Minister for our good according to our Petitions Ep. 120. c. 22. Ep. 121. c. 9. This sense is oft expressed by S. Augustin and in the Book under his name De diligendo Deo and seemeth well to agree with the expressions of others of the ancient Fathers and with the notion of the ancient Jews as it is mentioned by Philo Phil. de Plant. Nae de Gigantibus and thus much seemeth to be encluded in these words of the New-Testament Heb. 1.14 Are they not all ministring spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be Heirs of Salvation And Mat. 18.10 Take heed that you despise not one of these little ones for I say unto you that their Angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in Heaven And this notion expresseth an honourable ministration of the holy Angels De Cu. Dei l. 9.6 15. which hath respect to the Church of God but doth not allow them as S. Aug. would not to be accounted Mediators nor to receive Religious worship from us but to be honoured by us Charitate non servitute De Ver. Râ—elig c. 55. by an high degree of respectful love but not by Religious service and subjection 10. As to that passage of Ecclus. 46.22 Which mentioneth Samuel prophecying after his death it is sufficient here to observe that that that part of that Chapter is by our Kalendar directed to be omitted And from all this it may appear that nothing is in our service appointed to be read out of the Apocrypha which being rightly understood is any way hurtful or of ill influence upon practice Yet it is to be further noted that he who shall acknowledge that there is much good contained and no evil or sin advised in any of the Apocryphal Books is still far from admitting them to be equal to the Canonical Scriptures For though there may be divers Books free from actual error yet it is the Prerogative of the holy Scriptures alone to be immediately indited by that holy Spirit who can never err and to be tendered of God and received of his Church as the perpetual and infallible rule to manifest the will of God and the Doctrines of Faith SECT VII Considerations about that Translation of the Psalms used in the Liturgy 1. The next thing to be treated of is the ue of the Psalms according to the version in the Common-Prayer-Book concerning which Consid 1. The use of this Translation doth not require us to judge it the best English Translation For as formerly the sentences out of the Psalms before Morning Prayer and at the Communion were expressed according to another ancient and distinct translation so both the Epistles and Gospels and the sentences out of the Psalms at the beginning of Morning and Evening Prayer are now altered according to our last allowed English Translation which alteration seemeth to prefer that Translation as the best 2. Cons 2. The Translation of the Psalms used in our Liturgy is from the Hebrew to which it generally agreeth sometimes using the liberty of a paraphrastical stile And the Hebrew being the Original is doubtless more pure than any Translation which differeth fromit And though the Septuagint in the Book of Psalms which of all other hath been of most frequent publick use in the Christian Church doth vary less from the Hebrew than in any other Poetical Book of holy Scripture yet a Catalogue may be given of at least an hundred and fifty places wherein the Septuagint differeth from the Hebrew not in any Christian Doctrine but in the manner of expressing the sense of those Texts in all which the version in the Liturgy accordeth with the Hebrew and dissenteth from the Septuagint Indeed in some phrases and clauses our version followeth the Septuagint where the matter is unblameable and three entire verses which are not in the Hebrew Chaldee or Syriack are in the fourteenth Psalm added in this English Version according to the ordinary Copies of the 70 Grot. in Ps 14. and of many but as Grotius intimateth not all of the Aethiopick Vulgar Latin and Arabick and which are not in the Greek Manuscript from Alexandria but these Verses being the same with what is cited by the Apostle out of the Old Testament Rom. 3.12 13 18. cannot be disallowed as to the matter of them and the Psalms in the Liturgy being chiefly used as Hymns of praise or our words of blessing God agreeably to the practice of the Jewish and ancient Christian Church may well admit in that use of such a variation from the Hebrew Text. 3. If we observe the practice of the ancient Christian Churches we shall find that the Greek Church publickly used the Psalms according to the Septuagint and the Latin Arabian and Aethiopick Churches V P. Pithaeum de Latin Biblior Interpret had their Psalms of publick use translated from the Septuagint or with a little tincture from Lucian the Martyr wherein they also followed some evident corruptions of the Greek Copies as the Arabick in admitting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ps 17.14 the Aethiopick in reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ps 39.5 Ps 92.10 and the Vulgar in translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Syriack Version was translated out of the Hebrew but hath suffered some alterations by being revised according to the Septuagint from whence among other things it received its frequent use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but this Version hath many imperfections as chiefly its leaving out sometimes a whole verse as in Ps 34.9 and sometimes some part thereof as Ps 58.9 The result of this consideration is this that the Psalms publickly used in the Church of England are more fully agreeing to the Original Hebrew than any of those known Versions were which were used in the ancient Christian Churches and he who thinketh that he may not lawfully join or Minister in the Church of England because of our use of this version of the Psalms might have discerned greater cause in this very particular to have kept him at a greater distance from all the famous ancient Christian Churches in the World 4. Cons 3. The particular places most blamed in this Version of the Psalms do afford no sufficient cause when our superiours enjoin the use of this Translation to withhold our hearty consent thereto I shall instance in three places which are chiefly urged 1. One is Ps 106.30 where this Translation readeth it then stood up Phinees and prayed and so the Plague ceased But the Version in our Bibles rendreth it Then stood up PHinehas and executed judgment The word in the Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Verbs of which Root being most used in the form Hithpahel do generally signifie to pray and in this form of Pihel they are rarely used and do sometimes signifie judging or the judge interposing between men and men to end their strife But
Tom. 2. Athanas where he purposely declareth them to be no part of the Canon of Scripture And amongst the Protestants Dr. Reinolds who wrote so largely against the authority of the Apocrypha Books Censura de Lib. Apocr Prael 7. in his Censura yet in one of his Praetections declareth of some of them chiefly Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom valde bonos utiles esse omnibus tractationibus praeferendos that they are exceeding good and profitable and to be preferred before all Treatises of other Writers Prael 74. and in another Praelection expressing his judgment of the same Books saith proximum illis locum deberi post scripturam sacram that they ought to have the next place after the holy Scripture in the former of which expressions he followeth the steps of S. Aug. de praedestin Sanctorum Exam. post 1. de Scrip. Can. And Chemnititus alloweth them to be Books quae à fidelibus in Ecclesiis leguntur Which are read in the Churches by the faithful and non esse abjectos damnatos that they are not condemned writings and off-casts but may be received in the number of the holy writings or sacrae scripturae sobeit they be not reputed the Canon of Faith and this saith he we willingly both yield and teach 5. Cons 4. And it is in this Case especially to be considered that in our Church no Apocryphal Chapter is appointed for any Lords Day throughout the Year not is any directed for any Holy-day but only out of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus which are Books of great esteem with all those who have well considered them And also upon those Week-days when some Apocryphal Chapters are read there are always other Canonical Scriptures read likewise Directory of reading the holy Script whereas they who do oppose Conformity so far as we may take the Directory for their rule did never appoint or direct any Scriptures to be ordinarily and publickly read upon any of these week days but ordered that where the reading on either Testament endeth on one Lords day it should begin on the next Wherefore it is to be well noted and observed that our Church doth not herein differ from the dissenters as if they did require the Canonical Scriptures to be more frequently read in publick than our Kalendar appointeth but our Kalendar requireth the Holy Scriptures to be much more frequently read in publick almost six Chapters for one besides the Epistles and Gospels than the Directory did and besides them these Apocryphal Lessons for profitable instruction 6. But if any persons shall decry in the general the hearing any thing in the Church besides the holy Scriptures of immediate infallible inspiration this would either from unadvisedness or from what is worse reject and disown to the great disadvantage of Religion the use of Sermons Exhortations and Catechism Nor is it any sufficient cause to condemn the reading Apocryphal Chapters because they are read as one of the Lessons For our Church manifestly declareth these Lessons not to be Canonical Scripture nor can any command of God be produced which either directly or by consequence requireth that in every daily Assembly of Christians there must be two Lessons read out of the Canonical Scripture or that none may be taken out of any other approved Book And it is manifest that the censuring this practice condemneth divers if not all the ancient Churches before the decaying and degeneracy of the Christian Profession V. Bishop Durhams Schol. Hist of Can. of Scrip. Sect. 60. For though it be admitted that the Laodicean Council did appoint that none but the Canonical Books should be read in the Church and that Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy there mentioned are intended for parts of the Prophecy of Jeremy yet long before that did even the Greek Church read the Epistles of Clemens c. above mentioned and the Book of Hermas And it is not to be wondered that there should be different practices observed in the Church in matters of order and liberty 7. Cons 5. Whereas this Church is the more blamed for using some Apocryphal Chapters while some others acknowledged to be Canonical Scripture are not appointed to be read by the Kalendar which are mostly either some Prophecies hard to be understood or matters of Genealogy or Jewish Observations or some Histories for the mostpart expressed in other Scriptures appointed to be read it must be considered that even hence it is evident that the Kalendar was never intended to be a Determination or Declaration of what is Canonical Scripture and of certain divine authority but only a direction for useful and profitable reading Nor was it the Custom of the ancient Christian Church Conc. Laod. c. 60. that the Canon of the Scripture should be described by what was publickly read the rule of the Laodicean Council which cometh nearest thereto did not direct the Revelation to be read The ancient Jews who divided the Old Testament into the Law the Prophets and the Hagiographa Bux Syn. Jud. c. 11. Salian Annal Eccl. A. M. 3447. n. 16. did for a long time only read the Law in the Synagogues after which only a Section of the Prophets was added but that the Hagiographâ—a which included all the Books from the beginning of the Chronicles to the end of the Canticles besides Ruth Lamentations and Daniel were not read in the Jewish Synagogues Hor. Heb. in Joh. 4.15 hath been observed from the Talmudists and this is agreeable to divers passages of the New Testament Luk. 4.16 Act. 13.15 27 Act. 15.21 Yet Christ and his Apostles blamed not the Jews but joined with them in this service 8. Cons 6. That which is objected from the matter of these Apocryphal Chapters which are appointed to be read is not sufficient either to prove them hurtful or not useful as will appear from the following Section SECT VI. The Objections from the matter of the Apocrypha disoussed 1. Among the particular Objections from the matter of these books Obj. 1. Judith Susanna Bel and the Dragon are thought to be sabulous because no certain time can be easily fixed for Judith S. Hierome calleth the other susannae Belis Draconis fabulas Prol. in Dan. Com. in Dan. 13. 14. and Josephus maketh no mention of them But first if these Books should be admitted to be parabolical discourses to express the great opposition of many wicked men against God and his Worship the Vanity and Folly of their Pride and evil designs and the mighty protection that God can give to his people by his Almighty Power they might still be allowed to be of very considerable use The frequent use of Parabolical Instructions among the Jews is both manifest from their Talmudical Writers and allowed by the practice of our Saviur And besides this they had another Custom of Clothing real Histories under different names which expressed a resemblance of the things intended Targ. in Cant. c. 6. v. 7
and affectionately recommended and hath naturally such other dangerous attendants as have been above observed to be the result of the breach or want of the Churches Peace This sin is to the Church what Sedition is to the State the most manifest and direct means to hinder its Government and to destroy that Society which is best preserved in true Vnity and of which as Christ himself hath so every Christian ought to have a tender regard It is to the body of Christ what disjointing is to the body of man it hindreth the actions of the body and the usefulness of the members to each other it weakneth the whole and causeth pain and anxious grief to those other members which are not senseless and is ordinarily accompanied with swelling tumours in the part ill-affected and out of order 12. And as it self is contrary to Gods Commandment so its influence promoteth all manner of sin and is called by Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an original of evils Ign. Ep. ad Smyrn For besides the evils above mentioned which accompany this sin as it includeth a breach of the Churches Peace it is apt to prevail with the Separatist to so much impiety as to place much of his Religion in that which is his sin viz. his unwarrantable separation and it is oft if not ordinarily attended with so great uncharitableness as to be pleased with respect to the interest of their party in hearing if not speaking evil concerning others who withstand them It promoteth prosaneness and disadvantageth Religion in others by rendring censures and admonitions of the Church when they are administred the less efficacious upon the offenders who are the more ready to conclude that it is no great shame or danger to be excluded from that Society of Christians from which many who profess Religion do exclude themselves And upon this and other easily discernable accounts it is a probable occasion of remisness in the exercising discipline which would be more enforced and enlivened by a more general Union whereby also divers obstacles and impediments would be removed Athan. Synops in 1. Ep. ad Cor. Thus Athanasius was of opinion that the Corinthian divisions were the cause why the incestious person was not rejected SECT IV. Some false Conceptions of Schism refuted 1. But because there are some notions or rather misrepresentations of this sin of Schism designed to excuse many from the guilt thereof whom the rules of Christianity do envolve under it I shall endeavour to discover the insufficiency of such Plaisters either to cover or cure so great and dangerous wounds as the deep rents made in the Church to which they are applyed 2. A first false Conception of Schism A first Notion is the natural result of the New-England Independant Principles of Church-Communion They assert expresly Ans to 32. Qu. quo 4. that Baptism neither maketh nor admitteth any to be members of the Church and call it the opinion of Papists and Anabaptists that we enter into the Church by Baptism But they assert the foundation of Church-Society to be laid in their Church-Covenant which is a particular contract among themselves binding themselves to God and one to another to live in Christian Society with that particular Congregation to which they join themselves by this contract Apol. for Chur. Coven p. 3 5 15. And this Church-Covenant is they say the Constitutive form of a Church and joining in it is that which maketh a particular person a member of a Church And from hence it may be easily infered that there can be no duty of holding and therefore no sin of Schism in withdrawing or neglecting Communion where they have not made this engagement by that particular Covenant 3. But this notion of the Vnion and Communion of the Church doth confine it to such strait limits as to exclude in a manner all Christians of all ages from Church Society but themselves and is thereby uncharitable and no stranger to Schism and can not consist with the full and due sense of the Churches Catholicism for the ancient Church did never account the obligation to Christian Communion to be so narrow a thing as only to respect a particular Congregation and therefore never framed any such particular Covenant This is also directly contrary to S. Paul who as an argument to Union and against Schism saith 1 Cor. 12 13. By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body and teacheth us that we are baptized into Christ Rom. 6.3 and thereby are planted together in the likeness of his death v. 5. and that they who are baptized into Christ do put on Christ Gal. 3.27 Which Scriptures do sufficiently express that by our Baptism as we undertake the Christian life so we thereby are admitted to be members of the Church or body of Christ and are engaged as members to Vnity therein and to continue in Communion therewith Whereas if this notion was admitted the grounds for the being and Vnion of the Church which the Scriptures lay down together with the Apostolical and Primitive practice must be accounted as insufficient and the necessary support of its being and Union must be derived from this late invention All which things are sufficient to manifest the errour of this opinion and to shew that there may be a sinful breach of the Vnity of the Church among them who never entred into that Church Covenant 4. A second Notion Dr. Owen of Love Church Peace c. 3. But one of that way of our own Nation treating of Schism and separation acknowledgeth Baptism to give Relation to or entrance into the Catholick Church visible but still owneth a particular contract or joint consent among themselves to be the only bond for external Ecclesiastical Communion in a particular Church or as he expresseth it to be that wherein the Vnion of such a Church doth consist which will be hereafter further considered N. 19 20. Dr. Owen's Review of Schism ch 8 9. And he giveth us this representation of Schism That the sin of Schism doth not consist in the want of or breach of external Vnity by separation but in the want of internal Vnity by needless divisions of judgment in a particular Congregation as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he saith is used 1 Cor. c. 1.11 Hence these assertions are laid down 1. That the departing of any man or men from any particular Church as to the Communion peculiar to such a Church is no where in Scripture called Schism nor is so in the nature of the thing it self 2. One Church refusing to hold that Communion with another which ought to be between them is not Schism properly so called 5. But if we here consider the matter or thing it self we must enquire whether Christian Religion doth allow needless separations in the Christian Church And surely he must have strange thoughts of the earnest commands and frequent arguments for Christian Unity who supposeth them to regard only an inward
