In the Greek they are more significant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Put upon you Sophisticall Paralogismes In locum The word Philosophy seems to me to be all one with worshiping of Angels v. 18. saies the Doctor Superstition Sect. 7. probabilitate sermonis by probable arguments as Beza by Rhetoricall insinuations or sophisticall subtleties as D. Davenant explaines it to lead you away from Christ Now the Apostle goes on to discover some of those toiles and waies whereby Seducers did beguile their followers 1. Philosophicall speculations having a shew of much wisdome ver 8. Beware least any man spoil you through Philosophie an instance whereof is given in the 18. ver in voluntary humilitie and worshiping of Angells 2. Traditions and Inventions of men superadded or continued in the worship of God an instance wherof is in the 20.22 ver Why are yee subject to Ordinances after the Commandements Doctrines of men 3. Mosaical Ceremonies revived after they were abrogated by Christ of which he speakes ver 16.17 His scope in all is to dispute against all rites and Ceremonies obtruded upon the Church as parts of Divine worship D. Daven in locum as necessary duties of holiness and righteousness and as binding Conscience As that learned and judicious Professor expresses it And the Apostle opposes this onely against them ver 8. They are not after Christ but invented and imposed by men Not after Christ i. e. not after the Doctrine or Commandement of Christ in the Gospell which he expressâ—s in another phrase ver 19. Not holding the head but after the Commandements and Doctrines of men ver 22. Whence it appeares that the Reverend Doctor seemes mistaken when hee saies Where yet you must observe he doth not speake of Commands but Doctrines i. e. not of the prohibition of the Magistrate c. but of false teachers imposing them as the commands of God For the Apostle speakes expresly these impositions Touch not tast not c. were after the Commandements and Doctrines of men ver 22. and ver 8. after the Traditions of men to worship God by the observation of them The worship of God did once consist in these observations and Abstinencies and the false Teachers put them upon their followers as still usefull to this end Having done this hee sets an ill Character upon those Doctrines of worship which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in Willworship c. But are after the Commandements and Doctrines of men not any Doctrines or Commands of Christ and so no better than Willworship c The Doctor seemes to place the illnesse of this practice in this That they urging some abolisht ceremonies as still in force by divine precept should thereby deny Christ to be come in the flesh Which though it bee true in part yet is not all that the Apostle here intended but this he also addes that they placing the worship of God in those observances not after Christ but after the Commandements and traditions of men did fall into Willworship which had a shew of wisdome but no more For it is not onely sinfull Willworship to teach and observe the Old Ceremonies as parts of Gods worship when they are abolished but also to inuent a new way of worship as that of worshiping Angells was for certain ver 18. and to put it upon God as an acceptable worship § 4. That wee have not mistaken the Doctors meaning will appear by that which he addes about the difference betwixt making of positive humane Lawes in indifferent things and urging or teaching things for Divine commands which either never were commanded by God or else are now outdated by Christ The Apostles discourse proceeds of the latter c. This is true the Apostle hath here no reflection on the Magistrates making lawes in indifferent things but yet if the Magistrate or Church should invent and impose any new way of worshiping God as the Church of Rome hath done many would not the Apostles arguing conclude them to be Will-worship as well as if they had urged and taught some antiquated ceremonies to be observed as a part of the worship of God The Doctor grants and asserts Sect. 3. That if the Magistrate should teach or impose Doctrines of men upon others as the Commands of God when they are not he should thereby incurre the censure of a false teacher also And if he should teach or impose some antiquated worship upon his people though not as the command of God would he not be a Teacher of false worship also As for his instance of David who appointed the Levites to serve from the age of 20. years whereas God by Moses had appointed it but from 25. years old c. It is first Impertinent for hee brings it as an instance of a Magistrates power in a thing indifferent whereas this was in a matter of Religion and more then so in a matter formerly Commanded by God wherein what he did is not imitable by any Magistrate now who hath no power to order any thing in Religion against a former Order of God as in the case in hand there was What then may be said for Davids altering the appointment of God as in some other things besides Divines do answer that David was a Prophet inspired by God or directed by some other Prophet how to Order the affaires of the Temple and worship of God And this to mee is evident by texts of Scripture 1 Chron. 