with joy and Feasting in the Citie § 30. The like may be said of the Festivities at marriage which were not indeed instituted by God nor need to be being that Marriage it selfe is a Civill thing and not Religious and in things of that nature if they were soberly and temperately observed Christ was never scrupulous to conform to the customes of the places where he came But Christmas day is made a piece of Religious service and a voluntary oblation to the honour of Christ by others and by the Dr. himselfe sect 28. § 31. These Instances then are both impertinent what hath he more pertinent to the present purpose Why that which I still expected to meet with is his strongest plea for this he saies It must be remembred that the weekly Fast of the Resurrection the Lords day was not instituted by Christ or God himselfe but by the Apostles of Christ and that the mentions of the first day of the week are no prescriptions or Law for the observing of it c. Before we hear more le ts consider this For first there want not learned men who thinke that Christ himselfe did institute or designe the day But secondly if the Apostles did institute it as the Doctor grants that 's more than some of his Colleagues will grant and thank him for it and more than he dare peremptorily say of his Christmas day Hee speaks it doubtingly either of the Apostles or succeeding Church Secondly if the Lords day was instituted by the Apostles of Christ do not their Institutions carry in them a Divine prescription or Law for the observation of it And if they instituted the first day of the week to be the Lords day or Christian Sabbath do not at least some mentions of the first day of the week imply their Institution of that day to be holy and require withall the observation of it as 1 Cor. 16.2 in the judgement of some no great Favourers of the Lords day Sabbath Le ts now hear what hee saies more If any thing of that nature as a law be there sought for it will rather appear to belong to the Annuall than weekly Feasts So 1 Cor. 5.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let us keep the paschall Festivity is annexed immediately to Christ our Passeover c. and to that also the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Lords day Rev. 1.10 is thought to belong To which I say 1. The vulgar Latin authorized by the Church of Rome as willing to make Easter of Apostolick Institution as the Doctor did not find this Law for it in this text That renders it onely epulemur let us keep Feast though the word signifie also festum diem agere and is by some no mean ones glossed thus Because on Festivall daies there were solemn Feasts of slesh observed Estius in locum hence this word is used for to celebrate festum solemne epulum asolemn Feast or Banquet by allusion to the typicall Paschall Feast Before him the learned Aquinas In locum could not find Easter here Epmlemur scilicet manducantes Christum c. let us feast viz. eating Christ not onely Sacramentally but spiritually Before them Saint Chrysostom was not so quick sighted to find a Law for Easter here but an every day Holyday for so he saies The Apostle saying let us keep the Feast he said not because the pasch or Easter or Pentecost was present but shewing that all or every time is a Festivall season to Christians And presently after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every day is a Pestivall to us yea all our life Not much unlike doth Saint Ambrose interpret the word Hoc est laetitiam habentes renovationis facta vetera fugiamus That is having the gladnesse of renovation let us fly our old works c. Serm of Resurr I adde but one thing more The learned Bishop of Winchester who pleads as strongly for this Easter Feast as any yet founds it not upon this text though he had occasion to name it but upon the Custome of the Church 2. It is proved above out of Socrates that the Apostles instituted not any Holydaies except the Lords day therefore nor this of Easter 3. That the Lords day Rev. 1.10 should belong to the Easter day is the fancie of some who of late have laboured to depresse the honour of the Lords day contrary therein to all the antient and modern writers In a word as was said afore the difference in observation of it in the severall Churches argues it not to be Apostolical Which difference the Doctor notes in this Section § 32. It s true that Aerius is by Epiphanius branded as an Heretick for some opinions justly if they be truly charged upon him But it is well known to the learned that all is not Heresie that Epiphanius calls so Nor all Aerius opinions justly censured as Heretical Epit. Hist Cen. 4. cap. 47. as the Doctor or any may see if he consult with Osiander the Epitomizer of the Centuriators And he is found in some of those opinions to be seconded by divers antient Fathers as is asserted by some of our learned Modern Divines if it were not unnecessarie here to manifest 2. As for the Festivities of the Martyrs it is granted they began betimes as Superstition ever attends Religion and Devotion which though they were intended for good ends yet as things of mens Inventions do they produced in time much Superstition not onely in multiplication of Holydaies but in opinion of more Holinesse more * As the Romans did s 67. efficacie of prayers on such daies and at last flat Idolatry both in dedication of the daies to those Saints and Martyrs and to Invocation and praying to them Which at first were onely times of commemoration of their vitues and encouragements of Imitation of them And this might suffice for answer to the next section § 33. Yet when he would inferre from this example of the Martyrs Festivities Where will be no reason to doubt that so the daies of the death or Martyrdome of the Apostles themselves were formerly solemnized by them and that this early c. he presumes too much upon his own reason not able it seemes to produce any Testimonies of those or former times for such observations which I the rather take notice of because the Doctor uses not to wave any Testimonie that doth but look that way and allso because I observe that the learned Chemnitius a man of vast reading having reckoned up the Festivalls Vbi supra p. 263. that were in observation in the first four hundred years can find none by name of any Apostle but referres them to the time of Carolus Magnus Anno 800. or at least to Constantines time which was in the begining of 400. § 35. That Christmas or the Feast of the Nativitie was not Apostolicall hath been made appear before That which he now alledges from the Constitutions called Apostolicall will weaken his cause the more
himself are guilty of an affected departure from the Universall Church If the Church of England at her first Reformation saw cause and had Power to throw away some may not the same Church of England having the same power upon just the same or like reasons cast off the rest If he say Hee speaks it of the Universall Church of all Ages and especially of the first age wee shalll joyne issue with him therein and and say If he can prove which I am confident he cannot that in rejecting or not observing these Festivalls wee have departed from the Universall Church in all ages wee shall be content to let his censure fall upon us till then we are safe And for a closure of the whole matter we shall take into consideration his Rule prescribed in his first Quaerie abour Resolving controversies and be judged by it It is this Quaere 1. Sect. 35 What ever hath the concordant attestation of the Christian Church of the first ages the Scripture remaining obscure or silent in the matter that it was the Doctrine or practise Apostolicall there remains not to any that now lives any imaginable ground of sober or prudent doubting or questioning the truth of it This resolution and Case the Doctor beginns with and intends it as a Rule applicable to all the following cases against Socinians and other Hereticks and Schismaticks Sect. 40. Hee means we thank him those that reject this Festivall as Sect. 12. and 45. of this Quaerie appears But is this Rule universally true Are there no cautions nor exceptions yes three at least 1. It must be in cases where the Scripture is either obscure or silent in the matter 2. That it be not extended any further than to the primitive Antients 3. And again to an accordance of those Testimonies without any considerable opposition that this or that was delivered from the Apostles We shall by his leave apply this rule to the case in hand and dare venture to be judged by it First considering the Rule and then the cautions And first for the Rule it selfe we desire to know again what he means by the Church of the first ages If he take it inclusively to take in the Churches of the Apostolicall time while they were yet alive wee should not stick to grant his rule to be good What ever doctrine or practise hath the concordant attestation of that Church it was Apostolicall The Negative whereof being a surer Rule to jvdge by What ever doctrine or practise wants such concordant universall uniform Attestation is not Apostolical For they being all guided by on Spirit would all agree uniformly in the same Doctrine or practice But there are not many things so attested by the Church of that age On the other side if he meane it exclusively of that age and to include onely the after ages it will prove a Crooked Rule Many Doctrines and practises being taken up which were not Apostolicall but meer Inventions of men which like a Gangreen soon overspead the face of the Church And by the different Timing and observation of them proved by the best Divines not to be Apostolicall Secondly for the concordant attestation of the primitive Antients of the second or third Age without considerable opposition which is one of the Cautions that this was delivered from the Apostles I shall put in a just exception in the words of the learned and honoured Lord Falkland in his discourse Of the infallibility of the Church of Rome who plead the universall Tradition of the Church for their Religion as the Doctor does