c. And euery plant that my Father planteth not shall be rooted out And as Math. 15.15 Thus haue you made the commandements of God of none effect by your Traditions Our Answer The first Text Mar. 7.8 mentioning washing of cups pointeth indeed at a Mystical Ceremony of Humane inuention which is there condemned but how Not because of the signification of a spirituall duety but for the Pharisaicall leauen of corrupt doctrine taught hereby for there was in it two ounces of leauen at the least the first was in attributing a legall purification to such their Washings thinking thereby to be cleansed from bodily pollutions through the touching of the bodies of the dead and such like euen as well as by the washings which God himselfe had appointed to the same end Their second errour was in their imputing of a spirituall vertue and efficacie vnto them of cleansing their soules from sin as is manifest by the reproofe which Christ vsed against those Ceremonies saying That which is without and entreth into man cannot defile a man but that which is within and commeth out of the man that defileth a man Therefore this their washing was not condemned as a meere Ceremonie but for the mixture of a false doctrine teaching an efficacy and vertue of purification which it had not Concerning the second Text the case standeth thus The Pharises by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is second Traditions taught their Disciples a strange peece of Catechisme called Corban to wit The gift that shall be offered by me shall profite thee that is Every voluntary offering that thou shalt giue to the Temple or for the benefite of the Priesthood shall gaine of God a blessing vpon thee albeit thou shouldest neglect thy parents in withdrawing that Gift from their reliefe in their great necessity For confutation of this errour Christ opposeth the commandement saying Moses said vnto you that is as S. Matthew hath it God namely by Moses said Thou shalt honour thy Father c. But you say Corban c. So that this Tradition of the Pharisees is a flat contradiction vnto the expresse Law of God And therefore so vtterly vnfit to confute the vse of Ceremonies which are not as directly condemned by Gods Word that we may thinke your minds were busied vpon some other obiects when you made this obiection We haue heard all your obiections against addition of Ceremonies in the state of the Old Testament and find that the further you seeke to depart from the Pharisees who did adde superfluous Ceremonies the more you winne fellowship with the Sadduces who abandon all additions of new Ceremonies vnder the same estate SECT III. Their second proofe from S. Augustine Augustine de doctr Christ. lib. 3. cap. 15. doth argue against significant Ceremonies Our Answer S. Augustine speaketh of Phrases of Scripture which when they make for piety and charity he would not haue expounded figuratiuely but when any sentences do seeme to command any thing that is Facinerous heynous and wicked then saith he must wee vnderstand them as being figuratiuely spoken As for example that saying of Christ Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man c. which for the same cause must needs receiue a figuratiue interpretation But how shall this concerne the matter of Ceremonies to proue them vnlawfull because they are significant By this inference it shall not be lawfull for vs to vse any phrase of speech whether figuratiue or proper because Omnis oratio est oris ratio euery speech of a reasonable man except he wil needs be as sounding brasse a tinkling cymbal is significant There is I confesse in S Augustine else-where these sayings Signa quae ad res diuinas pertinent Sacramenta appellantur If heereby you shall collect that S. Augustine will admit of no Signes of holy duties which are not Sacraments then shall you bewray your small acquaintance you haue had with the language of S. Augustine with whom nothing is more frequent or familiar than to call all Signes of any holy thing Sacraments And so by your consequence you shall haue as many Sacraments as there are parts and parcels of parables and similitudes To conclude whosoeuer shall but vnclaspe any one volume of S. Augustine he shall finde a manifest mention and approbation of some one or other Significant Ceremonie which was not of Diuine Ordinance This your alleaging one onely Father who notwithstanding maketh against you doth openly tell vs that you can conceiue small confidence that Antiquity did euer patronize your cause SECT IIII. Their third Proofe from the Testimonies of Protestant Diuines M. Calvin in Leuit. 4.22 Zepperus pol. Eccles. pag. 50. Iewell Beza do all condemne Ceremonies inuented by man which are of mysticall signification Our Answer You erre for want of a distinction of termes for the word mysticall signification hath two acceptions the one Sacramentall by signification of grace conferred by God the other is onely Morall by signification of mans spirituall duty and obedience towards God The Ceremonies which we defend are onely mystical-morall but the signification of Ceremonies which M. Caluin reproueth is onely that Mysticall which is properly Sacramentall as is euident in the place alledged where he speaketh of Sacraments Quibus annexa est promissio gratiae Whereunto God hath annexed a promise of grace And againe Testantur de gratia Dei Zeppperus speaketh not a word of any mysticall signification at all B. Iewell insisteth onely in the Sacramentall and hath not one word touching the morall nor any Protestant author that I haue read Beza onely excepted hath spoken absolutely against Signes Symbolicall and meerly significant Yet Beza himselfe I presume will be found hereafter to allow them in some Cases This distinction as it is pertinent so is it also of some importance and therefore ought to be diligently obserued as will better appeare in our Answer to their next obiection SECT V. Their fourth proofe from Reason Their first Obiection Symbolicall signification giueth vnto