28.19 All this said David the Lord made me to understand in writing by his good hand upon me even all the works of this pattern which hee ascribes to the Spirit of God ver 12 13. cap. 23.27 by the last words of David the Levites were numbred from 20 years old of which he saies the spirit of the Lord spake by me 2 Sam. 23.2 3. But this by the way § 5. The full importance of the words ver 22. hee saies is this That when those abstinencies are imposed and taught as divine obliging precepts this is an abuse of them which were otherwise innocent things and that abuse of them dangerous or destructive But 1. why doth he refuse our Translation of those word which all are to perish with the using For the verb from whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived signifies sometimes simply to use Estius in locum And the Civill Lawyers take Abusus for the consuming use ordinarily 2. Whither the Apostle speaks of the meats or of those ordinances of abstaining both may be said to perish in the using The meates apparently and the Ordinances themselves in this sense that whereas whilst they were under Gods command they were profitable to the observers now being outdated they perish with the using without any spirituall advantage 3. There is little or nothing in the text to import that they were imposed and taught by the False Treachers as Divine obliging precepts though if so that had beene an abuse of them but rather that they
2. The Worship of the Law was for the most part Ceremoniall in externall pompe and services But the Worship of the Gospel is lesse ceremonious and gaudie and more spirituall Joh. 4. in spirit and truth opposed to those ceremoniall typicall shadowes and figures of the Legall worship The Gospel Worship is for the most part morall praying preaching hearing c. without any thing like to that ceremoniall worship except the observation of the Lords day and the two Sacraments designed and instituted by Christ himself or by his Commission But if the Church have a power to institute ceremoniall Worship she may bring us back to a Legall worship equall with the Jewes as the Church of Rome hath done 2. If the Church have any such power to institute Ceremonies they must be either Non-significant ones but those Protestants disclaim as idle fooleries or significant and then either by nature or Institution Those of nature need no Institution If Institution be pleaded it must be either Divine but the Church hath nothing to do with them they are instituted to her hands Or Humane but that 's expreslly against the second Commandement as hath been said elsewhere God onely can prescribe his own worship Hence it was that those Traditions of worship introduced by the false teachers are coudemned because they were the Doctrines and commandements of men Col. 2.22 which when our Divines urge against such kind of ceremoniall worship in the Church of Rome as Humane Institutions they have no way to avoid it Vide Estium Corne l. A lapide in locum but to say Ceremonies instituted by an humane spirit as ours are are there condemned but theirs are instituted by the holy Ghost joyning with their Pastors in the Regiment of the Church as the Rhemists speak on Math. 15.9 and others more And therefore Papists may better plead their binding power than ours can do I shall adde to this That to institute significant ceremonies as a part of Worship is a superstjtious excesse and so Wil-worship which I prove from the Doctors own Concessions To put more virtue and efficacie into things Of Superstition sect 45. then either naturally or by the Rule of Gods Word is in them is a nimiety so Superstition but for men to institute significant ceremonies for edification to teach and instruct c. is to put more virtue and efficacy in them then naturally or by the Rule of the Word that is Divine Institution God put in them ergo The Major is the Doctors own the Minor is evident They have it not by Nature nor by divine Institution then they needed not humane Institution ergo it is superstitious and consequently the Church hath no such power 3. Grant her but such power and there will be no end of Ceremonies no man can tell where she will stay Of Superstit sect 38. unlesse some bounds be prescribed in Scripture The Doctors qualifications That they be few and wholsome have no ground to rest on For who shall judge of the number or unwholsomnes without a Rule Not any private man that 's denyed and very reasonably Not a particular Church the Universall may judge otherwise Not the Universall Church of one Age for the next Generation may be wiser and thinke them too few or too many not wholsom or unwholsom and so may either multiply or annul them See more of this in the Discourse of Superstition Sect. 32.33 Upon this ground