SOME TREASURE Fetched out of RUBBISH OR Three short but seasonable Treatises found in an heap of scattered Papers which Providence hath reserved for their Service who desire to be instructed from the Word of God concerning the Imposition and Use of Significant Ceremonies in the Worship of God viz. I. A Discourse upon 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in Order Tending to search out the Truth in this Question viz. Whether it be lawful for Church-Governours to command indifferent decent things in the Administration of God's Worship II. An Enquiry Whether the Church may not in the Celebration of the Sacrament use other Rites significative than those expressed in the Scripture or add to them of her own Authority III. Three Arguments Syllogistically propounded and prosecuted against the Surplice The Cross in Baptism And Kneeling in the Act of receiving the Lord's Supper Every Word of God is pure Add not thou unto his Word lest he reprove thee and thou be found a Liar Prov. 30.5 6. Prove all things hold fast that which is good Abstain from all appearance of evill 1 Thes 5.21 22. Let every man be fully perswaded in his own mind For whatsoever is not of Faith is sin Rom. 14.5 23. LONDON Printed in the Year 1660. To the Reader THese ensuing Treatises were found laid by the Walls and covered with dust in the study of an old Non-Conformist there being diverse Copies of each under several unknown hands And as Armour Treasure and other things usefull hidden in the time of our late Wars have since been brought forth for profitable Imployment The like is hoped of these Papers which have so long been kept in darkness if seriously perused by men of sober minds The fileings of Gold are precious and the Charge of Christ is considerable Joh. 6.12 Gather up the Fragments that are left that nothing be lost Which Speech of his may both warrant and encourage the collecting publishing of the precious divine Truths penned by Gods faithful Embassadours for the edification of his Church Mr. John Cotton that faithful Servant of Christ famous in both Englands was the known Author of the first Discourse and as it s verily believed of the second also Mr. Robert Nichols studiously composed the third who was a man though less known yet deservedly famous for his great Abilities and profitable Ministry in Cheshire for many years where his memory is still very precious When Reverend Dr. Morton was Bishop of Chester hâ— required in writing of those Ministers in his Diocess who did not conform to the Ceremonies the Reasons of this their refusal Thereupon these three Arguments were by Mr. Nichols presented unto him attested by his own hand and afterwards defended in dispute with that learned Bishop before many Witnesses The Bishop being hereby convinced of the good mans Ability and Ingenuity was his friend to his dying day The publishing of these Papers is for the preventing of the imposition and practice of sapless superstitions Ceremonies which good end now designed may hopefully be effected if the Lord will give men herein concerned to study these Controversies with unbyassed hearts It is notorious that the pressing of these Ceremonies in former time occasioned woful Divisions in the Church of Christ with much affliction unto men famous both for their parts and piety in their Generations and men of truly tender Consciences and unblamable Conversation And it is much to be questioned whether ever any reall spirituall advantage come to Christian Soul by the pressing or by the observing of them If the Lord would grant that Issue unto this Publication which is sincerely intended and heartily prayed for many thanks would be given unto his Majesty through Jesus Christ with comfort unto them that love Truth and Peace A DISCOURSE UPON 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in Order Tending to search out the Truth in this QUESTION viz. Whether it be lawful for Church Governors to command indifferent decent things in the Administration of God's Worship ALL which that place holdeth forth touching this Point may be summed up for ought I can discern in these particulars 1. That the whole Church and every Member thereof are to perform all the Duties of God's Worship in a decent and orderly manner 2. What the Church and Members thereof are to do in this kind that the Church-Governours may and ought to see it to be done 3. It being the duty of Church-Governours to see that all things be done decently and orderly in the Congregation It is therefore their part in eminent measure to be able to discern and judge what is decent and undecent orderly or disorderly When I say it is their part I mean it is their duty their Place and Authority requireth it Not that they alwayes have a Power or Spirit of discerning to judge aright in this case For it seemeth the High-Priests and Prophets yea and David himself all of them thought it decent to bring back the Ark of God upon a new Cart which afterwards David himself saw and confessed it was not done after due order 1 Chron. 15.13 From whence it appeareth since they also are subject to errours in this kind that it will not be safe for them to judge and declare the decency of things by no better Rule than their own Will and Pleasure but by such Rules as the Holy Ghost directs us unto in this case which are Scripture Nature Civil Custom yea and I willingly admit the lawful Custom of the Church or Congregation in which a man liveth for to judge of decency by all these Rules we have Warrant in Scripture 1 Cor. 11.14 16. 14.33 And indeed they who are to approve themselves in all their proceedings as Paul did and all Church-Ministers ought to do to every Man's Conscience in the sight of God It is not for them to give the ground of their proceedings only from their own Will and Pleasure but from such Rules as every good Conscience may see approvable 4. This place in hand holdeth forth also this further Truth That what things the Church seeth by the former Rules to be indifferent and decent or which Church-Governours shall declare so to be those things may lawfully be done For the further clearing hereof and the better discerning of the Power of Church-Governours in these matters It may be observed that of decent things lawful to be done in God's Church some things are 1. Indifferent and decent As to preach in a Gown or Cloak whereof the one is no more necessary or expedient than the other 2. Expedient and decent As to abide in single life or to enter into Marriage of which though Marriage in time of Persecution be indifferent yet single life is much more expedient to prevent trouble in the Flesh 3. Necessary and decent either alwayes as a Woman to keep silence in the Church or at least Hic nunc so as the neglect thereof would be uncomely to the