for his Christmas Thus he writes If the Relation of one Pappias could cozen so farre all the prime Doctors of the Church Christian into a beliefe of the celebration of a thousand years after the Resurrection so as that not one of those two first ages oppose it marke that till Dionysius Alexandrinus who lived at least 250. yeares after Christ nay if those first men did not onely believe it as probable but Justin Martyr saith he holds it and so do all that are in all parts Orthodox Christians Irenaeus sets it down directly for a Tradition and relates the very words that Christ used when he taught this which is plainer than any other Tradition is proved or said to be out of Antiquity by them of Rome If I say these could be so deceived why might not other of the Antients as well be deceived in other points And then what certainty shall the learned have when after much labour they thinke they can make it appear that the Antients thought any thing a Tradition that indeed it was so c. The Doctors wisdome can easily apply this to the case in hand And I perceive he was aware of such an objection and therefore labours to prevent it by saying That Justin Martyr Quaer 1. sect 38. the prime assertor of it that 's a mistake for he and Irenaeus also had it from Pappias who was their Senior confesses other Christians of pure and pious intentions to he otherwise minded But for that let him answer his friend the Lord Falkland Lo. Falk reply p. 73. who saies That Justin Martyr saies that in his time all all Orthodox Christians held it and joynes the opposers with them who denyed the resurrection and esteems them among the Christians like the Saduces among the Jewes and again saies It found no resistance in above two Ages by any one known and esteemed person And what now is become of the Doctors Rule Thirdly the Rule applyed to the case in hand will prove more then the Doctor intended a light to discover his Christmas far from an universall Apostolicall usage For. 1. The Rule must hold onely in things wherein the Scripture is obscure or silent But for Institution of Feasts particularly this of Christmas the Scripture is neither obscure nor silent For the Scripture is cleare and speaks aloud against it both in the Law the fourth Commandement which requires peremptorily but one of seaven for God allowing six for mens occasions and also in the Gospell which clearly speaks against observation of daies except the Lords day the the Christian Sabbath whither Jewish Heathenish or Christian Festivalls of old were part of the Ceremoniall yoke upon the Jewes and therefore to give the Church a power to institute Holydaies is to reduce the yoke again 2. They have not the concordant Testimonie of the Primitive Antients neither of the Apostles themselves nor of those that lived in the same age with them as of Ignatius nor in the second Centurie of Pappias Justin Martyr Irenaeus c. which may the better be believed because the Doctor brings not one instance of any of those so much as mentioning this Festivall except out of the Constitutions of the Apostles falsely so called which Isodorus by Gratians report of him Dist 16. saies Where known to be corrupted by Hereticks under the name of the Apostles This Chemnitius further proves because the
keep it stilo novo 10. daies before us Which difference of observation as was said of Easter argues it not to be Apostolicall nor soon after our Saviours daies as the Doctor saies For if they had instituted such a Feast to the honour of our Saviour they would all have agreed upon the same day in all places as they did in observation of the Lords day for our Christian Sabbath § 8. Upon those his premises he drawes out two Corolaries or Characters set upon this or any other Christian Solemnity Easter Pentecost c. of immemoriall usage in this Nation First that the antiquity of it doth no way argue that it hath any thing of the corruptions of the Roman See adhering to it but the contrary To which we have partly spoken afore and now adde that as the observation of Easter differently from the Western Church doth argue that wee received not our Christianity from Rome so the Antiquity of the observation of Christmas and some other Festivalls suppose in the third or fourth Century may also argue that they have nothing of the corruption of the Roman See we mean since it was judged Antichristian about the yeare 600. adhering to them But yet may have too much of the Corruption of those Churches wherein they were first invented Corruption we say which crept into those Churches not long after the Apostles daies It 's known to all that read the Histories of the Church how many Innovations and Superstitions were crept into the Church long before Rome began to be Babilon And Romish Religion is a bundle of most of those Corruptions § 9. But for the second inference That any such antient usage of this particular Church if it had no other ground to stand on as its foundation or concurrence of all other Churches as pillars to sustaine it were a very competent Authority for the continuance of such a practice in this Kingdome Wee shall take leave to demur a little upon this For grant as wee may that this Anglicane or British Church be very antient by its foundation and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for its authority as subordinate to no Forrain Patriarch yet we justly question though the Doctor doe not whither it be invested with such an unquestionable power to institute what Ceremonies it please which may not upon good reasons be changed and abolished It is known sufficiently that many antient Customes and Ceremonies as antient perhaps as his Christmas instituted or taken up by this and the concurrence of many if not most Churches have without temeritie been altered and abolished and others may and must when they be abused to Superstition and prophaness as this Feast will appear to have been It will not be amiss here briefly to consider what that unquestionable power of this or any Church is to constitute Ceremonies for its selfe as it shall judge most useful most for edification and most agreeable to the Analogie of faith which consequently may not without great temerity be changed and abolished by any And then whither this Feast be a Ceremonie of that nature For the first the Authority of the Church to constitute Ceremonies for its selfe it is not justly called unquestionable for it hath for many years past beene the apple of contention between the Prelates and the Non-conformists But before we debate it we desire to know and be satisfied in two things 1. What he meanes by the Church whither 1. the Universall Church for he often speakes of that Sect. 12.45 c. and charges us with seperation and Schism for departure from the Universall Church If so I would say two things First that the Universall Church of the first ages or since never met to institute any Ceremonies for all Churches nor in speciall for this of Christmas Secondly if they had met yet that Church had no power to bind after Churches if they met if they saw cause to abolish them for a reason anon to be given But 2. if he take it of a particular Church as this of England as here he doth then I say again 1. We read of no such Cannons made by the Church at the first conversion to make the usage so antient and to bind all her Children in after ages 2. If we did find such yet the Succeeding Church having the same Power may annull if she see cause what was by them instituted 2. We desire also to know what he means by Ceremonies for this is an ambiguous word under which the Romanists do shroud their Superstitious Will-worship Ceremonies then are of two sorts 1. Meere Circumstances of commanded Worship for the more orderly and decent performance of it Or 2. Parts of Worship as the Iewish Ceremonies for certain were If the Doctor mean it in the latter sense as I think he does wee must again distinguish of such Ceremonies they are either dumbe and non-significant as the Church of Rome hath many or Significant and that either by Nature or by Institution If significant by institution then either by Divine or Humane Institution These Distinctions being premised wee suppose the Doctor does not meane of the Ceremoniall circumstances or Adjuncts of commanded worship for that will not stand him in any stead nor does any man deny the Church a Power to order those But he must meane it of Ceremoniall Worship as opposed to Moral And that not for Dumbe or Non-significant Ceremonies those he dislikes in the Church of Rome but for Significant Ceremonies not significant by Nature those need no Institution but by Institution not Divine that were little lesse than a contradiction but Humane Institution Then the question is this Whither the Church Universall for all Churches or a particular Church for her own members have an unquestionable Authority to institute Significant Ceremonies as parts of worship which may not upon just reasons be changed or abolished This was the Question to be proved but is onely taken for granted in these particulars by the Dr. 1. That the Church whether Universall or particular hath such a power to institute Ceremonies unlesse they be such as tend to Eutaxy and Decencie and the preservation or furtherance of Gods commanded worship what and how many she please as she shall judge most usefull most for edification c. as the Doctor saies but goes not about to prove but takes it as unquestionable This we do deny and wee thinke upon good reasons besides the judgement of Reformed Churches If the Church be allowed such a power the mischiefes will be many As. 1. It s prejudicious to the simplicity of Gospell-worship 2 Cor. 11.3 the simplicity which is in Christ That is in the Gospell of Christ Ceremonies burthenous in the number might turn it into evill Will worship sect 25. It was spoken with respect to the false Apostles who by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subtle perswasive words did corrupt both the Doctrine and Worship of the Gospell as may appear by comparing this place with Col.