grow all those more then Jewish ceremonies of the Romish Church That of the first 2. The Doctor takes for granted also that the Church hath power to institute Holy daies such as Christmas and to make them equall with the Lords day For of this he is speaking while he gives the Church this unquestionable power but he cannot but know this is denyed by many Divines 3. He also takes as yeelded That there is some ancient Institution of this Church for his Christmas from our first conversion which must be the ground for it to stand on and a competent Authoritie for the continuance of such a practise in this Kingdome but this he hath not proved 4. Once more he takes as granted That such ceremonies or Festivals established by a Church That were to restrain our liberty and to exchange one burthen for another So the Dr. of Superstition sect 56. may not without great temerity be changed or abolished by any What not by the Universall Church not by the succeeding Church That were to make the Laws of a particular Church like those of the Medes and Persians unchangeable and equall with the Laws of God Or else to cut short the succeeding Church from the same priviledge of the former and so in time the Church may lose all power to institute New ceremonies or else ceremonies may be multiplyed to the end of the world And so much of the first the Authority of the Church to institute Ceremonies A word of the next Secondly we must enquire whether if the Church have any power to ordain any Ceremonies this of Christmas be such as she may ordain We have said and say again to institute Holy daies and to make them parts of Geds worship is a priviledge of God alone If now the Doctor shall say The Church institutes this Festival onely as a circumstance or Adjunct of Worship commanded it will bee little to his purpose and makes it no more holy than any other day when the same worship is performed But it s evident that in the Church of Rome this and other Festivals are not counted meer Ceremonies in that sense but as parts of Divine Worship and so observed with greater solemnities and more Ceremonies than the Lords day it self which is both superstitious and sacrilegious And thus it hath been with some yea many of our Prelatical and Cathedral men esteemed and observed not onely as equally holy with the Lords day but with more solemn services with more abstinencie from labour and recreations as we shall hear our Doctor confesse anon We now consider what he sayes to prove the disusing of these Feasts blameable § 10. These are part of that establishment which the Reformation in this Kingdom hath enacted for us by act of Parliament To this we say 1. The Reformation formerly made in this Kingdome we have good cause to blesse God for but we know it was not so full and perfect as the Reformers themselves could have wished by reason of the times new come out of the darknesse of Popery and the tenaciousnesse of old customs received by tradition of their Fathers 2. This seems to grant that the Reformation and so the establishment of these Festivals in this Nation was made by the State and not by the Church which now is pleaded for § 11. Secondly This other Feasts of Christ are in the Reformed especially the Lutheran Churches stil retained and where they are taken away in some Churches by some sober members wished for We answer to
which is due to such and I am not blameworthy If hee meane that his resolution and vow makes his voluntary oblation more accepted he addes to his Superstition to second Will-worship with a vow and so profanes his vow as well as the worship of God If he meane that his vow is a further degree of worship what will hee answer to the Papists who make vowes of single life and povertie c. to be a speciall worship of God which he rejects If he say their Vowes are of things unlawfull but mine of things lawfull I grant this difference but then say that in making those vowes or things vowed to be parts of the worship of God they both agree and both are Superstitious § Sect. 53. 41. It is not then the straining of these any degree above their ranke as elevating an ecclesiasticall constitution into a Divine precept c. That onely makes him faulty and that perhaps saies he capable of the title of Superstition For if either the Church or he place divine worship acceptance more acceptance because not commanded or more perfection c. in such performances it is and will be Superstition still what ever they think Besides in devised worship it is not enough to free from guilt of Superstition to say or think I account this or that holy onely by the Authority of the Church and not of Christ For whosoever is the Author of such Holinesse he places more in it than God allowes and so must needs be Superstitious § 42. Obj. Papists and other Superstitious persons have don so and so the thing is Superstitious and must be forborn Sol. 1. Sect. 54. The ill use of a thing will not corrupt a thing commanded or an innocent thing True but we suppose your