so to distinguish unless it can be shewd which yet hath not been done that the distinction hath footing in the Word of God The Papists and Lutherans do in this manner plead for the Use of Images in their Churches Images are Lay-men's Books by them they are put in mind of the Death and Passion of Christ they may see more at once represented by them than they can read in many hours What Answer do our Divines return unto them but this That the Word and Sacraments were appointed of Christ to teach Conc. Seno sense Harm Conf. Helver cap. 4. fol. Synt. Tom. 2. l. 6 7. 19. in secundo praec Par. in Gen. 28.18 De secundo praec tit de Imag. c. 15. resp ad Arg. 9. 10. Faith cometh by hearing not by seeing or gazing Jew art ador div 10. Mart. in 1 Reg. 7. Gualter in Heb. 2.18 and that to add to them is presumptuous against the Lord inâ—urious unto his Ordinances that teaching to the Eye is sufficiently performed by the Sacraments and that the Lord for Instruction of his People commanded his Ministers to preach not to paint Faith saith Zanchius is to be promoted but by what means such as God hath ordained viz. The Word and the Sacraments God would have us to be taught divine things and all men as well vulgar as others to know things belonging to their Salvation But whence or of what Instructors Of those that he hath given to be Teachers unto us not of those that do please our selves He hath given unto us the Book of the Creatures whence we may know many things of God He hath given us the Book of the Scripture which he would have continually to be read and to be explained in the Church What canst thou desire more He hath given Sacraments Glasses of divine mysteries He hath instituted us a Ministry and â—â—arged us to exercise our selves daily in the Law of God Ought not these Books and Teachers to be sufficient for us Now a significant Ceremony is an Image or a Representation to teach by striking the sense and what is said against Images must necessarily hold against them also so that either we must take part with the Lutherans and Papists against the Worthies of our Church or acknowledge the former distinction to be vain and of none effect Nay let this distinction be of any weight and the Papists must be acquitted in their Oyl Cream Salt Spittle Crosses Lights Tabers and the rest of their rotten Customs wherewith they have besmeared and defiled the Ordinances of God for none of these be held by them to be of absolute necessity A second Answer there is given to this Argument of no more strength than the former viz. That to devise Signs of spirituall things is unwarrantable but not to ordain Ceremonies that shadow forth some moral duty which Man oweth to God But this is barely spoken not proved by any passage of holy Writt and may as easily be cast off as it is brought forth The Scripture doth not teach it lawful for Man to devise mystical Signs appropriated to the solemn Worship of God to represent moral duties when it forbiddeth by any devised Sign of that Nature to shadow forth spiritual duties and what we learn not thence in matters of this kind we dare not receive When the Lord was pleased to instruct his Church by Types and Figures he himself appointed not onely those that did prefigure Christ but such also as served by their signification to teach moral duties All mystical Rites the Lord himself precisely prescribed Exod. 25.9.38.39 39.42.43 1 Chro. 28.12.19 2 Chro. 29.25 1 Chro. 24 19. 2 Chro â— 8.14 laying a strict charge upon Moses to make all things according to the pattern shewed him which Rule was religiously observed by all religious and worthy Reformers of Religion afterwards not one adventuring without special direction from the Word of God to add any thing thereto or alter ought therein Again Duties moral and spiritual are parts of God's inward worship and Ceremonies ordained to teach either of them by mystical Representation are parts of his outward Worship and Service and so the matter is one whether the Sign doth shaddow forth a morall or spiritual duty for it is not the particular good thing signified by the Sign but the Institution of it to that end that makes the Worship true or false If it be appointed of God it is true Worship let the signification be moral or spiritual if of men it is false Worship whatsoever it be set a-part to represent or teach in our intention in the solemn Worship of God In defence of Images it is objected that Paulinus Nolanus Bishop commanded the History of the Old and New Testament to be painted in his Church and that to this end that the People might be drawn from surfetting and drunkenness when they met together to banquet in that place being busied in viewing and beholding Images See Jewel's Apol. par 5. cap. 3. div 1.2 Our Divines reply that the Authority of man ought not to seem any thing against the plain and manifest Word of God and Nolanus and his followers did offend the more grievously Martyr part 2. c. 5. S. 23. that they adventured to do that which the former Fathers did alwayes disallow whereby we see what the judgment of Ancient and Modem Divines is touching Images setup in the Church to represent or put in mind of Moral duties And if Images must be abolished significant signs of mens devising by the same reason remain under condemnation for they are Images that is certain figures having relation to the exemplar or certain pictures with relation of representations 3. No Act Ordinance nor Institution contrary to a general Negative Commandment is lawfull unless that Act Ordinance or Institution be in special warranted by the Word of God for the Scripture should not be sufficient to make the man of God that is the Minister or Prophet perfect to every good work if an Act in special might be lawful without particular approbation which is in general condemned as unjust and evill If we find that holy men of God did some particular things 1 Sam. 7.17 1 King 18.32 Dâ—â—â—â— 2.5 6 7 13 14. which were generally forbidden in the Law as Samuel built an Altar at Ramath Elias the Prophet on Mount Caâ—mel when by the Law it was not lawfull to offer any Sacrifice but before the Lord in the place which he should chuse We must know they did this by special direction and extraordinary instinct The Lawyers say Generi per speciem derogatur Sext. de lib. 5. tit de regulis Juris 33. Digest l. 50. tit 17. regul 80. That a particular doth derogate from the general And in these places where a special fact doth not agree with a general Precept there the Scripture is not repugnant unto it self but by the special it is derogated from the general But though it
