Dispute Against the English-Popish Ceremonies, Part 3 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI.
That the lavvfulnesse of the Ceremonies is falsely grounded vponupon the holy Scripture: vvhere such places as are alleadged by our Opposites, either for all the Ceremonies in generall, or for any one of them in particular, are vindicated from them.
IT remaineth now, to examine the warrants which our Opposites pretend for the lawfullnesse of the Ceremonies. But I perceive Sect. 1 they know not well what ground to take hold on. For Instance whereof; oEccl. Pol. lib. 5. S. 69.Hooker defendeth the lawfulnesse of Festivall dayes, by the law of nature. pOn praec. 4.D. Douname groundeth the lawfulnesse of them on the law of God, making the observation of the Sabbaths of rest appointed by the Church, such as the Feasts of Christs Nativity, Passion, &c. to be a duty commanded in the Law of God, and the not observing of them, to be a thing forbidden by the same Law. But qEpist. to the past. of the Church of Scotl.B. Lindsey proveth the lawfulnes of those Holy dayes, frō the power of the Church to make lawes in such matters. As for the Lords day saith he, which hath succeeded to the Iewish Sabbath, albeit God hath cōmanded to sanctify it, yet neither is the whole publike worship nor any part of it appropriated to that time, but lawfully the same may be performed vponupon any other convenient day of the weeke, of the monethmonth, or of the yeare, as the Church shall think expedient. VponUpon this ground Zanchius affirmed: Ecclesiae Christi liberum esse quos velit preter dominicos dies sibi sanctificandos deligere. And by this warrant did the Primitive Church sanctify these five anniversary dayes of Christs Nativity, &c.
Nay, let us observe, how one of them wavereth from himselfe, in seeking here some ground to rest upon. Paybody groundeth the lawfulnesse of kneeling at the Sacrament, on nature, part. 2. cap. 4, Sect. 1. On the act of Parliament, part. 3. cap. 1. Sect. 31. On an Ecclesiasticall Canon, part. 3. cap. 1. Sect. 33. On the Kings soveraigne authority, part. 3. cap. 1. Sect. 36. Yet againe he saith, that this kneeling is grounded upon the commandement of God, part. 3. cap. 3. Sect. 11.
Well. I see our Opposites sometimes warrant the lawfulnesse of the Ceremonies from the Law of God, sometimes from the Law of Man, and sometimes from the Law of Nature. But I will prove that the lawfullnesse of those Ceremonies we speake of, can neither be grounded upon the Law of God, nor the Law of Man, nor the Law of Nature, and by consequence that they are not lawfull at all: So that besides the answering of what our Opposites alleadge for the lawfulnesse of them, we shall have a new Argument to prove them unlawfull.
I beginne with the Law of God. And first, let us see what is alleadged Sect. 2 from Scripture for the Ceremonies in generall: Then-after, let us looke over particulars. There is one place which they will have in mythologie to stand for the head of Medusa, and it they still object to us for all their Ceremonies: even that r1. Cor. 14. 40.the Apostle, Let all things be done decently and in order: What they have drawne out of this place, sOf the law…. of kneel. pag. 3.D. Burgesse hath refined in this maner. He distinguisheth betwixt praeceptum & probatum; and will have the controverted Ceremonies to be allowed of God, though not cōmanded. And if wee would learne how these Ceremonies are allowed of God, tIbid. pag. 11.he gives us to understand, that it is by commanding the generall kynd to which these particulars doe belong. If we aske, what is this generall kynd commanded of God to which these Ceremonies doe belong? vIbid. pag. 4.He resolves us, that it is order and decency: And if further we demaund, how such Ceremonies as are instituted and used to stirre up men in respect of their signification unto the devoute remembrance of their duties to God, are in such an institution and use matters of meere order? As a Magisteriall Dictatour of Quodlibets; xIbid. pag. 14.he tells us that they are matters of meere order sensu largo, in a large sence. But lastly, if we doubt where he readeth of any worship commaunded in the generall, and not commaunded but only allowed in the particular yIbid. pag. 6. 7.he informeth us, that in the free-will-offrings, when a man was left at liberty to offer a Bullock, Goate, or Sheep at his pleasure, if he chose a Bullock to offer, that Sacrifice in that particular, was not commaunded, but only allowed. What should I doe, but he surd… contra absurdum? Neverthelesse least this Iolly fellow thinke himself more Iolly then he is, I answer 1. How absurd a tenet is this which holdeth that there is some particular worship of God allowed and not commanded? What new Light is this which maketh all our divines to have been in the mist, who have acknowledged no worship of God, but that which God hath commanded? Who ever heard of commanded and allowed worship? As for the instances of the free-will-offerings, zFresh suite, pag. 153.Ames hath answered sufficiently, that though the particulars were not nor could not be determined, by a distinct rule in generall, yet they were determined by the circumstances, as our Divines are wont to answer the Papists, about their Vowes, Counsels, Supererogations: NOT BY A GENERALL LAW, BVT BY CONCVRRENCE OF CIRCVMSTANCES. So Deut. 16. 10. Moses sheweth that the freist offrings were to be according as God had blessed them; From whence it followeth, it had been sinne for any Israelite, whom God had plentifully blessed, to offer a paire of Pigeons in stead of a Bullock or two, upon his owne meere pleasure. Where that proportion was observed, the choice of a Goate before a Sheep, or a Sheep before a Goate was no formall worship.
