Dispute Against the English-Popish Ceremonies, Part 3 · Chapter 7
CHAP. VII.
That the Lawfulnesse of the Ceremonies can not be warranted by any Ecclesiasticall Law, nor by any power which the Church hath to put order to things belonging to Divine Worship.
WE have proved that the Ceremonies cannot be warranted by Sect. I the Law of God. It followeth to examine whether any Law of Man, or power upon Earth, can make them lawfull or warrantable unto us.
We will beginne with Lawes Ecclesiasticall: where first of all, it must be considered well, what power the Church hath to make lawes about things pertaining to Religion & the Worship of God, and how farre the same doth extend it self. D. Fields resolution, touching this Question, is as followeth. Thus, saith eOf the Church, lib. 4. cap. 31.he, we see our Adversaries cannot prove that the Church hath power to annex unto such Ceremonies and observations as she deviseth, the remission of sinnes, and the working of other Spirituall and supernaturall effects, which is the only thing questioned between them and us about the power of the Church. So that all the power the Church hath, more then by her power to publish the Commandements of Christ the Sonne of God, and by her censures to punish the offenders against the same, is only in prescribing things that pertaine to comelinesse and order. Comelinesse requireth that not only that gravity and modesty doe appeare in the performance of the works of Gods service, that beseemeth actions of that nature, but also that such Rites and Ceremonies bee used, as may cause a due respect unto and regard of the things performed, and thereby stirre men up to greater fervour and devotion.
And after: Order requireth that there be set houres for prayer, preaching, and ministring the Sacraments, that there be silence & attention when the things are performed, that Women be silent in the Church, that all things be administrate according to the rules of Discipline.
This his discourse is but a bundle of incongruities: For. 1. he saith, that the Churches power to annex unto the Ceremonies which she deviseth the working of Spirituall and supernaturall effects, is the onelyonly thing questioned between our adversaries and us, about the power of Church. Now, our Adversaries contend with us also about the power of the Church to make new Articles of Faith; and her power to make Lawes binding the conscience: both which controversies are touched by flib. 4. cap. 6. & cap. 34.himselfe.
2. He isath, that comelinesse requireth the use of such Ceremonies, as may cause a due respect unto, and regard of the works of Gods service, and thereby stirre men up to greater fervour and devotion. But it hath been already shewed, that gSupra cap. 6. sect. 3the comelinesse which the Apostle requireth in the Church and service of God, cannot comprehend such Ceremonies under it, and that it is no other then that very common externall decency, which is beseeming for all the Assemblies of men, as well civill as sacred.
3. Whileas he is discoursing of the Churches power to prescribe things pertaining to order, contra-distinguished from her power which she hath to publish the Commandements of Christ, he reckons forth, among his other examples, Womens silence in the Church, as if the Church did prescribe this as a matter of order left to her determination, and not publish it as the Commandement of Christ in his Word.
4. Whereas he saith, that the Church hath power to prescribe such Rites & Ceremonies, as may cause a due respect unto, & regard of the workes of Gods service, and thereby stirre men up to greater fervour and devotion: by his owne words shall he be condemned. For a little before, he reprehendeth the Romanists for maintaining that the Church hath power to annex unto the Ceremonies which she deviseth, the working of Spirituall and supernaturall effects. And a litle after, he saith, that the Church hath no power to ordaine such Ceremonies as serve to signify, assure and convey unto men, such benefites of sauing grace, as God in Christ is pleased to bestow on them. Now, to cause a regard of, and a respect unto the works of Gods service, and thereby to stirre up men to …ervour and devotion, what is it but the working of a Spirituall & supernaturall effect, & the conveying unto men such a benefit of saving grace, as God in Christ is pleased to bestow on them? In like manner, whereas he holdeth, that the Church hath power to ordaine such Ceremonies, as serve to expresse those Spirituall and Heavenly affections, dispositions, motions or desires, which are or should be in men; In the very same place he confuteth himselfe, whileas he affirmeth that the Church hath no power to ordaine such Ceremonies as serve to signifie unto men those benefites of saving grace, which God in Christ is pleased to bestow on them. Now, to expresse such Heavenly & Spirituall affections, dispositions, motions, or desires, as should be in men; is (I suppose) to signify unto men such benefites of saving grace, as God in Christ is pleased to bestow on them. Who dare deny it?
hEpist. to the Past. of the Church of Scotland.B. Lindsey's opinion touching this power of the Church, Sect. 2 whereof we dispute, is, that power is given unto her to determine the circumstances, which are in the generall necessary to be used in Divine worship, but not defined particularly in the Word.