all men taught by his Word Monumenta autem quibus res divinae representantur sunt sola Sacramenta non picta aut ficta aut sculpta sed administrata et usurpata legitimè In the Book of Homilies Hom. for Whitsontide part 2. Fulk against Rhem. in Luc. 24. Sect. 5. all humane devised signs are condemned in Baptism because no signs should burden the Church save those which the Lord hath left which are not burdensome D. Fulk demandeth of the Rhemists How is the sign of the Crosse a convenient memoriall of Christ's death which is not ordained of Christ nor taught by the Apostles to be such Cont. Bell. de cult Sanct. l. 3. c. 7. Lambertus Danaus is resolure It is blasphemy saith he to think that any outward thing may be made a sign in the Church of any thing that is spiritual unlesse it be expresly ordained in the Word and commanded by God himself to be used to that end Bucer condemneth them that devise any sign for religious use And this the Schoolmen themselves saw and taught It pertaineth only to the signifier to determine what signs must be used to signifie 7. The Scripture is the sole and sufficient Rule of all immediate worship Levit. 10.1 Jer. 7.31 Deut. 12.31 32. Col. 2.23 internal or external moral or ceremonial as it is evident by the whole tenour of Gods Word and the general Confession of all Protestant Divines The Lord never left it to the will and arbitrament of man to worship him as seemed good in his own eyes But in all Ages of the World and states of the Church he still prescribed how he would be served The duty that Adam owed in the state of Innocency must be paid according to the prescription he was taught in what he should shew his obedience what time he should set apart as a solemn day of rest the like may be said of all the worship he was to perform After the Fall Was any worship allowed which was not commanded We read not of any express Commandement that the Fathers had to offer Sacrifice or to observe the difference of clean and unclean beasts But without question they received particular instructions from the Lord touching these things either by the inspiration of his Spirit or some Word or both For the Scripture saith God had respect unto Abel and his sacrifice But sacrifice and burnt-offerings could not please him Gen. 4.4 5. Psal 50.9 10. Heb. 11.7 Heb. 11.6 if they had not been offered in faith and obedience Again By faith Abel offered a greater sacrifice then Cain without which it is impossible to please God But faith presupposeth revelation and obedience a Commandement In other Ages of the Church it is most clear and evident that the Lord shewed to his Church the whole form of worship wherewith for that time he would be served unto which they might not add from which they might not detract the least jot or tittle The Prophets our Saviour Christ the Apostles Levit. 10.1 Jer. 7.31 28.14.47 12.30 29.26 31.20 Exod. 20.5 10.26 12.30 Judg. 10.10 2 Sam. 16.19 2 Reg. 10.18 19 21 22. 17.33 21.28 1 Chr. 28.19 2 Chro. 30.23 Jer. 8.2 Mal. 3.14 15. Rainold incens Apoc. tom 2. p. 244. do sharply reprehend all Rites devised by man for religious use though carrying never so great a shew of wisdom humility and care which they would never have done if will-worship had not been unlawful and displeasing unto God To spend many words in the confimation of this Point is superfluous since it is a truth generally received by all Protestant Divines That Ceremonies are unlawful when they be imposed urged or used with opinion of holiness necessity or worship But to prevent mistaking it will be expedient here to shew what Worship is and what warrant each part thereof must have from God The Hebrew word Habad which signifies to Serve is commonly used for all that service good and bad which is given either to the true God or Idols which two kinds of worship as they agree in one common nature of Worship or Service so do they in their general or common nature though they be opposite in their special nature objects and adjuncts contraries we know must consent in some third as vertue and vice hot and cold black and white the same is to be held of Divine worship true and false For service comprehending under it worship true and false as the parts thereof at least analogical of necessity the common nature of worship must agree to them both else how could the service of Idols or false-worship of the true God be called Worship This hath been wisely observed in other cases not unlike by our learned Writers against the common Adversary Bellarmine would prove That the offering of Incense and sweet Odours is not a Sacrifice in the New Testament because it is not offered by the Priest only nor only to the Lord. Our Divines reply That there are many Sacrifices to which that definition of Sacrifices cannot agree viz. prophane Sacrifices which are offered by them that are no Priests to devils and not to God after a manner devised not prescribed by God and therefore seeing that of Sacrifices some be holy and some prophane in the definition of a sacrifice in general those things only are to be put which are common to both kinds In like manner when there is a true and false worship an holy and prophane service those things only are to be put in the definition of worship which agree to both kinds Divine worship taken in that latitude of sense as to comprehend the service of God true and false for to speak of the worship of false gods is impertinent is an action or work commanded by Divine Authority instituted by man or devised upon our own heads whereby God is worshipped his promises are sealed or obedience to his Will is taught Zanch. de redemp in secundum prec Par. dradiaph pag. 90. All actions that man performeth unto man are not parts of civil worship but every act that man performeth directly or immediately to God is a part of Divine worship and ought meerly to concern his glory For it is impossible to conceive how the creature who is infinite degrees inferiour to the Creator in excellency and altogether unable to return the least good back again to Him for the infinite blessings he hath received from him should perform any act immediately unto him but worship A work commanded is not large enough to comprehend the whole nature of worship but doth distinguish true worship from false as the uprightness of the heart doth sincere worship from hypocritical and counterfeit To say Man is a reasonable creature alwayes enjoying sound health is not the definition of Man but of a sound man because there be many subject to infirmities and diseases who yet be men So to define Worship to be a work commanded of God