whole works of our Redemption by him was instituted by himself or his Apostles by him authorized and inspired for this very end comes about once in every week To limit it therfore to one day in a year to remember that Mercy is not an exaltation but a derogation from it If this were done on his owne designed Day wee need not fixe another day 2. The exercises done upon the day are acceptable duties any day therefore upon this True but then any day whereon these duties are done is as holy a Day as Christmas day or if he think the duties are more acceptable for the Dayes sake or for the voluntary dedication of it by men I feare they will be so much lesse acceptable to God and no better than Superstition 3. There may be excesse and Superstition in setting out a day every year as Holy as a woship of God as Super statutum where God requires but one in seaven as Holy for men to command more is too much presumption His reasons against it are invalide 1. Because a dutie cannot be performed without time True but without a set a fixed holy time it may Here 's a fallacie from time as a naturall and necessary adjunct of an action to Time as Holy as Worship Which yet is not observed by the Doctor For he with others seemes to hold Time in the 4th Commandement to be onely an Adjunct of worship as of any other action but we think Time in the 4th Commandement is a part of worship And this I think they do make it in this present case For they doe not onely make the duties praying praising preaching c. a part of worship Sees 48. which they are every day when they are performed but the very Dedication and observation of the Day it selfe to be a voluntary oblation a Freewill-offering an honour and service to Christ as wee shall hear 2. Abraham saies he rejoyced to see this day and the Angells rejoyced on the very day c. So would we if wee knew the Day but this does not prove that they intended to set that day apart as Holy without command from Christ the Lords day being appointed for that end 3. The abstaining from labours is partly though not onely the excesse for it makes it necessary as a duty of an Holy day when God hath not made it necessary having allowed 6 daies for mens own works though Rest be agreeable to holy duties Festivities and Fasting daies of Gods command yet then it presupposes a Command of God for those Duties and Daies Or if the Time be onely an Adjunct of those duties then Rest is necessary onely naturali necessitate not moralj because no man can solemnly for any time wait upon God in holy duties and his labours too But this is necessary any day when holy duties are performed 4. For the 25 th day of December to be the day of Christs birth wee shall speake to it hereafter ad sect 36. Onely wee observe what he saies upon the mistake of the day That the mistake will be very pardonable in those who verily think they are not mistaken They doe perform the businesse of the day as compleatly and substantially on a mistaken day as on the true one and the excuse of blamelesse ignorance will wash away greater errours than this if an errour Does not this sound somewhat like the Papists Doctrine of veniall sinnes It puts me in mind of a subterfuge of Bellarm. and others when we object upon their owne confessions that there may be danger of Idolatry in the Sacrament if the bread be not transubstantiated into the body of Christ They answer There is no danger of it to one that fimply beleeves it is and worshiping after his wonted manner For in such things humane certitude is sufficient So Jacobs lying with Leah instead of Rachell ignorantly was not guilty of adulterie c. This is saiesacute Chamier not to take away Idolatrie but to stupifie the Idolater can any ignorance be blamelesse against a Law of God or wash away an Errour without the blood of Christ Would not Christ have revealed the very day if he had intended the day to be kept holy as a worship of himself But I shall put him a case Suppose the Jews had mistaken the day of the week for the Sabbath or the day of the month for the Passeover had they not sinned because they thought they were not mistaken Had the business been as compleatly and substantially performed on a mistaken day as on the true one When the very day was as strictly commanded as the business it self Let him consider it I shall here insert the judgement of the learned Chemnitius who though he allow the observation of this and other Festivals as a Lutheran with a reservation of Christian liberty Exam. Conc. Trid. p. de diebus Fest p. 265 without necessity of obligation c. yet he notes no less then thirteen wayes or kinds of Superstition in Papists observation of Holy daies We note some of them 1. In placing Holinesse in the dayes which God hath not placed in them 2. Esteeming the services then done better and more holy and acceptable then if done on other dayes 3. Placing the worship of God on them in ceasing from labours and frequenting of Churches 4. Forbidding of labours on those daies when they hinder not the publick Worship 5. In the Necessity of observation 6. In the multitude of them To which may be added that 7. They discriminate persons to be more or lesse holy as they observe or neglect them And lastly as more grace and blessing is expected from such voluntary uncommanded observances Now how far many men amongst us are guilty of all or some of these kinds of Superstition it remains to discover First for placing holiness in them equall with the Lords day and above other dayes It appears both by mens words and deeds By word in calling them Holy daies and equalling them with the Lords day See Sect. 59. To be esteemed above other daies of the year c. consecrating it from common to sacred uses as both of the Churches instituted The Doctor himself sect 20. calls this Festival most sacred and sect 24. tels us The day hath been observed if not much more certainly as strictly as any Lords day in the year c. And so it was in all Cathedrals at least with more solemn services with stricter cessation from sports then on the Lords day on which sports were permitted but no touching cards or dice that day Sect. 77. being more then lawfull pious in it self Ibid. Secondly not onely the services but the observation of the day also was esteemed an higher piece of service than that of the Lords day more acceptable then commanded worship because more voluntarie So the Dr. often Thirdly Sect. 59. An oblation to God in honour to him c. Treat of Wilworship sect 29. See sect 59. people may not
3. The third is That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or will-worship is nothing but voluntary worship as innocent as the Freewil-offering c. Which seems a contradiction in adjecto that voluntary worship and uncommanded should be innocent For 1. It s expresly against the second Commandement which forbids all worship not commanded by God 2. Voluntary Worship is an Addition to the Rule of worship and eo nomine Superstition and that 's sinfull 3. Why is the worship of Angells of Saints c. criminall but because it was worship invented and added by the will of man but that 's granted to be sinfull Yet they do not urge it as a Commandement of God 4. If Wil-worship be innocent I cannot see how all that rabble of Superstitious worship at Rome can be condemned for they are not held out as Commandements of God but as the Traditions of men 4. The last ground of Mistake is that the Doctor takes for granted That a Church or particular person hath power to institute observe worship not commanded by God Which remaines upon him to prove before he can vindicate his Festivall as he and others maintain it from the double crime of Superstition and Willworship which I prove by this one argument If all Additions to the word in matter of worship be criminous and sinfull as prohibited by God Deut. 4.2 and elsewhere then no man or Church can without sinne adde any worship to that commanded by God But the first is true ergo These I take it are the principall grounds of the Doctors Misprisions and are more largely shewed in the Tracts themselves To shut up this If Superstition be an excesse of Religion as allready it is proved to be and more hereafter if Willworship or uncommanded worship be an Addition to the Gospell Rule as cannot well rationally be denyed I see not how the Doctor can wash his hands or his Holiday from those two crimes For he makes the consecration observation of the day to be a part of uncommanded worship the day to be more holy than other daies as holy as the Lords day places virtue in it by pleasing God by it and of more acceptance because voluntary all which and more appeare in the Tract it self which if they be not Additions and excesses against the second and fourth Commandement I leave to the judgement of the indifferent Reader when he hath seriously considered and weighed what hath been and shall be spokâ—n hereafter OF SVPERSTITION Section 1. IN a just and Methodicall order of Translation the Discourse of Superstition should precede that of Will-worship that being more generall this last a Special under it Which that we may discover we shall before we debate it with the Doctor enquire and as well as we can resolve what Superstition is And this cannot so well be found by searching into the Monuments of Heathen Authors Latine or Greeke which is the Doctors way from the Names and senses by them given they being apt to misleade themselves and us in this search as by the judgement of Divines the matter belonging to Religion the chiefe and last of all Arts They that never knew what true Religion meant are all judges of Superstition which is the worke and worker thereof in the excessive part § 2. Superstition in the generall notion of it is not unfitly defined by the learned Schooleman A vice contrary to Religion Aquin. 22. q. 92. a. 1.2 in the excesse as profanesse is the other contrary in the Defect Not that a man can be too Religions indeed in the commanded worship of God Dr. Ames in medul on second Commandment Aquin. ibid. with respect or in order to the formall vertue of Religion but as one explaines himselfe in order to the Acts or externall meanes of worship superadded by the wisdome or will of man when a man tenders worship either to whom it is not due or not in that manner which he ought Now in Religion or worship of God in generall as distinct from Justice or Charity in the second Table foure things are considerable according to the foure Commandments of the Table 1 A right Object God alone 2 a right Matter commanded worship 3 a right manner with all due Reverence 4 a right Time his owne appointed Day and answerable Superstition may extend to the whole first Table Superstition is that which adds humane indeavours to divine precepts Vrsin in 2 precept More then is appointed by the law of God D. Fulk in Act. 17. s 4. Worship without Gods commandement M. â—erk on the second Command when there is a Nimiety or excesse in any of these For the Discoverie whereof we must observe that the Commandements of God having every one of them a Negative and an Affirmative part expressed or understood the Duties of Religion doe stand in the midst as vertues between two extremes As e. g. there is a double errour against the first Commandement one in the Defect that 's Atheism having no God at all the other in excesse that is Polytheism having too many 2 In the second Commandement there is first a Defect not observing Gods prescribed worship than an excesse in adding and observing devised worship 3 So also in the third Commandement there is a Defect in want of Reverence due to the Divine Majesty which is sometimes partly called profanesse and an excesse in additions of Ridiculous rites and ceremonies or gestures and the like 4. In the fourth Commandement there is a Defect in observing no Time when Gods designed Sabbath is neglected and an excesse when men institute other Holy Dayes and Times as Jeroboam did 1 King 12.32 He ordained a Feast like unto the Feast that was in Judea Thence it is apparent that in this generall sense there may be Superstition in or against all the Commandements of the first Table in the excessive part and it were easie to observe that many Divines especially doe call the excesses of any Commandement by the name of Superstition § 3. And hence it may appeare that some are too short in designing the Species or kinds of Superstition As first the learned Schooleman who makes but three kinds of it Idolatry Illegitimate worship and Divination The first and last whereof Ibid a. 2. in corp are referred by Divines to the first Commandement and the other illegitimate or uncommanded worship to the second For Idolatry properly so called is either the worship of a false God instead of the true or of many or other Gods with him And Divination being a consulting with the Devill is a giving of that honour to him which is due onely to God and so the worst kind of Idolatry So he limits Superstition D. Ames Medul on the second Commandement only to two Commandements But I find another Reverend Doctor restraining it to one Commandement viz. the second when he designes it thus Superstition is a vice whereby undue worship is tendered unto God Hee means that