voluntary oblation not to be a thing commanded but to be a thing forbidden as all Willworship is and therefore to be forborn 2. He saies there is nothing to oblige me to abstain from that which they have Superstitiously used unlesse danger of being thought Superstitious as they or making others be so which is not Superstition but scandall To be thought Superstitious when I may avoid it is a wrong to my credit to cause others to be so is a wrong to their Soules But these are not consequent of that we speake of that is of Will-worship which is one of the worst kinds of Superstition tendering that to God as worship which he commanded not § 43. And now the Doctor may be pleased to review and if he will recall his bitter false uncharitable conclusion Sect. 57 58. unbeseeming both his piety and gravity For now it will appear and shall doe more hereafter that the charge of Superstition upon some men is no Mormo nor yet unjust but what is avowed by himself and party to be their opinion and practice and what is proved to be really Superstitious according to the true Notion of the word Superstition amongst Reformed Orthodox Divines which if it be not sufficiently yet manifested shall more fully be made good in the following Exercitation of Willworship EXERCITATION THE SECOND OF WILL-WORSHIP WITH DOCTOR HAMOND BY D. C. Math. 15.8 9. This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth and honoreth me with their lips but their heart is far from me But in vain do they worship me teaching for Doctrines the commandments of men August de consens Evang. lib. 1. c 18. De um sic colere oportet quomodo ipse se colendum praecepit London Printed for John Wright at the signe of the Kings Head in the Old Bayley OF WILL-WORSHIP Section 1. HAD the Reverend and learned Doctor as it became him distinguished the words either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek or Will-worship in English before he began his Defence of them wee should better have been able to judge of his Discourse about them For the words in both languages may be taken in a double sense 1. For Voluntary Spontaneous or willing worship that is willingnesse and freenesse in worship commanded by God and then they were too blame that put an ill notion upon them Or 2. For worship devised by the wit and appointed by the will of man as contradistinguished to the wisdome and will of God and then it was not so much the ill-Fortune as he calls it as the just punishment of them to passe under an ill notion and to be taken for somewhat reproveable as well in a Christian as in an Heathen For the summe and scope of the second Commandement August de consens Evang. l. 1. c. 18. in the Affirmative part being this God must be worshiped with his owne prescribed worship and in the Negative part to forbid all devised worship of God This is acknowledged by the Doctor God is to be worshipt in a manner peculiar to him appointed by him Apend on 2d. Commandement by the wit or will of man The very name of will of man put to worship of God as opposed to the will of God the onely Rule of worship is as a brand in the forehead of it to characterize it as condemnable in all § 2. How oft or seldome the Greek word is used in other Authors or the Translators of the old Testament wee shall not trouble our selves to enquire when the thing signified by it in the second sense above in which sense the Reverend Doctor doth and must take it or he hath no Adversarie that is devised and imposed worship by the will of man is so much decryed and declaimed against in Scripture as an high Indignity and affront to the Divine Majesty This is something little to the credit of it That the simple word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are but twice a peâ—ce used in the booke of wisdom and alwaies in an ill notion 2. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it self being but once used in the New Testament it is by the judgement of most Interpreters Protestant and Popish taken in an ill notion as shall appeare hereafter § 3. What the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place Col. 2.23 signifieth may indeed be gathered from the Contents But the Reverend Doctor seemes too short in laying of it out The Apostles discourse in that place is saies he of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doctrines of men teaching some things to be forbidden by God that he forbiddeth not This is in part true some false teachers might impose some Doctrines upon their brethren as Gods Commands when they were not as being now outdated by Christ but the scop of the Apostle is Bez. in locus to dispute in this Chapter against the corruptions that were creeping in in their Christian worship which was the use and end of those Doctrines and to stablish the Colossians against them Which that it may appear let us review the context from the 4. verse downwards Thus he begins This I say that no man should beguile you with enticing words