I know the Church can determine nothing, which is not of this kynd and quality. But the Prelats meaning (as may be seene in that same Epistle of his,) is, that whatsoever the Church determineth, if it be such a circumstance as is in the generall necessary, but not particularly defined in the word, then we can not say, that the Church had no power to determine & enioyne the same, nor be led by the judgement of our owne consciences, Iudging it not expedient, but that in this case we must take the Churches Law to be the rule of our consciences. Now, by this ground which the Prelat holdeth, the Church may prescribe to the Ministers of the Gospell, the whole habit & apparel of the Leviticall high Priest, (which were to Iudaize.) For apparrell is a circumstance in the generall necessary, yet it is not particularly defined in the Word. By this ground, the Church may determine that I should ever pray with my face to the East, preach kneeling on my knees, sing the Psalmes lying on my backe, and heare Sermon standing only upon one foot. For in all these actions a gesture is necessary; but there is no gesture particularly defined in the Word, to which wee are adstricted in any of these exercises.
And further, because uno absurdo dato, mille sequuntur: By this ground the Prelate must say, that the Church hath power to ordaine three or foure holy dayes every weeke, (which ordinance, as he himselfe hath told us, could not stand with charity, the inseparable companion of piety) for time is a circumstance in the generall necessary in divine worship: yet in his Iudgement wee are not bound by the Word to any particular time, for the performance of the duties of Gods worship.
By this ground we were to say, that Pope Innocent the third held him within the bounds of Ecclesiasticall power, when in the great Lateran Councell, Anno 1215, he made a Decree, that all the faithfull of both sexes should once in the yeare atleast, to wit, upon Easter-day, receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist. From whence it hath come to passe, that the common people in the Church of Rome receive the Sacrament only upon Easter. Now, the time of receiving the Sacrament is a circumstance in the generall necssary, for a time it must have, but it is not particularly defined in the Word, It is left indefinite 1. Cor. 11. 26. yet the Church hath no power to determine Easter-day, either as the onelyonly time, or as the fittest time, for all the faithfull of both sexes to receive the Eucharist. What if faithfull men and women cannot have time to prepare themselves (as becommeth,) being avocated & distracted by the no lesse necessary then honest adoes of their perticular callings?
What if they can not have the Sacrament upon that day administered according to our Lords institution? What if they see Papists confirming themselves in their Easter-superstition, by our unnecessary practice? Shall they swallow these and such like soule destroying Camels, and all for straining out the gnate of communicating precisely upon Easter day? But since time is a necessary circumstance, and no time is particularly defined, the B. must say more also, that the Church may determine Easter day, for the onelyonly day whereupon wee may receive the Lords Supper.
Last of all, if the Church have power to determine all circumstances in the generall necessary, but not particularly defined in the Word, what could bee said against that auncient order of solemne baptising onelyonly at the holy dayes of Easter and Pentecost, (whereby it came to passe, that very many died unbaptised, as iLib. 5. cap. 22.Socrates writeth?) Or what shall be said against kLib. de Baptismo.Tertullian his opinion which alloweth laymen, yea women, to baptise. May the Churches determination make all this good, for asmuch as these circumstances of the time when, and the persons by whom baptisme should be ministred, are in the generall necessary, but not particularly defined in the Word? Ite leves nugae.
lPrael. tom. 1. de potest. Eccl. contr. 2.Camero, as learned a Formalist as any of the former, expresseth Sect. 3 his Iudgement copiously touching our present Question. He saith, that there are two sorts of things which the Church commandeth, to wit, either such as belong to Faith & manners; or such as doe conduce to Faith and manners: that both are in Gods Word prescribed exserte plainly, but not one way, because such things as pertaine unto Faith and manners, are in the Word of God particularly commanded, whereas those things which conduce to Faith and manners are but generally commended unto us. Of things that pertaine to Faith and manners, he saith, that they are most constant and certaine, and such as can admit no change, but as for things conducing to Faith and manners, hee saith, that they depend upon the circumstances of persons, place and time, which beeing almost infinite, there could not be particular precepts delivered unto us concerning such things. OnelyOnly this is from God commended unto the Church, that whatsoever is done publikely, bee done with order; and what privately, be decent.
These things he so applieth to his purpose, that he determineth, in neither of these kindes the Church hath power to make Lawes, because in things pertaining to Faith and manners, the Law of our Lord Iesus Christ is plainely expressed: and in those things, wherein neither Faith nor manners are placed, but which conduce to Faith and manners, we have indeed a generall Law, not having further any particular Law, for that reason alleadged, namely, because this depends upon the circumstances.
Thereafter he addeth. Quid sit fides, quid sit pietas, quid sit charitas, verbo Dei demonstratur. Quid ad haec conducat, seu reputando rem in universum, seu reputando rem quatenus singulis competit, pendet ex cognitione circumstantiarum. Iam id definire Deus voluit esse penes Ecclesiam, hac tamen lege, ut quod definit Ecclesia conveniat generall definitioni Dei.