2. How will D. Burgesse make it appeare, that the English Ceremonies Sect. 3 doe belong to that order and decency, which is comanded. aDe effect. Sacr. lib. 2 cap. 31.Bellarmine would have all the Ceremonies of the Church of Rome comprehended vnderunder order and decency, and therefore warranteth them by that Praecept of the Apostle. Let all things be done decently and in order. The one shall as soone prove his poynt as the other, and that shall be never.
For 1. The Apostle only commands that each action and Ceremony of Gods worship be decently and orderly performed, but gives us no leave to excogitate or devise new Ceremonies, which have not been instituted before. He hath spoken in that Chapter of assembling in the Church, Prophecying and Preaching, Praying & Praising there.
Now let all these things, and every other action of Gods worship Ceremonies and all be done decently and in order. Licet ergo, Paulus, &c, Albeit therefore saith bIn praefat. elench. relig. Papistic.Ioh. Bastwick, Paul hath committed to the Church, the judging both of decency and order, yet hat he not graunted any liberty of such misticall Ceremonies, as by their more inward signification doe teach the duty of piety: For since the whole liberty of the Church in the matter of Divine worship, is exercised only in order and decency; it followeth that they doe impudently scorne both God and the Scriptures, who doe extend this liberty to greater things, and such as are placed above us. Most certaine it is, that Christ the Doctour of the Church hath by his owne written and sealed Word, aboundantly expounded unto us the will of God; neither is there further need of any Ceremonies, which by a secret vertue may instruct us: neither is it lesse evident, that order consisteth not its the institution or use of new things, but only in the right placing of things which have been instituted before. Decency, saith cDe cas. consc. lib. 4. cap. 11.Baldwine, is opposed to levitie, and order to confusion. Spectat autem hic ordo potissimum ad Ritus Ecclesia in officijs Sacris in quibus nullum debet esse scand…um, nulla confusio.
Then, in his Iudgment, order is not to the Rites of the Church a generall kynd, but only a concomitant circumstance; neither are the Rites of the Church comprehended under order, as particulars under the generall kynd to which they belong, but order belongeth to the Rites of the Church, as an adjunct to the Subject. And I pray, must not the Rites of the Church be managed with decency and order? If so; then must our Opposites either say, that order is managed with order, which is to speake nonsence, or else that the Rites of the Church are not comprehended under order. But if not; then it followeth that the Rites of the Church are to be managed with levity; confusion, and scandall, for every action that is not done indecently and in order, must needs be done scandalously and confusedly. 2. Order and decency, whether taken largo, or stricto sensu, allwayes signify such a thing as ought to be in all humane actions, as well civill as sacred; for will any man say that the civill actions of men are not to be done decently and in order? dAmes. Bell. enerv iom. 1. lib. 3. crp. 7.The directions of order and decency, are not (we see) propria religionis. But as eVbi supra.Balduine sheweth out Gregory Nazianzen, order is in all other things, as well as is in the Church. Wherefore sacred significant Ceremonies shallnever be warranted, by the precept of order and decency, which have place no lesse in civility then in religion.
Now to the particulars. And first, that which Christ did Matth. Sect. 4 19. 13. 15. can not commend unto us the Bishopping, or confirmation of children by prayer and imposition of hands. For as fCom. in illum locum.Maldonat saith rightly, Haebre orum consuetudinem fuisse, ut qui majores erant & aliqua pollebant divina gratia, manuum impositione inferioribus benedicerent, constat ex Gen. 48. 14. 15. hac ergo ratione adducti parentes, Infantes ad Christum afferebant, ut impossit is manibus illis benediceret. And as touching this blessing of children and imposition of hands upon them, saith gon Mat 19. sect. 9.Cartwright, it is peculiar unto our Saviour Christ: used neither by his disciples, nor his Apostles, either before or after his Ascension. Whereunto maketh that the Children being brought, that he should pray over them, he did not pray for them, but blessed them, that is to say commended them to be blessed, thereby to shew his Divine power. These being also yet Infants, and in their suatheling cloutes, as by the Word which the Evangelist useth, and as by our Saviour Christs taking them into his armes, doth appeare; beeing also in all likelihood unbaptised. Last of all, their confirmation is a notable derogation unto the holy Sacrament of Baptisme, not alone in that it presumeth the sealing of that which was sealed sufficiently by it: but also in that both by asseueration of words; and by specialty of the Minister that giveth it, it is even preferred unto it.