Revenge 2 Cor. 11.7 In praepostera in solita quadam obstinenti◠afflicticne corporis ibid. Will deserve to be numbred among the effects of godly sorrow But to this we say again there may be such a punishing not sparing or mortifying of the body and selfdenyall which hath a shew of wisdom or piety but is not onely a counterfeit but an impious mistaken mortification or selfdenyall viz. when this punishing of the body is made a part of the worship of God What thinks the Doctor of the Baalites launcing and cutting themselves What of all the Romish ridiculous pennances pilgrimages fastings c. Does he not justifie them in all their Wilworships and that from this text have they not a great shew of Wisdom Piety Devotion of selfdenyall and mortyfication of the body are these acceptable to Christ Are their selfpunishments worthy to be numbred with that Revenge or accounted among the effects of godly sorrow If he say not I ask what is it that makes them impious mistaken mortification c. Hee cannot say because they held those forth as Commands of God for that they deny then it must be because they make them worships of God Voluntary worship yet that the Doctor endeavours to justifie by this text I shut up this thus These two virtues as hee calls them are there so far from justifying Willworship to which they are associated that they fare the worse for it and are made unchristian and impious by its company For though Humility and selfdenyall in the commanded worship of God be excellent virtues yet when they precede or accompany the constitution of false that is devised Willworship nothing is more impious and abhominable to God § 12. The second reason of his good sense is this Because these Doctrines are here said in respect of the VVillworship to have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 somewhat of wisdom or piety in them which somevvhat if reall then it is paralel to that of 1 Tim. 4.8 bodily exercise is a little profitable still or profitable for a little Before I adde the rest I say to this 1. This somewhat reall matter of wisdome in willworship in the judgement of most Interpreters is nothing but a meere shew and appearance and indeed reall folly and impiety as was manifested on Sect. 7. And for the parallel place the gloss corrupts the text when he thus expounds it Bodily exercise profiteth a little or for a little For the Apostle opposing bodily exercise to Godlinesse which is profitable to all things he means that such bodily exercise abstinence from marriage and meats made a service or worship of God is profitable for nothing or rather by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is hurtfull and abhominable and so is the VVillvvorship in this place The Doctor seemes to place the illness of those bodily exercises in this when they are taught as necessary to the defaming of marriage and meats he means I suppose necessary as commanded by God But say I if they taught them as they did some of them onely as Commands of men not necessary no defaming marriage c. but as an acceptable worship of God would the Doctor say they were not hurtfull and abhominable but profitable a little I think not or if he doe he justifies some Papists who make them a speciall worship of God not necessary c. But we said afore the words here signifie onely a shew of wisdome or piety Then saies hee the argument will be still of validity For can any thing be said to have so much as a shew of Wisdom in respect of VVillworship in it if that Wil-worship passe confessedly either for foolish or impious Let him aske all Interpreters who render the words a shew of VVisdome in Superstition or affected Religion how this can be But I cannot but wonder at the Doctors question For cannot a thing have a shew of wisdome or piety which is confessedly foolish or impious and if so may it not be so in respect of the VVillworship in it The Baalites launcing and cuttiug themselves in their devotions had it not to them at least a shew of piety and yet that worship was confessedly impious say the like of the Papists whipping themselves and other ridiculous and heathenish pennances have they not to them and others of their superstition a great shew of wisdome and piety and yet to us are confessedly foolish and impious Cannot doth not the doctrine of False teachers hold out a shew of wisdome and piety in their worship and yet to all orthodox known to be foolish and impious Does not on the one side the Wisdome of God in the Gospell hold out a shew of foolishnesse to naturall wise men and yet is the wisdome and power of God to salvation on the other does not is not the wisdom and piety of Hypocrites and Idolaters folly and impiety to God But saies the Dr. Can any thing be represented to me as having so much as a shew of piety in respect of rage or lust discernible in it This comparison is ill laid For rage and lust are for kind confessedly wicked things But worship may be true or false and so as true worship may have a shew of folly to natural men so may false and the refore impious worship