his glory laid down in the hand of any creature as it dishonoureth the Husband that his wife give her body to another representing his person For this cause Bernardus Puiol faith Images are properly to be Adored contrary to that which Durandus saith And Azorius saith It is the common opinion that Images are to be worshipped with Latreia the highest honour due to God So saith he Thomas Alexander Bonaventura Richardus Albertus Paludanus Alman Marsilius Capreolus Cajetanus caeteri juniores sic sentiunt The fourth expression of wit is this distinction of Vasquez That that internall submission to God as to the Creator and chief God is due to God only and that the image seeing it is a Creature is not capable of that high honour But the externall act of kissing and kneeling he will have due to the image for the excellency of the Samplar And so he denyeth contrary to Suarez That the image separated from the Samplar or the humanity of Christ separated from Divinity can be Adored But if externall Adoration may be given to images so also internall submission Thou shalt not bow down to them Religiously it is expounded in the second Commandment Thou shalt not Worship them It is grossenesse in Vasquez to say The Worshipping of images was forbidden the Iews in the second Commandment as a Ceremoniall inhibition because of the Iews propension to idolatry But Act. 17. 29. Paul expoundeth the second Commandment Forbidding the similitude of God And the Athenians were not under the Law of Ceremonies Ioannes de Lugo saith This is a probable opinion But it is clear Cornelius a devout man one who feared and worshipped God whose Prayers were heard in heaven for Christs sake knew that Peter was a man which lodged in the house of Simon a Tanner yet his Religious externall bowing though he knew Peter was not God but a Divine man resembling God by Peter is rebuked as idolatry Act. 10. v. 25 26. I cannot help Ioan. de Lugo to say That Peter forbade Cornelius to worship him not because it was a sin but for modesties cause But 1. Peters Argument striketh against idolatry ver 26. Stand up he forbiddeth Religious kneeling for I my self also a man The very Argument that Paul and Barnabas useth Act. 14. â—er 15. We also are men c. and used against the idolatry of Lystra expresly condemned in that place And the Angels Argument against the idolatry of Iohn Rev. 19. 10. I am thy fellow servant Worship God Ergo externall Religious bowing should not be given to any save to God 2. Peter and the Angel should have opened the Jesuits and Formalists distinction if worshipping of Saints and dumbe images be worshipping of God and the honour principally of inward acknowledgment of the Supremacy and Soveraignty of God be intended in bowing to images and modesty should not forbid honouring of God And whereas Ioannes de Lugo saith Iohn was forbidden to Worship the Angel to signifie that our nature in Christ was advanced to a dignity above the Angels But 1. then it is unlawfull to any to worship Angels 2. Nor is it Lawfull to give the Virgine Mary Divine worship as Suarez saith 1. For her excellency in touching Christ 2. For her Grace and Sanctity 3. For her mothers place in bearing Christ because her nature in Christ is not exalted above the nature of other believers for the nature common to all believers and Eadem specie was assumed by Christ 3. The Angel saith Worship God he therefore believed the Worshipping of Angels was not the Worshipping of God All these fight against Religious bowing before the elements in due regard of so Divine mysteries the Bread would say if it could speak See thou do it not for I also am a Creature The fifth trick of wit is a distinction of Suarez That one and the same act of Adoration may be given and is given in externall Worship to the image and to God but in reference to God it is Latreia the high Honouring of God and in reference to the image it is an inferior Veneration So do our Formalists say as Burges saith Adoration and Veneration differ not but by mens will and if it be lawfull to Adore God before the Ark Why not at the Sacrament The Bread and the Wine are Christ significative as the Ark had the title of Iehovah by occasion of the elements not as they are but as they signify we may tender a knee-knee-worship not at all to them but only to God or Christ And again he holdeth it lawfull to Adore the elements but then Adoration as given to the elements is Veneration and Adoration in a large sence 1 Chron. 29. 20. The people Worshipped God and the King The outward Adoration was one as the word by which it is expressed was one but the Religious and Civill worship were distinct in the minde and intention of the worshippers Edward the 6. Book saith Kneeling is to eschew prophaning of the Sacrament Opposit to prophaning is externall Religious honouring expressed by kneeling and that is Adoring Hence one and that same Adoration and externall bowing is given to Bread and to Christ but the minde and will of the Adorer maketh the same act in reference to Christ Adoration or Latreia of the highest degree of honour but in reference to the Bread lawfull Veneration of an inferior nature Answer 1. If it were possible that the Wise could transmit her body in the act of Harlotry by or through a strange Lover to her Husband her will and minde might change Adultery if she saith she giveth her body to a stranger but in her minde and will intendeth to bring forth children to her own Husband So if divers acts of the minde make Religious kneeling to a stock or Bread lawfull if one should Adore the man Iudas as a memoriall of Christ his intention of will might save his Soul if he say I give one and the same externall worship to Iudas and to Christ Or if Cornelius should say I give one and the same knee worship to Peter and to Christ but in my intention they be far different For I Worship Iudas and Peter in that act with Civill homage Commanded in the fifth Commandment as they be Christs Apostles and represent him but in that same I Worship Christ with the highest honour called Latreia Vasquez and Burges make them one externall Worship The three Children might have kneeled to the Image of Nebuchadnezzer for their minde and will as Formalists say might have put another signification of honouring the Lord Iehovah upon their knee-worship and externall kneeling could not have been denyed to the Lord Iehovah and so the three Children should not have given Divine honour and knee-glory to the Image and they were fooles who did hazard their bodies to the fire But wisemen think if they had given knee-worship what ever their heart thought they should
iis tribuamus divinitatis aliquid Grave Athanasius saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The invention of Images is from an evil fountain and not from good and whatsoever hath a bad beginning cannot be deemed in any thing good being altogether bad The Papist Harding bringeth in a counterfeit Dialogue of Athanasius betwixt Christ and his Church and Christ comforting his Church because she was persecuted for worshipping Christs Image but when and where this persecution was none knoweth for many times hath the Church been persecured for not worshipping Images but see the answer of the learned Jewell thereunto Epiphanius who lived Anno 370. proveth against the Collyridiams That Mary nor no creature should be adored Vnde est simulachrificum hoc studium et diabolious conantus praetextâ— enim justitiae sempersubiens hominum mentem drabolus mortalem naturam in hominum oculis deificans Statuas humanas imagines pre se ferentes per artum veritatem expressit et mortui quidem sunt qui adorantur Item Revera sanctum erat corpus Mariae non tamen Deus honorata non in adorationem data Mary was not God and therefore is not to be adored He professeth that he did rive a vail that had painted in it the Image of Christ or of some man Cum ego videssem in Ecclesia Christi contra authoritatem scripturarum hominis pendere imaginem scidi illud c. Lactantius Formianus Images are to represent these who are absent God is every where present it is vanity therefore to forme an image of God Also There is no Religion where there is an image Also your gods be either in Heaven or not if they be not in Heaven why do ye worship them If they be in Heaven why do ye not lift your eyes to Heaven while you adore them Why do you convert your eyes toward walls stocks and stones rather then toward that place where you imagine your gods to be His Arguments against Images be these 1. They forget reason when they fear the work of their own hands 2. God is not absent but present every where 3. The image is a dead thing void of sense God is the eternall and everliving God 4. Nothing mortall should be worshipped 5. What vanity to hope for protection from these things which cannot defend themselves â— 6. The image is lesse and viler then the worshipper 7. Man according to Gods image is the image of God 8. s God needeth nothing neither torches because he made the light nor images This man lived Anno 300. Before which time the Church of Christ being persecuted they had no Churches nor Images