The act of Perth about kneeling, would draw some commendation Sect. 5 to this Ceremony, from those words of the bPsal. 95. 6.Psalme, O come let us worship and bow downe. let us kneele before the Lord our maker. Which is as if one should argue thus. We may worship before the lord. Ergo before a creature. We may kneele in an immediate worship of God, Ergo in a mediate. For who seeth not, that the kneeling there spoken of, is a kneeling in the action of solemne praise, and Ioyfull noise of singing unto the Lord? I wish you, my Masters, more sober spirits, that ye may feare to take Gods name in vaine, even his word which he hath magnified above all his name. cIren. lib. 1. cap. 7, 6. 7.Dr. Forbesse goeth about to warrant private Baptisme, by Philips baptising the Eunuch, there being no greater company present, so farre as we can gather from the narration of Luke, Act. 8. As lykwise by Paul and Silas their baptising the Goaler and all his, in his owne private house, Act. 16. Touching the first of those places, we answere. 1. How thinks he that a man of so great auctority and charge, was alone in his Iourny? we suppose a great man travelling in a charret, must have some number of attendants, especially having come to a solemne worship at Ierusalem. 2. What Philip then did, the extraordinary direction of the Spirit guided him unto it, Vers. 29. 39. As to the other place, there was in that time of persecution no liberty for Christians to meet together in Temples and publike places as now there is. Wherefore the example of Paul and Silas doth prove the lawfulnesse of the like deed in the like case.
dEccles. Pol. lib. 5. S. 65.Hooker muttereth some such matter, as a commendation of the Sect. 6 Signe of the Crosse, from these two places, Ezech. 9 4 Revel. 7. 3. alleadging that because in the forehead nothing is more plaine to be seene then the feare of contumely and disgrace: therefore the Scripture describeth them marked of God in the forehead, whom his mercy hath undertaken to keep from finall confusion and shame. eDe lmag. sanct. cap. 29.Bellarmine alledgeth for the Crosse the same two places. But for answer to the first, we say that neither the signe whereof we read in that place, nor yet the use of it can make ought for them. As for the signe itselfe. Albeit the Ancients did interprete this signe of the letter Tau, to have been the signe of the Crosse, yet saith fCom. in illum locum.Junius, Bona illorum venia; T quidem Graecorum, latinorumque majusculum, crucis qoudammodo signum videtur effingere, verum hoc ad literam Haebreorum Tau non potest pertinere. Deinde ne ipsum quidem Graecorum latinorumque T, formam Crucis quae apud veteres in usu erat quum sumebantur supplicia, representat.
Whereupon dissenting from the Auncients, he delivers his owne Iudgement, that Tau in this place is taken Technikos, for that signe or marke of the le…ter wherewith the Lord commanded to marke the elect for their safety and preservation. And so there was no mistery to be sought in that letter more then in any other. As for the use of that marke, wherewith the elect in Ierusalem were at hat time sealed, it was only for distinction and separation. It had the same use which that sprinkling of the posts of the doores had, Exod. 12. 7. only the foreheads of men and women, and not the posts of doores were here marked, because only the remnant according to election, and not whole families promiscously were at this time to be spared, as Iunius noteth.
But the use of the signe of the Crosse pretended by Formalists, is not to separate us in the time of Iudgement, but to teach that at no time we ought to be ashamed of the ignominy of Christ.
Shortly, the signe wherewith they in Jerusalem were marked, was for preservation from Iudgement, but the signe of the Crosse is used for preservation from sinne. Thus we see, that neither the signe nor the use of it, had any affinity with the Crosse. Now, the surest interpreation of that place Ezech. 9 4. is to take Tau for an apellative noune, signifying generally and indefinitly a Marke or a Signe, so that there is no make determined by this word: only there was a commandemēt given te set a certaine marke, some signe or other, upon the foreheads of the elect. So have our English Translatours taken the place.