who bring them into the Church On the other side it will not follow the Apostolical Church had a custome to observe the Sabbath of the Jews when they came amongst them to circumcise sometimes to abstain from blood c. to avoyd offence and winne the Jews ergo they that go about afterwards to lay down these are contentious this will no wayes be admitted The reason is because the Apostles afterwards repealed those Jewish customes Two cautions therefore must be added to make the Affirmative constringent 1. That the custome which is pleaded for be brought into the Church by the Apostles themselves for Gospel worship For he saies We we have no such custome nor the Churches of God The Gospel Churches by us planted 2. That the custome pleaded be grounded truly if not so clearly upon the Word of God For this is no good argument against a rational Disputant The present Church of Rome suppose or any Church some centurie or more of years after the Apostles hath such or such a custom ergo we must receive it unless we will be counted contentious But this is thought a good inference The Apostolicall purest Church had a custom to observe the Lords day the first day of the week Act. 20.7 1 Cor. 16.1 2. instead of the old Sabbath ergo that day was instituted by the Apostles and they that reject it or prophane it are more then contentious even sacrilegious And upon these considerations fiderations the Doctor hath consulted ill to his own cause to produce this Text for his Festivall For hee dare not say it was instituted by the Apostles nor can prove it was observed by the prime and purest Church though he oft assert it then the inference is strong against him The Apostle prime Apostolicall Church had no such custom as the observation of Christmas ergo they are contentious who plead for its continuance It matters not then what the ancient usage of the Church of England hath been if it began not with the Apostles in the first Churches Which of the Feast of Christs Nativitie cannot I think be proved I am sure is not performed by the learned Doctor Nor yet that the Church of England was extant in the Apostles times or if it were that this custome of Christmas was from the begining of the plantation of the Gospell amongst us which yet he undertakes to manifest § 2. The latter he first begins with And that it is thus ancient he will prove By one objection against viz. the retaining of some heathen usages in the observation of it which are undeniable Testimonies of the Antiquity and un-interrupted continuance of this practise even from the time of our first conversion For otherwise it is not imaginable how any heathen usage should be found adherent to it But this is no way constringent For they might bee added together with the Festival it self some good while after the first conversion of some part of this Island the better to winne the rest to a liking of Christian Religion by conforming to them in celebration of Festivals as the like was done to winne the Jewes in observing the old Sabbath Pentecost c. The Apostles saies the Doctor to attract the Jews to the Christian Religion Sect. 71. did gratifie them in retaining many of their customs That was for a time but after cast them off And this Festivall being substituted instead of the old Saturnalia in the same Month as is confessed by many Sect. 63. and the Doctor himselfe no marvaile if some heathen usages stuck close to it and could not since be gotten out For those heathen usages continued by the ruder multitude and others too though they have been no part of the office of the Feast yet doe they fully hold out these two things 1. How easie a thing it is for such ill usage to creep into humane Ordinances 2. How hard it is to get them out when once got in being ready to plead prescription Seeing after so long a time as fifteen or sixteen hundred yeares continuance as the Dr. thinks they still attend the Festival people being more tenacious of customs received by the Tradition of their Fathers 1 Pet. 1.18 then of the very Institutions of God § 3.4 For the former that the conversion of England was early is very likely but not so early as is pretended but not proved For as the Histories and Monuments are very obscure and doubtfull differing much one from another so the Doctor himself is very uncertain where to place the beginning or who was the Instrument of our conversion It may be beleeved either Apostolical or very near the Apostles times Faine would hee have us think it was by some Apostle if he knew how to make it out Some affirm it was Simon Zelotes Sect. 6. And there was some colour for the affirmation of Simon Metaphrastes That St. Peter stayed in Britaine sometime converted many and constituted Churches ordained Bishops in the twelfth year of Nero's reign But he slurs his Author thus The authority of this Writer is not great He might have said Nothing worth being contradicted by so many others and by the Doctor himself by and by Yet it might be near the Apostles times by some Apostolicall men some say rather by Joseph of Arimathea for so Mr. Camden reports from as ancient Records and credible as any we have for we have none very ancient or very credible That Joseph of Arimathea planted Christianity here coming out of France Belike Crescens sent him hither to convert she Britains if he did not come and doe it himself For so the Doctor would have it and proves it out of Scripture 2 Tim. 4.10 Crescens sent by St. Paul was gone into Galatia where Galatia may signifie France as some Authors take it and the Doctor is willing to beleeve it For presently though others contradict hee takes it for granted when he sayes What is so early affirmed in Scripture of the communicating of the Gospell to France i. e. by Crescens which is so near to us removes all improbabilitie from those Histories which record the plantation of the Gospel in these Islands in the Apostles times It s easie to beleeve that Crescens if he were in France might quickly step over into Engl. but the former is yet to prove For the Doctor knows very well that very learned men deny that Galatia was there taken for France but for a part of Asia which is far enough from England Yea they demonstrate it as they think that it was not meant of France for which I referre him to Estius on the place 2 Tim. 4.10 However whether Crescens were ever in France or no sure he was not in England to convert the Nation Hear the Doctors own words This which he had said before is an evidence that neither Peter nor Paul nor Crescens nor any of those that usually accompanied either of those two Apostles did bring the Christian Faith to
this Island He might have added Nor Joseph of Arimathea nor Simon Zelotes upon the reason there by him given The Affirmation of Gildas that this was in Tiberius's Raign was meer Tradition and farre from probability For then England should be converted within four yeares after Christs death In the 18. of Tiberius our Lord suffered and Tiberius raigned but 22. in all No Authors of any credit lay it so high As for Tertullian and Origen they lived both in the third Centurie above 200. years after Christ And it s very likely Christianity was planted here in some parts some time before them But it s very observable that neither of those Antients nor any before them in all their writings ever mention the Feast of the Nativity as then in observation though they often speake of other usages of the Church before and in their times The most probable opinion is that though some persons of this as of most Nations were converted early to the Faith yet the Nation or any considerable part of it was not converted till King Lucius his time about the yeare of Christ 180. the first Christian King in the whole world which is a great honour to our Nation This was done say Historians in the time of Eleutherius then Bishop of Rome who lived towards the end of the second Centurie And his Epistle to King Lucius if that be Authentick Sir Henr. Spilm concil Brit. p. 16. for the Doctor doubts it and well he may if hee do but remember what a learned Historian saies doth not say that Britain had long ago before Lucius his time received the Faith but rather nuper lately and so it was in the Latine in the Doctors Margine but wisely left out in the English which why it was done let others judge Historians say that King Lucius desired of Eleutherius that he and his people might have some sent to baptize them who accordingly sent Fugatius and Damianus Now if Christianity had been planted here from the Apostles times or by Apostolicall men it s not probable that they left no Presbyters here to baptize but that they must send to Rome for such which would give Romanists a fairer plea to subject England to Rome then that of Augustine the Monke which the Doctor disputes so much against hereafter § 5. Dioclesians persecution falls in the beginning of the fourth Century after Christ before which time wee hear of Christianity planted here and it may be the Feast of the Nativity was set up in some Churches before this time but not universally in all till about 400. years after Christ as wee shall hear the Doctor confesse before we have done though he pleads hard to prove it a custome of the Church in all ages And this may serve anon to answer that which will be produced for the Festivitie that Dioclesian slew 20000 Christians assembled together on that day though the Author of that report is of no great credit § 6. The celebration of Easter by the antient British Churches contrary to the custome of the Western Churches will give little light to the maine question concerning the first Plantation of the Gospell here by the Apostles c. or the Antiquity of the Festivall pleaded for It may indeed argue that England did not receive Christianity first from Rome in Augustines time but does not prove that those that planted Christianity here were such as in the Apostolicall times kept their Easter after the Jewish manner For the Eastern Christians commonly kept it so but not in the Apostles times Which the Doctor takes for granted but is denyed him and that upon these Reasons 1. There is no mention of either the Institution or observation of it in Scripture nor any ground to found it upon The Apostles did take advantage of that and the like Solemnities to preach to the Jewes to convert them as was said afore but so farre were they from Institution of them as