to be ornaments in their Churches as saith t Ambrosius and also Chrysostom who was displeased with the fooleries in Temples in his time and saith They were not like the Templâ—s of the Apostolick Churches and Tertullian and Eusebius saith They had then Simplices domos Simple houses void of paintries and pictures And the want of Temples was objected against Christian Religion as Origen cleareth in the time of Constantine the son of Chlorus as saith Sozomen and Eusebius Temples were builded but as Joan. Quintinus expoundeth Tertullian without the ornaments of images and Tertullian himself maketh building of Altars and portracts Idolâ—tricos cultus Idolatrous worship In the fourty years space betwixt the reign of Valerian and the 19. year of Dicclesian there were Oratories and Temples builded but neither painted Pictures nor Images in them as saith e Eusebius Yea of thirty Bishops of Rome even from Peter and Paul to Sylvester and Constantine the Emperour to wit three hundred years there were none who were not persecuted to blood or to death or some other way It is a vain thing to say they had breathing time to build Temples and erect Altars and golden Images of Christ and the Virgin Mary and the Saints It is true in the two hundreth year after Christ under Alexander Severus Gordianus Philippus Gallienus Churches were builded as Nicephorus saith but again under Dioclesian they were demolished to the ground but observe well there were no Images of Christ broken which that Tyrant in despite of Christ would not have omitted see Eusebius they were builded again under great Constantine so Sozomen Otho Phrisingensis and Nicephorus The dream of Platina for the building of a Church by the donation of Constantine with twelve portions of earth equall to the number of the twelve Apostles and of another Church with the title of the holy Crosse at Ierusalem which Helena found in that place and Constantine placed in this Church at Rome is refuted by Hospinian yet is there no word of any Images in these Churches Arnobius An. 330. maintaineth against the heathen that the Christians ought to have no Images 1. Because the device of images is a novelty and was not before two thousand years but God and Religion are no new things 2. Because either the Gods dwelleth in their images against their will or of their own accord if the former be said they are compelled which is absurd If the latter then they do either bide alwayes in their images and so are miserable or they go out of the images when they please and then the images are empty things Eusebius Caesariensis who lived An. 300. when Constantia Augusta wrote to him for the Image of Christ answered That could not be 1. Because his manhood was joyned with his Godhead and could not be separated therefrom 2. Because his Godhead cannot be represented Mortuis inanimatis coloribus with dead and livelesse colours Hieronimus who lived An. 331. under Constantine denyeth that any Creature Angel or Virgin Mary should be worshipped Ruffinus faith Helena the mother of Constantine adored crucified Christ but antiquity saith not that she adored the nails that fixed him to the Crosse because they were but creatures Ambrosius who lived Anno 370. condemneth Images 1. Because they change the images of the dead in the glory of God who worshippeth images 2. The living serve the dead 3. They take from stocks and stones what they are and give to them what they are not 4. Idols are unclean 5. It is undecent to worship what men maketh with their hands 6. Because images are but shadows Augustine condemneth Images 1. Because they infect the vveak mindes of rude people to worship them 2. They have eyes and see not 3. The creatures are images of God not stocks 4. Idols are huskes and empty 5. These who brought in Images tooke away the feare of God and increased error 6. Martyrs are not gods 7. Confounded be they who worship stones our living stone Christ is in heaven 8. Though worshippers of Images say they worship God in Images yet they worship devills for good men as Paul and
appointed yet is it not Morall that a Pastor be such or such a Country man so he be apt to teach and holy Crossing signifying the dedication of the Baptized Childe to the service of Christ must be Morall but what sort of River the â—â—ter of Baptisme be is meerly Physicall not Morall So there be two sort of things in Gods Worship things either meerly Morall or meerly Naturall And here also we consider things Circumstantiall as Time Place c. And circumstances are either meerly Physicall or 2. meerly Morall or 3. mixt partly Morall partly Physicall Circumstances meerly Physicall are such adjuncts of divine worship as are common and unseparable concomitants of both civil naturall and Religious or Sacred actions performed by men and as they are such contribute no Morall goodnesse or badnesse to the action or Agent in the performance thereof such as I take to be the seven individuall proprieties of every man Forma figura locus tempus strips patria nomen under Forme and figure The first two I comprehend such a proportion of body a man of a high stature or low a man beautifull or not beautifull to which I crave leave to reduce all externall Formes of habites as cloathes the head covered or not covered the situation of the body as as they are in themselves meer Physicall acts kneeling sitting standing the eyes cast down to the earth or lifted up the hands lifted up or not lifted up the knocking on the breast or not knocking motions of the soul that are naturall Time Place Family Country Name as such a person Thomas not Iohn the son of such a man not of such a man 1. All these are common concomitants of Civill Naturall and Religious actions for all actions performed by man of what kinde soever as naturall to eat sleep or civill to declaime an oration before the people or religious to preach or pray must be done by some persons Iohn or Thomas men of some Family in some time in some place for they are not actions eternall and so must be done in time and place so the Agents must have some habite some gesture in the doing of all these actions and they are unseparable Adjuncts of all these actions because neither actions naturall civill nor Religious can be performed but by some persons in some habite and gesture in some time in some place and lastly they are meere circumstantials and contribute no Morall goodnesse or badnesse to the actions as they are but common and unseparable circumstances for because he preacheth in time or in place simply the preaching is neither Morally good nor ill better or worse because Thomas prayeth in Gown or Cloak in this place rather then that place so it be not Locus ut sic of intention such a Religious place before the Image of Christ or the Father or the Virgin Mary the praying is neither the more or the lesse acceptable to God because of these common and unseparable adjuncts Hence there can be no such force in these circumstances as to make the actions indifferent Such as contend for the lawfulnesse of Ceremonies say our circumstances of time place and the like is nothing but a meerblinde for we cannot say they enumerate all these circumstances for habite gesture person are not meer circumstances and they mustcome in under the lap of this general c. or the like To which I answer that to my knowledge all these that are meer Physical circumstances are particularly enumerated such as are 1. Time 2. Place 3. Person or Agent 4 Name 5. Family 6. Condition as Country Family House 7. Habits or Garments 8. Gestures as sitting standing lifting of the eyes or hands knocking on the breast kneeling and there is no blinde in this enumeration for there be no other particulars that can be enumerated except this time of the day eight or ten of clock this place not any other this person not another and these are only considered here as circumstances not as such and such circumstances but the truth is the enumeration of Symbolicall Rites as Crosse Surplice and the like is really a blinde and is an enumeration with a wide belly and includeth species and not individuals only as Symbolicall Ceremonies such as are Crossing Bells Oyle Salt Spettle Milk turning to the East toward the people from the people toward the Altar with a high voice with a low voice and a thousand the like yea all the old Ceremonies of Moses with a new face all the toyes of the Masse of the Dedication of Churches which would fill a Volumne like the Rationale of Durandus 2. Some Circumstances are meerely Morall for as Divines distinguish Time and Place in Time as Time and as such a Religious Time the Lords Sabbath Tempus tempus ut sic and Place as Place or such a Religious place Locus locus ut sic So we may distinguish here between circumstances in common or in grosse and such and such circumstances As time is a common adjunct of Divine Worship But such a time to wit the Lords-day is both the time of Worship and Worship it self So there is place of Worship and there is such a Religious place The holy of holiest the Temple A habit is a meer accident of Worship the person John or Thomas is also an accident