This exposition is confessed by gCom. in Ezech. 9. 4Gasper Sanctius, to be followed almost by al the Hebrew masters, and by the most Auncient Interpreters, to wit, the Septuagints, Aquila, and Symachus. The word beareth this glosse, euen according to the confession of those, who expound it otherwise in this place, to wit, for an Image or representation of the Crosse. Tau saith hIbid.Sanctius commune nomen est, quod signum indefinite significat. Tau is expounded by *Gram. Hebr. part. 1. cap. 1.Bellarmine, to signify Signum or Terminus. Well then: our Adversaries themselves can say nothing against our interpretation of the word Tau. We have also Buxtorf for us, who in his Hebrew Lexicon, turneth Tau to be Signum, and for this signification he citeth both this place Ezech. 9. 4, and Iob. 31. 35. Taui signum meum.
Lastly, if Tau be not put for a common appellative noune signifying a marke or signe, but for the figure or character of the letter Tau as an Image of the Crosse, by all likelyhood this character only should have been put in the Hebrew text, and not the noune fully written; Vehithvitha tau, and marke a marke. As to the other place, Revel. 7. 3. iComm. i… illum locum.Pareus observeth, that there is no figure or forme of any signe there expressed, and he thinks that seale was not outward and visible, but the same whereof we read 2. Tim. 2. 19. and Revel. 14. 1. Which can no be interpreted de signo transeunte: nam Christianum semper nomen filij & patris in fronte opportet gerere, saith kAnimad. ad Bell. de imag. sanct cap. 29.Iunius.
D. Fulk on Revel. 7, 3. saith, that the signe here spoken of is proper to Gods elect, therefore not the signe of the Crosse, which many reprobates have received.
lSerm. on that place.B. Andrewes will have the feast of Easter drawne from that Sect. 7 place 1. Cor. 5. 8. Where he saith; there is not only a warrant, but an order for the keeping of it, and he will have it out of doubt, that this feast is of Apostolicall institution, because after the times of the Apostles, when there was a contention about the maner of keeping Easter, it was agreed vponupon by all, that it should be kept, and when the oneside alleadged for them St. Iohn, and the other S. Peter, it was acknowledged by both, that the feast was Apostolicall.
J answer, the Testimony of Socrates deserveth more creditthen the Bishops naked conclusion.
I am of opinion saith mLib. 5. cap. 22.Socrates, that as many other things crept in of custome in sundry places, so the Feast of Easter to have prevailed among all people, of a certaine private custome & observation.
But whereas B. Lindsy in defence of B. Andrewes, replyeth that Socrates propoundeth this for his owne opinion only.
I answer, that Socrates in that Chapter proveth his opinion from the verie same ground, which B. Andrewes wresteth, to prove that this Feast is Apostolicall. For while as in that hot controversy about the keeping of Easter, they of the East alleadged Iohn the Apostle for their Author, and they o▪ the vvest alleadged Peter & Paul for themselves; Yet (saith Socrates, there is none that can shew in writing any testimony of theirs, for confirmation and proofe of their custome. And hereby I doe gather, that the celebration of the Feast of Easter, came up more of custome then by any Law or Canon.
Douname (as I touched before) alleadgeth the fourth commandement Sect. 7 for holy dayes of the Churches institution. But nIn Epist. ad quenda qui a reform. relig. ad Papism. defecerat.D. Bastwick alleadgeth more truly the fourth commandemēt against them, Six dayes shalt thou labour. This Argument I have made good elsewhere, so that now I need not insist vponupon it. There are further two examples alleadged against us, for holy dayes, out of Esther 9. 17. 18. 17. 28. and Jo. 10. 22.
VVhereunto we answer. 1. That both those feasts were appointed to be kept with the consent of the whole Congregation of Jsrael, and body of the people, as is plaine from Esther. 9. 31. & 1. Maccab. 4. 59. therefore they have no shew of making ought for such feasts as ours, which are tyrannically urged upon such as in their consciences doe condemne them.
2. Jt appeares, that the dayes of Purim were only appointed to be dayes of civill mirth and gladnesse, such as are in use with us, when we set out bone-fires, and other tokens of civill joy for some memorable benefite which the Kingdome or Common-wealth hath received, For they are not called the holy dayes of Purim, but simply the dayes of Purim, a day of feasting and of sending portions one to another, Esther. 9. 19. 22. no word of any worship of God on those dayes. And whereas it seemeth to oProc. in Perth. assemb. part, 3. p. 30.B. Lindsey, that those dayes were holy, because of that rest which was observed upon them: He must know that the text interpreteth itself, and it is evident from Vers. 16. and 22. that this rest was not a rest from labour, for vvaiting upon the vvorshipping of God, but only a rest from their enemies.
But B. Andrewes goeth about to prove by six reasons, that the dayes of Purim were holy dayes, and not dayes of civill joy and Solemnity Sect. 9 only.p Serm. on Esther. 9. 31.