is to shew what lawful and holy Worship is Esay 29.13 Matth. 15.9 not what worship in general For many things are worship which God never required That Worship is true which God commandeth that false which man deviseth that sincere that proceedeth from an honest heart a good conscience Psal 78.34 35. and faith unfained that hypocritical which cometh from an halting divided double heart or is performed by the outward man alone But truth and sincerity being speciall adjuncts of worship appointed and commanded of God cannot come within the definition of worship in general And as the means that God hath appointed to seal his promises or teach obedience be acts of divine service So the means that man shall devise or invent of himself for that end and purpose must needs be worship also If God be worshipped when obedience is taught by the preaching of the Gospel or his promises sealed by the use of the Sacraments When the same duty is taught by visible signs or the promise confirmed by new devised seals he is worshipped and honoured for every action whereby God is worshipped is worship and every work whereby obedience is taught is obedience or service From hence it appears that the definition of essential worship to be That which is necessarily required to God's service so as that the contrariety thereof must needs displease him is too short as that which agreeth not to all worship but only to that which is true and ordained of God For we know many Traditions Customs and Ceremonial observations are obtruded upon the Churches as worship the contrary whereof would please and not displease God Were not the precepts of men reprehended by the Prophet Esay the Pharisaical washings taxed by Christ Esay 29.13 Matth. 15.9 Mar. 7.7 Col. 2.23 and other Ceremonial observations condemned by the Apostle Paul as matters of worship though false and erroneous How could there be any will-worship if all worship were necessarily required of God Neither are those Ceremonies only to be reputed essential parts of worship that be urged with opinion of Sanctity Necessity Efficacy whether true or false but those signs also that are devised to be means of spiritual instruction by their notable and mystical signification It being a part and means of his worship to teach his worship To place the worship of God in Faith Hope and Love only and not in external Rites and Ceremonies is contrary to Truth and Reason For then the Ceremonies of the Law the Sacraments of the New Testament must be reputed no parts of Gods essential worship which is most absurd Calv. Inst l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 9.12 The Papists are accused by the Learned of our side to place the Worship of God in their vain Traditions and Observations What worship do they in end only accessary and accidental as some call it No but essentiall and substantial and yet they speak of Rites and Ceremonies which by the Canons and Constitutions of that Synagogue are not mainained to be of absolute necessity to salvation as they plainly profess and our Divines acknowledg Whereby it is not hard to gather what is meant by essential or substantial worship that it stands not only in internal duties but also in external Rite and Ceremonies which are acknowledged to be of no absolute necessity Now the better to conceive what warrant every part of Gods service must have from the Scripture three things are to be distinguished in it The first is the essential worship it self whether concerning mans duty or the means of his Instruction The second the natural Ceremonies or voluntary compositions or gestures of the body as are with moderate deliberation used to shadow forth the hidden motions affections and dispositions of the mind that are begotten by the consideration of Gods excellent Greamess Majesty Goodness Love c. The third is the circumstances and order of performance which is by some called accidental or accessary worship such as concern time place person and manner of performance all which are required in the celebration of Gods worship Thus Divines make a difference and that necessarily betwixt the substance of worship and the things annexed to it as necessary circumstances And as we must distinguish the substantial means of worship from the external testifications of inward devotion by natural Ceremonies so must they be distinguished from bare and naked circumstances of time place and manner of celebrating divine Mysteries for circumstances are meetly accessaries to worship no parts thereof if we speak properly according to the ordinary acceptation of the word 1 King 19.18 Hos 13.2 Ezek. 18. 6. in Classical Authors But the gestures of the body made and purposely framed to shadow forth the hidden affection of the Soul are external acts of adoration and worship The true worshippers of God are distinguished from Idolaters by this that they had not bowed the knee to Baal Kissing bowing to an Image is condemned as a service of the Idol and the whole worship of God is oft-times signified by the terms of kissing Psal 2.12 Esay 45.23 Phil. 2.9 10. Ephes 3.24 Joh. 4.20 21. 1 Reg. 8.54 Ezr 9.5 Deut. 4.19 Psal 95.5 Matth. 17.4 Matth. 2.1 11. bowing kneeling adoring falling down before him In the old Testament the worship of God is noted by this word Carah which signifieth the bending of the knees or hams Kadad which signifieth to bow or nod the head Sagad almost of the same signification Schaphel Schachah and Shacack which signify to bow the whole body and sometimes to fall flat upon the ground In the New Testament Gods Worship is noted by these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to bow the knee and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to worship by kissing and casting down himself at the knees of another What that to adore is to give honour with the gesture of the body aswell as with the mind or words Priscianus and Nonnius derive the word Adoratio of Ador which signifieth fine flower or corn whereof fine Cakes were made which the Romans used in their Sacrifices Valla derive it of oro but yet he saith Adorare nihilominus sine ore sieri not sine flexu genuum ac gestu corporis It implyeth in it three acts first An apprehension of the excellency of that which is adored Secondly An act of the Will desiring to do something to testify our acknowledgment of this greatness and our subjection and inferiority Thirdly An outward act expressing the same The two former are internal the last is outward bringing that to light that was hid in the heart but the Hebrew Greek and Latine words signifying adoration do note an external humiliation and either a prostration of the whole body or of some part viz. the head or the bending of the knee or kissing of the hands to shadow forth and express the internal affection of the heart which is the Soul and life of external worship But if it be