The matter he illustrates with this one Example: Gods Word doth define in the generall, that we are to fast, and that publikely, But in the particular wee could not have the definition of the Word, because there are infinite occasions of a publike Fast, as it is said in the Schooles individua esse infinita: so that it is the Churches part, to looke to the occasion, & this depends upon the consideration of the circumstances. This discourse of his cannot satisfy the attentive Reader, but deserveth certaine animadversions.
First then, it is to be observed, how he is drawne into a manifest Sect. IV contradiction: for whereas he saith, that Gods Word doth exserte & diserte commend unto us generatim, such things as conduce to Faith and maners, & that concerning things of this nature we have a generall Law in Scripture, how can this stand with that which he addeth, namely, that it is in the Churches power to define what things doe conduce to faith, piety, & charity, even reputando rem in universum?
2. Whereas he saith, that the Church hath no power to make Lawes, neither in things belonging to faith and maners, nor in things conducing to the same; I would also see how this agreeth with that other position, namely, that it is in the power of the Church to define what things conduce to faith, piety and charity.
3. What meanes he by his application of order to publike, & decency to private actions? As if the Apostle did not require both these in the publike workes of Gods service, performed in the Church.
4. Whereas he saith, that such things as conduce to Faith and maners, doe depend upon the circumstances, and so could not be particularly defined in the Word, either he speakes of those things, as they are defined in the generall, or as they are defined in the particular. Not the first, for as they are defined in the generall, they cannot depend upon changeable circumstances, and that because according to his owne tenet, the Word defines them in the general, & this definition of the Word is most certaine & constant, neither can any change happen unto it. Wherefore (without doubt) he must pronounce this, of the definition of such things in the particular. Now to say, that things conducing to faith & maners, as they are particularly defined, doe depend upon circumstan…, is as much as to say that circumstances depend upon circumstances. For things conducing to Faith and manners, which the Church hath power to determine particularly, what are they other then circumstances? Surely, he who taketh not Cameroes Iudgement to be, that the Church hath power to determine somewhat more then the circumstances (and by consequence a part of the substance) of Gods worship, shall give no sence to his words. Yet if one would take his meaning so, I see not how he can be saved from contradicting himself; for as much as he holdeth, that such things as pertaine to Faith & manners are particularly defined in the Word. To say no more, I smell such a thing in Cameroes opinion as can neither stand with reason nor with himselfe.
5. Gods Word doth not onelyonly define things pertaining to Faith and manners, but also things conducing to the same, and that not onelyonly generally but in some respects, and sometimes particularly. And we take for example his owne Instance of fasting. For the Scripture defineth very many occasions of fasting, Ezra 8. 21. 2 Chron. 20. Iona 3. Ioel 2. Act. 13. 3. Ios. 7. 6. Iud. 20. 16. Esther 4. 16. Ezra 9. & 10. Zach. 7. From which places we gather, that the Scripture defineth fasting to be used.
1. For Supplication, when we want some necessary or expedient good thing.
2. For Deprecation, when we feare some evill.
3. For Humiliation, when by our sinnes we have provoked Gods wrath. Neither can there be any occasion of fasting, whereof I may not say that either it is particularly defined in Scripture, or else that it may be by necessary consequence defined out of Scripture, or lastly, that it is of that sort of things which were not determinable by Scripture, because circumstances are infinite, as Camero hath told us.
Thus having sailed by those rockes of offence: I direct my Sect. V course straight, to the descrying of the true limits, within which the Churches power of enacting Lawes about things pertaining to the worship of Cod, is bounded and confined, and which it may not overleape nor transgresse.
Three conditions I finde necessarily requisite, in such a thing as the Church hath power to prescribe by her Lawes.
1. It must be onelyonly a circumstance of Divine Worship, no substantiall part of it, no sacred significant and efficacious Ceremonie. For the order and decency left to the definition of the Church, as concerning the particulars of it, comprehendeth no more, but mere circumstances. mEpist. to the Past. of the Church of Scotland.B. Lindsey, doth but unskilfully confound things different, when he talketh of the Ceremonies and Circumstances left to the determination of the Church. Now by his leave, though Circumstances be left to the determination of the Church, yet Ceremonies (if we speake properly) are not.