Ceremonies a chiefe part of Sacraments when they are appointed to teach vs by their signification Our Answer Our Ceremonies are onely morall signes as hath bene said signifying vnto vs morall duties to wit the Surplice to betoken Sanctity of life the Signing the forehead with the Crosse Constancy in the faith of Christ and Kneeling at the Communion our Humility in receiuing such pledges of our Redemption by Christ Iesus As for the Sacramentall signe Euery Sacrament hath two significations in in it the one is Ad modum signi to represent some spirituall thing the second is Ad modum sigilli to seale an assurance of some diuine promise of Grace So that a Sacramentall signe being as Sacramentall so likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Seale of Gods promises as the Apostle calleth Circumcision is alwayes founded vpon the expresse couenant of God therefore none but the Author of the couenant may
institute or appoint any such signe For whosoeuer shall vndertake to adde a seale vnto the will and couenant of any Testator amongst men is forthwith held Falsarius and thereby made obnoxious to the law and liable to the grieuous iudgements of man How much more damnable an Act were it for any to affixe any signe properly Sacramentall vnto the Testament of our Lord Iesus which whosoeuer shall atttempt to do becometh guilty of sacrilegious deprauation of the blessed Mysteries of Saluation Now then for further clearing of this point we may thus distinguish of Mysticall and spirituall signes in Gods Church some are meerly significant by resembling spirituall things and some are not only significant but also obsignant namely sealing and exhibiting vnto vs the Truth of Gods promise Therefore these Mysticall signes which we call Sacramentall differ from the mysticall signes morall both as the Sacramentall are Significant by speciall representation and as they are obsignant by ratifying and applying of Gods couenant of Grace vnto vs as the Aspersion of the water in Baptisme is a signe of Remission of sinne conferred vpon the person baptized and therefore is it proper to God who onely giueth the thing to ordaine such a signe But the morall signe doth not represent any Collation of grace giuen by God vnto man but onely notifieth a duety of man in some morall vertue which he oweth vnto God Your owne witnesse Zanchius hath something to this purpose saying What are Sacraments but Images wherein is reuealed and represented vnto vs the grace of God in Christ Iesus by the remission of sinne and life euerlasting whereby there is offered to the minds of receiuers Christ with all the benefits of the Eternall couenant made vnto vs in Christ In which respect these Sacraments are rightly called the Signes and Seales of the Couenant of Grace These points thus standing I could not but wonder at the former Thesis as at a strange Paradox that maketh signification to be the chiefe point of a Sacrament which if wee did maintaine then Bellarmine might haue some colour to insult vpon Protestants by this obiection viz. If Sacraments be onely signes then the Crucifix is a better signe to signifie the death of Christ than the SacrameÌ„t This is his consequence Will our Non-conformists now allow him this Assumption by accounting a signe to be a chiefe part of our Sacraments Nay should they not rather inueigh against the impudencie of such Romish Proctors who vsually impute vnto Protestants doctrines of their owne deuising For Caluine whom the Papists in this Answer do especially impugne hath told them I thinke I may say an hundred times that we account not our Sacraments meere signes to represent the graces of God but that they are also seales to present and exhibite the truth of Gods promises of Grace and to applie them to the hearts of faithfull Receiuers Let me adde further for the satisfaction of the more ingenuous the conuiction of such as wil be peruerse who tell vs that Signification is a principall part of a Sacrament that then all the morall signes vsed in the Leuiticall worship as namely Bels Lauars Lights Candlesticks and other Ceremoniall instruments euen vnto the very Snuffers of the Tabernacle should things taking their denomination froÌ„ the principal parts be properly deemed Sacraments And the like I may say of abstinence from Hogges flesh from touching of the corpes of the Dead from Linsey-woolsey apparrell and an hundreth such others whereby diuerse moralities are signifyed but no Sacrament implyed In a word the very soule of a signe to make it a Sacrament is Annexa à Deo promissio gratiae as the Iesuite himselfe doth acknowledge SECT VI. Their second Obiection from Reason If the Ceremonies that God himselfe ordained to teach his Church by their morall signification may not be now vsed much lesse may any of those which man hath deuised Our Answer I answer first that the vse of some I vnderstand this word in a large acception Iewish Rite without any Iewish opinion is not damnable For how many Christians vnder Prester Iohn are circumcised at this day yet not Sacramentally that is in opinion either of the necessity of it or else Typically as signifying that the Messias is to come in the flesh but onely Customarily and as it were Nationally for distinction from other people Or as the Greeke Churches anciently vsed the celebration of Easter according to the time of the Iewish Passeouer although with a difference both of Signe and Signification But more of Iewish Rites hereafter Secondly it is far more safe for Christians to invent new Ceremonies of morall signification that to vse those old which had bene appointed by Gods ordinance not but that the ordinance of God is infinitly to be preferred before mans but both because God who ordained those Iewish Ceremonies for a time ordained also that they should be abolished in time as also lest that their vse might ingender an opinion of the necessity of them eueÌ„ because they had beene once commanded by God and consequently might inthrall the minds of men and