pertinentium Thirdly we find the Name Sacrament given to those Signs pertaining to the Levitical Worship which of all others if in truth that Title may be given unto any might most properly be called Moral by signification of Man's spiritual Duty and Obedience The Shew-Bread Exod. 25.30 39.36 1 Chron. 9.32 23.29 called in Hebrew Bread of faces or of presence because the Loavs or Cakes were to be set before the Face or in the Presence of God continually and the Bread of ordering and disposition because they were disposed in certain order and time In Greek Mat. 12.4 Mar. 2.26 Heb. 9.2 the Bread of Proposition and in a contrary order The proposition of Bread or Cakes Did it not signify the Office of the godly that they should stand continually before God receive his Commandments and sanctify themselves to his Obedience As the Ark signified the presence of God in his Church so his Table with the twelve Cakes signified the Multitude of the faithful presented unto God in his Church continually serving him It may be this placing of the Shew-bread before the Ark might signify that the Lord hath his Church continually in his sight and doth take care thereof But the principal thing taught thereby was the sincerity and purity of them that walk in the Light and present themselves before God What duty soever Man oweth to God it is to be performed by vertue of the Coveuant that he hath made with Man and so the Signs of God's Promise do imply Man's Duty and the Signs of Man's Duty do imply God's Promise though some do signify the one some the other And from this we learn Sacramentasunt vâ—sibilia signa quâ—bus doctrina illa declaratur obsignatur Mart. de Sacr. l. 1. c. 2. q. 8. what is a Sacrament in general viz. A Sign Analogical of God's Will and Pleasure whether teaching what he requires or representing and fealing what he promiseth True Sacraments are Signs and Seals instituted of God to signify his Will and confirm his ' Promises But divine Institution is to be removed from the definition of a Sacrament in general as that which doth distinguish true from false and not explicate the common nature of the thing The distinction that some make of Signs moral signifying the spiritual Obedience which Man oweth unto God and mystical or sacramental representing and confirming the Promises of God is not to be received For Signs teaching to the Eye by representation what the Word bringeth to the Ear are Sacraments signifying the same thing that the Word doth as hath been shewed before But Signs analogical must be distinguished from negative Precepts forbidding the use of this or that in it self indifferent Jewishabstinence from diverse Mears legally unclean to shew that they were separated from other Nations to be a peculiar People unto the Lord cannot properly be called a Sign signifying by resemblance For God in that Law seemeth not so much to respect the Nature of those living Creatures prohibited to be eaten Act. 1.15 16 17 28. Juni Annot. in Lev. 11. but by this external Sign he would have his People to be discerned and separated from all other People And if this figurative commanded Abstinence should be deemed sacramental what errour is therein committed As by such Abstinence the Israelites professed themselvs to be the peculiar People of God separated from all idolatrous Nations round about them so did the Lord by this Commandment signify and assute that he had taken them to Covenant and made choice of them to be his peculiar Treasure The reason whereby this commanded Abstinence is urged doth confirm thus much Lev. 11.44 I am the Lord your God ye shall therefore sanctify your selvs and ye shall be holy for I am holy neither shall ye defile your selves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the Earth For I am the Lord that brought you up out of the Land of Aegypt to be your God These figurative Ordinances then were Signs of the Covenant teaching what duty man owed to God and assuring back again what favour they had with God And when the Apostle speaking of Levitical Service Heb. 8.9 10. which stood onely in Meats and Drinks and diverse washings and carnal Ordinances imposed on them until the time of Reformation Beza in Heb. 9.10 calleth them figures for the time then present doth he not in effect say they were Sacraments The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evill is called a Sacrament or a Sacramental Precept Kâ—cherm Theol lib 2. c 2. Polan Synt. lib. 6. cap. 44. Chaimer panstrat tom 4. lib. 1. cap. 7. Si neque propter se neque ex suanatura certe propter aliud ex Inslitutione by many excellent and worthy Divines as it did signify to Man that he should have experience of good so long as he continued in Obedience and of evil or misery if he did disobey and as it was a Sign whereby he was admonished of his mutability and tried in his Obedience But if forbearance of the Tree of Knowledge was an Act Sacramental much more Abstinence from such Meâ—ts as by the Law were forbidden unto the Israelites Nor shall we need to fear the force of the Jesuite insulting over Protestants by this Objection viz. If Sacraments be onely Signs then the Crucisix is a better Sign to signify the death of Christ than the Sacraments For we acknowledge our Sacraments not bare Signs of God's Promise or significations of Man's Duty but holy Seals of what he promiseth to us and we by stipulation promise back again unto him And this the Jesuite himself doth and cannot but acknowledge howsoever impudently against Conscience he imputes unto us his own device for our Doctrine But we may further tell this Romish Proctor that a Crucifix made to teach by proportion or resemblance that Christ dyed for our sins or that God gave his Son to suffer death for our Redemption is a Sacrament or a sacramental Sign signifying by special Representation though false and erroneous because it is devised by man not ordained by God The greatest Defenders of mystical Signs distinguish them into moral and sacramental which differ say they from the former both as the Sacramental are significant by special Representation and as they are obsignant by ratifying and applying of God's Covenant of Grace unto us And from this we may gather that Spiritual sigus which signify by representation the promise of God as the Crucifix doth are Sacramental else is the distinction it self faulty and the difference which is made betwixt signs Moral and Sacramental And yet we make not Signification the principal part of those special Sacraments of the Old or New Testament which it pleased God to add to his gratious and free Covenant but Spiritual signification is so proper to the Sacraments that whatsoever sign is ordained to signify and represent any such promise it is thereby made a