First, saith he, it is plaine by Vers. 31. they tooke it in animas, upon their soules, a soule-matter they made of it: there needs no soule for feria or festum, play or feasting. They bound themselves super animas suas, which is more then upon themselves, & would not have been put in the margent, but stood in the text: thus he reprehendeth the English Translatours, as you may perceive.
Answ. The B. could not be ignorant that nephesch signifyeth corpus animatum, as well as anima, and that the Hebrevves doe not allwayes put this word for our soules, but verie often for ourselves. So Psal. 7. 2, and Psal. 59. 3. vve read naphschi: my soule: for me; and Psal. 44. 25. naphschenu: our soule: for we; and Gen. 46, 26. col-nephesch: omnes animae: for omnes homines.
VVhat have we any further need of Testimonies. Six hundreth such are in the holy te…t. And in this place Esth. 9, 31. vvhat can be more plaine, then that nghal-naphscham: vponupon their soule: is put for nghalehem: upon themselves, especially since nghalehem is found to the same purpose both in Vers. 27. and 31.
Jf we will make the text agree well with it self, how can we but take both these for one? But proceed we with the Bishop. Secondly, saith he, the bond of it reacheth to all that religioni eorum voluerunt copulari vers. 27. then, a matter of religion it was, had reference to that: what need any Ioyning in religion for a matter of good fellowship?
Answ. there is no word in the text of religion. our English translation reads it, all such as joyned them selves unto them. Montanus, omnes adjunctos. Tremellius, omnes qui essent se adjuncturi eis. The old latine version reads it indeed as the Bishop doeth.
But no such thing can be drawen out of the word hannilvim, which is taken from the radix lava, signifying simply and without any any adjection, adhaesit, or adjunxit se. But let it be so, that the text meaneth only such as were to adjoyne themselves to the religion of the Iewes; yet why might not the Iewes have taken upon them a matter of civility, not only for themselves, but for such also as were to be joyned with them in religion? Could there be nothing promised for Proselytes but only a matter of religion?
Alas! Is this our Antagonists great Achilles, who is thus falling downe and succumbing to me a silly Stripling. Yet let us see, if there be any more force in the remnant of his reasons.
For a third, he tells us, that it is expressely tearmed a Rite and a Ceremony, at the 23. and 28. Verses, as the Fathers read them.
Answ. If some of the Fathers through ignorance of the Hebrew tongue, have put into their versiones more then the originall beareth, shall we therefore erre with them.
In the 23. Vers. we have no more but Susceperunt, as Pagnime, or Re…eperunt, as Tremellius reads it: But to read, Susceperunt in solemnem ritum, is to make an addition to the text.
The 28. Vers. calls not this Feast a Rite, but only dies memorati, or celebres. And what if we graunt that this Feast was a rite? might it not, for all that, be meerely civill? No, saith the Bishop, Rites, I trust, and Ceremonies, pertaine to the Church, and to the service of God.
Answ. The version which the Bishop followed, hath a Rite, not a Ceremony. Now, of Rites is certaine, that they belong to the common-wealth, as well as to the Church. For injure Politico, sui sunt, imperati & solemnes ritus, saith qDe Pol. Mosis cap. 7.Iunius.
Fourthly, saith the B. they fast and pray here in this Verse; (meaning the 31.) fast the eve, the fourteenth, and so then, the day following, to be holy day of course.
Answ. The latine version, which the B. followeth, and whereupon he buildeth this reason, readeth the 31. Verse very corruptly, and no wayes according to the originall, as will easily appeare to any who can compare them together. Wherefore the best interpreters take the fasting and prayer spoken of Vers. 31. to be meant of the time before their delivery. Now, after they were delivered, they decreed that the matters of their fasting and crying, should be remembered upon the dayes of Purim; which were to solemnize that preservation, quam Iejunio & precibus fuerant a Deo consequuti, as saith Tremellius.
But fiftly, sai…h he, with fasting and prayer (here) almes also is enjoyned, (at the 22. Verse) these three will make it past a day of revels or m…r…h.
I have answered already, that their fasting and praying are not to be referred to the dayes of Purim, which were memorialls of their delivery, but to the time past, when by the meanes of fasting and prayer they did impetrate their delivery, before ever the dayes of Purim were heard of: and as touching almes, it can make no holy day; because much almes may be, and hath been given upon dayes of civill joy and solemnity.
If the B. help not himselfe with his sixt reason…, he is like to come off with no great credit. May we then know what that is?
Lastly, saith he, as a holy day the Iewes ever kept it, have a peculiar set service for it in their Seders; set Psalmes to sing, set lesson, to read, set prayers to say, good and godly all: None, but as they have used from all antiquity.
Answ. 1. The B. could not have made this word good, that the Iewes did ever & from all antiquity keep the dayes of Purim, in this fashion.