but if God command such an Ephod as Aaron and the Priests were to wear this is not a meer circumstance that the person who administreth the Lords-Supper be John or Thomas is a meer circumstance but that this person be a called Pastor not a private man is more then a circumstance And therefore these circumstances taken in common and their Universall nature are meerly Physicall circumstances but taken in their particular and determinate restrictions as such circumstances they may be meerly Morall circumstances such as are the common adjunct of the time of Worship the place and the Sabbath time and the Temple for Iewish Worship The former are circumstances meerly Physicall the latter meerly Morall I mean as they are restricted other wayes The Temple of Jerusalem served as our meeting places do to sence off the injuries of Heaven and Sun but that is as a place not as such a place 3. There be some mixt circumstances as these same Physicall circumstances clothed with their own seasonable conveniences so time for Worship and due and convenient time is required there may be some Scandalous and Superstitious time for Worship A habit in the Preacher is required and that a grave one a place is required for private Worship and a fit place such as is not the Market-street for private Praying the inconveniency of the circumstance may vitiate the Worship I did say that Christ Iesus hath set down in the Word a perfect Plat-form of Church-Government in all Morals I say in all Morals because the Word doth not teach us any thing of circumstances Physicall as Physicall Scriptura talia non ponit sed
supponit The Scripture saith not That the Worship of God must have a time a place when and where it s to be performed a person who is to perform it a habit or garments on the person that Worshippeth the Scripture teacheth none of these but supposeth that they are and must be because nature teacheth that without time place person habit gesture its unpossible that these or any humane actions can be and therefore Prelaticall Formalists do without all sense or reason require that we should prove by Scripture the lawfulnesse of time place person habit gesture in Gods Worship for these are presupposed in all actions Naturall Civill Religious Private Publike Lawfull unlawfull in acts of Arts Sciences of Morall conversing and all yea there is as good reason that they demand Scripture to prove he must be a living man who hath a reasonable soul and senses and is born of a woman who Preacheth and Administrateth Sacraments which is presupposed by nature When the Heretick willeth me to prove from Scripture that Christ is very man it is a vain thing he should demand of me beside to prove by Scripture that Christ is such a one also as can laugh weep admire sing sigh c. for these are presupposed to follow mans nature and if Scripture prove Christ to be a true man it presupposeth by natures light that he can laugh he can weep and that in some time some place in some habit in some gesture so he be a man for that is presupposed by the light of nature and known by the most Barbarous who never heard of Scripture and therefore there is no greater reason to put us to prove all the naturall and unseparable circumstances of Worship such as time and place without which it is impossible any action at all can be performed then that we should presse Prelats to prove by Scripture that Iames Vsher is born of English or Irish Parents for sense and nature can prove all these without Scripture But because their Ceremonies of Crossing bowing to Altars Festivall dayes Oyl Salt Spittle Masse clothes are nothing warrantable by natures light and must have Morall and Symbolicall influence in Worship as positive Religious observances having some spirituall signification and use except they be reasonlesse fancies we have just reason to demand a warrant and speciall Charter for all Morals and so for their Ceremonies in the Scripture and to call their c. humane Ceremonies and the like a blind For if Prelats can prove these Ceremonies to be from Christ and warranted by his Testament we shal yield that their natural circumstances of time when you should Bow to Altars and Crosse a Baptized Infant and where or in what place you should wear Surplice and that the person that useth Oyl Spittle Salt in Baptisme must do it in some habit and with some gesture either sitting standing lying or kneeling are all warrantable and lawfull from the light of nature for if Gods light of Scripture warrant wearing of a Surplice as it doth warrant Sacramentall eating and drinking the light of nature must warrant these concreated naturall and unseparable circumstances of time place person habit gesture used in both the former and the latter But because I said that circumstances of time and place have a threefold consideration Physicall Morall and Mixt and I have spoken onely of these circumstances in a Physicall or naturall consideration therefore in the other two considerations there being involved some Morall goodnesse and because there is no Morall goodnesse imaginable but it must have its essentiall form and being from a Law or word of God therefore all the former circumstances as they are clothed with either morall conveniency and expediency or with some Religious positive goodnesse must be warranted by the Word of God or the Rules of sinlesse and spirituall Prudence which cannot deviate from the word of God For circumstances clothed with Religious Positive goodnesse such as are the Sabbath day the holy of Holiest the Temple these are not meer circumstances but worship it self So a Religious habit as an Ephod or a Surplice is not a meer circumstance or a meer habit but a worship or such a part or limb of worship as must be warranted by the word of truth else it is nothing but a will-device and a forgery and so to be rejected And as touching things of Prudence they are things properly mixt as at what hour Sermon shall begin in such a Church at eight or nine or ten of the clock how the worship shall be ordered whether you should begin the Worship with a word of Prayer or a word of Praising or a word of Exhorting to stir up for the duty of the day is a matter of Prudence and because God hath not laid the band of a Precept on us to begin with either of the three therefore it would seem that though the things themselves be Morall and must be warranted by a Word of God yet the order is not Morall but Prudentiall and so cannot fall under a command of the Church for to me it is hard that men and the Church should lay on a tie or bond of a Precept where God hath laid on no such bond The Church in these mixt things where the Morality is not clear at farthest can but go on to directive advises as Paul doth 1 Cor. 7. 6. 12. Not to imposing of Laws nor to injunctions or Commandments under the pain of Church-censures for Christ must bind and ratifie in Heaven all Church-censures on earth and so the Church cannot command nor censure but as Christ himself would command or censure Now because the rest of the conclusion shall be farther cleared I prove that Christ hath so far forth set down a perfect Plat-form of Church-Government in the Scripture as he hath not given a liberty to Rulers Prelats or to the Church her self to set up a variable Plat-form sutable to their particular Civill Government Laws Manners and Customes 1 Arg. What ever maketh the man of God perfect thorowly furnished unto all good workes and is written for this end that any Timothy or Faithfull Pastor might know how he ought to behave himself in the House of God That must make the man of God perfect in this good work of holy walking as a perfect Governour or a perfect Church-member to be governed in all Morall acts of Discipline and godly behaviour according to the spirituall policie of the Lords house and so must hold forth a perfect Plat-form of Discipline which doth not varie ebbe and flow and alter according to the Civill Government Laws Manners and Customs of men But the Scriptures of God doth so instruct all Members of the visible Church both Governours and governed 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. 1 Tim. 3. 14 15. Ergo the Scripture must hold forth a perfect form of Discipline which doth not varie ebbe flow and alter according to the Civill Governments Laws Manners and Customes of men The