nSerm. on E…her. 9. 31.B Andreues avoucheth, that Ceremonies pertaine to the Church only and to the service of God, not to civill solemnities. But so much (I trust) he would not have said of circumstances, which have place in all morall actions, and that to the same end and purpose, for which they serve in religious actions, namely, for beautifying them with that decent demeanour which the very light and law of natural reason requireth, as a thing beseeming all humane actions. For the Church of Christ being a society of men and women, must either observe order & decency in all the circumstances of their holy actions, time, place, person, forme, &c. or else be deformed with that misorder and and confusion, which common reason and civility abhorreth. Ceremonies therefore, which are sacred observances, and serve only to a religious & holy use, and which may not without Sacriledge be applied to another use, must be sorted with things of another nature then circumstances. Ceremoniae, Ceremonies (saith oOf the Church, lib. 4. cap. 31.D. Field) are so named as Livie thinketh from a towne called Caere, in the which the Romās did hide their sacred things when the Gaules invaded Rome. Other thinke that Ceremonies are so named a carendo, of abstaining from certaine things, as the Iewes abstained from Swines flesh, and sundry other things forbidden by God as uncleane. Ceremonies are outward acts of Religion, &c. Qua propter etiam, saith pDe polit. Mos. cap. 7.Iunius Ritus & Ceremonias inter se distinximus, quia in Iure politico sui sunt imperati & … ritus: Ceremonia vero non nisi sacra observationes in cultis dirin… appellant…. Ceremonia, saith qDe Saram. lib. 2. cap. 29.Bellarmine, proprie & simpliciter sic vocata, est externa actio qua non aliunde est bona & landabilis, nisi quia fit ad Deum colendum. From which words rBell. enerv. tō. 3 lib. 1. cap. 8.Amesius concludeth against him, that he & others with him doe absurdly confound order, decency & the like, which hauehave the same use & praise in civill things, which they have in the worship of God, with religious & sacred Cemonies. Yet sMan… duct. pag. 33.D. Burgesse rejecteth this distinction betwixt circumstances and Ceremonies, as a meere nicitie or fiction. And would ye know his reason? For that, saith he, all circumstances (I meane extrinsecall) which incurre not the substance of the action, when they are once designed or observed purposely, in reference to such a matter, of whose substance they are not, they are then Ceremonies. If this be not a nicitie or fiction, I know not what is. For what meanes he here by a matter? An action, sure, or else a nicitie. Well then: we shall have now a world of Ceremonies. Whē I appoint to meet with another man at Barwick upon the tenth day of May, because the place and the day are purposely designed in referēce to such a matter, of whose substance they are not, namely, to my meeting with the other mā, for talking of our businesse, therefore the towne of Barwick, and the tenth day of May, must be accounted Ceremonies. To me its nice, that the D. made it not nice, to let such a nicitie fall from his penne.
When I put on my shooes in reference to walking or wash my hands in reference to eating, am I using Ceremonies all the while? The Doctour could not choose but say so, for asmuch as these circumstances are purposely designed and observed in reference to such matters, of whose substance they are not.
2. That which the Church may lawfully prescribe by her Lawes Sect. 6 and ordinances, as a thing left to her determination, must be one of such things as were not determinable by Scripture, for that rea…on which Camero hath given us, namely, because Individua are Infinita. We meane not in any wise to circumcribe the infinite power & wisdome of God: only we speake upon upposition o… the bounds & limits which God did set to his written word, within which he would have it contained, and over which he thought fi…t that it should not exceed. The case being thus put, as it is, we say truely of those severall and changeable circumstances, which are left to the determination of the Church, that being almost infinite, they were no… particularly determinable in Scripture; for the partic lar definition o… those occurring circumstances, which were to be rightly ordered in the workes of Gods service, to the end of the World, and that ever according to the exigency o… every present occasion and different case, should have filled the whole world w…h b…okes. But as for other things pertaining to Gods worship, which are not to be reckoned among the circumstances of it, they being neither in number many, nor in change various, were most easily and conveniently determinable in Scripture. Now, since God would have his word, (which is our rule in the workes o… his service) not to be delivered by tradition, but to be written and sealed un o us, that by this meanes, for obviating Satanicall subtilty, and …uccouring humane imbecillity, we might have a more certaine way for conservation of true religion, and for the instauration of it when it faileth among men: how cab we but assure our selves, that every such acceptable thing pertaining a…y way to religion, which was particularly and conveniently determinable in Scripture, is indeed determined in it, and consequently hat no such thing as is not a meere alterable circumstance, is left to the determination of the Church?
3. If the Church prescribe any thing lawfully, so that she prescribe Sect. 7 no more then she hath power given her to prescribe, her ordinance must be accompanied with some good reason and warrant, given for he satisfaction of tender consciences. This condition is (alas) too seldome looked unto by Law-makers, o… whom one fi…ly complaineth thus:
Lex quam vis ratio Ciceroni summa …ocetur,
Et bene laudetur lex quae ratione … ▪
Invenies inter logistas raro logistas:
Mor… & exempli leges sunt …raque Templi.
But this fa…hien we leave to them who will have all their Anomalies taken for Analogies. It … meth not the …pouse of Christ endued with the Spirit of meeknesse, to command any thing impe…iously, and without a reason given.