constraine them to a necessary obseruation of the whole Leviticall Law for so the Apostle reasoneth against certaine false Apostles who by their superstitious vrging of those Iewish Ceremonies sought to bring in againe the ancient bondage of all Iewish Rites SECT VII Their third Obiection from Reason This will open a gappe vnto Images Oyle Spittle and all Popish Ceremonies all which Bellarmine commendeth as fit to put men in remembrance as when the Priest did sprinkle the people with holy water saying Remember thy Baptisme And thus defend they their Images euen for remembrance Our Answer What is this you say That therefore there will be a gap opened 1. to All others 2. to the Popish 3. and for example to these Ceremonies now specified So many particulars and so many errours For first to argue from the vse of some few to an admittance of all other Ceremonies to like kinde which are in the Church of Rome almost innumerable is a consequence farre more lauish then this viz. Some wise men may be of his Maiesties Priuy Counsell therefore All wise men of the Kingdome ought to haue place in that Honourable Senate Secondly Then all Popâ—sh c. say you This consequence I take to bee both vnreasonable and vnconscionable It is first as vnreasonable as it would be for a Patient who hauing had of his Physitian the Receipts of some Apothecary Drugs should thereupon presume that it is safe and wholesome for him to taste of euery boxe in the Apothecary's shop For it is well knowne that as there are some good customes in the Church of Rome so are there many bad Next the word Popish is here taken of you in the strictest sence not simply for the Ceremonies themselues but for the mixture of abuses that are in them by the superstition of that Church And therefore
reade that the Gileadites which were of the children of Israel did build an Altar on the other side of Iordan in testimony of their ioynt faith and profession with their brethren in the one and onely Religion of God This example is pregnant and hath much exercised and troubled your wits but to what effect we shall best iudge by your Answer SECT XVI The Non-conformists Answer The Altar that stood on Iordans banke was not of Ecclesiasticall but Ciuill vse the tribes themsâ—lues confesse that they had grieuously sinned if that they had determined an Altar vnto the same vse that the Lord God set vp one before It was a memoriall that they were one people with their brethren intituled to and estated in the priuiledges of the Lord with them but it was no mysticall signe of Christ and his Grace Our Replie The point then in question is whether it were not especially for a spirituall vse whereof we cannot better be resolued than by the whole current and maine scope of the Storie which doth apparently euince that it was for a religious mysticall signification albeit not of Christ and his graces yet of spirituall blessings and morall duties So though it were not erected for the same vse whereunto the Altar that God appointed was appropriated yet was it ordained for a representation thereof Let vs consult with the Text it selfe to the end that wee may answer your Maior Proposition euen in terminis Your Dispute is of humane Ceremonies and this was so humane that it was ordained by man without any speciall warrant from God And this is very plaine because these Gileadites when they were to satisfie their brethren who at the first iudged the building of this Altar to be a detestable and an abominable transgrâ—ssion against God did not replie that God had commanded them so to do but answered very ingenuously saying We haue done this c. And againe imputing it to their own proper motion Therefore said we Let vs build vs c. whence it is euidently apparent that this act proceeded meerely from their owne reason without any particular direction from God Secondly your proposition requireth that the Ceremonies be appointed to Gods seruice and so was this Altar although not to sacrifice thereon yet as the Text speaketh for A patterne of the Altar of the Lord vpon which Gods people did sacrifice As wee account the Crosse in Baptisme not to bee the very Crosse of Christ whereupon he offered that great sacrifice of Mans redemption but onely a kind of resemblance thereof Now an Altar of sacrifice being one of the supreme instruments of Gods immediate worship that other which was a resemblance thereof doublesse cannot bee said to haue beene onely of a ciuill vse Thirdly your proposition mentioneth Ceremonies of mysticall signification to teach any spirituall dutie Euen as againe wee say that the Crosse in Baptisme is vsed in the way of protestation of Christian courage in the spirituall conflict against the whole world of Infidels Here also I thinke this very Text doth sufficiently warrant such mysticall signification for seeing all actions borrow their forme and essence from the end whereunto they are intended and that these Gileadites in this act of consent in vnitie of Religion did not so much intend to make knowen their interest in the temporal inheritance as in the spirituall priuiledges of Gods chosen people This doth necessarily argue that this Altar was not set vp so much for any ciuill vse as for a mysticall resemblaÌ„ce which is manifest in the Story where the vse of this Altar is expressed thus The Altar is called Ed that is witnesse for it shall bee a witnesse betweene vs that the Lord is God Therefore the end was that thereby they hauing relation to the other Altar of God might protest and publish their ioynt faith and seruice with all other Israelites to the onely true God And as this end did concerne themselues so there was yet another end that did respect their posterity and in this regard they made the Altar Prolepticall for to preuent an obiection that might afterward arise betweene these Gileadites and their brethren on the other side of Iordan namely to this effect What haue you to do do with the God of Israel You haue no part with the Lord And so might haue made them