had not appointed them or they might have invented others of the same kind afterwards and have added to those God appointed but this they might not do It 's true that this would increase the multitude of Ceremonies and multitude of Ceremonies of one sort would make them (f) Dr. Morton protest appeal Lib. 1. Cap. 3. Sect. 3. inconvenient because this carryeth with it change of circumstances whereon conveniency or inconveniency doth depend But if one Ceremony be lawful hundreds of the same kind be lawful also for the definition of one is predicated of all of that sort It cannot be truly said That the Jewish Church had less liberty to devise Ecclesiastical Rites whatsoever some say (g) Dr. Sparks Perswasions to uniformity cap. 3.8 5. pag. 11. Josh 22.10 than the Christian Church hath except the Christian Church could under the Lord's Charter shew this Priviledge to be granted unto her Add further that the speciall Ground that the maintainers of Ceremonies do or can bring in for the now-urged Ceremonies is the fact of the Reubenites building the Altar If this Argument be of any force must they not grant liberty to the Church of the Jews as well as the Church of the new Testament Therefore if men deny the Jews that liberty which the Christian Church may rightfully claim they will prove themselves to stand upon no Ground 4. Such Vestiments cannot be used in Faith without which the use thereof is sinful Faith in this place is a firm assurance of mind and conscience Rom. 14.23 resting on assured Ground that the thing which a man doth is allowed of God to be done by him So that two things are here implyed 1. That the Act to be done Calvin in loc others Vid. Marlo in loc be allowed of God otherwise the conscience that doth it how confident soever it be is erroneous and faulty (h) Covel's ans to Mr. Burges Apol. pag. 9. citing Mooker No man can do evil with a good conscience 2. That the mind of the Doer certainly apprehend a lawfulnesse for the doing of it else the conscience sinneth through doubtfulnesse With this assurance of mind and conscience who can use such Vestiments as are meerly Ecclesiastical Mystical Rites when he cannot find aâ—â— firm Ground out of the Scripture that God alloweth such under the New Testament 5. Whoseover doth not admit the Proposition he openeth a gap unto Oyl Cream Spittle Candles holy Water and other Popish Ceremonies to enter into the Church which our learned Divineâ— reject for this that they are mystical significant Rites devised by Man as is to be seen not by the Judgment of Forraign Divines onely As of the Church of Wittenburg Harm Confess part 2. artic 32. de Corem Ecclesiasticis The Churches of France and the low Countries in their Observations upon the Harmony of Confessions Ibid. Sect. 17. ad Saxâ—n Confess Observ 1. Calvin in Esay 20.2 Mat. 21.25 Beza Epist 8. But also our own Divines Dr. Whitgift Defence of Answer to the Admon Tract 7. cap. 7. divis 8. pag. 291. Mr. Perkins in his Commentary on Gal. 3.23 24 25. who dissallow such signification of Apparrel in Ecclesiastical use as Peter Martyr in his Epistle to Hooper would put upon it Loc. commun pag. 1088. Edit 1613. And further if the Proposition be not true Perkin's Demonstration of Probl. in Title Apurten to Masse Sect. 6. Dr. Morton's protest appeal Lib. 1. Cap. 3. Sect. 5. Pag. 58. Might not a man reason thus for the bringing in of Popish Rites of the same nature and kind Vestiments instituted by man and appropriated to God's Worship and of mystical signification are lawful Therefore Oyl Cream Spittle Candles and other such like Popish Rites are lawful also 6. To conclude worthy Divines have condemned all Ceremonies when they have been parts of and appropriated to Worship As Calvin Institut Lib. 4. Cap. 10. Sect. 8. Perkins Reform Cathel p. 136. And doth not Dr. Abbott call all Priestly Garments whereby they are distinguished from the rest of the Church a spiritual Character of the Beast Antichr Demon. Cap. 11. Sect. 26. And whereas for eight hundred years after Christ there were but eight Vestures used in the whole mysteries of Religion and now among the Papists there be fifteen six Priestly and nine of the Bishops What reason is there to prove them or such of them unlawful which our Law hath rejected if this Proposition be not true The Assumption proved In the proof whereof it is requisite that I insist upon these three Heads 1. That the Surplice in our Church is appropriated to God's solemn Worship as to meet to Ecclesiastial use 2. That it is appointed for signification of spirituâ—â— Duties 3. That this is done by Man without Warrant from the Word of God The first of these 3 Heads is apparant by the Reasons following 1. Albeit young Students in the Universities who by their matriculation did receive their primam tonsuram into the Clergy The Surplice to be appropriated to Ecclesiastical use Queristers in the Cathedrall Churches being antiently reputed of the Clergy and some Clerks in some Parochial and Collegiat Churches have heretofore and still do retein the Surplice Yet we see that the use is still restrained to Worship viz. Prayers reading Scripture administration of Sacraments c. And out of that use it is not to be found neither is there any civil use made of the Surplice As for buriall of the dead it is used by none but by a Minister or one initiate into the Clergy and that with solemn prayers accompanying Who then can say that the use of the Surplice in Burials is a withdrawing of it from Ecclesiastical use 2. I might urge what I observe out of Dr. Whitgift who denying Pope Hadrian to be the Inventer of the Surplice Spark's perswâ—sion to Uniformity cap. 5. pag. 19. Def. Tract 7. cap. 6. Divis 1. would draw the Original thereof from Stephaâ—â—â— Bishop of Rome whose testimony if it be ought worth proven that holy Vestments are not to be touched of any save the Priest Ibid. cap. 5. divis 2. and consequently that they are not of civi use Socrates hominibus Luc. Osiand Epitom Histor Ecclesiast Cent. 3. Lib. 3. Cap. 14. 3. In Popery the Surplice was appropriated to God's solemn Worship without which no Priest might say Service Missal Rom. part 1. Missa in Galli cantu Missa in die Nativitatis Dâ—â—â—â— Neither could Water or Bells or any thing else be hallowed Dr. Humphry his Antidiploma missal Rom. part 3. pag. 96. And if it were not of the essence of the Masse that every Priest that sayth it have a Surplice on yet some Priest cannot say Mass without it Durand rational Lib. 3. Cap. 1. Numb 9. Neither can any Priest make his breaden-god except he have it on Rhâ—â—â— aâ—â—tat in 1 Cor. 11.29 This I omit to urge though I must confess that hough oâ—r Church