Ecclesiae enim est docere primùm, tum praescribere, saith tIsraele… Tom. 1. pag. 367.Camer…. And againe: Non enim domina…uy cleris, nec agit cum ijs quos Christus redemit, ac si non possent capere qu d sit religiosum, quid minus.
wIn apologet.Tertullians Testimony is knowne. Nulla lex, &c. No Law, saith he, owes to itselfe alone the conscience of its equitie, but to these from whom it expects obedience. Moreover, it is a suspected Law which will not have itself to be proved, but a wicked Law, which not being proved yet beareth rule.
It is well said by our Diuines, xChemnit. exam. part. 2. p. 121.that in Rites and Ceremonies the Church hath no power to destruction but to edification. And yCalv. instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. f. 32.that the observations of our Ecclesiasticall Canons, must carry before them a manifest utility. zJoh. Calv. Epist. & resp. col. 478.Pijs vero …ratribus durum est, subjicere se rebus illis quas nec rectas esse nec utiles animadvertunt. … here it …e objected, that some things are convenient to be done, therefore because they are prescribed by the Church, and for no other reason. For example, in two things which are alike lawfull and convenient in themselves, I am bound to doe the one and not the other, because of the Churches prescription. So that in such cases it seemeth there can be no other reason given for the ordinance of the Church, but only her owne power and authority, to put order to things of th…s nature.
I answer, that even in such a case as this the conveniency of the thing itself is anterior to the Churches determination, anterior I say de congruo, though not de facto, that is to say, before ever the Church pre scribe it, it is such a thing as (when it falleth out to be done at all) may be done conveniently; though it be not (before the Churches prescribing of it,) such a thing as should and ought to be done as convenient. Which being so, we doe still hold, that the conveniency of a thing must alwayes goe before the Churches prescribing of it, goe before I meane, at least de congruo. Neither can the Church prescribe any thing lawfully, which she sheweth not to have been convenient, even before her determination.
These things being permitted, I come to extract my projection, & to make it evident, that the lawfulnes of the controverted Ceremonies, can not be warranted by any Ecclesiasticall Law. And this I prove by three Arguments.
First, those conditions which I have shewed to be required in that thing which the Church may lawfully prescribe by a Law, are not quadrant nor competent to the Crosse, Kneeling, Surplice, Holy-dayes, &c.
For 1. they are not meere circumstances, such as have place in all morall actions, but sacred, misticall, significant, efficacious Ceremonies, as hath been aboundantly shewed in this dispute already. For example: aManuduct, pag. 37.D. Burgesse calleth the Surplice a religious or sacred Ceremony. And againe, bOf the kawf. of 5 neel. pag. 2.he placeth in it a misticall signification of the purenesse of the minister of God. Wherefore cCap. 1.the replier to D. Mortons particular defence saith well, that there is great difference betwixt a grave civill habite and a misticall garment.
2. It cannot be said, that thes… Ceremonies are of that kynd of things, which were not determinab… by Scripture: neither will our Opposites, for very shame, adventure to say, that things of this kynd to which Crosse, Kneeling, &c. doe belong, viz. sacred significant Ceremonies left (in their Iudgement) to the definition of the Church, are almost infinite, and therefore could not be well and easily determined in Scripture.
Since then, such things as are not meere circumstances of worship, can neither be many nor various (as I said before,) it is manifest that all such things were easily determinable in Scripture.
3. Our Ceremoniall Lawes are not backed with such grounds & reasons, as might be for the satisfying and quieting of tender consciences, but we are borne downe with will and authority: whereof I have said enough dSupra part. 1. cap. 4. & 6else-where.
2. If the Ceremonies be lawfull to us, because the Law and Ordinance Sect. 9 of the Church prescribes them, then either the bare and naked prescription of the Church, having no other warrant then the Churches owne authority, makes them to be thus lawfull; or else the Law of the Church, as grounded upon and warranted by the Law of God and nature. Not the first; for eFr. Iun. de polit. Mos. cap. 1Divines hold, legem humanam ferri ab hominibus, cum ratione procedunt ab illis alijs antegressis legibus. Nam legis humanae regula proxima est duplex. Una innata quam legem naturalem dicimus altera inspirat…, quam divinam, &c. Ex his ergo fontibus lex humana procedit: haec incunabula illius, a quibus se aberr…, lex degener est; indigna legis nomine. We have also the testimony of an Adversary. For saith not fApol. part. 3. cap. 1. Sect. 25.Paybody himselfe: I graunt it is unlawfull to doe in Gods worship any thing upon the meere pleasure of man.
