In the Greek they are more significant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Put upon you Sophisticall Paralogismes In locum The word Philosophy seems to me to be all one with worshiping of Angels v. 18. saies the Doctor Superstition Sect. 7. probabilitate sermonis by probable arguments as Beza by Rhetoricall insinuations or sophisticall subtleties as D. Davenant explaines it to lead you away from Christ Now the Apostle goes on to discover some of those toiles and waies whereby Seducers did beguile their followers 1. Philosophicall speculations having a shew of much wisdome ver 8. Beware least any man spoil you through Philosophie an instance whereof is given in the 18. ver in voluntary humilitie and worshiping of Angells 2. Traditions and Inventions of men superadded or continued in the worship of God an instance wherof is in the 20.22 ver Why are yee subject to Ordinances after the Commandements Doctrines of men 3. Mosaical Ceremonies revived after they were abrogated by Christ of which he speakes ver 16.17 His scope in all is to dispute against all rites and Ceremonies obtruded upon the Church as parts of Divine worship D. Daven in locum as necessary duties of holiness and righteousness and as binding Conscience As that learned and judicious Professor expresses it And the Apostle opposes this onely against them ver 8. They are not after Christ but invented and imposed by men Not after Christ i. e. not after the Doctrine or Commandement of Christ in the Gospell which he expressâ—s in another phrase ver 19. Not holding the head but after the Commandements and Doctrines of men ver 22. Whence it appeares that the Reverend Doctor seemes mistaken when hee saies Where yet you must observe he doth not speake of Commands but Doctrines i. e. not of the prohibition of the Magistrate c. but of false teachers imposing them as the commands of God For the Apostle speakes expresly these impositions Touch not tast not c. were after the Commandements and Doctrines of men ver 22. and ver 8. after the Traditions of men to worship God by the observation of them The worship of God did once consist in these observations and Abstinencies and the false Teachers put them upon their followers as still usefull to this end Having done this hee sets an ill Character upon those Doctrines of worship which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in Willworship c. But are after the Commandements and Doctrines of men not any Doctrines or Commands of Christ and so no better than Willworship c The Doctor seemes to place the illnesse of this practice in this That they urging some abolisht ceremonies as still in force by divine precept should thereby deny Christ to be come in the flesh Which though it bee true in part yet is not all that the Apostle here intended but this he also addes that they placing the worship of God in those observances not after Christ but after the Commandements and traditions of men did fall into Willworship which had a shew of wisdome but no more For it is not onely sinfull Willworship to teach and observe the Old Ceremonies as parts of Gods worship when they are abolished but also to inuent a new way of worship as that of worshiping Angells was for certain ver 18. and to put it upon God as an acceptable worship § 4. That wee have not mistaken the Doctors meaning will appear by that which he addes about the difference betwixt making of positive humane Lawes in indifferent things and urging or teaching things for Divine commands which either never were commanded by God or else are now outdated by Christ The Apostles discourse proceeds of the latter c. This is true the Apostle hath here no reflection on the Magistrates making lawes in indifferent things but yet if the Magistrate or Church should invent and impose any new way of worshiping God as the Church of Rome hath done many would not the Apostles arguing conclude them to be Will-worship as well as if they had urged and taught some antiquated ceremonies to be observed as a part of the worship of God The Doctor grants and asserts Sect. 3. That if the Magistrate should teach or impose Doctrines of men upon others as the Commands of God when they are not he should thereby incurre the censure of a false teacher also And if he should teach or impose some antiquated worship upon his people though not as the command of God would he not be a Teacher of false worship also As for his instance of David who appointed the Levites to serve from the age of 20. years whereas God by Moses had appointed it but from 25. years old c. It is first Impertinent for hee brings it as an instance of a Magistrates power in a thing indifferent whereas this was in a matter of Religion and more then so in a matter formerly Commanded by God wherein what he did is not imitable by any Magistrate now who hath no power to order any thing in Religion against a former Order of God as in the case in hand there was What then may be said for Davids altering the appointment of God as in some other things besides Divines do answer that David was a Prophet inspired by God or directed by some other Prophet how to Order the affaires of the Temple and worship of God And this to mee is evident by texts of Scripture 1 Chron. 28.19 All this said David the Lord made me to understand in writing by his good hand upon me even all the works of this pattern which hee ascribes to the Spirit of God ver 12 13. cap. 23.27 by the last words of David the Levites were numbred from 20 years old of which he saies the spirit of the Lord spake by me 2 Sam. 23.2 3. But this by the way § 5. The full importance of the words ver 22. hee saies is this That when those abstinencies are imposed and taught as divine obliging precepts this is an abuse of them which were otherwise innocent things and that abuse of them dangerous or destructive But 1. why doth he refuse our Translation of those word which all are to perish with the using For the verb from whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived signifies sometimes simply to use Estius in locum And the Civill Lawyers take Abusus for the consuming use ordinarily 2. Whither the Apostle speaks of the meats or of those ordinances of abstaining both may be said to perish in the using The meates apparently and the Ordinances themselves in this sense that whereas whilst they were under Gods command they were profitable to the observers now being outdated they perish with the using without any spirituall advantage 3. There is little or nothing in the text to import that they were imposed and taught by the False Treachers as Divine obliging precepts though if so that had beene an abuse of them but rather that they
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
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
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