Vnity and yet to allow of open breaking and dividing and visible falling into pieces Is this to think either honourably or reasonably of the designs of Christ to suppose that he should express his Church to be one body compacted and joined together Eph. 4.16 intending that its real members might be daily parting asunder by disclaiming the communion of each other or that the whole Church should be as one building fitly framed together Eph. 2.21 but with free allowance that its parts should be at such a manifest distance as never to come so near one another as to owne their communion And when our Saviour prayed for his Church which should believe through his Apostles Doctrine as a consequent upon their believing that they may be one in us that the world may believe that thou hast sent me Joh. 17 20 21. Cyp. de Ovat Dom. Christoph in Joh. 17. Hom. 81. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest that that Union of the Church which should tend to convince the World of Christianity and engage them to the Faith of Christ must besides the inward Vnity of faith and love include an open and professed holding communion with each other which is the most visible testimony of their Unity and the want of which hath occasioned them who were strangers to Christianity to decry and loath the Christian Religion as appeareth from what is above-mentioned in the second Section Hier. in Eph. 4. And when S. Paul requireth to keep the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of peace it hath been reasonably of old thence inferred that separation and breaking the Churches peace ought to be rejected because it opposeth and loseth that Vnity of the Spirit Cypr. Ep. 52. which Christians should maintain by renouncing fellowship with the Church of Christ 6. And it is manifest that needless withdrawing or not holding communion with that particular setled Church where we abide with appearance of causeless distast towards it or the way of its communion was vehemently and with a pathetick zeal condemned in S. Peter himself withdrawing and separating from the Gentiles which action included a blameable forbearance of manifesting his allowance and approbation of their way of Christian life and serving God Gal. 2.11.14 And the manifold cautions against divisions oft expressed in the Scriptures do especially condemn such separation which is the highest attempt and most open profession of dividing and as this separation is expresly condemned in the holy Scripture so this is that thing which is so greatly condemned by the ancient Canons above named and that even under the term and name of Schism And it is of no small moment to observe that the Primitive Church who received the holy Commandments of the Gospel from the Apostles did always understand the precepts of peace to extend mainly to the duties of external communion especially considering that whereas the Churches peace can only be broken by Church contests which are managed either by words writings or open actions of discord this latter way of expressing them by actions of separation and open rendezvous of parties is of all other the highest and most considerable 7. But if the use of the word Schism be here considered it includeth much of needless strife about words to deny 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Schism signifying division or renting asunder to be a fit expression for rents and separations in the Church when it hath been so used in the common Ecclesiastical custom of speech and is that which is according to the direct and proper import of the word And if S. Paul accounted the bandying into parties and factions at Corinth though without separation which some account to be their case to be Schisms because their Unity was thereby opposed and hindred much more must separation which is the highest appearance of parties and breach of Unity and was probably the true state at Corinth be so accounted of 8. Dr. Owen of Evang. Love and Church Peace c. 5. And whereas the same person hath of late purposely undertaken to espouse the interest of separation from the present Church of England and to defend it from the charge of Schism the pleas and pretences made in behalf thereof will now fall under our enquiry 9. A third Notion Its first Plea P. 167 171 172. One principal Plea is That where things or observances unscriptural are made the indispensible condition of Communion there to refuse submission to such things imposed and to with hold Communion from that Church is no Schism but a discharge of a duty And that we may understand what he meaneth by such expressions as Vnscriptural conditions of Communion he telleth us in one place P. 171. We do not dispute the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the things themselves P. 177. and in another place that it may be at present granted that the manner or modes of the performance of Gods worship with rites and ceremonies for order and decency may be lawfully appointed or as it pleased him to call it instituted by the rulers of the Church yet saith he this will not help in our present enquiry unless it be also granted that what may be lawfully practised in the worship of God may be also lawfully made a necessary condition of Communion And he saith in another places P. 205. It is required in this case not only to produce a warranty from the Scripture for the use of Liturgies but also for making the constant attendance on them a necessary condition of Communion Wherefore his sense is that with-holding Communion becometh lawful and a duty where any appointments for orderly ministration and the fit and decent performance of Gods service though lawful in themselves but not particularly expressed in Scripture as conditions of Communion are so determined that they must be submitted to and complyed with by them who embrace actual Communion with that particular Church 10. But this is both false in it self and would render all setled Church-Communion utterly Vnlawful and would make separation the Universal duty of all Christians in every Christian Assembly in the World not excepting them of the Congregational way For the Scriptures have not injoined the particular time for Sacramental and other administrations nor the place for publick Assemblies nor in what method Prayer Preaching Sacraments Psalms Chapters Hymns with other thanksgivings and services are to be performed nor hath it determined us either to or against any particular lawful form or external rite as making them either universally necessary or sinful but these with divers other things of like nature are left to the rules of Ecclesiastical Liberty and Prudence Now it concerneth him who made this exception to discover how there can possibly be any orderly Christian Assemblies and unconfused performances of Religious services where such things as these are not determined as where their Prayers and Services are neither performed with nor without a form c. And to the common
therewith requireth a consent to omit and refuse known duties commanded by Christ P. 216. P. 218.231 For the proof of which he giveth two instances In his first instance he claimeth to every Minister of a particular Congregation by the appointment of Jesus Christ the whole immediate care of the flock so that no part of discipline should be exempted from his office or care p. 219. and this he saith by Consormity they must renounce p. 229. Which Plea for separation or rejecting Communion is as much as to say that no Minister may lawfully communicate and exercise his Ministry in any Church where this kind of Congregational Independency is not the fixed Government or where the Episcopal Power and Authority above Presbyters in all or any publick acts of discipline is preserved An assertion which favours of great rashness in rejecting all those manifest evidences produced by divers on the behalf of this Episcopal Government and Jurisdiction with such an height of confidence as professedly to disclaim the lawsulness of Ecclesiastical Ministration and Communion with those who in practice embrace them Yea this is such a position as would have engaged all Christian Ministers to have renounced the Communion of all the ancient Churches in the Christian World in the times of the most eminent Fathers of the Church by this new way and method of the Churches Peace and Unity And therefore instead of a charge against our Church he hath herein done it this honour to mention that as a chief matter of exception against it in which it is conformable to the purest ages of Christianity 16. Conc Nic. c. 5. Conc. Ant. c. 6. The Councils of Nice and Antioch which are part of the Code of the Universal Church expressing a manifest distinction between Bishops and Presbyters do declare the disciplinary proceedings of Church censures to be under the Bishops ordering and authority and before them S. Cyprian did the same Cyp. Ep. 10 65. both concerning excommunication and publick disciplinary absolution and Ignatius frequently required that nothing should be done without the Bishops Authority to which agree the Scripture expressions concerning Timothy Titus and the Apocalyptick Angels And that the ancient Churches and the authority of their Bishops were not confined to single Congregations as some would have us believe is apparent 1. Conc. Neoc c. 13. Conc. Ant. c. 8. Conc. Sard. c. 6. Athanas Apol. besides the instances from the Roman and other Churches in Scripture 1. From the frequent mention of Country-Presbyters and Religious Assemblies in such places for which no Bishops were appointed 2. From the multitude of Presbyters in one City it not being credible that 46. Presbyters for the City of Rome in Cornelius his time 2. Eus Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Photii Nomo can Yit 1. c. 30. Justin Novel Const ◠60. at Constantinople with a greater number both before and after Justinians Constitution and a numerous Company in other Churches should be designed with a Bishop and many Deacons for the service of God in a single Congregation 3. Because the greatest Cities in the World with the parts adjacent when Christians were most numerous had but one regular Bishop and he who can imagine that in the most flourishing times of Christianity there were never more Christians in those Precincts than made up a single Congregation though divers Churches were built at Jerusalem and other places may as well conceive the same of the present London Diocess And though there be some expressions in some ancient Writers as Tertullian and S. Hierome which many have thought to assert the ancient exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction by a Bench of Presbyters of equal authority which would be too large a digression to be here considered yet even that notion also must fall under the heavy censure of this exception 17. The other instance concerneth private Members P. 141.142 and the whole Church being abridged and deprived of that liberty to discharge their duty which by the law of Christ they are to provide for Among these duties he nameth reproof admonition and exhortation as if these things were not allowed in our Church which is an intimation that needeth reproof and also withdrawing from them that walk disorderly and putting such obstinate offenders from among them Now this instance also is built upon the bottom of Independency groundlesly supposed to be a divine institution Decl. of Faith and Ord. of Congr Ch. Par. 2. Se. 4 5 7. Answ to 32. Quest qu. 14. 15. For the Independents allowing the Ministers the principal care about the discipline of the Church do assert an authority and power of Church-Government to be seated in all the members of the church together with their Officers yea that the members of the Church may censure their Officers and some of them as they of New-England express it that the Keys are committed to all believers who shall join together according to the ordinance of Christ And Dr. O. who gives somewhat more authority to Ministers than many others of them do yet declareth his non-admittance of our discipline p. 256. upon this account as one as being in the hands of meerly Ecclesiastical persons or such as are pretended so to be This late device of discipline being exercised by an authoritative power of all the members of the Church is claimed here as necessary for embracing Communion but this is not only contrary to the Church of England Gillespy Gov. of Ch. of Scot. Part. 2. c. 1. Postscript Jus Div. Reg. Eccles Par. 2. c. 10. with the ancient Churches and to the French Dutch and other reformed Churches abroad but it is also directly opposed and refuted by the Presbyterians both of Scotland and England and this also is a general argument for separation from all Christian Assemblies of the Primitive and Reformed Churches except a few of themselves 18. But as under the former instance he insisted much upon the great usefulness of administring Church-discipline which if rightly stated and in its due measures we heartily admit so here he reflecteth upon the defects of exercising discipline among us urging that upon such defects as by the design of his discourse he representeth ours to be P. 244 245. pious men may without the least suspition of the guilt of Schism forsake the Communion of that Church and if they have a due care of their own salvation they will understand it to be a duty But what he intimately chargeth upon the Church of England speaking of the Church where wicked persons are admitted without distinction or discrimination unto the Communion of the Church and tolerated therein without any procedure with them or against them if this be generally understood of all wicked persons as those words without distinction or discrimination to import it is untrue and slanderous But if this be meant only of divers particular persons it is acknowledged that a more vigorous
every occasion but because in great Assemblies attentio auditorum per usitatas formulas non parum juvatur the attentiveness of the hearers is not a little helped forward by usual forms Consid Contr. Ang. c. 7. q. 2. The Walachrian Classis of Zealand do in like manner declare publick forms to be lawful and profitable for the helping and directing the attention of the auditors and the preserving Uniformity and that in good forms of Prayer Christians may pray with a humble sense of their wants with holy affection desire zeal faith and a Religious acting of the heart to God suitable to their own cases nobis expertis certissimum est is a thing say they most certain to us who have experienced it 12. But the surest way of tryal whereby forms of Prayer may be manifested to bring no disadvantage to the Church of themselves is from considering several arguments to that purpose as 1. because as I have shewed God himself prescribed a constant form of Prayer for the Jewish Offrings and a form of Priestly blessing and our Saviour directed the Lords Prayer as a form and presented a form of words for the administring Baptism but it must be at the least a great misapprehension and sin to think that the holy God and our blessed Saviour should command and enjoin what is of its own nature a hindrance to godliness Piety and true Religion and a disadvantage to the Church De Orat. Dom. S. Cyprian said well what Prayer can be more spiritual than that which was given to us by Christ by whom the holy Spirit himself was sent 2. Because it is generally acknowledged that the singing Psalms of Prayer or praise may be advantageously performed in a set form of words and the holy Scriptures are not the less edifying nor the less applicable to our selves because they are contained in a set form of words both in reading the Scriptures and in Prayer our hearts ought to be religiously moved towards God though in somewhat a different manner 3. Because all the ages of the Christian Church from the first Centuries have used them as an advantage to Religion and it is not at all probable that such excellently devout and judicious men as the fourth and fifth Centuries abounded with should be so stupid and dull spirited as not any of them to discern between the helps and hindrances of religious devotion in matters of most ordinary practice Wherefore though many mens minds may be most pleased and delighted with variety of expression there is no prejudice to piety from a set form further than this is caused by prejudice against such a form or by want of a Religious temper to join in it Here I shall note what Mr. Baxter observeth though he yield not so much use of forms as I plead for He saith Disp of Liturgy Prop. 10. the constant disuse of forms is apt to breed a giddiness in Religion and it may make men Hypocrites who shall delude themselves with conceits that they delight in God when it is but in these novelties and varieties of expression that they are delighted and therefore he adviseth forms to fix Christians and make them sound And the arguments in the foregoing Section do evidence the benefits of their constant use SECT III. Of the manner of composing the Prayers in our Liturgie chiefly of Responsals and short Prayers 1. Coming now to a particular consideration of that form of Prayer enjoined in this Church I shall wave such things where the force and matter of the objections is cut of by the alterations authoritatively made in the new establishment of our Liturgy and beginning with the Prayers themselves in the daily service there are two things especially to be treated of concerning their general frame and contexture The first is that the people are required to bear a part in this service not only in that they are by voice to join in the Confession and Doxology but that several Petitions are required to be expressed by the united voice of all the Assembly This is condemned by the Non-Conformists Except of Presbyter p. 4. who say that the Minister is appointed for the people in all publick services appertaining to God and that the people hereby seem to invade that sacred office the Scriptures making the Minister the mouth of the people to God in Prayer and intimating the peoples part to be only to say Amen 2. But since our Saviour condemneth the teaching or receiving for doctrines the commandments of men we may not embrace that as a Scripture doctrine where the Scripture delivereth no such thing Indeed under the law there was a special command of God that whatever legal Sacrifices were offered to him some few extraordinary cases only excepted that service was to be performed by the hand of the Priest but there is no constitution under the Gospel that spiritual Sacrifices of Prayer thanksgiving or the expression of a contrite broken heart may be offered up to God in no other way than by the mouth of a Minister though it be in a publick Assembly And what they assert is sufficiently to other mens understandings contradicted by themselves who allow the people liberty by their voices to join in singing those Psalms which contain both Prayers praises and Confessions 3. The truth is all such Prayers as have particular reference to the Consecration and Administration of the Sacraments and to the Ministerial absolution and benediction ought to be performed by the Minister alone though it be in a private place and upon a particular occasion because these things enclude the power of the Keys But as for others the rules of order and edification will direct that Prayers and Confessions which are considerably long should be expressed by one that the rest may the better understand and join in them and the authority of the Ecclesiastical office and its order and degree in the Church will require this to be performed by some in the Ministry For this we have the examples of the Scripture times to which agreeth the practice of the following ages De Eccles Dogm c. 30. and the author under S. Aug. name saith that those who are of authority in the Church tota fere Ecclesia secum congemiscente postulant precantur do put up their requests and Prayers almost all the Church joining with their sighs and groans Yet this practice doth no way disallow the peoples vocal joining in short Ejaculations or in other generally known Petitions since this may be of good use to unite their affections more firmly to quicken their minds into a greater fervency and to fix their spirits in a more diligent attending to the service they are about and more particularly to express their joining therein whereby they may both incite others and use their tongues as instruments of Gods glory 4. Indeed S. Paul speaketh of him who occupieth the room of the unlearned saying Amen at their blessing or giving of thanks