2. This maner of holding that Feast, whensoever it beganne, had no warrant from the first institution, but was (as many other things) taken up by the Iewes in after ages: and so the B. proveth not the p…nt which he taketh in hand, namely, that the dayes spoken of in this text were enacted or appointed to be kept as holy dayes.
3. The service which the Iewes in latter times use upon the dayes of Purim, is not much to be regarded. For as rMos. and Aaron, lib. 3. cap. 11.Godwyn noteth out of Hospinian, they reade the history of Esther in their Synagogues, and so often as they here mention of Haman, they doe with their fists and hammers beat upon the benches and boords, as if they did knock upon Hamans head.
When thus they have behaued themselves, in the very time of their Lyturgie, like furious and drunken people, the rest of the day they passe over in outragious revelling. And here I take leave of the Bishop.
Thirdly, we say, whether the dayes of Purim were instituted to be Sect. 10 holy dayes, or not, yet there was some more thē ordinary warrāt for them, because Mordecai, by whose advice & direction they were appointed to be kept, was a Prophet by the instinct and revelation of the Spirit, Esther. 4. 13. Non multum fortasse aberraverimus, saith sDe Origfestor. cap. 2. ad. finem.Hospinian, si dicamut hoc a Mordochao & Hesthera, ex peculiari Spiritus Sancti instinctu factum.
tVbi supra pag. 31.B. Lindsey beleeveth, that they had only a generall warrant such as the Church hath still to put order to the circumstances belonging to Gods worship, and all his reason is because if the Iewes had received any other particular warrant, the Sacred story should not have passed it over in silence.
Answ. Thus much we understand from the Sacred Storie, that the Iewes had the direction of a Prophet for the dayes of Purim; and that was a warrant more then ordinary, because Prophets were the extraordinary Ministers of God.
Fourthly, as touching the Feast of the dedication of the Altar by Sect. 11 Judas Machabeus. 1. Let us heare what wAnnot. on Io. 10. Sect. 4.Cartwright very gravely and judiciously propoundeth.
That this Feast was unduely instituted and ungroundedly, it may appeare by conference of the dedication of the first Temple vnderunder Solomon, and of the secund, after the captivity returned from Babylon. In which dedication seeing there was no yearly rememberance by solemnity of Feast, not so much as one day, it is evident that the yearly celebrtion of this Feast for eight dayes, was not compassed by that Spirit that Solomon and the captivity were directed by: Which Spirit when it dwelt more plentifully in Solomon, and in the Prophets that stood at the stearne of the captivities dedication, then it did in Iudas, it was in him so much the more presumptuous, as having a shorter legge then they, he du… in that matter overstride them. And his rashnesse is so much the more aggravated, as each of them for the building of the whole Temple, with all the implements and furniture thereof, made no Feast to renewe the annuall memory, where Iudas only for renewment of the Altar, and of certaine other decayed places of the Temple, instituted this great solemnity.
2. The Feast of the dedication was not free of Pharisaicall invention: For as xAnnot. in Jo. 1…. 22.Tremellius observeth out of the Talmud, statuerunt Sapientes illius seculi, ut recurrentibus annis, …cto illi dies, &c. Yet albeit the Pharises were called Sapientes Israelis. yVbi supra, p. 31.B. Lindsey will not graunt, that they were the wise-men of whom the Talmud speaketh; for (saith he) it behoved these who appointed festivities, not only to be wise-men, but men of authority also.
But what doe we heare? were not the Pharises men of authority? Why? zMath. 23. 2.Saith not Christ they sate in Moses Chaire? Saith not aCom. in illum locū.Calvine, In Ecclesia regimine & Scripturae interpretatione, haec sect… primatum tenebat? Saith not bPraelect. in Math. 19. 3. de Pharis.Ca…ero, Cum Pharisaeorum pr…cipua esset authoritas (ut ubique docet Iesephus.) &c.
Doth not Iosephus speake so much of their authority, that in one cAntiq. Iud. lib. 13 cap. 24.place he saith, Nomē igitur regni, erat penes reginam (Alexandram) pen… Phariseos vero administratio. And in dAntiq. Iud. lib. 17 cap. 3.another place, Erat▪ enim quadam Iudaeorum Secta exactiorem Patri… legis cognitionem sibi vendicans, &c. Hi Pharisaei vocatur, genus hominum astutum, arrogans, & interdum regibus quoque infestum, ut eos etiam aperte impuguare non vereatur?
