Against Symbolizing with Antichrist in Ceremonies, Part · Chapter 2 · Section 31 [i.e. 30]
#Sect. 31. Obiections of the Oppoſites: The Croſſe is ſooner to be vſed in that it teacheth good things, and hath a profitable ſignification: therefore eueryevery ceremonie is ſignificant, or els vayne: that the Lord delighted much in ſignes which the woman ſhewed, and blamed Simon for not ſhewing the like, &c.
HOwbeit our Oppoſites lacke not a painting to make it ſeeme euen faire and beautifull. They tell vsus the Croſſe is the ſooner to bee vſed in that it teacheth good things, and hath a profitable ſignification. Heereupon it is obiected (firſt of all) that eueryevery ceremonie is ſignificant,aHook. li. 5. cap. 65. fol. 15…. Luke 7.44. or elſe vaine; that our Lord delighted much in ſignes which the woman ſhewed; and blamed Symon▪ for not ſhewinge the like: and that the kneeling, knockinge of the breaſt, and the lifting vp of the eyes, are all of them ſignes which ſignifie ſomewhat. At a worde, that no ceremonie can adde a decencie to Gods worſhip vnleſſe it ſignifie. And is there any aunſwere expected to ſo groſſe a paralogiſme, and ſo wilfull an ignoraunce of the Elench? For wee diſlike not all ſignes, but onelyonly ſuch as arebTheodor. …aza epi. … ad Grindal Epiſc. London…. Symbolicall, of which the ſigne of the Croſſe is one, but theſe forenamed are none. For ſeeing God hath reſerued to himſelfe all authoritie to ordaine the ſeales and ſignes of his owne Couenant, wee are worthely ielous againſt all other ſignes, in cauſe they be Sacramentall.
Now what is a Sacramētall ſigne? For the vnderſtanding hereof we muſt conſider that ſome ſignes are Nata only, ſome onelyonly data, ſome nata and data both, and theſe are Sacramental, ascBellarmin. de ſacram. in gen. c. 9. Bellarmine truly deduceth out of Auguſtine and others. It being ſo, our Oppoſites wander from the queſtion, when they talke of kneeling knocking of the breſt, and lifting vp the handes in prayer, becauſe theſe are not ſignes Sacramentall, of which the queſtion is, but ſignes naturall: witnes this they are common to all men of what Religion ſoeuer they be. And this our neighbourdConfeſſ. Scor…. aedit. Iun. …0 25…0. churches ſee who vſe the former ſignes of knocking, kneelinge, lifting, who yet renounce all Croſſes and croſſings, and all Simbolicall ſignes of popery. VponUpon the ſame ſtring do our Oppoſites iarre when they prooue man may ordaine the ſigne of the Croſſe in the ſeruice of God, becauſe Paule approueth the ſigne of avayle to ſhewe the ſubiection of the wife vntounto the Huſband. For what hauehave we to doe with this ſigne which is not Sacramentall, but Artificiall, which Paule (we ſee) prooueth to agree with the Law of nature, and ſo doth the CanoneChem…i…. examin. p. 2. titul. de rit. … Cor. 10. Law it ſelfe. Againe, our Oppoſites wander from the queſtion when they tell vsus, that man may ordaine ſignes for order and decencie, as a faire cloth on the communion table, is a ſigne of reuerence, and the ringing a Bell is the ſigne of a Sermon. What hauehave we to doe with theſe ſignes againe, which are not Sacramentall, but meerly Artificiall? not Simbolica, but marè indicantia? not ſignifying but ſhowing only. What aptnes hauehave theſe ſignes of their owne nature to intimate theſe things? ſure none at all, neither could they be ſignes of them more then an Ivie-buſhe is of it ſelfe a ſigne of wine, had not inſtitution of man ordained them to this purpoſe. Neither of theſe ſignes then are within the Queſtion as the ſigne of the Croſſe is, which way bee thus demonſtrated. Two things are required to a Sacramentall ſigne, the firſt is, that it hauehave by nature ſome analogie, and relation to the thing it ſignifieth. Secondly, that this Analogie and reuerence bee but confuſef…ellar… …ſup…a. apta quidem vsus ſignificet, ſed acta non ſignificans niſi humana inſtitutione determinetur. For enſample, the particular Image of Titius is no Sacramentall ſigne but naturall, becauſe the ſimilitude is ſo vehement, that of it ſelfe it repreſenteth him. The Image that hath but the generall ſhape of a man, is no ſigne of Titius more then of Caius. Yet when it is determined by the painter to be the Image of Titius, whoſe name hee writeth vnderneath it to reſtraine it vntounto him, now it a ſigne of Titius, not meerely naturall, nor meerely artificiall, but in the middle betweene both (or mixt of both rather) that is, Symbolicall: So fareth it with the ſigne of the Croſſe. The Croſſe is a ſimilitude of a man crucified, as thegSuarez tom. 1. in Thom. diſput. 