Moses the Prince is Commanded to make all according to the Patern in the Mount 2. God speaketh to all Israel and not to the Princes only Deut. 4. 1. Hearken O Israel he speaketh to these who are bidden to keep their soul diligently v. 6. 3. It is Bellarmines groundlesse charity to think private heads who were not Princes and Law-givers did not take on an hâ—iry Mantle to deceive Zach. 13. 4. And say Thus saith the Lord when God had not spoken to them Ier. 23. 16. 32. Yea and Private women added their own dreams to the word of God Ezech. 13. 17 18. 3. They say Traditions are from Gods Spirit But hath Gods Spirit lost all Majesty Divinity and power in speaking If the Popes Decretals the Councels the dirty Traditions wanting life Language and power be from Gods Spirit Formalists admit Traditions from an humane spirit and in this are shamed even by Papists who say God only â—an adde to his own Word whereas they say men and the worst of men Prelates may adde to Gods vvord 4. But that additions perfecting are forbidden is clear 1. Additions perfecting as Didoclavius saith argueth the word of imperfection and that Baptisme is not perfect without Crossing 2. It is Gods Prerogative to adde Canonick Scripture to the five books of Moses and the Nevv-Testament and the doctrine of the Sacraments which cannot be Syllogistically deduced out of the Old Testament Matth. 28. 19 20. Ioh. 21. 31. Heb. 3. 2. Rev. 1. 19. and these are perfecting and explaining additions therefore men may by as good reason adde Canonick Scripture to the Revelation as adde new Positive Doctrines like this The holy Surplice is a sacred signe of Pastorall Holinesse Crossing is a signe of dedicating the childe to Christs service for Papists â—ay even Vasquez That the Pope neither in a generall Councell nor out of it can ordain any nevv points of Faith vvhich are not contained in the principles or Articles revealed and may not be evidently concluded out of them Formalists answer It is not lavvfull to adde any thing as a part of divine worship but it is Lawfull to addâ— something as an indifferent Rite coming from Authority grounded upon common equity And this is the ansvver of the Jesuite Vasquez The Pope and Church cannot make an Article of Faith for that is believed by divine Faith to come from God only but as Law-givers they may give Laws that bindeth the conscience and yet are not altogether essentiall in worship If additions as divine parts of Gods worship say we be forbidden God then forbidding to adde such Traditions forbiddeth his own spirit to adde to Gods word for no man but God can adde additions Divine that is coming from God but God himself by good consequence the forbidding men to add additions as really coming from God should forbid men to be Gods for divine additions are essentially additions coming from God but if he forbid additions only of mens divising but obtruded to have the like efficacy and power over the conscience that Canonick Scripture hath then were it lawfull to adde killing of our children to Molech so it were counted not really to come from God with opinion of divine necessity and by this God should not forbid things to be added to his Word by either private or publick men but only he should forbid things to be added with such a quality as that they should by Divine Faith be received as coming from God and having the heavenly stamp of Canonick Scripture when as they are come only from the Pope and his bastard Bishops so all the fables of the Evangell of Nicodemus The materials of the Iewish and Turkish Religion might be received as lawfull additions so they do not contradict the Scripture as contrary to what is written but only beside what is written and with all so they be received as from the Church Also 3. Additions contrary to the word are diminutions to adde to the eight Command this addition The Church saith it is lawfull to steal were no addition to the ten Commandments but should destroy the eight Commandment and make nine Commandments only and the meaning of Gods precept Deut. 12. Thou shalt neither adde nor diminish should be Thou shalt neither diminish neither shalt thou diminish And so our Masters make Moses to forbid no additions at all 6. Commentaries and Expositions of the Word if sound shall be the word of God it self the true sense of a speech is the form and essence of a speech and so no additions thereunto but explanations except you make all sound Sermons Arbitrary Ceremonies and Traditions whereas Articles of Faith expounded are Sermons and so the Scripture it self materially taken is but a Tradition QUEST II. Whether Scripture be such a perfect rule of all our Morall Actions aâ— that the distinction of essentiall and necessary and of accidentall and Arbitrary worship cannot stand And if it forbid all worship not only contrary but also beside the word of God as false though it be not reputed as divine and necessary FOrmalists do acknowledge as Morton Burges Hooker and others teach us that Ceremonies which are meer Ceremonies indifferent in nature and opinion are not forbidden yea that in the generall they are commanded upon common equity and in particular according to their specification Surplice Crossing Knâ—eling before consecrated Images and representations of Christ are not forbidden and negatively Lawfull having Gods allowing if not his commanding will but only God forbiddeth such Ceremonies wherein men place opinion of divine necessity holinesse and efficacy in which case they become Doctrinall and essentiall and so mens inventions are not Arbitrary and accidentall worship But let these considerations be weighed 1. Distinct The Word of Go being given to man as a Morall Agent is a rule of all his Morall Actions but not of actions of Art Sciences Disciplines yea on of meer nature 2. Distinct Beside the Word in actions Morall and in Gods worship is all one with that which is contrary to the Word and what is not commanded is forbidden as not seeing in a creature capable of all the five senses is down right blindenesse 3. Lawfulnesse is essentiall to worship instituted of God but it is not essentiall to worship iâ— generall neither is opinion of sanctity efficacy or Divine necessity essentiall to worship but only to Divine worship and its opinion not actuall nor formall but fundamentall and materiall 4. Seeing the Apostles were no lesse immediatly inspired of God then the Prophets it is a vain thing to seek a knot in a rush and put a difference betwixt Apostolick Commandments or Traditions and divine Commandments as it is a vain and Scripturelesse curiosity to difference betwixt the Propheticall truths of Moses Samuel Isaiah Ieremiah Ezekiel c. And Divine Prophecies which is as if you would difference betwixt the fair writing of Titus the writer and the writing made by the pen of Titus
are not regulated by the word 2. Some agree to man as he liveth as to sleep eat drink and these are considered as animall actions Actiones animales and do not belong to our Question But as they are in man they be two wayes regulated by the word 1. According to the substance of the act the Law of nature and consequently the word of God Commandeth them If one should kill himself through totall abstinence from meat and sleep he should sin against the Law of nature 2. These actions according as they are to be moderated by reason are to be performed soberly and are in Gods word Commanded 3. Some actions agree to man as he is an Artificiall or Scientifick agent as to speak right Latine to make accurate demonstrations in Geometry and these are ruled by Art man in these as they be such is not a Morall Agent but an Artificiall Agent I say as they are such because while one speaketh Latine according to the Art of Disputer or Linacer he should not lie and all morality in these actions are to be ruled by Gods vvord and as actions of Art they are not every good path or every good Morall vvay that Solomon speaketh of Prov. 2. 9. and therefore it is a vain Argument against the perfection of Gods word 2. Hooker saith God teacheth us something by spirituall influence Ans If without the word by only influence spirituall as he taught the Prophets it was a vain instance for influence visions inspirations were of old in place of Scripture If Ceremonies as Crossing Surplice come this way from God they be as nobly born as the Old and New-Testament If God teach any thing now by influence spirituall without Scripture Hooker is an Enthusiast and an Anabaptist If experience and sense teach many things now which Scripture doth not teach and yet is worship or a Morall Action we desire to know these 3. The instance of Thomas learning that Christ is risen from the dead by sence and not by Scripture and of the Iews believing by miracles and not by Scripture might make a Iesuit blush for Christs Resurrection and the Doctrine of the Gospel confirmed by Miracles are not Arbitrary Rites beside Gods word but fundamentals of salvation Hence the man will have us believe God revealeth Articles of faith to us by other means then by his word Thomas was helped by his sense and some Iews to believe Christs Death and Resurrection by miracles But the formall Object of their Faith was the Lord speaking in his scriptures 2. Hooker Objecteth When many meats are set before me in the Table all are indifferent none unlawfull if I must be ruled by Scripture and eat in faith and not by natures light and common discretion I shall sin in eating one meat before another How many things saith Sanderson do Parents and Masters command their servants and sons Shall they disobey while they finde a warrant from Scripture Ans For eating in measure the Scripture doth regulate us for eating for Gods glory the scripture also doth regulate us and the action of eating according to the substance of the action is warranted by the Law of nature which is a part of the word the meer order in eating