Doctrina Evangelicorum ceu haereticâ Satanicâ seditiosâ That by the lamentable discords of the Protestants the Papists are frighted from the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches as if it was Heretical Satanical and Seditious and in the same place he speaketh his own thoughts We saith he can not approve the cause of the Protestants which always some part of themselves and sometimes the chief and most numerous part doth detest 4. Nor are their endeavours ordinarily wanting to blow up the Coals of contention that they may be advantaged by the smoak Letter to the Lord Treasurer in Fuller ubi supra That they did animate some dissenters from Conformity in the Queens days was asserted by Bishop Whitgift upon his own certain knowledge And that in these last thirty years and upwards they were promoters of our divisions is more than probable from the informations given to the Archbishop V. Biblioth Reg. p. 42. 1640. by Andreas ab Habernsfield a Bohemian of noble descent and from many particular passages concerning our late discords published by Mr. Prinne and Monsieur du Moulin together with diverse credible relations of known Romanists in the meetings of diverse Sects Mr. Baxter long since declared that he began to have a strong suspicion that the Papists had indeed an hand in the extirpation of Episcopacy Grot. Relig Sect. 66. and citeth Bishop Bramhal's words against Meliterius There was a Bishop in the World losers may have leave to talk whose privy Purse and subtil Counsels did help to kindle that unnatural War in his Majesties three Kingdoms 5. Agreeably hereto it was observed their Policy about two hundred years since to endeavour to extinguish the sparks of light in the Bohemian Church by dividing them asunder Comen Historiola Sect. 36. and as Comenius relateth admiscebant se personati quidam qui Papae causam promoturi dissentiones mutuas promovebant Bulleng adv Anabapt and Bullenger as he is cited by Bishop Whitgift in his exhortation before his Answer to the Admonition declared that the Anabaptists in Switzerland and the parts of Germany were animated by the subtil Papists 6. Yet if any will not so much as suspect that these seeds of division are either secretly sown or watered from these hands considerate men have found cause to conclude that they expect to reap an harvest by them This hath not only been expressed by some of themselves and discerned by others in the Churches of England Bohemia and Switzerland but the same hath been also apprehended in all other Protestant Churches Hubertus Languetus a man of great authority and at that time the Duke of Saxonies Embassador resident in the Emperours Court at Vienna as Comenius who relateth the words of his Epistle declareth writing to Andreas Stephanus a Bohemian Bishop declared what his observation had discovered almost an hundred years since saith he the Pope feareth nothing more than our consenting and joining in Vnity sed sunt inter nos insani quidam Theologi c. But there are amongst us some furious Divines who reject all right Counsels and thereby perform a work advantagious to the Popes interest 7. And even Beza in the life of Calvin declareth concerning the controversies in Saxony about adiaphorous rites as the Surplice c. that Calvin did at first dislike Ph. Melanchthon who perswaded to Conformity but afterwards he discovered that there was no reason so to do For at that time it did not appear saith Beza with what spirit that evil Genius and the whole Troop of the Flacians who disdained Conformity were hurried on which afterward caused so many troubles and still do hinder the work of God non aliter sane nec minus suriose impudenter quam si ab ipso Romano Pontifice magnas stipendiis esset conducta with no less impudence and sury saith he than if they had been hired by large salaries from the Pope of Rome Praef. in Apol. Catech And this contentious spirit of Flacius Illyricus who was in some other respects a man deserving commendation hath gained him this Character from Vrsin that he was one qui per complures annos praestantissimis atque veris Christianis Orthodoxis viris obtrectando multas non necessarias altercationes excitando plurimorum conscientias passim Ecclesias in Germania turbavit Who for divers years by his discrediting worthy and true Christians and Orthodox men and by stirring up many unnecessary contentions was a troubler of divers Consciences and Churches all over Germany 8. Nor is it hard to discover that these dissentions about our publick service are made an occasion by some others I might say by many others who are more careless than scrupulous in matters of Piety for their gross neglecting the worship of God and the duties of Religion as the disputes about the Lords Supper have in several places apparently caused a great carelessness of attending on that great Ordinance Letter to the Council ubi supra It was Bishop Whitgifts observation concerning our former times that in King Edwards time and the beginning of Queen Elizabeths before the heat of these contentions the Gospel mightily prevailed and took great encrease but since this schism and division saith he the contrary effects have happened And indeed no other can be well expected because hereby is manifestly wanting that forcible motive from the general joining in the service of God with readiness of mind and with one consent which might perswade them who are otherwise careless of Religion to be more serious by making them ashamed of their negligence 9. And doubtfulness of Religion in some and profaneness of life in others are the woful ordinary consequents of such differences When the Donatists who neither erred in the Faith nor appeared vitious in their lives made a great breach in the Church about matters of discipline Optatus noteth Opt. adv Parm. l. 5. that while they contended that their separation was lawful and the Orthodox Church decryed it as unlawful the common people were doubtful and at a stand in the practice of Religion Inter vestrum licet nostrum non licet nutant remigant animae populorum And that Apostolical man Clemens expresseth the fruits of the divisions in the Corinthian Church about their Governours to be these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your division hath perverted and turned aside many Ep. ad Cor. p. 61. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it hath discouraged many and made them despond 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it bringeth many into doubtfulness and us all to grief and sorrow 10. And besides divers others ways mentioned in the following Sections whereby Religion is disadvantaged by these oppositions it is upon this
apprehensions of other men it is very manifest that unless there be a complyance or submission to such determinations by the members of the Church they can not actually communicate in these administrations unless they could communicate in what they will not yield to join in Yet these things with us are not made the conditions of communion any other way than the submission to lawful determinations of those things which must be one way or other determined is necessary for them who will join in such an orderly Society 11. And they who urge this objection do themselves make their determinations of these things besides some other things peculiar to their way as much a condition of Communion in their Congregations as our determinations are with us They may possibly stamp a divine authority upon those usages of their own which really have it not and urge such things for laws of God which he hath not established but this being much of the same nature with teaching for doctrines the commandments of men can never render their communion the more acceptable And I suppose this following discourse will sufficiently manifest that the divine authority doth neither enjoin their way of service without all forms and other rites nor disapprove of ours And now the arguments brought in that Treatise to make good this exception will concern themselves to answer as well as others and may be easily solved For 1. P. 173. When Christ gave Commission to his Apostles to baptize all Nations and teach them to observe whatsoever he commanded he thereby enjoined all his doctrines and precepts to be received and obeyed of all men and especially of those who imbrace the Christian baptism but he doth not thereby forbid rules of decency and order which are required in the Scripture to be received in the Communion of Christians And 2. Lib. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 2 3. the Apostles practice and 3. their doctrine with a particular consideration of the fourteenth Chapter to the Romans will be evidenced in this Treatise to give both allowance and direction for Ecclesiastical constitutions of order 12. The fourth argument is from this instance of fact P. 191. When Victor Bishop of Rome excommunicated the Asian Churches for not observing Easter at the same time with the Roman Church this his action as fixing new bounds to Church-Communion was then disliked much by others and especially rebuked by one of the most holy and learned men then living which was Irenaeus Ans Well might Victors actions be censured by Irenaeus which was not only a directing and retaining that as a sixed rule of order for his own Church Eus Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was then the Roman Custom and practice and which Irenaeus and the French Churches as well as many others did allow and judge requisite in that very Epistle to Victor but it was the obtruding that which was no Apostolical command or institution to be so far Apostolical as to be thereupon a doctrine and practice necessary to be received in all parts of the Christian Church and that all other whole Churches who received it not were not to be owned in the Communion of the Catholick Church Ibid. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and upon this account he undertook to excommunicate the Asian Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being Heterodox or erring from the Faith But our Church can be charged with no such practices as these were for it declareth it self thus B. of Com. Prayer of Ceremonies In these our doings we condemn no other Nations nor prescribe any thing but to our own people only which words with other to the same purpose are prefixed to our Liturgy His fifth argument is P. 194. that hence it would follow that there is no certain rule of Communion amongst Christians fixed and determined by Christ To which I answer that in all doctrines of Christianity nothing can be required as necessary for Communion with any Church but what Christ hath determined yet even here every errour in judgment or miscarriage in practice doth not forfeit the right of Communion and concerning defaults they who have the power of the Keys which is managed with Ecclesiastical Prudence Albasp Observat l. 2. Obs 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18. are allowed to consider of times and other circumstances whence the Church of God hath unblameably used sometimes greater and other times less severity about the same crimes But that there should be different prudential rules of external order in the communion of different Churches hath generally been allowed and acknowledged in the ancient Church and pleaded for amongst the reformed Churches 13. P. 171 202. Indeed it is in the same Treatise urged as a thing included under this exception of Vnscriptural conditions of Communion that Ministers are required to express their approbation of the things injoined as the Liturgy Articles and Book of Ordination by their subscription or declaration But besides that these things are not intended for conditions of Christian communion but requisite for regular administrations and the preservation of order it is but reasonable that they who insist on this Plea before they blame us much more before they separate from us upon this account should themselves consider whether they would be willing to receive any persons to be Ministers of their Congregations who do not some way or other express their allowance of their way and order and particularly whether they would entertain him as their Minister who is resolved to perform all ministerial actions according to the order of the Liturgy If they be willing to entertain such a Minister and Ministration they must thereby justifie our way of order and communion by their submitting to the same terms of injoying Church-Communion But if they will admit no person to be a Minister in their Churches as indeed they will not before they are satisfied that he approveth and will continue in the way and order of their Churches while they herein blame our Church they should consider those words of the Apostle Rom. 2.1 Thou art inexcusable O man whosoever thou art that judgest for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self for thou that judgest dost the same things 14. But of the lawfulness of things as enjoined in the Church for order sake which is the main thing considerable in this exception and which hath been divers times sufficiently justified Bishop Whitgift Tr. 2. Hccles Folit l. 3. Lib. 2. c. 2. by Bishop Whitgift Mr. Hooker and many others since them I shall treat in another place more particularly and it will be sufficient here to add that God who hath appointed Rulers in his Church to guide and command hath also made it a duty to obey them who have the rule over us 15. Its second Plea Another Plea for separation from the Church of England is That the joining in communion
therewith requireth a consent to omit and refuse known duties commanded by Christ P. 216. P. 218.231 For the proof of which he giveth two instances In his first instance he claimeth to every Minister of a particular Congregation by the appointment of Jesus Christ the whole immediate care of the flock so that no part of discipline should be exempted from his office or care p. 219. and this he saith by Consormity they must renounce p. 229. Which Plea for separation or rejecting Communion is as much as to say that no Minister may lawfully communicate and exercise his Ministry in any Church where this kind of Congregational Independency is not the fixed Government or where the Episcopal Power and Authority above Presbyters in all or any publick acts of discipline is preserved An assertion which favours of great rashness in rejecting all those manifest evidences produced by divers on the behalf of this Episcopal Government and Jurisdiction with such an height of confidence as professedly to disclaim the lawsulness of Ecclesiastical Ministration and Communion with those who in practice embrace them Yea this is such a position as would have engaged all Christian Ministers to have renounced the Communion of all the ancient Churches in the Christian World in the times of the most eminent Fathers of the Church by this new way and method of the Churches Peace and Unity And therefore instead of a charge against our Church he hath herein done it this honour to mention that as a chief matter of exception against it in which it is conformable to the purest ages of Christianity 16. Conc Nic. c. 5. Conc. Ant. c. 6. The Councils of Nice and Antioch which are part of the Code of the Universal Church expressing a manifest distinction between Bishops and Presbyters do declare the disciplinary proceedings of Church censures to be under the Bishops ordering and authority and before them S. Cyprian did the same Cyp. Ep. 10 65. both concerning excommunication and publick disciplinary absolution and Ignatius frequently required that nothing should be done without the Bishops Authority to which agree the Scripture expressions concerning Timothy Titus and the Apocalyptick Angels And that the ancient Churches and the authority of their Bishops were not confined to single Congregations as some would have us believe is apparent 1. Conc. Neoc c. 13. Conc. Ant. c. 8. Conc. Sard. c. 6. Athanas Apol. besides the instances from the Roman and other Churches in Scripture 1. From the frequent mention of Country-Presbyters and Religious Assemblies in such places for which no Bishops were appointed 2. From the multitude of Presbyters in one City it not being credible that 46. Presbyters for the City of Rome in Cornelius his time 2. Eus Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Photii Nomo can Yit 1. c. 30. Justin Novel Const ◠60. at Constantinople with a greater number both before and after Justinians Constitution and a numerous Company in other Churches should be designed with a Bishop and many Deacons for the service of God in a single Congregation 3. Because the greatest Cities in the World with the parts adjacent when Christians were most numerous had but one regular Bishop and he who can imagine that in the most flourishing times of Christianity there were never more Christians in those Precincts than made up a single Congregation though divers Churches were built at Jerusalem and other places may as well conceive the same of the present London Diocess And though there be some expressions in some ancient Writers as Tertullian and S. Hierome which many have thought to assert the ancient exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction by a Bench of Presbyters of equal authority which would be too large a digression to be here considered yet even that notion also must fall under the heavy censure of this exception 17. The other instance concerneth private Members P. 141.142 and the whole Church being abridged and deprived of that liberty to discharge their duty which by the law of Christ they are to provide for Among these duties he nameth reproof admonition and exhortation as if these things were not allowed in our Church which is an intimation that needeth reproof and also withdrawing from them that walk disorderly and putting such obstinate offenders from among them Now this instance also is built upon the bottom of Independency groundlesly supposed to be a divine institution Decl. of Faith and Ord. of Congr Ch. Par. 2. Se. 4 5 7. Answ to 32. Quest qu. 14. 15. For the Independents allowing the Ministers the principal care about the discipline of the Church do assert an authority and power of Church-Government to be seated in all the members of the church together with their Officers yea that the members of the Church may censure their Officers and some of them as they of New-England express it that the Keys are committed to all believers who shall join together according to the ordinance of Christ And Dr. O. who gives somewhat more authority to Ministers than many others of them do yet declareth his non-admittance of our discipline p. 256. upon this account as one as being in the hands of meerly Ecclesiastical persons or such as are pretended so to be This late device of discipline being exercised by an authoritative power of all the members of the Church is claimed here as necessary for embracing Communion but this is not only contrary to the Church of England Gillespy Gov. of Ch. of Scot. Part. 2. c. 1. Postscript Jus Div. Reg. Eccles Par. 2. c. 10. with the ancient Churches and to the French Dutch and other reformed Churches abroad but it is also directly opposed and refuted by the Presbyterians both of Scotland and England and this also is a general argument for separation from all Christian Assemblies of the Primitive and Reformed Churches except a few of themselves 18. But as under the former instance he insisted much upon the great usefulness of administring Church-discipline which if rightly stated and in its due measures we heartily admit so here he reflecteth upon the defects of exercising discipline among us urging that upon such defects as by the design of his discourse he representeth ours to be P. 244 245. pious men may without the least suspition of the guilt of Schism forsake the Communion of that Church and if they have a due care of their own salvation they will understand it to be a duty But what he intimately chargeth upon the Church of England speaking of the Church where wicked persons are admitted without distinction or discrimination unto the Communion of the Church and tolerated therein without any procedure with them or against them if this be generally understood of all wicked persons as those words without distinction or discrimination to import it is untrue and slanderous But if this be meant only of divers particular persons it is acknowledged that a more vigorous
execution of discipline which I have in the former Section noted to be hindred in the effects thereof and not helped by divisions and separations is desireable and would be advantageous to the Church Yet here we must observe 1. That some mens rigour would make the rules of Communion overstrict and severe which was the ground of the Schism of the Novatians and Donatists and as some have anciently related of the Meletians also and it is not desireable that the Churches authority should be acted by such heats 2. That real defects in this particular though they are not to be approved of are no sufficient ground for separation since such blemishes were mixed with the beauty of the Apostolical Churches themselves as is manifest from almost all the Apostolical Epistles and particularly from the first Epistle to the Corinthians in which divers miscarriages were taxed and yet unity was strictly commanded and dividing severely rebuked Yea this very discourse at sometimes will not owne P. 126. that this thing solely of it self is sufficient to justifie a separation and the Congregational Churches in England in the Declaration of their Faith and order affirmed Of Institution and Order of Churches Sect. 21. the Church-members upon offences taken by them having performed their duty private admonition and relating it to the Church ought not to disturb any Church-order or absent themselves from the publick assemblies or the administration of any ordinances upon that pretence but to wait upon Christ in the further proceeding of the Church 19. Last Plea Another thing only touched in that discourse but which is the main ground of mis-apprehensin is that there is saith he no Evangelical obligation to local or external Comunion P. 256 257. with any particular or parochial Church of this Nation because every man may relinquish it by removing his habitation which plea floweth from want of a right sense of the Church Catholick For every Christians obligation to keep Communion with the Church is founded in his being visibly a member of Christs body which includeth his visible fellowship with the whole Church which he entreth upon by Baptism and from hence he standeth obliged to communicate with that regular fixed part of this Church where he resideth and from which he hath no warrantable or necessary cause of separation In this respect our Parochial Assemblies are of like nature with the Jewish Synagogal Assemblies unto which they were not obliged by any special Synagogal-Covenant but partly from Gods general command of their assembling themselves together and partly from their Religious profession and circumcision engaging them to Communion with the whole Church of the Jews and thereby to their Synagogal-Communion Hereupon under that dispensation it was the practice of our Blessed Saviour whose example should not be over-looked by us to attend upon these Synagogal Assemblies and the Religious worship of God celebrated therein as appears Luk. 4.16 At Nazareth where he had been brought up as his custom was he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day 20. And can it enter into the heart of any Christian to imagine that the holy Apostles who in their travells could not be fixed in any particular Congregation did not stand bound by the duty of Christian Vnity to join themselves in Communion with the particular fixed Churches or Assemblies of Christians where they came as S. Peter at Antioch S. Paul at Jerusalem and divers other places though such Churches were founded by some of the other Apostles And upon this account of the Vnity of the body of Christ the Primitive Christians when they went abroad into other Regions and distant parts of the World did with a Religious care seek the Communion of the Churches where they came and not to make separate Assemblies Yea this is a thing so far acknowledged by our English Independants themselves though they can talk at another rate where it serves their interest that in their publick Confession of Faith at the Savoy they say Conf. Ch. 27. Sect. 2. All Saints are bound to maintain an holy fellowship and Communion in the worship of God which communion though especially to be exercised by them in the relations wherein they stand whether of Families or Churches yet as God affordeth opportunity it is to be extended to all those who in every place call upon the name of the Lord Jesus 21. But the conditions required in any particular fixed Christian Assembly embracing the Christian Faith and Worship in the place of our residence to make it our duty upon the account of the Christian Vnity to join therein are these two 1. That our communicating therein doth not oblige us to join in any action or profession which is sinful This is acknowledged on all hands and needeth no further proof because the Christians duty of keeping in Communion with Christ himself doth require it 2. That the Assembly we join in doth not maintain an unwarrantable separation from the Communion of the established Church for here to join in Communion is to join in separation and is like Barnabas and the other Jews joining with S. Peter Gal. 2.14 who all walked contrary to the truth of the Gospel in withdrawing from the Communion of the Gentiles at Antioch and the communicating with such a separating Assembly would be a breach of that Apostolical command of avoiding them who cause divisions Rom. 16.17 And we may observe that the joining in needless separations being a sin against the commands of Christ which require Christian Unity and Communion can not be warranted by any authority upon earth because that authority can not dispense with the commands of Christ but ought to be subject to them and therefore as S. Peter's practice and countenance Theod. Hift. l. 4. c. 22. Aug. Ep. 166. did not excuse Barnablas and the other Jews so neither could the indulgence of Valons the Emperour or his Predecessor execuse the different Sects by them tolerated from being guilty of Schism and the breach of Christian duty in their divisions and separations 22. Another notion of Schism there is A fourth Notion of Schism which condemneth separation where ever Communion is lawful but assumeth that whereever any thing unlawful or strongly suspected Mr. H. Tract of Schism p. 2 5 8. is required in order to Communion there to hold Communion would be to join in conspiracy and separation is then both lawful and necessary Concerning which notion granting that separation is necessary where any thing unlawful is required in order to Communion I can not admit for truth that if any thing suspected be so required separation becometh lawful thereby For if by suspected be meant whatsoever the person who maketh the separation doth suspect as evil by this rule he who through carelessness of enquiry or prejudice and want of Charity is needlâ—sly suspicious about any form of service or way of Church-Administrations will be allowed to separate and to be therein free from