ceasse from seruing the Lord Therefore say the Gileadites haue we built this Altar You see then that the Altar being a Patterne of the Altar of the Lord was a Religious Instrument and of the Altar of sacrificing a Religious Act and that to testifie both for them and their posteritie a publicke consent in the true Religion and worship of God which was a most religious end And also this to auow the profession of their Religion which maketh it a morall signe of a religious signification How therefore can any be so dimme-sighted as not to discerne any other thing herein except onelie a Ciuill vse The matter standing thus we may guesse with what indignation and displeasure you would haue entertained this answer by inueighing against that their Humane inuention as the daughter of blind Deuotion in themselues and mother of Idolatry to their posterity and by charging them concerning that Altar and crying aloud Downe with it Down with it euen to the ground not departing thence vntill with your out-cries you had seene it demolished before your face But contrarily their brethren the Gouernours of Gods people euen such as were most zealous for God to preserue his Religion in all integrity they were otherwise minded For When Phineas the Priest and the Princes of the Congregation and Heads of thousands of Israel which were with him heard the word which the children of Reuben and children of God and the children of Manasses had spoken it pleased them And furthermore when they returned into the Land of Canaan to the children of Israel and brought them word it is said that they pleased the children of Israel and they blessed God and did not intend to go vp in battell against them Take you therefore I pray you the hearts of Brethren and be like-minded as were these deuout children of God be desirous to enioy the peace of the Church in the truth of Religion and not â—t the sight of euery Ceremonious appurtenance to start aside occasioning hereby not onely dissention amongst them who are your Brethren in all the essentiall parts of Religion but also Contumacie against your Mother the Church which begot you in Christ and brought you to the interest which you haue in the couenant of Grace SECT XVII Our second Instance concerning Ceremonious Instruments belonging to Gods worship may be in Salomon his Altar 1. King 8.64 Salomon built a Brazen Altar and set it beside the Altar of the Lord offering thereon burnt offerings because the Brazen Altar which was before the Lord was not sufficient to receiue the burnt offerings Here we see first onely
gouerned by the word of God in all such things as belong to mans saluation meaning things absolutely necessary to the worship of God as hath beene amply proued But touching such things as appertaine vnto Discipline it is lawfull for the Church to make Lawes Canons and Constitutions so doth the Apostle teach that women must pray with their heads couered and men bare-headed So doth the Church ordaine in what place at what time quomodò after what manner whether standing or sitting men must communicate And M. Caluin obseruing the Apostle's reproofe of persons contentious in Ceremoniall points which is v. 16. If any man seeme to be contentious we haue no such Custome nor yet the Church of God when he met with some that did out of the same spirit of contention resist the Constitutions of that Church of Geneua he maketh a generall application thereof against all such turbulent and factious spirits Qui bonos vtiles ritus nullâ necessitate convellunt i. Who vnnecessarily do oppugne the profitable Rites of the Chucch Here I need not make any recapitulation of these seuerall points the indifferent Reader may easily finde in the confession of the fore-named witnesses 1. That these are things indifferent 2. That they were prescribed as fit for those times 3. That consequently they were to be dutifully obserued 4. That they were Symbolicall and had in them significations of morall duties 5. That they were applyed to Diuine worship 6. and lastly That the same authority doth still remaine in the Church to ordaine the like Significant Ceremonies whensoeuer there shall be iust occasion thereunto Thus much of the Apostles time We descend lower SECT XXIX Our second Proofe for Confutation of their last generall Argument and for our Confirmation of the Morall vse of Ceremonies is from the vniuersall Custome of the Church of Christ as well Primitiue as Successiue Concerning all these times whosoeuer is conuersant in the Ecclesiasticall Histories or in the writings of Fathers of former ages may make good this our Assertion to wit That the Church hath liberty to ordaine Rites and Ceremonies of Mysticall signification thereby to represent spirituall duties and that properly in the publique seruice of God And also may proue so farre forth as by light of Story can appeare that euer since the Apostles daies it hath bene the constant and consonant doctrine of the Church held by all the most Orthodoxe Fathers and glorious Martyrs of Christ who watered the Church with their bloud whereby it became so blessedly fruitfull in the procreation of an innumerable off-spring of faithfull Christians in all succeeding ages amongst whom we that do now professe the Gospell of saluation haue by the mercy of God our interest in the couenant of Grace and consequently in the assured hope of our eternall inheritance Yea and that which as I think should astonish the heart of any aduersary in this point of Church-liberty in making Ceremonies hath euer bene so vndebatably held for an vncontrollable truth throughout the whole processe of times that no one man as I suppose either Orthodoxe or Hereticall hath euer till of late bene heard either to haue written or so much as spoken against the Generall of it I shall not need to seeke euidence out of Stories in this behalfe the Non-conformists themselues are not ignorant hereof who besides many other Instances do as often as they see occasion againe and againe repeate the custome