1. Cor. 14.16 But the very phrase of blessing and giving of thanks makes it probable that this Text is to be understood as Mr. Thorndike expoundeth it of the Consecration of the Communion And at that time the people did ordinarily answer Amen and nothing more as appeareth from the early testimonies of Justin Martyr and Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria 2. But if this sense be not admitted this Text of the Apostle doth neither mention nor in the context more nearly refer to Prayer than to singing in which latter the peoples bare saying Amen is not contended for nor allowed as a constant rule for the Churches practice though it was probable the usual method in the Christian Assemblies in those Apostolical days when the duty of singing was performed by the immediate inspiration of the spirit upon some particular persons and that these extraordinary motions of Gods spirit in those times were only vouchsafed to the Clergy or Ministry is not probable from the contents of that very Chapter And therefore this place of Scripture doth not confine the whole vocal service of God excepting an Amen to the Ministry the people being altogether debarred and excluded 5. But that all the servants of God may allowably be interested where the due rules of order and edification are observed in the outward joint expression of praise and Prayer to God is very agreeable to the holy Scriptures where the holy Angels are represented to cry one to another and say Holy holy holy is the Lord of Hosts the whole Earth is full of his glory Is 6.3 and all Israel praised God and said For he is good for his mercy endureth for ever 2. Chr. 7.3 And as S. Paul exhorteth that with one mind and one mouth Christians should glorifie God Rom. 15.6 S. John in his Vision beheld and heard the four living things the Elders the Angels and every Creature in Heaven and Earth expressing blessing honour glory and power unto God Rev. 4.8 11. Ch. 5 8. 14. and a great multitude whom no man could number crying with a loud voice and saying Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne and to the Lamb. Rev. 7 9 10. and he heard also the voice of the 144000. who were with the Lamb on Mount Sion as the voice of many Waters and as the voice of a great thunder singing a new Song Rev. 14.1 2 3. and these places last mentioned are the more considerable because they contain representative Visions of the service acceptably performed to God in the Christian Church 6. If we consult Ecclesiastical practice there is very probable evidence that under the Old Testament the people did vocally join by responsals in the ordinary service of God in the Sanctuary and Synagogues V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 6.13 Both the Joma and other Tracts of the Talmud mention the people in the period of their Prayers expressing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Blessed be the name of the glory of his Kingdom for ever and ever In Ch. Par. in Deut. 10.16 And the particular responsals used by the Jews at Circumcision are expressed by Fagius The use of alternate singing among the Essens is sufficiently known but that this was of very ancient use in the Jewish Church is very likely because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth to answer is an usual expression of singing even in the holy Scriptures And there appeareth considerable evidence from Ex. 15. v. 1. v. 20. that that Song of Moses and the Children of Israel Phil. de Vit. Mos l. 3. was uttered as Philo Judaeus averreth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with responsal melodies alternately repeated 7. In the Christian Church the Original of the Antiphona or the alternate singing of Hymns by two quires is ascribed by Socrates to Ignatius the like use of Davids Psalms is declared by Theodoret to have had its beginning at Antioch from Flavianus and Diodorus Their Original in the Latin Church is referred by Platina to Damaseus and by Walafridus Strabo to S. Ambrose Is Hisp de Eccl. Offic. l. 1. c. 7 8. but both Isidorus Hispalensis and Rabanus Maurus do testifie that long before this the Responsoria wherein the whole Quire answered to one Man Rab. Maur. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 50 51. were known by that name and used in the Latin Church And sometimes the whole Assembly joined in their Hymns and Psalms sometimes they were sung by one alone all the rest joining to eccho forth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or end of the Hymn Conc. Laod c. 15 and by the Laodicean Council the wholy Assembly were not allowed to join in their publick singing which was required to be performed by the appointed singers only Thus the Ecclesiastical practice hath varied according to what was thought prudent and convenient 8. Concerning Prayers and Confessions S. Basil declareth it to have been in his time the ordinary practice of divers Eastern Churches Bas Ep. 63. that every man by his own words did profess repentance and make confession Naz. Or. 3. And Gr. Nazianzene acquainteth quainteth us that Julian in imitation of the Christians did appoint amongst the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a form of Prayer to be said in parts or by way of Responsals Hierom also relateth that populus cum sacerdote loquitur in precibus the people did speak with the Priest in the Prayers and Gregory the great noteth Gr. Ep. l. 7. c. 63. that in the Greek Church the Lords Prayer was ordinarily said by all the people together and as anciently as we can meet with any parcels of Liturgy or particular Offices the use of responsals may be easily discerned even as far as S. Cyprians sursum Corda and Habemus ad Dominum Wherefore the use of responsals and the people joining in some expressions in the publick service of god was a thing thought useful by the ancient Church as well as by our own and is allowable by the rules of the Scripture and the Order of the publick worship of God and whosoever assert that the vocal joining of the people in any expressions of Prayer in the publick Assembly is as Vzziahs action was an intrenching upon the Priests Office doth set up such Bars about the service of God which do keep Gods people at a greater distance from the throne of Grace than the nature and priviledge of Christian liberty will allow Yet the composing or directing particular Prayers for the publick use of Christian Assemblies is the proper work of the Church Officers who are to be the guides thereof as also teaching and instructing being an act of authority doth ordinarily belong to the Ministers of the Church and this is that speaking which is forbidden to Women in the Church because it is an act of authority 1. Cor. 15.34 1. Tim. 2.12 Whereas the joint expressing some words of confession or supplication is wholly an act of humility and is not forbidden
c. which is so much disliked by some is sufficiently vindicated from Battology or a vain and superstitious multiplying of words in the foregoing Section N. 11. To which I shall here add these considerations 1. That it seemeth unreasonable and partial that they who allowed themselves in the conclusion of their own Prayers to use that Doxology To whom Christ with the Father and the Holy Ghost be Glory frequently four or five times in the same Assembly should undertake to determine Except of Presbyt p. 16. that this other Doxology more expresly acknowledging divine glory eternally due to all the three persons of the Trinity is unsit to be used more than once in the Morning and once in the Evening 2. That since in all our Christian service and especially in Hymns and Psalms of praise it is our duty to give glory to the holy Trinity it cannot be blamable to express that with our mouths which is at that time the most fit and proper exercise of our minds 3. That it is manifest from divers passages of the Psalms and other Scriptures as 2. Chr. 5.13 Ch. 7.3 Ch. 20.21 Ezr. 3.11 Jer. 33.11 That with their Hymns or Psalms the Jews ordinarily used some such Doxology as this Hallelujah or praise ye the Lord for he is good for his mercy endureth for ever Delph Phoenic c. 6. Hence it is probably conjectured that preparation to the Paeanism among the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had its original being the corruption of Hallelujah And from this use of the Jews the Arabian Church their Neighbours did probably derive their practice of expressing Hallelujah at the end of every Psalm as appeareth in the Arabick version of the psalms who also make use of this Doxology to the three persons distinctly which is expressed in the Arabickversion at the end of every tenth Psalm but was probably in practice at the end of every Psalm And that the Western Church used this Doxology Glory be to the Father Cassian Col. l. 1. c. 8. and at the end of every Psalm we have the testimony of Cassian for about thirteen hundred years since Wherefore since this is of so ancient original in the Christian Church so agreeable to the practice of the Jewish Church approved by the Holy Scriptures and a practice so reasonable in it self it may be piously used but not justly blamed in our Liturgy 2. The reading the Athanasian Creed to some though not the generality of Non-Conformists who heartily owne the doctrine of the Trinity hath been thought a matter not free from difficulty For that Creed expressing what must be believed of every one who would be saved doth contain deep mysteries as for instance that the Son is not made nor created but begotten and that the Holy Ghost is neither made nor created nor begotten but proceeding Now since believing things as necessary to Salvation is not an assent to the use of Phrases and expressions but to the sense contained in them it must enclude that there is some difference understood between what is affirmed and what is denied But the difference between the Eternal Generation and Eternal Procession being a Mystery where the greatest Divines see but darkly they are justly affraid to condemn all persons as uncapable of Salvation who cannot reach to so high a pitch 3. But here it is to be considered that in that Creed commonly called the Athanasian there are some things contained and expressed as necessary points of Faith and other things for a more clear and useful explication of the truth though they be not of equal necessity to be understood adn believed even by the meanest capacities Thus if we first consider the contexture of that Creed the Faith declared necessary concerning the Trinity is thus expressed in the begining thereof The Catholick Faith is this that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Vnity neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance After this followeth an explication useful to set forth the true Christian Doctrine which beginneth For there is one person of the Father c. after which explication the same necessary doctine to be known and believed is thus again expressed pressed and distinguished from that explication in these words So that in all things as is aforesaid the Vnity in Trinity and Trinity in Vnity is to be worshipped he therefore who will be saved must thus think of the Trinity So that the acknowledging and worshipping the Trinity of persons and Vnity of Godhead is that which only is declared necessary in the former part of that Creed and this must be acknowledged necessary since we are baptized into the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and we must believe and worship according as we are baptized 4. What is contained in this consideration is the more clear both with reference to the instance mentioned and to the Vnion of the two natures in Christ by this following observation viz. That our Church doth both here and in her Articles evidently receive the Athanasian Creed and yet from the manner of using the Apostles Creed in the form of Baptisin as containing the profession of that Faith into which we are baptized in the Catechism as containing all the Articles of the Christian Faith and in the Visitation of the sick as being a rule to try whether he believe as a Christian man should or not it is manifest that no more is esteemed in our Church of necessity to salvation for all men to believe than that only which is contained and expressed in the Apostles Creed 5. I proceed to consider some expressions in the Litany In the way to which I shall only reflect upon that objection which if it had not been mistaken had been very inconsiderable framed by Mr. Cartwright against the Litany in General That it being chiefly a deprecatory Prayer against evils was framed by Mamertus Bishop of Vienna or rather Vienne in France upon a special occasion of the calamities of that Country This was a very strange and gross mistake for the Litaniae which were ordered by Mamertus were days of supplication in Rogation Week which days were called Litania minor triduanae Litaniae and by some Litania major Alcuin de Div. offic Tit. dieb Rogat Amal. de Eccl. Offic. l. 1. c. 37. Stra. de Reb. Eccl. c. 28. Mur. c. 57. as is manifest from Aleuinus Amalarius Strabo Mictologus Rupertus Tintiensis Johannes Beleth besides other latter ritualists and the French Historians especially Gregorius Turonensis who all mention what Mamertus did in appointing days of Prayer which were called Litaniae to be yearly observed for the obtaining Gods mercy in their distress occasioned by wild Beasts and frequent Earthquakes But that deprecatory Prayers which are called Litanies also and were so called by S. Basil and were of so great use in the stationary days of the ancient Church should have their original from Mimertus
also from sin and their whole man from destruction And in this sense if this Petition should be supposed to enclude which in the proper sense of the words it doth not even Traitors and Robbers can we be blamed to pray even for them that God would preserve them from further sin and so keep them that they may have time and grace for repentance and that thereby they may be preserved from eternal destruction according to Mat. 5.44 12. That Petition that God would have mercy upon all men is condemned by some but is certainly commanded by S. Paul requiring us to make Prayers for all men for nothing can be prayed for which doth not enclude Gods mercy But such light objections which are easily made against the best words that the wisdom and piety of man can devise I think not worthy the further naming but shall now proceed to some other matters of greater moment SECT V. Considerations concerning the publick reading Apocryphal Chapters 1. The reading the Apocryphal Chapters in our Church hath been severely censured as if it was a forsaking the holy Scriptures which are the waters of life to drink of other unwholsom streams but that this matter may be rightly understood without prejudice or mistake it will be requistie to take notice of these following considerations 2. Cons 1. The excellent authority of the Canonical Books of Holy Scripture as they are distinguished from the Apocryphal is fully and clearly acknowledged by this Church in her Articles Art 6. where it declareth concerning the Apocryphal Books that the Church as S. Hierome saith doth read them for example of life and instruction of manners but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine which Article plainly disclaimeth them from being accounted Canonical Books of the Holy Scripture That the Jews do not owne these Books as any part of the Old Testament is manifest from their Bibles which contain them not and the particular evidences from the Jewish Rabbins against every one of those seven Books of the Apocrypha which are forged to be Canonical by the Council of Trent are some of them exhibited by Hollinger Thes Phil. l. 2. c. 2. Sect. 1. And that neither the ancient Church of the Jews before the destruction of Jerusalem nor Christ and his Apostles nor the several Ages of the Christian Church till some late Romish Councils did acknowledge or make use of these Books as Canonical is solidly and learnedly evidenced by the Bishop of Durham Schol. Hist of Can. of Scripture throughout with reference to the sixth Article of this Church Wherefore though it would be injurious to the holy Scriptures that any other Books which are not of divine inspiration should be accounted of equal authority with them yet it is far from being a dishonour either to them or to they holy Spirit who indited them if either these Apocryphal or any other good Books be esteemed useful and profitable and acknowledged to contain things that are true and good 3. Cons 2. It was can usual practice in the ancient Christian Church that some of these Apocryphal Books and other good writings besides the holy Scriptures were publickly read as instructive Lessons in their Assemblies but with such variation as the prudence of every Church thought meet In the second Century both the Fpistle of Clemens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the then ancient Custom In Eus Hist l. 4. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and some other Ecclesiastical Epistles were publickly read even on the Lords days for their instruction as Dionysius of Corinth testifieth And in Euscbius his time as well as before it Ibid. l. 3. c. 15. was the Epistle of Clemens publickly read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greatest number of Churches Aug. de Civ Dei l. 22. c. 8. Hom. de Sanct. de S. Steph. Ser. 7. In the African Church in S. Augustins time the Histories of the passions of Martyrs v. Hom. 26. inter 50. and accounts of miraculous works by the efficacy of Christian Prayer were read in their Churches which Custom though it was very pious in the beginning was at last intolerably abused to the bringing in legend stories And more particularly the publick reading several Apocryphal Books as Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees was ordered in one of the Carthaginian Councils in S. Augustins time 3. Carth. c. 47. Cont. Carth. c. 27. and that Canon was taken into their Code and besides what S. Hierom oft speaketh of these Books being read in the Church but distinguished from their Canon Ruffinus his contemporary who was first his friend and then his adversary having given first an acount of the Canonical Books proceedeth to these Books which he saith are not Canonical but Ecclesiastical Ruff. in Symb. as Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Tobit Judith c. and declareth the judgment of the ancient Fathers before his time concerning them quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesiis voluerunt sed non proferri ad auctoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam that they would have them all to be read in the Churches but not to be produced as of authority to confirm any matters of Faith And that in after Ages these Books were read in the Church Isid de Eccl off l. 1. c. 11 12. Rab. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 53. is evident from Isidonss Hispalensis and in the very same words from Rabanus Maurus and might be shewed from very many others if that was needful 4. Cons 3. These Books called the Apocrypha have been greatly esteemed both in the ancient Church and by the chief Protestant Writers as very useful though not divine writings Divers of the ancients have cited them under the title of the holy Scripture using that Phrase in so great a latitude as to signifie only holy writings though not divinely inspired The Council of Carthage above-named doth there call them Canenical Books as doth also S. Augustin who was in that Council De Doct. Christ lib. 2. c. 8. using the word Canonical in a large sense for it is manifest from that and divers places of S. Aug. that they were not esteemed of equal authority with those Books properly called Canonical And therefore Cajetan for the interpretation of the right sense of there words Caj Com. in Esth in fin hath well declared concerning these Books Non sunt Canonici i. e. regulares ad firmandum ea quae sunt fidei possunt tamen dici Canonici hoc est regulares ad aedificationem fidelium or they are not Canonical as containing a rule to direct our faith an belief though they may sometimes be called Canonical as containing rules to better our lives In the Greek Church where they were not at least so much publickly read as in the Latin they were accounted useful for instruction as appeareth besides the Citations of the Greek Fathers from that very Epistle of Athanasius Fragm Epist 39. in
8. whence the Targum mentioning the expedition against Antiochus speaketh of him under th ename of Alexander and the Prophet speaketh to the Jews under the stile of the Rulers of Sodom and the Elders of Gomorrha 2. And secondly the Objection is not sufficient to disprove the Historical truth of these Books if we consider 1. That the fixed time of the life of Job and the time to which divers Prophecies refer is not easily determined which yet is no good argument against the truth of either as it is a bad argument against the credit of ancient History either of our own or other Nations that it is hard to fix the scituation of divets ancient places mentioned by names now unknown 2. That both Josephus and other Historians do make no mention of divers considerable things which were certainly true as for Josephus some of the Prophets and the matter of divers Canonical Books and some remarkable Histories as particularly all that referred to the framing the Golden Calf are omitted by him 3. That the ancient Christians who had the use of divers ancient Jewish Writers and other Histonary now lost and had thereby greater opportunity of searching into the Historical truth of these things did esteem them to be true Relations Bel and the Dragon is cited as a true Narration containing an example for Martyrdom and an instance of the sureness of Gods provision for them that trust in him by Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus S. Cyprian and Gr. Nazianzen and divers others V. Lit. African in Crit. Sacr. Tom. 8. p. 46 47. And Origen particularly undertook the defence of the truth of the History of Susanna in answer to the Letter of Africanus which containeth the sum of all the Objections against it Eus Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were fully and manifestly satisfied by Origen saith Eusebius S. Hierome also wrote a Comment upon Susanna and upon Bel and declareth Origen to have written upon the same And S. Hierome calling these fabulaes useth that word here as he doth elsewhere V. Epist ad Castrutium for true Narrations which we also sometimes call stories and these very things he particularly acknowledgeth for truths Apol. 2. ad Ruff. Proleg in Habbacuc ad Chromatium And Judith is propounded as a true Narration and example of love to her people or courage by Hierome Origen Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Clem. Ep. ad Corinth p. 70. and even by Clemens Romanus the Companion of St. Paul in that his undoubted Epistle to the Corinthians And these testimonies are the more considerable because several of these Writers and particularly Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Origen and Hierome were men of great knowledge in all ancient learning Wherefore there is very considerable evidence that these relations are true Histories though it would be inconsiderable matter of Objection if they were acknowledged to be only Parables 3. Obj. 2. Judith approveth the fact of Simeon against the Sichemites by desiring the like assistance from God Ch. 9. and spake things untrue Ch. 10. v. 12 13 14. and Ch. 11. and yet she was commended highly and blessed by Joacim and the Elders Ans Both in these Books and even in the Canonical Scriptures we must distinguish between things Historically related which are many times evil and the matters of precept and command which are always good The main design of this Book of Judith being to shew Gods wonderful Providence in preserving his Church divers things are mentioned in the carriage of Judith which are neither to be allowed in her nor imitated by us And in the Canonical Scriptures we read of good men uttering expressions in Prayer which were unadvised and blamerble such were Elijahs intercession against Israel and both his and JOnah's passionate desire of Death We also read of Jacob by false speaches procuring his Fathers blessing which were allowed by Rebecca and of the contrivance of Jacobs other Sons against Joseph with their lying devices to paliate their own sin and of the like wiles which Jehu used to destroy the Worshippers of Baal and in some things both Jehu and Judith deserved commendation but in other things their practices as the other now mentioned and divers more are not examples for our imitation but rather warnings to us to take heed of the like miscarriages 4. Obj. 3. From Tobit there are divers things objected Of what is said against any thing contained in the fifth Chapter which is purposely left out of our Kalendar I shall take no notice But Ch. 6.9 10. The using the heart and liver of a Fish is declared as from an Angel to be a Cure for one vexed with an evil Spirit and the Gall thereof to be a remedy for the whiteness of the eyes Concerning which place two ways of interpretation are propounded by Drusius Drâ—â—â— Tob. theone that these words concern a Disease or distemper of body occasioned by the operation or influence of an evil spirit which yet may be healed by natural remedies which the Angel did direct and he sheweth that some parts of fishes are reputed to have medicinal vertue and it is ordinarily acknowledged that some distempers curable by Medicine may be promoted by evil spirits But the other which I chiefly embrace is to this purpose that it is no ways improbable that God who more frequently manifested himself by Angels before the coming of Christ should by the Ministry of one of them vouchsafe an extraordinary help and cure to one who religiously served him though by the use of means otherwise inconsiderable that his mercy and mighty power should be manifested by the effecting such a Cure By washing in Jordan according to the Prophets direction the Leprosie of Naaman was miraculously cleansed by washing in Siloam at our Saviours command the blind man obtained a wonderful Cure So small a thing as Moses his râ—d ordered by Gods power was an instrument of working divers miracles and by Elijah's Mantle smiting the Waters they were twice divided 2. Kin. 2.8 14. and in Egypt at the sprinkling of bloud the destroying Angel passed over Now can any man think it either impossible or altogether incredible that God should produce great effects by small appearances at the direction of an Angel who had oft done the like at the direction of a Prophet And this direction of the Angel is manifestly designed for a particular preservation to Tobit and a Cure to his Father and the following Chapters declare the effect of both nor ought it to be doubted but that our great and eternal God hath done many great things besides what was thought necessary to be expressed in the Canonical Scriptures 5. Obj. 4. In the sixth seventh and ninth Chapters of Tobit the Angel who is said to Accompany him is spoken to under the name of Azarias viz. the Son of Ananias and seemeth to owne that name whereas it could not be true that the Angel was this Azarias But here it must