of others that they who err by mistake may attain to a right judgment and that those who act out of any spirit of opposition may have their hearts reformed and be made willing to mind their duty 7. And because among the other things required of Ministers who conform many dissenters have expressed themselves to be most dissatisfied about the clauses concerning the Covenant and some who have undertaken to make a Surveigh of these things Surveigh of Grand Case Case 6. though they may be mistaken in the measure of their ground have declared that this is the great mountain in their way to be removed by the Faith of miracles I shall in the first place take that into consideration and manifest that there is a ready safe and direct passage without any great difficulty or need of miracles over that which only appeareth to them to be a mountain if we be willing to walk in the plain paths to which we are directed by the Scripture rules 8. And whereas in the other particulars expressed there is nothing more if so much disliked and opposed than what is contained in the Liturgy and particularly the Ceremonies I shall endeavour in the remaining part of this Book to give a true account of these things the right understanding whereof may be very conducible towards the Churches peace and the general good CHAP. II. Of the Covenant SECT I. Of its being an unlawful Oath 1. THE acknowledgment to be made by Ministers concerning the Covenant being no permanent Constitution may require the shorter discourse Yet it is needful that so much be said as to manifest that while it is for the present continued and until it shall be withdrawn and abated it ought not to be an obstacle to any in the entrance upon Ecclesiastical administrations or civil offices To this end I shall first consider the Oath it self that it was n it self unlawful and then its obligation so far as that is concerned in this acknowledgment 2. Now an Oath may be accounted unlawful in it self with respect to the wholsom laws of the land and upon this account any Oath especially concerning publick affairs of Government is unlawful in it self where either the matter or the constitution and framing is unwarantable according to the law That the Covenant and its Imposition was in this respect unlawful will be easily admitted by all impartially considering persons who cannot be supposed to acknowledge that whatsoever either for or against their own interest obtaineth in any wise a vote in the two Houses but is not assented to but disallowed by the King hath a sufficient legal and warrantable constitution 13. Car. 2.1 And accordingly by the highest authoritative way of resolution this Oath is declared Vnlawful by a publick Act in our Statute Laws 3. And it s not having a legal Constitution besides what respecteth the particular matter thereof is sufficient to render it unlawful in it self according to the law of God which establisheth order commandeth obedience to Government and subjection to all wholsom humane laws For by the law of God the Oaths of Subjects against the will of their Rulers for altering matters of Government must be declared to be unlawful as not being according to the rule of righteousness And it is not the matter only which maketh an Oath or Promise Vnlawful in it self but all other necessary ingredients or attendents may have the like effect and influence as the consideration of the person who taketh the Oath with respect to his capacity and authority and many other such like things which the Canonists have expressed in this distick Sayr Clav. Reg. l. 5. c. 3. Sit jusjurandum licitum decerne notato Quis cui quid per quid ad quid cur quomodo quando Martin Margarit Decret Filiuc Trac 25. n. 204. Agreeable hereunto Filiucius a Casuist maketh an express distinction between pomissio illiciâ—a ex parte materiae and promissio illicita per seipsam telling us that a promise made by a Son against the prohibition of his Father may be a lawful promise as to the matter of it but yet it is an unlawful promise in it self as encluding in it self an unlawful thing that is disobedience to his Father 4. But touching the matter of the Covenant being unlawful I might note that that clause expressing them who take the Covenant to be of one reformed Religion and that they had before their eyes the glory of God and the honour of the King was either not so true or not so well known concerning one another as that they might safely express it in a warrantable Oath And what concerned the doctrine worship discipline and Government of Scotland and Ireland was that which could not be understood as the matter of an Oath should be by ordinary persons in England who were required to take it And that clause declaring that this Covenant was made according to the commendable practice of these Kingdoms in former times did not only require them who took it to be well skilled in History but also declareth former open combinations of Subjects by Oath against the mind and will of their Prince to alter the affairs of Government to be commendable practices which is to assert what is contrary unto truth 5. And how much it was in the matter of it Unlawful by its designed tendency to promote a civil War even against the King may also be considered For though the King was known to oppose this Oath yet the Covenant engaged them who took it according to their places and callings to assist and defend all those that entred into this League and Covenant in the maintenance and pursuing thereof And also that they should all the days of their lives coniinue therein against all opposition And that this phrase according to our places and callings was not understood nor intended in the Covenant and by the contrivers thereof in the due limited sense though many private persons did so take it is manifest by considering what kind of assistance to each other was by them practised before at and after the taking the Covenant and also because the taking this phrase in such a strict restrained sense would have been utterly inconsistent with what is joined therewith viz. the assisting and defending all those that enter into this League and Covenant in the maintaining and pursuing thereof to continue therein against all opposition and not to be withdrawn from it by whatsoever perswasion or terrour since all this was against the Kings known command and open Proclamation 6. As this Covenant had respect to the affairs of the Church it appeareth unlawful upon a double account 1. That endeavour intended in the Covenant for the alteration of Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government was in the nature thereof an Unlawful endeavour for thereby Subjects did undertake of themselves though without legal authority and without and against the Kings consent to alter oppose and expel what was established by the
Script Angl. They who entred into the Ministry at Strasburgh after its first reformation did by Oath undertake to keep in the Communion and obedience of the Church and its Governours according to the law of God and their Canons Statutes and Ordinances And it is related from the laws of Geneva where an established Liturgy is one of their Constitutions that all they who were there received to the Ministry must oblige themselves by Oath to observe the Ecclesiastical Ordinances ordained by the Councils of that City In the Hungarian reformed Church they who enter the Ministry do by a very solemn Oath oblige themselves to the observations of the Ecclesiastical Canons Eccles Augl Vindic cap. 31. in fin and to the performing due obedience to the Bishop and other Superiours in the Church as may be seen in their Oath as it is fully exhibited by Mr. Durell from their Synodical Constitutions 5. The Subscriptions or Declarations required amongst us besides what for the present concerneth the Covenant are an acknowledgment of the Kings just authority to secure the Government of the Articles of Religion to preserve truth of Doctrine and of the Liturgy and Book of Ordination to maintain order and Uniformity to which end also tendeth the Oath of Canonical obedience wherein such obedience to the Bishop and his Successors is engaged in all lawful and honest things which must needs be blameless unless it could be accounted a sin to resolve to do good and honest things in a way of order Of these I shall in this discourse treat of what concerneth the Liturgy which is chiefly opugned and therefore requireth the principal consideration for the vindicating our Communion in the worship of God and the manifesting the unlawfulness of the breach thereof 6. Some declared allowance of the Liturgy hath since the reformation been ordinarily required in this Church Art 35. The Articles in the time of King Edward the Sixth contained an approbation both of the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordination In Queen Elizabeths time the allowance of the use and the Subscription to the Book of Common-Prayer was required by the Advertisements Advertism 7. Eliz Can. 1571. c. concionatores Tract 21. c. 1. and Canons and defended by Bishop Whitgift Since Queen Elizabeth the same hath been performed in the Subscription according to the 36th Canon and in the Declaration and Acknowledgment in the Act of Uniformity which in seense much agreeth therewith 7. The subscription required by the thirty sixth Canon is grounded upon the Constitutions of the Convocation confirmed by the authority of the Kings broad Seal according to his supream authority in causes Ecclesiastical and according to the Statute 25. Henr. 8. And so the Canons of the Church did of old frequently receive a confirmation by the Emperours sanction under his Sea which is a thing of so great antiquity that Eusebius relateth concerning Constantine the first Christian Emperour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that by his Seal Eus de Vit. Const l. 4. c. 27. he ratisied the determinations made by the Bishops in their Synods 8. That Article in this Canon which referreth to the Book of Common-Prayer doth enclude an acknowledging three things First that that Book containeth nothing contrary to the word of God which is intended to be manifested in the following Chapters touching the things chiefly opposed The second will be consequent thereupon viz. that it may lawfully be so used The third and last clause is a promise to use the form prescribed in that Book in publick Prayer and administration of the Sacraments and none other the lawfulness of which promise doth evidently follow from the former clause and its sense is of the same import with those words of the acknowledgment required in the Act of Uniformity viz. I will conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England as it is now established 9. But some especial doubts have been peculiarly entertained concerning the sense of the Declaration in the Act of Uniformity in giving unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the Book of Common-Prayer c. But while our Government doth require the use of this form both the intended sense being the same with that of the two former clauses concerning the Liturgy in the Canon above-mentioned and the expression thereof may upon equitable and impartial consideration appear clearly and fairly justifiable To which purpose the true sense of assenting and consenting and the things to which this hath respect is to be enquired after 10. Wherefore it is first to be considered that as to assent when referred to things asserted is to owne the truth of them so when referred to things to be done ordered or used it is to allow that they should be put in practice in which latter sense assenting is one and the same with consenting Now the Act of Uniformity both immediately before this Declaration and in divers other places referreth this unfeigned assent and consent to the use of the things in that Book contained and prescribed and thereby directeth us to this ordinary sense of the word Assent as doth also the nature of the things to be assented to which for the main part are Prayers Thanksgivings and Rubricks which being no assertions or propositions are to be used but not properly to be believed This notion of assenting in the same signification with consenting is according to the frequent use of assensus in the Latin as when things are agreed unanimi assensu consensu and the marriage of Children is declared Littleton C. of Tenaunt in Dower that it should be de assensu consensu parentum and we read of dower de assensu patris in our English Law-Books and the same might be evidenced by various English Examples But this Declaration being required by our Statute Laws it may be sufficient to observe that this is a very common sense of the word assent in our English Statutes 11. 25. Ed. 1. c. 1 Pref. to 18. Ed. 3. to 2. Ric. 2. passim Thus from King Edw. I. will King Henry the seventh and sometimes after our Statute Laws are oft declared to be assented unto or to be made with the assent of the Lords c. But from Queen Elizabeths time downwards the Laws are oft expressed to be enacted by the King or Queen with the consent of the Lords c. and sometimes with their assent and consent as 1. Jac. 2. 21. Jac. 2. In the same sense par assent assensus and such like expressions are frequently used in our most ancient Statutes in their Latin and Frence Originals As in St. de Carl. Ordinat Forest c. 6. St. Lincoln Westm 4. Exilium Hug. le despenser Ordin pro ter Hib. And about common assaâ—s the word assent is three times in one paragraph used in this sense concerning the recovery of any land 14 Eliz. 8. by the assent and agreement of the persons to
whom the reversion shall appertain Nor doth the using these two words of assent and consent in the same clause require such a sense of this Declaration in which they must differ from each other since variety of words even in the most soleum acknowledgments is oft used not to express the difference but to determine the certainty of sense according to that Rule Ex Reg. Juris Quae dubitationis tollendae causa inseruntur jus commune non laedunt Thus in the Oath of Obedience or Allegiance I A. B. do truly and sincerely acknowledge profess testifie and declare that our Soveraign Lord is lawful and rightful King Where all these words connected by conjunctive Particles do only serve more expresly to manifest the same thing 12. And since the consideration both of persons and time make it evident that this assent to be given cannot contribute any thing to the authoritative ordering and constitution of these things which were before established by authority its most proper and natural sense must import a consent to or allowing of the use of these things which is the sense unto which the expressions in the Act of Uniformity do also plainly direct Wherefore such things only as are to be used being both contained and prescribed as all the Prayers Hymns directing Rubricks Kalendar and the Whole frame of the Liturgy come within the compass of this Declaration But some things occasionally declared and not prescribed are not contained under it In the Preface For instance these words That this Book as it stood before established by law did not contain in it any thing which a godly man may not with a good Conscience use and submit to though they be true and considerable yet if they were encluded under this Declaration then even such things as were thought fit to be altered must be still in some sort assented unto which is both contrary to the end of such alterations and to the proper sense of the words of this Declaration 13. And even such persons who conceive some things or expressions prescribed either in the Phrases of Common-Prayer it self or in the pointing of the Psalms or in the Translation of the Psalms or other Scriptures not to be suitable to their own desires or apprehensions yet to be free from fin and of such a nature as that the whole remaineth useful to guide the exercises of Piety those persons may safely and with a good Conscience make this Declaration of assent with respect unto other weighty considerations of submission to Authority promoting Peace Order and Unity and the edification of the Church in the united exercise of a right religious worship Even as such learned men who may judge even our last translation of the Bible not to have fitly expressed the sense of some difficult places may yet both unfeignedly assent and earnestly perswade to the diligent use thereof as knowing it to be of excellent advantage to the pious and humble Readers for their profitable learning the Gospel Doctrine and the will of God 14. Wherefore by this Declaration is given such an open vocal approbation of this Book required by Law as agreeth in sense with the subscription enjoined by Canon And the intend thereof is to express such an unfeigned allowance or consent to all things contained and prescribed in the Book of Comon-Prayer with the Psalms as that they may warrantably and with a good Conscience be used as they are established by authority the truth of which will appear more manifest upon a particular enquiry CHAP. IV. Of the Liturgy and the ordinary service appointed therein SECT I. The lawfulness antiquity and expediency of publick forms 1. PVblick Prayer is acknowledged by all Christians to be a chief part of the worship of God who hath said My house shall be called an house of Prayer for all people But since God hath not expresly declared in his word whether the ordinary publick duties of Christian Prayer should be performed with or without a form the determination of the sittest practice in this case must be made not without regard to the authority of Governours by a respect to the rules of order edification and the glory of God and an eye unto approved examples from which considerations I shall produce divers evidences of the requisiteness of a set form for the publick offices of the Church both from Reason and from example and authority 2. The reasons are such as these 1. That hereby a fit true right and well ordered way of worship in addresses to God may be best secured to the Church in its publick service of God that neigher God nor his worship may be dishonoured their being many easily discernable ways of considerable miscarriage in the publick offices of the Church even by them who err not in the doctrines of Religion 2. That needful comprehensive petitions for all common and ordinary spiritual and outward wants of our selves or others with fit thanksgivings may not in the publick supplications of the Church be omitted which considering men as they are can no other way be either so well or at all assured 3. That the affections and hearts of pious and religious men may be more devont and better united in their presenting their service to God where they may consider before-hand what particular Prayers and Thanksgivings they are to offer up and come the more ready and prepared to join in them This is an advantage of which many are deprived by a bad temper of mind either sucked in by prejudice or swallowed down by carelessness 3. 4. That such difficult parts of Church Offices as Baptism and the Lords Supper the matter of which requireth great consideration that they may be clearly and aright expressed as both Conformists and many Non-Conformists acknowledge and is evident from the many disputes about them by men neither of mean parts nor dangerous designs may by a more considerate care in the composure of a form be so framed that men of greatest understandings may with readiest assent entertain them and that they may be sufficiently vindicated against the boldest opposers 5. To be an evidence to other Churches and future times after what way and manner we worship God and that both the matter and expression of our service to him is sound and pious in our general and common worship And this may be a full testimony that such a Church both receiving the true faith and expressing a right way of worship is both a true and in its measure a pure and incorrupt Church 4. The Arguments from example which in general countenance the lawfulness or expediency of a form are two which will require a larger Declaration The first is from the practice and example of Christ who directed his Disciples the use of the Lords Prayer as a set form and that from thence the custom of the Christian Church De Eccles Offic. l. 1. c. 9. in composing and using set forms did take its pattern is reasonably
1. Cor. 14.16 But the very phrase of blessing and giving of thanks makes it probable that this Text is to be understood as Mr. Thorndike expoundeth it of the Consecration of the Communion And at that time the people did ordinarily answer Amen and nothing more as appeareth from the early testimonies of Justin Martyr and Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria 2. But if this sense be not admitted this Text of the Apostle doth neither mention nor in the context more nearly refer to Prayer than to singing in which latter the peoples bare saying Amen is not contended for nor allowed as a constant rule for the Churches practice though it was probable the usual method in the Christian Assemblies in those Apostolical days when the duty of singing was performed by the immediate inspiration of the spirit upon some particular persons and that these extraordinary motions of Gods spirit in those times were only vouchsafed to the Clergy or Ministry is not probable from the contents of that very Chapter And therefore this place of Scripture doth not confine the whole vocal service of God excepting an Amen to the Ministry the people being altogether debarred and excluded 5. But that all the servants of God may allowably be interested where the due rules of order and edification are observed in the outward joint expression of praise and Prayer to God is very agreeable to the holy Scriptures where the holy Angels are represented to cry one to another and say Holy holy holy is the Lord of Hosts the whole Earth is full of his glory Is 6.3 and all Israel praised God and said For he is good for his mercy endureth for ever 2. Chr. 7.3 And as S. Paul exhorteth that with one mind and one mouth Christians should glorifie God Rom. 15.6 S. John in his Vision beheld and heard the four living things the Elders the Angels and every Creature in Heaven and Earth expressing blessing honour glory and power unto God Rev. 4.8 11. Ch. 5 8. 14. and a great multitude whom no man could number crying with a loud voice and saying Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne and to the Lamb. Rev. 7 9 10. and he heard also the voice of the 144000. who were with the Lamb on Mount Sion as the voice of many Waters and as the voice of a great thunder singing a new Song Rev. 14.1 2 3. and these places last mentioned are the more considerable because they contain representative Visions of the service acceptably performed to God in the Christian Church 6. If we consult Ecclesiastical practice there is very probable evidence that under the Old Testament the people did vocally join by responsals in the ordinary service of God in the Sanctuary and Synagogues V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 6.13 Both the Joma and other Tracts of the Talmud mention the people in the period of their Prayers expressing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Blessed be the name of the glory of his Kingdom for ever and ever In Ch. Par. in Deut. 10.16 And the particular responsals used by the Jews at Circumcision are expressed by Fagius The use of alternate singing among the Essens is sufficiently known but that this was of very ancient use in the Jewish Church is very likely because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth to answer is an usual expression of singing even in the holy Scriptures And there appeareth considerable evidence from Ex. 15. v. 1. v. 20. that that Song of Moses and the Children of Israel Phil. de Vit. Mos l. 3. was uttered as Philo Judaeus averreth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with responsal melodies alternately repeated 7. In the Christian Church the Original of the Antiphona or the alternate singing of Hymns by two quires is ascribed by Socrates to Ignatius the like use of Davids Psalms is declared by Theodoret to have had its beginning at Antioch from Flavianus and Diodorus Their Original in the Latin Church is referred by Platina to Damaseus and by Walafridus Strabo to S. Ambrose Is Hisp de Eccl. Offic. l. 1. c. 7 8. but both Isidorus Hispalensis and Rabanus Maurus do testifie that long before this the Responsoria wherein the whole Quire answered to one Man Rab. Maur. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 50 51. were known by that name and used in the Latin Church And sometimes the whole Assembly joined in their Hymns and Psalms sometimes they were sung by one alone all the rest joining to eccho forth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or end of the Hymn Conc. Laod c. 15 and by the Laodicean Council the wholy Assembly were not allowed to join in their publick singing which was required to be performed by the appointed singers only Thus the Ecclesiastical practice hath varied according to what was thought prudent and convenient 8. Concerning Prayers and Confessions S. Basil declareth it to have been in his time the ordinary practice of divers Eastern Churches Bas Ep. 63. that every man by his own words did profess repentance and make confession Naz. Or. 3. And Gr. Nazianzene acquainteth quainteth us that Julian in imitation of the Christians did appoint amongst the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a form of Prayer to be said in parts or by way of Responsals Hierom also relateth that populus cum sacerdote loquitur in precibus the people did speak with the Priest in the Prayers and Gregory the great noteth Gr. Ep. l. 7. c. 63. that in the Greek Church the Lords Prayer was ordinarily said by all the people together and as anciently as we can meet with any parcels of Liturgy or particular Offices the use of responsals may be easily discerned even as far as S. Cyprians sursum Corda and Habemus ad Dominum Wherefore the use of responsals and the people joining in some expressions in the publick service of god was a thing thought useful by the ancient Church as well as by our own and is allowable by the rules of the Scripture and the Order of the publick worship of God and whosoever assert that the vocal joining of the people in any expressions of Prayer in the publick Assembly is as Vzziahs action was an intrenching upon the Priests Office doth set up such Bars about the service of God which do keep Gods people at a greater distance from the throne of Grace than the nature and priviledge of Christian liberty will allow Yet the composing or directing particular Prayers for the publick use of Christian Assemblies is the proper work of the Church Officers who are to be the guides thereof as also teaching and instructing being an act of authority doth ordinarily belong to the Ministers of the Church and this is that speaking which is forbidden to Women in the Church because it is an act of authority 1. Cor. 15.34 1. Tim. 2.12 Whereas the joint expressing some words of confession or supplication is wholly an act of humility and is not forbidden