vniversally vsed in the Churches throughout the world to wit of Standing in the time of publicke prayers in all the Lords daies betweene Easter and Pentecost whereby the primitiue Fathers did signifie their faith of Christ his Resurrection If this were a Diuine Ceremony why do you not obserue it But if it were Humane and yet had as you know a Mysticall signification of some spirituall dutie by representing both the remembrance of Christs Resurrection and also the protestation of their Christian faith therein which Signe likewise was appropriated vnto the publicke worship of God in the act of holy prayer then can you not but acknowledge in this one Ceremony that Antiquity doth pleade for our whole defence nor can you gaine-say but that herein the iudgement of our Church Quoad thesin in generall for we do not heereby iustifie euery Ceremony which was held either of diuers Fathers or Churches in seuerall times but that which was vniversall must needs convince you of Novelty in this kinde Lastly Zanchie doth witnesse concerning the obseruation of our Festiuals of Easter Pentecost c. that they haue since the time of the Apostles continued to this day this then is another Catholicke Ceremony of Morall signification SECT XXX Our Third Proofe for Confutation of their last Generll Argument and for our Confirmation of the lawfulnesse of Ceremonies which are of Morall signification is from the testimonies of their owne Witnesses M. Caluin is alwaies worthy of the first place among the innumerable company of late Diuines and he saith Nè quis nos calumnietur c. Lest any man slander vs by iudging vs nimis esse morosos to be too peeuishly precise as though we would take away all libertie in externall things here I do testifie vnto my godly Readers that I contend not about Ceremonies which concerne onely Decencie and Order or else Si Symbola sint if they bee signes and incitements vnto that reuerence which we should performe vnto God for our dispute is against those workes which some do as properly belonging vnto God and wherewith they thinke that God is truely worshipped Thus M. Caluin as you see in the last part of this sentence disalloweth onely such Ceremonies of Humane Inuention which men make to be essentiall parts of Gods worship And in the former part thereof he doth allow of Symbolicall Ceremonies so far as they may be Signes and Incitements to the more due performance of Gods worship Euen as in another place answering a Question conceiued about Ceremonies he saith Ergonè inquies nihil Ceremoniale rudiâ—ribus dabitur ad invandam eorum imperitiam Will you then say saith he shall nothing that is Ceremoniall bee permitted to the ruder sort for the helpe of their ignorance Here a Non-conformist would haue made a peremptory answer they shall haue allowed them to Ceremonie at all which is of symbolicall signification But M. Caluin more iudiciously and discreetly Id ego non dico tantùm contendo vt modus adhibeatur qui Christum illustret non obscuret I say not so saith he onely I contend that a meane may be kept which may manifest Christ and not darken and obscure him And for exemplification of this meane hee propoundeth the institution of Christ for our imitation whose Sacramentall Ceremonies are both Paâ—ce Few and minimè laboriosae very easie The same witnesse likewise else-where doth allow a priuate vse of Pictures cum rerum gestarum notatione which are set forth with the narration of Storie quae vsum in
of God was peremptoâ—y charging the Gouernors of Israel to subvert all the places of Hâ—athenâ—sh worship to destroy their altars breake downe their images burne their gâ—oues demolish their Idols and to roote out the very name of those places yet notwithstanding afterwards in the time of the Iudges was Gedeon permitted to offer of his owne accord a sacrifice vnder an oake Whereupon Saint Augustine is noted to obserue That the custome of Gods people whereby they offered sacrifice euen without the Tabernacle if onely to the true God and not vnto strange Gods was so farre approued by God himselfe that he was said to be exaudiens offerentes which I may interpret to yeeld vnto the prayers of them who did offer sacrifices Which example we haue propounded although not as euery way imitable yet to prooue that to doe things in their owne nature not impious for the furtherance of Gods worship is not so culpable as some would inforce SECT XXIIII Our second Proofe is from the iudgement of ancient Fathers The Fathers did not alwayes abolish such Ceremonies as had beene formerly abused for they as your selues know did for a long time continue the Iewish Ceremony of Ester obserued by the godly Bishops and Martyrs of the Churches of Asia albeit not Iewishly that is to the same end whereunto the Iewes did celebrate it Yea and the Ceremonie of Circumcision was for many yeeres continued in the succession of many Christian Bishops of Ierusalem although not Sacramentally after the profession of the Iewes thereby to signifie that Christ the promised seed was to come in the flesh which was a Ceremony Propheticall but Historically to shew their descent from the loines of their grand Patriarke Abraham the first father of Circumcision So likewise the Testimonies which your selues haue alledged and obiected out of the Fathers shew that they did not euermore purge the former Abuses of Ceremonies by priuation in remoouing the things themselues but sometimes onely by translation As for example The Councell of Nice changed the Iewish Easter into the Lords day And the Councell of Gangris abolishing the Fasts which some vsed vnchristianlie on the Lords day Can. 18. did in the 19. denounce an Anathema and curse against them who should condemne other Fasts appointed by the Church Many such like changes are found in antiquity concerning Fasts Feasts Habits and other like adiuncts of holy worship Which doe altogether disable the validity of your Position that would extinguish all Ceremonies which haue at any time beene superstitiously