be considered V. Ambr. de Abr. Patr. l. 1. c. 6. Drus in gen 18.3 V. Gen. 18.2 16. 22. that it is the usual practice even of the Holy Scriptures to call Angels by the name of such as they represent or resemble The two Angels that came to Sodom in the appearance of men are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men Gen. 19.12 The Angel that appeared to Manoah's Wife being asked if he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man who appeared to the Woman declared that he was Jud. 13.11 the Angel in the Sepulchre who gave tidings of the resurrection of Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a young man Mar. 16.5 and the two Angels who appeared at the Ascension of our Lord are called by S. Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men in white apparel Act. 1.10 Now it is not agreeable to religious piety to condemn such ways of expression as evil and sinful which are allowed in the holy word of God nor is it unseemly for an holy Angel to owne that manner of expression which the holy Spirit himself useth And besides this Estius in loc diffic Scrip. in Tob. that which is hinted by Estius may well be admitted that the name of Azarias the Son of Ananias might be taken by the Angel upon himself to express by the signification of these names what was the business he came to effect Azarias signifying the help of God and Ananias the grace and favour of God that by the Angel the help of God was vouchsafed which is the effect of the Favour of God Obj. 5. The last Objection from Tobit and the most considerable is Tob. 12.15 Where the Angel is reported to say I am Raphael one of the seven holy Angels which present the Prayers of the Saints and go in and out before the glory of the holy one For the clearing of this place touching the Phrase of the seven holy Angels which yet is neither in Munsters Hebrew Copy of Tobit nor in the Syriack it may be taken for an definite number as the like Phrase is used Mat. 12.45 Mede Disc on Zech. 4.10 And Mr. Mede's Notion is known who asserteth it as an evident truth in his judgment and for which he giveth considerable proof that there are only seven principal Angels or Arch-Angels to which these words refer But whether these words be understood definitely for seven only or indefinitely for an uncertain number we have the like expression in the Canonical Scripture Zec. 4. 10. Rev. 5.6 7. What is here said concerning Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints this being a point of truth or matter of belief may not be received accordin gto the judgment both of the ancient Church and our present Church upon the authority of an Apocryphal Book further than it is grounded upon the evidence of the Canonical Scripture and in such a ense only as is agreeable to the Doctrine of those holy Scriptures Indeed if these words be acknowledged to be the words of an holy Angel as they are related in this Book according to some versions then must they be as certainly true as if they had been spoken by a Prophet or Apostle But admitting that an holy Angel did converse with Tobit yet might his words be either misapprehended or in this passage misrepresented And that they are so may be hence with some probility conjectured because in this place Tob. 12.15 there is no mention of Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints either in the Hebrew Copy of Munster or Fagius or in the Syriack Version or in the Latin which S. Hierome translated out of the Chaldee but it is only expressed in the Greek which our Translation followeth and this very place was above 1400. Years ago thrice cited by Cyprian Cypâ—â— de Orat. Domin de Mortalitate Adv. Jud. l. 1. n. 20. without this clause on this manner Ego sum Raphael unus ex septem Angelis Sanctis qui adsistimus conversamur ante claritatem Dei Indeed in the twelfth Verse both according to the Greek the Hebrew and the Latin the Angel spake of his bringing the remembrance of their Prayers before the holy one but even there the Syriack mentioneth no such thing 8. But because these words are in our version and taken in a restrained sense have been ordinarily admitted as a truth by divers ancient Christian Writers I shall give a double account in what sense these words may be taken agreeably to the Canonical Scriptures and the anciently received Doctrine in the Christian Church who owned not the Angels as Mediators nor did allow that Prayers should be put up to Angels 1. They judged that the holy Angels who are frequently present with us do join in our Religious worship and Prayers to God and as all who join in Prayers do present those Prayers to God so particularly do the holy Angels who enjoy a nearer Communion with God then we have yet attained Cont. Cels l. 5. p. 273 238. Lib. 8. p. 401. So Origen who expresly declareth against praying to Angels or to any who do themselves supplicate addeth afterward that the Christians particular Angel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presenteth the Prayers joining in them P. 420. and in another place of the same Book V. D. Hammond Annot in 1. Cor. 11.10 saith that many myriads of Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do join in Prayer with them who pray to God And as holiness disposeth an Angel to be ever ready to join in glorifying God so love maketh them ready to desire our good Luk. 15.10 since there is joy in the presence of the Angels of God over one sinner that repenteth And S. John in his Vision of the Churches worship declareth the holy Angels about the Throne to join in their Amen thereto Rev. 7.10 11 12. 9. 12. That the holy Angels being Gods Messengers as their name imports are both Ministers of conveying much good to us from God which divine Providence could bbestow without their Ministry and of representing our state and desires to God as his Servants and our friends which are fully and immediately manifest to God who is Omniscient And this may be performed partly as they are testifiers and witnesses of our actions Ad fr. in Erem Serâ—â— 68. with desire of our good and such S. Aug. judgeth them certainly to be and S. Paul giveth Timothy a charge before the elect Angels 1. Tim. 5.21 and speaketh of their presence in the Church 1. Cor. 11.10 and if Satan be the accuser of the brethren before God Rev. 12.10 the holy Angels may well be thought truly to represent what is good and partly as they are ministring Spirits attending on God and desiring our good they declare our Prayers not as Mediators but as Ministers non quia Deum doceant as S. Aug. expresseth sed quia voluntatem ejus super his consulunt desiring to know what commands God will give them to
of this Text will discover Divers other instances may be observed such as in the Syriack translation reading Ps 7.11 God is not angry every day to which the Greek agreeth and in the Syriack and Arabick which in the Historical Books translateth from the Syriack expressing 2. Kin. 18.27 That they may not eat their own dung Mr. Thorn Epil l. 1. c. 32. which sense is well allowed by a learned man of our own Nation and in the Septuagint with the vulgar Arabick and Aethiopick who are guided by it rendring Ps 35.20 They spake peace to me and also in the Samaritan translating Gen. 41.16 God will not give answer without me The difference of divers translations may be noted in such places as these Num. 11.25 where some have They did not cease and others They did not proceed and in Job 34.30 Dent. 20.19 and Deut. 21.12 Where some read She shall pare or cut off her nails others She shall nourish her nails or suffer them to grow and our last English Translation doth in the Text embrace the former and in the margent the latter but it would be a great folly thence to conlude that that Translation of the Bible is either useless or hurtful See the like 2. Kin. 19.25 Ps 121.11 Yet the various ways of rendring some particular expressions of Scripture where it may be difficult to determine that sense which must exclude all other is very far from acknowledging the sense of Scriptures ancertain in matters of Faith and Christian life which are frequently and manifestly therein expressed and to which the general consent of the purest times of Christianity and in matters of life the very principles of Reason and Conscience do agree All that can be hence concluded is that there is sufficient matter in divers passages of Scripture for the exercise of the learnedest Criticks and greatest Students as there is abundant plainness of instruction in the most necessary things for the meanest capacities SECT VIII Of Holy-days or Festival-days 1. These days are acknowledged to have no particular divine institution but have been allowed and appointed by the Church of God and are established by the civil Sanctions of our laws 5. 6. Edw. 6.3 The end of their appointment is for the promoting the service of God and Religious exercises Injunct n. 20. Can. 13. as is at large expressed in that Statute by which they were particularly confirmed and in the Queens Injunctions and in the Book of Canons which requireth them to be employed in hearing Gods word read and taught in private and publick Prayers in acknowledging our ofsences to God and amendment of the same in being reconciled to our neighbours where there hath been displeasure in oft receiveing the Communion in visiting the poor and sick persons and using all sober and godly conversation If such fruits of Christian Piety were more plentifully and abundantly brought forth they would by their pleasant sweetness both recommend themselves and those times and seasons the good use of which more especially contributed to their ripeness and maturity 2. Now these Duties being the principal business of the Christian life it must either be asserted that no particular time may be peculiarly set apart thereto unless it can be proved that God hath particularly instituted that time which is an evil Principle whereby men would be taught to reject daily Christian exercises and to live in disobedience to Gods commands and in much impiety and irreligion or else it must be granted which is truth that God having commanded these Duties doth both allow and expect that fit and seasonable times in the whole course of life be allotted to the practice thereof whence some portions of every day and some especial days may be profitably and advantagiously imployed in these Religious exercises And such times may allowably the called Holy hours and days from the holy actions of Gods Service and Religion for which they are reserved and to which they are appointed 2. Kin. 12.18 Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 2. For For that is properly holy which is set apart to God and also according to cl Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all that is a holy time in which we receive the knowledge of God but the use of the word Holiday is no more but the ancient English and Saxon word for Church-festivals 3. But whereas many persons mispend these days in vanity and intemperance which by the direction of the Church and the prescription of the Law ought to be and by others are used piously and devoutly these mens miscarriage condemneth their abuse but not the appointment of these times to other good ends and purposes The Jews in Isaiahs time abused their fasting days in hypocrisie and to wicked ends fasting for strife and envy and to smite with the fist of wickedness Isa 58.4 and yet the appointing fasting days to a better end was not only allowed at other times but even in his time also in Isa 22.12 Indeed the corruptions of many men are prone to make a bad improvement of the best things The three solemn Feasts of the Jews Tract Kiddush in which all their Males must appear before the Lord were through their abuse of them acknowledged by their own Talmud to be become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Vlcer of the year Buxtorf Lex Rab. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Feasis of Parâ—â—x were religiously appointed though amongst the debauched Spirits of the Jews they were turned into meer Baccanalia or voluptuousness and vanity And the want of care in many persons of the Service of god upon the Lords days hath administred just cause for that great complaint in our Homilies Hom. of time and place of Prayer Part. 1. That God is greatly dishonoured and the Devil served upon that day And in my apprehension it is not improbable that the oposition maintained against the observing these Holidays may have this forcible influence upon many who are easily withheld from good but hardly perswaded ot it to make them the more neglectful therein of Religious exercises 4. It was the practice of the Jewish Church and was in many instances allowed by the holy Scriptures to set apart voluntarily some days for Religious Service which God had not particularly enjoyned I might mention their usual Fasts of the first-born before the Passeover and their Fasts after the days of unleavened bread and after Pentecost The annual Fasts for many years of the fourth fifth seventh and tenth months are mentioned by the Prophet Zechariah Zech. 8.19 We read also of a particular Fast proclaimed by Jehosaphat 2 Chron. 20.3 and of another in Josiahs time Jer. 36.9 and another in Josiahs time Jer. 36.9 and another commanded by Ezar Ezr. 8.21 and of a three days Fast appointed by Esther which the Chaldee Paraphrast with some probability observeth to be kept within the days of unleavened bread See Esth 3.12 with Chap. 4.8 16. Chal. par in Est 4.17
designed for these Religious actions 2. That though the Jewish Sabbath had a peculiar respect to their deliverance from Egypt Deut. 5.15 Yet for that mercy which was far inferiour to what Christians enjoy by Christ they observed also other yearly solemnities especially the great Feasts of the Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles Wherefore though the observation of the Lords day as it is one day in seven encludeth a testimony that we worship God the Creator who made the World in six days and rested the seventh and as it is the first day of the Week it containeth a a professed owning and honouring of Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour who accomplished his humiliation and began his exaltation on that day yet this doth by no means exclude the lawful use of any other time directed either by voluntary choice or Ecclesiastical or political laws for the advantage of piety in the worship of God and the more solemn observance of those great actions of our blessed Lord which ought evermore to be had in remembrance CHAP. V. Of the particular Offices in the Liturgy SECT I. Of the direction for Communicants receiveing the Lords Supper 1. THE first particular office according to the order of the Book is that for the Communion at the end of which the Rubrick requiring every Parishioner to communicate at least three times in the year is disliked because many persons may not be duly qualified to receive Presbyt Excep p. 21. and therefore this Rubrick was desired either to be left out or to be altered to this sense that the Communion should be thrice in the year administred if there be a convenient number to receive Now because this exception is thought considerable whereas indeed the Rubrick is herein not only justifiable but very commendable I shall endeavour to clear this whole matter by these considerations 2. Cons 1. To receive the holy Communion is a very great Christian duty and cannot be neglected without grievous sin and the displeasure of God This may appear by observing that God strictly required all his Sacramental Institutions to be received when he appointed Circumcision he declareth concerning the uncircumcised Manchild that that Soul should be cut of from his people he hath broken my Covenant Gen. 17.14 When he ordered the use of the Pass-over he said the man that is clean and not in a journey and forbeareth to keep the Passover the same soul shall be cut off from his people because he brought not the Offring of the Lord in his appointed season that man shall bear his sin Num. 9.13 and even this person who was unclean was bound to keep the Passover in the next following month Num. 9.10 11. Under the New Testament those words Joh. 3.5 Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God are by the general testimony of Antiquity to be understood concerning Baptism and the Pharisees are condemned for rejecting the Counsel of God against themselves being not baptized of John Luk. 7.30 Now the reason why God was so greatly offended at the neglect of these Sacraments is expressed to be because he accounted this to be a disowning or dis-esteeming his Covenant of which his Sacraments were a sign and seal Gen. 17.14 and because Gods appointment and institution therein was not obeyed Num. 9.13 Luk. 7.30 Wherefore because the Lords Supper doth exhibit the New Testament in the blood of Christ and the partaking thereof is particularly commanded by Christ it must upon the same reasons be as evil and dangerous to neglect this Sacrament as those other And if it be further considered that this is a special Ordinance of eminent Christian profession shewing forth the Lords 〈◊〉 till he come 1. Cor. 11.26 and exhibiting the Communion of the body and blood of Christ the right partaking of this Ordinance must needs be concluded to be a principal action and service of Christianity whether we consider the duty performed or the benefits which may be thereby received 3. If the practice of the Apostolical and Primitive Church be consulted the three thousand converted on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost was given Act. 2.42 did all continue stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of Bread and Prayer And the receiving the Communion was esteemed so high a part of the Christian service in their publick Assemblies Act. 20.7 that their assembling was called their coming together to break bread Conc. Ant. c. 2. The Council of Antioch determined them to be cast out of the Church who were present at the reading of the Scriptures but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a disorderly manner went away and received not the Eucharist Can. Ap. 9. and the same was decreed in the Canons of the Apostles and much to the same purpose in other Councils which as that of Antioch were embraced as part of the Code of the Universal Church Agreeably hereunto it was Ignatius his desire for the Ephesians Ign. Ep. ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they all of them jointly and every one of them particularly should meet together and partake of the same bread Among the Protestant Churches Syn. Petricor Sect. 5. 1587. the Polonian Synod consisting of members who owned three distinct confessions did unanimously declare that all Pastors ought to teach and accustom their auditors that as oft as the Lords Table is prepared in the publick Assemblies for the faithful they should not neglect every one of them to come unto it And the vehement expressions in the Geneva Catechism and in Bucers Censura against them who neglect to come to the Lords Supper might be here added with other testimonies of the same nature Only it must be here observed that Non-Conformity hath run its changes at such a variance as if both the extreams were to be preferred to the middle way The Author of the Admonition esteemed this direction for the Communicants receiveing to be too large T. C. Reply p. 117. and that too much was done in directing them to Communicate but both Mr. Cartwright the chief opposer of the Liturgy in Queen Elizabeths time Alt. Damasc c. 10. p. 727 728 and the Author of the Altare Damascenum who was the most violent censurer thereof in King James his time thought that too little was done herein for both of them would have all who are in the Churches Communion forced even by civil punishments saith the former and statis temporibus omnes adigendi sunt saith the latter to receive the Lords Supper and both of them condemn them who abstain from the Lords Table out of fear as guilty of superstition and that they ought not to be born with But now again the Chanel is altered and the stream is returned to the other side But by the invariable rule of the will of God which is an unerring guide it is the duty of all Christians to attend upon