If they take them, (as needs they must,) to the latter part, then let them either say, that the Ceremonies are lawfull unto us, because the Church judgeth them to be agreable to the Law of God & nature, or because the Church proveth unto us by evident reasons, that they are indeed agreeable to these Lawes. If they yeeld us the latter, then it is not the Churches Law, but the Churches reasons given for her Law, which can warrant the lawfulnesse of the… …to us: which doth elude and elide all that which they alleadge for the lawfulnesse of them from the power and authority of the Church.
And further, if any such reasons be to be given forth for the Ceremonies, why are they so long kept up from us? But if they hold them at the former, thereupon it will follow, that it shall be lawfull for us to doe every thing which the Church shall Iudge to be agreeable to the Law of God and nature, and consequently to use all the Iewish, Popish and Heathnish Ceremonies, yea to worship Images; If it happen that the Church judge these things to be agreeable to the Law of God and nature.
It will be answered (I know) that if the Church command any thing repugnant to Gods Word, we are not bound to doe it, nor to receive it as lawfull, though the Church judge so of it: But otherwise, if that which the Church judgeth to be agreeable to the Law of God and nature, (and in that respect prescribeth) be not repugnant to the Word of God, but in itself indifferent, then are we to embrace it as convenient, and consonant to the Law of God and nature, neither ought we to call in Question the lawfulnesse of it.
But I reply, that either we must judge a thing to be repugnant or not repugnant to the Word, to be indifferent or not indiffere…t in itself, because the Church judgeth so of it, or else because the Church proveth unto us by an evident reason that it is so. If the latter; we have what we would. If the former; we are just where we were; The argument is still set a foot: then we must receive every thing (be it never so bad,) as indifferent, if only the Church happen so to judge of it. For quod competit alicui qua tali, &c. So that if we receive any thing as indifferent, for this respect, because the Church judgeth it to be so, then shall we receive every thing for indifferent; which the Church shall so judge of.
3. The Church is forbidden to adde any thing to the commandements Sect. 10 of God, which he hath given unto us, concerning his worship and service. Deut. 4. 2. and 12, 32. Prov. 30. 6. therefore she may not lawfully prescribe any thing in the workes of Divine worship, if it be not a mere circumstance, belonging to that kynd of things which were not determinable by Scripture.
Our Opposites have no other distinctions, which they make any use of against this argument, but the very same which Papists use in defence of their unwritten dogmaticall traditions; namely, that additio corrumpens is forbidden, but not additio perficiens: that there is not alike reason of the Christian Church, and of the Iewish: that the Church may not adde to the essentiall parts of Gods worship, but to the accidentary she may adde.
To the first of those distinctions we Answer, 1. That the distinction itself is an addition to the word, and so doth but begge the Question.
2. It is blasphemous, for it argueth, that the commandements of God are imperfect, and that by addition they are made perfect.
3. Since our Opposites will speake in this dialect, let them resolve us, whether the washings of the Pharises, condemned by Christ, were corrupting or perfecting additions. They cannot say, they were corrupting; for there was no commandement of God, which those washings did corrupt or destroy, except that cōmandement which forbiddeth mens additions. But for this respect, our Opposites dare not call them corrupting additions, for so they should condemne all additions whatsoever. Except therefore, they can shew us that those washings were not added by the Pharises, for perfecting, but for corrupting the Law of God, let them consider how they ranke their owne Ceremoniall additions, with those of the Pharises. We reade of no other reason wherefore Christ cōdemned thē, but because they were Doctrines, which had no other warrant then the commandements of men. Math. 15. 9. For as the Law ordained diverse washings, for teaching and signifying that true holinesse and cleanesse, which ought to be among Gods people; so the Pharises would have per…ected the Law by adding other washings (and moe then God had commanded,) for the same end and purpose.
To the second distinction, we say that the Christian Church hath Sect. 11 no more liberty to adde to the commandements of God …hen the Iewish Church had. For the second commandement is morall and perpetuall, and forbiddeth to us as well as to them the additions and inventions of men in the worship of God. Nay, as gInst. lib. 4. cap. 10. f. 17.Calvine noteth, much more are we forbidden to adde unto Gods Word, thē they were. Before the comming of his wel-beloved Sonne in the fl…sh, saith hLetter to the Regent of Scotland.Iohn Knox, severely he punished all such as durst interprise to alter or change his Ceremonies and Statutes, as in i1. Reg. 13. and 15Saul, k2. Paral. 26.Uziias, lLevit. 10.Nadab, Absha, is to be read. And will he now, after that he hath opened his Counsell to the World by his only Sonne, whom mMath. 17.he commaundeth to be heard, and after that nAct. 1. (, and 3. 2. Cor. 11. 1 Col. 2.by his holy Spirit, speaking by his Apostles, he hath established the religion in which he will his true worshippers abide to the end, will he now I say admitt (o) mens inventions in the matter of Religion, &c.? For this sentence he prouounceth: pDeut. 4. 12.Not that which seemeth good in thy eyes, shalt thou doe to the Lord thy God, but that which the Lord thy God commanded thee, that doe thou: Adde nothing unto it, diminish nothing from it. Which sealing up his New Testament he rep…ateth in these words: qApoc. 2That which ye have, hold till I come, &c.