vsed either after any Iewish Hereticall or Heathenish opinion Lastly you haue been so frequent vrgent and instant in alledging the Testimonies of ancient Doctors for the abolishing of all things which haue beene formerly abused that a man would thinke you professe your selues to be children of those graue Fathers and to yeeld your selues to be gouerned by their prudent directions But it is well knowne to as many as haue seene the faces of the aforesaid Fathers either in the generall Histories of the Church or in their owne bookes that all of them did both maintaine and practize the vse of mysticall Ceremonies Will you therefore admit of their iudgements why then do you reiect such kind of Ceremonies will you not allow them why do you then obiect such witnesses whose vniuersall consent you can so easily contemne Nay but to refuse as you often doe to be tryed by the Testimonies of such Fathers whose patronage in the very same cause you haue so peremptorily challenged must needs bewray in you preuarication rather than confidence in this maner of proofe SECT XXV Our third Proofe for Confutation of their Tenent is from Reasons And our first Reason is from an Inconuenience There was neuer almost any truth so diuine or Ceremonie so sacred which the filthy mouthes and sordid fingers of some heretikes haue not wickedly polluted Thus diuers of them haue not forborne to peruert to their Hereticall sences both the Sacraments of our Lord Iesus being vnto vs the two seales of the Couenant of Grace As first concerning Baptisme some Heretikes haue erred in the matter Baptizing with fier so did the Seleuci some in the forme In nomine ignoâ—i Patris as did the Marcitae some in the persons baptized by Baptizing the dead as did the Cataphryges some by Rebaptizing as doe the Anabaptists Secondly concerning the Eucharist likewise the Cathari would not admit for the matter Bread as thinking this Creaturue was from an euill beginning The Aquarij would not allow of Wine But of all other the Papists haue most prophaned this holy Sacrament by their manifold Sacriledge as well thorow their irreligious opinions as by their Idolatrous Adorations Wee are not ignorant that you doe except against some things which being abused by man were not commanded by God notwithstanding these instances may serue to teach vs that seeing the best things and of most holy vse haue beene subiect vnto hereticall abuses of godlesse men it will be almost impossible for vs to find any Ceremonie which shall be altogether without exception And to be forbidden to vse any Ceremonie would bring no small preiudice to our Christian libertie SECT XXVI Our second Reason is taken from the absurditie of the Non-conformists Rule of reforming Abuses onely by Abrogation and of curing Contraries by Contraries Whereas the Non-conformists say that Contraries are to be cured by contraries as if there were no way to purge Superstition but by the extirpation of all Monuments and Remembrances thereof I would wish them to consider whether to argue as they haue done from the abuse of a thing to the necessarie abolishing of the vse thereof be not as great an abuse of true Logicke as a Scholler in any reasoning can possibly commit Because according to the right Topique place concerning Vse and Abuse the Axiome standeth rather thus Whatsoeuer is subiect to abuse the same may be turned to a right vse And the reason is good because Vsus Instrumenti est per se abusus verò est per accidens Nothing can bee excepted from this Rule but onely sinnes and defects which are not things abused but meerely Abuses themselues In the causes Levitically-Legal a Woman polluted and defiled with an vncleannesse might be purged from her issue of bloud And a man that had a running issue in his flesh might be cleansed Seeing therefore these Legall pollutions had their cleansings how then is it that you assume so conclusiuely that A Ceremonie being once superstitiously defiled cannot afterwards be made cleane Secondly in Morall causes for there may be an Analogie betweene the Leuiticall pollutions and cleansings and the Morall abuses and their reformations a woman that hath committed folly although she cannot recouer her Virginitie yet vpon her repentance she may repaire her honesty Againe the person that is as sacrilegious as Dionysius may be restitution and almes become as truely Gods Almoner as Zacheus May it bee thus in persons
and Parties SECT VI. Our 4. Subdiuision of Actiue Scandall in respect of consequences and effects in occasioning A lapse into sinne or errour Hinderance from Grace The fourth and last Subdiuision is in respect of the Consequences and the effects of Scandall whether it be an Hinderance of their saluation who are already members of the Church by prouoking them with such Scandalous examples either to vse indifferent things against their consciences and occasion them to relapse from the faith as hath bene said or else if it be an hinderance of them who are yet aliens from the couenant of grace to set a Scandall and blocke against them Which latter point of Scandalizing S. Paul doth condemne saying Giue no offence neither to the Iew nor to the Grecian Whereupon The Apostle saith M. Caluin nameth Iewes and Gentiles teaching vs that we are debters vnto all sorts of men euen to those that are Aliens that we may gaine them to the faith Thus much of Actiue Scandall SECT VII Of the second generall member of Scandall which is called Passiue and the diuision thereof is in respect of the Party offended Matter of offence The second generall member of Scandall is called Passiue when the offence is not giuen by any fault of the Speaker or Doer but rather taken by the sinister apprehension of the Hearer or Interpreter concerning some thing that is either good or at least not euill in it selfe Which Passiue offence is distinguished either in respect of the party offended or else in respect of the nature of that matter wherein the offence doth consist SECT VIII Our 1. Subdiuision