is not a Morall action and so without the lists of the question If the question be of the order of eating I think not that a Morall action 2. Eating of divers meats is a mixt action and so requireth not a warrant in the Morality every way if you eat such meats where there be variety to choose as you know doth ingender a Stone or a Cholick you sin against the sixth Commandment 3. Masters Parents Commanders of Armies may command Apprentices servants sons souldiers many Artificiall actions in Trades in War where both Commanders and obeyers are artificiall not morall Agents and so they touch not the question but what is morall in all actions of Art Oeconomy Sciences is ruled by the word except our Masters offend that Paul said Children should obey their Parents in the Lord That men are not both in commanding inferiours and obeying Superiours vexed with scruples cometh not from the insufficiency of Gods word but from this that mens consciences are all made of stoutnesse But if this be true Seth Enoch Noah Shem could not eat nor sleep saith Hooker but by revelation which was Scripture to them Answer Supernaturall Revelation was to these Fathers the rule of Gods worship and all their actions supernaturall and of all their actions morall in relation to the last end but for eating and drinking they being actions naturall they were to be regulated in these by naturall reason and the Law of nature which was apart then of the Divine Tradition that then ruled the Church while as yet the word was not written Hooker urgeth thus It will follow that Moses the Prophets and Apostles should not have used naturall Arguments to move people to do their dutie they should only have used this Argument As it is written else they taught them other grounds and warrants for their actions then Scripture Ans None can deny naturall Arguments to be a part of the word of God as is clear Rom. 1. 19. 1 Cor. 15. 36 37. 1 Cor. 11. 14. Yea Christ Mat. 7. 12. teacheth that this principle of nature whatsoever ye would men should do to you do ye so to them is the Law and the Prophets because it is a great part of the Law and the Prophets and therefore they say in effect As it vvritten in the Scripture when they say as it is written in mans heart by nature 2. Principles of nature are made scripture by the Pen-men of the holy Ghost and do binde as the Scripture 3. It will be long ere the Law of nature teach Crossing and kneeling to bread to be good Ceremonie They Object I could not then ride ten miles to solace my self with my friends except I had warrant from Scripture and seeing the Scripture is as perfect in acts of the second Table as in acts of the first I must have a reason of all the businesse betwixt man and man of all humane and municipall Laws but it is certain saith Sanderson faith as certain as Logick can make it is not required in these but onely Ethicall and Conjecturall faith whereby we know things to be Lawfull Negatively It s not required that we know them to be Positively conform to Gods Word Ans If you ride ten miles with your friend and do not advise with his word who sayes Redeem the time you must give account for idle actions if Christ say you must give an account for idle Words 2. Though there seem to be more Liberty in actions of the second Table then of the first because there be far moe Positive actions not meerly Morall which concerneth the second Table because of Oeconomy Policy Municipall and Civill Laws Arts Sciences Contracts amongst men that are not
Aristotle faith well in an indivisible point It is a non-consequence and so mens will is the best house that Ceremonies are descended of If they can be proved by a necessary and infallible consequence we desire to hear it for it must be thus or the like Things not contrary to the Word and commanded as apt to edifie may be Lawfull Arbitrary Worship But Ceremonies are such Ergo the Proposition is not true because Rulers judge either such things apt to edifie because they see them to be so in themselves or because they judge them to be so in themselves therefore they are so in themselves the former cannot be said because this light whereby Rulers see Ceremonies to be apt to edifie is either light of Scripture or nature or both If this be said they can make others see this light Also if there be goodnesse and aptitude to edifie souls in Ceremonies by natures light sound reason or the Word of God they cannot be Arbitrary or indifferent worship but must be essentiall worship having warrant and Commandment from God for what natures light or Scripture Commandeth that God himself Commandeth and what God Commandeth is essentiall not Arbitrary worship 2. And secondly they are not Arbitrary things but necessary and Lawfull by natures light by Scripture or both which they deny if the latter be true then is the will of Rulers that which maketh Ceremonies good and Lawfull aâ—â—in and blasphemous assertion for Pope or Prince or mens pleasure finde pre-existent goodnesse and Lawfulnesse in things and they do not make them good It is proper to God alone who calleth things that are not to create both beings and goodnesse of beings 5. If Arbitrary goodnesse and Lawfulnesse of Ceremonies be thus warrantable because nor contrary to the word and esteemed Arbitrary I might fail against the first four Commandments by superstition and idolary so I esteem these to wit Idolatry and superstition Arbitrary and not of Divine necessity and yet in so doing I should neither sin nor commit acts of false worship because superstition and Idolatry are indeed forbidden but superstition and Idolatry with the opinion that they have neither holinesse merit nor Divine necessity but are meerly Arbitrary are no where forbidden in the word Let Formalists by their grounds shew us a Scripture for it for they cannot by their Doctrine be forbidden as false worship seeing they want that which essentially constituteth false worship as they teach for they as the Argument supposeth want opinion of necessity Divine merit and holinesse 6. If the Churches will commanding Crossing and Surplice make them Lawfull then their forbidding them shall make them unlawfull and mans will shall be a Pope and God 7. If Rulers conclude them Lawfull then either upon Nationall reasons concerning Britain rather then other Nations or upon reasons immutable eternal if the latter be said they be essential worship not Arbitrary if the former be said they be more apt to stir up the dull senses of Brittish men then otheâ—s which is a dream Dull senses are alike every where sin originall alike in all places and God in his perfect word hath provided alike remedies against naturall dulnesse to all mankinde else we in Britaine do supererogate and the word must be perfect to some Nations in that which is common to all and not to others 8. By as good reason Arbitrary mercy and Arbittary justice is holden as Arbitrary worship for the Lords word is as perfect in works of charity for the second Table as in works of Religion for the first and if so be then it were in mens will to do things conducing for the murthering or not murthering of our brethren of their own wit and will without the word of God and there should be some lawfull acts of will-love or will-murther 9. Laws oblige as Papists grant as Driedo and Vasquez say after Gerson Occam Almain and other Papists from the goodnesse of the matter commanded in the Law not from the will of the Law-giver If then the generall will and command of God constitute Arbitrary worship this worship from Gods will layeth a band on the conscience no lesse then essentiall worship For Hezechiah is no lesse obliged in conscience to apply Figs to his boyle and Moses to make every little ring in the Tabernacle when God commandeth these then the Prophets are to write Canonick Scripture for Gods Authority in Commanding is equall in all though in respect of the matter there be great things and lesse things of the Law therefore Gods generall permissive-will doth no lesse oblige the conscience then his approving will 10. To this Arbitrary worship agreeth all the properties of will-worship as 1 Colos 2. 18. It beguileth us of our reward for no promise of God is made of a Bishoprick for conformity 2. It is will-humility to be devouter then God willeth us 3. It intrudeth in things not known in the word 4. It holdeth not the head Christ for it maketh him not a perfect Law-giver if Prelares under him give Laws added to his word and that after the Traditions of men 5. It inthralleth men dead with Christ to a yoak They object But not to yoak upon the conscience Answer yea but we are in Christ freed also from the externall yoak as from shedding of blood in Circumcision removall out of the Campe seven dayes many Ceremoniall Sabbaths presenting of the male-children and going up to sacrifica at Jerusalem yea expensive offerings all called burdens Act. 15. 10. Col. 2. 20. Gal 4. 3 4 5. Col. 2. 14. 15. And multiplied holy dayes Surplice Crossing keeping us in that same bondage though lesse they may say Magis minus non variant speciem 6. This worship perisheth vvith the use 7. Subjecteth us to the Ordinances of men 8. Hath a shew of wisdom Mr. Burges saith Some will-worship iâ— not unlavvfull aâ— three Sermons in one day The free-vvill offerings and vows vvere in some sort vvill-Worship The Church at her godly discretion and will may appoint some Formalities to attend the Worship Answer Gregor de valent saith That some Idolatry is Lawfull some unlawfull This man saith some will-worship is lawfull some unlawfull that is some sin is Lawfull some unlawfull 2. Three preachings come from zeal not from will and is no new worship different from preaching and there may be reason therefore where all cannot be present in one day at all the three there is reason for three preachings none for Crossing 3. Will as will is carver of will-worship Will createth not the worship but determineth the circumstances according to the light of reason in Lawfull worship But where will as will void of reason hath influence in the worship it is wills brood 4 The Freewill offerings were determined by God the poor should offer a pair of Doves in the Free-will offering But the rich a Lamb and it was sin for the rich to offer a pair of doves and therefore