the institutions of Christ which is the first consideration I propound 4. Cons 2. The necessity of being duly qualified for the right receiving the Lords Supper doth not leave men at all excusable in their ordinary forbearing for the danger of performing any Religious duty carelesly is expressed in the holy Scriptures to quicken men unto the greater piety in their attendance upon those services but not to give them any liberty of neglecting them That slothful and wicked servant who hid his talent in a Napkin had at last no comfort by his pretended excuse for his neglect that he looked upon his Lord as an hard man whom he could not please Mat. 25.24 30. but was cast into outer darkness It was no way lawful for the Aaronical Priests to forbear to offer the Sacrifices which God had commanded because he had declared that he would be sanctified in them that come nigh him and had destroyed Nadab and Abihu for their undue approach Though God upbraided the Jews that they did steal and murder and commit adultery c. and come and stand before him in his House which was called by his name yet it was still the duty of every male among them religiously to present themselves there before the Lord three times in the year Deut. 16.16 and they were all enjoined to keep the Passover which encluded a yielding themselves to the Lord. 2. Chr. 30.8 and a preparing their heart to seek God v. 19. And when S. Paul had said 1 Cor 11.27 28 29. that whosoever shall eat his bread and drink this Cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord this giveth no allowance to any to neglect this Ordinance but the next verse directeth but let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup and the following words For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body are laid down as an argument to shew that men ought to examine themselves and so to eat and drink 5. He that heareth or readeth the word of God or knoweth his will or professeth the name of Christ without obedience yielded thereunto doth encrease his sin and condemnation and yet hearing reading knowledge and profession of Christianity are necessary duties but that which it here only available and is every mans indispensable duty is to join the life of Christianity with its knowledge and profession So it is a duty to receive this Sacrament and to be careful not to receive it unworthily or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unsuitably to its nature and institution Wherefore this Ordinance encluding under the Elements of Bread and Wine an Heavenly Communion of the body and blood of Christ whose death is here represented as he offered up himself to God for us and established the New Testament with the assurance of all the blessings and promises thereof the worthy receiving this Sacrament will require that Communion with Christ be both heartily desired and piously embraced that the death and mediation of Christ be acknowledged as the only way of atonement and remission of sins that the Christian Religion established in the New Testament or Covenant be owned as the only true Religion and all others rejected that the promises of eternal life pardon and grace be valued and sought after as the chief objects of desire and hope and that the Christian practice which the New Testament requireth be undertaken and resolved upon with a circumspect care of repentance and amendment of what is amiss and with a peculiar respect to peace and love by reason of this Sacrament of Unity it being noted by S. Augustine De Consecr dist 2. c. Qui manducant that he who receiveth the Sacrament of Vnity and doth not hold the bond of peace doth not receive the Sacrament for his good but as a testimony against himself which was also the Doctrine of S. Paul 1 Cor. 11.17 18. And though there be too many who do not practise according to the necessary rules of Christianity it is absolutely and indispensably necessary for them that their lives be changed and amended that they may not only be fit to receive this holy Sacrament but that they may be fit to partake of the blessing of God and to avoid the dreadful miseries of everlasting torments and to live answerable to their Baptismal Covenant that they may be advantaged by their profession of Christianity And let any man consider whether it be not as unreasonable a Plea in the sight of God for any man to avoid the holy Communion because he is not willing to live according to the Christian rules when both these things are his duty as it would be in the sight of a Prince for a Subject to refuse to take the Oath of Allegiance upon pretence that he is enclined to undertake practices of Rebellion 6. Cons 3. The Doctrine of our Church and its Rules for Communion do not allow that any persons should come to the holy Sacrament otherwise than in a suitable and Religious manner but it jointly urgeth as the holy Scriptures do also the duty of coming and the necessity of coming preparedly Amongst our Writers Bishop Cranmer declared that we ought not unreverently and unadvisedly to approach to the Lords Table but we ought to come to that Board of the Lord with all reverence Def. of Cath. Doctr. of the Sacr. l. 3. c. 14. faith love and charity fear and dread Both Bishop Whitgift and Mr. Hocker in their defence of the Order for the Communion against T. C. allow that there may be cause of present forbearance from this Sacrament because of unfitness but this ought to be amended B. Whitg Tr. 9. c. 6. Tr. 15. c. 2. and that it is not desirable that men persisting in wickedness should be constrained to come to the Lords Supper Eccles Pol. l 5. c. 68. But it is needless to add other testimonies when the Communion Book it self in the first exhortation saith If any of you be a blasphemer of God an hinderer or slanderer of his word an adulterer or be in malice or envy or in any other grievous crime repent you of your sins or else come not to that holy Table lest after the taking of that holy Sacrament the Devil enter into you as he entred into Judas and fill you full of all iniquities and bring you to destruction both of Body and Soul Wherefore it is acknowledged in our Church that the receiving the Holy Communion is not a right Christian action where it is not performed with a Christian spirit and disposition and partly upon this account and partly for the disciplinary discountenancing of wickedness both the twenty sixth Canon and the Rubrick before the Communion do require that no notorious evil liver or malicious man before their amendment be suffered to come to the Lords Table and consistently herewith must that
the holy Sacrament contrary to Christs institution or otherwise then he had delivered it Just 〈◊〉 Justin Martyr declareth that after the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief person in Ecclesiastical Office had given thinks those who are called Deacons and Ministers did distribute to every one that was present Bread and Wine mixed with Water Tert. de Cor. Mil. c. 3. and Tertullian very clearly declarâ—th that they received the Eucharist 〈◊〉 de aliorum manibus quam praesidentium from the hands of none other persons than those who presided in the Church And thus far we have plain evidence that in these ancient times the Lords Supper was particularly distributed to every Communicant by the Ministers of the Church 5. But the words of Clemens Alexandrinus are produced Commis pap ubi sup as a testimony that in his time which was the same with Tertullians the Church Officers did not distribute this Sacrament to the faithful but only suffered every one of them to take a part thereof according to his own choice he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strom. l 1. The sense of whose words is this that some persons to wit Church Officers or Ministers being here opposed to the people and supposed to have the power of the Keys in admitting to the Eucharist distributing the Eucharist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here not properly signifying dividing as the Latin Translation rendreth it for the Minister can in no proper sense be said to divide the Wine into parts of which every one may take one but it signifieth distributing or delivering to every one the Sacrament do suffer every one of the people to take part thereof Now it seemeth a strange acuteness from hence to conclude that the Ministers did not particularly distribute this Sacrament because the people were suffered to take or receive as if one mans receiving was wholly inconsistent with anothers delivering Whereas indeed the particular distribution of the Elements is encluded in the true sense of this place of Clemens and is no ways opposed thereby And this is sufficient to clear the ancient practice of the Church herein and to shew that so far as we can judge thereby or by the Jewish Customs or the most probable expressions of Scripture our blessed Lord at his institution of this Sacrament did deliver it particularly to every one of his Disciples and even in that respect was also amongst them as one that serveth 6. I proceed now more briefly to the consideration of the words which our Saviour spoke at the distribution of this Sacrament Now these words of command Take eat in S. Matthew and Mark drink ye all of it in S. Mat. and do this in remembrance of me in S. Luke and S. Paul as also these words this is my body which is given for you and my bloud which is shed for you are all expressed in the plural number as being directed to more persons than one Yet considering that these holy Pen-men did in short relate the institution of Christ sufficiently delivering what was necessary for us but not confining themselves to the very words he spake but to the sense thereof which is manifest because they all four relate his words spoken at the distribution differently from one another the Evangelists expressions may well consist with his speaking particularly to every person because what is spoken to every one may be briefly and succinctly related as spoken to them all And though this be not certain which yet is the more probable from the evidence above given of the particular distribution of the Sacramental Elements to every Communicant let them who manage this Objection consider with themselves whether they would grant that in other Cases which they plead for in this We read that when our Lord gave full Commission to his Apostles he said to them Jo. 20.21 22 23. As my Father hath sent me even so send I you Receive ye the Holy Ghost Whose sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whose sins ye retain they are are retained and yet I suppose no sober spirited man will from hence infer that where divers persons are at one time to receive Orders that no solemn words of ordination may lawfully be expressed to each person particularly and distinctly but that they ought to be spoken to them all together generally and jointly Our Saviour also commanded his Disciples Mat. 28.19 to teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost but will any Christian think it hence deducible that where divers persons or great numbers are to be baptized together the solemn words of baptizing them in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost may not lawfully be expressed severally to every person And if the baptismal form of words may be solemnly and suitably to that Sacrament applyed to every person baptized by the general acknowledgment of all Christians there can be no reason why the like may not be allowed in the Lords Supper Wherefore the practice of our Church herein is no way unsuitable to the institution of Christ or the nature of this Sacrament and the alteration of it would be for the worse and to the abating the solemnity of its Administration 7. Concerning the Communion I shall only further consider that Rubrick which directeth that if any of the Bread and Wine that was consecrated do remain it shall not be carried out of the Church but the Priest and such other Communicants as he shall then call unto him shall immediately after the blessing reverently eat and drink the same Now this is supposed by some to give too high an honour to the Sacramental Elements even after the Communion is ended to which I answer 1. That all superstitious or other sinful honour of the Elements must be founded in the embracing those false apprehensions and corrupt Doctrines which our Church rejecteth and he who nourisheth such corrupt opinions which none can do unless he forsake the truth and the Doctrine of our Church might have more opportunity for such corrupt practices by the Elements being carried out of the Church than by their being eaten and drunk in it 2. That our Church doth sufficiently distinguish the eating and drinking the undistributed Elements from the Communion it self both by the formerly allowed use of them and by the appointing them to be eaten and drunk after the blessing which endeth the office of the Communion and by expressing them under the name of Bread and Wine whichh was consecrated Such remaining Elements have been variously disposed of Hist Eccles l. 4. c. 35. Evagrius relateth it as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an ancient custom at Constantinople that they were sent to the Children at School to be received by them as an acknowledgment of the Christian Religion before the Council of Laodicea Conc. Laod. c. 14. they were sometimes sent to other Churches as Enlogiae and tokens of Communion with
baptized in riper years where every person then baptized is said to be regenerated and graffed into the body of Christs Church to be born again and made an heir of everlasting Salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ and to have now by Baptism put on Christ being made a Child of God and of the Light Yet it is not hereby intended to be dogmatically declared that every adult person receiving Baptism is thereby in a certain state of Salvation because true Faith and Repentance which some such persons may possibly want is in them necessary in order to the spiritual efficacy of the Sacraments and is so acknowledged by the Doctrine of our Church Artic. 27. For as our Articles declare that those who receive Baptism rightly are thereby as by an instrument graffed into the Church and obtain remission of sins so they also assert concerning Sacraments Artic. 25. that in such only who worthily receive the same they have a wholesom effect and operation 5. Agreeable hereto are the frequent expressions of the ancient Church in which it was ordinarily and truly delivered that Baptism without true Faith and Repentance cannot avail to the salvation of the adult nor put them into a present justified state And though some words in S. Augustine by way of dispute and inquiry do incline to the contrary yet that that was none of his fixed judgment was sufficiently observed by the Master of the Sentences Sent. l. 4. Dist 4. b. Aug. Cont. Liter Petit l. 1. c. 23. S. Augustine proveth that Baptism is inwardly of no profit to some from the example of Simon Magus and from the same instance S. Hierome concludeth Hier. in Ezek. 16. that he who doth not receive Baptism with a compleat Faith is indeed baptized with water sed nequaquam baptizatus est in salutem but is in no wise baptized unto salvation Cyril Hieros Procatach and Cyrill of Hieru expresseth him who cometh with his body to Baptism and not with his heart to be nothing profited And this must needs be acknowledged for truth because the performance of the conditions of the Covenant of grace by the adult can in no respect be confined to Baptism only 6. Yet these Writers did ordinarily acknowledge both universally concerning all persons baptized and particularly concerning any adult person that they had put on Christ and were made his Members and were regenerated by the Holy Ghost and born again with other such like expressions S. Augustine saith Cont. Donat l. 5. c. 24. Men put on Christ either ad Sacramenti perceptionem so far as concerneth the receiving the Sacrament or usque ad vitae sanctificationem as far as reacheth to the sanctification of life which is admitted by P. Lombard who inferreth thence that all persons who receive Baptism put on Christ Cyril telleth every one of those adult persons who came to be baptized Cyr. Catech 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Holy Ghost will seal your Souls According to the expression of Rabanus any baptized person à Christo Christianus vocatur De instit Cleric l. 1. c. 1. Dei Patris Ecclesiae matris noscitur esse filius is called from Christ a Christian and is known to be a Child of God his Father and of the Church his Mother and Clemens Alexandrinus accounteth all who are admitted into the Church of Christ to be called Members of Christ whose body is the Church and towards them who indulge themselves in Carnal practices and pleasures Strom. l. 7. he indulgeth himself in this fanciful expression to esteem them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 7. But above all the language which the holy Scripture useth is to be observed which as it oft speaketh of Children of God and such like Phrases concerning them who are inwardly renewed by a divine life which it every where requireth as of absolute necessity so upon account of visible admission to the Church and profession of the Faith it oft applyeth the like expressions towards every person received into the Church So 1. Gal. 3.27 S. Paul declareth as many of you as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ 2. Concerning baptized persons being Members of Christ and graffed into his body the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 12.13 We are all baptized into one body and v. 27. Ye are the body of Christ and Members in particular Which words respect every one in the Church of Corinth who are required from this argument because they are members of Christs body to consult not themselves but the benefit of the whole Church and to consider the different proportions of several Members And when he useth this Argument against Fornication 1. Cor. 6.15 Shall I take the Members of Christ and make them the Members of an Harlot God forbid he doth no doubt thereby disswade every person who had undertaken Christianity from that filthy sin because by his Baptism his body was dedicated to be a Member of Christ And to this may be added what our Saviour speaketh Joh. 15.2 of a branch in him that beareth not fruit 8. V. Sect. 9. n. 5. 3. Concerning the titles of being regenerated born again and being the Children of God we may observe that even those circumcised Members of the Jewish Church who denyed the holy one and the just and killed the Prince of life Act. 3.14 15. Act. 3.25 and who as yet had not repented nor were converted v. 19. were yet called the Children of the Covenant which God made with Abraham And of those Jews for whom the Apostle had great sorrow and continual heaviness and for whom he could wish himself accursed from Christ he saith Rom. 9.4 that to them pertaineth the adoption By which expressions it is meant that they were visibly Children of the Covenant by undertaking it and that they were under the tenders and external priviledges of adoption and under the visible means of the spiritual benefits thereof Under the Christian profession the Apostle expressing to his Galatians the difference between being under the legal Covenant which gendreth to bondage Adv. Marc. l. 5. c. 4. Ch. 4.24 and the Evangelical Covenant which bringeth forth them that are free or between Judaismus and Christianismus as Tertullian speaketh saith that the Jerusalem which is above that is the Covenant of Grace and the Gospel Doctrine as Illyricus rightly glosseth is the Mother of us all Illyr Gloss in Loc. v. 26. and we are the Children of the promise v. 28. Which things are mentioned as titles of priviledge which their undertaking the Gospel profession did receive them unto And when the Apostle telleth them Gal. 3.26 Ye are all the Children of God by Faith in Christ Jesus it is evident from his scope that by faith is there understood the Gospel dispensation of Faith undertaken by them in opposition to the Law and that those who by Baptism are admitted to the profession of the Christian Faith are called the