of the Passiue Scandall is concerning the fault of the party offended either by defect in Iudgement Affection The fault of the party offended may proceed from a double defect one is the corruption of his iudgement yet through a wilfull and an affected ignorance such as was the Scandall taken by the Capernaites through their carnall construction of that speech of our Sauiour saying Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man c. Whereat some were so greatly offended that they refused to heare Christ any more for the which some Disciples also did apostatate from him This I may call an affected ignorance because they did not ingenously seeke to be satisfied by any Reason but onely in a meere stupiditie or rather obstinate incredulity asked How shall he giue vs his flesh to eate For notwithstanding they were answered by Christ himselfe that the speech was not to be taken carnally or literally but spiritually yet had they not the patience to endure the speech of Christ For which cause he suffered them wretched men that they were to Depart from him Thus much of the Scandall proceeding from the iudgement of the Party The second defect proceedeth directly from the poison of a carnall affection whether of pride as in such as tooke offence at the pouerty of Christ or in enuy which is called oculus nequam as in him that tooke offence at Christs bounty vnto whom it was said Is thy eye euill because mine is good Or lastly in malice which is called Scandalum Pharisaeorum who tooke offence both at the miracles of Christ imputing them to the Prince of the Deuils and at his doctrine conceâ—ning whom Christ as permitting malicious men if they needs will to fall sinck and perish in their sinnes saith in that place Let them alone they are blind Leaders of the blind and both shall fall into the Ditch And the truth is that whosoeuer they be that are Scandalized through their owne malice or wilfulnesse Non tam pati dici possunt quà m facere Scandalum that is They may be said more properly to do than to suffer scandall Thus much of the Scandall passiue as it respecteth the disposition of the party scandalized SECT IX Our 2. Subdiuision of Scandall Passiue in respect of the opinion of Indifferencie Necessitie The second respect considerable in a Scandall of this kinde doth râ—gard the nature of the cause whereabout it doth arise which is sometimes about a matter indifferent Now in such a case questionlesse much indulgence should be vsed towards weake persons whose infirmity proceedeth onely from simple ignorance Nor should we where the case stands thus prouoke any by our example to vse any thing although otherwise indifferent against their consciences because this is called a Destroying of thy brother Which indulgence notwithstanding is to be allowed onely till such time as the doctrine concerning the indifferencie of vsing or not vsing the thing in question hath bene sufficiently declared after which time if any presumptuously perseuer and will not be instructed the condigne penalty which shall be thenceforth inflicted cannot bee called Scandalum sith that this doth alwaies presuppose a meere weakenesse for want of due meanes of knowledge But if the euent and consequence of the Scandall be not onely an offence of priuate mens consciences but also an ouerthrow of some generall and necessarie doctrine of the Church which tendeth to edification and saluation then ought we to maintaine the Tenet of S. Augustine Praestat vt scandalum admittatur quà m vt veritas amittatur meaning that it is better the persons of some men should take offence by our Preaching and doctrine then that the truth of God should suffer any preiudice through our regardlesse silence And for our better warrant in so doing S. Paul hath giuen vs manifest documents from his owne examples one in not circumcising of Titus and the other in withstanding of Peter Thus much of the Diuisions and Subdiuisions of Scandall which being duely considered will expedite all difficulties that you can obiect in the question of Scandall for out of these you may collect the true and full sence of the Scriptures which you haue alleaged in your first Obiection from holy Writ as will better appeare in our Answers and Confutations In the meane time leauing your Proposition as granted according to our former limitations we put you to the triall of your Assumption SECT X. The Generall Assumption of the Non-conformists against our Ceremonies because of Scandall Their Pretences of Scandall occasioned by our Ceremonies are manifold to wit in respect of 1 Superstitious Papists 2 Prophane â—â—rsons 3 Weake brethrâ—n 4 Their whole Congregations 5 Their owne vnconformable Ministers 6 All sorts in generall at least by appearance of euill Their first Obiection of Scandall by our Ceremonies is in respect of superstitious Papists The Papists will bee hardened to see vs borrow our Ceremonies from their Religion Our Answer We answer that our Rites which haue beene purged from Popish superstition are no more the Ceremonies of Papists then our Churches are theirs wherein notwithstanding your selues do willing Pray and Preach being now conuerted from the seruice of the Romish Idoll vnto the syncere worship of God And therefore Papists by our reformation of things which they haue abused haue