because what it teacheth is a lie for what it teacheth is Scripture Isa 52. 11. That these who beareth the Vessels of the Lord that is Pastors should be holy but it is a Doctrine of lies because it representeth Pastorall holinesse by humane institution without all warrant of the Word of God And when Paul calleth holidayes Elements Gal. 4. 6. He meaneth that they spell to us and teach us some truth as Estius saith That holidayes do teach us Articles of Faith To which meaning Paludanus Cajetan Vasquez say God may well be painted in such expressions as Scripture putteth on God as in the likenesse of a Dove as a man with hands eyes ears feet all which are given to God in Scripture 4. It is essentiall to the Word to set down the means of Gods worship which is the very scope of the second Commandment and therefore the Iews washings and Traditions are condemned because they be Doctrines of men appointed by men to be means of the fear or worship of God as Math. 15. 9. Mar. 7. 8. Isa 29. 13. Hence we owe subjection of Conscience to Ceremonies as to lawfull means of Worship 1. Stirring up our dull senses And 2. as lawfull signes representing in a Sacramentall signification holy things 3. As teaching signes 4. As means of Gods fear and worship Whereas God as Ainsworth observeth well in the second Commandment forbiddeth all images and representations 2. All shapes Exod. 20. 4. Temniah 3. Forms of figures Tabuith Deut. 4. 16. 5. Any type of shadow Tselem Ezek. 7. 20. 16 17. 6. Any pictured shape Maskith Levit. 26. 1. Any Statue Monument Pillar Mattesebah any Graven or Molten Portraict Hos 13. 2. 5. We are obliged to obey the Word Exod. 20. 7. Prov. 3. 20 21. Prov. 8. 13. Ier. 6. 16. Ier. 5. 7. 2. We owe to the Word belief Luk. 1. 20. Love Psal 119. 49. 81. Hope 3. And are to expect a reward therefore Psal 19. 11. Rev. 2. 7. 10. 27 28. Gal. 4. 11. Rom. 6. 23. Coloss 2. 18. Hebrew 11. 25. Psal 34. 9. Psalme 58. 11. Then if Decency be commanded and order in the third Commandment Ergo this and that orderly mean of Worship as Surplice But can we say I hope in the Surplice O how love I crossing and Capping can we believe in Ceremonies as means of Gods worship 6. The word is Gods mean to work supernaturall effects to convert the soul Psal 19. 7. To work Faith John 20. 3. To edifie Act. 20. 32. To save Rom. 1. 16. The obedience to Gods word bringeth Peace Psal 119. 165. Comfort v. 50. Gen. 49. 18. Isa 38. 3. But Ceremonies being apt to stir up the dull minde must be apt to remove Naturall dulnesse which is a supernaturall effect and so to bring Peace joy comfort Organs are now holden by the same right that they were in Moses-Law then they must stir up supernaturall joy There must be peace and comfort in practising them Hear how this soundeth This is my comfort O Lord in my affliction that thy Surplice Organs and holy-dayes have quickened my dull heart Now what comfort except comfort in the Scriptures Rom. 15. 4. Ceremonies be innocent of all Scriptures What joy a proper fruit of the Kingdom of heaven Rom. 14. 17. can be in saplesse Ceremonies yea observe 1. Who truly converred from Popery who inwardly humbled in soul doth not abhor Ceremonies by the instinct of the new birth 2. What slave of hell and prophane person call not for Ceremonies 3. Who hath peace in dying that Ceremonies were their joy 7. All Lawfull Ordinances may by prayer be recommended to God for a blessed successe as all the means of salvation Psal 119. 18. Matth. 26. 26. Act. 4. 29 30. 2. We may thank God for a blessed successe which they have by the working of the spirit of Grace 2 Cor. 2. 24. 1 Cor. 1. 4 5. 2 Thes 1. 2 3. Ephes 1. 3. 3. We are to have heat of zeal against prophaning of word Sacraments Prayer or other Ordinances of God But what faith in praying Lord work with Crossing Capping Surplice For where the word is not nor any promise there be no Faith Rom. 10. 14. What praising can there be for Ceremonies working upon the soul What zeal except void of knowledge and light of the word and so but wilde-fire Gal. 4. 17 18. Phil. 3. 6. 2 Sam. 21. 2. can there be though the Surplice be imployed to cleanse Cups and Crossing be scorned If the subject be nothing the accidents be lesse if Surplice be not commanded nor forbidden the reverent or irreverent usage thereof cannot be forbidden nor commanded true zeal is incensed only at sin and kindled toward Gods warranted service 8. I take it to be Gods appointment that the Spirit worketh by a supernaturall operation with his own Ordinances in the regenerated but we desire to know how the Spirit worketh with Ceremonies Formalists are forced by these grounds to maintain the Lawfulnesse of Images So 1. They be not adored 2. If they be reputed as indifferent memorative Objects and books to help the memory But 1. It shall be proved that at first Papists did give no adoration to Images nor doth Durandus Hulcot Pic. Mirandula acknowledge any adoration due to them but proper to God before the Images as objects 2. We may liken God and Christ to a stock so we count it indifferent to make or not to make such an image yet likening him to any thing is forbidden Isa 40. 18. Also we esteem it Idolatry interpretative to take Gods place in his word and to make any thing to be a mean of grace except Gods own Ordinances Against all these Formalists have diverse exceptions As 1. Our Ceremonies say they do not respect the honour of God immediatly and in themselves but by accident and as parts of Divine worship by reduction as it containeth all the adjuncts of worship Ans Such Logick was never heard of 1. If he mean a Surplice in the materials to wit Linnen and Crossing Physically considered as separated from their signification do not tend immediatly to the honour of God but as an adjunct he speaketh non-sense for so Bread Wine eating drinking Water in Baptisme do not immediatly respect the honour of God but only as they have a Morall consideration and stand under Divine institution But yet so the materiall of worship is not the adjunct thereof but the matter as the body of a living man is not one adjunct of a man If he mean that Ceremonies in a Morall not in a Physicall consideration do not immediatly respect the honour of God but reductively and by accident Let him show us if the Surplice doth not as immediatly and without the intervening mediation of any other thing signifie and stir up our mindes to the remembrance of Pastorall holinesse as eating all of one bread doth immediatly stir up our mindes to the remembrance of our Communion of love that
Religions colour is supernaturally white ingenuous not whorish 2. Or then it addeth order of parts and this is by right grave and convenient circumstantiating of things in Gods worship and Paul dreamed never of Crossing to grace baptizing 3. Or it addeth due quantity Religious worship hath no quantity but time 4. It is against sense that order is commanded in the third Commandment but not Surplice Crossing because they are by accident orderly what agreeth essentially to the generall agreeth not essentially and necessarily to the speces and particulars which are by accident under that generall as what agreeth to a man agreeth not to white and black men Decency is commanded but by accident and by mans will Surplice is decent But then God commanding Sacraments should not command Bread and Wine sor they are by accident and by Gods will Sacraments he might have chosen other Elements yet the will of God commanding Sacraments commandeth this and this Sacrament also What agreeth essentially to man agreeth essentially to all men black and white If Gods will essentially concur to constitute decency in his own worship then must that same will essentially concur to constitute this decency in Surplice Crossing 2. It supposeth a great untruth that Crossing is not worship because not ordained of God but that proveth it is not Lawfull worship but not that it is non-worship for Crossing used to the honour of Baal