also from sin and their whole man from destruction And in this sense if this Petition should be supposed to enclude which in the proper sense of the words it doth not even Traitors and Robbers can we be blamed to pray even for them that God would preserve them from further sin and so keep them that they may have time and grace for repentance and that thereby they may be preserved from eternal destruction according to Mat. 5.44 12. That Petition that God would have mercy upon all men is condemned by some but is certainly commanded by S. Paul requiring us to make Prayers for all men for nothing can be prayed for which doth not enclude Gods mercy But such light objections which are easily made against the best words that the wisdom and piety of man can devise I think not worthy the further naming but shall now proceed to some other matters of greater moment SECT V. Considerations concerning the publick reading Apocryphal Chapters 1. The reading the Apocryphal Chapters in our Church hath been severely censured as if it was a forsaking the holy Scriptures which are the waters of life to drink of other unwholsom streams but that this matter may be rightly understood without prejudice or mistake it will be requistie to take notice of these following considerations 2. Cons 1. The excellent authority of the Canonical Books of Holy Scripture as they are distinguished from the Apocryphal is fully and clearly acknowledged by this Church in her Articles Art 6. where it declareth concerning the Apocryphal Books that the Church as S. Hierome saith doth read them for example of life and instruction of manners but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine which Article plainly disclaimeth them from being accounted Canonical Books of the Holy Scripture That the Jews do not owne these Books as any part of the Old Testament is manifest from their Bibles which contain them not and the particular evidences from the Jewish Rabbins against every one of those seven Books of the Apocrypha which are forged to be Canonical by the Council of Trent are some of them exhibited by Hollinger Thes Phil. l. 2. c. 2. Sect. 1. And that neither the ancient Church of the Jews before the destruction of Jerusalem nor Christ and his Apostles nor the several Ages of the Christian Church till some late Romish Councils did acknowledge or make use of these Books as Canonical is solidly and learnedly evidenced by the Bishop of Durham Schol. Hist of Can. of Scripture throughout with reference to the sixth Article of this Church Wherefore though it would be injurious to the holy Scriptures that any other Books which are not of divine inspiration should be accounted of equal authority with them yet it is far from being a dishonour either to them or to they holy Spirit who indited them if either these Apocryphal or any other good Books be esteemed useful and profitable and acknowledged to contain things that are true and good 3. Cons 2. It was can usual practice in the ancient Christian Church that some of these Apocryphal Books and other good writings besides the holy Scriptures were publickly read as instructive Lessons in their Assemblies but with such variation as the prudence of every Church thought meet In the second Century both the Fpistle of Clemens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the then ancient Custom In Eus Hist l. 4. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and some other Ecclesiastical Epistles were publickly read even on the Lords days for their instruction as Dionysius of Corinth testifieth And in Euscbius his time as well as before it Ibid. l. 3. c. 15. was the Epistle of Clemens publickly read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greatest number of Churches Aug. de Civ Dei l. 22. c. 8. Hom. de Sanct. de S. Steph. Ser. 7. In the African Church in S. Augustins time the Histories of the passions of Martyrs v. Hom. 26. inter 50. and accounts of miraculous works by the efficacy of Christian Prayer were read in their Churches which Custom though it was very pious in the beginning was at last intolerably abused to the bringing in legend stories And more particularly the publick reading several Apocryphal Books as Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees was ordered in one of the Carthaginian Councils in S. Augustins time 3. Carth. c. 47. Cont. Carth. c. 27. and that Canon was taken into their Code and besides what S. Hierom oft speaketh of these Books being read in the Church but distinguished from their Canon Ruffinus his contemporary who was first his friend and then his adversary having given first an acount of the Canonical Books proceedeth to these Books which he saith are not Canonical but Ecclesiastical Ruff. in Symb. as Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Tobit Judith c. and declareth the judgment of the ancient Fathers before his time concerning them quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesiis voluerunt sed non proferri ad auctoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam that they would have them all to be read in the Churches but not to be produced as of authority to confirm any matters of Faith And that in after Ages these Books were read in the Church Isid de Eccl off l. 1. c. 11 12. Rab. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 53. is evident from Isidonss Hispalensis and in the very same words from Rabanus Maurus and might be shewed from very many others if that was needful 4. Cons 3. These Books called the Apocrypha have been greatly esteemed both in the ancient Church and by the chief Protestant Writers as very useful though not divine writings Divers of the ancients have cited them under the title of the holy Scripture using that Phrase in so great a latitude as to signifie only holy writings though not divinely inspired The Council of Carthage above-named doth there call them Canenical Books as doth also S. Augustin who was in that Council De Doct. Christ lib. 2. c. 8. using the word Canonical in a large sense for it is manifest from that and divers places of S. Aug. that they were not esteemed of equal authority with those Books properly called Canonical And therefore Cajetan for the interpretation of the right sense of there words Caj Com. in Esth in fin hath well declared concerning these Books Non sunt Canonici i. e. regulares ad firmandum ea quae sunt fidei possunt tamen dici Canonici hoc est regulares ad aedificationem fidelium or they are not Canonical as containing a rule to direct our faith an belief though they may sometimes be called Canonical as containing rules to better our lives In the Greek Church where they were not at least so much publickly read as in the Latin they were accounted useful for instruction as appeareth besides the Citations of the Greek Fathers from that very Epistle of Athanasius Fragm Epist 39. in
be considered V. Ambr. de Abr. Patr. l. 1. c. 6. Drus in gen 18.3 V. Gen. 18.2 16. 22. that it is the usual practice even of the Holy Scriptures to call Angels by the name of such as they represent or resemble The two Angels that came to Sodom in the appearance of men are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men Gen. 19.12 The Angel that appeared to Manoah's Wife being asked if he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man who appeared to the Woman declared that he was Jud. 13.11 the Angel in the Sepulchre who gave tidings of the resurrection of Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a young man Mar. 16.5 and the two Angels who appeared at the Ascension of our Lord are called by S. Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men in white apparel Act. 1.10 Now it is not agreeable to religious piety to condemn such ways of expression as evil and sinful which are allowed in the holy word of God nor is it unseemly for an holy Angel to owne that manner of expression which the holy Spirit himself useth And besides this Estius in loc diffic Scrip. in Tob. that which is hinted by Estius may well be admitted that the name of Azarias the Son of Ananias might be taken by the Angel upon himself to express by the signification of these names what was the business he came to effect Azarias signifying the help of God and Ananias the grace and favour of God that by the Angel the help of God was vouchsafed which is the effect of the Favour of God Obj. 5. The last Objection from Tobit and the most considerable is Tob. 12.15 Where the Angel is reported to say I am Raphael one of the seven holy Angels which present the Prayers of the Saints and go in and out before the glory of the holy one For the clearing of this place touching the Phrase of the seven holy Angels which yet is neither in Munsters Hebrew Copy of Tobit nor in the Syriack it may be taken for an definite number as the like Phrase is used Mat. 12.45 Mede Disc on Zech. 4.10 And Mr. Mede's Notion is known who asserteth it as an evident truth in his judgment and for which he giveth considerable proof that there are only seven principal Angels or Arch-Angels to which these words refer But whether these words be understood definitely for seven only or indefinitely for an uncertain number we have the like expression in the Canonical Scripture Zec. 4. 10. Rev. 5.6 7. What is here said concerning Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints this being a point of truth or matter of belief may not be received accordin gto the judgment both of the ancient Church and our present Church upon the authority of an Apocryphal Book further than it is grounded upon the evidence of the Canonical Scripture and in such a ense only as is agreeable to the Doctrine of those holy Scriptures Indeed if these words be acknowledged to be the words of an holy Angel as they are related in this Book according to some versions then must they be as certainly true as if they had been spoken by a Prophet or Apostle But admitting that an holy Angel did converse with Tobit yet might his words be either misapprehended or in this passage misrepresented And that they are so may be hence with some probility conjectured because in this place Tob. 12.15 there is no mention of Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints either in the Hebrew Copy of Munster or Fagius or in the Syriack Version or in the Latin which S. Hierome translated out of the Chaldee but it is only expressed in the Greek which our Translation followeth and this very place was above 1400. Years ago thrice cited by Cyprian Cypâ—â— de Orat. Domin de Mortalitate Adv. Jud. l. 1. n. 20. without this clause on this manner Ego sum Raphael unus ex septem Angelis Sanctis qui adsistimus conversamur ante claritatem Dei Indeed in the twelfth Verse both according to the Greek the Hebrew and the Latin the Angel spake of his bringing the remembrance of their Prayers before the holy one but even there the Syriack mentioneth no such thing 8. But because these words are in our version and taken in a restrained sense have been ordinarily admitted as a truth by divers ancient Christian Writers I shall give a double account in what sense these words may be taken agreeably to the Canonical Scriptures and the anciently received Doctrine in the Christian Church who owned not the Angels as Mediators nor did allow that Prayers should be put up to Angels 1. They judged that the holy Angels who are frequently present with us do join in our Religious worship and Prayers to God and as all who join in Prayers do present those Prayers to God so particularly do the holy Angels who enjoy a nearer Communion with God then we have yet attained Cont. Cels l. 5. p. 273 238. Lib. 8. p. 401. So Origen who expresly declareth against praying to Angels or to any who do themselves supplicate addeth afterward that the Christians particular Angel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presenteth the Prayers joining in them P. 420. and in another place of the same Book V. D. Hammond Annot in 1. Cor. 11.10 saith that many myriads of Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do join in Prayer with them who pray to God And as holiness disposeth an Angel to be ever ready to join in glorifying God so love maketh them ready to desire our good Luk. 15.10 since there is joy in the presence of the Angels of God over one sinner that repenteth And S. John in his Vision of the Churches worship declareth the holy Angels about the Throne to join in their Amen thereto Rev. 7.10 11 12. 9. 12. That the holy Angels being Gods Messengers as their name imports are both Ministers of conveying much good to us from God which divine Providence could bbestow without their Ministry and of representing our state and desires to God as his Servants and our friends which are fully and immediately manifest to God who is Omniscient And this may be performed partly as they are testifiers and witnesses of our actions Ad fr. in Erem Serâ—â— 68. with desire of our good and such S. Aug. judgeth them certainly to be and S. Paul giveth Timothy a charge before the elect Angels 1. Tim. 5.21 and speaketh of their presence in the Church 1. Cor. 11.10 and if Satan be the accuser of the brethren before God Rev. 12.10 the holy Angels may well be thought truly to represent what is good and partly as they are ministring Spirits attending on God and desiring our good they declare our Prayers not as Mediators but as Ministers non quia Deum doceant as S. Aug. expresseth sed quia voluntatem ejus super his consulunt desiring to know what commands God will give them to
l. 7. and Computus Copticus in Scaliger they did not only allow and observe such days as lawful but they appointed and owned them as conducing to the honour and advancement of Christianity being piously and religiously used 8. Amongst the Protestants the Bohaemian Church Rat. Disc c. 3. and those of the Augustane Confession are very much agreeable to us in the observation of Festivals Conf. Boh. c. 15. Conf. Aug. c. 15. Conf. Helv. c. 24. and their approbation of these days not only as lawful but as useful and requisite is contained in their publick Confessions and the Church of Switzerland alloweth several such days with a Maximopere approbamus and the Dutch Church observe the Nativity of Christ and some other Festivals as appeareth from their Canons ratified by the Synod of Dort Indeed the Church of Geneva and that of Scotland which from 1560. till 1617. did herein follow it did not admit of any of these days but this was so little pleasing to Calvin the most eminent Minister of Geneva that he writing concerning the day of our Lords Nativity which was not there celebrated saith Calo Ep. Hallero Sancte testari possum I can in a sacred manner proiest that this thing was transacted when I neither knew of it nor had any such desire and he further declared that it was his endeavour that it might have been there observed Wherefore the laying aside all these days was even in his eyes the defect and blemish but not the perfection and bâ—â—â—ty of that Church 9. Besides all these arguments from authority to prove the allowableness of Festival days for Religious exerciss it may be considered that if it be both lawful and good when we have received some eminent mercy from God to set some hours or some particular day apart to praise and magnifie the goodness of God there is the same or greater reason to give allowance to the observation of these stated Christian Festivals For I think no man can deny that not only the benefits flowing from the great actions of our Saviour but even the advantages accruing to us from the Apostles and Evangelists by their faithful preaching the Gospel of Christ and giving testimony to his Doctrine and continuing stedfast therein unto the death is to us more valuable and advantageous than any temporal benefit whatsoever because our enjoying the knowledge of Christ and being Christians which is the fruit of the Apostles and Evangelists making known the Gospel to the World is a greater priviledge than any outward advantage in the World And the benefit of holy exercises and of being employed in glorifying God is so excellent that the use of particular times appointed for that purpose ought not be rejected by pious men though some men do abuse those means which they should emprove 10. But it is here objected that the fourth Commandment saith six days shall thou work and S. Paul blameth the Galatians for observing days and times and months and years Concerning which places waving divers other things which might be answered 1. Let the Objectors consider whether themselves would be willing to admit this to be the sense of either of these Texts That it is not lawful to set apart any day of the Week either for praying fasting or for praise and thanksgiving if this sense be allowed they must then condemn not only the instances abovementioned both of Jewish and Christian practice but they must also deny them that liberty which the prophet Joel commanded them to exercise Joel 2.15 sanctisy a Fast call a solemn Assembly and thereby render Gods command of none effect but if this sense of these Scriptures ought not to be admitted then cannot the Religious observation of Festival days be thereby condemned 2. These words six days shalt thou labour never were to the Jews a Precept of such an unlimited and unbounded sense as to admit of no other use of any day but in labour Indeed isoth idleness and negligence were here condemned and those days allowed and appointed for labour in this restrained sense or with this exception Vnless some reasonable and accountable occasion require the contrary The reason of this restrained sense will appear necessary because the solemn days of Gods appontment under the Jewish State ought to be observed even upon any of those six days though they required strict rest as the day of atonement did and because it was also lawful upon a providential occasion to employ a day in voluntary mourning for a sick or dead friend 2 Sam. 3.31 33 35. Ch. 12.16 17 or in rejoicing for the Circumcision of a Child or such like cause and it must be still acknowledged lawful for a Child Servant or Subject to employ a day upon the command of his Father Master or Soveraign in attendance upon their persons much more might the Jews keep a Fast or observe a Feast when Esther required and signal providence directed them thereto August Conc. Adimant c. 16. 3. The observing days and times condemned Gal. 4.10 concerneth wholly the Jewish solemnities as S. Aug. and S. Hierome observe and the scope of the place demonstrateth the observing which is opposite to Christianity Hier. in Loc. Thus he who keepeth the Jewish Sabbath out of Conscience to the Moisaical Law doth so far oppose Christianity and return to Judaism this being a shadow of good things to come Col. 2.16 17 and is condemned by S. Paul but he who Christianly observeth the Lords-day acteth for the advancement of Christianity and the honour of Christ and is not in this place blamed by the Apostle And so he who observeth the new Moons out of respect to the Law standeth charged with Judaizing but he who setteth apart any day for Christian exercises acteth as becometh a Christian for as he is the best Christian who is most frequently exercised in these practices so he cannot be blamed who especially upon some days engageth himself to these duties So that the difference between our observeing the Christian Festivals and the Jewish is answerable to the difference between Judaism and Christianity 11. As to that Objection against the observation of the days of the Annunciation or the Conception of our Saviour the Nativity Passion and Ascension of our Lord that these days are at least the less allowable because the Lords day is particularly appointed for the worship of God and the honourable memorial of the great undertaking and actions of our Saviour it may be sufficient to observe 1. That this argument seemeth equally to oppose the setting apart any other Portion of time besides the Lords day to be purposely and particularly employed for the Religious worship of God which would greatly prejudice the exercise of Religion or at least the insisting upon this objection will not allow Christians to engage themselves to glorifie God for Jesus Christ and to admire the grace of Christ upon any other day because this would require some other time to be