Christian Feasts that they do expresly repeal them and cry them down 2. Lib. 5. c. 22. Socrates the Historian saies The Apostles were not sollicitous to appoint any Festivall daies at all then not this of Easter 3. The difference of the observation of it in the Eastern See Lo Falk reply p. 99. and Western Churches makes it evident it was not Instituted by the Apostles for then it would be uniformly observed in all places And as for the Authority of the succeeding Church in such matters we shall meet with it anon yet this we say at present that the observation of Easter hath better Antiquity than this of Christmas though not Apostolicall § 7. But the Doctor hath found one Evidence of moment Christmas day is called in our old Monument Midwinter day whence it may reasonably be concluded that when that name was first applyed to that day Christmas day was in the Calendar either coincident with or not far removed from the Winter Solstice and wee continue to call the 24. of June Midsomer day halfe a year from the 25th of December How sweetly all agree John Baptist was conceived six months before our Lord and and so born six months before him Hence the Feastmasters plead his birth on the 24. of June and his and our Lords on the 25. of December 1. But I would be satisfied which is the Older Festivall that of John or this of Christ It s observed by Chemnitius that the Feast of the Nativity was not heard of in the most antient Church till towards the 400. year but no mention of the Feast of Iohn Baptist till towards the 800. year Or it may be they were both appointed about the same time upon supposition then by the Western Church that our Saviour was borne on the 25. of December as the Doctor saies and the Feast of Nativity setled upon that day either they or some others placed the Feast of Iohn Baptist on the 24. of Iune that all might correspond 2. If the names of Midwinter day and Midsommer day were so called here while the Island was Heathen they were far more antient than Christmas Day and then Christmas day was rather applyed to Midwinter day than Midwinter day to Christmas day but however it was it followes not as the Doctor would have it that it must be soon after our Saviours times that this day was capable of that appellation and consequently that the day was here celebrated so early For it might be a good while after so called when the Island was first converted which was not as we have discoursed till towards the end of the second Century 3. It is confessed by the Doctor that Midwinter day is a fortnight sooner than our Christmas day the solstice being about the 11. of December Then say I they kept not Christmas day on Midwinter day for that 's a fortnight sooner So wee keep it not on the same day with our first converts nor yet on the day that the Western Church now keep it who
2. The Worship of the Law was for the most part Ceremoniall in externall pompe and services But the Worship of the Gospel is lesse ceremonious and gaudie and more spirituall Joh. 4. in spirit and truth opposed to those ceremoniall typicall shadowes and figures of the Legall worship The Gospel Worship is for the most part morall praying preaching hearing c. without any thing like to that ceremoniall worship except the observation of the Lords day and the two Sacraments designed and instituted by Christ himself or by his Commission But if the Church have a power to institute ceremoniall Worship she may bring us back to a Legall worship equall with the Jewes as the Church of Rome hath done 2. If the Church have any such power to institute Ceremonies they must be either Non-significant ones but those Protestants disclaim as idle fooleries or significant and then either by nature or Institution Those of nature need no Institution If Institution be pleaded it must be either Divine but the Church hath nothing to do with them they are instituted to her hands Or Humane but that 's expreslly against the second Commandement as hath been said elsewhere God onely can prescribe his own worship Hence it was that those Traditions of worship introduced by the false teachers are coudemned because they were the Doctrines and commandements of men Col. 2.22 which when our Divines urge against such kind of ceremoniall worship in the Church of Rome as Humane Institutions they have no way to avoid it Vide Estium Corne l. A lapide in locum but to say Ceremonies instituted by an humane spirit as ours are are there condemned but theirs are instituted by the holy Ghost joyning with their Pastors in the Regiment of the Church as the Rhemists speak on Math. 15.9 and others more And therefore Papists may better plead their binding power than ours can do I shall adde to this That to institute significant ceremonies as a part of Worship is a superstjtious excesse and so Wil-worship which I prove from the Doctors own Concessions To put more virtue and efficacie into things Of Superstition sect 45. then either naturally or by the Rule of Gods Word is in them is a nimiety so Superstition but for men to institute significant ceremonies for edification to teach and instruct c. is to put more virtue and efficacy in them then naturally or by the Rule of the Word that is Divine Institution God put in them ergo The Major is the Doctors own the Minor is evident They have it not by Nature nor by divine Institution then they needed not humane Institution ergo it is superstitious and consequently the Church hath no such power 3. Grant her but such power and there will be no end of Ceremonies no man can tell where she will stay Of Superstit sect 38. unlesse some bounds be prescribed in Scripture The Doctors qualifications That they be few and wholsome have no ground to rest on For who shall judge of the number or unwholsomnes without a Rule Not any private man that 's denyed and very reasonably Not a particular Church the Universall may judge otherwise Not the Universall Church of one Age for the next Generation may be wiser and thinke them too few or too many not wholsom or unwholsom and so may either multiply or annul them See more of this in the Discourse of Superstition Sect. 32.33 Upon this ground grow all those more then Jewish ceremonies of the Romish Church That of the first 2. The Doctor takes for granted also that the Church hath power to institute Holy daies such as Christmas and to make them equall with the Lords day For of this he is speaking while he gives the Church this unquestionable power but he cannot but know this is denyed by many Divines 3. He also takes as yeelded That there is some ancient Institution of this Church for his Christmas from our first conversion which must be the ground for it to stand on and a competent Authoritie for the continuance of such a practise in this Kingdome but this he hath not proved 4. Once more he takes as granted That such ceremonies or Festivals established by a Church That were to restrain our liberty and to exchange one burthen for another So the Dr. of Superstition sect 56. may not without great temerity be changed or abolished by any What not by the Universall Church not by the succeeding Church That were to make the Laws of a particular Church like those of the Medes and Persians unchangeable and equall with the Laws of God Or else to cut short the succeeding Church from the same priviledge of the former and so in time the Church may lose all power to institute New ceremonies or else ceremonies may be multiplyed to the end of the world And so much of the first the Authority of the Church to institute Ceremonies A word of the next Secondly we must enquire whether if the Church have any power to ordain any Ceremonies this of Christmas be such as she may ordain We have said and say again to institute Holy daies and to make them parts of Geds worship is a priviledge of God alone If now the Doctor shall say The Church institutes this Festival onely as a circumstance or Adjunct of Worship commanded it will bee little to his purpose and makes it no more holy than any other day when the same worship is performed But it s evident that in the Church of Rome this and other Festivals are not counted meer Ceremonies in that sense but as parts of Divine Worship and so observed with greater solemnities and more Ceremonies than the Lords day it self which is both superstitious and sacrilegious And thus it hath been with some yea many of our Prelatical and Cathedral men esteemed and observed not onely as equally holy with the Lords day but with more solemn services with more abstinencie from labour and recreations as we shall hear our Doctor confesse anon We now consider what he sayes to prove the disusing of these Feasts blameable § 10. These are part of that establishment which the Reformation in this Kingdom hath enacted for us by act of Parliament To this we say 1. The Reformation formerly made in this Kingdome we have good cause to blesse God for but we know it was not so full and perfect as the Reformers themselves could have wished by reason of the times new come out of the darknesse of Popery and the tenaciousnesse of old customs received by tradition of their Fathers 2. This seems to grant that the Reformation and so the establishment of these Festivals in this Nation was made by the State and not by the Church which now is pleaded for § 11. Secondly This other Feasts of Christ are in the Reformed especially the Lutheran Churches stil retained and where they are taken away in some Churches by some sober members wished for We answer to
the Lawes of the Church and so it proceeds from obedience to superiours Vid. Append a dutie of the 5th Commandement But to the particulars we say many things Pract. Catech on 4. Commandement 1. Did he not a little before found the Times or daies designed to publick worship upon the equity or morality of the 4th Commandement Hear what he saies of the Importance of that 4th Commandement It is a designation of Time for the speciall performing of Gods publick worship and again It is not onely lawful but necessary to set apart some times for Gods service he means by that Commandement Then say I if the 4th Commandement do necessarily require a designation of some Time for worship private as well as publick for so hee resolves in answer to the next question there does not the same Commandement as necessarily require the observation or sanctification of that Time but it must be reduced to the 5. Commandement Let him remember what he saies in his Treatise of Will-worship Sect. 4. If the matter of the command were before commanded by God 't were then no longer obedience to the Law of the Magistrate but onely to God The application is easie and I adde must God be beholden to men either for the designation or observation of his due Time by a duty from the 5th Commandement What if Superiours be so prophane See Sabbath Redevivum at large these things as to set apart no time for Gods worship or not to enjoine and require the observation of that Time is every man free to observe some or none at his pleasure what if there be no Publick Worship what if a man be and live in places where neither Time nor Publick Worship is appointed by Superiours is hee now at libertie to take all Time as his own so it seemes by this Doctrine if men observe Times Lords day and others onely as a dutie to Superiours in the 5th Commandement 2. He takes for granted that the Designation of the sufficient Time due and necessary by the 4th Commandement is in the power of men Church or state which we say belongs onely to God 3. He also supposes that the Church or State hath power to Sanctifie a Time so that it must not ordinarily be mixed with prophane and common uses which wee think God onely can doe 4. He also takes it as granted that the Church may designe as little or as much as few or as many Times or Daies as they shall think fitt and that ordinarily in every week or month or year without Sperstition as an act of piety which we suppose they cannot do without prejudice to the 4th Commandement and to Christian liberty seeing the burden of Jewish Holydayes is taken off by Christ and we reduced to the 4th Commandement as for one day in seaven to be holy so for our allowance of six daies for our own works The result of this answer is this that they that retain this usage of the Festival as a day made Holy by the Church or state are both injurious to God in usurpation upon his prerogative in the 4th Commandement and also guilty of Willworship in holding up a Worship not commanded by God against the second Commandement 2. In respect to those who first instituted it without command from others in whom onely it is called Will-worship they are free from guilt too 1. because among the Jewes some Feasts were instituted that of Purim and of the Dedication without command c. 2. Freewill-offerings of this Nature are to be the more not the lesse acceptable for being voluntary To this we say in generall it may be Will-worship to observe what is commanded by others as well as to institute worship without a command In speciall to the first reason the Feasts instituted by the Jewes we shall speak anon here sect 29. To the second of Freewill-offerings wee say 1. These Holydayes of mens Institution are not like those Freewill-offerings of the old Law as we have shewed upon his Treatise of Willworship sect 29. 