hath varied and changed somewhat from out immediate fore-fathers the Papists from whom it cometh to us yet they did not remove it from Ecclesiasticall Places and Services or instituted a civil or ordinary use of the foresaid Vestment Doth not the Stature in the first year of Queen Elizabeth appoint such Ornaments in the Church to be retained as were in the Church of England by Authority of Parliament in the second year of Edward the sixth Cap. 2. untill other Order be taken by the Authority of the Queen c. at the time of the Communion and other administration c. Was Order taken No. We must judge then for what kind of use the Surplice by the Stature of King Edward the sixth was instituted and allowed The words of the Book of Common-Prayer in the second year of his Reign are these Upon the Day and at the time appointed for the Ministration of holy Communion the Priest that shall execute that holy Ministery shall put on him the Vestures appointed for that Administration c. If the use of the Surplice stand by Statute it is for any thing that I know by this which declares it to be retained for meer Ecclesiastical use If it be so as Dr. Sparks saith in his Perswasion to uniformity Cap. 5. pag. 20. 21. That Queen Elizabeth by vertue of the said Statute by the consent of the Arch-Bishop and High Commissioners in the seventh year of her Reign appointed the Surplice to be worn instead of the Albe yet it hindreth not but proves what I say in this Section Can. Eccles 14. 17. But because this I think is confessed I pass to the second Head in the Assumption That the Surplice is significant of spiritual Duties is clear 1. All our Ecclesiasticall Ceremonies are such In the Treatise of Ceremonies prefixed to that Book They are neither dumb nor dark saith the Book of Common-Prayer but apt to stirr up the dull mind of man to a remembrance of his Duty by some notable and special signification Mr. Hooker saith Ceremonies destitute of signification must be vain also he calleth them visible Signs Eccl. Pol. Lib. 5. Sect. 55. Ibid. Lib. 4. Sect. 1. which are undoubtedly most effectuall to open such matter as when men know and remember carefully they must needs be a great deal the better informed Thus much also Dr. Covell doth avouch against the Plea of the Innoc pag. 58. 2. To omit that the Papists say All their Priestly Garments have mysticall signification Bell. de miss lib. 6. cap. 14. And that the Priest must be cloathed in White to signifie innocency and purity Lindan de Câ—lebr miss ob reverentiam Salvatoris totius Coelestis curiae quam Sacraâ—â—into altar consiciende confecto non est dubium interesse Those Learned men who were set awork in the dayes of King Edward the Sixth and since and who therefore were most likely to know the meaning of our Church in imposing have avouched That it is Hook Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 29. and ought to be continued for signification Bucer opera Anglican pag. 682. Pet. Mart. Loc. Comman pag. 1088. Now concerning the third Head The Surplice in that foresaid use and signification is without warrant of the Word of God It may thus be proved 1. The Surplice being a garment of a special nature and use in that it is a meer Ecclesiastical and Mystical Rite ought to have a special Divine Institution as such garments have had in the Church of the Jews for Reason requires that the ground be suitable to the nature of the thing But such a ground it hath not neither can any shew any special Institution 2. There is not so much as any general warrant for it in the Book of God First there is none in the Old Testament The Priestly garments were tyed only to the place of Ceremonies Exod. 28.43 Ezek. 42.14 Mornaeus de Eucharist not used in any of the Synagogues of the Land nor in any of those 460 which are reported to be in Jerusalem Were typical wherein it stands not with the nature of the times of the New Testament to mitigate them Ezek. 42.13 14. 44.15 17 19. 1 Chron. 15. Spark perswas to uniformity cap. 5. pag. 22. Neither were they used in the Peoples sight except once extraordinary by occasion of the presence of the Ark before the People So that if there had been any further use of them viz. for glory and comeliness as one saith Spark Ibid. not considering that in the use also they were typicall yet they cannot possibly warrantize Vestiments in the sight of the People If the Prophets did use ordinarily any apparel whereby they might be known from other men which doth seem doubtfull to some that read 1 Sam. 9.18 1 King 20.41 yet that which they did wear was of common and daily use worn in Town and Field c. 2 King 1.8 Esay 20.2 Zach. 13.14 So that it matters not in this case Whitg def tract 7. cap. 2. pag. 262. though the Prophets were discerned by a peculiar form of Cloke seeing it was not of Ecclesiastical and Mystical signification and withall was extraordinary as their Function was Our Divines condemn the Popish Massing Garments because they are Jewish To seek ground for the Surplice out of the Levitical Law is it not then to overthrow our own grounds Further Matth. 3.4 in the New Testament there is no ground for the Surplice The habit of John Baptist was daily and common not Ecclesiastical and Mystical That Christ or his Apostles did use or institute any Mystical or Ecclesiastical attire none can shew by the holy Scriptures and the relation of other Histories is but humane and fallible not the ground of faith The Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 14.40 requiring all things to be done decently and in order in the Assemblies of the Saints did give commandment for the right and seemly performance of such Ordinances as were before established but laid no ground for the institution of mystical Rites in religious services This speech of the Apostle is a Precept and hath a Divine binding power which not to obey is death How can this concern the institution of the Surplice which is no such matter but reputed indifferent by the Urgers What the Apostle commands is necessary and indispensable by Man But the Surplice and other Rites are arbitrary and may be dispensed with and utterly abolished D. Morton in Protest Appeal lib. 1. cap. 3. Sect. 2. numb 3. pag. 54. The Surplice is confessed to be but an humane tradition Spark Perswas to Uniform cap. 5. pag. 21. Who can prove hence that there is any better ground for the Surplice than for the 15 Priestly Robes used in the Church of Rome Thus doth it appear that the Scripture affordeth not any warrant for the Surplice in our use I know many Testimonies are cited forth of the ancient Writers but their