the ancient Fathers have ordinarily used or it is approved by those Writings which only are of Divine Authority and by those which are in the Church of greatest humane Authority 6. The expression of his being a dear Brother doth only enclude a respect suitable to a Brotherly relation and expresseth that the Members of the Church of Christ had real desires of the welfare of such persons as are received into its Communion 7. That clause in committing the body to the ground in sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal life doth so evidently express the Faith and Hope of the general resurrection wherein all Christians are concerned when as it followeth he shall change our vile bodies and make them like to his glorious body that it cannot reasonably be understood with a particular restriction to the party deceased but it declareth that while this object of mortality is before our eyes the Faith of the Resurrection to Life remaineth fixed upon our hearts 8. When we give thanks to God that he hath delivered this our Brother out of the miseries of this sinful World it must be considered that the enâ—ling all troubles and miseries is an act of Gods mercy and ought to be so acknowledged though some men by their own neglect of the Christian life deprive themselves of the benefits thereof as the goodness of God in his patience ought to be owned though some aggravate their own misery by the mis-emprovement thereof And some regard may be had in this expression to the Christian hope of the future estate which is the more quickned by every instance of our present frailty And both this and the former expressions may be used with a particular confidence of the eternal bliss of any holy person deceased and with the exercise of the judgment of Charity in its proper object 9. There is only one expression in the latter Prayer which encludeth particularly our favourable thoughts of the person departed when we pray that we may rest in him as our hope is this our Brother doth In the use of which Phrase we may well express different degrees of hope according to the different evidences of Piety in several distinct persons But even where men were vitious in their lives there may be in ordinary cases some degree of hope that they knowing and professing the truth might at last become truly penitent though we have no evidence thereof For some degree of hope doth not enclude so much as the judgment of Charity and it may be exercised where ever we cannot certainly determine the contrary Yet if there should be any such extraordinary case where not so much as any degree of hope can be admitted it is far more desireable that this expression should be omitted in that singular case alone which would be very rarely found than that all ordinary expressions of the hopefulness of them who depart this life in Communion with so excellent a Church as this is should be expunged and disclaimed For as this would be an undertaking extreamly groundless and deeply uncharitable so the very sound thereof may be enough to affright Pagans from Christianity and Papists from the Reformation if our selves did not allow ordinarily any hopes of the happy estate of the Members of our Church 10. Yet that this may not be misunderstood and mis-emproved when it is applyed to such persons who have been wanting in the practice of due strictness of Christian life and too much swerved from the holy Rules and Doctrines delivered in the Gospel and received by our Church we ought to consider that this expression of hope is no encouragement to any others to be guilty of the like neglects For the bare expression of hope is below any degree of evidence and only expresseth that our judgments and understandings cannot conclude it absolutely certain that he was finally impenitent though his state may appear extreamly hazardous And whosoever liveth wickedly and dyeth without sufficient repentance of which god can certainly judge where man cannot it will be no advantage to him in the other World that his name was mentioned in the Church with some degree of hope or as the Author of the Constitutions expresseth it Const Apol. lib. 8. c. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the state of such a person is not the less miserable because frail men are not endued with that infallible judgment whereby they can conclude it utterly desperate 11. The Charity of the ancient Christian Church in expressing their hope of them who dyed in their Communion is very manifest and it is a great mistake which some have entertained that through the strictness of their Discipline no persons had their names honourably mentioned by the Church with hopes of their future happiness but such who had lived altogether free from any apparent sinfulness of life or had given severe testimonies of a strict amendment Indeed some rigorous Canons neither of general practice nor of long continuance in the Church would not allow some offenders whatsoever repentance they manifested to be reconciled to the Church or admitted to its Communion throughout their whole life no nor at the hour of death and yet these Canons have been conceived only to make them perpetual Poenitentes so that after their death their oblations were received or they all who were admitted as such Penitents were then owned among them who had relation to the Church Albasp Obs l. 2. c. 4. and of whom it had hope but amongst the ordinary rules of Primitive Discipline these were generally admitted 1. That whosoever came under any censure of the Church Cyp. Ep. 54. Can. Apost 52. whatsoever his crime was he might upon his supplication be admitted to be one of the Poenitentes or to be under the rules of penance 4. Con. Carth. c. 74. and the not admitting him hereto was accounted an heinous crime because non fas est Ecclesiam pulsantibus â—laudi 2. That if any of these Poenitentes were under dangerous sickness or approaching death Cyp. Ibidem Conc. Nicen c. 13. Ancyr can 6. Araus can 3. 4. Carth. c. 77. it was requisite they should be then admitted to the peace of the Church and its Communion 3. That even they who being under censure did only in the time of dangerous sickness desire to be admitted Penitents might thereupon forthwith be both admitted Penitents and receive reconciliation and Communion Conc. Araus c. 2. Leo. Ep. 91.4 Carth. c. 76. This is a consequent from the two former and is encluded in the Canon of Ancyra now mentioned and is manifest by divers other particular testimonies and it was grounded upon this reason because as Leo expresseth it we cannot limit the times nor determine the measures of Gods mercy 4. That all who were so received into the Church Dion de Eccles Hier. c. 7. with others who died in its Communion Cyp. Ep. 10. and even Penitents who dyed without the opportunity of obtaining
to build a Temple contrary to any command of God but was only a determination of 2omewhat external relating to the Service of God to express his higher honour and reverence of God and Religion which was therefore approved of God though it was not particularly commanded by him Seder Olam Rab. c. 11. And if we may herein credit the Jewish Chronicle when the house of God was set up at Shiloh there was a soundation laid of stone which God had not enjoyned nor forbidden upon which the Tabernacle made of Boards Curtains and Skins was erected 7. I know that the Jewish Writers do assert that the Law of Moses did command the building the Temple by which I here understand a house of stone and Cedar as distinguished from the Tabernacle this seemeth to be affirmed by Maimonides Maim in Praec affirm 20. Gemar in San. hedr. c. 2. Sect. 6. Joseph Ant. Jud. l. 7. c. 4. and is asserted by the Talmud and Josephus saith David designed to build a Temple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Moses had foretold But this is not agreeable to what God himself declareth to the contrary 2 Sam. 7.7 Spake I a word with any of the Judges of Israel whom I commanded to feed my people Israel saying Why build ye not me an house of Cedar and the ground upon which these Jewish Writers build is mistaken For 1. that place which the Gemara insisteth upon Deut. 12.10 11. concerning the place which God should chuse only enjoyneth a fixed place for the Tabernacle of God and his Service where he should chuse it after he had placed them in Canaan as may appear by comparing Deut. 12.1 5 11 12. Josh 18.1 Jer. 7.12 and the Tabernacle is expresly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the house of choice in the Seder Olam Seder Olam Rab. ubysupra And those words Exod. 15.2 I will prepare him an habitation being spoken before the building of the Tabernacle do refer thereto and the Tabernacle is expresly called his habitation 1 Sam. 2.29 2 Sam. 15.25 and in divers other places as it was also very frequently called by the name of the Temple both in the Psalms and in the Books of Samuel and the Sanctuary in the place produced by Maimonides Exod. 25.8 and in many others 8. Thus I have now shewed that even in the Temple Worship of the Jews some external Rites not appointed by God were lawfully practised and amongst others a Sacramental gesture which was not used in the institution of the Sacrament a decent Vesture of white Linen for them who attended the Service of God therein and a memorative and ingaging sign of the Altar of Witness or the Altar Ed. and the Reader will easily conceive how nearly the nature of these three things resemble and justifie our gesture at the Communion the use of the Surpless and the Cross at Baptism 9. Secondly I shall consider the Synagogue Worship of the Jews which hath a nearer alliance to the Christian Worship In their Synagogues they assembled to profess and owne God and his Law to hear his Word to praise his Name and call upon him and to perform other such like Duties And this was not chiefly a Ceremonial Worship as that of the Temple was but a Moral Worship or such a Worship as consisted of Duties which in the general nature of them are perpetually obligatory upon all the Servants of God in this World and not upon the Jews only nor were they peculiar to the Mosaical Constitutions And concerning this which was their ordinary weekly and indeed a principal Worship of God it is truly observed by Mr. Thorndike Of Religious Assemblies c. 2. that there was very little established by God in the Book of the Law And they were also in some particulars left to their own prudential determinations where the Christian Church is not 10. A first instance I here give of the liberty of the Jewish Church making determinations concerning things external velating to Religion is touching the Ordination of the Ecclesiastical Officers of the Synagogal Assemblies by Imposition of Hands The Officers Ecclesiastical in these Assemblies were those who were anciently called the Sons of the Prophets or their Elders Scribes Rabbins and Doctors of the Law Neither the nature of their Office and Authority nor especially the manner of their Admission thereto is any where determined in the Law of God but depended upon the Churches Constitutions for the preserving order and authority in its Assemblies And yet that all who were the Synagogal Officers or who were admitted to teach there except the extraordinary case of Prophets were ordained thereto by Imposition of Hands and what their different manners of Ordination were according as they committed to them different power or authority of teaching or judging is sufficiently from the Jewish Forms declared by Mr. Selden De Syned l. 1. c. 7. Sect. 2 4. And this authority of Ordination was so far approved by our Blessed Saviour that he declared concerning the Scribes and Pharisees Mat. 23.2 3. That they sit in Moses seat all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do But though this Ordination of Elders or Rabbies among the Jews was founded upon no Divine Institution as is truly asserted by Mr. Selden Seld. ibidem the state of the Christian Church is herein under the determination of Divine and Apostolical Constitutions 11. A second instance is concerning the Habit of the Prophets and the Sons of the Prophets That the Prophets used a rough or hairy garment or Mantle which was peculiar to them may be collected by the practice of Elijah who was known by his hairy garment and whose Mantle fell from him when he was taken into Heaven 1 King 1.8 Chap. 2.13 and from the appearance of Samuel in his Mantle 1 Sam. 28 14. And even the Annotations composed by the Members of the Assembly do probably assert that when Isaiah is said to go naked Annot. in Is 20.2 Isa 20.2 no more is intended but that he put off his Prophetical Robe or Mantle such as fell from Elias It is also generally acknowledged that the Prophet Zechary speaking of wearing a rough garment to deceive Zech. 13.4 doth thereby intend the ordinary Prophetical garment so Munster Vatablus Castalio Clarius Drusius and Grotius do assert and Calvin calleth that garment habitum Propheticum Junius stileth it communem amictum prophetarum and Bochartus thinketh that it was vestis prophetarum propria Bochart Hieroz l. 1. c. 2. That the Sons of the Prophets used a particular habit by which they were easily discernable from other men may be probably collected from 2. Kin. 9.5 6 11 12. and is more manifest from 1. Kin. 20.35 41. And besides these habits which were of ordinary use in their converse there may some particular evidence be given of garments peculiarly used in their Synagogal Assemblies that such was their practice about our Saviours time may appear
the Jews made use to towards the Cities of the Gentiles to express their defilement and uncleanness 2. 2. The denying the lawful use of external Rites and humane observations in the worship of God is ordinarily attended with partiality of judgment For it is almost generally acknowledged that in taking a Religious Oath some external Ceremony addeth a solemnity and reverence to that sacred action whence when other Ceremonies in publick worship were laid aside there was an Act of Parliament as it was entituled that in taking an Oath it might be lawful for any man either to lay his hand upon the Book or to hold up his right hand which was the way made use of in taking the Covenant And Bishop Saunderson to this purpose judiciously declareth DeJuram Obl. Pral 5. Sec. 12. that he could never receive any satisfaction though he had oft considered with himself and enquired of others why a prescribed form of words and the use of the solemnity of external Rites either ought not as things superstitious to be removed from the Religious use of an Oath or else may not as useful helps of piety be retained in the other parts of Gods worship I know that some have told us that an Oath is not a part of the natural worship of God belonging to the first commandment nor of the instituted worship in the second Commandment but of the revrend use of Gods name in the third Commandment and that the principal use of an Oath is to confirm truth and end strife and therefore it is not primarily an act of worship but secondarily and consequentially But indeed all this is but a plausible mistake For an Oath as it is distinguished from a bare assertion encludeth a direct profession and particular acknowledgment of the Omniscience of God and his searching the heart of man and of the justice of God in the punishing evil and that he is a God of truth and invocateth him as such and this is part of the natural worship of God or of the honour which is due to God as being founded in the nature of God and the natural estate of man And since God hath instituted this way of Religious appeal to himself an Oath must be acknowledged to enclude also part of the instituted worship of God And the Rite of laying the hand upon the Book and kissing it or holding up the hand being designed as a testimony to others of a mans appeal to Gods Omniscience and Justice the end of that Ceremony is primarily to manifest this religious application to God and therefore it is attendant upon an Oath as it is properly an act of worship 3. 3. If no external observations not commanded by God might lawfully be admitted in the worship of God then must the publick exercise thereof cease For God who did expresly determine the time and place for the Jewish Tabernacle and Temple worship hath not prescribed the same circumstances for the Christian service Nor hath he prescribed in all things the method and gesture for our Religious addresses nor the kind of Bread and Wine at the Lords Supper yet these things must necessarily be determined where these Ordinances are celebrated Disp of Humane Cerem c. 2. Wherefore Mr. Baxter acknowledgeth that such things as these and the decent habit for the service of God be left to humane prudence to order and may be determined for order decency and edification But Mr. Rutherford undertaking to fix the right bounds for the Churches authority distinguisheth things moral Introd to Div. Right of Gh. Govern Sec. 1. and Physical circumstances and these latter only he granteth may be determined and ordered by the Church but not the former These Physical circumstances he saith are only eight and there can be no more enumerated viz. time place person name family condition habit gesture Now to omit the examining the terms of that distinction and the considering that most of our Ceremonies as they are called are encluded under habit and gesture it is manifest that he hath pitifully shackled himself in endeavouring the undue confinement of the Churches Power For as there can be no possible account why those eight things and no more can be determined by the Church so it is very obvious to discern how monstrous this enumeration is having needless redundancy in adding as distinct circumstances from the person the name family and condition to which he might with as much reason have added the age stature and complexion of the person and they have likewise a great deficiency since according to his position it is unlawful to determine what version of the Bible shall be read in the Church what Vessels shall be used in administring the Sacraments and in what method Prayers Praises Psalms Sermons and other Offices shall succeed to each other the appointing of which was a chief design of the Directory And some men who undertook to decry every think referring to the worship of God as unlawful unless it was particularly injoined in the Scripture did advance this false position so far In Edw. Gangrena Par. 2. Er. 172. as to assert that the Directory was a breach of the second Commandment and that there was no word of God to warrant the making that Book more than Jeroboam had when he set up two high places the one at Daâ— and the other at Bethel Nor can such a charge be avoided nor Religion be secured from confusion unless it be admitted which is certainly true that some things â—â—ternal may lawfully be appointed about the exercise thereof though may be not particularly enjoined of God 4. The reason why I have in this Section conjoined the inconveniency attending the disallowing Ecclesiastical Constitutions and Observations together with those consequent upon the disclaiming external Rites and Ceremonies is because both these are equally impugned by almost all the arguments produced with special respect to the latter of them SECT VI. Some Objections from Reason and from the Old Testaâ—â—â—â— examined 1. Against the 〈◊〉 use of some Ceremonies in the Christian Church there are mustred up a 〈◊〉 Army of Objections if a weak 〈…〉 be so called a particular answer 〈◊〉 every of which would be tedious and needless For the affirming that such establishments oppose the Soveraignty of Christ or accuse him of negligence or unfaithfulness and that they make men the Masters of our Religion and such like manifestly appear to be false accusations by considering that these external Rites are such things of an indifferent nature that their appointment by humane authority hath been allowed of God both under the Old and New Testament as hath been above evidenced To assert that the allowance of any Ceremonies ordered by Ecclesiastical Prudence V. Hooker Eccles Pol. l. 3. chargeth the Scripture with insufficiency and leaveth us at a loss as some tell us it doth for a Rule of Faith Proceedeth from a gross misunderstanding as if these indifferent things particularly considered were
matters of Faith and that the Scripture could not be a sufficient Rule For Faith and Holy Life unless it enclude a determination of all prudential circumstances that none should be ordered in the Church which are not there appointed To decry all such things as Vnlawful because in our Church there hath been much strife and contention about them to the breach of the Churches Peace may appear to be a very weak argument from observing that both the Jewish and the Apostolical and Primitive Christian Churches and several Lutheran Churches of late have enjoyed a very peaceable state together with such Ecclesiastical Constitutions but the more manifest cause of strife and contention is from misunderstanding in some and from want of humility and obedience in others and these persons have found matter sufficient for them to make a breach of the Churches Peace in other points besides Ceremonies 2. As to that Objection that the allowing any Authority for the appointing such things in the Church will leave its power in a boundless and unlimited state if this was of any force it would equally oppose all other commanding Authority in every superior relation in the World And as secular Rules have Authority to make Laws for the Peace and Order of Kingdoms but not to exercise oppression nor to change the nature of Good and Evil nor to make any divine Precepts so Rulers in the Church are allowed to direct and appoint what tendeth to good order and decency but may not deliver any thing as Gods command which is not nor alter any of his Precepts and Institutions nor to enjoin things needlesly burdensom How the allowing some Ceremonies in the Christian Church is a quite different thing from the reducing the Ceremonial law of the Jews hath been shewed in the first Section of this Chapter Wherefore I now come to examine the Scripture evidence which some plead against Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions 3. Obj. 1. The sin of Nadab and Abihu for which fire came out from the Lord and devoured them was their offering strange fire before the Lord which he commanded them not Lev. 10.1 2. And this is supposed by them who urge this Objection to be only an outward rite or circumstance of worship in making use of that fire in the service of God which was not enjoined and about which he had made no determination Ans 1. Cypr. Ep. 73. de Vnit Eccl. It was much more truly acknowledged of old that the sin of Nadab and Abihu was that what they did was Dei traditione contempta Iren. adv Haer. l. 5. c. 44. in despite of what God had declared to the contrary and therefore their sin hath been frequently parallel'd with the sin of Corah Dathan and Abiram And whereas the Scripture declareth their sin to be a doing that which God commandeth them not that Phrase in the holy Scriptures which I commanded them not doth not denote gods having enjoined nothing about that particular action but ordinarily by a Meiosis intimateth Gods having severely prohibited it Thus God declared their building high places of Tophet and of Baal to burn their Sons and their Daughters to be things he commanded them not Jer. 7.31 Jer. 19.5 and the same expression is used concerning committing Adultery with their Neighbours Wives and speaking lying words in the name of the Lord Jer. 29.23 and concerning the serving other Gods and worshipping the Sun Moon and the Host of Heaven Dent. 17.3 all which things were vehemently forbidden in the Law of God Wherefore some have thought that the sin of Nadab and Abihu consisted in Offring strange Incense Fag in loc which God had expresly forbidden Ex. 30.9 Which opinion is declared by Fagius and doubtless this was the judgment of Josephus though the ordinary Copies of Josephus express it to be their Offring other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrifices than Moses had commanded Joseph Ant. l. 3. c. 10. but that it should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Incense is manifest by comparing Josephus with the Hebrew and the Septuagint Others have observed that before that time God had appointed Aaron only and not his Sons to offer any incense unto him and therefore it might be an act of great presumption in them and when Corah presumed to invade the Priests Office to offer incense botht he Samaritan Version and the Septuagint reading the Hebrew with a little variation of the points in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Num. 16.37 called that which he offered strange fire And some others have thought them so boldly irreverent as against the command of God to thrust themselves into the holy of holies This is collected by some of the Jewish Doctors from Lev. 16.1 2 3. and is admitted by Junius Jun. in Lev. 10.1 4. Ans 2. But admitting that their sin consisted in making use of that fire which God did not allow we must further assert with Munster that God having caused fire miraculously to consume the Sacrifice uon the Altar Lev. 9.24 and commanded that the fire upon the Altar should be continually burning to wit for the use of Gods service and should never go out Lev. 6.12 13. their offering other fire was an opposing of Gods command For if any should imagine that when God had commanded incense to be offered which must be offered with fire he did leave it undetermined what fire they should make use of and that in this case the choice of any sort of fire because it was not commanded was a grievous sin this would represent the holy and righteous will of God as contradictory to it self and as inevitably forcing the Priests to be guilty of sin because upon this unreasonable supposition their offring incense with fire which was their duty and commanded of God must necessarily be accounted a sin and displeasing to God And if such positions were admitted they will bring after them a numerous train of manifest absurdities and contradictions as that the Priest ought as God had commanded to burn wood upon his Altar but might in no wise make use of any sort or kind of wood to that purpose because God had not particularly enjoined it and the like may be said of the kind of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper and of divers other things under the time of Christianity 5. Obj. 2. God commanded Deut. 12.32 Whatsoever I command you observe and do thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it Ans 1. That these words do properly condemn on the one hand superstition of the making any thing a part of Religion and the Law of God which indeed is not and on the other hand want of Religious reverence in neglecting obedience to what God had enjoined and commanded But that divers things referring to the worship of God were allowably under the Jâ—â—â—sh despensation ordered as matters 〈…〉 expediency by humane prudeâ—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ve in a former Section given suâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—mony and if such appointment 〈…〉 been