2. We add it is not in the power of men to institute any worship not commanded by God and is flatly against the second Commandement But these Holydaies are by him made parts of Worship 3. Suppose the Jewes should have made more Holydaies yearly than God commanded would they have been accepted should they not have heard who required these at your hands wee may guesse by their Fasts which they appointed God instituted one Fast onely once a year upon the Expiation day They in their captivity appointed more in the 5. and 7. month yearly but what acceptance found they see Zech. 7.5 when yee fasted and mourned in the 5. and 7. month even those 70. years did yee at all fast to me even to me And may not Papists who have a Saint and an Holyday allmost for every day in the year be justified by this arguing Hath it not a great shew of wisdome Piety Devotion to devoâ—e most of their time to God Are they not their Free-wil-offerings the more acceptable because voluntary and uncommanded Let no man say they dedicate those daies to Saints and Invocate the Saints c. and that makes them abhominable But suppose none of those but the Holy daies be as the Church of England expressed herself devoted onely to the honour of God but yet esteemed as more holy aad as a Worship of God and more acceptable to God because voluntary even these and that other that it s done without command of God will denominate them Will-worship and so odious to God And so much for that Secondly he comes now to vindicate it from Superstition and saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Supestitum cultus worshiping of Daemons or soules of dead men but its little lesse then blasphemie to number Christ with them c. To which we say For the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Superstition wee have considered it in his Treatise of Superstition and have found him granting the sense of them to be farre larger than the Worshiping of Daemons And wee have proved it rather to signifie any false Superradded worship not commanded of God A Nimiety or excesse of Religion as Super statutum above the Law of God In a word any false worship of the true God which is exemplified in many particulars there amongst which this is one In placing the worship of God or more holinesse in things times places c. then God hath placed in them Wee shall consider what he saies to vindicate this Festivall from it 1. The Birth of Christ is a mercy of such excellent quality that it can never be overvalued c. This is granted But to Institute a day as Holy without command of Christ for an Annuall commemoration of this is above the power of any Church and a Superstitious presumption and withall needlesse considering that the Lords day which includes the commemoration not onely of his Birth but his Resurrection and the
without offence to God follow their lawful vocations on that day Rest is made an oblation to God placing the worship of God in the observation of the day as a voluntarie oblation and parallel with the Freewill-offerings in the Law which the Doctor takes speciall notice of * were parts of Gods worship Offer it up a voluntary oblation to Christ in the service and to the honour of Christ c. Sect. 28. Fourthly Forbidding labours on that day with greater zeal and severer penalties than on the Lords day It was held and accordingly censured as more Piacular to worke upon this day than on the Lords day Fifthly In the necessitie of the observation of it in so much as hee was esteemed no good Christian that did not observe it Sixthly It became a note of discrimination of people as more or less Religious Just as the Doctor observed * Willworship s 28. of the Hasidaei and makes it part of their Superstition or Will-worship That they first began to add to the law of God voluntary performances of their owne then they made them necessary and laid the obligation of them on others to doe as they did and then not being obeyed discriminated themselves from all others as the onely obedient servants of God and so called themselves Pharisees And was not this exemplified in the Institution of this Festivall At first after an Age or two from the Apostles some began to set up this and other days as a voluntary oblation to Christ and a pious Addition to the Lords day others in time made it necessary as Socrates observed and then laid the obligation of it upon others to doe as they did And if they were not obeyed they discriminated themselves from such as refused as the onely pious and Religious men of the Times That good Father Saint Austin was a little faulty here if that worke was Austins All that acknowledge themselves sonnes of the Church observe the Festivalls of the Church cited by the Doctor § 35. Serm. de Temp. 250 To which the Dr. adds 'T is consequent to this that they which observe them not disclaime this sonship and cast themselves out of this family Pract. Cat. And hear the Doctors owne discrimination of himselfe and his party by the censure of himselfe and his party by the Censure of the Refusers The fastidious rejecting or not observing the Festivalls of the Church universall the great dayes c. must certainly be looked upon by every man as an act of affected departure from the universall Church of Christ in all ages as well as from the reformed Church of England his mother Sect. 45. Which Sect. 12. he had called an Act of Division and Separation from that Church of the first and purest times How justly or truly let the Reader judge by that which hath and shall be said In the meane time the Doctor hath handsomely given or taken the name of Pharisees to himselfe and his parties as volunteeres in worship above the law of God and left the name of honest modest Karaej unto others who dare not venture to goe beyond or before the Law in worship Obj. But he starts an objection It hath a semblance of that Mat. 5.9 Teaching for doctrines the Traditions of men He answers Doctrines there is the affirming a thing to be the pleasure and command of God as if I should put the Kings broad Seale to a deed of my owne but this is no waies chargeable on those that acknowledge this an Ecclesiasticall institution and pretend it not to be prescribed by Christ I reply 1 Teaching for Doctrines here is not the affirming a thing to be a command of God or not that onely but is expounded by Col. 2.22 after the commandements and doctrines of men That is men out of their wisdome prescribe and by their authority command such and such doctrines either as very pious and pleasing or more acceptable to God as a voluntary worship not alwaies affirming them to bee the commandements of God but holding them out as the Traditions of the Elders as the Pharisees did 2. It s so much more chargeable on them that acknowledge it an Ecclesiasticall Institution as a kind of Superstition because those Pharisees and false Teachers as he saies pleaded Gods Command for their doctrines for what they did in matter of worship But these pretend onely the Churches command which is worse then putting the Kings seale to a deed of their owne For it usurps the very throne of God to appoint his worship which is the highest Treason Other things there are concerning this controversie which we shall take notice of hereafter In pract Catechism and now come to consider how he can vindicate this Festivall from the Riot and excesse commonly found there which he acknowledges a sin and a greater sin in a Christian than in a Jew whose promises were of an earthly plenty c. To which we say § 17. The Jewish promises being for the most part of earthly plenty not onely for they had also spirituall promises they were permitted like children fed with milke and hony a weeke of earthly joyes and pleasures But the promises and exhibitions of them by Christ being all Spirituall to Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Spirituall joyes are as the Doctor sayes well the Christians eminent if not onely portion but these are not limited to one or twelve dayes in a year but daily joyes every day is a Christmas to a godly heart Rejoyce in the Lord alwaies againe I say rejoyce § 18. Festivity and hospitality its true are separable from riot but very hardly And if gluttony and drunkennesse were the prescribed worship in Heathenish Feasts wee have found by long experience they were the practised intertainement of this Festivall which many yeares preaching could not reforme The heathenish usages in it almost yeelded sect 2. as they doe imply that the Festivall it selfe was instituted to gratifie the Heathens by imitation of their feasts at the same time of the yeare so God to shew his dislike if not his detestation of it hath fuffered these Humane inventions and institutions in his service to be attended and celebrated with the two extremes of true worship Superstition and Prophanesse we shall heare anone Sect. 21. That in the ancient Church on dayes of Festivitie men began to adorne themselves sumptuously to shew their pride to fare deliciously to surfeting drunkennesse So soone these abuses got into them and all this while for so many hundred years could not be gotten out by all the Fathers Children of the Church The spirituall dainties of a Christian peace with God and joy in the holy Ghost the quotidian Festivall are free from these excesses Be not drunke with wine wherein is excesse but be filled with the Spirit speaking to your selves in Psalmes and Hymnes and spirituall songs making melody in your hearts to the Lord. Those that have most of these care least for