and to edifie souls in performing their duty to Baal is essentially a worshipping of Baal otherwayes worshipping of Idols is not Worship and yet it is an Act of Religious honouring of the Idol 3. The Command that commandeth or forbiddeth the end commandeth and forbiddeth the means Thou shalt not murther forbiddeth the Master not to command his servant to ride an extreamly deep and impetuous River though the not riding of such a River be not set down in the word and it is not forbidden as an Arbitrary action If therefore decency binde the conscience then the decency of this Rite to wit Crossing bindeth the conscience Our Ceremonies are not Nationall for Crossing being a Religious Rite in all the world it s alike decent Ergo non Crossing in some Country cannot be undecent Things meerly Religious as all significant Ceremonies are of alike nature every where and admit not of heat and cold with divers climates are of good or evil manners with divers Nations therefore they must be determined in the word the man who Preâ—aced on our Service book said without some Ceremonies it is impossible to keep any order or quiet Discipline in the Church I am sure he must think that Paul preached in some Surplice that he might teach holinesse with his garments one way or other he hath a stronger Faith then I can reach without circumstances worship cannot be but without Romish dirt the Worship and Discipline are better kept then with such whorish busking Also whatever is a profession in fact of a false Religion by Ceremonies indifferent and yet proper to a false Religion is a denying of the true Religion but the using of these Ceremonies used by Papists and Iews is such Ergo The Proposition is Scripture Gal. 2. 14. Peter lived after the manner of the Iews in using the Religious materials of the Jews though he had no Iewish intention or opinion yea Acts 10. he disputeth against that So Circumcision Galathians 6. 14 15 is put for the Jewish Church Now Altars Organs Iewish Ephods or Surplice Masse cloaths and Romish Crossing bowing to Altars Images are badges of Iewish and Popish Religion We know the dispute betwixt Augustine and Ierome who defended Peters dâ—ssimulation Gal. 2. to gain the Iews But Augustine saith Epist 9. Si propterea illa Sacramenta celebravit Paulus quia simularet se judaeum ut illos lucrifaceret cur non etiam Sacrificavit cum Gentibus quia iis qui sine lege erant tanquam sine lege factus est ut eos quoque lucrifaceret Yea then as Augustine saith to Ierome Epist ad Hyeronym 19. We might use all the Iewish Ceremonies to gain the Ievvs and so fall in the Herersie of Ebion and the Nazarites Duvallius 2. Thom tract de legib q. 3. Art 3. would defend Peter in that but he saith Magis placet Barronii Responsio Tom. 1. Annal. an 51. Petrum venialiter peccasse As for Pauls Circumcising of Timothy Papists clear him Vasquez Tom. 1. in 12. disp 181. cap. 8. Loâ—o tempore accomodato He did it when he could not offend the Gentiles Aquinas 12. q. 103. Art 4. Yea so the Fathers as Augustine Epist 19. Chrysostom Cyrill Hyeronym Also Papists Bensonius tractat de fuga lib. 1. disp 1. q. 4. ad Articul 4. Vasquez Tom 1. 12. disp 182. cap. 4. Brove to use Iewish Ceremonies though with no Iewish minde is unlawfull Suarez Tom. de legib lib. 9. de leg Divin pos cap. 14. Vsus Circumcisionis ex prohibitione est factus malus actus malus non honestatur propter intentionem bonam Aquinas 22. q. 11. câ— 12. q. 103. Art 4. As one should mortally sin who should say Christum nunc nasâ—iturum Christ is yet to be incarnat So the using of the Iewish Ceremonies were a lie in fact Cajetan and Toletus acknowledge a lie in fact Salmeron in Gal. 5. q. 2. saith It is unlawfull to use the Iewish Ceremonies Aegidius Comick de actib supernatural lib. 2. disp 15. dub 3. â— 39. Nullo modo licet obullum finem uti Ceremoniis propriis falsae Religionis Vasquez 12. disp 182. â— 48. Patres Doctores communiter tenent non licere Lodo. Meratius Iesuita to 1. in Thom. tract de legib disp 19. Sect. 2. n. 5. Mentiti fuissent Apostoli usurpantes exteriores legis Mosaicae Ceremonias si non ex animâ— usurpabant tanquam sibi vere licitas ex animo vere colendi Deum per illas sicut ab aliis per easdem colebatur So Grego Valent. Tom. 2. disp 7. punct 7. q. 7. Soto de justif l. 2. q. 5. It is a Religious scandall to the users of these Ceremonies for Ceremonies devised by men of no necessary use in Gods worship are monuments of Idolatry snares drawing the practisers to Idolatry and so unlawfull as the High places Groves Images though not Adored of the Canaanites This Argument is so learnedly prosecuted by D. Ammes that I adde nothing to it QUEST V. Whether the Ceremonies especially kneeling in the act of receiving the Sacrament be guilty of idolatry VVHoever presumeth to invent a worship of his own committeth Idolatry interpretatively because he worshippeth a God whom he conceiveth is pleased with false worship But that is not the true God for he is pleased with no worship but what he hath prescribed himself but all inventers and practisers of humane Ceremonies worship such a God Also all who usurpeth the room and place of God give the glory of God to creatures but all Authors and practisers of
we are to worship If therefore we Adore God at the presence of the elements as memorative signes we do Adore the elements but if the kneeler direct all his worship before the elements to Christ up at the right hand of the Father Why then as Lactantius said well to the Gentiles do they not turn away their senses and eyes off the elements For Christ is not substantially inclosed in them and lift them up toward heaven where they believe Christ to be But in so doing the elements should not be received as Sacraments for in the act of receiving we are to fixe our souls upon the visible elements If the Athenians did believe the golden image Act. 17. 29. was essentially God and kneeled to it as to God Paul did in vain rebuke them for believing that the Godhead was like silver or gold and if the men of Lystra believed the shapes of men and the likenesse of men to be essentially God and in that respect gave the honour of Sacrificing due to God to these shapes then the Scripture in vain should bring these men of Lystra in as putting a difference betwixt the shapes of men and the Godhead of Jupiter and Mercurius to which they were about to give Divine Sacrifice And if Formalists kneel before the elements and give a transitive glory to Christ through them they are in the same sense Idolaters that the Gentiles were So the Councel of Moguntine and Alphonsus de Castro deny that they Adore the letters of the Name Jesus drawn with base ink or the Tree of the Crosse but they Adore the signified thing Yea saith Waldensis He that beholdeth the image almost forgetteth the image while as he is ravished with the thing signified as many see a man clothed and yet being asked they cannot declare the colour of his clothes the minde is so much set upon the man Yea the Adorer may hate the painted image of Christ because the rude ignorance of the painter when he Adoreth Christ in the same image though he may love some morall representation in it This Doctrine is taught by Gregorius and by Adrianus and approved by a Councel at Rome under Stephanus the third II. Conclusion Grosser Papists go a subtiler way to work and do avouch that the very Latreia and supream worship that is proper to God is given to the Image Though the creature saith Suarez cannot Primo per se principally kindly and of it self be worshipped or adored with Latreia the supream worship due to God yet it may be co-adored with the same honour that is given to Christ as is the Kings purple Robe So the first Distinction is of Adoration and co-Adoration or Adoration kindely and by it self and Adoration with another Henriquez saith It is a fault that it is not preached to the people that the image of Christ is to be adored with supream worship called Latreia Crabrera saith many Schoolmen are of this mind and so doth Azorius Archangelus Rubeo Iacobus de Graphiis Let us worship saith he every Image with that same worship with which we worship the samplar That is let us bestow the worship highest of Latreia upon the Image of God and Christ and the signe of the Crosse as it bringeth us in minde of Christs suffering The second distinction is that the Image is truly properly adored as the materiall object no lesse then the samplar Hence they reprove Durandus Picus Mirandula Hulcot and others who say that Images are improperly adored Raphael de la Torres answering to that of Durandus and Mirandula That Images are adored by accident in respect that before them and at their naked presence as before memorative objects we adore God and Christ saith he are adored by accident is thus to be understood Images are adored Ratione Alterius by reason of another Vel per aliud by another thing but this argueth not that Images are improperly adored hereby onely is denyed that there is any adoration of the proper excellency of the thing adored Hence he would say that the borrowed honour of Adoration given to the Image is