thanksgiuing for remission of our sinnes and all the Royall Benefites of his Death and Passion And not to presume too much of such familiaritie with CHRIST which seemeth to thrust out Humility from this Banquet and Type of Christ his humiliation But be it sufficient contentment that we might be but as Ostiarij Doore-keepers in that Celestiall Temple and not presume that by vertue of our Coheirship we must needs set our selues vpon the same Tribunall with Christ Who is set at the right hand of God in the heauenly places farre aboue all Principalitie and Power and Might and Domination and euery name that is named not onely in this world but also in that which is to come SECT XII Their third Pretence to proue the Intention of Christ is from the due disposition of the Receiuer The Disposition of heart which is required of vs in our very Act of receiuing is not so much humility as assurance of faith and cheerefulnesse which is much better expressâ—d and shewed by the gesture of Sitting than of Kneeling Our Answer You will not thinke I hope that Humility doth hinder the assurance of faith or that the difference of outward Gesture must needs set Christian vertues at variaÌ„ce but you suppose that faith is more welcome to this Banquet than Humility and that therefore Faith must be attended with the gesture called Sitting but Humility must not be suffered to haue her handmaid called Kneeling to waite vpon her I maruaile who made you Vsher at this feast But let you these two Vertues alone and they will walke hand in hand as louing Sisters and both haue their seruants attending vpon them in the same actions To this end I propound vnto you two Theologicall concords The first concord is betweene Faith and Humility in that myrrour which is set forth by our Sauiour in the Gospell concerning the great man that said vnto Christ Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest come vnder my Roofe Thus doth Humility vnueile her selfe but what said his Faith Speake thou to wit Christ the word onely and my seruant shall be whole This was such an admirable assurance of faith in the estimation of Christ himselfe that he said Verily I haue not sâ—und such faith no not in Israel and yet this Faith and Humility in this one act kissed each other The second concord is to be seene betweene Humiliatâ—on and Thankfulnesse euen in the Gesture of Kneeling as it is often and plainely recorded in holy Writ for the Prophet Dauid in a Psalme of Thankfulnesse doth exhort the true Worshippers thus Let vs come before his presence with giuing of thankes How By Sitting or Standing So peraduenture the presumption of some would say but the Prophet as it were by way of preuention saith And worship and fall downe before the Lord our Maker Will you see this acted One man of ten persons that were cured of the Leprosie returning and glorifying God fell downe at Christ his feete giuing him thankes And if you shall say that this Thankfulnesse was not so well expressed by this gesture of Humility which is Kneeling then may you as well impute a peece of Indecorum vnto the twenty foure Elders more then was meet when in their act of yeelding glory and praise they are said to vse the same gesture of kneeling and accordingly you might spy out a lesse seemelinesse in the Angels who are dâ—scribed by a kind of Analogie and resemblance to vse their Humiliation by Kneeling in worshipping and giuing God thankes You must seeke out for your owne reputation sake some more tollerable reason than this to proue your pretended Intentiâ—n of Christ or else confesse that you intended nothing but to wrangle with the Church SECT XIII Their fourth pretence to proue the Intention of Christ is from a pretended meannesse of the Element If our Sauiour had intended that the outward Elements should hâ—ue beene thus reuerenced he would not haue made choice of bread and wine which are so common and base Our Answer It seemeth then by this Obiection that you fancie Ambrosia Nectar Manna or some such other Element of a more perfect nature which may in your opinion deserue such a Reuerence Whereas the Sacraments of bread and wine are by you esteemed but base I cannot for my part but blush in your behalfe to heare such Turkish and Heâ—thenish language proceed from any Professour of Christianitie Haue you not yet taken out S. Peters lesson That which God hath sanctified let no man call common If he could speake thus much of ordinarie meates what an impiety must it be to abase these Elements which are consecrated vnto a Sacramentall vse to be Seales of the Couenant of grace and are most fit of all other creatures to expresse our vnion with Christ and communion with all faithfull Christians This I vrge not as perswaded that you can be so irreligiously minded as your words may import but to let you vnderstand that you haue bin so far transported with preiudice as that when you spake against due reuerence in receiuing this blessed Sacrament you could not but speake irreuerently SECT XIIII Their fift Pretâ—nce to prooue the Intention of Christ against Kneeling is from the example of the Apostles It were great Hypocrisie in vs to pretend greater Reuerence and Deuotion in râ—câ—iuing of it then was in the Apostles nay if it were fit for vs to vse Kneeling it was much more fit for the Apostles in â—egard of Christ his corporall presâ—nce among them Our Answer This Consequence is a non sequitur and that in diuers respects first in respect of the purpose of Christ who then made himselfe familiar with his disciples that he might the better instruct them whilest he was yet in the forme of an ordinary man in so much that at the time of the institution of this Sacrament he rose from Table and would needs wash his disciples feet to what end I haue giuen you an example saith Christ that as I your Lord and master haue washed your feet you also ought to wash one anothers feet And further professeth himselfe to haue bene amongst them not so much as one that sat at Table as one that was seruant vnto them But after his Ascention and glorification the precept was laid vpon All that All Knees should bow vnto him which gesture if it ought to haue bene performed at the sight of his presence in the flesh then must they haue bene alwayes Kneeling Secondly in respect of the Apostles themselues who were the first choice and immediate Embaâ—sadours for Christ and instruments of reconciliation of the world by meanes of that most Royall Embassage which they receiued from Christ the King of glory and not so only but also who were indued with all kind of graces of Gods Spirit as well of gifts called gratuÌ„ facientia as graetis data But we who are exceedingly inferiour vnto those golden