earthly joyes and they that care most for earthly joyes without which the Festivitie would be thought a time of Lent Fasting it s feared least of those Spirituall dainties § 19. As some having left this custome of Christmas so called have used their liberty of Feasting at other times which argues sayes the Doctor The good cheere not to be the thing disliked in it So others that keepe up or cry up the custome of the Festivity have taken the liberty to lay aside Hospitality and Charity not onely at that time but all the yeare long which shewes it was not so much the Hospitality that they liked as an old Custome received by Tradition of their Fathers which usually sticks as Ivie to the tree closer to carnall hearts then any truth of Religion or Institution o◠God That good Cheer and Hospitality and better cloathes are the attendant upon Gods Festivities is a knowne and granted truth But the Doctor must first prove this to be one of them Necessary or Lawfull and then talke of better cheer and cloaths Hospitality to friends and Charity to the poore have time enough to be exercised all the yeare But to make a Misers Feast as they say at Christmas and to neglect both neighbours and poore all the yeare after is but a poore evidence of Hospitalitie or Charitie § 20. If the Doctor will yeeld as he seemes to doe That when the Attendant hath destroyed the principall and the External part shall devoure the inward and when it shall appeare that the excesses and vices of men occasioned by the Christmas cheere sports are more considerable to the raising of Soules than his forementioned uses are beneficiall c. That then he will beleeve there is place and season of Reformation in this particular The time is long agoe past when Reformation should have found a place and season not onely of the excesse aforesaid but of the Festivitie it selfe which hath ordinarily if not inseperably been attended with such mischiefs without the least attempt of Reformation § 21. When pride and surfeting c. got first into Festivities in the Ancient Churches as is confessed the Fathers had they endeavored the Removall of the occasion the Feasts themselves they had prevented many grievous sinnes which to this day have been the concomitants of such Festivities and had saved the Reformers of latter times much worke which now they finde by the opposition of such as hate to be reformed As for his Discipline to be exercised only upon the riotous outward party Saint Paul might have taught him a better way of Reformation who when the Agapae the Feasts of Charity begun upon good intentions to relieve the poore and testifie brotherly affections began to be abused to surfeting and drunkenesse 1 Cor. 11. did not exercise his discipline onely upon the outward Riotous party but upon those Feasts themselves by distraction or abolition of them Some man perhaps the Doctor would have said must the abuse of a laudable custom take away the use thereof might not the Apostle have tryed other remedies to rescue a laudable custome from an impious appendage as in the next section § 22. But yet see how Indulgent and tender the Doctor is in his Reformation 1. The eating and sporting part that neede not be abolished save onely in case of great and generall abuses 2. Nor then till the abuses are not onely so great as decernible to out-ballance the good uses but also so generall that the whole Church in a manner runs madding into those very great abuses So that lesser and lesser general abuses need no Reformation this is pretty unntempered morter but we shall assume The abuses have beene long so great that they out-ballance the good pretended and so generall that the whole nation if not the whole Church hath runne madding after them besides the Superstition on the Churches part almost equall to that in the brazen serpent of which before and hereafter more Therefore its time they should be abolished in relation to this Festivity § 23. It is easily beleeved that not onely the loosly disposed as he saies will turne the Lords day into luxury and excess but also the superstitiously devoted to this day who prefer it in opinion and practise above the Lords day These latter will not labour or play upon Christmas day no touching either cards or dice that day as sect 24. But it s knowne two well that the Lords day it was the ordinary practise of some great Rabbies and ceremonialists after evening prayer if not all the afternoone to play at cards and so continue till night And this is the common issue of all inventions of men in the service of God as to preferre them before the Institutions of God The Statutes of Omri are kept So to make bold with Gods Institutions rather then their owne They for the most part that are most strict and zealous in pleading for and observation of the Festivalls are commonly most remisse and loose in observation of the Lords day § 24. For this we have the Doctors owne assertion Christmas day it self hath been kept if not much more certainly as strictly as any Lords day in the year in frequenting the services of the Church c. in keeping at home c. not touching either cards or dice that day The excesses have been on the after daies c. To which we say First this is part of the Superstition we charge it with that the day hath been esteemed and accounted more sacred most sacred the Dr. calls it sect 20. and observed with more much more or certainly as strictly as the Lords day any Lords day in the year wee think equal strictness of observation were too much to set their posts cheeke by joale with Gods But we know the ground of this to be that they make the Lords day and Festivalls to be founded on the same * See sect 57. The Lords day by the same authority appointed yet sect 31. he saies the Apostles instituted the Lords day Authority viz. of the Church and then why as one of them sayes should they not have equal observation Secondly the not touching of Cards or Dice on Christmas day it seemes the Doctor alowes both on the other daies may seem to adde to their Superstition or Hypocrisie Their Superstition if cards and dice be lawfull in that they forbid them on a day that God hath not forbidden them which is to make it an holy day equall to Gods besides that noted in the former section that some would touch and touch again Cards on the Lords day Their Hypocrisie if they be unlawfull that pretend to worship God one day by touch not handle not that they may take a dispensation or licence to offend him all the twelve daies after For I pray why are Cards or Dice more lawfull I say not on the Lords day on Stephens or Johns day than on Christmas day why more unholy or unlawfull on Christmas
because they are generally accounted posthumous and spurious And that saying of Nicephorus no very credible Author that Justinus the Emperour commanded it to be kept Festival over the World Shakes the Antiquity of it For if the Apostles had instituted it it would have had an universall observation over the world long before Justinus his daies ho lived in the 6. Century As for Dioclesians burning so many thousand on Christmas day wee have spoken before and onely now note that Nicephorus saies it was done by Maximinus However this was in the beginning of the 4th Centurie as was said above § 36. Though it be not much Materiall to the Festivities observation whither it was the 25. day of December as now of late Sect. 61 it was kept or some other day as he elsewhere saies yet the proofes for that day are not very cogent It s probable they that first instituted the day did fixe it by some Tradition on that day Some yea many things there are that may make us doubt of the truth of our Calculation First the Doctor himselfe hath given us one ground of scruple sect 7. when he saies Christmas day is in our old Monuments called Midwinter day which is the day of the Winter Solstice confessed by him to be a fortnight distant from the 25. of December Secondly it hath been the opinion of many if not most of our learned Divines that our Lord dyed when he was about 33. and halfe years of age or near unto 34. as the Doctor saies Now the death of Christ was at the time of the Passeover about our March Quaer 1. Sect. 10. or Aprill If now Christ died at 33. and an half then count 6. months backward when he was just 33. years old and that will fall about September If at 34. compleat then hee was born and dyed just about the same time that is about Aprill That 's another ground of scruple in our Calculation Thirdly the Arabick Codex of the Counsells is of younger date not able to justifie the Canons called Apostolicall to be Apostolicall Fourthly Sect. 37. the Doctor himselfe is upon his ifs and t is probable If it were framed by those that succeeded the Apostles c. so it is probable they were first intitled Canons of Apostolicall men Or if it were one of those which in succeeding times were added and put into that volum c. This is enough to shake the authority of those Canons and so the Antiquity of the Festivall on such a day § 39. It s very like that Twelfe day is of the same Originall and same Antiquity with Christmas day or not not much younger but both of them Posthumous to the prime Antiquity The observation of both not much differing in their solemnitie A speciall Holyday imitating the custome of the Jewes which kept the first and last daies of every Feast daies of solemn assembly so speciall and solemn that it outwent the Lords day as Christmas also did which is usuall for mens inventions to out do the Institutions of God § 40. But there is something that weakens the Antiquity of this Twelfe day Festivall viz. Vide Chemnit Prolegom 4. p. 14. a in Harmon p. 15 a. As baptized in the beginning of December that it is not certain 1. whence it had the name of the Epiphanie whither from the appearing of the Star to the wisemen or from the descending of the Holy Ghost upon Christ at his Baptisme or as the Doctor himself addes Sect. 41. From the first appearing of Christ in the World 2. It is made more uncertain because Epiphanius affirms that many orthodox Christians in Aegipt did keep the Feast of the Nativitie on that Twelfe day And the Doctor saies hee is more inclined to the last of the three conjectures that is that Epiphania signifies the day when Christ was born in the flesh as Epiphanius had said which though the Doctor say that it is confuted by Saint Hierome yet is enough to shake the Authority of the Institution that certainly it is not Apostolicall nor by the Primitive purest Churches when the name was not agreed on in Epiphanius time in the fourth Centurie nor the day it selfe distinguished but Christmas day by some was observed on the same day Whither the Mag◠came to Christ the next twelfe day after his Birth or that day twelvemonth I shall not dispute onely I shall tell the Doctor that Cheronicus is of opinion that they came the twelfth day after Christs Birth and seem to have reason for it The 41 42 43. Sect. 45. Harm in locum Sections may receive their solution from what is all-ready said § 44. But now hee will put it beyond all question by the testimony of Chrysostome and other Antients out of the censuall Tables of Augustus the Registers of such as were enrolled at the Taxe Luc. 2.1 together with the place and day of the month and year when it was done This indeed would end the question concerning the day of Christs Birth but makes yet nothing to the maine question That Christmas so called is of Apostolicall Institution or of the next age Le ts hear what may be said to those Testimonies To begin with the most antient Justin Martyr he brings the Rolls to evidence the place of Christs Birth but saies not a word of the observation of the Festivitie of his Birthday in his time The like may be said for Tertullian He alledges the Rolls fidelissimum testem Dominicae Nativitatis marke that a most faithfull witnesse of the Lords Nativity which Marcion denyed not Natalis Diei testem a witnesse of the Observation of his Birthday as Festivall in his time or on the 25. of December for he makes no mention of that Festivall at all which is probable he would if any such Custome had been then in Being The whole weight then of the businesse must lye upon Saint Chrysostom who in his Hom. of the Nativity saies We have received the day from those that accurately knew these things and which dwell in the City of Rome Suppose we shotld grant this Testimonie to be true and Authentick for the day of our Lords Birth which yet is doubtfull by what hath been said before and shall anone yet this will not prove that Antiquity of the Festivall which the Doctor would thence conclude For besides that Chrysostome lived in the fourth Centurie when the Tradition was grown to a Law as Socrates said himselfe gives us occasion of scruple by the weakness of his proofs He tells us of a threefold demonstration that the Day which they celebrated Tom. 5. p. 512. l. 23. was in the month of December called by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the month wherein Christ was conceived was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wee shall consider his Demonstrations in order 1. The first is this That this Festivall was so suddenly published every where and that it arose and flourished to such an