truly and properly the Adoration that is due to God but it is given to the Image in reference to God and not for any inherent Excellency that is in the Image For saith he If we do not properly adore the Image we do but exercise the materiall action of kissing and kneeling to the image without any internall affection of submission to the Samplar He addeth that it is enough that the intention of submission is referred to the samplar and the external Adoration to the Image for if any shall saith he kisse the earth as the rude multitude in some place doth upon an intention of inward submission of heart to God Nequaquam vere proprie adorat terram he doth not truly and properly adore the earth but only he exerciseth a materiall action of kissing toward the earth But I answer all this is vanity for such a one worshippeth the earth but referreth the internall submission to God and all this is to say the Image doth truly partake of the Religious honour Latreia due to God only A third distinction is here of Gabriel Biel on the Canon of the Masse In the Adoring of images saith he and of other things which are adored by accident though there be an externall act of bowing both to the images and the samplar yet there be two internall acts which are different vvhereof one is terminated and bounded upon the image not absolutely as it is such a materiall thing of stone or mettall but as it is an image This is an acknowledgement whereby I esteem the Image a thing ordained to represent Christ or a complacency whereby I rest on such a thing as to be honoured for Christ and the other iâ— a recognition and acknowledgement immediatly terminated and bounded upon the samplar whereby it is acknowledged to be the chiefest good But the truth is Religious geniculation before the image or at the presence of the image saith Durandus as if the samplar were there present is one and the same adoration given to the image and the samplar and all that Gregorius de Valentia saith against this is that Durandus minus circumspectâ— locutus he spake not so warily as need were And so did their seventh pretended synod speak as Leontius expoundeth them Non liguorum aut colorum naturam adoro absit and Vasquez saith They displease some in so speaking but they mean well They meant all that which our Formalists do and there is no discord saith Gabriel Biel in re in the matter it self for both say 1. that the creature should not be adored with the highest honour Lateria of it self as if it were the object of Adoration 2. Both teach that the minde and affection is carried toward the samplar which
come to the Supper Be not Iudges of mens Conscience Ans Christ Commanding not to cast Pearls to Swine and scourging out those that polluted that Temple that was a type of his body doth Argue clearly that the holy things of God should not be prophaned But that Christ rebuked all abuses in the worship of God in particular Erastus cannot say 2. It is one thing to forgive our brother by putting away private grudge and a church-pardoning in the name of Christ is another in the former sense we are to forgive our enemy though he repent not Mat. 6. 12. 14 15. Rom. 12. 19 20. Luk. 23. 34. But this forgivenesse Luk. 17. is not said to be ratified in heaven for God doth not alway forgive when we forgive God doth forgive when the sinner repenteth Erastus will have a lying confession ratified in Heaven 3. When the Church in Christs Name forgiveth not upon words and lies but upon Visible Testimonies of repentance they are no more Iudges of the heart then Isaiah when he said Except ye believe ye shall not be established and Paul when he said to the Jaylor Believe and thou shalt be saved for without more then lying words of mouth yea without true lively faith neither could the one be established nor the other saved Erastus When Paul dehorteth the Corinthians to eat things Sacrificed to Idols in the Idols Temple because they could not be partakers of the Table of the Lord and of the Table of Devils he bids them not forsake the Supper of the Lord but only not to go to the Feast of Idols because the Supper and these Tables of Devils are inconsistant therefore he saith I will not have you to have fellowship with Devils but he saith not I will not have you to come to the Supper of the Lord nor deth he bid them approve their repentance â—re they come to some I know not what Presbyters And in this place he speaketh of an externall Communion as the purpose and words prove because he speaketh of Israel according to the flesh 3. Because those that eat things Sacrificed to Idols were perswaded there was no difference between those meats and other meats Ans Erastus his Argument is this being reduced to form is if Paul say not 1 Cor. 10. I will not have you come to the Lords Supper but only I will not have you to have fellowship with the Devil in his Table then he will have none debarred by the Elders from the Lords Supper But the latter is true I deny the Proposition it is a connexion that one who taketh on him to refute such a precious and eminent divine as Theod. Beza may be ashamed of and yet his book from head to foot standeth most upon a negative Argument from some particular place of Scripture for he speaketh nothing of the power of Elders to keep the holy things of God pure What if he should say Moses in the first of Genesis saith not I will not have you not to come to the Lords Supper Ergo there is no authoritative debarring of men from the Lords Supper Such sandy consequences no learned Divines would ever dream of 2. Beza nor any of our Divines never dreamed that God in the Old or New Testament said Nolo vos ad mensam domini ad sacramenta venire which are the words of Erastus so his conclusion cometh not near the controversie Iews and Gentiles are invited and commanded to come to Christ and so to all the Ordinances and Sacraments but I hope this will not infer that all should come to the Sacraments hand over head and whether they be clean or unclean circumcised or Baptized or not circumcised not Baptized God commanded Aarons sons to serve in the sanctuary and appear before him in their charge What Ergo it is not Gods will that they come not to the Sanctuary and before him unwashed and with strange fire and without their holy garments this is the very consequence of Erastus Our question I conceive is whither all must be admitted promiscuously and whether even those that come immediatly from the Devils Table without any preparation known to the Church should be set at Christs elbow to eat the Lords body and blood Erastus saith Paul never said Nolo vos ad mensam domini venire then because two negatives make one affirmative Paul must say I will that all that are partakers of the table of the Devil come and be partakers of the Lords body But the conclusion is contradicent to Erastus himself who faith right down I judge that he vvho vvill but trample the Sacraments should not be admitted unto them and to Paul 1 Cor. 11. 27 c. 3. Erastus confoundeth two Questions one is whither all should be admitted to the Lords Supper Erastus saith every where in his book none are to be debarred another by whom are they to be admitted or debarred By the civill Magistrates saith Erastus by the Stewâ—rds and Officers of the house of God the rest of the Church consenting say we 4. The Argument will conclude that not onely the Church or Magistrate ought to admit those that have fellowship with the Devil to the Table of Christ but they ought to command them to come it being Christs will they should be admitted and that they themselves who are Communicants are obliged though keeping fellowship with the Devil to come and eat their own damnation for Paul saith by this reason in the place 1 Cor. 10. No more I will not have the partakers of the Devils table to come to the Lords table nor he saith I will not have the Elders to debar them if Erastus say they should try and examine themselves and come He flees from the controversie which is not whether the worthy but whether the scandalous and unworthy should come Erastus saith all should come 5. Whereas Erastus will have the Apostle to speak of the externall Communion of the Elements onely 1. It is false 2. Nothing to the purpose it is false 1. ver 16. It is called the Communion of the body and blood of Christ and that must be more then externall Communion 2. ver 17. We many are one body this is not an externall body only for it is the unity of the body of Christ signified by one bread 3. It is not externall only but internall and spiritual fellowship with Devils that is condemned ver 20. 21. Ergo It must be internall Communion with Christ in his death that is sealed and commanded 4. This is meer Socinianisme to have the Sacraments only memorative signes as is clear 2. It is not to a purpose for if the Church debar only from externall society from the Church and externall Seals this debarring being ratified in Heaven Matth. 18. It is sufficient for our conclusion 5. Paul his condemning of eating at the Idols Table as inconsistent with eating and drinking of the Lords body he must expresly forbid those who eateth