doth also add to the honour of that holy estate and therefore it may well be mentioned as a further excellency of that holy relation that God hath consecrated it to such an excellent mystery that in it is signified and repented the spiritual Marriage and Vnity between Christ and his Church SECT IX Of the Communion of the sick and the Office for Burial 1. The Communion of the sick is very allowable because the dying state may need the best supports of Christian Faith the highest encouragements of Divine Grace and the chief means to strengthen hope all which is encluded in this Ordinance of the Lords Supper it being a pledge and assurance yea a tender from Christ of mercy and forgiveness to them who truly repent and believe And though the celebrating this holy Communion in private places Conc. Laod. c. 58. standeth condemned in ordinary cases by the ancient Canons Conc. Nic. c. 13. yet in this extraordinary Case sick or dying persons were ordinarily allowed to receive it and the Council of Nice doth well approve of the sick persons desire thereof And though it be sufficiently proved by Albaspinus that the Viaticum frequently given to dying Penitents did not always enclude the Eucharist yet it is manifest that they did frequently partake thereof 4. Conc. Carth. c. 76 78. as is expressed not only in the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage but in the more ancient testimony of Dionysius Alexandrinus Eus Hist Eccles l. 6. c. 36. 2. Divers Protestant Churches besides our own Rat. Disc c. 3. have retained the use thereof and amongst them the Bohaemian Syn. Petric Sect. 5. the Polonian with the consent of the Ministry of the three several Confessions Form Visit Aegr in Bucer and that of Strasburgh as it was in Bucers time And though this was not practised at Geneva Calv. de quibusd Ritib Aug. 12. 1561. Calv. Oleviano Cal. Dec. 1563. yet Calvin did in several places and even towards the end of his life testifie his allowance thereof and also that there were divers weighty causes which constrained him to judge that it ought not to be denied 3. But against this it is objected that some persons who have led vitious lives may earnestly desire the Communion in their sickness and yet not be truly penitent for their sins and therefore cannot worthily partake of those holy Mysteries To which I answer that even in this Case Christian Charity must encline to the more favourable part and since man hath no certain evidences to judge of sincere repentance the infallible discerning thereof must be reserved to the judgment of God And if this person hath lived vainly and exorbitantly the Minister may acquaint him with the nature if need be of true Faith and Repentance and the necessity thereof both to a dying Man and to a Communicant and if he appear so far as is in him desirous to practise and exercise those Christian Graces and to obtain the help of Jesus Christ and his Grace to deny him this Sacrament would be to deny him a testimony in Gods name that he will upon these conditions bestow grace and remission of sins and to shut up the means of Grace and remission from a Sinner who seeketh after it and certainly it cannot agree with the Ministers Office to reject those persons who in a dying state declare they would come to Christ And in the strict times of Primitive Discipline he was thought worthy to be deposed from his Ministry who either rejected or did not receive any Sinner upon his return and a peculiar Charity towards dying persons was expressed in divers ancient Canons 4. In the Office for Burial several expressions are misliked as being thought unmeet to be spoken of every person dying in the Churches Communion Where a first expression to be considered is That Almighty God of his great mercy hath taken to himself the Soul of the person departed When yet we cannot assert that every person dying in our Communion is eternally saved Ans Besides what may be said of the judgment of Charity the wise man telleth us Eccl. 12.7 that the Spirits of dying men return to God who gave them that is to be disposed of according to his righteousness and our Church in this place acknowledgeth the mercy of God through the grace of Christ who now hath the Keys of Hell and Death that dying persons do not forthwith go into the power of the Devil who had the power of Death Heb. 2.14 but do immediately go into the hands of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ to be disposed of by him according to the promises and conditions of the Gospel Covenant This is that which all Christians must acknowledge to flow from the great mercy of God towards man and that this is the sense intended in this place I am induced to believe because in the ancient Offices of Burial they magnified the Divine Power whereby the unjust and tyrannous power of the Devil was overcome and our Lord receiveth us Dioniss de Eccles Hier. c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto his peculiar and most righteous judgment Yet even this sense doth express a general and firm confidence of the future happy state of all them who heartily embrace the Christian Faith and life as being consequent upon the gracious mediation and Soveraign Dominion of Jesus our Saviour 5. And whereas this Office calleth the deceased person Our Brother and Our dear Brother these Phrases may undoubtedly be applyed to every person who professing Christianity dyeth in the Churches Communion And that extensive sense of those words is sufficiently warranted by the use thereof in Scripture when it commands us to love our Brother not to put a stumbling block before our Brother not to defraud our Brother 1. Thes 4.6 to forgive our Brother Mat. 18.34 and when it speaketh of the Brother that walketh disorderly 2. Thes 3.6 and of admonishing him as a Brother v. 14. and of thy Brother trespassing against thee and if he hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother Chrys in Heb. 11. Hom. 25. Mat. 18.15 and if any man that is called a Brother be a Fornicator 1. Cor. 5.11 from which place S. Chrysostom observeth that every Christian man baptized by the laver of regeneration is there called a Brother Tertullian in a general sense as they are men alloweth even the Heathen to be accounted Brethren Apol. c. 39. though they be Mali fratres evil Brethren but in a more special sense he so esteemeth of all Christians Praep. Evang l. 1. c. 4. who acknowledge one God the Father and much to the same purpose writeth Eusebius Cyr. Hier. Praef. And Cyril telleth all those who gave up their names to Christianity that they become the Sons and Daughters of one Mother V. Albasp Obs l. 1. c. 19. So that this manner of expression in this Office is the same which the Scriptures and
Corona militis c. 3. Eucharistiae Sacramentum etiam antelucanis caetibus sumimus do intimate that that Sacrament was administred also at other times besides those early Morning Assemblies and S. Cyprian as Pamelius noteth Cyp. Ep. 63. n. 48. expresseth their communicating the that Carthaginian Church both in the Morning and the Evening Socr. Hist Eccl. l 5. c. 21. as Socrates long after relateth the Custom of Evening Communions in the Churches of Egypt and those nigh to Thebais And therefore the Eucharist and Agapae might be and were joined together as is manifest from another place of Tertullians Apology Apol. c. 7 8. 5. And that these things were mutable Rites and no perpetual Laws to the Christian Church is manifest not only from general Ecclesiastical practice but also because the Scriptures give no command for the love Feasts though they mention that practice with approbation and the kiss which was a token of love and friendship according to the Custom of those Countries was thence directed to be observed by those Christians only as a token of their Christian greeting and salutation and a testimony of their Vnity and Communion Yet because these things were used at the time of the holy Communion as outward actions representing part of that Christian duty practice and engagement which was signified by that holy Ordinance it self and undertaken therein they were in this use properly Ecclesiastical Rites and do justifie the use of such external actions in the service or duties of Religion which are useful to excite or promote Christian practice 6. And besides these the Apostles direction for men to pray or prophesie with their heads uncovered 1 Cor. 11.4 was the determining an external Rite for order and decency and not without some respect to the common expressions of Reverence in Greece and other parts of the Roman Empire The Jewish Priests performed their Temple service with their heads covered with their Bonnets as did the High Priest also in his Mitre and it was his honour and dignity that he might not uncover his head Lev. 21.10 he representing hereby the glory and honour of the Messias In the Jewish Synagogue worship their men constantly prayed with their faces vailed V. Hor. Hebr. in 1. Cor. 11.4 in token of shame as is manifest from divers testimonies of the Talmudists agreeably to which Custom the holy Angels in Isaiah's Vision are represented standing before God and worshipping with their faces covered Is 6.1 2 3. The ancient Romans used uncovering the head as an expression of honour to great men but yet from the time of Aeneas Plutarch Prob. Rom. q. 10 11 13. as Plutarch affirmeth they had their heads covered in most of their Religious solemnities The Grecians worshipped with their heads uncovered as did the Romans also in their adoration of Saturn But S. Paul considering the Christians relation and encouragements and the customary use of vailing among women as fitly becoming and expressing their shamefastness modesty and subjection he thence from the consideration of comeliness determineth that the expression of reverence which most befitteth the state of men in their Religious service is to uncover their heads and not to vail them both in praying and in prophesying or praising and glorifying God chiefly under extraordinary or prophetick raptures in which sense the Chaldee Paraphrast oft expoundeth the Phrase of prophesying in the Old Testament and R. D. Kimchi Ch. Par. in 1. Sam. 10.5 6 10 11 13. Ch. 19 20 21 23 24. Drus in 1. Sam. 10.6 also as he is cited by Drusius And the consequence hereof is this that such outward actions as tend to express a comely reverence in the service of God may be filty appointed and used therein under the Gospel dispensation 7. But because I shall in the following Chapter give some other instances of Apostolical practice I forbear in this place to urge any more and therefore shall not insist upon S. Peter submitting to have his feet washed at our Saviours command which some have noted to be a Jewish Paschal Rite then practised under an Evangelical signification nor upon the observations enjoined to the Gentile Christians by the Council at Jerusalem Act. 15. nor upon those other manifestly ancient Rites which are not mentioned in the Scriptures but were by the Fathers of the Primitive Church called Apostolical Rites or Apostolical Traditions But instead of prosecuting what is contained in this last instance I shall observe that it was a current position among the chief Protestant Writers of the Churches beyond the Seas that in points of external rite order and decency some things were appointed by the Apostles in the Churches of Christ which were not recorded in the holy Scriptures Kemnit Exam de Tradit 7 m. Genus Thus Kemnitius asserteth that it is manifest from the Apostles writings that they did ordain and deliver some Rites unto the Church verisimile est quosdam etiam alios externos ritus qui in scriptura annotati non sunt to Apostolis traditos esse And it seemeth true that there were other external Rites delivered by the Apostles which are not mentioned in the Scripture Beza upon those words of S. Paul The rest will I set in order when I come 1 Cor. 11.34 granteth that the Apostle did in that Church detemine other things not mentioned in that Epistle but pertinent ad ordinem Ecclesiasticum non ad dogmata they were not matters of Doctrine but of Ecclesiastical Order And upon the same words he saith that they appointed things referring to order as time place forms of Prayer and such like as times places and persons did require Zanch. Tract de Sacr. Script Qu. 8. Zanchy also citing the same Text by way of Objection in his Treatise of the holy Scripture answereth That concerning matters of order and decency we acknowledge many things to have been appointed in the Churches by the Apostles which are not written Concedimus multa fuisse instituta ab Apostolis in Ecclesiis quae non sunt scripta 8. That command of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in order doth manifestly suppose a power and command its exercise in the Church of Corinth for the appointing what is requisite to those ends and is to this purpose urged not only in the Church of England but by those other modern Writers who are in high esteem with most Non-Conformists Infst l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 27. Calvin in his institutions from this Scripture asserteth a necessity of laws made by Ecclesiastical Constitutions because order and decency cannot otherwise be kept nisi additis observationibus tanquam vinculis quibusdam and in his Commentaries he thence asserteth In 1. Cor. 14.40 that God hath left external Rites unto our liberty that we might not account his worship to consist in them Zanchy Zanch. Compend Doct. Christianae Loc. 16. considering this Text enquireth what the Apostle
matters of Faith and that the Scripture could not be a sufficient Rule For Faith and Holy Life unless it enclude a determination of all prudential circumstances that none should be ordered in the Church which are not there appointed To decry all such things as Vnlawful because in our Church there hath been much strife and contention about them to the breach of the Churches Peace may appear to be a very weak argument from observing that both the Jewish and the Apostolical and Primitive Christian Churches and several Lutheran Churches of late have enjoyed a very peaceable state together with such Ecclesiastical Constitutions but the more manifest cause of strife and contention is from misunderstanding in some and from want of humility and obedience in others and these persons have found matter sufficient for them to make a breach of the Churches Peace in other points besides Ceremonies 2. As to that Objection that the allowing any Authority for the appointing such things in the Church will leave its power in a boundless and unlimited state if this was of any force it would equally oppose all other commanding Authority in every superior relation in the World And as secular Rules have Authority to make Laws for the Peace and Order of Kingdoms but not to exercise oppression nor to change the nature of Good and Evil nor to make any divine Precepts so Rulers in the Church are allowed to direct and appoint what tendeth to good order and decency but may not deliver any thing as Gods command which is not nor alter any of his Precepts and Institutions nor to enjoin things needlesly burdensom How the allowing some Ceremonies in the Christian Church is a quite different thing from the reducing the Ceremonial law of the Jews hath been shewed in the first Section of this Chapter Wherefore I now come to examine the Scripture evidence which some plead against Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions 3. Obj. 1. The sin of Nadab and Abihu for which fire came out from the Lord and devoured them was their offering strange fire before the Lord which he commanded them not Lev. 10.1 2. And this is supposed by them who urge this Objection to be only an outward rite or circumstance of worship in making use of that fire in the service of God which was not enjoined and about which he had made no determination Ans 1. Cypr. Ep. 73. de Vnit Eccl. It was much more truly acknowledged of old that the sin of Nadab and Abihu was that what they did was Dei traditione contempta Iren. adv Haer. l. 5. c. 44. in despite of what God had declared to the contrary and therefore their sin hath been frequently parallel'd with the sin of Corah Dathan and Abiram And whereas the Scripture declareth their sin to be a doing that which God commandeth them not that Phrase in the holy Scriptures which I commanded them not doth not denote gods having enjoined nothing about that particular action but ordinarily by a Meiosis intimateth Gods having severely prohibited it Thus God declared their building high places of Tophet and of Baal to burn their Sons and their Daughters to be things he commanded them not Jer. 7.31 Jer. 19.5 and the same expression is used concerning committing Adultery with their Neighbours Wives and speaking lying words in the name of the Lord Jer. 29.23 and concerning the serving other Gods and worshipping the Sun Moon and the Host of Heaven Dent. 17.3 all which things were vehemently forbidden in the Law of God Wherefore some have thought that the sin of Nadab and Abihu consisted in Offring strange Incense Fag in loc which God had expresly forbidden Ex. 30.9 Which opinion is declared by Fagius and doubtless this was the judgment of Josephus though the ordinary Copies of Josephus express it to be their Offring other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrifices than Moses had commanded Joseph Ant. l. 3. c. 10. but that it should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Incense is manifest by comparing Josephus with the Hebrew and the Septuagint Others have observed that before that time God had appointed Aaron only and not his Sons to offer any incense unto him and therefore it might be an act of great presumption in them and when Corah presumed to invade the Priests Office to offer incense botht he Samaritan Version and the Septuagint reading the Hebrew with a little variation of the points in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Num. 16.37 called that which he offered strange fire And some others have thought them so boldly irreverent as against the command of God to thrust themselves into the holy of holies This is collected by some of the Jewish Doctors from Lev. 16.1 2 3. and is admitted by Junius Jun. in Lev. 10.1 4. Ans 2. But admitting that their sin consisted in making use of that fire which God did not allow we must further assert with Munster that God having caused fire miraculously to consume the Sacrifice uon the Altar Lev. 9.24 and commanded that the fire upon the Altar should be continually burning to wit for the use of Gods service and should never go out Lev. 6.12 13. their offering other fire was an opposing of Gods command For if any should imagine that when God had commanded incense to be offered which must be offered with fire he did leave it undetermined what fire they should make use of and that in this case the choice of any sort of fire because it was not commanded was a grievous sin this would represent the holy and righteous will of God as contradictory to it self and as inevitably forcing the Priests to be guilty of sin because upon this unreasonable supposition their offring incense with fire which was their duty and commanded of God must necessarily be accounted a sin and displeasing to God And if such positions were admitted they will bring after them a numerous train of manifest absurdities and contradictions as that the Priest ought as God had commanded to burn wood upon his Altar but might in no wise make use of any sort or kind of wood to that purpose because God had not particularly enjoined it and the like may be said of the kind of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper and of divers other things under the time of Christianity 5. Obj. 2. God commanded Deut. 12.32 Whatsoever I command you observe and do thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it Ans 1. That these words do properly condemn on the one hand superstition of the making any thing a part of Religion and the Law of God which indeed is not and on the other hand want of Religious reverence in neglecting obedience to what God had enjoined and commanded But that divers things referring to the worship of God were allowably under the Jâ—â—â—sh despensation ordered as matters 〈…〉 expediency by humane prudeâ—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ve in a former Section given suâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—mony and if such appointment 〈…〉 been
Baptism engaged them to acknowledge and worship the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Baxt. Disp of Gerem c. 2. Sect. 58. And whereas it is objected against the use of any such external signs that this is to set up something to work Grace in the same manner that the Sacraments do which do only objectively teach remember and excite and thereby work on the understanding will memory and affections all this is grounded upon manifest misapprehensions For the holy Sacraments do not only stir us up to the exercise of Grace already received but do tender to us a Communion with Christ and a Communication of further Grace from him which no humane Rites can do Artic. 25. Whence our Articles declare them to be effectual signs of Grace and Gods good will towards us by the which he doth work invisibly in us and doth not only quicken but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him In Sect. and agreeably hereunto is the Doctrine of all the Protestant Writers above-mentioned But to condemn all objective incitements to the exercise of Grace as humane Sacraments where there is no pretence of their being direct means of conveying further Grace from God would enclude a censuring any particular becoming actions gravity and due expression of affectionateness in the Minister or people in Christian Assemblies because it is a means to excite others to the greater reverence and Religious devotion and would condemn any actions as sinful and evil meerly from their being useful to promote good And for example hereupon he who looking into a Register Book where his Baptism is recorded shall only take notice of his Age should be commended but he who upon the sight of his name in that Book is put in memory concerning his Baptismal Covenant and excited to a care of answering that Covenant by a Christian and pious life should be guilty of grievous sin as if this was to make that Book to be a kind of Sacrament And they who reject all exciting signs as being Sacramental may find almost all the same pretences to dislike all words not instituted of God which do excite men to Religious Piety especially when they are accompanied with any outward action though it be but a gesture because not only Sacramental signs but Sacramental words in their Sacramental Use as in Baptism I baptize thee in the name c. do both exhibit and excite Grace as an essential part of that Sacrament and there is not much more reason to conclude all exciting signs to be Sacramental signs than to account all exciting words to be Sacramental words 15. Sixthly Other external things in Gods worship are properly significant of reverence towards him and of high esteem of him and his Ordinances Such are a humble and devout behaviour and gesture which are Hypocritical actions where no such signification is intended but when designed to this end they are truly religious but far from being Sacramental O◠this nature are the preparing and preserving decent structures and other things comely as Communion Table Cup c. which are set apart for Religious service And to this sixth head belongeth the use of the Ministerial Garments appointed in our Church as the use of the Cross in the Office of Baptism is of the nature of a memorative and exciting sign under the former head And to dislike these things solely because of such signification is to account the actions of man who in Gods worship acts as a reasonable Creature to be the worse meerly because he is able to give a good and rational account why he doth perform them SECT II. Of Ecclesiastical appointments considered as imposed and enjoined 1. Having proved in the former Chapter the lawfulness of some external Rites and having shewed in this Chapter that they do not become unlawful by being significant we may hence infer that nothing can be said against the enjoining some such lawful Rites but what will equally oppose all Ecclesiastical Injunctions and Constitutions in things indifferent For if these things be in themselves both lawful and in their due circumstances useful as I have above shewed and if there be a power in the Church of enjoining lawful things to useful purposes then cannot the establishing these things thus directed be disallowed But to deny the lawfulness of Ecclesiastical Sanctions and Constitutions is to charge all the ancient famous known parts of the Church of Christ with a sinful usurpation of Authority in the Church for that they enjoined what they judged useful both in General and Provincial Synods is manifest from the Canons of the Code of the Universal Church and of the Roman and African Churches and from the more ancient Canons among those called the Apostles and from other Ecciesiastical Rules of Discipline frequently mentioned in Tertullian S. Cyprian and other ancient Writers And that this practice of the Church was used ever since the Apostles is not only manifest from the instances given in the former Chapter Sect. 3. but is also evident from the Synod at Jerusalem and its decisions concerning somethings indifferent mentioned Act. 15. 