Fathers of the first Ages doe not so much as intimate any such usage in their times No mention there is amongst the most antient of celebrating the Feast of the Nativitie till Basills Nazianzenes and Chrysostomes time who lived not till the fourth Centurie at least They say indeed it was in practise in some places before their time but that might be some 100. more or lesse years and yet be farre from the first ages of the Church or being Universall 3. Another of the Doctors cautions is it must be attested without any considerable opposition But this his Christmas found in the fourth Centurie as we heard Sect. 44. In Chrysostomes time there was a considerable opposition Many being doubtfull many charging the Festivity with novelty and as of late brought in For a conclusion then of all the Doctors Censure is too harsh and the Character too hard that is set upon the refusing of it That it hath nothing but the Novelty and contempt of Antiquity to recommend it unto any We shall onely put him in mind of two places in his owne writings The one here at Sect. 35. the other Testimony of Nicephorus That Justinus the Emperor first commanded it to be kept Festivall over the world Then say I it was not an Universall usage in all ages of the Church which the Doctor hath so long pleaded for for Justinus lived in the sixt Century I know what hee answers to it That belonging onely to the edict of the Emperour for the universall observation doth no way prejudge the Churches whither Apostolicall or Primitive Institution of it It s enough to prejudge the universall observation of it in all Ages and consequently it is not Apostolicall The other place is in his Practicall Catechisme where he confesses pag. 181. It was not solemnized universally till about 400. yeares after Christ. How often hath he charged us with departure from the Universall Church in rejecting and not observing the Festivities of the Universall Church c. Sect. 12. and in that Sect. 45. I hope upon second thoughts hee will be more moderate in his Censures and find that his rash zeale for the Authority of the Church his Mother and Tradition of the Antients his Fathers hath carried him beyond the bounds of Reason and Religion § 46. The remaining part of the Doctors discourse is spent in answering 16. Quaries propounded by another But most of what hee hath said may be taken away by what hath above beene answered I shall not put my sickle into another mans Corn but leave it to the Author of them or some friend of his to vindicate them § 74. The Doctor now for a conclusion drawes out some Quaeres of his owne to be considered and answered by him that shall undertake this businesse as a shorter way to question and debate the truth or supposed certainty of some of his own principles For an essay this § 75. Whither it be not lawfull for the Church either nationall of one or Universall of all parts of Christendome especially of that age nearest the Apostles of the first and purest time to take upon it to institute one or more daies upon any speciall occasion of some eminent mercy of Gods toward the whole Church to be used yearly in acts of Christian piety and charity Chemnit Exam. de dieb Fest Ames Medul in 4. precept D. Riv. in Exod. 20. p. 206. 6. by all the Children of that Church and to expect obedience from them But under favour this is not the question now between us For not onely the Lutherans but even the most rigid Calvinists and Nonconformists as they were called do grant That the Church or rather the State hath power to set apart any day to the acts of piety and charity not onely upon extraordinary eminent mercies but upon ordinary occasions provided 1. They be not too many for number nor 2. Imposed as necessary to the prejudice of Christian libertie Nor 3. made parts of the worship of God and other like cautions and conditions by them prescribed And if the Superiour Powers shall appoint such daies so qualified this may secure both those that institute them and those that observe them from any crime of Superstition It s more then probable that they who first appointed those daies in memory of the Martyrs in their particular Churches intended no more but on such a day yearly to commemorate the Faith and constancie of those holy Sufferers as with thanks to God for his Graces in them so to the Incouragement of other Christians to imitate their virtues But after Ages soon grew Superstitions in their Number in their use and end Dedicating daies to to Saints Invocating them in their prayers Making the observation of them necessary The daies themselves holy holyer than other daies than the Lords day placing the worship of God in them expecting more acceptance more blessing from the services of those daies as a voluntary worship These abuses were foreseen by the Reformed Churches and thereupon either the Daies were rejected altogether by some or cautioned against by others especially by this Church of England as all doe know But when this last generation of misdevout men began to exceed in the honour estimation and observance of those remaining Festivalls especially this of Christmas equalling them with if not preferring them above the Lords day as was said before c. then those that were conscientious and tender of the Worship of God beganne to oppose such inchroachments upon it who formerly did observe the daies and others that thought they had Power in their hands did lay them aside upon these reasons It were too long to instance the particular Superstitions not onely of the vulgar people but even of many Divines discovered in their Practises and Discourses against the Lords day and for the Holydaies None that I know or have met with have manifested more waies of being Superstitious in this Subject of Holydaies than the Doctor in this discourse of Festivalls as hath beene made appeare at the end of the sixteenth Section to which I referre the Reader and proceede to his second question § 77. Whither such an antient Institution of the Church of Christ by name the anniversarie feast of Christs birth though it be not affirmed to be commanded by Christ or instituted by the Apostles or in it selfe considered without respect to the Institution absolutely necessary to the being of a Church yet being thus more than lawfull pious in it selfe proper in respect of the ground primitively Catholick if not Apostolick in respect of the Institution may be lawfully abolished c. Wherein the Doctor takes for granted these things which he hath not proved 1. That this Festivall is of so antient Institution as primitively Catholick if not Apostolick Seeing it hath beene made appear to be neither 1. Apostolicke or 2. a Primitive Institution nor 3. Of Catholick observation till at least the 400. yeare by his owne confession 2. That it
is more than lawfull pious in it selfe When at most it is but a thing Indifferent in its use and in its Abuse by Superstition and Willworship more than unlawfull impious 3. That such an Antient Institution if it were proved so abused to Superstition and profanesse may not by a particular Church or Christian Magistate be lawfully abolished without regard to the Universall the Universall Church being never like to meet or if they could the greatest part being Antichristian unlike ever to consent to the abolishing of it Till the Doctor shall prove these things a further answer is not needfull And so I come to his last question which is this Whither by any obligation of conscience it appear necessary to be thus abolished on this onely ground of truth because the following dayes have sometimes beene mispent in riot c. by some wicked men But here again the Doctor takes for granted what hee hath not proved viz. That the onely ground of truth or onely true ground of abolishing this Festivall was the Riot committed in the following daies whereas the principall charge against it was the Superstition and Willworship attending the observation of it though the Riot and prophanesse of the following daies might justly adde an Aggravation to them and call for a Reformation And now for a conclusion of all wee shall make bold to propound some questions to the Doctor or any that shall undertake this cause And they are these 1. Whither any Church nationall or universall since the Apostles have power to institute any Religious Ceremonies as parts of worship c. as it is propounded Sect. 9. and in particular this Festivall of Christmas making it a part of Divine worship the day equally holy as the Lords day c. and not be Superstitious 2. Whither if any Humane Institution in the worship of God be abused to Superstition and prophanesse it may not ought not to be abolished 3. Whither the Feast of Christmas in speciall hath not been abused to riot and excesse by the most part of vulgar people and to Superstition also by them and many Divines and by the Doctor himself if Superstition be an excesse of Religion as we have proved it to be 4. If so then Whither it was not necessary for such as have power in their hands to abolish such an Institution as Hezekiah did the brazen Serpent which had a better Originall and Author for the Superstition and Idolatry cleaving to it and as Saint Paul did the Agapae the Lovefeasts for the prophanesse crept into them D. Rivet in Exod. 20. pap 205. a. Hic existimamus Regulam illam habere locum Adiaphora non necessaria horrenda Idolomania polluta esse abolenda FINIS Errata Pag. 1. l 2. for Translation r. Tractation l. 18. for all r. ill l. 19. for work and worker r. worm and canker p. 2. l. 14. put in First before Table p. 3. l. 8. for partly r. particularly p. 4. l. 12. r. defines p. 17. l. 21. for since r. sinne p. 10. may r. Superstitiosiores l. 19. r. others worshiped p. 19. l. 4. a fine dele a God p. 25. r. l. 3. for when r. then p. 27. l. 1. for their r. then l. 3. r. institution l. 4. for our r. one p. 28. l. 12. for bear they p 30. l. 5. for matter r. rather l. 9. put in must dist l. 5. a f. r. Math. 15. p. 41 l. 19. for not r. but. p. 45. l. last r. context p. 46. l. 6. a f. for toiles r. wiles p. 41. l. 18. r. Teachers p. 45. l. 20. for these r. the p. 52. l. 23. for there r. here p. 65. l. 17. r. therefore p. 66. l. 2 r. transform p. 69. l. 1. r. outdated p. 78. l 18. for lo. r. Lord. p. 81. l. 9. r. abhorres l. 18. r. hear p. 82. l. 5. a f. r. among p. 84. l. 11. r. voiding p. 85. l. 3. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 86. l. 11. r. works l. 19. r. Hasidim p. 88. l. 12. r. contradistinction p. 96. l. 8. a f. r. distinction p. 98. l. 12. for now r. nor l. 22. for his r. this p. 100. l. 5. for again r. often l. 8. for we r. he p. 102. l. 3. a f. for there r. this p. 108. l. 13. for trase r. trash so l. 16. p. 111. l. 4. for rod r. rode p. 113. l. 17. r. binds p. 116. l. 7. a f. r. affirming p. 119. l. 3. r. Karaei Title pag. at end for vincimur r. vincuntur p. 123. l. 6. after mnde put in a double inference p. 129. l. 11. for above r. about p. 132. l. 3. a f. for plead r. placed p. 166. for raising r. ruining p. 167. l. 17. for distr r. destruction p. 175. l. 2. a fine for is r. as p. 176. l. 1. for Fast r. Feast l 13. put in I.