have a shew of wisdome and piety in it to the same men And the one though it have a shew of folly yet may have none in it but is the very wisdome of God So the other though it have a shew of wisdome or piety in it yet hath none but is both folly and impiety Let me put it a little more home to him May there not be zeale which may be nothing but rage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Saint James which may have a shew of true zeale and yet be nothing but rage and madnesse must I needs suppose somewhat really of wisdom or piety in that passion or else it cannot have so much as a shew of wisdome or piety To conclude may not the Divell himselfe transferre himself into and so have a shew of an Angell of light Vid. Append and must I suppose necessarily that there is somewhat really of light or piety in him or else cannot hee have so much as a shew of them To conclude this argument let the Doctor note it once for all that the words are not Which things have a shew of wisdom and of Willworship and of Humility and of not sparing the body For then as wisdome was good and taken in a good sense so might the rest be taken and the fault be that they had onely an appearance not the truth or power but the words are They have a shew of wisdome in Willworship and in Humility c. And if they were faulty because they had onely a shew of wisdome they wil bee more faulty that they had but a shew of piety or worship or Humility So that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. doe no more
this The Churches that retain these Feasts especially the Lutherans are not reputed the best Reformed Churches nor by the Doctor himself I beleeve thought fit to be compared with England some other Churches in Doctrine and Worship and so no fit presidents for our Reformation What private persons wish or say is not much to be regardded unlesse their reasons bee constringent However we are not alone nor the first in this dis-usage of this Festivall Some Protestant Reformed Churches are with us and afore us As for the Sermons given to Christmas day by some that now disuse it wherin The whole body of their publick devotions is falsely said now to consist their prayers being as good and as large as the Liturgies it will afford him no more succour than this That the Authority then in being commanding Vacation from work they onely took the opportunity to preach to prevent disorders in their people which attend such Festivities And the Authority now in force prohibiting they doe forbear to preach § 12.3 The laying down or disusing the observation of this Festivity is not an act of Division or separation from either the particular Church of England or from the Universall Church in all ages especially that of the first and purest times Not the latter for certain for we have proved afore the first and purest ages of the Church did not observe it Not the former unlesse he will yeeld that the Reformation of the Church of England in former times was a Division or separation from the Church of Rome or the Reformation in Luthers time was a division and separation from the Catholick Church as Papists say it was § 13.4 If Superstition and profaness may be ground sufficient to lay aside a Custome the complexion of the times have long since invited to the laying aside the usage of this Feast His pretences to the contrary are insufficient 1. The omission of Christmas sermons and services tends not to raze out of the minds of the ignorant sort the slender knowledge they have of the birth of Christ and consequent mysteries of Religion For the Gospell being read and preached on all the year long they cannot but often hear of the Birth Life Death Buriall and resurrection of Christ The Knowledge which the ignorant people learned by some mens Christmas Sermons Act 25 was slender indeed nothing but a Superficiall as he Notionall carnall knowledge of one Jesus as that Roman Deputie spake that was borne at that time to give men liberty to Feast be merry 2. This cannot as he charges it gratifie their worldly affections and assist Atheism c. but rather to keep it as usually they did in all Festivall delights like the Revells of Bacchus did both mote gratifie their Worldly lusts and tended to Atheism and profanesse 3. The Casuists whose great reason hee seemes to applaud affirming that the necessaries of beleefe for the vulgar sort are no more than the great Holy dayes of the year spake with as much that is as little reason as their fellowes the Jesuits who say and affirm that Images are the best laymens-books instead of the Scriptures 4. The ejecting of these Holydaies out of the Church will not any with dispatch the opinion of any necessity of beleeving the Articles of faith the Creed being still to be retained in and with the Catechisme for the Ministers preaching constantly of those Truths may helpe not onely in some degree as he but very much and more than the great Holydaies of themselves can doe And why not abundantly sufficient as it was in the