because it could not consist with their owning the Law of Moses and is not mentioned either in the Scriptures or in Josephus But considering how little Josephus wrote that hath any kind of relation to the Samaritan worship and that our Saviour chargeth them with a miscarriage about the object of their worship Joh. 4.22 Ye worship saith he ye know not what considering also that the worshippers at Bethel by whom the Samaritans were instructed did before their Captivity worship God there by an Image and that the Assyrians Syrians and others Neighbouring upon the Samaritans as Bochartus sheweth Bochart ibidem did chuse the form of a Dove to be the Image and resemblance of God there is no just reason to question the evidence of the Jewish Writers concerning the Samaritans 4. It hath been also objected against all Ecclesiastical Constitutions that the Apostle blamed the Colossians Col. 2.20 21. Why as though living in the World are ye subject unto Ordinances such as he mentioneth in the next verse Touch not or eat not tast not handle not Ans This place concerneth not prudential Rules of order Davenant Zanch. In Loc. but it blameth the Colossians that they should suffer their minds to be deluded Whitak Cont. 4. Qu. 7. c. 3. and their practices to be enshared and perverted by false positions delivered as Doctrines and this is observed to be the sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 20. and these things were called the Commandments and Doctrines of men v. 22. and will-worship v. 23 because they were delivered as proper divine Commandments And that this was the cause of the Apostles reproving the Colossians may be further manifest because the Apostles themselves upon a prudential and Christian account enjoined the Gentiles to forbear some sorts of meal the observing of which Apostolical Constitution which did not doctrinally declare those things themselves to be unclean was in no wise condemned by S. Paul writing to his Colossians 5. That place of S. James Jam. 4.12 There is one Lawgiver who is able to save and to destroy doth appropriate to God the Authority of establishing and executing such Laws the obeying or disobeying which is the sure way to eternal life or destruction because they are his Laws but this Scripture having no peculiar respect to the worship of God in publick Assemblies doth no more condemn Ecclesiastical Constitutions of Creder in the Church than either the civil sanctions of secular Governours or the Domestick commands of Parents or Masters Inst l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 7 30. And even Calvin with some respect to this place of St. James aserteth in his Institutions that in the great matters of Christianity there is unicus vitae magister one only who is to rule and command our life but in externa Disciplina Ceremoniis in matters external concerning Discipline and Ceremonies he hath not thought sit to prescribe every particular thing but hath left us to be guided by general rules 6. I know that some who urge this place of S. James would thence conclude that none besides God have any power or Authority by their commands to himâ—â—â—â— Consciences of men Now though this TExe speaketh nothing expresly of Conscience or its obligation I shall concerning that matter add that Ecclesiastical Constitutions do no otherwise bind the Consciences of men so far as concerneth the nature of the obligation than the commands of Magistrates Parents and Masters do though they have ordinarily the stronger motives with direct respect to the Peace and Order of the Church and the edification of its Members And it must be acknowledged that no humane Authority can bind the â—â—â—ing power of Conscience so that it is 〈…〉 that a duty which is whereby â—â—â—â—â—â—ded without having liberty 〈…〉 of its lawfulness and this is â—â—â—ifâ—â—tly the sense of several 〈…〉 Writers when they say that Goâ—â—â—â—ly hath power to bind the Conscience But that humane Laws and commands do secondarily and consequentially bind the Conscience to take care of practising what is lawfully commanded is that which can 〈◊〉 be denyed It would certainly sound harshto a Christian Ear if any shall assert that a Child is not bound in Conscience to do any particular lawful thing which his Father commandeth him it being all one to assert that it is not his duty and that he is not bound in Conscience to do it But if he be bound in Conscience to do that upon his Fathers command which he was not bound to undertake without that command it must needs be his command which layeth that obligation upon Conscience secondarily and consequentially or with a respect unto Gods general command of obedience 7. In this sense it is not unusual with Protestant Writers beyond the Seas as well as with divers of our own Nation as particularly Bishop Saunderson de Obligatione Conscientiae Duct Dubit l. 3. c. 1. rule 1.5 Ch. 4. rule 5. and Bishop Taylor very largely in his Ductor Dubitantium to assert that the injunctions of our Superiours bind the Conscience Vrsin in his Explicatio Catechetica asserteth the Constitution of the Magistrate to bind the Conscience that is saith he by reason of the command of the Magistrate Ex. Cat. qu. 96. it becometh necessary to be performed and cannot be neglected without the offence of God though it be no case of scandal In praec 2. de Cultu Dei And in his Loci Theologici he to the same purpose declareth edicta Magistratûs obligant conscientias and absque scandalo obligatur conscientia ad harum legum observationem To the same purpose may Paraeus be produced Alsted Theol. Cas c. 2. Reg. 2. And Alsted very well noteth that humane laws mediately or under God do bind the Conscience even as an Oath Vow or promise made by a mans sely doth 8. I shall not insist upon that objection from Heb. 3.5 6. which expresseth the faithfulness of Christ to be more glorious than the faithfulness of Moses from whence it hath been with more manifest violence than strength of argument concluded that under the Gospel which is perfectly and compleatly delivered by Christ there is no place left for any prudential Constitutions which were say they wholly excluded under the Mosaical law But I suppose I have beyond all contradiction evinced that under the Mosaical Law there were divers things appointed by Ecclesiastical Authority And that Moses's faithfulness consisted in delivering the Law as he received it and not in the compleatness of enjoining every particular circumstance in the Church will appear evident because otherwise he could not be accounted as faithful with respect to their Synagogue worship as to their Temple worship And it may be further noted that the numerous divine commands about matters external referring to the Temple worship V. Sanders de Obl. Cons prael 6. Sect. 30. which was the Law of Commandments contained in Ordinances was no part of the
and whether this position will not go far toward the condemning Religious and devout behaviour in Christian Assemblies because it is an outward and visible expression of a pious frame of mind whereas such external actions rightly used with a due significancy are testimonies and incentives of Piety and Religion but without such a signification are either Hypocritical or at least vain and empty 5. But some distinguish here between such things which have a natural significancy as Religious gestures and such things as signifie by humane Constitutions and consent the former they do admit but not the latter But this distinction is to little purpose partly because there can be no sufficient reason given why the latter should be universally disallowed while the former are approved partly because most things supposed to have a natural significancy did derive their original signification from humane custom and consent as reverent gestures and uncovering the head and partly because divers particular things above-mentioned which cannot be disapproved cannot be pretended to have a natural signification to which laying the hand on the Book in an Oath and others more may be added 6. Cons 3. The disallowing all external significative Rites in Gods service is a thing opposite to the general sense of the Church of God in all former Ages That divers signfiicative Rites were lawfully used in the Jewish Church without any divine Institution is sufficiently manifest from the instances given in the former Chapter and such were also the Apostolical Rites of the Love-kiss the Feasts of Charity and the having mens heads uncovered and not veiled The judgment of Calvin and Zanchy approving such Ceremonies of Ecclesiastical appointment were also in that Chapter produced and the same may be observed in Vrsin Explic. Catech. q. 103. and P. Martyr Ep. Hoopero Art 15. The Bohemian Confession teacheth that such Rites by whomsoever they were introduced ought to be preserved which advantage Faith the worship of God and other things that are good amongst Christians with which agreeth the Strasburgh Confession Cap. 14. Some significative Rites of the Ancient Christian Church were also mentioned in the foregoing Chapter to which may be added the frequent use of the Trinal Mersion in Baptism as a profession of the Trinity and of Conformity to the Death of Christ which continued three days and this is used in divers Protestant Churches at this day they also sometimes purposely used the single Merscon to testifie the Unity of the Godhead In c. 2. q. 1. c. legum Sometimes as appeareth by the words of Hincmarus the person to be baptized supposing him adult was to give up his name in writing to signifie by that action his willingness and desire to undertake Christianity and to obtain Baptism And very anciently the person receiving Baptism did then change his Garments arraying himself in white as an admonition to him that he then changed his state and undertook the innocency of the Christian profession De Consecr Dist 4. c. post baptismum Accepisti this Custom was observed by Gratian from Rabanus and S. Ambrose and is thought by a learned man of our own Nation to be as ancient as the Apostles themselves and to be alluded unto in the use of those Scripture Phrases Mr. Thorndike Right of the Church c. 4. of putting of the old man with his deeds and putting on the new man Col 3.9 10. 7. The main Objection peculiarly directed against signisicant Ceremonies is that such things have a resemblance of Sacraments but no Ecclesiastical Authority nor any person below Christ himself can constuâ—â—te or appount a Sacrament Cont. Faust l. 10. c. 16. Indeed S. Augusline sometimes speaketh of Sacraments as being nothing else but verba visibiliâ— visible words and other where saith Ep. 5 Marc. that signs referring to divine things are called Sacraments but these expressions were noted by Kemnitius as instances to shew Kemnit Exam. de Sacram. Can. 1. that S. Augustine used the word Sacrament in a great latitude of sense this being an Ecclesiastical word not always taken in the same strictness of signification And S. Aug. doth there peculiarly speak of a certain kind of signs viz. the Jewish Ceremonies appointed by the Divine Law which I have above observed to enclude somewhat Sacramental 8. But that we may rightly apprehend 〈…〉 significative signs are lawfully 〈…〉 in the Church I shall distinguish 〈◊〉 signs referring to matters of Religion into so many several ranks or Classes as may be sufficient for the clearing my present enquiry Wherefore 9. First Some external signs are appointed to ratifie seal and confirm the Covenant of God and to tender and exhibit the Grace of that Covenant or Christ himself unto us And these signs are properly Sacraments according to the definition thereof in our Church Catechism to be outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual Grace given unto us ordained by Christ himself as a means whereby we receive the same and a pledge to assure us thereof Accordingly Baptism as a means of Grace doth exhibit remission of sins Act. 22.16 and Salvation 1 Pet. 3.21 and the Lords Supper exhibiteth the New Testament in Christs bloud and is the Communion of the body and bloud of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 Ch. 11.25 And Rabanus Maurus describing a Sacrament saith De Instit Cler. l. 1. c. 24. that therein sub integumento rerum corporalium virtus divina secretius operatur salutem And that this is the common Doctrine of the Protestant Writers concerning Sacraments which they defend against the Calumnies of the Papists who charge them with asserting the Sacraments to be only significative signs but not exhibitive and also against the fond opinion of the Anabaptists and other Sectaries accounting Sacraments to be chiefly professing signs may be evidenced by perusing Bishop Cranmer in his Preface to his Book of the Sacrament Bishop Ridley de Coena Dom. p. 28 29. Bishop Jewel Apol. Reply Art 8. Dr. Whitaker de Sacr. Qu. 1. c. 3. Bucer Conf. de Euchar. Sect. 45. Epist ad Michael N. Hispan Kemnit Exam. de Sacr. Can. 5 6 7. Vrsini Apol. Catech. ad 3 m Calumn adv Anabapt Chamier de Sacram l. 1. c. 10. Sect. 13. Rivet Cath. Orth. Tr. 3. q. 1. with many others Now none can appoint any such sign as this but he who hath power of giving the Grace exhibited thereby and if any humane authority constitute any sign to this end and purpose it would therefore be an high intrenchment upon the Soveraignty of God and the authority of Christ and the expecting this Grace from any such sign is great superstition 10. Secondly There are signs appointed not to exhibit and tender the Grace of Gods Covenant but to testifie in Gods name the certainty of some point of Faith as the Star in the East was a witness of Christs Birth and an assurance thereof to the Wise men or to tender some particular
Baptism engaged them to acknowledge and worship the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Baxt. Disp of Gerem c. 2. Sect. 58. And whereas it is objected against the use of any such external signs that this is to set up something to work Grace in the same manner that the Sacraments do which do only objectively teach remember and excite and thereby work on the understanding will memory and affections all this is grounded upon manifest misapprehensions For the holy Sacraments do not only stir us up to the exercise of Grace already received but do tender to us a Communion with Christ and a Communication of further Grace from him which no humane Rites can do Artic. 25. Whence our Articles declare them to be effectual signs of Grace and Gods good will towards us by the which he doth work invisibly in us and doth not only quicken but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him In Sect. and agreeably hereunto is the Doctrine of all the Protestant Writers above-mentioned But to condemn all objective incitements to the exercise of Grace as humane Sacraments where there is no pretence of their being direct means of conveying further Grace from God would enclude a censuring any particular becoming actions gravity and due expression of affectionateness in the Minister or people in Christian Assemblies because it is a means to excite others to the greater reverence and Religious devotion and would condemn any actions as sinful and evil meerly from their being useful to promote good And for example hereupon he who looking into a Register Book where his Baptism is recorded shall only take notice of his Age should be commended but he who upon the sight of his name in that Book is put in memory concerning his Baptismal Covenant and excited to a care of answering that Covenant by a Christian and pious life should be guilty of grievous sin as if this was to make that Book to be a kind of Sacrament And they who reject all exciting signs as being Sacramental may find almost all the same pretences to dislike all words not instituted of God which do excite men to Religious Piety especially when they are accompanied with any outward action though it be but a gesture because not only Sacramental signs but Sacramental words in their Sacramental Use as in Baptism I baptize thee in the name c. do both exhibit and excite Grace as an essential part of that Sacrament and there is not much more reason to conclude all exciting signs to be Sacramental signs than to account all exciting words to be Sacramental words 15. Sixthly Other external things in Gods worship are properly significant of reverence towards him and of high esteem of him and his Ordinances Such are a humble and devout behaviour and gesture which are Hypocritical actions where no such signification is intended but when designed to this end they are truly religious but far from being Sacramental O◠this nature are the preparing and preserving decent structures and other things comely as Communion Table Cup c. which are set apart for Religious service And to this sixth head belongeth the use of the Ministerial Garments appointed in our Church as the use of the Cross in the Office of Baptism is of the nature of a memorative and exciting sign under the former head And to dislike these things solely because of such signification is to account the actions of man who in Gods worship acts as a reasonable Creature to be the worse meerly because he is able to give a good and rational account why he doth perform them SECT II. Of Ecclesiastical appointments considered as imposed and enjoined 1. Having proved in the former Chapter the lawfulness of some external Rites and having shewed in this Chapter that they do not become unlawful by being significant we may hence infer that nothing can be said against the enjoining some such lawful Rites but what will equally oppose all Ecclesiastical Injunctions and Constitutions in things indifferent For if these things be in themselves both lawful and in their due circumstances useful as I have above shewed and if there be a power in the Church of enjoining lawful things to useful purposes then cannot the establishing these things thus directed be disallowed But to deny the lawfulness of Ecclesiastical Sanctions and Constitutions is to charge all the ancient famous known parts of the Church of Christ with a sinful usurpation of Authority in the Church for that they enjoined what they judged useful both in General and Provincial Synods is manifest from the Canons of the Code of the Universal Church and of the Roman and African Churches and from the more ancient Canons among those called the Apostles and from other Ecciesiastical Rules of Discipline frequently mentioned in Tertullian S. Cyprian and other ancient Writers And that this practice of the Church was used ever since the Apostles is not only manifest from the instances given in the former Chapter Sect. 3. but is also evident from the Synod at Jerusalem and its decisions concerning somethings indifferent mentioned Act. 15. 2. Concerning the Decrees of that Council at Jerusalem I shall Observe 1. That some part of the matter of them was not contained under the Divine Precepts of perpetual obligation but was enjoined only as Ecclesiastical laws of mutable Constitution I should willingly acknowledge that not only that part of the Apostolical Decree which concerned Fornication but that also which concerned things offered unto Idols did contain an immutable Law to all Christians and that what S. Paul writeth upon this subject in his first Epistle to the Corinthians did not at all invalidate or dispense with the Decree of the Apostolical Synod as divers worthy men have judged but only declareth how far that Decree intended to oblige That which renders this opinion probable is because it is evident by comparing Act. 15.20 with Act. 15.29 that the Apostles in commanding to abstain from meats offered to Idols designed only to prohibit the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pollutions of Idols and because after the writing the Epistles to the Corinthians it was still in as general terms as that Synod did express it accounted a duty to abstain from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or things sacrificed to Idols not only by divers particular ancient Writers but by one of the Canons of the Greek Code Conc. Gangr Can. 2. and even by S. John in the Revelations Rev. 2.14 But that that Decree concerning things strangled and bloud was no perpetually binding Law of God may be evinced from the general judgment of the Church of God Aug. cont Faust l. 32. c. 13. Binius in 4. Syn. Apost de Immolatis which doth not now account it binding some very few persons excepted from such general expressions of holy Scripture as that nothing is unclean in it self and to the pure all things are pure and from the Apostles expressing their Decree to be
a laying a burden upon the Churches Act. 15.28 Wherefore when the whole matter of this Decree is in that verse called necessary things we must thereby understand that some things indifferent yea under the Gospel inconvenient in their own nature being judged of use for the avoiding scandal and promoting Peace and Vnity in the Church became necessary to be practised in the Church after that Decree and Injunction And though the end of designing the Unity and encrease of the Church did require that in some things the Gentile Christians should yield a complyance to the Jews yet in what particulars this compliance should consist was determined by the authority of this Apostolical Synod whereby the practice thereof became necessary 3. Obs 2. That Apostolical Decree concerning these matters indifferent was designed to lay an obligation upon the practice of all Gentile Christians in those Apostolical times There are indeed some very learned men who have reputed this Decree to be a local constitution confined to Syria Cilicia and the Territories of Antioch and Jerusalem And if it had extended no further it had been a sufficient instance of an injunction in things indifferent but if it was intended to oblige all the Gentiles it is thereupon to be esteemed a more full and large example Now that this Decree contained in the first Canonical and Apostolical Epistle of the New Testament was of general concernment to the Gentile Christians though its inscription referred 〈◊〉 those places above-mentioned may be concluded because S. James declared it in general to have respect to the believing Gentiles Act. 21.25 because S. Paul Silas and Timotheus delivered this Decree even unto the Cities of Lycaonia Phrygia and Galatia to be observed by them Act. 16.1 3 4 6. and because the Primitive Christians did in all places account themselves bound by this determination of the Apostles to abstain from bloud and things strangled as appeareth from the testimonies of Tertullian Tertul. Apol c. 9. Minut. in Oct. Orig. cont Cels l. 8 Eus Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 1. Minutius Felix Origen the Epistle from France concerning their Martyrs recorded in Eusebius and the Canon of the Greek Code above-mentioned 4. Obs 3. It is acknowledged upon good grounds and granted by the Presbyterians that this Apostolical Sanction doth evidence a power in the Church of enjoining in lawful things what may be conducible to the good and welfare of the Church both because the successive practice of the Church did thence-forward exercise such a power and because though the Apostles might be inspired extraordinarily after they met together in this Synod yet they did not account a particular divine inspiration necessary to make an Ecclesiastical Constitution but in that great question whether and how far the Gentiles should undertake the Law of Moses they came together to consider of this matter Act. 15.5 6. and proceeded therein by way of disputation v. 7. Hence Gillespy in his assertion of the Government of the Church of Scotland Gillesp Par. 2. Ch. 4. Ch. 8. concludeth the authority of Synodical Assemblies and that they have a diatactick power to make Decrees The London Ministers in their Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici Part. 2. c. 14. declare this Apostolical Synod to be a pattern and platform for others and thence allow a Synodical power of imposing things on the Church which they assert to be encluded in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 15.28 And the Assemblies Consession doth from hence assert a power in Synods to make Decrees and determinations Conf. c. 31. which ought to be received with reverence as from Gods Ordinance and to set down rules and directions for the better ordering the publick worship of God Yet it may be observed that some of that way have in this particular manifested great partiality as Mr. Rutherford Ruth Introd to Div. Right of Ch. Gov. Sect. 5. p. 81. Disp of Candale Libert qu. 5. when he disputes against our Church and against the lawfulness of external Rites he denyeth any power in the Church to prescribe Laws touching things indifferent Plea for Presbyt Ch. 14. p. 199. but in his Plea for Presbytery he asserteth their Synods to have power to make Ecclesiastical Canons and Decrees which tie and bind particular Congregations to observe and obey them 5. Wherefore if the Apostles did make injunctions concerning things indifferent and imposed them upon all the Churches of the Gentiles and accounted their authority of Ecclesiastical Government guided by prudential consideration to be sufficient without extraordinary inspiration to establish such a Sanction then must this power remain in the Church taking in the Princes supremacy where the Authority of Church Government abideth permanent 6. And if we consider the Church under the General Notion of a Society as it is ordinary in all Societies for the Rulers thereof to exercise a power of making Rules and Constitutions not contradictory to any superiour Government for preserving a due order in that Society so this doth especially take place in the Christian Church where there are special divine Laws which require care to be taken for order and decency and command Christians to obey them who have the rule over them And that those who will enjoy the Communion of any particular Church must submit to the Rules of order appointed therein is but the proper result of orderly Constitution and is of general practice insomuch that the French Reformed Churches as hath been observed by Mr. Durell Durelli Vindic. Eccl. Angl. c. 22. in Praf would not suffer Mr. Welch who came thither from Scotland to continue in administring the Sacrament without using the prescribed form of Prayer and admitting the standing gesture according to the order of that Church but he being enjoined Conformity by the Synod at S. Maixant 1609 left that Church and Realm rather than he would embrace it 7. But it is by some pleaded against the lawfulness of Constitutions Ecclesiastical that these are an infringing of Christian liberty But whereas Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions are in themselves lawful as hath been proved prudential determinations about such indifferent things can no more incroach upon Christian liberty than do the political Sanctions of Civil Laws and the Domestick commands of Parents and Masters And surely every mans apprehension must needs acknowledge it a gross mistake to imagine that when the Precepts of Christianity do earnestly enjoin the practice of self-denial meekness submission and obedience to superiours it should be the priviledge of Christian liberty to disoblige men from any or these things which would represent our most excellent Religion as contradicting it self But true Christian liberty conveyeth a priviledge of freedom from that which the Christian Doctrine abolisheth the Mosaical Covenant and Ceremonies of the Law from that which its Precepts prohibit and disclaim the life of sin and bondage to the Devil and being under any other as our Soveraign and supreme
