he saies for it § 25.1 If it were a denotation of some ill it would not prejudice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the addition in the middle noting Superfluity perhaps some unlawfull or luxuriant matter Supervacaneam religionem sponte assumptum sive affectatam si◠Estius in ver 18 taken into that worship either prohibited object or noxious at least burthenous ceremonies in number or quality might turn that into evill which the voluntariness or uncommandednesse of them were not able to do To this I say The superfluity of them consisted not onely in the number burthen quality of them but even in the voluntary constitution of them as worship of God For so our Saviour charges them In vain do they worship me c. and that 's Superfluous worship And the uncommandednesse if there were nothing else in a matter of worship turnes them into ill and abhominable For this is the summe of the second Commandement God must be worshiped with his own prescribed worship and consequently all uncommanded worship is superfluous vain and sinfull as hath oft been said § 26. But secondly he saies I cannot acknowledge that word is taken by Epiphan in an ill sense though that was the Interpretation of their name they might be ill men yet the name might not signifie any ill thing c. who would think the Pharisees should find an advocate being such notorious Hypocrites The very name of their Religion argues them proud vain superfluous worshipers both for number and burthen of their ridiculous ceremonies and all of their own devising as parts of worship and yet the word cannot be yeelded to be taken in an ill notion Epiphan is describing the Heresie of the Pharisees awing others and calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as offending both in Willworship of their owne devising and also in the abundance and superfluity of them and yet the word hath no ill notion let him enjoy his own sense of it Sure our Saviour would not have condemned them so oft so sharply for both these if the words might have had a good sense or notion § 27. The truth is the main crime of the Pharisees was their censorious proud despising of other men whom they thought not so godly as themselves This is another of the Doctors mistakes Their main crime was that which was the occasion of that despising of other men Math. 23. which was their Hypocrisie which was cloaked with their mancle of Devotion in the Superfluity and Supererogation of their Traditions and Willworship which making them proud as all Willworshipers are with a shew of wisdom they despised others whom they thought lesse godly than themselves Luke 18. 1. trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others Their strictnesse in some particulars neglected by others was not so much in moralls as in ceremonialls of their own devising in washings and Fastings and placing the worship of God in them as Papists do and therefore the Doctor mistakes when he applies that Scripture to these these things ought you to have done for there it meant of things commanded by God but then their fault was that they were exact in the least commands and loose in far greater matters Or if they ought to have done their own Traditions why does our Saviour so bewoe them so often for doing of them And yet the Doctor saies Their strictnesse in Religion is far from being it self any ill character or blemish upon their voluntary religious performances wherein their superlative strictnesse did consist Their Superlative strictnesse consisted chiefly in the observation of their own Traditions even to the avoiding of the Commandements of God by them Mat. 15 6. and does this leave no blemish upon them I say no more let him consider it § 28. His third answer for the Pharisees is That the Originall of them was from the Hasidaei so called for their excess of charity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and voluntary performances above what the Law required of them and so differed from the Karraim who did that onely which was commanded by the Law c. It s likely to be so But when he saies these were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he renders such as in their obedience performed voluntarily some things which the Law required not and so differed from the Karaei I know not what he means for the word signifies onely such as were devoted voluntarily or as our English Translation reads it wellminded to the Law that is the Law of God But I think his intention is to fetch hence a colour for the Pharisees and his own voluntary worship whereas the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies onely the freenesse or willingnesse of the Soul in the prescribed worship of God For all was to be voluntary and willing service and Gods people a willing people Ps 110 Populus volunta tum Now in this sense the Karaej were also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wellminded or voluntarily devoted to the Law But this word differs much from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a will-worshiper which signifies rather as wee have proved a Deviser of worship than one voluntary in gods prescribed worship Or if he take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for those Freewill offerings allowed in the Law as the 70. render the word yet in this sense the Karaej I doubt not were as well devoted and as wellminded to the Law as the Hasidaej The difference then between them was rather in this that the one in their worship kept close to the Rules of the Law the others would Supererogate and devise worship above or beside the Law and so the Doctor I think intends it Now I beleeve our Saviour would not have blamed the Pharisees for their Freewill offerings or voluntary performances in that sense because the Law allowed and approved them but he blames them for their Traditions their voluntary worship devised by themselves which the Doctor calls their voluntary performances above the Law And therefore however Scaliger may justifie the Karaei for doing onely what was commanded of them He can never justifie the Hasidaei for doing more in the worship of God than was commanded them unlesse he will condemn our Saviour for condemning them For the rest of the discourse in this Section I shall onely note the progresse of Willworship At first the Hasidaei afterwards Pharisees were onely men devoted or well minded to the Law it seemes in words of Charity Afterwards they finding applanse from men they began to perform some voluntary worship which the Law required not Then at last their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Scaliger saies came to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their voluntary worship came to be necessary and formed into precepts Then from pious men The sidem they became Dogmatizers laying obligations upon all to do as they did and not being obeyed discriminated themselves from all others as the onely obedient servants of God and so called themselves Pharisees c. The
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
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
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