testimony being but humane proveth not that God doth allow and warrantize the Surplice Yea some of them do not at all concern Ecclesiastical Vestiments Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 33. Such is that testimony that Eustathim was deprived of his Bishoprick for not wearing decent apparel befitting his place Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 20. Such also was that white rayment that Semius the Novat did wear and that under-garment of white Linnen in which Cyprian the Martyr stood apparelled after he had given his Cap or Byrrhus to the Executioner and his upper garment called Dalmatica to the Deacon Vide Concil à Binnio Collect. Conc. Gang. cap. 12. part 385. Such is the garment spoken of by the Council of Gangris as he that considers it may see So that these places are mis-alledged by D. Whitgift Def. tract 7. cap. 4. divis 1. pag. 208. c. And that likewise of Chrysost Homil. 6. ad popul Antioch who sheweth That the dignity of the Ministery standeth not in going up and down the Church in a white garment that is as a gallant white attire being a garment of honour both in the Eâ—â—â— parts Perk. Probl. t t. The Appu ten of the Masse and in the West among the ancient Romans Sigon de Jud. lib. 3. cap. 14. As for that which the Apostle John is said to went called a Miter but ratehr a thin plate as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie either Eusebius doth thereby alluding to Moses's Law Histor Eccles lib. 3. cap. 25. SecunduÌ„ aliam div sionem 31. Conference with Hart cap. 8. divis 4. pag. 516. Exod. 28.36 mean that John entred into the Sanctuary as it were with Prerogative and had the very Mysterie of God revealed to him Rev. 1.1 as Dr. Rainolds doth understand or else if this relation deserve credit seeing Eusebius Pamphilus lived Anno Domini 320 about 200 years after the death of him of whom he writeth and saith John was a Bishop which agrees not with the Apostle's Office and Commission that was universal yet this habit was a common and daily habit as the words of the Author rather import Moreover some Testimonies urged do concern the Jewish Vestiments as that of Jerom in Ezek. 44. The Religion of God hath one habit as Mr. Hooker confesseth Eccles Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 29. Lastly though some testimonies quoted may shew that anciently there were some Linnen garments in Ecclesiastical use as Theodoret lib. 2. cap. 27. speaks of a baptizing robe given by Constantine to Macarius Bishop of Jerusalem Lib. 1. advers Pelagium And Jerome makes mention of Linnen garments used in administration by Bishops Priests and Deacons And the Councel of Carthage Can. 41. where there were 214. Bishops of whom Austine was one decreed Diaconus tempore oblatimis tantum vel lectionis Albâ induatur Yet none of these prove that these were instituted for mystical signification or if they were that there was warrant from the Word of God for so doing Thus the Assumption being confirmed the Conclusion necessarily followeth That the Surplice may not lawfully be used Of the sign of the Crosse in Baptism THat the use of the sign of the Crosse in Baptism is unlawful I prove by this Argument No Rite meerly Ecclesiastical and of mystical signification having no Warrant from the Word of God can be used without sin But the sign of the Crosse in Baptism is a Rite meerly Ecclesiastical and of mystical signification having no warrant from Gods Word Ergo It cannot be used without sin The Proposition of this Argument being in effect the same with the Proposition of the Precedent Argument the Cross and Surplice being Homogenea is confirmed by the Reasons of the foregoing Proposition I will therefore with great brevity confirm this Major First Such Rites as are meerly Ecclesiastical and mystical having no warrant from Gods Word are false worship Otherwise we shall never be able to convince the Papists of Will-worship in their Superstitious Rites Also all actions whereby religious duties are taught in Gods publick service are Worship otherwise how can the preaching of the Word be worship But Rites meerly Ecclesiastical and mystical c. do teach us spiritual and religious duties Are they not Worship then Yet not true for they are not divinely warranted Of necessity therefore they must be false Worship Secondly Such mystical Rites are Sacraments not approved of God Sacraments they be for they are visible signs of an invisible grace and have both the parts of a Sacrament which are set down in the common Catechism authorised by Law But these are not true Sacraments when God the Author of the Covenant doth not institute them Thirdly Such Rites as are meerly Ecclesiastical and Mystical are not discernable to be good by the light of Nature and therefore are to have approbation from Gods Word the rule of Faith otherwise with safety of conscience they cannot be received Fourthly Our Learned Divines say That to bring insignificant Ceremonies into the Church is plain Judaism Dr. Reynolds Conference with Hart cap. 8. divis 4. pag. 521. Willet Synops 2. gen Cont. 24.2 part of the Qu. pag. 110. Edit 1614. The Assumption now remains to be proved and in it three things 1. That the sign of the Crosse is meerly Ecclesiasticall 2. Of Mystical signification 3. Without warrant out of God's Word First There is not the least shew to deny the sign of the Crosse to be meerly Ecclesiastical For other use of the sign of the Crosse than in Baptism we deny Indeed anciently it was ordinary in common use as well as in Ecclesiastical So likewise it is with the Papists but ordinary Crossing morning and evening is condemned by our Divines and the Law requireth urgeth and alloweth only the use of the Crosse in Baptism wherein if it be not of meer Ecclesiastical use what can Ecclefiasticall use be defined to be Secondly Can there be produced any likelihood or shew of truth to deny the sign of the Crosse to be of mystical signification seeing all our Ceremonies are such as was before shewed and the words of the Common-Prayer-Book do teach as much saying We receive this Child into the Congregation c. and do sign him with the sign of the Crosse Can. 30. in token that hereafter c. And the Canon saith That the Child baptized is dedicated to God by the sign of the Crosse These things I suppose do prove the sign of the Cross to be of mystical signification Now it remains that I shew That this mystical Rite is without warrant out of the Word of God This may be proved by these Arguments following Though the Crosse being a Rite of a peculiar nature ought to shew for it self a peculiar and special Institution yet it is so void of that that there is not so much as a general warrant for it in the Book of God As the examination of the places cited by the Papists or Protestants will manifest