Lord besides Jesus Christ and from that from which its promises tend to secure us the curse and wrath to come and thereby from Hell and Death But it was S. Peters Doctrine that we should obey every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake as free Conf. Ch. 20. Sect. 4. 1 Pet. 2.13 16. And it was truly expressed in the Assemblies Confession That they who upon pretence of Christian Liberty shall oppose any lawful power or the lawful exercise of it whether it be Civil or Ecclesiastical resist the Ordinance of God And as for those strange spirited men who account the practising things indifferent to be the worse because they are enjoined they are guided by such dangerous Principles of false imaginary Liberty as would teach Children and Servants that things otherwise lawful are sinfully performed when they are commanded by their Parents and Masters 8. Ruth Introd to Doctr of Scandal But Mr. Rutherford objecteth that the nature of things indifferent are not capable of being enjoined by a Law For saith he what wise man will say the Church may make a law that all men should cast stones into the water or as he in another place instanceth that a man should rub his beard Whether these and other such like words proceeded from gross mistake of the Question about things Indifferent or from wilful misrepresentation thereof to please the humours of scornful men I cannot affirm For things called Indifferent in this Question are not such as can tend to no good but are a mispending time when purposely undertaken as a designed business and enclude also such a levity and vanity as is inconsistent with gravity and seriousness and much more with Religious Devotion But the things here called matters indifferent are such where many things singly taken are in their general nature useful but because no one of them is particularly established by any Divine Law the appointing any one in particular is called the determination of a thing Indifferent because some other might have been lawfully appointed Thus the use of one special form of Prayer prescribed not condemning all others as unlawful is the use of an indifferent thing to an useful end And the ordering some proper Hymns or Psalms of praise for the glorifying God and decent gestures of reverence in Gods service and the appointing a fit translation of the Bible for publick use and a particular visible sign of Christian profession are things of good use but are called Indifferent because these particular things are not so established by Divine Precepts but that some other Prayers Hymns Gestures Translation or token of profession might have been without sin and breach of any particular divine commands chosen and appointed in the Church and the like may be said of other things So that such things as these which may manifestly have a profitable use where they are observed without misunderstanding and prejudice but are no special matters enjoined by any Divine Laws immediately given from God himself are the most proper and most accountable matter for Ecclesiastical Laws and Constitutions and are fit to be ordered by those who are invested with Power and Authority especially when the particular things so established may be peculiarly recommended upon good considerations of Antiquity or manifest usefulness 9. But some have further Questioned whether things concerning the Church and the order thereof may be established by secular Sanctions the transgression of which is attended with civil penalties This Authority hath been exercised by the most Religious Kings and Rulers of Israel in the Old Testament who were therefore commended in the Holy Scriptures and also by the Christian Emperours as appears by their Laws in the Codex and Novellae and by divers Kings of our own and Foreign Nations in former times it is acknowledged by the Articles of our Church Article 37. and by the Doctrine and practice of the ancient Church is established by our Laws and hath been defended by divers good Writers concerning the Kings Supremacy in Causes Ecclesiastical But some there are both at home and abroad joining herein with the Spirit of the Anabaptists who have undertaken to deny the lawfulness of any such proceedings under pretence of advancing Christianity thereby and of pleading for due liberty in matters of Religion but their grounds and reasons on which they build are not strong enough to bear the weight they lay upon them 10. For they who tell us that the use of such civil Laws and penalties tendeth to declare that the motives and arguments of the Gospel are weak and insufficient to recommend the Christian truth and preserve the order of the Church without the help of the secular power do seem not to consider that Treasons Murders Adulteries Thefts and Perjuries with other great crimes are vehemently prohibited by the Precepts of Christ and yet are upon good grounds punished by the power of the Sword which is also Gods Authority not because of any insufficiency of the arguments propounded by the Doctrine of Christ but because the corruptness of many mens Spirits is such that divers persons are prone to overlook the most weighty motives and arguments which are of an Heavenly and spiritual nature when they are more affected with sensible things of much less concernment 11. And as for them who say that all temporal laws and penalties about Church matters will never make men truly Religious but may make them Hypocrites and cause them to profess and practice what they do not heartily approve this is manifestly untrue for though I grant that these means have sometimes accidentally this ill effect upon some men yet even Laws ad Penalties rightly dispensed are a proper and effectual means in themselves to make men seriously and rightly Religious Aug. Ep. 48. This effect as S. Augustine upon his own knowledge declareth they obtained both in his own Church and divers other African Churches where many of the Donatists from thence took occasion seriously to consider and embrace the truth and rejoiced that by this means they were brought to the right knowledge thereof And thus all well-ordered Government in a Realm or Family the encouraging what is good and the discountenancing errours prophaneness and all disorders by great men or others may have this accidental ill consequence upon some men that it may occasion them hypocritically to pretend to be better than they are out of affection of applause and designs of advantage yet these things being duties as the Magistrates care to promote Religion is also they ought not to be neglected because they may possibly be abused 12. And whereas some urge that in the Apostolical times which were the best there were no secular sanctions or outward penalties used in matters of Religion they might also have observed that Kings and Emperours were then no countenancers favourers nor yet Professoes of Christianity which is not to be a pattern for succeeding times when it must be esteemed a blessing to the Church
to have Kings her nursing Fathers and a duty to all Rulers upon earth to acknowledge their subjection to Jesus Christ And yet even in the Apostles times there were corporal punishments miraculously inflicted to awaken men to mind the practice and careful exercise of Christianity not only in the particular instances of Saul going to Damascus of Ananias and Sapphira and of Elymas but the delivering a person to Satan hath been ordinarily observed to enclude with the sentence of the Church a giving him over to some outward bodily calamities to be inflicted on him by the evil spirit of which a particular instance is given concerning the Servant of Stilico Paulin in Vit. Ambr. prope fin by Paulinus in the life of S. Ambrose 13. But that this Question may be resolved we must note 1. That it concerneth only secular authority when it is rightly informed in these matters of Religion about which such Laws are established For according to the Rules of Conscience as no authority upon earth may lawfully countenance or join in the profession of an errour so neither may it by commands constitutions or penalties design to advance it But it is as unreasonable that the use of secular authority to advance what is good and commendable should hence be condemned as that the holy action of Abraham Gen. 18.19 commanding his Children to keep the way of the Lord should be disliked because it is certainly unlawful for any Parents to command and enjoin their Children to entertain sin and embrace errour For it is every mans duty to close with that which is good and to favour and prefer it but it is his sin to oppose it or to make use of his interest in the behalf of that which is evil 2. Bishop Whitgifts Defence of his Ex. to Magist ion fin Nor is this Question about the lawfulness of designing the ruine and destruction of any persons only because they err in matters of Religion which is a thing by no means allowable and not only the use of Fire and Faggot for pretended Heresie but the inflicting capital punishments for the sole crimes even of real Heresie or notorious errours in Religion have been sufficiently disclaimed by the great defenders of our Political and Ecclesiastical Constitutions 14. 3. To establish such Laws backed with penalties about good and useful matters Ecclesiastical which may be a proper and fit motive respect being had by the prudence of Superiours to the nature of the things enjoined and to the temper of the persons to be dealt with to excite men to consider and mind their duty is not only allowable but it is the natural result of Rulers discountenancing evil designing their subjects good being careful of the Churches welfare and of serving God in the use of their authority and is contained under that Apostolical Rule Rom 13.4 If thou do that which is evil be affrâ—â—d of the power But if any shall to word that outward punishments are no way useful to direct mens minds to a sense of their duty he must contradict the common experience of a considerable part of Mankind and must disclaim any advantage for amendment of life from paternal correction the constitution of Magistracy and divers providential chastisements of God against the frequent expressions of holy Scripture And he must also undertake to assert that the condition of Israel was not better when all the people engaged themselves to the service of God moved by the zeal for true Religion in their Kings attended with their denouncing temporal punishments on them who neglected or refused than when every one 〈◊〉 and professedly walked in the 〈◊〉 of his own heart 15. And whereas several expressions 〈◊〉 Writers speak against the use of external force in matters of Religion divers of them are intended against the Pagan or Heretical powers oppressing the truth others against over-rigorous severities and extremities towards some persons under errour some were the expressions of those who were themselves abetters of Schism as Socretes was and there are some few expressions of others who were men of greater affection than consideration whose words may be over-ballanced both by reason and other Authorities SECT III. Of Ecclesiastical Constitutions about things scrupled 1. That such things which some persons scruple oppose and dispute against may be practised without sin by them who discern and are well satisfied of their lawfulness is a thing that needeth not much proof For if this be denyed Christianity must be accounted a state of bondage where every mans mistaken apprehensions would lay an obligation on the Consciences of others Wherefore in that Case when some Christians judged it unlawful to eat all sorts of meat S Paul allowed him who discerned his liberty to make use thereof Rom. 14.2 6. Yet because both in that Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans and in 1 Cor. 10. he giveth command to Christians to beware of grieving and offending their brethren the general case of Scandal in things Indifferent will in this place come under some consideration concerning which it may be sufficient to observe three things 2. First That the offending others prohibited in those places by the Apostle consisted not in displeasing others only but in performing such actions which tended to occasion some to fall from Christianity or others not to embrace it This sense of these Precepts Right of the Church c. 4. is observed as a thing manifest by Mr. Thorndike Thus S. Paul declareth the using liberty about things offered to Idolls so as to be a stumbling block to the weak 1 Cor. 8 9. to consist in emboldning them towards the Idol v. 10. whereby the weak Brother perisheth v. 11. And though the Apostle sometimes mentioneth this sin of offending others under the name of grieving them Rom. 14.15 he thereby intendeth an occasioning them to disgust the Christian Religion and therefore in the same verse commandeth Destroy not him with thy meat c. And when he recommendeth in this Case the pleasing of others it is in designing their profit that they may be saved 1 Cor. 10.33 Yet it must be further acknowledged that according to the expressions of other Scriptures it is a sinful scandal or giving offence when any one by the use of his liberty doth knowingly induce others to the commiting any sin being under no obligation to determine this use of his liberty for according to S. Hierome that is scandal where a man dicto vel facto occasionem rui nae cuiquam dederit 3. But the meer displeasing or grieving others about matters indifferent is not always a sin for our Saviour himself greatly grieved his Apostles when he told them that one of them should betray him but as yet concealed the man Mat. 26.21 22. Yet Christianity will not allow a morose and pievish temper but directeth men to be loving amicable and kind and to be ready to please others where duty or prudence do not otherwise engage us but out of
of corrupt minds who have by this means drawn Disciples after them For besides the consideration of Papists and other Sectaries abroad where multitudes of their followers have really believed their errors and with a misguided zeal opposed the truth as S. Paul did while he continued in Judaism we have also sufficient evidence hereof at home in our former times of licentiousness Saints Rest Part. 1. Ch. 7. Sect. 14. Insomuch that Mr. Baxter then complained that professors of Religion did oppose and deride almost all that worship of God out of Conscience which must then be grolly depraved and corrupted which others did out of prophaneness And the provincial Assembly as it was called at London then declared That there was scarce any truth of Christ but was charged in those unhappy times Jus div Min. Evangel Pas 2. c. 3. so they called them as Antichristians and that the Doctrine of the Trinity of Christ being equal with the Father of the immortality of the Soul of repentance humilitation sanctification and good works out of obedience to Gods commands with other Doctrines were condemned as Antichristian and also that the places where they met together to worship God the worship they there performed their Church-Government and Ministry was also say they called Antichristian Now if amongst other things opposed and condemned the most essential Doctrines of Christian Religion have not escaped these vehement and unjust censures it cannot be expected that the best Constitutions of the Church should be generally entertained without all scruple and suspition especially so long as through the itch of of dispute things ordered in the Church are thought blameable for being significant that is useful for all insignificant things are here useless and for being enjoined that is recommended by the highest authority which God hath set in and over 〈◊〉 Church 9. Assert 3. As all Ecclesiastical Constitutions must be in themselves certainly lawful not needlesly burdensom and such as the Governours of the Church judge to be unquestionably useful and expedient so where they are such their lawfulness would not be so much contended against as it is by them who are concerned to obey provided they humbly and calmly made use of the best rules to direct their own practice which rules are here the same which must be received in other practical controversies of Religion viz. First That he who hath sufficient capacity of understanding to judge clearly and solidly of the things questioned and of the strength of the arguments produced should without any prejudice or passion embrace and entertain what appeareth manifestly allowable and such an understanding so proceeding can neither condemn the right way nor embrace the wrong because truth only can be clearly evidenced to an unbyassed and able judgment and for such a man to follow any authority whatsoever against this manifest evidence of truth is to put himself under the blind Leaders of the blind Secondly Men ought to be so humble as not to account their own judgments sufficient rationally to decide any matters of dispute or determine the force of any argument when they really are not and this will direct men of mean capacities not over-forwardly to engage in controversies above their reach nor violently to espouse what may be wrong or oppose what may be right but humbly to desire and seek for clearer apprehensions or the best directions and informations Thirdly That in these matters those whose own weakness of understanding is not able to conduct them through the mists of dispute ought to make use of the best and safest guides to direct and lead them and should follow their counsel and advice Aug. de Vtilit credendi c. 12. c. For it is manifestly the case of great multitudes of adult Christians in the World as hath been long observed that their judgments are not so strong and clear but that especially in divers matters of dispute which are no part of the Christian Creed they must and do follow the guidance of others and are led by their judgment direction and authority where themselves have not capacities to judge of the evidence of proofs But here as the man who chooseth an ill guide for his way or an ignorant Physician to advise for his health or an unskilful Lawyer for his Estate so he that followeth a bad Leader in matters concerning Religion must bear in some respects the consequents of his own bad choice 10. And whereas some would have persons to forbear practising in matters of dispute until themselves be able by the capacities of their own judgments throughly to solve the difficulties objected they ought to have considered that in most practical disputes as concerning Infant Baptism the observing rules of order and keeping Communion with a particular Church and obeying the commands of Rulers to forbear practising what ought to be performed is to yield to sin and with choice to act against a duty and to require this is also to proceed upon a principle which will leave such mens Consciences under inextricable difficulties For instance if men were taught that none ought to bring their Infant-Children to be baptized until they were able themselves judiciously to answer all that is urged to the contrary by the Anabaptists this if practised would tend to make considerable numbers of weak Christians whose heads are not capable of managing disputes to neglect their â—â—ry herein and in practice to close 〈…〉 â—abaptists But if again they were taught which must needs be as reasonable as the other that they may not safely chuse to forbear the bringing their Infants to Baptism because even that choice is a moral action unless they could clearly refute all those great arguments which prove this to be their duty it will be manifest that in this case there can be no way to disentangle the Consciences of such men of mean capacities but only by following the directions above given And the like may be said concerning other instances 11. But that such persons who cannot themselves search into disputes may not be dangerously misguided two rules are to be observed V. Aue. cont Crescon l. â— c. 33. First That for them to be directed by the general judgment principles and practices of the primitive Church where that can be evidently and without contradiction discovered by skilful and faithful relaters thereof is a more safe course in any matter of dispute which themselves cannot fathom than to be led meerly by the judgment and authority of any men or company of men who oppose the same because the greater authority is to be preferred before the less and by this rule many errours of Papists and Sectaries may be rejected Secondly That where such persons of weak judgments cannot clearly understand either the grounds of truth under present debate or the judgment and practice of the ancient Church whether through defect or diversity of information it is their best and surest way ordinarily to be directed and led by
Dionysius of Alexandria speaketh of a Communicant in his Church Eus Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we may properly render it standing at the Lords Table and the testimony of Justin Martyr above produced giveth a very probable intimation of the same gesture But when as the ancient Churches had two stationary days in a Week that is the sourth and sixth days with which the seventh day was also joined at Caesaria as is manifest from S. Basil upon which the holy Communion was administred it is probable Basil Ep. ad Caesariam that as upon those days they prayed kneeling so they did in the same gesture receive this Sacrament in attendance upon which they thought an humble gesture of adoration to be very suitable this Sacrament being accounted by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the dreadful mysteries 5. Albasp Obs l. 1. Obs 15. Indeed Albaspinus undertaketh to assert without any proof that the chief reason why anciently they stood in their Prayers upon the Lords days and the Pentecost was because upon those days they received the holy Communion and it was requisite they should use none other than a gesture of Joy upon that day in which they communicated in that Sacrament But besides the improbability of supposing daily Communions where we have no testimony thereof from Easter to Whitsunday this observation is very plainly contradicted by Albaspinus himself in his very next observation Obs 16. where he declareth that the Eucharist was constantly celebrated upon the stationary days and yet upon those days he yieldeth that the ancient Christians did pray kneeling Conc. Trul. c. 90. and this his conjecture is also contrary to what is asserted by the sixth general Council by Zonaras and Balsamon upon the twentieth Council of Nice and by S. Hierom Austen Hieron Prooem in lib. 1. Com. in Eph. Basil and other Fathers who unanimously assert that their joyfulness to the wonder of the Gentiles for the Resurrection of Christ and their professing themselves to be risen with him and to expect resurrection by him was the cause of their standing gesture at those times in their Religious Prayers But that the most humble gesture was not thought inconsistent with the Eucharist may appear Gr. Nazianz Orat. in Gorgon Besides the testimonies above produced from what Gregory Nazianzen relateth of his Sister Gorgonia who privately fell down prostrate before the Altar with the Sacrament in her hand 6. Wherefore kneeling at the holy Sacrament or receiving it in a gesture of Prayer and Religious Worship unto God was no way disallowed as unlawful by the Primitive Church but our practice herein is but a building upon their Foundations who themselves used a gesture of Adoration or the same gesture with that of Prayer 7. Obj. 4. Kneeling is a gesture which hath been grosly abused by the Papists in worshipping the Host according to their Doctrine of Transubstantiation and to that end it was enjoined by Honorius the third Ans 1. NO sinful use of any gesture though it be in the most manifest idolatry doth render that gesture unlawful in Religious service to God as was shewed in the former Chapter Though the Israelites sate down to eat and drink when they had offered Sacrifices to the golden Calf Ex. 32.6 it was still allowable in the days of Samuel to sit down to feast upon the Sacrifices of God 1 Sam. 9.13 22. And though the discumbing or reclining gesture was anciently used in Idolatrous Feasts Amos 2.8 Ezek 23.41 and so continued in some places very common till the times of Christ being designed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sit or rather discumb in the Idols Temple 1. Cor. 8.10 Conc. Ancyr Can. 51 and for some hundred years after as appears from the Council of Ancyra yet Christ himself made use of this gesture at the Jewish Passover according to the Custom and Canons of the Jewish Church 8. Ans 2. Though it be true that many Papists but not all do receive and adore the Host kneeling yet the Decree of Honorius so oft insisted upon is herein mistaken and misapplyed That Decree commandeth that the people cum elevatur hostia salutaris se reverenter inclinet Decret Greg. Lib. 3. Tit. 41. c. 10. idem faciens cum eam deferat Presbyter ad infirmum which words speak not the gesture of communicating or at the time of receiving the Sacrament but only concerns their behaviour as spectators when the Host immediately after the Consecration is elevated or when it is carried abroad to the sick And though the old Gloss supposeth that kneeling was thereby at such times enjoined which the practice of many in that Communion cannot admit Espencaeus a more learned man than the Author of the Gloss Espencaeus De Adorat Euch. l. 2. c. 16. accounteth that Decree rather to prohibit kneeling and to direct as the words se reverenter inclinet may import a standing gesture with expression of reverence And Espencaeus telleth us in the same place that in 1555. the kneeling gesture had not obtained in the Church of Lyons and that when some endeavoured to obtrude it upon that Metropolis a stop was put to their proceeding by the Royal Authority and in the same place in that Book purposely written for the adoration of the Sacrament he declareth that it is not much material in what gesture it is performed whether sitting standing lying or kneeling 9. Ans 3. They who will lay aside all gestures grosly abused must upon the same account reject all those which are in this Sacrament ordinarily received in the Protestant Churches both standing and sitting as well as kneeling That standing was a gesture used in the Romish adoration of the Host by many of the ordinary sort of Papists is evident from Espencaeus now cited Sacr. Cerem lib. 1. Sect. 2. Cap. 1. f. 22. And if he who is elected Pope be not Bishop or Priest at his Priestly Ordination he receiveth the Sacrament standing for then as their Book of Ceremonies informs us Ordinator communicat electo stanti in ipso cornu de corpore sanguine Christi Ibid. c. 2. f. 28. and the same gesture is used by him at his Episcopal Ordination Communionem sumet sub utraque specie stans c. and as this is the gesture of the Pope in that great solemnity of the Popes being invested with his Papal dignity V. Durand Rat. l. 4. c. 54. n. 45. so upon the great Mass upon Christmas day if the Pope himself celebrate the Mass the Deacon who attendeth upon him receiveth it at the Popes hand in a standing gesture Diaconus slans inclinato capite ex ejus manibus de Corpore Christi communicat Ibid. Lib. 2. Sect. 1. Cap. 14. calamo slans sanguinis partem sugit and in the same gesture the consicient Priest usually receiveth 10. Sacerdotal Par. 1. Tract 4. c. 35. But because sitting is most