Wherefore whileas rEccl. pol. lib. 2.Hooker saith, tha… Christ hath not by positive lawes so farre descended into particularities with vsus, as Moses with the lewes: Whileas sPrael…ct. tom. 1. pag 369.Camero saith, non esse disputandum ita, …t quoniam in vetere Testament…, de rebus alioqui adiaphoris certa fuit lex, & …id in novo Testamento habere locum: And whiles tEpist. to the Past. of the Church of Scotland.B. Lindsey saith, that in the particular circumstances of persons …y whom, place where, time when, and o… the forme and order how the worship and worke of the ministery should be performed h… Church hath power to define whatsoeuer is most expedient, and that this is a prerogative wherein the Christian Church differeth …rom the Iewish Synagogue: They doe but speake their pleasure in vaine, and cannot make it appeare, that the Christian Church hath any more power to adde to the commandements of God, then the Synagogue had of old.
It is …ell said by wCourse of conforformity, pag. 155.one: There were many points of service, as Sacrifices, washings, anniversary dayes &…. whi…h …e have not: but the determination of such as we have, is as particular as theirs, except vvherein the nationall circumstances make impediment. For one place not be appointed for the worship of God, nor one Tribe o… the worke of the ministery, among us, as among them, not because more power was left to the Christian Church, for determining things that pertaine to the worship of God, then was to the Iewish, but because the Christian Church was to spread it self over the, whole Earth, and not to be confined within the bo…ds of one nation as the Synagogue was.
Let us then here call to mynd the distinction which hath been shewed betwixt religious Ceremonies and morall circumstances: Sect. 12 for as touching morall circumstances which serve for common order and decency in the worship of God, they beeing so many and so alterable, that they could not be particularly determined in Scripture, for all the different and almost infinite cases, which might occure the Iewish S…agogue had the same power for determining things of this na…e, which the church of Christ now hath. For the law did not define but left she be defined by the Sinagogue, the set houres for all pub…e divine service, whē it should begin, how long it should last, the order should be kept in the reading and expounding of the law …aying, singing, carechi…g, excommunicating censuring and …ving of Delinquents, &c. the circumstances of the celebration of mariage, of the education of youth in Schooles and Colledges, &c.
But as for Ceremonies which are proper to Gods holy worship, xHebr. 3. 2.shall we say, tat the fidelity of Christ the Sonne hath been lesse, then the fidelity of Moses the servant? which were to be said, if Christ had not by as plaine, plentifull, and particular directions and ordinances, provided for all the necessities of the Christian Church in the matter of religiō, as Moses for the Iewish. Or if the least pinne, and the meanest appurtenance of the Tabernacle, and all the service thereof, behooved to be ordered according to the expresse commandement of God by the hand of Moses, how shall we thinke, that in the rearing, framing, ordering, & beautifying of the church the house of the living God, he would have lesse honor & prerogative givē to his owne well-beloved Sonne, by whom he hath spoken to us in these last dayes, & whom he hath commāded vsus to heare in all things; Or that he will accept at our hands any sacred Ceremony, which men have presumed to bring into his holy and pure worship, without the appointment of his owne word and will revealed vntounto us? Albeit the worship of God and religion in the Church of the new Testament, be accompanied without Ceremonies numero paucissimis observatione facillimis, significatione praestantissimis, (as yEpist. 118.Augustine speaketh of our Sacraments) yet we have in Scripture no lesse particular determination and distinct direction, for our fevve, easie and plaine Ceremonies, then the Iewes had for their many heavy, and obscure ones.
As for the third distinction, of adding to the accidentary parts of it, Sect. 13 …emēber, that J heard in the logicks, of pars essentialis or Phisica, & pars integralis or mathematica; of pars similaris, & pars dissimilaris; of pars c…ua & pars discreta. But of pars accidētaria heard I never till now. There is (I know) such a distinction of Pars integralis, that it is either pr…alis and necessaria, or minus principalis and non necessaria. But w… cannot vnderstand their pars cultus accidentaria, to be pars integ…alis non necessaria, because then their distribution of worship into e…entiall & accidentary parts, could not answer to the rul…s of a just dist…bution: of which one is, that distributio debet exhauri…e totum distributu…. Now, there are some parts of worship, which cannot be comp…hended in the foresaid distribution, namely, partes integrales necessar… What then? Shall we let this vvilde Distinction passe, because it cannot … well nor formally interpreted? Nay, but we will observe their mean… who make use of it, For unto all such parts of worship as are not ess…iall (and which they are pleased to call accidentarie) they hold, … Church may make addition. Whereunto I answer, 1. Let them m… us understand, what they meane by those essentiall parts, to which th… Church may adde nothing: and let them beware least they give us a… … ticall description of the same.