2. Concerning the Decrees of that Council at Jerusalem I shall Observe 1. That some part of the matter of them was not contained under the Divine Precepts of perpetual obligation but was enjoined only as Ecclesiastical laws of mutable Constitution I should willingly acknowledge that not only that part of the Apostolical Decree which concerned Fornication but that also which concerned things offered unto Idols did contain an immutable Law to all Christians and that what S. Paul writeth upon this subject in his first Epistle to the Corinthians did not at all invalidate or dispense with the Decree of the Apostolical Synod as divers worthy men have judged but only declareth how far that Decree intended to oblige That which renders this opinion probable is because it is evident by comparing Act. 15.20 with Act. 15.29 that the Apostles in commanding to abstain from meats offered to Idols designed only to prohibit the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pollutions of Idols and because after the writing the Epistles to the Corinthians it was still in as general terms as that Synod did express it accounted a duty to abstain from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or things sacrificed to Idols not only by divers particular ancient Writers but by one of the Canons of the Greek Code Conc. Gangr Can. 2. and even by S. John in the Revelations Rev. 2.14 But that that Decree concerning things strangled and bloud was no perpetually binding Law of God may be evinced from the general judgment of the Church of God Aug. cont Faust l. 32. c. 13. Binius in 4. Syn. Apost de Immolatis which doth not now account it binding some very few persons excepted from such general expressions of holy Scripture as that nothing is unclean in it self and to the pure all things are pure and from the Apostles expressing their Decree to be
Lord besides Jesus Christ and from that from which its promises tend to secure us the curse and wrath to come and thereby from Hell and Death But it was S. Peters Doctrine that we should obey every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake as free Conf. Ch. 20. Sect. 4. 1 Pet. 2.13 16. And it was truly expressed in the Assemblies Confession That they who upon pretence of Christian Liberty shall oppose any lawful power or the lawful exercise of it whether it be Civil or Ecclesiastical resist the Ordinance of God And as for those strange spirited men who account the practising things indifferent to be the worse because they are enjoined they are guided by such dangerous Principles of false imaginary Liberty as would teach Children and Servants that things otherwise lawful are sinfully performed when they are commanded by their Parents and Masters 8. Ruth Introd to Doctr of Scandal But Mr. Rutherford objecteth that the nature of things indifferent are not capable of being enjoined by a Law For saith he what wise man will say the Church may make a law that all men should cast stones into the water or as he in another place instanceth that a man should rub his beard Whether these and other such like words proceeded from gross mistake of the Question about things Indifferent or from wilful misrepresentation thereof to please the humours of scornful men I cannot affirm For things called Indifferent in this Question are not such as can tend to no good but are a mispending time when purposely undertaken as a designed business and enclude also such a levity and vanity as is inconsistent with gravity and seriousness and much more with Religious Devotion But the things here called matters indifferent are such where many things singly taken are in their general nature useful but because no one of them is particularly established by any Divine Law the appointing any one in particular is called the determination of a thing Indifferent because some other might have been lawfully appointed Thus the use of one special form of Prayer prescribed not condemning all others as unlawful is the use of an indifferent thing to an useful end And the ordering some proper Hymns or Psalms of praise for the glorifying God and decent gestures of reverence in Gods service and the appointing a fit translation of the Bible for publick use and a particular visible sign of Christian profession are things of good use but are called Indifferent because these particular things are not so established by Divine Precepts but that some other Prayers Hymns Gestures Translation or token of profession might have been without sin and breach of any particular divine commands chosen and appointed in the Church and the like may be said of other things So that such things as these which may manifestly have a profitable use where they are observed without misunderstanding and prejudice but are no special matters enjoined by any Divine Laws immediately given from God himself are the most proper and most accountable matter for Ecclesiastical Laws and Constitutions and are fit to be ordered by those who are invested with Power and Authority especially when the particular things so established may be peculiarly recommended upon good considerations of Antiquity or manifest usefulness 9. But some have further Questioned whether things concerning the Church and the order thereof may be established by secular Sanctions the transgression of which is attended with civil penalties This Authority hath been exercised by the most Religious Kings and Rulers of Israel in the Old Testament who were therefore commended in the Holy Scriptures and also by the Christian Emperours as appears by their Laws in the Codex and Novellae and by divers Kings of our own and Foreign Nations in former times it is acknowledged by the Articles of our Church Article 37. and by the Doctrine and practice of the ancient Church is established by our Laws and hath been defended by divers good Writers concerning the Kings Supremacy in Causes Ecclesiastical But some there are both at home and abroad joining herein with the Spirit of the Anabaptists who have undertaken to deny the lawfulness of any such proceedings under pretence of advancing Christianity thereby and of pleading for due liberty in matters of Religion but their grounds and reasons on which they build are not strong enough to bear the weight they lay upon them 10. For they who tell us that the use of such civil Laws and penalties tendeth to declare that the motives and arguments of the Gospel are weak and insufficient to recommend the Christian truth and preserve the order of the Church without the help of the secular power do seem not to consider that Treasons Murders Adulteries Thefts and Perjuries with other great crimes are vehemently prohibited by the Precepts of Christ and yet are upon good grounds punished by the power of the Sword which is also Gods Authority not because of any insufficiency of the arguments propounded by the Doctrine of Christ but because the corruptness of many mens Spirits is such that divers persons are prone to overlook the most weighty motives and arguments which are of an Heavenly and spiritual nature when they are more affected with sensible things of much less concernment 11. And as for them who say that all temporal laws and penalties about Church matters will never make men truly Religious but may make them Hypocrites and cause them to profess and practice what they do not heartily approve this is manifestly untrue for though I grant that these means have sometimes accidentally this ill effect upon some men yet even Laws ad Penalties rightly dispensed are a proper and effectual means in themselves to make men seriously and rightly Religious Aug. Ep. 48. This effect as S. Augustine upon his own knowledge declareth they obtained both in his own Church and divers other African Churches where many of the Donatists from thence took occasion seriously to consider and embrace the truth and rejoiced that by this means they were brought to the right knowledge thereof And thus all well-ordered Government in a Realm or Family the encouraging what is good and the discountenancing errours prophaneness and all disorders by great men or others may have this accidental ill consequence upon some men that it may occasion them hypocritically to pretend to be better than they are out of affection of applause and designs of advantage yet these things being duties as the Magistrates care to promote Religion is also they ought not to be neglected because they may possibly be abused 12. And whereas some urge that in the Apostolical times which were the best there were no secular sanctions or outward penalties used in matters of Religion they might also have observed that Kings and Emperours were then no countenancers favourers nor yet Professoes of Christianity which is not to be a pattern for succeeding times when it must be esteemed a blessing to the Church
Amalarius de Eccles Offic. l. 4. c. 3. solemus stare but when they were sometimes sung by one person alone the usage of the Church in such indifferent things not being always the same in the Western Church Cassian Inst l. 2. c. 8. in the time of Cassian they all stood up at the end of the Psalms with joint voices to render glory to God 4. Standing at the Creed is a visible sign or token of the profession of the Faith therein contained which profession is a duty much required in the holy Scripture and is one part of our glorifying God for which Religious Assemblies of Divine Worship are intended In the Creed we professedly acknowledge the three persons in the glorious Trinity to be the only true God and our only Lord and a standing posture well becometh a Servant in his professed owning and attending upon his Master we openly declare every one for our selves I believe c. the ground of our Christian hope and comfort that believing in the Father who made the World in the Son who died rose again ascended and shall judge all men and in the Holy ghost we have expectation in the Church of God and the Communion of Saints of obtaining forgiveness of sins resurrection and everlasting life and do also acknowledge all these Articles of the Christian Faith and a standing gesture is very suitable to any solemn Declaration of our minds in matters of moment and concernment And as the profession of Faith encludeth a stedfast resolution to continue firm in the acknowledgment of the Christian Doctrine this is so properly signified by the standing gesture according to the general apprehensions of the World that both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek which are words expressing the standing gesture are in the holy Scripture used to signifie an asserting with resolution Deut. 25.8 1 Chr. 34.32 1 Cor. 16.13 2 Thes 2.15 and the like Idioms of speech are in some other languages as well as our own designing to express what we resolve to stand to SECT II. Of standing up at the Gospel 1. Standing at the Gospel is appointed in our Liturgy of which a very reasonable true and good account may be given Some Ritualists have told us that the Western Church stood up at the Gospel and not at the Epistle because the Gospel containeth matters of Faith and belief the Epistle consisteth of Rules of life and practice and that the Gospel and not the Epistle expresseth the very words spoken by Christ But I account not these reasons sufficient partly because the Gospels for some days do not contain and the Epistles for some days do contain the points of Christian Faith and the express words of Christ and partly because by insisting on these things alone we can have no reason antecedent to the appointment why standing at the Gospel should be required with us and not at the second Lesson in the Morning Service 2. Wherefore I observe 1. That in the devouter times both of the Jewish and Christian Church it was frequently observed by the people to manifest their reverence unto the holy Scriptures by standing up at the reading thereof When Ezra opened the Book of the Law Salian Annal. Eccles A. M. 3447. n. 16. all the people stood up Neh. 8.5 and the Children of Israel stood up in their places to read the Law of the Lord Neh. 9.3 and our blessed Saviour who according to the Custom of the Jewish Doctors taught sitting stood up to read the words of the Prophet Ecclesiastici lib. 1. c. 4. Luke 4.16 20. Junius observeth this as one thing wherein the practice of the Jewish Synagogue and the Christian Church did agree si verbum Dei ipsum legitur stat erecta Auditorum corona that when the word of God was read the whole Assembly stood up which observation was true concerning sometimes of the Jewish Church and of the principal parts of the Christian Church Sozom. l. 7. c. 19. Wherefore though Sozomen relateth that the Alexandrian Bishop did not stand up at the reading the Gospel yet he noteth it as such a peculiar usage that he had not seen nor heard the like any where else 3. And though in the Jewish Church the people and among them our Saviour Luk. 2.46 usually sat to hear their Doctors and the ancient Christians sometimes heard their Sermons and Exhortations in the same gesture as may be collected from Justin Martyrs second Apology Euseb de Vit. Const l. 4. c. 33. yet Eusebius acquainteth us that Constantine that famous Emperour whose practice doubtless was not singular would not hear a Sermon or Treatise about divine things in a sitting but only in a standing posture as judging it not allowable to do otherwise And that in the African Churches they did even until S. Austens days generally stand Aug. Hom. 26. both at Sermons and all Lessons out of the Scriptures is manifest from what he expresseth to that purpose And such respect was shewed even among barbarous Nations to what was dictated from God that Eglon King of Moab when Ehud told him he had a message from God unto him did arise out of his seat Jud. 3.20 4. Obs 2. Out of tenderness to the weakness and infirmity of many Christians liberty was granted to them that they might hear the longer Lessons or portions of holy Scripture sitting Aug. ibidem but as a testimony of their honour to the whole they were required at the reading other portions of Scripture to stand up S. Austen telleth us how he gave Counsel and in some sort made supplication that those who were infirm and not well able to stand might humbly and attentively hear the longer Lessons sitting but in the same place he maketh complaint that this liberty granted only to the infirm in those African Churches was taken by others more generally than was intended or allowed And to somewhat a like liberty the words of Amalarius in the ninth Century seem to refer Amalar. de Eccles Offic. l. 4. c. 3. who saith in recitatione lectionis sedere solemus aut silendo stare it is our Custom either to sit or to stand with silence when the Lesson is read And whereas in the Christian Church the Law and Prophets with some of the Apocrypha and the Gospels and Epistles were publickly read in their Assemblies as is manifest both from Councils Fathers and Ritual Writers the Latin Church enjoined standing up at the Gospel only which was ordinarily short for many hundred years past Microl. c. 9. the Greek Church as Micrologus relateth stood up also at the Epistle which was likewise short Cassand Liturg. c. 5. and so did also the Churches of Russia as Cassander observeth from the History of Sigismundus Liberus For though a posture of reverent respect to the word of God is very suitable whensoever it is read yet that the Church should allow a liberty to hear the
longer Lessons sitting while this particular reverence is expressed only at the reading some shorter portion of the Scripture De Eccl. Offic. l. 3. c. 11. is very allowable because it is well observed by Amalarius that the Apostles themselves did sometimes hear the Scriptures read in the Jewish Synagogue sitting as is evident from Act. 13.14 15 16. Where they entred into the Synagogue and sat down and after the reading the Law and the Prophets Paul stood up 5. Obs 3. Standing at a short portion of the Gospel rather than at any other portion of the Scripture is reasonably chosen to express reverence to the holy word of God because the actions and words of our blessed Saviour are for the most part therein contained In the Primitive Church while the servour of true devotion did continue they heard the Writings of the Apostles read with that high esteem and veneration as if they had then seen the Apostles faces and received those words from their mouths which Tertullian thus expresseth Tertul. de Praescrip c. 36. Authenticae literae eorum sc Apostolorum recitantur sonantes vocem representantes faciem uniuscujusque eorum And in like manner they heard the words of the Gospel as if they had seen Christ himself and received these words from his mouth And though all divine truth be therefore highly valuable because it is from God yet so far as concerneth the deliverer it was requisite and warranted by the Scriptures Mat. 21.37 Heb. 2.1 2 3. Ch. 3.3 that those who lived when Christ was in the flesh should shew the higher respect of the two to Christ himself speaking whose words are ordinarily in the Gospel than to his Apostles who were sent by him Ign. Ep. ad Philadelph Wherefore Ignatius accounteth the Gospel to have this excellency in it viz. the presence of our Saviour Jesus Christ and his suffering and resurrection And out of special respect to our Lord and Saviour it was the Custom of the ancient Greek Church to stand up when ever the Book of the four Evangelists was opened Chrysost de Circo Const Apost l. 2. c. 57. or any Lesson read from thence though the gesture of sitting was allowed at the hearing any other Books of Scripture so that the liberty of sitting even at any Lessons from the Gospel was not there indulged the practice of divers Churches being in these things not alway the same where the same liberty was allowed concerning the other Scriptures 6. Wherefore to shew that outward respect to the holy Scriptures which both the Jewish and Christian Churches have owned and wherein our blessed Lord hath given us an example to stand up at the reading them is reasonable and unblameable And the liberty allowed for sitting at the other Scriptures which for order sake is sit to be used doth not countenance any want of high respect to all Divine truth which is expressed by manifesting this respect to a particular short part thereof and that part is to this purpose chosen wherein the words and actions of our Lord and Master do frequently occur SECT III. Of the fitness of kneeling at the Communion and the gesture at the institution of that Sacrament considered 1. To kneel at the receiving the holy Communion hath been judged a gesture very expedient and commendable upon divers respects 1. Because this Sacrament doth in a special manner exhibit a mystical and spiritual Communion with Christ or the Communion of his body and bloud and the greatest reverence and most humble gesture is very convenient for so solemn an Ordinance and so near an approach to Jesus Christ especially since in this great Ordinance there ought to be a devout religious worship performed unto Christ himself Kneeling therefore is a fit gesture of adoration performed in this Ordinance unto God and Jesus Christ which is the more inoffensively performed because our Church hath openly declared against any adoration either of the Sacramental Bread and Wine Rubr. after Communion or of any corporal presence of Christs natural flesh and bloud therein 2. Because of the greatness of the benefits conveyed in this Ordinance to the worthy receiver such as the Grace of God and remission of sins in the bloud of Christ and if he who receiveth some great gift or some great pardon from his Prince doth fitly receive it kneeling and the Poenitentes in the ancient Church always received Ecclesiastical absolution from the Rulers of the Church upon their knees in token of their submissive humility much more he who cometh unto Christ in this Sacrament to receive from him the remission of his sins tendred in his bloud of the New Testament should appear before him with humility Ibidem To this purpose Kneeling at the Sacrament is in our Liturgy declared to be for a signification of an humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy receivers and Mr. Hooker saith very well coming as receivers of inestimable Grace at the hand of God Eccles Pol. l. 5. c. 68. what doth better beseem our bodies at that hour than to be sensible witnesses of minds unfeignedly humbled 2. 3. Kneeling is a suitable gesture for solemn Prayer and humble thanksgiving both which may be sitly exercised at the receiving this Sacrament For religious Prayer becometh him who there affectionately desireth to be made partaker of the benefits of Christs Passion and therefore the Communicant should devoutly join in and in heart say Amen to those Petitions at the delivery of the Elements which peculiarly refer to himself The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy Body and Soul to everlasting life and The bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ c. And humble thanksgiving at the holy Eucharist for the benefits of the New Testament there tendred the love of Christ in his sufferings here remembred and for the means of Communion with the Father and the Son in this Ordinance encluded with reflexion on our own guilt Ans to Admenit Tr. 15. c. 1. div 11. pollution and infirmity is a fit exercise for this Ordinance And upon this consideration Bishop Whitgift declared the kneeling gesture to be very meet for the receiving this Sacrament 3. But against the lawfulness of this gesture divers things are objected 1. That Kneeling is no Table gesture as sitting is nor doth it so properly express our fellowship with Christ Rutherf Divine Right of Ch. Gov. p. 196. and the honour and priviledge of Communion with him as Coheirs Ans 1. As the Lords Supper is no common Feast but a Heavenly Banquet prepared by Jesus Christ which principally consisteth of spiritual graces and benefits and Communion with Christ signified by and tendred under the outward Elements so the administration and participation of this great Ordinance ought not to be guided by the Rules of common Table fellowship but by more religious considerations At other Tables the attendants