first planting of Churches before these Festivalls were invented We have had enough experience that in those places Cathedrall Cities where those Festivalls have been most punctually and solemnly observed taking in there Chrystmas Sermons too there have been found lesse saving knowledge of Christ more Superstition and more Prophanesse than in any Country Villages where the Gospell hath been sinceerely preached § 14. The Impatience of sound Doctrine and readinesse to embrace what ever is novel is not to be found in those of dee per sound knowledge but in the ungrounded professors of former times made formal Christians by external Ceremonies outward Pomp of service But those that endeavoured to Reforme the abuses of Superstition and prophanesse are the men onely or chiefly that propugne and maintain sound Doctrine whereas those that were the greatest favourers of those Festvities some of them either are fallen into the propagating of error Arminianism c. or at least doe little appeare to maintain the truth As for Hospitality and charity at those times its observable in many strong pleaders for Christmas that they are willing enough to abate the charge of the Feast both then and all the year after yet no body hinders them from being Hospitable and Charitable § 15.5 What ever specious design was in the first institutors of this piece of Service to Jesus Christ as after it is called it matters not much Gideons design in making a Golden Ephod was very fair to leave a Monument of his Victory as a pious publik acknowledgement of his thankfullnesse yet it proved a snare to him and his house to all Israel Many of the Superstitions of the now Church of Rome had no doubt a pious design and a shew of wisdome but the issue hath been very mischeivous Even so it hath happened to this Institution now in hand § 16. There may indeed a threefold guilt and danger be charged upon the Institution and continuance of this observance 1. Of Will-worship because it is not commanded in scriptures 2. of Superstition in observing dates 3. Of Riot frequent in such Festivalls The two former he saies he hath spoken to else where viz. both in his Treatises of Will-worship and Superstition and also in his practicall Catechisme In the two former though something be said in generall or in thesi yet nothing that I observe in speciall or in hypothesi of this Festivall Indeed in his practicall Catechisme hee hath undertaken the vindication of it from all these three charges but more largely the two first there aad here more of the last that of Riot we shall consider what he saies in order First to free the Festivall from the charge of Willworship he proceeds two waies 1. In respect of those who retain the usage of it they observe it in obedience to the Lawes of the Church and so it proceeds from obedience to Superiours a duty of the 5 th Commandement This argument should not have had the first place but the second in a just method The Doctor should first have proved that they that instituted the Festivall had a lawfull power to do it before he proved them that observe the usage to be innocent For may not Papists plead the same argument for observation of not onely their Holydaies but of their invocation of Saints adoration of Images and the Masse it selfe They do it in obedience to
himself are guilty of an affected departure from the Universall Church If the Church of England at her first Reformation saw cause and had Power to throw away some may not the same Church of England having the same power upon just the same or like reasons cast off the rest If he say Hee speaks it of the Universall Church of all Ages and especially of the first age wee shalll joyne issue with him therein and and say If he can prove which I am confident he cannot that in rejecting or not observing these Festivalls wee have departed from the Universall Church in all ages wee shall be content to let his censure fall upon us till then we are safe And for a closure of the whole matter we shall take into consideration his Rule prescribed in his first Quaerie abour Resolving controversies and be judged by it It is this Quaere 1. Sect. 35 What ever hath the concordant attestation of the Christian Church of the first ages the Scripture remaining obscure or silent in the matter that it was the Doctrine or practise Apostolicall there remains not to any that now lives any imaginable ground of sober or prudent doubting or questioning the truth of it This resolution and Case the Doctor beginns with and intends it as a Rule applicable to all the following cases against Socinians and other Hereticks and Schismaticks Sect. 40. Hee means we thank him those that reject this Festivall as Sect. 12. and 45. of this Quaerie appears But is this Rule universally true Are there no cautions nor exceptions yes three at least 1. It must be in cases where the Scripture is either obscure or silent in the matter 2. That it be not extended any further than to the primitive Antients 3. And again to an accordance