3. There is nothing alleadged which can prove the lawfulnesse of this Feast of the dedication.
It is but barely and boldy affirmed by eVbi supra pag. 32.B. Lindsey, that the Pharises were not rebuked by Christ for this feast, because we reade not so much in Scripture. For there were very many things which Iesus did and said, that fJo. 21. 25.are not written in Scripture. And whereas it seemeth to some, that Christ did countenance and approve this feast, because gJo. 10. 22. 23.he gave his presence unto the same, we must remember, that the circumstances only, of time and place, are noted by the Euangelist, for euidence to the storie, and not for any mistery. Christ had come up to the feast of Tabernacles, Io. 7. and tarried stil all that while, because then there was a great confluence of people in Ierusalem. Whereupon he tooke occasion to spread the …t of the Gospell for catching of many soules And whileas Iohn saith, It was at Ierusalem the feast of the Dedication he gives a reason, only of the confluence of many people at Ierusalem, and sheweth how it came to passe that Christ had occasion to preach to such a great multitude. And whileas he addeth, And it was Winter, he giveth a reason of Christs walking in Solomons porch, whether the Iewes resort was; it was not thought beseeming to walk in the Temple it selfe, but in the porch men used to conveene either for talking or walking, because in summer the porch shaddowed them from the heat of the sunne, and in Winter it lay open to the sunne shine and to heat. Others thinke that whileas he saith, it was winter, importeth that therefore Christ was the more frequently in the Temple, knowing that his time was short which he had then for his preaching, for in the entry of the nex Spring he was to suffer. Howsoever, it is not certaine of what feast of dedication Iohn speaketh; hIn Io. 10. 22.B…llinger leaves it Doubtfull: and Maldonat saith, that this opinion which taketh the dedication, of the Altar by Iudas Machabeus to be meant by Iohn, hath sewest Comm, ibid.authors. But to let this passe, whereas the kAnnot. ibid.Rhemists alleadge that Christ approved this feast, because he was present at it: Cartwright and Fulke answere them that Christs being present at it proveth not his approving of it. Non festum proprie honoravit Christus saith lAnimad in Bell contr. 3. lib. 4. cap. 17. nota. 6.Iunius, sed caetum piorum convenientum festo: nam omnes ejusmodi occasiones seminandi Euangelii sui observabat & capiebat Christus.
Quasi vero (saith mDe orig. Temp lib. 4. cap. 2.Hospinian) Christus Encaeniorum causa Hierosolymam abierit. Nay, but he saw he had a convenient occasion, ad instituendam hominum multitudinem, ad ill…d festum confluentium.
Even as Paul choosed to be preseut at certaine Iewish feasts, nCalv. in act. 18. 21.not for any respect to the feasts themselves, nor for any honour which he meant to give them, but for the multitudes cause, who resorted to the same, among whom he had a more plentifull occasion to spread the Gospell at those festivities, them at other times in the yeare.
I had thought here to close this chapter; but finding that as the Parret which other while useth the forme of a mans voice, yet being Sect. 11 beaten and chaffed, returneth to its owne naturall voice, so some of our Opposites, who hauehave beene but erst pr…ting some what of the language of Canaan against us, finding themselves pressed and perplexed in such a way of reasoning, have quickly changed their tune, and beginne to talk to us of warrants of another nature nor the word of God: I am therefore to digresse with them. And I perceive ere we know well where they are, they are passed from Scripture to custome. For if we will listen, thus saith one of te greatest note among hem, pSerm. on. 1. Cor. 11. 16.B. Andrewes I trow they call him. We doe but make our selves to be pittied otherwhile, (well said) when we stand wringing the Scriptures, (well said) to straine that out of them which is not in them (well said) and so can never come Liquide from them, (well said:) when yet we have for the same point the Churches custome, cleare enough. And that is enough by vertue of this text; (meaning. 1. Cor. 11. 16.) And after he saith, that we are taught by the Apostles example in points of this nature, of Ceremony or Circumstance, ever to pitch upon habemus, or non habemus talem consuetudinem.
Answ. 1. The text gives him no ground for this doctrine, that in matters of Ceremony we are to pitch upon habemus or non habemus talem consuetudinem, so that he is wide away while as he spendeth the greatest part of his Sermon, in the pressing of this point, that the custome of the Church should be enough to us in matters of Ceremony, and particularly in the keeping of Easter: for the custome of the Church there spoken of, is not concerning a point of circumstance, but concerning a very substantiall and necessary point, namely, not to be contentious: neither doth the Apostle urge those orders of the mens praying uncovered, and the womens praying veiled, from this ground, because so was the Churches custome, (as the B. Would have it.) but only he is warning the Corinthians not to be contentious about those matters, because the Churches have no such custome as to be contentious. So is the place expounded by Chrysostome, Ambrose, Calvine, Martyr, Bullinger. Marlorat, Beza, Fulcke, Cartwright, Pareus, and our owne Archbischop of Sainct Andrews in his sermon upon that text. And for this exposition it maketh, that the Apostle in the praeceding part of the Chapter hath given sufficient reasons for that order of covering or veiling the women: wherefore if any would contend about the matter, he tells them they must contend with themselves, for they not the Churches of God would not contend with them, they had no such custome. But if we admit B. Andrewes glosse, then why doth the Apostle, after he hath given good reasons for the veiling of Women, subjoyne, If any man seeme to be contentious, &c. The B. resolveth us, that the Apostle saw that a wrangling wit would elude these reasons which he had given, and he had no other reasons to give, therefore he resolves all into the Churches practice, enough of it self to suffice any that will be wise to fobriety.