fierceness carrieth them very far yet if we consult the judgment of the Protestant Churches who all admit an uniform gesture in their several churches not only the Lutheran Churches make use of kneeling at the Communion as an expression and excitement of devotion but the Bohaemian Church which also used kneeling declared that this gesture being piously received Ratio Discipl Cap. 3. Sect. 4. devotionem ipsam in conspectu Dei humilitatem adcoque gaudium cum tremore auget encreaseth devoutness of mind humility in the sight of God and awful rejoycing Those of the Helvetick Confession in Poland who themselves used standing did approve of kneeling in the Polish Synods above-mentioued nor hath it ever been condemned by any Protestant Church abroad but is particularly approved and well allowed of also by divers of the most eminent Ministers of the Reformed Churches as hath been manifested by Mr. Durel Zanchy declareth Zanch. in Sec. praec c. 17. that there is no doubt but that they act holily and according to the will of God who come to handle and partake of the holy Sacrament with external reverence also And Hospinian declareth that the Sacraments ought to be handled with great Religion and reverence Hospin Hist Sacram l. 5. c. 8. according to the Custom of every Church with a comely habit modest behaviour soberly and devoutly with the head uncovered and with bended knees CHAP. IV. Of other particular Rites appointed in the Church of England SECT I. Of the Surpless 1. A Decent habit in the service of God is generally allowed to be expedient and Bucer observed that whether men will or no they must acknowledge that the distinct Garments and Ornaments of Magistrates doth procure a singular respect to their Magistracy And a decent habit used by Ministers in the worship of God doth express a reverent esteem of the service of God and promoteth a due respect to them and their Ministration with men of unprejudiced minds Upon which account a particular comely attire for the Levites under the Law Ch. 1. Sect. 2. as hath been above-shewed and for Christian Ministers both in the Primitive and reformed Churches was ordered and appointed by Ecclesiastical Authority and to this end with us as with many other Churches anicent and modern reformed the use of the Surpless is received the decency of which is to be considered 2. As the service of God in Religious ministrations is excellent and honourable Baron A. 44. Casaub Exercit. 16. n. 73. Selden de Synod l. 1. c. 3. so the general sense of a great part of the World both Jews and Gentiles have accounted white garments to be honourable and comely and they are also approved as such by the wisdom of God himself in the description of the most excellent persons and things The glorious attire of the Lambs wise and some of the Apocalyptick Angels is expressed by their being arrayed in white linen Rev. 19.8 Chap. 15.6 the glorious state of the whole Church of God and its Members and of the Elders before the Throne is signified by their being cloathed in white raiment Rev. 7.9 Chap. 3 4 19. chap. 4.4 and the appearance of Angels the Transfiguration of Christ and the vision of the glory of God are represented in white garments Mark 16.5 Act. 1.10 Mark 9.3 Dan. 7.9 and the Holy Ghost would certainly not make use of things indecent and unseemly as representations of such great and glorious excellencies And therefore they who will condemn or deride a vesture of white linen as being in it self uncomely must first undertake to give evidence Zanch. in 2. Pracept c. 16. that they have better judgments concerning what is decent in the Church than the rest of the World have P. Martyr Ep. ad Hoop or than he hath who gave the being both to the World and to the Church And it hath been acknowledged by Protestant Writers of good note that the use of white linen hath hereby this special advantage that from the natural simplicity of the colour the special consideration of white linen above expressed and the use of these expressions in Scripture it may aptly direct us to the meditation and consideration of purity 3. Yet because it must be acknowledged that things in themselves otherwise unblamable may become unlawful when they are made use of upon evil principles or in any evil way or to bad ends and purposes and whereas the use of the Surpless is charged by some with Judaizing and by others with too much compliance with the degenerate state of the Christian Church under Popery I shall take these things into consideration 4. Though such things as have a natural comeliness or conveniency do not become unlawful to Christians at all times because they were made use of or injoyned in the Law of Moses as hath been manifested yet I further observe Ch. l. Sect. 1. that the Surpless was no Aaronical garment as hath been ordinarily supposed and granted Among the high Priests garments his Ephod which was made of blue Purple Scarlet and sine twined linen and his Robe which was all of blue can have no affinity with the Surpless neither of them being white linen and both of them of a different shape and his linen Breeches Bonnet Mitre and Girdle bear not the least resemblance thereto it remaineth therefore that none other of their garments can be like to our Surpless unless either the Coat of the high Priest or the Coats of the inferiour Priests which are sometimes called Ephods should agree thereto The high Priests Coat was ordinarily an under-garment worn next to his skin upon which he put on his Robe Ephod and other attire as may be collected from Moses his consecration of Aaron Lev. 8.7 8. and is plainly expressed by Josephus who was himself a Priest Josep Ant. l. 3. c. 8. and at Jerusalem whilst this attire was yet worn 5. But it must be owned that upon the day of atonement which was the tenth day of the seventh mouth the high Priest went into the Holy of Holies in a linen Coat without his other ordinary Priestly garments Philo. de Somn. Targ. Jonath in Lev. 16.4 Salian An. 2545. n. 54. as is affirmed by Philo Judaeus who also saith that this was a white Coat though others as well as our English Translators in Exod. 28.39 suppose it was embroidered by one of the Chaldee Paraphrasts and by divers others both Jewish Writers and Modern Christians Cun. de Rep. Heb. l. 2. c. 1. And though Cunaeus representeth the contrary opinion which he opposeth as the common opinion of those Christian Writers which went before him yet it must be acknowledged as manifestly true from Lev. 16.4 23 24 32. that the high Priest entred the Holy of Holies without his glorious attire only in a linen Coat with linen Breeches Mitre and Girdle which might well signifie that humble purity was more fit to appear before God than
confess him who was crucified let the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sign of the Cross be confidently made upon the forehead with the finger Catech. 13. Amalar. de Eccl. Offic. l. 3. c. 18. And Amalarius saith we believe that we shall be saved by him who was crucified of whose name the Jews are ashamed and therefore we make the sign in our forehead which is the seat of shame And to this purpose the use of this sign by some of the Souldiers under Julian is accounted in Theodoret to be an expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Christian profession Theod. Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 16. And indeed when-ever the ancient Christians used this sign publickly especially when any one signed himself therewith it always included a profession of Christ yet since through the blessing of God we live not among the Gentiles or Jews who oppose the name of Christ and have other sufficient visible signs of professing the faith of Christ in publick Assemblies of the Church the use of this Rite to this end is no way needful to be continued amongst us but because it is liable to the same danger with what I mention in the following particular the disuse hereof is useful and commendable in the present state of the Church 3. Secondly This sign was most frequently used as an expression of hope and and trust in Christ crucified and of confidence in him expectation of blessing from him and supplication unto God by him To this purpose both Latine and Greek Writers have paralleled this with Moses lifting up his hands when Israel was engaged with Amalek which was a manifestation of devout application to God and holy considence in him De Cor. Mil. c. 3. Ad Vxor l. 2. c. 5. Chrys ad pop Ant. Hom. 21. And this use of this sign was anciently very common in the actions of life even in retirement and privacy as is expressed by Tertulian Thus S. Chrysostom directed the Christian when he went abroad that he might be in safety under the divine protection to disclaim the Devil and express his adhering to Christ with using the sign of the Cross When Julian after his Apostacy was affrighted and terrified while he sought to consult with the Devil as a remedy against his fears he signed himself with the sign of the Cross Naz. Orat. 3. which Nazianzen expresseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which words shew his use of that sign to be a declaration of flying for aid and expecting help from Christ whom he persecuted Upon this account this sign was sometimes anciently used in the working Miracles as is expressed by Nazianzen Epiphanius and other Fathers as a visible testimony of confidence in Christ which Casaubone well expresseth Casaub Exerc. 13. in Baron n. 33. Opem à Christo petiit facto signo crucis quod Primitivae Ecclesiae fuit symbolum ejus fiduciae quam in Christo cruce ipsius passione ponebant And whereas this sign was long since used in every sacramental administration and some expressions of the Ancients have mentioned spiritual aid and grace to be conveyed per signum crucis by the use of this sign they hereby only meant that these benefits flowed from Christs Passion and were obtained by a Religious application unto him as Cassander asserteth Cassand in Hymn Eccles p. 220. Haud dubiè nil aliud significare volebant quam omnem tutelam salutem in morte Christi esse constitutam sacramenta omnia vim atque efficaciam suam non aliunde quam à morte Christi haurire In like manner the Christian Emperours from Constantine and downwards made use of the Banner of the Cross as an expression of their trust in Christ crucified and the same is related by Bede Bed Eccl. Histl l. 3. c. 2. concerning Oswaldus in England in his engagement against the Britains 4. Yet because this sign which hath been grosly abused to superstition by placing an operative vertue and essicacy in the meer outward use thereof would in this ordinary practice be still very liable to the same abuse by many persons or to be so misunderstood by others because they cannot upon every such action declare their intent and end in that usage as is done in our Liturgy when it maketh use of the Cross in Baptism therefore the disuse of this outward sign as an expression of Christian confidence in order to the avoiding of that which is properly scandal the producing corruption in Religion and the sin of man which is therein included is altogether as reasonable and fit as was the ancient forbearance of the Love-kiss and the Agapae upon the same account 5. Thirdly The sign of the Cross as also generally made upon the foreheads of them who were received unto the Church Hence in the instruction of the Catechumeni Aug. de Catech. Rudib. c. 20. they were every one of them told at their due time Passionis crucis signo in fronte hodie signandus es omnesque Christiani signantur that he must then be signed in the forehead with the sign of the Cross according to the manner of all Christians And that this sign was constantly attendant upon the admission of members in the regular administrations of the Church is declared by S. Augustin upon John Tr. in Johan 118. and the same usage is reckoned by S. Basil among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas de Spir. Sanct. c. 27. or the fixed Laws and Constitutions of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and when S. Cyprian saith Cyp. de Vnit Eccles in fronte signantur qui Dominum promerentur he thereby meaneth that they who are though worthy to be admitted to Christianity are so signed in their foreheads 6. The intent of this sign in this use thereof was that the Church did hereby solemnly testifie those persons having relation to the Christian society to stand obliged to mainain the Christian profession and life and so far as concerned her authority did hereby dedicate or engage them thereto and charge and require them to be mindful thereof and this was a token to admonish them that they must not be ashamed to confess the Christian Faith and to fight under Christs Banner and to serve and honour him Upon this account the sign of the Cross was ordinarily called Signum or Signaculum Dei by the Latine Writers and by the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the seal or mark whereby these persons were declared to be set apart to God so far as the Church had any right over Cyp. Ep. 56. or interest in them of her communion Thus those words of S. Cyprian Muniatur frons ut signum Dei incolume servetur do exhort to Christian constancy and resolution that they might thereby keep inviolable what was intended by this sign on their forehead which engaged them thereto Aug. in Psal 85. And when S. Austin checketh the Donatists who confined the Kingdom of
Christ to the narrow limits of some parts of Africa saying Dost thou call thy self a Christian that thou mayst envy the glory of Christ cujus signum in fronte te portare asseris whose sign thou clarest thy self to bear in thy forehead he thereby sheweth that this sign was accounted to include an engagement or admonition to promote and advance the honour of Christ And that it might be a more plain Memorial of the Christian faith and duty when it was used to the Catechumens Confes l. 1. c. 11. De pec Mer. Remis l. 2. c. 26. Aug. de Symb. l. 2. c 1. some distant time before their Baptism of which S. Austin maketh frequent mention the abrenunciation and profession of faith were then joyned therewith as appeareth from S. Aug. de symbolo ad Catechum the like unto which appeareth in our office of private Baptism and when it was used at the time of the administration of Baptism it immediately followed upon the persons professing to undertake the Christian life Dionys de Hier. Eccl. c. 2. as is expressed by the Author De Hierarchia Ecclesiastica And some dark intimation of this Primitive use of this sign may be discerned remaining in the corruptions of the Papacy but the more clear expression thereof is exhibited in our reformation 7. This sign used in our Church upon any person in the office of Baptism is declared to be in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ Crucified and manfully to fight under his Banner against sin the World and the Devil c. Which words speak this sign to be a token by way of remembrance of his duty to the person baptized and a testimony of engagement upon him and expectation concerning him from the Church Which sense of these words is made more manifest by the Canon Can. 30. which declareth that it is apparent in the Communion Book that the infant baptized is by vertue of Baptism before it be signed with the sign of the Cross received into the Congregation of Christs stock as a perfect member thereof and not by any power ascribed unto the sign of the Cross and it after addeth that this Church accounteth this sign a lawful outward Ceremony and honourable badg whereby the infant is dedicated to the service of him that died upon the Cross Now dedicating a person being an engaging or setting him apart unto God and it being evident from the Canon that this dedicating is wholly distinct from the baptismal dedication to be a Member of Christs Church we must hereby understand the Church to engage this Member upon her account to the service of Christ in like manner as when any Father shall give himself to the Lord as the Macedonians did 2 Cor. 8.5 and with diligent care shall warn and charge his Children to yield and devote themselves to God this is properly called his dedicating himself and his to the service of God And this sense is yet more evident from the office of Baptism where the Minister baptizing acting in the name of God saith in the singular number N. I baptize c. but saith in the plural number We receive this Child and do sign him c. acting herein in the name of the Rulers and other Members of the Catholick Church in Communion with us the whole body desiring and seeking the good of every member So that hereby there is as great an obligation laid upon this person baptized as the members of Christs body and the power of his Church can lay upon him by their relation to him interest in him and authority over him 8. Defence of three Cerem Par. Ch. 2. Sec. 7. With much agreeableness to this sense Bishop Morton declared that the Child is dedicated to God by consecration in Baptism which is a Sacrament of Grace but the dedication which is fignified by the sign of the Cross is not by any proper consecration to God or tender of grace received from God by such a sign made but is a declarative token of duty which afterwards the person baptized ought to perform concerning his constant and visible profession of the Christian Faith Bishop Fern saith Consider of Concernment Gh. 7. n. 7. Eccles Polit l. 5. Sec. 65. it signifieth the duty of the baptized and is to mind him of it and Mr. Hooker termeth it an admonition to glory in the service of Christ and a memorial of duty and a bar or prevention to keep from Apostacy 9. Now besides the Sacraments themselves it is very useful and needful to admit other means of memorial and solemn charge to engage men to the faithful service of God who are too prone to be negligent therein Though all Abrahams Family were circumcised God had a special favour for Abraham because he would command his Children and Houshold after him Gen. 18.18 19. and they would keep the way of the Lord. And though in Joshua's time the Israelites were circumcised Josh 24.22.27 and kept the Passover and had their Sacrifices and publick general Assemblies before the Tabernacle yet Joshua did further solemnly engage them to God and set up a stone as a witness thereof And when S. Paul mentioned the good profession which Timothy made before many witnesses 1 Tim. 6.12 13. he thought fit to add a solemn charge unto Timothy in the sight of God and Jesus Christ which requireth him to answer that profession Wherefore since such a charge is in it self very useful if as members we have that due value we ought to have for the body of Christs Church that engagement charge or expectation which hath a concurrent force and influence both from the Rulers and from multitudes of other members of that body must be thought the most solemn and weighty of all other 10. That in so considerable a Case some significant rite is very expedient to add to the solemnity thereof is sufficiently proved by the common wisdom of Mankind when they commit to others any great charge and by the prudence of the ancient Church in this very particular And this rite of the sign of the Cross is upon many accounts very proper for this purpose because it is apt to suggest to our minds the remembrance of the name of Christ which was anciently signified by chi the first letter of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old form of which letter was this †as appeareth from an ancient Inscription proâ—â—ced by Scaliger and of the Passion of our blessed Saviour upon the Cross Scalig. Animad in Euseh p. 110 120. and of the nature of Christianity in taking up his Cross and also because it was a sign to this end honourably used by the Primitive Christians And our Church hath taken abundant care to prevent all superstitiousness in the use hereof both by appointing it after the person is baptized and received as both the Office of Baptism and the Canon expresseth and by the
Cens c. 11. And Bucer in his Censura declareth it to be an ancient and simplex ritus apure or innocent Rite and that he judgeth the use thereof to be neither indecent nor unprofitable 17. I know there are some who think their own apprehensions so much above all others that they are no otherwise moved by testimonies which are produced against them than to express their censures Altar Damasc c. 10. p. 830. and sometimes their contempt o◠the most worthy Writers and on this manner doth Didoclavius deal with the testimony of Bucer which I now produced saith he it is frigida diluta censura nec satis expendisse videtur it was his dull and weak judgment about this matter and he did not seem to have considered what he wrote But let not such think that their authority is of any value to be put in the balance against the Primitive Church and so many reformed Churches and Writers and therefore as there being no just cause from the consideration of this rite it self and the use thereof to condemn it the censure of such persons is unjust and uncharitable and the dislike of others who are more modest in their opposition is also groundless SECT III. Of laying on hands in Confirmation THis Imposition of hands is the more opposed Didocl Altar Damasc c. 5. p. 359. Except of Presbyt p. 29. because of those Declarative words in the Prayer used at Confirmation Vpon whom after the example of the holy Apostles we have now laid our hands to certifie them by this sign of thy favour and gracious goodness to them The Non Conformists here will neither allow that the Apostles practice should be accounted any example for laying on hands in Confirmation nor that this sign may be used to certifie Gods grace and favour which seemeth say they to speak it a Sacrament 2. Wherefore we are first to consider what Warrant this imposition of hands in Confirmation may claim from the practice of the Apostles We read Act. 8.15 17 18. that after Philip had baptized at Samaria by the Apostles prayer accompanied with imposition of hands they received the Holy Ghost and the same is related concerning the Disciples at Ephesus Act. 19.6 Here we have an Apostolical practice evident that they imposed hands and prayed and thereupon the Holy Ghost was received It is indeed acknowledged that in those instances there was a visible and miraculous testimony of the presence of the Holy Spirit by speaking with Tongues c. but the chief blessing of Gods Spirit consisteth in the inward Graces of the Spirit which were not peculiar to that time and that the obtaining the strengthning grace of the Spirit was in an especial manner designed by the Apostles imposition of hands is declared by Irenaeus Iren. adv Haeres l. 4. c. 75. Aug. Tract 6. in Ep. 1. Johan and it was justly esteemed by S. Austin that the Holy Ghost is here received where no miraculous gifts are bestowed but the gracious dispositions of love peace and unity are entertained And prayer especially the most solemn Prayer of the Bishop or chief Officer of the Church joyned with imposition of hands which was a testimony of peculiar benediction used by dying Jacob and others under the Old Testament and by Christ and his Apostles under the New is a means to obtain this blessing to such who are disposed and qualified for the receiving thereof but that those who indulge and give way to their corruptions and passions as the Corinthians did by their divisions could not receive the increase of the grace and strength of the Holy Spirit by the Apostolical imposition of hands is also asserted in the place above-mentioned by Irenaeus And if any persons will contend that the imposition of hands now received in the Church cannot be a practice according to the example of the Apostles because in those times the Holy Ghost was oft miraculously received which cannot now be expected he may as well assert that the imposition of hands for Ordination is not continued in the Church from the example of the Apostles because then the Holy Ghost was sometimes extraordinarily given thereby or that our praying and preaching is not a doing that for which we have the Apostles for an example because we cannot by them expect such wonderful gifts as sometimes were conferred under the Apostles doctrine and by their prayer 3. And by the searching into Antiquity we may discern the general use of this Imposition of hands in the Church as from the Apostles When the Apostle Heb. 6.2 speaketh of the Foundation of the Doctrine of Baptisms and of laying on of hands the ordinary exposition of the Greek and Latine Fathers refer those words unto Confirmation and in the same sense are they understood by Calvin Beza Illyricus and many other Protestants Eusebius ralateth a story Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein Confirmation was used under the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 while S. John was yet alive and Cornelius noted it as a defect in Novatus the Schismatick that he never obtained Confirmation from the Bishop for receiving the Holy Ghost which he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus Hist l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his words are related in Eusebius Tertullian in his short account of the Rites of the Church Tertul. de Resur Cam. c. 8. De Baptism c. 8. after he had mentioned Baptism expresseth Confirmation in these words Caro manus impositione adumbratur ut anima Spiritu illuminetur and in his Book De Baptisma saith that after Baptism is used imposition of hands calling for and inviting the holy Spirit by that benediction Cypr. Ep. 73. S. Cyprians testimony is yet more full who saith that for those whom Philip baptized that which lacked was performed by Peter and John by whose prayer and imposition of hands the Holy Ghost was invocated and poured forth upon them which also saith he is now practised among us that those who are baptized in the Church are presented to the chief Officers of the Church that by our prayer and imposition of hands they may obtain the Holy Ghost and may by Confirmation attain to the highest Order of Christians or signaculo dominico consummentur S. Ambrose speaketh of Confirmation Amb. de Sacr. l. 3. c. 2. Hieron adv Lucif Aug. Cont. l. 3. c. 16. l. 5. c. 23. in Psal 130. that the holy Spirit is thereby obtained by prayer S. Hierom approveth it for Apostolical and S. Austin in divers places defendeth the practice hereof with relation to the Apostolical imposition of hands and for the receiving the Holy Ghost even when the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were no more communicated and this imposition of hands was enjoyned by the ancient Council of Elvira Conc. Elib c. 38. unto them who being baptized in case of necessity did afterwards recover their health And therefore this practice of the