of those Testimonies without any considerable opposition that this or that was delivered from the Apostles We shall by his leave apply this rule to the case in hand and dare venture to be judged by it First considering the Rule and then the cautions And first for the Rule it selfe we desire to know again what he means by the Church of the first ages If he take it inclusively to take in the Churches of the Apostolicall time while they were yet alive wee should not stick to grant his rule to be good What ever doctrine or practise hath the concordant attestation of that Church it was Apostolicall The Negative whereof being a surer Rule to jvdge by What ever doctrine or practise wants such concordant universall uniform Attestation is not Apostolical For they being all guided by on Spirit would all agree uniformly in the same Doctrine or practice But there are not many things so attested by the Church of that age On the other side if he meane it exclusively of that age and to include onely the after ages it will prove a Crooked Rule Many Doctrines and practises being taken up which were not Apostolicall but meer Inventions of men which like a Gangreen soon overspead the face of the Church And by the different Timing and observation of them proved by the best Divines not to be Apostolicall Secondly for the concordant attestation of the primitive Antients of the second or third Age without considerable opposition which is one of the Cautions that this was delivered from the Apostles I shall put in a just exception in the words of the learned and honoured Lord Falkland in his discourse Of the infallibility of the Church of Rome who plead the universall Tradition of the Church for their Religion as the Doctor does for his Christmas Thus he writes If the Relation of one Pappias could cozen so farre all the prime Doctors of the Church Christian into a beliefe of the celebration of a thousand years after the Resurrection so as that not one of those two first ages oppose it marke that till Dionysius Alexandrinus who lived at least 250. yeares after Christ nay if those first men did not onely believe it as probable but Justin Martyr saith he holds it and so do all that are in all parts Orthodox Christians Irenaeus sets it down directly for a Tradition and relates the very words that Christ used when he taught this which is plainer than any other Tradition is proved or said to be out of Antiquity by them of Rome If I say these could be so deceived why might not other of the Antients as well be deceived in other points And then what certainty shall the learned have when after much labour they thinke they can make it appear that the Antients thought any thing a Tradition that indeed it was so c. The Doctors wisdome can easily apply this to the case in hand And I perceive he was aware of such an objection and therefore labours to prevent it by saying That Justin Martyr Quaer 1. sect 38. the prime assertor of it that 's a mistake for he and Irenaeus also had it from Pappias who was their Senior confesses other Christians of pure and pious intentions to he otherwise minded But for that let him answer his friend the Lord Falkland Lo. Falk reply p. 73. who saies That Justin Martyr saies that in his time all all Orthodox Christians held it and joynes the opposers with them who denyed the resurrection and esteems them among the Christians like the Saduces among the Jewes and again saies It found no resistance in above two Ages by any one known and esteemed person And what now is become of the Doctors Rule Thirdly the Rule applyed to the case in hand will prove more then the Doctor intended a light to discover his Christmas far from an universall Apostolicall usage For. 1. The Rule must hold onely in things wherein the Scripture is obscure or silent But for Institution of Feasts particularly this of Christmas the Scripture is neither obscure nor silent For the Scripture is cleare and speaks aloud against it both in the Law the fourth Commandement which requires peremptorily but one of seaven for God allowing six for mens occasions and also in the Gospell which clearly speaks against observation of daies except the Lords day the the Christian Sabbath whither Jewish Heathenish or Christian Festivalls of old were part of the Ceremoniall yoke upon the Jewes and therefore to give the Church a power to institute Holydaies is to reduce the yoke again 2. They have not the concordant Testimonie of the Primitive Antients neither of the Apostles themselves nor of those that lived in the same age with them as of Ignatius nor in the second Centurie of Pappias Justin Martyr Irenaeus c. which may the better be believed because the Doctor brings not one instance of any of those so much as mentioning this Festivall except out of the Constitutions of the Apostles falsely so called which Isodorus by Gratians report of him Dist 16. saies Where known to be corrupted by Hereticks under the name of the Apostles This Chemnitius further proves because the