2. There are many parts of Gods worship, which are not essentiall, yet such as will not suffer any addition of the Church. For proof vvhereof, J demaund, vvere all the Ceremonies commanded to be …sed in the legall Sacraments and Sacrifices, essentiall parts o… those worships? No man will say so. Yet the Synagogue was tied to observe those (and no other then those) Ceremonies, which the Word prescribed. When Israel was againe to keepe the Passeover, qNum. 9 3.it was said; In the fourteenth day of this monethmonth at even, ye shall keep it in his appoinded season: according to all the Rites of it and according to all the Ceremonies of it, shall ye keep it. And rib. vers. 5.againe: According to all that the Lord commanded Moses, so did the Children of Israel. Ritibus & Ceremonijs divinitus institutis, non licuit homini suo arbitrio aliquid adijcere aut detrahere, sCom. in 1. Reg, 8. 65.saith P. Martyr.
3. If those accidentarie parts of worship, which are commanded Sect. 14 in the Word, be both necessary to be used necessitatè praecepti, and likewise sufficient meanes fully adequate and proportioned to that end, for which God hath destinated such parts of his worship as are not essentiall, (which must be graunted by every one who will not accuse the Scripture of some defect and imperfection:) then it followeth that other accidentarie parts of worship, which the Church addeth thereto, are but superfluous and superstitious.
4. I call to mind another Logicall maxime: Sublata una parte, tollitur totum. An essentiall part being taken away, totum essentiale is taken away also. In like maner, an integrant part being taken away, totum integrum cannot remaine behinde. When a man hath lost his hand or is foot, though he be still a man Phisically, totum essentialè, yet he is not a man mathematically, he is no longer totum integralè. Iust so, if we reckon any additions (as the Crosse, Kneeling, Holy-dayes, &c.) among the parts of Gods worship, then put the case that those additions were taken away, it followeth that all the worship which remaineth still, will not be the whole and entire worship of God, but only a part of it, or at the best, a defective, wanting, lame, and maimed worship.
5. I have made it evident, tSupra Cap. 1. Sect. 6.that our Opposites make the controverted Ceremonies to be worship, in as proper and peculiar sence as any thing can be; and that they are equalled to the chiefe and principall parts of worship, not ranked among the secondary or lesse principall parts of it.
6. Doe not our Divines condemne the addition of Rites & Ceremonies, to that worship which the Word prescribeth, as well as the addition of other things, which are thought more essentiall? Wee have heard Martyrs words to this purpose.
wIn …. praec Col. 363.Zanchius will have us to learne from the second commandement, in externo cultu qui Deo debetur, seu in Ceremoniis nihil nobis esse ex nostro capite comminiscendum, wether in Sacraments or Sacrifices, or other sacred things, such as Temples, Altars, Clothes and Vessels, necessary for the externall worship; but that wee ought to be contented with those Ceremonies which God hath prescribed.
And in xIb. col. 502.another place, he condemneth the addition of any other rite whatsoever, to those rites of every Sacrament which have been ordained of Christ. Si Ceremonijs cujusvis Sacramenti, alios addas ritus, &c.
yAnnot. on Phil. 2. 10.D. Fulke pronounceth even of signes and rites, that vve must doe in Religion and Gods service, not that which seemeth good to us, but that only which he commandeth. Deut. 4. 2. c. 12. 32.
And zEpist ad protect. Angl.Calvine pronounceth generally, Caenam Domini rem adeo sacrosanctam esse, ut ullis hominum additamentis eam conspurcare sit nefas.
And thus have we made good our Argument, that the lawfulnsse of the Ceremonies cannot be warranted by any Ecclesiasticall Law. Sect. 15 If we had no more against them, this were enough, that they are but humane additions, and want the warrant of the Word. When Nadab and Abihu offered strange fire before the Lord, and when the Iewes burnt their Sonnes and their Daughters in the Valley of the Sonne of Hinnon; howsoever manifold wickednesse might have been challenged in that which they did, yet if any would dispute with God upon the matter, he stoppeth their mouthes with this one Answer, aLevit. 10. 1. ler. 7. 31.I commanded it not, neither came it into my heart. May we last of all heare what the bCausa. 11. q. 3. v. 101.Canon Law it selfe decreeth? Is qui praeest, fi praeter voluntatem Dei, vel praeter quod in sanctis Scripturis evidenter praecipitur, vel dicit aliquid, vel imperat, tanquam falsus testis Dei, aut Sacrilegus habeatur.