fierceness carrieth them very far yet if we consult the judgment of the Protestant Churches who all admit an uniform gesture in their several churches not only the Lutheran Churches make use of kneeling at the Communion as an expression and excitement of devotion but the Bohaemian Church which also used kneeling declared that this gesture being piously received Ratio Discipl Cap. 3. Sect. 4. devotionem ipsam in conspectu Dei humilitatem adcoque gaudium cum tremore auget encreaseth devoutness of mind humility in the sight of God and awful rejoycing Those of the Helvetick Confession in Poland who themselves used standing did approve of kneeling in the Polish Synods above-mentioued nor hath it ever been condemned by any Protestant Church abroad but is particularly approved and well allowed of also by divers of the most eminent Ministers of the Reformed Churches as hath been manifested by Mr. Durel Zanchy declareth Zanch. in Sec. praec c. 17. that there is no doubt but that they act holily and according to the will of God who come to handle and partake of the holy Sacrament with external reverence also And Hospinian declareth that the Sacraments ought to be handled with great Religion and reverence Hospin Hist Sacram l. 5. c. 8. according to the Custom of every Church with a comely habit modest behaviour soberly and devoutly with the head uncovered and with bended knees CHAP. IV. Of other particular Rites appointed in the Church of England SECT I. Of the Surpless 1. A Decent habit in the service of God is generally allowed to be expedient and Bucer observed that whether men will or no they must acknowledge that the distinct Garments and Ornaments of Magistrates doth procure a singular respect to their Magistracy And a decent habit used by Ministers in the worship of God doth express a reverent esteem of the service of God and promoteth a due respect to them and their Ministration with men of unprejudiced minds Upon which account a particular comely attire for the Levites under the Law Ch. 1. Sect. 2. as hath been above-shewed and for Christian Ministers both in the Primitive and reformed Churches was ordered and appointed by Ecclesiastical Authority and to this end with us as with many other Churches anicent and modern reformed the use of the Surpless is received the decency of which is to be considered 2. As the service of God in Religious ministrations is excellent and honourable Baron A. 44. Casaub Exercit. 16. n. 73. Selden de Synod l. 1. c. 3. so the general sense of a great part of the World both Jews and Gentiles have accounted white garments to be honourable and comely and they are also approved as such by the wisdom of God himself in the description of the most excellent persons and things The glorious attire of the Lambs wise and some of the Apocalyptick Angels is expressed by their being arrayed in white linen Rev. 19.8 Chap. 15.6 the glorious state of the whole Church of God and its Members and of the Elders before the Throne is signified by their being cloathed in white raiment Rev. 7.9 Chap. 3 4 19. chap. 4.4 and the appearance of Angels the Transfiguration of Christ and the vision of the glory of God are represented in white garments Mark 16.5 Act. 1.10 Mark 9.3 Dan. 7.9 and the Holy Ghost would certainly not make use of things indecent and unseemly as representations of such great and glorious excellencies And therefore they who will condemn or deride a vesture of white linen as being in it self uncomely must first undertake to give evidence Zanch. in 2. Pracept c. 16. that they have better judgments concerning what is decent in the Church than the rest of the World have P. Martyr Ep. ad Hoop or than he hath who gave the being both to the World and to the Church And it hath been acknowledged by Protestant Writers of good note that the use of white linen hath hereby this special advantage that from the natural simplicity of the colour the special consideration of white linen above expressed and the use of these expressions in Scripture it may aptly direct us to the meditation and consideration of purity 3. Yet because it must be acknowledged that things in themselves otherwise unblamable may become unlawful when they are made use of upon evil principles or in any evil way or to bad ends and purposes and whereas the use of the Surpless is charged by some with Judaizing and by others with too much compliance with the degenerate state of the Christian Church under Popery I shall take these things into consideration 4. Though such things as have a natural comeliness or conveniency do not become unlawful to Christians at all times because they were made use of or injoyned in the Law of Moses as hath been manifested yet I further observe Ch. l. Sect. 1. that the Surpless was no Aaronical garment as hath been ordinarily supposed and granted Among the high Priests garments his Ephod which was made of blue Purple Scarlet and sine twined linen and his Robe which was all of blue can have no affinity with the Surpless neither of them being white linen and both of them of a different shape and his linen Breeches Bonnet Mitre and Girdle bear not the least resemblance thereto it remaineth therefore that none other of their garments can be like to our Surpless unless either the Coat of the high Priest or the Coats of the inferiour Priests which are sometimes called Ephods should agree thereto The high Priests Coat was ordinarily an under-garment worn next to his skin upon which he put on his Robe Ephod and other attire as may be collected from Moses his consecration of Aaron Lev. 8.7 8. and is plainly expressed by Josephus who was himself a Priest Josep Ant. l. 3. c. 8. and at Jerusalem whilst this attire was yet worn 5. But it must be owned that upon the day of atonement which was the tenth day of the seventh mouth the high Priest went into the Holy of Holies in a linen Coat without his other ordinary Priestly garments Philo. de Somn. Targ. Jonath in Lev. 16.4 Salian An. 2545. n. 54. as is affirmed by Philo Judaeus who also saith that this was a white Coat though others as well as our English Translators in Exod. 28.39 suppose it was embroidered by one of the Chaldee Paraphrasts and by divers others both Jewish Writers and Modern Christians Cun. de Rep. Heb. l. 2. c. 1. And though Cunaeus representeth the contrary opinion which he opposeth as the common opinion of those Christian Writers which went before him yet it must be acknowledged as manifestly true from Lev. 16.4 23 24 32. that the high Priest entred the Holy of Holies without his glorious attire only in a linen Coat with linen Breeches Mitre and Girdle which might well signifie that humble purity was more fit to appear before God than
that such Confirmation with Imposition of hands might be restored 9. But it remaineth to be inquired how the Church can certifie the persons confirmed by the sign of Imposition of hands of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them For the answering of which waving other considerations I shall observe two things First that as this imposition of hands is a testimony of admitting persons to a higher rank of Christian Professors who ratifie their baptismal Covenant by their own action intimating also an approbation of this profession it includeth the power of the Keys whereby the Officers of the Church are enabled by Gods authority to declare particularly his favour and gracious goodness to them who embrace the conditions of Christianity and to direct them thereunto and to this purpose was Imposition of hands on the Penitents at divers times used in the ancient Church And to testifie Gods gracious acceptance either by our words or actions of mens undertaking the exercise of Christianity is a thing greatly different from the tendering the divine grace of Gods Covenant as exhibited by any sign as a means to convey the same which is the proper nature of a Sacrament 10. Secondly This Imposition of hands is a sign of a Benediction in Gods name from the Officer of Gods Church The Levites and especially the Priests under the Law were required to bless the people in the name of God Deut. 10.8 1 Chron. 23.13 which blessing was performed in a way of benedictory prayer or supplication Numb 6.23 and this blessing in Gods name was a testimony of Gods giving his blessing to them supposing them not to render themselves uncapable thereof Num. 6.27 The external testimony of their general blessing all the people Targ. Jonath in Num. 6.23 was most probably by lifting up their hands towards them as is declared by one of the Chaldee Paraphrasts and is observed by Baronius Baron Annal Eccl. An. 34. n. 220. and we have an instance of this Rite attending the Priestly benediction Lev. 9.22 and our Saviour made use of the same Luk. 24.50 But in their solemn particular benedictions in the Old Testament they used Imposition of hands of which we have an example Gen. 48.14.16 in Jacobs blessing the Sons of Joseph this Rite was also used in their Ordination of their Elders and the constant use hereof in the particular benedictions by persons of great eminency among the Jews is reasonably esteemed the cause why the Jews brought little Children to Christ that he might put his hands on them and pray Mat. 19.13 Gret in Mat. 19.13 And from the frequent practice of this Rite Junius and Tremellius have ventured to admit a Paraphrase into their Translation concerning the Priestly benediction wherein they express the use of Imposition of hands in Num. 6.27 which can only be allowed concerning particular benedictions The end and design of imposition of hands in benediction 〈…〉 voc 〈◊〉 Jâ—n in Num. 6. c. 7. is declared by Ravanellus to be in testimony of the help favour and grace of God to be given to him who receiveth imposition of hands and Junius saith by this sign they were to testifie to the people Gods grace which are Phrases much like those in this Prayer at Confirmation in our Liturgy Yet this Rite was only a sign of Gods favour in this use with respect to the Benediction or Prayer for that person supposing and hoping him to be duly qualified for the receiving the benefit therein desired and therefore is of no Sacramental nature 11. Now â—lessing including nothing Ceremonial and peculiar to the Law and the Ministry of the Old Testament is very suitable to the Gospel which is in an especial manner a Dispensation of Blessing And this benediction or praying 〈◊〉 for Gods blessing was the 〈…〉 designed in this Apostolical 〈◊〉 of hands with prayer and from their time this use hath been continued in the Christian Church as hath been shewed and it would be a strange unreasonable and uncharitable thing if those who come to renew their baptismal Covenant might not receive the Churches blessing in Gods name with prayer for their Christian growth and perseverance And the dignity of Office in the Church chiefly giving authority to bless according to that rule of the Apostle Heb. 7.7 without all contradiction the less is blessed of the greater this solemn benediction at Confirmation hath thereupon been justly reserved to the Bishop or chief Officer of the Church by whom alone it was performed in the time of S. Cyprian and S. Hierom. 12. Confirmation in our use thereof is called by Bishop Whitgift Bishop Whitg Defence p. 785. Eccl. Pol. l. 5. Sect. 66. The Bishops benediction by laying on of hands by Mr. Hooker This special benediction the Rite or Ceremony of Confirmation and when Confirmation was restored in Scotland in the fourth Article of the Assembly of Perth it was declared concerning children who had been catechized that the Bishop should bless them with prayer for the increase of their knowledge and the continuance of Gods heavenly grace with every one of them And the ancient Confirmation was accounted a Benediction by Tertullian Tertul. de Bapt. c. 8. Conc. Eliber c. 77. and a Benediction of the Bishop by the Council of Elvira And since the Gospel-dispensation is a Ministration of Blessing and the great blessing of the Gospel is to receive the promise of the Spirit Gal. 3.14 This benedictory prayer upon a solemn occasion for the grace and strength of that Spirit was suitably accompanied in the practice of the Apostles and the Christian Church with the ancient and proper token of benediction the Imposition of hands 13. Presbyt Except p. 29. But it hath been urged that the Articles of our Church declare imposition of hands in Confirmation to be a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice and that Confirmation hath no visible sign appointed by God Artic. 25. and therefore Imposition of hands cannot therein certifie children of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them and thus contradictions are injuriously imposed upon the Church The words of the Article to which they refer are these Article 25. Those five commonly called Sacraments that is to say Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimony and Extreme Vnction are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures but yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lords Supper for that they have not any visible sign or Ceremony ordained of God The sense of the former part of which words is That the Church of Rome accounting Confirmation Penance Orders and Extreme Vnction for proper Sacraments of the Gospel their errour herein proceedeth from their corrupting those things which were practised by the Apostles but their esteeming Marriage to be a Sacrament is a mis-representing a state of life allowed in the
Scripture to be a Gospel-Sacrament 14. The latter clause of those words of the Article do manifestly alike deny Confirmation and Ordination to have any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God or that God hath not appointed in them any such properly Sacramental sign as Baptism and the Lords Supper hath For in both these the Imposition of hands is immediately a representation of a benediction and of being thereby received into a higher degree among Christians by the ministerial power of the Church and though further grace from God is needful in this higher degree and humble and devout persons may receive grace from God suitable to whatsoever state he calleth them yet grace is in these cases to be expected in the use of Prayer and from the Promises of Gods assistance to and presence with his people and his Ministry but not immediately from God by the use of Imposition of hands as an outward sign whereby that grace is directly exhibited and conveyed and moreover proper Sacraments are seals of Gods whole Covenant and means whereby he conveyeth both pardoning and satisfying grace And I further add that the acknowledging the sign of Imposition of hands in Confirmation not to have any divine institution or immediate command hindreth not its being of Apostolical practice and that in the use thereof we may both follow the example of the Apostles and certifie Gods favour and gracious goodness to persons confirmed according as is above expressed SECT IV. Of the Ring in Marriage And the Conclusion 1. The Ring was by the old Nonconformists called a Sacramental Sign and a new Sacrament and others since have expressed some fear lest the use of these words with the delivery of the Ring In Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost should favour them who account Marriage a Sacrament But if this was an intimation of a Sacrament a last Will and Testament beginning In the Name of God c. and being signed and sealed must be accounted a Sacrament And even among the Romanists who esteem Marriage for a Sacrament the Ring is not fixed upon for the sign or matter thereof but some fix upon the persons contracting others upon all those words and actions whereby consent is signified others as Estius speaketh doubt which of these to close with Bellarm. de Matrim Sacr. c. 6. and Bellarmine admitteth them both 2. Now though Marriage be in some sense a Religious Constitution as having its original institution from God yet both the nature of this society and the end of it speak it a civil state of Gods appointment even as the state of Government and Subjection is and therefore as other civil contracts are established by words of consent ordinarily attended with real signs or tokens as with us some Livery and Seisin is used in the passing over an Estate and by the general consent of the World an Earnest attendeth ordinary Bargains so by a large consent of Nations hath a Ring been thought fit to establish the Matrimonial contract as a pledge or earnest thereof Whence it was an ordinary custom among the Jews to use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ring of Espousing the manner of its use among the modern Jews is expressed by Buxtorfe in his Synagogua Judaica Syn. Jud. c. 28. and the ancient practice thereof is mentioned in the Talmud in Kiddushin Buxt Lex Radbin in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among the ancient and laudable customs of the Roman Empire Tertul. Apol c. 6. Tertullian reckoneth this for one that women then wore gold only on that one finger quem sponsus oppignorasset annulo pronubo where the Bridegroom had put the pledge of the Matrimonial Ring Baron An. 57. n. 51. and Pamelius upon that place of Tertullian and Baronius also observeth the like use of the Ring to be expressed by Pliny to which purpose also are the words of Juvenal who describing Marriage saith Et digitis pignus fortasse dedisti Juven Sat. 6. and Theosebius in Photius calleth the Ring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conjoyner of conjugal society But though the use of this Rite in Marriage was very ancient Tertul. de Idolatr c. 16. even among the Pagan Nations Tertullian assureth us it was no part of their Paganism saith he Neque annulus neque conjunctio maritalis de alicujus idoli honore descendit but this pledge and other common earnests were prudently used long before the time of Christ and are still continued under Christianity 3. And that the principal use of this Rite is under the Christian state continued to be an earnest of this Matrimonial Contract is not only manifest from those ancient ritual words mentioned by Durantus Durandus and many others Annulo suo subarravit me sibi Dominus but from S. Augustin Aug. Tr. 2. in 1. Ep. Johan who calleth it arram sponsi the pledge or earnest of the Husband and the same intent hereof is expressed in several testimonies cited in Gratians Decretum c. 30. q. 5. c. nostrates Foeminae V. Gloss in c. 27. q. 2. si quis And in our Liturgy the giving and receiving a Ring is declared to be a pledge of the Vow and Covenant made between the persons who enter upon this state of Marriage And whereas these words In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost have some relation to the pledge of Wedlock by the Ring in our Office of Marriage as it is a testimony of consent to the Covenant of Marriage the sense and design thereof is to express thus much That this Contract of Marriage in the Church is undertaken with respect to the Rules of the Christian Doctrine and the Institution of God concerning Marriage and by Authority therefrom and in Subjection thereunto and that by reason of this institution the expressed consent of the persons contracting must stand firm and inviolable and therefore it is fitly and solemnly declared to be In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost in that being now joyned together by God no man can put them asunder 4. But besides this principal end of the Ring the delivery thereof did also include a giving authority to the Wife to command and take care of the goods of the house and the provisions which the ancient Romans usually sealed and hence the Ring given in Marriage was a Seal-ring Paed. l. 3. c. 11. Thus Clemens Alexandrinus calleth it a Ring of Gold given to the Woman but not for ornament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to set a seal upon what requireth safe custody and in the same Chapter he saith that the care of the house is fitly committed to the Wife and those who have no wives may use the Seal-ring themselves So he expresseth this ancient usage of giving a Seal-ring which may also not improbably be designed in the comprehensiveness of Tertullians language Tertull. ad Vxor l. 2. c 9. by his Phrase of