Answ If any man seeme to be blasphemous, we have no such custome, neither the Churches of God. What? shall a wrangling wit elude the reasons given by the Spirit of God, in such sort, that he must give some other more sufficient proofe for that which he reacheth? Then the whole Scriptures of God must yet be better proved, because the unstable doe wrest them, as q2. Pet. 3. 16.Peter speakes.
2. The custome of the Church is not enough to pitch on, and Sect. XIII it is found oftentimes expedient to change a custome of the Church.
rEpist. 80. ad Euslath. medle.Basilius Magnus doth flatly refuse to admit the authority of custome: Consuetudo sine veritate, saith sAd Pompeium contra Epist Stephani.Cyprian, vetustas erroris est. Frustra enim qui ratione vincuntur, saith tDe Bapt. contra Donatist. l. 4. cap. 5.Augustine, consuetudinem nobis objiciunt, quasi consuetudo major sit veritate, &c. N… pudor est ad meliora transire, saith uEp. 31.Ambrose to the Emperour Valentinian: Quaelibet consuetudo, xDecr. part. 1. dist. 8. c. 7.saith Gratia…, veritati est postponenda.
And againe: yDecr. part. 2. caus. 35. q. 9. c. 3.Corrigendum est quod illicite admi…itur, aut a praed… cessoribus admissum invenitur. zI. Lips. lib. de una relig. advers. DialogistamA Politick Writer admonisheth retinere antiqua, only vvith this caution: Si proba.
aIoh. Calv. Epist. & resp. col. 484. 485.Calvine (speaking against human Ceremonies) faith: Si objiciatur, &c. If. saith he, antiquity be objected (albeit they who are too much addicted to custome and to received fashions, de boldly use this buckler, to defend all their corruptions,) the refutation is easie: For the Auncienes also themselves with heavie complaints, have aboundantly testified, that they did not approve of any thing which was devised by the will of men. In the end of the Epistle he alleadgeth this testimony of Cyprian. If Christ alone be to be heard, then we ought not to give heed what any man before us hath thought fit to be done, but what Christ (who is before all) hath done, for we must not follow the custome of man, but the trueth of God.
What can be more plaine, then that antiquity cannot be a confirmation to errour, nor custome a prejudice to trueth?
Wherefore bIren. lib. 1. c. 8. §. 3.D. Forbesse also despiseth such Arguments as are taken from the custome of the Church.
3. There vvas a custome in the Churches of God, to give the Sect. XIV holy Communion to Infants, & another custome to minister Baptismeonly about Easter and Pentecost: Sundry such abuses got place in the Church.
If then it be enough to pitch upon custome, why ought not those customes to have been commended & continued? But if they were commendably changed, then ought we not to follow blindly the bare custome of the Church, but examine the equity of the same, and demaund grounds of reason for it.
S. Paul, (saith cAnnot. on 1 Cor. 11. 16.D. Fulke,) doth give reasons for that order of covering Womens heads: By whose example the Preachers are likewise to endeavour to satisfy by reason both men & women, that humbly desire their resolution for quiet of their conscience, & not to beate them dovvne vvith the club of custome only.
4. Whereas the custome of some Churches is alleadged for the Ceremonies, wee have objected the custome of other Churches against them: Neither shall ever our Opposites prove them to be the customes of the Church universall.
5. A great part of that Ecclesiasticall custome which is alleadged for the Ceremonies, resolveth into that Idolatrous & superstitious use of them, which hath long continued in the kingdome of Antichrist: But that such a custome maketh against them, it hath been proved dSupra cap. 2.before.
6. If it were so that we ought to pitch upon the Churches custome, yet (that I may speake with Mr. Hooker) the Law of common indulgence permitteth us to think of our owne customes, as half a thought better then the customes of others.
But why was there such a change made in the Discipline Policie and Orders of the Church of Scotland, which were agreable to the Word of God, confirmed & ratified by generall Assemblies & Parliaments, used and enjoyed with so great peace and purity? Oure, custome should have holden the Ceremonies out of Scotland, hold them in else-where as it may.