56. ſect 2. Ieſuite teacheth truely. Heereby he is of nature apt to repreſent any one man crucified, Peter, Andrew, or whoſoeuer. The Churches determination commeth and reſtraineth him to the ſonne of man Chriſt Ieſus crucified, and is he not nowe a Sacramentall ſignifier of him? Yes, as well as the member of generation was a ſigne of originall ſinne in the Sacrament of circumciſion. This member hath Analogie to the propagation of it, becauſe it is an inſtrument of propagation. The very ſame habitude and relation hath the Croſſe to the death of Chriſt. For was it not an inſtrument of it? Gedeons Ephod had no naturall fitneſſe to repreſent the God that gaue him victorie; but the ſigne of the Croſſe hath as good to repreſent Chriſtes death: becauſe it is an inſtrument of his death as well as thehAuguſt. queſt. ſup. Iudic. cap. 41. Ephod was an inſtrument of Gods worſhip.lIoh. Bohe. Auba. de moribu… gent. lib. 1. cap. 5. The Emperour of Ae…hiopia when he goeth foorth, hath a Croſſe carried before him, and an earthen pitcher full of earth: the one ſignifying his profeſſion, the other his mortalitie. Hath this pitcher of earth a Symbolicall ſignification? Then hath the ſigne of the Croſſe aſwell. For it is onelyonly by the adiunct or effect of mortatalitie that he Symbolizeth with the ſame, and a Metonimicall Symbolizer, the Croſſe is as well as he. ThemAuguſt. de mirabi. ſacr. ſenp. lib. 1. ca. 16 Aegyptians for a monument of Ioſephes feeding them with corne, ſet vp an Oxe by his Toumbe: which was the cauſe (as Auguſtine thinketh) that the Iewes choſe the figure of an Oxe in the wilderneſſe. Now looke what Analogie this Oxe had to repreſent the husbandrie of Ioſeph, and the ſame hath the Croſſe to repreſent the death of Chriſt: it beeing an inſtrument thereof aſwell as the Oxe was an inſtrument of Ioſephes husbandrie. This*Ioh. Rainold. de Idolat. lib. 2 cap. 3. ſect. 1…. Ioſeph is called Bos Dei, by God himſelfe, and his feeding of Aegypt with corne, is repreſented in Pharaohes dreame by ſeuen fatt Kine, becauſe in Aegypt they were the inſtruments of husbandrie, as Ioſephus telleth vsus. The Romanes alſo honoured Minucius, aureo boue, when hee reteyned them in time of dearth. all which make cleare that a figure drawen from the inſtrument is Symbolicall, and ſo by conſequent proue the Croſſe to bee Symbolicall, it being an inſtrument of Chriſtes death which it repreſenteth to vsus. The beaſtes that were worſhipt in Aegypt had Symbolicall relation ſufficient to repreſent their Gods, becauſe they were the badges ofnLudoni. Viues in Auguſt. Godeſ…alk Steweceius in veget. de re militar. them which they bore in their banners, while they were aliue. How much more hath the Croſſe a relation ſufficient to Chriſtes death ſeeing he more neerly pertaines vntounto it: then theſe beaſtes did to the men whom they reſemble? How is the ſerpent apt to figure Chriſt crucified, but by the poale on which hee is hanged, which figured the Croſſe the neereſt inſtrument of his crucifying? What need more a doe? ſuch aptnes hath the Croſſe to ſignifie the crucifying of Chriſt, as that the Fathers, yea Scriptures themſelues vſe by the name of the Croſſe to deſcribe his death, euen as the Canon of the Croſſe it ſelfe confeſſeth. No marueile, the one being the Suppoſitum; the other the Appoſitum (as Bellarmine ſpeaketh) which are ſo neerely linckt together as that the one may very well ſtand for the other.oSilueſt. inſumma. ver. imag. Figura Christi eſt, quae ducit ad Chriſtum argurtiuè. Nowe what argument hath quicker paſſage then that which commeth from ſuch a ſubiect to ſuch an adiunct? But Sacramentall ſignes are ſimilitudinary. True, but there is a ſimilitude Metonimicall, as well as Metaphoricall, which Metaphoricall ſimilitude is not wanting in the Croſſe, neither as thoſe wordes ofpTho. Aq. pag. 3. qu. 75. art. 9. Aquinas ſhewe inſignitur ſigno Crucis, ſicut miles ſigno ducis. They ſhall hauehave their Fathers name written in their forheades. This hath alluſion to the ſigne of the Croſſe (ſay ſome) which is not ſo, but to the writing of the EmperoursqIuſt. Lypſ. de Roman. militia. li. 1 dialog. 9. marke and name in the fleſh, yea foreheads of thoſe who were preſt to warre, vntill the writing of it in the forehead was by therCod▪ lib. 9 ti. 7. ca. 17. Law forbidden. Howbeit, as ſouldiers are ſeparated to their Emperour by his marke, ſo are men ſet apart vntounto Chriſt, to fight vnderunder his banner by the ſigne of the Croſſe. The very word token [we ſigne him with the ſigne of the Croſſe in token, &c.] ſheweth that the Croſſe is vſed as a foreign à figura à typus; all which the Scriptures, 1. Pet. 3.2….sGregor. Nazianz, oration. de paſch. 2. Auguſt. epiſt. 23.Fathers, ourtAnglican. confeſſ. art. 10. ſelues appropriate to a Sacramentall ſignifying. To conclude (then) as there are words meerely indicant which ſhew, & words figuratiue which ſignifie: ſo are there ſignes merè indicantia which ſhew, and ſignes ſymbolicall which ſignifie, and a man may determine the firſt, but not the latter: euen as we were tolde by Thomas and Caietan in part before. Now this power to determine ſignes indicant, whether it be a deuiſing or no I will not diſpute, it may ſeeme man may onelyonly in the ſeruice of God diſpoſe. It is apparant he cannot deuiſe any of the naturall indicant ſignes mentioned before, but diſpoſe them only. As for the ſignes which are artificial and depend on mans inſtitution, in this ſenſe he is only a diſpoſer of them, & not a deuiſer in that he is tyed to ſuch as are decent in vſe already. So that he may not deuiſe any newe ceremonie againſt common decencie: witnes Paul, who taketh not vponupon him to approue the vayle before he hath proued it decent, 1. Cor. 11.and who beateth downe eueryevery contrary rite to this. It is not decent in common practiſe, we hauehave no ſuch cuſtome, nor the Churches of God, which now fighteth ſtrongly againſt the Croſſe and Surplice: becauſe where are they vſed out of our Church? And this may ſuffice for this firſt obiection.