that such Confirmation with Imposition of hands might be restored 9. But it remaineth to be inquired how the Church can certifie the persons confirmed by the sign of Imposition of hands of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them For the answering of which waving other considerations I shall observe two things First that as this imposition of hands is a testimony of admitting persons to a higher rank of Christian Professors who ratifie their baptismal Covenant by their own action intimating also an approbation of this profession it includeth the power of the Keys whereby the Officers of the Church are enabled by Gods authority to declare particularly his favour and gracious goodness to them who embrace the conditions of Christianity and to direct them thereunto and to this purpose was Imposition of hands on the Penitents at divers times used in the ancient Church And to testifie Gods gracious acceptance either by our words or actions of mens undertaking the exercise of Christianity is a thing greatly different from the tendering the divine grace of Gods Covenant as exhibited by any sign as a means to convey the same which is the proper nature of a Sacrament 10. Secondly This Imposition of hands is a sign of a Benediction in Gods name from the Officer of Gods Church The Levites and especially the Priests under the Law were required to bless the people in the name of God Deut. 10.8 1 Chron. 23.13 which blessing was performed in a way of benedictory prayer or supplication Numb 6.23 and this blessing in Gods name was a testimony of Gods giving his blessing to them supposing them not to render themselves uncapable thereof Num. 6.27 The external testimony of their general blessing all the people Targ. Jonath in Num. 6.23 was most probably by lifting up their hands towards them as is declared by one of the Chaldee Paraphrasts and is observed by Baronius Baron Annal Eccl. An. 34. n. 220. and we have an instance of this Rite attending the Priestly benediction Lev. 9.22 and our Saviour made use of the same Luk. 24.50 But in their solemn particular benedictions in the Old Testament they used Imposition of hands of which we have an example Gen. 48.14.16 in Jacobs blessing the Sons of Joseph this Rite was also used in their Ordination of their Elders and the constant use hereof in the particular benedictions by persons of great eminency among the Jews is reasonably esteemed the cause why the Jews brought little Children to Christ that he might put his hands on them and pray Mat. 19.13 Gret in Mat. 19.13 And from the frequent practice of this Rite Junius and Tremellius have ventured to admit a Paraphrase into their Translation concerning the Priestly benediction wherein they express the use of Imposition of hands in Num. 6.27 which can only be allowed concerning particular benedictions The end and design of imposition of hands in benediction 〈…〉 voc 〈◊〉 Jâ—n in Num. 6. c. 7. is declared by Ravanellus to be in testimony of the help favour and grace of God to be given to him who receiveth imposition of hands and Junius saith by this sign they were to testifie to the people Gods grace which are Phrases much like those in this Prayer at Confirmation in our Liturgy Yet this Rite was only a sign of Gods favour in this use with respect to the Benediction or Prayer for that person supposing and hoping him to be duly qualified for the receiving the benefit therein desired and therefore is of no Sacramental nature 11. Now â—lessing including nothing Ceremonial and peculiar to the Law and the Ministry of the Old Testament is very suitable to the Gospel which is in an especial manner a Dispensation of Blessing And this benediction or praying 〈◊〉 for Gods blessing was the 〈…〉 designed in this Apostolical 〈◊〉 of hands with prayer and from their time this use hath been continued in the Christian Church as hath been shewed and it would be a strange unreasonable and uncharitable thing if those who come to renew their baptismal Covenant might not receive the Churches blessing in Gods name with prayer for their Christian growth and perseverance And the dignity of Office in the Church chiefly giving authority to bless according to that rule of the Apostle Heb. 7.7 without all contradiction the less is blessed of the greater this solemn benediction at Confirmation hath thereupon been justly reserved to the Bishop or chief Officer of the Church by whom alone it was performed in the time of S. Cyprian and S. Hierom. 12. Confirmation in our use thereof is called by Bishop Whitgift Bishop Whitg Defence p. 785. Eccl. Pol. l. 5. Sect. 66. The Bishops benediction by laying on of hands by Mr. Hooker This special benediction the Rite or Ceremony of Confirmation and when Confirmation was restored in Scotland in the fourth Article of the Assembly of Perth it was declared concerning children who had been catechized that the Bishop should bless them with prayer for the increase of their knowledge and the continuance of Gods heavenly grace with every one of them And the ancient Confirmation was accounted a Benediction by Tertullian Tertul. de Bapt. c. 8. Conc. Eliber c. 77. and a Benediction of the Bishop by the Council of Elvira And since the Gospel-dispensation is a Ministration of Blessing and the great blessing of the Gospel is to receive the promise of the Spirit Gal. 3.14 This benedictory prayer upon a solemn occasion for the grace and strength of that Spirit was suitably accompanied in the practice of the Apostles and the Christian Church with the ancient and proper token of benediction the Imposition of hands 13. Presbyt Except p. 29. But it hath been urged that the Articles of our Church declare imposition of hands in Confirmation to be a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice and that Confirmation hath no visible sign appointed by God Artic. 25. and therefore Imposition of hands cannot therein certifie children of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them and thus contradictions are injuriously imposed upon the Church The words of the Article to which they refer are these Article 25. Those five commonly called Sacraments that is to say Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimony and Extreme Vnction are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures but yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lords Supper for that they have not any visible sign or Ceremony ordained of God The sense of the former part of which words is That the Church of Rome accounting Confirmation Penance Orders and Extreme Vnction for proper Sacraments of the Gospel their errour herein proceedeth from their corrupting those things which were practised by the Apostles but their esteeming Marriage to be a Sacrament is a mis-representing a state of life allowed in the
Scripture to be a Gospel-Sacrament 14. The latter clause of those words of the Article do manifestly alike deny Confirmation and Ordination to have any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God or that God hath not appointed in them any such properly Sacramental sign as Baptism and the Lords Supper hath For in both these the Imposition of hands is immediately a representation of a benediction and of being thereby received into a higher degree among Christians by the ministerial power of the Church and though further grace from God is needful in this higher degree and humble and devout persons may receive grace from God suitable to whatsoever state he calleth them yet grace is in these cases to be expected in the use of Prayer and from the Promises of Gods assistance to and presence with his people and his Ministry but not immediately from God by the use of Imposition of hands as an outward sign whereby that grace is directly exhibited and conveyed and moreover proper Sacraments are seals of Gods whole Covenant and means whereby he conveyeth both pardoning and satisfying grace And I further add that the acknowledging the sign of Imposition of hands in Confirmation not to have any divine institution or immediate command hindreth not its being of Apostolical practice and that in the use thereof we may both follow the example of the Apostles and certifie Gods favour and gracious goodness to persons confirmed according as is above expressed SECT IV. Of the Ring in Marriage And the Conclusion 1. The Ring was by the old Nonconformists called a Sacramental Sign and a new Sacrament and others since have expressed some fear lest the use of these words with the delivery of the Ring In Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost should favour them who account Marriage a Sacrament But if this was an intimation of a Sacrament a last Will and Testament beginning In the Name of God c. and being signed and sealed must be accounted a Sacrament And even among the Romanists who esteem Marriage for a Sacrament the Ring is not fixed upon for the sign or matter thereof but some fix upon the persons contracting others upon all those words and actions whereby consent is signified others as Estius speaketh doubt which of these to close with Bellarm. de Matrim Sacr. c. 6. and Bellarmine admitteth them both 2. Now though Marriage be in some sense a Religious Constitution as having its original institution from God yet both the nature of this society and the end of it speak it a civil state of Gods appointment even as the state of Government and Subjection is and therefore as other civil contracts are established by words of consent ordinarily attended with real signs or tokens as with us some Livery and Seisin is used in the passing over an Estate and by the general consent of the World an Earnest attendeth ordinary Bargains so by a large consent of Nations hath a Ring been thought fit to establish the Matrimonial contract as a pledge or earnest thereof Whence it was an ordinary custom among the Jews to use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ring of Espousing the manner of its use among the modern Jews is expressed by Buxtorfe in his Synagogua Judaica Syn. Jud. c. 28. and the ancient practice thereof is mentioned in the Talmud in Kiddushin Buxt Lex Radbin in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among the ancient and laudable customs of the Roman Empire Tertul. Apol c. 6. Tertullian reckoneth this for one that women then wore gold only on that one finger quem sponsus oppignorasset annulo pronubo where the Bridegroom had put the pledge of the Matrimonial Ring Baron An. 57. n. 51. and Pamelius upon that place of Tertullian and Baronius also observeth the like use of the Ring to be expressed by Pliny to which purpose also are the words of Juvenal who describing Marriage saith Et digitis pignus fortasse dedisti Juven Sat. 6. and Theosebius in Photius calleth the Ring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conjoyner of conjugal society But though the use of this Rite in Marriage was very ancient Tertul. de Idolatr c. 16. even among the Pagan Nations Tertullian assureth us it was no part of their Paganism saith he Neque annulus neque conjunctio maritalis de alicujus idoli honore descendit but this pledge and other common earnests were prudently used long before the time of Christ and are still continued under Christianity 3. And that the principal use of this Rite is under the Christian state continued to be an earnest of this Matrimonial Contract is not only manifest from those ancient ritual words mentioned by Durantus Durandus and many others Annulo suo subarravit me sibi Dominus but from S. Augustin Aug. Tr. 2. in 1. Ep. Johan who calleth it arram sponsi the pledge or earnest of the Husband and the same intent hereof is expressed in several testimonies cited in Gratians Decretum c. 30. q. 5. c. nostrates Foeminae V. Gloss in c. 27. q. 2. si quis And in our Liturgy the giving and receiving a Ring is declared to be a pledge of the Vow and Covenant made between the persons who enter upon this state of Marriage And whereas these words In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost have some relation to the pledge of Wedlock by the Ring in our Office of Marriage as it is a testimony of consent to the Covenant of Marriage the sense and design thereof is to express thus much That this Contract of Marriage in the Church is undertaken with respect to the Rules of the Christian Doctrine and the Institution of God concerning Marriage and by Authority therefrom and in Subjection thereunto and that by reason of this institution the expressed consent of the persons contracting must stand firm and inviolable and therefore it is fitly and solemnly declared to be In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost in that being now joyned together by God no man can put them asunder 4. But besides this principal end of the Ring the delivery thereof did also include a giving authority to the Wife to command and take care of the goods of the house and the provisions which the ancient Romans usually sealed and hence the Ring given in Marriage was a Seal-ring Paed. l. 3. c. 11. Thus Clemens Alexandrinus calleth it a Ring of Gold given to the Woman but not for ornament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to set a seal upon what requireth safe custody and in the same Chapter he saith that the care of the house is fitly committed to the Wife and those who have no wives may use the Seal-ring themselves So he expresseth this ancient usage of giving a Seal-ring which may also not improbably be designed in the comprehensiveness of Tertullians language Tertull. ad Vxor l. 2. c 9. by his Phrase of
Matrimonium obsignatum Concerning the custom of the Romans sealing their houshold provisions Pliny telleth us Plin. Nat. Hist l. 33. c. 1. Cibi potus annulo vindicantur à rapina Their meats and drinks were by the use of the Ring secured from robbery and that the most ancient use of Rings was wholly designed for sealing is declared by Macrobius Macr. Satum l. 7. c. 13. Veteres non ornatûs sed signandi causa annulum circumferebant And that the giving a Ring was of old a testimony both of special favour and of committing authority appeareth by the instances of the Rings given by Pharaoh to Joseph and by Ahasuerus to Mordecai both which are confidently and probably asserted by Boetius Epo to have been Seal-rings saith he Boet. Epo Quest Heroin l. 2. qu. 5. n. 21. Quod de annulo dicitur utrobique de signatorio sumendum est proculdubio ad extollendam tam Josephi quam Mardochaei authoritatem ut quibus rex uterque concrederet omnia And though the custom of sealing things belonging to the house and the use of a Seal-ring in Marriage is not with us continued yet with reference to this ancient usage the delivery of the Ring may still fitly import the Husbands committing the things and affairs of his house to the care and authority of his Wife 5. This Rite also did probably express not only an honourable estate as Marriage is but also a state of freedom and liberty the Ring in Marriage being used by them only in the former times of the Roman Empire who were Free-men and not Slaves and Vassals whence it is declared by Macrobius in the place above-cited that no persons under servitude might by the Laws of the Empire wear a Ring Cod. l. 6. Tâ—t 8. Se. 2. Digest lib. 40. Tit. 10. Sect 5. Lib. 38 Tit. 2. Se. 3. n. 1. Jus annulorum famuli non habebant And the civil Law it self doth in divers places declare treating De jure aureorum annulorum that if any person who was no Free-man obtained the right of wearing a Ring he thereupon all his life time enjoyed the Priviledges of the Ingenui or Free-men though he might not dispose of what he had at his death And Gotofredus giveth an instance from Dio Gotofr ibidem concerning Musa a Physician to whom Augustus gave a Ring that he might enjoy this freedom Agreeably hereto the Ring in Marriage may among us in some kind intimate a state of civil freedom from vassallage and villainage in the persons contracting and may more particularly express that by the Matrimonial Contract there is made over to the Wife a right of Copartnership in the Immunities and that degree of honourable estate which the Husband possesseth But though these things last mentioned may well be admitted and allowed the main intent of the use of the Ring is to be a pledge or earnest of the Marriage covenant as is expressed in these words With this Ring I thee wed Buc. Censur c. 20. Disp of Cerem c. 2. Sect. 43. And this use of it was approved by Bucer as a thing very convenient and Mr. Baxter hath declared that he saw no reason to scruple its lawfulness 6. And hence a good account may be given of these words used with the Ring With my body I thee worship Which not only includeth the Husbands honouring his Wife but also declareth that he taketh his Wife with her issue by him into participation of that degree of civil Worship Dignity or Freedom which himself hath and as this suiteth well the nature of their Union in being one flesh L. Cokes Reports 5. Part. Cawdreys Case so it agreeth with the usage of the common Law of England wherein otherwise than in the Civil Law both the freedom and honour of the whole Family dependeth on the Husband And more especially these words design to express the mans receiving this woman to be his Wife in the honourable estate of Matrimony so as she should enjoy that degree of civil worship and other Matrimonial Priviledges as authority of guiding the House and commanding the Family and a right of her issue being Heirs whereby the honourable condition of a Wise or Materfamilias was distinguished from a Concubine taken in the best sense for one under a Matrimonial Contract and therefore sometimes called a Wife but without the right to these Priviledges Of such Concubines in the times of the Old Testament we have a frequent account in the holy Scriptures Grat. Decret Dist 34. c. 3 4 5. the Canon Law giveth intimation of such under Christianity and Gellius among the old Romans maketh a difference between some women who were received into a state of Marriage but not in the most honourable degree thereof and to these he alloweth the name of Matrons and other Wives who were their Matres-familias Noct. Attict l. 18. c. 6. as having a disposal of the Family and a relation to the right of inheriting And this Phrase may also be allowed to signifie that the Husband hath not power over his own body but the Wife as the Apostle speaketh 1 Cor. 7.4 And therefore the sense of these words appeareth to be very considerable 7. And as to the word Worship it is here evidently taken for an expression of civil honour respect and eminency which was a more usual acceptation of that Phrase in the last Age than now it is as may appear from these words of Mr. Tyndal Tyndall against Sir Tho. More Concerning worshipping or honouring which two terms saith he are both one the words which the Scripture doth use in the worshipping or honouring of God are these to love God cleave to him c. all which words saith he we use also in the worshipping of man howbeit diversly and the difference thereof doth all the Scripture teach Nor is the word Worship in its common use so perticuliarly now referred to divine Worship but that besides the ordinary title of Worship in a civil sense given to men we also read in the last Translation of our Bibles such Phrases as these 1 Chron. 29.20 they worshipped God and the King i. e. gave due honour reverence and obeisance both to God and the King Luk. 14.10 then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee Rev. 3.9 I will make them come and worship before thy feet and in the ancienter Versions there occurreth a much more frequent use of such Phrases And therefore these words With my body I thee worship are not unallowable in the Phrase and are very significant comprehensive and of great moment in their sense design and intent 8. And now having impartially and diligently considered those appointments in our Church which for an hundred years past have been by divers persons so severely censured and opposed though by others worthily defended and justly valued the result is this 9. First That if these things were rightly and truly understood and apprehended they would be well approved and the vehement out-crys against them and the open separation from this Church upon this account would appear unreasonable and sinfully uncharitable And this right understanding is a matter of no great difficulty to intelligent persons by whom others might be directed who shall impartially make inquiry having their spirits possessed with humility meekness calmness and charity unto which Christianity obligeth all men 10. Secondly That though misunderstanding and mistakes or prejudices and a strong affection to one party of men and over-suspicious thoughts of and designed oppositions against others may and do engage many to disclaim these things established even to the present dangerous breach of the Churches peace and unity and the extreme hazard of its future welfare yet nothing hath been nor indeed can be produced against the way of worshipping God established in our Churchâ— which either ought upon Principles of Conscience or according 〈◊〉 the Rules of Christian and Moral prudence to hinder pious men from hearty joyning therein or yielding unfeigned assent and consent thereto 11. Thirdly That those persons who will resolvedly oppose with violence these establishments in the Church of England and renounce its Communion upon any accounts referring to the Liturgy and way of Worship appointed therein may observe that almost all the same things which they blame in our Church and for which they injuriously depart from it have been received and appointed with many other things which their Principles do equally or more severely condemn in the Primitive Church and especially in the third fourth and fifth Centuries of the Rites and way of Worship in which Ages we have more ample records than of the the times foregoing and had they then lived they must upon the same accounts according to their present Principles and practices have disclaimed the Communion of all the famous known Churches of the Christian World in those Ages which have been and deserve to be greatly renowned And this besides the former considerations which refer to the things themselves is of so great moment that he who would have rejected the Communion of those Churches must have thereby disowned Membership with the Body of Christ and could never have reconciled such practices with endeavouring to keep the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace FINIS Errata Pag. 160. lin 4. 10. for pretection read prelection p. 166. l. 11. for Histonery r. Histories p. 177. l. 4. dele that p. 197. l. 3. for ipsiusve verabile r. ipsius venerabili p. 222. l. 32. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 229. l. 20. r. I shall p. 302. l. 30. for become r. be come p. 311. l. 2. dele if p. 354 l. 20. r. sufficient rule for faith p. 355. l. 18. for rules r. Rulers pag. 460. l. 27. for sometimes r. some-times p. 481. l. 7. r. may appear besides p. 497. l. 28. for springling r. sprinkling Other less mistakes must be left to the ingenuity and pardon of the Reader